The URL can be used to link to this page

2016, 03-22 Regular MeetingAGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FORMAL FORMAT MEETING Tuesday, March 22, 2016 6:00 p.m. Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers 11707 E Sprague Avenue Council Requests Please Silence Your Cell Phones During Council Meeting CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION: Pastor Joe Pursch, Valley Fourth Memorial Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF AGENDA INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS MAYOR'S REPORT PROCLAMATION PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any subject except those on this agenda as action items. (Action items include public hearings, and those items under NEW BUSINESS. Public Comments will be taken on those items at the time those items are discussed.) When you come to the podium, please state your name and city residence for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. 1. Administrative Report: Limited Tax General Obligation (LTGO) Bonds for City Hall — Mark Calhoun, Erik Lamb, and Bond Attorneys 2. CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. Proposed Motion: I move to approve the Consent Agenda. a. Approval of claim vouchers on March 22, 2016 Request for Council Action Form, Total: $2,858,570.80 b. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending March 15, 2016: $364,344.22 c. Approval of February 23, 2016 Council Meeting Minutes, Formal Format d. Approval of March 1, 2016 Council Meeting Minutes, Study Session Format e. Approval of March 8, 2016 Council Meeting Minutes, Special 4:00 p.m. Meeting PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any subject except those on this agenda as action items. (Action items include public hearings, and those items under NEW BUSINESS. Public Comments will be taken on those items at the time those items are discussed.) When you come to the podium, please state your name and city residence for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS 3. SCRAPS Update — Mark Calhoun 4. Sidewalk/Snow Removal — Cary Driskell 5. Uncovered, unsecured loads — Erik Lamb Council Agenda 03-22-16 Formal Format Meeting Page 1 of 2 6. Independent Investigative Counsel — Cary Driskell 7. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins INFORMATION ONLY 8. Department Monthly Reports 9.WSDOT Call for Projects CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT General Meetin,i Schedule (meeting schedule is always subject to change) Regular Council meetings are generally held every Tuesday beginning at 6:00 p.m. The Formal meeting formats are generally held the 211 and 41 Tuesdays. Formal meeting have time allocated for general public comments as well as comments after each action item. The Study Session formats (the less formal meeting) are generally held the 1st 3rd and 5t'- Tuesdays. Study Session formats DO NOT have time allocated for general public comments; but if action items are included, comments are permitted after those specific action items. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing, or other impairments, please contact the City Clerk at (509) 921-1000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made. Council Agenda 03-22-16 Formal Format Meeting Page 2 of 2 P:IClerklAgendaPackets for Web12016Iagendapacket 2016, 03-2211tem 1 RCA 2016 03 22 2016 LTGO Bonds.docx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 22, 2016 Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ information ® admin. report Department Director Approval: ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Issuance of 2016 Limited Tax General Obligation (LTGO) Bonds for the Purpose of Constructing a New City Hall Building. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35A.40, 35.37, 39.36, 39.46, and 39.53; Variety of Federal tax and securities laws. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Numerous Council discussions have taken place regarding the City Hall project with the most recent on February 23, 2016 when Council approved the final City Hall plans and authorized the City Manager to proceed with the bid process. BACKGROUND: Developing options for a permanent City Hall building has been a Council budget and economic development goal for the past several years and the process over the past year is summarized in the bullet points below: • In early 2015 the City closed on a 3.38 acre parcel at the former University City Mall site at a total cost of approximately $1,160,000. • At the February 17, 2015 Council workshop, staff discussed the selection process for architectural firms to design the building. • At the March 17, 2015 Council meeting staff updated the Council on the selected design firm and discussed the draft professional services agreement for the project. • At the March 24, 2015 meeting, the Council authorized the City Manager to contract with Architects West to design the building at a total contract price of $996,700. • The architect team conducted a public hearing on May 6, 2015 and met with Councilmembers and staff to finalize the program and design and discuss design parameters for the building. • The project team updated the Council on the design process and displayed two potential concepts on September 15, 2015. Council indicated a preference for one of the concepts which was approved on September 29, 2015. • Interior color and material options were discussed on November 18, 2015 and a general heating and cooling discussion was held on December 1, 2015. • A general discussion on interior and exterior details occurred on December 29, 2015 and a status update was given on January 19, 2016 and February 2, 2016. • On February 16, 2016, staff and the project architect provided a detailed review of the construction plan set and the specification documents. Final floorplans, exterior and interior details, materials, and site layout were discussed. • On February 23, 2016 Council approved the final City Hall plans and authorized the City Manager to proceed with the bid process. • The bid development process is currently underway. We anticipate the total project cost will be $14.4 million with $6.3 million covered with cash set aside specifically for this purpose plus an additional $8.1 million in net limited tax general obligation bond proceeds that will be repaid over a 30 -year period in roughly equal annual installments. The $14.4 million is anticipated to cover the cost of the land acquisition, design, construction, furniture and fixtures. Additional costs that will be borne by the City are those for replacing the broadcasting equipment located in the Council chambers and television studio Page 1 of 3 P:IClerklAgendaPackets for Web12016Iagendapacket 2016, 03-2211tem 1 RCA 2016 03 22 2016 LTGO Bonds.docx including cameras, tricaster, additional television screens and a variety of other equipment. The cost of these items will be financed through the use of PEG funds we have set aside for this purpose and these will be included in the 2017 Budget in PEG Fund #107. In order to issue bonds, the City Council must consider and adopt a bond ordinance authorizing the issuance, sale, and delivery of the 2016 LTGO Bonds, and further authorizing the City Manager to execute all other necessary documents to issue the 2016 LTGO Bonds. Other documents include, but are not limited to the "official statement" (which can be thought of as the prospectus) that details the 2016 LTGO Bonds to potential investors, the bond purchase contract wherein the City will agree to sell the 2016 LTGO Bonds to the underwriter, and other necessary securities and tax documents. When issuing municipal bonds the expertise of a number of individuals is required including: 1. Bond Counsel, who renders an opinion on the validity of the bonds, the security and source of payment for the bonds, and whether and to what extent interest on the bonds is excludable from federal income taxation. The opinion of bond counsel provides assurance both to issuers and to investors who purchase the bonds that all legal and tax requirements relevant to the matters covered by the opinion are met. Bond counsel also prepares the bond ordinance. The City has selected the Pacifica Law Group to represent the City as bond counsel. 2. The Financial Advisor, who advises the City on certain financial matters related to bond issuance and, under Federal securities laws, has a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the City. The Financial Advisor provides ongoing advice with respect to the structure and timing of the bond issue, reviews documents for financial aspects (such as sale parameters), and assists the City with receiving a rating for the bonds. For this issue the Financial Advisor is also preparing the City's preliminary and final official statements. The Financial Advisor works with the Bond Underwriter on the day of pricing to ensure that the rates proposed by the Underwriter are fair and reasonable given the bond market. The City has selected Piper Jaffray as the financial advisor. 3. The Bond Underwriter, who markets the City's bonds to potential investors as well as provides ideas and suggestions with respect to structure and timing of the bond issue. The Bond Underwriter ultimately purchases the City's bonds from the City pursuant to a bond purchase contract at an arm's-length commercial transaction and resells the bonds to investors. Since the Bond Underwriter is purchasing the City's bonds, it does not have a fiduciary duty to the City. The City has selected D.A. Davidson as underwriter. Each of the participants are paid only in the event the 2016 LTGO Bonds are issued and payment is made from the proceeds of the Bonds, so the costs for such services do not impact the City's General Fund. The attached Bond Ordinance authorizes the issuance of the 2016 LTGO Bonds, which will be issued as limited tax general obligations of the City, and payable from available funds of the City and non-voter approved property taxes. The full faith, credit and resources of the City will be pledged for the annual levy and collection of such taxes and for the prompt payment of the principal of and interest on the 2016 LTGO Bonds when due. The Bond Ordinance also states the authorized use of proceeds of the 2016 LTGO Bonds (to finance the New City Hall Building and to pay costs of issuance for the Bonds), sets forth covenants with respect to maintaining tax exempt status and covenants with regard to ongoing annual reporting to satisfy Federal securities laws, authorizes the City Manager to approve the preliminary and final official statements on behalf of the City, and provides for the source of payment and security for the 2016 LTGO Bonds. Page 2 of 3 P:IClerklAgendaPackets for Web12016Iagendapacket 2016, 03-2211tem 1 RCA 2016 03 22 2016 LTGO Bonds.docx By approving the Bond Ordinance, the Council authorizes the City Manager to approve the final terms of the 2016 LTGO Bonds and to sign the bond purchase contract with the Bond Underwriter, subject to limitations contained in the Bond Ordinance. As a result, approval of the Bond Ordinance is the only official action that the Council will need to take to authorize the issuance and sale of the 2016 LTGO Bonds. Section 12 of the Bond Ordinance authorizes the City Manager to approve the final interest rates, aggregate principal amount and principal amounts of each maturity, redemption rights and the sale of the 2016 LTGO Bonds to the Bond Underwriter so long as: (1) the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds does not exceed $8,300,000, (2) the final maturity date for the Bonds is no later than December 1, 2045, (3) the aggregate purchase price for the Bonds shall not be less than 98% of the aggregate stated principal amount of the Bonds, excluding any original issue discount, and (4) the true interest cost for the Bonds (in the aggregate) does not exceed 4.50%. Subject to these sale parameters, the City Manager is authorized to execute the bond purchase contract with the Bond Underwriter. After the sale of the 2016 LTGO Bonds and execution of the bond purchase contract, the City Manager will provide a report to Council describing the final terms of the Bonds. The delegated authority to approve the 2016 LTGO Bond terms will expire 120 days after the effective date the Bond Ordinance. If the 2016 LTGO Bonds cannot be sold (e.g. a bond purchase contract signed) within these parameters or within this timeframe, the 2016 LTGO Bonds will not be sold and additional Council action will need to be taken to proceed. OPTIONS: In order to proceed with this project the issuance of limited tax general obligation bonds is necessary. At the point Council awards the bid on the City Hall project (currently set for the April 26, 2016 Council meeting), Council will be presented with a "base bid" option plus nine alternatives. Depending upon the alternatives selected by Council it is conceivable the project might exceed $14.4 million which would necessitate the need for net bond proceeds of greater than $8.1 million. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to proceed with first reading at a future Council meeting. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Costs related to the bond issue would be folded into the 2016 LTGO Bond issue amount and consequently the City would incur no out-of-pocket expenses. Issue related expenses would primarily include: • Underwriter fee (D.A. Davidson) • Bond counsel (Pacifica) • Financial advisor (Piper Jaffray) • Bond rating (Moody's) STAFF CONTACT: Mark Calhoun and Erik Lamb ATTACHMENTS: • Draft proposed Bond Ordinance Page 3 of 3 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 16 - LIMITED TAX GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, 2016 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF LIMITED TAX GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF THE CITY IN THE AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF NOT TO EXCEED $8,300,000, TO FINANCE COSTS RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION, EQUIPPING AND FURNISHING OF A NEW CITY HALL FACILITY AND TO PAY COSTS OF ISSUING THE BONDS; PROVIDING THE FORM, TERMS AND COVENANTS OF THE BONDS; PROVIDING FOR THE DISPOSITION OF THE PROCEEDS OF SALE OF THE BONDS; DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO APPROVE THE FINAL TERMS OF THE BONDS; AND PROVIDING FOR OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. PASSED MAY 10, 2016 PREPARED BY: PACIFICA LAW GROUP LLP Seattle, Washington 10118 00002 fa262m42rg CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. TABLE OF CONTENTS* Page Section 1. Definitions and Interpretation of Terms 2 Section 2. Authorization of the Project 4 Section 3. Authorization of Bonds and Bond Details 5 Section 4. Registration, Exchange and Payments 5 Section 5. Redemption Prior to Maturity and Purchase of Bonds 7 Section 6. Form of Bonds 10 Section 7. Execution of Bonds 12 Section 8. Application of Bond Proceeds 12 Section 9. Tax Covenants 13 Section 10. Debt Service Fund and Provision for Tax Levy Payments 14 Section 11. Defeasance 14 Section 12. Sale of Bonds 15 Section 13. Preliminary and Final Official Statements 16 Section 14. Undertaking to Provide Ongoing Disclosure 16 Section 15. Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds 19 Section 16. Severability; Ratification 19 Section 17. Effective Date 20 * This Table of Contents is provided for convenience only and is not a part of this Ordinance. -i- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg 03/17/16 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 16 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF LIMITED TAX GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF THE CITY IN THE AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF NOT TO EXCEED $8,300,000, TO FINANCE COSTS RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION, EQUIPPING AND FURNISHING OF A NEW CITY HALL FACILITY AND TO PAY COSTS OF ISSUING THE BONDS; PROVIDING THE FORM, TERMS AND COVENANTS OF THE BONDS; PROVIDING FOR THE DISPOSITION OF THE PROCEEDS OF SALE OF THE BONDS; DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO APPROVE THE FINAL TERMS OF THE BONDS; AND PROVIDING FOR OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington (the "City"), a noncharter code city governed by the provisions of chapter 35A.13 of the Revised Code of Washington (the "RCW"), has deemed it in the best interest of the City that the City construct, equip and furnish a new City Hall facility (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Washington State law to issue limited tax general obligation bonds to pay costs of the Project; and WHEREAS, after due consideration the Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to authorize the issuance and sale of limited tax general obligation bonds to pay a portion of the costs of the Project and to pay costs of issuance for the bonds, as set forth herein; and WHEREAS, this Council wishes to delegate authority to the City Manager, or his designee (the "Designated Representative"), for a limited time, to approve the interest rates, maturity dates, redemption terms and principal maturities for the bonds within the parameters set by this Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City expects to receive a proposal from D.A. Davidson & Co. (the "Underwriter") and now desires to issue and sell the bonds to the Underwriter as set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley ordains as follows: Section 1. Definitions and Interpretation of Terms. (a) Definitions. As used in this Ordinance, the following words shall have the following meanings: Beneficial Owner means any person that has or shares the power, directly or indirectly, to make investment decisions concerning ownership of any Bonds (including persons holding Bonds through nominees, depositories or other intermediaries). Bond Counsel means Pacifica Law Group LLP or an attorney at law or a firm of attorneys, selected by the City, of nationally recognized standing in matters pertaining to the tax exempt nature of interest on bonds issued by states and their political subdivisions. Bond Purchase Contract means the contract for the purchase of the Bonds between the Underwriter and the City, executed pursuant to Section 12 of this Ordinance. Bond Register means the registration books showing the name, address and tax identification number of each Registered Owner of the Bonds, maintained pursuant to Section 149(a) of the Code. Bond Registrar means, initially, the fiscal agent of the State of Washington, for the purposes of registering and authenticating the Bonds, maintaining the Bond Register, effecting transfer of ownership of the Bonds and paying interest on and principal of the Bonds. Bonds mean the City's Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds, 2016, authorized to be issued pursuant to this Ordinance in the aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $8,300,000. City means the City of Spokane Valley, a municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Washington. City Clerk means the duly appointed and acting City Clerk of the City or the successor to the duties of that office. City Manager means the duly appointed and acting City Manager of the City or the successor to the duties of that office. Closing means the date of delivery of the Bonds to the Underwriter. Code means the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as in effect on the date of issuance of the Bonds or (except as otherwise referenced herein) as it may be amended to apply to obligations issued on the date of issuance of the Bonds, together with applicable proposed, temporary and final regulations promulgated, and applicable official public guidance published, under the Code. Commission means the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. -2- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg Council or City Council means the Spokane Valley City Council, as the general legislative body of the City as the same is duly and regularly constituted from time to time. Debt Service Fund means the City's LTGO Debt Service Fund and the accounts contained therein, as further provided pursuant to Section 10 of this Ordinance. Designated Representative means the City Manager, or his designee. The signature of the Designated Representative shall be sufficient to bind the City. DTC means The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York, a limited purpose trust company organized under the laws of the State of New York, as depository for the Bonds pursuant to Section 4 of this Ordinance. Fair Market Value means the price at which a willing buyer would purchase the investment from a willing seller in a bona fide, arm's length transaction (determined as of the date the contract to purchase or sell the investment becomes binding) if the investment is traded on an established securities market (within the meaning of Section 1273 of the Code) and, otherwise, the term "Fair Market Value" means the acquisition price in a bona fide arm's length transaction (as referenced above) if (i) the investment is a certificate of deposit that is acquired in accordance with applicable regulations under the Code, (ii) the investment is an agreement with specifically negotiated withdrawal or reinvestment provisions and a specifically negotiated interest rate (for example, a guaranteed investment contract, a forward supply contract or other investment agreement) that is acquired in accordance with applicable regulations under the Code, (iii) the investment is a United States Treasury Security --State and Local Government Series that is acquired in accordance with applicable regulations of the United States Bureau of Public Debt, or (iv) any commingled investment fund in which the City and related parties do not own more than a 10% beneficial interest therein if the return paid by the fund is without regard to the source of the investment. To the extent required by the applicable regulations under the Code, the term "investment" shall include a hedge. Federal Tax Certificate means the certificate executed by the Designated Representative or the Finance Director setting forth the requirements of the Code for maintaining the tax exemption of interest on the Bonds to be dated as of the date of Closing, and attachments thereto. Finance Director means the Finance Director of the City or the successor to such officer. Government Obligations means those obligations now or hereafter defined as such in chapter 39.53 RCW, as this chapter may be hereafter amended or restated. Letter of Representations means the Blanket Issuer Letter of Representations given by the City to DTC, as amended from time to time. Mayor means the duly appointed and acting Mayor of the City or the successor to the duties of that office. MSRB means the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board or any successors to its functions. -3- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg Official Statement means the disclosure documents prepared and delivered in connection with the issuance of the Bonds. Project means constructing, equipping and furnishing a new City Hall facility. Project Account means the account created pursuant to Section 8 of this Ordinance. Registered Owner means the person named as the registered owner of a Bond in the Bond Register. For so long as the Bonds are held in book -entry only form, DTC or its nominee shall be deemed to be the sole Registered Owner. Rule means the Commission's Rule 15c2-12 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as the same may be amended from time to time. Underwriter means D.A. Davidson & Co., or its successors. (b) Interpretation. In this Ordinance, unless the context otherwise requires: (1) The terms "hereby," "hereof," "hereto," "herein, "hereunder" and any similar terms, as used in this Ordinance, refer to this Ordinance as a whole and not to any particular article, section, subdivision or clause hereof, and the term "hereafter" shall mean after, and the term "heretofore" shall mean before, the date of this Ordinance; (2) Words of the masculine gender shall mean and include correlative words of the feminine and neuter genders and words importing the singular number shall mean and include the plural number and vice versa; (3) Words importing persons shall include firms, associations, partnerships (including limited partnerships), trusts, corporations and other legal entities, including public bodies, as well as natural persons; (4) Any headings preceding the text of the several articles and sections of this Ordinance, and any table of contents or marginal notes appended to copies hereof, shall be solely for convenience of reference and shall not constitute a part of this Ordinance, nor shall they affect its meaning, construction or effect; and (5) All references herein to "articles," "sections" and other subdivisions or clauses are to the corresponding articles, sections, subdivisions or clauses hereof. Section 2. Authorization of the Project. The Bonds are being issued to finance costs related to Project and to pay costs of issuance for the Bonds. The cost of all necessary design, architectural, engineering, and other consulting services, inspection and testing, administrative and relocation expenses, on and off-site utilities, related improvements and other costs incurred in connection with the Project shall be deemed a part of the costs of the Project. The Project shall be complete with all necessary furniture, equipment and appurtenances. Any remaining costs of the Project shall be paid from other City funds legally available for such purposes. -4- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg Section 3. Authorization of Bonds and Bond Details. For the purpose of paying the costs of the Project and paying costs of issuance of the Bonds, the City shall issue and sell its limited tax general obligation bonds in an aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $8,300,000 (the "Bonds") as set forth herein. The Bonds shall be general obligations of the City, shall be designated "City of Spokane Valley, Washington, Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds, 2016" with additional series designation or other such designation as determined to be necessary by the Designated Representative. The Bonds shall be dated as of the date of Closing; shall be fully registered as to both principal and interest; shall be in the denomination of $5,000 each, or any integral multiple thereof, within a maturity; shall be numbered separately in such manner and with any additional designation as the Bond Registrar deems necessary for purposes of identification; shall bear interest from their date payable on the dates and commencing as provided in the Bond Purchase Contract; and shall mature on the dates and in the principal amounts set forth in the Bond Purchase Contract, as approved and executed by the Designated Representative pursuant to Section 12 of this Ordinance. Section 4. Registration, Exchange and Payments. (a) Bond Registrar/Bond Register. The City hereby specifies and adopts the system of registration approved by the Washington State Finance Committee from time to time through the appointment of state fiscal agencies. The City shall cause a bond register to be maintained by the Bond Registrar. So long as any Bonds remain outstanding, the Bond Registrar shall make all necessary provisions to permit the exchange or registration or transfer of Bonds at its designated office. The Bond Registrar may be removed at any time at the option of the Finance Director upon prior notice to the Bond Registrar and a successor Bond Registrar appointed by the Finance Director. No resignation or removal of the Bond Registrar shall be effective until a successor shall have been appointed and until the successor Bond Registrar shall have accepted the duties of the Bond Registrar hereunder. The Bond Registrar is authorized, on behalf of the City, to authenticate and deliver Bonds transferred or exchanged in accordance with the provisions of such Bonds and this Ordinance and to carry out all of the Bond Registrar's powers and duties under this Ordinance. The Bond Registrar shall be responsible for its representations contained in the Certificate of Authentication of the Bonds. (b) Registered Ownership. The City and the Bond Registrar, each in its discretion, may deem and treat the Registered Owner of each Bond as the absolute owner thereof for all purposes (except as provided in Section 14 of this Ordinance), and neither the City nor the Bond Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Payment of any such Bond shall be made only as described in Section 4(g), but such Bond may be transferred as herein provided. All such payments made as described in Section 4(g) shall be valid and shall satisfy and discharge the liability of the City upon such Bond to the extent of the amount or amounts so paid. (c) DTC Acceptance/Letters of Representations. The Bonds initially shall be held by DTC acting as depository. To induce DTC to accept the Bonds as eligible for deposit at DTC, the City has executed and delivered to DTC a Blanket Issuer Letter of Representations. Neither the City nor the Bond Registrar shall have any responsibility or obligation to DTC participants or -5- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg the persons for whom they act as nominees (or any successor depository) with respect to the Bonds in respect of the accuracy of any records maintained by DTC (or any successor depository) or any DTC participant, the payment by DTC (or any successor depository) or any DTC participant of any amount in respect of the principal of or interest on Bonds, any notice which is permitted or required to be given to Registered Owners under this Ordinance (except such notices as shall be required to be given by the City to the Bond Registrar or to DTC (or any successor depository)), or any consent given or other action taken by DTC (or any successor depository) as the Registered Owner. For so long as any Bonds are held by a depository, DTC or its successor depository or its nominee shall be deemed to be the Registered Owner for all purposes hereunder, and all references herein to the Registered Owners shall mean DTC (or any successor depository) or its nominee and shall not mean the owners of any beneficial interest in such Bonds. (d) Use of Depository. (1) The Bonds shall be registered initially in the name of "Cede & Co.", as nominee of DTC, with one Bond maturing on each of the maturity dates for the Bonds in a denomination corresponding to the total principal therein designated to mature on such date. Registered ownership of such Bonds, or any portions thereof, may not thereafter be transferred except (A) to any successor of DTC or its nominee, provided that any such successor shall be qualified under any applicable laws to provide the service proposed to be provided by it; (B) to any substitute depository appointed by the Finance Director pursuant to subsection (2) below or such substitute depository's successor; or (C) to any person as provided in subsection (4) below. (2) Upon the resignation of DTC or its successor (or any substitute depository or its successor) from its functions as depository or a determination by the Finance Director to discontinue the system of book entry transfers through DTC or its successor (or any substitute depository or its successor), the Finance Director may hereafter appoint a substitute depository. Any such substitute depository shall be qualified under any applicable laws to provide the services proposed to be provided by it. (3) In the case of any transfer pursuant to clause (A) or (B) of subsection (1) above, the Bond Registrar shall, upon receipt of all outstanding Bonds, together with a written request on behalf of the Finance Director, issue a single new Bond for each maturity then outstanding, registered in the name of such successor or such substitute depository, or their nominees, as the case may be, all as specified in such written request of the Finance Director. (4) In the event that (A) DTC or its successor (or substitute depository or its successor) resigns from its functions as depository, and no substitute depository can be obtained, or (B) the Finance Director determines that it is in the best interest of the beneficial owners of the Bonds that such owners be able to obtain physical Bond certificates, the ownership of such Bonds may then be transferred to any person or entity as herein provided, and shall no longer be held by a depository. The Finance Director shall deliver a written request to the Bond Registrar, together with a supply of physical Bonds, to issue Bonds as herein provided in any authorized denomination. Upon receipt by the Bond Registrar of all then outstanding Bonds together with a written request on behalf of the Finance Director to the Bond Registrar, new Bonds shall be -6- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg issued in the appropriate denominations and registered in the names of such persons as are requested in such written request. (e) Registration of Transfer of Ownership or Exchange; Change in Denominations. The transfer of any Bond may be registered and Bonds may be exchanged, but no transfer of any such Bond shall be valid unless it is surrendered to the Bond Registrar with the assignment form appearing on such Bond duly executed by the Registered Owner or such Registered Owner's duly authorized agent in a manner satisfactory to the Bond Registrar. Upon such surrender, the Bond Registrar shall cancel the surrendered Bond and shall authenticate and deliver, without charge to the Registered Owner or transferee therefor, a new Bond (or Bonds at the option of the new Registered Owner) of the same date, maturity, and interest rate and for the same aggregate principal amount in any authorized denomination, naming as Registered Owner the person or persons listed as the assignee on the assignment form appearing on the surrendered Bond, in exchange for such surrendered and cancelled Bond. Any Bond may be surrendered to the Bond Registrar and exchanged, without charge, for an equal aggregate principal amount of Bonds of the same date, maturity, and interest rate, in any authorized denomination. The Bond Registrar shall not be obligated to register the transfer of or to exchange any Bond during the 15 days preceding any principal payment or redemption date. (f) Bond Registrar's Ownership of Bonds. The Bond Registrar may become the Registered Owner of any Bond with the same rights it would have if it were not the Bond Registrar, and to the extent permitted by law, may act as depository for and permit any of its officers or directors to act as a member of, or in any other capacity with respect to, any committee formed to protect the right of the Registered Owners or beneficial owners of Bonds. (g) Place and Medium of Payment. Both principal of and interest on the Bonds shall be payable in lawful money of the United States of America. Interest on the Bonds shall be calculated on the basis of a year of 360 days and twelve 30 -day months. For so long as all Bonds are held by a depository, payments of principal thereof and interest thereon shall be made as provided in accordance with the operational arrangements of DTC referred to in the Letter of Representations. In the event that the Bonds are no longer held by a depository, interest on the Bonds shall be paid by check or draft mailed to the Registered Owners at the addresses for such Registered Owners appearing on the Bond Register on the fifteenth day of the month preceding the interest payment date, or upon the written request of a Registered Owner of more than $1,000,000 of Bonds (received by the Bond Registrar at least 15 days prior to the applicable payment date), such payment shall be made by the Bond Registrar by wire transfer to the account within the United States designated by the Registered Owner. Principal of the Bonds shall be payable upon presentation and surrender of such Bonds by the Registered Owners at the designated office of the Bond Registrar. Section 5. Redemption Prior to Maturity and Purchase of Bonds. (a) Mandatory Redemption of Term Bonds and Optional Redemption. The Bonds shall be subject to mandatory redemption to the extent, if any, set forth in the Bond Purchase Contract and as approved by the Designated Representative pursuant to Section 12. The Bonds shall be subject to optional redemption on the dates, at the prices and under the terms set forth in -7- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg the Bond Purchase Contract approved by the Designated Representative pursuant to Section 12. (b) Purchase of Bonds. The City reserves the right to purchase any of the Bonds offered to it at any time at a price deemed reasonable by the Finance Director. (c) Selection of Bonds for Redemption. For as long as the Bonds are held in book -entry only form, the selection of particular Bonds within a maturity to be redeemed shall be made in accordance with the operational arrangements then in effect at DTC. If the Bonds are no longer held by a depository, the selection of such Bonds to be redeemed and the surrender and reissuance thereof, as applicable, shall be made as provided in the following provisions of this subsection (c). If the City redeems at any one time fewer than all of the Bonds having the same maturity date, the particular Bonds or portions of Bonds of such maturity to be redeemed shall be selected by lot (or in such manner determined by the Bond Registrar) in increments of $5,000. In the case of a Bond of a denomination greater than $5,000, the City and the Bond Registrar shall treat each Bond as representing such number of separate Bonds each of the denomination of $5,000 as is obtained by dividing the actual principal amount of such Bond by $5,000. In the event that only a portion of the principal sum of a Bond is redeemed, upon surrender of such Bond at the designated office of the Bond Registrar there shall be issued to the Registered Owner, without charge therefor, for the then unredeemed balance of the principal sum thereof, at the option of the Registered Owner, a Bond or Bonds of like maturity and interest rate in any of the denominations herein authorized. (d) Notice of Redemption. (1) Official Notice. For so long as the Bonds are held by a depository, notice of redemption shall be given in accordance with the operational arrangements of DTC as then in effect, and neither the City nor the Bond Registrar shall provide any notice of redemption to any beneficial owners. The notice of redemption may be conditional. Thereafter (if the Bonds are no longer held by a depository), notice of redemption shall be given in the manner hereinafter provided. Unless waived by any owner of Bonds to be redeemed, official notice of any such redemption (which redemption may be conditioned by the Bond Registrar on the receipt of sufficient funds for redemption or otherwise) shall be given by the Bond Registrar on behalf of the City by mailing a copy of an official redemption notice by first class mail at least 20 days and not more than 60 days prior to the date fixed for redemption to the Registered Owner of the Bond or Bonds to be redeemed at the address shown on the Bond Register or at such other address as is furnished in writing by such Registered Owner to the Bond Registrar. All official notices of redemption shall be dated and shall state: (A) the redemption date, (B) the redemption price, (C) if fewer than all outstanding Bonds are to be redeemed, the identification by maturity (and, in the case of partial redemption, the respective principal amounts) of the Bonds to be redeemed, -8- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg (D) any conditions to redemption, (E) that unless conditional notice of redemption has been given and such conditions have either been satisfied or waived, on the redemption date the redemption price shall become due and payable upon each such Bond or portion thereof called for redemption, and that interest thereon shall cease to accrue from and after said date, and (F) the place where such Bonds are to be surrendered for payment of the redemption price, which place of payment shall be the designated office of the Bond Registrar. On or prior to any redemption date, unless such redemption has been rescinded or revoked, the City shall deposit with the Bond Registrar an amount of money sufficient to pay the redemption price of all the Bonds or portions of Bonds which are to be redeemed on that date. The City retains the right to rescind any redemption notice and the related optional redemption of Bonds by giving notice of rescission to the affected registered owners at any time on or prior to the scheduled redemption date. Any notice of optional redemption that is so rescinded shall be of no effect, and the Bonds for which the notice of optional redemption has been rescinded shall remain outstanding. (2) Effect of Notice; Bonds Due. If notice of redemption has been given and not rescinded or revoked, or if the conditions set forth in a conditional notice of redemption have been satisfied or waived, the Bonds or portions of Bonds to be redeemed shall, on the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price therein specified, and from and after such date such Bonds or portions of Bonds shall cease to bear interest. Upon surrender of such Bonds for redemption in accordance with said notice, such Bonds shall be paid by the Bond Registrar at the redemption price. Installments of interest due on or prior to the redemption date shall be payable as herein provided for payment of interest. All Bonds which have been redeemed shall be canceled by the Bond Registrar and shall not be reissued. (3) Additional Notice. In addition to the foregoing notice, further notice shall be given by the City as set out below, but no defect in said further notice nor any failure to give all or any portion of such further notice shall in any manner defeat the effectiveness of a call for redemption if notice thereof is given as above prescribed. Each further notice of redemption given hereunder shall contain the information required above for an official notice of redemption plus (A) the CUSIP numbers of all Bonds being redeemed; (B) the date of issue of the Bonds as originally issued; (C) the rate of interest borne by each Bond being redeemed; (D) the maturity date of each Bond being redeemed; and (E) any other descriptive information needed to identify accurately the Bonds being redeemed. Each further notice of redemption may be sent at least 20 days before the redemption date to each party entitled to receive notice pursuant to Section 14 and with such additional information as the City shall deem appropriate, but such mailings shall not be a condition precedent to the redemption of such Bonds. (4) Amendment of Notice Provisions. The foregoing notice provisions of this Section 5, including but not limited to the information to be included in redemption notices and the persons designated to receive notices, may be amended by additions, deletions and changes in -9- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg order to maintain compliance with duly promulgated regulations and recommendations regarding notices of redemption of municipal securities. Section 6. Form of Bonds. The Bonds shall be in substantially the following form: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NO. $ STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY LIMITED TAX GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND, 2016 INTEREST RATE: % MATURITY DATE: CUSIP NO.: REGISTERED OWNER: CEDE & CO. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: The City of Spokane Valley, Washington (the "City"), hereby acknowledges itself to owe and for value received promises to pay to the Registered Owner identified above, or registered assigns, on the Maturity Date identified above, the Principal Amount indicated above and to pay interest thereon from , 20 , or the most recent date to which interest has been paid or duly provided for until payment of this bond at the Interest Rate set forth above, payable on , and semiannually thereafter on the first days of each succeeding and . Both principal of and interest on this bond are payable in lawful money of the United States of America. The fiscal agent of the State of Washington has been appointed by the City as the authenticating agent, paying agent and registrar for the bonds of this issue (the "Bond Registrar"). For so long as the bonds of this issue are held in fully immobilized form, payments of principal and interest thereon shall be made as provided in accordance with the operational arrangements of The Depository Trust Company ("DTC") referred to in the Blanket Issuer Letter of Representations (the "Letter of Representations") from the City to DTC. The bonds of this issue are issued under and in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution and applicable statutes of the State of Washington and Ordinance No. duly passed by the City Council on May 10, 2016 (the "Bond Ordinance"). Capitalized terms used in this bond have the meanings given such terms in the Bond Ordinance. This bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled to any security or benefit under the Bond Ordinance until the Certificate of Authentication hereon shall have been manually signed by or on behalf of the Bond Registrar or its duly designated agent. This bond is one of an authorized issue of bonds of like date, tenor, rate of interest and date of maturity, except as to number and amount in the aggregate principal amount of $ (the `Bonds") and is issued pursuant to the Bond Ordinance to provide funds to -10- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg pay the cost of constructing, equipping and furnishing a new City Hall facility and paying costs of issuance for the Bonds. The Bonds are subject to redemption prior to maturity as provided in the Bond Purchase Contract and the Bond Ordinance. The Bonds may be transferred and exchanged upon surrender to the Bond Registrar as provided in the Bond Ordinance. The Bonds are not "private activity bonds" as such term is defined in the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"). The City has designated the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3)(B) of the Code. The City hereby irrevocably covenants and agrees with the owner of this bond that it shall include in its annual budget and levy taxes annually, within and as a part of the tax levy permitted to the City without a vote of the electorate, upon all the property subject to taxation in amounts sufficient, together with other money legally available therefor, to pay the principal of and interest on this bond as the same shall become due. The full faith, credit and resources of the City are hereby irrevocably pledged for the annual levy and collection of such taxes and the prompt payment of such principal and interest. The pledge of tax levies for payment of principal of and interest on the bonds may be discharged prior to maturity of the bonds by making provision for the payment thereof on the terms and conditions set forth in the Bond Ordinance. It is hereby certified that all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and statutes of the State of Washington to exist, to have happened, been done and performed precedent to and in the issuance of this bond have happened, been done and performed and that the issuance of this bond and the bonds of this issue does not violate any constitutional, statutory or other limitation upon the amount of bonded indebtedness that the City may incur. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, has caused this bond to be signed by the manual or facsimile signature of its Mayor, attested by the manual or facsimile signature of the City Clerk, and seal of the City to be impressed or reproduced hereon, all as of ,2016. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON (SEAL) By [Facsimile Signature] -11- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg Mayor Attest: [Facsimile Signature] City Clerk Date of Authentication: CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This is one of the Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds, 2016, of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, dated , 2016, as described in the within mentioned Bond Ordinance. WASHINGTON STATE FISCAL AGENT, as Registrar By Authorized Officer Section 7. Execution of Bonds. The Bonds shall be executed on behalf of the City by the facsimile or manual signature of the Mayor or City Manager and shall be attested to by the facsimile or manual signature of the City Clerk, and shall have the seal of the City impressed or a facsimile thereof imprinted, or otherwise reproduced thereon. In the event any officer who shall have signed or whose facsimile signatures appear on any of the Bonds shall cease to be such officer of the City before said Bonds shall have been authenticated or delivered by the Bond Registrar or issued by the City, such Bonds may nevertheless be authenticated, delivered and issued and, upon such authentication, delivery and issuance, shall be as binding upon the City as though said person had not ceased to be such officer. Any Bond may be signed and attested on behalf of the City by such persons who, at the actual date of execution of such Bond shall be the proper officer of the City, although at the original date of such Bond such persons were not such officers of the City. Only such Bonds as shall bear thereon a Certificate of Authentication manually executed by an authorized representative of the Bond Registrar shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to the benefits of this Ordinance. Such Certificate of Authentication shall be conclusive evidence that the Bonds so authenticated have been duly executed, authenticated and delivered hereunder and are entitled to the benefits of this Ordinance. Section 8. Application of Bond Proceeds. The Finance Director is hereby authorized to create a Project Account, and subaccounts therein as necessary, for the purposes set forth in this section. A portion of the proceeds of the Bonds shall be deposited in the Project Account in the amounts specified in the closing memorandum prepared in connection with the issuance of the Bonds. Such proceeds shall be used to pay or reimburse the City for the costs of the Project and to pay costs of issuance of the Bonds. The Finance Director shall invest money in the Project Account and the subaccounts contained therein in such obligations as may now or hereafter be permitted to cities of the State by law and which will mature prior to the date on which such money shall be needed, but only to the extent that the same are acquired, valued and -12- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg disposed of at Fair Market Value. Upon completion of the Project, Bond proceeds (including interest earnings thereon) may be used for other capital projects of the City or shall be transferred to the Debt Service Fund to pay principal on the Bonds. Section 9. Tax Covenants. The City shall take all actions necessary to assure the exclusion of interest on the Bonds from the gross income of the owners of the Bonds to the same extent as such interest is permitted to be excluded from gross income under the Code as in effect on the date of issuance of the Bonds, including but not limited to the following: (a) Private Activity Bond Limitation. The City shall assure that the proceeds of the Bonds are not so used as to cause the Bonds to satisfy the private business tests of Section 141(b) of the Code or the private loan financing test of Section 141(c) of the Code. (b) Limitations on Disposition of Project. The City shall not sell or otherwise transfer or dispose of (i) any personal property components of the Project other than in the ordinary course of an established government program under Treasury Regulation 1.141-2(d)(4) or (ii) any real property components of the Project, unless it has received an opinion of nationally recognized bond counsel to the effect that such disposition shall not adversely affect the treatment of interest on the Bonds as excludable from gross income for federal income tax purposes. (c) Federal Guarantee Prohibition. The City shall not take any action or permit or suffer any action to be taken if the result of such action would be to cause any of the Bonds to be "federally guaranteed" within the meaning of Section 149(b) of the Code. (d) Rebate Requirement. The City shall take any and all actions necessary to assure compliance with Section 148(f) of the Code, relating to the rebate of excess investment earnings, if any, to the federal government, to the extent that such section is applicable to the Bonds. (e) No Arbitrage. The City shall not take, or permit or suffer to be taken, any action with respect to the proceeds of the Bonds which, if such action had been reasonably expected to have been taken, or had been deliberately and intentionally taken, on the date of issuance of the Bonds would have caused the Bonds to be "arbitrage bonds" within the meaning of Section 148 of the Code. (f) Registration Covenant. The City shall maintain a system for recording the ownership of each Bond that complies with the provisions of Section 149 of the Code until all Bonds have been surrendered and canceled. (g) Record Retention. The City shall retain its records of all accounting and monitoring it carries out with respect to the Bonds for at least three years after the Bonds mature or are redeemed (whichever is earlier); however, if the Bonds are redeemed and refunded, the City shall retain its records of accounting and monitoring at least three years after the earlier of the maturity or redemption of the obligations that refunded the Bonds. (h) Compliance with Federal Tax Certificate. The City shall comply with the provisions of the Federal Tax Certificate with respect to the Bonds, which are incorporated -13- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg herein as if fully set forth herein. The covenants of this Section shall survive payment in full or defeasance of the Bonds. (i) Bank Qualification. The City hereby designates the Bonds for purposes of paragraph (3) of Section 265(b) of the Code and represents that not more than $10,000,000 aggregate principal amount of obligations the interest on which is excludable (under Section 103(a) of the Code) from gross income for federal income tax purposes (excluding (i) private activity bonds, as defined in Section 141 of the Code, except qualified 501(c)(3) bonds as defined in Section 145 of the Code and (ii) current refunding obligations to the extent the amount of the refunding obligation does not exceed the outstanding amount of the refunded obligation), has been or will be issued by the City, including all subordinate entities of the City, during the calendar year 2016. Section 10. Debt Service Fund and Provision for Tax Levy Payments. The City has previously authorized the creation of a fund to be used for the payment of debt service on the Bonds and other limited tax general obligations of the City, designated as the "LTGO Debt Service Fund" (the "Debt Service Fund"), and within such fund separate accounts as determined to be necessary by the Finance Director, for the purpose of paying debt service on the Bonds. No later than the date each payment of principal of and/or interest on the Bonds matures or becomes due and payable, the City shall transmit sufficient funds, from the Debt Service Fund or from other legally available sources to the Bond Registrar for the payment of such principal and/or interest. Money in the Debt Service Fund not needed to pay the interest or principal next coming due may temporarily be deposited in legal investments for City funds, but only to the extent that the same are acquired, valued and disposed of at Fair Market Value. The City hereby irrevocably covenants and agrees for as long as any of the Bonds are outstanding and unpaid that each year it shall include in its budget and levy an ad valorem tax upon all the property within the City subject to taxation in an amount that will be sufficient, together with all other revenues and money of the City legally available for such purposes, to pay the principal of and interest on the Bonds as the same shall become due. The City hereby irrevocably pledges that the annual tax provided for herein to be levied for the payment of such principal and interest shall be within and as a part of the regular property tax levy permitted to cities, and that a sufficient portion of each annual levy to be levied and collected by the City prior to the full payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds will be and is hereby irrevocably set aside, pledged and appropriated for the payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds. The full faith, credit and resources of the City are hereby irrevocably pledged for the annual levy and collection of said taxes and for the prompt payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds as the same shall become due. Section 11. Defeasance. In the event that the City, in order to effect the payment, retirement or redemption of any Bond, sets aside in the Debt Service Fund or in another special account, cash or noncallable Government Obligations, or any combination of cash and/or noncallable Government Obligations, in amounts and maturities which, together with the known earned income therefrom, are sufficient to redeem or pay and retire such Bond in accordance with its terms and to pay when due the interest and redemption premium, if any, thereon, and -14- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg such cash and/or noncallable Government Obligations are irrevocably set aside and pledged for such purpose, then no further payments need be made into the Debt Service Fund for the payment of the principal of and interest on such Bond. The owner of a Bond so provided for shall cease to be entitled to any lien, benefit or security of this Ordinance except the right to receive payment of principal, premium, if any, and interest from the Debt Service Fund or such special account, and such Bond shall be deemed to be not outstanding under this Ordinance. The City shall give written notice of defeasance to the owners of all Bonds so provided for in accordance with Section 14. Section 12. Sale of Bonds. (a) Bond Sale. The Bonds shall be sold at negotiated sale to the Underwriter pursuant to the terms of the Bond Purchase Contract. The Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to delegate to the Designated Representative, for a limited time, the authority to approve the final interest rates, aggregate principal amount, principal amounts of each maturity of the Bonds, and redemption rights for the Bonds. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Section 12, the Designated Representative is hereby authorized to approve the final interest rates, aggregate principal amount, principal maturities, and redemption rights for the Bonds in the manner provided hereafter so long as: (1) the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds does not exceed $8,300,000, (2) the final maturity date for the Bonds is no later than December 1, 2045, (3) the aggregate purchase price for the Bonds shall not be less than 98% of the aggregate stated principal amount of the Bonds, excluding any original issue discount, and (4) the true interest cost for the Bonds (in the aggregate) does not exceed 4.50%. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this section, the Designated Representative is hereby authorized to execute the Bond Purchase Contract on behalf of the City. Following the execution of the Bond Purchase Contract, the Designated Representative shall provide a report to the Council describing the final terms of the Bonds approved pursuant to the authority delegated in this section. The authority granted to the Designated Representative by this Section 12 shall expire 120 days after the effective date of this Ordinance. If a Bond Purchase Contract for the Bonds has not been executed within 120 days after the effective date of this Ordinance, the authorization for the issuance of the Bonds shall be rescinded, and the Bonds shall not be issued nor their sale approved unless such Bonds are re -authorized by ordinance of the Council. The ordinance re -authorizing the issuance and sale of such Bonds may be in the form of a new ordinance repealing this Ordinance in whole or in part or may be in the form of an amendatory ordinance approving a bond purchase contract or establishing terms and conditions for the authority delegated under this Section 12. -15- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg (b) Delivery of Bonds; Documentation. Upon the passage and approval of this Ordinance, the proper officials of the City, including the Designated Representative, are authorized and directed to undertake all action necessary for the prompt execution and delivery of the Bonds to the Underwriter and further to execute all closing certificates and documents required to effect the closing and delivery of the Bonds in accordance with the terms of the Bond Purchase Contract. Such documents may include, but are not limited to, documents related to a municipal bond insurance policy delivered by an insurer to insure the payment when due of the principal of and interest on the Bonds as provided therein, if such insurance is determined by the Designated Representative to be in the best interest of the City. Section 13. Preliminary and Final Official Statements. The Designated Representative is hereby authorized to deem final the preliminary Official Statement relating to the Bonds for the purposes of the Rule. The Designated Representative is further authorized to approve for purposes of the Rule, on behalf of the City, the Official Statement relating to the issuance and sale of the Bonds and the distribution of the Official Statement pursuant thereto with such changes, if any, as may be deemed by him or her to be appropriate. Section 14. Undertaking to Provide Ongoing Disclosure. (a) Contract/Undertaking. This Section 14 constitutes the City's written undertaking for the benefit of the owners, including Beneficial Owners, of the Bonds as required by Section (b)(5) of the Rule. (b) Financial Statements/Operating Data. The City agrees to provide or cause to be provided to the MSRB, the following annual financial information and operating data for the prior fiscal year (commencing in 2016 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015): 1. Annual financial statements, which statements may or may not be audited, showing ending fund balances for the City's general fund prepared in accordance with the Budgeting Accounting and Reporting System prescribed by the Washington State Auditor pursuant to RCW 43.09.200 (or any successor statute) and generally of the type included in the official statement for the Bonds under the headings (or similar headings) "General Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance" and "General Fund Balance Sheet"; 2. The assessed valuation of taxable property in the City; 3. Ad valorem taxes due and percentage of taxes collected; 4. Property tax levy rate per $1,000 of assessed valuation; and 5. Outstanding general obligation debt of the City. Items 2-5 shall be required only to the extent that such information is not included in the annual financial statements. -16- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg The information and data described above shall be provided on or before the end of nine months after the end of the City's fiscal year. The City's fiscal year currently ends on December 31. The City may adjust such fiscal year by providing written notice of the change of fiscal year to the MSRB. In lieu of providing such annual financial information and operating data, the City may cross-refer to other documents available to the public on the MSRB's internet website or filed with the Commission. If not provided as part of the annual financial information discussed above, the City shall provide the City's audited annual financial statement prepared in accordance with the Budgeting Accounting and Reporting System prescribed by the Washington State Auditor pursuant to RCW 43.09.200 (or any successor statute) when and if available to the MSRB. (c) Listed Events. The City agrees to provide or cause to be provided to the MSRB, in a timely manner not in excess of 10 business days after the occurrence of the event, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events with respect to the Bonds: 1. Principal and interest payment delinquencies; 2. Non-payment related defaults, if material; 3. Unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial difficulties; 4. Unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial difficulties; 5. Substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perform; 6. Adverse tax opinions, the issuance by the Internal Revenue Service of proposed or final determinations of taxability, Notices of Proposed Issue (IRS Form 5701-TEB) or other material notices or determinations with respect to the tax status of the Bonds, or other material events affecting the tax status of the Bonds; 7. Modifications to the rights of Bondholders, if material; 8. Optional, contingent or unscheduled Bond calls other than scheduled sinking fund redemptions for which notice is given pursuant to Exchange Act Release 34-23856, if material, and tender offers; 9. Defeasances; 10. Release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment of the Bonds, if material; 11. Rating changes; -17- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg 12. Bankruptcy, insolvency, receivership or similar event of the City; 13. The consummation of a merger, consolidation, or acquisition involving the City or the sale of all or substantially all of the assets of the City, other than in the ordinary course of business, the entry into a definitive agreement to undertake such an action or the termination of a definitive agreement relating to any such actions, other than pursuant to its terms, if material; and 14. Appointment of a successor or additional trustee or the change of name of a trustee, if material. (d) Format for Filings with the MSRB. All notices, financial information and operating data required by this undertaking to be provided to the MSRB shall be in an electronic format as prescribed by the MSRB. All documents provided to the MSRB pursuant to this undertaking shall be accompanied by identifying information as prescribed by the MSRB. (e) Notification Upon Failure to Provide Financial Data. The City agrees to provide, or cause to be provided, to the MSRB notice of its failure to provide the annual financial information described in Subsection (b) above on or prior to the date set forth in Subsection (b) above. (f) Termination/Modification. The City's obligations to provide annual financial information and notices of listed events shall terminate upon the legal defeasance, prior redemption or payment in full of all of the Bonds. Any provision of this section shall be null and void if the City (1) obtains an opinion of nationally recognized bond counsel to the effect that the portion of the Rule that requires that provision is invalid, has been repealed retroactively or otherwise does not apply to the Bonds and (2) notifies the MSRB of such opinion and the cancellation of this section. The City may amend this section, without the consent of bondowners, with an opinion of nationally recognized bond counsel in accordance with the Rule. In the event of any amendment of this section, the City shall describe such amendment in the next annual report, and shall include, a narrative explanation of the reason for the amendment and its impact on the type (or in the case of a change of accounting principles, on the presentation) of financial information or operating data being presented by the City. In addition, if the amendment relates to the accounting principles to be followed in preparing financial statements, (1) notice of such change shall be given in the same manner as for a listed event under subsection (c), and (2) the annual report for the year in which the change is made shall present a comparison (in narrative form and also, if feasible, in quantitative form) between the financial statements as prepared on the basis of the new accounting principles and those prepared on the basis of the former accounting principles. (g) Remedies Under This Section. The right of any bondowner or Beneficial Owner of Bonds to enforce the provisions of this section shall be limited to a right to obtain specific -18- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg enforcement of the City's obligations under this section, and any failure by the City to comply with the provisions of this undertaking shall not be an event of default with respect to the Bonds. (h) No Default. Except as otherwise disclosed in the City's official statement relating to the Bonds, the City is not and has not been in default in the performance of its obligations of any prior undertaking for ongoing disclosure with respect to its obligations. Section 15. Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. In case any Bonds are lost, stolen or destroyed, the Bond Registrar may authenticate and deliver a new Bond or Bonds of like amount, date and tenor to the Registered Owner thereof if the owner pays the expenses and charges of the Bond Registrar and the City in connection therewith and files with the Bond Registrar and the City evidence satisfactory to both that such Bond or Bonds were actually lost, stolen or destroyed and of his or her ownership thereof, and furnishes the City and the Bond Registrar with indemnity satisfactory to both. Section 16. Severability; Ratification. If any one or more of the covenants or agreements provided in this Ordinance to be performed on the part of the City shall be declared by any court of competent jurisdiction to be contrary to law, then such covenant or covenants, agreement or agreements, shall be null and void and shall be deemed separable from the remaining covenants and agreements of this Ordinance and shall in no way affect the validity of the other provisions of this Ordinance or of the Bonds. All acts taken pursuant to the authority granted in this Ordinance but prior to its effective date are hereby ratified and confirmed. -19- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg Section 17. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council this 10th day of May, 2016. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Pacifica Law Group LLP, Bond Counsel Date of Publication: Effective Date: -20- 10118 00002 fa262m42rg L.R. Higgins, Mayor CERTIFICATE I, the undersigned, City Clerk of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington (the "City"), DO HEREBY CERTIFY: 1. That the attached is a true and correct copy of Ordinance No. (the "Ordinance") of the City, duly passed at a regular meeting of the City Council (the "Council") held on May 10, 2016. 2. That said meeting was duly convened and held in all respects in accordance with law, and to the extent required by law, due and proper notice of such meeting was given; that a legal quorum was present throughout the meeting and a legally sufficient number of members of the Council voted in the proper manner for the passage of said Ordinance; that all other requirements and proceedings incident to the proper passage of said Ordinance have been fully fulfilled, carried out and otherwise observed; and that I am authorized to execute this certificate. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 10th day of May, 2016. Christine Bainbridge, MMC, City Clerk 10118 00002 fa262m42rg CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 22, 2016 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Approval of the Following Vouchers: VOUCHER LIST 03/04/2016 03/08/2016 03/09/2016 03/09/2016 03/10/2016 03/10/2016 03/11/2016 VOUCHER NUMBERS 37854-37881; 229160029 37882-37904 5414; 5422-5425; 37905-37906 6530-6535 37907-37912 37913-37947; 304160026 37948-37957 GRAND TOTAL: TOTAL AMOUNT $1,620,481.90 $ 33,955.37 $ 311,008.68 $ 671.00 $ 275.00 $ 885,685.90 $ 6,492.95 $2,858,570.80 Explanation of Fund Numbers found #001 - General Fund 001.011.000.511. City Council 001.013.000.513. City Manager 001.013.015.515. Legal 001.016.000. Public Safety 001.018.013.513. Deputy City Manager 001.018.014.514. Finance 001.018.016.518. Human Resources 001.032.000. Public Works 001.058.050.558. CED - Administration 001.058.051.558. CED — Economic Development 001.058.055.558. CED — Development Services -Engineering 001.058.056.558. CED — Development Services -Planning 001.058.057.558 CED — Building 001.076.000.576. Parks & Rec—Administration 001.076.300.576. Parks & Rec-Maintenance 001.076.301.571. Parks & Rec-Recreation 001.076.302.576. Parks & Rec- Aquatics 001.076.304.575. Parks & Rec- Senior Center 001.076.305.571. Parks & Rec-CenterPlace 001.090.000.511. General Gov't- Council related 001.090.000.514. General Gov't -Finance related 001.090.000.517. General Gov't -Employee supply 001.090.000.518. General Gov't- Centralized Services 001.090.000.519. General Gov't -Other Services 001.090.000.540. General Gov't -Transportation 001.090.000.550. General Gov't -Natural & Economic 001.090.000.560. General Gov't -Social Services 001.090.000.594. General Gov't -Capital Outlay 001.090.000.595. General Gov't -Pavement Preservation on Voucher Lists Other Funds 101 — Street Fund 103 — Paths & Trails 105 — Hotel/Motel Tax 106 — Solid Waste 120 - CenterPlace Operating Reserve 121— Service Level Stabilization Reserve 122 — Winter Weather Reserve 123 — Civil Facilities Replacement 204 — Debt Service 301 — REET 1 Capital Projects 302 - REET 2 Capital Projects 303 — Street Capital Projects 309 — Parks Capital Grants 310 — Civic Bldg Capital Projects 311 — Pavement Preservation 312 — Capital Reserve 402 — Stormwater Management 403 — Aquifer Protection Area 501 — Equipment Rental & Replacement 502 — Risk Management RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve attached list of claim vouchers. [Approved as part of the Consent Agenda, or may be removed and discussed separately.] STAFF CONTACT: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS: Voucher Lists vchlist 03/04/2016 9:39:29AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 37854 3/4/2016 000150 ALLIED FIRE & SECURITY 37855 3/4/2016 000173 BINGAMAN, GREG 37856 3/4/2016 000508 CONOCOPHILLIPS FLEET 37857 3/4/2016 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 37858 3/4/2016 002157 ELJAY OIL COMPANY 37859 3/4/2016 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 37860 3/4/2016 000007 GRAINGER 37861 3/4/2016 000917 GRAYBAR 37862 3/4/2016 001296 H.D. FOWLER CO INC JC1019219 EXPENSES 44282028 RE-313-ATB60216048 4248101 45193 45194 45195 45196 9029012763 983765945 14134944 37863 3/4/2016 004853 HALVERSON NORTHWEST LAW GROUP 184400 37864 3/4/2016 003877 HATCH, CALEB EXPENSE 37865 3/4/2016 003297 HIGGINS, LEWIS ROD EXPENSES Fund/Dept 001.090.000.518 001.018.014.514 402.402.000.531 101.042.000.542 101.000.000.542 001.013.000.513 001.058.056.558 001.058.056.558 001.058.056.558 402.402.000.531 001.090.000.518 101.043.000.542 001.013.015.515 001.013.015.515 001.011.000.511 Description/Account Amount INSTALL ACCESS CONTROL Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : FEBRUARY 2016 FLEET FUEL BILL Total : REIMBURSE TRAFFIC SVCS MAINZ Total : FUEL FOR MAINTENANCE SHOP & Total : LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION SUPPLIES: STORMWATER SUPPLIES: IT SUPPLIES: PW PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 2,460.03 2,460.03 41.63 41.63 974.24 974.24 6,681.51 6,681.51 744.26 744.26 25.00 72.25 98.60 96.05 291.90 52.35 52.35 52.94 52.94 6.61 6.61 156.00 156.00 14.04 14.04 110.70 Page: 1 vchlist 03/04/2016 9:39:29AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 37865 3/4/2016 003297 003297 HIGGINS, LEWIS ROD 37866 3/4/2016 001728 HP FINANCIAL SERVICES CO (Continued) 600483996 37867 3/4/2016 000086 INLAND EMPIRE UTILITY, COORDINATIN 2016 37868 3/4/2016 000265 JACKSON, MIKE 37869 3/4/2016 001987 JENKINS, ART 37870 3/4/2016 004632 LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS 37871 3/4/2016 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 37872 3/4/2016 003587 PACE, ED 37873 3/4/2016 002520 RWC GROUP 37874 3/4/2016 000836 SCHULTZ, WILLIAM J. MARCH 2016 EXPENSES 42267557 825387993001 825930474001 EXPENSES 22924N 23927N CM21941N EXPENSE 37875 3/4/2016 000709 SENSKE LAWN & TREE CARE INC. 7056925 7056927 37876 3/4/2016 004535 SHRED -IT USA LLC Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 001.090.000.548 SCHEDULE 572E3651 Total : Total : 101.042.000.542 2016 UTILITY MEMBER DUES Total : 001.013.000.513 AUTO ALLOWANCE Total : 402.000.193.531 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : 001.076.305.575 TELECOM SERVICES 001.090.000.518 001.013.015.515 Total : OFFICE SUPPLIES: IT OFFICE SUPPLIES: LEGAL Total : 001.011.000.511 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 101.000.000.542 CREDIT MEMO Total : 001.058.056.524 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : 001.090.000.518 001.090.000.518 SNOW REMOVAL CITY HALL SNOW REMOVAL FUTURE CITY HF Total : 110.70 830.28 830.28 6,124.50 6,124.50 300.00 300.00 30.46 30.46 1,257.54 1,257.54 169.55 40.50 210.05 25.98 25.98 67.23 35.01 -97.29 4.95 142.61 142.61 54.35 92.40 146.75 9409622866 001.090.000.518 DOCUMENT DESTRUCTION 156.30 Page: 2 vchlist 03/04/2016 9:39:29AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 3 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 37876 3/4/2016 004535 004535 SHRED -IT USA LLC (Continued) 37877 3/4/2016 000230 SPOKANE CO AUDITORS OFFICE FEBRUARY 2016 37878 3/4/2016 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 37879 3/4/2016 000093 SPOKESMAN -REVIEW, THE 37880 3/4/2016 000335 TIRE-RAMA 37881 3/4/2016 002597 TWISTED PAIR ENTERPRISES LLC 229160029 2/29/2016 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 29 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 42000241 51503137 447854 8080041479 2262016 9290200891 Fund/Dept 001.058.056.558 001.016.000.554 001.016.000.523 001.018.016.518 402.402.000.531 001.090.000.518 001.016.000.521 Description/Account Amount RECORDING FEES Total : Total : ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICE MAR FEBRUARY 2016 HOUSING INVOIC Total : ADVERTISING ACCT 50869 SERVICE: 53697D Total : Total : NEW CITY HALL PLANNING MEETII Total : LE CONTRACT BILLING FEBRUARI Total : Bank total : 156.30 694.00 694.00 20,680.89 110,241.18 130,922.07 341.30 341.30 36.90 36.90 300.00 300.00 1,467,372.00 1,467,372.00 1,620,481.90 29 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 1,620,481.90 Page: 3 vchlist 03/08/2016 1:17:56PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: L Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 37882 3/8/2016 000150 ALLIED FIRE & SECURITY IVC1035830 37883 3/8/2016 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC 9728695 S0124385 37884 3/8/2016 003300 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 37885 3/8/2016 001169 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY 37886 3/8/2016 000326 CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION #19 37887 3/8/2016 002662 DAVID'S BRIDAL INC 37888 3/8/2016 002308 FINKE, MELISSA 37889 3/8/2016 000070 INLAND POWER & LIGHT CO 37890 3/8/2016 001635 ISS FACILITY EVENT SERVICES 37891 3/8/2016 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER CO 37892 3/8/2016 000997 OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY Jan 2016 Feb 2016 Feb 2016 V#5320 Feb 2016 Feb 2016 2301 1000895 1000983 998008 February 2016 S R04008316 Fund/Dept 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.090.000.519 001.058.056.558 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.301.571 001.076.301.571 101.042.000.542 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.302.576 001.076.305.575 Description/Account Amount KEYS FOR CENTERPLACE Total : LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLYAT C Total : SUPPLIES: GEN GOV KITCHEN Total : PETTY CASH: 13853,54,55,56,57,58 Total : UTILITIES: CP Total : ANNUAL VENDOR PROGRAM FEE: Total : INSTRUCTOR PMT INSTRUCTOR PMT UTILITIES:FEB 2016 PW Total : Total : FEB 2016 MONTHLY CLEANING EVENT SERVICES AT CENTERPLA( EVENT SERVICES AT CENTERPLA( Total : UTILITIES: FEB 2016 PARKS Total : 55.22 55.22 324.41 82.50 406.91 332.33 332.33 12.99 12.99 65.27 65.27 1,800.00 1,800.00 251.25 1,695.00 1,946.25 420.55 420.55 7,136.00 168.56 42.14 7,346.70 1,257.83 1,257.83 ELEVATOR SERVICE CONTRACT A 1,866.99 Total : 1,866.99 Page: vchlist 03/08/2016 1:17:56PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 37893 3/8/2016 003208 RODDA PAINT CO. 09448861 09448939 37894 3/8/2016 000415 ROSAUERS FOOD & DRUG CENTER 10-1211839 37895 3/8/2016 000748 ROTO -ROOTER 93700 37896 3/8/2016 000709 SENSKE LAWN & TREE CARE INC. 6494117 7056926 7069890 37897 3/8/2016 000404 SPOKANE VALLEY HERITAGE MUSEUM Feb 2016 37898 3/8/2016 001083 STANDARD PLBG HEATING CONTROLS 54176 37899 3/8/2016 001206 SWANSON'S REFRIGERATION &, RESTA 128733 37900 3/8/2016 001472 TESTAMERICA LABORATORIES 59102545 37901 3/8/2016 003175 VISIT SPOKANE Jan 2016 37902 3/8/2016 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 0245693-2681-2 0245694-2681-0 0245695-2681-7 37903 3/8/2016 003610 WEST PLAINS CHAMBER OF COMMERC 2016-295 Fund/Dept 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 101.042.000.542 001.016.000.521 101.042.000.542 105.000.000.557 001.016.000.521 001.076.305.575 001.076.300.576 105.000.000.557 101.042.000.542 001.076.305.575 001.016.000.521 001.076.305.575 Description/Account Amount SUPPLIES FOR CP SUPPLIES FOR CP Total : TRADE SHOW SUPPLIES: CP Total : LABOR/SERVICE AT CENTERPLAC Total : 895 CONTRACT MAINTENANCE SNOW REMOVAL AT PRECINCT FLAGGING SERVICES Total : 2016 LODGING TAX GRANT REIMB Total : FEB 2016 MONTHLY MAINT: PRECI Total : WALK IN FREEZER REPAIR AT CP Total : J2829-1 MONTHLY DRINKING WATE Total : 2016 LODGING TAX GRANT REIMB Total : WASTE MANAGEMENT: MAINT SH( WASTE MGMT: CENTERPLACE WASTE MGMT: PRECINCT Total : MEMBERSHIP FOR CENTERPLACE Total : 39.23 300.73 339.96 27.12 27.12 509.80 509.80 530.46 217.40 169.57 917.43 439.00 439.00 605.46 605.46 435.93 435.93 28.50 28.50 13,637.50 13,637.50 173.27 738.47 283.09 1,194.83 300.00 300.00 Page: vchlist 03/08/2016 1:17:56PM Voucher List Page: Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 37904 3/8/2016 004917 WHITE, KARLA Expenses 001.018.014.514 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 8.80 Total : 8.80 23 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 23 Vouchers in this report I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Bank total : 33,955.37 Total vouchers : 33,955.37 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: ✓1- 03/09/2016 8:01:29AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 5414 3/4/2016 000165 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS Ben66049 001.231.15.00 PERS: PAYMENT 94,128.99 Total : 94,128.99 5422 3/4/2016 000048 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS, 401A PLAN Ben66051 001.231.14.00 401A: PAYMENT 32,670.34 Total : 32,670.34 5423 3/4/2016 000682 EFTPS Ben66053 001.231.11.00 FEDERAL TAXES: PAYMENT 35,367.21 Total : 35,367.21 5424 3/4/2016 000145 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS, 457 PLf Ben66055 001.231.18.00 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION: PAYI 7,177.10 Total : 7,177.10 5425 3/4/2016 000162 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS, 401A EXEC P1 Ben66057 001.231.14.00 401 EXEC PLAN: PAYMENT 1,453.68 Total : 1,453.68 5433 3/4/2016 000682 EFTPS Ben66061 001.231.12.00 FEDERAL TAXES: PAYMENT 1,210.00 Total : 1,210.00 37905 3/4/2016 000120 AWC 37906 3/4/2016 000699 WA COUNCIL CO/CITY EMPLOYEES Ben66045 001.231.16.00 Ben66059 001.231.16.00 HEALTH PLANS: PAYMENT HEALTH PLANS (COUNCIL): PAYMENT Total : 125,546.32 10,868.27 136,414.59 Ben66047 001.231.21.00 UNION DUES: PAYMENT 2,586.77 Total : 2,586.77 8 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 311,008.68 8 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 311,008.68 Page: 7 7 vchlist 03/09/2016 10:11:42AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code: pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 6530 30/2016 004912 DOWNRIVER GRILL 6531 3/9/2018 001262 MCKNLAY&PETERS 6532 3X9/2016 004913 MERCER HEALTH & BENEFITS 6533 3/9/2016 004914 POLIGNONI, ALICE 6534 3/9/2018 004915 WARHORSE KARATE 6535 3/9/2016 004918 WOLFE, STEVEN 6 Vouchers for bank code: pk-ref 6 Vouchers in this report PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND Fund/Dept 001.23710.99 001.23710.88 001.237.10.99 001.237.10.99 001.337.10.90 001.237.10.99 Amount DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM Total : DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM Total: Total: Total: Total: DEPOSIT REFUND: RM 216 DEPOSIT REFUND: RM 213 DEPOSIT REFUND: RM 111 DEPOSIT REFUND: BALLROOM D.A Total : Bank tota: 210.00 210.00 210.00 210.00 52.00 52.00 52.00 52.00 52.00 52.00 95.00 95.00 671.00 Total vounhara: 671.00 vchlist 03/10/2016 1:04:04PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 37907 3/10/2016 004918 GASAWAY, DEAN 37908 3/10/2016 004919 M2 TECHNICAL SERVICES INC 37909 3/10/2016 004920 MCAULIFFE, PATRICK 37910 3/10/2016 004922 OAS, TYLER 37911 3/10/2016 004921 T MOBILE 9209 37912 3/10/2016 004923 VANETTEN, SHELDON & ELIZABETH 6 Vouchers for bank code : apbank CRY WOLF REFUND CRY WOLF REFUND CRY WOLF REFUND CRY WOLF REFUND CRY WOLF REFUND CRY WOLF REFUND Fund/Dept 001.016.000.342 001.016.000.342 001.016.000.342 001.016.000.342 001.016.000.342 001.016.000.342 Description/Account Amount FALSE ALARM REFUND PERMIT Vi 25.00 Total : 25.00 FALSE ALARM REFUND PERMIT VE 35.00 Total : 35.00 FALSE ALARM REFUND PERMIT Vi 25.00 Total : 25.00 FALSE ALARM REFUND PERMIT Vi 25.00 Total : 25.00 FALSE ALARM REFUND PERMIT V' 130.00 Total : 130.00 FALSE ALARM REFUND PERMIT VE 35.00 Total : 35.00 Bank total : 275.00 6 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 275.00 Page: vchlist 03/10/2016 1:16:24PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 37913 3/10/2016 000648 ABADAN REPROGRAPHICS 37914 3/10/2016 002931 ALL WESTERN INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY 37915 3/10/2016 003076 AMSDEN, ERICA 59190 102181 EXPENSE 37916 3/10/2016 003337 ARROW CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY INC 168199 168250 168410 37917 3/10/2016 001816 BENTHIN & ASSOCIATES 37918 3/10/2016 002837 CENTRAL PRE -MIX CONCRETE CO 37919 3/10/2016 003306 CENTURY SURVEY INC 37920 3/10/2016 001888 COMCAST 37921 3/10/2016 001880 CROWN WEST REALTY LLC 37922 3/10/2016 002604 DELL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC 37923 3/10/2016 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 37924 3/10/2016 003697 ELECTRIC LIGHTWAVE LLC 2440 13-2221959 2647 MARCH 2016 FEBRUARY 2016 78398175 RE-313-ATB60216055 RE-313-ATB60216100 13704211 Fund/Dept 001.032.000.543 101.000.000.542 001.032.000.543 Description/Account Amount PAPER FOR PLOTTER SUPPLIES: PW Total : Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : 402.402.000.594 SUPPLIES: PW 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 303.000.238.595 101.042.000.542 311.000.240.595 001.090.000.518 101.042.000.543 001.090.000.548 101.000.000.542 303.000.201.595 001.090.000.586 0238 -SURVEY SERVICES ELASTI-PATCH MIX Total : Total : Total : PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 16-027 Total : INTERNET CITY HALL Total : COMMON AREA CHARGES FOR M/ Total : COMPUTER LEASE 001-8922117-0( Total : REIMB ROADWAY MAINT ITS INFILL PROJECT PHASE 3 Total : SCRAPS INTERNET SERVICE 191.14 191.14 103.36 103.36 20.52 20.52 155.47 5.24 11.70 172.41 3,493.75 3,493.75 2,010.66 2,010.66 11,130.00 11,130.00 154.70 154.70 178.04 178.04 1,006.63 1,006.63 23,874.91 104.53 23,979.44 104.94 Page: 10 vchlist 03/10/2016 1:16:24PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 37924 3/10/2016 003697 003697 ELECTRIC LIGHTWAVE LLC 37925 3/10/2016 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 45156 37926 3/10/2016 002992 FREEDOM TRUCK CENTERS 37927 3/10/2016 001253 GORDON THOMAS HONEYWELL 37928 3/10/2016 000007 GRAINGER 37929 3/10/2016 003959 MAX J KUNEY CO 37930 3/10/2016 002203 NAPAAUTO PARTS 37931 3/10/2016 000662 NAT'L BARRICADE & SIGN CO 37932 3/10/2016 003090 NORTH 40 OUTFITTERS 37933 3/10/2016 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. (Continued) PC001331646:01 PC001332370:01 Feb 16 1042 9034117409 PAY APP 17 720104 720190 720240 950069 90396 067543/3 822243109001 822732808001 822733389001 825988073001 825988819001 826479773001 826635034001 826918355001 Fund/Dept 311.000.229.595 Description/Account Amount LEGAL PUBLICATION 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 001.011.000.511 101.042.000.542 303.303.155.595 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 001.032.000.543 001.032.000.543 001.032.000.543 001.032.000.543 001.032.000.543 001.032.000.543 001.076.304.575 001.076.000.576 GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS SUPPLIES: PW 0155 - SULLIVAN SUPPLIES FOR SUPPLIES FOR CM - SUPPLIES SUPPLIES FOR SUPPLIES: PW SUPPLIES: PW Total : 104.94 Total : 153.60 Total : 3,416.31 Total : 3,416.31 Total : 27.03 153.60 145.10 86.42 231.52 27.03 RD WEST BRIDGE Total : MAINTENANCE SH MAINTENANCE SH FOR MAINTENANC MAINTENANCE SH Total : OFFICE SUPPLIES: OFFICE SUPPLIES: OFFICE SUPPLIES: OFFICE SUPPLIES: OFFICE SUPPLIES: OFFICE SUPPLIES: OFFICE SUPPLIES: OFFICE SUPPLIES: Total : Total : PW PW PW PW PW PW SENIOR CENTE CENTERPLACE 573,828.35 573,828.35 21.07 54.13 -21.07 72.59 126.72 268.12 268.12 16.84 16.84 11.79 40.83 6.72 14.18 13.44 21.00 82.06 105.13 Page: vchlist 03/10/2016 1:16:24PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 37933 3/10/2016 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. (Continued) 826929551001 001.032.000.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW 81.51 826930044001 001.032.000.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW 81.51 Total : 458.17 37934 3/10/2016 004855 PAUL'S HOME REPAIR LLC 1608 001.090.000.518 TABLE TOP REPLACEMENT, DESK 1,082.65 Total : 1,082.65 37935 3/10/2016 002616 ROADWISE INC 56104 101.000.000.542 ICE MELT 5,787.96 Total : 5,787.96 37936 3/10/2016 002288 SARGENT ENGINEERS INC. 30305 101.043.236.542 CONTRACT 15-133 652.00 Total : 652.00 37937 3/10/2016 002835 SCS DELIVERY INC 8161 001.011.000.511 PACKAGE DELIVERY FOR COUNCI 100.00 Total : 100.00 37938 3/10/2016 000709 SENSKE LAWN & TREE CARE INC. 6997866 122.122.000.542 WINDSTORM 11-17-15 CLEANUP 11,022.18 Total : 11,022.18 37939 3/10/2016 002531 SIX ROBBLEES INC 58969 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 195.59 Total : 195.59 37940 3/10/2016 000779 SOUTHARD, BRAD FEBRUARY 2016 101.042.000.542 DEAD ANIMAL REMOVAL 1,460.00 Total : 1,460.00 37941 3/10/2016 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 934001678 001.016.099.594 Q4-15 CAD/RMS COST 84,232.38 Total : 84,232.38 37942 3/10/2016 000065 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 3294612049 001.013.000.513 OFFICE SUPPLIES: LEGISLATIVE 118.85 Total : 118.85 37943 3/10/2016 002597 TWISTED PAIR ENTERPRISES LLC 2232016 001.011.000.511 BROADCASTING COUNCIL MEETIN 1,468.00 Total : 1,468.00 37944 3/10/2016 000014 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC. 045-054066 001.090.000.518 LASERFICHE - EDEN CONNECTOF 225.00 Total : 225.00 Page: vchlist 03/10/2016 1:16:24PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 37945 3/10/2016 000087 VERIZON WIRELESS 37946 3/10/2016 002291 WACE 37947 3/10/2016 000347 WORLEY, STEVE 304160026 3/4/2016 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 36 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 36 Vouchers in this report I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date 9718570804 9760819901 Spring 2016 EXPENSE FEBRUARY 2016 Fund/Dept 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 001.058.056.524 001.032.000.543 001.016.000.512 Description/Account Amount FEB 2016 VERIZON CELL PHONES FEB 2016 WIRELESS DATA CARD: Total : WACE SPRING 2016 CONFERENCE Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : SPOKANE COUNTY SERVICES Total : 1,923.26 320.08 2,243.34 65.00 65.00 125.73 125.73 155,834.97 155,834.97 Bank total : 885,685.90 Total vouchers : 885,685.90 Page: vchlist 03/11/2016 1:26:07PM Voucher List Page: 1 Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 37948 3/11/2018 003316 INLAND NW BUSINESS, TRAVELASSOC 2016 37949 3/11/2018 002890 INPRO 37950 3/11/2010 000388 IRVIN WATER DIST#6 37951 3/11/2016 001944 LANCER LTD 37952 3/11/2016 000052 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 37953 3/11/2016 000748 ROTO -ROOTER 37954 3/11/2018 002092 THOMPSON, CHRIS 37955 3/11/2016 000167 VERA WATER &POWER 37956 3/11/2016 000088 WCP SOLUTIONS 37957 3/11/2018 001793 WWRC 10 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 10 Vouchers in this report 100 Feb 2016 0457993 1910452749 93707 Expenses March 2016 9460150 R'18 Fund/Dept 001.076.305.575 001]]76.305.575 001.076.300.578 001.078.305.575 001.013.000.513 001.076.305.575 001.018.013.513 101.042.000.542 001.016.000.521 001.070.000.576 Description/Account Amount EXHIBITOR REGISTRATION - TRAC Total : BRIDAL FAIR BOOTH AND ADVERT Total: UTILITIES: PARKS Total � Total : BUSINESS CARDS UTL[OES�FY\RKS OFFICE SUPPLIES: LEG/EXEC Total : LABOR/SERVICE AT CENTERPLAC Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : UTILITIES: MARCH 2016 SUPPLIES AT PRECINCT Total : Total: 2016 AGENCY MEMBERSHIP DUE Total : 325.00 325.00 730.00 730.00 166.00 166.00 77.72 77.72 20.57 20.57 532.63 532.63 12.90 12.90 3,311.80 3,311.80 566.33 566.33 750.00 750.00 Bank tota: 6,492.85 Total vouchars: 6,492.95 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 22, 2016 Department Director Approval : Item: Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ['new business ['public hearing ['information ❑admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Payroll for Pay Period Ending March 15, 2016 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN; BACKGROUND: Budget/Financial impacts: Employees Gross: $ 282,176.31 $ Benefits: $ 82,167.91 1 Total payroll $ 364,344.22 $ Council Total $ 282,176.31 $ 82,167.91 $ 364,344.22 RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to Approve above payroll. [Approved as part of the Consent Agenda, or may be removed and discussed separately.] STAFF CONTACT: Raba Nimri DRAFT MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meeting Formal Meeting Format Tuesday, February 23, 2016 Mayor Higgins called the meeting to order at approximately 6:50 p.m. (The preceding 5.00 p.m. special meeting ran long, hence the lateness of starting this 6:00 regular meeting.) Attendance: Rod Higgins, Mayor Arne Woodard, Deputy Mayor Dean Grafos, Councilmember Chuck Hafner, Councilmember Ed Pace, Councilmember Sam Wood, Councilmember Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Pro Tem Staff Mark Calhoun, Deputy City Manager Cary Driskell, City Attorney John Hohman, Comm & Eco. Develop Dir. Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Mike Stone, Parks & Recreation Director Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director Erik Guth, Public Works Director Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Morgan Koudelka, Sr Administrative Analyst Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk INVOCATION: In the absence of a pastor, a few moments of silence were observed. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council, staff and audience rose for the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the agenda. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS: Councilmember Wood: no report. Councilmember Hafner: no report. Councilmember Grafos: said he attended the Spokane Auto Show, the Employee Appreciation Event at Bumpers, and the Chamber meeting concerning the economic forecast. Councilmember Gothmann- said he met with members of the American Islamic Relations at a local mosque and spoke to many leaders who said they just want to meet and live peacefully without discrimination or bullying; also attended a Visit Spokane meeting with a presentation by the Arts Commission; and the Chamber meeting concerning the economic forecast. Councilmember Pace: said he attended the annual Boy Scouts breakfast, and the Chamber luncheon and meeting. Deputy Mayor Woodard: said the Boy Scout function raised over $220,000. MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Higgins reported that he also attended the Spokane Auto show; went to Mayor Condon's State of the City speech; attended and gave a talk at the Mica Peak High School, an early learning center dedication; went to the GSI Trade and Transportation Show; gave an address to some of the VFW past presidents; and went to the Chamber lunch. PROCLAMATION: (see below under public comments) PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Higgins invited public comments. Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 02-23-2016 Page 1 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT Barbara Lomax: Spokane Valley: she asked not to be on the three-minute timer so she could ask a question. She said she came into City Hall about 2 p.m. and asked about the meeting room and time of the meeting, and was given a copy of the agenda, and told the meeting was at 6:00 p.m.; and she asked why this meeting started over an hour early. Mayor Higgins explained that we had a special meeting and Ms. Lomax asked how that was publicized. At the behest of Mayor Higgins, City Clerk Bainbridge explained about the special 5:00 p.m. meeting, and the process of public notification for that meeting. Then speaking on the topic for which she originally came to the meeting, said she understands the City has a contract with the cable company; that she got a mailing about a month ago informing her that the CMT channel would be dropped; and over the following few months, was further notified of Comcast dropping two more channels, yet her bill was not reduced accordingly, and she suggested that perhaps the City Attorney could answer that question. City Attorney Driskell said that if she would leave her contact information, staff will look into the situation and get back to her. To go back a little Mayor Higgins mentioned the proclamation tonight acknowledging Developmental Disabilities Awareness Week. It was noted that unfortunately the person to receive the proclamation from the ARC had to leave the meeting earlier. Mayor Higgins read the proclamation declaring March as Developmental Disabilities Awareness Month. Mayor Higgins then invited further public comments. Krisinda Marshall, Spokane Valley: regarding sidewalks; said she was concerned by a nice letter she got on Saturday regarding the sidewalks; said back on January 20, some Councilmembers were present at the meeting for the sidewalks; it was very heated with the neighbors giving reasons why they were against the sidewalk; but the letter stated that "following the comments received at the public meeting held January 20th on the project, the City would like to gather input from property owners near the project site. Generally those properties from 8th Avenue to Appleway Trail along both sides of Blake." She said she thinks that is great, but then the next line goes on to read "on Saturday February 27th beginning at 9 a.m." — so on Saturday — "the City staff plans to mark the proposed sidewalk using marking paint, survey stakes and ribbon." She said this makes no sense, because on January 20th the comments were not positive; all the comments received were negative, and even though there were so many negative comments, we are going to come stake your properties anyway. She said that along with that, they got a map of individual properties; said she understands that the area is the right-of-way and not really their own property, but a lot of people will lose landscaping, curbing, driveways, and fencing. She said it is not the sidewalk she is concerned about, but is the safety of those walking up and down the street; there are car accidents, thefts, and other things that need to be addressed first; said they have been advised by one of the Councilmembers to call crime check and/or 9-1-1 to make sure incidents are reported; said she made several 9-1-1 calls in the last week regarding accidents, speeding, possible drugs houses that they have watched in their neighborhood; said that she thinks this needs to be reconsidered, and that she will be attending the next CDBG meeting. Elizabeth Sexton, Spokane Valley: she read a letter she said she wrote to Ray Wright, and that she would read the letter she delivered yesterday: "It seems like you are trying to do an end -run around the homeowners on Blake Road as well as some of the Councilmembers. I believe you have received our input on more than one occasion regarding the sidewalk that no one wants. That input was received on January 20th and was from the property owners." She said this letter states like they want to gather input form the property owners, well, she continued to read: "we already gave you our input, what more do you need. We will continue to oppose the sidewalk as a project that isn't needed. We have sidewalks on McDonald and Evergreen, as well as bike paths, and this is not wanted, and we will be at the Council meeting January 23rd, which is today, to also voice our objections." She said it's kind of funny because she was reading an article about unshoveled walks from a Spokane Valley Councilman; and said it is very true because Mr. Grafos brought this up about not having the sidewalks shoveled; said if in an older neighborhood, there are snowplows that pile the snow on the sidewalks but the residents are expected to keep those walks cleared and if we don't, we are subject to a fine. She said it says here, that we are classified as a low to moderate - income neighborhood; and those people who can't do their own because of their age, won't be able to afford to hire someone to do it either. She said we just don't need the sidewalk. Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 02-23-2016 Page 2 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT Nina Fluegal, Spokane Valley: said she agrees with the previous statements about not having a sidewalk that leads to an Appleway Trail that no one wants anyway; also mentioned there are a group of teenagers gathering before class in the small parking lot on the east side of Browns Park, where they smoke cigarettes and e -cigarettes and laugh at the security officer who can't do anything about it since the kids are not on school property, and she suggested that some police officers should disburse them; said the kids are near other people's properties, and they are under eighteen and not supposed to be smoking. Mike Davisson, Spokane Valley: said he attended the last several council meetings and sees a disturbing trend; that he sees motions being brought forth without any conversation and without any public input and then immediately being voted on with some of the Councilmembers stating that they hadn't even seen this before and had no idea about it prior to the meeting; said he doesn't know exactly how that can happen because we have an open meetings act in Washington, and that he guesses everyone is just on the same wavelength, and that they wouldn't be having meetings outside a public forum because that wouldn't be legal; said that we are watching this and is something that has to be addressed; and when Council brings in a motion, there should be public comment and should have ample materials for the other Councilmembers to read and you shouldn't be just voting it through. As an example, he said on Council's study session when they brought up a letter, said there was a phone call to Mr. Pace from Mike Padden to support a bill moving from committee to the assembly floor and Mr. Pace brought up no text of the bill and that he was told by several other Councilmembers that they hadn't read the bill, yet Mr. Pace was asking for support. He asked how could someone support it without ever reading it; said that makes no sense, and the fact that it is a complex water right issue even leads to more questions as to public input to understanding all aspects of the bill, and not just a last minute emergency, "oh we gotta send a letter to support this." He said that is not the type of government we need, it not the type of government we should have, and that he thinks state law says that it's not the type of government that the city should be running. Gabe Chambers, Spokane Valley: said he is not ok with the sidewalk; that he read a bunch of articles and it is just not safe; and clearly everybody is not ok with it. 1. CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. Proposed Motion: I move to approve the Consent Agenda. a. Approval of claim vouchers on Feb 23, 2016 Request for Council Action Form, Totaling: $2,663,113.24 b. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending February 15, 2016: $384,907.10 c. Approval of February 2, 2016 Council Meeting Minutes, Study Session d. Approval of February 9, 2016 Council Meeting Minutes, Formal Format e. Approval of February 16, 2016 Council Meeting Minutes, Study Session It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the Consent Agenda. NEW BUSINESS: 2. Motion Consideration: Comprehensive Plan Contract — John Hohman It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the Agreement for Professional Services with Van Ness Feldman for the update of the Comprehensive Plan, Phase Three. Director Hohman explained that this motion is in follow-up to last week's discussion concerning completion of the comprehensive plan process that began November 2014, which process needs to be completed by June 2017; said they have held several public meetings; four Planning Commission meetings and thirteen Council meetings to discuss this issue; that this Comp Plan Review will be completed in three phases, the third of which is addressed by this contract. Mr. Hohman gave a re -cap of the other phases; said the entire document will be economic development focused with unique items for each goal and policy, and the contractors will make sure everything is legal and defensible. Mayor Higgins invited public comment. Mr. Lynn Plaggemeier said he hopes there will be another citizens Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 02-23-2016 Page 3 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT preservation group for the comp plan and rather than have roundtables and notes which works well for administration, to get input from the people; said there needs to be a time when this is open to the public for comments, and that he hopes such interaction will be started; said he wanted an opinion from the contractor and asked if the location of the city hall had any effect on any portion of the comp plan, and if so was it the driving factor, a small factor, or no factor at all. There were no further public comments. In response to a question from Councilmember Pace about the term of the contract and any extensions, Mr. Driskell explained that any change must be agreed to by both parties. Councilmember Pace said he hopes that this turns into a hard deadline; that he wanted it done a year earlier and was told the only way was to spend about $400,000 for a consultant, but by the time it is all over, we would have spent $571,000, and said it would be a shame if the deadline slipped any further. Councilmember Grafos said he feels as if we are between a rock and a hard spot with the population allocation from Spokane County, as that issue was what pushed this back; said this is a very complicated document, and not unlike the Shoreline Master Plan, we can't just jump in; it must be done right and this consultant will do all they can to get this done and done correctly; since this will be the future of our City for the next ten to fifteen years, we must take the time and do it right. Councilmember Gothmann said he is no fan of the Growth Management Act, but spending that much on this plan is a shame; while Councilmember Hafner said he feels the additional expenses are worthwhile so as to avoid the lawsuits the County had, and said he knows staff is working to get is done as soon as possible. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 3. Motion Consideration: Mayoral Appointments, Lodging Tax Advisory Committee — Mayor Higgins After Mayor Higgins announced his appointments for this committee, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to confirm the Mayoral appointments to the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee as follows: Representing an entity which collects the tax: Colleen Heinselman, for a term beginning immediately upon appointment and expiring December 31, 2017; and Representing an individual involved in activities funded by the tax: Chuck Stocker, for a term beginning immediately upon appointment and expiring December 31, 2017. Mayor Higgins invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 4. Motion Consideration: Approval of City Hall Plan — John Hohman It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve the final City Hall plans as presented and authorize the City Manager to proceed with the bid process. Director Hohman gave a brief history of the project, which he explained has been discussed since the City's incorporation; said the first programming document was drafted in 2008, revised in 2013, and again in 2015; that this has been a Council goal for every year since 2009 with the current process to select a site beginning in 2012; at Council's request, staff analyzed buildings for sale and one could not be found that met the City's needs, so available properties were researched and Council selected the U -Cities property, with a formal purchase of the 3.4 acres at the corner of Sprague and Dartmouth in December 2014, for a price of $1.157 million, and that the contract for the design and construction services is just under $1 million After Mr. Hohman's explanation of the history of this project, Councilmember Gothmann asked if there is a requirement to have art, and Mr. Hohman replied there is not; however, the idea of having art in the building has been element of the project for some time. At the request of Deputy Mayor Woodard, Mr. Hohman also explained the list of alternates. Mayor Higgins invited public comment. Mr. Lynn Plaggemeier said he wants justification for the city hall along with the economic justification for the new city hall; said he put in a formal request for the justification and that a clerk or anybody could have pulled it and given it to him; said he has not received anything which led him to believe that after a week, maybe there never was a justification put down on paper that the council could give; said he really questioned if anybody provided Council with something to make a decision about the city hall; said it is very bothersome. Concerning Mr. Hohman's presentation of a contract for $225,000, that he doesn't know if Council knows what kind of inspection that buys and he asked if the City will get stuck for all the testing; regarding the alternate basement, he asked if the elevator would go all the way to the basement as if not, it Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 02-23-2016 Page 4 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT won't comply with the handicap design; said the plan needs another look and Council better start looking a little more critical as far as the cost as no one has been really out front on telling what it will cost. Ms. Peggy Doering: said in reference to Mr. Gothmann's questions about public art said she applied for both economic development and tourism funding; said she believes the Spokane Valley Arts Council was given a grant to help build shelves someplace; and said if you go back you can see there was some actual discussion and an award was made to help with that; said she applauds the design process and thoughtful comments and is glad it is coming together. Mr. John Harding, Spokane Valley said he is coming to the discussion late; that he addressed this a couple of weeks ago; said this process started in 2008 but a lot has happened since then, and members of the Council have changed; said this economy and the national economy is very fragile and it will have an impact on us at some point; said during last year we went from a full time to a part-time nation; that the mean income dropped $4,000; said he is concerned whether this is the proper time to do this and maybe a pause is warranted; said we are at war and the enemy is on our soil. Ms. Jennie Willardson: said the plans for the new city hall look beautiful and it will be such a nice addition for our city to have something the city owns; that it will help with economic development stating we are a city, and mentioned the jobs it will provide in building it; said she hopes we will work with the Spokane Valley Arts Council in getting some wonderful art work for the building. Ms. Barbara Lomax: said there could be some things to decorate the new city hall available locally from the Heritage Museum as they have collected a lot of material over the years, and said it would be entertaining and inexpensive in the decorating and in educating people who come to city hall. Mr. Lynn Plaggemeier: asked where does the five year plan for maintenance repair and capital improvement fit in the in the category of projects that need to be done; and it seems city hall is way down on the list. There were no further public comments. Council discussion included comment from Councilmember Gothmann that land is a good investment and we would purchase a building for the same reasons people buy a house, so we don't have to pay rent, and said we pay about $400,000 to $500,000 a month for this building; and said the new city hall will be a good addition to our City. Councilmember Grafos added that infrastructure projects will help our city and help revitalize that area; said the interest rates are low and the bond rates are great, and we would be trading rent for purchase. Mr. Calhoun noted that economic justification was given at the July 2012 council meeting where the escalating cost of staying in this building for thirty years was compared with owning our own building; and agreed that this decision is much like the decision many make to own a home versus renting; said we will have a building designated specifically for city operations and we look forward to revitalizing the area as this would very much be an economic development project. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 5. Motion Consideration: Historic Preservation — Deputy Mayor Woodard It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded that the motion carried at the December 29, 2015 Council meeting to forward the Historic Preservation Program item to the Planning Commission for further consideration, be rescinded. Deputy Mayor Woodard said he makes this motion not because he doesn't like historic preservation, but he feels there was some hurry bringing back only the one option for a state type of historic preservation; with the information about the number of properties, he estimated one hundred or so wouldn't even qualify; thinks there are other options and instead of going with the one, suggests staff concentrate on the comp plan, and re -address the issue with more information, perhaps about Spokane County's plan and work under that plan; or maybe simply a city -sponsored type of plan; said Council needs to talk about that; and that he prefers to keep the Planning Commission available to take care of the comp plan, and come back later with this. Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 02-23-2016 Page 5 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT Councilmember Grafos asked why we would deny our property owners and citizens who have invested in our city, the same economic benefit Spokane County has; said we can't provide those tax incentives on those buildings without being a Certified Local Government; that he feels it is worth the estimated cost of $15,000 a year to preserve our history and heritage; and if we don't try to help we will see a lot more parking lots and things going in the wrong direction; said we are trying to get major companies to our area and they look at some of those amenities for their employees; that it would be an all -voluntary program, and he feels this motion would be a short-sighted decision. Councilmember Hafner said Council spent a lot of time on this issue and the previous council voted four to three to move forward; said he feels that December decision is still valid; that the Planning Commission has plenty of time and once the Commission gives Council their recommendations, Council would have a better idea of what to do; said he wants to continue. Councilmember Pace said he thinks it's great for buildings to be preserved, but it should be about the land owner and not the government; he questioned if there is a true benefit to the property owner; mentioned a previous case involved a citizen wanting to move his one -hundred year old home and the problems associated with that move; said due to building code issues, the house isn't even legal; said he thought we could roll back the building code and make it easier for building owners but that is not the case; said he won't vote for it unless there is a benefit for property owners; and he resents the idea that the National Park Service has to approve our city historical preservation program; said that is most ridiculous. Councilmember Wood said as a former member of the Planning Commission, being on that Commission takes a lot of work and a lot of time reading and with the comp plan coming up, this would be an extra burden on the Planning Commission and he prefers revising this issue after the completion of the comp plan. Councilmember Gothmann said he too is a former member of the Planning Commission and when he was on the Commission, they did the first com plan; said he thinks one can still eat and chew gum at the same time; said he is not afraid of state and federal codes, and that is one of the reasons to send this to the Planning Commission so they can address that. Mayor Higgins invited public comment. Jennie Willardson: said she does not want to see this rescinded and is very much in favor of historic preservation; that she is a historic preservation activist and that it is great for economic development and she mentioned the City of Spokane's historic preservation is going well; said they have historic home concerts and other functions to acknowledge the historic buildings, and there is a national conference for historic preservation; said it also increases property values. There were no further public comments. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Higgins, Deputy Mayor Woodard, and Councilmembers Pace and Wood. Opposed: Councilmembers Grafos, Hafner and Gothmann. Motion carried. At the request of the Mayor, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to defer the administrative reports except the advance agenda, to the next meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Public Comments were not solicited. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 6. Comprehensive Plan Existing Conditions Report — Lori Barlow. Deferred to a future meeting. 7. SCRAPS Update — Mark Calhoun, Morgan Koudelka. Deferred to a future meeting. 8. Sidewalk/Snow Removal — Cary Driskell. Deferred to a future meeting. 9. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins Concerning the Blake Sidewalk project, Councilmember Pace said he was disappointed there was marking done at the site as if the project were moving forward, and said he thought there was previous discussion about this being re -visited. Deputy Mayor Woodard stated that it is on the March 1 agenda, and he will be making a presentation on what happened at the CDBG meeting and where it stands there, prior to the March 3 public hearing at the Public Health Building, on all those allotments that were made at the CDBG Board meeting. Councilmember Pace asked if Council is going to get to vote on this; Deputy Mayor Woodard Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 02-23-2016 Page 6 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT suggested it might be made into a motion, and Councilmember Pace also asked that a vote be taken on the issue. Councilmember Gothmann agreed with the idea of having a vote. Deputy City Manager Calhoun said that following the January 20 meeting, City Manager Jackson committed to having our Public Works and Community Development Departments meet with the neighbors, and the conclusion was rather than meet in a room, to instead meet with the neighbors in the neighborhood to give them a sense of what the sidewalk would look like; and how it would run through the neighborhood; and that meeting is set up for this Saturday February 27 beginning at 9 a.m. until about 11 a.m.; he said we heard that all of the comments taken January 20 were against the project, but that wasn't the entire neighborhood so the idea was to get out and do that. Deputy Mayor Woodard said that would probably be appropriate information in addition to what he will have for the meeting next week as to what happened at the CDBG meeting. Mr. Calhoun said this isn't staff pushing, but rather staff making an attempt to educate the entire neighborhood; he said the previously mentioned letter went out to all of the residents on Blake Road between the Appleway Trail and 8th and some of the surrounding areas, and also the letter briefly explained the project and indicated staff was going to put in paint marks, etc., to give a sense of where this sidewalk would run along the right-of-way, and included in the letter was a drawing that provided an overall concept of what it would look like, and for the individual property owners on the east side of the street where the sidewalk would go, a second drawing was included customized to that area. Deputy Mayor Woodard asked if it would be appropriate to have an action item placed on the next agenda as the way it stands now, there is no funding for it; and said he can't go to that public hearing meeting on the 3rd and say that we accept that; said in speaking right up front, he advocated against the project because of what was going on with the neighborhood and other projects that we had to look at to try to figure out what we were going to do with them and follow the County's instructions, and said that he wants to go into that next week; he said he thinks he needs a vote from the council to go get our money or whatever it is they decide. Councilmember Hafner said he would also like to see the results of the Saturday discussions with the neighborhood prior to making a decision. Mr. Calhoun said staff will put together information concerning that meeting, to be distributed to Council. Councilmember Grafos said he feels it is a great idea for staff to go out there and mark the sidewalk, but as a caution, we had this grant pending, which means that is money our citizens would not have to spend for this sidewalk; we have to be careful and make the right decision for all our citizens; and the issue is, is the sidewalk project good for the city overall. Mr. Calhoun said the results meeting with the public at the site this Saturday will be part of the packet for next Tuesday evening. The (10) Department Monthly Reports; and (11) Third Avenue Preservation Project were for information only and were not reported or discussed. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: There were no comments. It was moved by Deputy Mayor, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:26 p.m. ATTEST: L.R. Higgins, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 02-23-2016 Page 7 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT Attendance: Councilmembers MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY COUNCIL MEETING STUDY SESSION Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley, Washington March 1, 2016 Staff Rod Higgins, Mayor Arne Woodard, Deputy Mayor Dean Grafos, Councilmember Chuck Hafner, Councilmember Ed Pace, Councilmember Sam Wood, Councilmember Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Pro Tem Mark Calhoun, Deputy City Manager Cary Driskell, City Attorney Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney John Hohman, Comm. & Economic Dev. Dir. Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director Mike Stone, Parks & Rec Director Eric Guth, Public Works Director Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Higgins called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. Mayor Higgins announced that there will be an executive session at the end of tonight's meeting. ACTION ITEMS: 1. Motion Consideration: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) 2016 Funding, Blake Sidewalk — Deputy Mayor Woodard Calling a point of order, Councilmember Hafner said he read the minutes of the CDBG Advisory Committee concerning about funding discussions including discussions from Councilmember Wood and the water district which Councilmember Wood chairs, and he asked if Councilmember Wood would recuse himself on this issue due to a conflict of interest. Councilmember Wood said he previously spoke with the Mayor and Council concerning this and his intent tonight was to recuse himself, and he asked to be excused. Mayor Higgins excused Councilmember Wood and he left the room at 6:03 p.m. It was moved by Councilmember Pace and seconded by Deputy Mayor Woodard to authorize the Acting City Manager to finalize and execute a letter to the Spokane County Board of Commissioners stating that the City relinquishes its right, for 2016 only, to receive 20% of the Community Development Block Grant funds allocable for 2016. Deputy Mayor Woodard explained that he sits on that Board, and prior to an explanation of the process of applying for funds and the decisions of that Board, asked Public Works Director Guth to explain the basics of the project and what they did on the weekend. Mr. Guth explained that a meeting was held here on the evening of January 20 to discuss the project with the neighborhood; that the project proposed is to add a sidewalk on Blake Road from Appleway Trail up to 8th along the east side of Blake Road; at that meeting there was opposition from the residents to the sidewalk; there were questions and discussion regarding the sidewalk and its placement relative to driveways, mailboxes, front yards, trees, landscaping, etc.; after that meeting staff discussed about having a site visit to try to layout in appropriate spatial terms in the field where this might fall relative to those things; he said that last Saturday the 27th staff went out at 9 a.m. and marked generally speaking where the right-of-way was and where the sidewalk would fall within that right-of-way in order to give the residents an idea of where, if it were to go forward, how it would fit in the neighborhood and location, how it would fit along the street, and how to accommodate things such as trees. Mr. Guth said there were about ten to fifteen residents who came out and spoke with us; said the majority of those residents not in favor of the Council Study Session: 03-01-2016 Page 1 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT sidewalk; everyone on the east side were not in favor and there were one or two on the west side who were not necessarily opposed to it. Mr. Guth brought Council's attention to the materials on the dais, of a recap summary and some photos. Deputy Mayor Woodard said the CDBG Board convened at 4:00 p.m. January 14 to look at the grant applications; said there were fourteen applications this time compared with thirty-nine the first year; said funding is always a problem, with $2.6 million being applied for yet only having about $981,000 in available funds, of which 20% does come off for Spokane Valley's project if one is submitted. Deputy Mayor Woodard said that most of these projects are submitted from such towns as Latah, Millwood, Cheney, Rockford and other small cities in the County and they apply for their water districts or sewer systems; said once in a while a sidewalk project might be included, but not really because it is not considered an essential need particularly in the small towns. He said that two years ago, Spokane Valley challenged that or went to the County Commissioners and they forwarded it on to HUD, the entity which funds the grants, and plead our case of sidewalks with 93,000 people, is indeed an essential need, especially where they are close to the schools, like safe routes to schools, because we really don't have them, so people were walking in the streets and in the mud; so we succeeded in getting sidewalks for Spokane Valley in the low to moderate -income areas accepted by HUB to qualify. He said that in the past, sidewalk projects that had been done in the valley were ADA -ramp projects to make sure that our handicapped, wheelchairs, walkers, senior and others, could get around in our city; and said that those had always qualified under CDBG. He further explained that now we have $981,000; take $271,000 or our 20% away from that leaving about $600,000 to spread over $2.8 million minus our $337,000 project; said it is quite a challenge; said there are two directives from the Board of County Commissioners: (1) fully fund the project or not at all, and (2) they will usually have a priority they'd like to see move forward; this year that priority was sewer hookups in the valley; said there are still about 700-800 left to hook up; they requested for $220,000 of the CAPA program that does that. He said that is the County's first priority, and they could make the Board go back again and again until the Board comes up with something that makes sense to the County Commissioners, if the Board doesn't at least give it some consideration and a vote; and sometimes several votes. Deputy Mayor Woodard explained that sewer system hookups are not limited to low to medium -moderate neighborhoods, but who those who usually haven't hooked up yet are those poorer and older neighborhoods; and he said this would have funded about forty or forty-two hookups at approximately $5,000 each. He said the CAPA program is not a grant to the homeowner but is a no to low-interest loan, which is recovered when the people sell their home. So the County gets that money back, and 75% of it will come back to the CDBG program to be re -allocated in the future. He said that is why it was a high- priority project, it's because some of those funds will come back when people start selling their homes and need the sewers hooked up. He said there are about twenty members on the Board, three from the Valley, and he represents the Council. Deputy Mayor Woodard said the Board went through the whole thing probably about three times before getting hung up on how to provide the money in full for some projects that was felt by the committee, and he said he would agree with them, that were more important than a Spokane Valley sidewalk. He said this happened early January; he had a December meeting where the neighbors came out in force and did not want the sidewalk project; he said that opinion stunned everyone as Council has never had anyone object to a sidewalk. In that light, he said, when it was motioned originally from one of the Valley representatives to go to $270,000 from the $330,000 he seconded the motion. He said there was some discussion and the Board went on through some more, and the Board discovered they were still $1 million shy of getting where they needed to go on the approximate $981,000 worth of projects that would get funded at some point. He said when you have cities like Rockford, Latah, Cheney, our own Carnhope Water District, east Spokane over by Millwood and others that apply, and they don't have a tax base to find money anywhere; 400 residents in Rockford and they have one well, which is 40-50 years old and they are starting to see some problems; so $330,000 seemed to him to be a more important project than the sidewalks; so when it came back to Spokane Valley again of what is wanted, he suggested someone make a motion as all he could do is, he can't give our money away, but might agree with the Board that it Council Study Session: 03-01-2016 Page 2 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT should probably be eliminated, but he said he can't, doesn't have the authority to give Spokane Valley' s money away. Deputy Mayor Woodard said it was voted on, and he objected, he voted against it when it came to $200,000 and then when it went to zero; he said he voted against both times; said he may agree but he still voted against it. He said what happened is the CAPA project that benefits only people in the corporate boundaries of Spokane Valley and Carnhope, both got full funding for their projects, which is why Councilmember Wood recused himself. Deputy Mayor Woodard said that Carnhope is the poorest area in Spokane Valley, and they need water lines for fire protection and maybe some re -development; said he felt that in the fact that we still got about $290,000 for Spokane projects, it was a good trade-off this year if we were going to have to make a trade-off at all. He said as a Council, Council can demand that $271,000, and that is what tonight's decision is about. He said there are two things that are starting to be talked about: (1) CAPA will be eliminated and so will Carnhope; and (2) the other thing that became a real discussion among the Board was that all Spokane Valley projects, whether submitted by Spokane Valley or not, should be counted in Spokane Valley's allocation. He said he has been pretty successful for our Valley projects over the five years; real successful; and he's been real successful in helping argue for those other water districts and/or sewer projects, CAPA projects, other things that benefitted our citizens over the years to the point that we've gotten way beyond our allocation; and said he thinks it will become a discussion in the future that all valley projects will be counted as valley, as opposed to "Spokane Valley" gets their percentage, and everyone else vies for it; he said he will be attending the Thursday, 6 p.m. hearing at the Health Building, then they meet on the 10th for final recommendations to the County; and it will depend on Council as to what will be happening on Thursday night; and said he will argue for and "go for the gusto" on whatever the decision is; and said he could not do other than what he did when people need water and sewer as opposed to a place to walk; said he likes sidewalks and has never voted against one. Councilmember Grafos asked Mr. Guth if this sidewalk project would benefit about 1400 citizens and that there were about fifteen or sixteen people at the meeting, and Mr. Guth replied there were about ten to fifteen people at the Saturday meeting; and the meeting held previously here at City Hall had about twenty people attend. In response to Councilmember Gothmann's question, if the citizens were aware staff was coming out Saturday. Mr. Guth said a letter went out to property owners of all of the properties lining both sides of Blake from Appleway Trail to 8th Avenue; said the letter described what staff was planning to do Saturday, and included a map conceptually showing the improvements on the east side and how it would all fit, an aerial map, and for the properties on the east side, an enlargement of each property was included and how it would relate to the west side of their property with this improvement; and the property owners on the west side of the street got the overall map and the letter; he said if there were renters, the property owner would have received the notice; but added that he spoke to a couple who were renters and they met at the property. Mayor Higgins asked Mr. Woodard to confirm that if the City takes the money, it can only be spent on the sidewalk. Deputy Mayor Woodard replied yes as that is the only project our city submitted. Mayor Higgins asked then, if the citizens don't want the sidewalk, and we have $271,000, what happens to the funds? Deputy Mayor Woodard replied that the CDBG is a timely grant and must be used in a specific time in order to be granted the money; the fact that we have already missed the project submission time, that money would automatically go back into the fund and the committee would reconvene to decide what to do with those funds. In returning to the amount of $270,000, Councilmember Grafos said that the actual allocation or set-aside amount as per the interlocal agreement with Spokane County, was $358,000. Deputy Mayor Woodard disagreed and said that was not what was presented to them and in documentation; said at the beginning of the meeting they started with $1.3 million, there were some ad -ons, minus the 20% the County takes for managing the project, then our City's allocation amount as being what it is, but that has never been taken off prior to allocating funds; and reiterated that amount of $271,000. Councilmember Grafos referred to a list showing the HUB allocations, with $1,342,593 allocated to the County, and a percentage of funds to go to the City of Spokane Valley on our population, of $358,790, and the project type is sidewalk and not water districts. Deputy Mayor Woodard surmised about the document; and said if you go there, Council Study Session: 03-01-2016 Page 3 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT before it's managed, that could be the number, but that he has never seen that number and it wasn't a number given to them; but even it if was, 20% would be taken from that prior to the money that can actually be allocated because of Spokane County's management fees. Councilmember Grafos said he wanted to put it on the record. Councilmember Grafos mentioned that the 20% in management fees in round numbers on $300,000, that's why the part that was approved, the amount available for the sidewalk, was about $338,000, which was the cost of that sidewalk to the taxpayers of this city. Mayor Higgins invited public comment. David Starr, Spokane Valley: said he doesn't live on that block but he has plenty of Facebook comments from people who do live on that block, who are against it; said this is the first place where citizens can address their government; and if you fail to take them into account in making these decisions more than you take into account the federal money that is coming here, you disenfranchise them, and him and all the citizens; spending the money because the government has it to give to us is not an excuse to spend it; if we need it, then sure; but arguing about the amounts doesn't bode well for the public perception of Council, and said he finds it disappointing; and feels most important, is that Council needs to take the citizens' opinion into Council's deliberations on this. Crisinda Marshall, Spokane Valley: said she was there on Saturday to greet the public employees, and said that it didn't start off very well; said she spoke with Ray Wright who was very nice, but he came in there and said that we're only here because City Council wants to proceed with this project; she said that instantly made her wonder because she was here last Tuesday and spoke with Mark Calhoun who said they were there to answer questions, not because City Council said this is want we're doing; said right after that she called Councilmembers Ed Pace, Sam Wood, Deputy Mayor Woodard and Mayor Higgins, and said she is confused and asked if someone could let her know what the meeting is about because she felt betrayed, as if someone on the outside if saying we're going to put these sidewalks through, but we're going to tell you we're just going to ask questions. She said they have all repeatedly stated their case and she feels Council is here to listen to the public; when a Councilmember said this would benefit about 1300 citizens, where are those citizens' comments; and that the only comments Council has heard have been negative; she said she loves her neighborhood, but there are several changes that need to be made before this sidewalk comes in; she said just because someone gives you free money, and said it is not free money as she has paid her taxes; she said this grant money comes from someplace, it's not free, she's already paid for it; she said it's not that we are saying no to it right now, we just need other issues fixed in our neighborhood. She said she also spoke with Eric Guth who as he mentioned, received a lot of negative feedback; there were a couple of people who were ok with the project. She said they had somebody else, Steve Worley, who came in there and said leave our public employees alone, let us be, and let them do their job. She said they were letting them do their job; we followed them; they were marking our sidewalks and our streets, and they were taking public comment. There were no issues whatsoever. Tony Lazanis, Spokane Valley: said there are outside sources or the County trying to tell you what to do; I think you are doing a good job, you should do a better job and do whatever you can to help the people in the Valley; you have a good tax base and you should do the right things; that he appreciates what Council does and encouraged them to do better. Randy Kimm, Spokane Valley: said he has lived in this neighborhood for about 48 years; said he lives five houses off of Blake on 7th; said he knows what it is like to ride bikes and walk his grandkids in the neighborhood; said what he sees going up and down Blake and down 7th, 6th and 5th, are three very unmarked intersections where more people don't treat it as such; and if the sidewalk proceeds, it will make this neighborhood less conducive to safety in that respect; cars are going fast enough and people aren't looking and we have already had some serious accidents at these intersections, and as a more thoroughfare is being promoted, we'll see even more accidents; said when he drives up and down 8th Avenue, where sidewalks are really needed because there is one lane of pavement and there are dirt shoulders and said he is constantly driving around people who are trying to stay off the dirt; said he does not know where the figure of 1300 Council Study Session: 03-01-2016 Page 4 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT to 1400 people would benefit from this sidewalk; more sidewalks will make the area less quiet and more dangerous because of the increased traffic flow; and said he hasn't talked to anyone in favor of the sidewalk; and he urged Council to listen to their constituents, and work on areas that truly need the protection. Nina Fluegal, Spokane Valley: said she lives two houses away from the Blake and 4th intersection; of all the sidewalks to have, that she has one that doesn't make any sense at all as it stops right at her property from the new development that was built right next to her; said the intersection on 4th and Blake is extremely dangerous; there are no sidewalks or curbing on the west side of 4th leading to McDonald; the curbing is on the east side of 4th on the other side of Blake; concerning the four-way intersection, said they have been trying to get a four-way stop for a long time because the traffic has become immense; so even if a sidewalk were put in, how would anyone cross safely if that is a complete through street, and said that 4th has been a racetrack since the last few years; and it directly intersects with Blake, and leading to the sidewalk and to the Appleway trial is just terrible; no one wants it as it will increase more traffic; and said the sidewalk on Blake is a fruitless endeavor and makes no sense at all. Gabe Chambers, Spokane Valley: said we should not be spending that money on things that people don't want; it is ridiculous; as mentioned in the handout, most people are not ok with it; he suggested Council spend the money on other things; said the Appleway Trail is just terrible; no one wants it; no one says they want the sidewalk. There were no further public comments. Councilmember Gothmann stated that he previously served on the same committee as Deputy Mayor Woodard, and did so for six years so is aware of how the committee works, and said that Deputy Mayor Woodard described it perfectly; said he also rides his bike daily and one of his favorite places to ride his bike is the trial; and said in the process, he is constantly going up and down 4th and has found 4th an outstanding place to ride; said there's not much traffic and the cars are very cooperative; and on a ride a few days ago he rode up and down Blake; and he understands that there are neighborhoods that don't have sidewalks and the reasons they don't; said Carnhope was mentioned; that it is a very small water district, and one of the things that has happened to that water district, is it is along the freeway and there were many houses removed along there so Carnhope has been hit hard by the North/South freeway; the grants are offered for specific reasons, and if we don't take the money, it will not be available for some other project; he said he supports the motion made, that we have given adequate opportunity for the neighborhood to comment and if they don't want it, they should not have to have it; said he is looking forward to the completion of the Appleway Trail as he rides it daily, and it is very heavily used by walkers, bike riders, parents and kids and is a great trial and a great addition to our city. Councilmember Grafos said the people on the CDBG committee are tasked to work in the best interest and represent the interest of the City of Spokane Valley, and based on what he has just learned, he is calling for an investigation by the Washington State Attorney General's Office to look into possible political favoritism and corruption by Deputy Mayor Arne Woodard, and that this is in regard to his role as the City of Spokane Valley's representative on the Community Development Block Grant Committee. Mayor Higgins interrupted and suggested that this is neither the time nor the place. Mr. Grafos said he has before him the minutes of the January 14, 2016 meeting and he'd like to place it in the record for the public to review. Councilmember Hafner suggested that Council should be allowed freedom of speech, while Mayor Higgins replied that he does not feel this is the time or the place to be making charges against Councilmembers; said he feels there is a time and a place but this isn't it. Councilmember Grafos said he wants to talk about this report that is going into the record; he said that the money that was allocated to the City of Spokane Valley and our citizens and taxpayers was $338,000; the project cost for Spokane Valley sidewalks was $337,000; now entering into the mix is the Carnhope Irrigation District application; the motion stated, seconded by Arne Woodard, and then approved; that award totals $73,440, which then was subtracted from the remaining funds leaving the $270,000 for the sidewalk project; then there was a discussion that followed on sidewalk funding on the remaining $270,000. Mr. Grafos quoted from the Council Study Session: 03-01-2016 Page 5 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT materials, a statement from Deputy Mayor Woodard: "I will say that this has the capability of cutting a block or two off if we need to as a city;" the next discussion, sidewalk funding remaining was $200,000; at that point the discussion talks down the sidewalk project. Mr. Grafos continuing reading the quote by Mr. Woodard: "The criticalness of these projects to these small towns and whatnot far exceed into our smaller water districts," which Mr. Grafos said is a private company and not a city project — "our smaller water districts even in the Spokane Valley far exceed the need of the valley for a sidewalk." Quoting again from the meeting minutes: "I tend to look at the cumulative benefit of the valley as opposed to, we have a project. Carnhope has a project. They are all separate but they are all valley; they may not be my project but they benefit the valley." In summary, said Councilmember Grafos, with Arne's coaching, the city projects receives no funding; and Councilmember Sam Wood, chairman of the Board of Carnhope Water District, walks away with his water district enriched with $72,000 of the taxpayer's money, a private company; Rockford walks away with $224,000 from the 2015 allocation; and added to the $212,000 diverted 2012 funds, city funds, courtesy of Arne Woodard, he said Mr. Woodard took 11% of that allocation in 2012, and he said this has resulted in a loss of several hundred thousand dollars of funding for Spokane Valley. Mr. Grafos said he thought Mr. Woodard represented the city of Spokane Valley, not all those others. Councilmember Pace said that he understands that if Council passes on this, Council won't accept the federal money this year, and it would be used for some other project in the greater Spokane area that will do the public some good somewhere; he agreed that water districts are private but said they are still public utilities; he said he doesn't care where it goes as it will benefit some area in Spokane County; said it is clear that the citizens that live along Blake or in the neighborhoods around Blake, don't want this; so he suggested Council not do it. Councilmember Hafner said he looked into the minutes from the CDBG because he heard we went from the original amount of $337,000 down to $279,000, down to $200,000, down to zero, and said he wondered what happened to our funding; said we had an interlocal agreement with the County that stated we would receive 20% of funding, which amounted to approximately that $278,000, or originally the $337,000; they call that a set-aside amount of money, which is for our city officials to use in whichever way they feel is best for the city exclusive of all the others; he said others had an opportunity to apply for grant money too; said this dedication was done in 2004 and was done for a reason, because we were the highest populated city around and it was felt that there should be a set amount of monies that we could use as a city. Councilmember Hafner said he has tried not to get emotional, and just wants to look at the facts and have his decision based on those facts. Councilmember Hafner read from the minutes of that CDBG meeting, a staff report from Pat Stretch, CSHCD Staff: "This is a sidewalk improvement and ADA compliance curb cuts on Blake Road. Proposed to serve approximately 1,130 individuals, 47% low -moderate housing. For those of you who know the Valley it's located on Blake Rd from 8"'-Appleway trail. Asking $337,075. This application does address a high priority need for sidewalk improvements in the City of Spokane Valley and does meet infrastructure goals and objectives. It addresses a high priority need also of removal of architectural barriers making sidewalks ADA accessible with curb cuts. Meets National Objective of benefitting low -moderate income persons based on area -wide benefit. Service area is census tract 12701 block group 1, which is low -moderate at least 50% of housing; and that neighborhood is primarily residential. We recommend full funding in the amount of $337,075 since it is eligible and all costs requested are appropriate for CDBG funding." Councilmember Hafner said he looks at that information for what it does for a particular area of our city, and that his responsibility is doing, approving what is best for this city and not necessarily all the time what you may think is best for a particular segment; he said he goes by what it is trying to do; not necessarily for right now but maybe a few years from now; said he asked himself why we went from $337,000 to none, so he went through the minutes to find out why that happened. To give an indication that this committee is made up of numerous small cities, which all have their needs and wants and that there is never enough money to go around; but he said this amount of money is dedicated for the City of Spokane Valley; but there have been times when they have gone below that; and there's a quote in here where one of the committee members asked Deputy Mayor Woodard why the City didn't yell and scream a few years prior Council Study Session: 03-01-2016 Page 6 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT when the City didn't get the amount of money allocated; adding that it is Deputy Mayor Woodard who is on the committee as our city's representative; and said that Mr. Woodard's reply was not to worry about it, as usually he doesn't have to go to the Council for approval, but if you want me to go down to zero he could have a problem, and that he would talk to the Mayor but the Mayor's not the problem — the City Manager is the problem. Councilmember Hafner said as everyone now knows, it is no longer a problem with the City Manager; and that Deputy Mayor Woodard was going to go ahead, and no matter what he had determined that it is the small critical areas that were going to get the funding; and Councilmember Hafner asked why should they have the opportunity to take away money that is justifiably ours. Councilmember Hafner said if people would like, they can get a copy of those meeting minutes, as the minutes tell the story of what went on in this committee and why we came down to a zero amount of money; and he asked why are we giving up $279,000 when it's not necessary. Councilmember Hafner said sidewalks are for the citizens' benefit, as eventually, there will need to be ADA curbs for the best of our community, which this application addresses. In paraphrasing from those minutes, Councilmember Hafner said a question was asked, what would happen if the citizens didn't want this project and were able to convince the council not to move ahead with it; and could another application be substituted or whatever? The answer was it would have to go through another competitive process. The Town of Latah said, so if the Valley has this set-aside funds but there is no approved application, then it can't be spent, is that right? Councilmember Hafner said the application was approved by the people who approve all those projects for these people. Continuing with the minutes, Councilmember Hafner said then there was a motion to go down from the $270 to $200,000 because the $270 was not approved; and that was when there was discussion about the small critical projects needed like for the water district; but that Mr. Woodard (in the minutes) said that maybe we could go down from $200,000 to 2nd or 5th and do the balance on another project. Again in referring to the minutes, Councilmember Hafner said the $270,000 that was recommended and reduced to zero; said the $200,000 supposedly went for two projects: $200,000 for sewers and $70,000 for the Carnhope Water District; said that was exactly the amount of money that we were going to receive. Councilmember Hafner said the chair of that committee, who was from the City of Spokane Valley, said "I am responsible in saying that the City of Spokane Valley has 20% set aside of $271,000; what are they going to do if they vote no and we lose $271,000;" and then finally a motion passes to fund Spokane Valley at zero. Continuing with the minutes, Councilmember Hafner said that Tom Hormel, City of Spokane Valley, said that this isn't the first time we were under the set-aside; two years ago we went under the set-aside so this will be the first time I think we didn't fund anything but going under the set-aside the City didn't throw a tantrum;" and Mr. Woodard said "well they did, you just didn't hear about it. I granted that because I probably can do that without the vote of the council; but a zero is a different story." And from the Town of Latah: "I look at the $271,000 set- aside and to say down to zero, is kind -of in your face and not just procedurally from the standpoint of equity basis that this is all established on .... I just feel like it is the wrong decision to be taking in light of the set-aside amount we all understand is the basis for how funds are allocated." Councilmember Hafner said our representative, Deputy Mayor Woodard, in response to that said "I'm going to be talking to the mayor tomorrow; he's not gonna be my problem. It's really gonna be the City Manager. The City Manager does not set policy the council does. I just don't know if I have their votes to go zero. I'm going to argue for the small critical, not the small projects, but the small critical projects for the other communities, and that's what I'm going to do." Councilmember Hafner said he won't argue that, but said not to argue and take away money that we have set aside and worked so hard for; said that the two projects that took our money away was the Carnhope Irrigation District for $73,000, and the sewer projects for $200,000. Councilmember Hafner said under the circumstances, what he thinks there was a lot of misinformation, said he can't look at saying we lost $279,000 simply because we couldn't work it out and make sure it was done correctly; and said that he will not vote for this motion at this time. Deputy Mayor Woodard said that in addition to his presentation, of the 14 projects, only two were not recommended for full funding; so there were more projects approved for full funding then there was money Council Study Session: 03-01-2016 Page 7 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT available. Councilmember Pace said there is a proposed sidewalk project and the people living along the street who don't want it; and then the government expert comes along and tells them they do need the sidewalk because it will be of benefit; said he will vote on the side of the people who live along the streets, which will give the money back and prevent the sidewalk from being built. At the request of the Mayor, Councilmember Pace re -read the motion: to authorize the Acting City Manager to finalize and execute a letter to the Spokane County Board of Commissioners stating that the City relinquishes its right, for 2016 only, to receive 20% of the Community Development Block Grant funds allocable for 2016. Councilmember Gothmann said he thinks there is a misapprehension about how these projects are created and he explained the process for the call for projects and the submittal of those projects; said in the past the projects were evaluated by staff and approved by HCDAC; the problem in the past was that the City of Spokane Valley was competing with Rockford, and that the City of Spokane Valley had twenty times more people than Rockford; which was why this agreement came about with a set-aside for Spokane Valley; and if the set-aside is not taken, the question is what to do with the funds which will go back into the fund to be used for someone else; he said we cannot go back and rescue the money; we submit a project and if this Council disapproves the project, HCDAC would not approve it. Councilmember Gothmann moved the question, which stops debate: vote by acclamation: In favor: Mayor Higgins, Deputy Mayor Woodard, and Councilmembers Gothmann and Pace. Opposed: Councilmembers Grafos and Hafner. Motion carried. Vote by show of hands on the main motion: In Favor: In favor: Mayor Higgins, Deputy Mayor Woodard, and Councilmembers Gothmann and Pace. Opposed: Councilmembers Grafos and Hafner. Motion carried. City Attorney Driskell left the room to notify Councilmember Wood of the end of this discussion, and Councilmember Wood returned to the dais at 7:10 p.m. NON -ACTION ITEMS: 2. Comprehensive Plan Existing Conditions Report — John Hohman, Lori Barlow Director Hohman said tonight is an opportunity to discuss the comprehensive plan existing conditions report, which was previewed with Council back in November and to bring it back tonight to set the stage for further discussions of the comprehensive plan update which will be going on for the majority of this calendar year; said these reports form the basis of our economic trends as well as transportation conditions; and said Ms. Barlow will discuss some of the planning items as well as the visioning report. Senior Planner Barlow explained about the authority to plan; the recommendation for the population forecast; discussed the report's housing and economic trends, including demographic trends, housing tends, economic trends, land uses; then talked about the significant changes of those development trends since the recession; discussed residential land capacity and acres buildable by zone; went over the medium density residential zoning, mixed use zoning, office zone including why office and garden office are not developing; neighborhood commercial zoning and the issue of can we develop small scale retail uses in neighborhoods; then moved into the land uses and key destinations in the transportation system showing population density, commute characteristics, and pedestrian, bike and public transit facilities; and noted some of the overall challenges and opportunities. Mr. Hohman mentioned that next week's agenda includes presentations on the retail and the tourism studies. At 8:01 p.m., Mayor Higgins called for a recess; the meeting reconvened at 8:14 p.m. Mayor Higgins explained that in the interest of time, the Public Safety Oversight item and the 2015 Accomplishments report will be switched, with the Public Safety item coming on next. 4. Public Safety Oversight/Advisory Committee — Councilmember Pace Mayor Higgins invited Sheriff Knezovich to talk about the existing advisory committee. Sheriff Knezovich explained that recently he solicited feedback from the Sheriff's and Chief's Association, on the number of advisory boards and so far, none have been found, although he said he will still need to check with other jurisdictions that he has not heard back from, such as Seattle and King County. Sheriff Knezovich said that the City of Spokane and the Spokane County Sheriff's Office does have Oversight and have had for several Council Study Session: 03-01-2016 Page 8 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT years; said they have both internal and external oversight. The Sheriff said his office must submit an annual report on the number of complaints; and he went through his PowerPoint showing a variety of statistics on the number and disposition of complaints, both internal and external, as well as a breakdown of the origination of those complaints; number of j ail medical lawsuits, and other lawsuits. Sheriff Knezovich then discussed the composition of the external oversight committee, as well as the Citizens Advisory/Review Board, adding that twelve out of the seventeen members on the Advisory Board are Spokane Valley residents. He said public safety officers take their jobs very seriously, and hold themselves to a very high standard. He also mentioned there are two openings on the board and he would like to offer those to Council; and said perhaps they would need to speak with legal counsel because if a Councilmember were a voting member, there might be liabilities attached; but said the legal department can research that. It was noted there were several members of the board present, and at Mayor Higgins' request, they stood and introduced themselves. Sheriff Knezovich also that that the Board is trying to take their responsibilities to a different level and have requested the National Association of Civilian Oversights to do a peer review of the board in the hope that the Board can work toward becoming an accredited advisory board. The Sheriff also noted he distributed copies of the board's bylaws for Council's review. Councilmember Pace said he proposed the establishment of a Spokane Valley citizen oversight committee, to get input from the citizens; said public safety is our number one priority and public safety is 70% of our budget; that some of the reasons for the committee include power and transparency; power as noted in article 1 section 1 of the Constitution, and to protect and maintain individual rights; so a committee appointed by Council and who reports to Council, would bring that power closer to the people and the people closer to Council. He said transparency does not call for any closed -door sessions so the meetings would be open to the public; and he went over the information on his handout Discussion on a Public Safety Citizens Oversight Committee. Councilmember Pace said he hopes to schedule this discussion at a future study session. Councilmember Wood asked about coordinating with water districts and Councilmember Pace said that would fit in, as noted in Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 2.45 as part of the public health and safety functions; and said he proposed the Committee would be developing relationships and coordinating flow of information. Council discussion included comment from Councilmember Hafner that he feels we don't need an oversight committee since one is already in existence and that this would represent another layer of government. Councilmember Grafos said we are a contract city and most of the meetings this year have included discussion about law enforcement, adding that we have no control over fire protection; he also asked if this would involve increasing the size of city staff. Councilmember Pace agreed we don't have such authority for fire, but SVMC discusses all that as part of the public safety function the city has concern for; and concerning staff, he likened this to the staff's involvement with the Planning Commission. To give some perspective on SVMC 2.45, City Attorney Driskell explained that was adopted early in the incorporation process, in 2003, and we did not have a contract with the Sheriff's Office and were just finalizing many issues; that we did not fully know about fire protection at the time and had not annexed into the two fire districts until later; adding that nothing has ever been formally done in connection with SVMC 2.45 Mr. Calhoun said staff could attempt to gather some background research on this, and ask Mr. Driskell to initiate some discussions with the Center for Justice, and report in the near future. Deputy Mayor Woodard suggested not pursuing this until after the March workshop, with Councilmember Hafner adding that he would like to see more information on liability as well. Councilmember Gothmann said he feels we have adequate review now and seems ridiculous to add just one more; if people have complaints they can go to the website review board; and said he sees no reason for such a committee, doesn't think we can afford such a committee, and too is concerned about our liability protection. Council Study Session: 03-01-2016 Page 9 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT At 9:00 p.m., it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to extend the meeting for thirty minutes, or until 9:30 p.m. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Higgins, Deputy Mayor Woodard, and Councilmembers Gothmann, Pace, Hafner, and Grafos. Opposed: Councilmember Wood. Motion carried. 3. Accomplishments Report for 2015 — Department Directors In the interest of time, it was agreed to postpone this item until next week. 5. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins The discussion of when to schedule future discussions on a public safety oversight committee resulted in consensus to have it scheduled for some time after the March 15 workshop. Councilmember Hafner asked about the status of the Governance Manual and it was agreed to wait to add that to a future agenda until after that committee has had a chance to meet. 6. Council Comments — Mayor Higgins Councilmember Hafner remarked on a recent newspaper article about a press conference and said he did not understand why he was not told about this and would like to have known and been a part of that. Councilmember Grafos also noted he was troubled by that press conference; that he was there but was troubled by the statement made by the Mayor that we were going to keep the sheriff's contract, and he asked how the Mayor could bind this City to a legal contract with first having a discussion with the Council. Councilmember Gothmann asked Mr. Calhoun if the issue of responsibilities and how the Sheriff contract gets renewed, could be on an upcoming agenda; and Mr. Calhoun said that would be discussed during the March workshop, that the four-year contract is automatically renewed January 1, 2018, but Council has the option if desired, to notify the County within eighteen months, of a desire to terminate the contract, which must be done by mutual consent. 7. City Manager Comments — Mark Calhoun Mr. Calhoun mentioned an upcoming public works FMSIB (freight mobility strategic investment board) grant opportunity for $18 to $23 million state-wide, with applications due March 14; and said the idea is to apply for the grant for the Argonne Road Bridge widening; and asked for Council consensus to bring this item back next week as a motion item. There were no objections. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn into executive session for approximately thirty minutes to discuss litigation and potential litigation, and that no action would be taken upon return to open session. Council adjourned into executive session at 9:13 p.m. At approximately 9:49 p.m., Mayor Higgins declared Council out of executive session, after which it was immediately moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. ATTEST: L.R. Higgins, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Study Session: 03-01-2016 Page 10 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Special Meeting Tuesday, March 8, 2016 Attendance: Councilmembers: Staff: Rod Higgins, Mayor Cary Driskell, City Attorney Arne Woodard, Deputy Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Ed Pace, Councilmember Sam Wood, Councilmember Bill Gothmann, Council Pro Tem ABSENT: Dean Grafos, Councilmember Chuck Hafner, Councilmember Mayor Higgins called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present except Councilmembers Grafos and Hafner. EXECUTIVE SESSION: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn into executive session for approximately one hour and forty-five minutes to discuss potential litigation and that no action will be taken upon return to open session. [RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)]. Council adjourned into executive session at 4:03 p.m. At 5:49 p.m., Mayor Higgins declared Council out of executive session, at which time it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. L.R. Higgins, Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Minutes: 03-08-2016 Page 1 of 1 Approved by Council: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 22, 2016 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ['public hearing ['information ® admin. report ['pending legislation ['executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Spokane County Regional Animal Protection Service (SCRAPS) Update. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Interlocal Agreement for Animal Control Services in the City of Spokane Valley. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: In January 2013 Council approved an Interlocal Agreement with Spokane County for the provision of animal control services. BACKGROUND: In 2012 the City issued a request for proposals (RFP) for the provision of animal control services and received responses from two local providers. After considerable research and deliberation SCRAPS was ultimately selected and staff set about negotiating an Interlocal Agreement that was approved by the City Council in January 2013. At about the same time, Spokane County also entered into similar agreements for services with the City of Spokane and a number of smaller surrounding jurisdictions. In summary, the Interlocal Agreement contains the following provisions: Term: Became effective on January 1, 2014 and runs for a term of 20 -years, expiring December 31, 2033. Cost: The annual cost of service includes two components: Operating cost: Fixed at $242,081 in 2014 and may increase by a measure of the consumer price index (CPI) each year. Debt Service: In 2014 the County issued $5.9 million in general obligation bonds to acquire the building where SCRAPS is now located as well as make substantial renovations to meet operational needs. The portion of the bond issue attributable to the City of Spokane Valley's use was set at $900,000 and the City will reimburse the County at the rate of $45,000 per year through 2033. O&M Debt Service Total 2014 Fee 242, 081.00 45, 000.00 287, 081.00 2015 cpi increase - % x 1.30% 2015 cpi increase - $ = 3,147.05 2015 Fee 245,228.05 45,000.00 290,228.05 2016 cpi increase - % x 0.40% 2016 cpi increase - $ = 980.91 2016 Fee 246, 208.96 45, 000.00 291, 208.96 1 Cost for animal control services since incorporation are as follows (and noteworthy here is the cost containment achieved through competitive bidding, contract negotiations and contract manaaementl: 2003 288,120 2004 399,555 2005 403,770 2006 426,633 2007 327,582 2008 332,839 2009 335,537 2010 314,255 2011 306,923 2012 284,926 2013 295,556 2014 242,081 2015 245,228 2016 246,209 0 288,120 (Apr - Dec 2003) 0 399,555 0 403,770 0 426,633 0 327,582 0 332,839 0 335,537 0 314,255 0 306,923 0 284,926 0 295,556 45,000 287,081 45,000 290,228 45,000 291,209 Animal Control Services: Specific services are categorized between Field, Shelter and Educational including hours of operation and days of service. Regional Animal Control Advisory Board: A Regional Animal Advisory Board of Directors is called for and is composed of five members including two from Spokane County, two from the City of Spokane Valley and a fifth representative that is jointly appointed. Each member of the Board is expected to have financial or budget experience and be available to meet at least quarterly to review operations and discuss budget matters. Approval of Annual SCRAPS Budget: • An annual budget shall be submitted by the SCRAPS Director to the Board of Directors by September 1 of each calendar year. • By October 1 the Board of Directors will consider and make a written recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. • By November 1 the Board of County Commissioners will respond to the Board of Directors in writing either in agreement with the recommendations of the Board of Directors or suggesting changes. • The Board of Directors has until December 1 to respond to any changes proposed by the Board of County Commissioners. • The Board of County Commissioners ultimately makes the final decision on the budget. SCRAPS Budget • Revenue sources include income from contracting cities, animal licenses, shelter services and contributions. Revenues in 2016 are projected at $3,525,339. • Expenses reflect the cost of operations including shelter operations and animal pick-up. Expenditures in 2016 are budgeted at $3,797,178. • 2016 Expenditures are expected to be $271,839 greater than revenues which will in -part be covered by $116,070 transfer from other designated fund balances accounted for outside 2 Debt Year O&M Service Total 2003 288,120 2004 399,555 2005 403,770 2006 426,633 2007 327,582 2008 332,839 2009 335,537 2010 314,255 2011 306,923 2012 284,926 2013 295,556 2014 242,081 2015 245,228 2016 246,209 0 288,120 (Apr - Dec 2003) 0 399,555 0 403,770 0 426,633 0 327,582 0 332,839 0 335,537 0 314,255 0 306,923 0 284,926 0 295,556 45,000 287,081 45,000 290,228 45,000 291,209 Animal Control Services: Specific services are categorized between Field, Shelter and Educational including hours of operation and days of service. Regional Animal Control Advisory Board: A Regional Animal Advisory Board of Directors is called for and is composed of five members including two from Spokane County, two from the City of Spokane Valley and a fifth representative that is jointly appointed. Each member of the Board is expected to have financial or budget experience and be available to meet at least quarterly to review operations and discuss budget matters. Approval of Annual SCRAPS Budget: • An annual budget shall be submitted by the SCRAPS Director to the Board of Directors by September 1 of each calendar year. • By October 1 the Board of Directors will consider and make a written recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. • By November 1 the Board of County Commissioners will respond to the Board of Directors in writing either in agreement with the recommendations of the Board of Directors or suggesting changes. • The Board of Directors has until December 1 to respond to any changes proposed by the Board of County Commissioners. • The Board of County Commissioners ultimately makes the final decision on the budget. SCRAPS Budget • Revenue sources include income from contracting cities, animal licenses, shelter services and contributions. Revenues in 2016 are projected at $3,525,339. • Expenses reflect the cost of operations including shelter operations and animal pick-up. Expenditures in 2016 are budgeted at $3,797,178. • 2016 Expenditures are expected to be $271,839 greater than revenues which will in -part be covered by $116,070 transfer from other designated fund balances accounted for outside 2 the SCRAPS enterprise fund. This leaves SCRAPS with expenditures exceeding revenues by $155,769. They currently have a sufficient fund balance to cover this operating deficit. License Revenue & Other Items: • 2014 Animal License Budgeted Revenue was $1,450,862. • 2014 Actual License Revenue was $1,125,758. • City of Spokane was estimated to have $800,000 in annual pet license revenue in the regional model cost estimate but had less than $500,000 in revenue in 2014. • Total SCRAPS revenues were more than $600,000 under budget in 2014. • Debt Service Reserve Fund intended to be funded annually to a maximum of $300,000. No contributions have been made to this point. Service Workload Indicators and Performance Measures: Request for Service Impounds Investigations Emergency Calls Trapping Total 14,815 9,939 1,290 541 265 26,850 2014 Licensed Animals Dogs 41,297 Cats 15,768 Total 57.065 Total Live Release Rate Dogs 89.8% Cats 58.4% OPTIONS: N/A RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: This is simply an update and no Council action is required. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The City of Spokane Valley's 2016 Budget includes an appropriation of $295,133 to cover SCRAPS expenses which we now know will actually be $291,209 including $246,209 for operations and $45,000 for a debt service reimbursement. Through the balance of the Interlocal Agreement, the cost may increase by no more than the CPI assessed against the operations component. The debt service portion is fixed through the 20 -year life of the agreement. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Calhoun, Deputy City Manager, and Morgan Koudelka, Senior Administrative Analyst ATTACHMENTS: Interlocal Agreement for Animal Control Services in the City of Spokane Valley. 3 rw./V I. 1.7- 00 errta INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES IN TIM CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between Spokane County, a political subdivision of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 1116 West Broadway Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99260, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY" and the City of Spokane Valley, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99206, hereinafter referred to as "CITY," jointly hereinafter referred to as the "PARTIES." The COUNTY and CITY agree as follows. SECTION NO. l: RECITALS AND FINDINGS (a) The Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County has the care of COUNTY property and the management of COUNTY funds and business under RCW 36.32.120(6). (b) Counties and cities may contract with each other to perform certain functions which each may legally perform under chapter 39.34 RCW (Interlocal Cooperation Act). (c) Pursuant to the provisions of 36.32.120(6) and RCW 36.32.120(7), Spokane County, through its Board of County Commissioners, may enact ordinances dealing with animal control within the unincorporated area of Spokane County. (d) Pursuant to the provisions of RCW 35A.11.020, the City of Spokane Valley may enact ordinances dealing with animal control within its boundaries. (e) Spokane County intends on acquiring and improving property ("Regional Animal Control Facility") from which Spokane County will provide certain animal control services to itself, the City of Spokane Valley, and other governmental jurisdictions. The cost of acquiring and improving the Regional Animal Control Facility will be financed in part through the operational savings realized by the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County and other governmental jurisdictions contracting with Spokane County to receive animal control services from the Regional Animal Control Facility. Spokane County desires to enter into an agreement with the City of Spokane Valley wherein the City will contract to receive animal control services from the County for a term of twenty (20) years thus providing the County with operational savings to finance in part the County's acquisition and improvement of the Regional Animal Control Facility. (f) The City of Spokane Valley desires to utilize the services of Spokane County for the purpose of performing certain animal control services within the boundaries of the City of Spokane Valley for a term of twenty (20) years. Page 1 of 22 SECTION NO. 2: DEFINITIONS (a) Agreement: "Agreement" means this Interlocal Agreement between the CITY and COUNTY regarding animal control services. (b) City: "CITY" means the City of Spokane Valley. (c) County: "COUNTY" means Spokane County. (d) Services: "Services" means those services identified in Attachment "1" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. (e) Annual Fee: "Annual Fee" means that annual amount of money which the CITY will pay the COUNTY to provide Services. The annual fee shall be comprised of debt service costs and operating costs as further addressed in Section No. 5. (f) Uncontrollable Circumstances: "Uncontrollable Circumstances" means the following events: strikes, riots, wars, civil disturbances, insurrections, acts of terrorism, fires and floods, weather conditions, volcanic eruptions, lightning or earthquakes or other acts of God at or near where the Services are performed and/or that directly affect providing of such Services. (g) Consumer Price Index: "Consumer Price Index" or "CPI" means the percentage change between the current year index and the previous year index as determined by United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, West -Size Class B/C, Consumer Price Index, All items for all urban consumers (CPI -U), Base year Annual Average. See Attachment "2". For example, as shown on Attachment "2" the CPI for calendar year 2012 is 3.0%. It was calculated by determining the difference in the CPI -U for 2010 and CPI -U for 2011, dividing this number by the CPI -U for 2010 and rounding the number to the nearest 1/10 of 1%. (LE. Difference between 133.778 and 137.748 = 3.97/133.778=2.96 rounded up to 3.) (h) Regional Animal Control Facility: "Regional Animal Control Facility" means that entire property acquired, improved and owned by Spokane County from which the County will provide Services. SECTION NO. 3: PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to reduce to writing the PARTIES' understandings as to the tenns and conditions under which the COUNTY will provide Services on behalf of the CITY. Page 2 of 22 SECTION NO. 4: DURATION/WITHDRAWAL This Agreement shall commence on January 1, 2014, ("Commencement Date") and run for a term of twenty (20) years. In the event the COUNTY for any reason whatsoever is unable to commence providing Services on the Commencement Date, it will provide the CITY with at least six (6) months advance written notice which shall state the date upon which the COUNTY will provide Services. This twenty (20) year time frame shall be referred to as the "Initial Term." The PARTIES acknowledge that the Initial Term is necessary in order for the COUNTY to realize operational savings which it will use to acquire and improve the Regional Animal Control Facility. At the conclusion of the Initial Term, this Agreement may be renewed upon mutual agreement of the PARTIES. All renewals shall be subject to all terms and conditions set forth herein unless otherwise mutually agreed upon. If the COUNTY does not mutually agree to a renewal, or terminates the Agreement as provided for herein after during the renewal time frame, then the COUNTY shall pay the CITY an amount of money equal to the unamortized value of the Regional Animal Control Facility as of the date of nonrenewal or termination. The value of the Regional Animal Control Facility for the purpose of the provision shall be based on the original acquisition cost plus improvements less the COUNTY's up -front contribution of $900,000 multiplied by 22.9% depreciated over fifty (50) years from the date of occupancy. Once effective, this Agreement can only be terminated by: (1) mutual agreement of the PARTIES; or (2) with respect to all obligations of either party except the CITY's obligation for debt service costs, the CITY may terminate upon 6 months written notification to the COUNTY in advance of January 15t of any calendar year. In the event of termination under this provision, the CITY shall still retain responsibility for its share of the debt services costs through the remainder of the term of the Agreement. At the COUNTY'S option this amount may be paid by the CITY over the remaining term of the Agreement or in a lump sum amount. Upon termination, the CITY will have the right to purchase any vehicles and/or equipment used to provide Services which the COUNTY determines are surplus to it needs. The price shall be mutually agreed upon by the PARTIES. Subsequent to the Initial Term, either party may terminate this Agreement for any reason whatsoever upon a minimum of six months advance notice as provided for in Section 7 to the other party. After the initial term, no depreciation or building use fees attributable to the original acquisition and improvement of the Regional Animal Control Facility shall be charged to the CITY for the remaining useful life of the Regional Animal Control Facility. SECTION NO. 5: COST OF SERVICES AND PAYMENTS The CITY shall pay the COUNTY an annual fee for Services provided under this Agreement. The annual fee for Services contemplates Services commencing as of January 1St of each year and Page 3 of 22 running through December 31st of each year. The annual fee shall be comprised of debt service costs and operating costs. Debt service costs shall remain fixed through the life of the Agreement or until the debt service costs have been retired, whichever occurs first. The annual debt service costs will be FORTY-FIVE THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS ($45,000.00). The operating cost for the calendar year 2014 will be TWO HUNDRED FORTY TWO THOUSAND EIGHTY ONE AND 00/100 DOLLARS ($242,081.00). For each subsequent year, the PARTIES agree that the annual operating costs shall be determined by the Board of County Commissioners based on a written recommendation from the Regional Animal Control Advisory Board of Directors and process as provided for herein after, not to exceed limitations contained within Section No. 5(C)(6) In the event the term of this Agreement commences at other than the beginning of any calendar year, the annual operating costs will be prorated on a daily basis for that year. A. Establishment of Regional Animal Control Advisory Board There shall be established a Regional Animal Control Advisory Board of Directors ("Board of Directors") for the term of the Agreement. The Board of Directors shall consist of five (5) members, two (2) representatives to be appointed by each party and a fifth representative to be jointly appointed. The appointees shall have financial or budget experience. A majority of the Board of Directors shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of any business so long as both the COUNTY and the CITY are represented. The number of representatives may be modified by recommendation of the Board of Directors and agreed to by the PAR i'ihS The Board of Directors shall meet at the call of the Spokane County Regional Animal Protection Service Department Director at least quarterly and more frequently, if necessary, during the adoption of the annual budget. The Spokane County Regional Animal Protection Service Department Director or his/her designee shall attend all Board of Director meetings as a non-voting member. B. Responsibility of the Board of Directors with regard to the annual budget of the Spokane County Regional Animal Protection Service Department Services will be provided by the COUNTY through Spokane County Regional Animal Protection Service Department ("SCRAPS"). SCRAPS shall be operated as an enterprise fund. For the purposes of this Agreement the terminology "enterprise fund" shall mean a fund that provides goods and services for a fee which makes the entity providing the goods and services self-supporting. An "enterprise fund" complies with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Page 4 of 22 The SCRAPS Director shall prepare an annual budget for SCRAPS. The annual budget shall minimally include all revenues, including Regional Animal Control Facility revenues and grant revenues, by source anticipated by SCRAPS for the following calenda budget year and shall additionally include: (i) debt service to acquire and remodel the Regional Animal Control Facility, (ii) debt service / building reserve fund, (iii) cash reserve of 10% of annual budgeted operating expenditures, and (iv) operating costs for SCRAPS providing Services including, but not limited to salary/wages, benefits and other annual operating costs. The anneal budget shall be submitted by the SCRAPS Director to the Board of Directors on or before September 1st of each calendar year for the following year. The annual budget will include indirect costs calculated in accordance with the COUNTY's Countywide OMB A-87 Cost Allocation Plan. No costs billed directly to SCRAPS will be included in the indirect costs._On or before October 1st each calendar year, the Board of Directors shall consider and make a written recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners on the annual budget for SCRAPS. On or before November 1st of each calendar year the Board of County Commissioners shall in writing acknowledge and agree in writing with the written recommendation by the Board of Directors or suggest changes to the written recommendation. If the Board of County Commissioners suggests changes to the written recommendation, the Board of County Commissioners shall not take formal action on the adoption of the annual budget until it receives a written response from the Board of Directors on the suggested changes. The written response from the Board of Directors on the suggested changes must be received by the Board of County Commissioners on or before December 1st. In the event the Board of County Commissioners does not receive a written recommendation from the Board of Directors on or before October 1St as provided for herein or a response to suggested changes by *December 1St as provided for herein, the Board of County Commissioners shall adopt the SCRAPS annual budget taking into consideration the financial goals set forth subparagraph (C) hereinafter. The Board of County Commissioners' decision on the budget shall be binding on the PARTIES. C. Financial Goals In conjunction with the preparation of the annual budget by the SCRAPS Director, recommendation(s) on the annual budget by the Board of Directors and adoption of the annual budget by the Board of County Commissioners, every effort will be made to increase efficiencies, enhance revenues and control costs. Additionally, the SCRAPS Director, Board of Directors and Board of County Commissioners shall take into consideration economic conditions, revenue forecasts for the PARTIES and other participating jurisdictions as well as any state wide initiatives or legislative actions that would impact the PARTIES or other participating jurisdictions. Also, the following financial goals shall be considered: 1. Annual debt service for acquisition and remodeling of the Regional Animal Control Facility must be paid. Page 5 of 22 2. Maintaining a reasonable cash reserve of 10% of annual budgeted operating expenditures. Provided in conjunction with this financial goal, the PARTIES shall identify a time line and method for establishing the cash reserve. The time line and method of accumulating the cash reserve shall consider, but not be limited to, utilizing special assessments, and/or utilizing revenue(s) from other SCRAPS programs, and/or utilizing short term borrowing. Upon termination of the Agreement, the CITY shall receive 22.29% of the cash reserve balance existing at the time of termination if the City of Spokane has contracted for Services with the COUNTY by January 1, 2014. The 22.29% was determined as set forth in Attachment "3" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. If the City of Spokane has not contracted for Services with the COUNTY by January 1, 2014, the CITY shall receive 46.16% of the cash reserve balance existing at the time of termination. The 46.16% was determined as set forth in Attachment "4" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Any amount due shall be refunded within thirty (30) days of termination. 3. Maintain an optimum level of Service relative to available financial resources of participating jurisdictions which is reflected in the annual budget operating costs which includes, but is not limited to, salary/wages, benefits and other operating cost items, based upon the recommendation of the SCRAPS Director. 4. Any amount in the enterprise fund in excess of funds to satisfy financial goals (1), (2) and (3) shall be placed in a debt service / building reserve fund at a targeted amount of up to Sixty Thousand Dollars ($60,000.00) a year or until the debt service / reserve fund reaches the amount of Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000.00). The debt service / building reserve fund will be utilized as a reserve fund to pay delinquent debt service costs and/or to repair the Regional Animal Control Facility as needed. The Board of Directors will approve the use of these funds to pay delinquent debt service costs and/or repair of the Regional Animal Control Facility except in the case of emergency repairs, in which instance the Board of County Commissioners will authorize the use of these funds with notification to the Board of Directors as soon as possible thereafter. Upon the use of the debt service / building reserve funds, the Board of Directors will replenish the fund in the manner described at the beginning of this section. The Board of Directors may recommend an increase in the debt service / building reserve fund amount in their annual written recommendation but otherwise the balance will not exceed Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000). Upon termination of the Agreement during the Initial Term, or at the end of Initial Term, or any renewal thereof, the CITY shall receive the amount it contributed toward the debt service/building reserve fund. Provided, however, if the termination is during the Initial Term, the CITY shall not receive the amount it contributed toward the debt service/building reserve fund until the end of the Initial Term. Any amount due shall be refunded within thirty (30) days of termination, except when the termination occurs during the initial term, in which instance it shall be due thirty (30) days after the end of the Initial term. 5. Excess monies in the enterprise fiznd after financial goals (1), (2), (3) and (4) have been satisfied, may be rebated as recommended by the Board of Directors and approved by the Board of County Commissioners. 6. Under no circumstance can the proposed annual budget by the SCRAPS Director, recommendation thereon by the Board of Directors, or adopted budget by the Board of Page 6 of 22 County Commissioners cause the CITY's operating fee to exceed the previous year's annual operating fee plus the CPI. 7. The intent of this Agreement is to allow the CITY to participate in SCRAPS, a regional animal control system, in which all participating cities, towns and other governmental jurisdictions share equitably in the costs and revenues. If any city, town, or other governmental jurisdiction is offered more favorable terms than those offered to the CITY in this Agreement, excluding debt for governmental jurisdictions with a population of less than 20,000 inhabitants and excluding start-up costs, then those same terms shall also be offered to the CITY at the same time. If any jurisdiction receiving Services from SCRAPS as of January 1, 2013 cancels its agreement for Services, the level of service provided by SCRAPS may be reduced accordingly and neither the COUNTY, nor any other remaining jurisdiction receiving Services, shall have any responsibility to backfill any reduction in revenues. D. Billing / Payments The COUNTY shall advise the CITY in writing of its annual fee for Services on or before the first Monday of December for the subsequent calendar year. The CITY' s annual operating fee shall not exceed its previous year's annual operating fee plus the CPI. The City's anm,al capital fee shall remain fixed. There shall be no annual settle and adjust reconciliation with regard to any Services provided under this Agreement. However, variances between actual revenues and expenditures and the budgeted revenues and expenditures shall be taken into consideration when preparing the subsequent years' budgets. With regard to operating costs, in the first year of the Agreement, the COUNTY will bill the CITY for the cost of Services in seven payments. The first payment shall be due on or before January 5th. The first payment will equal one-half of the annual fee for that year. The following six (6) payments shall be in equal installments of 1/12 of the annual fee. Each installment shall be due on or before the July 5th, August 5th, September 5th, October 5th, November 5th, and December 5th. In subsequent years, the COUNTY will bill the CITY for the annual operating costs in twelve equal payments, each due by the fifth of each month of the calendar year. The COUNTY will bill the CITY by the 15th of the month immediately preceding the month when the payment is due. With regard to debt service costs, the COUNTY will bill the CITY on April 1st and October 1st each year for payments of one-half of the annual debt service costs (1/2 of $45,000.00 = $22,500.00). Each payment of TWENTY TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED AND 00/100 DOLLARS ($22,500.00) shall be due by May 1st and November 15t of each calendar year respectively. The COUNTY, at its sole option, may charge interest on any late operating costs payments or debt service costs payments calculated on any lost interest earning had the amount due been invested since the date due to the date of payment in the COUNTY's investment pool. Page 7 of 22 SECTION NO. 6: RELATED RESPONSIBILITIES IN CONJUNCTION WITH PROVIDING SERVICES The COUNTY or its designee agrees to attend staff meetings as requested by the CITY. The COUNTY or its designee agrees to meet upon request by the CITY or its designee to discuss any Service provided under the terms of this Agreement. The CITY agrees the COUNTY may use the COUNTY's stationery in conjunction with providing Services under the terms of this Agreement. The Spokane County Regional Animal Protection Services Department Director or his/her designee will immediately notify the CITY of any animal caused injuries to humans, any animal abuse and/or hoarding cases, or any injury to an owned or stray animal occurring within the CITY and caused by an employee of SCRAPS while on duty. SECTION NO. 7: NOTICE All notices or other communications given hereunder shall be deemed given on: (i) the day such notices or other communications are received when sent by personal delivery; or (ii) the third day following the day on which the same have been mailed by first class delivery, postage prepaid addressed to the COUNTY or the CITY at the address set forth below for such party, or at such other address as either party shall from time -to -time designate by notice in writing to the other party: COUNTY: Spokane County Chief Executive Officer or his/her authorized representative 1116 West Broadway Avenue Spokane, Washington 99260 CITY: City of Spokane Valley Manager or his/her authorized representative 11707 East Sprague, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 SECTION NO. 8: RECORDS REVIEW The CITY shall be allowed to conduct random reviews of the records generated by the COUNTY in performance of this Agreement. The CITY will provide the COUNTY with reasonable advance notice of the records reviews. The PARTIES agree that they will make best efforts to achieve a resolution of any potential records confidentiality issues, including entering into confidentiality agreements or other similar mechanisms that will allow disclosure of the necessary information to accurately conduct a records review. Page 8 of 22 SECTION NO. 9: COUNTERPARTS This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which, when so executed and delivered, shall be an original, but such counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same. SECTION NO. 10: ASSIGNMENT No party may assign in whole or part its interest in this Agreement without the written approval of the other party. Provided, however, this does not prohibit the COUNTY from contracting for any euthanasia or cremation services. SECTION NO. 11: COUNTY EMPLOYEES The COUNTY shall hire, assign, retain and discipline all employees performing Services under this Agreement according to applicable collective bargaining agreements and applicable state and federal laws. The COUNTY agrees to meet and confer with the CITY with respect to staff that is assigned to provide Services. Issues of discipline or performance will be specifically handled according to COUNTY policies. SECTION NO. 12: LIABILITY (a) The COUNTY shall indemnify and hold harmless the CITY and its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent act or omission of the COUNTY, its officers, agents and employees, relating to or arising out of performing Services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that any suit based upon such claim, action, loss, or damages is brought against the CITY, the COUNTY shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense; provided that the CITY reserves the right to participate in said suit if any principle of governmental or public law is involved; and if final judgment in said suit be rendered against the CITY, and its officers, agents, and employees, or jointly against the CITY and the COUNTY and their respective officers, agents, and employees, the COUNTY shall satisfy the same. (b) The CITY shall indemnify and hold harmless the COUNTY and its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent act or omission of the CITY, its officers, agents and employees, relating to or arising out of performing Services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that any suit based upon such claim, action, loss, or damages is brought against the COUNTY, the CITY shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense; provided that the COUNTY reserves the right to participate in said suit if any principle of governmental or public law is involved; and if final judgment in said suit be rendered against the COUNTY, and its officers, agents, and employees, or jointly against the COUNTY and the CITY and their respective officers, agents, and employees, the CITY shall satisfy the same. Page 9 of 22 (c) If the comparative negligence of the Parties and their officers and employees is a cause of such damage or injury, the liability, loss, cost, or expense shall be shared between the Parties in proportion to their relative degree of negligence and the right of indemnity shall apply to such proportion. (d) Where an officer or employee of a Party is acting under the direction and control of the other Party, the Party directing and controlling the officer or employee in the activity and/or omission giving rise to liability shall accept all liability for the other Party's officer or employee's negligence. (e) Each Party's duty to indemnify shall survive the termination or expiration of the Agreement. (f) The foregoing indemnity is specifically intended to constitute a waiver of each Party's immunity under Washington's Industrial Insurance Act, chapter 51 RCW, respecting the other party only, and only to the extent necessary to provide the indemnified Party with a full and complete indemnity of claims made by the indemnitor's employees. The PARTIES acknowledge that these provisions were specifically negotiated and agreed upon by them. (g) The COUNTY and the CITY agree to either self insure or purchase polices of insurance covering the matters contained in this Agreement with coverages of not less than $5,000,000 per occurrence with $5,000,000 aggregate limits including professional liability and auto liability coverages. SECTION NO. 13: RELATIONSHIP OF THE PARTIES The PARTIES intend that an independent contractor relationship will be created by this Agreement. The COUNTY shall be an independent contractor and not the agent or employee of the CITY. The CITY is interested only in the results to be achieved and that the right to control the particular manner, method and means in which the Services are performed is solely within the discretion of the COUNTY. Any and all employees who provide Services to the CITY under this Agreement shall be deemed employees solely of the COUNTY. The COUNTY shall be solely responsible for the conduct and actions of all employees under this Agreement and any liability that may attach thereto. Likewise, no agent, employee, servant or representative of the CITY shall be deemed to be an employee, agent, servant or representative of the COUNTY for any purpose. SECTION NO. 14: MODIFICATION This Agreement may only be modified in writing by mutual written agreement of the PARTIES, and approved by the respective legislative bodies. SECTION NO. 15: PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT The ownership of all property and equipment utilized in conjunction with providing the Services under this Agreement shall remain with the COUNTY unless otherwise specifically and mutually agreed to by the PARTIES. Page 10 of 22 SECTION NO. 16: ALL WRITINGS CONTAINED HEREIN/BINDING EtFECT This Agreement contains terms and conditions agreed upon by the PARTIES. The PARTIES agree that there are no other understandings, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement. No changes or additions to this Agreement shall be valid or binding upon the PARTIES unless such change or addition is in writing, executed by the PARTIES. This Agreement shall be binding upon the PAR I'1r,S hereto, their successors and assigns. SECTION NO. 17: DISPUTE RESOLUTION Any dispute between the PARTIES which cannot be resolved between the PARTIES shall be subject to arbitration. Except as provided for to the contrary herein, such dispute shall first be reduced to writing. If the COUNTY CEO and the CITY cannot resolve the dispute it will be submitted to arbitration. The provisions of chapter 7.04 A RCW shall be applicable to any arbitration proceeding. The COUNTY and the CITY shall have the right to designate one person each to act as an arbitrator. The two selected arbitrators shall then jointly select a third arbitrator. The decision of the arbitration panel shall be binding on the PARTIES and shall be subject to judicial review as provided for in chapter 7.04A RCW. The costs of the arbitration panel shall be equally split between the PARTIES. SECTION NO. 18: VENUE STIPULATION This Agreement has been and shall be construed as having been made and delivered within the State of Washington and it is mutually understood and agreed by each party that this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington both as to interpretation and performance. Any action at law, suit in equity or judicial proceeding for the enforcement of this Agreement, or any provision hereto, shall be instituted only in courts of competent jurisdiction within Spokane County, Washington. SECTION NO. 19: SEVERABILITY The PAR I'1ES agree that if any parts, terms or provisions of this Agreement are held by the courts to be illegal, the validity of the remaining portions or provisions shall not be affected and the rights and obligations of the PARTIES shall not be affected in regard to the remainder of the Agreement. If it should appear that any part, term or provision of this Agreement is in conflict with any statutory provision of the State of Washington, then the part, term or provision thereof that may be in conflict shall be deemed inoperative and null and void insofar as it may be in conflict therewith and this Agreement shall be deemed to modify to conform to such statutory provision. Page 11 of 22 SECTION NO. 20: RECORDS All public records prepared, owned, used or retained by the COUNTY in conjunction with providing Services under the terms of this Agreement shall be deemed CITY property and shall be made available to the CITY upon request by the CITY subject to the attorney client and attorney work product privileges set forth in statute, court rule or case law. SECTION NO. 21: HEADING The section headings appearing in this Agreement have been inserted solely for the purpose of convenience and ready reference. In no way do they purport to, and shall not be deemed to define, limit or extend the scope or intent of the sections to which they pertain. SECTION NO. 22: TIME OF ESSENCE OF AGREEMENT Time is of the essence for this Agreement and in case either party fails to perform the obligations on its part to be performed at the time fixed for the performance of the respective obligation by the terms of this Agreement, the other party may, at its election, hold the other party liable for all costs and damages caused by such delay. SECTION NO. 23: UNCONTROLLABLE CIRCUMSTANCES/IMPOSSIBILITY A delay or interruption in or failure of performance of all or any part of this Agreement resulting from Uncontrollable Circumstances shall be deemed not a default under this Agreement. A delay or interruption in or failure of performance of all or any part of this Agreement resulting from any change in or new law, order, rule or regulation of any nature which renders providing of Services in accordance with the terms of this Agreement legally impossible, and any other circumstances beyond the control of the COUNTY which render legally impossible the performance by the COUNTY of its obligations under this Agreement, shall be deemed not a default under this Agreement. SECTION NO. 24: FILING The CITY shall file this Agreement with its City Clerk or, alternatively, place the Agreement on the CITY's website. The COUNTY shall file this Agreement with the County Auditor, or, alternatively, place the Agreement on the COUNTY's web site or other electronically retrievable public source. SECTION NO. 25: EXECUTION AND APPROVAL The PARTIES warrant that the officers executing below have been duly authorized to act for and on behalf of the party for purposes of confirming this Agreement. Page 12 of 22 SECTION NO. 26: COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS The PARTIES shall observe all federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, to the extent that they may be applicable to the terms of this Agreement. SECTION NO. 27: DISCLAIMER Except as otherwise provided, this Agreement shall not be construed in any manner that would limit either party's authority or powers under law. SECTION NO. 28: ANTI -KICKBACK No officer or employee of the CITY, having the power or duty to perform an official act or action related to this Agreement shall have or acquire any interest in the Agreement, or have solicited, accepted or granted a present or future gift, favor, service or other thing of value from or to any person involved in the Agreement, or otherwise violate the requirements of RCW 42.23.030 SECTION NO. 29: NON-DISCRIMINATION No individual shall be excluded from participation in, denied the benefit of, subjected to discrimination under, or denied employment in the administration of or in connection with this Agreement in violation of state or federal law. SECTION NO. 30: NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES Nothing in this Agreement is intended to give, or shall give, whether directly or indirectly, any benefit or right, greater than that enjoyed by the general public, to third persons. SECTION NO. 31: ANNUAL REPORT The SCRAPS Director shall prepare annual report. The annual report shall include, among other matters, performance measurements/indicators and a twelve (12) month Activity Study. Performance measurements/indicators will include: • Statistics regarding annual number of pet licenses sold/issued • Annual live release rate — animals returned to owner, adopted and/or transferred to other facilities/rescue groups • Where applicable, industry statistics for the same measures will also be listed for the above two (2) bullets The Activity Study will include monthly statistics regarding: • Requests for service Page 13 of 22 • Emergency calls • Animal impounds • Investigations • Trapping The Activity Study will be sent out monthly as part of the reporting process. SECTION NO. 32: INSURANCE During the term of the Agreement, the COUNTY shall maintain in force at its own expense, each insurance noted below: A. Workers' Compensation Insurance in compliance with RCW 51.12.020, which requires subject employers to provide workers' compensation coverage for all their subject workers and Employer's Liability or Stop Gap Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000; B. General Liability Insurance on an occurrence basis, with a combined single limits of not less than $10,000,000 each occurrence for bodily injury and property damage. It shall include contractual liability coverage for the indemnity provided under this Agreement. It shall provide that the CITY, its officers and employees are additional insureds but only with respect to the COUNTY's services to be provided under this Agreement; and C. Automobile Liability Insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent of not less than $15,000,000 each accident for bodily injury and property damage, including coverage for owned, hired and non -owned vehicles. D. Professional Liability Insurance with a combined single limit of not less than $5,000,000 each claim, incident or occurrence. This is to cover damages caused by the error, omission, or negligent acts related to the professional services to be provided under this Agreement. The coverage must remain in effect for two years after the Agreement is completed. There shall be no cancellation, material change, reduction of limits or intent not to renew the insurance coverage(s) without thirty (30) days written notice from the COUNTY or its insurer(s) to the CITY. Written evidence of insurance shall reflect that the insurance afforded therein shall be primary insurance and any insurance or self-insurance carried by the COUNTY shall be excess and not contributory insurance to that provided by the CITY. As evidence of the insurance coverages required by this Agreement, the COUNTY shall furnish acceptable insurance certificates to the CITY at the time it returns the signed Agreement. The certificate shall specify all of the parties who are additional insured; and include applicable policy endorsements, the thirty (30) day cancellation clause, and the deduction or retention level. Insuring companies or entities are subject to CITY acceptance. If requested, complete copies of insurance policies shall be provided to the CITY. The Page 14 of 22 COUNTY shall be financially responsible for all pertinent deductibles, self-insured retentions, and/or self-insurance. SECTION NO. 33: RCW 39.34 REQUIRED CLAUSES A. PURPOSE: See Section No. 3 above. B. DURATION: See Section No. 4 above. C. ORGANIZATION OF SEPARATE ENTITY AND ITS POWERS: No new or separate legal or administrative entity is created to administer the provisions of this Agreement. D. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PARTIES: See provisions above. E. AGREEMENT TO BE FILED: See Section No. 24. F. FINANCING: Each party shall be responsible for the financing of its contractual obligations wider its normal budgetary process. G. TERMINATION: See Section No. 4 above. H. PROPERTY UPON TERMINATION: See Section No. 15 above. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this Agreement to be executed on date and year opposite their respective signatures. DATED: / jo243fr,CJ-' ATTEST -Clerk of the Boar BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS P OUN WASHON , Chair Daniela Erickson Page 15 of 22 AL FRENC , Vice -Chairman Kms' 0-044 TODD MIELKE, Commissioner DATED: I 13 City Clerk li-- ./49-t -4`1,ilyivN - Approved as to fo1,,,,,o, F„401_,,,, Cii~v"Atto Y Page 16 of 22 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY ATTACHMENT "1" The COUNTY through the Spokane County Regional Animal Protection Services (SCRAPS) will provide Animal Control Services to the CITY within the CITY's boundaries. The CITY agrees to specially commission any SCRAPS staff which may be necessary for them to carry out such Services so long as such staff meet the requirement(s) necessary for such commission. For the purpose of this Agreement, Animal Control Services shall include: ITEM 1: ITEM 2: ITEM 3: ITEM 4: Enforcement of the CITY'S Animal Control Ordinance presently in effect and/or as hereafter amended by the City consistent with this Agreement; Enforcement of chapter 16.08 RCW (Dogs); Enforcement of chapter 16.52 RCW (Prevention of Cruelty to Animals); and Enforcement of chapter 16.54 RCW (Abandoned Animals). Enforcement includes field services, shelter services, educational services, the licensing of dogs, cats and appearing before all administrative and judicial hearings in conjunction with such duties and functions. FIELD SERVICES Field Services include those provided during normal hours of operation as well as emergency services provided only after normal hours of operation. Normal hours of operation will be determined by the COUNTY after consultation with the Board of Directors. Field Services provided during normal hours of operation include: (1) Dog at large complaints; (2) Cat at large on private property; (3) Dog barking; (4) Dog or cat — no license; (5) Dog or cat — no rabies vaccination; (6) Dog threatens person; (7) Dog threatens domestic animal; (8) Dog or cat bite; (9) Injured dog or cat; (10) Sick dog or cat; (11) Agency assist; (12) Abandoned animal; (13) Animal cruelty; (14) Dead on arrival dog or cat; (15) Confined dog or cat; (16) Trapping dog or cat; (17) Vicious dog; (18) Kennel inspections; (19) Dangerous dog inspections; and (20) Others as deemed necessary by the SCRAPS. Field Services provided after normal hours of operation, referred to as Emergency Services, include: (1) Injured or sick dog/cat; (2) Dog/cat bite — dog/cat is still at large; (3) Dog bite — severe dog bite (victim is in hospital and dog will need to be quarantined immediately in the county shelter); (4) Vicious or threatening dog — dog threatens persons or domestic animals and is still at large; (5) Animal in our humane trap that is making a disturbance or injuring itself; (6) Other law enforcement agency requests for assistance when animals are involved; (7) Other emergencies such as extreme cruelty or pet dying in a hot vehicle; and (8) Multiple calls on same problem — animal control officer on call will evaluate and make a determination on whether to respond. Page 17 of 22 SHELTER SERVICES Shelter Services are provided Monday, Wednesday and Friday from noon to 5:30 p.m.; Tuesday and Thursday from noon to 6:30 p.m.; Saturday and Sunday from noon to 5:30 p.m. closed holidays. Shelter Services include the following: (1) Housing dog/cat — occasional other animal; (2) Pet license program; (3) $ ; (4) Animal redemptions; (5) Adoption program; (6) Volunteer program; (7) Dog training program; (8) Trapping program; and (9) Crematorium. Shelter Services hours may be adjusted by the COUNTY after consultation with the Board of Directors. EDUCATIONAL SERVICES Educational services include: (1) Dog bite prevention program — elementary schools and service workers; (2) School career fair participation; (3) Specialty presentations available upon request; (4) Public service announcements — newspaper, radio and television; (5) Community outreach such as fair booth, license clinics, special events; and (6) Website. The COUNTY may conduct surveys within the CITY for unlicensed dogs and cats. ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE / LICENSES/ FEES / PENALTIES In conjunction with the enforcement of the CITY'S Animal Control Ordinance, the CITY shall adopt and keep current by appropriate legislative action an Animal Control Ordinance substantially identical to that adopted by the COUNTY as it presently exist or as it may hereinafter be modified/amended, to include all licenses/fees/penalties. This responsibility shall not be deemed a restriction upon the CITY's legislative power. The City may enact ordinances dealing with animal control within its boundaries. Provided, further, the CITY may add a surcharge to its license fee ("City License Fee Surcharge".) All revenues from licenses/fees/penalties collected (not including City License Fee Surcharge) shall be retained by SCRAPS and applied to the cost of providing Services. Any such City License Fee Surcharge shall not be retained by SCRAPS. The COUNTY shall remit to the CITY all such City License Fee Surcharges collected under the terms of this Agreement semiannually on or before or before July 31St for the time frame from January 1st through June 30th of each calendar year this Agreement is in effect and January 31St for the time frame from July 1St through December 31St of each year this Agreement is in effect. The COUNTY shall provide the CITY with a copy of its Animal Control Ordinance presently codified in Chapter 5.04 of the Spokane County Code and all subsequent modifications/amendments thereto. The CITY shall provide the COUNTY with copies of its adopted/amended Animal Control Ordinance substantially identical to chapter 5.04 of the Spokane County Code. Page 18 of 22 The CITY shall provide legal counsel to prosecute any citations/complaints issued by COUNTY in enforcement of Items No. 1 through 4 herein above in any court of lawful jurisdiction except if the enforcement constitutes a felony. In performing the above Animal Control Services, the COUNTY will provide such personnel, as it deems necessary as well as any and all vehicles and materials of any kind or nature whatsoever. The COUNTY will provide additional Animal Control Services above and beyond those set forth herein to CITY at cost negotiated between the CITY and the COUNTY. Animal Control Services provided by the COUNTY under the terms of this Agreement, absent subsequent negotiation and agreement will not include: 1. Picking up dead wildlife or livestock on CITY streets, roads or alleys. 2. Providing emergency service for dead animals at any time or for dead dogs/cats after normal hours of operation. 3. Providing traps to the public for wildlife. 4. Responding to calls pertaining to dead or injured wildlife threatening the safety of other animals or the public. 5. Holding licensed dogs/cats in the Regional Animal Control Facility for a period of more than five (5) business days. Provided, at sole discretion of the COUNTY, holding periods may be extended. 6. Holding unlicensed dogs/cats in the Regional Animal Control Facility for a period more than seventy-two (72) hours. Provided, at sole discretion of the COUNTY, holding periods may be extended. 7. Holding any wildlife at the Regional Animal Control Facility. 8. Providing Hearing Examiner Services. CITIZEN COMPLAINT PROCESS • Written complaints may be filed via an email help request or complaint form available on the SCRAPS website or through the mail. Verbal complaints, whether submitted telephonically or in person, shall be documented in writing by SCRAPS staff receiving the complaint. • All complaints will be handled by SCRAPS Management Team within five (5) business days unless the complaint is related to an ongoing active investigation. • Unresolved complaints will be referred to the Board of County Commissioners and will be resolved within ten (10) business days of receiving the complaint from the SCRAPS Management Team. The COUNTY will notify the CITY's representative in writing of the Board of County Commissioners' decision. • The COUNTY will provide the CITY on a monthly basis a report listing any complaints received within the CITY by SCRAPS staff for the preceding month, which shall include at least the following information: Page 19 of 22 o The nature of the customer complaint o The location of the incident o Response times to customer complaints The COUNTY shall work with the CITY to develop a system for mapping the locations of any complaints received. SERVICE GOALS • Emergency/high priority calls responded to within 24 hours — immediate response when a person and/or animal is at immediate risk (safety/health). • Routine calls responded to within 48 hours — nuisance calls such as barking, dogs not on a leash, etc. • Licensed/identified animals impounded by animal protection officer in field will be returned directly to the owner if someone is home to receive the animal. Otherwise owner will be notified via phone and mail that their animal was impounded within 24 hours of impounding. • Dedicated emergency phone line — no voice mail. All emergency calls for service will be answered by a person — either SCRAPS staff or answering service. • Convenience for citizen with online pet licensing (new/renewal) and online request for service option. • Current list of impounded animals updated every two hours on website — helpful for owners who are missing their pet. • Animal Protection Officers have 24/7 access to pet license data and animal control records via laptops in the field. • All impounded animals scanned for a microchip at the time of impound, given a health exam and vaccinated (unless vicious and threatening safety of staff). • All SCRAPS staff are trained in customer service through the Spokane County Training Program and are required to follow the Spokane County Behavioral Standards. SCRAPS STANDARDS • Guidelines for Standards of Care in Animal Shelters published by The Association of Shelter Veterinarians 2010 - the guidelines were developed to provide a tool that would allow communities and animal welfare organizations, to identify minimum standards of care, as well as best and unacceptable practices. • Animal Control Management A Guide for Local Governments published by the Humane Society of the United States — a guide to establish effective animal care and control Page 20 of 22 • National Animal Control Association Training Guide — a guide to training today's professional animal control officer • American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Professionals website — animal welfare tools and resources Any CITY concern for nonperformance shall be forwarded to the SCRAPS Board of Directors for consideration at their next scheduled meeting. Failure to resolve the CITY's concern by the SCRAPS Board of Directors at their next scheduled meeting shall result in the concern being immediately forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners for resolution. If the CITY is not satisfied by the decision of the Board of County Commissioners, it may resolve the issue pursuant to SECTION No. 17. Page 21 of 22 ATTACHMENT "2" Copy of U. S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS CPI (ON FOLLOWING PAGE) Page 22 of 22 la :D,B'Aftm' 1 NTC OF LABOR, BU.IU3AU OF LABOR STATISTICS Western Information Office, 90 7th St., Suite 14-100, San Francisco, CA 94103 Information Staff(415) 625-2270 / Fax (415) 625-2351 WEST • Size Class SIC 05/11/12 Consumer Price Index, All Items, December 1996=100 for All Urban Consumers (CPI -1.1), YEAR JAN FEB MARCH 1993 1994 1995 1996 1897 100.4 1998 102.3 1999 103.6 2000 105.7 2001 109.8 2002 111.9 2003 113.8 2004 116.0 2005 119.5 2006 122.9 2007 126.2 2008 131.328 2009 130.682 2010 133.366 133.513 133.863 2011 134.917 135.826 137.200 2012 138.465 138.997 140.235 Table of over -the -year percent increa APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC 100.8 101.2 101.4 101.5 101.3 101.3 101.5 101.8 102.1 102.4 102.3 102.3 102.2 102.4 102.3 102.3 102.5 102.7 103.0 103.5 103.8 104.1 105.1 104.8 104.5 104.9 105.2 105.2 105.5 105.5 106.2 107.1 107.2 107.3 107.7 108.1 108.3 108.8 109.0 109.2 110.1 110.7 110.6 111.1 111.2 111.4 111.2 111.7 112.1 112.0 112.4 112.8 113.7 112.5 112.2 112.5 113.0 113.1 113.3 113.1 114.5 115.4 114.9 114.7 114.4 115.1 115.5 115.6 115.5 114.9 117.0 117.9 117.8 118.2 117.9 117.9 118.1 118.4 119.2 119.3 119.8 120.4 121.4 121.3 121.1 121.3 122.0 123.1 123.6 122.8 123.7 124.2 124.9 125.7 125.6 125.6 126.2 125.9 125.5 125.1 126.8 127.8 128.8 129.1 129.3 129.1 128.9 129.1 129.9 130.6 131.538 132.896 133.694 134.023 135.283 136.021 135.207 134.834 133.795 131.440 131.636 131.775 131.912 131.990 132.952 132.774 132.756 133.128 133.618 133.335 134.133 133.889 133.635 133.685 133.704 133.544 133.745 133.930 138.174 138.598 138.269 138.128 138.171 138.564 138.696 138.411 140.619 ses. An entry for Feb. 2006 indicates the percentage increase from Feb. 2005 to Feb. 2008. 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 1.9 1.5 1.1 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.8 2.8 2.3 2.2 2.5 2.6 2.4 2.4 1.9 2.0 2.3 2.9 2.0 2.4 3.1 3.1 2.9 3.4 3.3 3.5 3.9 3.7 3.4 3.2 3.5 3.2 3.1 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.6 1.9 2.1 1.9 2.8 1,3 0.9 1.0 1.6 1.3 1.1 1.0 1.7 1.9 2.3 1.1 2.0 2.0 2.3 2.2 2.2 1.9 1.6 1.9 2.2 2.2 2.5 3.1 3.1 2.4 '2.3 2.4 3.2 3.8 3.0 2.2 2.1 3.1 2.6 2.7 . 2.9 3.3 4.0 3.7 2.9 2.8 3.4 3.2 2.9 3.6 3.7 3.5 3.4 2.3 1.5 1.9 2.7 2.5 2.9 3.2 2.7 2.9 2.8 2.2 2.5 3.5 4.4 4.0 3.7 3.9 3.8 3.8 4.7 5.4 4.9 4.5 3.0 0.7 -0.5 0.1 -0.8 -1.3 -1.5 -1.7 -2.4 -1.8 -1.3 -0.1 1.4 2.1 1.4 1.6 1.7 1.4 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.4 1,2 1.7 2.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.3 3.3 3.8 3.7 3.3 2.6 2.3 2.2 1.8 100.0 102.0 103.4 105.7 108.9 111.6 113.1 115.2 119.0 121.8 125.0 130.5 129.725 133.132 134.328 138.017 2.0 1.4 2.2 3.0 2.5 1.3 1.9 3.3 2.4 2.6 4.4 -0.6 2.6 0.9 2.7 ATTACHMENT "3" With City of Spokane (Not including "other" Revenue) Estimated Percent of Services based on 2010 Activity Study (Excluding Investigation) Cost Spokane County 23.84% $258,914 Spokane Valley 22.29% $242,081 Millwood 0.43% $ 4,670 Cheney 0.96% $ 10,426 Liberty Lake 0.78% $ 8,471 City of Spokane 51.70% $561,488 TOTAL: 100% $1,086,050 ATTACHMENT "4" Without City of Spokane (Not including "other" Revenue Estimated Percent of Services based on 2010 Activity Study (Excluding Investigation) Cost Spokane County 49.36% $258,912 Spokane Valley 46.16% $242,079 Millwood 0.88% $ 4,670 Cheney 1.98% $ 10,426 Liberty Lake 1.62% $ 8,471 TOTAL: 100% $524,558 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 22, 2016 Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ information ® admin. report Department Director Approval: ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative report — Discussion on removal of snow and ice from public sidewalks. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 7.05.040(C). PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adoption of nuisance provisions in 2003, amended over the years, most recently in 2012. BACKGROUND: Questions have arisen regarding what options the City has with regard to getting public sidewalks cleared of accumulations of snow and ice. The accompanying PowerPoint presentation is a general discussion on the various aspects of this issue. Following Council discussion and direction, staff will identify a future action plan for further Council discussion. This incremental approach is likely to take several meetings as the Council and staff discuss various options. OPTIONS: NA. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: NA. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Unknown. STAFF CONTACT: Cary P. Driskell, City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint presentation discussing options. SNOW AND ICE ON SIDEWALKS - DISCUSSION POINTS Cary Driskell City Attorney, City of Spokane Valley Erik Lamb Deputy City Attorney, City of Spokane Valley March 22, 2016 City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney i Broad topic discussion tonight The City has an interest in having snow and ice removed from public sidewalks. We are raising this now so we can address this early and then implement any changes well in advance of the next snow season. Accumulations of snow and ice can make pedestrian use of sidewalks difficult, including use of assistive -mobility devices. Accumulations of snow and ice on sidewalks can significantly limit access to businesses, affecting their profitability. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Types of accumulations of snow and ice 1. Natural accumulations. These result from snowfall and the normal freezing that occurs in winter. 2. Accumulations from other sources. These result from activities such as snow plowing by City crews, or plowing by private contractors from parking lots onto public sidewalks. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Responsibility for removal Every jurisdiction I could find places responsibility for removal of snow and ice from sidewalks on the adjoining property owner, which includes snow and ice deposited by city snow plows. Doing so is within a city's authority under the police powers pursuant to the Washington State Constitution, Article ii, Section ii, and pursuant to RCW 35A.ii.o2o (powers vested in legislative bodies of non -charter and charter code cities). Spokane Valley already places this responsibility on adjoining property owner pursuant to SVMC 7.o5.o4o(C) as a nuisance. As discussed below, this has not been wholly effective in addressing this issue. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney SVMC 7.05.040(C) SVMC 7.05.040 states as follows: No person, firm, or entity shall erect, contrive, cause, continue, maintain, or permit to exist any public nuisances within the City, including any public rights-of-way abutting a person, firm, or entity's property. Prohibited public nuisances include, but are not limited to: (C) Sidewalks: 3. Snow or ice not removed from a public sidewalk within a reasonable time. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Treating snow and ice as a nuisance Addressing snow and ice removal from sidewalks through the nuisance code seemed to be a logical approach, and the City has increased its use of this over the past year, but it has not proven as effective as we would have liked. It is not written for these types of conditions. Snow and ice to be removed "within a reasonable time". Self -abatement process for any nuisance allows up to 3o days. Civil penalties associated with a nuisance violation are $500 per event, which is not proportionate with this type of violation. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Consider using infraction citation An enforcement option that various jurisdictions use is to issue a civil infraction, which is then handled in District Court like a speeding ticket. If this option is chosen, we could classify a violation as a Class 4 infraction, the lowest level under Washington's infraction system, and carries a base penalty of $25, plus mandatory court costs of 1o5% of the base penalty, totaling $51.25. A repeat violation (for instance within 12 months) could result in the same penalty, or categorize any additional violations as a Class 3 infraction ($5o base, $52.5o costs = $io2.5o total). City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Alternatives for enforcement - summary Continue using SVMC 7.05.o4o(C). 2. Implement infraction system with chosen infraction level. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney 8 Educational program Regardless of the approach adopted, the City will want to continue to broadly distribute an educational program to inform residents and businesses of what the expectations are, including why it is important to comply. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Existing educational program Annual letter to all registered Spokane Valley businesses Brochures distributed at i6 community locations Included in all SnowInfo updates sent to Media Release and SnowInfo email lists Distributed via RSS feed Included in recorded SnowInfo line message Posted to website City News and Snowlnfo pages Featured in Winter HotTopic newsletter mailed City-wide Covered by print, broadcast and online media City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney 10 Additional considerations The City will want to clearly communicate several additional things: Snow and ice deposited on public sidewalks by City snow plows is the responsibility of the adjoining property owner to remove. This is unquestionably unpleasant, but the adjoining property owner is in the best position by far to perform this task both from the standpoint of physical location and timeliness. It is a safety hazard and illegal to move snow from sidewalks, private driveways, and private parking lots onto the roadway, which can in certain circumstances result in a criminal charge under state and local law. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Council discussion At this point, staff is interested to hear what discussion the Council has on the issues raised in tonight's presentation. After considering those discussions, staff will begin to put together more refined options for additional Council discussion, including citizen input. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 22, 2016 Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ information ® admin. report AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative report materials. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 70.93.097. Department Director Approval: ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session — securing and covering transported waste PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council heard an administrative report on December 1, 2015. BACKGROUND: State law requires that cities having a manned waste transfer station adopt a code provision making it unlawful to transport waste materials on public rights-of-way unless those materials are covered or otherwise secured from coming out of the vehicle and littering the right-of-way. Further, State law authorizes those cities to collect a fee for anyone arriving at a transfer station with an uncovered load. The City of Spokane, through the Regional Solid Waste System, provided transfer station services in Spokane Valley until a year ago, and enforced its own code provision in relation to charging vehicles arriving to dump materials that were uncovered an extra fee. Spokane Valley established its own solid waste system in late 2014 and has determined that RCW 70.93.097 requires that the City adopt Code provisions addressing these issues since it has contracted with Sunshine Recyclers, Inc. for the use of the University Transfer Station. On December 1, 2015, staff presented an administrative report on the need for City code amendments to comply with RCW 70.93.097. During that report, Staff discussed proposed code amendments that would closely track RCW 70.93.097. The proposed amendments also included additional language making it illegal to transport hazardous materials or biomedical waste in a manner that endangers or is likely to endanger any person or property. Regulating hazardous materials or biomedical waste is not necessary under the statute, but some jurisdictions have a similar provision to have a tool to address instances when it comes up. The proposal also included the authority for the City to collect a fee from any self -haulers who arrive at the Sunshine University Transfer Station with an uncovered load. As discussed at that administrative report, the fee amount is not specified in State law, and so is subject to the discretion of the local legislative body. At the administrative report, Council requested additional information on what fee levels other cities have, how they are enforced, and other potential options in lieu of a fee. In response, Staff has reviewed code provisions from other cities to determine how comprehensive various approaches are. Jurisdictions impose a wide range of fees, which we found ranging from $5 upwards to $25 for initial violations, and increased amounts for repeat offenders. Further, staff contacted several jurisdictions regarding implementation and enforcement of their fees. Generally, other jurisdictions indicated challenges in imposing fees regularly. Several do not enforce fees, or give warnings or other educational materials in lieu of fees. Those that enforce fees indicated that there are often difficulties and enforcement often leads to angry customers. Staff also met with Sunshine Recyclers, Inc., to discuss possible options at the University Transfer Station. Through our discussion with Sunshine, they indicated that it does not appear to be a major issue for self -haulers dumping at the University Transfer Station. Thus, instead of setting a fee, staff is recommending a revised approach and has included a revised proposal for Council's consideration. The City is still required to adopt regulations prohibiting the transportation of uncovered or unsecured waste loads, so the revised proposal continues to track RCW 70.93.097 and makes it illegal to transport waste without securing or covering it. However, in lieu of imposing a fee, the revised proposal provides that Council may impose a fee to be collected at the University Transfer Station at such time and in such amounts as it may determine necessary through modification to the City's adopted fee resolution. Since there will not be an immediate fee, staff will work on creating appropriate educational materials (e.g., brochures or website materials) that can be distributed by Sunshine at the University Transfer Station to those that do not have secured or covered loads. We have included mock- ups of an example website and examples of brochures that other jurisdictions distribute. Further, staff will work with Sunshine on tracking the number of haulers that do not have secured or covered loads in order to determine whether a fee may in fact be needed and what amount might be appropriate. At that time, staff would return to Council and Council could establish such fee as it may deem appropriate. The remainder of the revised proposal tracks the original proposal and includes the additional language making it illegal to transport hazardous materials or biomedical waste in a manner that endangers or is likely to endanger any person or property. Finally, in order to enforce the new provisions, the proposal provides for penalties of violations. Some cities make a violation a misdemeanor, while some make it an infraction. A class 2 civil infraction carries a penalty of $125, but with statutory assessments (additional fees) it comes to approximately $265. If the Council would prefer making a lower infraction, the penalty plus assessments of a class 3 civil infraction are approximately $120. The proposed penalty for illegally transporting hazardous or biomedical waste is a misdemeanor, punishable by up to 90 days in jail and/or up to $1,000 fine. This is proposed due to the higher risk of harm to the public if there is a violation. OPTIONS: Make changes as appropriate prior to adoption. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to place on agenda for first reading. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None STAFF CONTACT: Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: Revised proposed code language relating to transportation of uncovered materials Mock-up of example website to educate about uncovered/unsecured loads Example brochures from other jurisdictions SVMC 7.10 — TRANSPORTATION OF WASTE MATERIALS 7.10.010 - Transportation of waste. Pursuant to RCW 70.93.097, as now adopted or subsequently amended, it is unlawful for any person to operate any vehicle or combination of vehicles which is transporting waste materials upon the public rights-of-way of the City unless the waste material being transported is covered or otherwise secured to prevent the waste materials from escaping from the vehicle, except pursuant to SVMC 7.10.020. 7.10.020 - Exemption. A vehicle which is transporting uncovered waste materials as prohibited in SVMC 7.10.010 shall be exempt from any monetary penalty if that waste is otherwise secured or is unlikely to spill from the vehicle. Pursuant to RCW 70.93.097, as now adopted or subsequently amended, a vehicle transporting sand, dirt, or gravel in compliance with the provisions of RCW 46.61.655 shall not be required to secure or cover a load. 7.10.030 - Additional fee for uncovered load at transfer station. The City shall impose and charge a fee to any vehicle arriving at any City owned, operated, or contracted transfer station with an uncovered or unsecured load of waste material in violation of chapter 7.10 SVMC, which shall be in addition to any regular fees associated with dumping waste materials at the transfer station, at such time and in such amounts as the Council may hereafter determine necessary pursuant to an adopted fee schedule. 7.10.040 - Transportation of biomedical or hazardous waste. It is unlawful for any person to transport biomedical or hazardous waste in such a fashion that said waste endangers or is likely to endanger any person or property. 7.10.050 — Violator liable for all cleanup costs. Any person or company responsible for a violation of chapter 7.10 SVMC shall be responsible for the cleanup and removal of any waste materials on public or private property. Failure to remove such waste materials within a time period specified by the City may result in the City undertaking the removal for the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. In that event, the person(s) or company(s) responsible for the deposit of the waste materials shall be responsible for all actual costs of abatement and all expenses incurred in attempting to collect the abatement costs. 7.10.060 — Penalties. (A) Any person found in violation of SVMC 7.10.010 shall be found to have committed a [class 2/3 civil infraction], and shall be subject to the monetary penalties set forth in RCW 7.80.120, as adopted or subsequently amended, and any applicable statutory assessments. (B) Any person found in violation of SVMC 7.10.040 shall be found to have committed a misdemeanor, and shall be subject to the penalties set forth in SVMC 1.10.010(A), as adopted or subsequently amended. Uncovered &Unsecured Office of the City Attorney Trash Loads Background RCW 70.93.097 State law requires that cities with a staffed transfer station adopt an ordinance to reduce litter from vehicles by making it unlawful to transport waste materials unless those materials are covered or otherwise secured in such a way as to prevent the materials from escaping the vehicle. As part of the ordinance, cities shall adopt a fee at the transfer station to be paid by anyone who has an uncovered or unsecured load. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney moin. roun• - cont.= Washington State Department of Ecology Roughly 4o percent of litter on highways comes from unsecured loads. It is estimated that road litter causes 25,000 accidents in North America each year, nearly loo of which are fatal. Every year, road debris causes about 400 accidents on Washington State highways. 4o percent of the litter -related violations issued by Washington State Patrol in 2007 were for a failure to secure a load; 21 percent were issued for debris escaping from those loads. More than 12 million pounds of litter comes from vehicles each year in Washington State. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Background —cont. The City of Spokane, through the Regional Solid Waste System, provided transfer station services in Spokane Valley in the past. Spokane Valley established its own solid waste system in late 2014 and has determined that RCW 70.93.097 requires that the City adopt Code provisions addressing these issues. Uncovered load fees in other jurisdictions range from $5.0o to $25.00. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Background - cont. While some jurisdictions enforce an uncovered or unsecured load fee through the transfer station facilities operators, many jurisdictions primarily provide education and warnings to those with uncovered or unsecured loads. Fees are issued to repeat offenders. Staff and Sunshine Recyclers met to discuss the need for a fee and how it would be imposed at the University Transfer Station. Sunshine has indicated uncovered/unsecured loads do not appear to be a major problem Sunshine is willing to distribute educational materials to those with uncovered/unsecured loads and track the number of uncovered or unsecured loads to determine the need for a fee. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney I1Tpter7.1OSVMC As required by State law, 7.10 adopts code provisions directing that the transportation of uncovered or unsecured waste materials is unlawful. The City shall impose and charge a fee for uncovered or unsecured loads of waste materials at such time and in the amount Council determines necessary pursuant to an adopted fee schedule. Allows educational process and tracking to determine if, when, and what amount of a fee may be necessary or appropriate Exemptions and penalties. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney ducational Component Begin with a process of educating and informing the public of the uncovered or unsecured trash load ordinance and the dangers associated with traveling with an uncovered or unsecured load. Create and disseminate educational information to the public. Examples include: Pamphlets (available at the transfer station and city hall). City Webpage. Press Release. Sunshine University Transfer Station facility operators assist the City in educating the public and disseminating informational brochures. Sunshine University Transfer Station facility operators track the number of uncovered and unsecured loads to determine whether a fee is needed. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Questions? City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney 8 Solid Waste. Uncovered Loads. Fee for Uncovered Loads fdefaultaspk City of SPOKANE VALLEY i u c rArc j ivj c i. Washington YOUR GOVERNMENT - DEPARTMENTS - SERVICES - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - Departments Departments - Home Community and Economic Development ► City Attorney City Clerk ► City Council ► City Manager ► Directory Documents Finance ► Forms Human Resources ► Operations & Admin ► Parks & Recreation ► Police Public Works ► Solid Waste ► Solid Waste n Uncovered and Unsecured Loads n Uncovered and Unsecured Loads Uncovered Loads Secure your load for safer roads! It is illegal to transport solid waste without properly securing or covering the load. Driving with an unsecured load is against Washington State and local law. If you are caught by police driving with an unsecured load, you may face a fine of $ . What is an Unsecured Load? An unsecured load has not been fastened in or attached to the vehicle with tarps, rope, straps, netting, or chains, so as to prevent any part of the load or the covering from becoming loose, detached, or leaving the vehicle while the vehicle is moving. "But I'm just going a short way and I won't be driving fast." Even if you are driving slowly for just a couple of blocks you are still required to secure your Toad. The law is clear - every vehicle that travels on every publicly maintained road must have a secured load_ "But what I'm hauling is so heavy it couldn't possibly fall out." Just because you can't imagine it happening doesn't mean it hasn't happened_ Each year, heavy items such as large truck tires, spools of wire, and large pieces of wood fall from vehicles and end up on our roadways creating hazards for motorists_ Take the time to always secure your load_ "But my load is below the top of the truck bed." Even with a small load, items can shift and become loose or airborne_ Don't risk it- secure your load. How do I Secure a Load? A load is secure when nothing can slide, shift, fall, or sift onto the roadway, or become airborne_ Cover your load with a tarp_ Covering your load with a tarp and then securely fastening the tarp to the vehicle is good way to ensure that your Toad is secure. Tie down using rope, netting, straps, or chains. Tie large items directly to your vehicle_ Make sure that any covering is securely tied down. Put lighter items lower and place heavier items on top to help keep them in place and secure the heavy items to your vehicle. Don't overload your vehicle_ • Double-check that your load is secure. Here are some questions to ask yourself: Is there any chance of debris or cargo falling or blowing out of my vehicle? Is my load secured at the back, sides, and top? What would happen to my load if I had to brake suddenly or if I hit a bump or if another vehicle hit mine? Would I want my loaded vehicle driving through my neighborhood? Would I feel safe if I were driving behind my vehicle? Why should you secure your load? • It prevents injuries and saves lives. • It prevents litter. • It will cost you money if you don't • histhe law. Solid Waste » Uncovered and Unsecured Loads » Uncovered and Unsecured Loads Uncovered Loads Secure your load for safer roads! It is illegal to transport solid waste without properly securing or covering the load. Driving with an unsecured load is against Washington State and local law. If you are caught by police driving with an unsecured load, you may face a fine of $ What is an Unsecured Load? An unsecured load has not been fastened in or attached to the vehicle with tarps, rope, straps, netting, or chains, so as to prevent any part of the load or the covering from becoming loose, detached, or leaving the vehicle while the vehicle is moving. "But I'm just going a short way and I won't be driving fast." Even if you are driving slowly for just a couple of blocks you are still required to secure your load. The law is clear — every vehicle that travels on every publicly maintained road must have a secured load. "But what I'm hauling is so heavy it couldn't possibly fall out." Just because you can't imagine it happening doesn't mean it hasn't happened. Each year, heavy items such as large truck tires, spools of wire, and large pieces of wood fall from vehicles and end up on our roadways creating hazards for motorists. Take the time to always secure your load. "But my load is below the top of the truck bed." Even with a small load, items can shift and become loose or airborne. Don't risk it — secure your load. How do I Secure a Load? A load is secure when nothing can slide, shift, fall, or sift onto the roadway, or become airborne. • Cover your load with a tarp. Covering your load with a tarp and then securely fastening the tarp to the vehicle is good way to ensure that your load is secure. • Tie down using rope, netting, straps, or chains. Tie large items directly to your vehicle. Make sure that any covering is securely tied down. • Put lighter items lower and place heavier items on top to help keep them in place and secure the heavy items to your vehicle. • Don't overload your vehicle. • Double-check that your load is secure. Here are some questions to ask yourself: • Is there any chance of debris or cargo falling or blowing out of my vehicle? • Is my load secured at the back, sides, and top? • What would happen to my load if I had to brake suddenly or if I hit a bump or if another vehicle hit mine? • Would I want my loaded vehicle driving through my neighborhood? • Would I feel safe if I were driving behind my vehicle? Why should you secure your load? • It prevents injuries and saves lives. • It prevents litter. • It will cost you money if you don't. • It is the law. PREVENT LITTER AND KEEP WASHINGTON ROADS CLEAN AND SAFE "No person shall throw, drop, deposit, discard, or otherwise dispose of litter upon any public property in the state...whether from a vehicle or otherwise." (Source: RCW70.93.060 (1)). Around 37 percent of all litter -related citations issued by Washington State Patrol are for a failure to secure a load. An additional 22 percent of citations are issued for debris escaping from loads. (Source: Washington State Patrol Records). Covering or securing your load will keep money in your pocket. You'll keep our roads safer. And you'll be doing your part to keep Washington clean and beautiful. Litter and it will hurt. REPORT VIOLATORS DEPARTMENT OF 866 -LITTER -1 866-548-8371 ECOLOGY State of Washington For a 'Tips For Secured Loads" video or more information, visit www.litter.wa.gov. Solid Waste & Financial Assistance Program Publication Number 08-07-030 If you need this publication in an alternate format, please contact the Solid Waste & Financial Assistance Program at360-407-6900. Persons with hearing loss can call 711 for Washington Relay Service. Persons with a speech disability can call 877-833-6341. NOTICE: This document is intended for information purposes only. Nothing in this document constitutes professional advice, nor does any information in this document constitute a comprehensive or complete statement of the issues discussed or the laws relating thereto. The Department of Ecology will not be liable for any loss or damages, including loss or damages resulting from implementation of methods or procedures described herein. Tips For Secured Loads Ask yourself... "Would I feel safe driving behind my vehicle?" Litter and it will hurt. REPORT VIOLATORS 866 -LITTER -1 866-548-8371 If the answer is "No," you need to do a better job securing your cargo. Each year in North America, road litter, either dumped on purpose by motorists, or fallen accidentally from unsecured loads, causes 25,000 accidents, nearly 100 of them fatal. Here in Washington, road litter also hurts. On average, over 400 accidents involving road debris happen on state highways each year. (Source: Washington State Department of Transportation). Many accidents and injuries could be prevented simply by securing vehicle loads more effectively. The tips included in this brochure provide common sense guidelines for securing loads. Each load is different, and the driver of every vehicle must make sure that nothing in the vehicle can fly out or shift during transit. Littering in Washington brings stiff fines. When material escapes your vehicle because your load isn't secure, you're littering. State law (RCW 46.61.655) specifically requires that "No vehicle shall be driven or moved on any public highway unless such vehicle is so constructed or loaded as to prevent any of its load from dropping, sifting, leaking or otherwise escaping..." Simply traveling with an unsecured load is against the law. If any part of your load can escape your vehicle — even if it doesn't — you can get a ticket. In the event something you're hauling flies off or leaks out and harms a person or property, the penalty hurts. Tickets from Washington State Patrol and local police can cost up to several thousand dollars. You might even spend time in jail. If you arrive at a landfill or transfer station with an unsecured load of garbage, prepare to pay extra. Please be aware that your community may have a load ordinance that goes beyond the state law and requires loads to be covered. Check with local authorities to be sure you are in compliance. What is a "secured load"? A load is secure when no cargo can slide, shift, fall, sift onto the roadway, or become airborne. • Secure all cargo to prevent movement forward and backward, side to side, and up and down. • Secure all cargo against wind and other forces that can cause it to become airborne. • Secure all cargo against sifting through the bed of a truck or trailer and onto the roadway. USE THE RIGHT TIE -DOWNS TO SECURE YOUR LOADS. The first step in securing a load begins with tie -downs such as straps, ropes, or chains. Weight and gravity alone will not hold items in place Adjustable tie -down hooks can easily be moved to meet differing needs. (See Figure 1) A stake -hole eye bolt is a more solid but less adjustable option. These are inserted in the stake holes, then screwed and tightened into place. (See Figure 2) A cargo bar buttresses against the sides of the truck bed, helping to prevent items from sliding or tipping. (See Figure 3) Blocking devices such as sand bags or chocks, along with rubber mats, can reduce movement of cargo and help hold slippery items in place. (SeeFigure4) Webbed straps with tightening ratchets are some of the most secure, easiest -to -use tie -downs. As a general rule, the straps should be rated with a holding strength twice the weight of the load. (See Figure 5) Bungee cords should not be used as primary tie -downs. Bungee cords, along with twine, string, small gauge cord, or rope, may be used to secure items together inside a load. (See Figure 6) Cargo netting holds smaller, lighter items in place, but isn't designed to keep heavy items from sliding and shifting. (See Figure 7) Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 TIPS FOR SECURED LOADS There are several forces that can move or shift your loads: hitting a bump, turning a corner, sudden braking or going up a hill. These forces can tip items or send them flying onto the roadway. Wind can also turn any load into an airborne hazard. Lighter goes lower. Place lighter items in the bottom of the load so that heavier items can help hold items down. (See Figure 8) Keep the load below the top edge of the truck bed or trailer, if possible. (See Figure 9) Block items against each other or bundle them together to minimize shifting and movement. Place tall cargo against the back of the cab and strap upright cargo securely to the truck bed or trailer. Lay tall items flat in the truck bed or trailer, if possible. (See Figure 10) Block the wheels of equipment such as lawn mowers to prevent rolling. Wrap straps around and through wheeled equipment to further secure it. (See Figure 11) Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Securely seal all boxes, bags, and garbage cans to keep contents from blowing away. Wrap straps through and around items such as hand trucks and ladders. Secure the straps to anchor points in the bed of the truck or trailer. (See Figure 12) Buttress and strap small items such as shovels and rakes, gas cans, and paint cans together, and/or cover them with a secured tarp. Place items such as hand tools in the cab of the truck or in a toolbox secured to the bed of the truckortrailer. (See Figure 13) Secure cushions, pillows and other loose light items against the wind. (See Figure 14) Strap and secure mattresses and furniture to the vehicle, so no amount of wind or other forces can dislodge them. (see figure 15) Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Figure 15 Uncovered materials such as wallboard or cardboard may disintegrate in the rain. Cover items with a solid, water -proof tarp to prevent airborne debris. (See Figure 16) Fully cover loose material with a solid tarp and secure the tarp to the truck or trailer. All corners of a load should be tagged with red flags (one foot by one foot), if the load extends four feet beyond the bed of a truck or trailer. (See Figure 17) Remove all mud, rocks, or other debris from a vehicle's body, fenders, frame, undercarriage, wheels, and tires before driving on paved, public roads. (See Figure 18) Once underway, stop and check to see that nothing has loosened or shifted. (See Figure 19) Figure 16 Figure 17 Figure 18 Figure 19 Secure your load as if everyone you loved were in a car behind you. - Robin Abel, mother of Maria Federici "No vehicle shall be driven or moved on any public highway unless such vehicle is so constructed or loaded as to prevent any of its load from dropping, sifting, leaking, or otherwise escaping therefrom" (RCW 46.61.655). Washington State Law Allows these Fines: • Failure to secure load - first degree (causing bodily harm to another) - Up to $5000 and/or up to 1 year in jail (gross misdemeanor) • Failure to secure load - second degree (causing damage to property of another) - Up to $1000 and/or up to 90 days in jail (misdemeanor) Driving with unsecured load - traffic infraction - $216 Is there any chance of debris falling (or blowing) out of my vehicle? Would I feel safe if I were driving behind my vehicle? What would happen to my Toad if I had to brake suddenly or if I hit a bump? Would I want my loaded vehicle driving through my neighborhood? Is my load secured on top, on the sides, and in back? • AVOID FEES AND FINES • KEEP OUR ROADS SAFE • HELP PREVENT LITTER Do I need to drive slower than I normally do? Did I double-check my load to make etre it is secured? 4 Loads That Must be Secured • Garbage cans must be secured to the vehicle or trailer bed with lids fastened to the container, or they must be covered with a cargo net or tarp. • Sheets of plywood, OSB, drywall, or sheet metal must be tied down. • Cardboard boxes must be tied down or covered with a net. • Each large item, such as furniture, appliances, mattresses or box springs, etc., must be tied to the vehicle. • Yard waste must be tied down. • Garbage in bags must be completely covered with netting or tarp. • Liquids, such as motor oil and antifreeze for recycling, must be in closed containers that are tied to the vehicle or packed so that they cannot shift or fall over. Secure the load with enough cargo net, ropes, chains, straps, and/or bungee cords so the load cannot shift, move or fall out. Loads That Must be Covered & Secured • Loads with loose plastic bags or paper must be covered with a tarp. Construction or demolition debris must be covered with a tarp. Covering the load with a sheet of plywood that is secured to the vehicle is acceptable if no part of the load, such as lightweight material, can blow or fall out. • Roofing materials must be covered with a tarp, • Lightweight materials visible to attendant, like paper, loose plastic bags or containers, buckets, etc, must be covered with a tarp. • Garbage in bags must be covered with a net or a tarp. • Yard waste with leaves or other loose lightweight debris must be covered with a tarp. • Loose garbage must be covered with a tarp. • Recyclable materials such as cans, bottles and paper products in open containers must be covered with a tarp. Cover the load completely with a tarp. The tarp must be tied to the vehicle to secure the load. A tarp that is • flapping at the back, sides, front, or top is not secured. /'Secure Loads X Unsecure Loads Netting, straps, rope, chain and bungee cord can be used to tie each large item to the vehicle. There is nothing in this load that can blowout, so a cover is not needed. Load should be repacked and covered with tarp and/or a cargo net and secured to the vehicle's bed. REMEMBER T SECURE/COVER YOUR LOAD ✓ pgl�p� QLJ lo-O0FEEFOR LOADS UNSECOREDIUNCOVERED Tarp covers the entire load and is well tied to the vehicle. Top, sides and back of Toad are not secure. Debris can fall or fly out of moving vehicle. Got Household Hazardous Waste? Pack It Right! yr Properly Packed Use leak -proof tub or plastic lined cardboard box. Pack spaces with newspaper and put leaking containers in ZiploC` type bags. Improperly packaged and transported household hazardous waste (HHW) is dangerous to you, your family, pets, the environment and our staff. X Improperly Packed Never mix different products together. Do not let containers tip. Do not store leaking containers together. For facility hours, location and more info: http://www.kitsapgov.com/sw/modwastehtm • Keep products away from children and pets and out of the passenger compartment of your vehicle. If you are transporting HHW in a truck; secure the load with ties to prevent the load from shifting. • Keep products in their original containers. If you have used something different, label it. • Make sure items are well sealed, lids tight, not leaking. Keep broken or leaking containers separate from other items. • Place items in leak- proof tubs packed with newspaper. Put leaking containers into another tub or "Ziploc" type bag. Use cat litter or other absorbent if necessary. • Wrap fluorescent bulbs or tubes in newspaper to prevent breakage. Keep fluorescent bulbs or tubes separate from rest of load. • Do not bring large containers (over 5 gallons) or large loads (over 50 gallons) without calling first. • Empty paint cans and other containers may go in your regular trash. Remove lids. 43096 01114 Board of Yakima County Commissioners Ordinance 4-2005 Section 1. Yakima County Code Section 6.02.030 and all Ordinances amending said section are hereby amended as follows: "Unsecured Load" means a shipment of solid waste in or on a vehicle that is not covered with a tarp, inside an enclosed vehicle or otherwise secured or tied down by safety chains or other fastening devices in a manner that will prevent materials from spilling, escaping, falling or being blown or deposited outside the vehicle while the vehicle is in motion. For purposes of this definition, solid waste contained in trash bags that are not covered with a tarp, inside an enclosed vehicle or otherwise secured down is an unsecured load. Passenger vehicles $5.00 Trucks (over 3 yards) $ 1 5.00 Adopted May 31, 2005 Good Load Tie down with rope, bungee cords, netting or straps. Tie items directly to your vehicle including large items like appliances and garbage cans. Cover your load with a sturdy plastic tarp or net. Think about what would happen to your load if you had to stop suddenly or swerve. Put lighter weight things at the bottom of the load and don't overload your truck bed. Bad Load If your load is NOT inside a vehicle, covered with a tarp and/or tied down with ropes, straps or a net , you have an UNSECURED LOAD. County employees are required to issue you an unsecured load fine. Secure Your Load Unsecured loads create litter and can cause accidents and injuries to motorists. Even if you're going a short distance and not driving on the highway, you are required by law to secure your load. YAKIMA Yakima County Public Services Solid Waste Division 7151 Roza Hill Drive Yakima, WA 98901 Phone: 509-574-2450 Fax: 509-574-2458 www.co.yakima.wa.us/publicservices/solidwaste.htm Why Should I Secure My Load? Unsecured Toads can cause serious injury and death: • In February 2004, Maria Federici was critically injured near Renton, WA, when an entertainment center fell from the back of a trailer being pulled by a vehicle in front of her. A 2 by 6 foot piece of particle board flew through her windshield, hitting her in the face. Maria permanently lost her eyesight and has endured numerous surgeries including complete facial reconstruction. Maria's bill went into effect July 2005. Under the law, failure to secure a load that causes an injury is now a gross misdemeanor and carries a maximum punishment of one year in jail and a $5,000 fine. • A loose tarp causes fatal crash on 1-5. In January 2006, a young man was killed and a five year old boy critically injured on 1-5 in Tacoma after a tow truck crashed into their car while swerving to avoid a tarp. • In February 2006, a woman and her young niece were nearly killed on HWY 101 near Hoquiam when a huge piece of plywood flew off a truck and right into their windshield. The plywood shattered the windshield and came within inches of the driver's face. An Unsecured Load Will CostYou • As of July 2005, the fine for transporting an unsecured load is $194. If an item falls off a vehicle and causes bodily harm, the driver now faces gross misdemeanor charges and penalties up to $5,000 and/or up to a year in prison. • In Washington State the fine for littering something as small as a piece of paper is $103 and can go up to $5,000 for bigger items such as a mattress or piece of furniture. • In Yakima County, the unsecured load fee at our solid waste facilities can be $5.00 or $15.00 depending on the capacity of your vehicle. You can dispute your fine by obtaining a dispute form from the scale house attendant or administration office. Digital photos are recorded of disputed loads at the scales to assist us in determining if a violation was made. Thank you for covering your Toad! SecureYour Load For Safer Roads Across North American, over 25,000 accidents are caused each year by litter that is either purposefully dumped by motorists or that falls out of vehicles with unsecured loads. Nearly 100 of those accidents are fatal. According to the Washington State Department of Transportation, road debris causes about 350 accidents every year on state highways. 34% of the litter -related violations issued by Washington State Patrol in 2003 were for a failure to secure a load. Unsecured loads cause up to 25% of Washington State's roadside litter. (Source: www.ci.seattle.wa.us) Meeting Date: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action March 22, 2016 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative report — discussion regarding independent investigation — requested resignation of City Manager Mike Jackson. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: NA. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: During discussion of the Advance Agenda at the March 8, 2016 Council meeting, Council requested that staff prepare discussion points on a potential independent investigation regarding the factual circumstances surrounding the February 23, 2016 motion to request that City Manager Mike Jackson resign. BACKGROUND: At 5:00 p.m. on February 23, 2016, the City Council conducted a special meeting for the purpose of reviewing the job performance of a public employee. Following an executive session, Council reconvened in open session and a motion was made to request City Manager Mike Jackson's resignation. Following public comment, the Council voted 4-3 to request Mr. Jackson's resignation. Questions have been asked by members of the public regarding (1) the legal sufficiency of the notice of the meeting that was given to the public in advance of the special meeting, (2) the legal sufficiency of the notice of the meeting that was given to individual Councilmembers in advance of the meeting, and (3) whether there was an illegal meeting between the four members of the majority which voted to request Mr. Jackson's resignation, in advance of the meeting on February 23, 2016. During the Advance Agenda portion of the March 8, 2016 Council meeting, there was consensus for staff to prepare a discussion about options for hiring an independent investigator to look into these factual issues. Staff believes the following would be relevant to be included in the Council's discussion: 1. The investigator would be hired by staff rather than Council to avoid accusations of bias for or against a certain outcome; 2. The investigator should have no prior contractual or employment relationship with the City for the same reason; 3. The investigator should preferably be based outside of the Spokane region; 4. The investigator should deliver his/her final report publicly to the Council in open session with a brief synopsis of the findings; 5. The investigator should provide a copy of his/her report to each Councilmember the day prior to delivering it to the public in open session; 6. All Councilmembers should commit to working with the investigator to ensure all relevant facts are made part of the investigator's report; 7. All Councilmembers should agree to not talk about the factual circumstances during public Council meetings until the investigator's report is delivered; 8. All discussions between the Councilmembers and the investigator, or staff and the investigator (if any), shall remain confidential until the investigator delivers the report publicly; 9. The Council may want to consider delaying the start of the investigation until such time as the City has resolved all outstanding issues regarding Mr. Jackson's separation from the City so that these two issues are kept separate as much as possible under the circumstances; and 10. Does Council have any suggested discussion topics? OPTIONS: (1) Consensus for staff to draft a motion for Council consideration at a future meeting which includes all of the listed considerations above, except number(s) ; or (2) take other action as appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to move forward with a motion on a future agenda to authorize the Deputy City Manager to finalize and execute a contract with an independent investigator to investigate and issue a report to the City Council regarding (1) the legal sufficiency of the notice of the meeting that was given to the public in advance of the special meeting, (2) the legal sufficiency of the notice of the meeting that was given to individual Councilmembers in advance of the meeting, and (3) whether there was an illegal meeting between the four members of the majority which voted to request Mr. Jackson's resignation, in advance of the meeting on February 23, 2016. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Unknown at this time. STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: To: From: Re: DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA as of March 17, 2016; 8:25 a.m. Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative Council & Staff City Clerk, by direction of City Manager Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings March 29, 2016, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. ACTION ITEM: 1. Motion Consideration: Independent Investigative Counsel — Cary Driskell NON -ACTION ITEMS: 2. Admin Report: Solid Waste Collection — Eric Guth, Morgan Koudelka, Erik Lamb 3. Comp Plan Water Rights/Districts Discussion — Adam Jackson, Henry Allen 4. WSDOT Call for Projects (Bicycles, and Safe Routes to School) — Eric Guth 5. FASTLANE and TIGER Grants Update — Eric Guth 6. Comp Plan Goals and Policies Discussion — Lori Barlow 7. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins April 5, 2016, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Comp Plan Tiny Homes Discussion — Micki Harnois 2. Annual Comp Plan Amendment (CPA -2016-0001) — Karen Kendall 3. Solid Waste Contract/Road Wear Fee — Eric Guth 4. Port District Update — John Hohman 5. Rescue Taskforce Update — Chief Van Leuven 6. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins [due Mon, Mar 21] (30 minutes) (25 minutes) (20 minutes) (15 minutes) (15 minutes) (60 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 170 minutes] [due Mon, Mar 28] (15 minutes) (20 minutes) (15 minutes) (15 minutes) (30 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 100 minutes] April 12, 2016, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Motion Consideration: Approval of WSDOT Call for Projects — Eric Guth 3. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins [due Mon, Apr 4] (5 minutes) (10 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 20 minutes] April 19, 2016, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. First Reading 2016 LTGO Bond Ordinance (City Hall) — Mark Calhoun 2. Tiny Houses — Ian Robertson, (Mark Calhoun) 3. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins [due Mon, Apr 11] (20 minutes) (30 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 55 minutes] Friday, April 22, 2016; 9:30 noon; Spokane Regional Council of Governments meeting Spokane County Fair & Expo Center, Conference Facility, 404 NHavana Street April 26, 2016, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Apr 18] 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes) 2. First Reading Ordinance, Annual Comp Plan Amendment (CPA -2016-0001) — Karen Kendall (20 minutes) 3. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) 4. Info Only: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: 30 minutes] May 3, 2016, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Apr 25] 1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) Draft Advance Agenda 3/17/2016 8:36:44 AM Page 1 of 2 May 10, 2016, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Second Reading Ordinance, Annual Comp Plan Amendment (CPA -2016-0001) 3. Second Reading 2016 LTGO Bond Ordinance (City Hall) — Mark Calhoun 4. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins May 17, 2016, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins Mav 24, 2016, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins 3. Info Only: Department Reports May 31, 2016, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins June 7, 2016, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins [due Mon, May 2] (5 minutes) — Karen Kendall(10 mins) (10 minutes) (5 minutes) [due Mon, May 9] (5 minutes) [due Mon, May 16] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [due Mon, May 23] (5 minutes) [due F May 27] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) June 14 2016, Special Mtg, Budget Workshop, 8:30 a.m.- 4:30 p.m. (no evening mtg) [due Mon, June 6] Council Chambers June 21, 2016, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins June 28, 2016, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins 3. Info Only: Department Reports *time for public or Council comments not included OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS: Avista Electrical Franchise AWC Conference (June 21-24) Carnahan & 8th Domestic Violence Advocacy (Police) Drug Enforcement Update — Rick VanLeuven Economic Development Marketing Plan Emergency Preparedness Fire /Police Depts Rescue Task Force Greenhouse Gas Emissions Policy Intelligence -led policing John Wayne Trail Resolution, ext Hiawatha Trail Ord 15-023 Marijuana Ext/Renew [unlicensed medical shops] (expires 6/9/16) Ord 16-003 Mining Ext (expires 8/21/16) Public Safety Ad Hoc Committees SVMC 2.45 Review/Discussion Draft Advance Agenda 3/17/2016 8:36:44 AM [due Mon, June 13] (5 minutes) [due Mon, June 20] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) SRTMC Agreement (June/July 2016) TIP 2017-2022 (May/June) Trans -Pacific Partnership Trade Agreement Page 2 of 2 Spokane ..+ric Valley City of Spokane Valley Community Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 02/29/2016 Page Title 1 Cover Sheet 2 Pre -Application Meetings Requested 3 Online Applications Received 4 Construction Applications Received 5 Land Use Applications Received 6 Construction Permits Issued 7 Land Use Applications Approved 8 Development Inspections Performed 9 Code Enforcement 10 Revenue 11 Building Permit Valuations Printed 03/01/2016 07:12 Page 1 of 11 Spokane .000 Valley Pre -Application Meetings Requested Community Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 02/29/2016 A Pre -Application Meeting is a service provided to help our customers identify the code requirements related to their project proposal. Community Development scheduled a total of 13 Pre -Application Meetings in February 2016. 15 10 .1��ii IIIr�r��i til )i7 II.11"I';• 11rV,{I,1,;G�r,Gl�)l,i.'i1111�ll;pj;1i;! i,!i!ry,iG1�I,!!!'!!!'!.',I !!;lll.,J;i,ijl irI 71 �oa Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Commercial Pre -App Land Use Pre -Application Meeting Monthly Totals Annual Total To -Date: 24 Land Use Pre -Application Commercial Pre -App Meeting Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Se 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 Oct Nov Dec 0 0 0 0 5 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Printed 03/01/2016 07:12 Page 2 of 11 Community Development Online Applications Report 01/01/2016 - 02/29/2016 Online Applications Received Community Development received a total of 190 Online Applications in February 2016. 200 100 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Trade Permit Sign Permit Right of Way Permit Reroof Permit Demolition Permit Approach Permit - Seriesl Approach Permit Demolition Permit Reroof Permit Right of Way Permit Sign Permit Trade Permit Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 101 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 55 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 105 189 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Annual Total To -Date: Printed 03/01/2016 08:04 294 Page 1 of 1 Spokan' ems``` 41111.y Construction Applications Received Community Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 02/29/2016 Community Development received a total of 443 Construction Applications in February 2016. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Commercial - New Commercial - TI Residential - New ® Other Construction Permits Commercial - New Commercial - TI Residential - New Commercial - Trade Residential - Trade Residential - Accessory Demolition Sign Other Construction Permits Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 4 2 0 0 0 0 15 10 0 0 0 0 0 16 19 0 0 0 0 0 *28 *25 0 0 0 0 0 0 *109 *114 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 *3 *4 0 0 0 0 0 0 *8 *13 0 0 0 0 0 *144 *248 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 329 443 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Annual Total To -Date: Printed 03/01/2016 07:13 772 Page 4 of 11 *Includes Online Applications. Spokane ....IF Valley Land Use Applications Received Community Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 02/29/2016 Community Development received a total of 58 Land Use Applications in February 2016. 60 40 20 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Boundary Line Adjustment Short Plat Preliminary gm Long Plat Preliminary Binding Site Plan Preliminary Final Platting Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Administrative Exception/Interpretation Other Land Use Permits Boundary Line Adjustment Short Plat Preliminary Long Plat Preliminary Binding Site Plan Preliminary Final Platting Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Administrative Exception/Interpretation Other Land Use Permits Monthly Totals Annual Total To -Date: Printed 03/01/2016 07:13 95 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 46 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 Page 5 of 11 Spokane 4,00.0 Valley Construction Permits Issued Community Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 02/29/2016 Community Development issued a total of 367 Construction Permits in February 2016. 400 200 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Commercial - New Commercial - TI Residential - New ® Other Construction Permits Commercial - New Commercial - TI Residential - New Commercial - Trade Residential - Trade Residential - Accessory Demolition Sign Other Construction Permits Monthly Totals Annual Total To -Date: Printed 03/01/2016 07:14 663 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 113 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 182 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 296 367 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Page 6 of 11 Spokane ....IF Valley Land Use Applications Approved Community Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 02/29/2016 Community Development approved a total of 51 Land Use Applications in February 2016. 60 40 20 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Boundary Line Adjustment Short Plat Preliminary gm Long Plat Preliminary Binding Site Plan Preliminary Final Platting Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Administrative Exception/Interpretation Other Land Use Permits Boundary Line Adjustment Short Plat Preliminary Long Plat Preliminary Binding Site Plan Preliminary Final Platting Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Administrative Exception/Interpretation Other Land Use Permits Monthly Totals Annual Total To -Date: Printed 03/01/2016 07:14 80 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Oct Nov Dec 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 51 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Page 7 of 11 Spokane .000 Valley. Development Inspections Performed Community Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 02/29/2016 Community Development performed a total of 958 Development Inspections in February 2016. Development Inspections include building, planning, engineering and ROW inspections. 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014 2015 2016 Jan Fe Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 762 958 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 801 974 1,063 1,243 1,421 1,761 1,626 1,146 1,053 1,059 934 777 601 633 996 1,281 1,323 1,296 1,415 1,225 1,310 1,483 971 1,027 0 0 Printed 03/01/2016 07:15 Page 8 of 11 Totals Spokane ,osic Valley Code Enforcement Community Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 02/29/2016 Code Enforcement Officers responded to 23 citizen requests in the month of February. They are listed by type below. Please remember that all complaints, even those that have no violation, must be investigated. 30 20 10 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Complaint, Non -Violation Environmental General Nuisance Mi Property Complaint, Non -Violation Environmental General Nuisance Property Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0 0 2 12 0 0 0 0 1 0 21 0 4 1 0 o o 0 o o 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 o o 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 18 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Annual Total To -Date: 41 Printed 03/01/2016 07:15 Page 9 of 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane .� Valley Revenue 2016 Trend 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 Community Development Revenue totaled $191,658 in February 2016. 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 Community Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 02/29/2016 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec + 2016 2015 - Five -Year Trend Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep $213,319 $191,658 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $77,272 $72,713 $144,159 $149,274 $188,707 $202,096 $153,853 $116,015 $132,681 $131,066 $97,315 $74,775 $108,328 $161,174 $187,199 $123,918 $117,453 $162,551 $162,864 $99,587 $181,791 $99,627 $102,195 $1,581,462 $74,628 $66,134 $198,571 $160,508 $282,086 $152,637 $117,776 $127,540 $153,838 $149,197 $84,442 $97,689 $1,665,046 $158,912 $51,536 $102,538 $106,496 $184,176 $409,592 $277,553 $102,021 $129,174 $133,561 $98,386 $66,559 $1,820,504 $34,204 $60,319 $177,737 $173,932 $268,672 $223,888 $123,137 $103,703 $113,731 $112,542 $108,948 $51,745 $43,842 $77,247 $80,774 $118,237 $84,684 $106,909 $88,247 $83,949 $167,076 $78,237 $95,172 $58,881 Oct Nov Dec $0 $0 $ Totals $404,977 $75,414 $1,540,565 Printed 03/01/2016 07:16 Page 10 of 11 1,552,558 Spokane .Valley Building Permit Valuation 2016 Trend 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 Community Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 02/29/2016 Community Development Building Permit Valuation totaled $28,136,860 in February 2016. 30, 000, 000 25, 000, 000 20,000,000 15, 000, 000 10, 000, 000 5,000,000 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec -+•- 2016 2015 Five -Year Trend Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec $7.96M $28.14M $0.00M $0.00M $0.00M $0.00M $0.00M $0.00M $0.00M $0.00M $0.00M $6.76M $4.80M $6.38M $9.26M $18.09M $18.98M $11.21M $7.48M $10.66M $9.92M $4.89M $3.48M $2.93M $10.71M $8.07M $18.60M $6.73M $7.53M $5.05M $8.06M $5.15M $14.42M $5.86M $5.07M $3.18M $2.45M $9.90M $8.92M $34.58M $7.44M $6.37M $9.47M $12.01M $7.74M $3.60M $6.30M $25.49M $1.92M $3.59M $7.30M $22.22M $41.88M $32.91M $6.52M $8.11M $14.22M $7.25M $2.54M 173.95M'! $0.72M $2.95M $5.29M $5.32M $24.39M $33.08M $7.91M $9.89M $6.47M $8.78M $3.76M $1.66M p110.22M'. $1.46M $5.95M $5.03M $6.15M $2.53M $4.98M $3.83M $3.45M $21.54M $4.46M $3.97M $1.85M Totals $0.00M . $36.10M 111.90M $98.18M 111.96M Printed 03/01/2016 07:16 Page 11 of 11 Sj,�i'"ane Valley 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall®spokanevalley.org Memorandum To: Mark Calhoun, Deputy City Manager From: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director 1 Date: March 14, 2016 Re Finance Department Activity Report — February 2016 Following is information pertaining to Finance Department activities through the end of February 2016 and included herein is an updated 2015 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures through the end of December. For the next couple of months we'll focus our financial analysis on 2015 rather than 2016 because "how" 2015 wraps up will largely guide our decision making process as we progress towards the 2017 Budget development process. 2015 Yearend Process In February we have continued to work on closing the books for 2015, and we hope to have this process complete by the end of March. This process typically continues through March because we continue to receive additional information pertaining to both revenues and expenditures (particularly construction related activity). Following the closing of the books we will begin the process of preparing our annual financial report which will be finished by the end of May. We hope to have the State Auditor's Office on site by early June to begin the audit of 2015. 2015 Windstorm Costs and FEMA Grant Reimbursement The total 2015 costs related to the response and cleanup of the 2015 Windstorm last November came in at about $169,000. Additional costs necessary to repair City parks to their prior condition are expected to be about $100,000 during 2016, and we expect these costs to be included as a budget amendment to the 2016 Budget. Of the total windstorm related costs, $60,381 was expended out of the Winter Weather Reserve Fund #122. The City is eligible to participate in a FEMA grant reimbursement program related to the 2015 Windstorm, and we expect the City to recover a portion of the total amount expended on the windstorm. We plan to replenish the Winter Weather Reserve Fund #122 for the $60,381 spent once we receive reimbursement from FEMA. City Hall Bond Process — 2016 LGTO Bonds We anticipate the total City Hall project cost will be $14.4 million with $6.3 million covered with cash set aside specifically for this purpose plus an additional $8.1 million in net limited tax general obligation bond proceeds that will be repaid over a 30 -year period in roughly equal annual installments. The $14.4 million is anticipated to cover the cost of the land acquisition, design, construction, furniture and fixtures. In order to issue bonds, the City Council must consider and adopt a bond ordinance authorizing the issuance, sale, and delivery of the 2016 LTGO Bonds. The bond ordinance will come before Council on the following dates: P:IFinancelFinance Activity ReportslCouncil Monthly Reports1201612016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.docx Page 1 • March 22 • April 19 • May 10 Administrative report on the 2016 LTGO Bond Ordinance 1st reading of the 2016 LTGO Bond Ordinance 2nd reading of the 2016 LTGO Bond Ordinance Budget to Actual Comparison Report A report reflecting 2015 Budget to Actual Revenues and Expenditures for those funds for which a 2015 Budget was adopted (and amended on October 27) is located on pages 5 through 18. It's important to keep in mind that the figures included are preliminary and we anticipate they will continue to change as a result of the fact we continue to receive invoices related to 2015 expenditure activity as well as some additional revenues. We will follow-up with Final 2015 figures once the books are closed. We've included the following information in the report: • Revenues by source for all funds, and expenditures by department in the General Fund and by type in all other funds. • A breakdown between recurring and nonrecurring revenues and expenditures in the General Fund, Street O&M Fund and Stormwater Fund. • The change in fund balance including beginning and ending figures. The beginning fund balance figures are those that were reflected in our 2014 Annual Financial Report. • Columns of information include: o The amended 2015 Budget as adopted. o December 2015 activity. o Cumulative 2015 activity through December 2015. o Budget remaining in terms of dollars. o The percent of budgeted revenue collected or budgeted expenditures disbursed. A few points related to the General Fund #001 (page 5): Recurring revenues collections are currently at 102.60% of the amount budgeted with 100.00% of the year elapsed. • Property tax collections have reached 11,280,147 or 100.03% of the amount budgeted. Receiving more revenue than was actually assessed is a result of the assessor collecting delinquent taxes from previous years. Property taxes are paid to Spokane County in two installments each year on April 30 and October 31 and are then remitted to the City primarily in May and November with lesser amounts typically remitted in June and December. In January we received one final payment related to 2015 collections that is reflected herein. • Sales tax collections finished the year at $18,209,568 which was $581,168 or 3.30% greater than the amount budgeted. • Gambling taxes are at $418,691 or 93.90% of the amount budgeted. Gambling taxes are paid quarterly with fourth quarter payments due by January 31. Effective July 1, 2015, the gambling tax rate on card games was reduced from 10% to 6%. • Franchise Fee and Business Registration revenues are typically received in the month following a calendar year quarter. These revenues reached $1,210,692 which was $64,692 or 5.65% greater than the amount budgeted. • State shared revenues are composed of State of Washington distributions that include items such as liquor board profits, liquor excise tax, streamlined sales tax mitigation and criminal justice monies. Most of these revenues are paid by the State in the month following a calendar quarter. These have collectively finished the year at $2,011,629 which is $242,729 or 13.72% greater than the amount budgeted. The balance in excess of the budgeted amount is primarily due to shared liquor revenues that were restored during the 2015 State Legislative session as well as shared marijuana taxes. P:IFinancelFinance Activity ReportslCouncil Monthly Reportsl201612016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.docx Page 2 • Fines and forfeitures revenues are composed of monthly remittances from Spokane County with payments made in the month following the actual assessment of a fine and false alarm fees. These have finished the year at $1,360,910 or $146,190 (9.7%) less than the amount budgeted. • Community Development service revenues are largely composed of building permit and plan review fees as well as right of way permits. These revenues finished the year at $1,479,949 which is $154,849 or 11.69% greater than the amount budgeted. • Recreation program fees are composed of revenues generated by the variety of parks and recreation programs including classes, swimming pools (in -season), and CenterPlace. They have finished the year at $654,254 which is $90,754 or 16.11% greater than the amount budgeted. Recurring expenditures are currently at 94.88% of the amount budgeted with 100.00% of the year elapsed. Investments (page 19) Investments at December 31 total $48,512,577 and are composed of $43,506,574 in the Washington State Local Government Investment Pool and $5,006,003 in bank CDs. Total Sales Tax Receipts (page 20) Total sales tax receipts reflect State remittances through December and total $20,581,821 including general, criminal justice and public safety taxes. This figure is $874,145 or 4.44% greater than the same 12 -month period in 2014. Economic Indicators (pages 21 — 23) The following economic indicators provide information pertaining to three different sources of tax revenue that provide a good gauge of the health and direction of the overall economy. 1. Sales taxes (page 21) provide a sense of how much individuals and businesses are spending on the purchase of goods. 2. Hotel / Motel taxes (page 22) provide us with a sense of overnight stays and visits to our area by tourists or business travelers. 3. Real Estate Excise taxes (page 23) provide us with a sense of real estate sales. Page 21 provides a 10 -year history of general sales tax receipts (not including public safety or criminal justice) with monthly detail beginning January 2007. • Compared with calendar year 2015, 2016 collections have increased by $130,926 or 7.56%. • Tax receipts reached an all-time high in 2015 at $18,209,568, besting the previous record year of 2014 when $17,440,083 was collected. Page 22 provides a 10 -year history of hotel/motel tax receipts with monthly detail beginning January 2007. • Compared with calendar year 2015, 2016 collections have increased by $4,795 or 17.70%. • Collections reached an all-time high in 2015 of $581,237, exceeding the previous high set in 2014 of $549,267. Page 23 provides a 10 -year history of real estate excise tax receipts with monthly detail beginning January 2007. • Compared with calendar year 2015, 2016 collections have increased by $8,306 or 8.64%. • Tax receipts peaked in 2007 at nearly $2.6 million, decreased precipitously in 2008 and 2009, and are slowly gaining ground. P:FinancelFinance Activity ReportslCouncil Monthly Reports1201612016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.docx Page 3 Debt Capacity and Bonds Outstanding (page 24) This page provides information on the City's debt capacity, or the dollar amount of General Obligation (G.O.) Bonds the City may issue, as well as an amortization schedule of the bonds the City currently has outstanding. • The maximum amount of G.O. bonds the City may issue is determined by the assessed value for property taxes which for 2016 is $7,748,275,097. Following the December 1, 2015, debt service payment the City has $6,375,000 of nonvoted G.O. bonds outstanding which represents 5.49% of our nonvoted bond capacity, and 1.10% of our total debt capacity for all types of bonds. Of this amount: o $5,250,000 remains on bonds issued for the construction of CenterPlace. These bonds are repaid with a portion of the 1/10 of 1% sales tax that is collected by the Spokane Public Facilities District. o $1,125,000 remains on bonds issued for road and street improvements around CenterPlace. The bonds are repaid with a portion of the real estate excise tax collected by the City. Street Fund Revenue Sources (pages 25 and 26) The last two charts reflect a history for the two primary sources of revenue in Street Fund #101. These include: • Page 25 provides a 10 -year history of Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax collections with monthly detail beginning January 2007. o Compared with calendar year 2015, 2016 collections have increased by $11,320 or 7.42%. The increase is due primarily to increased motor vehicle fuel taxes that were approved by the State Legislature in 2015 and were effective beginning in August 2015. o Tax receipts peaked in 2007 at just approximately $2.1 million, and subsequently decreased to a range of approximately $1,857,000 to $1,940,000 in the years 2011 through 2015. • Page 26 provides a 6 -year history of Telephone Utility Tax collections with monthly detail beginning January 2009 (the month in which the tax was imposed). o Compared with 2015, 2014 collections have increased by $4,219 or 2.37%. o Tax receipts peaked in 2009 at $3,054,473 and have decreased each year since due to what we suspect is the reduction in land lines by individual households. o The 2016 Budget was adopted with a revenue estimate of $2,340,000. We will watch this closely as we progress through the coming months. P:IFinancelFinance Activity ReportslCouncil Monthly Reports1201612016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.docx Page 4 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Twelve -Month Period Ended December 31, 2015 #001 - GENERAL FUND RECURRING ACTIVITY Budget Year Elapsed = 2015 100.0% 2015 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget December December 31 Remaining % of Budget Revenues Property Tax 11,277,100 760,029 11,280,147 3,047 100.03% Sales Tax 17,628,400 2,929,528 18,209,568 581,168 103.30% Sales Tax - Criminal Justice 1,468,700 249,564 1,523,588 54,888 103.74% Sales Tax - Public Safety 820,100 138,782 848,665 28,565 103.48% Gambling Tax and Leasehold Excise Tax 445,900 87,051 418,691 (27,209) 93.90% Franchise Fees/Business Registration 1,146,000 298,225 1,210,692 64,692 105.65% State Shared Revenues 1,768,900 538,213 2,011,629 242,729 113.72% Fines, Forfeitures and Penalties 1,507,100 196,488 1,360,910 (146,190) 90.30% Community Development 1,325,100 108,748 1,479,949 154,849 111.69% Recreation Program Fees 563,500 8,665 654,254 90,754 116.11% Miscellaneous Department Revenue 95,900 5,173 112,232 16,332 117.03% Miscellaneous & Investment Interest 131,200 25,040 140,920 9,720 107.41% Transfer -in - #101 (street admin) 39,700 3,308 39,700 (0) 100.00% Transfer -in - #105 (h/m tax -CP advertising) 30,000 30,000 30,000 0 100.00% Transfer -in -#402 (storm admin) 13,400 1,117 13,400 0 100.00% Total Recurring Revenues 38,261,000 5,379,932 39,334,345 1,073,345 102.81% Expenditures City Council 513,114 28,888 367,280 145,834 71.58% City Manager 688,363 67,805 665,170 23,193 96.63% Legal 461,839 44,723 458,766 3,073 99.33% Public Safety 24,153,492 2,333,178 23,339,708 813,784 96.63% Deputy City Manager 691,303 73,970 672,801 18,502 97.32% Finance / IT 1,203,879 91,852 1,062,307 141,572 88.24% Human Resources 243,317 20,389 235,600 7,717 96.83% Public Works 921,914 64,524 738,727 183,187 80.13% Community Development -Administration 261,094 20,162 250,570 10,524 95.97% Community Development - Econ Dev 298,276 24,081 238,902 59,374 80.09% Community Development - Dev Svc 1,424,944 135,791 1,385,124 39,820 97.21% Community Development - Building 1,380,902 103,927 1,193,448 187,454 86.43% Parks & Rec- Administration 271,372 20,024 261,255 10,117 96.27% Parks & Rec - Maintenance 844,642 131,144 834,344 10,298 98.78% Parks & Rec - Recreation 226,174 18,338 237,342 (11,168) 104.94% Parks & Rec - Aquatics 496,200 4,783 488,288 7,912 98.41% Parks & Rec - Senior Center 91,985 7,771 85,376 6,609 92.81% Parks & Rec - CenterPlace 824,997 86,781 811,547 13,450 98.37% Pavement Preservation 920,000 76,667 920,000 (0) 100.00% General Government 1,710,200 317,728 1,422,409 287,791 83.17% Transfers out - #502 (insurance premium) 325,000 27,083 325,000 0 100.00% Transfers out - #310 (bond pmt>$434.6 lease pr 67,600 5,633 67,600 0 100.00% Transfers out - #310 (city hall o&m costs) 271,700 22,642 271,700 0 100.00% Total Recurring Expenditures 38,292,307 3,727,885 36,333,262 1,959,045 94.88% Recurring Revenues Over (Under) Recurring Expenditures (31,307) 1,652,047 3,001,083 3,032,390 Page 5 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Twelve -Month Period Ended December 31, 2015 #001 - GENERAL FUND - continued NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Budget Year Elapsed = 2015 100.0% 2015 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget December December 31 Remaining % of Budget Revenues Transfers in - #106 (Repymt of Solid Waste) 40,425 0 40,425 0 100.00% Total Nonrecurring Revenues 40,425 0 40,425 0 100.00% Expenditures Transfers out - #309 (park grant match) 115,575 8,333 115,575 0 100.00% Transfers out - #107 (move PEG cash) 267,300 0 267,333 (33) 100.01% General Government - IT capital replacements 120,000 8,343 97,455 22,545 81.21% General Government - City Hall Remodel 23,300 0 12,842 10,458 55.11% City Manager (2 scanners) 3,000 0 3,000 0 100.00% Public Safety (const offices for unit supervisors) 25,000 0 0 25,000 0.00% Community & Econ Dev (comp plan update) 250,000 1,943 206,704 43,296 82.68% Parks & Rec (upgrade dial-up modem at pools) 10,000 0 1,955 8,045 19.55% Parks & Rec (replace CP lounge carpet) 8,000 8,000 8,000 0 100.00% Parks & Rec (CenterPlace 10yranniversary) 7,400 0 7,938 (538) 107.28% Parks & Rec (CenterPlace Roof Repairs) 36,000 2,512 13,883 22,117 38.56% Parks & Rec (Windstorm Park Clean-up) 0 38,045 38,045 (38,045) 0.00% Police Department - CAD/RMS 309,700 84,232 294,575 15,125 95.12% Police Department - (gate motor replace) 4,300 0 4,253 47 98.90% Police Department - (radar recorder) 4,600 0 4,600 0 100.00% Transfers out - #312 ('13 fund bal >50%) 1,783,512 0 1,783,512 0 100.00% Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 2,967,687 151,409 2,859,671 108,016 96.36% Nonrecurring Revenues Over (Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures (2,927,262) (151,409) (2,819,246) 108,016 Excess (Deficit) of Total Revenues Over (Under) Total Expenditures (2,958,569) 1,500,638 181,837 3,140,406 Beginning fund balance 24,573,898 24,573,898 Ending fund balance 21,615,329 24,755,735 Page 6 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Twelve -Month Period Ended December 31, 2015 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS #101 - STREET FUND RECURRING ACTIVITY Budget Year Elapsed = 2015 100.0% 2015 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget December December 31 Remaining % of Budget Revenues Motor Vehicle Fuel (Gas) Tax 1,859,900 333,702 1,935,629 75,729 104.07% Investment Interest 3,000 742 3,212 212 107.05% Insurance Premiums & Recoveries 0 0 4,319 4,319 0.00% Utility Tax 2,565,100 358,707 2,257,184 (307,916) 88.00% Miscellaneous Revenue 10,000 0 9,647 (353) 96.47% Total Recurring Revenues 4,438,000 693,151 4,209,990 (228,010) 94.86% Expenditures Wages / Benefits / Payroll Taxes 677,297 93,424 738,381 (61,084) 109.02% Supplies 111,500 4,211 116,660 (5,160) 104.63% Services & Charges 2,122,808 268,111 2,044,331 78,477 96.30% Snow Operations 520,000 219,678 465,232 54,768 89.47% Intergovernmental Payments 748,000 126,020 727,591 20,409 97.27% Interfund Transfers -out - #001 39,700 3,308 39,700 0 100.00% Interfund Transfers -out - #501 (non -plow vehicle 12,077 1,006 12,077 (0) 100.00% Interfund Transfers -out - #311 (pavement preserve 206,618 17,218 206,618 (0) 100.00% Total Recurring Expenditures 4,438,000 732,977 4,350,589 87,411 98.03% Recurring Revenues Over (Under) Recurring Expenditures 0 (39,826) (140,599) (140,599) NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Grants Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% 11,200 11,200 11,200 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Revenues 0 11,200 11,200 11,200 0.00% Expenditures Capital 45,000 (64,691) 25,875 19,125 57.50% Pavement marking grinder 8,000 0 6,019 1,981 75.23% Interfund Transfers -out - #303 0 123,955 123,955 (123,955) 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 53,000 59,264 155,848 (102,848) 294.05% Nonrecurring Revenues Over (Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures (53,000) (48,064) (144,648) (91,648) Excess (Deficit) of Total Revenues Over (Under) Total Expenditures (53,000) (87,890) (285,247) (232,247) Beginning fund balance 1,705,244 1,705,244 Ending fund balance 1,652,244 1,419,997 Page 7 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Twelve -Month Period Ended December 31, 2015 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS - continued #103 - PATHS & TRAILS Revenues Motor Vehicle Fuel (Gas) Tax Investment Interest Total revenues Expenditures Miscellaneous Capital Outlay Total expenditures Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance Budget Year Elapsed = 2015 100.0% 2015 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget December December 31 Remaining % of Budget 7,800 1,407 8,164 364 104.67% 0 17 62 62 0.00% 7,800 1,425 8,226 426 105.46% 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0.00% 7,800 1,425 8,226 426 29,828 29,828 37,628 38,054 #104 - TOURISM FACILITIES HOTEL/MOTEL TAX FUND Revenues Tourism Facilities Hotel/Motel Tax 178,700 54,526 182,236 3,536 101.98% Investment Interest 0 76 111 111 0.00% Total revenues 178,700 Expenditures Capital Expenditures 0 Total expenditures 54,602 182,347 3,647 102.04% 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0.00% Revenues over (under) expenditures 178,700 54,602 182,347 3,647 Beginning fund balance 0 0 Ending fund balance 178,700 182,347 #105 - HOTEL / MOTEL TAX FUND Revenues Hotel/Motel Tax Investment Interest 550,000 83,886 581,237 31,237 105.68% 300 126 484 184 161.35% Total revenues 550,300 84,012 581,721 31,421 105.71% Expenditures lnterfund Transfers - #001 30,000 30,000 30,000 0 100.00% Interfund Transfers - #309 (Volleyball Cts) 68,000 0 68,000 0 100.00% Tourism Promotion 502,000 141,243 484,968 17,032 96.61% Total expenditures 600,000 171,243 582,968 17,032 97.16% Revenues over (under) expenditures (49,700) (87,231) (1,247) Beginning fund balance 209,949 209,949 Ending fund balance 160,249 208,702 Page 8 14,390 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Twelve -Month Period Ended December 31, 2015 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS - continued #106 - SOLID WASTE Revenues Sunshine Administrative Fee Grant Proceeds Total revenues Budget Year Elapsed = 2015 100.0% 2015 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget December December 31 Remaining % of Budget 125,000 31,250 125,000 0 100.00% 26,800 0 0 26,800 0.00% 151,800 31,250 125,000 26,800 82.35% Expenditures lnterfund Transfers -#001 40,425 0 40,425 0 100.00% Supplies 0 0 153 (153) 0.00% Services & Charges 111,375 0 30,377 80,998 27.27% Waste to Resources Activities 0 8,924 18,511 (18,511) 0.00% Total expenditures 151,800 8,924 89,465 62,335 58.94% Revenues over (under) expenditures 0 22,326 35,535 (35,535) Beginning fund balance 7,339 7,339 Ending fund balance 7,339 42,874 #107 - PEG FUND Revenues Comcast PEG Contribution Transfers in - #001 92,000 19,876 81,806 10,194 88.92% 267,300 0 267,333 (33) 100.01% Total revenues 359,300 Expenditures PEG Reimburse - CMTV 12,000 PEG COSV Broadcast 68,400 Total expenditures 80,400 Revenues over (under) expenditures 278,900 Beginning fund balance 0 Ending fund balance 19,876 349,139 10,161 97.17% 0 0 12,000 0.00% 5,443 47,957 20,443 70.11% 5,443 14,432 47,957 32,443 59.65% 301,182 (22,282) 0 278,900 301,182 #120 - CENTER PLACE OPERATING RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest Interfund Transfer 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues 0 0 0 0 0.00% Expenditures Operations Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0.00% Revenues over (under) expenditures 0 0 0 0 Beginning fund balance 300,000 300,000 Ending fund balance 300,000 300,000 Page 9 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Twelve -Month Period Ended December 31, 2015 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS - continued Budget Year Elapsed = 2015 100.0% 2015 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget December December 31 Remaining % of Budget #121 - SERVICE LEVEL STABILIZATION RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest 8,200 2,543 8,590 390 104.76% Interfund Transfer 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues Expenditures Operations Total expenditures Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance #122 - WINTER WEATHER RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest Interfund Transfer 8,200 2,543 8,590 390 104.76% 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0.00% 8,200 2,543 8,590 390 5,453,199 5,453,199 5,461, 399 5,461,789 800 247 833 33 104.15% 0 0 0 0 0.00% Subtotal revenues 800 247 833 33 104.15% Expenditures Wind Storm expenses 500,000 60,381 60,381 439,619 12.08% Total expenditures 500,000 60,381 60,381 439,619 12.08% Revenues over (under) expenditures (499,200) (60,134) (59,548) (439,586) Beginning fund balance 504,020 504,020 Ending fund balance 4,820 444,472 #123 - CIVIC FACILITIES REPLACEMENT FUND Revenues Investment Interest Interfund Transfer - #001 1,300 271 1,323 23 101.74% 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues 1,300 271 1,323 23 101.74% Expenditures Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 0.00% Transfers out - #311 (pavement preservation) 616,284 51,357 616,284 0 100.00% Total expenditures 616,284 51,357 616,284 0 100.00% Revenues over (under) expenditures (614,984) (51,086) (614,961) 23 Beginning fund balance 1,174,070 1,174,070 Ending fund balance 559,086 559,109 Page 10 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Twelve -Month Period Ended December 31, 2015 DEBT SERVICE FUNDS #204 - DEBT SERVICE FUND Revenues Spokane Public Facilities District Interfund Transfer -in - #301 Interfund Transfer -in - #302 Total revenues Expenditures Debt Service Payments - CenterPlace Debt Service Payments - Roads Total expenditures Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance Budget Year Elapsed = 2015 100.0% 2015 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget December December 31 Remaining % of Budget 373,800 274,400 373,800 0 100.00% 82,150 6,846 82,150 0 100.00% 82,150 6,846 82,150 0 100.00% 538,100 288,092 538,100 0 100.00% 373,800 38,305 374,083 (283) 100.08% 164,300 14,014 164,017 283 99.83% 538,100 52,319 538,100 0 100.00% 0 235,773 0 4,049 4,049 4,049 4,049 Page 11 0 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Twelve -Month Period Ended December 31, 2015 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS #301 - CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues REET 1 - Taxes Investment Interest Total revenues Budget Year Elapsed = 2015 100.0% 2015 Actual Actual thru Budget Budget December December 31 Remaining % of Budget 800,000 71,477 1,065,789 265,789 133.22% 1,000 503 1,654 654 165.36% 801,000 71,980 1,067,442 266,442 133.26% Expenditures Interfund Transfer -out - #204 82,150 6,846 82,150 0 100.00% Interfund Transfer -out -#303 569,413 12,197 567,113 2,300 99.60% Interfund Transfer -out - #311 (pavement preser' 251,049 0 251,049 0 100.00% Total expenditures 902,612 19,043 900,312 2,300 99.75% Revenues over(under)expenditures (101,612) 52,937 167,131 264,142 Beginning fund balance 1,426,957 1,426,957 Ending fund balance 1,325,345 1,594,088 #302 SPECIAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues REET 2 - Taxes 800,000 216,313 1,065,789 265,789 133.22% Investment Interest 1,000 492 1,662 662 166.23% Total revenues 801,000 216,805 1,067,451 266,451 133.26% Expenditures Interfund Transfer -out - #204 82,150 6,846 82,150 0 100.00% Interfund Transfer -out - #303 413,271 130,872 331,099 82,172 80.12% Interfund Transfer -out - #311 (pavement presen, 251,049 0 251,049 0 100.00% Total expenditures 746,470 Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance 137,718 664,298 82,172 88.99% 54,530 1,325,144 79,087 403,153 1,325,144 1,379,674 1,728,297 Page 12 184,279 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Twelve -Month Period Ended December 31, 2015 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS - continued Budget Year Elapsed = 2015 100.0% 2015 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget December December 31 Remaining % of Budget #303 STREET CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues Grant Proceeds 10,321,343 1,940,178 8,223,959 (2,097,384) 79.68% Developer Contribution 364,378 62,544 363,894 (484) 99.87% Miscellaneous 0 0 50 50 0.00% Transfer -in -#101 0 123,955 123,955 123,955 0.00% Transfer -in -#301 569,413 12,197 567,113 (2,300) 99.60% Transfer -in - #302 413,271 130,872 331,099 (82,172) 80.12% Transfer -in - #312 Sullivan Rd W Bridge 500,000 34,508 42,730 (457,270) 8.55% Investment Interest 0 11 38 38 0.00% Total revenues 12,168,405 2,304,264 9,652,838 (2,515,567) 79.33% Expenditures 060 Argonne Rd Corridor Upgrade SRTC 06-31 1,214,829 3,321 1,248,474 (33,645) 102.77% 123 Mission Ave -Flora to Barker 252,570 5,209 37,956 214,614 15.03% 141 Sullivan & Euclid PCC 10,000 330 9,848 152 98.48% 142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan 120,494 4,230 17,771 102,723 14.75% 149 Sidewalk Infill 93,190 0 8,177 85,013 8.77% 155 Sullivan Rd W Bridge Replacement 7,846,931 2,116,180 6,482,244 1,364,687 82.61% 156 Mansfield Ave. Connection 1,172,716 7,986 712,689 460,027 60.77% 159 University Rd / 1-90 Overpass Study 40,852 0 2,842 38,010 6.96% 166 Pines Rd. (SR27) & Grace Ave. Int. Safety 101,110 (30,853) 47,322 53,788 46.80% 167 Citywide Safety Improvements 260,576 104,228 315,032 (54,456) 120.90% 177 Sullivan Road Corridor Traffic Study 55,556 0 19,332 36,224 34.80% 191 Vista Rd BNSF Xing Safety Improvements 300 0 190 110 63.29% 196 8th Avenue - McKinnon to Fancher 400 0 396 4 99.11 % 201 ITS Infill Project Phase 1 (PE Start 2014) 56,056 30,049 37,884 18,172 67.58% 205 Sprague/Barker Intersection Improvements 51,428 6,461 13,132 38,296 25.53% 206 Sprague/Long Sidewalk Project 357,714 3,215 304,933 52,781 85.24% 207 Indiana & Evergreen Transit Access 85,000 3,225 3,345 81,655 3.94% 211 Trent Lighting Replacement 96,535 34,989 100,649 (4,114) 104.26% 220 Houk-Sinto-Maxwell St Preservation 18,473 0 15,555 2,918 84.21% 221 McDonald Rd Diet (16th to Mission) 56,800 7,229 7,229 49,571 12.73% 222 Citywide Reflective Signal Backplates 4,500 0 0 4,500 0.00% 223 Pines Rd Underpass @ BNSF & Trent 10,000 0 2,000 8,000 20.00% 224 Mullan Rd Street Preservation 162,375 0 133,069 29,306 81.95% 234 Seth Woodard Sidewalk Improvements 0 6,204 6,204 (6,204) 0.00% xxx N. Sullivan Corridor ITS Project 0 0 0 0 0.00% Construction - Small Works 0 123,955 123,955 (123,955) 0.00% Contingency 100,000 0 0 100,000 0.00% Total expenditures 12,168,405 2,425,959 9,650,228 2,518,177 Revenues over (under) expenditures 0 (121,695) 2,609 (5,033,744) Beginning fund balance 72,930 72,930 Ending fund balance 72,930 75,539 Note: Work performed in the Street Capital Projects Fund for preservation projects is for items such as sidewalk upgrades that were bid with the pavement preservation work. Page 13 79.31% P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Twelve -Month Period Ended December 31, 2015 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS - continued Budget Year Elapsed = 2015 100.0% 2015 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget December December 31 Remaining % of Budget #309 - PARKS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues Grant Proceeds 90,000 1,106 1,560 (88,440) 1.73% Interfund Transfer -in - #001 115,575 8,333 115,575 (0) 100.00% Interfund Transfer -in - #105 (Brown Volleyball CI 68,000 0 68,000 0 100.00% Interfund Transfer -in #312 (Appleway Trail) 554,650 524,812 524,812 (29,838) 94.62% Investment Interest 500 241 813 313 162.56% Total revenues 828,725 534,493 710,760 (117,965) 85.77% Expenditures 176 Appleway Trail - University to Pines 540,600 483 524,569 16,031 97.03% 203 Browns Park Volleyball Courts 244,200 0 241,481 2,719 98.89% 208 Old Mission Trailhead Parking Improvements 0 0 68 (68) 0.00% 212 Edgecliff Park Restroom Sewer Project 0 0 (6,923) 6,923 0.00% 217 Edgecliff picnic shelter 106,450 0 104,257 2,194 97.94% 225 Pocket dog park 98,975 100,358 108,436 (9,461) 109.56% 227 Appleway Trail - Pines to Evergree 104,050 919 1,803 102,247 1.73% 231 Mission Trailhead landscaping 47,100 41,466 47,066 34 99.93% 232 Shade structure at Discovery Playground 38,000 36,341 36,341 1,659 95.63% xxx City entry sign 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total expenditures 1,179,375 179,567 1,057,096 122,279 89.63% Revenues over (under) expenditures (350,650) 354,925 (346,337) (240,244) Beginning fund balance 451,720 451,720 Ending fund balance 101,070 105,383 #310 - CIVIC FACILITIES CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues Investment Interest 1,200 577 2,113 913 176.11% Interfund Transfer -in - #001 339,300 28,275 339,300 0 100.00% Interfund Transfer -in - #312 58,324 0 58,324 0 100.00% Total revenues 398,824 28,852 399,737 913 100.23% Expenditures Capital (City Hall Land Acquisition) 1,128,200 0 1,128,118 82 99.99% Professional Services 12,100 0 8,621 3,480 71.24% Total expenditures 1,140,300 0 1,136,738 3,562 99.69% Revenues over (under) expenditures (741,476) 28,852 (737,001) (2,648) Beginning fund balance 1,919,550 1,919,550 Ending fund balance 1,178,074 1,182,549 Note: The fund balance includes $839, 285.10 paid by the Library District for 2.82 acres at the Balfour Park site. If the District does not succeed in getting a voted bond approved by October 2017 then the City may repurchase this land at the original sale price of $839,285.10. Page 14 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Twelve -Month Period Ended December 31, 2015 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS - continued Budget Year Elapsed = 2015 100.0% 2015 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget December December 31 Remaining % of Budget #311 - STREET CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS 2011+ Revenues Interfund Transfers in- #101 206,618 17,218 206,618 0 100.00% Interfund Transfers in -#123 616,284 51,357 616,284 0 100.00% Interfund Transfers in -#301 251,049 0 251,049 0 100.00% Interfund Transfers in -#302 251,049 0 251,049 0 100.00% Interfund Transfers in- #001 920,000 76,667 920,000 0 100.00% Grant Proceeds 971,032 6,433 835,224 (135,808) 86.01% Investment Interest 0 1,004 3,390 3,390 0.00% Total revenues 3,216,032 152,678 3,083,614 (132,418) 95.88% Expenditures Pre -Project GeoTech Services 50,000 41,432 41,432 8,568 82.86% Pavement Preservation 2,565,050 0 0 2,565,050 0.00% 179 2013 Street Preservation Ph2 0 0 2,851 (2,851) 0.00% 180 2013 Street Preservation Ph3 0 0 209 (209) 0.00% 186 Adams Road Resurfacing 0 0 388 (388) 0.00% 187 Sprague Ave Preservation Project 0 0 2,915 (2,915) 0.00% 188 Sullivan Rd Preservation Project 0 466 888,634 (888,634) 0.00% 202 Appleway Street Preservation Project 0 0 226 (226) 0.00% 211 Sullivan Trent to Wellesley 0 20,613 454,799 (454,799) 0.00% 218 Montgomery Ave Street Preservation 0 303 308,223 (308,223) 0.00% 220 Houk-Sinto-Maxwell Street Preservation 0 513 294,057 (294,057) 0.00% 224 Mullan Rd Street Preservation 0 5,140 361,004 (361,004) 0.00% 226 Appleway Resurfacing Park to Dishman 0 6,959 6,959 (6,959) 0.00% 229 32nd Ave Preservation 0 11,806 34,660 (34,660) 0.00% 233 Broadway Ave St Presery - Sulliv to Moore 0 2,626 4,051 (4,051) 0.00% Total expenditures 2,615,050 89,859 2,400,408 214,642 91.79% Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance #312 - CAPITAL RESERVE FUND Revenues Transfers in - #001 Investment Interest 600,982 1,922,013 62,819 683,206 1,922,013 2,522,995 2,605,219 (347,061) 1,783,512 0 1,783, 512 0 100.00% 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues 1,783,512 0 1,783,512 0 100.00% Expenditures Transfers out - #303 - Sullivan Rd W Bridge 500,000 34,508 42,730 457,270 8.55% Transfers out - #309 - Appleway Trail 540,600 524,812 524,812 15,788 97.08% Transfers out - #309 - Appleway Trail (Pines to E 14,050 0 0 14,050 0.00% Transfers out - #310 - City Hall Land 58,324 0 58,324 0 100.00% Transfers out - #313 - City Hall Constr 5,162,764 0 5,162,764 0 100.00% Total expenditures 6,275,738 559,320 5,788,630 487,108 92.24% Revenues over (under) expenditures (4,492,226) (559,320) (4,005,118) (487,108) Beginning fund balance 8,581,715 8,581,715 Ending fund balance 4,089,489 4,576,597 #313 - CITY HALL CONSTRUCTION FUND Revenues Transfers in - #312 Total revenues Expenditures Professional Services Total expenditures Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance 5,162,764 0 5,162,764 0 100.00% 5,162,764 0 5,162,764 0 100.00% 702,400 113,821 362,138 340,263 51.56% 702,400 4,460,364 0 113,821 (113,821) 362,138 4,800,627 0 340,263 51.56% 4,460,364 4,800,627 Page 15 (340,263) P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Twelve -Month Period Ended December 31, 2015 ENTERPRISE FUNDS #402 - STORMWATER FUND [-RECURRING ACTIVITY Budget Year Elapsed = 2015 100.0% 2015 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget % of December December 31 Remaining Budget Revenues Stormwater Management Fees 1,880,000 156,291 1,861,368 (18,632) 99.01% Investment Interest 1,500 727 2,455 955 163.65% Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total Recurring Revenues 1,881,500 157,018 1,863,823 (17,677) 99.06% Expenditures Wages / Benefits / Payroll Taxes 488,101 34,963 392,941 95,160 80.50% Supplies 15,900 619 30,240 (14,340) 190.19% Services & Charges 1,097,468 156,705 1,086,479 10,989 99.00% Intergovernmental Payments 27,000 1,200 15,291 11,709 56.63% Interfund Transfers -out - #001 13,400 1,117 13,400 (0) 100.00% Total Recurring Expenditures 1,641,869 194,603 1,538,352 103,517 93.70% Recurring Revenues Over (Under) Recurring Expenditures 239,631 (37,585) 325,471 85,840 NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Grant Proceeds 389,674 0 423,332 33,658 108.64% Interfund Transfers -in - #403 120,000 0 120,000 0 100.00% Developer Contributions 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Revenues 509,674 0 543,332 33,658 106.60% Expenditures Capital - various projects 875,340 0 230,247 645,093 26.30% VMS Trailer 16,000 0 15,546 454 97.16% 166 Pines Rd. (SR27) & Grace Ave. Int. Safety 0 34,844 34,844 (34,844) 0.00% 188 Sullivan Rd Preservation 0 0 50,680 (50,680) 0.00% 193 Effectiveness Study 0 0 192,638 (192,638) 0.00% 198 Sprague, Park to University LID 0 0 10,453 (10,453) 0.00% 199 Havana - Yale Diversion 0 0 4,887 (4,887) 0.00% 200 Ponderosa Surface Water Diversion 0 0 3,540 (3,540) 0.00% 206 Sprague/Long Sidewalk Project 0 0 25,967 (25,967) 0.00% 211 Sullivan Trent to Wellesley 0 464 143,255 (143,255) 0.00% 218 Montgomery Ave. St Preservation 0 0 87,314 (87,314) 0.00% 220 Houk-Sinto-Maxwell St Preservation 0 0 77,361 (77,361) 0.00% 224 Mullan Rd Street Preservation 0 0 16,427 (16,427) 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 891,340 Nonrecurring Revenues Over (Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures Excess (Deficit) of Total Revenues Over (Under) Total Expenditures Beginning working capital Ending working capital 35,307 893,159 (1,819) 100.20% (381,666) (35,307) (142,035) (72,893) 1,933,564 (349,827) 31,839 (24,355) 117,680 1,933,564 1,791,529 1,909,209 Note: Work performed in the Stormwater Fund for preservation projects is for stormwater improvements that were bid with the pavement preservation work. Page 16 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Twelve -Month Period Ended December 31, 2015 ENTERPRISE FUNDS - continued Budget Year Elapsed = 2015 100.0% 2015 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget December December 31 Remaining % of Budget #403 - AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA Revenues Spokane County 500,000 236,677 533,593 33,593 106.72% Grant DOE - Broadway SD Retrofit 1,260,000 0 433,773 (826,227) 34.43% Grant revenue 0 0 602,830 602,830 0.00% Total revenues Expenditures lnterfund Transfer -out - #402 197 Broadway SD retrofit Total expenditures Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning working capital Ending working capital 1,760,000 236,677 1,570,196 (189,805) 89.22% 120,000 0 120,000 0 100.00% 1,080,000 0 530,308 549,692 49.10% 1,200,000 0 650,308 549,692 54.19% 560,000 1,773 236,677 919,887 1,773 561,773 921,660 Page 17 (739,496) P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Twelve -Month Period Ended December 31, 2015 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS #501 - ER&R FUND Revenues Transfer -in - #001 Transfer -in - #101 Transfer -in - #402 Investment Interest Total revenues Expenditures Vehicle Acquisitions Total expenditures Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning working capital Ending working capital Budget Year Elapsed = 2015 100.0% 2015 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget % of December December 31 Remaining Budget 19,300 1,608 19,300 0 100.00% 12,077 1,006 12,077 0 100.00% 4,167 347 4,167 0 100.00% 1,000 429 1,449 449 144.91% 36,544 3,391 36,993 449 101.23% 30,000 0 23,790 6,210 79.30% 30,000 6,544 1,235,794 0 3,391 23,790 13,203 1,235,794 6,210 79.30% 1,242,338 1,248, 997 (5,761) #502 - RISK MANAGEMENT FUND Revenues Investment Interest 0 2 8 8 0.00% Interfund Transfer - #101 0 0 0 0 0.00% Interfund Transfer - #001 325,000 27,083 325,000 (0) 100.00% Total revenues 325,000 Expenditures Auto & Property Insurance Unemployment Claims Miscellaneous Total expenditures Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning working capital Ending working capital 27,086 325,008 8 100.00% 325,000 0 284,112 40,888 87.42% 0 1,105 14,722 (14,722) 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0.00% 325,000 1,105 0 168,209 168,209 25,981 298,834 26,174 168,209 26,166 91.95% 194,383 (26,157) SUMMARY FOR ALL FUNDS Total of Revenues for all Funds 74,208,705 10,299,842 72,658,709 Per revenue status report 74,208,705 10,299,842 72,658,709 Difference 0 (0) 0 Total of Expenditures for all Funds Per expenditure status report 78,056,137 8,777,504 70,998,817 78,056,137 8,777,504 70,998,817 0 (0) 0 Total Capital expenditures (included in total expenditures) 20,048,270 2,793,610 16,038,533 Page 18 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Investment Report For the Twelve -Month Period Ended December 31, 2015 Beginning Deposits Withdrawls Interest Ending 001 General Fund 101 Street Fund 103 Trails & Paths 104 Tourism Facilities Hotel/Motel 105 Hotel/Motel 120 CenterPlace Operating Reserve 121 Service Level Stabilization Reserve 122 Winter Weather Reserve 123 Civic Facilities Replacement 301 Capital Projects 302 Special Capital Projects 303 Street Capital Projects Fund 304 Mirabeau Point Project 307 Capital Grants Fund 309 Parks Capital Project 310 Civic Buildings Capital Projects 311 Pavement Preservation 312 Capital Reserve Fund 402 Stormwater Management 403 Aquifer Protection Fund 501 Equipment Rental & Replacement 502 Risk Management *Local Government Investment Pool 3/11/2016 $ 44,184,763.71 $ 3,003,008.62 $ 2,000,000.00 $ 49,187,772.33 2,298,092.10 0.00 0.00 2,298,092.10 (3,000,000.00) 0.00 0.00 (3,000,000.00) 23,717.99 2,994.78 0.00 26,712.77 $ 43,506,573.80 $ 3,006,003.40 $ 2,000,000.00 $ 48,512,577.20 matures: 6/28/2016 rate: 0.40% 11/4/2016 0.50% Balance Earnings Budget Total LGIP* BB CD 2 BB CD 3 Investments $ 44,184,763.71 $ 3,003,008.62 $ 2,000,000.00 $ 49,187,772.33 2,298,092.10 0.00 0.00 2,298,092.10 (3,000,000.00) 0.00 0.00 (3,000,000.00) 23,717.99 2,994.78 0.00 26,712.77 $ 43,506,573.80 $ 3,006,003.40 $ 2,000,000.00 $ 48,512,577.20 matures: 6/28/2016 rate: 0.40% 11/4/2016 0.50% Balance Earnings Budget Current Period Year to date $ 31,833,139.23 1,518,133.87 35, 573.63 155, 319.48 257,110.76 300,000.00 5,201,470.20 504,534.77 553,880.18 1,029,220.28 1,006,549.11 22,895.29 0.00 0.00 492,150.21 1,181,086.10 2,052,592.76 0.00 1,486,399.44 0.00 877,410.86 5,111.03 $ 18,704.82 742.22 17.39 75.94 125.70 0.00 2,543.01 246.67 270.79 503.19 492.10 11.20 0.00 0.00 240.61 577.44 1,003.52 0.00 726.71 0.00 428.97 2.49 $ 73,378.47 3,211.56 61.94 110.81 484.05 0.00 8,590.23 833.23 1,322.61 1,653.57 1,662.31 37.81 0.00 0.00 812.80 2,113.36 3,389.87 0.00 2,454.80 0.00 1,449.05 8.44 $ 65,000.00 3,000.00 0.00 0.00 300.00 0.00 7,300.00 700.00 1,700.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 500.00 1,900.00 0.00 0.00 2,500.00 0.00 1,000.00 0.00 $ 48,512,577.20 $ 26,712.77 $ 101,574.91 $ 85,900.00 Page 19 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 02 29 - 2015 12 PRELIMINARY No 3.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Sales Tax Receipts For the Twelve -Month Period Ended December 31, 2015 Month 3/11/2016 Difference Received 2014 2015 $ 0/0 February 1,891,031.43 1,962,820.56 71,789.13 3.80% March 1,324,975.84 1,358,307.78 33,331.94 2.52% April 1,357,736.39 1,401,618.35 43,881.96 3.23% May 1,636,894.44 1,655,903.08 19,008.64 1.16% June 1,579,545.34 1,557,740.48 (21,804.86) (1.38%) July 1,653,343.86 1,886,262.22 232,918.36 14.09% August 1,751,296.73 1,944,085.56 192,788.83 11.01% September 1,772,033.14 1,894,514.58 122,481.44 6.91% October 1,754,039.63 1,765,807.42 11,767.79 0.67% November 1,802,029.08 1,836,885.94 34,856.86 1.93% December 1,619,010.52 1,683,925.38 64,914.86 4.01% January 1,565,739.35 1,633,949.35 68,210.00 4.36% 19,707,675.75 20,581,820.70 19,707,675.75 20,581,820.70 874,144.95 4.44% Sales tax receipts reported here reflect remittances for general sales tax, criminal justice sales tax and public safety tax. The sales tax rate for retail sales transacted within the boundaries of the City of Spokane Valley is 8.7%. The tax that is paid by a purchaser at the point of sale is remitted by the vendor to the Washington State Department of Revenue who then remits the taxes back to the various agencies that have imposed the tax. The allocation of the total 8.7% tax rate to the agencies is as follows: - State of Washington 6.50% - City of Spokane Valley 0.85% - Spokane County 0.15% - Spokane Public Facilities District 0.10% * - Criminal Justice 0.10% *' - Public Safety 0.10% * 2.20% local tax - Juvenile Jail 0.10% * - Mental Health 0.10% * - Law Enforcement Communications 0.10% * - Spokane Transit Authority 0.60% `_': 8.70% * Indicates voter approved sales taxes In addition to the .85% reported above that the City receives, we also receive a portion of the Criminal Justice and Public Safety sales taxes. The distribution of those taxes is computed as follows: Criminal Justice: The tax is assessed county -wide and of the total collected, the State distributes 10% of the receipts to Spokane County, with the remainder allocated on a per capita basis to the County and the cities within the County. Public Safety: The tax is assessed county -wide and of the total collected, the State distributes 60% of the receipts to Spokane County, with the remainder allocated on a per capita basis to the cities within the County. Page 20 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Sales Tax Collections - January For the years 2007 through 2016 January Collected to date 1,759,531 1,729,680 1,484,350 1,491,059 1,460,548 1,589,887 1,671,269 1,677,887 1,732,299 1,863,225 130,926 7.56% February 1,155,947 1,129,765 1,098,575 963,749 990,157 1,009,389 1,133,347 1,170,640 1,197,323 0 March 1,196,575 1,219,611 1,068,811 1,018,468 1,015,762 1,067,733 1,148,486 1,201,991 1,235,252 0 April 1,479,603 1,423,459 1,134,552 1,184,137 1,284,180 1,277,621 1,358,834 1,448,539 1,462,096 0 May 1,353,013 1,243,259 1,098,054 1,102,523 1,187,737 1,174,962 1,320,449 1,400,956 1,373,710 0 June 1,428,868 1,386,908 1,151,772 1,123,907 1,248,218 1,290,976 1,389,802 1,462,558 1,693,461 0 July 1,579,586 1,519,846 1,309,401 1,260,873 1,332,834 1,302,706 1,424,243 1,545,052 1,718,428 0 August 1,516,324 1,377,943 1,212,531 1,211,450 1,279,500 1,299,678 1,465,563 1,575,371 1,684,700 0 September 1,546,705 1,364,963 1,227,813 1,191,558 1,294,403 1,383,123 1,466,148 1,552,736 1,563,950 0 October 1,601,038 1,344,217 1,236,493 1,269,505 1,291,217 1,358,533 1,439,321 1,594,503 1,618,821 0 November 1,443,843 1,292,327 1,155,647 1,139,058 1,217,933 1,349,580 1,362,021 1,426,254 1,487,624 0 December 1,376,434 1,129,050 1,070,245 1,141,012 1,247,920 1,323,189 1,408,134 1,383,596 1,441,904 0 Total Collections 17,437,467 16,161,028 14,248,244 14,097,299 14,850,409 15,427,377 16,587,617 17,440,083 18,209,568 1,863,225 Budget Estimate 17,466,800 17,115,800 17,860,000 14,410,000 14,210,000 14,210,000 15,250,000 16,990,000 17,628,400 18,210,500 Actual over (under) budg (29,333) (954,772) (3,611,756) (312,701) 640,409 1,217,377 1,337,617 450,083 581,168 (16,347,275) Total actual collections as a % of total budget 99.83% 94.42% 79.78% 97.83% 104.51% 108.57% 108.77% 102.65% 103.30% n/a P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\Sales Tax\2016\sales tax collections 2015.xlsx 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 1,759,531 1,729,680 1,484,350 1,491,059 1,460,548 1,589,887 1,671,269 1,677,887 1,732,299 1,863,225 3/9/2016 2016 to 2015 Difference 130,926 7.56% % change in annual total collected 5.36% (7.32%) (11.84%) (1.06%) 5.34% 3.89% 7.52% 5.14% 4.41% n/a % of budget collected through January 10.07% 10.11% 8.31% 10.35% 10.28% 11.19% 10.96% 9.88% 9.83% 10.23% % of actual total collected through January 10.09% 10.70% 10.42% 10.58% 9.84% 10.31% 10.08% 9.62% 9.51% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of January 2,000,000 1,800,000 1,600,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 2007 2008 2009 2010 January 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 • January Page 21 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Hotel/Motel Tax Receipts through - January Actual for the years 2007 through 2016 January Total Collections February March April May June July August September October November December Total Collections Budget Estimate Actual over (under) budg P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\Lodging Tax\2016\105 hotel motel tax 2016.xlsx 2007 1 2008 1 2009 1 2010 1 2011 1 2012 1 2013 1 2014 1 2015 2016 25,137.92 28,946.96 23,280.21 22,706.96 22,212.21 21,442.32 24,184.84 25,425.40 27,092.20 31,887.27 25,137.92 25,310.66 29,190.35 37,950.53 31, 371.01 36,267.07 56,281.99 51,120.70 57,260.34 43,969.74 36,340.64 31,377.41 461,578.36 400,000.00 61,578.36 28,946.96 24,623.06 27,509.99 40,406.02 36,828.53 46,659.88 50,421.37 50,818.35 60,711.89 38,290.46 35,582.59 26,290.11 467,089.21 400,000.00 67,089.21 23,280.21 23,283.95 25,272.02 36,253.63 32,588.80 40,414.59 43,950.26 50,146.56 50,817.62 36,784.36 34,054.79 27,131.43 423,978.22 512,000.00 (88,021.78) 22,706.96 23,416.94 24,232.35 39,463.49 34,683.32 39,935.36 47,385.18 54,922.99 59,418.96 41,272.35 34,329.78 26,776.84 448,544.52 380,000.00 68,544.52 22,212.21 21,442.32 24,184.84 25,425.40 22,792.14 21,548.82 25,974.98 26,013.62 24,611.28 25,654.64 27,738.65 29,383.93 38,230.49 52,130.37 40,979.25 48,245.81 33,790.69 37,478.44 40,560.41 41,122.66 41,403.41 43,970.70 47,850.15 52,617.63 49,311.97 52,818.60 56,157.26 61,514.48 57,451.68 57,229.23 63,816.45 70,383.93 58,908.16 64,298.70 70,794.09 76,099.59 39,028.08 43,698.90 43,835.57 45,604.07 37,339.36 39,301.22 42,542.13 39,600.06 32,523.19 30,432.13 34,238.37 33,256.28 457,602.66 490,004.07 518,672.15 549,267.46 480,000.00 430,000.00 490,000.00 530,000.00 (22,397.34) 60,004.07 28,672.15 19,267.46 27,092.20 27,111.00 32,998.14 50,454.72 44,283.17 56,975.00 61,808.87 72,696.67 74,051.29 49,879.71 42,376.17 41,509.90 581,236.84 550,000.00 31,236.84 31,887.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31, 887.27 550,000.00 (518,112.73) Total actual collections as a % of total budget 115.39% 116.77% 82.81% 118.04% 95.33% 113.95% 105.85% 103.64% % change in annual total collected % of budget collected through January 105.68% n/a 10.67% 1.19% (9.23%) 5.79% 2.02% 7.08% 5.85% 5.90% 5.82% n/a 6.28% 7.24% 4.55% 5.98% 4.63% 4.99% 4.94% 4.80% 4.93% 5.80% % of actual total collected through January 5.45% 6.20% 5.49% 5.06% 4.85% 4.38% 4.66% 4.63% 4.66% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of January 35,000.00 30,000.00 25,000.00 20,000.00 15,000.00 10,000.00 5,000.00 0.00 Y--- 2007 2008 2009 2010 January 2011 2012 2013 2014 3/9/2016 2016 to 2015 Difference $ Bio 4,795 17.70% 4,795.07 17.70% 2015 2016 • January Page 22 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 1st and 2nd 1/4% REET Collections through January Actual for the years 2007 through 2016 January P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\REET\2016\301 and 302 REET for 2016.xlsx 2007 1 2008 1 2009 f 2010 1 2011 1 2012 1 2013 1 2014 1 2015 1 2016 228,896.76 145,963.47 55,281.25 59,887.08 64,128.13 46,358.75 56,898.40 61,191.55 96,140.79 104,446.46 Collected to date 228,896.76 February 129,919.79 March 263,834.60 April 211,787.08 May 222,677.17 June 257,477.05 July 323,945.47 August 208,039.87 September 165,287.21 October 206,442.92 November 191,805.53 December 179,567.77 145,963.47 159,503.34 133,513.35 128,366.69 158,506.43 178,202.98 217,942.98 133,905.93 131,240.36 355,655.60 147,875.00 96,086.00 55,281.25 45,180.53 73,306.86 81,155.83 77,463.58 105,020.98 122,530.36 115,829.68 93,862.17 113,960.52 133,264.84 71,365.60 59,887.08 64,121.61 86,204.41 99,507.19 109,624.89 105,680.28 84,834.48 72,630.27 75,812.10 93,256.02 72,021.24 38,724.50 64,128.13 36,443.36 95,879.78 79,681.38 124,691.60 81,579.34 79,629.06 129,472.44 68,019.83 61,396.23 74,752.72 65,077.29 46,358.75 56,114.56 71,729.67 86,537.14 111,627.22 124,976.28 101,048.69 106,517.19 63,516.73 238,094.79 104,885.99 74,299.65 56,898.40 155,226.07 72,171.53 90,376.91 116,164.91 139,112.11 128,921.02 117,149.90 174,070.25 117,805.76 78,324.02 75,429.19 61,191.55 67,048.50 81,723.70 105,448.15 198,869.74 106,675.77 208,199.38 172,536.46 152,322.59 123,504.75 172,226.74 117,681.62 3/9/2016 2016 to 2015 Difference 8,306 8.64% 96,140.79 104,446.46 8,305.67 8.64% 103,507.94 165,867.91 236,521.17 165,748.39 347,420.87 217,374.58 202,525.05 179,849.27 128,832.69 129,869.62 157,919.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total distributed by Spokane County 2,589,681.22 1,986,762.13 1,088,222.20 962,304.07 960,751.16 1,185,706.66 1,321,650.07 1,567,428.95 2,131,577.69 104,446.46 Budget estimate 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 760,000.00 800,000.00 950,000.00 1,000,000.00 1,200,000.00 1,600,000.00 1,600,000.00 Actual over (under) budget 589,681.22 (13,237.87) (911,777.80) 202,304.07 160,751.16 235,706.66 321,650.07 367,428.95 531,577.69 (1,495,553.54) Total actual collections as a % of total budget 129.48% 99.34% 54.41% 126.62% 120.09% 124.81% 132.17% 130.62% 133.22% n/a % change in annual total collected 5.22% (23.28%) (45.23%) (11.57%) (0.16%) 23.41% 11.47% 18.60% 35.99% n/a % of budget collected through January 11.44% 7.30% 2.76% 7.88% 8.02% 4.88% 5.69% 5.10% 6.01% 6.53% % of actual total collected through January 8.84% 7.35% 5.08% 6.22% 6.67% 3.91% 4.31% 3.90% 4.51% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of January 250,000.00 - 200,000.00 150,000.00 100,000.00 50,000.00 0.00 January 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 ■ January Page 23 H:\Finance Activity Reports\2015\debt capacity.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Debt Capacity 2/17/2016 2015 Assessed Value for 2016 Property Taxes Voted (UTGO) Nonvoted (LTGO) Voted park Voted utility 1.00% of assessed value 1.50% of assessed value 2.50% of assessed value 2.50% of assessed value 7,748,275,097 Maximum Debt Capacity Outstanding as of 12/31/2015 Remaining Debt Capacity Utilized 77,482,751 116,224,126 193,706,877 193,706,877 581,120,631 0 6,375,000 0 0 6,375,000 77,482,751 109, 849,126 193,706,877 193,706,877 574,745,631 /I 0.00% 5.49% 0.00% 0.00% 1.10% Bonds Repaid Bonds Remaining 2014 LTGO Bonds Period Ending CenterPlace Road & Street Improvements Total 12/1/2014 12/1/2015 12/1/2016 12/1/2017 12/1/2018 12/1/2019 12/1/2020 12/1/2021 12/1/2022 12/1/2023 12/1/2024 12/1/2025 12/1/2026 12/1/2027 12/1/2028 12/1/2029 12/1/2030 12/1/2031 12/1/2032 12/1/2033 225,000 175,000 i 135,000 125,000 360,000 300,000 400,000 260,000, 660,000 185,000 190,000 230,000 255,000 290,000 320,000 350,000 390,000 430,000 465,000 505,000 395,000 300,000 245,000 225,000 180,000 130,000 165,000 130,000 130,000 135,000 140,000 140,000 145,000 150,000 155,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 315,000 320,000 365,000 395,000 430,000 465,000 500,000 545,000 430,000 465,000 505,000 395,000 300,000 245,000 225,000 180,000 130,000 165,000 5,250,000 1,125,000 6,375,000 5,650,000 1,385,000 7,035,000 Page 24 1 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\MVFT\2016\motor vehicle fuel tax collections 2016.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Motor Fuel (Gas) Tax Collections - January For the years 2007 through 2016 2007 1 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 January 172,711 165,698 133,304 161,298 Collected to date 172,711 165,698 133,304 161,298 154,792 159,607 146,145 152,906 152,598 163,918 February 162,079 149,799 155,832 145,869 146,353 135,208 145,998 148,118 145,455 0 March 156,194 159,316 146,264 140,486 141,849 144,297 135,695 131,247 140,999 0 April 175,010 165,574 161,117 161,721 165,019 153,546 156,529 156,269 157,994 0 May 173,475 162,281 156,109 158,119 154,700 144,670 151,595 156,850 156,259 0 June 183,410 176,085 173,954 168,146 158,351 159,827 167,479 161,965 164,872 0 July 178,857 166,823 169,756 164,221 165,398 160,565 155,348 157,805 168,205 0 August 183,815 171,690 179,012 176,869 153,361 164,050 173,983 172,308 186,277 0 September 191,884 176,912 175,965 175,067 173,820 171,651 195,397 173,299 174,505 0 October 180,570 165,842 163,644 164,475 158,889 153,022 133,441 160,539 161,520 0 November 181,764 193,360 167,340 168,477 160,461 162,324 164,303 165,871 181,771 0 December 159,750 142,230 144,376 143,257 124,714 138,223 142,140 141,298 153,338 0 Total Collections 2,099,519 1,995,610 1,926,673 1,928,005 1,857,707 1,846,990 1,868,053 1,878,475 1,943,793 163,918 Budget Estimate 2,000,000 2,150,000 2,050,000 1,900,000 1,875,000 1,897,800 1,861,100 1,858,600 1,858,600 2,004,900 Actual over (under) budg 99,519 (154,390) (123,327) 28,005 (17,293) (50,810) 6,95319,875 85,193 (1,840,982) Total actual collections as a % of total budget 104.98% 92.82% 93.98% 101.47% 99.08% 97.32% 100.37% 101.07% 104.58% n/a % change in annual total collected 6.25% (4.95%) (3.45%) 0.07% (3.65%) (0.58%) 1.14% 0.56% 3.48% n/a 154,792 159,607 146,145 152,906 152,598 163,918 % of budget collected through January 8.64% 7.71% 6.50% 8.49% 8.26% 8.41% 7.85% 8.23% 8.21% 8.18% % of actual total collected through January 8.23% 8.30% 6.92% 8.37% 8.33% 8.64% 7.82% 8.14% 7.85% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of January 200,000 180,000 160,000 140,000 120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 January 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 3/9/2016 2016 to 2015 Difference 11,320 7.42% 11,320 7.42% 2013 2014 2015 2016 ■January Page 25 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\Telephone Tax\2016\telephone utility tax collections 2016.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Telephone Utility Tax Collections - January For the years 2009 through 2016 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 January 128,354 234,622 241,357 Collected to date 128,354 234,622 241,357 193,818 217,478 210,777 177,948 182,167 February 282,773 266,041 230,366 261,074 216,552 205,953 212,845 0 March 230,721 264,175 245,539 234,113 223,884 208,206 174,738 0 April 275,775 254,984 238,561 229,565 214,618 206,038 214,431 0 May 242,115 255,056 236,985 227,469 129,270 210,010 187,856 0 June 239,334 251,880 239,013 234,542 293,668 210,289 187,412 0 July 269,631 250,593 244,191 226,118 213,078 205,651 190,984 0 August 260,408 246,261 349,669 228,789 211,929 205,645 185,172 0 September 249,380 240,111 241,476 227,042 210,602 199,193 183,351 0 October 252,388 238,500 237,111 225,735 205,559 183,767 183,739 0 November 254,819 247,848 240,246 225,319 212,947 213,454 175,235 0 December 368,775 236,065 236,449 221,883 213,097 202,077 183,472 0 Total Collections 3,054,473 2,986,136 2,980,963 2,735,467 2,562,682 2,461,060 2,257,183 182,167 Budget Estimate 2,500,000 2,800,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 2,900,000 2,750,000 2,565,100 2,340,000 Actual over (under) budg 554,473 186,136 (19,037) (264,533) (337,318) (288,940) (307,917) (2,157,833) Total actual collections as a % of total budget 122.18% 106.65% 99.37% 91.18% 88.37% 89.49% 88.00% n/a % change in annual total collected n/a (2.24%) (0.17%) (8.24%) (6.32%) (3.97%) (8.28%) n/a 193,818 217,478 2014 [ 2015 210,777 2016 177,948 182,167 % of budget collected through January 5.13% 8.38% 8.05% 6.46% 7.50% 7.66% 6.94% 7.78% % of actual total collected through January 4.20% 7.86% 8.10% 7.09% 8.49% 8.56% 7.88% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of January 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 3/9/2016 2016 to 2015 Difference 4,219 2.37% 4,219 2.37% January 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 is January Page 26 Rick VanLeuven Chiefof Police Spokane Valley Police Department Accredited Since 2011 Services provided in partnership with the Spokane County Sheriff's Office and the Community, Dedicated to Your Safety. Ozzie Knezovich Sheriff TO: Mark Calhoun, Deputy City Manager FROM: Rick VanLeuven, Chief of Police DATE: March 15, 2016 RE: Monthly Report February 2015 February 2016: February 2015: CAD incidents: 4,769 CAD incidents: 4,453 Reports taken: 1,724 Reports taken: 1,704 Traffic stops: 1,212 Traffic stops: 1,063 Traffic reports: 278 Traffic reports: 257 CAD incidents indicate calls for service as well as self -initiated officer contacts. Hot spot maps are attached showing February residential burglaries, traffic collisions, vehicle prowlings, and stolen vehicles. Also attached are trend -line graphs for 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016: Citations, Spokane Valley Dispatched Calls, Self -Initiated Calls, Collisions, Persons Crimes, Property Crimes, and Sex Crimes. Also included is the February Crimes by Cities stats report. This report reflects incidents that occurred in a specific city to which a deputy from Spokane County took the courtesy report. For example, an individual may have had his car stolen in Airway Heights, and he waited until he returned home in the Newman Lake area to make a report. In 2011, we switched from UCR to NIBRS classification. As a result, certain crimes were broken down to their violation parts for NIBRS and each part is now counted. Consequently, comparing certain crimes before 2011 to crimes during or after 2011 is not recommended using the graphs. The crimes that are impacted by the NIBRS classification changes that should not be compared to prior graphs include: Adult Rape, Assault, Forgery and Theft. ADMINISTRATIVE: Chief VanLeuven along with Sheriff Knezovich and others from the Spokane County Sheriffs Office attended the Annual Boy Scout Leadership Breakfast at the Spokane Convention Center in mid-February. Page 1 Chief VanLeuven also attended a number of monthly meetings as well as quarterly In -Service Training in mid-February. SHERIFF'S COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING EFFORT (SCOPE): In the month of February, S.C.O.P.E. participated in: • Trent Elementary Resource Fair • GoodGuides Mentoring WVHS • East Valley Community Coalition Meeting • Crime Stoppers Meeting • GSSAC Coalition Meeting • Operation Family ID February 2016 Volunteers Hours per Station *Includes estimated volunteer service hours that are provided in the City of Spokane Valley. These two locations cover both Spokane Valley and the unincorporated portion of the county. Location # Volunteers Admin Hours L.E. Hours Total Hours Central Valley 9 40.0 37.5 77.5 East Valley* 22 173.5 157.5 331.0 Edgecliff 22 349.0 36.0 385.0 Trentwood 6 147.5 86.0 233.5 University 24 341.0 71.5 412.5 West Valley* 22 588.5 46.5 635.0 TOTALS 105 1,639.5 435.0 2,074.5 Volunteer Value ($22.14 per hour) $45,929.43 for February 2016 Spokane Valley Graffiti Report 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Jan. 0 2 3 5 5 Feb. 0 7 16 8 1 March 2 13 11 7 April 14 9 30 14 May 16 4 4 10 June 15 9 13 5 July 41 7 12 4 Aug. 57 22 6 10 Sept. 26 4 12 6 Oct. 30 7 6 6 Nov. 19 7 2 4 Dec. 37 1 7 10 Total 257 92 97 89 6 Page 2 S.C.O.P.E. Incident Response Team (SIRT) volunteers contributed 21 on -scene hours (including travel time) in February, responding to crime scenes, motor vehicle accidents and providing traffic control; 12 hours were for incidents specifically in Spokane Valley. There was no Special Event in Spokane Valley in February. Total February volunteer hours contributed by SIRT, including training, stand-by, response and special events is 498; total for 2016 is 1,024. Abandoned vehicles tagged by S.C.O.P.E. volunteers for impoundment in Spokane Valley in January totaled 22 and in February 35 with 8 vehicles in January and 8 in February, respectively, eventually cited and towed. Twelve hulks were processed in January and three hulks processed in February. During the month of February, a total of 103 vehicles were processed; total for 2016 is 173. SCOPE LATENT PRINT STATS SCOPE DISABLED PARKING ACTIVITY REPORT TRAINING HOURS SCSO SVPD TOTAL January 0 29 36 65 February 4.5 21 39 60 YTD - TOTAL 4.5 50 75 125 SCOPE DISABLED PARKING ACTIVITY REPORT City of Spokane Valley # of Vol. # of Vol. # of Hrs. # of Disabled Infractions Issued # of Warnings Issued # of Non - Disabled Infractions Issued January 2 11 2 0 0 February 2 1.5 2 0 0 YTD Total 4 12.5 4 0 0 Spokane County # of Vol. # of Hrs. # of Disabled Infractions Issued # of Warnings Issued # of Non - Disabled Infractions Issued January 2 26.5 2 0 0 February 2 18 0 0 0 YTD Total 4 44.5 2 0 0 OPERATIONS: Teacher Arrested for Heroin Possession - Spokane Valley Sheriffs Deputies arrested a 52 -year- old male at the Super 8 Motel on North Argonne in Spokane Valley for Possession of Heroin. During the incident, the male stated he is broke due to addiction, has lost everything and is currently on administrative leave from his job as an elementary school teacher for the last 25 years. The incident began in early February, just prior to 5:00 a.m., when Deputies Randy Watts and Riley Quine responded to the location for a noise complaint. Once at the scene, Dep. Watts received Page 3 information the male was selling heroin from one of the rooms. He contacted motel staff who cooperated with the deputies. The deputies attempted to contact the male at the room, but were unsuccessful. They left the location, but a short time later received information the male suspect had returned to the motel and was in the lobby. The deputies returned to the location and contacted the male who agreed to talk with Dep. Watts after he was advised of his rights. When confronted with the information, the male initially denied any knowledge, but later admitted he made a mistake. He explained he was broke, had lost almost everything and needed money. The male consented to a search of his hotel room where Dep. Watts observed several spoons used to melt heroin for ingestion and hypodermic needles. Dep. Watts also seized a bag containing a brown -colored substance believed to be heroin, digital scales, cash and baggies that appeared to contain methamphetamine residue. The brown -colored substance was later field tested and showed a presumptive positive result for heroin. The male suspect was transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail for Possession of Heroin with Intent to Deliver. Driver Claims "Right" to Not Identify Himself — In early February at approximately 5:30 p.m., Spokane Valley Sheriff's Deputy Jeff Thurman observed a white Suzuki Aerio travelling southbound on Argonne in the center lane. The 41 -year-old male driver made a quick and abrupt left turn across the inside lane of travel into a parking lot at Mission and Mullan in Spokane Valley. The male failed to use a turn signal prior to making the improper turn and cut off another vehicle, almost causing a collision. Dep. Thurman pulled in behind the vehicle, which was occupied by two males in addition to the male driver. Dep. Thurman contacted the driver as he exited the vehicle and asked for his driver's license, registration and proof of insurance. The male said he was "traveling," not in commerce, and didn't have identification. Dep. Thurman provided the reason for the traffic stop and advised the driver that he had nearly caused a collision. The driver explained he was arguing with a passenger who insisted he turn into the gas station, so he did. Dep. Thurman told the driver he wanted to make sure he wasn't impaired and told the driver that he needed to identify himself (Washington RCW 46.61.020). The driver provided his first name and said he didn't have a last name. During this time, the two passengers in the vehicle exited and went into the store. A short time later, the males exited the store and started to approach as Dep. Thurman continued to try and identify the driver. Dep. Thurman asked the males to stay back and initially they did not comply, prompting Dep. Thurman to request emergency backup, which arrived within minutes. Dep. Thurman advised the driver again that he needed to properly identify himself or he would be arrested and booked into jail. The driver continued to argue that he was being unlawfully detained per Constitutional Code and did not identify himself. Dep. Thurman advised the driver that he was under arrest and placed him in handcuffs without incident. The male driver was searched incident to arrest and a set of keys and sunglasses were removed. The driver then argued he was being kidnapped and Dep. Thurman was committing theft. After being placed in a patrol car, the male driver provided his full name and date of birth. Dep. Thurman learned the male's driving status was suspended in the 3rd degree. The vehicle was released to one of the passengers after he provided a valid driver's license showing he could lawfully drive the vehicle. The male suspect was transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail for Refusal to Give Information or Cooperate with an Officer and DWLS 3rd Degree. He was also issued a notice of infraction for Improper Turn and No Proof of Insurance. This was the second time in two days a driver claimed to be "traveling," implying they didn't need a driver's license. The other incident occurred a few days earlier, during a traffic stop in Medical Lake. The driver, who was stopped for speeding, was respectful, and provided the required information to Spokane County Sheriff's Deputy Jesse Depriest, but claimed to be a "free traveler" and wanted to talk to the Sheriff. During this incident, the driver was issued a criminal citation for DWLS 3rd Degree and a notice of infraction for Speeding. Page 4 Convicted Felon, Firearm, Reckless Driving & Stolen Vehicle - Spokane Valley Sheriff's Deputies assisted by K9 Gunnar arrested a 30 -year-old male for several felonies after a very disturbing and dangerous incident came to a successful conclusion in the area of North Van Marter and Broadway in Spokane Valley. The incident began at approximately 6:45 p.m. in mid-February, when Deputy Jason Karnitz was fueling his unmarked patrol car at the Cenex gas station on the corner of University and Sprague. Dep. Karnitz was in uniform and standing by his vehicle when a black Mercedes came around the store at a high rate of speed and slid to a stop behind him. Dep. Karnitz, startled by this, looked at the driver who was staring back at him. The 30 -year-old driver did not drive away or exit the vehicle, but instead began moving around inside the car and appeared to be very nervous. Dep. Karnitz noticed the Mercedes did not have a front license plate and he was aware this vehicle matched the description of a Mercedes reported stolen earlier. Not knowing what the driver's intentions were, or if he was armed, Dep. Karnitz got in his vehicle, pulled away and tried to circle around behind the vehicle to check the rear license plate and gain a position of advantage. As Dep. Karnitz pulled in behind the vehicle and confirmed it was reported stolen, the driver sped off Dep. Karnitz attempted to follow, but did so with caution. When he came around the store, the vehicle was gone. Dep. Karnitz pulled forward to begin looking for the vehicle, when the Mercedes reappeared from the rear of Dep. Karnitz's vehicle and was headed straight for him. With recent events around the nation where law enforcement officer have been assaulted or murdered, Dep. Karnitz drove away as he tried to create distance, but the driver chased after him. With additional deputies responding to assist, Dep. Karnitz gained distance and then quickly pulled off Sprague into another parking lot near Gillis. The driver did not follow and continued east on Sprague. Not wanting to initiate a pursuit, Dep. Karnitz followed the vehicle as he waited for backup. Stopped at a red light at Sprague and Bowdish, Dep. Karnitz could see emergency lights approaching from the east. The driver then suddenly turned north on Bowdish against the red light and almost collided with several vehicles. Dep. Karnitz tried to follow the vehicle and provide updated information to the marked patrol vehicles as the driver continued his reckless behavior. Deputy Hunt with his K9 partner Gunnar caught up to the vehicle as he turned north on Van Marter. Dep. Hunt, driving a marked patrol car with his emergency lights and siren activated, joined Dep. Karnitz. They drove toward the vehicle, which appeared to be coming to a stop, but then the driver started to flee. With the driver's continued reckless behavior, Dep. Hunt positioned his patrol car and conducted a PIT maneuver stopping the driver's attempt to flee. The deputies gave several commands for the male driver to show his hands, but he failed to comply and actively began digging around the console area. The deputies gave several more announcements for him to show his hands and they advised if he continued to refuse to comply, K9 Gunnar would be deployed. Dep. Hunt observed the doors of the vehicle were unlocked and moved to the passenger's side rear of the vehicle with K9 Gunnar. With the suspect refusing to follow commands, K9 Gunnar entered the vehicle from the rear passenger door and made contact with the suspect. Reacting to K9 Gunnar, suspect brought both of his hands into view. Dep. Karnitz and Dep. Hall quickly moved in and took control of the suspect's hands. Dep. Hunt called K9 Gunnar back as the suspect was taken into custody. Deputies located a 1911 -style, semi -auto pistol inside the vehicle near the center console. They learned the suspect was a convicted felon prohibiting him from possessing a firearm. They also learned he had a valid felony Department of Corrections warrant and two misdemeanor warrants for his arrest. The male suspect received medical attention before he was transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail for Possession of a Stolen Motor Vehicle, Unlawful Possession of a Firearm, Reckless Driving, Resisting Arrest and the warrants. Juvenile Arrested for Bomb Threat — In mid-February, Spokane Valley Sheriffs Deputy Cole Speer arrested a 13 -year-old juvenile male and booked him into the Spokane County Juvenile Detention Facility for Threats to Bomb or Injure Property, a felony. The investigation began after a Page 5 bomb threat was discovered on a boys bathroom stall at Greenacres Middle School in mid- February. The threat caused the entire school to be evacuated while several deputies conducted a search; no explosive was found. Since that time, Deputy Speer, a Central Valley School Resource Deputy, worked closely with Central Valley School District staff to find the person responsible, ultimately leading to the arrest. The Spokane Valley Police Department and Spokane County Sheriff's Office takes threats of this nature very seriously and anyone found to make threats such as this will be held accountable for their actions. Sheriff Knezovich stated, "School should be a place where children feel safe, not threatened. We will continue to work with Central Valley School District and the other school districts we partner with to ensure the safety students." RCW 9.61.160 Threats to bomb or injure property Penalty. (1) It shall be unlawful for any person to threaten to bomb or otherwise injure any public or private school building, any place of worship or public assembly, any governmental property, or any other building, common carrier, or structure, or any place used for human occupancy; or to communicate or repeat any information concerning such a threatened bombing or injury, knowing such information to be false and with intent to alarm the person or persons to whom the information is communicated or repeated. (2) It shall not be a defense to any prosecution under this section that the threatened bombing or injury was a hoax. (3) A violation of this section is a class B felony punishable according to chapter 9A.20 RCW. Spokane Valley Detectives Investigating Suspicious Death — In mid-February, Spokane Valley Major Crimes Detectives, assisted by members of the Forensic Unit, processed the scene of a suspicious death in Spokane Valley. Spokane Valley Deputies responded to a report of a deceased adult male at an apartment located in the 12700 block of East Mansfield. Spokane Valley Major Crimes Detectives would like to talk to anyone who knows or had contact with the 34 -year-old victim, Clifford "Cory" D. Fowler. Fowler, who appears to have led somewhat of a private lifestyle, completed work on February 11 th but was not heard from after that time. Detectives would like to talk with anyone who had contact with Fowler prior to his death or knows of his activities. Anyone with information regarding this incident or observed anything suspicious at the apartment complex around this timeframe is asked to call the Major Crimes Tip Line at 509-477-3186. Surveillance Videos Help Detective's Identify Prolific Burglar — In late February, Spokane Valley Investigative Unit (SVIU) Detectives took a 49 -year-old male into custody while serving a search warrant in the 12400 block of East Mansfield. The suspect was booked into the Spokane County Jail for seven felony charges and is believed to be connected to six active cases including a burglary in the area of Sullivan and 16th Avenue in mid-February. In early February, Spokane Valley Sheriffs Deputy James Hill responded to a reported burglary in the 2900 block of North Center where a suspect kicked the victim's front door in to gain entry. The victim stated she contacted West Valley School District (WVSD) Security and asked them to look at their security video since it faces her residence. Video of a suspect vehicle was found and provided to West Valley Resource Deputy Cashman. WVSD Security, working in partnership with Deputy Cashman, Page 6 identified the vehicle and provided the information to SVIU Detectives who began working the case. Also in early February, Spokane Valley Sheriff's Deputy Craig Chamberlin responded to the report of a different burglary in the 10700 block of East Empire Way. The victim in this case also had the door of the residence kicked in and provided video surveillance of the incident. SVIU Detectives working these cases developed additional information and identified the 49 -year-old male as the suspect. SVIU Detectives, assisted by Spokane Valley Sheriffs Deputies, served a search warrant at a residence located in the 12400 block of East Mansfield on Friday afternoon. While serving the warrant, they contacted the suspect and took him into custody without incident. The male suspect has a long history of preying upon citizens in Spokane County and Spokane Valley. He was recently arrested last November for 1St Degree Burglary after an alert neighbor witnessed him kick the front door open of her neighbor's residence in north Spokane County. During this incident, Deputy Liljenberg and Deputy Dawson arrested the male suspect after witnessing him carrying items from the victim's house to his vehicle. These are great examples of citizens and school district officials working together with law enforcement to hold criminals accountable for their actions. The surveillance video, ultimately purchased by the citizens of Spokane Valley, provided by West Valley School District Officials of the suspect vehicle was extremely helpful. We are very thankful for our great partnership with WVSD and our citizens as we continue to work together to keep our schools and community safe. BB Gun Vandals Cause Estimated $77,000 in Damage - Spokane Valley Investigative Unit Detective John Oliphant charged a 19 -year-old male and an 18 -year-old male for 1St Degree Malicious Mischief after learning they shot several windows with BB guns throughout Spokane Valley. The total damage caused by the suspects during these multiple incidents is estimated to be over $77,000. From his investigation, Det. Oliphant learned the two males drove around and shot cars, houses, businesses and windows several times between November 22, 2015 and January 3, 2016. The pair victimized citizens and businesses alike in the general areas of 8th Avenue between Carnahan and Park Road, along the Sprague/Appleway corridor and up and down the Argonne/Mullan corridor as well as some incidents in adjacent neighborhoods. The two suspects were stopped in a vehicle and identified on January 3, 2016, by Deputies Jeff Getchell and Randy Watts after an observant citizen witnessed the suspects in the act and began following the vehicle. The suspects said they initially started shooting cans and bottles after purchasing a BB gun, but eventually became bored before deciding to drive around and shoot cars, houses and buildings. It was only with the assistance of an observant citizen coupled with the hard work of patrol deputies and detectives, these suspects were caught and can now be held accountable for their actions. Auto/Pedestrian Collison on Mansfield - Spokane Valley Collison Investigators were called to the scene of an auto/pedestrian collision in late February in the 11900 block of East Mansfield in Spokane Valley. The collision involved a 15 -year-old male pedestrian and a 59 -year-old male driver. The juvenile was transported to a local hospital with serious and possible life-threatening injuries. The incident began at approximately 5:00 p.m. when deputies responded to a call of a juvenile who had vandalized a laundry room of the Pinecroft Trailer Court. A few minutes later, it was reported the juvenile ran into the street and was struck by a vehicle. Initial information shows the juvenile was running north across Mansfield and was almost hit by a vehicle travelling eastbound and as the juvenile continued northbound, he was struck by a westbound vehicle. Investigators believe driver impairment may also be a factor in this collision. The driver of the vehicle has not been charged at this time, but this is an active investigation and charges may be filed in the future. Spokane Valley Deputies, K9 & Air 1 Locate Attempted Murder Suspect — In late February at approximately 11:30 p.m., Spokane Valley Sheriff's Deputies responded to a reported male with a Page 7 gun in the area of the 15900 block of E Sprague in Spokane Valley. Additional information provided to the responding deputies was the male discharged the firearm during a fight and fled the location on foot. Once at the scene, deputies learned the 58 -year-old male suspect became involved in domestic violence incident, which quickly escalated to a physical fight with a handgun involved. During this incident, the suspect was fighting with a male inside an apartment and fired the handgun, sending a bullet into the ceiling. Witnesses said the suspect then chased his estranged wife into one of the bedrooms, pointed the handgun at her and pulled the trigger; however, the pistol fortunately malfunctioned and did not fire. The male suspect fled the apartment prior to deputies arriving at the scene. Deputies quickly set a perimeter and began giving announcements a K9 would be used if the male did not surrender, as Air 1 and Deputy Kullman with his K9 partner Khan began searching the area. Using their FLIR camera, Air 1 located what appeared to be a person hiding in some bushes in the 15600 block of East Valleyway. They advised the deputies on the ground of the possible suspect location as K9 Khan began tracking in that direction. K9 Khan located and made contact with the male suspect and he was quickly taken into custody as Air 1 continued to observe from overhead. The suspect received medical treatment before he was transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail for Attempted Murder 1st Degree, Assault 1st Degree, two counts of Harassment -Threats to Kill, Burglary 1St Degree, Unlawful Possession of a Firearm 2nd Degree, Felony Violation of a Domestic Violence No Contact Order and Malicious Mischief 3rd Degree. Thankfully, none of the victims, other citizens or deputies were injured during this volatile and extremely dangerous situation. Jury Duty Scam - Spokane County Superior Court is warning the public about a scam in which victims are accused of failing to report for jury duty. For several weeks, the court has fielded numerous inquiries from people who say they received a call from someone claiming to be a Police Officer, US Marshall, or Sheriff s Deputy representing the court. The caller would claim there had been an arrest warrant issued for failing to appear then tell the potential victims to pay up to $2,000 with a cashier's check to cover the warrant. The court does not call people or issue warrants in these matters, and court officers will never ask for a payment or personal information. The jury duty scam is common. According to the FBI, victims are caught off -guard by the unexpected threat of arrest and are more willing to give out personal information to defuse the situation. The scammers then use that information to steal a person's identity or empty a bank account, for example. This scam has been circulating throughout the Country in recent weeks. Anyone who receives such a call is urged to hang up and contact Crime Check at 456-2233 Phone Scammers "Claim" to be Deputies - The Spokane County Sheriff's Office received a report of a male claiming to work for the Sheriffs Office as he threatened arrest and demanded money for warrants. A call was placed to the scammer's phone number, 509-237-2600, and a male answered and transferred the call to a male who identified himself as "Detective Mike Ellis." When confronted, the suspect transferred the call to another male who identified himself as "Lieutenant Gray." The scammers continued to threaten arrest if the victim does not drive to Fred Meyer immediately and obtain a voucher for money owed due to a Failure to Appear or Contempt of Court warrant. When a real Sheriffs Lieutenant told the scammers he would meet them to pay them money, the scammers stated the warrants could not be paid in person and eventually hung-up. The Spokane County Sheriff's Office does not employ a "Mike Ellis" or a "Lieutenant Gray." The Spokane County Sheriff's Office and Spokane Valley Police Department would like to remind everyone law enforcement will NEVER call and request or demand fines to be paid over the phone. Scammers continue to prey upon citizens because they eventually find someone who believes their story and becomes a victim. Scammers continue to conduct phone scams where they identify themselves as employees of the IRS, Page 8 Social Security Administration, a law enforcement agency, a court employee or some other business or government agency. DO NOT be fooled into becoming a victim. DO NOT provide bank account information, credit or prepaid credit card information or any other personal information over the phone. CITIZENS ACADEMY OFFICER INVOLVED SHOOTING INCIDENTS O Ask the Deputies who have been there about these tragic incidents O Learn about the tools your Deputies carry, including live -fire demonstrations O Participate in hands-on, REALISTIC Defensive Tactics training O Learn about the laws that govern Criminal Procedure and which situations justify the use of lethal force. O Meet and hear from the investigators that make up the Spokane Investigative Regional Response (S.I.R.R.) Team: our Primary O.I.S. Investigators WHEN : Every Monday and Wednesday night in April, beginning April 4th and ending April 27th, 2016 (8 days total). Class runs from 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. WHERE : 2302 N. Waterworks St., Spokane, WA. 99212 TO SIGN UP : Call Deputy Chris Johnston @ 477-2592 Or email crjohnston(&spokanesheriff.org REGISTRATION IS FREE! Class size is limited so sign up soon! Due to limited seating, attendees MUST attend 7 out of 8 sessions. ******************** Page 9 sv Crime Report Date Range: 2/1/2016 to 2/29/2016 Year To Date Totals: Full Year Totals: Regional Intelligence Group 9 February- February- 2016 -YTD 2015 -YTD 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2016 2015 BURGLARY 76 69 147 154 999 1,167 1,079 1,030 997 918 FORGERY 55 59 115 107 633 658 693 627 515 341 MAL MISCHIEF 113 133 253 294 1,678 1,645 1,624 1,763 1,548 1,177 NON -CRIMINAL 15 11 29 31 134 151 106 108 160 913 PROP OTHER 131 104 253 236 1,595 1,449 1,463 1,355 1,114 855 RCRVD VEH 44 34 118 62 409 464 531 438 407 293 STLVEH 36 37 107 67 516 573 596 570 515 478 THEFT 239 254 504 502 3,089 3,096 3,105 2,753 2,407 2,358 VEH OTHER 8 19 29 45 201 279 268 287 194 3 VEH PROWL 76 123 176 257 1,183 1,196 1,205 1,160 1,488 1,395 TOTAL PROPERTY CRIMES 793 843 1,731 1,755 10,437 10,678 10,670 10,091 9,345 8,731 ASSAULT 94 91 175 191 1,072 1,087 902 891 955 888 DOA/SUICIDE 18 14 54 41 275 222 218 250 208 188 DV 53 33 119 85 695 485 386 402 498 1,141 HOMICIDE 2 0 5 0 2 3 2 2 3 1 KIDNAP 3 0 6 4 28 41 24 16 14 16 MENTAL 22 32 60 73 381 307 268 270 252 289 MP 15 7 30 20 190 138 156 154 124 128 PERS OTHER 289 265 561 578 3,494 3,203 2,976 2,901 2,372 1,603 ROBBERY 6 10 9 20 90 94 88 74 59 57 TEL -HARASS 11 8 26 20 111 132 148 212 162 153 TOTAL MAJOR CRIMES 513 460 1,045 1,032 6,338 5,712 5,168 5,172 4,647 4,464 ADULT RAPE 6 9 12 16 80 70 64 75 62 44 CHILD ABUSE 2 3 5 5 30 42 26 27 56 115 CUSTINTFER 9 20 23 44 197 237 236 190 184 206 IND LIBERTY 2 0 4 2 25 29 20 27 17 8 MOLES/CHILD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 47 RAPE/CHILD 1 1 1 2 14 13 13 13 23 28 RUNAWAY 25 37 44 69 409 406 397 530 510 490 SEX OTHER 7 2 14 5 66 69 45 37 56 215 SEX REGIS F 0 0 0 0 2 0 4 8 2 1 STALKING 2 3 3 3 16 24 21 24 19 18 SUSP PERSON 58 39 110 102 602 604 440 423 340 215 TOTAL SEX CRIMES 112 114 216 248 1,441 1,494 1,266 1,354 1,287 1,387 DRUG 28 30 60 65 379 336 314 424 511 534 ISU OTHER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 TOTAL ITE 28 30 60 65 379 336 314 424 513 536 TRAFFIC 278 257 622 540 3,476 3,216 3,525 3,957 3,569 3,081 TOTAL TRAFFIC REPORTS 278 257 622 540 3,476 3,216 3,525 3,957 3,569 3,081 TOTAL REPORTS RECEIVED 1,724 1,704 3,674 3,640 22,071 21,436 20,943 20,998 19,361 18,199 Printed 3/9/2016 7:32:16 AM Rpt011 Page 1 of 1 CAD Incidents by Cities (Only incidents handled by Spokane County Sheriff's Office) ili Date Range: 2/1/2016 to 2/29/2016 Regional Intelligence Group 9 AH CH DP FC FF LAH LL ML MW RF SCO SPA SPK SV WAV TOTALS CAD Incidents 32 150 200 17 5 0 38 176 90 9 3,065 7 753 4,769 0 9,311 Self Initiated Incidents 25 44 103 6 1 0 28 105 26 1 1,099 1 666 1,898 0 4,003 Drug Self Int (Patrol) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 0 2 0 0 9 Traffic Stops 7 16 33 0 0 0 8 27 12 0 535 0 290 1,212 0 2,140 Traffic Stops (ARST/CIT/IN) 1 1 13 0 0 0 4 9 6 0 260 0 113 565 0 972 TS (Warrants) 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 7 20 0 32 Calls for Service 7 106 97 11 4 0 10 71 64 8 1,966 6 87 2,871 0 5,308 Alarms 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 0 95 0 0 91 0 193 Accidents 0 6 4 1 0 0 4 2 5 1 147 1 7 162 0 340 Accidents (ARREST/CIT) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 8 Drug Calls 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 40 0 53 DV 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 8 2 0 107 0 12 183 0 319 DUI 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 79 0 6 81 0 174 DUI (Arrest) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 25 0 27 Pursuits 0 Suspicious Activity 3 7 18 1 0 0 1 15 17 1 410 2 46 554 0 1,075 Vehicle Recovered 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 2 42 0 61 911 Abandon Line 1 22 8 3 0 0 0 22 5 1 162 1 13 213 0 451 Shoplifting 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 0 49 All Arrests (ARREST/CIT/IN) 7 1 19 1 0 0 4 14 9 0 345 0 140 800 0 1,340 Crime Check Reports 0 0 20 0 4 0 0 12 21 1 410 3 3 503 0 977 Printed 3/9/2016 7:17:35 AM Rpt001 Page 1 of 1 RMS Crimes by Cities (Only incidents handled by Spokane County Sheriff's Office) Date Range: 2/1/2016 to 2/29/2016 Regional Intelligence Group 9 AH CH DP FC FF LAH LL ML MW RF SCO SPA SPK SV WAV TOTALS BURGLARY 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 0 39 0 0 76 0 121 FORGERY 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 51 1 1 55 0 113 MAL MISCHIEF 0 0 4 0 1 0 0 5 6 0 92 1 3 113 0 225 NON -CRIMINAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 5 15 0 28 PROP OTHER 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 3 0 64 0 18 131 0 220 RCRVD VEH 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 6 44 0 71 STL VEH 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 0 6 36 0 74 THEFT 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 120 0 8 239 0 381 VEH OTHER 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 10 0 0 8 0 20 VEH PROWL 0 0 6 0 1 0 0 0 7 0 63 0 1 76 0 154 TOTAL PROPERTY CRIMES 0 0 25 1 4 0 0 10 27 0 497 2 48 793 0 1,407 ASSAULT 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 8 2 0 57 0 10 94 0 177 DOA/SUICIDE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 26 0 2 18 0 47 DV 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 30 0 0 53 0 90 HOMICIDE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 KIDNAP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 4 MENTAL 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 17 0 0 22 0 41 MP 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 11 0 0 15 0 29 PERS OTHER 0 0 11 0 3 0 0 8 7 0 175 0 30 289 0 523 ROBBERY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 6 0 10 TEL -HARASS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 11 0 1 11 0 25 TOTAL MAJOR CRIMES 0 0 20 2 3 0 0 23 13 0 331 0 43 513 0 948 ADULT RAPE CHILD ABUSE CUST INTFER IND LIBERTY RAPE/CHILD RUNAWAY SEX OTHER STALKING SUSP PERSON TOTAL SEX CRIMES DRUG TOTAL ITF O 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 6 0 13 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 2 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 2 0 9 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 2 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 5 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 25 0 0 25 0 57 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 7 0 12 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 O 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 40 0 7 58 0 108 O 0 8 0 1 0 0 1 2 1 91 2 10 112 0 228 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 7 0 6 28 0 43 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 7 0 6 28 0 43 TRAFFIC 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 4 5 2 136 0 67 278 0 497 TOTAL TRAFFIC 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 4 5 2 136 0 67 278 0 497 TOTAL REPORTS RECEIVED 0 0 58 3 8 0 0 39 48 3 1,062 4 174 1,724 0 3,123 Printed 3/9/2016 7:21:38 AM Page 1of1 Francis umbra Eorke r\v er Eu id Buck e e rick Mission Mission • untry, l ista Sprague ewa 1 St 10 /4 Terre 2 Commercial Burglary Low (5 th 0 0.5 I Miles I � � Map Produced: 09 Mar 2016 orpe 2 2016 February Commercial Burglary Hotspots Medium High 1 ) 2 0 3 0 4+ Prepared By: Regional Intelligence Group 9 Spokane County Sheriff y Lake 0 0.75 1.5 Miles Ii I Map Produced: 09 Mar 2016 E 2016 February Residential Burglary Hotspots Residential Burglary — Low =Medium - High 1 O 2 O 3 O 4+ Prepared By: Regional Intelligence Group 9 Spokane County Sheriff F co\umbi s Fork6 leeee r"v LL Fre€erick Bucke Mission ntry Vista 1 st I0 Terre o 0.75 I.5 Mmes I i 1 Map Produced: 09 Mar 2016 orpe 2016 January & February Stolen Vehicle Hotspots 5 E Stolen Vehicles Low =Medium - High 1 2 0 3 0 4+ S Prepared By: Regional Intelligence Group 9 Spokane County Sheriff Francis Wellesley 1 Vall rick 7 YS r\ rT, Eu Buckeye 40th 8e// e -erre 0.5 I Miles Map Produced: 09 Mar 2016 2016 February Vehicle Prowling Hotspots E 6 Vehicle Prowling Low - Medium =High 1 O 2 O 3 O 4+ Prepared By: Regional Intelligence Group 9 Spokane County Sheriff 11 0 0.5 I Mlles i I Map Produced: 09 Mar 2016 2016 February Traffic Collision Hotspots Traffic Collisions Lo w C N 2 Medium Low Medium _ High 2 0 3 0 4+ Prepared By: Regional Intelligence Group 9 Spokane County Sheriff Selected Data for Comparisons RMS Stats/Charts - Spokane Valley 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Regional Intelligence Group 9 Spokane Valley Dispatched Calls February April June August October December January March May July September November January February March April May June July August September October November December 2013 2746 2383 2882 2928 3166 3195 3491 3529 3127 3016 2753 2773 2014 2702 2550 2992 2935 3369 3291 3847 3593 3279 3069 2715 2884 2015 2995 2658 3209 2971 3473 3639 3928 3817 3652 3675 3104 3029 2016 2966 2871 2013 2014 2015 2016 Printed 3/9/2016 7:30:11 AM Page I of 28 Selected Data for Comparisons RMS Stats/Charts - Spokane Valley 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Regional Intelligence Group 9 Spokane Valley Person Crimes February April June August October December January March %lay July September November 2013 2014 2015 -- 2016 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2013 223 180 213 256 248 255 278 278 249 243 251 243 2014 270 225 265 273 280 274 335 331 323 286 290 279 2015 301 248 285 261 316 330 348 313 272 272 263 318 2016 306 299 "ou! Page 16 of 28 Selected Data for Comparisons RMS Stats/Charts - Spokane Valley 1000 800 600 400 200 0 Regional Intelligence Group 9 Spokane Valley Property Crimes February April June August October December January March (:1ay July September November 2013 2014 +� 2015 2016 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2013 717 599 729 671 634 634 697 710 695 817 710 689 2014 632 578 758 665 717 706 727 665 755 683 671 778 2015 706 675 644 586 633 636 686 709 700 733 603 787 2016 707 595 Printed 3/9/2016 7:30:11 AM Rpt007 Page 17 of 28 Selected Data for Comparisons RMS Stats/Charts - Spokane Valley 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Regional Intelligence Group 9 Spokane Valley Self Initiated Incidents February April June August October December January March May July September November 2013 --.- 2014 2015 �-� 2016 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2013 1638 1881 2015 1696 1639 1745 2094 1682 1477 1766 1660 1512 2014 2126 1707 1831 1763 1899 1903 2096 1863 1826 1802 1794 1723 2015 1923 1795 2038 2001 1606 1838 2073 2003 1958 2072 1715 1602 2016 2168 1898 Rpt00 7 Page 20 of 28 Selected Data for Comparisons RMS Stats/Charts - Spokane Valley 50 40 30 20 10 0 Regional Intelligence Group 9 Spokane Valley Crime Sex Crimes February April June August October December January March May July September November January February March April May June July August September October November December 2013 24 23 26 21 44 41 36 37 32 29 33 38 2014 26 38 41 43 42 25 25 33 34 36 39 33 2015 36 36 26 23 42 27 45 32 22 25 21 29 2016 26 22 2013 2014 2015 2016 Printed 3/9/2016 7:30:11 AM Page 22 of 28 Selected Data for Comparisons RMS Stats/Charts - Spokane Valley 200 150 100 50 0 Regional Intelligence Group 9 Spokane Valley Traffic Collisions February April June August October December January March May July September November January February March April May June July August September October November December 2013 120 69 82 79 90 107 87 98 97 76 114 128 2014 100 105 83 65 103 82 93 90 105 112 116 95 2015 105 76 110 102 106 127 103 103 124 94 131 152 2016 132 76 2013 2014 2015 2016 Printed 3/9/2016 7:30:11 AM Rp007 Page 27 of 28 Selected Data for Comparisons RMS Stats/Charts - Spokane Valley 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Charge Count from Tickets: Spokane Valley Regional Intelligence Group 9 February April June August October December January March May July September November 2013 2014 • 2015 ▪ 2016 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2013 901 1086 1136 995 978 1226 1290 970 757 1078 948 827 2014 1216 1000 917 959 1130 1110 1242 998 1054 843 868 881 2015 985 895 1006 1054 762 843 985 1019 1124 954 825 866 2016 1547 997 Printed 3/9/2016 7:30:11 AM Ppt007 Page 28 of 28 Spokane �,. Valleyk PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT February 2016 AGREEMENTS FOR SERVICES ADOPTED AND IN OPERATION Contract Name Contractor Contract Amount Total Expended of Contract Expended Street Maintenance Poe Asphalt $1,366,663.00 $1,730.09 0.13% Street Sweeping AAA Sweeping $490,200.00 $82,900.47 16.91% Storm Drain Cleaning AAA Sweeping $189,990.00 $0.00 0.00% Snow Removal Poe Asphalt $70,000.00 $13,561.65** 19.37% Landscaping Senske $57,878.00 $1,060.92 1.83% Emergency Traffic Control Senske $10,000.00 $169.57 1.70% Litter and Weed Control Geiger Work Crew $60,000.00 $4,147.00** 6.91% State Highway Maintenance WSDOT $265,000.00 $30,556.42** 11.53% Traffic Signals, Signs, Striping Spokane County $632,000.00 $0.00** 0.00% Dead Animal Control Brad Southard $20,000.00 $3,325.00 16.63% * Budget estimates ** Does not include January and/or February 2016 — waiting on invoices 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Citizen Requests for Public Works 1 Total Reque sts Misc Dead Anima Remo val Graffi ti On City Prope rty • Submitted 101 3 12 2 Grave Shoul dering Lands Repor Illicit capin t A Disch g Potho arge ROW le Road way Nazar d Sign & Signal Reque sts Snow Storm Plow/ Drain Street Swee Traffic Remo age/E ping val rosion Weed Contr of 2 2 1 40 10 26 0 0 3 0 0 • In Progress 4 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 • Resolved 97 3 12 1 1 2 0 40 9 26 0 0 3 0 0 *Information in bold indicates updates 1 WASTEWATER Status of the process can be monitored at: http://www.spokaneriver.net/, http://www.ecy.wa.gov/geographic/spokane/spokane river basin.htm, http://www.spokanecounty.orq/utilities/WaterReclamation/content.aspx?c=2224 and http://www.spokaneriverpartners.com/ STREET MAINTENANCE ACTIVITY The following is a summary of Public Works/Contractor maintenance activities in the City of Spokane Valley for February 2016: • AAA Sweeping continued with arterial maintenance sweeping, sidewalk cleaning and began residential street sweeping on February 25tH • Geiger Work Crew continued with litter cleanup. • Continued with pothole patching. STORMWATER UTILITY The following is a summary of Stormwater Utility activities in the City of Spokane Valley for February 2016: • Completed work on updating swale inventory and information in GIS, as well as entering stormwater structure information into the GIS system for new 2015 developments and projects. • Continued assessment of stormwater retrofit possibilities with several 2016 pavement preservation projects. • Continued work on service contract renewals for Roadway Landscaping and Weed Control Services. • Continued work on an internal review of the City's Stormwater Program to prepare for probable future audit by the State. • Continued work on various capital improvement projects, (see below). Worked on negotiating grant agreements with Ecology on several projects including, Sprague LID, University to Park; Decant Phase 3; and Stormwater Retrofits with Pavement Preservation Projects. *Information in bold indicates updates 2 CAPITAL PROJECTS Si kdne .000 ley Public Works Projects Monthly Summary - Design & Construction February -2016 Street Projects 0155 Sullivan Rd W Bridge Replacement #4508 0166 Pines Rd. (SR27) &Grace Ave. Int Safety 0201 ITS Infill Project- Phase 1 0207 Indiana & Evergreen Transit Access Imp 0221 McDonald Rd Diet (16th to Mission) 0234 Seth Woodard Sidewalk Improvements 0236 Fancher Road Bridge #3502Joint Repair 0238 Pines RD Mirabeau Parkway Intersection 0239 Bowdish Rd & 11th Ave. Sidewalk Street Preservation Projects 0226 Appleway Resurfacing, Park to Dishman Mica 0229 32nd Ave Preservation Project 0233 Broadway Ave Street Pres-Sulliv to Moore 0235 NB Sullivan Rd. Pres (Spo Rvr-Flora Pit) 0240 Saltese Road Preservation Project Traffic Projects 0167 Citywide Safety Improvements 0222 Citywide Reflective Signal Back Plates 0228 Transportation Management Center Stormwater Projects 0198 Sprague, Park to University LID Parks Projects 0227 Appleway S.U.P. - Pines to Evergreen 0237 Appleway Trail - Sullivan to Corbin FHWA - BR HSIP FHWA - CMAQ STA - FTA/NF HSIP CDBG COSY TIB - UAP TIB - SP FHWA - STP(U) COSV COSV COSV COSV HSIP HSIP COSV 06/27/14 04/22/16 03/25/16 03/18/16 04/22/16 05/13/16 02/25/16 04/15/16 06/10/16 01/02/17 02/12/16 04/15/16 tbd 08/05/16 07/18/14 05/13/16 04/15/16 04/01/16 05/13/16 05/27/16 03/10/16 05/06/16 07/01/16 01/02/17 02/26/16 05/06/16 tbd 08/26/16 07/31/15 08/21/15 tbd tbd Local agency work 100 95 95 90 0 10 100 90 0 57 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10/04/16 10/01/16 12/31/16 12/31/16 12/31/16 12/31/16 06/01/16 12/31/16 12/31/16 60 0 12/31/17 100 0 12/31/16 50 0 12/31/16 33 0 12/31/16 5 0 12/31/16 100 0 100 80 0 96 07/31/16 03/01/19 12/31/15 $ 15,833,333 $ 733,086 $ 327,562 $ 85,000 $ 1,853,630 $ 389,987 $ 160,000 $ 446,338 $ 506,342 $ 1,190,000 $ 1,570,000 $ 450,000 $ 65,834 $ 920,000 $ 503,424 $ 81,000 $ 45,000 Dept of Ecology 2/24/17 3/10/17 30 0 11/30/17 $ 20,000 FHWA-STP(U) 01/12/18 02/02/18 COSV 03/03/17 03/24/17 0 0 12/31/18 0 0 12/31/17 $ 1,899,252 $ 2,130,000 $ 29, 209, 788 Design Bid Estimated Total Project Design & Construction Projects Proposed Open %Complete Construction Project # Funding Ad Date Date PE I CN Completion Cost Street Projects 0155 Sullivan Rd W Bridge Replacement #4508 0166 Pines Rd. (SR27) &Grace Ave. Int Safety 0201 ITS Infill Project- Phase 1 0207 Indiana & Evergreen Transit Access Imp 0221 McDonald Rd Diet (16th to Mission) 0234 Seth Woodard Sidewalk Improvements 0236 Fancher Road Bridge #3502Joint Repair 0238 Pines RD Mirabeau Parkway Intersection 0239 Bowdish Rd & 11th Ave. Sidewalk Street Preservation Projects 0226 Appleway Resurfacing, Park to Dishman Mica 0229 32nd Ave Preservation Project 0233 Broadway Ave Street Pres-Sulliv to Moore 0235 NB Sullivan Rd. Pres (Spo Rvr-Flora Pit) 0240 Saltese Road Preservation Project Traffic Projects 0167 Citywide Safety Improvements 0222 Citywide Reflective Signal Back Plates 0228 Transportation Management Center Stormwater Projects 0198 Sprague, Park to University LID Parks Projects 0227 Appleway S.U.P. - Pines to Evergreen 0237 Appleway Trail - Sullivan to Corbin FHWA - BR HSIP FHWA - CMAQ STA - FTA/NF HSIP CDBG COSY TIB - UAP TIB - SP FHWA - STP(U) COSV COSV COSV COSV HSIP HSIP COSV 06/27/14 04/22/16 03/25/16 03/18/16 04/22/16 05/13/16 02/25/16 04/15/16 06/10/16 01/02/17 02/12/16 04/15/16 tbd 08/05/16 07/18/14 05/13/16 04/15/16 04/01/16 05/13/16 05/27/16 03/10/16 05/06/16 07/01/16 01/02/17 02/26/16 05/06/16 tbd 08/26/16 07/31/15 08/21/15 tbd tbd Local agency work 100 95 95 90 0 10 100 90 0 57 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10/04/16 10/01/16 12/31/16 12/31/16 12/31/16 12/31/16 06/01/16 12/31/16 12/31/16 60 0 12/31/17 100 0 12/31/16 50 0 12/31/16 33 0 12/31/16 5 0 12/31/16 100 0 100 80 0 96 07/31/16 03/01/19 12/31/15 $ 15,833,333 $ 733,086 $ 327,562 $ 85,000 $ 1,853,630 $ 389,987 $ 160,000 $ 446,338 $ 506,342 $ 1,190,000 $ 1,570,000 $ 450,000 $ 65,834 $ 920,000 $ 503,424 $ 81,000 $ 45,000 Dept of Ecology 2/24/17 3/10/17 30 0 11/30/17 $ 20,000 FHWA-STP(U) 01/12/18 02/02/18 COSV 03/03/17 03/24/17 0 0 12/31/18 0 0 12/31/17 $ 1,899,252 $ 2,130,000 $ 29, 209, 788 Street Projects 0123 Mission Ave - Flora to Barker 0141 Sullivan & Euclid PCC 0142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan 0205 Sprague/Barker Intersection Improvement 0223 Pines Rd Underpass @ BNSF &Trent Stormwater Projects 0193 Effectiveness Study 0199 Havana -Yale Diversion 0200 Ponderosa Surface Water Diversion FHWA - STP(U) FHWA - STP(U) FHWA - STP(U) COSV COSV 08/15/15 12/31/17 08/31/16 12/31/16 tbd Dept of Ecology 06/30/15 Dept of Ecology 10/31/16 Dept of Ecology 10/31/16 15 80 90 5 0 100 35 35 $ 917,700 $ 175,260 $ 276,301 $ 51,619 $ 10,000 $ 300,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 1,770,880 *Information in bold indicates updates 3 Design Bid Estimated Total Project Design Only Projects Complete Open % Complete Construction Project # Funding Date Date PE Completion Cost Street Projects 0123 Mission Ave - Flora to Barker 0141 Sullivan & Euclid PCC 0142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan 0205 Sprague/Barker Intersection Improvement 0223 Pines Rd Underpass @ BNSF &Trent Stormwater Projects 0193 Effectiveness Study 0199 Havana -Yale Diversion 0200 Ponderosa Surface Water Diversion FHWA - STP(U) FHWA - STP(U) FHWA - STP(U) COSV COSV 08/15/15 12/31/17 08/31/16 12/31/16 tbd Dept of Ecology 06/30/15 Dept of Ecology 10/31/16 Dept of Ecology 10/31/16 15 80 90 5 0 100 35 35 $ 917,700 $ 175,260 $ 276,301 $ 51,619 $ 10,000 $ 300,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 1,770,880 *Information in bold indicates updates 3 TRAFFIC CIP Projects Staff continues to coordinate with traffic related design and study items as part of CIP projects. The installation of countdown pedestrian timers at traffic signals is on-going (weather permitting). The sign upgrades and bicycle route installations are planned to start in February/March (weather permitting). Specific Studies Staff is coordinating with WSDOT on the Henry Road IJR and the North Spokane Corridor (NSC) IJR. Development Projects Reviewing traffic impact studies and letters for several projects and assisting Development Engineering with the Comprehensive Plan Update. PLANNING AND GRANTS Blake Road Sidewalk, 8th to Appleway Trail Public Works met with the neighborhood along Blake Road and marked out the sidewalks so people could see the impacts to their frontage. Comments were taken and a field report was completed for information to the City Council. Council meets on March 1, 2016 to decide whether or not the City will fund this project. The City is pursuing CDBG grant funding for this project for a total project cost of $348,655. If the County funds this project and the City moves forward, the project will be constructed in the summer of 2017. FMSIB Grant Funding The Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) issued a Call for Projects on February 3, 2016 for the allocation of state transportation funding for projects that improve the movement of products and goods. This grant program will provide funding beginning in 2017 on through 2021, with total funding of $18-$23 million statewide over the 5 -year period. Grant applications are due March 14, 2016. USDOT 2016 FASTLANE and TIGER VIII Call for Projects The USDOT has issued a 2016 Call for Projects for two grant programs; the FASTLANE (Fostering Advancements in Shipping and Transportation for the Long-term Achievement of National Efficiencies) and the TIGER VIII (Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery) competitive grant programs. FASTLANE The USDOT is soliciting applications for $800 million in grants. The availability of the dedicated grants marks the first time in USDOT history that a program establishes broad, multiyear eligibilities for freight infrastructure, including intermodal projects across the country. Grant applications for the FASTLANE grant are due April 14, 2016. *Information in bold indicates updates 4 TIGER Vlll The TIGER will fund $500M for transportation projects across the country under this eighth round. These capital funds will be for surface transportation infrastructure and will be awarded on a competitive basis for projects that will have a significant impact on the nation, a metropolitan area, or a region. Applications are due on April 29, 2016. Capital Programs and Community and Economic Development Staff are evaluating the grant criteria to determine which projects identified in the City's Transportation Improvement Plan and Comprehensive Plan would qualify for funding under the two grant programs. *Information in bold indicates updates 5 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 22, 2016 Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business ® information ['admin. report Department Director Approval: El ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2016 Call for Projects for Safe Routes to School (SRTS) and the Pedestrian and Bicycle Programs GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: The WSDOT (Washington State Department of Transportation) has issued a Call for projects for the statewide Safe Routes to School and the Pedestrian and Bicycle grant programs. This call is for federal and state funding for the 2017-2019 biennium. Currently, $18.4 million is anticipated statewide for the Pedestrian and Bicycle program and $19.2 million statewide for the Safe Routes to School Program. The WSDOT call for projects consists of two funding categories and two types of projects. The Safe Routes to School program solicits projects that address school traffic safety, access and mobility within two miles of a school and/or local transportation safety program servicing children in grades K-12. The purpose is to increase the number of children walking and biking to school safely. Projects may include sidewalk improvements, traffic calming and speed reduction improvements, and pedestrian and bicycle crossing improvements. The application deadline for Safe Route to School is May 13, 2016. The second WSDOT funding category and call for projects is the Pedestrian and Bicycle Program. This program solicits projects that reduce pedestrian and bicycle collisions and increase the number of people who choose to walk and bike for transportation. Projects of these types are facilities or systems to increase pedestrian/bicycle safety and/or mobility infrastructure improvements. The application deadline for the Pedestrian and Bicycle Program is May 6, 2016. Staff has begun evaluating the proposed grant criteria and has not yet identified a draft list of projects to review with council. However, information staff will use to develop this draft list of projects includes: • Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Program • School District and School Administrators, "Safe Route to School Plans" • Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Traffic Control for School Areas, and • Aerial photography and site visits. Staff will provide a draft list of suggested projects for each program with the Administrative Report scheduled for March 29, 2016. OPTIONS: Information Only RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Information Only. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: No financial match is required for these projects; however, the "Call for Projects" indicates that projects with matching funds will be scored more favorably. STAFF CONTACT: Steve Worley, P.E., Senior Capital Projects Engineer; Eric Guth, P.E., Public Works Director. ATTACHMENTS: