The URL can be used to link to this page

2017, 07-25 Regular MeetingAGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FORMAL FORMAT MEETING Tuesday, July 25, 2017 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 Mike Graef of United Methodist Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF AGENDA INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS MAYOR'S REPORT PROCLAMATION 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 claim vouchers on July 25, 2017 Request for Council Action Form, Total: $2,528,219.26 b. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending July 15, 2017: $371,747.26 c. Approval of July 11, 2017 Formal Council Meeting Minutes NEW BUSINESS: 2. Motion Consideration: Law Enforcement Interlocal Agreement — Morgan Koudelka [public comment] 3. Motion Consideration: Potential Transportation Grants — Adam Jackson [public comment] 4. Motion Consideration: Extension of Library District Interlocal Agreement — Cary Driskell [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 07-25-17 Formal Format Meeting Page 1 of 2 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 5. Spokane Housing Authority, Revenue Bonds — Erik Lamb 6. Public Records Act Changes — Erik Lamb, Chris Bainbridge 7. Police Dept Monthly Report — Mark Werner 8. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins INFORMATION ONLY (will not be reported or discussed): 9. Department Reports 10. Quarterly Permit Center Report CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT General Meetinji 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 2nd 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'=d and 5r'—' 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 07-25-17 Formal Format Meeting Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: El consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Approval of the Following Vouchers: VOUCHER LIST 07/06/2017 07/10/2017 07/13/2017 07/14/2017 07/18/2017 07/18/2017 07/19/2017 VOUCHER NUMBERS 7185-7222 42103-42144; 2344978; 2391790 42145-42147 42148-42174 5853; 5923; 5925; 5941-5943; 5945; 7223-7248 42175-42178 5960 GRAND TOTAL: TOTAL AMOUNT $5,067.00 $2,276,222.98 $7,609.57 $41,156.95 $194,908.76 $2,844,00 $410.00 $2,528,219.26 #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 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 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 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 314 — Railroad Grade Separation Projects 402 — Stonnwater Management 403 — Aquifer Protection Area 501 — Equipment Rental & Replacement 502 — Risk Management 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: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS: Voucher Lists vchlist 07/06/2017 7:51:54AM Voucher List Page: 1 Spokane Valley Bank code : pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 7185 7/6/2017 006089 AGEN, LINDA PARK REFUND 001237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: EDGECLIFF PA 75.00 Total : 75.00 7186 7/6/2017 006102 ALLEN, KATIE PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MIRABEAU ME/ 75.00 Total : 75.00 7187 7/6/2017 006090 BAB1CH, ALEX PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT RM/SM, 500.00 Total : 500.00 7188 7/6/2017 006103 BEAUREGARD, RITA PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREENACRES 75.00 Total : 75.00 7189 7/6/2017 006104 BEIER, COLLEEN PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MIRABEAU ME. 75.00 Total : 75.00 7190 7/6/2017 006105 BENNETT, ALLYSON PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 SUMMER DAY CAMP REFUND 118.00 Total : 118.00 7191 7/6/2017 006106 BRAMER, RUTH PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: TERRACE VIEV 75.00 Total : 75.00 7192 7/6/2017 006107 BROWN, AMANDA PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: DISCOVERY PL 75.00 Total : 75.00 7193 7/6/2017 006091 BRUNO, DAVID PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREENACRES 159.00 Total : 159.00 7194 7/6/2017 006119 BRYANT, MARY JEAN PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 SUMMER DAY CAMP REFUND 86.00 Total : 86.00 7195 7/6/2017 006092 DEPAULO, REBECCA PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: BROWN PARK 75.00 Total : 75.00 7196 7/6/2017 006077 DS CONNECTIONS NW PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM/: 210.00 Total : 210.00 7197 7/6/2017 006093 ELLIOTT, DELA PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREENACRES 75.00 Page: 1 vchlist 07/06/2017 7:51:54AM Voucher List Page: 2 Spokane Valley Bank code : pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 7197 7/6/2017 006093 006093 ELLIOTT, DELLA (Continued) Total : 75.00 7198 7/6/2017 006108 FLORES, TERESA PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 SUMMER DAY CAMP REFUND 86.00 Total : 86.00 7199 7/6/2017 005126 GALLINGER, PEGGY PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MIRABEAU ME, 75.00 Total : 75.00 7200 7/6/2017 005282 GENESIS CHURCH PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: TERRACE VIEV 75.00 Total : 75.00 7201 7/6/2017 006094 GOMEZ, ALVARO PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREENACRES 75.00 Total : 75.00 7202 7/6/2017 002690 GRAVELLE, LORI PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 SUMMER DAY CAMP REFUND 118.00 Total : 118.00 7203 7/6/2017 006095 GRISHKO, VIKTORIYA PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: TERRACE VIEV 75.00 Total : 75.00 7204 7/6/2017 001729 HALME CONSTRUCTION, INC. PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: VALLEY MISSIC 75.00 Total : 75.00 7205 7/6/2017 001500 JOHNSON, KRIS PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: TERRACE VIEV 159.00 Total : 159.00 7206 7/6/2017 006096 KENT, TODD PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: FIRESIDE LOU[ 210.00 Total : 210.00 7207 7/6/2017 006109 KITTILSON, CASSIE PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: VALLEY MISSIC 75.00 Total : 75.00 7208 7/6/2017 003072 LEE, LINDA PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: VALLEY MISSIC 75.00 Total : 75.00 7209 7/6/2017 006097 MCMILLAN, DANA PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREENACRES 75.00 Total : 75.00 7210 7/6/2017 006098 NEDASHKOVSK[Y, MIKHAIL PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM/: 500.00 Page: 2 vchlist 07/06/2017 7:51:54AM Voucher List Page: 3 Spokane Valley Bank code : pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 7210 7/6/2017 006098 006098 NEDASHKOVSKIY, MIKHAIL (Continued) Total: 500.00 7211 7/6/2017 006111 PACIFIC KEEF CHURCH PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MIRABEAU ME 75.00 Total : 75.00 7212 7/6/2017 006112 PHILLIPS, FAYE PARK REFUND 001237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: DISCOVERY PL 75.00 Total : 75.00 7213 7/6/2017 006114 RAUCH, KATHLEEN PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: DISCOVERY PL 75.00 Total : 75.00 7214 7/6/2017 006115 RUPPEL, ARIC PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: DISCOVERY PL 75.00 Total : 75.00 7215 7/6/2017 006117 SAND, JULIE PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: DISCOVERY PL 75.00 Total : 75.00 7216 7/6/2017 006099 SHUMWAY, SHAINA PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: FIRESIDE LOUI 500.00 Total : 500.00 7217 7/6/2017 006100 SIMON, TRACY PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: TERRACE VIEV 75.00 Total : 75.00 7218 7/6/2017 006116 SPANGLE, KRISTEN PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 SUMMER DAY CAMP REFUND 118.00 Total : 118.00 7219 7/6/2017 006101 UTECHT, CHAD PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: BROWNS PARD 125.00 Total : 125.00 7220 7/6/2017 006118 VIA, MARGARETHE PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: EDGECLIFF PA 75.00 Total : 75.00 7221 7/6/2017 006078 YOUNG, GAIL PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM/: 210.00 Total : 210.00 7222 7/6/2017 005329 ZHIMINAICELA, LOURDES PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MIRABEAU MEQ 243.00 Total : 243.00 38 Vouchers for bank code : pk-ref Bank total : 5,067.00 Page: 3 vchlist 07/10/2017 9:49:45AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page:L� 1. ' Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 42103 7/3/2017 001107 ADVANCEDTRAFFIC PRODUCTS 42104 7/3/2017 001685 AICPA 42105 7/3/2017 005268 ATLAS ADVERTISING LLC 42106 7/3/2017 004439 BIRCH COMMUNICATIONS INC 42107 7/3/2017 006120 BLAKE HOMESTEAD LLC 42108 7/3/2017 002517 BROWN BEARING CO INC 42109 7/3/2017 000101 CDW-G 42110 7/3/2017 001888 COMCAST 42111 7/3/2017 003255 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS 42112 7/3/2017 002604 DELL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC 0000000956 0000017976 0000018005 0000018032 0000018303 00022574 1386 24327741 SEP -2017-0009 5878239 JFT1842 July -Aug 2017 592009 79073292 79076637 Fund/Dept 101.042.000.594 101.042.000.594 101.042.000.594 101.042.000.594 101.042.000.594 001.013.000.513 001.058.051.558 001.076.305.575 001.058.058.345 101.000.000.542 001.090.000.518 001.090.000.518 101.042.000.543 001.090.000.548 001.090.000.548 42113 7/3/2017 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION RE-313-ATB70613050 101.042.000.542 RE-313-ATB70613129 309.000.227.595 Description/Account Amount CREDIT MEMO RE 0000018303 WAVETRONIX SMARTSENSOR DIG WAVETRONIX SMARTSENSOR DIG WAVETRONIX SMARTSENSOR DIG TRAFFIC CONTROL IMPROVEMENT Total : MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL: M CALH( Total : ADVERTISING Total : PHONE SERVICE AT CENTERPLAC Total : PERMIT REFUND SEP -2017-0009 Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : SUPPLIES: SNOWPLOWS IT EQUIPMENT (MINOR) INTERNET CITY HALL TOWER RENTAL COMPUTER LEASE 3050 MICRO OC COMPUTER LEASE: 3 YR WORKS1 Total : REIMBURSE ROADWAY MAINT CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING -1,376.33 21,024.51 226.03 938.40 1,376.33 22,188.94 265.00 265.00 1,612.00 1,612.00 416.48 416.48 350.00 350.00 19.45 19.45 536.78 536.78 106.17 106.17 210.22 210.22 231.68 2,286.44 2,518.12 1,282.87 100.16 Page: rte_ vehlist 07/10/2017 9:49:45AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Pager Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 42113 7/3/2017 000734 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION (Continued) 42114 7/3/2017 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 42115 7/3/2017 004950 EIGHT31 CONSULTING 42116 7/3/2017 003682 EPIC LAND SOLUTIONS INC 42117 7/3/2017 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 42118 7/3/2017 005474 FREIGHTLINER NORTHWEST 42119 7/3/2017 000609 GENDRONS CO 42120 7/3/2017 001983 GLOBAL EQUIP COMPANY 42121 7/3/2017 001253 GORDON THOMAS HONEYWELL Fund/Dept RE 46 JG6362 L019 302.303.155.595 RE 46 JG6457 L006 309.000.227.595 1053 313.000.215.594 0417-0702 303.000.247.595 47486 47487 47491 PC001381233:01 8424 111172255 111182524 June 17 1042 42122 7/3/2017 003085 GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING, STAND. 02504315 42123 7/3/2017 000007 GRAINGER 42124 7/3/2017 002538 HYDRAULICS PLUS INC 9486888994 001.058.056.558 001.058.056.558 001.013.000.513 101.000.000.542 001.032.000.543 106.000.230.537 106.000.230.537 001.011.000.511 001.018.014.5 Description/Account Amount ITS/SIGNAL/MAINTENANCE SIGNAL INSPECTION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Total : Total : Total : 0247 -PARCEL ACQUISITION/RELOC Total : LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION SUPPLIES: SNOWPLOWS SMALL TOOLS - PW RECYCLING STATIONS RECYCLING CONTAINERS GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : 4 GASB SUBSCRIPTION - 538990 Total : 001.032.000.543 21673 101.000.000.542 SMALL TOOLS - PW Total : SERVICE HYDRAULIC PUMP - SNO 1,383.03 195.95 1,174.65 1,370.60 4,500.00 4,500.00 2,682.95 2,682.95 73.95 94.35 25.00 193.30 131.13 131.13 18.37 18.37 2,032.75 2,398.40 4,431.15 4,845.21 4,845.21 252.00 252.00 95.14 95.14 462.40 vchlist 07/10/2017 9:49:45AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 42124 7/3/2017 002538 002538 HYDRAULICS PLUS INC 42125 7/3/2017 000313 INLAND ASPHALT COMPANY INC. 42126 7/3/2017 000132 MODERN ELEECTRIC WATER CO 42127 7/3/2017 000636 MOORE IACOFANO GOLTSMAN, INC. 42128 7/3/2017 006121 NELSON, MANDY 42129 7/3/2017 003090 NORTH 40 OUTFITTERS 42130 7/3/2017 005049 PEDERSON, 'MICHAEL ROY 42131 7/3/2017 000041 PROTHMAN COMPANY 42132 7/3/2017 000019 PURFECT LOGOS LLC 42133 7/3/2017 003407 RIGHT! SYSTEMS INC 42134 7/3/2017 002835 SCS DELIVERY INC 42135 7/3/2017 006079 SHOCKEY PLANNING GROUP INC (Continued) PAY APP 1 EE -16-002 EE -16-003 0049045 CSV REFUND 075115/3 JUNE 2017 2017-5959 45580 SI -152967 10119 201706016 42136 7/3/2017 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 42000397 51503857 Fund/Dept 311.000.255.595 313.000.215.594 313.000.215.594 309.000.227.595 001.000.000.321 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 001.032.000.543 001.058.056.558 001.090.099.594 001.011.000.511 001.058.056.558 001.016.000.554 101.042.000.542 Description/Account Amount Total : 0255 -CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Total : CIP 0215 - UNDERGROUND 3 -PHA CIP 0215 - 3-PHASE METER & CTS Total : PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Total : CSV ENDORSEMENT REFUND Total : SMALL TOOLS/MINOR EQUIP: STRI Total : • Total: Total : SIGN Total : DEAD ANIMAL REMOVAL EMPLOYMENT SERVICES BARRACUDE BACKUP APPLIANCE Total : PACKAGE DELIVERY FOR COUNCI Total : PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Total : ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICE JULY: WORK CREW INVOICE MAY 2017 462.40 457,923.01 457,923.01 2,390.50 2,383.84 4,774.34 847.31 847.31 13.00 13.00 29.85 29.85 650.00 650.00 4,666.67 4,666.67 38.08 38.08 54,398.91 54,398.91 50.00 50.00 747.50 747.50 21,071.39 6,673.60 Page: �� vchlist 07/10/2017 9:49:45AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 -4--- Bank— Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 42136 7/3/2017 000001 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 42137 7/3/2017 002540 SPOKANE HOUSE OF HOSE INC. 607217 42138 7/3/2017 002978 SPOKANE SODA WORKS 42139 7/3/2017 000065 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 42140 7/3/2017 000335 TIRE-RAMA 42141 7/3/2017 000780 UNION PACIFIC RR CO 42142 7/3/2017 000087 VERIZON WIRELESS 42143 7/3/2017 000964 VOLT MANAGEMENT CORP 42144 7/3/2017 000140 WALT'S MAILING SERVICE LTD 2344978 6/30/2017 000001 SPOKANE CC) TREASURER 2391790 7/5/2017 000001 SPOKANE CC) TREASURER 44 Vouchers for bank code : apbank (Continued) M19074 3341499154 3341499155 3341499156 8080051156 FOLDER 02964-38 9787735808 40310003 56016 56237 9290201127 JUNE 2017 Fund/Dept 101.042.000.542 101.000.000.542 001.058.055.558 001.058.055.558 001.058.055.558 001.058.055.558 303.000.201.595 001.032.000.543 001.090.000.518 303.303.141.595 303.303.166.595 001.016.000.521 001.016.000.512 Description/Account Amount Total : SMALL TOOLS - STREET DEPT Total : SANDBLAST #211 Total : OFFICE SUPPLIES: COMM DEV OFFICE SUPPLIES: COMM DEV OFFICE SUPPLIES: COMM DEV Total : BATTERY FOR 2013 ESCAPE 4-009 Total : SUPPLEMENTAL WIRELINE CROS: Total : JUNE 2017 VERIZON CELL PHONE Total : HELP DESK TEMP POSTAGE SERVICES POSTAGE SERVICES Total : Total : LE CONTRACT BILLING JUNE 2017 Total : SPOKANE COUNTY SERVICES Total : 27,744.99 16.75 16.75 2,663.10 2,663.10 7.61 126.14 22.79 156.54 197.94 197.94 1,505.00 1,505.00 1,756.17 1,756.17 1,080.00 1,080.00 436.83 328.49 765.32 1,469,581.00 1,469,581,00 198,029.06 198,029.06 Bank total : 2,276,222.98 44 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 2,276,222.98 Page: 4� vchlist 07/13/2017 12:39:03PM Voucher List Spokane Valley 2 Page: G` Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept DescriptionlAccount Amount 42145 7/13/2017 000508 CONOCOPHILLIPS FLEET 50350428 001.058.057.558 JUNE 2017 FLEET FUEL BILL 2,570.67 Total : 2,570.67 42146 7/13/2017 002604 DELL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC 79037538 001.090.000.548 COMPUTER LEASE: 3 YR WORKS1 4,572.90 Total : 4,572.90 42147 7/13/2017 000230 SPOKANE CO AUDITORS OFFICE MAY 2017 001.058.056.558 RECORDING FEES 466.00 Total : 466.00 3 Vouchers for bank code : apbaik Bank total : 7,609.57 3 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 7,609.57 1, 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: schlist 07/14/2017 8:41:00AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 42148 7/14/2017 000394 AM LANDSHAPER INC 42149 7/14/2017 004046 AMERICAN ONSITE SERVICES 4/17/2017 A-218741 A-218746 A-218786 42150 7/14/2017 003076 AMSDEN, ERICA Expenses 42151 7/14/2017 000444 ARCTIC LIGHTING & ELECTRIC 15324 42152 7/14/2017 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC 9869579 S1166886 42153 7/14/2017 003300 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 42154 7/14/2017 006132 CICCARELLI, JAN 42155 7/14/2017 000326 CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION #19 42156 7/14/2017 000278 DRISKELL, CARY 42157 7/14/2017 000246 EAST SPOKANE WATER DIST #1 42158 7/14/2017 002308 FINKE, MELISSA June 2017 BLD -2017-1271 June 2017 June 2017 Expenses June 2017 June 2017 Fund/Dept 001.076.300.594 001.076.300.576 001.076.300.576 001.076.300.576 001.032.000.543 001.016.000.521 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.011.000.511 001.058.059.322 402.402.000.531 001.076.300.576 001.013.015.515 402.402.000.531 001.076.301.571 Description/Account Amount BROWNS PARK WATER SERVICE Total : FENCING AND PICKUP FEE AT BR( PORTABLE RESTROOMS AT PARK: CREDIT: PORTABLE RESTROOMS Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : LIGHTING REPAIR IN PARKING L01 Total : LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C Total : SUPPLIES: COUNCIL WORKSHOP Total : PERMIT REFUND BLD -2017-1271 Total : UTILITIES: PW UTILITIES: PARKS AND CENTERPL Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : WATER CHARGES: JUNE 2017 Total : INSTRUCTOR PMT Total : 5,225.21 5,225.21 187.58 74.57 -14.00 248.15 17.12 17.12 476.00 476.00 258.71 25.83 284,54 122.87 122.87 30.00 30.00 244.26 1,064.19 1,308.45 59.53 59.53 2,951.25 2,951.25 288.75 288.75 Page: vchlist 07/14/2017 8:41:OOAM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Banc code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 42159 7/14/2017 000441 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 42160 7/14/2017 000070 INLAND POWER & LIGHT CO 42161 7/14/2017 000388 IRVIN WATER DIST. #6 42162 7/14/2017 001635 1SS FACILITY EVENT SERVICES 42163 7/14/2017 001944 LANCER LTD 42164 7/14/2017 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER CO 42165 7/14/2017 001860 PLATT ELECTRICAL SUPPLY 42166 7/14/2017 000748 ROTO -ROOTER 42167 7/14/2017 000709 SENSKE LAWN & TREE CARE INC. 42168 7/14/2017 005215 SONGBIRD CONSULTING LLC 42169 7/14/2017 005012 SPOKANE CO ENVIRONMENTAL June 2017 June 2017 June 2017 1193193 0465189 June 2017 June 2017 N320233 N329817 104525 7911631 June 2017 July 2017 42170 7/14/2017 000404 SPOKANE VA_LEY HERITAGE MUSEUM June 2017 June 2017 Fund/Dept 001.090.000.519 101.042.000.542 001.076.300.576 001.076.305.575 DescriptionlAccount Amount SUPPLIES FOR GEN GOV UTILITIES: JUNE 2017 UTILITIES: PARKS & PW Total : Total : Total : EVENT SVCS AT CENTERPLACE Total : 001.076.305.575 BUSINESS CARDS: CP 001.076.302.576 101.042.000.542 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 402.402.000.531 001.076.301.571 001.076.302.576 105.000.000.557 105.000.000.557 Tota! : UTILITIES: JUNE 2017 PARKS UTILITIES: JUNE 2017 PW Total : SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE Total : LABOR/SERVICE AT CENTERPLAC Total : FLAGGING SVCS: ON 6/26/17 Total : INSTRUCTOR PMT Total : SPOKANE CO SEWER CHRGS: JUI Total : 2017 LODGING TAX GRANT REIMS 2017 LODGING TAX GRANT REIMB 4.56 4.56 438.36 438.36 1,023.77 1,023.77 100.08 100.08 56.04 56.04 4,061.24 9,041.54 13,102.78 123.10 43.10 166.20 318.78 318.78 176.00 176.00 742.50 742.50 1,635.08 1,635.08 424.00 425.00 Page: vchlist 07/14/2017 8:41:OOAM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 42170 7/14/2017 000404 000404 SPOKANE VALLEY HERITAGE MUSE (Continued) 42171 7/14/2017 006037 STATE PROTECTION SVCS INC 42172 7/14/2017 001472 TESTAMERICA LABORATORIES 42173 7/14/2017 000295 VALLEYFEST 42174 7/14/2017 000167 VERA WATER & POWER 27 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 27 Vouchers in this report 53970 59106443 2017 0003705 June 2017 Fund/Dept 001.076.000.576 001.076.300.576 001.076.305.575 309.000.227.595 101.042.000.542 Description/Account Amount Total : SECURITY SERVICES FOR PARKS Total : J6383-1 MONTHLY DRINKING WATE Total : VALLEYFEST EVENT PUBLICATION Total : INSTALL WATER SERVICE: APPLW, UTILITIES: JUNE 2017 MASTER BIL Total : 849.00 1,584.00 1,584.00 28.50 28.50 1,515.00 1,515.00 5,038.54 3,365.89 8,404.43 Bank total : 41,156.95 Total vouchers : 41,156.95 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: 'r" 07/18/2017 10:27:05AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 5853 7/5/2017 000164 LABOR & INDUSTRIES Ben74561 314.231.17.00 LABOR & INDUSTRIES: PAYMENT 24,189.44 Total : 24,189.44 5923 7/5/2017 000165 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS Ben74563 001.231.15.00 PERS: PAYMENT 90,161.33 Total : 90,161.33 5925 7/5/2017 000699 WA COUNCIL CO/CITY EMPLOYEES Ben74565 001.231.21.00 UNION DUES: PAYMENT 2,503.14 Total: 2,503.14 5941 7/5/2017 000048 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS, 401A PLAN Ben74567 001.231.14.00 431A: PAYMENT 31,527.62 Total : 31,527.62 5942 7/5/2017 000682 EFTPS Ben74569 311.231.11.00 FEDERAL TAXES: PAYMENT 36,903.38 Total : 36,903.38 5943 7/5/2017 000145 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS, 457 PLI Ben74571 001.231.18.00 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION: PAYI 7,992.78 Total : 7,992.78 5945 7/5/2017 000162 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS, 401A EXEC PI Ben74573 00t231.14.00 401 EXEC PLAN: PAYMENT 637.50 Total : 637.50 5960 7/5/2017 000682 EFTPS Ben74580 001.231.11.00 FEDERAL TAXES: PAYMENT 993.57 Total : 993.57 8 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 194,908.76 8 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 194,908.76 Page: vchlist 07/18/2017 3:31:09PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice FundlDept DescriptionlAccount Amount 7223 7/18/2017 006122 ANDREWS, MAURITA PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: DISCOVERY PL 75.00 Total : 75.00 7224 7/18/2017 006134 CHURCH OF THE RESURRECTION PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: TERRACE VIEV 75.00 Total : 75.00 7225 7/18/2017 006135 COX, NELS N PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: TERRACE VIEV 159.00 Total : 159.00 7226 7/18/2017 004485 DAVIS, M. EILEEN PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREENACRES 75.00 Total : 75.00 7227 7/18/2017 005194 DAY, CAROL E PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: TERRACE VIEV 75.00 Total : 75.00 7228 7/18/2017 006123 DERR, SHANE PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: VALLEY MISSIC 75.00 Total : 75.00 7229 7/18/2017 006137 EVANS, ALYSSA PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: DISCOVERY Pl. 75.00 Total : 75.00 7230 7/18/2017 006136 EXPEDITORS INTERNATIONAL PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREENACRES 75.00 Total : 75.00 7231 7/18/2017 006138 FFEWNI PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MIRABEAU ME 75.00 Total : 75.00 7232 7/18/2017 006108 FLORES, TERESA PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 SUMMER DAY CAMP REFUND 118.00 Total : 118.00 7233 7/18/2017 005071 GARCIA, VERONICA PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: TERRACE VIEV 75.00 Total : 75.00 7234 7/18/2017 006139 HALVERSON, CARYLA PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: DISCOVERY PL 75.00 Total : 75.00 7235 7/18/2017 006133 HEATH, ELISHA PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 SUMMER DAY CAMP REFUND 118.00 Page: vchlist 07/18/2017 3:31:09PM /L Voucher List Page: / Spokane Valley Bank code : pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice FundlDept DescriptionlAccount Amount 7235 7/18/2017 006133 006133 HEATH, ELISHA (Continued) Total : 118.00 7236 7/18/2017 004490 HOOPER, GRACE PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: VALLEY MISSIC 75.00 Total : 75.00 7237 7/18/2017 006124 LANGENHEIM, MALLORY PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: DISCOVERY PL 75.00 Total : 75.00 7238 7/18/2017 006125 LONG, JEFF PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: TERRACE VIEV 75.00 Total : 75.00 7239 7/18/2017 000551 MILLAN, ESTEBAN PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MIRABEAU MEQ 75.00 Total : 75.00 7240 7/18/2017 006140 MILLER, NICHOLAS PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: DISCOVERY PL 75.00 Total : 75.00 7241 7/18/2017 006126 MOLNER, DERIC PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: TERRACE VIEV 159.00 Total : 159.00 7242 7/18/2017 006127 MOORES, DENNIS PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MIRABEAU MEQ 75.00 Total : 75.00 7243 7/18/2017 006128 PINNACLE CHURCH PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: EDGECLIFF PA 75.00 Total : 75.00 7244 7/18/2017 006141 RANG, RICK PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: VALLEY MISSIC 75.00 Total : 75.00 7245 7/18/2017 006129 SPOKANE HMONG ASSN. PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: EDGECLIFF PA 300.00 Total : 300.00 7246 7/18/2017 006142 WHITE, CARRIE PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MIRABEAU MEQ 75.00 Total : 75.00 7247 7/18/2017 006130 WOOD, STACY PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREENACRES 75.00 Total : 75.00 7248 7/18/2017 006131 WOODIN, AMANDA PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM/: 490.00 Page: vchlist 07/18/2017 3:31:09PM / s Voucher List Page: Spokane Valley Bank code : pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept DescriptionlAccount Amount 7248 7/18/2017 006131 006131 WOODIN, AMANDA (Continued) Total : 490.00 26 Vouchers for bank code : pk-ref Bank total : 2,844.00 26 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 2,844.00 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: vchlist 07/19/2017 8:57:56AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 42175 7/19/2017 005580 GO WIRELESS 42176 7/19/2017 006144 S&S COATINGS 42177 7/19/2017 006145 SPOKANE WALL SYSTEMS 42178 7/19/2017 004153 STARBUCKS COFFEE #3230 4 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 4 Vouchers in this report CRY WOLF REFUND CRY WOLF REFUND CRY WOLF REFUND CRY WOLF REFUND Fund/Dept 001.016.000.342 001.016.000.342 001.016.000.342 001.016.000.342 Description/Account Amount REFUND FALSE ALARM PMTS - AC Total : REFUND PERMIT #V2380 - CK 468. Total : REFUND PERMIT #V1720 - CK 773E Total : REISSUE FALSE ALARM REFUND F Total : Bank total : 205.00 205.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 155.00 155.00 410.00 Total vouchers : 410.00 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 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 Pay Period Ending July 15, 2017 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: Budget/Financial impacts: Employees Gross: $ 276,134.51 $ Benefits: $ 95,612.75 $ Total payroll $ 371,747.26 $ Council Total $ 276,134.51 $ 95,612.75 $ 371,747.26 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, July 11, 2017 Mayor Higgins called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Attendance: Rod Higgins, Mayor Arne Woodard, Deputy Mayor Caleb Collier, Councilmember Pam Haley, Councilmember Mike Munch, Councilmember Ed Pace, Councilmember Sam Wood, Councilmember Staff Mark Calhoun, City Manager John Hohman, Deputy City Manager Cary Driskell, City Attorney Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Mark Werner, Police Chief Mike Stone, Parks & Rec. Director Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director Morgan Koudelka, Sr. Administrative Analyst Gloria Mantz, CIP Manager Doug Powell, Building Official Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Micki Harnois, Planner Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk INVOCATION: Pastor Al Hulten of Valley Assembly Church gave the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Members of Webelos Pack 426 led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. 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 Councilmembers Wood, Haley and Pace had no report. Councilmember Collier mentioned tonight's meeting with the Scouts from Troop 426 and that they discussed railroads. Councilmember Munch reported that he met with the Board of Health and that they have chosen a new health officer. Deputy Mayor Woodard reported that he attended several ribbons cuttings; went to the Chamber's Board of Director's Meeting, and the Chamber's Government Affairs meeting where they discussed the results of the state budget, particularly on the school districts' funding; adding that the State's Capital Budget has not yet been passed, and that affects school projects. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Higgins reported that he attended the Clean Air Council board meeting where they discussed their concern with the extremely hot weather and that the ozone presents a health hazard for citizens, especially the young and the elderly; and that he attended the Spokane Valley Theater performance of Patsy Cline, which he said was very well done. PROCLAMATION: n/a Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 07-11-2017 Page 1 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT PUBLIC COMMENTS: After explaining the procedure, Mayor Higgins invited public comment. Mr. Scott McClay, Spokane Valley: said he was present during our City's incorporation and that it was a civil war then, which continues; said people didn't want us to duplicate services but we are still conducting a civil war and we need to all stand together instead of sitting on our laurels and continuing to put up with what is going on; said it is appalling we are still going through this battle. Mr. Bob West, Spokane Valley: said he is the Vice Chair of the Citizens Advisory Board (CAB) for the Spokane County Sheriff, and he wanted to share that they were recently given an award through the Lutheran Community Services Northwest, where the CAB was nominated for the 2017 Partners in Justice award for outstanding service. Ms. Laura Rentz, Spokane: said she has been working with the City of Spokane to help reward businesses doing the right things concerning service dogs; said she had a great letter she was hoping the valley would support as well; said the letter extends congratulations and thanks to businesses putting up the right signage for service dogs; said she was unable to get a copy printed for this Council, but she can submit it to Council later this week, and if Council approves, it would be signed by her and by our Council. 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 claim vouchers on July 11, 2017 Request for Council Action Form, Total: $2,021,410.73 b. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending June 30,2017: $408,733.95 c. Approval of June 27, 2017 Council Meeting Minutes, Formal Meeting Format It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the Consent Agenda. NEW BUSINESS: 2. Proposed Resolution 17-013 Authorizing Temporary Parking Restrictions — Cary Driskell It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve Resolution 17-013 delegating authority to impose temporary parking restrictions relating to construction projects. After City Attorney Driskell explained the purpose of the resolution as noted in his Request for Council Action form, Mayor Higgins invited public comment. No comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 3. Motion Consideration: Consultant Contract Pines & Trent Grade Separation, Phase 1 - Gloria Mantz It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute a contract with HDR Engineering, Inc., in the amount of $124,349.85 for the Pines Road/BNSF Grade Separation Project Phase 1 design services. Ms. Mantz explained that staff issued a Request for Qualifications for engineering design services for the Pines Road, and that two firms submitted a proposal and staff selected HDR Engineering and DEA Consultants to design the project. Ms. Mantz explained that the city proposed a slightly different design, as noted in the included alternative 1 and 2, and she explained the difference in the two alternatives, all as noted in her Request for Council Action form. She also stated that staff recommends moving forward with the design in two phases, and the first will analyze and compare the alternatives, including cost, right-of-way needs, impacts to properties, safety and other pertinent project elements so that the City can then select the preferred alternative. Ms. Mantz noted the first phase will also include a public involvement process; and in the second phase the Consultant will complete the preliminary engineering design of the selected alternative. Mayor Higgins invited public comment. No comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 07-11-2017 Page 2 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT PUBLIC COMMENTS: After explaining the procedure, Mayor Higgins invited public comment Ms. Nina Fluegal, Spokane Valley: she started to comment about the previous motion on the design phase of the Pines and Trent Grade Separation project, but Mayor Higgins informed her that we are now outside that agenda item so her comments are out of order. There were no further public comments. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 4. Urban Farm & Animal Keeping — Micki Harnois At the request of Mayor Higgins, Ms. Pat Munts, Small Farms and Acreage Coordinator for the WSU Spokane County Extension Office, was invited to join staff in the presentation/discussion. Planner Harnois went through the PowerPoint presentation explaining the process for amending the code, and the summary of the proposed new regulations. Mayor Higgins noted on slide 8 that he would prefer removing mink, chinchilla, gnawing animals, etc., as mink are not pets and should not be in a residential area. City Attorney Driskell mentioned that there will be a section that defines the animals, and staff is working to identify whether an animal would qualify as a small animal. Mayor Higgins said he would still prefer those animals be prohibited, and Councilmember Munch agreed, stating that the prohibited animals should include rabbits as well. Mr. Driskell said staff will look into that and will ultimately need a concurrence of Council. Rather lengthy discussion ensued regarding animals, including the idea of weight restrictions on swine and the problems associated with keeping some animals below a certain weight; with Councilmembers Haley and Pace preferring pigs not be included at all, which led to further discussion about housing requirements for pigs as they are rooters and are destructive and that it takes work to keep their area free from odor. Ms. Munts mentioned that Spokane City requires people to attend pig certification classes, and that when she last checked, there were only three people attending. Councilmembers ultimately nodded in agreement to remove pigs from the small animal category. Discussion moved to the proposed regulation to keep animal enclosures "adequately maintained" and whether that definition was too vague. It was suggested to change "adequately maintained" to some sort of verbiage about having fencing appropriate to the animal, or change it to "adequately contained." The City's Code Enforcement policy was also mentioned and Deputy Mayor Woodard clarified that when it comes to code enforcement, we are not complaint driven; that if our Code Enforcement Officer sees a problem, he will take care of it. Discussion also included the topic of control of large animals and Ms. Harnois stated that our contract with SCRAPS does not include animal control except for dogs and cats. Ms. Harnois added that in cases of animal cruelty, SCRAPS would react but that they don't handle escaped animals. Mr. Driskell said that if Council wants some of these regulations, we will need to engage in discussion with SCRAPS to see what they are willing to do and at what fee, and Mr. Calhoun noted that these issues will need further work before returning for further Council discussion. Deputy Mayor Woodard said he would like to include that for escaped animals, we would seek recovery of costs from the animal's owner, and Mr. Driskell agreed. Mr. Calhoun also noted that staff will check with the City of Spokane concerning their contract with SCRAPS and what that contract includes if anything, about escaped animals. There was also brief discussion about the regulations for an accessory structure, which lead to a discussion about aggressive bees and that Ms. Munts suggested changing the verbiage from prevent overcrowding and swarming, to "minimizing" swarming as she stated one cannot prevent bees from swarming as it is a natural process (slide 10). City Attorney Driskell noted that once we are ready for the ordinance, that most of SVMC 19.65 will be repealed and replaced by moving this topic into 19.78; he noted that when this was presented to the Planning Commission the suggestion was to amend 19.78 but said that isn't accurate as you can't create a new chapter and amend it at the same time, but rather we will create a new chapter 19.78 and move most of 19.65 to its new location in 19.78. The discussion moved to the disposal of horse manure with Ms. Harnois explaining that City Engineer Henry Allen did some research on the issue; said there are various means of disposal, whether that be using Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 07-11-2017 Page 3 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT it for compost, or even contacting some landscaping companies that might want to re -use it; she explained that horse manure is not a green waste but can be disposed of at Sunshine Disposal or at the Waste -to - Energy Plant. Ms. Harnois mentioned that she spoke with Nancy Hill at SCRAPS and they handle the small farm animals, but would bill the handling of each animal separately as per their fee schedule. Ms. Harnois said she also spoke with our Code Enforcement Officer who indicated that he has received complaints about residents having more chickens than allowed, and of chickens getting loose. Mayor Higgins said it is obvious more time is needed before bringing this back to Council for a first reading; and that he would like to have another administrative report. City Manager Calhoun concurred. In addition, the idea of allowing community gardens in commercial and/or industrial areas was discussed. Ms. Harnois said the initial rationale was to have this in a residential area as a neighbor activity, and Councilmember Munch and Wood said they would prefer this be permitted in all zones, especially neighborhood commercial, but excluding commercial. Ms. Barlow said when this comes back to Council for further discussion, the idea of community gardens can be discussed further as currently they would be designed as permitted in residential zones, adding that commercial greenhouses would not fall under this category. Mayor Higgins called for a recess at 7:25 p.m.; he reconvened the meeting at 7:39 p.m. 5. Library Ad-hoc Committee Update — Mark Calhoun, Cary Driskell Via his PowerPoint presentation, City Attorney Driskell gave a comprehensive report on the background of the City's and Spokane County Library District's interlocal agreement, of the purchase of the vacant land adjacent to the existing Balfour Park, and of the proposed 2017 interlocal agreement amendments. Discussion included cost of purchasing the land, the City's ability to develop the park if the library building doesn't happen; and of the mention of use of those funds for other projects. Mr. Driskell also explained that if we don't do something with the interlocal agreement, it will expire in October at which time, the City would be required to return the money; and if we committed to something other than what is in the interlocal or proposed amendments, we would have to re -negotiate and time is a factor. There was Council consensus to bring this amendment interlocal to Council at the July 25 meeting for approval consideration. 6. Law Enforcement Contract — Mark Calhoun, Cary Driskell, Morgan Koudelka After City Manager Calhoun went over the background of the Law Enforcement Contract, Sr. Administrative Analysist Koudelka discussed the goals/summary of changes included in the Council packet material, as well as some of the additional negotiated items. Mr. Koudelka explained that the contract doesn't specifically discuss morale issues, but such issues as sick leave, sustainability, and being able to take a vehicle home, all relate to morale. Regarding taking a vehicle home, Mr. Koudelka explained some of the pros and cons, said they looked at policies of other cities as well as other studies, and where cities had problems with take home vehicles was where there was no policy or the policy was not enforced; the County policy is that one can take home a vehicle if they live within a certain distance of the city; said the advantages include saving time and saving fuel costs, and holding officers accountable is very effective and the officer tends to take better care of the vehicle; and when additional officers are needed immediately such as with the windstorm case, those officers can be on site much quicker. There was Council consensus to bring this back for a motion approval consideration at the July 25 Council meeting. At 8:49 p.m., it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to extend the meeting to 9:15 p.m. 7. City Hall Update - Doug Powell, Jenny Nickerson Building Official Powell went through the PowerPoint showing the various sections of the city hall building, and noting we are still on schedule. Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 07-11-2017 Page 4 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT 8. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins Councilmember Collier said a citizen contacted him about "endless yard sales" and he suggested a review of our City's yard sale policies. 9. Potential Transportation Grant(s) This item was for information only and was not reported or discussed. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS City Manager Calhoun commented on the FASTLANE Grant that we previously applied for and that we have not heard anything about the latest grant submittal; said he received notification from Senator Cantwell's office that the FASTLANE grant has now been renamed INFRA Grants (Infrastructure for Rebuilding America), has $1.5 billion available, and has a November 2, 2017 deadline; said he anticipates we will pursue that and report back to Council. Mr. Calhoun said each year the budget process includes outside agency funding, and that will process will begin this Friday with media releases and notification on our website, and that we will be sending out courtesy letters to past applicants; he said there is $150,000 available in the 2018 budget, and the deadline to submit an application is August 11. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:58 p.m. ATTEST: L.R. Higgins, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 07-11-2017 Page 5 of 5 Approved by Council: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business ['information ❑admin. report AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Services Amendment GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 39:34 Department Director Approval: ® new business ['public hearing ['pending legislation ['executive session Interlocal Agreement for Law Enforcement PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Authorized Contract 10-109, Interlocal Agreement for Costs Incident to Law Enforcement Services in the City of Spokane Valley, on August 10, 2010. Provided consensus on July 5, 2016 to establish Law Enforcement goals and authorize staff to negotiate inclusion of goals in the Law Enforcement agreement. BACKGROUND: The Spokane County Sheriff's Office has provided law enforcement service to the City of Spokane Valley since incorporation. The current contract was executed in 2010. Council has expressed interest in reviewing the current contract and identifying possible changes to the terms. At the Council Workshop on March 15, 2016, City staff and the Police Chief presented information specific to the Law Enforcement Contract. A follow-up presentation was made to Council on June 7, 2016. As a result of Council comments and staff research, staff developed a list of proposed Public Safety goals specific to Law Enforcement for the consideration of Council. Council arrived at a consensus for establishing the Law Enforcement goals on July 5, 2016, and authorized the City Manager to negotiate with the Sheriff and the County to amend the Interlocal Agreement for Law Enforcement Services, incorporating the City's goals into the agreement. City staff has negotiated the new terms with the Sheriff and the County and presents the draft amended agreement to Council for consideration. OPTIONS: (1) Authorize execution of the Interlocal Agreement; or (2) take other action as appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the Interlocal Agreement for Law Enforcement Services as provided by the Spokane County Sheriff's Office to the City of Spokane Valley BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The 2017 budget for the Law Enforcement Agreement is $20,036,884. The impact of the new cost methodology will be estimated later in 2017. STAFF CONTACT: Morgan Koudelka, Senior Administrative Analyst; Cary Driskell, City Attorney; Mark Calhoun, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: Negotiated results; Marked -Up Version of Amended Law Enforcement Agreement, Clean Version of Law Enforcement Agreement. SPOKANE VALLEY PUBLIC SAFETY - LAW ENFORCEMENT GOALS: NEGOTIATED RESULTS Goals #1: Contract Length ➢ Rolling Termination of 18-24 months. ➢ Evaluation presented to Council periodically or prior to term expiration. ➢ Auto -renewal with authorization by Council. Addressed in Section Nos. 4.1 and 4.2, page 2 of the redlined agreement • 5 year term. • 24 month termination after three years are complete. • Must have Council authorization for auto renewal. Goal #2: Vehicle Color ➢ Marked vehicles will be Light Blue Metallic in color. ➢ Existing vehicles left the color they are. Addressed in Section No. 12.1, page 17 of the redlined agreement • Vehicles shall display the color, identification and logo of City. Goal #3: Marked Cars ➢ Patrol, Traffic, School Resource Officer, and Community Service Vehicles are clearly marked. ➢ Detective and Supervisor cars are left unmarked. ➢ Current County Sign Shop decals are utilized. Addressed in Section No. 12.1, page 17 of the redlined agreement • Patrol, Traffic, School Resource Officer, and Community Service vehicles that are assigned to the City shall display the color, identification and logo of City. • Detective and Supervisor vehicles may be left unmarked. Goal #4: Officer Uniforms ➢ Create a Spokane Valley Police Officer uniform committee comprised of Spokane Valley Police Officers to identify the best options to create a unique Spokane Valley Police identity. ➢ These options will be presented to Council for consideration. Addressed in Section No. 12.2, page 17 of the redlined agreement • Assigned personnel shall wear additional identification in the nature of a patch, clearly indicating affiliation with City on uniform jackets and jumpsuits. Page 1 of 5 SPOKANE VALLEY PUBLIC SAFETY - LAW ENFORCEMENT GOALS: NEGOTIATED RESULTS Goal #5: Dedicated Officers ➢ Through the Contract with the Sheriff's Office, identify, when feasible, a fixed number of dedicated Spokane Valley Police Officers, including Investigative Services. Addressed in Section No. 2.4, page 2 of the redlined agreement • Dedicated City Officers listed in Exhibit 3 are 100% dedicated to providing service to the City and work under the supervision of the Police Chief. Addressed in Section No. 5.1.1, page 4 of the redlined agreement • City may unilaterally adjust the number of dedicated City officers. Addressed in Section No. 5.1.2, page 4 of the redlined agreement • Sheriff shall ensure that shared service units listed in Exhibit 4 work with the Police Chief and Precinct Commander to provide case updates, information, and data as requested. • Sheriff shall have the ability to make permanent adjustments to the number of commissioned officers providing services listed under shared units in Exhibit 4 after 30 days advanced notice is provided to the City and accompanied with a cost impact estimate and service level impact estimate. Addressed in Section No. 8.3, page 11 of the redlined agreement • Sheriff and Police Chief shall work together to determine the personnel assigned to fill Dedicated City Officers positions. • Sheriff and City will work together to encourage Dedicated City Officer retention and fill open positions to provide continuity of services. • Sheriff and City Manager shall discuss anticipated vacancies and how best to prepare to fill those vacancies. Addressed in Section No. 8.5, page 11 of the redlined agreement • Dedicated service units and officers shall work under the supervision of the Police Chief and be located at the City Precinct Building. Addressed in Section No 9.3, pages 13 and 14 of the redlined agreement • Police Chief will review the performance of all Dedicated City Officers and report any recommendations for performance improvement to the City Manager. • Police Chief will identify duties of all Dedicated City Officers. • Police Chief will provide supervision and direction to all Dedicated City Officers. Addressed in Exhibits 1 and 3 of the redlined agreement • Dedicated City service units and officers identified. Page 2 of 5 SPOKANE VALLEY PUBLIC SAFETY - LAW ENFORCEMENT GOALS: NEGOTIATED RESULTS Goal #6: Cost Methodology ➢ Develop a simple cost methodology. ➢ Contract cost estimate based on current year budget. ➢ Segregated Spokane Valley cost units. ➢ Rolling average for indirect costs. ➢ Settle and Adjust reconciliation. Addressed in Section No. 6, page 5 of the redlined agreement • Cost will be determined by the Law Enforcement Cost Allocation Plan ("LECAP"). The LECAP was greatly simplified and made more accurate and timely through the following changes: o Salary and benefit costs for Dedicated City Officers will be segregated and tracked separately. o Fuel costs will be tracked separately. o Shared costs will be allocated according to factors jointly determined by the City and the County. o Estimated costs will be calculated using the current year's budgeted costs. o Estimated indirect costs will be calculated using an indirect cost rate (%). o Staff and the City Manager have the ability to make minor refinements to the LECAP without amending contract. o Any changes require mutual agreement between City and County. o The Settle and Adjust reconciliation is applied to a single invoice instead of over twelve months. o The Commissioned Officer Rate, the Commissioned Officer Worksheet, and the Cost Calculation Model will be eliminated along with inflationary escalators and vacancy adjustments. o Some cost centers will be combined. o The number of allocation factors and statistics will be reduced. Goal #7: City Control of Police Chief ➢ Retain current scenario where City Manager hires the Police Chief from a list of candidates provided by the Sheriff. ➢ The Police Chief reports to the City Manager and the Sheriff. Addressed in Section No. 9, pages 12 and 13 of the redlined agreement • City Manager hires and terminates the Police Chief. • Sheriff may remove the Police Chief after consultation with the City Manager. • Duties of the Police Chief include working with the City Manager to establish goals, objectives, and performances measures, identifying supplemental training for Dedicated City Officers, maintaining communication between the City Manager and the Sheriff, and notifying the City Manager of any significant criminal events or civil emergencies that occur in the City. Page 3 of 5 SPOKANE VALLEY PUBLIC SAFETY - LAW ENFORCEMENT GOALS: NEGOTIATED RESULTS Goal #8: Public Information ➢ For emergency and emerging incidents in Spokane Valley, the Spokane Valley Police Chief will act as the spokesperson for the City and will coordinate with the Sheriff's Office Public Information Officer when releasing public information. The City Manager will be notified of such events. For general public information of a non -emergency nature specific to Spokane Valley, the Sheriff's Office will coordinate with the City Manager, City P10, and City Police Chief prior to release. Addressed in Section No. 33, page 23 of the redlined agreement • Sheriff will endeavor to have the Police Chief interact with the media when appropriate. Note: Sheriff will work with City and Police Chief to establish identity of Spokane Valley while maintaining ability to take responsibility for significant incidents involving law enforcement. Goal #9: Contract Performance ➢ Establish service level outcomes and specifications to align financial expenditures with performance received. Addressed in Section No 5.2.1, page 5 and Exhibit 2, page 28 of the redlined agreement • Performance Measures and Workload Indicators shall be provided on a quarterly basis. • Modifications shall be made jointly by the Parties as needed. • Performance Goals shall be established by the City Manager and the Police Chief. • Failure to meet goals shall result in progress reports with corrective measures taken. Goal #10: S.C.O.P.E. Services ➢ Enhance SCOPE services by further utilizing the substantial resource of volunteers motivated to serve the community. Addressed in Exhibit 1, pages 26 and 27 of the redlined agreement • SCOPE services were maintained as a service provided through the Law Enforcement Agreement. The negotiating parties believed that additional language is not necessary but can be addressed through the duties of the Police Chief and Sheriff and regular meetings between the Police Chief, Sheriff and City Manager. Goal #11: Spokane Valley strives to be a crime -free city Addressed in Section No 1.6, page 1 of the redlined agreement • Goal added to recitals. "The Parties, in providing these law enforcement services, seek to make the City a Crime -Free City." Goal #12: Regular Police Department Updates to Council Page 4 of 5 SPOKANE VALLEY PUBLIC SAFETY - LAW ENFORCEMENT GOALS: NEGOTIATED RESULTS Addressed in Section No. 9.6, page 14, of the redlined agreement. • At the request of the City Manager, Sheriff will make presentations to the Council and appearances at City functions as his schedule permits. • City Manager will also instruct staff and Police Chief to make presentations to Council as needed. Additional Negotiated Items 1. Section 4.3: Added records transfer and timeline to transition plan. 2. Section 5.1: Services can be changed only by written mutual agreement of parties. 3. Section 5.1: Police Chief can reassign personnel temporarily up to 90 days to meet current needs. Longer moves must be approved by City Manager (Permanent changes to dedicated officers would have to be approved by Council). 4. Section 5.1: Staffing additions will be filled in 60 days unless prevented by staffing shortages. In this case, a time estimate will be provided along with quarterly updates. 5. Section 6.1: The City shall not be charged for costs unrelated to the provision of law enforcement services in the current year and shall receive a credit for building and maintenance charges in recognition of the City -owned Precinct Building and Garage. 6. Section 6.2: Established timeline for reviewing and paying estimated costs. 7. Section 6.5: Capital Purchase language was simplified and a requirement to consult with City prior to purchases that impact the City greater than $200,000 was added. Flexibility was added to choose whether to bill the City immediately or flow a purchase through the cost plan. 8. Section 8.4: Language was added to define how patrol districts would change or be evaluated in the event of annexation or due to changes to call load or response times. 9. Section 8.5.1: A Mutual Aid section was added to clarify when Dedicated City Officers can work outside of the City Limits. 10. Section 9.3.11: Added language to the Police Chief duties requiring the Chief to coordinate with the City Manager regarding capital improvement needs of the Precinct Building. 11. Section 9.4: Added to duties of the Precinct Commander to require Commander to work with City staff to provide data as requested. 12. Section 9.6: Added a section for the duties of the Sheriff that provides for greater oversight and interaction between Sheriff, Spokane Valley Police, City Manager, and City Council. 13. Section 9.8: Enhanced scope of meetings between party representatives and added requirement that City be notified in advance of changes that impact costs or services. 14. Section 13: Added language that addresses the timely transfer of records in the event of a transition of services. 15. Section 18: Revised the dispute process to include a step requiring an action plan prior to arbitration. Page 5 of 5 DRAFT INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT 071117 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR COSTS INCIDENT TO LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES IN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEYAS PROVIDED BY THE SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE TO THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into among Spokane County, a political subdivision of the state of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 1116 West Broadway Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99260, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY," the Spokane County Sheriff, a separate elected official of Spokane County,. having offices for the transaction of business at 1100 West Mallon Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99260, hereinafter referred to as "SHERIFF" and the City of Spokane Valley, a municipal corporation of the state of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at the Redwood Plaza, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 (10210 E. Sprague after August 31, 2017), hereinafter referred to as "CITY," jointly hereinafter referred to as the "Parties" and individually referred to as "Party" COUNTY, SHERIFF and CITY agree as follows. SECTION NO. 1: RECITALS AND FINDINGS 1.1 Under RCW 36.32.120(6), the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, acting on behalf of Spokane County, has the care of County property and the management of County funds and business. 1.2 Under chapter 39.34 RCW ("Interlocal Cooperation Act"), public agencies may contract with each other to perform certain functions which each may legally perform. 1.3 Under chapter 36.28 RCW, the Spokane County Sheriff is the Chief Law Enforcement Officer and Conservator of the Peace of Spokane County. 1.4 The City of Spokane Valley desires to utilize the services of the Spokane County Sheriff's Office to provide law enforcement services. 1.5 The direct and indirect costs for law enforcement services will be set forth in the Law Enforcement Cost Allocation Pplan ("LECAP"), attached hereto as Exhibit "3"described in Section 6 and incorporated herein by this reference. 1.6 The Parties, in providing these law enforcement services, seek to make the CITY a crime -free city. Page 1 of 31 SECTION NO. 2: DEFINITIONS 2.1 Agreement: "Agreement" means this Interlocal Agreement among Sheriff, City and County regarding the provision of law enforcement services. 2.2 City: "CITY" means the City of Spokane Valley. 2.3 County: "COUNTY" means Spokane County. 2.4 Dedicated CITY Officers: "Dedicated CITY Officers" means those commissioned officers (SHERIFF Deputies) listed in Exhibit "3" that are 100% dedicated to providing service to the CITY and who work under the supervision of the CITY Police Chief. 2.54 Services: "Services" means those services identified in Exhibit 1. 2.65 Sheriff: "SHERIFF" means the duly elected sheriff of Spokane County possessing those general duties set forth in chapter 36.28 RCW. 2.76 Uncontrollable Circumstances: "Uncontrollable Circumstances" means the following events: riots, wars, civil disturbances, insurrections, acts of terrorism, external fires and floods, volcanic eruptions, lightning or earthquakes at or near where the Services are performed and/or that directly affect providing of such Sservices. SECTION NO. 3: PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to reduce to writing the Parties' understanding as to the terms and conditions under which SHERIFF will provide Services to CITY. The Sservices will be consistent with the City's council/manager form of management pursuant to chapter: RCW 35-A.13 RCW. SECTION NO. 4: DURATION AND TERMINATION 4.1 Initial Tterm and Renewal. The initial term of this Agreement shall commence as of 12:01 A.M. on the date of execution, 2010, and run through mMidnight, December 31, 202244, for all provisions except for the cost methodology, which shall be implemented beginning on January 1, 2018. Thereafter, this Agreement shall automatically renew for fivefettf-year time frames, unless the termination process outlined herein is invoked. The Automatic renewal shall not occur unless the CITY provides notice to the COUNTY that the City Council has authorized the renewal. 4.2 Process for Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by any Pparty by providing written notice on or after June 30, 2012December 31, 2020 to all other Parties. COUNTY shall consult with SHERIFF prior to providing written notice of termination under this subsection. SHERIFF shall consult with COUNTY prior to providing written Page 2 of 31 notice of termination under this subsection. This termination will shall be effective (244 8) eighteen twenty-four months after written notice is provided as long as such written notice is provided prior to mMidnight December 31, 20223. The same time intervals for terminations shall apply to future terms if the termination process is not invoked during the initial contract period. 4.3 Implementation of Termination. When notice of termination is given, SHERIFF and CITY agree to jointly prepare a Transition Plan: and complete by a mutually agreed date. 4.3.1 Transition Plan. The Transition Plan shall identify and address, among other items (i) personnel issues; (ii) workload; and (iii) on-going case assignments; and (iv) the transfer of records. If the SHERIFF and CITY cannot mutually agree to the terms of the Transition Plan, either Party can request arbitration as provided in Section No. 18. SHERIFF and CITY shall equally share the cost of said arbitration, 4.3.2 Implementation of Transition Plan. Parties agree to use all best efforts to create and effectuate a mutual implementation of the Transition Plan. 4.4 Termination of the Agreement -Vehicles and Equipment. At the termination of this Agreement, CITY shall have the option to purchase, subject to agreement of SHERIFF and COUNTY, COUNTY -owned vehicles and/or equipment used to provide Services. 4.5 Waiver of Statutory Terms. To the extent that it is applicable to law enforcement Sservices, the Parties hereby waive the statutory termination rights of RCW 39.34.180(3) and elect instead to follow these contractual termination procedures as the sole method of terminating this Agreement, the terms of which are detailed in this subsection. 4.6 Termination of the Agreement and Settle and Adjust. The Parties recognize that Costs for Services under the Agreement areis calculated utilizing the LECAP. The LECAP is Charges for the current year are based on actual estimated costs from two years prior to the current contract year and are subject to a settle and adjust reconciliation to actual costs after the year is complete. As such, in the event this Agreement is terminated as provided for in Sub -section 4.2 hereinabove, the Agreement will be subject to a settle and adjust for the last two years of the term of the Agreement based upon the LECAP for the two (2) subsequent years after termination. for any years that have not yet been reconciled. In the event of termination, the Parties shall follow the process set forth in Section No. 6 to determine the settle and adjust for each of the last two (2) years of the Agreement as well as the process to object to the final adjustment(s) determined for each of the last two (2) years to include dispute resolution as set forth in Subsection 6.4P set forth hereinafter. SECTION NO. 5: SERVICES Page 3of31 5.1 Services Provided and Service Levels. The Sheriff SHERIFF shall provide those Services set forth in Exhibit "1," attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. These Services shall only be changed by mutual written agreement of Parties. 5.1.1 Dedicated CITY Officers. CITY may unilaterally, on an annual basis, adjust the number of Dedicated CITY Officers service level FTE's set forth in Category One of Exhibit "34-" only after meaningful prior consultation between the SHERIFF and the CITY. Written notice of such an adjustment to Category One shall be provided by CITY to COUNTY and SHERIFF no later than November 30' with the adjustments to be effective on Januaryl4 of the following year. If COUNTY fails to provide the third quarterly report or changes to the LECAP allocation as set forth in Section 5.2 below, said notice is required to occur 30 days after this information is provided. Any other adjustments in Category One services may occur by mutual agreement as set forth in Section 6.6_ The Police Chief shall have the ability to move Dedicated CITY Officers to different service units on a temporary basis, not to exceed 90 days, to meet current workload demands, with notification to the City Manager. Moves that exceed 90 days must be approved by the City Manager and be accompanied by a demonstrated need. CITY patrol staffing shall be maintained at a level that allows for a minimum of one patrol officer per patrol district per shift. CITY and SHERIFF, by mutual agrccmcnt may also adjust the level of service FTE's set forth in Catcgory Two of Exhibit "1." Such Agreement shall be executed no later than November 30th preceding the contract year. 5.1.2 Shared Services. SHERIFF shall provide shared Services listed in Exhibit "1" to CITY. SHERIFF shall ensure that shared service units work with the Police Chief and Precinct Commander to provide case updates, information, and data as requested. SHERIFF shall have the ability to make permanent adjustments to the number of commissioned officers providing Services listed under shared units in Exhibit "4" after 30 days advanced notice is provided to the CITY and accompanied with a cost impact estimate and service level impact estimate. The SHERIFF's ability to temporarily shift shared personnel to meet emerging needs shall not be limited. Any adjustments in Sservices under this section shall only be operative after relevant notice and impact bargaining negotiations for reductions in force are satisfied with the relevant cCollective bBargaining uUnits but in no event shall the delay in implementation exceed 60 days after the SHERIFF has satisfied his good faith bargaining obligations pursuant to chapter 41.46 RCW for reductions. Additions will be filled in 60 days unless staffing shortages delay implementation, Page 4 of 31 in which case, SHERIFF shall provide to CITY an estimated time to fill new positions added by CITY, and will continue to provide quarterly updates until the positions are filled. Any permanent adjustments that take place under this section after the original cost estimate has been prepared shall result in the COUNTY recalculating the annual cost estimate and then adjusting the remaining monthly payments unless otherwise mutually agreed upon by the SHERIFF and City Manager. Notwithstanding the above, SHERIFF'S ability to fulfill his statutory obligation to provide law enforcement Services to COUNTY and CITY shall not be limited. 5.2 Periodic Reporting Requirements. SHERIFF shall provide to CITY quarterly reports, within 30 days from the end of each quarter, that identify statistics used to calculate CITY'S cost in the LECAP referenced in Section No. 6 below. Those statistics which are only available to COUNTY on an annual basis shall be provided annually within 30 days of the end of each calendar year- unless the statistics are provided by an outside agency, in which case they shall be provided within 15 days after they are provided to COUNTYby CITY. These reports will allow CITY to monitor service consumption and cost accrual throughout the year. 5.2.1 Performance Measures and Workload Indicators. Available data for the indicators and measures listed in Exhibit "2" shall be provided by SHERIFF to CITY on a quarterly basis, unless otherwise mutually agreed upon by SHERIFF and the City Manager. The indicators and measures shall be modified jointly by the City Manager and SHERIFF as needed to provide the most accurate assessment of the Services provided to CITY. Goals for each performance measure shall be established by the City Manager and the Police Chief. SHERIFF and CITY shall work together jointly to provide the necessary support and resources to achieve established goals. Failure to meet established goals on a quarterly basis shall result in progress reports provided by the Police Chief to the City Manager. The reports shall indicate the causes of the deficiencies and provide responsive action taken or recommendations by the Police Chief to correct the deficiencies as well as progress made toward achieving the goals. The progress reports shall continue until the deficiency has been corrected. COUNTY will provide to CITY, any changes in the allocation of law enforcement services set forth in the adopted LECAP as defined in Section 6.3. SECTION NO. 6: COST OF SERVICES Page 5 of 31 6.1 Cost Methodology. CITY costs will be determined by utilizing the LECAP. The LECAP will allocate costs through a combination of direct dedicated CITY officer costs; and shared and indirect costs allocated through mutually agreed upon allocation bases. Salary and Benefits for Dedicated CITY Officers will be segregated into separate budget units and costs will be tracked separately. The allocation bases will be reviewed by the COUNTY and CITY as needed. Any changes to the allocation bases will be made by staff of the CITY and COUNTY and mutually agreed upon by the SHERIFF, COUNTY CEO, and the City Manager. Indirect costs will be applied from the Countywide Cost Allocation Plan, the COCAP. The COCAP will be prepared in accordance with OMB U.S. Office of Management and Budget Circular 2 CFR 200. The CITY shall not be charged for costs unrelated to the provision of law enforcement Services in the current year, including but not limited to, costs for tax assessor and treasurer tax collections. CITY shall receive a credit for COCAP building charges and associated maintenance and utility costs, in recognition of CITY -owned facilities (precinct/garage). CITY shall also receive a credit for Services paid through other revenue sources and Services that have been pre -paid by CITY. 6.24 B-asisEstimated Costs. The LECAP will be used to estimate CITY cost for Services for a contract year based upon the contract year's budget. Estimated indirect costs will be calculated by applying an indirect rate derived from actual indirect costs from the most recently completed year.. Cost for services shall be based upon the Law Enforcement Cost Allocation Plan (LECAP) as previously identified and incorporated herein. CITY shall have 4530 days to review the estimated costs and ask questions. Should the estimate not be provided or not be finalized by the time the invoices for a new contract year are due, CITY will continue to pay at the previous year's monthly rate until the estimate is finalized. If the CITY has paid one or more months at the previous year's rates, the COUNTY will calculate the difference between the previous year's rates and the current year's monthly estimate for those months and add the difference to the first monthly payment at the current year's estimate. COUNTY shall notify CITY of any budget amendments expected to increase CITY's law enforcement costs by more than $200,000. 6.3 Settle and Adjust. The LECAP will be used to calculate the actual CITY cost for the contract year based upon the contract year's actual expenses. After calculating the CITY's actual costs for a contract year, any overage or underage from the estimated billed amount will be applied to the next invoice. Should the contract no longer be in effect, payment by either Party will be due within 30 days of agreement of the final amount. Page 6 of 31 COUNTY shall provide CITY with the actual cost calculations for the contract year in writing via the LECAP no later than September 30th of any calendar year for the preceding year's costs. CITY will have thirty (30) calendar days from its receipt of the LECAP to provide COUNTY with any written objections to the amounts set forth therein. COUNTY agrees to consider all written objections received from CITY and reply to CITY no later than fifteen (15) calendar days of receipt of CITY'S objections. In the event the Parties cannot mutually resolve any written objections(s) submitted by CITY within an additional fifteen (15) calendar day time frame, or such other time frame as the Parties may mutually agree to, the objections shall be resolved pursuant to the Dispute Resolution provisions set forth in Section No. 18. 6.2 Methodology. Costs for Services will be calculated utilizing the Cost Calculation Model (CCM) as shown in Exhibit "2" which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 6.23 COCAP and LECAP. Once the Countywide Cost Allocation Plan ("COCAPD and is LECAP are finalized, no changes will be made to any department cost or allocation basis until the following year other than as indicated in the MID YEAR FULL TIME EQUIVALENT FTE ADJUSTMENTS defined in sub section 6.6. Each year, departments within the Sheriff's Office will be reviewed to determine if the costs are being appropriately allocated. Eachyear. Each allocation basis will be reviewed to determine if it is the best basis for allocating the costs. CITY shall be notified immediately of aAny material changes in allocating department costs,Jthat would likely require a COUNTY budget amendment). orCITY shall be notified of changes in allocation basis prior to it being applied, accompanied with the reason for the changewill be provided to _CITY with explanations for any deviation from the initial plan no later than the end of the third quarter. Both Tthe COCAP and the LECAP will be prepared in accordance with OMB U.S. Office of Management and Budget Circular A 87. The LECAP referenced herein shall not contain COUNTY costs as set forth in Category Four of Exhibit "1" and further tThe COCAP shall not contain regional costs that are COUNTY responsibility or costs unrelated to providing law enforcement services, including but not limited to, costs for tax assessor and treasurer tax collections. CITY shall receive a credit for COCAP building charges and associated maintenance and utility costs, in recognition of CITY owned facilities (precinct/garage). The COCAP and the LECAP will be completed by September 30th of each year for determining the actual costs for the prior year. For example, the actual cost for the calendar year 200179 would be completed by September 30, 20180. 6.4 CCM. Costs for Services shall be calculated utilizing the LECAP. The LECAP will be based on actual costs. Page 7 of 31 The model based on thc LECAP costs from two ycars prior will cstimatc costs for thc current agreement year. The Per Commissioned Officer Rate as well as the dollar amount for Other Allocations for the contract year will be multiplied by (1) any cost of living or for the calendar year immediately following the LECAP year; and by (2) a 1.25% multiplier for the calendar year immediately following the LECAP year; and by (3) any cost of living or wage change(s) granted commissioned deputies under any collective bargaining agreement for the calendar year two years subsequent to the LECAP year; and by (4) a 1.25% multiplier for the calendar year two years subsequent to the LECAP year. After generating the Per Commissioned Officer rate for the interlocal agreement year using the Commissioned Officer Worksheet (Exhibit "1"), the number of Category One and Cate_o Ttwo officers will be updated to reflect current year staffing levels. The total contract costs then will be automatically calculated. This model can also be used for any MID YEAR FULL TIME EQUIVALENT (FTE) ADJUSTMENTS. The CCM shall be provided by COUNTY to CITY by September 30th for the following year. 6.45 Retro-aActive Salary Adjustments. The Police Chief will inform the CITY of the commencement and settlement of applicable collective bargaining agreements, as well as inform CITY of the status of any pending negotiations as to tentative agreements. Should any applicable bargaining agreement not be settled in time to include any salary adjustments granted commissioned deputies under any collective bargaining agreement in the contract calculation modelcost estimate for a given year, and that collective bargaining agreement is settled during that year, and the settlement contains a retroactive salary adjustment, COUNTY will bill CITY for the full amount of CITY'S portion of the retroactive payment. CITY will be responsible for paying COUNTY within thirty (30) days of the billing date. Additionally, COUNTY will—may recalculate the estimated Interlocal Agreement amount employing the cost of living or wage increase(s) granted commissioned deputies under any collective bargaining agreement and adjust the remaining monthly payments. 6.6 Mid Year Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Adjustments. In the event the Parties negotiate a change in full time positions, mid year, such change, for purposes of calculating costs under the LECAP, can occur only once during any interlocal agreement year and in any event no later than August 30th of such year. Additionally, COUNTY will recalculate the estimated interlocal agreement amount and adjust the remaining monthly payments. Any reduction would become operative only after the relevant notice and impact bargaining obligations for reductions in force are satisfied with the effected Collective Bargaining unit but in no event shall the delay in implementation exceed 60 s. 6.47 Settle and Adjust. The LECAP will be used to reconcile the actual agreement cost for the year for which it is calculated to the estimated amount the CITY paid the COUNTY during that same year as set forth in Section 6.69. After completing the Cost Calculation Model calculating the CITY's actual costs for the current agreementa particular year, any Page 8 of 31 overage or underage from the settle and adjust will be applied to the total amountnext invoice. This combined figure will follow the billing procedure. Should the contract no longer be in effect, payment by either party will be due within 30 days of agreement of the final amount. COUNTY shall provide CITY with its final adjustmentsettle and adjust calculation in writing no later than September 30th of any calendar year for the .recedin. ear's costs. The adjustment will include a copy of the full LECAP any supporting financial reports. CITY will have thirty (30) calendar days from its receipt of the written adjustment to provide COUNTY with any written objections to the amounts set forth therein. COUNTY agrees to consider all written objections received from CITY and reply to CITY no later than fifteen (15) calendar days of receipt of CITY'S objections. In the event that the Parties cannot mutually resolve any written objections(s) submitted by CITY within an additional fifteen (15) calendar day time frame, or such other time frame as the Parties may mutually agree to, the objections shall be resolved pursuant to the Dispute Resolution provisions set forth in Section No. 18. 6.58 Capital Purchases. Capital items equipment deemed necessary for all commissioned officers, excluding vehicles, with a cost greater than COUNTY capital threshold (currently $2,000) and less than $10,000, as well as capital items with a cost equal to or greater than $50,000, will—may be billed to CITY at the time of purchase contingent upon prior CITY authorization. CITY will be billed according to its proportionate share.to CITY'S current usage percentage of the items COUNTY will bill CITY for this cost at the time of the purchase and payment will be due within 30 days of the billing date. After As part of the LECAP settle and adjust reconciliationis completed for the year of the purchase(s), COUNTY will give CITY credit for the full amount paid for capital equipment in that year. The Parties may also jointly agree to apply this language to capital purchases of any amount on a case-by-case basis. All capital items purchased by COUNTY will become the property of COUNTY. All items purchased by CITY will become the property of CITY. Capital items that have been purchased with grant funds by either CITY or COUNTY, or other funding sources, and —capital items that are not utilized in providing law enforcement &services to CITY, will not be charged to CITY. All capital items that are utilized in providing law enforcement Sservices to CITY, and which are not immediately billed to CITY according to the terms stated in this section, and that were not purchased with other funding sources, will be incorporated as fixed assets in the (COCAP) and reimbursed through depreciation. The COCAP is a cost within the LECAP. County shall consult with CITY prior to committing to capital purchases that exceed $200,000. Typical recurring expenses such as vehicles are exempt from this requirement. 6.69 Billing Procedure. COUNTY will bill CITY for one -twelfth of COUNTY'S calculated estimated contract amount as determined in contract calculation model during the Page 9 of 31 first week of theeach month. Regular monthly payments by CITY will be due by the end of the month in which they are billed. Should the bill be received at a later date, the City shall have 21 days to process the payment. 6.710 Penalty. At the sole option of COUNTY, a penalty may be assessed on any late payment of the monthly calculated contract amount owed by CITY in an amount equal to lost interest earnings had the payment been timely paid and invested in the Spokane County Treasurer's Investment Pool. Any resolution of a disputed amount through use of the arbitration process identified in Section No._18 shall include at the request of any Party, a determination of whether interest is appropriate, including the amount. SECTION NO. 7: MUNICIPAL POLICE AUTHORITY CITY shall retain all police powers and, by virtue of this Agreement CITY confers municipal police authority on the SHERIFF. Page 10 of 31 SECTION NO. 8: OFFICER ASSIGNMENT, RETENTION, DISCIPLINE AND HIRING COUNTY is acting hereunder as an independent contractor as to: 8.1 Hiring. The SHERIFF shall hire, assign, retain and discipline all employees/deputies according to the applicable collective bargaining agreements, civil service rules, and state and federal laws. 8.2 Standards of Performance Governed by the SHERIFF. Control of personnel, standards of performance, discipline and all other aspects of performance shall be governed by the SHERIFF. Provided, however that only qualified, trained personnel meeting all of the requirements of applicable state laws or regulations shall be utilized in the performance of Services. 8.3 Assignment of HeesDedicated CITY Officers. SHERIFF shall use, whenever possible, deputies who volunteer for duty within CITY. In those instances where there are an insufficient number of deputies who volunteer for duty within CITY, then SHERIFF shall determine who shall be assigned for duty. SHERIFF or his designee and Police Chief shall work together to determine the personnel assigned to fill Dedicated CITY Officer positions. SHERIFF and CITY will work together to encourage deputy Dedicated City Officer retention and fill open positions to provide continuity of Sservices. SHERIFF -or his designee and the City Manager shall discuss anticipated openings due to retirements and transfers to other agencies and jointly determine how to best prepare to fill those vacancies. 8.4 Patrol Districts. CITY'S Police Chief will establish patrol districts within CITY in order to assure accurate collection of data related to criminal traffic activityPatrol districts for the CITY are established in Exhibit "56". The patrol districts will coincide within CITY limits_ as closely as possible without compromising efficient use of reactive patrol deputies. A patrol district is a geographical area of a size and configuration designed to minimize response times to citizen's calls for Sservices. Response is typically measured from the time a call is received to the time the unit arrives on the scene. If the boundary of the CITY limits change, the SHERIFF will work together with the City Manager and the Police Chief to determine if a change to the number of patrol districts is necessary. The Police Chief will also periodically evaluate the calls for Service and other impacts to response times and make recommendations to the City Manager, if necessary, regarding changes to patrol districts. All changes to the number of patrol districts in CITY shall be authorized by the Council and SHERIFF. 8.5 Dedicated Patrol UnitsCITY Units and Officers, Mutual Aid. SHERIFF recognizes that the is providing sworn police Sservices dedicated to CITY. In so doing, the law enforcement services shall be dedicated to CITYDedicated CITY Service units, established in Exhibit "1", and the Dedicated CITY Officers, established in Exhibit "3", shall work under the supervision of the Police Chief and be located at the CITY Precinct Page 11 of 31 Building and shall not be used elsewhere within COUNTY. Provided however, in the event of an emergency or a call by a deputy for assistance, mutual aid may be rendered. CITY dedicated officers shall be provided in the number of officers shown in Exhibit "3". Service units identified as "Shared Resources" in Exhibit "4" shall be shared between the CITY and COUNTY and costs shall be allocated according to bases mutually agreed upon by staff. 8.5.1 Mutual Aid. Dedicated CITY Officers shall provide mutual aid to other local law enforcement agencies, when possible, for emergency requests. Additionally, Dedicated CITY Officers and COUNTY Officers shall continue to assist each other and work together, sharing information and resources when mutually beneficial. Dedicated CITY Officers may be assigned to regional task force units and directed by the Police Chief to assist with investigations outside of the CITY limits for cases that have a regional impact and benefit the CITY as well as other local jurisdictions. This section does not diminish the SHERIFF's State Constitutional and statutory law enforcement powers pursuant to chapter 36.28 RCW, nor his ultimate authority over all SHERIFF's Office employees. SECTION NO. 9: CITY POLICE CHIEF AND PRECINCT COMMANDER SELECTION, REMOVAL AND DUTIES, AS WELL AS CITY MANAGER'S AND SHERIFF's RESPONSIBILITIES THERETO: 9.1 Selection of Police Chief or Precinct Commander. When, for any reason, there occurs a vacancy in the position of Police Chief or Precinct Commander, the SHERIFF shall designate three or more SHERIFF Deputies of the rank of Lieutenant or higher, or as otherwise agreed by the parties, as candidates for each of the positions of CITY Police Chief or Precinct Commander. The positions of Police Chief or Precinct Commander shall be appointed from said lists of qualified candidates by the City Manager. 9.2 Removal of Police Chief or Precinct Commander. 9.2.1 Removal by SHERIFF. The SHERIFF may remove the Police Chief or Precinct Commander at any time after consultation with the City Manager. 9.2.2 Removal fly City Manager. The SHERIFF shall remove the Police Chief or Precinct Commander at any time after the written request and consultation of the City Manager. 9.2.3 Reduction of Precinct Commander's Rank Due to Economic Conditions. A reduction in SHERIFFheriff's Office Civil Service Rank due to economic necessity shall not be the sole basis for the removal of the appointed Precinct Commander by either the City Manager or the SHERIFF. Page 12 of 31 9.3 Duties of Police Chief. The Police Chief shall report to the City Manager or his/her designee and to the existing command structure within SHERIFF's OfficeFFICE. The duties of the Police Chief shall include: 9.3.1 Working with the City Manager or his/her designee to establish goals, objectives and performance measures for CITY police Services which reflect specific needs within CITY; 9.3.2 Coordinating police activities within CITY, including hours of operation and CITY -specific protocols and procedures, attending meetings and providing reports as requested by the City Manager and such other duties common to a cGity pPolice cGhief including enforcement of CITY codes and ordinances; 9.3.3 Reviewing the performance of deputies all Dedicated CITY Officersassigned to CITY. Reporting to CityITY Manager or his/her designee and SHERIFF any serious recommendations for performance improvement; 9.3.4 Identify duties of deputies all Dedicated CITY Officersassigned to CITY _as specific needs arise or as requested by the City Manager or his/her designee within the context of established policies and procedures. Reporting to SHERIFF any changes in duty of Dedicated CITY Officersassigned deputies; 9.3.5 Overseeing implementation within CITY of all SHERIFF policies and procedures. Maintaining a copy of SHERIFF procedures on file at City Hall for CITY'S reference. SHERIFF shall be notified of any public disclosure record requests to view or obtain a copy of the policies and procedures on file; - 9.3.6 Notifying and providing electronic access to the City Manager or his/her designee of any change in SHERIFF procedures or policies, or resource as permitted by this Aagreement; 9.3.7 Identifying areas of supplemental training for deputies assigned to CITYDedicated CITY Officers. Making recommendations to SHERIFF for supplemental training. Making recommendations to the City Manager or his/her designee for training not provided by SHERIFF; 9.3.8 Providing supervision and direction to the Precinct Commander, Lieutenants and Sergeantsall Dedicated CITY Officers assigned to CITY as well as other assigned personnel, and acting as liaison with SHERIFF Command Staff; 9.3.9 Maintaining communication between the City Manager and SHERIFF command structures to ensure that changes in SHERIFF policies are agreeable to Page 13 of 31 CITY and that change in CITY policies are agreeable to SHERIFF. In the event a CITY procedure, policy, goal or operation differs from the SHERIFF'sS, CiITY Manager or his/her designee, SHERIFF and COUNTY shall meet and mutually determine which policy will prevail; 9.3.10 Notifying the City Manager or his/her designee of any significant criminal occurrence or civil emergency within CITY or rRegion that would impact the public safety or operations of CITY, and, 9.3.11 Coordinating with City Manager regarding maintenance and capital improvement needs of the CITY Precinct Building. 9.4 Duties of the Precinct Commander. The Precinct Commander shall act as Police Chief in his/her absence and under the Police Chief as CITY Police Department's primary administrative assistant, and also work with CITY staff to provide data as requested and complete information required for CITY planning documents. 9.5 Duties of the City Manager. The City Manager or his/her designee shall have the responsibility of providing general direction and supervision to the assigned Police Chief relative to the furnishing of law enforcement Sservices to CITY as set forth in chapter 35A.13 RCW and the terms of this Agreement. 9.6 Duties of the SHERIFF. The SHERIFF or his designee shall make regular visits to the CITY Precinct Building and ensure that SHERIFF policies and procedures are being followed and that law enforcement Service is provided to CITY according to the terms of this Agreement and according to the standards of the SHERIFF. At the request of the City Manager, SHERIFF will make presentations to the Council and appearances at CITY functions as his schedule permits. 9.76 Quarterly Meetings - Sheriff and City Manager. The SHERIFF and the City Manager shall meet on a quarterly basis to ensure regular communication and to seek joint consideration of all matters of concern regarding thise law enforcement Agreement. Either party may invite representatives from their respective organizations to attend. It is intended that the Parties in these meetings review the Interlocal Agreement and discuss matters of mutual interest; monitor cost trends, work jointly on potential cost savings, revenue sources and other budgetary matters that may impact Service levels; seek long- term sustainability of contract terms; consider changes in labor contracts, review allocation of resources or other potential cost changes and changes to the cost allocation plan items that may impact either party. The dates of these meetings will be determined by mutual agreement but should coincide with the budget cycles of each party. 9.87 Quarterly Mmeeting — Financial and Contract Administration Representatives. At the request of Rrepresentatives for CITY,. and COUNTY, or SHERIFF, representatives shall meet_quarterly to discuss potential cost changes and changes to the Page 14 of 31 COCAP, the LECAP or the CCM.or other items that may impact the CITY's law enforcement costs or Service levels. If possible, CITY shall be notified of such changes prior to implementation, allowing CITY an opportunity to comment. SECTION NO. 10: OBSERVATION OF LABOR NEGOTIATIONS CITY may participate with other cities that contract with COUNTY for law enforcement Sservices to select no more than two (2) representatives from the contracting cities to observe labor negotiations between COUNTY, SHERIFF and the collective bBargaining units representing the employees of the SHERIFF, provided that such observers adhere to rules established by COUNTY, the SHERIFF and the bargaining units for the negotiations. SECTION NO. 11: PROPERTY, EQUIPMENT AND TRAINING 11.1 Ownership of Property and Equipment. The ownership of all property and equipment utilized in association with either SHERIFF or CITY meeting their responsibilities under the terms of this Agreement, shall remain with the original owner at all times to include termination, unless otherwise specifically and mutually agreed upon in writing by the Parties to this Agreement. 11.2 Stationery, Notices and Forms. CITY shall supply at its own cost and expense any special supplies, logos or patches, stationery, notices, forms where such must be issued in the name of CITY. 11.3 Additional Technology. CITY desires to maintain a police force that is trained and equipped with the latest technology. SHERIFF agrees to provide police service personnel providing S&ervices under this Aagreement that are trained and equipped with such technology as is customarily provided to deputies providing law enforcement services in the unincorporated areas of Spokane the County. Any technology not currently in use or not customarily provided to patrol deputies, may be requested by CITY or SHERIFF. Parties agree to meet and confer over the need for the acquisition, training, or use of new technology with the final decision regarding the acquisition and use of new technology resting solely with the SHERIFF so long as CITY and COUNTY have the necessary financial resources to acquire such technology and train deputies Dedicated CITY Officers in its use. Such costs shall be incorporated into the LECAPborn solely by the CITY. 11.4 Additional Training. CITY has indicated that it may desire to have the deputies Dedicated CITY Officers providing Services to CITY under the terms of this Agreement attend additional or supplemental training. The SHERIFF agrees not to unreasonably withhold approval of any written request(s) by CITY for deputies Dedicated CITY Officers providing Services under the terms of this Agreement to attend additional or supplemental training. The SHERIFF may also require staff Dedicated CITY Officers assigned to provide Services to CITY under the terms of this Agreement to participate in Page 15 of 31 necessary state and federal training and conferences that focus on the prevention of crime and the protection of CITY'S citizens. The costs of any additional or supplemental training requested by CITY under this section and approved by the SHERIFF, or determined necessary by the SHERIFF shall be born solely by CITY. 11.5 Police Department Building, Maintenance, and Janitorial. CITY will provide offices, to include sufficient parking, for the City of Spokane Valley Police Department located at 12710 E. Sprague Avenue, City of Spokane Valley, 99216 or at such other location mutually agreed to between the CITY and SHERIFF. CITY shall provide all operation, maintenance and janitorial services for said offices. Page 16 of 31 SECTION NO. 12: COMMUNITY IDENTITY 12.1 Patrol Vehicles. Patrol, Traffic, School Resource Officer, and Community Service vehicles that are assigned to CITY may shall display the color, identification and other logo of CITY at CITY'sg sole expense. Additionally, the vehicles will indicate that they are SHERIFF vehicles. SHERIFF and CITY will determine the form of identification jointly. Detective and Supervisor vehicles may be left unmarked. 12.2 Uniform. SHERIFF maintains a uniform directed by state law. It is a uniform that carries a great deal of pride. CITY recognizes that the assigned personnel will retain the uniform of the Spokane County Sheriff's Office; however, SHERIFF agrees that assigned personnel may shall wear additional identification in the nature of a pin, patcha patch, uniform items, or other like identification clearly indicating affiliation with CITY on uniforms, jackets, and jumpsuits. Jumpsuits shall include the word "Police" in large type on the back. The nature and design of any additional identification will be determined jointly by SHERIFF and CITY and provided to SHERIFF by CITY at CITY'sg sole expense. SECTION NO. 13: RECORDS All records prepared, owned, used or retained by COUNTY or SHERIFF in conjunction with providing Services under the terms of this Agreement shall be deemed COUNTY property and shall be made available to CITY upon request by the City Manager subject to the records retention schedule set forth by the Washington State Secretary of State, the attorney client and attorney work product privileges set forth in statute, court rule or case law. The Parties agree to cooperate in complying with the provisions of c€hapter 42.56 RCW. Should the Agreement terminate, the Parties will meet, and discuss the nature and extent of records required to be transferred to the successor agency. The COUNTY agrees to effect the transfer no later than the last day of the contract. The cost of any transfers of records to the control of the CITY under this provision shall be assumed solely by the CITY. SECTION NO. 14: UNCONTROLLABLE CIRCUMSTANCES/IMPOSSIBILITY A delay or interruption in or failure of performance of all or any part of this Agreement resulting from Uuncontrollable Ceircumstances shall be deemed not a default under this Agreement. A delay or interruption in or failure of performance of all or any part of this Agreement resulting from any change in or new law, order, rule or regulation of any nature which renders providing of Sservices in accordance with the terms of this Agreement legally impossible, and any other circumstances beyond the control of the SHERIFF, which render legally impossible the performance by the SHERIFF of its obligations under this Agreement, shall be deemed not a default under this Agreement. Page 17 of 31 SECTION NO. 15: RELATIONSHIP OF THE PARTIES For the purpose of this section, the terminology "COUNTY' shall also include SHERIFF. The Parties intend that an independent contractor relationship will be created by this Agreement. COUNTY shall be an independent contractor and not the agent or employee of CITY, that CITY is interested only in 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 the SHERIFF. Any and all employees who provide Sservices to CITY under this Agreement shall be deemed employees solely of the SHERIFF. The SHERIFF shall be solely responsible for the conduct and actions of all employees under this Agreement and any liability that may attach thereto. Likewise, no agent, employee, servant or representative of CITY shall be deemed to be an employee, agent, servant or representative of the SHERIFF or COUNTY for any purpose. SECTION NO. 16: LIABILITY For the purpose of this sSection, the terminology "COUNTY" shall also include the "PROSECUTING ATTORNEY." (a) COUNTY shall indemnify and hold harmless CITY and its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent act or omission of COUNTY, its officers, agents and employees, relating to or arising out of performing Sservices pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that any suit based upon such claim, action, loss, or damages is brought against CITY, COUNTY shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense and if final judgment in said suit be rendered against CITY, and its officers, agents, and employees, or jointly against CITY and COUNTY and their respective officers, agents, and employees, COUNTY shall satisfy the same. (b) CITY shall indemnify and hold harmless COUNTY and its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent act or omission of CITY, its officers, agents and employees, relating to or arising out of performing Services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that any suit based upon such claim, action, loss, or damages is brought against COUNTY, CITY shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense and if final judgment in said suit be rendered against COUNTY, and its officers, agents, and employees, or jointly against COUNTY and CITY and their respective officers, agents, and employees, CITY shall satisfy the same. (c) If the comparative negligence of the Parties and their officers and employees is a cause of such damage or injury, the liability, loss, cost, or expense shall be shared between the Parties in proportion to their relative degree of negligence and the right of indemnity shall apply to such proportion. Page 18 of 31 (d) Where an officer or employee of a Party is acting under the direction and control of the other Party, the Party directing and controlling the officer or employee in the activity and/or omission giving rise to liability shall accept all liability for the other Party's officer or employee's negligence. (e) Each Parry's duty to indemnify shall survive the termination or expiration of thise Agreement. (0 The foregoing indemnity is specifically intended to constitute a waiver of each Parry's immunity under Washington's Industrial Insurance Act, chapter 51 RCW, respecting the other party only, and only to the extent necessary to provide the indemnified Party with a full and complete indemnity of claims made by the indemnitor's employees. The Parties acknowledge that these provisions were specifically negotiated and agreed upon by them. (g) COUNTY and CITY agree to either self insure or purchase polices of insurance covering the matters contained in this Agreement with coverages of not less than $5,000,000 per occurrence with $5,000,000 aggregate limits including professional liability and auto. SECTION NO. 17: INITIATIVES AND LOCAL BUDGET REDUCTIONS The Parties recognize that revenue -reducing initiative(s) passed by the voters of Washington and/or local revenue reductions (i.e. loss of sales tax) and/or local government mandates may substantially reduce local operating revenue for CITY, COUNTY or both Parties. The Parties agree that it is necessary to have flexibility to reduce the contracted amount(s) in this Agreement in response to budget constraints resulting from the passage of State-wide revenue -reducing initiative(s) and/or local revenue reductions and/or local government mandates. If such an event occurs, the Parties agree to negotiate in good faith to achieve a mutually agreeable resolution in a timely fashion. SECTION NO. 18: DISPUTE RESOLUTION Any dispute regarding the interpretation of, failure to perform, or the costs for Sservices assessed under the terms of this aAgreement between the SHERIFF, COUNTY or CITY shall first be reduced to writing and considered by the COUNTY CEO ("Chief Executive Officer") and the City Manager if it is a monetary dispute. If it is a non -monetary dispute, it shall be reduced to writing and considered by the SHERIFF and City Manager. The City Manager and the COUNTY CEO or SHERIFF shall agree to develop a corrective action plan to address any dispute covered in this section. The action plan shall be completed within 30 days of agreement to develop the action plan unless the Parties agree to extend this timeline. The action plan shall be implemented by the SHERIFF within 30 days of completion of the action plan. If the SHERIFF or CEO fails to complete or implement an action plan, discontinues the action plan without agreement by the City Manager, or the Paye 19 of 31 dispute otherwise remains unresolved, the dispute may be submitted to arbitration by any Party.which cannot be resolved between the respective parties shall be subject to arbitration. Except as provided for to the contrary herein, such dispute shall first be reduced to writing and considered by the COUNTY CEO ("Chief Executive Officer") and the City Manager if it is a monetary dispute. If it is a non monetary dispute, it shall be reduced to writing and considered by the SHERIFF and City Manager. If the COUNTY CEO or SHERIFF respectively and the City Manager cannot resolve the dispute it will be submitted to arbitration. COUNTY or SHERIFF, respectively, and CITY shall have the right to designate one person each to act as an arbitrator. The two selected arbitrators shall then jointly select a third arbitrator. The decision of the arbitration panel shall be binding on the Parties and shall be subject to judicial review as provided for in chapter 7.04A RCW. The costs of the arbitration panel shall be equally split between the respective Parties. SECTION NO. 19: ASSIGNMENT No party may assign in whole or part its interest in this Agreement without the written approval of the other Parties. Nothing in this section shall prohibit COUNTY or SHERIFF from contracting with third parties for Sservices provided for in this Agreement. SECTION NO. 20: NOTICES All notices called for or provided for in this Agreement shall be in writing and must be served on any of the Parties either personally or by certified mail, return -receipt requested, sent to the Parties at their respective addresses herein above given. Notices sent by certified mail shall be deemed served when deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid. SECTION NO. 21: VENUE STIPULATION This Agreement has been and shall be construed as having been made and delivered within the State of Washington and it is mutually understood and agreed by each Party that this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington, both as to interpretation and performance. Any action at law, suit in equity or judicial proceeding for the enforcement of this Agreement, or any provision hereto, shall be instituted only in courts of competent jurisdiction within Spokane County, Washington. SECTION NO. 22: COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS The Parties shall observe all federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, to the extent that they may be applicable to the terms of this Agreement. SECTION NO. 23: DISCLAIMER Page 20 of 31 Except as otherwise provided, this Agreement shall not be construed in any manner that would limit either Party's authority or powers under law. Page 21 of 31 SECTION NO. 24: HEADINGS The Section and subsection headings appearing in this Agreement have been inserted solely for the purpose of convenience and ready reference. In no way do they purport to, and shall not be deemed to, define, limit or extend the scope or intent of the sections to which they pertain. SECTION NO. 25: ALL WRITINGS CONTAINED HEREIN This Agreement contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the Parties. No other understandings, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement shall be deemed to exist or to bind any of the Parties. Parties have read and understand the whole of the above Agreement and now state that no representations, promises or agreements not expressed in this Agreement have been made to induce either to execute the same. SECTION NO. 26: COUNTERPARTS This Agreement may be executed in any number of multiple signed originals, each of which, when so executed and delivered, shall be an original, but such counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same. SECTION NO. 27: AGREEMENT TO BE FILED COUNTY shall file this Agreement with such offices or agencies as required by chapter 39.34 RCW. SECTION NO. 28: TIME OF ESSENCE OF AGREEMENT Time is of the essence of this Agreement and in case any Party fails to perform the obligations on its part to be performed at the time fixed for the performance of the respective obligation by the terms of this Agreement, the other respective Party may, at its election, hold the other Party liable for all costs and damages caused by such delay. SECTION NO. 29: CHAPTER 39.34 RCW REQUIRED CLAUSES A. Purpose. See Section No. 3 above. B. Agreement to be Filed. See Section No. 27 above. C. Duration. See Section No. 4 above. D. Termination. See Section No. 4 above. Page 22 31 E. Organization of Separate Entity and Its Powers. No new or separate legal or administrative entity is created to administer the provisions of this Agreement. F. Responsibilities of the Parties. See applicable sSections within Agreement. G. Property upon Termination. See Section Nos. 4.4 and 11 above. SECTION NO. 30: SEVERABILITY The Parties agree that if any parts, terms or provisions of this Agreement are held by the courts to be illegal, the validity of the remaining portions or provisions shall not be affected and the rights and obligations of the Parties shall not be affected in regard to the remainder of the Agreement. If it should appear that any part, term or provision of this Agreement is in conflict with any statutory provision of the State of Washington, then the part, term or provision thereof that may be in conflict shall be deemed inoperative and null and void insofar as it may be in conflict therewith and this Agreement shall be deemed to modify to conform to such statutory provision. SECTION NO. 31: THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES. This Agreement is intended for the benefit of COUNTY, CITY and SHERIFF and not for the benefit of any third parties. SECTION NO. 32. SURVIVAL Without being exclusive, Section Nos. 16, 20, and 21 of this Agreement shall survive any termination, expiration or determination of invalidity of this Agreement in whole or in part. Any other sgections of this Agreement which, by their sense and context, are intended to survive shall also survive. SECTION NO. 33. MEDIA RELEASES AND CONTACT Media releases concerning law enforcement activities covered under this Agreement will be prepared by the SHERIFF'S Public Information Officer. Any such release of information to the media that is deemed to be sensitive or likely to cause concern or alarm shall be provided to the City Manager before its release. CITY shall not issue any media releases regarding law enforcement activities covered under this Agreement without prior approval of the SHERIFF unless otherwise agreed by the Parties. SHERIFF will endeavor to have the Police Chief or designee interact with the media when appropriate. SHERIFF's ability to interact with the media on CITY's behalf shall not be limited by this section. Page 23 of 31 SECTION NO. 34: MODIFICATION This Agreement may only be modified in writing by the mutual written agreement of the Parties. (This space intentionally left blank.) 24 31 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date and year opposite their respective signatures. DATED: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE- COUNTY, WASHINGTON AL FRENCHMARK RICHARD, Chair ATTEST: CLERK OF THE BOARD BY: JOSH KERNSBONNIE MAGER, Vice -Chair GINNA VASQUEZDANIELA ERICKSON Commissioner SHELLY O'QUINNTODD MIELKE, ********** DATED: SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF: OZZIE KNEZOVICH ********** DATED: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY: MIKE JACKSONMARK CALHOUN, Interim City Manager Attest: CHRISTINE BAINBRIDGE City Clerk Approved as to form only: Office of the City Attorney Page 25 of 31 Exhibit 1— Services Provided to CITY by SHERIFF CITY Dedicated Service Units CITY Police Department Administration (Chief, Commander, Sergeant) Patrol Traffic Community Services Domestic Violence School Resource Officers K-9 Major Crimes and Sex Crimes Investigationsneed to discuss concerns about assigning investigators from this unit as "Dedicated Officers" Property and Drug Crimes Investigations Shared Service Units Major Crimes Sex Crimes Investigative Task Force Joint Terrorism Task Force Safe Streets (Drug Task Force and Gang Enforcement) Marinc/Scarch & RescueEmergency Operations Team SHERIFF Command Staff Public Information Officer Training/Professional Standards SCOPE/SIRT Radio Dispatch Helicopter Forensics Crime Check Records Management Property Storage Explosive Disposal Communications Crime Analysis Garage Firing Range Fleet SWAT/Hostage Negotiation Extra Duty Employment Reservist and Explorer Units Crime Check Civilian Administrative Support Computer Aided Dispatch/Report Management System Page 26 of 31 Regional Services Civil Marine Patrol SHERIFFheriff Sex Offender Registration Page 27 of 31 Exhibit 2 — Performance Measures and Workload Indicators Workload Indicators Total incidents per Dedicated CITY Patrol Officer per shift Total citizen initiated Calls for Service Total citizen initiated Calls for Service with Dedicated CITY Patrol Officer response Total Dedicated CITY Officer initiated incidents Total Dedicated CITY Officer involved incidents Total incidents requiring written documentation Total property crimes Total crimes against persons Total incidents resulting in custodial arrest Total traffic infractions/citations issued Total traffic infractions/citations from citizen complaints Total reported collisions Total Major Crime investigations initiated Total Sex Crime investigations initiated Total Property/Drug Crime investigations initiated Performance Measures Average patrol staffing per shift Citizen complaints per 1,000 Dedicated CITY Officer incidents Outcome of complaint investigations (% sustained, not sustained, exonerated, unfounded, pending, changed to inquiry) Use of force per 1,000 Dedicated CITY Officer incidents Outcome of use of force incidents (% within policy and not within policy) Average response time for priority 1 calls for Service Percentage of calls for Service with deputy response Percentage of incidents that were deputy initiated Percentage of solvable property crime cases assigned Percentage of assigned cases solved by investigative unit Percentage of assigned cases solved by charges filed by investigative unit Total unassigned cases Cases inactivated due to lack of evidence or leads Collisions per capita Percentage of traffic complaints worked Page 28 of 31 Exhibit 3 - Dedicated CITY Officers Administrative Police Chief/Undersheriff 1 Precinct Commander/Captain 1 Sergeant 1 Patrol Lieutenant 2 Sergeant 9 Deputies 47 K-9 Deputies 3 Traffic Sergeant 1 Detective/Corporal 1 Deputies 5 Community Services Deputy 1 Domestic Violence Detective/Corporal 1 School Resource Officer Deputy 4 Property and Drug Crimes Sergeant 1 Detectives 10 Deputy 1 Total Dedicated Officers 89 29 31 Exhibit 4 Combined Number of Officers in Shared Units Inve stigations Captain 1 Lieutenant 1 DEA Deputy 1 Major Crimes Sergeant Detectives Sex Crimes Sergeant Detectives 1 6 1 6 Investigative Task Force Lieutenant 1 Regional Intelligence Group Detective 1 Joint Terrorism Task Force Detective 1 Safe Streets (Drugs and Gangs) Sergeant 1 Detectives 4 Deputies 1 Emergency Operations Team Deputy 2 Command Staff Undersheriff 1 Public Information Officer Sergeant 1 Training/Professional Standards Lieutenant 1 Sergeant 2 Deputies 2 Total Shared Officers 35 30 s°1.31 Exhibit 5 - CITY Patrol Districts Sackson 9 Liberty iake 1,:'es Spokane Vallee Police Districts 1-6 au,.•�. 31 31 DRAFT INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT 071117 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES AS PROVIDED BY THE SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE TO THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into among Spokane County, a political subdivision of the state of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 1116 West Broadway Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99260, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY," the Spokane County Sheriff, a separate elected official of Spokane County,. having offices for the transaction of business at 1100 West Mallon Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99260, hereinafter referred to as "SHERIFF" and the City of Spokane Valley, a municipal corporation of the state of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at the Redwood Plaza, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 (10210 E. Sprague after August 31, 2017), hereinafter referred to as "CITY," jointly hereinafter referred to as the "Parties" and individually referred to as "Party" COUNTY, SHERIFF and CITY agree as follows. SECTION NO. 1: RECITALS AND FINDINGS 1.1 Under RCW 36.32.120(6), the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, acting on behalf of Spokane County, has the care of County property and the management of County funds and business. 1.2 Under chapter 39.34 RCW ("Interlocal Cooperation Act"), public agencies may contract with each other to perform certain functions which each may legally perform. 1.3 Under chapter 36.28 RCW, the Spokane County Sheriff is the Chief Law Enforcement Officer and Conservator of the Peace of Spokane County. 1.4 The City of Spokane Valley desires to utilize the services of the Spokane County Sheriff's Office to provide law enforcement services. 1.5 The direct and indirect costs for law enforcement services will be set forth in the Law Enforcement Cost Allocation Plan ("LECAP"), described in Section 6 and incorporated herein by this reference. 1.6 The Parties, in providing these law enforcement services, seek to make the CITY a crime -free city. Page 1 of 26 SECTION NO. 2: DEFINITIONS 2.1 Agreement: "Agreement" means this Interlocal Agreement among Sheriff, City and County regarding the provision of law enforcement services. 2.2 City: "CITY" means the City of Spokane Valley. 2.3 County: "COUNTY" means Spokane County. 2.4 Dedicated CITY Officers: "Dedicated CITY Officers" means those commissioned officers (SHERIFF Deputies) listed in Exhibit "3" that are 100% dedicated to providing service to the CITY and who work under the supervision of the CITY Police Chief. 2.5 Services: "Services" means those services identified in Exhibit 1. 2.6 Sheriff: "SHERIFF" means the duly elected sheriff of Spokane County possessing those general duties set forth in chapter 36.28 RCW. 2.7 Uncontrollable Circumstances: "Uncontrollable Circumstances" means the following events: riots, wars, civil disturbances, insurrections, acts of terrorism, external fires and floods, volcanic eruptions, lightning or earthquakes at or near where the Services are performed and/or that directly affect providing of such Services. SECTION NO. 3: PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to reduce to writing the Parties' understanding as to the terms and conditions under which SHERIFF will provide Services to CITY. The Services will be consistent with the City's council/manager form of management pursuant to chapter 35A.13 RCW. SECTION NO. 4: DURATION AND TERMINATION 4.1 Initial Term and Renewal. The initial term of this Agreement shall commence as of 12:01 A.M. on the date of execution, and run through midnight, December 31, 2022, for all provisions except for the cost methodology, which shall be implemented beginning on January 1, 2018. Thereafter, this Agreement shall automatically renew for five-year time frames, unless the termination process outlined herein is invoked. The Automatic renewal shall not occur unless the CITY provides notice to the COUNTY that the City Council has authorized the renewal. 4.2 Process for Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by any Party by providing written notice after December 31, 2020 to all other Parties. COUNTY shall consult with SHERIFF prior to providing written notice of termination under this subsection. SHERIFF shall consult with COUNTY prior to providing written notice of Page 2 of 26 termination under this subsection. This termination shall be effective (24) twenty-four months after written notice is provided as long as such written notice is provided prior to midnight December 31, 2022. The same time intervals for terminations shall apply to future terms if the termination process is not invoked during the initial contract period. 4.3 Implementation of Termination. When notice of termination is given, SHERIFF and CITY agree to jointly prepare a Transition Plan and complete by a mutually agreed date. 4.3.1 Transition Plan. The Transition Plan shall identify and address, among other items (i) personnel issues; (ii) workload; (iii) ongoing case assignments; and (iv) the transfer of records. If the SHERIFF and CITY cannot mutually agree to the terms of the Transition Plan, either Party can request arbitration as provided in Section No. 18. SHERIFF and CITY shall equally share the cost of said arbitration. 4.3.2 Implementation of Transition Plan. Parties agree to use all best efforts to create and effectuate a mutual implementation of the Transition Plan. 4.4 Termination of the Agreement -Vehicles and Equipment. At the termination of this Agreement, CITY shall have the option to purchase, subject to agreement of SHERIFF and COUNTY, COUNTY -owned vehicles and/or equipment used to provide Services. 4.5 Waiver of Statutory Terms. To the extent that it is applicable to law enforcement Services, the Parties hereby waive the statutory termination rights of RCW 39.34.180(3) and elect instead to follow these contractual termination procedures as the sole method of terminating this Agreement, the terms of which are detailed in this section. 4.6 Termination of the Agreement and Settle and Adjust. The Parties recognize that Costs for Services under the Agreement are calculated utilizing the LECAP. Charges for the current year are based on estimated costs and are subject to a settle and adjust reconciliation to actual costs after the year is complete. As such, in the event this Agreement is terminated as provided for in Subsection 4.2 hereinabove, the Agreement will be subject to a settle and adjust for any years that have not yet been reconciled. In the event of termination, the Parties shall follow the process set forth in Section No. 6 to determine the settle and adjust as well as the process to object to the final adjustment(s) as set forth in Subsection 6.4 set forth hereinafter. SECTION NO. 5: SERVICES 5.1 Services Provided and Service Levels. The SHERIFF shall provide those Services set forth in Exhibit "1," attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. These Services shall only be changed by mutual written agreement of Parties. 5.1.1 Dedicated CITY Officers. CITY may unilaterally adjust the number of Dedicated CITY Officers set forth in Exhibit "3" only after meaningful prior Page 3 of 26 consultation between the SHERIFF and the CITY. Written notice of such an adjustment shall be provided by CITY to COUNTY and SHERIFF. The Police Chief shall have the ability to move Dedicated CITY Officers to different service units on a temporary basis, not to exceed 90 days, to meet current workload demands, with notification to the City Manager. Moves that exceed 90 days must be approved by the City Manager and be accompanied by a demonstrated need. CITY patrol staffing shall be maintained at a level that allows for a minimum of one patrol officer per patrol district per shift. 5.1.2 Shared Services. SHERIFF shall provide shared Services listed in Exhibit "1" to CITY. SHERIFF shall ensure that shared service units work with the Police Chief and Precinct Commander to provide case updates, information, and data as requested. SHERIFF shall have the ability to make permanent adjustments to the number of commissioned officers providing Services listed under shared units in Exhibit "4" after 30 days advanced notice is provided to the CITY and accompanied with a cost impact estimate and service level impact estimate. The SHERIFF's ability to temporarily shift shared personnel to meet emerging needs shall not be limited. Any adjustments in Services under this section shall only be operative after relevant notice and impact bargaining negotiations for reductions in force are satisfied with the relevant collective bargaining units but in no event shall the delay in implementation exceed 60 days after the SHERIFF has satisfied his good faith bargaining obligations pursuant to chapter 41.46 RCW for reductions. Additions will be filled in 60 days unless staffing shortages delay implementation, in which case, SHERIFF shall provide to CITY an estimated time to fill new positions added by CITY, and will continue to provide quarterly updates until the positions are filled. Any permanent adjustments that take place under this section after the original cost estimate has been prepared shall result in the COUNTY recalculating the annual cost estimate and then adjusting the remaining monthly payments unless otherwise mutually agreed upon by the SHERIFF and City Manager. Notwithstanding the above, SHERIFF'S ability to fulfill his statutory obligation to provide law enforcement Services to COUNTY and CITY shall not be limited. 5.2 Periodic Reporting Requirements. SHERIFF shall provide to CITY quarterly reports, within 30 days from the end of each quarter, that identify statistics used to calculate CITY'S cost in the LECAP referenced in Section No. 6 below. Those statistics which are only available to COUNTY on an annual basis shall be provided annually Page 4 of 26 within 30 days of the end of each calendar year unless the statistics are provided by an outside agency, in which case they shall be provided within 15 days after they are provided to COUNTY. These reports will allow CITY to monitor service consumption and cost accrual throughout the year. 5.2.1 Performance Measures and Workload Indicators. Available data for the indicators and measures listed in Exhibit "2" shall be provided by SHERIFF to CITY on a quarterly basis, unless otherwise mutually agreed upon by SHERIFF and the City Manager. The indicators and measures shall be modified jointly by the City Manager and SHERIFF as needed to provide the most accurate assessment of the Services provided to CITY. Goals for each performance measure shall be established by the City Manager and the Police Chief. SHERIFF and CITY shall work together jointly to provide the necessary support and resources to achieve established goals. Failure to meet established goals on a quarterly basis shall result in progress reports provided by the Police Chief to the City Manager. The reports shall indicate the causes of the deficiencies and provide responsive action taken or recommendations by the Police Chief to correct the deficiencies as well as progress made toward achieving the goals. The progress reports shall continue until the deficiency has been corrected. SECTION NO. 6: COST OF SERVICES 6.1 Cost Methodology. CITY costs will be determined by utilizing the LECAP. The LECAP will allocate costs through a combination of direct dedicated CITY officer costs; and shared and indirect costs allocated through mutually agreed upon allocation bases. Salary and Benefits for Dedicated CITY Officers will be segregated into separate budget units and costs will be tracked separately. The allocation bases will be reviewed by the COUNTY and CITY as needed. Any changes to the allocation bases will be made by staff of the CITY and COUNTY and mutually agreed upon by the SHERIFF, COUNTY CEO, and the City Manager. Indirect costs will be applied from the Countywide Cost Allocation Plan, the COCAP. The COCAP will be prepared in accordance with OMB U.S. Office of Management and Budget Circular 2 CFR 200. The CITY shall not be charged for costs unrelated to the provision of law enforcement Services in the current year, including but not limited to, costs for tax assessor and treasurer tax collections. CITY shall receive a credit for COCAP building charges and associated maintenance and utility costs, in recognition of CITY -owned facilities Page 5 of 26 (precinct/garage). CITY shall also receive a credit for Services paid through other revenue sources and Services that have been pre -paid by CITY. 6.2 Estimated Costs. The LECAP will be used to estimate CITY cost for Services for a contract year based upon the contract year's budget. Estimated indirect costs will be calculated by applying an indirect rate derived from actual indirect costs from the most recently completed year. CITY shall have 30 days to review the estimated costs and ask questions. Should the estimate not be provided or not be finalized by the time the invoices for a new contract year are due, CITY will continue to pay at the previous year's monthly rate until the estimate is finalized. If the CITY has paid one or more months at the previous year's rates, the COUNTY will calculate the difference between the previous year's rates and the current year's monthly estimate for those months and add the difference to the first monthly payment at the current year's estimate. COUNTY shall notify CITY of any budget amendments expected to increase CITY's law enforcement costs by more than $200,000. 6.3 Settle and Adjust. The LECAP will be used to calculate the actual CITY cost for the contract year based upon the contract year's actual expenses. After calculating the CITY's actual costs for a contract year, any overage or underage from the estimated billed amount will be applied to the next invoice. Should the contract no longer be in effect, payment by either Party will be due within 30 days of agreement of the final amount. COUNTY shall provide CITY with the actual cost calculations for the contract year in writing via the LECAP no later than September 30th of any calendar year for the preceding year's costs. CITY will have thirty (30) calendar days from its receipt of the LECAP to provide COUNTY with any written objections to the amounts set forth therein. COUNTY agrees to consider all written objections received from CITY and reply to CITY no later than fifteen (15) calendar days of receipt of CITY'S objections. In the event the Parties cannot mutually resolve any written objection(s) submitted by CITY within an additional fifteen (15) calendar day time frame, or such other time frame as the Parties may mutually agree to, the objections shall be resolved pursuant to the Dispute Resolution provisions set forth in Section No. 18. 6.4 Retroactive Salary Adjustments. The Police Chief will inform the CITY of the commencement and settlement of applicable collective bargaining agreements, as well as inform CITY of the status of any pending negotiations as to tentative agreements. Should any applicable bargaining agreement not be settled in time to include any salary adjustments granted commissioned deputies under any collective bargaining agreement in the cost estimate for a given year, and that collective bargaining agreement is settled, and the settlement contains a retroactive salary adjustment, COUNTY will bill CITY for the full amount of CITY's portion of the retroactive payment. CITY will be responsible for paying COUNTY within thirty (30) days of the billing date. Additionally, COUNTY may recalculate the estimated Interlocal Agreement amount employing the cost of living or wage Page 6 of 26 increase(s) granted commissioned deputies under any collective bargaining agreement and adjust the remaining monthly payments. 6.5 Capital Purchases. Capital equipment deemed necessary for all commissioned officers, excluding vehicles, with a cost greater than $50,000, may be billed to CITY at the time of purchase contingent upon prior CITY authorization. CITY will be billed according to its proportionate share. COUNTY will bill CITY for this cost at the time of the purchase and payment will be due within 30 days of the billing date. As part of the settle and adjust reconciliation, COUNTY will give CITY credit for the full amount paid for capital equipment in that year. The Parties may also jointly agree to apply this language to capital purchases of any amount on a case-by-case basis. All capital items purchased by COUNTY will become the property of COUNTY. All items purchased by CITY will become the property of CITY. Capital items that have been purchased with grant funds by either CITY or COUNTY, or other funding sources, and capital items that are not utilized in providing law enforcement Services to CITY, will not be charged to CITY. All capital items that are utilized in providing law enforcement Services to CITY, and which are not immediately billed to CITY according to the terms stated in this section, and that were not purchased with other funding sources, will be incorporated as fixed assets in the (COCAP) and reimbursed through depreciation. County shall consult with CITY prior to committing to capital purchases that exceed $200,000. Typical recurring expenses such as vehicles are exempt from this requirement. 6.6 Billing Procedure. COUNTY will bill CITY for one -twelfth of calculated estimated contract amount during the first week of each month. Regular monthly payments by CITY will be due by the end of the month in which they are billed. Should the bill be received at a later date, the City shall have 21 days to process the payment. 6.7 Penalty. At the sole option of COUNTY, a penalty may be assessed on any late payment owed by CITY in an amount equal to lost interest earnings had the payment been timely paid and invested in the Spokane County Treasurer's Investment Pool. Any resolution of a disputed amount through use of the arbitration process identified in Section No. 18 shall include at the request of any Party, a determination of whether interest is appropriate, including the amount. SECTION NO. 7: MUNICIPAL POLICE AUTHORITY CITY shall retain all police powers and, by virtue of this Agreement, CITY confers municipal police authority on the SHERIFF. Page 7 of 26 SECTION NO. 8: OFFICER ASSIGNMENT, RETENTION, DISCIPLINE AND HIRING COUNTY is acting hereunder as an independent contractor as to: 8.1 Hiring. The SHERIFF shall hire, assign, retain and discipline all employees according to applicable collective bargaining agreements, civil service rules, and state and federal laws. 8.2 Standards of Performance Governed by the SHERIFF. Control of personnel, standards of performance, discipline and all other aspects of performance shall be governed by the SHERIFF. Provided, however that only qualified, trained personnel meeting all of the requirements of applicable state laws or regulations shall be utilized in the performance of Services. 8.3 Assignment of Dedicated CITY Officers. SHERIFF or his designee and Police Chief shall work together to determine the personnel assigned to fill Dedicated CITY Officer positions. SHERIFF and CITY will work together to encourage Dedicated City Officer retention and fill open positions to provide continuity of Services. SHERIFF or his designee and the City Manager shall discuss anticipated openings due to retirements and transfers to other agencies and jointly determine how to best prepare to fill those vacancies. 8.4 Patrol Districts. Patrol districts for the CITY are established in Exhibit "5". The patrol districts will coincide within CITY limits. A patrol district is a geographical area of a size and configuration designed to minimize response times to citizen's calls for Services. Response is typically measured from the time a call is received to the time the unit arrives on the scene. If the boundary of the CITY limits change, the SHERIFF will work together with the City Manager and the Police Chief to determine if a change to the number of patrol districts is necessary. The Police Chief will also periodically evaluate the calls for Service and other impacts to response times and make recommendations to the City Manager, if necessary, regarding changes to patrol districts. All changes to the number of patrol districts in CITY shall be authorized by the Council and SHERIFF. 8.5 Dedicated CITY Units and Officers, Mutual Aid. SHERIFF recognizes that he is providing sworn police Services dedicated to CITY. Dedicated CITY Service units, established in Exhibit "1", and the Dedicated CITY Officers, established in Exhibit "3", shall work under the supervision of the Police Chief and be located at the CITY Precinct Building. CITY dedicated officers shall be provided in the number of officers shown in Exhibit "3". Service units identified as "Shared Resources" in Exhibit "4" shall be shared between the CITY and COUNTY and costs shall be allocated according to bases mutually agreed upon by staff. 8.5.1 Mutual Aid. Dedicated CITY Officers shall provide mutual aid to other local law enforcement agencies, when possible, for emergency requests. Page 8 of 26 Additionally, Dedicated CITY Officers and COUNTY Officers shall continue to assist each other and work together, sharing information and resources when mutually beneficial. Dedicated CITY Officers may be assigned to regional task force units and directed by the Police Chief to assist with investigations outside of the CITY limits for cases that have a regional impact and benefit the CITY as well as other local jurisdictions. This section does not diminish the SHERIFF's State Constitutional and statutory law enforcement powers pursuant to chapter 36.28 RCW, nor his ultimate authority over all SHERIFF's Office employees. SECTION NO. 9: CITY POLICE CHIEF AND PRECINCT COMMANDER SELECTION, REMOVAL AND DUTIES, AS WELL AS CITY MANAGER'S AND SHERIFF's RESPONSIBILITIES THERETO 9.1 Selection of Police Chief or Precinct Commander. When, for any reason, there occurs a vacancy in the position of Police Chief or Precinct Commander, the SHERIFF shall designate three or more SHERIFF Deputies of the rank of Lieutenant or higher, or as otherwise agreed by the parties, as candidates for each of the positions of Police Chief or Precinct Commander. The positions of Police Chief or Precinct Commander shall be appointed from said lists of qualified candidates by the City Manager. 9.2 Removal of Police Chief or Precinct Commander. 9.2.1 Removal by SHERIFF. The SHERIFF may remove the Police Chief or Precinct Commander at any time after consultation with the City Manager. 9.2.2 Removal by City Manager. The SHERIFF shall remove the Police Chief or Precinct Commander at any time after the written request and consultation of the City Manager. 9.2.3 Reduction of Precinct Commander's Rank Due to Economic Conditions. A reduction in SHERIFF's Office Civil Service Rank due to economic necessity shall not be the sole basis for the removal of the appointed Precinct Commander by either the City Manager or the SHERIFF. 9.3 Duties of Police Chief. The Police Chief shall report to the City Manager or his/her designee and to the existing command structure within SHERIFF's Office. The duties of the Police Chief shall include: 9.3.1 Working with the City Manager or his/her designee to establish goals, objectives and performance measures for CITY police Services which reflect specific needs within CITY; Page 9 of 26 9.3.2 Coordinating police activities within CITY, including hours of operation and CITY -specific protocols and procedures, attending meetings and providing reports as requested by the City Manager and such other duties common to a city police chief including enforcement of CITY codes and ordinances; 9.3.3 Reviewing the performance of all Dedicated CITY Officers. Reporting to City Manager or his/her designee and SHERIFF any serious recommendations for performance improvement; 9.3.4 Identify duties of all Dedicated CITY Officers as specific needs arise or as requested by the City Manager or his/her designee within the context of established policies and procedures. Reporting to SHERIFF any changes in duty of Dedicated CITY Officers; 9.3.5 Overseeing implementation within CITY of all SHERIFF policies and procedures. Maintaining a copy of SHERIFF procedures on file at City Hall for CITY'S reference. SHERIFF shall be notified of any public record requests to view or obtain a copy of the policies and procedures on file; 9.3.6 Notifying and providing electronic access to the City Manager or his/her designee of any change in SHERIFF procedures or policies, or resource as permitted by this Agreement; 9.3.7 Identifying areas of supplemental training for Dedicated CITY Officers. Making recommendations to SHERIFF for supplemental training. Making recommendations to the City Manager or his/her designee for training not provided by SHERIFF; 9.3.8 Providing supervision and direction to all Dedicated CITY Officers as well as other assigned personnel, and acting as liaison with SHERIFF Command Staff; 9.3.9 Maintaining communication between the City Manager and SHERIFF command structures to ensure that changes in SHERIFF policies are agreeable to CITY and that change in CITY policies are agreeable to SHERIFF. In the event a CITY procedure, policy, goal or operation differs from the SHERIFF's, City Manager or his/her designee, SHERIFF and COUNTY shall meet and mutually determine which policy will prevail; 9.3.10 Notifying the City Manager or his/her designee of any significant criminal occurrence or civil emergency within CITY or region that would impact the public safety or operations of CITY, and Page 10 of 26 9.3.11 Coordinating with City Manager regarding maintenance and capital improvement needs of the CITY Precinct Building. 9.4 Duties of the Precinct Commander. The Precinct Commander shall act as Police Chief in his/her absence and under the Police Chief as CITY Police Department's primary administrative assistant, and also work with CITY staff to provide data as requested and complete information required for CITY planning documents. 9.5 Duties of the City Manager. The City Manager or his/her designee shall have the responsibility of providing general direction and supervision to the assigned Police Chief relative to the furnishing of law enforcement Services to CITY as set forth in chapter 35A.13 RCW and the terms of this Agreement. 9.6 Duties of the SHERIFF. The SHERIFF or his designee shall make regular visits to the CITY Precinct Building and ensure that SHERIFF policies and procedures are being followed and that law enforcement Service is provided to CITY according to the terms of this Agreement and according to the standards of the SHERIFF. At the request of the City Manager, SHERIFF will make presentations to the Council and appearances at CITY functions as his schedule permits. 9.7 Quarterly Meetings - Sheriff and City Manager. The SHERIFF and the City Manager shall meet on a quarterly basis to ensure regular communication and to seek joint consideration of all matters of concern regarding this Agreement. Either party may invite representatives from their respective organizations to attend. It is intended that the Parties in these meetings review the Interlocal Agreement and discuss matters of mutual interest; monitor cost trends, work jointly on potential cost savings, revenue sources and other budgetary matters that may impact Service levels; seek long-term sustainability of contract terms; consider changes in labor contracts, review allocation of resources or other items that may impact either party. The dates of these meetings will be determined by mutual agreement but should coincide with the budget cycles of each party. 9.8 Quarterly Meeting — Financial and Contract Administration Representatives. At the request of CITY, COUNTY, or SHERIFF, representatives shall meet to discuss potential changes to the COCAP, the LECAP, or other items that may impact the CITY's law enforcement costs or Service levels. If possible, CITY shall be notified of such changes prior to implementation, allowing CITY an opportunity to comment. SECTION NO. 10: OBSERVATION OF LABOR NEGOTIATIONS CITY may participate with other cities that contract with COUNTY for law enforcement Services to select no more than two (2) representatives from the contracting cities to observe labor negotiations between COUNTY, SHERIFF and the collective bargaining units representing the employees of the SHERIFF, provided that such observers adhere to rules established by COUNTY, the SHERIFF and the bargaining units for the negotiations. Page 11 of 26 SECTION NO. 11: PROPERTY, EQUIPMENT AND TRAINING 11.1 Ownership of Property and Equipment. The ownership of all property and equipment utilized in association with either SHERIFF or CITY meeting their responsibilities under the terms of this Agreement, shall remain with the original owner at all times to include termination, unless otherwise specifically and mutually agreed upon in writing by the Parties to this Agreement. 11.2 Stationery, Notices and Forms. CITY shall supply at its own cost and expense any special supplies, logos or patches, stationery, notices, forms where such must be issued in the name of CITY. 11.3 Additional Technology. CITY desires to maintain a police force that is trained and equipped with the latest technology. SHERIFF agrees to provide police service personnel providing Services under this Agreement that are trained and equipped with such technology as is customarily provided to deputies providing law enforcement Services in the unincorporated areas of the County. Any technology not currently in use or not customarily provided to patrol deputies, may be requested by CITY or SHERIFF. Parties agree to meet and confer over the need for the acquisition, training, or use of new technology with the final decision regarding the acquisition and use of new technology resting solely with the SHERIFF so long as CITY and COUNTY have the necessary financial resources to acquire such technology and train Dedicated CITY Officers in its use. Such costs shall be born solely by the CITY. 11.4 Additional Training. CITY has indicated that it may desire to have the Dedicated CITY Officers providing Services to CITY under the terms of this Agreement attend additional or supplemental training. The SHERIFF agrees not to unreasonably withhold approval of any written request(s) by CITY for Dedicated CITY Officers providing Services under the terms of this Agreement to attend additional or supplemental training. The SHERIFF may also require Dedicated CITY Officers assigned to provide Services to CITY under the terms of this Agreement to participate in necessary state and federal training and conferences that focus on the prevention of crime and the protection of CITY'S citizens. The costs of any additional or supplemental training requested by CITY under this section and approved by the SHERIFF, or determined necessary by the SHERIFF shall be born solely by CITY. 11.5 Police Department Building, Maintenance, and Janitorial. CITY will provide offices, to include sufficient parking, for the City of Spokane Valley Police Department located at 12710 E. Sprague Avenue, City of Spokane Valley, 99216 or at such other location mutually agreed to between the CITY and SHERIFF. CITY shall provide all operation, maintenance and janitorial services for said offices. Page 12 of 26 SECTION NO. 12: COMMUNITY IDENTITY 12.1 Vehicles. Patrol, Traffic, School Resource Officer, and Community Service vehicles that are assigned to CITY shall display the color, identification and logo of CITY at CITY's sole expense. Additionally, the vehicles will indicate that they are SHERIFF vehicles. SHERIFF and CITY will determine the form of identification jointly. Detective and Supervisor vehicles may be left unmarked. 12.2 Uniform. SHERIFF maintains a uniform directed by state law. It is a uniform that carries a great deal of pride. CITY recognizes that the assigned personnel will retain the uniform of the Spokane County Sheriff's Office; however, SHERIFF agrees that assigned personnel shall wear additional identification in the nature of a patch, clearly indicating affiliation with CITY on uniforms, jackets, and jumpsuits. Jumpsuits shall include the word "Police" in large type on the back. The nature and design of any additional identification will be determined jointly by SHERIFF and CITY and provided to SHERIFF by CITY at CITY's sole expense. SECTION NO. 13: RECORDS All records prepared, owned, used or retained by COUNTY or SHERIFF in conjunction with providing Services under the terms of this Agreement shall be deemed COUNTY property and shall be made available to CITY upon request by the City Manager subject to the records retention schedule set forth by the Washington State Secretary of State, the attorney client and attorney work product privileges set forth in statute, court rule or case law. The Parties agree to cooperate in complying with the provisions of chapter 42.56 RCW. Should the Agreement terminate, the Parties will meet, and discuss the nature and extent of records required to be transferred to the successor agency. The COUNTY agrees to effect the transfer no later than the last day of the contract. The cost of any transfers of records to the control of the CITY under this provision shall be assumed solely by the CITY. SECTION NO. 14: UNCONTROLLABLE CIRCUMSTANCES/IMPOSSIBILITY A delay or interruption in or failure of performance of all or any part of this Agreement resulting from Uncontrollable Circumstances shall be deemed not a default under this Agreement. A delay or interruption in or failure of performance of all or any part of this Agreement resulting from any change in or new law, order, rule or regulation of any nature which renders providing of Services in accordance with the terms of this Agreement legally impossible, and any other circumstances beyond the control of the SHERIFF, which render legally impossible the performance by the SHERIFF of its obligations under this Agreement, shall be deemed not a default under this Agreement. Page 13 of 26 SECTION NO. 15: RELATIONSHIP OF THE PARTIES For the purpose of this section, the terminology "COUNTY' shall also include SHERIFF. The Parties intend that an independent contractor relationship will be created by this Agreement. COUNTY shall be an independent contractor and not the agent or employee of CITY, that CITY is interested only in 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 the SHERIFF. Any and all employees who provide Services to CITY under this Agreement shall be deemed employees solely of the SHERIFF. The SHERIFF shall be solely responsible for the conduct and actions of all employees under this Agreement and any liability that may attach thereto. Likewise, no agent, employee, servant or representative of CITY shall be deemed to be an employee, agent, servant or representative of the SHERIFF or COUNTY for any purpose. SECTION NO. 16: LIABILITY For the purpose of this section, the terminology "COUNTY" shall also include the "PROSECUTING ATTORNEY." (a) COUNTY shall indemnify and hold harmless CITY and its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent act or omission of COUNTY, its officers, agents and employees, relating to or arising out of performing Services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that any suit based upon such claim, action, loss, or damages is brought against CITY, COUNTY shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense and if final judgment in said suit be rendered against CITY, and its officers, agents, and employees, or jointly against CITY and COUNTY and their respective officers, agents, and employees, COUNTY shall satisfy the same. (b) CITY shall indemnify and hold harmless COUNTY and its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent act or omission of CITY, its officers, agents and employees, relating to or arising out of performing Services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that any suit based upon such claim, action, loss, or damages is brought against COUNTY, CITY shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense and if final judgment in said suit be rendered against COUNTY, and its officers, agents, and employees, or jointly against COUNTY and CITY and their respective officers, agents, and employees, CITY shall satisfy the same. (c) If the comparative negligence of the Parties and their officers and employees is a cause of such damage or injury, the liability, loss, cost, or expense shall be shared between the Parties in proportion to their relative degree of negligence and the right of indemnity shall apply to such proportion. Page 14 of 26 (d) Where an officer or employee of a Party is acting under the direction and control of the other Party, the Party directing and controlling the officer or employee in the activity and/or omission giving rise to liability shall accept all liability for the other Party's officer or employee's negligence. (e) Each Parry's duty to indemnify shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement. (0 The foregoing indemnity is specifically intended to constitute a waiver of each Party's immunity under Washington's Industrial Insurance Act, chapter 51 RCW, respecting the other party only, and only to the extent necessary to provide the indemnified Party with a full and complete indemnity of claims made by the indemnitor's employees. The Parties acknowledge that these provisions were specifically negotiated and agreed upon by them. (g) COUNTY and CITY agree to either self insure or purchase polices of insurance covering the matters contained in this Agreement with coverages of not less than $5,000,000 per occurrence with $5,000,000 aggregate limits including professional liability and auto. SECTION NO. 17: INITIATIVES AND LOCAL BUDGET REDUCTIONS The Parties recognize that revenue -reducing initiative(s) passed by the voters of Washington and/or local revenue reductions (i.e. loss of sales tax) and/or local government mandates may substantially reduce local operating revenue for CITY, COUNTY or both Parties. The Parties agree that it is necessary to have flexibility to reduce the contracted amount(s) in this Agreement in response to budget constraints resulting from the passage of State-wide revenue -reducing initiative(s) and/or local revenue reductions and/or local government mandates. If such an event occurs, the Parties agree to negotiate in good faith to achieve a mutually agreeable resolution in a timely fashion. SECTION NO. 18: DISPUTE RESOLUTION Any dispute regarding the interpretation of, failure to perform, or the costs for Services assessed under the terms of this Agreement between the SHERIFF, COUNTY or CITY shall first be reduced to writing and considered by the COUNTY CEO ("Chief Executive Officer") and the City Manager if it is a monetary dispute. If it is a non -monetary dispute, it shall be reduced to writing and considered by the SHERIFF and City Manager. The City Manager and the COUNTY CEO or SHERIFF shall agree to develop a corrective action plan to address any dispute covered in this section. The action plan shall be completed within 30 days of agreement to develop the action plan unless the Parties agree to extend this timeline. The action plan shall be implemented by the SHERIFF within 30 days of completion of the action plan. If the SHERIFF or CEO fails to complete or implement an action plan, discontinues the action plan without agreement by the City Manager, or the Page 15 of 26 dispute otherwise remains unresolved, the dispute may be submitted to arbitration by any Party. COUNTY or SHERIFF, respectively, and CITY shall have the right to designate one person each to act as an arbitrator. The two selected arbitrators shall then jointly select a third arbitrator. The decision of the arbitration panel shall be binding on the Parties and shall be subject to judicial review as provided for in chapter 7.04A RCW. The costs of the arbitration panel shall be equally split between the respective Parties. SECTION NO. 19: ASSIGNMENT No party may assign in whole or part its interest in this Agreement without the written approval of the other Parties. Nothing in this section shall prohibit COUNTY or SHERIFF from contracting with third parties for Services provided for in this Agreement. SECTION NO. 20: NOTICES All notices called for or provided for in this Agreement shall be in writing and must be served on any of the Parties either personally or by certified mail, return -receipt requested, sent to the Parties at their respective addresses herein above given. Notices sent by certified mail shall be deemed served when deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid. SECTION NO. 21: VENUE STIPULATION This Agreement has been and shall be construed as having been made and delivered within the State of Washington and it is mutually understood and agreed by each Party that this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington, both as to interpretation and performance. Any action at law, suit in equity or judicial proceeding for the enforcement of this Agreement, or any provision hereto, shall be instituted only in courts of competent jurisdiction within Spokane County, Washington. SECTION NO. 22: COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS The Parties shall observe all federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, to the extent that they may be applicable to the terms of this Agreement. SECTION NO. 23: DISCLAIMER Except as otherwise provided, this Agreement shall not be construed in any manner that would limit either Party's authority or powers under law. Page 16 of 26 SECTION NO. 24: HEADINGS The Section and subsection headings appearing in this Agreement have been inserted solely for the purpose of convenience and ready reference. In no way do they purport to, and shall not be deemed to, define, limit or extend the scope or intent of the sections to which they pertain. SECTION NO. 25: ALL WRITINGS CONTAINED HEREIN This Agreement contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the Parties. No other understandings, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement shall be deemed to exist or to bind any of the Parties. Parties have read and understand the whole of the above Agreement and now state that no representations, promises or agreements not expressed in this Agreement have been made to induce either to execute the same. SECTION NO. 26: COUNTERPARTS This Agreement may be executed in any number of multiple signed originals, each of which, when so executed and delivered, shall be an original, but such counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same. SECTION NO. 27: AGREEMENT TO BE FILED COUNTY shall file this Agreement with such offices or agencies as required by chapter 39.34 RCW. SECTION NO. 28: TIME OF ESSENCE OF AGREEMENT Time is of the essence of this Agreement and in case any Party fails to perform the obligations on its part to be performed at the time fixed for the performance of the respective obligation by the terms of this Agreement, the other respective Party may, at its election, hold the other Party liable for all costs and damages caused by such delay. SECTION NO. 29: CHAPTER 39.34 RCW REQUIRED CLAUSES A. Purpose. See Section No. 3 above. B. Agreement to be Filed. See Section No. 27 above. C. Duration. See Section No. 4 above. D. Termination. See Section No. 4 above. Page 17 of 26 E. Organization of Separate Entity and Its Powers. No new or separate legal or administrative entity is created to administer the provisions of this Agreement. F. Responsibilities of the Parties. See applicable sections within Agreement. G. Property upon Termination. See Section Nos. 4.4 and 11 above. SECTION NO. 30: SEVERABILITY The Parties agree that if any parts, terms or provisions of this Agreement are held by the courts to be illegal, the validity of the remaining portions or provisions shall not be affected and the rights and obligations of the Parties shall not be affected in regard to the remainder of the Agreement. If it should appear that any part, term or provision of this Agreement is in conflict with any statutory provision of the State of Washington, then the part, term or provision thereof that may be in conflict shall be deemed inoperative and null and void insofar as it may be in conflict therewith and this Agreement shall be deemed to modify to conform to such statutory provision. SECTION NO. 31: THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES. This Agreement is intended for the benefit of COUNTY, CITY and SHERIFF and not for the benefit of any third parties. SECTION NO. 32. SURVIVAL Without being exclusive, Section Nos. 16, 20, and 21 of this Agreement shall survive any termination, expiration or determination of invalidity of this Agreement in whole or in part. Any other sections of this Agreement which, by their sense and context, are intended to survive shall also survive. SECTION NO. 33. MEDIA RELEASES AND CONTACT Media releases concerning law enforcement activities covered under this Agreement will be prepared by the SHERIFF'S Public Information Officer. Any such release of information to the media that is deemed to be sensitive or likely to cause concern or alarm shall be provided to the City Manager before its release. CITY shall not issue any media releases regarding law enforcement activities covered under this Agreement without prior approval of the SHERIFF unless otherwise agreed by the Parties. SHERIFF will endeavor to have the Police Chief or designee interact with the media when appropriate. SHERIFF's ability to interact with the media on CITY's behalf shall not be limited by this section. Page 18 of 26 SECTION NO. 34: MODIFICATION This Agreement may only be modified in writing by the mutual written agreement of the Parties. (This space intentionally left blank.) Page 19 of 26 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date and year opposite their respective signatures. DATED: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ATTEST: CLERK OF THE BOARD BY: GINNA VASQUEZ AL FRENCH, Chair JOSH KERNS, Vice -Chair SHELLY O'QUINN, Commissioner ********** DATED: SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF: OZZIE KNEZOVICH ********** DATED: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY: MARK CALHOUN, City Manager Attest: CHRISTINE BAINBRIDGE City Clerk Approved as to form only: Office of the City Attorney Page 20 of 26 Exhibit 1— Services Provided to CITY by SHERIFF CITY Dedicated Service Units CITY Police Department Administration (Chief, Commander, Sergeant) Patrol Traffic Community Services Domestic Violence School Resource Officers K-9 Property and Drug Crimes Investigations Shared Service Units Major Crimes Sex Crimes Investigative Task Force Joint Terrorism Task Force Safe Streets (Drug Task Force and Gang Enforcement) Emergency Operations Team SHERIFF Command Staff Public Information Officer Training/Professional Standards SCOPE/SIRT Radio Dispatch Helicopter Forensics Crime Check Records Management Property Storage Explosive Disposal Communications Crime Analysis Garage Firing Range Fleet SWAT/Hostage Negotiation Extra Duty Employment Reservist and Explorer Units Crime Check Civilian Administrative Support Computer Aided Dispatch/Report Management System Page 21 of 26 Regional Services Civil Marine Patrol SHERIFF Sex Offender Registration Page 22 of 26 Exhibit 2 — Performance Measures and Workload Indicators Workload Indicators Total incidents per Dedicated CITY Patrol Officer per shift Total citizen initiated Calls for Service Total citizen initiated Calls for Service with Dedicated CITY Patrol Officer response Total Dedicated CITY Officer initiated incidents Total Dedicated CITY Officer involved incidents Total incidents requiring written documentation Total property crimes Total crimes against persons Total incidents resulting in custodial arrest Total traffic infractions/citations issued Total traffic infractions/citations from citizen complaints Total reported collisions Total Major Crime investigations initiated Total Sex Crime investigations initiated Total Property/Drug Crime investigations initiated Performance Measures Average patrol staffing per shift Citizen complaints per 1,000 Dedicated CITY Officer incidents Outcome of complaint investigations (% sustained, not sustained, exonerated, unfounded, pending, changed to inquiry) Use of force per 1,000 Dedicated CITY Officer incidents Outcome of use of force incidents (% within policy and not within policy) Average response time for priority 1 calls for Service Percentage of calls for Service with deputy response Percentage of incidents that were deputy initiated Percentage of solvable property crime cases assigned Percentage of assigned cases solved by investigative unit Percentage of assigned cases solved by charges filed by investigative unit Total unassigned cases Cases inactivated due to lack of evidence or leads Collisions per capita Percentage of traffic complaints worked Page 23 of 26 Exhibit 3 - Dedicated CITY Officers Administrative Police Chief/Undersheriff 1 Precinct Commander/Captain 1 Sergeant 1 Patrol Lieutenant 2 Sergeant 9 Deputies 47 K-9 Deputies 3 Traffic Sergeant 1 Detective/Corporal 1 Deputies 5 Community Services Deputy 1 Domestic Violence Detective/Corporal 1 School Resource Officer Deputy 4 Property and Drug Crimes Sergeant 1 Detectives 10 Deputy 1 Total Dedicated Officers 89 Page 24 of 26 Exhibit 4 - Combined Number of Officers in Shared Units Inve stigations Captain 1 Lieutenant 1 DEA Deputy 1 Major Crimes Sergeant Detectives Sex Crimes Sergeant Detectives 1 6 1 6 Investigative Task Force Lieutenant 1 Regional Intelligence Group Detective 1 Joint Terrorism Task Force Detective 1 Safe Streets (Drugs and Gangs) Sergeant 1 Detectives 4 Deputies 1 Emergency Operations Team Deputy 2 Command Staff Undersheriff 1 Public Information Officer Sergeant 1 Training/Professional Standards Lieutenant 1 Sergeant 2 Deputies 2 Total Shared Officers 35 Page 25 of 26 Francis Exhibit 5 - CITY Patrol Districts I0 7 Va11el5P 8 .eC Pe °fin N -1,V 1lt les ley Trent 8,—. 12 LT_ 4 Sprague 98th n 10 5 SR 1J _._.32nd1 Sackson 6 8tlj 9 Liberty iake 1 es Spokane Valley Police Districts 1-6 au,.•�. Page 26 of 26 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 25, 2018 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: Potential Transportation Grants — Call For Projects: FY 2018 Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) Urban Arterial Program (UAP) and the Sidewalk Program (SP) GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Resolution 17-011 - Adoption of the 2018-2023 Six - Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), May 23, 2017; Resolution 17-006 — Approval to amend the adopted 2017 TIP to include University Road (16th to 24th and also 24th to Dishman-Mica), February 28, 2017; Approved motion to apply for STP grant funds from SRTC for the Broadway PCC Intersection project, September 8, 2009, Informational RCA on July 11, 2017, Admin. Report, July 18, 2017. BACKGROUND: On June 1, 2017, the Washington State TIB issued a Call for Projects for the allocation of funding for the Urban Arterial Program (UAP) and Sidewalk Program (SP). The UAP makes approximately $75M available statewide and Spokane Valley is eligible to apply for funds from the Northeast Region's allocation of $8.4M. The SP makes approximately $5M available statewide and Spokane Valley is eligible to apply for funds from the East Region's allocation of $1.1M. The application submittal due date for TIB funding is August 18, 2018. Staff has reviewed the grant scoring criterion and compared it to the City's 2018-2023 TIP, Pavement Management Program, Comprehensive Plan, water district capital improvement plans, accident hot spots and other elements of the City's transportation network. Staff anticipates that the projects proposed below will score well and have a high potential to receive funding. Based on a preliminary evaluation, the following draft list of projects has been developed for consideration. Please note that estimated project costs are planning -level preliminary estimates and are anticipated to change as more information becomes available and the grant applications are finalized. Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) Project Name Total Estimated Cost Grant Request* (80%) Estimated City Match (20%) Urban Arterial Program (UAP) ($'s in 1.000s) Mullan Rd — Broadway Ave. to Indiana Ave (PE & CN) $926 $741 $1851 University Rd — 16th to Dishman Mica Rd (CN Only) $2,276 $1,821 $455 1 Broadway Ave - Argonne Rd and Mullan Rd intersections (CN Only) $2,250 $1,800 $450 2 Sidewalk Program (SP) ($'s in 1.000s) Mission Ave. Sidewalk—Bowdish to Union (PE &CN) $486 $389 $97 2 1 Matching Funds Source: Pavement Preservation 2 Matching Funds Source: REET OPTIONS: 1) Approve the list of recommended projects for TIB grant applications as presented, 2) Revise the list of projects for TIB grant applications, or 3) take other appropriate action. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to authorize the City Manager or designee to apply for Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) grants for the following projects: 1) MuIlan Road — Broadway to Indiana; 2) University Road — 16th to Dishman Mica; 3) Broadway Avenue Intersection — Argonne & MuIlan; and 4) Mission Avenue Sidewalk — Bowdish to Union. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The City's required match on TIB funded projects is 20% of the total grant request. If the City does not receive grant funding for one of the pavement preservation projects, adjustments may be necessary to the pavement preservation schedule to provide the necessary match to ensure sufficient REET funds (#301 and #302). This approach leverages the pavement preservation fund (#311) to match awarded grants ultimately providing more dollars to support the pavement preservation program. STAFF CONTACTS: Adam Jackson — Planning & Grants Engineer Mike Basinger — Economic Development Manager John Hohman — Deputy City Manager ATTACHMENTS: Project Summary Sheets TIB Project: MuIlan Broadway to Indiana ca 0 a) CD, Indiana E. w Indiana , d c m L m. ces Baldwin co in Nora Knox Knox l Shannon "; 7 ) 2" 0! Michielli Nora Shannon LL ! Sinto Sharp WI m a� Boone r0- - Desmet } ii Cataldo dt a'a ccs 2 0 § ii Maxwell ,,, Il , O „4- 'En Il`4°Sintoli2 'o ° --rc_.._.�io 1m LLc °o 7 c N Sharp . }I o Boone w =1 o 1:1, = a Nora _L c o, ca m, E Augusta E Broadway 3,' LL Springfield EI C 7,5 2018 Project Description: 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Mullan Road from Broadway to Indiana Avenue is a 3 -lane principal arterial. As identified in the City's Pavement Management Analysis Report, the pavement through this section is ready to receive a moderate depth hot mix asphalt overlay (1.5 to 2.5 inch- es) while areas between Broadway and Mission are anticipated to require a full depth reconstruction. Any ADA -deficient pedestri- an facilities will be updated. All broken sidewalks will be replaced or restored. Benefits of Project: This project will apply a new pavement surface extending the life of the road. In addition to the road surface, all sidewalks will be field reviewed to verify that they meet current ADA requirements. Sidewalk and sidewalk ramps not meeting these requirements will be upgraded to meet the current standards. The City will also provide long -needed stormwater improvements during a single construction window, limiting the impact to the roadways. Project Cost Estimate: Preliminary Engineering (PE) = $84,000 Right of Way (RW) = $15,000 Construction (CN) = $827,000 Estimated Remaining Project Cost = $926,000 TIB Project: University Rd - 16th Ave to Dishman-Mica Rd MI= r E.rl ;e. s a • 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Project Description: University Road from 16th Ave to Dishman-Mica Rd is a 4 -lane Minor Arterial with adjacent sidewalk throughout. University is generally rated by the City's 2015 Pavement Management Analysis Report as "marginal" or "poor." This project will provide an asphalt grind & overlay and will restripe to provide (4) 11 -foot wide travel lanes and (2) 5 -foot wide bike lanes. The total project length is approximately 1.2 miles. Any ADA -deficient pedestrian facilities will be updated. Portions of University experience storm runoff issues due to the flat grades as well. Further, to provide flexibility, the City has provided the option to split the project into two phases at 28th Ave. This break-point is consistent with North Phase's scheduled water improvements in 2018 by the water purveyor and provides the funding agency flexibility when allocating funds. Benefits of Project: This project will apply a new pavement surface, extending the life of the road. All curb ramps will be field verified to meet current ADA requirements. The addition of bike lanes on this project is consistent with the Transportation Element of the City's Compre- hensive Plan and will improve connectivity for those riders coming or going south of University & Dishman-Mica. This project also allows the City to provide long -needed stormwater improvements during a single construction window; limiting the impact to roadways. Project Cost Estimate: North Phase (CN) = $1,331,000 South Phase (CN) = $945,000 Total Construction (CN) = $2,276,000 TIB Project: Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan PCC Intersection (CN only) 2018 Project Description: 2019 2020 " 2021 2022 2023 This project will reconstruct the intersections of Broadway Avenue at Argonne and Mullan Roads with Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) pavement. It will also provide new sidewalks along both sides of Broadway between Argonne & Mullan. New pedestrian curb ramps will also be provided at the intersection corners as needed. Benefits of Project: The existing intersection is experiencing severe rutting, raveling and longitudinal cracking. Significant truck traffic continues to destroy the pavement. Preservation of the existing pavement is not an option because the existing pavement section does not have the structural integrity to support the heavy turning trucks. Reconstruction of this intersection using PCC Pavement will pro- vide a long term solution to prevent further pavement deterioration. This is the most cost effective solution and the least expen- sive for the taxpayer. The design life of the project is 30 years. The project will also provide new sidewalks and pedestrian ramps. Currently, much of the sidewalks have widths between 4 -feet and 5 -feet. Most of the existing sidewalks have adequate right-of-way to allow for new, wider concrete sidewalks. New sidewalk widths will vary between 5'-6' as right-of-way and existing conditions allow. Project Cost Estimate: Construction (CN) = $2,250,000 Updated June, 2017 TIB Project: Mission Ave Sidewalk - Bowdish Rd to Union Rd Mission Ave E Maxwell Av e Existing Roadway — 5' Ex. Bike Lane 6' New Sidewalk Legend -•-•-• Sidewalk Project Existing Sidewalk/Pathway BPMP Safe Routes to School 2018 New 6" Curb Mission Ave Sidewalk - Cross Section not to scale 2019 Feet 100 200 300 400 500 2020 2021 2022 2023 Project Description: This project provides approximately 1,700 feet of sidewalk on the north side of Mission Avenue from 160 feet east of Union Road to Bowdish Road. The project includes minor site grading and preparation, placement of base rock, miscellaneous paving, new concrete sidewalk, and minor landscape restoration. The City has adequate right-of-way for the proposed improvements. The surrounding properties are zoned as Single Family Residential with Mission Park immediately to the west of the project. Just north of the homes fronting the north side of Mission Ave. are multiple parcels zoned Corridor Mixed Use and Multi -Family. These un- developed parcels along Bowdish and Wilbur are in the permit -review stages for proposed apartments and self -storage units that will complete the build -out of the developable area. Mission Ave. is a designated Minor Arterial with a speed limit of 35 mph. Benefits of Project: The project will provide a continuous pedestrian corridor along Mission Road; connecting Pines Road to Valley Mission Park. Pe- destrians currently walk on the narrow gravel shoulder along Mission Avenue. The future growth of the undeveloped parcels along this portion of Mission also increase the need for pedestrian facilities; as people will inherently travel south to Mission and look to travel east to Pines or west to Bowdish. The project will also provide a clear and delineated surface for people utilizing the existing bus stop on Pines Road. Project Cost Estimate: Preliminary Engineering (PE) = $ 60,000 Construction (CN) = $426,000 Estimated Total Project Cost = $486,000 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 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 — 2017 Amendments to the 2012 Interlocal Agreement for Acquisition of Real Estate Between City of Spokane Valley and Spokane County Library District. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Chapter 39.34 RCW. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adoption of interlocal agreement in September, 2012 regarding sale and development of Sprague site. On January 3, 2017, the City and SCLD created a library ad hoc committee comprised of SCLD Board of Trustee members, SCLD senior staff, two City Councilmembers, and City senior staff; administrative report and update July 11,2017. BACKGROUND: The City purchased 8.4 acres in 2012 after the SCLD asked the City to purchase the property. The City had no interest in acquiring the property prior to that time, but did so to partner with SCLD following the request. The City then sold 2.82 acres to SCLD to build a new central library facility. SCLD attempted to pass a construction bond twice, but fell just short both times. The vote in 2015 resulted the majority of voters favoring the bond (57.5% yes votes) but it fell short of the 60 percent supermajority requirement. On January 3, 2017, the City and SCLD appointed the ad hoc committee, which met five times. The purpose for the library ad hoc committee was to identify and implement ways the two entities could continue to partner to assist SCLD in getting the Sprague/Herald library facility constructed. The library ad hoc committee discussed the desirability of amending the 2012 interlocal agreement in several ways: First, amend Section 10 to change the timeframe for successfully getting voter approval on a construction bond from October 31, 2017 to October 31, 2022, with a mutual option for two additional years; and Second, amend Section 6 to remove the firm requirement for a minimum building size of 30,000 square feet, and change it to approximately 25,000 square feet, which will depend in large part on extensive public input; and Third, in an effort to keep a future bond request to voters as low as possible (well below the prior bond request of $22 million), both partners would be obligated to commit a $1.3 million investment in the library site. The City would pay $1.3 million toward shared spaces (such as the central plaza and parking) and frontage expenses (curb, gutter, sidewalk). With regard to the City's amount, the City has retained the full amount of the sale proceeds from SCLD in 2012 ($839,285.10), which would be used for most of its obligation. The remaining $461,000 would come from the City's General Fund. The existing agreement is for the parties to evenly split the frontage and joint use areas. In the administrative report on July 11, there were questions from several Councilmembers as to whether the SCLD would actually be investing any funds into the project to "match" those by the City. At that time, staff stated that SCLD would use its prior land acquisition costs for this site and a second site near Conklin Road and Sprague Avenue (for a second, smaller library facility) as its investment by not seeking repayment through the bonds for those prior expenditures. The reality is that anything the City does not contribute would be an investment in the project by the District, roughly $11-12 million dollars. On July 18, 2017, the SCLD Board voted 3-2 to not approve the proposed amendments outlined herein. Following the action by the SCLD Board to not approve the proposed 2017 amendments, staff for the City and SCLD met on July 20. One point of discussion was that the SCLD Board expressed significant concern that there was not more public engagement to gauge public interest at this point. Staff for both entities determined that it would be appropriate and helpful to have a public meeting in late September where the original plan is laid out, including the joint conceptual site plan process, the attempted bond measures, and the proposed 2017 amendments are all explained in depth. Public collaboration and input would be anticipated and welcomed. It is anticipated we would conduct this public meeting the week of September 25 to ensure the City is sufficiently moved into the new City Hall. If the Council and SCLD Board approve these proposed amendments, the intent would be for SCLD and the City to begin an intensive public involvement process to better define the needs, expectations, and voter support for financing and constructing for two new facilities near the intersections of Sprague/Herald and Sprague/Conklin. OPTIONS: (1) Move to approve proposed 2017 Amendment; or (2) take other action as appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move we authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the 2017 Addendum to the 2012 Interlocal Agreement for Acquisition of Real Estate Between the City of Spokane Valley and the Spokane County Library District as drafted. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: If approved, this would commit the City to investing $1.3 million in joint site areas and frontage improvements, of which the City already has $839,285.10 set aside. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Calhoun, City Manager; John Hohman, Deputy City Manager; Cary Driskell, City Attorney. ATTACHMENTS: (1) 2012 Interlocal Agreement for Acquisition of Real Estate Between City of Spokane Valley and Spokane County Library District; (2) Proposed 2017 Amendments to the Interlocal Agreement for Acquisition of Real Estate Between City of Spokane Valley and Spokane County Library District (in "mark-up" format so all proposed amendments are readily apparent); and (3) PowerPoint materials providing brief summary of the proposed 2017 amendments. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR ACQUISITION OF REAL ESTATE BETWEEN CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY AND SPOKANE COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT This Agreement is made by and between the CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY ("City") and the SPOKANE COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT, a Washington municipal corporation ("Library District") collectively referred to herein as the "Parties", based upon the following Recitals. The Agreement shall become effective as of the date the last Party hereto executes this Agreement. RECITALS A. WHEREAS, the Parties each have need of acquiring real property in furtherance of their respective public purposes; and B. WHEREAS, four contiguous parcels of real property comprising approximately 8.4 acres located on the corner of Sprague and Herald within the City and legally described on the attached Exhibit "A", (the "Property") have been identified by the Parties as appropriate to their needs. The Spokane County parcel numbers are 45174.9053, 45174.9054, 45174.9055, and 45174.9056; and C. WHEREAS, City anticipates entering into negotiations with the owner of the Property, Pring Corporation ("Pring"), whereby the City would purchase the Property from Pring; and D. WHEREAS, the Library District for its purposes needs between two and one-half and three and one-half acres of the Property while the City needs the balance; and I: \S PODOC S \26321 \00006\AGREE\ 1007874 1 C)0 --1(4o E. WHEREAS, the Parties hereto wish to enter into this Agreement for the purpose of agreeing to jointly develop the Property and to provide for dividing the Property between the City and the Library District at a later date such that the interests of both Parties will be served; and F. WHEREAS, the Parties acknowledge that there will be costs to construct frontage improvements directly related to the anticipated development activity of the respective Parties, and that the Parties need to apportion those costs between themselves; and G. WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36.34.340, the City is authorized to acquire by purchase title to real property for park and recreational purposes; and H. WHEREAS, RCW 39.33.010 authorizes governmental entities to transfer real property between themselves as set forth in RCW 39.33.020, and I. WHEREAS, RCW 39.34.030(1) provides that any power or authority capable of being exercised by a public agency of this state may be exercised jointly with any other public agency of this state. NOW THEREFORE, based upon the foregoing recitals, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Joint Board. No joint board or agency shall be created as a result of this interlocal agreement between the Parties. Any action taken pursuant to the terms of this agreement must be separately approved by the governing boards of each Party. 2. Purchase of Property. The City will negotiate in good faith with Pring regarding a Real Estate Purchase and Sale Agreement (the "Purchase and Sale Agreement") for the purchase of the Property. 3. Purchase Price. The Library District, contemporaneous with the Closing between the City and Pring, and subject to mutual agreement on the price paid by the City to Pring, shall pay to the City an amount equal to the per square foot Purchase Price of the Property based upon the total number of square feet of the Property determined by the survey times two and one-half acres (108,900 sq. ft.) together with the same proportionate share of any survey, title, recording, closing, and phase I environmental audit costs. Any appraisal fees shall be paid entirely by the City. The City is not represented by any Realtor, and shall not pay any fees related to services provided by any Realtor related to purchasing the Property unless otherwise agreed to in writing. I: \S PODOCS\26321\00006\AGREE\1007874 2 4. Title. The Parties agree that the Purchase and Sale Agreement shall reflect that the Purchase Price at Closing shall be paid in cash and that title to the Property shall be taken in the name of the City, subject to the contract right of ownership by the Library District of at least 2.5 acres, as identified in this Agreement. This contract right of ownership is enforceable in an action for specific performance. 5. Closing. Closing of the transaction to purchase the Property shall occur on or before a date mutually acceptable to the City and Pring. 6. Joint Site Development Plan. Within one year following the Closing, the Parties shall work together to A. mutually select a consultant team; and B. draft and finalize a Joint Site Development Plan with the goal of agreeing, among other things, on how much of the Property the Library District will require for its purposes, and location of the same. The Parties intend that the Joint Site Development Plan shall include building footprints, parking, curb cuts, sidewalks, storm water management, access including reciprocal access and parking easements if any, and any other matters that the Parties deem desirable to be included as part of such Joint Site Development Plan. The Library District anticipates that its needs will include the following: A. A minimum of a 30,000 square foot building on one floor, that will serve as a destination facility with programming intended to draw participants from the Spokane County region. B. The exterior building image should provide a sense that this building is a library and an important civic and community building. This can be accomplished by using timeless, quality materials like brick, stone, concrete and composite metal panels to name a few. C. Site Requirements: • Building footprint a minimum of 30,000 square feet. • Vehicular access required for rear service entrance. I:\S PODOCS\26321\00006\AGREE\1007874 3 • Appropriate parking to meet the City's code minimum requirements for a public library, with a 100 seat meeting room. • Require frontage on or clear visibility from Sprague Avenue but not from behind a parking lot. • At least one side of library building adjacent and open to landscaped park area. The City anticipates that its needs will include the following: A. Land for a park or other civic uses B. Due to civic nature of the site, shared hardscape such as walkways and plaza anticipated C. Potential amenities to consider: • parking • reading garden • public market space • civic plaza and fountain • flag display/Veteran's memorial • small picnic shelter • large shelter • performance/gathering place • seasonal cafe place • open field • walking loop/trail I:\S PODOC S \2632 1\00006\AGREE \ 1007874 4 • art/sculpture walk D. Site requirements: • Public access to library restrooms • Park frontage on Sprague • Off-street parking for City users (shared parking with library) Fundamental to the understanding between the Parties hereto is that as of the date hereof, neither Party is in a position to know precisely how the Property should be divided such that the resulting two parcels will maximize the use and benefit to each Party of the Property for the Parties' respective needs to the extent allowed by law. To that end, the Parties agree that as of the date hereof, the number of square of feet and the precise location of the boundary line to be created cannot be known until completion of the Joint Site Development Plan. The Parties therefore agree to cooperate in good faith with each other to arrive at a mutually satisfactory arrangement for dividing the property as reflected in the Joint Site Development Plan. Any engineering or other consulting fees incurred in this process shall be split equally. Allocation of costs for a traffic study that addresses impacts of anticipated development is the subject of a separate Memorandum of Understanding between the Parties. Based upon the traffic study, the Parties have identified certain right-of-way improvements or site -wide improvements (collectively referred to as "frontage improvements) that are necessary for the respective proposed projects. The Parties agree to split the frontage improvements currently identified in the traffic study on an equal basis. The frontage improvements currently identified are set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto. Allocation of additional costs for any other frontage improvements that are necessitated by or otherwise determined as part of the Joint Site Development Plan will be as agreed by the Parties within 30 days of completion of the Joint Site Development Plan. The Parties will negotiate the allocation of any such additional frontage improvement costs in good faith. 7. Property Adjustment. If, as a result of the Joint Site Development Plan process the Library District determines that it needs more than 2.5 acres, then the City agrees that it will sell to the Library District at the original per square foot Purchase Price up to one additional acre of the Property. Payment to the City by the Library District of any additional property in excess of the original 2.5 acres shall be made on or before recording of the Deed described in Section 8 below. Any costs incurred for the boundary line adjustment process, and any surveying fees and fees for preparation and recording of the Deed shall be paid for by the Library District. Any legal fees incurred by the Parties shall be the separate responsibility of each. I: \S PODOC S \26321 \00006\AGREE\ 1007874 5 8. Deed to Library District. Within 30 days after completion of the Joint Site Development Plan, the Parties will cooperate to initiate the process to adjust the boundary line as agreed in the Joint Site Development Plan through a boundary line adjustment. Within 10 days of the completion of the boundary line adjustment, the City will convey to the Library District by deed that portion of the Property designated for the Library District on the Joint Site Development Plan to the Library District. 9. Failure of Joint Site Development Plan. In the event that, despite their good faith best efforts, the Parties are unable to agree on a Joint Site Development Plan as described above, and absent an agreement between the Parties to extend the deadline for developing such Joint Site Development Plan, then City shall, within 60 days after the final deadline for developing the Joint Site Development Plan, reimburse the Library District the full amount of that portion of the Purchase Price together with the pro -rata share of any survey, title, recording, closing, and phase I environmental audit costs paid by the Library District and from that point in time this agreement would be considered void. Each Party shall pay one-half of the costs of the Joint Site Development Plan if the project does not go forward, either due to failure to agree on a Joint Site Development Plan or because the District does not pass its bond as set forth in Section 10. 10. Re -Purchase by City. In order to construct a library building and ancillary improvements on the portion of the Property acquired by the Library District, it is anticipated that the Library District will need to secure voter approval of a District -wide bond levy covering this and other projects. Without voter approval of such bond, the Library District will not be in a position to develop its portion of the Property. The Parties agree that in the event that the Library District has not, within five years following the Closing, secured voter approval of a construction bond for the library building and ancillary improvements in such amount as shall be determined necessary by the Library District, that thereafter the Library District shall reconvey all of the Property back to the City at the same price paid by the Library District to the City. Such payment shall be paid all in cash. The Library District, in such event, shall convey title to the City with the same type of instrument as it received the Property from the City, and from that point in time this agreement would be considered void. In the event the construction bond is approved, the Library District shall commence construction within one year of the date of voter approval of the construction bond. 11. Maintenance Costs. The City agrees to maintain the Property, including that portion deeded to the Library District, until such time as the Library District shall begin development of its property. Maintenance is anticipated to include weed control and trash removal, and the Library District agrees to reimburse the City on an annual basis its proportionate share of such costs. The District and City shall negotiate in good faith the allocation of maintenance costs for the external library grounds both during the period of construction of the library facility, as well as maintenance costs once the facility is constructed. 12. Use of Property. The City agrees that its portion of the Property will be dedicated to public use and will not be sold to any third party. The Library District agrees that its portion of I:\S PODOC S\2632I \00006\AGREE\1007874 6 the Property will be developed into a public library facility provided that funding for such project is secured as provided above in Section 10. The City, at its expense, will be allowed to use the entire site for civic purposes until the District provides the City with a notice that the District will commence construction activities in 30 days. The City agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the District from and against all claims, causes of action, and damages arising out of the City's use of the Property for any such civic purposes. 13. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties hereto and their respective heirs, personal representatives, legal representative, agents, attorneys, successors and assigns. 14. Entire Agreement. This Agreement is the sole and entire agreement between the Parties, and there is no other agreement, either oral or in writing, which modifies the terms of this Agreement. No statement, promises, or inducements made by either Party or any agent of either Party that is not contained in this written Agreement shall be valid or binding. Any enlargement, modification or alteration of this Agreement is binding only if executed in writing and signed by all Parties hereto. 15. Attorneys' Fees. In any action to enforce this Agreement, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to recover expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, at all trial and appellate levels, including any bankruptcy proceedings. 16. Venue. This Agreement is entered into in the State of Washington and venue of any action shall be the Superior Court for Spokane County. 17. Notices. All notices, demands or other communications which are required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing, and either personally delivered or mailed to the other Party at the address set forth below its signature on this Agreement, or at such other addresses as either party may give to the other by notice in writing pursuant to the terms of this paragraph. 18. Waiver. Waiver by either Party of any covenant, condition or provision of this Agreement shall not operate as or be considered to be a waiver by such Party of any other covenant, condition or provision hereof, or of any subsequent breach of either Party. 19. Additional Acts. The Parties each hereby agree to perform, execute and/or deliver or cause to be performed, executed and/or delivered, any and all such further acts, documents and assurances as may be reasonably required to consummate the transaction contemplated hereby. I:\SPODOCS\26321\00006\AGREE\1007874 7 20. Recording of Agreement. Pursuant to the provisions of RCW 39.34.040, this Interlocal Agreement shall be filed with the office of the Spokane County Auditor. 21. Negotiation and Construction. This Agreement, and each of the terms and provisions hereof, are deemed to have been explicitly negotiated between the Parties, and the language in all parts of this Agreement shall, in all cases, be construed according to its fair meaning and not strictly for or against either Party. 22. Representation of Authority. Each person who executes this Agreement represents and warrants to the Parties that he or she has the authority to do so. SPOKANE COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY By:�. lilf By: Print Name: NOlnt; L deboev' Print Name: /'2€ L'hv1 Title: EyeathVe/Dveaw Address: 4131 Z. N. 4-tej it A 3 p e,Q e W4 Dated: q/l q/rz'- Title: l Address: /1 70 7 L s';'PV4, ee ,COP-4 h& ✓ tier Dated: Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form: fl ' Philip S. Brooke, Attorney at Law Dated: la/ City Attori y Dated: 9 `� 7 -1 2 I : \ S PO DO C S \26321 \00006\AG R EE\ 1007874 8 EXHIBIT A The southeast quarter of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 17, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, W.M., in the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington; Excepting therefrom the West 20 feet; Further excepting therefrom the North 15 feet; Further:.exccepting therefrom the• South 80.'feet.for Sprague Avenue. Spokane Co. parcel no.s 45174.9053, 45174.9054, 45174.9055, and 45174.9056 Frontage Improvements Cost Estimate Project Name: Spokane County Llbrary - Proposed Main Library Site Frontage Improvements: Herald Rd.; Main Ave. Prepared By: Preparation Date: Bryan D. Hicks, P.E. July 18, 2012 EXHIBIT B Spokane Valley ITEM ii WSDOT STD. SPEC. WSDOTSTD. #! ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT OF MEASURE PLANNED QUANTITY ESTIMATED UNIT PRICE ESTIMATED ITEM PRICE 1 1-09.7 0001 MOBILIZATION L.S. 1 $ 31,500.00 $ 31,500 2 1-05.4 7038 ROADWAY SURVEYING L.S. 1 $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500 6 1-07.15 7736 SPCC PLAN L.S. 1 $ 500.00 $ 500 9 1-10.3 6971 PROJECT TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL L.S. 1 $ 4,000.00 $ 4,000 10 2-01 0035 CLEARING AND GRUBBING L.S. 1 $ 4,000.00 $ 4,000 12 2-02 SAWCUT ASPHALT PAVEMENT L.F. 1,300 $ 1.50 $ 1,950 14 2-03 0310 ROADWAY EXCAVATION & EMBANKMENT, INCL. HAUL C.Y. 738 $ 16.00 $ 11,808 17 4-04 5115 CRUSHED SURFACING TOP COURSE C.Y. 368 $ 48.00 $ 17,664 19 5-04 HMA CL. 1/2", 0.25 FT. DEPTH, PG 64-28 S.Y. 144 $ 24.00 $ 3,456 20 5-04 HMA CL. 1/2", 0.33 FT. DEPTH, PG 64-28 S.Y. 872 $ 20.00 $ 17,440 26 7-05 1062 PRECAST CONCRETE DRYWELL TYPE B - SWALE EACH 3 $ 3,400.00 $ 10,200 34 8-01 TEMPORARY EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL L.S. 1 $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500 35 8-02 SWALE EXCAVATION INC. HAUL C.Y. 380 $ 23.00 $ 8,740 36 8-02 6405 TOPSOIL TYPE A C.Y. 150 $ 33.00 $ 4,950 39 8-02 6555 SOD INSTALLATION S.Y. 1,361 $ 8.00 $ 10,888 40 8-03 6071 IRRIGATION SYSTEM L.S. 1 $ 7,500.00 $ 7,500 42 8-04 6700 CEMENT CONC. TRAFFIC CURB & GUTTER L.F. 1,225 $ 13.00 $ 15,925 43 8-04 6707 CEMENT CONC. PEDESTRIAN CURB L.F. 80 $ 18.00 $ 1,440 44 8-04 1070 CEMENT CONC./QUARRY SPALL SPILLWAY S.Y. 20 $ 50.00 $ 1,000 45 8-06 7059 CEMENT CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APPROACH S.Y. 186 $ 44.00 $ 8,184 47 8-14 7055 CEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK S.Y. 727 $ 34.00 $ 24,718 48 8-14 7058 CEMENT CONCRETE CURB RAMP TYPE A EACH 4 $ 1,250.00 $ 5,000 51 8-20 6912 HAWK PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL L.S. 1 $ 200,000.00 $ 200,000 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $ 393,863 Contingency (25%) Inflation Adjustment Factor (4%/yr) Construction Sub -Total PE (15%) CE (15%) Utility Allowance - Undergrounding of overhead lines (East side of Herald) Right Of Way 2 years TOTAL PROJECT ESTIMATE 98,466 31,509 '523,838 78,576 78,576 20,000 $ 700,989 Cost Estimate Assumptions: Includes pavement widening, sidewalk, curb & gutter and swales for frontage of undeveloped parcel along Herald Rd. and Main Ave. Estimate does not Include frontage Improvements in front of existing Balfour Park on Main Ave or Balfour Rd. Includes HAWK Pedestrian Crossing Signal on Sprague Ave. Main Ave. - (Herald Rd. to Felts Rd.) Local Access Street L = 650 -ft 3" HMA over 6" CSTC; Ex, Width: 30 -ft wide; No additional widening req'd 10 -ft swale; 6 -ft sidewalk, Herald Rd. - (SDra0ue Ave. to Main Ave.) Collector Street' L = 575 -ft 4" HMA over 6" CSTC; Ex. Width: 25 to 30 -ft; Widen to 40 -ft 10 -ft swale; 6 -ft sidewalk DRAFT 2017 ADDENDUM TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR ACQUISTION OF REAL ESTATE BETWEEN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY AND THE SPOKANE COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley (the City) and Spokane County Library District (the Library District) (referred to jointly as the Parties) executed an interlocal agreement (the Agreement) on September 27, 2012. The purpose of the Agreement was for the City to sell the District certain real property located on the north side of Sprague Avenue, between Balfour Road and Herald Road, with the intent that the Library District would design and construct a new library facility that would serve as the primary library facility in the City; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, the City sold 2.5 acres to the Library District, Spokane County parcel number 45174.9063 (the Site), with the transaction closing on or about October 31, 2012. The Parties agreed to an additional transfer of property pursuant to the Agreement, which was dependent upon the needs of the Library District as determined in a collaborative joint needs analysis/conceptual site plan prepared by the Parties. The total property acquired by the Library District from the City was 2.82 acres, with the total closing price, including land and apportioned costs, of $839,285.10; and WHEREAS, Section 10 of the Agreement contains a requirement that "in the event that the Library District has not, within five years following the Closing, secured voter approval of a construction bond for the library building and ancillary improvements in such amount as shall be determined necessary by the Library District, that thereafter the Library District shall reconvey all of the Property back to the City at the same price paid by the Library District to the City." WHEREAS, the conceptual site plan process took place largely in 2013, and included significant technical input and analysis by the Parties, consultants, and the public. This extensive public participation has been integral to the plan to develop the Site as the main library facility in the City, including identifying the functions desired and needed by the community in a modern library facility; and WHEREAS, in April 2014, the Library District put two ballot measures before the electorate in the greater Spokane Valley region. The first measure was whether to create a capital facilities area which was a subset of the entire Library District, and which would primarily benefit from the proposed improvements. The second measure was whether to approve construction of the new library at the Site, a second but smaller library facility near the intersection of Sprague Avenue and Conklin Road, as well as improvements at the Argonne Branch, located at Argonne Road and Upriver Drive. The creation of the capital facility area, which required a simple majority, was approved. The vote to approve construction of the facilities, which required at least a 60% approval, failed, although it received 54.84% approval; and 2017 Interlocal Agreement Addendum, Acquisition of Real Estate for Library Page 1 of 4 DRAFT WHEREAS, in August 2015, the Library District again requested that the voters in the capital facility area approve the proposed construction. The capital facility area is legally valid for up to two election attempts, so did not need to be approved as part of the 2016 effort. This effort received 57.57% approval, falling just short of being successful; and WHEREAS, the Parties mutually recognize the importance of having a modern, functional library facility to support the educational needs of the citizens of the City, including children and adults; and WHEREAS, the Parties mutually recognize the economic development benefits of co - locating the new library facility with the City's proposed renovations of Balfour Park, which are also adjacent to the City's new City Hall facility. The Parties assert these combined improvements will act as a magnet for private development in the area; and WHEREAS, the Parties prepared a Joint Site Plan which identified certain right-of-way improvements or site -wide improvements (collectively referred to as "frontage improvements") that are necessary for the respective proposed projects on the site. Said improvements will benefit the multiple uses planned for the combined site. The Parties wish to work together to provide the necessary site improvements while keeping the cost manageable for the citizens; and WHEREAS, the Parties agree that a continuing and enhanced partnership between the Parties is crucial for success in jointly developing the Site. NOW THEREFORE, the Parties agree to make the following amendments to the Agreement: 6. Joint Site Development Plan. A. An approximately 25,000 square foot building on one floor, that will serve as a destination facility with programming intended to draw participants from the Spokane County region. The ultimate size of the facility shall be determined following appropriate public engagement. C. Site requirements: Building footprint of approximately 25,000 square feet. The Parties agree to contribute the following amounts to the frontage and/or site improvements on the Library Site which have been identified in the Joint Site Development Plan. The Library District shall contribute its investment of $1.3 million to purchase the two library construction sites, including the Site, as well as the second library site near Sprague Avenue and Conklin Road, and will no longer seek reimbursement for the land costs through a subsequent bond. This Library District obligation is separate from and in 2017 Interlocal Agreement Addendum, Acquisition of Real Estate for Library Page 2 of 4 DRAFT addition to any amount sought in bond proceeds, and represents the actual expenditure amounts to purchase both sites. The City shall contribute $1.3 million in frontage and/or joint site improvements on the Library Site. This amount includes the $839,285.10 paid by the Library District to the City for the Site. This City obligation is separate from and in addition to any frontage or site improvements the City would already be responsible for in developing and constructing Balfour Park. The intent of these contributions by the Parties is to accomplish the mutual goals set forth in the recitals to this Addendum, above, and to reduce the amount of bond proceeds that would be requested from the voters. Exhibit B, previously attached to this Agreement is deleted. The Parties shall, within 45 days of validation of the passage of ballot measure approving construction bonds, form a joint site development project team. 10. Re -Purchase by City. In order to construct a library building and ancillary improvements on the portion of the Property acquired by the Library District, it is anticipated that the Library District will need to secure voter approval of a bond levy covering the Library Site and the Sprague and Conklin site projects. Without voter approval of such bond, the Library District will not be in a position to develop its portion of the Property. The Parties agree that in the event that the Library District has not, by October 31, 2022, secured voter approval of a construction bond for the library building and ancillary improvements in such amount as shall be determined necessary by the Library District, that thereafter the Library District shall reconvey all of the Property back to the City at the same price paid by the Library District to the City. The Parties may, by mutual written agreement after October 31, 2021, extend the timeframe for reconveyance by an additional two years, to October 31, 2024. Such payment shall be paid all in cash. The Library District, in such event, shall convey title to the City with the same type of instrument as it received the Property from the City, and from that point in time this agreement would be considered void. In the event the construction bond is approved, the Library District shall commence construction within one year of the date of voter approval of the construction bond. 12. Use of Property. The City agrees that its portion of the Property will be dedicated to public use and will not be sold to any third party. A deed restriction shall be recorded by the Library District within a reasonable amount of time from voter approval of a construction bond that would limit the use of the Site to a library facility for a minimum of 50 years from date of opening. The Library District agrees that its portion of the Property will be developed into a public library facility provided that funding for such project is secured as provided above in Section 10. The City, at its expense, will be allowed to use the entire site for civic purposes until the District provides the City with a notice that the District will commence construction activities in 30 days. The City agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the District from and against all claims, causes of action, and damages arising out of the City's use of the Property for any such civic purposes. 2017 Interlocal Agreement Addendum, Acquisition of Real Estate for Library Page 3 of 4 DRAFT This Addendum shall become effective upon the date of the signature of the last party signing this document. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Mark Calhoun, City Manager Date Signed: Approved as to form: Office of the City Attorney Date Signed SPOKANE COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT Nancy Ledeboer, Executive Director Date Signed: Approved as to form: Cynthia McMullen, Counsel for SCLD Date Signed 2017 Interlocal Agreement Addendum, Acquisition of Real Estate for Library Page 4 of 4 DRAFT 2017 ADDENDUM TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR ACQUISTION OF REAL ESTATE BETWEEN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY AND THE SPOKANE COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley (the City) and Spokane County Library District (the Library District) (referred to jointly as the Parties) executed an interlocal agreement (the Agreement) on September 27, 2012. The purpose of the Agreement was for the City to sell the District certain real property located on the north side of Sprague Avenue, between Balfour Road and Herald Road, with the intent that the Library District would design and construct a new library facility that would serve as the primary library facility in the City; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, the City sold 2.5 acres to the Library District, Spokane County parcel number 45174.9063 (the Site), with the transaction closing on or about October 31, 2012. The Parties agreed to an additional transfer of property pursuant to the Agreement, which was dependent upon the needs of the Library District as determined in a collaborative joint needs analysis/conceptual site plan prepared by the Parties. The total property acquired by the Library District from the City was 2.82 acres, with the total closing price, including land and apportioned costs, of $839,285.10; and WHEREAS, Section 10 of the Agreement contains a requirement that "in the event that the Library District has not, within five years following the Closing, secured voter approval of a construction bond for the library building and ancillary improvements in such amount as shall be determined necessary by the Library District, that thereafter the Library District shall reconvey all of the Property back to the City at the same price paid by the Library District to the City." WHEREAS, the conceptual site plan process took place largely in 2013, and included significant technical input and analysis by the Parties, consultants, and the public. This extensive public participation has been integral to the plan to develop the Site as the main library facility in the City, including identifying the functions desired and needed by the community in a modern library facility; and WHEREAS, in April 2014, the Library District put two ballot measures before the electorate in the greater Spokane Valley region. The first measure was whether to create a capital facilities area which was a subset of the entire Library District, and which would primarily benefit from the proposed improvements. The second measure was whether to approve construction of the new library at the Site, a second but smaller library facility near the intersection of Sprague Avenue and Conklin Road, as well as improvements at the Argonne Branch, located at Argonne Road and Upriver Drive. The creation of the capital facility area, which required a simple majority, was approved. The vote to approve construction of the facilities, which required at least a 60% approval, failed, although it received 54.84% approval; and 2017 Interlocal Agreement Addendum, Acquisition of Real Estate for Library Page 1 of 4 DRAFT WHEREAS, in August 2015, the Library District again requested that the voters in the capital facility area approve the proposed construction. The capital facility area is legally valid for up to two election attempts, so did not need to be approved as part of the 2016 effort. This effort received 57.57% approval, falling just short of being successful; and WHEREAS, the Parties mutually recognize the importance of having a modem, functional library facility to support the educational needs of the citizens of the City, including children and adults; and WHEREAS, the Parties mutually recognize the economic development benefits of co - locating the new library facility with the City's proposed renovations of Balfour Park, which are also adjacent to the City's new City Hall facility. The Parties assert these combined improvements will act as a magnet for private development in the area; and WHEREAS, the Parties prepared a Joint Site Plan which identified certain right-of-way improvements or site -wide improvements (collectively referred to as "frontage improvements") that are necessary for the respective proposed projects on the site. Said improvements will benefit the multiple uses planned for the combined site. The Parties wish to work together to provide the necessary site improvements while keeping the cost manageable for the citizens; and WHEREAS, the Parties agree that a continuing and enhanced partnership between the Parties is crucial for success in jointly developing the Site. NOW THEREFORE, the Parties agree to make the following amendments to the Agreement: 6. Joint Site Development Plan. A. An approximately minimum of a 258,000 square foot building on one floor, that will serve as a destination facility with programming intended to draw participants from the Spokane County region. The ultimate size of the facility shall be determined following appropriate public engagement. C. Site requirements: Building footprint of approximatelya minimum of 3025,000 square feet. The Parties agree to contribute the following amounts to the frontage and/or site improvements on the Library Site which have been identified in the Joint Site Development Plan. The Library District shall contribute its investment of $1.3 million to purchase the two library construction sites, including the Site, as well as the second library site near Sprague Avenue and Conklin Road, and will no longer seek reimbursement for the land costs through a subsequent bond. This Library District obligation is separate from and in 2017 Interlocal Agreement Addendum, Acquisition of Real Estate for Library Page 2 of 4 DRAFT addition to any amount sought in bond proceeds, and represents the actual expenditure amounts to purchase both sites. The City shall contribute $1.3 million in frontage and/or joint site improvements on the Library Site. This amount includes the $839,285.10 paid by the Library District to the City for the Site. This City obligation is separate from and in addition to any frontage or site improvements the City would already be responsible for in developing and constructing Balfour Park. The intent of these contributions by the Parties is to accomplish the mutual goals set forth in the recitals to this Addendum, above, and to reduce the amount of bond proceeds that would be requested from the voters. Exhibit B, previously attached to this Agreement is deleted. The Parties shall, within 45 days of validation of the passage of ballot measure approving construction bonds, form a joint site development project team. the subject of a separate Memorandum of Understanding between the Parties. Based upon the traffic study, the Parties have identified certain right of way improvements or site wide improvements (collectively referred to as "frontage improvements) that are necessary for the respective proposed projects. The Parties agree to split the frontage improvements currently idcntificd in the traffic study on an equal basis. The frontage improvements currently identified are set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto. Allocation of additional costs for any other frontage improvements that are necessitated by or otherwise determined as part of the Joint Site Development Plan will be as agreed by the Parties within 30 days of completion of the Joint Site Development Plan. The Parties will negotiate the allocation of any such additional frontage improvement costs in good faith, 10. Re -Purchase by City. In order to construct a library building and ancillary improvements on the portion of the Property acquired by the Library District, it is anticipated that the Library District will need to secure voter approval of a District wide bond levy covering the Library Site and the Sprague and Conklin site projects.this and other projects. Without voter approval of such bond, the Library District will not be in a position to develop its portion of the Property. The Parties agree that in the event that the Library District has not, by October 31, 2022within five years following the Closing, secured voter approval of a construction bond for the library building and ancillary improvements in such amount as shall be determined necessary by the Library District, that thereafter the Library District shall reconvey all of the Property back to the City at the same price paid by the Library District to the City. The Parties may, by mutual written agreement after October 31, 2021, extend the timeframe for reconveyance by an additional two years, to October 31, 2024. Such payment shall be paid all in cash. The Library District, in such event, shall convey title to the City with the same type of instrument as it received the Property from the City, and from that point in time this agreement would be considered void. In the event the construction bond is approved, the Library District shall commence construction within one year of the date of voter approval of the construction bond. 2017 Interlocal Agreement Addendum, Acquisition of Real Estate for Library Page 3 of 4 DRAFT 12. Use of Property. The City agrees that its portion of the Property will be dedicated to public use and will not be sold to any third party. A deed restriction shall be recorded by the Library District within a reasonable amount of time from voter approval of a construction bond that would limit the use of the Site to a library facility for a minimum of 50 years from date of opening. The Library District agrees that its portion of the Property will be developed into a public library facility provided that funding for such project is secured as provided above in Section 10. The City, at its expense, will be allowed to use the entire site for civic purposes until the District provides the City with a notice that the District will commence construction activities in 30 days. The City agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the District from and against all claims, causes of action, and damages arising out of the City's use of the Property for any such civic purposes. This Addendum shall become effective upon the date of the signature of the last party signing this document. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT Mark Calhoun, City Manager Date Signed: Approved as to form: Office of the City Attorney Date Signed Nancy Ledeboer, Executive Director Date Signed: Approved as to form: Cynthia McMullen, Counsel for SCLD Date Signed 2017 Interlocal Agreement Addendum, Acquisition of Real Estate for Library Page 4 of 4 Update -Interlocal agreement with Spokane County Library District Mark Calhoun, City Manager Cary Driskell, City Attorney July 25, 2017 City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney r Background In 2012, the Spokane County Library District (SCLD) requested that the City purchase 8.4 acres of vacant land adjacent to the existing Balfour Park. As the City worked to finalize its purchase from the Pring Corporation, the City and SCLD negotiated a separate interlocal agreement for the sale of the City's new property. The interlocal states that the City would sell 2.5 acres to SCLD and, pursuant to Paragraph 6, that the parties would engage in a joint site plan process to determine how much additional property SCLD would need. As a result of the joint site analysis process, the City and SCLD identified that an additional .32 acres would be needed by the SCLD, for a total purchase of 2.82 acres. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney r� ■ �• pokane Valley Park/Library Conceptual Site PEan ar :hiitec:i =e . utter iOr resit ri I r= -c JT( hp�e : to HERALD RD MAIN ST READING GARDE RR/STAGRR/STAG E AMPHITHEATER PUB ART WATER FEATURE/ BUS STOP SPRAGUE AVE FIRE STATION BALFOUR RD A $119ARD Ili I L Background - continued Paragraph 10 of the interlocal states that SCLD needs voter approval on a construction bond to build two library facilities, including this one and another near Conklin Road and Sprague Avenue. Paragraph 10 further states that if the SCLD fails to pass a bond for construction within five years of closing, "the (SCLD) shall reconvey all of the Property back to the City at the same price paid by (SCLD) to the City." SCLD unsuccessfully attempted ballot measures asking for $22 million in 2014 and 2015, with the second nearly reaching the required 6o% for passage. That five year period expires October 31, 2017. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Background - continued On January 3, 2017, the City and SCLD created a library ad hoc committee comprised of SCLD Board of Trustee members, SCLD senior staff, two City Council members, and City senior staff. The purpose for the ad hoc committee was to identify and implement ways the two entities could continue to partner to assist SCLD in getting the Sprague library facility constructed. The ad hoc committee has met five times since early 2017. In its last meeting, the ad hoc committee approved making recommendations to SCLD and the Council that both bodies approve the proposed 2017 amendments. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Proposed 2017 amendments. Change the expiration date on October 31, 2017, to October 31, 2022 (five additional years) . Additionally, the parties may, by mutual written agreement extend the timeframe for reconveyance by an additional two years, to October 31, 2024. Change the building size from minimum of 30,000 square feet to approximately 25,000 square feet, and that the ultimate size of the facility would be determined following appropriate public engagement. Add a requirement that thearties form a joint site development project team within days of passage of a ballot measure approving construction bonds to 45 Y p pp g ensure that the shared library and park amenities are coordinated, and that appropriate timing issues in planning and construction are considered. Add a requirement that SCLD place a deed restriction on its property that would limit the use to a library site for a minimum of 5o years. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Proposed 2017 amendments The 2012 interlocal contained provisions that obligated the parties to evenly split the cost of all shared areas such as the shared plaza, as well as frontage improvements (curb, gutter, sidewalk). The 2017 amendment would require the City to invest $1.3 million in the SCLD project, which would be used to pay for development of these joint use areas and frontage improvements. The proposed $1.3 million would include the $839,285.10 SCLD paid the City for the land, which has been held by the City since closing. The City would need to allocate an additional $461,000 to joint areas pursuant to the proposed amendment. On July 11, I stated that SCLD would similarly commit the approximately $1.3 million it has previously invested through purchasing the two sites. In doing so, SCLD would not seek reimbursement for those land acquisition costs through the bond sale. Several Councilmembers expressed doubt as to whether not seeking reimbursement for past expenditures reflected an actual investment of funds. The reality is the City and SCLD both receive funds from the citizens and businesses. Anything beyond the City's $1.3 million would be paid by SCLD, with the funds coming from the citizens. As such, the SCLD investment would really be in the $11-12 million range. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Questions? City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney 8 Meeting Date: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action July 25, 2017 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business ['new business ['public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ['pending legislation ['executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Spokane Housing Authority Revenue Bonds GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35.82; Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None. BACKGROUND: The Spokane Housing Authority ("SHA") is in the process of issuing its Revenue Bonds (Heritage Heights, Westfall Village, and Valley 206 Projects), Series 2017 (the "Bonds") in an amount not to exceed $40,000,000 to finance acquisition and rehabilitation of three existing apartment projects located at 3818 North Cook Street and 3724 North Cook Street, Spokane, and 2400 North Wilbur Road, Spokane Valley. Pursuant to Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code, the jurisdiction(s) in which the projects are located must provide approval of the issuance of the Bonds. Such approval is solely to meet the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code in order for the Bonds to be issued. City approval does not obligate the City with any financial responsibility for the Bonds, nor does the City incur any financial liability for SHA's repayment of the Bonds. Since the Valley 206 project located at 2400 North Wilbur Road is located in Spokane Valley, SHA has requested the City to provide the required approval. The Resolution before City Council was drafted by the City's bond counsel in order to comply with the Internal Revenue Code and to ensure that the City will have no liability for payment of the Bonds. SHA has indicated it has conducted a required public hearing on the projects and issuance of the Bonds at a special meeting of the SHA Board on May 22, 2017. A copy of the minutes are attached. Further, SHA has indicated the Valley 206 project consists of renovation and rehabilitation of 207 units in existing apartments. Staff understands that SHA will have a representative available to discuss the Valley 206 project in further detail and to answer any City Council questions at Council's August 8, 2017 meeting. OPTIONS: Consensus to consider Resolution No. 17-014 for approval at Council's August 8, 2017 meeting; or take other action deemed appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to consider Resolution No. 17-014 for approval at Council's August 8, 2017 meeting; or take other action deemed appropriate. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A. STAFF CONTACT: Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: A. Proposed Resolution No. 17-014; B. Minutes from SHA Special Meeting of May 22, 2017 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 17-014 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, APPROVING THE ISSUANCE BY THE SPOKANE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF ITS REVENUE BONDS, (WILBUR AND COOK PORTFOLIO), SERIES 2017; AND PROVIDING FOR OTHER MATTERS PROPERLY RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley, Washington (the "City") is a noncharter code city duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the Constitution and the laws of the state of Washington; and WHEREAS, the Spokane Housing Authority (the "Authority"), a public body corporate and politic of the state of Washington, intends to issue its Revenue Bonds (Wilbur and Cook Portfolio), Series 2017 (the "Bonds"), in the aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $40,000,000 and to loan the proceeds thereof to Wilbur and Cook Affordable Portfolio, LLLP, a Washington limited liability limited partnership (the "Borrower") of which the Authority is the general partner, in connection with the acquisition and rehabilitation of three existing apartment projects: 3818 North Cook Street and 3724 North Cook Street, Spokane, Washington, containing a total of one hundred seventy-two (172) units of housing; and 2400 North Wilbur Road, Spokane Valley, Washington, containing a total of two hundred seven (207) units of housing; and the payment of issuance costs with respect to the Bonds; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Authority pursuant to the requirements of Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), with respect to the Bonds, on May 22, 2017, in Spokane, Washington, following timely notice being published in a newspaper of general circulation throughout the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received a written summary of the public hearing in which no public comments were received; and WHEREAS, the City Council is the elected legislative body of the City with respect to the approval of the Bonds for purposes of Section 147(f)(2)(A)(ii) of the Code. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington as follows: Section 1. Approval. Pursuant to the request of the Authority, the City Council hereby approves the issuance by the Authority of the Bonds, a portion of the proceeds of which will be loaned to the Borrower to finance the apartment project located in the City of Spokane Valley (and not the portion located in the City of Spokane) This approval is intended to comply with the requirements of Section 147(f)(2)(A)(ii) of the Code in order to permit the issuance of the Bonds. In providing this approval, the City shall take no financial responsibility and incur no financial liability with respect to the Authority's issuance or repayment of the Bonds. Resolution 07-014 Approving Bonds for SHA Page 1 of 2 Section 2. Effective Date. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption. ADOPTED this August 8, 2017. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON L.R. Higgins, Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the City Attorney Resolution 07-014 Approving Bonds for SHA Page 2 of 2 Spokane Housing Authority Board of Commissioners Special Meeting Minutes for May 22, 2017 Board Attendees: Keith James, Chair Larry Johnson, Commissioner Ben Rascoff, Counsel Besse Bailey, Vice Chair Gretchen Campbell, Commissioner Staff Attendance: Pam Tietz, Executive Director Lori Hays, CFO/Deputy Director Dave Scott, Director of Housing Assistance Programs Diana Klasen, Director of Property Management Amanda Carpentier, HR Manager 1. Convening of the Meeting — Chair James called the meeting to order at 3:05 P.M. and shortly thereafter closed the meeting to open the public hearing. a. Public Hearing Regarding the Proposed Bond for Wilbur and Cook Affordable Housing, LLLP — With no comments received and no public in attendance, Chair James closed the public hearing at 3:10 P.M. and reconvened the Special Meeting. b. Public comments — None. c. Commissioner Comments — Commissioner Johnson commented regarding a request from Valley 206 tenants for garden/planter boxes. The community health team is looking for potential funding to support this activity. Chair James noted he will be meeting investors to discuss the Wilbur and Cook project. 2. Action on proposed Resolutions and Motions a. Deferred to new business or unfinished business 3. Consent Calendar — All items listed under the "Consent Calendar" are considered routine and will be enacted by one motion unless a Commissioner or citizen so requires, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. a. Approval of Minutes from Regular Meeting on May 1, 2017 b. Review of Utilization Report for April 2017 c. Review of month-end Financial Reports for April 2017 d. Resident Group Reports e. News & Notes 3.e.1 Executive Director Vice -Chair Bailey moved to approve the Consent Calendar, Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion, and all approved unanimously. 4. Executive Director's Report — Pam Tietz reported an update on commissioner recruitment, contract with a communications firm, and successfully housing 24 youth in the 100 Day Challenge. Commissioner Campbell arrived at the meeting at 3:25 P.M. 5. New Business Spokane Housing Authority Board of Commissioners Special Meeting Minutes for May 22, 2017 a. Motion to approve out of region travel for the Affordable Housing Association of certified public accountants' Public Housing Authority Conference — after discussion, Vice -Chair Bailey moved to approve the out of region travel as presented, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, all approved unanimously. b. NAHRO/PHADA letter regarding operating reserve offset lawsuit — Mrs. Tietz presented the board with a letter she received on May 22, 2017 regarding legal actions taken by other housing authorities as a class action "Breach of Contract" resulting from the 2012 Public Housing Reserves Offset (Recapture). After discussion, Vice -Chair Bailey moved to authorize Pam Tietz to join the second filing of the lawsuit as discussed. Seconded by Commissioner Campbell, all approved unanimously. 6. Unfinished Business - None. 7. Adjournment — Chair James adjourned the meeting at 3:40 P.M. Chair: Secretary: Pamela Tietz Exe• ti e Director CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business ['new business ['public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ['pending legislation ['executive session AGENDA TITLE: Public Records Act (PRA), Legislative Update and Impact GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Chapter 42.56 RCW; ESHB 1594; EHB 1595 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: During the 2017 Legislative session, two significant public records bills were enacted: Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1594 (Chap. 303, Laws of 2017), and Engrossed House Bill 1595 (Chap. 304, Laws of 2017). They became effective July 23, 2017. The bills provide several new public records procedures, amend some sections and add new sections to the PRA at RCW 42.56. Initially brought forward to address issues that agencies were facing, the final bills represent a compromise of the various stakeholders, including agencies and media. The bills contain several changes that provide benefit to the City, including possible grants for improving public record management systems, a consultation program to provide assistance with developing best practices, and specific authority for the City to deny requests for "all records." As part of the compromise, the City is now required to maintain PRA logs for each public record request, City staff must receive additional training, and the City must provide annual reports to the State of information regarding PRA requests. The idea was these changes will help by providing more factual and accurate data on the costs agencies incur fulfilling requests, and that perhaps the data gathered would lead to further reform. Here are some highlights. ESHB 1594: Public Record — amends the definition to exclude certain records of certain volunteers. Training — requires public records officers to receive training on retention, production and disclosure of electronic documents, including updated and improved technology information services. Five -Day Response Clarifications — provides that a response to a request within the five -business day period is an acknowledgement of receipt and request for clarification, and that the agency must provide "to the greatest extent possible, a reasonable estimate of time the agency will require to respond to the request if it is not clarified." Logs — adds a new section to RCW 40.14 that requires public agencies to maintain a log of requests to include for each request, the identity of the requester (if provided), date of receipt, text of request, description of records produced, description of records redacted/withheld and the reasons, and date of final disposition. Note that there is no additional funding included from the State to pay for creation of these logs. Consultation Program — establishes a program within the Office of the Attorney General and the State Archives to consult with local governments on public records best practices. Data Collection & Reporting — requires agencies "with actual staff and legal costs associated with fulfilling public records request of at least $100,000 during the prior fiscal year" to report to the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee (JLARC), 17 data points about the agency's PRA requests. (see attached list). We are determining whether the City incurs at least $100,000 in actual staff and legal costs to fulfill public records requests annually in order to determine if the City will need to provide the required Page 1 of 4 report. As a note, in the event the City is required to provide the report, there is no additional funding from the State to pay for or assist with creation of the report. Grant Program — creates a local agency competitive grant program at the State Archives for one-time investments to improve technology information systems for records retention, management, disclosure and related training, through June 30, 2020. Denying Unclear Request — allows the City to not respond to any portion of a request that is not clear. Open Records Portal — Requires the Office of the Secretary of State to conduct a study to assess the feasibility of implementing a statewide open records portal. EHB 1595: Costs — agencies may charge fees for certain electronic records. The City may charge these by either establishing the actual cost to produce the electronic record, or if it determines it would be unduly burdensome to establish the actual cost, through a default fee schedule provided in the PRA. Currently, the City utilizes the default fee schedule for paper copies. These have been established in the City's fee resolution, and in order to charge for electronic copies, the City will need to amend the fee resolution. The default fee schedule set forth in the PRA provides that the agency may not charge in excess of: $0.15 per page for photocopies; $0.10 per page for scanned records; $0.05 per each 4 electronic files or attachment uploaded to e-mail or other means of electronic delivery; $0.10 per gigabyte for transmission in electronic format; and Actual cost of any digital storage, container or envelope used to mail copies and the actual postage or delivery charge. The City may combine the charges above to the extent that more than one type of charge applies to copies produced in response to a particular request. The bills provide that the City may also charge a flat fee as an alternative to those separate fees listed above, but it may be no more than $2.00 for any request, and may only be done when the City reasonably estimates and documents that the costs are clearly equal to or more than $2.00. Note that the City cannot (and currently does not) charge for copies that are on our website (including in our Laserfiche repository), unless the request is to provide the records through other means. Finally, the bills authorize the City to include a customized service charge if the City estimates that the request would require the use of information technology expertise to prepare data compilations, or provide customized access services that are not used by us, and such customized service charge may reimburse us up to the actual cost of providing the services. However, the City cannot use a customized service charge unless we notify the requestor of the customized service charge to be applied to the request, including an explanation of why such charge applies, a description of the specific expertise, and a reasonable estimate cost of the charge. The notice must also provide the requestor the opportunity to amend the request in order to avoid or reduce the cost of a customized service charge. Again, for the City to impose this charge, the fee resolution would need to be amended. Staff is currently reviewing the current costs imposed and the options for electronic copies, and will be returning in the future with proposed amendments to the City's fee resolution. Denying Request for All Records — allows the City to deny requests for all City records. Denying Bot -Generated Requests — allows the City to deny overwhelming computer generated "bot" requests that consist of multiple requests from the requestor to the City within a 24-hour period, if the City shows that responding would cause excessive interference with other essential functions. Page 2 of 4 OPTIONS: Discussion RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion Budget impact: Unknown. There will be additional costs in the form of staff time and City resources to create the required logs, and if required, the annual report to the State. Staff likely will propose amendments to the City's fee resolution to allow the City to collect at least the default costs for electronic copies. Note that such costs generally do not cover the entire costs for producing such records. Staff Contact: Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk; Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Attachments: Sample, Clerk's Current Public Records Log; 17 data points about the City's PRA requests Page 3 of 4 Agencies with actual staff and legal costs over $100,000 annually must report certain performance measures over the preceding year, by July 1st of each subsequent year, to JLARC. Agencies with costs under $100,000 may, but are not required to provide these reports. These measures include: 1. Identification of leading practices and processes for records management and retention; 2. The average length of time to acknowledge receipt of a public records request; 3. The proportion of requests where the agency provided the requested records within five days of receipt of the request compared to the proportion of requests where the agency provided an estimate of anticipated response time beyond five days of receipt of the request; 4. Comparison of the agency's average initial estimate provided for disclosure of responsive records with the actual time when all responsive records were fully disclosed; 5. The number requests where the agency formally sought additional clarification from the requestor; 6. The number of requests denied and the most common reasons therefor; 7. The number of requests abandoned by requestors; 8. To the extent the information is known by the agency, requests by type of requestor; 9. Which portion of requests were fulfilled electronically versus by physical records; 10. The number of requests where the agency was required to scan physical records electronically to fulfill disclosure; 11. Estimated agency staff time spent on each individual request; 12. Estimated costs incurred by the agency in fulfilling records requests, including costs for staff compensation and legal review, and a measure of the average cost per request; 13. The number of claims filed alleging a violation of chapter 42.56 RCW; 14. The costs incurred by the agency litigating claims alleging a violation of chapter 42.56 RCW; 15. The costs incurred by the agency with managing and retaining records; 16. Expenses recovered by the agency from requestors for fulfilling public records requests, including any customized service charges; and 17. Measures of requestor satisfaction with agency responses, communication, and processes relating to the fulfillment of public record requests. The bill further states that the JLARC must consult with agencies to develop a reporting method and clearly define standardized metrics. By December 1, 2019, the JLARC must report to the legislature on its findings from the review, including recommendations on whether the competitive grant program, the attorney general's consultation program, and the state archivist's training services should continue or be allowed to expire. Page 4 of 4 PUBLIC RECORDS ACT LEGISLATIVE UPDATE AND TWO SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC RECORDS BILLS • ESHB 1594 • ESHB 1595 • AWC-supported bills • Final bills represent compromise from all interest groups and stakeholders • Benefits to City: o Ability to charge for electronic copies o Possible grants for improving public record management systems o State consultation program for best practices o Ability to deny requests for "all records." • Additional requirements imposed on City: o Logs for each request o Annual reporting o Additional training for public records officers • Effective July 23, 2017 ESHB 1594 • Training — requires public records officers to receive training on retention, production and disclosure of electronic documents, including updated and improved technology information services. • Five -Day Response Clarifications — provides that a response to a request within the five -business day period is an acknowledgement of receipt and request for clarification, and that the agency must provide "to the greatest extent possible, a reasonable estimate of time the agency will require to respond to the request if it is not clarified." • Denying unclear request — City may not respond to any portion of a request that is unclear • Logs — adds a new section to RCW 40.14 that requires public agencies to maintain a log of requests to include for each request, the identity of the requester (if provided), date of receipt, text of request, description of records produced, description of records redacted/withheld and the reasons, and date of final disposition. • Consultation Program — establishes a program within the Office of the Attorney General and the State Archives to consult with local governments on public records best practices. • Grant Program — creates a local agency competitive grant program at the State Archives for one-time investments to improve technology information systems for records retention, management, disclosure and related training, through June 30, 2020. • Data Collection & Reporting — requires agencies "with actual staff and legal costs associated with fulfilling public records request of at least $100,000 during the prior fiscal year" to report to the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee, 12 data points about the agency's PRA requests. • Note we are determining whether we believe we have actual costs of at least $100,000. • No funds were provided by State to pay for costs associated with this report. Data Collection & Reporting cont. - Report Requirements: • Identify leading practices for retention/management • Average length of time to acknowledge receipt of records request • Proportion of requests provided w/in 5 - day period versus those outside period • Comparison of agency's initial time estimate versus actual time to respond • Number of requests where clarification needed • Number of requests denied • Number of requests abandoned • Costs incurred by the agency managing and retaining records • Expenses recovered for fulfilling records requests • Requests by type of requestor (to extent known) • Number of requests filled electronically versus with physical records • Number of requests where City had to scan records into electronic format • Estimated agency staff time spent on each individual request • Estimated costs incurred by agency fulfilling requests • Number of claims filed for alleged violations of PRA • Costs of agency in litigating PRA claims • Measure of requestor satisfaction ESHB 1595 • Costs - agencies may charge fees for certain electronic records. o Establish the actual costs to produce electronic records; OR o Use default schedule provided in PRA. • $o.15 per page for physical records • $0.10 per page for scanned records • $0.05 per each 4 electronic files or attachments uploaded to e-mail or other means of electronic delivery • $o.io per gigabyte for transmission in electronic format; and • Actual cost of any digital storage, container, or envelope used to mail copies and actual postage or delivery charge. o Note: We cannot and do not charge for copies that are on our website (including Laserfiche), unless the request is provide the records through other means. IMMILIPIP"1.11--- ESHB 1595 • Costs cont. - • In lieu of determining costs on a per page basis, City may impose a flat fee of up to $2.00 for a request, provided that the City shows the request would cost at least $2.00. • City may impose a customized service charge to reimburse actual costs where request requires use of IT expertise to prepare data compilations or customized access services not normally used by the City. City must notify of customized service charge on the front-end. • City currently uses default amounts for physical records, as set forth in City Fee Resolution. • Fee Resolution will need to be amended prior to imposing new electronic record costs. Staff is reviewing options and will come forward at a future date to discuss options in detail. • Denying Request for All Records - agencies may deny requests for all records • Denying Bot -Generated Requests — agencies may deny overwhelming computer generated "bot" requests that consist of multiple requests from the requestor to the agency within a 24-hour period, if the City shows that responding would cause excessive interference with other essential functions. Questions? PRR LOG TABLE Log No Date Received Requestor Name 'Company Ned Description of Request ResponseDate Action Taken Date Complet E -Copy CD Copy Pg -Copy # Docs Fees Pd To Legal Notes Days tc 4-122 6/11/2014 Armitage, Nik Greenacres Park mainten 6/13/2014 Granted 9/24/2014 ❑ ❑� ❑� 137 $36.40 ❑ 4-193 7/31/2014 Hill, Spencer maint records, incident re 7/31/2014 Referred to Outsid 7/31/2014 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ WSDOT 4-233 11/3/2014 Kirby, Stephen Tikor Consult invoices for legal services 11/3/2014 Granted 2/5/2015 ❑ ❑ 1 $2.40 ❑ 4-257 12/10/2014 Hallenberg, Pia S/R letters concerning mariiu 12/17/2014 closed 2/11/2015 _ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ Did not respond to requests for clarification 4-258 12/24/2014 Worley, Anastasia 8168921441 bldg permits 12/29/2014 Granted 1/7/2015 ❑ D 152 $28.12 ❑ 4-259 12/23/2014 Konkright, Kelly attachments to interlocal 12/23/2014 Granted 1/6/2015 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ 4-260 12/31/2014 Palmer, Brandon plat certificate for SHP-20 1/5/2015 Granted 1/5/2015 ❑,r ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ 4-278 12/23/2014 Ward, Steve 81680215102715 N Flora 12/29/2014 Granted 1/6/2015 155 $23.25 ❑ 5-001 1/6/2015 Brundige, Seth 110 N Park solid and haz 1/8/2015 Withdrew 2/10/2015 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ 5-002 1/7/2015 Garcia, Randy Dept of Licen 8202601029 & 82040017 1/13/2015 NIF 1/13/2015 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ 5-003 1/8/2015 Palmer, Brandon Spokane Title plat certificate for Crosby 1/9/2015 Granted 1/9/2015 ID ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ 5-004 1/9/2015 Jernigan, Sonni List of house fires 1/1/20 1/12/2015 Referred to Outsid _ 1/12/2015 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ Ii Valley Fire 5-005 1/13/2015 Torgerson, Lloyd title reports for 4908 E 1s 1/16/2015 Withdrew 1/27/2015 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ 5-006 1/27/2015 Baker, Kirsten code enforcement compl 1/27/2015 Granted 2/6/2015 ❑ ❑ 7 $1.05 ❑ 5-007 1/29/2015 Hayward, Matthew employee names, lob titl 1/29/2015 Granted 2/20/2015 ID ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ 5-008 1/28/2015 Warrick, Cole solid, hazardous waste pe 2/2/2015 Granted 2/10/2015 _ ❑ ❑ ❑O 46 $6.90 ❑ 5-009 1/21/2015 Washington, Rebec zoning and building code 1/23/2015 Granted 2/2/2015 ❑ ❑ D 1 $0.00 ❑ 5-010 2/2/2015 Mulvey, Bob recorded short plat SHP-2 2/2/2015 Granted 2/2/2015 ❑D ❑ ❑ 0 50.00 ❑ 5-011 1/22/2015 Hume, Dwight findings of fact from batc 1/26/2015 Granted 1/30/2015 O ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ 1' 5-012 1/22/2015 Palmer, Brandon plat certificate for SHP-20 1/27/2015 Granted 1/28/2015 O ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ 5-013 1/26/2015 Autrey, Dan review permit file for 169 1/26/2015 Granted 1/26/2015 ❑ C O 60 $11.85 ❑ 5-014 1/27/2015Juego, Dominic . c ofo and open bldg/plan 1/27/2015 Granted 1/27/2015 ❑ L 39 $5.85 ❑ 5-015 1/22/2015 North, Rachel 8245301053 c of o for 21 1/26/2015 Granted 1/26/2015 U L ❑ 0 $0.00 LI 5-016 1/22/2015 North, Rachel 8245251046 c of o for 15 1/26/2015 Granted 1/26/2015 0 ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ .5-017 1/22/2015 North, Rachel 8245271047 c of o for 17 1/23/2015 NIF 1/23/2015 ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ 5-018 1/21/2015 Washington, Rebec Goetz, Tracey 8240691315 c ofo for 11 1/23/2015 Granted 1/23/2015 ID ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ .5-019 1/21/2015 permit sign drawings 1/21/2015 1/21/2015 Granted 1/21/2015 ❑ ❑ © 0 $0.00 ❑ .5-020 3/20/2015 P1...., Lynn org chart Granted 1/21/2015 LI ❑ 0 0 $0.00 ❑ ❑ 5-021 12/18/2014 Taylor, Rosetta 8156541212 c of o, open 12/29/2014 Granted 1/13/2015 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 5 day response due to holiday and closure 5-022 1/15/2015 Schwartz Stanley CPA -2015-0001 staff repo 1/15/2015 Granted 1/15/2015 0 50.00 ❑ .5-023 2/3/2015 Fallon Mike GIS Data 2/6/2015 Granted 2/19/2015 ❑r ❑ ❑ 0 50.00 ❑ .5-024 2/23/2015 Hayward Matthew union contracts 2/23/2015 Granted 2/23/2015 l ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ .5-025 2/26/2015 Harper code enforcement file for 3/3/2015 Granted 4/10/2015 ❑ ❑ ❑d 35 $5.25 ❑ .5-026 3/4/2015 Whittekiend, Justin documents related to dev 3/6/2015 Granted 3/11/2015 ❑ ❑ ❑/ 42 $8.54 ❑ .5-027 3/4/2015 Sullivan, Jack site plan for BLD -2013-02 3/4/2015 Granted 3/4/2015 ❑ ❑ Ill 4 $0.00 ❑ .5-028 2/27/2015 Carroll, Joseph permit and related files fo 2/27/2015 Granted 2/27/2015 2/26/2015 V ❑ ❑ 6 0 $0.00 $0.00 Li ❑ .5-029 2/26/2015 Ray, Gordon Browns Park Volleyball co 2/26/2015 Granted -5-030 2/25/2015 Todd, Kyle permits, c ofo and USTs f 2/25/2015 Granted 2/25/2015 ❑ ❑ 3 $0.00 , ❑ -5-031 2/25/2015 Miller, Ryan building footprint data sh 2/25/2015 Granted 2/26/2015 ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ -5-032. ..2/24/2015 Walker, Jesse 8335151503 list of delive 2/25/2015 Granted 2/25/2015 0 $0.00 - ❑.5-033 2/24/2015 Hurof, Nicholas 1914 S Early Dawn Dr per 2/25/2015 Granted 2/25/2015 ❑ ❑ © 6 $0.00 ❑ L5-034 2/23/2015 Hayward, Matthew laborunioncontracts .'2/23/2015 Granted 2/23/2015❑ ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ L5-035 2/19/2015 Benecchi, Rick SHP-10-10 1st and 2nd re 2/19/2015 Granted 2/19/2015 ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ L5-036 2/17/2015 Wirth, Dan , permit file for 10321 E M 2/17/2015 Granted 2/17/2015 ❑ ❑❑ 62 $9.30 ❑ L5-037 2/11/2015 Palmer, Brandon plat certificate for SHP-2 2/17/2015 Granted 2/17/2015 ❑ ❑ 0 $0.00 ❑ L5-038 2/11/2015 Valkenaar Dorothy permits and apps for 182 2/11/2015 Granted 2/11/2015 6 $0.00 LI L5-039 2/10/2015 Sherick, Lonnie review permit file for 920 2/10/2015 Granted 2/10/2015 ❑ ❑ 0 3 $0.00 ❑ L5-040 2/5/2015 Weinand, Kathleen STA STA contracts and payme 2/5/2015 Granted 2/9/2015 0 $0.00 ❑ L5-041 1/19/2015 Worley, Anastasia any records environment 1/20/2015 Granted 1/28/2015 ❑ ❑ 0 210 $38.20 ❑ 15-042 2/4/2015 Dawley, Richard 8282461129 11901 E Sint 2/5/2015 Granted 2/5/2015 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 '. $0.00 ❑ '. Page 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 25, 2017 Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business ['information ® admin. report Department Director Approval: ['new business ['public hearing ['pending legislation ['executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Police Department Monthly Report GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: At Council's request, Police Chief Werner will give an overview of the Police Department's May monthly report. OPTIONS: Discussion RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: NA. STAFF CONTACT: Chief Werner ATTACHMENTS: May Monthly Report Mark Werner Chief of Police Spokane Valley Police Department Accredited Since 2011 Services provided in partnership with the Spokane County Sherds Office and the Community, Dedicated to Your Safety. Ozzie Knezovich Sheriff TO: Mark Calhoun, City Manager FROM: Mark Werner, Chief of Police DATE: July 14, 2017 RE: Monthly Report June 2017 In August 2016, we switched from UCR to NIBRS classification, which means we went from reporting based on a hierarchy to reporting all the crimes for each incident. Consequently, comparing crime statistics before August 2016 to crime statistics after that timeframe is not recommended using the data provided in the attached charts and graphs. ADMINISTRATIVE: In early June, Chief Werner attended the Joint Leadership Forum meeting along with other law and fire command staff. A meeting was held in early June at the Prosecutor's Office regarding dealing with nuisance residences. Following that meeting, Chief Werner attended the quarterly Spokane Regional Safe Streets Task Force Policy Board Meeting along with others from the Sheriff's Office. The month of June brought the end of an era at University High School with the retirement of Deputy Jeff Duncan. Deputy Duncan has been the School Resource Officer for many years and built strong relationships with all the staff as well as the students. He was recognized for his years of service in mid-June at a school assembly. As he leaves his role as the resident deputy at the school, he won't be going far, taking on a new role with the school, that of a school bus driver. The large shoes he leaves behind to fill will be assumed by Deputy Brian Lawler, who has been with the Sheriff's Office since 2003. Chief Werner attended a one -day Crisis Intervention Team Training in mid-June at the Sheriff's Training Center. Page 1 The end of June brought another Bureau of Law Enforcement Association (BLEA) Graduation Ceremony for the class of 749. The Sheriff's Office welcomed six new graduates from the class, who were sworn in as Deputy Sheriffs shortly after graduation. At the end of June, we bid adieu to SCOPE Volunteers Jim and Sharon Ball as they moved to warmer weather in Arizona. Jim and Sharon volunteered numerous hours for the Spokane Valley Investigative Unit (SVIU) for the past few years, assisting detectives in numerous tasks such as picking up and viewing surveillance footage of crimes, returning search warrant returns to the court downtown, and any other task. Although they will be missed, the unit has recruited four more SCOPE Volunteers to assume the duties. We truly treasure the hours these volunteers give to the Spokane Valley Police Department! Chief Werner attended First Aid Training at the end of June at the Sheriff's Training Center. SHERIFF'S COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING EFFORT (SCOPE): In the month of June, S.C.O.P.E. participated in: • Spokane Valley YMCA Children's Day (Operation Family ID and Helmet Giveaway) • S.C.O.P.E. West Valley Parade and Carnival • East Farms Elementary STEAM Day (Bike Rodeo and Mounted Patrol) • ValleyFest Organization Meeting • Head Start Partnership Meeting • S.C.O.P.E. Spokane Indians Night • Safe Kids Coalition Meeting • GoodGuides Mentoring WVHS • East Valley Community Coalition Meeting Underage Drinking/Drug Prevention • GSSAC Coalition Meeting • Operation Family ID June 2017 Volunteers Hours per Station *Includes estimated volunteer service hours that are provided in the City of Spokane Valley. These two locations cover both Spokane Valley and the unincorporated portion of the county. Location # Volunteers Admin Hours L.E. Hours Total Hours Central Valley 5 37.5 55.5 93 East Valley* 23 391 269 660 Edgecliff 7 272 2.5 274.5 Trentwood 6 205 80 285 University 28 551.5 27.5 579 West Valley* 20 651.5 55.5 707 TOTALS 89 2,108.5 490 2,598.5 Volunteer Value ($22.14 per hour) $57,530.79 for June 2017 S.C.O.P.E. Incident Response Team (SIRT) volunteers contributed 92 on -scene hours (including travel time) in June, responding to crime scenes, motor vehicle accidents and providing traffic control; no hours were for incidents specifically in Spokane Valley. The Special Events in June included 11 hours for the Mirabeau Park Bicycle Ride. Total June volunteer hours contributed by SIRT, including training, standby, response and special events is 1,405; total for 2017 is 7,397. (Starting in January, Page 2 we changed the way we calculate `standby' time for our members. In the past, we only gave 8 hours for standby even though our members are on standby for 24 hours at a time. So this year, we credit the full 24 hours then deduct any of the actual 'on scene' time to get our Adjusted "Total SIRT Volunteer Hours." The numbers this year will be appreciatively higher than years past.) Abandoned Vehicles SCOPE DISABLED PARKING ACTIVITY REPORT Apr May June Tagged for Impounding 19 14 22 Cited/Towed 12 5 10 Hulks Processed 14 7 10 Total Vehicles Processed 88 72 112 Yearly Total of Vehicles Processed 292 364 476 SCOPE DISABLED PARKING ACTIVITY REPORT City of Spokane Valley # of Vol. # of Vol. # of Hrs. # of Disabled Infractions Issued # of Warnings Issued # of Non - Disabled Infractions Issued January 2 33 1 0 0 February 2 10 2 0 0 March 0 0 0 0 0 April 2 12 0 0 0 May 2 32 0 0 0 June 0 0 0 0 0 YTD Total 8 87 3 0 0 Spokane County # of Vol. # of Hrs. # of Disabled Infractions Issued # of Warnings Issued # of Non - Disabled Infractions Issued January 2 31 2 0 0 February 3 19 2 0 0 March 2 25 1 0 0 April 2 28 3 0 0 May 3 43.5 10 0 0 June 2 27 1 0 0 YTD Total 14 173.5 19 0 0 OPERATIONS: SWAT Team Serves Search Warrant, Arrests Armed Robbery Suspect. Major Crimes Detectives Seek Second Suspect — In the early morning hours, the Spokane Valley SWAT Team, assisting Major Crimes Detectives, served a high-risk search warrant at a residence located in the 14100 block of E. Wellesley. A 31 -year-old male suspect was arrested and booked for Page 3 Robbery 1St Degree, Assault 1st Degree and Assault 3rd Degree. The second suspect, a 32 -year- old male, was not at the location, but was later arrested. In early June, prior to 6:00 a.m., the Spokane Valley SWAT Team served a search warrant at the request of Major Crime Detectives investigating an armed robbery and assault. The investigation began in late May when Spokane Valley Deputies responded to a trouble unknown call in the 12100 block of E. Portland just prior to noon. They contacted an adult male victim who reported two males, one armed with a knife, assaulted and attempted to rob him. During a struggle, the victim received several stab wounds, lacerations and was violently beaten. The victim received medical attention for non -life threatening injuries. Detectives learned during their investigation that the first suspect is a convicted felon with a history of being armed and violent. They also located pictures of the second suspect, also a convicted felon, posing with rifles (appeared to be AK -47, AR -15 style) furthering the belief the pair had access to weapons and might be armed. SWAT Team members contacted the first suspect at the residence and successfully took him into custody without incident. The second suspect was not at the location and was believed to have left just prior to the team's arrival. It is not known if he was tipped off due to several social media posts of the SWAT Team staging in the area or if he left due to some other reason. During a search of the location, investigators did not locate the weapons observed in the pictures. This is the goal of the SWAT Team and a great example of a peaceful resolution due to the prior preparation, planning and deployment of SWAT and detectives ending with no injuries and the arrest of an armed robbery suspect with a violent criminal history. Later in the week, on a Sunday evening at approximately 6:20 p.m., a friend of the second suspect's called and requested contact by law enforcement in the area of the Public Safety Building stating the suspect wanted to clear his name. Spokane Police Officers made contact with the male and notified Spokane Valley Major Crimes Detectives working the case. The male suspect was taken into custody and booked into the Spokane County Jail for Robbery 1' Degree, Assault 1' Degree and Assault 3rd Degree. SWAT and Hostage Negotiators End Standoff Peacefully — In early June, Spokane Valley SWAT Team members, Hostage Negotiators (HNT) and deputies worked together to peacefully end a very tense situation involving a suspect who stole his ex -girlfriend's car, had unrelated felon warrants for his arrest, and refused to exit his residence. After SWAT and HNT arrived, the 27 -year-old suspect was peacefully persuaded to surrender. He was taken into custody for Robbery 2nd Degree and for his active felony warrants. In early June, at approximately 12:15 p.m., Spokane Valley Deputy Glenn Hinckley responded to a vehicle theft reported in the area of 1520 N. Argonne in Spokane Valley. The female victim stated her ex-boyfriend (the suspect) called her earlier, sounded upset, and asked her to give him a ride. He was acting strange when she picked him up from Northern Quest Casino, so she drove straight to his residence in the 10700 block of E. Nora, but he refused to get out of the vehicle. She started to get scared and decided to drive to Argonne and Mission where they would be at a public place. Once there, the suspect continued to refuse to get out. Fearing for her safety, she pulled the ignition keys and planned to run into the store, but the male suspect grabbed her hand and squeezed until she dropped the keys. He pushed her out of the vehicle as she was screaming for help and drove away. While she spoke with Deputy Hinckley, the male suspect called her several times and asked her why she was talking to the (expletive) "cops" and denied stealing the car. During one of the calls, the victim could hear the suspect was with his young daughter and knew he was at the Nora address. Due to the severity of this incident, the safety of the child believed to be with the male suspect, his history and his refusal to answer the door at the residence, the SWAT Team and HNT were called to the scene. HNT Page 4 Negotiator Detective Lloyd Hixon made contact with the suspect by phone and successfully convinced him to exit the residence and peacefully surrender. He was transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail for Robbery 2nd Degree along with his warrants. In addition to this robbery charge, he was held on unrelated charges of burglary, harassment -threats to kill, malicious mischief 2nd, reckless endangerment, driving while suspended, and DUI. Deputies, SWAT, and HNT negotiators again show success in obtaining the "ultimate goal," a peaceful resolution to very intense and dangerous situations. This outcome is an example of planning and teamwork, utilizing the deployment of special equipment operated by specially -trained deputies coupled with the efforts of caring, highly trained negotiators. Male with Knife Refuses to Evacuate Burning Motel Advances Toward Deputies and is Shot - Early in the morning, Spokane Valley Deputies were called to assist Spokane Valley Fire (SVFD) with an active fire on the second floor of the Motel 6 located at 1919 N. Hutchinson. Responding Deputies were advised an adult male, armed with a knife, was suspected of starting the fire in his second -floor room and refused to leave. While the other motel guests were being evacuated, deputies encountered the male who refused commands, made statements law enforcement would have to shoot him, and advanced toward deputies with a knife in his hand, causing them to fire their weapons. In early June, at approximately 3:30 a.m., Spokane Valley Deputies were called to the Motel 6 to assist Spokane Valley Fire. Information received at that time was a male on the second floor started a fire in his room and was refusing to come out. Arriving deputies observed heavy smoke on the second floor of the building and began assisting SVFD with the evacuation of the motel guests. They encountered a male on the second floor, armed with a knife, and would not follow commands. Deputies lost sight of the male when he walked back into the smoke-filled hallway, slowing the ability to complete the evacuations. He was heard yelling he would not leave and deputies would have to shoot him. Deputies made contact with the male again as he walked down the stairs to the first floor, still armed with the knife, and advanced toward them. Shortly after, deputies advised shots had been fired and requested medics. The male was transported to a local hospital where he underwent surgery for his wounds. The Officer Involved Protocol was enacted and SIRR Team investigators responded to the scene to conduct the investigation and processed the scene for evidence. The SIRR Team is comprised of multiple agencies in eastern Washington, including the Spokane County Sheriffs Office, Spokane Police Department, the Washington State Patrol and the Spokane Valley Police. • The WA State Patrol is the managing agency in this incident. All future communications regarding this investigation will be sent via the SIRR Team. • The Spokane County Sheriff's Office will release the names of the deputies involved in the incident. • Once the SIRR Team investigation is complete, the case will be forwarded to the Spokane County Prosecutor's Office for review. Spokane Regional Safe Streets Task Force and Partners Take Down Drug -Trafficking Criminal Enterprise - More than 100 federal, state, and local law enforcement agents coordinated arrest and search operations in mid-June at approximately 15 locations throughout Spokane and Yakima, Washington, and in Idaho. The operations led to the successful and safe arrests of 18 of the 22 subjects implicated in an alleged significant drug-trafficking enterprise. The subjects will face an array of Page 5 charges in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington for conspiracy to distribute cocaine and methamphetamine. The arrests are the culmination of a two-year investigation by the Spokane Regional Safe Streets Task Force. Investigators in Spokane, Washington; Yakima, Washington; and Post Falls, Idaho, searched locations believed to contain evidence of the criminal activity of this enterprise and made numerous arrests. The case is being investigated by the Spokane Regional Safe Streets Task Force—composed of the FBI, Spokane Police Department, Spokane County Sheriff's Office, and Spokane Valley Police Department—and other law enforcement agencies, including the Washington State Patrol, United States Border Patrol, the Washington State Department of Corrections, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). The United States Marshals Service and the Drug Enforcement Administration were also integrally involved in this enforcement action. These operations in Idaho were carried out by the FBI's North Idaho Violent Crimes Task Force. Suspected Burglar Captured After He Attempts to Flee - Spokane County Sheriff's Office and Spokane Valley Deputies captured a 36 -year-old male suspect early in the morning after a vehicle pursuit. The suspect, suspected of stealing a firearm during a burglary last week in Spokane Valley, had been trying to avoid capture since that time. In mid-June at approximately 2:05 a.m., Spokane County Sheriff's Deputy Scott Kenoyer observed a Maroon Ford P/U drive from the footpath portion of the Centennial Trail at the Maringo Trail Head (9800 E. Maringo). Deputy Kenoyer activated his emergency lights and siren in an attempt to stop the vehicle and contact the driver. Instead of stopping, the male suspect made the decision to flee. Deputy Kenoyer, in a fully -marked vehicle, requested assistance and advised he was in pursuit. The male suspect appeared to have little or complete disregard for his safety or the safety of others as he failed to stop at stop signs, traffic lights, and at times, reached speeds approaching 85 mph as he tried to evade capture. With little vehicle or pedestrian traffic out at this time of the morning, Deputy Kenoyer continued the pursuit with additional Spokane County and Spokane Valley Deputies responding to assist. In the area of the 17700 block of East Wellesley, the truck left the roadway, went through a barbed wire fence and into a field. The suspect lost control of the vehicle in the field and spun around. With the male suspect's vehicle now facing deputies, they moved into position to block him and avoid a possible escape attempt. The male suspect followed commands and was taken into custody without further incident. He was transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail for Attempting to Elude a Pursuing Police Vehicle and Malicious Mischief 3rd Degree for this morning's incident. He was also booked for Residential Burglary and Theft of a Firearm stemming from the burglary reported on June 13, 2017 in Spokane Valley. The vehicle the suspect was driving was seized as evidence. Spokane Valley Property Crimes Unit Detectives, who have been working this case, will search the vehicle for the firearm and other property/evidence once a search warrant has been obtained. Detectives suspect the male was involved in another burglary they are investigating and additional charges could be filed as these investigations continue. Spokane Valley Deputy Convinces Distraught Male Not to Jump – In mid-June, Spokane Valley Deputy James Wang convinced a distraught male with suicidal thoughts to get the help he needed instead of trying to end his own life by jumping from the Barker Bridge into the Spokane River. The male was taken into protective custody and provided medical assistance. In mid-June, at approximately 9:15 p.m., Spokane Valley Deputy Wang responded to citizen's reports of a male making suicidal statements and preparing to jump from the Barker Bridge into the Spokane Page 6 River. When Deputy Wang arrived, he observed the male positioned toward the outside of the bridge, sitting on the rail. As Deputy Wang approached, the male stood up as if he was going to jump and shook his head no at the deputy. Deputy Wang backed up and the male sat back down. Deputy Wang began talking with the male, who explained he was going through some hard times, felt suicidal, and wanted to jump off the bridge. After several intense minutes, Deputy Wang successfully convinced the male to climb back over the railing and allow Deputy Wang to get him the help he needed instead of trying to end his life. Spokane Valley Fire personnel, already on scene to assist, provided medical attention. The male was transported to a local hospital for further medical assistance. Thank you to the caring citizens who reported and talked with this man while Deputy Wang and Spokane Valley Fire responded to assist. The Spokane Valley Police Department and Spokane County Sheriff's Office would like to encourage anyone considering suicide to please seek help by calling 911 or the Spokane Mental Health 24 hour Crisis Line at (509) 838-4428, toll-free (877) 678-4428. Emergency services are available and accessible to all Spokane County residents, 24 -hours a day, 7 -days a week, 365 days a year regardless of age, culture, mental health coverage and without need for pre -authorization based on medical necessity criteria. Suspect Arrested for Warrants & Child Luring, Later Assault Another Inmate - Spokane Valley Deputies investigating a reported abduction attempt arrested a 26 -year-old male suspect for outstanding felony/misdemeanor warrants and attempting to lure a child. Later, an assault charge was added after the suspect struck another inmate in the jail, breaking the victim's front tooth. In late June, at approximately 6:00 p.m., Spokane Valley Deputies responded to Horizon Middle School for a report of a male attempting to abduct/lure a young female. Responding deputies were informed the father of the victim was in a verbal confrontation with the suspect. Deputy Turner arrived and observed the male suspect begin pacing when he observed the patrol car. The male suspect identified himself, but seemed reluctant and said he shouldn't have any warrants. When the suspect was informed Deputy Turner was investigating a possible child abduction/luring and a verbal argument, the male suspect stated he was at the school to meet his son and he didn't touch the girl; he appeared extremely nervous as he spoke. He initially said he thought the victim was his daughter and could only see the back of the victim's head, not her face. He continued, saying he was there to meet his ex-wife and daughter at the softball game. The male suspect, however, could not provide his ex- wife's name and failed to provide a contact phone number. The suspect continued to change his version of events, and later denied even speaking to the victim. A computer check of the male suspect revealed two confirmed warrants for his arrest, a Washington State Department of Corrections warrant (original charge of Malicious Mischief 2nd Degree & Money Laundering) and a local misdemeanor warrant for Assault. When the male suspect was taken into custody and told he was being arrested for the warrants, he said, "Is that all?" The suspect was advised of his rights and declined to answer questions or provide any additional information. The victim's father explained he was getting some items out of his vehicle and his daughter was waiting for him a short distance away. He heard the male suspect calling and looked over to observe the suspect motion with his hand to the victim and heard him say "Come here." He confronted the male suspect, who said he was there to meet his daughter and mistakenly thought the victim was her. The father walked away and told the other parents at the softball game what occurred, only to look back and observe the same male playing catch with some other small children. The other parents quickly called their children away. None of the other parents seemed to know the male suspect and the victim's father did not believe he actually had a child Page 7 at the ballpark. He watched the suspect walk around and said he appeared to have no purpose as he meandered. The father called and reported the suspect's behavior and confronted him again. The victim confirmed she was looking toward the male suspect when he attempted to contact her and turned away. This directly contradicts the suspect's explanation when he said he only saw the victim from behind and confused her for his daughter. She also said the male tried twice to get her to come over and go with him before her dad confronted him. The male suspect was transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail for the warrants and an additional charge of Luring. Later that same evening, Deputy Turner responded to a suspicious person call in the area of Horizon Middle School referencing the male suspect's actions. Deputy Turner was told by the mother of a young boy that the same male suspect attended an estate sale in the area in the past few days where she spoke to him. At that time, he showed an interest toward her son and asked questions about him and what sports he played. She became concerned after hearing from a friend about the incident at Horizon and the suspect's arrest because he had arrived at her location an hour prior to the incident to look at some furniture she was selling. She said the male suspect asked more questions about her son and seemed more interested in him than the furniture. She told the suspect that he was playing baseball and wasn't there. The male suspect left the location, paced around and walked off toward Horizon Middle School. She explained after being told about the incident, she felt the suspect was attempting to find her son when he went to the school. At approximately 8:20 p.m., Deputy Turner was advised the male suspect assaulted another inmate while in the booking area and Spokane County Deputy Brad Humphrey was responding to investigate the incident. Deputy Humphrey learned during his interviews that the suspect was in a holding cell with other inmates. They were talking and some of the inmates began laughing at the suspect due to his charges. Witnesses stated the suspect grew angry and, without provocation or warning, struck the victim in the mouth with his elbow breaking his tooth and cutting his lip. The male suspect refused to answer questions or provide a statement. An additional charge of Assault 4th Degree was added for this incident. Armed DV Suspect Wanting to be Shot, Successfully Taken into Custody - A suspect armed with a large knife was successfully taken into custody by Spokane Valley Deputies assisted by Spokane County Deputies, Hostage Negotiators, and Air 1. During the incident, the suspect had threatened to take his own life and told deputies he would force them to shoot him. In late June, at approximately 8:45 a.m., Spokane Valley Deputy Jay Bailey responded to the 15700 block of E. Longfellow for a report of several violations of a "No Contact" domestic violence court order of protection. The victim stated her ex-boyfriend, a 41 -year-old male, continued to contact her in violation of the court order. Deputy Bailey observed several text messages sent by the suspect over the past several days on the victim's phone. Deputy Bailey confirmed the court order had been served on the suspect and was in effect. Deputy Bailey was unable to contact the male suspect in person but contacted him by phone. The conversation was cordial and the male suspect agreed to meet Deputy Bailey after he finished work. At approximately 2:15 p.m., he spoke with the suspect by phone again. The suspect said he knew he "messed up" and asked if he had to meet Deputy Bailey. During the conversation, the male suspect became very emotional, upset, and began making suicidal statements. Deputy Bailey tried to calm him down, but the male made comments that deputies would have to shoot him, and he hung up. Deputy Bailey notified the victim of his conversation with the male suspect and told her to call 911 if she saw him. She explained he had made statements about "suicide by cop" in the past. At approximately 3:35 p.m., the victim reported the suspect was sending Page 8 her text messages again saying that today is the day law enforcement will shoot him. At approximately 4:00 p.m., Deputy Travis Smith and Deputy Bailey responded to a 911 call by the victim reporting that the suspect showed up at the Longfellow address and was armed with a knife. The male suspect displayed an approximate 12" knife before leaving in a vehicle prior to the deputies' arrival. The victim also reported receiving several new text messages from the suspect. At approximately 4:45 p.m., Deputy Cunningham located the male suspect's vehicle parked in the parking lot of Minnehaha (climbing rocks) located at 5626 E. Upriver Drive. A citizen stated the suspect was on top of the climbing rock wall and said he would jump if law enforcement arrived. Several Spokane Valley Deputies and Spokane County Deputies responded to assist along with Hostage Negotiators and Air 1. Several attempts by negotiators and deputies to coax the suspect into surrendering were unsuccessful. He made several statements that he would have to be shot or would jump from the cliff. With his erratic behavior and statements, the safety of the public recreating in the area was of great concern. During the standoff, which lasted over an hour, deputies assisted by the airborne view of Air 1, worked to keep innocent citizens from harm as they worked to defuse the situation and less lethal options were deployed, if needed. Just prior to 6:00 p.m., the suspect walked from the cliffs toward the parking lot and his vehicle. As he approached deputies with his knife (approximately 12" fixed blade) in a sheath on his hip, he refused to follow clear instruction to stop and get on the ground. Deputies fired less -lethal bean bag rounds striking the suspect, which did not stop him and appeared to have no effect. Deputies physically took the male suspect to the ground and, despite his efforts to fight and resist, took him into custody. The suspect was provided medical attention for some minor cuts and abrasions before being transported to a local hospital to be medically cleared by a mental health professional. During this time, he continually asked the deputy why deputies didn't "just shoot" him. He was then transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail for Violation of a Court Order of Protection (six counts). Congratulations Graduating K9s and their Partners - In late June, three K9s and their handlers graduated from K9 training and are now out protecting their communities and working to keep other deputies/officers safe. We congratulate them on this achievement and wish them a long and safe career. SPOKANE COUNTY Spokane County Sheriff's Office Deputy Cloy Hilton Chewelah Police Department Officer Matt Miller and his partner K9 Rebel: Rebel is the one and only active patrol K9 in all of Stevens County. K9 Rebel is certified for patrol work and drug detection. Grant County Sheriff Office Deputy Tyson Voss and his partner K9 Edo: Edo is patrol certified. Spokane County Sheriff's Office Deputy Clay Hilton and his partner K9 Bane: Bane is patrol certified. Thank you to retired Spokane County Sheriff's Office Deputy and K9 Handler Bob Bond for training these K9 Teams, enabling them to gain their certification. Page 9 Spokane County Sheriff's Office joins Operation Dry Water to raise awareness about dangers of boating under the influence — The Spokane County Sheriff's Office Marine Enforcement Unit will be participating in Operation Dry Water as part of a nationally coordinated effort to increase knowledge about the dangers of boating under the influence (BUI). The goal was to reduce the number of accidents and deaths associated with alcohol and drug use on our waterways. Operation Dry Water weekend, June 30 -July 2, was the national weekend of amplified enforcement of boating under the influence laws and recreational boater outreach. Spokane County Sheriff's Office is reaching out to our community and to the entire recreational boating community as part of the yearlong Operation Dry Water campaign to inform and educate boaters about the hazards and negative outcomes associated with boating while under the influence of alcohol or drugs. "Recreational boating is a fun and enjoyable activity. Consuming alcohol while on the water can hinder that experience and create a dangerous scenario for you, your friends and family, and others on the water," says Marine Enforcement Deputy Jim Ebel. "Alcohol impairs judgment and reaction time on the water, just as it does when driving a car, even more so because of the added stressors of sun, heat, wind, noise and the vibrations of the boat. The Spokane County Sheriff's Office wants everyone to have a great summer on the water, and to do that, you've got to stay safe and stay sober while underway." SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF SHERIFF OZZIE D. KNEZONICH As Operation Dry Water weekend and the July 4th holiday approached, law enforcement and recreational boating safety volunteers were out on the water educating boaters about safe boating practices and removing impaired operators from the water. The Spokane County Sheriff's Office supports these efforts as they go a long way in ensuring the safety of recreational boaters and water sport enthusiasts. Tips to staying safe on the water: • Boat sober - Alcohol use is the leading contributing factor in recreational boater deaths. Alcohol and drugs use impairs a boater's judgment, balance, vision and reaction time. • Wear your life jacket - 83% of drowning victims were not wearing a life jacket. • Take a boating safety education course - 77% of deaths occurred on boats where the operator did not receive boating safety instruction, where instruction was known. Boaters can take the pledge to boat safe and boat sober, and find more information about boating under the influence at operationdrywater.org. Do Not Leave Valuables, Identification/Credit Cards, or Firearms in Vehicles - Nice weather is here and more people are out enjoying our parks, lakes and outdoor activities. We would like to remind everyone that criminals are also out looking to prey on valuables left unattended in vehicles. Don't be a victim of these prowling thieves, plan ahead; don't leave valuables in your vehicle. The Spokane Valley Police Department and Spokane County Sheriff's Office continue to receive reports from citizens who have returned to their vehicles, only to find all their valuables, wallets, credit cards, phones/tablets, money, fire arms and personal paperwork and keys gone. It doesn't matter to Page 10 criminals if a vehicle is locked or unlocked (some are), it takes less than a second for a thief to enter your vehicle and steal your property. Please help us stop property crime and, most of all, help you avoid having a really bad day and becoming a victim of a criminal who doesn't care about you or the hardships they cause; they just want your stuff. Don't leave valuables or anything you're not willing to lose in your vehicle. If you must, conceal all of them out of sight or secure items in your trunk, even if you'll only be away for a couple minutes. Help us by reporting suspicious activity to Crime Check at 509-456-2233. Provide descriptions of persons and vehicles believed to be involved with criminal activity/vehicle prowling. If you witness a crime in progress, call 911. LOCK ITEMS IN YOUR TRUNK OBSERVE AND REPORT CARS SHOULD KEEP GARAGE NEVER RUN DOORS CLOSED UNATTENDED Page 11 Spokane County Sheriff's Office Regional Intelligence Group Spokane Valley Districts IBR Classification: Burglary 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 JANUARY FEBRUARY a w r 7 -, f7 SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NQVEMBER DECEMBER —0 --Calendar 2014 IN—Calendar 2015 -4--Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 Month Count Year Calendar 2014 Calendar 2015 Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 January 86 84 72 56 February 62 66 74 59 March 110 71 78 44 April 108 68 87 53 May 97 69 73 49 June 109 86 93 59 July 113 103 89 August 93 86 103 September 107 94 90 October 81 105 71 November 84 81 92 December 132 81 63 Grand Total 1182 994 985 320 * IBR Offense: Burglary/Breaking & Entering 220 Produced: 7/13/2017 For Law Enforcement Use Only This document is confidential and may not be further disseminated or released to any unauthor}zed persons pursuant to RCW 42.56.420 Spokane County Sheriff's Office Regional Intelligence Group Spokane Valley Districts IBR Classification: Murder NonNeg Manslaughter 2.5 2 1.5 0.5 0 JANUARY FEBRUARY I d r w )- N u a 4 a w vs a • 4 ▪ €a D a SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER Calendar 2014 I—II—Calendar 2015 =—A—Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 Month Count Year Calendar 2014 Calendar 2015 Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 January 1 February March 1 April 1 May 1 June July 1 1 August 1 1 September October 2 November 1 1 1 December 1 Grand Total 5 5 4 *IE3R Offense: Murder/Non-Negligent Manslaughter 09A Produced: 7/13/2017 For Law Enforcement Use Only This document is confidential and rnay not be further disseminated or released to any unauthorized persons pursuant to RCW 42.56.420 Spokane County Sheriffs Office Regional Intelligence Group Spokane Valley Districts IBR Classification: Identity Theft 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 JANUARY FEBRUARY u T w Yf- ¢ z .__.n N U D 4 SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEM BER ---Calendar 2014 --Calendar 2015 ,-,—Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 Month Count Year Calendar 2014 Calendar 2015 Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 January 9 19 18 9 February 10 25 16 24 March 21 28 11 22 April 25 13 14 16 May 15 19 10 27 June 16 17 15 17 July 19 10 19 August 15 21 9 September 22 11 7 October 18 8 7 November 7 7 10 December 18 19 8 Grand Total 195 197 144 115 *IBR Offense: Identity Theft 26F Produced; 7/13/2017 For Law Enforcement Use Only This document is confidential and may not be further disseminated or released to any unauthorized persons pursuant to RCW 42.56.420 Spokane County Sheriff's Office Regional Intelligence Group Spokane Valley Districts IBR Classification: Fraud 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 FEBRUARY u 2 } w >-H Q z vi n Q SEPTEM BER OCTOBER NOVEM BER DECEMBER -0—Calendar 2014 k—# -Calendar 2015 --A-Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 Month Count Year Calendar 2014 Calendar 2015 Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 January 23 12 23 27 February 17 19 17 38 March 24 20 21 37 April 23 18 16 43 May 27 24 8 53 June 22 14 19 57 July 13 17 27 August 23 29 14 September 14 24 16 October 21 34 41 November 21 18 38 December 18 25 30 Grand Total 246 254 270 255 *IBR Offense: Fraud - Credit Card/ATM 26B, Fraud - False Pi etenses/5windling/Con Games 26A, & Fraud - Impersonation 26C Produced: 7/13/2017 For Law Enforcement Use Only This document is confidential and may not be further disseminated or released to any unauthorized persons pursuant to RCW 42.56.420 Spokane County Sheriff's Office Regional Intelligence Group Spokane Valley Districts IBR Classification: DUI 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 JANUARY FEBRUARY = J y W } 1-- 0 < Z J vl CC d 2 a D 5 a a go D a SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER —4—Calendar 2014 :—f --Calendar 2015 —f—Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 Month Count Year Calendar 2014 Calendar 2015 Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 January 28 30 30 24 February 35 22 30 26 March 31 25 31 33 April 25 28 23 18 May 39 27 27 19 June 25 29 31 28 July 28 31 19 August 29 31 18 September 29 18 20 October 22 25 20 November 35 21 28 December 32 13 27 Grand Total 358 300 304 148 * IBR Offense: DU190D Produced: 7/13/2017 For Law Enforcement Use Only This document is confidential and may not be further disseminated or released to any unauthorized persons pursuant to RCW 42.56.420 Spokane County Sheriff's Office Regional Intelligence Group Spokane Valley Districts IBR Classification: Drugs 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 FEBRUARY 2 u 2 J CC - a W z r J SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER Calendar 2014 • 11 •Calendar 2015 Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 Month Count Year Calendar 2014 Calendar 2015 Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 January 6 2 5 19 February 2 3 30 March 3 2 3 30 April 1 4 1 36 May 1 1 6 22 June 4 2 3 18 July 2 3 1 August 4 4 16 September 3 5 28 October 1 4 20 November 1 1 19 December 3 27 Grand Total 28 31 132 155 * IBR Offense: Drug Equipment Violations 35B & Drugs/Narcotics Violations 35A Produced: 7/13/2017 For Law Enforcement Use Only This document is confidential and may not be further disseminated or released to any unauthorized persons pursuant to RCW 42.56.420 Spokane County Sheriff's Office Regional Intelligence Group Spokane Valley Districts IBR Classification: Theft From Motor Vehicle 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1ANUARY FEBRUARY 2 2 >- w >- i- < Z J VI D Q SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER Calendar 2014 ;—U—Calendar 2015 —g—Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 Month Count Year Calendar 2014 Calendar 2015 Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 January 94 134 101 98 February 113 124 76 102 March 136 96 72 94 April 86 62 134 130 May 95 84 108 79 June 81 68 177 107 July 81 85 139 August 78 92 131 September 112 109 103 October 89 112 124 November 105 92 153 December 112 110 117 Grand Total 1182 1168 1435 610 * IBR Offense: Theft From Motor Vehicle 23F Produced: 7/13/2017 For Law Enforcement Use Only This document is confidential and may not be further disseminated or released to any unauthorized persons pursuant to RCW 42.56.420 Spokane County Sheriff's Office Regional Intelligence Group Spokane Valley Districts IBR Classification: Motor Vehicle Theft Month Count Year Calendar 2014 Calendar 2015 Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 January 61 29 72 44 February 58 38 38 38 March 70 37 42 44 April 41 34 47 42 May 40 57 36 27 June 33 35 32 28 July 36 35 40 August 37 48 39 September 50 52 35 October 46 40 51 November 52 33 33 December 42 57 39 Grand Total 566 495 504 223 " IBR Offense: Motor Vehicle Theft 240 Produced: 7/13/2017 For Law Enforcement Use Only This document is confidential and may not be further disseminated or released to any unauthorized persons pursuant to RCW 42.56.420 Spokane County Sheriff's Office Regional Intelligence Group Spokane Valley Districts IBR Classification: Robbery 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 JANUARY FEBRUARY S u oC 2 J K a 4 Z J N SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER —4—Calendar 2014 F ; •Calendar 2015 —tel—Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 Month Count Year Calendar 2014 Calendar 2015 Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 January 6 11 3 3 February 5 9 7 6 March 8 12 8 7 April 7 6 4 2 May 8 6 8 2' June 10 5 5 1 July 8 8 6 August 4 7 3 September 11 15 2 October 10 7 10 November 14 3 10 December 9 11 3 Grand Total 100 100 69 21 * IBR Offense: Robbery 120 Produced: 7/13/2017 For Law Enforcement Use Only This document is confidential and may not be further disseminated or released to any unauthorized persons pursuant to RCW 42.56.420 Spokane County Sheriff's Office Regional Intelligence Group Spokane Valley Districts IBR Classification: Assault 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 JANUARY FEBRUARY >- u, r2 7 ✓ Q z J SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER -Calendar 2014 t -Calendar 2015 Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 Month Count Year Calendar 2014 Calendar 2015 Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 January 94 108 79 97 February 70 97 97 95 March 78 85 94 77 April 89 81 85 89 May 80 104 115 91 June 93 101 83 95 July 112 94 88 August 121 83 63 September 113 81 81 October 97 84 99 November 87 88 97 December 79 88 88 Grand Total 1113 1094 1069 544 IBR Offense: Aggravated Assault 13A & Simple Assault 13B Produced: 7/13/2017 For Law Enforcement Use Only This document Is confidential and may not be further disseminated or released to any unauthorized persons pursuant to RCW 42.56.420 Spokane County Sheriff's Office Regional Intelligence Group Spokane Valley Districts IBR Classification: Theft 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 JANUARY FEBRUARY x u > w Y 1- < z -' v - l7 D a SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER I—$—Calendar 2014 --F-Calendar 2015 —i—Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 Month Count Year Calendar 2014 Calendar 2015 Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 January 226 247 262 209 February 193 243 208 200 March 228 246 228 221 April 235 245 246 204 May 263 223 207 237 June 289 245 298 249 July 282 287 257 August 283 257 203 September 280 262 221 October 273 247 231 November 237 213 245 December 301 284 222 Grand Total 3090 2999 2828 1320 IBR Offense: Theft - All Other 23H, Theft - Pocket -Picking 23A, Theft - Purse -Snatching 238, Theft - Shoplifting 23C, Theft From Building 23D, Theft From Coin -Operated Machine 23E, & Theft of Motor Vehicle Parts/Accessories 23G Produced: 7/13/2017 For Law Enforcement Use Only This document is confidential and may not be further disseminated or released to any unauthorzed persons pursuant to RCW 42.56.420 Spokane County Sheriff's Office Regional Intelligence Group Spokane Valley Districts IBR Classification: Rape 16 0 FEBRUARY = J } W li a z a < -, 2 SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER —0—Calendar 2014 --*--Calendar 2015 —:1—Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 Month Count Year Calendar 2014 Calendar 2015 Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 January 3 8 7 8 February 13 10 6 5 March 15 4 9 7 April 8 9 5 9 May 9 6 12 11 June 5 5 7 3 July 2 6 4 August 11 14 2 September 9 3 4 October 9 13 5 November 6 6 6 December 8 7 4 Grand Total 98 91 71 43 *IBR Offense: Rape - Forcible 11A Produced: 7/13/2017 For Law Enforcement Use Only This document is confidential and may not be further disseminated or released to any unauthorized persons pursuant to RCW 42.56.420 Spokane County Sheriff's Office Regional Intelligence Group Spokane Valley Districts IBR Classification: Counterfeiting Forgery 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 r z FEBRUARY x u 2 SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER Calendar 2014 ,Calendar 2015 — —Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 Month Count Year Calendar 2014 Calendar 2015 Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 January 11 18 14 9 February 12 18 13 11 March 12 11 25 20 April 15 7 6 20 May 22 9 10 25 June 16 9 15 15 July 25 12 11 August 10 12 7 September 11 8 11 October 12 12 7 November 12 6 15 December 7 20 12 Grand Total 165 142 146 100 '1BR Offense: Counterfeiting/Forgery 250 Produced: 7/13/2017 For Law Enforcement Use Only This document is confidential and may not be further disseminated or released to any unauthorized persons pursuant to RCW 42.56.420 Spokane County Sheriff's Office Regional Intelligence Group Spokane Valley Districts c9_.' IBR Classification: Destruction Damage Vandalism 250 200 150 100 50 0 z FEBRUARY s cc i >- w >- F- 4 z -' In D a SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER t i• -_-Calendar 2014 '—U --Calendar 2015 . -,i—Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 Month Count Year Calendar 2014 Calendar 2015 Calendar 2016 Calendar 2017 January 118 162 133 160 February 116 130 111 149 March 157 127 148 136 April 130 126 151 172 May 126 130 134 139 June 136 130 176 142 July 140 125 154 August 117 141 160 September 143 130 118 October 131 156 165 November 136 129 196 December 183 163 160 Grand Total 1633 1649 1806 898 IBR Offense: Destruction/Damage/Vandalism 290 Produced: 7/13/2017 For Law Enforcement Use Only This document is confidential and rnay not be further disseminated or released to any unauthorized persons pursuant to RCW 42.56.420 March 1. 2017 - PS C T F I T F V 1 U 4116117 TOTALS P C T F I T F S V 1 U 04123117 TOTALS P C T F 1 T F S V I U 04130!17 TOTALS P C T F I T F S V I U 05107117 TOTALS P C T F I T F S V I U 05/14117 TOTALS P C T F I T F S V I U 05121/17 TOTALS June 30, 2017 PERSONS BOOKED 17 2 5 24 4 1 5 3 3 6 2 2 3 3 5 5 PERSONS REMAINING [N CUSTODY 9 1 4 14 13 3 16 12 3 15 11 11 9 9 15 15 PERSONS SUMMONS / WARRANT REQUESTS 13 5 3 21 5 2 3 10 2 4 3 9 4 1 5 4 1 1 6 0 5 5 NEW CHARGES - FELONY 90 90 42 222 27 8 40 75 12 22 13 47 30 2 17 49 35 2 3 40 21 9 4 34 NEW CHARGES - MISDEMEANOR 44 13 5 62 24 0 8 32 2 6 0 8 11 1 12 1 1 2 4 2 1 7 WARRANT ARRESTS - FELONY 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 WARRANT ARRESTS - MISDEMEANOR 6 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 P C T F I T F S V I U 05!28117 TOTALS P C T F T S V I U 06104117 TOTALS P C T F I TT F S V 1 U 06111/17 TOTALS P C T F I F S V I U 06118117 TOTALS P C T F 1 T F S V I U 06125117 TOTALS P C T F I T F S v I U 06130/2017 TOTALS 5 1 6 1 3 4 2 2 1 0 0 1 3 0 0 3 2 1 0 64 14 14 12 12 12 12 11 0 0 11 12 12 11 1 0 12 3 1 6 10 1 1 8 10 4 3 3 10 1 1 3 5 2 0 3 5 8 1 5 110 31 8 20 59 1 6 48 55 33 4 6 43 3 3 6 12 20 0 6 26 45 8 12 727 5 18 23 1 4 5 1 1 2 4 0 0 0 0 2 0 4 6 13 1 5 180 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 To: From: Re: DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA as of July 20, 2017; 8:30 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 August, 1, 2017 no meeting - National Night Out August 8, 2017, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 17-010, Snow Removal - Cary Driskell 3. Resolution Authorizing Bond for Affordable Housing — Erik Lamb 4. Motion Consideration: Lodging Tax Advisory Council Goals — Chelsie Taylor 5. Admin Report: Jail, Public Safety, and Justice Council — Cary Driskell, Dr. vanWormer 6. Admin Report: City Hall Update - Doug Powell, Jenny Nickerson 7. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins 1due Tue, Aug 11 (5 minutes) (15 minutes) (10 minutes) (10 minutes) (60 minutes) (10 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 115 minutes] August 15, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. CRAVE NW Report — John Hohman 2. Urban Farming and Animal Keeping — Micki Harnois 3. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins [*estimated August 22, 2017, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 17-010, Snow Removal — Cary Driskell 3. Admin Report: 2018 Budget: Estimated Revenues/Expenditures — Chelsie Taylor 4. Admin Report: Police Dept Monthly Report — Mark Werner 5. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins 6. Info Only: Department Reports August 29, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Marketing Report — Mike Basinger 2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins [*estimated 1due Tue, Aug 81 (15 minutes) (20 minutes) (5 minutes) meeting: 40 minutes] 1due Tue, Aug 151 (5 minutes) (15 minutes) (30 minutes) (15 minutes) (5 minutes) meeting: 70 minutes] 1due Tue, Aug 221 (15 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 20 minutes] September 5, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. Idue Tue, Aug 291 1. Red Cross - Household Emergency Kits - Mark Calhoun; Megan Snow, Am. Red Cross (20 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 25 minutes] September 12, 2017, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. Idue Tue, Sept 51 1. PUBLIC HEARING: 2018 Budget Revenues (includes property tax) — Chelsie Taylor 2. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes; resolution to set budget hearing for 10-10) 3. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins (15 minutes) (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 25 minutes] Draft Advance Agenda 7/20/2017 1:34:32 PM Page 1 of 3 September 19, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Proposed ordinance adopting 2018 property taxes — Chelsie Taylor 2. Outside Agencies Presentations: Economic Development & Social Services 3. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins fdue Tue, Sept 121 (10 minutes) (-120 mins) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 135 minutes] September 26, 2017, Formal Meetin2 Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Mayoral Appointment: Citizen to Spokane Housing Authority — Mayor Higgins 3. Admin Report: Police Dept Monthly Report — Mark Werner 4. City Manager's Presentation of 2018 Preliminary Budget — Mark Calhoun 5. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins 6. Info Only: Department Reports October 3, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Proposed 2017 Budget Amendment — Chelsie Taylor 2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins October 10, 2017, Formal Meetin2 Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed 2018 Budget — Chelsie Taylor 2. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 3. First Reading Proposed Property Tax Ordinance — Chelsie Taylor October 17, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins [*estimated [*estimated [*estimated [*estimated October 24, 2017, Formal Meetin2 Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed 2017 Budget Amendment — Chelsie Taylor 2. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 3. Second Reading Proposed Property Tax Ordinance — Chelsie Taylor 4. First Reading Ordinance Amending 2017 Budget — Chelsie Taylor 5. First Reading Ordinance Adopting 2018 Budget — Chelsie Taylor 6. Motion Consideration: Allocation of Funds to Outside Agencies — Chelsie Taylor 7. Admin Report: Police Dept Monthly Report — Mark Werner 8. City Manager's Presentation of 2018 Preliminary Budget — Mark Calhoun 9. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins 10. Info Only: Department Reports October 31, 2017, Formal Meetin2 Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Admin Report: 2018 Fee Resolution — Chelsie Taylor November 7, 2017, Study Session, 6:00 p.m. [*estimated [*estimated fdue Tue, Sept 191 (5 minutes) (5 minutes) (15 minutes) (45 minutes) (5 minutes) meeting: 75 minutes] fdue Tue, Sept 261 (10 minutes) (5 minutes) meeting: minutes] fdue Tue, Oct 31 (20 minutes) (5 minutes) (15 minutes) meeting: 40 minutes] [due Tue, Oct 101 (5 minutes) meeting: minutes] fdue Tue, Oct 1711 (15 minutes) (5 minutes) (15 minutes) (15 minutes) (20 minutes) (20 minutes) (15 minutes) (45 minutes) (5 minutes) meeting: 155 minutes] [due Tue, Oct 241 (5 minutes) (20 minutes) meeting: minutes] [Note: meeting might be cancelled due to election night] Draft Advance Agenda 7/20/2017 1:34:32 PM Page 2 of 3 November 14, 2017, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Final Hearing on 2018 Budget — Chelsie Taylor 2. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 3. Second Reading Ordinance Amending 2017 Budget — Chelsie Taylor 4. Second Reading Ordinance Adopting 2018 Budget — Chelsie Taylor 5. Admin Report: LTAC Recommendations to Council — Chelsie Taylor 6. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins November 21, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins November 28, 2017, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. Meeting cancelled due to Thanksgiving Holiday December 5, 2017, Study Session, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins [due Tue, Nov 7] (20 minutes) (5 minutes) (15 minutes) (20 minutes) (20 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 85 minutes] [due Tue, Nov 14] (5 minutes) December 12, 2017, Formal Meetin2 Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Fee Resolution, 2018 — Chelsie Taylor 3. Motion Consideration: Award of LTAC Funds — Chelsie Taylor 4. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins December 19, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins [due Tue, Nov 21] (5 minutes) [due Tue, Dec 5] (5 minutes) (10 minutes) (25 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 45 minutes] [due Tue, Dec 12] (5 minutes) December 26, 2017, Formal Meetin2 Format, 6:00 p.m. Meeting cancelled due to Christmas Holiday January 2, 2018, Study Session, 6:00 p.m. Administration of Oath of Office to Newly Elected Officials 1. Election of Mayor and Deputy Mayor — Chris Bainbridge 2. Advance Agenda — Mayor *time for public or Council comments not included OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS: 8th & McDonald (Oct) CDBG (Hearing Sept/Oct) Consultant Contract, Barker Grade Sep.Ph 1 Disc Golf Park Farmers Market Fee Resolution (credit card fees, Health District/Parental Rights Legislative Agenda (Sept/Oct) Official Newspaper Protestor Conditions Property Crimes Grant Cont. School Interns Second Amend. Sanctuary City Shipping Containers Sign Ordinance etc.) [due Tue, Dec 26] Solid Waste Contract Approval Sullivan Road Bridge Update Transportation & Infrastructure Undergrounding Utility Facilities in ROW Water Banking Yard Sales Regulation Review Zero Tolerance of Crime (15 minutes) (5 minutes) Draft Advance Agenda 7/20/2017 1:34:32 PM Page 3 of 3 .,•••10Valley. City of Spokane Valley Community & Public Works Monthly Report June 2017 Page Title 1 Cover Sheet 2 Pre -Application Meetings Requested 3 Online Applications Received 4 Construction Applications Received 5 Land Use Applications Received 6 Construction Permits Issued 7 Land Use Applications Approved 8 Development Inspections Performed 9 Code Enforcement 10 Revenue 11 Building Permit Valuations 12 Agreements for Services Adopted and in Operation, Citizen's request for PW assistance 13 Wastewater, Street Maintenance, Stormwater 14 Capital Projects 15 Traffic 16 Planning and Grants Spokane 4.• Valley Pre -Application Meetings Requested Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2017 - 06/30/2017 A Pre -Application Meeting is a service provided to help our customers identify the code requirements related to their project proposal. Community & Economic Development scheduled a total of 12 Pre -Application Meetings in June 2017. 20 _.. 10 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Land Use Pre -Application Commercial Pre -App Meeting Commercial Pre -App Land Use Pre -Application Meeting Monthly Totals Annual Total To -Date: 77 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 11 3 9 11 7 6 0 0 Oct Nov Dec 0 0 0 0 3 2 8 6 5 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 5 17 17 12 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 Printed 07/03/2017 11:21 Page 2 ��a.Ile Walley, Online Applications Received Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2017 - 06/30/2017 Community & Economic Development received a total of 248 Online Applications in June 2017. 400 200 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Trade Permit Right of Way Permit Sign Permit Reroof Permit Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Pre -Application Meeting Request Demolition Permit Other Online Applications Approach Permit Approach Permit Demolition Permit Other Online Applications Pre -Application Meeting Request Reroof Permit Right of Way Permit Sign Permit Trade Permit DecJan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov 2 0 2 4 7 3 0 3 2 4 93 0 0 0 0 3 1 152 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 7 31 51 33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 38 56 48 71 91 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 81 80 112 82 55 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Monthly Totals Annual Total To -Date: Printed 07/03/2017 11:21 1,163 3 Spokane uai1ey Construction Applications Received Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2017 - 06/30/2017 Community & Economic Development received a total of 479 Construction Applications in June 2017. 600 400 200 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Commercial - New Commercial - TI Residential - New ® Other Construction Permits Commercial - New Commercial - TI Residential - New Commercial - Trade Residential - Trade Residential - Accessory Demolition Sign Other Construction Permits Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 8 7 5 10 9 11 8 13 6 16 12 12 0 0 0 6 7 21 22 24 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 *18 *29 *32 *35 *13 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 *106 *93 *157 *119 *142 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 14 21 13 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 *3 1 *5 *4 *8 *13 0 0 0 0 0 0 *10 4 14 *7 *12 *8 0 0 0 0 0 0 *97 *101 *177 *200 *326 *353 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 257 262 431 434 559 479 0 0 0 0 0 0 Annual Total To -Date: Printed 07/03/2017 11:22 2,422 Page 4 *Includes Online Applications. Spokane Val ley Land Use Applications Received Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2017 - 06/30/2017 Community & Economic Development received a total of 58 Land Use Applications in June 2017. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Boundary Line Adjustment Short Plat Preliminarytl Long Plat Preliminary Binding Site Plan Preliminary Final Platting Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Administrative Exception/Interpretation Other Land Use Permits Boundary Line Adjustment Short Plat Preliminary Long Plat Preliminary Binding Site Plan Preliminary Final Platting Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Administrative Exception/Interpretation Other Land Use Permits M Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1 1 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 44 89 79 68 55 0 0 0 0 0 0 onthly Totals 54 49 101 91 78 58 0 0 0 0 0 0 Annual Total To -Date: Printed 07/03/2017 11:22 431 Page 5 r��a.Il .0•00Valley' Construction Permits Issued Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2017 - 06/30/2017 Community & Economic Development issued a total of 484 Construction Permits in June 2017. 600 400 200 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Commercial - New Commercial - TI Residential - New - Other Construction Permits Commercial - New Commercial - TI Residential - New Commercial - Trade Residential - Trade Residential - Accessory Demolition Sign Other Construction Permits Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 16 6 2 4 24 13 9 13 8 9 9 18 0 5 8 12 21 26 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 26 28 34 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 99 103 143 116 143 56 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 13 17 13 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 3 4 6 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 4 15 6 11 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 65 84 148 179 299 338 0 0 0 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 225 252 372 390 539 484 0 0 0 0 0 0 Annual Total To -Date: Printed 07/03/2017 11:23 2,262 Page 6 I��Ol.ile ,,•00 Valley Land Use Applications Approved Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2017 - 06/30/2017 Community & Economic Development approved a total of 53 Land Use Applications in June 2017. 100 50 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Boundary Line Adjustment Short Plat Preliminary ; Long Plat Preliminary Binding Site Plan Preliminary Final Platting Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment State Environmental Polity Act (SEPA) Administrative Exception/Interpretation Other Land Use Permits Boundary Line Adjustment Short Plat Preliminary Long Plat Preliminary Binding Site Plan Preliminary Final Platting Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Administrative Exception/Interpretation Other Land Use Permits M Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 41 82 77 62 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 onthly Totals 46 43 83 80 63 53 0 0 0 0 0 0 Annual Total To -Date: Printed 07/03/2017 11:23 368 Page 7 Malley, Development Inspections Performed Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2017 - 06/30/2017 Community & Economic Development performed a total of 1646 Development Inspections in June 2017. Development Inspections include building, planning, engineering and ROW inspections. 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec -+- 2015 2016 2017 2017 2016 2015 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Totals 965 773 1,348 1,346 1,719 1,646 0 0 0 0 0 0 764 958 1,333 1,390 1,445 1,564 1,283 1,453 1,553 1,529 1,510 1,072 801 974 1,063 1,243 1,420 1,761 1,624 1,144 1,053 1,060 934 777 Printed 07/03/2017 11:24 Page 8 ��a.Ile 4,000Mal1ey, Code Enforcement Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2017 - 06/30/2017 Code Enforcement Officers responded to 59 citizen requests in the month of June. They are listed by type below. Please remember that all complaints, even those that have no violation, must be investigated. 60 40 20 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec CE -Stop Work Order Environmental General Nuisance - Property Complaint, Non -Violation CE -Stop Work Order Complaint, Non -Violation Environmental General Nuisance Property Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 16 38 29 41 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11 10 9 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 33 17 49 39 51 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 Annual Total To -Date: Printed 07/03/2017 11:24 248 Page 9 .010 Valley Revenue 2017 Trend 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2017 - 06/30/2017 Community & Economic Development Revenue totaled $274,897 in June 2017. 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec -11- 2017 2016 -I- Five -Year Trend Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec $185,045 $153,153 $153,939 $236,944 $318,163 $274,897 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $111,168 $95,595 $204,786 $164,968 $246,034 $229,320 $161,973 $153,562 $149,720 $157,088 $108,461 $90,334 $213,319 $191,658 $383,912 $196,705 $371,319 $243,029 $128,848 $271,684 $252,268 $208,349 $150,902 $133,482 $74,775 $108,328 $161,174 $187,199 $123,918 $117,453 $162,551 $162,864 $99,587 $181,791 $99,627 $102,195 1,581,462 $74,628 $66,134 $198,571 $160,508 $282,086 $152,637 $117,776 $127,540 $153,838 $149,197 $84,442 $97,689 $1,665,046 $158,912 $51,536 $102,538 $106,496 $184,176 $409,592 $277,553 $102,021 $129,174 $133,561 $98,386 $66,559 $1,820,504 $34,204 $60,319 $177,737 $173,932 $268,672 $223,888 $123,137 $103,703 $113,731 $112,542 $108,948 $51,745' 1,552,558 Totals 41 1,873,009 $2,745,475 Printed 07/03/2017 11:25 Page 10 w��a.Ile 4000 Valley Building Permit Valuation Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2017 - 06/30/2017 Community & Economic Development Building Permit Valuation totaled $35,741,785 in June 2017. 2017 Trend 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2017 2016 --- Five -Year Trend Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec $23.81M $18.37M $6.98M $30.86M $35.66M $35.67M $0.00M $0.00M $0.00M $0.00M $0.00M $0.00M $8.06M $9.23M $16.50M $10.05M $24.94M $21.81M $11.86M $15.11M $13.08M $10.86M $5.65M $4.22M $7.97M $28.14M $55.63M $10.09M $36.76M $19.11M $7.07M $41.60M $33.68M $9.13M $7.76M $5.52M $2.93M $10.71M $8.07M $18.60M $6.73M $7.53M $5.05M $8.06M $5.15M $14.42M $5.86M $5.08M $3.18M $2.45M $9.90M $8.92M $34.58M $7.44M $6.37M $9.47M $12.01M $7.74M $3.60M $6.30M $25.49M $1.92M $3.59M $7.30M $22.22M $41.88M $32.91M $6.52M $8.11M $14.22M $7.25M $2.54M $0.72M $2.95M $5.29M $5.32M $24.39M $33.08M $7.91M $9.89M $6.47M $8.78M $3.76M $1.66M Printed 07/03/2017 11:25 Page 11 Totals \$151.35M 151.36M 262.46M $98.19M 111.92 S"��`okan� .iFP Valle ENGINEERING MONTHLY REPORT June 2017 AGREEMENTS FOR SERVICES ADOPTED AND IN OPERATION * Budget estimates ** Does not include June Contract Name Contractor Contract Amount Total Expended % of Contract Expended Street Maintenance Poe Asphalt $1,366,663.00 $206,262.14 15.09% Street Sweeping AAA Sweeping $490,200.00 $190,617.01 38.89% Storm Drain Cleaning AAA Sweeping $189,990.00 $23,863.32 12.56% Snow Removal Poe Asphalt $132,578.46 $132,578.46 100.00% Landscaping Senske $58,746.00 $14,203.48 24.18% Weed Spraying Spokane Pro Care $19,400.00 $2,813.00 14.50% Emergency Traffic Control Senske $10,000.00 $2,653.26 26.53% Litter and Weed Control Geiger Work Crew $70,000.00 $22,480.21 32.11% State Highway Maintenance WSDOT $265,000.00 $105,175.04 39.69% Traffic Signals, Signs, Striping Spokane County $632,000.00 $203,919.45 32.27% Dead Animal Control Mike Pederson $20,000.00 $8,900.00 44.50% Citizen Requests for Public Works - June 2017 Request Submitted In Progress Waiting (30+ days) Resolved C.A.R.E.S. 19 2 3 14 CPW Projects 2 2 Dead Animal Removal 6 6 Illicit Discharge 1 1 Landscaping ROW 19 4 15 Report a Pothole 13 1 12 Roadway Hazard 6 6 Sign & Signal Requests 7 7 Storm Drainage / Erosion 8 8 Street Sweeping 12 12 Weed Control 1 1 Traffic 29 29 Totals 123 7 3 113 12 WASTEWATER Status of the process can be monitored at: http://www.spokaneriver.net/, http://www.ecy.wa.gov/geographic/spokane/spokane river basin.htm http://www.spokanecounty.orq/utilities/WaterReclamation/content.aspx?c=2224 and http://www.spokaneriverpartners.com/ STREET MAINTENANCE ACTIVITY The following is a summary of Contractor maintenance activities in the City of Spokane Valley for June 2017: • Poe Maintenance Contract — Asphalt patch repair. • J and H Construction began stormwater repair work at 16 locations throughout the City. • AAA Sweeping — Arterial maintenance sweeping continued. Residential spring sweep was completed. • AAA Sweeping Vactor Contract — Cleaning sidewalk underdrains on arterials, catchbasins and drywells. • Geiger Work Crew — Litter pickup and right of way dryland grass mowing. STORMWATER UTILITY The following is a summary of City Stormwater Utility activities for June 2017: • Two interns started for working on inspection and inventory of stormwater systems. • Stormwater staff worked with Central Valley School District and County Water resources to teach 5th graders about aquifer protection and improving water quality from stormwater. • Continued working on the following tasks: o Testing GIS ArcCollector for pilot collection of field data. o Reviewing GPS tracking options to replace eRoadTrac for service vehicles such as snowplowing, sweeping, and storm drain -cleaning operations. o Stormwater action request list for small works and maintenance projects in 2017 and 2018, completing 13 projects so far this year, overall status shown below: Stormwater Ratepayer Project Requests Jun -17 Total Requests Logged Since 2009: 264 2017 Completed Projects: Completed Projects 2009-2016: Unwarranted (No -Build) List: 13 106 34 Total Project Backlog: 111 Remaining Projects Assigned for 2017-2019 Small Works: Maintenance: Large Capital: 78 25 2 Unfunded Projects Large Capital: 6 Remaining Backlog Awaiting Assignment: 13 0 CAPITAL PROJECTS ,ally. Public Works Projects Monthly Summary - Design & Construction June -2017 Project # Design & Construction Projects Funding Proposed Ad Date Bid Open Date % Complete Estimated Construction Completion Total Project Cost PE I CN Street Projects 0123 Mission Ave - Flora to Barker 0141 Sullivan & Euclid PCC 0155 Sullivan Rd W Bridge Replacement #4508 0166 Pines Rd. (SR27) & Grace Ave. Int Safety 0201 ITS Infill Project- Phase 1 0221 McDonald Rd Diet (16th to Mission) 0239 Bowdish Rd & 11th Ave. Sidewalk 0249 Sullivan & Wellesley Intersection Improv 0250 9th Ave Sidewalk- Raymond to University 0251 Euclid Avenue Reconstruction Project 0258 32nd Ave Sidewalk-SR27to Evergreen Street Preservation Projects 0240 Saltese Road Preservation Project 0248 Sprague Street Pres - Sullivan to Corbin 0252 Argonne Resurfacing: Broadway to Indiana 0253 Mission - Pines to McDonald 0255 Indiana St Pres (Mirabeau-Evergreen) 0259 North Sullivan ITS Project Traffic Projects 0222 Citywide Reflective Signal Back Plates Parks Projects 0227 Appleway S.U.P. - Pines to Evergreen 0237 Appleway Trail - Sullivan to Corbin FHWA - STP(U) FHWA - STP(U) FHWA- BR HSIP FHWA - CMAQ TIB - UAP TIB - SP FHWA - STP(U) STA - FTA/NF COSV TIB - SP COSY FHWA - STP(U) FHWA - STP(U) COSY COSY CMAQ HSIP 02/02/18 03/03/17 06/27/14 TBD 08/25/17 05/27/16 02/17/17 05/03/19 03/31/17 03/10/17 04/13/18 02/23/18 03/24/17 07/18/14 TBD 09/08/17 06/17/16 03/03/17 05/24/19 04/14/17 03/31/17 04/27/18 04/28/17 05/12/17 04/06/18 04/27/18 02/02/18 02/23/18 04/14/17 04/28/17 03/31/17 04/14/17 02/23/18 03/16/18 30 100 100 100 99 100 100 2 100 100 5 100 10 0 100 100 10 0 0 95 0 0 98 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 90 100 0 11/15/18 12/31/17 06/30/17 4/3/2018 4/3/2018 07/31/17 08/31/17 12/31/19 07/31/17 12/31/17 09/28/18 10/31/17 12/31/19 10/31/18 10/31/17 09/15/17 10/31/2018 $ 4,333,334 $ 2,404,838 $ 15,833,333 $ 878,865 $ 350,402 $ 2,524,104 $ 536,342 $ 1,370,000 $ 240,000 $ 2,647,479 $ 471,891 $ 1,041,100 $ 1,770,000 640,000 770,000 949,613 914,209 TBD TBD 0 0 03/01/19 $ 81,000 FHWA-STP(U) 11/11/16 12/09/16 100 95 07/31/17 $ 2,134,057 COSV 06/28/17 08/11/17 90 0 10/31/17 $ 2,130,000 Street Projects 0142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan 0143 Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation 0205 Sprague/Barker Intersection Improvement 0223 Pines Rd Underpass @ BNSF &Trent 0247 8th & Carnahan Intersection Improvements 0259 North Sullivan ITS Project Street Preservation Projects 0254 Mission - McDonald to Evergreen 0256 University Rd Pres -24th to Dishman Mica 0257 University Rd Pres -16th to 24th Stormwater Projects 0193 Effectiveness Study 0198 Sprague, Park to University LID 0199 Havana -Yale Diversion 0200 Ponderosa Surface Water Diversion FHWA-STP(U) 12/31/18 COSY COSV 12/31/18 COSY COSY COSY COSY 02/01/18 03/31/18 05/31/17 12/01/17 Dept of Ecology 06/30/17 Dept of Ecology 03/01/18 Dept of Ecology 10/31/18 Dept of Ecology 10/31/18 14 90 0 5 0 0 10 75 10 10 100 30 35 35 $ 276,301 $ 1,327,781 $ 51,619 $ 1,710,000 $ 250,000 $ 914,209 67,000 48,000 53,000 600,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Design %Complete Total Project Project # Design Only Projects Funding Complete Cost PE Date Street Projects 0142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan 0143 Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation 0205 Sprague/Barker Intersection Improvement 0223 Pines Rd Underpass @ BNSF &Trent 0247 8th & Carnahan Intersection Improvements 0259 North Sullivan ITS Project Street Preservation Projects 0254 Mission - McDonald to Evergreen 0256 University Rd Pres -24th to Dishman Mica 0257 University Rd Pres -16th to 24th Stormwater Projects 0193 Effectiveness Study 0198 Sprague, Park to University LID 0199 Havana -Yale Diversion 0200 Ponderosa Surface Water Diversion FHWA-STP(U) 12/31/18 COSY COSV 12/31/18 COSY COSY COSY COSY 02/01/18 03/31/18 05/31/17 12/01/17 Dept of Ecology 06/30/17 Dept of Ecology 03/01/18 Dept of Ecology 10/31/18 Dept of Ecology 10/31/18 14 90 0 5 0 0 10 75 10 10 100 30 35 35 $ 276,301 $ 1,327,781 $ 51,619 $ 1,710,000 $ 250,000 $ 914,209 67,000 48,000 53,000 600,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 TRAFFIC HAWK Pedestrian Signal, Pines Rd & Appleway Trail A HAWK pedestrian signal (High -Intensity Activated crossWalK beacon) for the Appleway Trail crossing at Pines Road is nearing completion. CIP and Traffic staff have been working with WSDOT to complete the signal timing and to tie a communications line into the traffic signal at Pines and Sprague Avenue. The HAWK pedestrian signal is expected to be in operation by about mid-July. CIP, Traffic, and Economic Development is working to publish HAWK pedestrian signal information on the City's website and plans to work with the local newspapers to publish an article to alert drivers of the new device. WSDOT Hardware Updates for City Traffic Signals WSDOT purchased new engine boards and software to update 43 Spokane Valley traffic signal controllers using federal grants they've received. The equipment to make the change arrived on June 29th. City and State traffic signal maintenance crews have developed a plan to make the upgrades by mid-August. This upgrade will improve communications between City to City and City to State traffic signals for better signal coordination and traffic progression on the City's busiest corridors. The equipment for these upgrades is approximately $91,000. 8th and McDonald Intersection City staff has been working to reduce the trend of increased vehicle crashes at the 8th and McDonald intersection. Staff presented a plan to the City Council on June 27th to keep the existing two-way stop condition while implementing the following mitigation: 1) Reduce the speed limit on 8th Avenue between Pines and Sullivan Roads to 30 mph. Staff will prepare the necessary resolution for future City Council consideration. 2) Install new red flashing beacons above the stop signs on 8th Avenue and install crossroad warning sign assemblies with yellow flashing beacons above the signs on McDonald in advance of 8th Avenue. 3) Clear vegetation and look for options to relocate fencing to comply with the sight triangle requirements for the intersection. This will be accomplished by City forces working with the adjoining property owners. 4) Continue to work with Modern Electric to determine options for relocating the utility pole on the northwest corner of the intersection. 5) Continue to monitor the intersection through the end of 2017 to determine if the recommended mitigations have reduced the crashes to the expected rate of from one to three per year. 6) If the crash rate is lowered to the expected rate, continue to closely monitor the intersection. 7) If there is no apparent improvement to the intersection safety after applying these mitigations, install a 4 -way stop controls and continue to closely monitor the intersection safety. 15 PLANNING AND GRANTS Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) The City is awaiting official confirmation of its CDBG award from Spokane County Community Services, Housing and Community Development Department for a sidewalk project along 8th Avenue from Dicky Road to Thierman Road. The preliminary funding recommendation is $453,895. Staff is presently scoping CDBG opportunities for 2017. U.S. Department of Transportation INFRA Grant Program The Department of Transportation (DOT) is announcing the Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA) discretionary grant program through a Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) in the Federal Register. The INFRA program will make approximately $1.5 billion available to projects that are in line with the Administration's principles. INFRA advances a pre-existing grant program established in the FAST Act of 2015 and utilizes updated criteria to evaluate projects to align them with national and regional economic vitality goals. Staff will review the grant scoring criteria and develop a list of projects for City Council consideration. Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) FY 2019 Call for Projects On June 1, 2017, the Washington State TIB issued a Call for Projects for the allocation of funding for the Urban Arterial Program (UAP) and Sidewalk Program (SP). The UAP makes approximately $75M available statewide and Spokane Valley is eligible to apply for funds from the Northeast Region's allocation of $8.4M. The SP makes approximately $5M available statewide and Spokane Valley is eligible to apply for funds from the East Region's allocation of $1.1M. The application submittal due date for TIB funding is August 18, 2018. Staff has reviewed the grant scoring criterion and compared it to the City's 2018-2023 TIP, Pavement Management Program, Comprehensive Plan, water district capital improvement plans, accident hot spots and other elements of the City's transportation network. Staff anticipates that the projects proposed below will score well and have a high potential to receive funding. Based on a preliminary evaluation, the following draft list of projects has been developed for Council consideration. Please note that estimated project costs are planning -level preliminary estimates and are anticipated to change as more information becomes available and the grant applications are finalized. Transportation Improvement Board (TIP) Project Name Total Estimated Cost Grant Request (80%) Estimated City Match* (20%) Urban Arterial Program (UAP) ($'s in 1.000s) Mullan Rd — Broadway Ave. to Indiana Ave (PE & CN) $911 $728 $1831 University Rd — 16th to Dishman Mica Rd (CN Only) $2,276 $1,821 $455 1 Broadway Ave - Argonne Rd and Mullan Rd intersections (CN Only) $2,250 $1,800 $450 2 Sidewalk Program (SP) ($'s in 1,000's) Mission Ave. Sidewalk — Bates to Union (PE &CN) $377 $302 $75 2 Matching Funds Source: Pavement Preservation 2 Matching Funds Source: REET 16 SI4.* .00.Valley Memorandum 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall@spokanevalley.org To: Mark Calhoun, City Manager From: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director Date: July 18, 2017 Re: Finance Department Activity Report — June 2017 Following is information pertaining to Finance Department activities through the end of June 2017 and included herein is an updated 2017 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures through the end of June. 2016 Yearend Process The 2016 books were closed during April and the annual financial report was completed in May. The State Auditor's Office were on site throughout the month of June and completed fieldwork for the single audit and financial statement portions of the audit as of July 141h. We expect they will return to complete the accountability audit later this fall. 2017 Surplus of City Furniture and Equipment Resolution #17-010 declaring surplus furniture and equipment has been approved by Council on May 9, 2017. Finance staff members are currently working with local businesses, auctions, and recyclers to dispose of the surplus items prior to the move to the new City Hall building. 2018 Budget Development The 2018 Budget development process began in the Finance Department in early March and on April 10th we sent detailed budget requests to all departments to complete by mid-May. By the time the budget is scheduled to be adopted on November 141h, the Council will have had an opportunity to discuss the budget on seven occasions including three public hearings. • June 13 Council budget workshop • August 22 Admin report on 2018 revenues and expenditures • September 12 Public hearing #1 on the 2018 revenue and expenditures • September 26 City Manager's presentation of preliminary 2018 Budget • October 10 Public hearing #2 on 2018 Budget • October 24 First reading on proposed ordinance adopting the 2018 Budget • November 14 Public hearing #3 on the 2018 Budget • November 14 Second reading on proposed ordinance adopting the 2018 Budget P:IFinancelFinance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports1201712017 06 30.docx Page 1 2018 Property Tax Levy A significant part of the budget development process includes the annual levy of property taxes which in 2017 are expected to account for approximately 28% of recurring General Fund revenues. Council discussions specifically related to this topic will take place at the following meetings: • September 12 — Public hearing on 2018 revenues including property taxes • September 19 — Admin Report on proposed ordinance levying 2018 property taxes. • October 10 — First reading of ordinance levying 2018 property taxes and confirming tax levy. • October 24 — Second reading of ordinance levying 2018 property taxes and confirming tax levy. Outside Agency Funding in the 2018 Budget The City has historically provided funding for local organizations involved in either social services or economic development activities and the preliminary 2017 Budget currently has $150,000 collectively available for this, with $43,000 being set aside for contracted economic development. The schedule leading to awarding funds is as follows: • July 14 — Letters mailed to agencies that have historically received funding, media release to City website and notice to newspapers. • August 11 — Agency requests are due at City Hall. • September 19 — Economic development and social service agency presentations to Council. • October 11 — Council makes final determination of awards. Budget to Actual Comparison Report A report reflecting 2017 Budget to Actual Revenues and Expenditures for those funds for which a 2017 Budget was adopted is located on pages 6 through 19. Because we attempt to provide this information in a timely manner, this report is prepared from records that are not formally closed by the Finance Department at month end or reconciled to bank records. Although it is realistic to expect the figures will change over subsequent weeks, I believe the report is materially accurate. We've included the following information in the report: • Revenues by source for all funds, and expenditures by department in the General Fund and by type in all other funds. • A breakdown between recurring and nonrecurring revenues and expenditures in the General Fund, Street O&M Fund and Stormwater Fund. • The change in fund balance including beginning and ending figures. The beginning fund balance figures are those that are expected to be reflected in our 2016 Annual Financial Report. • Columns of information include: o The 2017 Budget as adopted o June 2017 activity o Cumulative 2017 activity through June 2017 o Budget remaining in terms of dollars o The percent of budgeted revenue collected or budgeted expenditures disbursed A few points related to the General Fund #001 (page 6): Recurring revenues collections are currently at 46.08% of the amount budgeted with 50% of the year elapsed. P:IFinancelFinance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports1201712017 06 30.docx Page 2 • Property tax are paid to Spokane County in two installments each year on April 30 and October 31 and are then remitted to the City primarily in May and November with lesser amounts typically remitted in June and December. Property taxes received thus far in 2017 are $6,337,391 or 54.56% of the amount budgeted. • Sales tax collections represent only 5 -months of collections thus far because taxes collected in June are not remitted to the City by the State until the latter part of July. Collections are currently at $8,053,710 or 40.57% of the amount budgeted. • Gambling taxes are at $103,212 or 30.22% of the amount budgeted. Gambling taxes are paid quarterly with second quarter payments due by July 31St • Franchise Fee and Business Registration revenues are typically received in the month following a calendar year quarter. So far in 2017 we have received $352,167 or 29.35% of the amount budgeted. • State shared revenues are composed of State of Washington distributions that include items such as liquor board profits, liquor excise tax, streamlined sales tax mitigation and criminal justice monies. Most of these revenues are paid by the State in the month following a calendar quarter. Through June we've received remittances totaling $912,286 or 43.35% of the amount budgeted. • Fines and forfeitures revenues are composed of monthly remittances from Spokane County with payments made in the month following the actual assessment of a fine and false alarm fees. Through June we've received remittances through the month of May with receipts of $398,781 or 29.30% of the amount budgeted. • Community Development service revenues are largely composed of building permit and plan review fees as well as right of way permits. Revenues are currently at $1,250,301 or 86.27% of the amount budgeted. • Recreation program fees are composed of revenues generated by the variety of parks and recreation programs including classes, swimming pools (in -season), and CenterPlace. Currently, revenues total $389,116 or 60.71% of the amount budgeted. Recurring expenditures are currently at $17,165,209 or 42.76% of the amount budgeted with 50% of the year elapsed. Departments experience seasonal fluctuations in activity so they don't necessarily expend their budget in twelve equal monthly installments Investments (page 20) Investments at June 30 total $57,933,563 and are composed of $52,925,132 in the Washington State Local Government Investment Pool and $5,008,430 in bank CDs. Total Sales Tax Receipts (page 21) Total sales tax receipts reflect State remittances through June and total $9,099,477 including general, criminal justice, and public safety taxes. This figure is $324,265 or 3.70% greater than the same 5 -month period in 2016. Economic Indicators (pages 22 — 24) The following economic indicators provide information pertaining to three different sources of tax revenue that provide a good gauge of the health and direction of the overall economy. 1. Sales taxes (page 22) provide a sense of how much individuals and businesses are spending on the purchase of goods. 2. Hotel / Motel taxes (page 23) provide us with a sense of overnight stays and visits to our area by tourists or business travelers. 3. Real Estate Excise taxes (page 24) provide us with a sense of real estate sales. P:IFinancelFinance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports1201712017 06 30.docx Page 3 Page 22 provides a 10 -year history of general sales tax receipts (not including public safety or criminal justice) with monthly detail beginning January 2008. • Compared with calendar year 2016, 2017 collections have increased by $288,411 or 3.71%. • Tax receipts reached an all-time high in 2016 at $19,887,049, besting the previous record year of 2015 when $18,209,568 was collected. Page 23 provides a 10 -year history of hotel/motel tax receipts with monthly detail beginning January 2008. • Compared with calendar year 2016, 2017 collections have decreased by $8,811 or 4.48%. • Collections reached an all-time high in 2016 of $596,374, exceeding the previous high set in 2015 of $581,237. Page 24 provides a 10 -year history of real estate excise tax receipts with monthly detail beginning January 2008. • Compared with calendar year 2016, 2017 collections have increased by $125,565 or 15.56%. • Tax receipts peaked in 2007 at nearly $2.6 million, decreased precipitously in 2008 and 2009, and have been gaining ground since. The City is again approaching tax receipt levels that were seen prior to the recession. Debt Capacity and Bonds Outstanding (page 25) This page provides information on the City's debt capacity, or the dollar amount of General Obligation (G.O.) Bonds the City may issue, as well as an amortization schedule of the bonds the City currently has outstanding. • The maximum amount of G.O. bonds the City may issue is determined by the assessed value for property taxes which for 2017 is $8,124,487,663. Following the December 1, 2016 debt service payments, the City has $13,260,000 of nonvoted G.O. bonds outstanding which represents 10.88% of our nonvoted bond capacity, and 2.18% of our total debt capacity for all types of bonds. Of this amount: o $5,065,000 remains on bonds issued for the construction of CenterPlace. These bonds are repaid with a portion of the 1/10 of 1% sales tax that is collected by the Spokane Public Facilities District. o $995,000 remains on bonds issued for road and street improvements around CenterPlace. The bonds are repaid with a portion of the real estate excise tax collected by the City. o $7,200,000 remains on bonds issued for construction of the new City Hall building. The bonds are to be repaid with General Fund revenues. Street Fund Revenue Sources (pages 26 and 27) The last two charts reflect a history for the two primary sources of revenue in Street Fund #101. These include: • Page 26 provides a 10 -year history of Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax collections with monthly detail beginning January 2008. o Compared with calendar year 2016, 2017 collections have decreased by $15,748 or 1.94%. o Tax receipts peaked in 2007 at just approximately $2.1 million, and subsequently decreased to a range of approximately $1,857,000 to $2,000,000 in the years 2011 through 2016. • Page 27 provides a 6 -year history of Telephone Utility Tax collections with monthly detail beginning January 2009 (the month in which the tax was imposed). o Compared with 2016, 2017 collections have decreased by $24,768 or 2.82%. Unlike tax revenues collected by the State and remitted monthly, these taxes are paid to the City P:IFinancelFinance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports1201712017 06 30.docx Page 4 directly by the service provider. Consequently there is not a "clean cutoff' in terms of when a vendor pays the tax. o Tax receipts peaked in 2009 at $3,054,473 and have decreased each year since due to what we suspect is the reduction in land lines by individual households. o The 2016 Budget was adopted with a revenue estimate of $2,340,000. Actual 2016 revenues came in at $2,069,308. The 2017 Budgeted revenues were amended to $2,000,000, and we will watch actual receipts closely as the year progresses. o The City has hired a consultant to perform an audit of providers who pay the telephone utility tax. The audit will assess whether providers are accurately remitting all taxes owed to the City, and the consultant will be paid on a contingent basis out of revenues recovered from the telephone providers. One audit has been completed, and the City received a payment in the amount of $97,370 which is comprised of recovered revenue plus interest and penalty fees. Per the contract with the consultant, the City will pay $24,343 or 25% of the amount recovered. P:IFinancelFinance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports1201712017 06 30.docx Page 5 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2017\2017 06 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Six -Month Period Ended June 30, 2017 #001 - GENERAL FUND RECURRING ACTIVITY Budget Year Elapsed = 2017 50.00% 2017 Budget Actual Actual through Budget June June 30 Remaining % of Budget Revenues Property Tax 11,614,500 894,149 6,337,391 (5,277,109) 54.56% Sales Tax 19,852,100 1,564,119 8,053,710 (11,798,390) 40.57% Sales Tax - Public Safety 919,000 71,005 373,073 (545,927) 40.60% Sales Tax - Criminal Justice 1,669,000 130,423 672,694 (996,306) 40.31 % Gambling Tax and Leasehold Excise Tax 341,500 9,237 103,212 (238,288) 30.22% Franchise Fees/Business Registration 1,200,000 11,897 352,167 (847,833) 29.35% State Shared Revenues 2,104,600 355,056 912,286 (1,192,314) 43.35% Fines, Forfeitures and Penalties 1,361,000 69,517 398,781 (962,219) 29.30% Community Development 1,449,300 277,046 1,250,301 (198,999) 86.27% Recreation Program Fees 640,900 80,464 389,116 (251,784) 60.71% Miscellaneous Department Revenue 94,000 9,344 74,191 (19,809) 78.93% Miscellaneous & Investment Interest 133,500 30,256 164,127 30,627 122.94% Transfer -in - #101 (street admin) 39,700 3,308 19,850 (19,850) 50.00% Transfer -in - #105 (h/m tax -CP advertising) 30,000 0 0 (30,000) 0.00% Transfer -in - #402 (storm admin) 13,400 1,117 6,700 (6,700) 50.00% Total Recurring Revenues 41,462,500 3,506,939 19,107,599 (22,354,901) 46.08% Expenditures City Council 542,872 26,258 237,068 305,804 43.67% City Manager 724,435 54,556 320,659 403,776 44.26% Legal 515,994 38,474 225,054 290,940 43.62% Public Safety 24,950,372 1,879,530 11,092,052 13,858,320 44.46% Deputy City Manager 752,277 53,569 344,820 407,457 45.84% Finance/IT 1,282,460 103,039 608,022 674,438 47.41% Human Resources 262,417 20,455 125,533 136,884 47.84% Public Works 921,632 48,959 416,898 504,734 45.23% City Hall Operations and Maintenance 303,918 42 908 303,010 0.30% Community Development - Administration 228,462 6,244 48,625 179,837 21.28% Community Development - Econ Dev 692,832 48,088 290,763 402,069 41.97% Community Development - Dev Svc 1,433,384 103,843 575,010 858,374 40.12% Community Development- Building 1,481,734 95,624 618,482 863,252 41.74% Parks & Rec - Administration 290,064 23,709 135,636 154,428 46.76% Parks & Rec - Maintenance 861,350 67,869 353,502 507,848 41.04% Parks & Rec - Recreation 246,295 15,759 76,386 169,909 31.01% Parks & Rec - Aquatics 482,350 12,641 24,740 457,610 5.13% Parks & Rec - Senior Center 95,916 7,558 44,591 51,325 46.49% Parks & Rec - CenterPlace 901,958 70,035 392,501 509,457 43.52% General Government 1,240,850 18,290 318,497 922,353 25.67% Transfers out - #204 ('16 LTGO bond debt service) 430,630 33,113 165,563 265,068 38.45% Transfers out - #309 (park capital projects) 160,000 13,333 80,000 80,000 50.00% Transfers out - #311 (Pavement Preservation) 953,200 79,433 476,600 476,600 50.00% Transfers out - #501 36,600 3,050 18,300 18,300 50.00% Transfers out - #502 (insurance premium) 350,000 29,167 175,000 175,000 50.00% Total Recurring Expenditures 40,142,002 2,852,638 17,165,209 22,976,793 42.76% Recurring Revenues Over (Under) Recurring Expenditures 1,320,498 654,301 1,942,390 621,892 Page 6 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2017\2017 06 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Six -Month Period Ended June 30, 2017 #001 - GENERAL FUND - continued NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Budget Year Elapsed = 2017 50.00% 2017 Budget Actual Actual through Budget June June 30 Remaining % of Budget Revenues Transfers in - #106 (Repymt of Solid Waste) 40,425 3,369 20,213 (20,213) 50.00% Transfers in - #310 (Lease in excess of bond pyrr 490,500 40,875 245,250 (245,250) 50.00% FEMA Grant Proceeds 0 13,164 22,869 22,869 0.00% Grant Proceeds - Dept of Commerce 114,200 0 45,158 (69,042) 39.54% Total Nonrecurring Revenues 645,125 57,407 333,489 (311,636) 51.69% Expenditures General Government - IT capital replacements 100,000 0 10,025 89,975 10.03% City Hall lease payment (2017 final year) 513,100 54,333 327,057 186,043 63.74% Police Department - CAD/RMS 145,000 47,512 47,512 97,488 32.77% Community & Econ Dev (retail recruitment) 50,000 0 0 50,000 0.00% Com & Econ Dev (NE Industrial Area PAO) 114,200 55,641 114,200 0 100.00% Parks & Rec (Browns Park water lines) 30,000 0 2,904 27,096 9.68% Parks & Rec (pool drain pipe & gutter line repairs) 12,000 0 0 12,000 0.00% Parks & Rec (replace Great Room audio/visual) 345,000 0 0 345,000 0.00% Parks & Rec (replace carpet at CenterPlace) 24,750 16,061 16,061 8,689 64.89% Transfers out - #122 258,000 0 33,113 224,888 12.83% Transfers out - #312 3,003,929 0 0 3,003,929 0.00% Transfers out - #314 (Pines Underpass design) 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 0 100.00% Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 5,795,979 1,373,546 1,750,871 4,045,108 30.21% Nonrecurring Revenues Over (Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures (5,150,854) (1,316,139) (1,417,383) 3,733,471 Excess (Deficit) of Total Revenues Over (Under) Total Expenditures (3,830,356) (661,838) 525,008 4,355,364 Beginning fund balance 29,073,972 29,073,972 Ending fund balance 25,243,616 29,598,980 Page 7 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2017\2017 06 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Six -Month Period Ended June 30, 2017 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS #101 - STREET FUND RECURRING ACTIVITY Budget Year Elapsed = 2017 50.00% 2017 Budget Actual Actual through Budget June June 30 Remaining % of Budget Revenues Telephone Utility Tax 2,000,000 209,006 854,861 (1,145,139) 42.74% Motor Vehicle Fuel (Gas) Tax 2,040,300 173,479 792,534 (1,247,766) 38.84% Multimodal Transportation 98,868 15,755 31,512 (67,356) 31.87% Right -of -Way Maintenance Fee 50,000 0 71,112 21,112 142.22% Investment Interest 4,000 777 3,219 (781) 80.47% Miscellaneous Revenue 10,000 0 0 (10,000) 0.00% Total Recurring Revenues 4,203,168 399,017 1,753,237 (2,449,931) 41.71% Expenditures Wages / Benefits / Payroll Taxes 754,872 50,843 428,703 326,169 56.79% Supplies 105,000 2,495 61,601 43,399 58.67% Services & Charges 2,168,151 72,615 537,536 1,630,615 24.79% Snow Operations 468,000 74,535 618,851 (150,851) 132.23% Intergovernmental Payments 795,000 53,354 246,889 548,111 31.06% Interfund Transfers -out - #001 39,700 3,308 19,850 19,850 50.00% Interfund Transfers -out - #501 (non -plow vehicle rei 23,250 8,432 44,095 (20,845) 189.66% Interfund Transfers -out - #501 (plow replace.) 77,929 0 6,494 71,435 8.33% Interfund Transfers -out - #311 (pavement preserval 67,342 5,612 33,671 33,671 50.00% Signal Detection Replacement Program 40,000 1,376 17,423 22,577 43.56% Total Recurring Expenditures 4,539,244 272,570 2,015,113 2,524,131 44.39% Recurring Revenues Over (Under) Recurring Expenditures (336,076) 126,447 (261,875) 74,201 NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Grants 0 0 1,341 1,341 0.00% Insurance proceeds (traffic signal cabinet) 0 1,598 82,838 82,838 0.00% Interest & penalties on utility taxes 0 25,527 25,527 25,527 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Revenues 0 27,126 109,706 109,706 0.00% Expenditures Durable striping at Trent & Argonne 75,000 0 0 75,000 0.00% Spare traffic signal equipment 30,000 14,969 14,969 15,031 49.90% Battery backups for intersections 15,000 0 0 15,000 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 120,000 14,969 14,969 105,031 12.47% Nonrecurring Revenues Over (Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures (120,000) 12,157 94,738 214,738 Excess (Deficit) of Total Revenues Over (Under) Total Expenditures (456,076) 138,603 (167,137) 288,939 Beginning fund balance 1,318,504 1,318,504 Ending fund balance 862,428 1,151,367 Page 8 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2017\2017 06 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Six -Month Period Ended June 30, 2017 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS - continued #103 - PATHS & TRAILS Revenues Motor Vehicle Fuel (Gas) Tax Investment Interest Total revenues Expenditures Capital Outlay Total expenditures Budget Year Elapsed = 2017 50.00% 2017 Budget Actual Actual through Budget June June 30 Remaining % of Budget 8,600 732 3,343 (5,257) 38.87% 0 27 111 111 0.00% 8,600 759 3,454 (5,146) 40.16% 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0.00% Revenues over (under) expenditures 8,600 759 3,454 (5,146) Beginning fund balance 37,384 37,384 Ending fund balance 45,984 40,838 #104 - TOURISM FACILITIES HOTEL/MOTEL TAX FUND Revenues Tourism Facilities Hotel/Motel Tax Investment Interest Total revenues Expenditures Capital Expenditures Total expenditures 377,000 32,573 122,276 (254,724) 32.43% 0 463 1,747 1,747 0.00% 377,000 33,035 124,024 (252,976) 32.90% 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0.00% Revenues over (under) expenditures 377,000 33,035 124,024 (252,976) Beginning fund balance 571,232 571,232 Ending fund balance 948,232 695,256 #105 - HOTEL / MOTEL TAX FUND Revenues Hotel/Motel Tax Investment Interest 580,000 50,112 187,960 (392,040) 32.41 % 500 223 797 297 159.47% Total revenues 580,500 Expenditures Interfund Transfers - #001 30,000 Tourism Promotion 604,000 50,335 188,757 (391,743) 32.52% 0 0 30,000 0.00% 8,912 73,280 530,720 12.13% Total expenditures 634,000 Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance 8,912 73,280 560,720 11.56% (53,500) 41,423 115,477 219,790 219,790 166,290 335,267 Page 9 (952,463) P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2017\2017 06 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Six -Month Period Ended June 30, 2017 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS - continued Budget Year Elapsed = 2017 50.00% 2017 Budget Actual Actual through Budget June June 30 Remaining % of Budget #106 - SOLID WASTE Revenues Sunshine Administrative Fee 125,000 0 31,300 93,700 25.04% Investment Interest 0 46 215 (215) 0.00% Grant Proceeds 26,800 (0) 27,247 (447) 101.67% Total revenues 151,800 46 58,761 93,039 38.71 % Expenditures Interfund Transfers - #001 Education & Contract Administration Total expenditures Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance #107 - PEG FUND Revenues Comcast PEG Contribution Investment Interest 40,425 111,375 3,369 20,213 14,100 48,863 20,213 50.00% 62,512 43.87% 151,800 0 79,122 17,469 (17,423) 69,075 (10,314) 79,122 82,725 45.50% 79,122 68,808 10,314 80,000 0 19,956 60,044 24.95% 0 174 691 (691) 0.00% Total revenues 80,000 174 20,648 59,352 25.81% Expenditures PEG COSV Broadcast Capital Outlay 12,500 0 0 12,500 0.00% New City Hall Council Chambers 250,000 0 0 250,000 0.00% Total expenditures 262,500 0 0 262,500 0.00% Revenues over (under) expenditures (182,500) 174 20,648 (203,148) Beginning fund balance 240,341 240,341 Ending fund balance 57,841 260,989 #120 - CENTER PLACE OPERATING RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest Interfund Transfer 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues 0 0 0 0 0.00% Expenditures Operations Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0.00% Revenues over (under) expenditures 0 0 0 0 Beginning fund balance 300,000 300,000 Ending fund balance 300,000 300,000 Page 10 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2017\2017 06 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Six -Month Period Ended June 30, 2017 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS - continued Budget Year Elapsed = 2017 50.00% 2017 Budget Actual Actual through Budget June June 30 Remaining % of Budget #121 - SERVICE LEVEL STABILIZATION RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest 21,900 3,658 14,949 (6,951) 68.26% Interfund Transfer 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues Expenditures Operations Total expenditures 21,900 3,658 14,949 (6,951) 68.26% 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0.00% Revenues over (under) expenditures 21,900 3,658 14,949 (6,951) Beginning fund balance 5,483,425 5,483,425 Ending fund balance 5,505,325 5,498,374 #122 - WINTER WEATHER RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest 600 162 759 159 126.57% Interfund Transfer - #001 258,000 0 0 (258,000) 0.00% Grant Reimbursement for Windstorm Cleanup 0 0 3,170 3,170 0.00% Subtotal revenues Expenditures Snow removal expenses Total expenditures 258,600 162 3,929 (254,671) 1.52% 500,000 0 0 500,000 0.00% 500,000 0 0 500,000 0.00% Revenues over (under) expenditures (241,400) 162 3,929 (754,671) Beginning fund balance 242,835 242,835 Ending fund balance 1,435 246,764 Page 11 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2017\2017 06 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Six -Month Period Ended June 30, 2017 DEBT SERVICE FUNDS #204 - DEBT SERVICE FUND Revenues Spokane Public Facilities District Interfund Transfer -in - #001 Interfund Transfer -in - #301 Interfund Transfer -in - #302 Total revenues Budget Year Elapsed = 2017 50.00% 2017 Budget Actual Actual through Budget June June 30 Remaining % of Budget 379,750 0 94,875 (284,875) 24.98% 430,630 33,113 198,675 (231,955) 46.14% 103,511 6,619 39,713 (63,798) 38.37% 103,510 6,619 39,713 (63,798) 38.37% 1,017,401 46,350 372,975 (644,426) 36.66% Expenditures Debt Service Payments - CenterPlace 382,867 0 94,875 287,992 24.78% Debt Service Payments - Roads 162,900 0 16,450 146,450 10.10% Debt Service Payments -'16 LTGO Bond 397,350 0 123,675 273,675 31.12% Total expenditures 943,117 0 235,000 708,117 24.92% Revenues over (under) expenditures 74,284 46,350 137,975 (1,352,543) Beginning fund balance (74,284) (74,284) Ending fund balance (0) 63,691 Page 12 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2017\2017 06 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Six -Month Period Ended June 30, 2017 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS #301 - CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues REET 1 - Taxes Investment Interest Total revenues Budget Year Elapsed = 2017 50.00% 2017 Budget Actual Actual through Budget June June 30 Remaining % of Budget 800,000 101,367 466,347 1,700 1,446 5,861 (333,653) 58.29% 4,161 344.74% 801,700 102,813 472,207 (329,493) 58.90% Expenditures Interfund Transfer -out - #204 103,511 6,619 39,713 63,798 38.37% Interfund Transfer -out - #303 437,002 0 6,396 430,606 1.46% Interfund Transfer -out - #311 (pavement preserve 660,479 0 0 660,479 0.00% Interfund Transfer -out - #314 280,079 0 0 280,079 0.00% Total expenditures 1,481,071 6,619 46,109 1,434,962 3.11% Revenues over (under) expenditures (679,371) 96,194 426,098 (1,764,455) Beginning fund balance 1,746,393 1,746,393 Ending fund balance 1,067,022 2,172,490 #302 - SPECIAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues REET 2 - Taxes Investment Interest 800,000 101,367 466,347 1,700 1,801 7,201 (333,653) 58.29% 5,501 423.59% Total revenues 801,700 103,169 473,548 (328,152) 59.07% Expenditures Interfund Transfer -out - #204 103,510 6,619 39,713 63,798 38.37% Interfund Transfer -out -#303 1,173,230 0 27,018 1,146,212 2.30% Interfund Transfer -out - #311 (pavement preserve 660,479 0 0 660,479 0.00% Total expenditures 1,937,219 6,619 66,731 1,870,488 3.44% Revenues over (under) expenditures (1,135,519) 96,550 406,817 (2,198,641) Beginning fund balance 2,300,560 2,300,560 Ending fund balance 1,165,041 2,707,377 Page 13 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2017\2017 06 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Six -Month Period Ended June 30, 2017 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS - continued Budget Year Elapsed = 2017 50.00% 2017 Budget Actual Actual through Budget June June 30 Remaining % of Budget #303 STREET CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues Grant Proceeds 3,756,320 0 207,898 (3,548,422) 5.53% Developer Contribution 40,097 0 61,168 21,071 152.55% Transfer -in - #301 437,002 0 6,396 (430,606) 1.46% Transfer -in -#302 1,173,230 0 27,018 (1,146,212) 2.30% Transfer -in - #312 8th & Carnahan Intersct 193,000 0 0 (193,000) 0.00% Transfer -in - #312 Euclid Ave Reconst 1,750,000 0 0 (1,750,000) 0.00% Transfer -in - #312 Sullivan Rd W Bridge 10,000 0 (418,211) (428,211) -4182.11% Total revenues 7,359,649 0 (115,730) (7,475,379) -1.57% Expenditures 123 Mission Ave -Flora to Barker 500,000 9,946 60,506 439,494 12.10% 141 Sullivan & Euclid PCC 2,150,000 7,428 35,153 2,114,847 1.64% 142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan 0 67 815 (815) 0.00% 155 Sullivan Rd W Bridge Replacement 10,000 13,682 191,846 (181,846) 1918.46% 166 Pines Rd. (SR27) & Grace Ave. Int. Safety 333,224 2,846 36,692 296,532 11.01% 167 Citywide Safety Improvements 5,000 0 3,055 1,945 61.10% 201 ITS Infill Project Phase 1 (PE Start 2014) 300,000 0 1,508 298,492 0.50% 205 Sprague/Barker Intersection Improvement 40,097 0 0 40,097 0.00% 207 Indiana & Evergreen Transit Access 5,000 0 0 5,000 0.00% 211 Sullivan Trent to Wellesley 0 0 (17,811) 17,811 0.00% 221 McDonald Rd Diet (16th to Mission) 5,000 0 30 4,970 0.60% 222 Citywide Reflective Signal Backplates 36,000 0 0 36,000 0.00% 229 32nd Ave Preservation 2,500 0 0 2,500 0.00% 234 Seth Woodard Sidewalk Improvements 5,000 0 0 5,000 0.00% 238 Pines RD Mirabeau Parkway Intersection 5,000 0 (21) 5,021 -0.41% 239 Bowdish Rd & 11th Ave. Sidewalk 471,342 5,195 26,923 444,419 5.71% 247 8th & Carnahan Intersection Improvments 193,000 0 192,941 59 99.97% 249 Sullivan & Wellesley Intersection 198,000 26 11,548 186,452 5.83% 250 9th Ave Sidewalk 240,000 1,151 15,741 224,259 6.56% 251 Euclid Ave Reconstruction Project 1,750,000 11,678 60,437 1,689,563 3.45% 258 32nd Ave Sidewalk-SR27 to Evergreen 0 11,095 11,556 (11,556) 0.00% 259 North Sullivan ITS Project 110,486 521 8,083 102,403 7.32% Contingency 1,000,000 0 0 1,000,000 0.00% Total expenditures 7,359,649 Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance 63,635 639,000 0 75,566 (63,635) (754,730) 75,566 75,566 (679,164) 6,720,649 (14,196,028) 8.68% Note: Work performed in the Street Capital Projects Fund for preservation projects is for items such as sidewalk upgrades that were bid with the pavement preservation work. Page 14 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2017\2017 06 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Six -Month Period Ended June 30, 2017 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS - continued Budget Year Elapsed = 2017 50.00% 2017 Budget Actual Actual through Budget June June 30 Remaining % of Budget #309 - PARKS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues Grant Proceeds 3,217,267 0 46,429 (3,170,838) 1.44% Interfund Transfer -in - #001 160,000 13,333 80,000 (80,000) 50.00% Interfund Transfer -in -#312 (Appleway Trail) 561,915 0 0 (561,915) 0.00% Investment Interest 800 0 99 (701) 12.33% Total revenues 3,939,982 13,333 126,528 (3,813,455) 3.21% Expenditures 227 Appleway Trail - Pines to Evergreen 1,925,957 556,297 882,914 1,043,043 45.84% 237 Appleway Trail - Sullivan to Corbin 1,853,225 24,503 67,811 1,785,414 3.66% 242 Browns Park Splashpad 0 478 478 (478) 0.00% 261 Edgecliff Park Splashpad 125,000 1,162 8,746 116,254 7.00% Total expenditures 3,904,182 582,439 959,950 2,944,232 24.59% Revenues over (under) expenditures 35,800 (569,106) (833,422) (6,757,687) Beginning fund balance 111,714 111,714 Ending fund balance 147,514 (721,708) #310 - CIVIC FACILITIES CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues Investment Interest 1,200 726 3,448 2,248 287.30% Total revenues 1,200 726 3,448 2,248 287.30% Expenditures Transfers out - #001 (Lease pymt in excess of bond) 490,500 40,875 245,250 245,250 50.00% Total expenditures 490,500 40,875 245,250 245,250 50.00% Revenues over (under) expenditures (489,300) (40,149) (241,802) (243,002) Beginning fund balance 1,333,159 1,333,159 Ending fund balance 843,859 1,091,357 Note: The fund balance includes $839,285.10 paid by the Library District for 2.82 acres at the Balfour Park site. If the District does not succeed in getting a voted bond approved by October 2017 then the City may repurchase this land at the original sale price of $839,285.10. Page 15 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2017\2017 06 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Six -Month Period Ended June 30, 2017 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS - continued Budget Year Elapsed = 2017 50.00% 2017 Budget Actual Actual through Budget June June 30 Remaining % of Budget #311 - PAVEMENT PRESERVATION FUND Revenues Interfund Transfers in- #001 953,200 79,433 476,600 (476,600) 50.00% Interfund Transfers in- #101 67,342 5,612 33,671 (33,671) 50.00% Interfund Transfers in- #301 660,479 0 0 (660,479) 0.00% Interfund Transfers in- #302 660,479 0 0 (660,479) 0.00% Grant Proceeds 340,800 0 23,870 (316,930) 7.00% Investment Interest 0 2,247 7,655 7,655 0.00% Total revenues 2,682,300 87,292 541,796 (2,140,504) 20.20% Expenditures Pre -Project GeoTech Services 50,000 0 0 50,000 0.00% Pavement Preservation 3,000,000 0 0 3,000,000 0.00% 211 Sullivan Trent to Wellesley 0 0 (43,720) 43,720 0.00% 221 McDonald Road Diet 0 0 1,418 (1,418) 0.00% 226 Appleway Resurfacing Park to Dishman 0 0 144 (144) 0.00% 235 NB Sullivan Rd Pres (Spo Rvr-Flora Pit) 0 0 805 (805) 0.00% 240 Saltese Road Preservation 0 5,952 37,000 (37,000) 0.00% 248 Sprague Street Pres - Sulliv to Corbin 0 5,870 30,290 (30,290) 0.00% 252 Argonne Resurfacing: Broadway to Indiana 0 8,660 10,713 (10,713) 0.00% 253 Mission - Pines to McDonald 0 16,659 38,043 (38,043) 0.00% 254 Mission - McDonald to Evergreen 0 1,028 15,747 (15,747) 0.00% 255 Indiana Street Preservation 0 10,612 43,342 (43,342) 0.00% 256 University Rd Pres -24th to Dishman 0 5,646 24,840 (24,840) 0.00% 257 University Rd Pres -16th to 24th 0 67 3,979 (3,979) 0.00% Total expenditures 3,050,000 54,494 162,601 2,887,399 5.33% Revenues over (under) expenditures (367,700) 32,798 379,195 (5,027,903) Beginning fund balance 2,953,564 2,953,564 Ending fund balance 2,585,864 3,332,759 #312 - CAPITAL RESERVE FUND Revenues Transfers in - #001 Investment Interest 3,003,929 0 0 (3,003,929) 1,000 3,155 13,507 12,507 0.00% 1350.65% Total revenues 3,004,929 3,155 13,507 (2,991,422) 0.45% Expenditures 215 City Hall Construction 0 115 115 (115) 0.00% Transfers out -#303 1,953,000 0 (418,211) 2,371,211 -21.41% Transfers out - #309 561,915 0 0 561,915 0.00% Transfers out - #314 483,000 0 0 483,000 0.00% Total expenditures 2,997,915 115 (418,095) 3,416,010 -13.95% Revenues over (under) expenditures 7,014 3,040 431,602 (6,407,433) Beginning fund balance 4,310,362 4,310,362 Ending fund balance 4,317,376 4,741,964 Page 16 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2017\2017 06 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Six -Month Period Ended June 30, 2017 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS - continued #313 - CITY HALL CONSTRUCTION FUND Revenues Investment Interest Total revenues Expenditures Capital Outlay - City Hall Total expenditures Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance Budget Year Elapsed = 2017 50.00% 2017 Budget Actual Actual through Budget June June 30 Remaining % of Budget 0 2,056 11,618 (11,618) 0.00% 0 2,056 11,618 (11,618) 0.00% 5,344,219 692,348 3,508,154 1,836,065 65.64% 5,344,219 (5,344,219) 6,148, 061 692,348 (690,293) 3,508,154 (3,496,537) 6,148, 061 803,842 2,651,525 1,836,065 (1,847,682) 65.64% #314 - RAILROAD GRADE SEPARATION PROJECTS FUND Revenues Interfund Transfers in - #001 (Pines underpass des 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 0 100.00% Interfund Transfers in - #301 (Barker overpass desi 280,079 0 0 280,079 0.00% Interfund Transfers in - #312 483,000 0 0 483,000 0.00% Grant Proceeds 489,921 0 0 489,921 0.00% Investment Interest 0 471 471 (471) 0.00% Total revenues 2,453,000 1,200,471 1,200,471 1,252,529 48.94% Expenditures 143 Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation 770,000 1,321 7,620 223 Pines Rd Underpass 1,683,000 1,554 486,642 762,380 1,196, 358 0.99% 28.92% Total expenditures 2,453,000 2,875 494,262 Revenues over (under) expenditures 0 1,197,596 706,209 Beginning fund balance 0 0 Ending fund balance 0 706,209 Page 17 1,958,738 (706,209) 20.15% P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2017\2017 06 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Six -Month Period Ended June 30, 2017 ENTERPRISE FUNDS #402 - STORMWATER FUND RECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Stormwater Management Fees Investment Interest Budget Year Elapsed = 2017 50.00% 2017 Budget Actual Actual through Budget June June 30 Remaining % of Budget 1,860,000 181,456 1,057,016 (802,984) 56.83% 2,500 1,782 6,509 4,009 260.36% Total Recurring Revenues 1,862,500 183,237 1,063,525 (798,975) 57.10% Expenditures Wages / Benefits / Payroll Taxes 551,321 35,010 203,950 347,371 36.99% Supplies 15,425 1,592 5,390 10,035 34.95% Services & Charges 1,111,076 117,173 271,172 839,904 24.41% Intergovernmental Payments 50,000 0 0 50,000 0.00% Vehicle Rentals - #501 12,750 1,063 6,375 6,375 50.00% Interfund Transfers -out - #001 13,400 1,117 6,700 6,700 50.00% Total Recurring Expenditures 1,753,972 Recurring Revenues Over (Under) Recurring Expenditures NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Grant Proceeds 155,954 493,588 1,260,384 28.14% 108,528 27,283 210,000 569,937 461,409 71,785 151,160 (58,840) 71.98% Total Nonrecurring Revenues 210,000 71,785 151,160 (58,840) 71.98% Expenditures Capital - various projects 450,000 0 0 450,000 0.00% 193 Effectiveness Study 210,000 55,264 107,958 102,042 51.41% 211 Sullivan Trent to Wellesley 0 0 (13,504) 13,504 0.00% Watershed Studies 50,000 0 0 50,000 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 710,000 Nonrecurring Revenues Over (Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures Excess (Deficit) of Total Revenues Over (Under) Total Expenditures Beginning working capital Ending working capital 55,264 94,455 615,545 13.30% (500,000) 16,521 (391,472) 1,773,103 43,804 56,706 556,706 626,643 1,018,115 1,773,103 1,381,631 2,399,746 Note: Work performed in the Stormwater Fund for preservation projects is for stormwater improvements that were bid with the pavement preservation work. #403 - AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA Revenues Spokane County Investment Interest 460,000 0 253,225 (206,775) 55.05% 0 804 2,912 2,912 0.00% Total revenues 460,000 804 256,136 (203,864) 55.68% Expenditures Capital - various projects 530,000 0 0 530,000 0.00% Total expenditures 530,000 0 0 530,000 0.00% Revenues over (under) expenditures (70,000) 804 256,136 (733,864) Beginning working capital 950,725 950,725 Ending working capital 880,725 1,206,861 Page 18 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2017\2017 06 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Six -Month Period Ended June 30, 2017 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS Budget Year Elapsed = 2017 50.00% 2017 Budget Actual Actual through Budget June June 30 Remaining % of Budget #501 - ER&R FUND Revenues Interfund vehicle lease - #001 32,500 2,708 16,250 (16,250) 50.00% Interfund vehicle lease - #101 23,250 1,938 11,625 (11,625) 50.00% Interfund vehicle lease (plow replace) 77,929 6,494 38,965 (38,964) 50.00% Interfund vehicle lease - #402 12,750 1,063 6,375 (6,375) 50.00% Transfer in - #001 (CenterPlace kitchen reserve) 36,600 3,050 18,300 (18,300) 50.00% Investment Interest 2,000 738 2,961 961 148.07% Total revenues 185,029 15,991 94,476 (90,553) 51.06% Expenditures Snow Plow Replacement 122,400 0 110,309 12,091 90.12% Snow Plow Blades 28,000 11,398 11,398 16,602 40.71 % Total expenditures 150,400 11,398 121,707 28,693 80.92% Revenues over (under) expenditures 34,629 4,593 (27,231) (119,246) Beginning working capital 1,136,951 1,136,951 Ending working capital 1,171,580 1,109,721 #502 - RISK MANAGEMENT FUND Revenues Investment Interest Interfund Transfer - #001 Total revenues Expenditures Auto & Property Insurance Unemployment Claims Miscellaneous Total expenditures Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning working capital Ending working capital 0 350,000 59 59 59 0.00% 29,167 175,000 (175,000) 50.00% 350,000 29,225 175,059 (174,941) 50.02% 350,000 0 311,467 38,533 88.99% 0 0 8,887 (8,887) 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0.00% 350,000 0 320,354 29,646 91.53% 0 233,688 233,688 29,225 (145,295) 233,688 88,392 (204,587) SUMMARY FOR ALL FUNDS Total of Revenues for all Funds 72,918,583 5,939,065 26,559,277 Per revenue status report 72,918,583 5,939,065 26,559,277 Difference - - - Total of Expenditures for all Funds Per Expenditure Status Report 85,600,769 85,600,769 6,212,739 6,212,739 28,057,581 28,057,581 Total Capital expenditures (included in total expenditures) 24,233,950 1,471,161 5,978, 622 Page 19 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2017\2017 06 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Investment Report For the Six -Month Period Ended June 30, 2017 Beginning Deposits Withdrawls Interest Ending 7/17/2017 LGI P" BB CD UMPQUA CD Total Investments $ 50,470,479.15 $ 3,022,002.45 $ 2,003,004.52 $ 55,495,486.12 2,413,914.78 0.00 0.00 2,413,914.78 0.00 (22,002.45) 0.00 (22,002.45) 40,738.36 3,427.69 1,998.18 46,164.23 $ 52,925,132.29 $ 3,003,427.69 $ 2,005,002.70 $ 57,933,562.68 matures: 6/28/2018 11/15/2017 rate: 1.30% 0.40% Balance Earnings Current Period Year to date Budget 001 General Fund $ 30,893,127.63 $ 25,350.25 $ 87,683.55 $ 73,000.00 101 Street Fund 1,008,836.79 776.54 3,218.79 4,000.00 103 Trails & Paths 35,300.65 27.17 111.40 0.00 104 Tourism Facilities Hotel/Motel 600,986.21 462.60 1,747.44 0.00 105 Hotel/Motel 289,808.22 223.08 797.37 500.00 106 Solid Waste Fund 59,780.33 46.02 214.65 0.00 107 PEG Fund 225,601.47 173.65 691.45 0.00 120 CenterPlace Operating Reserve 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 121 Service Level Stabilization Reserve 4,752,850.39 3,658.44 14,948.91 21,900.00 122 Winter Weather Reserve 210,568.77 162.08 759.40 600.00 123 Civic Facilities Replacement 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 301 Capital Projects 1,877,922.78 1,445.50 5,860.55 1,700.00 302 Special Capital Projects 2,340,284.50 1,801.40 7,201.07 1,700.00 303 Street Capital Projects Fund 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 309 Parks Capital Project 0.00 0.00 98.62 800.00 310 Civic Buildings Capital Projects 943,379.74 726.15 3,447.60 1,200.00 311 Pavement Preservation 2,918,660.88 2,246.60 7,654.84 0.00 312 Capital Reserve Fund 4,099,002.14 3,155.15 13,506.52 1,000.00 313 City Hall Construction Fund 2,670,541.03 2,055.61 11,617.59 0.00 314 Railroad Grade Separation Projects 611,732.26 470.87 470.87 0.00 402 Stormwater Management 2,314,648.51 1,781.67 6,509.06 2,500.00 403 Aquifer Protection Fund 1,044,869.20 804.27 2,911.69 0.00 501 Equipment Rental & Replacement 959,253.82 738.37 2,961.43 2,000.00 502 Risk Management 76,407.36 58.81 58.81 0.00 "Local Government Investment Pool $ 57,933,562.68 $ 46,164.23 $ 172,471.61 $ 110,900.00 Page 20 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2017\2017 06 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Sales Tax Receipts For the Six -Month Period Ended June 30, 2017 Month Received 2016 2017 7/17/2017 Difference February 2,109,906.28 2,250,071.29 140,165.01 6.64% March 1,488,699.93 1,553,546.20 64,846.27 4.36% April 1,555,221.97 1,567,402.86 12,180.89 0.78% May 1,852,586.82 1,962,909.06 110,322.24 5.96% June 1,768,797.14 1,765,547.51 (3,249.63) (0.18%) 8,775,212.14 July 1,848,301.11 August 2,013,841.16 September 1,963,131.36 October 2,044,241.64 November 2, 058, 260.31 December 1, 862, 239.72 January 1,875,424.10 9,099,476.92 22,440,651.54 9,099,476.92 324,264.78 3.70% Sales tax receipts reported here reflect remittances for general sales tax, criminal justice sales tax and public safety tax. The sales tax rate for retail sales transacted within the boundaries of the City of Spokane Valley is 8.8%. The tax that is paid by a purchaser at the point of sale is remitted by the vendor to the Washington State Department of Revenue who then remits the taxes back to the various agencies that have imposed the tax. The allocation of the total 8.8% tax rate to the agencies is as follows: - State of Washington 6.50% - City of Spokane Valley 0.85% - Spokane County 0.15% - Spokane Public Facilities District 0.10% * - Criminal Justice 0.10% - Public Safety 0.10% * 2.30% local tax - Juvenile Jail 0.10% * - Mental Health 0.10% * - Law Enforcement Communications 0.10% * - Spokane Transit Authority 0.70% * (1) 8.80% (1) * Indicates voter approved sales taxes (1) Sales tax rate increased to 8.8% as of April 1, 2017 In addition to the .85% reported above that the City receives, we also receive a portion of the Criminal Justice and Public Safety sales taxes. The distribution of those taxes is computed as follows: Criminal Justice: The tax is assessed county -wide and of the total collected, the State distributes 10% of the receipts to Spokane County, with the remainder allocated on a per capita basis to the County and the cities within the County. Public Safety: The tax is assessed county -wide and of the total collected, the State distributes 60% of the receipts to Spokane County, with the remainder allocated on a per capita basis to the cities within the County. Page 21 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Sales Tax Collections - May For the years 2008 through 2017 January February March April May P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\Sales Tax\2017\sales tax collections 2017 2008 1 2009 1 2010 1 2011 1 2012 1 2013 1 2014 1 2015 1 2016 1 2017 1,729,680 1,129, 765 1,219,611 1,423,459 1,243,259 1,484,350 1,098,575 1,068,811 1,134, 552 1,098,054 1,491,059 963,749 1,018,468 1,184,137 1,102, 523 1,460,548 990,157 1,015,762 1,284,180 1,187, 737 1,589,887 1,009,389 1,067,733 1,277,621 1,174, 962 1,671,269 1,133, 347 1,148, 486 1,358,834 1,320,449 1,677,887 1,170, 640 1,201,991 1,448,539 1,400,956 1,732,299 1,197, 323 1,235,252 1,462,096 1,373,710 1,863,225 1,316,682 1,378,300 1,640,913 1,566,178 1,992,273 1,369,740 1,389,644 1,737,933 1,564,119 Collected to date 6,745,774 5,884,342 5,759,936 5,938,384 6,119,592 6,632,385 6,900,013 7,000,680 7,765,298 8,053,709 June 1,386,908 1,151,772 1,123,907 1,248,218 1,290,976 1,389,802 1,462,558 1,693,461 1,641,642 0 July 1,519,846 1,309,401 1,260,873 1,332,834 1,302,706 1,424,243 1,545,052 1,718,428 1,776,653 0 August 1,377,943 1,212,531 1,211,450 1,279,500 1,299,678 1,465,563 1,575,371 1,684,700 1,746,371 0 September 1,364,963 1,227,813 1,191,558 1,294,403 1,383,123 1,466,148 1,552,736 1,563,950 1,816,923 0 October 1,344,217 1,236,493 1,269,505 1,291,217 1,358,533 1,439,321 1,594,503 1,618,821 1,822,998 0 November 1,292, 327 1,155, 647 1,139, 058 1,217, 933 1,349, 580 1,362,021 1,426, 254 1,487, 624 1,652,181 0 December 1,129,050 1,070,245 1,141,012 1,247,920 1,323,189 1,408,134 1,383,596 1,441,904 1,664,983 0 Total Collections 16,161,028 14,248,244 14,097,299 14,850,409 15,427,377 16,587,617 17,440,083 18,209,568 19,887,049 8,053,709 Budget Estimate 17,115,800 17,860,000 14,410,000 14,210,000 14,210,000 15,250,000 16,990,000 17,628,400 18,480,500 19,852,100 Actual over (under) budg (954,772) (3,611,756) (312,701) 640,409 1,217,377 1,337,617 450,083 581,168 1,406,549 (11,798,391) Total actual collections as a % of total budget 94.42% 79.78% 97.83% 104.51 % 108.57% 108.77% 102.65% 103.30% 107.61 % n/a % change in annual total collected (7.32%) (11.84%) (1.06%) 5.34% 3.89% 7.52% 5.14% 4.41% 9.21% n/a % of budget collected through May 39.41% 32.95% 39.97% 41.79% 43.07% 43.49% 40.61% 39.71% 42.02% 40.57% % of actual total collected through May 41.74% 41.30% 40.86% 39.99% 39.67% 39.98% 39.56% 38.45% 39.05% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of May 9,000,000 8,000,000 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 0 May 1 6/26/2017 2017 to 2016 Difference ok 129,048 6.93% 53,058 4.03% 11,344 0.82% 97,020 5.91% (2,059) (0.13%) 288,411 3.71% 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 • May • April • March • February • January Page 22 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Hotel/Motel Tax Receipts through - Actual for the years 2008 through 2017 January February March April May Total Collections P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\Lodging Tax \2017\105 hotel motel tax 2017 2008 1 2009 1 2010 1 2011 1 2012 1 2013 1 2014 1 2015 1 2016 1 2017 28,947 24,623 27,510 40,406 36,829 23,280 23,284 25,272 36,254 32,589 22,707 23,417 24,232 39,463 34,683 22,212 22,792 24,611 38,230 33,791 21,442 21,549 25,655 52,130 37,478 24,185 25,975 27,739 40,979 40,560 25,425 26,014 29,384 48,246 41,123 27,092 27,111 32,998 50,455 44,283 31,887 27,773 34,330 52,551 50,230 27,210 26,795 31,601 52,242 50,112 7/10/2017 2017 to 2016 Difference (4,677) (14.67%) (978) (3.52%) (2,729) (7.95%) (309) (0.59%) (118) (0.24%) 158,315 140,679 144,503 141,637 158,255 159,438 170,191 181,939 196,771 187,960 (8,811) (4.48%) June 46,660 40,415 39,935 41,403 43,971 47,850 52,618 56,975 55,060 0 July 50,421 43,950 47,385 49,312 52,819 56,157 61,514 61,809 65,007 0 August 50,818 50,147 54,923 57,452 57,229 63,816 70,384 72,697 73,700 0 September 60,712 50,818 59,419 58,908 64,299 70,794 76,100 74,051 70,305 0 October 38,290 36,784 41,272 39,028 43,699 43,836 45,604 49,880 55,660 0 November 35,583 34,055 34,330 37,339 39,301 42,542 39,600 42,376 46,393 0 December 26,290 27,131 26,777 32,523 30,432 34,238 33,256 41,510 33,478 0 Total Collections 467,089 423,978 448,545 457,603 490,004 518,672 549,267 581,237 596,374 187,960 Budget Estimate 400,000 512,000 380,000 480,000 430,000 490,000 530,000 550,000 580,000 580,000 Actual over (under) budg 67,089 (88,022) 68,545 (22,397) 60,004 28,672 19,267 31,237 16,374 (392,040) Total actual collections as a % of total budget 116.77% 82.81% 118.04% 95.33% 113.95% 105.85% 103.64% 105.68% 102.82% n/a % change in annual total collected 1.19% (9.23%) 5.79% 2.02% 7.08% 5.85% 5.90% 5.82% 2.60% n/a % of budget collected through May 39.58% 27.48% 38.03% 29.51% 36.80% 32.54% 32.11% 33.08% 33.93% 32.41% % of actual total collected through May 33.89% 33.18% 32.22% 30.95% 32.30% 30.74% 30.99% 31.30% 32.99% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of May 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 May 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 May April March February January Page 23 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 1st and 2nd 1/4% REET Collections through May Actual for the years 2008 through 2017 January February March April May Collected to date P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\REET\2017\301 and 302 REET for 2017 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 1 2016 1 2017 145,963 159,503 133,513 128,367 158,506 55,281 45,181 73,307 81,156 77,464 59,887 64,122 86,204 99,507 109,625 64,128 36,443 95,880 79,681 124,692 46,359 56,115 71,730 86,537 111,627 56,898 155,226 72,172 90,377 116,165 61,192 67,049 81,724 105,448 198,870 96,141 103,508 165,868 236,521 165,748 104,446 83,583 220,637 205,654 192,806 153,661 124,514 282,724 169,060 202,734 725,853 332,388 419,345 400,824 372,367 490,838 514,282 767,786 807,128 932,693 June 178,203 105,021 105,680 81,579 124,976 139,112 106,676 347,421 284,897 0 July 217,943 122,530 84,834 79,629 101,049 128,921 208,199 217,375 248,899 0 August 133,906 115,830 72,630 129,472 106,517 117,150 172,536 202,525 231,200 0 September 131,240 93,862 75,812 68,020 63,517 174,070 152,323 179,849 178,046 0 October 355,656 113,961 93,256 61,396 238,095 117,806 123,505 128,833 253,038 0 November 147,875 133,265 72,021 74,753 104,886 78,324 172,227 129,870 186,434 0 December 96,086 71,366 38,725 65,077 74,300 75,429 117,682 157,919 164,180 0 Total distributed by Spokane County 1,986,762 1,088,222 962,304 960,751 1,185,707 1,321,650 1,567,429 2,131,578 2,353,822 Budget estimate 2,000,000 2,000,000 760,000 800,000 950,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 1,600,000 2,000,000 Actual over (under) budget (13,238) (911,778) 202,304 160,751 235,707 321,650 367,429 531,578 353,822 Total actual collections as a % of total budget % change in annual total collected % of budget collected through May % of actual total collected through May 932,693 2,000,000 (1,067,307) 99.34% 54.41% 126.62% 120.09% 124.81% 132.17% 130.62% 133.22% 117.69% n/a (23.28%) (45.23%) (11.57%) (0.16%) 23.41 % 11.47% 18.60% 35.99% 10.43% n/a 36.29% 16.62% 55.18% 50.10% 39.20% 49.08% 42.86% 47.99% 40.36% 46.63% 36.53% 30.54% 43.58% 41.72% 31.40% 37.14% 32.81% 36.02% 34.29% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of May 1,000,000 900,000 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 May 7/10/2017 2017 to 2016 Difference 49,214 47.12% 40,931 48.97% 62,087 28.14% (36,594) (17.79%) 9,928 5.15% 125,565 15.56% 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 • May ■ April • March • February ■ January Page 24 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Debt Capacity\2017\debt capacity 2017 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Debt Capacity 2016 Assessed Value for 2017 Property Taxes 8,124,487,663 Voted (UTGO) Nonvoted (LTGO) Voted park Voted utility 1.00% of assessed value 1.50% of assessed value 2.50% of assessed value 2.50% of assessed value Maximum Outstanding Remaining Debt as of Debt ok Capacity 12/31/2016 Capacity Utilized 81,244,877 121,867,315 203,112,192 203,112,192 609, 336, 576 0 81,244,877 13, 260, 000 108, 607, 315 0 203,112,192 0 203,112,192 13,260,000 596,076,576 0.00% 10.88% 0.00% 0.00% 2.18% 2014 LTGO Bonds 12/1/2014 Bonds 12/1/2015 Repaid 12/1/2016 225,000 175,000 185,000 135,000 125,000 130,000 360,000 300,000 315,000 0 0 75,000 360,000 300,000 390,000 585,000 390,000 975,000 75,000 1,050,000 12/1/2017 190,000 130,000 320,000 150,000 470,000 12/1/2018 230,000 135,000 365,000 155,000 520,000 12/1/2019 255,000 140,000 395,000 160,000 555,000 12/1/2020 290,000 140,000 430,000 165,000 595,000 12/1/2021 320,000 145,000 465,000 170,000 635,000 12/1/2022 350,000 150,000 500,000 175,000 675,000 12/1/2023 390,000 155,000 545,000 180,000 725,000 12/1/2024 430,000 0 430,000 185,000 615,000 12/1/2025 465,000 0 465,000 95,000 660,000 12/1/2026 505,000 0 505,000 00,000 705,000 12/1/2027 395,000 0 395,000 2 5,000 600,000 12/1/2028 300,000 0 300,000 2 5,000 515,000 12/1/2029 245,000 0 245,000 220,000 465,000 12/1/2030 225,000 0 225,000 225,000 450,000 Bonds 12/1/2031 180,000 0 180,000 235,000 415,000 Remaining 12/1/2032 130,000 0 130,000 240,000 370,000 12/1/2033 165,000 0 165,000 250,000 415,000 12/1/2034 0 0 0 260,000 260,000 12/1/2035 0 0 0 270,000 270,000 12/1/2036 0 0 0 280,000 280,000 12/1/2037 0 0 0 290,000 290,000 12/1/2038 0 0 0 305,00 305,000 12/1/2039 0 0 0 315,00 315,000 12/1/2040 0 0 0 330,000 330,000 12/1/2041 0 0 0 340,000 340,000 12/1/2042 0 0 0 355,000 355,000 12/1/2043 0 0 0 365,000 365,000 12/1/2044 0 0 0 375,000 375,000 12/1/2045 0 0 0 390,000 390,000 5,065,000 995,000 6,060,000 7,200,000 13,260,000 5,650,000 1,385,000 7,035,000 7,275,000 14,310,000 Page 25 2/8/2017 Road & LTGO Bonds Period Street 2016 LTGO Grand Ending CenterPlace Improvements Total Bonds Total 12/1/2014 Bonds 12/1/2015 Repaid 12/1/2016 225,000 175,000 185,000 135,000 125,000 130,000 360,000 300,000 315,000 0 0 75,000 360,000 300,000 390,000 585,000 390,000 975,000 75,000 1,050,000 12/1/2017 190,000 130,000 320,000 150,000 470,000 12/1/2018 230,000 135,000 365,000 155,000 520,000 12/1/2019 255,000 140,000 395,000 160,000 555,000 12/1/2020 290,000 140,000 430,000 165,000 595,000 12/1/2021 320,000 145,000 465,000 170,000 635,000 12/1/2022 350,000 150,000 500,000 175,000 675,000 12/1/2023 390,000 155,000 545,000 180,000 725,000 12/1/2024 430,000 0 430,000 185,000 615,000 12/1/2025 465,000 0 465,000 95,000 660,000 12/1/2026 505,000 0 505,000 00,000 705,000 12/1/2027 395,000 0 395,000 2 5,000 600,000 12/1/2028 300,000 0 300,000 2 5,000 515,000 12/1/2029 245,000 0 245,000 220,000 465,000 12/1/2030 225,000 0 225,000 225,000 450,000 Bonds 12/1/2031 180,000 0 180,000 235,000 415,000 Remaining 12/1/2032 130,000 0 130,000 240,000 370,000 12/1/2033 165,000 0 165,000 250,000 415,000 12/1/2034 0 0 0 260,000 260,000 12/1/2035 0 0 0 270,000 270,000 12/1/2036 0 0 0 280,000 280,000 12/1/2037 0 0 0 290,000 290,000 12/1/2038 0 0 0 305,00 305,000 12/1/2039 0 0 0 315,00 315,000 12/1/2040 0 0 0 330,000 330,000 12/1/2041 0 0 0 340,000 340,000 12/1/2042 0 0 0 355,000 355,000 12/1/2043 0 0 0 365,000 365,000 12/1/2044 0 0 0 375,000 375,000 12/1/2045 0 0 0 390,000 390,000 5,065,000 995,000 6,060,000 7,200,000 13,260,000 5,650,000 1,385,000 7,035,000 7,275,000 14,310,000 Page 25 2/8/2017 • 1 1 3 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Motor Fuel (Gas) Tax Collections - For the years 2008 through 2017 January February March April May P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue \MVFT\2017\motor vehicle fuel tax collections 2017 2008 1 2009 1 2010 1 2011 1 2012 1 2013 1 2014 1 2015 1 2016 1 2017 165,698 149,799 159,316 165,574 162,281 133,304 155,832 146,264 161,117 156,109 161,298 145,869 140,486 161,721 158,119 154,792 146,353 141,849 165,019 154,700 159,607 135,208 144,297 153,546 144,670 146,145 145,998 135,695 156,529 151,595 152,906 148,118 131,247 156,269 156,850 152,598 145,455 140,999 157,994 156,259 163,918 163,037 145,537 167,304 171,829 7/10/2017 2017 to 2016 Difference ok 150,654 (13,264) (8.09%) 164,807 1,770 1.09% 138,205 (7,332) (5.04%) 168,000 696 0.42% 174,211 2,382 1.39% Collected to date 802,668 752,626 767,493 762,713 737,328 735,962 745,390 753,305 811,625 795,877 (15,748) (1.94%) June 176,085 173,954 168,146 158,351 159,827 167,479 161,965 164,872 157,737 0 July 166,823 169,756 164,221 165,398 160,565 155,348 157,805 168,205 177,427 0 August 171,690 179,012 176,869 153,361 164,050 173,983 172,308 186,277 177,567 0 September 176,912 175,965 175,067 173,820 171,651 195,397 173,299 174,505 194,640 0 October 165,842 163,644 164,475 158,889 153,022 133,441 160,539 161,520 166,369 0 November 193,360 167,340 168,477 160,461 162,324 164,303 165,871 181,771 176,178 0 December 142,230 144,376 143,257 124,714 138,223 142,140 141,298 153,338 152,787 0 Total Collections 1,995,610 1,926,673 1,928,005 1,857,707 1,846,990 1,868,053 1,878,475 1,943,793 2,014,330 795,877 Budget Estimate 2,150,000 2,050,000 1,900,000 1,875,000 1,905,800 1,868,900 1,866,400 1,867,700 2,013,400 2,048,900 Actual over (under) budg (154,390) (123,327) 28,005 (17,293) (58,810) (847) 12,075 76,093 930 (1,253,023) Total actual collections as a % of total budget 92.82% 93.98% 101.47% 99.08% 96.91 % 99.95% 100.65% 104.07% 100.05% n/a % change in annual total collected (4.95%) (3.45%) 0.07% (3.65%) (0.58%) 1.14% 0.56% 3.48% 3.63% n/a % of budget collected through 37.33% 36.71% 40.39% 40.68% 38.69% 39.38% 39.94% 40.33% 40.31% 38.84% % of actual total collected through May 40.22% 39.06% 39.81% 41.06% 39.92% 39.40% 39.68% 38.75% 40.29% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of May 900,000 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 ■ M ay 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 May April March February January Page 26 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Telephone Utility Tax Collections - For the years 2009 through 2017 January February March April May P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\Telephone Tax\2017\telephone utility tax collections 2017 2009 1 2010 1 2011 2012 1 2013 2014 2015 1 2016 1 2017 128,354 282,773 230,721 275,775 242,115 234,622 266,041 264,175 254,984 255,056 241,357 230,366 245,539 238,561 236,985 193,818 261,074 234,113 229,565 227,469 217,478 216,552 223,884 214,618 129,270 210,777 205,953 208,206 206,038 210,010 177,948 212,845 174,738 214,431 187,856 182,167 173,971 177,209 171,770 174,512 162,734 163,300 162,536 157,285 209,006 7/10/2017 2017 to 2016 Difference ok (19,433) (10.67%) (10,671) (6.13%) (14,673) (8.28%) (14,485) (8.43%) 34,494 19.77% Collected to date 1,159,738 1,274,878 1,192,808 1,146,039 1,001,802 1,040,984 967,818 879,629 854,861 (24,768) (2.82%) June 239,334 251,880 239,013 234,542 293,668 210,289 187,412 170,450 0 July 269,631 250,593 244,191 226,118 213,078 205,651 190,984 174,405 0 August 260,408 246,261 349,669 228,789 211,929 205,645 185,172 171,909 0 September 249,380 240,111 241,476 227,042 210,602 199,193 183,351 170,476 0 October 252,388 238,500 237,111 225,735 205,559 183,767 183,739 166,784 0 November 254,819 247,848 240,246 225,319 212,947 213,454 175,235 166,823 0 December 368,775 236,065 236,449 221,883 213,097 202,077 183,472 168,832 0 Total Collections 3,054,473 2,986,136 2,980,963 2,735,467 2,562,682 2,461,060 2,257,183 2,069,308 854,861 Budget Estimate 2,500,000 2,800,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 2,900,000 2,750,000 2,565,100 2,340,000 2,200,000 Actual over (under) budg 554,473 186,136 (19,037) (264,533) (337,318) (288,940) (307,917) (270,692) (1,345,139) Total actual collections as a % of total budget 122.18% 106.65% 99.37% 91.18% 88.37% 89.49% 88.00% 88.43% n/a % change in annual total collected n/a (2.24%) (0.17%) (8.24%) (6.32%) (3.97%) (8.28%) (8.32%) n/a % of budget collected through May 46.39% 45.53% 39.76% 38.20% 34.54% 37.85% 37.73% 37.59% 38.86% % of actual total collected through May 37.97% 42.69% 40.01% 41.90% 39.09% 42.30% 42.88% 42.51% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of May 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 1. May 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 May April March ■ February ■ January Page 27 Stiokane .0.0Valley Operations & Administrative Services 2nd Quarter 2017 Administrative: • Completed 2017 Precinct Building Estimated Costs and Settle and Adjust for County • Reviewed and Completed Prosecutor 2015 Settle and Adjust • Reviewed and Processed 1Q CAD/RMS invoice • Completed Public Defender Amendment • Reviewed and Completed 2016 Detention Services Settle and Adjust • Completed Law Enforcement Negotiations • Completed Execution of Solid Waste Collection Contract • Completed Re -work of Law Enforcement Cost Methodology Human Resources: Recruitment Filled or Recruiting Recruitment Filled or Recruiting PT Recreation Assistant — Host Recruiting Stormwater Intern Filled Summer Day Camp Counselor Filled Senior Engineer — Traffic Filled Day Camp Assistant Lead Counselor Filled City Engineer Recruiting Day Camp Lead Counselor Filled Engineer — Planning/Grants Filled Park Program Lead Filled Transportation Planner Recruiting Recreation Intern Filled Economic Development Specialist Filled PIO Intern Recruiting Engineer Recruiting Development Services Coordinator Recruiting Special Projects: • Reorganization • Planning for move to New City Hall Building • Employee Appreciation • Personal Safety Training • WCIA Audit (Volunteers) Central Reception: Business Registration • New Registrations — 530 • Reactivations — 10,958 Visitor Volume • April — 159 • May— 158 • June — 131 Web Site: 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 -2- CaII Log Volume: 1,716 Total Calls 111 �� ■. .._ III 111 . ■ es S. `a5 6a °J. \°o \°tom �5 \°�c�` O°�� y°ot \e Oa�e \taw `�ea� �° Oe \y°e �`�� ' O tca Pa ,L, -,AQ -'2' Q� cs4 (a O ■ April ■ May ■ June Web Site Summary 2nd Quarter 2017 April May June Year to Date Unique User Sessions 11,926 12,857 14,784 76,559 Top Five Pages Viewed Job Openings 2,733 3,027 2,994 19,510 Pools 371 1,626 6,182 8,920 Parks & Rec 1,018 1,492 2,338 6,912 Permit Center 1,549 1,641 1,552 8,431 Parks 890 1,554 1,861 5,665 Top Five "Referrer" Web Sites Google 9,396 10,270 12,797 60,577 Bing 574 704 889 4,117 Visit Spokane 63 123 175 421 Spokanecares.org 94 73 120 577 Spokesman 60 32 17 338 1 1 1 Total C.A.R.E.S. Requests: 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 -3- 1 1 s� e o c �c c• \ e {- . �\�� a� _,.b sk,`arc Q ami\ �� a�- r"-�� coa g ' < �` b •April •May •June ,..� P *Wane , . Valley D !EAFll(•)NI FIRST QUARTER REPORT JANUARY—MARCH 2017. ADMINISTRATION AND PARKS: • Contracts completed in the first quarter include: o Amendment #1 to the Janitorial Services Agreement for CenterPlace to exercise the first of three one-year renewals. o Agreement for Professional Services for the Edgecliff Park Splash Pad Project. o Construction Agreement for the Browns Park Water Service Project. o Agreement for Recreational Services to conduct an instructional painting class at CenterPlace. o Amendment #1 to the Agreement for Recreational Services for teaching beginner sports to children ages 3-6 years old. o Amendment #1 to the Agreement for Recreational Services for teaching multiple sports to ages 4-12 years old. o Agreement for Recreational Services to conduct orienteering classes. o Amendment #1 to the Janitorial Services Agreement for the Police Precinct. Initial work on the 2018 Parks and Recreation Department budget began with updating the Business Plan. The Centennial Trail Coordinating Council continued to meet monthly. For each calendar year, the jurisdictions will rotate who will act as meeting chair and manage the agenda and meeting minutes. For 2017, we are volunteering in that capacity. The extreme weather and record rainfall has affected and damaged the Centennial Trail in certain areas. We will be assessing the damage and discussing repairs once the river has receded. The renovations at Riverfront Park this year could possibly affect special events and permitting along the Centennial Trail. Staff met with the other jurisdictions to discuss the challenges of special events and how we can work together with our permitting processes. • Staff was involved with the Appleway Trail Open House in February which focused on the design of the trail from Sullivan Road to Corbin Road. • Staff began working with the Public Works Department on the construction of the Pines to Evergreen section of the Appleway Trail. • Mike participated in the Library Ad Hoc Committee monthly meetings. Staff completed our department's section of the City's Annual Accomplishments. • Edgecliff Park splash pad bids were due March 31. ADMINISTRATION CONT'D: • We put out an Invitation to Bid in March to replace carpet and wall base at CenterPlace in three of the classrooms, Rooms 109, 110, and 213. Bids were received and the project will be completed in April. • We also went out to bid for the Audio/Visual Upgrade project in the Great Room of CenterPlace. Evco Sound and Electronics, Inc. was chosen to do the development. We would like to put out an Invitation to Bid this summer for installation. CENTERPLACE: • Staff booked 432 CenterPlace reservations during the first quarter of 2017, which is 39% more reservations than taken the first quarter of 2016. There has been an increase in reservations because Lincoln Center was sold to a church and is no longer renting space for events. There will also be two additional community events held at CenterPlace: Crave! and Octoberfest. • Staff participated with a booth at the Bridal Festival held at the Spokane Convention Center on January 14 and 15. • We held an Open House in January for citizens to explore what CenterPlace has to offer for weddings, conferences, business meetings, or other special event needs. It was also to showcase Le Catering, our in-house caterer, who provided various delicious food menu samples. • CenterPlace was the location again and hosted the annual Inland Northwest Professional Resource Organization's (INPRO) Bridal Fair on February 18. • Staff has been working with the organizers of the Crave! event to plan and secure space for the four-day event at CenterPlace June 15-18, 2017. • CenterPlace was honored to be the location of an evening with Rick Steves, hosted by KSPS, for a Live Travel Talk. He is an author and TV personality focusing on European travel. Needless to say, it was a "packed" house, but not so sure if any suitcases were yet. RECREATION AND AQUATICS: • Summer Day Camp and Park Program planning began. Job positions were posted for summer recreation seasonal positions and interviews were conducted, • Summer Movies in the Park planning also began and a public voting process was conducted to choose the three free movies. The top three movie choices that will be showcased this summer are: "Secret Life of Pets" (Mirabeau Meadows), "Sing" (Mirabeau Meadows), and "Finding Dory" (Valley Mission). Waste Management and Washington State Employees Credit Union are sponsoring these summer movies. • We coordinated with East Valley School District to confirm and finalize our meal program sites for this summer. Terrace View Park and Valley Mission Park will have both breakfast and lunch. Edgecliff Park will have lunch. • The Spring/Summer Recreation Brochure was designed in- house utilizing Adobe InDesign software. The brochure was distributed to all Spokane Valley elementary schools, past participants, City Hall, Spokane Valley libraries, and the HUB. • This spring, the 2017 Washington Recreation and Parks Association Annual Conference will be held in Spokane. Jennifer Papich, our Recreation Coordinator, is on the Planning Committee and continued to participate in meetings to coordinate efforts to organize and bring this conference to our region. • Jennifer visited with Boy Scout Pack 4419 to discuss the importance of Parks and Recreation in our city and communi • Registration opened for spring and summer recreation programs on March 27, 2017. On the first day of registration, $27,612 in program registrations was processed. Idg3 spokanevalley.org/recreation 509.688.0300 MOVES RK SxIont VAN Parts Ituresti:n toarlicent Gtitiles qsa ri is far DIM fridnn'pilso-ffgifsammulif4faeyfol fre-marteattiritks fsr thadren wilt II art an h wr Wert ex l me sfarl of St'sEl Friday, July 19 G. \lualtiatr \ Itwlo''s Scutt lift of Nts \[o\k 1pom.o .. W9 EC friday. July /8 \vflotsam' i \vs 4\c. \ftlilc' 4tk51L:�1 friday, August 11 C Valley \li><-io;tr,aalt rsaidm> Poly WSECU & Waite- Mmoi,Tenxiit 3 SENIOR CENTER: • Several new members that have joined the Senior Center are folks with special needs. A program through Spokane County helps integrate special needs people into the community and become more involved. The billiards room, bingo, and dance are the favorite activities they and their peer support person can enjoy. • The average age of Senior Center participants is 75. There are 222 members in the 70-79 age group, which makes up the majority of the membership. This falls in the national average age of senior center memberships and attendees. We have 31 members 90+ years of age. One member who is 95 years young plays ping pong twice a week. How many of us can say that about ourselves right now? A new activity has been added, "memory boxes," which are made of paper mache. These are sent to local hospitals for families who have lost a child. These are treasure boxes to hold memories of your loved one. • A new program, "Marie's Movie Club/' is to offer a movie the first Tuesday of the month. They get a group together who like movies, but don't care to go alone. This has been well received and folks look forward to what movie has been selected each month. • The Association continues to seek volunteers for the front reception desk. Shifts are four hours, 8 a.m.-12 p.m. and 12-4 p.m. Both shifts are available and money handling may be required. • The Board of Directors has a bulk mailing permit and will begin mailing out the monthly newsletters and printing them in-house. Numbers That Count... January February March Total Attendance 2,065 2,150 2,616 New Members 10 12 29 4 PARKS AND RECAT1ONI Spokane r SAND QUARTER REPORT alley Agis,l-1 NE 2017 ADMINISTRATION AND PARKS: • Contracts worked on in the second quarter include: o Construction Agreement for the CenterPlace Carpet Replacement project. o Professional Services for the CenterPlace AV Upgrade project. o Agreement for Professional Services for a Spokane Valley Farmers Market to research and develop the possibility of a market at four possible Spokane Valley park sites. Staff presented the information to City Council. o Construction Agreement for the Edgecliff Park Splash Pad project, plus an Amendment. o Right of Way Acquisition Project Agreement with WSDOT regarding the purchase of a portion of the WSDOT Sullivan pit site, to add to our existing park. o Amendment to the Construction Agreement for the Browns Park Splash Pad project. o Construction Agreement for the Terrace View and Park Road Pool Repair projects. o Electrical Service Extension Agreement with Avista for Browns Park. o Agreement for Services for a Parks and Recreation Private Security Contract. o Amendment to the Agreement for Professional Services for the CenterPlace West Lawn Master Plan. ® We were preparing and gearing up for the parks summer season and reservation season which began in April. There are always extra maintenance items and cleaning up to do from the winter months, © Staff has continued working with Senske on a variety of vandalism issues. The Browns Park restrooms have especially been hit hard with graffiti, fires in the sinks, and destruction of toilets, sinks, and toilet paper holders. Because of the costly repairs and replacements, we have had to close the restrooms and we are providing portable toilets for the second season in a row. Because of these issues and others that have/may occur, we contracted with State Protection Services, dba: GoJoe Patrol -SPS, for security services. We have added two area lights also to the park. • Staff presented an Administrative Report to City Council regarding the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Staff spent considerable time developing the City budget for our department for 2018. Some trees were planted at the Valley Mission Dog Park, which will help in adding shade. Dog agility elements were also added to provide interesting fun. The Browns Park Splash Pad project was completed and families are appreciative and excited to be using it. Our Park Ambassador was added for the summer season. This position has proven to be invaluable as a direct liaison with the citizens and shelter reservations, and for solving numerous problems that arise. • Staff continued to monitor weekly the construction of the Pines to Evergreen section of the Appleway Trail. • Design has been completed and approved by City Council for the Sullivan to Corbin section of the Appleway Trail. We expect it to go out to bid in August. ADMINISTRATION CONT'D: • EVCO Sound and Electronics, Inc. is currently working on the design of the audio/visual upgrade in the Great Room of CenterPlace. We would like to complete the design and go out to bid for installation before the end of this year. CENTERPLACE: o Staff booked 118 CenterPlace reservations during the second quarter of 2017. We have booked a total of 764 reservations for 2017 and 239 reservations for 2018 so far. ® Staff participated in several business fairs and meetings. These included the Post Falls Community Business Fair held at the Greyhound Park Event Center; the Inland Northwest Business Travel Association held at the Spokane Convention Center; and the Greater Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce Business Showcase held at the Spokane County Fair & Expo Center. • CenterPlace staff has been working with Vision Marketing to bring two community events to CenterPlace. The first event was Crave!, a four-day food and beverage tasting and cooking demonstration event in June held on the CenterPlace West Lawn and the Great Room. This community event brought in celebrity chefs from all over the country. Even with the rain, it was pretty successful in its inaugural year and generated a lot of interest. Crave be a yearly event moving to July 2018. The second event will be Octoberfest and will be a two-day event held the last weekend in October in our Great Room. will ® Staff attended the Washington Recreation and Parks Association Annual Conference & Trade Show, which was held at the Davenport Grand in Spokane the first week of May. This conference is usually held on the west side of the state; the last time it was held in Spokane was 2009. This year's theme was "Celebrating Legacy: Inspiring Communities to Play" (70 years for Spokane). There were 400 attendees and 40 exhibitors. • We were excited to be the location of a family concert given by Caspar Babypants (real name Chris Ballew) at CenterPlace, sponsored by the Spokane County Library District. He plays a mix of original kid -friendly tunes, classic nursery songs, and arrangements of Beatles favorites. The kids had a ball and it was a big success. 2 RECREATION AND AQUATICS: • In April, we lost Jennifer Papich, our Recreation Coordinator, to the City of Spokane. We are excited for Jennifer, but Spokane's gain is our loss. We have big shoes to fill on the eve of summer. • Our summer Recreation Programs have begun! With this summer season, seven Summer Day Camp Counselors, one Recreation Intern, and one Park Program staff have been hired and trained. • The Counselor in Training Program continues to be a success this year. Ten kids (ages 12-17) are participating in this six-week course that teaches youth all the aspects of being a Day Camp Counselor. After they complete this course, they shadow at Summer Day Camp and Park Programs as volunteer `Counselors in Training" to gain experience. • Summer Day Camp began the week of June 19. Our Summer Day Camp is very popular with nine of the weeks filled by May 5. We also have a wait list for these nine weeks in the event of cancelations. Each Summer Day Camp week has space for 56 campers (ages 6-11 yrs). Registered campers participate in fun activities, park visits, swimming and field trips. • The free Summer Park Program also began June 19 at Terrace View, Edgecliff, and Valley Mission. Our onsite summer Parks and Recreation staff lead games, arts, crafts and other fun activities in the mornings. Another great part of this program includes serving FREE meals at the parks in partnership with the East Valley School District Meal Program for children 18 years and under. Breakfast and lunch are served at Terrace View and Valley Mission, and lunch only is served at Edgecliff. • Valley Mission was our first pool to open for the season on June 17. Terrace View and Park Road Pool opened for the season June 19. Registrations for swimming lessons continue to be popular at all three pools. We processed $12,650 in swim lesson registrations the first weekend the pools were open. Swim team continues to be a hit with 56 team members at both Terrace View and Valley Mission and 44 team members at Park Road. 3 SENIOR CENTER: • April was Volunteer Appreciation Month. The Senior Center invited all volunteers to a luncheon at Darcy's in appreciation for their help during the year. • The programs through the Community Colleges of Spokane ACT 2 Seniors Program offered four different art classes. They ranged from watercolor, to pen and ink, to multi -media. • The Senior Center held an Art Show for the first time with ACT 2 students and instructors selling their art. It was a wonderful success with ten artists, and everyone sold something. There was no admission, and artwork pieces were very reasonably priced. • There is a group of ladies who meet on Friday for social time and to paint. There is no instructor for this group; they just enjoy each other and the arts and crafts room. • The Aerobics class through ACT 2 had 371 total. The class meets three times a week. • Rite Aid Pharmacy gave 15 pneumonia shots in the Wellness Center. Flu shots are planned for September. • The Elder Law Group presentation was well received with 10 people. Each person received a coupon for a one-hour consultation worth $375 on how to protect your assets. • The Hospice Bereavement Group usually has about 6-8 people meeting with a lead counselor on a weekly basis. • The resource and referral information available continues to be utilized frequently. We find many people do not know where to begin to find what services are available in our community. Oftentimes, the Senior Center is the first point of contact. • The AARP Driver Refresher Course is popular that is held the second Monday of each month. • Bridge, pinochle, spite and malice, scrabble, and cribbage have loyal followers that meet each week. Numbers That Count... April May June Total Attendance 2,047 1,954 2,207 New Members 25 9 21 4 pokane" jUalley 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall®spokanevalley.org 1h1` `4N`.N`4N"'? `4N"'? `4N".N`4N"'? `4N"'? `4N"wN`4N"'? `'F"'? `4N"wN`4N"'? `4N"010.N`4N"'? `4N"010.N`4N"'? `4N"'? `4N"wN`4N"'? `'F"'? `4N"wN`4N"'? `4N"010.N`4N"'? `4N"010.N`4N"'? `4N"'? `4N"wN`4N"'? `'F"'? `4N"wN`4N"'? `4N"010.N`4N"'? `4N"010.N`4N"'? `4N"'? `4N"wN`4N"'? `'F"'? `4N"wN`4N"'? `4N"010.N`4N"'? `4N"010.N`4N"'? `4N"'? `4N"wN`4N"'? `'F"'? `4N"wN`4N"'? `4N"010.N`4N"'? `4N"010.N`4N"'? `4N"'? `4N"wN`4N"'? `'F"'? `4N"wN`4N"'? `4N"'? `4N`.N`4N"'? "C?1 Memorandum To: Mark Calhoun, City Manager; John Hohman, Deputy City Manager; Doug Powell, Building Official; and Luis Garcia, Development Services Coordinator From: Elisha Heath, Executive Assistant Date: July 3, 2017 Re: Permit Center Survey for Second Quarter 2017 In an effort to better serve our citizens and customers, the City has instituted a customer service survey for the Permit Center. Surveys were made available to those who have visited the Permit Center and those who have applied for a permit in person or online. Methods utilized for sending out surveys: 1. Electronic surveys sent to email addresses collected from applications and from Permit Center sign -in sheet 2. Paper surveys mailed to applicants 3. Paper surveys handed out with permit packets 4. Paper surveys handed out at Planning counter Please note: 1. The number of permits issued does not directly relate to the number of surveys sent out. This is because a number of contractors and service companies pull multiple permits on a regular basis, and for those contractors it was determined to only send one survey per contractor or company. However, quarterly, the contractors will be sent a survey to continue to assess their experience over time. 2. Spokane Valley Fire Department issues the SVFD (sprinkler system) permits so the contractors pulling these permits were not sent surveys. In addition, ROW (right-of-way) permits were not included since they are primarily pulled by utility companies. 3. Mailed paper surveys were sent with a self-addressed, stamped envelope for return. Page 1 of 8 Survey Results Total number of permits issued April - 403 May - 554 June - 507 Total: 1,464 Total Number of Surveys sent out and returned Type of Permits Residential Paper Surveys Electronic Surveys Totals Number sent out 302 456 758 Number returned 68 24 92 Return percentage 22.52% 5.26% 12.14% Returned as undeliverable by the USPS 19 - 19 Type of Permits Residential 52 Commercial 23 General Information 2 Planning or Land Use 8 Development Engineering 0 Other 3 The number of permit types does not correspond with the number of total surveys returned since surveys returned had multiple types of permits selected. Customer Comments: The total number of survey responses received does not correspond with the numbers in this chart since respondents did not always select only one response choice or choose to only answer a few questions. What did you like about the service provided? 1. Good staff, fast service. 2. So much improved! 3. We used your online website. Very easy and fast getting out permit. Thank you! 4. Quick in and out. 5. Super friendly and quick. 6. Everyone is super nice and helpful. Getting a permit is very easy! 7. The e -permitting is quick and simple. 8. The friendliness of the staff and their knowledge and helpful suggestions. 9. Agent was courteous, professional and helpful. Explained process and suggested proper course of action. Page 2 of 8 Excellent Fair Poor Staff were available to assist me 78 4 2 Staff were helpful, knowledgeable, and professional 77 5 1 Staff provided clear information 75 5 3 Resources were available to address my needs 74 5 3 I am satisfied with the service provided 77 6 3 Customer Comments: The total number of survey responses received does not correspond with the numbers in this chart since respondents did not always select only one response choice or choose to only answer a few questions. What did you like about the service provided? 1. Good staff, fast service. 2. So much improved! 3. We used your online website. Very easy and fast getting out permit. Thank you! 4. Quick in and out. 5. Super friendly and quick. 6. Everyone is super nice and helpful. Getting a permit is very easy! 7. The e -permitting is quick and simple. 8. The friendliness of the staff and their knowledge and helpful suggestions. 9. Agent was courteous, professional and helpful. Explained process and suggested proper course of action. Page 2 of 8 10. Started on time, efficient use of time organized. 11. Quick and efficient. 12. Fast and great. 13. Nothing. 14. The online service is great. I only wish my permit was available to pay and print out faster like the City of Spokane. 15. Everyone was friendly and helpful. 16. Very helpful. 17. Karen Kendall spent extra time answering questions, printing helpful documents, and making sure everything was clearly understood. She is fabulous! 18. Extremely attentive, swift and knowledgeable. 19. Fast, friendly, helpful. 20. I am so happy with the changes you have made. It was such a hassle to wait for engineering. 21. Online process very easy. 22. Pulled permit online - very convenient. 23. Very helpful and accommodating. 24. Very helpful. 25. Speed. 26. Great service! 27. Very friendly and helpful staff. 28. All people were very friendly, quick to help and offered any and all information they figured would be helpful (at City Hall). Inspector was very friendly and helpful, seemed very knowledgeable. 29. Micki very helpful. 30. They were fast and helpful. 31. Working with Karen is very nice. She knows the requirements and is willing to help. 32. Always available and quick to respond. 33. Courteous, cheerful, knowledgeable. 34. Quick turnaround time! 35. Quick and painless. 36. It was prompt and knowledgeable. 37. Staff was friendly and helpful. 38. Helpful, knowledgeable, and friendly. 39. Friendly staff, helpful and gracious. 40. Friendly, quick. 41. Quick. 42. Very fast, efficient, professional and helpful. Blazingly fast permitting process - vastly exceeded all of our expectations. 43. Good service. 44. Staff is friendly but not very helpful. I get sent to voicemail all the time. 45. Tamara is great to work with very knowledgeable, she helped us submit successfully. 46. Friendly and helpful. 47. Everyone was helpful and gave us ideas we hadn't thought about. 48. People very kind and proficient. 49. Resource handouts. 50. Very friendly and knowledgeable. 51. Very fast and website is easy to use. 52. Customer service was top notch! Best I've experienced in any City. Page 3 of 8 53. Fairly simple to use. 54. Everyone there is very helpful and willing to work with me. 55. One stop shopping and in and out. 56. Karen Kendall was extremely helpful answering all our questions, giving us printouts, measuring and helping us figure space. Our experience with her was absolutely wonderful. 57. Everything. 58. Friendly faces. 59. Friendly and helpful. 60. Willingness to help move my needs forward in a positive manner/quick response. 61. The help I received from the staff. 62. Great customer service. 63. She was very polite and people oriented. 64. They had my permit ready to go. 65. They were able to address my concerns regarding easement. 66. It was direct and informative, exactly what I was needing. 67. Very professional approach that Luis Garcia took. Brought the neighbor into compliance. Was running a business in a B-1 home for approx. 4 years. How can we improve our service? Page 4 of 8 Customer Comments Staff Response provided by Luis Garcia, Development Services Coordinator. 1 Nothing I can think of. 2 Just make sure that when the permit is approved to notify the permit applicant. Fair to satisfaction because there was a failure to notify me, otherwise excellent. Spoke with applicant. Analyzed the process that led up to the mistake and have implemented a fix that notifies internal facilitators that a permit is ready and to notify the applicant. Enhancements will continue. 3 I was satisfied. 4 Inspectors need to return phone calls, not ignore them. Inspections will soon (week of the 15th of May) have the capability to be scheduled via the public portal. This will limit the amount of telephone inspection requests. This comment is difficult as there was no contact information provided. If scheduling was the issue, it will be resolved this week. If it is another communication issue, the policy is for field staff to return calls in the same manner as office staff. 5 Have electrical permits. At this point electrical enforcement is with Labor and Industries. To have this enforcement come under the City, the City must hire an electrical professional that has a journeymen's certification pursuant to state law. This can prove costly and cause other deficiencies with building inspections. Other cities have contracted with an electrical professional. We have had some very preliminary discussions on bringing one on in a contract fashion, but has not progressed from there. Based on this comment, I will bring it up at Page 4 of 8 Page 5 of 8 the next management meeting and update accordingly. 6 Not sure — seems fine now! 7 Keep it up. 8 No one has been able to help me update our address... Sent email to contact. I am trying to see what the appropriate address is and what account is the appropriate account. This company has multiple accounts that they have created so I will further attempt to merge the many contacts into one primary. 9 Nothing. 10 None. 11 Keep doing what you are doing! 12 When taking permits online — It would be helpful to have the permit right away — not go through all the steps. Also very hard to get refunds. We are in the process of launching this capability to direct issue permits. Further I have created a process where the permit center cashier is processing refunds to expedite this process by not having to wait until I can get to it. 13 I was cautioned by the concrete company that the deicer used by the City could damage the concrete. He suggested I contact you and request the City discontinue the use of these chemicals and/or adopt alternative measures. Read and reviewed by Public Works. 14 No complaints from me, so....? 15 Nothing I can see. 16 The engineers seem to want to do their own designing on projects. With regards to the survey comment received by the Permit Center that stated that "the engineers seem to want to do their own designing on projects," we have discussed this internally and believe we do not try to design the customer's projects. We will ensure that for future project discussions and reviews that we will explain the City's minimum design requirements and only provide design suggestions if requested by the customer/applicant. 17 Return your inspection process for roof tear-offs to the way they were before the storm. The per-deck was called for once the tear-off was complete like all the other cities locally. When asked if a tear-off that lasts for more than 1 day (like most) would need a sheeting inspection each day, we were told it was up to the inspector, get all of your guys on the same page so we can get a yes or no to this question. Met with customer and his partner on April 28th at the Permit Center. Jenny and Doug also in meeting. We discussed the process and any emergency situations. The process will remain that a deck inspection is required prior to concealment as this is outlined in the adopted code. The education of the builder helped in this situation. Contractor understands expectations, therefore case is resolved. 18 Just keep it up! 19 I don't have any idea's plus or minus 20 years and you gave me the best performance ever. 20 Keep being friendly and helpful. 21 Not take so long and call when ready. Page 5 of 8 22 Remove unnecessary regulations. 23 List of General Contractors who perform TI — Even a list, without any recommendations would be useful. Spoke with customer. We discussed the liability of providing such a list could create for Spokane Valley should a relationship go sideways. He agreed. We then spoke about the Washington L&I website to use as a resource and he thought that was perfect, but suggested a link to the L&I website from our website. 24 Inspection call in should be past 7 am. 25 Have a paper or "map" of what to do for subdividing a lot for steps needed to take and cost. Left a message. Case is considered resolved as we are constantly in the process of creating helpful aids for our development community. We will continue to work on this in a similar fashion as our other handouts. 26 Wish you had the document that I needed. Spoke with customer. She was looking for a record that we do not have in our custody. As we cannot recreate records, I recommended she speak with utility purveyors to get the data she is looking for. She was excited to have another avenue to explore and thanked us for following up. 27 Specific rather than "authority having jurisdiction" codes that are Spokane Valley. I spoke with customer. Funny thing is that I had already spoken with him about this specific topic and all of his questions were answered then. We have already created Permit Center Bulletins that assist the construction community as well as internal staff. We will continue to create these as topics and time allow. 28 None. 29 Exceeded my exceptions (expectations) already. 30 Getting permits faster. 31 Seems to be working good the way it is. 32 Condiments. 33 Create a brows -able website The City of Spokane Valley is constantly looking for new ways to improve our website. We are beginning with an update to all of our forms that we list online and make them uniform and accurate. From there we will also be looking at search ability. Maybe a member of IT or Mr. Whitehead would be able to speak more intelligently about the exact steps being taken. 34 Make sure that when the permit is approved to notify whoever applied for it. 35 Keep on smiling. 36 I am happy with your service. 37 It is perfect, no need for adjustment. 38 To be able to order permits online and pay at the same exact time instead of having to go back and pay after permit has been processed. We order many permits here at Sturm. City of Spokane is the easiest and most efficient with online permits. I mentioned that we do have this capability to submit and directly issue a permit and that it would be live later this month (May). She was excited for it and thanked us for showing attention to her comment. Page 6 of 8 39 The zoning changes you've made have greatly affected our project criteria. We don't think we or anybody else will be able to build a single story over 55 community in Spokane Valley with the new zoning laws Contacted customer about concern, he is planning on attending the developer's forum to ask any questions that he has. He was extremely impressed on our level of follow up. 40 Print inspection area on permit This issue was resolved. I attempted to contact customer who left the comment and he is no longer employed with the company. I spoke with their office employee and let them know that the inspection area is no longer needed as all inspections are placed in one message bank. Further, we are in the process of opening up the online portal inspection requests. They were excited to hear about this. 41 Change to online inspection scheduling. So much easier. Spoke with customer about our Portal Inspection Requests that will be going live soon. She was excited about the update and the follow up. 43 2 Try to cover everything up front in the pre- development phase. Customer has already met with Staff/Council-- members to address his concerns. Racking comments is provided at the Pre -App level and will be reviewed for consistency. Further, the effects of segregation/merge of properties will get a more detailed conversation on the responsibilities and adverse impacts. 43 SF Valuations for basement/bath remodel. I have attempted to contact customer on multiple occasions via telephone. There is no message option available. I also attempted to contact via email with it being sent back undeliverable. 44 Listing what is required for permit on website. I was able to call and find out ahead of time what was needed though. Spoke with customer. Her project was an owner/builder residential addition onto their existing home. Prior to requesting inspection, they attempted to find the information on what was needed to qualify for a permit. When they did not find the information on the website, they called the Permit Center. Staff was friendly and the process was swift, only comment was to have the info on website. 45 If Mr. Garcia's approach is the norm in this dept. nothing needs to be tweaked. Any other suggestions? Page 7 of 8 Customer Comments Staff Response provided by Luis Garcia, Development Services Coordinator. 1 Thank you. 2 Maybe have inspectors use emails to reply to set up times. 3 Not at this time. 4 I build all over the place. Your employees rock! Bob the inspector is great. 5 Sorry, no. 6 No. Page 7 of 8 7 None- Wonderful experience all the way around! 8 Ask questions. Two sides to every story. 9 If there are common things that people come in for, have a handout to guide them through the process. 10 Keep up the great work. 11 Really like the way Spokane city does theirs. Customer was speaking about the ability to directly issue a permit online without having to wait for staff to process the permit request. Mentioned our update that is coming on the direct issue permit and he was happy. He further noted that he was impressed that we actually read and showed attention to the survey result. He was happy with the follow- up. 12 None. 13 Everything was great except at the end when I was not notified that the permit was approved, in fact was approved the day I submitted the additional information that was requested after the initial submittal. It was a series of mishaps that caused the delay of 2 weeks, but if the initial call had been made it wouldn't have mattered. 14 None. 15 Just to say thank you to all the staff. Great help! 16 Can city conduct a survey of land in the future? Not sure what exactly this means? If they mean that we should be surveying property for property line boundaries, this is not the function of a municipal government. A site inspection verifies compliance with adopted site development standards, yet to get into civil property line establishing is outside the purview of this form of government. 17 I felt the website could use more specific information, but it's difficult to cover every trade. Everything your office did made it clear and easy. Nothing to resolve. Website is constantly being updated. 18 City needs to work out using credit cards for license purchase. The State Department of Revenue only permits check or money orders. This is a service that we are currently operating in behalf of the State. Staff will request this enhancement from the State of Washington. Page 8 of 8