2009, 10-13 Regular Meeting MinutesAttendance:
MINUTES
City of Spokane Valley
City Council Regular Meeting
Formal Meeting Format
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Mayor Munson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and welcomed everyone to the 169th meeting.
Rich Munson, Mayor
Dick Denenny, Deputy Mayor
Rose Dempsey, Councilmember
Bill Gothmann, Councilmember
Ian Robertson, Councilmember
Gary Schimmels, Councilmember
Diana Wilhite, Councilmember
City Staff:
INVOCATION: Pastor Claude Duty of Community of Christ Church gave the invocation.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Munson led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: It was moved by Councilmember Wilhite, seconded and unanimously
agreed to approve the agenda.
INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: n/a
Dave Mercier, City Manager
Mike Jackson, Deputy City Manager
Mike Connelly, City Attorney
Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attomey
Ken Thompson, Finance Director
Neil Kersten, Public Works Director
Kathy McClung, Community Development Dir.
Rick VanLeuven, Police Chief
John Whitehead, HR Manager
Greg McCormick, Planning Manager
Mike Basinger, Senior Planner
Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer
Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk
COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS:
Councilmember Wilhite: reported regarding Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC), that an
update should be corning shortly on SRTC suggested improvements; that she also attended the City's
developer's meeting here at City Hall for members of the development community and said staff did an
excellent job of presenting and addressing questions; she went to the SCOPE dinner where awards were
presented for outstanding performance; and attended the Association of Washington Cities (AWC)
regional meeting in Spokane.
Councilmember Gothmann: said that he attended the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) meeting
in Yakima and on the way to Yakima, went to the city of Zillah for a ribbon cutting, population 2,770,
and said the city received about $480,000 in TIB funding for an $808,000 project, which was changing a
curve, that the project includes some of the kinds of streetscape proposed for Sprague in conjunction with
the SARP; that for this ribbon cutting, the mayors of Zillah, Toppinish, and Granger attended the
celebration of the completion of this project as well as their Washington Legislator and Senator, and their
US Representative; that this was a project put together by the determination of the Mayor and Council of
Zillah; that one of the business members donated a large sign to the City so they could put the City's logo
on the sign to provide a gateway to their City. From Zillah, Mr. Gothmann said he went on to the TIB
Council Regular Meeting 10 -13 -2009 Page 1 of 7
Approved by Council: 10 -27 -09
meeting in Yakima; during that meeting they discussed a project in the City of Grand View, population
9,400, the project, "Alive Downtown Improvements" was $4.7 million, the project was to revitalize the
downtown of Grand View to include pedestrian friendly walks and canopies, similar streetscape to what is
proposed in our SARP; and that they received funding for this project from State Rural Opportunity Fund
Grant, HUD CDBG Grant, Port of Grand View, Grand View Rotary Club, Grand View Economic
Development, Grand View Chamber of Commerce, City of Grand View Utility Fund, Yakima County
Supporting Investment and Economic Diversity Loan Fund, USDA Rural Development Loan and others,
and that they had a funding shortfall and were applying for funding of $700,000 on a $4.7 million dollar
project, and that project went through; and he said it is exciting to see other cities with populations one -
tenth our size, getting out and acquiring funding to get the projects completed, and said that the Grand
View project is not competed yet. Councilmember Gothmann said the TIB meeting also did a review of
projects, and he referenced his "Transportation Funds Available to Spokane Valley" (Partial List),
including the TIB projects completed since June, 2009; he said that the TIB Director presented a review
of these listed projects which were completed within the past three months, and said there are over 200
TIB projects in progress now; and this list was for those projects completed within the last three months;
and he mentioned several of the cities on the list including Bremerton and Newcastle, and that the
Newcastle project, the Cold Creek Parkway, a major thoroughfare, took over eight years to complete and
was done in four phases; and said these cities are tapping the appropriate entities to get funding and are
getting their projects done; and said the City of Spokane Valley can do likewise. Councilmember
Gothmann mentioned again the partial list of funding available, including assistance from the
Transportation Improvement Board, which includes Mr. Gothmann, as well as the Community
Development Block Grant. Councilmember Gothmann mentioned he has an appointment with Spokane
Transit Authority this week and will speak with Spokane County, Liberty Lake, and Airway Heights to
discuss their projects. Councilmember Gothmann also thanked the City of Spokane Valley for the work
on the curb -to -curb paving during the sewer project.
Councilmember Dempsey: said she attended the open house for the US Census, that they mentioned there
was the equivalent of our City's population, an estimated 82,000, which were missed on the last census
and they hope to get a better count; she attended the AWC meeting; and today went to the annual Hire -
ability luncheon where they talked about the importance of hiring people with disabilities; and she said
that Walgreen's distribution centers have a policy of hiring at least 30% of their workforce in their
distribution center, with people with disabilities; and she reported Walgreens said they have not dropped
any of their standards; and she said perhaps as a city we could work on something like that to offer
opportunities to people with disabilities.
Councilmembers Schimmels: said he also attended the AWC meeting; the Solid Waste Liaison Board
meeting; and a few weeks ago also attended the SCOPE awards banquet.
Councilmember Robertson: reported that he attended the AWC meeting, which was his first such
meeting; that he met with Mayor Verner at her request concerning "green jobs" which is the number one
goal of our Governor in 2010, and that he and Mayor Verner had a discussion on how to achieve that and
to work on the environment without hurting business; and regarding solid waste management, Mayor
Verner shared some information with him on some of the major problems associated with that in our
county; and he explained that Mayor Verner also spoke of her city's right to incorporate adjacent land in
urban growth areas, that she was not speaking of Spokane Valley but rather in conjunction with the west
side of their city near Airway Heights.
Deputy Mayor Denenny: said that he attended the AWC meeting, which was his last one; and said he had
an interesting meeting with STA on setting up different protocols for purchasing, with more information
to come later.
Council Regular Meeting 10 -13 -2009 Page 2 of 7
Approved by Council: 10 -27 -09
MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Munson reported that he met with the Superintendent of West Valley
Schools to discuss Initiative 1033; and he was invited to their community involvement meeting set for
November 5, for the purpose of discussing how the schools and the community interact; that he attended
the STA Operations Committee meeting, and said concerning a possible continued drop in sales tax
revenues and that STA felt it prudent to anticipate a zero growth rate for sales tax revenues for 2010 but
he suggested they examine the possibility of a 3.5% drop in sales tax revenues; which means if that
occurs, there will be a cut in service, but that nothing was finalized on specific figures; that he did a radio
spot for the Convention Visitor's Bureau commending the hotel and restaurant staffs on becoming
certified, and to congratulate them over the radio and recommend they continue to stay certified; that he
attended the AWC meeting and the SCOPE dinner. Mayor Munson also mentioned that the Health
District has asked for a letter of support for their grant to assist with their prevention efforts, that there
are two federal grants totaling about $2.5 million, and Deputy Mayor Denenny added that the Department
feels comfortable they will likely get at least one grant, that the program looks at the social components of
poor health and how to counteract that by proper diet and exercise; and said he and Councilmember
Gothmann will be signing individual support letters as Board members; and there was Council consensus
that Mayor Munson sign a letter to support this program.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Munson invited general public comments and no comments were
offered.
1. CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any
member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered
separately.
b. Payroll for pay period ending September 30, 2009: $338,142.00
c. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of September 15, 2009
d. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of September 22, 2009
Councilmember Robertson asked that item la be removed to discuss separately. It was then moved by
Deputy Mayor Denenny, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the consent agenda with the
exception of la.
a. Claim Vouchers, Voucher #18440 through #18586; 921090022, 930090043: total: $4,965,265.08
Councilmember Robertson asked about voucher #18580 for former councilmember Taylor's cell
allowance; and Mr. Thompson said those are retroactive expenses but he will check to confirm Mr.
Taylor's official separation date, and if Mr. Taylor was not here during the month of September, the
amount will need to be recovered. It was then moved by Councilmember Robertson, seconded and
unanimously agreed to approve the vouchers as presented.
NEW BUSINESS:
2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 09 -024 Adopting 2010 Budget — Ken Thompson
After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Denenny and
seconded to approve Ordinance 09 -024 adopting the budget for the calendar year 2010. Finance Director
Thompson explained that this is the ordinance which will adopt the 2010 budget; that we held three public
hearing; that this budget is $10 million less than the current year's budget; and that the Appendix A
listing the positions and classifications is not the correct schedule, as the correct schedule is before
Council on the dais, and is really a hybrid of 2009 and 2010. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no
comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions:
None. Motion passed.
Council Regular Meeting 10 -13 -2009 Page 3 of 7
Approved by Council: 10 - 27 - 09
3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 09 -030 Amending Cable Code — Cary Driskell
After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Councilmember Robertson and
seconded to approve Ordinance 09 -030. Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained that this ordinance will
establish the baseline set of regulations under which any cable operator that wanted to set up, would have
to operate; that it is similar to the proposed franchise the City is negotiating with Comcast; and said there
is a minor change from the first reading under section 29, as Comcast requested a slightly lower standard,
and said staff feels comfortable with that modification. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no
comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions:
None. Motion carried.
4. Motion Consideration: Confirmation of Mayoral Appointment for Planning Commission Vacancy —
Mayor Munson
It was moved by Councilmember Robertson and seconded to confirm Mayor Munson's recommended
appointment of Rustin Hall to the Planning Commission for a term beginning immediately and ending 12-
31 -2009. Mayor Munson briefly explained that this vacancy is as a result of Mr. Robertson's appointment
to Council; that council received applications from very qualified people and it was not an easy decision
to make. Mayor Munson also mentioned that as current Planning Commissioner Towey is running
unopposed on the November ballot, that will leave another vacancy on the Planning Commission, and if
those who submitted an application for this position wish to be considered, they only need contact the
City Clerk and let her know and they would not need to complete another application. Mayor Munson
invited public comment. Tony Lazanis: said that Mr. Hall is a very good person and he thanked him for
applying for the position. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions:
None. Motion carried.
5. Motion Consideration: Adopt 2010 Legislative Agenda — Mayor Munson
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Denenny and seconded to adopt the 2010 Legislative Agenda as
presented.
City Manager Mercier gave the highlights of the following eight principle items of interest; i.e. (1) street
utility enabling legislation; (2) increased state funding for the 911 system; (3) seek $300,000 for the
acquisition of park land adjacent to the Park Road pool and Centennial Middle School; (4) Law
Enforcement District enabling legislation; (5) securing state funding for statewide communications
interoperability infrastructure; (6) reasonable legislation related to the "cap and trade" provisions of
climate control regulations under consideration; (7) access to enhanced state fuel purchasing power; and
(8) provide support for the Association of Washington Cities' legislative agenda items that serve the best
interests of the City of Spokane Valley. After brief council discussion, Mayor Munson invited public
comments; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None.
Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
Mayor Munson called for a short recess at 7:00 p.m., and reconvened the meeting at 7:12 p.m.
6. Motion Consideration: Council Position, Initiative 1033
Mayor Munson explained the procedure for taking comments on the upcoming ballot issue, Initiative
1033; that up to ten minutes would be allowed for a speaker to speak in favor of the measure; then up to
ten minutes allowed for a speaker to speak in opposition; then the floor would be opened for general
comments from those for the measure, followed by those against the measure, and then for general
comments; and said after hearing all comments, Council would determine whether to support the ballot
measure. Mayor Munson asked Finance Director Thompson to give a summary of Initiative 1033 and the
anticipated affects to the budget. Mr. Thompson went over his handout of "Estimating Impacts of
Initiative 1033" with assumptions outlined by the Association of Washington Cities, which was updated
September 3, 2009. Mr. Thompson explained the various columns on the chart, of population growth
estimate based on OFM's (Office of Finance Management) forecasted population increases for cities in
Council Regular Meeting 10 -13 -2009 Page 4 of 7
Approved by Council: 10 -27 -09
urban counties, the general fund revenues and revenue growth, the general fund revenue with the limit,
the lesser of the general fund revenue limit, the percentage increase in the general fund limit or actual
revenues, the amount over or under the revenue limit, the transfer to lower city property taxes, and
property tax after the lower city property tax account transfers; and to summarize, Mr. Thompson said this
initiative would take away our ability to pay for any new service; that the formula allows for a little
population increase and a small increase in property taxes; and Mayor Munson noted that if we have an
increase in our sheriff's office contract of nine percent annually, there would be no funding to cover that;
and Mr. Thompson confirmed there would be very little funding to cover it. Mayor Munson invited public
comment.
Speaking for Initiative 1033: Joanne McCann, 2211 East 35 Spokane, 99203
Ms. McCann explained that this is not new but completes the renewal of an initiative passed sixteen years
ago, which formula the State has lived under for several years, which was called Initiative 601; that
Olympian politicians at that time were dedicated to excessive spending and the growth of big government,
and 601 was gradually gutted; so this is simply a renewal of what the voters wanted. She said some of the
important things are that the City will probably be able to afford new programs because there are only
certain things controlled by the formula, and voters can still vote for more money for the city or more
funding for the roads, and that would not affect the formula. She said that sixteen years ago politicians
told us that initiative 601 would destroy our schools, but it didn't; and after it was passed schools per
capita were spending more for students, and they do not have larger classes but actually have smaller
classes, and she said she would never want to vote against anything that would hurt the people. She said
there are differences between our initiative and that of the TABOR Colorado initiative; that they are both
tax relief initiatives; TABOR was a Constitutional amendment and not amendable by the legislator; but
1033 is an initiative which allows for legislative change and after two years, it can be repealed; that
TABOR included all funding revenues including federal monies and restricted funds, but 1033 does not
include the tax initiatives put to the voters, but only included city, county and state basic budget, and
schools, libraries, and fire districts are not included, and federal funding is not included. Ms McCann then
read the following excerpt from the September 26, 2009 Bellingham Herald article, written by Barry
Poulson, Senior Fellow in Fiscal Policy at the Independence Institute in Golden, Colorado:
"Critics often argue that TABOR forced the state to cut spending. The empirical record for state
spending in Colorado refutes this claim. In contract to California, state spending in Colorado has
grown at roughly the rate in the private economy. From 1993 to 2007 real per capita state spending
grew 28% while per capital GDP grew 30 %. With an effective tax and spending limit in place
Colorado has been able to lower tax burdens, creating one of the best business tax climates in the
country. Colorado has attracted more business investment and jobs than most other states. Over the
period since TABOR was passed Colorado has experienced one of the highest rates of economic
growth in the nation. Despite this success, politicians and special interest groups routinely attack
TABOR because it doesn't give them carte blanche authority to tax and spend. Washington
residences would be lucky to have our TABOR amendment. It strengthens fiscal rules and policies
conductive to economic growth and prosperity and prevents the kind of fiscal debacle occurring in
California."
Speaking in general regarding Initiative 1033: Art Britton, E 18812 Euclid, Spokane Valley 99207:
He said he is not in favor of any levy at the present time; he said his personal battle since 2007 is to stay
above water; that he can't handle any more; that he asked Mayor Munson about a telephone tax and was
told it didn't have to go before the voters, and said he did not appreciate that; that last year his property
taxes were raised way up in 2007, and said he sees this mess coming we got into now; and said he had to
go back to work to keep from sinking, so he is definitely a no.
Council Regular Meeting 10 -13 -2009 Page 5 of 7
Approved by Council: 10-27-09
Mayor Munson invited further comments against the initiative, and then for the initiative, and there were
no further comments offered. Mayor Munson then opened the floor for council discussion and questions.
Councilmember Gothmann asked Mr. Thompson that if we were to receive $808,000 in grants for doing a
project at an intersection, what happens to the funds relative to 1033; and Mr. Thompson said he feels
1033 would not come into play as that would be a state grant which would be excluded. Mayor Munson
asked about the use of Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) funds for matching funds, and asked how 1033
would affect the use of those funds, and Mr. Thompson said he feels 1033 would not affect us there as the
only thing affected would be the general fund, and REET funds come into construction funds and projects
as our match; but there are several exceptions to the initiative, grant money is one, and transfers from
other city funds are also not included. Mayor Munson said there is a possibility of a 10% inflation next
year, and if the Department of Revenue says we have a population growth of 1.2 %, which has been the
average, how does that affect us? Mr. Thompson said it would not be an "either /or" but a combination of
growth, and an eight or ten percent inflation rate would really hurt us as we won't likely see the extra
revenue, and even if we did, it would be used to offset other general fund revenues, so there would be no
actual revenue increases but eight or ten percent more expenses because of inflation. Mr. Thompson said
that the general fund is what is used to operate most of our operating costs, such as police, planning,
public works, almost every department except stormwater and street are in the general fund; and any
increase in the general fund revenue, whether it comes from property tax or sales tax, would be used to
reduce the property tax. Councilmember Gothmann said if we were to experience twice the amount of
construction, we would theoretically need twice the number of planners to be paid for by these fees; and
Mr. Thompson said whatever the increase in general fund revenue, we would have to reduce our property
tax the following year by the same amount; so we could not use the extra fees for the houses to go on line,
to pay for the planners needed to service that function. Mr. Thompson said the fees could be used to pay
the extra planners, but we would still have to reduce the property taxes.
After further council discussion, it was moved by Councilmember Gothmann, seconded and unanimously
passed that the City Council go on record as recommending a no vote to the voters on initiative 1033.
Prior to the vote, Mayor Munson again invited public comments; and no comments were offered.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Munson invited general public comments; no comments were offered.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: N/A
7. GS1 Presentation of Marketing Plan for the SARP — Robin Toth
Ms. Toth said she appreciates the work the city does on behalf of the Spokane Valley citizens; and she
then went through her PowerPoint presentation on their draft marketing plan for the Sprague Appleway
Revitalization Plan; and said they anticipate doing the plan in phases with a keystone or kick -off project
to use as a catalyst or magnet for additional investment along the corridor. Ms. Toth said that there is
currently some mixed use in the area; but before there can be more retail, infrastructure is needed at the
city center to create that catalyst project; that they intend to include the street improvements in a phased
approach as well, including streetscape, banners, and lighting to create a sense of place; that next week
one of the site selectors will be in the area and she would like to engage some staff in that regard to have a
quick turnover of twelve or eighteen months to start the ball rolling; that they have representatives and
other legislators on board and she is working to get them to think about how they can help fund this
project; perhaps instead of referring to the plan as "SARP" it might be referred to as University Crossing,
or Gateway Plaza, something quick to say; she mentioned the need to create flyers and /or signs to get
people to see information at the site. In response to a question about AutoRow, Ms. Toth said they could
move in a parallel course with the city center and she does not see that as a conflict. Mayor Munson asked
Ms. Toth if she would be interested in participating in an ad hoc committee to include Auto Row, one
councilmember, and a citizen, to develop the area in concept, and Ms. Toth indicated her willingness to
do so. Mayor Munson also asked councilmembers to start thinking about ways to give an ad hoc
committee some direction; and said he would like to move forward on this in December.
Council Regular Meeting 10 -13 -2009 Page 6 of 7
Approved by Council: 10 -27 -09
8. Update on CIP Leveraging— Steve Worley
Public Works Director Kersten, for Mr. Worley, gave a brief history of the capital projects and of some of
the grant funds we received; and said of the $67 million total project costs, our match was approximately
$12 million, which is a "great bang for the buck." Mr. Kersten said all the projects for next year are
funded and have city matches except we are not fully funding the STEP (sewer tank elimination program)
for 2010; that we will have more information next week and at this point, it appears we will need about
$2.6 million in matching funds; that the STEP put about $7.4 million into those residential streets for a
little over $2 million in city funds; that all the sewer projects were on poor roads and roads forty years old
and the project needed to be done; and Mr. Kersten highlighted some of the larger projects this year.
9. Comp Plan Quarterly Update — Greg McCormick
Planning Manager McCormick said that the Growth Management Act (GMA) allows jurisdictions to
update comprehensive plans no more than once a year; that the City codified this process in our Code
which is consistent with state law; that we published notices in August advising the public of the annual
amendment process and said we will accept comprehensive plan amendment applications for the 2010
cycle through November 2, 2009, since the November I' deadline date falls on a Sunday this year. He
explained that the notice was posted in the main reception area of City Hall, the Permit Center, and at the
Spokane Valley Library
10. CTA 05 -09 Amendment — Mike Basinger
Senior Planner Basinger explained that this is a privately initiated text amendment to the City's Code to
provide density incentives for development that include an affordable housing component in the
Multifamily, Medium Density Residential District; and the Multifamily High Density Residential District,
Corridor Mixed Use, Mixed Use, Mixed Use venue, City Center, and Community Boulevard district
zones. Mr. Basinger explained through his PowerPoint, that affordable housing is integrally connected to
our community's economy, and said that a person earning minimum wage, has far less disposable income
for rent, and these affordable housing units would assist in that regard. Mr. Basinger said this is scheduled
as an ordinance first reading for October 27.
16. INFORMATION ONLY: The Centennial Trail- National Trail Status was for information only and
was not reported or discussed.
EXECUTIVE SESSION: N/A
It was moved by Councilmernber Wilhite, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting
adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
ATTEST
hristine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Council Regular Meeting 10 -13 -2009
Approved by Council: 10 -27 -09
Page 7 of 7
SIGN -IN SHEET
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DATE: October 13, 2009
YOUR SPEAKING TIME WILL GENERALLY BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES
Please sign in if you wish to make public comments.
NAME
PLEASE PRINT
A a D 11 ri XI
TOPIC OF CONCERN YOU
WILL SPEAK ABOUT
ADDRESS
lSk <z Eq c,,L, 0
TELEPHONE
r?a/o lfl9
fl
ESTIMATING IMPACTS OF INITIATIVE 1033
Assumptions outlined by the Association of Washington Cities (see more on assumptions below)
Updated September 3, 2009
*,Shaded)cel ilIeed)out)byjunsdictlon
dependingyupohl " _ ocalrconditonsiand f
orliadrk
C higher growth
Gen. Fund rev.
IPD (March
to March)
(Note 1)
Population
Growth
Estimate*
(Note 2)
0.50% T50%
1.80% x
2.00% 0`150 %0
1.80% 0_501
1.80% r ^ O 50%
1.70% zt 0!50 %%
1.70% J ��
3 Or50%
GF Forecast
w /out 1 -1033
(Note 3)
- T331300'000
33,882,750
34,560,405
35,338,014
36,133,119
36, 946,115
37,777,402
Forecasted
Growth in GF
Revenues*
(Note 3)
, rgOY50%
1r 75
00e%
252/s
X25 %0
2
25%
Levy w /out
"Lower City
Property Tax
Account"
Transfer*
t.irowtn in rrop
Tax w /out
"Lower City
Property Tax
Account"
Transfer
Estimated*
- (Note 4)
X 1 0 ?50010001
10,799,500
11.015.490
1,460,516
11, 689, 726
11,923,521
o
2.00%
'2:00% 2.00%
' 0 %o
?00%
NOTES
/ (J -/3-f'
CY 2009
CY 2010
CY 2011
CY 2012
CY 2013
CY 2014
CY 2015
Estimated
Actual GF
Revenues
w /out Limit
(Note 5)
33,300,000
33,882,750
34,555,427
35,329,661
36,123,330
36,935,324
37,766,066
(1) IPD estimates for CY 2009 -CY 2011 are from the June 2009 Washington State Economic and revenue Forecast.
(2) Population growth estimates provided are based on OFM's forecasted population increases for cities in urban cou
(3) General fund revenues and revenue growth should reflect current forecasts without 1 -1033
(4) Growth should reflect anticipated councilmanic increases plus increases due to new construction /improvements, 5
(5) CY 2010 revenue calculated as:(CY 2009 GF REV X GF forecasted growth) + CY 2009 GF REV; CY 2011 and su
growth) + CY 2010 GF REV; For simplicity the same forecasted growth rate is assumed with or without passage of 1 -1
(6) CY 2010 revenue limit calculated as: CY 2009 GF REV X (1+ 2009 (3 /0 Change Pop) X (1+ 2009 % Change IPD);
2010 % Change IPD)
(7) Lower City Property Taxes Account is applied to previous year's full levy, reflecting any limit factor increase (plus r
Reflects the amount of the levy set for collection in following year
Gen Fund
Revenue w/ Limit
(Note 6)
33,300,000
33,633,833
34,410,438
35,274,140
36,088,620
36, 921, 906
37, 737, 326
Lesser of GF
Revenue Limit
(J) or GF
Actuals
growing at rate
in column F (I)
33,300,000
33,633,833
34,410,438
35, 274,140
36,088,620
36,921,906
37,737,326
% Increase in
Gen Fund Limit
or Actual
Revenues
(Column K)
1.00%
2.31%
2.51%
2.31%
2.31%
2.21%
Amount
Over /Under
Revenue Limit
(I-J)
248,918
144,989
55,522
34,710
13,418
28,740
Transfer to
"Lower City
Property Taxes
Account"
0
248,918
144,989
55,522
34,710
13,418
Property Tax Aftei
"Lower City
Property Tax
Account" Transfer
(Note 7)
10,500,00C
10, 799, 50C
10, 766, 573
11,090,811
11,404,994
11,655,016
11,910,103
Inflation estimates for CYs 2012 -15 are from the June 2009 HIS Global Insight forecast (OFM)
nties cities should replace with own estimates
rnnexation, electric generation wind turbine facilities and state - assessed property
bsequent years calculated as ((CY 2010 GF REV - transfer to Lower City Property Tax Account) X % GF forecasted
1033.
W 2011 and subsequent years limit calculated as: CY 2010 GF REV - transfer X (1 + 2010 % Change Pop) X (1 +
rew construction /improvements, annexation, electric generation wind turbine facilities and state - assessed property).
Sep, 26, 2009
Coloradoan says tax - limiting initiative there has worked
BARRY W. P W LSON I THE BELLNGHAM HERALD
Opponents of Washington's Initiative_1033 are woefully uninformed about the Colorado's Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR) passed
by voters in 1992. Critics of Washington's ballot measure say 1 -1033 is similar to our TABOR, which they claim is a disaster for our
state. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The best way to appreciate the positive impact of TABOR in Colorado is to contrast our experience with California's. The Golden
State's GANN Amendment, a precursor of TABOR, limited the growth of state revenue and spending to the sum of inflation and
population growth. In the late 1980s, under pressure from the education employee lobby, the California legislature abandoned the
GANN Amendment. The rest is history.
Over the last two decades without GANN, state spending in California increased much more rapidly than personal income. To
sustain the higher level of spending, taxes were increased to one of the highest levels in the country. Despite the higher tax burden,
the state incurred a structural deficit that required even higher levels of debt. California created one of the worst business tax
environments in the country. Business investment and jobs left the state for other states with better tax climates. Population left the
state for other states with lower tax burdens. In short, California has experienced retardation in economic growth over the last 20
years.
Shortly after California abandoned the GANN Amendment, Colorado voters passed TABOR. It also limits the rate of growth of state
revenue and spending to the sum of inflation and population growth. Surplus revenue above the TABOR limit must be rebated to
taxpayers. From 1997 to 2000 state revenue grew in exc- ss of the TABOR limit, and the state rebated about $3.25 billion in surplus
revenue to taxpayers.
The TABOR Amendment has worked much the way it was intended, allowing Colorado citizens to decide how much government
they want and are willing to pay for. If any jurisdiction wants to spend surplus revenue, or increase taxes or debt, it must have voter
approval.
Many statewide ballot measures have been presented to Colorado voters since TABOR was enacted. Two of the six ballot measures
seeking approval to spend surplus revenue were passed, and four were defeated. Eight ballot measures proposing tax increases
were introduced, but only one of these measures passed. Of the four property tax measures introduced, two providing property tax
relief to specific groups passed; two measures proposing property tax increases were defeated.
At the local level, however, many more spending or tax increases have been approved, usually because they were tied to specific
local government programs to which the voters decided to give extra funds.
Critics often argue that TABOR forced the state to cut spending. The empirical record for state spending in Colorado refutes this
claim. In contrast to Califomia, state spending in Colorado has grown at roughly the rate in the private economy. From 1993 to 2007
real per capita state spending grew 28 percent, while per capita GDP grew 30 percent.
Wrth an effective tax and spending limit in place Colorado has been able to lower tax burdens, creating one of the best business tax
climates in the country. Colorado has attracted more business investment and jobs than most other states. Over the period since
TABOR was passed Colorado has experienced one of the highest rates of economic growth in the nation, while California has
experienced retardation in economic growth.
As California citizens and businesses leave for other states, such as Colorado, the evidence is Gear. States that impose an effective
tax and spending limit, and that pursue prudent fiscal policies, create a better business tax climate compared to states that pursue
profligate fiscal policies in the absence of effective tax and spending limits. Critics who argue that state spending should not be
constrained by tax and spending limits are really arguing that government should grow more rapidly than the private sector.
Polls reveal that Colorado citizens support the TABOR Amendment by a greater majority today than when it was enacted. Citizens
support each of the TABOR provisions by a large majority: the cap on the growth of revenue and spending; the requirement for voter
a proval to spend surplus revenue; and the requirement for voter approval to increase taxes and debt.
Despite this success, politicians and special interest groups routinely attack TABOR because it doesn't give them carte blanche
authority to tax and spend. Washington residents would be lucky to have our TABOR amendment. It strengthens fiscal rules and
policies conducive to economic growth and prosperity, and prevents the kind of fiscal debacle occurring in California.
any Poulson is a Senior Fellow in Fiscal Policy at the Independence Institute in Golden, Colorado.
d a 4 a ‘e ed -p^'u
Transportation Funds Available to Spokane Valley
(Partial List)
Federal:
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Federal Stimulus)
Bridge Replacement Program (Funding for bridge construction projects)
Community Development Block Grants (HUD Grants to benefit low income areas —
• Bill Gothmann sits on this board)
Congestion Management Air Quality (Reduce congestion, increase air quality)
Federal Direct Grants (Feds pass a bill specifying a project)
Surface Transportation Program - Urban (Arterial improvements)
Surface Transportation Program - Enhancement (Bike /Pedestrian Improvements)
Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (Transportation infrastructure)
State
Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (Freight related projects)
Transportation Improvement Board (Bill Gothmann sits on this board)
Urban Arterial Program (Funds arterial improvements)
Urban Corridor Program (Funds corridors important to more than one municipality)
Sidewalk Program (funds sidewalk construction /improvements)
Washington State Department of Transportation (Fund highway programs)
Washington State Direct Grants (Legislature passes a bill specifying a project)
Local
City of Spokane Valley
Real Estate Excise Tax funds (Usually used for matching grants)
General Fund (Usually avoided because it is primarily for Police)
Stormwater Fund (Funds stormwater portion of locally- funded street improvements)
Developers Contributions (Developers usually provide sidewalks and 1/2 of street)
Private Contributions (many communities use these sources)
Chambers of Commerce
Rotary Clubs
Individuals
Corporations
Spokane Regional Transportation Committee (Prioritizes and coordinates regional
transportation; manages federal funds; typically do not fund road improvement projects
themselves; Diana Wilhite serves on this committee)
Spokane Transit Authority (Some funding for roads because they use the roads;
Dick Denenny and Rich Munson sit on this board)
Tax Increment Financing District (Loans paid back out of taxes on increased assessed value)
Others ??
/U, /3 -17 / L '4)7C-t_
Transportation Improvement Board Projects
Completed Since June, 2009
City Population TIB Funds Total Project Cost
(Millions of Dollars)
Bremerton 36,620 5.9 44.5
Newcastle 9,925 21.9 41.2
Kenmore 20,450 3.5 27.9
Union Gap 5,830 5.6 12.5
Bellingham 76,130 1.9 9.9
Chehalis 7,185 2.0 5.7
Duvall 5,980 3.0 4.8
Granite Falls 3,375 0.70 2.4
Omak . 4,780 0.72 1.0
Anacortes 16,790 0.48 0.95
Zillah 2770 0.43 0.81
Farmington 135 0.79 0.79
Twisp 985 0.69 0.73
Okanogan 2,495 0.49 0.55
Notes:
1. Millwood's Argonne project was $1.4 million. Their population is 1660.
2. The existing Appleway /Sprague project from 1 -90 to University cost $17.2 million.
Bill Gothmann 10 -09 -2009
PA'OcTtO% L //#l/Tc3
Mayor
Norm Childress
City Council
Joan Souders
Jan McDonald
Pam Horner
Mike Bren
Bill Moore
Diana Jennings
Jesse Palacios
flc/e104/ZEMENFNrs
City Staff
Scott Staples, City Administrator
Cus Arteaga, Public Works Director
Anita Palacios, City Clerk
Consultants
Huibregtse, Louman
Associates, Inc.
Yakima,Washington
Hough Beck & Baird Inc.
Seattle, Washington
Brockway Opfer
Raab Architecture
Yakima,Washington
Block Captains
Chuck Stegeman
Mike Edwards
Gloria Mendoza
Jesse Rodriguez
Todd Thornock
Lynn Boast
Mike Bren
Ron Bertram
Eric Horn
Tadd Bowlsby
Pam Horner
Division Street
Streetlights
Pedestrian Lights
Banners •
Street Trees
Quartzite Stone Band
West 2nd Street
Streetlights
Pedestrian Lights
Hanging Baskets
Street Trees
Quartzite Stone Band
g' Intersection
_A Streetlights
Planters
Bistro Tables at Businesses
Larger Trees in Planting Areas
roposed Streetscape
A B
West 2nd Street - - - -- s •
Wile PATOIS:
• September 11, 2007: Downtown
Revitalization Committee forms.
• September 18, 2007: Downtown
Revitalization Committee tours
Walla Walla downtown.
• October 15, 2007: Downtown
Revitalization Committee
meets with consultant team.
• December 6, 2007: Twenty -four
participants attend Business/
Property Owner Workshop.
• December 27, 2007: Block
Captains review results of
Business /Property Owner
Workshop.
• January 22, 2008: Consultant
team meets with
Grandview City Council.
• -February 12, 2008: Fifty -
three community members
attend forum and review
`Alive Downtown' concept.
• March 5, zoo8: Block
Captains and merchants
meet to review the process
and discuss concerns and
opportunities.
B'
Division Street - •
L. rigr
Ieatlen'vhei
Prosser and Grandview eye
downtown development
font different perspectives
GRANDVIEW /Ideas
Continued from Page 1C tic II inA the impish:e-
tmore
Roll ar. In, owns a h
salon on the t side of
nit - onSlreets She lilted
-• tcard that
rag the par
} e other d
.. }oat of the
d the pro-
excited.'
orm the
pores par
the 531
pyasing
tear up the
ar
Downtown takes
next step toward j
improvements
Wider
walks
but Tess
parking
Grandview debates
tradeoff posed in
downtown proposal
1, am cOVITNEY
GILVD■IEW -When,
will people pad:!
That wantemain gtes
a Lion Meeday nom residents
ei Wsiuvoeaen here
n oun Pith v 66,
walks.
About 60
o el: randy t"
'Grand
AL /VE p 0 �t /� V TO %/N /HP POO !/Eft 7 S
Committed Project Funding
State Rural Opportunity Fund Grant
$2o,000
HUD CDBG Planning -Only Grant
$24,000
Port of Grandview, Grandview Rotary Club,
Grandview Economic Development, and Grandview
Chamber of Commerce
$8,200
City of Grandview Utility Funds
$298,800
Yakima County Supporting Investment in Economic
Diversity (SIED) Loan Funds
$250,000
Yakima County Supporting Investment in Economic
Diversity (SIED) Grant Funds
$250,000
ARRA Transportation Grant
$2,030,000
State Capital Budget Funds
$500,000
HUD CDBG Recovery Grant
$550,000
USDA Rural Development Loan (Grandridge Balance)
$150,000
Funding Shortfall (Grant Request Submitted)
$700,000
TOTAL COMMITTED FUNDS
4,781,000
P WtC7 vtSM /P770#
VISION
In June 20(36, the Grandview City Council adopted the Vision Statement
for an `Alive Downtown'.
GOAL
The goal established for the revitalization effort is to create a pedestrian
friendly downtown which will encourage commerce for residents and
visitors alike.
CONCEPT
Throughout presentations to business and property owners and
to the general public, a single concept emerged as a preferred
concept. Wider sidewalks with pedestrian amenities on both
Division Street and West Second Street were desired, which
required an adjustment to the street centerline and parking
layouts.
NEXT STEPS
The next steps in the development process are to apply for and
secure additional grant and /or loan funds to design and construct
the preferred design concept improvements.
COST aSrrnt f TT
PLAN
West znd S treet
Division Street
r
ti nOi
44h
BEFORE
AFTER
/ Pciab&r2 ge, 77D
CITY OF ZILLAH
WEST FIRST AVENUE TIB IMPROVEMENTS
TIB PROJECT NO. 6 -E- 947(007) -1
PROJECT FUNDING
Transportation Improvement Board
Yakima County SIED Grant
Yakima County SIED Loan - City of Zillah
Yakima County SIED Loari - Private Partners
Zillah Lakes Development, Yakima Valley Farm
Workers Clinic, Zillah Gateway, Vintage Valley
Medical Center
TOTAL PROJECT COST
$483,440
$162,500
$112,500
$50,000
$808,440
4 01* Huibregtse, Lowman Associates, Inc.
• CIVIL ENGINEERING • LAND SURVEYING • PLANNING