Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025, 12-16 Formal B Meeting PacketAGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FORMAL B FORMAT Tuesday, December 16, 2025 6:00 p.m. Remotely via ZOOMMeeting and In Person at Spokane Valley City Hall, Council Chambers 10210 E. Sprague Ave. Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Please Silence Your Cell Phones During Council Meeting NOTE: Members of the public may attend Spokane Valley Council meetings in -person 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." Citizens must register by 4 p.m. the day of the meeting to provide comment by Zoom. Please use the links below to register to provide verbal or written comment. • Sign up to Provide Verbal Public Comment at the Meeting via Calling -In • Submit Written Public Comment Prior to the Meeting • Join the Zoom WEB Meeting CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF AGENDA SPECIAL GUESTS/PRESENTATIONS: PROCLAMATIONS: 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. If a person engages in disruptive behavior or makes individual personal attacks regarding matters unrelated to City business, then the Council and/or Mayor may end that person's public comment time before the three -minute mark. 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 at the meeting. ACTION ITEMS: 1. Ordinance 25-018: Second Read School Speed Camera Program — Gloria Mantz, Jerremy Clark [public comment opportunity] 2. Ordinance 25-019: First Read Wireless Communication Tower Height Reg Amendment — Steve Roberge [public comment opportunity] 3. Resolution 25-018: Legal Newspaper of Record — Kelly Konkright, Marci Patterson [public comment opportunity] Council Agenda December 16, 2025 Page 1 of 2 4. Motion Consideration: 2026 Lodging Tax Grant Allocations — Sarah Farr [public comment opportunity] 5. Motion Consideration: 5-Year Plan to Prevent & Address Homelessness Adoption — Eric Robison [public comment opportunity] 6. Motion Consideration: K-9 Patrol Deputy — Erik Lamb, Chief Ellis [public comment opportunity] 7. Motion Consideration: Sullivan/Trent Preferred Alternative — Robert Blegen, Rob Lochmiller [public comment opportunity] NON -ACTION ITEMS: 8. Admin Report: Signal Cabinet Wrap Discussion — Virginia Clough & Guest 9. Admin Report: Comprehensive Plan Discussion — Steve Roberge, Mike Basinger & Guest INFORMATION ONLY (will not be reported or discussed): GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITY: General public comment rules apply. COUNCIL COMMENTS MAYOR'S COMMENTS CITY MANAGER COMMENTS EXECUTIVE SESSION ADJOURNMENT t,�.F - LT u; �`•• 3_='�t�l O 2 Scan to access the meeting materials Council Agenda December 16, 2025 Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 16, 2025 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. Report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Second Reading Ordinance 25-018; Automated Traffic Safety Cameras GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Chapter 46.63 RCW PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: • March 4, 2025 — Administrative report at the budget workshop discussing a potential school zone speed safety camera program • October 7, 2025 — Administrative report discussing a potential school zone speed safety camera program • November 18, 2025 — First Reading of Ordinance 25-018 BACKGROUND: Staff brought forward information and estimates related to automated school zone speed enforcement cameras during the winter budget workshop. During the Administrative Report earlier this fall, Council provided consensus to bring back an ordinance to establish an automated enforcement program. During the first reading of the ordinance, Council voted to return for a second reading. This is the second reading of said ordinance. Program Background: The primary benefit of speed safety camera (SSC) installations is the reduction of speed violations in school zones or other areas with vulnerable road users. House Bill 2384 (HB 2384) was passed in 2024 to expand the opportunities and increase the flexibility for the installation of speed safety cameras. As defined in HB 2384, a SSC is "a device that uses a vehicle sensor installed to work in conjunction with ... a speed measuring device, and a camera synchronized to automatically record one or more sequenced photographs, microphotographs, or electronic images of the front or rear of a motor vehicle at the time the vehicle ... exceeds a speed limit as detected by a speed measuring device." Several jurisdictions in Washington have maintained SSC programs for several years, each with resulting reductions in speeding and citations over time. Speed is a contributing factor in 31 % of fatal crashes in Washington. From 2014-2023, 21 % of traffic fatalities in Washington were pedestrians or bicyclists. 90% of pedestrians are expected to survive a crash at or below 25 mph (WTSC SSC Readiness Guide). Program Evaluation: Through discussions with the Spokane Valley Police Department (SVPD), five school zones were included in a pilot study to evaluate speeds. Initial results of the study identified that automated speed cameras for at least three of the schools would result in a sustainable program assuming 24-hour operation of the cameras. Next Steps: With consensus to establish a speed safety camera program, staff are returning with the second reading of an ordinance establishing the program. Once established, a system vendor would be selected for the program through a request for proposals (RFP) process. The selected vendor would complete their own speed study to estimate citations and revenues for the City to select the desired schools for implementation. During this time, the vendor would be developing the system on their platform in preparation for equipment installation. Once the equipment is installed, a minimum 30-day warning period is required before the system is turned on. HB 2384 allows appropriately trained and certified civilian employees of a law enforcement agency, or a public works or transportation department to review infractions detected using a SSC; this was previously required to be completed by law enforcement officers. To administer the program, one FTE (Grade 16) is necessary to manage the program, review the citations, provide court support and prioritize and allocate the funds for public works to implement. Implementation of a 24-hr SSC program is expected to bring in enough revenue to fund the new position. There is not sufficient capacity to add a full program to any current staff in public works. It is recommended that an additional position be created once the system is approved and a vendor has completed the installation. The City currently funds numerous elements of projects that improve traffic safety and affect traffic calming. Revenue from an SSC program would be available to fund these elements, thus freeing up other City funds. Such a program would also free up uniformed police officers to provide patrols at locations other than those with automated enforcement. The attached ordinance would add a new chapter to Title 9 SVMC. This chapter 9.60 SVMC would authorize the program in accordance with RCW 46.63.220 et seq. OPTIONS: Move to adopt Ordinance 25-018 with or without modifications and authorize adding one FTE (Grade 16) to the 2026 Budget; or take other action as deemed appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve Ordinance 25-018 adopting Camera Program and authorize adding 1 FTE 2026 Budget as necessary. chapter 9.60 SVMC Automated Traffic Safety (Grade 16) to the 2026 Budget and amend the BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: There are no costs to the City until the SSC equipment is installed and the 30-day warning period has passed. At that time, the City would incur the monthly vendor fee of up to $10,000 per location and additional staffing costs. After the 30-day warning period, the City will begin collecting the revenue from the speed fines. Per the pilot study, a 24- hour SSC program is expected to generate approximately $1.5M in revenue after the administration costs. The citations and subsequent revenues are expected to decrease over time as speed compliance improves but has been shown to maintain adequate levels for funding the program in other jurisdictions. STAFF CONTACT: Jerremy Clark, Traffic Engineering Manager; Gloria Mantz, City Services Administrator ATTACHMENTS: Draft Ordinance DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO.25 — 018 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY ADOPTING CHAPTER 9.60 OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING THE CITY'S AUTOMATED TRAFFIC SAFETY CAMERA PROGRAM, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, pursuant to Article XI, section 11 of the Washington State Constitution, and RCW 46.63.210 et seq., the City of Spokane Valley has the power to regulate the use of its rights -of -way and to that end may adopt an ordinance authorizing the use of automated traffic safety cameras to regulate speed and other activities thereon; and WHEREAS, the City has conducted preliminary evaluations of specific school zones to estimate the volume and speeds of vehicles in order to determine where automated traffic safety cameras would have the greatest impact on safety for school -aged children, and families; and WHEREAS, the City is currently preparing analyses for future camera placement in accordance with RCW 46.63.220; and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 46.63.030, the City may designate a public works employee performing under the supervision of a qualified traffic engineer to review infractions detected by an automated traffic safety camera, and to issue notices of infractions; and WHEREAS, the City desires to establish this automated traffic safety cameras program to promote the public health, safety and welfare of rights -of -way users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, and motor vehicle drivers. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, do ordain as follows: Section 1. Adopting chapter 9.60 SVMC titled "Automated Traffic Safety Camera Program". Chapter 9.60 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code is hereby adopted as follows: 9.60.010 Purpose. Pursuant to the authority granted by chapter 46.63 RCW, the City is authorized to use automated traffic safety cameras and related automated systems to detect, record, enforce, and prosecute specific traffic violations. This chapter shall establish the City's automated traffic safety program in accordance with RCW 46.63.210 et seq. The purpose of the program is to promote the health, safety and welfare of all rights -of -way users by creating a safer environment for all. 9.60.020 Definitions. The definitions of the terms below shall apply throughout this chapter: "Automated traffic safety camera" means a device that uses a vehicle sensor installed to work in conjunction with a speed measuring device, and a camera synchronized to automatically record one or more sequenced photographs, microphotographs, or electronic images of the front or rear of a motor vehicle at the time the vehicle exceeds a speed limit as detected by a speed measuring device. "School speed zone" has the same meaning as described in RCW 46.61.440 (1) and (2). Ordinance 25-018 Automated Traffic Safety Camera Program Page 1 of 7 DRAFT "School walk zone" means a roadway identified under RCW 28A.160.160 or roadways within a one -mile radius of a school that students use to travel to school by foot, bicycle, or other means of active transportation. "School zone speed limit" shall mean twenty miles per hour. "Regulatory speed limit" shall mean the regular posted speed limit of the roadway outside of school speed zone hours. 9.60.030 Authorized use of automated traffic safety camera A. Pursuant to RCW 46.63.250, the City is authorized to use automated traffic safety cameras and related automated systems to detect speed violations, including but not limited to school speed zone violations. B. Use of automated traffic safety cameras to detect speed violations is restricted to use in the following locations: 1. School speed zones 2. School walk zones C. Additionally, the City may authorize the use of one additional automated traffic safety camera per 10,000 population to detect speed violations in locations deemed by the City Council to experience higher crash risks due to excessive vehicle speeds. 9.60.040 Analysis of proposed locations — Camera placement A. The City shall prepare an analysis of the locations where automated traffic safety cameras are proposed to be located before adding traffic safety cameras to a new location, or relocating any existing cameras withing the jurisdiction. The analysis shall consider the impact on livability, accessibility, economics, education, and environmental health, and demonstrate the need for traffic cameras based on one or more of the following in the vicinity of the proposed camera location: 1. Travel by vulnerable road users; 2. Evidence of vehicles speeding; 3. Rates of collision; 4. Reports showing near collisions; and 5. Anticipated or actual ineffectiveness or infeasibility of other mitigation measures. B. Camera placement The primary purpose of camera placement is to record images of the vehicle and vehicle license plate when an infraction is occurring. The City shall consider installing automated traffic safety cameras in a manner that minimizes the impact of camera flash on drivers. 9.60.050 General restrictions — Reporting requirements A. Limited access facility on -ramp —Automated traffic safety cameras may not be used on an on - ramp to a limited access facility as defined in RCW 47.52.010. Ordinance 25-018 Automated Traffic Safety Camera Program Page 2 of 7 DRAFT B. State Highways - The city may use automated traffic safety cameras to enforce traffic ordinances on state highways that are also classified as city streets under chapter 47.24 RCW. The City shall notify the Washington State Department of Transportation when it installs an automated traffic safety camera to enforce traffic ordinances as authorized in this subsection. C. Annual Reports — The City shall post an annual report on its website with the following information: 1. Number of traffic crashes at each location where an automated traffic safety camera is located; 2. Number of notices of infraction issued for each camera; 3. Percentage of revenues received from fines issued used to pay for the costs of the automated traffic safety camera program; and 4. Report the uses of revenues that exceeded the costs of operation and administration of the automated traffic safety camera program. D. Washington Traffic Safety Committee Reports — The City shall provide the Wahington traffic safety commission data in the form and manner specified by the commission pursuant to RCW 46.63.220(b)(11). E. Notices of infractions may not be issued to the registered vehicle owner of: 1. A marked fire engine equipped with emergency lights and siren; or 2. An ambulance licensed by the department of health and equipped with emergency lights and siren; or 3. A marked police vehicle actively using emergency lights and siren. 9.60.060 Signage and public notice A. All locations where an automated traffic safety camera is used shall be clearly marked by placing signs at least 30 days prior to activation of the camera in locations that clearly indicate to a driver either that: 1. The driver is within an area where automated traffic safety cameras are authorized; or 2. The driver is entering an area where violations are enforced by an automated traffic safety camera. The signs shall be readily visible to a driver approaching an automated traffic safety camera. Signs shall comport with the specifications and guidelines under that Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways as adopted by the Washington State Department of Transportation under chapter 47.36 RCW. B. The advanced notice and signing in this section shall be the minimum public notice required, though additional forms of public notice may also be given. 9.60.070 Infraction Processing. A. Issuing Authority. An employee of the City's Public Works Department performing under the supervision of a qualified traffic engineer and as designated by the City Manager or designee has Ordinance 25-018 Automated Traffic Safety Camera Program Page 3 of 7 DRAFT the authority to issue a notice of infraction when the infraction is detected through the use of an automated traffic safety camera pursuant to this chapter and RCW 46.63.220 through 46.63.260, and to issue notices of infraction consistent with RCW 46.63.220(9). Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing in this chapter prohibits a law enforcement officer from issuing a notice of traffic infraction to a person in control of a vehicle at the time a violation occurs under RCW 46.63.030(1) (a), (b), or (c). B. Notice mailed. A notice of infraction shall be mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle within 14 days of the violation, or to the renter of a vehicle within 14 days of establishing the renter's name and address pursuant to SVMC 9.60.120. C. Accompanying certificate or facsimile. The notice of infraction shall include with it a certificate or facsimile thereof, based upon inspection of photographs, microphotographs, or electronic images produced by an automated traffic safety camera, stating the facts supporting the notice of infraction. The certificate or facsimile described herein is prima facie evidence of the facts contained in it and is admissible in a proceeding charging a violation under this chapter. 9.60.080 Adjudication of infraction. A. Response. A person receiving a notice of infraction based on evidence detected by an automated traffic safety camera may respond to the notice by mail or as otherwise indicated on the notice of infraction. B. Availability of evidence. The photographs, microphotographs, or electronic images evidencing the violation shall be available for inspection and admission into evidence in a proceeding to adjudicate the liability for the infraction. C. Responsibility for infraction. The registered owner of a vehicle is responsible for an infraction issued pursuant to this chapter unless the registered owner overcomes the presumption in RCW 46.63.075, or, in the case of a rental car business, satisfies the conditions under SVMC 9.60.120 of this chapter. 9.60.090 Limitation on photos — Use of photos. A. Automated traffic safety cameras may only record images of the vehicle and vehicle license plate while an infraction is occurring. The image must not reveal the face of the driver or of passengers in the vehicle. B. All photographs, microphotographs, or electronic images, or any other personally identifying data prepared under this section are for the exclusive use of authorized City employees in the discharge of duties pursuant to this chapter and are not open to the public and may not be used in a court in a pending action or proceeding unless the action or proceeding relates to a violation under this chapter. C. Photographs, microphotographs, or electronic images, or any other personally identifying data shall not be used for any purpose other than enforcement of violations under this chapter nor retained longer than necessary to enforce this chapter. 9.60.100 Penalties The amount of the fine issued for an infraction generated using an automated traffic safety camera shall be Ordinance 25-018 Automated Traffic Safety Camera Program Page 4 of 7 DRAFT as described below. A. General speed infraction. The penalty for a speed infraction committed outside of school speed zone hours shall be as follows: Speed Violation Fine Amount Exceeding the Regulatory $100 Speed Limit 6+ MPH Exceeding the Regulatory $145 Speed Limit I I+ MPH B. School speed zone infraction. The penalty for a speed infraction committed within a designated school speed zone during school speed zone hours shall be as follows: Speed Violation Fine Amount Exceeding the School Zone $145 Speed Limit by 6+ MPH Exceeding the School Zone $290 Speed Limit by 11+ MPH C. Any fees and penalties for failure to respond shall follow the standard court schedule for infractions. D. Pursuant to RCW 46.63.220(15), registered owners of vehicles who receive notices of infraction for automated traffic safety camera -enforced infractions and are recipients of public assistance under Title 74 RCW or participants in the Washington women, infants, and children program, and who request reduced penalties for infractions detected through the use of automated traffic safety camera violations, must be granted reduced penalty amounts of 50 percent of what would otherwise be assessed for a first automated traffic safety camera violation and for subsequent automated traffic safety camera violations issued within 21 days of issuance of first automated traffic safety camera violation. Eligibility for Medicaid under RCW 74.09.510 is not a qualifying criterion under this subsection. Registered owners of vehicles who receive notices of infraction must be provided with information on their eligibility and the opportunity to apply for a reduction in penalty amounts through the mail or internet. The City Manager or designee may establish an online ability -to -pay calculator to process and grant requests for reduced fines or reduced civil penalties for automated traffic safety camera violations. 9.60.110 No Effect on Driving Record Infractions detected using automated traffic safety cameras are not part of the registered owner's driving record under RCW 46.52.101 and 46.52.120. 9.60.120 Rental car business. A. If the registered owner of the vehicle is a rental car business, the issuing agency must, before a notice of infraction being issued pursuant to this chapter, provide a written notice to the rental car business that a notice of infraction may be issued to the rental car business if the rental car business does not, within 18 days of receiving the written notice, provide to the issuing agency Ordinance 25-018 Automated Traffic Safety Camera Program Page 5 of 7 DRAFT by return mail: 1. A statement under oath stating the name and known mailing address of the individual driving or renting the vehicle when the infraction occurred; or 2. A statement under oath that the business is unable to determine who was driving or renting the vehicle at the time the infraction occurred because the vehicle was stolen at the time of the infraction. A statement provided under this subsection must be accompanied by a copy of a filed police report regarding the vehicle theft; or 3. In lieu of identifying the vehicle operator, the rental car business may pay the applicable penalty. B. Timely mailing of this statement to the issuing agency relieves a rental car business of any liability under this chapter for the notice of infraction. 9.60.130 Compensation to camera vendor. The compensation paid to the manufacturer or vendor of the equipment used must be based only upon the value of the equipment and services provided or rendered in support of the system and may not be based upon a portion of the fine or civil penalty imposed or the revenue generated by the equipment. 9.60.140 Use of revenue generated by the automated safety camera program. A. The City may utilize revenue generated by the automated safety camera program for: 1. Traffic safety activities related to construction and preservation projects and maintenance and operations purposes including, but not limited to, projects designed to implement the complete streets approach as defined in RCW 47.04.010, changes in physical infrastructure to reduce speeds through road design, and changes to improve safety for active transportation users, including improvements to access and safety for road users with mobility, sight, or other disabilities; and 2. The cost to administer, install, operate, and maintain the automated traffic safety cameras, including the cost of processing infractions. B. Uses described in 9.60.140(A)(1) shall include use of revenue in census tracts of the City that have household incomes in the lowest quartile determined by the most currently available census data and areas that experience rates of injury crashes that are above average for the city or county. Funding contributed from traffic safety program revenue must be, at a minimum, proportionate to the share of the population of the county or city who are residents of these low-income communities and communities experiencing high injury crash rates. This share must be directed to investments that provide direct and meaningful traffic safety benefits to these communities. Revenue used to administer, install, operate, and maintain automated traffic safety cameras, including the cost of processing infractions, are excluded from determination of the proportionate share of revenues under this subsection 9.60.140(B). C. Beginning four years after an automated traffic safety camera authorized pursuant to this chapter is initially placed and in use, 25 percent of the noninterest money received for infractions issued by such cameras in excess of the cost to administer, install, operate, and maintain the cameras, including the cost of processing infractions, must be deposited into the Cooper Jones active Ordinance 25-018 Automated Traffic Safety Camera Program Page 6 of 7 DRAFT transportation safety account created in RCW 46.68.480. 9.60.150 Publication of automated traffic safety program policies This ordinance and other automated traffic safety camera program policies shall be published on the City's website. Section 2. Other sections unchanged. All other provisions of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code not specifically referenced herein shall remain in full force and effect. Section 3. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance. Section 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after the date of publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City. PASSED by the City Council this day of 12025. Mayor, Pam Haley ATTEST: Marci Patterson, City Clerk Approved As To Form: Kelly Konkright, City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 25-018 Automated Traffic Safety Camera Program Page 7 of 7 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 16, 2025 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. Report ❑pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: First reading of Ordinance #2025-019 amending Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) Chapter 22.120 Wireless Communication Facilities GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A; SVMC 17.80.150,19.30.040, 22.120, 19.60, 19.65.30. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adoption of Ordinance 25-013 an emergency interim ordinance, and Resolution 25-017. BACKGROUND: On December 9, 2025, City Council gave consensus to move forward with a first reading and requested modification to the draft code language enabling both regional and local providers of first responder emergency communications to increase tower height to 100 feet and an additional 20 feet for antenna array in certain zones. Spokane Regional Emergency Communications (SREC) intends to relocate their operations to Spokane Valley. SREC is a regional public safety call center serving among other agencies the Spokane County Sheriff's Office, Spokane Valley Fire Department, and Spokane County Fire District 8. They receive 911 calls and dispatch those calls to emergency service providers. SREC has provided that their communication tower must be at least 100 feet in height and an additional 20 feet needed for an antenna for a total height of 120 feet to effectively provide communication services throughout the region. On July 29, 2025, City Council adopted Ordinance 25-013 (attachment 2), as an emergency interim ordinance increasing the height limits for communication towers used by regional facilities for first responder communication. A duly noticed public hearing was held on September 16, 2025, providing an opportunity for public comment. Subsequently on September 16, 2025, Resolution 25-017 (attachment 3) affirmed Ordinance 25-013. The ordinance stipulated that the interim regulations would be in effect for 180 days unless repealed, extended, or modified by the City Council. On October 21, 2025, SREC submitted a complete application under the interim ordinance to build a tower up to 120 feet tall inclusive of antennae array. As a result, SREC now has a vested right to construct the tower as designed. The Planning Commission considered code amendments to the SVMC that would solidify the interim regulations into the SVMC as provided by the Council (CTA-2025-0002) at a study session on October 9, 2025, and held a public hearing on October 23, 2025. The Planning Commission voted 5-0 (2 members were absent) on October 23, 2025, to recommend to City Council that permanent changes should not be made to Chapter 22.120 SVMC. The Planning Commission voted 4-2 (1 member was absent) on November 13, 2025, to recommend forwarding the findings of fact to the City Council. Planning Commission did not view a permanent amendment as being currently warranted because SREC secured vested rights under the interim ordinance to build a communication tower and antennae array with a total height up to 120 feet. The Planning 1st Ordinance Reading for Code Text Amendment CTA-2025-0002 Pagel of 2 Commission's Findings and Recommendation are provided as attachment 5 and meeting minutes as attachments 6, 7, and 8. Although SREC has submitted an application and is vested under the emergency interim regulations, after those regulations sunset there are still potential land use related risks that may lead to future emergency communication service interruptions. Below are three examples: 1. There are scenarios under which SREC may lose its vested rights and be without the ability to build the same tower without additional action by the Council. 2. Assuming the tower is constructed under the current interim regulations, the tower will be a legal non -conforming use. If 80% or more of the tower were to be damaged, then SREC would not be able to replace it with another tower of the same height. 3. In the future, for various reasons that cannot be foreseen, it is possible that emergency providers may need the ability to construct their own towers in other locations within the city within a timeframe that is insufficient for a code text amendment to be processed and a permit issued. It is because of these risks and out of caution that staff recommend a permanent code text amendment to ensure emergency communications do not experience a future interruption due to land use regulations. CTA-2025-0002 (attachment 4) is a city -initiated code text amendment to amend Chapter 22.120 SVMC to increase the tower height limit when the tower is used for first responder communication. Current regulations limit the tower height to 60 or 80 feet depending on the zoning district. The CTA would increase the tower height in the commercial and industrial zones (Mixed Use, Commercial Mixed Use, Regional Commercial, Industrial Mixed Use, and Industrial) to 100 feet, with an additional 20 feet for an antenna array, for a total combined height of up to 120 feet, but that increase is only allowed if the operator provides first responder emergency communication. OPTIONS: Move to Advance Ordinance #2025-019 to a second reading or take other action deemed appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to advance Ordinance #2025-019 to a second reading. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: There are no anticipated financial impacts. STAFF CONTACT: Steve Roberge, Planning Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1) Draft Ordinance 2025-019 2) Ordinance 25-013 3) Resolution 25-017 4) CTA-2025-0002 Draft Code 5) Planning Commission Findings of Fact and Recommendation 6) Planning Commission Meeting Minutes: October 9, 2025 7) Planning Commission Meeting Minutes: October 23, 2025 8) Planning Commission Draft Meeting Minutes: November 13, 2025 9) Staff Report CTA-2025-0002 10) Power Point Presentation 1st Ordinance Reading for Code Text Amendment CTA-2025-0002 Page 2 of 2 Draft CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO.25-019 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 22.120.040 AND ADOPTING HEIGHT RESTICTIONS FOR COMMUNICATION TOWERS USED FOR FIRST RESPONDER COMMUNICATIONS, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley ("City") contracts with the Spokane County Sheriff's Office ("SCSO") to provide law enforcement services within the City, and receives both emergency medical and fire protection services from Spokane Valley Fire Department ("Fire Department") and Spokane County Fire District No. 8 ("Fire District" and collectively with the Fire Department, "Fire Service Providers"); and WHEREAS, the SCSO and the Fire Service Providers both contract with Spokane Regional Emergency Communications ("SREC"), a regional public safety answering point (i.e. a regional 911 call center) formed under RCW 39.34 et seq., to receive calls for emergency response services (i.e. 911 emergency calls) and dispatch appropriate emergency personnel to respond to emergencies (hereinafter "emergency communication services"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 11, Section 11 of the Washington Constitution, the City of Spokane Valley ("City") is authorized to "make and enforce within its limits all such local police, sanitary and other regulations as are not in conflict with general laws," which includes the adoption of regulations governing land uses within the city; and WHEREAS, emergency communication services being unavailable for any length of time could foreseeably result in delay or non -delivery of emergency lifesaving services, and therefore presents an imminent risk of harm to the health, safety, and welfare of persons both in and outside the City; and WHEREAS, in order to provide uninterrupted emergency communications to the City and SREC's other member agencies, Emergency Interim Ordinance 25-013 was passed on July 29, 2025; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held related to the emergency interim Ordinance 25-013 on September 16, 2025; and WHEREAS, Resolution 25-017 was passed on September 16, 2025, reaffirming Ordinance 25-013 and the Finding of Facts; and WHEREAS, on October 3, 2025, the City issued a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Determination of Non -significance; and Ordinance 25-019 Page 1 of 6 Draft WHEREAS, on October 10, 2025, the Washington State Department of Commerce was notified pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, providing a 60-day notice of intent to adopt amendments to Spokane Valley development regulations; and WHEREAS, on October 23, 2025, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to receive evidence and information, and to provide an opportunity for public testimony. The Commissioners subsequently voted five to zero, with two members absent, to recommend that the City Council deny CTA-2025-0002; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission voted four to two, with one member absent, to approve the Findings and Recommendations for denial as presented on November 13, 2025; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed amendment to SVMC 22.120.040 is in the best interest of the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the City; and WHEREAS, on December 9, 2025, the City Council provided consensus to proceed forward with a first reading of the proposed amendment to SVMC 22.120.040. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley do ordain as follows: Section 1. Preliminary Findings. The City Council hereby adopts the above recitals as findings of fact in support of this Ordinance. Section 2. Findings and Conclusions. SVMC 17.80.150(F) identifies the approval criteria for an amendment to Titles 17-24 SVMC. The City may approve a Municipal Code Text amendment if it finds that the proposed text amendment (A) is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, and (B) bears a substantial relation to public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment. The City Council acknowledges that the Planning Commission conducted appropriate investigation and study and held a public hearing on the proposed amendments. The City Council has read and considered the Planning Commission's findings and recommendation, and makes the following findings and conclusions: A. Findings: The proposed amendment is consistent with and supported by the Comprehensive Plan. Emergency service towers are critical infrastructure that act as the backbone for emergency communications and services to everyone in the City and the region. This amendment is consistent with the following Comprehensive goals and policies: LU-G2 Provide for land uses that are essential to Spokane Valley residents, employees, and visitors. Ordinance 25-019 Page 2 of 6 Draft CF-GE Ensure efficient and cost-effective public safety and emergency services. CF-P7 Maintain a comprehensive emergency management plan that meets the needs of the city and coordinates with regional emergency planning efforts. U-P2 Promote the development of citywide communication networks using the most advanced technology available. Conclusion: The proposed amendment is consistent with and supported by the Comprehensive Plan. B. Findings: The proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment. SREC operates the regional 911 call center that serves the City, Spokane County and other areas in the region. SREC will be locating their 911 call center and an emergency communications tower to a site within the Spokane Valley City limits. They have demonstrated that to provide continuous and reliable emergency communication they require a wireless communication tower that is 100 feet in height. The code text amendment ensures that emergency communication services can be provided ensuring the continuation of emergency services while not allowing additional towers that do not provide first responder communications to be constructed at the increased height. Conclusion: The proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment. Section 3. Amendment. SVMC 22.120.040— Tower Height Limitations is hereby amended as follows: The support tower, antenna array, and supporting electrical and mechanical equipment shall be installed using stealth technology. Stealth technology applies to all personal wireless service facilities, including, without limitation, antennas, towers and equipment structures. For any facility, stealth technology means the use of both existing and future technology through which a personal wireless service facility is designed to resemble an object which is already present in the local environment, such as a tree, streetlight, or traffic signal. It also includes: A. For personal wireless service support towers: 1. If within existing trees, "stealth technology" means: a. The tower is to be painted a dark color; b. Is made of wood or metal; and c. A greenbelt easement is required to ensure permanent retention of the surrounding trees. 2. Stealth technology for towers in a more open setting means that they must have a backdrop (for example, but not limited to, trees, a hillside, or a structure) on at least two Ordinance 25-019 Page 3 of 6 Draft sides, be a compatible color with the backdrop, be made of compatible materials with the backdrop, and that architectural or landscape screening be provided for the other two sides. If existing trees are the backdrop, then a greenbelt easement is required to ensure permanent retention of the surrounding trees. 3. Antennas shall be integrated into the design of any personal wireless service tower to which they are attached. External projections from the tower shall be limited to the greatest extent technically feasible. 4. For rooftop antennas or antennas mounted on other structures: a. For omnidirectional antennas 15 feet or less above the roof, stealth technology means use of a color compatible with the roof, structure or background; b. For other antennas, stealth technology means use of compatible colors and architectural screening or other techniques approved by the City. B. For antennas mounted on one or more building facades, stealth technology means use of color and materials such that the facility has architectural compatibility with the building. It shall be mounted on a wall of an existing building in a configuration as flush to the wall as technically possible and shall not project above the wall on which it is mounted. C. For equipment structures, stealth technology means locating within a building, or if on top of a building, with architecturally compatible screening. An underground location, or above ground with a solid fence and landscaping, is also considered stealth technology. D. Advertising or display shall not be located on any support tower or antenna array; however, the owner of the antenna array shall place an identification plate indicating the name of the wireless service provider and a telephone number for emergency contact on the site. E. No artificial lights other than those required by the FAA or other applicable authority shall be permitted. All security lights shall be down -shielded, and installed to be consistent with Chapter 22.60 SVMC. F. The facility shall be enclosed by a sight -obscuring secured fence not less than six feet in height with a locking gate. No barbed wire or razor wire shall be permitted. G. The support tower foundations, equipment shelters, cabinets or other on -the -ground ancillary equipment shall be buried below ground or screened with a sight -obscuring secured fence not less than six feet high. The requirement for a sight -obscuring fence may be waived provided the applicant has secured all on -the -ground ancillary equipment in a locked cabinet designed to be compatible with and blend into the setting, and the means of access for the support tower is located a minimum of 12 feet above the ground. Ordinance 25-019 Page 4 of 6 Draft H. All support structure(s) for wireless communication antennas shall have their means of access located a minimum of eight feet above the ground unless the requirement for a fence has been waived. L The support tower shall meet the minimum primary structure setback requirements for the underlying zone. J. Support towers shall not be permitted inside a public park, public monument or private holding located within a public park or public monument. K. The height of the support tower or antenna array above grade shall not exceed the maximum height identified in Table 22.120-1. The height of a support tower shall include antenna, base pad, and other appurtenances and shall be measured from the finished grade of the parcel. Table 22.120-1 — Tower Height Limitations Zone Antenna Array Support Tower R-1, Single -Family Residential Estate R-2, Single -Family Residential Suburban R-3, Single -Family Residential Urban 20 feet above the zoning height limitation 60 feet' MFR, Multifamily or 16 feet above existing structure Residential Mixed Use (MU) Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Regional Commercial (RC) 20 feet above the zoning height limitation 20 feet higher than the maximum height allowed Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) or 20 feet above existing structure in the zone or 80 feet whichever is IeSS1,2 Industrial (I) 'Wireless communication services for first responder communications in the MU, CMU, RC, IMU, and I zones shall be allowed a tower height of up to 100 feet and an additional 20 feet of height for attached antenna array, for a total height of up to 120 feet. 2An additional 20 feet in height for each additional antenna array collocated on the support tower, up to a maximum tower height of 100 feet, including the height of all antennas. Section 4. Other sections unchanged. All other provisions of section SVMC 22.120.040 not specifically referenced hereto shall remain in full force and effect. Ordinance 25-019 Page 5 of 6 Draft Section 5. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority set forth herein and prior to the effective date of this Ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 6. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity of unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance. Section 7. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City of Spokane Valley as provided by law. Passed by the City Council this day of December, 2025. Pam Haley, Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk, Marci Patterson Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Ordinance 25-019 Page 6 of 6 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO.25-013 AN EMERGENCY INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING IMMEDIATE HEIGHT RESTICTIONS FOR COMMUNICATION TOWERS USED BY REGIONAL FACILITIES FOR FIRST RESPONDER COMMUNICATIONS, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley ("City") contracts with the Spokane County Sheriff's Office ("SCSO") to provide law enforcement services within the City, and receives both emergency medical and fire protection services from Spokane Valley Fire Department ("Fire Department") and Spokane County Fire District No. 8 ("Fire District" and collectively with the Fire Department, "Fire Service Providers"); and WHEREAS, the SCSO and the Fire Service Providers both contract with Spokane Regional Emergency Communications ("SREC"), a regional public safety answering point (i.e. a regional 911 call center) formed under RCW 3 9.3 4 et seq., to receive calls for emergency response services (i.e. 911 emergency calls) and dispatch appropriate emergency personnel to respond to emergencies (hereinafter "emergency communication services"); and WHEREAS, SREC currently maintains its regional 911 call center facility, including its primary/master communication tower, on property that SREC leases from the City of Spokane; and WHEREAS, the lease between the City of Spokane and SREC will expire at the end of 2025, after which the City of Spokane has stated it intends to begin occupying and using the property to operate its own emergency call center; and WHEREAS, the City, SCSO, and other current member agencies of SREC are not and do not anticipate becoming members or recipients of emergency communication services from the City of Spokane; and WHEREAS, in order to provide uninterrupted emergency communications to the City and SREC's other member agencies, SREC needs to have use of a fully operational regional 911 call center, including a new primary/master communications tower, before the City of Spokane fully occupies SREC's current leased facilities; and WHEREAS, SREC owns real property within the City located at 12809 Mirabeau Parkway (hereinafter "Property") on which it intends to locate its new regional 911 call center and primary/master communications tower; and Ordinance 25-013 Page 1 of 6 WHEREAS, the Property is located within the Mixed Use (MU) zone, and Title 22, Chapter 120 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code ("SVMC 22.120 et seq.") prevents communication tower structures from exceeding 60 feet in height in the MU zone and prevents antenna array from reaching more than 20 feet above the tower, for a total allowable maximum height of 80 feet; and WHEREAS, in order to function properly and reliably dispatch emergency personnel throughout the Spokane County region without signal interference or refraction, SREC's primary/master communications tower structure must be constructed to be at least 100 feet in height without attached antenna arrays, and up to 120 feet in total height including all attached antenna arrays, such that it is able to send and receive signals free from interference of surrounding buildings, power lines, and other facilities; and WHEREAS, SREC will lose the ability to reliably and consistently dispatch emergency personnel to respond to all emergency calls for service throughout the region if the primary/master communications tower construction and 911 call center renovations are not completed and in operation before SREC no longer has use of the existing facilities owned by the City of Spokane; and WHEREAS, SREC needs to complete construction of the new primary/master communications tower on the Property before it can be programmed to effectively communicate with SREC's other supporting communication towers; and WHEREAS, SREC cannot construct the primary/master communications tower without first having a design for the same, and cannot design the tower to be both operationally effective and permittable by the City due to the current language of SVMC 22.120 et seq. WHEREAS, SREC must also complete renovations to convert the existing building into SREC's new 911 call center in order to receive and send emergency communications, but cannot take on the financial burden of proceeding with construction thereof unless and until the SVMC allows emergency wireless communication towers to be at least 100 feet in height (120 feet in total height including antenna array) because it could result in waste of public taxpayer funds; and WHERAS, SREC estimates it will take at least 2 months to complete design and construction of the new primary/master communication tower, and an additional 5 months thereafter to complete the necessary programming for the tower to be operational; and WHEREAS, between now and the date by which permits would need to be issued for SREC to complete the construction and programming necessary for the new primary/master communications tower to be operational, there is not enough time for (a) the City and the City Planning Commission to complete the process required by SVMC 18.10 et seq. to amend SVMC 22.120 et seq. and (b) City Council to thereafter consider and take action on the Planning Commission's recommendations; and Ordinance 25-013 Page 2 of 6 WHEREAS, (a) SREC will not be able to continue providing uninterrupted and continuous emergency communication services once it no longer has access to its current 911 call center unless its new facilities within the City have been constructed and are operational, and (b) SREC will lose access to the currently leased 911 call center and facilities after December 31 ,2025, once the City of Spokane has established and is operating its own 911 call center at that location; and WHEREAS, SREC does not currently own property that could serve as an alternative site for the new primary/master emergency communications tower and 911 call center; and WHEREAS, emergency communication services being unavailable for any length of time could foreseeably result in delay or non -delivery of emergency lifesaving services, and therefore presents an imminent risk of harm to the health, safety, and welfare of persons both in and outside the City; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 11, Section 11 of the Washington Constitution, the City of Spokane Valley ("City") is authorized to "make and enforce within its limits all such local police, sanitary and other regulations as are not in conflict with general laws," which includes the adoption of regulations governing land uses within the city; and WHEREAS, RCW 35A.63.220 authorizes the enactment of an interim land use regulation prior to holding a public hearing, provided the City conducts a public hearing on the interim regulation within 60 days of the date of adoption of the same; and WHEREAS, pursuant to WAC 197-11-880, the adoption of this interim land use ordinance is exempt from the requirements of a threshold determination under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and future permanent zoning regulations will be reviewed in accordance with SEPA Rules; and WHEREAS, due to the urgent need for SREC to construct a new primary/master communications tower and 911 call center to ensure SREC can reliably provide continuous uninterrupted emergency communication services to the region and City, this emergency ordinance is necessary to protect public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the emergency immediate interim ordinance amendment established by this Ordinance is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, public safety, public property and public peace. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley ordains as follows: Section 1. Preliminary Findings. The City Council hereby adopts the above recitals as findings of fact in support of this Ordinance. Section 2. Interim Amendment Adopted. The City Council hereby declares an emergency and adopts an interim amendment to Title 22 SVMC by adding a new section Ordinance 25-013 Page 3 of 6 22.120.060 SVMC "Towers for Emergency Communications Services," as provided in Exhibit A on an interim basis for the period of 180 days while this emergency ordinance is in effect. This temporary interim amendment is adopted pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70A.390. Section 3. Public Hearing. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220, the City Council shall conduct a public hearing on this interim amendment on September 16, 2025, at 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, to hear and consider the comments and testimony of those wishing to speak at such public hearing regarding the interim amendment set forth in this !Ordinance. The hearing will take place at the City of Spokane Valley City Hall in City Council Chambers, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, 99206. Immediately after conducting the public hearing, the City Council shall adopt findings of fact on the subject of this interim amendment and either justify the continued adoption of the interim amendment, cancel the interim amendment, or modify the interim amendment as determined necessary. Section 4. Duration. The interim amendments set forth in this Ordinance shall be in effect as of the date of this Ordinance and shall continue in effect for a period of 180 days from the date of this Ordinance, unless repealed, extended, or modified by the City Council after subsequent public hearing(s) and entry of appropriate findings of fact, pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220. Section 5. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority set forth herein and prior to the effective date of this Ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 6. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance. Section 7. Declaration of Emergency; Effective Date. The City Council hereby declares this Ordinance is in response to a public emergency and is necessary for the protection of public health, safety, and welfare to establish an interim amendment that provides a building height allowance for those regional facilities providing emergency communication services for first responders. This interim amendment must be imposed as an emergency measure to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, and to promote the effective emergency communications throughout the region for effective policing and lifesaving services while the City considers permanent amendments to SVMC 22.120.060. This Ordinance does not affect existing vested rights, nor will it prohibit development within the City since all other allowable uses are not affected by this interim amendment. Based on the reasons and declaration of emergency stated herein, this Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption by the City Council. Passed by the City Council this 291h day of July, 2025. Pam Haley, Mayor Ordinance 25-013 Page 4 of 6 AT EST: City Cle , Marci Patterson Approved as to Form: Office Yrthe City Attorney Date of Publication: RU, (�c Effective Date: r 1 2 Ordinance 25-013 Page 5 of 6 Section 22.120.060 — Towers for Emergency Communications Services Wireless communication services, including transmission towers or antenna support structures, that are used by regional facilities for first responder communication shall be exempt from the provisions of SVMC 22.120-1 Tower Height Limitations. Such regional facilities that assist with first responder communication shall be allowed a height restriction of up to 100 feet for the tower and up to 20 feet for the antenna array attached to the tower, for a total combined height up to 120 feet (where the tower is no more than 100 feet from the ground and no antenna array extends more than 20 feet above the top of the tower). Ordinance 25-013 Page 6 of 6 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO.25-017 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, REAFFIRMING ORDINANCE NO. 25-013 AND THE FINDINGS OF FACT THEREIN WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley ("City") contracts with the Spokane County Sheriff's Office ("SCSO") to provide law enforcement services within the City, and receives both emergency medical and fire protection services from Spokane Valley Fire Department ("Fire Department") and Spokane County Fire District No. 8 ("Fire District" and collectively with the Fire Department, "Fire Service Providers"); and WHEREAS, the SCSO and the Fire Service Providers both contract with Spokane Regional Emergency Communications ("SREC"), a regional public safety answering point (i.e. a regional 911 call center) formed under RCW 39.34 et seq., to receive calls for emergency response services (i.e. 911 emergency calls) and dispatch appropriate emergency personnel to respond to emergencies (hereinafter "emergency communication services"); and WHEREAS, SREC needs to relocate both its regional 911 call center and primary/master communications tower to property SCREC owns within the City of Spokane Valley because SCREC's lease to its current facilities expires at the end of 2025 and the lessor has decided to not renew the lease; and WHEREAS, the City's development code does not allow wireless communication tower structures greater than 60 feet in height (80 feet including the tower structure and antennae array); and WHEREAS, in order to function properly and reliably dispatch emergency personnel throughout the Spokane County region without signal interference or refraction, SREC's primary/master communications tower structure must be constructed to be at least 100 feet in height without attached antenna arrays, and up to 120 feet in total height including all attached antenna arrays, such that it is able to send and receive signals free from interference of surrounding buildings, power lines, and other facilities; and WHEREAS, between now and the date by which permits would need to be issued for SREC to complete the construction and programming necessary for the new primary/master communications tower to be operational, there is not enough time for (a) the City and the City Planning Commission to complete the process required by SVMC 18.10 et seq. to amend the City's development code, and (b) City Council to thereafter consider and take action on the Planning Commission's recommendations; and WHEREAS, on July 29, 2025, the City Council used its emergency authority under RCW 35A.63.220 to prevent imminent threat to the public health, safety, and welfare, and passed Interim Ordinance No. 25-013 authorizing wireless communication tower structures to be up to 100 feet in height (120 feet including antennae array) when used by regional facilities for first responder communications; and WHEREAS, after July 29, 2025, the following has occurred: (1) SREC has learned that it will not be able to occupy its current facilities for any period of time in year 2026, and (2) in order to maintain continuous operations, SREC secured temporary administrative office space under lease within the City and a separate communications facility north of the City of Spokane from which it will be able to temporarily provide regional emergency communication services beginning in 2026, but the facilities are inadequate to reliably provide emergency communication services other than on a short-term basis due to their size, layout, condition, and distance from each other; and WHEREAS, RCW 35A.63.220 requires City Council to hold a public hearing on Interim Ordinance No. 25-013 within 60 days after adoption; and WHEREAS, Interim Ordinance No. 25-013 set the public hearing to receive testimony for September 16, 2025, beginning at 6:OOpm (or as soon as can be heard thereafter) at City Council Chambers; and WHEREAS, notice for the public hearing was duly advertised in the Spokane Valley News Herald on August 29, 2025; and WHEREAS, City Council held a public hearing and received public testimony regarding Interim Ordinance No. 25-013 on September 16, 2025; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington as follows:: Section 1: Recitals Incorporated. The statements in the above recitals are incorporated herein by this reference. Section 2: Findings of Fact Reaffirmed. The City Council reaffirms the findings of fact adopted in Section 2 of Interim Ordinance 25-013. Section 3: Effective Date. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. Passed by the City Council this 16" day of September, 2025. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY 9 Pam Haley, Mayor ATTEST: Approved as to form: M&U�' Marci Pa rson, City Clerk Offic of thd 7 Attorney Table 22.120-1 - Tower Height Limitations Zone Antenna Array Support Tower R-1, Single -Family Residential Estate R-2, Single -Family Residential Suburban R-3, Single -Family Residential Urban 20 feet above the zoning height limitation or 16 feet above existing 60 feet' MFR, Multifamily Residential structure Mixed Use (MU) Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) Neighborhood Commercial (N C) Regional Commercial (RC) 20 feet above the zoning height 20 feet higher than the maximum height Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) limitation or 20 feet above existing structure allowed in the zone or 80 feet whichever is less1 2 Industrial (I) ' Wireless communication services for first responder communications in the MU, CMU, RC, IMU, and I zones shall be allowed a tower height of up to 100 feet and an additional 20 feet of height for attached antenna array, for a total height of up to 120 feet. 2An additional 20 feet in height for each additional antenna array collocated on the support tower, up to a maximum tower height of 100 feet, including the height of all antennas. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION CTA-2025---0002 Proposed Amendtneitt to Spokaiie Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) Pursuant to SVMC 17.80.150(E) the Planning Commission shall consider the proposal and shall prepare and forward a recommendation to the City Council following the public hearing. The following findings are consistent with the Planning Commission recommendation. Background: 1. Spokane Regional Emergency Communications (SREC) operates the regional 911 call center that serves the City and Spokane County. SREC has been located at a facility it leases from the City of Spokane. SREC's lease terminates at the end of 2025, and Spokane has elected to not renew SCREC's lease. 2. Consequently, SREC is relocating its call center and master communications tower to property it owns in Spokane Valley. To continue to provide regional emergency communication services for the region the SREC must construct its master emergency wireless communications tower at the new site swiftly. 3. SREC has identified that to provide reliable continuous emergency communications services throughout the region, the communications tower must be at least 100 feet high with the antenna array able to extend up to 20 feet above the tower. The Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 22,120,040 prohibits tower heights from exceeding a maximum height of 60 feet, with an additional 20 feet allowed for antenna array attached to the tower. 4. On July 29, 2025, City Council adopted Ordinance 25-013, as an emergency interim ordinance increasing the height limits for' communication towers used by regional facilities for first responder communication. The ordinance stipulated that these interim regulations would be in effect for 180 days unless repealed, extended or modified by the City Council, 5. CTA-2025-0002 is a city -initiated code text amendment (CTA) to increase the tower height limit identified in chapter 21.120 Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) up to 100 feet with an additional 20 feet for an antenna when the tower is used by a regional organization for first responder communications, and other related matters. 6. The Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing and conducted deliberations on October 23, 2025. The Commissioners voted 5-0 (with two commissioners absent) to recommend that City Council deny CTA-2025-0002 and recommending no changes to the municipal code. Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation: t. Compliance with SVMC 17.80.150(F) Approval Criteria a. The proposed text anmendinent is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. Findings: The proposed amendment is consistent with the following goals and policies of Comprehensive Plan: i. LU-G2 Provide for land uses that are essential to Spokane Valley residents, employees, and visitors. ii. CF-GE Ensure efficient and cost-effective public safety and emergeney services. iii. CF-P7 Maintain a comprehensive emergency management plan that meets the needs of the city and coordinates with regional emergency planning efforts. iv. U-P2 Promote the development of citywide communication networks using the most advanced technology available. Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission CTA--2025-0002 Page I of 2 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SPOKANE 'VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION b. The proposed arzrendrzzerzt bears a substantial relation to public health, safety, ivelfar•e and protection of the environment. However, the .Planning Corzanaission also finds that: i. The proposed amendment avould allow the increase in tower height in both non- commercial and commercial zones, and that zf needed, an applicant has the ability — in non-erner gency situations — to apply for a variance to the tolver height provided they denaonstr•ate variance requirements are met. ii. SREC's need for• additional height is not date to an expansion of their current open•ating system, but because they are forced to relocate. The existing conditions of the new location cause the need for additional tower height, and it is unlikely that SPEC or another regional emergency corrzrrrznzicatiorzs provider• will need an additional tower at this height at a different location in the fitture. iii. SREC has not indicated a future need for additional toivers that meet or do not meet the catrrent height limit regulations. iv. SREC has submitted a building permit for the construction of a 100 foot -tall tower that is vested under- the regulations established by ORO 25-01.3. The permit is complete and vested. The construction of the 100 foot -tall tower can proceed, and no f tither• emer gency presently exists. v. The construction of the tower eliminates the need for the additional tower and antenna height increase, as each occurrence and the specific needs of the site cannot be anticipated, and may not be addressed by the proposed CTA. vi. There is no evidence that any fztrther- requests will be made for a tower height increase by a regional provider for the pinpose of emergency connn inications. Findings: The proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to public health, safety and welfare or the envirorvnent. Conclusion: The proposed text amendment is consistent with the approval criteria contained in the SVMC 17.80.150 (F), but a permanent amendment of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code is not absolutely necessary. 2. RecommendAtion: For the reasons stated above, the Spokane Valley Planning Commission recommends that City Council deny CTA-2025-0002. Attachment: Exhibit 1 — Proposed Amendment CTA-2025-0002 Signed this 13" day of November 2025 Planning Commission Chair ATTEST 1 Denise clain, Office Assistant I Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission CTA-2025-0002 Page 2 o£2 Draft C'T`A-2025-0002 Chapter 22.120 WIRELESS COMMUNICATION TACILITIES Sections: 22.120.010 Purpose and intent. 22.120.020 Permits and exemptions. 22.120.030 Required application submittals. 22.120.040 Design standards. 22.120.050 Landscaping. 22.120.010 Purpose and intent. Tliese standards were developed to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, and minimize visual impacts on residential areas, while furthering the development of wireless communication services. These standards were designed to comply with the Telecommunication Act of 1996. The provisions of Chapter 22.120 SVMC are not intended to and shall not be interpreted to prohibit or to have the effect of prohibiting wireless communication services. Chapter 22.120 SVMC shall cover all wireless communication services other than small call services, which are regulated ptlrWaut to Chapter 22.121 SVMC. 22.120.020 Pennits and exemptions. Where a transmission tower or antenna support structure is located in a zoning district which allows such use as a permitted use activity, administrative review and a building permit shall be required, subject to the project's consistency with the development standards set forth in SVMC 22.120.040. In instances where the use is not allowed as a permitted use activity, a conditional use perinit and building permit shall be required in addition to a demonstration of consistency with all required development standards. Exemption: Wireless radio utilized for temporary emergency communications in the event of a disaster is exempt from the Provisions of SVMC 22.120,020 and shall be permitted in all zones. 22.120.030 Required application submittals. All applications for wireless antenna arrays and wireless communication support towers shall include the following: A, A letter signed by the applicant stating that all applicable requirements of the FCC, the FAA, and any required avigation easements have been satisfied. B. A scaled site plan clearly indicating the location, type and height of the proposed tower, antennas, On - site land uses and zoning, adjacent land uses and zoning, adjacent roadways, proposed ineans of access, setbacks from property lines, elevation drawings of the proposed tower, the equipment structure, fencing, buffering and the type of stealth technology which will he utilized. The full, detailed site plan shall not be required if the antenna is to be mounted on an existing structure. C. The applicant shall have performed and provided a Photographic simulation of the proposed facility from all affected properties and public rights -of -way. D. The applicant shall provide copies of any environmental dociunents required by the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). CTX 2025-0002 Ch, 22.120 SVMC -- Draft E. The applicant shall have de►nonstrated effort to collocate on an existing support tower or other structure,. New support towers shall not be permitted within one mile of an existing support tower unless it is demonstrated that no existing support tower or other structure can accommodate the proposed antenna array. The City reserves the right to retain a qualified consuItatit, at the applicant's expense, to review file supporting documentation for accuracy. F. Evidence to demonstrate that ►ie existing support tower or other structure can accommodate the proposed antenna array may consist of the following: 1. No existing support towers or other structures are located within the geographic areas required to meet the applicant's engineering requirements. 2. Existing support towers or other structures are not of suffieient height to meet the applicant's engineering requirements. 3. Existing support towers or other structures do not have sufficient structural strengtl► to suppo►t the applicant's proposed antenna array and related equipment. 4. The applicant's proposed antenna would cause electromagnetic interference with the ante►ma oil the existing support towers or other structures, or the antenna on the existing support towers or other structures would cause interfercticc with the applicant's proposed antenna. G. Tile applicant of a new tower shall provide a signed statement stating the applicant has provided notice to all other area wireless service providers of its application to encourage ti>e collocation of additional antent►as ota the structure. Id. A signed statement from the owner and/or landlord to remove the facility or obtain another permit for• tine facility within six months of when file facility is no longer operating as part of a wireless communication system authorized and licensed by the FCC, I. Proof that all the necessary property or easements have been secured to assure for the proper construction, continued maintenance, and general safety of tile properties adjoining the wireless communication facility 22.120,040 Design standards. The support tower, antenna array, and supporting electrical and mechanicat equipment sliall be installed using stealth technology. Stealth technology applies to all personal wireless service facilities, including, without limitation, antennas, towers and equipment structures. For any facility, stealth technology ►ncans the use of both existing and future technology through which a personal wireless service facility is designed to resemble an object which is already present in the local environment, such as a tree, streetlight, or traffic signal. It also includes: A. For personal wireless service support towers: 1. If within existing trees, "stealth teelmology" means: a, The tower is to be painted a dark color; b. Is made of wood or metal; and c. A greenbelt easement is required to ensure permatient retention of the surrounding trees. CIA 2025-0002 2 Ch. 22,120 SYAX -- Drafi 2. Stealth technology for towers in a more open setting means that they must have a backdrop (for example, but not limited to, trees, a hillside, or a structure) on at least two sides, be a compatible color with the backdrop, be made of compatible materials with tine backdrop, and that architectural or landscape screening be provided for the other two sides. If existing trees are the backdrop, then a greenbelt casement is required to ensure permanent retention of the surrounding trees. 3. Antennas shall be integrated into the design of any personal wireless service tower to which they are attached. External projections from the tower sliall be limited to the greatest extent technically feasible. 4. For rooftop antennas or antennas moulntcd on other structures: a. For omnidirectional antennas 15 feet or less above the roof, stealth technology means use of a color compatible with the roof, structure or background; b. For other antennas, stealth technology means use of compatible colors and architectural screening or other techniques approved by the City. B. For antennas mounted on one or more building facades, stealth technology means use of color and materials such that tine facility has architectural compatibility with the building. It shall be, mounted on a wall of an existing building in a configuration as flush to the wall as technically possible and shall not project above the wall on which it is mounted. C. For equipment structures, stealth technology means locating within a building, or if on top of a building, with architecturally compatible screening. An underground location, or above ground with a solid fence and landscaping, is also considered stealth technology. D. Advertising or display shall not be located on any support tower or antenna array; however, the owner of the antenna array shall place an identification plate indicating the name of tile wireless service provider and a telephone number for emorgency contact oil the site. E. No artificial lights other than those required by tine FAA or other applicable authority shall be permitted. All security lights shall be down -shielded, and installed to be consistent with Chapter 22.60 SVMC. F. The facility shall be enclosed by a sight -obscuring secured fence not less than six feet in height with a locking gate. No barbed wire or razor wire shall be permitted. G. The support tower foundations, equipment shelters, cabinets or other on -the -ground ancillary equipment shall be buried below ground or screened with a sight -obscuring secured fence not less than six feet high. The requirement for a sight -obscuring fence may be waived provided the applicant has secured all on -the -ground ancillary equipment in a locked cabinet designed to be compatible with and blend into the setting, and the means of access for the support tower is located a minimum of 12 feet above the ground. H. All support structures) for wireless communication antennas shall have their means of access located a nninnimum of eight feet above the ground tmless the requirement for a fence has been waived. I. The support tower shall meet the minimum primary structure setback requirements for the underlying zorle. .1. Support towers shall not be permitted inside a public park, public monument or private holding located within a. public park or public monument. CT112025-0002 3 Ch. 22.120 SVMC — Draft K. The height of tine support tower or antenna array above grade shall not exceed tine maximum height identified in 'fable 22.120-1. The height of a support tower shall include antenna, base lead, and other appurtenances and shall be measured from the finished grade of the parcel. Table 22.120-1— Tower Height Limitations Zone Antenna Array Support Tower R-1, Single -Family Residential Estate 20 feet above the zoning ]teiglnt limitation or 16 feet above existing structure GO feet n R-2, Single -Family Residential Suburban R-3, Single -Family Residential Urban Ml R, Multifamily Residential Mixed Use (MU) Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Regional Commercial (RC) 20 feet above the zoning ]neiglnt limitation or 20 feet above existing structure 20 feet higher than the maximum height allowed in the zone or 80 feet whichever is leSS" � 2 Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) Industrial (1) r Wireless communication services, including tn'ansmission towers orantenna support struCtUreS, that are used by a regional organization for first responder communication shall be allowed to be a hei girt t of UI to 100 feet for the tower and ull-to an additional height of 20 feet for the antenna array attactned to the tower, for a total combined hei I nt lip to 120 feet, --!An additional 20 feet in height for each additional antenna array collocated on the stnpport tower, tip to a maximum tower height of 100 feet, including the height of all antennas. 22.120.050 Lfludscaping. Refer to Chapter 22.70 SVMC for landscaping requirements applicable to tine underlying zoning district. CTA 2025-0002 Clr. 22.120 SVMC — Al qfi Regular Meeting Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Spokane Valley City Hall October 9, 2025 L Chairman Robert McKinley called the regular meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. The meeting was held in person and via ZOOM meetings. II. The Commissioners and staff stood for the Pledge of Allegiance. III. Administrative Assistant Denise Mclain took attendance, and the following members and staff were present: Michael Kelly Bob McKinley Emily Meyer John Robertson - late Justin Weathermon Ann Winkler Dan Wilson Kelly Konkright, City Attorney Steve Roberge, Planning Manager Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Adam Knight, Associate Planner Levi Basinger, Associate Planner Justan Kinsel, IT Specialist Denise Mclain, Administrative Assistant IV. AGENDA: Commissioner Kelly moved, and it was seconded, to approve the agenda for October 9, 2025. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. V. MINUTES: Commissioner Kelly moved, and it was seconded, to approve the meeting minutes as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. VI. COMMISSIONER REPORT: Commissioner Wilson attended the Manufacturing matters event sponsored by the Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce at CenterPlace. He discussed the importance of manufacturing in our region and our economy. Chairman McKinley attended the City Council meeting the week before last. He expressed his interest in the exciting things coming up and the importance of what they do at the Planning Commission Meetings. VII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Steve Roberge, Planning Manager, gave an update on the next couple of meetings. The next meeting will have the public hearing for wireless communication tower heights, with the administrative report being presented tonight. Then there will be a general discussion on land use scenarios. We will discuss new requirements, particularly housing and how those fit into our city. The first meeting in November will be an Open House with the public to show tn the spectrum of compliance to the public during the regularly scheduled meeting on November 13 10-9-2025 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 3 Chairman McKinley pointed out that our 2nd meeting in November would be on a holiday and canceled, as well a meeting in December and January due to holidays. VIIL PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment offered. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS: a. Findings of Fact: CTA-2025-0001— Home Business Licensing Levi Basinger, Associate Planner, presented the Code Text Amendment for Home Business Regulations to remove the home business permit fee regulation. He gave a brief summary of the previous actions regarding the amendment and made a recommendation to approve the Findings of Fact to present to City Council. Commissioner Meyer thanked Mr. Basinger and staff for the addition of the recommendation to keep the fee exemption. Commissioner Robertson arrived at 6:11 p.m. Commissioner Kelly moved, and it was seconded, to approve the Findings of Fact as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. b. Study Session: CTA-2025-0002 — Wireless Communication Tower Height Lori Barlow, Senior Planner, presented the Code Text Amendment regarding an increase of the height for certain wireless communication towers regulations. Ms. Barlow introduced Adam Knight, Associate Planner, who will be taking over the process after this meeting. She discussed background information on the amendment, to include the need for Spokane Regional Emergency Communications (SREC) to build a tower that is higher than our current regulations allow for. Ms. Barlow presented an overview of current regulations in Chapter 22.120 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code as well as Ordinance 25-013 regarding towers for emergency communication services. The ordinance allowed for SREC to build a tower at 100 ft, which is 20 ft higher than our code allows for regional commercial and industrial zones, and 40 feet higher than is allowed in residential zones. She also presented the proposed change to the code in comparison to our current code, stating that he ordinance will expire, and the commission is being asked to consider a more permanent change to the code for future needs. The commissioners discussed the potential future needs of SREC regarding tower height, tower placement, and potential interference. Concerns were made about the impact in residential zones, what other providers might meet the definition of an "emergency responder", and whether there was a better option other than allowing the height increase in all zones. Suggestions were made to leave the code as -is, to evaluate each application on a case -by -case basis, or to change the requirement in the industrial/regional commercial zones and require an application process for residential zones, such as a conditional use permit or 10-9-2025 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 3 variance. There was a general consensus that a conditional use permit for residential zones was the preferred option despite the application fee and sometimes lengthy application process. The commissioners requested that staff research neighboring jurisdictions to compare our code and the proposed changes with what other cities are doing. Mr. Knight reviewed the upcoming process for this code text amendment. The next meeting will be the public hearing. There was a discussion regarding the timeline of the code text amendment and whether it would be approved before the ordinance timeline expired, which is possible. X. GOOD OF THE ORDER: Commissioner Wilson will not be available in the next two weeks and will be missing our next meeting. Commissioner Winkler commented on the parking issue in apartment complexes and expressed a need to study neighborhoods before the comprehensive plan update. Mr. Roberge offered to discuss after the meeting. Chairman McKinley expressed his appreciation to the staff for all of their work. XI. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Robertson moved, and it was seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 7: 26 p. m. The vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. Bob McKinley, Chairman Date Signed Denise Mclain, Secretary I. II. IV. V. Regular Meeting Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Spokane Valley City Hall October 23, 2025 Chairman Robert McKinley called the regular meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. The meeting was held in person and via ZOOM meetings. The Commissioners and staff stood for the Pledge of Allegiance. Administrative Assistant Denise Mclain took attendance, and the following members and staff were present: Michael Kelly Bob McKinley Emily Meyer - Absent John Robertson Justin Weathermon Ann Winkler Dan Wilson - Absent Kelly Konkright, City Attorney Steve Roberge, Planning Manager Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Adam Knight, Associate Planner Jonny Solberg, IT Specialist Denise Mclain, Administrative Assistant There was a consensus from the Planning Commission to excuse Commissioner Wilson and Commissioner Meyer from the meeting. AGENDA: Commissioner Kelly moved, and it was seconded, to approve the agenda for October 23, 2025. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was five in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. MINUTES: Commissioner Kelly moved, and it was seconded, to approve the meeting minutes as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was five in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. VI. COMMISSIONER REPORT: There were no reports from the commissioners. VIL ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Steve Roberge, Planning Manager, asked if the Planning Commission signed up for the Comprehensive Plan Update. He reported that the next meeting would be an open house style similar to Community Conversations that the City Council is doing. The planning department will highlight 3 draft land use scenarios: distributed density, increase ***, and targeted rezone. The open house will run from 5:00pm to 6:00pm, with the regular meeting to follow. 10-23-2025 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 3 Commissioner Kelly voiced his concern on the strain on resources and where the limit to our city's utility capacity lies. VIIL PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment offered. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS: a. Public Hearing: CTA-2025-0002 — Wireless Communication Tower Height Chairman McKinley opened the public hearing at 6: 1Opm. Lori Barlow, Senior Planner, introduced Adam Knight, Associate Planner, and presented the code text amendment regarding wireless communication tower height. Ms. Barlow gave a review of the process, the approval criteria, and notified the commission that the next meeting would be Findings of Fact. She reviewed the current issue with the wireless communication tower regulations and why City Council has decided to take action. Chairman McKinley asked about extending the height to anticipate future needs. Ms. Barlow responded that the current need is 100 feet, and we are trying to meet their needs based on current designs. She also confirmed that a permit for a new tower has been fully vested with the building department under the temporary emergency ordinance. Ms. Barlow shared three possible options for the Planning Commission to consider for recommendation to the City Council. Mr. Knight presented a comparison of neighboring jurisdictions and the height allowances in each zoning district. Commissioner Weathermon asked for more information on the variance application process if the commission chose to not approve the code text amendment. Commissioner Winker asked for a comparison with the conditional use permit and variance process. Commissioner Kelly asked for clarification on what would define a regional emergency provider and there was a discussion on that definition and application process. Chairman McKinley closed the public hearing at 7:OOpm. The commissioners deliberated options and discussed current regulations. There was a consensus to consider leaving the regulations as they are. Commissioner Weathermon moved, and it was seconded, to retain the current code regulations and deny CTA-2025-0002 as it was presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was five in favor, zero opposed and the motion passed. 10-23-2025 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 3 X. GOOD OF THE ORDER: Commissioner Kelly thanked the staff for the work they put into the presentation. Commissioner Roberston also thanked the staff. Chairman McKinley voiced his hope that the next meeting would have a good turnout at the public meeting. XI. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Winkler moved, and it was seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 7:12 p.m. The vote on the motion was five in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. Bob McKinley, Chairman Date Signed Denise Mclain, Secretary Regular Meeting Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Spokane Valley City Hall November 13, 2025 L Chairman Robert McKinley called the regular meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. The meeting was held in person and via ZOOM meetings. II. The Commissioners and staff stood for the Pledge of Allegiance. III. Administrative Assistant Denise Mclain took attendance, and the following members and staff were present: Michael Kelly Kelly Konkright, City Attorney Bob McKinley Steve Roberge, Planning Manager Emily Meyer Lori Barlow, Senior Planner John Robertson Adam Knight, Associate Planner Justin Weathermon Chad Knodel, IT Manager Ann Winkler Denise Mclain, Administrative Assistant Dan Wilson - Absent Jennifer Musselwhite, Administrative Assistant There was a consensus from the Planning Commission to excuse Commissioner Wilson from the meeting. IV. AGENDA: Commissioner Kelly moved, and it was seconded, to approve the agenda for November 13, 2025. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. V. MINUTES: Commissioner Winkler moved, and it was seconded, to approve the meeting minutes as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. VI. COMMISSIONER REPORT: There were no reports from the commissioners. VIL ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Steve Roberge, Planning Manager, reported that he has additional information on the land -use scenarios discussed in the last meeting. He introduced the consultants from Community Attributes, Inc, Elliot Weiss and Clara Mattucci, to present those scenarios. Commissioner Kelly asked for clarification on the land use needs presented in the scenarios. Commissioner McKinley requested that the commissioners have some time to review the scenarios and slides in order to discuss them at the next meeting. Commissioner Kelly asked if there would be time to sit down with Community Attributes to have some discussions and ask questions outside of 11-13-2025 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 3 the meeting. Commissioner Winkler asked for some clarification on the Urban Growth Area shown on the slides. VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT: Mike Dolan, Spokane Valley, expressed concern with shipping containers and asked the commission to prohibit them in the city, but to allow them for storage purposes. Joseph Godsee, Spokane Valley, suggested a solution for increasing home ownership in the valley by allowing co-op sales of condos where the owner owns the unit as well as a portion of the property. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS: a. Discussion: CTA-2025-0002 Reconsideration and Findings of Fact — Wireless Communication Tower Height Lori Barlow, Senior Planner, presented the RPCA with additional information on the decision made regarding the Code Text Amendment. This presented additional scenarios that might present a barrier for emergency providers should the commission decide to continue with their recommendation. She also presented the course of action for reconsidering a motion or to continue their original decision to deny the Code Text Amendment. Commissioner Winkler asked for clarification on the process that was needed for SREC to get the emergency ordinance to build the tower. She also asked about the zoning code regulations for towers in the different parts of the code. Commissioner Robertson asked what towers the fire and police department are currently using. Kelly Konkright, City Attorney, shared that they are using one on the north side of Spokane. Commissioner Kelly asked for clarification on the process for reconsideration. Commissioner Weathermon expressed concern about multiple towers showing up all over town. Commissioner Meyer agreed with Mr. Konkright that emergency ordinances are not a good path forward for procedure. Commissioner Meyer moved, and it was not seconded, to reconsider the motion for CTA- 2025-0002. There was no discussion. The motion did not pass. Commissioner Kelly moved, and it was seconded, to adopt the Findings of Fact and deny the recommendation for CTA-2025-0002. There was a discussion about the process for the decision to move to City Council. The vote on the motion was four in favor, two opposed and the motion passed. Ms. Barlow announced that she would be retiring and this will be her last meeting. X. GOOD OF THE ORDER: Commissioner Winkler asked for an update on the parking study. Commissioner Kelly shared his appreciation of the staff. Commissioner Weathermon agreed and thanked staff. Commissioner Meyer shared her appreciation with the commissioners and congratulated Ms. Barlow. Commissioner Robertson also thanked the staff and agreed with the 11-13-2025 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 3 decision of the commission. Chairman McKinley thanked the commissioners for sharing their opinions and thanked the staff for their work. XI. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Meyer moved, and it was seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 7:25 p.m. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. Bob McKinley, Chairman Date Signed Denise Mclain, Secretary COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Spokane STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE ,d;OOOValley, PLANNING COMMISSION CTA-2025-0002 STAFF REPORT DATE: October 15, 2025 HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: October 23, 2025, beginning at 6:00 p.m.. This hearing will be conducted in person and remotely using web and telephone conference tools. A link to the Zoom meeting is provided on the agenda for the Planning Commission and posted to the City's webpage: www.spokanevalley.org/planningcommission. PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: A city -initiated code text amendment (CTA) to increase the tower height limit identified in chapter 21.120 Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) when the tower is used by a regional organization for first responder communications, and other related matters. APPROVAL CRITERIA: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, SVMC 17.80.150, and 19.30.040. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS: Staff conclude that CTA-2025-0002 is consistent with the criteria for review and approval, and consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF CONTACT: Lori Barlow, AICP, Senior Planner or Adam Knight, Associate Planner REVIEWED BY: Steve Roberge, Planning Manager ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Proposed Amendment Exhibit 2: SEPA Determination of Non -Significance Exhibit 3: Notice of Public Hearing Exhibit 4: Ordinance 25-013 APPLICATION PROCESSING: Chapter 17.80 SVMC, Permit Processing Procedures. The following table summarizes the procedural steps for the proposal. Procedural Action Date Department of Commerce 60-day Notice of Intent to Adopt Amendment October 2, 2025 Notice of SEPA DNS Routed to Agencies October 2, 2025 Published Notice of Public Hearing October 3, 2025 Published Notice of SEPA DNS October 3, 2025 Background: SVMC 19.60.050 Permitted uses identifies that telecommunication wireless support towers and antennas are allowed uses in all zones of the city so long as the supplemental use regulations in chapter 19.65 SVMC are met. SVMC 19.65.030 identifies that telecommunication wireless support towers located in a residential Staff Report and Recommendation CTA-2025-0002 or multifamily zone require a conditional use permit pursuant to chapter 19.150 SVMC, and that all towers and antennas must comply with chapter 22.120 SVMC Wireless Communication Facilities. Chapter 22.120 SVMC identifies the associated permits required, application submittal requirements, landscaping requirements and design standards. SVMC 22.120.040 deals predominantly with aesthetic standards to ensure that the communication tower and antennas blend in with the environment to the extent reasonably possible but also include specific height limits for towers and antennas within zones. See SVMC Table 22.120-1 included below. Generally, towers in the Regional Commercial Zone, Industrial or Industrial Mixed -Use Zone are allowed to be 80 feet high with antennas extending 20 feet above the tower. Towers in all other zones are allowed to be up to 60 feet high with the antenna extending an additional 16 feet above the tower or 20 feet above the zoning height limit. Table 22.120-1 -Tower Height Limitations Zone Antenna Array Support Tower R-1, Single -Family Residential Estate 20 feet above the zoning height limitation or 16 feet above existing structure 60 feet R-2, Single -Family Residential Suburban R-3, Single -Family Residential Urban MFRr Multifamily Residential Mixed Use (MU) Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Regional Commercial (RC) 20 feet above the zoning height limitation or 20 feet above existing structure 20 feet higher than the maximum height allowed in the zone or 80 feet whichever is less* Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) Industrial (I} *An additional 20 feet in height for each additional antenna array collocated on the supporttower, up to a maximum tower height of 100 feet, including the height of all antennas. In April 2025 staff conducted a pre -commercial application meeting with Spokane Regional Emergency Communications (SREC) to re -locate their operations in Spokane Valley. SREC operates the regional 911 call center that serves the City, Spokane County, and many other areas in the region. SREC initially proposed a tower with antenna that was approximately 145 feet high, which exceeded the tower height limits in the Mixed -Use Zone. After evaluating the regulations and impacts on their services SREC initiated additional discussions with City staff noting that their communication tower must be at least 100 feet in height to provide communications services throughout the region. On July 29, 2025, City Council adopted Ordinance 25-013, as an emergency interim ordinance increasing the height limits for communication towers used by regional facilities for first responder communication. The ordinance stipulated that these interim regulations would be in effect for 180 days unless repealed, extended or modified by the City Council (see exhibit 4). The interim regulations will allow SREC to obtain the necessary permits to construct the tower to prepare the new location for operation and ensure continuous and reliable emergency communication services in the region. Page 2 of 5 Staff Report and Recommendation CTA-2025-0002 The interim regulations ensure that SREC can provide emergency communication services to facilitate their relocation and serve as temporary rules in effect while the permanent regulations are considered and adopted. It is intended that the interim regulations will expire or be repealed. Therefore, City Council directed the Planning Commission to consider an amendment to the tower height limit for regional organizations providing emergency communications. Regulations developed and adopted by this process will be permanent regulations. Staff developed the draft code text amendment consistent with the intent of the interim regulations which created a narrow exception for increasing the tower height limit only if the following two criteria were met: the user is a regional provider, and the use will be for emergency communications. This prevents the exception from being utilized by commercial communication providers or other operators but does allow opportunities for towers meeting the criteria to increase the height limit in all zones, including offsite wireless communication towers. ANALYSIS: The current wireless communication facilities regulations establish the maximum tower and antenna height regardless of who the user is. The current regulations affect private, broadcast, and public safety services equally. The regulations establish an 80-foot maximum tower height in the Regional Commercial, Industrial and Industrial Mixed -Use Zone and a 60-foot maximum tower height in all other zones. Maximum antenna heights of 20 feet above the zoning district height limit are regulated similarly. Towers and antennas are permitted uses in all zones citywide, but a conditional use permit (CUP) is required when proposed in residential or multi -family zones. Towers and antennas are considered as a separate use and may be located as a primary use on any site. The proposed amendment: 1. Increases the maximum height limit allowed in all zoning districts if the user is a regional organization providing emergency responder communications — Both criteria must be met. SVMC Table 22.120-1 Tower Height Limitations establishes the maximum tower and antenna height allowed by zoning district. The table does not distinguish between user or purpose. Pursuant to SVMC Appendix A the definition of Tower is "Any structure built for the sole or primary purpose of supporting any FCC -licensed or authorized antennas and their associated facilities, including structures that are constructedfor wireless communications services including, but not limited to, private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul and the associated site. " All towers are regulated by the established height limits. Adding the exception language establishes an increased maximum tower height limit if the user is a regional organization that intends to use the tower for first responder communications. Both criteria must be met to achieve the additional height. Regional organizations are not defined in the SVMC, nor are first responder communication. However, SREC is considered the regionalized emergency response communications organization for Spokane County providing emergency and non -emergency call services, fire and law dispatch, and reports for law enforcement agencies. Other regional organizations that could potentially meet the criteria would include fire departments or police departments. While "regional organization" describes a broad group. "first responder communications" refers to a small group of persons with specialized training who are among the first to arrive and provide assistance at the scene of an emergency. First responders typically include law enforcement officers, emergency medical services members (EMT's or paramedics) and fire fighters. The common understanding of the terms appears to provide guidance to implement the code. According to a SREC presentation given on September 26, 2024, SREC currently has 23 radio tower sites to manage Spokane County. The additional tower is needed to facilitate reliable and continuous communication at their new site. The network is established, and SREC has not indicated a need for Page 3 of 5 Staff Report and Recommendation CTA-2025-0002 additional towers in the future. It is unlikely that the exception allowing additional height for regional organizations providing first responder communications will result in additional towers. 2. Increases the maximum height limit up to 100 feet in all zones, which is an increase of 20 feet in the regional commercial, industrial and industrial mixed -use zone and 40 feet in all other zones if the user and use criteria are met. The existing tower height regulations are identified in SVMC Table 22.120-1. The maximum tower height is 80 feet in the Regional Commercial, Industrial, and Industrial Mixed -Use zones, and a maximum tower height of 60 feet in all other zones. The current regulations acknowledge the need for communication towers but place lower height limits in residential zones and commercial zones that allow residential uses. The amendment would increase the maximum tower height in all zones up to 100 feet. Wireless communication towers are permitted uses in all zones, but a conditional use permit (CUP)is required for a tower to be constructed in a residential or multifamily residential zone. The CUP does not allow the tower height limit to be increased but establishes a public review process to ensure that potential impacts from the use can be mitigated. The amendment has no impact on the required CUP but would establish the new allowed height in residential zones as 100 feet. Additional Code text amendment options for consideration: The Planning Commission expressed concern that the code text amendment may be too broad and may not adequately protect the residential zones. The Planning Commission may wish to consider the following options for amending the code. 1. Increase the height limit for wireless communication towers meeting the criteria in non- residential zones, and allow the increase in residential zones through the CUP process if a network need for additional height can be demonstrated; 2. Increase the height limit for wireless communication towers meeting the criteria in non- residential zones only; 3. Retain the code as is without exception for height increase and rely on the variance process to address unique situations as they occur. A. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE TEXT AMENDMENT 1. Compliance with Title 17 SVMC (General Provisions) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code a. Findings: SVMC 17.80.150(F) identifies the approval criteria for an amendment to Titles 17-27 SVMC. The City may approve a Municipal Code Text amendment if it finds that: i. The proposed text amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan: Staff Analysis: The proposed amendment is supported by the Comprehensive Plan and is consistent with the following Comprehensive goals and policies: LU-G2 Provide for land uses that are essential to Spokane Valley residents, employees, and visitors. CF-GE Ensure efficient and cost-effective public safety and emergency services. CF-P7 Maintain a comprehensive emergency management plan that meets the needs of the city and coordinates with regional emergency planning efforts. Page 4 of 5 Staff Report and Recommendation CTA-2025-0002 U-P2 Promote the development of citywide communication networks using the most advanced technology available. ii. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment: Staff Analysis: The proposed amendment bears substantial relation to public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment. SREC operates the regional 911 call center that serves the city, Spokane County and other areas in the region. SREC will be locating their 911 call center and emergency communications tower to a site within the Spokane Valley City limits. They have demonstrated that to provide continuous and reliable emergency communication they require a wireless communication tower that is 100 feet in height. The code text amendment ensures that emergency communication services can be provided ensuring the continuation of emergency services while limiting the opportunity for additional towers to be constructed at the increased height. b. Conclusion(s): The proposed text amendment is consistent with the approval criteria contained in the SVMC 17.80.150(F). Finding and Conclusions Specific to Public Comments a. Findings: No public comment has been received to date either in support of the code text amendment or in opposition. The City Attorney noted at the Planning Commission Study Session on October 9, 2025, that one person expressed concern to City Council over health impacts of wireless communication facilities on July 29, 2025, which was the date Ordinance 25-013 was adopted establishing the interim regulations increasing the tower height limit. Pursuant to SVMC 17.80.150 and consistent with SVMC 17.80.120 the notice of public hearing was published on October 3, 2025, and October 10, 2025, in the Spokane Valley News Herald and posted on the City's website. b. Conclusion(s): Adequate public noticing was conducted for CTA-2025-0002 pursuant to adopted public noticing procedures. 3. Finding and Conclusions Specific to Agency Comments a. Findings: The City has not received any agency comments to date. b. Conclusion(s): No concerns noted. B. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth in Section A the proposed code text amendment to increase the height limit for wireless communication towers identified in chapter 22.120 Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) when the tower is used by a regional organization for first responder communications, and other related matters is consistent with the requirements of SVMC 17.80.150(F) and the Comprehensive Plan. Page 5 of 5 0000� COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 3 okane DEPARTIv><ENT Valle Y DETERMINATION OF NON SIGNIFICANCE 10210 East Sprague Avenue • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.720.5000 • Fax: 509.720.5075 • planning@spokanevalleywa.gor NAME & FILE NUMBER: CTA-2025-0002 / Communication Tower Height Regulations PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: CTA-2025-0002 is a city -initiated code text amendment to Chapter 22.120 SVMC Wireless Communication Facilities that adds an exception to the tower height limit when the tower is used by regional facilities for first responder communication. The amendment authorizes towers for wireless communication services to be up to 100 feet tall (up to 120 feet tall including antennae array) when used by regional facilities for first responder communication. This amendment establishes the height restriction for towers meeting these criteria in all zoning districts. PROPOSAL LOCATION: Applies to all properties in the City of Spokane Valley. APPLICANT/OWNER: City of Spokane Valley LEAD AGENCY: City of Spokane Valley REVIEW: The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after reviewing a completed environmental checklist and related information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. DETERMINATION: This DNS is issued under WAC 197-I1-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date issued. Written comments ma be submitted beginning October 3 2025 and must be received by 5:00 p.m. on October 17, 2025. STAFF CONTACT: Adam Knight, Associate Planner, City of Spokane Valley; 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206; PH: (509) 720-5031, akniglit@spokanevalleywa.gov RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Steve Roberge, Planning Manager DATE ISSUED: October 3, 2025 SIGNATU APPEAL: An appeal of this determination shall be submitted to the City of Spokane Valley Economic Development Department within 14 calendar days after the date issued. Appeals must be received by 4:00 p.m. by October 17, 2025. The appeal must be written and specific factual objections made to the City's threshold determination. Appeals shall be conducted in conformance with Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 17.90 Appeals, and any required fees pursuant to the City's adopted Fee Schedule shall be paid at the time of appeal submittal. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-680, appeals shall be limited to a review of a final threshold determination. City of Spokane Valley October 3, 2025 Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) Page 1 of 1 File No. CTA-2025-0002 Notice of Public Hearing City of Spokane Valley CTA-2025-0002— Wireless Communication Tower Height Amendment This hearing will be conducted in person, with the option to attend remotely using web and telephone conference tools, as described below. Hearing Date and Time: October 23, 2025, at 6:00 p.m. Location: City Hall, 10210 E Sprague Ave, Spokane Valley, WA Zoom Meeting Details: Join Zoom Meeting A link to the Zoom meeting will be provided on the agenda and posted to the City's webpage: www.spokanevaUey.org/plamingcommission. File Number: CTA-2025-0002 Description of Proposal: City -initiated code text amendment to Chapter 22.120 SVMC Wireless Communication Facilities that adds an exception to the tower height limit when the tower is used by regional facilities for first responder communication. The amendment adds SVMC 22.120.060 to Chapter 22.120 SVMC that authorizes towers for wireless communication services to be up to 100 feet tall (up to 120 feet tall including antennae array) when used by regional facilities for first responder communication. This amendment establishes the height restriction for towers meeting these criteria in all zoning districts. Proposal Location: This is a non -project action; the amendment will apply citywide. Applicant: City of Spokane Valley, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Hearing Procedures: The Planning Commission will conduct the hearing pursuant to the rules of procedure adopted in SVMC Title 18 (Boards and Authorities). The public is encouraged to submit written comments prior to the hearing by sending the comments to Adam Knight, 10210 E Sprague Ave., Spokane Valley, WA 99206, or email to AKnightgspokanevalleywa.gov. All comments received between October 3, 2025 (the date of this notice) and October 23, 2025, (the date of the hearing) will be considered. Comments will need to be received no later than 4:00 PM on October 23, 2025, to be submitted into the record. Comments received will be entered into the record at the time of the public participation portion of the Public Hearing. Comments received through US Mail will be included if they are received prior to the hearing. All interested persons may testify at the public hearing in person or via the zoom meeting address and/or phone number. Interested persons planning to attend via ZOOM will need to sign up to speak no later than 4:00 p.m. on October 23, 2025. Use the link referenced above to sign up for oral public comments. This is not an opportunity for questions or discussion. Remarks will be limited to three minutes per person. Written comments and documents may only be submitted prior to the hearing. Any appeal of the City Council's decision will be based on the record established before the Planning Commission, pursuant to SVMC 17.90 (Appeals). The Planning Commission will forward a recommendation on the request to the Spokane Valley City Council. Environmental Determination: Spokane Valley, acting as the Lead Agency, issued a Determination of Non - significance (DNS) on October 3, 2025, pursuant to WAC 197-11-340 (2). The 14 day appeal/comment period expires on October 17, 2025. Staff Report and Inspection of File: A staff report will be available for inspection seven (7) calendar days before the hearing. The staff report and application file may be inspected at the Spokane Valley Permit Center Monday — Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. excluding holidays. If you have any questions, please contact Adam Knight, Associate Planner, Planning Division, at AKnightkspokanevalleywa. -ov. Patricia Rhoades Spokane Valley Deputy City Clerk Publish: October 3 and 10, 2025 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO.25-013 AN EMERGENCY INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING IMMEDIATE HEIGHT RESTICTIONS FOR COMMUNICATION TOWERS USED BY REGIONAL FACILITIES FOR FIRST RESPONDER COMMUNICATIONS, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley ("City") contracts with the Spokane County Sheriff's Office ("SCSO") to provide law enforcement services within the City, and receives both emergency medical and fire protection services from Spokane Valley Fire Department ("Fire Department") and Spokane County Fire District No. 8 ("Fire District" and collectively with the Fire Department, "Fire Service Providers"); and WHEREAS, the SCSO and the Fire Service Providers both contract with Spokane Regional Emergency Communications ("SREC"), a regional public safety answering point (i.e. a regional 911 call center) formed under RCW 3 9.3 4 et seq., to receive calls for emergency response services (i.e. 911 emergency calls) and dispatch appropriate emergency personnel to respond to emergencies (hereinafter "emergency communication services"); and WHEREAS, SREC currently maintains its regional 911 call center facility, including its primary/master communication tower, on property that SREC leases from the City of Spokane; and WHEREAS, the lease between the City of Spokane and SREC will expire at the end of 2025, after which the City of Spokane has stated it intends to begin occupying and using the property to operate its own emergency call center; and WHEREAS, the City, SCSO, and other current member agencies of SREC are not and do not anticipate becoming members or recipients of emergency communication services from the City of Spokane; and WHEREAS, in order to provide uninterrupted emergency communications to the City and SREC's other member agencies, SREC needs to have use of a fully operational regional 911 call center, including a new primary/master communications tower, before the City of Spokane fully occupies SREC's current leased facilities; and WHEREAS, SREC owns real property within the City located at 12809 Mirabeau Parkway (hereinafter "Property") on which it intends to locate its new regional 911 call center and primary/master communications tower; and Ordinance 25-013 Page 1 of 6 WHEREAS, the Property is located within the Mixed Use (MU) zone, and Title 22, Chapter 120 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code ("SVMC 22.120 et seq.") prevents communication tower structures from exceeding 60 feet in height in the MU zone and prevents antenna array from reaching more than 20 feet above the tower, for a total allowable maximum height of 80 feet; and WHEREAS, in order to function properly and reliably dispatch emergency personnel throughout the Spokane County region without signal interference or refraction, SREC's primary/master communications tower structure must be constructed to be at least 100 feet in height without attached antenna arrays, and up to 120 feet in total height including all attached antenna arrays, such that it is able to send and receive signals free from interference of surrounding buildings, power lines, and other facilities; and WHEREAS, SREC will lose the ability to reliably and consistently dispatch emergency personnel to respond to all emergency calls for service throughout the region if the primary/master communications tower construction and 911 call center renovations are not completed and in operation before SREC no longer has use of the existing facilities owned by the City of Spokane; and WHEREAS, SREC needs to complete construction of the new primary/master communications tower on the Property before it can be programmed to effectively communicate with SREC's other supporting communication towers; and WHEREAS, SREC cannot construct the primary/master communications tower without first having a design for the same, and cannot design the tower to be both operationally effective and permittable by the City due to the current language of SVMC 22.120 et seq. WHEREAS, SREC must also complete renovations to convert the existing building into SREC's new 911 call center in order to receive and send emergency communications, but cannot take on the financial burden of proceeding with construction thereof unless and until the SVMC allows emergency wireless communication towers to be at least 100 feet in height (120 feet in total height including antenna array) because it could result in waste of public taxpayer funds; and WHERAS, SREC estimates it will take at least 2 months to complete design and construction of the new primary/master communication tower, and an additional 5 months thereafter to complete the necessary programming for the tower to be operational; and WHEREAS, between now and the date by which permits would need to be issued for SREC to complete the construction and programming necessary for the new primary/master communications tower to be operational, there is not enough time for (a) the City and the City Planning Commission to complete the process required by SVMC 18.10 et seq. to amend SVMC 22.120 et seq. and (b) City Council to thereafter consider and take action on the Planning Commission's recommendations; and Ordinance 25-013 Page 2 of 6 WHEREAS, (a) SREC will not be able to continue providing uninterrupted and continuous emergency communication services once it no longer has access to its current 911 call center unless its new facilities within the City have been constructed and are operational, and (b) SREC will lose access to the currently leased 911 call center and facilities after December 31 ,2025, once the City of Spokane has established and is operating its own 911 call center at that location; and WHEREAS, SREC does not currently own property that could serve as an alternative site for the new primary/master emergency communications tower and 911 call center; and WHEREAS, emergency communication services being unavailable for any length of time could foreseeably result in delay or non -delivery of emergency lifesaving services, and therefore presents an imminent risk of harm to the health, safety, and welfare of persons both in and outside the City; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 11, Section 11 of the Washington Constitution, the City of Spokane Valley ("City") is authorized to "make and enforce within its limits all such local police, sanitary and other regulations as are not in conflict with general laws," which includes the adoption of regulations governing land uses within the city; and WHEREAS, RCW 35A.63.220 authorizes the enactment of an interim land use regulation prior to holding a public hearing, provided the City conducts a public hearing on the interim regulation within 60 days of the date of adoption of the same; and WHEREAS, pursuant to WAC 197-11-880, the adoption of this interim land use ordinance is exempt from the requirements of a threshold determination under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and future permanent zoning regulations will be reviewed in accordance with SEPA Rules; and WHEREAS, due to the urgent need for SREC to construct a new primary/master communications tower and 911 call center to ensure SREC can reliably provide continuous uninterrupted emergency communication services to the region and City, this emergency ordinance is necessary to protect public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the emergency immediate interim ordinance amendment established by this Ordinance is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, public safety, public property and public peace. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley ordains as follows: Section 1. Preliminary Findings. The City Council hereby adopts the above recitals as findings of fact in support of this Ordinance. Section 2. Interim Amendment Adopted. The City Council hereby declares an emergency and adopts an interim amendment to Title 22 SVMC by adding a new section Ordinance 25-013 Page 3 of 6 22.120.060 SVMC "Towers for Emergency Communications Services," as provided in Exhibit A on an interim basis for the period of 180 days while this emergency ordinance is in effect. This temporary interim amendment is adopted pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70A.390. Section 3. Public Heariniz. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220, the City Council shall conduct a public hearing on this interim amendment on September 16, 2025, at 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, to hear and consider the comments and testimony of those wishing to speak at such public hearing regarding the interim amendment set forth in this 'Ordinance. The hearing will take place at the City of Spokane Valley City Hall in City Council Chambers, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, 99206. Immediately after conducting the public hearing, the City Council shall adopt findings of fact on the subject of this interim amendment and either justify the continued adoption of the interim amendment, cancel the interim amendment, or modify the interim amendment as determined necessary. Section 4. Duration. The interim amendments set forth in this Ordinance shall be in effect as of the date of this Ordinance and shall continue in effect for a period of 180 days from the date of this Ordinance, unless repealed, extended, or modified by the City Council after subsequent public hearing(s) and entry of appropriate findings of fact, pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220. Section 5. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority set forth herein and prior to the effective date of this Ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 6. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance. Section 7. Declaration of Emergency; Effective Date. The City Council hereby declares this Ordinance is in response to a public emergency and is necessary for the protection of public health, safety, and welfare to establish an interim amendment that provides a building height allowance for those regional facilities providing emergency communication services for first responders. This interim amendment must be imposed as an emergency measure to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, and to promote the effective emergency communications throughout the region for effective policing and lifesaving services while the City considers permanent amendments to SVMC 22.120.060. This Ordinance does not affect existing vested rights, nor will it prohibit development within the City since all other allowable uses are not affected by this interim amendment. Based on the reasons and declaration of emergency stated herein, this Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption by the City Council. Passed by the City Council this 29"' day of July, 2025. 72�-11 111;.�- &1,4- W,.A/ Pam Haley, Mayor C/ Ordinance 25-013 Page 4 of 6 AT EST: City Cle , Marci Patterson Approved as to Form: Office the City Attorney Date of Publication:RU, Effective Date: r 1 2 Ordinance 25-013 Page 5 of 6 Section 22.120.060 — Towers for Emergency Communications Services Wireless communication services, including transmission towers or antenna support structures, that are used by regional facilities for first responder communication shall be exempt from the provisions of SVMC 22.120-1 Tower Height Limitations. Such regional facilities that assist with first responder communication shall be allowed a height restriction of up to 100 feet for the tower and up to 20 feet for the antenna array attached to the tower, for a total combined height up to 120 feet (where the tower is no more than 100 feet from the ground and no antenna array extends more than 20 feet above the top of the tower). Ordinance 25-013 Page 6 of 6 r�� O CO Z c Z W J O w a U w d') U > U N N cam N� N I can I C: 0) C: 0) L cu C: cu C: _ 0 QOf O�--- OofN cn U 0) CO � I C: � c� 0) N.0 � � U a U Lcu U N >O4- O� O= Z z O o0 U H Q U C:C Z J U ca Z W I �0)CUp�N a W W W 0 Z W H O N U.L= }' � �' cu _a 0 cl)U Q = Z N O cn O 0 C)Z TZ20- N E 0 O Cc V o s� 9 U) m (D O C/) N 0 Q O U N O � }, O .-. OW N EUj> W N �C/) C: C: c C O •0 0 Q N U (n O 4-0 C: N N 'E +r U E U O Q O cn0 "rn O co 4-0 -0 U Co N C: '� � O N N L N � E M C/) N O N � Co 3: O uj >O 0O O � � Co C;) O — C: .C: O E O N > E Q N O O Q O 'N O C: N C Co +r � O CO � M O Q " O Co C: 0 0 N O O� O � N O N N N U X _ C: > cn O � ca ca �+ L > ra = 7 7-, L [¢ � ro 'r 0 a. a E � cc Q o -C CL [ff L NlZ L C bA +� 0 ry C) -0 a ` -- "� Q) N C w _ R3 C _ 4[S o O C "CS =j Q} . e4i R7 ro L4-1 • L • Ln r C1(7 x G(7 x m u V w ,v � cu -0 `° 0 o 4-1 o -cu f y_ Si o C 0 C} Q7 Q1 `y cu 4J L Q1 p a+ N f w C7 Q7 bA Q L o 0 L 0 0 -0 L— ro o ro o— L o 0 N R3 u N R3 U 4. 6U 3 " L cu Q QJ rN N S41 W i C7 `° a3 •� •kx0 CD to CT okucu w os � c 4-1 0o cv w Qa E v e cC a) E ° � cro E11 L ai o L � N � � Il LT � � 0 � N Q7 N 'Z Q1 LA 7 i U ` O N RS m , +� ti0 dp f� bA v O ro M to E � ro C a.+ r N N fY3 t1 �3 CC Lu 3 0L L, Ci iJ z �' 2 W ■ U) a O ■ U) CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 16, 2025 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA TITLE: Resolution No. 25-018 Designating the Spokesman -Review as the Official Newspaper for the City of Spokane Valley. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 65.16.020 Qualifications of legal newspaper: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: December 2002: Council approved Resolution No. 02-11 designating the Spokesman Review as the City's official newspaper and authorized the City Manager to execute a one-year contract with The Spokesman Review for legal advertising services. March 16, 2004, study session: the differences between the Valley News Herald and Spokesman Review were discussed. At the March 23, 2004, regular meeting, Council approved Resolution 04-006 designating the Valley News Herald as the official newspaper; and there was Council consensus to bring this matter back for discussion in a year. December 7, 2004, study session: It was Council consensus to stay with the Valley News Herald and review the issue again the following year, and at the December 6, 2005, meeting, Council determined there was no need to continue the annual review. October 31, 2017, study session: After The Exchange qualified as a legal newspaper, staff provided an administrative report to Council comparing The Exchange to the Valley News Herald and Spokesman Review. Council consensus at the time was to keep the Valley News Herald as the official newspaper of the City. November 5, 2025, study session: Staff presented an administrative report to Council at the November 5t1' Council meeting. Council directed City staff to draft a resolution designating the Spokesman -Review as the official newspaper of the City and present it to Council for approval. BACKGROUND: Prior to November 5' of this year, Council's last review of the official newspaper designation was 8 years ago. Staff are providing updated information regarding the current circulation rates, cost, and other details regarding each newspaper for Council to consider whether to keep the Valley News Herald or designate either the Spokesman -Review or The Exchange as the City's official newspaper moving forward. It's imperative for us to improve customer service and meet deadlines more efficiently. Newspaper Options: Spokesman Review (Spokesman): Since the Spokesman publishes daily, there are more options for publication dates thus making it easier to meet deadlines and continue departmental efficiency for projects. At approximately 44,000 daily readers, the Spokesman also reaches a greater percentage of the public than the Valley News Herald (which has approximately 650 weekly readers) or the Spokane Exchange. The total cost to publish small advertisements in the Spokesman would often be lower because the Spokesman does not charge for the first affidavit or a fee to publish online in addition to print, but the total cost to publish large advertisements in the Spokesman would be slightly higher than either the Spokane Exchange or Valley News Herald. However, the cost per reader, even for large advertisements, is much lower with the Spokesman compared to either the Valley News Hearld or Spokane Exchange. This is due to the Spokesman having a daily readership that is more than sixty (60) times greater than the Valley News Herald's weekly readership. The Spokesman previously had special "Valley View editions" with reduced publication rates on Thursdays and Saturdays but has since reduced that to Thursdays only. Legal notices must be received at least two days prior to publication if published on Monday through Saturday, or Friday by 5 pm for the Sunday edition. The Spokesman was the City's official newspaper from the date of incorporation (March 31, 2003) until March 23, 2004, when the City switched to the Valley News Herald as its official newspaper. The Spokesman's normal course of action is to have contracts executed with local jurisdictions that select them as their official newspaper. The Spokesman is offered both electronically and in print for Sunday — Friday (the Saturday paper is only offered electronically). The City's legal notices would be generated in both the print and electronic versions of the newspaper to allow for more views at no additional cost. Valley News Herald (Herald): The Herald publishes weekly on Fridays, (although we generally get our copies on Thursday afternoons). This often requires staff to schedule deadlines further out than otherwise necessary in order to meet publication deadlines. While large advertisements cost slightly less to publish in The Herald than the Spokesman, The Herald's circulation is much smaller. Notices must be received by the Herald by Tuesday noon of the same week. The paper is mailed to subscribers, with rack copies also available at various locations throughout the City. The Herald has been the City's official newspaper since March 23, 2004. Until August 2025, the Herald was only available in a printed format. In August an electronic option for legal notices was provided in the Cheney Free Press online for an additional cost of $5 per notice. The Spokane Exchange: The Exchange is an independently owned company that distributes the Exchange, Eastern Washington's free weekly classified newspaper distributed regionally throughout northeastern Washington and north Idaho. The paper publishes weekly on Thursdays and notices must be received by the newspaper by noon Wednesday. Other than our legal publications, most legal notices published in the Exchange are from law firms advertising estate and probate notices, or notices to creditors. They do not have subscribers as their distribution is demand distribution on racks. OPTIONS: After discussion, Council may (1) adopt Resolution No. 25-018; or (2) take other action Council deems appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move to adopt Resolution No. 25-018, a resolution designating the Spokesman -Review as the official newspaper of the City of Spokane Valley. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Historical costs for each of the publications are as follows: Publication 2025 as of 12/11/25 2024 2023 Spokesman Review $17,810 $20,084 $20,268 Spokane Exchange $15,418 $20,200 $18,062 Valley News Herald $14,766 $20,296 $17,668 Total $47,994 $60,580 $55,998 It is important to note that the historical costs indicated above reflect market rate pricing. If the City chooses to enter into a contract, contracted costs for the Spokesman Review will be under market rates. Also, volumes for the Spokesman Review would increase from historical amounts and the activity for the Exchange and Valley News Herald would be eliminated. All this being taken into account, it is difficult to compare historical costs to expected future costs. STAFF CONTACT: Marci Patterson, City Clerk; Kelly Konkright, City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: List of Official Publications (from Spokane County's Website) Draft Resolution No. 25-018: A Resolution of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, Designating a New Official Newspaper of the City of Spokane Valley and Repealing Resolution Nos. 02-11 and 04-006 List of Official Publications In the Matter of Approving Legal Newspapers - Official Papers for Publication RCW 65.16.020 Name of Paver Address Date of Date Notices Must Be Publication Received Cheney Free Press 1616 W 1st Street Thursday Tues - 10 a.m. (Times Publishing Company) Cheney, WA 99004 509-235-6184 Spokesman -review 999 W Riverside Daily Sam - 5pm. Spokane, WA 99201 Sunday Friday - 5pm 509-459-5000 The Tribune 104 N Main Wednesday Friday Case 42-107003 Deer Park, WA 99006 509-276-5043 Official Gazette of the City of 808 W Spokane Falls Wednesday Thursday - Noon Spokane Spokane, WA 99201 509-625-6350 Valley News Herald 523 N Pines Friday Tuesday - Noon Spokane, WA 99206 509-924-2440 Liberty Lake Splash 23515 E Maxwell Court Wednesday Unknown Liberty Lake, WA 99019 North Palouse Journal 33 W Emma Street Unknown Unknown P.O. Box 289 Rockford, WA 99030-0289 The Exchange 5111 E. Trent Avenue Thursday Wednesday - Noon Spokane, WA 99212 509-922-3456 The Inlander 1227 W Summit Parkway Thursday Unknown Spokane, WA 99201 (https: //www.spokanecounty. org/2128/List-of-Official-Publications) CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO.25-018 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESIGNATING A NEW OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NOS. 02-11 AND 04-006 WHEREAS, RCW 35A.21.230 requires the City to designate an official newspaper for the City of Spokane Valley having the qualifications prescribed by RCW 65.16 for the purposes of publishing notices, ordinances (or summaries thereof) and other matters relating to the business of the City of Spokane Valley; and WHEREAS, on December 17, 2002, the Spokane Valley City Council passed Resolution 02-11 which designated the Spokesman -Review as the official newspaper of the City of Spokane Valley; and WHEREAS, on March 23, 2004, the Spokane Valley City Council passed Resolution 04-006 which amended Resolution No. 02-11 to designate the Spokane Valley News Herald as the official newspaper of the City of Spokane Valley; and WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley City Council has reviewed the costs, publishing schedules and deadlines, scope of services, and circulation volume of qualified local newspaper services and it desires to re -designate the official newspaper of the City of Spokane Valley; and WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley desires to change the current official newspaper of the City of Spokane Valley to a newspaper (1) with a larger number of readers in the region so that City notices, solicitations for bids on City projects and contracts, and other official notifications are read by a greater percentage of the population, and (2) publishes more than one time per week so the City can publish legally required notices without delay that may otherwise occur; NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, that: Section 1. Repeal of Resolution Nos. 02-11 and 04-006. City of Spokane Valley Resolution Nos. 02-11 and 04-006 are hereby repealed in their entirety. Section 2. Official Newspaper. The City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, through its City Council designates the Spokesman -Review as the official newspaper of the City of Spokane Valley. The City shall submit to the newspaper its legal notices, ordinances (or summaries thereof), and all other matters which state law requires be published. The newspaper, after publication, shall provide an affidavit to the City of Spokane Valley setting forth the text and date of publication. This Resolution shall not prevent the City from publishing notices, advertising or other matters in other available publications. Section 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective on January 1, 2026. Adopted this day of December, 2025. Resolution No. 25-018 Page 1 of 2 ATTEST: Marci Patterson, City Clerk Approved as to form: Office of the City Attorney Resolution No. 25-018 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY: Pam Haley, Mayor Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 16, 2025 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration -Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) - Recommendations GOVERNING LEGISLATION: State Law RCW 82.08 and 67.28; Spokane Valley Municipal Code 3.20 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: In 2025 for the 2026 awards, the Council had several discussions pertaining to lodging tax including the allowable uses of the revenue, the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee's role in the process, and the 2026 Council goals and priorities for the use of lodging tax revenues. Council gave consensus at the November 5, 2025 meeting for City staff to work with Innovia to prepare applications related to the proposed Innovia Ice Sports Facility for LTAC consideration, as was requested by the LTAC on October 29, 2025. On November 18, 2025, Council heard an administrative report on the initial round of funding recommendations by the LTAC from the October 291" meeting. On December 9, 2025, Council heard an administrative report on the second round of funding recommendations from the LTAC developed at their meeting held on November 201n BACKGROUND: Pursuant to SVMC 3.20.010, the City has imposed and levied a total tax of 3.3% on the furnishing of lodging that occurs with Spokane Valley. The total tax is made of two portions, a 2% portion and a 1.3% portion, and each portion may be used for different purposes. The organizations to which the tax proceeds are distributed are ultimately determined by the City Council which receives a recommendation from the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC). The LTAC is comprised of five members who are appointed by the City Council. The LTAC makes its recommendations in an open meeting after reviewing a combination of written application materials and hearing an oral presentation by each applicant. These presentations allow the LTAC the opportunity to ask questions and clarify information regarding the project or proposal. On October 29, 2025, the LTAC met to consider proposals and hear presentations from applicants seeking a portion of the $930,000 appropriated in the City's 2026 budget for the 2% portion of lodging taxes in Fund #105. The LTAC recommendations for funding were made in two motions; the first motion unanimously passed to recommend transferring $447,000 from Fund #105 to Fund #104. This increased the 2026 ending fund balance in the capital expenditure Fund #104 to approximately $2M. The transfer also left Fund #105 with an available award amount of $483,000 for the 2026 requests. The second motion was to recommend grant funding allocations from the 2% tax totaling $483,000. At the end of the October 291" meeting the LTAC unanimously approved a motion to hold another special meeting to consider applications related to the Innovia Foundation Ice Sports Facility Proposal. The LTAC held a meeting on November 20, 2025, to hear presentations supporting the proposals submitted by the City and Innovia Foundation in response to the LTAC request for application. The LTAC proposed two motions for recommendations for funding. The first motion was to recommend funding Innovia's Ice Sports Facility request for operational support starting in 2027 for a five-year period through the end of 2031. The support would be up to $600,000 annually in 2027 and 2028, and up to $550,000 annually in 2029, 2030, and 2031. The recommendation is contingent and conditioned upon agreement that no lodging facilities be developed on the site over the course of the ground lease while lodging tax funds are provided to support operations, and also contingent and conditioned upon agreement for Innovia to provide a review in 2031 with the LTAC of further operational support needs of the facility and the tourism generation that occurred during the initial period of lodging tax funding. The motion passed unanimously. The second motion was to recommend funding the City's request for capital infrastructure costs related to Innovia's development of an ice sports facility on the City's Sullivan property. The motion stated that $2M of lodging tax funding available in Fund #104 be used toward design and construction of the infrastructure improvements as identified in the City's application. The recommendation is contingent and conditioned upon the City executing a ground lease or similar lease with Innovia for the construction of an ice sports facility in substantially the form as identified in Innovia's lodging tax application, and that the conditions of the LTAC's recommended operational support for Innovia are met. The second motion also passed unanimously. Tonight's item is a motion consideration on the LTAC recommendations to include: • the 2% tax portion funding allocations in 2026, totaling up to $483,000 in grant awards • the recommended transfer in 2026 from Fund #105 to Fund #104 in the amount of $447, 000 • the 1.3% capital portion allocation for 2026, in the amount up to $2 million, and • the 5-year, operational support allocation from the 2% portion beginning in 2027 through 2031. OPTIONS: The options for City Council action are to either (1) approve some, or all of the listed recipients and amounts recommended by the LTAC or (2) not approve any recipients and ask the LTAC to revise its recommendation for further City Council action. A third option, which is rarely used, allows City Council to conduct its own review of the materials submitted, including the minutes and recommended amounts by the LTAC, and come up with its own proposed distribution of the revenue for any of the applicants. If the distribution is different, the City must give the LTAC 45 days to review and provide comments on the proposed revised distribution before taking final action. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Motion #1: 1 move to make the following allocation of Lodging Tax funds for calendar year 2026 from Fund # 105 from the 2% tax: City of Spokane Valley — The Course Operations & Maintenance — up to $260, 811 Spokane Valley HUB - Events and Tourism — up to $145,000 21 st USA West Square Dance Convention - Square Dance Convention — up to $50, 000 Spokane Co Fair & Expo Center - Interstate Fair Marketing and Safety - $27,189 And a transfer of the remainder of actual lodging tax collections in the amount of $477, 000 to be moved into the 1.3% Lodging Tax Fund #104. Motion #2: I move to allocate up to $2,000,000 of Lodging Tax funds from Fund #104 from the 1.3% tax to the design and construction of the infrastructure improvements as identified in the City's application. The recommendation is contingent and conditioned upon the City executing a ground lease or similar lease with Innovia for the construction of an ice sports facility in substantially the form as identified in Innovia's lodging tax application. Motion #3: 1 move to allocate Lodging Tax funds from Fund #105 starting in calendar year 2027 up to $600, 000 annually in 2027 and 2028, and up to $550, 000 annually in 2029, 2030, and 2031. The funding is contingent and conditioned upon agreement that no lodging facilities be developed on the site over the course of the ground lease while lodging tax funds are provided to support operations, and also contingent and conditioned upon agreement for Innovia to provide a review in 2031 with the LTAC of further operational support needs of the facility and the tourism generation that occurred during the initial period of lodging tax funding. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The 2026 Budget includes total revenues of $1,500,000 in lodging taxes, including $900,000 from Fund #105 from the 2% tax and $590,000 in Fund #104 from the 1.3% tax. Total expenditures are budgeted at $960,000 in Fund #105, including $30,000 to offset advertising at CenterPlace and up to $930,000 to be allocated in the 2026 funding year. The fund balance at the conclusion of 2026 is expected to be about $233,000 in Fund #105, which should be adequate to cover cash flow needs. After including the LTAC recommended transfer from Fund #105 to Fund #104, the estimated fund balance of Fund #104 at the end of 2026 will be just over $2M. There are currently no budgeted 2026 expenditures in Fund #104; however, if the LTAC recommendation to fund the City's capital application supporting the Innovia Ice Sports Facility is awarded by Council, expenditures will be added in a future 2026 budget amendment. The City anticipates future revenues in Fund #105 to be sufficient to provide for the LTAC recommended multi -year lodging tax agreement to partially fund the operational costs for the proposed Innovia Ice Sports Facility from 2027 through 2031. Expenditures would be added to the annual budget each year during the budget development process. STAFF CONTACT: Sarah Farr, Accounting and Finance Program Manager ATTACHMENTS: Chart of Combined LTAC recommendations in the 2026 Budget Minutes of October 29, 2025 LTAC meeting Minutes of November 20, 2025 LTAC meeting � � « x � 0 c � 0 -i CD 0 04 k ? ƒ 0 � c k (n q � � � 7 , , , , , o LO o � / o A \ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 L o 0 0 0 o LO 0 0 0¥ m \/ o o m n¥ ma y k 2 IRT co 0 E $ e % 2 0 > I w LU w @ ® a 0) E 0 0 § 0 m 0 J @ m \ U $ \ I 0 q @ & / 2 / ��$�$�f 2 'a.@ e 5 O 2 2 y 7 2 4 I m \ g I 0) § m 0 @ a @ f q»: 0)2 0 0 e 2 4 E A .� 2 .S 2 O 2 q ƒ LL g ƒ 0 E f > ± \ 2 � \ z / ' q / 2 " @ $ (5 k ' - .- f � \ 0 % f % \ U , y 12 U> 0 I 2 f I m / / c § / /� Jm y , - @ 9 12 2 U 2 Do � .\ 0 g 2 > z J ƒ > « & /fu $ % § 0 I- 0> m\- 3> E 3� a f- 0 2 2 m ? �_ z E 0 f� f f f� e 2 U D U) � � � � � 3 U R R o / R o R 0 0 0 o I o C\[ oC14, C\l LO � I Q c) k (D� k E E ƒ o g Z3 ■ 'e °cu E � k 2 ƒ w - 0 \ > E R « E Q x q ® 04 7 ± k� \ R CT k 0 0 LIZ MINUTES LODGING TAX ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING SPECIAL MEETING October 29, 2025 8:00 a.m. Spokane Valley City Hall 10210 E Sprague Ave. Attendance: Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Members: Chair: Councilmember Rod Higgins Rustin Hall, Spokane Sports Grant Guinn, Tru by Hilton Amanda Hoffert, Oxford Suites Kary Gibbs, Spokane County Fair & Expo Center Sta Chelsie Walls, Finance Director Tony Beattie, Sr. Deputy City Attorney Sarah Farr, Accounting & Finance Program Manager Sarah Mattox, Accountant Jonny Solberg, IT Specialist Marci Patterson, City Clerk Chair Councilmember Higgins called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. and welcomed everyone, after which he called for a five-minute recess to allow for the final member to arrive. Chair Higgins called for a recess at approximately 8: 00 a.m. The meeting was reconvened at 8: 05 a.m. Senior Deputy City Attorney Beattie introduced himself, and explained that as appointed officials, members of this committee are subject to laws such as those dealing with open government; and he went through his Open Public Government PowerPoint training for Committee members, explaining the various portions of the Public Records Act, and the Open Public Meetings Act. Committee Member Guinn arrived at 8:15 a.m. Chair Higgins called for a recess at approximately 8: 25 a.m. The meeting was reconvened at 8: 30 a.m. Opening Comments: Accounting and Finance Program Manager Ms. Farr gave an overview of the contents of the notebook, including the Lodging Tax committee process, City Council goals and Priorities for use of Lodging Tax Revenues and provided instruction on the presentations that were to follow. Public Comment Opportunity: Chair Higgins explained that this is an opportunity for public comment and that comments will be limited to three minutes each. Chair Higgins opened the floor for public comments. No public comments were offered. Chair Higgins called for a recess at approximately 8: 50 a.m. The meeting was reconvened at 9: 00 a.m. Presentations were made in the following order: 1. CitfSpokane Valley — John Bottelli The applicant seeks $260,811 for the operations and maintenance of The Course, a new cross-country course in Flora Park. 2. Spokane Conservation District — Lisette Walser The applicant seeks $37,000 to promote the Scale House Market with billboards and professional "leave behind" materials to showcase the destination event and conference venue. 3. Cody Productions Inc — Mr. Chris Cody The applicant seeks $11,000 to market the Spokane Motorcycle Show and Sale. LTAC Minutes October 29, 2025 Page 1 of 3 4. CNC Productions LLC — Mr. Chris Cody The applicant seeks $11,000 to market the annual RV show. 5. Washington State Quilters — Cheryl Clossin The applicant seeks $50,000 to market and advertise the 2026 Quilt Show in October. 6. Spokane Valley Summer Theatre The applicant withdrew the application and did not attend the meeting. 7. Spokane County Fair and Expo Center — Ms. Erin Gurtel The Spokane County Fair and Expo Center seeks $80,000 to continue to enhance the fair marketing program and to enhance the costs for police, fire and security presence during the Fair. 8. Spokane Valley HUB Sports Center.— Mr. Phil Champlin The applicant seeks $145,000 to market their 2026 events and promote tourism to the area. 9. Spokane Valley Heritage Museum —Ms. Ja. n�gleton & Mr. Tom McArthur The applicants seek $38,500 to assist in their tourism promotion and marketing efforts. 10. Inland NW Wildlife Council — Melannie Jones The applicant seeks $75,000 for the Big Horn Outdoor Adventure Show's marketing and advertising efforts. After the final presentation, Ms. Farr provided further instruction on the ranking spreadsheet. The committee chose to review and make a decision on the available funding for Fund 105 before moving on to ranking the presentations spreadsheet. Concerning the 2% tax (Fund 105), it was moved by Mr. Guinn, seconded and unanimously agreed to move the $447, 000 to that Fund 104 (Capital Fund) leaving us with an available award of $483, 000. Lodizine Tax Advisory Committee members develop fundine recommendations Ms. Farr provided instruction on the spreadsheet ranking and noted once the committee members have completed their individual recommendations, to please hand them to her and she will include all the totals on one spreadsheet. Ms. Farr said that once all figures are included on the spreadsheet, the average is the starting point in the discussion; that committee members are free to discuss this, that they can stay with the average, or negotiate different values for different events; and once completed, she will need a motion on the applicant distributions. Chair Higgins called for a recess at approximately 10: 54 a.m. The meeting was reconvened at 11: 00 a.m. Lodging Tax Advisory Committee member discussion and award recommendation Members gave their ranking recommendations to Ms. Farr and they were entered on the spreadsheet. The committee members discussed the amounts based on the ranking. It was then moved by Mr. Hall, seconded to accept the amounts as the ranking sheet has allocated below. Mr. Hall noted there all the applicants are worthy and this is a difficult task and that he appreciated the applicant's materials. Mr. Guinn stated he would like to see the allocation as fully funded or not at all and no partial funding. Vote by acclamation: in favor: Chair Higgins, Committee Members Hall, Gibbs and Hoffert. Opposed.- Committee Member Guinn. Motion carried. The amounts are as follows: City of Spokane Valley, The Course: $260,811 Spokane Valley HUB: $145,000 WA State Quilters, 2026 Quilt Show: $ 50,000 Spokane County Fair & Expo Center, Fair Marketing & Safety $ 27,189 LTAC Minutes October 29, 2025 Page 2 of 3 It was moved by Mr. Guinn, seconded to invite the city staff to come forward to the LTA committee to talk to us about potentially using this $2 million dollars that we have in fund 104 to make a presentation to LTA to see how we can use the money to support the ice rinks that are being proposed over on Sullivan Road and how this committee might be able to use these funds to get that thing off the ground. Mr. Guinn restated the motion in a more compressed manner as he continued the discussion: It was moved by Committee Member Guinn and seconded to invite the city staff to come and present to LTA in a Special Meeting so that we don't have to wait until next year in October to propose to us how we might be able to use this money to support that facility. The Committee discussed the ice sports facility and Mr. Hall noted that the projections that were presented to city council detailed that it was not something that would need continual subsidy and would like to see a presentation. Ms. Farr called for clarification on the motion regarding an application and Mr. Guinn amended the motion to include the following statement: ask city staff to come forward with an application to request to show us how they would use this $2 million for this type of facility. Vote by acclamation on the motion with the amended sentence: in favor: Unanimous. Opposed.- None. Motion carried. Mr. Guinn noted that they would like to have a special meeting for the additional presentation and application. It was moved by Mr. Guinn, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 11:12a.m. Respectfully submitted, Marci Patterson, Spokane Valley City Clerk LTAC Minutes October 29, 2025 Page 3 of 3 MINUTES LODGING TAX ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING SPECIAL MEETING November 20, 2025 8:00 a.m. Spokane Valley City Hall 10210 E Sprague Ave. Attendance: Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Members: Chair: Councilmember Rod Higgins Rustin Hall, Spokane Sports Grant Guinn, Tru by Hilton Amanda Hoffert, Oxford Suites Kary Gibbs, Spokane County Fair & Expo Center Sta : John Hohman, City Manager Chelsie Walls, Finance Director Erik Lamb, Deputy City Manager Gloria Mantz, City Services Administrator Sarah Farr, Accting & Finance Program Manager Robert Blegen, Public Works Director Mike Basinger, Community & Econ. Dev. Director Kelly Konkright, City Attorney Sarah Mattox, Accountant Jonny Solberg, IT Specialist Marci Patterson, City Clerk Chair Councilmember Higgins called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. and welcomed everyone. Clerk Patterson called roll; all committee members were present. Opening Comments: Accounting and Finance Program Manager Ms. Farr gave an overview of the request for the Special Meeting, including a brief review of the Lodging Tax committee process, and provided instruction on the presentations that were to follow. Public Comment Opportunity: Chair Higgins explained that this is an opportunity for public comment and that comments will be limited to three minutes each. Chair Higgins opened the floor for public comments. No public comments were offered. 1. Innovia Foundation — Spokane Valle.. Imports Facilily — Shelly O'Quinn The applicant seeks $600,000 for the operational support of the dual -sheet ice arena at the city owned Sullivan Park. 2. City of Spokane Valley — Infrastructure Improvement for Future Ice Sports Facility - John Hohman The applicant seeks $2,000,000 from the Lodging Tax Capital fund to offset the infrastructure costs requested by Innovia which are estimated to cost $3.03M for the dual -sheet ice arena at Sullivan Park. Mr. Hohman gave a history on the LTAC funding and how the opportunity of the venues came about. He noted that the city previously had surveys completed and did research on the type of venues that were lacking in our area. Mr. Hohman went into detail on the needs of the city and what the overall project would entail. He went over the various components of the infrastructure improvements at the park. Ms. O'Quinn provided details on the facility and that the drive would be for tournaments and a give back to the youth in the community. She noted that the benefactor for the project wanted to see a facility that the whole community could benefit from. The committee reviewed the requests and Mr. Hall noted the addition of a line item for replacement items and Ms. O'Quinn stated that it was correct and that they knew from the beginning that it would need to be built in right away. The committee also spoke about the budget and the five-year window of operations at the facility and hopefully running in the black at that time. Ms. O'Quinn stated that she was hopeful and that this is just a budget and will have a better look once the facility is operational. The committee reviewed the potential transfer of the property and noted that it is not a planned LTAC Minutes November 20, 2025 — Special Meeting Page 1 of 3 transaction at this time and Ms. O'Qumn confirmed that it will be written in the agreement as an option but is not planned in stone. It will be written so that it can be maintained for long after it is built and occupied. Mr. Hohman provided information on why the city would want it to be in the community and provide the community benefit and how that can be achieved long term. Committee member Guinn asked for an explanation on the request for $600,000 and where that amount came from. Ms. O'Quinn gave information on the study that was done and noted that it will take time to build the retail spaces and those ground leases for revenue for the operational stability for the ice facility. Mr. Hohman noted that the donor wants to make sure that there is more public access for low cost or no cost and that will come as a revenue deduction for the free sports that would be offered. Committee member Guinn spoke about the retail site and the potential desire to put a hotel on the site and asked what the retail component may look like. Ms. O'Quinn noted they talked about the adjacent project and the hotel and restaurants came up as revenue options. She also noted that they are not breaking ground on any of that now and that the ice rink facility comes first. She explained that the key is that we do need to develop retail space and get those ground leases and it is important that they are complimentary to the facility and that they kick off revenue to support the ice sports facility. The hotel would be a potential option, but if we can find something else in that five years that could be a generation of revenue, we could do that as well. The committee discussed the overall land and space for the ice sports facility and the potential commercial development site as well. Mr. Hohman noted that they would like to work with a retail recruiter to assist with the variety of options that could go into the space. Ms. O'Quinn spoke about who would manage the space and that Innovia would hire someone to take that over as another LLC, a non-profit organization, with no crossover with funds but still under Innovia. Mr. Guinn noted that the hotel community is excited for the ice sheets; just not excited for another hotel to be part of the site. Ms. O'Quinn stated that she would highly recommend supporting the ice facility with LTAC dollars and help come up with the retail space options for revenue generation. She also stated that there are groups that are already wanting to be part of the ice sports facility and will help will drive tourism to the valley. Mr. Guinn agreed that we want this facility to bring heads on beds to the hoteliers and let our local community get use of the facility as well. Ms. O'Quinn provided examples of clubs that have already shown an interest in the ice sheets and that would generate tourism in the community and continue to keep our youth involved. Chair Higgins stated that they have thoroughly discussed the presentation and would ask for motions on the requests. It was moved by Mr. Guinn, seconded that lodging tax fund from Fund #105 be used to support the ice sports facility operation starting in 2027 for a five year period through the end of 2031, with support of up to $600, 000 annually in 2027 and 2027, and up to $550, 000 annually in 2029, 2030 and 2031. This recommendation is contingent and conditioned upon Innovia's agreement that no lodging facilities will be developed by it or a related developer in the full I1-acre site through the term of its ground lease with the city so long as lodging tax funds are being provided to support operations. The recommendation is also contingent upon agreement for Innovia to provide a review in 2031 with the LTAC of the operational support needs of the ice sports facility and the tourism generation that has occurred during the initial period of lodging tax funding. Chair Higgins invited public comment. Mike Dolan, Spokane Valley provided comment. Vote by acclamation on the motion: in favor: Unanimous. Opposed. None. Motion carried. It was moved by Mr. Guinn, seconded that the LTAC recommend funding the City's lodging tax request for capital infrastructure related to Innovia's development of an ice sports facility on the City's Sullivan property as follows: The $2M of lodging tax funds available in Fund #104 be used for design and construction of the infrastructure improvements at the City's Sullivan property as identified in the City's lodging tax application. This recommendation is contingent and conditioned upon the City executing a ground lease or similar lease with Innovia for the construction of an ice sports facility in substantially the form as identified in Innovia's lodging tax application, and that the conditions of the LTA Cs recommended operational supportforinnovia are met. Chair Higgins invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation on the motion: in favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. LTAC Minutes November 20, 2025 — Special Meeting Page 2 of 3 It was moved by Mr. Guinn, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:43a.m. Respectfully submitted, Marci Patterson, Spokane Valley City Clerk LTAC Minutes November 20, 2025 — Special Meeting Page 3 of 3 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 16, 2025 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Adoption of a 5-Year Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Substitute Senate Bill 5386 (amending document recording fee statutes in 2023); requirements for adopting a local plan RCW 43.185C.050, RCW 43.185C.080, RCW 43.185C.160; Affordable and Supportive Housing Sales and Use Tax Credit RCW 82.14.540; Chapter 3.06 SVMC. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: July 25, 2023: City Council adopted a resolution to assume control over document recording fees and to establish a homeless housing program. August 22, 2023: Administrative report discussing Regional Homeless Housing Plan. October 24, 2023: Adoption of the 2020-2024 Continuum of Care (CoC) Regional 5-year plan to prevent and end homelessness (Plan). November 19, 2024: Administrative report discussing the draft 2025-2029 CoC Plan May 13, 2025: Approval of the Regional Homeless Coordination Interlocal Agreement July 22, 2025: Administrative report discussing City's 5-year Plan BACKGROUND: On July 25, 2023, the Council adopted a resolution to assume control over available document recording fees from Spokane County and establish a Spokane Valley homeless housing program. Per RCW 43.185C.160, the City is required to adopt a five-year homeless housing plan. In October 2023, the Council adopted the 2020-2024 CoC Regional 5-Year Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness (Plan). In mid -October 2024, the Washington State Department of Commerce (DOC) released the 2025-2030 Local Homeless Housing Plan Guidance, which outlines the various plan requirements for the 2025-2030 cycle. To incorporate the recently released guidelines, DOC extended the deadline for the new plan adoption to December 31, 2025. The required objectives for the updated Plan are different from the required objectives during the 2020- 2024 period. Below is a summary of 2025-2030 objectives: • Promote an equitable, accountable and transparent homeless crisis response system. • Prioritize those with the greatest barrier to housing stability and the greatest risk of harm. • Prevent episodes of homelessness whenever possible. • House everyone in a stable setting that meets their needs. • Strengthen the homeless service provider workforce. The CoC conducted extensive outreach and solicited feedback for revisions to the Plan, particularly through the CoC's sub -committees, which are populated by a variety of service providers, people with lived experience, and anyone from the public that is interested in participating. Input was also provided through a survey. The City's Homeless Housing Task Force also provided feedback on the draft Plan, and public comments were accepted and collated as part of the City's multiple rounds of feedback to the CoC. Page 1 of 2 The 2025-2030 CoC Plan was created in partnership between Spokane County, the City of Spokane, and the CoC. The City of Spokane Valley participates in the CoC board and subcommittees. The 2025-2030 CoC Plan meets requirements from both HUD and DOC, including the updated required objectives. The Plan provides performance metrics for each intervention type and are detailed in the 5-Year Performance Management Plan (PMP). System Performance Measures (SPMs) are prescribed by HUD. The Minimum Performance Standards and System Performance Targets are set by the CoC and are designed to ensure compliance with the SPMs. Projects not meeting minimum performance standards will be required to develop a Corrective Action Plan (CAP). Projects that do not meet minimum performance standards or fail to fully participate in the CAP by the end of the next quarter may face a loss or reduction of funding. The recently released a Notice Of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) from HUD introduced significant changes to the prioritizing and allocation for future funding. The CoC is in active discussions about how the region may respond to these changes. The CoC's response could include updating the Plan to meet new requirements. The Plan may be updated at any time, if it remains in compliance with relevant state and federal guidelines. On November 20, 2025, the City's Homeless Housing Task Force recommended the adoption of the CoC 5-Year Plan. OPTIONS: Motion to adopt the 2025-2030 CoC 5-year plan or take such other action deemed appropriate by City Council RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to adopt the 2025-2030 CoC 5-year plan BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Adoption of a Plan is required to administer the local recording fees for homeless and housing purposes. The 2026 annual budget includes total projected revenues from local recording fees of approximately $365,000 in the Homeless Housing Program Fund #110. Expenditures are currently projected to be approximately $380,000 and the fund balance at the conclusion of 2026 is expected to be about $231,000 in Fund #110. STAFF CONTACT: Eric Robison, Housing and Homeless Coordinator ATTACHMENTS: Presentation Current CoC Regional 5-Year Plan Current CoC Performance Management Plan Page 2 of 2 �Q FL 0) a ■ O L O 72 O L O 7F) 0 o 70 E 70 = Q U) O a) � .0 ' CO N Op O SQ � N CL o� ca E Lo = L C) .L _o C) w (D U A O C) 70 0) 70 U) M E E 0_' � .� o ca 72 U E N 0 A U Q m 0 0 0 O 0- 0- O L p L 0 C) U 0 — Ca O Ca N N � � NO — 0 N N TLcs p N O 0 N O O N O O L Ca p tU O O .� _N M L O N ' U ca v O p co to v O o U 04 0 }' 0 70 N - 070 N O N N NO 0-N 70 E CV N m N N U m O U -� Q � a) 70 0- O L- M -0 O '' N Co _p 0') m _ U �--� U � -I--� � a) 0 = O � v o w >, O N U U N V o N .� -0O — O 0 � � � U U) W a W Moll 0 Z Q J 0 LU Ot W w LU LU 0 L 0 ; . fn O O Q N •C: ' CL ( •� > • C � E 0) a-x 2 L CL - }'S1 Q cn `� yr U ,�/� V/ 0) � N N• O O to N Q � c N O -r � O Q O O N N `� cny N ' L N N _r_E O 70 cm N � N_r to O cn N (D to U N 70 - cnO cu fn >+ -0 U L � '0 O a) C QLJ) 0 N to 0) N N L U O > 0 N N C Q w O .O Q� L� a� C�� O a � Q QC X N N ,C: ai C: N 0 � U (6 to O Q O Q cn 0 > cnL O C 0 N C: E L 70 w i E O (D 0 0) Q N Cn � � O C U � 5, M U) U) 0 cn ( .L (D cn o � E M • ( cn cn • cn N O C: E 0) cn •(D fn 'U cn O O to 0" > N O_ N N 0) E O E L O > N cn O N QL L O (D ^L LL� ^f1 in ^f1 2� ryr V ^ J _>I Q E O U cn N 0) L FZ N U E L Q O = N CL O >+ E 0 a) N N cn j, a) E.-. cm U c O O O (u U) cn U cm � 70 70 _ U U) a)to p L � ca -0 L cn cn c a) a)O E cu a) a)Cn (u N t%j to a)U O > a) U 0 L U N E a L � c: a) (U E V ca a)O E a)ca U_ cn C L a)— W O 0-� - to a) 4-j L O _ O N N L ) cn E cn � (a � -j cu al +� L +� N O _N N E ^ � to U a)L� L L O a42 _� k ! 1 • ' • 1 I 1 • „ 7 53 • i d s .at Wt - f - a r� • F - ill; AL � � • <' i �r r .'�;3 i�� � 1 y I• 1 1 y,�.� *ram `�'�`� s; x • „.i.� LO N O N O N L CI*4 a) > 0 Z o N z N U Q LO O >, L.L N W � � fA °° N W 06 ~ � N O N 0) F n 0, Q V CV L O N O _ 0 N J c: E cn cn 'T N m p U 0 z a) >+ a U _ 70 i ca N70 Q i N E O E cm O L N N cu a)/�� n � /1 a)-0 U 0—O U L 0 ° U � O CO �cn i O cm O N C •c O N D O a)= N � 0 L O cn � O N +� N O O cu Q > � a)N � O W N O -0 cu p a)-5 Cf)N L (u E � O x a) 0 W > U ca O Z Z U (n Y r�■ vJ 0 ■Po'low r� nvJ W 558 Agenda Item 5 Attachment 2 Spokane Regional Continuum of Care Five -Year Performance Management Plan 2025-2030 Updated May 2025 SPOKAN E PEG IONAAL Continuum of Care Spokane Regional CoC Performance Management Plan Table of Contents 1. Acronyms and Definitions 6 2. Introduction 8 2.1. Alignment with the Continuum of Care Mission 8 2.2. Current State of the CoC Geographic Region and Homeless Response 8 2.2.1. Governance 8 2.2.2. Regional Integration The CoC is a regional body that strives towards regional solutions to meet the specific needs of those experiencing homelessness in both the urban and rural parts of Spokane County. It is critical that strategies address gaps and opportunities throughout the region. This includes representation from the City of Spokane, the City of Spokane Valley, and Spokane County on the CoC Board, as well as partnering on the Point in Time Count, other surveys and data collection and analysis. The goal here is to ensure that the geographic diversity of the region is considered in program design and access to services is responsive to urban and rural households. 9 2.2.3. Service Delivery 10 2.2.4. Funding, Resources, and Metrics 10 2.2.5. Encampments 11 2.2.6. Affordable Housing 11 2.2.7. Aging Population 12 2.2.8. Data -Driven Solutions 12 2.3. Objectives of the 5-Year Strategic Plan 12 3. Objective One: Promote an equitable, accountable, and transparent homeless crisis response system. 13 3.1. Introduction 13 3.2. Measures of Success and Performance 14 3.3. Strategies 15 3.4. Current Condition 15 3.4.1. Outreach Efforts 15 3.4.2. Community Court 16 3.4.3. Coordinated Entry Improvements 17 3.4.4. Emergency Services 19 3.4.5. Prevention 20 3.4.6. Diversion 20 3.5. Actions to Meet the Objectives 20 4. Objective Two: Prioritize those with the most significant barriers to housing stability and the greatest risk of harm. 23 4.1. Introduction 23 4.2. Measures of Success and Performance 23 4.3. Strategies 24 4.4. Current Conditions 24 4.5. Actions to Meet the Objectives 24 5. Objective Three: Effective and efficient homeless crisis response housing and services that swiftly moves people into stable permanent housing 25 5.1. Introduction 25 5.2. Measures of Success and Performance 26 5.3. Strategies 26 5.4. Current Condition 26 5.4.1. CoC Funding and RFP Committee 27 5.5. Actions to Meet the Objectives 27 6. Objective Four: Seek to house everyone in a stable setting that meets their needs. 29 6.1. Introduction 29 6.2. Measures of Success and Performance 30 6.3. Strategies 30 6.4. Current Conditions 30 6.4.1. Emergency Shelter 31 6.4.2. Transitional Housing 31 6.4.3. Rapid Re -Housing 31 6.4.4. Permanent Supportive Housing 32 6.5. Actions to Meet the Objectives 32 7. Objective Five: Strengthen the homeless provider workforce 33 7.1. Introduction 33 7.2. Measures of Success and Performance 33 7.3. Strategies 34 7.4. Actions to Meet the Objectives 34 8. Review Process 34 8.1. Action Steps 35 8.2. Timeline 35 8.3. Modifications and Updates 35 9. Attachment 3 37 Performance Management Plan 37 Introduction 39 Background 39 Basics of Performance Measurement 39 System Performance Targets 39 Minimum Performance Standards 39 Setting Performance Objectives 39 Monitoring Project and System Performance 40 Quarterly Performance Reporting 40 Annual Performance Review 40 Victim Services Providers 40 Sharing QPR Data 40 Corrective Action Planning 41 System -Level Performance Reporting 41 Implementing the Performance Management Plan 41 Page 3 of 17 Providers' Responsibilities and Meeting Performance Objectives Ensure HMIS Data Quality Run and Review Quarterly Project Report Develop Internal Improvement Plans as Needed Participate in Corrective Action Plan as Required Spokane City/County CoC Project Performance Objectives 41 41 42 42 42 42 Page 4 of 17 Introduction The Spokane Regional Continuum of Care (CoC) Performance Management Plan identifies minimum performance expectations and system performance targets for the CoC and outlines how performance is measured and monitored. This plan should help homeless assistance projects in managing their performance and ensuring access to ongoing funding. Background The CoC's geographic area includes the entirety of Spokane County. The City of Spokane's Community, Housing, and Human Services (CHHS) Department serves as the Collaborative Applicant' for the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Continuum of Care grant, is a lead grantee for the Department of Commerce Consolidated Homeless Grant (CHG) and sits as the City's representative on the CoC Board. Spokane County also receives, as a lead grantee, CHG funding and also sits on the CoC as the County representative. The City of Spokane Valley currently provides grant opportunities to homeless providers from their general fund and also receives a portion of locally collected document recording fees from the County that are also used to help support their homeless population; and also sits on the CoC as the City of Spokane Valley representative. Basics of Performance Measurement System Performance Targets For CoC purposes, the system includes, at minimum, all CHG and CoC funded homeless services projects operating within the geography of the CoC. Other projects may wish to participate in HMIS and our CoC encourages their participation to expand the data that our CoC requires to make informed policy decisions as it relates to the delivery of homeless services. Measuring performance of the system is important, as it helps us understand how well we are doing at addressing and ending homelessness. Additionally, it can help our community identify areas of the system that could be replicated or may need improvement. Lastly, as part of the CoC Program regulations, HUD requires that all CoCs monitor the performance of their system. To drive better outcomes for participants in the homeless system and to achieve the goal of ending homelessness for all populations, the CoC has set targets for all performance measures deemed key indicators of high performing systems. All projects within the homeless system are expected to make progress towards the system targets for all applicable project performance measures. The Systems Performance Measures (SPMs) from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) are a set of standardized metrics designed to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of local homelessness assistance systems. These measures us track our progress toward ending homelessness and improving the performance of their programs. Here are the key Systems Performance Measures HUD uses to evaluate homeless assistance systems: 1. Length of Time Homeless • This measure tracks how long people experience homelessness before they are connected to permanent ' CoC Governance — Collaborative Applicant - HUD Exchange Page 5 of 17 housing. The goal is to reduce the length of time a person or family remains homeless, which is a key indicator of a system's efficiency. 2. Returning to Homelessness • This measures the percentage of people who exit homelessness but return within a specified time period, usually within 12 months. A lower rate of return is an indicator that the system is effectively preventing future homelessness. 3. First -Time Homelessness • This measure looks at the number of people experiencing homelessness for the first time in a given period. It helps assess how well the system is preventing new homelessness. 4. Successful Permanent Housing Outcomes • This measure tracks the percentage of people who exit homelessness and remain in permanent housing (or move to permanent housing destinations) after leaving homelessness assistance programs. A higher percentage indicates that the system is successfully moving people out of homelessness into stable housing. S. Employment and Income Growth for Homeless Persons in CoC Programs • This measures the percentage of people in homelessness assistance programs who experience an increase in employment income. Employment is a key factor in achieving long-term stability for individuals exiting homelessness. 6. Criminal Justice Involvement of People Experiencing Homelessness • This measure tracks whether individuals experiencing homelessness become involved in the criminal justice system. A reduction in criminal justice involvement is seen as an indicator that the system is providing effective services that help people avoid re-entry into the justice system. 7. Homelessness Prevention and Housing Stabilization • This assesses the effectiveness of programs aimed at preventing homelessness and helping individuals and families remain housed. It evaluates how well the system supports households at risk of homelessness or those struggling to maintain stable housing. These measures help HUD and CoCs assess whether they are achieving their goals of reducing homelessness and improving the quality of life for those affected. They are used as part of the Homelessness Management Information System (HMIS) to collect, analyze, and report data on homelessness. CoCs submit their data annually to HUD, which uses this information to gauge national progress and identify areas for improvement in homelessness programs. By tracking these outcomes, HUD encourages systems to identify strengths and gaps, improve services, and ultimately reduce homelessness. Minimum Performance Standards Measuring the performance of homeless assistance projects is critical for a number of reasons. It helps us understand how well projects are doing at ending homelessness, as well as what issues projects may need to improve upon. It helps us identify project types/models that may be more successful at ending homelessness than others. Additionally, HUD, the WA State Department of Commerce, and other key funders require project performance reporting and monitoring. To help drive system performance, the CoC has set minimum performance standards that funded projects are expected to maintain over the course of an annual period. Setting Performance Objectives The CoC Board in collaboration with the Collaborative Applicant was tasked with creating this Performance Management Plan, including setting the minimum performance standards and system performance targets, to establish a system performance improvement strategy for the CoC and an annual review process for projects funded under the City's Homeless Services RFP. CHHS staff considered HUD's project performance objectives and system performance measures, Commerce's system performance expectations, and CoC projects' combined Page 6 of 17 performance on those objectives in determining where to set minimum standards and system targets for the CoC's project portfolio. The Collaborative Applicant, in partnership with Sub Committees, reviewed current projects' performance, as well as anecdotal community and project information, to help determine what goal to set. Monitoring Project and System Performance Quarterly Performance Reporting Homeless assistance projects' performance is monitored on a quarterly basis via the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) generated Quarterly Performance Report (QPR). The QPR provides project -level performance information for each measure listed in this plan and is shared with the CoC Board and funded providers each quarter. The QPR is meant to be generated from HMIS after the end of each quarter; however, it is available for agencies to run and review at any time for a custom performance period. Providers should be sure their HMIS data has been fully updated and is accurate prior to the generation of each report. The quarters are as follows: • First Quarter = July 1— September 30 o Reports performance data for first quarter Second Quarter = July 1— December 31 o Reports performance data for first and second quarters Third Quarter = July 1— March 31 o Reports performance data for first, second, and third quarters Fourth Quarter = July 1— June 30 o Reports performance data for the full year All projects should review their quarterly performance data and provide outcomes of key metrics to the Collaborative Applicant. Projects that consistently fail to meet project performance objectives should develop internal plans and processes for improvement, with the assistance of the Collaborative Applicant. Annual Performance Review On an annual basis, the CoC's Funding and RFP Committee will review performance data from the past award year (July to June) and make recommendations to the CoC Board regarding monitoring plans and funding allocations/reallocations. Victim Services Providers Domestic Violence (DV) victim services providers are not required to participate in HMIS but must maintain a comparable database. While victim service providers do not have their performance data generated out of HMIS via the QPR, all funded DV providers will be required to submit performance data to CHHS staff as requested for annual project evaluation, funding application, or monitoring purposes. Sharing QPR Data Each quarter, project QPRs submitted to the Collaborative Applicant will be posted on the CHHS website for all funded projects within 45 days of the end of the quarter. Staff will work with providers to ensure that all performance data to be shared with the public is as accurate as possible. Performance narratives will be included in the posted dashboard for each project. Page 7 of 17 Corrective Action Planning Projects that fail to maintain minimum performance standards or make progress towards system performance targets (outlined in the performance improvement timeline section of each grant agreement) will be required to participate in a Corrective Action Planning (CAP) process. Ongoing poor performance could ultimately result in the loss or reduction of funding. More detail on the CAP process can be found in the Corrective Action Plan Guide. System -Level Performance Reporting The system -level performance will be reported annually to the CoC Board in accordance with the HUD System Performance Measures (SPM) Report. Please note that not all performance measures outlined in this plan are included in the SPM. Implementing the Performance Management Plan Collaborative Applicant (CA) staff are responsible for implementing this Performance Management Plan on behalf of the Spokane City/County CoC. Implementation involves working with HMIS staff and providers to publicly share the QPR, reviewing all data therein, and sharing project and system performance information with the CoC on a quarterly basis. In reviewing quarterly and annual project performance information, staff will also work with the Spokane City/County CoC Funding and RFP Committee to identify any consistently under- performing projects and target them for CAP development as needed. The CA staff will report on system performance on the measures in this plan at least annually. In addition to monitoring project and system performance, CA staff work with the CoC Funding and RFP Committee to annually review and update the Performance Management Plan measures and goals. Providers' Responsibilities and Meeting Performance Objectives Ensure HMIS Data Quality Because the QPRs used to monitor project performance are generated from HMIS, it is critical that HMIS data be accurate, timely, and complete. To this end, it is essential that providers adhere to the data quality standards outlined in the Spokane HMIS Data Quality Plan. All data entered into the CoC's HMIS shall be a reflection of information provided by the client, as documented by the intake worker or otherwise updated by the client and documented for reference. All required data elements for each program type must be entered by the 10th day of the following month (including weekends and holidays) for all client activity during the preceding month. The percentage of required data elements identified as 'missing /data not collected' should be no more than 1%, depending on project type and data element. Average rates of 'client doesn't know' or 'client refused' must adhere to the acceptable average determined for the project type as set by the HMIS Committee. For a comprehensive outline of data quality expectations for participation in the CoC's HMIS, please see the Spokane HMIS Data Quality Plan. Monthly Data Quality reports are required to be submitted by each provider and failure to meet this requirement will result in performance deficiencies. Page 8 of 17 Run and Review Monthly and Quarterly Project Report To help homeless providers manage their performance on the objectives laid out in this Performance Management Plan, HMIS staff have made monthly and quarterly reports available to providers. The QPR provides detailed information about a project's performance on all the objectives in this plan including client -level data. The QPR will be generated by the HMIS team and sent to the provider for their review. If the data does not reflect what they believe to be an accurate representation of the work they've completed, it is incumbent on the provider to work closely with the HMIS staff to remedy the data. Providers will have a prescribed timeline to rectify the errors prior to the QPR being publicly presented. Providers can run the QPR on their projects using HMIS whenever they like to better understand in real-time how they performed on all the objectives in this Performance Management Plan. At a minimum, though, HMIS will run the QPR on a quarterly basis and submit the report to providers within 15 days of the end of the quarter. Any projects that may not be meeting minimum performance standards ought to be accompanied by a brief narrative overview explaining quarterly outcomes for each performance measure inclusive of steps taken during the quarter to improve performance, external factors that influenced performance during the quarter, and planned actions to improve or maintain high performance in the following quarter. This narrative is an opportunity to highlight challenges faced by the project, areas of success (particularly those which are replicable by other providers), and to address steps for performance improvement. Performance narratives will be included in the published report for all projects. The CA encourages projects that are meeting or exceeding performance measures to include a narrative on their project. This provides the public an opportunity to learn more about the agency and the program. Develop Internal Improvement Plans as Needed Providers should monitor their own performance on all project performance objectives on, at minimum, a quarterly basis. If providers notice in the QPR that they are not meeting an objective, it is their responsibility to develop internal plans to address the poor performance and they should ensure that improvement is made. As previously mentioned, projects that fail to meet an objective for at least one year may be targeted for development of a CAP. Once on a CAP, a project runs the risk of losing renewal funding if they are not able to improve their performance within a specific timeframe. Ensuring that project performance objectives are met will keep projects from being targeted for CAP development. Participate in Corrective Action Plan as Required As mentioned previously, projects that fail to maintain minimum performance standards or to make adequate progress towards system performance targets may be required to participate in a CAP. Ongoing poor performance, or failure to fully participate in the CAP, could ultimately result in the loss or reduction of funding. More details on the CAP process can be found in the Corrective Action Plan Guide. Spokane Regional CoC Project Performance Measures The following are the project performance objectives for Spokane Regional CoC homeless assistance projects. The goals apply to all CoC-funded homeless projects and all City -funded coordinated entry, emergency shelters, rapid re -housing, transitional housing, diversion, street outreach, and permanent supportive housing projects. Overflow and seasonal emergency shelters are exempt from the performance standards. Page 9 of 17 Projects that are newly funded that does not meet the minimum performance standards will have adequate time to achieve the minimum performance expectations outlined below. This timeline will be determined, in collaboration, with the provider, RFP Committee, and CA staff. Moreover, the type of project must also be considered when determining the performance improvement timeline. Projects that do not meet minimum performance standards will be required to develop a Corrective Action Plan (CAP). Projects that do not meet minimum performance standards or fail to fully participate in the CAP by the end of the end of the next quarter may face a loss or reduction of funding. Page 10 of 17 Night -by -night Emergency Shelter Projects Performance Measures Measure Minimum Performance Standard System Performance Target Length of Time Emergency Shelter (ES) projects Emergency Shelter (ES) projects will have Homeless in ES will have an average length of an average length of stay of no more (SPM Metric 1a.1) stay of no more than 90 days than 30 days At least 40% of persons in ES At least 50% of persons in ES projects Exits to Permanent projects will move into will move into permanent housing at Housing permanent housing at exit exit (SPM Metric 7b.1) Exits to Temporary or At least 25% of persons in ES At least 30% of persons in ES projects Institutional Settings projects will move to certain will move to certain temporary and (SPM Metric 7a.1) temporary and institutional institutional settings at program exit. settings at program exit Returns to ES projects will have no more than ES projects will have no more than 10% Homelessness 20% of adults who exited to of adults who exited to permanent (SPM Metric 2b) permanent housing return to housing return to homelessness within homelessness within two years of two years of exit exit Employment and At least 35% of person in ES At least 50% of person in ES projects will Income Growth (SPM projects will gain or increase gain or increase employment or non - Metric 4.6) employment or non -employment employment cash income at exit, when cash income at exit, when they they have a Date of Engagement. have a Date of Engagement. Average Length of The average length of time for The average length of time for persons Time persons enrolled in ES projects enrolled in ES projects between to Date of between enrollment and the enrollment and the person's date of Engagement person's date of engagement shall engagement shall be no greater than 10 (Local Measure) be no greater than 30 days days Page 11 of 17 Continuous Stay Emergency Shelter Projects Performance Measures Measure Length of Time Homeless in ES (SPM Metric 1a.1) Exits to Permanent Housing (SPM Metric 7b.1) Exits to Temporary or Institutional Settings (SPM Metric 7a.1) Returns to Homelessness (SPM Metric 2b) Average Rate of Utilization (Local Measure) Employment and Income Growth (SPM Metric 4.6) Minimum Performance Standard Continuous Stay Emergency Shelter (CSES) projects will have an average length of stay of no more than 90 days At least 55% of persons in CSES projects will move into permanent housing at exit At least 25% of persons in CSES projects will move to certain temporary and institutional settings at program exit CSES projects will have no more than 20% of adults who exited to permanent housing return to homelessness within two years of exit The average numbers of persons enrolled in CSES projects per night will represent no less than the 85% of projects' total bed inventory At least 40% of person in CSES projects will gain or increase employment or non -employment cash income or at exit. System Performance Target Continuous Stay Emergency Shelter (CSES) projects will have an average length of stay of no more than 30 days At least 80% of persons in CSES projects will move into permanent housing at exit At least 30% of persons in CSES projects will move to certain temporary and institutional settings at program exit. CSES projects will have no more than 10% of adults who exited to permanent housing return to homelessness within two years of exit The average numbers of persons enrolled in CSES projects per night will represent no less than the 95% of projects' total bed inventory At least 50% of persons in CSES projects will gain or increase employment or non -employment cash income or at exit. Page 12 of 17 Homelessness Diversion Projects Performance Measures Measure Minimum Performance Standard System Performance Target Successfully At least 55% of persons in Homeless At least 80% of persons in Homeless Diverted from Diversion projects are successfully diverted Diversion projects exit to permanent the Homeless housing at program exit. System (Includes both exits to PH and temp stays with friends and family) (Local Measure) Returns to Diversion projects will have no more than Diversion projects will have no more Homelessness 6% of persons who exited to permanent than 5% of persons who exited to (Local Measure) housing return to homelessness within 1 permanent housing return to year. homelessness within 1 year. Page 13 of 17 Street Outreach Projects Performance Measures Measure Minimum Performance System Performance Target Standard Exis to Permanent At least 40% of persons in Street At least 50% of persons in Street Outreach Housing (SPM Metric Outreach (SO) projects will move (SO) projects will move into permanent 7a.1) into permanent housing at exit. housing at exit. Average time from The average length of time from The average length of time from date of Date of Engagement date of engagement to engagement to successful exit is 60 days. to Successful Exit successful exit is 90 days. (Changed from Average Length of Time to Date of Engagement) (Local Measure) Exits to Temporary or At least 25% of persons in SO At least 30% of persons in SO projects will Institutional Settings projects will move to certain move to certain temporary and institutional (SPM Metric 7a.1) temporary and institutional settings at program exit. settings at program exit Successful Exits from At least 55% of persons in SO At least 65% of person in SO projects will Street Outreach (SPM projects will move into move into permanent housing or to certain Metric 2b) permanent housing or to certain temporary housing and institutional settings temporary and institutional at program exit. (Change from 80%) settings at program exit. Returns to SO projects will have no more SO projects will have no more than 10% of Homelessness (SPM than 20% of adults who exited to adults who exited to permanent housing Metric 2b) permanent housing return to return homelessness within two years of homelessness within two years exit. of exit Serving those with At least 64% of persons served At least 75% of persons served by SO the Long Lengths of by SO projects will have lengths projects will have lengths of Homelessness of homelessness greater than 12 homelessness greater than 12 months. (Local Measure) months. Employment and At least 35% of person in SO At least 50% of persons in SO projects will Income Growth (SPM projects will gain or increase gain or increase employment or non - Metric 4.6) employment or non- employment cash income at exit when they employment cash income at exit have a Date of Engagement. when they have a Date of Engagement. Page 14 of 17 Homeless Prevention Projects Performance Measures Measure Minimum Performance Standard System Performance Target Employment and At least 20% of persons in HP projects At least 40% of persons in HP projects Income Growth will gain or increase employment or will gain or increase employment or (SPM Metric 4.6) non -employment cash income at exit. non -employment cash income at exit Exits to Permanent At least 70% of persons in Homeless At least 80% of persons in Homeless Housing Prevention projects exit to permanent Prevention projects exit to permanent (Local Measure) housing at program exit. housing at program exit. Returns to Homeless Prevention projects will have Homeless Prevention projects will Homelessness no more than 10% of persons who have no more than 15% of persons (Local Measure) exited to permanent housing return to who exited to permanent housing homelessness within six months of the return to homelessness within six enrollment exit date. months of the enrollment exit date. Transitional Housing Projects Performance Measures Measure Minimum Performance Standard System Performance Target Length of Time Transitional Housing (TH) projects will Transitional Housing (TH) projects Homeless in TH have an average length of stay of no more will have an average length of stay (SPM Metric 1a.2) than 160 days (270 for youth and young no more than 90 days (120 days for adult projects) youth and young adults) Exits to Permanent At least 55% of persons in TH projects will At least 80% of persons in TH Housing (SPM Metric move into permanent housing at exit projects will move into permanent 7b.1) housing at exit Employment and At least 35% of person in TH projects will At least 50% of persons in TH Income Growth gain or increase employment or non- projects will gain or increase (SPM Metric 4.6) employment cash income or at exit employment or non -employment cash income or at exit Returns to TH projects will have no more than 10% of TH projects will have no more than Homelessness (SPM adults who exited to permanent housing 5% of adults who exited to Metric 2b) return to homelessness within two years permanent housing return to of exit homelessness within two years of exit Average Rate of The average numbers of persons enrolled The average numbers of persons Utilization in TH projects per night will represent no enrolled in TH projects per night (Local Measure) less than the 85% of projects' total bed will represent no less than 95% of inventory. Both unit and bed utilization. projects' total bed inventory Page 15 of 17 Rapid Re -Housing Projects Performance Measures Measure Minimum Performance Standard System Performance Target Rapid Placement into RRH projects will place persons into RRH projects will place persons into Permanent Housing permanent housing within 60 days of permanent housing within 90 days of (Local Measure) project entry project entry Exits to Permanent At least 70% of persons entering RRH At least 80% of persons entering RRH housing (SPM Metric projects will remain in permanent projects will remain in permanent 7b.1) housing at exit housing at exit Employment and At least 20% of persons in RRH At least 40% of persons in RRH Income Growth (SPM projects will gain or increase projects will gain or increase Metric 4.6) employment or non -employment cash employment or non -employment cash income at exit income at exit (Specify Singles and Families) Returns to RRH projects will have no more than RRH projects will have no more than Homelessness (SPM 10% of adults who exited to 5% of adults who exited to permanent Metric 2b) permanent housing return to housing return to homelessness within homelessness within two years of exit two years of exit Permanent Supportive Housing/ other Permanent Housing Projects Performance Measures Measure Minimum Performance Standard System Performance Target Exits to or Retention At least 93% of housed persons remain in At least 95% of housed persons of Permanent Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) remain in Permanent Supportive Housing project or exit to permanent housing (PH) Housing (PSH) project or exit to (SPM Metric 7162) as of the end of the reporting period or at permanent housing (PH) as of the program exit end of the reporting period or at program exit Employment and At least 50% of persons entering a PSH At least 55% of persons entering a Income Growth for project will gain or increase employment PSH project will gain or increase stayers (SPM Metric or non- employment cash income during employment or non- employment 4.3) the reporting period or at annual cash income during the reporting assessment period or at annual assessment Employment and At least 45% of persons entering a PSH At least 50% of persons entering a Income Growth for project will gain or increase employment PSH project will gain or increase Leavers or non- employment cash income at exit. employment or non- employment (SPM Metric 4.6) cash income at exit Annual Income At least 25% of persons in a PSH project At least 30% of persons in a PSH Growth and/or Non will gain or increase income or non -cash project will gain or increase income Cash Benefits benefits (ie: food assistance) on an annual or non -cash benefits (ie: food (Local Measure) basis. assistance) on an annual basis. Returns to PSH projects will have no more than 5% of PSH projects will have no more than 3% Homelessness (SPM adults who exited to permanent housing of adults who exited to permanent Metric 2b) Page 16 of 17 return to homelessness within two years of exit housing return to homelessness within two years of exit Average Rate of The average numbers of persons enrolled in The average numbers of persons Utilization PSH projects per night will represent no less enrolled in PSH projects per night will (Local Measure) than 85% of projects' total bed inventory. represent no less than the 95% of projects' total bed inventory Measure applies to unit utilization and bed utilization. Coordinated Entry Performance Measures Measure Minimum Performance Standard System Performance Target At least 40% of referrals made by SHCA, At least 60% of referrals made by SHCA, HFCA and YYA CE to requesting providers HFCA and YYA CE to requesting providers Successful shall have a successful outcome. These shall have a successful outcome. These referrals outcomes are to be managed by the CE outcomes are to be managed by the CE Leads but the responsible party of entering Leads but the responsible party of (Local Measure) the outcome in HMIS is the requesting entering the outcome in HMIS is the provider. requesting provider. Average Length The average length of time from date of The average length of time from date of of time from Assessment to Referral Placement shall be Assessment to Referral Placement shall Assessment to no longer than 30 Days. be no longer than 45 Days. Referral Placement (Local Measure) Average Length The average length of time from date of The average length of time from date of of Time from referral placement to referral outcome shall referral placement to referral outcome Date of Referral be no longer than 15 days. shall be no longer than 30 days. Placement to Referral Outcome (Local Measure) Page 17 of 17 Agenda Item 5 Attachment 1 Spokane Regional Continuum of Care 6VUk4uv h 2025-2030 Five -Year Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness SPOKAN E REGIONAL Continuum of Care Spokane County Spokane ,;,oOValley Table of Contents 1. Acronyms and Definitions 5 2. Introduction 7 2.1. Alignment with the Continuum of Care Mission 7 2.2. Current State of the CoC Geographic Region and Homeless Response 8 2.2.1. Governance 8 2.2.2. Regional Integration 8 2.2.3. Partnership and Community Engagement 9 2.2.4. Service Delivery 9 2.2.5. Funding and Resources 9 2.2.6. Encampments 10 2.2.7. Affordable Housing 10 2.2.8. Aging Population 11 2.2.9. Data -Driven Solutions 11 2.3. Objectives of the 5-Year Strategic Plan 11 2.31 Objective One 11 2.32 Objective Two 11 2.33 Objective Three 12 2.34 Objective Four 12 3. Objective One: Promote and equitable, accountable, and transparent homeless crisis response system. 11 3.1. Introduction 11 3.2. Measures of Success and Performance 13 3.3. Strategies 13 3.4. Current Condition 14 3.4.1. Outreach Efforts 14 3.4.2. Community Court 15 3.4.3. Coordinated Entry Improvements 16 3.4.4. Emergency Services 18 3.4.5. Prevention 19 3.4.6. Diversion 19 3.5. Actions to Meet the Objectives 19 4. Objective Two: Prioritize those with the most significant barriers to housing stability and the greatest risk of harm. 22 Page 2 of 32 4.1. Introduction 22 4.2. Measures of Success and Performance 22 4.3. Strategies 23 4.4. Current Conditions 23 4.5. Actions to Meet the Objectives 23 5. Objective Three: Effective and efficient homeless crisis response housing and services that swiftly moves people into stable permanent housing 24 5.1. Introduction 24 5.2. Measures of Success and Performance 25 5.3. Strategies 25 5.4. Current Condition 26 5.4.1. CoC Funding and RFP Committee 26 5.5. Actions to Meet the Objectives 26 6. Objective Four: Seek to house everyone in a stable setting that meets their needs. 29 6.1. Introduction 29 6.2. Measures of Success and Performance 30 6.3. Strategies 30 6.4. Current Conditions 30 6.4.1. Emergency Shelter 30 6.4.2. Transitional Housing 31 6.4.3. Rapid Re -Housing 31 6.4.4. Permanent Supportive Housing 32 6.5. Actions to Meet the Objectives 32 7. Objective Five: Strengthen the homeless provider workforce 33 7.1. Introduction 33 7.2. Measures of Success and Performance 33 7.3. Strategies 33 7.4. Actions to Meet the Objectives 33 8. Review Process 34 8.1. Action Steps 34 8.2. Timeline 34 8.3. Modifications and Updates 34 9. Attachment 1 35 Housing Inventory Chart (HIC) 35 Page 3 of 32 10. Attachment 2 42 Objective Four Excel Document 42 11. Attachment 3 43 Performance Management Plan 43 Introduction 45 Background 45 Basics of Performance Measurement 45 System Performance Targets 45 Minimum Performance Standards 45 Setting Performance Objectives 45 Monitoring Project and System Performance 46 Quarterly Performance Reporting 46 Annual Performance Review 46 Victim Services Providers 46 Sharing QPR Data 46 Corrective Action Planning 47 System -Level Performance Reporting 47 Implementing the Performance Management Plan 47 Providers' Responsibilities and Meeting Performance Objectives 47 Ensure HMIS Data Quality 47 Run and Review Quarterly Project Report 47 Develop Internal Improvement Plans as Needed 48 Participate in Corrective Action Plan as Required 48 Spokane Regional CoC Project Performance Measures 48 Page 4 of 32 Spokane Regional Continuum of Care Five -Year Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness 2025 to 2030 1. Acronyms & Definitions ACI AHAR APP Anchor Community Initiative Annual Homeless Assessment Report Annual Performance Plan Annual Performance Report APR ARPA American Rescue Plan Act BNL By -Name List CA Collaborative Applicant CAP Corrective Action Plan CDBG Community Development Block Grant Program (CPD Program) CE Coordinated Entry CFDA Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance CFR Code of Federal Regulations CHHS Community, Housing, and Human Services (a City of Spokane Department) COC Continuum of Care approach to assistance to the homeless Cognizant Agency The Federal agency responsible for negotiating with a grant recipient on behalf of all federal agencies the recipient receives funds from Collaborative Applicant The party responsible for applying on behalf of the region for CoC funds Continuum of Care Federal program stressing permanent solutions to homelessness Consolidated Plan; a locally developed plan for housing assistance and urban development under the Community Development Block Grant and other CPD programs Community Planning & Development Con Plan CPD DCYF Division of Children, Youth, and Families Discretionary Grants Federal agency can exercise judgment in selecting the recipient through a competitive grant process EPLS Excluded Parties List System Emergency Shelter Emergency Shelter Grants (CPD Program) 1968 act (amended in 1974 and 1988) providing HUD Secretary with fair housing enforcement and investigation responsibilities ES ESG Fair Housing Act Federal Fiscal Year Begins on October 1 and ends on September 30 of the next calendar year Federal Register The official journal of the Federal Government. FMR Fair Market Rate (maximum rent for Section 8 rental assistance) A formula grant is a type of mandatory grant that is awarded based on statistical criteria for saecific tvaes of work. The authorizine legislation and Formula Grants regulations define these statistical criteria and the amount of funds to be distributed. So, the term "formula" refers to the way the grant funding is allocated to recipients. FUP Family Unification Program Grantee HCDAC I Housing and Community Development Advisory Board for Spokane County CSHCD HEARTH Act Homeless Emergency and Rapid Transition to Housing Act Page 5 of 32 HHAA Homeless Housing Assistance Act HIC Housing Inventory Chart HMIS Homeless Management Information System HOME Home Investment Partnerships (CPD program) HOPWA Housing for People Living with HIV/AIDS HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development HUD-VASH HUD -Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing program LGBTQIA+ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, Queer/Questioning, Intersex, Asexual, More (sexualities, sexes, and genders) Grants a federal agency is required to award if the recipient meets the qualifying conditions Mandatory Grants McKinney-Vento Act Federal Legislation providing a range of services to homeless people MOU Memorandum of Understanding NAEH National Alliance to End Homelessness NOFA Notice of Funding Availability OMB Office of Management & Budget PATH Prevention Assistance and Temporary Housing (Homeless program) P&Ps Policies and Procedures PH Permanent Housing PSH Permanent Supportive Housing Recipient Direct recipient of funds from Federal Agency RFP Request for Proposal RRH Rapid Re -housing S+C Shelter Plus Care SHP Supportive Housing Program SOAR SSI/SSDI Outreach, Access, and Recovery SRC Spokane Resource Center SRO Single Room Occupancy Program Sub -Grantee An agency who receives pass -through funding to operate a project Sub -Recipient Indirect recipient of Federal Funds through a pass -through agency (Recipient) TBRA Tenant -Based Rental Assistance TH Transitional Housing UFA Unified Funding Agency USC United States Code YAB Youth Advisory Board YHDP Youth Homeless Demonstration Grant YHSI Youth Homelessness System Improvement Youth Build HUD program to promote apprenticeships for needy youth in building trades YYA Youth (17 and under) and Young Adults (18 to 24-years) Page 6 of 32 2. Introduction 2.1. Alignment with the Continuum of Care Mission The 5-Year Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness ("5-Year Plan") is intended to align with the mission of the Continuum of Care (CoC), as the advisory body of the Spokane County's Region's homeless crisis response system. The CoC's mission is to make homelessness rare, brief, and non -recurring by fostering shared responsibility among stakeholders and coordinating resources essential to the success of local plans to end homelessness. 2.2. Current State of the CoC Geographic Region and Homeless Response The homeless crisis response system and the ways in which the CoC Board and local governments respond is impacted by the current context on a number of key issues, including: 2.2.1. Governance The current CoC governance structure was implemented in 2017 and was designed to connect a variety of sectors that intersect with homelessness in an effort to provide a holistic perspective to address complex needs and leverage available resources. The Spokane Regional CoC consists of the Collaborative Applicant, the CoC Board, the CoC sub- committees, homeless service providers, and community stakeholders. In the Spokane Regional CoC, the city of Spokane serves as the collaborative applicant. The CoC Board is composed of more than 20 representatives, including people with lived homeless experience, homeless service providers, public housing, behavioral health and chemical dependency, workforce, healthcare, law and justice, advocates, education, funders, local business, and regional government. These representatives are system leaders who can make decisions that quickly change the way we address key challenges and be responsive to changing needs. The Continuum of Care Boards' governance structure is rooted in collaboration from a wide spectrum of stakeholders. There are four distinct Committees that make up the Board structure: A. Executive -The Executive Committee, along with assistance from the Collaborative Applicant, is tasked with membership recruitment, ensuring compliance with the CoC Charter; setting the board agenda; nominations to ensure board succession; and various other tasks as outlined by the CoC Charter or otherwise directed by the CoC Board. B. The Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) and Performance Evaluation Committee is co-chaired by a CoC Board Member and the HMIS Lead. Together, they set the agenda from feedback by providers, the Collaborative Applicant, CoC Executive and Board. Topics include data integrity, HMIS database improvements, and highlighting any errors in reports and data sharing with the public and report generation to track the efficacy of the programs funded through federal, state and local dollars. C. The Planning and Implementation Committee is made up of distinct subcommittees and workgroups that are the foundation of how the CoC Board governs and identifies gaps in system delivery which in turn helps them determine how to best support system change. There are a total of five sub committees that fall under the CoC Board governance structure. Four sub committees focus on unique populations often affected by homelessness in their own distinct way, which requires different best practices be employed, and the fifth subcommittee is Diversion which focuses on diverting households from entering Coordinated Entry and where a shallow subsidy, if any, may be offered. The population specific sub committees are: Page 7 of 32 I. Youth and Young Adult II. Veterans III. Single Adults without minor children (includes Chronic Households) IV. Families with minor children (Includes Chronic Households) V. Diversion Workgroups include: I. Coordinated Entry Workgroup (led by the three Coordinated Entry Leads) II. Street Outreach Workgroup III. By Names List Workgroups: Youth and Young Adults; Single Adults (Chronic and longest lengths of homelessness) IV. Equity Workgroup In 2019, the Spokane Regional Continuum of Care was awarded Unified Funding Agency (UFA) designation. This is a prestigious designation and is awarded because of the Collaborative Applicant's expertise in financial management, monitoring and evaluation, governance, and strategic leadership. UFA communities have increased control over certain federal funding streams, leading to better ability to manage projects locally and allocate funds to meet changing needs. However, due to COVID- 19 and the deleterious impacts that followed, the CoC was unable to effectively lean into its UFA status until early 2024. 2.2.2. Regional Integration The CoC is a regional body that strives towards regional solutions to meet the specific needs of those experiencing homelessness in both the urban and rural parts of Spokane County. It is critical that strategies address gaps and opportunities throughout the region. This includes representation from the City of Spokane, the City of Spokane Valley, and Spokane County on the CoC Board, as well as partnering on the Point in Time Count, other surveys and data collection and analysis. The goal here is to ensure that the geographic diversity of the region is considered in program design and access to services is responsive to urban and rural households. 2.2.3. Partnership and Community Engagement There is an extraordinary level of community partnerships that span across municipalities, service providers, faith leaders, and citizens. There are currently agencies funded by the CoC Board that operate more than twenty different programs that serve people experiencing homelessness, with even more partners and programs integrated into the coordinated response system. There is increased participation in the CoC Sub -Committees by both public and privately funded agencies, broadening the lens by which we assess the system, contributing data from across systems into the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS), working together on complex and multi -faceted issues impacting those experiencing homelessness, and closing the gap to ensure effective and efficient service delivery. Finally, with the CoC's geographic coverage spanning across the entire county, there is regional leadership involving the City of Spokane, the City of Spokane Valley, and Spokane County in support of regional efforts to prevent and end homelessness. The CoC Board has focused on engaging the business community in discussions and planning for a variety of strategies to address a multitude of community needs (e.g. partnerships between business and service agencies, mentorship, training for staff on homelessness, and employment/skills training for clients), creating a position on the CoC Board to be held by a business representative to ensure that lens is considered in all conversations, and continuing to provide training and education on the homeless community to all business that request it. Page 8 of 32 The opioid epidemic and its intersection with homelessness, has increased the need for deeper integration with emergency services. Substance Use Disorder (SUD) services will need to be further expanded and deeper coordination between the homeless and healthcare systems. The CoC Board will work closely with the City of Spokane and Spokane County to leverage local funding that can bring new beds online that address co-occurring disorders. This is another area where leaning into our UFA status may present an ideal pairing of federal and local dollars. Currently, we do not have enough beds to meet the needs of individuals who desire SLID treatment. 2.2.4. Service Delivery The system has seen a number of new projects come online in the last few years, as well as a significant number of new HMIS users that contribute data that aids in program design and funding allocations. Coordinated efforts to address needs of specialized populations (e.g. 2S-LGBTQIA+, people fleeing domestic violence, veterans, justice -involved, and youth and young adults) has led to improved service delivery and opportunities for people to get engaged with the system and resolve their homelessness quickly. The HMIS Lead has increased the number of participating agencies that either enter directly into HMIS or who have passive access to HMIS. Widening the net of HMIS access ensures that households who are being served by various providers that offer different services, can view current enrollments into HMIS, which enhances the way in which our community is able to assist a household experiencing homelessness and reduces the possibility of duplication. Where federal dollars tend to be a lot more challenging to recruit new providers that can compete for this funding, the City of Spokane and Spokane County are currently under contract with By and For Agencies. This level of partnership creates a much more streamlined approach to getting much needed resources into the hands of specific subpopulations that have historically been unable to access traditional housing and homeless resources. Specifically, if local governments can enter into contracts with long standing providers who have served specific subpopulations, then this is the preferred path to opt into. 2.2.5. Funding, Resources, and Metrics The CoC recognizes that local funding sources are the most flexible of funding that can be leveraged in communities. Because of this flexibility, we understand that new projects may naturally require new outcome metrics and would be based on whether a project is high, medium or low barrier. Housing First must be seen as offering an individual what they need to thrive and not just a one size fits all approach. This might mean that through local and state funds, the CoC may wish to work closely with Spokane County, City of Spokane Valley and the City of Spokane to collaborate in procuring, through competitive RFP, sober living emergency shelters, transitional housing or permanent housing projects. Towards this end, we are also cognizant that the metrics as laid out in this plan and based on the SPM, would not be the same standards that would be required of medium/higher barrier projects. Instead, they must be commensurate to that of the individuals being served. Said metrics, shall be decided by both the CoC and the local jurisdictional board or committee who make those funding decisions. Such metrics will be added to this Plan by way of an amendment by the CoC Board. As of the date of this plan, the future of homeless and housing services funding is tenuous. This will require a concerted effort among private and public sectors to partner and therefore maximize resource availability and impact. It is the intent of the CoC to partner with all willing entities that seek to improve the overall health and long-term stability of those who live in poverty. This includes, but is Page 9 of 32 not limited to, healthcare, employment agencies, SUD and mental health facilities, credit unions, business interests, and philanthropic entities. Likewise, agencies who only administer State funded programs as RRH or TH will also be expected to meet higher positive outcome measurements than those agencies who might have both RRH supported by state and/only federal funds. HUD RRH is much more stringent than a state funded RRH program and the outcome expectations should be measured differently. These nuances in outcome expectations will be addressed in the attached Performance Management Plan. 2.2.6. Encampments Over the last four years, the CoC has worked diligently on addressing unsheltered homelessness, as those numbers appear to increase, and visibility of encampments have impacted citizen's perceptions of safety. As a result, the CoC has invested more deeply in street outreach, an intervention that has proven results through direct engagement with people living unsheltered, and in re-engaging a coordinated outreach network to case conference and support efforts to help complex cases and to ensure outreach professionals are able to support efforts to reach people in need throughout the county. The City of Spokane has also begun utilizing a database and an integrated system to better track and map encampments and improve opportunities to send targeted service supports to those areas. Outreach then is utilized to provide a service -rich engagement strategy when encampments must be cleaned up in order to try and get people into the homeless service system and prevent the camps from being re-formed. Projects formed as a result of Camp Hope are also able to be utilized for other Encampment Resolution creating a pipeline to service for future designated encampment zones. Additionally, the City of Spokane Valley has implemented a robust mapping system that tracks encampments since 2021. Much like the City of Spokane, tracking this type of data ensures a more streamlined deployment of supportive services and other types of assistance needed by those who are unsheltered. The City of Spokane Valley has also invested in an interdisciplinary team of behavioral health professionals and local deputies who deploy together when responding to encampments. The deputies are specially trained to work with individuals who are unsheltered and assist in connecting them to the services needed. 2.2.7. Affordable Housing Spokane has spent multiple years in an affordable housing crisis, with historically low vacancy rates Coupled with growing general population, this has created additional challenges to housing people experiencing homelessness, as they struggle to compete for scarce housing resources. With many people looking for places to rent, those utilizing vouchers and/or have less income, criminal background or lack of rental history are less competitive for the few units that are available. Furthermore, increasing rents are significantly limiting the availability of affordable housing and has the effect of adding to local homelessness. It is important to continue focusing on affordable rental housing to prevent and end homelessness. This includes supporting capital investments — using local, state, and federal resources in adding and preserving affordable housing throughout the region. In the unincorporated areas and twelve cities and towns outside the city limits, Homeless Prevention has significantly curtailed homelessness for families who would otherwise become homeless and eventually seek services in the City of Spokane. This resource is critical for those households. Page 10 of 32 Despite challenges, the homeless crisis response system has continued to house people at increasing rates over the last three years despite the massive barriers presented during the pandemic, utilizing innovative solutions and working on improved landlord engagement strategies. 2.2.8. Aging Population The fastest growing demographic in our region is the Medicare -age population. This means a shift in the types of services that may be necessary to address targeted needs, as well as connections to resources that previously have not been utilized. 2.2.9. Data -Driven Solutions As more projects contribute data to the HMIS, the depth and scope of knowledge continues to increase. This local data, alongside best practice research from around the country, has led to the design of data -driven programs. The CoC, Spokane County, City of Spokane Valley and the City of Spokane, are all pivoting towards performance -based funding. As part of this, all CoC contracts contain a Performance Management Plan that was approved by the CoC Board, the CHHS Board and elected officials. The Performance Management Plan sets both minimum performance standards, as well as performance targets for all homeless service projects'. As outlined in the plan, quarterly performance reports will be shared with the CoC Board and will be posted on the City of Spokane's (Collaborative Applicant) website. Funding decisions will be made, in part, based on performance achieved by projects on an annual basis, ensuring that the community is investing in interventions that are meeting or exceeding outcomes for our system. As noted above, performance metrics will vary based on whether the project is funded, with federal, state or local efforts. As of 2025, the three major jurisdictions are working towards implementing the same CoC Performance Plan in their state and locally funded homeless projects. 2.3. Objectives of the 5-Year Strategic Plan The plan follows guidance from the Washington State Department of Commerce, in association with HUD and the Spokane Regional Continuum of Care Board and Sub -Committees. 2.31 Objective One: Promote an equitable, accountable, and transparent homeless crisis response system. 2.32 Objective Two: Prioritize those with the greatest barrier to housing stability and the greatest risk of harm. 2.33 Objective Three: Prevent episodes of homelessness whenever possible. 2.34 Objective Four: Seek to house everyone in a stable setting that meets their needs. 2.35 Objective Five: Strengthen the homeless provider workforce. 3. Objective One: Promote an equitable, accountable, and transparent homeless crisis response system. 3.1. Introduction Since its inception, the Spokane Regional Continuum of Care (CoC) has made major system -wide changes to better address homelessness. One of the achievements has been continual improvements in our Coordinated Entry (CE) system. Since 2023, our continuum has operated three Coordinated Entry Points (CEP's) based on sub - population: homeless families, youth and young adults and single adults. Spokane was an early adopter of the CE system. Implemented in 2012, CE utilizes Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) to identify individuals living in homelessness by linking them to the resources necessary to support movement to permanent housing. The CE system gained national recognition by the Page 11 of 32 National Alliance to End Homelessness (NAEH) for utilizing Housing First principles (i.e. not denying entry into CE based on not having ID or social security card), expanding access to satellite sites, and comprehensively assessing and prioritizing families by vulnerability and severity of needs. Equitable access to services is the cornerstone of any Coordinated Entry System. How access is defined for community members who are experiencing homelessness and housing instability varies. Access for someone who is wheelchair bound, or blind will be different to someone who is able to traverse our community with ease. Moreover, someone who lives in a rural area may not be able to access services in the same manner that their urban counterparts can. The CoC is committed to scrutinizing how we deliver services in our region and will lean on agencies that represent community members who have unique needs or who have additional barriers that our traditional CEP system cannot easily meet. Data shows that certain demographics, when compared to the overall population in Spokane County, experience homelessness at a much higher rate. These disparities among the homeless population in our community must be addressed. Contracting with more By and For Organizations is one tangible way that jurisdictions have sought to decrease this disparity, and our CoC is currently contracting with more By and For Organizations than in previous yea rs. The three CEPS offer intake, assessment, referrals, housing placement and diversion, and supportive services all under one roof. Satellite sites throughout the county create a "no wrong door" approach to this centralized and integrated one -stop crisis response system that expedites linkage to housing and supports. In 2023, a new Youth centered, Youth and Young Adult (YYA) entry system was added to CE. The Youth and Young Adult (YYA) CE is administered by VOA, a youth and young adult provider. Young adults may continue to enter through either the single adult or family system, depending on family status and age, both of which have adopted changes to better serve youth. These changes include but are not limited to youth -specific walk-in hours to create safer, more welcoming environments and the introduction of satellite sites for youth to be assessed in locations they already frequent (e.g. unaccompanied youth shelter and drop -in centers). After many years of using the SPDAT suite of tools for assessment and prioritization in our CE system, in 2024 the Spokane CoC adopted a community created tool called the "SALA". Tools from other Washington cities were considered and a proposal was sought from a consulting firm within the state who had participated in similar work in other cities. Ultimately the lead CE agencies came together and created a tool based on identifying barriers and vulnerabilities that create the most challenges for obtaining and maintaining housing across all racial and ethnic identities; also considering gender identity and sexual orientation. A draft was then vetted amongst stakeholders including those with live experience of homelessness and a pilot took place prior to full implementation in July 2024. Our CoC has three active pipelines for unique sub populations and while there is always room for improvement, we have a very active CE Workgroup who is continually working towards system improvements. However, because CE has been a well -established system within our community for the past ten years, our CoC was in the unique position to be able to evaluate and improve our system based off feedback and performance measures taken from within our own community, rather than broader theoretical data, and has been working tirelessly to do so since. A "By -Name List" (BNL) is a real-time list of all people in each subpopulation experiencing homelessness. By -name lists are a known best practice for homeless service systems because they can contain a robust set of data points that coordinate access and service prioritization at a household level, allow for easier case conferencing, are a collective tool of ownership and responsibility among differing agencies, and allow stakeholders to understand the homeless system inflow and outflow at a systems level. Not only does this tool allow for a triage of services and system performance evaluation on a micro level, but it allows for advocacy for policy changes and additional funding for resources necessary to end homelessness on a systems level. Page 12 of 32 In Spokane, the Veteran BNL, known as the "Veteran Master List", was developed in 2016. The Veteran Master List is currently a HMIS tool, which reflects every veteran in our community identified as being homeless, where they are sleeping, and what provider they are working with. The tool collects data provided by veterans and centralizes it in a single electronic form, regardless of where the veteran first interfaced with the homeless system. Among many other data points, the tool tracks offers of housing that are made and the results of those referrals for each veteran on the list. The Veteran Master List helps determine what interventions are or are not working and which veterans in our community are going to need additional resources and effort to house. The tool has directly contributed to a reduced length of time homeless for veterans due to the ability of outreach teams and caseworkers to more quickly identify who is a veteran and experiencing homelessness in our community. The faster we can provide housing and/or suitable interventions, the cheaper and more effective our system becomes. Due to the success of the Veteran Master List, the City of Spokane CHHS Department, Youth and Young Adult Sub Committee, and the Youth Advisory Board (YAB) have been working closely to ensure the continued development of the YBNL (Youth By Names List). Volunteers of America, the current Youth and Young Adult Coordinated Entry Lead, facilitate YYA (Youth and Young Adult) case conferencing. This meeting relies greatly on the By Names List to aid in their case conferencing efforts. 3.2. Measures of Success and Performance 1. Compliance with local, state and federal coordinated entry requirements for all projects receiving federal, state and local homeless funds. Compliance with CoC Policies and Procedures which include HUD recommended CE Core Elements. 2. Compliance with local, state and federal CE data collection requirements required to build and maintain active lists of people experiencing homelessness, and to track the homeless status, engagements and housing placements of each household. 3. For communities in Street Outreach projects: Increase the percentage of exits to positive outcome destinations to the level of the top 20% of homeless crisis response systems nationwide. 3.3. Strategies 1. Use outreach and coordination between every system that encounters people experiencing homelessness to quickly identify and engage people experiencing homelessness into services that result in a housing solution. 2. Apply for additional funding sources to aid the outreach and engagement process. 3. Continue to leverage current street outreach programs and/or partner with agencies outreach efforts that quickly identify and engage people experiencing homelessness 4. Identify and implement staff training such as diversion, progressive engagement, motivational interviewing, trauma informed care, etc. 3.4. Current Condition 3.4.1. Outreach Efforts Spokane County, City of Spokane, and the City of Spokane Valley have partnered to ensure that Street Outreach programs remain strong despite the low availability of permanent housing available in our region. Homeless Outreach teams help individuals living in homelessness access services to meet their basic survival needs and work with community partners to promote transition to emergency housing, transitional housing and permanent housing. The Outreach staff meet individuals by going to populated areas and building rapport by offering a kind smile, Page 13 of 32 supplies (such as socks or personal hygiene products), and snacks until individuals are ready and able to seek safer shelter. The goal is to identify and engage unsheltered households who are not connected with existing services and connect them to the needed resources, based on what they need to move towards housing. In addition to the outreach organizations funded by the City of Spokane, Spokane County and the City of Spokane Valley, there are several additional outreach efforts within Spokane County funded through other means. For example, Youth REACH is a project of VOA that employs 2.5 full- time employees to provide peer outreach, access to shelter services, referrals, and other necessary support to at -risk youth and young adults struggling on the streets and in other unsafe locations in Spokane County. Youth REACH utilizes an outreach team composed of young people partnered with adults to provide outreach, and a case manager knowledgeable of area resources and services, and skilled at engagement and motivation with the target population. The primary function of the outreach teams is to engage youth, establish trust and build relationships that will lead youth to case management services; connecting them to financial, housing, employment, education, healthcare, and legal services that will meet their needs and create successful future outcomes. In addition to Youth REACH, VOA is in the process of forming an in -reach team that will be taking youth and young adult referrals from other systems that work with homeless or at -risk youth, such as behavioral health providers, schools and the juvenile justice system. Utilizing both in -reach and outreach, VOA can make contact with a wide variety of youth and young adults in order to assist them in navigating the system, which will greatly improve accessibility. Additionally, Catholic Charities of Eastern Washington (CCEW) has an Opioid Use Disorder Peer Support Program that provides outreach, as well as specialized assistance to individuals engaging in treatment services. And, finally, there is specialized Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF) outreach staff who target interventions for veterans. In addition to increasing outreach funding in recent years, the Spokane City/County CoC has reinvigorated the Outreach Huddle, which seeks to join the area outreach workers, agency staff, local behavioral health staff, and the criminal justice system to unitedly case conference chronically homeless and/or other high barrier clients. Case conferencing is a nationally recognized best practice model that our community has sought to implement across populations. These meetings occur once a month and are a chance for staff to discuss more challenging cases to create a care plan where the different service providers are able to take a unified front and address individual needs in a holistic and targeted way. An array of representative service providers ranging from the medical and behavioral health community to law enforcement and fire personnel, and community court legal staff converse directly with the outreach workers in order to create a unified front and address individual needs in a holistic and targeted way. 3.4.2. Community Court City of Spokane Municipal Court's Community Court, established in 2013, is a Therapeutic Harm Reduction Court built upon a model created by the Center for Justice Innovation. This Court is designed to provide accountability with help. The approach is to dig to the root of behavior, apply resources to needs that are revealed by the participant. Those needs become conditions the participant is required to work towards to assist them in transitioning to a healthier life and away from the revolving door that can be the criminal legal system. It is one of many approaches Municipal Court takes to uphold public safety and provide appropriate redress to issues revolving around addiction and shelter challenges. Page 14 of 32 Community Court depends heavily on the service providers in Spokane to come together to reduce barriers to access to those who are likely disenfranchised with society, trauma filled, struggling with either Mental Health or Substance Use Disorders — or a combination of the two — and in so doing, reconnect the participant as a healthier productive member of society. Before a person enters Community Court, they meet with their attorney and determine the viability of the case and the desire of the participant to either adjudicate the case or engage in the court. If the participant chooses to adjudicate their case, the matter is immediately transferred to the traditional system. If the person opts into the program, the accountability begins with Needs Assessment to determine whether there is history of drug or alcohol use, involvement in the criminal legal system, needs for identification, health insurance, housing, education, employment, eligibility for Social Security benefits, food assistance, Veteran Services, Substance Use Disorders or Mental health issues and others. Those expressed needs then dictate the terms of their agreement to meet as the participants make their way through the program. If treatment is indicated every effort is made to have the shortest turnaround time to facilitate admission into treatment programs. The emphasis for the participants is to work on their respective needs by showing up at Community Court every week. They must be making progress on their individualized path having accomplished a minimum of community enhancement hours as well as connection to basic health and treatment requirements. If there is non-compliance, they are counseled and redirected. Incentives and sanctions are metered by the same best practices used in Treatment Courts: 4:1 ratio so that accountability with help can bring them into compliance. While incarceration is an option, many other tools are used to bring behavior back into line, until it doesn't. A flash sanction may be imposed, or the participant may be terminated from the program after a hearing. A snapshot of a month (2024/2025 data) at Community Court reveals the following: • 110 lunches served each week • 19 hours average of community service completed per week/76 per month • 3 Substance Use Disorder assessments completed each week/12 per month • 7 participants on average enter inpatient SUD/MH treatment facility per month • 14 community partner agencies average per week • Self -Report of CCAT findings o 92.2% identified a housing need ■ 71% reported being unhoused ■ 7% reported living in a shelter 0 98% identified an employment need 0 54% identified a SUD need 0 35% identified a mental health/trauma need 0 68% identified as male 0 32% identified as female • The average age range entering Community Court is between 35-44 years old • 15 replacement/renewal driver licenses/identification cards ordered on average per month Page 15 of 32 • 16 people referred to Consistent Care for MAT services with 12 actively engaged • 60 Risk/Need assessments completed on average per month The Continuum of Care (CoC) is hopeful that the Community Court model can be implemented throughout the County in the coming years. 3.4.3. Coordinated Entry Improvements Our previous Five-year plan called for the creation of universal CE Policies and Procedures. In 2022 we were able to implement these with the inclusion of the CoC recommended CE Core Elements. Additionally, one of priorities that was previously identified was the development of a Coordinated Entry System (CES) that served Youth and Young Adults. In 2024, the CoC created the YYA CE, a youth -specific coordinated entry system. Through the YHDP funding VOA was selected to administer the YYA CE. Additional strategies include creating Housing Navigator positions for youth and young adults that aid individuals in applying for and obtaining permanent housing; the utilization of best practice theories for youth case management (i.e. critical transition coaching); and the employment of diversion strategies that are tailored to the needs of the demographic age group. In 2024, a new CE assessment and prioritization tool was created and implemented by the lead CE agencies in the Community. This tool was fully implemented after stakeholder review and a pilot period in July 2024. Our CoC acknowledges that only prioritizing households who have the highest acuity can create difficulties in assisting other community members who may require only a light touch. Further, it creates a system whereby we are asking, as a system, that lower acuity individuals become more traumatized over time to access services. Of course, the funding of projects such as Diversion and funding more eviction prevention programs help, the connection of traditional housing projects such as Rapid Rehousing, Transitional Housing and Permanent Supportive Housing, continue to be unattainable for households that do not score the highest and thus are not prioritized for these interventions. As such, the following strategies will assist the CoC in crafting a Coordinated Entry System that is still compliant with both federal and state guidelines. Expanding Housing Access for Lower -Acuity Individuals has been a widely discussed topic within the CoC for many years. We hope to expand the continuum with interventions that meet the need of households at the time they enter the CE gateway. Background & Need HUD's Coordinated Entry (CE) system prioritizes individuals with the highest vulnerabilities for Rapid Rehousing (RRH) and Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH). However, lower -acuity individuals and those who may be experiencing homelessness for the first time, have limited/fixed income, or need minimal support often struggle to access housing assistance despite being at risk of chronic homelessness. To create a more comprehensive, HUD -compliant housing system, we propose a multi -pronged approach to serve lower -acuity individuals while maintaining prioritization for high -needs populations. Proposed Strategies 1. Expand Diversion & Prevention Efforts Page 16 of 32 a. Increase funding for homelessness prevention and diversion programs (e.g., one-time financial assistance, mediation, or transportation aid). b. Develop partnerships with faith -based organizations, nonprofits, and local businesses to create flexible funding pools for individuals who don't meet CE criteria but still face housing insecurity. 2. Establish Non -HUD -Funded RRH for Lower -Acuity Individuals a. Apply for state, county, philanthropic, or private funding to operate RRH, TH or PSH programs outside of State and HUD's CE requirements. b. Create eligibility criteria focused on employment status, eviction history, and affordability challenges, rather than vulnerability scores. 3. Implement a Tiered RRH Support Model a. Work with the CoC to create a RRH/TH/PSH program that scales assistance based on need. b. Higher -acuity individuals receive longer -term rental assistance and intensive case management. c. Lower -acuity individuals receive shorter -term support (e.g., 3-6 months of rental assistance) with light -touch case management. This model ensures all individuals receive appropriate levels of support without displacing those with greater needs. 4. Adjust CE Assessment & Prioritization a. Work with the CoC to explore modifications to the CE assessment tool to include factors such as: Risk of eviction, Housing affordability in the region. Recent job loss or income barriers b. Ensure lower -acuity individuals who still face housing barriers have a pathway into RRH without undermining HUD prioritization standards. 5. Leverage Non-CoC Housing Resources a. Work with Spokane Housing Authority to prioritize lower -acuity homeless individuals for Housing Choice Vouchers or project -based units. b. Expand access to employment -linked housing programs and workforce housing for individuals with some income but insufficient savings for market rent. Funding Sources & Sustainability • Seek state and local government grants for non -HUD RRH funding. • Engage private foundations and corporate donors to support a flexible rental assistance fund. • Explore social impact bonds or outcome -based funding models to incentivize housing stability. • Align efforts with workforce development programs to integrate employment and housing solutions. Expected Outcomes Page 17 of 32 • More efficient use of State and HUD resources by ensuring those with moderate needs do not become chronically homeless. • Increased exit rates from homelessness, reducing shelter reliance and overall system strain. • Stronger public -private partnerships, leading to a more holistic housing approach for all individuals experiencing homelessness 3.4.4. Emergency Services Spokane County offers numerous emergency hotlines. Eastern Washington 2-1-1, operated by Frontier Behavioral Health, is a broad free and confidential service via an easy access phone number where individuals can call to receive information about the availability of our Community's resources by a trained Referral Specialist.2 2-1-1 can provide information ranging from food bank locations, homeless services„ health and wellness support, utility/energy assistance, veteran services, legal resources, disaster and crisis support, transportation, free tax preparation, and veterinarian services (this is not an exhaustive list). However, if an individual has a distinct issue that they are needing help with, then other specialized hotlines for assistance. The YWCA offers a 24-hour domestic violence helpline where an advocate located at their safe shelter is prepared to help to discuss options, safety plans, and other community resources.3 Lutheran Community Services offers a 24-hour crisis line for survivors of sexual assault to seek out information about their options in terms of medical care, healing and legal services. Additionally, Frontier Behavioral Health offers a mental health or substance use disorder hotline called the 24- Hour Regional Crisis Line, which gives assessments to those in crisis whose health and/or safety are in crisis. Spokane Fire Department has partnered with FBH to create a Behavioral Health Response Unit that responds exclusively to mental health calls; this is a three -person team consisting of a paramedic and a licensed mental health counselor. With the increase of fentanyl overdoses and opioid settlement funding, a substance use disorder professional, a social worker and case manager were added to this team. Once it has been established that there is a behavioral health case, the team is engaged to try to assess their immediate needs and the best ways to support them through their crisis. Spokane Police Department has a similar program called the Community Diversion Unit which also pairs with mental health professionals to respond to individuals in the community experiencing a mental health crisis, aiming to divert individuals away from jails and hospitals and connect them to the services and resources they may need. Additional funding from the opioid settlement was used to create a High Utilizer and Complex Care Initiative. This includes a contracted community -based provider to coordinate care, provide intensive wrap -around services, and launch case management services for individuals cycling between jail, emergency departments and local shelters. 3.4.5. Eviction Prevention During 2021 our CoC were recipients of an influx of eviction prevention funds from the Federal Government. This money eventually was taken over by the Department of Commerce, and our community has continued to be grantees of these funds. Prevention is a critical tool to ensure that our system works upstream to assist households avoid entry into the homeless system, which ends up being far more expensive than simply maintaining their housing. 2 https://fbhwa.org/programs/additional-support-services/eastern-washington-211-ew211 3 https://ywcaspokane.org/programs/help-with-domestic-violence/24-hour-heIpIine-fags/ Page 18 of 32 3.4.6. Diversion Diversion is a housing first, person -centered, and strengths -based approach to help households identify the choices and solutions to end their homeless experience with limited interaction with the homeless crisis response system. It assists households to quickly secure permanent or temporary housing by encouraging creative and cost-effective solutions that meet their unique needs. It is a short-term intervention focused on identifying immediate, safe housing arrangements, often utilizing conflict resolution and mediation skills to reconnect people to their support systems. Diversion offers flexible services that may be coupled with minimal financial assistance when needed. This unique approach engages households early in their housing crisis. A staff member trained in the techniques of diversion initiates an exploratory conversation to brainstorm practical solutions for households to resolve their homelessness quickly and safely. Staff help households see beyond their current crisis by encouraging them to generate creative ideas and identify realistic options for safe housing based on their own available resources rather than those of the crisis response system. In 2019, the CoC committed to a Diversion -First Model. As such, the City of Spokane and its partners invested in training by the Center for Dialogue and Resolution, based out of Tacoma, Washington, in Diversion strategies. Fifty front-line service providers were trained, with nearly a dozen becoming trainers in Diversion and committing to continue training staff from across the system. 3.5. Actions to Meet the Objectives Objective 1: Promote and equitable, accountable, and transparent homeless crisis response system. Action Activity Responsible Party Timeline 3.5.1 • Collaborative applicant to Sub -Committees & 2024-BNL Develop and maintain "By- ensure that monthly BNL CHHS HMIS Team 2027- Name-Lists" BNL for sub- meetings occur. Project Plan populations to achieve • Refine BNL criteria in functional zero: CMIS/confirmation. 1. Single Adults 2. Veterans 3. Youth and Young Adult 3.5.1b • Review the built for Sub -Committees & 2027 Develop a project plan for zero/functional zero model CHHS HMIS Team BNL in the HMIS by • Create BNL reports in HMIS subpopulation • Analyze Data from reports quarterly. • Develop Intervention Strategies base on the analyzed reports 3.5.2 • Utilize HUD's STELLA tool Sub -Committees, 2027 Ensure equity in outcomes which will assist our CoC in Collaborative evaluating disparities in our Applicant, CoC system. Board • Establish reports for subcommittees and projects to analyze disparities for all Page 19 of 32 racial groups and conduct outreach to agencies that support these populations to collaborate on serving them in an effective manner thereby reducing disparities. • Review the report quarterly • Quarterly assessment of the SALA tool. 3.5.2b • Translate annual community Sub -Committees, 2027 Enhance language access surveys in Spanish, Russian, Collaborative and Marshallese. Applicant • Conduct annual community surveys. 3.5.3 Increase the number of • Sub -Committees and Sub -Committees, Ongoing BIPOC, Immigrant/Refugee, workgroups establish an CoC Board, MOU 2S-LGBTQ+, Disability, organizational outreach plan Collaborative between Medical, and Justice Involved for: Applicant Providence Organizations in the CoC and o BIPOC and CoC to CE o Immigrant/Refugee be o 2S-LGBTQ+ completed o Disability by no later o Medical than 2025. o Justice Involved • Report on the progress of the plan at meetings. • Strengthen Medical/Healthcare linkages and formalize partnerships in MOU 3.5.4 Sub -Committees, Ongoing Increase Community • Create a CoC and CE CoC Board, Education marketing and education Collaborative plan. Applicant, CE • Host an annual Coordinated Workgroup, Equity Entry Symposium Workgroup • Annual training opportunities on: data, diversion strategies, homeless prevention, system access and CE, myths/ facts, trauma -informed care • Require agencies to attend community -wide trainings and keep training logs for employee's engagement efforts • Revamp and maintain the CoC Website 3.5.5 Improve access and • Ensure ongoing training for CE Leads, CE Ongoing accessibility to CE satellite sites Providers, Sub - Page 20 of 32 • Determine where there are Committees, CoC gaps where people are Board, Collaborative accessing services and if there Applicant, HMIS is further need for additional Committee sites Maintain monthly meetings of the CE Workgroup Create info sheets for the CoC Website. Develop a universal intake. Update CoC and CE policies and procedures annually 3.5.6 Improve system • Quarterly review Sub -Committees, CE 2025 & performance performance measures as a Providers, CoC Ongoing system Board, Collaborative • Quarterly review measures Applicant for underperforming projects. • Develop a performance improvement plan for underperforming projects. 4. Objective Two: Prioritize those with the most significant barriers to housing stability and the greatest risk of harm. 4.1. Introduction Coordinated Entry refers to the Continuum -wide effort to assess the vulnerability of homeless households through CE and connect them to the appropriate housing resource(s) based upon level of need as quantified during their Assessment. The implementation of coordinated assessment is now a requirement of receiving both CoC funds from HUD and state homeless service funds from the WA State Department of Commerce and is considered a national best practice. Coordinated entry assessments are used to prioritize the most vulnerable homeless households and connect them to the appropriate level of housing and support. As the homeless service system of Spokane continues to develop and strengthen, system changes are focused on what works best for homeless households and rapid exits to permanent housing solutions. On -going evaluation processes include: • Survey homeless households seeking assistance through the Coordinated Entry System; and • Collaborate with homeless service providers to discuss system improvements based on survey results; and • Monthly Coordinated Entry Lead meetings The Spokane Regional CoC acknowledges that no two homeless experiences are the same and that circumstances and situations are unique; therefore, need targeted responses. The homeless population is made up of numerous subpopulations, which is indicative that to effectively cater to the unique needs of each, different sets of priorities should be established. Therefore, CoC sub -committees have been extensively discussing and reorganizing CE prioritization measures of each population. Page 21 of 32 Along with the reorganization of prioritization measures, the CoC continues to review the Housing Inventory Count (HIC)4 to ensure that the system has an adequate housing inventory to meet the needs of our community's most vulnerable. 4.2. Measures of Success and Performance 1. Compliance with state and federal Coordinated Entry requirements for all projects receiving local, state and federal homeless funds. 2. Compliance with the Office of Homeless Youth's "Five recommendations for making Coordinated Entry work for youth and young adults."' 3. Successful implementation of prioritization policies for all projects receiving federal, state and local homeless funds, resulting in prioritized people consistently being housed in a timely manner. 4. Prioritize unsheltered homeless households and increase percent served of unsheltered homeless households by 5% or maintain compliance level.' 5. Average length of stay in night -by -night emergency shelter (target 30 days) and exit to permanent housing from night -by -night shelter (target 50%). 4.3. Strategies 1. Improve Case Conferencing mechanisms to effectively meet the need of our most vulnerable. 2. Have CoC Sub -Committees reevaluate vulnerability priority factors by subpopulation and continuously re- evaluate for use by Coordinated Entry System. 4.4. Current Conditions Our CE system currently includes separate entry sites for singles, families and youth and young adult. Additionally, we have awarded funds to our local Victim Service Provider, the YWCA, to provide specific CE services for survivors of DV. Both the singles and family systems offer satellite sites to offer a no wrong door approach and allow those seeking services to do so with providers they are already working with to lessen the trauma associated with retelling their store multiple times. In 2024 we implemented a new community created assessment and prioritization tool in an effort to create more equitable access to vacancies in the homeless response system and minimize the trauma associated with the invasiveness of the SPDAT which had previously been in use. 4.5. Actions to Meet the Objectives Action Activity Responsible Party Timeline 4.5.1. Maintain and update • Evaluate current CE Providers, CoC Board 2025 & universal CE policies P&Ps by CE system Ongoing and procedures annually and update (P&Ps) as needed. Research barriers and interventions as well as culturally specific interventions. 5 https://deptofcommerce.apP.box.com/s/s1cabcfob0ev039u3gfl8r4f8cbO380f 6 Department of Commerce CHG Grant sections 2.1.1, 8.4.2 and 8.4.4 Page 22 of 32 4.5.2. Annual Coordinated • Create a short-term CE Providers 2025 & Entry Symposium work group to plan Annually Symposium • Plan and host an education opportunity for agencies to share their programs • Requirement to continue as a satellite site for CE 4.5.3. Annual Review of P&P • Sub -Committees Sub -Committees, CoC Annually for sub populations evaluate Board, Collaborative vulnerabilities to be Applicant prioritized by population based off community needs • CE work group to review and offer recommendations for any updates 4.5.4. Match the best • Review quarterly Sub -Committees, & Ongoing intervention with the SALA referrals and Collaborative Applicant need project outcomes • Map the system for gaps and needs 5.1. Objective Three: Prevent Episodes of Homelessness Whenever Possible 5.2. Introduction Spokane's homeless service response system underscores the dual importance of providing permanent housing solutions and ensuring individuals can maintain housing stability. In this section we will discuss Eviction Prevention and the CoC's Move -On Strategy. Where the former is an actual financial intervention + supportive services (like TH/RRH/PSH), the latter is a strategy employed by CoC's to effectively and successfully move households into independent living and out of homeless programs. To address the growing needs of our community, it is essential to expand financial and case management services that stabilize households when they face housing insecurity. Beginning in 2020 our community, like many others, saw an influx of federal and state funding that sought to keep households in their homes. These funds were earmarked as prevention dollars to ensure continuity in maintaining housing stability due to the impact of COVID. Since this time, prevention has come back into the fold as a more permanent intervention offered under Coordinated Entry. We currently have contracts with By and For Agencies that do not require the use of Coordinated Entry for referrals, they are required to enter into HMIS, however. We currently do not use ESG funds as an available eviction prevention activity since the State has offered robust funding in this arena. Eviction Prevention (EP) dollars also tie together case management services, and it is expected that agencies provide robust case management to ensure a household not become unstably housed post financial assistance. These supportive services are tailored based on the subpopulation served. For example, a family with minor children may need assistance in finding employment, less expensive childcare, or may come to the conclusion that both parents should be working, but only one parent can be out of the house no more than 20 hours per week. In Page 23 of 32 this case, supportive services would include, at minimum, connection with Worksource (local employment agency) to connect the household with the most appropriate employment options. Conversely, a household that is elderly, on fixed income and unable to work, might work with their case manager to submit applications to income based affordable housing. In either scenario, supportive services meets the household where their at and the end goal is to ensure that they do not enter the homeless system. Since the State has not provided communities with outcome metrics for Eviction Prevention, this plan proposes that EP follows the same measures as outlined for RRH. Housing should be more than just a short-term fix; it must equip participants with the skills and resources needed to maintain long-term stability. The aim is to integrate participants into the broader community, fostering opportunities for personal growth and development. By gaining new experiences, they can develop a diverse skill set, increasing their chances of achieving self-sufficiency and independent living. Moreover, adopting a strong Move -On Strategy across the Continuum of Care (CoC) ensures that we are setting households up for success and stability, which then will prevent more episodes of homelessness in the future. The "Moving -On" strategy supports clients in Emergency Housing (EH), Transitional Housing (TH) and Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH). A Move -On strategy must be employed in all interventions, but particularly in PSH, where Housing Choice Vouchers are an option for households who successfully live in a project based voucher (PBV) unit for 12 months or more and have good rental history. By transitioning participants to housing environments without on -site, intensive services, the strategy offers several benefits: • Participant Empowerment: Fosters independence by providing a less service -intensive living environment. • Cost -Effectiveness: Frees up PSH resources for individuals with higher service needs. • System Flow: Creates better resource allocation within the community's homeless response system. By aligning high -service housing programs with mainstream, less intensive housing assistance options, we can expand choices for households experiencing homelessness and improve overall system efficiency. The Moving -On strategy is centered on household participation.. Collaborating with participants to identify when they are ready for greater independence is critical. Establishing a structured process for assessing readiness ensures that transitions are supportive and effective, paving the way for sustainable housing outcomes and greater community impact. 5.3. Measures of Success and Performance 1. Eviction Prevention will adhere to the same metrics as RRH. The CoC will monitor how well the Move -On Strategy is implemented and executed by working with the HMIS Administrator to pull relevant reports on who is eligible and what providers are doing to prepare households for independent living. 5.4. Strategies Monitor QPR's on returns to homelessness for EP enrollments. Identify opportunities for system improvement should we see significant influx post enrollment and financial assistance. Improve data quality to better measure the efficacy of the Move On Strategy. 5.5. Current Condition In addition to the Department of Commerce's performance measures, a Performance Management Plan is also a local tool that our CoC will use to evaluate baseline data, create minimum performance standards and system performance targets for many projects and at minimum those funded by state and federal funding. As noted earlier, when funding sources are more flexible and can support medium to high barrier projects, a stricter Page 24 of 32 measurement of performance will be contractually required. In some cases, projects that are funded with local dollars (no federal or state funding) measurements may be determined by staff and the local governing body. This is especially the case if the intervention is not within the menu of interventions already funded by HUD or CHG that local jurisdictions are able to use as a guide when determining fair measures of outcomes. 5.5.1. CoC Funding and RFP Committee The CoC Funding and RFP Committee oversees the Request for Proposal (RFP) process, including coordinating CoC program funding awards with other funding partners. The Committee reviews project and system performance data from the past award year and makes recommendations to the Collaborative Applicant regarding monitoring plans and funding allocations and/or reallocations. Additionally, the CoC Funding and RFP Committee is responsible for reviewing and updating the Performance Management Plan on an annual basis, including working with the Collaborative Applicant to set minimum performance standards and system performance targets, to establish a system performance improvement strategy for the CoC. In doing so, HUD's project performance objectives and system performance measures, Commerce's system performance expectations, and CoC projects' combined performance on those objectives were considered in determining where to set minimum standards and system targets for the CoC's project portfolio. 5.6. Actions to Meet the Objectives Action Activity Responsible Party Timeline 5.6.1. Create a system -wide Assess system readiness Collaborative Applicant, 2026 & move -on strategy for move -on strategy Sub -Committees, CoC Ongoing • Convene PSH providers Board already utilizing an agency -specific move -on strategy • Receive agency feedback on system -wide strategies • Solicit CoC Board approval 5.6.2. Implement system- System -wide move -on Collaborative Applicant, 2026 & wide move -on strategy training Sub -Committees, CoC ongoing strategy Agency training Board • Develop move -on strategy guidance • Develop mechanism to measure effectiveness of the move -on strategy • CoC Board approval of policies 5.6.3. Achieve high- Collaborative Applicant, 2025-2027 performing Prioritize TH and Rental Sub -Committees, CoC community Assistance for new Board performance set out project models in the Performance Identify and apply for more funding to continue to grow inventory of available housing and Page 25 of 32 Management Plan' supportive services as for all project types needed • Increase use of dedicated subsidies (e.g. Housing Choice and VASH Vouchers) • Monitor data for length of time between end of supportive services post - move out and returns into the system • Standardize aftercare services based off a local best practice policy • Ongoing diversion training and implementation • Increase income potential of those receiving services through stronger partnerships with employment agencies, career development agencies (e.g. the WorkSource Spokane, and Next Generation Zone), childcare services, transportation availability, etc. • Increase marketing strategy of the Spokane Resource Center Diversion mechanism • Improve access to mainstream benefits (e.g. SOAR, DSHS, TANF, ABD, VA Benefits, etc.) • Identify new strategies to develop affordable housing for all subpopulations through community forums and business partnerships • Determine where there are gaps in accessing services • Improve data quality to minimize error responses Page 26 of 32 and increase reliability (e.g. HMIS, etc.) 5.6.4. Adopt a person- Research staffing levels CoC Sub -Committees & CE Ongoing centered holistic for appropriate service Providers services approach delivery. • Develop training materials and resources to support CE providers with the adoption 6. Objective Four: Seek to house everyone in a stable setting that meets their needs. 6.1. Introduction The Department of Commerce and the CoC recognize that theoretical formulas produce imperfect information as the state of our nation and the growing population, as well as the real estate market, cannot be perfectly projected. In preparation for this next objective, the Department of Commerce released a tool that when entered with our current housing inventory and homeless population would produce good faith and transparent estimates of the impact of the variety of local strategies being considered, tailored to local priorities. Though the numbers are not meant to be interpreted literally, this tool has enabled the City of Spokane's CHHS Department, currently the Collaborative Applicant, to explore how plans for creating more units within different interventions would affect the system. Additionally, the tool calculates annual funding and increases projected to be needed due to inflation and rent - driven increase. This knowledge, though not exact, will help the CHHS Department prepare in advance for additional needed funding streams. 6.2. Measures of Success and Performance A local plan that includes an estimate of people experiencing homelessness that will be housed during 2025 after successful implementation of the local plan using existing resources, and the count of households left unsheltered at a point in time in 2025, based on credible data and research; including the data, assumptions, calculations, and related citations necessary for outside parties to review and reproduce the estimate. 6.3. Strategies 1. Use the Department of Commerce Modeling Tool to assist in the 2026 Point -in -Time prediction. 2. Utilize System Performance Targets adopted by the CoC into the tool. 3. Use data from a variety of system sources to project an estimate of housing sources that are currently projected to join the Spokane homeless system. 4. Use the data to identify housing solutions that will assist the CoC in planning for the future financial expenditures, system impact and strategic investment. 6.4. Current Conditions In the 2019 Point -in -Time count, 1,309 individuals living in homelessness were documented, 315 of them being unsheltered. Contrast that with the 2024 Point in Time count that surveyed 2,021 individuals and 443 of these households unsheltered. We believe these are two important time comparisons due to the pandemic, the rising cost of housing and the severe shortage of affordable housing stock that Spokane County has faced over the last five years. The other significant factor has been the use of fentanyl and the lack of State planning and implementation of SUD and mental health facilities. Emergency shelters house some of the highest acuity individuals in our community due to the deficiency in appropriate care better left to State planning. The CoC wil Page 27 of 32 prioritize working with the Washington Health Care Authority and other appropriate agencies to identify options that would add units to our community, especially for high acuity households and those who require a higher level of care. As highlighted above, the pace by which affordable housing has been built has not kept up with the demand; towards this end, the available interventions offered under Coordinated Entry do not adequately meet the high needs of those who are experiencing homelessness. In spite of this, the CoC continues to look for ways to improve homeless outreach, offer interventions commensurate to the level of need that a household requires, all to ensure that homelessness is rare, brief and non -recurring. As noted above, Spokane County has been experiencing economic growth and has seen similar increases in the cost of housing and a consistently low vacancy rate. Low-income and homeless households face many barriers to housing in a highly competitive rental market. To increase the rate of permanent placement from shelter, TH, and RRH, the CoC has increased its investment in landlord incentive strategies, facilitated greater coordination between landlord liaisons, and supported legislative actions to decrease barriers for homeless households. Additionally, some existing resources were reallocated to provide rental assistance programs more opportunities to incentivize landlords to rent to homeless households and mitigate perceived risk of renting to them. To meet the growing need and improve system outcomes, the CoC continues to look towards adding additional housing units across intervention types, as well as increasing project performance measures, particularly in percentages of successful and permanent exits from the interventions. 6.4.1. Emergency Shelter Emergency shelters play an important role in a crisis response system, providing beds on a first come, first served basis, to any person experiencing homelessness. City of Spokane, Spokane County and the City of Spokane Valley -funded emergency shelter system is Housing -First and includes housing -focused services by population type. Combined with other public and private funded shelters, the current emergency shelter system offers targeted shelters for single men and single women (households without children), families, young adults, minor youth and those fleeing domestic violence. In 2024, the City of Spokane implemented a Scattered Site model that continues to focus on specific subpopulations but are smaller and more boutique -style shelters. A Housing Navigation Center currently assists in making a certain number of referrals to each site, but many of these beds are still open on a first come first serve basis in order to ensure equal access. Another sub population that has manifested due to the burgeoning need of medical fragile households who are homeless, are respite bed shelters. We currently have three sites that hold 30 individuals each and many of the referrals come directly from hospitals. Over the next several years, there is an intention to bring new shelters online for key populations that have challenges accessing the existing shelter system or who are particularly vulnerable. Concurrent with this increase in scattered sites, there will be a reduction in congregate shelter capacity. There is continued need for regional solutions for emergency shelter, including a strategically located space that could meet the holistic needs of those throughout the region. 6.4.2. Transitional Housing Transitional housing (TH) refers to a supportive — yet temporary — type of accommodation that is meant to bridge the gap from homelessness to permanent housing by offering structure, supervision, support, life skills, and in some cases, education and training. In past years, funding availability for TH has declined nationally, and Spokane County has been impacted by these reductions. However, the CoC continues to pursue tailored housing resources for the populations for which TH is considered a best practice. Service models vary by population, but include at minimum, master leased units and the opportunity for project participants to "transition in place", thereby reducing impact on the individual and allowing them to move from the TH project Page 28 of 32 into permanent housing without having to move. We also know that transitioning in place is not always possible since it means a reduction in a provider's housing portfolio and due to the high costs of housing, it is better to use the unit as more of a bridge to permanent housing. Our CoC is committed to bringing more TH units online and establishing programs that offer both low and higher barrier programs (i.e.: sober living). Innovative solutions, including shared housing for young people and joint TH-RRH interventions, have been brought online and continuing to expand these creative solutions is critical for creating diversity in housing inventory and for supporting individualized needs. The CoC would like to continue monitoring data and expand this intervention accordingly. 6.4.3. Rapid Re -Housing Rapid re -housing (RRH) provides short-term rental assistance and services, with the goal of helping people obtain housing quickly, increase self-sufficiency, and stay housed. It is offered without preconditions (e.g. employment, income, absence of criminal record, or sobriety) and the resources and services provided are typically tailored to the needs of the person. That said, where the program eligibility requirements may be low barrier, households must still compete with other community members that come without the challenges of low to no income, criminal background, stigma of being homeless. This requires a healthy housing stock that includes access to housing by the working poor, households on fixed incomes, and who come with a variety of backgrounds, is truly available. Currently, this is not the case in our Continuum. It is worth noting that we continue to be a high performing CoC despite the pragmatic challenges noted above. The CoC is dedicated to tailoring different RRH programs to meet unique needs of subpopulations depending on the funding stream. Specifically, HUD federally funded RRH programs are much stricter than State funded RRH and therefore, the measurement outcomes will be higher based on allowable costs and FMR allowances. Regardless of funding streams, RRH providers employ a progressive engagement model to provide a better service intensity to meet different needs. Progressive engagement is the practice of helping households end their homelessness as rapidly as possible, despite barriers, with minimal financial and support resources". More support is applied to those households who continue to struggle to stabilize. Progressive engagement acknowledges individualization and the fact that homelessness is a complex struggle; therefore, when a participant shows that they are in need of more help, it can be provided to meet their needs. On the other hand, by avoiding more assistance than is required to end homelessness and prevent an immediate return to the streets or shelter, programs can help more people, close housing placement gaps, and reduce the time people remain homeless. The CoC has utilized RRH as a critical intervention with significant success. Continuing to move this forward — through standard RRH, TH-RRH joint projects, and others — will be important over the next five years. 6.4.4. Permanent Supportive Housing Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) continues to be a priority for the region. The current system operates both facility -based and scattered -site PSH projects and, for the last few years, new PSH projects have come online to improve access to these service -intensive support interventions for chronically homeless adults. At the same time, existing projects have begun to utilize FCS and GOSH to enhance the level and quality of supportive services for PSH interventions, which also enhance the use of limited federal resources. While point -in -time count data indicates a reduction in chronically homeless throughout Spokane County, the CoC is focusing on ensuring PSH availability for specific subpopulations who may benefit from improved access and accessibility of this inventory. For example, there currently is not a set -aside of PSH units for youth or young adults, and current prioritization policy means this demographic often struggles to be prioritized for existing units. As a result, focused attention and a review of CE policies and procedures is underway by the CE Workgroup to ensure the need is met. Furthermore, the CoC and the Page 29 of 32 Veteran's Administration are deepening their partnership to improve access to VASH vouchers for veterans. 6.5. Actions to Meet the Objectives Action Activity Responsible Party Timeline 6.5.1. Projection of Use the Department of Collaborative Applicant 2025 & Unsheltered Commerce Tool for this Ongoing Individuals Living in Calculation. Homelessness in 2025. 6.5.2. Update Annually with Use the Department of Collaborative Applicant 2025 & Housing Inventory Commerce Tool for this Ongoing Count. Calculation. 6.5.3. Seek to expand Public Presentations to Collaborative Applicant, 2025 & affordable housing Philanthropy and Sub -Committees, CoC Ongoing investments from Business to broaden the Board business and funding to increase. philanthropy. affordable housing production. • Explore the creation of a Fund Development Committee. • Work with the city and county to leverage affordable housing production dollars, and advocate for projects that fill gaps and are equitable. 7. Objective Five: Strengthen the Homeless Provider Workforce 7.1. Introduction Homeless service provider workers have seen many challenges over the last 10 years and Spokane is no exception. Providers are having a difficult time filling positions, which exacerbates already stretched staff capacity to provide quality and timely services. A 2023 study published by the Department of Commerce looked at the challenges and trauma experienced in the field and the loss of frontline workers in this field. The study reports that workers in this field have huge workloads and are dealing with failures of systems and the effects of systemic racism and poverty and are dealing with primary and secondary trauma daily. They are often underpaid and the programs that they work in are not guaranteed funding. COVID-19 did not cause these issues, but it added additional work and stress to meet increased demand. To meet the needs of the affordable housing crisis, homeless service providers need trained and stable workers. The system has recognized the value of individuals with lived experience of homelessness and encourages service providers to add these individuals to their workforce. It should be considered, Page 30 of 32 however the unique needs of these individuals and organizations should be equipped to offer support as needed. This could include Employee Assistance Programs (EAP) and sufficient paid sick leave. Funding sources should consider awarding staffing dollars that allow providers to pay wages that align with market rates for similar positions and provide sufficient benefit packages. Agencies should ensure their staffing structures offer opportunities for growth. 7.2. Measures of Success and Performance 1. Completion of an initial analysis utilizing Department of Labor data and local surveys of housing workforce. 2. Improve worker retention in the homeless provider network. 3. Improve safety in homeless provider work. 4. Decrease the time positions stay vacant. 7.3. Strategies 1. Work in collaboration with local government, community and agency stakeholders to gather quantitative and qualitative data that further explains the current state of homeless service provider workers in Spokane County's homeless service system. 2. Conduct worker roundtables and community surveys 7.4. Actions to Meet the Objectives Objective Five: Strengthen the Homeless Services Workforce Action Activity Responsible Party Timeline 7.5.1 Evaluate initial data View and evaluate data Collaborative Applicant & 2025 utilizing Department from the tool as a system CoC Sub -Committees of Labor Data, to begin to formulate Commerce Study plans that will minimize trauma and increase retention in the field. 7.5.2 Analyze Data Collect quantitative and Collaborative Applicant, 2026 qualitative data CoC Sub Committees, CoC • Review data in sub- Board committees and the CoC Board. 7.5.3 Analyze data Collect, compile, Collaborative Applicant, 2026 organize, and evaluate. CoC Sub -Committees 7.5.4 Develop intervention Research funding options Collaborative Applicant, 2030 strategies Research best practice CoC Sub Committees, CoC • Adopt system -wide Board practices and interventions to support workers. 7.5.5 Measure ongoing Develop/adapt a Collaborative Applicant, 2030 evaluation and monitoring tool CoC Sub Committees, CoC learning Evaluate effectiveness of Board interventions Page 31 of 32 • Institute changes as approved by the CoC Board. 8. Review Process On an annual basis, the CoC Board is entrusted to review the 5-Year Plan to evaluate progress towards stated goals. Simultaneously, the CoC Committees and Subcommittees should use this plan to guide their work plans on an ongoing basis. 8.1. Action Steps 1. Review of the Objectives, including the Action Steps to Meet the Objectives, to determine if objectives have been met and/or are on track to meet timelines; and 2. Mobilize relevant Responsible Parties to address shortfalls and/or opportunities; and 3. Propose modifications or updates, as needed, to address Objectives; and 4. Seek CoC Board approval; and 5. Train funded and CoC partners on any changes made to the 5-Year Plan. 8.2. Timeline In the last quarter of each year during the lifespan of this 5-Year Plan, the CoC Board or its delegate Committee (e.g. Planning and Implementation Committee) will review the plan in accordance with the Review Process. 8.3. Modifications and Updates All modifications and updates to this plan need to be approved by the CoC Board. This can be completed on an ad - hoc basis or during the annual review process. Page 32 of 32 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 16, 2025 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion consideration: K9 Unit GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Interlocal Agreement with Spokane County and Spokane Sheriff's Office PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Numerous discussions regarding Law Enforcement Services BACKGROUND: City Council's top priority is public safety. In line with that priority, City Council has opted to provide law enforcement services pursuant to an interlocal agreement with the Spokane County Sheriff and Spokane County. As part of that agreement, City Council is responsible for setting the number and types of dedicated officers. Currently, the City has three K9 units that operate during the power shift period, which generally covers afternoon into night to provide additional offices during times with higher call volume. This means there are not always K9 units on duty. K9 units are patrol officers and generally operate as patrol units for purposes of responding to calls. In certain instances, the K9 unit will be used to assist other calls to aid in locating suspects, providing initial response to maximize officer safety, and as needed as an additional tool. When a K9 unit is needed but one is not on duty, SVPD will either call -out an off - duty K9 or ask other agencies for use of their K9 units. Chief Ellis is proposing to convert a standard dedicated patrol position to a K9 patrol position and to move a K9 position to each of the four platoons. This would provide a K9 unit on -duty seven days a week and would eliminate the need for call -outs or use of other agency K9 units. Chief Ellis will provide more information about his proposal. The Sheriff's Office is currently purchasing and training two new K9 units to replace outgoing K9's on the unincorporated side, and so it would be cost effective to make the move at this time. A cost impact sheet is provided. The cost of acquiring the K9 will be covered by a recent donation to the Sheriff's Office. There is a one-time kennel purchase of $5,000 and ongoing costs of approximately $5,200 for specialty pay, food, and veterinarian services. These costs will be offset by approximately $1,200 in reduced costs for not having to pay for call -outs of off duty K9 officers. Thus, for 2026, the estimated total impact is approximately $9,000. The City recently confirmed that it received $250,000 from the federal COPS grant for the new positions authorized in 2026. This grant covers a portion of officer salary for three years, which means the City will receive approximately $80,000 each year for the next three years towards officer costs. This grant has not yet been incorporated into the 2026 budget, and so will allow approximately $80,000 of general fund revenue to be used for other purposes. Thus, the costs for the K9 conversion would be covered by the offset from the COPS grant. The Public Safety Committee has met and heard the proposal and agreed unanimously to recommend the conversion. This conversion would require an amendment to the dedicated units under the contract, and so is subject to Council approval. Given the timing for the Sheriff's Office to acquire a new K9, staff are seeking Council approval tonight. OPTIONS: Motion to approve conversion of a patrol position to a K9 position and for the City Manager to execute such amendments as are necessary to incorporate into the current Law Enforcement Interlocal Agreement; or take such other action as may be desired. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Motion to approve conversion of a patrol position to a K9 position and for the City Manager to execute such amendments as are necessary to incorporate into the current Law Enforcement Interlocal Agreement; or take such other action as may be desired. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Acquisition cost of K9 is approximately $15,000, which will be covered by a recent donation. One-time cost of approximately $5,000 for a kennel. Ongoing costs of approximately $5,200 for incentive pay, food, and veterinarian services. Reduction in current costs of approximately $1,200 due to not needing to pay extra call -out pay for off duty K9's. Total for 2026 is estimated at approximately $9,000 ($10,200 - $1,200= $9,000) and approximately $5,200 annually each year after. Cost would be covered in 2026 by general fund made available from recently received COPS grant. STAFF CONTACT: Spokane Valley Police Chief Ellis; Erik Lamb, Deputy City Manager ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint Cost Impact Notification t uu ca L WE W N N z O vJ 0 o 4-0 C N +� cu U N cn N N O >, C O ZZ O � a U i � � a) 4-0 a cl)c o L 0 (a a) U u- n Q N L L L C: L >, O O >� 1 U CLI) Cl) C: =3 N C yr _� � N (a a) (a O p a-� ca ca -0 -�-j L ■� � � L O cu (a a) a)U Q � � a)U }, a)> CUp L L O U (a L a) U LL j a) O a)C: a) 0 (1) (a LL N (a ) . . J co. L O O {� (a Q N cn c O -0 E cn a) O O U E c a)O 4-0 � + " -C cn O cn O W L a)(u -0 U_ a)O OcnO Q }' V O O cn (a p — 4-0 (a � 0 Q c - C: E a) ; = L- N � (a O U� (a N a)O (I) O') (a N vj L 0) N CU � 0) L Cl) U cn O Cl) L CL a) N CO O U L a) F �dyyy. l` yam. IFr� ^ cu - ~ L >1 ^0 W E Q ca L a) O 2 o _0 (a 0 _ 0) p O cu c 0 (a CU Q 0 a)O Eo0 Fu O Fu yr >1 O E O O ca C N _a �— o o Co cn E O CL 'Cl) w -a Q Q _� Q LO I1 N L.1. LL O O }' C: N T N O a) { f} := O E O L E ^ O N O a cn cn U CU U � � N (a N 0 N O E (� a ._ Co O O O L lr-- O N > {f} O O -a N > U O > C: O ■ �= ' _ cn p (a 0 a)� (a N c: Q Q .� O v cn LL V O Z � Qo' FPO o,�sva*anfr �cnv ae i ,® City of Spokane Valley • Spok Cost and Service Impact Notification ane Dailey WA Change to Shared Law Enforcement Services 2003 Section 5.1.2 of the Interlocal Agreement for Law Enforcement Services requires 30-day notice and cost and service impacts estimates for any changes to commissioned officers in shared units. Date of Notice: 12/8/2025 Staffing Change Effective Date: January 1, 2026 Unit Name Addition Number Reduction Number Position/Rank K9 officer 0 0 Deputy Service Impact (Describe impact on service for all affected units This is a conversion of a patrol officer to K9 patrol officer. Cost Impact Item Salary & Benefits M&O Vehicle & Equipment Indirect Costs Total Costs Yearly incentive pay $2,977 $2,977 Yearly K9 food $1,050 $1,050 Yearly veterinarian $1,200 $1,200 Cost Impact Description Above are reccuring yearly costs for a K9 officer. There is also a one time cost of a kennel of $5000. Approximate yearly costs savings offset of $1200 for K9 call outs. Submitted By: Assistant Chief Sean Walter CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 16, 2025 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Sullivan /Trent Interchange: Preferred Alternative GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35.77.010, Perpetual Advanced Six -Year plans for coordinated transportation program expenditures. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: • 1/11/2022: Council passed Resolution 22-001, adopting the amended 2022-2027 Six Year Transportation Improvement Plan, which included this project. • 3/22/2022: Administrative report providing a project update. • 6/14/2022: Council passed Resolution 22-010 adopting the 2023-2028 TIP, which included this project. • 10/4/2022: Administrative report providing a project update. • 12/13/2022: Administrative report: Consensus to advance the Alternative #2-Diamond Interchange w/ Peanut Roundabout to final design. • 12/20/2022: Passed motion to select preferred alternative for advancing project. • 6/20/2023: Council passed Resolution 23-007 adopting the 2024-2029 TIP, which included this project. • 9/26/2023: Passed motion to execute final design contract. • 6/18/2024-Council passed Resolution 24-011 adopting the 2025-2030 TIP, which included this project. • 6/17/2025: Council passed Resolution 25-012 adopting the 2026-2031 TIP, which included this project. BACKGROUND: Staff's recommendation for the preferred alternative for the Sullivan Road/Trent(SR290) has changed from a Diamond Interchange with Peanut Roundabout to a Jug Handle with Roundabouts. The Sullivan Road/Trent(SR 290) interchange connects rural freight traffic with one of the region's busiest urban corridors. Sullivan Road between 1-90 and SR 290 is home to 9,000 jobs, 85% of which are directly related to freight. Large employers, including the Spokane Industrial Park and Amazon, move their goods and employees via Sullivan Road and Bigelow Gulch within Spokane County. Sullivan Road south of SR 290 is a WSDOT Freight and Goods Transportation System (FGTS) T-2 freight corridor carrying 4 to 10 million tons of freight annually, that turns into a T-1 freight corridor south of Euclid Road and continues to it's 1-90 connection, carrying over 10 million tons of freight annually. The connection of Bigelow Gulch Road into Sullivan Road has dramatically impacted the operations of the Sullivan/SR 290 interchange. Sullivan peak hour traffic volumes are expected to continue increasing from 1,700 existing trips to 2,400 future trips by 2030. Without reconstruction of the Sullivan/SR 290 interchange, it is expected that both westbound and eastbound ramp intersections will continue to degrade from a level of service that is already failing during the PM peak hour. This increase in traffic, delay and queuing will degrade the safety of the existing interchange, slow the movement of rural freight and general trips into the urban area, and ultimately restrict economic growth in the region. In 2021, the City selected KPFF Consulting Engineers (KPFF) to evaluate alternative designs for the interchange. KPFF, along with City staff, evaluated four alternatives in terms of cost, traffic flow, right-of-way needs, impacts to existing properties, constructability, safety, and other pertinent project elements in order for the City to select the preferred alternative to advance to final design. The four alternatives that were evaluated are: 1. Signalized Diamond Interchange 2. Diamond Interchange with Peanut Roundabout 3. Diverging Diamond Interchange 4. Jug Handle w/ Roundabouts An online survey was launched on October 20, 2022 and the City held an open house meeting on October 27, 2022, to present alternatives for public feedback. Of the 307 surveys collected from the online survey and open house, the Diamond Interchange with Peanut was the most favored at 35% and the Jug Handle with Roundabouts was second at 28%. The engineering team also reached out and met with several stakeholders for their input on their preferred alternative. Stakeholders either favored the Diamond Interchange with Peanut or Jug Handle with Roundabouts. Based on the engineering team's alternative analysis along with the community input and WSDOT acceptance, City staff recommended advancing Alternative #2-Diamond Interchange w/ Peanut Roundabout to final design. On December 20, 2022, the City Council passed a formal motion identifying Alternative #2 as the preferred alternative for advancing the project into design and construction. Due to receiving federal grants to fund the final design phase, the City was required to go through another formal consultant selection process and required the consultant design work to have a 16% Disadvantage Business Enterprise (DBE) goal. Staff issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) with the required DBE goals. KPFF was again selected as the most highly qualified firm to complete the final design work. With Council approval of the final design contract with KPFF the design began in October 2023. KPFF completed the survey, traffic analysis, geotechnical work and construction phasing needed for the design, and progressed the design to the 30% design level. Additional design components were determined during the 30% design, they are: • Includes improving Sullivan Road to the north between the interchange and Wellesley Avenue. • WSDOT required a shared -use path along the improvements of Trent Avenue between Progress Road and Sullivan Road. A shared -use path on Trent Avenue is consistent with the City's Bike and Pedestrian Master Program. Several impactful issues came to light during the 30% design, that have major implications for the project costs and feasibility of the preferred alternative. These items are: • Grant agencies, WSDOT and pedestrian/multimodal design guidelines are emphasizing a performance -based approach to accommodating pedestrian users and bicyclists. This emphasis creates the need for much wider sidewalks/paths that include buffers that go beyond City standards. With wider multimodal facilities needed on Sullivan Road combined with the trapezoidal shape requiring longer outside girders, the two bridges will cost more. The costs of the two bridges alone make up the majority of the estimated construction costs of the project. The existing bridge over BNSF Railway has a clear span of 42ft. During the alternative analysis and 30% design a clear span of 98 ft was used, similar to clear span on the Barker/BNSF Grade Separation Project. Through the design process and coordination with BNSF Railway during the 30% design, BNSF is requiring a clear span over their track to meet their current standards of 124ft. The increased span combined with the trapezoidal shape requires larger girders and additional bridge square footage on the bridge increasing the cost of the bridge. The 30% design confirmed that Progress Road will lose its connection to Trent Avenue. The length needed for the acceleration and merge of the westbound on -ramp onto Trent Avenue will extend west beyond Progress Road. To construct the improvements, Sullivan Road will need to be reduced down to one lane in each direction for the majority of the construction. The west half of the two existing bridges will have to be demolished first and then half of the new bridges can be constructed. Once traffic can be moved to the western half of the new bridges, the remaining existing bridges can be demolished, and the remaining portion of the new bridges can be built. The phasing of the bridge construction will likely double the duration needed to construct the bridges, compared to if the bridges can be constructed all at once. Construction phasing is particularly difficult for the bridge over BNSF railroad, where several track closure windows will need to be scheduled and approved by BNSF. Due to the disadvantages discovered with the Diamond Interchange with Peanut Roundabout, staff will be discussing moving forward with a revised "Jug Handle with Roundabouts" alternative for final design of the interchange in order to lower the construction costs of the project and to better deal with the issues stated above. The revised "Jug Handle with Roundabouts" alternative benefits are: • Provides the same Level of Service (Traffic Flow) as the "Diamond Interchange with Roundabout." • Rated the best (tied) alternative for reduction in fatal and serious injury collision. • Lower construction costs. • Shorter construction duration and better traffic flow during construction. • Possible construction phases based on available funding at the time. • Progress Road may remain open to Trent Ave. To move the alternative forward in design, staff anticipates a $550,000.00 supplement will be needed with the design consultant to get the new alternative to 30% design level. There remains approximately $2.17 million of KPFF current contract ($3,195,832.68) that will be used to get the new alternative from 30% design to final design/ad ready bid set. KPFF anticipates completing the final design by May 2027. The City's project funding and budget for the engineering design are shown below: Project Funding Source Alternative Analysis Final Design Fund 312 City $368,530.00 $131,470.00 REET Funds City $365,000.00 Traffic Impact Fees City $149,059.00 SRTC Federal $1,367,500.00 National Highway Freight Program Federal $3,052,767.00 Totals $368,530.00 $5,065,796.00 City staff will hold a public open house to present public comment on the revised "Jug Handle with Roundabouts" final design and will report back to Council. OPTIONS: 1) Move to advance the "Revised Jug Handle" concept to final design and authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute a supplement agreement with KPFF Consulting Engineers, Inc. for the Sullivan/Trent Interchange Reconstruction Project. 2) Take other appropriate action. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to advance the "Revised Jug Handle" concept to final design and authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the consultant agreement with KPFF Consulting Engineers, Inc. with a new contract amount not to exceed $4,100,000.00 for the Sullivan/Trent Interchange Reconstruction Project. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: To date, the City has secured funding in excess of $5 million for the final design of the project. These funds will be used for the KPFF Consulting contract and supplement. The City has also secured additional $10.6 million in federal funds that can be used for right-of-way and construction. STAFF CONTACT: Robert Blegen, Public Works Director Rob Lochmiller, Engineering Manager ATTACHMENTS: Presentation Exhibit -Diamond Interchange with Peanut Roundabout (30% Design) Exhibit -Revised Jug Handle Concept 0 +-j CU C-) LLI LO LLJ LLJ CN 0 CN QS E O L 0 cu m -fmj 0 a) ■mmmm% O L a c +-' CU O O }, j Q a�70 � � � +-+ U O •� U Q c 0 � U) 0 O U 70 X > �A N CU � O c6 4-o � o � 7 �M � p0 70 70 i N — U) O Cfl C�6 • C6 O C�6 C�6 +_+ U) O _ � •� O O C) CU Cn U) 70 Cn Cn U m }+ Q Nt t � . 1-1 C. • i d Q a S, ~y Ll47 ■.. LU Lu N Tschirley Rd 1 , i 1 N Flora Rd • 'N Flora 1 • • a ~N Industrial Park 51h St.LU iR ME IF. E .,'3 m t LU LU ILU LU �N Sullivan Rd .. N Sullivan Rd Q. N Burns Rd * s t N Adams Rd o N Calvin Rd t_ N.Best R ' N Bannen Rd w N Mayhew Rd w y •+ N Keller Rd _ y V W - y N McDonald Rd d ■ O L M 20 of �+ N 1aA � O U 0 7C3 U C6 07 N a--+ (n LL 1aA U + N >, _ }' p (n � +-+ U N — 70 +� to m 7 N N N O 0 > +� 70 U _ UC6 � (n O Q N Q O U> >' cn O 70� �����0-- �z 0 Q O O 1aA N (n O = N � — C6 Cfl (� N 0 � N 0 O U N 00 O i..� U b a-+ O E LL C6 cn Q (10 O N 70 N 0 N C�6 m Q U) co O Q i C3 0 C6 O U) 0 � U 70 .'SIP O O E N � v o M >_ 4-1— o -0 to O U N— O �cn U to i � }' N U Ov m O m ca OL U) to i m LL z m N � a--' blA C6 E 7011 O U) N _0 _0 N C6 N ate) O I� a--+ C6 C6 N O O 7 -n i LL (� j N 70 C6 � �� o �� o o � O � 70 Q � 70 70 N N 070M � J a J a S Q U 0 O .1 •' � P[ ice" 1 } as �3liJ i JJ O N �c O N �E� ��= cn 0 ��� N W O0-0 0 0� � c� (D -0W 0 OLD w N N .� � O�to � c N 0 070 W_M M�0O0 L i N O O p 070 (Q �= i i i c D Q at U � � U C6 � Q U •- oaU) U) Q) 0 0 0 U) 070 m 0 2 o +� 7C3 +� Q o-0 O 2 to H O i E IQO c ca 2 N � O +� N +-' 4-j 0 _0 N � � to 0.6 N ` U O � U j O O N U O 4-, O U O O N � = U U U N — O w i u b�A N u CU6 LL U II � z X E N O N cn — w ;--3 z w m LS, - rx atiy as SS38008d a b�A to N 7D N U) � N N N � � � •� OU C6 � C) C) to C� N c �� 5 N (n 4-1 O 4-1 U 4-1 a� 7C3 v — cn 4-1 o o o o 4-1 CU) +� Q 70 O O U O � � i }, N , o N o �_ C c6 a � O O cn a� a� � U � N a� U \ cn Q c6 o U) 4-j LL to Q U N N _N L.L U) O C6 I I O E 70 -0 U m C-06 J Cn m N � z � m O LL ■ cu L N bao C to L U i 4?N C _(D C to )ao 70 (D (n LL LL U) U) 0 0 � ti rn LL LL U) U)a a O O rl (� O Ln -1 Ln 0 It i ' Ln (h • N a) a) c LL •� by c by c • a� a� c c� c c� > > O O s�. W U * U i- E no .� 0') rn -1 ca c6 c6 Q U) U) U c E E E C9 C9 O a> i . N N -1 -0 ca U N cn U) nA O O — 0 O U U U ca _ E O H O U ca C J O ca C J O ca -k cu 70 N � co +-+ c c- ,-- C a--+ O W � • Cn � 0 N 70 C 70 O •tn _ N 70 U — 1aA f6 a-+ � N N — + +� 0-O � N +� O C6 2 70 N 7C3 U b�U E o to U }' to 1aA _N O O N C6 C1 2 N N O +-+ LL � i 70 CO O U 7C3 � tj O O N � V _ C6 N co +� 7C3 O N U O 70 J)co }' Cn f 6 C6 Cll CL N U ( Co O N O— O O i a=+ to c Q CL N QE Q C!) J O Co O }, O +- U +- 4-1U 00 oo -0 c o a) = }' O O 0 -0 cn 0 N N a) 4-1 (D N O U O o -moo ,abE cn LEI m DC c6 '69- I- LO LO ka LL LL 4a Z a� � U C6 N 2 O 1aA Q � N N � O > N 7C3 � 1aA N 7C3 � U 4 -+ N O 0 70 O � 0 CU6 = 4-j U cn 7 N � 7C3 - O N OU U � N O � o � 7C3 N a� 7C3 � o (n 4 -' U O 0-_ � N 0 � _N U LSD o o � Om � OL _o U � U III L cu a � b�A O � O O E — N � bOiA O N •� � N � U C6 +-' O O O U +j N i C�6 C6A O �: Q to �' O � O U O U C6 > C6 O C6 N U � j C6 — N U N -j (n O > — M > O O E C " O � O N — to C6 C6 N E 5 i � C6 C6 N O to N E U) O O O > N to -' -P O U _D > Q D to a-j CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 16, 2025 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Signal Box Art Wraps GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: At the May 31, 2022 City Council meeting, direction was provided to partner with Spokane Arts and Spokane Teachers Credit Union (STCU) to participate in a grant program to design, order and install vinyl art wraps on several traffic signal boxes in Spokane Valley. Those wraps were installed in 2023 and Mayor Haley was a member of the selection committee. The Council also received an update on public art on December 10, 2024 that included visuals of the signal box wraps, donated sculptures in Spokane Valley, and the StoryMap GIS tool. BACKGROUND: Spokane Arts has been awarded another STCU grant to wrap 12 additional boxes. Skyler Oberst, Executive Director of Spokane Arts, reached out and asked if the Spokane Valley Arts Council (SVAC) could be involved in this process with the City with the goal of highlighting art and artists in the valley. STCU has a long history of sponsoring municipal art wraps including partnerships with Spokane Valley, Spokane, Liberty Lake, Kennewick and Sandpoint. As mentioned, the City recently worked with Spokane Arts and in this proposal, Spokane Arts would like to include SVAC in the process. There are many benefits of this program including community engagement, supporting visual arts in the valley and spotlighting Spokane Valley artists. In addition, wrapping signal boxes with art deters graffiti, however if tagged, vinyl wraps are easier to clean than bare metal. Bright designs make the boxes more visible to pedestrians and drivers and may reduce accidental collisions. Wrapping the boxes is also a great way to beautify neighborhoods, generate community pride, spark creativity and encourage discussion. A nine -member selection committee would be comprised of: • Spokane Valley 2026 Mayor and Deputy Mayor • SVAC President Marc McIntosh and VP Russell Braymen • STCU "Here for Good Foundation" representative (grant sponsor) • Spokane Arts representative (TBD) • Georgia Oxford, Greater Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce representative • Spokane Valley Citizens o Catherine Yaiko, Friend of the SVAC Board and volunteer o Holly Swanson, Spokane Gallery and Framing owner (Spokane Valley business), former SVAC Board member and current volunteer Additionally, Skyler Oberst would serve as a non -voting resource person to help facilitate the process with best practices. SVAC and Spokane Arts recommend the following process and timeline: January • SVAC issues a Call to Artists with 90-day submittal period (City & Spokane Arts to share) April/May • Selection committee juries in the artists • Artists are notified if they are or are not selected with feedback on initial proposal • Artists with designs selected for wraps will receive a stipend from STCU May/June • Selected artists complete their designs • City Council updated on selected designs July/August • Wraps installed Recommended cabinet locations were determined based upon the following criteria: • City -owned • Not on WSDOT-owned properties (such as interchanges) • Highly visible • High traffic areas • Graffiti deterrent • Consideration of city's signal box replacement schedule and currently wrapped locations Recommended Locations for 2026 Wraps: • SW corner of University and Sprague (near Rosauers) • Indiana Avenue (near NW corner of Barnes & Noble parking lot) • NE corner of Sullivan Park • Sprague and City Hall (across from Balfour Park) • NE corner of Sprague and Mullan • NE corner of Argonne and Sprague • NE corner of Argonne and Mission • NE corner of Pines and Sprague • NW corner of 81" and Sullivan • NE corner of Broadway and Vista • NE corner of 41" and University • NW corner of 81" and University OPTIONS: Consensus to participate in the program with Spokane Valley Arts Council and Spokane Arts and appoint 2026 Mayor and Deputy Mayor to serve on the selection committee or alternatively, reject the offer to participate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to participate with SVAC and Spokane Arts for 12 signal box art wraps and appoint the 2026 Mayor and Deputy Mayor to serve on the selection committee. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: No initial cost to the city to develop and install the art wraps, but the city will need to maintain the wraps after installation. STAFF CONTACTS: Virginia Clough, Legislative Policy Coordinator/Project Manager ATTACHMENTS: Presentation — Signal Box Art Wraps Cl) � O dt C) cn C) FMC) U) U) C) L Q L O a) Q C) m a o � Q a cn a) CDL a) o m a) 0 o 0 m a ■� v C:L T m O � 2 a) � J C)7 O C)� � � L O a)i N x O W O N CD }' E L CO O >' C� a) oo a) _ .m 0 2 _ 0 cm - L u U M :3 N > 0 2 o� 0 o � _ coca a)�' - � ca M o � � •� O � �N ��U o o � N U) O � o U c� No �, � � o a)cn -a E O - — Q •- o O O cn O c }, O C6 a)C6 4 i .� O O •� O Q O �U U U c6 cn _ Q LcnO O L �� O� c� U O U Q Q N Q L C6 O O .. > '— O X O � a)cn O . O � j � L- CL U 4-0-a C6 O C: O C/) .� tf � O O cu m O E C6 O O E+= O to a) w o O LED C6 U to QL m cm � a)O cn � 4-0 m U X O O ,cn CnWCnW0co0cn_0 22 4. �� �"� a)c a)(/) C6 UC6 x L- O U O Cn C6 U i O in � a) cu - •— � M a)4-0 � O _ a)C6 O cu 4-0 O U C6 • C6 � U 4-0 ca 0 C: � a) o L- MimiC6 to C6 � O C6 •0 4� E .� FM N N ci 0 LM am 4-0 U _ C6 c O a ' o- �Qcn cn E E 'cp Q O .O O O C6 U cU a) c CU a) cn -0 N .cn •� E v — cn O O O E 4-0 ' E QO •— O > —0 � CO c6 Q cn 4-0 U O cn 4-0 cn 4-0 C6 cn 4-0 cn Q U CO E O cn m O O U a) O O a) a) -a O cn 4-0 Ln C6 a) U a) O CO cn cn O a O 4-0 O �� .-n CO N O N O E E cn 4-0 c� cn .. ` IDrke{4 a J m� c 'c O c d L w un U v pa uewde4D S N Sulliva ! m d-p 4>pa—A1II^S S FA!IInS S - _ m ¢ s � d 7 r Ptl ""ePtl S ■ a CO �d'use�G�en3 i ¢ v a a N w r � O C y.. CL CL P# yslpma& S Pd 4slPm051 $ L o 03" n d � w d o w w a �' g w f - w c m o0 - s K ° a ova r a _ w , IQ w o•t. -a ra ''` may` '. C7 �. ,1.. cq �r L +0 N� U a) L N� c N a) cn Q cu � 0 O O 4-0 cu cn oO L) N L ■� J +� U ■� a) 0 a) x cn O cn 30 O = to O }' (a a)}i ♦� W ) �_' U m U � V ■ +� O to N a) cu � U O L C) Z > ca � � co cn J• (M) N cn a-+ 4) z CU a) > V/ W CU L � a ) CU 'av , L � 0 L O cu a)� U C-) C: c6 Q � E U) a) O >1 E E .. O a) a) U) U L CD O c6 Ocn I L 4-0 O O CU N .> cu � U C QL C6 = �� v 0 � cn O > Q N Ncu �--+ CO a) a) N cu. N O � N O O L � > �= U cn O � a) ca cN E ca > E � ca a) v, 0 O a):3 -0 L Q O a-> ca L Q a) o .0 },U�c U a a a �.�}, .> O U U � U) U) U) U U) U)c O a) 0- Q cn Cn L CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 16, 2025 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Comprehensive Plan- Land Use Scenarios GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Ordinances: 16-018; 18-014; 19-004; 20-008; 21-014 (adopting and amending Comprehensive Plan) BACKGROUND: The Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A) requires the City to conduct an update of its Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations by the end of December 2026. The update is intended to accommodate a new housing allocation, support responsible growth, provide plans for appropriate infrastructure and environmental protection, update policies and code to be consistent with new State requirements and changing community needs. Washington State and Spokane County have allocated 16,661 housing units to the City of Spokane Valley for the 20-year growth period ending in 2046. The State has additionally required cities to plan for and accommodate housing units affordable to all economic segments of the community in their comprehensive plan updates. Housing types have been categorized by the State as serving certain economic segments (exhibit 1). In response to the housing allocation and providing for all economic segments, three future land use scenarios have been developed and are outlined below. No Action Alternative: This alternative only focuses on state mandates, which become effective automatically even without city action to update local code provisions. This mandate from the state is designed to "preempt" or override local laws, taking effect by default if the local jurisdiction does not adopt its own compliant measures or an equivalent standard. It should be noted that this scenario, "no action" would likely result in non-compliance and potential legal or financial penalties. Scenario A- Limited Rezone + Upzone: • Adds additional housing unit capacity in R1, R2, R3, and R4 (existing low density residential zones), especially in the form of Middle Housing and ADUs under new state guidance. • Identifies moderate density increases (to 32 dwelling units per acre) in MFR, CMU and MU (existing multifamily and mixed -use zones) • Adds multifamily zoning north of Sprague Ave. (through rezoning of certain property in current R4 zone to MFR) • Allows for multifamily in RC zones (up to 32 dwelling units per acre) • Anticipates UGA expansion to accommodate allocated job growth derived through regional planning efforts resulting in a need for more commercial and industrial land Administrative Report for Land Use Scenarios Page t of 2 Scenario B- No Rezone, Stronger Upzone: Adds additional housing unit capacity in RI, R2, R3, and R4 (existing low density residential zones), especially in the form of Middle Housing and ADUs under new state guidance. • Identifies relatively aggressive density increases (to 40 units per acre) in MFR, CMU and MU (existing multifamily and mixed -use zones) • Allows for multifamily in RC zones (up to 40 units per acre) • Anticipates UGA expansion to accommodate allocated job growth derived through regional planning efforts resulting in a need for more commercial and industrial land OPTIONS: Not applicable. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: None. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: There are no anticipated financial impacts. STAFF CONTACT: Steve Roberge, Planning Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1) Housing type by income 2) Land Use Scenarios 3) Land Use Scenarios Presentation Administrative Report for Land Use Scenarios Page 2 of 2 N O U `•, n0 ^W 0 0 a CO O _O 7D 7D Is / ❑ O ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ a 0 0 O co O Ln a Ile 0 O Ltd O M 2 cn 0 � a O 0 o c? O 0 0_ c c a = o m E a M N 0 O N QLO N O N cq O � •L .p N � N � � U o � U y O L LL. � U Q 0 �Q ov a Q u a O > > Q m m au cJ c c 3 o a � O CL Y � � N 0-1\\v.. a 4 Q ¢� di -0 -0 -0 o v Y v m u COL w A > w N 11 1! 1 � � 16R do a fob INS x wit N U •L_ � 1 �a�,r• � \O ` w � G 0�5r o V > rmoo Ji is a '�P�' UDf1W N w yff z r O Wo c; Q► 1 E� �� o NONE C_ 8 o p p6 Q Z 1 .A 0 c< d o a�� i C °3 �U '° b)E 2 o� Q E-0 E� 0 3 c �. 0� �U E c o d 7 Y� a 95 C 4 O Q 4 .O > v Q � O U o- ) n N O Q on N x �v w U c: N C• Q� N } v • � 07 c o O • • Q _ C w < o v a o U Q v 2 O L 14 7 0 v `n U C -d C Q S� h o � 3=¢> Py uoni.IInS 0 3 L rr 30� CD > Y4, o o TA a N Pa A;ISJaniun S > ° d m m 0 w T 3 ueiinw N o C > > D a v aQ m= � a a m � aeu a b m 3 Q o aLD on c o 3 moma a°a-SE 2 Q7 'c O O_ 4. cp V `z 00 GAADO u Q u Q b u u Q ro c G 4 Q` •e u `� •• O N a a U_ s o e>> ° o U o E o E u E a •E � o o a ` g a ISm O^ O � , 'rL H N s7 'a K O y- N 6 a&: •e rc `L `� V.0 S C Z d d 1 1 1 1 1 1 Q t °ao o ��� o v a3,c� ao my D' = o U j � UQ) E E a) rnE p C 0� �-a�T v dE-3Ea �536Qo>>0_ I w 0�0C aQo<�o � E E O �� p U� s o� o=aaa a a°06 0 a m m v o a U a CL CL Q, cc PO- c o o; r x U o m IL n �° w �J a N � Q7 !SA _ O U>- Duo N O N Q >�a Pd..4s)aniun S m m Q w 3 4— a t) N W'a uollnw N w Z z c a� L O� E :2 ��-71 6 a U = EO� (D U N N of! U �: (U O C Q 6(D -p -0 U r a-j Ln a-j O ° m (n o Q O N O O N N Ln 0 E -cU OC � U N N N � m 0 °6 U -0 D EE j Q O J N }' U Q O a w U m • • • Z Q c� a f w z Q J !# H, - ;!/ � ! co � $ ® $ � E :L Ln _ \ r / $ 'E o $ ® / g z N ii : = 7 � k 4 I \ 2 � t coE2 2 $ m LU $ 2 / 2 ® �tn _ 6 $ t � z _ -0 % � $ \ u / 0 E i 0 2 $ E m 2 4) Z w '� 7 q / $ ® \ m $ 4 2 ./0 E / 0 u 0 m / ujw < % O L U u 0 CO c 2� 7 •- $ 7 2•q 2 = 2 q / 7 w $ 7 E / 2 F / - / ? / u 7/ E q / L� � M 0 c m \ � � E N 2 E_ / / / w 3 2 2 $ 0 U m m 2 LL L n E F, — �ga r a 1 � d C O s > N U N •� z w 3 ULr, o CO '- W m M CD Z D UJ t� t E u Q O a-+ tn N O crn ZW N •� O m Q J uj N N 4 o J LnLn E C w aj 3 4 CO m •° > _0 0 7 0 U � Q Ln N 0 O O� - x Z E O c O Q d d m W +, p _ M `� > O T Ln a U a E 0 0� . Z g �c 0 LL z 0 L n� W Q O ,x v W I O 0 O O � N O Ln � (6 U O O O � Ln E E E RC CO O a Z ppw CO CO ♦♦W v, Z g �c 0 LL z 0 L Ln :3 :3 O O _ -C Ln O O N O N U Ln N Ln N O Ln Ln U Ln Ln a) O C- E Q m O N O 0 L N E W CA I ra \w W CO CO W C/) CL J W i o W Z J -W CO2 D O 00 Z W C) Z W W W W 2W LL ®LL 00 0 Q O i ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ cn ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Q In ❑ a a° 0 N T- a 3° 0 O ■ O M m m U L N E E O U CO U O � O m aO L, z > W U U E m CO O w Cf) O cn o D z Q o p� o �V V, ILLL U a o x 0 W pC W ._ E m M -a : -- U U z = O c -0 N O c -J m (n C) 0 w 0 = L _ M � LO N a w O w w N O; O w N %O %O 0.2 V N ; Q N N LO �� � r CC E � r < N 4 M�i N �CX ta Q. W s N C a a aD 4 _ O IL = 0 0 0 m o6-� 0 0 o � r 0 O O c m c p E E 0 O O N N - O a 0 5 w w w > � O : = 0 >) U) U O O cn m Q +; M U +� cn X_ E :3 m O a N •- E '4-, X E ♦. .. V O E ♦ � '4 O(6 > U) U x Q m - Es 4-), 4 o o N >) QW O O U ♦♦^^ co 0 (a) 0 a)E � U� ♦W V♦ G) � 0 X ) (a)C M O L N N O N O U) aE (6 M - 4-j + O c U) ON 0-p NN -C O L.-U a� U U O �, E C O T .. .0 N + U O — N U)ppig� m O ( -0 U) 'cn V (6 4- U W� •E J � O _0 Z W — .. � � �(D cn p � m i U) Z - '4J •i cn (a)� 4-0 0-(a)U •i U)O � O a) Q r- �C)a r-�Q O p� Q - O V V V Z (A (A . \\ k; . pƒy )!> -) 5ƒk/ ` /)§/ )o # os \ �.■� \(§\ , \ 3+ : - ■ _}/ y \]f75 oo ��� __:\\;)\ ) f{ A \\\}}\\ i4i'i ~` s.�\11���� is « �■ . > �. �«�.�� �j■`� -&� . /\ ��\\ ■ r , � d / - « � ' , . % < _ � �� - w + - ( lea |� ee � a } 2 : l . - � � § - �a me, \ s \\ \\ \\ 5 \ @ ` 2 �\ � �� ■ Q {} t■ , \ C m. ■ ��■ ■ E\\ 0 [\ filing � m UU m E a) a E _ U)LO U Q) (D m U a) m U M Q ::) � n r m E m� U�-U) � U) o � Q -C -0 N t O p a O O Q6-O p L U OU >3 Q a E a E a 0 0 O+ n N�,.�c- cUEoa W6 3 C) QIhI � � c a i o I ■ ru m u Q � (6 �,�_ M (1) > LL U)U) �-02 C o O o 4- M +-) a(>D a > m Q Q ID aQ >� L u ° o .o — � m 3 �C3 T 3 O1 a 2 n u 'p C- j.` O U o H U Oa 8 = o o v �O-Op Q `u 0 a II m o NO o 0�03 x a m t r n a 6 v o 75 o®�ooaon0 a a a m t\ o Y O {� N o 1F Y o rc z z F f U 0 0 _ -G + i Q Pa uolhW N Q c0 ° cep TO � O 5 O O da>o O � U) � Q n 0-0 m j >, _ U U v m -0 — E L M — U)m U — O O � +, -0 cn Q U O�_ �n m 0 m L a� a� .0' 0 M a s E� um ° w U.� m.� a-C-0 u a aQ o° u oaa� _0'O u c c a o ° N U ° v Do c o u -° o'u?3¢ ac E�> Q O O N E O y O a �E�Eo �E6ao U aaa� v-oo v32 n u C U- .S U E c a< 0�2¢-O° v ° oa ya° o r E _ n a o g o U i a°°o — 0 O cN is Ir v o 0 • �i 1�� � y O H ° rcZ s i i U rc G a P� uoni,IlnS . d � w m ID m N m a a � W a q Qo O 1p 4 �Q Q >° �a i � ; o �G z o° p��ppa F�°• � � Pa AJivani,un S r. n 4— a a orb uo n Q II W N N a LL lul°o ' ZD c o }2 2 m =o u m 7 Q) �-6E ao c -O O`0 aa °ca�O 3�0 mo o E a o�° U E -0o �aU -0- �x-° W a) } O p C O 6 0� -a a U L / vVi�3Z� r