Loading...
2011, 12-27 Regular Meeting Minutes MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meetings Formal Meeting Format Tuesday,December 27,2011 Mayor Towey called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Attendance: City Staff: Tom Towey,Mayor Mike Jackson,City Manager Gary Schimmels,Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell, City Attorney Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Mike Stone,Parks &Recreation Director Dean Grafos, Councilmember Neil Kersten,Public Works Director Chuck Heiler, Councilmember John Hohman, Community Dcv. Director Arne Woodard, Councilmember Carolbelle Branch,Public Information Officer Carrie Koudelka,Deputy City Clerk Absent: Brenda Grassel, Councilmember INVOCATION: Pastor John Vander walker of Community of Christ Church led the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Towey led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Deputy City Clerk Koudelka called the roll, all Councilmembers were present except Councilmember Grassel. It was moved by Councilntentber Grafos, seconded, and unanimously agreed to excuse Cottncilmeniber Grassel from the meeting. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded, and unanimously agreed to approve the agenda. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: Deputy City Clerk Koudelka administered the oath of office to Councilmembers-Elect Dean Grafos and Ben Wick. Mayor Towey administered the oath of office to Councilmember-Elect Arne Woodard. Mayor Towey then read and presented a plaque to Councilmember Gothmann in appreciation for the years of service he has given to the City as both a Planning Commissioner and Councilmember. COMMITTEE,BOARD,LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS: Councilmember Woodard gave no report. Councilmember Gothmann said he attended the SNAP meeting, the Spokane Valley Employee Appreciation dinner, the Spokane Valley Chamber breakfast, and the SNAP annual party. Councilmember Grafos gave no report. Deputy Mayor Schimmels said he attended the Spokane Valley Chamber Transportation Committee meeting, the grand opening for Walmart, and toured the City's facilities with staff and Council. Councilmember Blather said he attended the Walmart opening ceremony, the Washington Transportation Commission meeting where they reported they sent out questionnaires to 1000 people in the state regarding their feelings on roads, infrastructure and preservation to try to come up with a means to take care of preservation of roads. He said that while Spokane Valley is doing fine now, we need to consider our road conditions and how we will address concerns so that Spokane Valley is not in the same situation as many other cities around the state. Council Regular Meeting 12-27-2011 Page 1 of 7 Approved by Council:02-14-2012 MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Towey said he attended the city tour and visited the different areas and projects of the City. He said he also attended the Transportation Council meeting and the Walmart groundbreaking. • PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Towey invited public comments. Margaret Mortz, 3420 S. Ridgeview Drive - Ms. Mortz said she would like the signal at Progress and Sprague to be accessible and more compatible with ADA requirements and with future economic development. She said the December 17 edition of the Spokesman Review had an article that said the City is considering removal of the current signal due to the decline in traffic volume. She said according to the ADA, people with mobility problems have a right to public transportation and the signal at Sullivan is not accessible. She said the City should focus on enhancing the infrastructure for new business. She said if a new business moves in to the former Yokes building, they will need a protected left turn lane for access. She said under ADA it just takes one person with a vision or mobility problem to file a grievance with the Department of Justice and is conditioned upon access to public transit. She said there are bus stops at Progress and ADA compliance is required when there is any major construction and she said the reconstruction of Sprague qualifies as a trigger for ADA compliance. 1. CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. a. Approval of the following claim vouchers: VOUCHER LIST DATE VOUCHER NUMBERS: TOTAL AMOUNT 12/09/2011 24567-24585 $67,858.61 12/09/2011 24566; 2458624630; 1205110013 $363,416.72 12/19/2011 24631-24684 $379,643.52 12/20/2011 3780-3783 $6,441.00 12/21/2011 24685-24708 $56,210.27 GRAND TOTAL $873,570.12 b.Approval of Payroll for period ending December 15,2011: $267,719.89 c. Approval of December 6, 2011 Council Study Session Minutes d.Approval of December 13, 2011 Council Meeting Minutes It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the consent agenda. NEW BUSINESS: 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending SVMC 20.80.030(F), Boundary Line Adjustment - Marty Palaniuk After Deputy City Clerk Koudelka read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to advance the ordinance amending SVMC 20.80.030(F) to a second reading. Planning Technician Palaniuk said on December 13, 2011, he reported to Council on the Boundaty Line Adjustment and the requirements in this Code Text Amendment. He said the amendment allows the City to process simple boundary line adjustments without requiring a record of survey and provides flexibility in determining if a survey is necessary after evaluating the proposal. Mayor Towey invited public comment; none offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed..None. Motion carried. 3. Proposed Resolution 11-012 Repealing and Replacing Resolution 06-025, Council Health Benefits— Caty Driskell It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to approve Resolution 11-012 repealing and replacing Resolution 06-025 specifying the insurance plan and health related benefits. City Manager Jackson said Council discussed this topic at the December 13, 2011 meeting and he explained the Council Regular Meeting 12-27-2011 Page 2 of 7 Approved by Council:02-14-2012 resolution would accurately reflect the practice that has been in place since 2003 incorporation. He said the first change is in Section 1, second paragraph adding that the City will pay 100 percent of either benefit plan for Councilmembers. The second change is in the third paragraph removing a reference to Councilmembers regarding the Premium Only Program because Council would not have a need for that program due to not paying for their benefits. Also, the words "and Councilmembers"were added to the last sentence of Section 6. The new resolution also breaks out the first paragraph of Section 1 into three separate paragraphs for clarity. Mayor Towey invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 4.Mayoral Appointments of Planning Commissioners—Mayor Towey Mayor Towey said there were twelve applicants for the two openings on the Planning Commission and he then read the purpose of the Planning Commission, He said he interviewed all twelve applicants and was impressed with their qualifications, which made for a difficult decision.It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schinunels and seconded to approve the Mayoral appointments of Lewis Higgins and Steven Neill to the Planning Commission. Mayor Towey invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Towey invited public comments; no comments were offered. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 5. Snow Plowing Policy—Neil Kersten Public Works Director Kersten explained this item is on the agenda at the request of Councilmember Grafos. He said he will outline the policy and Council can discuss ally changes they want to make. He then explained the priorities as outlined in the packet. Mr. Kersten said we have four priorities: Priorities 1 and 2 are the arterials, Priority 3 relates to the hilly areas and Priority 4 is the flat, residential valley floor. He said under Priority 4, the term "substantially inhibited" as it relates to residential plowing is confusing.He said the way his department determines when traffic flow is substantially inhibited is when snow accumulates to four inches or more, and they look at a number of factors such as the amount of snow, the number of complaints we receive on our complaint system, and personal observation by staff. He said it varies greatly across the city, but he said as two-wheel drive cars start to have problems getting around they will do a full plow, primarily with residential contractors. Councilmember Hafner asked what "substantially inhibited" means. Mr. Kersten said when there is four inches or more of snow and we expect to get more snow, and when we start receiving a number of complaints from people having trouble getting around in various areas, his staff looks at those areas and then he talks to the City Manager to make a decision about doing a full plow. He said the contract road graders plow the residential areas because by the time we order them plowed the snow is very compact and hard so they need a grader. Councilmember Hafner said clarification is in order. Mr. Kersten agreed that the term is confusing. Mayor Towey asked if it would be beneficial to delete the word "substantially." Mr.Kersten agreed. City Manager Jackson said this plan means whatever the Council wants it to mean. He said the intent was to balance the cost of snow removal and the impact to residential citizens. He said not all citizens agree as to when we should plow. Mr. Kersten said that removing the word would not affect how they do business and would not affect the budget. He said each time we plow the residential streets the cost is roughly between $60,000 and $80,000, and if snowfall continues, the cost is significantly higher. Councilmember Grafos said that figure is the cost for a full plow. Mr. Kersten said it is actually for the residential streets only and he can get Councilmember Grafos those numbers if he would like. Council Regular Meeting 12-27-2011 Page 3 of 7 Approved by Council:02-14-2012 Mr. Kersten said that de-icing Priorities 1, 2, and 3 pertain to bridges, intersections, and hillsides respectively. He said depending on the condition,when snow develops on the roadways they may or may not fully de-ice the entire length of the arterial. He said we have improved our methods in de-icing arterials and intersections and we are now able to de-ice Sprague with just one truck and it is able to do all three lanes with one pass, which makes it more efficient and keeps our cost lower. Before it snows they will use the liquid de-ice, but once there is snow on the ground they use the granular. He said as long as they don't get rain, the granular de-ice will stay on the roads for a few days and continue to work and is very cost effective. He said they generally don't de-ice Priority 4 roads other than a few areas where there are steep hills and a few roads around schools where people are stopping and dropping off children. He said traffic is typically slower in the residential neighborhoods so there is not much need for de-icing. Mr. Kersten said it takes two full days with all trucks and graders running to do a City-wide full plow. Councilmember Grafos asked Mr. Kersten to provide him with firm numbers on plowing costs.Mr. Kersten said on November 27, 2010, the cost for contract road graders to plow Priority 4 residential streets was $63,000. He said they did a second plow in early December 2010 that cost $58,000, and in February 2011. they plowed most of the city but weren't able to do all the roads before the conditions changed and that cost was $49,000. Councilmember Grafos asked what the budget is for plowing through December. Mr. Kersten explained we have an annual budget amount of$520,000 per calendar year so it is for January, February, March, and then November and December. Whatever is left if we do not spend all of the$520,000 goes back into the street fund. Mr. Kersten said by comparison, Spokane only uses liquid de-ice and they spend about $1,500 for each Iane mile and have a $2.8 million budget. Spokane Valley has about half as many streets and we spend $519 per lane mile which is 1/3 the cost of Spokane.He said we also don't have the same level of service as Spokane but he thinks we're fairly efficient. Spokane Valley has five employees plus contract services where Spokane has forty-nine employees. Mr. Kersten said if Council wants to propose changes, he will provide a cost estimate for those changes. He said last year we did not receive many complaints and he felt we provided a good level of service at a very good cost, but with more money in the budget we can make it better. He recommends they remove the word "substantially" in the Priority 4 residential plowing but otherwise he thinks the plan is fine and people seem to be satisfied with the level of service.All of our de-ice trucks and plows are equipped with GPS for tracking their location. City Manager Jackson commented that residential streets were designed to be just a few blocks from arterials for easy access. Councilmember Grafos asked why the level 1, 2, and 3 priorities use four inches as the indication to plow vs. the threshold of"inhibited" in the Priority 4 level. He said if there are four inches of snow in the valley floor, we should plow it because citizens are paying for it. Mayor Towey said he thinks if we define when we plow in black and white and then abide by that every time, the costs will go up. He said in reviewing the comments and complaints we received he thinks we're doing a pretty good job,but if our plan says we plow everything when we get four inches of snow, it takes away our flexibility and there are too many variables to be restricted to plowing at a specified depth, such as a projected warming trend. He said he likes the flexibility we currently have. He said we should continue to monitor the plan but when it comes down to it, someone has to make the decision on when we actually plow. Councilmember Hafner said winter is upon us and this should have been discussed two or three months ago. City Manager Jackson said this plan was reviewed and adopted by Council last year and we can bring this back for review and adoption each year if it is the desire of Council. Mr. Kersten asked for Council direction. Councilmember Hafner asked when they normally discuss this plan and City Manager Jackson said this should be discussed in advance of the budget adoption discussion. He recommends bringing the plan back to Council for discussion with the changes recommended and said Council can think about any other changes they want to propose before bringing it back again for adoption. Mr. Kersten said to let him know if he can get them any other information so he will have it Council Regular Meeting 12-27-20I 1 Page 4 of 7 Approved by Council:02-14-2012 for Council. Mayor Towey said it would be interesting to see how many positive and negative comments we get from citizens. Mr. Jackson said he would try to get that information from our service request system. 6. Pines Road Project#0061 Consultant Agreement with Transpo—Neil Kersten Public Works Director Kersten said this project is funded by a grant by CMAQ which is a federal grant for Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality. This project is for the engineering design services to install fiber optic cable, traffic cameras and connect traffic signals to the Spokane Regional Transportation Management Center from Sprague to Trent on Pines. The quote from Transpo Group is $199,763 and the grant is for $1,801,900 with a match from the City of$281,221. Mr. Kersten said this contract amount is within the City Manager's authority but because it is so close to the $200,000 threshold, they wanted to bring it to Council because there is a good chance there may be a change order along the way. Councilmember Woodard asked if this ITS system is going to control the three intersections mentioned on page 7 as not being included in the scope of the project or if the controllers are new enough at those intersections that they do not need to be replaced. Mr. Kersten said he would find the answer and bring that back to Council. He said he thinks it should include control of every intersection from Sprague to Trent but he will verify that and bring the information back for Council.It was the consensus of Council to bring this back to the January 10, 2012 meeting for consideration. Mayor Towey called for a break at 7:16p.m. The meeting reconvened at 7:30 p.m. 7. Street Maintenance Contract Renewal—Neil Kersten Public Works Director Kersten said that Council had requested he give Council more information regarding this contract and he is hopeful that he's brought back all the information as requested for Council to see if the current contract is reasonable. He then went through his slide presentation. He said Poe's cost per square yard for preservation work on average is $12.83. He used the Broadway Safety Project bid as a good comparison of competitive bids for street preservation. Poe was the low bidder on that project at $11.70 per square yard, Inland Asphalt bid $14.35, Cameron-Reilly bid $16.00 and Spokane Rock bid $19.10. He said in using this comparison, he thinks the current contract with Poe for street maintenance is very competitive to current bids. Councilmember Grafos asked if there is a warranty on the grind and overlay projects. Mr. Kersten said under the Washington State Department of Transportation contract, there is no warranty when we receive federal funds for the project, but if we are using local fluids we usually have a warranty. The current Poe contract uses local funds and, typically whenever there is a problem, they fix it. Mr. Kersten then compared the 2011/12 on-call grader bid to Poe's current snow removal contract. Poe's hourly rate is $157.15 per hour. Seven bids came in ranging from $120/hour to $200/hour. He said they granted contracts to six of those seven bidders, bud did not contract with Spokane Rock because their bid of$200/hour and $700 mobilization rate was nearly twice as much as the other bids. He said under the current Poe contract, they mobilize one time and then the trucks are on our Iot and ready to go as soon as we need them with no additional mobilization charges. He said in comparing Poe's contract rates for 2011 and 2012, the overall 2012 rate has gone down 6.8%. He said he thinks Poe has provided excellent service, they are familiar with the streets and City operations, are efficient and cost effective and have been plowing our streets for the last three years. He recommends renewing Poe's contract for 2012 and honoring the seven-year intent of the contract as long as they continue to provide excellent service and their rates remain competitive. He said he thinks it improves the bid if a contractor knows they will have a long-term contract as long as they provide good service.He said this contract runs through 2014 and is due to re-bid for 2015. Councilmember Grafos said there is nothing that says the City has to pay more than the Washington State Prevailing Wage rate for a contract so we should not have to pay the $1.50 more per hour that Poe is Council Regular Meeting 12-27-2011 Page 5 of 7 Approved by Council:02-14-2012 paying their foremen or superintendents. Mr. Kersten said the prevailing wage rates are for the operators and that foremen and superintendents get paid more because they are supervising the operators. City Manager Jackson said the prevailing wage rates are the minimum rates of pay, they can be paid more but not less. Councilmember Grafos said he thinks any additional pay over the prevailing wage rates that the contractor pays their workers should not be reflected in the wages but should be in their profit and overhead. Mr. Kersten said that is not how the contract was bid. The City has to pay their cost plus 22 percent overhead and profit and it is likely that if the City said they would not pay anything over state prevailing wages the contractor would shift those costs and raise the 22 percent overhead and profit amount to cover the costs. Councilmember Grafos said the next contract should have the provision that the City will not pay over the state prevailing wage. Mr. Kersten said that is up to Council but this is a standard contract. City Manager Jackson said we can look at that but he doesn't know that it will change the overall bid amount and the lowest total cost is what we look at in awarding a contract, Mr. Kersten said he doesn't believe the extra pay belongs in cost and overhead and said again that this is a standard cost-plus contract. He said it is up to Council to deviate from the normal process, but he agrees with Mr. Jackson that it would not change anything because the contractor will simply slide that cost into overhead and profit and raise that rate to cover their costs. Councilmember Woodard said he thinks if we re-bid it in today's market the cost and overhead rate of 22 percent would be closer to 18-19 percent. He also said there are provisions in the RFP that run the contract cost up considerably such as the five-year or newer provision for equipment and he said no contractor amortizes new equipment over a five-year period and they can't bid a project with owned, newer equipment. He said in section 4.3 on page seventeen of the RFP, contractors have asked him the purpose for the requirement of using equipment that is no more than five years old. Mayor Towey said we are in a seven-year contract with annual renewals based on specific factors such as performance. He said that if after the seven year period Council wants to reduce the term to four or five renewal options,Council can do that but we are in a seven-year contract and he said he thinks there is a benefit to a company to have that stability as long as they perform for the citizens. He said if we start to bid every year, they will lose that stability and he thinks we should continue to monitor the contract each year but honor this contract. Councilmember Gothmann said it is important to have quality work as well as low cost. Mr. Kersten said he can make some changes in the next bid but even if we get a bid with lower prices, the overall cost could still be more due to less efficiency of a new contractor or various other factors. Councilmember Hafner said he doesn't know if it would be fair to Poe if we were to re-bid this contract now. He said he thinks we should move forward with the Poe contract. Mayor Towey said we should bring it back for a motion consideration. Mr. Kersten asked if they want to do a short-term change order to the current contract for snow removal to get through the remainder of the year and there were no objections from Council. It was the consensus of Council to bring the contract back on January 10, 2012,for consideration. 8. Sweeping Contract Renewal—Neil Kersten Public Works Director Kersten said this contract is similar to the street maintenance and bid about the same time. He said in this renewal they have requested a two percent increase for 2012. He explained that comparisons for the sweeping rates are more difficult than street maintenance because there are not many sweepers to compare. He said he thinks the prices are reasonable, the current contractor provides good service and we are able to sweep more road than we have in the past. He said he recommends we renew the contract. Councilmember Hafner asked what other agencies provide sweeping services. Mr. Kersten said there are very few and none in Spokane Valley at this scale of sweeping. Councilmember Grafos said that when this contract comes back for consideration he would like to approve a one percent increase rather than the requested two percent. Mr. Kersten said he can discuss that with the contractor but that he would like consensus from the Council that that is the direction of the full Council. Mayor Towey said he doesn't Council Regular Meeting 12-27-2011 Page 6 of 7 Approved by Council:02-14-2012 think two percent is out of line. Councilmember Woodard said one percent is closer in line with what he thinks it should be with regard to maintaining and repairing equipment. Councilmember Gothmann said Social Security recipients are receiving a 3.6 percent increase because the consumer price index is going up this year and repair prices have not gone down, Councilmember Hafner asked what the cost difference is between one and two percent for this contract. City Manager Jackson said the difference is $4,500. He also said it is the responsibility of staff to negotiate the terms of a contract and to negotiate the best contract possible. He said that doesn't always mean the lowest cost, but takes into consideration service levels provided. He said it is not for Council to make counter-offers, but he understands the intent of Council to ask for a lower rate. He said staff will talk with the contractor to see if anything can be done to lower their requested rate of increase.Mayor Towey said the contract will come back on Janucny 10, 2012 for consideration. 9.Advance Agenda—Mayor Towey City Manager Jackson asked that Council save any information from their packet if they want to retain it for a future meeting because we are trying to use less paper in the packets. He said we will continue to provide electronic links to the information on our website. He also mentioned a letter we received from the County to the City of Spokane regarding a termination notice issued to Spokane should they decide to transport their prisoners to another jail that might impact the cost to the County or other jail partners,the County would have the ability to renegotiate and recalculate those costs. INFORMATION ONLY(will not be discussed or reported): The Senske Maintenance Contract Renewal,Department Reports and Street Preservation items were for information only and were not discussed or reported. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m. r ; AT ,4 S/ Thomas E.Towey,Mayor ristine Bainbridge, Cr Clerk ff Council Regular Meeting 12-27-2011 Page 7 of 7 Approved by Council:02-14-2012 GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT SIGN-IN SHEET SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: December 27, 2011 GENERAL CITIZEN COMMENTS YOUR SPEAKING TIME WILL GENERALLY BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTE: Please si n in if ou wish to make i ublic comments. NAME TOPIC OF CONCERN YOUR COMPLETE TELEPHONE PLEASE PRINT YOU WILL SPEAK ADDRESS ABOUT EffillaPI i t t•3' / �' Please note that once information is entered on this form, it becomes a public record subject to public disclosure. NO. BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON IN THE MATTER OF THE INTERLOCAL ) AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR THE ) NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING PROVISION OF DETENTION SERVICES ) BETWEEN THE CITY OF SPOKANE AND ) SPOKANE COUNTY APPROVED UNDER ) RESOLUTION NO. 11-0310 ) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington (hereinafter referred to sometimes as the "Board") pursuant to RCW 42.30.080, that a special meeting will be held by the Board at 1:30 P.M. on Friday, December 23, 2011, or as soon as possible thereafter at the Spokane County Commissioners Briefing Room, lst Floor, Spokane County Courthouse, located at 1 116 W. Broadway, Spokane, Washington. The Board may conduct the special meeting via phone conference. The purpose of the special meeting will be for the Board to discuss and possibly take action on the following item: 1. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR THE PROVISION OF DETENTION SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF SPOKANE AND SPOKANE COUNTY APPROVED UNDER RESOLUTION NO. 11-0310. The Board reserves the right to hold an executive session on the above listed item. The terminology"action"as used herein shall mean deliberate, discuss, consider, review,evaluate, make a collective decision or take a vote on the above listed item. Any person may appear at the time; place and date set forth herein above and observe the action(s) of the Board of County Commissioners. No public testimony will be accepted. The Board reserves the right to ask staff questions regarding the above item. The public is not entitled to attend an executive session. All meetings and hearings are conducted in facilities that are readily accessible to everyone. Additional information with regard to the accessibility of the Spokane County Commissioners Briefing Room, or notification of an ADA accommodation should be made to Daniela Erickson, Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners at(509)477-2265. APPROVED BY THE BO ' �day of December 2011. N f o g C©1s�‘kk' �_, y AL FRENC ,CHAIR ATTEST: {41 Ate' .�� r 1.1" A Atli -74 Daniela Erickson, Clerk of the Board Page 1 of 1 SPOK .• �' C O U lit `T Y OFFIC13 OF COUNTY Co11 u rlssIONERS TODD MIELKE,1ST DISTRICT•MARK RICHARD,2ND DISTRICT•AL FRENCH,3RD DISTRICT December 23,2011 VIA HAND DELIVERY VIA CERTIFIED MAIL Mary B.Verner,Mayor Washington State Office of Financial Management City of Spokane Insurance Building 808 West Spokane Falls Blvd. 302 Sid Snyder Avenue SW,Suite 300 Spokane,Washington 99201-3335 Olympia,Washington 98501-1342 Re: Notice of Termination of "INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR THE PROVISION OF DETENTION SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF SPOKANE AND SPOKANE COUNTY" Spokane County Resolution No. 11-0310 ORP 2011-0193 Dear Mayor Verner:. Pursuant to Resolution No. 11-0310 and ORP 2011-0193, the City of Spokane (the "City") and Spokane County (the "County") executed a document entitled "INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR THE PROVISION OF DETENTION SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF SPOKANE AND SPOKANE COUNTY" ("the "Detention Services Agreement"). Under the Detention Services Agreement, the County through the Sheriff agreed to provide cost effective detention and correction services to the City for a three(3)year timeframe commencing January 1,2010. Section No.9 of the Detention Services Agreement provides in part: SECTION NO. 9:ADVISORY GROUP • ...Notices: If either Party has a desire to make substantial changes which may affect the responsibilities or cost of the other, the Party must provide no Iess than 180 days written notice to the Detention Services Advisory Group chairman and all other members of the advisory group from each jurisdiction of their intentions(s). Consistent with Section No. 9, on October 4, 2011, Rick Romero, Internal Auditor, send an electronic communication to Captain John McGrath,Jail/Geiger Corrections Director. It provided in part: Ted is on his way to Indianapolis and asked if I would send you both an e-mail to start the 180 day clock running as we discussed at last week's Stakeholder's meeting. The 180 day notice is for the purpose of letting the partner municipalities know that we are exploring the possibility of contracting with an outside corrections facility for up to 50 daily inmates (ADP)... Subsequent to Mr. Romero's electronic communication, on November 23, 2011, Howard Delaney, City Attorney, confirmed Mr.Romero's communication and advised James Emacio, Chief Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, as follows: 1116 WEST BROADWAY AVENUE • SPOKANE,WASHINGTON 99260-0100 • (509)477-2265 • Mary B.Verner December 23,2011 Page 2 The October 4, 2011, e-mail from Rick Romero was sent to directly John McGrath, as Chairman of the DSAG. The communication was confirmation of the oral notice of the City's intention to partially move to a less expensive incarceration alternative provided to the DSAGF during its initial organizational meeting in September of this year.... Section No 4 of the Detention Services Agreement additionally provides in part as follows: SECTION 4: TERM ...If a Party desires to terminate the relationship created by this Agreement, it must provide not less than 180 days written notice to the other PARTIES and to the Washington State Office of Financial Management. The notice shall state the grounds for termination and the specific plans for accommodating the affected inmate population. Consistent with the provisions of Section No.4 of the Detention Services Agreement,this correspondence is intended by the County to provide the City with 180 days legal notice of termination of the Detention Agreement. This action is being taken solely for the purposes of preserving the County's right to recalculate County's Jail service costs that likely will increase if the City actually follows through on its October 4, 2011, determine to reduce its ADP in the Jail by fifty (50) individuals through housing its inmates outside Spokane County. The County's preliminary analysis indicates that the number of inmates under the City's jurisdiction capable of relocation will be deminimus and thus will not provide any efficiency in our regional system. As a result,it is probable that the fixed costs per inmate for those inmates who remain in the County's Jail will increase, requiring the County to adjust the rates to our local partners. By issuing this notice, Spokane County wishes to preserve its right to adjust the rates should further analysis support our initial findings. In addition, we wish to express our concerns regarding any decision by the City to house local citizens (post and pre-sentenced) in another community, with the hopes of dissuading you from taking such action. We find that the counties presently offering contracts for jail beds are requiring "put or pay contracts" which obligate the cities to a pay for a minimum number regardless if they are filled. We also understand that these counties offer few or no applicable programs to address the underlying causes of criminal behavior,nor would they be capable of providing re-entry services due to their lack of proximity to Spokane. Many of the classifications of inmates being considered by the City for relocation are now eligible for or are presently engaged in programs reducing repeat offenders, increase public safety and delivering better justice sooner. Though the City may realize modest short tenn_savings by housing inmates in that must be addressed as one unified region if we are to be successful. Additionally, unforeseen processing costs, legal challenges and public outcry will likely result in these estimates being overstated and short-lived. By dislocating arrestees from their community (some prior to conviction if we are to understand the City's present direction) you will be separating them from their families and from effective adequate legal representation. The impact to an abandoned child or spouse,not to mention the innocent accused,would be profound. Mary B. Verner December 23,2011 Page 3 Finally, such a decision by the City would reverse course on our shared commitment to paradigm changing reforms and will have untold long-term ramifications; both financial and societal. We strongly encourage you to reconsider this direction, During the 180 day tinreframe provided for in this correspondence, the County looks forward to working with the City to reassess its determination to reduce its ADP in the Jail by fifty(50) nidividuals and house them in another community as well as that decision's effect on the fixed costs of operating the County Jail. Very truly yours, Al French,Chair Todd Mielke,Vice-Chair Mark Richard,Commissioner cc: Detention Services Advisory Committee Members John McGrath,Detention Services Commander, jmcgrath`,spokanecounty.org Christopher Wiese, Detention Services Finance Mgr.,cwiese @spokanecounty.org Guy Cavender,Cost Recovery-Spokane County g-eavender@spokanecountv.org Marshall Farnell, CEO,Budget and Finance/Spokane Co.,mfarnell�,spokanecounty.org Bob Wrigley,Budget and Finance Director—Spokane,bwrigley @spokanecounty.org Thomas E. `Ted' Danek,Jr.—Spokane City Administrator,tdanek@spokanecity.org spokanecity.org Cary Driskell,City of Spokane Valley Attorney,CDriskell @spokanevalley.org Morgan Koudelka, City of Spokane Valley Sr.Admin Analyst,mkoudelka @spokanevalley.org Rick Romero,City of Spokane Internal Auditor,rromero @spokanecity.org Deby Cragun,City of Deer Park-Clerk/Treasurer,dcragun;,ci.deerpark.wa.us John Higgins,Mayor of Medical Lake,mayor@nedical-lake.org Albert Tripp, City of Airway Heights-City Manager,atripp@cawh.org Arlene Fisher,City of Cheney-City Administrator,afisher@cityofcheney.org Tom Trulove,Mayor, City of Cheney,ttrulove@cityofcheney.org Perla Duncan,JRA,Administrator for Region 1, peria.duncan @dshs.wa.gov Rob M. Smith,JRA, smithdmx`,dshs.wa.gov • Margaret Mortz: 3420 S. Ridgeview Dr.,Spokane Valley,WA 99206; 893-1472 To: City Council Members, Mr. Jackson, and M . Note, 7 /V/6,17/'? //// From: Margaret Mortz 7 -X1"1 Re: There needs to be an accessible signal at Progress and Sprague to be compatible with ADA standards and future economic development The Spokesman Review had an article reporting that the signal at Progress and Sprague was under consideration to be removed. (Dec. 17, page V4). It indicated that, after the closure of Yokes, vehicle traffic was reduced below the level requiring a signal. It also indicated that pedestrian volume was hard to measure. There are other factors that the City must consider in addition to vehicle traffic volume. I wish to address two issues: 1. The ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) requires that blind or mobility- impaired persons have safe access to public bus stops, which requires an accessible signal at Progress and Sprague since there is not an accessible signal at Sullivan. This requirement will be activated by the Sprague reconstruction. 2. Infrastructure for new business developments at the Progress/Sprague intersection should be enhanced not degraded. Left turns into/from the former Yoke's property should be done via a left-turn-protected signal at Progress. New businesses at that site would have as much need for customer safety as Yoke's had. ADA compliance for the blind or mobility-impaired pedestrians The metric for pedestrian traffic is simple in terms of legal compliance with the ADA. It takes only one pedestrian with a vision or mobility disability who is denied safe access to the public bus stops to file a legal grievance with the Dept. of Justice. '1 Margaret Mortz:3420 5. Ridgeview Dr.,Spokane Valley,WA 99206;893-1472 People with disabilities have a legal right for safe access to public transportation across multilane, busy, public arterials. There are bus stops on Sprague at Progress that a blind person or mobility-impaired person needs to reach by crossing Sprague. Major new road improvements, such as Sprague reconstruction, trigger the ADA requirement for accessibility. The signals at Sullivan/Sprague were not designed to be accessible to the blind or mobility impaired even though new construction was recently done. I am a "qualified person with a mobility disability" and I am making a formal request for an accessible signal at Progress and Sprague. This is not just about one person. There are new housing developments along 4th street in that neighborhood that have the type of small ranchers which tend to appeal to people over 55. This increases the potential pedestrian traffic by people with low vision or mobility problems. Part of the desirability of that location is access to public transportation. An accessible signal at Progress/Sprague should have auditory timing signals for blind persons. Timing should allow people with mobility problems enough time to safely cross or (at least) reach a safe-haven spot on the median. Left turns should be controlled to prevent cars from cutting in front of pedestrians. There should also be explicit signage to warn right turners against pulling in front of a blind person or mobility-impaired person. There should also be visible timing signals for deaf persons who cannot hear the auditory timing counts. More details on accessible signals can be found in the following links. ham://www.access-board.gov/research/pedestrian-signals/bulletin.htm http://www.access-board.dov/prowac/norm.htrn http://www.accessforblind.org/aps resources.html Infrastructure for new business developments at that intersection The economic planning goal should be to provide infrastructure to support new business, not remove infrastructure. A signal was needed when Yoke's was open, and will be needed for a new business to thrive. There needs to be left turn signals and lanes so eastbound traffic on Sprague can turn north onto Progress and use the '2 Margaret Mortz: 3420 S. Ridgeview Dr.,Spokane Valley,WA 99206;893-1472 Progress ingress driveways to enter the properties on the north side of Sprague. People leaving the properties to go east on Sprague should use the Progress exit driveways and turn left at a signal at Progress and Sprague. Assume that a new business wants to develop that property. They want to capture traffic coming on Sprague from the west, Unprotected left turns from Sprague into the property would be hazardous due to the very small timing gaps in the westbound Sprague traffic flow. It is not a predictable traffic flow with regular gaps that could allow a train of cars to make safe left turns. There are often many cars travelling west on Sprague during one signal cycle at Sullivan. Following that, many cars turn west onto Sprague from northbound and southbound Sullivan during subsequent Sullivan signal cycles. Additionally, there are people leaving other parking lots between Progress and Sullivan during the few timing gaps that remain. If there were no signal at Progress, people trying to turn left into the north properties from eastbound Sprague might make risky attempts at fast left turns, or there might be long delays and/or traffic backups. T-Bone accidents from risky left turns are particularly hazardous and should be prevented. Customers may find delays or risks so unpleasant that they do not come back. In summary: 1. The ADA requires that accessible signals across major arterials allow blind or mobility-impaired pedestrians to safely reach public bus stops. Since major new road repairs would be done in the Progress/Sprague area, the ADA requirements will be triggered. This is a formal request under the ADA for an accessible signal by a "qualified person with a mobility disability" for such a signal. 2. Future economic development of the former Yoke's area requires safe left turn signals at Progress and Sprague so that cars can safely enter or leave the business. '3