2009, 07-23 special AGENDA
SPECIAL JOINT MEETING
Spokane Valley City Council
Spokane City Council
Thursday, July 23, 2009
3:00 p.m. — 5:00 p.m.
City of Spokane City Council Briefing Center
808 West Spokane Falls Blvd.
DISCUSSION AGENDA ITEMS INCLUDE (but are not limited to):
1) Topic: Municipal Courts
Objective: Discuss City of Spokane's Municipal Courts System including whether it is
possible to expand that system to include the Ciry of Spokane Valley
2) Topic: Growth Management Act (GMA) Joint Planning Policies and Implementation
Objective: Discuss how to work together in the future
3) Topic: Regional Transportation/Transportation Benefit District(TBD)
Objective: Discuss possible changes to the TBD. (See Mayor Munson's attached"white
paper")
During meetings held by the City of Spokane Valley Council,the Council reserves the right to take"action"on any
item listed or subsequently added to the agenda. The term"action"ineans to deliberate, discuss, review, consider,
evaluate,or make a collective positive or negative decision.
07/23/2009 Joint Meeting, City of Spokane and City of Spokane Valley
White Paper describing the changes needed to the current Transportation Benefit District
Legislation.
1. Remove the Sunset provision or extend the time frame for the Sunset Provision to allow
for long-term bonding for capital projects.
2. Provide flexibiliry to fund emergency repairs that are not covered in the approval given in
the initial ballot issue. For example, damage caused during a declared state of emergency
or severe winter break up, damage that could not be anticipated when the original voter
approval ballot process takes place. Wording could be introduced that would identify a
specific portion of the funding for such events or require a new voter approval process for
new emergency projects or emergency funding authorization for a specific list of general
emergency situations (flooding, winter breakup, snow removal or fire).
3. With voter approval, the ability to extend the life of a TBD that allows revisions or
additions to the project list stated in the original voter ballot issue. For example, in year
five of a TBD, the need to add a new capital project (street rehabilitation) that was not
anticipated in the original voter approval ballot. This voter-approved action would allow
the TBD to issue new bonds to pay for the capital project and automatically extend the
life of the TBD to provide funding for the project. Currently, a new TBD would have to
be established to deal with this situation.
4. Enhanced funding mechanisms that provide sustainable funding. The ability to provide
funding that will be able to be increased as costs increase is essential. An example would
be the Street Utiliry Authority. Static measures such as the Vehicle Tab fee will only
work until increasing costs catch up with and surpass the revenue stream. It is essential
we go to the voters once with a funding mechanism that will solve the funding problem
without having to go to them and ask for more money to complete ongoing (maintenance
and operation) M&O and regional transportation projects.
5. Our initial ask list will be based on estimates. We all know the initial estimates for capital
projects are not necessarily what the actual costs are at the end of the process. Sometimes
costs are more and sometimes they are less than the initial ask The TBD must have some
mechanism to deal with unanticipated cost over-runs and leftover funds that were not
expended because of various cost savings successes. Even if we build in a contingency
percentage to cover cost over runs, many times it is not enough during periods of
escalating inflation. Municipal Councils have the abiliry to adjust their budgets to deal
with these situations. The current TBD does not.
6. The abiliry for municipalities to continue sustainable funding tools after the TBD period
of existence ends. The need for local M&O funding will not end with the termination of a
TBD. If we can provide for an unlimited life span of a TBD whose scope can be
expanded with a series of voter approved project lists, than this provision is not
necessary.
07/23/2009 Joint Meeting, City of Spokane and City of Spokane Valley