2009, 03-10 Regular Meeting
AGENDA
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
Council Meeting #155
Tnesday, March 10, 2009 6:00 p.m.
Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers
11707 E Sprague Avenue
Counci! Requests Please Silence Your Cell Phones During CvuncH Meeting
CALL TO ORDER:
IlWOCATION: Pastor A1 Hulten of Valley Assembly Church
PLEDGE OF ALLEG :
ROLL CALL_
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS:
COMNIITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON StifMIMARY RFPORT :
MAYOR'S REPORT:
1. Proclamativn: National Alzheimer's Disease Awareness Month
2. Proclamntiorr: Absol:itely Incredible Kid Day
PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is an apportunity for the public to speak on any subject not on the agenda
for action. Whea you come to the podium, please state yow name and address for the record and limit
remarl:s to three minutes.
1. CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. A
Councilmember may remove an item from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately.
a. Claim Voucbers
VOUCHER LIST DATE I WNOUCHER NUMBERS: M TOTAL AMOUNT
02/03/2009 Youcher # 16596 through # 16602 r $4,240.13
02/06/2009 Beginning 4 16634; ending # 16655 ~ $364,545.33
02/19/2009 Beginning # 16698; ending# 20090210 ~ $1,776,565.18
02/20/2009 ~ Be$inning 4 16736; ending # 16745 ( $100,140.82
02/27/2009 ~ Beginni.ng # 16750; ending # 16773 N $73,369.42
03/02/2009 M Beginning # 16748; ending # 16794 ~ $481?054.69
~ GRAND TOTAL N $2,799,915.57 ,
b. Payroll for pay period ending February 28, 2009: $ 336,803.05
c. Approval of CounciVCounty Board Joint Meeting Minutes of February 23, 2009
NEW BUSINESS:
2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 09-004 Amending Ordinance 08-028, Amended Legal Description -
Mike Connelly [public comment]
3. Motion Consideration: Indiaaa Avenue Extension Project, TIB Grant - Steve Worley
[Public comment]
CouncU Agenda 03-10-49 Regular Mceting Page 1 of 2
~
PUBLIC C0MIlVLENTS This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any topic. When you come to
the podium, please state your name and address for the record and limit remarks to three minutes.
ADMINtSTRATYVE REPORTS:
4. Spokane Transit Authority Fare Structure Report - David Swalling, Steve Blaska
5. City Hall Design Sen-ices - Neil Kersten
INFORNiATION ONLY: n/a
EXECUTIVE SESSIOV: nla
ADJOURIYMENT
N
FUTURE SCHEDZJLE (meetirtg schedule rs always subject 1o change)
Regurar Counci! Meetings are generally held 2nd and 4o Tuesdays, beginning ai 6: 00 p.m
Council Study Sessions arre gerrerally held 1'; 3'd and Sth Tuesdays, beginning at 6: 00 p.m
Tuesdav. Marc6 17. 2009: No Couocil meeting~._Council attends National League of Cities
Congressional Conference in Washington, D.C.
,
NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend thc meeting who rcquire special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing, or othcr
impairments, please coatact the City Clerl at (509) 921-1000 az soon as possible so thai airangements may be made.
Council Agenda 03-10-09 Rcgutnr Mccting Pagc 2 of 2
crrv p6koane
S ValleYe
,
NationaC,ACzheimer's Di.sease Awareness
Citj► of Spokane Valley, 2Vashington
WHEREAS, There are approximately 5.2 million Arrzericans with Alzheimer's disease and
nearly 10 million Americans car•ing for someone tivith Alzheirrrer•'s disease or
other types of dementia; und
WHEREAS, An estimated 10 million Baby Boomers will develop Alzheimer's disease; and
WHEREAS, The State of Washington can expect an 81 % increase in the number of cases of
Alzheimer's disease within the next 20 years; and
WHEREAS, Alzheimer's disease will cost this country $100 billion and thousands of lives,
and
WHEREAS, The City of Spokane Valley suppoYts the Alzheimer's Association in its mission
to create u world without Alzheimer's daseuse cznd its support of our families.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Richar•d Munson, 1Vlayor of the Caty of Spokune Valley, on behalf of
the Spokane Valley City Council and the citizens of the City of Spokane Valley, da hereby
procluim March 2009 as
National Alzheimer's Disecise Awareness Month
and I encozcrage our citizens to recognize and support the Alzheimer•'s Assocacction - Inland
NOrthwest Chapter.
Dated this IOthAdn,y ofMar•ch, 2009.
i
~
.
l > >
tIR ichard Munson ~
~
~ Mayor
~ •
, ~ ti
, ~crri6kane
p
Valleyo Vroclamatt'oii
A6soCuteCy Incyedi6Ce WDayg
City of Spokane VaCCey, Washington
WHEREAS, March 19, 2009 has been declared Absolutely Incredible Kid DayO by Carnp
Fire USA, and
WHEIZEAS, Youth are greatly affected by the world around them and this day takes the time
to uppf•eciate children in a heartfelt letter making them feel inspired and loved -
a message every child needs to hear, and
WHE.REAS, This call to action urges ull adults to wr•ite letters of love and appreciation to
children they know; and
WHEREAS, The goal of this day is for all children of all ages acyoss the nation to receive at
least one personal, encour•aging letter.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Richard Munson, MayoY of the City of Spokune Valley, on behalf of
the Spokane Valley City Council and the citizens of the City of Spokane Valley, do hereby
proclaim March 19, 2009, as
Ahsolutely IncYedible Ificl Day@
und I encoarrage all citizens to participate in this celebrution of our community's children.
Dated this 10`h day of Mar•ch, 2009.
~
N 7 /
. .
chard Mitnso~ . ~ Mayor
. „ ~
l
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: 03-10-09 City Manager Sign-off.
Item: Check all that apply: Z consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Approval of the Following Vouchers:
VOUCHER LIST DATE N W/VOUCHER NUMBERS: I TOTAL AMOUNT
02/03/2009 ~ Voucher # 16596 through # 16602 ~ $4,240.13
02/06/2009 ~ Beginning # 16634; ending # 16655 ~ $364,545.33
02/19/2009 ~ Beginning # 16698; ending # 20090210 ~ $11776,565.18
02/20/2009 ~ Beginning # 16736; ending # 16745 ~ $100,140.82
02/27/2009 ~ Beginning # 16750; ending # 16773 ~ $73,369.42
03/02/2009 ~ Beginning # 16748; ending # 16794 ~ $481,054.69
~ GRAND TOTAL ~ $2,799,915.57
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION:
Approve claims for vouchers as listed above.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
STAFF CONTACT: Lisa Combs, Accounting Technician
ATTACHMENTS Voucher Lists
vchlist Voucher List Page: 1
02103I2009 4:40:25PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
16596 213/2009 001534 ALL PRINT 2-009 11596 WINDOW ENVELOPES 309.51
Total : 309.51
16597 21312009 000379 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY 2-009 06207 JAN 09: PETTY CASH 6.00
06209 JAN 09* PETTY CASH 0.50
06210 JAN 09: PETTY CASH 0.25
Total : 6.75
16598 21312009 001907 GORTSEMA, NADINE ZCX)q Refund REFUND DAMAGE DEPOSIT 200,00
Total : 200.00
16599 2I312009 001723 HEDEEN & CADITZ, PLLC Za0$ 6068 LEGAL SERVICES 2,760.00
Total : 2,760.00
16600 21312009 000036 OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN ZooB 966013143000 OFFICE SUPPLIES FIN 37.12
Total : 37.12
16601 213/2009 001906 UHSCU ZpOq Refund REFUND DAMAGE DEPOSIT 194.00
Total : 194.00
16602 2/312009 000061 WILHITE, DIANA Zo-'~:g Mileage 2008 MILEAGE EXPENSES 732.75
Total : 732.75
Bank total : 4,240.13
I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, Total vouchers : 4,240.13
that the materials have been furnished, the sezvices
rendered, or the labor per£ormed as described herein
and that the claam is just, due and an unpaid
obhgation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that
I am authoxized to au henticate a.nd certify said clai.m.
.
Finance Daxector Date
Mayor Date
Council Member Date Page: 1
vchlist Voucher List Page: 1
0210612009 4:08:49PM Spokane Valley
, Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
16634 21612009 001534 ALL PRINT 11617 BUSINESS CARD ORDER 56.42
Total : 56.42
16635 216/2009 001081 ALSCO LSP0554834 FLOOR MATS: CITY HALL 14.47
Total : 14.47
16636 21612009 000335 ALTON'S TIRE INC. 6-39717 OIL CHANGE: 40206D 3712
Total : 37.12
16637 21612009 000379 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY 06212 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 0.50
06214 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 0.50
06215 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 3.00
06218 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 1.00
06219 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 0.50
06221 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 5.00
Total : 10.50
16638 216J2009 000429 COFFMAN ENGINEERS 812683 42171 SULLIVAN BRIDGE #0095 1,680.00
Total : 1,680.00
16639 21612009 000508 CONOCOPHILLIPS FLEET 870166725901 JAN 09: FLEET FUEL BILL 1,07389
Total : 1,073.89
16640 21612009 000035 CORPORATE EXPRESS 92663079 OFFICE SUPPLIES- OPS 539.40
Total : 539.40
16641 2/612009 001753 DINGUS, ZARECOR & ASSOC 1423 JAN 09: ACCOUNTING SERVICES 1,905.00
Total : 1,905.00
16642 21612009 001859 FINANCIAL FORENSICS 3044 DEC 08: JAIL FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 1,264.00
Total : 1,264.00
16643 2l612009 001649 KILGORE CONSTRUCTION INC PMT #9 POOL UPGRADES #0073.0074 0075 140,638.62
Total : 140,638.62
16644 2l612009 001021 LARSON'S DEMOLITION, INC. PMT #2 42227 OLD SR CENTER DEMO #0072 59,729.44
Page. 1
vchlist Voucher List Page: 2
0210612009 4:08:49PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
16644 216/2009 001021 001021 LARSON'S DEMOLITION, INC. (Continued) Total : 59,729.44
16645 21612009 001669 MCGEE, MARY KATE Expenses TRAVEL EXPENSES 64,60
Total : 64.60
16646 216/2009 001035 NETWORK DESIGN & MANAGEMENT 16465 PMT #2 42197 COMPUTER HARDWARE 39,229.83
Total : 39,229.83
16647 21612009 000193 NORTHWEST CHRISTIAN SCHOOL INC 4th Qtr CAM 4TH QTR 2008: CAM CHARGES 1,653.56
Total : 1,653.56
16648 216/2009 000469 NORTHWEST PLAYGROUND EQUIP INC 30690 PLAYGROUND EQUIP• VALLEY MIS 58,908.88
42199
30718 42199 PLAYGROUND EQUIP VALLEY MIS 20,803.52
Total : 79,712.40
16649 21612009 000512 OFFICETEAM 23191617 STAFFING SERVICE: LASERFICHE 521.60
23191618 STAFFING SERVICE: LASERFICHE 48900
Total : 1,010.60
16650 21612009 001276 RANDALL, DAVID 1299 42210 SW ANALYSIS - VALLEYVIEW PONI 16,798.15
. Total : 16,798.15
16651 2l612009 000779 SOUTHARD, BRAD 301259-301260 42269 JAN 09: BIO CLEAN-UP 3,900.00
Total : 3,900.00
16652 2/612009 000230 SPOKANE CO AUDITORS OFFICE 0037915 FILING/RECORDING FEES 326.00
0038134 FILING/RECORDING FEES 89.00
0038309 FILING/RECORDING FEES 348.00
0039069 FILINGIRECORDING FEES 191.00
0039585 FILING/RECORDING FEES 113.00
Total : 1,067.00
16653 2J612009 000710 SPOKANE CO BAR ASSOC C69JAN38 JAN 09: PHOTOCOPIES 1.75
Total : 1.75
16654 21612009 000140 WALTS MAILING SERVICE 13258 BROADWAYIFANCHER MAILERS #I 133.34
Total : 133.34
Page: 2
vchlist VOUCher List Page: 3
02106/2009 4:08:49PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
16655 2/612009 000152 WSDOT ATB90113067 URBAN RAMPS #0099 654.98
ATB90113072 APPLEWAY TRUNKLINE #0062 66.60
ATB90113083 SIGNAUILLUMINATION MAINT 1,436.75
ATB90113084 STATE ROUTE ROADWAY MAINT. 11,866.91
Total : 14,025.24
22 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 364,545.33
22 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 364,545.33
I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury,
that the materials have been furnished, the services
xendered, or the labor performed as described herein
and that the clai.m is just, due and an unpaid
obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that
I am authorized to authenticate and certi£y said claim.
l~
Finance Director Date
Mayor Date
Council Member Date
Page: 3
vchlist Voucher List Page: 1
02I1912009 1:20:51PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
16698 2117/2009 001276 RANDALL, DAVID 1304 42211 SW ANALYSIS FOR CONSTRUCTIC 9,223.20
Total : 9,223.20
16699 211712009 001276 RANDALL, DAVID 1305 42211 SW ANALYSIS FOR CONSTRUCTIC 5,600.00
Total : 5,600.00
16701 2l1812009 000379 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Permit Fee PERMIT FEE: VALLEY MISSION PA( 287.14
Total : 287.14
16702 211912009 001917 A-1 CAMERA REPAIR 4021 CAMERA REPAIR: PARKS 92.40
Total : 92.40
16703 211912009 001534 ALL PRINT 11671 LOGO ENVELOPES 26632
11676 BUSINESS CARDSINAME PLATES 414.69
Total : 681.01
16704 2l19/2009 001012 ASSOC BUSINESS SYSTEMS 282170 COPIER COSTS: 21799 41.67
282221 COPIER COSTS: 21783 246.92
Total : 288.59
16705 2119/2009 001606 BANNER BANK JAN 09 JAN 09: 4433 166.41
Total : 166.41
16706 2119/2009 001648 BERK & ASSOCIATES 5682-01-09 COLLABORATIVE GRANT: CD 682 50
5682-12-08 COMPETITIVE GRANT 1,072.50
5750-01-09 EMERGING ISSUES GRANT- CD 5,847.20
5750-12-08 EMERGING ISSUES GRANT 8,015.29
Total : 15,617.49
16707 211912009 001157 COUNTRY HOMES POWER EQUIP 347315 TOOL SERVICE: PW 48.61
347316 TOOL SERVICE: PW 93.18
347317 TOOL SERVICE: PW 93.18
347320 TOOL SERVICE: PW 93.18
347321 TOOL SERVICE: PW 93.18
347322 TOOL SERVICE: PW 103.72
347323 TOOL SERVICE: PW 104.20
Page: 1
vchlist Voucher List Page: 2
0211912009 1:20:51PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
16707 2119/2009 001157 001157 COUNTRY HOMES POWER EQUIP (Continuetl) Total : 629.25
16708 2119/2009 000683 DAVID EVANS & ASSOCIATES 265518 42243 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SVC 1,670.78
265657 JAN 09: REVIEW SERVICES 2,588.00
Total : 4,258.78
16709 2/1912009 000278 DRISKELL, CARY Mileage DEC 08: TRAVEL EXPENSES 11.70
Mileage JAN 09: TRAVEL EXPENSES 74.25
Total : 85.95
16710 2l1912009 001003 GEOENGINEERS INC 0098501 42213 EVERGREENISPRAGUE #0102 117.50
0098501 42215 PINES/SPRAGUE #0103 81.25
42215
0098501 42214 MCDONALDISPRAGUE #0104 7200
42214
Total : 270.75
16711 2119/2009 001253 GORDON THOMAS HONEYWELL JAN1042 JAN 09: LOBBYIST SERVICE 3,148.31
Total : 3,148.31
16712 211912009 000002 H& H BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC. 142940 JAN 09: COPIER COSTS 95.00
142941 JAN 09: COPIER COSTS 142.43
182095 JAN 09: COPIER COSTS 105 84
182096 JAN 09: COPIER COSTS 4.96
182177 COPIER COSTS 533.38
182178 COPIER COSTS 6.29
182182 COPIER COSTS 41.74
182191 JAN 09: COPIER COSTS 35.45
182270 JAN 09: COPIER COSTS 891.81
182271 JAN 09: COPIER COSTS 117.66
182272 JAN 09: COPIER COSTS 137.15
182273 JAN 09: COPIER C05TS 14.84
182274 JAN 09: COPIER COSTS 431.00
182275 JAN 09: COPIER COSTS 101.94
182278 JAN 09: COPIER COSTS 574.14
182279 JAN 09: COPIER COSTS 8916
Total : 3,322.79
Page: 2
vchlist Voucher List Page: 3
0211912009 1:20:51PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
16713 2/19/2009 000505 H& H FINANCIAL SERVICES INC. 2325 JAN 09: LEASE PMT 233.71
2326 JAN 09 LEASE PMT 307.62
2327 JAN 09: LEASE PMT 413.06
2374 FEB 09: LEASE PMT 233.71
2375 FEB 09: LEASE PMT 307.62
2376 FEB 09• LEASE PMT 413.06
Total : 1,908.78
16714 211912009 000313 INLAND ASPHALT COMPANY INC. PMT #6 42102 PINESIMANSFIELD #0005 101,596.30
Total : 101,596.30
16715 211912009 001912 INLAND NW CHAPTER AACN REFUND REFUND DAMAGE DEPOSIT 198.00
Total : 198.00
16716 2119l2009 001914 KIPP, RYAN Expenses MISC EXPENSES REIMBURSED 175.50
Total : 175.50
16717 2l1912009 000993 LES SCHWAB TIRE CENTER 520101 WINTER CHANGEOVER: 38904D 103.27
Total : 103.27
16718 2/1912009 001886 LLOYD'S AUTOMOTIVE 5490 HEADLIGHT: 17.21
Total : 17.21
16719 2119/2009 001631 MELBOURN, THOMAS Expenses CERTIFICATION 70.00
Total : 70.00
16720 211912009 000069 MERCIER, DAVID Feb 09 FEB 09: AUTO ALLOWANCE 400.00
Total : 400.00
16721 211912009 000239 NORTHWEST BUSINESS STAMP INC. 72072 STAMP SUPPLIES: CD 121.53
Total : 121.53
16722 2119/2009 000121 NORTHWEST MAILING, INC 60004 SERVICE ON FOLDING MACHINE 200.91
Total : 200.91
16723 2/1912009 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 441454727-001 LITERATURE HOLDER: PW 42.89
455815203-001 OFFICE SUPPLIES: FIN 40,25
Page: 3
vchlist VouCher List Page: 4
02I1912009 1:20:51PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
16723 211912009 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. (Continued) 462186023-001 42254 OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW 88310
42254
462186147-001 42254 OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW 9.76
462186148-001 42254 OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW 47.91
462186149-001 42254 OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW 30.43
Total : 1,054.34
16724 211912009 000512 OFFICETEAM 23243165 STAFFING SERVICE: LASERFICHE 586.80
23243172 STAFFING SERVICE- LASERFICHE 652.00
Total : 1,238.80
16725 2119/2009 001919 RIPATTI, CHRIS Refund REFUND DAMAGE DEPOSIT 5200
Total : 52.00
16726 2/19/2009 000126 SECRETARY OF STATE - WA Renewal CENTERPLACE TRADEMARK RENE 5.00
Total : 5.00
16727 2119/2009 001915 SHAW' ASSOC SPECIALTIES 1466 TOILET ACCESSORIES: PRECINCT 13.51
, Total : 13.51
16728 2l19I2009 000084 STANDARD REGISTER CO 5369366 CHECK STOCK: FIN 1,102.27
Total : 1,102.27
16729 2119I2009 001918 STANLEY, KELLY Refund CUASS CANCELLED REFUND 37.00
Total : 37.00
16730 2119/2009 000065 STAPLES BUSINESS ADVANTAGE 3114177287 OFFICE SUPPLIES CD 246.16
3114177288 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CD 99.29
3114177289 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CD 45.60
3114433917 RETURN: CD -38.03
3114433918 OFFICE SUPPLIES' CD 63.57
3114433919 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CD 5030
3114433920 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CD 212.15
3114702858 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CD 275 83
Total : 956.97
16731 2l1912009 000773 STUDIO CASCADE, INC. 1409 OCT 08- COLLABORATIVE PLANNIP 2,82000
Page: 4
vchlist Voucher List Page: 5
0211912009 1:20:51PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
16731 2/19/2009 000773 STUDIO CASCADE, INC, (Continued)
1415 NOV 08- COLLABORATIVE PLANNIP 2,000.00
1425 DEC 08: COLLABORATIVE PLANNIP 500.00
1437 JAN 09: COLLABORATIVE PLANNIN 935.00
Total : 6,255.00
16732 211912009 000063 TAYLOR, STEVE Mdeage TRAVEL EXPENSES 7.70
Total : 7.70
16733 2/19/2009 001911 THE GLOVER MANSION REFUND REFUND DAMAGE DEPOSIT 1,940.00
Total : 1,940.00
16734 2/1912009 001913 WEBSITE PROS Refund REFUND DAMAGE DEPOSIT 214.00
Total : 214.00
16735 2/19/2009 001910 WILLIAMS INLAND DISTRIBUTORS REFUND REFUND DAMAGE DEPOSIT 50.00
Total : 50.00
1302009 1I30/2009 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER Jan 09 JAN 09: SHERIFF SERVICES 1,158,867.73
Total : 1,158,867.73
20090206 2l5/2009 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER Jan 09 JAN 09: COUNTY SERVICES 205,482.36
Total : 205,482.36
20090210 2/11/2009 001865 MORGEN & OSWOOD CONSTRUCTION PMT#3 42219 BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION #0003 250,825.03
Total : 250,825.03
40 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 1,776,565.18
40 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 1,776,565.18
Page: 5
vchlist Voucher List Page: 6
0211912009 1:20:51PM Spokane Valley .
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury,
that the materials have been furnished, the services
xendered, or the labor performed as described hexezn
and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid
obhgation against the CZty of Spokane Valley, and that
I am authorized to authenticate and certify said clai_m.
1G
rmance Director Date
Mayor Date ,
Council Member Date
Page: 6
vchlist Voucher List Page: 1
02120I2009 11:20:52AM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount
16736 2120/2009 000135 APA 2009 MEMBERSHIPS 609.00
Total : 609.00
16737 212012009 000786 K& N ELECTRIC MOTORS, INC. 0091749 42253 K&N CONTROL PANEL REPAIR 2,306.07
Total : 2,306.07
16738 2120/2009 000512 OFFICETEAM 23271672 STAFFING SERVICE: LASERFICHE 652.00
23271673 STAFFING SERVICE:LASERFICHE 652.00
Total : 1,304.00
16739 2I2012009 001731 SNEDA 10189 2ND PAYMENT:SNEDA 2,000.00
Total : 2,000.00
16740 2l2012009 000323 SPOKANE CO UTILITIES FEB 2009 SPOKANE COUNTY SEWER 1,411.51
Total : 1,411.51
16741 2/20/2009 000451 SPOKANE REG SPORTS COMMISSION 4th Qtr Pmt 4TH QTR LODGING TAX 41,325.51 Total : 41,325.51
16742 2120/2009 000406 SPOKANE REGIONAL CVB 1847 JAN 2009 CONTRACT PMT 19,666.67
Total : 19,666.67
16743 2/2012009 000405 SPOKANE VALLEY PARTNERS 2009 #1 OUTSIDE AGENCY REIMBURSEME 2,834.61
Total : 2,834.61
16744 2/2012009 000257 STATE AUDITOR'S OFFICE L75305 AUDITORS 1,454.10
Total : 1,454.10
16745 2120/2009 001872 WA DEPT OF INFO SERVICES 45504946 42225 HP STORAGEWORKS MIRRORING 27,229.35
Total : 27,229.35
10 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 100,140.82
10 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers: 100,140.82
Page: 1
vchlist Voucher List Page: 2
02l2012009 11:20:52AM Spokane Vailey
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescfiptionlAccount Amount
I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of pedury,
that the matenals have been furnished, the services
rendered, or the labor performed as descnbed herem
and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation
against the Ciry of Spokane Valley, and that I am
authonzed to authenticate and certify to said claim
Finance Director Date
Page. 2
vchlist Voucher List Page: 1
02127I2009 3:04:19PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionfAccount Amount
16750 2l27/2009 001081 ALSCO LSP0558449 FLOOR MATS: SHERIFF 15.22
LSP0558450 FLOOR MATS: SHERIFF 2.75
LSP0562110 FLOOR MATS: CITY HALL 14.47
Totai : 32.44
16751 2/27/2009 000030 AVISTA 010119017 UTILITIES: PARKS MASTER AVISTP 11,670.25
Total : 11,670.25
16752 2/27/2009 001409 BEST LINE 053102192009 ANSWERING SERVICE: CP 21 25
Total : 21.25
16753 2/2712009 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC 8995283 LINEN SERVICE: CP 50.76
Total : 50.76
16754 2127/2009 000109 COFFEE SYSTEMS INC 3820:016043 COFFEE SUPPLIES 67.38
3820:018436 COFFEE SUPPLIES 196.98
Total : 264.36
16755 2127/2009 000035 CORPORATE EXPRESS 93597139 OFFICE SUPPLIES 90.13
Total : 90.13
16756 2127/2009 000743 CROWN MOVING CO INC 09-10012-911 MOVING COSTS 85.15
Total : 85.15
16757 2127/2009 000912 DEX MEDIA WEST FEB 2009 ADVERTISING:CP 225.00
FEB 2009 ADVERTISING: SENIOR CNTR 40.00
Total : 265.00
16758 2127/2009 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 31630 LEGAL PUBLICATION 25.00
31631 LEGAL PUBLICATION 25.00
31632 LEGAL PUBLICATION 91.80
31633 LEGAL PUBLICATION 94.35
31634 LEGAL PUBLICATION 81.60
31662 LEGAL PUBLICATION 51.70
31665 LEGAL PUBLICATION 132 80
31666 LEGAL PUBLICATION 128.00
31669 LEGAL PUBLICATION 102.00
Page: 1
vchlist Voucher List Page: 1
0212712009 3:04:19PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
16758 2/2712009 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC (Continued)
31670 LEGAL PUBLICATION 185.30
31671 LEGAL PUBLICATION 77.35
Total : 994.90
16759 2/27/2009 000009 HEWLETT PACKARD CO 45504946 SOFTWARE LICENSE 27,229 35
Total : 27,229.35
16760 212712009 000288 INTL CODE COUNCIL 1073753-IN PUBLICATIONS- BLDG 54247
1073970-IN REGISTRATIONS' BLDG 118 00
10838341N REGISTRATIONS BLDG 59 00
Total : 719.47
16761 2127/2009 001635 ISS FACILITYIEVENT SERVICES 20374 JAN 09. EVENT SERVICES 177.58
20422 JAN 09 EVENT SVCS. CP 98.50
20438 JANITORIAL SVC: CP 7,136.00
Total : 7,412.08
16762 2/2712009 001684 MARKETING SOLUTIONS NW CP 2-9-09 ADVERTISING: CP 15,846.30
Total : 15,846.30
16763 2l27/2009 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC 461385442-001 42241 OFFICE SUPPLIES 275.32
463893845-001 OFFICE SUPPLIES 33.01
464220149-001 42277 OFFICE DEPOT 98 50
Total : 406.83
16764 2127I2009 000997 OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY SR 04008309 ELEVATOR SERVICE: CP 1,697.52
Total : 1,697.52
16765 2127/2009 000019 PURRFECT LOGOS, INC. 23180 SIGNAGE' PRECINCT 3315
Total : 33.15
16766 2127I2009 000322 QWEST 509-921-6787 5116 PHONES 46.15
509-922-7091 0606 PhIONES- MISSION POOL 106.74
509-926-1840194B PHONES- PARK ROAD POOL 106.74
Total : 259.63
16767 2I2712009 000709 SENSKE LAWN & TREE CARE INC. 2972582 DE-ICE:PRECINCT 5.53
Page: 2
vchlist VouCher LiSt Page: 3
0212712009 3:04:19PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
16767 2l27/2009 000709 SENSKE LAWN & TREE CARE INC. (Continued)
3020533 PEST CONTROL:PRECINCT 70.66
3347333 DE-ICE:PRECINCT 108.70
3357736 DE-ICE: PRECINCT 81.53
3359496 DE-ICE•PRECINCT 81.53
Total : 347.95
16768 212712009 000898 SPOKANE PROCARE 221892 LANDSCAPE SERVICE 433.57
Total : 433.57
16769 212712009 000406 SPOKANE REGIONAL CVB 1855 CTA REGIST: CP 50.00
1857 CTA REGIST: CP 100.00
1862 CTA REGIST: CP 50.00
1863 CTA REGIST• CP 100.00
Total : 300.00
16770 2/27J2009 000311 SPRINT 326088106 WAPS FOR LAPTOPS 509.54
Total : 509.54
16771 2127/2009 000501 THOMPSON PUBLISHING GROUP 2009 HR SUBSCRIPTION 438.50
Total : 438.50
16772 2/2712009 001464 TUU TELECOM 02734613 INTERNETlDATA LINES: CP 4,136.29
Total : 4,136.29
16773 2127/2009 000706 WSAPT Spring 2009 CONFERENCE REGISTRATION 125.00
Total : 125.00
24 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 73,369.42
24 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 73,369.42
Page: 3
vchlist Voucher LiSt Page: 4
0212712009 3:04:19PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
I, the undersigned, do certify under penaity of pequry,
that the materials have been fumishetl, the services
rendered, or the labor performed as descnbed herein
and that the claim is just, due and an unpaitl obligation
agamst the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am
authonzed to authenticate and certify to said claim.
Finance Director Date
Page: 4
vchlist Voucher List Page: 1
0310212009 11:56:58AM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
16748 2/24/2009 001818 GUITAR CENTER PREPAY 16-CHANNEL MIXER: CP 434.79
Total : 434.79
16749 212412009 001606 BANNER BANK 5579 JAN 09: GRIFFITH 2,059.40
Total : 2,059.40
16774 3/2/2009 000335 ALTON'S TIRE INC. 6-38789 MISC SERVICE: 40204D 100.36
6-39960 OIL CHANGE: 35517D 48.51
Total : 148.87
16775 312/2009 001606 BANNER BANK 2832 FEB 09: 2832 2,075.89
4391 FEB 09: MERCIER 623.78
Total : 2,699.67
16776 3/212009 000796 BUDINGER & ASSOC INC M08218-1 42110 GEOTECHNICAL ENG #0003 229.85
P08355-4 42226 GEOTECHNICAL ENG #0054 130.00
Total : 359.85
16777 3/212009 001157 COUNTRY HOMES POWER EQUIP 347698 TOOL SERVICE• PW 117.31
Total : 117.31
16778 312/2009 000278 DRISKELL, CARY Mileage TRAVEL EXPENSES 99.00
Total : 99.00
16779 312/2009 000252 LOWE'S BUSINESS ACCOUNT 02600 MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES: CP 46.70
10112 MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES: CP 60.63
14264 MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES: CP 98.63
14637 MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 194.41
14763 MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES: PRECIN 19.23
FC FINANCE CHG 6.22
Total : 425.82
16780 3/212009 000069 MERCIER, DAVID Expenses TRAVEL EXPENSES 463.90
Expenses TRAVEL EXPENSES 743.19
Mar 09 MAR 09: AUTO ALLOWANCE 400.00
Total : 1,607.09
Page: 1
vchlist VouCher LiSt Page: 2
03102l2009 11:56:58AM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
16781 3/212009 000062 MUNSON, RICHARD Expenses TRAVEL EXPENSES 172.20
Total : 172.20
16782 312l2009 000036 OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN 966118612000 BUDGET SUPPLIES: FIN 51.10
Total : 51.10
16783 31212009 000512 OFFICETEAM 23309539 STAFFING SERVICE: LASERFICHE 546.05
23309540 STAFFING SERVICE: LASERFICHE 586.80
23320071 STAFFING SERVICE: LASERFICHE -16.30
Totai : 1,116.55
16784 3/2/2009 000019 PURRFECT LOGOS, INC. 23122 REPLACE GRAPHICS ON PD CRUI; 149.46
Total : 149.46
16785 3/2/2009 001659 RUEN-YEAGER & ASSOC INC 24086 BROADWAYIFANCHER #0067 979.55
Total : 979.55
16786 3J2/2009 000064 SCHIMMELS, GARY Expenses TRAVEL EXPENSES 414.70
Total : 414.70
16787 3l2/2009 001921 SCHMIDT, TAVIS Expenses TRAVEL EXPENSES 36.00
Total : 36.00
16788 3f2/2009 000172 SPOKANE CO ENGINEER VLY0901 JAN 09: ENGINEERING SERVICES 434,209.83
Total : 434,209.83
16789 3I212009 000090 SPOKANE CO INFO SYSTEMS 50303627 JAN 09: COUNTY IT SUPPORT 16,524.45
Total : 16,524.45
16790 3/2/2009 000311 SPRINT 959698810-015 FEB 09: CELL PHONES 947.63
Total : 947.63
16791 3/2/2009 000065 STAPLES BUSINESS ADVANTAGE 3115304609 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CD 120.12
3115539863 RETURN -23.00
3115539864 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CD 103.08
3115539865 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CD 1.09
Total : 201.29
Page: 2
vchlist VoUCher LiSt Page: 3
0310212009 11:56:58AM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
16792 3/212009 000061 WILHITE, DIANA Expenses TRAVEL EXPENSES 119.20
Expenses TRAVEL EXPENSES 6.95
Total : 126.15
16793 3/2/2009 000152 WSDOT 90210075 SIGNAUILLUMINATION MAINT: PW 2,706.18
90210076 STATE ROUTE ROADWAY MAINT. f 15,440.63
Total : 18,146.81
16794 3/212009 000361 WSDOT-ENGINEERING PUB. 4784 08 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS 27.17
Total : 27.17
23 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 481,054.69
23 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 481,054.69
I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury,
that the materials have been furni.shed, the services
rendered, or the labor performed as described herein
and that the clai.m is just, due and an unpaid
obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that
I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim.
Finance Dixector Date
Mayor Date
Council Member Date
Page: 3
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: 03-10-09 City Manager Sign-off:
Item: Check all that apply: N consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE :
Payroll for Period Ending February 28, 2009:
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
BACKGROUND:
OPTIONS:
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION:
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
Gross: $ 215,585.97
Benefits: 1 121,217.08
TOTAL PAYROLL: $ 336,803.05
STAFF CONTACT: Raba Nimri
ATTACHMENTS
DRAFT
MINUTES
Special Joint Meeting
Spokane Valley City Council and
Spokane County Board of County Commissioners
Monday, February 23, 2009
1:30 p.m. - 4:30 p.m.
Spokane County Human Resources Department Training Room
1229 W Mallon Avenue, Spokane, Washington
Attendance:
Citv of Snokane Vallev Spokane Countv
Rich Munson, Mayor Todd Mielke, Chair
Dick Denenny, Deputy Mayor Mark Richard, Vice-Chair
Rose Dempsey, Councilmember Bonnie Mager, Commissioner
Gary Schimmels, Councilmember
Diana Wilhite, Councilmember
Absent:
Bill Gothmann, Councilmember
Steve Taylor, Councilmember
Staff: SQokane Countv Staff
Dave Mercier, City Manager Marshall Farnell, Chief Executive Officer
Mike Jackson, Deputy City Manager Jim Emacio, DPA, Prosecutor's Office
John Hohman, Senior Engineer, Development Bruce Rawls, Director Division of Utilities
Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Daniela Erickson, Clerk of the Board
Mike Connelly, City Attorney
Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
Ken Thompson, Finance Director
Rick VanLeuven, Police Chief
Ian Whitney, Legal Intern
Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk
At 1:37 p.m., Commissioner Chair Mielke called the meeting to order, welcomed everyone, and asked
Mayor Munson if he had a preference for the order of agenda items. Mayor Munson said Council would
like to discuss wastewater first. (Note: The following agenda items are in the order discussed.]
41. (3) Wastewater issues: Update, Capacitv Proiection; Moratorium, Tarizet Rates - Bruce Rawls
With the aid of his PowerPoint, Mx. Rawls explained the plant schedule and history: that a DBO (design-
build option) contract and limited notice to proceed was accomplished January 13, 2009; with a full
notice to proceed for construction issued February 20, 2009. Mr. Rawls said that during spring 2010 we
will need TNIDL (total maximum daily load) for SRF (state revolving funding); that summer 2011 we
will need a TMDL/NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permit for startup testing
of the plant; with an early start date for operations anticipated January 2012; and that the completion
deadline is June 30, 2012. Mr. Rawls also reviewed effluent options of discharging to Spokane River;
water reclamation to the wetlands, to industrial use, or to aquifer recharge; and briefly discussed the delta
elimination plan to get a discharge permit into the River, and said he feels we will get the permit; and
mentioned the STEP (sewer tank elimination program) might be able to be used as a credit. Mr. Rawls
said that he met with representatives from the Department of Ecology (DOE) and that he is optimist that
the TMDL river clean-up plan is going in the right direction; that if it gets appealed, it would make
Joint City/ Spokane Counry BoCC Meetmg Minutes 02-23-09 Page 1 of 9
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
scheduling questionable, but that he still feels the outcome would be better then it would have been
before. Mr. Rawls mentioned we will be looking at the total water quality picture instead of the water
quality right next to the dam; and added that with the industrial use option, which would be In]and Empire
Paper, that they use about four million gallons a day, so our effluent may be suitable for their process; but
that option will need further evaluation of all the chemicals to make sure it will work; and that the Paper
company's seasonal shut downs would also need to be addressed. Regarding an aquifer recharge, Mr.
Rawls said that would be a pilot project and if there are no other options available, we would apply for a
permit and operate on a five-year interval pilot permit to determine if any technical issues arise; and that
there could be some opposition to that option. Concerning the wetlands, he explained that the area in
mind is the Saltese area, but he said we need to determine how much water would be put on flats and run
down stream into fihc aquifer; adding that every option has issues, and would be expensive and
challenging.
Mr. Rawl's slides three and four consisted of a chart showing the sewer connection data for the past three
years with a breakdown of new construction and the STEP program; and a graph showing the flow in
gallons per day. An additional slide on flow projections showed that our contractual capacity is ten
million gallons per day, with current unused capacity of 1.5 million gallons daily (mgd); but he said by
spring 2015 the projection is to hit 10 mgd; adding that the remaining STEP customers would equal about
1.7 mgd; and he stated that we don't want to get to the point where there is no capacity forcing us not to
allow new development. Concerning a sewer moratorium, Mr. Rawls said the County does not have a
plan, but moratorium issues are complicated and would have to take into consideration the STEP versus
new development, and that the new development would need to take into consideration commercial
versus residential, and vested plats versus new plats; adding that once you use the capacity, you can't give
it back. Mr. Rawls said that the estimate for remaining capacity is potentially three years past the plant
opening. As a side note, Mr. Rawls mentioned that the State Health Department threatened a moratorium
in 1993, which was what triggered the STEP program. Chair Mielke said that he feels we will know a lot
more by the end of this year; that Jay Manning (of the DOE) wants to issue permits in the first quarter
next year and if not; we would need to get together and discuss the issues further. Mr. Rawls mentioned
there has been no legal discussion on vesting over the last few years; and Commissioner Richard said it
would be important to review vesting and the associated elements concerning providing sewer to vested
plats; with Mr. Rawls mentioning that it becomes more complicated as not every vested plat is built on,
and things to consider would be ready to build or already built. Mayor Munson asked how long it might
take to look at these legal issues, and Attorney Emacio responded that staff would examine these issues
over the nexfi few weeks and come back with some preliminary idea. City Manager Mercier asked where
is the balance on trying to accelerate connections after STEP versus holding them off, and which would
more profit the overall enterprises, taking if off the system versus not accelerating connections and
thereby affecting capacity? Mr. Rawls responded that there are many variables including an aggressive
water conservation program launching now with rebates, and that time will tell if the 10% overall could
mean more available gallons, but that we just don't know how effective it might be, or how many people
might implement it, but said that we will spend a substantial amount of funds on this and it will be
beneficial in terms of wastewater.
Concerning projected monthly rates, Mr. Rawls said that the current single family rate is $35.34; that a
previous projection for 2012 with SFR was $38.44; but new estimates are $45 to $50 with discharge into
the River; and $50 to $55 with discharge into wetlands; that revenue bond financing in lieu of LTGO
(limited tax general obligation) bonds (versus revenue utility bonds which require additional reserves and
sometimes have higher rates), adds $0.75 to $1.50 per month; and said there would be numerous policy
decisions which would affect the rates. Mr. Rawls said a sensitivity analysis was conducted before the
new rates for 2009 were determined; and said that staff will do a new rate study over the next three to four
months. Items to take into consideration for rates, Mr. Rawls explained, are placing more of the charge on
the connection and less on the monthly rate, or vice-versa, and how fast to ramp in the rate structure.
Joint City/ Spokane County BoCC Meeting Minutes 02-23-09 Page 2 of 9
Approved by Council•
DRAFT
Discussion ensued regarding how to incorporate stich rates into the Valley; the rate analysis; mention
from Mayor Munson and Deputy Mayor Denenny that Council would like to contribute more regarding
the rate format and the rate analysis and any policy decisions; that the County Commissioners would like
Council's input on such; mention by Mr. Rawls that he would bring a consultant to Council to discuss key
processes and that there would be another joint session before the rates are taken to a public hearing; with
further comment from Mr. Rawls that other communities' rates, such as Airway Heights, would likely be
at or above $50.00. Mr. Mercier asked if any financial decisions have been made yet, and Mr. Rawls
responded that so far, the idea is to borrow money from the reserves until June, then sell bonds, that they
are waiting until June to receive the 2007 annual report in order to get the best possible rating, and that
they hope the bond market will be more conducive over the next four to five months; that the hope is to
have a rate study completed, if not adopted, before June; although he mentioned that schedule might be
too aggressive; but said an idea on how to pay back the indebtedness must be formulated prior to going to
the bond companies. Mr. Rawls also stated that all customers would be treated the same regardless of
what area they reside in; as developers don't like the different rates for different areas as it leads to
selective placement of projects.
Chair Mielke mentioned that the DOE is working on legislation to give greater flexibility on how to
implement the timelines; that the DOE recognizes they have some inconsistencies and they are looking
for flexibility to align more with federal standards to address downstream standards versus state sovereign
standards; but added that he is uncertain how such legislation is progressing. City Manager Mercier
mentioned the City would appreciate knowing when that fina] conversation would take place regarding a
financing decision; and Mr. Farnell mentioned it should occur prior to June; that they are waiting for Mr.
Rawls to complete the rate analysis, and feels it could be more likely in May so that financing can be
addressed in June. Mr. Rawls said he hopes to have some options on sewer rates mid to late March; then
make those modifications and come back in April with the results; then in May wrap-up the discussion
about bonds and financing as it amounts to rates; that they are budgeted for ten or twelve different rate
scenarios and will direct their consultant to do perhaps six, and said the City may want their staff to sit
with County staff as the difference scenarios are explained. Mayor Munson agreed that would be a good
approach and asked to be kept appraised.
Commissioner Richard said none of the Board members are excited about proposing rate increases to the
citizens, that Spokane Valley citizens are also Spokane County citizens, and he would hope to work
carefully and cautiously, realizing an increase will be a struggle for many; that no dollar amount has been
set yet, but they are committeed to make sure the system is as cost effective as possible; that they are
building a sufficient plant with technology driving the costs, adding that care needs to be taken not to
send conflicting statements to citizens. Commissioner Mager said everyone needs to be assured we are
all in this together, and that Spokane Valley is supportive of the Board moving forward with this plan,
realizing that Spokane Valley has a large stake in this as well. Mayor Munson said that Spokane Valley
took the position last year to support this plant and that hasn't changed; that Spokane Valley is looking at
alternatives just in case this doesn't work, but that Spokane Valley is committed to this plan.
Commissioner Mielke said that the new treatment plant really does make a difference in cleaning up the
River; and he acknow]edged they are trying to meet standards while protecting the River and aquifer and
said he feels they are still on target to do that; to which Mayor Munson agreed and said that at this point it
makes sense for Spokane Valley to look at a Plan B even just to re-confirm that perhaps there is no Plan
B; and that he hopes to move smoothly and keep the cost down as much as possible. Mr. Rawls
mentioned that he is not aware of any other jurisdiction that has done a delta elimination plan; that Liberty
Lake was looking at golf courses, but a delta elimination is a big problem for this region and he said
without a STEP, we'd have more serious problems; and Commissioner Mielke added that we are uniquely
situated because of the work done on delta elimination; that we have conditional approval for a facilities
plan.
Joint City/ Spokane County BoCC Meeting Minutes 02-23-09 Page 3 of 9
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
Commissioner Richard voiced his concern about comments that Spokane Valley is looking at alternatives,
and he asked if Spokane Valley would like County staff to be engaged in that process, also asking when
such analysis is expected to be completed; and stated that prior to the County using bonds or engaging in
debt service, he wants to make sure Spokane Valley is with them; as he explained that it appears Spokane
Valley is saying they're with the County, but reserve the right not to be; that the County is moving on an
expensive and extensive process, and he said he does not want to hear that Spokane Valley has changed
its mind in June, as that would be a significant blow. Mayor Munson said Spokane Valley is very aware
of the hard work the County has done and will continue to do; and that Spokane Valley had not received
any alternative to date, but tllat it makes sense to look at an alternative if one exists; he asked if there is
any possibility of avoid a building moratorium; that it doesn't appear that a moratorium would occur at
this point, but he said that would be the trigger to have Spokane Valley state it has another plan, adding
that the City has an obligation to be ready for tlle worst case scenario; stressing once again that it is
becoming more apparent there is only one choice, but Spokane Valley must do due diligence. City
Manager Mercier stated that if after the first quarter there is no permit, Spokane Valley would be
amenable to come back; that the "A Plan" is with tlle County, but we want something on the shelf if
things don't work out; adding that we need to manage remaining capacity. Conversation moved to rates
and alternatives, and Chair Mielke mentioned the idea of prioritizing remaining capacity should the
County not be where desired by the first quarter. Mr. Mercier asked if there is a working group looking at
utilities, and asked if it would make sense to have Spokane Valley employees part of that meeting. Mr.
Rawls said the Saltese Project is an ongoing project and staff meets about every quarter or so to discuss
industrial re-use and recharge; that there is no "working group" but he will do everything possible to
make surc Mr. Mercier and Spokane Valley Public Works Director Kersten is made aware of data
concerning this; and he would appreciate City Management advising of who would want to be part of a
rate study; adding that he is going on vacation for a few weeks and plans to "hit it hard" upon his return.
Mr. Mercier said he would let Mr. Rawls know of which staff to involve. Mayor Munson ended by stating
that Spokane Valley needs to be part of the process, and wants to work with the Board of County
Commissioners on this issue.
#2. (1) Contractual Relations: Obiective: Discuss Pros and Cons of Contractual Relationship in the Future
Attorney Emacio distributed a rivo-page handout showing (1) general fund-payments from the City of
Spokane Valley, (2) ISD payments from City of Spokane Valley, (3) Road Fund 1 10 Billings to City of
Spokane Valley; and page two "Concerns Relative to Contracting." City Manager Mercier distributed a
one-page copy of "Valley/County Contract Details Draft." Mr. Emacio explained that his document
figures represent what Spokane Valley paid the County since the contracting process, that the figures are
broken doNvn into three categories with footnotes identifying why some of the numbers are smaller. Mr.
Mercier explained that his handout uses the 2009 budget numbers and is submitted to identify the array of
services for which we have interlocal agreements. Mr. Emacio explained that page two of his handout
addresses the pros and cons of a contracting relationship, that some aspects are technical and some
philosophical; and said the document speak for itself. Regarding methodologies, Mr. Emacio said the
issues are dealing with an indirect rate application and an inability to adopt a methodology which ensures
full cost recovery; he said that while many contracts have been revised, the Sheriffls contract is still
working under the 2003 methodology; that the first issue is, from a County's technical perspective, the
need for constant review and revision of inethodologies, and to recognize that such works both ways; and
unless there are agreements to review and revise, the only way to gain attention is to terminate a contract,
much like the City did with the District Court contract; and that the second issue, Mr. Emacio explained,
is the indirect cost analysis; he said that Morgan Koudelka and the County's Administrative Services
Department recognized that the administrative cost and indirect costs of the County issuing under the
Sheriffs Office and Jail contract are not properly allocating indirect costs, and that the parties are moving
to resolve that. Further, Mr. Emacio stated, as a result of the indirect rate issues, Spokane valley opted to
continue to pay the Sheriffs Office and the Jail Contracts under the 2007 rate; and he added that
Joint City/ Spokane County BoCC Meeting Mmutes 02-23-09 Page 4 of 9
Approved by Council.
DRAFT
maintenance and operation expenses and salaries have increased; and that increased rate is the new rate;
but since Spokane Valley has not resolved that, there is now a shortfall in revenue, and the only option,
Mr. Emacio said, is to charge interest on the payments they see as owing and due; adding that this all
creates cash flow problems, and puts both parties in awkward positions. The third issue, Mr. Emacio
explained is that sometimes it is impossible to re-coup all costs unless people keep exact track of time
spent working on every contract; so the figures captured in indirect cost analysis don't really account for
actual staff time. Regarding the road maintenance agreement, Mr. Emacio said that the contract specifies
the County will receive pay only when rendering those winter snow removal services; so when there is no
snow, there are no services; and that there are not a lot of other duties and responsibitities under those
circumstances; but that the County still pays the staff when they are really not being as effective as they
should be; summarizing that sometimes it is impossible to recapture all costs in providing services to the
Valley; that some costs are negligible and some are not.
Chair Mielke added that the County is in a unique circumstance, as the statutes only allow recovering
costs; and said that he doesn't want to get penalized by the State Auditor for not having sound
methodology; that he did not intend to go into specific contract elements today; he said regarding the law
enforcement contract, there was a stipulated level of service rather than having the contract expressed in
"x" number of officers per 1,000 population; that the population changes over time but that the County is
still locked into a hard number; that law enforcement is concerned about appropriate backup and other
issues specific to that department, and perhaps in terms of the original contract, it is not flexible; yet the
terms state it can be amended by mutual agreement, and without that, the only option is to terminate and
take chances to coine back and negotiate terms. Chair Mielke added that a lot of time is spent in contract
oversight and number checking on both sides.
City Manager Mercier said that the interlocal initiated in 2003 was a new venture for both sides; and a
valiant effort was made to capture as much as relevant, but that it is an evolutionary process; that Spokane
Valley agrees methodologies need to be reviewed and updated and some has occurred and Spokane
Valley now has about ten or eleven model contracts with unified language such as in the indemnification
clause; but said he feels constrained in asking for alternatives in payment status without contractual
changes, that he appreciates that the County is recapturing some expenses thxough indirect costs such as
in the road maintenance contract, all supplies being used were purchased through the County Public
Works with a 20% charge for overhead used on the supply side; and a 24% charge for an administrative
provision; and said tllat the settle and adjust is a very serious matter and the respective staffs work
diligently on that issue. Mr. Mercier continued by explaining that in August 2008, he received a letter
from Mr. Farnell regarding cash flow and about the City not paying the 2008 rates; and said we accept
that there might be some disagreements that might require time to resolve; that the County should not be
liable for the funds and he sees no problem in making payments on it; that the County did not receive the
amount cited for 2008 because of the inability to go through the settle and adjust; and stated that Spokane
Valley's work suggested that in 2006, Spokane Valley was owed $609,000; so the worries for the two
entities are about the same. Mr. Mercier said he indicated to Mr. Farnell last August of preferring not to
go into mediation, so the City hired a forensic accountant to have "fresh eyes" to examine this and issue a
report; which was issued in December; and that likewise the County contacted the State Auditor's office
for addttional review, and said he realizes we are waiting for that outcome. Mr. Mercier said the point is,
that this is a serious amount of money, and he is concerned that it has the potential serious compounding
affect; so it is important to get a mechanism for 2006 so it doesn't perpetuate in adverse ways in the
future; that Spokane Valley does not seek direct subsidy from the County, and if we can identify and
agree on relative costs, such as communication and maintenance, we could come to agreement with a
demonstrated ability to attack issues and try to come to common understanding. Further, Mr. Mercier
explained that Spokane Valley recognizes the ongoing question is whether to continue a contracting
relationship, and if not, if sufficient notice could be made so we can make rational efforts to do something
different. Additionally, Mr. Mercier said that after Spokane Valley's incorporation, the County had about
Joint City/ Spokane County BoCC Meeting Minutes 02-23-09 Page 5 of 9
Approved by Council.
DRAFT
two million in road funds without sufficient staff to deploy; and both parties agreed we would phase out
summer road services and that a transition plan was articulated to move without disadvantaging our
mutual constituents. Realizing the County at any time can make a decision on whether to continue a
contractual arrangement, Mr. Mercier said it is important that if the County is contemplating termination,
that Spokane Valley be part of that prior to a final decision; that he acknowledges there have been some
bumps along the way, and several issues have been discussed and identified, along with ways to solve
those; and that at each conversation, Spokane Valley raised the issue if the County wants to do something
different, we would require a three-year transition, as capital is involved in ordering equipment, which
takes considerable time; and although the agreement stipulates six month's notice, and the County
extended that, Mr. Mercier said it doesn't give ample time to deal with all that is required, that he respects
the County's desire to do something different, but would appreciate phasing this to make it more
rationale.
Mr. Emacio said that regarding the law enforcement contract, that Spokane Valley is in breach of that
contract, as payment is based upon a template with a budget divided by twelve monthly payments with an
end of the year settle and adjust; that he asked Spokane Valley to examine the contract; and said that this
is why the County is upset as Spokane Valley has not been paying what it should and if there is
disagreement on that amount, the monthly amount should not be changed until the matter has becn
reconciled; that Spokane County decided to charge interest, but said he had hoped Spokane Valley would
pay the monthly amount and the settle and adjust at the appropriate time. Mr. Emacio said he has been
with the County for thirty-five years, and never had so many disagreements with so many contracts, as the
County has with Spokane Valley; that the County has a lot of agreements with other cities and he said he
is not sure what the issue is as others' contracts can be resolved by a phone call. Mr. Emacio further
explained that issues beriveen the two entities have been more contentious perhaps because of the amount
of the contract; and said he believes we should work closer regarding notification; and added that he was
shocked to learn about Spokane Valley terminating the district court contract; and that the County could
have been given six month's notice or the issue could have been started earlier so that the County would
not have to go to the legislature to reduce the number of judges; and said the entities both need to
communicate better. Chair Mielke said that in full disclosure, he and Mayor Munson discussed this about
thirty day's prior to termination.
City Manager Mercier said that today is the first time he heard about a"breach of contract" and will be
looking into that. Mr. Mercier said that notification for termination of court services was an out tluow of
some shock and surprise that our Council experienced when the road services contract was suddenly
terminated; a consequence of that action was to put Council on alert that there may be other contracts with
the County where the County might want to do something else; that this higlilighted the importance of
having a"Plan B" so Council ordered an alternatives analysis for the contracts. Mayor Munson added that
he sent e-mails to all three Commissioners before the decision, to advise that it was coming and why; and
that for all the contracts, an extra effort would be made well iri advance of any debate. Sudden termination
of the road maintenance contract, Mr. Mercier continued, put the City in a defensive posture and
necessitated having another plan if anything else were not to continue. Regarding the District Court
contract, Mr. Mercier said the statutory requirement was that the City had to give notice by February 1 or
would not have another opportunity to do so until 2015; and he explained that Deputy City Attorney
Driskell talked to members of the bench about this prior to the issue coming before Council for decision,
and to the Board o£ County Commissioners, explaining that a very short time span was in operation.
Mayor Munson said the City would like an extension of the snow removal contract; that when the original
contract was formulated, it allowed for three to four months for a transition plan; but that he wants to
make sure our mutual citizens have snow removal that will get the job done; and again asked the Board to
reconsider to negotiate on how to work this out. Chair Mielke said that the Board had originally engaged
in those contracts and may have sent mixed messages, that perhaps it was discussed as being a transition
Joint City/ Spokane County BoCC Meeting Mmutes 02-23-09 Page 6 of 9
Approved by Council•
DRAFT
issue or a long term basis, but provided there is mutual sharing, there wasn't a problem; but for whatever
reason, the summer road piece went away, and an issue for him is the no payment unless the snow falls
and the plows are out in the City limits; that the last two years are not good examples as there has been
plenty of work; but prior to that, they went through a number of years where there were lower amounts or
no snow; and it still cost to have crews ready to go; that there are full-time employees and in reviewing
the County's financial issues, the Board must look at the revenue streams and where we are "hanging out
a littie;" that if you don't get the winter you think you will, the revenue stream is affected; and said it
costs to have a crew ready to go on standby; and there are costs to being ready without compensation
Mr. Mercier said he understands the concern and would be happy to discuss this; but said his
understanding was, there would not be layoffs as a result of the County not having the summer road
piace; adding that he would like an opportunity to better understand. Mayor Munson agreed and said that
the City is asking to open negotiations in order to accommodate all needs; and said he does not expect an
answer now. Chair Mielke said he felt the employee cllange would occur over time through attrition.
Employees were on the County clock on standby, explained Commissioner Richard, who said that County
Engineer Bob Brueggeman had indicated it was a net zero gain; but would likely have a slight increase in
impact to the budget; that percentage-wise, the inability to perform is greater than the loss; that regarding
the transition and who initiated it, he said he still doesn't know all the answers, but recalls having this
conversation when he was a candidate in 2005 and 2006; that there were a couple constrains then and
there were some decisions based on an inability to serve some summer contract elements; that Spokane
Valley felt they were not adequately serving the interest and in 2005 or 2006, it may have been mutually
felt that Spokane Valley was inaking the effort to prioritize some elements. Commissioner Richard said
this has to be a mutually beneficial relationship, and for the County to remain committed, he doesn't want
to compromise levels of service; that he discussed this with each councilmember; and said that those are
our employees and the County logo, and it is the county phone that rings; that it is important not to
compromise that level of service; that there must be communication and dialogue; and decisions made
about the number of inches of snow before deploying plows should be communicated to the Board prior
to incorporating such decisions. Regarding the "all or nothing" concept, Commissioner Richard said the
Board began to feel it was the desire of Spokane Valley to take on the sweeping, and it was the engineer's
opinion it was the beginning of the phasing out; which contemplated all except the snow removal.
Further, Commissioner Richard said comments at the City's retreat could have been handled better; that
he never heard there may have been some mutual culpability, but continues to hear that Spokane County
is not addressing trust; and said we have to address how to talk about our employees in the newspapers,
and mentioned criticism about County employees taking off for Christmas Day; he said this is not good
and employees don't feel respected; adding that the City has to recognize that what is said has a ripple
affect of County employees' morale; and he asked for Spokane Valley's commitment to be careful what
they say and do before making a comment in the media about the level of service from County
employees.
City Manager Mercier said that neither City of Spokane Valley employees nor City officials made
derogatory comments about the County crew; that he had heard there were such comments, but performed
a media search and found none; so there is some myth in operation; and added that he could not think of
anyone saying anything other then compliments about the County's road work; but said that he recognizes
that the county will be contacted by the public when they are disgruntled about snow removal; and said
that the City has added a hot line for such calls; and said that the City would be willing to put magnetic
signs on the equipment when the service is done by Spokane Valley; but there is a difference between
pre- and post-incorporation, in that the deployment trigger in the past for was when the valley floor had
four or more inches; and in the first three years, the valley floor was plowed only once; but the change
discussed was when traffic is functionally impaired, the plows should be deployed, and said staff talked
with County staff well in advance of council hearing that, and Mr. Mercier said he apologizes if the word
did not reach the Board of County Commissioners, and he urged the County, that then they think there is
Joint City/ Spokane County BoCC Meeting Minutes 02-23-09 Page 7 of 9
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
an incident, to contact the City and the City would try to get to the facts. Commissioner Richard said there
were a series of newspaper articles about the decision not to go into residential streets in 2008, but staff
telling them to go there; and there are issues such as hiring, letting go, and hiring again independent
contractors and of some challenges in the first year of their use; and likewise asked the City if they
recognize a potentially damaging issue, to call. Commissioner Richard said he talked about magnetic
signs a few years ago, and said that while tllat may have been more tongue-in-check; perhaps it is
something to consider.
Regarding the law enforcement services, Councilmember Schimmels said he is ashamed of both entities;
that this has been going on for three years; and he suggests the County and Spokane Valley staff invoke
mediation; and get this issue behind us and move forward. Attorney Emacio said the issue is very
complex; and mentioned a need to reduce the methodology to vvriting; but that the County is waiting to
get a response from the State Examiner; and then staff can sit down with Spokane Valley's expert and
discuss the issue; adding that he feels this needs to be resolved at staff level. Mr. Farnell said that should
be coming soon, and that they would share that information with Spokane Valley; that there are many
frustrating issues like jail costs, pre-trial issues, how to recover costs; fractionalization of felonies and
misdemeanors and how costs are recovered. To clarify, City Attorney Driskell mentioned that the timeline
has not been three years, as the 2006 billing period reconciliation didn't start until late 2007. Mr. Mercier
added that there is no known purposeful drag time; and Mayor Munson mentioned that fractionalization is
a state-wide issue and the Washington Association of Cities is working on coming up with a formula for
the good of all entities; and as an aid to communication and to staying informed on the issues, Mr.
Mercier said he attends the Board's Tuesday meetings.
There was further discussion on the mutual benefits of open communication and cooperation on various
issues and practices; sharing the same economic system; sharing the same constituents; how hearing
rumors without explanations causes frustration on both sides; about providing ongoing services; the use
of public record requests between entities; and of possible councilmanic actions.
#3. (2) Metro Road Standards: Obiective: Obtain Commitment of ?urisdictions to nrioritize nroiect
completion
It was mentioned that this topic can be placed on a future agenda, but briefly the issue concerns private
roads inside the urban growth boundary; and connectivity; and of looking at unified standards. Mayor
Munson said he sent Commissioner Magcr a position paper last week concerning road standards and
connectivity. Mr. Mercier mentioned a working group at SRTC has been addressing this and their last
meeting was back in September; and that Ciiy Engineer Hohman is working on our street standards
program with the hope of completing that this summer. Mr. Hohman said the City's standards were
always similar to the County as they were adopted from the County's standards; and that the City is
projecting to stay with those standards; but that the committee left off on the larger issues such as private
streets and connectivity and that they just started to get to that last summer. Chair Mielke said if Spokane
Valley adopts the road standards, and if they are substantially similar to that original spreadsheet, it would
be just a matter of having dialogue on some public policy issues; and he proposed to jointly take a look at
that and use the spreadsheet as a template; and work toward joint adoption; and mentioned all this goes
back to the joint planning agreements and being able to reference a unified document; and Commissioner
Richard added that the goal is to have one documcnt, and if it didn't exactly fit every city, the County
could come up with something uniformly acceptable to the municipalities so that tlle County would not
have rivelve different road standards. Mayor Munson said he has no problem in working to get that
template. Mr. Mercier suggested that once the study is finished, to continue in a regional effort, and if the
SRTC group gets re-energized, some of the work could be done in parallel. Chair Mielke said he could
assign their staff to work with the City's and to pick up up where SRTC left off; with Mr. Mercier saying
he would be happy to share all information. Mr. Hohman stated that the draft wasn't quite ready, but that
he would be interested in sharing and moving forward; much as City staff did on the regional stormwater
Joint City/ Spokane County BoCC Meeting Minutes 02-23-09 Page 8 of 9
Approved by Council•
DRAFT
design; a long process but it worked well. Chair Mielke mentioned that perhaps SRTC could "cue this
back up" and if Spokane Valley is willing, this issue can be identified on the strategic calendar for 2009;
and when it comes up for discussion, it would be beneficial to have staff to help explain the issues.
4. EmerEencv Communications Initiative Update: Obiective: Discuss status of svstem uograde.
svecificallv the chanize in sales tax collection proiections
Regarding the 1/10 of 1% sales tax to allow an interoperable system to meet FCC mandates, Spokane
Police Department Planning Unit Manager Bob Lincoln explained that within two months, he will have a
plan that states more precisely what is needed and what will occur, and he distributed copies of his four-
page handout on the revenues in the county and historical revenue changes, along with future estimates;
projected grant needs, estimated bond service expense, and an organizational chart showing aspects of
regional communications; he mentioned that the funds are not needed in 2009 but the cash flow will be
needed in 2010; that they have not issued a"Request for Proposals" yet but hope once drafted and
released, the bids tivould be very competitive; that they are still looking at some site work but haven't
completed the survey of sites; and he mentioned the future bond market is unknown, and regarding sales
tax revenue, they actually have more questions then answers now; and he added that from January 17 to
February 12, they have probably seen the worst credit for this, and that globally banking has absorbed
about 12% so the financial impact and is not even close to what it could be; ending by explaining that
they are trying to confirm costs.
5 Outcome Based MeetinQS: Obiective: Discussion of future meetinLys
It was mutually agreed that the parties should strive to meet quarterly, and will work toward a goal of
having another meeting in May.
6. Discussion of Future Meeting Tovics
In the interest of time, this was not discussed.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 4:37 p.m.
ATTEST:
Richard Munson, Mayor
Christine Baiiibridge, City Clerk
Joint City/ Spokane County BoCC Meeting Minutes 02-23-09 Page 9 of 9
Approved by Council:
i
CTI'Y OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: March 10, 2009 City Manager Sign-off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old biisiness E new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: First Reading for proposed Ordinance #09-004 amending section 2 of
Ordinance #08-028 and Exhibit A relating to the legal description for the vacation of approximately
390' in length of unimproved 5`b Avenue right-of-way abutting parcel #'s 45231.1510, 45231.1511,
45231.1512, 45231.1519, 45231.1523 and 45231.1524.
BACKGROUND: On December 9`h, 2008 the council passed the second reading of ordinance #08-028
which authorized City staff to complete the vacation process for STV-02-08 once all the conditions noted
in the ordinance were satisfied. The conditions included that a record of survey of the area to be vacated
be provided by n professional land surveyor. Upon receipt of the record of survey the document was
routed for review to David Evans and Associates who noted that the property description written in the
Ordinance contained an error. The proposed ordinance corrects the error in the property description in
Section 2 of Ordinance #08-028 and Exhibit A and acids the legal description provided on the record of
survey. The proposed ordinance does not affect the total amount due to the Gity for the property, or
change other provisions of the original ordinance in any way.
OPTIONS:
1. Muve to 2"d reading scheduled at next City Council Meeting for approval.
2. Move to suspend the rules for a second reading and adopt the ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION: Move to suspend the rules and adapt ordinance 09-004
STAFF CON'TACT: Lori Barlow - Associate Planner
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit 1: Draft Ordinance #09-004 with Exhibit A
,
DRA FT
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. 09-004
AN ORDINANCE QF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY
WASHINGTON, AMENDING SECTION 2 OF ORDINANCE 08-028 AND EaHIBIT A
RELATING TO THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR THE VACATION OF
APPROXIlVIATELY 390' IN LENGTH OF 5TH AvENUE ABUTTING PARCEL
NUMBFRS 45231.1510, 45231.15119 45231.15129 45231.15199 45231.1523 AND
45231.1524, AND PROVIDING FUR OTHER MATTF.RS PROPERLY RELATING
THERETO.
WHERLAS, the City Council passed Urdinance 08-028 an December 9, 2008 which granted
Brent Elliott's request to vacate approximately 390' of 5`h Avenue as described in Application file
#STV02-08; and
Whereas, the City of Spokane Valley staff noted an error in the legal description in section 2 of
the ordinance relating to the property to be vacated; and
Whereas, cornecting the error will not rhange any values of the total amount due to the City for
the property to be vacated; anc3
Whereas, the City of Spokane Vallzy wishes to correct the error to avoid confusion regarding thc
property to be vacated.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Ciry Council of the City of Spokane Valle}-, Spokane County,
Washington, do ordain amending ordinance 08-028 as follows:
Section 1. Section 2 of ordinance 08-028 shall be amended as follows:
Sectioo 2. Propertv to be Vacated. Based upon the above findings and in accordance with this
Ordinance, the City Council does hereby vacate the street which is incorporated herein by reference, and
defined as follows:
That portion of S~Avenue right-of-way located approximately 257' east oJProf;ress Road and
approximalely 447233' west of Newer Street as depicted in Appendix A attached hereto rrnd
. further clescribecl as the south 20.00 reei c7f the north hulj utul the IIU/'lIJ 20. 00 feel of ljle svuli1
IlcWf of Truct I35, Yera Addition, uccording to Plat recvrded in volume "O" of nlnls, vaQe 30.
Svokmte Cotmtti•. FYcrshinwan: exeeDt culj, pvrtion 1vim-, tii-ithifi the tivest 215`h of snld Trnet 135;
located in !he SE of the NE of Section23, Township 23 North, Range 44 East, Willamette
Meridian, Spokcme Cou»ty, Washington.
Seciion 2. Exhibit A of ordinance 08-028 shall be amended as is set forth in the attached amended
Fxhibit A.
Section 3. All other provisions of Ordinance 08-028 shall remain in full force and effect.
Section 4. Severabilitv. 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
Ordinance #09-004 Amending Street Vacation Ordinance 08-028 Page 1 of 3
DRAFT
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
publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City of Spokane
Vallcy as provided b}, laNv.
PASSED bN' the Citv C'ouncil this dav of March , 2009
ATTF,ST:
Kichard Munson, Mayor
City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge
Approved As To Form:
Office of the City Attorney
Date of Publication:
Effective Date:
Ordinance fi09-004 Amending 5treet Vacation Ordinance 03-028 Page 2 of 3
UR9 FT
Exhibit "A"
Property Descriptioa
That portion of 5d' Avenue righi-of-way located approximatcly 257' east of Yrogress Road and
~ approximately 447233' west of Newer Street as depicted below; [ocated in the SE'/, of tli
o Section'' T(-)N\ n,~i,;m'l \?;_,r,1, P, ± ~t;ti
r-
Washingtk
k1l"
:9 45231.~0i tS2~12Bd1 t'ii]I.~11 CS2]t AB30 t52]11k~1 LS?31,03~2 1.13N 42]tt212 4S231.nQ7 esra,.1381
&W1, ,S22 -r~
432311513 Portion of 5`b Avenue to be
vacated
CS'2~t.tiaA Li2311310 t.ltvc - -
t52]1.151[ . -
+b3i271,
_ '~52?113Z]
GS2312~8~ t~]1?~0]
_j L
5 t' Avenue 1 r
45?3t25ot M3121ot
t~31.152U -
N GM12'u ti312it1:
" G32)t 15f4
` t52]t t5t2
452]1 1 S21 452311 i13
h}
I 331 t 452314503 452312603
ta"23115t3 "'1 ` •
~
_ - ~
452312331 ~►''~1.4D01 4.5211 AiJJ ~Il i t1Cf: ~S2]t CIJt [S231?2c}
/
esi» 203e 4S231 AM 45:n, cNx 4523141a; 4~» 0l=iii0.01 mi 0 29
Ordin,-inec ~-'09-004 /1i11endin~~ Street Vac.,tiun Or(liilance 08-028 i'ai4e 3 of'3
CITY OF SF~OKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meetin~ Date: Arlarch 10, 2009 City Marrager Sign-off:
item: Check a1l thafi apply: consent 0 old business ❑ new business Q pubaic hearing
0 informatian 0admin. report [I pending legislation
AGEIVDA ITEM TITLE: Motian Considera#ian: Indiana Avenue Extensian Project - TIB
Grarrt
GUIIERNING LEGISLATlON: N1A
PREV!OUS COUh[CIL ACTION TAKEN: Approval of 2009r2014 Six Y+eac Transportation
Irnprovement Plan +an June 24, 2008 (Resoiution #08-014) which in~luded the ind`tana Extension
Project; Apprcrved on August 12, 2008 a motaon ta submit TIB Grant Applicatian for the I ndiana
Av~nue Ex#ension F'roject; Info RCA in February 24h C+auncil F'acket,Admin Report at IUlarch 3`d
Study Session.
BA~CKGRQUND: The City of Spokane Valley was successful in receivir~g a fiIB grant for the
indiana Avenue Extensivn Project under T1B's Urban Corridor Program (UCP), The City app1ied
for praject grant funds in A,ugust of 2008, and was nvtrfied Navernber 25, 2008, that funding has
been approved fflr this road extensian projec#.
The proposed project wouid extend Indiana Ave east to the MkssionlFlora intersection as a
three-fane roadway incfudinc~ ~~enter left turn lane, srdeavalks, curbs, gutters, bike Fanes, and
drainage improvements. This praject wi11 heip alleviate congestivn afong Broadway Ave an~
Su1livan Rd by completing a missing link and praviding an east-west route immediately north of
1-90. The Ci#y has obtained written suppork fram Hanson Industries, inc., Spokane Transi#, and
Cen#ennial Properties, Inc. to move fonward wath this proje+ct.
However, before we can request gran# reirnbursement for costs associated with this project, the
attached Fuei Tax Grant Dist(butiorr Agreements must be signed by t1~e Mayar and returned to
TlB fvr processrng.
OPTlONS: 1) Authorize Mayar to sign TIB Fuel Tax Grant Dist(butaon Agreemertt ar 2)
F'rovide additiona1 direction to stafF
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTiON. Motican tQ authodze #he N1ayor t+o sign #he T18 Fuel
Tax Grant Distribution Agreement for the Indiana Avenue Extension Prvject.
BIJDGETIFiNANCIAL INiPACTS; The City has been granted TIB funds in th+~ amount o#
$1,566,850, for the praject specified above. Addi#ianai funding an this project consis#s of City of
Spokane VaIley for $314,900; Private Developer - Centenrtial Properties for $529,688; and
Private [~evelvper - Hansvn lndustries far $200,000.
STAFF COINTACT. Steve VWoriey, Senior Capita1 Projects Engineer
Neil Kersten, Pub1ic Worc.s Qirec#or
ATTACHMENTS Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreements (2); PrQject Fundir,g 5tatus Fofm (1 Attachmenk 'l -
Project Fundrng Sumnnary (1); Correspandence #rann 11VA 5fi T1B tv Neif Kersten
1-
Washington Sfate Transporfation Improvemenf Board
Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreement
LEAD AGENCY: ~ SPOKANE VALLEY
PROJECT NUMBER: 9-E-208(002)-1
PROJECT TITLE: Indiana Avenue
PROJECT TERMINI: ~ 3,600' e/o Suliivan to Mission & Flora
1.0 PURPOSE
The Washington State Transportation Improvement Board (hereinafter referred to as "TIB")
hereby grants funds for the project specified in the attached documents, and as may be -
subsequently amended, subject to the terms contained herein. It is the intent of the parties, TIB
and the grant recipient, that this Agreement shall govem the use and distribution of the grant
funds through all phases of the project. Accordingly, the project specific information shall be
contained in the attachments hereto and incorporated herein, as the project progresses through
each phase.
This Agreement, together with the attachments hereto, the provisions of chapter 47.26 Revised
Code of Washington, the provisions of title 479 Washington Administrative Code, and TIB
Policies, constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and supercedes all previous
written or oral agreements between the parties.
2.0 PARTIES TO AGREEMENT
The parties to this Agreement are TIB, or its successor, and the grant recipient, or its successor,
as specified in the attachments.
3.0 TERM OF AGREEMENT
This Agreement shall be effective upon execution by TIB and shall continue through completion
of each phase of the project, unless terminated sooner as provided herein.
4.0 AMENDMENTS
This Agreement rnay be amended, by mutual agreement of the parties. Such amendments shall
not be binding unless they are in writing and signed by personnel authorized to bind each of the
parties.
5.0 ASSIGNMENT
The grant recipient shall not assign or transfer its rights, benefits, or obligations under this
Agreement without the prior written consent of TIB. The grant recipient is deemed to consent
to assignment of this Agreement by TIB to a successor entity. Such consent shall not constitute
a waiver of the grant recipient's other rights under this Agreement.
6.0 GOVERNANCE & VENUE
This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the state of
Washington and venue of any action brought hereunder shall be in the Superior Court for
Thurston County.
TIB Form 190-500 Page 1 of 3 Rev. 2,'14l2003
~
Washington Sfate Transporfafion Improvement Board
Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreement
7.0 TERMINATION
7.1 UNILATERAL TERMINATION
Either party may terminate this Agreement upon 30 days' prior written notice to the other
party. If this Agreement is so terminated, the parties shall be liable only for performance
rendered or costs incurred in accordance with the terms of this Agreement prior to the
effective date of termination.
7.2 TERMINATION BY MUTUAL AGREEMENT
Either party may terminate this contract in whole or in part, at any time, by mutual
agreement with a 30 calendar day written notice from one parly to the other.
7.3 TERMINATION FOR CAUSE
In the event TIE3 determines the grant recipient has failed to comply with the conditions
of this Agreement in a timely manner, TIB has the right to suspend or terminate this
Agreement. TIB shall notify the grant recipient in writing of the need to take corrective
action. If corrective action is not taken within 30 days, the Agreement may be
terminated. TIB reserves the right to suspend all or part of the Agreement, withhold
further payments, or prohibit the grant recipient from incurring additional obligations of
funds during the investigation of the alleged compliance breach and pending corrective
action by the grant recipient or a decision by TIB to terminate the Agreement. The grant
recipient shall be liable for damages as authorized by law including, but not limited to,
repayment of misused grant funds. The termination shall be deemed to be a
Termination for Convenience if it is determined that the grant recipient: (1) was not at I
fault, or (2) failure to perform was outside of the grant recipient's control, fault or
negligence. The rights and remedies of TIB provided in this Agreement are not
exclusive and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law.
7.4 TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE
TIB may, by ten (10) days written notice, beginning on the second day after the mailing,
terminate this Agreement, in whole or in part, because federal or state funds are no
longer available for the purpose of ineeting TIB's obligations, or for any reason. If this
Agreement is so terminated, TIB shall be liable only for payment required under this
Agreement for performance rendered or cosis incurred prior toihe effeciive date of
termination.
7.5 TERMINATION PROCEDURE
Upon receipt of notice of termination, the grant recipient shall stop work and/or take such
action as may be directed by TIB.
TI B Form 19Q-500 Page 2 of 3 Rev. 2/14/2003
~
~ Washington State Transportation lmprovement Board
Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreement
8.0 AVAILABILITY OF TIB FUNDS
The availability of Transportation Improvement Board funds is a function of Motor Vehicie Fuei
Tax collections and existing vontractual obligations. The local agency shall submit timely
progress billings as project costs are incurred to enable accurate budgeting and fund
management. Failure to submit timely progress billings may result in delayed payments or the
establishment of a payment schedule.
9.0 ATTACHMENTS
Attachments are incorporated into this agreement with subsequent amendments as needed.
Approved as to Form
This 14th Day of February, 2003
Rob McKenna
Attorney General
By:
Signature on file
Elizabeth Lagerberg
Assistant Attorney General
Lead Agency Transportation Improvement Board
Signature of Chairm2nMayor Date Executive Director Date
Print Name Print Name
TIB Form 190-500 Page 3 of 3 Rev. 211412003
Transportation Improvement Board
~Project Funding Status Form
~
Agency: SPOKANE VALLEY TIB Project Number. 9-E-208(002)-1
Project tvame: Indiana Avenue
3,600' e/o Sullivan to Mission 8 Flora
Verify the information below and revise if neoessary.
Retum to:
Transportation Improvement Board
PO Box 40901
Olympia, WA 98504-0901
PROJECT SCHEDULE
o s
-i pl cat M
Construction Approval Date
Contract Bid Award Oct 2010
Contract Completlon Jan 2011
PROJECT FUNDING PARTNERS I
List aciditional fundfn artners ard amouni.
1.•I,tii~fr-l..ir'f~Y~'~r!P - .
=r;~'~~ -Funding,Farlners . Amcun_ RaviSed FunGing = .~_~~dr.;r•,1%
SPOKANE VALLEY 314,90U
WSOOT 0
Federal Funds 0
Developer - Centennial Properties 529.688
Developer - Hanson Industries 200,000
70TAL LOCAL FUNDS 1,044,588
Both agency officials must sign the form before returning it to the Tf6 office.
Mayor or Public Works Director
Sipnalure Date
Printed or Typed Name Titlo
Ffnancial Officer
5lgnature pa1e
Printed or 7yped Name Tltle
TIB Funding Status Report
,
Attachment 1
Project Funding Summary
Project Information
Lead Agency SPOKANE VALLEY
Project Number 9-E-208(002)-1
Project Title Indiana Avenue
Project Termini 3,600' elo Sullivan to Mission & Flora
T16 funds for the project are: ~
Phase TIB Funds
Design 156,650
Right of Way 0
Construction 1,410,200
Total Grant 1,566,850
TIB Form 190-600 Rev. 2114R003
~
~ E Washington State
Transportation Improvement Board
~yO4 fmp~~ '
TIB Members November 25, 2008 inalmember Je+anne Ouubidge
cnsk. cay orF.d" wsy
~
Comrrisstoner C,reg Partrfi Mr. Neii Kersten 2008
~
t'F,;e Chatr, VM~ltmBn County Public Works Director
Todd CdemBn, P.E
PM o/ Vancouv+er City of Spokane Valiey
:ouncitmem-ter $am Gawtord 11707 E Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 E:'
"Olwm cou* Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Katl,ieen Devis
"ISDOT Dear Mr. Kersten:
Merk Freiberger, P.E_
cay orsearo-wooney
--rebry PaLAaHammond,P.E Congratulations! We are pleased to announce the selection of your project, Indiana
"'SOOT Avenue, 3,600' e!o Sullivan to Mission & Flora, TIB project number 9-E-208(002)-1. The
M~~ ~nsh total TIB contribution for this project is $1,566,850.
cxy a ca centa
°vrm" Before any work is allowed on this project, you must:
CounalmemherNetlMcC1ure • Verify the informafion on the Program Funding Status form, revise if necessary,
cA''°"'e'k"a and sign;
Oldc MWnley . Submit the section of your adopted Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan
Crty ol Ba11Yphem
NeJso„ listing this project;
Gran! Cowrty . Sign both copies of the Fuel Tax Agreement;
~I Satan • Return the above items to TIB;
lfir;t3 0/ Finnncia! A.lanaQement
~ • You may begin work only after you receive notification from TIB.
Heidl Stamm
NS PuW►c Atfeirs
Harold
K%rr~CountyMehDT,° If you have questions, please contact Gloria Bennett, TIB Project Engineer, at (360)
s~eve Thorteen. P.E 586-1143 or e-mail GloriaB an.TlB.wa.QOV. sr*hom4o cowwy
Vodcpich Sincerely,
Cdy o( Bonney Laka
Jay Webar ` , -
ity Rck3d Administration Board 1
Rigipr, wasds, P.E. 3tcycrs Axrance a wasri,oron
Commf3slOner Mke Wilson Stevan Gorcester
Cvan "aft` C-°"m'' Executive Director
Enclosure
scevan corzescer
Fxetuf" Dtrodor
P.O. Box 40901
Glympia, WA 98504-0901
Phone:380-586-1140
Fax:36D-586-1165
www.tib.wa.gov
Investing in your /ocal communify
AGENDA ITEM: SPOKANE TR.ANSIT AUTHORITY CITIZEh' ADVISORY COMMII'TEE
FARE STRUCTURE PROJECT - INFQRMATION -
SUMMARY: Dwing the last year, the Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) has been evaluating Spokane Transit's Tariff Policy.
The Committee presented its draft proposal to the Board of Directors at the December 2008 'Board Meeting
regarding chaages to STA's current fare structure. The Committze is seeking input prior to making a formal
recomriiendation to the Board in r4arch.
The last time STA increased fares was 2002.
The attached Committee Report provides the details oi'the CAC's draft proposal that was presented in December.
Significant elements of the draft proposal:
- Due to declining sales tax revenue and increased operational costs, we are proposing that STA unplement a
fare increase for both Fixed Route and Paratransit.
• Fares should be increased in two phases between now and January 2011 to achieve an
appropriate user fee relative to the cost of service. This action also brings STA fares more in
line with other comparable transit agencies.
• Fixed Route base fare would increase from $1.00 to $1.25 in the first phase. Other fare
products (Two-hour pass, Day Pass, Monthly Pass,.etc.) would increase in price accordingly.
The fare increase in the second phase raises the base fare from S 1.25 to $1.50.
• Paratransit base fare should be equal to the Fixed Route base fare.
- STA should add one ne«• fare category in order to charge a premium fare for express service. Other fare
categories (Adult, Youth, & VIP) remain in place.
Citizen Advisary Committee Fure .Strucrtu•e Project
Conrmiltee Repart - Page 1
Introduction
Committee Members
➢ David Swalling (Chair)
➢ Fyrne Bemiller
➢ Victor Frazier
➢ Elaine Hoskin
➢ Margaret Jones
➢ Dean Lynch
➢ Brenda Smits
i ~r iran~l
2 Citizen Advisory Committee
Introduction
The CAC was established as an advison, body to ihe
Board in 2005.
In May 2007, the CAC elected to focus on specific issues
in order to provide the best value-added to the Board of
Ilirectors.
The first specific project selected was to evaluate/update
Spokane Transit's Tariff Policy.
The Committee has used STA staff to provide the
necessary resources and support to study this issue in
depth.
3 Citizen Advisory Committee 6' 74
Citi: en Advi.ro,r), Comrnittee Fcrre Structur°e P'raject
Conrmittee Repor;t - Page 2
What we'`Ve done:
Condu~~ed Research
~ ~ariff Policy reviewed
> F'hilosophy a.nd Strategic Statements
> Recommendeci Chariges to Board
> Confirmed Need for Additional Revenue
+~~nducte+~ Detailed Process to Upda.te Fare
Structure
)0- Developed Proposal for Public Input
4 cit~~~n Advisory comm~~~~ ~ ~Iffld
The CAC canducted extensive background research. The significant resouz°ces are Iisted belaw:
Transit Cooperative Research Program Reports 1Studi.es
Na~bville Fare Struc[ure Review
C-TRAN Fare Policy Stud.Y
Other Transit Fare Structures (10 agencies)
Pierce Valley Rtde
Lane Kitsap
$en Franklin Sound
C-iRAN EvereLt
Community Tri-Met
F~eviewed agproximately 35 news service articles vf far+e chaanges in other cornrnunities nation-xNide
Citizen Advisory Committee Fare Strticture Projecl
Committee Report - Page 3
Where we are in the process:
Developed draft proposal for public comment
➢ No formal recommendation at this time
➢ Seeking input from Board and Public
6 Citizen Advisory Committee
Pianned Pubiic Outreach
➢ Meetin9s «•ith designated eroups
~ Plaza events
~ Srecial N%-ebsite infortliatioil and feedbaLk mechanism
i- Telephone "Hot Line"
➢ STA StaffilEmployee Operations and Customer Service Comrnittee
➢ Other regular media outlet inforniation and printed material
➢ Other printed material
s Citizen Advisory Committee
STA Communication Department will support the CAC in scheduling an aggressive public comment process in
order to allow public input to shape the CAC's fuial recommendation to the Board. The significant events are:
Conduct at least two meetings with CAC members the following designated groups: 1. Social Service
Agencies/Disabled Community; 2.Employers!Colleges & Schools
Cirizen Advisorti• Committee Fare Structure Prvject
Committee Report - Page 4
Stage at least two Plaza events where CAC and staff will have an information table and be available to
educate and respond to questions. This has proven to be an effective means to contact transit users.
Web aceess to highlight the CAC fare structure convecsation and the ability to comment
Set up a separate telephone "hot line" dedicated to receiving comments from the public about the fare
structure issue
Other regular media outlet information
Other printed material in the Qn Baard rider periodical, signage, Rider Alerts and posten in buses
What is next:
➢ Targeted public process (Jan - March)
➢ Recommendation to Board (March)
➢ Final public process - Public Hearing (April)
> Board action (May)
➢ Implementation
7 Citizen Advisory Committee ~WNW
Citizen Advisary Committee Fare Structure Project
Committee Report - Page S
Tariff Policy Philosophy
"To encourage increased ridership by providing
a convenient and reasonably priced method for
citizens to enjoy the advantages of public
transportation."
(R iders h ip-basedph ilosophy)
Public transportation should be:
➢ Cost Effective
➢ Easy to Use / Limit Complexity
➢ Reduce Use of Cash
➢ No zonal differences
➢ Farebox return objective = 20%
Baua Approva cAC Recxuwn&-a
Cbangcs ta Twiff Policy Philosophy and Stratcgic Ststcmrnts in Noven*ar 2007
s Cifizen Advisory Committee 9 ',''pftlw
These principles have been used as the criteria to guide the Committee's analysis and craR the draR propos.:i. For
instaace, the Commitcce limited the number of nTes of fare5 in order to keep the system easv to use and limit
complexity.
Confirmed Need for Additional Revenue
(Current Situation)
> Changes Since Last Fare Increase In 2002
➢ Service level and ridership increases
➢ Cost of living increases
➢ Fuel price increase
➢ Farebox Recovery Ratio
➢ Fixed Route 17.2%'` (20% goal)
➢ Pacatramit 1.8%*
through 3'd Quarter 2008)
➢ STA Operational Costs Remain Low
s Citjzzen Advisory Committee
Citizen Advisor►, Com,nittee Fare Structure Project
Committee Report - Page 6
Many factors have had an impact on STA costs since the last fare increase in 2002
Increased Service
21 % Fixed Route
17% Paratransit
Ridership Increase
46% Fixed Route
2 1 % Patatrwsit
Cost of Living (CPI) Increase +20%
Fuel Price Increase
Avg. Pr(ce/Gal. 961ncrease from 2002
2002 $0.81
2007 $2.41 198%
2008 $3.44 3259G
As a result of the factors above STA's Farebox Recovery (the percentage of the cost of the senrice that is covered b),
user fares) does not meet the objective of 20% for Fixed Route service. The farebox recovery rate of 20% was set
based on S7'A staff counsel that this is a general i.ndustry standard. No Farebox Recovery objective is set for
Paratransit.
Thraugh the 3id Quarter the current Farebot Recovery is:
Fixed Route l 7.2°, o
Paratransit 1.8%
STA has constrained operating costs at a level significantly below other transit agencies in Washington State.
Therefore there is little to no ability to increase Farebox Recovery through a reduction in operational costs.
Confirmed Need for Additional Revenue
(Future Projections)
S- Decrease in sales tax revenue has long-term impact
Y Increased ridership alone does iiot meet revenue demand
➢ Transit agencies nation-,,,tiride are raising fares to
help deal with same challenges
10 CitizenAdvisory Commfttee
Declining sales tax revenue is projected to be approximately $48.3M lower than was anticipated in the 2008-2014
Transit Development Plan. STA staffprojects that sales tax revenue will be below the 20071evel of funding until
2012.
Citizen Advisory Commitree Fare Struet:tre Project
Cvnrnrittee Repvrt - Pnge 7
FARE STRUCTURE PROPOSAL
FOR
PUBLIC COMMENT
11 Citizen Advisory Committee
FARE STRUCTURE PROPOSAL
FOR PLIBLIC COMMENT
Process
➢ Detined Coniponents
➢ Customer Categories
i Products
y Tested pricing alternatives using
industry fare elasticity model
i Set Fixed Route Fare Proposal
➢Phase 1 (September 2009)
➢Phase 2 (January 2011)
➢ Paratransit Proposal osmym
12 Citizen Advisory Committee
C'itizen Advisory Commrttee Fare Structure Project
Committee Repnrt - Page 8
FA"1n1%FU-J CATEGORIES
Current Categories Retained
Adult (19-64 years)
Youth (6 -18 years)
VIP (65+ years, qualifying disability, Medicare qualified)
Paratransit (meets qualifications in accordance with ADA)
Added Express Fare CateQOrv
The addition of an Express Fare category, allows an increased
charge for the 2-hour Pass; Day Pass, and Monthly Pass on STA
limited stop, express service.
13 CiUzen Advisory Commntee
The Committee did an extensive review of current and potencial fare categories and products. The proposal includes
one new fare category, Express Service. This category was added in order to charge an increased fare on STA
express service routes.
The Committee considered, but did not adopt, Low Income as another additional category. The Committee chose to
use other special programs/grants as subsidies rather than establish a new customer category that would be difficult
to monitor eligibiliry. This concept will be added to the Tariff Policy Strategic Statements as formal
recammendation to the Board.
.
Citizen Advison, ' Comnrittee Fare Structure Project
Committee Report - Page 9
Fixed RQUte Pronosal
im ms o1ro1/ii
CaeeQory CurreM Price Phaae 1 Prlu Phssa 2 Price
lldult Cash 1.00 126 1.60
AduIt 2 HR Pass 1 i 1.00 I i 1.25 S 1.60
Adult Day Pass : 2.50 I i 3.00 ~ i 3.60
Adutt Motttfily Pass f 33.00 ~ i 40.00 I i 46.00
Youth Csah ~ S 1.00 ~s 1.25 I f 1.50
Youth 2 HR Pass ~ i 1.00 I i 1.25 I t 1.60
Youth Dav Pass I f 2.60 f 3.00 ~ S 3.50
Youth Monlhly Pass I S 26.00 s 28.00 ~ i 30.00
Youth 8ummer Paas ~ i 39.95 I5 40.00 S 46.00
VIP Cssh ~ t 0.60 ~ S 0.60 s OJS
VIP 2 HR Pass ~ f 0.60 ~ t 0.60 ~ i 0.75
VIP Oay Pass 1 t 2.60 I t 3.00 ~ f 3.50
VIP Mortth Paaa 16.50 t 20.00 22.60
Ex ress Cash• 1.00 : 1.60 2.00
Ex ress 2 HR Psss• 1.00 1.60 2•00
Ex nss D Pass' 2.50 i 3.50 : 4.00
Ex nss Montt~ Pass' 33.00 43.00 S 60.00
Ci Ticket E 18.00 f 25.00 t .0 ~
'
14 'EKPress !s a new fare category
The proposal for Fixed Route fares increases the base fare (Adult 2-Hour Pass) from $1.00 to $1.25.
All other fare categories increased similarly. The overall percentage increase is 19°'o for all categories.
The chart below shows a summary of the impact of Phase 1 and 2.
Phase 1 Phase 2
Amount °r6 Change Amount °Yo Change
Base Ridership 9,436 }662 ~ 9,436,662 Change in Ridership = 0 Ogo 0 0%
Base Fare Revenue 6.082r 5 6rQ 2~7 1
Change in Revenue 1,141 ~1~ 19°r6 ~ 2,2~2 68S 37%.
~
Base Farebox Recovery Ratio = 16.31 16•31
NewFarebox Recovery Ratio = 18.37 , 19% 22.40 37%
8ase Average Fare = 0.65 $ 0.65
Avera9e Fare = ~ 0.77 19%1$ 0.89 37%5
Citizen Advisnry Committee Fare Structure Project
Committee Report - Page 10
Spokane Transit
Fixed Route 2007 Actuai Allocated Operating Expense (;37.3M)
Current Fare Structure
16.3 , I
Fare Revenue $6.1 M
Fsrebox Recovery 06.3
Phase 1 Phase 2
i
3.1'K 3.096
A
1b.3° 3.1'3G
16.3-
Fare Revenue $7.2M
Farobox Recovery 19.47~5~ Faro Revenua S8.4M
Farebox Recovery 22.4%
15 Citizen Advisory Committee
The fare elasticity model employed for analysis af the proposed fare changes used 2007 actual data. ?he resulting
projected increase in revenue, farebox recovery, and average system fare are related to that baseline. 'I'he actual
impact in 2049 and 2010 is dependent on ridership and cost data at time of implementation.
The Committee chose to assume no decrease in ridership due to increased fares. The fare elasticity model has the
capability to project revenue based on alternate assumptions where ridership declines due to increased fares. For
instance, if ridership decreased by 1% due to increase in fares, then revenue would be approximately $60,000 less ~
than this projection.
The impact of the proposed change on revenue, fareboa recovery, and average system fare is listed below:
Additional Fare Revenue
Phase 1: $1,141,717
Phase 2: $2,272,999
Farebox recovery
Phase 1: 19.4%
Phase 2: 22.4%
Average system fare
Phase l: $0.77
Phase 2: $0.89
As depicted in these pie charts, it is unportant to note the reladve impact of fare increases on the total cost of
providing tbe service. A fare increase is just one ingredient in solving the challenge to sustaia current service given
the future revenue projections and increasing costs.
.
Gitizen Advisory Committee Fare Structure Project
Committee Report - Page 11
C4MPARISON OF PHASE 1
WITH OTHER TRANSIT AGENCIES
16 Citizen Advisory Committee
COMPARISON BY CATEGORY OF
PHASE1 PROPOSED FARES VS.
MEDlAN FARES OF OTHER TRANSITS
$60.00 ov
55~~
$50.00
o~
~ ■ PROPOSED FARE
$40.00 - pHASE 1
$30.00
o~
$20.00
■ MEDIAN FARE OF
OTHER TRANSITS
$10.00
6
S'`• 5,~1~ so• ~06
$0.00 - - nouLr aDuLT Yourn roun+ vU enae wv
dA6E MONTHIY lAbE MIONTTA.Y FARE MOHTNLY
fARS P1135 FARE PA= PASS
CiUten Advtaory Commitbee ~
Citize►r Achisorv Committee Fare Structure Projecr
Committee Report - Page 12
~
D L FARE STRUCTURE MATRIX COMPARISON
November 2008 Dat~
apak,nw ftm tm en s-TWUI ra.m~ft Imn M. sMd crxm m~as
~ n.a.w aw•~ tr-un a, • ~ a„a,«r.~+i eA ~ a+." a»~.4 nau.~
Rti~ Ikbd $rndl
PROPOSEI
09vtA9
Plum 1
bASE CASH/ 1.25 ISO 1S0 1.00 130 1.50 1.00 1SD 150 0.50 2.30
TyYO HOl1R (no
PASS +rswlw+)
Dlt1f VA55 3.00 3.00 2.75 1.00 2.00 42S
C1ILENDAR 10.00 54.00 45.00 1750 45.00 S4.00 30.00 95.50 S4.00 54.00 a2.50
MONTHIY
PASS
18 Citizen Advisory Committee
,
Phase 1 of the proposal still has STA below comparative transit agencies.
YOUTH 6-181FARE STRUCTURE MATRlX COMPARISON
vemb r 2008 Data i
Spokana tr~ taer M GMYd Lremryw mftLM Atw iQued l~rsc L~+~s
Trani p«w.1 Pw~+i B1~Io f 1 D~+d a+d Db~i I+y" IM~q M•f+wA
ft~.aee~ ~
PROP05ED
Q9~D1/09
, Phase 1
BASE CAfll/
T1MO IICUR 1.23 0.1f 47S O.i3 O.iS i.OG OSO &75 1A0 O.SO 1SD
/A66 ~ im
hsri~frrsl
aw vwss s_oo 1 1.30 Ws 3.00 i.oo 425
cALDKM
MoNrHUr 28.00 nAo u,.So 9.00 30.00 ;s.oo u.oo u.u u.oo u.oo u.oo
rAss
wmma
w►ss CW,utN 40.00 u.oo son u.oo am u.oo
19 Citizen Advisory Committee
,
Citizen Advisory Cammittee Fare Structure Praject
Committee Report - Page 13
STA Youth fares will be slightly above comparative transit agencies.
VIP FARE STRUCTURE MATRIX COMPARISON
November 2008 Data
apolc,e. es 1m am ~ sonmdlr Aft sen0 d~ lwMec
Raw+w.! tl+~.~.! ~ W 1~) ~t f~ad t~M fcvaaq (►sv+ne
Rn ooes; fsase► sou*4
PROPOSED
0liN1m9
pAeat 1
B/lSF CASH/
TWO MOtJR .60 0.15 O1SQ; 0.50 0.65 0 50 0.50 0.75 030 free 0.95
pAiS E5+ r{d: wrtr Ea
fteo tfdt frse
OAY PAS3 3,00 3.00: 2,75 3.00 1.00 4.25
65- ridc
tree
CwlEA1DAA
MON7t1tY 20,00 27.00 20 -W 11.o0 18.00 :e.Is ie.co is.ca
PASS
S~Ya~slr
20 Citizen Advisory Committee
STA VIP fares will be belcw cc►inparativ;: trai-isit a~;encies.
€XPRESS FARE STRUCTURE MATRIX COMPARISON
November 2008 Data
S~ eun !M ae sr~ltl c~m lufa ss~ sama f~s~ :~:s
~ Rarrl I~d ~eW fMarw~wrl prb~wl l~l PMf~ N•R•~0 1~~++1
K~+1 I~•~Ni ~1
PROPOSED
OY/Dl"
Pffut 1
6AtE CASH/ 1.60 1.00 b 1.f0 1.00 to L50
TM HOIJR Olymplm par7bew
I"S
DN MSS 3.60 6.00
C/►tFA1QAR
Mp~ 4&00 Ii.00 145.00 126.00
~ FASS
21 CitizenAdvisory Committee
~
CitLren Advisory Committee Fare Structure Project
Committee Report - Page 14p
PAR.ATRANSIT
PROPOSAL
22 Citizen Advisory Committee f41
Paratransit Proposal
Proposal: Paratransit service fare should be equal
to Adult base fare for Fixed Route service.
➢ High cost
➢$21.49 Paratransit vs. $3.95 Fixed Route per trip
➢ High use compared to other communities
➢ The proposal complies with state and federal law
23 Citizen Advisory Committee ewato
➢ Paratransit service expease is approximately 20% of STA total operating budget
200/o of budget provides 5% of all trips«
➢ 9.4M Fixed Route trips
Y O.SM Paratransit trips
CitLen Advisary Committee Fare Strtrcture Project
Committee Report - Page 15
Cost per trip is over 5 times more expensive*
➢ S 3.95 Fixed Route
➢ S21.49 Paratransit
Users pay lower percentage of cost of service*
➢ 16.3% Fixed Route
➢ 1.90/o Patatransit
➢ High use compared to other communities
Spokane Transtt 506,710 1.29
Everctt Tnnsit 103,342 1.00
C-TRAN (Clzrk Co.) 230,409 0.67
Kng Co METRO I,118,400 0.60
Pkrte transit (Tacoma/Pkrce Co) 123,284 O.SB
Community Transit (Snohomtsh Co) 212,263 0.44
Wasldngtcn State Ufteized Averaae 2,594,368 0.66
Paratransit Proposal
Cu rrent 09/01 /09 01 /01111
Category Price Phase 1 Price Phase 2 Price
Paratransit Cash $ .50 $ 1.25 $ 1.50
Paratransit 2 HR Pass $ .50 $ 1.25 $ 1.50
Paratransit Day Pass $ 2.50 $ 3.00 $ 3.50
Paratransft Monthly Pass $ 16.50 $ 40.00 $ 45.00
24 Citizen Advisory Committee owoua
The pie chart shows the very small proportion of the cost of Paratransit service that is paid for by users.
T'he Committee proposes to equate the users' cost to be the same as full fare on 5xed rouie service. Fare revenue in
Phase 1 increases from 5205,084 to $502,991. Fareboa Recovery increases from 1.88% to 4.62° o.
Citizen Advisory Con:ntittee Fare Structure Project
Committee Report - Page 16
Spokane Transit
Paratransit 2007 Actuai Allocated Operatlng Expense ($10.8M)
Current Fare Structure
1.9%
Fare Revenue $205K ~
Farebox ReCOVery 1.9%
Phase 1 Phase 2
1.9% 2.79b 0.796
1.9% 2.736 ~
Fare Revenue $503K '
Farebox Recovery 4.6°~ Fare Revenue $580K~4
Farebox Recovery 5.3
25 Ci6zen Advisory Committee
PARATRANSIT/FIXED ROUTE
FARE STRUCTURE MATRIX COMPARISON
November 2008 Data
Spokwo e.sa ua. mn cITNee cwwufft nw En.. smea c~,na m:~a ~sca
Tranw R.o"•1 u.a•.1 hl1o nr i f-n-+d ~ nm. ~ e~~.n ro.t.ne ~
ITII- as.,d
PROPOSED
Q9+01iCD
PtIiSf I
aAAATRANSR lis .75 Book 1.00 1!0 1.30 2.00 3.75 n/. 1.00 120 .73
oi10 Round
Tklals TriP
for
~
~D PAMM 1.25 LSO S1.S0 LOO 130 130 1.00 / 130 n/s .SO 1 hr. i.SO -
2.00 (Midudn WQ; 235
~ Tnnda) 1.2 4•r••*'
M1~
~n 3mum
$2.00
King County Metro & Pierce Transk retdtn Flxed Route
reduced fare for ParatransR customers
26 Citizen Advisory Committee
,
Citi:en Advisor}, Comnrittee Fare Structure Project
Committee Report - Poge 17
VVhat is neat:
➢ Targeted publie process (Jan - March)
➢ Recommendation to Board (March)
➢ Final public process Public Hearing (April)
➢ Board action (May)
➢ Implementation
27 Citizen Advisory Committee qisftVw
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: March 10, 2009 City Manager Sign-off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information 0 admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Schematic Design Services for the New City Hall Facility
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council approved the City Hall Program document on
July 15, 2008.
BACKGROUND: Bernardo Wills and GGLO developed the City Hall Program document which
outlines the function and space requirements for the future City Hall. In order to continue the
development of the City Hall project and continue with the work schedule approved by Council I
have attached a proposal from Bemardo Will and GGLO for schematic design services for City
Hall. This phase will develop the architectural and engineering schernatic design for the City
Hall building including a detailed cost estimate.
Currently the City has not secured the property for the City Hall project. We will include in the
contract a limit of $50,000 in expenditures until such tirne the City has control of the site. Once
the site is under City control we will proceed with the remainder of the design services.
The total cost of the service will not exceed $377,000.
OPTIONS: S c.hedule the for consideratian at a futtiire d-,ite or giv+_ staff o`.h-dircc+inn
RECflMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION:
BUDGET/FlNANCIAL IMPACTS: Funds are available in tne Civic Building Fund
STAFF CONTACT: Neil Kersten
ATTACHMENTS BWA/GGLO Proposal
i
: SERNARDO I WILLS
AFiCHITECTS PC
November 10, 2008
Mr. Neil Kersten, AIA
City of Spokane Valley
11747 E. Sprague Avenue
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Re: City of Spokane Valley • City Hall Schematic Design Services
BWA #fl8-365
Dear Neil:
Based on our pre-design and programming worlc arid?•understanding of the project, we are
pleased to ofFer this fee proposal for the incremen:all~ level of architectural and
engineering services:
.
A. Pro eC,t De tion: Constrtxtion of a 0 to 608sf thre~n'story plus basement
municipal building on a 31 acre parcel siCuate ~a par • e proposed =ity Center project
at the former University Shopping:Cer~ter with p o ram ces and featur escribed in the
City Hall Program report dated ~5~~ ~ 20~8 prepare~ y,.the BWA/GGLO design team. Exterior
building design is expetted to ~'407dte me combi tion of rnasonry veneer, pre-cast
concrete features, and gtass/met 'cu ll wit l joist/steet deck or cast-in-
place/post tensioned concrete floo d roo ,sy,ste►ns, . onventional foundations and
~:r
footings. lnterior:_.imp[,~vements a expected~1o, incl e, a complete build out of
to ~ use.
programmed spaces.witall t of finis p_oI ~afc'
Site improvement' . fs ex ted to inee new and existing parklng areas, utilities,
landscape areas, pe 'an~fn+ak~w~ys and trance plaza, screened trash enclosure and
loadin -ttoc f e• ce/de ivefya~'ea,L_tfe.furni8s, lighting, curbs and gutcers, etc. for the
a ~"edia el 'acent~the City MalZ~buittli . Although the project will tikely indude
ad dhal park an -~Z,a open~ace and qf ¢site wor4c such as stree( improvements and
uti ' e extension ,tihese corrlponents are not defined at thls time and conceptual design
work se features `i~art of~~separate design proposat and task and is not induded
at this t a part of Ba~i Services?
The current Uction bii.d~ec for the project is $14,100,000 escalated to 2010 dollars,
not lnduding a ange 0~ er cw~tingency, design fees, sales tax, testing and inspections
and similar soft uin the referenced City Hall Program. The project has a LEED
goal of 'Gold' or.be itcr
• J
B. Scooe of Work tor Bas1c Services_ Schematic Deslgn generally represents approximatety 15
to 2096 of the total architectural and engineerinQ etfort for a project such as this. The work
will be produced primarily using 6uilding Information Modeling (B1M) software to Qenerate
both 2-0 and 3-D drawings and sketches. Using Building Information Modeling software from
the inception will facilitate transltion between phases, provide better integration betvreen
dlsciptines, and allow the design team to better present design concepts and systems to the
Owner, it is the intent of this fee proposal to provide Schematic Design Phase services as an
incremental step to mave the projett forward and to further define the project's scope,
character, features, and budget in accordance with the attached Exhibit A Schemadc Design
107 S HQNARD FOURTN FIOOR
SPOXANE NA 992C1
509.638•45I1
FAX 509•838•4605
wwW.BFRNRRi GMI IS.CCM
~
BERNARDO IWILLS
ARCHITrC73 AC
Scope of Work. Based on the approved Schematic Design Phase, future phases of our work
will include Deslgn Development, Construction Documents, Bidding, and Construction Phase
services.
C. Fee ProQosal for Basic Services: We can provide the best and mast responsive service in the
formative phase of a project if our fee is based on the actuat time we spend on the project
and our standard hourly rate uhedute with provisions for consudtant costs and reimburscih(e
Architectural $170,000.00
► Civil Engineering 17,500.00
► Landscape Arrhitecture 39,500.00
► Structural Engineering 22,500,00
► Mechanical Engineering 28,500.00
► Electrital EngineerinQ 5,500,00
► Interior Design 000.00
► Cost Estimating ' .00
► LEED/ELCCA 33;~, c~
< Graphics 8t PresenCation Materiats 15.000,
Total Schematic Design Not-to•Exceed Budge IW $377,000.00
The above is an estimate only a rtaurs and cos ~ ay fluctuate between tasks as the
.'-:-r
work pragresses; however, we riot,eXceed the e amount without your prior
approvaL - -
. .
.r~;~ =
D. Servite:s Not InctL~rfn ervices: ased:on,our ur~erscanding of the project co date,
the following se h~~ s are n cluded i c'Services~b yit can be added if necessary or
requesied. '
,
► o phic an
,r;~'~=:~ffi~ig`~i' • ubdiprocE=ss e applications, pub[ic hearings and/or
% similar lan acti
► raffic Study,M ~ ech vestigations or EnvironmenGal Assessments
► sing previou rnpl r approved work at the request of the Owner
► Developme r Cons ion Documents Phases
►~e tions, insp ons or testing required by regulatory agencles
• Buildi missio Value Enrinrmal Constructabflity Reviews
► Inventory urniture, fixture, and equipment (FFE)
E. Time Schedule: Estirnated Schernatic Design Phase duration is 12 to 16 weeks.
F. Reimbursabte Expenses: The following costs are directly associated with the project and
are invoiced as reimbursahle expenses at 1.10 times our direct costs:
► Printing, presentation boards, and avernight shipping
► Fees paid to regulatory agencies or USGBC for project review or registration
► Travel expenses from/to Seattle (airline and per dlem)
I
BERNARDO I WILLS
ARCHITECTS PC
This fee proposal is intended to be short and concise, but we can provide additional information
suth as an expanded list of work for any of the listed tasks, estimated staff-hours, drawing
index, consultant proposals, etc. We look forward to continuing with this project and are
available to answer any questions you have conceming the above.
Sincerely,
Gary Bemardo, AIA
Principal
Enc: Exhibit A Schematic Qesign Phase Scope of Work
Accepted By:
S;qned Date
i
BERNARDO I WILLS
ARCHITECTS PC
Exhibit A/ Schematic Design Phase Scope of Work
Date: November 10, 2008
Project: City of Spokane Valley - City Hall
It is the intent of this fee proposal to provide Schematic Design Phase services as an incremental
step to move the project forward and to further define the projett's scope, tharacter, features,
and budget in accordance with the following scope of work:
Basic Services
A. Architectural:
1. Prepare draft schedule for work and periodic, up tes k progresses.
-
2. Review surveys, work to date, applic;zb codes, an er pertinent information
applicable to the Project, including ;p~opflsed Ciry Cente sign Guidelines and the
proposed zoning code.
3. Prepare comprehensive buildjng code a ysis based n accupan roups and assumed
oonstruction type.
4. Meet with appropriate a "es (i,e. utilt r~ anies, waste nagement, fire
department, etc.) to deter ' d-party d;~ 'arameter's.
5. Meet with Owner's Core Tear " ated reptatfives to confirm Program, design
concepts, goals, and strategi rogress,
6. Develop Goncep[ual Design Alt tives ' trilting bsite plan layouts, ftoor plan
diagrams, and assing fo er r, eW`'~•
7. Based on t e`rr oncept Der, 7lve,develop Schematic Design
Documents escnbe~ size, araand f~atures of the Project including
architectural, landsq~'. t, inteno tructural, mechanical and electrical systems
and materiats an ment5 aropriate.
eting ,~~rr r~:ir` a iake presentations to the City Council and
8, l.ej f, e
~ p~~ S~akgroi reyuc~ i
,,b e c key meetings include:
M eting 1: off g to re nd confirm program and project design goals
eeting 2: D~ Con Charette to review design team's initial concepts and
rovide directio ,
► p eet ng 3: Present'clesign •_cepts~and selett preferred option
► hleetlng.-4: Schem~att~c Design Charette to review design teams initial Schematic
Design--Work and pr vc~ttle direction
► Meeting ~~Sc~er~~ti~~Design presentation to Core Team for review and comment
► Meeting 6: p~ sk tion to City Council
9. Provide overall prb'e~management including coordination of multiple consultants.
10. Prepare Schematic Design Construction Cost Estimate.
11. Provide draft of Schematic Design Submittal for Owner review. Based on review
comments, finalize Schematic Qesign Submittal for formal approval.
12. Prepare outline specifications.
13. Assist Owner in analyzing different project delivery methods (i.e. traditional sequential
cfesign-bid-build, negotiated design/buitd, General ConVactor/Construction
Management-GC/CM, etc.).
14. AssiSt Owner in defining pubtic art opportunities for project integration.
107 S N0OARD fUUR1N FLOCR
SPOKANE WA 99201
509•838•4511
fAX 509-838•LE05
kwW.9ERNARDOwILLS.COM
4
UMBE RNA RDa ~ ~~LLS
ARCHlTECFS PC
15. P'repare formal ~chematic Design Submittal package to inc(ude Design Narrative,
Drawirrgs (site plan, flaor pEans, elevations, building sectivns, character sketches,
massing studies), Code rev°iew summary, outline specificatiorts, and cosk estinnate.
a4 ~ivi Ii
1, Ar+alyze existing utilities and road system within the proposed City Center to define
preferrei infras'tructure extensions td serve City Hall, as well as future City C+enter
develapments. Deveiop phasing plan for infrastructure Impravements.
2. Prepare preliminary LEED analysis and assi3t w3th Cost EstirnaCe.
G. Land~~ape Architecture: . .
1. Confirm exterior design program and requi,re~,e~ s and develop preliminary
landscapelhardscape strategies for site an+d a~ t eet frontage.
2. Assist with site plan de^velopment to assur~ mpti~ir)-ce vrrith zvning code and ather
der►eloprnent Standards. ~ ~
3, P~'epare preliminary LEED ar~aly~sis and ikk~ Cost ~~f
G. Structural.
d'Ing fG[]t3ng5,
mtt
1, F+~ev'IE'w GeoteCI'liT1iC~~ Report afl+C~ anat t]ondt st GtU["aI ~]155 e I
#c~undations, fl~oar framing, rvof framirt nd ~t resi~tin e~nts For cast _
efFlCiencie5 and constructab itity} f 2. Providc narrakive surnmariA~~~ ref erred syste~~ J-ies, loading, and siismic standards,
3. Prepare pretiminary LEED analy§is andrassist Estimate,
E. Mei~hanicaL
I . Analyze apt+onal itvsti~qis for pRum irsg, H1fIn rgynLs and prepare narrative
sumrnariz~~g,Prefle i-rc-d~"~ .t s. N~,
2, F'roVide UC1e=Cihe'.YIoYV d'l~ r ene1°gy'~~~d ~alySis, preliminary l..EED evalt~atio~n.
3. Identify plunfiLii g°, risers, tct chase~; : echanical +equtpment rooms, air intake and
+++au5t t~a~;Itian , ire spr; . ~ ~ ser, an ecial nccupancy zonesf
4. OV,th'-Cost Fst r~~,'~~; '
- _ - e - ~
_
. EI ~t~.~ca1: .
F `
1. WR!yte optional ms f-~ignting, electrical servlce and distribution, fire alarm,
Pav~%51 or~nmr~r~i~hort ~ate anprepare narrative su~nmar~zir~g p~refe~~ed sys~terrs.
I» E s target levK,46r, various prcrgram spaces and tasklamhient 1ighting
strategi
3. Prorride ort1~,t~~ ~ stii~vir~C',di.~+ram.
4. I~Lenti#y riseirz,~Mel tr~~~~~'~urls, e'lectrical r~ovms, cabLe tfay [c~atio;ns.
5. Prepare preLirnrn ,r~+ '~Eanat'ysis and a5sist v~rith Cc~st Estirna#e.
f.
G. Interi4r Deslln:
1. Review fumiture, fixkure and equipnent (FFE) need-s with Uwmer ta determine re-use or
new and arpsis'k witih preliminary space planning and FFEE scape (FFE irwentoiy nat
tnclWClecl).
2, fstablish typica4 rrvorkstation and office needs based on staff functiorrs iind develvp
preliminary FFE budget.
3. Develop preliminary tyRical ma'terial finash rnatrix for pmgram spaces 1`or budgetirtg.
4. Prepare preliminary LEED analysis and assist with Cvst Estimate.
H. C.,st Es##ma n :
V
EE~NARAO ~ ~IILLS
Mli B- -
ARCHITECTS PC
1, Provide input tv design team regarding proposed buylding systems and materiais.
2. Prepare Schematic Design Cost Estimate based an quantity take-offs and unit prites.
1. LEEDlELC+GA:
i. Reriew Guidetines fnr Pvbtic Agencies in Washington State Energy Life Cycle Cvst
Anatysis (ELCCA) requirement~ and estabtish strategies #or comp[iance.
2. Reyiew LEED Ghecclist and estabEish tredit vpportunitees Yrith design team and Owner.
3. Register project with l1SGBC and set up on-line account ar►cf web access.
4. Organize and +conduct `Eco Charette' for Core Team and Consuitants ko discuss LEEQ
opportunitTes and goa1s; make abhreviated presentation to City Councik and
Stake?evlders graups as re~uested.
J. GPohici ~nd Pr'4sentatI2p APtqtrrriR63a
1. Prepare graphics fvr City Councit or Stakeho ~e aLions to inc[ude 3Q computer
madels, PowerPoint presentations, aradl'or cn e ngs a ~ etches of project.
2. Prepare printed graphics for Design tonubmittat a . hematie Gesign Submittal
packages.