The URL can be used to link to this page

2003, 10-07 Study SessionTuesday. October 7,2003 SU BJECT Proclamations Awards 1. Finance/Admin 2. Community Development 3. Community Development 4. Public Works 5. Lcga1 /P1iv' 6. Legal 7. Administration 8. Finance/Aft in Council Requests Please Turn Off All Electronic Devices During Council Meeting DISCUSSION LEADER ACTIVITY Mayor Del/lensing Cal Walker Nina Regor (10 minutes) Marina Sukup (25 minutes) Marina Sukup ( 10 minutes) Neil Kasten (20 minuets) Cary Driskell (10 minutes) Cary Driskell (10 minutes) Nina Rcg (15 minutes) Ken Thompson/Nina Rigor (10 minutes) 9. Advance Agenda Mayor DcVleming (5 minutes) 10. Council Check -in Mayor DcVleming (10 minutes) Study Setsinn Agenda. September 16, 2003 AGENDA CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL WORKSHEET STUDY SESSION CITY HALL AT REDWOOD PLAZA 11707 East Sprague Avenue, First Floor avc 6:00 P.M. GOAL Spokane is Reading: Walk ro School Day Scope Award Presentation Motion Consideration: Motion to Authorize Capital Improvement Bonding up to $2,430,000.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Ordinances for Discussion 10128 agenda Comprehensive Plan Housing Discussion/ Element Discussion information Right -of -way and Cross Circulation Discussion( Between Applcway & Sprague information Proposed Resolution for Participation 10/14 Agenda in Commission on Regional Wastewater Treatment Issues Probation Services Discussion Mintbeau CenterPlacc Update Budget Discussion Note: .At Council Study Sessions, there will be no public comments, except Council reserves the right to request information from the public and staff as appropriate. Page 1 of 1 Discussion/ information Discussion/ information Discussion( information Discussion/ information Discussion/ information Meeting Date: October 7, 2003 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business X new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Motion to Authorize Capital Improvement Bonding up to $2,430,000. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: N/A BACKGROUND: The City proposes about $30 million in capital projects in 2004 (including the CenterPlace project). In the short time since incorporation, Spokane Valley has been very successful in securing external funding for its street capital projects. We anticipate receiving over $5.6 million in state and federal funds for several projects. The grants pay for over 81% of the cost of those projects. State grants are awarded through the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB), and federal grants are awarded through the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) and the Bridge Replacement Advisory Committee (BRAC). This agenda item proposes authorizing bonds in the amount of $2.43 million to pay for a share of the local match of the grant- funded and other projects. A week ago, City staff mentioned bonding $2.379. The amount has increased by $51,000 to incorporate the bond issuance costs, which are an allowed use of bond proceeds. If Council chooses to authorize the street bonds, the City will jointly propose them along with the CenterPlace bonds. This would save on bond issuance costs. If approved, the Bond Ordinance scheduled for a first reading on October 14 will be updated to include the street bonds. The attached spreadsheet shows the draft capital expenditures for 2004, including a column displaying the projects the street bond proceeds would fund. OPTIONS: Council may authorize a different bond amount, or may choose not to authorize street bond funds. The capital project work plan would be adjusted accordingly. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to authorize capital improvement bonding up to $2,430,000. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This motion would increase bond proceeds, which would be offset by capital project expenditures. STAFF CONTACT: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager, and Ken Thompson, Finance and Administrative Services Director ATTACHMENT: Draft Capital Expenditures for 2004 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action 7,000,000 260,000 105,000 349,000 439,000 110.000 141,000 204,000 3114,000 31,000 237,000 2,50000 2.459,000 2,773,000 2,701,000 3,989,000 $ • _ 15,700 50,000 15,000 49,090 60,000 $ 180,700 55,000 239,000 141,000 52,000 114,000 $ 600.000 1 200,000 200,000 828,000 509,000 917,000 1,173,000 148,000 $ 3.422.000 1,872,000 $ 1,872,000 581,000 $ 561,000 87.000,000 $ 2,430,000 3 2.500,000 1 11.622,000 Department 303 Street Fund 304 Mirabeau Point 402 Starmwater 102/2003 12:00 PM Road Construction Proiect, 161h Avenue - Propel 2 l31shman Mice to Pines • 1,932,000 Park Road • Project 2 Oth to Appionay 821.000 Pfnes1lan00ld WIIMur Rd, to Rhos 620,000 IOarkcr Road Reconstruction PE 6 RW 1.150,000 Bettor Road Hddgo R0Orlacemenl PE 6 RW 702,000 evergreen Road 16th to 2n1 1,521,000 Mbtxloneous Road Construction 430,000 2491 Avenue Sidewalk Project (MAP) 1011,000 Untod .EFrnileli0ll_Safaty,P15110 a; SWOran Rand & 41h Avenue Sbnel (RW R CR) 16,700 Rood Paycheck ( e,rtignk9mfnali_o f nit�ID); Carnahan 2,569,000 Shiite 2,014,01X) Venatiolo Maio II 2,585,003 WeolherwoodUOwern 4,033,003 Bums Reed 31,00:1 Mlecolbnootn Propels 50,000 Miroeta le 0 Vatay Couplet 19,000 Road Replacement Projects 400.000 Conndlenl Contrail 60,000 Cameucdon In Progress 0,900,000 Drdnoge Protects _ 200,000 'Reel Estate Exrao Tax 1 "Reel Estate Excise Tex 2 •••Transportation improvement Hoard (Stale Funds) - "Spokane Regional Transportation CounW (Federal Funds) Bridge Reptecernnnt Advisory Commlltao (Fornoml funds) Total Capital Expenditures j22,121,1= City of Spokane Volley Capital Expenditures for 2004 Wirabeau Paint Pond Street Road nonagons & °rant Proceeds Capital Outlay Description Total Proceeds emds CentAntdtens and Fans BEET 1• Arterial Sheet Fund DRAFT SW Manognmont CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 7, 2003 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business Einew business ❑ public hearing x information ❑ admin. report Zpending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2003 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A - Growth Management Act — Spokane Valley Interim Comprehensive Plan — Spokane Valley Interim Zoning Code PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: N/A BACKGROUND: The City of Spokane Valley Interim Comprehensive Plan provides for an annual comprehensive plan amendment process. The deadline for submitting comprehensive plan amendment requests was July 1, 2003. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed amendments on August 28, 2003. After considering public testimony, the Commission continued the hearing to September 11, 2003, requesting Planning Staff to develop an alternative recommendation for CPA - 03-05. The Comprehensive Plan Amendments, with Planning Commission Recommendations, are summarized below: 1. File No. CPA - 03 - 01 Location: 8915 East Montgomery Request: Change 5 acres from Low Density Residential to Regional Commercial PC Recommendation: Change to Community Center and zone B -2 2. File No. CPA -03 -02 Location: South side of Appleway Avenue, east of Park Road Request: Change 3 acres from Neighborhood Commercial to Regional Commercial PC Recommendation: Change to Community Commercial and zone B -2 3. File No. CPA -03-03 Location: West side of Pines Road, between Union Pacific Railroad right -of -way and Mansfield Avenue Request: Change 2.5 acres from High Density Residential to Light Industrial PC Recommendation: Change to Light Industrial and zone 1 -2 4. File No. CPA -03 -04 Location: Cataldo Avenue, west of Bradley and north of 1 -90 (Golf Dome property) Request: Change 2.6 acres from Low Density Residential to Light Industrial PC Recommendation: Change to Light Industrial and zone 1 -2 5. File No. CPA -03 -05 Location: West of Pines Road between Broadway and Cataldo Avenue Request: Change 3 acres from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential PC Recommendation: Change southern portion to Medium Density Residential and zone UR -12; no change on northern portion of parcel. 6. File No. CPA -03 -06 Location: North side of Broadway Avenue, between Blake and Mamer Roads Request: Change 5 acres from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential PC Recommendation: Change to High Density Residential and zone UR -22 7. File No. CPA -03 -07 Location: Northwest corner of Barker Road and Boone Avenue Request: Change 3 acres from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential PC Recommendation: Change to west portion of property to Medium Density Residential and zone UR -12; change east portion of property to Community Commercial and zone B -2 Staff concurs with the recommendations of the Planning Commission. OPTIONS: The Council may adopt the Planning Commission recommendations, deny the requests, remand the requests back to the Planning Commission for further proceedings, or modify the Commission's recommendations after conducting a public hearing, per RCW 36.70A.035(2)(a). The Council may set a public hearing date at any regularly scheduled meeting. The public hearing requires at least 15 days public notice and all property owners within 400 feet of the proposal must be mailed an individual notice. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: N/A unless the Council wishes to hold a public hearing on one or more of the proposed amendments. If this is the case, Council may wish to set a hearing date. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A STAFF CONTACT: Marina Sukup, Community Development Director ATTACHMENTS Staff report, zoning and comprehensive plan maps for each request, application materials submitted by applicant. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 7, 2003 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: Housing GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A - Growth Management Act PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: N/A BACKGROUND: 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. This presentation covers the Housing element, including the requirements of the Growth Management Act, the adopted Countywide Planning Policies, an overview of relevant elements of the Interim Plan, a review of available estimates and the next steps in formulating a plan for housing within the City. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: N/A BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A STAFF CONTACT: Marina Sukup, Community Development Director ATTACHMENTS Presentation *Wane 400 0Val1ey COMIRREHIENSWE HOUSINIO Communit Develo ment Department . . _ OCTOBER 7, 2003 OIL. if r Cipromiir Oniiirete c GMA M anate a = , 0_ AiNlik '-- E 5,. oil ii 0 u C M P 1 4 . 1.3.[10 Steering Committee 0 gc 31 C EL 0 0 0 • 0 a GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT Planning Goals Urban Growth -efficient Reduce Sprawl Transportation-efficient multi Housing affordability for all Economic Development Property Rights Permits — timely & fair Natural Resource Industries Open Space & Recreation Environment Citizen Participation & Coordination Public Facilities & Services Historic Preservation 1 Interim Plan Goals • Coordination with other jurisdictions, agencies and neighborhoods • Reduce regulatory barriers and allow greater flexibility in the development process • Develop a variety of housing options for all economic groups • Ensure adequate housing availability 1 GMA Required • Inventory & Analysis • Policies. objectives and mandatory provisions • Identifies land for housing • Adequate provision for ALL economic segments of the community • 2 Preliminary Estimates* City Washington Yardley Millwood Area Dishman -Mica % SF, Duplex 67.4% 65.4% % 10+ DU 15.5% 14.4% Next Steps % 1990 - % before 2000 1940 19.6% 6.3% 21.7% 12.5% 70.3% 10.0% 5.3% 19.7% 65.7% 19.2% 15.0% 16.1% 72.8% 13.1% 14.0% ; 6.3% ' Demographic 8 Economic Analysis of Spokane Valley • Update baseline data • Develop Housing element of the Comprehensive Plan in accordance with GMA requirements • Seek CDBG entitlement status • Coordinate with regional housing improvement efforts in the interim 4 Preliminary Estimates* • Persons /household (average) • Owner - occupied • Renter • Married couple • Married couple w /children< 18 years • Householder living alone • Female Head of Household • With children < 18years ead of Household > 65 years • _ w.•... t !�= 144 >.• Rental 322 " - Preliminary Estimates* Housing Tenure 2.66 2.46 52.8% 23.8% 26.0% 11.0% 7.3% • Demographic & Economic Analysis of Spokane Valley 1990 2000 % Change • Median Home Value $63,354 $119,383 6.5 • Washington $93,400 $168,300 6.1 • Median Gross Rent $382 $571 4.1 • Washington $445 $663 4.1 • Median Gross Rent $382 $571 4.1 • Washington $445 $663 4.1 3 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 7. 2003 City Manager Sign -off Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public heanng X information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Right -of -Way and Cross - Circulation Between Appleway and Sprague GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: See map on the west wall of Council Chambers. OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT ATTACHMENTS GOVERNING LEGISLATION: ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Resolution CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 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: Proposed Resolution Re: Participation in Committee on Regional Wastewater Treatment Issues PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Various wastewater treatment issues in planning for new treatment facility. BACKGROUND: Members of the respective legislative governing bodies have met over the past few months with the DOE to determine the extent the various jurisdictions will be able to, and required to, work together on regional wastewater treatment issues. The committee that would be formed is an effort to achieve greater communication between jurisdictions. Spokane County adopted a resolution nearly identical to this one. OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Adopt the Resolution. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Negligible. STAFF CONTACT: Neil Kersten or Nina Regor. Proposed admin resolution re: participation of wastewater committee — C. Driskell 9 -22 -03 draft 1 RESOLUTION NO. 03- CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASFTTNGTON A RESOLUTION IN THE MATTER OF PARTICIPATING IN A COMMITTEE TO CONSIDER GOVERNANCE OF REGIONAL WASTE WATER TREATMENT, ANi) APPOINTING COUNCIL MLMMMIBER TO REPRESENT THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY. WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the RCW 35A.11.020 the City Council for Spokane Valley, Washington, (hereinafter the "Council ") has the responsibility for the care of City property and the management of City funds and business; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 35.67.020, the Council has the authority to control and manage a system of sanitary and storm sewers; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 36.70 and RCW 36.94, the Board of County Commissioners for Spokane County (hereinafter the "Board ") has adopted a Comprehensive Wastewater Management Ilan (CWIvtP) as an element of the County's Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Board has adopted a Wastewater Facilities Plan with a recommendation to design, construct, and operate a new regional wastewater treatment plant to treat wastewater flows primarily from the Spokane Valley area; and WHEREAS, the City of Spokane has suggested that a regional wastewater treatment plant to process Combined Sewage Overflows, as well as sanitary sewage, be constructed at a different site from the County's preferred site; and WHEREAS, the Cite of Spokane Valley will be a major source of wastewater flows to the new regional treatment plant, and has indicated an interest in exploring concepts to regionalize the governance of wastewater management in Spokane County; and WHEREAS, a meeting of elected officials from Spokane County, City of Spokane, and City of Spokane Valley was held on August 13, 2003; and WHEREAS, one point of discussion and tentative agreement at the meeting was to attempt to establish a committee of elected officials, with one. member from each municipal agency, for the purpose of evaluating approaches to establish a new regional governance for management of regional wastewater treatment; and WHEREAS, each municipal agency agreed to address this issue in their individual forums, and attempt to formalize their agency's support for a committee to evaluate regional wastewater governance, as well as appoint a representative from their agency. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council for Spokane Valley that the Council supports establishment of a committee to evaluate regional wastewater governance, subject to the following conditions: 1. The evaluation of regional wastewater governance shall be pursued on a parallel track with the continued implementation of design, construction, and operation of a new regional wastewater treatment plant in or near Spokane Valley. 2. Evaluation of regional wastewater governance shall not be an impediment or obstacle to implementation of the new regional wastewater treatment plant. cpd work files /wastewater /resolution to form committee 9 -22 -03 draft 1 Page 1 of 2 Proposed admin resolution re: participation of wastewater committee — C. Driskell 9 -22 -03 draft 1 3. A conceptual evaluation of the Playfair Race Course, located at 202 North Altamont, will occur initially and promptly to determine its suitability and acceptability as an alternate site to the finalist sites listed in the Spokane County Wastewater Facilities Plan. 4. Implementation of the new regional wastewater treatment plant and evaluation of governance, shall be pursued with the intent to retain the financial advantages of the Washington State Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund (SR.F) Loan, F1''04094, which has been offered to Spokane County by the Department of Ecology. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council for Spokane Valley that will be Spokane Valley's representative on the regional governance committee, if such committee is endorsed by the other municipal agencies and Spokane County, consistent with the above listed conditions. ATTEST: Adopted this day of October, 2003. City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved as to Form: Deputy City Attorney, Cary P. Driskell City of Spokane Valley Mayor Michael DeVieming cpd work files /wastewater /resolution to form committee 9 -22 -03 draft 1 Page 2 oft Spokane jVal�ey Memorandum To: City Council From: Cary P. Driskell CC: Dave Mercier, Nina Regor Date: September 30, 2003 Re: Probation services Background on Probation services. Contract ncaotiations to date. 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org Spokane Valley does not currently have a formal contract with Spokane County for the County to provide probation services. The County has continued to perform these services on the belief that we would eventually pay for what has been provided. Probation services are required when somebody is sentenced for committing a misdemeanor crime. Typically, the defendant will only receive a very small part of any jail sentence imposed. I will discuss an example with you at the session. The person is then placed on probation for either one or two years. This is the hammer by which the Court hopes to force good behavior. Time pay for the fine and probation costs are set up, and both these amounts are generally paid at 525.00 per month, with the fine being paid in full before the probation fees are paid. This results in the.service being used, and SV paying for it, at least a year before the defendant pays the assessed probation fee. There are several types of probation, monitored and unmonitored. Somebody on probation for a DUI conviction will have a more active type of probation which requires meeting with the defendant regularly, resulting in charges to the City. Somebody on probation for theft, Driving While License Suspended, or similar charge would be unmonitored, which basically results in no charge to us. The probation officer merely checks every 6 or so months to see if the defendant has any new charges that violate the terms of probation. Starting with the interim staff in March, the City and County have discussed what form a probation services agreement would take. The County made approximately $200,000 in net revenue on probation services in 2002. The original contract proposed was by Karla McNeily, the bead probation officer for Spokane County and City of Spokane (the position is shared by the jurisdictions, but she is an employee of City of Spokane). It simply suggested that the County continue to operate probation as a function of the Court. ('That was not apparently reduced to writing. Attached as Exhibit A to this memo is a similar agreement between Union Gap and Toppenish. It was included for illustrative purposes for the Council.) It would not cost us any additional money, and whatever the County could make on the service it would keep. Stan McNutt and Lee Walton were in favor of that approach. Both parties proceeded on that path for about a month, at which point the County Commissioners indicated that they would only agree to a contract whereby the County got true cost recovery. Given that statement, the County Finance Department and Probation Services Department arrived at a formula on cost allocation. After another two months of discussion between Stan McNutt, Fran Boxer, myself and Jim Emacio, the County sent Spokane Valley a letter on July 3lwith the finalized draft agreement reflecting that we would be charged for every 15 minutes worked by probation, with the cost reflective of the formula. (See Exhibit B, letter and draft agreement from County) Even after the County sent that letter, staff continued to ask if the County would reconsider, and agree to simply have the County operate probation. The County has continued to respond that the approach the County will take on all its contracts is one of cost recovery. The flip side, as the County asserts here, is that the contract could be a net gain for SV. In the long term, this may be a revenue generating proposition for SV. In the short term, the service would be rendered, but generally not paid for by a defendant for well over a year. In effect, we will be "filling the pipeline" with paying probation service users for almost two years before we reach a breakeven point. Fortunately, the rampup is much slower than the County anticipated. In March/April, the anticipated 2003 nine month probation services costs from the County were $165,000. Through the first five months of 2003 (April - August), the total billed to Spokane Valley for probation services is under $2,000. This amount will increase pretty substantially over the next five months though. One of the issues we continue to work an is how the hourly rate was calculated for both probation officers and for staff. It is not clear how the indirect costs and M &O costs were calculated, and whether there is any potential for duplication of costs to us. We continue to try to clarify this matter. Options to probation and incarceration I am working on putting together a report that analyzes some programs that offer alternatives to incarceration, including global positioning systems, electronic home monitoring, SCR.A,Ibf units, requesting that prosecutors not recommend the full amount of jail time with most of it suspended, and the person on two years probation. Instead, put them on GPS or EHM for five days (which they pay $15 -20 per day instead of us paying $69 for each day they are in jail), and don't suspend any sentence. Subsequent offenses get increased time on GPS or EH M, but not suspended time. I will get you more information on these types of programs in the near future. INTERLOCAL PROBATION SERVICES AGREEMENT The interlocal agreement is entered into by and between the City of Toppenish, hereinafter referred to as Toppenish, and the City of Union Gap, hereinafter referred to as Union Gap, pursuant to RCW 39.34 In consideration of mutual promises contained herein, the parties hereto mutually agree as follows: PURPOSE It is the purpose and intent of this agreement in Union Gap shall provide probation services for the City of Toppenish. Whereas the Toppenish Municipal Court has Jurisdiction over persons charged with the offense of driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or drugs (DUI) many of whom petition for deferred prosecution, which entails periodic reviews of compliance with alcohol treatment programs, and such persons, are placed on probation for the duration of their treatment programs; Whereas the caseload in Toppenish Municipal Court is not large enough to require a full time probation officer, but probation services are required and needed in many cases; Whereas Union Gap operates a probation department where the defendant pay for all the costs of the services; Whereas as a condition of deferred prosecutions Toppenish desires to require inmates to report regularly to a probation officer for compliance monitoring; Whereas no new separate legal or administrative agency is created by this agreement; 1 NOW THEREFORE IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS: I. LIABILITY Each party shall indemnify and hold harmless the other, its officers, agents, and employees, from all liability, loss or damage, including costs of defense they may suffer as a result of claims, demands, actions, damages, costs or judgments which result from each party's own negligent acts relating to the probation services to be provided pursuant to this agreement. 2. PROBATION SERVICES Union Gap shall provide probation services to Toppenish for any and all defendants placed on probation through Toppenish' Municipal Court. The Union Gap Probation Department shall provide the same quality of probation services for the City of Toppenish as it provides for the City ofUnion Gap. Probation costs shall be paid by the defendant and shall be set by the City Council for the City of Union Gap. All payments for probation services shall be paid directly to Union Gap by the defendant. Union Gap Probation Services shall comply with all state laws pertaining to probation departrneuts and personnel therein. The probation services shall be provided at a location in the City of Toppenish when necessary to meet defendant needs and at the discretion of Union Gap Probation Services. A facility shall be provided by the City of Toppenish for this purpose. 3. MODIFICATION Modification of this agreement will be only by written agreement between the parties, and no oral understanding or agreement shall alter the terms of this agreement_ 4. CONTROL Control and disposition of any real or personal property purchased, acquired, or held by Union Gap to operate or maintain probation services shall remain with Union Gap. 2 5_ TERMINATION Termination of this agreement by either party may be accomplished on 60 days written notice to the other party for any reason. 6. DURATION The duration of this agreement shall be from the date of execution by all parties umtil such time that either party elects to terminate this agreement pursuant to paragraph 5 above. 7. NO THIRD PARTY RIGHTS This agreement is entered into for the sole benefit of the Cities of Toppenish and Union Gap, and does not create any rights in third parties. Each city shall pass a resolution authorizing this agreement. A copy of this agreement shall be filed with the county auditor and the Secretary of State as required by RCW 39.34.040. CITY OF TOPPENISH Attest: April 'Dated this 23 day of Mah -2001. ROSA M. BOTELLO, City Clerk 3 CITY OF UNION GAP By Attest: EX)-1 )B. Dear Dave: i July 31, 2003 Mr. David Mercier, City Manager City of Spokane Valley 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 Re: Interim Probation Agreement OFFICE OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS JOHN ROS/ EU.FY, isi DlsrRICr • KATE. MCCASLIN, 2r °D oismICf • PHILUP D. MARRiS, 3RD DISTRICT This correspondence is in follow up to the meeting that Jim Emacio and I bad with you several weeks ago. In that meeting we discussed the finalization of the Parks Agreement as well as the pending "Interlocal Agreement for Probation Services for the City of Spokane Valley (Probation Agreement')." With regard to the Probation Agreement, you proposed that instead of the present agreement where the City pays the County "actual" costs and retains all probation assessments collected from defendants participating in the Probation program, that the County provide such services and it retain court imposed probation assessment fees. As Jim explained, this proposal was discussed earlier between Stan McNutt and Jim. It was unacceptable to the County for several reasons. First, under this approach, the County funds all City probation services until the defendants pay his/her probation assessment fee. In some instances, this may take years. Second, as you point out and according to Karla McNeilly, the assessment fees generated by those participating in the program wben collected may ultimately exceed costs for providing services. As such, by the City paying "actual cost" and retaining all assessment fees collected from its defendants, the City will receive any "surplus." The Board of County Commissioners recently reaffirmed its view that the present proposal wherein the City pays all actual costs and retains all probation assessment fees is acceptable. Incidentally, in our meeting you questioned whether or not the City was responsible for providing Probation Services in conjunction with the prosecution of misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor offenses committed in its jurisdiction for violations of state law or its own ordinances. It is Jim Emacio's view that RCW 39.34.180 makes the City responsible for providing probation services. 1116 WEST BROADWAY AVENUE • SPOKANE, WASH INCTON 99260-0100 • (509) 456 -2265 Mr, Dave Mercier Jelly 31, 2003 Page 2 Consistent with audit policies, in order for the County to continue providing Probation Services to the City it is necessary to have a Memorandum of Understanding ( "MOU") in place. Accordingly, this correspondence is to at as a Memorandum of Understanding ("MOIL") between the County and City. Under the terms of the MOIJ the County will a to provide Probation Services to the City commencing retroactively from April 1, 2003 and ruining through December 31., 2003, unless terminated by either . party upon 24 hours written notice. The terminology Probation Service,. shall mean those services outlined in Section No, 4 (SERVICES PROVIDED) of that document entitled `INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PIOBATION SERVICES FOR THE crry OF SPOKANE VALLEY (April 1, 2003- December 31., 2004) [` °AGREE'I ENT "], l have enclosed a copy of that document, The County will charge the City all actual costs for Probation Services as set forth in Section No. 3 (COST FOR PROBATION SERVICES) and Attachment "A" referenced therein in the AGREEMENT. The County will bill the City for the cost of Probation Services, monthly, on or before the 5 of the month for services provided during the preceding month. Payments by GIT will be due within 30 days of receipt of a billing invoic. The County through the Court agrees that aD assessments collected by Court in conjunction with providing Probation Services to CITY under the terms of this MOU shall be remitted to CITY no later than the 10 of the month for the previous month. If this proposal is acceptable, please execute this MOU in the space provided for hereinafter and forward the ori back to my attention. Sincerely your, H: Uxtfem\waltQn -boxer paid QcQ3d3_OOC FRANCINEE M. BOXER Chief Executive Officer Enclosure (1) Reviewed and Accepted and Agreed to this — day of , 2003. Dave Mercier, City Manager Return to: Pagel of 10 Aaniela Erickson Clerk of the Board 1116 West Broadway Spokane, Washington 99260 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PROBATION SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY (April 1, 2003- December 31, 2004) !HIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and among the Spokane County District/Municipal Court, having offices for the transaction of business at 1100 West Mallon, Spokane, Washington 99260, hereinafter referred to as "COURT," Spokane County, having offices for the transaction of business at 1116 West Broadway Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99260, hereinafter referred to as "BOARD," together sometimes referred to along with the COURT as "COUNTY," and the City of Spokane Valley, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at the Redwood Plaza, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206, hereinafter referred to as "CITY," jointly hereinafter referred to as the "PARTIES." WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 36.32.120(6), the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County has the care of County property and the management of County funds and business; and WHEREAS, pursuant to chapter 35.02 RCW, the City of Spokane Valley established 12:01 A.M. March 31, 2003, as its official date of incorporation and upon that date will commence operations as a city; and WHEItEAS, pursuant to chapter 35:02 RCW, as of the official date of incorporation, local governmental authority and jurisdiction with respect to the newly incorporated area will transfer from COUNTY to CITY; and WHEREAS, chapter 39.34 RCW {l,nterlocal Cooperation Act), authorizes counties and cities to contract with each other to perform certain functions which each may legally perform; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 39.34.180, the City of Spokane Valley is responsible for the casts incident to investigation, prosecution, adjudication and incarceration of misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor offenses that occur within its jurisdiction and that are committed by adults; and AREAS, Spokane County has established the Spokane County District/Municipal Court under the provisions of chapter 3.38 RCW for the judicial administration of the laws of the State of Washin and the ordinances of Spokane County. The Spokane County DistrictLMunicipal Court consists of one district encompassing all of Spokane County; and WHEREAS, the Spokane County District/Municipal Court has entered into an interlocal Cooperation Agreement with the City of Spokane wherein the City of Spokane provides managerial and administrative support for the Spokane County District Court Probation Services Department ("Department"). The Department is funded by monthly assessments established by the COURT under. R CW 10.64.120 which are paid by persons receiving probation services; and WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley desires to utilize the services of the Spokane County District/Municipal Court Probation Services Department for the purpose of providing probation services as directed by the Spokane County District/Municipal Court for i0 misdemeanor ar gross misdemeanor offenses constituting a violations of a state state committed by an adult within the City of Spokane Valley and/or (ii) a violation of the City of Spokane Valley's ordinances. NOW TITEREFORE for and in consideration of the mutual promises set forth hereinafter and as provided for in the above - referenced recitals, the PARTIES do hereby agree as follows: SECTION NO. 1: POSE The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth. the PARTIES' understanding as to the terms and conditions under which COURT will provide Probation Services to CITY. For the purpose of this Agreement "Probation. Services" are further de-scribed in Section No. 4 herein below. Page 2at10 SECTIOI NO. : DURATION This Agreement shall be effective at 12 :01 L.M. on April 1, 2003, and run through 12:00 P.M. December 31, 2004, unless one or all of the PANTIES give notice of termination as provided for in Section No. 5 and Section No. 14 of this Agreement. SECTION NO. 3: COST FOR PROBATION SERVICES CITY shad pay COUNTY the actual costs for Probation Services provided under this Agreement. Actual costs will be billed en a fifteen (15) minute basis as provided for herein after for services performed by Probation Officers and Support Staff. The charges for each classification will be composed of the following four elements: (i) `Direct Cost per Hour" for probation officer and support staff positions; (ii) `Indirect Cost per Hour" calculated by applying the percentage rate established by County Administrative Services Department for each calendar year to the "Direct Cost per Hour" for the positions of probation officer and support staff, (iii) "Admire per Hour" for supervision of probation officer and support staff; and (iii) "M & 0 per Hour". Attached hereto as Attachment "A" and incorporated herein by reference is a breakdown of the hourly rates for the positions of probation officer and support staff for calendar year 2003 showing all the above components. The same methodology used to establish the 2.003 hourly rate will be used to establish the 2004 hourly rate. The "Total Cost Per Hour Per Employee" for the positions of probation officer and support staff may increase or decrease during any calendar year as well as during the tern-. of this Agreement as a result of labor contracts, COLA's and/or salary increases /decrease-s which will affect Direct Cost per Hour, Indirect Cost per Hour, and Adrnin per Hour elements, COUNTY will notify CITY in writing of any changes or modifications to Attachment "A.." No change in the "M&0 per Hour" rate will take place during any calendar gear. Any changes in the Total Cost Per Hour Per Employee" during any calendar year will became effective iminediately. COUNTY agrees to meet with CITY upon request to substantiate any increases /decreases in the hourly rate. There will be a mi.nirnum fifteen 15) minute charge for any Probation Service. All Probation Services provided in excess of fifteen (15) minutes will be billed as follows: 0 minutes up to 15 minutes Charged 'A hour 15 minutes up to 30 minutes* Charged A hour Page 3 one *If time spent is less that 22 minutes, it will be billed at '/4 hour. If time spent is more than 22 minutes it will be billed at 'A hour. 30 minutes up to 45 minutes ** Charged % hour * *If time spent is less that 37 minutes, it will be billed at ''A hour. If time spent is more than 37 minutes it will be billed at 3 /4 hour. 45 minutes up to 1 hour *** Charged 1 hour * * *If time spent is less that 37 minutes, it will be billed at % hour. If time spent is more than 37 minutes it will be billed at 1 hour. For time in excess of an hour, the above will apply except for the first 15 minutes which will be billed as follows: 1 hour up to 1 hour and 15 minutes * * ** Charges '/4 hour * * * *If time spent is less that 1 hour and 7 minutes, it will be billed at 1 hour. If time spent is more than 1 hour. and 7 minutes it will be billed at 1 and ' /4 hour. COURT will keep time records showing the Probation Service performed in 15- minute intervals subject to charges being rounded up or down as provided for above. COUNTY will bill CITY for the cost of Probation Services as set forth in the Attachment, monthly, on or before the 5 of the month for services provided during the preceding month. Payments by CITY will be due within 30 days of receipt of a billing invoice. At the sole option of COUNTY a penalty may be assessed on any late payment by CITY based on lost interest earnings had the payment been timely paid and invested in the Spokane County Treasurer's Investment Pool. Pursuant to RCPT 10.64.120, COURT establishes a monthly assessment that is levied on persons referred by COURT for. Probation Services. This assessment in most instances is collected from persons receiving Probation Services. COURT agrees that all assessments collected by COURT in conjunction with providing Probation Services to CITY under the terms of this Agreement shall be remitted to CITY. Assessments collected shall be remitted to CITY'S designee no later than the 10 day of each month for the previous month. COURT shall keep records of all assessments collected in conjunction with providing Probation Services under the terms of this Agreement. Any such assessments ultimately collected in conjunction with providing Probation Services to CITY, regardless of whether or not this A.greement is in effect, shall be remitted to CITY. Page 4 of 10 COURT shall use the same collect services to collect delinquent assessments due CITY under the terms of this Agreement that it uses to collect other delinquent accounts. G (t.tr s S /vt c 0 3µtrA 004- SECTION NO. 4: SERVICES PROVIDED Probation Services shall include case anagement as directed by the Spokane County District Court for misdemeanor o s ses constituting a violation of a state statue committed by an adult within the City o . pokane Valley and/or a violation of CITY'S ordinances constituting a misdemeanor. Case management includes the monitoring of cases in pre- trial status, providing supervision and monitoring of sentenced offenders, and supervision and monitoring of offenders whose cases are on a deferred status. Monitoring includes meeting with the offenders, reviewing the court's probation orders, consulting with various service providers and other criminal justice entities, tracking criminal activity, and referral for appropriate services. Probation Services shall also include verification of an offenders' compliance or non - compliance to COURT. SECTION NO. 5: NOTICE All notices or other communications given hereunder shall be deemed given on: (1) the day such notices or other communications are received when sent by personal delivery; or (ii) the third day following the day on which the same have been mailed by first class delivery, postage prepaid addressed to the PARTIES at the address set forth below for such Party, or at such other address as PAR 1' ES shall from time-to-time designate by notice in writing to the other PARTIES: C OUNTY: COURT: CITY: Page 5 of 10 V Spokane County Chief Executive Officer or his/her authorized representative 1116 West Broadway Avenue Spokane, Washington 99260 Spokane District Court Presiding Judge Spokane County District Court 1100 West Mallon Avenue Spokane, Washington 99260 City of Spokane Valley City Manager or his/her authorized representative Redwood Plaza 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 SECTION NO. 6: COUNTERPARTS This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which, when so executed and delivered, shall be an original, but such counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same. SECTION NO. 7: ASSIGNMENT No Party may assign, in whole or in part, its interest in this Agreement without the approval of all other PARTIES. SECTION NO. 8: LIABILITY (a) COUNTY shall indemnify and hold harmless CITY and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent act or omission of COUNTY /COURT, their officers, agents and employees, or any of them relating to or arising out of performing services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that any suit based upon such claim, action, loss, or damages is brought against CITY, COUNTY shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense; provided that CITY reserves the right to participate in said suit' if any principle of governmental or public law is involved; and if final judgment in said suit be rendered against CITY, and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them, or jointly against CITY and COUNTY /COURT and their respective officers, agents, and employees, COUNTY shall satisfy the same. (b) CITY shall indemnify and hold harmless COUNTY /COURT and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent act or omission of CITY, its officers, agents and employees, or any of them relating to or arising out of performing services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that any suit based upon such claim, action, loss, or damages is brought against COUNTY/COURT, CITY shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense; provided that COUNTY /COURT reserve the right to participate in said suit if any principle of governmental or public law is involved; and if final judgment in said suit be rendered against COUNTY /COURT, and their officers, agents, and employees, or any of them, or jointly against COUNTY and CITY and their respective officers, agents, and employees, CITY shall satisfy the same. (c) The foregoing indemnity is specifically intended to constitute a waiver of each party's irnanunity under Washington's Industrial Insurance Act, Chapter 51 RCW, respecting the other party only, and only to the extent necessary to provide the indemnified party with a Page 6 of 10 full and complete indemnity of claims made by the indemnitor's employees. The PARTIES acknowledge that these provisions were specifically negotiated and agreed upon by them. (d) COUNTY and CITY agree to either self insure or purchase polices of insurance covering the matters contained in this Agreement with coverages of not less than $5,000,000 per occurrence with $5,000,000 aggregate limits including auto liability coverage. SECTION NO. 9: RELATIONSHIP OF THE PARTIES The PARTIES intend that an independent contractor relationship will be created by this Agreement. No agent, employee, servant or representative of COUNTY /COURT shall be deemed to be an employee, agent, servant or representative of CITY for any purpose. Likewise, no agent, employee, servant or representative of CITY shall be deemed to be an employee, agent, servant or representative of COUNTY /COURT for any purpose. SECTION NO. 10: REPORTING COURT shall provide a mutually acceptable quarterly report to CITY that will contain information relating to Probation Services performed during the preceding quarter. SECTION NO. 11: PROBATION SERVICES STAFF COURT shall hire, assign, retain and discipline all employees performing Probation Services under this Agreement according to collective bargaining agreements, relevant civil services rules and regulations, state and federal laws and applicable agreements. COURT agrees to meet and confer with CITY with respect to staff assigned to provide Probation Services. SECTION NO. 12: RECORDS All public records prepared, owned, used or retained by COURT in conjunction with providing Probation Services under the terns of this Agreement shall be deemed CITY property and shall be made available to CITY upon request by the CITY Manager subject to the court rule, statue or case law. COURT will notify CITY of any public disclosure request under chapter 42.17 RCW for copies or viewing of such records as well as COURT'S response thereto. Page 7 of 10 SECTION NO. 13: ASSURANCE COUNTY and COURT represent and assure CITY that no other city or town will receive more favored treatment in receipt of Probation Services than that made available to CITY for similar services. SECTION NO. 14: MODIFICATION OR TERMINATION This Agreement may be modified in writing by mutual agreement of the PARTIES. Any Party may terminate this Agreement for any reason whatsoever upon a minimum of 90 days written notice to the other PARTIES. Upon termination COURT shall continue to provide Probation Services to completion for those cases assigned by COURT to receive Probation Services prior to the effective date of the termination. SECTION NO. 15: PROPERTY ANA EQUIPMENT The ownership of all property and equipment utilized in providing Probation Services shall remain with the original owner unless specifically and mutually agreed by the PARTIES to the contrary. SECTION NO. 16: ALL WRITINGS CONTAINED HEREIN/BINDING EFFECT This Agreement contains terms and conditions agreed upon by the PARTIES. The PARTfES agree that there are no other understandings, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement. No changes or additions to this Agreement shall be valid or binding upon the PARTIES unless such change or addition is in writing, executed by the PARTIES. This Agreement shall be binding upon the PAR'1'iE;S hereto, their successors and assigns. SECTION NO. 17: VENUE STIPULATION This Agreement has been and shall be construed as having been made and delivered within the State of Washington and it is mutually understood and agreed by each party that this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of. Washington both as to interpretation and performance. Any action at law, suit in equity or judicial proceeding for the enforcement of this Agreement, or any provision hereto, shall be instituted only in courts of competent jurisdiction within Spokane County, Washington. Page 8 of 10 SECTION NO. 18: SEVERABILITY It is understood and agreed among the PARTIES that if any parts, terms or provisions of this Agreement are held by the courts to be illegal, the validity of the remaining portions or provisions shall not be affected and the rights and obligations of the PARTIES shall not be affected in regard to the remainder of the Agreement. If it should appear that any part, term or provision of this Agreement is in conflict with any statutory provision of the State of Washington, then the part, tern or provision thereof that may be in conflict shall be deemed inoperative and null and void insofar as it may be in conflict therewith and this Agreement shall be deemed to modify to conform to such statutory provision. SECTION NO. 19: HEADLNGS The section headings appearing in this Agreement have been inserted solely for the purpose of convenience and ready reference. In no way do they purport to, and shall not be deemed to define, limit or extend the scope or intent of the sections to which they pertain IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this Agreement to be executed on date and year opposite their respective signatures. DATED: SPOKANE COUNTY MUNICIPAL/DI:STRICT COURT: ATTEST: VICKY M. DALTON CLERK OF THE BOARD BY: Daniela Erickson, Deputy Page 9 of 10 By Its: DATED: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE, COUNTY, WASHINGTON JOHN ROSKELLEY PHILLIP D. HARRIS, Chair M. KATE MCCASLIN DATED: Attest: City Clerk Approved as to form only: Acting City Attorney I CVVdlcy CGri Dmif CwRrun43 mb¢rinOpraaui= arvvkra 0501LDOC Page 10of CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY: By: Its: (Title) Indirect Direct Cost per 2003 Cost Per Cost per Hour at Admin M&O Position # Budget Person Hour 6.27% per Hour per Hour Total Cost Per Hour Per Employee Type Probation Officer 5 251,988 50,397.60 25.84 1.62 . 3.55 1.00 32.02 Support Staff 6 190,433 31,738.83 16.28 1.02 3.55 1.00 21.85 11 Hours worked per Position 1,950 Spokane County Probation Office Hourly Rates Based on 2003 Budget Total Hours Worked 21,450 Administration 76,200 3.55 (Cost per hour, based upon cost of $76,200, divided by 11 staff @ 1950 hours each) M&O 21,549 1.00 (Cost per hour of m&o, based upon total cost of S21,549 divided by 11 staff @ 1950 hours each) 540,170 4.56 Total per hour charge for administration and maintenance/operation expenses ATTACHMENT "A" Meeting Date: October 7, 2003 City Manager Sign -off: X Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent X old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing X information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Mirabeau CenterPlace Update GOVERNING LEGISLATION: NIA PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: This is the fourth Council meeting update on the CenterPlace project. Council has taken action as scheduled on the necessary steps in the project, for example the interlocal agreement with the PFD and Spokane County. BACKGROUND: Attached is the second project status report. At the meeting, the project consultants will present an overview of the interior decor choices, as well as the exterior materials of the building. OPTIONS: NIA RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Informational only. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: General Fund for City of Spokane Valley costs STAFF CONTACT: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager ATTACHMENT: CenterPlace Status Report # 2 Memorandum To: David Mercier, City Manager and Members of Council From: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Date: October 2, 2003 Re: CenterPlace Status Report #2 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall@spokanevalley.org Following is a summary of CenterPlace project activities. The project's tight timeline remains on track, and we continue to adjust our approach as necessary. Legal The bond ordinance first reading is scheduled for Council consideration on October 14. Financial The City is working with Mike Ormsby, Bond Counsel, and Sean Keatts, Underwriter to prepare for the bond issuance. Focus has been on the creation of the Preliminary Official Statement. The City is contracting with a financial advisor to provide an objective evaluation of the bond sale proposal. We will be in San Francisco on October 16 and 17 for rating presentation(s) to Moody's, and potentially Standard & Poor's and/or Fitch rating agencies. We will also be meeting with several bond insurers. Construction The site grading has been separated from the rest of the project. It will be bid as a separate package. This allows the City to more easily meet the commencement of project requirement while giving a little additional time to complete the bulk of the construction documents. Those documents have now been completed, and will be submitted to the City permit center by the end of the week. We are also laying out the bidding timelines in preparation for announcing the site grading project. Other Mike Jackson, Mike Ormsby and 1 met with Gary Livingston and others from the Community Colleges of Spokane. The College is willing to sign a letter of intent once some of the details are worked out. Focus will be on a partnership, with the College agreeing to make rooms available for regional and cultural activities when not in use for classes. This will help the City meet the regional requirement of the PFD bond reimbursement. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 10 - - 03 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent 111 old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing x information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Budget Discussion GOVERNING LEGISLATION: State budget law PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: At the October 14, City Council Meeting there will be a public hearing on revenue sources for the 2004 budget. We thought we would use the October 7 study session to give you a brief overview (a first touch) of our 2004 projected revenues. We are still fine tuning our estimates, so there may be adjustments when the revenues are - presented at the public hearing. Also attached is a draft of our proposed fee schedule for 2004. Staff is continuing work on a cost recovery analysis of the city's fees. In addition, staff is working on some formatting changes to the fee resolution based upon citizen and employee feedback. OPTIONS: No action is required at this time. The public hearing on October 14, is required by budget law. We should consider testimony from the hearing before making changes to the projected revenues. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: No action is recommended at this time. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None STAFF CONTACT: Ken Thompson, Finance Director General Fund Revenues DRAFT City of Spokane Valley 2004 Budget Detail Rovenucs by Typo Property Tax Property Tax - City S 6,880,000 Property Tax - Library 2,150,000 9,030,000 5@tes Taxes Sates Tax 11,000,000 Sates Tax - Criminal Justice 920,000 11,920,000 Gambling Taxes Punch Boards & Pull Tabs 110,000 Bingo & Raffles 30,000 Card Games 550,000 690,000 Leasehold Excise Tax 5,000 Franchise Fees 640,000 State Shared Revenue:; MVET Criminal Justice - Population 11,100 Criminal Justice Area #1 14,134 Criminal Justice Area #2 20,191 Criminal Justice Area #3 20,191 Criminal ,luslice Area #4 17,200 DUI - Cities 12,000 Liquor Board Excise Tax 296,000 Liquor Board Profits 492,000 882,816 Service Revenues Building Permits 506,000 Plumbing Permits 34,000 Grading Permits 7,000 Mechanical Permits 34,000 Demolition Permits 1,000 Misc. Permits & Fees 192,00D Plans Check Fees 197,000 971,000 Fines and Forfeitures Fines & Forfeits - Traffic 175,000 Other Criminal Nan - Traffic Fines 275,00 450,000 Recreation Program Charges Activity Fees (To use a recreational fatality) 9,000 Program Fees (To participate in a program) • 220,000 229,000 Investment Interest Investment Interest 6,000 Sales Tax Interest 6,000 Property Tax Interest 6,000 Miscellaneous Revenues 15,000 33,000 Transfers Transfer trom Street Fund 42,500 Transfer from Capital Projects 80,000 122,500 Total General Fund Revenue $ 24,973,316 Other Fund Revenues DRAFT City of Spokane Valley 2004 Budget Detail Revenues by Type 101 Street Fund Motor Fuel (Gas) Tax 1,194,960 Interfund Interest 75000 1,269,960 102 Arterial Street Fund Motor Fuel (Gas) Tax 542,000 103 Trails & Paths Fund Motor Fuel (Gas) Tax 5,040 107 Hotel /Motel Fund Hotel /Motel Tax 380,000 204 Debt Service - LTGO 03 Facilities District Revenue 600,000 Debt Service Transfer from Capital Projects and Special Capital Projects 200,000 800,000 301 Capital Projects Fund REET 1 - 1st .25 Percent 840,000 302 Special Capital Projects Fund REET 2 - 2nd .25 Percent 840,000 303 Street Capital Projects Transfer from Arterial Street Fund 600,000 Transfer from Special Capital Projects 200,000 Proceeds from LT Debt 2,430,000 3,230,000 401 Sewer Fund Transfer from Street Fund 402 Stormwater Management Fund Stormwater Management Fee 747,500 501 Equipment Rental & Replacement Fund Workstation Charges 88,200 Pool Car Charges 5,560 Vehicle Replacement Charges 30,694 124,454 510 Risk Management Fund Employment Security Transfers 7,500 Risk Management Services 130,000 137,500 101212003 3:02 PM 11 Total Revenues $ 33,889,770 Building Permit, total valuation $1 - $500 $23.50 eliminated — included in valuation to $25,000 Building Permit, total valuation $501 to $2,000 $23,50 for $500, + $3.05 each additional $100 eliminated — included in valuation to $25,000 Building Permit, total valuation to $25,000 $69.25 for first $2,000 + $15 for each additional $1,000 Building Permit, total valuation $25,001 to S50,000 $391.25 for first $25,000 + $10.10 for each additional $1,000 Building Permit, total valuation $50,001 to $100,000 $643.75 for first $50,000 + $7 for each additional $1,000 Building Permit, total valuation $ I00,001 to $500,000 $993.75 for first $100,000 + $5.60 for each additional $1,000 Building Permit, total valuation $500,001 to 1,000,000 $3,223.75 for first $500,000 + $4.75 for each additional 1,000 Building Permit, total valuation SI mil lion & up $5,608.75 for first $1 million + $3.15 for each additional $1,000 Except: Private garages (wood frame) $19.00 sq ft. Except: Private garages (masonry) $22.00 sq. ft. Except: Pole Buildings $19.00 sq. ft. Except: Open carport, decks, porches $15.00 sq. ft. sheds under 200 sq. ft. $45.00 eliminated — included in min. basic building permit fee min. basic buildin &.ermit fee $35.00 $69.25 early start agreements (foundations 25% of bldg permit fee temporary certificate of occupancy $50.00 fast track permits not allowed hourly rate set for city employees $47.00 signs mounted on buildings $45.00 sign and pole mounting $65.00 PLUMB11'G CODE: basic fee per each permit $35.00 basic fee each supplemental permit $7.50 unit fees: for each plumbing fixture $6.00 unit fees private sewage disposal systems $20.00 unit fees: water heater $6.00 unit fees industrial waste pre- treatment interceptor $15.00 unit fees: repair or alternate water piping, drainage or vent piping, each fixture $6.00 TYPE OF FEE OR CHARGE Draft Chart, Fee Resolution Exhibit A for 2004 EXHIBIT A FEE RESOLUTION DRAFT CHART OF PROPOSED INCREASES CURRENT FEE PROPOSED FEE Page 1 of 11 unit fees: lawn sprinkler system on any one meter $25.00 unit fees: for atmospheric type vacuum breaker each $6.00 unit fees: backflow protective device $6.00 unit fees: medical gas .er outlet $6.00 unit fees: interceptors, each $6.00 MECHANICAL CODE: basic fee for permit issue $35.00 basis fee supplemental permit $7.50 Unit fee for furnace & suspended heaters to 100,000 btu $12.00 over 100,000 btu $15.00 duct work system $10.00 . Heat pump & Air conditioner to 3 tons $12.00 3 - 15 tons $20.00 over 15 to 30 tons $25.00 over 30 to 50 tons $35.00 over 50 tons $60.00 gas water heater $10.00 i s . iping system, each outlet $1.00 gas log, fireplace & gas insert installation $10.00 appliance vents installation, relocate, replace $10.00 each re airs or additions $15.00 Boilers, compressors & Absorption Systems 3 hp to 100,000 btu or Tess $12.00 3 - 15 hp 100,000 to 500,000 $20.00 15 -30 hp 500,000 to million btu over 30 hp 1 million - 1,750,000 btu $35.00 over 50 hp - over 1,750,000 btu $60.00 air handlers: each unit up to 10,000 cfm $12.00 each unit over 10,000 cfm $15.00 Coolers $10.00 each fan connection to single duct $10.00 each ventilation system $12.00 each hood served by mechanical exhaust $12.00 incinerators: installed or relocation - residential $19.00 incinerators: install or relocate commercial $22.00 a. u liances, each $10.00 unlisted appliances under400,000 btu $50.00 unlisted appliances over400,000 btu $100.00 Hood, type I 550.00 Hood, type TT $10.00 Draft Chart, Fee Resolution Exhibit A for 2004 Page 2ofII LP stora • e tank $10.00 wood or pellet stove insert $10.00 wood stove system free standing $25.00 Residential Removal /Addition 0 New Single Family 0 Tenant Im.rovement to 10.000 sq ft $35.00 tenant improvement 10,001 + $45.00 multi - family per bldg $60.00 new commercial & industrial $90.00 Approved plans permit or any other permit $4.50 multi- family projects permit $4.50 for 1 unit $2.00 each additional unit * ( *forwarded to Wa St Bldg Code Council) DEMOLITION PERMIT Single Family Residence $44.00 ._ `. a e _ . .. - : • +$10- $44.00 treat separately, see below treat separately, see below each -septi undefffettncl-tank garaL'e or accessory buildin,t $20.00 associated with a residence or commercial buildin,:' septic tank or underground flammable tanks $10.00 Commercial bldg $125.00 + $20 for bldg $125.00 treat separately, see above treat separately, see above garage or out tindefg etae+k *t MTSC FEES Hourly rate for misc. inspections $47.00 hourly rate for misc plans check $47.00 hourly rate for permit specialist $42.00 hourly rate for .fanners $47.00 OVERTIME CHARGES FOR plans checker inspector permit specialist planners 1.5 times their regular rate hour' ' fees for contracted services accordin • to contract rate hourly rate for special called inspections $47.00 Mobile Horne Location permit & inspection: temporary mobile home $60.00 mfg'd home per section $50.00 plus basement/crawlspace valuation permit fee Draft Chart, Fee Resolution Exhibit A for 2004 Page 3 of 11 HOUSE MOVING Class 1,11, Ill moving permit $60.00 inspection fee $60.00 + $47.00/hr after 1 hr + .50 /mile if bldg moved into City Minimum Housing Inspection Fee $55.00 + $47.00 /hr after 1st hour Minimum investigative inspection fee if permit is required $55.00 SPECIAL INSPECTIONS (requested by owner or tenant) fire, wind, mud slide, flood damage $60.00 day care $60.00 nursing homes, hospitals, ct $60.00 + $47.00/hr after l s' hour special occupancies $60.00 Excess inspections created by contractor for given project per inspection $47.00 reinspections: residential & commercial $47.00 Condominium conversion plans review & inspection fee $47.00 TEMPORARY TENTS, CANOPIES, AIR SUPPORTED STRUCTURES FOR PUBLIC USE (does not apply to tents less than 2200 sq. ft, canopies less than 400 sq. ft, camping tents, or tents used for private, non - commercial events: plans check fee $13.00 basic permit fee $60.00 Enclosing deck or patio: basic fee: valuation of project (min $3,000 evaluation) plans examination 20% of basic fee • SWIMMING POOLS: (over 5,00 • al Ions $50.00 + . Iumbin _ fees Reroof permit based on value of project. Change of use of occupancy classification permit $47.00 Draft Chart, Pee Resolution Exhibit A for 2004 Page 4 of 11 Ci RA D fN G Permit Fees 50 Cubic Yards or less $ 20.00 • 51 to 100 Cu. Yd. $ 20.00 101 to 1.000 Cu. Yd For the first 100 Cu. Yd $ 20.00 Plus $7. for each additional 100 Cu. Yd. 1,001 to 10,000 Cu. Yd. For the first 1,001 Cu. Yds. $ 83.00 Plus $ 6. for each additional 1 Cu. Yd. 10,001 to 100,000 Cu. Yd. For the First 10,000 Cu. Yds $147.00 Plus $ 15. for each additional 10,000 Cu. Yds. 100.001 to 200,000 Cu. Yds. For the 1 m 100,000 C. Y. $368.00 Plus $ 15. for each additional 100,000 Cu. Yds. 200,000 or more Cu. Yds. For the 1 200,000 yds $503.00 Plus $15.00 for each additional 200,000 Cu. Yds. Plans Checking Fees 50 Cubic Yards or less No Fee 51 to 100 Cu. Yds. $ 12.00 101 to 1,000 Cu. Yds. $ 20.00 1,001 to 10,000 Cu. Yds. $ 25.00 10,001 to 100,000 Cu. Yds. For first 10,000 Cu. Yds. $ 25.00 plus $ 7.00 for each additional 10,000 Cu. Yds. 100.001 to 200,000 Cu. Yds. $ 98.00 Plus $6.00 for each additional 1 00,000 Cu. Yds. 200.001 Cu. Yds or more $158.00 Land Clearing only - (without earth being moved) $ 65.00 FALSE ALARM FEES for repeated malfunctioning false FIRE alarm in a given 6 -month period 1S` alarm no charge 2 alarm $30.00 $70.00 3' alarm $70.00 $100.00 4' alarm $120.00 $150.00 5 alarm 550.00 + require hired fire watch FALSE SECURITY ALARM FEES repeated malfunctioning false security alarm in a liven 6 -month _period l' alarm no charge 2 alarm $70.00 3' alarm 5100.00 4'' r� & subsequent 5150.00 FIREWORKS (ti max per RCW 70.77) $100.00 + $500 deposit or performance bond + liability insurance $1 million Plans check & inspection fee for new commercial projects not mentioned elsewhere $40.00 Draft Chart, Fee Resolution Exhibit A for 2004 Pagc 5 of 11 Fire watch service (3 hr minimum, plus hourly thereafter) $140.00 After hour inspections, plans reviews, consultations for projects riot requiring a permit & other special services hours fee: time and a half of the hourly rate Hourly rate $47.00 Plans check - commercial fire alarm, ermit .tans check & ins ection based on value Fire alarm systems - residential - all zones $40.00 fire alarm systems - residential - permit fee $35.00 Sprinkler systems , tenant improvements, less than 10 heads $65.00 Sprinkler systems, tenant improvements, 11 or more heads $85.00 New systems: commercial: plans check, inspection s& permit based on value New systems: residential -each riser plus each plug or head $1.10 Fire extinguisher system $50.00 + $1.50 each nozzle Standpipe installation Class 1 and 11 558.00 Standpipe installation Class LH. S70.00 Fire pump installation S55.00 p ower generators installation $55.00 Flammable and combustible liquids storage tanks installation: 1. Underground, 1st tank $ 55.00 plus each additional tank on same site $ 35.50 2 . Above ground tank $ 55.00 plus each additional tank on the same site $ 35.00 3. Annual permit fee for storage $ 30.00 Haz irdous materials storage tanks installation: 1. _ Less than 500 gallons - each $ 75.00 2. 500 - 1,199 gallons each $104.00 3. 1,200 gallons or more • $147.00 Liquefied petroleum tanks: installation 1. Less than 500 gallons $ 84.00 2. 500 - 9,999 gallons $104.00 3. 10,000 gallons or more $147.00 Gaseous oxygen systems installation: 1. Less than 6,000 cubic feet $ 78.00 2. 6,000 - 11,999 cubic feet $ 90.00 3. 12,000 cubic feet or more S118.00 Draft Chart, Fee Resolution Exhibit A for 2004 Page 6 of 11 Nitrous systems installation: I. plus each outlet Medical gas systems installation: $ 95.00 $12.00 1. Gaseous system $ 90.00 plus each outlet. $ 12.00 2 Liquefied system $ 95.00 plus each outlet $ 12.00 1-lazardous material recycling system installation: 1. 110 gallons or less per day capacity $ 95.00 2. More than 1 10 gallons per day capacity $117.00 Vapor recovery system installation: (per tank) 1. Phase I - tank truck and tank $ 90.00 2. Phase 11- vehicle fueled and tank $115.00 Cryogenic tank installation: (lst tank) $ 95.00 Each additional tank on same site $ 35.00 Removal or abandonment, or any combination thereof, of flammable or combustible liquid storage tanks: 1. First tank (commercial) $ 84.00 2. Each additional tank on the same site (commercial) $ 47.50 3. Contrac -tors permit for removal or abandonment of residential under - ground fuel tanks $ 75.00 Fire Department fee for inspections and follow up. For initial inspection, plans check and follow up inspections as called for in the Fire Code the fire department will be paid 65% of the fee collected for the permit. This payment will be paid quarterly. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLATS: Subdivisions Tentative plat $250.00 eliminated - no such plat preliminary plat $2,000 + $25.00 /lot final plat $1,000 + $10.00/lot PLATS: Short Plats tentative plat $250.00 eliminated - no such plat Preliminary 2 -4 lots $500.00 final plat 2-4 lots $800.00 + $ 1 0.00 /lot preliminary plat 5 -9 lots $1,000 + $25.00 lot . final plat 5 -9 Tots $800.00 + $10.00 lot Short plat appeal $200.00 PLAT MODIFICATION subdivision plat $650.00 short plat $265.00 Draft Chart, Fee Resolution Exhibit A for 2004 Paw. 7 oft! BINDING SITE PLA.N $1,500.00 binding site plan modification $1,300.00 binding site change of conditions $650.00 AGGREGATION /SEGREGATION Lot line adjustment $100.00 Lot line elimination $100.00 Certificate of exemption $95.00 eliminated — duplicate fee ENVIRONMENTAL RL VIE W SETA Checklist single dwelling (when required) $100.00 all other developments $300.00 appeal of SFPA determination $250.00 eliminated — included in appeal of Administrative decision (below) environmental impact statement review $2,000.00 SHORELINE substantial development permit $800.00 Shoreline conditional use $800.00 eliminated — included in conditional use Shoreline variance $800.00 eliminated — included in public hearing variance appeal local $100.00 eliminated — included in appeal of administrative decision pre application conference $61.00 Critical areas $300.00 PERMITS Home Occupation Permit $300.00 Conditional Use Permit $500.00 $800.00 tern ora Use Permit 0 -90 da s $150.00 temporary use permit to 30 days 100.00 eliminated — see above temporary use permit 31 -90 days $250.00 eliminated — see above VARIANCES administrative $300.00 single family residence $300.00 eliminated — included in public hearing variance signs and all others I $750.00 eliminated — included in public hearing variance public hearings $1,500.00 PLAN AMENDMENTS Comp plan amendment $1,500.00 ZONING zoning map amendments (rezone) $1,500.00 zoning & subdivision code text change $500.00 $1,500.00 combining district $1,000.00 PUD tentative plan $250.00 eliminated — included in PUD plan PUD plan $1,500.00 + $25.00 /lot Draft Chart, Fee Resolution Exhibit A for 2004 Page 8 of 11 P11!) Modification 5500.00 PUD minor modification $250.00 eliminated — major & minor m odifications not separately defined in Code PUI) major modification $750.00 eliminated — major & minor modifications not separately defined in Code SITE PLAN REVIEW $250.00 Street Vacation Application 300.00 SIGNS review of permanent sign $150.00 review of temporary sign $75.00 Code enforcement violation approval to hearing examiner $250.00 APPEALS Appeal of decision $200.00 eliminated — included in appeal of Administrative Decision Appeal of Administrative Decision 51.000.0(1 Appeals of Hearing Examiner Findings $300.00 PUBLIC WORKS Commercial construction site engineering review $250.00 + hourly rate after 5 hrs Residential construction site engineering review $250.00 + hourly rate after 3 hrs. Traffic Impact Fees Analysis not available $50.00 + hourly rate after I s' hour PERMITS Right -of -way use permit (obstruction, utilities, approach) $50.00 + hours rage after I hour Floodplain Permit $50.00 + hourly rate after 1 hour INSPECTIONS Stormwater system review $250.00/hr for engineering and field inspection based on actual time $250.00 flat fee Stormwater system inspections $50.00 .+ hourly rate after I S hour Field monitoring or inspections of grading residential sites hourly rate field monitoring or inspections of grading non - residential sites hourly rate Commercial, multi family and multi - lot sites: four (4) hour minimum $200.00 plus hourly industrial or mineral industrial sites $225.00 plus hourly Draft Chart, Fee Resolution Exhibit A for 2004 Page 9 of 11 Conditional use permits plus inspection fee $200.00 variances hourly rate $250.00 plus hourly shoreline permits HOURLY RATE $50.00 public right of way obstruction permit $16.00 + review & inspection fee at hourly rate $16.00 + review & inspection fee at hourly rate ($25.00 minimum at time of application) utility right of way permit $16.00 + review & inspection fee at hourly rate $16.00 + review & inspection fee at hourly rate ($25.00 minimum at time of application) approach permit $25.00 + review & inspection fee at hourly rate $25.00 + review & inspection fee at hourly rate ($25.00 minimum at time of application) Cash, certified check or bond for right -of -way cleani g $1,000.00 ADMINISTRATION COPY FEES: Copies of audio or video tapes, photos, maps or other records needing reproduction at cost copies of written records .15 per page copies of annual budget $ 10.00 NSF Check $25.00 PARKS & RECREATION Basic Administrative Fees to be considered when applying rates $30.00 admin fee $50.00 refuse fee Picnic Shelter <200 •eo.1e $30.00 Picnic Shelter (200+ people) S150.00 refundable deposit ( <200 people) $50.00 Refundable deposit (200+people) $250.00 Events — includes pavilion $150.00 Non -profit applications will be considered by the Spokane Valley Parks Dept $80.00 Mirabeau Springs Small Shelter & waterfall $1 50.00 (max 4 hours) refundable deposit ( <200 people) $50.00 Mirabeau Meadows shelter (<200 people) $80.00 shelter (200 + people) S150.00 refundable de osit <200 •eo•le) $50.00 refundable deposit (200+ people) $250.00 Draft Chart, Fee Resolution Exhibit A for 2004 Page 10 of 11 VALLEY MISSION ARENA $100.00 RENTAL (per weekend- Fri /Sa /Sttn2 $50.00 Deposit (renter responsible for on- site preparation; requires liability insurance) AQUATICS pool admission (age 5 +) $1.00 admission (age 5 and under) free _pool punch pass (25 swims) $20.00 _pool weekend family discount 1 child under 13 free w /paying adult. reservation ( <50 $100.00 /hr., min 2 hours food fee (if applicable) $25.00 reservation (50 -100) $125.00 /hr., min 2 hrs food fee (if applicable) $50.00 Reservation (101 to 150) $150.00/hr., rain 2 hrs. food fee (if applicable $75.00 Field Use Rental $25.00 I" hour: $15.00 each additional hour Professional Photography Perinil $25.00 Annually Indoor use: Open gym admission $2.00 Indoor playground proRratn $20.00 admission (10 entries) room rentals $10/hr., min 3 hr gym rentals, practice, games $15 /hr., min 2 hrs gym rentals, events, dances $100.00 rental of Western Dance Hall now handled by WDH Draft Chart, Fee Resolution Exhibit A for 2004 Page 11 of 11 To: Council & Staff From: City Manager Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings DRAFT ADVANCE' AGENDA For Planning Discussion Purposes Only as of October 3, 2003 10:00 a.m. Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative October 9, 2003 Growth Mgrnt Steering Committee of Elected Officials, 9 -11 a.rn., Spokane Valley City Council Chambers October 13, 2003, 12 -1 (Bring your own lunch); Quarterly Local Gov't Mtg, Cooperative .Extension Office October 14, 2003 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. [due date Oct 3] 1. PUBLIC i{EARING Budget Revenues /Fee Schedule for 2004 [20 minutes] 2. Nuisance Abatement Ordinance — Second Reading [15 minutes] 3. Proposed Bond Ordinance — First Reading [15 minutes] 4. Proposed Resolution to Extend For One Year Annexation to Fire Districts Nos. 1, 8 and 9 [20 minutes] 5. Proposed Resolution for Participation in Committee on Regional Wastewater Treatment Issues [5 minutes] 6. Motion Consideration: a. Clarification of intent and Reafl•inimation of Planning Commission Appointments [10 minutes] b. Hotel /Motel Ratification of Tourism Allocations [10 minutes] 7. Administrative Reports: [no public comment] a. Budget Discussion [10 minutes] b. Staff Report, CD13G Project Ideas [10 minutes] c. Towing Ordinance Discussion [20 minutes] d. Draft lnterlocal Agreement for Employee Transportation Program [15 minutes] 8. Information Only: [no public comment] Status of Previous Public Comments /Concerns Minutes of Planning Commission [estimated meeting time: 150 minutes* ] October 15, 2003, AWC 2003 Regional Meeting, 6 p.m.; The Davenport Hotel, 10 S. Post Street October 21, 2003 Study Session 6:00 p.m. (due date Oct 1.0] 1. Proposed Sewer /refuse collection ordinance — Stan Schwartz (15 minutes) 2. Proposed Emergency Management Services lnterlocal Agreement — Cal Walker/Nina Regor (15 minutes) 3. Wastewater Issues Discussion —Neil Kerstcn (20 minutes) 4. Agreement for Sewer Extensions and Operation — (STEP) — Neil Kersten (15 minutes) 5. Comprehensive Plan Utilities Element Discussion — Marina Sukup (20 minutes) 6. Discussion of Library Service Option and Draft Interlocal Agreement —Nina Regor (30 minutes) 7. City Legislative Agenda Discussion — Dave Mercier (15 minutes) 8. Budget Discussion — Ken Thompson/Nina Regor (15 minutes) 9. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeVleming (5 minutes) 10. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) TOTAL MINUTES: 160 Max mtg time: 150 minutes Advance Agenda — Draft Page 1 of 4 Revised 10/3/2003 10:09 AM October 28, 2003 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. [due date Oct 17] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Introduction to Preliminary Budget [20 minutes] 2. Proposed Bond Ordinance — Second Reading [10 minutes] 3. Proposed Towing Ordinance — First Reading [15 minutes] 4. Sewer /Refuse Collection Ordinance — First Reading [ 15 minutes] 5. Three (3) Proposed Ordinances approving Comp Plan Amendments — First Reading [60 minutes] 6. Agreement for Sewer Extensions and Operation — (STEP) —Neil Kersten [15 minutes] 7. Administrative Reports: [no public comment] a. CDBG Project Review Initial Selection [15 minutes] 8. Information Only: [no public comment] Status of Previous Public Comments /Concerns Planning Commission Minutes Department Monthly Reports [estimated meeting time: 150 minutes* ] October 30, 2003, 6:00 p.m., Joint Meeting: City Council and Spokane Valley Planning Commission Spokane Valley Council Chambers (tentative date) November 4, 2003 Study Session 6:00 p.m. [due date Oct 24] 1. Adult Entertainment Discussion — Marina Sukup (20 minutes) 2. Flood Plain Resolution and Ordinance — Marina Sukup (20 minutes) 3. Wastewater Issues Discussion —Neil Kersten ( 20 minutes) 4. Comprehensive Plan Parks & Open Space Element .Discussion — Marina Sukup (20 minutes) 5. Formal Vote on Submission of applications on CDBG — Greg McCormick (15 minutes) 6. Police Station Purchase and/or Maintenance and Operation Agreement — Cal Walker/Nina Regor (20 minutes) 7. Proposed Property Tax Levy Discussion — Ken Thompson (20 minutes) 8. Council Check in — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) 9. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeVleming (5 minutes) 10. City Manager Comments —Dave Mercier (10 minutes) TOTAL MINUTES: 1.60 Max mtg time: 150 minutes (November 11, 2003 Regular Meeting falls on Veteran's Day) Wed, Nov 12, 2003 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. [due date Oct 31 ] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed Property Tax [20 minutes] 2. Proposed Sewer /Refuse Collection Ordinance — Second Reading [ 15 minutes] 3. Proposed Towing Ordinance — Second Reading [10 minutes] 4. Three (3) Proposed Ordinances approving Comp Plan Amendments — Second Reading[20 minutes] 5. Proposed Property Tax Ordinance Fixing Amounts to be Raised — First Reading [10 minutes] 6. Motion Consideration: Council Sets Final Budget Hearing for November 25, 2003 [5 minutes] 7. Library Service lnterlocal Agreement [20 minutes] 8. Administrative Reports: [no public comment] 9. information Only: [no public comment] Status of Previous Public Comments/Concerns Minutes of Planning Commission [estimated meeting time: 100 minutes* ] Advance Agenda — Draft Page 2 of 4 Revised 10/3/2003 10:09 AM November 18, 2003 Study Session 6:00 p.rn. [due date Nov 71 r l I. Proposed Library Agreements — Nina Regor (10 minutes) 2. Comprehensive Plan Capital Facilities Element Discussion — Marina Sukup (20 minutes) 3. Wastewater Issues Discussion — Neil Kersten (20 minutes) 4. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeVleming (5 minutes) 5. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) TOTAL MINUTES: 65 Max mtg time: 150 minutes [NOTE: Copies of preliminary budget will be available to the public no later than November 201 November 25. 2003 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. [due date Nov 14] 1. PUBLIC BEAMING: Final Budget Hearing to Adopt 2004 Budget [20 minutes] 2. Proposed Property Tax Ordinance Fixing Amounts to be Raised — Second Reading [10 minutes] 3. Annual Appropriation Ordinance — First Reading [15 minutes] 4. Council Consideration of Hotel/Motel Grant Proposals [30 minutes] 5. Administrative Reports: [no public comment] 6. Information Only: [no public comment] Status of Previous Public Comments/Concerns Planning Commission Minutes Department Monthly R.eports [estimated meeting time: 75 minutes* ] December 2.2003 Study Session 6:00 p.m. [due date Nov 211 I. Wastewater Issues Discussion — Neil Kersten (20 minutes) 2. Council Check in — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) 3. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeVleming (5 minutes) 4. City Manager Comments— Dave Mercier (10 minutes) . December 9 — 13, 2003 National League of Cities (i\TLC) Congress of Cities, Nashville, Tennessee December 9, 2003 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. 1. Annual Appropriation Ordinance — Second Reading 2. Administrative Reports: [no public comment] 3. Information Only: [no public comment] Status of Previous Public Comments/Concerns Minutes of Planning Commission TOTAL MINUTES: 45 Max mtg time: 150 minutes [estimated meeting time: minutes* ] December 16. 2003 Study Session 6:00 p.m. [due date Dec 5] 1. Comprehensive Plan Capital Facilities .Element Discussion — Marina Sukup (20 minutes) 2. Wastewater Issues Discussion — Neil Kersten ( 20 minutes) 3. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeVleming (5 minutes) 4. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) TOTAL MINUTES: 55 Max mtg time: 150 minutes Advance Agenda — Draft Page 3 of 4 Revised 10/3/2003 10:00 AM December 23, 2003 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. I. Administrative Reports: [no public comment] 2. Information Only: [no public comment.] Status of Previous Public Comments /Concerns Planning Commission Minutes Department Monthly Reports [due date Dec 12] [estimated meeting time: minutes* ] December 30, 2003 Study Session 6:00 p.rn. [due date Dec 19] 1. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeV leming (5 minutes) 2. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) TOTAL MINUTES: 15 Max mtg time: 150 minutes January 6, 2004, Study Session 6:00 p.m. [due date Dec 26J 1. Council Check in — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeV leming (5 minutes) 3. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) TOTAL MINUTES: 25 Max rntg time: 150 minutes January 13, 2004 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. [due date Jan 2] 1. Administrative Reports: [no public comment] 2. Information Only: [no public comment] Status of Previous Public Comments/Concerns Minutes of Planning Commission [estimated meeting tune: minutes* ] [* estimated meeting time does not include time for public comments] Advance Agenda— Dia fi Page 4 of 4 Revised 10 /3/2003 10:09 AM