2003, 09-09 Regular MeetingAGENDA
rPOI&N CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
Tuesday. ' eptember 9, 2003
CITY HALL AT REDWOOD PLAZA
11707 East Sprague Avenue, First Floor
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
INVOCATION
Pastor Linda Crowe, United Church of Christ
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
INTRODUCTION OF SPECLAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS
COMMI7T .E, BOARD. LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS
MAYOR'S REPORT:
Proclamations: National Payroll Week
Constitution Week
a. Approval of Regular Council Meeting Minutes of August 26, 2003
b. Approval of Study Session Minutes of September 2, 2003
c. Adoption of 2004 Goals
d. Approval of Claims: $1,348,976.96
e. Approval of Payroll: 5108,015.01
OLD BUSINESS: None
Council Requests All Electronic Devices be Turned Off During Council Meeting
Cuvncil Agenda 09.09 - 03 Regular Meetinr Page I of 2
PUBLIC COMMENTS For members of the Public to speak to the Council regarding matters NOT on
the Agenda. Please state your name and address for the record and limit remarks to three minutes.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: Proposed Budget Amendment: An ordinance amending Ordinance No_ 62
pa zed by the City Council March 27. 2003 which adopted a budget for the period of March 31, 2003
through Dumber 31, 2003.
(l) Open Public Hearing
(2) Citizen Comments on Proposed Ordinance
(3) Close Public Hearing
CONSENT AGENDA Consists of items considered routine which arc approved as a group. A
Councilmember may remove an item from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately.
I .
7 a
6:110 P.M.
NEW BUSINESS
2 Ordinance No. 03 -080 Authorizing Interlocal Agreement with Public Facilities District - Second
Reading [public comment]
3. Ordinance No. 03-079 Budget Amendment Ordinance - First Reading [public comment]
4. Motion: Consideration of Hotel/Motel Lodging Tax Advisory Conunittee Recommendation
5. Ordinance No. 03 -078 Zoning Code Compliance - Second Reading [public comment]
6. Ordinance No. 03-081 Hearing Examiner Ordinance - First Reading [public comment]
7. Ordinance No. 03 -067 Junk Vehicle Ordinance - First Reading [public comment]
8. Resolution No. 03 -045 Accepting Conveyance of Park Properties
9. Contract: Motion to Approve Intcrlocal Agreement between Spokane County and the City of Spokane
Valley Relating to the Ownership, Funding, Operation and Maintenance of Parks. Open Space,
Recreation Facilities and Programs [public comment]
10. Motion to Adopt Citizen Participation Plan
PUBLIC COMMENTS (Maximum of three minutes please; state your name and address for the record)
PENDING LEGISLATION
ADMINLSTRATIVE REPORTS:
11. Staff Report: Conceptual Framework for a Unified Development Code
INFORMATION
12. Proposed Methodology for Street Vacation
13. Status of Sullivan Road and 4` Avenue Signal Project
14. Minutes of Planning Commission
15. Status of Previous Public Comments/Concems:
a. Mr. & Mrs. Stiles: Sargent and Montgomery Street Traffic Issues, Barricade follow -up
b. Robert Lowe: Timberlane Road Zoning and Code Enforcement Issues
ADJOURNMENT
FUTURE SCHEDULE
Regular Council Meetings are held the 2" and 4 Tuesdays of the month, beginning al 6:00 p.m.
Council Study Sessions are held on the off Tuesdays of the month, beginning at 6:00 p.m.
Other Upcoming Meetings/F. vent•:
Sept 17, 2003, "Conversation with the Community" 6:30 p.m.. Central Park Condo Or, 6011 E, 6"' Ave
Sept 24, 2003, Public Transportation Improvement Conference, Spokane Transit Bd M g, 1:00 p.m.
Sept 30, 2003, No Study Session Meeting
Council Agenda 09.09 -03 Regular Meeting Page 2 of 2
DRAFT
MINUTES
City of Spokane Valley
City Council Regular Meeting
August 26, 2003
Mayor DeVleming called the City of Spokane Valley Regular Meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Attendance:
Councilmcmbers: Michael DeVleming, Mayor
Dick Denenny, Councilmember
Mike Flanigan, Councilmember
Richard Munson, Councilmember
Gary Schimmels, Councilmember
Steve Taylor, Councilmember
Staff Present: David Mercier, City Manager
Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager
Stanley Schwartz, Interim City Attorney
Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
Ken Thompson, Finance Director
Mike Jackson, Parks & Recreation Director
Neil K.ersten, Public Works Director
Kevin Snyder, Current Planning Manager
Tom Scholtens, Building Official
Sue Pearson, Deputy City Clerk
Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk
Absent: Diana Wilhite, Deputy Mayor (excused)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor DeVleming led the Pledge of Allegiance.
INVOCATION: Pastor Steve Williams of New Life Assembly of God gave the invocation.
ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called roll.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Mayor DeVleming said that the Proposed Tourism Promotion Area
Administrative Report will be moved to Committee, Board, Liaison Summary Reports (with public comment:
taken on that item immediately afterward); that item 115 will be removed and brought back at a later date; that
we are adding item #7a Dangerous Dog Review Process; and 11 a Review of Parks Agreement Negotiations
Progress. It was moved by Councilmember Denenny and .seconded by Councilmember Munson to approve
the agenda as amended. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions:
None. Motion carried.
INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: None
COMMITTEE, 8OA}21), LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS:
Councilmember Munson reported he and Councilman Schimmels attended a very beneficial training session
with AWC on the budget process.
Councilmember Flanigan reported that the Hotel/Motel Tax Committee considered the grant requests, and
that Councilman Flanigan requests that this item be placed on next week's study session agenda so that the
committee can be present and answer council questions regarding the. funding allocations. He mentioned he
has the proposals should council wish to review them; he thanked the committee for their work, and added
that he felt the process was done in a very fair manner. Councilmember Flanigan said this Tax Committee is
strictly an advisory committee and final funding decisions will be left to council discretion. Some of the
committee members included Councilmember Flanigan, two representatives from entities which collect the
tax., and two representatives from entities eligible to receive the funds. Councilmember Taylor said he would
Council Minutes O8-26.03 Page 1 of 7
Date Approved by Council:
DRAFT
like to have the stakeholders present at the next study session so that council may receive input from those
entities. Mayor DeVleming suggested leaving that opportunity open. Attorney Schwartz suggested that if
council is going to substantially modify any of the recommendations, that they might want to seek additional
committee input.
Mayor DeVleming invited public comment:
Troy Dressen, 15015 Indiana, Spokane Valley: stated he would like to see funds given to the experts in the
field who work extensively with tourism and who have worked in that capacity for long periods of time; he
encouraged allowing the hotel /motel association to give more specific recommendations.
Jeff Fox, General Manager, Mirabeau Park Hotel (formerly Spokane Valley Doubletree): said he serves on
the committee; that the room tax was a self - imposed tax to create a fund to be able to reinvest in the area
from which it was generated; that the criteria he used in judging each proposal was how many heads and
beds it would generate so that it would replenish the aforementioned fund.
Ron Anderson, Represents Boards of the Spokane Regional Convention and Visitor's Bureau, the Sports
Commission, and the Hotel/Motel Association: said the two eminent marketing organizations with proven
results in this region are the Spokane County Visitors and Convention Bureau, and the Spokane Regional
Sports Commission; that they support the pure use of lodging tax dollars in marketing to increase heads and
beds; he said the current recommendation is for the CVB to receive 30% of the available funds and feels this
is not a good partnership; he asked council to examine each recommendation to see if that proposal will put
heads in beds.
.Jodi Sander, Chair, Valley Tourism Committee and General Manager of Holiday Inn Express: said the •
lodging tax money collected must be reinvested into events that bring business back to the hoteliers as soon
as possible; she does not support use of the funds as "seed money" to help projects get off the ground; that
we need to market the area regionally as a destination and not divide funds between the two cities (Spokane
and Spokane Valley).
John Brewer, President, Spokane Regional Convention and Visitor's Bureau: he encouraged council to
listen to tax collectors as how best to use this resource for the greatest return on the investment; the CVB is a
proven marketing arm of the entire region; its mission is to market for tourists, film activity, leisure activity,
international travel, group tour and conventions, and to put the funds into use and show a clear return on the
investment; he feels they are the best organization to help bridge that transition from the City of Spokane;
with limited resources he encouraged Council to keep with an entity that shows results; he's hopeful that the
CVB will receive a proportionate amount of funding from the Valley that they received from the City of
Spokane, which was over 70% of available funds, and over 75% of available funds from the County.
Clark Hager, 11717 East Lenora Drive: said it is a great testimony that we have created this City and that
now we have the legal responsibility of determining where our tourism dollars will be spent.
Richard Beam, 3626 S. Ridgeview, the Spokane Valley Business Association: said he gets concerned when
someone says "1 know how better to spend your money than you do." Said lots of regional activities deserve
our support; that one of the main reasons we incorporated was so we can determine how to spend our own
money, and we know better what it is in the best interests of Spokane Valley and how that money should be
spent; suggests council seriously consider the recommendations of the committee and these discussions
belong before that committee and not before the Council.
Ray Perry: withdrew option to speak at this point.
Cal Clausen, owner of Holiday Inn Express, Quality Inn on the Argonne/Mission corridor, and the Holiday
Inn Express downtown: said that he has been in the lodging business for about 25 years, that there is a
disproportionate amount of funding going to the CVB and that should be taken into consideration. From a
Council !Minutes 08 -26 -03 Page 2 of 7 .
Date Approved by Council:
DRAFT
business standpoint, he said if he were the CVB and if he were spending an inordinate amount of time where
he's getting less money, he would concentrate his efforts where most. of the money is coming from and do a
better job there; that legal issues have been brought up and there are two members of the board who voted on
their own proposal and wonders if that is legal or merely a conflict of interest. He feels the CVB is a very
positive entity and it would be a mistake to deter that relationship.
Rob Higgins, Councilnrember from City of Spokane, East 1024 Mission: said he is here as a member of the
Regional Convention Visitor's Board; he served as Chair of the finance committee for the City of Spokane
back in the 1980s, and they dealt with this issue and adopted a policy to deal with the limited resources, and
that policy now generates about 70% of their S900,000 lodging tax money and allows the "best bang for the
buck."
Tony Lazanis, Vice President of the Hotel /Motel Association: said council must use funds to benefit the
Valley businesses and the Valley; that there are 47 conventions in Spokane and only two of them come to the
Valley; that the Valley does not have a facility to support such conventions, and this money can be used to
expand the facility in order to have large gatherings to benefit the Valley.
Mayor DeVleming invited other public comment. None being offered, Mayor DeVleming asked for council
consensus to allow tirne at the next study session for a more formal presentation from the Committee, and to
allow time for comment from the Hotel /Motel Association. Council concurred.
MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor DeVleming reported that we are taking some initial steps similar to the
Comp Plan issue, and getting together September 24 with the U- Cities Property Owners Group to discuss
some ideas and possibilities that might take place in the U -City area.
PUBLIC COMMENT: Mayor DeVleming asked for public comment on matters not on the agenda.
Ed Mertens, 1310N Pierce, Spokane Valley: voiced his concern about the figures being presented in relation
to Mirabeau and that the S400,000 which the newspaper reported which was not in the preliminary budget.
Mayor DeVleming asked Mr. Mertens if he would save his comments for when that topic is addressed.
PUBLIC HEARING: Extension of Moratorium. Mayor DeVleming announced that this proposed
ordinance would extend the moratorium on filing and acceptance of applications for development permits or
land use approval associated with adult entertainment and adult retail establishments.
Mayor DeVleming opened the public hearing at 6:50 p.m. and asked for staff presentation of the proposal.
Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained that the proposed ordinance would extend the current moratorium
for an additional six months in order to give the City opportunities to examine zoning regulations regarding
adult retail use establishments; that staff has been working on this issue and will continue doing so; that
pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220 staff has developed a work plan which is attached to the ordinance. Driskell
explained that this would extend the amortization schedule for one year; that there are zoning issues related
to amortization such as if the citing of these existing facilities will affect whether they stay where they are
and if it will affect new facilities coming in; and that there are a number of constitutional legal implications
that staff needs to explore and research to he able to present a full range of options and the accompanying
impacts.
Mayor DeVleming invited public comment.
Annette Remchwd, 1705 N Mullan Lane: said she appreciates council taking the time to study this issue and
appreciates the moratorium, and hopes that any further development will be stopped.
Countil Minut:s 05 -26 -03 Page 3 of 7
Date Approved by Council:
DRAFT
Mayor DeVleming invited other public comment; none being offered, Mayor DeVleming closed the public
hearing at 6:57 p.m.
ADDI'T`IONAL PUBLIC COMMENT: .
Dorothy Stiles: distributed pictures of the area in question; said there was an incident recently where a child
was riding his bicycle on the right side of the road, a truck came around the corner and missed the child by
approximately five feet; she said a barrier had been promised because their fence had been knocked down
several times; said the truck traffic is getting worse; and there are several businesses in the residential area
including a carwash and storage units. Ms. Stiles suggested having a dead -end street between Sargent and
Montgomery. Staff will continue to monitor and follow up on this issue.
1. CONSENT AGENDA: After City Clerk Bainbridge read the Consent Agenda, it was moved by Mayor
DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Munson to approve the Consent Agenda. Vote by
Acclamation: In favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
OLI) BUSINESS: None
NEW BUSINESS:
2. Ordinance No. 03 -076, Extending Moratorium on Development Permits or Land Use Approvals
Associated with Adult Entertainment and Adult Retail Establishments: It was moved by Councilmember
Munson and seconded by Councilmember Denenny to advance the ordinance to a second reading on
September 9, 2003. Deputy City Attorney Driskell mentioned two changes in the ordinance: the title will be
changed from establishing a moratorium to extending the moratorium; and Section 7 will change as follows:
"that Council declares that a public urgency and emergency exists such that this ordinance must be
immediately effective in order to preserve and protect the public health, public safety, public property, and
public peace" provided this ordinance is adopted by a majority vote, plus one of the whole membership of
the city council. Attorney Driskell said the moratorium will expire March 2, 2004, and the amortization
schedule will expire September 7, 2005 consistent with the remainder of the ordinance. It was moved by
Councilmember Denenny and seconded by Councilmember Taylor to amend the motion to suspend the
rules, move this to a second reading, and adopt ordinance 03 -076 with the incorporated changes proposed
by Attorney Driskell. Vote to amend the motion by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None.
Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Vote on the newly amended motion adopting Ordinance 03 -076: In
Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
3. Ordinance No. 03 -077. EMAN Franchise Ordinance: City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance by title. It
was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Taylor to suspend the rules, move this
to a second reading, and approve Ordinance 03 -077. Attorney Driskell said that EMAN representatives did
not formally accept the original franchise within the required time period, and that this is the second edition;
that in the meantime, Council adopted the Columbia Franchise which contained different language. In the
interest of uniformity in franchises, the language and terms of this franchise now reflect those contained in
the Columbia Franchise. Councilmember Munson said there was no construction required of the Columbia
Franchise, which is not the case with EMAN, and the situations are different. Vote by Acclamation: Mayor
DeVleming, Councilmembers Schimmels, Denenny, Flanigan, and Taylor. Opposed: Councilmember
Munson. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
4. Ordinance No. 03 -075, Zoning Code Compliance: City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance by title. It
was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Munson to give the ordinance the first
reading, and advance it to second reading on or about September 9, 2003. Attorney Driskell said this is the
zoning code compliance chapter proposed by staff to replace the existing interim zoning code compliance
section; that the existing chapter (adopted by Spokane County) had some abatement provisions which were
in need of modification; that staff wanted to more effectively give meaning to the zoning code and that a
change in the compliance section was necessary; the change previously requested by Council is located in
Chapter 14.406.035 (page 6 of the draft), new subsection c: "The director is authorized to determine, based
Council Minutes 08 -26 -03 Page 4 of 7
Date Approved by Council:
DRAFT
upon past complaints regarding a property, subsequent field investigation and other relevant: criteria, whether
a compliant: is reliable. If the director determines a compliant is not reliable, the director is not obligated to
conduct a field investigation." This was added to address the issue of invalid complaints and subsequent
unnecessary field investigations. Mayor DeVleming asked for public comment.
Robert Lowe, 1111 S. Timberlane Drive in the Valley: said that Code Enforcement left him a problem in
dealing with his business and operation location; that he moved his business to its current location because it
was his understanding that there would be no problems provided his business is drop off and pick up and not
retailing; that he has been told he now needs a use permit at the cost of $61.00 and must pay $500.00 for
another permit with no guarantee the permit application will be granted; that he feels he has a right to travel
that street and is doing everything possible to comply. Mayor DeVleming asked City Manager Mercier to
give staff this information so that staff can prepare a brief to present to council at the next regular council
meeting, and to deliver a copy of that briefing to Mr. Lowe.
Vote by acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried
5. Ordinance No. 03 0?0 Budge inee— Removed from the agenda.
6. Ordinance No. 03 -080 Authorizing lnterlocal Agreement. with Public Facilities District. — First Reading.
City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance by title. ft was moved by Councilnremher Denenny and seconded
by Corurcil;nember Munson to advance Ordinance 03 -080 to a second reading on or about September 9,
2003. Bonds Attorney Mike Ormsby gave a brief overview explaining that there was a suggested
modification given by Councilmember Munson approximately one month ago, and another modification was
made relative to the amount of bonds that would be issued; the ordinance makes certain findings regarding
the nature of the Mirabeau Point Project in order to qualify for receipt of regional project tax revenues; and
the ordinance also approves the interlocal agreement between the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County,
and the Public Facilities District. Attorney Ormsby said we did everything we could to ensure the control of
the construction, financing, operation and ownership of the project, that we will break ground by the
beginning of next year, and that certain activities will be held in this facility that will qualify it as a regional
project Attorney Ormsby said we want this agreement until our bonds are paid in full, that the PFD has
agreed to levy the tax it can for as long as it needs to make the County and the City of Spokane Valley
whole; that the City of Spokane Valley is the primary beneficiary of the financial aspect of this agreement;
and that the City of Spokane Valley wants to be able to enforce against the. PFD their financial obligation to
reimbursement us and we want to do so until the bonds arc paid in full. Councilmember Munson asked if we
should decide later to give the maintenance and operation obligations for this facility to another entity (while
continuing to pay our obligations), would eve need an approval from the County and the PFD to do so?
Attorney Ormsby said he will research that question and respond in writing to council with his findings.
Councilmember Schimmels referred to the last PFD minutes and an article in the newspaper that the PFD
sold their $77 million worth of bonds and netted $80.5 million; Ormsby said he will provide those particulars
in his written response. Mayor DeVleming asked for public comment.
Ed Mertens, 1310 N Pierce Rood, Spokane Valley: said he has concerns about spending the funds without
having a good blueprint. to show where it's going, why and when; feels we owe it to the people before going
ahead with the plan. Councilmember Munson responded that we have gone through a blueprint on numerous
occasions and those concerns have already been answered.
Clark Hager, 11717 Fast Lenora Drive: said the bond meetings were done in secret in apparent violation of
open meeting's act and that citizens had no right to comment as those things were being created; said council
should get an unqualified official opinion of the bond counsel that the Facilities District does not have to
have ownership in Mirabeau Point; and /or to get that opinion from the bond attorney of the Facilities District.
Phillip Rudy, 10702 East Fruithill Road: asked if there is a dissolution clause to protect the City should it
desire to no longer be a part of the agreement.
Council Minutes 08-26-03 Paee 5 of 7
Date Approvcd by Council:
DRAFT•
Kep Fournier, 11814 East Maxwell: said he appreciates the comments of the previous citizens; but does not
appreciate comments which relate to the City of Spokane; that the City of Spokane Valley is separate and he
appreciates the work of the Council.
Tony 1_.azanis, 106261. Trent: said that Council does not have a blueprint alluded to in previous comments;
wants to know who will control the senior center and has concerns of what we will get for the money spent;
that he hopes Council will make changes to get more for its money; and wants to make sure we qualify for
the diversion funds.
Ray Perry, 2020 N Ely Road: said he feels Clark Hager is looking out for the community's interest and he
would like to see us fulfill the legal responsibilities that are needed to certify that the bonds will be valid and
enforceable.
In response to the issues raised, Attorney Ormsby said his firm will give an unqualified legal opinion on the
validity and enforceability of the bonds and they will give that opinion or the bonds won't get issued; there
will be an opinion relative to the enforceability of the agreement; and on the issue of the ownership
requirement, Ormsby said they worked with the State Auditor's Office and Department of Revenue on a
number of these types of projects, and the intent of the policy is to try to encourage as many joint projects as
possible; there are a number of projects where the county issues the bonds and the PFD owns and operates
the facility, or the City does; and that he is satisfied with the intcrlocal agreement being proposed and is
being approved by the other two entities and their council, in that it meets the requirement that entitles the
City of Spokane Valley to be eligible for funds from the PFD; and that bond council to the PFD has agreed to
comply with and live up to the agreement; and he and the bond counsel community are satisfied that an
ownership requirement is not there but there is an involvement requirement and this agreement satisfies those
provisions.
Councilmember Denenny said there have been approximately four presentations regarding the specifics of
the project and at least one meeting describing a line -by -line detailed accounting of the funds; with at least
another meeting readjusting those figures; and that the PowerPoint presentations are available for public
viewing and were part of the council's agenda.
Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
Mayor LDeVlerning called for a short recess at 8:36 p.m., and reconvened the meeting at 8:45 p.m.
7. Presentation of Lease Proposal from "Splash Down :" Parks & Recreation Director Jackson said tonight's
presentation is informational and pointed out comparisons of the two leases, along with pros and cons
contained in the council backup material; he mentioned his example was based on the 2002 season, and with
the expected improvements a threshold will be broken of 5300,000; and when that occurs, if the concessions
are reduced as requested, it will have more significant impact on the amount of funds corning to the City than
what is indicated. Director Jackson said-the main issues include a 20 -year lease to match the term of their
prospective bank loan, that they are asking for additional land to construct additional improvements (the
location of the present basketball and tennis courts), and to consider the changes in the financial
arrangements which can be explained in more detail later. Jackson said it would also be good to know our
long -range plans for aquatic facilities in this community and the value of that existing park; and that Debbie
Weisen said their proposal could be accomplished in phases.
Debbie Weisen gave a brief history of the facility and the dream they have that they want this to be "the
place" where everyone goes in the Valley; that this year they had over 400 season pass holders. She added
that they want to expand the facility to include: a two -man slide, a place to swim, added seating, a lazy river,
and expansion of the park with emphasis on family park. She said to do this they propose taking over the
basketball and tennis courts, which are not used to a large extent. As they would like to keep the concession
Council Minutes 08 -26 -03 Page 6 of 7
Date Approval by Council:
DRAFT
prices low; they propose paying 10% for all gross receipts instead of keeping different percentages for
different functions such as entrance and concessions.
It was ,moved by Mayor DeVlemirrg and seconded by Councilnrember Taylor to extend the meeting
another 30 minutes. Vote by acclamation: Unanimous in support.
Discussion continued about removal and potential costs of the tennis and basketball courts, actual use of the
courts, and different options other than a 20 -year lease. It was council consensus that this is a good
opportunity, that 20 -years seems reasonable, that a study should be conducted on the funds needed regarding
the courts issue, gain sharing, cost recovery, and the risks associated with all of the above. I1 was proved by
Mayor DeVlcnring and seconded by Councilmen:6er Munson to instruct the City Manager to proceed with
negotiations on this lease. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions:
None Motion carried
7a. .Added Item: Council Delegation to Conduct Dangerous Dog Hearing. Attorney Driskell explained that
Ordinance 56 adopted Spokane County's animal control ordinances by reference, and also provides that this
City Council may delegate hearing authority, regardless of whether any quasi-judicial or other matter is then
pending, for the purpose of delegating the appeal or other matter for hearing and disposition. It was moved
by Councilmember Schinumels and seconded to delegate the City Council's authority to Spokane County
Board of Commissioners to conduct that dangerous dog hearing in this instance, regarding the Betty
Seynrnr owner and Susan Van GYyk. Mier hearing a brief report from Attorney Driskell regarding this case,
Mayor De \tleming asked for the vote. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None.
Abstentions: None. Motion carried
Cite Manager Mercier said that agenda items 8 through 11 are provided for review and digestion and that
staff can provide further comment at a later date if council desires.
I la. Added Item: Review of Parks Agreement Negotiations: City Manager Mercier said the last time they
discussed this was whether construction management and oversight. should be new terms; that he met with
County staff and that section 2.5 was of concern, but that it. was determined the grant excludes construction.
The proposal went to the County Commissioners today; they reduced service fees on a series of activities and
found equal amount of monies to handle the oversight, and also provided a stop loss statement to make sure
no expenses were added expenses to council and that this was to go on their following week's consent
agenda; also that City Manager Mercier made it clear this was our last and best offer.
There being no further business, it was moved, seconded and unanimously agreed upon to adjourn. The
meeting adjourned at 9:35 p.m.
ATTEST:
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Michael DeVleming, Mayor
Council Minutes 08 -26-03 Page 7 of 7
Date Approved by Council;
Attendance:
Councilmembcrs:
Michael DeVleming, Mayor
Diana Wilhite, Deputy Mayor
Dick Denenny, Councilmember
Mike Flanigan, Councilmember
Richard Munson, Councilmember
Gary Schimmels Councilmember
Steve Taylor, Councilmember
DRAFT
MINUTES
City of Spokane Valley
City Council Study Session
September 2, 2003, 6:00 p.m.
Staff:
David Mercier, City Manager
Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager
Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
Ken Thompson, Finance Director
Marina Sukup, Community 'Development Director
Mike Jackson, Parks R.Recreation Dir.
Cal Walker, Police Chief
Kevin Snyder, Current Planning Manager
Neal Kersten, Public Works Director
Sue Pearson, Deputy City Clerk
Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk
Mayor DeVleming opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m., welcomed all in attendance, reminded everyone
that this is a study session and there will be no public comments, and requested that all electronic
devices he turned off for the duration of the meeting.
I. Project Access Presentation: Dr. Selinger, Medical Director Spokane County Medical Society
Project Access, described this physician-led community partnership charity care system, which provides
access to the full continuum of medical care for the low income uninsured who are not eligible for other
forms of health insurance. After his PowerPoint presentation, Dr. Selinger asked for the City's
endorsement as this project begins in two days at. the Spokane Falls Family Clinic; and asked for a future
annual commitment. of $1.25 per person. It was moved by Councilmember Denenny and seconded by
Councilmember Munson to endorse the program and as a gesture of support, to allocate $5,000 toward
the program this year as a show of good faith. Councilmember Flanigan mentioned that staff may need
to make some adjustments to include this as part of future budgeting processes. Council concurred. Vote
by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried
2. Presentation Hotel/Motel Tax Committee: Councilmember Flanigan explained that Council
directed this Committee to approve a mix of marketing and activity proposals in their deliberations of
allocation of funds. Councilor Flanigan said that questions were previously raised concerning some of the
decisions of the committee regarding possible conflicts of interest. Flanigan said the majority of the
committee felt there was no need for anyone to recusc themselves at any time and that the committee was
very fair in their deliberations. Flanigan also mentioned there were questions about the ad for the visitor's
guide. The committee unanimously agreed that it was good for the Spokane hotels but the ad did not
come through the process in the same manner as the proposals. Flanigan said it: would be inappropriate to
support an ad that was not regional, and reminded council the direction to the committee was for a mix of
marketing and activities; the committee delegated 70% of the funds for marketing, and 30% for activities.
Jeff Fox, General Manager of Mirabeau Park Hotel: said he is frustrated and not happy with the outcome;
that he is a major contributor and the largest contributor to this fund and made his recommendations to
council as outlined in his September 2, 2003 letter.
Peggy Doerring: Thanked Council for allowing citizens to participate in the committee process; said this
is an advisory committee to help the city government perform their duties; that she believes there was
undue influence and intimidation; that they worked hard with clue diligence in reviewing the 29
Study Session Minutes 09 -02 -03 Page 1 of 4
Date Approved by Council:
DRAFT
applications; that they evaluated and researched the proposals given to them and some proposals did not
meet the RCW guidelines and therefore did not make the final cut.
Jeff Fox: concerning the community- focused events, said the community would benefit but the hotels
would not; the event needs to start with a room night; that we need more community facilities but doesn't
see any room nights coming out of the museum, the skate park and Valley Fest and that perhaps those
functions should be funded from other sources; that the hotel business is not doing well this year and
those three entities are the ones with which he had the most issue.
Councilman Flanigan then explained the two different hotel /motel taxes: one is the regular tax and the
other is a special tax; the regular tax is not an additional tax; but this special tax is actually a rebate on the
State's return of sales tax revenue. The other tax is the additional 2% which is what the larger hotels pay,
which is used for items such as retiring the debt on the arena. Jeff Fox then explained the procedure used
in allocating the funds; e.g., writing the names of the entities on the white board and putting in the
committee member's recommendation, yet keeping the agreed upon 10% reserve. City Manager Mercier
reminded everyone that there are not enough receipts in yet to be able to forecast what the total revenue
would be in the fund. In response to a question concerning tools used to govern the allocation process,
Ms. Singleton said the most important tool was the RCW. Councilmember Flanigan also mentioned the
evaluation form was used to rank the proposals. More discussion ensued regarding the submittal of the
ad, costs associated with it, the lateness of the ad, and whether to consider it with the proposals.
City Manager Mercier mentioned that in reference to the composition of the advisory committee and any
possible conflict of interest, that the legal staff researched that issue and determined there is no conflict of
interest in the committee composition; and that the statute requires committee membership to include
members who are representatives of businesses required to collect tax, and members who are involved in
activities authorized to be funded by the revenue received.
Cal Clausen, Sterling Hospitality Management Company: distributed his August 31, 2003 memo to the
Council and remarked on the main points of that memo; he said that the lodging business in Spokane
County is not healthy; he stressed funding the CVi3 at least, if not more, to the point where they were in
the past; that perhaps the membership of the committee is legal but it doesn't look good for someone on
the committee to vote on their own proposal; that he is a donor and if the CVB were funded adequately he
could make donations to Valley Fest and Heritage Museum. Clausen said soccer fields are easy to
measure in that teams won't come if there are no facilities; that Valley Fest is a local community as is the
museum and they likely won't generate revenue from outside sources. Clausen also encouraged Council
to consider an easier process so that this process won't have to be repeated periodically concerning
allocation of-these funds.
Several comments, questions and answers were then directed to and from Mr. Brewer explaining the
strategy of how CVB operates and how the Spokane Valley could be marketed. Further discussion
followed concerning the Fair and Expo center, which saw increased profits this year; its budgeting and
funding process and the facility in general. It was also mentioned by Mr. Brewer regarding the ad, that
perhaps the reason Spokane Valley was not mentioned is that it was written before the City incorporated.
Pat Estes, Valley Fest: said he is a volunteer for this function; that this event is one of only three events
that take place in the Valley; they need marketing assistance as the Fest the potential to be a premier
valley event; all staff members are volunteers and the $5600 would be used solely to market the event;
without those funds they will not be able to market as they would like; they have a goal of having the Fest
become a multiple -day event.
Laura Lower, Museum Professional: worked at other museums in Washington and knows that people
carne from all over; they hope to attract people from 190; many visitors to museums ask of places to stay;
Study Session Minutes 09 -02 -03 Page 2 of 4
Date Approved by Council:
DRAFT
museums bring people from the national scene, which gains attraction and that gives people reason to
write about the museum in travel and other magazines.
Jayne Singleton, Coordinator of Spokane Valley Heritage Museum. Said this is the fastest growing
segment of the tourism industry; they are a community asset and act as a gateway; she believes they do
put heads in beds.
Bob Sanders, Member of Valley YMCA Advisory Board and Skate Park Development Committee: said
he believes the hotel group has given them a resounding endorsement; they speak of difficulty in bringing
people into town and this skate project can do that; the park is a two -phase project with a three -acre skate;
their activities will include national competitions of professional skateboarders.
George Skidmore, Spokane Valley Junior Soccer Association: said he feels the committee arrived at a
balance of marketing and activities; that Plantes ferry Park started with a donation and is now a three
million dollar facility; they are already beginning to attract visitors to their tournaments; they have 13
soccer fields; next year will be a showcase for the Far West Tournament 2004 which will bring 20,000
people from the 13 western states who will stay about a week, and that could generate 100,000 overnight
stays. He said that he is asking for funds to finish the multiple purpose building which will bring dollars
from concession sales and will attract more tournaments.
Members from Valley Fest said their festival is corning up September 20, and they urge council to make a
decision quickly. Ms. Singleton said she has proposed a budget with diversified revenue stream; that they
plan to hold an auction, will use corporate and private donations, plan a gift shop with photographs to
sell; she added that federal grants are the biggest component of museums and they need these funds as a
match for those grant funds.
tt
■vas moved by Favor DeVleming and seconded by Deputy Mayor Wilhite to put the committee
recomme►rdations on next Tuesday's council meeting agenda. In discussing the motion,
Councilmember Taylor added that he would like to have Mr. Fox's letter as part of next council's packet.
Rote on Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried
Mayor DcVleming called a recess at 8:10 p.m., and reconvened the meeting at 8:25 p.m.
3. Proposed Junk vehicle Ordinance: Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained how the ordinance
would regulate junk vehicles, that it was before Council May 27 and was tabled then with instruction to
gain more citizen input and to ascertain what other communities are doing. Attorney Driskell said this
issue was also set before the Planning Commission as a public hearing. Attorney Driskell then reviewed
the definitions, exemptions, and remaining sections of the ordinance. It was Council consensus to place
this item on the September 9 council agenda.
4. Comprehensive Plan, Shoreline and Critical Area Elements: Community Development Director
Sukup went through her PowerPoint presentation and mentioned that the handout is somewhat different
from what was contained in council's original packet.
5. Mira beau Project Update: Deputy Mayor Wilhite asked if the classroom portion was reduced to one
story. It was mentioned that the second floor will only be "roughed in" and that negotiations are still
ongoing with the community colleges. Deputy City Manager Regor said she is meeting with Mike
Ormsby this Friday on this topic and will give another update next week.
6. Wastewater Issues: Public Works Director Kersten distributed his September 2, 2003 memorandum
and discussed that memo's highlights concerning the direction for the technical committee. Director
Kersten said that the Department of Ecology has not committed to another meeting date yet and that he
Study Session Minutes 09 -02 -03 Page 3 of 4
Date Approved by Council:
will keep Council appraised on that issue; he added that work is progressing on finalizing the STEP
Agreement and that should be ready for the next study session. Director Kersten said the technical
committee is scheduled fora follow -up meeting September 15, 2003. City Manager Mercier added that in
regard to sending a letter to the City of Spokane, he does not feel a conclusion needs to be made rapidly;
that all parties are aware of the need for interim capacity and the need to move along with the issues; and
it appears all parties are willing to exercise patience; he agrees DOE still plays a large role and he is
encouraged that constructive conversations are taking place and feels all involved are moving forward in
the decision making process. City Manager Mercier said when he left the DOE meeting, there was a
consensus to follow parallel tracks that there would be work attempted on the TMDL and other similar
issues, and another track on governance issues which could play out over a longer timetable than the
capacity issues; that staff is working on details of what components of an overall plan could be considered
of regional value; they also want to make sure the low interest loan is not attached to a particular site.
Director Kersten received a letter concerning the loan and said the deadline for making a decision about
the loan is approximately August of next year.
11 was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Munson to extend the meeting 15
more minutes. Vote by Acclamation: 1n Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None.
Motion carried.
7. Advance Agenda Additions: In response to questions concerning the budget process, City Manager
Mercier said he recommends working with the council as a whole rather than just the finance committee
although he would be. happy to do any other work with the finance committee if council so chooses; that
he will endeavor by the end of next week to have all departments register their initial requirements; that
next week's agenda will include approval of budget goals after which, we will be in a better position to
set dates for further budget refinement. In response to council question concerning identifying sales
taxes, City Manager Mercier said the work of Microflex is not completed and Finance Director Thompson
has been reviewing the latest returns. Microflex should be contacted again in another two to three weeks.
8. Council Check -in: City Manager Mercier reminded council that this is an opportunity for council to
identify if the system or process or some interaction between council and staff or otherwise needs any
adjustment. City Manager Mercier said variance reports should be ready for council review the end of
September.
9. Citv Manager Comments: City Manager Mercier said he received an e-mail late this afternoon
indicating the County Commissioners accepted the parks transfer and parks maintenance agreement as
part of their consent agenda, and those items will be included on the next council agenda.
There being no further business, it was moved, seconded and unanimously agreed upon to adjourn. The
meeting adjourned at 9:16 p.m.
Attest:
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
DRAFT
Michael DcVleming, Mayor
Study Session Minutes 09 -02 -03 Page 4 of 4
Date Approved, by Council:
Meeting Date: September 9, 2003 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: X consent
AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Adoption of 2004 Goals
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: NIA
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
X old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: On August 11, Council held a study session to
discuss the 2004 budget process and goals.
BACKGROUND: An August 15 staff memo summarized the discussion, and included two
documents for Council review. Attached are updated versions with minor revisions:
Attachment 1: Draft 2004 Guiding Principles, Goals and Department Workplan Activities —
Subgoal '2.3 originally read, "Develop a plan for maintaining the transportation system including
evaluation of a local funding source."
That subgoal has been separated into two new ones to better reflect Council intent. Revised
Subgoal 2.3 reads, "Develop a Transportation Master Plan." A new Subgoal 2.4 reads,
"Develop a local funding plan to maintain the City's streets."
Attachment 2: Draft 2004 Goals Table — In the Category column, the goal references were
incorrect in the August 15 version, and have been renumbered. In a couple of cases, the lead
department has been clarified.
OPTIONS: Revise the draft goals, including adding or deleting goal(s).
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to adopt the 2004 Goals.
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The guiding principles and goals provide the foundation
upon which the 2004 budget will be based.
STAFF CONTACT: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
1. Updated Draft 2004 Guiding
Principles Goals and Department
Workplan Activities
2. Updated Draft 2004 Goals Table
City of Spokane Valley
Draft 2004 Guiding Principles, Goals and
Department Workplan Activities
Based on Council Study Session, August 11, 2003
Attachment 1
Note: Guiding Principles and Goals are numbered for ease of reference, and not intended to reflect relative
priority.
Guiding Principles
1. Maintain current service level, especially core services, to the greatest degree
possible.
2. Live within current sources of revenue, i.e., no increase in taxes or tax rates, if
possible.
3. Maintain a business friendly environment.
Goal 1: Experiment with a Managed Competition Program
designed to identify alternative service providers at more economical
rates than accorded by current service providers.
Goal 1 Subgoals:
1.1 Develop a long -term approach for library services for City of Spokane Valley
residents.
1.2 Develop a long -term approach for fire services for City of Spokane Valley
residents.
1.3 Assess cost effectiveness of Court - related contracts.
Draft 2004 Guiding Principles, Goals and Department Workplan Activities, continued
September 9, 2003
Page 2 of 4
Coal 2: initiate the Development of Spokane Valley's First Comprehensive. Plan
which will create the City's long -term vision and link transportation
system improvements to land use goals in support of that vision.
Goal 2 Subgoals:
2.1 Develop a Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
2.2 Establish development regulations implementing the Comprehensive Plan in a
Uniform Land Development Code, to include subdivision requirements, zoning
regulations, development standards, building codes and engineering details.
2.3 Develop a Transportation Master Plan.
2.4 Develop a local funding plan to maintain the City's streets.
2.5 Develop a strategic annexation program.
Goal 2 Department Workplan Activities:
• Complete the initial draft on the Comp Plan, including the land use,
transportation, parks and recreation, and capital facilities elements. (Lead —
Community Development)
• Develop and implement a public participation program. Potential techniques
include electronic newsletter; informational brochures; and citizen surveys, as
well as meetings with citizen groups, neighborhoods, and other special interest
groups. (Lead — Community Development)
• Integrate the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) into the Comp Plan. (Lead
— Community Development)
Goal 3: Continuously Improve Overall Communication
between government and its citizens, between staff and Council, among
staff and among Council members.
Goal 3 Department Workplan Activities:
• Initiate development of an interactive web -based GIS. (Lead — Community
Development and Public Works)
• Publish all Planning Commission agendae, Comprehensive Plan and development
regulation drafts on the web. (Lead — Community Development)
• Initiate records storage and retrieval system. (Lead — City Clerk)
• Publish Facts & .Figures — City of Spokane 'Valley to include demographics,
permit activity, City contact information, etc. (Lead — Administration ?)
• Further develop the City's web site to enhance citizen participation. (Lead —
Administration)
Draft 2004 Guiding Principles, Goals and Department Workplan Activities, continued
Septem ber.9, 2003
Page 3 of 4
Goal 4: Develop a Five -Year Strategic Financial Plan
that forecasts revenues and expenses as well as identifies funding and
. financial challenges and options.
Goal 5: Develop and Strengthen External Relations
to advance the interests of Spokane Valley through interaction and
advocacy with neighboring jurisdictions, the state legislature, funding
boards and commissions, the congressional delegation and statewide and
national municipal organizations.
Goal 5 Subgoals:
5.1 Maximize coordination among agencies.
Goal 6: Develop an Approach for Long -Term Wastewater Services
including the evaluation of a regional system option.
Goal 6 Subgoals:
6.1 Develop a funding plan for extended road surfacing as part of sewer improvement
proj ects.
Draft 2004 Guiding Principles, Goals and Department Workplan Activities, continued
September 9, 2003
Page 4 of 4
Other Department Workplan Activities
Community Development
• Streamline permit issuance and inspection processes with a goal for same -day
inspections and predictable (48-96 hour) turnaround on plan review.
• Cross -train and certify code compliance and building inspections personnel.
• Develop informational brochures, including Everything You Wanted to Know
about Getting a Building Permit and Development 101 in Spokane Valley.
• Streamline development review processes. (Note: this activity includes other
City departments and other agencies.)
• Enhance citizen self -help area. (Note: this activity includes other City
departments, especially Public Works.)
Deputy City Manager
• Develop and evaluate options for a City Hall. (Note: this activity includes other
City departments, especially Public Works.)
Parks d Recreation
• Manage the construction phase of the Mirabeau Point CenterPlace project to
ensure the facility meets the timeline for occupancy in 2005. (Note: this activity
includes other City departments, especially Public Works.)
Public Works
• Manage contracts with Spokane County and others for public works services and
construction.
• Provide engineering services to support City projects and the City's planning and
building activity.
• Seek grant support for City public works projects.
Potential Future Goals
• Address the City's role in social service, economic development and arts &
cultural issues in the community.
GOALS
CATEGORY
LEAD
Possible Goals from Staff:
1. Manage the Construction Phase of the
Dept. workplan
Parks /PW
Mirabeau Point CenterPlace Project so that the
facility meets the timeline for occupancy in 2005.
2. Experiment with a Managed Competition
Goal
CM/DCM
Program designed to identify alternative service
providers at more economical rates than accorded
by current service providers.
3. Initiate the Development of the First
Goal
CD
Comprehensive Plan for Spokane Valley that
will create the City's long -term vision and link
transportation system improvements to land use
goals that support achieving the adopted vision.
4. Overall Communication.
Goal
Citywide
5. Develop a Five -Year Strategic Financial Plan
Goal
Finance
that forecasts revenues and expenses as well as
identifies funding and financial challenges and
options.
6. Develop and Strengthen External Relations that
Goal '
Council /CM
advance the interests of Spokane Valley through
interaction and advocacy with neighboring
jurisdictions, the state legislature, funding boards
and commissions, the congressional delegation and
statewide and national municipal organizations.
7. Determine if we are Going to Contract or
Subgoal to #1
DCM
Annex Library District, or start our own.
8. Determine if we are going to contract or annex
Subgoal to #1
DCM
Fire District, or start our own.
9. Assess Cost Effectiveness of Court- Related
Subgoal to #1
CA
Contracts and determine if we should provide
these services ourselves.
10. Manage Contracts with Spokane County and
Dept. workplan
PW
Others for public works services and construction.
11. Provide Engineering Services to support City
Dept. workplan
PW
Projects and the City's planning and building
activity.
12. Seek Grant Support for City public works
Dept. workplan
PW
projects.
City of Spokane Valley
Draft 2004 Goals Table
Based on Council Study Session August 11 2003
Attachment 2
13. Develop a Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
Subgoal to #2
Parks
14. Initiate Development of an Interactive Web -
Dept. workplan for #3
_
CD /PW
Based GIS.
15. Publish all Planning Commission Agendas.
Dept. workplan for #3
Dept. workplan for #3
CD
City Clerk
Comprehensive Plan and Development
Regulation Drams on the web.
16. Initiate Records Storage and Retrieval System.
17. Publish "Facts & Figures - City of Spokane
Dept. workplan for #3
Administration
Valley" to include demographics, permit activity,
the names and addresses of elected City, county,
and state officials, etc.
18. Streamline Permit Issuance and Inspection
Dept. workplan
CD
Processes with a goal of same day inspections and
predictable (48 -96 hour) turnaround on plan
review.
19. Cross - training and Certification of Code
Dept. workplan
CD
Compliance and Building inspections
Personnel.
20. Informational Brochure - "Everything you
Dept. workplan
CD
wanted to know about getting a Building Permit ".
21. In cooperation with. other departments and
agencies. Establish Development Regulations
Subgoal to #2
CD
Implementing the Comprehensive Plan in a
Uniform Land Development Code, to include
subdivision requirements, zoning regulations,
development standards, building codes and
engineering details.
22. Streamline Development Review Processes to
Dept. workplan
CD
include all reviewing departments and agencies.
23 . Informational Brochure — "Development 101 in
Dept. workplan
CI)
Spokane Valley ".
24. Enhance. Citizen Sell -Help Area.
Dept. workplan
CD/PW
25. Develop and Implement a Public Participation
Dept. workplan for n2
CD
Program for the Comprehensive Plan. Public
participation techniques include electronic
newsletter, public information brochures, citizen
surveys, informational meetings with citizen
groups, neighborhoods, and other special interest
groups.
26. Complete Initial Draft on the Citv's
Dept. workplan for #2
CD
Comprehensive Plan, specifically the land use,
transportation, parks and recreation, and capital
facilities elements. Consultant assistance may be
required for the transportation, parks and
recreation, and capital facilities elements.
Draft 2004 Coals Table, continued
September 9, 2003
Page 2 of 3
GOALS
I CATEGORY 1 LEAD
27. State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)
Dept. workplan for #2
CD
Integration into the comprehensive planning
process. Consultant assistance anticipated to
comply with the SEPA requirements of the
comprehensive plan.
Council Suggestions:
28. Minimum — Maintain Current Service Level.
Guiding Principle
(combine with #30
29. Address:
Future
• Social Services
• Economic Development
• Arts & Culture
30. Don't Reduce Core Scrvicc — treat as living
Guiding Principle
(combine with #28)
document (i.e , make changes).
31. Wastewater Treatment:
Goal
• Subgoal
PW
• Roads funding
32. No Increase in Taxes (or tax rates) impossible.
Guiding Principle
(Live within current sources of revenue.)
33. Plan for Maintaining Transportation System:
Separate Subgoals to
#2
PW
• Local funding source?
34. Maintain Business- Fricndl Environment
Guiding Principle
35. Maximize Coordination Among,Agcncies
Subgoal to #5
Dept. workplan
DCM/PW
36. Options for City Hall (alternatives).
37. Develo a Stratel Annexation Program
Subgoal to #2
CD
Added Post August 11, 2003:
38. Further Develop the City's Web Site to enhance
Dept. workplan for 143
Administration
citizen participation
Draft 2004 Coals Table, continued
September 9, 2003
Page 3 of 3
GOALS
CATEGORY [ LEAD
CA = City Attorney; CM = City Manager; CD = Community Development
DCM = Deputy City Manager; PW = Public Works
OPTIONS:
ATTACHMENTS Vouchers for 08 -22 -03
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: 09 -09 -03 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: x consent ❑ old business ❑ new business D public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Claims: Voucher listing total for the weeks of August 22, 2003 and
August 29 2003 batch
List of Vouchers for 8- 29 -03:
Damage deposit refund 50.00
Reimbursement, relocation 1,728.93
Federal population certificate 1,530.00
Office supplies 185.31
Office supplies 280.24
Geiger Jail Costs for June 5,070.00
Reimbursement for relocation 3,500.00
Expense reimbursement 14.86
Power charges 71.02
Membership dues balance 826.00
Engineering services 390.00
Employee name plates 191.99
Building rent for September 20,496.93
Contract services 2,625.00
Printing 473.90
City logo for parks van 75.67
Vinyl decals for police cars 1,913.37
Day camp craft supplies 53.49
Parks & Rec field trip 292.40
Municipal Membership Dues 21,250.00
Mileage & Travel Expenses 24.49
Street lighting power charges 469.89
Bicycles & Accessories 1,718.62
Spokane County Treasurer 1,243,733.48
TOTAL 1,306,965.59
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve claims of $42,011.37 for 8 -22 -03
Approve claims of $1,306,965.59 for 8 -29 -03
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: $1,348,976.96
STAFF CONTACT: Ellen Avey
vchlist •
08122 9:36:19AM
Bank code : apbank
Voucher
Date Vendor
3350 8/22/2003 000154
3351 8122/2003 000264
3352 8/22/2003 000037
3353 8/22/2003 000134
3354 8122/2003 000030
AASHTO
ALLEY, DEBI
AMERICAN LINEN
AVISTA UTILITIES
3355 8/2212003 000168 B & C TELEPHONE INC.
3356 8/2212003 000032 BERRETH LOCHMILLER & ASSOC
3357 8122/2003 000173 BINGAMAN, GREG
3358 8/22/2003 000101 CDWG
3359 8/22/2003 000109 COFFEE SYSTEMS INC
3360 8/2212003 000227 CONKLIN, PEGGY
3361 8122/2003 000035 CORPORATE EXPRESS
Voucher List
Spokane Valley
Invoice PO #
400691850101 30051
081503
225896
APA CONFERENCE, EVENT DYNAMICS I req -SK
731634175
74738
3655
1007
JE82022 30054
15634
8152003
45330833 30055
30055
DescriptionlAccount
BOOK
REIMBURSEMENT
FLOOR MAT SERVICE
REGISTRATION
ELECTRIC SERVICE AGREEMEN
Total :
TELEPHONE HEADSET
ACCOUNTING SERVICES
IT TECH SERVICES
HP A -B IEEE 1284 PRINTER CAB
Total :
COFFEE
EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT
Total :
OFFICE SUPPLIES
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
Page: 1
34.98
34.98
45.18
45.18
600.00
600.00
1,956.52
1,956.52
128.42
128.42
120.00
120.00
405.00
405.00
505.19
505.19
724.64
124.64
18.27
18.27
11.02
11.02
Page: 1
vchlist
0812212003 9:36:19AM
Bank code : apbank
3371
Date Vendor
Voucher _
3362 8122/2003 000014 EDEN SYSTEMS, INC.
3363 8/22/2003 000260 EWFOA
3364 8/2212003 000028 FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANK
3365 8/22/2003 000208 GIBSON, JAMES
3366 8/2212003 000002 H & H BUSINESS SYSTEMS
3367 812212003 000250 HARLEY DOUGLAS, INC
3368 8122/2003 000259 HUMANIX
3369 8/2212003 000070 INLAND POWER AND LIGHT CO
3370 8/22/2003 000265 JACKSON, MIKE
8/22/2003 000266
JAMES, GAY
3372 812212003 000114 JVH TECHNICAL
List
Spc ,_ Valley
PO #
Description/Account
Invoice
17450 SOFTWARE_ SUPPORT
17576 TRAINING COSTS
17577 PROJECT MGMT1CONSULTING al
81503
CC1217 -8/03
CC1225 -810
CC -5045 8 -03
CC -5151 8 -03
81803
111416
02 -JNA -asst
132158
80703
81803
127
6480
30052
REGISTRATION
Total :
TRAVEL & RELATED EXPENSES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING EXPEN
CREDIT CARD PAYMENT
CREDIT CARD PAYMENT Total
REIMBURSEMENT
COPY CHARGES
TEMP LABOR
STREET LIGHTING
REIMBURSEMENT
PLOTTER INK
Total :
Total :
FLOODPLAIN BOND RELEASE
Total :
Total :
EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENTotal
Total :
Total :
Amount
11,655.00
4,641.23
1,537.50
17,833.7
40.00
40.00
1,379.9
901.59
138.80
612.48
3,032.79
130.38
130.38
1,764.43
1,764.43
2,000.00
2,000.00
84.60
84.60
30.00
30.00
13.50
13.50
7.47
7.47
1,098.8
1,098.88
Page:
vchlist
08/2212003 9:36:19AM
Bank code :
Voucher
3373
apbank
Date Vendor
812212003 000263
LANZCE DOUGLAS, INC.
3374 812212003 000262 LENHART CONSTRUCTION
3375 812212003 000033 MCPC
3376 8/22/2003 000198 MONTGOMERY, KRISTIN
3377 8/22/2003 000043 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
3378 8122/2003 000016 PETROCARD SYSTEMS
3379 8/22/2003 000045 PHONES PLUS
3380 8122/2003 000041 PROTHMAN COMPANY
3381 812212003 000019 PURRFECT LOGOS, INC.
3382 8/22/2003 000024 RESOURCE COMPUTING INC.
3383 8/22/2003 000267 SAMARITAN OCCUPATIONAL MED.
3384 812212003 000067 SIGNS NOW
3385 812212003 000199 TALBOT, CHRISTINE
Voucher List
Spokane Valley
Invoice
Various
03- JNA - 28
4418747 30056
82003
432169121
C366043
Asst
2003 - 191119
9072
36013
777771161
11601096
81303
PO #
Description /Account
FLOODPLAIN BOND RELEASE al .
BOND RELEASE PAYMENT
OFFICE SUPPLIES,
EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT
Total
CELL PHONE SERVICE
VEHICLE FUEL
LABOR & EQUIP
MAGNETIC SIGN
NETWORK LABOR
EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL
Total :
Total :
COROPLAST WIRE STAND
Total :
Total :
Total :
EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT tai
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT tai
Amount
2,500 00
2,500.00
300.00
300.00
38.06
38.06
35.76
35.76
671.26
671.26
302.88
302.88
1,068.48
1,068.48
271.31
271.31
43.24
43.24
4,581.20
4,581.20
120.00
120.00
24.65
24.65
7.54
7.54
vchlist .
0812212003 9:36:19AM
Bank code : apbank
3387
3388
3389
3390
3391
3392
8/2212003 000228 TYPECRAFT INCORPORATED
812212003 000087
8/22/2003 000097
812212003 000237
43 Vouchers for bank code : apbank
43 Vouchers in this report
VERIZON WIRELESS, BELLEVUE
WARREN, DICK
WEIDERT, HOLLY
I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury,
that the materials have been furnished. the services
rendered, or the labor performed as described herein
and that the claim is lust, due and an unpaid obligation
against the City of Spokane Valley, and that 1 am
authorized to authenticate and certify to said claim.
Finance Director Date
Vc� List
Spc -a Valley
Invoice
Voucher Date Vendor
3386 8/22/2003 000093 THE SPOKESMAN - REVIEW
73103
8/22/2003 000261 THRIFTY CAR RENTAL
Thrifty
812212003 000102 TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE CO 262292
00045353
1793237554
81303
815003
PO #
DescrIption /Account
CLASSIFIED ADVERTISEMENT
Total :
CAR RENTAL
TITLE SEARCH WORK
TYPESETTING CHARGE
CELL PHONE CHARGES
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
CONSULTING & TRIP EXPENSE
Total :
MILEAGE
Total :
Bank total :
Total vouchers :
Amount
398.99
398.99
213.96
213.96
172.96
172.96
6.49
6.49
9.25
9.25
963.03
963.03
9.31
9.31
42,011.37
42,011.37
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: 09 -09 -03 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: x consent ❑ old business El new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Payroll for Period Ending August 31, 2003
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
BACKGROUND:
OPTIONS:
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION:
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Payroll for period ending 8/31/03
$ 97,718.10 salaries & wages
$ 10,296.91 benefits
$- 108,015.01 total payroll
STAFF CONTACT: Daniel Cenis
ATTACHMENTS
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: September 9, 2003 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business xx new business
❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report
❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Ordinance Authorizing Interlocal Agreement with Public Facilities
District
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: First Reading August 26, 2003
BACKGROUND: Excerpted minutes from the Council's June 24, 2003 council meeting: Bond
Attorney Mike Ormsby explained the agreement and summarized the PFD's position at that
time. Ormsby said then that he feels the direction council has given is that the Valley City would
like to have a proportionate share of the excess revenues of this project and that we are willing
to talk with the PFD about how to define those excess revenues. Ormsby said he will be in
contact with County's counsel tomorrow to discuss this and then in contact with PFD's counsel
the following day for discussion.
Ormsby concluded by stating that in terms of the current interlocal agreement, the goal is to
insure it contains the representations needed for the City to qualify for regional project tax
revenue. It was mentioned that the agreement does not provide for any lien or other ownership
interest in the PFD which was a very fundamental part of council instructions at the onset.
Ormsby said he will begin work on the allocation of excess revenues and will report back to the
Council.
OPTIONS:
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Motion to adopt Ordinance No. 03 -080
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
STAFF OR OTHER CONTACT: Mike Ormsby
ATTACHMENTS
Preston I Gates I EI I is
VIA E -MAIL AND IIAND DELIVERY
Mayor Mike DeVleming .
Members, City Council . -
City of Spokane Valley
. 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 •
• Spokane, WA 99206
Re: Response to Inquiries Raised at the City Council Meeting of August 26, 2003
Dear Mayor DeVlerning and Councilmembers:
September 2, 2003
At the first reading of the ordinance making certain findings regarding the regional nature
of the Center Place Project and approving the Interlocal Agreement between the City 'of Spokane
Valley (the "City"), the Public Facilities District of Spokane County (the "PFD ") and Spokane
County (the "County "), a number of questions and issues were raised by members the Council
and public. The purpose of this letter is to respond to the questions and issues raised. I am sure
you also appreciate that the nature.of some of the questions or issues raised are more fiscal or.
policy issues, as opposed to legal concerns.
•
(1) Need for Approval on Transfer of Operational Control Responsibility by the City.
Councilor Munson, in light of the "non - assignability" previsions of the Agreement, inquired
regarding the possible future desire of the City to transfer some or all of the responsibility for the
ogerafion'ofCerfterRae Title "Pro]ect'') 'to 'another agency of the or putilid- enmity: i have'"
had the opportunity to review the Agreement and the question raised by Councilor Schimmels is
not one that we really anticipated in drafting of the Agreement (we were more focused on
construction,and financing issues). Having said that though, I do not think that the Agreement
would require approval of the transfer of the responsibility for operational or program •
requirements by the City to another City created agency or body. For example, if the City
created a Park Board or its own public facilities district, there would be no prohibition on the
transfer of operational or programmatic responsibility by the City. However, if the transfer is to
another governmental entity probably not associated with the City, or some private or non -profit
corporation, such transfer would require the express consent of the PFD and the County.
As expressed at the City Council Meeting, the City's primary concern is that the PFD live
up to its financial.commitments under the Agreement and remits regional project tax revenue
A LAW FIRM A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING OTHER LIMITED LIABILITY ENTITIES
•
Michael C. Ormsby
mormsby@prestongatcs.com
Direct Fax Number: (509) 444 -7868
601 WEST RIVERSIDE AVENUE, SUITE 1400 SPOKANE, WA 99201.0628 TEL: 15091 624:2100 FAX: 15091 456 - 0146 www.ptestongates_com
Anchorage Coeur d'Alene Hong Kong Orange County Portland San Francisco Scattle Spokane Washington. DC
7"
Mayor Mike DeVleining
September 2, 2003
Page 2
( "RPTR ") to the City in a timely manner in order to meet debt service payments on bonds issued
by the City. The PFD's primary concern with both the County and the City is that each entity
spends the RPTR it receives on the project defined in the Agreement, as that is the Project that
has been qualified for RPTR. The PFD will be asking attorneys for both the County and the City
to issue a legal opinion that the Project financed with RPTR'meets the requirements of the statute
and that "commencement of construction" has occurred prior to January 1, 2004.
(2) PFD Bond Financing. Councilor Schimmels raised questions regarding the PFD
bond financing which was approved earlier this month. I am attaching to this letter schedules
that have been received from Bond Counsel for the PFD in this financing, setting forth a variety
of financial information for the Council.
.0f particular interest, you should note that the PFD issued $77 million worth of bonds,
but sold some of those bonds at a premium, generating an additional $3,526,715.05 ( "Excess
Premium "). The Excess Premium is scheduled to be used to pay cost of issuance for the Bonds
(underwriters discount, financial advisor fee, bond counsel fee) and other planning costs
associated with the bonds and the project. By using the Excess Premium to cover these costs, the
PFD will then have $77 million left for the purchase of real estate and convention center -
construction.
Selling bonds at a premium is not uncommon. It is more prevalent in today's market
since interest rates are so low. Many bond purchasers want to buy bonds at a premium because
they believe it will make it easier for them to remarket the bonds, should they want to. Do not be
at all surprised that the purchase offer ultimately brought to the City by Lehman Brothers also
includes some bonds acquired by purchasers at a premium.
You would also be interested to know that the bond reserve fund ( "Reserve Fund ") for .
the PFD bonds is initially being financed by the purchase of an insurance policy by the PFD
from VLBIA; a raunicipal insurance. co: npany:.- As`you:recalIfrom,t e4low•of:funds • .
included in the agreement, should the PFD not have adequate revenue to make principal and
interest payments on their bonds, there is a draw on the Reserve Fund for the money necessary to •
make the debt service payment. MBIA, as the provider of the insurance policy would :be called -
on.to make payment. For your information and reference, I am attaching (both to -the e -mail
version and hand delivered version) the following enclosures that 1 received from Bond Counsel
for the PFD: the sources and uses of the Bond Proceeds; the Debt Service Schedule and
coverage at 0% growth for the PFD.Bonds; and the estimated closing costs for the PFD Bonds.
. There were a number of other issues raised and questions asked by members of the public
at the meeting. I am not sure that I heard all of those questions or concerns, but let Me respond -
to the ones that I do remember as follows:
Mayor Mike DeVleming
September 2, 2003
Page 3,
(1) Open Public Meetings Act. The concern about the conduct about the negotiation
sessions involving elected leadership from the PFD, County and City, as well as their
professional and legal advisors, violating the Open Public Meetings Act (the "Act ") was raised.
Differentiating between the policy considerations opposed to the legal requirements, is
important. In my opinion, the Act, in my opinion, was not violated. (One could still make the
"policy" argument that even though it was not required, that the meetings should have been
open.) However, the decision about the characterization of the sessions was actually made by
the PFD and the County. Both of those entities said that if the sessions were going to be open,
neither of those entities would participate. At least directly, the City took no position, but
remained at the meetings , at least tacitly agreed with it. (As your attorney, I can tell you that 1
do not believe the Open Public Meetings Act was violated:)
The PFD Board also held two public hearings on the Agreement before it was approved
by the PFD Board and held a third public hearing after it was approved and issues were raised by
the County. I would also remind the Council that this Agreement has been available for public ..
review since early August and -the August 26,2003, meeting was the second time the Agreement .
had been brought before the City Council. I do appreciate that opponents of the Agreement
might argue that public hearing on a finished document overview after it has already been
approved by two bodies is not sufficient, but 1 can assure you that the Council has complied with
all legal requirements relative to the development of the Agreement.
- (2) Jeopardy of the Arena funds. One participant in the meeting on August 26
raised the issue that "Arena funds are now in jeopardy." If that is the case, it is actually an issue
for the PFD Board to respond to, not the City of Spokane Valley City Council.
(3) Nature ofiegal opinions available. There were a number of concerns expressed
regarding legal review and legal opinions of those participating in this project. Preston Gates &
Ellis, LLP "Preston Gates" will be prepared to give -an unqualified legal opinion on the bonds
iss ueuby -the provided . that the - bonds - arc'valid;:: legal .•• �
obligations of the City and the interest paid on the bond is exempted from Federal' Income Tax.
Counsel for the PFD will be giving an opinion regarding the enforceability of the . •
Agreement. Preston Gates will be giving an opinion that the project, or at least the portion of it
financed with tax proceeds, is a "regional project" under the definition of the applicable statute:
(We are currently working with City staff on developing the information and allocations
necessary to be able to make this conclusion, but presumably if bonds are issued Preston Gates
will have completed our work and concluded that it does qualify.)
(4) Dissolution clause. One of the community members inquired as to whether or not
there is a dissolution clause in this Agreement. The direct answer to that question is no.
However, there is a clause in the Agreement to "sever" any unenforceable or other provisions
that may be found to be illegal from enforcement under the terms of the Agreement. The point
Mayor Mike DeVlemi_ng
•
September 2, 2003
Page 4
made by the citizen who raised this issue was a good one, but typically it is more validly made
when dealing in a business relationship. Here, the City, PFD and the County have a contract,
and you usually do not want to have a provision. for "dissolution" of a contract, particularly if
one party can unilaterally invoke the dissolution clause, which is what is typically provided in
the business setting when a dissolution clause is inserted.
I guess the bottom -line here is that there is no dissolution clause, but I would respectively
suggest that such a clause would not be appropriate given the nature of this particular
Agreement.
.Finally, the point was made by more than one citizen that "they did not feel enough •
information had been shared .with members of the public about the project and the Agreement."
Whether this feeling is prevailing in the community or not, I will leave to you. However, I
would state that I would be happy to attend any information meeting with members of the public
that the City Council or City staff may feel appropriate. Most of the issues that would arise at
such a meeting are probably going to be fiscal or policy in nature, as opposed to legal, but again, -
.if such meetings are held and our presence would be of benefit, we will be there.
I hope this letter and the attachments respond adequately to the questions raised at the
August 26 meeting. I will again be present on September 9, 2003, when this matter again
C _J comes before the Council. However, you should feel free to contact me in the meantime, if you •
have any questions or desire additional information. Thank you again for the opportunity to .
work with all of you on this exciting project. Best personal regards.
MCO:ana
cc: David Mercier (with enclosures)
Nina Regor (with enclosures)
Ken Thompson (with enclosures) •
Mike Jackson (with enclosures)
Neil Kersten (with enclosures)
Stan Schwartz (with enclosures)
Very truly yours,
PRESTON GATES'& L'LLIS LLP
By
Michael C. Ormsby
Sources:
Uses:
SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS
Spokane Public Facilities District, Washington
Hotel/Motel Tax and Sales /Use Tax Bonds
Series 2003
Dated Date 09//112003
Delivery Date 09/11/2003
.Bond Proceeds:
Par Amount • 77,000,000.00
Original Issue Discount (31,294.55)
Premium 3,558,008.60
Delivery Date Expenses:
Cost of Issuance
Underwriter's Discount
MBIA Bond Insurance Premium (0.625 %)
MBIA Reserve Surety Premium (3 %)
• Cost Reimbursement to District
80,526,714.05
. 421,564.69
613,690.00
1,076,000.00
208,000.00
• 909,578.92
3,228,833.61
Other Uses of Funds:
' Construction Fund 77,000,000.00 ..
Contingency 297,880.44
77,297,880.44
80,526,714.05
Aug 20, 2003 9:42 am Prepared by Lehman Brothers (Finance 4.434 SPOKANE :DISTRICT- 200309 i 1) '
7 \‘
J
BOND DEBT SERVICE
Spokane Public Facilities District, Washington
Hotel/Motel Tax and Sales /Use Tax Bonds
Series 2003
Dated Date
Delivery Date
0 911 1120 03
09/11 /2003
Period
Ending Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service
12/01/2003 • - 940,036.11
12101/2004 145,000 2.000% 4,230,162.50
12/01/2005 145,000 2.000% 4227,262.50
12/01/2006 155,000 2.500% 4,224,362.50
12/01 /2007 160,000 3.000% 4,220,487.50
12/01/2008 275,000 3.000% 4,215,687.50
12/01/2009 • 275,000 3.125% 4,207,437.50
12/01/2010 290,000 4.000% 4,198,843.75
12/01/2011 295,000 4.250% 4,187,243.75
12/01/2012 • 315,000 ' ' 4.500% 4,174,706.25
12/01/2013 325,000 4.500% 4,1 6
12101/2014 340,000 4.125% 4,145,906.25
12101/2015 360,000' 4.250% 4,131,88125
12/01/2016 370,000 • 4.250% 4,116,581.25
12/01/2017 385,000 4.375% 4,100,856.25
12/01/2018 3,465,000 5.750% 4,084,012.50
12/01/2019 3,6 5.750% 3,884,775.00
12/01/2020 3,875,000 5.750% 3,674,037.50
12/01/2021 • 4,100,000 5.750% 3,451,225.00
12/01 /2022 4,335,000 5.750% 3,215,475.00.
12/01/2023 4,585,000 5.750% 2,966,212.50
12/01/2024 . -4,845,000 5.750% 2,702,575.00
12/01/2025 5,125,000 5.750% 2,423,987.50
12/01/2026 5,420,000 5.750% 2,129,300.00
12/01/2027 4,710,000 , 5.750% 1,817,650.00
12/01/2028 , 4,445,000 ,. 5.750% , 1,546,825,00
12/01/2029 4,705,000 5.250% 1,291,237.50
12/0112030 4,950,000 5.250% 1,044,225.00
12/01/2031 . 5,210,000 5.250% 784,350.00
12/01/2032 5,485,000 5.250% 510,825.00
12/01/2033 4,245,000 5.250% 167,146.88
940,036.11
4,375,162.50
4,372,262.50
4,379,362.50 .
4,380,487.50
4,490,687.50
4,482,437.50
4,488,843.75
4,482,243.75
4,489,706.25
4,485,53125
4,485,906.25
4,491,881.25
4,486,581.25
4,485,85625
7,549,012.50
7,549,775.00
7,549,037.50
7,551,225.00
7,550,475.00 -
7,551,212.50
7,547,575.00
7,548,987.50
7,549,300.00
6,527,650.00
5,9.9
5,994,225.00
5,994,350.00
5,995,825.00'
4,412,146.88
77,000,000 95,175,845.49 172,175,845.49
Aug 20, 2003 . 9:42 am Prepared by Lehman Brothers . - .. . . (Finance 4.434 SPOK.ANE:DISTRICT- 200309 1 i )
Period
Ending
BOND DEBT SERVICE
Spokane Public Facilities District, Washington
Hotel/Motel Tax and Sales /Use Tax Bonds
Series 2003
Dated. Date
Delivery Date
Principal Coupon
' 09111/2003 - - -
12/01/2003 - 940,036.11 940,036.11 .940,036.11
06/01/2004 •• 2,115,081.25 2,115,081.25
12/01/2004 145,000 2.000% 2,115,081.25 2,260,08125 4,375,162.50
06/01/2005 - - 2,113,631.25 2,113,63125
12/01/2005 • 145,000 2.000% 2,113,631.25 2,258,63125 4,372,262.50
06/01/2006 - - 2,112,181.25 2,112,18125
12/01/2006 .155,000 2.500% 2,112,181.25 2,267,181.25 4,379,362.50
06/01/2007 • • -. 2,110,243.75 . 2,110,243.75
12/01/2007 . . 160,000 3.000% 2,110,243.75 2,270,243.75 • '. 4;380,487.50
06/01/2008 , - - ' 2,107,843.75 2,107,843.75
12/01/2008 275,000 3.000% 2,107,843.75 2,382,843.75 . ' 4,490,687.50
06/01/2009 • - - 2,1.03,718.75 2,103,718.75 .. =
12/01/2009 275,000 3.125% 2,103,718.75 2,378,718.75 ' 4,482,437.50
06/0112010 - . - . 2,099,421.88 2,099,421.88
12/01/2010 • 290,000 . ' 4.000% 2,099,421.88 2,389,421.88 • 4,488,843.75 .
06/01/2011 2,093,621.88 2,093,621.88. -
12101/2011 295,000 4.250% 2,093,621.88 2,388,621.88 4,482,243.75
06/01/2012 - - - 2,087,353.13 2,087,353.13 . • -
12/01/2012 315,000 . 4.500% 2,087,353.13 2,402,353.13 • 4,489,706.25
06/01/2013 • - - 2,080,265.63 2,080,265.63 -
12/01/2013. • 325,000 - 4.500% 2,080,265.63 _ 2,405,265.63 4,485,531.25
06101/2014. ' - - 2,072,953.13 2,072,953.13 -
12/01/2014 340,000 . 4.125% 2,072,953.13 2,412,953.13 4,485,906.25
08/0112015 - 2,065,940.63 2,065,940.63
12/01 /2015 _ . .6Q,Q00 _., • • 4,250% 2,065,940,6,3 • > .2,425,940.63... 4.,49
06/01/2016 - ' 2,058,290.63 '2,058,290.63 • • -
12/01/2016 370,000 • . ,4.250% 2,058,290.63 2,428,290.63 • 4,486,581.25
06/01/2017 - - 2,050,428.13 2,050,428.13 . -
12/01/2017 .. 385,000 4.375% 2,050,428.13 ' 2,435,428.13 4,485,856.25
06/01/2018 . - - 2,042,006.25 . 2,042,006.25 -
12/01/2018 • 3,465,000 5.750%. 2,042,006.25 5,507,006.25 7,549,012.50
06/01/2019 1,942,387.50 1,942,387.50 -
12/0112019 3,665,000 • 5.750% 1,942,387.50 5,607,387.50 7,549,775.00
06/01/2020 . - . 1,837,018.75 1,837,018.75 •
12/01/2020 . 3,875,000• 5.750% 1,837,018.75 5,712,018.75 7,549,037.50
06/01/2021 - 1,725,612.50 . 1,725,612.50 -
12/01/2021 • 4,100,000 5.750% 1,725,612.50 5,825,612.50 ' 7,551,225.00
06/01/2022 • - 1,607,737.50 1,607,737.50 -
12/01/2022 4,335,000 5.750% . 1,607,737.50 5,942,737.50 7,550,475.00
06/01/2023 - - 1,483,106.25 1,483,106.25 -
12/01/2023 4,585,000 5.750% 1,483,106.25 6,068,106.25 7,551,212.50
06/01/2024 - 1,351,287.50 1,351,287.50
12/01/2024 4,845,000 • 5.750% 1,351,287.50 6,196,287.50 7,547,575.00
06/01/2025 - 1,211,993.75 ' 1,211,993.75 -
09/11/2003
09/11/2003
•
Interest Debt Service
Annual
Debt Service
Aug 20, 2003 9:42 am Prepared - t); Brothers • (Finance 4.434 SPOKANE:DISTRICT - 20030911)
Period
Ending
12/01/2025
06/01/2026
1 2/01/2026
06/01/2027
12/01 /2027
06/01/2028
12/01/2028
06/01 /2029
12/01/2029
06/01/2030
12/01 /2030
06/01 /2031
12/01/2031
06/01/2032
12/01/2032
06/01,2033
09/01/2033
12/01/2033
Spokane Public Facilities District, Washington
Hotel/Motel Tax and Sales /Use Tax Bonds
Series 2003
Principal Coupon
5,125,000 5.750%
5,420,000 5.750%
4,710,000 5.750%
4,445,000 5.750%
4,705,000 5.250 %'
4,950,000 5.250%
5,210,000 5.250%
5.250%
5.250%
5,485,000
4,245,000
77,000,000
BOND DEBT SERVICE
Interest
1,211,993.75
1,064,650.00
1,064,650.00
908,825.00
908,825.00
773,412.50
773,412.50
645,618.75
645,618.75
522,112.50
522,112.50
392,175.00.
392,175.00
255,412.50
255,412.50
.111,431.25
. 55;715.63
Debt Service
6,336,993.75
1,064,650.00
6,484,650.00
908,825.00
5,618,825.00
773,412.50
5,218,412.50
645,618.75
5,350,618.75
522,112.50
5,472,112.50
392,175.00
5,602,175.00
255,412.50
5,740,412.50
111,431.25
4,300,715.63
95,175,845.49 • 172,175,845.49
Annual
Debt Service
7,548,987.50
7,549,300.00
6,527,650.00
5,991,825.00
5,996237.50
5,994,225.00
5,994,350.00
5,995,825.00
4,412,146.88
172,175,845.49
Aug 20, 2003 9:42 am Prepared by Lehman Brothers (Finance 4.434 SPOKANE:DISTRICT - 20030911)
' 8o,d Component
Serial Bonds:
Par Amount
Premium
Production
Underwriter's Discount
Purchase Price
Accrued•Intorost
Net Proceeds
BOND PRICING
Spokane Public Facilities District, Washington
Hotel /Motel Tax and Sales /Use Tax Bonds
Series 2003
Maturity Call Call Premium
Date Amount Rate Yield Price Date Price (- Discount) Takedown
12/01)2004 145,000 2.000% 1.180% 100.991 1,436.95 2.500
12101/2005 145,000 , 2.000% 1.5990% 100.890 1,290.50 2.500
12101/2006 - 155,000 2.500% 2.040% 101.425 2,208.75 3.750
12/01/2007 160,000 3.000% 2.510% 101.949 3,118.40 3.750
12/01/2008 • 275,000 3.000% 2.870% 100.623 , - 1,713.25 • 5.000
1210112009 275,000 3.125% 3.220% 99.465 - (1,471.25) 5.000
12/01/2010 290,000 4.000% 3.57056 102.711 - 7,661.90 5.000
12/01/2011 .295,000' 4.25016 3.630% 102.933 8,652.35 5.000
12/01/2012 315,000 4.500% 4.01056 103.741 11,784.15 5.000
12/01/2013 325,000 4.500% 4.140% 102.970 9,652.50 . 5.000
12101/2014 • 340,000 4.125% 4.280% 98.624 (4,678.40) 5.00b
12701/2015 360.000 4.2509E 4.400% 98.587 - (5,086.50) 5.000
12/01/2016 370,000 4.250% 4.5201/. 97.328 (9,886.40) 5.000.
12/01/2017 • 385,000 4.375% 4.630% 97.358 (10,171.70) 5.000
12/01/2016 3,455,000 5.750% 4.560% 109.628 C 12/0112013 100.000 333,610.20 6,250
12/01/2019 3,665,000 5.750% 4.630% 109.031 C 12/01/2013 100.000 330,986.15 . 6.250
12101/2020 3,875,000 5,750% 4.710% 108.352 C 12101/2013 100.000 323,640.00 6.250
12101/2021 4,100,000 5.750 %' 4.780% 107.763 C 12/01/2013 100.000 318,283.00 6.250
12/0112022 4,335.000 5.750% 4.830% 107.345 C 12101/2013 100.000 318,405.75 6.250
12/01/2023 4,585,000 5.750% 4.870% 107.011 C 12!01/2013 100.000 321,454.35 6.250
12/01/2024 4,845,000 5.75094 4.910% •106.679 C 12/01/2013 100.000 323,597.55 6.250
12/01/2025 5,125,000. '5.75056 4:930% 106.514 C 12101/2013 100.000 333,842.50 6.250
12/01/2026 5,420,000 - 5.750% 4.950% 106.348 C 12/01/2013 100.000 344,061,60 6.250
12/01/2027 _ 4,710,000 5,750% 4.97094 106.183 C 12/01/2013 100.000 291,219.30 6.250
12/01/2028 4,445,000 5.750% 4.980% 106.101 C 12/01/2013 • 100.000 271,189.45 6.250
52,405,000 3,526,714.05
Term Bonds due September 1,.2033: ,
1210112029 4,705.000 '5.250% 5.250% 100.000
12/0112030 . 4,950,000 5.25095 5.250% 100.000
12101/2031 5,210,000 5.25096 5.250 94 . 100.000
12/01/2032 5,465,000 5.250% 5.250% 100.000
09101/2033 4,245,000 5.250% 5.25096 100.000
24,595,000
77,000,000 3,526,714.05
'Dated Date 09/11/2003
Delivery Date .09/11/2003
First Coupon ' 12/01/2003
77.000,000.00
3,526,714.05.
80,526,714.05
(613,690.00)
79,913,024.05 103.783148%
79.913,024.05
104.580148%
(0.797000)
6.250
6.250
6.250
6.250
6.250
Aug 20, 2003 '9:42 am Prepared by 'Lehman Brothers ' (Finance 4.434 SPOKANE:DISTRICT- 20030911)
Bond Component
BOND SUMMARY STATISTICS
Spokane Public Facilities District, Washington
Hotel/Motel Tax and SaleslUse Tax Bonds
Series 2003
Dated Date 09/11/2003
Delivery Date 09/11/2003
Last Maturity 09/01/2033
Arbitrage Yield
True Interest Cost (TIC)
Net Interest Cost (NIC)
All -In TIC
Average Coupon
'Average Life (years) : 22.406
Duration of Issue (years) 12.797
Par Amount
Bond Proceeds
Total Interest .
Net Interest
Total Debt Service
Maximum Annual Debt Service
Average Annual Debt Service
• 'Serial Bonds 52,405,000.00
Term Bonds due September 1, 2033 24,595,000.00
7.7,000,000.00
. 80,526,714.05
95,175,845.49
92,262,821.44
172,175,845.49
7,551225.00
5,744,51 3.84
Par Average Average
Value Price Coupon Life
106.730
100.000
5.167338%
5.336769%
5.347640%
5.493518%
5.516481%
5.695% 19.705
5.250% 28.163
77,000,000.00 22.406
All -In Arbitrage
TIC . TIC. _.. , Yield
Par Value 77,000,000.00 ' 77,000,000.00 77,000,000.00
+Accrued Interest - -
+ Premium (Discount) 3,526,714.05 3,526,714.05 3,526,714.05
- Underwriter's Discount (613,690.00) (613,690.00)
- Cost of Issuance Expense (421,564.69)
- OtherAmounts (1,076,000.00) (2,193,578.92) (1,284,000.00)
Target Value 78,837,024.05 77297,880.44 79,242,714.05
Target Date 09/11/2003 09/11/2003 09/11/2003
Yield 5.336769% 5.493518% . 5.167338%
Aug 20, 2003 9:42 am Prepared by Lehman Brothers' (Finance 4.434 SPOKANE:DISTRICT- 20030911)
Bond Component
Serial Bands:
Date
FORM 8038 STATISTICS
Spokane Public Facilities District, Washington
Hotel /Motel Tax and Sales /Use Tax Bonds
Series 2003
Dated Date
Delivery Date
09111/2003
09/11/2003
12/0112004 145,000.00 2.000% ' 100.991 146,436.95 145,000.00
12/01/2005 145,000.00 2.000% 100.890 146,290.50 145,000.00
12/01/2006 .155,000.00 2.500% 101.425 , . 157,208.75 155,000.00
12/01/2007 180,000.00 3.000% 101.949 163,118.40 160,000.00
12101/2008 275,000.00 3.000% 100.623 ' 276,713.25 275,000.00
12/01/2009 275,000.00 3.125% 99.465 273,528.75 275,000.00
12/01/2010 290,000.00 ' 4.000% ' 102.711 297,861.90 • 290,000.00
12/01/2011 295,000.00 4.250% 102.933 303,652.35 295,000.00
12/01/2012 315,000.00 4.500% ' 103.741 326,784.15 . 315,000.00
12/01/2013 325,000.00 • 4.500% ' 102.970 334,652.50 325,000.00
12/01/2014 340,000.00 . 4.125% • 98.624 335,321.60 340,000.00
12/01/201,5 360,000.00 4.250% 98.587 354,913.20 360,000.00
12/01/2016 370,000.00 4.25096 97.328 360,113.60 370,000.00
12/01/2017 385,000.00 4.375% 97.358 374,828.30 385,000.00
12/01/2018 3,465,000.00. 5.750% • 109.628 3,798,610.20 3,465,000.00
12/01/2019 3,665,000.00 5.750% - 109.031 3,995,986.15 3,665,000.00
12/01/2020 3,675,000.00 5.750% 108.352 4,198,640:00 3,875,000.00
12/01/2021 4,100,000.00 5.750% - 107.763 4,418,283.00 4,100,000.00
12/01/2022 4,335,000.00 5.750% 107.345 4,653,405.75 4,335,000.00
• 12101/2023 4,585,000.00 5.750% • 107.011 4,906,454.35 : 4,585,000.00
12/01/2024 4,845,000.00 5.750% 106.679 5,168,597.55 4,845,000.00
12/01/2025 5,125,000.00 5.750% • 106.514 5,458,842.50 5,125,000.00
12/01/2026 5,420,000.00 5.750% 106.348 5,764,061.60 5,420,00(100
12/01/2027 4,710,000.00 5.750% 106.183 5,001,219.30 4,710,000.00
12/01/2028 . 4,445,000.00 5.750% • 106.101 • 4,716,189.45 4,445,000.00
Term Bonds due September 1, 2033:
12/0112029 ,4,705,000.00 - 5.250% - 100.000 4,705;000.00 4,705,000.00
12/01/2030 4,950,000.00 • 5.250% 100.000 4,950,000.00. 4,950,000.00
12/01/2031 5,210,000.00 5.250% 100.000 5,210,000.00 5,210,000.00
12/01/2032 .5,485,000.00 5.250% 100.000 5,485,000.00 • . 5,485,000.00 •
09101/2033 4,245,000.00 5.250% 100.000 4,245,000.00 4,245,000.00
Stated Weighted Net
Maturity Interest Issue Redemption Average Interest
Date Rate Price at Maturity Maturity Yield Cost
Final Maturity 09/01/2033 5.250% 4,245,000.00 4,245,000.00 - -
Entire Issue 80,526,714.05 77,000,000.00 • 22.3017 5.1673% 5.1033%
Proceeds used for accrued interest
Proceeds used for bond issuance costs (including underwriters' discount)
Proceeds used for credit enhancement
Proceeds allocated to reasonably required reserve or replacement fund
Redemption
Principal Coupon Price Issue Price at Maturity
77,000,000.00 80,526,714.05 77,000,000.00
0.00
1,035,254.69
1.284,000.00
0.00
Aug 20, 2003 9:42' am • Prepared by Lehman Brothers (Finance 4.434 SPOKANE:DISTRICT 20030911)
J
PROOF OF ARBITRAGE YIELD
Spokane Public Facilities District, Washington
HotelUMotel Tax and SaleslUse Tax Bonds
Series 2003
Present Value
to 09/1112003
• Date Debt Service - @ 5.1673376%
-12101/2003 940,036.11 • 929,438.98
06/0112004 2,115,081.25 • 2,036,567.85
12/0112004 2,260,081.25 2,123,459.30
06/0112005 2,113,63125 1,935,846.35
12101 /2005 , 2,258,631.25 2,016,548,94
06/012006 2,112,181.25 1,838,300.01
121012006 2,267,181.25 1,923,504.57
06/012007 2,110,243.75 1,745,264.99
12/01/2007 2,270,243.75 1,830,303.10
06/01/2008 2,107,843.75 1,656,573.51
• 12/01/2008 2,382,843.75 • 1,825,532.79
• 06/01/2009 '2,103,718.75 1,571,098.89
12/01/2009 2,378,718.75 1,731,732.12
06/01/2010 2,099,421.88 • 1,489,906.82
12/01/2010 2,389,421.88 1,653,004.36
06/01/2011 2,093,621.88 , 1,411,891.04
12101/201.1 2,388,621.88 1,570,261.97
06/01/2012 2,087,353.13 1,337,649.74
12/0172012 2,402,353.13 1,500,738.76
06/01/2013 2,080,265.63 1,266,802.23
12/012013 50,975,265.63 . 30,260,165.40
06/01/2014 676,565.63 391,510.58 '
12/01/2014 1,016,565.63 573,443.67 •
• 06/01/2015 • 669,553.13 368,181.67
12/01/2015 1,029,553.13 551,883.81
06/01/2016 661,903.13 345,871.75
12/012016 • 1,031,903.13 525,631.48'
'06/012017 654,040.63 324,764.79
12101/2017 . 1,039,040.63 _502,942.70..._..
06/012018 645,618.75 304,537.87
12101/2018 645,618.75 296,965.27
06/012019 645,618.75 289,485.91
121012019 645,618.75 282,194.93
06/01/2020 645,618.75 ' 275,087.58
121012020 645,618.75 268,159.23
06/01/2021 645,618.75 261,405.38
12/012021 645,618.75 254,821.64
06/012022 645,618.75 248,403.71
12/012022 645,618.75 242,147.42
06/012023 • . 645,618.75 236,048.70
12/012023 645,618.75 230,103.59
06/012024 645,618.75 224,308.21
12/01/2024 645,618.75 218,658.79
06/01)2025 645,618.75 213,151.66
12)01/2025 645,618.75 207,783.22
06/01/2026 645,618.75 202,550.00
12/01/2026 645,618.75 197,448.59
06/0112027 645,618.75 192,475.65
Aug 20, 2003 9:42 am Prepared by Lehman Brothers • ' ' (Finance 4.434 SPOKANE:DISTRIC.T- 20030911) •
Delivery date
Par Value
Premium (Discount)
Arbitrage expenses
' Target for yield calculation
PROOF OF ARBITRAGE YIELD
Spokane Public Facilities District, Washington
Hotel /Motel Tax and Sales/Use Tax Bonds
Series 2003
Present Value
to 09/11/2003
Date Debt Service • @ 5.1673376%
• 12/01/2027 645,618.75 187,627.97
0610112028 645,618.75 182,902.38
121012028 ' 645,618.75 178,295.80
06/01/2029 645,618.75 173,805.25
12/01/2029 5,350,618.75 1,404,146.87
06/01/2030 522,112.50 133,565.53
12/01/2030 5,472,112.50 1,364,605.43.
06/012031 392,175.00 95,335.30
12/012031 5,602,175.00 1,327,554.30
06/012032 255,412.50 59,001.02
12/01/2032 5,740,412.50 1,292,653.92
' 06/01/2033 111,431.25 24,460.65
09/01/2033 - 4,300,715.63 932,100.10
143,312,282.99 79,242,714.05
Proceeds Summary
09/11/2003
77,000,000.00
3,526,714.05
(1,284,000.00)
79,242,714.05
r
Aug 20, 2003 9:42 am - Prepared by Lehman Brothers — "' ' • (Finance 4.434'SPOKA E:DISTRICT- 20030911)"' ..."
PROOF OF ARBITRAGE YIELD
Spokane Public Facilities District, Washington
Hotel /Motel Tax and Sales /Use Tax Bonds
Series 2003
Assumed CaII /Computation Dates for Premium Bonds
Net Present
Value (NPV)
Bond • tvlaturity Call Call to 09/1112003
Component Date Date Price @ 5.1673376%
SERIALS 12/0112018 12/01/2013 100.000 (174,525.61)
SERIALS 12/01/2019 12/01/2013 100.000 (162,719.19)
SERIALS 12101/2020 12/01/2013 100.000 (145,731.55)
SERIALS 12/01/2021 12/01 /2013 100.000 (130,044.38)
SERIALS 12/01/2022 1210112013, 100.000 (119,377.84)
SERIALS 12101/2023 12/01/2013 100.000 (110,948.48)
SERIALS 12/01/2024 12101/20/3 100.000 (101,154.60)
SERIALS 12/01/2025 12/01/2013 100.000 (98,544.22)
SERIALS 12/01/2026 12/01/2013 100.000 (95,2.19.33)
SERIALS 12/01/2027 12/01/2013 100.000 (74,974:45)
SERIALS 12/01/2028 .12/01/2013 100.000 (67,111.24)
Rejected CaII /Computation Dates for Premium Bonds
Net Present
Value'(NPV)
Bond Maturity Call' Call to09/11/2003 . Increase
Component Date Date Price . @ 5.1673376% to NPV
SERIALS 12/0/12018 - (122,305.62) 52,219.99
SERIALS 12/01/2019 (98,030.56) 64,688.63
SERIALS 12/01/2020 • (67,837.30) 77,894.25
SERIALS 12/01/2021 • - --- • (36,070.53)" • 91,967.85
SERIALS 12/01/2022 • (12,542.80) 106.835.04
SERIALS 12/01/2023 - 11,692.22 122,640.70
SERIALS 12/01/2024 38,125.12 139,279.72
SERIALS 12/01/2025 58,519.31 157,063.53
SERIALS 12/01 /2026 . • • 80,667.86 175,887.19
SERIALS 12/01/2027 85,950.72 160,925.17
SERIALS 12/01/2028 92,004.58 159,115.82
Aug 20,:2003 9:42 am Prepared by•Lehman Brothers' (Finance 4.434 SPOKANE :DISTRICT- 20030911) -
Year
Erbdin0
12101
2003.
2004
2005
2005
2007
2003
2009
2014}
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2019
2019
2020
2621
2022
2023
2024
2025
2020
2027
2020
2020
2030
2031
2032
2033
The Series 2001 Bands
Pdnel 31 151,.°- -rest • 74301 PrfntI.ol "Rakn
61,520.000 51,653.506 $3.173,500
1,590,000 1,555.106 3,175,100
1.570,000 1,505,509. 3,175,60E
1.750,000 1,422,106 3,172,145
1,1335,0041 1,334,505 3,169,505
1,91..5 004 1,242,0- 3,057,055'
1,915,200 1,152,105 3,067,106
2,005,000 1.056,350 3,001,356
2,110,000 956,100 3,008.100
2,210,400 950,606 3,060,606
2,340,000 723,531 3,053,531
2,475,000 598,991 3,063,981
2,605,000 454,300 3,059,300
2,750,000 311,025 3,001,025
2,5135,000 159,175 3,054,775
SPOKANE PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT CERT SERVICE SCHEDULE AND COVER/ 4 AT 4% GROWTH
5145,000
145,000,
155,0CH)
160,009
275,040
275,000
20040
295,000
315,000
325.000
340.000
300.000
370,000
305,000
3,465,000
3,665.1100
3,975.000
4,100.000
4,375,000
4,565,000
4,045,000
5,125,000
5,420,000
4,710,000
4,44 5,000
4,705,049
4,950,000
5210,000
5,4 55,000
2, 245 , 000
531,495,000 414.996,575 546,491,575 $77.000,800 '.
: 2,000%
•:260296
,22.504%
.3,000?6
.3.000%
,125(.
'4.000%
4 -250%
. 4.125%
• 4.250%
4.250%
_4,3755
5.780%
5.150%
5. 750%
• 5.75046
5.750%
3.750%
3,750%
5.750%
.5.750%
5.75096
:5.750%
5-250%
•
'3,250194
a -250%
5.25094
5,250%
{1} Excludes Other Avall Funds,
{21. hschides 9173,963.75 of B #sE Rerd puld on iho 1995 14,46140 Loam prior to 11s defoasonca,.
Tho Elands • _
141nµ1
5940,030
4.230,163
4.227,203
4.224,303
4.220,400
4.215,600
4,207,435
4,198.844
4,187,244
4,174,106
4,160,531
4,1'1S.606
4,131,981
4,110.561
4,100,056
4,064.013
3,89.,775
3,674.030.
3,451.225
3.215,475
2,906,213
2,702,575
2,423,950
2,129,300
1.017,650
1,546,825
1.291,'238
1.044,225
754,350
510,025
167,147
•
•
•
•
•
• Tole
T0Ilil Dabl 54x.Io
5940,439 54,287,506 (2)
4,775,163 7,550,269
4,372,263 7,5-47,869
4,379,363 •.7,551,409
4,360,460 7,550,094
4,490,6133 7,548,544
4,452,439 7,549,544
;1,468,844 . 7,550, 200
4,482,244 • 3,540.350
4,469,705 7,550,313
4,465,531 _ 7,549,007
4,485,906 7,549,000
4,401,901
4.460.591
4.405.056
7.549,013
7,549,775
7.549.038
7.551.225
7,547,575
7,548,988
7,549,390
6,527,650
5,991,525
5,095,230
5,934,225
5,994.350
5,995,825
4,412,147
7.551,161
7,547.606
7,550.831
7,549.013
7,549,775
1,549.938
•.551.225
7,554,475 '7,550,475
7,551,213 7,551.213
7,547.575
- 7.548,988
7,549,340
6,527,650
5,991,625
5,996,2313
5,994,225
5,994,350
5,960,825
4.412.147
595,175.845 $172,175,1345 $216,841364
1,568.999
1,568.999
1,566.996
1,059,990
1.599.006
1,569,99d.
1,555,998
1.566,998
1.563,998
1,56$,996
1.56
1, 123, 598
545,193,845
PRt:d Js safe al 0% Growth
Hotel!, . $01051 Skate Cradil
Motel Tax Llse Yflx - SalletiLlse Tax
51,566.999 $6,016,222 51,980,014
• 1.568,998 6,916,222 1,990.014
1.566.993 .6,015,222 1,906,014
. 1.568,993 5,015,222 1,906,014
1,568,998 6,916,222 1,905,614
1.568,999 5,016,222 1,906,614
1,559,996 5,016,222 1,908,014
1,568,984 6,010,222 1,960,614
1.565.990 6,016222 1,965,514
• 1,565,996 6,036, 222 1,906,614
1,566,998 6,016,727 1,906,614
1,560,990 6,016.222 '1,956,514
1,566,990 6,016.222 . 1.966,614
1,566,995 5,010,222 1.060,611
• 1,5£6,998 6,015,222 1,965,614
1,0013,908 6,016,222 1,955,614
1,569,990 6,016.222 1,556,614
1,555,999 0+,016.222 1.065,611
1,566,590 • 6,010,222 1,066,614
5,016,222 1,966,014
6,015,222 1.966,614
6,916,222 1,960,614
0,015,222 .1.960,814
6.016,222 1,9436,01.1
0.016,222 671.4.17
1,.016,222
6.01 6,222
6,416,222
5,016,222
5,016,222
4, 459,536
$194.040,498
94 7,870,176
Total
$9.551,534
0,551',834
9,551,834
9,551,034
9,551,83.1
9,551,834
9,551,83
9,551,834
9,551,834
9,551,934
9,551.834
9,551.1334
9,551.03 -4
9,551,634
9,551.934
9,551,934
9,551,034
0,551,R34
9,551,634
.9,551,834.
9,551.834
9,551.93.4
9.051,534
9.551,8.34
6.256,607
7,555,220
7,585,220
7,585,220
7,565,220
7,585.220
5,583.732
9281,010,520
OurpluM Debt SWAIM
Revenues Cbvcra
90,264,320 2 - 22&
2,001,565 1.265x
2,403,965 1.266x
2,000.365 1.265x
2,001.744 1.265x
2,003.290 1,265x
2,002,290 1,265x
2,001.034 1,265x
2,003,46.1 1.265,4
2,001,522 1.265x
2.002.772 1.,265x
2.007,947 1,285x
2.000.053 1. 255x
2.004,2.25 1.2136x
2.901,203 1.285x
2.002,972 1. 265x
2.002,059 1. 265x
2,002,797 1.265x
2.000,609 1.205x
2,001.359 1,205x
2.000,522 1,2554
2,004,259 1,2054
2,002,847 1.255x
2,042, 534 1,265x
1,729,017 1,205x
1,593.305 1,266x
1 ,586.963 1,265x
1,$90,995 1.265x
1,590,070 1,265x
1,569,395 1,265x
1,171.595 1 -26€0
$52,109,136 - -
Firm
A. Dashen & Associates
Foster Pepper & Shefelman
Hawley Troxell Ennis & Hawley
Perkins Coie
Lukins & Annis
l\l oody's
Standard & Poor's
Lukins & Annis
Control Seneca •
The Arbitrage Group
i -Deal Prospectus
U.S..Bank
Sub -Total
Spokane PFD
MBIA
MBIA
Lehman Brothers
Total
[1] $150,000 total (fees and expenses) Tess $78,310.92 billed to date.
[2] Excludes invoices through August 7, 2003 (recovered in PFD reimbursement).
[3] Estimated; will not be known with certainty until final official statement is printed.
$77,000,000
Spokane Public Facilities District
Hotel /Motel Tax and Sales /Use Tax Bonds
- Series 2003
Estimated Costs of Issuance at Closing
Role • Amount
Financial Advisor $103,000.00
Bond Counsel' 71,689.08 [1)
Underwriter's Counsel 73,000.00
Initial Bond Counsel 51,004.22
District Counsel 37,000.00 [2]
Rating Agency 32,750.00
Rating Agency 30,000.00
Interim Bond Counsel 10,821.39
POS /OS Printer '7,500.00 [3]
1995 Escrow Verifier 1,850.00
Official Statement Distributor 1,750.00
Escrow Agent • 1,200.00
S421,564.69
Out -of- Pocket Reimbursement 5909,578.92
Bond Insurer 1,076,000.00
Reserve Insurer 208,000.00
Underwriter 613,690.00
53,228,833:61
_ .8/20/2003 9:46 AM __ __ _ _
. Spokane. P_FD_2003..Spread.xls_COI__.... _.
DRAFT ORDINANCE 03 -080
ORDINANCE NO. 03-080
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, MAKING FINDINGS REGARDING A
REGIONAL PROJECT, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
WITH THE SPOKANE PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT, AND PROVIDING FOR
OTHER MATERS PROPERLY RELATING THERETO.
WHEREAS, the Spokane Public Facilities District (the "PFD ") is authorized by chapter 36.100
RCW to acquire, construct, own, remodel, maintain, equip, repair, finance and operate "regional centers"
as defined in RCW 35.57.020 and the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington (the "City ")
is authorized by chapter 35.57.020 RCW to acquire and operate "regional centers;" and
WHEREAS, RCW 35.57.020 and 36.100.030 authorize the City and the PFD to participate in the
financing of all or any part of a regional center public facility on such terms as may be fixed by agreement
between the respective legislative bodies without submitting the matter to a vote of the electors thereof,
unless the provisions of the general laws of this state applicable to the incurring of indebtedness require
such submission; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the District has determined that it is in the best interests of
the residents and inhabitants of the District for the District to undertake and accomplish three regional
centers projects within its boundaries, i.e., the Convention Center Project, the Fair and Expo Center
Project and the Mirabeau Point Project (collectively, the "Regional Center Projects "); and
WHEREAS, the District submitted proposals to its qualified electors, and on May 21, 2002, those
qualified electors approved proposals to expand its powers and to extend its existing sales and use tax and
existing hotel/motel tax to enable the District to undertake and accomplish the Regional Center Projects;
and
WHEREAS, the District has determined that the amount required to be funded from Regional
Tax Revenues (defined hereinafter) to undertake and accomplish the Regional Center Projects, including
expenses incidental thereto, does not exceed $96,000,00; and
WHEREAS, the parties intend to jointly develop the Regional Center Projects, in accordance
with an "Interlocal Agreement for Development of Regional Center Projects" substantially in the form
attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference ( the "Agreement "), as multipurpose facilities
meeting the definition of "regional centers" under RCW 35.57.020. The Regional Center Projects are
intended to directly serve Spokane County (the "County"), the District, the City of Spokane and the City,
and their respective residents, as well as serving a broader population in the region, the State of
Washington and portions of Idaho and Montana. The City, the County and the District have all indicated
a desire to work cooperatively under RCW 36.100.030(2), chapter 35.559 RCW, chapter 39.34 RC\V and
chapter 67.28 RCW so that the District, the County and the City can obtain sufficient financing to
accomplish the Regional Center Projects consistent with the terms of the Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the City expects to issue and sell its limited tax general obligation bonds in an
aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $7,000,000 to provide financing for a portion of the costs of
undertaking and accomplishing the Mirabeau Point Project; and
WHEREAS, the PFD, County and the City each are authorized pursuant to chapter 35.57 RCW,
either individually or jointly with another municipality such as the District, to acquire, lease, construct,
add to, improve, replace, repair, maintain, operate and regulate the use of regional centers, and are further
Draft Ordinance 03 -080 Page 1 of 4
DRAFT ORDINANCE 03 -080
authorized by chapter 35.59 RCW to participate in the financing of, and to appropriate and /or expend any
available public money for regional centers. RCW 36.100.030(2) provides that a public facilities district,
may enter into contracts under chapter 39.34 RCW for the joint provision and operation of facilities,
including regional centers, and may enter into contracts under chapter 39.34 RCW where any party to the
contract provides and operates such facilities for the other party or parties to the contract. Chapter 39.34
RCW further enables the Parties to carry out collectivity any activities that they are individually permitted
to pursue under applicable law; and
WHEREAS, the District, the County and the City have negotiated an agreement under which (1)
the District will carry out the Convention Center Project; (ii) the County and the District will jointly
develop the Fair and Expo Center Project under the County's lead, with the District providing financial
assistance in the form of intergovernmental payments (the Fair and Expo Center Payments "); and (iii) the
City and District will jointly develop the Mirabeau Point Project under the City's lead, with the District
providing financial assistance in the form of intergovernmental payments (the "Mirabeau Point
Payments ");
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the City Council (the "Council ") of the City of Spokane
Valley, Washington as follows:
Section 1: Findings
(1) Regional Center. The development of the Mirabeau Point Project (the "Project'') is
estimated to attract visitors to the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington by the year
2005. It is expected to compete with small- to medium -sized conference centers throughout Eastern
Washington, Northern Idaho and Western Montana, and is expected to draw attendees from across that
region by offering multiple -day conferences, conventions, trade shows, events and festivals attracting
overnight visitors, as well as being available for smaller regional and community events, specialty
sporting evens, artistic, musical, theatrical, or other cultural exhibitions, presentations, or performances.
The Project is expected by 2006 to attract economic benefits in direct and indirect positive economic
impacts to the City, primarily as a result of increased tourism and demand for services, food and lodging.
The City Council therefore finds that the Regional Center Project meets the definition of "regional center"
found in R.CW 35.57.020 and because it serves a regional population. In addition, the total Project cost,
including debt service, is expected to exceed $10 million.
(2) PFD Taxes. The Council finds that the City, PFD and Spokane County will meet the
33% match relating to the PFD Sales Tax and required under RCW 82.14.390 by contributions of cash
and other services by private entities and individuals, the City of Spokane, the County, the City and PFD,
which shall be counted as an in -kind donation.
Section 2: Ratification of Interlocal Agreement. The City Council approves the lnterlocal
Agreement between the County, the City and the PFD in substantially the form attached hereto as
Exhibit A. The Mayor and the Clerk of the City are authorized and directed to execute and deliver the
Agreement on the City's behalf in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A.
Section 3: City Bonds. The City Manager and his designees are authorized and directed to
work with the City's financial advisor, underwriter, bond counsel, rating agencies, potential bond insurers
and other appropriate persons or entities, to structure the City bonds and prepare for the issuance and sale
of those bonds. The issuance of the City bonds shall be approved by future ordinance of the Council.
Draft Ordinance 03 -080 Page 2 of 4
ATTEST:
DRAFT ORDINANCE 03 -080
Section 4: Authority Granted to City Officials. The City Manager and other appropriate
City Officials are hereby authorized to do and perform from time to time any and all acts and things
consistent with the Ordinance necessary or appropriate to carry this Ordinance into effect.
Section 5: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect from and after its adoption and
publication, as required by law.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County Washington, this
day of 2003.
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
(SEAL)
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Michael DeVleming, Mayor
Draft Ordi nance 03 -080 Page 3 of 4
DRAFT ORDINANCE 03 -080
1, the undersigned, Clerk of the City Council of the City of the Spokane Valley, Spokane
County Washington, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance is a full, true, and correct copy of an
Ordinance duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City, duly and regularly held at
the regular meeting place thereof held on July , of which meeting all members of said Council had due
notice and at which a majority thereof were present; and that at said meeting said Ordinance was adopted
by the following vote:
(SEAL)
AYES, and in favor thereof, Councilmembers:
NOES, Councilmembers:
ABSENT, Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:
1 further certify that I have carefully compared the same with the original Ordinance on
file and of record in my office; that said Ordinance is a full, true, and correct copy of the original
Ordinance adopted at said meeting; and that said Ordinance has not been amended, modified, or rescinded
since the date of its adoption, and is now in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
this day of , 2003.
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Draft Ordinance 03 -080 Page 4 of 4
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
FOR DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL CENTER PROJECTS
Exhibit A
_ aainnnC.e 034E0 Exhibit A
Imalnul Agroa ait Pf° — Pope t of 30
SECTION 1 DEFINIIIONS 3
SECTION 2 DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCING OF THE CONVENTION CENTER PROJECT 7
2.1 Development of the Convention Center Project 7
2.2 Timeline for Development of Convention Center Project 8
2.3 Site Acquisition Development and Ownership 8
2.4 District Insurance for the Convention Center Project 8
2.5 Local Matching Contributions for Regional Center Projects 8
2.6 Financing of Convention Center Project 9
2.7 Application of Regional Tax Revenues 10
2.8 Future Convention Center Project Expansion 10
2.9 Convention Center Project Operation 11
SECTION 3 DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCING OF THE FAIR & EXPO CENTER PROJECT 11
3.1 Development of the Fair & Expo Center Project 11
3.2 Timeline for Development of Fair & Expo Center Project. 11
3.3 Site Acquisition, Development and Ownership of Fair & Expo Center Project 11
3.4 Financing of Fair & Expo Center Project 12
3.5 Fair & Expo Center Payments 12
3.6 County Insurance for the Fair & Expo Center Project 13
SECTION 4 DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCING OF THE MIIRABEAU POINT PROJECT 14
4.1 Development of the Mirabeau Point Project 14
4.2 Timeline for Development of Mirabeau Point Project 14
4.3 Site Acquisition, Development and Ownership of Mirabeau Point Project 14
4.4 Financing of Mirabeau Point Project 15
4.5 Mirabeau Point Payments 16
4.6 Valley City Insurance for the Mirabeau Point Project 17
'SECTION 5 MISCELLANEOUS 17
5.1 Administrator of Joint Undertaking 17
5.2 Supplemental Agreements 17
5.3 Effectiveness of Agreement 17
5.4 Assignment 17
50336620.04
TABLE OF CONTENTS
P ale
5.5 Third Party Beneficiaries 17
5.6 Actions Contesting Agreement 17
5.7 Entire Agreement, Amendments and Waiver 18
5.8 Governing Law; Venue 18
5.9 Captions - 18
5.10 Notices 18
5.11 Specific Approvals 19
5.12 Severability 20
5.13 Counterparts 20
5.14 Time is of the Essence 20
snsssnOoa
This Interlocal Ag eeinent for Development of Regional Center Projects ("Agreement")
is entered into this day of July, 2003, by and among the SPOKANE PUBLIC
FACILITIES DISTRICT (the "District"), a municipal corporation duly organized and existing
under the laws of the State; SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON (the "County "), a class A
county duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of. Washington (the "Slate "); and
the CITY OF SPO1 AI E VALLEY (the "Valley City"), a municipal corporation duly
organized and existing under the laws of the State.
The entities •executing this Agreement are each referred to below as a "Party," and are
collectively referred to as the "Parties," Unless otherwise defined in this Agreement, each
capitalized term used in this Agreement shall have the meaning given in Article II.
SU }65620.11
LNTELOCAL AGREEMENT
FOR DEVELOPMENT Ol+ REGIONAL CENTER PROJECTS
RECITALS
"PLAN C" DRAFT OF JUNE 27, 2003
A. The District is authorized under RCW 36.1.00.030(1) to "acquire, construct own,
remodel, maintain, equip, reequip, repair and operate sports facilities, entertainment facilities,
convention facilities or regional centers as defined in RCW 35.57.020, together with contiguous
parking facilities."
B. RCW 36,100.040 provides that a public facilities district may submit an
authorizing proposition to the voters of the district to impose art excise tax on the sale of or
charge made for the furnishing of lodging by a hotel, rooming house, tourist court, motel or
trailer camp, and the granting of any similar license to use real property on premises haying more
than 40 lodging units the proceeds of which excise tax must be used for the acquisitii0n, design,
construction, remodeling, maintenance, equipping, rcequipping, repairing and operation of its
public facilities.
C. RCW 82.14.048 provides that a public . facilities district may submit an
authorizing proposition to the voters of the district to impose a sales and use tax at a rate not to
exceed 2/10 of 1% of the selling price in the case of a sales tax, or value of the article used, iri the
case of a use tax, the proceeds of which. sales and use tax shall be used for the financing, design,
acquisition, construction, equippng, operating, maintainin, remodeling, repairing and
reequippi n g of its public facilities.
D. RCW 82.14.390 . authorizes the governing body of a public facilities district
created before July 31, 2002, that commences construction of a new regional center, or
improvement or rehabilitation of an existing regional center, before January 1., .2004, to impose a
sales and use tax with the rate of such sales and use tax not to exceed 0.033 percent of the
selling price in.the case of a sales tax or value of the article used in the case bf a use tax, which
sales and use tax shall expire when the bonds issued for the construction of the regional center
and the related parking facilities are retired, but not More than 25 years after the tax. is first
collected.
E. The Board of Directors of the District has determined that it is in the best interests
of the residents and inhabitants of the District for the District to undertake and accomplish three
regional center projects within its boundaries, i.e., the Convention Center Project, the Fair &
Expo Center Project and the Mirabeau Point Project (collectively, the "Regional Center
Projects ").
F. The District submitted proposals to its qualified electors, and on May21, 2002,
those qualified electors approved proposals to expand its powers and to extend its existing sales
and use tax and existing hotel/motel tax to enable the District to undertake and accomplish the
Regional Center Projects.
G. The District has determined that the amount required to be funded from Regional
Tax Revenues (defined hereinafter) to undertake and accomplish the Regional Center Projects,
including expenses incidental thereto, does not exceed $96,000,000.
H. The Parties intend to jointly develop the Regional Center Projects, in accordance
with this Agreement, as multipurpose facilities meeting the definition of "regional centers" under
RCW 35.57.020, "multi- purpose community centers" under RCW 35.59.010, and, in the case of
the Convention Center Project and the Fair & Expo Center Project, "tourism- related facilities"
under RCW 67.28.080. The Regional Center Projects are intended to directly serve the County,
the District and the Valley City, and their respective residents, as well as serving a broader
population in the region and the State. The Valley City, the County and the District desire to
work cooperatively under RCW 36.100.030(2), chapter 35.59 RCW, chapter 39.34 RCW and
chapter 67.28 RCW so that the District can obtain sufficient financing to accomplish the
Regional Center Projects consistent with the terms of this Agreement.
1: By the District Bond Resolution, the District has approved or will approve the
issuance and sale of its Sales/Use Tax and Hotel/Motel Tax Bonds, 2003, in an aggregate
principal amount of not to exceed $77,000,000 to finance a portion of the costs of undertaking
and accomplishing the Convention Center Project.
J. By the County Bond Resolution, the County has approved or will approve the
issuance and sale of its limited tax general obligation bonds as portions of two separate series in
an aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $12,000,000 to provide financing for a portion of
the costs of undertaking and accomplishing the Fair & Expo Center Project.
K. By the Valley City Bond Ordinance, the Valley City has approved or will approve
the issuance and sale of its limited tax general obligation bonds in an aggregate pri.mipal amount
of not to exceed $7,000,000 to provide financing for a portion of the costs of undertaking and
accomplishing the Mirabeau Point Project.
L. The County and the Valley City each are authorized pursuant to chapter 35.59
RCW, either individually or jointly with another municipality such as the District, to acquire,
lease, construct, add to, improve, replace, repair, maintain, operate and regulate the use of multi-
purpose community centers, and are further authorized by chapter 35.59 RCW to participate in
the financing of, and to appropriate and/or expend any available public money for, multi- purpose
50366820.04
-2-
community centers. RCW 67.28.120 provides that any municipality (including any city or
county) may, individually or jointly with any other municipality or person, acquire and operate
tourism- related facilities. RCW 36.100.030(2) provides that a public facilities district may enter
into agreements under chapter 39.34 RCW for the joint provision and operation of facilities,
including regional centers, and may enter into contracts under chapter 39.34 RCW where any
party to the contract provides and operates such facilities for the other party or parties to the
contract. Chapter 39.34 RCW further enables the Parties to carry out collectively any activities
that they are individually permitted to pursue under applicable law.
M. The County, the District and the Valley City have negotiated this Agreement
under which (i) the District will carry out the Convention Center Project; (ii) the County and the
District will jointly develop the Fair & Expo Center Project under the County's lead, with the
District providing financial assistance in the form of intergovernmental payments (the "Fair &
Expo Center Payments "); and (iii) the Valley City and the District will jointly develop the
Mirabeau Point Project under the Valley City's lead, with the District providing financial
assistance in the form of intergovernmental payments (the "Mirabeau Point Payments ").
N. The District, by Resolution No. 03 -03 adopted on July 1, 2003, has authorized the
execution of this Aa eement on behalf of the District.
O. The County, by Resolution No. adopted on
authorized the execution of this Agreement on behalf of the County.
2003, has
P. The Valley City, by Ordinance No. passed on , 2003, has
authorized the execution of this Agreement on behalf of the Valley City.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual representations, covenants,
promises and agreements hereinafter contained, the District, the County and the Valley City
mutually represent, covenant, acknowledge and agree as follows:
SECTION 1 DEFINITIONS.
AGREEMENT
Unless otherwise defined in this Agreement, each of the following terms shall have the
meaning set forth in this Section 1.
1.1 Acquisition, acquiring or acquire shall include purchase, securing, lease, receipt
by gift or grant, condemnation, transfer or other acquirement, or any combination thereof.
1.2 Arena Reimbursement Obligation means the aggregate amount of any District
funds, other than Regional Tax Revenues, that are used by the District for the purposes of
acquiring, constructing, .financing and otherwise supporting the Regional Center Projects,
including but not limited to making interfund loans for the construction or improvement of the
Convention Center Project, paying debt service on the District Bonds, and making
Intergovernmental Payments, or advancing funds to meet necessary Convention Center operating
and maintenance expenses for which no other funds are available before 2018, plus interest at the
5Q3S6S20.w
-3-
Intergovernmental Rate on the amounts so used, loaned or advanced, until fully repaid from
Regional Tax Revenues in accordance with Section 2.7 of this Agreement.
1.3 Bond Fund means the Spokane Public Facilities District Bond Fund established
by District Bond Resolution No. 01 -02.
1.4 Business Day means any day other than: (a) a Saturday or Sunday, (b) a day on
which commercial banks in the County are authorized or obligated to close, or (c) a day on
which the offices of the County are closed.
1.5 Code means the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, together with
corresponding and applicable final or temporary regulations and revenue rulings issued or
amended with respect thereto by the United States Treasury Department or the Internal Revenue
Service.
1.6 Convention Center Project means a Regional Center Project consisting of the
Acquisition of an interest in, construction of improvements to and the expansion of the real
' property located in the City of Spokane, commonly known as the Spokane Convention Center,
all as more particularly described in Exhibit A, attached and incorporated herein by reference
and as described in the Spokane Center Development Agreements. The Convention Center
Project constitutes both a "regional center" as that term is used in RCW 36.100.030(1) and RCW
35.57.020 and a "tourism - related facility" as that term is used in RCW 67.28.080.
1.7 County means Spokane County, Washington.
1.8 County Bonds mean (i) S6,445,000 in principal amount of the .County's
$19,205,000 Limited Tax General Obligation and Refunding Bonds, Series 2003A, authorized
by the County for improvements to the Fair & Expo Center pursuant to Resolution No. 3.0471,
adopted by the County's Board of County Commissioners on May 20, 2003, and (ii) $5,555,000
in principal amount of the County's Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds, Series 2003C, to be
issued by the County.
1.9 County Bond Resolution means, collectively, Resolution No. 3 -0471 of the
County adopted on May 20, 2003, and such other resolution of the County authorizing, among
other matters, the issuance and sale of the County Bonds.
1.10 Develop or Development includes any one or more of the following: acquisition
of, construction of, ownership of, remodeling, maintaining, equipping, re-equipping, repairing,
financing, and operating the Regional Center Projects as specified herein and undertaken by the
Parties as agreed to in this Agreement according to the powers conferred upon the Parties under
chapters 35.57;35.59, 36.100, 39.34 and 67.28 RCW and RCW 82.14390.
1.11 District means the Spokane Public Facilities District, a municipal corporation
duly organized and existing under the laws of the State
50386820.04
0
1.12 District Bond Reserve Insurance means any policy of reserve insurance, surety
bond or other similar instrument obtained by the District to satisfy the District Bond Reserve
Requirement in lieu of a deposit of cash and investments in the Reserve Fund to satisfy the
District Bond Reserve Requirement in accordance with the District Bond Resolution.
1.13 District Bond Reserve Requirement means the debt service reserve requirement
for the District Series 2003A Bonds established by the District Bond Resolution.
1.14 District Bond Resolution means one or more resolutions of the District
authorizing, among other matters, the issuance and sale of the District Bonds.
1.15 District Bonds means the District's Sales /Use Tax and llotellMotel Tax Bonds,
2003, issued in one or more series, in an aggregate principal amount of not to exceed
$77,000,000, authorized by the District Bond Resolution.
1.16 District Lodging Tax means the two percent (2 %) excise tax imposed by the
District on the sale of or charge made for the furnishing of lodging under the authority of RCW
36.100.040, as such tax has been extended beyond 2017 by District Resolution No. 02 -03 with
the approval by a majority of the voters of the District voting thereon at a special election held on
May 21, 2002.
1.17 District Sales & Use Tax means the one -tenth of one percent (0.1%) sales and use
tax imposed by the District under the authority of RCW 82.14.048, as extended beyond 2017 by
District Resolution No. 02 -02 with the approval by a majority of the voters of the District voting
thereon at a special election held on May 21, 2002.
1.18 District State Credit Sales & Use Tax means the thirty-three one thousandths of
one percent (0.033 %) sales and use tax imposed by the District under the authority of RCW
82.14.390 and District Resolution No. 01 -06.
1.19 Fair & Expo Center Project means a Regional Center Project consisting of the
construction of improvements to the real property located in the County, commonly known as
the Spokane County Fair & Exposition Center, all as more particularly described in Exhibit A.
attached and incorporated herein by reference. The Fair & Expo Center Project constitutes both a
"regional center" as that term is used in RCW 36.100.030(1) and 35.57.020 and a "tourism -
related facility" as that term is used in RCW 67.28.080.
1.20 Fair & .Expo Center Payments means the scheduled intergovernmental payments
required to be paid by the District to the County in respect of the Fair & Expo Center Project
pursuant to Section 3.5 of this Agreement as set forth in Exhibit C -1 attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference, together with all compensatory payments required to be
paid by the District to the County pursuant to Section 3.5 of this Agreement.
1.21 Intergovernmental Payments means the Fair &. Expo Center Payments and the
Mirab Point Payments.
50396x10.04
-5-
1.22 Intergovernmental Payment Schedule means the schedule attached as Exhibit C,
showing dates and amounts of Intergovernmental Payments required to be made by the District
pursuant to this Agreement.
1.23 Intergovernmental Rate means a variable interest rate equal to the average rate of
return on local government funds invested in the County's Local Governmental investment Pool,
calculated monthly in accordance with the County's standard procedures, or, if the County's
Local Government Investment Pool ceases to exist, a variable rate equal to the average rate of
return on local government funds invested in the Local Government Investment Pool held and
administered by the Office of State Treasurer, calculated monthly in accordance with its standard
procedures. When used to determine compensatory amounts included in lntergovermnental
Payments, interest included in Arena Reimbursement Obligations, or for any other purpose of
this Agreement, the Intergovernmental Rate shall be applied on the basis of the actual number of
days elapsed during a 365/366 -day year.
1.24 Mirabeau Point Project means a Regional Center Project consisting of the
construction of improvements to the real property located in the Valley City, commonly known
as Mirabeau Point, all as more particularly described' in Exhibit A. attached . hereto and
incorporated herein by reference. The Mirabeau Point Project constitutes a "regional center" as
that term is used in RCW 36.100.030(1) and 35.57.020 and a "multi- purpose community center"
as that term is used in RCW 35.59.010.
1.25 Mirabeau Point Payments means the scheduled intergovernmental payments
required to be paid by the District to the Valley City in respect of the Mirabeau Point Project
pursuant to Section 4.5 of this Agreement as set forth in Exhibit C -2 attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference, together with all compensatory payments required to be
paid by the District to the Valley City pursuant to Section 4.5 of this Agreement, except that the
Regional Tax Revenues constituting Mirabeau Point Payments shall not include any portion of
District Lodging Tax revenues.
' 1.26 NRMSIRs means nationally recognized municipal securities information
repositories, as designated by the SEC.
1.27 Outstanding means, with respect to the District Bonds, the County Bonds and the
Valley City Bonds, any obligation that has not yet been paid, redeemed or legally defeased.
1.28 Party means any one of the parties to this Agreement, collectively, the Parties.
9
1.29 Project Fund means the Convention Center Project Fund established by the
District Bond Resolution.
1.30 Regional Center Project means any one of the Convention Center Project, the
. Fair & Expo Center Project and the Mirabeau Point Project (collectively, the Regional Center
. Projects), each of which constitutes a "regional center" as that term is used in RCW 35.57.020.
0
] ;31 Regional Tax Revenues means, collectively, all proceeds of the District State
Credit Sales & Use Tax received on and after March 1, 2003, and all proceeds of thc District
Lodging Tax and the District Sales & Use Tax received by or available to the District from and
after the earlier of (i) January 1, 2018, and (ii) the date on which all indebtedness incurred by the
District in connection with the Spokane Veterans Memorial Arena is retired and /or ]egal.ly
defeased-
1.32 Reserve Fund means the Spokane Public Facilities District Reserve Fund
established by District Resolution No 01-02.
1,33 S' means the -United States •Securities and .Exchange Commission.
1 -34 Spokane Center .Development Agreements means, collectively, the Intel
Cooperation Agreement; Property Transfer Agreement. and Lease, each executed and delivered
by The City of Spokane and the District effective _ 2003,
1.35 Treasurer means the County Treasurer.
1.315 Malley City njea_ns the City of Spokane Valley, Washington.
1.37 Valley City Woad Ordinance means the ordinance passed by the Valley City
authorizing, among other matters, the issuance and sale of the Valley City Bonds.
1.38 Valley. City Bonds means an issue of Valley City limited tax general obligation
bonds authorized by the Valley City Bond Ordinance to be issued in an aggregate principal
amount of not to exceed $7,000,000 to finance a portion of the cost of the Mrabeau Point
Project.
SECTION 2 DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCING OF THE CONVENTION
CENTER PROJECT
2.1 Development of the Convention Center Pro ect. The District and the City of
Spokane have entered into the Spokane Center Development Ageernents for the principal
purpose of making provision for the design, acquisition, construction, equipping, financing, and
operation by the District of the Convention Center Project on a cooperative basis. If accordance
with the Spokane Center Development Agreements and this Agreement, the District, on behalf
and for the benefit of itself and Spokane, will commence construction of the Convention Center
Project on or before January 1, 2004, 'and thereafter proceed with due diligence to completion of
the Convention Center Project The District, on behalf and for the benefit of itself and Spokane,
will be the lead agency with the primary responsibility for the development of the Convention
Center Project as a "regional center" (as defined by RCW 35.57- 020), as a "multi- purpose
community center" (as defined by RCW 35. 59.010) and as a "tourism- related facility" (as
defined by RCW 67,28,080), and shall finance, acquire, design, construct, own, lease, operate
and maintain the Convention Center Proj ect, all subject to the limitations set forth in the Spokane
Center Development Agreements and this Agreement The Convention Center Project shall be
-7-
developed and have the features substantially as described in Exhibit A and the Spokane Center
Development Agreements.
2.2 Timeline for Development of Convention Center Project. The District, on behalf
and for the benefit of itself and the City of Spokane, intends to commence construction of the
Convention Center Project by carrying out the demolition of certain existing structures,
commencement of parking improvements related thereto, or other construction activity prior to
December 31, 2003. The Convention Center Project is expected to be completed and placed in
service on or about September 1, 2006. The estimated timeline for financing and construction of
the Convention Center is set forth in Exhibit B. The dates set forth in Exhibit B are target dates
for action by the District. The failure of the District to meet . the dates set forth in the timeline for
financing and construction of the Convention Center shall have no effect on the other provisions
of this Agreement.
2.3.1 Pursuant to the Spokane Center Development Agreements, the City of
Spokane and the District have agreed to acquire all additional real property necessary to serve as
a site for the Convention Center Project, and the City of Spokane has agreed to exercise its
eminent domain authority, if necessary, to acquire that additional real property in accordance
with the Spokane Center Development Agreements. Title to Convention Center Project will be
held by the City of Spokane and the District as provided in the Spokane Center Development
Agreements.
2.3.2 The District, on behalf and for the benefit of itself and the City of
Spokane, will acquire the approvals necessary and shall take such other actions as may be
required to develop the Convention Center Project consistent with the Spokane Center
Development Agreements.
2.3.3 The District shall periodically provide reports to the other Parties on the
design, construction and operation of the Convention Center.
2.3.4 The District shall have full and complete control over the development of
the Convention Center Project, subject to the terms of the Spokane Center Development
Agreements and this Agreement. In addition, the District shall have full and complete control
over the operations of the Convention Center Project, subject to the terms of the Spokane Center
Development Agreements.
2.4 District Insurance for the Convention Center Project The District agrees to
acquire and maintain insurance in the form and amounts required by the Spokane Center
Development Agreements and otherwise as are consistent with the coverage of comparable
Convention Center facilities.
• 2.5 Local Matching Contributions for Regional Center Projects. As required by RCW
82.14.390(4), the Parties have provided and will provide funds for the Regional Center Projects
from other public or private sources, including but not limited to cash, in -kind contributions, and
land donated and used for the siting of the Regional Center Projects, equal to at least 33 percent
501666:0.04
2.3 Site Acquisition, Development and Ownership.
-8-
C._
of the amount collected by the District under the District State Credit Sales & Use Tax
(collectively, the "Local Match "). The Local Match includes and is anticipated to include at least
the following: (i) proceeds of the voter - approved District Sales & Use Tax, (ii) proceeds of the
voter - approved District Lodging Tax, (iii) land, existing improvements and personal property
contributed by the City of Spokane for use as the site of the Convention Center Project; and (iv)
land contributed by the County and /or the Valley City for use as the site of the Mirabeau Point
Project. The City's transfer of the Spokane Center to the District will be accomplished pursuant
to the Spokane Center Development Agreements.
2.6 Financing of Convention Center Project. The District shall be solely responsible
to finance the Convention Center Project with proceeds of the District Bonds and other legally
available funds allocated by the District for that purpose. The District shall have no obligation to
provide funds for the Convention Center Project other than as expressly provided by the Spokane
Center Development Agreements and this Agreement. The County and the Valley City shall
have no obligation to provide funds for the development of the Convention Center Project. In
order to enable the District Lodging Tax and District Sales & Use Tax to be used to provide debt
service on any and all obligations issued on a parity with the District's Hotel/Motel Tax and
Sales/Use Tax Refunding Bonds, Series 2001A (AMT) and Series 2001B (Non - AMT), the
District shall, in conjunction with the issuance of the District. Bonds, at its sole cost and expense,
exercise its option to purchase the facilities financed by that certain 1995 Financing Lease
Agreement dated as of June 5, 1995, by and between the District and the City of Spokane,
thereby enabling the City of Spokane to carry out the defeasance and redemption of its
outstanding Leased Revenue Bonds, Series 1995 (Multi - Purpose Arena Project).
2.6.1 The District Bonds shall be issued and sold pursuant to the District Bond
Resolution in one or more series in an aggregate principal amount not exceeding S77,000,000,
shall be District Series 2003 Bonds; shall be payable from and secured by a pledge of Regional
Tax Revenues and other revenues of the District; shall be payable on [June 1] (interest only) and
[December 1] (principal and interest) of each year; shall finally mature no later than June 1,
2033; and shall have such other terms as provided in the District Bond Resolution.
2.6.2 The District may issue refunding bonds at any time in its sole discretion,
without the consent of any other Party, for the purpose of refunding its outstanding obligations,
including District Bonds. The Parties recognize and agree that the District Bonds will be issued
on a parity of lien with the District's Hotel/Motel Tax and Sales/Use Tax Refunding Bonds,
Series 2001 A (AMT) and Series 2001 B (Non -AMT). The District may issue additional parity
bonds as long as it complies with the parity bond requirements set forth in [District Resolution
No. 01 -02 and] the District Bond Resolution. The District may also, without the consent of any
other Party, utilize such interfund loans as it deems necessary and appropriate to carry out the
financing of the Regional Center Projects and to make Intergovernmental Payments.
2.6.3 The District shall covenant in the District Bond Resolution to maintain the
tax exemption for the District Bonds, and shall provide to the other Parties copies of-annual
financial information and operating data and any material event notices filed by the District with
NRMSIRs pursuant to its continuing disclosure undertaking under SEC Rule 15c2 -12 in respect
of the District Bonds.
2.6.4 The Parties recognize that Regional Tax Revenues (as defined for the
purposes of this Agreement) may not be sufficient in every calendar year to pay in full all of the
District's obligations in respect of the cost of acquiring and constructing the Convention Center
Project, paying debt service on the District Bonds, making Intergovernmental Payments, and
otherwise supporting the Regional Center Projects, but that the District has other available funds
that the District will use to meet those obligations. Any use by tte District of any of its funds,
other than Regional Tax Revenues, for the Regional Center Projects shall create and constitute
an Arena Reimbursement Obligation in a like amount that shall be repaid from Regional Tax
Revenues in accordance with Section 2.7 of this Agreement.
2.7 Application of Regional Tax Revenues. The District promptly upon their receipt
shall deposit all Regional Tax Revenues into its Regional Center Projects Revenue Fund and use
and apply those Regional Tax Revenues (and the District directs the Treasurer on behalf of the
District to cause the Regional Tax Revenues to be used and applied) only for the following
purposes and in the following order of priority:
First, to make payments into the Bond Fund as necessary to pay all regularly scheduled
payments (including mandatory sinking fund payments) of principal of and interest on the
District Bonds as required by the District Bond Resolution and to pay debt service on bonds
issued on a parity of lien with the District Bonds;
Second. to make payments into the Reserve Fund as necessary to maintain a balance
therein equal to the District Bond Reserve Requirement and/or to reimburse the provider of
District Bond Reserve Insurance for draws thereon as required by the District Bond Resolution
and resolutions authorizing the issuance of parity bonds;
Third, to pay the Fair & Expo Center Payments and the "Mirabeau Point Payments,
pari passu in proportion to the respective amounts thereof then due and payable (including
shortfall payments and compensatory payments under Sections 3.5 and 4.5);
Fourth, to pay Arena Reimbursement.Obligations; and
Fifth, only upon payment in full of all Arena Reimbursement Obligations, twelve ninety-
sixths (12/96) to the County, seven ninety- sixths (7/96) to the Valley City and seventy -seven
ninety- sixths (77/96) to the District.
Any Regional Tax Revenues distributed under "Fifth," above, shall be used by. the County and
by the Valley City, respectively, solely for lawful Regional Center Project purposes, consistent
with applicable law and with the resolutions of the District imposing the taxes constituting the
Regional Tax Revenues.
2.8 Future Convention Center Project Expansion.' The District may at any future time
proceed with Development of additions to or subsequent phases of the Convention Center, but
none of the other Parties shall be obligated with respect to the financing of such future
improvements. If some or all of the Parties agree to participate in the development of such
additions, the respective Parties may enter into an addendum to this Agreement governing the
:o3s6n0A4
-10-
'
J
rights and obligations of those Parties with respect to the design, construction and operation of
the additional improvements.
2.9 Convention Center Project Operation. The District shall operate the Convention
Center in a businesslike manner and provide a level of service equivalent to or better than the
services provided by comparable public facilities in the state. The Convention Center shall be
available for use by the general public at rates established by the District. So long as District
State Credit Sales & Use Taxes are being collected and applied to the repayment of the Bonds,
the District shall operate the Convention Center Project as a "regional center project" as that
term is defined in RCW 35.57.020.
3.1 Development of the Fair & Expo Center Project. The County, on behalf and for
the benefit of the County and the District, shall be the lead agency with the primary
responsibility for the development of the Fair & Expo Center Project as a "regional center" (as
defined by RCW 35.57.020) and as a "tourism - related facility" (as defined by RCW 67.28.080),
and shall finance, acquire, design, construct, own, operate and maintain the Fair & Expo Center
Project, and otherwise administer its development and operation, for the benefit of and in
cooperation with the District, all subject to the limitations set forth herein.
3.2 Timeline for Development of Fair & Ex.o Center Project. The County, on behalf
and for the benefit of the County and the District, commenced construction of the Fair & Expo
Center Project on or about February 15, 2003. The County therefore represents and warrants to
the District that construction of the Fair & Expo Center Project commenced before January 1,
2004. The activity that constituted commencement of construction of the Fair & Expo Center
Project was the commencement by the County's contractors of the construction of a new
grandstand at the Fair & Expo Center that is presently scheduled for completion on or about
September 1, 2003.
503E6E2U.04
SECTION 3 DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCING OF THE FAIR & EXPO CENTER
PROJECT
3.3 Site Acquisition, Development and Ownership of Fair & Expo Center Project.
3.3.1 The County has acquired and now owns all real property necessary to
carry out the Fair & Expo Center Project.
3.3.2 The County shall, on behalf of itself and the District, acquire the approvals
necessary and shall take such other actions as may be required to enable the site to be suitable for
use as a Fair & Expo Center Project.
3.3.3 The County shall provide the District with periodic reports on the design,
construction and operation of the Fair & Expo Center Project, at least quarterly during
construction and at least annually thereafter.
3.3.4 The County shall have full and complete control over the development the
Fair & Expo Center Project, and shall own and operate the Fair & Expo Center Project for and
on behalf of itself and the District. In addition, the County shall have full and complete control
over the operation and management of the Fair & Expo Center, subject to the terms of this
Agreement. All of the District's legally cognizable ownership interest in the Fair & Expo
Center, if any, shall terminate and revert to the County upon the termination of the District's
obligation to make Fair & Expo Center Payments to the County.
3.3.5 The District and the County each find that the Fair & Expo Center Project
is a viable project construction of which has commenced before January 1, 2004. The County
agrees to provide, by and through the Fair & Expo Center Project, services to all the residents of
the County, which necessarily includes services to the residents of the other Parties to this
Agreement.
3.4 Financing of Fair & Expo Center Project. The County shall issue the County
Bonds to finance the Fair & Expo Center Project. The County Bonds shall be payable from and
secured by a pledge of the full faith and credit of the County (within the constitutional and
statutory tax limitations provided by law without a vote of the electors of the County); shall be
payable on June 1 (interest only) and December 1 (principal and interest) of each year; shall
finally mature no later than June 1, [2033]; and shall have such other terms as provided in the
County Bond Resolution. The District acknowledges and agrees that, although the County
Bonds will be limited tax general obligation bonds pledging the full faith and credit of the
County (within the constitutional and statutory tax limitations provided by law without a vote of
the electors of the County), the County at its sole option may (but is not required to) apply the
proceeds of the Fair & Expo Center Payments to the payment of the County Bonds. The County
Bonds and any disclosure documents related to the County Bonds shall contain the following
statement (or substantially similar language): "The [County Bonds] are not obligations of the
Spokane Public Facilities District, the City of Spokane, the City of Spokane Valley, the State of
Washington or any other political subdivision of the State of Washington other than the County.
All liabilities insured by the County with respect to the [County Bonds] shall be satisfied
exclusively from the tax revenues, credit and other legally available sources of the County and
no owner of the [County Bonds] or other person shall have any right of action against or recourse
to the Spokane Public Facilities District, the City of Spokane, the City of Spokane Valley, the
State of Washington or any other political subdivision of the State of Washington, or any of their
respective assets, credit, revenues or services on account of any debts, obligations or liabilities
relating to the [County Bonds]." Furthermore, the District acknowledges that its obligation to
make the Fair & Expo Center Payments as required by Section 3.5 of this Agreement and
described in the Intergovernmental Payment Schedule may be material to the offer and sale of
the County Bonds, and may be disclosed to potential purchasers and purchasers of those County
Bonds. At the County's request, the District will make an appropriate continuing disclosure
undertaking in respect of the County Bonds to the same extent as if the District were treated as
an "obligated person" (within the meaning of SEC Rule 15c2 -12) in respect of the County
Bonds. The County shall covenant in the County Bond Resolution to maintain the tax exemption
for the County Bonds, and shall provide to the District copies of annual information and
operating data and any material event notices filed by the County with NRMSIRs pursuant to its
continuing disclosure undertaking under SEC Rule 15c2 -12 in respect of the County Bonds.
3.5 Fair & Expo Center Payments. The District shall make Fair & Expo Center
Payments to the County in respect of the Fair & Expo Center Project on the payment dates and in
50365620,0+4
-12-
the amounts set forth in the lntergovermmental Payment Schedule attached as Exhibit C -1 to this
Agreement. The Fair &. Expo Center Payments shown on the Intergovernmental Payment
Schedule reflect amounts corresponding to expected debt service on the County Bonds. Upon
the issuance of the County Bonds, Exhibit C -1 shall be replaced with an adjusted schedule
approved by the District, acting reasonably, to ensure, assuming Intergovernmental Payments to
the County and the Valley City are used for debt service purposes, that the amounts of the
Intergovernmental Payments are compatible with the debt service requirements of all three
Parties. The District and the County recognize that the amounts on Exhibit C -1 reflect in some
years amounts that are greater than 12/96 of the expected Regional Tax Revenues in those years,
and in other years reflect amounts that are less than 12/96 of the expected Regional Tax
Revenues; however, the District is willing to allocate more than 12/96 in certain years to
accommodate the County in structuring the County Bonds, recognizing that less than 12/96 may
be allocated to the County in other years. The County may use and apply the Fair & Expo
Center Payments for any purpose in support of the Fair & Expo Center Project, including the
design, acquisition, construction, equipping, financing, operating, maintaining, repairing,
remodeling, and re- equipping of the Fair -& Expo Center Project. The District shall make the
Fair & Expo Center Payments solely from Regional Tax Revenues available for that purpose in
accordance with the provisions of Section 2.7 of this Agreement. The County and the District
recognize and agree that the actual amount of Regional Tax Revenues available to the District to
make Fair & Expo Center Payments on any particular date set forth in the Intergovernmental
Payment Schedule may differ from the amount required to be paid on that date. So long as other
District revenues, together with Regional Tax Revenues (if and to the extent any are required),
0 pledged to the District Bonds and other obligations of the District issued on a parity with the
District Bonds are sufficient to pay and secure the District Bonds and such parity obligations in
accordance with the District Bond Resolution or other authorizing resolution, the District agrees
to allocate and use Regional Tax Revenues to make Fair & Expo Payments when due in an
amount equal to the lesser of the amounts shown on the Intergovernmental Payment Schedule or
12 /19's -of the Regional Tax Revenues available to the District on the applicable due date;
provided, that any resulting shortfall in Regional Tax Revenues available to be allocated and
used by the District to fully satisfy debt service requirements of the District Bonds shall be an
Arena Reimbursement Obligation. If the District does not have Regional Tax Revenues
sufficient to pay Fair & Expo Center Payments in full on any date as set forth in the
Intergovernmental Payment Schedule, the District shall remain obligated to pay the remaining
balance due but not paid on that date (the "Fair & Expo Center Payment shortfall "), which shall
be paid to the County on the next scheduled payment date from Regional Tax Revenues
available to the District for that purpose in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.7 of this
Agreement, plus an additional compensatory payment equal to the amount of interest that the
County would have earned if the amount of the Fair & Expo Center Payment shortfall had been
invested in the County's Local Government Investment Pool at the Intergovernmental Rate from
its originally scheduled payment date until the Fair & Expo Payment shortfall is paid in full. All
unpaid Fair &. Expo Center Payments shall be paid in full no later than December 31, 2033, and
the District pledges to use all means and resources then legally available to the District to make
that payment when due.
3.6 County Insurance for the Fair & Expo Center Project. The County agrees to
acquire and maintain insurance in form and amounts as are consistent with the coverage of
503666:0.04
-13-
comparable Fair & Expo Center facilities and undertakings related to said facilities as
contemplated under this Agreement and to name the District as an additional named insured
thereunder.
smsss20.W
SECTION 4 DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCING OF THE MIRABEAU POINT
PROJECT
4.1 Development of the Mirabeau Point Project The Valley City, on behalf and for
the benefit of the Valley City and the District, shall commence construction of the Mirabeau
Point Project before January 1, 2004. The Valley City, on behalf and for the benefit of the
Valley City and the District, shall be the lead agency with the primary responsibility for the
development of the Mirabeau Point Project as a "regional center" (as defined by RCW
35.57.020) and "multi- purpose community center" (as defined by RCW 35.59.010), and shall
finance, acquire, design, construct, own, operate and maintain the Mirabeau Point Project, and
otherwise administer its development and operation, for the benefit of and in cooperation with
the District, all subject to the limitations set forth herein.
4.2 Timeline for Development of Mirabeau Point Project The Valley City, on behalf
and for the benefit of the Valley City and the District, shall commence construction of the
Mirabeau Point Project before January 1, 2004. The Mirabeau Point Project is expected to be
completed and placed in service on or before January 1, 2005. The estimated timeline for
financing and construction of the Mirabeau Point Project is set forth in Exhibit B. The Parties
acknowledge that the dates set forth in Exhibit B are target dates for action by the Valley City.
However, the date of commencement of construction is critical to the financing of the Mirabeau
Point Project and achieving the development schedule for the construction of the Mirabeau Point
Project. The failure of the Valley City to meet the dates set forth in the timeline for financing and
construction of the Mirabeau Point Project shall have no effect on the other provisions of this
Agreement, provided that construction of the Mirabeau Point Project commences before
January 1, 2004, as evidenced by a certificate executed by the City Manager of the Valley City
and the architect for the Mirabeau Point Project delivered to the District stating facts and
circumstances clearly demonstrating that such construction has commenced. If the Valley City
fails to commence construction of the Mirabeau Point Project before January 1, 2004, the
District's obligation to make the Mirabeau Point Payments pursuant to this Agreement shall
terminate.
4.3 Site Acquisition. Development and Ownership of Mirabeau Point Project.
4.3.1 The Valley City is proceeding to acquire from the County all real property
necessary to carry out the Mirabeau Point Project, and will have acquired ownership of such real
property prior to commencement of construction of the Mirabeau Point Project.
4.3.2 The Valley City, on behalf and for the benefit of the Valley City and the
District, shall acquire the approvals necessary and shall take such other actions as may be
required to enable the site to be suitable for use as the Mirabeau Point Project.
-14-
4.3.3 The Valley City shall periodically provide reports to the District on the
design, construction and operation of the Mirabeau Point Project, at least quarterly during
construction and at least annually thereafter.
4.3.4 The Valley City shall have full and complete control over the development
the Mirabeau Point Project, and shall own and operate the Mirabeau Point Project for and on
behalf of itself and the District. The Valley City shall have full and complete control over the
operation and management of the Mirabeau Point Project, subject to the terms of this Agreement.
All of the District's legally cognizable ownership interest, if any, in the Mirabeau Point Project
shall terminate and revert to the Valley City upon the termination of the District's obligation to
make Mirabeau Point Payments.
4.3.5 The District and the Valley City each find that the Mirabeau Point Project
is a viable project that is likely to commence construction before January], 2004. The Valley
City agrees that the general public shall have access to Mirabcau Point Project services, which
are expected to provide a regional benefit to the residents of the District and the Valley City.
4.4 Financing of Mirabeau Point Project. The Valley City shall issue the Valley City
Bonds to finance a portion of the cost of the Mirabeau Point Project. The Valley City Bonds
shall be payable from and secured by a pledge of the full faith and credit of the Valley City
(within the constitutional and statutory tax limitations provided by law without a vote of the
electors of the Valley City); shall be payable on June 1 (interest only) and December 1 (principal
and interest) of each year; shall finally mature no later than June 1, 2033; and shall have such
other terms as provided in the Valley City Bond Ordinance. The District acknowledges and
agrees that, although the Valley City Bonds will be limited tax general obligation bonds pledging
the full faith and credit of the Valley City (within the constitutional and statutory tax limitations
provided by law without a vote of the electors of the Valley City), the Valley City may at its sole
option (hut is not required to) apply the proceeds of the Mirabeau Point Payments to the payment
of the Valley City Bonds. The Valley City Bonds and any disclosure documents related to the
Valley City Bonds shall contain the following statement (or substantially similar language) "The
[Valley City Bonds) are not obligations of the Spokane Public Facilities District, Spokane
County, the City of Spokane, the State of Washington or any other political subdivision of the
State of Washington other than the City. All liabilities incurred by the City with respect to the
[Valley City Bonds] shall be satisfied exclusively from the tax revenues, credit and other legally
available sources of the City and no owner of the [Valley City Bonds) or other person shall have
any right of action against or recourse to the Spokane Public Facilities District, Spokane County,
the City of Spokane, the State of Washington or any other political subdivision of the State of
Washington, or any of their respective assets, credit, revenues or services on account of any
debts, obligations or liabilities relating to the [Valley City Bonds]." Furthermore, the District
acknowledges that its obligation to make the Mirabeau Point Payments as required by Section
4.5 of this Agreement and described in the Intergovernmental Payment Schedule may be material
to the offer and sale of the Valley City Bonds, and may be disclosed to potential purchasers and
purchasers of those Valley City Bonds. At the City's request, the District will make an
appropriate continuing disclosure undertaking in respect of the Valley City Bonds to the same
extent as if the District were treated as an "obligated person" (within the meaning of SEC Rule
15c2 -12) in respect of the Valley City Bonds. The Valley City shall covenant in the Valley City
50155620.04
-15-
Bond Resolution to maintain the tax exemption for the Valley City Bonds, and shall provide to
the other Parties copies of annual financial information and operating data and any material event
notices filed by the Valley City with NRMSIRs pursuant to its continuing disclosure undertaking
under SEC Rule 15c2 -12 in respect of the Valley City Bonds.
4.5 Mirabeau Point Payments. The District shall make Mirabeau Point Payments to
the Valley City in respect of the Mirabeau Point Project on the payment dates and in the amounts
set forth in the Intergovernmental Payment Schedule attached as Exhibit C -2 to this Agreement.
The Mirabeau Point Payments shown on the Intergovernmental Payment Schedule reflect
amounts corresponding to expected debt service on the Valley City Bonds. Upon the issuance of
the Valley City Bonds, Exhibit C -2 shall be replaced with an adjusted schedule approved by the
District, acting reasonably, to ensure, assuming Intergovernmental Payments to the County and
the Valley City are used for debt service purposes, that the amounts of the Intergovernmental
Payments are compatible with the debt service requirements of all three Parties. The District and
the Valley City recognize that the amounts on Exhibit C -2 reflect in some years amounts that are
greater than 7/96 of the expected Regional Tax Revenues in those years, and in other years
reflect amounts that are less than 7/96 of the expected Regional Tax Revenues; however, the
District is willing to allocate more than 7/96 in certain years to accommodate the Valley City in
structuring the County Bonds, recognizing that less than 7/96 may be allocated to the Valley City
in other years. The Valley City may use and apply the Mirabeau Point Payments for any
purpose in support of the Mirabeau Point Project, including the design, acquisition, construction,
equipping, financing, operating, maintaining, repairing, remodeling, and reequipping of the
Mirabeau Point Project. The District shall make the Mirabeau Point Payments solely from
Regional Tax Revenues available for that purpose in accordance with the provisions of
Section 2.7 of this Agreement. The Valley City and the District recognize and agree that the
actual amount of Regional Tax Revenues available to the District to make Mirabeau Point
Payments on any particular date set forth in the Intergovernmental Payment Schedule may differ
from the amount required to be paid on that date. So long as other District revenues, together
with Regional Tax Revenues (if and to the extent any are required), pledged to the District Bonds
and other obligations of the District issued on a parity with the District Bonds are sufficient to
pay and secure the District Bonds and such parity obligations in accordance with the District
Bond Resolution or other authorizing resolution, the District agrees to allocate and use Regional
Tax Revenues to make Mirabeau Point Payments when due in an amount equal to the lesser of
the amounts shown on the Intergovernmental Payment Schedule or 7/19's of the Regional Tax
Revenues available to the District on the applicable due date; provided, that any resulting
shortfall in Regional Tax Revenues available to be allocated and used by the District to fully
satisfy debt service requirements of the District Bonds shall be an Arena Reimbursement
Obligation. If the District does not have Regional Tax Revenues sufficient to pay Mirabeau
Point Payments in full on any date as set forth in the Intergovernmental Pa }anent Schedule, the
District shall remain obligated to pay the remaining balance due but not paid on that date (the
"Mirabeau Point Payment shortfall "), which shall be paid to the Valley City on the next
scheduled payment date from Regional Tax Revenues available to the District for that purpose in
accordance with the provisions of Section 2.7 of this Agreement, plus an additional
compensatory payment equal to the amount of interest that the Valley City would have earned if
the amount of the Mirabeau Point Payment shortfall had been invested in the County's Local
Government Investment Pool at the Intergovernmental Rate from its originally scheduled
503&5120.04
-16-
payment date until the Mirabeau Point Payment shortfall is paid in full. All unpaid Mirabeau
Point Payments shall be paid in full no later than December 31, 2033, and the District pledges to
use all means and resources then legally available to the District to make that payment when due.
4.6 Valley City Insurance for the Mirabeau Point Project The Valley City agrees to
acquire and maintain insurance in form and amounts as are consistent with the coverage of
comparable regional center facilities and undertakings related to said facilities as contemplated
under this Agreement and to name the District as an additional named insured thereunder.
SECTION 5 MISCELLANEOUS
5.1 Administrator of Joint Undertaking. For purposes of RCW 39.34.030(4)(a), the
Executive Director of the District shall serve as the administrator responsible for administering
the joint and cooperative undertaking among the Parties to this Agreement. There shall be no
"joint board" as that term is used in RCW 39.34.030(4)(a).
5.2 Supplemental Agreements. The Parties agree to complete and execute all
supplemental documents necessary or appropriate to fully implement the terms of this
Agreement.
5.3 Effectiveness of Agreement. This Agreement shall be effective with respect to
each Party upon execution by that Party and filing of the executed Agreement with the Spokane
County Auditor as required by the provisions of RCW 39.34.040. This Agreement and shall
continue in full force and effect until such time as all of the District Bonds and other obligations
issued or incurred by the District in connection with the development of the Regional Center
Projects, the County Bonds and the Valley City Bonds, are fully paid, retired and satisfied.
5.4 Assir'nment. No Party shall assign any of its rights or delegate any of its duties
under this Agreement without the express written approval of all other Parties.
5.5 Third Party Beneficiaries. Except as expressly provided by this Agreement, the
Parties shall not be obligated or liable by virtue of this Agreement to any third party. The Parties
may amend this Agreement by mutual agreement without the consent of any other third party or
the holders of the District Bonds, the County Bonds or the Valley City Bonds;provided, however
that while the District Bonds are Outstanding, no amendment by the Parties shall impair or
diminish the County's limited guaranty of the District Bonds hereunder, and while the County
Bonds or the Valley City Bonds are Outstanding, no amendment by the Parties shall impair or
diminish the District's obligations to make Intergovernmental Payment hereunder.
5.6 Actions Contesting Agreement.
5.6.1 Each Party shall appear and defend any action or legal proceeding brought
to determine or contest: (i) the validity of this Agreement; (ii) the legal authority of any Party to
undertake the activities contemplated by this Agreement; or (iii) the legal authority to perform
any of the Parties' respective obligations under this Agreement. Each party shall be responsible
for its own expenses including without limitation legal expenses, in connection with any such
proceeding.
50386810.04
-17-
5.6.2 If all Parties are not named as parties to the action, the Party named shall
give all other Parties prompt notice of the action and provide the all Parties with an opportunity
to intervene. Each Party shall bear any costs and expenses taxed by the court against it.
5.7 Entire Agreement, Amendments and Waiver. This Agreement contains the entire
agreement and understanding of the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and
supersedes all prior or contemporaneous oral or written understandings, agreements, promises, or
other undertakings by and among the Parties. This Agreement may not be modified or amended,
nor any rights thereunder waived, other than by a written instrument executed by all Parties, nor
shall any waiver of any right or remedy of any Party be valid unless in writing and signed by
such Party. No course of dealing by or among the Parties or any delay in exercising any rights
hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any rights of any Party. Nothing herein shall be deemed
to amend or supersede, or be deemed amended or superseded by, any provision of any other
agreement between the Parties with respect to the Regional Center Projects.
5.8 Governing Law: Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in
accordance with the laws of the State. The venue of any suit or arbitration arising under this
Agreement shall be in Spokane County, Washington, and if a suit, in Spokane County Superior
Court.
5.9 Captions. The article and section captions used in this Agreement are for
convenience only and shall not control and affect the meaning or construction of any of the
provisions of this Agreement.
5.10 Notices. All notices or other communications given hereunder shall be deemed
given on: (i) 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 mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the Parties at the addresses set forth below for the
Parties, or at such other address as any Party shall from time to time designaa by notice in
writing to the Parties:
COUNTY:
58386329.04
Spokane County
Chair of the Board of County Commissioners
West 1116 .Broadway
Spokane, WA 99260
Copy to:
-
Office of the County Prosecuting Attorney
Attn: Chief Civil Deputy
1115 W. Broadway
Spokane, WA 99260 -0270
FAX: (509) 477 -3672
DISTRICT:
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY:
503s6s?0.o4
5.11 Specific Approvals.
Spokane Public Facilities District
Chair of the Board of Directors
720 West Mallon Avenue
Spokane, WA 99201
Copy to:
Spokane Public Facilities District
Executive Director /General Manager
720 West Mallon Avenue
Spokane, WA 99201
FAX: (509) 324 -7050
City of Spokane Valley
11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Copies to:
5.11.2 Unless specifically otherwise provided for herein, all consents, approvals
and other decisions of the District hereunder shall be binding only if made in writing and
approved by resolution of the District's Board. No approval, consent, or decision of the District
for purposes of this Agreement shall be effective for purposes of any other agreement or
instrument to which the District is a party or beneficiary, or for any regulatory or other purpose.
-19-
City of Spokane Valley City Attorney
Mr. Stanley Schwartz
422 W. Riverside Drive, Suite 1100
Spokane, WA 99201
City of. Spokane Valley City Manager
11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Such names and addresses may be changed by written notice pursuant to this provision.
5.11.1 Unless specifically otherwise provided for herein, all consents, approvals
and other decisions of the County hereunder shall be binding only if made in writing and
approved by resolution of the Board of Spokane County Commissioners. No approval, consent,
or decision of the County for purposes of this Agreement shall be effective for purposes of any
other agreement or instrument to which the County is a party or beneficiary, or for any
regulatory or other purpose.
5.11.3 Unless specifically otherwise provided for herein, all consents, approvals
and other decisions of the Valley City hereunder shall be binding only if made in writing and
approved by ordinance of the Council of Valley City. No approval, consent, or decision of the
Valley City for purposes of this Agreement shall be effective for purposes of any other
agreement or instrument to which the Valley City is a party or beneficiary, or for any regulatory
or other purpose.
5.12 Severability. Whenever possible, each provision of this Agreement shall be
interpreted in such a manner as to be effective and valid under applicable law, but if any
provision of this Agreement is held to be prohibited by or invalid under applicable law, such
provision shall be ineffective only to the extent of such prohibition or invalidity, without
affecting or invalidating the remainder of this Agreement.
5.13 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, and each such
counterpart shall be deemed to be an original instrument. All such counterparts together will
constitute one and the same Agreement.
5.14 Time is of the Essence. It is hereby agreed that time is of the essence in the
performance of all covenants and conditions to be kept and performed under the terms of this
Agreement.
503E5E29.04
-20-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement by their duly
authorized officers and representatives this day of , 2003.
COUNTY:
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
John Roskelley, Chair
Phillip D. Harris, Vice-Chair
M. Kate McCaslin, Commissioner
ATTEST:
Daniela Erickson, Deputy Clerk of
the Board of County Commissioners
DISTRICT:
SPOKANE COUNTY .PUBLIC
FACILITIES DISTRICT
Bill Williams, Jr., Chair
Trish McFarland, Vice-Chair
Shaun Cross, Director
Rick LaFleur, Director
Erik E, Skaggs, Director
ATTEST:
Kevin J. Twohig, Executive Director
SU396824A4
VALLEY CITY:
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON
Michael DeVlemine, Mayor
ATTEST:
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
5N5552U.147
-23-
EXHIBIT A
REGIONAL CENTER PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS
A -1
CONVENTION CENTER PROJECT
Acquisition of an interest in, construction of improvements to and the expansion of the real
property located in the City of Spokane, commonly known as the Spokane Convention Center,
including without limitation, an expanded convention center with approximately 100,000 square
feet of exhibit space, 30,000 square feet of ballroom space and 37,5000 square feet of meeting
space, together with contiguous parking facilities consistent of approximately 800 parking
spaces. The Convention Center Project includes capital improvements and remodeling of the
Spokane Convention Center, the Spokane Opera House and the Washington State International
Agricultural Trade Center.
Construction of improvements to real property located in Spokane County commonly known as
the Spokane County Fair & Exposition Center, including, without limitation: the reconstruction
of grandstands in order to accommodate 5,000 persons; the construction; improvement and
expansion of meeting facilities; the installation of new roofing, heating and air conditioning
systems; a food court expansion; and other capital improvements.
Construction of improvements to real property located in the City of Spokane Valley commonly
known as Mirabeau Point, including without limitation, an approximately 48,000 square foot
multi - purpose facility including a cultural and performing arts center, a conference center and a
senior and community center.
A -2
FAIR & EXPO CENTER PROJECT
A -3
MIRABEAU POINT PROJECT
A -1
EX H:CI3rT B
EXPECTED TIMELINES FOR FINANCING AND CONSTRUCTION
OF THE REGIONAL CENTER PROJECTS
B -1
CONVENTION CENTER PROJECT
5/02 —12/03 Property Acquisition
7/03 — 9/04 Design Development and Construction Documents
12/03 Commence Construction
12/03 — 10/06 Construction
8/06 Move -in
2/03 — 1 /04 Design Development
2/03 Commence Construction
2/03 —1/05 Construction
8/03 Construction of Grandstand Completed
1/05 Completion of All Construction
11 /02 -10/03 Design Development
12/03 Commence Construction
12/03 -4/05 Construction
4/05 Completion of Construction
Sa3ase±oaa
B -2
FAIR & EXPO CENTER PROJECT
B -3
M1RAB EA U POINT PROJECT
13-1
SASB6820 O4
EXHIBIT C
C -1
FAIR & EXPO CENTER PAYMENTS
Semiannual Semiannual
Date Payment Date Payment -
12 /01 /03 245,860.59 06/01/19 267,931.25
06/01/04 292,500.00 12/01/19 562,931.25
12/01/04 292,500.00 06/01 /20 260,931.25
06/01/05 292,500.00 12/01/20 620,931.25
12/01/05 297,500.00 06/01/21 252,381.25
06/01/06 292,425.00 12/01/21 682,381.25
12/01/06 317,425.00 06/01/22 242,156.25
06/01/07 292,050.00 12/01/22 742,156.25
12/01/07 322,050.00 06/01/23 230,256.25
06/01/08 291,625.00 . 12/01/23 815,256.25
12/01/08 331,625.00 06/01/24 216,343.75
06/01 /09 290,975.00 12/01/24 881,343.75
12/01/09 340,975.00 06/01/25 199,518.75
06 /01 /10 290,125.00 12/01/25 949,518.75
12/01/10 350,125.00 06/01/26 180,543.75
06/01 /11 288,925.00 12/01/26 1,025,543.75
12/01/11 363,925.00 06/01/27 159,165.63
06/01/12 287,556.25 12/01 /27 909,1 65.63
12/01/12 372,556.25 06/01/28 140,190.63
06/01/13 285,681.25 12/01/28 910,190.63
12/01/13 390,681.25 06/01/29 120,709.38
06/01/14 283,581.25 12/01/29 985,709.38
12/01/14 398,581.25 06/01/30 98,821.88
06/01/15 281,443.75 12/01/30 1,043,821.88
12/01/15 411,443.75 06/01/31 74,912.50
06/01/16 278,931.25 12/01/31 1,119,912.50
12/01/16 428,931.25 06/01/32 48,475.00
06/01/17 275,931.25 12/01/32 1,203,475.00
12/01/17 440,931.25 06/01/33 19,250.00
06/01/18 272,631.25 12/01/33 789,250.00
12/01/18 507,631.25
C -1
503868:0.04
Date
C -2
MIRABEAU POINT PAYMENTS
Semiannual
Payment
12/01/03 06/01/19
06/0 12/01/19
12/01/04 06/01/20
06/01/05 12/01/20
12/01/05 06/01/21
06/01 /06 12/01 /21
12/01/06 06/01/22
06/01 /07 12/01 /22
12/01/07 06/01/23
06/01/08 12/01/23
12/01/08 06/01/24
06/01/09 12/01/24
12/01/09 06/01/25
06/01/10 12/01/25
12/01/10 06/01/26
06/01/1 1 12/01/26
12/01/11 06/01/27
06/01/12 12/01/27
12/01/12 06/01/28
06/01/13 12/01/28
12/01/13 06/01/29
06/01/14 12/01/29 .
12/01 /14 06/01 /30
06/01/15 12/01/30
12/01/15 06/01 /31
06/01 /16 12/01 /31
12/01 /16 06/01 /32
06/01/17 12/01/32
12/01/17 06/01/33
06/01/18 12/01/33
12/01/18
C - 2
Date
Semiannual
Pavment
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: September 3, 2003 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business x new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report x pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Ordinance amending 2003 budget
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: This item was discussed at the Council Study
Session on August 5, 2003. The City Council directed staff to move forward with these budget
amendments.
BACKGROUND: Finance Director Ken Thompson presented amendments to the 2003 budget
to the City Council on August 5. The size and number of amendments is likely greater in this
first year of incorporation for the City, than it will be in later years. Exhibit A itemizes these
amendments which are primarily in the General Fund. One amendment amends the
Hotel /Motel Fund (tourism promotion) and one amendment creates a budget for CenterPlace at
Mirabeau Point. I have also added the Project Access funding request ($5,000) presented to
the Council on September 2, 2003.
Interim loans, bond sale proceeds, program income and room tax will be used to pay these
costs.
OPTIONS: State law requires a balanced budget. Thus, the only viable option is to amend the
original 2003 budget. The City could hold all amendments until the end of the year and process
all amendments at that time. However, that approach would delay timely accounting and
reporting until year end as well.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: A council motion to consider the first reading of the
Ordinance is recommended.
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: These amendments will balance the City Budget for 2003.
Interim loans will need to be repaid with interest during the next few years.
STAFF CONTACT: Ken Thompson, Finance & Administrative Services Director
ATTACHMENTS The proposed Ordinance
and Exhibit °A° are enclosed
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 62 PASSED BY THE CITY
COUNCIL ON MARCH 27, 2003 AND ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE
PERIOD OF MARCH 31, 2003 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2003 APPROPRIATING
FUNDS AND ESTABLISHING SALARY SCITEDULES FOR ESTABLISHED
POSITIONS."
WHEREAS, subsequent to the adoption of the annual budget, it has become
necessary to make changes by adding appropriations and transferring funds in order to
properly perform various City functions, services and activities;
WHEREAS, the budget changes set forth in this Ordinance could not have been
reasonably anticipated or known when the annual budget was passed by the City Council;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the best interests of the City are
served by amending the adopted budget as set forth herein.
NOW THEREFORE, The City Council_ of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington
do ordain as follows:
Section 1. Budrzct Amendment. The Budget for the nine months ending December 31,
2003, and each item, appropriation, and fund are hereby revised as follows.
The following budget amendments are made:
A. The General Fund of the 2003 budget is amended to provide for an additional
appropriation in the amount of $611,500, funded through program income and a
loan as set forth on Exhibit "A."
B. The Fiotel/Motel Fund of the 2003 budget is amended to provide for an additional
appropriation in the amount of $190,000 funded through hotel /motel room tax.
C. There is hereby established in the City treasury a fund known and designated as
the "Mirabeau — CenterPlace Capital Project Fund" for the purpose of providing
funds for construction of a regional conference /special events center.
The 2003 City budget is amended to provide an appropriation in the amount of
$300,000 funded through a Public Facilities District grant and bond sale
proceeds.
Ord.15.10.09/03/03 - 1
C:11)ocuments and SettingslcbainbridgclLocal Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK2E1Budgct Amended Ordinance No 62.doc
1.
General
$13,892,900
$14,504,400
2.
Street
3.941,315
3,941,315
1
Arterial Street
400,000
400,000
4.
1- Iotel/Motel
10,000
200,000
5.
County City Loan
50,500
50,500
6.
Capital Projects
550,000
550,000
7.
Special Capital Projects
550,000
550,000
8.
Street Capital Projects
1,500,000
1,500,000
9.
Sewer
1,000,000
1,000,000
10.
Stormwater Management
555,000
555,000
11.
Equipment Rental & Replacement
70,525
70,525
12.
Mirabeau — CenterPlace
-0-
300,000
Total
$22,520,240
S23,621,740
For purposes of these budget amendments, Exhibit "A" is attached hereto and
incorporated by this reference as though set forth in full.
Section 2. Funds Ap_propriated. To facilitate the above budget amendments from the
estimated revenues, including beginning fund balances for each separate fund, the
appropriations and the aggregate total for all funds combined for the period March 31
through December 31 are set forth in summary form.
Section 3. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this
Ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent
. jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or
constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance.
Section 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5)
days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the
City as provided by law.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley this • day of
2003.
ATTEST:
Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORi\4:
Stanley M. Schwartz, Interim City Attorney
Date of Publication:
Ordinance
BEGINNING AMENDED
APPROJ'RIATION APPROPRIATION
Michael DeVleming, Mayor
Ord. l 5.1 0.09103/03 - 2
C:1Doeuments and Settingslebainbridgc\Lneal SettingsV1'cmporary Internet Files lOLK2l \Nudget Amended Ordinance No 62,dttc
Fund Purpose Amount Funding Source
Start -up costs:
General Microflex — Sales Tax $ 28,000 Loan proceeds
General Emergency Management Services 36,000 Loan proceeds
General Lease/Improvements 70,000 Loan proceeds
General Web Site 20,000 Loan proceeds
General Prothman Costs 26,000 Loan proceeds
General Start-.up Supplies 7,000 Loan proceeds
General Road Obstruction Program 70,000 Loan proceeds &
Program income
General Special Attorney 40,000 Loan proceeds
General Public Safety Vehicle 28,000 Loan proceeds
General Interim Positions (3) 40,500 Loan proceeds
General Traffic Engineering —
Manuals/Ilandbooks 1,500 Loan proceeds
Software — Synchro 3,000 Loan proceeds
General Technology — Computers,
Network & Consulting 194,000 Loan proceeds
General Inspector Manuals &
Certification 10,000 Loan proceeds
G eneral Consultants — Personnel Policies 20,000 Loan proceeds
General Council Memberships, Registrations,
& Travel 12,500 Loan proceeds
General Project Access 5.000
Other:
I- lotel/Motel
Capital Project
Tourism Promotion
Mirabeau — CcnterPlacc
EXHIBIT "A"
City of Spokane Valley
2003 Budget Amendments
August 5, 2003
$0-1,5_00.
5190,000 Room tax
$300,000 Bond proceeds
September 2, 2003
Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council:
This past Friday, August 29 2003, I had the opportunity to meet with my hotel colleagues to
review the proposed room tax allocation. By best estimate, the hotels represented at this
meeting have contributed approximately 82% of the 2% bed tax fund. Our purpose in
meeting was to discuss our concerns with the current proposal for spending the bed tax fund
and agree upon our common interest in short term returns on investment from those funds.
Our recommendation is that the current proposal be amended to reflect the following:
1. The total amount available in the fund should be reflected as $229,000.00 vs.
$200,000.00.
2. A reserve amount should be 10% of anticipated revenue. The hospitality industry is
in trouble and the monies we generate need to be aggressively marketed to insure
room nights rather than sitting in reserve.
3. The Valley hoteliers wish to appropriate $127,660.00 to the Spokane Convention
and Visitors Bureau of which $10,000.00 is to be dedicated to the design and
publishing of a Spokane Valley page in the Washington Visitors Guide and the
remaining $17,500 is to be used for design, production and distribution of
Fairgrounds marketing materials.
4. The Valley hoteliers also wish to appropriate $78,440.00 to the Spokane Regional
Sports Commission. $58,440.00 will be used to fund their business plan and the
remaining $20,000.00 will be earmarked for the completion of the Plantes Ferry
project.
We feel that our recommendation best benefits the industry by driving tourism into the City of
Spokane Valley. It is our expectation that you, as the good stewards of this fund, will consider
our concerns and act on our recommendations as to how the monies should be invested.
Yours trul
Jeff Fox
General Manager
MirabeauPark
HOTEL
www.mirabeauparkhotel.com
1100 N. Sullivan Road *Spokane Valley, WA 99037 0509 -924 -9000 *Fax 509 - 922 -4965
Lodging Taxes
Businesses providing lodging for less than 30 days must
report transient rental income under Lodging Taxes on
page 2 of the Combined Excise Tax Return. Examples
include hotels, motels, bed and breakfasts, vacation
rentals, trailer camps, RV parks, and tent campgrounds.
This allows cities and counties that impose the transient
rental tax to receive a distribution from the state portion
of the retail sales tax. It is not an additional tax.
Special hotel /motel taxes may apply to lodging charges.
The local rates vary by location (see column ioSpecl HtIfMtIIS
on the following rate chart). This tax is reported on page 2
of the tax return under Lodging Taxes. The gross taxable
income reported under the special hotel /motel tax section
should agree with the gross transient rental income reported
for each location.
(2) Spe Hotel/Motel and Convention and Trade Center taxes are in addition to state
and local sales tax for businesses that provide lodging.
Applicant
Request Range
Proposed Grant
Committee Recommendation
$200,000 available
with all voting
Conflicts abstaining
Convention and Visitors Bureau
$150,000 - 200,000
$63,200
$58,500
Valley Fest
$15,000- 10,724
5,600
4,500
Spokane Wine Association
$2535 -?
o.00
YMCA Skate Park
$25,000- 50,000
18,000
18,000
Valley Soccer Concession stand
$96,642 -?
24,800
24,800
Fair & Expo marketing
$20,000 -?
17,500
17,500
Regional Sports Commission
•
$100,000- 120,000
52,200
47,300
Arts Commission study
$10,000 -?
0
Valley Legacy Foundation- museum
$27,000 - 40,000
8,700
5,900
Tourism Guide AD
10,000
10,000
$200,000
$186,500
Sport Horse Breeders
•
$1980 -100
Sports USA facility
$103,000 -?
Splash Down expansion
$230,000 -?
legal issue
Spokane Vacations.com
$28,000- 39,000
legal issue
•
Centennial Trail
$12,480 - 23,480
Spokane Polo Club
$25,300 -100
Spokane Symphony
$20,000- 10,000
.
Armed Forces Aerospace Museum
$3327.20- 2530.51
Latah Creek sign
$20,000 -?
$12,500 -6250
legal issue
Senior Wellness Conference
fi
is
The New City Guide
ka .�
• to- a flat fee designed to cover the costs of implementing the program. A revenue- raising
business license scheme generally involves different fees for different classes of businesses.
Such fees may be based, for example, on the type of business, on the number of employees, or
on the square footage of the business facility.
:.;•:Utility business and occupation taxes. Utility taxes are levied on the gross operating
•::-•revenues that public and private utilities earn from operations within a city. Utilities on which
• these taxes may be levied include electric, water, sewer, solid waste, stormwater, gas, telephone,
%. cable TV, and steam. Taxes on some of these types of utilities are subject to a statutory
; maximum 6 percent rate, unless a higher rate is approved by the voters. Taxes on electric, gas,
:and telephone utilities cannot take effect until . at least 60 days after the ordinance is passed. The.
n oimposition of this tax for the fist time may be subject to a referendum procedure.'
l k,�
Lodging (hotel- motel) tax. Most cities may Impose a bask 2 percent tax on all charges
ifiuma
for furnishing lodging at hotels, motels, and similar establishments for a continuous period of
IF' less than one month. RCW 67.28.180(1). When this tax is imposed, the state sales tax decreases
by a like amount, so tourists and other lodgers experience no increase as -a result of this tax.
Most •cities may also impose an additional 2 percent. for a total of 4 percent, though this
• additional tax is not credited against the state sales tax. RCW 67.28.181(1).
.Before a city with a population over 5,000 may imposea lodging tax, it must establish a "lodging
. ax advisory committee. RCW 67.28.1817. A proposal to impose a new lodging tax must be
submitted to the lodging tax advisory committee for review and comment at least 45 days before
it is to become effective. Presumably, an interim council may establish a committee prior to the
fficial incorporation date, so that the tax can be made to -go into effect upon the official
incorporation date.
Revenues from this tax may be used only to pay for tourist promotion and.the acquisition and /or
Operation of "tourism- related facilities." RCW 67.28.1815. See A Revenue Guide for
,,.Washington Cities and Towns, MRSC Report No. 45, (August 1999), at pages 18 -22, for a
detailed discussion of the lodging tax, the lodging tax advisory committee , and the permissible
uses for the revenues from this tax.
This tax is remitted to the city by the state on a monthly basis. The Department of Revenue
needs at least 45 days to notify taxpayers of a new tax, rate change, or change in recipient of the
tax, and such a change must be effective the first day of a month. Therefore, if the council passes
• an ordinance effective the first of the month after incorporation, the first revenue will be received
five months later. For example, if a city incorporates on August 31 and passes a lodging tax
ordinance effective September 1, the DOR will begin collecting on November 1. Taxes collected
during November are remitted to DOR on December 25 and paid to cities,at nd of :Ja a � x,
Gambling tax. A city that decides to allow gambling activities within its borders may impose
a tax on gambling revenues. The maximum tax for amusement games is 2 percent of gross
receipts less the amount awarded as prizes. For bingo and raffles, it is 5 percent less the amount
awarded as cash or merchandise prizes. For punch boards and pull -tabs, the maximum rate is,
.[10■14 �- , -
129
_ION ' REGISTRATION .DI3A /OWNER NAME
.3 600 004 476 TRAILER INNS INC
3 - - - - 600 139 078 PARKLANE MOTEL
3 . . • 600 206 527 . K '0 A OF• SPOKANE •
3
3
3 . 601 416 21 SPOKANE SUPER 8 MOTEL _ .. .
3
3
. 601 621 163 RED TOP -MOTEL
3 601 650 191 • -,MAPLE TREE MOTEL Yx R V:'CORP
3 601 651 207 EASTGATE MOTEL
3
r - - =; 601 87.0..391 . - QUALITY INN VALL SUITES - - °' °- •
3 . 60i 872 183 -. - .COMFORT INN - •
3
TE 00/19/2003 TRANSIENT RENTAL INCOME • •
TAXPAYER DETAIL REPORT FOR 3213 SPOKANE VALLEY CITY FOR AUG 2003
REAL DISTRIBUTION
3
S
s
S T A T E O F W A S H I N G T O N -- D E P T O F R E V'E r
600 646 146 MOTEL 6 OPERATING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
600650 065 • PARK' LANE R V PARK
601 343 894 ALPINE MOTEL & .RV PARK INC
601 343 894 ALPINE MOTEL & RV PARK INC
601 416 212 SPOKANE SUPER 8 MOTEL
601 578 315 OXFORD SUITES
601 - 736.361 VALLEY HOSPITALITY
.. :• 60 -- : 804, • 547 SULLI VAN :INN VESTMENTS .LLC • •
601 804 547 SULLIVAN INN VESTMENTS LLC
601 872 183. COMFORT INN
60 872 183 COMFORT INN
601 919 626 - BROADWAY INN & SUITES •
602 016'851 WOLFF.'CORPORATE HOUSING INC
R Fi
06 c
O6 c
06 c
06 "c
06 E
05 E
06 2
05 2
06 2
-— - 006 "
02 2
• _ 06 2'
• 06 21
04 2i
06 2i
04 2(
• 05 21
06 2(
06 2(
602 038 992 fIESIDENCE INN I37 MARRIDTT _ - 06 •C
602 258 549 BEST WESTERN PHEASANT HILL
06 2C
Page 1 of 1
RCW 67.28.1817
Lodging tax advisory committee in large municipalities -- Submission of proposal for imposition of
or change in tax or use -- Comments.
(1) Before proposing imposition of a new tax under this chapter, an increase in the rate of a tax imposed
under this chapter, repeal of an exemption from a tax imposed under this chapter, or a change in the use
of revenue received under this chapter, a municipality with a population of five thousand or more shall
establish a lodging tax advisory committee under this section. A lodging tax advisory committee shall
consist of at least five members, appointed by the legislative body of the municipality, unless the
municipality has a charter providing for a different appointment authority. The committee membership
shall include: (a) At least two members who are representatives of businesses required to collect tax
under this chapter; and (b) at least two members who are persons involved in activities authorized to be
funded by revenue received under this chapter. Persons who are eligible for appointment under (a) of
this subsection are not eligible for appointment under (b) of this subsection. Persons who are eligible for
appointment under (b) of this subsection are not eligible for appointment under (a) of this subsection.
Organizations representing businesses required to collect tax under this chapter, organizations involved
in activities authorized to be funded by revenue received under this chapter, and local agencies involved
in tourism promotion may submit recommendations for membership on the committee. The number of
members who are representatives of businesses required to collect tax under this chapter shall equal the
number of members who are involved in activities authorized to be funded by revenue received under
this chapter. One member shall be an elected official of the municipality who shall serve as chair of the
' committee. An advisory committee for a county may include one nonvoting member who is an elected
official of a city or town in the county. An ad committee for city or town may include one
nonvoting member who is an elected official of the county in which the city or town is located. The
appointing authority shall review the membership of the advisory committee annually and make changes
as appropriate.
(2) Any municipality that proposes imposition of a tax under this chapter, an increase in the rate of a
tax imposed under this chapter, repeal of an exemption from a tax imposed under this chapter, or a
change in the use of revenue received under this chapter shall submit the proposal to the lodging tax
advisory committee for review and•comment. The submission shall occur at least forty -five days before
final action on or passage of the proposal by the municipality. The advisory committee shall submit
comments on the proposal in a timely manner through generally applicable public comment procedures.
The comments shall include an analysis of the extent to which the proposal will accommodate activities
for tourists or increase tourism, and the extent to which the proposal will affect the long -term stability of
the fund created under RCW 67.28.1815. Failure of the advisory committee to submit comments before
final action on or passage of the proposal shall not prevent the municipality from acting on the proposal.
A municipality is not required to submit an amended proposal to an advisory committee under this
section.
[1998 c 35 § 3; 1997 c 452 § 5.]
NOTES:
Validation of taxes imposed and collected and actions takcn -- Effective date --1998 c 35: See
notes following RCW 67.28.181.
Intent -- Severability- -1.997 c 452: See notes following RCW 67.28.080.
Savings -- 1997 c 452: See note following RCW 67.28.181..
►�,.. „. „ -., rnxtozlnoilnA-70ionoion-rrrt R /R ('WO / ?nQ /lM:7O /')n 047 R /1A/1 n11:
Page 1 of2
RCW 67.28.080
Definitions. •
The definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter unless the context clearly requires
otherwise.
(1) "Acquisition" includes, but is not limited to, siting, acquisition, design, construction, refurbishing,
expansion, repair, and improvement, including paying or securing the payment of all or any portion of
general obligation bonds, leases, revenue bonds, or other obligations,issued or incurred for such purpose
or purposes under this chapter.
(2) "Municipality" means any county, city or town of the state of Washington.
.(3) "Operation" includes, but is not limited to, operation, management, and marketing.
(4) "Person" means the federal government or any agency thereof, the state or. any agency,
subdivision, taxing district or municipal corporation thereof other than county, city or town, any private
corporation, partnership, association, or individual.
d' (5) "Tourism" means economic activity resulting from tourists, which may include sales of overnight
j'`� lodging, meals, tours gifts, or souvenirs.
(6) "Tourism promotion" means activities and expenditures designed to increase tourism, including
a ut not limited to advertising, publicizing, or otherwise distributing information for the purpose of
ttracting and welcoming tourists; developing strategies to expand tourism; operating tourism promotion
. agencies; and funding marketing of special events and festivals designed to attract tourists.
(7) "Tourism - related facility" means real or tangible personal property with a usable life of three or
more years, or constructed with'volnnteer labor, and used to support tourism, performing arts, or to
accommodate tourist activities:
• (8) "Tourist" means a person who travels from a place of residence to a different town, city, county,
state, or country, for purposes of business, pleasure, recreation, education, arts, heritage, or. culture.
[1997 c 452 § 2; 1991 c 357 § 1; 1967 c 236 § 1.]
NOTES:
Intent -1997 c 452: "The intent of this act is to provide uniform standards for local option excise
taxation of lodging." [1997 c 452 § 1.] •
Severability —1997 c 452: "If any provision of this act or its application to any person or
circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons
or circumstances is not affected." [1997 c 452 § 24.]
Savings —1997 c 452: See note following RCW 67.28.181.
Effective date, application -- 1991 c 357: "This act is necessary for the immediate preservation of
the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the state government and its existing public institutions,
and shall take effect after immediately [effect immediately (May 21, 1991)]. This act applies
retroactively to all actions taken under chapter 67.28 RCW on or after January 1, 1990." [1991 c 357 §
• ( To41no41n41" )noi1nTrrT /1? o pv..)roilnc1oi.)ri QhArmn1
The Spokesman - Review.com - Spokane allows $900,000 shift
NEWS
"Spokane
"Idaho
'Valley •
"Community
' Region
"Nation
' World
• Business
• Sports
' Lifestyle
' Entertainment
"Commentary
' Letters
"Obituaries
■More topics
' Full story list •
■Nev,stracics
"Archives
EXTRA
"pedal sections
• Forums
Steens only
Weather
IfTV listings
• iMovie listings
• For the record
ADS
"Special sections
"'Classifieds
' Find a job
' Find a car
' Find a Horne
• Apartments
"•Classified
Obituaries
I•Pleeting place
•Newspaper ads
RHow to
advertise
S ITE MAP
select..] ■
H ELP
IIIIIAbout S -R.com
U News tip
■ Feedback
■ Contact us
• SR•jobs
■ Privacy policy
DIE_ SPOKESMAN -REVI EWGOM
SPOKANE
Spokane allows S900,000 shift
Lodging -tax funds transferring to PFD for center
expansion
Related stories
1rlike Praaer
Staff writer
The Spokane City Council
on Monday voted to transfer
$900,000 in lodging taxes to
the Spokane Public Facilities
District as part of-the
• Convention Center
expansion.
AT A GLANCE
WHAT'S NEXT
Today, PFD board
members are scheduled
to meet to talk about
the site being chosen
for the new exhibit hall.
The action was the latest in an ongoing effort to build a
new 100,000 - square -foot exhibit hall under the guidance
of the PFD.
It is the same city- county agency that built and operates
the Spokane Arena.
Next Tuesday, the city will officially relinquish
ownership of the existing Spokane Center to the PFD.
The center will be remodeled and renovated as part of
the expansion.
Today, PFD board members are scheduled to meet to
talk about the site being chosen for the new exhibit hall
A selection announcement could be made when the
board convenes at 4 p.m. in the Champions Room at
Arena headquarters, 720 W. Mallon.
PFD officials are considering three sites, including
property east of the Doubletrec Hotel Spokane, the block
south of the existing Spokane Center and a combination
of the two.
The east site has logistical advantages because it is larger
and would more easily accommodate the new exhibit
hall and parking.
A larger hall is said to be critical for attracting national
conventions, as well as convention spending, to the Lilac
City.
Downtown business interests have come out in favor of
Tuesday, August 26, 2003
Printgr Friendly
E -mail this story
INTERACT
Submit comment
Feedback policy
Read replies
Shop ping Central
Classifieds
Find A Job
Find An Automobile
Find A Home
Apartments
Meeting Place
Newspaper Ads
How To Advertise
Home Delivery
Advertisement
•
falkliweatat
Want to knew when "the
game" is on? li's as easy
as puttns inyour Cade_
Page 1 of 3
Auto Review Online
View the'net.v and used
inventory of the areas
biggest car dealers.
www.autoreviewonline.com
Employment
Hundreds of Local Job
listings daily. Visit our online
classifieds to find your next
career.
www.spokesmanreviev.t.com
Real Estate
Buying or selling your home?
Looking for an apartment?
You can find exactly what you
are looking for in our Online
Real Estate section.
www.spokesmanrevlew.com
The Spokesman- Review.cor - Spokane allows $900,000 shift Page 2 of 3
placing the exhibit hall on the block bounded by
Washington, Main, Bernard and Spokane Falls.
But using that property would force designers to put the
exhibit hall lobby on a mezzanine level and to squish the
ceiling at the hall's north'end to accommodate the
mezzanine, officials said.
It would also place loading bays on Main Avenue,
creating potential conflicts between deliveries and
downtown traffic.
And a portion of public right -of -way along Bernard
Street would be needed for the project.
Business owners believe having the hall closer to
restaiirants, shops and some lodging facilities is an
advantage to getting•conventioners to go downtown.
"You start moving east and you are going in the wrong
direction," said City Council President Rob Higgins after
an executive session briefing on site acquisition.
He declined to say which site was preferred by the PFD
board. .
•
�As'i t of - the deal, city lodgii g•ta o ati $90 0,00 0 -
will be transferred to the PFD;. which: will use.them
much the same way, city has used them. ,
Half-4)f that money -will gq for marketing work by the
Spokane Convention and,Visitois Bureau and an'
operati4 subsidy. to Center. .;
,,The city will keep $100,000 a year in lodging tax
which total about $1 million annually
Completion is expected.late in 2006. .. .
The transfer will not change taxes being collected at
hotels and motels in the city.
Last week, the PFD board sold $77 million in bonds at
an interest rate of 5.16 percent with maturities through
2033 to finance•planning, site acquisition, design and
construction.
A one -tenth of 1 percent sales tax and a 2 percent
lodging tax initially approved for construction of the
Arena will be part of the revenue for repaying the bonds.
Voters a year ago approved .extending collections of
li - - r�• /Jwtir,,, cnr,1rp rn nrPvri rum /r, we -ct ry asn941 itF= f1R2603&M= x1400465
9/1/2003
Revenues
City Contract
County. Contract
City of Spokane Valley
Membership Dues
Other Private Revenue
Total Revenues
Cost of Sales
Cost of Goods Sold
Total Cost of Sales
Net Revenue
Current Month
Actual
$ 39,958.00
0.00
0.00
23,580.60
103,906.14
167,444.74
0.00
0.00
167,444.74
Expenses
Salaries and Wages 45,885.00
Payroll Taxes 4,678.12
Benefits 8,217.52
Total Personnel Expenses 58,780.64
Trade Shows & Bids 4,455.72
Fams & Site Inspections 151.40
Advertising & Mktg. 11,934.49
Publications & Print Proj 79,188.86
Total Marketing 95,730.47
Operating Expenses 20,496.95
Spokane Regional CVB
Income Statement
For the Three Months Ending March 31, 2003
Current Month
Budget
$ 49,083.33
0.00
0.00
24,166.67
103,575.01
176,825.01
0.00
0.00
176,825 01
54,252.17
5,696.42
8,300.58
68,249.17
5,966.67
3,166.67
11,508.34
80,400.01
101,041.69
40,844.18
\` f
Year to Date
Actual
S 122,000.13
48,750.00
' 0.00
70,910.44
116,721.47
358,382.04
107.72
107.72
358,274.32
150,385.78
16,104.75
27,068.20
193,558.73
22,584.38
973.10
28,420.14
84,840.64 ,
For Management Purposes Only
Year to Date Variance Total Year Bud
Budget
$ 147,249.99
48,750.00
0.00
72,500.01
122,225.03
390,725.03
0.00
0.00
390,725.03
162,756.51
' 17,089.26
24,901.74
204,747.51
21,700.01
6,600.01
43,000.02 .
85,100.03
.136,818.26 156,400.07 •
68,577.24 91,292.54
Total Cash Expenses 175,008.06 210,135.04 398,954.23 452,440.12
Depreciation & Amortizat 4,297.00 4,296.67 12,891.00 12,890.01
Net Chg in Fund Balance $ <11,860.32> $ <37,606.70> $ ' <53,570.91> $ <74,605.10>
<25,249.86>
0.00
0.00
<1,589.57>
<5,503.56>
<32,342.99>
107.72
107.72
<32,45
<12,370.73>
<984.51>
2,166.46
<11,188.78>
884.37
<5,626.91>
<14,579.88>
<259.39>
<19,581.81>
<22,715.30>
<53,485.89>
0.99
21,034.19
589,000.00
195,000.00
180,000.00
290,000.00
180,650.00
1,434,650.00
1,000.00
1,000.00
1,433,650.00
651,026.00
68,357.00
99,607.00
818,990.00
53,400.00
23,500.00
136,850.00
121,150.00
334,900.00
278,900.00
1,432.790.00
51,560.00
<50,700.00>
� j
Page: 1
3 Sep 2003 Page 1 of 2
Chris Bainbridge
From: Richard Munson
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 1:21 PM
To: Chris Bainbridge
Subject: hOTEL - mOTEL tAX
3 Sep 2003
9/4/2003
Motel /Hotel Tax Debate
Last night was an interesting exercise in democracy. To put this whole thing in
perspective, we are talking about a revenue source that represents .7% of our
projected revenues ($200,000/$28,000,000). To say we have spent a little too much
time on the subject is probably a gross understatement. However, these funds are tax
dollars, and we do have an obligation and duty to do our best to make sure the funds
are expensed efficiently and in a manner that is completely accountable to the public.
Frankly, I don't think we have achieved either of these goals. I was appalled to hear
the CVB has an administrative overhead of over $800,000.00 with an annual budget
of just $1.2 million. Their explanation of this figure leads me to believe they cannot
track nor account for the effectiveness of their sales efforts. If there were a choice, I
would vote to withhold all funds from them until they are able to account for and
measure the effectiveness of the dollars we give thorn. Given the information we
received last night, the CVB is currently incapable of providing an accurate
accounting of the funds they expense. I am very, very uncomfortable with this
situation. This council has adopted a policy of accountability with every single entity
we deal with., including our own staff. To ignore this requirement with the CVB is not
in line with our stated policy. However, they are the only game in town. The revenue
they spend on selling the area to the outside world is revenue the hoteliers and other
tourist related businesses do not have to spend from their already strapped revenues
(please note I did not say profits). Since I am going to recommend a higher allocation
for the CVB, I hope you all will join me and insist that they develop an accountability
system that will measure the effectiveness of the $800,000.00 in their administrative
efforts to "sell Spokane ". If they can't do this, we should be looking for another place
for the money next year. Perhaps our staff can assist them in developing this
accountability system. I have a. few ideas that may help them. I want to work with
them, not against them.
I believe our committee did their very best to provide us with a balance of event
building and marketing activities. However, two of the events, in my opinion, were
given too much money. The Museum has not shown they have achieved popular
support of our citizens. One way to measure that support is through the amount of
publicly donated dollars collected. The amount reported last night does not reflect an
activity people can't wait to attend. Again, perhaps our staff can assist them in
developing the kind of plan that will begin to excite our citizens about this project. I
am recommending we give the Museum $1000.00 to start with. Should this project
garner a reasonable amount of public support, we can revisit their needs next year.
Valleyfest is an important part of the City's effort to establish a sense of community
identity. The efforts of the volunteers who put this event on are almost Herculean and
demand our praise and respect: However, from the testimony given last night, it is
3 Sep 2003 Page 2 of 2
obvious they have not developed a plan that will evolve this activity into a regional,
tourist dollar collecting, event. Until we can see that such a plan has been developed,
1 cannot see how we can give them as much money as they have requested. Given the
short time frame to put the media campaign together, 1 recommend we reduce the
grant by half the requested amount.
The money the committee approved for the Fairgrounds is appropriate. Dolly's
explanation of how she can receive the dollars strongly indicates the money must be
given in a pass - through arrangement with an outside agency. As long a.s the CVB will
be that agency and will not charge a single penny of administrative costs against
these funds, I suggest we give the recommended amount to the CVB. Mike Flannigan
tells me that a pass - through organization is not required. Seems Dolly is having some
other issues she wishes to address. I for one am not willing to get involved with
internal issues. Ilowever, if no pass through organization is required, than we can
just as easily give the money directly to the fair grounds. I am sure Mike will be able
to add to our information on Tuesday. I hope he will have our legal staff check this
ou.t for us as well.
As 1 said last night, I believe the ad is a good and well conceived idea. Again, if the
CVB will agree to use these funds exclusively for the development and placement of
the ad, I would agree to give them the funds. They probably have the expertise to do
this well. We should insist that any ad must include ALL of the hoteliers in the valley,
regardless of size.
The reallocation 1 just suggested will give the CVB a little over $100,000.00. I want
to emphasize the absolute requirement that next year, the CVB must be able to
account for the dollars they are spending and be able to measure the success of how
these dollars bring revenue to the Spokane Valley.
1 hope we resolve this issue on Tuesday and will move on to more pressing matters
such as the waste water treatment plant and our budget development process.
Here is what the revised allocations will look like (if we give the $17,500 for the
fairgrounds to the CVB):
CVB $101,200
Valley Fest $2,800
Valley Soccer Concession Stand $18,000
Regional Sports Commission $52,200
Valley Legacy Museum $1,000
YMCA Skate Park $24,800
TOTAL $ 199,000
9/4/2003
Chris Bainbridge
Page 1 of 1
From: Richard Munson
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 1:32 PM
To: City Council; Chris Bainbridge; Dave Mercier; Cary Driskell; Stan Schwartz
Hi Steve,
Your numbers are the correct ones. I apparently reversed them in error. Goes to show you what sleep
deprivation can do to you.
Rich
I was mistaken as to what I thought was going to the Skate Park and the Concession stand. I would
like to see those two numbers reversed (Concession stand would get the $24,500 and the Skate Park
receive $18,000.)
Please let me know your thoughts on that change. My reasoning being that the concession stand can
most likely provide more immediate benefit to generating tourism dollars than a larger investment in
the skate park.
Thanks.
Steve
9/4/2003
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: 9 - - 03 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: consent XX old business new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Proposed Zoning Code Compliance chapter — second reading.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Interim Zoning Code adopted by Council prior to incorporation.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: This is the third touch by Council, with the first touch
being a study session 8- 19 -03, second touch being first reading 8- 26 -03.
BACKGROUND: Spokane Valley adopted the Spokane County Zoning Code as its Interim
Zoning Code prior to incorporation, with the intent of reviewing it and making changes where
appropriate to meet local demands. One of the items is Chapter 14.406, providing remedies for
the City in the event a person violates provisions of the Interim Zoning Code. The chapter, as
adopted, failed to provide adequate disincentives (civil penalties) or processes for abatement of
identified violations. This new section significantly enhances what was originally adopted, with
particular focus on abating the violations and providing the best mechanisms to be able to
secure payment of costs incurred by the City in abating violations.
The Planning Commission approved a very similar version, with changes made after their
approval relating to the City getting a judicial abatement order prior to entry onto private
property. On -going discussions with WCIA and MRSC revealed the need for such an order, so
that change was made.
At the study session on 8- 19 -03, the Council requested additional language to give the Director
authority to determine if a complaint is reliable. That language is found at 14.406.035, and
includes that the Director has no obligation to conduct a field investigation in the event the
complaint is found unreliable.
The Council had this on first reading 8- 26 -03, and did not request additional changes.
OPTIONS: Continue with the existing Interim Zoning Code compliance chapter.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Motion to adopt the ordinance as written.
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Anticipated to be neutral. The revised chapter authorizes an
abatement fund, which will be funded by penalties assessed under the chapter.
STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell or Marina Sukup.
ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance repealing and replacing Interim Zoning Code Chapter 14.406.
CITY OF SPOKANE. VALLEY,
WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 03 -078
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON, REPEALING
CHAPTER 14.406 OF TILE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY ZONING CODE ANT)
ESTABLISHING ZONING CODE COMPLIANCE CHAPTER 14.406.
WHEREAS, The City of Spokane Valley, Washington adopted a Zoning Code to regulate the
orderly development of the City of Spokane Valley; and
WHEREAS, the existing code compliance provisions, Section 14.406, does not adequately
provide the necessary processes to ensure abatement of identified code violations;
WHEREAS, violations of the City of Spokane Valley Zoning Code pose a threat to the health,
welfare and safety of the citizens of the City of Spokane Valley, and the City of Spokane Valley desires to
address this problem; and
WHEREAS, enforcement of the City of Spokane Valley Zoning Code is within the police powers
of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,
WASHINGTON ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Re peal. Section 14.406 of the City of Spokane Valley Zoning Code relating to
Zoning Code compliance is repealed in its entirety.
Section 2. New Zoning Code Compliance Section. The new Zoning Code Compliance
Section 14.406, as set forth in Attachment "A" to this Ordinance, is adopted.
Section 3. Severability. if any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance should
be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or
phrase of this ordinance
Section 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after
publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof occurs in the official newspaper of the City as
provided by law.
A`I" FI ST:
Passed on this day of September, 2003.
City Clerk Christine Bainbridge
Approved As To Norm:
Deputy City Attorney, Cary P. Driskell
Date of Publication:
Effective Date:
• Mayor, Michael DeVleming
Ordinance 03-078 Zoning Code Page 1 of 1
Proposed staff` draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
8 -19 -03 with new language
14.406.005 -
14.406.010 -
14.406.015 -
14.406.020 -
14.406.025 -
14.406.030 -
14.406.035 -
1 4.406.050 -
14.406.060 -
14.406.070 -
14.406.080 -
14.406.090 -
14.406.095 -
14.406.100 -
14.406.110 -
14.406.120 -
14.406.200 -
14.406.210 -
14.406.220 -
14.406.230 -
14.406.240 -
14.406.300 -
14.406.305 -
14.406.310 -
14.406.320 -
14.406.330 -
14.406.335 -
14.406.340 -
permit.
1 4.406.350 -
14.406.360 -
14.406.400 -
14.406.410 -
14.406.420 -
14.406.430 -
14.406.500 -
14.406.520 -
14.406.530 -
14.406.540 -
14.406.550 -
14.406.560 -
14.406.570 -
14.406.580 -
14.406.590 -
Name and intent.
Statement of policy.
Definitions.
Relationship to Growth Management Plan.
Declaration of public nuisance — misdemeanor.
Enforcement, authority and administration.
Guidelines for departmental responses to complaints.
Initial investigation.
Procedures when probable violation is identified.
Service — citation, notice and order, and stop work order.
Training and rulemaking.
Obligations of persons responsible for code violation.
Determination of compliance.
Voluntary compliance agreement — authority.
Voluntary compliance agreement — contents.
Failure to meet terms of voluntary compliance agreement.
Citations — authority.
Citations — effect.
Citation — contents.
Citation — modification or revocation.
Citation — remedy — civil penalties.
Notice and order — authority.
Notice and order — effect.
Notice and order — contents.
Notice and order — recording.
Notice and order — supplementation, revocation, modification.
Notice and order - administrative conference.
Notice and order — remedies — suspension, revocation or limitation of
Notice and order — remedies
Notice and order — remedies
Stop work order — authorized
Stop work order — effect.
Stop work order — remedy —
Stop work order — remedy —
Civil penalties — assessment
Civil penalties — duty to corn
Civil penalties — community
Civil penalties — waivers.
Civil penalties — critical areas
Cost recovery.
Collection of civil penalties,
Abatement
Code compliance abatement
Chapter 14.406
Zoning Code Compliance
— denial of permit.
— abatement.
civil penalties.
criminal penalties.
schedule.
ply.
service.
fees and costs.
fund — authorized.
While this chapter does authorize the City of Spokane Valley to take action to enforce the City
ordinances and regulations, it shall not be construed as placing responsibility for code
compliance or enforcement upon the City in any particular case, or as creating any duty on the
part of the City to any particular person or class of persons.
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
8 -19 -03 with new language
14.406.600 - Administrative appeals — standing - filing requirements.
14.406.610 - Administrative appeal — notice of hearing.
14.406.620 - Administrative appeal — procedures.
14.406.630 - Administrative appeal — final order.
14.406.640 - Judicial enforcement — petition for enforcement.
14.406.650 - Severability.
14.406.660 - Effective date.
14.406.005 — Name and intent. This chapter shall be known as "Zoning Code Compliance ".
The purpose of this chapter is to identify processes and methods to encourage compliance with
development ordinances and regulations adopted by the. City of Spokane Valley to promote and
protect the general public health safety and welfare of City residents. This chapter declares
certain acts to he civil violations and establishes non -penal enforcement procedures and civil
penalties. This chapter also declares certain acts to be misdemeanors subject to prosecution by
the City.
It is the intention of the City to pursue code compliance actively and vigorously in order to
protect the health, safety and welfare of the general public. This intent is to be pursued in a way
that is consistent with adherence to and respectful of fundamental federal and state
constitutional principles.
14.406.01.0 — Statement of policy. It is the policy of the City of Spokane Valley to emphasize
code compliance by education and prevention as a first step. This policy is designed to ensure
code compliance and timely action that is available to all persons and uniform in its
implementation. While warnings and voluntary compliance are desirable as a first step,
enforcement and civil penalties should be used for remedial purposes as needed to assure and
effect code compliance. Abatement or remediation should be pursued when appropriate and
feasible. Uniform and efficient procedures, with consistent application governed by regulation
should be used to accomplish this policy.
14.406.015 — Definitions.
A. "abate" means to take whatever steps are deemed necessary by the Director to ensure that
the property complies with applicable code requirements. Abatement may include, but is not
limited to, rehabilitation, demolition, removal, replacement or repair.
13. "civil code violation" means and includes an act or omission contrary to:
1. Any ordinance, resolution, regulation or public rule of the City that regulates or
protects the use and development of land or water; and /or
2. The conditions of any permit, notice and order or stop work order issued pursuant
to any such ordinance, resolution, regulation or public rule.
2
I >rnposcd staff draft Zon ing aide Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskel]
8 -]9 -03 witli new language
C. "The City means the City of Spokane Val ley, Washington,
1. "days" will be counted as business days when five or less days are allowed to do an act
required by this Ordinance. "days" will be considered calendar days when more than live days
are allowed to do an act required by this Ordinance.
E "determination of compliance" means a written statement from the Director or designee
that the Director has reviewed evidence to determine that the violation(s) has been sufficiently
abated as to the violation(s) stated in the voluntary compliance agreement, citation, notice and
order or stop work order.
F. "Director" means the Director of the Department of Community Development, or his or
her designee(s) authorized in writing_
G. "found in violation" means"
1. That a citation, notice and order or stop work order has been issued and not timely
appealed; or
2_ That a voluntary compliance agreement has been entered into; or
3. That the Hearing Examiner has determined that the violation has occurred and
such determination has not been stayed or reversed on appeal.
H. "Hearing Examiner" means the City of Spokane Valley Hearing Examiner, as provided
by City of Spokane Valley Ordinance number 57.
"mitigate" means to take measures, subject to City approval, to minimize the harmful
effects of the violation where remediation is either impossible or unreasonably burdensome,
J. "permit" means any .form of certificate, approval, registration, license or any other
written permission issued by the City. All conditions of approval, and all casements and use
limitations shown on the face of an approved final plat map which are intended to serve or
protect the general public are deemed conditions applicable to all subsequent plat property
owners, owner's tenants, and owner's agents as permit requirements enforceable under this
chapter.
K. " person " means any individual, association, partnership, corporation or legal entity,
public or private, and the agents and assigns of such individual, association, partnership,
corporation or legal entity.
L. "person responsible for a code violation" means the person who caused the violation, if
that can be determined, anchor the owner, lessor, tenant or other person entitled to control, use
and/or occupancy of the property where the civil code violation occurs.
M. "public rule" means any rule properly promulgated to implement City civil code
provisions.
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
8 -19 -03 with new language
N. "remediate" means to restore a site to a condition that complies with sensitive area or
other regulatory requirements as they existed before the violation occurred; or, for sites that have
been degraded under prior ownerships, restore to a condition which does not pose a probable
threat to the environment or to the general public health, safety or welfare.
0. "resolution" for purposes of this chapter means any resolution adopted by the City of
Spokane Valley City Council.
14.406.020 — Relationship to Growth Management Plan. This chapter is adopted as
development regulations pursuant to RCW 36.70A (Growth Management Act).
14.406.025 — Declaration of public nuisance — misdemeanor.
A. All civil code violations are hereby determined to be detrimental to the general public
health, safety and welfare and are hereby declared public nuisances. All conditions determined
to be civil code violations shall be subject to and enforced pursuant to the provisions of this
chapter except where specifically excluded by law or regulation.
13. Any person who willfully or knowingly causes, aids or abets a civil code violation
pursuant to this chapter by any act of commission or omission is guilty of a misdemeanor. Upon
conviction; the person shall be punished by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars and/or
incarceration for a term not to exceed ninety days. Each week (seven consecutive days) such
violation continues shall be considered a separate misdemeanor offense. As an alternative, or in
addition to any other judicial or administrative remedy provided in this chapter or by law or other
regulation, the Director may recommend that the Office of the City Attorney file a misdemeanor
complaint against the person responsible for code violation when the Director has documentation
or other evidence that the violation was willful and knowing.
1.4.406.030 — Enforcement, authority and administration.
A. In order to discourage public nuisances and otherwise promote compliance with
applicable code provisions, the Director may, in response to field observations or reliable
complaints, determine that civil code violations have occurred or are occurring, and may:
1. Enter into voluntary compliance agreements with persons responsible for code
violations;
2. Issue citations and assess civil penalties as authorized by this chapter;
3. Issue notice and orders assess civil penalties and recover costs as authorized by
this chapter;
4. Require abatement by means of a judicial abatement order, and if such abatement
is not timely completed by the person or persons responsible for a code violation,
undertake the abatement and charge the reasonable costs of such work as authorized by
this chapter;
4
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
8 -19 -03 with new language
5. Allow a person responsible for the code violation to perform community service
in lieu of paying civil penalties as authorized by SVZC 14.406.530;
6. Order work stopped at a site by means of a stop work order, and if such order is
not complied with, assess civil penalties as authorized by this chapter;
7. Suspend, revoke or modify any permit previously issued by the Director or deny a
pen application as authorized by this chapter when other efforts to achieve compliance
have failed; and
8. Forward a written statement providing all relevant information relating to the
violation to the Office of City Attorney with a recommendation to prosecute willful and
knowing violations as a misdemeanor offense.
B. The procedures set forth in this title are not exclusive. These procedures shall not in any
manner limit or restrict the City from remedying civil code violations or abating civil code
violations in any other manner authorized by law.
C. In addition, or as an alternative, to utilizing the procedures set forth in this chapter, the
Director may seek legal or equitable relief to abate any conditions or enjoin any acts or practices
which constitute a civil code violation.
D. In addition, or as an alternative, to utilizing the procedures set forth in this chapter, the
Director may assess or recover civil penalties accruing under this chapter by legal action filed in
Spokane County District Court by the Office of the City Attorney.
E. The provisions of this chapter shall in no way adversely affect the rights of the owner,
lessee or occupant of any property to recover all costs and expenses incurred and required by this
chapter from any person causing such violation.
F. in .administering the provisions for code enforcement, the Director shall have the
authority to waive any one or more such provisions so as to avoid substantial injustice by
application thereof to the acts or omissions of a public or private entity or individual, or acts or
omissions on public or private property including, for example, property belonging to public or
private utilities, where no apparent benefit has accrued to such entity or individual from a code
violation. Any determination of substantial injustice shall be made in writing supported by
appropriate facts. For purposes of this clause, substantial injustice cannot be based exclusively
on financial hardship.
O. The provisions of this chapter detailing the administration of code compliance procedures
are intended only for the purpose of providing guidance to City employees and are not
jurisdictional, and are not to be construed as creating a basis for appeal or a defense of any kind
to an alleged code violation.
H. The. Director may, upon presentation of proper credentials, with the consent of the owner
or occupier of a building or premises, or pursuant to a lawfully issued inspection warrant, enter at
reasonable times any building or premises subject to the consent or warrant to perform the duties
imposed by this chapter. It is the intent of the City Council that any entry made to private
-5-
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
8 -19 -03 with new language
property for the purpose of inspection for code violations be accomplished in strict conformity
with constitutional and statutory constraints on entry, and the holdings of the relevant court cases
regarding entry. The right -of -entry authorized by this chapter shall not supersede those legal
constraints.
1. . The Director or his or her representative may request that the police, appropriate fire
district, Spokane Regional I-Iealth District or other appropriate City department or other non -city
agency assist in enforcement.
1.4.406.035 — Guidelines for departmental responses to complaints.
A. The following guidelines should be applied by the Director, subject to resource
limitations, when responding to code compliance complaints. The timelines identified below
may be modified by Department rule, subject to council review and approval.
1. I-Iigh risk investigations needing an urgent response (within 24 hours) include any
cases in which there is an imminent likelihood of or actual bodily harm, damage to public
resources or facilities, damage to real or personal property, public health exposure or
environmental damage or contamination..
2. Moderate risk investigations needing a prompt response (within 72 hours) include
cases in which there is risk of bodily harm, damage to public resources and/or facilities,
damage to real or personal property, or environmental damage or contamination.
3. Low risk investigations needing response as time permits (within 14 days of
violation being identified by code compliance staff) including cases where the violation is
non - emergent, does not fit within the high risk or moderate risk categories and has only
minor public impacts.
B. The response times set out in this chapter are not jurisdictional, and failure to meet them
in any particular case shall not affect the City's authority to enforce City code provisions with
regard to that case.
C. The Director is authorized to determine, based upon past complaints regarding a property,
subsequent field investigations. and other relevant criteria, whether a complaint is reliable. If the
Director determines a complaint is not reliable, the Director is not obligated to conduct a field
investigation.
14.406.050 — Initial investigation. This chapter sets forth guidelines for more specific
procedures to be used by the Director in implementing this chapter. The guidelines set forth in
this chapter are not jurisdictional, and failure to meet them in any particular case shall not affect
the City's authority to enforce City code provisions with regard to that case.
A. Field verification. Except in emergencies and for low risk case complaints, field
verification should be made if possible prior to, concurrent with, or shortly after notifying the
person responsible for the code violation or alleged code violation. Low risk case complaints
should be acknowledged by sending a letter to the person(s) responsible for the code violation.
6
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
8 -19 -03 with new language
The letter should state that a violation may have occurred, but has not been verified, and should
ask the recipient to contact the person issuing the letter.
B. Advising interested parties of receipt of complaint and/or field investigation.
1. The person responsible for the code violation should be advised of any complaint
by personal contact; phone; posting and mail (return receipt requested).
2. The complainant should be contacted by phone, and if possible, in person during
the field visit.
C. The Director will record all violations in a database system, including a list of all actions
taken on the complaint.
D. To the extent possible, the Department shall check its own records and the records of
other agencies for previous violations on the site of the alleged violation or by the owner or
occupant of the site or such other person as may be responsible for the code violation.
E. Staff undertaking field investigations shall comply with the provisions of this chapter
regarding right of entry.
14.406.060 — Procedures when probable violation is identified.
A. The Director shall determine, based upon information derived from sources such as field
observations, the statements of witnesses, relevant documents and data systems for tracking
violations and applicable City codes, whether or not a violation has occurred. As soon as the
Director has reasonable cause to determine that a violation has occurred, he or she shall
document the violation and promptly notify the person(s) responsible for the code violation.
B. Except as provided in subsection D, a warning shall be issued verbally or in writing
promptly when a field inspection reveals a violation, or as soon as the Director otherwise
determines a violation has occurred. The warning shall inform the person determined to be
responsible for a code violation of the violation and allow the person an opportunity to correct it
or enter into a voluntary compliance agreement as provided for by this chapter. Verbal warnings
shall be logged and followed up with a written warning within five (5) days, and the site shall be
re- inspected within fourteen (14) days.
C. No warning need be issued in high risk cases, emergencies, repeat violation cases, cases
that are already subject to a voluntary compliance agreement, cases where the violation creates
or has created a situation or condition that is not likely to be corrected within seventy -two (72)
hours, cases where a stop work order is necessary, or when the person responsible for the code
violation knows, or reasonably should have known that the action was a civil code violation.
D. Citations may be issued in moderate and low risk cases, provided that the Director
determines it is probable that the violation can likely be fully corrected in a short period of time.
E. Notice and orders should be issued in all high risk cases in which a voluntary compliance
agreement has not been entered into within two (2) days of notification by the. Director. Notice
-7-
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
8 -19 -03 with new language
and orders may be issued in moderate and low risk cases where the Director determines that the
violation is unlikely to be fully corrected in a short period of time.
F. The Director shall use all reasonable means to determine and cite the person actually
responsible for the code violation occurring when the property owner has not directly or
indirectly caused the violation.
G. If the violation is not corrected, or a voluntary compliance agreement is not achieved
within fifteen (15) days of notification by the Director, a notice and order or stop work order
should be issued. Citations should be issued within fifteen (15) days from receipt of a complaint.
Notice and orders should be issued within twenty (20) days from receipt of a complaint. Stop
work orders should be issued promptly upon discovery of a violation in progress.
H. All complainants will be. asked by staff at the time the complaint is filed whether they
wish to be kept advised of enforcement efforts. Any complainant who provides a mailing
address and requests to be kept advised of enforcement efforts should be mailed a copy of all
written warnings, voluntary compliance agreements, citations, notice and orders, stop work
orders and notices of settlement conferences issued by the Director with regard to the alleged
violation. Any complainant may appeal a determination of code compliance issued by the
Director pursuant to SVZC 14.406.095.
14.406.070 — Service — citation, notice and order, and stop work order.
A. Service of a citation or notice and order shall be made on a person responsible for code
violation by one or more of the following methods:
1. Personal service of a citation or notice and order may be made on the person
identified by the Department as being responsible for the code violation, or by leaving a
copy of the citation or notice and order at the person's house of usual abode with a person
of suitable age and discretion who resides there;
2. Service directed to the landowner and /or occupant of the property may be made
by posting the citation or notice and order in a conspicuous place on the property where
the violation occurred and concurrently mailing notice as provided for below, if a mailing
address is available;
3. Service by mail may be made for a citation or a notice and order by mailing two
copies, postage prepaid, one by ordinary first class mail and the other by certified mail, to
the person responsible for the code violation at his or her last known address, at the
address of the violation, or at the address of the place of business of the person
responsible for the code violation. The taxpayer's address as shown on the tax records of
Spokane County shall be deemed to be the proper address for the purpose of mailing such
notice to the landowner of the property where the violation occurred. Service by mail
shall be presumed effective upon the third business day following the day upon which the
citation or notice and order was placed in the mail.
B. For notice and orders only, when the address of the person responsible for the code
violation cannot be reasonably determined, service may be made by publication once in the
-8
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskcll
8- 19-03 with new language
City's newspaper of record. Service by publication shall conform to the requirements of Civil
Rule 4 of the Rules for Superior Court.
C. Service of a stop work order on a person responsible for a code violation may be made by
posting the stop work order in a conspicuous place on the property where the violation occurred
or by serving the stop work order in any other manner permitted by this chapter.
D. The failure of the Director to make or attempt service on any person named in the
citation, notice and order or stop work order shall not invalidate any proceedings as to any other
person duly served.
14.406.080 — Training and rulcmaking.
A. In order to ensure strict conformity with the constraints on entry imposed by state and
federal law, and to ensure that City employees deal with the public in a manner which respects
the rights of private property owners, the Director shall develop and adopt internal procedures,
protocols and training programs governing the conduct of searches by compliance officers.
13. The Director shall adopt procedures to implement the provisions of this chapter, and
specifically the guidelines set out in this chapter describing.reasonable and appropriate protocols
for investigating code violations.
14.406.090 — Obligations of persons responsible for code violation.
A. It shall be the responsibility of any person identified as responsible for code a violation to
bring the property into a safe and reasonable condition to achieve code compliance. Payment of
civil penalties, applications for permits, acknowledgement of stop work orders and compliance
with other remedies does not substitute for performing the corrective work required and having
the property brought into compliance to the extent reasonably possible under the circumstances.
B. Persons determined to be responsible for a code violation pursuant to a citation or notice
and order shall be liable for the payment of any civil penalties and abatement costs, provided
however, that if a property owner affirmatively demonstrates that the action which resulted in the
violation was taken without the owner's knowledge or consent by someone other than the owner
or someone acting on the owner's behalf, that owner shall be responsible only for bringing the
property into compliance to the extent reasonably feasible under the circumstances. Should the
owner not correct the violation, only those abatement costs necessary to bring the property into a
safe and reasonable condition, as determined by the Director, shall be assessed by the City. No
civil penalties shall be assessed against such an owner or his or her property interest.
14.406.095 — Determination of compliance. After issuance of a warning, citation, voluntary
compliance agreement, citation, notice and order, or stop work order, and after the person(s)
responsible for a code violation have come into zoning code compliance to the satisfaction of the
Director, the Director shall issue a written determination of compliance. The Director shall mail
copies of the determination of compliance to each person originally named in the warning,
voluntary compliance agreement, citation, notice and order, or stop work order, as well as the
complainant, by certified mail, five -day return receipt requested.
Proposed slinff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8-26 -03 — C. Driskell
8 -19 -03 with new language •
14.406.100— Voluntary compliance agreement — authority.
A. Whenever the Director determines that a code violation has occurred or is occurring, the
Director shall make reasonable efforts to secure voluntary compliance from the person
responsible for the code violation. Upon contacting the person responsible for the code
violation, the Director may enter into a voluntary compliance agreement as provided for in this
chapter.
B. A voluntary compliance agreement may be entered into at any time after issuance of a
verbal or written warning, a citation, notice and order or a stop work order and before an appeal
is decided pursuant to SVZC 14.406.630.
C. Upon entering into a voluntary compliance agreement, a person responsible for a code
violation waives the right to administratively appeal, and thereby admits that the conditions
described in the voluntary compliance agreement existed and constituted a civil code violation.
D. The voluntary compliance agreement shall incorporate the shortest reasonable time
period for compliance, as determined by the Director. An extension of the time limit for
compliance, or a modification of the required corrective action may be granted by the Director if
the person responsible for the code violation has shown due diligence or substantial progress in
correcting the violation, but circumstances render full and timely compliance under the original
conditions unattainable. Any such extension or modification must be in writing and signed by
the Director and person(s) who signed the original voluntary compliance agreement.
� =1
L"
E. The voluntary compliance agreement is not a settlement agreement.
J
14.406.110 — Voluntary compliance agreement — contents.
A. The voluntary compliance agreement is a written, signed commitment by the person(s)
responsible for a code violation in which such person(s) agrees to abate the violation, remediate
the site, and/or mitigate the impacts of the violation. The voluntary compliance agreement shall
include the following:
1. The name and address of the person responsible for the code violation;
2. The address or other identification of the location of the violation;
3. A description of the violation and a reference to the provision(s) of the ordinance,
resolution or regulation which has been violated;
4. A description of the necessary corrective action to be taken and identification of
the date or time by which compliance must be completed;
5. The amount of the civil penalty that will be imposed pursuant to SVZC
14.406.500 i.f the voluntary compliance agreement is not satisfied;
6. An acknowledgement that if the Director determines that the terns of the
voluntary compliance agreement are -not met, the City may, without issuing a citation,
- 10-
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
8 -19 -03 with new language
notice and order or stop work order, impose any remedy authorized by this chapter, enter
the real property and perform abatement of the violation by the City, assess the costs
incurred by the City to pursue code compliance and to abate the violation, including
reasonable legal fees and costs, and the suspension, revocation or limitation of a
development permit obtained or to be sought by the person responsible for the code
violation;
7. An acknowledgement that if a penalty is assessed, and if any assessed penalty, fee
or cost is not paid, the Director may charge the unpaid amount as a lien against the
property where the civil code violation occurred if owned by the person responsible for
the code violation, and that the unpaid amount may be a joint and several personal
obligation of all persons responsible for the code violation;
8. An acknowledgement that by entering into the voluntary compliance agreement,
the person responsible for the code violation thereby admits that the conditions described
in the voluntary compliance agreement existed and constituted a civil code violation; and
9. An acknowledgement that the person responsible for the code violation
understands that he or she has the right to be served with a citation, notice and order, or
stop work order for any violation identified in the voluntary compliance agreement, has
the right to administratively appeal any such citation, notice and order, or stop. work
order, and that he or she is knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waiving those rights.
14.406.120 — Failure to meet terms of voluntary compliance agreement.
A. If the terms of the voluntary compliance agreement are not completely met, and an
extension of time has not been granted, the Director may enter the real property and abate the
violation without seeking a judicial abatement order. The person responsible for code
compliance may, without being issued a citation, notice and order, or stop work order, be
assessed a civil penalty as set forth by this chapter, plus all costs incurred by the City to pursue
code compliance and to abate the violation, and may be subject to other remedies authorized by
this chapter. Penalties imposed when a voluntary compliance agreement is not met accrue from
the date that an appeal of any preceding citation, notice and order, or stop work order was to
have been filed or from the date the voluntary compliance agreement was entered into if there
was not preceding citation, notice and order, or stop work order.
B. The Director may issue a citation, notice and order, or stop work order for failure to meet
the terms of a voluntary compliance agreement.
14.406.200 — Citations — authority. Whenever the Director has determined, based upon
investigation of documents and/or physical evidence, that a civil code violation has occurred, the
Director may issue a citation to any person responsible for code violation. The Director shall
make a determination whether or not to issue a citation within fifteen (15) days of receiving a
complaint alleging a violation or otherwise discovering that a violation may potentially exist.
Subsequent complaints shall be treated as new complaints for purposes of this chapter.
1-Iowever, such subsequent complaints shall not constitute a separate violation to which the
penalties of this chapter apply.
A. A citation represents a determination that a civil code violation has occurred and that the
cited party is a person responsible for a code violation.
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8-26-03 — C. Driskell
. 8 -19 -03 with new language
14.406.210 — Citations — effect.
B. A citation subjects the person responsible for a code violation to the civil penalties
prescribed by SVZC 14.406.500.
C. The person responsible for a code violation shall either pay the civil penalties assessed
within twenty (20) days of the date of issuance of the citation, or appeal the citation according to
the procedures described in SVZC 14.406.600 -630.
D. Failure to appeal the citation within twenty (20) days shall render the citation a final
determination that the conditions described in the citation existed and constituted a civil code
violation and that the cited party is liable as a person responsible for a code violation.
F. Imposition of a civil penalty creates a joint and several personal obligation in all persons
responsible for a code violation who are served with notice of the violation. The Office of the
City Attorney, on behalf of the City of Spokane Valley may collect the civil penalties assessed
by any appropriate legal means.
F. Issuance of a citation in no way limits the Director's authority to issue a notice and order
or stop work order to any person responsible for a code violation pursuant to this chapter.
14.406.220 — Citation — contents. The citation shall include all of the following information:
A. The address, when available, or location of the civil code violation;
13. A legal description of the real property or the Spokane County tax parcel number where
the violation occurred or is located, or a description identifying the property by commonly used
locators;
C. A statement that the Director has found the named person(s) to have conun.itted a civil
code violation and a brief description of the violation(s) found;
D. A statement of the specific ordinance, resolution, regulation, public rule, permit
condition, notice and order provision or stop work order provision that was or is being violated;
L. A statement that the citation represents a determination that a civil code violation has
occurred and that the cited party is subject to a civil penalty;
F. A statement of the amount of the civil penalty assessed, that payment of the civil
penalties assessed under this chapter does not relieve a person found to be responsible for a code
violation of his or her duty to correct the violation and/or to pay any and all civil penalties or
other cost assessments issued pursuant to this chapter, and that the penalty must be paid within
twenty (20) days, i f not appealed pursuant to SVZC 14.406.600 -630;
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
8 -19 -03 with new language •
F. A statement of the corrective or abatement action required to be taken and that all
required permits to perform the corrective action must be obtained from the proper issuing
agency;
G. A statement advising that any person named in the citation, or having any record or
equitable title in the property against which the citation is issued may appeal from the citation to
the Hearing Examiner within twenty (20) days of the date of service of the citation;
H. A statement advising that a failure to appeal the citation within twenty (20) days renders
the citation a final determination that the conditions described in the citation existed and
constituted a civil code violation, and that the named party is liable as a person responsible for a
code violation; and
I. A statement advising that a willful and knowing violation may be referred to the Office
of the City Attorney for prosecution pursuant to SVZC 14.406.025.
14.406.230 — Citation — modification or revocation.
A. The Director may add to, revoke in whole or in part, or otherwise modify a citation by
issuing a written supplemental citation. The supplemental citation shall be governed by the same
procedures and time limits applicable all citations contained in this chapter.
B. The Director may issue a supplemental citation, or revoke a citation issued under this
chapter:
1. if the original citation was issued in error;
2. whenever there is new information or change of circumstances; or
3. if a party to a citation was incorrectly named.
C. Such revocation or modification shall identify the reasons and underlying facts for
modification or revocation, and shall be served on the person responsible for a code violation in
conformity with this chapter.
14.406.240 — Citation — remedy — civil penalties. A citation shall carry a civil penalty to be
determined with reference to the schedule contained in SVZC 14.406.500.
14.406.300 — Notice and order — authority. When the Director has reason to believe, based on
investigation of documents and/or physical evidence, that a code violation exists or has occurred,
or that the civil code violations cited in a citation have not been corrected, or that the terms of a
voluntary compliance agreement have not been met, the Director is authorized to issue a notice
and order to any person responsible for a code violation. The Director shall make a
determination whether or not to issue a notice and order within twenty (20) days of receiving a
complaint alleging a violation or otherwise discovering that a violation may potentially exist, or
within ten (10) days of the end of a voluntary compliance agreement time period which has not
been met. Subsequent complaints shall be treated as new complaints for the purposes of this
chapter. Issuance of a citation is not a condition precedent to the issuance of a notice and order.
- 13 -
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
8 -19 -03 with new language •
14..406.305 — Noticc and order — effect.
A. A notice and order represents a determination that a civil code violation has occurred,
that the cited party is a person responsible for a code violation, and that the violations set out in
the notice and order require the assessment of penalties and other remedies that may be specified
in the notice and order.
13. Upon a determination by the Director that a civil code violation has occurred pursuant to
a notice and order, the Director is authorized to impose appropriate civil penalties pursuant to
SVZC 14.406.500 -580.
C. Any person identified in the notice and order as responsible for a code violation may
appeal the notice and order within twenty (20) days according to the procedures described in
SVZC 14.406.600 -630.
D. Failure to appeal the notice and order within the applicable time limits shall render the
notice and order a final determination that the conditions described in the notice and order
existed and constituted a civil code violation, and that the named party is liable as a person
responsible for a code violation.
E. Issuance of a notice and order in no way limits a Director's authority to issue a citation or
stop work order to a person previously cited through the notice and order process pursuant to this
chapter.
14.406.310 — Noticc and order — contents. The notice and order shall contain the following
information:
A. The address, when available, or location of the civil code violation;
B. A legal description of the real property or the Spokane County tax parcel number where
. the violation occurred or is located, or a description identifying the property by conunonly used
locators;
C. A statement that the Director has found the named person(s) to have committed a civil
code violation and a brief description of the violation(s) found;
D. A statement of the specific provisions of the ordinance, resolution, regulation, public rule,
permit condition, notice and order provision or stop work order that was or is being violated;
E. A statement that a civil penalty is being assessed, including the dollar amount of the civil
penalties per separate violation, and that any assessed penalties must be paid within twenty (20)
days of service of the notice and order;
F. A statement advising that any costs of 'enforcement incurred by the City shall also be
assessed against the person to whom the notice and order is directed;
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
8 -19 -03 with new language
G. A statement that payment of the civil penalties assessed under this chapter does not
relieve a person found to be responsible fora code violation of his or her duty to correct the
violation and /or to pay any and all civil penalties or other cost assessments issued pursuant to
this chapter;
H. A statement advising that the notice and order will be recorded against the property in the
Spokane County Auditor's Office subsequent to service;
1. A statement of the corrective or abatement action required to be taken and that all
required permits to perform the corrective action must be obtained from the proper issuing
agency;
J. A statement advising that, if any required work is not commenced or completed within
the time specified by the notice and order, the Director may proceed to seek. a judicial abatement
order from Spokane County Superior Court to abate the violation pursuant to SVZC 14.406.580;
K. A statement advising that, if any assessed penalty, fee or cost is not paid on or before the
due date, the Director may charge the unpaid amount as a lien against the property where the
civil code violation occurred if owned by a person responsible for a code violation, and as a joint
and several personal obligation of all persons responsible for a code violation;
L. A statement advising that any person named in the notice and order, or having any record
or equitable title in the property against which the notice and order is recorded may appeal from
the notice and order to the I- Tearing Examiner within twenty (20) days of the date of service of
the notice and order;
M. A statement advising that a failure to correct the violations cited in the notice and order
could lead to the denial of subsequent Spokane Valley permit applications on the subject
property;
N. A statement advising that a failure to appeal the notice and order within the applicable
time limits renders the notice and order a final determination that the conditions described in the
notice and order existed and constituted a civil code violation, and that the named party is liable
as a person responsible for a code violation; and
O. A statement advising the person responsible for a code violation of his/her duty to notify
the Director of any actions taken to achieve compliance with the notice and order..
P. A statement advising that a willful and knowing violation may be referred to the Office
of the City Attorney for prosecution pursuant to SVZC 14.406.025.
14.406.320 — Notice and order — recording.
A. When a notice and order is served on a person responsible for a code violation, the
Director shall file a copy of the same with the Spokane County Auditor's Office.
B. When all violations specified in the notice and order have been corrected or abated to the
satisfaction of the Director, the Director shall file a certificate of compliance with the Spokane
- 15 -
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
•
8 -19 -03 with new language
County Auditor's Office within five days of receiving evidence of abatement. The certificate
shall include a legal description of the property where the violation occurred and shall state
whether any unpaid civil penalties for which liens have been filed are still outstanding and if so,
shall continue as liens on the property.
C. After all liens have been satisfied, the Director shall file a notice of satisfaction of lien
with the Spokane County Auditor's Office within five days of final payment to City.
14.406.330 — Notice and order — supplementation, revocation, modification.
. A. The Director may add to, revoke in whole or in part, or otherwise modify a notice and
order by issuing a written supplemental notice and order. The supplemental notice and order
shall be governed by the same procedures and time limits applicable to all notice and orders
contained in this chapter.
B. The Director may issue a supplemental notice and order, or revoke a notice and order
issued under this chapter:
If the original notice and order was issued in error;
2. Whenever there is new information or change of circumstances; or
3. If a party to an order was incorrectly named.
C. Such revocation or modification shall identify the reasons and underlying facts for
modification or revocation, and shall be. filed with the Spokane County Auditor's Office.
14.406.335 — Notice and order - administrative conference. An informal administrative
conference may be conducted by the Director at any time for the purpose of facilitating
communication among concerned persons and providing a forum for efficient resolution of any
violation. Interested parties shall not unreasonably be excluded from such conferences.
14.406.340 — Notice and order — remedies — suspension, revocation or limitation of permit.
A. The Director may suspend revoke or modify any permit issued by such Director
whenever:
1. The permit holder has committed a code violation in the course of performing
activities subject to that permit;
2. The permit holder has interfered with the Director in the performance of his or her
duties related to that permit;
3. The permit was issued in error or on the basis of materially incorrect information
supplied to the City;
4. permit fees or costs were paid to the City. by check and returned from a financial
institution marked non - sufficient funds (NSF) or canceled; or
- 16 -
Proposed staffdraf. Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
8 -19 -03 with new language
5. For a permit or approval that is subject to sensitive area review, the applicant has
failed to disclose a change of circumstances on the development proposal site which
materially affects an applicant's ability to meet the permit or approval conditions, or
which makes inaccurate the sensitive area study that was the basis for establishing permit
or approval conditions.
B. Such suspension, revocation, or modification shall be carried out through the notice and
order provisions of this chapter and shall be effective upon the compliance date established by
the notice and order. Such suspension, revocation or modification may be appealed to the
Wearing Examiner using the appeal provisions of this chapter.
C. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Director may immediately
suspend operations under any permit by issuing a stop work order pursuant to SVZC 14.406.400-
430.
14.406.350 — Notice and order — remedies — denial of permit.
A. The City may deny a development proposal permit when, with regard to the site or
project for which the permit is submitted:
1. Any person owning the property or submitting the development proposal has been
found in violation of any ordinance, resolution, regulation or public rule of the City that
regulates or protects the public health, safety and welfare, or the use and development of
land and water; and /or
2. Any person owning the property or submitting the development proposal has been
found in violation and remains in violation of the conditions of any permit, notice and
order or stop work order issued pursuant to any such ordinance, resolution, regulation or
public rule; and/or
B. In order to further the remedial purposes of this chapter, such denial may continue until
the violation is cured by restoration accepted as complete by the City and by payment of any
civil penalty imposed for the violation, except that permits or approvals shall be granted to the
extent necessary to accomplish any required restoration or cure.
14.406.360 — Notice and order — remedies — abatement. In addition, or as an alternative, to
any other judicial or administrative remedy, the Director may use the notice and order provisions
of this chapter to order any person responsible for a code violation to abate the violation and to
complete the work at such time and under such conditions as the Director determines reasonable
under the circumstances. If the required corrective work is not commenced or completed within
the time specified, the Director may seek a judicial abatement order pursuant to this chapter.
14.406.400 — Stop work order — authorized. The Director is authorized to issue a stop work
order to a person responsible for a code violation. Issuance of a citation or notice and order is
not a condition precedent to the issuance of the stop work order.
14.406.410 — Stop work order — effect.
- 17 -
L Citations
$250
2. Notice and orders.and stop work orders
a. basic initial penalty
S500
b. additional initial penalties may be added where there is:
1. public health risk — amount depends on severity
$0 -2,500
2. environmental damage - amount depends on severity
$0 -2,500
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
8 -I9 -03 with new language
A. A stop work order represents a determination that a civil code violation has occurred or is
occurring, and that any work or activity that caused, is causing or contributing to the violation on
the property where the violation has occurred, or is occurring, must cease.
B. A stop work order requires the immediate cessation of the specified work or activity on
the named property. Work activity may not resume unless specifically authorized in writing by
the Director.
C. A stop work order may be appealed according to the procedures prescribed by SVZC
14.406.600 -630.
D. Failure to appeal the stop work order within twenty (20) days renders the stop work order
a final determination that the civil code violation occurred and that work was properly ordered to
cease.
E. A stop work order may be enforced by the City Police.
14.406.420 — Stop work order — remedy — civil penalties.
A. In addition to any other judicial or administrative remedy, the Director may assess civil
penalties for the violation of any stop work order according to the civil penalty schedule
established i.n SVZC 14.406.500.
B. Civil penalties for the violation of any stop work order shall begin to accrue on the first
day the stop work order is violated, and shall cease accruing on the day the work is actually
stopped.
C. Violation of a stop work order shall be a separate violation from any other civil code
violation.
14.406.430 — Stop work order — remedy — criminal penalties. In addition to any other judicial
or administrative remedy, the Director may forward to the Office of City Attorney a detailed
factual background of the alleged violation with a recommendation that a misdemeanor charge
be filed against the person(s) responsible for any willful violation of a stop work order.
14.406.500 — Civil penalties — assessment schedule.
A. Civil penalties for civil code violations shall be imposed for remedial purposes and shall
be assessed for each violation identified in a citation, notice and order or stop work order,
pursuant to the following schedule:
- 18 -
3. damage to property - amount depends on severity
$0 -2,500
4. history of similar violations (less than three)
$0 -1,000
5. history of similar violations (three or more)
$0 -5,000
6. economic benefit to person responsible for violation
$0 -5,000
c. the above penalties may be offset by the following compliance
1. full compliance with a voluntary compliance agreement
with prior history of 0 -1 similar violations
$0 -1,500
2. full compliance with a voluntary compliance agreement
and a history of two or more prior similar violations
$0 -250
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 - 26 - 03 — C. Driskell
B. The total initial penalties assessed for notice and orders and stop work orders pursuant to
this chapter shall apply for the first thirty day period following issuance of the order, unless
another time period is specified in a voluntary compliance agreement. If a voluntary compliance
agreement is not entered into within that time period, and no appeal is filed, the penalties for the
next fifteen day period shall be one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the initial penalties, and the
penalties for the next fifteen day period shall be two hundred percent (200 %) the amount of the
initial penalties. The intent of this subsection is to increase penalties beyond the maximum
penalties stated in SVZC 14.406.500(A) as an additional means to achieve timely compliance.
C. Citations shall be subject to a one -time penalty per violation. The Director retains
authority to issue a subsequent notice and order or stop work order for continued non-
compliance. In that event, additional penalties shall be imposed.
D. Civil penalties shall be paid within twenty (20) days of service of the citation, notice and
order or stop work order if not appealed. Payment of the civil penalties assessed under this
chapter does not relieve a person found to be responsible for a code violation of his or her duty to
correct the violation and/or to pay any and all civil penalties or other cost assessments issued
pursuant to this chapter.
E. The Director may suspend civil penalties pursuant to SVZC 14.406.500(A)(c) if the
person responsible for a code violation has entered into a voluntary compliance agreement.
Penalties shall begin to accrue again pursuant to the terms of the voluntary compliance
agreement if any necessary permits applied for are denied, canceled or not pursued, or if
corrective action identified in the voluntary compliance agreement is not completed as specified.
F. Civil penalties assessed create a joint and several personal obligation in all persons
responsible for a code violation.
G. In addition to, or in lieu of, any other state or local provision for the recovery of civil
penalties, the City may file for record with the Spokane County Auditor to claim a lien against
the real property for the civil penalties assessed under this chapter if the violation was reasonably
related to the real property. Any such lien can be filed under this chapter if, after the expiration
of thirty (30) days from when a person responsible for a code violation receives the citation,
notice and order or stop work order (excluding any appeal) any civil penalties remain unpaid in
whole or in part.
-19
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
8 -19 -03 with new language
14.406.520 - Civil penalties — duty to comply. Persons responsible for code violation have a
duty to notify the Director in writing of any actions taken to achieve compliance with the notice
and order. For purposes of assessing civil penalties, a violation shall be considered ongoing until
the person responsible for a code violation has cone into compliance with the notice and order,
voluntary compliance agreement, or stop work order, and has provided sufficient evidence of
such compliance.
1.4.406.530 - Civil penalties — community service. The Director is authorized to allow a person
responsible for a code violation who accumulates civil penalties as a result of a citation, notice
and order, or for failure to comply with the terms of a voluntary compliance agreement, to
voluntarily participate in community service projects in lieu of paying all or a portion of the
assessed civil penalties. Community service may include, but is not limited to; abatement,
restoration or education programs designed to clean up the City. The amount of community
service will reasonably relate to the comparable value of penalties assessed against the violator.
The rate at which civil penalties are worked off under this subsection is $ 10.00 per hour. The
Director shall take into consideration the severity of the violation, any history of previous
violations and practical and legal impediments in considering whether to allow community
service in lieu of paying penalties.
14.406.540 - Civil penalties — waivers.
A. Civil penalties may be waived or reimbursed to the payor by the Director under the
following circumstances:
1. The citation, notice and order or stop work order was issued in error; or
2. The civil penalties were assessed in error; or
3. Notice failed to reach the property owner due to unusual circumstances; or
4. New, material information warranting waiver has been presented to the Director
since the citation, notice and order or stop work order was issued.
B. The Director shall state in writing the basis for a decision to waive penalties, and such
statement shall become part of the public record unless privileged.
14.406.550 - Civil penalties — critical areas.
A. The code compliance provisions for critical areas are intended to protect critical areas and
the general public from harm, to meet the requirements of RCW 36.70A (the Growth
Management Act), and to farther the remedial purposes of this chapter. To achieve this, persons
responsible for a code violation will not only be required to restore damaged critical areas,
insofar as that is possible and beneficial, but will also be required to pay a civil penalty for the
redress of ecological, recreation, and economic values lost or damaged due to their unlawful
action.
B. The provisions of S \'ZC 14.406.550 are in addition to, and not in lieu of any other
penalty, sanction or right of action provided by law for other related violations.
-20-
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
8 -19 -03 with new language
C. Where feasible, the owner of the land on which the violation occurred shall be named as
a party to the notice and order. In addition to any other persons who may be liable for a
violation, and subject to the exceptions provided in SVZC 14.406.090, the owner shall be jointly
and severally liable for the restoration of a site and payment of any civil penalties imposed.
D. For the purposes of SVZC 14.406.550, violation of the critical area ordinance means:
1. The violation of any provision of City Ordinance number 49 (Interim Critical
Areas Ordinance), or of the administrative rules promulgated thereunder. Ordinance
number 49 adopted Spokane County Code, chapter 11.20, as its interim critical areas
regulations;
2. The failure to obtain a permit required for work in a critical area; or
3. The failure to comply with the conditions of any permit, approval, terms and
conditions of any sensitive area tract or setback area, easement, covenant, plat restriction
or binding assurance, or any notice and order, stop work order, mitigation plan, contract
or agreement issued or concluded pursuant to the above- mentioned provisions.
E. Any person in violation of the critical areas ordinance may be subject to civil penalties,
costs and fees as follows:
1. According to the civil penalty schedule under SVZC 14.406.500, provided that
the exact amount of the penalty per violation shall be determined by the Director based
on the physical extent and severity of the violation; or
2. The greater of:
14.406.560 - Cost recovery.
a. an amount determined to be equivalent to the economic benefit that
the person responsible for a code violation derives from the
violation, measured as the total of:
1) the resulting increase in market value of the property;
2) the value received by the person responsible for a code violation;
3) the savings of construction costs realized by the person responsible
for a code violation as a result of performing any act in violation of
the critical area ordinance; or
b. code compliance costs (such amount not to exceed $25,000) incurred by
the city to enforce City Ordinance number 49 (Interim Critical Areas
Ordinance) against the person responsible for a code violation.
A. In addition to the other remedies available under this chapter, upon issuance of a notice
and order or stop work order the Director shall charge the costs of pursuing code compliance and
21-
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
8 -19-03 with new language
abatement incurred to correct a code violation to the person responsible for a code violation.
These charges include:
1. Reasonable legal fees and costs. For purposes of SVZC 14.406, "reasonable legal
fees and costs" shall include, but is not limited to legal personnel costs, both direct and indirect,
incurred to enforce the provisions of this chapter; and
2. Administrative personnel costs. For purposes of SVZC 14.406, "administrative
personnel costs" shall include, but are not limited to administrative employee costs, both direct
and indirect, incurred to enforce the provisions of this chapter; and
3. Abatement costs. The Director shall keep an itemized account of costs incurred
by the City in the abatement of a violation under this chapter. Upon completion of any
abatement work, the Director shall prepare a report specifying a legal description of the real
property where the abatement work occurred, the work done for each property, the itemized costs
of the work, and interest accrued; and
4. Actual expenses and costs of the City in preparing notices, specifications and
contracts; in accomplishing or contracting and inspecting the work; and the costs of any required
printing, mailing or court filing fees.
13. Such costs are due and payable thirty (30) days from mailing of the invoice.
C. All costs assessed by the City in pursuing code compliance and/or abatement create a
joint and several personal obligation in all persons responsible for a code violation. The Office
of the City Attorney, on behalf of the City, may collect the costs of code compliance efforts by
any appropriate legal means.
D. In addition to, or in lieu of any other state or local provision for the recovery of costs, the
City may, after abating a code violation pursuant to this chapter, file for record with the Spokane
County Auditor to claim a lien against the real property for the assessed costs identified in this
chapter if the violation was reasonably related to the real property. Such a lien shall be
substantially in accordance with the provision regarding mechanic's liens in R.CW 60.04, and
said lien shall be foreclosed in the same manner as such liens.
E. Any lien filed shall be subordinate to all previously existing special assessment liens
imposed on the same property and shall be superior to all other liens, except for state and county
taxes, with which it shall share priority. The City of Spokane Valley may cause a claim for lien to
be fled for record within ninety (90) days from the later of the date that the monetary penalty is due
or the date the work is completed or the nuisance abated. The claim of lien shall contain sufficient
information regarding the notice of violation, a description of the property to be charged with the
lien, the owner of record, and the total of the lien. Any such claim of lien may be amended from
time to time to reflect changed conditions. Any such lien shall bind the affected property for the
period as provided for by state law.
14.406.570 — Collection of civil penalties, fees and costs. The Director may use the services of
a collection agency in order to collect any civil penalties, fees, costs and /or interest owing under
this chapter.
- 22 -
Proposed stall' draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
$ -19 -03 with new language
14.406.580 - Abatement.
A. Emergency Abatement: Whenever a condition, the continued existence of which constitutes
an immediate threat to the public health, safety or welfare or to the environment, is found to exist,
the City may summarily and without prior notice abate the condition. Notice of such abatement,
including the reason for it, shall be given to the person responsible for the violation as soon as
reasonably possible after the abatement.
B. Judicial Abatement: The City may seek a judicial abatement order from Spokane County
Superior Court, as deemed necessary, to .abate a condition which continues to be a violation of the
Spokane Valley Zoning Code where other methods of remedial action have failed to produce
compliance.
C. The City shall seek to recover the costs of abatement as authorized by this chapter.
14.406.590 - Code compliance abatement fund — authorized.
A. All monies collected from the assessment of civil penalties and for abatement costs and
work shall be allocated to support expenditures for abatement, and shall be accounted for
through either creation of an account in the fund for such abatement costs, or other appropriate
accounting mechanism.
B. Funds needed to abate a violation by the City shall be obtained from the abatement fund.
14.406.600 - Administrative appeals — standing - filing requirements.
A. Any person issued a citation or named in a notice and order or stop work order, and any
owner of the land where the violation for which a citation, notice and order or stop work order is
issued occurred, may file a notice of appeal of the following:
1. citation;
2. notice and order;
3. stop work order;
B. A complainant who requests to be kept advised pursuant to SVZC 14.406.060(T) may
appeal a determination of compliance by the Director.
C. A person that does not meet the requirements of SVZC 14.406.600(A) or (B) does not
have standing to appeal under this chapter.
D. Any person filing an appeal under this chapter who was issued a citation or order, or is
the owner of the land where the violation occurred, shall do so by obtaining the appeal form from
the Director and filing the completed appeal form with the Director within twenty (20) days of
service of the citation, notice and order or stop work order. A complainant who appeals the
determination of compliance by the Director must file any such appeal within twenty (20) days
of service of the determination of. compliance.
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
•8 -19 -03 with new language
E. Any administrative appeal considered under this chapter will be determined by the
Hearings Examiner pursuant to Spokane. Valley Ordinance 57, unless in conflict with specific
provisions of this chapter, in which case the specific provisions of this chapter shall control.
14.406.610 — Administrative appeal — notice of hearing. Upon receipt of a notice of appeal,
the City shall provide a hearing notice stating the time, location and date of the hearing on the
issues identified on the violation, notice and order or stop work order. The City shall mail this
notice by certified mail, five -day return receipt requested, to the person(s) responsible for a
violation.
14.406.620 - Administrative appeal — procedures.
A. The appeal hearing shall be conducted as provided for in Spokane Valley Ordinance 57
as adopted or hereafter amended.
B. Enforcement of any notice and order of the Director issued pursuant to this chapter shall
be stayed as to the appealing party during the pendency of any administrative appeal under this
chapter,' except when the Director determines that the violation poses a significant threat of
immediate and/or irreparable harm and so states in any notice and order issued.
C. Enforcement of any stop work order issued pursuant to this chapter shall not be stayed
during the pendency of any administrative appeal under this title.
t "1 D. When multiple citations, notices and order or stop work orders have been issued
simultaneously for any set of facts constituting a violation, only one appeal of all the
enforcement actions shall be allowed.
14.406.630 — Administrative appeal — final order.
A. Following review of the evidence submitted, the Hearing Examiner shall issue a written
order containing findings and conclusions, and shall affirm or modify the citation, notice and
order or stop work order previously issued if the Hearing Examiner finds that a violation has
occurred. The Hearing Examiner shall uphold the appeal and reverse the citation or order if the
examiner finds that no violation occurred.
B. If an owner of property where the violation has occurred has affirmatively demonstrated
that the violation was caused by another person or entity not the agent of the property owner and
without the owner's knowledge or consent, such property owner shall be responsible only for
abatement of the violation. Strict compliance with permit requirements may he waived regarding
the performance of such abatement in order to avoid doing substantial injustice to a non - culpable
property owner.
C. The Hearing Examiner's final order shall be final and conclusive unless proceedings for
review of the decision are properly commenced in Spokane County Superior Court within the
time period specified by applicable state law.
D. A final order by the Hearing Examiner affirming, revoking or modifying a citation, notice
and order or stop work order is a final decision.
- 24 -
Proposed staff draft Zoning Code Compliance for first reading 8 -26 -03 — C. Driskell
8 -19 -03 with new language
14.406.640 - Judicial enforcement — petition for enforcement.
A. In addition to ,any other judicial or administrative remedy, the Office of the City
Attorney, on behalf of the City, may seek enforcement of the Director's order by filing a petition
for enforcement in Spokane County Superior Court.
B. The petition must name as respondent each person against whom the Director seeks to
obtain civil enforcement.
C. A petition for civil enforcement may request monetary relief, declaratory relief,
temporary or permanent injunctive relief, and any other civil remedy provided by law, or any
combination of the foregoing.
14.406.650 - Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance, or any
regulation, rule or order adopted pursuant to the authority thereof be determined invalid or
unconstitutional, it shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence,
clause or phrase of this ordinance.
14.406.660 — Effective date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after
publication of this ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City as
provided by law.
CITY OF SPOKANE ''ALLEY
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. 57 -A
AN ORDB' ANCE OF THE CffY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY,
WASBJT TON, AMENDING. ORDINANCE NO. 57 ENTITLED AN ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WAS.FQNGTON, ESTABLISILIN T.H.E. OFFICE
Or THE BEARING EXAMINER, ADOPTING A FC£ARING EXAMINER SYSTEM
CONFERINC J IJIi1.S ICT!ON AND PROVIDE FOR RULES AND REGULATIONS."
WHEREAS, following the incorporation of the City of Spokane Valley, various Ordinances
have been reviewed and revised in an effort to facilitate the operations of the City; and
WHEREAS, upon review, it has been determined that Ordinance No. 57 relating to the
hearing examiner system should he amended in order to clarify and modify the legal ef=fect and
appeal process for certain land use decisions; and
WHEREAS, s uch modifications will facilitate the land use hearing and permitting process in
a manner that best serves the interest of the community. •
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane Counry,
Washington, do ordain as follows:
Section 1. Amenditeut,CJrdinance No. 57, Section 11 is hereby amended as follows. __ -H oeIetfd; _
ection 11, Decision -Le a gl Effect. The Examiner will receive and
ex arninc available information, ]make site visits, take official notice of matters,
conduct public bearings, prepare a record thereof, and enter findings, decision or
recommendations as provided in this section,
A. The decision of the Examiner on the following matters shall be final
and conclusive and have the effect of a final decision of the City Council_
1. Applications for variances;
2. Conditional arc permits;
1 Special use permits;
4. Shoreline Permits, when a public hearing is required;
5_ Preliminary Rlal :
6. __Appeals from any administrative decision of the Department
of Planning in the administrati enforcement ofthe Zoniris Cock
or other land use code or regulation; r , '{ DEt Eta d 9
C:1Doeuma,t5 and S tt n els]arsoiaocal Ssttingsl'I`cmporury tmenLee FleskOLKAAlOrdinanco No S? A -dnc
• — -{ Formatted: t3uIIQu and Numbering 1
1
7. Appeals on Statc Environmental Policy Act determinations. - — --( Formatted: But1ers and Numbering
B. The decision of the Examiner on the following matters shall be given
the effect of an administrative decision appealable to the City Council:
1. Site specific zone changes of property, including any
environmental determination (under SEPA);
2. Planned unit developments, including any environmental
determination (under SEPA); and
Any other applications or appeals that the City Council may
refer by motion or ordinance, specifically declaring the
Hearing Examiner can he appealed to the City Council.
C. The decision of a matter listed in Paragraph A above, except for a
shoreline permit, shall be given the effect of an administrative decision appealable to
the City Council., if it is related to a decision on a matter listed in Paragraph B that
was heard concurrently and that is appealed to the City.
D. In addition to the powers sci forth herein, the Examiner may: .
1. Regulate the course of thc hearing in accord with this
ordinance and other applicable laws and rules;
2. Hold conferences for the settlement or simplification of issues
by consent of the parties;
3. Dispose of procedural requests or similar matters;
4. Take such other action authorized by ordinance.
E. The Examiner is hereby empowered to act in lieu of the Board of
Adjustment, the Planning Commission, and such other official, boards or
commissions as may be assigned, for land use issues listed in Section 9, and other
land use issues authorized by the City Council. Wherever existing ordinances, codes
or policies authorize or direct the City Council, Board of Adjustment, Planning
Commission or other official, boards or commissions to undertake certain activities
which the Examiner has been assigned, such ordinances, codes or policies will be
construed to refer to thc Examiner.
Section 2. Amendment. Ordinance No. 57, Section 15 is hereby amended as follows.
Section 15. Appeals. Unless provided otherwise by this Ordinance or
statute (see RCW Chapter 36.70C and RCW Chapter 90.58), any aggrieved person
may submit a written appeal of the Examiner's Decision to the Council within
fourteen (14) calendar days from the date the final decision of the Examiner is
rendered. Forpurposes of this section an "a,taricved person" means aq_inclividual gr
entity who appeared and submitted testimony or evidence at the hearing before the
F, xarnincr. The Council shall hold a closed -record hearing on the appeal.
C:lDoeumenis and Scttings'slarurn\Local Settings\Tem.porary Internet FilesIOLKAA \Ordinance No 57 A.doc
Deleted: <ttrPrctiminary plms.
including any environmental
determination (under SEPA); raidl
4
effect.
Such written appeal shall allege specific errors of law or fact, specific
procedural errors or errors in the interpretation of the Comprehensive Plan or
development regulations.
Upon such written appeal being filed within the time period allotted and upon
payment of fees as required, a hearing will be held by the City Council. Such hearing
will be held in accord with appeal procedures adopted by the City Council. If the
Examiner has recommended approvals of the proposal, such recommendation will be
considered by the City Council at the sane time as the consideration of the appeal.
The Examiner's decision will be presumed to be correct and supported by the record
and law.
Where the Examiner's Decision recommends a royal of the m.osal and no
appeal has been filed within the time period set. forth above. City staff shall prepare
an ordinance (or other appropriate leeal document) that completes the Examiner's
Decision through final legislative action of the City Council. Such final action. for
zoning purposes, is considered a "official control" of the City by exercise of it's
zoning and planning authority pursuant tq Washington law.
. .
Section 3. Effect. Except as set forth above, Ordinance No. 57 shall remain in full force and
Section 4. Scverability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance shall be
held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence,
clause or phrase of this Ordinance.
Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after
date of publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the. City.
PASSED by the City Council this da�of September 2003. , —( Deleted: t
ATTEST:
Mayor, Michael DeVleming
City Clerk, Chris Bainbridge
C:\Documal s and Settings \slarsnn\Local Settings\Temporuy Internet r1es1OL1:AA \Ordinance No 57 A.doc
Deleted:1
)
Approved as to Form:
Interim City Attorney, Stanley M. Schwartz
Date of Publication:
Effective Date:
C:1Documents and Settingslslarson \Local Settings\Tcmparary Internet Eles \OL.KAA1Ordinunce No 57 A.doc
Meeting Date: September 9, 2003 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply_ C] consent El old business XX new business ❑ public hearing
information ❑ admin. report pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE ' Proposed Junk Vehicle Ordinance
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 4612.101
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request t for Council Action
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: First reading May 27, 2003, tabled by Council at that
time for additional research and community discussion. Study session 9 -2 -03_
BACKGROUND: After the proposed ordinance was tabled on May 27, 2003 extensive work
was done to research similar ordinances from other jurisdictions, to meet with representatives of
potentially affected citizens, and to draft new abatement provisions. The Planning Commission
conducted a public hearing at which testimony was taken_ The revised draft had nearly
unanimous approval from those attending and comment at the public hearing August 14, 2003.
The attached draft is the recommendation of the Planning 'Commission, The Council had a
study session on this 9-2-03, at vvhich no members of the public appeared. One change was
made to Section 4 (d) to add language that the applicable zoning code sections are also
amended to reflect the new junk vehicle ordinance, with an attachment. The new portions are
underlined_
OPTIONS: Not adopt a junk vehicle ordinance and attempt to enforce the existing ordinance
adopted from Spokane County, which does not promote abatement.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to place the proposed junk vehicle ordinance
draft on the September 23, 2003 regular,meeting agenda for second reading.
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This ordinance is intended, and expected to generate a small
amount of revenue, excluding the cost to the City of the Code Enforcement Officer.
STAFF CONTACT: Cary P. Driskell or Marina Sukup
ATTACHMENTS: Proposed administrative draft junk vehicle ordinance; and amended sections
of Zoning Code for Urban Residential zones to remove portions on storage of junk vehicles.
Proposed administrative draft —C. Driskell
September 4, 2003
Draft 8
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,
WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 03 -067
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE
VALLEY, WASHINGTON, REGULATING TIIE STORAGE OF
JUNK VEHICLES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY.
WHEREAS, there currently exists within the City a large number of private
properties where junk vehicles are being permanently stored in violation of existing
Zoning Code provisions;
WHEREAS, the storage of unlicensed and inoperable motor vehicles on private
property creates a public nuisance and interferes with the reasonable use and enjoyment
of property;
'WHEREAS, the storage of junk vehicles on private property poses a threat to the
health, welfare and safety of the citizens of the City, and the City desires to address this
problem;
WHEREAS, enforcement of public nuisances is within the police powers of the
City of Spokane Valley; Washington; and
WHEREAS, the City finds and declares that it is in the best interest of the
residents and inhabitants of the City to remove junk vehicles as public nuisances, and
provide for their abatement through due process.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,
WASHINGTON 170 ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1 — Purpose and intent. The City recognizes the benefit and enjoyment
individuals receive from the repair and rehabilitation of old or inoperable vehicles. It is,
however, the purpose and intent of this ordinance to provide for the removal of junk
vehicles from private property that create an attractive nuisance and negative aesthetic
impact upon property and the community.
SECTION 2 — Definitions.
A. "City" means the City of Spokane Valley, Washington.
B. "Code Enforcement Officer" means a regular or specially commissioned officer
so designated by the Director of Community Development for the City.
c /cpd work files /ordinances /junk vehicles /junk vehicle ordinance - proposed admin draft A for first reading 9 -9 -03
-t-
Proposed administrative draft — C. Driskell
September 4, 2003
Draft 8
C. "Director" means the City Manager or designee, who is anticipated to be Director
of Community Development for the City.
D. "Hearing Examiner" means the hearing examiner for the City.
E. "Impound" for the purposes of this ordinance means to take and hold a vehicle in
legal custody.
F. "inoperable" means incapable of being operated legally on a public highway,
including but not limited to, not having a valid, current registration plate or current
certificate of registration.
G. "Junk vehicle" means a vehicle substantially meeting at least three of the
following criteria:
1. Is three years old or older;
2. Is extensively damaged, such damage including but not limited to any of
the following: a broken window or windshield, missing wheels, tires, motor, or
transmission;
3. Is apparently inoperable;
4. Has an approximate fair market value equal only to the approximate value
of the scrap in it.
H. "Person(s) responsible for a violation" means:
1. The land owner where the junk vehicle is located as shown on the last
equalized assessment roll; and
2. The last registered owner of the vehicle, unless the owner in the transfer of
ownership of the vehicle has complied with RCW 46.12.101; and
3. The legal owner of the vehicle.
1. "Vehicle" for the purposes of this ordinance includes every device capable of
being moved upon a public highway and in, upon, or by which any persons or property is
or may be transported or drawn upon a public highway, including bicycles. The term does
not include devices other than bicycles moved by human or animal power or used
exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks, as set forth in RCW 46.04.670.
SECTION 3 — Abatement and removal of junk vehicles from private property.
Except as provided in Section 4, all junk vehicles placed, stored or permitted to be
located on private property within the City limits are public nuisances to be abated as
provided in this ordinance.
clepd work files/ordinances /junk vchic.Ies/junk vehicle ordinance - proposed admin draft 8 for first reading 9-9 -03
- ')-
Proposed administrative draft — C. Driskell
September 4, 2003
Draft 8
SECTION 4 — Exceptions. This ordinance does not apply to:
A. A vehicle or part thereof that is completely enclosed within a building in a lawful
manner where it is not visible from the street or other public or private property;
B. A vehicle or part thereof that is stored or parked in a lawful manner on private
property in connection with the business of a licensed dismantler or licensed vehicle
dealer, and is fenced according to the provisions of RC`V 46.80.130;
C. A junk vehicle does not include a vehicle which is in the process of being
repaired, as evidenced by the good faith efforts of the vehicle owner. This exception
shall include having up to one "parts" vehicle, from which parts are being salvaged
concurrent with the repair process for the vehicle being excepted from compliance in this
subsection. Good faith efforts of repair can include producing invoices showing work or
parts purchased for repair or renovation within thirty days prior to issuance of the notice
of violation, or a declaration under penalty of perjury that the vehicle is in the process of
being repaired and has been worked on within thirty days prior to issuance of the notice
of violation. This exception allows up to sixty (60) days for good faith repair. Upon
good cause shown, the Director shall have the discretion to grant one additional sixty (60)
day exception period to this ordinance. Under no circumstance shall any good faith
efforts of repair extend for more than 120 days, after which time this exception shall no
longer apply. This exception shall apply to one vehicle and one parts vehicle per parcel
of land per calendar year.
D. There shall be allowed as exceptions to this ordinance up to two (2) junk vehicles
in UR 3.5 and UR 7 zones, so long as they are completely sight - screened by maintained
Type 1 or II landscaping, a maintained landscaped berm, or fencing. Types I and II
landscaping are described in Spokane Valley Zoning Code Section 14.806.060. Junk
vehicles allowed by this exception are restricted to only the UR 3.5 and UR 7 zones.
Concurrent with the ado tion of this Ordinance S okane Valle Zonin ' Code • rovisions
14.616.355 (UR -3.5) 14.618.355 (UR -7), 14.620.355 (UR -12) and 14.622.355 (UR -22)
shall be amended as set forth in Attachments A to this Ordinance
SECTION 5 — Violation notice:
A. A Code Enforcement Officer is authorized to issue and serve a notice of violation
upon reasonable belief that a violation of one or more provisions of this ordinance has
occurred.
B. The notice of violation shall be issued to the person(s) responsible for a violation
of this ordinance. The last legal and registered owner need not be notified if the vehicle
is in such condition that identification numbers are not available to determine ownership.
C. The notice of violation may be served by means of personal service, or by mailing
a copy of the notice of violation to the person(s) responsible for a code violation to his or
c /cpd work files /ordinances /junk vehicles /junk vehicle ordinance - proposed admin draft 8 for first reading 9 -9 -03
-1-
Proposed administrative draft — C. Driskell
September 4, 2003
Draft 8
her last known mailing address as determined by the Code Enforcement Officer by
certified mail, with a five -day return receipt requested. Proof of service shall be made by
a written declaration under penalty of perjury by the person affecting the service,
declaring the time, date, place of service, and the manner by which service was made.
D. The notice of violation shall contain substantially the following information:
1. The name and address of the person to whom the notice of violation is
issued;
2. The location of the subject property by address or other description
sufficient to identify the subject property;
3. A description of the vehicle and its location, and the reasons the City
deems it to be a public nuisance in violation of this ordinance;
4. A description of the corrective action necessary to eliminate the violation;
5. That the corrective action must be performed within fifteen (15) days from
the date of service of the notice of violation;
6. That a hearing will be held by the Hearing Examiner, including the date
and time of the hearing, pursuant to Section 6 of this Ordinance;
7. A statement that if the person(s) responsible ' for a violation fails to
complete the corrective action, the City or its designee shall initiate judicial
abatement proceedings to remove, impound and dispose of the vehicle, and will
assess all costs of administration, court- related costs and removal against the
person(s) responsible for a violation after a hearing by the Hearing Examiner in
which the Hearing Examiner determines that there has been a violation of this
Ordinance;
8. A statement that the land owner upon which the vehicle is located may
appear in person at the hearing, or provide a written statement to the Hearing
Examiner denying responsibility for the presence of the vehicle on the land, with
his or her reasons for the denial;
9. A statement that a person responsible for a violation who voluntarily
complies with or allows abatement within fifteen days of receiving a notice of
violation shall not be assessed a civil monetary penalty; and
10. If the Hearing Examiner determines the appellant is a person responsible
for a violation, a $250 civil monetary penalty will be assessed.
SECTION 6 - Hearing on notice of violation.
ckpd work files /ordinances /junk vehicles /junk vehicle ordinance - proposed admin draft 8 for first reading 9 -9 -03
-4-
Proposed administrative draft — C. Driskell
September 4, 2003
Draft 8
A. A person receiving a notice of violation shall have fifteen (15) days from the date
of service of the notice of violation to voluntarily abate the junk vehicle(s) to avoid
imposition of a civil monetary penalty pursuant to Section 8 of this Ordinance. A hearing
shall be automatically scheduled, to be held after expiration of fifteen (l 5) days service of
the notice of violation. The notice of violation shall state the time, location and date of
the hearing on the issue of imposition of a civil monetary penalty.
B. The person(s) responsible for a violation may appear in person at a hearing or by
submitting a written statement for consideration. If the land owner denies responsibility
for the vehicle being on his or her land, and has provided sufficient written evidence in
support of the denial, the Hearing Examiner is authorized to determine, based upon
available evidence, whether the land owner is responsible for, or acquiesced to, the
presence of the vehicle. if the land owner has not acquiesced in the vehicle's presence,
the Hearing Examiner's order shall state such. In that instance, the land owner shall sign
a written permission form at the time of hearing allowing the City to immediately remove
the junk vehicle from his or her real property. If the land owner fails to sign the
permission form, he or she will be determined to be acquiescing in the vehicle's-presence
on the real property.
C. If the Hearing Examiner determines that a land owner is not responsible for a
vehicle being on his or her property, the City shall not assess costs of administration
(including civil monetary penalties) or nuisance abatement against the real property
where the vehicle is located.
D. The Hearing Examiner may uphold, modify or revoke the notice of violation as
appropriate. The Hearing Examiner shall provide written findings of fact and order
within five business days of the conclusion of the hearing. The Hearing Examiner's
order shall constitute a final action.
E. If the Hearing Examiner upholds the notice of violation, the I- Iearing Examiner
shall impose a civil monetary penalty of S250.
F. A copy of the Hearing Examiner's order shall be served upon the person(s) to
whom it is directed, either personally or by mailing a copy of the order by certified mail,
with a five -day return receipt requested, to such person at his or her last known address as
determined by the code compliance officer. Proof of service shall be made by a written
declaration under penalty of perjury by the person effecting service, stating the time, date,
location and manner by which service was made.
SECTION 7 — Abatement — costs — liens.
A. . Emergency Abatement: Whenever a condition, the continued existence of which
constitutes an immediate threat to the public health, safety or welfare or to the environment,
is found to exist, the City may summarily and without prior notice abate the condition.
Notice of such abatement, including the reason for it, shall be given to the person
responsible for the violation as soon as reasonably possible after the abatement.
cicpd work files /ordinances/junk vehicles/junk vehicle ordinance - proposed admin draft 8 for first reading 9 -9 -03
- 5 -
Proposed administrative draft — C. Driskell
September 4, 2003
Draft 8
B. Judicial Abatement: The City may seek a judicial abatement order from Spokane
County Superior Court, as deemed necessary, to abate a condition which continues to be a
violation of this Ordinance where other methods of remedial action have failed to produce
compliance.
C. The costs, including incidental expenses, of abating the violation shall be billed to
the person responsible for the violation and shall become due and payable to the City within
ten (10) calendar days after completion of abatement. The term incidental expenses
includes but is not limited to personnel costs, both direct and indirect and including
attorneys fees; costs incurred in documenting the violation; hauling, storage and disposal
expenses; and actual expenses and costs of the City in preparing notices, specifications and
contracts, and in accomplishing and/or contracting and inspecting the work; and the costs of
any required printing and mailing. All such costs shall constitute a lien against the affected
property and may be subject to collection following a court judgment. Such a lien shall be
substantially in accordance with the provision regarding mechanic's liens in RCW 60.04,
and said lien shall be foreclosed in the same manner as such liens.
D. The lien shall be subordinate to all previously existing special assessment liens
imposed on the same property and shall be superior to all other liens, except for state and
county taxes, with which it shall share priority. The City of Spokane Valley may cause a
claim for lien to be filed for record within ninety (90) days from the later of the date that the
monetary penalty is due or the date the work is completed or the nuisance abated. The claim
of lien shall contain sufficient information regarding the notice of violation, a description of
the property to be charged with the lien, the owner of record, and the total of the lien. Any
such claim of lien may be amended from time to time to reflect changed conditions. Any
such lien shall bind the affected property for the period as provided for by state law.
E. The vehicle shall be disposed of to a licensed motor vehicle wrecker or hulk
hauler with notice to the Washington State Patrol and the State Department of Licensing
that the vehicle has been wrecked. Any vehicle or part thereof impounded pursuant to
this ordinance shall be processed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington.
F. Any registered disposer under contract with the City for the impounding of
vehicles shall comply with any administrative regulations relative to the handling and
disposing of vehicles as may be promulgated by local authority or the Director.
G. Costs of removal will not be assessed against the legal owner of the vehicle if the
owner in the transfer of ownership of the vehicle has complied with RCW 46.12.101.
SECTION 8 — Civil Monetary Penalties — Voluntary Compliance. if the Hearing
Examiner determines that the person receiving the notice of violation is a person
responsible for a violation, that person shall be assessed a civil monetary penalty in the
amount of 5250.00.
c/cpd work files/ordinances /junk vehicies/junk vehicle ordinance - proposed admin draft 8 for first reading 9 -9 -03
Proposed administrative draft — C. Driskcll
September 4, 2003
Draft 8
SECTION 9 — Junk vehicle abatement program — authorized. The Director is
authorized to develop a comprehensive junk vehicle abatement program. It is intended
that this program will developed through community involvement. The purpose of the
Junk Vehicle Abatement Program is to develop a program that is cost effective for the
City, encourages voluntary compliance, and implements the goals of this Ordinance.
SECTION 10 — Junk vehicle abatement fund — authorized. All monies collected from
the assessment of civil penalties and for abatement costs and work shall be allocated to
support expenditures for abatement, and shall be accounted for through either creation of
an account for such abatement costs, or other appropriate accounting mechanism. Any
monies collected under this ordinance that exceed an amount projected to cover
anticipated abatement requirements within a six month time period shall be placed in the
general fund.
SUCTION 11 — Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance, or any regulation, rule or order adopted pursuant to the authority thereof be
determined invalid or unconstitutional, it shall not affect the validity or constitutionality
of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance.
SECTION 12 — Effective date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5)
days after publication of this ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of
the City as provided by law.
ATTEST:
PASSED by the City Council this day of September, 2003.
City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge
Approved as to form:
Interim City Attorney, Stanley M. Schwartz
Date of publication:
Effective date:
Mayor, Michael DeVleming
cicpd work files/ordinances /junk vehicles/junk vehicle ordinance - proposed admin draft 8 for first reading 9 -9 -03
-7-
14.616.355 Storage Standards
All storage (including storage of recyclable materials) shall be wholly within a building or shall be
screened from view from the surrounding properties and shall be accessory to the permitted use on
the site. There shall be no storage in any required front yard or flanking street yard.
Storage of inoperable and /or unlicensed vehicles is regulated by Spokane Valley Ordinance No- 67.
he- private, neneentmeFeial -stoF
remnants
must- be-st'e
over six (fir)- feet -in heightrecl-uir
SI
:14- 806,060-
Draft Zonine Code
Tn ve Do. I nn
ATTACHMENT A
Chapter 14.616
URBAN RESIDENTIAL -3.5 (UR -3.5) ZONE
ely sight - screened yyea F_F0und- from- uses- allowed-in thisszone- with -a
ype- 1 -or-II la ndseaped -a-r
etel-y enclosed -bt ilcl<ing luding-doors. Vehicle-remnants-or-parts
e d letely- enelesed- bu4kling -inelu -ding doors— lyenc -es
Etuon -14806.O60.
e-of-more than two -(.) inepeFable-or-
es inside the-IJR
adoption -plus -erne -year (September 1, 1993).
Chapter 14.618
URBAN RESIDENTIAL -7 (UR -7) ZONE
14.61.8.355 Storage Standards
All storage, except as provided below, shall be wholly within a building and shall be accessory to the
permitted use on the site. Where proposed, recreational vehicle parking areas shall be paved and
screened from view of adjoining properties. All multiple - family developments shall designate
recreational vehicle parking areas.
On lots where the primary use is a duplex or multi - family dwelling use, the private, nonconnmercial
storage of inoperable or not- currently - licensed vehicles or remnants thereof shall be allowed within a
permitted, completely enclosed building, including doors.
Storage of inoperable and /or unlicensed vehicles is regulated by Spokane Valley Ordinance No. 67.
On -lots where•the -p ' - _ ng the - private - senors ereial- storage - of -up-te
two (2) inopefble-e - net- enrrent - - - - - • • = •erco€ shall be completely sight
sc- reened -year round from uses allowed -in -this one with- a- feruee, rata stained- T-y- pe- l -er-fl lanel eaped
area- e t= na- intained- landscaped -berm. There i
r5: uehic- e - rem Rants-er partsside- a- vehiele-or -a
sed building in . _ . - - - eig it-require -a
(- landsc- a pin g- are- describ,,ed ect en
leer - all
outdoor- stefage -ef inope or not c-urfen icensed - vehicles -rin- lots -in- the- 141- 7-zene- where
the prim e 41-ti farn4y- dwelling ai d -for outdoor storage of mere -than two -(-3)
inoperable- ou-not curraently -lieer ' _ - - - - . ° . • _ ary use is a single family
dwelling, nenc-enfer.n i
(September 1, 1993).
Senternher 9. 1.nn1
14.620.355 Storage Standards
All storage shall be wholly within a building and shall be accessory to the permitted use on the site.
Where proposed, recreational vehicle parking areas shall be paved and screened from view of
adjoining properties. All multiple- family developments shall designate recreational vehicle parking
areas.
Storage of inoperable and /or unlicensed vehicles is regulated by Spokane Valley Ordinance No. 67.
Thepriv nonconui er.eial- storage- of- ineper-a•ble -or net- ctintly- licensed isles -e tnan s
theree€ ill- be- allewec it er tedd les ; i mss-
Draft Zoning Code
ATTACHMENT A
Chapter 1.4.620
URBAN RESIDENTIAL -12 (UR -12) ZONE
Chapter 14.622
URBAN RESIDENTIAL -22 (UR -22) ZONE
14.622.355 Storage Standards
All storage shall be wholly within a building and shall be accessory to the permitted use on the site.
Where proposed, recreational vehicle parking areas shall be paved and screened from view of
adjoining properties. All multiple- family developments shall designate recreational vehicle parking
areas.
Storage of ino +enable and or unlicensed vehicles is re•ulated b Spokane Valle Ordinance No. 67.
ante - private eneenu3nercial : terage-ef- i-noperable-er- net- eurrently-liccnsed-vchicics or- remnants
thei'ee d-withzin-aa- 1, er- mittecl;_eempletely- enelosed4o lding, inc luding deers-
Rentemher 9. 2003
Meeting Date: September_ 9, 2003 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business 0 new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
AGENDA ITEM TITLE : CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, RESOLUTION NO. O3-.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council review and discussion at previous meetings
and direction to staff.
BACKGROUND: This resolution accepts the conveyance of park properties from
Spokane County to the City of Spokane Valley and authorizes the City Manager to
execute all necessary documents to complete the conveyance and assume ownership
and control of the park properties.
OPTIONS: Approve /Disapprove
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The cost of base services in the agreement is estimated at
$656,137.87. There is S690,500.00 in the current 2003 budget for these expenses. Expenses
will be offset by estimated revenues of $94,745.00.
STAFF CONTACT: Mike Jackson, Parks and Recreation Director
ATTACHMENTS Resolution
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO. 03 -045
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY,
WASHINGTON, ACCEPTING THE CONVEYANCE OF PARK PROPERTIES FROM
SPOKANE COUNTY INCLUDING THE ASSUMPTION OF ALL DUTIES AND
AUTHORITY RELATED THERETO.
WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley incorporated on March 31, 2003;
WHEREAS, Spokane County is desirous of transferring to the City of Spokane Valley Spokane
County park properties including land and improvements located within the City for the purpose of
providing recreational opportunities to the City residents, visitors and guests;
WHEREAS, the parties have executed a "Interlocal Agreement between Spokane County and
the City of Spokane Valley Relating to the Ownership, Funding, Operation and Maintenance of Parks,
Open Space, Recreation Facilities and Programs" ( "Interlocal Agreement ") with one of the purpose to
provide for the transfer of park property from the. County to the City;
WHEREAS, the County is making the transfer of park properties for an in consideration of the
promises, covenants and consideration set forth in the Interlocal Agreement; and
WHEREAS, as a condition of the conveyances, the City agrees to maintain the park properties
in conformance with conditions imposed upon the properties through the conveyance documents as well
as the Interlocal Agreement.
NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley,
Spokane County, Washington, as follows:
The City of Spokane Valley accepts from Spokane County the conveyance of the following park
properties for and in consideration of the matters set forth in the Interlocal Agreement with the intent to
use, maintain and improve the same for the public benefit. The park properties are:
I. Myrtle Point.
2. Opportunity Township Hall.
3. .Valley Mission Fool.
4. Valley Senior Center.
5. Valley Mission Park.
6. Valley Mission Park (South).
7. Balfour Park.
8. Brown's Park.
9. Edgecliff Park.
10. Western Dance Center.
1 Sullivan Park.
12. Mirabeau Point Park.
13. Park Road Park.
14. Park Road Pool.
15. Terrace View Park.
16. Terrace View Pool.
17. Castle Park.
1LSV• FSII Uscrslebainbrideel ebainbridgelResolutions l?003\Rcsolution Accept Conveyance Palk Properties,0OC
The City agrees to operate, maintain and use the park properties consistent with conditions, if
any, imposed upon the property through Interlocal Agreement and conveyance document. The City
Council hereby accepts the grant, conveyance and transfer of the above identified properties and
authorizes the City Manager to execute all necessary documents to complete the conveyance and assume
ownership and control of the park properties within the City of Spokane Valley.
ATTEST:
Adopted this day of September , 2003.
City Clerk Christine Bainbridge
Approved as to Form:
Interim City Attorney, Stanley M. Schwartz
City of Spokane Valley
Mayor Michael DeVleming
\\ SV- FSIlUsers' v.: bainbrideel cbainbridge \Resolutions12003\Resolution Accept Conveyance Park Properties.DOC
Meeting Date: August 12, 2003 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Interlocal Agreement between Spokane County and the City of
Spokane Valley relating to ownership, funding and operation of parks, open space,
recreation facilities and programs.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35.02.225
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council review and direction to staff.
BACKGROUND: This agreement has been reviewed and revised numerous times by City
and County staff and their legal representation. The agreement sets forth the
responsibility and costs for operations, maintenance, repairs, improvements and
recreation programs.
OPTIONS: Approve or Disapprove
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Authorize City Manager to finalize and execute
the agreement with Spokane County.
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The cost of base services in the agreement is estimated at
$656,137.87. There is $690,500.00 in the current 2003 budget for these expenses. Expenses
will be offset by estimated revenues of $94,745.00.
STAFF CONTACT: Mike Jackson, Parks and Recreation Director
ATTACHMENTS Interlocal Agreement
NO. 3 0790
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
IN THE MATTER OF EXECUTING AN )
AGREEMENT BETWEEN SPOKANE )
COUNTY AND THE CITY OF SPOKANE )
VALLEY RELATING TO THE ) RESOLUTION
OWNERSHIP, FUNDING, OPERATION )
AND MAINTENANCE OF PARKS, OPEN )
SPACE, RECREATION FACILITIES AND )
PROGRAMS )
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 36.32.120(6), the Board of County
Commissioners, hereinafter referred to as `BOARD," has the care of County property and the
management of County funds and business; and
WHEREAS pursuant to the provisions of chapter 39.34 RCW, two or more public
entities may. jointly cooperate between each other to perform functions which each may
individually perform; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 35.02.225, a newly incorporated city
may contract with a county to provide essential services; and
WHEREAS, all local governmental authority and jurisdiction with respect to the newly
incorporated area transfers from Spokane County to the City of Spokane Valley upon the official
date of incorporation; and
WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley desires to own, operate, and maintain parks,
open space, recreation facilities and programs within its boundaries which were previously
owned, operated and/or maintained by Spokane County except for that property commonly
referred to as Buttercup; and
WHEREAS, Spokane County desires to divest itself of ownership, operation,
maintenance and financial responsibility for parks, open space, recreational facilities and
programs inside the boundaries of the City of Spokane Valley except for that property commonly
referred to as Buttercup; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the public that the City of Spokane Valley and
Spokane County take appropriate actions to ensure a smooth transition in the ownership,
operation and maintenance of parks, open space, recreational facilities and programs to avoid
disruption of service.
3 070
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HERE -BY RESOLVED by the Board of County
Commissioners of Spokane County, that either the Chairman of the Board, or a majority of the
Board, be and is hereby authorized to execute that document entitled "TNTERL OCAL
AGREEMENT BETWEEN SPOKANE COUNTY AND T.RE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
RELATING TO THE OWNERSHIP, FUNDING, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF
PARKS, OPEN SPACE, RECREATION FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS" pursuant to which,
under certain terms and conditions Spokane County will convey to the City of Spokane Valley
certain properties located with their boundaries which were used by the County for parks, open
space and recreational facilities and the City of Spokane Valley will contract with Spokane County
to maintain and operate the Properties to be transferred from April 1, 2003through December 31,
2004.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day o 003.
ATTEST:
VICKY M. DALTON
CLERK OF THE BOARD
it tvd ey
CitytkesoluticasAvalleppmks.doc
Page 2 of 2
niela Erickson, Deputy
BOARD OF COUNTY COMtiIISSIONERS
OF SPOKANE, COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Return to:
Parks Intel Agreement
Danicla Erickson
Clerk of the Board
1116 West Broadway
Spokane, Washington 99260
INTERLOCAL, AGREEMENT BETWEEN SPOKANE COUNTY
2 AND THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY RELATING TO THE OWNERSHIP, FUNDING,
3 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF PARKS, OPEN SPACE, RECREATION FACILITIES
4
AND PROGRAMS 3 0790
5
6 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between Spokane County, a political
7 subdivision of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 1116 West
8 Broadway, Spokane Washington 99260, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY," and the City of Spokane
9 Valley, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business
10 at the Redwood Plaza, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206,
11 hereinafter referred to as "CITY" jointly hereinafter referred to as the "PARTIES."
12
13 WITNESSETH
14
15 WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 36.32.120(6), the Board of County
16 Commissioners, hereinafter referred to as "BOARD," has the care of County property and the
17 management of County funds and business; and
1 8
19 WHEREAS pursuant to the provisions of chapter 39.34 RCW, two or more public entities may
20 jointly cooperate between each other to perform functions which each may individually perform; and
21
22 WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 35.02.225, a newly incorporated city may
23 contract with a county to provide essential services; and
24
25 WHEREAS, all local governmental authority and jurisdiction with respect to the newly
26 incorporated area transfers from Spokane County to the City of Spokane Valley upon the official date of
27 incorporation; and
28
29 WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley desires to o�sm operate, and maintain parks, open space,
30 recreation facilities and programs within its boundaries which were previously owned, operated and/or
31 maintained by Spokane County; and
32
Page I of 12
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
'v 44
45
WHEREAS, Spokane County desires to divest itself of ownership, operation, maintenance and
financial responsibility for parks, open space, recreational facilities and programs inside the boundaries of
the City of Spokane Valley; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the public that the City of Spokane Valley and Spokane
County take appropriate actions to ensure a smooth transition in the ownership, operation and
maintenance of parks open space, recreational facilities and programs to avoid disruption of service.
NOW THEREFORE for and in consideration of the mutual promises set forth hereinafter, the
PARTIES do mutually agree as follows:
SECTION NO. 1: CONVEYANCE
1.1 COUNTY shall convey to CITY by individual quit claim deeds in "as -is condition" all of its rights,
title and interests, and when possible assign any leasehold interest, license, easement or shared use
responsibility, in the parks, open space(s) and recreation sites, hereinafter collectively referred to as
"Properties," or individually referred to as "Property," listed in subsection 1.2 hereinafter, as well as
all personal property permanently affixed thereto such as buildings, pools, play equipment and ball
field improvements. Consideration for each transfer will be $1.00 and other consideration more
particularly described hereinafter.
1.2 The Properties to be transferred include:
Myrtle Point
Opportunity Township Hall
Valley Mission Pool
Valley Senior Center
Valley Mission Park
Valley Mission Park (South)
Balfour Park
Brown's Park
Edgecliff Park
Western Dance Center
Sullivan Park
Closing costs shall be apportioned according to custom in Spokane County.
Mirabeau Point Park
Park Road Park
Park Road Pool
Terrace View Park
Terrace View Pool
Castle Park
PARTIES recognize that the COUNTY acquired Properties with public funds and also from private
gifts /donations. CITY agrees to comply with any conditions imposed upon COUNTY by its use of
public funds in acquisition or improvement of any Property or conditions imposed on private
donations used to acquire or improvement any Property.
A condition precedent to the transfer of any Property which the COUNTY acquired or improved with
grant moneys from the Washington State Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation ( "IAC ")
will be (i) CITY'S adoption of a Park Plan and (ii) JAC'S approval of the transfer. CITY agrees to
timely adopt a Park Plan and apply for IAC approval of the Park Plan.
Each Party shall pay its own expenses in conjunction with the transfer of any Property including but
not limited to fees and expenses of agents representatives, counsel and accountants.
Parks Interlocal Agreement Page 2 of 12
1 ALTA Title insurance shall be at the sole cost of CITY.
2
3 PARTIES shall mutually agree to a closing date for any Property. Provided, however, the closing
4 date(s) shall not affect CITY'S obligation to maintain, operate, repair, and improve the Properties as
5 of April 1, 2003.
6
7 To the extent required by existing agreement between COUNTY and third parties or any recorded
8 documents, (1) CITY agrees and covenants to own, operate and maintain the Properties, as public
9 parks, public recreational facilities, and/or public open spaces respectively, and (2) CITY may trade
10 any Property or part thereof for another public park, public recreational property, and/or public open
11 space of equal or greater value. Transfers of any Property initially acquired by COUNTY with
12 moneys from Washington State Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation will require IAC
13 approval.
14
15 When considering the sale of park property, the CITY will rely upon the notice provisions and public
16 comment opportunity then used by the CITY when considering the disposal of any other CITY owned
17 real estate.
18
19 CITY agrees and covenants that it will not in any way limit or restrict access to and use of any
20 Property by non-CITY Y residents, except where title was taken by COUNTY in a proprietary capacity.
21
22 CiTY agrees and covenants that any and all user fees, including charges made by any lessees,
23 concessionaires, service providers and/or other assignees, shall be at the same rate for non - CITY
24 residents as for the residents of CITY.
25
26 COUNTY represents that it has provided to CITY all information and documentation it is aware of or
27 has in its possession regarding the Properties, including but not limited to the ownership,
28 encumbrance, maintenance, operations and limitations on title, use or conveyance thereof.
29
30 SECTION NO. 2: RESPONSIBILITY FOR OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIRS,
31 IMPROVEMENTS, AND RECREATION SERVICES
32
33 2.1 As consideration for COUNTY'S agreement to convey the Properties, CITY agrees to assume full
34 and complete responsibility for all maintenance, operation, repair, improvement, and provision of
35 recreation services on such Properties, to include facilities thereon, as of April 1, 2003.
36
37 2.2 CITY contracts with COUNTY to maintain and operate the Properties listed in Section No. 1.2 on and
38 after April 1, 2003 under the terms and conditions specified hereinafter. It is the intent of the PAR`l'[ES
39 that such responsibilities be consistent with the CITY'S Council/Manager form of government provided
40 for in chapter 35A.13 RCW.
41
42 2.3 Base Level Services. Acting solely as an independent contractor on behalf of CITY, COUNTY will
43 provide routine park maintenance and operation services for the Properties listed in Section 1.2 above
44 at that level and standard provided by the COUNTY or its agents to each individual Property in
Parks lnterlocal Agreement Page 3 of 12
1 calendar year 2002. This level of service is hereinafter referred to as "base level service." A
2 description of base level services is attached hereto as Attachment C.
3
4 CITY and COUNTY agree CITY will collect all income from all sources on the Properties.
5 COUNTY shall turn over to CITY all of COUNTY'S books and records concerning the same,
6 including books of account and ledgers, together with all income collected by the County since April
7 I 2003 presently held by COUNTY, including security deposits, and shall provide CITY with a full
8 accounting of all such funds through date of delivery.
9
10 COUNTY, in the performance of its maintenance and operation services, shall, to the best of its
11 ability, comply with and ensure compliance with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, codes,
12 rules and regulations applicable to the operation and maintenance of the Properties. With respect to
13 the maintenance and operation of the Properties, COUNTY'S services will include but not be limited
14 to the following:
15
16 (a) Employing, discharging and paying all persons providing base level service or otherwise
17 employed by COUNTY in the management and operation of the Properties;
18 (b) Purchasing all materials and supplies necessary for the maintenance and operation services to
19 the Properties;
20 (c) Contracting for and supervising the making of all repairs and alterations necessary to perform
21 the maintenance and operation services;
22 (d) Managing the Properties in full compliance with all laws and regulations of any federal, state,
23 county or municipal authority having jurisdiction over the Properties;
24 (e) Assisting CITY as needed in acquiring all necessary insurance on the Properties, including, but
25 not limited to, public property liability, fire and extended coverage hazard insurance.
26
27 COUNTY shall refer any third party contacts with respect to renewal or new operations, leasing,
28 licensing or concessions on any of the Properties to CiTY upon receipt and shall cooperate with
29 C1TY in the creation of any such relationship with said contacts. In the event CITY enters into any
30 leases, licenses, concessions or other similar an the PARTIES shall discuss incorporation
31 of the same into this Agreement.
32
33 CITY shall enforce all the terms and conditions of any applicable income producing agreement,
34 written or oral, during the term of this Agreement.
35
36 COUNTY shall provide CITY access to all of COUNTY'S books and records relating to the
37 Properties, including books of account and ledgers. Upon the termination of this Agreement, the
38 COUNTY shall deliver all the hooks and records relating to the Properties to CITY and provide CITY
39 with a full accounting of all Properties' expenditures and funds through the date of termination and
40 delivery.
41
42 CITY may request adjustments to individual tasks associated with base level service in order to meet
43 specific needs. COUNTY shall consider all such requests and, whenever reasonably practicable, alter
44 the work program as necessary.
45
Parks Intcrlocal Agreement Page. 4 of 12
1 CITY reserves the option of replacing any positions as described in Attachment "A ". In the event
2 CITY exercises that option CiTY shall (i) provide a minimum of sixty (60) calendar days written
3 notice prior to the effective date of such option notice being delivered to COUNTY, in accordance
4 with Section 5, and (ii) assume responsibility of providing personnel for said position at CITY'S sole
5 cost and expense. CITY and COUNTY shall adjust this contract to reflect CITY's assumption of said
6 costs reduction of payments to COUNTY for said services and /or position.
7
8 COUNifY is only required .to perform maintenance and operation services on the Properties listed in
9 Section 1.2 as those Properties were improved as of the 12:01 A.M. April 1, 2003, the CITY's official
10 date of incorporation. COUNTY and CITY anticipate that there may be further improvements made
11 to these Properties by CITY which will require additional maintenance. CITY agrees to pay
12 COUNTY for any increased maintenance costs to any Property, regardless of the funding source of
13 the improvement, due to any improvement thereto.
14
15 2.4 Extra or Enhanced Services. Acting solely as an independent contractor on behalf of CITY,
16 COUNTY will provide services above base level services upon written request from CITY and
17 mutual agreement as to any increased costs for such service. Such additional services arc hereinafter
18 referred to as "extra or an enhanced services."
19
20 2.5 Construction of Mirabeau Meadows Park. COUNTY agrees to complete the construction of
21 Mirabeau Meadows Park. For the purpose of this Agreement, the terminology "construction" shall
22 include (1) preparing bid document(s) for the Project (Mirabeau Meadows), (2) awarding the Project
23 pursuant to County public works laws; (3) construction management of the awarded Project; and (4)
24 acceptance of the completed Project. COUNTY has already prepared bid documents denominated as
25 Project No. P3993. COUNTY agrees not to award Project if the bid of lowest responsible bidder
26 exceeds $1.4 Million without consultation and approval by CITY.
27
28 The cost of the Mirabeau Meadows Park construction will be funded solely using a portion of State
29 Grant (INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT) #02- 99300 -018 estimated at $1.4 million except
30 for COUNTY staff construction over sight costs which will be paid by the CITY as provided for in
31 Attachment "A." No COUNTY money will be used.
32
33 2.6 Oversee Design of Mirabeau Point Center Place Facility ( "Facility "). County agrees only to
34 oversee the design of Mirabeau Point Center Place Facility ( "Facility ") until August 26, 2003 at
35 which time the CITY will assume such over sight responsibility. Provided, however, after August
36 26, 2003, the COUNTY will continue to provide staff time necessary to coordinate payments of
37 billings associated with the design of Project No. P3983. All future phase(s) of the Facility will be
38 the sole responsibility of the CITY. For the purpose of this Agreement, the terminology "oversee the
39 design" shall mean employment of an architect to design the Facility and payment for services solely
40 from State Grant ( INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT) #02- 99300 -018. No COUNTY money
41 will be used for the design of Facility. COUNTY has employed Tan Moore Architects under Project
42 Agreement No. P3983 to design the Facility. COUNTY will coordinate with CITY all major
43 decisions with respect to the design of the Facility; however, ultimate decision making authority shall
44 be CITY'S.
45
Parks Intcrlocal Agreement Page 5 of 12
1 The cost to design Mirabeau Point Center Place Facility will be funded solely using a portion of State
2 Grant (INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT) #02- 99300 -018 estimated at $500,000 except for
3 COUNTY staff design over sight costs which will be paid by the CITY as provided for in Attachment
4 "A ". If there are funds remaining in the State Grant (INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT) #02-
5 99300 -018 upon completion of the Mirabeau ivleadows Park construction and Mirabeau Point Center
6 Place Facility design, COUNTY staff will work with CITY staff to allocate unused grant moneys for
7 completion/construction of other elements of the Mirabeau Point Park Master Plan.
8
9 Separate from the Grant Funds allocated for design of the Mirabeau Point Center Place Facility, the
10 COUNTY has set aside $1.4 million for the construction of the new Senior Citizen Center Facility as
11 a component of the Mirabeau Point Center Place Facility. COUNTY agrees to make this money
12 available to CITY in the event CITY elects to proceed with construction of the Senior Citizen Center
13 Facility component of the Mirabeau Point Center Place Facility or any portion thereof not in a lump
14 sum, but as necessary to pay consultants and contractors for services completed. COUNTY shall
15 retain any and all interest on the $1.4 Million. The County understands that some of components of
16 the Mirabeau Point Center Place Facility may not be directly incorporated into the Senior Center
17 Facility but the Senior Center Facility may use such components. COUNTY agrees that the CITY
18 may use the $1.4 Million not only to fund the Senior Citizen Center but also other components of the
19 Mirabeau Point Center Place Facility which are used by the Senior Center Facility. For example,
20 there may very well be a kitchen which is shared by not only the Senior Citizens Center but also
21 another component of the Mirabeau Point Center Place Facility. The kitchen accordingly may be
22 funded in full or part with the 81.4 Million.
23
24 COUNTY shall not have an obligation to operate or maintain either the Mirabeau Meadows Park or
25 Mirabeau Point Center Place Facility after their completion until the PARTIES mutually agree as to
26 all increased operation and maintenance costs in accordance with Section 2.3 above.
27
28 2.7 Valley Mission Pool. COUNTY has set aside $1.6 million for the construction of an aquatic facility
29 intended to replace the Valley Mission Pool. COUNTY originally proposed a replacement pool to be
30 located at Valley Mission Park (South). The design of the new pool has been completed. However,
31 upon the vote to incorporate CITY, COUNTY opted to defer construction of the new pool.
32 COUNTY agrees to (0 transfer the complete plans for the new Valley Mission Pool to CITY and (ii)
33 to make available to CITY 81.6 million for construction of a new pool at any location as determined
34 by CiTY and using the design completed or another designed as approved by CITY. COUNTY
35 agrees to transfer plans for said pool to CITY upon execution of this Agreement. $1.6 million will be
36 retained by COUNTY and paid to CITY as needed by CITY to pay consultations and contractors in
37 conjunction with design /construction of a new pool. COUNTY shall retain any and all interest on the
38 $1.6 million.
39
40 SECTION NO. 3: DURATION
41
42 This Agreement shall commence at 12:01 A.M. on April 1, 2003 and terminate at 12:00 P.M. on December
43 31, 2004, unless terminated as provided for in Section 10. This Agreement shall be effective upon signature
44 by both PARTIES.
45
Parks tnterlocal Agreement Paee 6 of 12
1 SECTION NO. 4: COST OF SERVICES
2
3 CITY shall pay COUNTY the actual casts for base level services described herein and provided by
4 COUNTY to the Properties. For 2003 the costs of such base level services shall not include equipment
5 depreciation on equipment owned by COUNTY. The COUNTY, at its sole discretion may include such
6 equipment depreciation of equipment for calendar years 2004. The estimated cost for 2003 base level
7 services is SIX HUNDRED FIFTY -SIX THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED THIRTY- SD( DOLLARS and
8 87/100 ($656,136.87614,132.32). The methodology used to calculate the cost of providing CITY'S base
9 level services is set forth in Attachment "A," attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. This
10 methodology contemplates that the CITY retains all fees/revenues collected from Properties and facilities
11 — as of April 1, 2003. Further, CITY shall be responsible for all costs/assessments associated with
12 ownership of park properties /facilities including but not limited to electricity, sewer, water, gas, garbage,
13 telephone, and taxes. Said costs are separate from the estimated costs to provide base level services in
14 2003 as described herein.
15
16 In 2004, the PARTIES acknowledge that the estimated costs will automatically increase based upon
17 salary adjustments to include cost of living increases ( "COLA ") granted by the BOARD, increased costs
18 provided for in a Collective Bargaining Agreement, and increased costs for various items set forth in
19 Attachment "A." COUNTY will prepare an estimated cost for 2004 base level services using the same
20 methodology as set forth in Attachment "A." This estimate will be provided to CITY on or before
21 October 31, 2003. This estimate will be used for the purposes of 2004 billings.
22
23 COUNTY will bill CiTY for the estimated cost of services, monthly, during the first week of the month.
24 For calendar 2003, the estimated cost of $656,136.87 will be paid as provided herein. Payments by
25 CITY will be due by 5 working day of the following month. At the sole option of COUNTY, a penalty
26 may be assessed on any late payment by CITY based on lost interest earnings had the payment been
27 timely paid and invested in the Spokane County Treasurer's investment Pool.
28
29 At the end of calendar year 2003 and 2004, using actual costs COUNTY and CITY will each determine
30 respectively whether or not the estimated costs were accurate. To the extent that the CITY was over
31 billed in any year, it will receive a credit to be applied as mutually agreed. if the CITY was under billed,
32 it will receive a debit in the subsequent billing. The adjustment will normally take place in March of the
33 year following the year services were performed but no later than June 30 ( "date of detennination "). At
34 the sole discretion of the CITY, in the case of over billing, or the sole discretion of the COUNTY, in the
35 case of an under billing, the party may request interest on such amount based on lost interest earnings had
36 the under billing amount been invested since the end of the calendar year to the date of determination in
37 the Spokane County Treasurer's Investment Pool or the over billing amount been invested since the end
38 of the calendar year to the date of determination in the Washington Cities Investment Pool. M &O items
39 chargeable to the CITY shall be directly attributable and proportionate to services received by City under
40 the terms of this Agreement.
41
42 The Parties executed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on April , 2003. Under that MOU,
43 the County agreed to provide Base Level Services and Senior Center Services as described in Section 2.3
44 of this Agreement commencing April 1, 2003. The Parties by mutual assent subsequently included
45 Aquatic Services. All MOU services would be performed until both Parties formally executed this
Parks Interlocal Agreement Page 7 of 12
1 Agreement. The COUNTY would bill the CITY all actual costs for providing MOU services as generally
2 outlined in the Attachment "A" to this Agreement. The M.OU provided that in the event the Parties
3 executed this Agreement, in lieu of payment of actual costs under the MOU, by mutual agreement. the
4 Parties could simply invoice/pay for services under the terms of this Agreement.
5
6 The COUNTY has billed the CiTY under the MOU $23,042.61 for April 2003, $60,107.09 for May 2003
7 and S82,907.31 for June 2003. These billings do not represent all the actual costs for providing services
8 for those time frames due to, among other factors, delays in the COUNTY receiving invoices for
9 suppliers.
10
11 The Parties agree that as of July 1, 2003 and through the remainder of 2003, the CiTY will pay the
12 COUNTY that monthly amount of $72,904.09 which represents the estimated monthly cost to provide. all
13 services. For the months of April, May and Junc, 2003 the Parties agree that once the COUNTY
14 determines the actual billings for these months, it will bill CITY any difference between the billings to
15 date and the estimated monthly amount of $72,904.09. In the event the actual billings for April, May and
16 June exceed S72,904.09 or are less than $72,904.09, this excess or shortfall will be taken into
17 consideration in the adjust and settle time frame. discussed hereinabove.
18
19 SECTION NO. 5: NOTICE
20
21 All notices or other communications given hereunder shall be deemed given on: (1) the day such notices or
22 other communications are received when sent by personal delivery; or (ii) the third day following the day on
23 which the same have been mailed by first class delivery, postage prepaid addressed to COUNTY at the
24 address set forth below for such Party, or at such other address as COUNTY shall from time -to -time
25 designate by notice in writing to the other PARTiES:
26
27 COUNTY: Spokane County Chief Executive Officer or his/her authorized representative
28 1116 West Broadway Avenue
29 Spokane, Washington 99260
30
31 CITY: City of Spokane Valley City Manager or his/her authorized representative
32 Redwood Plaza
33 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106
34 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206
35
36 SECTION NO. 6: COUNTERPARTS
37
38 This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which, when so executed and
39 delivered, shall be an original, but such counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same.
40
41 SECTION NO. 7: ASSIGNMENT
42
43 COUNTY may assign any of its responsibilities under the terms of this Agreement so long as the COUNTY
44 remains responsible for oversight and supervision of all responsibilities.
45
Parks Intcrioeal Agreement Page 8 of 12
1 SECTION NO. 8: LIABILITY
2 (a) COUNTY shall indemnify and hold harmless CITY and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of
3 them from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature
4 whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent act or omission of COUNTY, its officers,
5 agents and employees, or any of them relating to or arising out of performing services pursuant to this
6 Agreement. In the event that any suit based upon such claim, action, loss, or damages is brought against
7 CITY, COUNTY shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense; provided that CITY reserves the right
8 to participate in said suit if any principle of governmental or public law is involved; and if final judgment
9 in said suit be rendered against CITY, and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them, or jointly
10 against C1TY and COUNTY and their respective officers, agents, and employees, COUNTY shall satisfy
11 the same.
12
13 (b) CITY shall indemnify and hold harmless COUNTY and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of
14 them from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature
1 whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent act or omission of CITY, its officers, agents
16 and employees, or any of them relating to or arising out of performing services pursuant to this
17 Agreement. In the event that any suit based upon such claim, action, loss, or damages is brought against
18 COUNTY, CITY shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense; provided that COUNTY reserves the
19 right to participate in said suit if any principle of governmental or public law is involved; and if final
20 judgment in said suit be rendered against COUNTY, and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of
21 them, or jointly against COUNTY and CITY and their respective officers, agents, and employees, C1TY
22 shall satisfy the same.
23
24 (c) The foregoing indemnity is specifically intended to constitute a waiver of each party's immunity under
25 Washington's Industrial Insurance Act, Chapter 51 RCW, respecting the other Party only, and only to the
26 extent necessary to provide the indemnified party with full and complete indemnity of claims made by
27 the indemnitor's employees. The PARTIES acknowledge that these provisions were specifically
28 negotiated and agreed upon by them.
29
30 (d) COUNTY and CI'T'Y agree to either self insure or purchase polices of insurance covering the matters
31 contained in this Agreement with coverages of not less than S5,000,000 per occurrence with $5,000,000
32 aggregate limits including for staff professional liability and auto liability coverages.
33
34 SECTION NO. 9: RELATIONSHIP OF THE PARTIES
35
36 The PARTIES intend that an independent contractor relationship will be created by this Agreement. No
37 agent, employee, servant or representative of COUNTY shall be deemed to be an employee, agent, servant or
38 representative of CITY for any purpose. Likewise, no agent, employee, servant or representative of C1TY
39 shall be deemed to be an employee, agent, servant or representative of COUNTY for any purpose.
40
41 SECTION NO. 10: MODIFICATION AND TERMINATION
42
43 This Agreement may be modified in writing by mutual ageement of the PARTIES.
44
Parks Interlocal Agreement Page 9 of 12
1 Any Party may terminate only the maintenance and obligation of COUNTY set forth in 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4
2 herein for any reason whatsoever upon a minimum of 90 days written notice to the other Party.
3
4 Any Party may terminate this Agreement for breach of any provision concerning the providing of
5 maintenance and operation services or payment of consideration upon thirty days (30) advance written notice
6 to the breaching Party. lithe defaulting Party cures the breach to the satisfaction of the noti Party within
7 the thirty-day (30) time frame or such time frame as is reasonably necessary to cure the default, then the
8 notice of termination shall be void.
9
10 Upon termination, CITY shall be obligated to pay for only those basic level services and extra or enhanced
11 services rendered prior to the date of termination based upon a pro rata allocation of costs to the date of
12 termination.
13
14 SECTION NO. 11: PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT
15
16 The ownership of all equipment owned and utilized by COUNTY in providing maintenance and operation
17 services under this Agreement or acquired by COUNTY from the consideration by CITY for such
18 maintenance and operation services shall remain with COU1N'TY upon termination of this Agreement.
19 Provided, however, the PARTIES acknowledge that GUY may purchase equipment and provide such
20 equipment to COUTY to perform such maintenance and operation expenses. The ownership of any
21 equipment acquired by CITY and made available to COUNTY to provide maintenance and operation
22 services under the terms of this Agreement shall remain with CITY upon termination of this Agreement.
23
24 Attached hereto as Attachment "13" and incorporated herein by reference is a listing of certain equipment and
25 machinery that COUNTY presently owns and may use in conjunction with providing maintenance and
26 operation services to CITY under the terms of this Agreement, if the Agreement runs its entire term without
27 termination COUNTY agrees to transfer to CITY at the end of said term at no cost and in an "as -is
28 condition" those pieces of equipment and machinery listed in Attachment "B" which are still owned by
29 COUNTY. If, for any reason, this Agreement is terminated by either Party prior to December 31, 2004
30 COUNTY agrees to sell to CITY in as "as -is condition" those remaining pieces of equipment and machinery
31 listed in Attachment `B" which are still owed by COUNTY for FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS
32 ($50,000.00).
33
34 SECTION NO. 12: GENERAL TERM
35
36 This Agreement contains terms and conditions agreed upon by the PARTIES. The PARTIES agree that there
37 are no other understandings, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement. No changes or
38 additions to this Agreement shall be valid or binding upon the PARTIES unless such change or addition is in
39 writing, executed by the PARTIES.
40
41 This Agreement shall be binding upon the PARTIES hereto, their successors and assigns.
42
43 SECTION NO. 13: VENUE STIPULATION
44
Parks interlacal Agreement Page 10 of 12
1 This Agreement has been and shall be construed as having been made and delivered within the State of
2 Washington and it is mutually understood and agreed by each Party that this Agreement shall be governed
3 by the laws of the State of Washington both as to interpretation and performance. Any action at law, suit
4 in equity or judicial proceeding for the enforcement of this Agreement, or any provision hereto, shall be
5 instituted only in courts of competent jurisdiction within Spokane County, Washington.
6
7
8 SECTION NO. 14: SEVERABIT.:TTY
9
10 It is understood and agreed among the PARTIES that if any parts, terms or provisions of this Agreement
11 are held by the courts to be illegal, the validity of the remaining portions or provisions shall not be
12 affected and the rights and obligations of the PARTIES shall not be affected in regard to the remainder of
13 the Agreement. If it should appear that any part, term or provision of this Agreement is in conflict with
14 any statutory provision of the State of Washington, then the part, term or provision thereof that may be in
15 conflict shall be deemed inoperative and null and void insofar as it may be in conflict therewith and this
16 Agreement shall be deemed to modify to conform to such statutory provision.
1.7
18 SECTION NO. 15: HEADINGS
19
20 The section headings appearing in this Agreement have been inserted solely for the purpose of
21 convenience and ready reference. In no way do they purport to, and shall not be deemed to define, limit
22 or extend the scope or intent of the sections to which they pertain.
23
24 SECTION NO. 16: REPRESENTATIVES
25
26 COUNTY hereby appoints the Spokane County Parks and Recreation Director or his/her designee for the
27 purpose of administering the terms of this Agreement. CITY hereby appoints the City Parks and
28 Recreation Director or his/her designee for the purpose of administering the terms of this Agreement.
29 Each PARTY'S representative agrees to meet on a monthly basis or as necessary to address COUNTY'S
30 provision of basic level services or extra/enhanced level services under the terms of this Agreement. in
31 the event there is a disagreement between the PARTIES, it shall be forwarded to the CO1.JN TY CEO and
32 CITY Manager for resolution.
33
34 Spokane County Parks and Recreation Director or his/her designee agrees to attend staff meetings as
35 requested by the CiTY Manager.
36
37 SECTION NO. 17: REPORTING
38
39 COUNTY, through the Spokane County Parks and Recreation Director or his/her designee shall provide a
40 mutually acceptable quarterly report to CITY that will contain information relating to services performed
41 under the terms of this Agreement during the preceding quarter.
42
43
Parks Interlocal Agreement
Page 11 of 12
rTh
1 SECTION NO. 18: STAFFING
3 COUNTY shall have the sole right and responsibility to hire, assign, retain and discipline all employees
4 performing services under this Agreement according to collective bargaining agreements and applicable state
5 and federal laws. COUNTY agrees to meet and confer with CITY with respect to staff are assigned to
6 provide such services.
7
8 SECTION NO. 19: RECORDS
9
10 All public records prepared, owned, used or retained by COUNTY in conjunction with providing services
11 under the terms of this Agreement shall be deemed CITY property and shall be made available. to CITY upon
12 request by CITY Manager. COUNTY will notify CITY of any public disclosure request under chapter 42.17
13 RCW for copies or viewing of such records as well as the COUNTY's response thereto.
14
15
16 year opposite their respective signatures. 3 0790
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2 8
29
30
31 DATED:
32
33 Attest:
34
35
36 City Clerk
37
38 Approved as to form only:
39
40
41 Acting City Attorney
42
43
44
EN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this Agreement to be executed on date and
` h
I t
1
D
z - o p- - 00 6 . G ?-
.c i �1.
m .�
1
•
‘
1/h TE C.1015
‘.
4f i
� JO % ' OSKELLE ',Chair
1 -
ILl
S, Vic Chai
DATED):
ATTEST:
VICKY M. DALTON
CLERK OF THE BOARD
13Y:
aniela Erickson, Deputy
Parks lnterlocal Agreement
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
M. KATE
j11 it , VASHINGTON
ill JIM . _
SLIN
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY:
By:
Its:
(Title)
Page 12 0112
PARKS-
AOUAT1CS-
AdministrativePerscnnet; Wages/Benefits
Director 10,685.81
Services Manager 31,324.97
Office Managor 4,473.18
01(rco Assistant 3 11,504.61
Accounting Tech 4 11,950.95
Sub Total 78,539.52
Maintenance Personnel'
Trades Specialist
Trades Specialist
Maintenance Worker 11
Mechanic II
Extra e p
Sub Total
Spokane County Parks and Rocroation Contract with City of Spokane Valley
ATTACHMENT "A"
38,058.39
19,029.24
32,001.03
18,111.35
28,000.00
133,200.01
Cost allocation tor ma!ntenance and operation of Valley Park Propartios: 42,390.25
Cost of Supplies 8 Materials for Maintaining Valloy Parks 81,931.77
Cost of Equpment M8O 19,689.93
Un•nnticipated Repairs and Maintenance due to Mother /totem and Vandalism 35,000.00
Total Cost for County to provide requested Park Operation: 390,751.48
MIRABEAU POINT PROJECTS- 1•
Mtrabeau Meadows Park Construction Oversight
Administrativ Perso�nnef:
Director 4,325.46
Services Manager 5,925.26
Facilities Director 708.25
Facilitios Self Ato t 270.00
Sub Total 11,228.97
Cost 05:cation tor construction oversight
Total for Meadows:
2,248.04
13,477.01
Mtrabeau Point, ContorPlaco Design Oversight
Administrative Personnel:
Director 3,379.27
Facilities Director 708.25
Facilities Self Arttatant 270.00
Sub 'Total 4,357.52
Cost 05ocotton tor contract oversight
Total tor CenterPlace:
Total Mtrabeau Point Combined Projects
872.38
5,229.90
18,706,91
Maintenance and Administtalien
Director 1,126.42
Sorvices Manager 4,610.94
Office Manager 2,982.03
Recreation Program Coordinator 6,014.40
Office Assistant 4 2,09925
Accounting Tech 4 3,543.22
Trades Specialist 22,812.00
Mechanic 11 2,557.35
Maintenance Extra Help 5,711.20
51,456.81
Aquatics Extra I•lelo
Aquatics Coordinator
Pool Managers 8 Lifeguards
Sub Total
Cost allot Sion for maintenance and operation of Valley Pool Facilities:
Cost of operating Supplies, Chemicals, Utililcos, eic. tor Vatey Pools
Cost of Equipment M8.0
Pap 1 of 2
4,176.90
76,983.00
81,159.90
26,549.87
14,700.00
3,731.42
Total Proposed Aquatics level of Senice: 177,598.00
SENIOR CENTER-
Spokane County Pnr'ks and Recreation Contract with City of Spokane Valley
City et Spokane Valley Enhanced Services request to expand aquatics services as follows:
Correct Season Plus Expended Hours for nil Three fouls:
( $7 P..xnnnded 1 aleck -Eral Datsl;
Earcedcd Se sc n Thar Labur Day for One of Three Pools;
(Additional 12 week days * 3 week -Fnd Days):
'fatal fur enhanced Agrmtics Servke :
24.40132
16.344.48
40,745.80
Grand Total for 2003 Aquatics Services: 218,343.80
Director 670.9. April 1st - May 31st
Services Manager 5,706.25
Office Manager 406.96 April 1st - May 31st
Senior Center Coordinator 4,147.70 April 1st • May 31st
Accountant Teen 4 393.70 April 1st - May 31st
Maintenance Worker 11 4,800.15
Mechanic 11 1,150.83
Extra Help (Janitor & Bus Drivers) 2.208.18 April 1st - May 31st
Sub Total 19,582.75
Cost allocation for maintenance and operation of Volley Senior Center 3,920.47
Cost of Supplies & Materiels for Maintaining Valley Sentior Center 4,404.00
Cost of Equipment M &O 337.41
Total Cost for County to provide requested Senior Center Services: 28,334.60
Grand Total Operations of Parks, Aquatics & Senior Center: 656,136.87
Date prepared: August 25, 2003 (Year 2003)
1 ' 'Neither construction management nor design oversight expenses will (Erectly or indirectly cause on increase In the total contract costs that
vould require any additional payment frorrl the city in the "adjust and settle process.'
Estimated
Current Value
Spokane County Parks Equipment and Machinery Package
(City of Spokane Valley)
$10,000.00
$7,500.00
$6,000.00
$6,000.00
$6,000.00
$6,000.00
$4,000.00
54,000.00
58.500.00
$58,000.00
Estimated Equip
Replacement #
Cost
S50,000.00
S45,000.00
S15,000.00
$15,000.00
$15,000.00
$15,000.00
$15,000.00
$15,000.00
$40,000.00
S225,000.00
Estimated Estimated Equip
Current Value Replacement #
Cost
$5,000.00 510,000.00
$1,200.00 $2,500.00
51,000.00 $6,000.00
S1,000.00 $6,000.00
S8,000.00 $12,000.00
58,000.00 $17,000.00
S8,000.00 $17,000.00
58,000.00 $17,000.00
54,000.00 $8,000.00
52,000.00 $6,000.00
$40,000.00 5100,000.00
55,000.00 $20,000.00
S5,000.00 $20,000.00
S2,000.00 $2,500.00
$400.00 5550.00
$200.00 S600.00
$98,800.00 $245,150.00
$156,800.00 $470,150.00
Total Total
Date prepared:
July 21, 2003
ATTACHMENT "B"
Vehicles
461 2 Ton 1974 Ford F -150
465 1 Ton 1986 Chevy C -30
428 1/4 Ton 1988 Chevy S -10
429 1/4 Ton 1988 Chevy S -10
430 1/4 Ton 1988 Chevy S -10
433 1/4 Ton 1988 Chevy S -10
508 1/4 Ton 1983 Ford Ranger
511 1/4 Ton 1983 Ford Ranger
431 1 Ton 1988 Chevy C -30
Machinery
1 Kawasaki Mule 1992 4X2
Portable Herb Sprayer
484 Haulette/Trailer 1972
485 Haulette/Trailer 1972
501 5th Wheel Trailer 1994
1 Olathe Turf Sweepers 1984
2 Olathe Turf Sweepers 1984
3 Olathe Turf Sweepers 1984
Orsi Flail Mower CR 350
Jacobsen Over Seeder
423 Toro Gang Mower 1991
10 72" Riding Mower 1992
11 72" Riding Mower 1994
Generator
Weed Trimmers (4)
Backpack Blower (2)
NOTE: Equipment Miles and hours
of usage dates back to January 1$t
2003 and is subject to change.
Miles
84,581
60,381
45,044
46,869
40,364
51,395
58,751
49,067
71,294
1652 Hours
Small
Small
Small
Medium
4547 Hours
4814 Hours
482 Hours
2711 Hours
1043 Hours
900 Hours
fl
2003 City of Spokane Valley Aquatics
Base Level of Service:
Pools shall operate from June 20th, through August 15th.
Puhlic Swim Schedule for each City Pool:
Open Monday through Friday
1:00-2:30p
2:45 -4:15p
4:30 -6:OOp
Swimming Lessons
Lessons are held at all three aquatic sites. A full range of swim lessons are offered from Parent and Tot through the Red Cross
Levels and adult lessons. All Levels S25.00. The majority of lessons will be held between 8 a.tn. and 12:30 p.m. on weekdays at
the pools.
Typical example of lesson schedule as follows:
Morning Lessons (8am- 12:30):
June 23 - July 4
July 7- July18
July 21 - August 1
August 4 - August 15
To accotmnodate families who are unable to attend morning swim lessons, a session of evening lessons will be offered at each City
Pool facility as follows:
Evening Lessons (after 6pm):
Valley Mission Pool Se Sion (July 7 -18)
Terrace View Pool Session (July 21 - Augusi I)
Park Road Pool Session (August 4 - August 15)
Swim Team
A Novice Swim Team program shall be provided open to youth age 6 through 18 yeah of age. Three practice sessions each week
(typically 7:OOAM- 8:OOAM.) plus three Wedn evening swim meets.
Additional Aquatics Services:
Current to Season Plus Expanded Hours for all Three
Pools; (57 Expanded Week Days _ 16 Week -End Days):
Extended Season That Labor Day for One of Three
Pools; (Additional 12 week days + 5 Week-End Days):
ATTACHEMENT "C"
Aquatics
Aquatics;
Spokane County will operate the pools according to all
applicable safety standards, rules and regulations as set
forth by the American Red Cross, Washington State
Health Department and other generally accepted practices.
City of Spokane Valley Requested
2003 Level of Service:
Pool Public Swim Schedule
Valley Mission • Terrace View * Park Road Pool
Friday, June 20th — August 15th •"
,Monday— Friday
1:30 -3:30p
3:45 —5:45p
6:00 — 8:OOp
(Tues. S Thurs Adults Only)
Sat. — Sun
2:00 - 4:30p
5:00 — 7:30p
* *Please note one valley pool will be open through
Labor Day, September 1st
Please Note: Unless otherwise listed above, base level of service does not include un- anticipated repairs and
maintenance due to mother nature & vandalism. A single account has been established within the contract to
address un- anticipated repairs and maintenance for all contractually maintained properties.
• Attachment *C" page 1 of 13
Tree Maintenance
Time allowance for
this task:
Maintenance staff time,
supplies, etc. to complete misc. 9.5 hours plus
tasks such as watering, pruning, supplies &
branch clean -up, etc... equipment
Moving
Trimming
Weed Trimming
Mowing
Irrigation
Start -up sprinkler system in the
spring.
Visits to park seasonally to
inspect & adjust sprinklers, time
clocks, address dry spots, and
complete minor repairs as
necessary.
Winterize/blow-out system in the
fall.
Fertilizer
Fertilize turf areas
Aerate
Aerate turf areas
Attachment "C" page 2 of 13
Times per week:
1
1
1
Times work
performed:
1 -time per year
45- visits to site per
season. Average
(1 hr.) visit
1 -time per year
Times work
performed:
3- applications per
year
Times work
performed:
1 -time per year
Balfour Park
Table & Garbage Can Placement & Time allowance
Misc. Repairs & Inspections for this task:
Wee kslS
eason:
26
Move tables and additional garbage cans
out of storage and into parks in the
spring. Return tables and most garbage
cans back into storage in the fall.
Repairs: Miscellaneous repairs &
inspections of fences, signs, backstops,
drinking fountains, play equipment,
benches, tables, garbage cans, etc...
26 Restroom Cleaning & Litter Control
26 Cleanings (includes supplies)
Sweeping
Parking Lots) v.ill be swept using the
asphalt sweeper, in Spring and again in
Summer.
Turf Sweeping in the spring.
2 -time per year
1 -time per year
Times work
Weed Control performed:
Weed Control in the form of spraying
weed killing chemical application.
1 -time per year
General Summary of Park Maintenance intended to apply to all parks described herein;
Parks will be maintained to a safe, clean condition in accordance with standard and customary care and in compliance with
applicable laws and regulations. Turf will be green and healthy with minimal dry or damaged areas. Mowing/trimming will
Include areas around trees, buildings, fences as necessary to maintain uniform appearance. Irrigation repairs will be made
in a timely manner to avoid wasting water and dry spots in turf. Playgrounds will be inspected on a regular basis and
maintained In safe condition. Restrooms will be clean and odor free. Sinks and stools will be leaned and disinfected on
a regular basis throughout the Park Season (April 15th through October 15th) as necessary. Graffiti will be removed or
painted over in a timely manner. Litter will be removed on a regular basis throughout the Park Season
(April 15th through October 15th) as necessary. The Spokane County Parks, Recreation and Golf Director and the City of
Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Director will communicate on a regular basis to monitor and manage the park
maintenance standards.
Please Note: Unless otheAvise listed above, base level of service does not include tin-anticipated repairs and
maintenance due to mother nature & vandalism. A single account has been established within the contract to address
un- anticipated repairs and maintenance for all oontractuafy maintained properties.
3.0 hours plus
supplies &
equipment
25.0 hours plus
supplies &
equipment
Times work
performed:
180
Times work
performed:
Tree Mai ntenarwce
Maintenance staff time, supplies,
eta. to complete mist- tasks such 16 hours ptus
as watering, pruning, branch dean supplies &
up, etc... equipment
Mowing
Mewing
Trimming
Weed Trimming
Irrigation
Start-Lip sprinkler System in the
spring.
Visits to park seasanalfy to inspect
8 adjust sprinklers, time clocks,
address dry spats. and 'complete
minor repairs es necessary.
44inter1zeiblow -u1 system In the
fall.
Fertilizer
Fertilize turf area
Aerate
Aerate turf areas
Attachment "C" page 3 of 13
Time allowance
for this task;
Times par Weeks /S
week: ea Son;
1 26
1 26
1 26
Times work
performed'
1.-time per year
75- visits to site
par season..
Average (1 hr.)
VIII
1 -Eirno par year
Times work
performed!_
3- applications
par year
Tim as .pork
performed;
1 -lime per year
Browns Park
Table & Garbage Can Placement
& Misc. Repairs & Inspections
btive tables and additional garbage
cans out of storage anti Into perks in
the spring. Return tables and most
garbage cans back into storage in the
fall.
Repairs: Miscellaneous repairs 8
inspections of fences, signs,
backstops, drtnking fountains, play
equipmen€, benches, tables, garbage
cans, etc -.-
Resiroom Cleaning,& Litter Control
Cleanings (includes supplies)
weednq
Parking Lot(s) will be swept using iha
asphalt sweeper, in Spring and again
in Su+'nmer.
Turf Sweeping in the spring.
Weed Control
Time allowance for
this task!
6.0 hours plus
supplies &
equipment
23 -0 hours plus
supplies &
equipment
Times work
90
Times work
performed:
2 -time per year
1 -time per year
Times work
performed:
Weed Control In the form of spraying
weed killing chemical application. 1 -time per year
Please N ote: Unless otherwise fisted above, base level Of service does not include un- aniclpated repairs and
melr.tenence due io moiler nature S vandalism- A single account has been established within the cvntraOt tc address
un- anticipated repairs ana maintenance tvr all contra tivafly maintained properiles.
Irrigation
Start -up sprinkler system in
the spring.
Visits to park seasonally to
inspect & adjust sprinklers.
time clocks, address dry
spots, and complete minor
repairs as necessary.
Winterize/blow-out system in
Mowing
Mowing
Trimming
Weed Trimming
Fertilizer
Fertilise turf areas
Aerate
Aerate turf areas
Attachment "C° page 4 of 13
Times work
performed:
1 -time per year
50- visits to site
per season.
Average (1hr.)
visit
1 -time per year
Times per
1
1
1
Times work
performed:
3- applications
per year
Times work
performed:
1-time per year
Weeks/Season:
26
26
26
Castle Park
Table & Garbage Can Placement & Tune allowance for this
Misc. Repairs & Inspections task:
Move tables and additional garbage
cans out of storage and into parks in
the spring. Return tables and most
garbage cans back into storage in the
fall.
Repairs: Mlscelaineous repairs &
inspections of fences, signs,
backstops, drinking fountains, play
equipment, benches, tables, garbage
cans, etc...
Restroom Cleaning & Litter Control Times work performed:
Cleanings (includes supplies) 90
Sweeping
Turf Sweeping in the spring.
Please Note: Unless otherwise listed above, base level of service does not Include un- anticipated repairs and
maintenance due to mother nature & vandalism. A single account has been established within the contract to address
un- anticipated repairs and maintenance for all contractually maintained properties.
4.0 hours plus
supplies & equipment
25.0 hours plus
supplies & equipment
Times work performed:
1 -time per year
Weed Control
Weed Control In the form of spray rig
weed killing chemical application. 1 -time per year
Times work performed:
Irrigation
Start -up sprinkler system in
the spring.
Visits to park seasonally to
inspect & adjust sprinklers.
time clocks, address dry
spots, and complete minor
repairs as necessary.
Winterize/blow -out system in
Mowing
Mowing
Trimming
Weed Trimming
Fertilizer
Fertilize turf areas
Aerate
Aerate turf areas
Attachment "C" page 5 of 13
Times wort
performed:
1 -time per year
120 - visits to site
per season.
Average (1hr.)
visit
1 -time per year
Times per
1
1
1
Times work
performed:
3- applications
Times work
performed:
1 -time per year
Edgecliff Park
Weeks /Season:
26
26
26
Table & Garbage Can Placement & Time allowance for this
Misc. Repairs & Inspections task:
Move tables and additional garbage
cans out of storage and into parks in
the spring. Return tables and most
garbage cans back into storage in the
fall,
Repairs: Miscellaneous repairs &
inspections of fences, signs,
backstops, drinking fountains, play
equipment, benches, tables, garbage
cans, etc...
Restroom Cleaning & Litter Control
Gleanings (inctudes supplies)
Sweeping
Parking Lot(s) Kill be swept using the
asphalt sweeper, in Spring and again
in Summer.
Turf Sweeping in the spring.
13.0 hours plus
supplies & equipment
25.0 hours plus
supplies & equipment
Times work performed:
110
Times work performed:
2 -time pet year
1 -time per year
Weed Control Times work performed:
Weed Control in the form of spraying
weed killing chemical application. 1 -time per year
Please Note: Unless otherwise listed above, base level of service does not include un- anticipated repairs and
maintenance due to mother nature & vandalism. A single account has been established within the contract to address
un- anticipated repairs end maintenance for all contractually maintained properties.
Mowing
Mowing
Trimming
Weed Trimming
I rdoation
Start -up sprinkler system in
the spring.
Visits to park seasonally to
inspect & adjust sprinklers,
time clocks, address dry
spots, and complete minor
repairs as necessary.
Winterize/blow -out system In
the fall.
Fertilizer
Fertilize turf areas
Aerate
Aerate turf areas
Attachment 'V page 6 of 13
Times per
week: Weeks/Season:
1
1
1
Times work
performed:
1 -time per year
50- visits to site
per season.
Average (thr.)
visit
1 -time per year
Times work
performed:
3- applications
per year
Times worts
performed:
1 -time per year
Park Road Park
26
26
26
Table 8 Garbage Can Placement &
Misc. Repairs & Inspections
Move tables and additional garbage
cans out of storage and into parks in
the spring. Return tables and most
garbage cans back into storage In the
fall.
Repairs: Miscellaneous repairs &
inspections of fences, signs.
backstops, drinking fountains, play
equipment, benches, tables, garbage
cans, etc...
Sweeping
Parking Lots) will be swept using the
asphalt sweeper, in Spring and again
in Summer.
Weed Control
Weed Control in the form of spraying
weed killing chemical application.
Moose Note; unless otherwise listed above, base level of service does not include un- anticipated repairs and
maintenance due to mother nature & vandalism. A single account has been established within the contract to address
un -anticlpated repairs and maintenance for all contractually maintained properties.
Time allowance for this
task:
4.0 hours plus
supplies 8 equipment
25.0 hours plus
supplies & equipment
Times work performed:
2 -time per year
Times work performed:
1-time per year
f �
Tree Maintenance
Maintenance staff time,
supplies, etc. to complete 14 -hours plus
misc. tasks such as watering, supplies &
pruning, branch clean -up, etc... equipment
Mowing
Mowing
Trimming
Weed Trimming
Irrigation
Start-up sprinkler system in the
spring.
Visits to park seasonally to
inspect E. adjust sprinklers,
time clocks, address dry spots,
and complete minor repairs as
necessary.
Winterize/blow -out system in
the fall.
Fertilizer
Fertilize turf areas
Aerate
Attachment "C" page 7of 13
Time allowance
for this task:
Times per WeeksfS
week: eason:
1 26
1 26
1 26
Times work
performed:
1 -time per year
120-vtslts to site
per season.
Average (1hr.)
visit
1 -time per year
Times work
performed:
3- applications
per year
Times work
performed:
Aerate turf areas 1-lime per year
Sullivan Park
Table & Garbage Can Placement & Time allowance for this
Misc. Repairs & Inspections task:
Move tables and additional garbage
cans out of storage and into parks in the
spring. Return tables and most garbage
cans back into storage in the fan.
Repairs: Miscellaneous repairs &
inspections of fences, signs, backstops,
drinking fountains, play equipment,
benches, tables, garbage cans, etc...
Restroom Cleaning & Litter Control
Cleanings (includes supplies)
Weed Control
Weed Control in the form of spraying
weed killing chemical application.
6.0 hours plus
supplies & equipment
25.0 hours plus
supplies & equipment
Times work performed:
90
Sweeping Times work performed:
Parking Lot(s) will be swept using the
asphalt sweeper, in Spring and again in
Summer. 2-time per year
Turf Sweeping In the spring. 1 -time per year
Times work performed:
1 -time per year
Salmon BBO Times work performed:
Move in 25 tables & chairs; leave box of
bags; leave extra toilet paper; empty
dumpster, have dumpster emptied after
event 1 -lime per year
Please Note: Unless otherwise listed above, base level of service does not include un anticipated repairs and
maintenance due to mother nature & vandalism. A single account has been established within the contract to address
un- anticipated repairs and maintenance for all contractually maintained properties.
Tree Maintenance
Maintenance staff time.
supplies. etc. to complete
misc. tasks such as watering,
pruning, branch clean -up.
etc...
Mowing
Mowing
Trimming
Weed Trimming
Irrigation
Start-up sprinkler system in
the spring. 1-time per year
Visits to park seasonatly to
inspec* & adjust sprinklers, 110- visits to site
time clocks. address dry spots, per season.
and complete minor repairs as Average (ihr.)
necessary. visit
Winterfzelblow -out system fn
the fall. 1-time per year
Fertilizer
Fertilize turf areas
Aerate
Aerate turf areas
Attachment ^C" page 8 of 13
Time allowance
for this task:
14 hours plus
supplies &
equipment
Times per week: Weeks/Season:
Times work
performed:
Times work
performed:
3- applications
per year
Times work
performed:
1-time per year
Terrace View Park
26
26
26
Table & Garbage Can Placement & Time allowance for this
Misc. Repairs & Inspections task:
!.love tables and additional garbage cans
out of storage and Into parks In the
spring. Return tables end moat garbage
cans back Into storage in the tall.
Repairs: Miscellaneous repairs &
inspections of fences, signs, backstops,
drinking fountains. play equipment,
benches, tables, garbage cans, etc...
Restroom Cleaning & Litter Control
Cleanings (includes supplies)
Turf Sweeping in the spring.
Weed Control
Weed Control in the form of spraying
weed killing chemical application.
please Note: Unless otherwise listed above, base level of service does not inciude un- anticipated repairs and
maintenance due to mother nature & vandalism. A single account has been established within the contract to address
un- anticipated repairs and maintenance for all contractually maintained properties.
6.0 hours plus supplies
& equipment
25.0 hours plus
supplies & equipment
Times work performed:
90
Sweeping
Parking Lot(s) will be swept using the
asphalt sweeper, in Spring and again in
Summer. 2 -time per year
Times work performed:
1-lime per year
Times work performed:
1-time per year
Tree Maintenance
Maintenance staff time,
supplies, etc. to complete
misc. tasks such as watering.
pruning, branch clean -up.
etc...
Mowing
Mooring
Trimming
Weed Trimming
Irrigation
Start-up sprinkler system In
the spring.
Visits to park seasonally to
inspect & adjust sprinklers.
time clocks, address dry spots,
and complete minor repairs as
necessary.
Winterize/blow -out system In
the fall.
Fertilizer
Fertilize turf areas
Aerate
Aerate turf areas
Attachment "C" page 9 of 13
Time allowance
for this task:
28 hours plus
supplies &
equipment
Weeks /
Times per week Season:
1
26
28
i 23
Times work
performed:
1 -time per year
150 - visits to site
per season.
Average (1hr.)
visit
1 -time per year
Times work
performed:
3- applications
per year
Times work
performed:
1 -time per year
Valley Mission Park
Table & Garbage Can Placement &
Misc. Repairs & Inspections Time aJowance for this task:
Move tables and additional garbage cans
out of storage and into parks In the
spring. Return tables and most garbage 6.0 hours plus supplies &
cans back Into storage in the fall. equipment
Repairs: Miscellaneous repairs &
inspections of fences, signs. backstops,
drinking fountains, play equipment, 25.0 hours plus supplies &
benches, tables, garbage cans, etc... equipment
Restroom Cleaning & Utter Control Times work performed:
Cleanings (includes supplies) 120
Times work performed:
Sweeping
Parking Lot(s) will be swept using the
asphalt sweeper, in Spring and again in
Summer. 2 -lime per year
Turf Sweeping in the spring.
Weed Control
Weed Control In the form of spraying
weed killing chemical application.
Remove sothern portion of corral
fenceing in preparation for Winter
sledding,
Deliver & place straw bales in
preparation far Water sledding.
Maintain, replace and clean straw
during sledding season.
Check & replace outside lighting
1 -time per year
Please Note: Unless otherwise listed above, base level of service does not include unanticipated repairs and
maintenance due to mother nature & vandalism, A single account has been established within the contract to address
un- anticipated repairs and maintenance for all contractually maiatalned properties.
Times work performed:
1 -time per year
Sledding/Coasting Hill Times work performed:
1 -time per year
1 -time per year
80- visits per sledding season
Re- Install southern portion of coral) fence
at conclusion of winter sledding season 1 -time per year
Lighting Time allowance for this task:
4.0 hours plus supplies &
equipment
Mowing Times per year
Trimming 3
Weed & Brush Trimming 3
Restroom Cleaning & Litter Times work
Control performed:
Cleanings at Mirabeau
(includes supplies )
Cleanings at Barker (includes
supplies)
Attachment "C" page 10 of 13
100
140
Times work
Sweeping performed:
Parking Lot(s) will be swept
using the asphalt sweeper 1 -time per year
Pathway will be swept 2 -times per year
Times work
Weed Control performed:
Weed Control in the form of
spraying weed killing chemical
application. 1 -time per year
Centennial Trail
Please Note: Unless othernise listed above, base level of service does not include un- anticipated repairs and
maintenance due to mother nature & vandalism. A single account has been established within the contract to address
un- anticipated repairs and maintenance for all contractually maintained properties.
Mirabeau Point Park
Irrigation
Start -up sprinkler system in the
spring.
Visits to park seasonally to
Inspect & adjust sprfnkters,
time clocks, address dry spots,
and complete minor repairs as
necessary.
Winterize/blow -out system in
Mo%%ing
Trimming
Weed Trimming
Mowing
Fertilizer
Fertilize turf areas
Aerate
Aerate turf areas
Attachment "C" page 11 of 13
Times work
performed:
1-time per year
100 - visits to site
per season.
Average (1 hr.)
visit
1 -time per year
Times per
1
1
1
Times work
performed:
3- applications
Times work
performed:
1 -time per year
26
26
26
Table & Garbage Can Placement & Time allowance for this
IVlisc. Repairs & Inspections
Move tables and additional garbage
cans out of storage and into parks in
the spring. Return tables and most
garbage cans back into storage in the 6.0 hours plus
fall. supplies & equipment
Repairs: Miscellaneous repairs &
inspections of fences, signs,
backstops, drinking fountains, ptay
equipment, benches, tables, garbage 25.0 hours plus
cans, etc... supplies & equipment
Restroom Cleaning & Litter Control Times work performed:
Weeks/Season: Cleanings (includes supplies) 90
Sweeping
Parking Lot(s) will be swept using the
asphalt sweeper, in Spring and again
in Summer.
Turf Sweeping in the spring.
Weed Control
Weed Control in the form of spraying
weed killing chemical application.
Please Note: Unless otherv4se Listed above, base level of service does not include un- anticipated repairs and
maintenance due to mother nature & vandalism. A single account has been established within the contract to address
un- anticipated repairs and maintenance for all contractually maintained properties.
task:
Times work performed:
2-time per year
1 -time per year
Times v.+ork performed:
1 -time per year
Note; Myrtle Point is considered open space propety
and is maintained in it's natural state.
Forest Management Practices
Thinning, tree removal, clean - up, etc...
Weed Control
Weed Control in the form of spraying weed killing
chemical application.
Misc. Repairs & Inspections
Repair! inspect fences, gates, culverts, etc...
Litter collection
Attachment "C page 12 of 13
Litter Control
Mrytle Point
Time allowance for this
task:
Zero within current
contract time - frame.
Times work performed:
1 -time per year
Time allowance for this
task:
10.0 hours plus supplies &
equipment
Time allowance for this
task:
10.0 hours plus supplies &
equipment
Please Note: Unless otherwise listed above, base level of service does not include un- anticipated repairs and
maintenance due to mother nature & vandalism. A single account has been established within the contract to address
un- anticipated repairs and maintenance for all contractually maintained properties.
L J Senior Center
Senior Center 2003 Base Level of Service
April 1st - May 31st
Spokane County shall staff, operate and maintain all Senior Center Services. 2003
Effective June 1st 2003: With the exception of Maintenance, the City of Spokane Valley
shall assume all responsibilities for staffing and operating Senior Center. June 1st 2003 +
Time allowance per -
Senor Center Maintenance Base Level of Service as follows: year
Snow removal from parking lot, sand perking lot in response to icy conditions,
repairimaintainlreplace doors, windows, walls, floors, toilets. sinks, drinking fountains,
electrical components, lighting. Mechanicly service and repair Senior Center bus.
20D -hours plus supplies
& equipment
Please Note: Unless otherwise listed above, base level of service does not include un- anticipated repairs and
maintenance due to mother nature & vandalism. A single account has been established within the contract to address
un- anticipated repairs and maintenance for all contractually maintained properties.
Attachment "C" page 13 of 13
0
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
X information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Public Participation Program
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A - Growth Management Act
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: N/A
BACKGROUND: A Public Participation Program is a necessary first step in initiating the
City's Comprehensive Plan. The City Council adopted the Spokane County
Comprehensive Plan as the City's Interim Comprehensive Plan prior to incorporation.
The City will be developing a new Plan consistent with the guiding provisions of the
Growth Management Act and the Countywide Planning Policies.
The draft Public Participation Program is aligned with the recommendations enumerated
in WAC 365 - 195 - 600(2) including visioning, the role of the Planning Commission, public
meetings and hearings, notice, solicitation of written comments and the means of
communication to be utilized in soliciting citizen comment.
The draft will be submitted to the Planning Commission for review on August 28, 2003.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: N/A
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A
STAFF CONTACT: Marina Sukup, AICP, Community Development Director
Sj6I
� Valley
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Public Participation Program
d raft
RCW 36.70A.140 of the Washington Growth, Management Act requires that each city "establish
and broadly disseminate to the public a public participation program ... for early and continuous
public participation in the development" of the city's Comprehensive Plan.
Consistent with the recommendations of the GMA which emphasize the involvement of the
broadest cross - section of the community, including the involvement of groups not previously
involved, the City of Spokane Valley adopts the following program for citizen participation in the
planning process:
1. Visioning Process — This process provides Spokane Valley citizens an opportunity to
establish a framework and context upon which the comprehensive plan will be based.
Planning Commission meetings will provide the forum for the initial community visioning
process. A draft "Vision" will be tested for consistency during the development of the
Plan as the community identifies priorities and implementation strategies and updated
accordingly. The ultimate "Vision" will be established at the conclusion of the planning
process as a result of community participation.
2. Planning Commission. The Planning Commission will play a key role in establishing the
City's dialogue with community members, hosting a series of meetings and workshops
during the development of the Plan. The Planning Commission will evaluate information
provided by the community and develop recommendations for submission to the City
Council.
3. Citizen Survey — The City will conduct a statistically valid survey of the citizens of
Spokane Valley. Survey questions will address specific issues of the comprehensive
plan that will provide city staff, planning commission and city council with meaningful
input for development of the comprehensive plan.
4. Public Meetings. Conduct a series of public meetings hosted by the Planning
Commission on the preliminary draft comprehensive plan. This ensures that the City will
meet the requirement for 'early and continuous" public participation in the
comprehensive planning process.
5. Public hearings. A series of Public Hearings (not less than three) will be held before the
Planning Commission to discuss the draft Plan. It is anticipated that at least two public
hearings will be held by the governing body prior to adoption of the Plan. An additional
public hearing will be held if substantive changes are made to the Plan document.
6. Public notice. The City will provide notice of all meetings and hearings pursuant to the
requirements of RCW 36.70A.020, .035, and .140.
8/13/2003 _ - 1
draft
7. Written Comment. The public will be invited to submit written comments as each
element of the Plan is developed, as part of any workshops or community meetings.
Comments will be specifically solicited from residents, special interest organizations and
business interests. Comments may be in the form of letters and other correspondence
to the city regarding the plan or comments received electronically on the city's website.
Log in all written comments received according to specific area of comprehensive plan.
8. Communications Programs & Informational Services — As staff and budgetary resources
allow, the activities will be undertaken to ensure broad -based citizen participation:
a. Comprehensive Plan newsletter — updating the community on planned meetings,
workshops or other significant comprehensive plan events. Articles on topics related to
the plan and a request for feedback from the community on topics related to the plan.
The newsletter will be disseminated via the city's website, emailed to a mailing list and/or
provided in paper copy as appropriate.
b. Interest Groups — Contact local interest groups (i.e. Chamber of Commerce, home
builders, environmental, neighborhoods, etc.) and arrange to meet and discuss relevant
comprehensive plan issues.
c. Community Workshops — Conduct community workshops hosted by the Planning
Commission in different parts of the city to encourage neighborhood participation in the
development of the comprehensive plan. These meetings will be held at neighborhood
schools, churches or other community facilities.
d. Press Releases & Public Service Announcements — Work with the local newspapers,
radio stations and televisions stations to advertise and promote significant events related
to the comprehensive plan.
e. Provide written articles to local media for publication.
f. Establish a Speaker's Bureau through the Planning Commission which will be
available to address service clubs and interested citizen groups.
g. Develop a database of interested citizens and provide regular correspondence
concerning the status of Plan development.
h. Identify key resource personnel representing agencies and groups whose plans will
be integrated into the Comprehensive Plan, including but not limited to fire districts,
utilities, libraries and school districts.
i. Maintain a log of all public participation meetings, events and actions that the city
engages in to provide documentation on the city's effort to meet the requirements of the
GMA.
8)13/2003 2
Spo
.
Memorandum
To: Dave Mercier, City Manager, Mayor and Members of City Council
From: Marina Sukup, AICP, Community Development Director
CC: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager
Date: September 4, 2003
Re: Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code
The Department of Community Development, in consultation with the Department of
Public Works, proposes to consolidate all development regulations within a uniform
development code. The assessment of the need for such a Code and a timeline for
implementation is attached.
Attachments
Assessment
Implementation Schedule
Preliminary Table of Contents
11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206
509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
ASSESSMENT
The current regulation of development is included in a variety of documents drafted
by Spokane County over the years, as well as the provisions of the Uniform Codes
adopted by the City at the time of incorporation. The regulations represent a
veritable labyrinth of processes which are often duplicative and unnecessarily time -
consuming, as well as rules which are ambiguous or even contradictory. In some
areas, requirements are absent or in need of updating to be current with statutory
or other requirements. In the case of the Uniform Codes, similar language may
have an entirely different meaning in other regulations, including the zoning
regulations.
II. FINDINGS
Development regulations would be better understood by the development
community, city staff and the public, if the myriad regulations were integrated in a
single place with a single set of definitions. Resolution of ambiguities and conflicts
would also permit the streamlining of development review processes, thereby
improving customer service. The format of some regulations, including the zoning
regulations, should be revised for improved readability, and those provisions which
do not apply to an urbanized area should be deleted.
III. CONCLUSION
Consolidation of all development regulations into a single Uniform Development
.Code would permit the resolution of ambiguities and conflicts, and would allow the
City to streamline its review procedures, resulting in both expedited and more
consistent review and enforcement.
IV. LIMITATIONS OF SCOPE
Certain provisions of the zoning regulations will need to await full development of
the Comprehensive Plan. Many others can and should be updated to delete
references which no longer apply and to improve readability. Procedures should
be streamlined and consolidated where possible.
V. RECOMMENDED ACTION
The City should initiate work on the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code as
soon as practical, establishing uniform definitions, reorganizing text and re-
formatting to improve readability. Provisions which do not depend on the adoption
of the Comprehensive Plan should move forward, while the format of those that do
should be updated without necessarily a change in substantive rules. The SVUDC
should include general provisions, administrative provisions, zoning regulations,
building codes and local amendments, special zoning provisions (conditional and
temporary use permits), Overlay zones (Critical Areas, Shorelines, Flood Hazard,
Airport Hazard), subdivision regulations and development standards. Definitions,
fee schedules, and other resource information should be included as appendices.
The Code should be codified once a year with all supplemental ordinances
approved by the City Council. A sample Table of Contents is attached.
VI. PLAN OF ACTION
The establishment of a Uniform Development Code with sections reserved for all
topics should be adopted initially. Additional sections should be included as
completed and approved. The provisions of the Zoning regulations should initially
include existing permitted uses, although certain additional zoning districts should
be considered initially e.g. an "Estate Residential District" that may provide for
keeping of large animals on lots one acre or greater in size; an "office" and /or
"Garden Office" to allow office development. Provisions of the Interim regulations
which do not apply in the urbanized area should be deleted. The use of tables
rather than straight text will alter the format, though not necessarily the substance
of existing provisions. This format will facilitate future changes is use which result
from the Comprehensive Planning process.
Certain sections may be expected to take longer to complete as a result of the
complexity of the current regulations., but also because some of the existing
regulations remain extremely controversial within the development community.
Representatives of the several sectors of the development community should be
enlisted to work with the staff in streamlining review and enforcement processes,
both to explore any weaknesses in the regulations, but also to initiate an education
process within the ranks of those most affected by such rules.
SPOKANE VALLEY UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT CODE
ARTICLE I
GENERAL PROVISIONS
1.01 Enactment 1.1
1.02 Purpose 1.1
1.03 Jurisdiction 1.1
1.04 Rules of Construction 1.1
1.05 Consistency with Comprehensive Plan 1.2
1.06. Definitions 1.2
1.07 Severability 1.2
1.08 Certificate of Occupancy & Compliance 1.2
1.09 -1.19 Reserved 1.2
1.20 Enforcement and Penalties 1.3
ARTICLE II
ADMINISTRATION
2.01. Planning Commission... 1.5
2.02. Hearing Examiner 1.5
2.03. Community Development Department 1.7
2.04. Building Official 1.7
ARTICLE III
BUILDING REGULATIONS
3.01. Adoption of Building Codes 3.1
3.02. Amendments to the 1997 Uniform Building Code 3.2
3.03. Amendments to the 1997 Uniform Fire Code 3.12
3.04. Amendments to the 1997 Uniform Residential Code 3.42
3.05. Amendments to the 1997 Uniform Mechanical Code 3.56
3.06. Amendments to the 1997 Uniform Plumbing Code 3.63
3.07. Amendments to the 1997 Uniform Fuel Gas Code 3.72
3.08. Amendments to the 1999 National Electrical Code 3.77
3.09. Amendments to the International Energy Code 3.79
ARTICLE IV
ZONING REGULATIONS
4.01. Applicability 4.1
4.02. Zoning Districts 4.1
4.02.1 Zoning Districts Established 4.1
4,02.2 Zoning District Map 4.1
4.02.3 Zoning District Boundaries 4.2
4.02.4 Compliance Required 4.2
4.02.5 Schedules and Illustrations 4.2
4.02.6 New and Unlisted Uses 4.3
4.03. Newly Annexed Territory 4.3
4.04. Platting Property 4.4
4.04.2 Creation of Building Site 4.4
4.05. Non -conforming Uses • 4.4
4.06. Changes & Amendments 4.6
4.07. Reserved 4.8
4.08. District Purpose and Supplemental Use Regulations 4.8
4.08.1 "R -1° Single Family Residential Estate District 4.8
4.08.3 "R -3.5" Single Family Residential District. 4.8
4.08.4 °R -7" Residential District 4.9
4.08.5 °TH" Townhome Residential District 4.9
4.08.6 "MF -12" and "MF -22" Multifamily Residential District 4.9
4.08.7 "MH" Mobile Home Park District 4.9
SPOKANE VALLEY UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT CODE
4.08.8 "GO" Garden Office District 4.9
4.08.9 "0" Office District 4.10
4.08.10 "B -1" Local Retail District 4.10
4.08.11 "B -2" Shopping Center District 4.10
4.08.14 "B -3" Corridor Commercial District 4.10
4.08.15 1-3" Office Technology District 4.11
4.08.18 1-2" and "1 -31" Industrial Districts 4.11
4.08.19 "PD" Planned Unit Development District 4.11
4.08.20 " CF" Community Facilities 4.15
4.10. Residential Accessory Use Regulations
4.19
4.11.- 4.14 Reserved 4.21
4.15. Height and Area Regulations 4.21
4.15,1. General Provisions 4.21
4.15.2. Residential Height and Area Regulations 4.22
4.15.3. Non - Residential Height and Area Regulations 4.23
4.20. Permitted Principal & Accessory Uses 4.25
4.20.1 General Provisions 4.25
4.20.2 Schedule of Principal Uses 4.26
4.20.3 Schedule of Accessory Uses 4.31
ARTICLE V
SPECIAL ZONES
5.01 Floodplain Hazard 5.1
5.02 Airport Hazard (Reserved)
5.03 Critical Areas (Reserved)
5.04 Shoreline Management (Reserved)
5.04 Historic Preservation (Reserved)
ARTICLE VI
SPECIAL ZONING PROVISIONS
6.01. Conditional Use Permits 6.1
6.01.1 Purpose 6.1
6.01.2 Permitted Uses 6.1
6.02.3 Approval Process and Procedure 6.1
6.01.4 Specific Use Permit Requirements 6.1
6.01.5 Permitted Uses 6 . 2
6.01.6 Revocation of Conditional Use Permit 6.5
6.02. Special Use Permits 6.5
6.02.1 Adult Retail Uses
6.02.2 Firearms and Explosives Sales and Service 6.7
6.04 Temporary Use Permits 6.7
6.05 Site Plan Approval 6.11
6.05.1 Purpose 6.11
6.05.2 Applicability 6.11
6.05.3 Site Plan Details 6.11
6.05.4 Review Standards 6.13
ARTICLE VII
ZONING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
7.01. Purpose 7.1
7.02. Applicability 7.1
7.03. Non - Residential Design Standards 7.1
7.03.1. Parking Garages 7.1
7.03.2. Exterior Facade Materials 7.1
7.03.3. Roof Top Mechanical Equipment 7.1
7.03.4. Outdoor Lighting 7.2
SPOKANE VALLEY UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT CODE
7.03.5. Utility Services 7.6
7.04. Off- Street Parking and Loading 7.7
7.04.1. Vehicle Parking 7.7
7.04.2. Off - Street Loading 7.12
7.04.3. Disabled Parking Requirements (RESERVED)
7.05. Landscaping Requirements 7.14
7.05.1. Standard Planting Materials 7.14
7.05.2 Multi- Family District & Non - residential Landscaping Requirements 7.14
7.05.3 Tree Planting Requirements for New Single Family Res. Development 7.17
7.05.4 Landscape Maintenance Requirements - All Districts 7.17
7.05.5 Landscape /Irrigation Plan Approval
7.06. Tree Preservation Requirements 7.18
7.06.1. Applicability 7.18
7.06.2. Tree Removal Permits 7.18
7.06.3. Calculation of Credits 7.18
7.06.4. Replacement of Trees 7.19
7.06.5. Guidelines for Tree Protection 7.20
7.07. Fences and Walls 7.21
7.08. Performance Standards 7.24
7.09. Sign Regulation 7.28
ARTICLE VIII
SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
8.01. Purpose 8.1
8.02. General Provisions 8.1
8.02.1. Jurisdiction 8.1
8.02.2. Applicable Law 8.3
8.02.3. Superseding Regulations 8.3
8.02.4. Amendments 8.3
8.02.5. Administrative Approval of Certain Minor Plats, Amending Plats and Replats 8.3
8.03. Plat Regulations 8.4
8.03.1. In General 8.4
8.03.2. General Development Plan 8.4
8.03.3. Preliminary Plat 8.6
8.03.4. Final Plat. 8.9
8.03.5. Combination Plat 8.11
8.03.6. Replat Procedure without Vacating Preceding Plat 8.11
8.04. Permits Required 8.12
8.05. Subdivision Standards 8.13
8.05.1. Street Design Standards 8.14
8.05.2. Thoroughfare Design Standards 8.21
8.05.3. Thoroughfare Design Standards 2 8.26
8.05.4. Private Street Guidelines 8.16
8.05.5 Design Details 8.27
8.05.6. Sidewalk Standards 8.27
8.05.7. Alleys 8.28
8.05.8. Median Cuts 8.28
8.05.9. Fire Lanes 8.28
8.06. Lot Design 8.28
8.07. Blocks 8.29
8.08. Water Utilities Standards 8.29
8.09. Wastewater Utility Standards 8.30
8.10. Extensions of Water and Wastewater Mains 8.30
8.11. Street Lights 8.31
8.12. Landscape Irrigation Systems 8.32
8.13. Drainage Requirements 8.33
SPOKANE VALLEY UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT CODE
8.14_ Monuments & Markers 8.34
8.15. — 8.19. Reserved
8.20. Mandatory Homeowner's Association 8.34
8.21. -8.24. Reserved.
8.25. Escrow Policies and Procedures. 8.36
8.26. Payment of Fees, Charges and Assessments 8.37
ARTICLE IX
THOROUGHFARE PLAN
9.01. Thoroughfare Plan 9.1
ARTICLE X
PARKLAND DEDICATION (Reserved)
10.01 Purpose 10.1
10.02 Requirements for Residential Development 10.1
10.03 Prior Dedication, Absence of Dedication 10.1
10.04 Money -in -lieu of Land 10.1
10.05 Comprehensive Plan Considerations 10.1
10.06 Special Fund; Right to Refund . 10.2
10.07 Annual Report Required 10.2
ARTICLE XI
IMPACT FEES (Reserved)
APPENDICES
A. Definitions
B. Filing Fees and Charges
C. Trees and Plants
D. Planned Development Districts
F. Standard Construction Details
- Paving
-TxDot
G. Standard Construction Details — Storm Drainage
H. Standard Construction Details
- Water
- Sanitary Sewer
Standard Construction Details — Trails
J. Traffic Impact Analysis Requirements
SPOKANE VALLEY UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT CODE
i
3 Zoning (Format ony)
4 Special Zones
5 Special Zoning Provisions
9/1/2003
9/12003
9/12003
12/1 /2003
7/1/2004
7/30/2004
13.2w
43.8w
48w
ID
2
Task Name
General & Administrative
Building Code & Local Amendments
6 Development Standards
7 Subdivision Regulations
8 Appendix A - Definitions
9 Appendix B - Fees
10 Appendix C - Engineenng Design
Details
Start
9/1/2003
9/1/2003
9/1/2003
9/12003
9/1/2003
9/1/2003
9/1 /2003
Finish
10/1 /2003
10/31 /2003
4/1/2004
3/12004
12/12003
1/1 /2004
4/30/2004
Duration
4.6w
9w
30.8w
26.2w
13.2w
17.8w
35w
03 03
Sep
Oct
04 03
Nov
Dec
Jen
Q1 04
Feb Apr
Apr
Q2 04
May
Q3 04
Jul Aug Sep
Meeting Date: 9 -9 -03 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
XX information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Memorandum re: Payment to City for Street Vacations
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35.79
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Previous memo to Council regarding procedural
requirements for processing street vacation requests. One question remained unclear, whether
the City could require payment for land being vacated. This memo answers that question in the
positive.
BACKGROUND: When the Council last reviewed the street vacation issue, I was not sure
whether the Council could require payment when the street or easement was not paid for by
public funds. In researching the issue in appellate case law, there appeared to be a conflict
between case law from 1970 and back, and statutory provisions from 1949 on.
After talking to Pat Mason at MRSC on Friday, he agrees that there exists what appears to be a
conflict in the language between case law and statutory requirements. That being said, he
stated that the widely accepted process on requiring payment is to follow the statutory
requirements.
Another issue is whether to charge a vacation application processing fee. Many cities impose
such fees. Spokane's is $300.
This leaves the Council with several policy issues to resolve: (1) whether or not to charge for the
vacated properties, (2) whether or not to adopt an ordinance essentially restating RCW 35.79,
and (3) whether to charge a vacation application processing fee.
OPTIONS: (1) Require payment or not for vacated streets. (2) Adopt or not adopt a vacation
ordinance.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Staff recommendation is to require payment
consistent with the statute, and not to adopt an ordinance. The procedures for vacating a street
are straight - forward enough. The Council may want to consider requiring payment for the value
of the street, but not requiring an application processing fee.
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Requiring payment for the value of the land would increase
city revenues. However, RCW 35.79.030 requires that one -half of the revenue received by the
city as compensation for the area vacated must be dedicated to the acquisition, improvement,
development and related maintenance of public open space or transportation capital projects in
the city.
STAFF CONTACT: Cary P. Driskell
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
ATTACHMENTS: Memorandum re: Payment to City for Street Vacations.
Spo"kan��
Memorandum
To: City Council
From: Cary P. Driskell
CC: Nina Regor, Stan Schwartz
Date: September 2, 2003
Re: Payment to City for street vacations
The policy choices are as follows:
11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206
509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org
1 previously provided the Council with a memorandum regarding street vacations
generally. There were two issues left unresolved.
The first issue was whether the City should charge applicants for the value of the real
property being vacated, and if so, in what amount. A portion of the previous memo
discussed the payment issue, but it will be summarized here for clarity. This memo
assumes the future needs assessment for road purposes has been answered in the
negative.
If the street or alley has been part of a dedicated public right -of -way for twenty -five years
or more, or if the subject property, or part thereof, were acquired at public expense, the
City may require the owners of the property abutting street or alley to compensate the
City in an amount that does not exceed the full appraised value of the area vacated. One
half of the revenue received by the City for such vacations must be dedicated to the
acquisition, improvement, development, and related maintenance of public open space or
transportation capital projects within the City.
lithe property sought for vacation has been owned for less than 25 years, or was not paid
for by public funds, the City rm require up to one -half the appraised value of the
property.
1. Not require payment for any street vacations.
2. Require some percentage between 1 and 100% of the appraised value for
properties dedicated for road purposes at least 25 years or paid for by public
funds.
3 Require some percentage between 1 and 50% of the appraised value for
properties dedicated for road purposes for less than 25 years or not paid for by
public funds.
The statutes on payment for vacated land 'were originally adopted in 1949. Since that
time, there have been various provisions for requiring payment for vacated right -of -way.
Although 1 have some remaining questions of how to reconcile early case law with the
newer statutory language, I discussed this issue with Pat Mason at MRSC, and he assured
nie the accepted approach is as outlined in 1 -3, above with regard to payment. He did
agree with me that there appears to be an apparent conflict between the statutory
language and case law up through at least 1970 where the City only owns an easement
over the property for road purposes. Despite that, most cities require payment, and get it.
1 also could not find anything requiring us to adopt an ordinance setting forth a process
for handling vacation requests. It appeared to me that we could simply do them as set
forth in the RCW. I checked with Pat Mason at MRSC to find out if we need to adopt an
ordinance. He responded today that there appears to be no requirement that cities adopt
street vacation ordinances, although most cities have them. If we did adopt such an
ordinance, it would essentially look like the provisions in RCW 35.79.
If you have any questions, please let me know.
Cary P. Driskell
Deputy City Attorney
Spokane
.
( �
2
Memorandum
To: Mayor DeVleming, Honorable Council members
From: Neil Kersten, Public Works Director
Thru: Dave Mercier, City Manager
Date: September 2, 2003
Re: Sullivan Road and 4 Avenue Signal Project
11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206
509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org
At the August 19, 2003 Council Work Session Councilmember Schimmels asked about
the funding of the Sullivan Road and 4` signal Project. This memo is in answer
to his question.
Our public works staff contacted the county and learned the following:
• A Hazard Elimination Safety grant has been approved for this signal project.
• Grant funds are obligated in stages as work on the project is completed. The three
stages for obligating funds are 1) preliminary engineering (PE), 2) right-or-way
purchase (RW), and 3) construction (CN).
• Grant funds for PE have been obligated and the PE work has been completed.
Spokane County has requested obligation of RW funds but has not received
authorization yet. Once the county gets authorization, negotiations for purchasing
a small amount of right -of -way for the signal poles will begin.
• Upon acquiring the needed right -of.- -way, a request will be put forth for obligating
the construction funds.
The total cost of this project is estimated to be $164,000. The City's share of these costs
is estimated at $16,00.0. The project is scheduled for construction next spring (assuming
the purchase of right - of-way doesn't take too long).
The project was originally scheduled for construction this year but was delayed because
of the incorporation of the valley.
I trust this addresses Councilmember Schimmels' question. Please contact me or Steve
Worley if you have any additional questions regarding this project.
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
Approved Minutes
Council Chambers — City Hall 11707 E. Sprague Ave.
August 14, 2003
L CALL TO ORDER
Bill othmann, Planning Commission Chair, called the meeting to order at
6 :30 p.m.
1I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Ti e Commission and audience recited the .Pledge of Allegiance,
11I. ROLL CALL
Fred Beau]ac — Present
Bob Blum — Present
David Crosby — Present
Gail Koglc — Present
Bill Gothmann — Present
Tan Robertson — Present
John 0, Carroll - Present
IV. APPROVAL ROVAi• OF AGENDA
Iran Robertson moved that the agenda be approved as presented. Fred Beaulac
seconded the motion, notion passed unanimously.
V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
It was moved by David Crosby and seconded by Gail Ko„ 1e that the minutes of
the .wally 23, 2003 Planning Commission iueetthg he approved as presented.
11 otian passed unanimously.
VI. PUBLIC COMMENT
.Five. citizens signed up to give public testimony. Commission Chair Bill
Crathmann. allowed five minutes at the podium to people speaking on behalf of a
group and three minutes to individuals.
Chuck Hafner, 4710 S. Woodruff, Spokane Valley, OVA
Mr. Hafrier and his family live in the Ponderosa Fifth Addition area, At one time
this neighborhood was zoned as a suburban single- family dwelling area which
allowed horses and other large animals. Yesterday. Mr- Rainer discovered that
Spokane County had clanged the zoning to that of an turban area The citizens
living in this area were never aware of the zoning change. J..e asked that the
.Planning Commission to do whatever need to be done to have the area rezoned
back to its original zoning status.
Robert E. Lee, 15620 E. 14 Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA.
Mr. Lee and his family live in the 'Ponderosa Fifth Addition area. He wished to
affirm lair- J layer's statements and stated that keeping horses had been the
primary reason for his selection of a home site. He urged the Planning
Commission to reconsider the present development regulations to allow horses on
their property.
Lisa Young, 1512 S. Shamrock, Spokane Valley, WA
Ms. Young presented the Planning Conunission with a letter and a petition signed
by residents of Rotchford Acre Tracts. (attached)
Myrna Gothmann, 10010 E. 48 Spokane Valley, WA
Mrs. Gothmann affirmed that no one in the area where she and her family reside
realized that their property had lost its original zoning status.
Gene Strunk, 12902 E. Broadway, Spokane Valley, WA
Mr. Strunk strongly urged the Planning Commission to recommend adoption of
the draft Junk Vehicle Ordinance to the City Council. He stated that junk vehicles
adversely affect property values and that this Ordinance is important for the
protection of tax payers in our community.
Jean Gulden, 10226 E. 44 Spokane Valley, WA
Ms. Gulden also lives in the Ponderosa area. She affirmed the previous public
comments made about her neighborhood, and asked the Planning Commission to
take the requested rezoning action so their neighborhood would not be degraded.
Mr. Gothmann closed the public comment session at 7:00 p.m.
The Planning Commission discussed its role in this and other rezone requests
made at previous meetings. Marina Sukup explained that she would be giving a
brief presentation at the end of the meeting with regard to the land use element of
Comprehensive Plan Development. There is a citizen participation plan built
into the process. She encouraged concerned citizens from the Ponderosa area
to stay for this presentation.
VII. COMMISSION REPORTS
There were no Commission reports.
VIII. ADMIN.[STRATIVE REPORT
Marina Sukup introduced the City's new Current Planning Manager, Kevin
Snyder, to the Planning Commission.
IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS
A. OLD BUSINESS:
Public Hearing: Junk Vehicle Ordinance
Bill Gothmann, Planning Conunission Chair, declared the Public Hearing
open at 7:07 p.m.
2
\
1 An Ordinance of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, Regulating the
Storage of Junk Vehicles. on. Private .Property.
Scott Kuhta, Planner, provided the Commission and the audience with a
brief outline of the process used to develop the proposed Junk Car
Ordinance., Cary Driske]I, Deputy City Attorney, reviewed the proposed
Ordinance and provided the Flaming Commission with a copy of new
abatement procedural changes which were recommended by the
Washington Cities insurance Authority (WCJA).
The Commission had no questions for the stale- Mr. Gothmann opened
the Rearing up to Public Testimony at 7 :22 p.m.
Jirn Poston, P.O. Sox 117, Spokane Valley, WA
Mr. Poston is an opponent of the Ordinance. As an old car enthusiast, he
doesn't think that the proposed Ordinance gives people who build street
rods enough time to complete their work.
Dale Hearn, 12714 E. Guthrie, Spokane Valley, WA
Mr. Ream spoke in support ofthe Ordinance and presented photos of an
existing property. He noted that the junk cars shown are used in
demolition derbies and then returned to the property and stored in the
gauge or driveway. The demolished parts are scattered around the yard
and the cars drip oil and antifreeze down the driveway, into the street, and
into the and into the public water system, creating a safety hazard to
animals children and adults. He encouraged the .Planning Commission to
recornmend adoption of the Junk. Car Ordinance to the City Council
A. Gene 'Hinkle, 11916 E. Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA
Dr. Hinkle is a proponent of the Ordinance. His neighbor in a business .
zone opened a nuie -up shop and has proceeded to store old cars on site for
over a year, Dr. Hinkle presented photos to the Planning Commission For
reference and permanent record. He encouraged adoption of the
Ordinance,
George Fcldinillcr, 14023 E. 25 Court, Spokane Valley, WA
Is an opponent of the Ordinance. He believes that teri years would be a
more adequate timefraine for hobbiests-
Following discussion of screening, Mr. Driskell affirmed that screening
from the view of an individual standing a ground level view would bc.
considered reasonable, rather than from someone looking down from a
deck.
Grant Rice, E. 16620 Valleyway, Spokane Valley, WA
Mr. Rice is a proponent of the Ordinance. He was originally against the
Ordinance, but has worked with staff to rewrite the trouble spots. Mr. Rice now
encourages the Planning Commission to recommend adoption of the Ordinance to
the City Council.
John Baldwin, E. 11905 22 " Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA
Mr. Baldwin is a proponent of the Ordinance. He works for University SCOPE
and takes many photos of junk cars, so he understands the impact this Ordinance
will have on the community. Mr. Baldwin believes the proposed Ordinance is
fair, and thinks the City has done an outstanding job to develop it.
Lloyd and Marianne Thomas, 12920 E. 26 Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA
(testimony provided via email and placed into permanent record)
Mr. and Mrs. Thomas are proponents of the Ordinance. They are pleased with the
City's efforts to clean up neighborhoods and private property. (Attached)
Gene Strunk, 12902 E. Broadway, Spokane Valley, WA
Mr. Strunk is a strong proponent of the Ordinance. He testified earlier during the
public comment session, and wanted to reaffirm his support.
Chuck Hafner, 4710 S. Woodruff, Spokane Valley, WA
Mr. Hafner is a proponent of the Ordinance. Derelict cars located on three sides
of his property in the Ponderosa area adversely affect the value of his property.
Ron Sythc, 12715 E. Guthrie Drive, Spokane Valley, WA
Mr. Sythe supports the proposal and testified that the junk cars leaking toxic
chemicals into the street are a danger hazard.
Mr. Gothmann closed the Public Testimony portion of the Hearing at 7:52 p.m.
The Planning Commission took a brief break.
The Planning Commission recommended that the following changes be made to
the language of the Ordinance:
SECTION 3:
"Except as provided in Section 4, all junk vehicles or parts thereof placed,
stored or permitted to be located..."
SECTION 7, Part D:
The lien shall be subordinate to all previously existing special
assessment liens imposed on the same property and shall be superior to all
other liens, except for state and county taxes, with which it shall share
priority".
Ian Robertson moved that the amended City Ordinance Regulating the Storage
of Junk Vehicles on Private Property, along with related changes to the
City's Zoning Code, be recommended to the City Council for adoption.
Fred Beaulac seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously.
4 --
B. NEW BUSINESS
Study Session — Adult Oriented Business Regulations
Scott Kuhta presented the Planning Commission with an overview of the
background and zoning regulations for Adult Oriented Businesses in the
Spokane Valley. City Council placed a six -month moratorium on
establishment of new adult businesses in early April. This moratorium is
near its end staff has proposed an extension.
Debi Alley
Administrative Assistant
The Public Hearing ended at 8:25 p.m.
Presently, there are only three areas in the Spokane Valley where a new
adult business can locate. Development of policies and procedures will be
handled slowly and carefully. Planning staff will continue to study the
issue and provide the Planning Conunission with further detailed
information.
Comprehensive Plan/.Land Use Presentation
Ms. Sukup briefed the Planning Conunission on the Land Use element of
the Comprehensive Plan, noting that the schedule for completion of the
Plan is aggressive. A preliminary draft should he available by the
Summer 2004.
X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER
Bill Gothmann requested that the Planning Commission meet for a special Vision
Development Session in September. He handed out revised copies of his draft
Vision Statement. Ms. Sukup will facilitate the session.
It was determined that there will be a Vision Development Workshop on
Thursday, September 11, 2003, from 5:00 — 6:30 p.m. in the Council
Chambers preceding the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting.
The next meeting of the City of Spokane Valley Planning Commission will be
on Thursday, August 28, 2003, from 6:30 — 9:30 p.rn. in the Council
Chambers.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
SUBMITTED: APPROVED:
13111 Gothmann
Chairman
Sf61:
.//c Valley
Memorandum
To: Dave Mercier, City Manager and members of Council
From: Mac McDonald, Public Works Supt through Neil Kersten, Director of PW
Date: September 3, 2003
Re: Stiles Traffic Complaints
11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane valley WA 99206
509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhallpspakanevalley.org
Vernon and Dorothy Stiles, who live at the intersection of Montgomery and Sargent, have had
long- standing concerns about truck traffic, vandalism, reckless driving, and cut - through traffic in
their vicinity. Southbound traffic on Argonne, particularly drivers whose destination is in the
Yardley area, find the Montgomery/Sargent/ Knox route preferable to remaining on Argonne to
Broadway. Montgomery was posted as a no truck (local only) street several years ago during
construction on Argonne and Mullan, and those signs have remained in place. The surrounding
neighborhoods are residential in character, except the commercial corridor along Argonne and the
North side of Montgomery, where a large truck rental business stores and maintains many of their
vehicles (see pictures). A mini- storage facility is also located on the North side of Montgomery.
These businesses generate considerable traffic which is
The Stiles' would like to have both Montgomery and Sargent: dead end in front of their property.
Staff feels that is not an appropriate solution given traffic circulation requirements.
The following is a list of actions and /or meetings with the Stiles: .
1. The County installed a No Trucks (local deliveries only) sign was installed during
construction of the Argonne/Mullan couplet several years ago —that sign has remained in
place.
2. In January, I met with the Stiles, and as a result of their concerns, had an advance
warning sip installed about 300 feet ahead of the intersection.
3. The police have met with the Stiles, and have targeted the area for increased enforcement.
4. The City Engineer has met with the Stiles, both in the office and on the site, and feels that
all typical signage and actions appropriate to the situation have been taken.
5. We agreed, as a "last ditch" effort to call attention to the curve, to install a Type 3
barricade with an attached arrow at the intersection to increase the visibility of the
warning. That barricade was installed on Tuesday, September 3 (sec attached photo).
At this point, staff feels that every reasonable accommodation to the traffic situation in this
location has been taken.
337
233
Vis
49050
413303
1
4.8051
40362
48305
4 fit -34 84 46
-1 84 46
%Au-40--
4AY:3
84
48242
413732
4.0243
40238
4.02r
40235
4.0240
40234
JR -3.S
40241
40231
40244
40230
40245
40304
40308
40301
03
u1t -384 46
J
AT
• =u un,: 0..0.00
public • rRco
existln
map SOUTC I
Map;faatui
from all so!
Jieve :bi eri;
adjusted tc
;:ahie:ie th
_. L a.
best:fit {;
- , {p0•NOT,��
MEASURE
on this`ma
.determine
distance 0
the grount
4
L i
rm m
Spokane
jUatley
Memorandum
To: Dave Mercier, City Manager, Mayor and Members of City Council
From: Marina Sukup, AICP, Community Development Director
CC: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager
Date: September 4, 2003
Re: 1111 S. Timberlane Drive — Mr. Lowe
11707 E Sprague Ave Suite i06 • Spokane Valley WA 99206
509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org
The property is located in the Rotchford Acres Tract east of Sullivan Road. The
subdivision was established over twenty years ago. Until January 15, 2002, the property
was zoned Suburban Residential -1 (SR -1). This designation permitted Home
Professions with the issuance of a home profession permit and Home Industry with a
Conditional Use Permit. The adoption of the Comprehensive Plan and the Phase I
Development Regulations changed the zoning to Urban Residential 7*. This
classification continues to allow Home Professions with a permit but does not permit
Home Industry.
Staff did evaluate whether Mr. Lowe's use of the property could be considered as either
a Home Profession or Home Industry, concluding that it could not qualify under either
characterization.
The Interim Zoning Code adopted by the City contains provisions for a variance to .. .
"(a) ensure that the adjustment shall not constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and similar zone
classification in which the property is situated, (b) ensure that the intent and purpose of
the Zoning Code is maintained with regard to location, site design, appearance,
landscaping and other features of the proposal and (c) protect the environment, public
interest and general welfare, and that the following circumstances are found to apply:
a. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size,
shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the Zoning
Code creates practical difficulties and is found to deprive the property of rights
and privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and similar zone
classification; and
b. That the granting of the variance will neither be materially detrimental to the
public welfare nor injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and
zone in which the property is located." (Interim Zoning Code Section 14.404.082)
The property is without problems of size, shape, or topography and is located on a
residential street. The surrounding neighborhood is exclusively residential in character.
1111 S, Timberlane
September 4, 2003
Page 3
Fallowing Mr. Lowe's presentation at the City Council on August 26, 2003, Community
Development Staff met with Mr. and Mrs. Lowe on August 29, 2003, to advise them of
the findings of our investigation. They were not pleased and left the meeting abruptly.
Attachments
Code Enforcement Summary
Photographs
Tax Data
SUMMARY
1111 S. Timberlane Dr.
August 29, 2003
After reviewing the taped testimony of Mr. Lowe, given before the City of Spokane
Valley Council on August 26, 2003, I've been directed to provide a brief summary of
the events leading up to this testimony. The following reflects niy investigation and
findings.
June 27, 2003 - Upon receipt of the initial complaints, I conducted a drive by
investigation of 11.11 S. Timberlane Drive. No one was home at the time, so :I:
deposited my business card with a note wedged into his mailbox door. As is
reflected in the photographs, Mr. Lowe's property and operation are impressive, in
cleanliness and organization. After speaking directly with Mr. Lowe that afternoon,
he informed me that he operated a transfer point for personnel, vehicles and
supplies out of his home.
He also expressed a concern that his neighbors were upset and requested they
directly contact him to work it out. 1 told him I would encourage his neighbors to
contact him.
•
During this conversation 1 did compliment Mr. Lowe on his operation. This is
where 1 believe my compliments were taken out of context. In no way did 1 imply
that his operation was acceptable or approved. As yet my investigation was just
beginning and 1 had no idea of the scope of his business.
We closed the conversation. I determined that based upon the evidence I had, there
was no zoning violation. 1 agreed to encourage direct communication between the
neighbors and himself and based upon our conversation, 1 asked the receptionist to
explain to additional complainants that it appears there is no zoning violations. I
was also left: with the impression that Mr. Lowe did not operate his business out of
his home, strictly a "transfer point ". I enjoyed the conversation as Mr. Lowe is a
pleasant and articulate individual.
July 1 thru 3. 2003 - The receptionist continued to receive numerous complaints
about the operations occurring on 1111 S. Timberlane. I spoke directly with two of
the complainants, who wished to remain anonymous, explaining my understanding
of what was occurring at this location. I also encouraged both complainants to
contact Mr. Lowe directly, both kindly declined stating their preference to remain -
anonymous.
July 7, 2003 — Received a phone call from the husband of a complainant. He wanted
me to look at the photographs and take his testimony on what he observes every day
and night. This complainant asked to be advised of all proceedings.
After reviewing all the evidence provided, the scope of Mr. Lowe's operation was
abundantly evident. At this point 1 re- opened the complaint file and changed the
course of the investigation.
July 10, 2003 — I sought council from the Deputy City Attorney regarding my
attempt to mediate a settlement between Mr. Lowe and his neighbors. De advised
me that this is not a good idea as the City of Spokane Valley needs to remain neutral
and enforce the existing zoning codes.
July 16, 2003 — Sent Mr. Lowe the first voluntary compliance request and informed
the complainants of the status.
August 14, 2003 — Sent Mr. Lowe the second voluntary compliance request and
informed the complainants of the status.
Since this time I have had numerous conversations with the original complainant
and many other complainants. In addition, one face to face conversation with Mr.
Lowe.
Chris A. Berg
Code Enforcement Officer
City of Spokane Valley
1111 S. Timberlane Drive
Location: Rotchford Acre Tracts Lot 1 Block 4 Property Number 45243.0401
Existing Zoning: UR 7* Land Use: Residential
Improvements: Dwelling, Attached Garage, General Purpose Building, Other
Fencing and Screening: 6 foot Cyclone w /privacy Slats encompassing 75% of lot
Adjacent Land Uses: Residential
Initial Complaint Received: 06/30/2003 Subsequent Complaints: Numerous verbal
3 Additional complainants
Code Enforcement Contact: 07/01/2003 Initial site visit
Two telephonic conversations and three site visits from
07/01 thru .07/14 (see file)
Under the interim zoning provisions, the use complained of might be characterized as a Home
Industry or a Home Profession. The requirements for a Home Profession as an Accessory Use
with which the use does NOT comply are as follows:
Home Professions (Interim Zoning Code 14.300.100)
1.
2. The use, including all storage space shall .not occupy more than 49% of the residence's
livable floor area. No home profession shall occupy a detached accessory building. All
storage shall be enclosed within the residence.
3. Only members of the family who reside on the premises shall be engaged in the home
profession.
8. Traffic generated which exceeds the following standards shall be prima fascie evidence
that the activity is a primary business and not a home profession.
a. The parking of more than two customer vehicles at any one time.
b. The use of loading docks or other mechanical loading devices.
c. Deliveries of materials or products at such intervals so as to create a nuisance to
the neighborhood.
9. The hours of operation for a home profession shall be limited from seven a.m. to ten
p.m. The applicant shall specify on the Home Profession permit the hours of operation.
10. A Home Profession permit shall be issued by the Department per fee established by the
Board.
A Home Industry is not permitted in a UR -7* district, but where allowed requires a
Conditional Use Permit. The use does NOT comply with Home Industry requirements as
follows:
Home Industry. (Interim Zoning Code 14.616.240.4)
b. The use shall be carried on in a primary residence or may be allowed in accessory
detached structures which are not, in total larger than two times the gross floor area of
the primary residence;
c. Only members of the family residing on the premises and no more than two employees
outside the family may be engaged in the home industry;
e. Window and outdoor displays may be approved by the Hearing Body.
h. Parking, traffic, and storage requirements shall as approved by the Hearing Body.
RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION
a. No permit was issued by Spokane County for a Home Profession.
b. Home Industry is not permitted in a UR -7' Zoning District.
c. Current operations do NOT meet the requirements for either:
i. Property owner acknowledges eight employees
ii. Hours do not conform to 7 am.m -10 p.m. requirements of a Home Profession
iii. Use of accessory structure will not qualify activity as a Home Profession
_
"3114
Legal Description
ROTCHFORD ACRE TRACTS L1 B4
Taxpayer
-
LOWE, PATRICIA A & ROBERT H
c/o
Sales
Sale Date
11/13/2002
02/1812003
Sale Price Sale Instrument Excise Number
$0.00 QuIt Claim Deed 200220091
$180,000.00 Statutory Warranty D 200302671
Taxpayer
Sales History (prior to 1999)
Qualified)
Sale Date Sale Price Sale Instrument Unqualified
03/12/1982 $72,742.00 CONVERTED FROM SGM Unqualified
12/06/1978 $61,900.00 CONVERTED FROM SCM Unqualified
08/29/1977 $50,000.00 CONVERTED FROM SCM Unqualified
Vacant/
Improved Transfer
Improved NORMAL SALE
Improved NORMAL SALE
Improved NORMAL SALE
Verification
VERIFIED
VERIFIED
VERIFIED
Improvements
Improvement ID Improvement Type Improvement Description
D Dwelling Dwelling
001 Other Attached Garage
01 Other
02 Other General Purpose Bldg x Other
Features
Year Built Size
. 1977 1,248
0 528
1985 1
1996 1,440
Unit of
Measure •
SF
SF
SF
SF
Features
Improvement Type Improvement Description
Feature Built -in Dishwasher
Feature Fireplace
Feature Range & oven combination
Size
1
2
1
Unit of
Measure
IT
Owner LOWE, PATRICIA A & ROBERT H
Taxpayer
-
LOWE, PATRICIA A & ROBERT H
c/o
Owner 1111 S TIMBERLANE DR
Taxpayer
1111 S TIMBERLANE DR
Address VERADALE, WA 99037-
Address
VERADALE, WA 99037 -
Market Values
2003
Acreage
Land
25,000 Exempt
0
Land Sq Feet 45,000
Impvmts
Value
107,700
Personal
0
Property Class Code 11 Single Unit
Total Value
132,700 Property
Exemption Year Active Exemptions
fl
Fact Sheet for Property Number 45243.0401
Data As of 3/22/2003
Site Addles
Page 1 of 1
1111 S TIMB DR
TCA
0144
Parcel Statu
Active
Reports
Report Date
Wednesday, August 27. 2003
•a