2022, 12-06 Study Session AgendaAGENDA
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
STUDY SESSION
Tuesday, December 6, 2022 6:00 p.m.
Remotely via ZOOM Meeting and
In Person at 10210 E Sprague Avenue
Council Requests Please Silence Your Cell Phones During Council Meeting
NOTE: Members of the public may attend Spokane Valley Council meetings in -person at City Hall at the
address provided above, or via Zoom at the link below. Members of the public will be allowed to comment in -
person or via Zoom as described below. Public comments will only be accepted for those items noted on the
agenda as "public comment opportunity." If making a comment via Zoom, comments must be received by 4:00
pm the day of the meeting. Otherwise, comments will be taken in -person at the meeting in Council Chambers,
as noted on the agenda below.
• Sign up to Provide Oral Public Comment at the Meeting via Calling -In
• Submit Written Public Comment Prior to the Meeting
• Join the Zoom WEB Meeting
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITY: This is an opportunity for the public to speak on
any subject except agenda action items, as public comments will be taken on those items where indicated.
Please keep comments to matters within the jurisdiction of the City Government. This is not an opportunity
for questions or discussion. Diverse points of view are welcome but please keep remarks civil. Remarks
will be limited to three minutes per person. To comment via zoom: use the link above for oral or written
comments as per those directions. To comment at the meeting in person: speakers may sign in to speak
but it is not required. A sign -in sheet will be provided in Council Chambers.
ACTION ITEMS:
1. Resolution 22-022 Amending Petty Cash Process — Dan Domrese [public comment opportunity]
2. Mayoral Appointment: Citizen to Spokane Housing Authority — Mayor Haley [public comment opportunity]
NON -ACTION ITEMS:
3. Federal Legislative Agenda — Mike Pieper, Virginia Clough
4. Interlocal Agreement with City of Millwood — Cary Driskell
5. Draft Fee Resolution for 2023 Master Fee Schedule — Chelsie Taylor
6. Sprague Avenue Stormwater Project — Gloria Mantz, Jerremy Clark
7. CenterPlace Catering Contract — Erik Lamb, John Bottelli
8. Chronic Nuisance — Erik Lamb, Chief Ellis
9. Right -of -Way Maintenance — Bill Helbig
10. Pavement Management Program Funding Options — Adam Jackson, Bill Helbig
11. Plantes Ferry Interlocal Agreement — Mike Basinger
12. Advance Agenda — Mayor Haley
INFORMATION ONLY: (will not be reported or discussed):
13. Department Reports
COUNCIL COMMENTS
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS
ADJOURN
Council Agenda. December 6, 2022 Page 1 of 1
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: December 6, 2022 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Proposed resolution 22-022 repealing and replacing resolution 21-006
establishing petty cash
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Spokane Valley Municipal Code 3.30.030 — General fund petty
cash established.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Chapter 3.30 SVMC was originally adopted in 2002
with minor revisions in 2015, and amended by Ordinance 22-024, approved on November 22,
2022. Resolution 08-024 establishing petty cash funds was originally adopted in December of
2008, and amended by resolution 11-001 in January of 2011. Both resolutions were repealed and
replaced by resolution 21-006 in September of 2021.
BACKGROUND: CenterPlace currently does not have any operating cash on hand for making
change for customers. The proposed resolution will establish two new change funds, one in the
amount of $400, and the other in the amount of $200 for CenterPlace to allow it to operate more
efficiently. These amounts mirror the change funds established for the permit center. This will
allow for maintaining sufficient quantities of various denominations to allow for effective making
of change without frequent trips to banks for converting back to useable denominations.
Additionally, it has been determined that the size of the Main Reception petty cash fund, currently
at $200, is excessive for the current usage. Reducing this to $50 continues to provide an
appropriate amount for the typical transactions, without having unnecessary cash on hand. The
three other funds: Building cash one at $400, Building cash two at $200, and Parks & Recreation
petty cash at $50 will remain as they are. This will bring the total of the City's petty cash, change
and working funds to $1,300.
OPTIONS: Move to approve Resolution 22-022; or take other action as appropriate.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve Resolution 22-022.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None anticipated.
STAFF/COUNCIL CONTACT: Daniel Domrese, Accounting Manager
ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution 22-022, redline and clean copies
DRAFT
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO. 22-022
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY,
WASHINGTON, REPEALING AND REPLACING RESOLUTION 21-006, ESTABLISHING
PETTY CASH, CHANGE, AND WORKING FUNDS FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES, AND OTHER
MATTERS RELATING THERETO.
WHEREAS, Spokane Valley Municipal Code 3.30.030 authorizes the development of rules and
policies concerning the administration of petty cash funds; and
WHEREAS, it is the general policy of the City to set aside small amounts of cash to make change
and reimburse employees for City operating costs; and
WHEREAS, the City has established small funds for these purposes in the past by motion,
resolution, or ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Washington State Auditor's Office recommends the adoption of these funds by
City resolution.
NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley,
Spokane County, Washington, as follows:
Section 1. Repeal. The Council hereby repeals Resolution 21-006 in its entirety, replacing it with
this Resolution.
Section 2. Replace. The following petty cash/change accounts shall be established in the amounts
shown below and administered by the position identified. The specific custodians for these accounts shall
be appointed by the City Manager or designee.
Name of account and Responsible Position Amount
Main Reception - Office Assistant $200 50
Building cash one - Development Services Coordinator/Building Official $400
Building cash two - Office Assistant/Permit Specialist $200
Parks & Recreation Petty Cash - Administrative Assistant $ 50
CenterPlace cash one — CenterPlace Coordinator $400
CenterPlace cash two — Office Assistant $200
The following are minimum requirements for establishment and operation of these accounts:
1. Each petty cash account shall be established by the governing body by resolution.
2. The custodian of each petty cash account should be independent of invoice processing, check signing,
general accounting and cash receipts functions.
Resolution 22-022 - Petty Cash Page 1 of 2
DRAFT
When it is not practical to hire additional personnel or to reallocate these duties among existing
personnel, a mechanism of review that accomplishes the objectives of the segregation of duties shall
be established. For example, periodic monitoring of cash receipts and/or independent performance of
the bank reconciliation add controls when complete segregation of duties is not possible.
3. The amount in petty cash shall be periodically counted and reconciled by someone other than the
account custodian.
4. The account custodian should ensure the petty cash is kept in a locked location.
5. The authorized amount of all such petty cash shall be included in the local government's balance sheet.
6. If petty cash is disbursed, it shall be replenished at least monthly. Account replenishment should be
subject to the same review and approval as processed invoices. Account replenishment shall be by
voucher with the appropriate receipts attached. The receipts shall show the date, recipient, purpose
and amount of each cash disbursement. These receipts shall be signed by the person receiving the
money, stamps, etc. At the time of account replenishment, the custodian shall ensure that the balance
remaining in petty cash, together with the amount of the replenishment voucher, equals the authorized
imprest amount.
7. The imprest amount of petty cash shall not exceed one month's salary or the surety bond covering the
custodian.
8. The fund shall not be used for personal cash advances even if secured by check or other I.O.U.'s.
9. Petty cash shall be replenished at the end of the fiscal year so that expenses will be reflected in the
proper accounting period.
10. Whenever an individual's appointment as custodian is terminated, the fund shall be replenished and
the imprest amount turned over to the Finance Director.
Section 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect upon adoption.
Adopted this day of 2022.
ATTEST: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Pam Haley, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Office of the City Attorney
Resolution 22-022 - Petty Cash Page 2 of 2
DRAFT
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO. 22-022
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY,
WASHINGTON, REPEALING AND REPLACING RESOLUTION 21-006, ESTABLISHING
PETTY CASH, CHANGE, AND WORKING FUNDS FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES, AND OTHER
MATTERS RELATING THERETO.
WHEREAS, Spokane Valley Municipal Code 3.30.030 authorizes the development of rules and
policies concerning the administration of petty cash funds; and
WHEREAS, it is the general policy of the City to set aside small amounts of cash to make change
and reimburse employees for City operating costs; and
WHEREAS, the City has established small funds for these purposes in the past by motion,
resolution, or ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Washington State Auditor's Office recommends the adoption of these funds by
City resolution.
NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane
County, Washington, as follows:
Section 1. Repeal. The Council hereby repeals Resolution 21-006 in its entirety, replacing it with
this Resolution.
Section 2. Replace. The following petty cash/change accounts shall be established in the amounts
shown below and administered by the position identified. The specific custodians for these accounts shall
be appointed by the City Manager or designee.
Name of account and Responsible Position Amount
Main Reception - Office Assistant $ 50
Building cash one - Development Services Coordinator/Building Official $400
Building cash two - Office Assistant/Permit Specialist $200
Parks & Recreation Petty Cash - Administrative Assistant $ 50
CenterPlace cash one — CenterPlace Coordinator $400
CenterPlace cash two — Office Assistant $200
The following are minimum requirements for establishment and operation of these accounts:
1. Each petty cash account shall be established by the governing body by resolution.
2. The custodian of each petty cash account should be independent of invoice processing, check signing,
general accounting and cash receipts functions.
Resolution 22-022 - Petty Cash Page 1 of 2
DRAFT
When it is not practical to hire additional personnel or to reallocate these duties among existing
personnel, a mechanism of review that accomplishes the objectives of the segregation of duties shall
be established. For example, periodic monitoring of cash receipts and/or independent performance of
the bank reconciliation add controls when complete segregation of duties is not possible.
3. The amount in petty cash shall be periodically counted and reconciled by someone other than the
account custodian.
4. The account custodian should ensure the petty cash is kept in a locked location.
5. The authorized amount of all such petty cash shall be included in the local government's balance sheet.
6. If petty cash is disbursed, it shall be replenished at least monthly. Account replenishment should be
subject to the same review and approval as processed invoices. Account replenishment shall be by
voucher with the appropriate receipts attached. The receipts shall show the date, recipient, purpose and
amount of each cash disbursement. These receipts shall be signed by the person receiving the money,
stamps, etc. At the time of account replenishment, the custodian shall ensure that the balance remaining
in petty cash, together with the amount of the replenishment voucher, equals the authorized imprest
amount.
7. The imprest amount of petty cash shall not exceed one month's salary or the surety bond covering the
custodian.
8. The fund shall not be used for personal cash advances even if secured by check or other I.O.U.'s.
9. Petty cash shall be replenished at the end of the fiscal year so that expenses will be reflected in the
proper accounting period.
10. Whenever an individual's appointment as custodian is terminated, the fund shall be replenished and
the imprest amount turned over to the Finance Director.
Section 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect upon adoption.
Adopted this 6th day of December, 2022.
ATTEST: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Pam Haley, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Office of the City Attorney
Resolution 22-022 - Petty Cash Page 2 of 2
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: December 6, 2022 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA TITLE: Motion Consideration: Mayoral Appointment to Spokane Housing Authority Board
of Commissioners.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Created in 1971, the Spokane Housing Authority (SHA) is dedicated to
increasing safe, affordable housing and providing opportunities to persons experiencing barriers to housing.
Annually, SHA provides housing assistance to over 5,000 families of low income through a combination
of tenant -based rental assistance, SHA-owned apartment communities, and scattered site housing. The
slogan of the SHA is "Providing Housing — Improving Lives."
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Spokane Valley Resolution 03-033 declaring need and
authorizing the SHA to exercise authority within Spokane Valley, and Spokane Valley Resolution 03-047
setting out the operational rules for the Authority; various appointments over the past years as the need
arose.
BACKGROUND: A six -member Board of Commissioners, appointed by the Mayor of Spokane, County
Board of Commissioners, and the Mayor of Spokane Valley governs the Authority.
Since the Housing Authority is established by state law, the appointment of a commissioner is made by the
Mayor and confirmed by the Council. A commissioner opening was announced on the City's webpage,
and in the Valley News Herald and the Exchange for 4 consecutive weeks with no applicants, followed by
another announcement for 3 consecutive weeks extending the deadline to apply to November 28, 2022. We
received two applications for consideration.
Mayor Haley intends to appoint Ms. Kristina Walker to the Spokane Housing Authority Board of
Commissioners.
OPTIONS: Move to confirm the appointment of Kristina Walker to the Spokane Housing Authority for a
five-year term beginning upon appointment; or do not confirm the appointment.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to confirm the Mayoral appointment of Kristina
Walker to the Spokane Housing Authority Board of Commissioners, for a five-year term beginning upon
appointment confirmation.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: none
STAFF/COUNCIL CONTACT: Mayor Haley
ATTACHMENTS: Application from Kristina Walker, and from Jamie Anderson
Application Form for Committees/Boards/Commissions
Return completed form to City Clerk:
Spokane Valley City Hall
10210 East Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Phone: 509-720-5102 ebainbridge@a.spokanevalley.org
Application may be mailed, e-mailed, or faxed. Please do not send an application via text message attachment. One application per position
please. DO NOT SUBMIT AN APPLICATION UNLESS THERE IS AN OPENING. Openings are generally advertised in the local
newspapers, and posted on the City's Webpage at Ititp://www,snokanevaliey.uraivolunteer Feel free to call the City Clerk if you have questions.
• l INTERESTED IN SERVING ON THE )FOLLOWING COMMITTEE: [Check one box; note requirements]
:►r 11/' . nning Commission —Most be a Spokane Valley resident. (See chapter 18.10 SVMC)
erms are for three years. Applicants are selected without respect to political affiliations, and serve without compensation.
[ ] Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) - Need not be a Spokane Valley resident. (See chapter 3.20 SVMC)
Terns are for one a, hvo years. Committee consists of five members:
One Councilmember: appointed by the Mayor, confirmed by the Council.
Two who represent a business required to collect the tax (hotels, motels, etc.).
Two involved in funded activities (such as a non-profit organization to increase tourism).
Identify the business or organization you represent
Spokane County (lousing and Community Development Advisory Committee (HCDACI
HCDAC includes two Spokane Valley residents; terms not to exceed three years.
Spokane Valley appointment pending final approval by Spokane County Board of Commissioners.
Spokane County Application and Supplemental Application also required.
S s okane County Human Rights Task Force — Terms are for four years. Must be a resident of Spokane Valley.
The Board currently meets 2" Tuesday of each month, 3:30 to 5:00 at Catholic Charities, 12 E 5th Spokane.
beftnokane Housing Authority (SI-LA) — regional committee, five members. Terms are five years.
One individual directly assisted by the Authority, jointly appointed by Spokane Mayor, Spokane Valley Mayor, and
Chair of Board of County Commissioners,
Two individuals who work or reside within Spokane City limits.
One individual who works or resides in unincorporated Spokane County.
One individual who works or resides within Spokane Valley City limits.
Check with the Ciiv Clerk concerning a vacancy on this committee.
[ 1 Other:
II)Name (please print): Y 1 f )1 t h 03 ()\ - L L or
Complete residence address: l Q,0t,49 1 b 4 V ' ik e- ` _
Street City
Complete mailing address (if different from above address):
Length of time residing at current address: 'S'
U.S. Citizen? [yes [ ]no
WA State registered voter? [yes [ ]no
What is your preferred way for us to contact you: [Nose: If you have an unlisted drone number, or do not wish your e-
ntail address made public, do not include that information. Once this document is submitted to the City, it becomes subject to
public disclosure.)
[ Hotne Phone: [ ] Work phone:
Ce11 Phone: 'RI to [ Other message phone:
E-mail address: (please print clearly): - VI(► S L.v,2V lC'1- CJ, I�K�t { t cc)vv-'
[ ] Regular mail to residence or mailing address shown above
EMPLOYMENT: (Please start with most
present [ ] previous
ame of employer:
held: (f ail � employment:
Address:
Position
2. [ ] present previou
Name of emR oyer: 1 L 1 I
lC
S�-�I rS1J�
1try1l.&
VY\ 2.
Address: mil
) Position he d: MA.
Spokane '�
��Va�1ey.
recent)
1 �l} V�,1 11�t) LOAD Vll3 \JC( 11JA Phone: � ] ' (5 5J
�j atcs em In mcnt; 9 ��.� -- l I��-�1��
_
l i1` rr-i Phone: G •7501
Dates of employment: of 1,AOi 7 --]-
Zip Code
1. [ ] current j?(]previous
2, [ ] current [ ] previous
3. [ ] current [ ] previous
4. [ ] current [ ] previous
3, [ ] present ( previous
Name of employer:
Address: Jti
Position held:
4. [ ] present previo
Name of em oyer:
Address:
Position held:
EDUCATION;
N�,rplo
ee oft ugh school
t _• GED: , yes
Trade schoolleolle efuniversity; '`�� l
e f Scho,p1 V # (j�(i 03 LeaM Address: l [ moo" j �� ir�ik�Ck S In
yes [ ] no VV Degree o - certification earned:
]
_ Phone: F i` - 12,,)- • ap.1.5
Dates o 'employment: l [1&,+ -U
1 di lA 1 l OT.A.f e
no
,e• Phone:
Dates of employment:
Address: V (16.0aN 'W
Trade school/college/university:
Name of School
Diploma: [ ] yes [ ] no
Other relevant certifications/licenses: .\ ! T1i koc- s
Address:
Degree or certification earned:
VOLUNTEER EXPERIENCE; Name of social, fraternal, organizations, ete.
SPO (COAL
PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS. Local, state, or national government boards, committees, or commissions
on which you serve or have served,
1. [ ] current [ ] previous
2. [ ] current [ ] previous
3. [ ] current [ ] previous
4. [ ] current [ ] previous
5. [ ] current [ ] previous
REAS
r this conamittec cornanission, board:
.Ply n Gay osizkif U
By signing this application, I certify under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington that all
information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further state that my appointment would not
represent a conflict of interest or an appearance of a conflict of interest with the duties of this position. I understand
this application is subject to disclosure pursuant to chapter 42.56 RCW.
\n4v).k8 Si nare
Date 'Signed
StiOliane
.000 Valley•
Application Form for Committees/Boards/Commissions
Return completed form to City Clerk:
Spokane Valley City Hall
10210 East Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Phone: 509-720-5102 cbainbridge( ispokanevalley.ora
Application may be mailed, e-mailed, or faxed. Please do not send an application via text message attachment. One application per position
please. DO NOT SUBMIT AN APPLICATION UNLESS THERE IS AN OPENING. Openings are generally advertised in the local
newspapers, and posted on the City's Webpage at httn://www.spokanevallev.org/volunteer Feel free to call the City Clerk ifyou have questions.
I AM INTERESTED IN SERVING ON THE FOLLOWING COMMITTEE: [Check one box; note requirements]
[ ] Planning Commission --Mast be a Spokane Valley resident. (See chapter 18.10 SVMC)
Terms are for three years. Applicants are selected without respect to political affiliations, and serve without corn
[ ] Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) - Need not be a Spokane Valley resident. (See chapter 3.20 S
Terms are for one or two years. Committee consists of five members:
One Councilmember: appointed by the Mayor, confirmed by the Council.
Two who represent a business required to collect the tax (hotels, motels, etc.).
Two involved in funded activities (such as a non-profit organization to increase tourism).
Identify the business or organization you represent
[ ] Spokane County Housing and Community Development Advisory Committee (HCDAC)
HCDAC includes (WO Spokane Valley residents; terms not to exceed three years.
Spokane Valley appointment pending final approval by Spokane County Board of Commissioners.
Spokane County Application and Supplemental Application also required.
[ ] Spokane County Human Rights Task Force — Terms are for four years. Must be a resident of Spokane Valley.
The Board currently meets 2°d Tuesday of each month, 3:30 to 5:00 at Catholic Charities, 12 E 5't' Spokane.
[V] Spokane Housing Authority (SHA) — regional committee, five members. Terms are five years.
One individual directly assisted by the Authority, jointly appointed by Spokane Mayor, Spokane Valley Mayor, and
Chair of Board of County Commissioners.
Two individuals who work or reside within Spokane City limits.
One individual who works or resides in unincorporated Spokane County.
One individual who works or resides within Spokane Valley City limits.
Check irith the City Clerk concerning a vacancy on this committee.
[ ] Other:
Cif,, °f S �2 je
NOV _q�20
Ofiy ° Of thskc ne
01 Cjerk
Name (please print): 1.-wnr+2_—• rtcA r yur2 la8'4Cct fri PI n ch !(so/Z
Complete residence address: I -plop 0. rei l.�.;i Qr Aid'i. SP6d Uu'Y (940 jaa
Street City Zip Code
Complete mailing address (if different from above address): i o A L • Sail'ite, tiacej 'Q 17 Rz` R I b 11:). i513 S4f
Length of time residing at current address: ,ir;
U.S. Citizen? [yes [ ]no WA State registered voter? M'yes [ ]no
What is your preferred way for us to contact you: [Note: Ifyou have an unlisted phone ntttnber, or do not wish your e-
mail address made public, do not include that information. Once this document is submitted to the City, it becomes subject to
public disclosure.]
[ ] Horne Phone: [ ] Work phone:
[/ Ce11 Phone: C6f! 1 iIL d j / [ ] Other message phone:
hi E-mail address: lease rint clearly): Mc.lrkiaSC- k-t,S;Vc iTC 6 gntryv , Cc)rin
[ 4 Regular mail t residence r mailing address shown above
EMPLOYMENT: (Please start with most recent)
1. [ ] present F✓ previous
Name of employer: ON) f- i }I A CflR4-I04'
Address: it(, , Li 1.6PW1 q103-+
Position held: G;j pllnl-4
2. [ ] present L v1 previous
Name of employer: aPQk, - R..- kopvirsUc,
Address: j,Si-di 1..3-ppr,llvtt1t. �U L rig0:it
Position held: a ko,
Phone: tsefo
Dates of employment: %
Phone: CScc13 3L/n.-atfI?)
Dates of employment: 6/Al — 1/X/
3, [ ] present [VI previous
Name of employer: Fit (IC)
)
Address: 10 f.3 Soil 1
Position held: �,41- of i-`c
4. [ ] present previous
Name of employer: 1:::1064 t4, gc-xX; DAVGAf2 roc) LL d.;(J}a
ro
Address: i6a'1f ,(, . (fspM 3f u A1iZwA$l (1f tibit"
Position held: P'Ni-ik
EDUCATION: uol l i (.3 AL*;p,. Uild
Name of high school me„fliL!_ L.A6t
Diploma or GED: TVI yes [ ] no
Trade school/college/university:
Name of School i 6 (r.
Phone: £sc4yi2[ -a60
Dates of employment: (j/3t110-'ydial
T1(410( P one: .]_,c)0-y)kL]
Dates of employment: f tJ; -• ya p 6
Address: cff 1 to,/
Address: 9,-7t>a (4,0,nk C/J efz., a tL h)O 1-5 ( [�
Diploma: FA yes [ ] no Degree or certification earned: % .A°1 f ),�t, �' r( ,,►►;m��
Trade school/college/university:
Name of School j3 ( Address: a '.SC)9 J5 J, idifiev r 04)apel„. l,3%
Diploma: [ ] yes h/J no 6. Degree or certification earned: CE :rifa tti CA.1A)L 13f.RAJ4 oar
0% a 1,..)c5t` I h s., rvan. •Pa Com Pe/
Other relevant certifications/licenses: Gf PT) fib.,!') _A As7£,(2G R407314.R A f('k 1 Pt P ' �Cit 5
VOLUNTEER EXPERIENCE: Name or social, fraternal, organizations, etc.
1. [ ] current E✓J previous LA .it) 'j 1 Lt C >C3-[• i 1( ( X5
2. [ ] current fyl previous EAST' CPL.p) ?'r r I-(c iP/1Ai__ C.1.)-• t1j-1
3. [AA current [ ] previous t,lcill-THZ,AciI cc,:PP, rfluN 1 1 np£R YOkJY £ J t ft,i5 ; ¢`t 1fa9
4. [ ] current [ ] previous WI lecdPrtic.e. JPie41W57-7 itt4 11-1' U i k (O
PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS. Local, state, or national government boards, committees, or commissions
on which you serve or have served. Na PRE id -OS f l - iA60. 7Q Qrcru`p-.oPf ro ' 1Li5
l . [ ] current [ ] previous
2. [ ] current [ ] previous
3. [ ] current [ ] previous
4. [ ] current [ ] previous
5. [ ] current [ ] previous
REASONS for applying for this committee, commission, board: i col T (-1 SIP -ri-iL CioentinciyVill
1r-1 ADORet.6511}4 7hQ ciurrer'` • ( 60.
By signing this application, I certify under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington that all
information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further state that my appointment would not
repre : nt a conflict of interest or an appearance of a conflict of interest with the duties of this position. I understand
thi a lication is su+j- t to disclosur ursp it to cJ apter 42.56 RCW.
gnature
/ t1/b.4cca
D Signe
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: December 6, 2022
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business
❑ information ® admin. report
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Federal Legislative Update
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A
Department Director Approval:
❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: This is an update on the status of 2022 federal
legislative efforts and presentation of the proposed 2023 Federal Legislative Agenda. This
discussion is the first review with the City Council.
BACKGROUND:
Mike Pieper of Cardinal Infrastructure will present potential items for the 2023 Federal Legislative
Agenda and provide an opportunity for City Council discussion. This year we are bringing forth
the federal legislative agenda a bit earlier than usual to get some general direction. Following this
administrative report, the project descriptions will be further developed with updated financial
information for the next review.
2022 FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE AGENDA STATUS REPORT
The 2022 federal agenda resulted in some big successes, particularly related to funding of at -
grade rail crossing safety awareness and improvements. Notably, three 2022 agenda items
received support at the federal level: Pines Road/BNSF GSP, Trent/Sullivan Interchange and
South Barker Road Corridor.
1. Pines Road/BNSF Grade Separation Project — Federal funding award — Yes.
This project received nearly $21.7 million in Rebuilding American Infrastructure with
Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) program funds this year. The project has also secured
contributions from Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) and Avista Utilities.
BNSF Railway will contribute towards a portion of the railroad bridge costs and is planning
to partner with the City for early bridge construction. The project has potential to receive
an additional $5 million from Senator Murray's Congressionally Directed Spending request
and an additional $5 million from WSDOT's Move Ahead Washington Railroad Crossing
Program. If the WSDOT $5 million is secured, the project will be fully funded and satisfy
the federal/non-federal funding requirements.
2. Trent/Sullivan Interchange (Formerly Bigelow Gulch & Sullivan Road Corridor
Project) — Activity has occurred with federal award pending.
The project received $1.2 million from WSDOT's National Highway Freight Program and
$1.4 million from SRTC. Representative McMorris Rodgers included $2.65 million in
funding for this project in the House of Representative's draft appropriations bill that
passed the House. It is possible this project will be combined with the draft Senate Bill and
passed as part of a larger omnibus appropriations bill in mid -December.
Page 1 of 3
3. South Barker Road Corridor — Federal funding award — Yes.
The Sprague & Barker Roundabout project was completed in 2022, making it the first
completed segment of the corridor. The $2.7 million project was funded by the City, SRTC
and WSDOT's City Safety Program. The City received a $3 million Congressionally
Directed Spending Award in 2022 intended for initiating the project's right-of-way
acquisition phase. The City requested $12.9 million in the 2022 Federal Legislative
Agenda to address multiple roadway and intersection reconstruction improvement
projects. The City was also awarded $1.1 million from SRTC to partially fund the segment
of Barker Road between Appleway Ave. and Sprague Ave. The City will continue to seek
a variety of funding opportunities to complete this corridor, including revenues generated
by the South Barker Corridor Impact Fees.
PROPOSED 2023 FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
The proposed 2023 Federal Legislative Agenda items include funding requests for three priority
projects as well as three policy considerations. Staff is working with Cardinal Infrastructure to
develop and update the project costs and details for the next discussion.
1. South Barker Road Corridor Projects — The Barker Road corridor parallels the eastern
boundary of Spokane Valley. The road intersects with Interstate 90 providing access to
more than 800 acres of industrial property and 220 acres of homes. The area is
experiencing rapid industrial growth north of the interstate and expanding residential
neighborhoods south of the interstate in Spokane County and east in the City of Liberty
Lake. Barker Road is a key arterial for vehicles accessing Interstate 90 or the east -west
Sprague Avenue corridor.
2. Trent/Sullivan Interchange — The City of Spokane Valley plans to redesign and
reconstruct the interchange at Sullivan Road and Trent Avenue (SR 290). This
project is currently in the design phase and federal funding is requested for
replacement of the Sullivan Road bridge over Trent Avenue and the adjacent bridge
over the BNSF Railway track. (The preferred alternative will be presented later in
December.)
With traffic growth in the area, along with the connection of Bigelow Gulch Road to
the Sullivan/Wellesley intersection, the city anticipates the interchange as currently
configured will fail to handle the traffic volumes by year 2030. The bridge clearance
over Trent Avenue does not meet current standards. The bridge has been repaired
six times in the last 10 years after being struck by vehicles passing under. Both the
bridges over Trent Avenue and the BNSF Railway will be replaced to support the
additional traffic demand and allow expansion of the BNSF mainline. Additionally,
the length of on -ramps at the interchange also does not meet current standards.
3. 1-90 Bridge Widening at Argonne/Mullan Roads Project — The City of Spokane Valley
requests federal funding assistance for the Argonne Road bridge over Interstate 90. The
bridge improvements will be a companion project to Spokane Transit Authority's (STA)
Park and Ride facility proposed at Interstate 90's south side between Argonne and Mullan
Roads. STA is awaiting award announcements for a $10 million regional mobility grant to
deliver this project. Should STA be successful in its request, the timing of the City's project
may require an earlier design. The City of Spokane Valley received $1.3 million from SRTC
in 2022 for a preliminary alternatives analysis. This analysis will require a coordinated
effort between the City, WSDOT, and STA.
Page 2 of 3
4. Policy Consideration #1 — Reauthorization of the Economic Development
Administration (EDA): The City of Spokane Valley supports the reauthorization of the
Economic Development Administration (EDA), with funding to carry out its mission of
"promoting innovation and competitiveness, preparing American regions for growth and
success in the worldwide economy." The City encourages Congress to continue to direct
EDA investments at regional and local projects, rather than funding distributed directly to
state governments. This flow of funding remains aligned with the EDA's original 1965
authorization and mission. With opportunities for EDA to modernize programs by way of
this reauthorization, the City urges Congress to remain traditional in the aspect of direct
regional and local investments.
5. Policy Consideration #2 - Continued Funding at the Authorized Levels for IIJA/BIL
Programs: The City supports continued funding at the authorized levels for programs
included in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (IIJA/BIL). Given the unprecedented growth
and maintenance needs of existing infrastructure within the region, the City encourages
Congress to continue to support the levels of funding provided under the IIJA. The City
fully supports robust oversight of the Federal Department of Transportation by Congress
of the projects and programs funded under the IIJA and offers assistance in providing
information supporting the level of funding that has been made available. The City
encourages Members of Congress to visit the region and see first-hand the extraordinary
growth driving the infrastructure improvements and the City's wise stewardship of these
funds.
6. Policy Consideration #3 - Implement Reforms to the Infrastructure Permitting
Process: The City encourages federal agencies to move swiftly to implement the reforms
to the infrastructure permitting process as required under FAST 41 and revised under the
IIJA. As the City continues to experience unprecedented growth, streamlining permitting
could help address critical safety and infrastructure needs, stimulate economic activity,
and provide more employment opportunities. The City encourages Congress, in its
oversight role, to encourage the Administration to move expeditiously on implementing
these reforms and to ensure that such reforms have practical applications on the
implementation of the IIJA.
OPTIONS: Discussion
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: For discussion only, however consensus is desired on
which policy consideration(s) to move forward with.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A
STAFF CONTACT: John Hohman, City Manager; Erik Lamb, Deputy City Manager; Virginia
Clough, Legislative Policy Coordinator; and Mike Pieper, Cardinal Infrastructure.
ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Legislative Agenda, PowerPoint presentation by Cardinal
Infrastructure
Page 3 of 3
2023 Federal Legislative Agenda
10210 E Sprague Avenue • Spokane Valley WA 99206
Phone: (509) 720-5000 • Fax: (509) 720-5075 • www.spokanevalley.org
FUNDING REQUESTS
South Barker Road Corridor Projects
Mission Avenue
•
Boone Avenue
Interstate 90
Sprague Avenue
4th Avenue
8th Avenue
The Barker Road corridor (pictured on left) parallels the
eastern boundary of Spokane Valley. The road
intersects with Interstate 90 providing access to more
than 800 acres of industrial property and 220 acres of
homes. The area is experiencing rapid industrial growth
north of the interstate and expanding residential
neighborhoods south of the interstate in Spokane
County and east in the City of Liberty Lake. Barker
Road is a key arterial for vehicles accessing Interstate
90 or the east -west Sprague Avenue corridor.
Trent/Sullivan Interchange Project
The City of Spokane Valley plans to redesign and
reconstruct the interchange at Sullivan Road and
Trent Avenue (SR 290). This project is currently in
the design phase and federal funding is requested
for replacement of the Sullivan Road bridge over
Trent Avenue and the adjacent bridge over the
BNSF Railway track. A preferred alternative will be
selected later in December.
With traffic growth in the area, along with the
connection of Bigelow Gulch Road to the
Sullivan/Wellesley intersection, the city anticipates
the interchange as currently configured will fail to
handle the traffic volumes by year 2030. The bridge
clearance over Trent Avenue does not meet current
standards. The bridge has been repaired six times in the last 10 years after being struck by vehicles passing
under. Both the bridges over Trent Avenue and the BNSF Railway will be replaced to support the
additional traffic demand and allow expansion of the BNSF mainline. Additionally, the length of on -ramps
at the interchange also does not meet current standards.
I-90 Bridge Widening at Argonne/Mullan Roads Project
The City of Spokane Valley requests federal funding assistance for the Argonne Road bridge over Interstate 90.
The bridge improvements will be a companion project to Spokane Transit Authority's (STA) Park and Ride
facility proposed at Interstate 90's south side between Argonne and Mullan Roads. STA is awaiting award
announcements for a $10 million regional mobility grant to deliver this project. Should STA be successful in its
request, the timing of the City's project may require an earlier design. The City of Spokane Valley received $1.3
million from SRTC in 2022 for a preliminary alternatives analysis. This analysis will require a coordinated effort
among the City, WSDOT, and STA.
2023 Federal Legislative Agenda
10210 E Sprague Avenue • Spokane Valley WA 99206
Phone: (509) 720-5000 • Fax: (509) 720-5075 • www.spokanevalley.org
2023
FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
POLICY STATEMENTS
Policy Consideration #1
Reauthorization of the Economic Development Administration (EDA)
The City of Spokane Valley supports the reauthorization of the Economic Development Administration (EDA),
with funding to carry out its mission of "promoting innovation and competitiveness, preparing American regions
for growth and success in the worldwide economy." The City encourages Congress to continue to direct EDA
investments at regional and local projects, rather than funding distributed directly to state governments. This flow
of funding remains aligned with the EDA's original 1965 authorization and mission. With opportunities for EDA
to modernize programs by way of this reauthorization, the City urges Congress to remain traditional in the aspect
of direct regional and local investments.
Policy Consideration #2
Continued Funding at the Authorized Levels for IIJA/BIL Programs
The City supports continued funding at the authorized levels for programs included in the Bipartisan Infrastructure
Law (IIJA/BIL). Given the unprecedented growth and maintenance needs of existing infrastructure within the
region, the City encourages Congress to continue to support the levels of funding provided under the IIJA. The
City fully supports robust oversight of the Federal Department of Transportation by Congress of the projects and
programs funded under the IIJA and offers assistance in providing information supporting the level of funding
that has been made available. The City encourages Members of Congress to visit the region and see first-hand the
extraordinary growth driving the infrastructure improvements and the City's wise stewardship of these funds.
Policy Consideration #3
Implement Reforms to the Infrastructure Permitting Process
The City encourages federal agencies to move swiftly to implement the reforms to the infrastructure permitting
process as required under FAST 41 and revised under the IIJA. As the City continues to experience unprecedented
growth, streamlining permitting could help address critical safety and infrastructure needs, stimulate economic
activity, and provide more employment opportunities. The City encourages Congress, in its oversight role, to
encourage the Administration to move expeditiously on implementing these reforms and to ensure that such
reforms have practical applications on the implementation of the IIJA.
STUDY SESSION
SPOKANE VALLEY
CITY COUNCIL
Michael Pieper, Senior Advisor
Cardinal Infrastructure, LLC
Federal Projects
1. Pines Road/BNSF Railway Grade
Separation Project
2. Spokane Valley River Loop Trail
3. Bigelow Gulch & Sullivan Road
Corridor
4. South Barker Road Corridor Projects
Policy Priority
1. Revise ARPA funds to allow
expenditures for transportation
projects
2. Increase funding for transportation
safety programs
3. Increase funding for economic
development programs
Education and Advocacy
• Submissions for congressionally directed
spending (FY 23 Appropriations)
• Applications to competitive grant
opportunities (RAISE)
• Meetings with congressional delegation
• Meetings with U.S. DOT Administration
officials
• Collaboration with U.S. Conference of M.yo
•
Advancing Project Priorities
1. Pines Road/BNSF Railway Grade Separation Project
• Senator Murray requested $5 million in FY 23 THUG appropriations [included in Senate draft]
• Award of $21.6 million FY 2022 RAISE G - •
2. Spokane Valley River Loop Trail
• Submitted to House and Senate offices for consideration in appropriations
3. Bigelow Gulch & Sullivan Road Corridor
• Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers requested $2.65 million House FY 23 THUD Appropriations
• Senator Cantwell Requested $2.65 million FY 23 THUD Appropriations [not included in draft]
5. South Barker Road Corridor Projects
• Continued work with Federal Railroad Administration to advance project
• Coordination with Union Pacific Railroad
Appropriations Status FY 23 and FY 24
Appropriations
• Status of FY 2023 appropriations
• House and Senate working to agree on final funding levels
• Congressionally Directed Funding requests will be included in
Omnibus
• Consequences of continuing resolution and impacts on projects
• FY 2024 congressionally directed spending process expected to
remain in place pending a decision by the House of
Representatives
Drought and Water
$4 billion for western drought response
via the Bureau of Reclamation.
Forestry
Provides $5 billion in funding for forest
management, planning and restoration
activities for both federal and
nonfederal forests.
Overview of Inflation
Reduction Act (IRA)
$369 billion in tax credits and additional
funding for zero -emissions vehicles and
technologies, building efficiency and
resilience, home energy efficiency and.
appliance electrification rebates, and
reducing air pollution and greenhouse ga
emissions overall, with many programs
targeting low-income and disadvantaged
communities.
Building Code Adoption
Provides $1 billion to support state and
local governments to adopt updated
building codes.
Vehicle Pollution Reduction
Grants
$1 billion to establish a new program:
Clean Heavy -Duty Vehicles —to award
grants and rebates to states, local
governments and nonprofit school
transportation associations to replace
certain heavy-duty vehicles, such as
garbage trucks and school busses, with
zero -emission vehicles.
Overview of Inflation
Reduction Act (IRA)
Provides non-taxable entities participating in
clean energy incentives with a direct payment
option in lieu of tax credits. This provision is
applicable for tax years starting after December
31, 2022 and ending before January 1, 2033.
Tax-exempt entities will be able to claim a
refund for the excess taxes they paid or
deemed to have paid. Under the IRA, the
amount of the credit will be paid to the to
exempt entity when they make an election to E.
receive the credit on a tax filing in the year in
which the •ro'ect is •laced in servic '�
Action Items and Next Steps
1. FY 2023 Appropriations
2. Review and Adopt 2023 Federal Legislative Agenda
3. Monitor and Evaluate Federal Grant Opportunities
4. Schedule Meetings with Administration and Congressional Delegation
5. Visits to Spokane Valley and Washington, D.C.
6. Submit for FY 2024 ppropriations
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: December 6, 2022 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: consentold businessnew businesspublic hearing
information admin. report pending legislation executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative report – proposed interlocal agreement with Millwood regarding
building plan review services and planning services.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 39.34.080 – Interlocal Agreements.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None.
BACKGROUND: The City of Millwood does not have in-house staff or software to process applications
for building plan review, and currently receives these services through an interlocal agreement with
Spokane County. Millwood Mayor Freeman contacted the City to inquire whether Spokane Valley had the
capacity and willingness to provide these services for Millwood.
Staff determined the City could provide those services to Millwood without any reduction in level of service
for City customers, and without material impact on our workload due to the low frequency with which the
services would be needed by Millwood. Staff further discussed with Mayor Freeman that Spokane Valley
may occasionally need the services of Millwood’s Planner, Christina Janssen, to supplement our staff for
specific projects. Ms. Janssen previously worked as a Planner for the City, so staff are familiar with her
capabilities. In those instances, the City would timely request Ms. Janssen’s assistance on a project basis,
which would be approved depending on her availability. Under these terms, Millwood could make Ms.
Janssen available to assist the City.
Millwood applicants would be subject to the same fees as established in the City’s current Master Fee
Schedule, and would additionally pay for one license fee for access to the on-line permitting system. In
those instances where the City utilized the services of Millwood’s Planner, the City would pay Millwood
$65 per hour worked.
This proposed interlocal agreement provides an opportunity for Spokane Valley and Millwood to
collaboratively provide for the citizens of both entities without any apparent negative consequences for
either. The agreement would continue until one or both parties gave at least 60 days’ advance notice of
termination. City staff would continue to monitor workflow issues to ensure that service to our citizens is
not negatively impacted by continuation of the agreement.
OPTIONS: (1) Place on a future agenda for motion consideration; or (2) take other action as appropriate.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to place on the December 13, 2022 agenda for
motion consideration.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This is expected to be revenue neutral because our fees are set at an
amount to recover actual costs.
STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, City Attorney.
___________________________________________________________________________
ATTACHMENTS: Draft interlocal agreement for provision of plan review services and planning services.
DRAFT
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR BUILDING PLAN REVIEW AND PLANNING SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF MILLWOOD AND THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between the City of Millwood, a municipal
corporation of the State of Washington, and the City of Spokane Valley, a municipal corporation of
the State of Washington, hereinafter referred to as “Spokane Valley,” jointly hereinafter referred to as
the “Parties.” Millwood and Spokane Valley agree as follows:
SECTION NO. 1: RECITALS AND FINDINGS
A. Cities may contract with each other to perform certain functions which each may
legallyperform under chapter 39.34RCW (Interlocal Cooperation Act); and
B. Millwood has adopted and enforces the Washington State Building Code pursuant
to chapter 19.27 RCW within its jurisdictional boundaries; and
C. Spokane Valley has a building division staffed by trained personnelthatregularly
review permit applications and plans for compliance with the Washington State Building Code; and
D. Millwood has a need for building plan review services to supplement their plan
review program and Spokane Valley currently has the ability to provide these services without negative
impacts to its program or service level; and
E. Spokane Valley has a need for occasional planning services, and Millwood has the
ability to provide such services depending upon current availability of their own staff; and
F. This Agreement is entered into for the benefit of the Parties to this Agreement only
and shall confer no benefits, direct or implied, on any third persons.
SECTION NO. 2: DEFINITIONS
A. Agreement: “Agreement”' means this Interlocal Agreement between Millwood and
Spokane Valley regarding building plan review services.
B. Services: “Services” means those services identified in this Agreement.
C. Compensation: “Compensation” means the amount of money which the Parties will
collect for providing Services as identified in this Agreement.
D. Uncontrollable Circumstances: “Uncontrollable Circumstances” means the
following events: riots, wars, civil disturbances, insurrections, acts of terrorism, external fires and
floods, volcanic eruptions, lightning, pandemic, or earthquakes at or near where the Services are
performed and/or that directly affect provision of such Services.
SECTION NO. 3: PURPOSE
The purpose of this Agreement is to establish the terms and conditions of the Parties with respect to
provision of the building plan review and permitting services by Spokane Valley to Millwood, and
planning services by Millwood to Spokane Valley. It is the intent of the Parties that Services will be
provided consistent with Millwood’s strong-mayor form of government pursuant to RCW Title 35,
and with Spokane Valley’s council-manager form of government pursuant to RCW Title 35A.
Interlocal Agreement, Millwood Page 1 of 7
DRAFT
SECTION NO. 4: DURATION/WITHDRAWAL
This Agreement shall commence on January 1, 2023 and run until one of the Parties provides notice
pursuant to Section 9. Any Party may withdraw at any time from this Agreement for any reason
whatsoever upon a minimum of 60 days’ advance written notice.
SECTION NO. 5: SPOKANE VALLEY’S RESPONSIBILITIES
Spokane Valley shall conduct plan reviews of building permit applications and perform building permit
inspections for compliance with the Washington State Building Code, as currently adopted or subsequently
amended, on behalf of Millwood using Spokane Valley staff.
A. Spokane Valley agrees to utilize a certified plans examiner and/or certified building inspector
to conduct reviews.
B. Planreviewsof building permitapplicationsshallbe conducted asgenerally set forth in Exhibit A to
this Agreement.
C. Unless previously agreed to by both Parties, the building permit plan review will be completed
with written comments returned to the permit applicant in 10 working days or less for applications reviewed
subject to the current International Residential Code (IRC), and 20 working days or less for applications
reviewed subject to the current International Building Code (IBC). Notwithstanding the above, plan
review times may be adjusted by written agreement of both Parties.
D. Following submission of a compliant building plan application to Spokane Valley by the
applicant, Spokane Valley will issue the applicant a building permit. This permit will be identified in such
a way that Millwood may access, track, and review the permit inspection status in the Spokane Valley
permitting system.
E. Spokane Valley will furnish all applicable building inspections associated with the permit. These
inspections include commercial and residential building structures, re-roofing, mechanical/HVAC, and
plumbing.
F. Once the applicant has received final approval for all appropriate inspected elements, Spokane
Valley will note the permit as “complete” within the Spokane Valley permitting system.
SECTION NO. 6: MILLWOOD’S RESPONSIBILITIES
A. Millwood will direct building permit applicants to Spokane Valley only after review and
approval of a site plan by Millwood.
B. Millwood is responsible for all road approach, water, and sewer permits associated with the
application.
C. Millwood will issue a Certificate of Occupancy to the applicant when the permit is noted as
“complete” within the Spokane Valley permitting system.
D. Millwood shall provide occasional planning services to Spokane Valley when requested, so long
as Millwood has trained staff for such services, and subject to work capacity of Millwood’s trained
planner(s).
Interlocal Agreement, Millwood Page 2 of 7
DRAFT
Unless previously agreed to by both Parties, any planning services provided pursuant to this Agreement
shall be completed with any written comments returned to Spokane Valley within 10 working days.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, planning services time frames may be adjusted by written agreement of
both Parties.
SECTION NO 7: COST OF SERVICES AND PAYMENTS
A. Spokane Valley services. Spokane Valley shall charge applicable building plan review
and permitting fees pursuant to its currently-adopted Master Fee Schedule B – Building Fees,
attached as Exhibit B to this Agreement and as may be amended by Spokane Valley. Permit applicants
shall be responsible for remitting payment of permitting fees directly to the City of Spokane Valley.
Millwood shall annually pay for a Spokane Valley permit software single-user license.
B. Millwood services. Millwood shall charge Spokane Valley the hourly rate of $65.00 for
planning services provided pursuant to this Agreement. This amount may be modified annually by the
Parties to reflect actual cost of services.
C. The Parties recognize that it is not always possible for either Party to timely discover errors
in payment. The Parties further recognize that there must be some finality to addressing such errors.
Accordingly, the Parties agree that both Parties are precluded from challenging any errors in payment if
the matter is not drawn in writing to the other Party's attention within 30 calendar days of the last
invoice of the calendar year. Errors raised within this time frame that are not mutually resolved shall
be subject to the Dispute Resolution pursuant to Section 17 unless otherwise agreed.
SECTION NO. 8: RELATED RESPONSIBILITIES IN CONJUNCTION WITH PROVIDING
SERVICES
A Spokane Valley representative shall make reasonable efforts to meet upon request by Millwood’s
Mayor or his/her designee to discuss any Service provided under the terms of this Agreement.
SECTION NO. 9: NOTICE
All notices or other communications given hereunder shall be deemed given on: (i) the day such notices
orother communicationsarereceivedwhensent by personal delivery; or (ii) the third day following the
day onwhichthesame have beenmailed by firstclass delivery, postage prepaidaddressedto Spokane
Valley or Millwood at the address set forth below for such Party, orat such other address as either Party
shall from time-to-time designate by notice in writing to the other Party:
City of Spokane Valley City Manager
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY:
or his/her authorized representative
10210 East Sprague Avenue
Spokane Valley, Washington 99206
City of Millwood Mayor
CITY OF MILLWOOD:
or his/her authorized representative
9103 East Frederick Avenue
Millwood, Washington 99206
Interlocal Agreement, Millwood Page 3 of 7
DRAFT
SECTION NO.10: ASSIGNMENT
NoPartymayassigninwholeorpartitsinterestinthisAgreementwithoutthewrittenapprovalof
the other Party.
SECTION NO. 11: EMPLOYEES OF EACH PARTY
Spokane Valley shall appoint, hire, assign, retain, and discipline all employees performing Spokane
Valley Services under this Agreement. Millwood shall appoint, hire, assign, retain, and discipline all
employees performing Millwood Services under this Agreement.
SECTIONNO.12:LIABILITY
A. Spokane Valley shall indemnify and hold harmless Millwood and its officers, agents, and
employees from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability,loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any
nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any alleged negligent act or omission of Spokane
Valley, its officers, agents, and employees, relating to orarisingoutofperformingServices pursuant
to this Agreement. In the event that any suit based upon such claim, action, loss, or damages is brought
against Millwood, Spokane Valley shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense; provided that
Millwood 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 Millwood,and its officers, agents, and
employees, or jointly against Millwood and Spokane Valleyand their respective officers, agents, and
employees, Spokane Valley shall satisfy the same.
B. Millwood shall indemnify and hold harmless Spokane Valley and its officers, agents, and
employees from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any
nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any alleged negligent act or omission of Spokane
Valley, 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 Spokane Valley, Millwood shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense; provided that Spokane
Valley 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 Spokane Valley, and its officers, agents,
and employees, or jointly against Spokane Valley and Millwood and their respective officers, agents,
and employees, Millwood shall satisfy the same.
C. If thecomparative negligenceofthePartiesandtheir officersand employees is a causeof
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 Party, the Party directing and controlling the officer or employee in the activity and/or
omissiongiving rise to liability shall accept all liability for the other Party's officer or employee's
negligence.
E. EachParty’s duty to indemnify shall survive the termination or expiration of the Agreement.
F. The foregoing indemnity is specifically intended to constitute a waiver of each Party’s
immunity under Washington’s Industrial Insurance Act, chapter 51 RCW, respecting the other Party
only, and only to the extent necessary to provide the indemnified Party with a full and complete
indemnity of claims made by the indemnitor’s employees. The Parties acknowledge that these provisions
Interlocal Agreement, Millwood Page 4 of 7
DRAFT
were specifically negotiated and agreed upon by them.
G. Spokane Valley and Millwood agree to either self-insure or purchase liability policies covering
the matters contained in this Agreement with coverages of not less than $3,000,000 per occurrence with
$3,000,000 aggregate limits including professional liability and auto liability coverages.
SECTION NO. 13: RELATIONSHIP OF THE PARTIES
The Parties intend that an independent contractor relationship will be created by this Agreement.
Spokane Valley shall be an independent contractor and not the agent or employee of Millwood and
that Millwood 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 areperformedissolelywithinthediscretionof Spokane
Valley. Any and all employees who provide Services to Millwood under this Agreement shall be deemed
employees solely of Spokane Valley. Spokane Valley 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 Millwood shall be deemed to be an employee, agent,
servant, or representative of Spokane Valley for any purpose.
SECTION NO. 14: MODIFICATION
This Agreement may be modified in writing by mutual written agreement of the Parties. Proposals for
modification shall be submitted to the other Party at least 60 days before the end of this Agreement.
SECTION NO. 15: PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT
The ownership of all property and equipment utilized in conjunction with providing the Services
shall remain with the original owner, unless otherwise specifically and mutually agreed to by the
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 HEREIN/BINDING 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 be valid or binding upon the Parties unless such change or addition is in
writing, executedby theParties.
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
and considered by Spokane Valley’s City Manager and Millwood’s Mayor. If Spokane Valley’s City
Manager and Millwood’s Mayor cannot resolve the dispute it will be submitted to arbitration. The
provisions of chapter 7.04A RCW shall be applicable to any arbitration proceeding.
Spokane Valley and Millwood shall have the right to designate one person each to act as an arbitrator.
The two selected arbitrators shall then jointly select a thirdarbitrator. The selection of arbitrators shall
commence within 30 calendar days of the running of the 30 calendar days’ time frame. The decision of
the arbitration panel shall be binding on the Parties and shall be subject to judicial review as provided for
Interlocal Agreement, Millwood Page 5 of 7
DRAFT
in chapter 7.04ARCW.
The costs of the arbitration panel shall be equally split between the Parties. Each Party shall be responsible
for its own costs in preparing and presenting its case.
SECTION NO. 18: VENUE STIPULATION
This Agreement has been and shall be construed as having been made and delivered within the State
of Washington and it is mutually understood and agreed by each Party that this Agreement shall be
governed by the laws of the State of Washington both as to interpretation and performance. Any action
at law, suit in equity, or judicial proceeding for the enforcement of this Agreement, or any provision
hereto, shall be instituted only in courts of competent jurisdiction within Spokane County, Washington.
SECTION NO. 19: SEVERABILITY
The Parties agree that if any part, term, or provision of this Agreement are held by the courts to be
illegal, the validity of the remaining portions or provisions shallnotbeaffected and therights and
obligations of the Parties shall not be affected in regard to the remainder of this Agreement. If it should
appear that any part, term, or provision of this Agreement is in conflict with any statutory provision of
the State ofWashington, then the part, term, or provision thereof that may be in conflict shall be deemed
inoperative,null, and void insofar as it may be in conflict therewith and this Agreement shall be deemed
to modify to conform to such statutory provision.
SECTION NO. 20: RECORDS
All public records prepared, owned, used, or retained by Spokane Valley in conjunction with providing
Services under the terms of this Agreement shall be deemed Millwood property and shall be made
available to Millwood upon request by Millwood’s Mayor subject to the attorney-client and attorney
work product privileges set forth in statute, court rule, or case law. Spokane Valley will notify
Millwood of any record request made pursuant to chapter 42.56 RCW for copies or viewing of such
records as well as Spokane Valley’s response thereto.
SECTION NO. 21: HEADINGS
The section headings appearing in this Agreement have been inserted solely for the purpose of
convenience and readyreference. In no way do they purport to, andshallnot be deemedtodefine,
limit,or extend the scope orintentof the sectionstowhich they pertain.
SECTION NO. 22: UNCONTROLLABLE CIRCUMSTANCES/IMPOSSIBILIT Y
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 Spokane Valley which render legally impossible the performance by Spokane Valley of its
obligations under this Agreement shall be deemed not a defaultunder this Agreement.
Interlocal Agreement, Millwood Page 6 of 7
DRAFT
SECTION NO. 23: FILING
The Parties shall comply with any requirements to file this Agreement pursuant to RCW 39.34.040.
SECTION NO. 24: EXECUTION AND APPROVAL
The Parties warrant that the officers executing below have been authorized to act for and on behalf of
the Party for purposes of confirming this Agreement.
SECTION NO. 25: INITIATIVES
The Parties recognize that revenue-reducing initiative(s) passed by the voters of Washington may
substantially reduce local operating revenue for Millwood, Spokane Valley, or both Parties. The Parties
agree that it may become necessary to amend this Agreement in response to budget constraints
resulting from the passage ofrevenue-reducing initiative(s). If such an event occurs, the Parties agree
to negotiate in good faith toachieve amutuallyagreeable resolution in a timely fashion.
SECTION NO. 26: COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS
The Parties shall observe all federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, and regulations to the extent that
they may be applicable to the terms of this Agreement.
SECTION NO. 27: DISCLAIMER
Except as otherwise provided, this Agreement shall not be construed in any manner that would
limit either Party’s authority or power under law.
CITY OF MILLWOOD CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Kevin Freeman, Mayor John Hohman, City Manager
DATED: DATED:
APPROVED AS TO FORM ONLY: APPROVED AS TO FORM ONLY:
Brian Werst, City Attorney Office of the City Attorney
Interlocal Agreement, Millwood Page 7 of 7
CoM MONITORS PERMIT PROGRESS IN SMARTGOVSYSTEM
APPLICATION INTAKE AT
CITY OF MILLWOOD (CoM)
CoM REVIEWS SITE PLAN
AND APPROVES
APPROVED APPLICANT IS
REFERED TO CITY OF
SPOKANE VALLEY (CoSV)
FOR PERMIT INTAKE
CoSV BUILDING
DEPARTMENT REVIEWS
PERMIT FOR IRC/IBC/ETC
CODE COMPLIANCE
CoSV ISSUES BUILDING
PERMIT AND COLLECTS
APPROPRATE FEE(S)
+
APPLICANT OR
CONTRACTOR CALLS CoSV
FOR APPROPRIATE
INSPECTIONS
+
CoSV INSPECTS AND ISSUES
FINAL APPROVAL OF
INSPECTED ELEMENTS
CoM ISSUES CERTIFICATE
OF OCCUPANCY BASED ON
CoSV PERMIT APPROVAL
PERMITS ISSUED BY CoSV FOR CoM
• Commercial building (new build, additions & remodels)
• Residential building (new build, additions & remodels)
• Re -roofing
• Mechanical/HVAC
• Plumbing
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: December 6, 2022 Department Director Approval: El
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Proposed resolution repealing and replacing the Master Fee Schedule
for 2023.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: The Master Fee Schedule setting 2022 fees was amended via
Resolution #22-009 which was adopted by the City Council on May 31, 2022.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Although the revenue impact of City fees is included in
the 2023 Budget, no previous Council action has been taken nor have discussions taken place
regarding changes to the attached proposed Resolution #22-XXX. Revenues generated by the
fee resolution in 2023 account for:
• $3,805,600 or 6.75% of total General Fund recurring revenues of $56,418,900.
• $1,951,000 or 99.9% of total Stormwater Management Fund recurring revenues of
$1,912,000.
BACKGROUND: Part of the annual operating budget development process involves City
Departments reviewing the Master Fee Schedule that is currently in place and determining
whether changes in the fees charged and/or language used in the governing resolution should be
altered. Recommended changes to the fee schedule are as follows:
• Under Schedule A — Planning — The Community and Public Works Department is proposing
fees increase by the automatic increase implemented in 2021. This increase is the lesser of
80% of the change from September to September of the Consumer Price Index for All Urban
Consumers (CPI-U), West Region, or 4%. The actual CPI increase as of September 2022 was
8.30%, and 80% of that was 6.64%, meaning that the automatic increase for 2023 was
calculated at 4%. The 4% increase did not affect any fees of $12 or less.
• Under Schedule B — Building - The Community and Public Works Department is proposing
fees increase by the automatic increase implemented in 2021, as described above under
Schedule A. The automatic increase was not implemented for the Building Permit Fees or
Stormwater Utility Charges as those are adjusted under a separate process. Additional
changes under Schedule B are as follows:
o Change the language under Other Permits to Manufactured Home instead of Factory
Assembled Structure and added Permit or Application Expiration Extension fee of $66.
o Stormwater Utility Fee increased to $58 annually based on Council action on November
9, 2022. An annual automatic increase based on CPI was also approved at that time and
this language was added to the automatic increase language at the beginning of Schedule
B.
• Under Schedule C — Parks and Recreation — The Parks and Recreation Department is
proposing some changes to the fee schedule to clarify and simplify various fees related to
Aquatics and CenterPlace.
• Aquatics — increase swim team fee from $60 to $75 to aid in cost recovery of the program.
• CenterPlace
o Simplify Auditorium fees by combining categories.
o Increase meeting room deposit fees from $52 to $75 to provide additional security
for our assets and to align with the damage deposit we collect for park shelter
reservations.
o Added an Outdoor Venue Damage Deposit Fee of $500.
o Cleanup fee renamed Self -catered event fee and revised to reference the room
location instead of group size as follows: Meeting Rooms at $52; Fireside Lounge
at $210; Great Room at $500.
o Bluetooth Speaker fee of $75 added for use of new equipment purchased for
CenterPlace to offer groups.
• Under Schedule D — Administration — minimum copy fee increased from $1 to $5.
• Any other changes are minor for clarification or grammar.
OPTIONS: Proceed with the proposed fee resolution and amendments to the Master Fee
Schedule as presented this evening, with or without further modifications.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Staff recommends the proposed Resolution #22-XXX,
repealing and replacing the Master Fee Schedule, be placed on the December 13, 2022, Council
agenda for approval consideration.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The proposed changes are not expected to have a significant
impact on 2023 General Fund revenues. Stormwater Utility Fees in the Stormwater Fund #402
are anticipated to increase from about $1.9 million to an estimated $5.6 million.
STAFF CONTACT: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director
ATTACHMENTS:
• Memo from the Community and Public Works Department that provides a detailed description
and rationale for the proposed fee changes.
• Memo from the Engineering Department that provides a detailed description and rationale for
Stormwater Utility Fee changes.
• Memo from the Parks and Recreation Department that provides a detailed description and
rationale for proposed fee changes.
• Memo from the City Clerk's Office that provides a detailed description and rationale for
proposed fee changes.
• Consumer Price Index, West Region — September 2022 News Release from October 13,
2022.
• A strike-through/underlined copy of the proposed Resolution #22-XXX showing recommended
changes.
10210 E Sprague Avenue • Spokane Valley WA 99206
Phone: (509) 720-5240 ♦ Fax: (509) 720-5075 ♦ permiteenter@spokanevalley.org
Memorandum
Date: 12/1/2022
To: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director
From: Greg Baldwin, Development Services Coordinator
CC: Bill Helbig, Community & Public Works Director
Jenny Nickerson, Building Official
Oksana Zhukov, Accountant/Budget Analyst
Re: 2023 Fee Resolution Proposed Changes
The Community and Public Works Department would like to propose the following changes to the
current Master Fee Schedule resolution for 2023.
l) OTHER PERMITS:
story Assembled Structure Manufactured Home (FAS) Placement Permit - $54.00 per section
Permit or Application Expiration Extension (New Fee) $66.00
Adult Entertainment -- Add a note below this section which states,
* Delegation of Authority from City Manager to the Spokane County Sheriff's Office to act as the
Licensing Administrator for the purposes of administering and enforcing Chapter 5.10 SVMC.
If you have any questions, or need additional information, please let me know. Thank You for the
consideration.
i 1 P a g e 2023 Master Fee Schedule Resolution Proposal
Spokane
Community & Public Works Department
10210 E Sprague Avenue ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206
Phone: (509) 720-5000 ♦ Fax: (509) 720-5075 • www.spokanevalley.org
Memorandum
Date: November 9, 2022
To: City Council
From: Gloria Mantz, PE
Re: Stormwater Fee Increase
The City Stormwater Utility manages its stormwater program pursuant to the Spokane
Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) Chapter 22.150 (Stormwater Management Regulations),
the Spokane Regional Stormwater Manual (SRSM), requirements set forth under the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II Municipal
Stormwater (MS4) Permit, and the Washington Department of Ecology Underground
Injection Control (UIC) Program.
The Stormwater Utility, an enterprise fund, is funded through the collection of Storm and
Surface Utility (Utility) fees from developed parcels located within the City, and the
Spokane County Aquifer Protection Area (APA) fee. The Stormwater Utility Fee of $21
per year is assessed uniformly on single family residences, duplexes, triplexes and
fourplexes. All other developed property is charged $21 for every 3,160 square feet of
measured impervious surface area or equivalent residential unit (ERU). The current
stormwater rate is expected to generate about $1.9 million in 2022 to City Fund 402. The
fee was established when the City incorporated and is in the adopted Master Fee
Schedule. The Stormwater Utility Fee has not increased since 2003.
The APA fee, a voter adopted fee, is imposed on each water meter within the City by
water meter size. The APA funds are collected by Spokane County, county -wide and
distributed proportionately to local jurisdictions. APA funds must be "expended entirely
on stormwater related projects that are designed to protect the aquifer." Without a
regional public vote, this fee will sunset in November of 2024. This fee is expected to
generate about $460,000 in 2022 to City Fund 403.
The City has recently developed a Stormwater Utility Plan to establish the Tong -term goals
of the Utility, identify solutions to adverse stormwater conditions, aging and non-standard
stormwater facilities, address capacity and water quality issues, identify strategies
necessary to ensure compliance with the MS4 permit and UIC programs, and develop a
sustainable financial plan for the utility. The Stormwater Utility Plan identified two Level
of Service (LOS) recommendations, Minimum Required and Pro -Active. The Levels of
Service recommendations guided a Stormwater Utility Rate Study and recommendations
for potential stormwater utility rate structures and fees.
November 9, 2022
Page 2 of 2
The public had the opportunity to provide input through a survey and public meeting held
on October 20, 2022. Most of the respondents support a Pro -Active LOS.
The Minimum Required LOS increases the Stormwater Utility Rate by $24/year to
$45/year per ERU. This rate increase includes funding for an additional 3.0 full time
employees (FTEs). Currently, there are 4.13 FTEs funded by the Stormwater Utility. The
estimated 2023 revenue for this LOS is $4.4 million. The Pro -Active LOS increases the
Stormwater Utility Rate by $371year to $58/year per ERU. This rate increase includes
funding for an additional 7.0 FTEs from the existing staffing levels. The estimated 2023
revenue for this LOS is $5.6 million. By adopting a LOS standard and associated
stormwater fee, the City's Stormwater Utility will have the ability to meet all required
federal, state, and local standards, as well as provide for continued maintenance and
development of the City's stormwater facilities.
On October 25, 2022, Council reached consensus to adopt the Pro -Active LOS and
November 9, 2022, Council passed a motion adopting the Pro -Active LOS and increasing
the stormwater utility fee to $58 per year with an annual increase consistent with the
consumer price index.
*Wane
.o•OValley
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
John Buttelli, Parks &Recreation Director
2426 North Discovety Place ♦ Spokane Valley, WA 99216
Phone: (509) 720-5200 • Fax: (509) 720-5250
Entail: parksandrec@spokanevalley.org
Memorandum
Date: November 4, 2022
To: Spokane Valley City Council
From: John Bottelli, Parks & Recreation Director
Re: 2023 Master Fee Schedule Update
Parks & Recreation is requesting the following changes to Schedule C of the 2023 Master
Fee Schedule:
AQUATICS
1. Swim Team fee increased from $60 to $75.
Explanation: After performing an analysis of swim team expenses (staffing costs for practices and
meets, t-shirts and miscellaneous supplies) the proposed fee of $75 seeks to recover our costs
while keeping swim team an affordable option for families in Spokane Valley. A comparison
Spokane County and City of Spokane aquatics fees is also provided.
CENTERPLACE
Note: Rental rates at CenterPlace have not increased in 14 years (since 2009). For 2023, adjustments to
the fee schedule are proposed to clarify and simplify certain pricing and to add prices for new available
items while overall CenterPlace Operations are evaluated.
Changes proposed for 2023 are as follows:
1. Auditorium fees condensed to include AV in the rental rate.
Explanation: 2021 rates for the Auditorium are confusing with two options: with -and -without an
additional AV rental fee of $262. The AV system is built into the auditorium and requires no
additional setup. Rates were combined and ultimately reduced to increase use of the space.
2. Meeting Room Damage Deposit fees increased from $52 to $75.
Explanation: Most damage deposits are returned to the customer. A modest increase was made
to the meeting room deposit amount to provide additional security for our assets and to align with
the damage deposit we collect for park shelter reservations ($75).
3. Outdoor Venue Damage Deposit fee of $500 added.
I
Explanation: No Refundable Damage Deposit exists for the West Lawn Plaza or North Meadow at
CenterPlace so staff has been utilizing the $500 wedding deposit for events on the West Lawn.
This formalizes a Refundable Damage Deposit for outdoor events on the Plaza or North Meadow
in order to protect our assets in the event of damage. Note that most damage deposits are
returned to customers.
4. Cleanup fee renamed Self -catered event fee and revised to reference the room
location instead of group size as follows: Meeting Rooms at $52; Fireside Lounge at
$210; Great Room at $500.
Explanation: The 2021 fees are confusing to customers. These changes do not result in
increased fees.
5. Bluetooth Speaker fee of $75 added for use of new equipment purchased for
CenterPlace to offer groups. The Bluetooth speakers can be connected to a user's
iPhone and include a hand-held or lapel microphone for speaking presentations.
End: Please see attached Parks & Recreation Fees Comparisons (Market Comparisons - 2022 Rates)
2
CenterPlace Market Comparisons - 2022 Summary Rollup
Event Space
Average $
Comp. Venues
CenterPlace $
CP % below
average
market $
CP after
hours $
CP after
hours %
below
average $
Board Room
Small Meeting Room
Large Meeting Room
Social Event Room
Banquet Hall
Small Outdoor space
Large Outdoor space
Small Wedding Outdoor
Wedding Reception Outdoor
Wedding Reception Hall
Wedding Reception Room
Entire Venue
63.75
89.17
146.88
222.97
281.88
399.00
489.50
400.00
5,479.00
4,239.55
4,000.00
5,333.33
60.00
50.00
75.00
100.00
125.00
125.00
250.00
250.00
2,500.00
1,500.00
1,000.00
4,500.00
6%
44%
49%
55%
56%
69%
49%
38%
54%
65%
75%
16%
85
75
100
125
150
150
275
275
-33%
16%
32%
44%
47%
62%
44%
31%
2022 Aquatics Market Analysis
Spokane Valley
Spokane County
Spokane City
Open Swim
$1
$3 - $6
Free
Swim Lessons
$ 40.00
$50 - $60
$50 - $60, sibling
discount of $5
$ 56.00
Swim Team
$ 60.00
8 weeks
$ 125.00
8 weeks
$ 210.00
8 weeks
Pool Rental
$ 300.00
2 hrs/fewer than 100
people/Saturdays/depends on
staff availability
$ 900.00
available on select
Fridays or Sundays 6
- 8pm
$100
per hour
$ 400.00
2 hrs/over 101
people/Saturdays/depends on
$ 150.00
Refundable Pool Damage
Deposit
https://static.spoka necity. o
rg/docu ments/recreation/g
aides/2022-summer-
activity-guide.pdf
N.,
Sitiokane
.4•00f Valley
10210 E Sprague Avenue ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206
Office of the City Clerk: 509.720-5102 ♦ cityhall@spokanevalley.org
Memorandum
To: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director; John Hohman, City Manager
From: Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk; Carrie Koudelka, Deputy City Clerk
Date: November 2, 2022
Re: 2023 Fee Resolution Proposals
The City Clerk's office would like to propose the following changes to the current Master Fee Schedule
resolution for 2023:
Schedule D — Administration
COPY FEE:
*it is the intent of the City of Spokane Valley to recover the cost of providing public records when the
total cost, including but not limited to the per -page, device, envelope, or postage costs, amounts to $5.00
or more.
Rationale: We propose changing this to $5.00 as the cost of invoicing, receipting, and vendor fee for
processing credit cards is more than we recover for copy fees.
U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
Bureau of Labor St.,tistics > Geographic Information > Western > News Release
Western Information Office
Western Monte
4Vr;syt Geagrhphy WesteinSuhjecis
Search Western Region
Western Archives Contact West+?n7
Consumer Price Index, West Region - September 2022
Area prices were up 0.3 percent over the past month, up 8.3 percent from a year ago
Prices in the West Region, as measured by the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U), increased 0.3 percent In
September, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. (See table A.) The September increase was influenced by higher
prices for shelter, food, and medical care. (Data In this report are not seasonally adjusted. Accordingly, month -to -month changes
may reflect seasonal influences.)
Over the fast 12 months, the CPI-U increased 8.3 percent. (See chart 1 and table A.) Food prices rose 10.8 percent. Energy prices
rose 20.1 percent, largely the result of an Increase in the price of gasoline. The index for all Items less food and energy increased
6.8 percent aver the year. (See table 1.)
Chart 1. Over -the -year percent change In CPI-U, West region, September 2019-
September 2022
8.0
7.0
6,0
6,0
4.0
3.0
Mar Jun Sep
2820
Source. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
JI tome
A1I tams less food and energy
Aar Jun Sep Dec
2021
View Chart Data
News Release Information
22-2001-SAN
Thursday, October 13, 2022
Contacts
Technical information:
(415) 826.2270
BLSinrsSF6b1p gov
yA W.D1s.goL 8aionehgest
Media contact:
(415) 625.2270
Related Links
5pf historical database
Food
Food prices rose 0.6 percent for the month of September. (See table 1.) Prices for food at home rose 0.6 percent, with Increases In rive of the six subcategories. Prices for food
away from home increased 0.5 percent for the same period.
Over the year, food prices rose 10.8 percent. Prices for food at home Increased 12.8 percent since a year ago, ranging from 9,4 percent for meats, poultry, fish, and eggs to
15.6 percent for other food at home. Prices for food away from home increased 8.0 percent.
Energy
The energy Index increased 0,1 percent over the month. The increase was mainly due to higher prices for natural gas service (2.3 percent). Prices for electricity rose 0.1
percent, but prices for gasoline declined 0.2 percent for the same period,
Energy prices rose 20.1 percent over the year, largely due to higher prices for gasoline (24,5 percent). Prices paid for natural gas service rose 21.6 percent, and prices for
electricity advanced 10,4 percent during the past year.
All Items less food and energy
The index for all Items less food and energy increased 0.3 percent In September. Higher prices for apparel (1.7 percent), medical care (1.0 percent), and shelter (0.7 percent)
were partially offset by lower prices for used cars and trucks (-4.3 percent), other goods and services (-0.5 percent), and household furnishings and operations (-0.2 percent).
Over the year, the Index for all items less food and energy increased 6.8 percent. Components contributing to the increase Included new and used motor vehicles (9.2 percent),
household furnishings and operations (9.0 percent), shelter (7.1 percent), and medical care (7.1 percent).
Table A. West region CPI-U 1-month and 12-month percent changes, ell Items Index, not seasonally adjusted
Month
--
January
2018 2019
2020
2021
2022
1-month
0,5
12-month 1-month
12-month
1-month
12-month
1-month
12-month
1-month
12-month
3.1I
3.1
3.2
3.2
3.5
02.
2.7
0,3
2.9
0.2
1.4
0.9
7.7
February
0.5
0,2
2.4
0.4
3.1
0.5
1.6
0.8
8.1
March
0.4
0,4
2,4
-0,2
2,5
0.7
2.4
1.3
8,7
April
0,4
0.8
2.9
-0.4
1,3
1.0
3.9
0.7
8.3
May
0.5
0.5
2,9
0.1
S.E
0.8
4.7
0.8
8.3
June
0.2
3,6
0.0
2.7
0.4
1.2
0.9
5.1
1.2
8.8
July
0.1
3.6
0.0
2.7
0.5
1.7
0,6
5.2
0.1
8.3
August
0.2
3.8
0.1
2,6
0.3
1.0
0.2
5.0
0.0
8,1
September
0.3
3.4
0,3
2.6
0.0
1.6
0.2
5.3
0.3
8.3
Month
October
November
1-
December
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
nonthl 12•month
0.I 3.5
4
-0,2! 3.3
-0.2 3.1
1-month
12-month
1-month
12-month
1-month
12-month
1-month
12-month
0.5
2.8
e.2
1.2
0,8
6.0
-0,1
2,8
0.0
1.4
1.5
0.5
6.5
-0.2
2.9
-0.1
0.4
7.1
The October 2022 Consumer Price Index for the West Region is scheduled to he released on November 10, 2022.
Technical Note
The Consumer Price Index (CPI) is a measures of the average change Fri prices over time in a fixed market basket of goods and services. The Bureau of Labor Statistics
publishes CPIs for two population groups: (1) e CPI for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) which covers approximately 93 percent of the total U.S. populatton and (2) a CPI for Urban
Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) which covers approximately 29 percent of the total U.S. population. The CPI-U includes, in addition to wage earners and clerical
workers, groups such as professional, managerial, and technical workers, the self-employed, short-term workers, the unemployed, and retirees and others not In the labor force.
The CPI is based on prices of food, clothing, shelter, and fuels, transportation fares, charges for doctors and dentists' services, drugs, and the other goods and services that
people buy far day-to-day living. Each month, prices are collected in 75 urban areas across the country from about 6,000 housing units and approximately 22,000 retail
establishments -department stores, supermarkets, hospitals, filling stations, and other types of stores and service establishments. All taxes directly associated with the purchase
and use of Items are included In the Index.
The Index measures price changes from a designated reference date; for most of the CPI-U the reference base is 1482-84 equals 100. An Increase of 7 percent from the
reference base, for example, is shown as 107.000. Alternatively, that relationship can also be expressed as the price of a base period market basket of goods and services rising
from $100 to $107. For further details see the CPI home page on the Internet at www.bls goefeej and the CPI section of the BLS Handbook of Methods available on the Internet
at www.bls,govlapub/horn/cpj.
In calculating the Index, price changes for the various items In each location are averaged together with weights that represent their Importance in the spending of the
appropriate population group. Local data are then combined to obtain a U.S. city average. Because the sample size of a local area Is smaller, the local area Index Is subject to
substantially more sampling and other measurement error than the national Index. In addition, focal indexes are not adjusted for seasonal influences. As a result, local area
Indexes show greater volatility than the national Index, although their long-term trends are quite similar. NOTE: Area indexes do not measure differences in the level of
prices between cities; they only measure the average change in prices for each area since the base period.
The West Region covered In this release is comprised of the following thirteen states: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico,
Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.
information in this release will be made available to sensory Impaired Individuals upon request. Voice phone: 202-691-5200; Telecommunications Relay Service: 7-1-1.
Tablet Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U): Indexes and percent changes for selected periods
West (1982-84=100 unless otherwise noted)
Item and Group
Expenditure category
Historical
data
Jul.
202
Indexes
Aug,
2 2022
Sep.
2022
Percent change from -
All Items
tEl
All items (December 1977=100)
Food and beverages
Food
Food at home
Cereals and bakery products
Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs
313,95?
557.484
319.435
321.428
307.392
311.396'
Dairy and related products
Fruits and vegetables
Nonalcoholic beverages and beverage materials
Other food at home
Food away from home
Alcoholic beverages
Housing
Shelter
I7
CJ
339.241
260.307
387.540
215.558
263.070'
337.584
268.488
339.184,
387.370
314.013
507.585
Jul.
2022
315.0941 8.3 0.4
509.331
321.522 323.196 10.4 1.2 0.5
323.582 325.368 10.8 1.2
309.684 311.473 12,8
315.874 316.590 14.8
338.220342.424
284.299 285.055
390.537 395.247
216.670
266,031 264.816
339.446 341.180
289.581 289.606
341.297 343.325
390.037 392.875
15.6
8.0 1.1
4.1 0.4 0.0
7.6 1.2 0.13
7.I 1.4 0.7
Footnotes
(1) This index series was calculated using a Laspeyres estimator. All other Rem stratum index series were calculated using a geometric means estimator.
(2) Indexes on a December 1982=100 base.
(3) Indexes on a December 1997=100 base.
(4) Special index based on a substantially smaller sample.
(5) Indexes an a December 1993=100 base.
(6) Indexes on a December 1977=100 base.
- Data not available
Regions defined as the four Census regions. West includes Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah,
Washington, and Wyoming.
NOTE: index applies to a month as a whole, not to any specific dale. Data not seasonally adjusted.
Event Space
Board Room
Small Meeting Room
(Comp to Small Meeting &
Small Dining)
Large Meeting
Room
Social Event Room
(comp to Fireside)
Banquet Hall
(comp to
Great Room)
Small Outdoor
Space
Large Outdoor space
(comp to Wes[ Lawn)
Wedding
Ceremony
Outdoor
Wedding
Reception
Outdoor
Wedding
Reception Hall
Wedding
Reception
Room
Entire Venue
n of guests
5-15
40
50-100
75-150
150-350
40
100.
40
150-400
150-350
75-150
Montvale
Cost
$100.00
$200.00
$150.00
$4,200.00
$2,800.00
Lumen Hall
Cost
$5,500.00
$1,000.00
$4,500.00
Glover Mansion
Cost
$118.75
$3,995.00
$3,995.00
Ballard Meadows
Cost
$150.00
$150.00
$4,300.00
$4,300.00
$4,000.00
Hampton inn
Cost
$150.00
$400.00
$5,000.00
Madison Home
Cost
$399.00
$499.00
Southside CC
Cost
$50.00
$75.00
$100.00
$175.00
$175.00
$2,240.00
Spokane Valley Event
Center
Cost
$180.00
$1,goo.00
Arbor Crest
Cost
$7,500.00
The Women's Club
Cost
$350.00
Historic Flight
Cost
$60.00
$250.00
$750.00
Riverside Place
Cost
$190.00
$325.00
$2,600.00
Patsy Clark
Cost
$100.00
$200.00
$300.00
$3,500.00
22 Rooms
Cost
$100.00
$150.00
$200.00
Meeting House
Cost
$100.00
$200.0D
The Barn on Wild
Rose Prairie
Cost
$480.00
$5,100.00
Mica Event Hall
Cost
$75.0D
CDA Shrine Club
Cost
$200.00
$2,000.00
A Touch of Country
Cost
$125.00
$6,500.00
$6,500.00
$6,500.00
$400.00
$4,500.00
Main Ave. Executive
Center
Cost
$65.00
Liberty Lake
Coworking
Cost
540.00
$50.00
Roosevelt Inn
Cost
$7,500.00
$6,700.00
Lavender Manor
Cost
$10,000.00
510,000.00
$5,500.00
Average Cost
$63.75
$89.17
$146.13B
$222.97
$281.88
$399.00
$499.50
$400.00
$5,479.00
$4,239.55
$4,000.00
$5,333.33
DRAFT
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO. 22-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON,
REPEALING AND REPLACING RESOLUTION 22-009, AND APPROVING THE 2023 MASTER
FEE SCHEDULE, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO.
WHEREAS, it is the general policy of the City to establish fees that are reflective of the cost of services
provided by the City; and
WHEREAS, the City uses a resolution to establish the schedule of fees for City programs, permits and
services, and periodically the fee resolution and fee schedule must be amended to incorporate new or modified
services; and
WHEREAS, Council desires to approve the resolution and accompanying fee schedule.
NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane
County, Washington, as follows:
Section 1. Adoption. The Master Fee Schedule is hereby adopted as provided herein and as shown
and incorporated in the attached schedules.
Section 2. Repeal. Resolution 22-009 is hereby repealed in its entirety.
Section 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect January 1, 2023.
Approved this day of December, 2022.
ATTEST: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Pam Haley, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Office of the City Attorney
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023 Page 1 of 20
D RAFT
MASTER FEE SCHEDULE
Fee Schedule Page No.
Schedule A: Planning 3
Schedule B: Building/Engineering 5
Schedule C: Parks and Recreation 11
Schedule D: Administrative 14
Schedule E: Other Fees 15
Schedule F: Police Fees 15
Schedule G: Transportation Impact Fees 16
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023 Page 2 of 20
DRAFT
MASTER FEE SCHEDULE
Schedule A — Planning
Automatic Annual Adjustment
Unless otherwise specifically amended, Schedule A of this Master Fee Schedule shall be reviewed and
automatically adjusted annually to reflect (80%) of any change from September to September of the Consumer
Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U), West Region, 1982-84=100, published by the United States
Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, or other comparable index if not published. In no event shall
the cumulative change in rates or charges be more than four percent (4%) per year. Unit prices shall be rounded
to the nearest dollar. The automatic adjustment shall be effective January 1 of each year. No other fee
schedules shall be affected by such automatic adjustment.
AMENDMENTS
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Zoning or other code text amendment
APPEALS
Appeal of Administrative Decision
Appeal of Hearing Examiner Findings
Transcript/record deposit on Appeals of Hearing Examiner Decisions
Appeal of Administrative Decision - Code Enforcement Final Decision
pursuant to chapter 17.100 SVMC
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA)
Single Dwelling (when required)
All other developments
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Review, minimum deposit
Addenda of existing EIS Review
SHORELINE
Substantial Development Permit - under $50K
Substantial Development Permit - over $50K
Shoreline Exemption
CRITICAL AREAS
Floodplain Permit not associated with a subdivision
Floodplain Permit associated with a subdivision
LAND USE ACTIONS
SUBDIVISIONS
Preliminary plat
Final Plat
Time extensions — file review and letter
FEE AMOUNT
$2,600.00 2.704.00
$2,600.00 2,704.00
$780.00 811.00
$1,0'I 0.001.082.00
$163.00 170.00
$520.00 541.00 unless otherwise
waived pursuant to SVMC 17.110
$291.00 303.00
$361.00 379.00
$2,288.00 2,380.00
$361.00 379.00
$1,0110.00 1,082.00
$1,6611.00 1.731.00
$621.00 649.00
$520.00 541.00
$520.00 541.00 + $51.00 56.00 per lot
$2,600.00 2704.00 + $12.00 44.00 per lot
$1,1 81.00 1540.00 + $10.0010.00 per lot
$520.00 541.00
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023 Page 3 of 20
DRAFT
SHORT PLATS
Preliminary 2 to 4 lots
Final plat 2 to 4 lots
Preliminary plat 5 to 9 lots
Final plat 5 to 9 lots
Time extensions - file review and letter
PLAT ALTERATION
Subdivision plat
Short plat
PLAT VACATION
BINDING SITE PLAN
Binding site plan alteration
Change of Conditions
Preliminary binding site plan
Creating lots within final binding site plan via Record of Survey
Final Binding Site Plan
AGGREGATION/SEGREGATION
Lot line adjustment
Lot line elimination
Zero lot line
OTHER PLANNING
Administrative Exception
Variance
Administrative Interpretations
Home Occupation Permit
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU)
Conditional Use Permit
Temporary Use Permit
Small Cell Permit Application
$520.00
$2,080.00 2.163.00
$1,21 8.00 1.298.00
$2,080.00 2,163.00 + $26.00 27.00 per lot
$1,352.00 1,406.00 + $26.00 27.00 per lot
$520.00 541.00
$1,218.00 1.298.00
$780.00 811.00
$1,533.00 1.594.00
$2,080.00 2,163.00
$2,080.00 2.163.00
$2,080.00 2.163.00
$1,560.00 1.622.00
$2,080.00 2.163.00
$260.00 270.00
$208.00 216.00
$208.00 216.00 + $10.00 10.00 per lot
541.00 for up to five sites + $101.00
Hourly Rate for City Employees
Document Recording Service by Staff
Street Vacation Application
Pre -application Meetings
*Fee shall be deducted from land use application,
filed within one year of pre -application meeting.
ZONING map amendments (rezone)*
Planned residential development plan
Planned residential development modification
Zoning letter
$520.00 541.00
$1,638.00 1.704.00
$364700 379.00
$101.00 108.00
$312.00 324.00
$1,661.001.731.00
$520.00 541.00
108.00 per additional site
$63.00 66.00
Hourly
$1,420.00 1.477.00
$260.00 270.00*
building or commercial permit fees when application is
$3,610.00 3.786.00
$2,080.00 2,163.00 + $27.00 28.00 per lot
$516.00 568.00
$218.00 227.00
*If rezone is combined with other action(s), cost of other action(s) is additional
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023 Page 4 of 20
DRAFT
Schedule B — Building
Automatic Annual Adjustment
Unless otherwise specifically amended, Schedule B of this Master Fee Schedule shall be reviewed and
automatically adjusted annually to reflect (80%) of any change from September to September of the Consumer
Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U), West Region, 1982-84=100, published by the United States
Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, or other comparable index if not published. In no event shall
the cumulative change in rates or charges be more than four percent (4%) per year. Unit prices shall be rounded
to the nearest dollar. The automatic adjustment shall be effective January 1 of each year. Building permit fees
ni nnu lly thr ugh the
Intcrnati nal C c C uncil (ICC) u lishcd u atcs.
Stormwater Utility Charges on Developed Parcels shall be reviewed and automatically adjusted annually to
reflect any change from September to September of the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-
U), West Region, 1982-84=100, published by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, or other comparable index if not published. In no event shall the cumulative change in rates or
charges be more than four percent (4%) per year. Unit prices shall be rounded to the nearest dollar. The
automatic adjustment shall be effective January 1 of each year shall not be included in the annual automatic
adjustment because updates are done through a separate analysis of the City's Stormwater Utility needs.
Building permit fees shall not be included in the annual automatic adjustment because updates occur semi-
annually through the International Code Council (ICC) published updates. No other fee schedules shall be
affected by such automatic adjustment.
Fee Payment
Plan review fees are collected at the time of application. Such fees may be adjusted during plan review.
Overages or under payments shall be appropriately adjusted at the time of permit issuance.
Plan review fees are separate from and additional to building permit fees. Permit fees and any other unpaid
fees shall be collected prior to issuance of the permit.
Fees for outside professional services required during the permit process shall be paid by the applicant.
Examples of outside professional services include review by contract reviewers, special inspection or
construction services, consultant services for special topics, surveying or other services required to determine
compliance with applicable codes.
Fee Refund Policy. Refunds authorized under this policy apply only to Schedule B.
PLAN REVIEW FEES
• Plan review fees are non-refundable once any plan review work has been started.
• Paid plan review fees may be refunded when an eligible request is received in writing.
• At a minimum, a $63.00 66.00 administrative fee shall be retained.
• If the paid plan review fee is less than $63.00 66.00, no refund is authorized.
• If the paid plan review fee is more than $63.00 66.00, the amount for refund shall be calculated
at the rate of 100% of the paid plan review fee minus $63.00 66.00.
PERMIT FEES
• Permit fees are non-refundable once work authorized by the permit has begun.
• Paid permit fees may be refunded when an eligible request is received in writing.
• At a minimum, a $63.00 administrative 66.00 administrative fee will be retained when fees
are refunded.
• If the paid permit fee is less than $63.00 66.00, no refund is authorized.
• If the paid permit fee is more than $63.00 66.00, the refund shall be calculated at the rate of
95% of the paid permit fee minus $63.00 66.00.
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023 Page 5 of 20
DRAFT
For any application taken or permit issued in error, a full refund of fees paid shall be made. No portion of the
paid fees shall be retained.
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023 Page 6 of 20
DRAFT
FEES
GENERAL
Hourly Rate for City Employees
Overtime rate for City Employees (1.5 times regular rate)
Investigation fee: Work commenced without required permits
Working beyond the scope of work
Replacement of lost permit documents
$63.00 66.00
$95.00 99.00
Equal to permit fee
$156.00 162.00
Hourly rate; 1 hour minimum
Revisions to plans requested by the applicant or permit holder shall be charged the hourly rate with a minimum
of one hour. Revised plans submitted in response to reviewer correction letters are not subject to the hourly
assessment.
Washington State Building Code Council Surcharge (WSBCC) — see the Washington State Building Code
Council website for fees.
BUILDING PERMIT:
Building permit fees for each project are set by the following fees. The figures below shall be used to determine
the building permit fees and plans check fees based on the value of the construction work as stated by the
applicant or the value calculated by the Building Official using the latest valuation data published in the
Building Safety Journal by the International Code Council, whichever value is greater.
Valuations not listed in the Building Safety Journal:
Building Type
Residential garages/storage buildings (wood frame)
Residential garages (masonry)
Miscellaneous residential pole buildings
Residential carports, decks, porches
Valuation Per Square Foot
$20.00 21.00
$23.00 24.00
$20.00 21.00
$16.00 17.00
Building Permit Fee Calculation
Total Valuation Building Permit Fee
$1.00 to $25,000.00
$25,001.00 to $50,000.00
$50,001.00 to $100,000.00
$100,001.00 to $500,000.00
$500,001.00 to $1,000,000.00
$69.25 for first $2,000.00 +
$14.00 for each additional $1,000.00 (or fraction thereof)
Up to and including $25,000.00
$391.25 for first $25,000 +
$10.10 for each additional $1,000.00 (or fraction thereof)
Up to and including $50,000.00
$643.75 for first $50,000.00 +
$7.00 for each additional $1,000.00 (or fraction thereof)
Up to and including $100,000.00
$993.75 for first $100,000 +
$5.60 for each additional $1,000.00 (or fraction thereof)
Up to and including $500,000.00
$3,233.75 for first $500,000.00 +
$4.75 for each additional $1,000.00 (or fraction thereof)
Up to and including $1,000,000.00
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023 Page 7 of 20
DRAFT
$1,000,001 and up $5,608.75 for first $1,000,000.00 +
$3.15 for each additional $1,000.00 (or fraction thereof)
Plan Review Fee Calculation % of Building Permit Fee
Plans review fee (general) 65%
Plans review fee — Group R-3 occupancies (single family less than 7,999 sq. ft.) 40%
Plans review fee — Group R-3 occupancies (single family 8,000 sq. ft. or more) 65%
Plans review fee — Group U occupancies (sheds, barns, et.) 25%
OTHER PERMITS:
SITE PLAN REVIEW
New Residential Home Site Plan Review
Residential Accessory Structure Site Plan Review
Commercial Site Plan Review
DEMOLITION PERMIT
Single Family Residence
Commercial Building
Garage or accessory building associated with residence or commercial building
Foundation Only Building Permit:
Swimming Pools, over 2 feet in depth
Re -roof (no plan review charge unless submitted for review)
Change of Use or Occupancy Classification Permit
TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
Commercial or Multifamily Building
Residential Building
$312.00 324.00
$83.00 86.00
$572.00 595.00
$18.00 50.00 flat fee
$136.00 141.00 flat fee
$22.00 23.00 flat fee
25% of building permit fee
$63.00 66.00+ plumbing fees
Based on Project Valuation
Hourly
$208.00 216.00
$156.00 162.00
Factory Assembled Structure Manufactured Home (FAS) Placement Permit $52.00 54.00 per section
Permit or Application Expiration Extension $66.00
Towers, elevated tanks, antennas Hourly
SIGN PERMIT:
Sign Permits are subject to the assessment of the WSBCC fee as noted in Schedule B "General" section and
the following review fees.
Sign Plan Review Fee $88.00 92.00
Wall Sign Permit $78.00 81.00 per sign (flat fee)
Freestanding or Monument Sign Permit $101.00 108.00 per sign (flat fee)
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023 Page 8 of 20
DRAFT
RIGHT-OF-WAY (ROW) PERMIT:
A traffic plan and traffic plan review is required if more than 50% of the width of any street is closed or if a
single arterial lane is closed. A minimum plan review fee of $63.00 (hourly rate for City employees) applies
to all right-of-way permits that require a traffic plan. If additional staff time is required, it shall be charged at
the hourly rate.
Fees for outside professional services required during the permit process shall be paid by the applicant.
Examples of outside professional services include review by contract reviewers, special inspection or
construction services, consultant services for special topics, surveying or other services required to determine
compliance with applicable codes.
TYPES OF ROW
Non -cut obstruction without clean up
Non -cut obstruction with clean up
Pavement cut obstruction, non -winter
Pavement cut obstruction, winter
Working without a permit
Commercial Approach Permit
Residential Approach Permit
Multiple Use Permit - overhead
Multiple Use Permit - underground
Erosion/Sediment Control - Site Inspection
Oversized Load Permit Fee
Structure Transport Permit
ENGINEERING PERMITS
GRADING PERMIT:
100 cubic yards (cu yd) or less
101 to 1,000 cubic yards
1,001 to 10,000 cubic yards
10,001 to 100,000 cubic yards
100,001 to 200,000 cubic yards
200,000 or more cubic yards
GRADING PLAN REVIEW FEE:
100 cubic yards (cu yd) or less
101 to 1,000
1,001 to 10,000
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023
$76.00 79.00
$111.00 119.00
$208.00 216.00
$218.00 227.00
100% Permit Fee
$78.00 81.00
$73.00 76.00
$111.00 119.00 per 1/4 mile
$676.00 703.00 per 1/4 mile
$10'1.00 108.00
$7S.00 81.00
$156.00 162.00 per section
$26.00 27.00
$26.00 27.00 for first 100 cu yd. +
$7.00 each additional 100 cu yd
$130.00 135.00 for first 1,000 cu yd +
$10.00 each additional 1,000 cu yd
$231.00 243.00 for first 10,000 cu yd+
$36.00 37.00 each additional 10,000 cu yd
$5'16.00 568.00 for first 100,000 cu yd +
$26.00 27.00 each additional 10,000 cu yd
$650.00 676.00 for first 200,000 cu yd +
$26.00 27.00 for each additional 10,000 cu yd
$21.00 22.00
$26.00 27.00
$36.00 37.00
Page 9 of 20
DRAFT
10,001 to 100,000 $36.00 37.00 for first 10,000 cu yd +
$26.00 27.00 each additional 10,000 cu yd
100,001 to 200,000 $182.00 189.00 for first 100,000 cu yd +
$26.00 27.00 for each additional 10,000 cu yd
200,001 or more $650.00 676.00 for first 200, 000 cu yd +
$26.00 27.00 for each additional 10,000 cu yd
Grubbing & Clearing Only (without earth being moved) $71.00 74.00
Paving Permit (greater than 5,000 sq. ft. - new paving only) $271.00 285.00
OTHER ENGINEERING
Design Deviation $156.00 162.00
STORMWATER UTILITY CHARGE ON DEVELOPED PARCELS:
Each single-family unit $21.0058.00 annual
All other properties each $21.0058.00 per 3,160 sq. ft impervious surface
MECHANICAL PERMIT:
Plan review fees for mechanical permits shall be collected at the time of application as noted in the "Fee
Payment" section of this schedule. Permit fees shall be collected when the permit is issued.
Mechanical Permit Fees
A. BASIC FEES
1. Basic fee for issuing each Stand -Alone permit
2. Basic fee for each Supplemental permit
B. UNIT FEES (in addition to the basic fee)
1. Installation or relocation of Furnaces and suspended heaters
a. up to and including 100,000 btu
b. over 100,000 btu
2. Duct work system
3. Heat pump and air conditioner
a. 0 to 3 tons
b. over 3 tons to 15 tons
c. over 15 tons to 30 tons
d. over 30 tons to 50 tons
e. over 50 tons
4. Gas water heater
5. Gas piping system
6. Gas log, fireplace, and gas insert installation
7. Appliance vents installation; relocation; replacement
8. Boilers, compressors, and absorption systems
a. 0 to 3 hp - 100,000 btu or less
b. over 3 to 15 hp - 100,001 to 500,000 btu
c. over 15 - 30 hp - 500,001 to 1,000,000 btu
d. over 30 bhp -1,000,001 to 1,750,000 btu
e. over 50 hp - over 1,750,000 btu
9. Air Handlers
a. each unit up to 10,000 cfm, including ducts
b. each unit over 10,000 cfm
$38.00 40.00
$.843 8.00
$11.00 15.00
$17.00 18.00
$11.00 11.00
$11.00 15.00
$22700 23.00
$27.00 28.00
$38.00 40.00
$66.00 69.00
$11.00 11.00
$1.00 per outlet
$11.00 11.00
$10.00 10.00 each
$11.00 15.00
$22.00 23.00
$27.00 28.00
$38.00 40.00
$66.00 69.00
$111.00 15.00
$17.00 18.00
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023 Page 10 of 20
DRAFT
10. Evaporative Coolers (other than portable)
11. Ventilation and Exhausts
a. each fan connected to a single duct
b. each ventilation system
c. each hood served by mechanical exhaust
12. Incinerators
a. residential installation or relocation
b. commercial installation or relocation
13. Unlisted appliances
a. under 400,000 btu
b. 400,000 btu or over
14. Hood
a. Type I
b. Type II
15. LP Storage Tank
16. Wood or Pellet Stove insert
17. Wood stove system - free standing
$11.00 11.00
$11.00 11.00
$44:00 15.00
$11.00 15.00
$22.00 23.00
$21.00 25.00
$51.00 56.00
$4-09700 113.00
$511.00 56.00
$11.00 11.00
$11.00 11.00
$11.00 11.00
$27.00 28.00
PLUMBING PERMIT:
Plan review fees for plumbing permits shall be collected at the time of application as noted in the "Fee
Payment" section of this schedule. Permit fees shall be collected when the permit is issued.
A. BASIC FEES
1. Basic fee for issuing each Stand -Alone permit $38.00 40.00
2. Basic fee for each Supplemental permit $8.00 8.00
B. UNIT FEES (in addition to the basic fee)
1. Each plumbing fixture on a trap $6700 6.00 each
(includes garbage disposals, dishwashers, backflow device, drainage, hot tubs, built-in water softener, water
closets, lavatories, sinks, drains, etc.)
2. Water Heater $6.00 6.00 each
3. Industrial waste pretreatment interceptor $17.00 18.00
(includes its trap and vent, except kitchen type grease interceptors functioning as fixture traps.)
4. Repair or alteration of water piping, drainage or vent piping $6.00 6.00 each fixture
5. Atmospheric type vacuum breaker $6.00 6.00 each
6. Backflow protective device other than atmospheric type vacuum breakers $6.00 6.00 each
7. Medical gas $6.00 6.00 per outlet
8. Interceptors $6 3 6.00 each
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023 Page 11 of 20
DRAFT
Schedule C — Parks and Recreation
ADMINISTRATIVE FEES
Basic fees to be considered when applying rates
Administrative Fee
Refuse Fee
AQUATICS
Pool admission (age 5 and under)
Pool admission (age older than 5)
Pool punch pass (25 swims)
Weekend family discount — 1 child under 13 free with paying adult
At the discretion of the City Manager, the Parks and Recreation Department may
admission open swim days.
Swimming Lessons
Swim Team Fee
Pool Rental (fewer than 100 people)
Pool Rental (101-200 people)
Refundable Pool Damage Deposit
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE PERMIT
CENTERPLACE
Conference Center Wing
Auditorium (presentation system included)
Auditorium (presentation system included)
Auditorium (presentation system included)
Auditorium w/Presentation System
Auditorium w/Presentation System
Auditorium w/Presentation System
Auditorium Refundable Damage Deposit
Executive Conference Room
Executive Conference Room 1/2 day
Executive Conference Room full day rental
Executive Conference Room Refundable Damage Deposit
Meeting Room (day and evening use)
Meeting Room
Large Meeting Room
Large Meeting Room
Large Meeting Room
Meeting Room
Meeting Room Refundable Damage Deposit
Portable Sound System
Bluetooth Speaker (includes hand-held or lapel microphone)
Platinum Package
*** Requires rental of presentation system, see below
$32.00
$52.00
free
$1.00
$20.00
on occasion offer free
$40.00
$60.00$75.00
$300.00 for 2-hr rental
$400.00 for 2-hr rental
$150.00
$10.00
$79.00 per hour
$475.00 per day
$236.00 per half day
$52.00 per hour* * *
$315.00 per day***
$158.00 per half day***
$52.00$75.00
$52.00 per hour
$156 per 4 hours
$416 per day
$52.00$75.00
$42.00 per hour
$263.00 per day
$75.00 per hour
$225.00 per half day
$450.00 per 9 hr. day
$131.00 per half day
$52.00$75.00
$150.00 per event
$75.00
$500.00 per event
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023 Page 12 of 20
DRAFT
Great Room
Multi-use/Banquet Hall
Multi-use/Banquet Hall - Wedding Ceremony - 2 hours
Multi-use/Banquet Hall — Wedding Reception — 10 hours
Multi-use/Banquet Hall
Multi-use/Banquet Hall
Small Dining Area
Refundable Deposit
Refundable Deposit — Weddings
Table Settings (linens and tableware)
Pipe & Drape rental
Senior Center Wing
Lounge with Dance Floor
Lounge with Dance Floor — Wedding Ceremony — 2 hours
Lounge with Dance Floor — Wedding Reception — 6 hours
Refundable Lounge deposit
Refundable Lounge deposit — Weddings
Meeting room (evening use)
Meeting room (evening use)
Meeting room (weekend use)
Meeting room (weekend use)
Meeting room deposit
West Lawn and CenterPlace
Rental fee
West Lawn Wedding Ceremony - 2 hours (with CenterPlace Reception)
West Lawn Plaza Rental
- North Meadow
North Meadow Rental
West Lawn Plaza Rental - 1/2 day
- North Meadow
North Meadow Rental —1/2 Day
Outdoor Venue Refundable Damage Deposit
$105.00 per hour
$500.00
$1,310.00
$840.00 per 9 hr session
$1,575.00 all day (6 a.m.-1 a.m.)
$52.00 per hour
$210.00
$500.00
$3.00 per place setting
$100/day
Miscellaneous
Cleanup Self -Catered Event fee for groups bringing their own food in on Sundays
• Groups under 30 in small meeting roomsreem
• Groups under 150 in large meeting room or lounge in Fireside Lounge
• Groups over 150 in Great Room
Host/Hostess (after hours)
Presentation System
(includes projector, podium, DVD/VCR sound system, camera system)
Room Setup
Satellite Video Conferencing
Sound System
Additional Microphones
Technical Support
LCD Projector/ Television
LCD Projector/ Television
Linens Only
Wine glass only rental
Conference Phone
$105.00 per hour
$500.00
$850.00
$210.00
$500.00
$42.00 per hour
$131.00 per 4 hr session
$262.00 per day
$131.00 per half day
$52.00
$3,500.00 per day
$1,000
$2,000 per day
additional $500 per day
$1,000 per day
$1,000
additional $250
$500
$500
$52
$210
$500
$25.00 per hour
$262.00 per day
$26.00 per hour
$262.00 per hour
$42.00 per day
$25.00 each
$42.00 per hour
$25.00 per hour
$100.00 per day
$10.00 per table
$.50 per glass
$100.00 per event
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023 Page 13 of 20
DRAFT
Easel Paper Pad $20.00 per pad
Laptop Usage $50.00 per event
Business Incentive Rental Policy — The Parks & Recreation Director has the authority to reduce the room
rental rate by one hr. when the rental meets the following criteria: minimum of 25 participants; utilize a
classroom at CenterPlace eight or more times per calendar year; and use in-house caterer for a meal each
reservation.
PICNIC SHELTER RESERVATION
(For groups fewer than 200 people)
Browns — large red (up to five hours)
Browns — small green (up to two hours)
Edgecliff (up to five hours)
Discovery Playground (up to two hours)
Greenacres — large (up to five hours)
Mirabeau Meadows (up to five hours)
Mirabeau Meadows — shelter and stage (up to five hours)
Mirabeau Springs — shelter and dock (up to two hours)
Sullivan (up to five hours)
Terrace View (up to five hours)
Valley Mission (up to five hours)
$100.00
$40.00
$100.00
$40.00
$100.00
$100.00
$150.00
$250.00
$100.00
$100.00
$100.00
EVENT RESERVATION — include shelter
(For groups of 200 or more people)
Events include but are not limited to activities such as car shows, tournaments, or high -risk activities. The
Parks and Recreation Director shall make the final determination.
General fee (up to five hours): $175.00
Non-profit applications with proof of qualifying as a 501(c)(3) entity (up to five hours): $100.00
EVENT PHOTOS
Mirabeau Springs shelter and dock
BALL FIELD RENTAL/USE
REFUNDABLE FACILITY DAMAGE DEPOSIT
Fewer than 200 people
Weddings, Special Events and events with 200 or more people
SPECIAL EVENTS (See Spokane Valley Municipal Code 5.15)
Application Fee
$150.00 per hour
$26.00 lst hour +
$15.00 each additional hour
$75.00
$300.00
$50.00
RECREATION
Recreation program fees are established at amounts to recover costs, as specified in the Parks and Recreation
revenue policy.
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023 Page 14 of 20
DRAFT
Schedule D — Administration
COPY FEE
Paper copies up to 11"x17" (b/w or color)
Paper copies larger than 11"x17" (b/w or color)
Scanned copies of paper records
Electronics records uploaded to email, cloud -based storage,
CD/DVD, or flash drive
Records transmitted in electronic format
Digital Storage Media Device (CD/DVD, flash drive)
Envelope
Postage
Records sent to outside vendor for reproduction
$0.15 per page*
$0.87 per square foot*
$0.10 per page *
$0.05 per every 4 electronic
files or attachments*
$0.10 per GB*
Actual Cost*
Actual Cost*
Actual Cost*
Actual Cost*
Customized Service Charge - When the request would require the use of IT expertise to prepare data
compilations or when such customized access services are not used by the agency for other business purposes,
the agency may charge the actual cost. The agency must notify the requestor that it will be doing a customized
service and can require a 10 percent deposit.*
*It is the intent of the City of Spokane Valley to recover the cost of providing public records when the total
cost, including but not limited to the per -page, device, envelope, or postage costs, amounts to $5.001.00 or
more.
Copy charges above may be combined to the extent more than one type of charge applies to copies responsive
to a particular request. When combining fees associated with the request, the City will determine the total cost
and charge accordingly.
Copy charges are assessed for each installment of records provided to the requestor. A deposit of 10% may be
required on public record requests.
NSF CHECK RETURN FEE $26.00
CREDIT CARD TRANSACTION PROCESSING FEE
Applies to all City fees paid by credit card/debit card except
for those fees under Schedule F — Police Fees (amount of the
alarm fee is intended to cover the total cost of administering
the false alarm program, including, but not limited to, payment
processing fees). Credit card transaction processing fees are
non-refundable.
2.5% of transaction amount
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023 Page 15 of 20
DRAFT
Schedule E — Other Fees
BUSINESS REGISTRATION
Business Registration
Nonprofit Registration
$25.00 annual
$10.00 annual
Out -of -City Business Registration with
annual revenues equal to or less than $2,000 (SVMC 5.05.020(D)) $0.00
Adult Entertainment*
Establishment License, Live Adult Entertainment
Establishment License, Adult Arcade
Adult Arcade Device License
Manager License
Entertainer License
Late Adult Entertainment License Fee* (charged in addition to the license fee)
7 to 30 calendar days past due
31 to 60 calendar days past due
61 and more calendar days past due
$1,575.00
$1,575.00
$157.00
$157.00
$157.00
25% of license fee
50% of license fee
75% of license fee
Appeal of Administrative Determination — Adult Entertainment License*
Adult Entertainment License denial, suspension or revocation pursuant
to SVMC 5.10 $1,050.00
*Delegation of Authority from City Manager to the Spokane County Sherriff's Office to act as the Licensing
Administrator for the purposes of administering and enforcing Chapter 5.20 SVMC.
Tow Operator Registration Fee $105.00 annual
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023 Page 16 of 20
D RAFT
Schedule F — Police Fees
FALSE ALARM RECOVERY FEE
Amount of the fee is intended to cover the total cost
of administering the false alarm program, including,
but not limited to, payment processing fees.
$65 per incident
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023 Page 17 of 20
DRAFT
Schedule G — Transportation Impact Fees
SOUTH BARKER CORRIDOR TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE
Pursuant to chapter 22.100 SVMC and the adopted South Barker Corridor Study and South Barker Corridor
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study, the following fees are the transportation impact fees applicable within
the South Barker Corridor area identified in the South Barker Corridor Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study.
Base Rate = $1,153 per PM Peak Trip
Land Use Group
ITE Code
ITE Land Use Category
Impact Fee Per Unit
210
Single Family & Duplex
$1,084
per dwelling unit
Residential
220
Multi -Family (Low -Rise) - Not Close to Rail
$588
per dwelling unit
Transit
310
Hotel (3 or More Levels)
$680
per room
Services
492
Health Club
$3.98
per sq ft
912
Bank
$15.74
per sq ft
520
Elementary School
$2,052
per employee
Institution
522
Middle School
$2,236
per employee
525
High School
$1,856
per employee
975
Drinking Establishment
$7.46
per sq ft
Restaurant
934
Fast Food Restaurant (with drive-thru)
$17.13
per sq ft
938
Coffee Shop with Drive-Thru (no indoor seating)
$1,912
per drive-thru lane
820
Shopping Center
$2.78
per sq ft
Retail
841
Automobile Sales - Used/New
$4.32
per sq ft
945
Convenience Store/Gas Station-GFA(4-5.5k)
$8,921
per pump
110
Light Industry/High Technology
$0.75
per sq ft
Industrial
140
Manufacturing
$0.85
per sq ft
150
Warehousing
$0.21
per sq ft
151
Mini -Storage
$19.37
per storage unit
710
General Office
$1.66
per sq ft
Office
720
Medical Office / Clinic
$4.53
per sq ft
750
Office Park
$1.50
per sq ft
ITE Trip Generation manual, l lth Edition
"sq $" means square foot.
"pump" means vehicle servicing position / gas pump.
"room" means available hotel room.
Pursuant to chapter 22.100 SVMC, transportation impact fees for uses not listed in the rate table shall
be based on (1) the most similar land use category identified in the table, or (2) the base rate and the
most similar land use category identified in ITE Trip Generation Manual, as documented by a trip
generation and distribution letter in accordance with Section 3.2 of the Spokane Valley Street
Standards.
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023 Page 18 of 20
DRAFT
MIRABEAU SUBAREA TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE
Pursuant to chapter 22.100 SVMC and the adopted Mirabeau and North Pines Road Subarea Transportation
Impact Fee Rate Study, the following fees are the transportation impact fees applicable within the Mirabeau
subarea identified in the Rate Study.
Base Rate = $698 per PM Peak Trip
Land Use Group
ITE Code
ITE Land Use Category
Impact Fee Per Unit
210
Single Family & Duplex
$657
per dwelling unit
Residential
220
Multi -Family (Low -Rise) - Not Close to Rail
per dwelling unit
Transit
$356
310
Hotel (3 or More Levels)
$412
per room
Services
492
Health Club
$2.41
per sq ft
912
Bank
$9.54
per sq ft
520
Elementary School
$1,243
per employee
Institution
522
Middle School
$1,355
per employee
525
High School
$1,125
per employee
975
Drinking Establishment
$4.52
per sq ft
Restaurant
934
Fast Food Restaurant (with drive-thru)
$10.38
per sq ft
938
Coffee Shop with Drive-Thru (no indoor seating)
$1,159
per drive-thru lane
820
Shopping Center
$1.69
per sq ft
Retail
841
Automobile Sales - Used/New
$2.62
per sq ft
945
Convenience Store/Gas Station-GFA(4-5.5k)
$5,405
per pump
110
Light Industry/High Technology
$0.45
per sq ft
Industrial
140
Manufacturing
$0.52
per sq ft
150
Warehousing
$0.13
per sq ft
151
Mini -Storage
$11.73
per storage unit
710
General Office
$1.01
per sq ft
Office
720
Medical Office / Clinic
$2.75
per sq ft
750
Office Park
$0.91
per sq ft
ITE Trip Generation manual, l lth Edition
"sq $" means square foot.
"pump" means vehicle servicing position / gas pump.
"room" means available hotel room.
Pursuant to chapter 22.100 SVMC, transportation impact fees for uses not listed in the rate table shall
be based on (1) the most similar land use category identified in the table, or (2) the base rate and the
most similar land use category identified in ITE Trip Generation Manual, as documented by a trip
generation and distribution letter in accordance with Section 3.2 of the Spokane Valley Street
Standards.
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023 Page 19 of 20
DRAFT
NORTH PINES ROAD SUBAREA TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE
Pursuant to chapter 22.100 SVMC and the adopted Mirabeau and North Pines Road Subarea Transportation
Impact Fee Rate Study, the following fees are the transportation impact fees applicable within the North Pines
Road subarea identified in the Rate Study.
Base Rate = $2,195 per PM Peak Trip
Land Use Group
ITE Code
ITE Land Use Category
Impact Fee Per Unit
210
Single Family & Duplex
$2,063
per dwelling unit
Residential
220
Multi -Family (Low -Rise) - Not Close to Rail
per dwelling unit
Transit
$1,119
310
Hotel (3 or More Levels)
$1,295
per room
Services
492
Health Club
$7.57
per sq ft
912
Bank
$29.97
per sq ft
520
Elementary School
$3,906
per employee
Institution
522
Middle School
$4,258
per employee
525
High School
$3,533
per employee
975
Drinking Establishment
$14.21
per sq ft
Restaurant
934
Fast Food Restaurant (with drive-thru)
$32.62
per sq ft
938
Coffee Shop with Drive-Thru (no indoor seating)
$3,640
per drive-thru lane
820
Shopping Center
$5.30
per sq ft
Retail
841
Automobile Sales - Used/New
$8.23
per sq ft
945
Convenience Store/Gas Station-GFA(4-5.5k)
$16,983
per pump
110
Light Industry/High Technology
$1.43
per sq ft
Industrial
140
Manufacturing
$1.62
per sq ft
150
Warehousing
$0.40
per sq ft
151
Mini -Storage
$36.87
per storage unit
710
General Office
$3.16
per sq ft
Office
720
Medical Office / Clinic
$8.62
per sq ft
750
Office Park
$2.85
per sq ft
ITE Trip Generation manual, llth Edition
"sq $" means square foot.
"pump" means vehicle servicing position / gas pump.
"room" means available hotel room.
Pursuant to chapter 22.100 SVMC, transportation impact fees for uses not listed in the rate table shall
be based on (1) the most similar land use category identified in the table, or (2) the base rate and the
most similar land use category identified in ITE Trip Generation Manual, as documented by a trip
generation and distribution letter in accordance with Section 3.2 of the Spokane Valley Street
Standards.
Resolution 22- Fee Schedule for 2023 Page 20 of 20
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: December 6, 2022 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative Report - Sprague Avenue Stormwater Pilot Project
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
• May 21, 2019 — Administrative Report regarding the details of the Water Quality Financial
Assistance Agreement with the Department of Ecology
• July 5, 2022 — Council reached consensus for a future motion consideration to terminate
the Agreement with Ecology
• August 30, 2022 — Administrative report regarding lane reduction for roadside swales and
shorter crosswalk and implementation of a pilot project to evaluate impact and gather
feedback; there was Council consensus to proceed forward with the three -lane Pilot
project this fall
BACKGROUND:
The Sprague Avenue Stormwater Project - University Road to Herald Road will install stormwater
treatment facilities to reduce the volume of pollutants that enter groundwater and the Spokane
Valley-Rathdrum Prairie Sole Source Aquifer. The project will also install a crosswalk between
City Hall and an STA bus stop at the new Library and Balfour Park. The design assumes that
Sprague Avenue will be reduced to three lanes between Herald and University. A future phase of
this project would reduce Sprague Avenue to four lanes between Herald and Park Roads.
Currently, westbound Sprague Avenue has five lanes within the project limits and is three lanes
east of University Road. The lane reduction allows use of the existing right-of-way to install the
necessary storm drainage improvement facilities while also reducing the width to make it safer for
pedestrians crossing Sprague Avenue.
During the July 15, 2022 meeting, Council requested additional information regarding the
performance of a 3-lane versus 4-lane project on Sprague Avenue. Both options were expected
to reduce speeds and have excess vehicle capacity. A target of the project is to reduce 85th
percentile speeds from 41.1 miles per hour (mph) to the posted speed of 35 mph or less; the 3-
lane option comes closest to meeting this target based on the traffic model. Based on current
peak hour volumes, a 3-lane section is expected to operate at 27% of capacity. The primary
difference between the two options is the pedestrian crossing time. A 4-lane section takes
approximately three seconds longer for a pedestrian to cross than a 3-lane section. This creates
additional vehicle collision exposure for pedestrians and additional delay for vehicles on Sprague
Avenue. Additionally, the 4-lane project would cost more to construct due to the need for
underground stormwater treatment ("Filterra" type units) instead of the planned swales with the
3-lane option.
With Council approval, staff completed a pilot project for five weeks that reduced Sprague Avenue
from University to Herald Roads to three lanes using tubular markers on the two southern lanes.
The pilot project also installed signs visible from the roadway and City Hall with directions to
complete an online survey as part of the outreach for public feedback. Staff also provided media
releases and spoke with news outlets regarding the project to solicit feedback. Traffic volume
and speed counts were collected before the pilot project and during the 4th week of the pilot project
to quantify volume and speed impacts of the lane reduction. When and if the project is
implemented, the project would eliminate the north and south lane.
PUBLIC INPUT & OUTREACH:
In August 2022, staff reached out to all businesses along the current project limits from University
to Herald Roads to describe the concept for the project. Of the 22 businesses contacted, staff met
with 17 in person, all were supportive of the lane reduction/pedestrian crossing project. Staff also
sent information via email to four businesses and two of them provided supportive replies. The
other two did not provide a response. Staff was unable to contact only one business, the 45
Degree Brewhouse, which was unoccupied during the outreach process. Most of the businesses
expressed concerns with speeding and crashes along this segment of Sprague. Some also
mentioned that the existing street trees block visibility to their businesses and their signs.
There were 296 responses gathered from the online survey. The survey results identify 32% of
respondents in support of the project configuration and 63% of respondents opposed to the
project configuration. The primary reasons for opposing the project were concerns about
congestion and perceived wasteful spending. The primary reasons for supporting the project
were speed reduction and improved safety. A full summary and output of the survey results is
included as an attachment.
Staff received 21 public comments outside of the online survey through phone calls, emails, or
interviews with the media. Of these, 7 were in support of the project, 14 were opposed to the
project. The primary reasons for support were for the reduction in speed and to make it safer for
pedestrians. The primary reasons for opposition were related to inducing congestion and
spending money to "undo" a project that added capacity in reference to the Sprague/Appleway
couplet. A full summary and output of the direct contact comments is included as an attachment.
PILOT STUDY RESULTS:
Traffic data was collected in July 2021, in September 2022 (immediately before the pilot project),
and in October 2022 (during the pilot project). Traffic volumes in October 2022 were lower than
in September 2022 but consistent with volumes in 2021. The average speeds increased by 1.2
mph while 85th percentile speeds decreased by 1.1 mph. The number of vehicles driving over 50
mph reduced from 120+ per day to 83 per day. Data was also collected west of Herald Avenue
(at the terminus of the pilot project) to determine if drivers accelerated when additional lanes were
available. This was shown not to occur, with lower average speeds and consistent 85th percentile
speeds as within the pilot project limits.
SUMMARY:
The findings of the data collection during the pilot project indicate that the traffic volumes on
Sprague Avenue were not impeded by the 3-lane configuration. The increase in average speed
and only slight reduction in 85th percentile speed illustrate that there is sufficient capacity to
accommodate traffic volumes with only 3 lanes. Additionally, the reduction in excessive speeding
(vehicles traveling over 50 mph) was reduced by 33 percent. Further, the fact that drivers did not
decrease speeds with fewer travel lanes further strengthens the need to provide a crosswalk with
as few lanes as necessary to reduce pedestrian exposure to traffic.
The pilot study installed tubular markers that blocked two of the southern lanes of Sprague. This
configuration made access from the south side difficult to gauge gaps on Sprague as it increased
the offset to the traveled lanes. This is not anticipated to occur with the project as the 3-lane
project would eliminate the north and south lanes using curb, resulting in better sight distance.
The table below provides a summary of the data associated with the existing and proposed
configuration, as well as a reminder of the 4-lane configuration.
Existing 3-Lane 4-Lane
Configuration Configuration Configuration
Vehicles per day
Peak vehicles per hour
Average Speed
85th Percentile Speed
Vehicles over 50 mph
Pedestrian Crossing Time
16,355 15,318
1,308
1,198
35.6 mph 36.8 mph
41.6 mph
40.5 mph
124 83
35.6 seconds
27.9 seconds
Not Measured
31.3 seconds
Volume to Capacity Ratio 20% 27% 22%
Project Cost
N/A
$1,700,730
$1,896,303
Funding Gap N/A $884,445 $1,080,018
A funding source available to address the funding gap includes Coronavirus Local Fiscal
Recovery Fund (CLFR). CLFR funds may be utilized because the project is an eligible
stormwater/water quality project for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) per the EPA
Overview of Clean Water State Revolving Eligibilities, dated May 2016. Currently, the City
Council has not allocated $1,379,386 of CLFR funds.
OPTIONS: 1) Advance the Sprague Avenue Stormwater project with a 3-lane configuration and
allocate $884,445 of CLFR funds, or 2) take other action or no action.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Seeking consensus to the Sprague Avenue
Stormwater project with a 3-lane configuration and allocate $884,445 of CLFR funds
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The project currently needs at least $884,445 to fund the
construction phase which could be allocated from available CLFR funds which would require a
future budget amendment.
STAFF CONTACT: Gloria Mantz, PE, City Engineer
Jerremy Clark, PE, PTOE, Traffic Engineering Manager
ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint Presentation
Online Survey Responses
Direct Contact Feedback Summary
Traffic Camera Video Clips (2) vill be shown during the Council meeting)
Gloria Mantz, PE, City Engineer
Jerremy Clark, PE, PTOE, Traffic Engineering Manager
December 6, 2022
Presentation Agenda
Project Background
Conceptual Design
Business Outreach
Pilot Project
Implementation
Findings
Feedback
Staff Observations
Traffic Metrics
Summary and Next Steps
2
Spokane
jvalleye
Project Background
Eastbound Sprague Avenue has five lanes between University and
Herald and three lanes east of University
Relatively low volumes and high speeds
Project proposes lane reduction within
project limits
Allows placement of stormwater facilities
within the existing ROW
Provides safe pedestrian crossing
Shorter crossing distance
Vehicle speed reduction
Extends the existing 3-lane section (east of University)
3
Spokane
jvalleye
Conceptual Design Plan — Lane Reduction & Crossing Project
BALFOUR PARK
Pedestrian
Crossing
SPOKANE VALLEY
CITY HALL
4
Spokane
.Valley
Conceptual Rendering — Lane Reduction & Crossing Project
Spokane
.Valley
Business Outreach
Contacted 22 businesses between University and Herald
Met with 17 businesses in person
Emailed project information to 4 others and University City "landlord"
Only one business was not contacted since it was unoccupied at the time
Businesses support the project and lane reduction
Businesses are concerned with:
Existing high vehicle speeds and crashes
Sign visibility due to trees
6
Spokane
jvalleye
7
Pilot Project Implementation
September 19 to October 21
Local television channels reached out for interviews and aired reports
DEMONSTRATION
PROJECT
SEP 19 to OCT 28
wow opp arevalley orgoorague
Spokane
.Valley
Pilot Project Implementation
Used tubular markers to reduce
Sprague to 3 vehicle lanes
Adjusted signal to convert shared
lane to left turn only lane
Observed driver behavior
Measured volumes and speeds
Solicited feedback from drivers
8
Pilot Project Findings
Highest volumes 12PM-1PM, 3PM-4PM
Typical traffic patterns resulted in more dense traffic platoons followed by
large gaps in traffic
9
Pilot Project Feedback
10
21 direct responses through phone, email, or media interviews
296 online survey responses
32% support the project, 63% oppose the project, 5% are unsure
First week, 28% supported and 71% opposed
May indicate a learning curve and earned support
Spokane
jvalleye
Pilot Project Feedback
Q9 Why do you favor a permanent lane reduction? (select all that apply)
Three lanes
provide the...
Drivers slow
down
It improves
safety for...
Other (please
specify)
Answered: 91 Skipped: 20:•
Three lanes provide the necessary capacity for traffic
It improves safety for pedestrians, which have fewer lanes to cross
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
11
Q10 Why do you oppose a permanent lane reduction? (Select all that
apply)
Three lanes do
not provide...
Drivers do not
slow down
It is
difficult to...
Other (please
specify)
Answered: 179 Skipped: 117
Three lanes do riot provide enough capacity for traffic
It is difficult to access business entrances in the segment
0 % 10% 20% 30% 40% 50 % 60 % 70% 80% 90% 100%
Spokane
.Valley
to turn on t...
Other (please
specify)
Pilot Project Feedback
Q6 How was the driving you observed more safe?
Drivers were
slowing down
Answered: 60 Skipped: 236
It was easier It was easier to turn on to or off of Sprague
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
12
were turning...
Too much
congestion o...
Other (please
specify)
Q7 How was the driving you observed Tess safe?
Answered: 162 Skipped: 134
Vehicles that Vehicles were turning blocked my travel
Too much congestion or vehicles moving slow
0%
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Spokane
.Valley
Pilot Project Feedback
Reasons of Support
Stormwater treatment
Lower speeds for drivers, pedestrians, and businesses
Safety for all
Reasons of Opposition
Cost and spending
Congestion will occur, now or in future
Use enforcement to control speeds
Difficult to access Sprague from businesses
Snow storage
13
Spokane
jvalleye
Pilot Project —Traffic Metrics
14
Existing 2022 2022
(2021) Pre -Project During Project
2022 During Project
Downstream
Vehicle Volumes
Vehicles per day 15,333 16,355
Peak vehicles per hour 1,180 1,308
Vehicle Speeds
15,318
1,198
14,971
1,202
Average 35.7 mph 35.6 mph 36.8 mph 35.0 mph
85t" Percentile 41.1 mph 41.6 mph 40.5 mph 40.8 mph
Vehicles over 50 mph 120 124 83 102
Data Collection Date July 27 September 8 October 19/20, 2022
Pilot Project —Staff Observations
15
Traffic stream had larger "platoons"
Fewer lanes to spread out resulted in longer clusters leaving the University signal
From driveways this gave the appearance of congestion
Platoons were followed by large gaps in traffic
During platoons, drivers were not able to cross Sprague as easily as before
Access from the south side was more difficult
As installed with pilot project, access was difficult from the southern driveways due to 36"
tubular markers blocking both southern lanes
Increased offset of traveled lanes and traffic control device made it hard to gauge gaps
Construction project would utilize one northern lane and one southern lane using standard
curbing, resulting in better sight distance.
Spokane
jValley=
Pilot Project —Staff Observations
Video clips will be provided at the Council meeting.
16
Spokane
jvalleye
Pilot Project —Summary
Significant and successful public outreach
Coverage in the media portrayed it as a speed reduction project
296 online survey responses and 21 direct contacts
32% support the project and 63% oppose the project
Primary opposition reasoning is congestion
not supported by speeds or volumes
Primary support reasoning is speed and safety
Stormwater treatment was missing from most public feedback
17
Spokane
jvalleye
Pilot Project —Summary
18
Speeds were not significantly reduced during the pilot project
Average speed increased 1.2 mph and 85th percentile speed decreased 1.1 mph
Quantifies the "platooning" observed, vehicles are staying together in groups at a
more consistent speed
33% reduction in excessive speeding (over 50 mph)
Indicates that a 3-lane Sprague did not induce congestion
Also indicates that any crosswalk would need to account for higher speeds
There were no reported crashes on this segment during the pilot project
Spokane
jvalleye
3 Lane Configuration
Project Estimated Cost - $1,700,730
Project Current Funding
STA Funds
PBP Grant
REET Funds
Total Current Funding
$ 163,685
$ 556,400
$ 96,200
$ 816,285
CURRENT BUDGET SHORTFALL: $ 884,445 (Qualifies for CLFR funds)
1
Next Steps
At the August 30, 2022 meeting, there was Council consensus to move
ahead with the 3-Lane pilot project. Staff now seeks Council consensus to
allocate CLFR funds to fully fund construction of a 3-Lane project.
Staff will evaluate driveways and turn bay locations
Anticipated construction in 2024
Questions?
20
Spokane
.Valley
Sprague Avenue Stormwater and Crosswalk Project
Lane Reduction Pilot Project Public Comments
Date Received
Name
Comments
Support or Oppose?
Comment Received Via:
Address
Phone No.
E-mail
9/19/2022
Fred's Appliance
Featured on KREM news with support for the project
Support
News
9/19/2022
Leather Furniture Galle
Featured on KXLY news with support for the project
Support
News
9/19/2022
Blair Thomen
I really believe that your not thinking about the increased population in Spokane Valley and the surrounding areas.
First the single lanes on Broadway choke traffic for both the morning and afternoon rush. Now you want to choke OpposeEmail
down Sprague? I am not a traffic engineer but l see traffic patterns and both of these ideas do not help the valley
move the populace from one place to another without frustration and extra time.
blairchomen@vahom
am
9/20/2022
Jeanine Patterson
Summarized from email: Study area isn't large enough to capture results; provided suggestions for improving side
reducing
street experiencealongSpragueandspeedvia police or automated enforcement
Support
Email
jpatters29@msn.com
9/20/2022
David ?
"While I don't live near that section of Sprague, I definitely see the need to narrow it to make it safer for pedestrians,
especially with the new park going it.
I'm pleased that the city is doing something right for a change. Good luck with getting it through to completion. It's a
good idea."
Support
Email
proucho.Pvahoo.com
9/20/2022
Steve Williams
25-year resident;" Are you out of your freaking minds'. He is a realto:
Oppose
Phone
509-270-1274
9/20/2022
Dusty
Summarized from phone call: Lane reduction is making it more unsafe; this is a slap in the face to every person that
lives in Spokane Valley; The City was clearly not planned well enough to handle the traffic that is on the roads and
now we are taking it away from the one road that is big enough; I am dumbfounded, I feel insulted, I feel attacked.
Oppose
Phone/Voice Mail
509-370-2604
9/21/2022
Tom Lutyens
Opposed to the project, he encourages maintaining the free flow oftransportatior
Oppose
Phone
16th and Evergreen
9/21/2022
Stephen Savage
Thinks this is a stupid idea, would like a call back. JC called back on 9/26 to discuss. Steve thinks the project is
intended to give a little park area in front of City Hall and does not believe it will be used for stormwater
Oppose
Phone
509-922-7870
9/21/2022
Jackie Wolf
Dislikes the Sprague project, primarily the ending and starting locations. This makes it hard to access places along
Sprague. Would like a call back.
Called back on 9/26 and explained reason behind project with stormwater and crosswalk. She thought it was all
about speed reduction. With further understanding, she is supportive of the projec
Support
PPor
Phone
Farr and 8th
509-590-6554
9/22/2022
LarryDeemer
Called on 9/22 to request additional information. Met in City Hall on 9/29 to discuss historical traffic counts and
reasoning behind the study. Does not support the project. There are currently three ''through'' lanes with a turning
n either side; growth is inevitable and we shouldn't reduce lanes. Speed should be addressed with police
enforcement with more crosswalks added for pedestrian safety
Opposephone
and in person
509-534-0304
nraeemer@aotcom
9/26/2022
Diane Doran
Thinks this is a stupid project. She goes north from U-City/Rosaurs to Raymond and cuts back to University to
continue north. This makes it harder to cross Sprague to Raymond. Don't take the that option away
Oppose
Phone
North University
509-570-8802
9/29/2022
Linda McIntosh
Drove through Sprague Avenue Saturday night at 7:30 (9/24). There were hundreds of kids "tooling the gut", she
could have gotten in the left two lanes but they were closed. It was terrifying. The government spent millions of
dollars to build improvements (couplet) planning for the future; we need to be planning for the future. The library
should be built on the same side of the street as City Hall, there is nothing at U-City worth visiting except for Rosaurs.
She wants to know how many times I go to the library that I need a crosswalk.
Oppose
Phone
509-448-2440
9/29/2022
Carole Gauche
I just want to voice my opinion on this so called lane reduction on Sprauge. I think it is a terrible idea. With the
increase in population in our city now is not the time to reduce the flow of traffic. I know you are concerned about
taffic near the new library, but honestly, how many people do you see walking or riding bikes these days. Everyone
drives cars. This reduction will just cause more aggressive driving and slow down our already crowded roads.
Oppose
Email
suearcookiesa3@comcastmer
10/11/2022
Bill Bussard
Called regarding narrowing of Sprague. Opposed to project. Hate to see the main thoroughfare narrowed down.
the issue is speed, post patrollmen on Sprague and issue citation,
Oppose
Phone
509-924-1036
10/14/2022
Maureen Adams
I've talked to so many people over the years as to why the initial change to 1 way was done in the first place. No one
knows?? Why weren't the people allowed to vote on it? No one I've talked to likes the 1 way!!! Now more
changes?? Really?
Oppose
Email
aecalmanz000@hormaitcom
10/16/2022
Cheryl Adamson
Don't know why the city of Spokane Valley is even thinking about this change. They must have to much money and
need a place to waste it. Leave Sprague westbound alone.
Oppose
Email
chervlkavess@vahoamm
10/17/2022
Jacob Fennen
Good idea to use the extra lanes for stormwater and make a shorter crossing. He does think that Sprague should be a
40-45 mph roadway based on its functional classification and width.
Support
Phone
509-218-6645
10/20/2022
Unknown
This is an idiotic idea. It should not go forward. Don't do it, it is a bad idea.
Oppose
Phone
509-280-6768
10/21/2022
Paula Blount
Requested information regarding the project, followed up via email to webpage and survey
Support
Phone/Email
509-924-6430
seouoia06@msn.com
10/21/2022
Mrs. Schmidt
Left a message, followed up on 10/26 saying the project doesn't make sense. Message left for more information,
pending call back.
Oppose
Phone
509-928-1164
Response Summary
Direct
Survey
Overall
Support
7
92
31.9%
Oppose
14
180
62.6%
Unsure
17
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
Q1 What times of the day do you most often drive this segment of
Sprague Avenue? (select all that apply)
Prior to 6 a.m.0
Between 6 and
9 a.m.
Between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m.
Between 4 and
7 p.m.
After 7 p.m.
ANSWER CHOICES
Prior to 6 a.m.
Between 6 and 9 a.m.
Between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m.
Between 4 and 7 p.m.
After 7 p.m.
Total Respondents: 294
0% 1 0 % 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
RESPONSES
4.76% 14
45.58% 134
54.76% 161
57.48% 169
20.41% 60
1/23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
Q2 How often do you drive through this segment? (select all that apply)
Answered: 294 Skipped: 2
Every day
Occasionally -
once or twic...
A few times a
month
Less
frequently o...
0% 1 0 % 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
ANSWER CHOICES
Every day
Occasionally - once or twice a week
A few times a month
Less frequently or other
TOTAL
RESPONSES
53.40%
35.71%
8.50%
2.38%
157
105
25
7
294
2/23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
Q3 Why do you drive through this segment? (select all that apply)
Commuting to
and from work
Shopping at
neighborhood...
Dropping or
picking up...
Other (please
specify)
Answered: 294 Skipped: 2
0% 1 0 % 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
ANSWER CHOICES
Commuting to and from work
Shopping at neighborhood businesses
Dropping or picking up passengers in the area
Other (please specify)
Total Respondents: 294
RESPONSES
50.68% 149
71.77% 211
12.59% 37
17.35% 51
OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE
1 Going to Costco 10/29/2022 7:31 PM
2 Driving from University west to the freeway on ramp. 10/27/2022 7:48 PM
3 Using Library Medical appointments Visiting friends 10/27/2022 10:33 AM
4 I also use Sprague as a preferred route to access businesses all the way into downtown 10/26/2022 10:00 AM
Spokane. I do not take the freeway as I consider it to be very dangerous due to excessive
speed. I worked in the area of the county courthouse until retirement a few years ago and
considered Sprague to be much safer until the "oneways" were put into play and drivers began
to treat them both like a raceway.
5 Shopping, taking kids to school, rtc 10/22/2022 12:25 PM
6 Daily church service. 10/21/2022 10:58 AM
7 meetings, church, etc. at buildings on Sprague or in the vicinity 10/21/2022 8:12 AM
8 I also have to go thru that area to get to my vet's office etc 10/20/2022 6:47 PM
9 On my way to medical offices 10/15/2022 12:29 AM
3/23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
10 College 10/14/2022 7:42 PM
11 Heading to costco, lowes,or freeway 10/14/2022 8:48 AM
12 Fun and pleasure 10/13/2022 5:17 PM
13 Shopping, traveling to get on freeway and using sprague for getting to other parts of town 10/12/2022 9:55 PM
14 City Hall! 10/11/2022 10:03 PM
15 Various misc. errands. City Hall business. Politics. 10/11/2022 9:14 PM
16 To get to my destination 10/11/2022 8:25 PM
17 On my way home 10/11/2022 8:18 PM
18 Driving through to get to argonne 10/11/2022 7:09 PM
19 Because it's the most direct route to Spokane from my home. 10/11/2022 5:06 PM
20 To pick up my grandson to care for while his father works and his mother is in nursing school 10/11/2022 4:52 PM
21 Typically headed further West on Sprague for business elsehere, seldom do business in this 10/11/2022 4:45 PM
area .... I am an avid cyclist, so generally, when pass thru this area I am on my cycle.
22 Various reasons 10/11/2022 3:34 PM
23 Attend City Hall council meetings and go to businesses in that area. 10/11/2022 3:19 PM
24 Vanessa Behan 10/11/2022 2:52 PM
25 Visiting a parent 10/11/2022 1:34 PM
26 if your going to do shit make it a two way road 10/11/2022 1:32 PM
27 Live general area, running errands. 10/11/2022 9:30 AM
28 Just passing through that area to stores further west of the area. 10/6/2022 6:56 PM
29 Get to home depot and Costco and freeway entrance 10/5/2022 4:24 PM
30 I walk along or cross this segment of Sprague more than I drive it. 10/5/2022 12:59 PM
31 Passing through 10/4/2022 11:46 AM
32 Visiting family 10/3/2022 3:27 PM
33 Visiting family on the South Hill. 10/3/2022 3:24 PM
34 Visiting family 10/3/2022 11:08 AM
35 Travel from home to other areas of the valley and lower southhill 10/3/2022 5:33 AM
36 Kids to and from school and sports activities. 10/1/2022 8:29 AM
37 Visit family 9/29/2022 1:31 PM
38 I'm choosing to not add additional details. 9/29/2022 10:42 AM
39 Family lives in the area 9/29/2022 8:05 AM
40 Commuting from one area of town to another. 9/29/2022 7:19 AM
41 Easiest avenue to places we need to go. Usually westbound and observe ALL wb lane with 9/27/2022 1:47 PM
traffic in them.
42 Church 9/26/2022 7:10 PM
43 Quickest, easiest route west. 9/25/2022 11:01 AM
44 any time I go to west spokane valley 9/25/2022 8:09 AM
45 Visiting family 9/22/2022 2:25 PM
46 As a thorough fare to get where I'm going 9/20/2022 9:14 AM
4/23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
47 commuting to other activities 9/20/2022 8:17 AM
48 live in the area, its my direct route to downtown and south spokane 9/19/2022 4:11 PM
49 Traveling from one part of valley to another 9/19/2022 2:16 PM
50 Live on Raymond Rd 9/19/2022 10:05 AM
51 Riding my bike down Sprague 9/19/2022 9:58 AM
5/23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
Q4 Did the reduction in lanes cause you to drive slower than you normally
do?
No
Unsure
ANSWER CHOICES
Yes
No
Unsure
TOTAL
'alarm di i im�ir;9dd 3�n3air
0% 1 0 % 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
RESPONSES
42.91% 127
44.93% 133
12.16% 36
296
6/23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
Q5 During the project, did you observe driving that was more safe or Tess
safe than before the project?
More safe
Less safe
Unsure
ANSWER CHOICES
More safe
Less safe
Unsure
TOTAL
0% 1 0 % 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
RESPONSES
21.28% 63
55.07% 163
23.65% 70
296
7/23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
Q6 How was the driving you observed more safe?
Drivers were
slowing down
It was easier
to turn on t...
Other (please
specify)
Answered: 60 Skipped: 236
0% 1 0 % 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
ANSWER CHOICES
Drivers were slowing down
It was easier to turn on to or off of Sprague
Other (please specify)
Total Respondents: 60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
RESPONSES
86.67%
43.33%
26.67%
OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)
appeared to be much easier for pedestrians to cross Sprague
Easier to keep track of cars traveling through the area
Less weaving of traffic.
I think most drivers where more conscious of their speeds however, directly after that segment
they started passing other cars at faster speeds.
People weren't making fast/aggressive lane changes to get across 5 lanes of traffic. It was
easier to change lanes safely in time to make your turn because there were fewer lanes and
people were driving more slowly.
drivers were being cautious be of the revision. trying to figure out how to navigate new layout
I live in the neighborhood one block north of Sprague. Drivers are racing through this section of
Sprague every single night. I feel that the reduce lanes will slow the vehicles or reduce the
number of vehicles in that section. I'm hopeful that the lane reduction will make the area safer
for my elementary school aged kids.
Also - aggressive driving increased - enforcement is a must!
Easier to walk around
But due to the slow down, some motorists were driving more aggressively and practiced lane
weaving to get ahead. Some would tailgate due to the slow down and immediately speed when
given the opportunity.
DATE
10/21/2022 8:13 AM
10/20/2022 5:35 PM
10/17/2022 12:32 PM
10/16/2022 1:04 PM
10/12/2022 12:38 PM
10/11/2022 11:22 PM
10/11/2022 10:53 PM
10/11/2022 2:52 PM
10/8/2022 9:21 AM
9/29/2022 7:19 PM
52
26
16
11 Forced drivers to watch for people walking and cyclists
8/23
9/28/2022 11:43 AM
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
12 Heavier density in the three lanes made traffic slower (within speed limit). 9/27/2022 2:25 PM
13 People seemed more aware with the change of pace 9/20/2022 2:08 PM
14 It was easier to watch for pedestrians 9/19/2022 7:48 PM
15 I didn't see any pedestrians when I drove through, but I know from personal experience that I 9/19/2022 10:13 AM
hate walking across wide roads because it feels dangerous. And wide roads make our city look
ugly.
16 The speeding and racing is horrendous 9/19/2022 10:05 AM
9/23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
Q7 How was the driving you observed Tess safe?
Vehicles that
were turning...
Too much
congestion o...
Other (please
specify)
Answered: 162 Skipped: 134
0% 1 0 % 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
ANSWER CHOICES
Vehicles that were turning blocked my travel
Too much congestion or vehicles moving slow
Other (please specify)
TOTAL
1
2
3
4
5
6
RESPONSES
11.73%
64.20%
24.07%
OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)
Numerous vehicle conflicts in business entrances and entry into lanes of travel.
When the light changes at university it is still like the start of the Indy 500 and there is still the
jockeying for position to be in the appropriate lane for future travel before you reach the
Argonne Mullen one ways. That is a very scary squeeze point because of the railroad
overpass. I know this is not on the plan now but sincerely hope at some point something can
be worked out to take this project further.
Drivers switching lanes without signaling, rapid lane changes, drivers speeding up to get ahead
of other drivers.
People here can't drive appropriately and weave in and out of traffic and due to the congestion
I was almost sideswiped several times.
Very confusing getting into Rosauers
vehicles were not allowing people to turn into businesses, vehicles were tailgating people in
front of them vehicles were swerving to avoid turning vehicles more people seemed angry
7 Traffic never slowed down and speeds were higher than 45 mph
8 Why do this, when there are so many other projects that need to be looked at more than this?
9 DANGEROUS and UN -SAFE DRIVING CONDITIONSHHI
10 Vehicles trying to negotiate the ridiculous blockages when they could of got into existing lanes
and turned into individual businesses.
11 Both above options. 10/12/2022 7:43 PM
19
104
39
162
DATE
10/27/2022 11:37 AM
10/26/2022 10:07 AM
10/23/2022 11:36 AM
10/22/2022 3:02 PM
10/22/2022 12:25 PM
10/20/2022 9:12 PM
10/15/2022 2:08 PM
10/13/2022 5:18 PM
10/13/2022 5:14 PM
10/12/2022 9:59 PM
10/23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
12 People seemed confused and there was a lot of lane changing, in a dangerous way.
13 Such a super dumb idea to reduce lanrs in this area. It is Very cumbersome getting out of the
shopping mall and going across the 2 lanes closed!!! I don't don't believe there is any positive
benefits. If trying control speeders, please find another solution. Thanks.
14 you have 5 lanes there for a reason unless your engineers that designed it dont know shit i
would listen to the first guy not the one trying to make a pet project by the shitty new city hall
you should have just bought the old building i mean you guys did not even inspect the new
building when it was being built
15 Speeding, lane changing without signals, following too close.
16 The lane reeducation has made it hazardous to visit Rosauers and city hall. It was so bad that
I went through Rosauers parking lot to get to city hall. The cones block visibility to enter and
exit the driveways on Sprague. Why does the city feel like it is appropriate to make Sprague
and University more dangerous?!!! I shutter to think how bad it will be in the snow.
17 Thanks to your Sprague traffic -cone experiment, I now despise turning out onto Sprague from
Rosauers with my groceries. There is no way I would ever want my grandkids with me in the
car driving through your traffic cone experiment after school. The fast teenagers of summer are
a perennial traffic problem, but they are a traffic problem made manageable with stop lights,
traffic tickets, and heavy fines for speeding. The vast majority of perennial traffic problems and
accidents in our area sadly involve winter driving conditions... which your traffic cone
experiment fails to model adequately. Imagining your traffic -coned areas as swales filled with
visibility -reducing trees and bushes when turning out onto Sprague is not an inviting scenario.
The City of the Valley hasn't bothered to cut back its swale vegetation on Sullivan in summer,
nor ever bothered to plow its Sullivan swale pedestrian trail in winter. I'd expect the same
maintenance issues with Sprague. Imagining plow -ice -berm -blocked swales creating meltwater
ponds across a narrowed Sprague in winter combined with yet another never -shoveled -in -winter
impassible pedestrian trail/sidewalk behind them like the trail on Sullivan in winter is not an
inviting scenario. Many people are forced to walk or bike along the snowplowed edges of
Sprague in winter when ice berms have made sidewalks inaccessible and/or impassible.
Planning sketches need to include walkers, bikers, bus riders, kids and old people struggling to
navigate their way along the snowplowed edges of the proposed 3-lane Sprague between the
ice berms and traffic of winter... or are the dead bodies of pedestrians on the ice in winter along
the side of the road also part of the plan to slow down traffic on Sprague? We need a STOP
LIGHT between City Hall and the new library. We need a serious STOP LIGHT to help regulate
traffic speed down Sprague, not just some flashing "pedestrian crossing" signal lights. We
need at least 4 lanes for traffic, not just 3, because we need to protect cars turning into and
out of businesses on both sides of Sprague year-round, and we need sufficient width on both
sides of Sprague to protect bikers and pedestrians when ice berms make their way impassible
in the dead of winter.
18 Difficult to pull out of businesses into correct lanes, drivers unsure how to turn into
businesses, brake checks happen often or improper turns from driving lanes
19 People cutting me off to change lanes. Impatient drivers, and drivers bolting out of driveways
to try and beat traffic
20 Believe it or not many vehicles have increased speed through that section now
21 More aggressive to get in front of others etc.
22 People speeding and swerving through congested traffic
23 tailgating drivers
24 Unlearn driving lanes Used to freedom of more lanes
25 More congestion which makes for a less safe environment.
26 People racing to get in front.
27 Both item one and two
28 Is the valley going to become the North side now?
29 Too much congestion and vehicles weren't driving any slower.
10/11/2022 8:30 PM
10/11/2022 3:22 PM
10/11/2022 1:34 PM
10/11/2022 9:32 AM
10/10/2022 2:26 PM
10/9/2022 3:48 PM
10/6/2022 11:44 AM
10/3/2022 5:34 AM
10/1/2022 8:07 AM
9/30/2022 10:59 AM
9/30/2022 10:57 AM
9/30/2022 6:40 AM
9/29/2022 6:08 PM
9/29/2022 3:36 PM
9/29/2022 3:16 PM
9/27/2022 1:48 PM
9/25/2022 4:42 PM
9/25/2022 11:04 AM
11/23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
30 People cutting slower traffic off. We voted years ago to not make these roads two way streets
because we like less traffic congestion. Please do not limit lanes. Don't make us like the
Northside of spokane where it is impossible to get north. Leave the lanes.
31 It made it harder to get into business like Rousaurs, U-haul and city hall. I had a hard time
seeing the driveways because of the cones. It was so bad I went through Rosaurs parking lot
to get to city hall.
32 Exiting vehicles pulling out and not waiting or going too slow
33 Both options applied
34 Confusion... was made a 6 lane one way that has been reduced and reduced. Why did the
valley waste the money to make 2 one lane roads to them reduce it to the same number of
lanes?
35 Cutting in front of my vehicle to make left turns.
36 With cones all over the place it is hard to get an idea of typical behavior.
37 Drivers changing lanes to enter/exit business and roads severely slow down the far lanes
pushing more drivers to the center which in turn makes the entire area most congested than
necessary
38 Turning cars more often
39 Road rage people trying to get to the front of the line cutting other cars off
9/24/2022 3:56 PM
9/23/2022 8:14 PM
9/22/2022 12:42 PM
9/21/2022 10:51 PM
9/20/2022 4:37 PM
9/20/2022 8:04 AM
9/19/2022 9:48 PM
9/19/2022 4:14 PM
9/19/2022 2:17 PM
9/19/2022 6:10 AM
12/23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
Q8 Do you favor or oppose a permanent lane reduction in this segment of
Sprague Avenue?
Favor
Oppose
Unsure
ANSWER CHOICES
Favor
Oppose
Unsure
TOTAL
Answered: 289 Skipped: 7
Ewa
o
0% 1 0 % 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
RESPONSES
31.83% 92
62.28% 180
5.88% 17
289
13/23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
Q9 Why do you favor a permanent lane reduction? (select all that apply)
Three Lanes
provide the...
Drivers sLow
down
It improves
safety for...
Other (please
specify)
Answered: 91 Skipped: 205
0% 1 0 % 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
ANSWER CHOICES
Three lanes provide the necessary capacity for traffic
Drivers slow down
It improves safety for pedestrians, which have fewer lanes to cross
Other (please specify)
Total Respondents: 91
1
2
3
4
5
OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)
It's the right thing to do for all of the above plus another that I think need to be mentioned.
Hopefully the swales will have bio-filtration beds because the ability to filter the runoff before it
reaches the aquifer is critical to our clean water and the health of our species and the
environment. Beautification is sorely needed on Sprague and if these are done correctly they
will be an enhancement and the addition of foliage also surves to scrub the air we all breath. I
read that some businesses have concerns about their signage. Some areas where I have
traveled place signs with building address and building numbers low so that the driver can
easily see these street side. They are usually placed horizontally BEFORE driveway.
saves taxpayer money by eliminating maintenance, repair and restoration of unneeded
pavement/infrastructure
This needs to be done all the way to Thierman. On both sprague and appleway.
I hope even more develop happens in that area and along appleway avenue to allow for safety
of traffic and pedestrians.
I believe it will improve access to the new library and will be safer for pedestrians and bikers
using the trail
RESPONSES
74.73%
62.64%
86.81%
24.18%
DATE
10/26/2022 10:27 AM
10/21/2022 8:14 AM
10/17/2022 12:37 PM
10/16/2022 1:06 PM
10/14/2022 7:54 AM
68
57
79
22
14/23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
6
7
8
9
Three lanes is more than adequate for the traffic flow. 5 feels silly and requires paranoid lane
positioning to get over to the side you need. Use the space for better things... it's wasted as it
is.
I'm hoping that with the space left by two unused lanes, there will be room to have protected
bike lanes (separated from car traffic with a barrier). Although I do not bike often, as a driver, I
am always worried about people in bike lanes in the event that they have to swerve, or just
being on a road as busy as Sprague where other drivers aren't always careful.
Makes the street look nicer which in turn makes the city nicer which in turn increases
businesses and residents.
ALL NHTSA, NIH - Federal, State and International studies show it is safer
10 We were driving through this section last month when another driver, apparently thinking all five
lanes were his, did an enormous u-turn and nearly ran right into us. This section doesn't need
five lanes for traffic! It gives people the wrong idea about how fast they can go and how
recklessly they can drive.
11 Like Monroe in Spokane, it will provide for more intimate traffic and subsequent business
gains.
12 Protects water quality
13 I used to cross these segments of Sprague/Appleway daily when I lived in the area to catch
the bus - it was extremely nerve-wracking and sketchy/unsafe! I've moved, but would love for
other citizens in that area to have better experiences than I did!
14 I love the idea of additional green space. Sprague is not an attractive street to drive down.
15 It proves a dedicated, protected bike lane is very doable.
16 I work on this segment of Sprague near University Road at the fire station. From inside our
building, you can constantly hear drivers FLYING past our building at 50+ mph at all times of
day every single day. With easy access to 1-90 on nearby north/south running arterials, there
will never realistically be a time when 5 lanes of traffic is necessary on this one lone section of
road. The open nature of the 5-lane road without question contributes to speeding, and it's
pretty risky watching people jaywalk between Sprague and Farr. With any luck this could even
lay the groundwork for the formation of a small "downtown" Spokane Valley, and help form a
better sense of Spokane Valley identity instead of just being sprawling suburbia. We also
somewhat regularly respond to vehicle collisions at Sprague & University, because a vehicle
turned the wrong direction out of the Taco Bell/Rosauers parking lot into opposing one-way
traffic on Sprague. A reduction of lanes could make it more obvious for all vehicles turning out
of the University shopping mall that traffic is one-way only and reduce collisions. People are
going to complain. People are going to intentionally speed during the pilot to prove a point. The
people complaining aren't going to have any real comprehension or understanding of city
planning. For years i've loudly heard cars speeding by through the walls of my workplace and
fully support this plan.
17 Potentially increased space for non -automobile traffic.
18 Better for businesses along as well
19 Though 1 would like to see drivers going slower through the entire length of Sprague Ave, 1
think this will only occur with tougher enforcement rather than less lanes.
20 Even if this wasn't providing the necessary amount of traffic lanes 1 would still support it.
People can bike, walk, take the bus, etc. if traffic gets too bad. We shouldn't have to own a
car to enjoy local businesses.
21 I've lived in the valley for 30 years. It's ridiculous that we have a five lane highway in what is
supposed to be our downtown. Sprague's traffic pattern should be changed like the Main Ave
corridor downtown near the community building. At least between University and Farr or
Argonne. There should be parking, protected bike and pedestrian lanes, crosswalks with
signals, landscaping, anything to increase the walk ability and decrease reliance on cars. The
bus stop is a great idea as well. Please don't be dissuaded by NIMBYs that only want cars and
box stores. Younger people want a walkable community, if you build it they will come.
Businesses, customers, restaurants, breweries, coffee shops, cafes, customers. Thank you
for pushing for these changes that will better downtown Spokane Valley for years to come!
10/12/2022 11:00 PM
10/12/2022 12:39 PM
10/11/2022 9:19 PM
10/11/2022 2:53 PM
10/11/2022 2:09 PM
10/11/2022 1:41 PM
10/6/2022 9:52 AM
10/4/2022 11:50 AM
10/3/2022 11:09 AM
9/28/2022 4:51 PM
9/24/2022 3:30 PM
9/21/2022 5:37 PM
9/20/2022 2:08 PM
9/19/2022 9:09 PM
9/19/2022 10:16 AM
9/19/2022 8:00 AM
15/23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
22 It will be safer to drive. i watch other drivers Making turns from the wrong lanes, some time's 9/19/2022 7:48 AM
almost running into other cars just to make a turn from the wrong lane. also people really like
to pass you if you are not going 10 mph over the speed limit. because they drive with a me
first mind set. please do this all the way to 190. and also appleway for the same length of road.
190 to university.
16/23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
Q10 Why do you oppose a permanent lane reduction? (Select all that
apply)
Three Lanes do
not provide...
Drivers do not
sLow down
It is
difficult to...
Other (please
specify)
Skipped: 117
0% 1 0 % 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
ANSWER CHOICES
Three lanes do not provide enough capacity for traffic
Drivers do not slow down
It is difficult to access business entrances in the segment
Other (please specify)
Total Respondents: 179
RESPONSES
77.09% 138
32.40% 58
53.07% 95
41.34% 74
OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE
1 It isn't clear to me the necessity to use our tax $$$ for something that doesn't seem to have a 10/29/2022 10:29 PM
known "end game" or apparent need.
2 It will have to be reversed at some time in the future. I do not see a benefit that that justifies 10/29/2022 7:33 PM
the expense
3 5-lane Arterial Is Not A BAD Thing Not excessive by short and long-term criteria Provides 2 10/27/2022 1:03 PM
lanes for turns and STA bus stops and 3 lanes for thru traffic Reduces stress situations;
increases user comfort Opens up spaces for vehicles to change lanes (e.g. for turns)
Increases following distances; reduces tailgating Allows for some future growth in traffic w/o
adverse effects on service Appropriate to main purpose of arterials: traffic movement/flow It is
there and PAID for. More DIRECT Solutions to Real Problems Available Speedsters: Increase
police presence Pedestrian Safety: Center island in crosswalk and a "yield" sign Traffic
Calming: Synchronize signals and post "green wave" speed Street Flooding/Ponding: Not a
concern here Aquifer Protection: Specific Pre -treatments in -line with existing dry wells (Swales
are roughly 50% effective; Zero to 80%; most Valley roads will not allow out -of -line swales or
pre-treatment facilities, so WHY is this short stretch, even if extended to 1-90, deemed
critical?) Untimeliness: Project Proposal and Study. Pedestrian and vehicular traffic will change
17/23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
4
5
6
7
considerably after the library and park are operational. Surveys and studies before that time
will not reveal the extent of any real problems . Depressed Service -Level Aspirations: Of the
half -dozen conventional levels of service the proposed service level is at the low end of the
scale. Investment Opportunity Cost: Use the funds required to tear up the existing (and
serviceable) road infrastructure toward a plan to extend Appleway beyond University. OR:
install and maintain EFFECTIVE in -line pre-treatment facilities. OR: cover the EXPOSED
aquifer areas (e.g. Thierman quarry and Sullivan quarry)
I think reducing from 5 to 3 lanes will actually increase the possibility of accidents due to
traffic having to wait for cars turning in the outside 2 lanes, with 5 lanes usually the through
traffic will be in the middle 3 lanes and the turning traffic will be in the outside 2 lanes.
Condensing from 5 to 3 lanes makes no sense to me and seems like a waste of money. I don't
believe that this stretch of road currently has a high accident rate problem.
I do not believe that our infrastructure is keeping up with the increase of population and to
reduce Sprague lanes of traffic serves no purpose other than to bottle neck the traffic. If it's
speeding that is a cause for concern, put in cameras. That would take the responsibility off the
law enforcement officer. As far as a crosswalk...I have never in 60 years had to stop to allow a
pedestrian cross in that area, however; I have had to stop further East of that area. If the city
has that kind of money they need to spend, (I am aware that it is a different budget, but maybe
priorities need to be rethought) maybe they should reallocate additional funds to the Fire
Department and our Emergence First Responders instead of always putting it on the taxpayers
to cover all the costs. Additionally, yes parks are beautiful IF they are maintained. We are
having so much trouble with the homeless, another park with give them another place to pitch
their tents and leave their trash and destroy bathroom facilities. I would not let my
Grandchildren go and play without adult supervision, would you? Instead, let's keep up the
walking trails. Trim back the weeds and cleanup the graffiti. I used to walk the trails but now I
am afraid to walk them alone. Hobo's sleeping on and under the benches, blocking the
restrooms etc..
This is a TOTAL waste of my money. In fact, I am absolutely exhausted thinking about tearing
up a beautiful NEW street on someone's whim of a crosswalk. In the 50 years that I have
driven Sprague, I have never seen anyone crossing that street .
when needing to turn into a business on the south side, the left lane is busy with traffic going
straight thus making congestion that is NOT needed.
8 In the winter when you have to plow, there will be even less room to drive.
9 Traffic increases every year and this creates a bottle neck
10 When traffic is restricted you find driver cutting in and out of lanes, trying to get around any
congestion. The valley should make Appleway continue all the way out to Greenacres and
change Sprague to a one way.
11 Remember when we had a bad winter and you used one lane to pile snow in? How will
emergency vehicles be able to travel through there if there if there are only two lanes?
12 Tax dollars are to be used elsewhere
13 I DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR IT!!!!
14 This is STUPID!!! I don't want to spend more money in taxes for this reduction""
15 It's more unsafe and a waste of taxpayer monies
16 With the Spokane Valley becoming so much more populated. This is a really dumb idea! Why
don't you finish the original idea to make Appleway go all the way thru to Sullivan, or even to
Liberty Lake!
17 Another cost not needed.
18 I think it is difficult to navigate because it's a short segment and again, people seem
confused/indecisive
19 Enforce the DAMN speed limits! Hire traffic enforcement police.
20 Needless expense and maintenance on greenery. Use that money for other projects.
21 One lane or five, the speed limit remains the same. This area does not need or warrant a
10/25/2022 2:16 PM
10/23/2022 12:06 PM
10/22/2022 12:27 PM
10/20/2022 9:14 PM
10/20/2022 6:50 PM
10/15/2022 12:30 AM
10/14/2022 10:05 AM
10/14/2022 8:20 AM
10/13/2022 5:19 PM
10/13/2022 5:15 PM
10/13/2022 5:12 PM
10/12/2022 10:01 PM
10/12/2022 7:07 PM
10/12/2022 9:44 AM
10/11/2022 8:31 PM
10/11/2022 7:27 PM
10/11/2022 7:11 PM
10/11/2022 5:07 PM
18/23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
speed reduction.
22 It is costly to make the changes and what does it really do? It seems that to make crossing
the road safely to get to the library could be accomplished by building an elevated crosswalk
and leave the traffic patterns alone. It seems like silliness and voters can tell that the city
fathers are NOT spending their own money for it.
23 Difficult to get out of businesses back into traffic due to car volume being down to 3 lanes. 4
would be better.
24 Maybe you can create a dedicated bike lane all the way to downtown or at least the pedestrian
bridge for bike commuters and make it separate from cars. That would be a great lane
reduction idea and reduce one lane pairing with storm drain management.
25 Cost, I'm tired of paying for you to play with Sprague Ave, return Sprague to two way traffic.
26 All of the above. It is not necessary to take away 2 lanes on a very small section of Sprague,
IMHO. I would like to know why the city feels this needs to be done. If speeding is a factor,
then find a better solution to address that. Not reduce lanes!! Thanks!
27 Historically you had to widen sprague to accommodate all of the traffic. Now you're going to
make it worse by reducing the lanes again. There was a reason they were widened in the first
place
28 Too many changes have been done on Sprague as it is.
29 because i said so if you want people to slow down put cops there pull people over playing fuck
fuck with lanes making traffic worse is not the solution then you just send people to other
roads that were not ment for the capacity you know why people fucking go 55 down there its
because they can no one stops them
30 The plan doesn't consider emergency vehicles and makes the street more dangerous. The plan
doesn't consider population growth in the valley. There was an interesting statement in Oct 6
issue of the Inlander in the Jeers section, "What is wrong with you Spokane Valley? Changing
Sprague Avenue AGAIN? All those cones in front of the University -Argonne stretch??? Do you
think Spokane is SHRINKING?????"
31 The lane reduction does not take into account snow and ice. To reduce traffic just put in a
traffic light and leave the number of lanes alone.
32 This is a bad idea. During rush hour 3 lanes are not enough. I have driven this route for 36
years and traffic keeps getting worse and worse. With all the new housing going in, we need all
lanes for traffic and business. To limit lanes now is a waste of money. A crosswalk by the
library should be enough, it should have flashing overhead lights!
33 Winter driving and snowplowing conditions have not been adequately modeled by your pilot
project.
Waste of time and money for this project
Bus stops
34
35
36 I believe this is a huge and unnecessary waste of taxpayer money. It seems there should be
more emphasis on spending funds on needed services, such as more police to monitor the
speeding along this area of Sprague Avenue. In addition, more law enforcement is needed to
combat what I think is a more important issue -- abating the many drug houses in the area (I
lived by one for a few years, and it was a nightmare).
37 I would support a reduction to 4 lanes. It would give a merging in/out lane for the businesses in
the area without causing slow downs from people pulling into and out of the parking lots. This
is turning into a Valley hub and we should think about future congestion so we don't end up
removing tomorrow what we build today.
38 A project like this also always includes a lot of tree planting etc. I like trees, but they are
generally placed in a fashion that makes it look like there are pedestrians.
39 4 lanes would be sufficient but 3 lanes are not. Especially in the winter
40 You changed it from 2 ways to one way- to make it less congested. Now you are going back.
Waste of money, cut taxes and extra spending.
10/11/2022 4:55 PM
10/11/2022 4:49 PM
10/11/2022 4:33 PM
10/11/2022 3:36 PM
10/11/2022 3:27 PM
10/11/2022 2:06 PM
10/11/2022 1:38 PM
10/11/2022 1:36 PM
10/10/2022 3:14 PM
10/10/2022 2:28 PM
10/10/2022 9:22 AM
10/9/2022 3:49 PM
10/8/2022 7:45 PM
10/5/2022 4:10 PM
10/3/2022 3:30 PM
10/1/2022 8:33 AM
9/30/2022 11:01 AM
9/29/2022 7:51 PM
9/29/2022 4:28 PM
19/23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
41 It took forever, including the splitting of Sprague into the one-way Sprague and Valley Way, to
get traffic to be less congested. Reducing the available lanes in a time when there are more
and more vehicles accessing our roads seems like we are moving backwards. This is
evidenced by the reduction of lanes that the City of Spokane has done to Sprague and Monroe
near the downtown areas. The congestion in those areas has increased drammatically!
42 More people moving into the valley. In years coming there will be more traffic and you want to
go from 5 lanes to 3. I don't believe this has been thought out very well.
43 As Spokane Valley grows, five lanes will provide more overall capacity and assist with traffic
flows during peak hours. A reduction in lanes will likely result in more commuters utilizing
alternative east/west corridors like Broadway/Mission/8th/16th which are not equipped to
efficiently handle larger traffic volumes. Additionally these alternative corridors are lined,
primarily, with residential uses which could increase safety and quality of life issues for
residents living along these arterials. Five lanes on Sprague provides a strong incentive to
concentrate traffic within a commercial corridor where there are less externalities.
44 This makes traveling on Sprague more confusing for many drivers and increases the risks for
collisions with other vehicles as well as any foot traffic.
45 Spokane Valley is growing and I think it will cause congestion and a bottle neck, similar to 1-90
46 This is a horrible decision. You have reduced so many of the regular streets to one lane
causing all types of traffic issues and you best idea is to take away 2 lanes causing another
hugh bottleneck. The whole Sprague Ave and Appleway is based on traffic for 5 lanes and now
you propose to reduce in on one side only creating a hugh bottleneck for three blocks. This will
casue traffic to speed up once there passed the bottleneck and cause more issues.
47 1 don't see the need to reduce from 5 to 3. 5 to 4 maybe, but not 3.
48 It CAUSES congestion, and extra confusion for for some drivers, plus there is NO NEED to do
this. We have plenty of other places to configure the storm water swells in this area. People
shop and do business where it is EASY to commute and access, lane reductions only cause
CONGESTION and irritated drivers. Stop the bull crap"""""' Leave Sprauge Ave alone
49 Four lanes may be an adequate alternative.
50 Use the money to make a walk way for pedestrians
51 All of the above
52 It looks very confusing.
53 Why is this even being discussed after voting for the two way apple way.
54 Dumbest idea since the Monroe Street catastrophe
55 Who the f thought this was a good idea? 1 will vote against anyone who approves this.
56 the three lanes east of Sprague are really congested. hate it
57 The Spokane Valley metro population will only continue to grow in the area. While Sprague
may only be at 20% capacity on the current 5 lanes of traffic now, this will steadily increase in
the future. Reducing lanes on a major arterial is backward thinking and will only serve to
burden future generations of drivers and commuters.
58 The whole point of making Sprague one way was to keep traffic moving freely and all this is
going to do is Make Sprague congested again.
59 Waiting through the backups that used to happen at Argonne/Mullan was horrible. My commute
is already too long without the added headache of sitting through multiple light cycles to get
through busy intersections. We need to widen the rest of Sprague and put Appleway through
out to Liberty Lake.
60 1) Spending tax dollars to fix something not broken, 2) Buses in third lane will create even
more traffic lane changes. 3) Major road change for a pedestrian crossing with no known
pedestrians.
61 Waste of money. There must be areas of greater need.
62 Spent money to add more lanes (added Appleway) to then reduce it back to same number of
9/29/2022 3:39 PM
9/29/2022 2:45 PM
9/29/2022 1:47 PM
9/29/2022 9:34 AM
9/29/2022 8:07 AM
9/29/2022 7:40 AM
9/29/2022 7:39 AM
9/29/2022 7:25 AM
9/28/2022 5:38 PM
9/28/2022 8:06 AM
9/27/2022 1:49 PM
9/26/2022 7:11 PM
9/25/2022 4:45 PM
9/25/2022 4:43 PM
9/25/2022 4:40 PM
9/25/2022 8:12 AM
9/23/2022 9:44 PM
9/23/2022 11:02 AM
9/22/2022 7:02 PM
9/22/2022 5:52 AM
9/21/2022 7:03 PM
9/20/2022 4:39 PM
20 / 23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
lanes.
63 Less lanes is stupid!! 9/20/2022 12:52 PM
64 Our tax dollars paid to have this road expanded, and now you are going to take more tax 9/20/2022 8:18 AM
dollars to reduce it. Contraindication!
65 If you want to reduce speed, enforce the limit. I haven't seen patrols in the area for months. 9/20/2022 8:05 AM
66 All the congestion is going to make air quality worse as well. It's ridiculous to reduce this to 9/20/2022 7:35 AM
three lanes.
67 You guys have to be absolutely retarded to believe that reducing the number of lanes on the 9/19/2022 11:11 PM
busiest street in the valley is a good idea. Especially as the city experiences unprecedented
growth.
68 For years, before Sprague turning into a one way road, Sprague Ave was always congested. 9/19/2022 8:51 PM
Now with growing numbers of residents in the area and new potential traffic for the new library
and park, you want to choke it off again! A continuous stream of cars has the potential to
increase road rage among drivers & add travel delays. If speed is the problem, then post police
& speed cameras all along the Sprague corridor, but please don't narrow out road!!!!
69 Have you jackasses seen how much traffic uses sprague!?!? Taking away lanes ONLY ADDS 9/19/2022 7:40 PM
TO THE FUCKING CONGESTION DIPSHITS. Look at the disaster other city traffic calming
BS has brought.
70 More people and traffic are coming to and thru the valley every day. Reducing lanes on 9/19/2022 4:29 PM
Sprauge will push more traffic to through the residential neighborhoods on Felts and Herald as
drivers try to use Broadway and Mission to avoid the congestion on Sprague. Felts and Herald
have no sidewalks. Sprague has sidewalks and lighted crossings for the few that use it.
Reducing spragues capacity at a time when traffic and population are increasing, while not
adding safey improvements to the residential streets drivers will flee too is not the answer
71 Why once again disrupt travel patterns and disrupt businesses where it used to be 2 lanes one 9/19/2022 2:20 PM
way two lanes opposite and a center turn lane now to less lanes to travel. When will engineers
ever have common sense and get things right the first time
72 Spokane has a major influx of people in the last two years and the sheer volume of traffic has 9/19/2022 12:26 PM
skyrocketed you don't help this stress by lowering lanes.
73 what happened to the lite rail system or the rest of apple way. just another way to steal money 9/19/2022 11:18 AM
from the tax payers. why don't you ask the spokane city counsel what they really want with the
valley other than all the tax money.
74 The new addition of the park and event center is going to make this section back up big time 9/19/2022 9:30 AM
during any event
21/23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
16-29 years oLd0
30-59 years oLd
60 or above.
Prefer not to
answer
Q11 What is your age?
Answered: 283 Skipped: 13
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
16-29 years old 8.48% 24
30-59 years old 61.13% 173
60 or above 25.80% 73
Prefer not to answer 4.59% 13
TOTAL 283
22 / 23
Sprague Avenue Pilot Project
Q12 To which gender identity do you most identify?
NiaLe
Female
Prefer not to
answer
ANSWER CHOICES
Male
Female
Prefer not to answer
TOTAL
Answered: 282 Skipped: 1,=
MEM
0% 1 0 % 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
RESPONSES
40.07% 113
47.87% 135
12.06% 34
282
23 / 23
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: December 6, 2022 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2023 CenterPlace Food Services Contract Update
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Approval of original 2009 contract and subsequent 2017
contract.
BACKGROUND: CenterPlace began utilizing an in-house caterer for food and beverage services
in 2009. This has proven to be a beneficial service to our customers and one that continues to
receive positive feedback.
The current CenterPlace food and beverage contract with Le Catering expires on December 31,
2022. While overall CenterPlace operations are being evaluated by outside consultants and staff,
the Parks and Recreation Department is interested in extending the contract for Le Catering to
continue to provide food and beverage services at CenterPlace for the duration of 2023.
Minor changes to the contract are proposed for 2023 to reflect current practices between the
parties, to increase the annual amount paid by the contractor into a kitchen equipment reserve
fund, and to provide additional revenues to the City in instances of approved off -site events that
are prepared by LeCatering using CenterPlace facilities.
OPTIONS: Council consensus to place the proposed contract for motion consideration on a future
agenda, with or without further changes to the proposed contract.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Seek Council consensus to place contract on a future
Council Agenda for motion consideration.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. The contract will provide additional revenue to the City.
STAFF CONTACT: John Bottelli, Parks & Recreation Director and Erik Lamb, Deputy City
Manager
ATTACHMENTS: Draft 2023 Contract
DRAFT
AGREEMENT FOR CENTERPLACE FOOD & BEVERAGE SERVICES
Eat Good Group LLC, DBA Le Catering Company
THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the City of Spokane Valley, a code City of the State
of Washington, hereinafter "City" and Eat Good Group LLC, DBA Le Catering Company, hereinafter
"Contractor," sometimes jointly referred to as "Parties."
IN CONSIDERATION of the terms and conditions contained herein the Parties agree as follows:
1. Grant of Catering/Concessions Privilege. The City grants Contractor exclusive authority for the sale of
food and beverages, including alcoholic beverages, and provision of food and beverage services associated
with such sales (collectively "food services") within CenterPlace as set forth in the Scope of Services,
attached as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein by reference, and more specifically as set forth immediately
below.
A. Events Booked after the Termination Date of this Agreement. Contractor agrees it shall not collect
any fee or deposit from any third party for any event at CenterPlace that is booked for a date after
the termination date of this Agreement, unless authorized in writing by the Parks and Recreation
Director (the "Director").
B. Special Events. The City reserves the right to permit an event to sell and/or give away food and
beverages or allow a home-made potluck in connection with Special Event for up to six Special
Events in CenterPlace during each calendar year, subject to the discretion of the Director.
C. Administration. The Director or designee shall administer and be the primary contact for
Contractor.
D. Representations. The City has relied upon the qualifications of the Contractor in entering into
this Agreement. By execution of this Agreement, Contractor represents it possesses the ability, skill,
and resources necessary to perform the work and is familiar with all current laws, rules, and
regulations which reasonably relate to the services contracted for. No substitutions of agreed -upon
personnel shall be made without the written consent of the City.
Contractor shall be responsible for the technical accuracy of its services and documents resulting
therefrom, and City shall not be responsible for discovering deficiencies therein. Contractor shall
correct such deficiencies without additional compensation except to the extent such action is directly
attributable to deficiencies in City furnished information.
E. Modifications. The City may modify this Agreement whenever necessary or advisable. The
Contractor shall accept modifications when ordered in writing by the Director or designee.
Compensation for such modifications or changes shall be as mutually agreed between the Parties.
2. Term of Contract. This Agreement shall be in full force and effect beginning January 1, 2812023, and
shall terminate 12:59 p.m. on December 31, 2023.remain in effect for one year, with up to five additional
one year renewal options which may be exercised by the Parks and Recreation Director until completion of
all contractual requirements. Renewals, if any, shall coincide with the calendar year.
Either Party may terminate this Agreement by at least 90 days' written notice to the other Party. In the event
of such termination, the City shall pay the Contractor for all work previously authorized and satisfactorily
performed prior to the termination date.
Contractor shall fulfill all contracts with third parties booked at CenterPlace prior to termination as called for
in this paragraph.
1
DRAFT
3. Event Pricing/Compensation.
A. Event Pricing. Event pricing by the Contractor shall be as set forth in the Event Pricing, which is
attached as Exhibit 2 and incorporated herein by reference.
B. Compensation. Payment by the Contractor shall be as set forth in the Compensation Terms, which
is attached as Exhibit 3 and incorporated herein by reference.
4. Facilities Access and Use. Access and use to the facilities shall be as set forth in Exhibit 4, which is
attached and incorporated herein by reference.
5. Payment. The City shall be paid as set forth in Exhibit 3.
6. Notice. Notice shall be given in writing as follows:
TO THE CITY:
Name: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Phone Number: (509) 720-5000921 1000
Address: 10210 East Sprague Ave.
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
TO THE CONTRACTOR:
Name: Eat Good Group LLC, DBA Le Catering Co.
Phone Number: -(509) 210-0880
Address: 24001 E. Mission Ave, Ste. 190
Liberty Lake, WA 99019
7. Applicable Laws and Standards. The Parties, in the performance of this Agreement, agree to comply
with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Contractor warrants that its designs,
documents, and services shall conform to all federal, state, and local statutes and regulations.
8. Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility Matters — Primary
Covered Transactions.
A. By executing this Agreement, the Contractor certifies to the best of its knowledge and belief, that
it and its principals:
1. Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or
voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any federal department or agency;
2. Have not within a three-year period preceding this proposal been convicted of or had a
civil judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or a criminal offense in
connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public (federal, state, or
local) transaction or contract under a public transaction; violation of federal or state antitrust
statues or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction
of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property;
3. Are not presently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental
entity (federal, state, or local) with commission of any of the offenses enumerated in
paragraph (A)(2) of this certification; and
4. Have not within a three-year period preceding this application/proposal had one or more
public transactions (federal, state, or local) terminated for cause or default.
2
DRAFT
B. Where the prospective primary participant is unable to certify to any of the statements in this
certification, such prospective participant shall attach an explanation to this Agreement.
9. Relationship of the Parties. It is understood, agreed, and declared that the Contractor shall be an
independent Contractor and not the agent or employee of the City; that the City is interested in only the results
to be achieved; and that the right to control the particular manner, method, and means in which the services
are performed is solely within the discretion of the Contractor. Any and all employees who provide services
to the City under this Agreement shall be deemed employees solely of the Contractor. The Contractor shall
be solely responsible for the conduct and actions of all its employees under this Agreement and any liability
that may attach thereto.
10. Ownership of Documents. All drawings, plans, specifications, and other related documents prepared
by Contractor under this Agreement are and shall be the property of City, and may be subject to disclosure
pursuant to RCW 42.56 or other applicable public record laws. The written, graphic, mapped, photographic,
or visual documents prepared by Contractor under this Agreement shall, unless otherwise provided, be
deemed the property of City. City shall be permitted to retain these documents, including reproducible
camera-ready originals of reports, reproduction quality mylars of maps, and copies in the form of computer
files, for the City's use. City shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose, distribute, and otherwise
use, in whole or in part, any reports, data, drawings, images, or other material prepared under this Agreement,
provided that Contractor shall have no liability for the use of Contractor's work product outside of the scope
of its intended purpose.
11. Records. The City or State Auditor or any of their representatives shall have full access to and the right
to examine during normal business hours all of the Contractor's records with respect to all matters covered
in this contract. Such representatives shall be permitted to audit, examine, and make excerpts or transcripts
from such records and to make audits of all contracts, invoices, materials, payrolls, and record of matters
covered by this contract for a period of three years from the date final payment is made hereunder.
12. Compliance with Leasehold Excise Tax
The Lessee hereby acknowledges that it is responsible for paying the "Leasehold Excise Tax," pursuant to
chapter 82.29A RCW, as now or hereinafter amended, which is applicable to this Agreement. The Lessee
shall be solely responsible for paying such tax to the City, and shall also be responsible for representing itself
in any challenge to the amount of such tax that the Washington State Department of Revenue determines is
due or any penalty associated with the tax.
The Lessee agrees to promptly pay when due all taxes, rates, charges and assessments, special or otherwise
and public charges of very kind and nature which may be lawfully imposed or assessed in any way on the
Lessee with reference to the Premises.
13. Contractor to provide performance bond. Contractor shall provide a performance bond in the amount
of $50,000 on the City's bond forms.
14. Insurance. Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement, insurance against
claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise from or in connection with the
performance of the work hereunder by Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees, or subcontractors.
A. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Contractor shall obtain insurance of the types described below:
1. Automobile liability insurance covering all owned, non -owned, hired, and leased vehicles.
Coverage shall be written on Insurance Services Office (ISO) form CA 00 01 or a substitute
form providing equivalent liability coverage. If necessary, the policy shall be endorsed to
provide contractual liability coverage.
2. Commercial general liability insurance shall be written on ISO occurrence form CG 00 01
and shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, independent contractors, and
3
DRAFT
personal injury and advertising injury. City shall be named as an insured under Contractor's
commercial general liability insurance policy with respect to the work performed for the
City.
3. Workers' compensation coverage as required by the industrial insurance laws of the State
of Washington.
B. Minimum Amounts of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain the following insurance limits:
1. Automobile liability insurance with a minimum combined single limit for bodily injury
and property damage of $42,000,000 per accident.
2. Commercial general liability insurance shall be written with limits no less than $1,000,000
each occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate.
3. Liquor liability insurance in the amount of $1,000,000 each occurrence. The City is to be
named as an additional insured on the liquor liability insurance. Host liquor liability
coverage may be substituted when alcohol is consumed and not sold on premises with the
prior written approval of the City.
C. Other Insurance Provisions. The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the
following provisions for automobile liability, professional liability, and commercial general liability
insurance:
1. Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance with respect to City. Any
insurance, self-insurance, or insurance pool coverage maintained by City shall be in excess
of Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it.
2. Contractor shall fax or send electronically in .pdf format a copy of insurer's cancellation
notice within two business days of receipt by Contractor.
D. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating
of not less than A:VII.
E. Evidence of Coverage. As evidence of the insurance coverages required by this Agreement,
Contractor shall furnish acceptable insurance certificates to the City Clerk at the time Contractor
returns the signed Agreement. The certificate shall specify all of the parties who are additional
insureds, and will include applicable policy endorsements, and the deduction or retention level.
Insuring companies or entities are subject to City acceptance. If requested, complete copies of
insurance policies shall be provided to City. Contractor shall be financially responsible for all
pertinent deductibles, self -insured retentions, and/or self-insurance.
15. Indemnification and Hold Harmless.
Consultant shall, at its sole expense, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City and its officers, agents, and
employees, from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, attorney's fees, costs of litigation,
expenses, injuries, and damages of any nature whatsoever relating to or arising out of the wrongful or
negligent acts, errors, or omissions in the services provided by Consultant, Consultant's agents,
subcontractors, subconsultants, and employees to the fullest extent permitted by law, subject only to the
limitations provided below.
However, should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that this Agreement is subject to RCW 4.24.115,
then, in the event of liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damages to property
caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of the Consultant and the City, its officers, officials,
employees, and volunteers, the Consultant's liability, including the duty and cost to defend, hereunder shall
be only to the extent of the Consultant's negligence. It is further specifically and expressly understood that
4
DRAFT
the indemnification provided herein constitutes the Consultant's waiver of immunity under Industrial
Insurance, Title 51, RCW, solely for the purpose of this indemnification. This waiver has been mutually
negotiated by the parties. The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this
Agreement.
Contractor shall, at its sole expense, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City and its officers, agents, and
expenses, injuries, and damages of any nature whatsoever relating to or arising out of the wrongful or
negligent acts, errors, or omissions in the services provided by Contractor, Contractor's agents,
subcontractors, subconsultants, and employees to the fullest extent permitted by law, subject only to the
limitations provided below.
out of such services caused by or resulting from the sole negligence of City or City's agents or employees.
Contractor's duty to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City against liability for damages arising out of
such services caused by the concurrent negligence of (a) City or City's agents or employees, and (b)
Contractor, Contractor's agents, subcontractors, subconsultants, and employees, shall apply only to the extent
of the negligence of Contractor, Contractor's agents, subcontr
Contractor's duty to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City shall include, as to all claims, demands,
losses, and liability to which it applies, City's personnel related costs, reasonable attorneys' fees, and the
reasonable value of any services rendered by the office of the City Attorney, outside consultant costs, court
costs, fees for collection, and all other claim related expenses.
Contractor specifically and expressly waives any immunity that may be granted it under the Washington
State Industrial Insurance Act, Title 51 RCW. These indemnification obligations shall not be limited in any
third party under workers' compensation acts, disability benefit acts, or other employee benefits acts.
Provided, that Contractor's waiver of immunity under this provision extends only to claims against Contractor
by City, and does not include, or extend to, any claims by Contractor's employees directly against Contractor.
Contractor hereby certifies that this indemnification provision was mutually negotiated.
16. Waiver. No officer, employee, agent, or other individual acting on behalf of either Party has the power,
right, or authority to waive any of the conditions or provisions of this Agreement. No waiver in one instance
shall be held to be waiver of any other subsequent breach or nonperformance. All remedies afforded in this
Agreement or by law, shall be taken and construed as cumulative, and in addition to every other remedy
provided herein or by law. Failure of either Party to enforce at any time any of the provisions of this
Agreement or to require at any time performance by the other Party of any provision hereof shall in no way
be construed to be a waiver of such provisions nor shall it affect the validity of this Agreement or any part
thereof.
17. Assignment and Delegation. Neither Party shall assign, transfer, or delegate any or all of the
responsibilities of this Agreement or the benefits received hereunder without first obtaining the written
consent of the other Party.
18. Subcontracts. Except as otherwise provided herein, the Contractor shall not enter into subcontracts for
any of the work contemplated under this Agreement without obtaining prior written approval of the City.
19. Confidentiality. Contractor may, from time to time, receive information which is deemed by the City to
be confidential. Contractor shall not disclose such information without the express written consent of the
City or upon order of a Court of competent jurisdiction.
20. Jurisdiction and Venue. This Agreement is entered into in Spokane County, Washington. Disputes
between City and Contractor shall be resolved in the Superior Court of the State of Washington in Spokane
5
DRAFT
County. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Contractor agrees that it may, at City's request, be joined as a party
in any arbitration proceeding between City and any third party that includes a claim or claims that arise out
of, or that are related to Contractor's services under this Agreement. Contractor further agrees that the
Arbitrator(s) decision therein shall be final and binding on Contractor and that judgment may be entered upon
it in any court having jurisdiction thereof.
21. Cost and Attorney's Fees. The prevailing party in any litigation or arbitration arising out of this
Agreement shall be entitled to its attorney's fees and costs of such litigation (including expert witness fees).
22. Entire Agreement. This written Agreement constitutes the entire and complete agreement between the
Parties and supersedes any prior oral or written agreements. This Agreement may not be changed, modified,
or altered except in writing signed by the Parties hereto.
23. Anti -kickback. No officer or employee of the City, having the power or duty to perform an official act
or action related to this Agreement shall have or acquire any interest in this Agreement, or have solicited,
accepted, or granted a present or future gift, favor, service, or other thing of value from any person with an
interest in this Agreement.
24. Business Registration. Prior to commencement of work under this Agreement, Contractor shall register
with the City as a business.
25. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Agreement should be held to be invalid
for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of any other
section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Agreement.
26. Exhibits. Exhibits attached and incorporated into this Agreement are:
1. Exhibit 1 - Scope of Services
2. Exhibit 2 - Event Pricing
3. Exhibit 3 - Compensation Terms
4. Exhibit 4 - Facilities Access and Use
5. Insurance Certificates
6. Copy of RFP
The Parties have executed this Agreement this day of December, 2022.
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Contractor:
John Hohman, City Manager By:
Its: Authorized Representative
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Office of the City Attorney
6
EXHIBIT 1
SCOPE OF SERVICES
1. Food Services
A. Contractor shall make sales of foods and beverages, including alcoholic beverages, and provide
associated food and beverage services (collectively "food services") for local and regional groups
which utilize CenterPlace Regional Event Center, as provided herein.
B. Contractor shall provide a catering team that includes an executive chef and designated sales person
exclusive dedicated to CenterPlace and they shall not provide services at any other venue by
utilizing this staff or any of the facilities at CenterPlace unless approved in writing beforehand by the
City.
C. Contractor shall provide examples of menus with various pricing strategies to meet the needs of
CenterPlace guests.
D. Contractor shall at all times maintain a high level of customer service and high quality of food and
food service.
E. Contractor shall inspect and monitor its own products and service levels by its staff.
F. Contractor and the City shall develop a communication and meeting schedule that is mutually
agreeable.
a. A representative of Contractor shall communicate or be available for communication on
ongoing and upcoming events with the City on a daily basis during business hours of
CenterPlace. Contractor's representative shall be available for contact by the City by phone.
b. Contractor shall provide an outside phone line and maintain it throughout the duration of this
agreement for CenterPlace customer food service inquires.
G. Contractor shall provide food services that range from traditional continental breakfasts to full -
service multi -course dinners. Such services shall be of a type that may range from formal (e.g.,
wedding) to informal (e.g., birthday party or conference) settings.
H. Contractor shall be available to provide services at the facility during all hours CenterPlace is open
as may be required to provide the services described herein.
I. Contractor shall perform all services under this Agreement being mindful of and not interrupting the
ongoing public use of CenterPlace. Contractor and its employees and staff shall be courteous and
respectful to all clientele and staff of CenterPlace at all times.
J. Contractor shall hold and maintain a Washington State Master Business license with a spirits license
at the time of the award of this contract.
K. CenterPlace staff shall set up, arrange and cover with tablecloth the tables and chairs for banquet
food services. The tables, chairs and related food service equipment or materials shall be clean, in
good working order and quality. Should Contractor be required to provide persons to assist in
setting up, taking down, dishes, etc. the City agrees to pay the reasonable cost for such persons as
mutually agreed.
L. Contractor shall, as may be requested by the City, open concession stands during events, provided
CenterPlace shall not request the Contractor to open a concession stand more than two hours in
advance of any event.
M. Contractor shall provide uniforms to be approved by the Director and shall require its employees to
wear such uniforms at all events at CenterPlace.
Exhibit 1 — Page 1 of 3
N. Contractor shall respond to any CenterPlace caterer or event referral within 24 hours or the next
business day.
O. The City shall have access on a quarterly basis to review any customer satisfaction surveys
conducted by Contractor.
P. The Contractor shall not utilize any employees at CenterPlace who have felony convictions in the
past five years, or who have felony convictions involving theft or dishonesty, or which would be
classified as a sexual offense without limitation on date of conviction.
2. Exclusivity
Contractor shall have the exclusive right to provide food services to guests and users of CenterPlace
during Monday through Saturday during standard operating hours; provided that guests and users may
bring small amounts of food and beverages (e.g., pastry tray and coffee) for meetings and small
gatherings of 20 attendees or less. On Sundays, guests and users of CenterPlace may provide their own
food or work with our caterer to provide food services for their events or gatherings; provided, however,
the kitchen shall not be available for guest or outside caterer use and shall only be available for use by
Contractor.
3. Special Events
The City reserves the right to permit an event to sell and/or give away food and beverages or allow a home-
made potluck in connection with a Special Event for up to six Special Events in CenterPlace during each
calendar year, subject to the discretion of the Director. In such events, the kitchen will not be available for
use by the Special Event participants.
4. Kitchen Use
Contractor shall have sole use of the kitchen at the CenterPlace facility except that CenterPlace staff
shall have access to the kitchen for warming meals, obtaining ice, brewing coffee, storing lunches, etc.
No other outside use ofthe kitchen is permitted with the exception of trade shows or food shows that
require use of the space. In that event a reasonable fee would be paid by the third party customer for
limited use and would by supervised by Contractor staff. Outside groups are allowed to bring their own
food into the building on Sundays but would have no access to the kitchen.
5. CenterPlace Agent
During the term of this agreement, Contractor shall provide a full-time Executive chef and a full-time
catering sales person to handle planning and sales of food services for CenterPlace.
6. Weddings
Weddings that take place at CenterPlace on Sundays shall may utilize the CenterPlace caterer to prepare
and serve food to guests. The Contractor shall work directly with these weddings to serve culturally -
authentic dishes to these customers.
7. Kitchen Cleaning
During the terra of this agreement, Contractor shall be responsible for cleaning the kitchen. The kitchen
shall be maintained in good condition at all times and meeting all health requirements. Duties include, at
a minimum, the following:
• Daily Cleaning
o Collect and properly dispose of all kitchen grease.
Exhibit 1 — Page 2 of 3
o Remove any dishes from walk-in cooler and wash, which will require Contractor and
CenterPlace staff sharing the area at times.
o Put away any cooking utensils and/or appliances.
o Spot clean hard surfaces and counters.
o Clean Dish Pit area after use, including interior of dish machine. Remove any and all food
debris from interior and exterior strainers. Contractor is not responsible for Meals on Wheels
mess.
o Power down dish machine after use and inspect for damage or irregular conditions. Report
these to CenterPlace staff.
o Turn off any fans, equipment or appliances.
o Remove mats from the floor.
o Report any damage or malfunctioning equipment.
• Clean and Shine Weekly
o Wipe down all hard surfaces, top to bottom.
o Shine stainless steel tables, shelving and appliances.
o Wipe down appliance doors, handles and shelving.
o Wipe down and clean exterior and interior of garbage cans.
• Monthly
o Spot clean interior of appliances.
o Clean stovetop oven.
• Quarterly
o Deep clean stovetop and grill, to include any catch basins or pans.
o Clean hood filters above the grilling area.
o Clean grill.
• Bi-Annually
o Shine stainless steel hood systems interior and exterior.
o Deep clean interior and exterior of appliances, to include racks.
• Yearly
o De -grease and detail the entire kitchen (excluding floors) to include walls, appliances and
walk-in coolers.
• CenterPlace Janitorial Contractor
o Will be responsible to clean the kitchen restroom, damp mop the kitchen floor twice a week
November to April and four times a week May to October and twice a week they will
degrease the kitchen floor.
o Will be responsible to empty all garbage cans.
• CenterPlace Staff
o Will be responsible for the cleaning and upkeep of the ice machine.
Exhibit 1 — Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT 2
EVENT PRICING
Upon the effective date of this Agreement, the Contractor shall submit to the City, for
approval by the Director, the menus and prices of primary food and beverage items which
shall be utilized by Contractor during the term of this Agreement. This submittal is not
intended to be a complete list of the menu and beverage items which may be served by
Contractor during the term of this Agreement. The Parties agree that Contractor may
create additional menu items to be added from time to time by Contractor in response to
customer demand. Contractor shall exercise its best efforts to maintain a pricing practice
consistent with the pricing set forth at the commencement of the Agreement. Contractor
shall maintain records supporting the prices charged for new menu and beverage items.
The Director reserves the exclusive right to review and approve the cost of providing
food services under this Agreement, which specifically includes the prices charged for
food, beverages, concessions and catering. Contractor, pursuant to its reasonable
business judgment and in consideration of prevailing market conditions in similar
facilities located in the Spokane region, may request that the Director approve food,
beverage, concession and catering price changes with such approval by the Director
subject to his reasonable discretion.
To support a requested price change, Contractor shall provide the Director with a written
request, identifying the current and proposed prices, a survey of the prices charged in
similar types of facilities within comparable markets, and such other information deemed
relevant by the Director. Unless agreed otherwise, price changes shall be effective 30
days following approval by the Director.
Exhibit 2 — Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 3
COMPENSATION TERMS
1. Payment. The Contractor —agrees to pay the City a commission equal to the
percentage of monthly Adjusted Gross Receipts for the following areas: 1) Food at 15 %
for the Great Room, Small Dining Room, Fireside Lounge, and all conference rooms; and
2) Alcohol at 5% for the Great Room, Small Dining Room, Fireside Lounge, and all
conference rooms; and 3) 5%0 of any and all outside venue services prepared using any of
the facilities at CenterPlace. Corkage Fee for client -provided wine is $5 per bottle.
Contractor shall submit monthly commission reports detailing the breakdown of food and
alcohol percentages owed the City for each event. These commissions were negotiated
from the amounts quoted in Contractor's response to the RFP to levels that are mutually
agreeable.
2. Kitchen Equipment Reserve. Contractor shall pay the City $3 6004,200 annually to
be placed into a reserve fund to be used for repair and maintenance to the kitchen
equipment at CenterPlace, Payment shall be made by check to the City within 45 days
after the effective date of this Agreement. Contractor shall work with CenterPlace staff to
assist in coordination of preventive maintenance programs for the kitchen equipment.
CenterPlace agrees to keep the inventory of the kitchen the same as it is at the
commencement of this Agreement.
3. Date / Form of Payment. The percentage of each month's Adjusted Gross Receipts
shall be computed and payment of the appropriate percentage sum shall be made within
40 days of month end. Payment shall be made to the City by delivery of a check to the
Director.
4. Accounting Records. Contractor shall maintain accounting records in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles and shall report gross revenues and
Adjusted Gross Receipts to the City. Reporting of Contractor business activity in
CenterPlace shall be monthly and shall separately set forth each activity.
5. Adjusted Gross Receipts. For purposes of this Agreement, "Adjusted Gross
Receipts" equals the total gross revenue received by Contractor for services provided
pursuant to this Agreement, excluding any applicable sales taxes, any standard hospitality
service charges, and any service charges or premiums charged in connection with the use
of credit or debit cards.
Contractor shall, within 90 days of the termination date of this Agreement, submit to the
City a statement of total Adjusted Gross Receipts and the rents payable thereon for the
Adjusted Gross Receipts for the term of this Agreement, which statement shall be
accompanied by an opinion of a certified or licensed public accountant.
Exhibit 3 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 4
FACILITY ACCESS AND USE
1. The Contractor is granted exclusive permission to use and enter designated areas of
CenterPlace Regional Event Center for the provision of food services as provided in
this Agreement. The City shall permit Contractor to occupy the food service area for
the purposes set forth in this Agreement. The food service area shall mean those
areas in CenterPlace which are designated or otherwise authorized by the Director to
be used for the operation of food services, which include, but are not limited to, the
kitchen, banquet areas, classrooms, Fireside Lounge or other small meeting rooms
where food and beverages may be consumed.
2. The City shall have the right to make inspections of the food service area to ensure
compliance with this Agreement. Further, the City reserves the right of ingress and
egress through the food service area for the purpose of operating, maintaining and
inspecting CenterPlace. Contractor shall return the facilities to a clean and sanitary
condition at the end of each event.
3. In addition to the indemnification provided in Section 13 of the Agreement, in the
event of third party damage or vandalism not the result of the negligence of
Contractor, the City shall bear the cost of repair to CenterPlace and City -owned
furnishings, fixtures, and equipment, and Contractor shall bear its costs of repair to its
facilities and equipment including fixtures and furnishings that may have been
installed by Contractor pursuant to this Agreement.
4. Within 30 days from the effective date of this Agreement, Contractor shall provide to
the City an inventory of all furnishings, fixtures, or other items of personal property
used or to be used by Contractor in providing food services. As of the date of this
Agreement, the City has identified the following as its inventory of City kitchen
furnishings, fixtures, and equipment:
1. 1-Bunn o Matte large coffee maker , 6 gallon capacity Model # U3
2. 2-Walk in coolers American Panel
3. 1-Walk in Freezer American Panel
4. Amana Commercial Microwave Model # RC17S
5. Hobart Commercial Dishwasher Model # D300-5036B
6. FryMaster Commercial Fryer Model # MJ45E-SC
7. 2- F.W.E Food Warming Mobile Carts Model # UHS-4 Model # PST-16
8. 1-Manitowoc Ice Machine Model # SY-0854A
9. 1-Globe Food Slicer Model # 4600
10. 1- Hobart Commercial Mixer Model # D300-5036B
11. Star Conveyor Toaster Model # QCS2-500
12. 1- Delfeld Drop In Hot Food Well Model # N8745-D
13. 1-Delfield Refrigerated Equipment Stand Model # F2875
Exhibit 4 -- Page 1 of 2
14. 1-Delfield Reach In Cooler Model # 4448N-12
15. 1- Hatco Glo Ray Food Warmer Model # GRAH-72
16. 1-Robot Coupe Commercial Food Processor Model # RX6
17. 1-Salvajor Commercial Disposer Model # 200-SA-MRSS
18. 1-Wells Free Standing Drawer Warmer Model # RW-2
19. 6- Wolf Commercial Convection Ovens Model #WKGD- 10
20. 1-Wolf Commercial Griddle Model # VT48-11
21. 1-Wolf Commercial Broiler Model # VC24-18
22. 1-Wolf Commercial Stove Top With Oven
23. 1-Wolf Commercial Salamander Broiler
24. 1-Rational Self Cooking Center Model # SCC-202
25. 2-BrewMatic Airpot Coffee Brewers Model # 1010546
26. 1-Duke Commercial Steam Table Model # DC-EP304-28SS-M
27. 1-Duke Commercial Cold Food Table Model # DC-327-25SS-N7-M
Upon termination of this Agreement, each of the Parties shall retain their respective
furnishings, fixtures, and equipment. Contractor shall identify any necessary repair or
maintenance that is required, or damage caused by someone other than the Contractor
to City furnishings during the term of this Agreement. Upon termination of this
Agreement, any damage to City inventory shall be presumed to have been caused by
Contractor unless otherwise identified by the Contractor as provided above, and City
may require Contractor to pay for all costs of repair at Contractor's sole expense.
5. Contractor shall have access and use of Rooms 133, 134, and 138, and 145 for their
office and dry storage needs as well as use of one refrigerator and freezer. Contractor
and City shall also coordinate for shared use of room 146B as needed for storage.
6. Keys for access to CenterPlace shall be issued to Contractor by the Director as
necessary to allow for efficient event preparation.
Exhibit 4 — Page 2 of 2
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: December 6, 2022 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: ❑ consent
❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative report — update on chronic nuisances pursuant to SVMC
7.05.045.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Chapter 7.05 SVMC; chapter 17.100 SVMC; chapter 7.48 RCW; and
chapter 7.43 RCW.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: January 16, 2018 adoption of SVMC 7.05.045 prohibiting
the maintenance of chronic nuisances, and SVMC 17.100.325 relating to abatement of chronic nuisances;
October 8, 2019 minor amendments. Multiple discussions with City Council in fall of 2021 through
summer of 2022 on parking on private property, camping on private property, and junk vehicle nuisance
provisions.
BACKGROUND: The City Council has adopted three primary types of nuisances and code violations
related to use of private property.
First, there are several general public nuisances. These are identified in SVMC 7.05.040 and include
nuisances such as junk vehicles, garbage and other material on private property, noise nuisances, graffiti,
and general development code violations. These are generally discrete nuisances in that there is an existing
condition (e.g., a junk vehicle or pile of garbage) and through the Code Enforcement process that nuisance
condition will be abated and removed, leaving the property free of nuisances. The process generally
consists of warning or notice and order identifying the violation, voluntary compliance by the person
responsible if they are willing, and litigation to receive a warrant of abatement to allow the City to enter the
property and abate the nuisance condition. This process generally takes several months or longer due to
the necessary due process considerations at each step, administrative appeals, and the statutory timelines
for court proceedings, as well as judge availability. There are also often significant challenges with service
of process to ensure the proper party is served the lawsuit. The City has historically relied on Geiger crews
for abatements, but due to staffing and limited availability during 2022, the City is in the process of hiring
on -call contractors for abatement services. Costs of abatement are filed as a lien against the property, which
is junior and subject to any prior liens and tax assessments. Historically, the City has not foreclosed on
general nuisance liens and is paid when the property is sold or through payment plans. In the event of a tax
foreclosure, the City's lien will generally not be paid.
Second, there are unfit dwellings/structure violations. These are identified in chapter 17.105 SVMC and
require a separate process to identify that a dwelling or structure is unfit and to proceed through warnings,
administrative complaints, administrative appeals, and superior court litigation for a warrant of abatement.
This process is required pursuant to State law, but allows the costs to be collected as part of the tax
assessments. This process generally takes longer than general nuisances, as there is often more
investigation required and the process includes more administrative steps. This process is only available to
require owners to repair or rehabilitate their houses or structures or to demolish them if they are damaged
too extensively. This process is often used when there is a structure fire that renders the house unlivable.
Generally, while securing the property is a sufficient interim step, ultimately the structure must be repaired
or demolished. Note that if an owner is given an unfit structure determination and they apply for and receive
Page 1 of 5
a demolition permit, those permits are generally valid for two years. In some instances, such as where the
unfit structure has not been addressed for an extended period of time, the City may limit the period for
required demolition (e.g., require demolition within three months).
Third, there are criminal chronic nuisances. These are located in SVMC 7.05.045. These are nuisances
related to ongoing criminal activity at a property, where the criminal activity is at a level that it creates a
public nuisance within the neighborhood. These address nuisances where there is not a discrete nuisance
condition, but the nuisance results from ongoing activity. Since there is not a single discrete condition that
can be abated, the remedy is to remove the owners and occupants from the property and to board up the
property and prohibit further use for up to one year. Due to the extreme remedy, these have historically
been limited by City Council to where criminal activity occurs, and not just ongoing or multiple instances
of general nuisance conditions. These nuisances also take several months or longer as they require police
involvement to determine that criminal activity has occurred and is ongoing and to provide notices to the
owners of the ongoing criminal activity. Generally, they also require a notice and order and the warrant of
abatement is obtained through superior court litigation.
In fall of 2021 through summer of 2022, City Council had a number of discussions about general public
nuisances and considered modifications regarding parking on private property, the number and allowable
locations for junk vehicles, and camping on private property. Those discussions remain ongoing, as there
was no clear consensus on how to proceed with those general nuisance amendments. However, as part of
those discussions, City Council identified a desire to review the existing criminal chronic nuisances.
This discussion will focus on the existing criminal chronic nuisance provisions. The full text of the
criminal chronic nuisance provisions are included as attachment "A."
Key Considerations.
Some key considerations for the existing criminal chronic nuisance provisions are that
(1) there must be some level of criminal activity in order for the property to be declared a criminal
chronic nuisance;
- this was based upon the conditions the City was originally attempting to address with
chronic nuisance regulations and consideration of the nature of the abatement (taking away
the house and property from the owner)
- there is also a connection with State law (chapter 7.43 RCW) which specifically provides
for drug house nuisance abatement.
- there must be either (1) four instances of criminal activity and one general nuisance
condition; or (2) five instances of criminal activity over a twelve-month period.
(2) criminal chronic nuisances thus require cooperation and coordination between the City's Code
Enforcement teams, the City's legal depaitnient, and the Spokane Valley Police Department (SVPD);
- Code Enforcement Officers and City Legal staff do not have direct access to the criminal
investigations, number of contacts, etc. directly, and rely on getting that information from
SVPD.
- historically, SVPD have identified potential criminal chronic nuisance properties since
they are based on ongoing criminal activity and SVPD have had that information.
Historically, criminal chronic nuisances have taken time to establish while SVPD conducts
investigations, including undercover activities and enforcement of search warrants. These
investigations may take several months to complete. While investigations are ongoing, the
Page 2 of 5
required notice of criminal activity may not be given in order to not disclose confidential
investigation information.
- In 2022, the City has been working with SVPD to have Code Enforcement identify
potential criminal chronic nuisance properties and to work collaboratively with SVPD to
identify criminal activity and to assist with confirming them as criminal chronic nuisances.
- The City has been challenged in the past with effective criminal chronic nuisance
enforcement due to SVPD staffing vacancy issues.
(3) criminal activity includes (a) service of search warrant, (b) arrest, (c) crimes occurring (and
known to City or SVPD), and (d) visits by SVPD.
- Visits alone cannot form basis for criminal chronic nuisance. This was an attempt to
require that there actually be some identified criminal activity in order to avoid declaring
a criminal chronic nuisance as a result of neighbor disputes.
- Activity for felony domestic violence does not qualify. This was to not "double" harm
victims of domestic violence, which could dissuade them from calling for law enforcement
assistance, as well as to give consideration to state law to protect domestic violence victims.
- Recent changes in law (the Blake decision and legislative changes) have had some impact
on the determination that criminal activity is occurring at a property. While drug
possession is still illegal, it is more difficult to arrest someone for drug possession or to
utilize that as a means of furthering ongoing investigations to other activities at houses.
(4) the Courts have found that due to the substantial remedy, due process considerations are critical.
Courts have found that where property owners are actively working on remedying the criminal activity,
cities will be under significant scrutiny and face difficult challenges of demonstrating that there is a criminal
chronic nuisance that can be abated. Related State law (chapter 7.43 RCW — drug nuisances) has similar
provisions requiring Courts to return property to owners if the owners are willing to immediately abate the
nuisances and prevent it from being a nuisance for a year;
(5) the process for prosecuting a criminal chronic nuisance largely follows the same process as for
general nuisances. First, facts are gathered by SVPD regarding the qualifying number of criminal activity
events. Notice of each qualifying criminal activity event is given to the property owner in order to allow
them to voluntarily address the ongoing criminal activity. Second, once there are at least five occurrences
of qualifying criminal activity, Code Enforcement issues determination that the property constitutes a
criminal chronic nuisance. This may be in the form of a warning or may be a Notice and Order. The
determination requires the owner to stop the ongoing criminal activity. Generally, if the owner is willing
to do so, this occurs through a voluntary compliance agreement, in which certain actions are required for
the owner to stop the ongoing criminal activity. This can include installation of additional security
measures, prohibiting certain individuals from being on the property, or evicting certain individuals from
the property. If the voluntary compliance agreement is violated, or if the owner does not agree to voluntarily
stop the criminal activity within the applicable time period, the City proceeds to file a lawsuit in Superior
Court to obtain an Order and Warrant of Abatement, authorizing the City to remove the owner from the
property and to board up the property for a period of up to one year.
Given the crucial connection with SVPD, SVPD will be available to discuss how they address criminal
chronic nuisances. This discussion will include the impact of the Washington Supreme Court's Blake
decision, and the Washington State Legislature's subsequent decriminalization of most drug possession
offenses on the City's enforcement of its criminal chronic nuisances.
SVPD will also discuss the historical staffing issues, how those issues have been addressed, and current
activities related to criminal chronic nuisances. SVPD have identified a Detective assigned to work more
Page 3 of 5
closely with City Code Enforcement Officers to identify and prosecute criminal chronic nuisances. SVPD
will also provide their thoughts whether there should be changes made to the criminal chronic nuisance
code. After recent discussion, SVPD have indicated they do not believe that changes are necessary and that
the primary issues have been due to staffing vacancies.
OPTIONS: Discussion.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Unknown.
STAFF CONTACT: Erik Lamb, Deputy City Manager; Caitlin Prunty, Deputy City Attorney; Jenny
Nickerson, Building Official; Kevin Richey, Assistant Police Chief; Pat Bloomer, Detective;.
ATTACHMENTS: Presentation
Page 4 of 5
ATTACHMENT "A"
Criminal Chronic Nuisances
7.05.045 Chronic nuisances.
A. No person, firm, or entity shall erect, contrive, cause, continue, maintain, or permit to exist any chronic
nuisance within the City including on the property of any person, firm, or entity or upon any public rights -
of -way abutting a person's, firm's, or entity's property. A parcel or lot of real property, a building, including
but not limited to the structure or any separate part of portion thereof, whether permanent or not, or the
ground itself, a unit within a building, or a mobile home, manufactured home, or recreational vehicle
(collectively referred to as "property") shall constitute a chronic nuisance when any of the following
conditions occur:
1. During any continuous 12-month period, the property in question:
a. A final determination has been made by the City that conditions on the property constitute a
nuisance pursuant to Chapters 7.05 and 17.100 SVMC; and
b. Has four or more occurrences of ongoing criminal activity related to the premises; or
2. During any 12-month period, the property in question has five or more occurrences of ongoing
criminal activity related to the premises.
B. Defenses. It shall be a defense against a declaration of chronic nuisance if the person alleged to be
responsible for the nuisance (1) affirmatively engages in reasonable and ongoing efforts to remedy the
nuisance and/or ongoing criminal activity; and (2) is not the perpetrator nor allows the perpetration of the
nuisance or ongoing criminal activities.
SVMC 7.05.020 Definitions.
"Ongoing criminal activity related to the premises" means that (1) criminal activity is or has been
occurring at the premises; or (2) criminal activity is or has been occurring near the premises and such
activity has a reasonable and proximate connection to the premises, whether by owners, occupants, or
persons visiting such owners or occupants. Examples of conduct or actions that constitute criminal
activity occurring at or near the premises of the subject property include, but are not limited to, the
following:
1. Service of a search warrant by law enforcement personnel; or
2. Arrest of one or more individuals by law enforcement personnel during any 24-hour period; or
3. Commission of a misdemeanor, gross misdemeanor, or felony at or near the premises and
where there is a reasonable and proximate connection between the crime or criminal and the
premises, including those visiting the owner or occupants of the premises; or
4. Visits by law enforcement personnel which occur based upon a reasonable belief by law
enforcement that a crime is occurring or has occurred, but which do not result in any of the
actions identified in subsections (1) through (3) of this definition; provided, that visits alone may
not form the sole basis for determining a premises to be a chronic nuisance premises.
For purposes of this definition, service of warrants, arrests, or commission of misdemeanor or felony
domestic violence shall not be considered criminal activity.
Page 5 of 5
Code Enforcement Program
Follow-up Topic
Criminal Chronic Nuisance
December 6, 2022
Erik Lamb, Deputy City Manager
Jenny Nickerson, Building Official
Caitlin Prunty, Deputy City Attorney
Assistant Chief Kevin Richey
Detective Pat Bloomer
Spokane
Valley
Background
City Council has adopted three primary types of nuisances and code violations related
to private property:
- General Public Nuisances (SVMC 705.040)
- Unfit Dwellings and Structures (SVMC 17.105)
- Criminal Chronic Nuisances (SVMC 705.045)
Council discussion in late 2021 and through July 2022 on various generalnuisance
issues. At last discussion, Council indicated desire to review Criminal Chronic
Nuisance provisions.
2
General Public Nuisances
General public nuisances - SVMC 7.05.040
List of conditions that constitute public nuisances.
Examples include junk vehicles, garbage and other material, noise, graffiti, and general development
code violations.
Generally discrete in that existing condition (i.e., junk vehicle or pile of garbage) can easily be abated
through Code Enforcement process.
Once abated, nuisance is gone.
Process
Administrative warning, Notice and Order (determination), litigation to receive Order and Warrant of
Abatement authorizing City to enter property to remove the nuisance condition.
Generally several months due to necessary due process considerations at each step, administrative
appeals, and statutory timelines for court proceedings, as well as available schedules with court
Historically relied on Geiger crews for abatement - now hiring on -call contractors
Costs filed as lien
3 Historically have not foreclosed on liens and they are paid when property transfers
Unfit Dwellings/Structures
Unfit Dwellings/Structures - SVMC 17.105
Solely for dwellings or structures that are unfit for living or occupancy
Separate process - required by State law
Allows costs to be collected as part of tax assessments
Process
Generally longer than general public nuisances due to additional administrative
steps
Requires owners to repair or rehabilitate houses or to demolish them
While securing property is sufficient interim step, ultimately structure must be
repaired or demolished
If owner applies for demolition permit, those permits are generally valid for two years,
though City may limit allowable time for repair/demolition through this process.
4
5
Criminal Chronic Nuisances
Criminal Chronic Nuisances - SVMC 7.05.045
Basis in State law (RCW 7.43 - Drug Nuisances)
Generally not a discrete nuisance condition, but rather the ongoing activity that creates
the nuisance
Abatement is thus to remove owner/occupants from property and to board it up for
up to one year
Due to extreme remedy, solely for ongoing criminal activity at a property
Process
Similar to general nuisances, but require Spokane Valley Police Department to
identify ongoing criminal activity; Notice and Order; Superior Court litigation to obtain
Order and Warrant of Abatement
Generally take longer than general nuisances because of additional need for SVPD
involvement to work the criminal activity
Criminal Chronic Nuisances
Criminal Chronic Nuisances - SVMC 7.05.045
7.05.045 Chronic nuisances.
k
• A. No person, firm, or entity shall erect, contrive, cause, continue, maintain, or permit to exist any chronic nuisance within
the City including on the property of any person, firm, or entity or upon any public rights -of -way abutting a person's, firm's, or
entity's property. A parcel or lot of real property, a building, including but not limited to the structure or any separate part of
portion thereof, whether permanent or not, or the ground itself, a unit within a building, or a mobile home, manufactured home,
or recreational vehicle (collectively referred to as "property") shall constitute a chronic nuisance when any of the following
conditions occur:
• 1. During any continuous 12-month period, the property in question:
• a. A final determination has been made by the City that conditions on the property constitute a nuisance pursuant to
Chapters 7.05 and 17.100 SVMC; and
• b. Has four or more occurrences of ongoing criminal activity related to the premises; or
• 2. During any 12-month period, the property in question has five or more occurrences of ongoing criminal activity related
to the premises.
• B. Defenses. It shall be a defense against a declaration of chronic nuisance if the person alleged to be responsible for the
nuisance (1) affirmatively engages in reasonable and ongoing efforts to remedy the nuisance and/or ongoing criminal activity;
and5(2) is not the perpetrator nor allows the perpetration of the nuisance or ongoing criminal activities.
Criminal Chronic Nuisances
Criminal Chronic Nuisances - SVMC 7.05.045
SVMC 7.05.020 Definitions.
•
• "Ongoing criminal activity related to the premises" means that (1) criminal activity is or has been occurring at the premises; or (2)
criminal activity is or has been occurring near the premises and such activity has a reasonable and proximate connection to the
premises, whether by owners, occupants, or persons visiting such owners or occupants. Examples of conduct or actions that
constitute criminal activity occurring at or near the premises of the subject property include, but are not limited to, the following:
• 1. Service of a search warrant by law enforcement personnel; or
• 2. Arrest of one or more individuals by law enforcement personnel during any 24-hour period; or
• 3. Commission of a misdemeanor, gross misdemeanor, or felony at or near the premises and where there is a reasonable and
proximate connection between the crime or criminal and the premises, including those visiting the owner or occupants of the
premises; or
• 4. Visits by law enforcement personnel which occur based upon a reasonable belief by law enforcement that a crime is occurring
or has occurred, but which do not result in any of the actions identified in subsections (1) through (3) of this definition; provided,
that visits alone may not form the sole basis for determining a premises to be a chronic nuisance premises.
• For purposes of this definition, service of warrants, arrests, or commission of misdemeanor or felony domestic violence shall not
be considered criminal activity.
7
Criminal Chronic Nuisances - Considerations
There must be some level of criminal activity in order for the property to be declared a
criminal chronic nuisance;
this was based upon the conditions the City was originally attempting to address with chronic
nuisance regulations and consideration of the nature of the abatement (taking away the house and
property from the owner)
there is also a connection with State law (chapter 7.43 RCW) which specifically provides for drug
house nuisance abatement.
there must be either (1) four instances of criminal activity and one general nuisance condition; or (2)
five instances of criminal activity over a twelve-month period.
8
Criminal Chronic Nuisances - Considerations
Criminal chronic nuisances thus require cooperation and coordination between the
City's Code Enforcement teams, the City's legal department, and the Spokane Valley
Police Department (SVPD);
Code Enforcement Officers and City Legal staff do not have direct access to the criminal
investigations, number of contacts, etc. directly, and rely on getting that information from SVPD.
historically, SVPD have identified potential criminal chronic nuisance properties since they are based
on ongoing criminal activity and SVPD have had that information. Historically, criminal chronic
nuisances have taken time to establish while SVPD conducts investigations, including undercover
activities and enforcement of search warrants. These investigations may take several months to
complete. While investigations are ongoing, the required notice of criminal activity may not be given in
order to not disclose confidential investigation information.
In 2022, the City has been working with SVPD to have Code Enforcement identify potential criminal
chronic nuisance properties and to work collaboratively with SVPD to identify criminal activity and to
assist with confirming them as criminal chronic nuisances.
The City has been challenged in the past with effective criminal chronic nuisance enforcement due to
SVPD staffing vacancy issues.
9
Criminal Chronic Nuisances - Considerations
Criminal activity includes (a) service of search warrant, (b) arrest, (c) crimes occurring
(and known to City or SVPD), and (d) visits by SVPD.
Visits alone cannot form basis for criminal chronic nuisance. This was an attempt to require that there
actually be some identified criminal activity in order to avoid declaring a criminal chronic nuisance as
a result of neighbor disputes.
Activity for felony domestic violence does not qualify. This was to not "double" harm victims of
domestic violence, which could dissuade them from calling for law enforcement assistance.
Recent changes in law (the Blake decision and legislative changes) have had some impact on the
determination that criminal activity is occurring at a property. While drug possession is still illegal, it is
more difficult to arrest someone for drug possession or to utilize that as a means of furthering
ongoing investigations to other activities at houses.
10
Criminal Chronic Nuisances - Considerations
The Courts have found that due to the substantial remedy, due process considerations
are critical. Courts have found that where property owners are actively working on
remedying the criminal activity, cities will be under significant scrutiny and face difficult
challenges of demonstrating that there is a criminal chronic nuisance that can be
abated. Related State law (chapter 7.43 RCW - drug nuisances) has similar provisions
requiring Courts to return property to owners if the owners are willing to immediately
abate the nuisances and prevent it from being a nuisance for a year;
11
Criminal Chronic Nuisances - SVPD
Impact of Blake decision and Legislative changes regarding drug possession
Staffing Issues
Current activities
Additional changes necessary?
12
Questions?
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: December 6, 2022 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business
❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative Report — Right -of -Way Vegetation Maintenance
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None
BACKGROUND: The City currently has over 450 centerline miles of roadways within its limits,
along with other, undeveloped rights -of -ways. As part of the normal street maintenance services,
the City does not have staff to maintain the areas outside the normal hardscape, pavement and
sidewalks, but rather contracts with multiple vendors for the service. This work includes
vegetation maintenance (mowing and trimming), weed control, trash and debris pickup and
disposal, and some minor improvement repairs (fencing, signs, etc.). The area being maintained
consists of approximately 13 acres of irrigated land and 104 acres of non -irrigated land.
Historically, the City has utilized three major vendors for these services. The major vendors, and
their services include the following.
• Spokane County Detention Services — Non -Irrigated Dryland grass area maintenance
• Senske Lawn & Tree Care — Irrigated grass area maintenance
• Clearwater Summit Group — Weed control (spraying) citywide
The 2022 roadway and right-of-way maintenance program was especially challenged for several
reasons. First, Detention Services unexpectedly stopped providing labor work crews beginning
in the spring due to lack of staff to monitor the crews. Second, the wet spring season extended
well into the month of June which kept vegetation growing, and with no Detention Services crews,
normal maintenance could not be performed. This lack of contracted maintenance crews, along
with the exceptional vegetation growth, resulted in numerous complaints and concerns from the
public.
To provide the maintenance services normally conducted by Detention Services, the City issued
Request for Proposals for Maintenance Contracts, to which there were no responses. The City
reached out to contractors that would typically provide landscape maintenance services to discuss
our needs, and all indicated that their workload and staffing levels were maximized. All the while,
maintenance services for non -irrigated areas were not completed through the summer.
Fortunately, in late August and early September, staff were able to negotiate contracts with three
additional vendors to provide maintenance services to assist in getting caught up to the backlog
since there was minimal maintenance throughout the summer. About the same time, Detention
Services were able to put together a small work crew of two to three workers, rather than the
historical eight or nine workers. With these new contracts and the limited detention services work
crew, all priority roadway and right-of-way non -irrigated areas were addressed by mid -October.
The following table shows the historical costs for services for each vendor from 2019 to 2022.
Roadway & Right -of -Way Landscape Maintenance Costs
Vendor
2019
2020
2021
2022
Spokane County Detention Services
$69,089.08
$50,183.67
$41,551.21
$24,078.38
Senske Lawn & Tree Care
$87,193.27
$51,163.62
$75,682.10
$80,099.94
Clearwater Summit Group
$39,000.00
$39,000.00
$39,000.00
$40,170.00
Revival Contracting
N/A
N/A
N/A
$23,350.38
Valley Landscaping
N/A
N/A
N/A
$14,318.17
AAA Sweeping
N/A
N/A
N/A
$22,963.26
Totals
$195,282.35
$140,347.29
$156,233.31
$204,980.13
The table shows that in 2020 and 2021, costs to the City for landscape maintenance services was
significantly less than costs in 2019 and 2022. This decrease coincides with the reduction in work
attributable to the COVID pandemic.
Also, the table indicates that there has been a significant decline in 2022 to costs attributable to
Detention Services due to the decrease in work crew support as previously described.
Finally, it should be noted that year to date costs for 2022 are similar to those in 2019, which are
historical costs. Unfortunately, as previously noted, the level of service provided by the City in
2022 was significantly less than service historically provided. Historically, maintenance crews
address non -irrigated areas at least three times per year. In 2022, contracted vendors only
addressed non -irrigated areas once.
As we move into 2023, indications from Detention Services are that the City will not have the
same level of support as in previous years. To meet historical levels of service, the City will again
be required to contract with additional vendors for support at significantly increased costs as
outlined below. In early 2023, staff will initiate additional contracts for maintenance of non -
irrigated areas; timing of which will allow vendors to plan for services.
OPTIONS: Discussion
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Historically, the City anticipates spending approximately
$200,000 annually on landscape maintenance services for roadway and right-of-way areas. As
noted previously regarding non -irrigated areas, Detention Services indicates that the same level
of support will not be available in 2023, requiring the City to contract with other vendors at
significantly higher costs.
The evaluation of the Community and Public Works Department maintenance activities conducted
by LA Consulting showed that the cost of Spokane County Detention Services provided
maintenance averaged approximately $8.50 per labor hour. To contract the same services with
other vendors at state prevailing wage rates as required, hourly labor rates vary from $50 to $75
per hour. Fortunately, in anticipation of these increased costs, the adopted 2023 City Budget
includes an additional $250,000 for contracted vegetation management.
STAFF CONTACT: Bill Helbig, PE, Community & Public Works Director
ATTACHMENTS: None
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: December 6, 2022 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative Report — Pavement Management Program: New
Revenue Options
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35A.11.020 — Powers vested in legislative bodies of
noncharter and charter code cities.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: The Pavement Management Program (PMP) has
been discussed at least 60 times by City Council since shortly after the City's incorporation.
Most recently, Council discussed the PMP as part of the following agenda items:
• April 19, 2022 — Administrative Report on the 2021 Street Sustainability Committee's (SSC)
efforts and next steps to improve the Pavement Management Program (PMP).
• May 10, 2022 — Administrative Report discussing using the Fund 106 to fund a new open -
order contract for 2023 pavement preservation -specific projects.
• June 14, 2022 —2023 Budget Workshop including discussion on the PMP and sustainable
funding for the PMP, including Street Fund #101.
• July 12, 2022 — Administrative Report on the prioritization of local access street projects.
• September 27, 2022 — Administrative Report on the allocation of Capital Reserve Fund
#312, identifying $250,000 for a 2023 surface treatment pilot project.
BACKGROUND:
The City's street network consists of roughly 450 centerline miles of roadway, including 127
centerline miles of arterials/collectors and 323 centerline miles of local access streets. This
equates to 1,025 total lane miles in the network covering roughly 9.2 Million square yards (SY)
of paved surfaces, equivalent to 1,900 acres. Roughly two-thirds of the City streets' pavement
area is attributed to local access streets. The remaining one-third of pavement area is located
on arterial or collector streets.
The City's Pavement Management Program (PMP) serves two primary functions:
• Preservation: Multi -year planning and implementation of pavement `treatments' to extend
the life of existing paved streets and sustain the pavement condition over time.
• Maintenance: Annual costs for repairs and upkeep of snowplow operations, traffic signals
and signs, streetlights, sidewalks, potholes, crack filling, and roadside maintenance.
Overall, to sustain today's citywide average Pavement Condition Index (PCI), the City, based on
full preservation and maintenance costs, should expend approximately $16 million annually:
$10 million for preservation and $6 million for maintenance. Currently, the City reliably provides
$8 million annually using the local street wear fee (Fund #106), Federal and State grants, and
utility and fuel tax revenues. The unfunded $8 million is partially covered by annual general
fund transfers into Street Fund #101 for maintenance, estimated at a transfer in excess of $3
million annually, for the immediate future. The remaining $5 million necessary for full funding of
the PMP continues to be unfunded and is realized by not completing or constructing planned
local access street preservation and reconstruction projects. The current approximate PMP
budget is depicted in the following table.
Pavement Management Program
$16 M Annual Need
Preservation & Reconstruction
(Funds #106,#311)
$10 M Need
Streets Maintenance
(Fund #101)
$6 M Need
Arterials/Collectors
$3.5 to $4 M Need
Local Access
$6.5 M Need
All Streets
$6 M Need
less $3 M (6% Recurring GF)
less $2 M (Avg Grants)
less $1.5 M
(Street Wear Fee)
less $1 M (Telephone Tax Revenue)*
less $2 M (Fuel Tax + Other Fees)
Fully Funded
$5 M Unfunded
$3 M Unfunded
Varies with grants + REET,
consider fully funded
Local Access Street
projects not
constructed
Currently covered by general fund
transfers to balance
Street Fund #101
*$1 M revenue from Telephone Utility Tax is declining annually. To offset this decline, general fund
transfers have been increasing.
The 2021 Streets Sustainability Committee (SSC) included 22 local and regional stakeholders
tasked to assist the City in its public outreach regarding future decisions focused on the
sustainability of the City's PMP. The SSC conducted seven meetings and was supported by
seven additional community stakeholder meetings, three public meetings, and a citywide public
survey that received 1,018 responses.
As a result, the 2021 outreach efforts resulted in nine findings:
1. Evaluate
A The pavement condition of City streets is described as "fair" or better.
B The PMP should be prioritized in the City's budget planning process.
2. Identify
A Survey respondents support increasing the prioritization of local access streets.
B Implement surface treatments as part of the PMP.
C Increase PMP funding to maintain the streets in their current condition.
3. Investigate
A Do not reduce funding to other City programs to fund the PMP.
B Transportation Benefit District is the most preferred funding option.
C New funding should evenly distribute costs to everyone.
D PMP funding should not rely on annual surplus fund transfers.
In summary, the SSC, along with the findings of its public survey and community outreach,
provided four key considerations for City Council:
1. Prioritization of local access streets
2. Implementation of surface treatments
3. Project delivery options
4. Funding options
Over the course of 2022, City Council and staff have identified potential solutions to the four
considerations above. To address prioritization of local access streets, implementation of
surface treatments and project delivery options, staff recommended the use the $1.5 M of
annual revenues from the Street Wear Fee Fund #106 to create a 2023 unit -priced contract for
pavement preservation and reconstruction of local access streets. It is anticipated that the unit -
priced contract will provide a more cost effective and flexible alternative than the typical delivery
method for capital improvement projects that requires the design -bid -build process for each
project. The scope of work of the unit price contract may also include surface treatments such
as surface seals, slurry seals or mircosurfacing.
Additionally, to evaluate the use of surface treatments, Council, at its September 27, 2022,
meeting, programmed $250,000 for developing and implementing a surface treatment pilot
project. Staff is currently working with adjacent jurisdictions to determine the feasibility of larger
regional pilot projects in order to deliver pilot projects more cost effectively.
To address the development of funding options to sustain the City's PMP, the SSC, City Council
and staff discussed new revenue sources available, including the development of a
Transportation Benefit District (TBD). The attached Available Funding Options Summary form
specifies the estimated potential revenues associated with each of the City's revenue options.
The various revenue options available without a public vote are summarized below:
• Utility Tax $8.1 million (at 6%, can be reduced to lower rate)
• TBD: Vehicle License Fee $1.4 million (years 1-2, can increase in year 3)
• Property Tax Banked Capacity $1.0 million
Voter approved revenue options include the following:
• TBD: Sales & Use Tax $7.4 million (max, could drop to $3.3 million)
• TBD: Excess Property Tax $0.13 million
• Levy Lid Lift $0.14 million
To fund the PMP, Council may choose any combination of the available options, which can
vary based on applied rates, economic/market conditions, etc. The "Utility Tax" requires further
analysis of which utilities to tax and at what rate, see the attached Utility Tax Revenue Options
page for more information. Seven neighboring jurisdictions had their utility tax rates compared to
Spokane Valley. The considered utilities included: electricity, natural gas, telephone, cable TV,
solid waste, water, and sewer.
• Four jurisdictions impose a utility tax on all seven potential utilities.
• One jurisdiction imposes a utility tax on six of the seven potential utilities.
• Two jurisdictions impose a utility tax on five of the seven potential utilities.
• Spokane Valley imposes a utility tax on telephone service only.
OPTIONS: Discussion Only.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Staff requests Council direction on whether new
funding sources should be considered for the Pavement Management Program and/or which
elements of the funding options are preferred over the others. Upon direction, staff intends to
develop a detailed funding proposal for council consideration and to offer opportunity for public
input.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None at this time.
STAFF CONTACT: Bill Helbig, PE — Community & Public Works Director
Adam Jackson, PE — Engineering Manager
ATTACHMENTS: Utility Tax Revenue Options
PowerPoint Presentation
Executive Summary — 2021 Streets Sustainability Committee Final Report
Utility Tax Revenue Options
(July 2022 Estimates)
Revenue Estimates
Electricity
1% Utility
Tax
2% Utility
Tax
3% Utility
Tax
4% Utility
Tax
5% Utility
Tax
6% Utility
Tax
$854,608
$1,709,215
$2,563,823
$3,418,430
$4,273,038
$5,127,645
Natural Gas 264,293 528,585 792,878
1,057,170 1,321,463 1,585,756
Sewer 152,073 304,146 456,218 608,291 760,364 912,437
Solid Waste 85,935 171,871 257,806 343,741 429,677 515,612
Total $1,356,909 $2,713,817 $4,070,725 $5,427,632 $6,784,542 $8,141,450
Estimated Impact on Residential Monthly Bills
Electricity
Average
Residential
Bill
1%
Utility
Tax
2%
Utility
Tax
3%
Utility
Tax
4%
Utility
Tax
5%
Utility
Tax
6%
Utility
Tax
$85.00
$0.85
$1.70
$2.55
$3.40
$4.25
$5.10
Natural Gas $63.00 $0.63 $1.26 $1.89 $2.52 $3.15 $3.78
Sewer $47.00 $0.47 $0.94 $1.41 $1.88 $2.35 $2.82
Solid Waste $33.00 $0.33 $0.66 $0.99 $1.32 $1.65 $1.98
Total $228.00 $2.28 $4.56 $6.84 $9.12 $11.40 $13.68
Est. Annual $2,736.00 $27.36 $54.72 $82.08 $109.44 $136.80 $164.16
Utility Tax Comparison with Other Jurisdictions
Municipality
Electricity
Natural
Gas
Telephone
Cable
TV
Solid
Waste
Water
Sewer
Spokane
6.0%
6.0%
6.0%
6.0%
20.0%
20.0%
20.0%
Liberty Lake
3.0%
3.0%
3.0%
3.0%
3.0%
-
-
Cheney
(1)
(1)
6.0%
5.0%
6.0%
11.0%
11.0%
Deer Park
6.0%
6.0%
6.0%
6.0%
12.0%
12.0%
12.0%
Airway Heights
6.0%
6.0%
6.0%
3.0%
10.0%
19.8%
15.0%
Pullman
8.0%
8.0%
8.0%
-
11.0%
8.0%
8.0%
Millwood
6.0%
2.0%
2.0%
-
2.0%
-
-
Spokane Valley
-
-
6.0%
-
-
-
-
(1) Rates are 6% for Regular, 4% for Residential Street and 4.75% for Parks.
Note: Utility tax rates for jurisdictions are from the municipal code of the jurisdiction or AWC 2015
Municipal Taxes and Fees Survey,
https://www.awcnet.orq/DataResources/resourcesbytopic/TaxandUserFeeSurvey.aspx.
Pavement Management Program
The Future of Spokane Valley's PMP
December 6, 2022
Bill Helbig, PE, Community & Public Works Director
Adam Jackson, PE, Engineering Manager
What makes up the City's paved street network?
■ 450 centerline miles
■ 127 Arterial/Collectors
■ 323 Local Access Streets
■ 1,025 Total Lane Miles
■ 1,900 Acres of Paved Streets
■ (8% of Total City Area)
■ Four Street Classifications:
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
Collectors Principal Arterial
Local Access 968,933
11%
Paved Area
(square yards)
Minor Arterial
1,406,315
15%
7%
Spokane Valley's PMP: What is it? How is it funded?
Pavement Management Program TOTAL
$16 M Annual Need vs. $8 M Annual Actual Allocation
Type of Work
Preservation & Reconstruction
(Funds #106, #311)
$10 M Need
Streets Maintenance
(Fund #101)
$6 M Need
Description
The street surface we actually drive on.
Everything else to make the street system
work (lights, signals, winter ops, etc.).
Location
Arterials/Collectors
$3.5 to $4 M Need
Local Access
$6.5 M Need
All Streets
$6 M Need
Revenues
$3 M (6% Recurring GF)
less $2 M (Avg. Grants)
$1.5 M
(Street Wear Fee)
$1 M (Telephone Tax Revenue)
$2 M (Fuel Tax + Other Fees)
Funding Level
Fully Funded
$5 M Unfunded
$3 M Unfunded
Comment
Grants + REET
(varies annually)
Local Access Street projects
not constructed
Covered by General Fund transfers to
balance Street Fund #101
3
How does our
community
value its PMP?
Media Releases
Social/Digital/Print
Pavement Management Program
Budget - Annual Cost to Maintain: $16 M/Yr
Historical Expenditure. Ss MfYr
Preservation
rnE 4ruel ao i,n you
pctonnNenun on
Budget: $10 M/Yr
Historical SS M/ir
Maintenance
Purr av rmr to make the
writ xrfnl Wa.e,
Budget: $6 M/Yr
Hiilori€ I: $3 M!*
2021 Public Outreach Milestones
*May11
SSC Mtg
#x
Jai 17,
Q 1U)38
9 Aug IB * 55C httC Q Sept 7 •Sept a
G.{ruxd Tiff JUL lavlur - Sph. a- Ldvd
..Haut Ow .,rron. vra.,ra 41L, w.an r.r.rl..,c=c1
xx alvYirY+t t'ilkr ias=rrand
ikd.,L. A.m.! cli.ndai d a,.,at
ra-g Ns c.Q.coma rrermenre
(., k 4r1=1m
Cerro 1
P P •
s$
n..wv
foLing
arrurrrn
sfa�r.;
4a
.Apr.3 ]uub
*SSC rite * SSC Mtg
_r r3
F.x3ng
Opium I. ro•
as
* SS
SSC Mhg
a4
51w.Y.mo
Rasnrul
CmiruJ
oAugia
lonnnuil
Fubbc
fi: 01,1I
$ •
Gnvlvc
vo t' lb
7umlar
`+p+Ix-4's lie}' r. li umryk CinY�rw.nt
s�nrGnrmn Nomal0 p .cru,g
6Aug 19 •SegtE Sept
July -September: Med&a Outreach (print, digital, video etc.)
WSept 1.4
SSC ld#gi6
F.FinA maativnzAin=
cinoy,on8..
Krly}Wl
q.3vFNI
Nov g
Sept 33 * Finn&
Rnvorl
2021 Streets
Sustainability
Committee :-
r1. Evaluate
2. Identify
W 3. Investigate
5
2021 SSC Findings
_-_,_\_-_,_
Goal
Item
Finding
1. Evaluate
A
B
The pavement condition of City streets is described as "fair" or better.
The PMP should be prioritized in the City's budget planning process.
2. Identify
A
B
C
Survey respondents support increasing the prioritization of local access streets.
Implement surface treatments as part of the PMP.
Increase PMP funding to maintain the streets in their current condition.
3. Investigate
A
Do not reduce funding to other City programs to fund the PMP.
B
Transportation Benefit District is the most preferred funding option.
C
New funding should evenly distribute costs to everyone.
D
f PMP funding should not rely on annual surplus fund transfers.
6
Incremental Implementation
Prioritization of Local Access Streets
2023 Unit -Cost Contract for Local Streets (Fund #106)
Implementation of Surface Treatments
2023 Pilot - Surface Treatments
Project Delivery Options
2023 Unit -Cost Contract for Local Streets
2023 Unit -Cost Contract for Street Maintenance
Funding Options
Still Needs to be Addressed by Council
Staff
Duration Cost
Funding Method
Approval Method
Available Funding Options Summary
(July 2022 Estimates)
Cost Impacts
Est. Annual Revenues
Notes
Property Tax Banked
Capacity
Council
$7.73 per $100,000 of assessed property value
$999, 000
Uses remaining "taxable" amount on
property values
Levy Lid Lift
Voter
$1.10 per $100,000 of assessed property value for
every 1% increase
1% increase generates Used after Property Tax Banked
$142,000
Capacity is implemented.
Transportation Benefit
District:
Vehicle License Fee
Council — up to $50
Voter — over $50
Start: $20 license fee
Year 2: Up to $40
Year 4: Up to $50
Max Fee: $100
$20: $1.4 M
$40: $2.9 M
$50: $3.6 M
Fees can increase in 2-year
increments without voter approval until
fees exceed $50.
Transportation Benefit
District:
Sales & Use Tax
Voter
Added tax up to 0.2% for up to 10 years
$3.3 Mil to $7.4 M
Revenue varies based on economic
trends.
Transportation Benefit
Excess ..-
District
Vot
$1 02 per $100,000 of assessed property value for
every 1% increase
1% increase generates Typically only lasts for a one-year
duration
Utility Tax
Min $0 33 monthly
Max $13 68 monthly
Vanes on which utilities are taxed, and
at which rate
*Council approved up to 6% for
Min $86,000 Electricity, Natural Gas, Steam,
Voter approval required if over 6%
*No limit for sewer, stormwater, solid
waste, water, cable TV
8
es Counci�-
want to fully
fund the PMP?
What f ndin:
options should
be pursued?
Streets Sustainability Committee
Final Report
Sfioka
jUalleye
Community & Public Works Department
City of Spokane Valley
11/9/2021
SCITY�
.000Val -
CONTENTS
Acknowledgements 1
Executive Summary 2
1. Introduction 4
A History: Spokane Valley's Pavement Management Program (PMP) 4
Recent PMP Developments 5
2021: The City's PMP Today 6
2. Purpose & Methodology 8
Purpose: Streets Sustainability Committee Goals 8
Methodology: A Broad -Reaching Effort 8
Methodology: A Detailed Process 9
3. Key Findings 13
Goal #1: Evaluate 14
Goal #2: Identify 15
Goal #3: Investigate 18
4. Process Review 23
5. Conclusion 26
Appendices 27
Appendix A — Street Sustainability Committee Questionnaire Response Forms
Appendix B — Public Survey Response Summary
Appendix C — Categorized Public Comments
Streets Sustainability Committee Final Report
Spokane
uMalley
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Street operations and maintenance, pavement preservation, and associated funding mechanisms, have
been a topic of discussion for city councils shortly after Spokane Valley's incorporation in 2003. Over the
years, the Pavement Management Program has been recognized as a priority; however, the City has
struggled to secure a consistent, reliable funding source that could sustain a long-term program.
Purpose & Methodology
The City's Pavement Management Program has identified a total annual cost of $16 million to sustain
the City's paved street network in its current overall "good" condition. The City has historically spent $8
million each year, or approximately 50% of the recommended PMP amount. The $8 million shortfall is
an indicator that City streets are deteriorating at a faster rate than current available funding can sustain.
City Council created the Streets Sustainability Committee to assist the City's public outreach efforts as it
relates to the long-term goals of the Pavement Management Program.
The goals of the Streets Sustainability Committee included:
1. Evaluate citizens' interest and support for maintaining city streets and suggesting pavement
condition goals.
2. Identify preference for maintaining city streets, types of treatments used, and long-term levels of
service.
3. Investigate current revenues and potential future funding sources for maintaining city streets at the
recommended level of service.
THE COMMITTEE
The 22-member Streets Sustainability Committee
served as staff's primary resource to seek input and to
connect with the community at large. Participants were
leaders in their respective fields and helped gather
input from their respective peer groups. The
Committee included 19 invited members from different
for- and nonprofit businesses, transportation
backgrounds, and three citizen -representatives who
applied to, and were recommended by Mayor Wick to
participate on the Committee. The Committee
membership was confirmed by the City Council on
March 23, 2021.
The fundamental assumption that guided the process
was the use of open-ended questions to address the Committee goals. This format promoted a
descriptive process rather than a prescriptive process, describing public opinion instead of seeking
agreement for a particular agenda or focus. In other words, to find out how the public felt about the
City's Pavement Management Program, the City would ask and listen to the responses. This
fundamental assumption shaped the Committee meetings, public meetings, and the public survey.
Public Meeks
& Workshe's
Media Releases
Social/Digital/Print
Streets Sustainability Committee Final Report
2
Spokane
uMalley
THE COMMUNITY
City staff worked with the Committee to develop a public outreach plan to share information with and
gather feedback from the community, including public meetings, community surveys, and paid
social/print/digital media. Through an iterative review process, City staff and the Committee finalized a
public survey that was used to gauge public opinion on the three goals of the Committee. The survey was
open to the public from mid -June to mid -September.
Key Findings
The key findings of the public survey and the Committee activities are summarized in Table 1. The City's
public outreach process resulted in 22 Committee responses and 1,018 public survey responses.
Table 1. Executive Summary - Key Findings by Committee Goal
Goal Item Finding
A The pavement condition of City streets is described as "fair" or better.
1 B The Pavement Management Program should be prioritized in the City's budget
planning process.
2
A Survey respondents support increasing the prioritization of local access streets.
B Implement surface treatments in the Pavement Management Program.
Increase Pavement Management Program funding to maintain the streets in their
current condition.
3
A
B
C
D
Do not reduce funding of other City programs to increase funding of the Pavement
Management Program.
Transportation Benefit District is the most -preferred funding option.
Survey respondents indicate new funding should evenly distribute costs to everyone.
Pavement Management Program funding should not rely on annual surplus fund
transfers.
Process Review
The process used by the City replicated the process used by other local agencies: informational material
was developed and provided, and Committee members were asked to actively participate, formulate
opinions on pavement management activities, and engage with the public to collect feedback. In
comparison with other agencies, the Committee process was well -attended, participants openly and
willingly provided comment, and were engaged and supportive in satisfying the Committee goals. The
process proved to be beneficial to both the Committee participants and the City.
Should the City proceed to implement a new revenue stream, the Committee members stressed the
importance of transparent, thoughtful, and intentional public messaging. Further, the Committee
acknowledged the time and effort expended on this 2021 public outreach process and shared
reservations that the findings would only be considered by City Council with no action taken.
Streets Sustainability Committee Final Report 3
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: December 6, 2022 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Plante's Ferry Sports Complex Public Master Planning — Interlocal
Agreement
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 39.34.080.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
10-18-2022: Admin Report Letter of Support.
10-25-2022: Motion Consideration Letter of Support.
BACKGROUND: Since at least 2016, City Council has been studying and considering a variety
of potential enhancements and improvements to Spokane County's Plante's Ferry Sports
Complex. There have been multiple studies regarding the feasibility of sports events and
improvements at Plante's Ferry.
Recently, the City was contacted by Spokane County Parks, Recreation and Golf about a funding
opportunity for improvements at Plante's Ferry Sports Complex. On October 25, 2022, the City
approved providing a Letter of Support to Spokane County Parks, Recreation and Golf for their
request to proceed with approximately $4 million of American Rescue Plan (ARP) funds to
develop a master plan, design, and construction of some portion of improvements at Plante's
Ferry Sports Complex. At that time, City Council requested an agreement be prepared regarding
the equal cost -sharing portion to complete a multi -phased master plan for the Plante's Ferry
Sports Complex.
Staff prepared an Interlocal Agreement, which has also been reviewed by Spokane County. The
Interlocal Agreement is attached for review by Council.
The interlocal agreement is currently scheduled as a motion consideration at the December 13,
2022 Council meeting. Upon Council approval, staff will forward the Interlocal to Spokane County
for their approval consideration. Once the document has been fully approved, the City and
Spokane County will work to immediately hire a planning firm to begin a master plan for the
Plante's Ferry Park Sports Complex. The master plan would cost approximately $100,000, and
the City and Spokane County will each pay half.
The City is currently engaged in a Tourism Strategy project with an expected completion date in
early spring 2023. The Plante's Ferry Park Sports Complex public master development planning
results will be an important element to factor into the Tourism Strategy report.
OPTIONS: Discussion and review of the Interlocal Agreement.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to place the interlocal agreement on the
December 13, 2022 Council agenda for a motion consideration or take other action deemed
appropriate.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: If approved, the City and County would engage a planning firm
to immediately begin the planning/study process. Staff estimates this effort would cost up to
$100,000, and each party would pay half each, up to $50,000. There are available funds in the
City Manager's budget.
STAFF CONTACT: Susan Nielsen, Economic Development Specialist
ATTACHMENTS: I nterlocal Agreement.
DRAFT
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH THE
FORMATION OF A MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR PLANTE'S FERRY SPORTS COMPLEX
THIS AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is entered by and between SPOKANE COUNTY, a political
subdivision of the State of Washington, ("County"), having offices for the principal place of business at
1116 West Broadway Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99260, and the City of Spokane Valley, a
municipal corporation of the State of Washington, ("City"), having offices for the principal place of
business at 10210 East Sprague, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206, each individually also referred
to hereinafter as a "Party" and collectively the "Parties".
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Revised Code of Washington ("RCW') Section
36.32.120(6), the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County has the care of County
property and the management of County funds and business; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Chapter 39.34 RCW (the "Interlocal Cooperation
Act"), the Parties may contract with each other to perform certain functions which each may legally
perform; and
WHEREAS, on November 1, 2022, the Spokane County Board of County Commissioners
adopted resolution No. 2022-0730 authorizing use of American Rescue Plan Act ("ARPA") funding
ARPA: 2221 — through the sub -category Strong Healthy Communities Neighborhood features
(2.22) to complete improvements to Plante's Ferry Sports Complex, more specifically, a multi -
phased park Master Development Plan, A&E design, and subsequent construction of one (1) or
more phases of renovations to Plante's Ferry Sports Complex; and
WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley ("City") City Council ("City Council") is supportive of the
Plante's Ferry Sports Complex improvement project and supports immediately hiring a firm to
develop a Master Development Plan (the "Master Development Plan" or "Plan"), and to pay for
up to half of the total costs of drafting of said Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City, in taking lead role in developing the Master Development Plan with respect
to the Plante's Ferry Sports Complex improvement project, will enable a Master Development
Plan to be developed in an efficient and quick manner to allow construction of improvements to
proceed as quickly as possible; and
WHEREAS, engaging a consultant firm to develop a Master Development Plan in a quick and
efficient manner is important to the City, as the City is currently engaged in a tourism study update
(the "Tourism Study"), and this Plan is intended to provide important data for the City's Tourism
Study; and
WHEREAS, the County recognizes the importance of obtaining a consultant for the purpose of
quickly analyzing existing facilities and to assess options for upgrades and improvements for the
benefit of residents Countywide, as well as to attract visitors from outside the region in ways that
bring tourism dollars to our area; and
WHEREAS, in 2023, the Tourism Study will explore revenue streams and marketing potential,
among other elements, to integrate into the overall tourism strategy of the City which will include
Page 1 of 8
DRAFT
outdoor sports complexes and special event venues, such as the Plante's Ferry Sports Complex;
and
WHEREAS, the Master Development Plan is also critical to review opportunities and options for
possible partnership and collaboration between County and the City in ownership, enhancements,
operations, and/or maintenance of the Plante's Ferry Sports Complex; and
WHEREAS, in preparation of the Plan, the City and County will be able to evaluate the financial
and operational implications that will provide critical information about those costs and impacts to
the Parties; and
WHEREAS, the Parties wish to jointly select and retain a consultant (Consultant) to: (1) develop
a multi -phased park Master Development Plan for Plante's Ferry Sports Complex as outlined
herein; and
WHEREAS, the Parties further desire that: (1) they work collaboratively to select a Consultant to
perform the Consulting Services, and enter into a contract with a Consultant to conduct the study;
and (2) the Parties equitably share the costs of said Consulting Services as set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED THAT:
1. Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to mutually engage Consulting Services
("Consulting Services") to complete a multi -phased park Master Development Plan
("Master Development Plan" or "Plan") for Plante's Ferry Sports Complex ("Complex").
a. The primary purpose of this Plan will be to provide a road map for renovation of
the Complex to more effectively meet current needs and future demand for local
sports programming (with an emphasis on youth programming), regional and
national tournaments and events that could draw teams and attendees from
beyond Spokane County.
i. A component of the Plan will be to establish a formal, long-term partnership
between the County and the City that may include shared ownership,
enhancement, operations, and maintenance of the facility.
b. In accomplishing this, the Plan shall:
i. Provide a multi -phased development master plan to serve as a road map for
future improvements to the Complex;
ii. Propose a plan to renovate the outdoor sports complex to meet current
needs and future demand for local sports, regional tournaments, and national
events that could draw teams and attendees from outside the area;
iii. Review existing applicable plans and studies;
iv. Provide an assessment of annual direct and indirect spending and
estimated tax revenue for the City and unincorporated County resulting from
the existing and future facilities at the Complex;
v. Evaluate the anticipated financial and operational consequences of
possible improvements that will provide critical information about those costs
and impacts to the Parties;
vi. Provide an inventory and assessment of similar local/regional facilities;
vii. Provide an in-depth analysis of current conditions at the Complex (field
quality, soils, stormwater, etc.);
Page 2 of 8
DRAFT
viii. Solicit and consider significant community and stakeholder input;
ix. Propose conceptual site plan(s) and renderings;
x. Propose an implementation/phasing plan with planning level cost estimates;
and
xi. Propose a planning process timeline with deliverables.
2. Administration. No separate and distinct legal entity shall be created to conduct this joint
undertaking.
3. Duration and Termination. This Agreement shall take effect upon execution of this
Agreement by the Parties and shall continue until the purposes of this Agreement have been
accomplished, as mutually agreed between the Parties, or at 4:00 p.m. on , 2023, unless
the Parties agree in writing to extend it or terminate it early.
This Agreement may be terminated for or without cause, in whole or in part, for convenience, or
for any reason whatsoever by either party upon ninety (90) days' notice to the other Party. In the
event of breach or default of any provision of this Agreement, the Party in breach or default shall
have ten (10) days to cure said breach or default, in the event of failure to cure said breach or
default, the Agreement shall be deemed terminated. Any amounts payable or due for any
Consulting Services up until the time of termination shall be payable equally by the Parties in
accordance with Section 5 of this Agreement.
4. Consulting Services. The Parties to this Agreement shall collectively and unanimously select
a Consultant (the "Consultant") to perform the Consulting Services which is mutually agreed
between the Parties. Once a Consultant is selected by the Parties, the Parties shall thereafter
enter into a contract with the Consultant, for a yet to be determined amount.
Each Party to this Agreement shall have co -equal rights to receive all correspondence to and from
the Consultant, to determine appropriate direction to be communicated to the Consultant, and to
attend and participate in meetings with the Consultant.
5. Cost Sharing. The total cost of the Consulting Services shall not exceed $100,000.00 USD,
with each Party agreeing to pay up to $50,000. The City will receive invoices directly from the
Consultant, and agrees to pay the Consultant directly for all Consulting Services. The City shall
then send invoice(s) to the County for its portion of the payment, and the County agrees to
reimburse the City for the applicable proportionate share as outlined in this Section. Payment to
the City shall be remitted by County within thirty (30) calendar days of receiving written notice
from the City, in accordance with Section 13 of this Agreement. Said notice shall include a copy
of the study results along with an invoice for the applicable amount due. The Parties shall share
the costs of the Consulting Services contract as follows:
• Spokane County 50%
• City of Spokane Valley 50%
6. Project Management. In collaboration with the County, the City shall develop a package of
information for use in seeking submittals, to complete the Master Development Plan. Upon
receipt of the submittals, the County and the City shall jointly and unanimously select the
Consultant who shall provide the identified services. Following selection, the Parties shall
Page 3 of 8
DRAFT
collaborate to develop a "scope of work" as the basis of the contract with the Consultant for
completion of the Plan.
7. Severability. Should any section, or portion thereof, of this Agreement be held invalid by
reason of any law, statute, or regulation existing now or in the future in any jurisdiction by any
court of competent authority or by a legally enforceable directive of any governmental body, such
section or portion thereof will be validly referred so as to approximate the intent of the Parties as
nearly as possible and, if unreformable, will be deemed divisible and deleted with respect to such
jurisdiction, but the Agreement will not otherwise be affected.
8. Remedies. No remedy herein conferred upon any Party is intended to be exclusive of any
other remedy, and each and every such remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to
every other remedy given hereunder or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute
or otherwise. No single or partial exercise by any Party of any right, power, or remedy hereunder
shall preclude any other or further exercise thereof.
9. Records. Each Party shall maintain adequate records to document obligations performed
under this Agreement. Subject to all applicable laws and regulations governing the records
maintained in performance of this Agreement, each Party and the Washington State Auditor shall
have the right to review the other Party's records with regard to the subject matter of this
Agreement, upon reasonable notice.
10. Entire Agreement. This written Agreement, together with the Exhibits attached hereto,
constitutes the entire and complete understanding and agreement between the Parties respecting
the subject matter hereof and cancels and supersedes any and all prior and contemporaneous
negotiations, correspondence, understandings, and agreements between the Parties, whether
oral or written, regarding such subject matter. The Parties understand and agree that this
Agreement may not be changed, modified, or altered except in writing signed by the Parties
hereto, and the provisions of the Agreement not specifically amended thereby will remain in full
force and effect.
11. Governing Law and Stipulation of Venue. This Agreement has and shall be construed as
having been made and delivered in the State of Washington and the laws of the State of
Washington shall be applicable to its construction and enforcement. Any action at law, suit in
equity, or judicial proceeding for the enforcement of this Agreement or any provisions hereto shall
be instituted only in courts of competent jurisdiction within Spokane County, Washington, unless
relocation or commencement elsewhere is required by law.
12. Filing. This Agreement shall be filed with the Spokane County Auditor and placed on its web
site or other electronically retrievable public source.
13. Notice. All notices or other communications given hereunder and sent or delivered to any
PARTY at the address set forth for such below in this Section and shall be deemed given: (1) when
certified mail is deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid; or (2) on the third day
following the day on which the same have been mailed by first class delivery, postage prepaid; or
(3) on the day such notices or other communications are received when sent by personal delivery,
Page 4 of 8
DRAFT
prepaid; or (4) if it is delivered by email, when the recipient, by an email sent to the email address
for the sender stated in this Agreement or by a notice delivered by another method in accordance
with this section, acknowledges having received that email, with an automatic "read receipt" not
constituting acknowledgment of an email for purposes of this Section.
All notices, requests, approvals, consents, or other communication, which may be required by this
Agreement, shall be given as follows:
SPOKANE COUNTY:
Doug Chase, Director
Spokane County Parks, Recreation and Golf Department
404 N. Havana Street
Spokane Valley, WA 99202
dchase@spokanecounty.org
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY:
John Hohman, City Manager
City of Spokane Valley
10210 East Sprague Avenue
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
jhohman@spokanevalley.org
14. Compliance With Laws. The Parties shall observe all applicable local, state, and federal laws,
regulations, orders, writs, injunctions, and/or decrees, to the extent that they may be applicable to the terms
of this Agreement.
15. Force Majeure. The Parties shall not be held responsible and/or liable for any delay or failure
in performance of the activities required herein when such delay or failure is due to causes beyond
the control and without the fault or negligence of the County. Neither Party will be held responsible
for delay or failure to perform hereunder when such delay or failure is due to fire, flood, riot, epidemic,
pandemic, acts of God or the public enemy, acts of terrorism, acts of war, unusually severe weather,
legal acts of public authorities, public enactments, labor disputes, or other circumstances which
cannot be forecast or provided against.
16. Non -Discrimination. During the performance of this Agreement, the Parties, their
employees, and agents shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race; religion;
color; sex; gender identity and expression; medical conditions related to any sensory, mental,
or physical condition; sexual orientation; marital status; age; national origin; ancestry; genetic
information; disability; veteran status; or any class protected by local, state, or federal law.
17. Amendments. No modification or amendment to this Agreement shall be valid until the
same is reduced to writing, in the form of an amendment, and executed with the same formalities
as this present Agreement.
18. Waiver. No officer, employee, agent or other individual acting on behalf of either Party has
the power, right or authority to waive any of the conditions or provisions of this Agreement. No
waiver in one instance shall be held to be a waiver of any other subsequent breach or
nonperformance. All remedies afforded in this Agreement or by law, shall be taken and
construed as cumulative, and in addition to every other remedy provided herein or by law.
Failure of either Party to enforce at any time any of the provisions of this Agreement or to require
Page 5 of 8
DRAFT
at any time performance by the other Party of any provision hereof shall in no way be construed
to be a waiver of such provisions nor shall it affect the validity of this Agreement or any part
thereof.
19. Assignment and Delegation. No Party shall assign, transfer or delegate any or all of the
responsibilities of this Agreement or the benefits received hereunder without first obtaining the
express written consent of the other Party.
20. Subcontracts. Except as otherwise provided herein, a Party shall not enter into
subcontracts for any of the work to be performed under this Agreement without obtaining
express written approval from the other Party to this Agreement.
21. Contract Documents. The Contract Documents consist of this Agreement and the other
documents listed in this Agreement as Exhibits, and all modifications and change orders issued
subsequent thereto. These form a contract and all are as fully a part of the contract as if attached
to this Agreement or repeated herein. In the event of any inconsistency between the provisions
of this Agreement and the documents listed below, the provisions of this Agreement will control
and the order of precedence will be in the order listed. An enumeration of the contract
documents is as follows:
1. This Agreement; and
2. Amendments or Modifications to this Agreement.
22. Dispute Resolution. Any dispute or controversy arising out of or relating to this Agreement,
or breach thereof, shall be settled by the following procedure:
Level 1:
Level 2:
Before entering into Level 2 or Level 3 of this Dispute Resolution
Procedure ("DRP"), designated representatives of each Party shall enter
into a series of meetings for the purpose of resolving the dispute or
controversy. The Level 1 period shall begin when one Party gives written
notice to the other by certified mail, personal, or electronic service. Such
notice shall identify the dispute or controversy with particularity and state
that the Party is commencing this Level 1 procedure to resolve the
dispute. After receipt of such notice the Parties shall meet either in person
or through electronic means. Should the dispute not be resolved within
thirty (30) calendar days of the commencement of the Level 1 period, the
dispute shall be advanced to Level 2.
Only after the Parties have completed Level 1 of the DRP without
resolving the dispute or controversy and before entering into Level 3 of
the DRP, the Parties shall enter into a mediation process. Each Party shall
bear its own costs in preparing for and conducting mediation, except that
the joint costs, if any, of the actual mediation proceeding shall be shared
equally by the Parties. The Parties shall select a mutually agreeable
mediator in Spokane County, Washington to aid the Parties in resolving
the dispute or controversy. The mediator shall be a licensed attorney in
the State of Washington and not be an employee or former employee of
either Party. The mediation shall be held at a mutually agreeable date,
time, and location. The Parties shall act in good faith as to resolving
disputes through mediation.
Page 6 of 8
DRAFT
Level 3:
Only after the completion of both Levels 1 and 2 above without a
satisfactory resolution of the dispute or controversy, either Party may
bring suit in in the courts of competent jurisdiction within Spokane County,
Washington.
If any legal action or other proceeding is brought for the enforcement of this Agreement, or
because of an alleged dispute, breach, default, or misrepresentation in connection with any
provisions of this Agreement, the successful or prevailing Party or Parties shall be entitled to
recover reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, and all expenses (including taxes) even if not
taxable as court costs (including, without limitation, all such fees, costs, and expenses incident
to appeals), incurred in that action or proceeding, in addition to any other relief to which such
Party or Parties may be entitled.
23. 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.
24. No Third -Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is intended for the benefit of the County
and City and not for the benefit of any third parties.
25. Time is of the Essence. Time is and will be of the essence for each term and provision of
this Agreement.
26. Headings. The section headings appearing in this Agreement have been inserted solely
for convenience and ready reference. In no way do they purport to, and shall not be deemed to,
define, limit, or extend the scope or intent of the sections to which they appertain.
27. Cooperation. The Parties agree to cooperate and work together to the best of their abilities
to effectuate the purpose of this Agreement.
28. RCW 39.34 Required Clauses
A. Purpose: See Section 1, above.
B. Duration: See Section 3, above.
C. Organization of Separate Entity and Its Powers: See Section 2, above.
D. Responsibilities of the Parties: See provisions above.
E. Agreement To Be Filed: See Section 11, above.
F. Financing: Each party shall be responsible for the financing of its contractual
obligations under its normal budgetary process.
G. Termination: See Section 3, above.
H. Property Upon Termination: There will be no property transferred by any party, or acquired
in furtherance of this Agreement, other than the report produced by the Consultant.
Page 7 of 8
DRAFT
29. Execution and Approval. The Parties warrant that the officers/individuals executing below
have been duly authorized to act for and on behalf of the Party for purposes of confirming this
Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused their duly authorized representatives to
execute this Agreement as of this day of 2022.
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY: SPOKANE COUNTY:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
By: OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
John Hohman, City Manager
ATTEST:
MARY KUNEY, CHAIR
JOSH KERNS, VICE -CHAIR
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk AL FRENCH, COMMISSIONER
Approved as to form: ATTEST:
Office of the City Attorney Ginna Vasquez
Clerk of the Board
Page 8 of 8
To:
From:
Re:
DRAFT
ADVANCE AGENDA
as of December 1, 2022; 2:30 p.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
Dec 13, 2022, Formal Meeting, 6:00 p.m. [due
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. First Reading Ordinance 22-025 Coeur d'Alene Tribe Franchise - Tony Beattie
3. Resolution 22-023 Adopting Fees for 2023 - Chelsie Taylor
4. Motion Consideration: Plantes Ferry Interlocal Agreement - Mike Basinger
5. Motion Consideration: Street & Stormwater Maint. & Repair Services Contract 2023 Option Yr- B.H
6. Motion Consideration: Street Sweeping Service Contract 2023 Option Year Renewal - Bill Helbig
7. Motion Consideration: CenterPlace Catering Contract - Erik Lamb, John Bottelli
8. Motion Consideration: Lodging Tax Awards for 2023 - Chelsie Taylor, Sarah Farr
9. Motion Consideration: Innovia Contract - Erik Lamb
10. Admin Report: Sullivan/Trent Interchange - Jerremy Clark, Rob Lochmiller
11. Admin Report: Yellowstone Franchise - Cary Driskell
12. Admin Report: Advance Agenda - Mayor Haley
13. Executive Session: [RCW 42.30.110(1)(g)] Review Performance of a public employee
[*estimated meeting:
Dec 20, 2022, Study Session/Hybrid, 6:00 p.m.
ACTION ITEMS:
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Second Reading Ordinance 22-025 Coeur d'Alene Tribe Franchise - Tony Beattie
3. Motion Consideration: Sullivan/Trent Interchange - Gloria Mantz
NON -ACTION ITEMS:
4. Neighborhood Restoration - Bill Helbig, Henry Allen
5. Annexation Update - Mike Basinger
6. Graffiti Abatement Program - Erik Lamb
7. Code Enforcement 2022 Highlights - Bill Helbig et al
8. Advance Agenda - Mayor Haley
9. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
Dec 27, 2022 - meeting cancelled - Christmas holiday
Jan 3, 2023, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
ACTION ITEMS:
1. TPA Appointments - Mayor Haley
NON -ACTION ITEMS:
2. Master Speed Limit Amendments - Bill Helbig
3. Govemance Manual Discussion - John Hohman
4. Advance Agenda - Mayor Haley
Tue Dec 6]
(5 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(10 minutes)
elbig (5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
(15 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(15 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
105 mins]
[due Tue Dec 13]
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(15 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(25 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 85 mins]
[due Tue Dec 27]
(5 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(20 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 40 mins]
Jan 10, 2023, Formal Meeting, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Resolution 23- Amending Master Speed Limit Schedule - Bill Helbig
3. Mayoral Appointments: Councilmembers to Committees - Mayor Haley
4. Mayoral Appointments- Planning Commission - Mayor Haley
5. Mayoral Appointments: LTAC Committee - Mayor Haley
6. Admin Report: Street Vacation 22-0003, 16th Ave & University Road - Levi Basinger
7. Admin Report: Advance Agenda - Mayor Haley
[due Tue Jan 3]
(5 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 50 mins]
Draft Advance Agenda 12/1/2022 2:35:11 PM Page 1 of 2
Jan 17, 2023, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
Proclamation: Community Risk Reduction Week
ACTION ITEMS:
1. First Reading Ordinance 23- Street Vacation, 22-0003, 16' Ave & Univ. Road — Levi Basinger
NON -ACTION ITEMS:
2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Haley
Jan 24, 2022, Formal Meeting, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Second Reading Ordinance 23- Street Vacation, 22-0003, 16' Ave
3. Admin Report: Fire Dept Monthly Report — Chief Soto
4. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Haley
5. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
Jan 31, 2023, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Haley
February 7, 2023, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. 2022 Accomplishments Report — John Hohman
2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Haley
AWC City Action Days, Olympia, Feb 15-16
February 14, 2023, Formal Meeting, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Haley
February 21, 2023 Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Haley
February 28, 2023 Formal Meeting, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Admin Report: Fire Dept Monthly Report — Chief Soto
3. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Haley
4. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
March 7, 2023, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Haley
March 14, 2023, Formal Meeting, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Haley
March 21, 2023 Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Haley
March 28, 2023 Formal Meeting, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Admin Report: Fire Dept Monthly Report — Chief Soto
3. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Haley
4. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
*time for public or council comments not included
OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS:
Airport Expansion Update
Appleway Trail Amenities
Basement space
CDBG Interlocal
Consolidated Homeless Grant
Continuum of Care (info item)
Core Beliefs Resolution
Mirabeau Park Forestry Mgmt.
& Univ. Road — Levi Basinger
Outside Agency Grant Process
Park Lighting
Pavement Mgmt. Funding
PFD Presentation
Prosecutor Services
Residency
SCRAPS Update
St. Illumination (owners, cost, location)
[due Tue Jan 10]
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[due Tue Jan 17]
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 25 mins]
[due Tue Jan 24]
(5 minutes)
[due Tue Jan 31]
(15 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[due Tue Feb 7]
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[due Tue Feb 14]
(5 minutes)
[due Tue Feb 21]
(5 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[due Tue Feb 28]
(5 minutes)
[due Tue March 7]
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[due Tue March 14]
(5 minutes)
[due Tue March 21]
(5 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
St. O&M Pavement Preservation
Street Scaping, signs, trees, etc.- info item
Vehicle Wgt Infrastructure Impact
Water Districts & Green Space
Way Finding Sign
Draft Advance Agenda 12/1/2022 2:35:11 PM
Page 2 of 2
Dave Ellis
Chief of Police
Spokane Valley Police Department
Accredited Since 2011
Services provided in partnership with
the Spokane County Sheriff's Office and the Community,
Dedicated to Your Safety.
Ozzie KneZOi?ch
Sheriff'
TO: John Hohman, City Manager
FROM: Dave. Ellis, Chief of Police
DATE: October 24, 2022
RE: Monthly Report for October 2022
ADMJNISTRAT1 VE:
The Sheriff's Office welcomed six new deputies in October:
• Lateral Deputy Dylan Werts is 30 years old, married, and has a three -year -old son. He grew
up in the San Jacinto Valley in Riverside County, California. He comes to us from the Hemet
(CA) Police Department, where he worked as a patrol officer and detective since 2015.
• Lateral Deputy Jeff Gallaher is 26 years old and was raised in Nespelem, Washington. In
2019, he worked for six months as a corrections deputy for the Grant County Sheriff s Office
and was a reserve officer with the Soap Lake Police Department. He was hired as a full-time
patrol officer with the Soap Lake PD in December of 2019.
• Lateral Deputy Corbin Enquist is 26 years old and married, he is from Spokane, attended
Shadle Park High School and Spokane Community College where he earned his AA degree in
Criminal Justice in 2020. He comes to us from the Cheney Police Department where he was
employed since 2018, serving as a patrol officer and FTO.
• Lateral Deputy Chris Hayter is 35 years old, married and has three daughters. He was born
and raised in Selah, Washington and attended Central Washington University where he earned
a degree in Political Science. He served in the U.S. Coast Guard Reserves for nine years as a
maritime enforcement specialist. He comes to us from the Bothell Police Department where
he served since 2014 as a patrol officer and SWAT team member..
• Lateral Deputy Evann Flanagan is 28 years old and was bom in San Jose, California. He has
lived in Post Falls, Idaho since the age of eight and attended Post Falls High School. He comes
to us from Post Falls Police Department, where he was employed since 2016 as a patrol officer.
Page 1
• Entry -Level Deputy Aleshia Salter is 32 years old, married, and has three children. She
attended University High School and Spokane Valley High School, graduating in 2008. She
has spent the past seven years facilitating long-term care for vulnerable individuals and was
the Executive Director of a local retirement facility. She recently became a volunteer firefighter
with the Newman Lake Fire Department.
Chief Ellis attended the Northwest Regional Aviation Quarterly Meeting, virtually, in mid -October.
The SCOPE Annual Recognition Banquet was held in mid -October which Chief Ellis attended. This
was a great time to recognize all the hard work and hours spent by our volunteers, giving to the
community in all the different areas encompassed in SCOPE. Our SCOPE volunteers do everything
from manning SCOPE stations, providing traffic assistance to crime scenes or special events,
transporting mail from the different facilities, to trying to lift fingerprints from vehicles that have been
prowled, just to mention a few tasks. We are very grateful for all their support of our mission.
The quarterly Board of Directors Meeting for the Spokane Regional Safe Streets Task Force was held
in mid -October, which Chief Ellis along with other command staff attended.
Also in mid -October, Chief Ellis toured the new homeless shelter at 4320 E Trent Avenue. A few
days later, he attended a meeting regarding Camp Hope with local law enforcement and city leaders.
Chief Ellis, along with others from local law enforcement and fire attended the monthly Spokane
Regional Emergency Communications Governing Board Meeting in late October.
Page 2
Trunk or Treat was another success this year, again held in partnership with Sun City Church on East
Sprague. We estimate over 1500 people attended the event.
Page 3
SHERIFF'S COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING EFFORT (SCOPE):
In the month of October, S.C.O.P.E. participated in:
o Model Train Show at the Fairgrounds
O Pines Cemetery for Trick or Trot Fun Run.
• Haunted 5K Fun Run in Millwood
• Pumpkin Lane in Deer Park
• Spokane Valley Trunk or Treat
• Model Train Show
• Operation Family ID/Open House at Fire
Station
• Operation Family ID/North Scope at
Home Depot
• SCOPE Appreciation Banquet
October 2022 Volunteers Hours per Station
*Includes estimated volunteer service hours that are provided in the City of Spokane Valley. These two locations cover
both Spokane Valley and the unincorporated portion of the county.
Location
# Volunteers
Admin Hours
L.E. Hours
Total Hours
Central Valley
11
87.5
53.5
141
East Valley*
17
160.5
297
457.5
Edgecliff
9
154
9
163
Trentwood
3
82
13.5
95.5
University
18
208
102.5
310.5
West Valley*
13
202
34
236
TOTALS
71
894
509.5
1,403.5
Volunteer Value ($34.87 per hour) $48,940.05 for October 2022
SCOPE DISABLED PARKING ACTIVITY REPORT
City of Spokane Valley
# of
Vol.
# of Hrs.
# of
Disabled
Infractions
Issued
# of
Warnings
Issued
# of Non -
Disabled
Infractions Issued
January
0
0
0
0
0
February
2
6
0
11
0
March
3
11
0
24
53
April
2
9
1
4
0
May
4
11
2
12
0
June
2
5
0
6
0
July
2
5
0
12
0
August
5
16.5
1
33
0
September
2
7
0
6
0
October
0
0
0
0
0
YTD Total
22
70.5
4
108
53
Page 4
Spokane County
# of
Vol.
# of Hrs.
# of
Disabled
Infractions
Issued
# of
Warnings
Issued
# of Non -
Disabled
Infractions Issued
January
2
7.5
0
12
0
February
2
5
0
10
0
March
2
5.5
0
4
0
April
2
3
0
0
0
May
3
10
2
2
0
June
0
0
0
0
0
July
0
0
0
0
0
August
0
0
0
0
0
September
1
3.5
0
7
0
October
1
5
0
7
0
YTD Total
13
39.5
2
42
0
The Latent Print Team received 39 incidents in October that generated 19 appointments, 3 "no
shows," 20 cancellations, processing of 10 vehicles with prints found on 6 vehicles; 21 of the 39
incidents occurred in Spokane Valley and 6 of the 10 vehicles processed resulted in prints found on 5
vehicles.
S.C.O.P.E. Incident Response Team (SIRT) volunteers contributed 53 on -scene hours (including
travel time) in October; 47 of those hours in October were for incidents in Spokane Valley,
responding to crime scenes, motor vehicle accidents and providing traffic control. There were 5 special
events in October: 3 were in Spokane Valley, which were the Model Train Show at the fairgrounds,
the Trick or Trot Fun Run at the Pines Cemetery, and the Trunk or Treat at Sun City Church. Total
volunteer hours contributed by SIRT, including training, stand-by, response and special events is 1,512
for October; total for 2022 is 12,693.
Abandoned Vehicles
August 2022
September 2022
October 2022
Tagged for impounding
30
79
79
Vehicles Towed
13
34
27
Hulks Processed
30
35
15
Total Vehicles Processed
114
245
207
Yearly Total of Vehicles Processed
1292
1537
1744
OPERATIONS:
Victim Locates Stolen Vehicle, Suspect Backs into Business and Tries to Flee on Foot - Spokane
Valley Deputies responded to the report of a located stolen vehicle. The suspect backed into a
business wall and fled on foot in an attempt to escape. Deputies quickly caught the fleeing
suspect and took him into custody. The suspect was booked into the Spokane County Jail for
Page 5
Possession of a Stolen Vehicle, Hit and Run Property Damage, and Obstructing Law
Enforcement. The suspect had just been released from jail by the courts a few weeks earlier on
his own recognizance for charges of Possession of a Stolen Vehicle and Making/Possessing
Burglary Tools. In early October, at approximately 8:00 pm, Spokane Valley Deputies responded
to the report of a located stolen vehicle in the parking lot of McDonald's, 15 S. Havana Street. The
victim of the vehicle theft, reported a few days earlier, stated she found her stolen 2020 Toyota
Corolla. She advised it was backed into a parking stall at McDonald's and was occupied by a white
male. Deputy Heaney, Deputy Lederle, and Deputy A. Johnson arrived, located the vehicle, and
positioned their patrol cars, with emergency lights activated, in front of the stolen vehicle to block any
escape. The 35-year-old male suspect placed the running car into reverse and backed over the curb,
ramming into the wall of the business. The suspect, realizing he couldn't flee in the vehicle, jumped
out and began running on foot east through the parking lot. Deputy Johnson quickly caught up to the
suspect and took him to the ground after hitting a wooden fence. The male suspect was taken into
custody by the deputies. The suspect was advised of his rights and refused to answer questions. The
victims stated they had been looking for their stolen cars since the theft. After they located it, they
called law enforcement and remained in the area until deputies arrived. One victim stated their other
vehicles were prowled on the same day of the vehicle theft. At that time, the suspect stole a backpack
containing the other victim's wallet and a key for the Corolla, which is how they believe it was
stolen. A McDonald's employee estimated the damage to the building at $10,000-$15,000. The
suspect was transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail for Possession of a Stolen Vehicle,
Hit and Run Property Damage, and Obstructing Law Enforcement. His total bond was set at $4,000
by Spokane County Superior Court Commissioner Stine. The suspect was just arrested in early
August, after he was found sleeping in the driver's seat of a stolen vehicle in the 400 block of S.
Thor. At that time, Spokane Police Officers charged him with Possession of a Stolen Vehicle and
Making/Possessing Burglary Tools. He was released days later on his own recognizance.
Three -Time Convicted Felon in Possession of Firearm, Arrested During Theft, Bond Set at
$5,000 - Responding to a theft call, a Spokane Valley deputy contacted and arrested the suspect,
a three -time convicted felon, for stealing over $230 worth of merchandise from a store. As a
convicted felon, the suspect was found to illegally be in possession of a firearm, the fourth time
he's been charged with this crime. He was
arrested for Unlawful Possession of a Firearm
2'd Degree and misdemeanor Theft 3rd
Degree. A female suspect, accompanied by
the male, was arrested for Theft 3rd
Degree. She was issued a criminal citation
and released at the scene. In early October, at
approximately 12:00 pm, Spokane Valley
Deputy Nathan Overbay responded to a possible
theft in progress call at Walmart, 5025 E.
Sprague Avenue. A store asset protection
associate (APA) advised a male and female were
observed possibly concealing items, in an
attempt to commit theft. Deputy Overbay went
to the security office and observed the 27-year-old male suspect concealing items in his pockets.
APA said he watched the 25-year-old female suspect hide merchandise in her pants. The pair were
• f5POKANFCOUNiY
SHERIFF
911EIIIFF OZZIE. D. HNEZOVICIe
The
Page 6
observed on camera walking throughout the store as the male suspect would take items, rip open the
package, and place the items in his pockets. Deputy Overbay waited outside the store, beyond all
points of sale, for the suspects to leave. As the male suspect began to exit, he noticed Deputy Overbay
and quickly turned toward the other exit. Deputy Overbay caught up to the male suspect, told him he
was under attest, grabbed his arm, and placed the suspect in handcuffs. The female suspect was
advised to follow them back inside the store to the security office, and she complied. Once in the
office, the male suspect stated, "I have a pistol in my shorts pocket." Deputy Overbay located a loaded
9mm SCCY pistol; earrings, a necklace, makeup, and other random items without packaging were
removed from his pockets. The stolen merchandise totaled over $230. The male suspect was advised
of his rights and agreed to answer questions. A check of his name revealed he was a three -time
convicted felon (Unlawful Possession of a Firearm 2"d Degree, Criminal Mischief with a Deadly
Weapon, and Unlawful Possession of a Firearm). The female suspect was advised she was under
arrest and a search revealed a $6 hair product hidden in her waistband. She was issued a criminal
misdemeanor ticket for Theft 3rd Degree and released at the scene. The male suspect, a convicted felon
and not legally allowed to possess a firearm, was transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail
for felony Unlawful Possession of a Firearm 2nd Degree and Theft 3rd Degree, a misdemeanor.
Major Crimes Detective Investigate Fatal Stabbing on E. Boone - The Spokane Valley Major
Crimes Detectives were called to the scene of a fatal stabbing in the 8000 block of E. Boone. The
suspect had fled the scene and had not been identified initially. In mid -October, at approximately
4:15 pm, Spokane Valley Deputies responded to the report of two males physically fighting near the
intersection of E. Boone and N. Dorn Court. Updated information stated one male was lying on the
ground, not moving, and the location of the second male was unknown. Deputies and Spokane Valley
Fire Fighters arrived at the scene and provided immediate medical aid. The adult male was
unresponsive and appeared to have suffered life -threatening stab wounds. He was transported to the
hospital in critical condition and later pronounced deceased. Major Crimes Detectives responded to
the scene to conduct the investigation. SIRT Team volunteers also responded to assist with traffic
control. Witness information indicated the possible suspect was a white male, 20s-30s, with dark curly
hair, black pants, and a gray hoodie with darker shoulders/hood. It was unknown if he was injured
during the fight. The Spokane County Medical Examiner's Office will release the victim's identity at
a later date when appropriate. The following day, detectives were contacted by the suspect's attorney,
which led to his arrest. Investigators learned the suspect is related to the victim. The male suspect
was booked into the Spokane County Jail for Murder 2" Degree. Additionally, he was booked on
unrelated arrest warrants for charges of Driving Under 21 Alcohol/Cannabis, No Valid Operator's
License 1st Degree, and Minor in Possession.
Fatal Motorcycle Crash at Barker Road and Sprague Avenue - Spokane Valley Traffic Unit
Investigators were called to the location of a one -vehicle fatal crash in Spokane Valley. The
adult male motorcycle rider was pronounced deceased at the scene. In mid -October, at
approximately 4:30 am, Spokane Valley Deputies responded to the report of a motorcycle crash at
Sprague Avenue and Barker Road. Arriving deputies and Spokane Valley Fire Fighters found the
adult male rider unresponsive, and he was pronounced deceased at the scene. Traffic Unit Investigators
were called to the scene to conduct the investigation. SIRT Team volunteers responded to assist with
traffic control. Initial information indicates the rider was traveling south on Barker Road at a high rate
of speed, failed to negotiate the roundabout, left the roadway, and crashed. The motorcycle involved
in the crash had been reported as stolen. While at the scene, a GMC Yukon arrived, and a 22-year-
Page 7
old male passenger contacted deputies. He explained he was checking on the rider, thinking it was his
friend. While speaking with the male, deputies checked his name and learned he had an active
misdemeanor warrant for his arrest. The male became very nervous and began walking back toward
the Yukon. Deputies told him he was not free to leave as they needed to talk to him about the crash
and that he had a warrant for his arrest. The male began running toward the Yukon while deputies told
him to stop and that he was under arrest. Deputies caught the male at the Yukon and took him into
custody; the driver of the vehicle sped away from the scene. The male was transported and booked
into the Spokane County Jail for Obstructing and his misdemeanor warrant. This remains an active
investigation, and speed is believed to be a contributing factor in this fatal crash.
DV Assault Suspect and Convicted Felon, believed to be Armed, Attempts to Avoid Arrest -
Spokane Valley Deputies located a convicted felon and Domestic Violence suspect who
reportedly threatened his ex -girlfriend and her husband with a pistol. He was taken into custody
after a short vehicle and foot pursuit. The suspect's two -year -old child was found in the vehicle
after he wrecked and fled on foot. The child was not injured, but he was taken to the hospital as
a precaution. A pistol was observed inside the suspect's vehicle, which was seized pending a
search warrant. In mid -October, at approximately 4:20 pm, Spokane Valley Deputy Heaney and
Deputy Ortiz responded to the report of a possible Domestic Violence/Stalking call in the 2900 block
of E. Cherry Lane in Spokane Valley. The victim and her husband explained the victim's ex -boyfriend
had been stalking her and her young daughter, whom they had in common. The 41-year-old male
suspect had been watching her and her daughter for weeks. She has custody of her daughter and told
the suspect if he wanted to see their child, he would need to pursue that in court. Just prior to calling
911, the victim observed the suspect sitting in a vehicle backed into a parking stall that enabled him
to view the victim's bedroom window. The victim told her husband, and they decided to contact the
suspect in the parking lot. Due to experience, she knew the suspect often carried a firearm despite
being a convicted felon, and her husband armed himself for self-defense. As they approached the car,
the suspect opened the door and stood in the vehicle's doorway, holding a pistol. The suspect raised
the handgun and pointed it at the victim and her husband. He demanded to see their daughter, and an
argument ensued regarding the parenting situation. At no time did her husband raise or point his
firearm at the suspect. Both victims feared for their lives and of being shot by the suspect. The suspect
eventually left the parking lot in a white 2005 Infiniti, and they reported the incident. Deputies
responded to the car lot where the suspect had reportedly purchased the car. They obtained information
regarding the SUV and that it had a temporary tag. They were also told the suspect had made
statements in the past that he would shoot law enforcement if they came around him. Deputy Spiewak,
Deputy Hood, and Deputy Tyler, with her partner K9 Jager, arrived in the area of the suspect's home
in the 1600 block of E. Sharp Avenue. While approaching the residence on foot, Deputy Spiewak
observed a white SUV matching the description of the car the suspect was driving. The SUV turned
around rapidly and went down a side street. The deputies returned to their patrol vehicles and began
searching the area for the car. Deputy Spiewak located the vehicle near the intersection of N. Regal
Street and E, Mission Avenue, and advised other patrol units that the SUV accelerated rapidly north
on Regal, crossing Mission. He activated his emergency lights and siren and advised the suspect was
fleeing. During the pursuit, a black sedan had to pull completely off the road to avoid being struck by
the suspect. As the suspect attempted to turn south on N. Fiske Street, he lost control, hit a power
pole, and spun, disabling his vehicle. Believing the suspect was armed, Deputy Spiewak maintained
behind the cover of his fully marked patrol car and gave orders for the male suspect to show his hands
and to get out of the vehicle. Deputy Spiewak's attention was diverted to several children and an adult
male who ran out from the houses where the crash occurred. Concerned for their safety, he told them
Page 8
to get back and go inside as the suspect exited the SUV and ran east, crossing Green Street. Several
citizens yelled to arriving deputies that the suspect was running along the river in the thick
brush. Deputy Tyler and partner K9 Jager arrived as deputies set up a permitter, with the assistance
of Spokane Police Officers, and K9 warnings were given. Shortly after Deputy Tyler and K9 Jager
began a track, SPD perimeter units advised the suspect was observed on the southeast side of Mission
and Green, running toward Mission. Deputy Sipes drove to the area and toward the male suspect, now
running up the dirt hill toward the railroad tracks. Deputy Sipes gave commands to the suspect, who
appeared tired, and he complied. He was taken into custody without further incident. Back at the
suspect's vehicle, as deputies cleared it, they noticed a young toddler in the rear passenger's seat. The
child was frightened but appeared uninjured. A child safety seat was not located in the SUV. The
child was provided medical aid to ensure he was not injured. He was transported to the hospital as a
precaution for further evaluation. The suspect was advised of his rights, and he agreed to answer
questions. The male suspect admitted to going to his ex -girlfriend's home to talk to her about their
daughter. He said he had been receiving threats from his ex about never seeing his daughter again. The
victims beat on his car, and they threatened him. When asked if he drew a pistol, the suspect said he
was a felon and would not answer further. The male suspect admitted to fleeing from deputies but said
he didn't know his son was still in the car. He thought his son went with his mother when he told her
to get out and take the child before he fled from deputies. A handgun was observed in the vehicle that
matched the description provided by the victims. The SUV was seized as evidence pending a search
warrant. The male suspect, a four -time convicted felon (Attempt to Elude, Manufacture/Sales
Controlled Substance, Possession of a Controlled Substance without a Prescription, Possession of a
Controlled Substance (cocaine -NV)), is prohibited from possessing a firearm. The male suspect was
transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail for Assault 2nd Degree (DV), Assault 2"d Degree,
Attempting to Elude Police Vehicle and Reckless Endangerment. The search warrant was served, and
Spokane Valley Investigations Unit (SVIU) detectives located and seized a loaded (one round in the
chamber) Glock 19 9min pistol, a Glock 19 magazine, and multiple small pills (approximately 200 or
more) believed to contain Fentanyl. SVIU Detectives charged the suspect with an additional felony
of Unlawful Possession of a Firearm.
Stabbing near the Spokane River - Spokane Valley Major Crimes Detectives are investigating a
reported stabbing near the Spokane River in the 16600 block of E. Indiana. The juvenile male
was transported to the hospital with what appeared to be possible life -threatening injuries. A
Page 9
second juvenile who was with the victim was not injured. This investigation continues, and no
arrests have been made. In late October, at approximately 4:15 pm, Spokane Valley Deputies
responded to the report of a possible stabbing in the 16600 block of E. Indiana, between the Centennial
Trail and the Spokane River. The juvenile caller stated his friend was stabbed in the
chest/torso. Deputies arrived and contacted the caller within minutes and were led to the victim's
location. They immediately assessed the victim's injuries and provided medical care until Spokane
Valley Firefighters arrived. The victim was transported to the hospital with possible life -threatening
wounds. The caller stated he and the victim were down by the Centennial Trail, shooting a pellet
gun. He walked away for a minute into the trees and suddenly heard the victim yell. When he looked
back, he observed a male in all -black clothing running away. A K9 Unit and a Spokane County
Regional Air Support Unit UAS were used to search for the suspect but were unsuccessful. A couple
days later, Spokane Valley Major Crimes Detectives interviewed the victim of the stabbing. At that
time, he was still hospitalized, but listed in stable condition. The victim provided additional
information regarding the suspect, describing him as a white male in his mid-3 0s, approximately 5' 11 "
tall, with a thin build, mustache, and a "pointy nose." He was wearing all black clothing except for
his shoes, which were described as black with a white Nilce swoosh. Through the continued
investigation, a second interview was conducted with the victim where he admitted he initially lied
because he was afraid of the 16-year-old male suspect after he had been violently attacked. He
explained the vicious stabbing was unprovoked, and the juvenile suspect attacked him from
behind. Afterward, the suspect would not call 911 until the victim, stabbed six times, promised he
wouldn't "snitch," and they devised a fake story and description of the fictitious attacker. The day
following the attack, detectives, with the assistance of Spokane Search and Rescue Volunteer B.
Everson and her partner K9 Nyjah, certified in human remains detection, recovered a knife believed
to have been used in the attack near the crime scene. One week after the incident occurred, Detective
Bohanek identified and arrested the juvenile suspect, charging him with 1st Degree Assault. The
suspect was transported and booked into the Spokane County Juvenile Detention Center on that
charge.
Suspects Attempt to Steal Flatbed Trailer, and Mini Excavator, Victim Fires a Pistol at Suspects
who Drove at Him - Spokane Valley Major Crimes Detectives were investigating an incident
where a victim chased down two suspects attempting to
steal the victim's flatbed trailer and mini excavator. The
victim tried to block the suspect's vehicle, but the driver ,
backed up and then drove toward the victim, causing him
to fear for his safety, and he fired his pistol at the
suspect's truck. The victim continued to try and follow
the suspect's truck and stolen equipment, later found
abandoned near N. Morton Street and E. North
Avenue. Spokane Police Officers assisted with the search
for the suspects, but they were not located. In late
October, at approximately 7:30 am, Spokane Valley
Deputies responded to the report of a stolen flatbed trailer
and mini excavator in the 1300 block of N. Bowdish Road in
Spokane Valley. The caller stated her husband was in his
truck chasing the suspected thieves, who attached their
(suspect's) truck to the trailer with the excavator and drove
away. A couple of minutes later, additional callers reported hearing gunshots in the 1500 block of N.
Bowdish. At approximately 8:00 am, callers reported a truck pulling a trailer/excavator was being
m wme eauvrr
SHERIFF
Page 10
chased near E. Wabash Avenue and N. Martin Street. The suspect's truck and stolen trailer/excavator
were located near N. Morton Street and E. North Avenue. Spokane Police Officers assisted, and a
perimeter was quickly established. A K9 Unit and UASs were used during the search, but the suspects
were not located. A significant amount of blood was found on the passenger's side floorboard of the
suspect's truck, and it is believed at least one of the suspects was injured during the incident. Major
Crimes Detectives responded to continue the investigation. The suspect's truck and the victim's trailer,
excavator, and handgun were all seized as evidence. The victim was cooperative and later released
without charges. When located, the suspects could face several charges, including felony assault and
theft. Suspect #1 was described as a white male in his 40s, wearing a bright neon jacket. Suspect #2
was described as a white male in his 40s, heavy set, wearing a red jacket, and limping (possibly shot
in the leg). Detectives continued the investigation and ultimately identified the two male suspects.
Charges have been filed on the 29-year-old male for 2nd Assault and 1st Theft, and on the 46-year-old
suspect (who sustained two gunshot wounds) for 1st Theft. Neither suspect has been located or arrested.
Browns Park in Spokane Valley Vandalized/Investigators Work to Identify People Who May
Have Information - Spokane Valley Investigative Unit (SVIU) Detectives would like to identify
the young adults/late teens that may have
information regarding this senseless act of -` Cam::
vandalism and they are asking for your
help. In late October, at approximately 7:10
pm, Spokane Valley Deputies received a
report of malicious mischief at Browns Park,
3111 S. Pines Road in Spokane Valley. The
caller reported four or five males were
attempting to break into the locked bathroom
at the park by using a 2 x 4 to break the lock. A
second caller provided similar information but
added one of the doors had been opened, and
the maintenance room appeared to have been
vandalized. The caller stated
one of the males might live in
the 11700 -- 11800 block of E.
15th Avenue. The arriving
deputy found the doors open
and observed fresh graffiti and
paint spilled on the ground,
garbage can, and grass around
the building. One of the door
locks was also destroyed. If
anyone has information about
this crime, please call Crime
Check at 509-456-2233
reference case number
#10145517.
1110145517
/410145517
Page 11
Help our Deputies/Investigators Hold
Criminals Accountable while Keeping Your
Neighborhood Safe - If you have a home or
business surveillance system, we would like
you to join our VIP (Video Identification
Program) program. This is a voluntary
program, and we are only asking for
locations of security systems that may help investigators quickly find video footage if a crime
occurred in your area. We are NOT asking for access to your system.
P
LOCK OBSERVE CARSSHOULD KEEPGARAGE
TEMS IN AND REPORT NEVER RUN DOORS CLOSED
UR TRUNK UNATTENDED
What is it? The VIP program lets us know where video footage might be found in the event a
significant incident or crime occurred in the area. With this information, investigators would know
the potential locations where video evidence of the actual incident, or a suspect/vehicle entering or
leaving the area where the crime occurred, might be found. This type of evidence and the ability to
obtain it quickly is invaluable.
Are you asking for access to remotely access my surveillance system? No, not at all. We merely
ask you to let us know that you have a system and what direction/area it may have
recorded. Investigators can then easily access a map of surveillance cameras locations in the area
where a crime was committed, including possible routes taken by the suspect(s) as they arrived or fled
the scene. In addition, they would have your contact information allowing them to contact locations
that may have this valuable evidence recorded.
How do I join? It's easy. Go to our website (www.spokanesheriff.org), click on the VIP icon, and.
provide your information. You can also copy and paste this direct link into your Internet browser
https://survey 123. arcgis.com/share/4405709204ca4dce8 77e 163 bb26fece6
Thank you for your continued support and your willingness
to help us keep our community safe.
Spokane County Sheriff's Office and Spokane Valley
Police would like to join with you to potentially solve
crimes or locate evidence of crimes faster and more
effectively. We are asking business and private
residences to advise us if they have recorded surveillance
systems and whom we would contact if a significant
incident occurred in their area.
We encourage residents who have operational
surveillance cameras outside their home to go to
the Sheriff's website and register their home
and video cameras. Thank you.
https://www.spokanecounty.org/1080/Sheriff
VIP
Video
Identification
Program
CLICK HERE
to voluntR1417 jolty
the VIP program
Page 12
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
IBR Count by District
Time Period: October 2022
Spokane Valley Districts
Unincorporated Districts
IBR Offense
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
DP
FF
LAH
ML
MW
RF
SPA
WAV OTHER
TOTAL
09A Murder/NonNegligent
Manslaughter
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
09B Negligent Manslaughter
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100 Kidnapping/Abduction
0
2
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
11A Rape - Forcible
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
11B Sodomy - Forcible
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
11C Sex Assault With Object
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
11D Fondling- Forcible
0
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
120 Robbery
0
0
2
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
13A Aggravated Assault
2
2
4
7
0
8
0
1
0
0
1
2
3
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
33
133 Simple Assault
11
15
8
13
4
13
2
1
0
4
2
3
10
4
0
0
1
0
4
0
0
0
0
3
98
13C Intimidation
4
5
5
7
3
8
3
1
1
0
0
2
4
4
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
4
52
36A Incest
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
36B Rape - Statutory
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
64A Human Trafficking - Commercial
Sex Acts
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
64B Human Trafficking - Involuntary
Servitude
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
500 Violation of Protection Orders
9
5
1
4
2
6
4
2
5
2
1
0
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
47
Total Crimes Against Persons
28
30
22
35
11
38
9
5
6
7
5
10
23
10
0
1
1
0
6
1
0
0
0
10
258
200 Arson
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
210 Extortion/Blackmail
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
5
220 Burglary/Breaking & Entering
20
9
6
5
4
7
3
2
2
9
6
4
8
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
101
23A Theft - Pocket -Picking
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
236 Theft - Purse Snatching
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
23C Theft - Shoplifting
44
2
2
20
3
6
1
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
1
0
0
10
96
23D Theft From Building
4
3
4
9
0
6
3
1
0
1
1
3
3
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
4
47
23E Theft From Coin Operatied
Machine
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
23F Theft From Motor Vehicle
14
18
5
18
14
8
12
4
5
20
4
5
21
2
0
2
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
3
159
23G Theft of Motor Vehicle
Parts/Accessories
7
8
2
6
2
5
4
1
0
3
2
4
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
49
23H Theft - All Other
16
9
10
20
6
8
13
2
2
4
12
4
13
3
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
136
240 Motor Vehicle Theft
14
12
4
10
1
7
10
4
4
2
1
0
5
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
3
79
250 Counterfeiting/Forgery
3
3
0
2
0
3
2
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16
26A Fraud - False Pretense/Swindling
11
5
3
3
1
6
5
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
3
50
26B Fraud - Credit Card/ATM
8
5
2
7
4
1
3
3
1
4
1
0
4
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
49
26C Fraud - Impersonation
0
3
0
1
0
3
0
0
2
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
14
26D Welfare Fraud
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
26F Identity Theft
0
2
3
3
0
1
2
0
1
2
1
2
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
22
26G Hacking/Computer Invasion
0
0
0
3
0
2
1
2
1
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
IBR Count by District
Time Period: October 2022
Spokane Valley Districts
Unincorporated Districts
IBR Offense
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
DP
FF
LAH
ML
MW
RF
SPA
WAV OTHER
TOTAL
270 Embezzlement
2
1
D
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
polo
Do
0
0
5
280 Stolen Property Offense
(Receiving, etc.)
4
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
10
290 Destruction/Vandalism
29
35
18
27
12
26
16
7
4
23
9
15
21
7
0
1
1
1
0
4
0
0
0
15
271
Total Crimes Against Property
177
117
62
135
47
90
75
28
24
75
38
40
89
19
0
12
1
2
3
18
2
1
0
69
1124
35A Drugs/Narcotics Violation
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
35B Drug Equipment Violation
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
370 Pornography/Obscene Material
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
39A Betting/Wagering
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
39B Gambling - Operating Promoting
Assisting
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
39C Gambling Equipment Violation
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
40A Prostitution
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
40B Prostiution - Assisting/Promoting
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
40C Purchasing Prostitution
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
510 Bribery
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
520 Weapon Law Violation
3
3
0
3
3
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
19
720 Animal Cruelty
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total Crimes Against Society
5
3
0
3
3
0
0
2
0
0
0
2
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
23
09CJustifiabeHomicide
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
90A Bad Checks
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
90B Curfew/Loitering
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
90C Disorderly Conduct
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
90D Driving Under Influence
8
7
3
2
3
4
0
0
2
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
37
90F Family Offense - NonViolent
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
0
0
0
0
0
90G Liquor Law Violation
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
90H Peeping Tom
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
901 Trespass of Real Property
7
6
3
6
2
3
1
2
1
2
1
4
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
4
49
90Z All Other Offenses
16
13
4
19
8
17
1D
1
3
8
1
6
17
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
23
149
Total Group B Offenses
31
27
10
27
13
25
12
3
7
10
2
12
20
2
0
2
0
0
0
4
1
0
0
31
239
NR Not Reportable
8
14
7
5
4
6
5
4
0
1
0
2
7
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
77
Total All Offenses
249
191
101
205
78
159
101
42
37
93
45
66
142
33
0
15
2
2
9
23
3
1
0
124
1721
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Burglary - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
—40-2017
—IS— 2018
—A-2019
2020
-IF 2021
—` 2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
55
51
33
40
53
57
February
52
26
20
56
45
40
March
42
34
37
53
43
64
April
49
36
35
70
41
50
May
47
34
57
69
49
42
June
58
29
38
69
44
48
July
51
44
48
63
54
51
August
56
51
57
58
59
67
September
77
38
50
67
39
54
October
37
48
46
68
38
51
November
32
49
41
57
62
-
December
34
47
40
63
55
-
Grand Total
590
487
502
733
582
524
* IBR Offense: Burglary/Breaking & Entering 220
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Rape - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
—4-2017
—M--2018
—*-a 2019
2020
— 2021
--• 2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
9
15
2
2
2
10
February
2
4
3
2
3
2
March
2
8
4
2
5
6
April
7
7
4
-
5
6
May
7
9
2
3
7
2
June
2
6
5
4
3
4
July
6
5
3
1
4
August
4
3
5
2
4
4
September
2
3
9
4
3
4
October
7
1
4
1
-
3
November
1
7
2
3
3
-
December
2
7
3
5
4
-
Grand Total
51
75
46
29
43
41
*IBR Offense: Rape - Forcible 11A, Sodomy - Forcible 11B,
Sexual Assault with Object 11C
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Assault - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
+ 2017
2018
-f— 2019
2020
— )K— 2021
- 2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
96
83
71
93
71
73
February
94
64
61
96
51
81
March
77
101
73
80
65
93
April
89
88
68
95
69
74
May
93
80
87
85
70
64
June
94
101
79
104
56
68
July
94
113
104
88
80
60
August
74
83
95
99
68
81
September
92
82
72
79
60
80
October
89
84
68
80
74
87
November
85
78
85
73
54
December
84
91
79
63
90
-
Grand Total
1,061
1,048
942
1,035
808
761
* IBR Offense: Aggravated Assault 13A & Simple Assault
130
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional intelligence Group 9
Robbery - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
3
6
3
8
8
6
February
6
2
8
12
7
4
March
7
5
4
6
5
3
April
3
6
4
8
9
2
May
2
9
6
3
7
5
June
1
3
2
8
3
7
July
4
7
8
5
5
6
August
1
6
11
6
6
14
September
4
6
8
8
4
2
October
4
5
7
6
7
5
November
3
3
12
3
4
-
December
1
4
10
5
7
-
Grand Total
39
62
83
78
72
54
* IBR Offense: Robbery 120
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Motor Vehicle Theft - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
47
36
35
32
29
38
February
37
27
22
32
25
35
March
47
27
20
31
25
57
April
42
26
30
29
24
42
May
27
25
34
29
29
43
June
28
24
25
33
26
34
July
43
40
32
25
24
51
August
36
20
30
27
41
67
September
43
27
37
27
40
45
October
39
32
25
31
42
48
November
33
45
36
29
54
-
December
29
32
34
29
55
Grand Total
451
361
360
354
414
460
* IBR Offense: Motor Vehicle Theft 240
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intenigence Group 9
Theft From Motor Vehicle (Vehicle Prowl) - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
98
75
51
66
87
76
February
104
33
44
98
106
89
March
94
77
73
58
75
96
April
130
62
122
75
88
74
May
79
70
140
85
77
54
June
107
67
84
80
70
73
July
97
107
114
77
66
67
August
69
88
99
148
118
74
September
118
85
80
130
128
72
October
70
105
97
116
120
77
November
52
112
96
90
81
-
December
69
71
112
97
85
-
Grand Total
1,087
952
1,112
1,120
1,101
752
` IBR Offense: Theft From Motor Vehicle 23F
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Damage/Destruction/Vandalism (MALMS) - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
—4— 2017
—M— 2018
—k-- 2019
2020
—)I(-2021
—6— 2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
157
146
125
113
132
132
February
148
95
67
142
121
133
March
137
121
122
105
104
194
April
173
127
143
157
133
173
May
139
143
161
116
133
148
June
144
_ 141
133
154
158
176
July
178
142
156
146
133
134
August
154
131
144
172
177
164
September
159
156
142
190
164
150
October
119
166
165
174
196
147
November
131
155
141
151
141
-
December
108
126
175
144
128
-
Grand Total
1,747
1,649
1,674
1,764
1,720
1,551
IBR Offense: Destruction/Damage/Vandalism 290
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Homicide - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
3
2
Z u L >` n a`a m a`j a�
(T3 o
coa�i u a iE
ai
o - w O Q o5
az
n
—0— 2017
a- 2018
—ilk-2019
2020
—X—2021
2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
-
-
-
-
-
-
February
-
-
1
1
1
March
-
-
-
-
1
-
April
-
-
1
May
-
-
-
1
1
June
-
1
-
-
-
-
July
1
-
-
-
1
-
August
-
-
-
-
1
September
-
-
-
-
1
-
October
-
-
-
-
2
November
1
-
-
-
1
-
December
-
-
1
1
-
-
Grand Total
2
1
1
3
9
3
*IBR Offense: Murder/Non-Negligent Manslaughter 09A
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOI<ANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Identity Theft - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
CO
ra
CU
E
m
0
cn
L
a)
E
ai
u
aJ
0
—H 2017
,2018
—A-2019
2020
—)1(— 2021
®.,gip 2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
9
19
17
17
12
10
February
24
16
10
17
18
23
March
22
13
13
12
20
14
April
16
22
20
17
23
10
May
31
21
13
442
18
7
June
19
17
5
47
12
14
July
23
14
12
26
13
13
August
12
15
8
28
22
13
September
17
13
15
16
22
5
October
15
21
17
18
16
9
November
18
23
12
15
13
-
December
24
16
7
17
13
-
Grand Total
230
210
149
672
202
118
*I BR Offense: Identity Theft 26F
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOT<ANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional intelligence Group 9
DUI - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
- 2 017
—El— 2018
— A— 2019
2020
—X-2021
2022.
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
22
19
32
26
21
29
February
25
18
22
28
24
28
March
32
39
22
8
15
25
April
19
14
27
17
18
23
May
19
32
18
15
21
19
June
28
23
24
27
30
18
July
26
17
25
25
17
23
August
24
28
24
21
7
29
September
20
37
37
22
19
21
October
24
32
27
27
25
27
November
18
28
31
21
19
-
December
20
23
19
22
34
-
Grand Total
277
310
308
259
250
242
* IBR Offense: DUI 90D
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Drugs - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
2017
-2018
—16-2019
2020
2021
—0— 2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
23
39
51
45
31
-
February
28
38
40
62
36
4
March
28
58
57
51
4
6
April
38
55
63
36
2
6
May
23
39
39
64
4
6
June
21
54
29
51
2
6
July
17
55
46
38
-
9
August
25
38
55
35
2
5
September
25
33
49
39
1
8
October
21
50
47
37
1
2
November
32
38
54
42
1
-
December
27
47
44
30
6
-
Grand Total
308
544
574
530
90
52
* IBR Offense: Drugs/Narcotics Violations 35A and Drug
Equipment Violations 358
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Fraud - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
120
100
80
60
40
20
ra
3
co
co
co
L
W
U
(00
L
CL
CU
C
3
3
3
00
3
E
4-,
4-,
12
a)
N
0)
0
Q)
0
—0-2017
•_2018
—lir-2019
2020
—0(— 2021
— 2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
26
69
64
69
65
55
February
36
46
32
59
57
80
March
37
59
62
50
97
56
April
43
55
58
62
97
56
May
53
67
57
85
63
55
June
57
64
50
73
64
49
July
61
64
65
67
81
58
August
54
64
65
70
94
75
September
65
49
57
67
79
64
October
65
60
75
76
59
63
November
53
56
68
62
71
-
December
42
60
49
61.
66
-
Grand Total
592
713
702
801
893
611
* IBR Offense: Pretenses/Swindling/Con Games 26A, Fraud - Credit Card/ATM 26B, and
Fraud - False & Fraud - Impersonation 26C
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOT<ANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Forgery - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
—0— 2017
—E— 2018
—A-2019
2020
-4IF 2021
— —2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
9
18
20
23
13
4
February
11
10
13
12
8
10
March
20
24
17
14
10
9
April
19
21
14
14
10
9
May
26
21
10
10
10
7
June
15
15
14
7
6
14
July
21
15
10
9
13
9
August
15
17
13
10
3
7
September
20
14
12
3
14
7
October
18
11
14
7
11
11
November
9
21
21
9
14
-
December
9
13
15
15
8
-
Grand Total
192
200
173
133
120
87
*IBR Offense: Counterfeiting/Forgery 250
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Theft - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
300
250
200
1.50
100
50
ra
ca
D
L
w
E
v
N
Q
CU
,,
L
E
0
z
0
fl
E
0
0
+ 2017
2018
--A— 2019
2020
-i- 2021
2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
206
237
237
239
198
197
February
200
165
188
199
185
198
March
217
209
212
197
193
203
April
201
201
206
181
185
198
May
235
230
230
152
161
176
June
252
224
232
217
185
218
July
236
238
236
195
156
234
August
223
211
256
168
177
232
September
212
194
233
218
194
192
October
236
235
240
204
210
204
November
218
198
205
218
201
-
December
199
251
231
230
198
-
Grand Total
2,635
2,593
2,706
2,418
2,243
2,052
* IBR Offense: Theft - Pocket -Picking 23A, Theft - Purse -Snatching 23B, Theft - Shoplifting 23C, Theft
From Building 23D, Theft From Coin -Operated Machine 23E, Theft of Motor Vehicle Parts/Accessories
23G, and Theft -AEI Other 23H
Produced: 11/07/2022
Spokane County Sheriff's Office
Response Times by Priority
October 2022
Spokane Valley
SCSO Unincorporated
SCSO All
Priority Create To Dispatch Dispatch To Arrive Create To Arrive Create To Dispatch Dispatch To Arrive Create To Arrive Create To Dispatch Dispatch To Arrive Create To Arrive
00:02:54
00:06:38
00:09:32
00:02:55
00:09:14
00:12:08
00:02:55
00:07:53
00:10:48
2
00:18:24
00:08:57
00:27:22
00:20:39
00:14:29
00:35:08
00:19:22
00:11:20
00:30:42
3
00:44:10
00:12:23
00:56:33
00:45:56
00:15:16
01:01:12
00:44:56
00:13:38
00:58:35
4
01:03:13
00:18:55
01:22:08
00:37:59
00:08:08
00:46:07
00:50:36
00:13:31
01:04:08
Totals
0:32:15
0:10:53
0:43:09
0:33:42
0.14:3$
0:48:20
0:32:53
0:12:31
0:45:24
Duration (hh:mm:ss)
2:52:48
2:24:00
1:55:12
1:26:24
0:57:36
0:28:48
0:00:00
Spokane Valley - Create to Dispatch
by hour grouping
00:00 - 04:00 - 08:00 - 12:00 - 16:00 - 20:00 -
03:59 07:59 11:59 15:59 19:59 23:59
—0—Priority 1 0:01:11 0:02:29 0:00:00 0:04:40 0:02:33 0:03:31
-Priority 2 0:07:38 0:15:30 0:15:24 0:23:50 0:28:00 0:10:22
—6—Priority3 0:16:03 0:42:34 0:43:34 0:50:07 1:11:20 0:20:21
-0.Priarity4 0:03:33 0:55:10 1:09:42 0:43:14 2:22:19 0:00:00
Duration (hh:mm:ss)
Spokane Valley - Dispatch to Arrival
by hour grouping
00:00 - 04:00 - 08:00 - 12:00 - 16:00 - 20:00 -
03:59 07:59 11:59 15:59 19:59 23:59
—I— Priority 1 00:05:53 00:02:15 00:00:00 00:13:23 00:07:18 00:02:10
Priority2 00:05:43 00:08:59 00:10:13 00:09:41 00:09:47 00:07:42
—1113riority 3 00:04:57 00:13:30 00:14:19 00:14:37 00:12:01 00:09:13
-Priority 4 00:03:41 00:02:42 00:05:56 00:45:49 00:11:16 00:00:00
00:50:24
00:43:12
00:35:00
00:28:48
00:21:36
00:14:24
00:07:12
00:00:00
Spokane County Sheriff's Office
Response Times by Priority
October 2022
Duration (hh:mm:ss)
SCSO Unincorporated- Create to Dispatch
by hour grouping
00:00 - 04:00 - 08:00 - 12:00 - 15:00 - 20:00 -
03:59 07:59 11:59 15:59 19:59 23:59
--Prioirty 1 0:01:34 0:00:00 0:03:15 0:02:43 0:06:16 0:01;03
- Priority 2 0:13:08 0:15:05 0:17:09 0:19:03 0:29:46 0:22:18
-O.-Priority 3 0:24:56 0:36:16 0:43:52 0:51:11 1:01:15 0:31:44
# Priority4 0:00:00 0:17:58 0:28:23 0:34:12 1:28:28 0:08:51
1:40:4a
1:26:24
1:12:0D
0:57:36
0:43:12
0:28:48
0:14:24
0:00:00
Duration (hh:mm:ss)
2:09:36
1:55:12
1:40:48
1:26:24
1:12:00
0:57:36
0:43:12
0:28:48
0:14:24
0:00:00
.-•-Priority 1
Priority 2
- Priority 3
tPrioirty 4
SCSO All - Create to Dispatch
by hour grouping
•
• •
00:00 - 04:00 - 08:00 - 12:00 - 16:00 - 20:00 -
D3:59 07:59 11:59 15:59 19:59 23:59
0:01:25 0:02:29 0:03:15 0:03:33 0:03:57 0;02:02
0:09:39 0:15:20 0:16:13 0:21:52 0:28:46 0:15:55
0:20:17 0:40:01 0:43:41 0:50:38 1:06:30 0:24:30
0:03:33 0:26:14 0:50:45 0:39:05 1:53:35 0:07:05
Duration (iih:mm
SCSO Unincorporated- Dispatch to Arrival
by hour grouping
a-
00:00 - 04:00 - 08:00 - 12:00 - 16:00 - 20:00 -
03:59 07:59 11:59 15:59 19:59 23:59
+Priority 1 00:16:59 00:00:00 00:03:54 00:04:07 00:09:32 00:09:45
-17,--,Priority 2 00:10:10 00:15:16 00:13:38 00:14:30 00:17:19 00:13:39
- ID-Priority3 00:13:00 00:13:37 00:14:16 00:17:12 00:17:42 00:11:30
-f- Priority 4 00:00:00 00:00:12 00:08:10 00:05:49 00:19:23 00:05:46
00:23:02
00:20:10
00:17:17
00:14:24
00:11:31
00:08:38
00:05:46
00:02:53
00:00:00
Duration (hh:mm:ss)
00:36:00
00:28:48
00:21:36
00:14:24
00:07:12
00:00:00
SCSO All - Dispatch to Arrival
by hour grouping
-4.-Priority 1 00:12:32 00:02:15
: 'Prioitty2 00:07:21 00:11:33 00:11:49 00:11:40 00:13:00 00:10:28
-8-Prioirty 3 00:08:47 00:13:33 00:14:18 00:15:52 00:14:45 00:10:03
- Prioirty 4 00:03:41 00:00:45 00:06:57 00:27:29 00:15:36 00:04:37
00:00 - 04:00 - 08:00 - 12:00 - 16:00 - 20:00 -
03:59 07:59 11:59 15:59 19:59 23:59
00:03:54 00:08:05 00:08:08 00:06:43
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
CaII Activity Heat Maps - Spokane Valley
October 2022
Citizen Calls by Day of Week and Hour
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
Saturday Total
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
28
20
15
11
11
12
18
18
24
19
34
25
25
38
43
45
31
23
35
44
31
25
19
14
15
12
9
7
6
13
11
30
45
40
31
27
50
46
40
42
47
39
50
32
32
33
28
17
10
13
8
7
9
4
16
24
27
29
22
24
43
31
41
41
46
38
32
36
31
15
18
14
11
10
8
7
8
7
15
31
26
37
24
28
33
47
24
42
52
26
44
28
33
26
17
14
9
7
11
13
12
7
19
38
29
28
44
24
25
29
29
36
39
38
26
27
29
25
17
6
10 27 110
10 20 92
15 13 79
7 16 68
7 9 62
4 11 58
10 16 105
21 17 179
28 24 203
33 33 219
24 227
40 211
37 255
37 36 264
42 39 258
35 48 289
41 281
38 236
29 40 256
36 41 244
21 52 229
30 42 196
35 34 168
20 31 116
48
43
42
25
34
Total 608
702
579
598
567
610
741 4405
Total Deputy Involved Incidents by Day of Week and Hour
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Total
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
23
10
13
16
8
11
20
9
18
18
26
21
13
22
19
31
20
14
20
30
23
25
28
26
14
27
18
7
4
7
14
29
448
38
30
29
36
43
42
33
21
23
25
26
32
29
24
22
15
16
8
11
10
5
17
28
27
24
29
27
32
26
30
30
23
19
21
26
20
14
14
13
10
11
5
6
3
7
22
33
31
33
29
31
32
43
35
31
25
17
26
20
22
14
11
12
8
7
9
11
8
5
17
41
23
27
38
25
26
33
32
23
21
17
14
18
21
19
18
16
12 31 113
14 21 106
18 11 82
7 18 76
5 6 44
5 12 52
11 9 110
22 20 182
21 16 184
21 27 188
27 38 217
37 30 200
32 29 200
37 21 225
35 21 214
24 29 201
36 161
23 129
16 24 146
24 31 175
15 174
25 161
29 160
18 27 134
15
16
41
35
36
Total 464 621 485 509 477 514 564 3634
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Citizen Call For Service (CFS) - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
L..-5
ro r6 L.d
7 .D7 - crb Q
C
[4 4]
LL
as
tri
ttO
7
Q
40
E
41
Q
41
4/1
9
U
0
- 4- 2017
f -2018
- -2019
2020
- 2021
-0-2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
3,088
3,405
3,351
3,521
3,680
3,792
February
2,942
2,862
3,170
3,638
3,342
3,652
March
3,546
3,597
3,711
3,504
4,052
4,475
April
3,416
3,460
3,839
3,405
4,078
4,072
May
3,987
4,331
4,516
3,941
4,415
4,382
June
3,955
4,006
4,349
4,153
4,810
4,463
July
4,459
4,467
4,976
4,570
4,993
4,880
August
4,204
4,286
4,680
4,319
4,583
4,840
September
3,799
4,048
4,318
4,259
4,397
4,504
October
3,718
3,927
4,072
3,909
4,471
4,405
November
3,353
3,582
3,646
3,392
3,966
December
3,406
3,530
3,668
3,678
4,252
Grand Total
43,873
45,501
48,296
46,289
51,039
43,465
*excludes calls handled by Crime Check only
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOI<ANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Citizen CFS With Deputy Response - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
-10-2017
�-�- 2018
-*-- 2019
2020
-X.-2021
--fp- 2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
1,941
2,208
2,190
2,319
2,295
2,180
February
1,787
1,865
2,011
2,364
2,072
2,124
March
2,224
2,375
2,386
2,321
2,399
2,663
April
2,119
2,230
2,418
2,417
2,475
2,318
May
2,478
2,731
2,851
2,650
2,605
2,528
June
2,416
2,516
2,654
2,677
2,712
2,463
July
2,609
2,685
2,983
2,660
2,544
2,530
August
2,589
2,639
2,852
2,708
2,527
2,741
September
2,336
2,555
2,725
2,524
2,312
2,666
October
2,292
2,510
2,547
2,462
2,453
2,502
November
2,131
2,350
2,416
2,170
2,221
December
2,157
2,314
2,402
2,301
2,326
Grand Total
27,079
28,978
30,435
29,573
28,941
24,715
Produced:11/07/2022
SPOT<ANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Citizen CFS Without Deputy Response - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
3,000
2,500
2,000.
1,500
1,000
500
-Q
�
c
G
ttO
j)
G
QJ
4-,
trl
Qi
Q
0
w
E
w
0
'Cu
E
w
- 01-- 2017
--EH 2018
-A-2019
2020
- 2021
- 2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
1,147
1,197
1,161
1,202
1,385
1,612
February
1,155
997
1,159
1,274
1,270
1,528
March
1,322
1,222
1,325
1,183
1,653
1,812
April
1,297
1,230
1,421
988
1,603
1,754
May
1,509
1,600
1,665
1,291
1,810
1,854
June
1,539
1,490
1,695
1,476
2,098
2,000
July
1,850
1,782
1,993
1,910
2,449
2,350
August
1,615
1,647
1,828
1,611
2,056
2,099
September
1,463
1,493
1,593
1,735
2,085
1,838
October
1,426
1,417
1,525
1,447
2,018
1,903
November
1,222
1,232
1,230
1,222
1,745
December
1,249
1,216
1,266
1,377
1,926
Grand Total
16,794
16,523
17,861
16,716
22,098
18,750
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Deputy Initiated Incidents - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
1,446
1,694
2,024
1,601
1,114
848
February
1,328
1,481
1,608
1,518
983
771
March
1,870
2,063
1,614
1,166
1,000
1,252
April
1,425
1,683
1,650
1,172
997
967
May
1,553
1,789
1,157
1,567
1,003
1,207
June
1,503
1,699
1,724
1,070
1,155
1,068
July
1,504
1,793
1,600
1,036
767
1,197
August
1,737
1,637
1,565
1,130
567
1,239
September
1,671
1,773
1,779
1,285
725
1,160
October
1,560
1,595
1,472
1,239
813
1,132
November
1,732
1,841
1,487
1,164
1,102
December
1,574
1,661
1,436
1,208
907
Grand Total
18,903
20,709
19,116
15,156
11,133
10,841
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Total Deputy Involved Incidents - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
5,000
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
ra
3
m
rn
a- )
LL
t
ro
m
2
as
3
4-,
3
bo
3
a
v
E
qJ
0
0
OJ
N
a)
.0
0
u
0
November
- 0-2017
-II- 2018
2019
2020
CIE- 2021
- 0-2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
3,387
3,902
4,214
3,920
3,409
3,028
February
3,115
3,346
3,619
3,882
3,055
2,895
March
4,094
4,438
4,000
3,487
3,399
3,915
April
3,544
3,913
4,068
3,589
3,472
3,285
May
4,031
4,520
4,008
4,217
3,608
3,735
June
3,919
4,215
4,378
3,747
3,867
3,531
July
4,113
4,478
4,583
3,696
3,311
3,727
August
4,326
4,276
4,417
3,838
3,094
3,980
September
4,007
4,328
4,504
3,809
3,037
3,826
October
3,852
4,105
4,019
3,701
3,266
3,634
November
3,863
4,191
3,903
3,334
3,323
December
3,731
3,975
3,838
3,509
3,233
Grand Total
45,982
49,687
49,551
44,729
40,074
35,556
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Crime Check Call For Service (CFS) - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
—0—2017
-A- 2018
-AL— 2019
2020
2017 2018.2019 2020 2021 2022
January
612
662
631
627
622
352
February
608
488
504
689
659
458
March
647
659
651
690
760
529
April
667
602
703
684
739
477
May
699
697
763
1,113
767
509
June
698
703
630
793
736
502
July
712
727
717
782
723
523
August
690
673
731
837
728
563
September
667
626
655
812
656
551
October
667
713
747
735
603
658
November
571
661
615
643
500
December
635
609
683
668
480
Grand Total
7,873
7,820
8,030
9,073
7,973
5,122
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Ticket Counts
Date Range: October 2022
Ticket Type
Criminal Non Traffic
Criminal Traffic
Infraction Non Traffic
Infraction Traffic
Parking
Spokane Valley Districts
Ticket Count Charges Count
87 97
39 47
0 0
231 282
0 0
Unincorporated Districts
Ticket Count Charges Count
37 35
31 35
1 1
273 345
0 0
All Districts
Ticket Count Charges Count
124 132
70 82
1 1
504 627
0 0
Totals:
Ticket Type
Criminal Non Traffic
Criminal Traffic
Infraction Non Traffic
Infraction Traffic
Parking
357 426
Deer Park
Ticket Count Charges Count
0 0
0 0
0 0
2 2
0 0
342 416 699 842
Medical Lake
Ticket Count Charges Count
1 0
0 0
0 0
6 10
0 0
Millwood
Ticket Count Charges Count
0 0
1 1
0 0
4 8
0 0
Totals:
2 2
10
5 9
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOT<ANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Ticket Charge Details -- Spokane Valley
Date Range: October 2022
Charge
Count
(blank)
46.12.650.7: FAIL TO TRANSFER TITLE W/I 45 DAYS
46.16A.030.2: OPER VEH W/O CRNT/PRPR REG & PLATE
46.16A.030,4: FAIL TO INITIALLY REGISTER VEHICLE
46.16A.030.5,0: FL RENEW EXPIRED REG >2 MTHS
46.16A.180.2: OPER/POSSESS VEH W/O REGISTRATION
46.16A.200.7D: VEH PLATE NOT VALID/IMPROPER ATTACH
46.16A.320.6: TRIP PERMIT VIOLATION
6
5
5
1
15
5
1
1
46.20,005: DRIVING WITHOUT LICENSE 2
46,20.015: DRIVING MOTOR VEHICLE WITH AN EXPIRED LICENSE WITH VALID IDENTIFICATION 14
46.20.017: LICENSE NOT IN POSSESSION 2
46.20,205: LIC(FAIL CHANGE ADDRESS) 1
46.20.342.1A: DWLS 1ST DEGREE 1
46.20.342.1B: DWLS 2ND DEGREE 3
46.20.342.1C: DWLS 3RD DEGREE 2
46.20.500; CYCLE(OPERATE W/O ENDORSEMENT) 3
46.20,740: MV IGNITION INTERLOCK DRIVE VEH WO 1
46.30.020: OPERATING A MOTOR VEHICLE WITHOUT INSURANCE 27
46.37.020: LAMPS, OPERATE VEH WO HEADLGHT WHEN REQ 1
46.37.040: LAMPS, HEADLAMPS REQ 1
46.37.050.3: TAIL LAMPS REQUIRED/ DEFECT LICENSE PLATE LAMP 1
46.37.050: DEFECTIVE LIGHTS 3
46.37.060: OPERATING WITHOUT REFLECTOR/CLEARANCE LAMP 1
46.37.150: LAMPS, LIGHTING VIO COLOR -LOCATION, PARK -STOP 1
46.37.430; WINDOWS, ILLEGAL GLAZED -TINTED 1
46.37.500: SPLASH APRONS -FENDERS, NONE ON VEH 2
46.37.522: MOTORCYCLE -HEAD LAMPS AND TAIL LAMPS REQUIRED 1
46.52.020: OLD CODE:VEH(HIT/RUN PERSON AT 2
46.61,022: FAILURE TO STOP WHEN REQUESTED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT 2
46.61.050: DISREGARD TRAFFIC SIGNAL SIGN 3
46.61.055.3A: ENTER INTERSECTION STEADY RED CIRCLE 1
46.61.055.4: FAIL TO STOP AT SIGNAL MARK 1
46,61.055: FAIL TO OBEY TRAFFIC CONTROL LEGEND 3
46.61.140: IMPROPER LANE USAGE 5
46.61.145.1: FOLLOW VEHICLE TOO CLOSELY 5
46.61,145.4: FOLLOW TOO CLOSE VULNERABLE USER 1
46.61.180.1: FAIL TO YIELD TO VEHICLE APPROACHING INTERSECTION 2
46.61.185,1: FAIL YIELD LEFT TURN MOTOR VEHICLE 3
46.61,190.2: FAIL STOP AT STOP SIGN/INTERSECTION 2
46,61.190.3: FAIL YIELD AT YIELD SIGN/INTERSECTION 3
46.61.200: FAIL TO STOP AT INTERSECTION/STOP SIGN 8
46.61.290: TURN, PROHIBIT-1MPROPER 2
46.61.305.2: IMPROPER LANE CHANGE (100 FT NOTICE) 1
46.61.305: FAIL TO SIGNAL STOP -TURN UNSAFE LANE 1
46,61,400.08: SPEED 8 OVER (OVER 40) 1
46.61.400.10U: SPEED 10 OVER (40 OR UNDER) 2
46.61.400.11U: SPEED 11 OVER (40 OR UNDER) 2
46.61.400.12U: SPEED 12 OVER (40 OR UNDER) 4
46.61.400.13U: SPEED 13 OVER (40 OR UNDER) 9
46.61.400,14U: SPEED 14 OVER (40 OR UNDER) 16
46.61,400,15U: SPEED 15 OVER (40 OR UNDER) 14
46,61.400.16U: SPEED 16 OVER (40 OR UNDER) 5
Produced: 11/7/2022
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Ticket Charge Details - Spokane Valley
Date Range: October 2022
Charge
Count
46.61.400.17U: SPEED 17 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
46.61.400.18: SPEED 18 OVER (OVER 40)
46.61.400.18U: SPEED 18 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
46.61.400.19: SPEED 19 OVER (OVER 40)
46.61.400.19U: SPEED 19 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
46.61.400.2: SPEEDING OVER MAXIMUM LIMIT
46.61.400.20: SPEED 20 OVER (OVER 40)
46.61,400.20U: SPEED 20 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
46.61.400.21U: SPEED 21 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
46.61.400.22U: SPEED 22 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
46.61,400.23U: SPEED 23 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
46.61.400.24U: SPEED 24 OVER (40 OR UNDER)
46.61.400.25: SPEED 25 OVER (OVER 40) 1
46.61.400.27U: SPEED 27 OVER (40 OR UNDER) 1
46.61.400.30U; SPEED 30 OVER (40 OR UNDER) 1
46.61.400.32U: SPEED 32 OVER (40 OR UNDER) 1
46.61.400.36U: SPEED 35 OVER (40 OR UNDER) 1
46.61.425: SPEED PASSING SLOW MOVING VEHICLES 1
46.61.440.01-05: SCHOOL/PLAYGROUND CROSSWALK SPEED 1-5 MPH OVER 2
46.61.440.06-10: SCHOOL/PLAYGROUND CROSSWALK SPEED 6-10 MPH OVER
46.61.440,11-15: SCHOOL/PLAYGROUND CROSSWALK SPEED 11-15 MPH OVER
46.61.440.16-20: SCHOOL/PLAYGROUND CROSSWALK SPEED 16-20 MPH OVER
46.61.440.21-25: SCHOOL/PLAYGROUND CROSSWALK SPEED 21-25 MPH OVER
46.61.500: RECKLESS DRIVING
46.61.502.5: DUI
46.61.502: OLD CODE:VEH(DWUIL/DRUG)NEW
46.61.503: DRIVER <21 YO CONSUME ALCOHOL/MARIJU
46.61.504: OLD CODE:VEH(PHY/UNIL/DRUG)NEW
46.61,525: NEGLIGENT DRIVING 2 DEGREE
46.61.672.1: PER ELECTRONIC DEVICE WHILE DRIVING
46.61.688: FAIL TO WEAR SAFETY BELT
46.61.745: CANNABIS IN MOTOR VEHICLE VIOLATION
7,105.450.1: PROTECTION ORDER VIOLATION
7.105.455.2: ANTIHARASSMENT PROTECTION ORDER VIOLATION
9.41.050.1A: CARRY CONCEALED PISTOL W/OUT PERMIT
9.41.250.1A: DANGEROUS WEAPON POSS,MANUF,SELL
9A.36.041.2: ASSAULT 4TH DEGREE
9A.36.150: DV INTER WITH REPORTING
9A,46,020.1: HARASSMENT
9A.46.080: ORDER VIO RESTRICT CONTACT
9A.48,090.1A: MALICIOUS MISCHIEF-3D
9A.48.090: MALICIOUS MISCHIEF-3
9A.52.070: TRESPASS 1
9A.52.080: TRESPASS 2
9A,52.100.1: VEHICLE PROWLING 2ND DEGREE
9A.56.050: OLD CODE: THEFT-3D
9A.76,020: OBSTRUCT LE OFF
9A.76.040: OBSTRUCT GOVT-RESISTING ARREST
9A.76.175: OBSTRUCT GOVT-MAKING FALSE OR MISLEADING STATEMENT TO PUBLIC SERVANT
9
2
3
1
5
1
1
4
3
2
3
2
1
3
7
2
4
1
21
1
1
2
33
8
2
7
1
1
1
28
1
1
1
1
8
7
2
2
24
7
3
2
GrandTotal 432
Produced:11/7/2022
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Criminal Ticket Counts - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
250
200
150
100
50
Ak
viglitter0"#
ai }+ L L L L
L ' - T• W �i1 di QI
03 co n S] _0 _0
Q
C 4- G Q N O OJ C
• di � 0 >
O Q 0 m
v z CI
V)
—4-2017
f 2018
2019
2020
—*-2021
—6-- 2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
152
175
207
173
124
127
February
140
130
174
185
128
109
March
165
195
172
140
117
155
April
102
149
171
153
123
135
May
116
175
131
154
126
122
June
149
179
186
171
125
132
July
165
184
172
130
108
152
August
147
147
168
152
88
174
September
125
169
174
162
109
127
October
164
178
176
175
112
126
November
163
157
169
130
115
December
148
188
168
132
116
Grand Total
1,736 '
2,026
2,068
1,857
1,391
1,359
*Ticket type of Criminal Non Traffic & Criminal Traffic
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
Non - Criminal Ticket Counts - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
396
367
357
198
195
193
February
238
338
261
266
172
156
March
422
472
226
133
166
253
April
110
219
299
111
198
200
May
241
385
130
164
211
406
June
380
489
421
128
353
224
July
295
499
359
217
285
187
August
357
257
297
204
132
212
September
461
480
306
199
179
248
October
365
387
273
139
216
231
November
329
366
253
195
295
December
274
254
253
238
157
Grand Total
3,868
4,513
3,435
2,192
2,559
2,310
*Ticket Type of Infraction Non Traffic & Infraction Traffic
Produced: 11/07/2022
SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Regional Intelligence Group 9
All Ticket Counts - Spokane Valley
Time Period: October 2022
—— 2017
—-2018
—dor-2019
2020
--A-2021
—11— 202.2
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
January
548
542
564
371
319
320
February
378
468
435
451
300
265
March
587
667
398
273
283
408
April
212
368
470
264
321
335
May
357
560
261
318
337
528
June
529
668
607
299
478
356
July
460
683
531
347
393
339
August
504
404
465
356
220
386
September
586
649
480
361
288
375
October
529
565
449
314
328
357
November
492
523
422
325
410
December
422
442
421
370
273
Grand Total
5,604
6,539
5,503
4,049
3,950
3,669
*A!l ticket types except parking
Produced: 11/07/2022