Loading...
2004, 04-20 Special Open House DiscussionCITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY WASTEWATER ISSUES PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE DISCUSSION CENTRAL VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT 19307 E. CATALDO APRIL 20, 2004, 6 -8 PM AGENDA EACH GROUP WILL BE "THE CITY COUNCIL FOR A DAY," AND WILL IDENTIFY THE FOLLOWING: a. WHAT ARE THE 2 MAJOR WASTEWATER ISSUES? (GROUPS MAY CONSULT WITH STAFF REGARDING ISSUES) b. DEVELOP 2 RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SHOULD PROCEED WITH RESOLVING THE 2 ISSUES. • ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS ARE RECORDED AT EACH TABLE. • SHEETS WILL BE POSTED ON THE WALL FOR REVIEW. • GROUP REPORTS -A dyy_ 1. WELCOME BY MICHAEL DEVLEMING, MAYOR 5 MIN. 2. OVERVIEW PRESENTATION ON CURRENT STATUS OF 20 MIN. WASTEWATER ISSUES. 3. OPEN HOUSE - FACT SHEETS, MAPS, DISCUSSION WITH 15 MIN. STAFF. 4. SMALL GROUP BREAK -OUT DISCUSSION. 45 MIN. 5. WRAP -UP DISCUSSION. 25 MIN Wastewater Issues Questionnaire City of Spokane Valley Public Open House Discussion April 20, 2004 Introductory Statement: Over the last several years, the County has examined a number of options for adding a new sewer treatment plant to the inventory of facilities that they own and operate in order to provide for continued growth and development within its service area which includes all of its customers in the city limits of the new City of Spokane Valley. Since the incorporation of Spokane Valley, the City Council with the assistance of interim and permanent staff has discussed with representatives of Spokane County and the City of Spokane the options they propose for a regional plant that would serve the needs of area residents and meet state and federal guidelines for obtaining a discharge permit. A discharge permit is required before a new plant can send treated (cleansed) water to the Spokane River; otherwise a plant could be built but not used. The federal Environmental Protection Agency and the Washington Department of Ecology have not resolved the question of whether the Spokane River can accept any additional discharge of treated wastewater effluent. Although estimates vary somewhat, the cost of a new plant would be about $100 million and the County's decisions about when and under what circumstances to commit to such a large financial investment are difficult. The County estimates that their sewer system will run out of capacity for new connections about 2009, that it takes about five (5) years from when they decide to go ahead with a new plant before it is available for use, and that the study of the Spokane River's ability to handle more discharges may not be complete before 2007. To assist the Spokane Valley City Council and staff sort through the various options for action, please consider and respond to the following questions: 1. In deciding whether to make the $100 million investment for a new treatment plant, do you think the County should wait until the environmental regulatory agencies determine if the river can accept discharges from a new plant? Yes No 2. What if waiting until 2007 for the environmental report means that a new plant could not be used until 2012 and the County's current system runs out of capacity for new connections in 2009? Would you wait? Yes No 3. In order to avoid running out of capacity, should the County take the risk in making the $100 million investment before they know for sure that a discharge permit will be granted? Yes No 4. What is more important to you: Circle one A. Reliability of sewer service (having it available and in good working order) B. The monthly cost of sewer service 5. Do you think the City should avoid working with the County in planning for the addition of a new regional sewer treatment plant that would allow new connections for residences and businesses in the Valley ?Yes No Why? 6. Do you think the City should avoid working with the City of Spokane in planning for the addition of a new sewer treatment plant that would allow new connections for residences and businesses in the Valley ?Yes No Why? 7. Would you favor the City of Spokane Valley attempting to take -over the County -owned sewer system servicing Valley residents? Yes No Why? A. If you favor a take -over and it required court action and legal expenses, would you want to proceed? Yes No B. If you favor a take -over and it resulted in higher monthly sewer rates, would you want to proceed? Yes No 8. How much more per month would you be willing to pay if Spokane Valley owned the sewer system? $ !Month 9. Should Spokane Valley assume the responsibility and risks for making the $100 million investment decision? Yes No 10. Should Spokane Valley consider taking -over the County sewer system before the discharge permit questions are resolved? Yes No Thank you for your assistance in wrestling with some of the difficult decisions that need to be made regarding the County sewer system. Mailing Address: City of Spokane Valley 11707 E. Sprague Ave., Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 City of Spokane Valley Public Open House Discussion April 20, 2004 Current Status of Wastewater Issues: • Regional Wasterwater Committee o Council approved participation in Regional Wastewater Committee on October 7, 2003. Meetings were held on October 22, 2003, February 18, 2004 and March 26, 2004. The next meeting will review various forms of regional governance options_ • Wastewater Interlocal • The City is currently working with the County on the development of an interlocal agreement which includes the following main issues Ownership, Operation and Maintenance Planning, Design and Construction of Sewers Wastewater Treatment Plant Capacity • DOE Agrees to Issue Permit Department of Ecology issued a letter on November 7, 2003 confirming they would issue the initial 5 -year National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for the new wastewater plant. • Approval of Regional Concept • In December, 2003 the County of Spokane, City of Spokane Valley and City of Spokane agreed to proceed with the analysis of the Playfair site for a regional wastewater facility o The regional facility would have 7.5 mgd capacity for the County/City of Spokane Valley and 2.5 mgd for the City of Spokane. • Ptayfair Site Analysis o The first public meeting for the supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on Playfair was held on February 25, 2004 • The second public meeting will be on May 12, 2004 at the East Central Community Center. • EPA Stops Permit and Loan • On March 2. 2004 the Department of Ecology informed us that the EPA had given them notice to not issue the NPDES permit and to not approve the State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan for the construction of the wastewater project • Meeting with EPA Administrator c On March 29. 2004 a meeting was held with John lani, Regional Administrator with EPA. c Mr. lani confirmed EPA's position, but agreed to a Spokane River Wastewater Permitting Work Session on May 4, 2004 • EPA Wastewater Work Session The Goal of the May 4'" work session will be to arrive at a common understanding of options, altematives and strategies for planning, permitting and implementing wastewater treatment in the Spokane River watershed. City of Spokane Valley Public Meetings on Wastewater Issues April 15, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Sewer extensions di operation agreement April 29, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Regional Wastewater Treatment System May 20, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Sewer extensions di operation June 17, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Sewer Extensions and Operations (STEP) with Spokane County July 1, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Cost Comparison Wastewater Treatment, and Sewer Extension and Operation (STEP) Agreement with Spokane County July 10, 2003 - Special Joint Meeting - Spokane County Board of Commissioners and Spokane Valley City Council • Sewer fund reserves • Financial modeling for wastewater improvements • Subsidies for sewer rates and charges • Options for adjusting future rates and charges August 13, 2003 - Regional Meeting with City of Spokane, Spokane County, City of Spokane Valley and Department of Ecology • Regional Issues Discussion August 19, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Wastewater Issues Discussion September 2, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Wastewater Issues Discussion September 16, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Wastewater Issues Discussion October 7, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Proposed Resolution for Participation in Commission on Regional Wastewater Treatment Issues October 21, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Wastewater Issues Discussion October 28, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Regular Meeting • Agreement & Sewer /5tormwater Ordinance Report November 18, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Wastewater Issues Discussion December 16, 2003 - City of Spokane Volley - Study Session • Wastewater Interlocal Agreement Draft December 23. 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Regular Meeting • Draft MOU for Septic Tank Elimination Program (STEP) with the County January 13, 2004 - City of Spokane Valley - Regular Meeting • Design Build Operate (DBO) Discussion • Approval of STEP MOU February 3, 2004 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Wastewater Policies Discussion March 2, 2004 - City of Spokane Valley - Regular Meeting • Wastewater Interlocal Agreement Discussion Spokane County Public Meetings and Notices on Wastewater Treatment Facilities September 2000 - Newsletter announcing wastewater facilities planning process September 21, 2000 - Public Meeting to discuss wastewater planning process December 2000 - Newsletter regarding second set of meetings January 10 S 11, 2001 - Public Meetings to discuss wastewater alternatives May 2001 - Newsletter regarding third set of meetings May 22 & 23, 2001 - Public Meeting to discuss preferred alternative of siting new plant in Spokane Valley November 2001 - Newsletter announcing draft Wastewater Facilities Plan and draft EIS December 18, 2001 - Public Hearing regarding Wastewater Facilities Plan adoption April 2002 - Newsletter announcing treatment plant siting process May 1, 2002 - Public Meeting to solicit input on Treatment Plant Siting process, describe the 15 identified sites, and to nominate possible sites May 2002 - Newsletter summarizing siting progress and announcing siting meeting June 13, 2002 - Public Meeting regarding 5 finalist treatment plant sites August 22, 2002 - Neighborhood meeting for the property owners surrounding the Stockyards site, to discuss concerns and get input October 2002 - Newsletter regarding finalist sites, Stockyards and Alki /Fancher, b announcing public meeting October 24, 2002 - Public Meeting to discuss the finalist sites and solicit public input November 2002 - Issue draft EIS for public comment December 2002 - Board of County Commissioners adopts final EIS for preferred sites February 2003 - Board of County Commissioners holds hearing and adopts Amendment 1 to Wastewater Facilities Plan March 2003 - Present - Considerations relative to formation of City of Spokane Valley February 25, 2003 - Public Meeting to consider Playfair Racetrack site Presentation to John Tani -March 29, 2004 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE • Early 80's, regional commitment to protection of Spokane Rathdrum Aquifer • Used ULID's initially, but switched to a prioritized rate based program in the 90's. Anticipate completion of septic tank elimination in the Urban Growth Area over the aquifer by year 2010. • In 1999, recognized that regional wastewater treatment capacity was insufficient to complete the STEP program and provide for continued regional growth. Recent flow projections indicate that the capacity limit for Spokane County /City of Spokane Valley will be reached in January 2009. • Completed a Facilities Plan in 2002 that recommended a new regional plant— Ecology approved. • Completed an Environmental Impact Statement and Facilities Plan Amendment in 2003 that identified a preferred site and recommended state of the art MBR treatment technology — Ecology Approved • Received an SRF loan offer from Ecology. in August 2003. for $73.4 million to design and construct the plant • Received a letter from Ecology in November 2003 indicating that an initial discharge permit would be issued for the new plant, consistent with the approved Facilities Plan. The letter went on to say that following the initial NPDES permit, the Department would likely exercise its enforcement discretion by issuing an Agreed Order with a compliance schedule tied to the 10 -year design capacity for the new facility to come into compliance with any new requirements that may be included in the forthcoming Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) • February 2004. were informed by Ecology staff that EPA staff had prepared a draft written document addressed to Ecology that no new or increased discharges were to be allowed into the Spokane River and that Ecology should not approve the SRF loan for the new plant or issue a discharge permit for the plant WATER QUALITY ASPECTS • Spokane River and Lake Spokane were listed for DO under the Class Based Standards • Washington has developed and is in the process of adopting Use Based Standards • Using the TMDL model developed by the Department of Ecology, excursions of DO are limited to certain of the strata within Lake Spokane for limited periods of the year • Dischargers have undertaken a Use Attainability Analysis, in accordance with EPA and Ecology guidance documents. to determine existing uses and attainable uses • On that basis, appropriate water quality criteria can be established for the riverine and lake segments to protect the uses. This may require Ecology to go through rule making to establish the site specific water quality criteria • Then, a TMDL can be determined. using the Ecology DO model, and wasteload allocations will result • Recent DO model runs have illustrated that excursions of DO will occur in Lake Spokane, even if all of the effluent from the point source dischargers in Washington State is eliminated from the Spokane River. • Recent DO model runs for the County project have illustrated that there is no predicted impact to DO in Lake Spokane from the proposed new regional plant KEY POINTS • Spokane County, City of Spokane. City of Spokane Valley, and Liberty Lake have been working together since 1980 to protect the quality of water in the aquifer, Spokane River, and Lake Spokane • This started with the septic tank elimination program in 1980 • In 1985 the phosphorus TMDL was established. Dischargers have been working together for 20 -years to successfully manage and implement improvements to wastewater management to reduce and limit the phosphorus loading to Lake Spokane • The proposed project for a new regional treatment plant is necessary to complete the septic tank elimination program, and is now becoming a component of the City of Spokane's CSO program • The new treatment plant is state of the art, best available technology. It will reduce mass loading to the Spokane River for Phosphorus, suspended solids, and BOD. We understood that this was consistent with EPA's policy of no net loading increase to a listed water body. • The City of Spokane is also planning for effluent filtration in the next 6 years, which will significantly reduce mass loading to the Spokane River • The draft EPA position to Ecology against approving the SRF loan, or approving a discharge permit creates a huge timing problem, in that the available capacity is projected to be exhausted by January 2009. We need to start design and construction now, to achieve that completion date. • Installation of Reverse Osmosis treatment process is not considered a feasible alternative for this region • Out of river discharge, such as land application of effluent, will be in conflict with water rights and exacerbate the critically low dry season water flows in the Spokane River "WASTEWATER" ti New regional treatment plant site development and environmental study results available for review Preliminary site development studies and environmental analysis on the two sites being considered for a new regional wastewater treatment plant - former Playfair and Stockyards - have been developed and are available for review. Spokane County, the City of Spokane Valley, and the City of Spokane have been evaluating these two sites for a plant that would treat wastewater from the City of Spokane Valley, and portions of Spokane County and the City of Spokane_ After considering comments provided at the February 25, 2004 public meeting and other submitted written comments, Spokane County identified the environmental issues to be analyzed and neighborhood issues to consider. Be sure to attend the May 12th public meeting to team about the results of the recent studies. provide comments on the Draft 2004 Supplemental Environmental impact Statement (EIS). learn what's next in the site evaluation and selection process, and share your comments and perspectives. An opportunity to ask questions and provide comments will follow the staff presentation. _> SroK,Ar COUNTY PUBLIC Wogs Utilities Division 1026 West Broads a) Spcikine, Washington 99260.0430 Public Meeting Wednesday May 12, 2004 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. East Central Community Center 500 S. Stone Street Be sure to attend the public meeting to: Leam about the results of the site development and environmental studies on the Playfair and Stockyards sites. Learn about the next steps in the wastewater facilities siting process. Provide comments on the Draft 2004 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. Share additional comments and perspectives. YOUR COMMENTS ARE IMPORTANT!!! The Draft 2004 Supplemental EIS will be available for review on April 20, 2004 It will be posted to the project web site, www.spokanecounty.orglutihties. follow link to Wastewater Treatment Plant Project. available at local librari and can be purchased by calling 477 -3604 ext. 7176. Written camments on this document are encouraged. All written comments must be received no later than 4:30 p.m. May 24, 2004. Comments should be submitted to Bruce Rawls, Spokane County Utilities. 1026 W. Broadway Avenue. Spokane, WA 99260 -0430. or via e-mail to brawls@spokanecounty. org To be added to the project mailing Ilst, call 477 -3604 ext. 7176. FACT SHEET PROJECT TITLE Spokane County Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Spokane Comp WWI? - Art! 2004 Sfplameats! EIS Spokane County proposes to construct a new regional wastewater treatment plant. The new plant and associated facilities will provide additional capacity for projected growth in the County, for increased wastewater flows generated by the County's Septic Tank Elimination Program, and for flows from the City of Spokane to reduce their Combined Sewage Outfalls (CSOs). This proposal is based on the assumption that Spokane County will continue to provide wastewater management services to the new City of Spokane Valley. If the new City chooses not to have Spokane County provide wastewater management services, then the proposal may change substantially. The impacts of sitine a wastewater treatment facility at either the Stockyards or Alki/Fancher sites were evaluated in the 2002 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The City of Spokane has recently decided to utilize capacity in the County's regional facility to reduce its CSOs. The addition of flows from the City of Spokane has prompted thc County to reevaluate the potential sites for the treatment facility. This 2004 Supplemental EIS will analyze the impacts of siting the treatment facility at the Stockyards or Playfair Racetrack site. The Playfair site was eliminated from consideration in the 2002 Supplemental EIS, but is now being included because: • The site is no longer being proposed for redevelopment as a racetrack and has been acquired by thc City of Spokane; • The site would better accommodate flows from the City of Spokane; • The alternative site considered in the 2002 Supplemental EIS, Alki/Fancher, may not be available in time to meet the required schedule for the new treatment facilities. The new treatment plant will provide wastewater treatment for Spokane County unincorporated valley areas, the City of Spokane Valley, the Town of Millwood, and provide capacity for flows from the City of Spokane. Currently the County has an agreement with the City of Spokane for 10 million gallons per day (mgd) of capacity at the City of Spokane's Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant (SAWTP). It is estimated that thc County's capacity at SA WTP will be exceeded by January 2009. The County proposal to construct a new treatment plant to provide an initial 10 mgd of capacity for the region by the end of 2008 with an ability to expand capacity in phases up to 20 mgd with ultimate buildout. This document, the Spokane County Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant Draft 2004 Supplemental EIS, identifies potential environmental impacts of the proposed new treatment .4prsl 2004 Spokane' Cowry W i$TP - Drar 20 04 Ssp lL mr nrul E lS plant_ The analysis is conducted on two alternative sites being considered by the County, and compared with a No Action Alternative: • Alternative 1 – Stockyards Site • Alternative: 2 - Playfair Site • Alternative 3 – No Action ACTION SPONSOR AND LEAD AGENCY Public Works Department Spokane County 1026 West Broadway Avenue Spokane, WA 99260 -0430 CONTACT PERSON Bruce Rawls, Utilities Director (509) 477 -3604 brawls a(�spokanecounty.org PERMITS, LICENSES, AND APPROVALS REQUIRED OR POTENTIALLY REQUIRED City of Spokane Spokane County Air Pollution Con �eency • Land Use — Special Usc Permit • Notice of Construction Approval (Spokane • Clearing and Grading County Air Pollution control Agency) • Building • Street Use • Shoreline Substantial Development Permit State of Washington City of Spokane Valley • State Environmental Review Pmcess (SERP) • Land Use (Ecology) • Clearing and Grading • National Pollution Discharge Elimination • Building System (Ecology) • Street Use • 401 Water Quality Certification (Ecology) • Hydraulic Project Approval (Department of Federal Fish and Wildlife) • Section 404 — Nationwide Permit 7 • General Permit for Biosolids Management (Ecology) ii April 2004 AUTHORS AND CONTRIBUTORS Adolfson Associates, Inc. 5309 Shilsbole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 HDR Engineering, Inc. 500 108th Avenue NE, Suite 1200 Bellevue, WA 98004 -5538 Hubbard -Gray Consulting, Inc. 6604 W. Iroquois Drive Spokane, WA 99208 April 2004 Spokane County 141;77' — Draft 2004 Szppkn eat FFS This Draft 2004 Supplemental EIS has been prepared under the direction of the Spokane County Public Works Department, Utilities Division. Research and analysis were provided by: Limno -Tech, Inc. 501 Avis Drive Ann Arbor, MI 48108 Eastern Washington University Archaeological and Historical Services 201 Isle Hell Cheney, WA 99004 -2420 URS Corporation 1101 Argonne, Suite 201 Spokane, WA 99212 DATE OF ISSUE OF DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL EIS April 20. 2004 PUBLIC MEETING ON DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL EIS A public meeting on the Draft 2(04 Supplemental EIS is scheduled for May 12, 2004 at the East Central Community Center. END OF DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL EIS COMMENT PERIOD May 24, 2004; 4:30 p.m. ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This Draft 2004 Supplemental EIS builds on the environmental analysis provided in the Programmatic EIS prepared for the Spokane County Wastewater Facilities Plan (Final EIS dated February 2002). In the programmatic document, analysis was conducted on several system options available to the County. The County utilized that information to make its decision to move forward with the construction of a new regional wastewater treatment plant. In 2002, the County prepared a Supplemental EIS to evaluate the impacts of siting the treatment plant at two locations. This 2004 Supplemental EIS will serve as additional environmental documentation for subsequent construction - related permits, provided the scope of the project described here does not substantially change. If substantive changes to the proposal are made, additional environmental review will be conducted. Additionally, the County will be sacking funding assistance from the State Revolving Fund and will meet requirements under the State Environmental Review Process. Spokane County if 1177' - Draft 2004 Supplemental EIS DISTRIBUTION Copies of this document have been sent to the agencies, individuals and libraries listed in Chapter 5. DOCUMENT AVAILABILITY Copies of this document are available for review at the Spokane County Public Libraries and at the wcbsitc listed below. Copies of this document arc also available for review or purchase at the Spokane County Public Works Office, Utilities Division. located at 1026 West Broadway Avenue. Purchase price in CD format is $5.00; in printed format 515.00. WEBSITE ACCESS This document may be viewed on the Spokane County Utilities Division website, www.spokanecountv.on !utilities. Click on the icon for Wastewater Treatment Plan Project, and then click on the view associated with the Draft 2004 Supplemental Impact Statement. .April 2004 City of Spokane Valley Wastewater Discussion Agenda • Update on die current status of wastewater t4SLIES. • OPEN HOUSE — Discussions with staff. • Break-Out Groups. • Develop issues and resnmrrendathons • Group Reports. • Wrap -up discussion. .rrr. atmnon 47W•• If Spokane Valley Owns the Wastewater Utility t•+ •• 1101M11 a... IM.. PPM an . ammo • MEMO {A af. n O••q ∎••i It tit Ibrmraaa mme.•Q vs is w. Pa warm 1114 1 PP Mon &MP. see Ai w rs Pt r mlm•a ► PINS •'•r OW Tam pa era af*. a•• w e 0.1 alp . s�Ar• r e a. 'Me an ■ w• ammo 4a.. . ra mat Wow •a►.ar•- Vl ~AI •nm•1•• at v swat •••■•• •+tee s aoa•m.r•••••os■ tit isele 1 Greater Coss if City of Spokane Valley Owns/Operates the Utility • p rovid S y Cord be te0uttd to Debt coverage ficur L45 • Spokane oebt e h l�n� wlith • Spokane Count, he icons to a Oreia• immure or r a art be til0 to r the amour c• hood! Pap v.w./. -w.. MMom 4/1r14144 ttrnate of Incrse In Wastewater Rates for Capital Costs by 2009 • Ii Spokane County crrnedloperatai the utility $6 - $15/ month • If Spoicane Nutley ownedraperated the uWlly $10 - $7t1fmnnth (33% greater than County) • P. An Increase m the General Facilities Charge mlgtct reduce these monthly user fees 1111•11■111••• 144.44 4114=0 I Regional Wasterwater Committee • Council approved partiapation In Regional Wastewater Committee on October 7, 2003 • Meetings were held on October 22, 2003, February 18, 2004 and March 26, 2004. • The next meeting will review various forms of regional govenance options. %so • 1 1 4114.4.41. A•• 14•4•4 *Ammo 1 2 1 Wastewater Interlocal • The Oty is currently working with the County on the development of an Interlocal agreement why includes the following main issues: - Ownership, operation and Ma tten ,r - Planning, Design and CornuCtton of Sewers - wastewater Treatment Plant Capacity • ■•■•■• L. MINIM Yilk7Cd. DOE Agrees to Issue Permit • Department of Ecology issued a letter on November 7, 2003 confining they would issue the initial 5 -year National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for the new wastewater plant tiI wa•∎∎•∎ am 1..w 4-711m0 Approval of Regional Concept • In December, 2003 the County of Spokane, City of Spokane Valley and City of Spokane agreed tD proceed with the analysts of the P.ayfair site for a regional wastewater facility. • The regional facility would have 7.5 rngd aipaaty for the County /City of Spokane Valley and 2.5 mgd for the City of Spokane. 3 Playfair Site Analysis • The County held the first public meeting for the supplemental Environmental Impact Statemern (EI5) on Mayfair was held on Febnary 25, 2004. • The second public meeting will be on May 12, 2004 at the East Central Ccxnmuntty Center. EPA Stops Permit and Loan • On March 2. 2004 the Departrnent of Ecology announced that the EPA had given notice to not issue the NPDES permit and to not approve the State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan for the construction of the wastewater project. •4115.7: 01 Meeting with EPA Adminis trator • On Mandl 29, 2004 a meeting was held with John Tani, Fleolonai AdmlNsbrtor with EPA. • Mr. iani confirmed EPA's position, but agreed to a Spokane River Wastewat Permitting Wort! Se on May 4, 2004 • .:,G1 4 1 EPA Wastewater Work Session • The Goal of the work ses ion will be to arrive at a common understanding of options, alternatives and strategies for planning, permitting and Implementing wastewater treatment in the Spotraane River water3t . J '. .— •gy r...l■. %mine*.. rm. _ 4I_.Y tIMONt111lift IPO . l■ - — � . •� Small Group Break-out • What are the 2 major wastewater issues? • Develop 2 recommendations on how the City of Spokane Valley should proceed to resolve the issues. • Wrap -up discussion. ti •.....� a.. .• J 5 Return to: Board of County Commissions Clerk of the Boat) 1116 W. Broadway Spokane, Washington 99206 Draft Interlocal Agreement Between the City of Spokane Valley and Spokane County Regarding Wastewater Management THIS AGREEMENT. made and entered into this day of January, 2004, by and between the CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY. Washington. a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the tnnsaction of business at 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley Washington, 99206 hereinafter referred to as the "CITY". and SPOKANE COUNTY, n political subdivision of the Stine of Washington. having offices for the transaction of business at 1116 West Broadway, Spokane Washington. Washington 99260. hereinafter referred to as the "COUNTY," jointly referred to. along with the CITY, as the "PARTIES." W ITNESSETH: WHEREAS. the CITY is located in thc Aquifer Protection Area established by the COUNTY by Ordinance 85 -061 dated July 30, 1985; and WHEREAS. prior to the incorporation cif the CITY. the COUNTY had, with the direction and approval of the State of Washington Department of Ecology (DOE), begun the extension of sanitary sewers within the Aquifer Protection Arca, which arca include.~ that area now incorporated as the City of Spokane Valley, following a program to be completed in accordance with the plan developed by the COLIr`TY; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY has created a Utilities Divisicm within the Public Works Department capable of implementing thc completion of the sanitary sever prowarn to standards acceptable to the CITY; and \WHEREAS, the COUNTY has prepared and adopted the Spokane County 2001 Comprehensive Wastewater Management Plan (Plan) for implementation of a sewer program for thc Urban Growth Arras within the Aquifer Pmtection Area; and LsDocNmeub pd Settlur. Al.rntenitnak, S tlittnCicamnr'Un Inlrntrl F itc+ wmiry. oxErValln larnmsnt•Prift3-lQ.1K- Ott 1, rt( X.We at - uin• L'opey-3lW illrars•wel arranrnln- Waste•sntsr►oIkw4f r. st-t+t.o.1+ 1 T lot A! WHEREAS. the CITY wishes to >cc the completion of the sanitary sewer system to protect and serve the CITY's residents, businesses, and the aquifer ;; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY has received an Extended Grant from the State of Washington Centennial Clean Water Fund to be used to reduce the cost impacts of sewer construction in the Aquifer Protection Area (APA); and WIIEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of chapter 36.36 RCW, the citizens of the COUNTY tinted to implement an APA Fee to provide a financing method to preserve, protect, and rehabilitate the Spokane Rathdrum Aquifer, which Fee will sunset in year 2005 unless it is r by the voters; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY, prior to November 4, 2003, had historically alloc one - eighth of 1% local option sales tax revenues collected pursuant to chapter 82.14.030(2) RCW to the sewer utility to subsidize the cost of sewers; and WHEREAS. the COUNTY has accumulated substantial fund balances in the sew=er utility fund(s) from connection fees, wastewater treatment charges, sales tax allocations and APA Fees; and WHEREAS, a substantial portion cof the APA Fees,sales tax revenues, connection fees, and wastewater treatment charges were contributed from within the area of the CITY; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY has had a policy of assisting property owners in the unincorporated areas, which included City of Spokane Valley, by reducing the net cost of the Capital Facilities Charge Rate (CFR) paid by each property within the sewer program; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of chapter 36.94.180 RCW, in the event of an incorporaticm of an Urea in which a county is operating a se NVeragc system, the property, facilities, and equipment of such sewerage system lying within the incorporated area may be transferred to the city if such transfer will not materially affect the operation of any of the remaining county system, subject to the assumption by the city of thc county's obligation relating to such property, facilities, and equipment, under the procedures specified in and pursuant to the authority contained in chapter 35.13.A RCW; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY and CITY are obligated to complete the elimination of septic tanks in the Urban Growth Area by extending sewer service to all properties within the CITY to the extent practicable; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY owns, operates, and maintains all of the existing public sewer system within thc CITY; and WHEREAS, pursuant to chapter 36.94.170 RCW the CITY has the primary authority for constructing, operating and maintaining a sewage system within the CITY unless the CITY desires through written consent that the COUNTY continue to own. operate, and maintain the public sewer system within the CITY. c .Uucameab end S ttiorr ,oArrftre ngl5etti �Teennornr' lAtc 4 Tilt■ a ?1J�5" µ a,c wrttr ptln_12m rj 11r*fd- Iel -1.t- Page 2 of 15 NOW, TT-IEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual promises set forth herein, the PARTIES hereto do mutually agree as follows: SECTION 1: OWNERSHIP. OPERATION. MAINTENANCE AND ADMINISTRATION 1 - 1 The CITY authorizes the COUNTY to own, operate and maintain the sanitary sewer system (System) within the CITY as a public utility. as provided for in chapter 36.94.170 RCW. For the purpose of this Agreement the terminology "System" shall mean all publicly owned sewers. manholes, appurtenances, and pumping stations within public rights of way or within public casements within the CITY. If the COUNTY implements a new regional wastewater treatment plant, as referenced in Section 3 of this Agreement, the. new regional wastewater treatment plant shall become a part of the "System ". 1 -2 The CITY shall grant a franchise to the COUNTY for use of CITY public right of w ay for the purpose of providing said sanitary sewer service. The CITY may charge a franchise fix to the COUNTY for said franchise. If the CITY chooses to charge, or adjust, a franchise fee, the CITY shall notify the COUNTY in writing not later than September 1 g of the preceding year, of the intent to charge, or adjust. the franchise fee. The purpose of thc franchise fcc would be to compensate the CITY for its reasonable costs, expense, and obligations actually incurred or contracted which are directly related to and which benefit the System in CITY areas that the COUNTY serves. Any CITY f_ anchi fte mnz% be recovered from the CITY raiep vers throut h th_- process set- forth in Sections 1 - 8 and 1 - 9. 1 -3 The COUNTY shall not enact or impose any tax on gross revenues generated by the System within the CITY pursuant to chapter 36.94.160 RCW. unless expressly autho ri�c�►! ha the Spokane Valley City Council_ 1-4 Time CITY initially shall adopt the provisions of Spokane County Code Chapter 8.03 ( "Sewer Code ") in its entirety. The CITY may adopt future revisions made by the COUNTY to Spokane County Cudc Chapter 8.03 within 90 calendar days of the date of adoption by thc COUNTY. Nothing contained herein shall prevent the City Council from exercising its Legislative discretion to amend, modify or repeal the Sewer Code as deemed reasonably necs ary to serve the hest interests of the CITY. provided the City shall not enact legislation that detrimentally impacts or unreasonably interferes with state or federal permits issucxi to operate the System. The CITY shall notify the COUNT' if it chooses not to adopt subsequent revisions requested by the COUNTY. or if the CITY elects to amend. modify or repeal the Sewer Code. 1 - The CITY delegates authority to the COUNTY to enforce the provisions of one C.-* -C- -G -&03 Sewer Code within the CITY_ COUNTY shill administer, bill, collect and account for all charges and service fees related to the System. The COUNTY shall be the primary party responsible for initiating any civil and!or criminal litigation for enforcement through its own legal counsel. The COUNTY shall be the •'f unman' ud Sett iicr.na;Terma4sa Sc.tinei In [COW FPeOUL1KS ittrti'elta zier cfl►-t►rstc3- l ..t_t11.X.: - la lee 1412 4110 larw- kivern Irani s str +e,e+VsneyAtreeretes- Ur*fF3 -4- -- On- li1ily Pap 3at15 primary. party responsible for inspection activities, engineering services, legal or other actions necessary to enforce compliance with the Sewer Code. In the event the COUNTY requests assistance from the CITY, and the CITY takes action to benefit the System, including but not limited to civil and/or criminal litigation for enforcement, surveys, studies or property acquisition, the COIINTy shall compensate the CiTY for its reasonable costs, expenses and obligations actually incurred Sec chapter 36.94.170 RCW. 1-6 All permits issued by the COUNTY for connection to thc System shall be reported to the CiTY. The COUNTY will direct sewer installers to the CITY for permits to work in the CITY rights of way. CITY shall retain all fees for right of w.ay permits. 1 -7 Each year in January, the COUNTY will report to the CITY (i) System extensions completed for the previous calendar year. (ii) the number of actual connections (ERU) completed the previous year, and (iii) the total ERU count for the System within the CITY. Ale County will maintain as - as built" plan of the system and make it available to the City. 1-8 The COUNTY shall be delegated thc authority to administer and enforce connection requirements to the sewer system, in accordance with the Sewer Code. COUNTY shall submit an annual report in January of each year listing the number and address of all properties where sewer service is available but which have not completed the connections to the System. 1 -9 The COUNTY, through its Board of County Commissioners, will establish, set, and adopt all fees, rates, and charges thereinafter "rates and chrcues") for the sanitary sewer system pursuant to chapters 36.94.140 and 35.67.020 RCW. To the maximum extent possible, ritcs and charges will be based on cost of service. Prior to setting rates and charges for the following year, the COUNTY shall: (1 ! present its proposal to the CITY for review and comment and (2) consider the comments of the CiTY prior i scttinc rates. The COUNTY will endeavor to maintain the cost of sewer construction and treatment plant capacity to serve both CITY and COUNTY customers at the lowest practicable cost. To further increase ratepayer confidence in the COUNTY'S pursuit of the Invest practicable costs, the COUNTY will submit its proposed rates and chart ►es for an external analysis (second opinion) by a qualified private - sector firm which was not a party to the preparation of the COUNTY'S proposal for rate and charges. The analytical report will be provided to the CIT'1' for consideration. The cost of such analtisis is a reasonable expense. of doine business and may be recovered through rates and charges 1 -10 The fees, rates and charges for customers inside the CITY will be equal to those outside the CITY. provided that the cost of service is equal. if a franchise fee is charged by the CITY, or if the cost of service varies substantially for a class of customers inside the CITY compared to outside, or if new subsidy revenues are provided to the sewer progum by either the CI I Y or COUNTY. differential fees, rates, or charges may be adopted. The COUNTY will meet with the City before adopting differential fees, rates. fvDocatprnt. ■n4 Scrrinei;nwrnttt L*ca1 Srtttnetationoran tattrnat FiksilLL' % amwtrerVenn kertv e_rart.l 10-04- 1(1.1.tN►SC_ heat nrVnlit, i0 144ttrriaea-ti= rte +reup,Wa,tt•ster>4Ik}kgreauest- teen 2%- t►4- ii}Abt Ptaic4of15 or charges. In the event that the parties do not agree on a proposed differential in fees, rat or charges, they agree to submit the issues to mediation. The form of the mediation shall be as agreed between the parties. CITY and COUNTY :tore that the future revenues for new treatment plant capacity, upgadrs of the City of Spokane Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant (SAW interceptors and pumping stations will he generated through a combination of General Facilities Charges (GEC's) and Wastewater Treatment Plant Charges. CITY agrees that subsidies for GFC's for new development should be eliminated, and that GFC's and Wastewater Treatment Plant Charges should be set at a level to generate adequate revenues to pay for new treatment plant capacity. COUNTY agrees that surplus revenues (above the amount necessary to subsidize Capital Facilities Rates (CfR'sj) in thc reserve funds will be used to offset the cost of new wastewater treatment plant capacity. 1 -12 Annually, prior to submission to the Board of County Commissioners for adoption. the COUNTY will provide the CITY with the proposed Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and proposed CFR's for extension and operation of the System within the CITY. 1 -13 For perfornicd by the CITY that relate to the planning and development of additional treatment facility capacity for the CITY as :et forth in Section 3, the CITY shall be reimburAd from thc Sewer Reserve Fund, SECTION 2: PLANNLNG. DESIGN, AND CONSTRUCTION OF SEWERS 2 -1 To the extent legally permissible, the COUNTY will update the Spokane County Comprehensive Wastewater_Managemcnt Plan (Plan) as necessary to conform to the City of Spokane Valley. Comprehensive (land use) Plan. 2 -2 The COUNTY shall be responsible for diligently pursuing the completion of the sanitary sewer system and septic tank elimination program (STEP) in accordance with the Plan and the Six Year Sewer Construction Capital Improvement Program, i'Pror*rm} ") as amended annually. This responsibility shall include the planning. design, and construction of new sewers, as identified in the Plan, within the System through the life of this Agreement. At least sixty d ziot to adoption of the STEP J'lan :Ind the Progum the same shall be submitted to the C'I'TY for review and comment_ Prior to the COUNTY commencing anv construction under the STEP Plan or Program. the COUNTY and the CITY shall mutually agne on the STEP Plan or Program. 2 -3 The COUNTY may extend the System to areas outside of the CITY. provided that adequate capacity is maintained in the trunk and interct::ptor sewers to serve properties within the CITY. Extension of sewer service ou of the CITY shall not cause additional costs to accrue to CITY sewer users. C ucui ra awl Scutari' ri t' nhrren'Lura! Srtliortgeis urar' Intrrnet Filelo01.1:.ST111"a.trwaic� UM. �rrtmrnt-ltrnrt3 10411 l P r RLLDK/(;f:»(=- EIt}ef 11 ,F;4.Mt.rleere rreemerowW'aerrNefre 'Mlilti.tceeit:rfl -Drell : r 44 R64 w Page 5 of 15 2-4 The COUNTY shall restore all CITY streets, in which sewer construction takes place, with full width reconstruction of the street base, surface and drainage to standards approved by the CITY, which standards shall not be less than the standards adopted and applied by the COUNTY prior to incorporation. The CITY shall pay for all additional costs to provide full width pavement, beyond the normal trench width pavement replacement. The methods used to establish the scope and budget for full width paving shall be generally consistent with thc methods established in Attachment "A ". At the beginning of each construction season, COUNTY staff in collaboration with CITY staff will evaluate the condition of streets and roads within the CITY. and determine the scope and cost for full width pavement in that year's projects. Full width pavement will not be included in the construction projects until the CITY and COU'NT'Y staffs' agree in writing to thc scope and budget for full width paving. During the construction period, COUNTY will provide monthly invoices to the CITY for the full width paving completed, and CITY shall provide payment to the COUNTY within 30 calendar days. Any late payment will be subject to a penalty based upon lost interest earnings had the payment been timely paid and invested in the Spokane County Treasurer's Investment Pool. 2 - The COUNTY shall continue to actively pursue grants and low interest loans to offset costs of the sewer construction program. Grants and loans shall be applied proportionally to COUNTY sewer customers outside and inside of the CITY. CITY agrees to cooperate with and support the COUNTY in pursuing grants and loans. 2 -6 The COUNTY will pursue the rcauthori7ation of the Aquifer Protection Area Fees as provided for in chapter 3636 RCW to reduce the cost of sewers to users of the System_ The CITY, through the City Council shall consider a resolution to support this effort to obtain additional funds to reduce thc cost of sewers to CITY residents and properties, -I — thte —r - ife4 b' low". thL CIW-svill--paELs—a—rest4lution agreeing that its boundaries be included within the Aquifer Protection Area 2-7 The COUNTY shall continue to provide a subsidy to the cost of CFR's using the computational method currently in effect, within the limits of sewer reserve funds available for the subsidy. A copy of that method is attached hereto as Attachment "B" and incorporated herein by reference. For the purpose of this Agreement the terminology "Sewer Reserve Fund" shall mean those monies reflected in Budget Funds 403 and 436, indicated as Beginning and End Fund Balances. Sewer Reserve Funds arc for authorized sewer uses and APA program uses, and are not solely for the subsidy of Capital Facilities Rates. Neither the COUNTY nor CITY will —be obligated to contribute any additional funds to support this subsidy. The COUNTY shrill con unit a fair and equitable am,ptult of the Sewer Rescue Fund to the c apital facility rates chareed the CITY ratepayers. Prior to allocating the fair and equitable amount committed to the CITY from the Sewer .Reserve Fund to the capital facility rates. the COUNT'' shill revive the consent of the CITY. C'-•t)xnmrne. and Setlitr_t,n •t .lnn.t criflutratmloonal Into Tort Filts101 _k57 W'rr*Itrrit[tVitlt, Arret mitt l)rdt3 - I444 K!_1.DOCGIW - W in of- 5{+okene- 4allr0.13244aterlees rrttm.R ear sterlinlkrArrerwest Pra4 - -3 :- 4-K& -sloe Page 6of15 SL•CI 3: WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT CAPACITY 3 -1 Currently. wastewater treatment is provided at the SAWTP. for which the COUNTY has a contract with the City of Spokane for up to 10 million gallons per day of capacity. _The COUNTY acknowledges that a portion of the above referenced wastewater treatment. capacity has been acquired by the CITY properties connected to the System. T 'Ct N . all uvide sulfide t w. tewatt nit ca it to c —ern Iv with the Comprehensive Plan of the CITY. 3 -2 The CITY agrees that the COUNTY will be the lead agency for implementation of a new regional wastewater treatment plant in thc western edge of the Spokane Valley geographic area. The new regional wastewater treatment plant will be capable of providing wastewater treatment capacity to customers in the CITY, the COUNTY. and the City of Spokane. lite COUNTY agrees to evaluate the Playfair Race Track as an alternate preferred site for the new regional plant, and will prepare amendments to the previously finalized Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SE1S) and Wastewater Facilities Plan Amendment report. provided that the City of Spokane agrees to provide a proportional share of the cost of engineering. The project will be designed, constructed and operated using the Design-Build-Operate (DBO) delivery method pur cant to RC's' Chapter 71 A 50 and this section. The COUNTY will endeavor to complete the evaluation of Playfair Race Truck on a schedule to facilitate execution of the SRF Loan Offer that has been attended to the COUNTY by the Washington Department of Ecology. The COUNTY will make the final decision on the location and sue of the new regional wastewater treatment plant. The COUNTY will present the draft Facilities Plan Amendment and draft amendment to the SE•IS to the CITY for review and comment prior to finalizing the documents. As the lead agency for implementation of the new regional wastewater treatment plant, the COUNTY will coordinate closely with the crrY. For purposes of this paragraph, thc terminology "coordinate" shall mean formulation of a technical review sgoup, including representatives from the public works departments of the COUNTY. the CITY, and the City of Spokane, which will meet on a regular basis to review the progress of work. and to discuss issues related to the technical aspects of the new regional wastewater treatment plant and to the project implementation process. A h f tl t - cities will- potih ate - the- 1 ioweomit'ince -for the -f> 1-s u ►s > 3 -3 Prior ro entering into an acre et with a service provider ti RCA 74.1 50.030 the COUNT)' shall form a DBO Procurement t Committee under RCW 70.15A040(3). 'fhe DB0 Nocunment Committee utilized by the COUNTY Shall include at least one representative p inted by the City Council of -the Cite' of Spokane Valley who tihdl participate in the DBO procurement process. The COUN'1Y shall make the final 1)130 selection following the Committer rccOrnmeudatiirn. To insure that the 0130 delivery metlwcl is the most cost efficient to the S•: steal and the City rut avers. the Cf l rN TY ca l .(\SS ., rratrrV r I.Dr R}-111 R11.1XX:GorACityikropoilise.Vallry4WAlesetiveai Atrrclart►rl• -Wa ro••- rrrVat{c.4 c+r,f- Drab- 24:.444u,41ot Page 7 of 15 shall obtain from tlx: Department of Ecology a determination concluding, that the DBG delivery method results in a cost RI:mg jo the system, its ratepayers and the di sip• t. construction and operation of the new Wastewater Treatment Plant, SECTION NO. 4: INDUSTRIAL PRETREA a T PROGRAM SECTION 5: NOTICE 4 -1 The CITY delegates authority to the COUNTY to implement and administer the County's Approved Industrial Pretreatment Program ( "AIPP ") in accordance with County, State, and Federal laws, regulations and requirements. For the purpose of this Agreement the COUNTY'S AMP shall mean the Industrial Pretreatment Pmgrttm dated June 5, 1998 and any revisions thereto approved by the Washington State Department of Ecology. This authority shall apply to all properties that utilize the COUNTY'S wastewater collection system located within the CITY'S incorporated boundaries. The AIPP includcs the COUNTY'S Pretreatment Ordinance as adopted in Chapter 8.03, Article 4000 "Pretreatment," (in its entirety), and Sections 8.03.9080, 8.03.9100. 8.03.9160, 8.03.9180, and 8.03.9185 of the Spokane County Code. 4 -2 The CITY shall adopt the provisions of Spokane County Code Chapter 8.03 Article 4000, "Pretreatment," (in its entirety), and Sections 8.03.9080, 8.03.9100, 8.03.9160, 8.03.9180, and 8.03.9185 prior to the COLNTY implementing or administering its AIPP within the Ct 1 Y'S boundaries. A copy of said Article and Sections are attached hereto in Appendix "A." The CITY agrees to review, consider and adopt future revisions made by the COUNTY to Spokane County Code Chapter 8.03, Article 4000 "Pretreatment," (in its entirety), and Sections 8.03.9080, 8.03.9100, 8.03.9160. 8.03.9180, and 8.03.9185 of the Spokane County Code within 90 calendar days of the date of adoption by the COUNTY. 4 -3 The CITY dclegatns authority to the COUNTY to enforce all the provisions of Spokane County Code Chapter 8.03. Article 4000 "Pretreatment," (in its entirety). and Sections 8.03.9080, 8.03.9100. 8.03.9160. 8.03.9180, and 8.03.9185 of the Spokane County Code within the CITY as those provisions pn.. ently exist or as they may be hereafter revised. The CITY agrees, upon request of the COUNTY. to make available any of its staff, to include law enforcement, which may be necessary in conjunction with COUNTY enforcement actions. All notices or other communications given hereunder shall be deemed given on: (1) the day such notices or other communications are received when sent by personal delivery; or (ii) the third day following the day on which the same have been mailed by first class delivery, postage prepaid addressed to COUNTY at the address set forth below for such Party, or at such other address as COUNTY shall from time -to -time designate by notice in writing to thc other PARTIES: COUNTY: Spokane County Chief Executive Officer or his/her authorized representative 1116 West Broadway Avenue Cibocrm Srt cntt sod tinr rL ritrthi Qra! Sru Noma tursgvitnur r 1 llrattlt.kSTwsuttw lusty/0k% kt;• turn t- Dr:R3 -1041- ` RI t.lt(Jcco.C'•t ..F p.lree- Vallet-1ad`1Jr H:vlearemlrrVrtirrAgmre tat- -D.gt -2-4:-04- RtAoc Page 8at15 Spokane, Washington 9g260 SEC t ION 6: C(l?N'I ART$ SECTION 7: ASSIGNMENT SECTION 8: LL-'LRtLITY CITY; City of Spokane Valley City Manager or hisr'hcr authorized representative Redwood Plaza 11707 FAA Sprague Avenue. Suite 1 Spokane Valley, Washington 01 4206 Tins Agrimintitt may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which, when so executed and delivered, slsal.l be an original, but such counterparts arts shall together constitute but one and the tee. No paw may as .sign in whole or yet its intern, in this Agreement without the written approval of all (- thes PAR t JhS fa) COUNTY shall indernnif and hold harmless CITY and its o ct, s,, agents, and employees, or any of them from any and all claims, actions, sum. liability, 10 costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent cat or u sican of COUNTY, its officers, eats and employees, or any of them relating to or arising out of performing services pursuant to this Agr cnt. In the event tD at any suit based upon such claim. action, loss, or drainages is brought against C_'l"t`Y, COUNTY shall defend the erne at its sole cosi and expense; provided that CITY reserves the right to participate in sail. suit if any principle of governmental or public law is irivrilved and if final judgment ill; said suit be rendered against CJTY, and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them, or jointly against CITY and COUNTY and their respective officers, agents, and employees, COUNTY shall satisfy the same. (h) CITY shall indemnify and hold harmless COUNTY and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability., loss, costs,., expenses. and damages of any nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent act or omission of CITY, its officers, agents and employees, or any of them relating to or arising out of performing services pursuant to this Agreement. In tine event that any suit based upon such claim, action, loss., or damages is brought against COUNTY, CITY shall defend the same at its sole cosi and expense: provided than COLTNTY reserves the right to participate in said suit Warty principle of governmental or public law is involved: and if final judgment in said suit be rendcrcd against COUNTY, and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them, or jointly against COUNTY and (T1`Y and their respective ofcct , agents, and employ w, CFPir shall satisfy the same. (c) The foregoing indemnity is specifically intended t ► constitute a waiver of each party's immunity under Washington's Industrial Insurance Act, chapter 51 RCW, respecting the other rid , !,S'Y ■.. w.. egg. S.':1 -L.. , '.t'� .0 1 674 J.1. DO( ' Qier .LN OP' 1s6M riAloviertowel . wtierVa are fly 144 lAto Paige 9 of 15 party only, and only to the extent necessary to provide the indemnified party with a full and complete indemnity of claims made by the indemnitur's employees. The PARTIES acknowledge that these provisions were specifically negotiated and agreed upon by them. (d) COUNTY and CITY agree to either elf insure or purchase polices of insurance covering the matters contained in this Agreement with coverages of not less than 55,000,000 per occurrence with S5,000.000 aggregate limits including for ENGINEERS professional liability and auto liability coverages. SECTION 9: REI..ATIONSFIIP OF THE PARTIES The PARTIES intend that an indepaidc nt contractor relationship will be created by this Agreement. No agent, employee, servant or representative of COUNTY shall be deemed to be an employee, agent, servant or represcntative of CITY for any purpose. Li:ewise. no agent, employee, servant or representative of CITY shall be deemed to be an employee. agcxtt, servant or representative of COUNTY for any purpose. SECTION 10: MODIFICA'11ON This Agreement may be modified in writing by mutual written agreement of the PARTIES. SECTION 11: DURATION This Agreement shall be effective as of the date set forth herein above and shell continue tmtil terminated pursuant to Section 11-2. SECTION 12: TERMINATION Ltpon 1 2-months ac --ser -by-eeFtif t}a 4Tttc CITY or COUNTY may terminate this Agrees ent upon 12 months written notice, sent by certified mail. pmvidcd that termination of this Agreement shall not occur during the p rind of time between the date of executiartJ,v the COUNTY of a contract with a DBO firm and the completion date of acceptance testing for the new reeir►nal wicstewater treatment plant: Within fifteen (15) calendar days after receipt of the written notice of termination, and at least once every two weeks thereafter, the parties shall meet to negotiate the terms and conditions of a Termination Agree;ncnt. The negotiation of the Termination Agreement shall address transfer of assets, transfer of employees, transfer of fund balance reserves, transfer of contractual obligations, transfer of indebtedness obligations, establishment of system value, transfer of the new regional wastewater trteat.rnent,p1ant. determination whether there is a material affect to the operation of any of the remaining COUNTY system. payments to the COUNTY. and all other aspects of an equitable termination of this Agreement, and pursuant to chapter 36.94.180 RCW. It is ae ifthe- C--fTY chop e sseme-j cs withif s utt rt- will -n tefiall et ng Crpoctrntrttts and %ttli n!<rrvttnaDolt irtun.•ri tuition r. latent i F1ki OL) 5 Wa trwatrr A[1ttmt1,t- DrzfL3- tU.44- RL .tO.t 'd -Myof Spe weer L.{h'-C -t3-34 erinm# Atm: an-A eflMwoestr- VttMvA ;+rake!•- 7>raR-s- 4=04-Rt.dw Page 10 of 15 If the parties are unable to reach final agreement on the terms and conditions cfa Terntination Agreement within six (6) 1110111/15 from the date of receipt of the notice, non-binding mediation shall ()cent_ The parties shall mutually decide the mediation procedures, claim and person(s) to co/att.-A the mediation. Mediation shall be 'concluded within twelve ( 2) months from the date of receipt of the notice, unless mutually agreed otherwise by the parties, SZCTION 1.3: PROPERTY AND EQI IPSIENT The ownz-ship of all property and equipment utilized by the COUNTY wider the terms of this Agreement shall curtain with the COINTY. SECFTO 14k AU. Miff GS CONTAINED HEREJNM ING EFITCT This Agreement contains terms and conditions agreed upon by the PAR I Lb& The PARTIES agree that there are no other understandings, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement_ This Agreement shall he binding upon the PARTIES litarto, their sucesors and intsigns SECT10144 15: VENUE STIPULATION This Agreement has been and shall he CMISITtled as having been made and delivered vidthin the State of Washington and it is mutunliy undnIstuod and agreed by utch party that this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of W`athingion both as to interpretation and performance. Any action at Inv:, suit in equity or judicial proceeding for the enforcement of this Amernetin cfr any provision hereto. shall be instituted only in courts of competent jurisdiction within Spokane County. Washington. SECTION 16: SEVERABILITY it is understood and agreed among the PARTIES that if any parts. tmus or pmvisions of this Agrecnient are held by the courts to be illegal. the validity of the remaining portions or provisions stall not be affected and the rights and obligations of the PARTIES shall not be affected in regard to the remainder of the Agreemenl if it should appear that any part. lei m or provision of this Agreement is in conflict with any 5tanitnry prtivision of the State of Washington, then the part, term or provision thereof that may be in conflict shall Lac deemed inoperative and null and void insofar as it may be in conflict therewith and this Agreement shall be deemed to rnixiify to conform to such statutory provision. SECTION 17: RE-CORDS All public records prepared, owned. used or retained by COUNTY in conjunction with this Agreement shall be deemed CITY property and shall be made available to ei FY upon' request by the CITY Mantigcv COUNTY will notify CITY of any public discloswe requm under chaplet Cflr ULL eft 44, Trart in' hitt/re Irr,w yekri. Pre r -Tirkft2 I -r Al,.1,1EIKX:G:. ort-ktrioluarw-Vogr,-14.1244-pie-riwal 4 Page 11 or IS 42.17 RCW for copies or viewing of such records as well as the PROSECUTOR'S response thereto. ,SEC" 1'1ON 18; HEADINGS The section headings appearing in this Agreement have been inserted solely for the purpose of convenience and ready reference. In no way do they purport to. and shall not be domed to define, limit or extend the scope or intent of the sections to which they pertain. SECTION 19: STATIONARY CITY agrees COUNTY %vi11 use COUNTY'S stationary in conjunction with meeting its responsibilities under the terms of this Agreemenl IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date and year opposite their respective signatures. DATED: BOARD OF COUNTY COMA+IISSIO ATTEST: VICKY M. DALTON CLERK OF THE BOARD BY: Daniela Erickson, Deputy JOHN ROSKELLEY, Commissioner DATED: Attt�st: City Clerk (Title) Approved as to form only: City Attorney PIIILLIP D. ILARRIS, Chair M. KATE MCCASLL'N1, Vice -Chair a' OF SPOKANE, COUNTY, WASHINGTON CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY: By: Its: C : +.t}nsnmcnt, and 5tnlnn`mLcntra'.I.wail Sc tt' :Lt l�+��nrnn In toner I ilre.01.1L; -A« isua 'rV altrr,te - 1 M'.c K M po arer V.I14+- 1433IN »MN..t.I. be.V.I►ryA,l.erment -1w n.a 2-1=-64-1111,4ke Page 12 of 15 +11uelitiwiktk *64 1 .werly '.MI rj Urn inuil...5rItingvNTrml Irit[i °IMti r : a mister "Ilk 1lI _TALI [ E41" I_DOC t«.+f .; x,441 - `. - MINister4.dl ,awlsxe rwe'erVidi ncsewl- Dr0-2-2 . itl r Page 13 ofl5 ATTACHMENT A TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY AND SPOKANE COUNTY REGARDING WASTEWATER MANAGE 101 Pavement Removal and Replacement Limits for Sewer Construction Spokane County will include in its annual sewer construction budget the costs to 'restore the paving that is required to be removed for sewer construction. inclociing mainline sewer. manholes, and side sewers. The City of Spokane Valley may elect to add to the scope of the paving work associated with County sewer projects. For example, the City may request additional pavement replacement to accomplish full -width paving, additional road pavement width. andior extended paving beyond the termination of the sewer main. The following guidelines shall be used as the underlying basis for determining the County's share of the asphalt concrete pavement (ACP) removal and replacement costs: 1. The quantity of ACP removed and replaced to construct a section of sewer main between two manholes shall be determined using the following dimensions: a) Width: The lesser of 1.8 times the average depth of the sewer along the section of sewer main, or the existing road width. h) Length: Manhole center to manhole center, plus an additional fifteen feet beyond each terminal manhole. 2. The quantity of ACP removed and replaced to excavate the trench for a sewer service stub shall be determined using the following dimensions: a) Width: 15 feet b) Length: Distance from edge of existing pavement to calculated limit of sewer main trench as determined in 1.8) above. 3. In those locations where ACP removal for the sewer main to the width described in 1.a) above would leave a strip of existing ACP less than six (6) feet in width. removal and replacement of that strip of existing ACP will be included in the cost of the sewer project, and shall become part of the County's share of the cost. 4. In those locations where ACP removal for the sewer main and service stubs, as described in paragraphs 1 and 2, would leave an area of existing ACP less than 50 square yards in sire, removal and replacement of that area of existing ACP will be included in the cost of the sewer project, and shall become part of the County's share of the cost. I S: jiKutncnts and Set])a,.'nLerstea'.t/lfa& st ainerq em twnrar lntrrtwt sail/ "err alMAmrnwrt*t-Dnftl-10.04- I1 tgX_V PCi4 eipoLaer- Leah.- {L.i4tetet4ucal eerrgreats•N't.rlewal rVallerStwrmest- I7rrr4- la= -Yi- fandet Page 14 of 15 ATTACRFNT E3 TO THE [ CERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE +CJ TY OF SPOKANE VALLEY AND SPOKANE COUNTY REGARDING WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT This Attachment illustrates the historical methodology used to lculate and establish the Capital Facilities Rates (CFR) 10 be applied for projects within the C Ul s Septic Tank Elimination Proms (STEP). The numb used in this illustration anz hypothetical raid do not relate to any specific, d .ai or year of contraction. This illustration does not imply what CFR airman will be established in future yew. NOTE'S! IES 1. ERLi denotes Equivalent Residential Unit 2. I'lie General Facilities Charge, at the unsubsidized rate„ is $2,510 per ERL1 in this illustration 3. Monthly CFR PaYrrlerlt atrno unts are computed lamed on 240 payments _ l'r�r Li 1c 8. the subsidy . fund ins: is provided from Reservesjn Fan and Czk.DuariutalStfiljazelimm e irz jarrsrt i'iict'411.r °` a vivo aurVadle.+ rrrm -4) WO- 1044- Ht.I,rx}I'C: ' Cia)=.of a pni tam k—Vw Ilk 3 r4eittinea atersprttts4f4 9rrFiaurr Ve iirt. 40rtrofteuf- Firrafi- 1 AO? Page 15 or 15 Total CO:rt of 'ects $12,000.000 f . 2 interim Ftnancin Costs E.stimaied at 2% $.L40,00 Subtotal - $1 2.240.000 l .. , • , IL .1 It 53.750,000 Subtotal = $8.490,000 fr General F.aciliti C1tar es (61r=C) 4 294 610 Sub total = $ 12.,784.610 Subsidy Fundin ilij 25 % s3,1 46.152 Subtotal = $9.88.458 10 Estimated Ntunber o I E.RIS s f 71 1 11 Ca • iirtl Faciliti Rate (CER1 - ERU = $5,604 C .cJL_A I'ION OF 1YlON11-ILY CFR I Estimated Bond Interest Rate 6 % CFR . er ERlJ $5,604.00 3 Bond Issuance Cusis 1.3 °pit $72.85 Total Amount Financed $5.676.85 `J 1 e ^sulLin j Montl!i° CFR PaVnn $40,67 ATTACRFNT E3 TO THE [ CERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE +CJ TY OF SPOKANE VALLEY AND SPOKANE COUNTY REGARDING WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT This Attachment illustrates the historical methodology used to lculate and establish the Capital Facilities Rates (CFR) 10 be applied for projects within the C Ul s Septic Tank Elimination Proms (STEP). The numb used in this illustration anz hypothetical raid do not relate to any specific, d .ai or year of contraction. This illustration does not imply what CFR airman will be established in future yew. NOTE'S! IES 1. ERLi denotes Equivalent Residential Unit 2. I'lie General Facilities Charge, at the unsubsidized rate„ is $2,510 per ERL1 in this illustration 3. Monthly CFR PaYrrlerlt atrno unts are computed lamed on 240 payments _ l'r�r Li 1c 8. the subsidy . fund ins: is provided from Reservesjn Fan and Czk.DuariutalStfiljazelimm e irz jarrsrt i'iict'411.r °` a vivo aurVadle.+ rrrm -4) WO- 1044- Ht.I,rx}I'C: ' Cia)=.of a pni tam k—Vw Ilk 3 r4eittinea atersprttts4f4 9rrFiaurr Ve iirt. 40rtrofteuf- Firrafi- 1 AO? Page 15 or 15 LEGAL ISSUES REGARDING OWNERSHIP AND OPERATION OF A WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND TREATMENT FACILITY BACKGROUND • The sanitary sewer collection system within the City of Spokane Valley is owned and operated by Spokane County. • System expansion and additional treatment capacity is required for the County Service Arca and the City of Spokane Valley. • The City and Spokane County arc negotiating an Interlocal Agreement for wastewater collection and treatment_ WASTEWATER OWNERSHIP AND OPERATION • By statute, primary authority to construct, operate and rogintstin sewage system which is within the County Sewer Service Area and Plan remains with the City. County may construct own, operate and maintain a sewer system within the City upon the written consent of the City. With pre - incorporation sewer system, written consent likely to control only system expansion_ • RCW 36.94.180 allows transfer of a sewer system upon incorporation of the City. In Summary, the above statute provides: The property, facilities and equipment of the County Sewer Sys;:cm within the incorporated area (the City) may be transferred to the City, if the transfer will not materially affect the operation of the remaining County system. The City shall assume the County's obligations relating to the property, facilities and equipment pursuant to RCW Chapter 35.13A. • Statutory Construction of RCW 36.94.180 - 4 key points. 1. Pmperty, facilities and equipment "within the City ". If a treatment plant is constructed outside of the City, can the City acquire the plant? • City has authority to condemn, purchase, acquire, construct and operate sewage system within and without the City's corporate limits RCW 35.67.020. Sec also, 4 below. • Condemnation depends upon the use of the County Property. C'ik cunicnu utul ScnngivJusstenlltd Setts ltcmparvr bitt nd FilcriOLEST,W Wwala Coilr -ucm 21 dac CONCLUSION 2. "May be transferred to the City" • Cotmty takes the position that the word "may" requires consent by the County. • MRSC states the word "may" requires a negotiated agreement. • Alternative opinion is the word "may" relates to the final subject in the state statute which is a reference to the general assumption laws of the state of Washington. Mutual consent may not be required. • A Court ruling may be required to determine which interpretation is correct. 3. "Will not materially affect" the remaining system. • Materially affect is a term that is not defined in the statute. • The above term should be the focus of engineering or other utility studies that analyze how a transfer will materially affect the remaining system. • There is no appellate case law that has defined this term in this statutory context.. Thus, the term will be a matter of judicial opinion. • The County has stated there will be a material affect on the remaining system. • A court ruling may be required to determine the meaning of "materially affect ". 4. "Subject to" ... "the procedures specified in and ... authority of RCW Chapter 35.13A." • RCW Chapter 35.13A is the general assumption laws for cities acquiring special purpose districts. • An assumption can occur a number of different ways all premised upon bow much of the district or system is located within the City. • If at least 60% is in the City, the City can acquire the whole except that portion of the County's system included within another city. • If there are facilities outside of the City which serve City ratepayers, the County, shall for the economically useful life of such facilities make available sufficient capacity to serve the sewage requirements of the City, to the extend that such facilities were designed to serve the City. RCW 35.13A.050. The above statutes relating to sewer systcm ownership and operation create a number of issues that have not been decided by the Washington Courts. It is anticipated an involuntary transfer (assumption) will require analysis by consultants and, very likely, judicial intervention. C:tDocumenti end SenteOnkerstenQoad Sat iinys:Temparary Internet Fda■CX.K5nWeetewate Collection 21_doc SPOKANE VALLEY 4/04 — WASTEWATER LTITLITY FINANCIAL INFORMATION 1. Can the City of Spokane Valley operate a portion of the wastewater utility as efficiently as one agency operating all of the utility? A. No. Spokane Valley would need duplicate equipment, tools and staffing to operate a portion of the utility. 2. Will there be added costs if the City of Spokane Valley owns/builds and operates the wastewater utility? A. There will be additional costs if the City of Spokane Valley is the lead agency. These costs would include additional reserves and debt coverage for construction bonds. 3. Does the City of Spokane Valley have an experienced team to operate a wastewater utility? A. No. Spokane Valley would need some or all of the existing 60+ employees that are operating the county's wastewater utility. Treatment plant operators would also be needed when the plant is ready for operation. 4. Who would handle the billing, accounting, collection, service requests, telephone calls for 35,000 customers? A. The county's office employees identified in question 3, currently handle these tasks. They receive help from the County Treasurer's office stag. If Spokane Valley was the lead agency, many of these same employees would be retained Some additional staff would be needed if the County Treasurer's staff became unavailable, or if Spokane Valley operated only a portion of the utility. 5. Are there likely to be legal challenges to this project which would result in greater costs? A. We hope the answer to this question is no. However, there could be as many as six governmental agencies involved, environmental groups, developers, builders and concerned citizens. The construction part of this program will take 5+ years with operations continuing for 40+ years. A legal challenge is possible. 6. Would general facilities charges and user fees increase over current amounts? A. Yes, these fees will increase because an additional $100 million of improvements would be made to the existing facilities. These increases will take place no matter which agency leads the project. If Spokane Valley was the Icad agency these charges/fees would be greater than if Spokane County was the lead agency because of additional borrowing costs a new organization would experience. 7. How much would the treatment plant cost and how would it be financed? A. The cost for a treatment plant would be approximately $100 million. There may be a loan available for S73 million at 1.6 %. The balance of the funding would be raised through the sale of revenue bonds by the lead agency and through the use of $20 million in County reserves. Annual debt service would be between $6 and $8 million. General facilities charges and user fccs would be used to pay the debt service. 8. How soon would construction start? A. Construction would start somewhere between 2007 and 2012 depending on when a permit became available, when a site was acquired, when legal issues were resolved and when funding was in place. The longer it takes for construction, the more the project will cost. LEGAL ISSUES REGARDING OWNERSHIP AND OPERATION OF A WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND TREATMENT FACILITY BACKGROUND • The sanitary sewer collection system within the City of Spokane Valley is owned and operated by Spokane County. • System expansion and additional treatment capacity is required for the County Service Area and the City of Spokane Valley. • The City and Spokane County are negotiating an Interlocal Agreement for wastewater collection and treatment. WASTEWATER OWNERSHIP AND OPERATION • By statute, primary authority to construct, operate and maintain sewage system which is within the County Sewer Service Area and Plan remains with the City. County may construct own, operate and maintain a sewer system within the City upon the written consent of the City. With pre - incorporation sewer system, written consent likely to control only system expansion. • RCW 36.94.180 allows transfer of a sewer system upon incorporation of the City. In. Summary, the above statute provides: The property, facilities and equipment of the County Sewer System within the incorporated area (the City) may be transferred to the City, if the transfer will not materially affect the operation of the remaining County system. The City shall assume the County's obligations relating to the property, facilities and equipment pursuant to RCW Chapter 35.13A. • Statutory Construction of RCW 36.94.180 - 4 key points. 1. Property, facilities and equipment "within the City ". If a treatment plant is constructed outside of the City, can the City acquire the plant? • City has authority to condemn, purchase, acquire, construct and operate sewage system within and without the City's corporate limits. RCW 35.67.020. See also, 4 below. • Condemnation depends upon the use of the County Property. C:1Documents and SeuinSs\nkcrstcn \Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OL1:571Wa tewatcr Collection 21_doc CONCLUSION 2. "May be transferred to the City" • County takes the position that the word "may" requires consent by the County. • MRSC states the word "may" requires a negotiated agreement. • Alternative opinion is the word "may" relates to the final subject in the state statute which is a reference to the general assumption laws of the state of Washington. Mutual consent may not be required. • A Cowl ruling may be required to determine which interpretation is correct. 3. "Will not materially affect" the remaining system. • Materially affect is a term that is not defined in the statute. • The above term should be the focus of engineering or other utility studies that analyze how a transfer will materially affect the remaining system. • There is no appellate case law that has defined this term in this statutory context. Thus, the terra will be a matter of judicial opinion. • The County has stated there will be a material affect on the remaining system. • A court ruling may be required to determine the meaning of "materially affect ". 4. "Subject to" ... "the procedures specified in and ... authority of RCW Chapter 35.13A." • RCW Chapter 35.13A is the general assumption laws for cities acquiring special purpose districts. • An assumption can occur a number of different ways all premised upon how much of the district or system is located within the City. • If at least 60% is in the City, the City can acquire the whole except that portion of the County's system included within another city. • if there are facilities outside of the City which serve City ratepayers, the County, shall for the economically useful life of such facilities make available sufficient capacity to serve the sewage requirements of the City, to the extend that such facilities were designed to serve the City. RCW 35.13A.050. The above statutes relating to sewer system ownership and operation create a number of issues that have not been decided by the Washington Courts. It is anticipated an involuntary transfer (assumption) will require analysis by consultants and, very likely, judicial intervention. C:1Docnrcnts and Settingslnkc ten1Loca1 Settings\Temporary Internet Files10LK571Wastewater Collection 21.doc City of Spokane Valley Public Open House Discussion April 20, 2004 Current Status of Wastewater Issues: • Regional Wasterwater Committee o Council approved participation in Regional Wastewater Committee on October 7, 2003. o Meetings were held on October 22, 2003, February 18, 2004 and March 26, 2004. o The next meeting will review various forms of regional governance options. • Wastewater Interlocal o The City is currently working with the County on the development of an interlocal agreement which includes the following main issues: o Ownership, Operation and Maintenance o Planning, Design and Construction of Sewers o Wastewater Treatment Plant Capacity • DOE Agrees to Issue Permit o Department of Ecology issued a letter on November 7, 2003 confirming they would issue the initial 5 -year National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) permit for the new wastewater plant. • Approval of Regional Concept o In December, 2003 the County of Spokane, City of Spokane Valley and City of Spokane agreed to proceed with the analysis of the Playfair site for a regional wastewater facility o The regional facility would have 7.5 mgd capacity for the County /City of Spokane Valley and 2.5 mgd for the City of Spokane. • Playfair Site Analysis o The first public meeting for the supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on Playfair was held on February 25, 2004 o The second public meeting will be on May 12, 2004 at the East Central Community Center. • EPA Stops Permit and Loan o On March 2, 2004 the Department of Ecology informed us that the EPA had given them notice to not issue the NPDES permit and to not approve the State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan for the construction of the wastewater project. • Meeting with EPA Administrator o On March 29, 2004 a meeting was held with John lani, Regional Administrator with EPA. o Mr. lani confirmed EPA's position, but agreed to a Spokane River Wastewater Permitting Work Session on May 4, 2004 • EPA Wastewater Work Session o The Goal of the May 4 work session will be to arrive at a common understanding of options, altematives and strategies for planning, permitting and implementing wastewater treatment in the Spokane River watershed. City of Spokane Valley Public Meetings on Wastewater Issues April 15, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Sewer extensions & operation agreement April 29, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Regional Wastewater Treatment System May 20, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Sewer extensions & operation June 17, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Sewer Extensions and Operations (STEP) with Spokane County July 1, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Cost Comparison Wastewater Treatment, and Sewer Extension and Operation (STEP) Agreement with Spokane County July 10, 2003 - Special Joint Meeting - Spokane County Board of Commissioners and Spokane Valley City Council • Sewer fund reserves • Financial modeling for wastewater improvements • Subsidies for sewer rates and charges • Options for adjusting future rates and charges August 13, 2003 - Regional Meeting with City of Spokane, Spokane County, City of Spokane Valley and Department of Ecology • Regional Issues Discussion August 19, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Wastewater Issues Discussion September 2, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Wastewater Issues Discussion September 16, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Wastewater Issues Discussion October 7, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Proposed Resolution for Participation in Commission on Regional Wastewater Treatment Issues October 21, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Wastewater Issues Discussion October 28, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Regular Meeting • Agreement & Sewer /Stormwater Ordinance Report November 18, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Wastewater Issues Discussion December 16, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Wastewater Interlocal Agreement Draft December 23, 2003 - City of Spokane Valley - Regular Meeting • Draft MOU for Septic Tank Elimination Program (STEP) with the County January 13, 2004 - City of Spokane Valley - Regular Meeting • Design Build Operate (DBO) Discussion • Approval of STEP MOU February 3, 2004 - City of Spokane Valley - Study Session • Wastewater Policies Discussion March 2, 2004 - City of Spokane Valley - Regular Meeting • Wastewater Interlocal Agreement Discussion Spokane County Public Meetings and Notices on Wastewater Treatment Facilities September 2000 - Newsletter announcing wastewater facilities planning process September 21, 2000 - Public Meeting to discuss wastewater planning process December 2000 - Newsletter regarding second set of meetings January 10 & 11, 2001 - Public Meetings to discuss wastewater alternatives May 2001 - Newsletter regarding third set of meetings May 22 & 23, 2001 - Public Meeting to discuss preferred alternative of siting new plant in Spokane Valley November 2001 - Newsletter announcing draft Wastewater Facilities Plan and draft EIS December 18, 2001 - Public Wearing regarding Wastewater Facilities Plan adoption April 2002 - Newsletter announcing treatment plant siting process May 1, 2002 - Public Meeting to solicit input on Treatment Plant Siting process, describe the 15 identified sites, and to nominate possible sites May 2002 - Newsletter summarizing siting progress and announcing siting meeting June 13, 2002 - Public Meeting regarding 5 finalist treatment plant sites August 22, 2002 - Neighborhood meeting for the property owners surrounding the Stockyards site, to discuss concerns and get input October 2002 - Newsletter regarding finalist sites, Stockyards and Alki /Fancher, & announcing public meeting October 24, 2002 - Public Meeting to discuss the finalist sites and solicit public input November 2002 - Issue draft EIS for public comment December 2002 - Board of County Commissioners adopts final EIS for preferred sites February 2003 - Board of County Commissioners holds hearing and adopts Amendment 1 to Wastewater Facilities Plan March 2003 - Present - Considerations relative to formation of City of Spokane Valley February 25, 2003 - Public Meeting to consider Playfair Racetrack site Presentation to John Iani -March 29, 2004 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE • Early 80's, regional commitment to protection of Spokane Rathdrum Aquifer • Used ULID's initially, but switched to a prioritized rate based program in the 90's. Anticipate completion of septic tank elimination in the Urban Growth Area over the aquifer by year 2010. • In 1999, recognized that regional wastewater treatment capacity was insufficient to complete the STEP program and provide for continued regional growth. Recent flow projections indicate that the capacity limit for Spokane County /City of Spokane Valley will be reached in January 2009. • Completed a Facilities Plan in 2002 that recommended a new regional plant — Ecology approved. • Completed an Environmental Impact Statement and Facilities Plan Amendment in 2003 that identified a preferred site and recommended state of the art MBR treatment technology — Ecology Approved • Received an SRF loan offer from Ecology, in August 2003, for $73.4 million to design and construct the plant • Received a letter from Ecology in November 2003 indicating that an initial discharge permit would be issued for the new plant, consistent with the approved Facilities Plan. The letter went on to say that following the initial NPDES permit, the Department would likely exercise its enforcement discretion by issuing an Agreed Order with a compliance schedule tied to the 10 -year design capacity for the new facility to come into compliance with any new requirements that may be included in the forthcoming Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). • February 2004, were informed by Ecology staff that EPA staff had prepared a draft written document addressed to Ecology that no new or increased discharges were to be allowed into the Spokane River and that Ecology should not approve the SRF loan for the new plant or issue a discharge permit for the plant WATER QUALITY ASPECTS • Spokane River and Lake Spokane were listed for DO under the Class Based Standards • Washington has developed and is in the process of adopting Use Based Standards • Using the TMDL model developed by the Department of Ecology, excursions of DO are limited to certain of the strata within Lake Spokane for limited periods of the year • Dischargers have undertaken a Use Attainability Analysis, in accordance with EPA and Ecology guidance documents, to determine existing uses and attainable uses • On that basis, appropriate water quality criteria can be established for the riverine and lake segments to protect the uses. This may require Ecology to go through rule making to establish the site specific water quality criteria • Then, a TMDL can be determined, using the Ecology DO model, and wasteload allocations will result • Recent DO model runs have illustrated that excursions of DO will occur in Lake Spokane, even if all of the effluent from the point source dischargers in Washington State is eliminated from the Spokane River. • Recent DO model runs for the County project have illustrated that - there is no predicted impact to DO in Lake Spokane from the proposed new regional plant KEY POINTS • Spokane County, City of Spokane, City of Spokane Valley, and Liberty Lake have been working together since 1980 to protect the quality of water in the aquifer, Spokane River, and Lake Spokane • This started with the septic tank elimination program in 1980 • In 1985 the phosphorus TMDL was established. Dischargers have been working together for 20 -years to successfully manage and implement improvements to wastewater management to reduce and limit the phosphorus loading to Lake Spokane • The proposed project for a new regional treatment plant is necessary to complete the septic tank elimination program, and is now becoming a component of the City of Spokane's CSO program • The new treatment plant is state of the art, best available technology. It will reduce mass loading to the Spokane River for Phosphorus, suspended solids, and BOD. We understood that this was consistent with EPA's policy of no net loading increase to a listed water body. • The City of Spokane is also planning for effluent filtration in the next 6 years, which will significantly reduce mass loading to the Spokane River • The draft EPA position to Ecology against approving the SRF loan, or approving a discharge permit creates a huge timing problem, in that the available capacity is projected to be exhausted by January 2009. We need to start design and construction now, to achieve that completion date. • Installation of Reverse Osmosis treatment process is not considered a feasible alternative for this region • Out of river discharge, such as land application of effluent, will be in conflict with water rights and exacerbate the critically low dry season water flows in the Spokane River r E WA kK) E R" iu New regional treatment plant site development and environmental study results available for review Preliminary site development studies and environmental analysis on the two sites being considered for a new regional wastewater treatment plant — former Playfair and Stockyards — have been developed and are available for review. Spokane County, the City of Spokane Valley, and the City of Spokane have been evaluating these two sites for a plant that would treat wastewater from the City of Spokane Valley, and portions of Spokane County and the City of Spokane. After considering comments provided at the February 25, 2004 public meeting and other submitted written comments, Spokane County identified the environmental issues to be analyzed and neighborhood issues to consider. Be sure to attend the May 12th public meeting to learn about the results of the recent studies, provide comments on the Draft 2004 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), learn what's next in the site evaluation and selection process, and share your comments and perspectives. An opportunity to ask questions and provide comments will follow the staff presentation. ■ iIL LEGEND tij'I - February 2004 IV* � 1 /�� Finalist Sites _ as DYs4NE nt Sit reatmenf P Selection ilia SPO COUXI1 PUBLIC WORDS Utilities Division 1026 West Broadway Spokane, Washington 99260 -0430 Public Meeting Wednesday May 12, 2004 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. East Central Community Center 500 S. Stone Street Be sure to attend the public meeting to: Leam about the results of the site development and environmental studies on the Playfair and Stockyards sites. Leam about the next steps in the wastewater facilities siting process. Provide comments on the Draft 2004 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. Share additional comments and perspectives. YOUR COMMENTS ARE IMPORTANT!!! The Draft 2004 Supplemental EIS will be available for review on April 20, 2004. It will be posted to the project web site, www.spokanecounty.org /utilities, follow Zink to Wastewater Treatment Plant Project; available at local libraries; and can be purchased by calling 477 -3604 ext. 7176. Written comments on this document are encouraged. All written comments must be received no later than 4:30 p.m. May 24, 2004. Comments should be submitted to Bruce Rawls, Spokane County Utilities, 1026 W. Broadway Avenue, Spokane, WA 99260 or via e-mail to brawls @spokanecounty.org. To be added to the project mailing list, call 477 -3604 ext 7176. FACT SHEET PROJECT TITLE Spokane County Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Spokane County WWTP — Draft 2004 Szp lemental EIS Spokane County proposes to construct a new regional wastewater treatment plant. The new plant and associated facilities will provide additional capacity for projected growth in the County, for increased wastewater flows generated by the County's Septic Tank Elimination Program, and for flows from the City of Spokane to reduce their Combined Sewage Outfalls (CSOs). This proposal is based on the assumption that Spokane County will continue to provide wastewater management services to the new City of Spokane Valley. If the new City chooses not to have Spokane County provide wastewater management services, then the proposal may change substantially. The impacts of siting a wastewater treatment facility at either the Stockyards or A lki/Fancher sites were evaluated in the 2002 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The City of Spokane has recently decided to utilize capacity in the County's regional facility to reduce its CSOs. The addition of flows from the City of Spokane has prompted the County to reevaluate the potential sites for the treatment facility. This 2004 Supplemental EIS will analyze the impacts of siting the treatment facility at the Stockyards or Playfair Racetrack site. The Playfair site was eliminated from consideration in the 2002 Supplemental EIS, but is now being included because: • The site is no longer being proposed for redevelopment as a racetrack and has been acquired by the City of Spokane; • The site would better accommodate flows from the City of Spokane; • The alternative site considered in the 2002 Supplemental EIS, Alki /Panther, may not be available in time to meet the required schedule for the new treatment facilities. The new treatment plant will provide wastewater treatment for Spokane County unincorporated valley areas, the City of Spokane Valley, the Town of Millwood, and provide capacity for flows from the City of Spokane. Currently the County has an agreement with the City of Spokane for 10 million gallons per day (mgd) of capacity at the City of Spokane's Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant (SAWTP). It is estimated that the County's capacity at SAWTP will be exceeded by January 2009. The County proposes to construct a new treatment plant to provide an initial 10 mgd of capacity for the region by the end of 2008 with an ability to cxpand capacity in phases up to 20 mgd with ultimate buildout. This document, the Spokane County Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant Draft 2004 Supplemental EIS, identifies potential environmental impacts of the proposed new treatment April 2004 i Spokane County 6VW'7P - Dr ft 20 04 Sapp lemenlal EIS plant. The analysis is conducted on two alternative sites being considered by the County, and compared with a No Action Alternative: • Alternative 1 – Stockyards Site • Alternative 2 - Mayfair Site • Alternative 3 – No Action ACTION SPONSOR AND LEAD AGENCY Public Works Department Spokane County 1026 West Broadway Avenue Spokane, WA 99260 -0430 CONTACT PERSON Bruce Rawls, Utilities Director (509) 477 -3604 brawls@spokanecounty.org spokanecounty.org PERMITS, LICENSES, AND APPROVALS REQUIRED OR POTENTIALLY REQUIRED Citv of Spokane Spokane County Air Pollution Control Agency • Land Use — Special Use Permit • Notice: of Construction Approval (Spokane • Clearing and Grading County Air Pollution control Agency) • Building • Street Use • Shoreline Substantial Development Permit State of Washington City of Spokane Valley • State Environmental Review Process (SERP) • Land Use (Ecology) • Clearing and Grading • National Pollution Discharge Elimination • Building System (Ecology) • Street Use • 401 Water Quality Certification (Ecology) • Hydraulic Project Approval (Department of Federal Fish and Wildlife) • Section 404 — Nationwide Permit 7 • General Permit for Biosolids Management (Ecology) ii April 2004 AUTHORS AND CONTRIBUTORS Spokane Couniv W J '7f' — Draft 2(E)4 Srpo lemenlal EIS This Draft 2004 Supplemental EIS has been prepared under the direction of the Spokane County Public Works Department, Utilities Division. Research and analysis were provided by: Adolfson Associates, Inc. 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 HDR Engineering, Inc. 500 108th Avenue NE, Suite 1200 Bellevue, WA 98004 -5538 Hubbard -Gray Consulting, Inc. 6604 W. Iroquois Drive Spokane, WA 99208 Limno -Tech, Inc. 501 Avis Drive Ann Arbor, MI 48108 Eastern Washington University Archaeological and Historical Services 201 Isle Hall Cheney, WA 99004 -2420 URS Corporation 1 101 Argonne, Suite 201 Spokane, WA 99212 DATE OF ISSUE OF DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL EIS April 20, 2004 PUBLIC MEETING ON DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL EIS A public meeting on the Drafl 2004 Supplemental EIS is scheduled for May 12, 2004 at the East Central Community Center. END OF DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL EIS COMMENT PERIOD May 24, 2004; 4:30 p.m. ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This Drafl 2004 Supplemental EIS builds on the environmental analysis provided in the Programmatic EIS prepared for the Spokane County Wastewater Facilities Plan (Final EIS dated February 2002). In the programmatic document, analysis was conducted on several system options available to the County. The County utilized that information to make its decision to move forward with the construction of a new regional wastewater treatment plant. In 2002, the County prepared a Supplemental EIS to evaluate the impacts of siting the treatment plant at two locations. This 2004 Supplemental EIS will serve as additional environmental documentation for subsequent construction - related permits, provided the scope of the project described here does not substantially change. If substantive changes to the proposal are made, additional environmental review will be conducted. Additionally, the County will be seeking funding assistance from the State Revolving Fund and will meet requirements under the State Environmental Review Process. April 2004 iii Spokane Country WIFTP —Draft 2004 Supplemental EIS DISTRIBUTION Copies of this document have been sent to the agencies, individuals and libraries listed in Chapter 5. DOCUMENT AVAILABILITY Copies of this document are available for review at the Spokane County Public Libraries and at the website listed below. Copies of this document are also available for review or purchase at the Spokane County Public Works Office, Utilities Division, located at 1026 West Broadway Avenue. Purchase price in CD format is $5.00; in printed format $15.00. WEBSITE ACCESS This document may be viewed on the Spokane County Utilities Division website, lA w.spokanecounty.org/utilities. Click on the icon for Wastewater Treatment Plan Project, and then click on the view associated with the Draft 2004 Supplemental Impact Statement. April 2004 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY WASTEWATER ISSUES PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE DISCUSSION CENTRAL VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT 19307 E. CATALDO APRIL 20, 2004, 6 -8 PM AGENDA 1. WELCOME BY MICHAEL DEVLEMING, MAYOR 5 MIN. 2. OVERVIEW PRESENTATION ON CURRENT STATUS OF WASTEWATER ISSUES. 3. OPEN HOUSE — FACT SHEETS, MAPS, DISCUSSION WITH 15 MIN. STAFF. 4. SMALL GROUP BREAK -OUT DISCUSSION. 45 MIN. EACH GROUP WILL BE "THE CITY COUNCIL FOR A DAY," AND WILL IDENTIFY THE FOLLOWING: a. WHAT ARE THE 2 MAJOR WASTEWATER ISSUES? (GROUPS MAY CONSULT WITH STAFF REGARDING ISSUES) b. DEVELOP 2 RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SHOULD PROCEED WITH RESOLVING THE 2 ISSUES. • ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS ARE RECORDED AT EACH TABLE. • SHEETS WILL BE POSTED ON THE WALL FOR REVIEW. • GROUP REPORTS 5. WRAP -UP DISCUSSION. 20 MIN. 25 MIN SPOKANE VALLEY 4/04 — WASTEWATER UTILITY FINANCIAL INFORMATION 1. Can the City of Spokane Valley operate a portion of the wastewater utility as efficiently as one agency operating all of the utility? A. No. Spokane Valley would need duplicate equipment, tools and staffing to operate a portion of the utility. 2. Will there be added costs if the City of Spokane Valley owns/builds and operates the wastewater utility? A. There will be additional costs if the City of Spokane Valley is the lead agency. These costs would include additional reserves and debt coverage for construction bonds. 3. Does the City of Spokane Valley have an experienced team to operate a wastewater utility? A. No. Spokane Valley would need some or all of the existing 60+ employees that are operating the county's wastewater utility. Treatment plant operators would also be needed when the plant is ready for operation. 4. Who would handle the billing, accounting, collection, service requests, telephone calls for 35.000 customers? A. The county's office employees identified in question 3, currently handle these tasks. They receive help from the County Treasurer's office staff. If Spokane Valley was the lead agency, many of these same employees would be retained. Some additional staff would be needed if the County Treasurer's staff became unavailable, or if Spokane Valley operated only a portion of the utility. 5. Are there likely to be legal challenges to this project which would result in greater costs? A. We hope the answer to this question is no. However, there could be as many as six governmental agencies involved environmental groups, developers, builders and concerned citizens. The construction part of this program will take 5+ years with operations continuing for 40+ years. A legal challenge is possible. 6. Would general facilities charges and user fees increase over current amounts? A. Yes, these fees will increase because an additional 5100 million of improvements would be made to the existing facilities. These increases will take place no matter which agency leads the project. If Spokane Valley was the lead agency these charges /fees would be greater than if Spokane County was the lead agency because of additional borrowing costs a new organization would experience. 7. How much would the treatment plant cost and how would it be financed? A. The cost for a treatment plant would be approximately $100 million There may be a loan available for $73 million at 1.5 %. The balance of the funding would be raised through the sale of revenue bonds by the lead agency and through the use of $20 million in County reserves. Annual debt service would be between $6 and $8 million. General facilities charges and user fees would be used to pay the debt service. 8. IIow soon would construction start? A. Construction would start somewhere between 2007 and 2012 depending on when a permit became available, when a site was acquired, when legal issues were resolved and when funding was in place. The longer it takes for construction, the more the project will cost. City of Spokane Valley • ,: Wastewater Discussion Agenda • Update on the current status of wastewater issues. • OPEN HOUSE — Discussions with staff. • Break -Out Groups. • Develop issues and recommendations • Group Reports. • Wrap -up discussion. 4i76,70:61 I Yietlytescr OD= ;tea If Spokane Valley Owns the Wastewater Utility mere am e.TQib ormom Oschwe oettra an oe dt,.ne .melons to trt tt aunea no wean; lecal totes rto•awe Scat •manr6661.ca6:7.a6710661$ Coxo exam, fad Odor tr Carp Drawn a mmlatte eeai RIM a+OC YrpPQtCa mDe bat b 5:CO nfbi (.IMVS•ti7' =Cn reached The rRSS 66, 13 eNarte o MG 4n My on an Wets aS# b aroma In ems d Ore Kae Th6T1 ae voontol Mope m Octnl Daft coons rel aartnts4 ctiy sn asa6:66 � a Run to ID(t re 6,6.76 .rswa>z rNmn tetamr yta• fluty it J On My of r6ciono Viq dU aaatrtt emt a .eos + Ya er to ate a mum of to o/4Yp Worn T7 Mitt, mem Ceab. etmnalon a CYCIC to Ds OR 66,666 6JIDA ID5. vie srar qan ibus 4F 20M 1 Greater Costs if City of Spokane Valley Owns/Operates the Utility • • A greater dirt coverage factor will be required to provide security to bond buyers Debt coverage factor 1.95 Spokane County has assessment principal and interest to Include in their revenues which helps In the debt coverage calculation • Spokane County has access to a greater amount of reserves which can be used to reduce the amount a bonds sold Estimate of Increase in Wastewater Rates for Capital Costs by 2009 • If Spokane County owned /operated the utility $6 - $15 /month • If Spokane Valley owned /operated the utility $10 - $20 /month (33% greater than County) • Note: An increase in the General Facilities Charge might reduce these monthly user fees I Regional Wasterwater Committee • Council approved participation in Regional Wastewater Committee on October 7, 2003 • Meetings were held on October 22, 2003, February 18, 2004 and March 26, 2004. • The next meeting will review various forms of regional governance options. t .-izmzooi 2 Wastewater Interlocal • The City is currently working with the County on the development of an interlocal agreement which includes the following main issues: — Ownership, Operation and Maintenance — Planning, Design and Construction of Sewers — Wastewa Treatment Plant Capacity DOE Agrees to Issue Permit • Department of Ecology issued a letter on November 7, 2003 confirming they would issue the initial 5 -year National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for the new wastewater plant. .R l Approval of Regional Concept • In December, 2003 the County of Spokane, City of Spokane Valley and City of Spokane agreed to proceed with the analysis of the Playfair site for a regional wastewater facility. • The regional facility would have 7.5 mgd capacity for the County/City of Spokane Valley and 2.5 mgd for the City of Spokane. ` VV :anw. 3 Playfair Site Analysis • The County held the first public meeting for the supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on Playfair was held on February 25, 2004. • The second public meeting will be on May 12, 2004 at the East Central Community Center. 1Vestaarto Opals Maar 4/112;31:104 EPA Stops Permit and Loan • On March 2, 2004 the Department of Ecology announced that the EPA had given notice to not issue the NPDES permit and to not approve the State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan for the construction of the wastewater project. ..1 T Meeting with EPA Administrator • On March 29, 2004 a meeting was held with John Tani, Regional Administrator with EPA. • Mr. Iani confirmed EPA's position, but agreed to a Spokane River Wastewater Permitting Work Session on May 4, 2004 wti.e.�.• ap... we. vivinrw 4 EPA Wastewater Work Session • The Goal of the work session will be to arrive at a common understanding of options, alternatives and strategies for planning, permitting and implementing wastewater treatment in the Spokane River watershed. 13 l Mloaram :r o ra,a y _t/t]/mD/ Wastewater Treatment Plant Schedule c_ emit At .. SO.oa Small Group Break -out • What are the 2 major wastewater issues? • Develop 2 recommendations on how the City of Spokane Valley should proceed to resolve the issues. • Wrap -up discussion. p g 5 Return to: Board of County Commissioners Clerk of the Board 1116 W. Broadway Spokane, Washington 99206 Draft Interlocal Agreement Between the City of Spokane Valley and Spokane County Regarding Wastewater Management THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of January, 2004, by and between the CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, Washington, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley Washington, 99206 hereinafter referred to as the "CITY ", and SPOKANE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 1116 West Broadway, Spokane Washington, Washington 99260, hereinafter referred to as the "COUNTY," jointly referred to, along with the CITY, as the "PARTIES." WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the CITY is located in the Aquifer Protection Area established by the COUNTY by Ordinance 85 -061 dated July 30, 1985; and WHEREAS, prior to the incorporation of the CITY, the COUNTY had, with the direction and approval of the State of Washington Department of Ecology (DOE), begun the extension of sanitary sewers within the Aquifer Protection Area, which arca includes that area now incorporated as the City of Spokane Valley, following a program to be completed in accordance with the plan developed by the COUNTY; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY has created a Utilities Division within the Public Works Department capable of implementing the completion of the sanitary sewer program to standards acceptable to the CITY; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY has prepared and adopted the Spokane County 2001 Comprehensive Wastewater Management Plan (Plan) for implementation of a sewer program for the Urban Growth Areas within the Aquifer Protection Area; and I C:1Docn men ts and Settineslnkersten \LocaI SettinesVrernpnrary Internet Files10L1:571WastewaterVnIleyit reenreat-Desft3-IO-04- RLI.DOCGAGNGit -ttf- Stnt iatrte -Valley- 143244tjteeloeal,Agreerne tits \ Wastewater-V alleyAgfeentent- Nrait- ?- ?7 -04-RL dee Pagel of 15 WHEREAS, the CITY wishes to see the completion of the sanitary sewer system to protect and serve the C1TY's residents, businesses, and the aquifer and WHEREAS, the COUNTY has received an Extended Grant from the State of Washington Centennial Clean Water Fund to be used to reduce the cost impacts of sewer construction in the Aquifer Protection Area (APA); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of chapter 36.36 RCW, the citizens of the COUNTY voted to implement an APA Fee to provide a financing method to preserve, protect, and rehabilitate the Spokane Rathdrurn Aquifer, which Fee will sunset in year 2005 unless it is reauthorized by the voters; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY, prior to November 4, 2003, had historically allocated one - eighth of 1% local option sales tax revenues collected pursuant to chapter 82.14.030(2) RCW to the sewer utility to subsidize the cost of sewers; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY has accumulated substantial fund balances in the sewer utility funds) from connection fees, wastewater treatment charges, sales tax allocations and APA Fees; and WHEREAS, a substantial portion of the APA Fees,_sales tax revenues. connection fees, and wastewater treatment charges were contributed from within the area of the CITY; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY has had a policy of assisting property owners in the unincorporated areas, which included City of Spokane Valley, by reducing the net cost of the Capital Facilities Charge Rate (CFR) paid by each property within the sewer program; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of chapter 36.94.180 RCW, in the event of an incorporation of an area in which a county is operating a sewerage system, the property, facilities, and equipment of such sewerage system lying within the incorporated area may be transferred to the city if such transfer will not materially affect the operation of any of the remaining county system, subject to the assumption by the city of the county's obligation relating to such property, facilities, and equipment, under the procedures specified in and pursuant to the authority contained in chapter 35.13.A R.CW; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY and CITY are obligated to complete the elimination of septic tanks in the Urban Growth Area by extending sewer service to all properties within the CITY to the extent practicable; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY owns, operates, and maintains all of the existing public sewer system within the CITY; and WHEREAS, pursuant to chapter 36.94.170 RCW the CITY has the primary authority for constructing, operating and maintaining a sewage system within the CITY unless the CITY desires through written consent that the COUNTY continue to own, operate, and maintain the public sewer system within the CITY. I C:1110euments nod Settirigs\nkrrsten \Local Settines\Temnorary Internet I i1cs10i,K571WastewaterValleVA _regiment- [)raft3- 10-04- $t L J , RO(;G: \GGittiwf- Spokane -Valle ents\wastewo ter- VullevArreemen oe Page 2 of 15 NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual promises set forth herein, the PARTIES hereto do mutually agree as follows: SECTION 1: OWNERSHIP, OPERATION, MAINTENANCE AND ADMINISTRATION 1 -1 The CITY authorizes the COUNTY to own, operate and maintain the sanitary sewer system (System) within the CITY as a public utility, as provided for in chapter 36.94.170 RCW. For the purpose of this Agreement the terminology "System" shall mean all publicly owned sewers, manholes, appurtenances, and pumping stations within public rights of way or within public easements within the CITY. If the COUNTY implements a new regional wastewater treatment plant, as referenced in Section 3 of this Agreement, the new regional wastewater treatment plant shall become a part of the "System ". 1 -2 The CITY shall grant a franchise to the COUNTY for use of CITY public right of way for the purpose of providing said sanitary sewer service. The CITY may charge a franchise fee to the COUNTY for said franchise. If the CITY chooses to charge, or adjust, a franchise fee, the CITY shall notify the COUNTY in writing not later than September I of the preceding year, of the intent to charge, or adjust, the franchise fee. The purpose of the franchise fee would be to compensate the CITY for its reasonable costs, expenses, and obligations actually incurred or contracted which are directly related to and which benefit the System in CITY areas that the COUNTY serves. Any CITY franchise fee may be recovered from the CITY ratepayers through the process set forth in Sections 1 -8 and 1 -9. 1. -3 The COUNTY shall not enact or impose any tax on gross revenues generated by the System within the CITY pursuant to chapter 36.94.160 RCW. unless expressly authorized by the Spokane Valley City Council. 1 -4 The CITY initially shall adopt the provisions of Spokane County Code Chapter 8.03 ( "Sewer Code ") in its entirety. The CITY may adopt future revisions made by the COUNTY to Spokane County Code Chapter 8.03 within 90 calendar days of the date of adoption by the COUNTY. Nothing contained herein shall prevent the City Council from exercising its legislative discretion to amend, modify or repeal the Sewer Code as deemed reasonably necessary to serve the best interests of the CITY, provided the City shall not enact legislation that detrimentally impacts or unreasonably interferes with state or federal permits issued to operate the System. The CITY shall notify the COUNTY if it chooses not to adopt subsequent revisions requested by the COUNTY, or if the CITY elects to amend, modify or repeal the Sewer Code. 1 -5 The CITY delegates authority to the COUNTY to enforce the provisions of Spokane County Code Chapter 8-4-3 -Sewer Code within the CITY. COUNTY shall administer, bill, collect and account for all charges and service fees related to the System. The COUNTY shall be the primary party responsible for initiating any civil and/or criminal litigation for enforcement through its own legal counsel. The COUNTY shall be the C:IDocuments and Scttingslnkersten1Local Settinps\Temporary Internet Files10LK571WastewatervalleyArrcement-Drnft3-IO01- RLl.DOC:C: or-Spokane -Val ley -143 4ote eai- ltreementskWastewalettValleyAg neol-Ura t - 27- D4- I4 -bdoc Page 3 of 15 primary party responsible for inspection activities, engineering services, legal or other actions necessary to enforce compliance with the Sewer Code. In the event the COUNTY requests assistance from the CITY, and the CITY takes action to benefit the System, including but not limited to civil and/or criminal litigation for enforcement, surveys, studies or property acquisition, the COUNTY shall compensate the CITY for its reasonable costs, expenses and obligations actually incurred. See chapter 36.94.170 RCW. 1 -6 All permits issued by the COUNTY for connection to the System shall be reported to the CITY. The COUNTY will direct sewer installers to the CITY for permits to work in the CITY rights of way. CITY shall retain all fees for right of way permits. 1 -7 Each year in January, the COUNTY will report to the CiTY (i) System extensions completed for the previous calendar year, (ii) the number of actual connections (ERU) completed the previous year, and (iii) the total ERIJ count for the System within the CITY. The County will maintain as "as built" plan of the system and make it available to the City. 1 -8 The COUNTY shall be delegated the authority to administer and enforce connection requirements to the sewer system, in accordance with the Sewer Code. COUNTY shall submit an annual report in January of each year listing the number and address of all properties where sewer service is available but which have not completed the connections to the System. 1 -9 The COUNTY, through its Board of County Commissioners, will establish, set, and adopt all fees, rates, and charges (hereinafter "rates and charges") for the sanitary sewer system pursuant to chapters 36.94.140 and 35.67.020 RCW. To the maximum extent possible, rates and charges will be based on cost of service. Prior to setting rates and charges for the following year, the COUNTY shall: (1) present its proposal to the CITY for review and comment and (2) consider the comments of the CITY prior to setting rates. The COUNTY will endeavor to maintain the cost of sewer construction and treatment plant capacity to serve both CITY and COUNTY customers at the lowest practicable cost. To further increase ratepayer confidence in the COUNTY'S pursuit of the lowest practicable costs. the COUNTY will submit its proposed rates and charges for an external analysis (second opinion) by a qualified private- sector firm which was not a party to the preparation of the COUNTY'S proposal for rates and charges. The analytical report will be provided to the CiTY for consideration. The cost of such anal , sis is a. reasonable ex.ense of doing business and ma : be recovered through rates and charges. 1 -10 The fees, rates and charges for customers inside the CITY will be equal to those outside the CiTY, provided that the cost of service is equal. If a franchise fee is charged by the CITY, or if the cost of service varies substantially for a class of customers inside the CITY compared to outside, or if new subsidy revenues are provided to the sewer program by either the CiTY or COUNTY, differential fees, rates, or charges may be adopted. The COUNTY will meet with the City before adopting differential fees, rates, C:10oeurnents and Set tir, sln !icemen \Local Se tti n es's' rt nipo ea ry Internet Files l0LIC57R1'astewaterVaIIevACrec men t-DryJ13-I0-04- RLI .DOCG:IG.City- of-Spol,ane-' -olle 324ktotertocal- rlareentenl+lw-astea'atef -Vex .te Ageeeeneot -t)r- aft- ?- ?i -04- RL•,doe Page 4of15 or charges. .In the event that the parties do not agree on a proposed differential in fees, rates, or charges, they agree to submit the issues to mediation. The form of the mediation shall be as agreed between the parties. CITY and COUN'T'Y agree that the future revenues for new treatment plant capacity, upgrades of the City of Spokane Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant (SAWTP), interceptors and pumping stations will be generated through a combination of General Facilities Charges (GFC's) and Wastewater Treatment Plant Charges. CITY agrees that subsidies for GFC's for new development should be eliminated, and that GFC's and Wastewater Treatment Plant Charges should be set at a level to generate adequate revenues to pay for new treatment plant capacity. COUNTY agrees that surplus revenues (above the amount necessary to subsidize Capital Facilities Rates (CFR's)) in the reserve funds will be, used to offset the cost of new wastewater treatment plant capacity. 1 -12 Annually, prior to submission to the Board of County Commissioners for adoption, the COUNTY will provide the CITY with the proposed Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and proposed CPR's for extension and operation of the System within the CITY. 1 -13 For work performed by the CITY that relate to the planning and development of additional treatment facility capacity for the CITY as set forth in Section 3. the CITY shall be reimbursed from the Sewer Reserve Fund. SEC I ION 2: PLANNING, DESIGN, AND CONSTRUCTION OF SEWERS 2 -1 To the extent legally permissible, the COUNTY will update the Spokane County Comprehensive Wastewater Management Plan (Plan) as necessary to conform to the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive (land use) Plan. 2 -2 The COUNTY shall be responsible for diligently pursuing the completion of the sanitary sewer system and septic tank elimination program (STEP) in accordance with the Plan and the Six Year Sewer Construction Capital Improvement Program, ('Program ") as amended annually. This responsibility shall include the planning, design, and construction of new sewers, as identified in the Plan, within the System through the life of this Agreement. At least sixty days prior to adoption of the STEP Plan and the Program the same shall be submitted to the CITY for review and comment. Prior to the COUNTY commencing any construction under the STEP Plan or Program, the COUNTY and the CITY shall mutually agree on the STEP Plan or Program. 2 -3 The COUNTY may extend the System to areas outside of the CITY, provided that adequate capacity is maintained in the trunk and interceptor sewers to serve properties within the CITY. Extension of sewer service outside of the CITY shall not cause additional costs to accrue to CITY sewer users. C:1Documents and Seth neslnkeesten11 .pea I Settines1Tena Flora ry I I° tlesA OLK57\ Wa stews tcr IIevAgreemcnt- Deaf13- 1Q-04- RLI.DOC I.W.ityr+fSpr+kane -V alley- iy 334 11Mer0eaF- rtgr eementslwastewateryalle3Agreeme Page 5ofl5 2-4 The COUNTY shall restore all CITY streets, in which sewer construction takes place, with full width reconstruction of the street base, surface and drainage to standards approved by the CiTY, which standards shall not be less than the standards adopted and applied by the COUNTY prior to incorporation. The CITY shall pay for all additional costs to provide full width pavement, beyond the normal trench width pavement replacement. The methods used to establish the scope and budget for full width paving shall be generally consistent with the methods established in Attachment "A ". At the beginning of each construction season, COUNTY staff in collaboration with CiTY staff will evaluate the condition of streets and roads within the CITY, and determine the scope and cost for full width pavement in that year's projects. Full width pavement will not be included in the construction projects until the CITY and COUNTY staffs' agree in writing to the scope and budget for full width paving. During the construction period, COUNTY will provide monthly invoices to the CiTY for the full width paving completed, and CiTY shall provide payment to the COUNTY within 30 calendar days. Any late payment will be subject to a penalty based upon lost interest earnings had the payment been timely paid and invested in the Spokane County Treasurer's Investment Pool. 2 -5 'The COUNTY shall continue to actively pursue grants and low interest loans to offset costs of the sewer construction program. Grants and loans shall be applied proportionally to COUNTY sewer customers outside and inside of the CITY. CITY agrees to cooperate with and support the COUNTY in pursuing grants and loans. 2 -6 The COUNTY will pursue the reauthorization of the Aquifer Protection Area Fees as provided for in chapter 36.36 RCW to reduce the cost of sewers to users of the System. The CiTY. throurd the City Council shall consider a resolution to support this effort to obtain additional funds to reduce the cost of sewers to CITY residents and properties; To the extent required — ley —law, the CITY will pass a rose ution agreeing that its boundaries be included within the Aquifer Protection Area. 2 -7 The COUNTY shall continue to provide a subsidy to the cost of CPR's using the computational method currently in effect, within the limits of sewer reserve funds available for the subsidy. A copy of that method is attached hereto as Attachment `B" and incorporated herein by reference. For the purpose of this Agreement the terminology "Sewer Reserve Fund" shall mean those monies reflected in Budget Funds 403 and 436, indicated as Beginning and End Fund Balances. Sewer Reserve Funds are for authorized sewer uses and APA program uses, and are not solely for the subsidy of Capital Facilities Rates. Neither the COUNTY nor CITY will —be obligated to contribute any additional funds to support this subsidy. The COUNTY shall commit a fair and equitable amount of the Sewer Reserve Fund to the capital facility rates charged the CITY ratepayers. Prior to allocating the fair and equitable amount committed to the CITY froni the Sewer Reserve Fund to the capital facility rates. the COUNTY shall receive the consent of the C1TY. I C:\l)ocuments and Settingslakerstepadical Settinis \Temporary Internet Files101,1: 57∎ Was tewaterVallevAerccmient- [lraft3- 10-04- RI.1.I)OCC:\C1Cit of + Set : -ene- 4itler- 1+1324Hnteriocal :Agrretneatsl 'usir.+�xte;1 a11ey:1gneernent- flr-aft 2 - 27 - 1)4 - doe Page 6 of 15 SECTION 3: WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT CAPACITY 3 -1 Currently, wastewater treatment is provided at the SAWTP, for which the COUNT Y has a contract with the City of Spokane for up to 10 million gallons per day of capacity. The COUNTY acknowledges that a portion of the above referenced wastewater treatment capacity has been acquired by the CITY properties connected to the System. The COUNTY shall provide sufficient wastewater treatment capacity to comply with the Comprehensive Plan of the CiTY. 3 -2 The CITY agrees that the COUNTY will be the lead agency for implementation of a new regional wastewater treatment plant in the western edge of the Spokane Valley geographic area. The new regional wastewater treatment plant will be capable of providing wastewater treatment capacity to customers in the CITY, the COUNTY, and the City of Spokane. The COUNTY agrees to evaluate the Playfair Race Track as an alternate preferred site for the new regional plant, and will prepare amendments to the previously finalized Supple Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) and Wastewater Facilities Plan Amendment report, provided that the City of Spokane agrees to provide a proportional share of the cost of engineering. The project will be designed, constructed and operated using the Design - Build- Operate (DBO) delivery method_pursuant to RCW Chajr 70.150 and this section. The COUNTY will endeavor to complete the evaluation of Playfair Race Track on a schedule to facilitate execution of the SRI' Loan Offer that has been extended to the COUNTY by the Washington Department of Ecology. The COUNTY will make the final decision on the location and size of the new regional wastewater treatment plant. The COUNTY will present the draft Facilities Plan Amendment and draft amendment to the SETS to the CITY for review and comment prior to finalizing the documents. As the lead agency for implementation of the new regional wastewater treatment plant, the COUNTY will coordinate closely with the CITY. For purposes of this paragraph, the terminology "coordinate" shall mean formulation of a technical review group, including representatives from the public works departments of the COUNTY, the CiTY, and the City of Spokane, which will meet on a regular basis to review the progress of work, and to discuss issues related to the technical aspects of the new regional wastewater treatment plant and to the project implementation process. A aeh-o -' e tlie4443 9- seleetf reees s- 3- 3 Prior to entering into an agreement with a service provider under RCW 70.1 50.030 the COUNTY shall form a DBO Procurement Committee under RCW 70.1 50.040(3). The DBO .Procurement Committee utilized by the COUNTY shall include at least one representative appointed by the. City Council of the City of Spokane Valley who shall participate in the DBO procurement process. The COUNTY shall make the final DBO selection following the Committee recommendation. To insure that the DBO delivery method is the most cost efficient to the System and the City ratepayers, the COUNTY CAD oenments Fled Settin slnkersten11A)cal `ettinesl'i'emnorary Internet Files\ 0LIC571«' ast ,cnt- tlraft3 -10 -04- R1.1.0 0 CGACACi ty-of-Spoke negalley- 1- J32-4k4nteAoenMgfeemeotskWastewa le i -Ve lleyAgr-ceine +rdoc f'age 7 of 15 shall obtain from the Department of Ecology a determination concluding that the DBO delivery method results in a cost saving to the system. its ratepayers and the desittm. construction and operation of the new Wastewater Treatment Plant. SECTION NO. 4: INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM 4 -1 The CiTY delegates authority to the COUNTY to implement and administer the County's Approved Industrial Pretreatment Program ( "AIPP ") in accordance with County, State, and Federal laws, regulations and requirements. For the purpose of this Agreement the COUNTY'S A.1PP shall mean the Industrial Pretreatment Program dated June 5, 1998 and any revisions thereto approved by the Washington State Department of Ecology. This authority shall apply to all properties that utilize the COUNTY'S wastewater collection system located within the CITY'S incorporated boundaries. The AiPP includes the COUNTY'S Pretreatment Ordinance as adopted in Chapter 8.03, Article 4000 "Pretreatment," (in its entirety), and Sections 8.03.9080, 8.03.9100, 8.03.9160, 8.03.9180, and 8.03.9185 of the Spokane County Code. 4 -2 The CITY shall adopt the provisions of Spokane County Code Chapter 8.03 Article 4000, "Pretreatment," (in its entirety), and Sections 8.03.9080, 8.03.9100, 8.03.9160, 8.03.9180, and 8.03.9185 prior to the COUNTY implementing or administering its AMP within the CITY'S boundaries. A copy of said Article and Sections are attached hereto in Appendix "A." The CITY agrees to review, consider and adopt future revisions made by the COUNTY to Spokane County Code Chapter 8.03, Article 4000 "Pretreatment," (in its entirety), and Sections 8.03.9080, 8.03.9100, 8.03.9160, 8.03.9180, and 8.03.9185 of the Spokane County Code within 90 calendar days of the date of adoption by the COUNTY. 4 -3 The CITY delegates authority to the COUNTY to enforce all the provisions of Spokane County Code Chapter 8.03, Article 4000 "Pretreatment," (in its entirety), and Sections 8.03.9080, 8.03.9100, 8.03.9160, 8.03.9180, and 8.03.9185 of the Spokane County Code within the CITY as those provisions presently exist or as they may be hereafter revised. The CITY agrees, upon request of the COUNTY, to make available any of its staff, to include law enforcement, which may be necessary in conjunction with COUNTY enforcement actions. SECTION 5: NOTICE All notices or other communications given hereunder shall be deemed given on: (1) the day such notices or other communications are received when sent by personal delivery; or (ii) the third day following the day on which the same have been mailed by first class delivery, postage prepaid addressed to COUNTY at the address set forth below for such Party, or at such other address as COUNTY shall from time -to -time designate by notice in writing to the other PARTIES: COUNTY: Spokane County Chief Executive Officer or his/her authorized representative 1116 West Broadway Avenue I C :IDocu men ts and Set tings \nkerstej \Lorin Sett inos \Temporary Internet F les \OI.iK571W1'aster'aterVtIIevAt reement-1)raft3-10-04- RL1.1)O CC: 1C,'tiC'ity -olt Spokane - Valley -143 44nterltical- Agr- eement .kwx:steweter-4411eyekgreentent- Draft- 2- 27 -04 -R) ue Page 8 of 15 CITY: Spokane, Washington 99260 SECTION 6: COUNTERPARTS This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which, when so executed and delivered, shall be an original, but such counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same. SECTION 7: ASSIGNMENT City of Spokane Valley City Manager or his/her authorized representative Redwood Plaza 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 No party may assign in whole or part its interest in this Agreement without the written approval of all other PARTIES. SECTION 8: LIABILITY (a) COUNTY shall indemnify and hold harmless CiTY and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent act or omission of COUNTY, its officers, agents and employees, or any of them relating to or arising out of performing services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that any suit based upon such claim, action, loss, or damages is brought against CITY, COUNTY shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense; provided that CITY reserves the right to participate in said suit if any principle of governmental or public law is involved; and if final judgment in said suit be rendered against CITY, and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them, or jointly against CITY and COUNTY and their respective officers, agents, and employees, COUNTY shall satisfy the sane. (b) CITY shall indemnify and hold harmless COUNTY and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent act or omission of CITY, its officers, agents and employees, or any of them relating to or arising out of performing services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that any suit based upon such claim, action, loss, or damages is brought against COUNTY, CITY shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense; provided that COUNTY reserves the right to participate in said suit if any principle of governmental or public law is involved; and if final judgment in said suit be rendered against COUNTY, and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them, or jointly against COUNTY and CITY and their respective officers, agents, and employees, CITY shall satisfy the same. (c) The foregoing indemnity is specifically intended to constitute a waiver of each party's immunity under Washington's Industrial Insurance Act, chapter 51 RCW, respecting the other C:IDocuments and Settiru',\nkcrsten \Local ScttinQS \Tcmpnrary Internet I'itcs\OLFK571WastewaterVaIlcvAgreement-Drstft3-IQdW- RLI.DOCC;1nCity- MMSpukene V alley- 143244ntei Kel- AKFeevttent .is,Wasteweter-ValleyAgfeentent -Draft 1 - 1 7 04-11-1,410e Page 9 of 15 party only, and only to the extent necessary to provide the indemnified party with a full and complete indemnity of claims made by the indemnitor's employees. The PARTIES acknowledge that these provisions were specifically negotiated and agreed upon by them. (d) COUNTY and CITY agree to either self insure or purchase polices of insurance covering the natters contained in this Agreement with coverages of not less than $5,000,000 per occurrence with $5,000,000 aggregate limits including for ENGINEERS professional liability and auto liability coverages. SECTION 9: RELATIONSHIP OF THE. PARTIES The PARTIES intend that an independent contractor relationship will be created by this Agreement. No agent, employee, servant or representative of COUNTY shall be deemed to be an employee, agent, servant or representative of CITY for any purpose. Likewise, no agent, employee, servant or representative of CITY shall be deemed to be an employee, agent, servant or representative of COUNTY for any purpose. SECTION 10: MODIFICATION This Agreement may be modified in writing by mutual written agreement of the PARTIES. SECTION 11: DURATION This Agreement shall be effective as of the date set forth herein above and shall continue until terminated pursuant to Section 14-2. SECTION 12: TERMiNAT.iON e -sent- lady- aeptj4ied- mail -tThe CiTY or COUNTY may terminate this Agreement upon 12 months written notice, sent by certified mail. provided that termination of this Agreement shall not occur during the period of time between the date of execution by the COUNTY of a contract with a DBO firm and the completion date of acceptance testing for the new regional wastewater treatment plant- Within fifteen (15) calendar days after receipt of the written notice of termination, and at least once every two weeks thereafter, the parties shall meet to negotiate the terms and conditions of a Termination Agreement. The negotiation of the Temnination Agreement shall address transfer of assets, transfer of employees, transfer of fund balance reserves, transfer of contractual obligations, transfer of indebtedness obligations, establishment of system value, transfer of the new regional wastewater treatment plant. determination whether there is a material affect to the operation of any of the remaining COUNTY system. payments to the COUNTY, and all other aspects of an equitable termination of this Agreement, and pursuant to chapter 36.94.180 RCW. 14-is athnowledee . • ., - • isdfietion- GAUNTY system. C :1Documents and Sett' neslnkerstenll.ocal SettinfisVFcmpnrin• Inttroct 1' Iles)01.1: 5711 'aslewaterN'alle∎.lttreement- Dram)- 11)d14- RLI.DOCG:1CtiC-ity- rfSpol: anew -elle greerneotAWnstewnterVallerAgreement- Draft - "a-2? "..4- ,°.,ioe Page 10 of 15 If the parties are unable to reach final agreement on the terms and conditions of a Termination Agreement within six (6) months from the date of receipt of the notice, non - binding mediation shall occur. The parties shall mutually decide the mediation procedures, dates, and person(s) to conduct the mediation. Mediation shall be concluded within twelve (12) months from the date of receipt of the notice, unless mutually agreed otherwise by the parties. SECTION 13: PROPERTY AND EQUTPMENT The ownership of all property and equipment utilized by the COUNTY under the terms of this Agreement shall rernai.n with the COUNTY. SECTION 14: ALL WRITINGS CONTAINED HEREIN/BINDING EFFECT This Agreement contains terms and conditions agreed upon by the PARTIES. The PARTIES agree that there are no other understandings, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be binding upon the PARTIES hereto, their successors and assigns. SECTION 15: VENUE ST11IPULATION This Agreement has been and shall be construed as having been made and delivered within the State of Washington and it is mutually understood and agreed by each party that this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington both as to interpretation and performance. Any action at law, suit in equity or judicial proceeding for the enforcement of this Agreement, or any provision hereto, shall be instituted only in courts of competent jurisdiction within Spokane. County, Washington. SECTION 16: SEVERABILITY It is understood and agreed among the PARTIES that if any parts, terms or provisions of this Agreement are held by the courts to be illegal, the validity of the remaining portions or provisions shall not be affected and the rights and obligations of the PARTIES shall not be affected in regard to the remainder of the Agreement. If it should appear that any part, term or provision of this Agreement is in conflict with any statutory provision of the State of Washington, then the part, term or provision thereof that may be in conflict shall be deemed inoperative and null and void insofar as it may be in conflict therewith and this Agreement shall be deemed to modify to conform to such statutory provision. SECTION 17: RECORDS All public records prepared, owned, used or retained by COUNTY in conjunction with this Agreement shall be deemed CITY property and shall be made available to CITY upon request by the CITY Manager. COUNTY will notify CITY of any public disclosure request under chapter C:1Dncumcnts and Scttingslnkerstenllncal Satin gslTemnnrar' Internet files10 571Wastwaierynllr vA.ereement- Draft3 -10 -04- R1:1.DOCC.i1f101 f Sl► rtl: nne->' xlleH- 43 24kMCe4oeaMgfeemenis1Wesiewate eVaileyAgreemenl Draft - 2-2.7-04- RIY.doe Page 11 of 15 42.17 RCW for copies or viewing of such records as well as the PROSECUTOR'S response thereto. SECTION 18: HEADINGS The section headings appearing in this Agreement have been inserted solely for the purpose of convenience and ready reference. In no way do they purport to, and shall not be deemed to define, limit or extend the scope or intent of the sections to which they pertain. SECTION 19: STATIONARY CITY agrees COUNTY will use COUNTY'S stationary in conjunction with meeting its responsibilities under the terms of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHF_.REOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date and year opposite their respective signatures. DATED: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE, COUNTY, WASHINGTON ATTEST: VICKY M. DALTON CLERK OF THE BOARD BY: DATED: Attest: Daniela Erickson, Deputy JOHN ROSKELLEY, Commissioner City Clerk (Title) Approved as to form only: City Attorney PHILLIP D. HARRIS, Chair M. KATE MCCASLIN, Vice -Chair CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY: By: Its: (::lnnen m eths nntl Set ti ngslnI crsten \LovnI Settint slTemporary Internet FiledOL:571■'nstewnterVn I IevA areemcnt -Dra ft3 -I0-04- RLI.IIoCG :\GaGitwollSpol:nne -Volley=l-f3 kfntefleeel- rttr-e ementr •144 Draft - 2-2-}- (1.1 -khdoe Page 12 of 15 I C :\Documents and ScttincslnkerstenlIA)cal Settin sVI'empnrary Internet Files1O1, 1C 571Wa stewat erV, tlleyA2reement- L)raft3- 10 -04- RI.1.1)0f CAOGit)44 Spokitne Va lley- L43 3Sli+ lDeripeal- Agreententslr WastewateAtalleyAgreemeOtt -L raft -2- 2-7-03- l4Isd4te Page 13 of 15 ATTACHMENT A TO TI-TE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY AND SPOKANE COUNTY REGARDING WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT Pavement Removal and Replacement Limits for Sewer Construction Spokane County will include in its annual sewer construction budget the costs to restore the paving that is required to be removed for sewer construction, including mainline sewer, manholes, and side sewers. The City of Spokane Valley may elect to add to the scope of the paving work associated with County sewer projects. For example, the City may request additional pavement replacement to accomplish full -width paving, additional road pavement width, and /or extended paving beyond the termination of the sewer main. The following guidelines shall be used as the underlying basis for determining the County's share of the asphalt concrete pavement (ACP) removal and replacement costs: 1. The quantity of ACP removed and replaced to construct a section of sewer main between two manholes shall be determined using the following dimensions: a) Width: The lesser of 1.8 times the average depth of the sewer along the section of sewer main, or the existing road width. b) Length: Manhole center to manhole center, plus an additional fifteen feet beyond each terminal manhole. 2. The quantity of ACP removed and replaced to excavate the trench for a sewer service stub shall be determined using the following dimensions: a) Width: 15 feet b) Length: Distance from edge of existing pavement to calculated limit of sewer main trench as determined in 1.a) above. 3. In those locations where ACP removal for the sewer main to the width described in 1.a) above would leave a strip of existing ACP less than six (6) feet in width, removal and replacement of that strip of existing ACP will he included in the cost of the sewer project, and shall become part of the County's share of the cost. 4. In those locations where ACP removal for the sewer main and service stubs, as described in paragraphs 1 and 2, would leave an area of existing ACP less than 50 square yards in size, removal and replacement of that area of existing ACP will be included in the cost of the sewer project, and shall become part of the County's share of the cost. CADocuments and Scttineslnkersten11.ncal ettings \TempttrarV Internet Files1 01.1C 571WasteHaterVallerAgreeinent- 1>raft3 -10 -04- R1. 1. DOC 1Ctaly- of- SpoknueNVttlley- 14334k1uterloxal-Ag reements‘wastewi tef-V alleyikgreement- Ofttft-2- .q-04 -RLdue Page 14 of 15 1 Total Cost of Projects $12,000,000 + 2 Interim Financing Costs Estimated at 2% $240,000 3 Subtotal = $12,240,000 4 Grant Funding From WDOE $3,750,000 5 Subtotal = $8.490,000 + 6 General Facilities Charges (GFC) $4,294,610 7 Subtotal — $12,784,610 8 Subsidy Funding @ 25 % $3,196,152 9 Subtotal = $9,588,458 / 10 Estimated Number of ERU's 1711 11 Capital Facilities Rate (CFR) per ERU = $5,604 CALCULATION OF MONTHLY CFR 1 Estimated Bond Interest Rate 6 % 2 CFR per ERU $5,604.00 3 Bond Issuance Costs (i, 1.3 % $72.85 4 Total Amount Financed = $5,676.85 5 Resulting Monthly CFR. Payment = $40.67 ATTACHMENT T B TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE C1TY OF SPOKANE VALLEY AND SPOKANE COUNTY REGARDING WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT This Attachment illustrates the historical methodology used to calculate and establish the Capital Facilities Rates (CFR) to be applied for projects within the COUNTY's Septic Tank Elimination Program (STEP). The numbers used in this illustration are hypothetical and do not relate to any specific data or year of construction. This illustration does not imply what CFR amount will be established in future years. NOTES: 1. ERU denotes Equivalent Residential Unit 2. The General Facilities Charge, at the unsubsidized rate, is $2,510 per ERU in this illustration 3. Monthly CFR Payment amounts are computed based on 240 payments 4. For Line 8, the subsidy funding is provided from Reserves in Fund 403 and Fund 436 I C:\Ducumcnts and Scttin.Ankcrstenll nrnl tiettingslTemDOrary Internet FileAOLIC571WastewaterValicvAereement- Drnft3 -10 04- RLI.DOCCAC.',Cit_r• ef- Spokane444ley-M32d11nterioce AgreementskWastewuter- Vallepkveement -Rfar- 247- 04 -R6doe Page 15 of 15