The URL can be used to link to this page

2017, 08-29 Study SessionAGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION FORMAT Tuesday, August 29, 2017 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11707 East Sprague Avenue, First Floor (Please Silence Your Cell Phones During the Meeting) 6:00 p.m. DISCUSSION LEADER SUBJECT/ACTIVITY GOAL CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL ACTION ITEM: 1. Proposed Resolution 17-015, Hirst Decision — Erik Lamb [public comment] 2. Motion Consideration: JAG Grant Application — Morgan Koudelka [public comment] 3. Motion Consideration: Public Defender Agreement Amendment — John Pietro [public comment] NON -ACTION ITEMS: 4. Mike Basinger, Leslie Marketing Report Discussion/Information Brassfield 5. Erik Lamb, Anthony Health District, Parental Rights Discussion/Information Bandiero 6. Mark Calhoun 2018 Legislative Agenda Discussion/Information 7. Information Only (will not be reported or discussed): 2017 TIP Amendment #2 8. Mayor Higgins Advance Agenda Discussion/Information 9. Mayor Higgins Council Check in Discussion/Information 10. Mark Calhoun City Manager Comments Discussion/Information ADJOURN Study Session Agenda, August 29, 2017 Page 1 of 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: August 29, 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: Proposed Resolution 17-015 — Whatcom County v. Hirst Legislative Solution. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: NA PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: On August 22, 2017, the City Council requested that staff draft a resolution outlining the issues involving the Washington State Supreme Court's decision in Whatcom County v. Hirst in October, 2016, and requesting and urging the Washington State Legislature to adopt a solution that addresses the negative impacts resulting from the Hirst decision. BACKGROUND: See above. OPTIONS: (1) Approve Resolution 17-015 as drafted or amended; or (2) take other action as appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve Resolution 17-015 urging the Washington State Legislature to address various issues resulting from the Washington State Supreme Court's Whatcom County v. Hirst decision regarding water rights. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: NA STAFF CONTACT: Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Resolution 17-015. DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 17-015 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, URGING THE WASHINGTON STATE LEGISLATURE TO ADDRESS VARIOUS ISSUES RESULTING FROM THE WHATCOM COUNTY V. HIRST SUPREME COURT DECISION, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, on October 6, 2016, the Washington State Supreme Court issued a decision in the case of Whatcom County v. Hirst, a case involving a property owner's ability to obtain a well permit for residential property for placement of a single family residential structure; and WHEREAS, in Hirst, the Washington State Supreme Court held that counties have a responsibility under the Growth Management Act to make determinations of water availability for development permit approval; and WHEREAS, the Hirst decision has had an extremely detrimental effect on the ability to develop residential properties which require wells, which is severely impacting many private property owners across the state of Washington, including property owners in the City of Spokane Valley; and WHEREAS, the Washington State Legislature considered various options during the 2017 session for providing a legislative fix to Hirst, but was unable to forward a bill to the Governor; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes the many benefits a legislative fix to Hirst would bring to the citizens of this state, including property owners in Spokane Valley. NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington as follows: Section 1. Declaration of City Council. The City Council respectfully requests that the Washington State Legislature act with all due haste in adopting a legislative fix to the Whatcom County v. Hirst decision by the Washington State Supreme Court on October 6, 2016, to minimize or eliminate the negative impacts on private property owners across the state. Section 2. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. Adopted this 29th day of August, 2017. City of Spokane Valley L.R. Higgins, Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Resolution 17-015 - Hirst Decision Page 1 of 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: August 29, 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: Justice Assistance Grant 2017 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: N/A BACKGROUND: The City of Spokane Valley has been allocated $26,193 as part of the 2017 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program. These funds are designed to support all components of the criminal justice system. Spokane Valley staff has relied on recommendations of the Spokane Valley Police Chief to identify proposed projects to be funded with the grant. The Police Chief and the City Manager have recommended spending the funds on thirteen Tasers ($21,969.45) and purchasing the following equipment for the Spokane Valley Investigative Unit: four video cameras, nine binoculars, two shotgun locks, four rifle locks, and two locking truck bed covers ($3,882). OPTIONS: 1.) Authorize application for the JAG grant. 2.) Request amendments to the application. 3.) Deny authorization to submit grant. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to Authorize the City Manager or designee to Apply for the Justice Assistance Grant for those items identified above. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: $26,193 in grants funds, no match required. STAFF CONTACT: Morgan Koudelka, Senior Administrative Analyst ATTACHMENTS: JAG Solicitation, Program Narrative, JAG Abstract Review Narrative, Budget Worksheet, Budget Narrative U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Assistance OMB No. 1121-0329 Approval Expires 12/31/2018 The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs (OJP), Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) is seeking applications for the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program. This program furthers the Department's mission by assisting State, local, and tribal efforts to prevent or reduce crime and violence. Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program FY 2017 Local Solicitation Applications Due: September 5, 2017 Eligibility Only units of local government may apply under this solicitation. By law, for purposes of the JAG Program, the term "units of local government" includes a town, township, village, parish, city, county, borough, or other general purpose political subdivision of a state; or, it may also be a federally recognized Indian tribal government that performs law enforcement functions (as determined by the Secretary of the Interior). A unit of local government may be any law enforcement district or judicial enforcement district established under applicable State law with authority to independently establish a budget and impose taxes; for example, in Louisiana, a unit of local government means a district attorney or parish sheriff. A JAG application is not complete, and a unit of local government may not receive award funds, unless the chief executive of the applicant unit of local government (e.g., a mayor) properly executes, and the unit of local government submits, the "Certifications and Assurances by Chief Executive of Applicant Government" attached to this solicitation as Appendix I. In addition, as discussed further below, in order validly to accept a Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 JAG award, the chief legal officer of the applicant unit of local government must properly execute, and the unit of local government must submit, the specific certification regarding compliance with 8 U.S.C. § 1373 attached to this solicitation as Appendix II, (Note: this requirement does not apply to Indian tribal governments.) (The text of 8 U.S.G. § 1373 appears in Appendix II.) Eligible allocations under JAG are posted annually on the JAG web page under "Funding." Deadline Applicants must register in the OJP Grants Management System (GMS) prior to submitting an application under this solicitation. All applicants must register, even those that previously registered in GMS. Select the "Apply Online" button associated with the solicitation title. All registrations and applications are due by 5 p.m. eastern time on September 5, 2017. This deadline does not apply to the certification regarding compliance with 8 U.S.C. § 1373. As explained below, a unit of local government (other than an Indian tribal government) may not validly accept an award unless that certification is submitted to the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) on or before the day the unit of local government submits the signed award acceptance documents. For additional information, see How to Apply in Section D. Application and Submission Information. Contact Information For technical assistance with submitting an application, contact the Grants Management System (GMS) Support Hotline at 888-549-9901, option 3, or via email at GMS.HelpDesk(cr�usdoj.gov. The GMS Support Hotline operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, including on federal holidays. An applicant that experiences unforeseen GMS technical issues beyond its control that prevent it from submitting its application by the deadline must email the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) Response Center at grants@ncjrs.gov within 24 hours after the application deadline in order to request approval to submit its application. Additional information on reporting technical issues appears under "Experiencing Unforeseen GMS Technical Issues" in How to Apply in Section D. Application and Submission Information, For assistance with any other requirement of this solicitation, applicants may contact the NCJRS Response Center by telephone at 1-800-851-3420; via TTY at 301-240-6310 (hearing impaired only); by email at grants(7a ncirs.gov; by fax to 301-240-5830, or by web chat at https:t/webcontact.ncjrs.govincichatichat.jsp. The NCJRS Response Center hours of operation are 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. eastern time, Monday through Friday, and 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. eastern time on the solicitation close date. Applicants also may contact the appropriate BJA State Policy Advisor. Funding opportunity number assigned to this solicitation: BJA-2017-11301 Release date: August 3, 2017 2 BJA-2017-11301 Contents A. Program Description 5 Overview 5 Program -Specific Information 5 Permissible uses of JAG Funds — In general 5 Limitations on the use of JAG funds 6 Required compliance with applicable federal laws 8 BJA areas of emphasis 9 Goals, Objectives, and Deliverables 10 Evidence -Based Programs or Practices 10 B. Federal Award Information 11 Type of Award 11 Financial Management and System of Internal Controls 12 Budget and Financial Information 13 Cost Sharing or Match Requirement 14 Pre -Agreement Costs (also known as Pre -award Costs) 14 Prior Approval, Planning, and Reporting of Conference/Meeting/Training Costs 14 Costs Associated with Language Assistance (if applicable) 14 C. Eligibility Information 15 D. Application and Submission Information 15 What an Application Should Include 15 How to Apply 26 E. Application Review Information 28 Review Process 28 F. Federal Award Administration Information 29 Federal Award Notices 29 Statutory and Regulatory Requirements; Award Conditions 29 General Information about Post -Federal Award Reporting Requirements 30 G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s) 31 H. Other Information 31 Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552 and 5 U.S.C. § 552a) 31 Provide Feedback to OJP 32 Application Checklist 33 Appendix I 35 3 BJA-2017-11301 Appendix 11 37 Appendix 111 39 Appendix IV 40 4 BJA-2017-11301 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program FY 2017 Local Solicitation CFDA #16.738 A. Program Description Overview The Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program is the primary provider of federal criminal justice funding to States and units of local government. BJA will award JAG Program funds to eligible units of local government under this FY 2017 JAG Program Local Solicitation. (A separate solicitation will be issued for applications to BJA directly from States.) Statutory Authority: The JAG Program statute is Subpart I of Part E of Title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968. Title 1 of the "Omnibus Act" generally is codified at Chapter 26 of Title 42 of the United States Code; the JAG Program statute is codified at 42 U.S.C. §§ 3750-3758. See also 28 U.S.C. § 530C(a). Program -Specific Information Permissible uses of JAG Funds — In general In general, JAG funds awarded to a unit of local government under this FY 2017 solicitation may be used to provide additional personnel, equipment, supplies, contractual support, training, technical assistance, and information systems for criminal justice, including for any one or more of the following: • Law enforcement programs • Prosecution and court programs • Prevention and education programs • Corrections and community corrections programs • Drug treatment and enforcement programs • Planning, evaluation, and technology improvement programs • Crime victim and witness programs (other than compensation) • Mental health programs and related law enforcement and corrections programs, including behavioral programs and crisis intervention teams Under the JAG Program, units of local government may use award funds for broadband deployment and adoption activities as they relate to criminal justice activities. 5 8JA-2017-11301 Limitations on the use of JAG funds Prohibited and controlled uses of funds – JAG funds may not be used (whether directly or indirectly) for any purpose prohibited by federal statute or regulation, including those purposes specifically prohibited by the JAG Program statute as set out at 42 U.S.C. § 3751(d): (1) Any security enhancements or any equipment to any nongovernmental entity that is not engaged in criminal justice or public safety. (2) Unless the Attorney General certifies that extraordinary and exigent circumstances exist that make the use of such funds to provide such matters essential to the maintenance of public safety and good order— (a) Vehicles (excluding police cruisers), vessels (excluding police boats), or aircraft (excluding police helicopters) (b) Luxury items (c) Real estate (d) Construction projects (other than penal or correctional institutions) (e) Any similar matters For additional information on expenditures prohibited under JAG, as well as expenditures that are permitted but "controlled," along with the process for requesting approval regarding controlled items, refer to the JAG Prohibited and Controlled Expenditures Guidance. Information also appears in the JAG FAQs. Cap on use of JAG award funds for administrative costs – A unit of local government may use up to 10 percent of a JAG award, including up to 10 percent of any earned interest, for costs associated with administering the award. Prohibition of supplanting; no use of JAG funds as "match"– JAG funds may not be used to supplant State or local funds but must be used to increase the amounts of such funds that would, in the absence of federal funds, be made available for law enforcement activities. See the JAG FAQs on BJA's JAG web page for examples of supplanting. Although supplanting is prohibited, as discussed under "What An Application Should Include," the leveraging of federal funding is encouraged. Absent specific federal statutory authority to do so, JAG award funds may not be used as "match" for the purposes of other federal awards. Other restrictions on use of funds – If a unit of local government chooses to use its FY 2017 JAG funds for particular, defined types of expenditures, it must satisfy certain preconditions: Body -Worn Cameras (BWC) A unit of local government that proposes to use FY 2017 JAG award funds to purchase BWC equipment or to implement or enhance BWC programs, must provide to OJP a certification(s) that the unit of local government has policies and procedures in place related to BWC equipment usage, data storage and access, privacy considerations, training, etc. The certification can be found at: https://www.bja.gov/Funding/BodvWornCameraCert.pdf. 6 BJA-2017-11301 A unit of local government that proposes to use JAG funds for BWC-related expenses will have funds withheld until the required certification is submitted and approved by OJP. The BJA BWC Toolkit provides model BWC policies and best practices to assist departments in implementing BWC programs. Apart from the JAG Program, BJA provides funds under the Body -Worn Camera Policy and Implementation Program (BWC Program). The BWC Program allows jurisdictions to develop and implement policies and practices required for effective program adoption and address program factors including the purchase, deployment, and maintenance of camera systems and equipment; data storage and access; and privacy considerations. Interested units of local government may wish to refer to the BWC web page for more information. Units of local government should note, however, that JAG funds may not be used as any part of the 50 percent match required by the BWC Program. Body Armor Ballistic -resistant and stab -resistant body armor can be funded through the JAG Program, as well as through BJA's Bulletproof Vest Partnership (BVP) Program. The BVP Program is designed to provide a critical resource to local law enforcement through the purchase of ballistic -resistant and stab -resistant body armor. For more information on the BVP Program, including eligibility and application, refer to the BVP web page. Units of local government should note, however, that JAG funds may not be used as any part of the 50 percent match required by the BVP Program. Body armor purchased with JAG funds may be purchased at any threat level, make, or model from any distributor or manufacturer, as long as the body armor has been tested and found to comply with the latest applicable National Institute of Justice (NIJ) ballistic or stab standards. In addition, body armor purchased must be made in the United States, As is the case in the BVP Program, units of local government that propose to purchase body armor with JAG funds must certify that law enforcement agencies receiving body armor have a written "mandatory wear" policy in effect. FAQs related to the mandatory wear policy and certifications can be found at: https://www.biagov/Funding/JAGFAQ.pdf. This policy must be in place for at least all uniformed officers before any FY 2017 funding can be used by the unit of local government for body armor. There are no requirements regarding the nature of the policy other than it being a mandatory wear policy for all uniformed officers while on duty. The certification must be signed by the Authorized Representative and must be attached to the application if proposed as part of the application. If the unit of local government proposes to change project activities to utilize JAG funds to purchase body armor after the award is accepted, the unit of local government must submit the signed certification to BJA at that time. A mandatory wear concept and issues paper and a model policy are available by contacting the BVP Customer Support Center at vests@usdoj.gov or toll free at 1-877-758-3787. The certification form related to mandatory wear can be found at: www.bia.gov/Funding/BodyArmorMandatoryWearCert.pdf. DNA Testing of Evidentiary Materials and Upload of DNA Profiles to a Database 7 BJA-2017-11301 0 If JAG Program funds will be used for DNA testing of evidentiary materials, any resulting eligible DNA profiles must be uploaded to the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS, the national DNA database operated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI]) by a government DNA lab with access to CODIS. No profiles generated with JAG funding may be entered into any other non-governmental DNA database without prior express written approval from BJA. In addition, funds may not be used for purchase of DNA equipment and supplies when the resulting DNA profiles from such technology are not accepted for entry into CODIS. Interoperable Communication Units of local government (including subrecipients) that use FY 2017 JAG funds to support emergency communications activities (including the purchase of interoperable communications equipment and technologies such as voice-over-internet protocol bridging or gateway devices, or equipment to support the build out of wireless broadband networks in the 700 MHz public safety band under the Federal Communications Commission [FCC) Waiver Order) should review FY 2017 SAFECOM Guidance. The SAFECOM Guidance is updated annually to provide current information on emergency communications policies, eligible costs, best practices, and technical standards for State, local, tribal, and territorial grantees investing federal funds in emergency communications projects. Additionally, emergency communications projects should support the Statewide Communication Interoperability Plan (SCIP) and be coordinated with the fulitime Statewide Interoperability Coordinator (SWIC) in the State of the project. As the central coordination point for their State's interoperability effort, the SWIC plays a critical role, and can serve as a valuable resource. SWICs are responsible for the implementation of SCIP through coordination and collaboration with the emergency response community. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security Office of Emergency Communications maintains a list of SWICs for each of the States and territories. Contact OEC a(�hq.dhs.gov. All communications equipment purchased with FY 2017 JAG Program funding should be identified during quarterly performance metrics reporting. In order to promote information sharing and enable interoperability among disparate systems across the justice and public safety communities, OJP requires the recipient to comply with DOJ's Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative guidelines and recommendations for this particular grant. Recipients must conform to the Global Standards Package (GSP) and all constituent elements, where applicable, as described at: https://www.it.ojp.gov/qsp grantcondition, Recipients must document planned approaches to information sharing and describe compliance to GSP and an appropriate privacy policy that protects shared information, or provide detailed justification for why an alternative approach is recommended. Required compliance with applicable federal laws By law, the chief executive (e.g., the mayor) of each unit of local government that applies for an FY 2017 JAG award must certify that the unit of local government will "comply with all provisions of [the JAG program statute] and all other applicable Federal laws." To satisfy this requirement, each unit of local government applicant must submit two properly executed certifications using the forms shown in Appendix I and Appendix II. All applicants should understand that OJP awards, including certifications provided in connection with such awards, are subject to review by DOJ, including by OJP and by the DOJ 8 SJA-2017-11301 Office of the Inspector General. Applicants also should understand that a materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement (or concealment or omission of a material fact) in a certification submitted to OJP in support of an application may be the subject of criminal prosecution, and also may result in civil penalties and administrative remedies for false claims or otherwise. Administrative remedies that may be available to OJP with respect to an FY 2017 award include suspension or termination of the award, placement on the DOJ high risk grantee list, disallowance of costs, and suspension or debarment of the recipient. BJA areas of emphasis BJA recognizes that there are significant pressures on local criminal justice systems. In these challenging times, shared priorities and leveraged resources can make a significant impact. As a component of OJP, BJA intends to focus much of its work on the areas of emphasis described below, and encourages each unit of local government recipient of an FY 2017 JAG award to join us in addressing these challenges: • Reducing Gun Violence — Gun violence has touched nearly every State and local government in America. While our nation has made great strides in reducing violent crime, some municipalities and regions continue to experience unacceptable levels of violent crime at rates far in excess of the national average. BJA encourages units of local government to invest JAG funds in programs to combat gun violence, enforce existing firearms laws, and improve the process for ensuring that persons prohibited from purchasing guns are prevented from doing so by enhancing reporting to the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). • National Incident -Based Reporting System (NIBRS) -- The FBI has formally announced its intentions to establish NIBRS as the law enforcement crime data reporting standard for the nation. The transition to NIBRS will provide a more complete and accurate picture of crime at the national, State, and local levels. Once this transition is complete, the FBI will no longer collect summary data and will accept data only in the NIBRS format. Also, once the transition is complete, JAG award amounts will be calculated on the basis of submitted NIBRS data. Transitioning all law enforcement agencies to NIBRS is the first step in gathering more comprehensive crime data. BJA encourages recipients of FY 2017 JAG awards to use JAG funds to expedite the transition to NIBRS. • Officer Safety and Wellness — The issue of law enforcement safety and wellness is an important priority for the Department of Justice. Preliminary data compiled by the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund indicates that there were 135 line -of - duty law enforcement deaths in 2016—the highest level in the past 5 years and a 10 percent increase from 2015 (123 deaths). Firearms -related deaths continued to be the leading cause of death (64), increasing 56 percent from 2015 (41). Of particular concern is that of the 64 firearms -related deaths, 21 were as a result of ambush -style attacks representing the highest total in more than two decades, Traffic -related deaths continued to rise in 2016 with 53 officers killed, a 10 percent increase from 2015 (48 deaths). Additionally, there were 11 job-related illness deaths in 2016, mostly heart attacks. BJA sees a vital need to focus not only on tactical officer safety concerns but also on health and wellness as they affect officer performance and safety. It is important for law enforcement to have the tactical skills necessary, and also be physically and mentally well, to perform, survive, and be resilient in the face of the demanding duties of the 9 BJA-2017-11301 profession. BJA encourages units of local government to use JAG funds to address these needs by providing training, including paying for tuition and travel expenses related to attending trainings such as VALOR training, as well as funding for health and wellness programs for law enforcement officers. • Border Security The security of United States borders is critically important to the reduction and prevention of transnational drug-trafficking networks and combating all forms of human trafficking within the United States (sex and labor trafficking of foreign nationals and U.S. citizens of all sexes and ages). These smuggling operations on both sides of the border contribute to a significant increase in violent crime and U.S. deaths from dangerous drugs. Additionally, illegal immigration continues to place a significant strain on federal, State, and local resources—particularly on those agencies charged with border security and immigration enforcement—as well as the local communities into which many of the illegal immigrants are placed. BJA encourages units of local government to use JAG funds to support law enforcement hiring, training, and technology enhancement in the area of border security. • Collaborative Prosecution -- BJA supports strong partnerships between prosecutors and police as a means to improve case outcomes and take violent offenders off the street. BJA strongly encourages State and local law enforcement to foster strong partnerships with prosecutors to adopt new collaborative strategies aimed at combating increases in crime, particularly violent crime. (BJA's "Smart Prosecution" Initiative is a related effort by OJP to promote partnerships between prosecutors and researchers to develop and deliver effective, data -driven, evidence -based strategies to solve chronic problems and fight crime.) Goals, Objectives, and Deliverables In general, the FY 2017 JAG Program is designed to provide additional personnel, equipment, supplies, contractual support, training, technical assistance, and information systems for criminal justice. The JAG Local Program is designed to assist units of local government with respect to criminal justice. As discussed in more detail below, a unit of local government that receives an FY 2017 JAG award will be required to prepare various types of reports and to submit data related to performance measures and accountability. The Goals, Objectives, and Deliverables are directly related to the JAG Progam accountability measures. Evidence -Based Programs or Practices OJP strongly emphasizes the use of data and evidence in policy making and program development in criminal justice, juvenile justice, and crime victim services. OJP is committed to: • Improving the quantity and quality of evidence OJP generates • Integrating evidence into program, practice, and policy decisions within OJP and the field • Improving the translation of evidence into practice OJP considers programs and practices to be evidence -based when their effectiveness has been demonstrated by causal evidence, generally obtained through one or more outcome evaluations. Causal evidence documents a relationship between an activity or intervention (including technology) and its intended outcome, including measuring the direction and size of a change, and the extent to which a change may be attributed to the activity or intervention. 10 BJA-2017-11301 Causal evidence depends on the use of scientific methods to rule out, to the extent possible, alternative explanations for the documented change. The strength of causal evidence, based on the factors described above, will influence the degree to which OJP considers a program or practice to be evidence -based, The OJP CrimeSolutions.gov website is one resource that applicants may use to find information about evidence -based programs in criminal justice, juvenile justice, and crime victim services. A useful matrix of evidence -based policing programs and strategies is available through the Center for Evidence -Based Crime Policy at George Mason University. BJA offers a number of program models designed to effectively implement promising and evidence -based strategies through the BJA "Smart Suite" of programs, including Smart Policing, Smart Supervision, Smart Pretrial, Smart Defense, Smart Prosecution, Smart Reentry, and others (see: https:f/www.bia.gov/Programs/CRPPE/smartsuite.html). BJA encourages units of local government to use JAG funds to support these "smart on crime" strategies, including effective partnerships with universities, research partners, and non-traditional criminal justice partners. BJA Success Stories The BJA Success Stories web page features projects that have demonstrated success or shown promise in reducing crime and positively impacting communities. This web page will be a valuable resource for States, localities, territories, tribes, and criminal justice professionals that seek to identify and learn about JAG and other successful BJA-funded projects linked to innovation, crime reduction, and evidence -based practices. BJA strongly encourages the recipient to submit success stories annually (or more frequently). If a unit of local government has a success story it would like to submit, it may be submitted through My BJA account, using "add a Success Story" and the Success Story Submission form. Register for a My BJA account using this registration link. B. Federal Award Information BJA estimates that it will make up to 1,100 local awards totaling an estimated $83,000,000. Awards of at least $25,000 are 4 years in length, and award periods will be from October 1, 2016 through September 30, 2020, Extensions beyond this period may be made on a case-by- case basis at the discretion of BJA and must be requested via GMS no less than 30 days prior to the grant end date. Awards of less than $25,000 are 2 years in length, and award periods will be from October 1, 2016 through September 30, 2018. Extensions of up to 2 years can be requested for these awards via GMS no less than 30 days prior to the grant end date, and will be automatically granted upon request. All awards are subject to the availability of appropriated funds and to any modifications or additional requirements that may be imposed by statute. Type of Award BJA expects that any award under this solicitation will be in the form of a grant. See Statutory and Regulatory Requirements: Award Conditions, under Section F. Federal Award Administration Information, for a brief discussion of important statutes, regulations, and award conditions that apply to many (or in some cases, all) OJP grants. 11 BJA-2017-11301 JAG awards are based on a statutory formula as described below. Once each fiscal year's overall JAG Program funding level is determined, BJA works with the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) to begin a four -step grant award calculation process, which, in general, consists of: (1) Computing an initial JAG allocation for each State, based on its share of violent crime and population (weighted equally). (2) Reviewing the initial JAG allocation amount to determine if the State allocation is less than the minimum award amount defined in the JAG legislation (0.25 percent of the total). If this is the case, the State is funded at the minimum level, and the funds required for this are deducted from the overall pool of JAG funds. Each of the remaining States receive the minimum award plus an additional amount based on its share of violent crime and population. (3) Dividing each State's final award amount (except for the territories and District of Columbia) between the State and its units of local governments at a rate of 60 and 40 percent, respectively. (4) Determining unit of local government award allocations, which are based on their proportion of the State's 3 -year violent crime average. If the "eligible award amount" for a particular unit of local government as determined on this basis is $10,000 or more, then the unit of local government is eligible to apply directly to OJP (under the JAG Local solicitation) for a JAG award. If the "eligible award amount" to a particular unit of local government as determined on this basis would be less than $10,000, however, the funds are not made available for a direct award to that particular unit of local government, but instead are added to the amount that otherwise would have been awarded to the State. Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Award recipients and subrecipients (including recipients or subrecipients that are pass-through entities') must, as described in the Part 200 Uniform Requirements2 as set out at 2 C.F.R. 200.303: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that [the recipient (and any subrecipient)) is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in "Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government" issued by the Comptroller General of the United States and the "Internal Control Integrated Framework", issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). (b) Comply with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal awards. 1 For purposes of this solicitation, the phrase "pass-through entity" includes any recipient or subrecipient that provides a subaward ("subgrant") to carry out part of the funded award or program. 2 The "Part 200 Uniform Requirements" refers to the DOJ regulation at 2 C.F.R Part 2800, which adopts (with certain modifications) the provisions of 2 C.F.R. Part 200. 12 BJA-2017-11301 (c) Evaluate and monitor [the recipient's (and any subrecipient's)] compliance with statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of Federal awards. (d) Take prompt action when instances of noncompliance are identified including noncompliance identified in audit findings. (e) Take reasonable measures to safeguard protected personally identifiable information and other information the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity designates as sensitive or [the recipient (or any subrecipient)] considers sensitive consistent with applicable Federal, State, local, and tribal laws regarding privacy and obligations of confidentiality. To help ensure that applicants understand the administrative requirements and cost principles, OJP encourages prospective applicants to enroll, at no charge, in the DOJ Grants Financial Management Online Training, available here. Budget and Financial Information Trust Fund — Units of local government may draw down JAG funds either in advance or on a reimbursement basis. To draw down in advance, a trust fund must be established in which to deposit the funds. The trust fund may or may not be an interest-bearing account. If subrecipients draw down JAG funds in advance, they also must establish a trust fund in which to deposit funds. Tracking and reporting regarding JAG funds used for State administrative costs — As indicated earlier, a unit of local government may use up to 10 percent of a JAG award, including up to 10 percent of any earned interest, for costs associated with administering the award. Administrative costs (when utilized) must be tracked separately; a recipient must report in separate financial status reports (SF -425) those expenditures that specifically relate to each particular JAG award during any particular reporting period. No commingling — Both the unit of local government recipient and all subrecipients of JAG funds are prohibited from commingling funds on a program -by -program or project -by -project basis. For this purpose, use of the administrative JAG funds to perform work across all active awards in any one year is not considered comingling. Disparate Certification — In some cases, as defined by the legislation, a disparity may exist between the funding eligibility of a county and its associated municipalities. Three different types of disparities may exist: • The first type is a zero -county disparity. This situation exists when one or more municipalities within a county are eligible for a direct award but the county is not; yet the county is responsible for providing criminal justice services (such as prosecution and incarceration) for the municipality. In this case, the county is entitled to part of the municipality's award because it shares the cost of criminal justice operations, although it may not report crime data to the FBI. This is the most common type of disparity. • A second type of disparity exists when both a county and a municipality within that county qualify for a direct award, but the award amount for the municipality exceeds 150 percent of the county's award amount. 13 BJA-2017-11301 ® The third type of disparity occurs when a county and multiple municipalities within that county are all eligible for direct awards, but the sum of the awards for the individual municipalities exceeds 400 percent of the county's award amount. Jurisdictions certified as disparate must identify a fiscal agent that will submit a joint application for the aggregate eligible allocation to all disparate municipalities. The joint application must determine and specify the award distribution to each unit of local government and the purposes for which the funds will be used. When beginning the JAG application process, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that identifies which jurisdiction will serve as the applicant or fiscal agent for joint funds must be completed and signed by the Authorized Representative for each participating jurisdiction. The signed MOU should be attached to the application. For a sample MOU, go to: www.bja.gov/Funding/JAGMOU.pdf. Cost Sharing or Match Requirement The JAG Program does not require a match. For additional cost sharing and match information, see the DOJ Grants Financial Guide. Pre -Agreement Costs (also known as Pre -award Costs) Pre -agreement costs are costs incurred by the applicant prior to the start date of the period of performance of the grant award. OJP does not typically approve pre -agreement costs. An applicant must request and obtain the prior written approval of OJP for any such costs. All such costs incurred prior to award and prior to approval of the costs are incurred at the sole risk of the applicant. (Generally, no applicant should incur project costs before submitting an application requesting federal funding for those costs.) Should there be extenuating circumstances that make it appropriate for OJP to consider approving pre -agreement costs, the applicant may contact the point of contact listed on the title page of this solicitation for the requirements concerning written requests for approval. If approved in advance by OJP, award funds may be used for pre -agreement costs, consistent with the recipient's approved budget and applicable cost principles. See the section on "Costs Requiring Prior Approval" in the DOJ Grants Financial Guide for more information. Prior Approval, Planning, and Reporting of Conference/Meeting/Training Costs\ OJP strongly encourages every applicant that proposes to use award funds for any conference-, meeting-, or training -related activity (or similar event) to review carefully—before submitting an application—the OJP and DOJ policy and guidance on approval, planning, and reporting of such events, available at: https://www.olp,qov/financialquide/DOJ/PostawardRequirements/chapter3.10a.htm. OJP policy and guidance (1) encourage minimization of conference, meeting, and training costs; (2) require prior written approval (which may affect project timelines) of most conference, meeting, and training costs for cooperative agreement recipients, as well as some conference, meeting, and training costs for grant recipients; and (3) set cost limits, which include a general prohibition of all food and beverage costs. Costs Associated with Language Assistance (if applicable) If an applicant proposes a program or activity that would deliver services or benefits to individuals, the costs of taking reasonable steps to provide meaningful access to those services 14 BJA•2017-11301 or benefits for individuals with limited English proficiency may be allowable. Reasonable steps to provide meaningful access to services or benefits may include interpretation or translation services, where appropriate. For additional information, see the "Civil Rights Compliance" section under "Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP Grants and Cooperative Agreements - FY 2017 Awards" in the OJP Funding Resource Center. C. Eligibility Information For information on eligibility, see the title page of this solicitation. Note that, as discussed in more detail below, the certification regarding compliance with 8 U.S.C. § 1373 must be executed and submitted before a unit of local government (other than an Indian tribal government) can make a valid award acceptance. Also, a unit of local government may not receive award funds (and its award will include a condition that withholds funds) until it submits a properly executed "Certifications and Assurances by Chief Executive of Applicant Government." D. Application and Submission Information What an Application Should Include This section describes in detail what an application should include. An applicant should anticipate that if it fails to submit an application that contains all of the specified elements, it may negatively affect the review of its application; and, should a decision be made to make an award, it may result in the inclusion of award conditions that preclude the recipient from accessing or using award funds until the recipient satisfies the conditions and OJP makes the funds available. An applicant may combine the Budget Narrative and the Budget Detail Worksheet in one document. If an applicant submits only one budget document, however, it must contain both narrative and detail information. Please review the "Note on File Names and File Types" under How to Apply to be sure applications are submitted in permitted formats. OJP strongly recommends that applicants use appropriately descriptive file names (e.g., "Program Narrative," "Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative," "Timelines," "Memoranda of Understanding," `Resumes") for all attachments. Also, OJP recommends that applicants include resumes in a single file. In general, if a unit of local government fails to submit required information or documents, OJP either will return the unit of local government's application in the Grants Management System (GMS) for submission of the missing information or documents, or will attach a condition to the award that will withhold award funds until the necessary information and documents are submitted. (As discussed elsewhere in this solicitation, the certification regarding compliance with 8 U.S.C. § 1373—which is set out at Appendix II—will be handled differently. Unless and until that certification is submitted, the unit of local government (other than an Indian tribal government) will be unable to make a valid acceptance of the award.) 15 BJA-2017-11301 1. Information to Complete the Application for Federal Assistance (SF -424) The SF -424 is a required standard form used as a cover sheet for submission of pre - applications, applications, and related information. GMS takes information from the applicant's profile to populate the fields on this form. To avoid processing delays, an applicant must include an accurate legal name on its SF - 424. Current OJP award recipients, when completing the field for "Legal Name," should use the same legal name that appears on the prior year award document, which is also the legal name stored in OJP's financial system. On the SF -424, enter the Legal Name in box 5 and Employer Identification Number (EIN) in box 6 exactly as it appears on the prior year award document. An applicant with a current, active award(s) must ensure that its GMS profile is current. If the profile is not current, the applicant should submit a Grant Adjustment Notice updating the information on its GMS profile prior to applying under this solicitation. A new applicant entity should enter the Official Legal Name and address of the applicant entity in box 5 and the EIN in box 6 of the SF -424. Intergovernmental Review: This solicitation ("funding opportunity") is within the scope of Executive Order 12372, concerning State opportunities to coordinate applications for federal financial assistance. See 28 C.F.R. Part 30. An applicant may find the names and addresses of State Single Points of Contact (SPOCs) at the following website: httbs://www.whitehouse,gov/omb/orants spoc/, If the State appears on the SPOC list, the applicant must contact the State SPOC to find out about, and comply with, the State's process under E.O. 12372. In completing the SF -424, an applicant whose State appears on the SPOC list is to make the appropriate selection in response to question 19 once the applicant has complied with its State E.O. 12372 process. (An applicant whose State does not appear on the SPOC list should answer question 19 by selecting the response that the "Program is subject to E.O. 12372 but has not been selected by the State for review.") 2. Project Abstract Applications should include a high-quality project abstract that summarizes the proposed project in 400 words or less. Project abstracts should be: • Written for a general public audience. • Submitted as a separate attachment with "Project Abstract" as part of its file name. • Single-spaced, using a standard 12 -point font (Times New Roman) with 1 -inch margins. • Include applicant name, title of the project, a brief description of the problem to be addressed and the targeted area/population, project goals and objectives, a description of the project strategy, any significant partnerships, and anticipated outcomes. • Identify up to 10 project identifiers that would be associated with proposed project activities. The list of identifiers can be found at www.bia.gov/funding/JAGldentifiers.pdf. 3. Program Narrative The following sections should be included as part of the program narrative3: a. Statement of the Problem — Identify the unit of local government's strategy/funding priorities for the FY 2017 JAG funds, the subgrant award process and timeline, and a 3 For information on subawards (including the details on proposed subawards that should be included in the application), see "Budget and Associated Documentation" under Section D. Application and Submission Information. 16 BJA-2017-11301 description of the programs to be funded over the grant period. Units of local government are strongly encouraged to prioritize the funding on evidence -based projects. b. Proiect Design and Implementation — Describe the unit of local government's strategic planning process, if any, that guides its priorities and funding strategy. This should include a description of how the local community is engaged in the planning process and the data and analysis utilized to support the plan; it should identify the stakeholders currently participating in the strategic planning process, the gaps in the needed resources for criminal justice purposes, and how JAG funds will be coordinated with State and related justice funds. c. Capabilities and Competencies -- Describe any additional strategic planning/coordination efforts in which the units of local government participates with other criminal justice criminal/juvenile justice agencies in the State. d. Plan for Collecting the Data Required for this Solicitation's Performance Measures — OJP will require each successful applicant to submit specific performance measures data as part of its reporting under the award (see "General Information about Post - Federal Award Reporting Requirements" in Section F. Federal Award Administration Information). The performance measures correlate to the goals, objectives, and deliverables identified under "Goals, Objectives, and Deliverables" in Section A. Program Description. Post award, recipients will be required to submit quarterly performance metrics through BJA's Performance Measurement Tool (PMT), located at: https://biapmt.oip.gov. The application should describe the applicant's plan for collection of all of the performance measures data listed in the JAG Program accountability measures at: https://biapmt.oip.gov/help/jagdocs.html. BJA does not require applicants to submit performance measures data with their application. Performance measures are included as an alert that BJA will require successful applicants to submit specific data as part of their reporting requirements. For the application, applicants should indicate an understanding of these requirements and discuss how they will gather the required data, should they receive funding. Note on Project Evaluations An applicant that proposes to use award funds through this solicitation to conduct project evaluations should be aware that certain project evaluations (such as systematic investigations designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge) may constitute "research" for purposes of applicable DOJ human subjects protection regulations. However, project evaluations that are intended only to generate internal improvements to a program or service, or are conducted only to meet OJP's performance measure data reporting requirements, likely do not constitute "research." Each applicant should provide sufficient information for OJP to determine whether the particular project it proposes would either intentionally or unintentionally collect and/or use information in such a way that it meets the DOJ regulatory definition of research that appears at 28 C.F.R. Part 46 ("Protection of Human Subjects"). Research, for the purposes of human subjects protection for OJP-funded programs, is defined as "a systematic investigation, including research development, testing and evaluation, designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge." 28 C.F.R. 46.102(d). 17 BJA-2017-11301 For additional information on determining whether a proposed activity would constitute research for purposes of human subjects protection, applicants should consult the decision tree in the "Research and the Protection of Human Subjects" section of the "Requirements related to Research" web page of the "Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP Grants and Cooperative Agreements - FY 2017" available through the OJP Funding Resource Center. Every prospective applicant whose application may propose a research or statistical component also should review the "Data Privacy and Confidentiality Requirements" section on that web page. 4. Budget and Associated Documentation (a) Budget Detail Worksheet A sample Budget Detail Worksheet can be found at www,ojp.gov/fundinq/Apply/Resources/BudgetDetailWorksheet.pdf. An applicant that submits its budget in a different format should use the budget categories listed in the sample budget worksheet. The Budget Detail Worksheet should break out costs by year. For questions pertaining to budget and examples of allowable and unallowable costs, see the DOJ Grants Financial Guide. (b) Budget Narrative The Budget Narrative should thoroughly and clearly describe every category of expense listed in the proposed Budget Detail Worksheet. OJP expects proposed budgets to be complete, cost effective, and allowable (e.g., reasonable, allocable, and necessary for project activities). This narrative should include a full description of all costs, including administrative costs (if applicable). An applicant should demonstrate in its Budget Narrative how it will maximize cost effectiveness of award expenditures. Budget narratives should generally describe cost effectiveness in relation to potential alternatives and the goals of the project. For example, a budget narrative should detail why planned in-person meetings are necessary, or how technology and collaboration with outside organizations could be used to reduce costs, without compromising quality. The Budget Narrative should be mathematically sound and correspond clearly with the information and figures provided in the Budget Detail Worksheet. The narrative should explain how the applicant estimated and calculated all costs, and how those costs are necessary to the completion of the proposed project. The narrative may include tables for clarification purposes, but need not be in a spreadsheet format. As with the Budget Detail Worksheet, the Budget Narrative should describe costs by year. (c) Information on Proposed Subawards (if any), as well as on Proposed Procurement Contracts (if any) Applicants for OJP awards typically may propose to make "subawards." Applicants also may propose to enter into procurement "contracts" under the award. Whether—for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements ---a particular agreement between a recipient and a third party will be considered a "subaward" or instead considered a procurement "contract" under the award is determined by federal rules and applicable OJP guidance. It is an important distinction, in part because the 18 BJA•2017-11301 federal administrative rules and requirements that apply to "subawards" and procurement "contracts" under awards differ markedly. In general, the central question is the relationship between what the third party will do under its agreement with the recipient and what the recipient has committed (to OJP) to do under its award to further a public purpose (e.g., services the recipient will provide, products it will develop or modify, research or evaluation it will conduct). If a third party will provide some of the services the recipient has committed (to OJP) to provide, will develop or modify all or part of a product the recipient has committed (to OJP) to develop or modify, or conduct part of the research or evaluation the recipient has committed (to OJP) to conduct, OJP will consider the agreement with the third party a subaward for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements. This will be true even if the recipient, for internal or other non-federal purposes, labels or treats its agreement as a procurement, a contract, or a procurement contract. Neither the title nor the structure of an agreement determines whether the agreement—for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements—is a "subaward" or is instead a procurement "contract" under an award. Additional guidance on the circumstances under which (for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements) an agreement constitutes a subaward as opposed to a procurement contract under an award is available (along with other resources) on the OJP Part 200 Uniform Requirements web page. (1) Information on proposed subawards and required certification regarding 8 U.S.C. § 1373 from certain subrecipients General requirement for federal authorization of any subaward; statutory authorizations of subawards under the JAG Program statute. Generally, a recipient of an OJP award may not make subawards ("subgrants") unless the recipient has specific federal authorization to do so. Unless an applicable statute or DOJ regulation specifically authorizes (or requires) particular subawards, a recipient must have authorization from OJP before it may make a subaward. JAG subawards that are required or specifically authorized by statute (see 42 U.S.C. § 3751(a) and 42 U.S.C. § 3755) do not require prior approval to authorize subawards. This includes subawards made by units of local government under the JAG Program. A particular subaward may be authorized by OJP because the recipient included a sufficiently detailed description and justification of the proposed subaward in the application as approved by OJP. If, however, a particular subaward is not authorized by federal statute or regulation and is not sufficiently described and justified in the application as approved by OJP, the recipient will be required, post award, to request and obtain written authorization from OJP before it may make the subaward. If an applicant proposes to make one or more subawards to carry out the federal award and program, and those subawards are not specifically authorized (or required) by statute or regulation, the applicant should: (1) identify (if known) the proposed subrecipient(s), (2) describe in detail what each subrecipient will do to carry out the federal award and federal program, and (3) provide a justification for the 19 BJA-2017-11301 subaward(s), with details on pertinent matters such as special qualifications and areas of expertise. Pertinent information on subawards should appear not only in the Program Narrative but also in the Budget Detail Worksheet and budget narrative. NEW Required certification regarding 8 U.S.C. § 1373 from any proposed subrecipient that is a unit of local government or "public" institution of higher education. Before a unit of local government may subaward FY 2017 award funds to another unit of local government or to a public institution of higher education, it will be required (by award condition) to obtain a properly executed certification regarding compliance with 8 U.S.C. § 1373 from the proposed subrecipient. (This requirement regarding 8 U.S.C. § 1373 will not apply to subawards to Indian tribes). The specific certification the unit of local government must require from another unit of local government will vary somewhat from the specific certification it must require from a public institution of higher education. The forms will be posted and available for download at: https:ifojp.gov/funding/Explore/SampleCertifications-8USC1373.htm. (2) Information on proposed procurement contracts (with specific justification for proposed noncompetitive contracts over $150,000) Unlike a recipient contemplating a subaward, a recipient of an OJP award generally does not need specific prior federal authorization to enter into an agreement that— for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements—is considered a procurement contract, provided that (1) the recipient uses its own documented procurement procedures and (2) those procedures conform to applicable federal law, including the Procurement Standards of the (DOJ) Part 200 Uniform Requirements (as set out at 2 C.F.R. 200.317 - 200.326). The Budget Detail Worksheet and budget narrative should identify proposed procurement contracts. (As discussed above, subawards must be identified and described separately from procurement contracts.) The Procurement Standards in the (DOJ) Part 200 Uniform Requirements, however, reflect a general expectation that agreements that (for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements) constitute procurement "contracts" under awards will be entered into on the basis of full and open competition. If a proposed procurement contract would exceed the simplified acquisition threshold—currently, $150,000—a recipient of an OJP award may not proceed without competition, unless and until the recipient receives specific advance authorization from OJP to use a non-competitive approach for the procurement. An applicant that (at the time of its application) intends—without competition—to enter into a procurement contract that would exceed $150,000 should include a detailed justification that explains to OJP why, in the particular circumstances, it is appropriate to proceed without competition. Various considerations that may be pertinent to the justification are outlined in the DOJ Grants Financial Guide. (d) Pre -Agreement Costs For information on pre -agreement costs, see Section B. Federal Award Information. 5. Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable) Indirect costs may be charged to an award only if: (a) The recipient has a current (that is, unexpired), federally approved indirect cost rate; or 20 BJA-2017-11301 (b) The recipient is eligible to use, and elects to use, the "de minimis" indirect cost rate described in the (DOJ) Part 200 Uniform Requirements, as set out at 2 C.F.R. 200.414(f). Note: This rule does not eliminate or alter the JAG -specific restriction in federal law that charges for administrative costs may not exceed 10 percent of the award amount, regardless of the approved indirect cost rate. An applicant with a current (that is, unexpired) federally approved indirect cost rate is to attach a copy of the indirect cost rate agreement to the application. An applicant that does not have a current federally approved rate may request one through its cognizant federal agency, which will review all documentation and approve a rate for the applicant entity, or, if the applicant's accounting system permits,, applicants may propose to allocate costs in the direct cost categories. For assistance with identifying the appropriate cognizant federal agency for indirect costs, please contact the OCFO Customer Service Center at 1-800-458-0786 or at ask.ocfo(a?usdoj.gov. If DOJ is the cognizant federal agency, applicants may obtain information needed to submit an indirect cost rate proposal at: www.oip.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/IndirectCosts.pdf. Certain OJP recipients have the option of electing to use the "de minimis" indirect cost rate. An applicant that is eligible to use the "de minimis" rate that wishes to use the "de minimis" rate should attach written documentation to the application that advises OJP of both: (1) the applicant's eligibility to use the "de minimis" rate, and (2) its election to do so. If an eligible applicant elects the "de minimis" rate, costs must be consistently charged as either indirect or direct costs, but may not be double charged or inconsistently charged as both. The "de minimis" rate may no longer be used once an approved federally -negotiated indirect cost rate is in place. (No entity that ever has had a federally approved negotiated indirect cost rate is eligible to use the "de minimis" rate.) 6. Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable) An applicant that proposes to provide direct services or assistance to residents on tribal lands should include in its application a resolution, a letter, affidavit, or other documentation, as appropriate, that demonstrates (as a legal matter) that the applicant has the requisite authorization from the tribe(s) to implement the proposed project on tribal lands. OJP will not deny an application for an FY 2017 award for failure to submit such tribal authorizing resolution (or other appropriate documentation) by the application deadline, but a unit of local government will not receive award funds (and its award will include a condition that withholds funds) until it submits the appropriate documentation. 7. Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Questionnaire (including applicant disclosure of high-risk status) Every unit of local government is to complete the OJP Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Questionnaire as part of its application. In accordance with the Part 200 Uniform Requirements as set out at 2 C.F.R. 200.205, federal agencies must have in place a framework for evaluating the risks posed by applicants before they receive a federal award. 21 BJA•2017-11301 8. Applicant Disclosure of High Risk Status Applicants that are currently designated high risk by another federal grant making agency must disclose that status. For purposes of this disclosure, high risk includes any status under which a federal awarding agency provides additional oversight due to the applicant's past performance, or other programmatic or financial concerns with the applicant. If an applicant is designated high risk by another federal awarding agency, the applicant must provide the following information: • The federal agency that currently designated the applicant as high risk • Date the applicant was designated high risk • The high risk point of contact at that federal awarding agency (name, phone number, and email address). • Reasons for the high risk status, as set out by the federal awarding agency OJP seeks this information to help ensure appropriate federal oversight of OJP awards. An applicant that is considered "high risk" by another federal awarding agency is not automatically disqualified from receiving an OJP award. OJP may, however, consider the information in award decisions, and may impose additional OJP oversight of any award under this solicitation (including through the conditions that accompany the award document). 9. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities An applicant that expends any funds for lobbying activities is to provide all of the information requested on the form Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF -LLL). 10. Certifications and Assurances by the Chief Executive of the Applicant Government A JAG application is not complete, and a unit of local government may not receive award funds, unless the chief executive of the applicant unit of local government (e.g., the mayor) properly executes, and the unit of local government submits, the "Certifications and Assurances by the Chief Executive of the Applicant Government" attached to this solicitation as Appendix I. OJP will not deny an application for an FY 2017 award for failure to submit these "'Certifications and Assurances by the Chief Executive of the Applicant Government" by the application deadline, but a unit of local government will not receive award funds (and its award will include a condition that withholds funds) until it submits these certifications and assurances, properly executed by the chief executive of the unit of local government (e.g., the mayor). 11. Certification of Compliance with 8 U.S.C. § 1373 by the Chief Legal Officer of the Applicant Government The chief legal officer of an applicant unit of local government (e.g., the General Counsel) is to carefully review the "State or Local Government: FY 2017 Certification of Compliance with 8 U.S.C. § 1373" that is attached as Appendix 11 to this solicitation. If the chief legal officer determines that he or she may execute the certification, the unit of local government is to submit the certification as part of its application. (Note: this requirement does not apply to Indian tribal governments.) As discussed further below, a unit of local government (other than an Indian tribal government) applicant will be unable to make a valid award acceptance of an FY 2017 JAG 22 BJA-2017-11301 award unless and until a properly executed certification by its chief legal officer is received by OJP on or before the day the unit of local government submits an executed award document. 12. Additional Attachments (a) Applicant Disclosure of Pending Applications Each applicant is to disclose whether it has (or is proposed as a subrecipient under) any pending applications for federally funded grants or cooperative agreements that (1) include requests for funding to support the same project being proposed in the application under this solicitation and (2) would cover identical cost items outlined in the budget submitted to OJP as part of the application under this solicitation. The applicant is to disclose applications made directly to federal awarding agencies, and also applications for subawards of federal funds (e.g., applications to State agencies that will subaward ("subgrant") federal funds). OJP seeks this information to help avoid any inappropriate duplication of funding. Leveraging multiple funding sources in a complementary manner to implement comprehensive programs or projects is encouraged and is not seen as inappropriate duplication. Each applicant that has one or more pending applications as described above is to provide the following information about pending applications submitted within the last 12 months: • The federal or State funding agency • The solicitation name/project name • The point of contact information at the applicable federal or State funding agency Federal or State Funding Agency Solicitation Name/Project Name Name/Phone/Email for Point of Contact at Federal or State Funding Agency DOJ/Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) COPS Hiring Program Jane Doe, 202/000-0000; jane.doe@usdoj.gov Health & Human Services/ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Drug -Free Communities Mentoring Program/ North County Youth Mentoring Program John Doe, 202/000-0000; john.doe@hhs.gov Each applicant should include the table as a separate attachment to its application. The file should be named "Disclosure of Pending Applications." The applicant Legal Name on the application must match the entity named on the disclosure of pending applications statement. 23 BJA-2017-11301 Any applicant that does not have any pending applications as described above is to submit, as a separate attachment, a statement to this effect: "[Applicant Name on SF - 424] does not have (and is not proposed as a subrecipient under) any pending applications submitted within the last 12 months for federally funded grants or cooperative agreements (or for subawards under federal grants or cooperative agreements) that request funding to support the same project being proposed in this application to OJP and that would cover identical cost items outlined in the budget submitted as part of this application." (b) Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity (if applicable) If an application involves research (including research and development) and/or evaluation, the applicant must demonstrate research/evaluation independence and integrity, including appropriate safeguards, before it may receive award funds. The applicant must demonstrate independence and integrity regarding both this proposed research and/or evaluation, and any current or prior related projects. Each application should include an attachment that addresses both i. and ii. below. i. For purposes of this solicitation, each applicant is to document research and evaluation independence and integrity by including one of the following two items: a. A specific assurance that the applicant has reviewed its application to identify any actual or potential apparent conflicts of interest (including through review of pertinent information on the principal investigator, any co -principal investigators, and any subrecipients), and that the applicant has identified no such conflicts of interest—whether personal or financial or organizational (including on the part of the applicant entity or on the part of staff, investigators, or subrecipients)—that could affect the independence or integrity of the research, including the design, conduct, and reporting of the research. OR b. A specific description of actual or potential apparent conflicts of interest that the applicant has identified—including through review of pertinent information on the principal investigator, any co -principal investigators, and any subrecipients—that could affect the independence or integrity of the research, including the design, conduct, or reporting of the research. These conflicts may be personal (e.g., on the part of investigators or other staff), financial, or organizational (related to the applicant or any subrecipient entity). Some examples of potential investigator (or other personal) conflict situations are those in which an investigator would be in a position to evaluate a spouse's work product (actual conflict), or an investigator would be in a position to evaluate the work of a former or current colleague (potential apparent conflict). With regard to potential organizational conflicts of interest, as one example, generally an organization would not be given an award to evaluate a project, if that organization had itself provided substantial prior technical assistance to that specific project or a location implementing the project (whether funded by OJP or other sources), because the organization in such an 24 BJA-2017.11301 instance might appear to be evaluating the effectiveness of its own prior work, The key is whether a reasonable person understanding all of the facts would be able to have confidence that the results of any research or evaluation project are objective and reliable. Any outside personal or financial interest that casts doubt on that objectivity and reliability of an evaluation or research product is a problem and must be disclosed. ii. In addition, for purposes of this solicitation, each applicant is to address possible mitigation of research integrity concerns by including, at a minimum, one of the following two items: a. If an applicant reasonably believes that no actual or potential apparent conflicts of interest (personal, financial, or organizational) exist, then the applicant should provide a brief narrative explanation of how and why it reached that conclusion. The applicant also is to include an explanation of the specific processes and procedures that the applicant has in place, or will put in place, to identify and prevent (or, at the very least, mitigate) any such conflicts of interest pertinent to the funded project during the period of performance. Documentation that may be helpful in this regard may include organizational codes of ethicslconduct and policies regarding organizational, personal, and financial conflicts of interest. There is no guarantee that the plan, if any, will be accepted as proposed. OR If the applicant has identified actual or potential apparent conflicts of interest (personal, financial, or organizational) that could affect the independence and integrity of the research, including the design, conduct, or reporting of the research, the applicant is to provide a specific and robust mitigation plan to address each of those conflicts. At a minimum, the applicant is expected to explain the specific processes and procedures that the applicant has in place, or will put in place, to identify and eliminate (or, at the very least, mitigate) any such conflicts of interest pertinent to the funded project during the period of performance. Documentation that may be helpful in this regard may include organizational codes of ethics/conduct and policies regarding organizational, personal, and financial conflicts of interest. There is no guarantee that the plan, if any, will be accepted as proposed. OJP will assess research and evaluation independence and integrity based on considerations such as the adequacy of the applicant's efforts to identify factors that could affect the objectivity or integrity of the proposed staff and/or the applicant entity (and any subrecipients) in carrying out the research, development, or evaluation activity; and the adequacy of the applicant's existing or proposed remedies to control any such factors. Local Governing Body Review Applicants must submit information via the Certification and Assurances by the Chief Executive (See Appendix I) which documents that the JAG application was made available for review by the governing body of the unit of local government, or to an organization designated by that governing body, for a period that was not less than 30 25 BJA-2017-11301 days before the application was submitted to BJA. The same Chief Executive Certification will also specify that an opportunity to comment on this application was provided to citizens prior to the application submission to the extent applicable law or established procedures make such opportunity available. In the past, this has been. accomplished via submission of specific review dates; now OJP will only accept a chief executive's certification to attest to these facts. Units of local government may continue to submit actual dates of review should they wish to do so, in addition to the submission of the Chief Executive Certification. How to Apply An applicant must submit its application through the Grants Management System (GMS), which provides support for the application, award, and management of awards at OJP. Each applicant entity must register in GMS for each specific funding opportunity. Although the registration and submission deadlines are the same, OJP urges each applicant entity to register promptly, especially if this is the first time the applicant is using the system. Find complete instructions on how to register and submit an application in GMS at www.oip.gov/gmscbt/. An applicant that experiences technical difficulties during this process should email GMS.HelpDeskCa usdoi.gov or call 888-549-9901 (option 3), 24 hours every day, including during federal holidays. OJP recommends that each applicant register promptly to prevent delays in submitting an application package by the deadline. Note on File Types: GMS does not accept executable file types as application attachments. These disallowed file types include, but are not limited to, the following extensions: ".com," ".bat," ".exe," ".vbs," ".cfg," ".dat," ".db," ".dbf," ".dll," ".ini," ".log," ".ora," ".sys," and ".zip." Every applicant entity must comply with all applicable System for Award Management (SAM) and unique entity identifier (currently, a Data Universal Numbering System [DUNS) number) requirements. If an applicant entity has not fully complied with applicable SAM and unique identifier requirements by the time OJP makes award decisions, OJP may determine that the applicant is not qualified to receive an award and may use that determination as a basis for making the award to a different applicant. All applicants should complete the following steps: 1. Acquire a unique entity identifier (DUNS number). In general, the Office of Management and Budget requires every applicant for a federal award (other than an individual) to include a "unique entity identifier" in each application, including an application for a supplemental award. Currently, a DUNS number is the required unique entity identifier. A DUNS number is a unique nine -digit identification number provided by the commercial company Dun and Bradstreet. This unique entity identifier is used for tracking purposes, and to validate address and point of contact information for applicants, recipients, and subrecipients. It will be used throughout the life cycle of an OJP award. Obtaining a DUNS number is a free, one-time activity. Call Dun and Bradstreet at 866-705-5711 to obtain a DUNS number or apply online at www.dnb.com. A DUNS number is usually received within 1-2 business days. 2. Acquire registration with the SAM. SAM is the repository for certain standard information about federal financial assistance applicants, recipients, and subrecipients. All applicants for OJP awards (other than individuals) must maintain current registrations in the SAM database. 26 BJA-2017.11301 Each applicant must update or renew its SAM registration at least annually to maintain an active status. SAM registration and renewal can take as long as 10 business days to complete. Information about SAM registration procedures can be accessed at https:/fwww.sam.gov/. 3. Acquire a GMS username and password. New users must create a GMS profile by selecting the "First Time User" link under the sign -in box of the GMS home page. For more information on how to register in GMS, go to www.olp.gov/gmscbt. Previously registered applicants should ensure, prior to applying, that the user profile information is up-to-date in GMS (including, but not limited to, address, legal name of agency and authorized representative) as this information is populated in any new application. 4. Verify the SAM (formerly CCR) registration in GMS. OJP requires each applicant to verify its SAM registration in GMS. Once logged into GMS, click the "CCR Claim" link on the left side of the default screen. Click the submit button to verify the SAM (formerly CCR) registration. 5. Search for the funding opportunity on GMS. After logging into GMS or completing the GMS profile for username and password, go to the "Funding Opportunities" link on the left side of the page. Select BJA and FY 17 Edward Byrne Memorial Local Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program. 6. Register by selecting the "Apply Online" button associated with the funding opportunity title. The search results from step 5 will display the "funding opportunity" (solicitation) title along with the registration and application deadlines for this solicitation. Select the "Apply Online" button in the "Action" column to register for this solicitation and create an application in the system. 7. Follow the directions in GMS to submit an application consistent with this solicitation. Once the application is submitted, GMS will display a confirmation screen stating the submission was successful. Important: In some instances, applicants must wait for GMS approval before submitting an application. OJP urges each applicant to submit its application at least 72 hours prior to the application due date. Note: Application Versions If an applicant submits multiple versions of the same application, OJP will review only the most recent system -validated version submitted. Experiencing Unforeseen GMS Technical Issues An applicant that experiences unforeseen GMS technical issues beyond its control that prevent it from submitting its application by the deadline may contact the GMS Help Desk or the SAM Help Desk (Federal Service Desk) to report the technical issue and receive a tracking number. The applicant is expected to email the NCJRS Response Center identified in the Contact Information section on the title page within 24 hours after the application deadline to request approval to submit its application after the deadline. The applicant's email must describe the technical difficulties, and must include a timeline of the applicant's submission efforts, the complete grant application, the applicant's DUNS number, and any GMS Help Desk or SAM tracking number(s). Note: OJP does not automatically approve requests to submit a late application. After OJP reviews the applicant's request, and contacts the GMS Help Desk to verify the reported technical issues, OJP will inform the applicant whether the request to submit a late application 27 BJA-2017.11301 has been approved or denied. If OJP determines that the untimely application submission was due to the applicant's failure to follow all required procedures, OJP will deny the applicant's request to submit its application. The following conditions generally are insufficient to justify late submissions to OJP solicitations: • Failure to register in SAM or GMS in sufficient time (SAM registration and renewal can take as long as 10 business days to complete.) • Failure to follow GMS instructions on how to register and apply as posted on the GMS website • Failure to follow each instruction in the OJP solicitation • Technical issues with the applicant's computer or information technology environment such as issues with firewalls E. Application Review Information Review Process OJP is committed to ensuring a fair and open process for making awards. BJA reviews the application to make sure that the information presented is reasonable, understandable, measurable, and achievable, as well as consistent with the solicitation. BJA will also review applications to help ensure that JAG program -statute requirements have been met. Pursuant to the (DOJ) Part 200 Uniform Requirements, before awards are made, OJP also reviews information related to the degree of risk posed by applicants. Among other things, to help assess whether an applicant that has one or more prior federal awards has a satisfactory record with respect to performance, integrity, and business ethics, OJP checks whether the applicant is listed in SAM as excluded from receiving a federal award. In addition, if OJP anticipates that an award will exceed $150,000 in federal funds, OJP also must review and consider any information about the applicant that appears in the non-public segment of the integrity and performance system accessible through SAM (currently, the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System; "FAPIIS"). Important note on FAPIIS: An applicant, at its option, may review and comment on any information about itself that currently appears in FAPIIS and was entered by a federal awarding agency. OJP will consider any such comments by the applicant, in addition to the other information in FAPIIS, in its assessment of the risk posed by the applicant. The evaluation of risks goes beyond information in SAM, however. OJP itself has in place a framework for evaluating risks posed by applicants. OJP takes into account information pertinent to matters such as - 1. Applicant financial stability and fiscal integrity 2. Quality of the management systems of the applicant, and the applicant's ability to meet prescribed management standards, including those outlined in the DOJ Grants Financial Guide 3. Applicant's history of performance under OJP and other DOJ awards (including compliance with reporting requirements and award conditions), as well as awards from other federal agencies 28 BJA-2017-11301 4. Reports and findings from audits of the applicant, including audits under the (DOJ) Part 200 Uniform Requirements 5. Applicant's ability to comply with statutory and regulatory requirements, and to effectively implement other award requirements Absent explicit statutory authorization or written delegation of authority to the contrary, the Assistant Attorney General will make all final award decisions. F. Federal Award Administration Information Federal Award Notices OJP expects to issue award notifications by September 30, 2017. OJP sends award notifications by email through GMS to the individuals listed in the application as the point of contact and the authorizing official. The email notification includes detailed instructions on how to access and view the award documents, and steps to take in GMS to start the award acceptance process. GMS automatically issues the notifications at 9:00 p.m. eastern time on the award date. NOTE: In order validly to accept an award under the FY 2017 JAG Program, a unit of local government (other than an Indian tribal government) must submit to GMS the certification by its chief legal officer regarding compliance with 8 U.S.C. § 1373, executed using the form that appears in Appendix II. (The form also may be downloaded at https://opp.gov/funding/Explore/SampleCertifications-8USC1373.htm.) Unless the executed certification either (1) is submitted to OJP together with the signed award document or (2) is uploaded in GMS no later than the day the signed award document is submitted, OJP will reject as invalid any submission by a unit of local government (other than an Indian tribal government) that purports to accept an award under this solicitation. Rejection of an initial submission as an invalid award acceptance is not a denial of the award. Consistent with award requirements, once the unit of local government does submit the necessary certification regarding 8 U.S.C. § 1373, the unit of local government will be permitted to submit an award document executed by the unit of local government on or after the date of that certification. Also, in order for a unit of local government applicant validly to accept an award under the FY 2017 JAG Program, an individual with the necessary authority to bind the applicant will be required to log in; execute a set of legal certifications and a set of legal assurances; designate a financial point of contact; thoroughly review the award, including all award conditions; and sign and accept the award. The award acceptance process requires physical signature of the award document by the authorized representative and the scanning of the fully executed award document (along with the required certification regarding 8 U.S.C. § 1373, if not already uploaded in GMS) to OJP. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements; Award Conditions If selected for funding, in addition to implementing the funded project consistent with the OJP- approved application, the recipient must comply with all award requirements (including all award conditions), as well as all applicable requirements of federal statutes and regulations (including those referred to in assurances and certifications executed as part of the application or in 29 BJA-2017-11301 connection with award acceptance, and administrative and policy requirements set by statute or regulation). OJP strongly encourages prospective applicants to review information on post -award legal requirements generally applicable to FY 2017 OJP awards and common OJP award conditions prior to submitting an application. Applicants should consult the "Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP Grants and Cooperative Agreements - FY 2017 Awards," available in the OJP Funding Resource Center. In addition, applicants should examine the following two legal documents, as each successful applicant must execute both documents in GMS before it may receive any award funds. • Certifications Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters; and Drug -Free Workplace Requirements • OJP Certified Standard Assurances (attached to this solicitation as Appendix IV) The web pages accessible through the "Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP Grants and Cooperative Agreements - FY 2017 Awards" are intended to give applicants for OJP awards a general overview of important statutes, regulations, and award conditions that apply to many (or in some cases, all) OJP grants and cooperative agreements awarded in FY 2017. Individual OJP awards typically also will include additional award conditions. Those additional conditions may relate to the particular statute, program, or solicitation under which the award is made; to the substance of the funded application; to the recipient's performance under other federal awards; to the recipient's legal status (e.g., as a for-profit entity); or to other pertinent considerations. Individual FY 2017 JAG awards will include two new express conditions that, with respect to the "program or activity" that would be funded by the FY 2017 award, are designed to ensure that States and units of local government that receive funds from the FY 2017 JAG award: (1) permit personnel of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to access any correctional or detention facility in order to meet with an alien (or an individual believed to be an alien) and inquire as to his or her right to be or remain in the United States and (2) provide at least 48 hours' advance notice to DHS regarding the scheduled release date and time of an alien in the jurisdiction's custody when DHS requests such notice in order to take custody of the alien pursuant to the Immigration and Nationality Act. Compliance with the requirements of the two foregoing new award conditions will be an authorized and priority purpose of the award. The reasonable costs (to the extent not reimbursed under any other federal program) of developing and putting into place statutes, rules, regulations, policies, or practices as required by these conditions, and to honor any duly authorized requests from DHS that is encompassed by these conditions, will be allowable costs under the award. General Information about Post -Federal Award Reporting Requirements A unit of local government recipient of an award under this solicitation will be required to submit the following reports and data: 30 BJA-2017-11301 Required reports. Recipients typically must submit quarterly financial status reports, semi- annual progress reports, final financial and progress reports, and, if applicable, an annual audit report in accordance with the (DOJ) Part 200 Uniform Requirements or specific award conditions. Future awards and fund drawdowns may be withheld if reports are delinquent. (In appropriate cases, OJP may require additional reports.) Awards that exceed $500,000 will include an additional condition that, under specific circumstances, will require the recipient to report (to FAPIIS) information on civil, criminal, and administrative proceedings connected with (or connected to the performance of) either the OJP award or any other grant, cooperative agreement, or procurement contract from the federal government. Additional information on this reporting requirement appears in the text of the award condition posted on the OJP website at: https://oip.gov/funding/FAPIIS.htm Data on performance measures. In addition to required reports, each recipient of an award under this solicitation also must provide data that measure the results of the work done under the award. To demonstrate program progress and success, as well as to assist DOJ with fulfilling its responsibilities under GPRA and the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010, OJP will require State recipients to provide accountability metrics data. Accountability metrics data must be submitted through BJA's Performance Measurement Tool (PMT), available at https://biapmt.oip.qov. The accountability measures are available at: https://biapmt.ojp.govfhelpliagdocs.html. (Note that if a law enforcement agency receives JAG funds from a State, the State must submit quarterly accountability metrics data related to training that officers have received on use of force, racial and ethnic bias, de-escalation of conflict, and constructive engagement with the public.) OJP may restrict access to award funds if a recipient of an OJP award fails to report required performance measures data in a timely manner. G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s) For OJP contact(s), see the title page of this solicitation. For contact information for GMS, see the title page. H. Other Information Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552 and 5 U.S.C. § 552a) All applications submitted to OJP (including all attachments to applications) are subject to the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and to the Privacy Act. By law, DOJ may withhold information that is responsive to a request pursuant to FOIA if DOJ determines that the responsive information either is protected under the Privacy Act or falls within the scope of one of nine statutory exemptions under FOIA. DOJ cannot agree in advance of a request pursuant to FOIA not to release some or all portions of an application. In its review of records that are responsive to a FOIA request, OJP will withhold information in those records that plainly falls within the scope of the Privacy Act or one of the statutory exemptions under FOIA. (Some examples include certain types of information in budgets, and names and contact information for project staff other than certain key personnel.) In appropriate 31 BJA-2017-11301 circumstances, OJP will request the views of the applicantlrecipient that submitted a responsive document. For example, if OJP receives a request pursuant to FOIA for an application submitted by a nonprofit or for-profit organization or an institution of higher education, or for an application that involves research, OJP typically will contact the applicantlrecipient that submitted the application and ask it to identify—quite precisely—any particular information in the application that applicantlrecipient believes falls under a FOIA exemption, the specific exemption it believes applies, and why. After considering the submission by the applicantlrecipient, OJP makes an independent assessment regarding withholding information. OJP generally follows a similar process for requests pursuant to FOIA for applications that may contain law-enforcement sensitive information. Provide Feedback to OJP To assist OJP in improving its application and award processes, OJP encourages applicants to provide feedback on this solicitation, the application submission process, and/or the application review process. Provide feedback to OJPSolicitationFeedback(a7usdoi.gov. IMPORTANT: This email is for feedback and suggestions only. OJP does not reply to messages it receives in this mailbox. A prospective applicant that has specific questions on any program or technical aspect of the solicitation must use the appropriate telephone number or email listed on the front of this solicitation document to obtain information. These contacts are provided to help ensure that prospective applicants can directly reach an individual who can address specific questions in a timely manner. If you are interested in being a reviewer for other OJP grant applications, please email your resume to oippeerreviewAlmsolas.com. (Do not send your resume to the OJP Solicitation Feedback email account.) Note: Neither you nor anyone else from your organization or entity can be a peer reviewer in a competition in which you or your organization/entity has submitted an application. 32 BJA-2017-11301 Application Checklist Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program: FY 2017 Local Solicitation This application checklist has been created as an aid in developing an application. What an Applicant Should Do: Prior to Registering in GMS: Acquire a DUNS Number (see page 27) Acquire or renew registration with SAM (see page 27) To Register with GMS: For new users, acquire a GMS username and password* (see page 27) For existing users, check GMS username and password* to ensure account access (see page 27) Verify SAM registration in GMS (see page 27) Search for correct funding opportunity in GMS (see page 27) Select correct funding opportunity in GMS (see page 27) Register by selecting the "Apply Online" button associated with the funding opportunity title (see page 27) Read OJP policy and guidance on conference approval, planning, and reporting available at olp•gov/financialquide/DOJ/PostawardRequirements/chapter3.10a.htm (see page 14) If experiencing technical difficulties in GMS, contact the NCJRS Response Center (see page 2) *Password Reset Notice — GMS users are reminded that while password reset capabilities exist, this function is only associated with points of contact designated within GMS at the time the account was established. Neither OJP nor the GMS Help Desk will initiate a password reset unless requested by the authorized official or a designated point of contact associated with an award or application. Overview of Post -Award Legal Requirements: Review the "Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP Grants and Cooperative Agreements - FY 2017 Awards" in the OJP Funding Resource Center. Scope Requirement: The federal amount requested is within the allowable limit(s) of the FY 2017 JAG Allocations List as listed on BJA's JAG web page. 33 BJA-2017-11301 What an Application Should Include: Application for Federal Assistance (SF -424) (see page 16) Project Abstract (see page 16) Program Narrative (see page 17) Budget Detail Worksheet (see page 18) Budget Narrative (see page 18) Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable) (see page 21) Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable) (see page 21) Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Questionnaire (see page 22) Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF -LLL) (if applicable) (see page 22) Certifications and Assurances by Chief Executive (see page 22) Certification of Compliance with 8 U.S.C. § 1373 by Chief Legal Officer (Note: this requirement does not apply to Indian tribal governments.) (see page 23) OJP Certified Standard Assurances (see page 40) Additional Attachments Applicant Disclosure of Pending Applications (see page 23) Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity (if applicable) (see page 24) 34 BJA-2017-11301 Appendix 1 Certifications and Assurances by the Chief Executive of the Applicant Government Template for use by chief executive of the "Unit of local government" (e.g., the mayor) Note: By law, for purposes of the JAG Program, the term "unit of local government " includes a town, township, village, parish, city, county, borough, or other general purpose political subdivision of a state; or, it may also be a federally recognized Indian tribal government that performs law enforcement functions (as determined by the Secretary of the Interior). A unit of local government may be any law enforcement district or judicial enforcement district established under applicable State law with authority to independently establish a budget and impose taxes; for example, in Louisiana, a unit of local government means a district attorney or parish sheriff. 35 BJA-2017.11301 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant Program FY 2097 Local Solicitation Certifications and Assurances by the Chief Executive of the Applicant Government On behalf of the applicant unit of local government named below, in support of that locality's application for an award under the FY 2017 Edward Etyma Justice Assistance Grant ("JAG`) Program, and further to 42 U.S.C. § 3752(a). l oertify under penalty ar perjury to the Office of Justice Programs ('OJP"), U.S. Department of Justice CUSDD.Fj. that al of the following are true and correct_ L I am the chief executive of the applicant unit of local government named below. and I have the authority to make the following representations on my own behalf and on behalf of the applicant unit of focal government_ understand that these representations will be relied upon as material in any OJP decision to make an award. under the application described above. to the applicant unit of local government 2. I certify that no federal funds made available by the award ('rf any) that OJP crakes based on the application described above ea he used to supplant focal funds, but will be used to increase the amounts of such funds that would, in the absence of federal funds. be made available for law enforcement activities. 3. I assure that the application described above (and any amendment to that application) was submitted for review to the governing body of the unit of local government (e.g., city council or county commission), or to an organization designated by that governing body. not less than 30 days before the date of this certification. 4. I assure that before the date of this certification— (a) the application described above (and any amendment to that application) was made public; and (b) an opportunity to comment on that application (or amendment) was provided to cozens and to neighborhood or community-based organizations. to the extent applicable law ar established procedure made such an opportunity available. 5. I assure that for each fiscal year of the award (if any) that OJP makes based on the application described above. the applicant unit of local government will maintain and report such data, records. and information (programmatic and financial), as OJP may reasonably require. 6. I certify that— (a) the programs to be funded by the award (deny) that OJP makes based on the application described above meet all the requirements of the JAG Program statute (42 U.S.C. §§ 3750-3758); (b) all the information contained fn that application is correct (c) in connection with that appfcation, there has been appropriate coordination with affected agencies; and (d) in connection with that award (if any). the applicant unit of local government vrll comply with all provisions of the JAG Program statute and all other applicable federal laws. 7. I have examined certification entitled "State or local Government FY 2017 Certification of Compliance with 8 U.S.C_ § 1373` executed by the chief legal officer of the applicant government with respect to the FY 2017 JAG program and submitted in support of the application described above, and I hereby adopt that certification as my own on behalf of that government 1 acknowledge that a materially false. fictitious. or fraudulent statement (or concealment or Emission of a material fact) in this certification, or in the apptication that it "supports, may be the subject of criminal prosecution (including under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 andfor 1621. and/or 42 U.S.C. § 3795a), and also may subsea me and the applicant unit of focal government to civil penalties and administrative remedies for false claims or otherwise (including under 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3730 and §§ 3801-3812). 1 also acknowledge that OJP awards. induding certifications provided in connection with such awards. are subject to review by USDOJ, including by OJP and by the USDCiJ Office of the Inspector General. Signature of Chief Executive of the Applicant Unit of Date of Certification Local Government Title of Chief Executive Printed Name of Chief Executive Horne of Applicant Unit of Local Government 36 f3JA-2017-11301 Appendix 11 State or Local Government: Certification of Compliance with 8 U.S.C. § 1373 Template for use by the chief legal officer of the "Local Government" (e.g., the General Counsel) (Note: this Certification is not required by Indian tribal government applicants.) Available for download at: https://oip.gov/funding/Explore/SampleCertifications-8USC 1373.htm 37 BJA-2017-11301 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS State or Local Government: FY 2017 Certification of Compliance with 8 U.S.C. § 1373 On behalf of the applicant government entity named below, and in support of its application, I certify under penalty of pequry to the Office of Justice Programs ('WP'), U.S. Department of Justice CUSCO.'). that al of Flue tenoning are true and correct: (1) I am the chief legal offroer of the State or Focal government of which the applicant entity narned below is a part nese jurisdiction), and I haw the authority to make this certification an behatfof thejurlsdicticn and the applicant entity (that is, the entity applying drentlyr to OJP). I understand that OJP Will rely upon this certification as a material representation in any decision to make ars award to the applicant entity. (2) I have carefully reviewed 8 U.S.C. § 1373(a) and (b), including the prohibitions on certan actions by Slate and focal government entities, -agencies, and -official regarding information on citizen—stip and Qnmgration status. I also have reviewed the provisions set out al (or referenced in) 8U.S.C_ §-1551 note ("Abolition ... and Transfer of Functions), pursuant to w'h'ich references to the 'Immigration and Naturalization Service in 8 U.S.C_ § 1373 are to be read, as a legal matter. as referennes io parbnutar components of the U.S_ Department of Homeland Seaeity. (3) I (and also the applicant entity) understand that the U.S. Department of Justice will require Slates and local governments (and agencies or other entities thereof) to comply with 8 U.S.C. § 1373. with respect to any 'program or ac5uly" funded in whole or in part vrith the federal financial assn tame provided through the FY 2017 OJP program under winch this certi6eation is being submitted (the FY 2017 0J13 Program` identified belay), specincally includng any such program or activity" of a governmental entity or -agency that is a subrecighient (at any tier) of funds under the FY 2017 OJP Program_ (4) I (and also the applicant entity) understand that. for purposes of this certification. "program or activity' means rtral f1 means under tile VI of the Clan Rights Act of 104 (see 42 U.S.C. § 2000d -4a). and that tenns used in this certification that are defiled in 8 U.S.C. § 1101 mean what they mean under that section 1101, except that the term 'Slate' also shad include American Samoa (cf 42 U.S.C. § Qarl I (ax2)) Also, I understand that, for purposes of this oertifloalion, neither a'public nstlu on of higher educawon (Le.. one that is owned. controled, ordirectly funded by a State or local government) nor an Indian bbe is considered a State or Focal government entity or -agency. (5) 1 have conducted (or caused to be conducted for me) a diligent inquiry and review concerning both— (a) the 'ingrain oractivitytobefunded (in Ade orinpart) wththe federal financial assistancesought by the applicant enthy under this FY 2017 OJP Program; and (b) any prohbtions or restrictions potentially applicable to the "program or adivrty" sa►nht to be funded under the FY 2017 OJP Program that deal with awning to, requesting or recervwng from. maintaining, or exchanging information of the types described in 8 U.S_C_ § 13724a) or (b), whetuerr imposed by a Slate or local government entity. -agency, or -official. (0) As of the date of this certification. neither the jurisd;ction nor any entity. agency. or official of the jurisdiction has in effect. purports to have in effect, or is sulnect to or bound by, any prohibition or any restriction that woutd apply to the program or activity' to be funded in whole or in part under the FY 2017 OJP Program (which., for the speeifo purpose of this paragraph 6, shall not be understood to include any such 'program or activity' of any subrecnnent at any tier), and that dears wilh either— (1) a govemment entity or -official sending or reoeiving information regarding citizenship or it migration status as described in 8 U.S_C. § 1373(a); or (2) a government entity or -agency seredrag to, requesting or reaeivng frorn, maintaining, or exchanging information of the types (and vnth respect to the entities) described in 8 U.S.C. § 1373(b). 1 acknowledge that a materially false. fictitious, or frauh#nt statement (or concealment or omssmn of a material fact) in this oertifacatmn, or in the appioaron twat it supports. may be the subject of criminal prosecution (including under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 andfor 1621. enactor 42 U.S.C. § 3795a), and also may sutjed me and the applicant entity to civi penalties and admnnistralive remedies for false clams or athemrise (including under 31 U.S.C. §§ 3721-3730 and §§ 3501-3812). l also acknowledge that OJP awards. including oeiiifeat irons provided m connection vat such awards, are subject to review by USDOJ, including by OJP and by the USDOJ Office of the Inspector General_ Signature of Chief Legal Officer of the Jurisdiction Printed Name of Chief Legal officer Date of Certification Title of Chief Legal officer of the Jurisdiction Name of Applicant Government Entity (i.e., the app'icant to the FY 2.017 OJP Program identified below) FY 20171 ?IP Program: Byrne Justice Assistance Grant ("JAG") Program 38 BJA•2017.11301 Appendix 111 8 U.S.C. § 1373 (as in effect on June 21, 2017) Communication between government agencies and the Immigration and Naturalization Service (a) In general Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, a Federal, State, or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual. (b) Additional authority of government entities Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, no person or agency may prohibit, or in any way restrict, a Federal, State, or local government entity from doing any of the following with respect to information regarding the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual: (1) Sending such information to, or requesting or receiving such information from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service. (2) Maintaining such information. (3) Exchanging such information with any other Federal, State, or local government entity. (c) Obligation to respond to inquiries The Immigration and Naturalization Service shall respond to an inquiry by a Federal, State, or local government agency, seeking to verify or ascertain the citizenship or immigration status of any individual within the jurisdiction of the agency for any purpose authorized by law, by providing the requested verification or status information. See also provisions set out at (or referenced in) 8 U.S.C. § 1551 note ("Abolition ... and Transfer of Functions") 39 BJA-2017-11301 AppondH I]V OJP Certified Standard Assurances 40 BJA-2017-11301 OMB No. 1121.Ot40 Expires 5 13 1120 1 4 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS CERTIFIED STANDARD ASSURANCES On behalf of the Applicant and in support of this application for a grant or cooperative agreement, I certify under penalty of perjury to the Moe of Justice Programs (OJP), U.S. Department of Justice ('Department`), that all ai the following are true and correct: (1) I have the atnhanity to make the foil Ewing representations on behalf of mrseff and the Applicant. I understaid that these rcpresentatuiswll be relied upon as material in any OJP decision to mate an award to the Applicant based on els application (2) I catty thaa the Applicant laas the legal authority to apply for the federal assistance souge by the afpf icaticn. and that it has the rdistitutionM, managerialsnd fnanaiial capab1ity (inducing fundsficient lo pay any n?qured non-federat share of project oasts) to Flan, marsage. and complete the proped described in the application property. (3) I assue that, throughout the period of performance for the award (d any) made by OJP based on the appicarcn— (a) the Applicant wit comply with all award requirements and a1 federal statutes and regulations aryl fable to the award: (b) the Applicant will require all subrecpients to cantly with a1 applicable award recsiremersts and al appfhcatle federal scathes and reg[ua5pis: and (c) the Applicant will mainta"n safeguards to address and prevent arty organizational cadet of direst, and also to prohibit employees from sang their positions in any manner that poses. or appears to pose, a personal or financial conflict of interest. (4) The A�pplqicant understands that the federal statutes and regti*cns appriiratte to the award (if any) made hhr OJP based on the application specific* idol tide statutes and regulators pertaining to owl rifts and nondisoraisehen, and. in addtier-- (a) the Applloan/ understands that the applicable statutes pertaining to cntl rights vril include section 50I of the OM Rights Act of 1634 (42 U.S.C. § 2030d); section 504 of the Rehabittalim Ad of 1073 (2g U.S.C" § 794), section 001 d the Educator' Amendments of 1872 (20 U.S.C. § 1081): and sector 303 of the Age Dscrimination Act of 1975 (42 U.S.C. § 6102k (b) Nie A¢plican! understands that the applicable statutes pert3ui to nendssrxirmnation may include season 815(c) of Title 1 of the Ormibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1868 (42 U.S.C. §3189d(c)); motion 14117(e) of the Victims cf Crime Act of 1144&4 (42 U.S.C. §10604(e)); sed ion 282A(b) of the .hrveritie Justice and Deligiency Prevention Art of 2002 (42 U.S.C. § 5872(b)); and drat the gait condition set cut at section 4001f2(bj(13) of the Udm a Agaarzst Women Act (42 U.S.G. § 1342.{bX 13)) also may apply, (c) the Apfdcarst understands that it must regaire any subrectptw t to comply with all such applicable statutes (ad associated regtialiong and (d) on Letelfof the Woad!, l make die specific assurances set out in 28 C.F.R. 042.105 and 42204. (5) The Applicant 2430 understands that (n addmn to any applicable progsannspecilc regulators ad to app€ratfe federal mats that paten lo civil rights and nondisdrirririatien) the federi rcguf atic+ns appiioal a to the award {if any) made by OJP based on the application may include, but are nc4 Imted to. 2 C.F.R. Part 2800 (the DOJ' Part 2110 Uniform Requ"rerrients) and 28 C.F.R Parts 22 (cccfdentiafty- research and statistical inferrriaton), 23 (c trrinal Intel igence systems). and 46 (human sutiects protection). (6) I assure that the Applicant Wit assist OJP as ne *ssay (and all rec(eiresubre ipients and contractors to assist as necessary) with the Department's compliance with Becton 106 of the Naionat lRstonc Presenia ed Ad of 1466 (54 U.S.C. 3961003), die Archeciogical and Ftstricat Preservation Act of 1874 (54 U.S.C. §§ 312501-312508), and the National Em uorrnental Policy Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4335). and 28 C.F.R Parts 61 WA) and 03 (itocdfai ns and wetlands). (7) I assure that the Applicant wll give 5* De -pertinent and the Gclrnemment Acovuntablity Moe, through any authorized represee4ative, access to, and opporhrvty to eaarrine, all paper or efecftonic records related to the awed (if any) made by OJP based en the appicalim (8) I assure that if the Appticarst is a gvrerrrnerntal entity, with respect ID the awed (dory) made by OJP based on the applicaton — (a) it w4 con-Fty with the requirements of the Uniform Relocated Assistance and Real PropertyAcgnisiticcs Act 0f 1470 (42 U.S.C. §§ 4001-4655), vitt govern the treatment ci persons dsfiaced as a result of federal ad federaf`y -assisted program.: acid (b) it vdII comply with requirements of 5 U.S.C. §§ 1501.1508 and 7324.7328, Michlint oertan pclticat act5vi5es of State or local goverment employees whose principal employment is n connection with an actvty financed in whale or in pail by federal assistance. I acknowledge that a materiaby false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement (or concealment or omission of a material fact) in this certification. or in the application Neal it supports, may be tie subject of criminal prosecution (including under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 arsdror 1821. andfor 42 U.S.C. § 3705a), and also may subject me and the Applicant to civil penaties and administrative mnedies for false claims or otherwise (induct -rig under 31 U.S.C. §§ 3720-3730 and 3801-3812). I also acknowledge that OJP awards. inducing certifications provided in connection 'eh such awrards, are subject to review by the Department including by OJP and by the Department's Office of the inspector General. 41 BJA-2017-11301 JAG 2017 Program Narrative for City of Spokane Valley, WA. JAG 2017 Grant Proposal The City of Spokane Valley respectfully submits this application for the 2017 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG). The City of Spokane Valley will act as fiscal agent for the JAG. This is the eighth year the City is eligible to apply as a non -disparate single jurisdiction. The City's Grant Accountant and Senior Analyst will be responsible for grant administration details as they relate to acting as fiscal agent, to include disbursement of fiends and collecting and submitting financial and performance measure reports of the JAG funding. Expenditures are tracked through individual budget lines for each federal grant received. City of Spokane Valley Projects The Spokane Valley Police Department, on behalf of the City of Spokane Valley, proposes to use their allocation of JAG funds ($26,193) for the grant program areas of law enforcement. The JAG fund allocated to Spokane Valley will be used to purchase thirteen Tasers with magazines, holsters, and warranties two aid patrol deputies and to purchase, two truck bed covers, four vehicle rifle locks, two shotgun locks, nine binoculars, and four video cameras to assist the investigative detectives. This equipment will enhance the ability of patrol officers to deploy non -lethal force to control situations and prevent escalation of incidents, enhancing the safety of officers and the public. Weapons locks for vehicles and binoculars and cameras will allow investigative officers to conduct surveillance while keeping them safe while locking truck bed covers will protect the equipment when not in use. Page 1 of 1 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant City of Spokane Valley, WA. SVJAGI7 Project Project Abstract Description: The proposed project for the City of Spokane Valley's 2016 Justice Assistance Grant in the amount of $26,193 is to purchase thirteen Tasers with magazines, holsters, and warranties two aid patrol deputies and to purchase, two truck bed covers, four vehicle rifle locks, two shotgun locks, nine binoculars, and four video cameras to assist the investigative detectives, at a total cost of $25,851.84. The Spokane Valley Police Department currently has 60 uniformed personnel assigned and 32 Tasers issued to officers. The additional Tasers would allow most of the patrol division to have this less -lethal capability. Other equipment identified enhances the readiness capabilities of the investigative unit. Goals and Objectives •:• Reduce the number injuries to suspects and officer which often occur when officers must go hands on with a suspect. •:• Preventing situations from escalating to a higher level of use of force, including deadly force situations. + Providing all uniformed patrol personnel with more less -lethal force options. + Enhance the safety and surveillance capabilities of investigative officers. Project Strategy: + Ensure officers issued a Taser are properly trained on use and deployment. Anticipated Outcomes: •:• Fewer injuries to suspects and officers during use -of -force encounters Project Identifiers ❖ Equipment: Audio/video and Forensic: Cameras and binoculars enhance surveillance capabilities. ❖ Officer safety: Allows officers to quickly deploy non -lethal force to prevent a incident from escalating. + Equipment: Tactical: weapons locks for vehicles allow investigative officers to have weapons readily available to gain tactical advantage when necessary. City of Spokane Valley Budget Narrative The 2017 JAG funds will be used to enhance the City's law enforcement program by purchasing and utilizing thirteen Tasers with magazines, holsters, and warranties, two truck bed covers, four vehicle rifle locks, two shotgun locks, nine binoculars, and four video cameras at a total cost of $25,851.84 A competitive bidding process will be used, ensuring that the best value will be received and JAG dollars maximized. No overhead or administrative costs will be charged against the project and all funds will be used to purchase the equipment and pay for associated installation. The identified expenditures are less than the total JAG award of $26,193 but leaves additional room should costs change prior to purchase. The City will also pay for all administrative and overhead costs. All funds are expected to be expended in the current year. General Instructions & Resources View Budget Sum 'nary OMB APPROVALNO.: 1121.0324 EXPIRES 7/31/2016 Budget Detail Worksheet (1) Purpose: The Budget Detail Worksheet is provided for your use in the preparation of the budget and budget narrative. All required information (including the budget narrative) must be provided. Any category of expense not applicable to your budget may be left blank, Indicate anynon-federal( match) amount in the appropriate category, if applicable. (2) For each budget category, you can see a sample by clicking (To View an Example, Click Here) at the end of each description. (3) There are various hot links listed in red in the budget categories that will provide additional information via documents on the Internet. (4) Record Retention: In accordance with the requirements set forth in 2 CFR Part 200,333 , all financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other records pertinent to the award shall be retained by each organization for at least three years following the closure of the audit report covering the grant period. (5) The information disclosed in this form is subject to the Freedom of Information Act under 5 U.S.C. 55.2, A. Personnel —List each Compensation paid for employees responsibilities and duties 75.50°%should be shown as PERSONNEL (FEDERAL) position by title and name of employee, if available. engaged in grant activities must be consistent of each position in relationship to fulfilling the project 75.50) 'I'o View an Example, Click ilere Show the annual salary rate and the percentage of time 10 be devoted to the project. with that paid for similar work within the applicant organization. Include a description of the goals and objectives. (Note: Use whole numbers as the perceniage of time, an example is Name Position Computation Cost Salary Basis Percentage of Time Length of Time -;Year $0 FEDERAL TOTAL, 50 PERSONNEL NARRATIVE (FEDERALI PERSONNEL (NON-FEDERAL) Computation Name Position Salary Basis Percentage of Tinie Length of Time Cost Year SO. NON-FEDERAL TOTAL SO PERSONNEL NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERAL' TOTAL PERSONNEL SO B. Fringe Benefits—Fringe benefits should be based on actual known costs or an approved negotiated rate by a Federal agency. in budget be shown If not based category Compensation ns .0765) Te View an Example, Click Here on an approved negotiated rate, list the composition of the fringe benefit package. Fringe benefits are for the personnel listed (A) and only for the percentage of time devoted to the project, Fringe benefits on overtime hours are limited to FICA, Workman's and Unemployment Compensation. (Nose; Use decimal numbers for the fringe benefit rates, nn example is 7.65% should FRINGE BENEFITS (FEDERAL) Description Comer Cation Cost Base Rate FEDERAL TOTAL $0 FRINGE BENEFITS NARRATIVE (FEDERAL FRINGE BENEFITS (NON-FEDERAL) Computation Description Base Rate Cost SO NON-FEDERAL TOTAL SO )?IUNGE BENEFITS NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERAL) TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS SO C. Travel—Itemize (rave] expenses of staff personnel by purpose (e.g., stafl'to training, field interviews, advisory group meeting, etc.). Describe the purpose of each travel expenditure in reference to the project objectives. Show the basis of computation (e.g., six people to 3-day training at SX airfare, SX lodging, SX subsistence). In training projects, travel and rneals for trainees should be listed separately. Show the number of trainees and the unit costs involved. Identify the location of travel, if known; or if unknown, indicate "location to be determined." Indicate source of Travel Policies applied Applicant or Federal Travel Regulations. Note: Travel expenses for consultants should be included in the "Contractual/Consultant" category. To View nil Example, Click Here TRAVEL (FEDERAL) Purpose of Travel Location Computation Cost Item Cos (Rate Basis for Rate= ti ` uanti Q ty: Number of People' Number. of Trips •Caste ,Lodging . . Night-._ - $0.00 Meals Day $0.00 Mileage Mile `: - . ; 50.00 Transportation; Round-tri t $0.00 .. Local Travel $0.00 Other 50.00 Subtotal $0.00 $o FEDERAL TOTAL SO TRAVEL NARRATIVE, (FEDERAL TRAVEL (NON-FEDERAL) Purpose of Travel Location Computation Cost Item Lodging Meals Mileage Transportation: Local Travel Other Cost Rate Basis for Rate Night Day Mile Quantity. Round -tri Number of People, Murmur of Trips -' - Cost $O.hO s0.0o 10.00 $0.00 50.00 $0.00 Subtotal $0.00 NON-FEDERAL TOTAL So TRAVEL NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERAL1 TOTAL TRAVEL SO D. Equipment— List non-expendable items that are purchased (Note: Organization's own capitalization policy for classification of purchasing versus leasing the "Contractual" category. liere of equipment should equipment, especially high Explain how the equipment be used) Expendable items should be included inthe "Supplies" category. Applicants should analyze the cost benefits subject to rapid tecluuological advances. Rented or leased equipment costs should be listed in of the project, and describe the procurement method to be used To View an Example, Click cost items and those is necessary for the success EQUIPMENT (FEDERAL) Item Computation Cost Quantity Cost Tasers '13 - .51,103.31 : . $14,343 Truck Bed Covers 2 5229.00 5458 Rifle Gun Locks 4 . 5134.99 5540 Shotgun Locks • 2 $134.99 5270 Binoculars . ` 9 5122.99 . $1,107 Video Cameras 4 5280.00 51,120 Shipping -: — -1 -- $31000 _ . ., 5310 Tae 1 52,065.89 52,066 Trier Accessories (Holsters, Magazines and Warranties) : 12 5469,84 . . . $5,638 FEDERAL TOTAL 525,852 EQUIPMENT NARRATIVE (FEDERAL) The Tasers will enhance the safely of' the officers and the public by increasing the number of officers who have non-lethal options to prevent incidents from escalating. The camera, binoculars and weapon locks will allow investigative officer to remain safe while conducting surveillance. All equipment will be procured through a three-quote policy, insuring the lowest prices are achieved. EQUIPMENT (NON-FEDERAL) Item Computation Cost Quantity Cost SO NON-FEDERAL TOTAL SO EOUIPIIENT NARRATEVE (NON-FEDERAL) TOTAL EQUIPMENT 525,852 E. Supplies— List items by type (office supplies, postage, training materials, copying paper, hand held tape recorders) and show the basis for computation. Generally, supplies include any To View an Example, Click Here and expendahle equipment items costing fess than $5,000, such as books, or consumed during the course of the project. materials that are expendable SUPPLIES (FEDERAL) Supply Items Comp nation Cost Quantity!Duration Cosi :. SO FEDERAL TOTAL S0 SUPPLIES NARRATIVE1FEDERAL) SUPPLIES (NON-FEDERAL) Supply Items Computation Cost Quantity/Duration Cost SO NON-FEDERAL TOTAL SO SUPPLIES NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERAL) TOTAL SUPPLIES SO F. Construction—Provide a description or renovations may be allowable. Minor repairs of the constriction project and an estimate of the costs. As a rote, construction costs are not allowable. In some cases, minor repairs and renovations should be classified in the 'other" category. Consult with the program office before budgeting funds in this category. To View an Example, Click Dere CONSTRUCTION (FEDERAL) Purpose Description of Work Cost FEDERAL TOTAL $0 .CONSTRUCTION NARRATIVE (EEDERALI CONSTRUCTION (NON-FEDERAL) Purpose Description of Work Cost NONFEDERAL TOTAL SO CONSTRUCTION_NARRATWVE (NON-FEDERALI TOTAL CONSTRUCTION SO Consultant excess G. Consultants/Contracts—Indicate whether applicant's formal, written Fees: For each consultant enter the name, if known, service to be provided, of $650 per day or 581.25 per hour require additional justification and prior CONSULTANT FEES (FEDERAL) Procurement Policy or hourly or daily fee approval from OJP.To View the Federal Acquisition Reeulations are followed. time on the project. Consultant Here fees in (8-hour day), and estimated an Example, Click Name of Consultant Service Provided Computation Cost Fee Basis Quantity .8 Hour Day. :.. $0 SUBTOTAL 50 CONSULTANT FEES NARRATIVE (FEDERALZ CONSULTANT FEES (NON-FEDERAL) Name of Consultant Service Provided Computation Cost Fee Basis Quantity Et Hour Day .' S0 SUBTOTAL 50 CONSULTANT FEES NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERAL] Consultant Expenses: List all expenses to be paid from the grant to the individual consultants in addition to their fees (i.e., travel, meals, lodging, etc.). This includes travel expenses for anyone who is not an employee of the applicant such as participants, volunteers, partners, etc. CONSULTANT EXPENSES (FEDERAL) Purpose of Travel Location Computation Cost ' item. Cost Rate -Basis for QuantityCost Rale Number of People, Npniber of :;Trips -'. Lodging ; Night $0.00 Meals Day 50.00 Mileage Mile - 50.00 Transportation: Round-tri S0.00 Local Travel 50.00 Other S0.00 Subtotal So.00 ' so SUBTOTAL 50 FEDERAL TOTAL SO CONSULTANT EXPENSES NARRATIVE (FEDERAL) CONSULTANT EXPENSES (NON-FEDERAL) Purpose of Travel Location Computation Cost Item Cost Rate Basis for Rate Quantity - Number of Pzopte` Numberof Trips_ Lodging Meals Night Day 5000 So.00 Miiea�e- Mile Transportation: Round -tri $0.00 Leval $0:00 Other 50.00 Subtotal S0.00 SUBTOTAL So NON-FEDERAL TOTAL SO CONSULTANT EXPENSES NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERAL) TOTAL CONSULTANTS SO Contracls:Yrovide a description of the product or service to in awarding contracts. A separate justification must be provided organization that is ineligible to receive a direct award. Note: CONTRACTS (FEDERAL) be procured by contract and an estimate of for sole source contracts in excess of $150,000, the cost. Applicants are encouraged to promote free and open competition A sole source contract may not be awarded to a commercial This budget category may include subawards. Item Cost FEDERAL TOTAL SO CONTRACTS NARRATIVE (FEDERAL) CONTRACTS (NON-FEDERAL) Item Cost NON-FEDERAL TOTAL SO ONTRACTS NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERkL1 TOTAL CONTRACTS SO TOTAL CONSULTANTS/CONTRACTS SO H. Other Costs—List items (e.g., rent ( arms-length transactiononly ), reproduction, telephone, janitorial or security services, and investigative or confidential funds) by major type and the basis of the computation. For example, provide the square footage and the cost per square foot for rent or provide a monthly rental cost and how many months to rent. The basis field is a text field to describe the quantity such as square footage, months, etc. To View nn Example, Click (fere OTHER COSTS (FEDERAL) Computation Description Quantity Basis Cost Length of Time Cost „ :SQ FEDERAL TOTAL SO OTHER COSTS NARRATIVE (FEDERAL) OTHER COSTS (NON-FEDERAL) Description Computation Cost Quantity Basis Cost Length of Time $0 NON-FEDERAL TOTAL $o OTHER COSTS NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERAL' TOTAL OTHER COSTS $0 1. Indirect Costs—Indirect costs are allowed if the applicant has a Federally approved indirect cost rate. A copy of the rate approval, (a fully executed, negotiated agreement ), must be attached. If the applicant does not have an approved rate, one can be requested by contacting the applicant's cognizant Federal agency , or the applicant may elect to charge a deminimis rate of 10% of modified total direct costs as indicated in x CFR Part 200.41,1f If the applicant's accounting system permits, costs may be allocated in the direct cost the indirect an example is rrn indirect rate of 15.73% should be shown as 15,73) To View an Example. Click !fere categories. (Use whale numbers as rale. INDIRECT COSTS (FEDERAL) Computation Description Base Rate Cost 50 FEDERAL TOTAL $0 INDIRECT COSTS NARRATIVE (F'EDERAL). INDIRECT COSTS (NON-FEDERAL) Description Computation Base Rate Cost $0 NON-FEDERAL TOTAL SO INDIRECT COSTS NARRATIVE (NON-FEDERAL) TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS SO Budget Summary-- When you have completed the budget worksheet, transfer the totals for each category to the spaces below. Compute the total direct costs and the total project costs. Indicate the amount of Federal funds requested and the amount of non -Federal funds that will support the project. Budget Category Federal Request Non -Federal Amounts Total A. Personnel $© $0 $0 B. Fringe Benefits $0 $0 $0 C. Travel 50 $0 50 D. Equipment $25,852 $0 $25,852 E. Supplies $0 50 $0 F. Construction 50 50 50 G. Consultants/Contracts $0 so $0 H. Other 50 $0 50 Total Direct Costs 525,852 50 525,852 1, Indirect Costs $0 $0 50 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS 525,852 $0 525,852 Paperwork Reduction respond to a collection create forms and instructions possible burden an this application is estimate, or suggestions Office of the ChiefFinancial Reports Project, 1121-0188, Budget, Washington, is not required lo number. We try to which impose the least time to complete and file the accuracy of this of Justice Programs, 20531; and to the Public Use of Management and Federal Request $25,852 Non -Federal Amount 50 Total Project Cost 525,852 Public Reporting Burden Act Notice: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, aperson of information runless it displays a current valid OMB control that are accurate, can be easily understood and you to provide us with information. The estimated average fottr (4) hours per application. If you have comments regarding for making this form simpler, you can write the Office Ofjicen; 810 Seventh Street, NW, Washington, DC Once of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office DC 20503. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: August 29, 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; Public Defender Amendment GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Pursuant to chapter 39.34 RCW (Interlocal Cooperation Act), counties and cities may contract with each other to perform certain functions that each may legally perform. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council authorized the City Manager to execute the following Agreement: C06-018, signed March 1, 2006, and Council adopted Public Defense Standards Resolution No. 15-006, signed July 14, 2015. BACKGROUND: Spokane County and Spokane Valley are proposing various modifications to the Public Defender Services Interlocal Agreement. The following modifications are listed by their corresponding amendment section numbers. o 1.1 base costs used to determine contract indirect rate currently defined as total department salary and benefits. Proposed rate base is total expenditures (salary and benefits plus M&O)—is consistent with an earlier modification adopted by Council for other contracts o 1.2 Investigator staff costs—a support unit within the Public Defender's Office— are currently allocated to the City using a fixed one percent allocation. Proposed basis is a payroll costs allocation basis o 1.3 General M&O and General Administrative costs currently allocated using an FTE basis. Proposed allocation basis is a payroll costs allocation basis. OPTIONS: 1) Authorize the City Manager to execute the contract amendment or 2) take other action as appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the Public Defender Amendment. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: $114,361 impact to 2017 budget to complete multiyear reconciliation (2010-2016). Ongoing estimated annual cost impact of approximately $26,940. STAFF CONTACT: John Pietro, Administrative Analyst ATTACHMENTS: (1) Amendment to the Interlocal Agreement for Public Defender Services in the City of Spokane Valley; (2) new costs exhibit; (3) Current Interlocal Agreement ADDENDUM TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICES IN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY THIS ADDENDUM, is made and entered into by and among the City of Spokane Valley (hereafter referred to as "City"), Spokane County (hereafter referred to as "County"), and Spokane County Public Defender (hereafter referred to as "Public Defender"), hereafter jointly referred to as the "Parties." WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, pursuant to chapter 39.34 RCW (Interlocal Cooperation Act), the Parties have entered into numerous interlocal agreements whereby County has agreed to provide services to City and its residents; and WHEREAS, this Addendum applies to the "Interlocal Agreement for Public Defender Services in the City of Spokane Valley (the "Agreement") executed by the County under Resolution No. 06-0195, the City under signature dated March 1, 2006, and the Public Defender under signature dated March 24, 2006; and WHEREAS, from time -to -time, the Parties review interlocal agreements such as this one for the purpose of analyzing the cost methodology to determine if it properly reflects the services being provided, and whether the costs of those services are being accurately charged. These amendments reflect such an analysis; and WHEREAS, there are various components of the full cost of providing services by County, including the indirect cost allocation, which takes into account the cost of services provided by what is commonly referred to as County's central services, which include, but are not limited to, such components as facilities maintenance, administrative services, and insurance. In past years, the indirect cost rate has been calculated based on salaries attributable to the provision of each service. The Parties now agree that, effective with the 2010 settle and adjust and for subsequent years, it is acceptable to base the indirect cost rate on total expenditures in calculating the full cost of providing the services; and WHEREAS, there are various position groups accounted for within the Public Defender services cost methodology, including, but not limited to, attorneys, paralegals, receptionists, and investigators. Investigators perform a role for public defense attorneys similar to the role performed by law enforcement officers on behalf of prosecuting attorneys, and includes such duties as interviewing witnesses, and compiling and analyzing evidence pertaining to a criminal case. In past years, the Public Defender investigator costs were allocated each year to the City by multiplying the total salary and benefits of all investigators by a fixed one percent, as specified in the former Exhibit 2, and in recognition of the previously limited role in which investigators supported City criminal cases; and WHEREAS, the County previously adopted Standards for Indigent Defense pursuant to Spokane County Resolution No. 13-0773, executed August 27, 2013; and the City adopted similar Standards for Indigent Defense pursuant to Resolution No. 15-006, executed July 14, 2015; and WHEREAS, the aforementioned Standards for Indigent Defense for City and County each address the appropriate use of investigators; and WHEREAS, for the time period 2010-2016, the Parties suspended the end -of -year cost reconciliation process and maintained payments at 2011 estimated rates, as is typical, while various changes were negotiated, including modifications to the indirect rate, changes to the allocation basis used for General Administrative salary and General M&O costs, and changes to the City's share of investigator salary costs. The effect of these changes resulted in a net City underpayment during this time period. The Page 1 of 3 City agrees to pay the County $245,361.08 to settle these past contract years within thirty (30) days of signing this addendum; and WHEREAS, effective beginning with the 2017 estimate and for subsequent years, the Parties desire to modify Exhibit 2 to more accurately reflect the increased time which investigators spend investigating City criminal misdemeanor cases. The Parties now agree that, effective with the 2017 estimate and for subsequent years, the total misdemeanor investigator costs shall be allocated using a payroll costs basis; and WHEREAS, in past years, the Parties allocated General Administrative Salary costs and General M&O costs to the misdemeanor unit using an attorney FTE (Full Time Equivalent) basis. The Parties now agree that effective with the 2017 estimate, the allocation basis used to allocate these component costs shall be a payroll costs basis. NOW THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the above referenced recitals which are adopted herein by reference, mutual promises set forth herein, and as provided for in the underlying document entitled "Interlocal Agreement for Public Defender Services in the City of Spokane Valley (January 1, 2005 -December 31, 2005)" (the "Agreement") executed by the County under Resolution No. 06-0195, the Parties agree as follows: SECTION ONE: 1.1 Effective with the 2010 Settle and Adjust and for Subsequent Years. INDIRECT RATE SCOPE OF CHANGE. The scope and purpose of this subsection of the Addendum to the Agreement is to change the way the indirect costs the County charges the City are calculated. Indirect costs are a component cost in determining the total actual cost for the provision of Services. Previously, the Parties calculated the indirect rate based on "salaries only" as adopted in the methodology set forth in former Exhibit 2 to the Agreement, but now agree that it is acceptable to calculate the indirect rate based on "total expenditures." 1.2 Effective with the 2017 Estimate and for Subsequent Years. INVESTIGATOR COST METHODOLOGY SCOPE OF CHANGE. This subsection is intended to change the way the investigator costs the County charges the City are calculated. Previously, the Parties calculated the City's share of investigator costs by multiplying the total salary and benefits costs of the investigator unit by one percent. Pursuant to the new Exhibit 2, investigator costs shall be allocated using a payroll costs allocation basis where the misdemeanor percentage share of investigator costs shall be determined by dividing the total Public Defender Department misdemeanor payroll costs, inclusive of attorneys and dedicated misdemeanor support staff, by the sum of those Public Defender payroll costs receiving investigative support. Currently those payroll units are felonies, misdemeanors, and Fund 161. The City's share of misdemeanor investigator costs is then determined by multiplying the City's percentage of misdemeanor attorney cases out of total misdemeanor cases, by the new misdemeanor investigator cost. 1.3 Effective with the 2017 Estimate and for Subsequent Years. GENERAL M&O AND GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE COST METHODOLOGY SCOPE OF CHANGE. This subsection is intended to change the way General M&O and General Administrative costs are allocated to the Misdemeanor unit. Previously, the Parties allocated General M&O and General Administrative Costs to misdemeanors using an FTE basis. Pursuant to the new Exhibit 2, the misdemeanor share of General M&O and General Administrative costs shall utilize a payroll costs basis and be determined by dividing the misdemeanor payroll costs by Page 2 of 3 the sum of all Public Defender payroll costs that utilize these services. The City's share of General M&O and General Administrative costs is then determined by multiplying the City's percentage of misdemeanor attorney cases out of total misdemeanor cases by the new misdemeanor General M&O and General Administrative costs. SECTION TWO: DURATION. This Addendum shall be in full force and effect for the remaining term of the Agreement, or any extension of that Agreement. SECTION THREE: REMAINDER OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT TO REMAIN THE SAME. The remaining provisions of the Agreement will remain unchanged by this Addendum. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Addendum to be executed on the date and year opposite their respective signatures. DATED: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON AL FRENCH, Chair ATTEST: JOSH KERNS, Vice -Chair Clerk of the Board DATED: ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM ONLY: Office of the City Attorney Commissioner CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Mark Calhoun, City Manager DATED: SPOKANE COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER Page 3 of 3 Tom Krzyminski, Spokane County Public Defender Spokane County Public Defender City of Spokane Valley 2017 Estimate Misdemeanor Direct Costs Percentage Spokane Budget Valley Valley Estimate 1,930,241 33.84% 653,161 Indirect 132,470 33.84% 44,825 2,062,711 697,986 City of Spokane Valley Cases - PDMan Cases per Incident Location Estimate 33.84% Actual Indirect Rate (applied to total expenditures) Estimate Actual 5159100 General Admin -Payroll 5159100 General Admin-M/O 5159100 General Admin-M/O 4170 Conflict 5159101 Investigators 5159200 Felony 5159300 Misdemeanor 5159300 Misd-Mental Health 3050020 5159400 Juvenile Offender 5159500 Juvenile Dependency -3050047 5159500 Juvenile Dependency -305C131 5159700 Civil Commitment 5159200 Fund 161 -Indigent Defense Adult Felony 5159500 Fund 162-Juv Dependency/Termination Reconciliation to 2017 Budget Expend Tabs: s/b 0 6.86% EXHIBIT 2 EAccount from Adopted Budget Reduce by Reduce by Dedicated Costs to be M&O Allocated Subtotal Payroll Reallocate Investigator Payroll to Felony, Misdemeanor and Fund 161 Subtotal Payroll Reallocate General Admin Payroll Total Payroll Reallocate General Reallocate Admin 4170- General Conflict Admin M/O Attomeys Add Back Dedicated M&O Total Expenditures 766,538 - (766,538) - - - 131,007 - (131,007) - - - 321,330 - (321,330) - - - 507,137 - (507,137) - - - 4,030,154 (119,494) - 3,910,660 326,120 4,236,780 373,919 4,610,699 49% 85,498 266,704 119,494 5,082,395 50.14% 1,608,872 (8,994) - 1,599,878 133,418 1,733,296 152,973 1,886,269 20% 34,978 8,994 1,930,241 19.04% 123,831 (355) - 123,476 123,476 10,897 134,373 1% 2,492 355 137,220 1.35% 276,316 - - 276,316 276,316 24,386 300,703 3% 5,576 44,986 351,265 3.47% 122,037 - 122,037 122,037 10,770 132,807 1% 2,463 9,640 144,910 1.43% 120,000 (1,719) 118,281 118,281 10,439 128,720 1% 1,719 130,439 1.29% 631,601 (5,013) - 626,588 626,588 55,300 681,888 7% 5,013 686,901 6.78% 598,355 (27,576) - 570,779 47,599 618,378 54,575 672,953 7% 27,576 700,529 6.91% 898,344 (68,059) - 830,285 830,285 73,277 903,562 10% 68,059 971,621 9.59% 10,135,522 (1,726,012) 8,178,300 507,137 8,685,437 766,538 9,451,975 100% 131,007 321,330 231,210 10,135,522 100.00% - Capital 3,489 Copier Lease 0.00 10,139,011 - Capital 3,489 Copier Lease 10,139,011 Note DRAFT Each EAccount is reduced by its dedicated M&O to calculate salary and benefits only, which is used as the basis to allocate investigator costs budgeted in 5159101, as well as the General Admin-M&O remaining after excluding M&O specific to conflict attomeys (4170). Conflict attomeys are separately allocated as the payroll basis would under allocate to felonies which is the predominant user of this line item. Note DRAFT Conflict Attorney M&O is used by Felony and Juvenile only and allocated to each EAccountthe percent of costs that each unit incurs during the prior year, as determined by the responsible person in the Public Defender's Office. Return to: Daniela Erickson, Clerk of the Board Board of County Commissioners 1116 W, Broadway Spokane, Washington 99260 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICES IN TETE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY (January 1, 2005 -December 31, 2005) 6 019 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and among the Spokane County Public Defender, having offices for the transaction of business as 1033 West Gardner, Gardner Court Building, Spokane. Washington 99260-0280, hereinafter referred to as "PU13L[C DEFGND1;R," Spokane County, having offices for the transaction of business at West 1 1 16 Broadway Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99260; hereinafter referred to as "BOARD," together sometimes referred to along with the PUBLIC DEFENDER as "COUNTY," 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, I [ 707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206, hereinafter referred to as "CITY," jointly hereinafter referred to as the "PARTIES." The PUBLIC DEFENDER, COUNTY and CITY agree as follows: SECTION NO. 1: RECITALS AND FINDINGS (a) The Board or County Commissioners of Spokane County has the care of COUNTY property and the management of COUNTY funds and business under RCW 36.32.120(6). (b) Counties and cities may contract with each other to perform certain functions which each may legally perform under chapter 39.34 RCW (Interlocal Cooperation Act). (c) The City of Spokane Valley pursuant to the provisions RCW 39.34.180 is responsible for the costs incident to (1) prosecution of inisdcmcanor and gross misdemeanor offenses which are violations of state statutes that occur within its jurisdiction and that are committed by adults, (2) traffic offenses committed by juveniles pursuant to RCW 13.04.030(I)(e)(iii), and (3) misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor offenses which are a violation of City of Spokane Valley ordinances and committed by adults. (d) The City of Spokane Valley desires to utilize the services of Spokane County Public Defender for the purpose of: (1) representing indigents where the initial charge is a State misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor offense committed by an adult and occurring within the City of Spokane Valley, (2) representing juveniles for traffic offenses pursuant to RCW interlocal Agreement, Public Defender Page 1 of 12 C06-18 - 13.04,030(l)(e)(iii) occurring within the City of Spokane Valley; and (3) representing indigents where the initial charge is a CITY misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor occurring within the City of Spokane Valley and referred to the Spokane County Public Defender. SECTION NO. 2: DEFINITIONS (a) Agreement: "Agreement" means this Interlocal Agreement between the CITY and COUNTY regarding public defender legal services. (b) City: "CITY" means the City of Spokane Valley. (c) County: "COUNTY" means Spokane County. (d) Maintenance and Operations: '`Maintenance and Operations" and "lv1&O" shall mean (I) those class codes (3000-5999 and 7000-9999) used by Spokane County in its budgetary process as prescribed by the MARS manual adopted by the State of Washington under chapter 43.88 RCW so long as such expenditures are directly attributable and proportionate to services rendered to CITY under the terms of this Agreement. (e) Services: "Services" means those services identified in Exhibit 1. (1) Compensation: "Compensation" means that methodology set forth in Exhibit 2 used to establish the amount of money which the CITY will pay the COUNTY for providing Services. (g} Capital Improvement: "Capital Improvement" shall mean any expenditure in excess of $1999.99 or Such higher Figure as set by the COUNTY as the capitalization threshold during the term of the Agreement. The COUNTY shall give the CITY advance notice of any increase in the capitalization threshold. The PARTIES agree to meet and discuss the impacts of any change in the capitalization threshold which will cause an increase of costs to the. CITY in excess of $50,000,00. Any such expenditure will be coded as provided for in the 13AR.S-manual adopted by the State of Washington under RCW 43.88. (It) 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 perforated anchor thatdirectly affect providing of such Services. (i) Report: "Report" means the. Public Defender's record management system commoril referred to as PDrnan. {j) Public Defender: "Public Defender" means that person appointed as public defender under chapter 36.26 RCW and his/here assistant(s). SECTION NO. 3: PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to reduce to writing the PAR'T'IES' understanding as to the terms and conditions under which the. PUBLIC DEFENDER will provide Services on behalf of the CITY. It is the Intel -local Agreement, Public Defender Page 2 of 12 intent of the PARTIES that Services to be provided by the PUBLIC DEFENDER will be consistent with the CITY'S Council/Manager form of government provided for in chapter 35A.13 RCW. SECTION NO. 4: DURATION/WITHDRAWAL This Agreement shall commence on January 1, 2005, and run through December 31, 2005. At the conclusion of the initial term, this Agreement shall automatically be renewed from year to year thereafter effective January lu to December 315` All renewals shall be subject to all terms and conditions set forth herein except for Exhibit 2. The PARTIES recognize it highly unlikely that Exhibit 2 setting forth the estimated costs for each year's Services will be available at the start of any renewal time frame. Accordingly, until a new Exhibit 2 has been prepared mid agreed to between the PARTIES, the PARTIES agree that the COUN'T'Y will bill the CITY and the CITY will pay the COUNTY at the same monthly payment rate used for the previous year. Upon the PARTES agreement on a new Exhibit 2, the CITY and COUNTY will reconcile payments Iodate under the previous year's payment schedule with the new payment schedule. Any underpayment for any Services will be due in the first payment due following reconciliation. Any overpayment for any Services will be credited to the first monthly payment due following the reconciliation. The PARTIES agree that no interest shall be owing by either Party to the other Party for any overpayment or underpayment determined as a result of the reconciliation. Any Party may withdraw at any time from this Agreement for any reason whatsoever upon a minimum of 180 days written notice as provided for in Section 7 to the other Party. In the event of termination, at CITY's option, PUBLIC DEFINDER shall continue to provide Services to completion for those cases filed prior to the effective date of the termination, SECTION NO. 5: COST OF SERVICES ANI) PAYMENTS The CITY shall pay the COUNTY the actual costs for Services provided under this Agreement. The estimated cost for 2005 Services under this Agreement shall be as set forth in Exhibit 2, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. This methodology uses the last six (6) months of Report numbers for 2003 and first six (6) months of Report numbers for 2004 and averages them for a twelve (12) month time frame, The resulting number is used as a basis to estimate the 2005 cost of Services. The COUNTY CEO shall advise the CI'T'Y Manager as soon as possible of any anticipated or unanticipated Capital improvement costs that arise during the contract period. The City shall pay capital improvement costs either (I) under the Cost Allocation Plan as an indirect cost amortized over the useful life of the improvement utilizing straight- line depreciation and incorporating the expected salvage value of the improvement at the end of its useful life or (2) as a direct cost in the form of a contribution made to the Equipment Rental and Revolving Fund. The CITY shall be responsible only for capital improvement costs incurred after March 31; 2003. Any portion of a capital improvement that was paid for or acquired through separate agreement or with grant proceeds, bond proceeds, user fees, donations, or any other acquisition method that reflects a contribution on behalf of CITY shall not be included in the depreciation schedule applied to the CITY. Any capital improvement for which the COUN'T'Y seeks reimbursement from the CITY must be necessary to fulfill the requirements of this Agreement. Interlocal Agreement, Public. Defender Page 3 of 12 At the end of the calendar year, using the methodology set forth in Exhibit 2, the PARTIES shall apply the actual expenditures and the. actual usage percentage to determine the final cost. It is the PARTIES intent that any adjustment take }dace as soon as possible and accordingly will use their respective best efforts to timely prepare, disseminate and review all expenditure documentation. The CITY will have sixty (60) calendar days from its receipt of the expenditure documentation to provide the COUNTY with any written objections(s) to such documentation. The written objection(s) must specifically identify the expenditure(s) in question. The COUNTY agrees to consider all written objections received from the CITY within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of the objections(s). En the event that the PARTIES cannot mutually resolve any written objection(s) submitted by the CITY within the thirty (30) calendar days time frame, or such other time frame as the PARTIES may mutually agree, the objections shall be resolved pursuant to the Dispute Resolution provisions set forth in Section No. 17. Pending resolution of the objections(s), the PARTIES agree that the CiTY shall pay that portion of the bill that is undisputed, To the extent that the CITY was over billed in any year and the Agreement is still in effect, the COUNTY shall credit the CI'T'Y for such overpayment in the next monthly payment owning by the CITY. Provided, however, in the event the Agreement is terminated at such time .that the overpayment is determined, the COUNTY shall reimburse the CITY for any overpayment within thirty (30) calendar days. To the extent that the CITY was under billed in any year and the Agreement is still in effect, the CITY shall reimburse the COUNTY for any under payment in the next monthly payment owing by the CITY. Provided, however, in the event the Agreement is terminated at such time that the underpayment is determined, the CITY shall reimburse the COUNTY for any underpayment within thirty (30) calendar days. Either Party may al its sole option charge interest on any overpayment or underpayment based on lost interest earning had the amount determined due been invested in the respective PARTIES investment pool at the end of the thirty (30) day time. frame provided for hereinabove to the date of payment. Any resolution of a disputed amount through use of the arbitration process identified in Section 17 shall include at the request. of either Party, a determination of whether interest is appropriate, including the amount. The COUNTY will bill the CITY for the cost of services as outlined, monthly, by the 15th of the month. Monthly payments will be calculated by dividing those annual costs set forth herein above by twelve (12). Payments by the CiTY will be due by the 5th day of the following month. The COUNTY, at its sole option, may charge interest on any late payment calculated on any lost interest earning had the amount due. been invested since. the date due to the date of payment in the COUNTY's investment poo1. SICTL,ON NO. 6: RELATED RESPONSIBILITIES IN CONJUNCTION WITH PROVIDING. SERVICES The COUNTY and PUBLIC DEFENDER or their designee agree to attend staff meetings as requested by the CiTY Manager, The COUNTY and PUBLIC DEFENDER or their designees agree to meet upon request by the CiTY Manager or his/her designee to discuss any Service provided under the terms of this Agreement. The CI'T'Y agrees the PUBLIC DEFENDER may use the COUNTY'S stationery in conjunction with providing Services under the ternis of this Agreement. interlocal Agreement, Public Defender Pace 4 of 12 SECTION NO. 7: NOTICE All notices or other communications given hereunder shall be deemed given on: (1) the day such notices or other communications are received when sent by personal delivery; or (ii) the third day following the day on which the same have been mailed by first class delivery, postage prepaid addressed to the COUNTY or the CITY at the address set forth below for such Party; or at such other address as either Party shall front time - to -time designate by notice in writing to the other Party: COUNTY: Spokane County Chief Executive Officer or his/her authorized representative 1 1 16 \Vest Broadway Avenue Spokane, Washington 99260 CITY: City of Spokane Valley City Manager or his/her authorized representative Redwood Plaza 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 PUBLIC DEFENDER: Spokane County Public Defender 1033 \V. Gardner, Spokane, Washington 99260-0280 SECTION NO. 8: REPORT -ENG Reports — The PUBLIC DEFENDER shall provide the CITY with reports documenting actual usage under this Agreement. The Parties agree that the terminology "reports documenting actual usage" means that type of information provided by the PUBLIC D1aFIGNDER to the CITY in the 2004 agreement for Services. An updated report shall be submitted quarterly unless otherwise mutually agreed by the Parties. Such reports shall be in a format as mutually agreed to between the Parties. The content and/or format for such reports may be changed from time -to -time by written agreement between CITY and COUNTY/PUBLIC DEFENDER staff. Records Review -- The CITY shall be allowed to conduct random reviews of the records generated by the COUNTY/PUBLIC DEFENDER in performance of this Agreement. The CITY will provide the COUNTY/PUBLIC DEFENDER with reasonable advance notice of the records reviews. The Parties agree that they will make best efforts to achieve a resolution of any potential records confidentiality issues, including entering into confidentiality agreements or other similar mechanisms that will allow disclosure of the necessary information to accurately conduct a records review. lithe CITY will be allowed to view only those records directly relating to Services provided within CITY's corporate boundaries, then the COUNTY/PUBLIC DEFENDER R must keep a log of original documents used to charge the CITY, and those documents must have identifying numbers or letters so the original source documents can be easily retrieved. SECTION NO. 9: COUNTERPARTS This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which, when so executed and delivered, shall be an original, but such counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same. Interlocal Agreement, Public Defender Page 5 of 12 SEC'T'ION NO. 10. ASSIGNMENT No Party may assign in whole or part its interest in this Agreement without the written approval of the other PARTY. SECTION NO. 11: COUNTY EMPLOYEES PUi3I,1C DEFENDER. shall hire, assign, retain and discipline all employees performing Services under this Agreement according 10 applicable collective bargaining agreements and applicable. state and federal laws. PUBLIC DEFENDER agrees to meet and confer with the CITY With respect to staff that is assigned to provide Services. Issues of discipline or performance will be specifically handled according to PUBLIC DEFENLDER/COUN'Y policies. SECTION NO. 12: LIABILITY For the purpose of this Section, the terminology "COUNTY" shall also include the "PUBLIC DEFENDER." (a) The COUNTY shall indemnify and hold harmless the CITY and its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, Toss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent net or omission of the 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 the CITY, the COUNTY shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense; provided that the CITY reserves the right to participate in said suit if any principle of governmental or public law is involved; and if final judgment in said suit be rendered against the CITY, and its officers, agents, and employees, or jointly against the CITY and the COUNTY and their respective officers, agents; and employees, the COUNTY shall satisfy the same.. (b) The CITY shall indemnify and hold harmless the COUNTY and its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, Toss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent act or omission of the 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 claims, action, loss, or damages is brought against the COUNTY, the CITY shall defend the same at its sole cost. and expense; provided that the COUNTY reserves the right to participate in said suit if' any principle of governmental or public law is involved; and if final judgment in said suit be rendered against the COUNTY, and its officers, agents, and employees, or jointly against the COUNTY and the CITY and their respective officers, agents, and employees, the 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. (d) Where an officer or employee of a Party is acting under the direction and control of the other Parry, 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. Interlocal Agreement, Public Defender Page 6 of 12 (e) Each Party's duty to indemnify shall survive the termination or expiration of the Agreement. ci -The foregoing indemnity is specifically intended to constitute a waiver of each Partys immunity under ‘Vashington'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 mute by the indemnitor's employees. The PARTIES acknowledge that these provisions were specifically negotiated and agreed upon by them. (g) The COUNTY and the CITY agree to either self insure or purchase policies of insurance covering the matters contained in this Agreement with coverages of not less than 55,000,000 per occurrence with $5,000,000 aggregate limits including professional liability and auto liability coverages. SECTION NO. 13: RELATIONSHIP OF TILE PARTIES The PARTIES intend that an independent contractor relationship will be created by this Agreement. The COUNTY/PUBLIC DEFENDER shall be an independent contractor and not the agent or employee of the CiTY, that the 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 COUNTY/PUBLIC DEFENDER. Any and all employees who provide Services to the CITY under this Agreement shall be deemed employees solely of the COUNTY/PUBLIC DEFENDER. The COUNTY 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 the CITY shall be deemed to be an employee, agent, servant or representative of the COUNTY For any purpose. SECTION NO. 14: MODIFICATION This Agreement may be mortified in writing by mutual written agreement of the PAR.TiHS. SECTION NO. 15: PROPERTY ANI) EQUIPMENT The ownership of all properly and equipment utilized in conjunction with providing the Services shall remain with the original owner, unless otherwise specifically and mutually agreed to by tic PARTIES to this Agreement. For the purpose of this section, the terminology "owner" means that Party which paid the full purchase price for the property or equipment. SECTION NO. 16: ALL WRITINGS CONTAINED HEREI,N'/BL TDING EFFECT This Agreement contains terms and conditions agreed upon by the PARTIES. The PARTIES agree that there are no other understandings, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement. No changes or additions to this Agreement shall he valid or binding upon the PARTIES unless such change or addition is in writing, executed by the PARTIES. This Agreement shall be binding upon the PARTIES hereto, their successors and assigns. SECTION NO. 17: DISPUTE RESOLUTION Any dispute between the PARTIES which cannot be resolved between the PARTIES shall be subject to arbitration. Except as provided for to the contrary herein, such dispute shall first be reduced to writing. If Interlocal Agreement, Public Defender Page 7 of 12 the COUNTY CEO and the CITY Manager cannot resolve the dispute it will be submitted to arbitration. The provisions of chapter 7.04 RC1\\' shall be applicable to any arbitration proceeding. The COUNTY and the 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 7.04 RCW. The costs of the arbitration panel shall be equally split between the PARTIES. SECTION NO. 18: VENUE STITUI,AT.ION 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. 19: 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 Stale 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 CO modify to conform to such statutory provision. SECTION NO. 20: RECORDS All public records prepared, owned, used or retained by the COUNTY in conjunction with providing Services under the terms of this Agreement shall be deemed CITY property and shall be made available to the CITY upon request by the CiTY Manager subject to the attorney client and attorney work product privileges set forth in statute, court rulc or case law. The COUNTY will notify the CITY of any public disclosure request under chapter 42.17 R.CW for copies or viewing of such records as well as the COUNTY'S response thereto. SECTr.ON NO. 21 : Ii EA D IjN'GS The section headings appearing in this Agreement have been inserted solely for the purpose of convenience and ready reference, In ito 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. 22: TIME OF ESSENCE OF AGREEMENT Time is of the essence of this Agreement and in ease either Party fails to perforin 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 Party may, at its election, hold the other Party liable for all costs and damages caused by such delay. Interlocal Agreement, Public Defender Page 8 of 12 SECTION NO. 23: UNCONTROLLM.LI C; [RCU`7STANCI STIMPOSSI13[LIfY 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 COUNTY which render legally impossible the performance by the COUNTY of its obligations under this Agreement, shall be deemed not a default under this Agreement. SECTION NO. 24: FILING This Agreement shall be filed by the County with such offices or agencies as required by chapter 39.34 RC1'J. SECTION NO. 25: EXECUTION AND APPROVAL The PARTIES warrant that the officers executing below have been duly authorized to act for and on behalf of the Party for purposes of confirming this Agreement. SECTION NO. 26: INITIATIVES The PARTIES recognize that revenue reducing initiative(s) passed by the voters of Washington may substantially reduce local operating revenue for the 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 revenue reducing initiative(s). 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. 27. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS The Parties shall observe all federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, to Mc extent that they niay be applicable to the terms of this Agreement. SECTION NO. 28:' DTSCLAIM R Except as otherwise provided, this Agreement shall not be. construed in any manner that would limit either Party's authority or powers ander law, SECTION NO. 29: ASSURANCE The CLTY shall pay the COUNTY the true and full cost of all Services provided under this Agreement. The intent of the Parties is that neither Party will subsidize the other and that the CITY will not subsidize any other jurisdiction that is receiving similar services. Interlocal Agreement, Public Defender Page 9 of 12 WrrmESS W' IFREOF, the PARTTT'S have c, fused l'h is Agreement to be executed on date and year opposite their respective signatures, DATED:'._,IN___L__t_Ofg:k01-1 ATTEST; Clerk of the Hoard Daniela Erickson .BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON Olioe'r{ DA'rE'I): ,... . 2 — cit DATED: ///0 ."l E. ',NA ' Ems. (-C.`liristine Bainnbridge, City Fled AITROVED AS TO FORM ONLY: )AML Office the 7•... Attorney JELK.E, Chair ABSENT 1RK RICHARD, Vice -Chair • �s k ✓ SPQK AN COU I CARRrS, Commissioner By: Jl� PUBLIC DEFENDER dice Al (Title) CITY Or SPOKANE=. VALLEY David Mercier, City Manager [Mei-local Agreement, Public Defender Page 10 of 12 EXHIBIT 1 For the purpose of this Agreement, PUBLIC DEFENDER Services shall include representation of indigent persons as required by the Constitution or state statutes (chapter 36.26 RCW) in conjunction with violations of state statutes that are punishable as misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor offenses that occur within CITY'S jurisdiction and that are committed by adults, and/or juveniles for traffic offenses pursuant to RCW 13.O4.030 (1) (e) (iii) or County policy, as well as any appeals to Superior Court. Additionally, PUBLIC DEFENDER shall represent indigent persons as required by the Constitution or state statutes (chapter 36.26 RCW) in conjunction with violations of CITY ordinances that are punishable as misdemeanor offenses except for any constitutional challenges to the CITY ordinance. It also includes representation of indigent persons as required by the Constitution or state statutes (chapter 36.26 RCW) in conjunction with violations of CITY'S Traffic Code, as well as any appeals to Superior Court. CITY agrees for CITY staff, at no cost to PUBLIC DEFENDER, to make best efforts to attend any District Court judicial proceedings where their presence is requested by the PUBLIC DEFENDER. All services to be provided by PUBLIC DEFENDER in courts under the terms of this Agreement shall he provided in courts located within the Spokane County Courthouse Complex. In the event CITY requests such court services to be provided at a location within CITY, the PARTIES agree to meet and rftutually, negotiate any and all increased costs to PUBLIC DEFENDER in providing such cote services at CITY location. Interlocal Agreement, Public Defender Page I I of 12 Salary - Misdemeanor * M & 0 - Misdemeanor * Salary - Investigator ** Capital Indirect **** Notes EXHIBIT 2 Component A 2005 Public Defender Adopted Budget Conipunent 13 Percentage Spokane Valley Component C Contract Amount 866,989.00 20, 790.00 282,554.00 1,170,333.00 33.25% 33.25% 1.00% *These amounts represent the Public Defender misdemeanor Adopted 2005 budget (3050052). **investigator Salaries are a component of the Public Defender legal services budget (3050047). ***The percentage of Public Defender crises attributable to the Spokane Valley is 33.25%. The percentage of Investigator salaries attributable to Spokane Valley is 1%. Component A multiplied by Component 13 equates the contract amount. ****The Indirect (Overhead) rate of 7.73% is applied only to salaries. The indirect rate is based on Spokane County's 0M13 A-87 Cost Plan Escalated 2003 for 2005, adjusted to only include depreciation of capital improvements acquired after the City's official date of incorporation, prepared by PRrvl Group, an independent plan preparer. 288,275.39 6,912.71 2,825.59 22,502.10 320,515.74 Interlocal Agreement, Public Defender Page 12 of' 12 Meeting Date: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action August 29, 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: Update on Marketing Plan 2016-2017 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: None PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Motion approved May 24, 2016, to award the contract to Atlas Advertising and authorize the Acting City Manager to finalize and execute the contract. BACKGROUND: A marketing effort was initiated in 2012 to promote the City as a great place to do business, live or visit. MDI Marketing provided these services to the City until 2015. Much of the focus was on reshaping negative local and regional perceptions regarding the City's permitting processes. MDI completed a series of video and audio commercials that ran on local television and radio stations to highlight the city's new streamlined, business -friendly approach to permitting and economic development. The goal was to increase permit numbers and make the city first choice for residential and business relocations. In May 2016, the City executed a contract with Atlas Advertising to create and implement a comprehensive economic development marketing strategy. Atlas Advertising was selected because of its extensive experience working with municipalities in economic development strategic planning and marketing, and its multiple connections with site selectors across the country. The consultant visited the City in late June 2016 and conducted a series of stakeholder interviews and surveys to determine the community assets, challenges and opportunities. In October 2016, the consultant presented its proposed marketing strategies to the Council and unveiled proposed logos and taglines to use in the implementation of marketing initiatives. The plan identified four key areas on which to focus in the next five years: brand positioning, community engagement, tourist attraction, and economic development. City staff will update Councilmembers on progress in the past 12 months, such as the launch of a new economic development website and digital marketing campaign, and address additional marketing strategies that are currently underway and/or planned in the near future. OPTIONS: Discussion RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Mike Basinger, Economic Development Manager; Lesli Brassfield, Economic Development Specialist ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint presentation 2016-2017 Marketing Initiatives City of Spokane Valley Economic Development Division Mike Basinger, Economic Development Manager Lesli Brassfield, Economic Development Specialist SPOKANE VALLEY ECONOM9C DEVELOPMENT 8/29/2017 Marketing prior to 2016 ..-IMO. 0• of Spoka°re Valley The Friendliest CM in City Case study Washington" n ,Pminmadwedmenodeveaseandl r�,E:.a na,:mmmlwn..d 1 pe;-a.eh and lna,�,em.s beldm6a^md mun �epeen ew: .n mduwiFe yua4luturt IheuNt"fe Pbnnlny GpN xM tM ent 9rh todea brand tcen++•+P"" wtiona+ rid unhiendy i,.„Ih<90 tht m LONI wave stapen3memMaertnala canletoM�tabr ,, ne4.Alo3 F Goab-Gt theGty°t �� dye City el SP^Wne YdleYa Tre tinglnbne cmnbrntatingracet, R 1"u ° en, ek Me FxmlU' -41.414.,,, „ vi, ._....,.dwm:`°." de.4, .num.,w'• eragyhesa Ci... u: pimrA "„ Ma 1abla land Na devaloP'ne. tnL,nn a- dY lfie Agrsve enttm,ratormri"e remozin,Ih..a11„d,te�ommw° `tothm ON. anx that the wmnwt* wind lwnPenthecAty ae+e'=.Y amine a,dca�rn ppow“ dineo ,nd,1nlenvmNax•.exn:+:w,0.n„�tK nn«nt d nAnw^n ,•tamWuP:pn d an dloadY ued go, mmMna aentnppx„noRwnm[...m g .fl.P, tedawtdnmdm12.eLliviivVa1kY "•1 1. na.edtna....J:>nd t' nilly ■Contract with MDI Advertising, 2012-2015 ■ Local campaign -improve City's image regarding permitting and economic development ■ Use of video, audio, display ads SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ■ Local TV, radio, print media 8/29/2017 2 Current marketing contract ■Published RFQ for Marketing Program, January 2016 •Atlas Advertising awarded contract, June 2016 ■October 2016: Atlas presents five-year marketing plan LA SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8/29/2017 3 Foundation for marketing plan I IIII I iJ SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ■Spokane Valley Retail Improvement Strategy, February 2016 ■Spokane Valley Tourism Strategy, July 2016 ■Spokane Valley Tourism Analysis, March 2017 8/29/2017 4 2017-2037 ADOPTED: DECEMBER 2016 ORDINANCE 140.16-01B Foundation (cont.) ■City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, December 2016 ■Marketing strategies reflected in these working documents SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8/29/2017 5 Focus of marketing plan Four key areas (over five years): ■ Brand development & position ■ Local community engagement ■Tourism ■ Economic development STAKEHOLDER RESEARCH BRAND POSITIONING LA SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8/29/2017 6 Seven key strategies 1. Develop and position City's brand 2. Launch economic development website 3. Increase use of social media 4. Develop digital media, additional video and print materials 5. Feature existing and new event opportunities 6. Leverage community assets (services, facilities, infrastructure) 7. Enhance marketing channels through local partners SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8/29/2017 7 #1: Develop and position our brand Spokane jUalley ASPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ASPOKANE VALLEY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - ■Strengthen use of City logo •Introduce unique logo to give identity to economic development initiatives (created December 2016) ■Deploytagline: Where tradition meets ambition 8/29/2017 8 #2: Launch economic development website ■ Build brand identity • Stand-alone, responsive to device ■Target consultants & senior executives ■ Share demographic, workforce information and data ■ Share opportunities, incentives • Exhibit business -friendly approach SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT VALLEY WELCOME TO SPOKANE VALLEY WASHINGTON tpp erre Ve ,fa uty of v9 sitl.Eamily mbus. satoes end me fn aaisetou=_ quality of r casae makes it easy anelo call Fmmae. Heine br. knbormaes. robusl ast tiye rams is city of kes by lousnoessez io expand or relocele. LEP.i'3',ACR=. PAP.I.FACILNING SUCCESS 8/29/2017 9 SPOKANE VALLEY EPoe.,swe+Off 0909 00 *1500 0n„000 eaaa.:paae,dopokareeaiae,rg Resources Available for All Businesses anomers owmoss is ceparang, cacanrg. ores[ ening on sooannc vary nas rr ourcasm ray nmrr/c. 5011116.5_Prag,erortam. po Fan asnaea�,re �i>s� a,,aa� i n.esss«�m w<nand ana-larger. �aaemVe mans-spmnaae va®ma ey na.5 n . r STATE INCENTIVES LOANS AND GRANTS LOCAL PROGRAMS anew ne«n 1.na FOr tominesse. Spokane vane 0..es number , programs a. Website (cont.) • Site launched December 2016 • 12,750 visits since launch • 10,915 users have visited site • Photo archive in development • Analytics help us understand who LA SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT visa s, ow si e can se improves 8/29/2017 10 #3: Increase use of social media • Stakeholder research showed desire for more community engagement • News available in real time • Text, images, video integration • Supports targeted, digital advertising (segmented by place, interest, age) • Digital tools help with social media LA SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT monitoring, arc wing 8/29/2017 11 • October 2016: City launches Twitter feed to share news, announcements ■ 3-4 items posted perweek; current following...300 plus individuals • Limited # characters, shares the `headline' • Use with traditional marketing (City newsletter, email messaging) ■A solid `first step' into social media Launch of Twitter ESpokane Valley mmrn opuFuyary fl&+eetl alober e016 Tweets Tweets & replies Media 5'erslwrw14va4lq, , . New to Twitter? p r.I.s.6,e ,:- �MaanF Valley 3fIN�iC% Aii99 ++^^�G• HHsll llpdave pexh eCult un hcn he fla purser e.iop....udget n. Nu .ot1KiylYall �R SMwn. 'Smits". Valley 3,f1}t^1% Aup7 1 -REE mim&FREE movie at Volley Miavun porkW al. Swim "SBP Movie M0A;p Miva;.Y 11t23[A��M fn. quq SPOKANE VALLEY — ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8/29/2017 12 #4: Develop digital media, video and print Valley, WA - Where Business Succeeds Spokane Learn More. spotan Business and Occupation r nation 00) tax or corporate income tax. ai Industries dam aboutthe advantages u; lndu�try Business Climate Find out about our business climate' and taxinceritNes. Business Resour4eou need Get the resou to succeed here. Atlas digital media campaign ■ Advertisements drive web traffic SPOKANE VALLEY — ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT • Text -only and image ads created • Ads placed on media sites based on key words or phrases used in Google search • Sites include Entrepreneur, USA Today, Business Week, Forbes, etc. 8/29/2017 13 USA -TODAY Seattle turf war: Delta expands on more Alaska Air routes saws 350 Shams 'YPEPE IFt'Ji,IPu Y[e`5 4uR'191 SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Digital media ■Ads launched in April and continue through December ■ 1.5 million impressions ■Ads have generated 11,000 plus site visits through August 17 ■ 88 percent of traffic coming to new website is from digital ads 8/29/2017 14 `Local champion' testimonial videos ■ Feature 8-10 senior executives from local businesses ■ Plan to share on City websites, TWO RAILROADS EN5k Union Pacific social media, TV stations, partner & websites • Build community pride, foster economic development SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT • 8/29/2017 15 Brochures and other materials Profiles, success stories ■ Topics: aerospace, distribution and logistics, manufacturing, professional services, industrial land options ■ Available in print and online • Distribute via economic development website, events, conferences, recruitment meetings, etc. 8/29/2017 16 #5: Feature and grow event opportunities ■Established events Valleyfest, Cycle Celebration ■New events Crave Food & Drink celebration - 2,000 plus attendance - 235 local hotel stays - PR and social media Oktoberfest at CenterPlace, Oct. 27-29 8/29/2017 17 #6: Leverage community assets ■ Waterfront and Whitewater parks • Multimodal trails • Fairgrounds, Avista stadium • Balfour Park redevelopment ■ CenterPlace & other entertainment venues ■ Valley events and culture 8/29/2017 18 #7: Enhance partner marketing channels GREATER SPOKANE umodie VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE • Improve online, print, video content available through local partners Greater • Ensure content is accurate, vibrant and supports brand positioning Inca pot • Pursue earned media & create `buzz' (regional print, tv, radio, blogs) ■ Generate interest through awards and accolades Near Nature. Near Perfect. SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8/29/2017 19 Measuring our success ■ Increase in website visits & time on webpages Tourism ■ Increase in digital engagement and social Economic media participation Development SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ■ Increase in community engagement (event participation, support for new initiatives) ■ Increase in business inquiries, permits and licenses ■ Increase in hotel stays and earned revenue 8/29/2017 20 C OnialoWie M W ay FM102061111111411111t Tourism Economic Development Next three years ■Refine strategies based on metrics ■Improve `targeted marketing' for specific industries ■Anticipate publishing RFQ for Marketing Services in October LA SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8/29/2017 21 2016-2017 Marketing initiatives Thankyou foryour time. Questions? LA SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONONMC DEVELOPMENT 8/29/2017 22 Meeting Date: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action August 29, 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: Parental Rights of Unvaccinated Students During an Outbreak at School GOVERNING LEGISLATION: • WA Const. art. IX § 1 Education • RCW Chapter 28A.150 General Provisions • RCW Chapter 28A.210 Health—Screening And Requirements • WAC Chapter 246-100 Communicable and Certain Other Diseases • WAC Chapter 246-105 Immunization Of Child Care and School Children Against Certain Vaccine -Preventable Diseases • WAC Chapter 246-110 Contagious Disease—School Districts and Childcare Centers • WAC Chapter 392-380 Public School Pupils—Immunization Requirement and Life - Threatening Health Condition PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None. BACKGROUND: Student vaccination requirements at local schools Washington law requires all public school students to be immunized and show proof of immunization prior to enrollment at school. Students are also required to stay up-to-date with a vaccination schedule throughout their schooling. The Washington State Board of Health develops the vaccination schedule. However, in lieu of vaccination, a student's parent may claim a medical, philosophical, or religious exemption for some or all required vaccines. A medical exemption is where a health care practitioner certifies that, in his or her judgment, a particular vaccine is not advisable for the student. Once the health care practitioner determines the student may safely be vaccinated, the exemption does not apply and the student is required to obtain the missing vaccine(s). A philosophical exemption is where a student's parent certifies that they have either a personal or philosophical objection to the immunization of their child. Finally, a religious exemption is where a student's parent certifies that their religious beliefs prevent them from immunizing their child. The exemptions must be claimed on a prescribed form to be effective. Circumstances where unvaccinated students may be excluded from school If a student is unvaccinated and does not have one of the three exemptions, the student will be excluded from school until they are either vaccinated or receive a valid exemption. If a disease "outbreak" occurs at school, the local health officer has the authority to exclude all unvaccinated and under -vaccinated students from school. In Spokane County, the local health officer is the physician appointed to lead the Spokane Regional Health District. The Spokane Regional Health District's policy is to declare an outbreak when there are two or more confirmed cases within the same building. Once an outbreak occurs, pursuant to state law, the local health officer "shall take all appropriate actions deemed to be necessary to control or eliminate actions deemed to be necessary to control or eliminate the spread of the disease." These discretionary actions include closing schools and excluding unvaccinated students. An exclusion order stays in effect as long as the local health officer deems it appropriate and necessary. For the most recent mumps outbreak, the exclusion order stayed in effect for 25 days after a mumps case was confirmed. Legal obligations of schools to educate excluded students Article IX, Section I of the Washington Constitution states, "It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for education of all children residing within its borders, without distinction or preference on account of race, color, caste, or sex." The Washington Supreme Court stated that the "constitutional duty to provide an `education' goes beyond mere reading, writing and arithmetic." McCleary v. State, 173 Wn.2d 487, 516 (2012). The Court recognized that education must also embrace "broad educational opportunities needed in the contemporary setting...." Id. Still, the legislature "enjoys broad discretion in selecting the means of discharging its duty...." Id. at 526. The legislature has not specified any requirement regarding additional education for excluded students. The legislature does require schools to offer approximately 1000 instructional hours to their students per year. However, the Washington Supreme Court found the duty of the school to provide ample education also creates a corresponding obligation for children to take advantage of the education offered by the state. Seattle Sch. Dist. v. State, 90 Wn.2d 476, 513 (1978). The state is also not obligated to provide "identical education to all children within the state regardless of the circumstances in which they are found." Tunstall v. Bergeson, 141 Wn.2d 201, 220 (2000). If a student does not have the required credits to graduate, he or she may stay in school until the age of twenty-one. School districts are also permitted to augment basic education with any "services, programs, or activities that the school district determines to be appropriate for the education of the school district's students." This may include offering tutoring or virtual classroom services to excluded students. With the recent outbreaks, local school districts were working to develop programs for children that were required to be excluded. The West Valley School District even published a FAQs webpage regarding the mumps outbreak. One of the questions listed was, "If my student is required to stay home for an extended period, is the district providing educational support like tutoring?" The answer was brief and stated that the district was looking into ways to help students stay on track with school work. Summary Outbreaks create a unique challenge for school districts. They must protect the health and safety of all of their students, whether vaccinated or not, as well as providing the opportunities for education for all students. Unfortunately, the State has not legislatively provided direction on how school districts should meet all of the challenges associated with outbreaks. The school district is not the entity ordering the exclusion during an outbreak. That power rests with the local health officer, who has broad authority to prevent the spread of communicable diseases. Yet, the school district is wholly responsible for providing all children with a basic education. Further, the law does not require that school districts provide alternative education to excluded students while they are excluded. Considering the lengthy period of exclusion (e.g., 25+ days), a legislative remedy addressing education of excluded students is one possible solution. In the meantime, some school districts have stated they are looking into providing additional services for excluded students. Finally, if an excluded student falls behind in their studies and fails to graduate on-time, they may stay in school until they reach the age of twenty-one. OPTIONS: Discussion RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: N/A. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A. STAFF CONTACT: Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney; Anthony Bandiero, Legal Intern. ATTACHMENTS: A. PowerPoint presentation. Parental Rights of Unvaccinated Students During an Outbreak at School Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Anthony Bandiero, Legal Intern 2017 City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney r Overview of topics Student vaccination requirements at local schools Circumstances where unvaccinated students may be excluded from school Legal obligations of schools to educate excluded students City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Vaccination requirements All students seeking enrollment must present proof of immunization or claim a recognized exemption.' There are three recognized exemptions:2 A. Medical B. Personal or Philosophical C. Religious 1. RCW 28A.210.080(1). 2. RCW 28A.210.090. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney 3 Vaccination requirements A student that has not been vaccinated and does not have a recognized exemption is prohibited from attending school.' Non -exempted students must also keep up to date with their vaccination schedule throughout the course of schooling.2 Vaccination schedule is set by Washington State Board of Health 1. RCW 28A.210.090. 2. WAC 392-380-045(2). City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Student exclusions from school Exempted students are allowed to be at school unless there is an "outbreak" and the local health officer determines that exclusion is a necessary means to control or eliminate the spread of disease.' An "outbreak" is defined as an "occurrence of cases of a disease or condition in any given area over a given period of time in excess of the expected number of cases as determined by the local health officer."2 1. RCW 28A.210.090. 2. WAC 246-110-010(7). City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney e •_ __:_. school Per the Spokane Regional Health District, an outbreak is declared when there are two or more confirmed cases within the same building.' Note that School Districts have no say in whether to exclude unvaccinated students — solely at discretion of local health officer. Options for Health District to control or eliminate outbreaks: Closing all or part of the affected schools Closing other schools Canceling activities or functions at schools Excluding any students, staff, or volunteers who are infectious, or exposed and susceptible (e.g., unvaccinated) to the disease. Once a determination is made to exclude students, they are excluded for a certain period of time — for the latest mumps outbreak it was 25 days from the last detected case in the building. Students may receive the vaccine and be allowed to return to school immediately. SRHD Website City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Obligation to educate excluded students WA Constitution says "[i]t is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for education of all children residing within its borders...."1 However, no specific state statute governing education of excluded unvaccinated students. Const. art. IX, § 1. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney ----06�gation to educate excluded students The Legislature requires schools to offer around 1000 instructional hours per year.' The WA Supreme Court has stated the duty of the school to provide ample education provides a corresponding obligation for children to take advantage of the education offered by the state.2 1. RCW 28A.150.220(2)(a). 2. Seattle Sch. Dist. V State, 90 Wn.2d 476, 513 (1978) City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Jbligation to educate excluded students Local schools may develop alternative education programs for excluded students to keep them on track. Local school districts were working on options during last outbreak. An excluded student has options, including: Work with the school to maintain academic progress; Get the required vaccine for the outbreak, and immediately return;' or If the student does not have enough credits to graduate, the student can remain in school until the age of 21.2 1. Per WA Dept. of Health website. 2. RCW 28A.150.220(6). City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Conclusion Schools are responsible for educating students, but the exclusion order comes from the local health officer. Notably, the City has no authority or control over school districts or the health district. Each is a separate municipal entity. Changes to the current process/determination would require legislative amendments. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Questions City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney 11 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: August 29, 2017 Department Director Approval ❑ Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Legislative Agenda GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: City Manager Calhoun will brief Council on the City's draft Legislative Agenda. OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: City Manager Mark Calhoun ATTACHMENTS : Spokane Valley's Draft Legislative Agenda CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY DRAFT 2018 LEGISLATIVE AGENDA Support Legislation Clarifying Valley Water Providers' Water Rights The City of Spokane Valley residents and businesses receive water through multiple regional water providers. To ensure adequate water supply for the growing Valley community, current law needs to be changed to clarify these water providers' water rights are for municipal water supply purposes and are not subject to relinquishment. The water providers are using water rights currently designated for agricultural irrigation and dairy purposes, rather than for municipal water supply. The Department of Ecology has indicated that agricultural irrigation and dairy water rights held or acquired by a municipal water supplier cannot be considered municipal water supply water rights without filing for a change of use permit. A change of use permit process is slow, costly, and may diminish the overall water right. The City supports legislation that clarifies that the water rights held by water providers serving the Spokane Valley region can be changed to municipal water supply purposes without going through the change of use permitting process. This issue was partially addressed in 2017 through an agreement with the Department of Ecology, but the balance of providers need the same clarity of process. Transportation Fundin2 Request: Bridging the Valley The City of Spokane Valley continues to make progress on: Phase 1: Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation Project The City of Spokane Valley respectfully requests that the state invest in Phase 1 of Bridging the Valley by allocating funds to the Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation project. The Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Project replaces an at -grade crossing with an overpass of BNSF's railroad tracks and Trent Avenue (SR 290). The project will eliminate two at -grade crossings, eliminating train/vehicle crash risks. The project will improve train travel through the Spokane region, which is a bottleneck of the Great Northern Corridor. The total project cost is currently anticipated to be $20 million. The City has already secured partial financing for the project including a $720,000 federal earmark, a Washington State Freight Mobility Investment Board grant equivalent to 20% of the total project cost, $3.6 million of City -generated funds specifically earmarked for this purpose, and $1.5 million that the City received in the 2017-2019 biennial transportation budget from the Washington State Legislature, which we plan to spend on bridge design. Once designed, the City hopes to continue its partnership with the state to fund right-of- way acquisition and construction. Phase 2: Pines Road Underpass / BNSF Grade Separation Project Following the successful completion of Phase 1, the City of Spokane Valley plans to request that the state invest in Phase 2 of Bridging the Valley by allocating funds to the Pines Road Underpass/BNSF Grade Separation project. The Pines Road Underpass/BNSF Grade Separation Project will replace an at -grade crossing with an underpass of BNSF's railroad tracks and Trent Avenue (SR 290). The project will eliminate a major at -grade crossing, eliminating train/vehicle crash risks. The project will improve train travel through the Spokane region, which is a bottleneck of the Great Northern Corridor. Using City funds, the City has already purchased property south of the rail line for the underpass. The City will seek future funding for the Pines Road Underpass/BNSF Grade Separation. Pass a Capital Budget: Fundin2 for Appleway Trail Park Amenities The City of Spokane Valley encourages the Legislature to pass a 2017-2019 Capital Budget with an allocation of $ $540,000 for park amenities for the first mile of the Appleway Trail. The most recent versions of the proposed 2017-2019 Capital Budget include this funding. These additional amenities include a restroom, topsoil, limited turf and dryland seeding, trees, drinking fountain, and benches. Using $1 million in City funds, the City previously funded, designed and constructed the paved portion of the first mile 1 without these amenities. The state has allocated funding for the remaining 3.25 miles (including amenities), scheduled over the next two years. This funding of $540,000 in the Capital Budget will bring amenities to the entire 4.25 mile trail, realizing the full conceptual plan and orienting future economic development. Protect the Local State -Shared Revenues The City of Spokane Valley requests that the Legislature preserve and restore local state -shared revenues. These funds include the Liquor Excise Tax Account ($442,294 in 2016), Liquor Board Profits ($804,057 in 2016), Municipal Criminal Justice Assistance Account ($280,337 in 2016), and City -County Assistance Account and Marijuana Revenues ($54,213 in 2016). Specifically, the City supports legislation that removes the 2011 cap on Liquor Profit revenues to restore the 50/50 revenue sharing relationship between the state and local governments. Spokane Valley is home to many warehouses and manufacturing facilities. As a result, the City receives over $500,000 each year in streamlined sales tax (SST) mitigation payments to compensate the City for financial losses when the state switched to a destination -based sales tax system. The 2017 Legislature indicated with the passage of the Marketplace Fairness Act, that the state intends to suspend streamlined sales tax mitigation payments in the 2019-21 biennium. Meanwhile, the Department of Revenue was directed to analyze if and when expected revenue gains from implementation of the Marketplace Fairness Act equal or exceed revenue losses to cities. The City will be closely monitoring the outcome of this and requests that cities receiving SST mitigation are made whole through this transition. Spokane Valley's economy is such that this transition has the potential to negatively impact Spokane Valley more significantly than other communities throughout the state. Abandoned/Foreclosed Homes The City of Spokane Valley supports legislation to provide cities with the tools to address abandoned and foreclosed homes. In 2016, the Washington State Supreme Court ruled in Jordan v. Nationstar that financial institutions cannot enter and secure homes until the foreclosure process is complete. This leads to many homes being abandoned that are mid -foreclosure. Abandoned homes throughout a community become sites for criminal activity, squatters, and declining property values. The City encourages the Legislature to adopt legislation in response to the Jordan v Nationstar case that provides cities with tools to address abandoned and foreclosed homes. Indigent Defense Funding The City of Spokane Valley supports full funding for municipal indigent defense services. In 2013, the Washington Supreme Court set new caseload standards for the number of cases a public defender can represent in a calendar year. This has increased the annual cost of providing indigent defense services by $71,521 or 11.4%. The City supports policy and fiscal changes to mitigate this new obligation. Protect Businesses by Reforming State Regulatory Burden The City of Spokane Valley strongly supports businesses small and large, in our City and across the state, because they are the lifeblood of our economy. Unfortunately, these businesses are forced to compete in a state regulatory environment that is increasingly burdensome, making it difficult to compete with businesses in neighboring states. Of most urgent concern is the regressive state business & occupation tax, with the current Labor & Industries program close behind, and both need significant reform before they do irreparable damage to commerce in Washington. Spokane Valley supports rebalancing the state-wide regulatory framework to encourage and support business development and retention. The City supports AWC legislative agenda items that serve the best interests of Spokane Valley. 2 Meeting Date: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action 8-29-17 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ® information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: DRAFT 2017 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Amendment #2 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35.77.010 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council adopted the 2017-2022 Six Year TIP on June 28, 2016, Resolution #16-009; Council passed a motion authorizing staff to apply for WSDOT's Call for Projects under the Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program on April 12, 2016; Council passed a motion to authorize staff to apply for WSDOT's Call for Projects under the Innovative Safety program on July 12, 2016; on February 28, 2017, Council adopted Resolution 17-006 which amended the 2017 TIP. BACKGROUND: The projects listed in the adopted TIP are based upon available information at the time relative to available funds and how those funds could be utilized for transportation projects. Since the February 28, 2017 Amendment #1 to the 2017 TIP, the City has received award letters for two separate grant opportunities: 1) Wellesley Avenue Sidewalk Project from McDonald to Evergreen funded by WSDOT's SRTS program, and 2) Citywide Signal Backplate project funded by the Federal Highway Safety Improvement Program's Innovative Safety Program. These projects must be amended into the City's TIP prior to spending City Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) funds. The Department of Commerce (DOC) requires a 60 -day notice for an amendment to the adopted TIP. This notice was received by DOC on July 7, 2017. The required public hearing and proposed resolution to amend the adopted 2017 TIP are both preliminarily scheduled for September 12, 2017. OPTIONS: Information Only RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Information Only BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The project costs shown in the draft Amendment #2 to the 2017 TIP are based on the award funding letters received from WSDOT. There are sufficient capital project funds to meet the local match requirements for these projects. STAFF CONTACT: Adam Jackson, PE, Planning & Grants Engineer Mike Basinger, AICP, Economic Development Manger ATTACHMENTS: Draft 2017 TIP Amendment #2 City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Adopted 2017 Transportation Improvement Program (Amended by Resolution 17-006 on 2/28/17) Proj. # 1 0226 2 0253 0254 0255 0257 0256 0240 0235 3 0251 4 0141 5 0237 6 0259 7 0252 8 0250 9 0249 10 0248 11 0143 12 0223 13 0227 14 0123 15 0258 16 17 18 0222 19 0239 20 0166 21 0201 22 0155 Project Appleway Preservation 2017 Street Preservation Project Mission Preservation Mission Preservation (PE) Indiana Preservation University Preservation (PE) University Preservation (PE) Saltese NB Sullivan Overlay Argonne Reconstruction PCC (PE) Euclid Reconstruct Sullivan/Euclid Concrete Intersection (RW/CN) Appleway Trail North Sullivan ITS Project Argonne Preservation 9th Ave Sidewalk Sullivan/Wellesley Intersection Improvement Sprague Preservation Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Pines (SR27)/BNSF Grade Separation Appleway Shared Use Path Mission Ave Improvement Project 32nd Ave Sidewalk 2016 - Citywide Signal Backplates 8th Ave SidewalkF Citywide Reflective Signal Backplates (PE/CN) Bowdish Sidewalk - 8th to 12th Pines (SR-27)/Grace Intersection Safety Project ITS Will Project (CN) Sullivan West Bridge From Park Various locations Pines McDonald Mirabeau Pkwy 16th 24th Houk Spokane Rvr Br Indiana Ave Flora Sullivan @ Sullivan 1-90 Broadway Raymond Sullivan @ Sullivan Barker @ Pines (SR27) Pines (SR27) Flora SR27 Various locations Dickey Various locations 12th Pines (SR 27) @ Various locations Sullivan Primary To Source Dishman Mica City McDonald City Evergreen City Evergreen City 24th City Dishman Mica City 24th City Flora Pit Road City Montgomery STP Barker City Euclid STP(U)/TIB Corbin RCO/COM Trent CMAQ Indiana STP(U) University FTA Wellesley CMAQ Corbin STP(U) BNSF RR Other FED BNSF RR City Evergreen STP(U)/TA Barker STP(U) Evergreen TIB HSIP Thierman CDBG HSIP 8th TIB Grace Ave HSIP CMAQ @Spokane River BR City Total 2017 Amount Project Costs $4,000 $30,000 $770,000 $770,000 $67,000 $67,000 $950,000 $950,000 $55,000 $55,000 $50,000 $50,000 $900,000 $900,000 $54,500 $54,500 $63,280 $468,750 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $300,414 $2,173,488 $313,797 $2,088,877 $27,750 $205,500 $10,000 $70,000 $45,896 $229,477 $27,000 $198,000 $36,000 $268,000 $0 $720,000 $1,200,000 $1,200,000 $266,747 $1,995,191 $112,000 $773,200 $11,325 $56,627 $0 $123,830 $31,956 $485,851 $900 $81,000 $219,699 $473,060 $172,815 $573,486 $47,000 $323,000 $140,000 $1,385,500 Funded Projects $7,813,799 $18,300,587 Planned Projects $63,280 $468,750 Total All Projects $ 7,877,079 $ 18,769,337 City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works AMENDED 2017 Transportation Improvement Program Resolution 17-OXX, September 12, 2017) Proj. # Project 1 0226 Appleway Preservation 2 2017 Street Preservation Project 0253 Mission Preservation 0254 Mission Preservation (PE) 0255 Indiana Preservation 0257 University Preservation (PE) 0256 University Preservation (PE) 0240 Saltese 0235 NB Sullivan Overlay Argonne Reconstruction PCC (PE) 3 0251 Euclid Reconstruct 4 0141 Sullivan/Euclid Concrete Intersection (RW/CN) 5 0237 Appleway Trail 6 0259 North Sullivan ITS Project 7 0252 Argonne Preservation 8 0250 9th Ave Sidewalk 9 0249 Sullivan/Wellesley Intersection Improvement 10 0248 Sprague Preservation 11 0143 Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation 12 0223 Pines (SR27)/BNSF Grade Separation 13 0227 Appleway Shared Use Path 14 0123 Mission Ave Improvement Project 15 0258 32nd Ave Sidewalk 16 2016 - Citywide Signal Backplates 17 8th Ave Sidewalk 18 0222 Citywide Reflective Signal Backplates (PE/CN) 19 0239 Bowdish Sidewalk - 8th to 12th 20 0166 Pines (SR-27)/Grace Intersection Safety Project 21 0201 ITS Infill Project (CN) 22 0155 Sullivan West Bridge 23 Wellesley Sidewalk Project 24 263 Citywide Signal Backplates Funded Projects Added Projects Planned Projects From Park Various locations Pines McDonald Mirabeau Pkwy 16th 24th Houk Spokane Rvr Br Indiana Ave Flora Sullivan @ Sullivan 1-90 Broadway Raymond Sullivan @ Sullivan Barker @ Pines (SR27) Pines (SR27) Flora SR27 Various locations Dickey Various locations 12th Pines (SR 27) @ Various locations Sullivan McDonald Various Locations Primary To Source Dishman Mica City McDonald City Evergreen City Evergreen City 24th City Dishman Mica City 24th City Flora Pit Road City Montgomery STP Barker City Euclid STP(U)/TIB Corbin RCO/COM Trent CMAQ Indiana STP(U) University FTA Wellesley CMAQ Corbin STP(U) BNSF RR Other FED BNSF RR City Evergreen STP(U)/TA Barker STP(U) Evergreen TIB HSIP Thierman CDBG HSIP 8th TIB Grace Ave HSIP CMAQ @Spokane River BR Evergreen SRTS HSIP City Amount $4,000 $770,000 $67,000 $950,000 $55,000 $50,000 $900,000 $54,500 $63,280 $2,000,000 $300,414 $313,797 $27,750 $10,000 $45,896 $27,000 $36,000 $0 $1,200,000 $266,747 $112,000 $11,325 $0 $31,956 $900 $219,699 $172,815 $47,000 $140,000 $ 44,700 $ 1,032 Total 2017 Project Costs $30,000 $770,000 $67,000 $950,000 $55,000 $50,000 $900,000 $54,500 $468,750 $2,000,000 $2,173,488 $2,088,877 $205,500 $70,000 $229,477 $198,000 $268,000 $720,000 $1,200,000 $1,995,191 $773,200 $56,627 $123,830 $485,851 $81,000 $473,060 $573,486 $323,000 $1,385,500 $ 447,000 $ 123,830 Total Project Costs $7,922,811 $19,340,167 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. To: From: Re: DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA as of August 24, 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 September 5, 2017 Meeting Cancelled Special Meeting: Friday, Sept 8, 2017: Spokane County Meeting, Council of Governments 10:00 a.m.-12:30 p.m., Spokane County Fair & Expo Center, Conference Facility, 404 N Havana St September 12, 2017, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. Proclamation: Constitution Week 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes; resolution to set budget hearing for 10-10) 2. PUBLIC HEARING: 2018 Budget Revenues (includes property tax) — Chelsie Taylor 3. PUBLIC HEARING: 2017 Amended Tip — Mike Basinger, Adam Jackson 4. Proposed Resolution Amending 2017 TIP — Mike Basinger, Adam Jackson fdue Tue, Sept 51 (5 minutes) (15 minutes) (15 minutes) (5 minutes) 5. Admin Report: Red Cross Household Emergency Kits -Mark Calhoun; Megan Snow, Red Cross (20 min) 6. Admin Report: draft ordinance adopting 2018 property taxes — Chelsie Taylor 7. Admin Report: CenterPlace Great Room Bid — Mike Stone 8. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins (10 minutes) (15 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 90 minutes] September 19, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Outside Agencies Presentations: Economic Development & Social Services 2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins fdue Tue, Sept 121 (-120 mins) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 125 minutes] September 26, 2017, Formal Meeting 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. Spokane Regional Health District — Dr. Lutz 2. Proposed 2017 Budget Amendment — Chelsie Taylor 3. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins October 10, 2017, Formal Meeting 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 4. Motion Consideration: CenterPlace Great Room Bid — Mike Stone Draft Advance Agenda 8/24/2017 11:43:34 AM fdue Tue, Sept 191 (5 minutes) (5 minutes) (15 minutes) (45 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 75 minutes] fdue Tue, Sept 261 (20 minutes) (10 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 35 minutes] [due Tue, Oct 31 (20 minutes) (5 minutes) (15 minutes) (10 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 50 minutes] Page 1 of 3 October 17, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Felts Field Update — Airport Director Larry Krauter 2. Official Newspaper of Spokane Valley — Chris Bainbridge, Cary Driskell 3. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins [due Tue, Oct 101 (15 minutes) (15 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] October 24, 2017, Formal Meeting 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. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins 9. Info Only: Department Reports October 31, 2017, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Admin Report: 2018 Fee Resolution — Chelsie Taylor [*estimated [due Tue, Oct 1711 (15 minutes) (5 minutes) (15 minutes) (15 minutes) (20 minutes) (20 minutes) (15 minutes) (5 minutes) meeting: 110 minutes] [due Tue, Oct 24] (5 minutes) (20 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] November 7, 2017, Study Session, 6:00 p.m. [Note: meeting might be cancelled due to election night] 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 Idue Tue, Nov 7] (20 minutes) (5 minutes) (15 minutes) (20 minutes) (20 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 85 minutes] Idue Tue, Nov 141 (5 minutes) 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 December 12, 2017, Formal Meeting 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 Draft Advance Agenda 8/24/2017 11:43:34 AM [due Tue, Nov 21] (5 minutes) Idue Tue, Dec 5] (5 minutes) (10 minutes) (25 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 45 minutes] Idue Tue, Dec 12] (5 minutes) Page 2 of 3 December 26, 2017, Formal Meeting 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. Selection 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) Density Standards (19.70.050(g)) Disc Golf Park Donation Recognition Emergency Management RFQ Farmers Market Fee Resolution (credit card fees, etc.) Grants received, history Janitorial Contract Nuisance Properties (drug houses, etc.) Police Precinct (officers, cars, carpet, etc.) Protestor Conditions School Interns Second Amendment Sanctuary City Shipping Containers Sign Ordinance Small Cell Regulations Snow Removal Ordinance 2' read 17-010 Solid Waste Contract Approval Sullivan Road Bridge Update Transportation & Infrastructure Undergrounding Urban Farming & Animal Keeping Utility Facilities in ROW Water Banking Yard Sales Regulation Review [due Tue, Dec 261 (15 minutes) (5 minutes) Draft Advance Agenda 8/24/2017 11:43:34 AM Page 3 of 3