The URL can be used to link to this page

2016, 10-25 Regular Meeting AGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FORMAL FORMAT MEETING Tuesday,October 25,2016 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 Isaac Hebden of the Intersection Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF AGENDA INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS COMMITTEE,BOARD,LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS MAYOR'S REPORT PROCLAMATION n/a 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.PUBLIC HEARING: 2016 Budget Amendment—Chelsie Taylor 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Community Development Block Grant Projects for 2017 — Mike Basinger, Chaz Bates 3. 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 Oct. 25,2016 Request for Council Action Form Totaling: $4,152,004.99 b.Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending October 15,2016: $367,731.74 c.Approval of October 4,2016 Council Meeting, Study Session Format d.Approval of October 11,2016 Council Meeting,Formal Meeting Format NEW BUSINESS: 4. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 16-014 Aggressive Solicitation—Erik Lamb,Kristopher Morton [public comment] 5. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 16-015 Property Tax—Chelsie Taylor [public comment] 6.First Reading Proposed Ordinance 16-016,Amending 2016 Budget—Chelsie Taylor [public comment] Council Agenda 10-25-16 Formal Format Meeting Page 1 of 2 7. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 16-017 Adopting 2017 Budget-Chelsie Taylor[public comment] 8. Motion Consideration: Fund Allocations to Social Service and Economic Development Agencies— Chelsie Taylor [public comment] 9. Motion Consideration: 2017 Community Development Block Grant Projects—Mike Basinger, Chaz Bates [public comment] 10.Motion Consideration: Browns Park Lease—Cary Driskell [public comment] 11.Motion Consideration: Selection of City Manager—John Whitehead [public comment] 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: 12. Periodic Review,Draft Comprehensive Plan,Planning Commission Findings—Mike Basinger 13.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins INFORMATION ONLY(will not be reported or discussed): 14. Department Reports 15. SRTMC(Spokane Regional Transportation Management Center)Interlocal Agreement 16. Sullivan Bridge Update CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT General Meeting 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 2nd and 411 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 51 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 10-25-16 Formal Format Meeting Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 25, 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: Public Hearing on the proposed 2016 Budget Amendment. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: In order for the City to amend an adopted budget, State law requires the Council to approve an ordinance that appropriates additional funds. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: The Council last took formal action on the 2015 Budget when it was amended on June 7, 2016. On October 4, 2016 an Administrative Report was delivered to Council regarding the need for a budget amendment. BACKGROUND: Since the initial adoption of the 2016 Budget on November 10, 2015 and the subsequent amendment on June 7, 2016, a number of events have transpired in the normal course of operations that necessitate a 2016 Budget amendment. They include: #001 - General Fund Provide additional appropriations (expenditures) of$521,759 comprised of: • $15,000 increase in professional services for outside legal counsel due to a greater need for services during 2016 than was anticipated during the 2016 Budget development. • $30,000 reduction in the General Government professional services, and increase in the transfer out of $30,000 to the Parks Capital Projects Fund #309 to pay for the unanticipated water connection costs for the Browns Park splashpad construction. • Additional $453,116 related to the agreed upon severance costs for the former City Manager and related legal fees. • A $16,418 transfer to the Winter Weather Reserve Fund #122 to replenish the fund to $500,000. • An additional transfer of $37,225 to Parks Capital Projects Fund #309 to pay for the replacement of the play structure at Terrace View Park that was damaged during the windstorm in November 2015. Increase revenues by $36,400 as a result of grant proceeds from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in the wake of the windstorm in November 2015. #101 — Street Fund Increase expenditures by $46,000 due to the need to replace and rewire a traffic signal cabinet that was damaged during a traffic accident. Increase revenues by $96,000, including $50,000, reflecting the right-of-way maintenance fee from Sunshine Disposal for the amount of solid waste received at the transfer facility that exceeded 45,500 tons and $46,000 in insurance proceeds received following a claim to replace and rewire a traffic signal cabinet that was damaged during a traffic accident. #103 —Trails and Paths Fund Increase expenditures by $9,300 to pay for additional unplanned expenditures related to the Appleway Trail — University to Pines closeout process. 1 #104 — Hotel / Motel Tax—Tourism Facilities Fund Increase estimated revenues by $19,500 reflecting revised projected hotel/motel tax revenues in 2016 from the 1.3% hotel/motel tax. #105 - Hotel / Motel Tax Fund Increase estimated revenues by $30,000 reflecting revised projected hotel/motel tax revenues in 2016 from the 2% hotel/motel tax. #122 —Winter Weather Reserve Fund Revenues for the Winter Weather Reserve Fund are being increased by $54,928. These funds are a combination of FEMA grant proceeds in the amount of $38,510 and a transfer in from the General Fund of $16,418. These revenues are a result of the 2015 windstorm cleanup effort which resulted in the fund falling below its target fund balance of $500,000. With these additional revenues, it will be returned to fully funded status. #123 — Civic Facilities Replacement Fund Expenditures are increased by $22. This will complete the effort to reduce the fund balance to $0 by the end of 2016. #301 — REET 1 Capital Projects Fund Increase Expenditures by $540,000 to reflect changes in project schedules for 2016 through: • An increase in transfers out to the Street Capital Projects Fund #303 by $520,000 to reflect a change in project schedules. • An addition of a transfer out to the proposed new Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund #314 in the amount of $20,000 for funding design costs for the Barker Grade Separation Project. Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) revenue is increased by $200,000 based on revised revenue projections. #302 — REET 2 Capital Projects Fund Expenditures are decreased by $540,000 to reflect changes in project schedules and makeup for 2016. Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) revenue is increased by $200,000 based on revised revenue projections. #303 — Street Capital Projects Fund This fund is being amended to reflect estimated actual progress on a number of projects as well as updates to estimated project costs. Expenditures and revenues are increased by $700,000. This includes a reduction in the contingency of $250,000 to bring the contingency from $1,000,000 to $750,000. As the Fund #303 budget is developed in July prior to the budget year, the City has historically included a $1,000,000 appropriation contingency to absorb changes in project timelines and costs that occur subsequent to the initial budget development process. This $1,000,000 appropriation contingency is then offset by a combination of assumed grant revenues and REET revenues transferred from Funds #301 and #302. Additional reductions include moving both the Barker Grade Separation and the Pines Grade Separation projects to the proposed new Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund #314. #309 — Park Capital Projects Fund This fund is being amended to reflect estimated actual progress on a number of projects. The increases seen in this fund are primarily a result of two segments of the Appleway Trail starting earlier than originally anticipated due to obligation of grant funds. Changes include increases in expenditures/ appropriations in the amount of$477,822. 2 Expenditure changes include: • An increase of $9,300 to the Appleway Trail — University to Pines segment to complete the closeout of the project. • An increase of$400 to complete the closeout of phase 1 of the Pocket Dog Park. • An increase of $102,247 to the Appleway Trail — Pines to Evergreen segment to complete design work. • The addition of $276,775 for the Appleway Trail — Sullivan to Corbin segment to complete design work. • An increase of $30,000 to the Browns Park Splashpad project due to unforeseen water connection fees. • The addition of $59,100 for replacement of the Terrace View Playground Equipment due to damage during the 2015 windstorm. Revenues will increase by $477,422, including: • Grant proceeds of $320,132 for the Appleway Trail — Pines to Evergreen and Sullivan to Corbin segments. • Grant proceeds from FEMA for the replacement of the Terrace View Playground Equipment in the amount of$21,875. • An increase of$67,225 in the transfer in from the General Fund for the remaining amount of the Terrace View Playground Equipment replacement and the Browns Park Splashpad water connection costs. • A transfer in of $9,300 from Trails and Paths Fund #103 for the Appleway Trail — University to Pines segment. • A transfer in of $58,890 from Capital Reserve Fund #312 for the Appleway Trail — Pines to Evergreen and Sullivan to Corbin segments. #311 — Pavement Preservation Fund Expenditures increase by $1,500,000 to account for changes in the schedules of projects and related to grant funding. Revenues increase by $2,063,022 reflecting an increase in grant revenues related to preservation projects in the amount of $2,063,000 as well as an increase of $22 transferred in from the Civic Facilities Replacement Fund #123. #312 — Capital Reserve Fund • Expenditures/appropriations of$566,160 include: o An increase of $457,270 for the Sullivan Rd West Bridge. This is based on scheduling and is not an increase in total contribution to the fund. o A reclassification of $500,000 related to the Pines Rd Grade Separation project. This reduces the amount transferred to Fund #303, and creates the amount to be transferred to the proposed new Fund #314 for the same dollar amount. o An increase of $50,000 reflecting a transfer to Street Capital Projects Fund #303 for the Euclid Ave — Flora to Barker project. o An increase of $13,800 reflecting an additional transfer to Parks Capital Projects Fund #309 for the Appleway Trail — Pines to Evergreen segment. o An increase of $45,090 reflecting a transfer to Parks Capital Projects Fund #309 for the Appleway Trail —Sullivan to Corbin segment. #313 — City Hall Construction Fund Expenditures are decreased by $5,355,005 for construction on the new City Hall building to reflect expenditures for the project moving into 2017. 3 #314 — Railroad Grade Separation Fund This is a proposed new fund for 2016. The intent of the fund is to account for the capital construction projects that are part of Bridging the Valley. Due to the anticipated size, scope, and duration of these projects, managing these projects in their own fund allows for the necessary monitoring without being obscured by the variety and quantity of the other projects in Street Capital Projects Fund #303 as well as keeping these projects from skewing the average volume of activity in Fund #303. Expenditures and revenues for this fund are proposed to be $750,000, which were previously budgeted in Fund #303, including: • $250,000 for preliminary design and engineering of the Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation project which is funded by a combination of $230,000 of grant proceeds and $30,000 in transfers in from the REET 1 Capital Projects Fund #301. • Expenditures of $500,000 for the purchase of land related to the Pines Rd Underpass at BNSF & Trent project which is funded by a transfer in from the Capital Reserve Fund #312. #402 — Stormwater Management Fund Expenditures/appropriations decreased by $375,000, including: • Capital Projects expenditures are decreased by $425,000 due to various capital projects being accounted for in the Aquifer Protection Area Fund #403. • An increase in street sweeping expenditures of$50,000 due to the 2015 windstorm. Revenues increase by $48,800 reflecting the receipt of FEMA grants to offset costs related to the 2015 windstorm. #403 —Aquifer Protection Area Fund Capital outlays in this fund have changed by a total reduction of$1,575,000 comprised of: • A reduction of $2,000,000 as the grant program that provided funding for the Sprague — Park to University LID has been delayed. • The addition of water quality related improvements related to road projects in the amount of $425,000 Revenues have been decreased by a total of$1,600,000: • A reduction of grant proceeds by $1,500,000 as the grant program that provided funding for the Sprague— Park to University LID has been delayed. • A reduction of the Spokane County APA Fee by $100,000 based on revised estimates. This budget amendment will create one new fund: • Fund #314 — Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund 4 The 2016 Budget amendment reflects the changes noted above and will affect 17 funds resulting in total appropriation/expenditure decreases of $4,133,942 and revenue increases of $1,676,072. Revenue Expenditure Fund Fund Increase Increase No. Name (Decrease) (Decrease) 001 General Fund 36,400 521,759 101 Street Fund 96,000 46,000 103 Trails and Paths Fund 0 9,300 104 Hotel / Motel Tax -Tourism Facilities Fund 19,500 0 105 Hotel / Motel Tax Fund 30,000 0 122 Winter Weather Reserve Fund 54,928 0 123 Civic Facilities Replacement Fund 0 22 301 REET 1 Capital Projects Fund 200,000 540,000 302 REET 2 Capital Projects Fund 200,000 (540,000) 303 Street Capital Projects Fund (700,000) (700,000) 309 Park Capital Projects Fund 477,422 477,822 311 Street Preservation Fund 2,063,022 1,500,000 312 Capital Reserve Fund 0 566,160 313 City Hall Construction Fund 0 (5,355,005) 314 Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund 750,000 750,000 402 Stormwater Management Fund 48,800 (375,000) 403 Aquifer Protection Area Fund (1,600,000) (1,575,000) 1,676,072 (4,133,942) OPTIONS: Future options are to accept the proposed amendments in whole or in-part. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: The purpose of this evening's public hearing is to consider input from the public on the proposed budget amendment and no action is required of Council at this time. Anticipated future action by the Council includes: • October 25, 2016— First reading of Ordinance #16-016 amending the 2016 Budget. • November 8, 2016 — Second reading of Ordinance #16-016 amending the 2016 Budget. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This action amends the estimated revenues and appropriations for the 2016 Budget that was adopted on November 10, 2015 and subsequently amended on June 7, 2016. There are adequate funds available to pay for these amendments. STAFF CONTACT: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS: • Fund level line-item detail of revenues and expenditures. 5 H:\Budget\2016\Amendment#2\2016 10 25 First Reading of Ordinance\amendment no 2 detail.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/25/2016 2016 Budget-Amendment#2 Line Item Detail Account Account Initial Amendment Amended Description Number Description/Justification Budget No 2 Budget #001 -General Fund Recurring Expenditures Professional Services- Legal Services 001.013.015.515.10.41.04 - Outside Legal Counsel needed more during 2016 51,762 15,000 66,762 Professional Services- Misc Studies 001.090.000.513.10.41.05 - Reduced for Browns Park Splashpad transfer 235,500 (30,000) 205,500 Transfers out-#309 001.090.000.597.30.00.90 - Browns Park Splashpad water connection 200,300 30,000 230,300 Total recurring expenditures 15,000 Nonrecurring Revenues FEMA Grant for Windstorm 001.090.000.331.97.03 - FEMA Grant Proceeds(2015 Windstorm) 0 36,400 36,400 Total nonrecurring revenues 36,400 Nonrecurring Expenditures City Manager's Severance 001.090.000.597.10.00.70 - City Manager's severance agreement&related legal costs 0 453,116 453,116 Transfers out-#122 001.090.000.597.12.00.20 - Replenish Winter Weather Reserve Fund 0 16,418 16,418 Transfers out-#309 001.090.000.597.30.00.90 - Parks&Rec Windstorm Damage 0 37,225 37,225 Total nonrecurring expenditures 506,759 Total of all General Fund revenues 36,400 Total of all General Fund expenditures 521,759 #101 -Street Fund Recurring Revenues Street Maintenance& Repair Charges 101.042.000.344.10.00 - Right of Way Maintenance Fee 0 50,000 50,000 Total recurring revenues 50,000 Nonrecurring Revenues Insurance Proceeds 101.042.000.395.20.00 - Insurance Proceeds 0 46,000 46,000 Total nonrecurring revenues 46,000 Nonrecurring Expenditures Traffic Signal Cabinet Replacement 101.042.000.594.42.63.03 - Accident at 16th/Sullivan-Signal Cabinet Replacement needed 0 46,000 46,000 Total nonrecurring expenditures 46,000 Total of all Street Fund revenues 96,000 Total of all Street Fund expenditures 46,000 Page 1 of 6 H:\Budget\2016\Amendment#2\2016 10 25 First Reading of Ordinance\amendment no 2 detail.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/25/2016 2016 Budget-Amendment#2 Line Item Detail Account Account Initial Amendment Amended Description Number Description/Justification Budget No 2 Budget #103-Trails and Paths Fund Expenditures Transfers Out-#309 103.000.000.597.30.00.90 - Appleway Trail -University to Pines 0 9,300 9,300 Total expenditures 9,300 #104-Hotel/Motel Tax-Tourism Facilities Fund Revenues Hotel/Motel Tax 104.000.000.313.30.01 - Revised estimate 357,500 19,500 377,000 Total revenues 19,500 #105-Hotel/Motel Tax Fund Revenues Hotel/Motel Tax 105.105.000.313.30.00 - Revised estimate 550,000 30,000 580,000 Total revenues 30,000 #122-Winter Weather Reserve Fund Revenues FEMA Grant for Windstorm 122.000.000.331.97.03 - FEMA Grant Proceeds 0 38,510 38,510 Transfers in-#001 122.000.000.397.00.10 - Replenish Winter Weather Reserve Fund 0 16,418 16,418 Total revenues 54,928 #123-Civic Facilities Replacement Fund Expenditures Transfer out-#311 123.000.000.597.31.00.10 - Pavement Preservation-deplete fund balance 559,786 22 559,808 Total Expenditures 22 Page 2 of 6 H:\Budget\2016\Amendment#2\2016 10 25 First Reading of Ordinance\amendment no 2 detail.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/25/2016 2016 Budget-Amendment#2 Line Item Detail Account Account Initial Amendment Amended Description Number Description/Justification Budget No 2 Budget #301 -REET 1 Capital Projects Fund Expenditures Transfers out-#303 301.000.000.597.30.00.30 - Revised project schedules 222,503 520,000 742,503 Transfers out-#314 301.000.000.597.31.00.40 - Barker Grade Separation- project design 0 20,000 20,000 Total expenditures 540,000 Revenues REET 1 - 1st Quarter Percent 301.301.000.318.34.00 - Revised estimate based on projections 800,000 200,000 1,000,000 Total revenues 200,000 #302-REET 2 Capital Projects Fund Expenditures Transfers out-#303 302.000.000.597.30.00.30 - Revised project schedules 922,816 (540,000) 382,816 Total expenditures (540,000) Revenues REET 1 - 1st Quarter Percent 301.301.000.318.34.00 - Revised estimate based on projections 800,000 200,000 1,000,000 Total revenues 200,000 #303-Street Capital Projects Fund Expenditures Capital outlay 303.000.223.595.xx.xx.xx - Pines Rd Underpass©BNSF&Trent 500,000 (500,000) 0 Capital outlay 303.000.xxx.595.xx.xx.xx - Euclid Ave. - Flora to Barker 0 50,000 50,000 Capital outlay 303.000.xxx.595.xx.xx.xx - Contingency 1,000,000 (250,000) 750,000 Total expenditures (700,000) Revenues Grant Proceeds 303.000.xxx.330.00.00 - Revised project schedules 8,797,263 (647,657) 8,149,606 Developer Fees 303.000.xxx.367.12.01 - Revised project schedules 314,700 (39,613) 275,087 Transfers in-#301 303.000.xxx.397.30.10 - Revised project schedules 222,503 520,000 742,503 Transfers in-#302 303.000.xxx.397.30.20 - Revised project schedules 922,816 (540,000) 382,816 Transfers in-#312 303.303.155.397.31.20 - Sullivan Rd. W. Bridge Replacement 1,010,509 457,270 1,467,779 Transfers in-#312 303.000.223.397.31.20 - Pines Rd Underpass© BNSF&Trent 500,000 (500,000) 0 Transfers in-#312 303.000.xxx.397.31.20 - Euclid Ave- Flora to Barker 0 50,000 50,000 Total revenues (700,000) Page 3 of 6 H:\Budget\2016\Amendment#2\2016 10 25 First Reading of Ordinance\amendment no 2 detail.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/25/2016 2016 Budget-Amendment#2 Line Item Detail Account Account Initial Amendment Amended Description Number Description/Justification Budget No 2 Budget #309-Park Capital Projects Fund Expenditures Capital outlay 309.000.176.595.xx.xx.xx - Appleway Trail -University to Pines 0 9,300 9,300 Capital outlay 309.000.225.594.xx.xx.xx - Pocket Dog Park-phase 1 0 400 400 Capital outlay 309.000.227.595.xx.xx.xx - Appleway Trail -Pines to Evergreen 104,050 102,247 206,297 Capital outlay 309.000.237.595.xx.xx.xx - Appleway Trail -Sullivan to Corbin 0 276,775 276,775 Capital outlay 309.000.249.595.xx.xx.xx - Browns Park Splashpad 116,500 30,000 146,500 Capital outlay 309.000.245.594.xx.xx.xx - Terrace View Playground Equip. Replacement 0 59,100 59,100 Total expenditures 477,822 Revenues Grant Proceeds 309.000.227.333.20.20 - Appleway Trail -Pines to Evergreen 90,000 86,361 176,361 Grant Proceeds 309.000.237.334.02.70 - Appleway Trail -Sullivan to Corbin 0 233,771 233,771 FEMA Grant for Windstorm 309.000.245.331.97.03 - Grant Proceeds Terrace View Playground 0 21,875 21,875 Transfer in-#001 309.000.245.397.00.10 - Terrace View Playground 200,300 37,225 237,525 Transfer in-#001 309.000.249.397.00.10 - Browns Park Splashpad 116,500 30,000 146,500 Transfer in-#103 309.000.176.397.10.30 - Appleway Trail University to Pines 0 9,300 9,300 Transfer in-#312 309.000.227.397.31.20 - Appleway Trail - Pines to Evergreen 14,050 13,800 27,850 Transfer in-#312 309.000.237.397.31.20 - Appleway Trail -Sullivan to Corbin 0 45,090 45,090 Total revenues 477,422 #311 -Pavement Preservation Expenditures Pavement Preservation 311.000.xxx.595.xx.xx.xx - Grant Funded Pavement Preservation Projects 3,000,000 1,500,000 4,500,000 Total expenditures 1,500,000 Revenues Transfers In-#123 311.000.000.397.12.30 - Transfer form Fund 123 556,786 22 556,808 Grant Proceeds 311.000.xxx.33x.xx.xx - Various Grants for Projects 0 2,063,000 2,063,000 Total revenues 2,063,022 Page 4 of 6 H:\Budget\2016\Amendment#2\2016 10 25 First Reading of Ordinance\amendment no 2 detail.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/25/2016 2016 Budget-Amendment#2 Line Item Detail Account Account Initial Amendment Amended Description Number Description/Justification Budget No 2 Budget #312-Capital Reserve Fund Expenditures Transfer to-#303 312.000.000.597.30.00.30 - Sullivan Road West Bridge 1,010,509 457,270 1,467,779 Transfer to-#303 312.000.000.597.30.00.30 - Pines Rd Underpass© BNSF&Trent 500,000 (500,000) 0 Transfer to-#303 312.000.000.597.30.00.30 - Euclid Ave- Flora to Barker 0 50,000 50,000 Transfer to-#309 312.000.000.597.30.00.90 - Appleway Trail -Pines to Evergreen 14,050 13,800 27,850 Transfer to-#309 312.000.000.597.30.00.90 - Appleway Trail -Sullivan to Corbin 0 45,090 45,090 Transfer to-#314 312.000.000.597.31.00.40 - Pines Rd Underpass© BNSF&Trent 0 500,000 500,000 Total expenditures 566,160 #313-City Hall Construction Fund Expenditures Capital Outlay-City Hall 313.000.215.594.xx.xx.xx - City Hall Construction Costs 12,649,405 (5,355,005) 7,294,400 Total expenditures (5,355,005) #314-Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund Expenditures Capital Outlays 314.000.143.595.xx.xx.xx - Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation 0 250,000 250,000 Capital Outlays 314.000.223.595.xx.xx.xx - Pines Rd Underpass©BNSF&Trent 0 500,000 500,000 Total expenditures 750,000 Revenues FHWA Direct Earmark Funds 314.000.143.333.20.20 - Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation Grant 0 230,000 230,000 Transfer in-#301 314.000.143.397.30.10 - Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation REET 0 20,000 20,000 Transfer in-#312 314.000.223.397.31.20 - Pines Rd Underpass© BNSF&Trent 0 500,000 500,000 Total revenues 750,000 Page 5 of 6 H:\Budget\2016\Amendment#2\2016 10 25 First Reading of Ordinance\amendment no 2 detail.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/25/2016 2016 Budget-Amendment#2 Line Item Detail Account Account Initial Amendment Amended Description Number Description/Justification Budget No 2 Budget #402-Stormwater Management Fund Expenditures Capital outlay 402.000.xxx.595.xx.xx.xx - Various Projects 576,100 (425,000) 151,100 Street Sweeping 402.402.000.531.36.47.06 - Windstorm-related street sweeping 0 50,000 50,000 Total expenditures (375,000) Revenues FEMA Grant Proceeds 402.402.000.374.97.03 - FEMA Grant for windstorm damage 0 48,800 48,800 Total revenues 48,800 #403-Aquifer Protection Area Fund Expenditures Capital Outlay 403.000.198.595.xx.xx.xx - Sprague- Park to University LID 2,000,000 (2,000,000) 0 Capital Outlay 403.000.xxx.595.xx.xx.xx - Various capital projects 0 425,000 425,000 Total expenditures (1,575,000) Revenues Spokane County APA Fee 403.000.000.337.38.00 - Revised Estimate 500,000 (100,000) 400,000 Dept of Ecology Grant 403.000.198.334.03.10 - Grant program delayed 1,500,000 (1,500,000) 0 Total revenues (1,600,000) Totals Across all Funds Total revenues 1,676,072 Total expenditures (4,133,942) Page 6 of 6 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 25, 2016 Department Director Approval: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ Consent ❑ Old business ❑ New business ® Public Hearing ❑ Information ❑Admin. Report ❑ Pending Legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: 2017 Community Development Block Grant Program GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: On October 18, 2016, City Council reviewed the proposed Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) sidewalk projects. BACKGROUND: The City of Spokane Valley is a member of the Spokane County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Consortium. Each year the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development provides CDBG entitlement funding to Spokane County. The City receives a 20% set-aside of Spokane County's annual federal appropriation for infrastructure projects. In 2016, the City did not receive a CDBG allocation, but in previous years, Spokane Valley's share is generally around $270,000. In discussions with Spokane County they concurred that it is acceptable to exceed the estimated 20% set aside for proposed CDBG sidewalk projects. The projects are scalable in the event that we are not awarded the entire project costs. Although the City has a guaranteed set aside, we must participate in the same application process as all other agencies requesting CDBG funding. To be eligible for CDBG funding, projects must be located in residential, low to moderate income target areas. Proposed projects must also be ranked as a "high priority" in Spokane County's Consolidated Plan, the guiding document for Spokane County's CDBG program. High priority infrastructure projects include water, sewer and street improvements. The CDBG application deadline is November 12, 2016. A public hearing on the proposed projects is scheduled for October 25, 2016. The following projects have been identified by City staff based on the evaluation of sidewalk needs in CDBG target areas: # Proposed CDBG Sidewalk Projects Estimated Costs 1 8th Ave— Dickey to Thierman (north side) $522,000 1 a 8th Ave— Eastern to Thierman $348,000 1 b 8th Ave— Eastern to Dickey $174,000 2 Mission Ave — Bates to Union (north side) $285,000 3 Indiana Ave — Pines to Mirabeau Park and Ride (north side) $230,000 On October 5, 2016 the City held an open house to discuss potential projects. At the open house one person spoke against the Flora Road project and staff received two phone calls from people who spoke in favor of the 8th Avenue project. All proposed projects are consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and help fill-in gaps to make pedestrian connections in the CDGB target areas. While the City's CDBG allocation is unknown at this time, the total project cost for Project 1 is more than the City's historic allocation. Project 1 can be split into two projects within the range of previous CDBG allocations. OPTIONS: Conduct Public Hearing RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Hold Public Hearing. A motion consideration will be taken during the latter part of tonight's council meeting. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: CDBG grants are typically funded at 100% of the total project cost. STAFF CONTACT: Chaz Bates, Economic Development Specialist Steve Worley, Senior Capital Projects Engineer ATTACHMENTS: Presentation Community Dev Block Chaz Bates, Economic Development Specialist Spokane_ City Council—CDBG Public Hearing—10-25-16 1 jValley CDBG Funding Progression • Housing and Urban Development ( HUD) • Spokane County Consortium • City's guaranteed set-aside is 20% • Match not required — but usually provided for local administration Spokane City Council—CDBG Public Hearing—10-25-16 2 jValley .........m... ...... .....iniiiiiiiimu Application Process • Low to Moderate Income Areas Sivifat...pith..fa.,Hewing.•M Comity C MiM1t YDF PMF.NT Bneb.nan. ices,P.m.ce d oOnly BLOC-KGB/Off PBOGB'lh1 mobn`JemF� —_---- 112W.SR.AVthRIRFO11RTHOOS Pler,eb- 9Sn.9Jan.,, ■ Project must have High Priority Ranking Fd.X#(50.)01-2561 GRAMSA "' 20172018 PKW2YM YEAR 1. APmlitaln, Phnur— Cunbu:a: Phunu: - ailet.Ad Address. Must benefit primarily residential 2. P TI ed adduced, 3. IIIISLESPELata, f, P.a'ect ncalim: S. Presaalit.: ■ High Priority Infrastructure Projects n. .....lindn Raved BeneRda.i�+ El nanert 31-See Sin 51-80%NiFl w^ .30%NIFI ]. Proposal Time Fes Mc[..r Cum Phllmt utPmJeal: B. Amount of CDBG Funds ltennestor S— The nnewe Wow chilies applicant willcond.( sedac.ry is the location.mad within nth bagelpresented.bsoa that de ropoeed activity apdmea hlgy priority County CDSG bill s fa the proposed beneficiaries. The applies. maniocs l CDBG fundswill ba used N he denuibad and nth br als • used only to ...eligible aoss demdn tes.,fooeel bud...a nnWater ...spa ater...spa laoowsandemvmdl of funds parentedin the will be obtained...en Gm lhr Miss, ------------ S---------------- ignlu.e of..haired Official �� Tine • Sewer Date Nmne(OM.Fant rt^pa) Organiranthis ade.al ID IR 0,0 offit Applicant_ Organiaabau s DUNS r:�--- " s�e'd��m°u".ar.� • Street Improvements mw,hate.baGourd ress pan�.aD� cPub�e.P�mRd,] loa, a.�u � Sidewalks (Spokane Valley - 2012) Spokane City Council—CDBG Public Hearing—10-25-16 3 jvalley ..........m... .......... ..iiiiiiin Project Selection Methodology \- B I C I A E I F Gaps :■ Identif Sidewalk I ;� ' 1 CDBGTarget Areas ( LMI )_ ,/ .° ,,,:-. o_ 411 im Close to Schools 4_ _ = -: { IImNA®Mal • Consistent with •. Emliiimi , L - J — 5 . 1 ' 5 Comprehensive Plan `--- ' B F Within right-of-way Spokane City Council—CDBG Public Hearing—10-25-16 4 Valley 2017 Potential CDBG Projects 8th Avenue between Dickey and Thierman Road(north side) Mission Avenue between Wilbur and Union Road(north side) MAT C,'OGa60.,[J04S1D[rC9[GOp`U+'I¢a4 66C�C{Ci'L3QD14 504.7..T:: HNulMM04M ENV/1K 6],.G.Th3517 6QQM4 ■ 8th Ave — Dickey to Thierman 'g • Mission Ave — Union to Wilbur Indiana Avenue between Pines Road and Mirabeau Park and Ride{north side) 504.7 Ct'OG516a1MG704M DC MC fsOPG EHE Ca QQM,4 ■ Indiana Ave — Mirabeau Park & Ride to Pines - - - - emit Spokane City Council—CDBG Public Hearing—10-25-16 5 Valley Public Open House Spokane Valley Community Development Block Grant Open House ' Postcard sent: 226 The Community Development Block Program(CDBG)is a flexible federal programthat allocates annual grants to larger cities and urban counties Codevelop viable communities,principally for low-and moderate-Moyne persons. The City of Spokane Valley participates in the CDBG program as a participant of the Spokane County Consortium.As part ofthat nteedcipation,Spokane eCitymValley rplyfofundinguaranteed set erageftheConsortingCDBtitlem ing.Sids.Evenwiththe ■ October 5th 5_7 pm guaranteed set aside the City must apply for funding like all other agencies requesting CDBG funding.Since 2D13,the City of Spokane Valley has used CDBG funds for sidewalk projects in priority areas. Forthe 2017 project year,the City of Spokane Valley has identified four sidewalk projects within the City that could qualify for CDBGtunds.I hese areas are: • 8th Avenue between Dickey Road ardermanRoad 2 phone caIIs a n d 1_ d ro p-i n • Mission Avenue between Wilbur Roadoadand Union Road CDBG Project Open House • Indiana Avenue between Mirabeau Park and Ride and Pines Road • Flora Road between Sprague Avenue and Broadway Avenue October 5,2016 The City of Spokane Valley invites residentsand owners within the four 5:00-7:00 p.m. project.Pa Participation House at ting Hall,in the comment onthe What: CDBG Project Open House • 2 calls support 8th Ave project projects.Participation inthe meeting will hely the Gity prioritize the limited CDBG funds. When: October 5,2016 @ 5:00-7:00 p.m. Where:Council Chambers-City Hall 11707 East Sprague Ave, 99206 • 1 drop-in opposed to Flora project For questions or comments about the open house or the City's CDBG participation,please contact Chaz Bates at c bates@s pokaneva llcy.org or 509 720-5315 Spokane City Council—CDBG Public Hearing—10-25-16 6 jValley' . .,t _ __ Project Description - 1 of 3 i _ `. ■ 8th Avenue CID MI= 111 6 s l i'". " '� �; , - 1X.' • Sidewalk north side of "'' �; street G .. ., ,i,le, , : � • Dickey to Thierman - 6- 1 nn • Approximate Cost t4 4 . r x - ' .- $522,000 r • li 91� Lr r _ — Thierman to Eastern yp 2017 CDBG Sidewalk Project 1 r I. �7 ` -2017 CDBG sidewalk Projects ` 14 ''" !4r I Formal Pathway Ss' a ailila• 4151' y e $.348,000 —Driveway Crossing tam LMI Target Area ` 1(— --'� L M r 3 4� O _.lamr .� —1,10 Eastern to Dickey $174,000 Spokane City Council—CDBG Public Hearing—10-25-16 7 Valley ..........m... ....... ....iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii Project Description - 2 of 3 ■ Mission Avenue s • Sidewalk north side of street om® I -: � �� • Union to Bates • Approximate Cost $ 285,000 i. r * I ' r dm is' �� 1,-,-;- -J i,, �, - • Bates to Bowdish outside LMI -.1F- requires other funding source Legend �'- ?I Ai. - 17 ' ' -44 IN 2017 CDBG Sidewalk Project 2 - - -- ` 2017 CDBG Sidewalk Projects AC: get 4r?0•#� — �e• +. IIs 11 Formal Pathway ' - �� . t Driveway Crossing _Iii _ 4 LMI Target Area ams®,r ,k It iiikalt" ll n -IY Spokane City Council-CDBG Public Hearing-10-25-16 8 Valley Project Description - 3 of 3 ■ Indiana Avenue it L . • Sidewalk north side of street ABY' a 7 -. lam" lR.. . "Kir { 'q\ �I a.. = • , � ' ( • Mirabeau Park and Ride to - if,/•Nr.- <ir .-1 . ( Pines 6 gap ,.., lip •` % .iiir y �" • Approxi mate Cost $ 230,000 11144,' �� - - - . : S,. pi M .R Legend 2017 CDBG Sidewalk Project 3 N" !STI t « --- e —2017 CD BG Sidewalk Projects SECS 3DC10 , Formal Pathway $ —Driveway Crossing j-I =LMI Target Area A - A . i -, �ac 4 Spokan ` City Council—CDBG Public Hearing—10-25-16 9 Valley Project Schedule • City Council recommendation on proposed project • Hearing October 25, 2016 • Application due November 12, 2016 • Construction 2017 >alleyCity Council—CDBG Public Hearing—10-25-16 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 25, 2016 Department Director Approval: El Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Approval of the Following Vouchers: VOUCHER LIST VOUCHER NUMBERS TOTAL AMOUNT 10/06/2016 39506-39540; 855716 $2,627,153.18 10/07/2016 39541-39568 $177,523.64 10/12/2016 5564; 5642; 5654-5656; 5667-5668; 39569; 39570 $335,994.45 10/13/2016 39571-39618; 867738 $935,781.91 10/13/2016 6942-6959 $2,352.00 10/18/2016 5657, 5672, 5673, 5676 $73,199.81 GRAND TOTAL: $4,152,004.99 Explanation of Fund Numbers found on Voucher Lists #001 - General Fund Other Funds 001.011.000.511. City Council 101 —Street Fund 001.013.000.513. City Manager 103 —Paths&Trails 001.013.015.515. Legal 105—Hotel/Motel Tax 001.016.000. Public Safety 106—SoIid Waste 001.018.013.513. Deputy City Manager 120 -CenterPlace Operating Reserve 001.018.014.514. Finance 121—Service Level Stabilization Reserve 001.018.016.518. Human Resources 122--Winter Weather Reserve 001.032.000. Public Works 123 —Civil Facilities Replacement 001.058.050.558. CED-Administration 204—Debt Service 001.058.051.558. CED--Economic Development 301 —REET 1 Capital Projects 001.058.055.558. CED—Development Services-Engineering 302- REET 2 Capital Projects 001.058,056.558. CED—Development Services-Planning 303--Street Capital Projects 001.058.057.558 CED--Building 309—Parks Capital Grants 001.076.000.576. Parks &Rec—Administration 310—Civic Bldg Capital Projects 001.076.300.576. Parks &Rec-Maintenance 311 —Pavement Preservation 001.076.301.571. Parks &Rec-Recreation 312—Capital Reserve 001.076.302.576. Parks &Rec-Aquatics 402---Stormwater Management 001.076.304.575. Parks &Rec- Senior Center 403 —Aquifer Protection Area 001.076.305.571. Parks&Rec-CenterPlace 501 —Equipment Rental &Replacement 001.090.000.511. General Gov't- Council related 502—Risk Management 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 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 Voucher List Page: 1 10/06/2016 9:23:01AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 39506 10/6/2016 003078 ALLWEST TESTING&ENGINEERING 82510 313.000.215.594 216-111 MATERIALS TESTING NEW 5,487.50 82537 311.000.221.595 216-042 MATERIALS TESTING 6,194.70 Total : 11,682.20 39507 10/6/2016 000135 APA 144189-1673 001.058.051.558 MEMBERSHIP 2017 C BATES 495.00 Total : 495.00 39508 10/6/2016 004278 ARCHITECTS WEST INC 8701 313.000.215.594 0215-CITY HALL DESIGN&CN ALM 5,253.96 Total : 5,253.96 39509 10/6/2016 000796 BUDINGER&ASSOCIATES INC M16277-3 311.000.229.595 0229-32ND AVE PRESERVATION 7,524.05 M16381-1 303.000.234.595 0234:16-116 MATERIALS TESTING 7,558.18 Total : 15,082.23 39510 10/6/2016 000322 CENTURYLINK SEPTEMBER 2016 001.076.000.576 2016 PHONE SVCS:ACCT 509Z141 530.31 Total : 530.31 39511 10/6/2016 000683 DAVID EVANS&ASSOCIATES 383532 101.042.000.542 SPV TRAFFIC SERVICES 2016-17 13,842.12 Total : 13,842.12 39512 10/6/2016 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION RE 46 JG6362 L018 303.303.155.595 0155-SULLIVAN RD W BRIDGE RE 1,958.17 RE 46 JG6457 L001 303.000.238.595 0238-SR 27&MIRABEAU PKWY 2,063.80 Total : 4,021.97 39513 10/6/2016 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION RE-313-ATB60919131 303.000.201.595 0201 - ITS INFILL PROJECT PHASE 79.90 RE-313-ATB60919146 311.000.226.595 0226-APPLEWAY RESURFACING 90.14 Total : 170.04 39514 10/6/2016 000912 DEX MEDIA WEST SEPTEMBER 2016 001.076.304.575 ADVERTISING FOR SENIOR CENTE 40.50 Total : 40.50 39515 10/6/2016 004040 EAGLE TECHNOLOGY MGMT INV00028983 001.090.000.518 UPEXCHANGE 79.00 Total : 79.00 39516 10/6/2016 001926 FARR,SARAH EXPENSES 001.018.014.514 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 63.08 Total : 63.08 Page: 1 vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 1010612016 9:23:01AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 39517 10/6/2016 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 46272 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 97.75 Total : 97.75 39518 10/6/2016 002568 GRANICUS INC 80555 001.011.000.511 MAINTENANCE FOR OCTOBER 20' 777.16 Total : 777.16 39519 10/6/2016 000002 H&H BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC. 323190 001.058.057.558 COPIER COSTS 20.32 323191 001.058.057.558 COPIER COSTS 3.84 323339 001.013.000.513 COPIER COSTS 356.14 323340 001.013.000.513 COPIER COSTS 18.00 323343 001.013.015.515 COPIER COSTS 131.33 323344 001.013.015.515 COPIER COSTS 8.87 323353 001.058.050.558 COPIER COSTS 239.66 323354 001.058.050.558 COPIER COSTS 28.83 323357 001.018.016.518 COPIER COSTS 209.28 323358 001.018.016.518 COPIER COSTS 18.12 323387 001.076.000.576 COPIER COSTS 387.10 323388 001.076.000.576 COPIER COSTS 23.56 323403 001.058.057.558 COPIER COSTS 11.72 Total : 1,456.77 39520 10/6/2016 002043 HDR ENGINEERING INC 1200010298 303.000.239.595 0239: 16-086-ROW SERVICES 3,665.03 Total : 3,665.03 39521 10/6/2016 003297 HIGGINS, LEWIS ROD EXPENSES 001.011.000.511 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 61.46 Total : 61.46 39522 10/6/2016 001728 HP FINANCIAL SERVICES CO 600504919 001.090.000.548 SCHEDULE 572E3651 830.28 Total : 830.28 39523 10/6/2016 005353 INTERMOUNTAIN MATERIALS,TESTING 7744 303.000.238.595 0238: 16-036 MATERIALS TESTING 2,328.90 Total : 2,328.90 39524 10/6/2016 000864 JUB ENGINEERS INC. 0103399 101.042.000.542 2016 TIP MAINTENANCE&UPDATE 9,104.36 Total : 9,104.36 39525 10/6/2016 005037 MERIDIAN CONSTRUCTION INC PAY APP 3 313.000.215.594 0215-CITY HALL CONSTRUCTION t 752,819.58 Page: 2 vchllst Voucher List Page: 3 10/06/2016 9:23:01AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 39525 10/6/2016 005037 005037 MERIDIAN CONSTRUCTION INC (Continued) Total : 752,819.58 39526 10/6/2016 000636 MOORE IACOFANO GOLTSMAN, INC. 0045590 309.000.227,595 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 7,575.66 Total : 7,575.66 39527 10/6/2016 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 865757987001 001.090.000.519 OFFICE SUPPLIES: IT 38.23 866131669001 001.018.016.518 OFFICE SUPPLIES: HR 62.39 Total : 100.62 39528 10/6/2016 003587 PACE, ED EXPENSES 001.011.000.511 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 19.07 Total : 19.07 39529 10/6/2016 005048 PARAMETRIX INC 22-30288 303.303.155.595 0155-SULLIVAN RD W BRIDGE RE 9,262.34 Total : 9,262.34 39530 10/6/2016 003407 RIGHT! SYSTEMS INC 143923 001.090.000.518 JUNIPER EX4300 EFL LICENSE 3,942.55 143924 001.076.099.576 JUNIPER EX2200 FOR MISSION AN 1,850.80 Total : 5,793.35 39531 10/6/2016 000031 ROYAL BUSINESS SYSTEMS IN49499 001.058.057.558 SEPTEMBER 2016 COPIER COSTS 1,863.84 Total : 1,863.84 39532 10/6/2016 000230 SPOKANE CO AUDITORS OFFICE SEPTEMBER 2016 001.058.056.558 RECORDING FEES 1,167.00 Total : 1,167.00 39533 10/6/2016 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 110100133 101.042.000.542 ENGINEERING 109,538.63 14800578 001.090.000.566 3RD QTR LIQUOR/EXCISE TAX 5,986.16 42000310 001.016.000.554 ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICE OCTO 43,017.41 51503442 001.016.000.523 SEPTEMBER 2016 HOUSING 110,241.18 Total : 268,783.38 39534 10/6/2016 001903 SPOKANE TRAFFIC CONTROL INC 105 101.042.000.594 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1,990.00 Total : 1,990.00 39535 10/6/2016 000311 SPRINT 959698810-106 001.058.057.558 GPS PHONE SEPTEMBER 2016 70.55 Total : 70.55 39536 10/6/2016 001887 VALMONT CD289000693 303.000.238.595 0238-POLE 23,595.51 Page: 3 vchlist Voucher List Page: 4 10/06/2016 9:23:01AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 39536 10/6/2016 001887 001887 VALMONT (Continued) Total : 23,595.51 39537 10/6/2016 000087 VERIZON WIRELESS 9772216930 001.032.000.543 SEPTEMBER 2016 VERIZON CELL 1,779.54 Total : 1,779.54 39538 10/6/2016 003728 WEDA 6822 001.143.70.00 2017 MEMBERSHIP COSV 400.00 Total : 400.00 39539 10/6/2016 003210 WEST CONSULTANTS INC. 008124 001.058.055.558 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 164.43 Total : 164.43 39540 10/6/2016 000980 WESTERN SYSTEMS INC 0000031179 303.000.221.595 0221-TRAFFIC EQUIPMENT 14,814.19 Total : 14,814.19 855716 9/30/2016 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 9290200982 001.016.000.521 LE CONTRACT BILLING SEPTEMBE 1,467,372.00 Total : 1,467,372.00 36 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 2,627,153.18 36 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 2,627,153.18 Page: 4 .vchlist Voucher List Page: 5-- —1"-- 10/07/2016 10/07/2016 9:24:07AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 39541 10/7/2016 003076 AMSDEN, ERICA Expenses 001.032.000.543 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 17.28 Expenses 001.032.000.543 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 17.28 Expenses 001.032.000.543 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 27.54 Total : 62.10 39542 10/7/2016 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC 9787425 001.076.305.575 LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C 45.97 S0147012 001.076.305.575 LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY ATC 50.85 Total : 96.82 39543 10/7/2016 003300 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL August 2016 001.090.000.519 SUPPLIES KITCHEN GEN GOV 229.15 Total : 229.15 39544 10/7/2016 000572 CARTER, CAROL Expenses 001.076.305.575 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 88.56 Total : 88.56 39545 10/7/2016 001169 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Sept 2016 001.058.056.558 PETTY CASH: 14787,88,89,90,91,92 27.11 Total : 27.11 39546 10/7/2016 003795 CLEARWATER SUMMIT GROUP 08165249 309.000.243.594 PAYAPP 2: BROWNS PARKNOLLE 72,161.02 Total : 72,161.02 39547 10/7/2016 000326 CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION#19 Sept 2016 402.402.000.531 UTILITIES: PW 733.69 September 2016 001.076.305.575 UTILITIES: PARKS AND CENTERPL 1,399.62 Total : 2,133.31 39548 10/7/2016 001701 DUFFEY, DAN Expenses 001.018.014.514 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 37.80 Total : 37.80 39549 10/7/2016 000246 EAST SPOKANE WATER DIST#1 September 2016 402.402.000.531 WATER CHARGES:SEPT 2016 4,222.70 Total : 4,222.70 39550 10/7/2016 005046 GRAPHIC ART PRODUCTIONS INC 540-8951 001.076.301.571 SIGNS FOR VALLEYFEST FOR PAR 150.01 Total : 150.01 39551 10/7/2016 000070 INLAND POWER&LIGHT CO 2301 101.042.000.542 UTILITIES:SEPT 2016 PW 430.03 Total : 430.03 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: —2--- -10/07/2016 9:24:07AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 39552 10/7/2016 001635 155 FACILITY EVENT SERVICES 1026967 001.076.305.575 EVENT SVCS FOR CENTERPLACE 131.69 1026968 001.076.305.575 MONTHLY CLEANING AT CENTERP 7,136.00 1064674 001.076.305.575 EVENT SVCS FOR CENTERPLACE 110.62 Total : 7,378.31 39553 10/7/2016 004926 LE CATERING CO Contract#2 001.076.305.575 CATERING INVOICE:ACTION COA( 1,050.46 Total : 1,050.46 39554 10/7/2016 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER CO Sept 2016 101.042.000.542 UTILITIES:SEPT 2016 PW 8,506.82 Total : 8,506.82 39555 10/7/2016 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER CO Sept 2016 001.076.302.576 UTILITIES:SEPT 2016 PARKS 4,016.73 Total : 4,016.73 39556 10/7/2016 001860 PLATT ELECTRICAL SUPPLY K254616 001.076.305.575 SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE 119.47 Total : 119.47 39557 10/7/2016 003237 PROSSER&SONS 41803 309.000245.594 REPLACEMENT OF PLAY STRUCTI. 7,995.80 Total : 7,995.80 39558 10/7/2016 000415 ROSAUERS FOOD&DRUG CENTER 09-689148 001.076.305.575 SUPPLIES FOR BRIDAL FAIR 8.58 10-1553847 001.076.305.575 SUPPLIES FOR BRIDAL FAIR 21.71 Total : 30.29 39559 10/7/2016 000709 SENSKE LAWN&TREE CARE INC. 6915594 001.076.300.576 CONTRACT MAINT: PARKS SEPT 2 58,934.26 7498893 001.016.000.521 MONTHLY SVCS AT PRECINCT:SE 556.38 7498987 001.076.300.576 MISC PARK REPAIRS 1,107.15 Total : 60,597.79 39560 10/7/2016 000324 SPOKANE CO WATER DIST#3 Sept 2016 402.402.000.531 WATER CHARGES FOR SEPT 2016 1,082.98 Total : 1,082.98 39561 10/7/2016 003532 STERICYCLE COMMUNICATION SOLUT 8010414079 001.076.305.575 ANSWERING SERVICE FOR CENT/ 55.64 Total : 55.64 39562 10/7/2016 001206 SWANSON'S REFRIGERATION&, RESTA 134402 001.076.305.575 OVEN REPAIR AT CENTERPLACE 787.10 Total : 787.10 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 "---3-- -10/07/2016 9:24:07AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 39563 10/7/2016 002306 TERRELL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, MIC 2672 309.000.244.594 0244-LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 236.25 Total : 236.25 39564 10/7/2016 001444 UNITED LABORATORIES INV167242 001.076.305.575 SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE 437.94 Total : 437.94 39565 10/7/2016 000167 VERA WATER&POWER Sept 2016 101.042.000.542 UTILITIES: SEPT 2016-MASTER BI 3,952.66 Total : 3,952.66 39566 10/7/2016 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 0064260-1518-3 402.402.000.531 WASTE MGMT: PW AUGUST 2016 1,440.19 Total : 1,440.19 39567 10/7/2016 000066 WCP SOLUTIONS 9770064 001.076.305.575 SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE 41.31 Total : 41.31 39568 10/7/2016 004961 ZOME INC ZDM-26992 001.076.305.575 SHIRTS/EMBROIDERY FOR CENTE 155.29 Total : 155.29 28 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 177,523.64 28 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 177,523.64 Page: -i' vchlist Voucher List Pager 10/12/2016 12:11:14PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 5564 10/5/2016 000164 LABOR&INDUSTRIES Ben69645 101.231.17.00 LABOR&INDUSTRIES:PAYMENT 26,875.87 Total: 26,875.87 5642 10/5/2016 000165 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS Ben69647 001.231.15.00 PERS:PAYMENT 93,154.83 Total: 93,154.83 5654 10/5/2016 000048 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS,401A PLAN Ben69649 001.231.14.00 401A:PAYMENT 32,708.10 Total: 32,708.10 5655 10/5/2016 000682 EFTPS Ben69651 001.231.11.00 FEDERAL TAXES:PAYMENT 35,123.94 Total: 35,123.94 5656 10/5/2016 000145 VANTAGEPOINTTRANSFERAGENTS,457 PLF Ben69653 001.231.18.00 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION:PAYI 7,107.21 Total: 7,107.21 5667 10/5/2016 000164 LABOR&INDUSTRIES Ben69657 001.231.17.00 LABOR&INDUSTRIES:PAYMENT 224.70 Total: 224.70 5668 10/5/2016 000682 EFTPS Ben69659 001.231.11.00 FEDERAL TAXES:PAYMENT 993.99 Total: 993.99 39569 10/5/2016 000120 AWC Ben69641 402.231.16.00 HEALTH PLANS:PAYMENT 122,786.45 Ben69655 001.231.16.00 HEALTH PLANS(COUNCIL):PAYMENT 14,529.15 Total: 137,315.60 39570 10/5/2016 000699 WA COUNCIL CO/CITY EMPLOYEES Ben69643 001.231.21.00 UNION DUES:PAYMENT 2,490,21 Total: 2,490.21 9 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Bank total: 335,994.45 9 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers: 335,994.45 Page: - vchlist Voucher List Page:1. ri' 10/13/2016 9:59:56AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 39571 10/13/2016 000197 ACRANET 1823 001.018.016.518 EMPLOYEE BACKGROUND CHECK 68.00 Total : 68.00 39572 10/13/2016 004942 AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES 1NC 37816973 001.058.099.558 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES: CONT 11,640.00 Total : 11,640.00 39573 10/13/2016 002543 AIR ELECTRIC EQUIPMENT&TOOLS 214765 101.000.000.542 SHOP TOOL REPAIR 220.86 214766 101.000.000.542 SHOP TOOL REPAIR 142.35 214767 101.000.000.542 SHOP TOOL REPAIR 100.22 Total : 463.43 39574 10/13/2016 002931 ALL WESTERN INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY 103401 101.000.000.542 SUPPLES: MAINTENANCE SHOP 46.63 Total : 46.63 39575 10/13/2016 003337 ARROW CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY INC 181493 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW STREET 529.33 Total : 529.33 39576 10/13/2016 000030 AVISTA 1001103485 303.303.155.595 SERVICE FOR BRIDGE LIGHTS 5,933.20 Total : 5,933.20 39577 10/13/2016 003247 BENECCHI, RICK RE-ISSUE REFUND 001.058,058.345 REFUND RECORDING FEE FOR BF 15.00 Total : 15.00 39578 10/13/2016 000572 CARTER, CAROL EXPENSES 001.076.305.575 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 22.42 Total : 22.42 39579 10/13/2016 003221 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY CIP 0251 303.000.251.595 SEPA CHECKLIST REVIEW CIP 025 350.00 Total : 350.00 39580 10/13/2016 001888 COMCAST OCTOBER 2016 001.090.000.518 INTERNET CITY HALL 106.15 Total : 106.15 39581 10/13/2016 000508 CONOCOPHILLIPS FLEET 47078033 001.058.057.558 SEPTEMBER 2016 FLEET FUEL 2,181.47 Total : 2,181.47 39582 10/13/2016 001157 COUNTRY HOMES POWER EQUIP 128608 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES:STREET 355.96 128610 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES:STREET 26.77 Page: rte" vchlist Voucher List Page: /, 10/13/2016 9:59:56AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 39582 10/13/2016 001157 001157 COUNTRY HOMES POWER EQUIP (Continued) Total : 382.73 39583 10/13/2016 001880 CROWN WEST REALTY LLC SEPTEMBER 2016 101.042.000.543 COMMON AREA CHARGES FOR ME 155.10 Total : 155.10 39584 10/13/2016 003255 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS 583515 101.042.000.543 TOWER RENTAL 208.13 Total : 208.13 39585 10/13/2016 002604 DELL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC 78704322 001.090.000.548 COMPUTER LEASE: 001-8922117-0 1,006.63 Total : 1,006.63 39586 10/13/2016 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION RE-313-ATB60919046 101.042.000.542 REIMBURSE TRAFFIC SVCS MAINZ 5,343.61 RE-313-ATB60919054 101,042.000.542 REIMBURSE TRAFFIC SVCS MAINZ 6,341.28 Total : 11,684.89 39587 10/13/2016 002920 DIRECTV[NC 29406091905 101.042.000.543 CABLE SERVICE FOR MAINTENAN 57.99 Total : 57.99 39588 10/13/2016 004538 DOWGIN, MATT EXPENSES 001.013.015.515 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 5.32 Total : 5.32 39589 10/13/2016 003392 EPICENTER SERVICES LLC 2016-20 106.000.000.537 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 7,304.79 Total : 7,304.79 39590 10/13/2016 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 46267 001.076.305.575 LEGAL PUBLICATION 49.35 46327 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 166.40 46328 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 44.80 46332 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 98.60 46334 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 94.35 Total : 453.50 39591 10/13/2016 001253 GORDON THOMAS HONEYWELL Sep16 1042 001.013.000.513 GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 3,786.28 Total : 3,786.28 39592 10/13/2016 000007 GRAINGER 9237260162 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES:STREET 19,11 9239721856 101.043.000.542 SUPPLIES:STREET(BRIDGE) 8.91 9240857236 101.043.000.542 SUPPLIES:STREET(BRIDGE) 29.06 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: # •-3---- 10113/2016 9:59:56AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 39592 10/13/2016 000007 000007 GRAINGER (Continued) Total : 57.08 39593 '10/13/2016 004853 HALVERSON NORTHWEST LAW GROUP 189936 001.013.015.515 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 624.00 Total : 624.00 39594 10/13/2016 002538 HYDRAULICS PLUS INC 20846 101.000.000.542 SERVICE SNOWPLOW#205 1,603.15 Total : 1,603.15 39595 10/13/2016 000313 INLAND ASPHALT COMPANY INC. PAY APP 1 311.000.226.595 16-128:0226 CONSTRUCTION 552,600.23 Total : 552,600.23 39596 10/13/2016 003185 LAMB, ERIK EXPENSES 001.013.015.515 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 358.16 Total : 358.16 39597 10/13/2016 003190 LUKINS&ANNIS P.S 356946 001.013.015.515 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,115.00 Total : 1,115.00 39598 10/13/2016 002203 NAPA AUTO PARTS 986418 402.402.000.531 TOOLS FOR STORMWATER 31.48 Total : 31.48 39599 10/13/2016 005115 NB STORMWATER ENGINEERING LLC,P 0004 402.000.193.531 CONSULTING SERVICES 14,139.00 Total : 14,139.00 39600 10/13/2016 005356 NIMRI,AIMEE EXPENSES 001.076.305.575 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 10.00 Total : 10.00 39601 10/13/2016 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 861801711001 001.032.000.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW 50.95 863324180001 001.032.000.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW 236.40 863324239001 001.032.000.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW 78.80 868491495001 001.018.014.514 OFFICE SUPPLIES: FINANCE 63.61 869455520001 001.076.000.576 OFFICE SUPPLIES: PARKS 210.37 Total : 640.13 39602 10/13/2016 001604 PACIFIC NW PAPER 174108 001.090.000.519 PAPER FOR CITY HALL 193.49 Total : 193.49 39603 10/13/2016 005049 PEDERSON, MICHAEL ROY September 2016 101.042.000.542 DEAD ANIMAL REMOVAL 1,000.00 Page: /Z- vchlist Voucher List Page: 10/13/2016 9:59:56AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 39603 10/13/2016 005049 005049 PEDERSON, MICHAEL ROY (Continued) Total : 1,000.00 39604 10/13/2016 003237 PROSSER&SONS 41803 309.000.245.594 REPLACEMENT OF PLAY STRUCTL. 7,713.18 Total : 7,713.18 39605 10/13/2016 000019 PURFECT LOGOS LLC 44413 101.042.000.542 DECALS/MAGNETS 179.36 Total : 179.36 39606 10/13/2016 002578 REBUILDING&HARDFACING INC 57889 101.000.000.542 CUTTING EDGES FOR SNOW PLO) 502.19 Total : 502.19 39607 10/13/2016 003407 RIGHT!SYSTEMS INC 144022 001.090.000.518 IT SUPPORT 183.43 Total : 183.43 39608 10/13/2016 002288 SARGENT ENGINEERS INC. 30687 101.042.000.542 CONTRACT 16-060: BRIDGE BEARI 237.38 Total : 237.38 39609 10/13/2016 002835 SCS DELIVERY INC 9020 001.011.000.511 PACKAGE DELIVERY FOR COUNCI 100.00 Total : 100.00 39610 10/13/2016 004844 SOLARWINDS INC. IN294899 001.090.000.518 SOLARWINDS NETFLOWTRAIFFIC 2,329.44 Total : 2,329.44 39611 10/13/2016 000668 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 35241.4101 001.076.000.576 2ND HALF 2016 STORMWATER/AQ 127.46 45093.0646 001.076.000.576 2ND HALF 2016 STORMWATER/AQ 873.99 45105.9010 001.076.000.576 2ND HALF 2016 STORMWATER/AQ 1,412.58 45114.9015 001.076.000.576 2ND HALF 2016 STORMWATER/AQ 371.52 45121.9118 101.042.000.543 2ND HALF 2016 STORMWATER/AQ 411.86 45162.0327 001.076.000.576 2ND HALF 2016 STORMWATER FEI 552.72 45174.9059 001.076.000.576 2ND HALF 2016 STORMWATER/AQ 28.40 45182.9132 001.076.000.576 2ND HALF 2016 STORMWATER/AQ 214.46 45201.0122 001.090.000.518 2ND HALF 2016 STORMWATER FEI 445.94 45222.0227 001.016.000.521 2ND HALF 2016 STORMWATER/AQ 357.61 45271.9007 001.076.000.576 2ND HALF 2016 STORMWATERIAQ 81.03 45271.9008 001.076.000.576 2ND HALF 2016 STORMWATER FEI 151.20 45273.9036 001.076.000.576 2ND HALF 2016 STORMWATER/AQ 158.85 45332.1517 001.076.000.576 2ND HALF 2016 STORMWATER/IRF 134.51 55182.1623 001.076.000.576 2ND HALF 2016 STORMWATERIAQ 25.50 Page: --Tr-- i3 vchlist Voucher List Pager 10/13/2016 9:59:56AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 39611 10/13/2016 000668 000668 SPOKANE CO TREASURER (Continued) Total : 5,347.63 39612 10/13/2016 000391 SPOKANE VALLEY FIRE DIST.#1 Q3-2016 001.229.45.00 03-2016 FIRE FEES 22,892.92 Total : 22,892.92 39613 10/13/2016 000093 SPOKESMAN-REVIEW,THE 462421 001.013.000.513 ADVERTISING ACCT 42365 2,441.96 Total : 2,441.96 39614 10/13/2016 000202 SRCAA 8204 001.090.000.553 4TH QTR 2016 ASSESSMENT 29,108.00 Total : 29,108.00 39615 10/13/2016 000065 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 3313100575 001.090.000.519 CREDIT FOR OFFICE SUPPLIES: G -5,44 3317120555 001.058.055.558 OFFICE SUPPLIES: COMMUNITY D 60.82 3317120557 001.058.055.558 OFFICE SUPPLIES: COMMUNITY 0 256.86 Total : 312,24 39616 10/13/2016 000335 TIRE-RAMA 8080045690 001.032.000.543 OIL CHANGE FOR 2004 TAURUS 3: 65.19 8080045770 001.058.055.558 OIL CHANGE 2013 FORD ESCAPE: 114.70 Total : 179.89 39617 10/13/2016 002597 TWISTED PAIR ENTERPRISES LLC 9292016 001.011.000.511 BROADCASTING COUNCIL MEETIN 1,326.00 Total : 1,326.00 39618 10/13/2016 002651 WOODARD,ARNE EXPENSES 001.011.000.511 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 72.97 Total : 72.97 867738 10/5/2016 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER SEPTEMBER 2016 001.016.000.512 SPOKANE COUNTY SERVICES 244,082.61 Total : 244,082.61 49 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 935,781.91 49 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 935,781.91 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: 10/13/2016 2:48:26PM Spokane Valley Bank code : pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 6942 10/13/2016 002807 BOUTEN CONSTRUCTION CO. PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: RM 212 52.00 Total : 52.00 6943 10/13/2016 005365 BOYER, DAYNA PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND:TERRACE VIEV 75.00 Total : 75.00 6944 10/13/2016 005371 CARDON, CATHY PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: RM 111 52.00 Total : 52.00 6945 10/13/2016 005359 EASTERN WASH-IDAHO SYNOD PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND:SMALL DINING 112.00 Total : 112.00 6946 10/13/2016 005362 GROVER, KRYSTIN PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREENACRES 75.00 Total : 75.00 6947 10/13/2016 005363 MAYGREN, DAVE PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MIRABEAU MEr 75.00 Total : 75.00 6948 10/13/2016 005366 NORTON,ALYSA PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: FIRESIDE LOUI 500.00 Total : 500.00 6949 10/13/2016 005372 NUCERITY INTERNATIONAL PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND:AUDITORIUM& 52.00 Total : 52.00 6950 10/13/2016 005369 NUTRITION FIRST PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: RM 109 52.00 Total : 52.00 6951 10/13/2016 005247 OLSEN, GLENNA REISSUE PARKS REFUN 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND:VALLEY MISSIC 75.00 Total : 75.00 6952 10/13/2016 005358 POTLATCH CORPORATION PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: BROWNS PARI' 75.00 Total : 75.00 6953 10/13/2016 005370 RISE,JANIENE PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: RM 212 10.00 Total : 10.00 6954 10/13/2016 005367 RIVER CITY PROFESSIONALS PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM 52.00 Page: -r--- vchlist Voucher List Page: r 10/13/2016 2:48:26PM Spokane Valley Bank code : pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 6954 10/13/2016 005367 005367 RIVER CITY PROFESSIONALS (Continued) Total : 52.00 6955 10/13/2016 005368 SKANDIA WINDOW FASHIONS PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND:GREAT ROOM 210.00 Total : 210.00 6956 10/13/2016 003917 TAYLOR, GREG REISSUE PARKS REFUN 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MIRABEAU ME/ 75.00 Total : 75.00 6957 10/13/2016 005360 VEHRS DISTRIBUTING PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM 210.00 Total : 210.00 6958 10/13/2016 005364 WANKER,AMANDA PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MIRABEAU ME, 300.00 Total : 300.00 6959 10/13/2016 005361 WDA SALMON BARBEQUE PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND:SULLIVAN 300.00 Total : 300.00 18 Vouchers for bank code: pk-ref Bank total : 2,352.00 18 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 2,352.00 Page: 10 vchlist Voucher List Page: �1"." 10/18/2016 1:18:53PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 5657 10/20/2016 002227 IDAHO TAX COMMISSION Ben69882 311.231.50.03 IDAHO STATE TAX BASE:PAYMENT 1,737.85 Total: 1,737.85 5672 10/20/2016 000048 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS,401A PLAN Ben69884 001.231.14.00 401A:PAYMENT 31,406.74 Total: 31,406.74 5673 10/20/2016 000682 EFTPS Ben69886 001.231.11.00 FEDERAL TAXES:PAYMENT 33,730.96 Total: 33,730.96 5676 10/20/2016 000145 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS,457 PL/Ben69888 001.231.18.00 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION:PAYI 6,324.26 Total: 6,324.26 4 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Bank total: 73,199.81 4 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers: 73,199.81 Page: 4------ CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 25, 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 October 15, 2016 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: Budget/Financial impacts: Employees Council Total Gross: $ 271,279.39 $ - $ 271,279.39 Benefits: $ 96,452.35 $ - $ 96,452.35 Total payroll $ 367,731.74 $ - $ 367,731.74 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 SPOKANE VALLEY COUNCIL MEETING STUDY SESSION Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley,Washington October 4,2016 Attendance: Councilmembers Staff Rod Higgins,Mayor Mark Calhoun,Deputy City Manager Arne Woodard,Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell, City Attorney Caleb Collier,Councilmember Chelsie Taylor,Finance Director Pam Haley, Councilmember Erik Lamb,Deputy City Attorney Mike Munch,Councilmember Eric Guth,Public Works Director Ed Pace,Councilmember John Hohman, Comm&Eco. Dev.Director Morgan Koudelka, Sr.Admin.Analyst Absent: Mark Werner,Police Chief Sam Wood, Councilmember 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 except Councilmember Wood. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to excuse Councilmember Wood from the meeting. 1. Emergency Preparedness—Cary Driskell; Ed Lewis,Dept.Emergency Management City Attorney Driskell introduced Mr. Ed Lewis, Deputy Director of the Greater Spokane County Emergency Management Center. Mr. Driskell explained various aspects of an emergency,including what is an emergency, who can declare an emergency, what the consequences are of declaring an emergency, and the actual process by City staff to declare an emergency. Mr. Driskell also mentioned the two forms included in tonight's packet: Proclamation of an Emergency or Disaster by the City Manager, and Resolution Proclaiming an Emergency. Mr. Driskell's PowerPoint included information on the various forms disasters can take,explanation of statutory authority,localized emergency,consequences of declaring a disaster, the Interlocal Agreement for Emergency Management for Regional disasters, and steps to take once the emergency is over. Mr. Lewis then went through his PowerPoint explaining the structure of the Greater Spokane Emergency Management,what they do,the timeline warnings from the National Weather Service of the past November windstorm, and identified actions taken during that storm. Mr. Lewis also brought attention to the materials he provided in blue folders,which included a copy of the City of Spokane Valley Executive Playbook. Mr.Driskell added that the playbook is a work in progress,and that it is logical for us to examine the idea of having a similar document to be prepared as a community for emergency events. Councilmember Munch mentioned Cascadia Rising and Mr.Lewis said should that occur,we would likely play a role but a specific role is unknown since the event would occur on the west side of the state. It was explained that Cascadia Rising refers to a large point magnitude Cascadia subduction zone earthquake that would likely displace thousands of people. Councilmember Collier asked about family preparation kits and Mr.Lewis said they had several kits at the fair,and that they try to keep citizens informed via social media, the website, and placing ads on all three networks. Mr. Lewis noted that there are also opportunities to participate in tabletop exercises such as what was recently conducted in Millwood. Council Study Session: 10-04-2016 Page 1 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT 2.Non-abandonment of Utility Facilities—Cary Driskell City Attorney Driskell explained that when facilities are left in the City's rights-of-way, there is an associated cost for removing them, and that the draft code language is written to address that issue. Mr. Driesell explained that such a new code provision would apply in most circumstances,regardless of whether the entity or person has a current franchise agreement with the City, but he mentioned that it would not apply to operators of cable television systems which are regulated separately.After briefing Council on the contents of the proposed ordinance, Deputy Mayor Woodard mentioned that Councilmember Wood had asked that he convey Mr. Wood's opposition to this ordinance, based on Mr. Wood's position with the water district. There was consensus to move this forward for a first ordinance reading at an upcoming meeting. 3. Ecology Stormwater Grants Fiscal Year 2018—Eric Guth Public Works Director Guth explained about the Ecology call for grants for fiscal year 2018, and of the four focal areas, including the Centennial Clean Water Program, the Clean Water Act, the State Water Pollution Control Fund,and the Stormwater Financial Assistance Program;he went over the proposed grant application list of projects, including the diversions for Havana, Ponderosa, Dishman-Mica, 14th, and 8th. Councilmember Munch asked what we spend on maintenance of swales,and Mr.Calhoun replied that staff would research that information and e-mail it to Council. Mr. Guth noted that this item is scheduled as a motion consideration for next week's meeting,if Council agrees. Council concurred. At 7:26 p.m.,Mayor Higgins called for a short recess. He reconvened the meeting at 7:35 p.m. 4. Solid Waste Collection Services Request for Proposal and Contract— Erik Lamb, Eric Guth, Morgan Koudelka Deputy City Attorney Lamb explained that this issue has been a working process over the past eight or more months and is as a result of our City wanting to take over garbage services;he mentioned the existing contracts expire March 2018, but we need time to procure a new contract as well as allow for transition time.Mr.Lamb said staff is looking for consensus to issue and release the Request for Proposal,as the goal is to get that published this Friday, and have responses due back mid-January.Mr.Lamb said that garbage is still a subscription service and there is no proposal for mandatory collection; that recycling is proposed to be included with garbage, but yard waste or compostables will be available as a separate subscription. Mr.Lamb also mentioned Council's previous comment about expanding the contracting scenarios for either a single exclusive for one provider to provide everything,or to separate that out for two exclusive providers: one for residential and one for commercial; and that Council discussion included having another option for an exclusive single family contract,and one or more non-exclusive contracts for all other non-single family like commercial,multi-family,and drop box.In response to a request to explain"drop box,"Mr.Guth said this is something more on a temporary nature like at a construction site. Mr. Lamb went over the four scenarios included in the Solid Waste Collection Contract Procurement Summary: (1) one exclusive contract; (2) exclusive single family and non-exclusive commercial/multi- family/drop box;(3)exclusive commercial/multi-family/drop box,and(4)single-family/commercial/multi- family and drop box contract. The issue of cart ownership was discussed with some Councilmembers opposed to cart ownership. Mr. Koudelka explained the potential for the City to own the carts, said it is a unique concept;as we embark in a competitive process for rates,the cars are included;they are durable and if not overly abused,could last twenty years; said the typical cost is recovered through assessment of rates to the ratepayers through the life of the contract, but we don't want to make homeowners and business owners pay for them in another ten years;said the carts that people have already paid for would go with the hauler; said ownership doesn't require any storage by the City as they would stay with the subscribed customers and owning them would create less disruption after the ten-year period;said it also creates a level playing field for all haulers at the next go-round as a potential new provider would not have to invest in new carts; said the color of the carts are controlled by us in the contract, and a new hauler would just put Council Study Session: 10-04-2016 Page 2 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT new stickers on the carts; again said this would be an option and shouldn't impact rates. Deputy Mayor Woodard asked staff to find out the cost of the cart; said he doesn't want it and suggested just taking that out and/or making is as an alternate; said if we keep it will have a cost factor and he asked what is the cost factor if we don't keep them; and again suggested taking it off and having them bid as a separate item; said we don't want to have our own garbage service,we are a contract city so we should let the haulers provide the services and add alternatives as needed. Councilmember Haley said she hasn't been able to keep a cart for one year without it cracking. Councilmember Pace also said he does not want to own a garbage can,as it is too much to think about and as a citizen, he just wants to pay the bill. Mr. Lamb asked if the cart ownership should be left in as an alternate or taken out completely. There was Council consensus to take it out completely. Deputy Mayor Woodard asked about disabled consumers and if we do anything special for them now; rhetorically asked if a person is disabled, how do they put their can out; said maybe by good neighbors; said why should we have an additional charge and put the burden on the collector to determine if someone is disabled; said we want the best rate we can and keep somewhat the same service; and if we are not including that now,why add it. Councilmembers agreed. The recovery of missed pickups was discussed and in response to the question of what we do now, Mr. Koudelka explained that the recovery varies depending on when the call is placed. Mr. Lamb added that this does not include a provision if the customer forgets to put it out; and explained that a"missed can" is when the driver just drove by it,and if that were to occur,they would be required to pick it up the next day; and said that one hauler has the ability to document when cans were put out so there would be no question of whether it was missed, or simply not put out in time. Mr. Lamb said we would want some standard, otherwise,there would be no reason to have the hauler ever come back; said to-date we have had the UTC (Utilities and Transportation Commission) enforce all complaints, but with the new system, the burden would be on City staff. Deputy Mayor Woodard said that some of the missed pickups could be due to holidays.Mr.Lamb said that one of the industry review comments suggested a missed day must be received by 3 p.m. that day, and if the call came in on a Friday, then it would be picked up on Monday. Council agreed with that idea. Councilmember Munch asked if the customer used their own cart would that cause problems for the hauler. Mr.Lamb said the first alternate is to have universal carts; said he is aware there are some people who want their own cart, so that was incorporated into the contract; but agreed it does cost the haulers time. Deputy Mayor Woodard also mentioned the pickup of Christmas trees and Mr. Lamb said that falls under yard waste and that the customer could chop it up and include it in yard waste. Council agreed with that idea. In summary, Mr. Lamb said he understands Council wants to eliminate cart ownership, disabled service and Christmas tree pickup,and asked if Council agreed to authorize staff to release the request for proposals this week. Councilmembers nodded in agreement. Live route tracking technology was discussed with Mr. Koudelka explaining that the technology is becoming fairly standard, that it ensures efficiency of routes, and allows research on claims of missed pickups.Mr. Guth likened that technology to what the snow plows use now as it helps customer service to know where the trucks are and have been; that it is fairly inexpensive and used frequently in this type of industry, such as with UPS and FedEx. Deputy Mayor Woodard said he does not want to tell the haulers how to do their business; they provide the service or get fired; if it is to their benefit to have live tracking then great,but customer service is their responsibility and we shouldn't get into their business models;that we want a service regardless of how they do it. Mr. Lamb explained that from a City standpoint, we are managing this and are responsible for pickup; that it becomes a City customer service issue and if there is a dispute between a hauler and a citizen, that would certainly aid in dispute resolutions. Deputy Mayor Woodard said he thinks some of that would be self-resolving and he wouldn't want to be dictated on how to run a business. Councilmember Haley asked if this is a new process and Mr. Lamb briefly explained Council Study Session: 10-04-2016 Page 3 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT that Council wanted to assume management for solid waste collection as it gives the City an opportunity to achieve better rates; that we could go back to the old UTC system if we didn't want to provide the service by contract, but this process has been ongoing for a while; adding that this would be the first contract to have total discretion for the services and requirements we want.Councilmember Pace said he does not want to go back to the certificate, but also doesn't want to micromanage. Mayor Higgins asked if there is a problem now,do people call the City.Mr.Lamb said under the proposal,the customer would be calling the hauler,but if the issue can't be resolved,we would be involved. Mayor Higgins said he feels the risk would be fairly minimal.Mr.Koudelka mentioned that under the old certificate,we did get some calls from people who had in some cases talked to the hauler and were not satisfied,or who thought the City was the provider, and in those cases,we would refer them to the UTC,and even sometimes we would converse with the UTC to facilitate some disagreement. Deputy Mayor Woodard asked what if the customer is not paying; said he feels we are complicating the contract and suggested keeping it simple. It was agreed by Council to omit the live route track technology. To clarify,Mr. Lamb asked if staff should proceed with the removal of the four items (can ownership, disabled service, Christmas trees, and live route tracking technology) and Council agreed. Mr.Lamb said this RFP process is also set up for an opportunity to have a"best and final" round after the initial submission; and said that ultimately Council can award from the initial responses,or do a best and final,and select alternates and/or pure rates. 5. Greater Spokane,Inc. Contract Update—John Hohman After Mr. Hohman went through the PowerPoint presentation explaining some of the duties of GSI, their membership distribution, funding, our contract and cost,business recruitment,retention and expansion, as well as the lobbying services and their international trade program,Councilmember Pace said he thinks we get a lot of"bang for the buck" and that it is beneficial to the Spokane Valley Residents to have the entire $150,000 allocated for outside agencies; also noted he doesn't think Council should decide who to contract with as that decision should be up to Mr. Hohman, and he therefore proposed restoring the full $150,000 back to the outside agency fund, and adding up to $50,000 to Mr. Hohman's budget to handle this type of contract. There was brief discussion about having a voting member on the executive committee and even if we were allowed to, that it wouldn't change things as the working relationship is the important part. Mayor Higgins suggested it would be beneficial to have a surrogate in case the Mayor couldn't attend a meeting, and Mr.Hohman said he would work on that. Mr. Calhoun said that next week Finance Director Taylor will come forward with the next iteration of the budget, and based on discussion tonight,will have $150,000 for outside agencies,and assume the $43,000 for GSI,which would increase the budget by .87% as a whole. Council concurred. Councilmember Collier said he would like to see Council have the ability to examine every contract, and Councilmember Pace said there are a lot of things Council relies on staff to do, and that Council doesn't want to micromanage. Mr. Calhoun noted that the City Manager contract authority limit is $200,000,but even with that,there are times when staff will bring Council a contract for approval. At 9:00 p.m., it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to extend the meeting by one hour. 6.Wa. Department of Commerce,2016 Environmental Permitting Grant Opportunity—John Hohman Director Hohman explained about the grant opportunity and that it must be used in the field of environmental permitting to open the door for manufacturing; said we have the industrial expansion area and are working hard on that; said we could do a lot of the environmental work up front so this would be like an ultimate certified site; said he is proposing using staff time as a local match; that we want to be competitive, and he sees no downside to this; and this would make it possible for us to market those properties as "shovel-ready" which would set us apart from anywhere in this region, including Idaho. Council agreed to bring this back for a motion at next week's meeting. Mr. Hohman also mentioned the recent addition of Mr. Chaz Bates working on the comp plan; said he has worked on a lot of environmental impact statements in the private arena,which is a great benefit. Council Study Session: 10-04-2016 Page 4 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT 7. Budget Amendment,2016—Chelsie Taylor Finance Director Taylor went over the proposed amendments to the 2016 budget, all as described within her October 4, 2016 Request for Council Action; she also discussed the proposed changes shown in blue on the accompanying attachments. Council concurred with moving this item forward as presented. 8. City Hall Update—Eric Guth Public Works Director Guth went through the PowerPoint presentation giving Council the latest update on the new City Hall project. 9.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins There were no suggested changes to the Advance Agenda. 10. 2017 Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)Request for Proposals This item was for information only and was not reported or discussed. 11. Council Check-in—Mayor Higgins Council had no further comments. 12.Acting City Manager Comments—Mark Calhoun Mr. Calhoun noted that staff has been working with Briahna Murray, legislators, and Council to set up a date for a meeting with the legislators, and that Administrative Assistant Sue Passmore will be in further contact with Council to try to set such a meeting. Mr. Calhoun mentioned that preferably before it gets cold enough to snow,that he will likely schedule a field trip for Council to the site of the new City Hall. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 9:31 p.m. ATTEST: L.R.Higgins,Mayor Christine Bainbridge,City Clerk Council Study Session: 10-04-2016 Page 5 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meeting Formal Meeting Format Tuesday, October 11,2016 Mayor Higgins called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Attendance: Staff Rod Higgins,Mayor Mark Calhoun,Acting City Manager Arne Woodard,Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell, City Attorney Caleb Collier,Councilmember Mike Stone,Parks&Rec Director Pam Haley, Councilmember Erik Lamb,Deputy City Attorney Mike Munch,Councilmember Chelsie Taylor,Finance Director Ed Pace,Councilmember Eric Guth,Public Works Director Sam Wood,Councilmember John Hohman, Comm&Eco. Dev.Director Mark Werner,Police Chief Kristopher Morton,Legal Intern Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk INVOCATION: Pastor Darrell Cole of the Living Hope Community Church gave the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Scouts from Troop 464 led Council, staff and the audience in 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 n/a COMMITTEE,BOARD,LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS Deputy Mayor Woodard: reported that he attended several Chamber of Commerce meetings, including a Transportation Committee meeting with some people from the Department of Transportation in attendance; and said it appears likely that the North/South Freeway will exit onto I-90. There were no other Council reports. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Higgins reported that he attended the GSI (Greater Spokane, Inc.) annual meeting, and the Clean Air Board Meeting. PROCLAMATION n/a PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Higgins explained the process,then invited public comment. Ms.Laura Renz, Spokane: said she is part of the service dog community and uses a service dog; said there are a lot of fake service dogs in the community,and perhaps it is time to get some regulations; said having a service dog is expensive and time-consuming,and they are actually trained to keep their handler safe;but when the dog comes in contact with a fake service dog which rushes the service dog,it distracts them and is very dangerous; said people bring pets in stores which makes the service dogs unsafe; said store owners can ask if the dog a service animal required because of a disability,and what work has the dog been trained to perform;but said many store owners are reluctant to ask questions for fear of embarrassing or offending Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 10-11-2016 Page 1 of 4 Approved by Council: DRAFT the dog owner; she said stores have an obligation to keep customers safe; and said she would be happy to help with some kind of regulation. Ms. Marilyn Wallace: said she came here a week ago for a Planning Commission meeting and the room was packed,as was the hallway;said she wasn't involved in the community"under fire"for a zone change, but she listened and people said they were highly disappointed that they did not receive notices about this zone change,and that one of the neighbors found out and told the others; and she asked that Council please not change the zone. Ms. Peggy Doering, Valleyfest Executive Director: she extended thanks to Council for the assistance in bringing Valleyfest to over 30,000 people this year; she thanked Council, the City, Parks and Recreation, and the agencies and staff in producing this community celebration and also extended thanks to the Police and Fire Departments for their presence at the festival as well as the parade. 1.PUBLIC HEARING: 2017 Proposed Budget—Chelsie Taylor Mayor Higgins opened the public hearing at 6:18 p.m. Finance Director Taylor gave an overview of the proposed budget for 2017, including a summary of the appropriations, number of full-time equivalent employees,revenues estimates pertaining to the general fund,and nonrecurring revenues and expenditures. Mayor Higgins invited public comment; no comments were offered and Mayor Higgins closed the public hearing at 6:26 p.m. 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 Oct. 11,2016 Request for Council Action Form Totaling: $315,290.32 b.Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending September 30,2016: $411,713.12 c.Approval of September 13,2016 Council Minutes,Regular Formal Meeting d.Approval of September 21,2016 Council Minutes, Special Study Session Meeting e.Approval of September 27,2016 Council Minutes, Special Meeting f.Approval of September 27,2016 Council Minutes,Regular Formal Meeting It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the Consent Agenda. NEW BUSINESS: 3.First Reading Proposed Ordinance 16-014 Aggressive Solicitation—Erik Lamb,Kristopher Morton After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title,it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to advance Ordinance 16-014, updating the City's prohibition on aggressive solicitation, to a second reading. Deputy City Attorney Erik Lamb introduced Legal Intern Kristopher Morton. Mr. Morton explained that the Spokane Valley Municipal Code 8.25.020 regulates "aggressive begging," or panhandling; but in light of a recent Washington Supreme Court case in which the court struck down a "begging"ordinance as an unconstitutional restriction on First Amendment protected speech,our Code may not be enforceable because it does not regulate aggressive solicitation generally, but rather regulates aggressive begging for a particular purpose, such as for money or goods.Mr.Morton explained that in the City of Lakewood v. Willis, Lakewood's ordinance prohibited begging in several public locations,and after a challenge by a defendant cited under that ordinance, the court found the ordinance unconstitutional because it imposed content-based speech restrictions, and the defendant's conviction was overturned; and consequently, our Code would most likely not comply with the Washington Supreme Court's decision in that City of Lakewood case. Therefore, Mr. Morton explained, staff proposes to amend our code by prohibiting aggressive solicitation of any kind in any public place in the City, by adding definitions for "aggressive solicitation" and "solicit" that are not content based; and he noted that the changes conform with the provisions in SVMC 8.25.025 which regulates solicitation from occupants of any vehicle when the solicitor is physically present within,or subsequently enters a prohibited roadway. Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 10-11-2016 Page 2 of 4 Approved by Council: DRAFT There was Council discussion about some of the verbiage,including comment from Councilmember Collier that the term"intimidate"can be subjective, and he also asked for perhaps a greater definition of the term aggressive. Deputy City Attorney Lamb said staff could look at adding a "reasonable person standard" clause,and stated that that we want to keep the definition clear.Mayor Higgins invited public comment;no comments were offered. Councilmember Munch stated that the right of petition is granted to citizens in the Bill of Rights, and suggested striking that word from the ordinance,suggesting it could"creep"into something more; and said with the word petition in the ordinance, he would not support the amendment. City Attorney Driskell explained that this change does not deal with a citizen's right to petition which is protected by the First Amendment, but the change does address protecting a citizen's right not to be subjected to aggressive behavior; he said this addresses the behavior of people who could badger or bother others aggressively or by intimidation. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Higgins, Deputy Mayor Woodard, and Councilmembers Pace and Haley. Opposed: Councilmembers Wood,Munch and Collier. Motion carried. 4.First Reading Proposed Ordinance 16-015 Property Tax—Chelsie Taylor After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title,it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to advance Ordinance 16-015 levying regular property taxes for 2017, to a second reading. Finance Director Taylor explained that passage of this ordinance is required by law in order to levy 2017 property taxes; that our levy rate will not include the 1% increase allowed by State law, but will include property taxes on new construction. Mayor Higgins invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 5.Motion Consideration: Ecology Stormwater Grants FY 2018—Eric Guth It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to authorize the Acting City Manager to apply for the FY18 Stormwater Water Quality Financial Assistance grant program for the (1) Spokane County Regional Decant Facility Canopy, the (2)Appleway improvements, Farr to University, and(3)Diversion projects on Havana, Ponderosa, Dishman Mica, 14th and 8`h. Mr. Guth briefly explained about the grant program, and said staff recommends applying for the grant for the projects mentioned in the motion, and contained in the Request for Council Action form. Mayor Higgins invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation:In favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 6.Motion Consideration: Wa. Dept. of Commerce,Permitting Grant Opportunity—John Hohman It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to authorize staff to prepare and submit a 2016 Environmental Permitting Grant application for up to $200,000 to fund a Planned Action Ordinance for the northeast industrial area. Mr.Hohman noted that the City is well positioned to meet the grant criteria for the industrial area in the northeast portion of the City, and if awarded,the fund should allow the City to analyze those specific areas in order to position us to provide clear predicable permit requirements and to advance economic objectives and support economic growth; said the consultant will do the majority of the legwork but staff will be involved in preparing the environmental impact statement and planned action ordnance; said staffs approximate $55,000 involvement would be about 24% of the overall effort, and he hoped using that as matching funds would make us very competitive.Councilmember Munch said he would like property owners to be involved and share in some of the cost in the future. Mayor Higgins invited public comment;no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation:In favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Higgins invited public comments. Ms.Nina Flugal,Spokane Valley: said her grandson is part of a karate class involved in an open tournament in February to be held at the Spokane Community College, and they are looking for businesses to become sponsors in the event;said business can sponsor from$400 down to$50;that the sponsorship would include Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 10-11-2016 Page 3 of 4 Approved by Council: DRAFT full advertising,and the trophies would carry the sponsor's name,and anyone interested in being a sponsor, should please contact her at 926-4387. Mr. Steve O'Meara, Spokane Valley: he spoke of the accidents that have occurred on 8th and McDonald, said the City Manager was supposed to get back to him but he never got a call; said the road was closed for two months and now that all the work is done,it has created a raceway; said there have already been three accidents, said he is furious as the City messed up on this huge opportunity, and that a four-way stop sign is a cheap remedy. Mr. Calhoun remarked that our Public Works staff will be giving an administrative report at next week's Council meeting on potential solutions for this area;said some of the remedies already applied include clearing away the vegetation blocking signs, putting up reflective tape on both posts, as well as reflection striping on the street;and that next week's report will include possible remedies including a signalized intersection,as well as a recommendation from the Public Works Department. Ms. Laura Patten: concerning that intersection, said she is happy to hear of some of the proposals; that it seems people are going faster with the improved roadway; said there are schools in the area,that some of the teenager drivers have even blown right through the stop sign, and said she is concerned with the possibility of loss of property and life. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 7.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins Mayor Higgins said he made an arrangement with KXLY radio, much like the City of Spokane has, for a member of Council to discuss on the radio,the previous night's meeting;that these radio spots would occur after a formal meeting,and he asked if Council is interested in participating,to please let him know and he will work on a schedule. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Mr. Calhoun Mr. Calhoun said staff has been working hard to set a date for a legislative agenda meeting with Council, the 4th District Legislators,some staff,and Lobbyist Briahna Murray,and the meeting is now scheduled for Tuesday,November 22, from 3:30 to 5 p.m. in City Hall's second floor conference room. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded, and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m. ATTEST: L.R.Higgins,Mayor Christine Bainbridge,City Clerk Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 10-11-2016 Page 4 of 4 Approved by Council: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 25, 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: Second Reading Proposed Ordinance No. 16-014, amending Spokane Valley Municipal Code 8.25.020, updating the City's prohibition on aggressive solicitation GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 8.25.020 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Administrative Report delivered to City Council on September 27, 2016. First Reading delivered to City Council on October 11, 2016. BACKGROUND: Spokane Valley Municipal Code ("SVMC") 8.25.020 currently addresses and regulates "Aggressive begging (panhandling)." Staff is proposing to amend SVMC 8.25.020 in light of a recent Washington Supreme Court case in which the court struck down a "begging" ordinance as an unconstitutional restriction on First Amendment protected speech. As currently written, SVMC 8.25.020 may not be enforceable because it does not regulate aggressive solicitation generally, but instead, it regulates aggressive begging for a particular purpose, i.e. begging for money or goods as charity. In City of Lakewood v. Willis, 375 P.3d 1056 (2016), Lakewood had an ordinance that prohibited begging in a number of public locations. After a challenge by a defendant cited under the ordinance, the court found the ordinance unconstitutional because it "impose[d] . . . content- based speech restriction[s] in a substantial number of traditional public forums . . . ." and overturned the defendant's conviction. Id. at 1064. The court highlighted that the First Amendment protects "`charitable appeals for funds, . . . including appeals in the form of begging or panhandling . . . ." Id. at 1059 (internal citations omitted). Begging and panhandling, as protected free speech, may be subject to reasonable time, place or manner restrictions but the City "bears the burden of justifying its restrictions on speech." Id. An ordinance restricting protected speech in a public forum must be "content- neutral, . . . narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest, and leave open ample alternative channels of communication." Id. The United States Supreme Court recently clarified that a law is "content based if 'on its face' [it] . . . define[s] regulated speech by particular subject matter . . . [or] by its function or purpose.- Id. at 1063 (citing Reed v. Town of Gilbert, 135 S. Ct. 2218 (2015)). As currently written, SVMC 8.25.020 prohibits "aggressive begging in any public place in the City . . . ." SVMC 8.25.020(A). Through SVMC 8.25.020, the City is regulating protected speech—begging and panhandling—in all public forums based upon the content of the speech ("begging" for money or goods as charity). Thus, as written, SVMC 8.25.020 most likely would not comply with the Washington Supreme Court's decision in City of Lakewood v. Willis. Staff is proposing to amend SVMC 8.25.020 to comply with the recent case by (1) prohibiting aggressive solicitation of any kind in any public place in the City, (2) adding definitions for "aggressive solicitation" and "solicit" that are not content based, and (3) making minor alterations to ensure SVMC 8.25.020 is consistent with the proposed amendment. Note that the City also continues to have SVMC 8.25.025, which prohibits solicitation from vehicle occupants. Staff is not proposing any changes to SVMC 8.25.025 because it is already generally applicable rather than content based. The proposed changed to SVMC 8.25.020 also conform to the provisions set forth in SVMC 8.25.025. From January 1, 2011 to present, Spokane Valley Police have arrested nine people for violations of SVMC 8.25.025 and 8.25.020. Out of the nine arrests, eight were for violations of SVMC 8.25.025 and one was for violation of SVMC 8.25.020. OPTIONS: Move to approve Ordinance No. 16-014, with or without further amendments; or take other action deemed appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve Ordinance No. 16-014, updating the City's prohibition on aggressive solicitation. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A. STAFF CONTACT: Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney; Kristopher Morton, Legal Intern ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Ordinance No. 16-014. DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 16-014 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON,AMENDING SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE 8.25.020,RELATING TO AGGRESSIVE SOLICITATION,AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley ("City") previously adopted and amended Spokane Valley Municipal Code("SVMC") 8.25.020 relating to aggressive begging; and WHEREAS,the U.S. Supreme Court in Reed v. Town of Gilbert, 1135 S. Ct. 2218, 192 L. Ed. 2d 236 (2015) and Washington State Supreme Court in City of Lakewood v. Willis, 375 P.3d 1056 (Wash. 2016) have recently clarified the extent by which cities may regulate protected forms of speech, including,begging,under the First Amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to ensure that SVMC 8.25.020 complies with the recent U.S. Supreme Court and Washington State Supreme Court decisions while still protecting public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS,public health, safety, and welfare is threatened when individuals aggressively solicit on public property because pedestrians and motor vehicle drivers approached by individuals engaged in aggressive solicitation may become fearful for their health, safety, or general welfare, may be more susceptible to real or perceived coercion when such request is preceded, accompanied, or followed by intimidating words, action, or other behavior, or may be discouraged from returning to an area due to the fear of potential aggressive solicitation; and WHEREAS, pedestrians and motor vehicle drivers approached by individuals engaged in aggressive solicitation may attempt to vacate the area suddenly, potentially endangering themselves, the public, and property; and WHEREAS, the City's reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on aggressive solicitation are a compelling government interest to protect the public health, safety, and welfare from intimidation and threats; and WHEREAS, the City seeks to balance its compelling government interest with protecting the rights of individuals to exercise their First Amendment rights safely; and WHEREAS,the proposed changes are in the best interests of the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the City. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington,ordains as follows: Ordinance 16-014, amending 8.25 Page 1 of 3 DRAFT Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to improve the health, safety,and welfare of the citizens of the City by prohibiting, and creating a remedy suited to address aggressive solicitation in public places within the City. Section 2. Amendment. Spokane Valley Municipal Code 8.25.020 is hereby amended as follows: 8.25.020 Aggressive-solicitation A. Any person who engages in aggressive beggingsolicitation in any public place in the City as those terms are defined by this sectionSVMC 8.25.020 is guilty of a misdemeanor. B. As used herein in this section: 1. "Aggressive beggingsolicitation"means to beg solicit with intent to intimidate another person into giving money or goodscomplying with the solicited request. 2. "BeggingSolicit" means. to ask for money or goods as a charity, whether by words, bodily gestures, signs or other means. a. Either orally or in writing, directly or by implication, to ask, beg, request or plead for employment, goods, services, financial aid, monetary gifts, or any article representing monetary value, for any purpose; b. Either orally or in writing, to sell or offer for immediate sale goods, services, or publications; c. To distribute without remuneration goods, services, or publications; or d. To solicit signatures on a petition or opinions for a survey. 3. "Intimidate"means to coerce or frighten into submission or obedience. 4. "Public place"means any road, alley,lane,parking area, sidewalk or any place,private or otherwise, adopted to and fitted for vehicular or pedestrian travel that is in common use by the public with the consent, expressed or implied,of the owner or owners; and any public playground, school grounds, recreation grounds, parks, parkways, park drives, park paths,and rights-of-way open to the use of the public. Section 3. Other sections unchanged. All other provisions of chapter 8.25 SVMC not specifically referenced hereto shall remain in full force and effect. Section 4. Severability. If any section,sentence,clause or phrase of this Ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance. Ordinance 16-014, amending 8.25 Page 2 of 3 DRAFT Section 5. 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 of Spokane Valley as provided by law. Passed this day of October, 2016. L.R. Higgins,Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved As To Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 16-014, amending 8.25 Page 3 of 3 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 25, 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: Second reading of Ordinance #16-015 levying 2017 regular property taxes and authorizing Spokane County to collect the tax on behalf of Spokane Valley. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: State law. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Through the 2017 Budget development process there have been a number of discussions regarding the 2017 property tax levy, including: • An administrative report on August 9th • A public hearing that was held on September 13th • An administrative report on September 21st • The first reading of Ordinance #16-015 on October 11th BACKGROUND: 2016 Levy and Estimated Rate per $1,000 of Assessed Value • State law requires that the City pass an ordinance that establishes a property tax levy, and per our 2017 Budget calendar we are scheduled to adopt this legislation on October 25, 2016. • State law limits the increase in the property tax levy to the lesser of the increase in the Implicit Price Deflator (IPD), which is the specific measure of inflation used by the State for property tax increases, or 1%. The IPD rate for the 2017 tax year was just issued on September 27, 2016, and it is 0.953% • Our proposed 2017 property tax levy does not include the 0.953% increase allowed by State law. • The levy will include property taxes on new construction. • With the passage of this ordinance we estimate the City will collect between $11,577,412 (based upon the most recent Spokane County estimate) and $11,614,518 (based upon the City estimate). These estimates are computed as follows: Spokane County Update as of City Estimate 9/21/2016 Difference 2016 Actual Levy 11,489,518.00 11,489,518.00 0.00 + 0% Increase 0.00 0.00 0.00 2017 Levy after increase 11,489,518.00 11,489,518.00 0.00 + Estimated new construction 125,000.00 87,894.00 37,106.00 Total estimated 2017 Levy 11,614,518.00 11,577,412.00 37,106.00 • The $37,106 difference between the two revenue figures is a result of the differences in the estimated new construction. • Because Spokane County figures are still preliminary and don't include administrative refunds and other adjustments, I recommend we stay with the City of Spokane Valley estimate. • This levy is based upon a September 21st update to the preliminary estimate of assessed property values provided to the City by the Spokane County Assessor of$8,136,902,947. 1 • Total property tax revenue of $11,614,518 on preliminary assessed values of $8,136,902,947 will produce a levy of approximately $1.427388 per $1,000 of assessed value in 2017 ($11,614,518 / ($8,136,902,947/1,000) = $1.427388). • The 2017 estimated levy rate of$1.427388 per $1,000 is $.055460 less than the 2016 levy rate of$1.482848. • It is important to note that that this estimate is based upon the Assessor's latest preliminary projections of assessed value as of September 21, 2016. A change in any of the elements including assessed value, new construction estimate and/or a change in the amount of our proposed levy will change the levy rate per $1,000. Banked Capacity Banked capacity is the difference between what the City could levy (the Highest Lawful Levy) and what it actually does. In any case, the City of Spokane Valley's maximum levy rate is $1.60 per $1,000 of assessed value. Any amount levied that is less than Highest Lawful Levy represents "banked capacity." Included in the analysis below is history of Spokane Valley levies including seven years of actual figures (2010 through 2016) and a preliminary estimate for 2017: A B C D E F G H I Highest Highest Banked Levy Taxable Lawful Actual Total Levy Rate Lawful Levy Levy Rate Banked Rate per Year Value Levy Levy Refund Levy per$1,000 $1,000(up per$1,000 Capacity (=C+D) (=E/(A/1,000)) to$1.60) (=G-F) 2016 assessment for 2017 $8,136,902,947 $12,169,985 $11,614,518 I ??? $11,614,518 $1.427388 $1.495653 $0.0682651 $555,467 2015 assessment for 2016 $7,748,275,097 $11,968,036 $11,477,044 $12,474 $11,489,518 $1.482848 $1.544606 $0.063368 $490,992 2014 assessment for 2015 $7,393,971,582 $11,740,674 $11,230,806 $48,346 $11,279,152 $1.525452 $1.587871 $0.068957 $509,868 2013 assessment for 2014 $7,168,991,028 $11,472,290 $11,049,400 $27,744 $11,077,144 $1.545147 $1.600000 $0.058989 $422,890 2012 assessment for 2013 $6,921,825,295 $11,074,920 $10,899,437 $20,495 $10,919,932 $1.577609 $1.600000 $0.025352 $175,483 2011 assessment for 2012 $7,087,523,395 $11,340,034 $10,808,900 $9,817 $10,818,717 $1.526445 $1.600000 $0.074939 $531,134 2010 assessment for 2011 $7,140,947,644 $11,138,355 $10,700,000 $32,863 $10,732,863 $1.503003 $1.559787 $0.061386 $438,355 2009 assessment for 2010 $7,169,492,602 $10,902,644 $10,799,500 $27,208 $10,826,708 $1.510108 $1.520700 $0.014387 $103,144 Note: Figures reflected for the 2017 levy are preliminary and subject to change. At this point the only known figure for 2017 is the Highest Lawful Levy. The Highest Lawful Levy is calculated by the County Assessor's Office with a 0.953%increase in IPD. • Generally speaking, you'll note there is a direct relationship between the Taxable Value listed in column A, and the Banked Capacity in columns H and I. In other words, as the Taxable Value increases the Banked Capacity also increases. • Alternatively though, there is an inverse relationship between the direction of the Taxable Value in column A and the Levy Rate per $1,000 in column F. In other words, as the Taxable Value increases (as is the case in 2016 and 2017) the Levy Rate per $1,000 decreases. Essentially what occurs in this case is that even though the Levy Rate per $1,000 may decrease, the actual amount paid by a property owner may not change significantly because the value of the property has increased. By the same token, as the economy declines and Taxable Values decrease, the Levy Rate per $1,000 will likely increase. • In the years the City does not levy the increase in property tax revenue that is allowed by State law (the lesser of the increase in the IPD or 1%), that potential increase is "banked" for potential future use. In 2017, the banked amount is limited by the 0.953% increase in the IPD; however, the City could bank capacity of up to 1% for 2017 by passing a second property tax ordinance demonstrating substantial need. The second ordinance would require passage by a majority plus one of Councilmembers. • The banked capacity can be accessed by the City through the annual property tax levy ordinance adopted by the Council. However, the City may only take the banked capacity up to a level where the levy rate per $1,000 of assessed value does not exceed $1.60. • Accessing the banked capacity does not mean we can go back in time and collect the property taxes we've left behind. It simply means we can reset the base upon which the calculation is made. 2 OPTIONS: Passage of this ordinance is required by law in order to levy 2017 property taxes. The Council could modify the ordinance to establish a different levy amount. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve Ordinance #16-015 levying regular property taxes for 2017. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This ordinance levies property taxes for the City's 2017 Budget where we anticipate property tax revenues to be approximately $11,614,500 or 28.01% of total General Fund recurring revenues of$41,462,500. STAFF CONTACT: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance No. 16-015 Levying 2017 Regular Property Taxes 3 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 16-015 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, LEVYING THE REGULAR PROPERTY TAXES FOR THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON FOR THE YEAR COMMENCING JANUARY 1, 2017 TO PROVIDE REVENUE FOR CITY SERVICES AS SET FORTH IN THE CITY BUDGET,AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley has met and considered its budget for the calendar year 2017; and WHEREAS,the City's actual levy amount from the previous year was $11,489,518; and WHEREAS,the population of the City is more than 10,000. NOW,THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley,do ordain as follows: Section 1. Property Tax Levy -An increase in the regular property tax levy is hereby authorized for the levy to be collected in the 2017 tax year. The dollar amount of the increase over the actual levy amount from the previous year shall be $0.00 which is a percentage increase of 0.0% from the previous year. This increase is exclusive of additional revenue resulting from new construction, improvements to property, newly constructed wind turbines, any increase in the value of state assessed property, any annexations that have occurred,and refunds made. Section 2. Transmittal of Budget. A complete copy of the budget as adopted, together with a copy of this Ordinance, shall be transmitted by the City Clerk to the Division of Municipal Corporations in the Office of the State Auditor,and to the Association of Washington Cities. Section 3. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause, or phase of this Ordinance. Section 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after the date of publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City. PASSED by the City Council this day of October,2016. L.R. Higgins,Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved As To Form: Date of Publication: Office of the City Attorney Effective Date: Ordinance 16-015 Levying 2017 Property Taxes Page 1 of 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 25, 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: First reading of proposed Ordinance #16-016 which amends the 2016 Budget. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: In order for the City to amend an adopted budget, State law requires the Council to approve an ordinance that appropriates additional funds. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: The Council last took formal action on the 2016 Budget when it was amended on June 7, 2016. On October 4, 2016, an Administrative Report was delivered to Council regarding the need for a budget amendment. Finally, earlier this evening a public hearing was held on this topic. BACKGROUND: Since the initial adoption of the 2016 Budget on November 10, 2015 and the subsequent amendment on June 7, 2016, a number of events have transpired in the normal course of operations that necessitate a 2016 Budget amendment. They include: #001 - General Fund Provide additional appropriations (expenditures) of$521,759 comprised of: • $15,000 increase in professional services for outside legal counsel due to a greater need for services during 2016 than was anticipated during the 2016 Budget development. • $30,000 reduction in the General Government professional services, and increase in the transfer out of $30,000 to the Parks Capital Projects Fund #309 to pay for the unanticipated water connection costs for the Browns Park splashpad construction. • Additional $453,116 related to the agreed upon severance costs for the former City Manager and related legal fees. • A $16,418 transfer to the Winter Weather Reserve Fund #122 to replenish the fund to $500,000. • An additional transfer of $37,225 to Parks Capital Projects Fund #309 to pay for the replacement of the play structure at Terrace View Park that was damaged during the windstorm in November 2015. Increase revenues by $36,400 as a result of grant proceeds from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in the wake of the windstorm in November 2015. #101 — Street Fund Increase expenditures by $46,000 due to the need to replace and rewire a traffic signal cabinet that was damaged during a traffic accident. Increase revenues by $96,000, including $50,000, reflecting the right-of-way maintenance fee from Sunshine Disposal for the amount of solid waste received at the transfer facility that exceeded 45,500 tons and $46,000 in insurance proceeds received following a claim to replace and rewire a traffic signal cabinet that was damaged during a traffic accident. 1 #103 —Trails and Paths Fund Increase expenditures by $9,300 to pay for additional unplanned expenditures related to the Appleway Trail — University to Pines closeout process. #104 — Hotel / Motel Tax—Tourism Facilities Fund Increase estimated revenues by $19,500 reflecting revised projected hotel/motel tax revenues in 2016 from the 1.3% hotel/motel tax. #105 - Hotel / Motel Tax Fund Increase estimated revenues by $30,000 reflecting revised projected hotel/motel tax revenues in 2016 from the 2% hotel/motel tax. #122 —Winter Weather Reserve Fund Revenues for the Winter Weather Reserve Fund are being increased by $54,928. These funds are a combination of FEMA grant proceeds in the amount of $38,510 and a transfer in from the General Fund of $16,418. These revenues are a result of the 2015 windstorm cleanup effort which resulted in the fund falling below its target fund balance of $500,000. With these additional revenues, it will be returned to fully funded status. #123 — Civic Facilities Replacement Fund Expenditures are increased by $22. This will complete the effort to reduce the fund balance to $0 by the end of 2016. #301 — REET 1 Capital Projects Fund Increase Expenditures by $540,000 to reflect changes in project schedules for 2016 through: • An increase in transfers out to the Street Capital Projects Fund #303 by $520,000 to reflect a change in project schedules. • An addition of a transfer out to the proposed new Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund #314 in the amount of $20,000 for funding design costs for the Barker Grade Separation Project. Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) revenue is increased by $200,000 based on revised revenue projections. #302 — REET 2 Capital Projects Fund Expenditures are decreased by $540,000 to reflect changes in project schedules and makeup for 2016. Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) revenue is increased by $200,000 based on revised revenue projections. #303 — Street Capital Projects Fund This fund is being amended to reflect estimated actual progress on a number of projects as well as updates to estimated project costs. Expenditures and revenues are decreased by $700,000. This includes a reduction in the contingency of $250,000 to bring the contingency from $1,000,000 to $750,000. As the Fund #303 budget is developed in July prior to the budget year, the City has historically included a $1,000,000 appropriation contingency to absorb changes in project timelines and costs that occur subsequent to the initial budget development process. This $1,000,000 appropriation contingency is then offset by a combination of assumed grant revenues and REET revenues transferred from Funds #301 and #302. Additional reductions include moving both the Barker Grade Separation and the Pines Grade Separation projects to the proposed new Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund #314. 2 #309 — Park Capital Projects Fund This fund is being amended to reflect estimated actual progress on a number of projects. The increases seen in this fund are primarily a result of two segments of the Appleway Trail starting earlier than originally anticipated due to obligation of grant funds. Changes include increases in expenditures/ appropriations in the amount of$477,822. Expenditure changes include: • An increase of $9,300 to the Appleway Trail — University to Pines segment to complete the closeout of the project. • An increase of$400 to complete the closeout of phase 1 of the Pocket Dog Park. • An increase of $102,247 to the Appleway Trail — Pines to Evergreen segment to complete design work. • The addition of $276,775 for the Appleway Trail — Sullivan to Corbin segment to complete design work. • An increase of $30,000 to the Browns Park Splashpad project due to unforeseen water connection fees. • The addition of $59,100 for replacement of the Terrace View Playground Equipment due to damage during the 2015 windstorm. Revenues will increase by $477,422, including: • Grant proceeds of $320,132 for the Appleway Trail — Pines to Evergreen and Sullivan to Corbin segments. • Grant proceeds from FEMA for the replacement of the Terrace View Playground Equipment in the amount of$21,875. • An increase of$67,225 in the transfer in from the General Fund for the remaining amount of the Terrace View Playground Equipment replacement and the Browns Park Splashpad water connection costs. • A transfer in of $9,300 from Trails and Paths Fund #103 for the Appleway Trail — University to Pines segment. • A transfer in of $58,890 from Capital Reserve Fund #312 for the Appleway Trail — Pines to Evergreen and Sullivan to Corbin segments. #311 — Pavement Preservation Fund Expenditures increase by $1,500,000 to account for changes in the schedules of projects and related to grant funding. Revenues increase by $2,063,022 reflecting an increase in grant revenues related to preservation projects in the amount of$2,063,000 as well as an increase of $22 transferred in from the Civic Facilities Replacement Fund #123. #312 — Capital Reserve Fund • Expenditures/appropriations of$566,160 include: o An increase of $457,270 for the Sullivan Rd West Bridge. This is based on scheduling and is not an increase in total contribution to the fund. o A reclassification of $500,000 related to the Pines Rd Grade Separation project. This reduces the amount transferred to Fund #303, and creates the amount to be transferred to the proposed new Fund #314 for the same dollar amount. o An increase of $50,000 reflecting a transfer to Street Capital Projects Fund #303 for the Euclid Ave — Flora to Barker project. o An increase of $13,800 reflecting an additional transfer to Parks Capital Projects Fund #309 for the Appleway Trail — Pines to Evergreen segment. o An increase of $45,090 reflecting a transfer to Parks Capital Projects Fund #309 for the Appleway Trail — Sullivan to Corbin segment. 3 #313 — City Hall Construction Fund Expenditures are decreased by $5,355,005 for construction on the new City Hall building to reflect expenditures for the project moving into 2017. #314 — Railroad Grade Separation Fund This is a proposed new fund for 2016. The intent of the fund is to account for the capital construction projects that are part of Bridging the Valley. Due to the anticipated size, scope, and duration of these projects, managing these projects in their own fund allows for the necessary monitoring without being obscured by the variety and quantity of the other projects in Street Capital Projects Fund #303 as well as keeping these projects from skewing the average volume of activity in Fund #303. Expenditures and revenues for this fund are proposed to be $750,000, which were previously budgeted in Fund #303, including: • $250,000 for preliminary design and engineering of the Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation project which is funded by a combination of $230,000 of grant proceeds and $30,000 in transfers in from the REET 1 Capital Projects Fund #301. • Expenditures of $500,000 for the purchase of land related to the Pines Rd Underpass at BNSF & Trent project which is funded by a transfer in from the Capital Reserve Fund #312. #402 — Stormwater Management Fund Expenditures/appropriations decreased by $375,000, including: • Capital Projects expenditures are decreased by $425,000 due to various capital projects being accounted for in the Aquifer Protection Area Fund #403. • An increase in street sweeping expenditures of$50,000 due to the 2015 windstorm. Revenues increase by $48,800 reflecting the receipt of FEMA grants to offset costs related to the 2015 windstorm. #403 —Aquifer Protection Area Fund Capital outlays in this fund have changed by a total reduction of$1,575,000 comprised of: • A reduction of $2,000,000 as the grant program that provided funding for the Sprague — Park to University LID has been delayed. • The addition of water quality related improvements related to road projects in the amount of $425,000 Revenues have been decreased by a total of$1,600,000: • A reduction of grant proceeds by $1,500,000 as the grant program that provided funding for the Sprague— Park to University LID has been delayed. • A reduction of the Spokane County APA Fee by $100,000 based on revised estimates. This budget amendment will create one new fund: • Fund #314 — Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund 4 The 2016 Budget amendment reflects the changes noted above and will affect 17 funds resulting in total appropriation/expenditure decreases of $4,133,942 and revenue increases of $1,676,072. Revenue Expenditure Fund Fund Increase Increase No. Name (Decrease) (Decrease) 001 General Fund 36,400 521,759 101 Street Fund 96,000 46,000 103 Trails and Paths Fund 0 9,300 104 Hotel / Motel Tax -Tourism Facilities Fund 19,500 0 105 Hotel / Motel Tax Fund 30,000 0 122 Winter Weather Reserve Fund 54,928 0 123 Civic Facilities Replacement Fund 0 22 301 REET 1 Capital Projects Fund 200,000 540,000 302 REET 2 Capital Projects Fund 200,000 (540,000) 303 Street Capital Projects Fund (700,000) (700,000) 309 Park Capital Projects Fund 477,422 477,822 311 Street Preservation Fund 2,063,022 1,500,000 312 Capital Reserve Fund 0 566,160 313 City Hall Construction Fund 0 (5,355,005) 314 Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund 750,000 750,000 402 Stormwater Management Fund 48,800 (375,000) 403 Aquifer Protection Area Fund (1,600,000) (1,575,000) 1,676,072 (4,133,942) OPTIONS: Options are to accept the proposed amendments in whole or in-part. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to advance Ordinance #16-016 amending the 2016 Budget to a second reading. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This action amends the estimated revenues and appropriations for the 2016 Budget that was adopted on November 10, 2015 and subsequently amended on June 7, 2016. There are adequate funds available to pay for these amendments. STAFF CONTACT: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS: • Draft Ordinance #16-016 • Fund level line-item detail of revenues and expenditures. 5 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 16-016 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON,AMENDING ORDINANCE 15-019,WHICH ADOPTED A BUDGET FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1,2016 THROUGH DECEMBER 31,2016 AS SUBSEQUENTLY AMENDED BY ORDINANCE 16-008; CREATING NEW FUND (314)RAILROAD GRADE SEPARATION PROJECTS FUND; AND OTHER MATTERS RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, the City Council passed Ordinance 15-019 on November 10, 2015, which adopted the 2016 annual budget; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved Ordinance 16-008 on June 7, 2016, which amended the 2016 annual budget, and WHEREAS, subsequent to the November 10, 2015 adoption and June 7, 2016 amendment of the 2016 annual budget, it has become necessary to make changes by adding new revenue, appropriations, amendments, and transferring funds in order to properly perform City functions, services and activities; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to create Fund 314 Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund, which will be used to account for activities related to the design and construction of railroad grade separation projects within the City;and WHEREAS, the budget changes set forth in this Ordinance could not have been reasonably anticipated or known when the 2016 annual budget was passed by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the best interests of the City are served by amending the 2016 budget to reflect unanticipated revenue, expenditures, transfers, and appropriating the same as set forth herein. NOW THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley,Washington do ordain as follows: Section 1. Amended Revenues and Appropriations. Ordinance No. 15-019 adopted a budget for the twelve months beginning January 1, 2015 and ending December 31, 2015 and Ordinance 16-008 amended the budget for the same period. Each item, revenue, appropriation, and fund contained in Section 1 of Ordinance 15-019, as subsequently amended by Ordinance 16-008, is hereby further amended as set forth in Attachment A to this Ordinance,which is incorporated herein. Section 2. Creating Fund 314. There is hereby created Fund 314 Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund which will be used to account for activities related to the design and construction of railroad grade separation projects within the City. Section 3. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section,sentence,clause or phrase of this Ordinance. Section 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law. Ordinance 16-016 amending the 2016 budget Passed by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley this day of November 2016. ATTEST: L.R.Higgins,Mayor Christine Bainbridge,City Clerk Approved as to form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 16-016 amending the 2016 budget Page 2 of 3 ATTACHMENT A Sources Uses Revenues Appropriations Estimated Beginning Ending Fund Fund Adopted via Amended viaAmended via Total Total Adopted via Amended viaAmended via Total Fund No. Annual Appropriation Funds Balance Ord. 15-019 Ord. 16-008 Ord.16-016 Revenues Sources Ord.15-019 Ord.16-008 Ord. 16-016 Appropriations Balance 001 General 26,045,+14 39,478,853 481,734 36,400 39,996,987 66,042,431 39,974,480 2,243,357 521,759 42,739,596 23,302,835 101 Street O&M 1,443,077 4,357,900 0 96,000 4,453,900 5,896,977 4,382,900 0 46,000 4,428,900 1,468,077 103 Paths&Trails 38,054 8,500 0 0 8,500 46,554 0 0 9,300 9,300 37,254 104 Hotel/Motel Tax-Tourism Facilities 182,347 357,500 0 19,500 377,000 559,347 0 0 0 0 559,347 105 Hotel/Motel Tax 208,701 550,300 0 30,000 580,300 789,001 590,000 0 0 590,000 199,001 106 Solid Waste 42,874 178,500 0 0 178,500 221,374 178,500 0 0 178,500 42,874 107 PEG 301,182 90,000 0 0 90,000 391,182 24,500 130,000 0 154,500 236,682 120 CenterPlace Operating Reserve 300,000 0 0 0 0 300,000 0 0 0 0 300,000 121 Service Level Stabilization 5,461,789 6,500 0 0 6,500 5,468,289 0 0 0 0 5,468,289 122 Winter Weather Reserve +14,472 600 0 54,928 55,528 500,000 500,000 0 0 500,000 0 123 City Facilities Repair&Replacement 559,108 700 0 0 700 559,808 559,786 0 22 559,808 0 204 Debt Service LTGO 03 4,049 547,100 198,734 0 745,834 749,883 547,100 198,734 0 745,834 4,049 301 Capital Projects 1,594,088 801,000 0 200,000 1,001,000 2,595,088 671,189 0 540,000 1,211,189 1,383,899 302 Special Capital Projects 1,728,297 801,000 0 200,000 1,001,000 2,729,297 1,371,502 0 (540,000) 831,502 1,897,795 303 Street Capital Projects 75,538 11,767,791 0 (700,000) 11,067,791 11,143,329 11,767,791 0 (700,000) 11,067,791 75,538 309 Parks Capital Projects 98,461 264,550 100,950 477,422 842,922 941,383 352,050 100,950 477,822 930,822 10,561 310 Civic Facilities Capital Projects 1,182,548 345,400 0 0 345,400 1,527,948 0 198,734 0 198,734 1,329,214 311 Pavement Preservation 2,605,219 2,301,500 0 2,063,022 4,364,522 6,969,741 3,050,000 0 1,500,000 4,550,000 2,419,741 312 Capital Reserve 4,576,597 0 1,828,723 0 1,828,723 6,405,320 1,524,559 0 566,160 2,090,719 4,314,601 313 City Hall Construction 4,789,046 0 7,946,088 0 7,946,088 12,735,134 294,400 12,451,520 (5,355,005) 7,390,915 5,344,219 314 Railroad Grade Separation Projects 0 0 0 750,000 750,000 750,000 0 0 750,000 750,000 0 51,680,891 61,857,694 10,556,229 3,227,272 75,641,195 127,322,086 65,788,757 15,323,295 (2,183,942) 78,928,110 48,393,976 Sources 1 Uses Revenues Appropriations Estimated Beginning Ending Fund Working Adopted via Amended viaAmended via Total Total Adopted via Amended viaAmended via Total Working No. Working Capital Funds Capital Ord. 15-019 Ord. 16-008 Ord.16-016 Revenues Sources Ord.15-019 Ord.16-008 Ord. 16-016 Appropriations Capital 402 Stormwater Management 1,896,925 1,871,500 175,000 48,800 2,095,300 3,992,225 2,240,115 251,100 (375,000) 2,116,215 1,876,010 403 Aquifer Protection Area 921,660 2,000,000 0 (1,600,000) 400,000 1,321,660 2,000,000 0 (1,575,000) 425,000 896,660 501 Equipment Rental&Replacement 1,248,997 102,333 4,667 0 107,000 1,355,997 330,000 0 0 330,000 1,025,997 502 Risk Management 194,383 325,000 0 0 325,000 519,383 325,000 0 0 325,000 194,383 4,261,965 4,298,833 179,667 (1,551,200) 2,927,300 7,189,265 4,895,115 251,100 (1,950,000) 3,196,215 3,993,050 Total of all Funds 55,942,856 66,156,527 10,735,896 1,676,072 78,568,495 134,511,351 70,683,872 15,574,395 (4,133,942) 82,124,325 52,387,026 Ordinance 16-016 amending the 2016 budget Page 3 of 3 H:\Budget\2016\Amendment#2\2016 10 25 First Reading of Ordinance\amendment no 2 detail.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/25/2016 2016 Budget-Amendment#2 Line Item Detail Account Account Initial Amendment Amended Description Number Description/Justification Budget No 2 Budget #001 -General Fund Recurring Expenditures Professional Services- Legal Services 001.013.015.515.10.41.04 - Outside Legal Counsel needed more during 2016 51,762 15,000 66,762 Professional Services- Misc Studies 001.090.000.513.10.41.05 - Reduced for Browns Park Splashpad transfer 235,500 (30,000) 205,500 Transfers out-#309 001.090.000.597.30.00.90 - Browns Park Splashpad water connection 200,300 30,000 230,300 Total recurring expenditures 15,000 Nonrecurring Revenues FEMA Grant for Windstorm 001.090.000.331.97.03 - FEMA Grant Proceeds(2015 Windstorm) 0 36,400 36,400 Total nonrecurring revenues 36,400 Nonrecurring Expenditures City Manager's Severance 001.090.000.597.10.00.70 - City Manager's severance agreement&related legal costs 0 453,116 453,116 Transfers out-#122 001.090.000.597.12.00.20 - Replenish Winter Weather Reserve Fund 0 16,418 16,418 Transfers out-#309 001.090.000.597.30.00.90 - Parks&Rec Windstorm Damage 0 37,225 37,225 Total nonrecurring expenditures 506,759 Total of all General Fund revenues 36,400 Total of all General Fund expenditures 521,759 #101 -Street Fund Recurring Revenues Street Maintenance& Repair Charges 101.042.000.344.10.00 - Right of Way Maintenance Fee 0 50,000 50,000 Total recurring revenues 50,000 Nonrecurring Revenues Insurance Proceeds 101.042.000.395.20.00 - Insurance Proceeds 0 46,000 46,000 Total nonrecurring revenues 46,000 Nonrecurring Expenditures Traffic Signal Cabinet Replacement 101.042.000.594.42.63.03 - Accident at 16th/Sullivan-Signal Cabinet Replacement needed 0 46,000 46,000 Total nonrecurring expenditures 46,000 Total of all Street Fund revenues 96,000 Total of all Street Fund expenditures 46,000 Page 1 of 6 H:\Budget\2016\Amendment#2\2016 10 25 First Reading of Ordinance\amendment no 2 detail.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/25/2016 2016 Budget-Amendment#2 Line Item Detail Account Account Initial Amendment Amended Description Number Description/Justification Budget No 2 Budget #103-Trails and Paths Fund Expenditures Transfers Out-#309 103.000.000.597.30.00.90 - Appleway Trail -University to Pines 0 9,300 9,300 Total expenditures 9,300 #104-Hotel/Motel Tax-Tourism Facilities Fund Revenues Hotel/Motel Tax 104.000.000.313.30.01 - Revised estimate 357,500 19,500 377,000 Total revenues 19,500 #105-Hotel/Motel Tax Fund Revenues Hotel/Motel Tax 105.105.000.313.30.00 - Revised estimate 550,000 30,000 580,000 Total revenues 30,000 #122-Winter Weather Reserve Fund Revenues FEMA Grant for Windstorm 122.000.000.331.97.03 - FEMA Grant Proceeds 0 38,510 38,510 Transfers in-#001 122.000.000.397.00.10 - Replenish Winter Weather Reserve Fund 0 16,418 16,418 Total revenues 54,928 #123-Civic Facilities Replacement Fund Expenditures Transfer out-#311 123.000.000.597.31.00.10 - Pavement Preservation-deplete fund balance 559,786 22 559,808 Total Expenditures 22 Page 2 of 6 H:\Budget\2016\Amendment#2\2016 10 25 First Reading of Ordinance\amendment no 2 detail.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/25/2016 2016 Budget-Amendment#2 Line Item Detail Account Account Initial Amendment Amended Description Number Description/Justification Budget No 2 Budget #301 -REET 1 Capital Projects Fund Expenditures Transfers out-#303 301.000.000.597.30.00.30 - Revised project schedules 222,503 520,000 742,503 Transfers out-#314 301.000.000.597.31.00.40 - Barker Grade Separation- project design 0 20,000 20,000 Total expenditures 540,000 Revenues REET 1 - 1st Quarter Percent 301.301.000.318.34.00 - Revised estimate based on projections 800,000 200,000 1,000,000 Total revenues 200,000 #302-REET 2 Capital Projects Fund Expenditures Transfers out-#303 302.000.000.597.30.00.30 - Revised project schedules 922,816 (540,000) 382,816 Total expenditures (540,000) Revenues REET 1 - 1st Quarter Percent 301.301.000.318.34.00 - Revised estimate based on projections 800,000 200,000 1,000,000 Total revenues 200,000 #303-Street Capital Projects Fund Expenditures Capital outlay 303.000.223.595.xx.xx.xx - Pines Rd Underpass©BNSF&Trent 500,000 (500,000) 0 Capital outlay 303.000.xxx.595.xx.xx.xx - Euclid Ave. - Flora to Barker 0 50,000 50,000 Capital outlay 303.000.xxx.595.xx.xx.xx - Contingency 1,000,000 (250,000) 750,000 Total expenditures (700,000) Revenues Grant Proceeds 303.000.xxx.330.00.00 - Revised project schedules 8,797,263 (647,657) 8,149,606 Developer Fees 303.000.xxx.367.12.01 - Revised project schedules 314,700 (39,613) 275,087 Transfers in-#301 303.000.xxx.397.30.10 - Revised project schedules 222,503 520,000 742,503 Transfers in-#302 303.000.xxx.397.30.20 - Revised project schedules 922,816 (540,000) 382,816 Transfers in-#312 303.303.155.397.31.20 - Sullivan Rd. W. Bridge Replacement 1,010,509 457,270 1,467,779 Transfers in-#312 303.000.223.397.31.20 - Pines Rd Underpass© BNSF&Trent 500,000 (500,000) 0 Transfers in-#312 303.000.xxx.397.31.20 - Euclid Ave- Flora to Barker 0 50,000 50,000 Total revenues (700,000) Page 3 of 6 H:\Budget\2016\Amendment#2\2016 10 25 First Reading of Ordinance\amendment no 2 detail.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/25/2016 2016 Budget-Amendment#2 Line Item Detail Account Account Initial Amendment Amended Description Number Description/Justification Budget No 2 Budget #309-Park Capital Projects Fund Expenditures Capital outlay 309.000.176.595.xx.xx.xx - Appleway Trail -University to Pines 0 9,300 9,300 Capital outlay 309.000.225.594.xx.xx.xx - Pocket Dog Park-phase 1 0 400 400 Capital outlay 309.000.227.595.xx.xx.xx - Appleway Trail -Pines to Evergreen 104,050 102,247 206,297 Capital outlay 309.000.237.595.xx.xx.xx - Appleway Trail -Sullivan to Corbin 0 276,775 276,775 Capital outlay 309.000.249.595.xx.xx.xx - Browns Park Splashpad 116,500 30,000 146,500 Capital outlay 309.000.245.594.xx.xx.xx - Terrace View Playground Equip. Replacement 0 59,100 59,100 Total expenditures 477,822 Revenues Grant Proceeds 309.000.227.333.20.20 - Appleway Trail -Pines to Evergreen 90,000 86,361 176,361 Grant Proceeds 309.000.237.334.02.70 - Appleway Trail -Sullivan to Corbin 0 233,771 233,771 FEMA Grant for Windstorm 309.000.245.331.97.03 - Grant Proceeds Terrace View Playground 0 21,875 21,875 Transfer in-#001 309.000.245.397.00.10 - Terrace View Playground 200,300 37,225 237,525 Transfer in-#001 309.000.249.397.00.10 - Browns Park Splashpad 116,500 30,000 146,500 Transfer in-#103 309.000.176.397.10.30 - Appleway Trail University to Pines 0 9,300 9,300 Transfer in-#312 309.000.227.397.31.20 - Appleway Trail - Pines to Evergreen 14,050 13,800 27,850 Transfer in-#312 309.000.237.397.31.20 - Appleway Trail -Sullivan to Corbin 0 45,090 45,090 Total revenues 477,422 #311 -Pavement Preservation Expenditures Pavement Preservation 311.000.xxx.595.xx.xx.xx - Grant Funded Pavement Preservation Projects 3,000,000 1,500,000 4,500,000 Total expenditures 1,500,000 Revenues Transfers In-#123 311.000.000.397.12.30 - Transfer form Fund 123 556,786 22 556,808 Grant Proceeds 311.000.xxx.33x.xx.xx - Various Grants for Projects 0 2,063,000 2,063,000 Total revenues 2,063,022 Page 4 of 6 H:\Budget\2016\Amendment#2\2016 10 25 First Reading of Ordinance\amendment no 2 detail.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/25/2016 2016 Budget-Amendment#2 Line Item Detail Account Account Initial Amendment Amended Description Number Description/Justification Budget No 2 Budget #312-Capital Reserve Fund Expenditures Transfer to-#303 312.000.000.597.30.00.30 - Sullivan Road West Bridge 1,010,509 457,270 1,467,779 Transfer to-#303 312.000.000.597.30.00.30 - Pines Rd Underpass© BNSF&Trent 500,000 (500,000) 0 Transfer to-#303 312.000.000.597.30.00.30 - Euclid Ave- Flora to Barker 0 50,000 50,000 Transfer to-#309 312.000.000.597.30.00.90 - Appleway Trail -Pines to Evergreen 14,050 13,800 27,850 Transfer to-#309 312.000.000.597.30.00.90 - Appleway Trail -Sullivan to Corbin 0 45,090 45,090 Transfer to-#314 312.000.000.597.31.00.40 - Pines Rd Underpass© BNSF&Trent 0 500,000 500,000 Total expenditures 566,160 #313-City Hall Construction Fund Expenditures Capital Outlay-City Hall 313.000.215.594.xx.xx.xx - City Hall Construction Costs 12,649,405 (5,355,005) 7,294,400 Total expenditures (5,355,005) #314-Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund Expenditures Capital Outlays 314.000.143.595.xx.xx.xx - Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation 0 250,000 250,000 Capital Outlays 314.000.223.595.xx.xx.xx - Pines Rd Underpass©BNSF&Trent 0 500,000 500,000 Total expenditures 750,000 Revenues FHWA Direct Earmark Funds 314.000.143.333.20.20 - Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation Grant 0 230,000 230,000 Transfer in-#301 314.000.143.397.30.10 - Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation REET 0 20,000 20,000 Transfer in-#312 314.000.223.397.31.20 - Pines Rd Underpass© BNSF&Trent 0 500,000 500,000 Total revenues 750,000 Page 5 of 6 H:\Budget\2016\Amendment#2\2016 10 25 First Reading of Ordinance\amendment no 2 detail.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/25/2016 2016 Budget-Amendment#2 Line Item Detail Account Account Initial Amendment Amended Description Number Description/Justification Budget No 2 Budget #402-Stormwater Management Fund Expenditures Capital outlay 402.000.xxx.595.xx.xx.xx - Various Projects 576,100 (425,000) 151,100 Street Sweeping 402.402.000.531.36.47.06 - Windstorm-related street sweeping 0 50,000 50,000 Total expenditures (375,000) Revenues FEMA Grant Proceeds 402.402.000.374.97.03 - FEMA Grant for windstorm damage 0 48,800 48,800 Total revenues 48,800 #403-Aquifer Protection Area Fund Expenditures Capital Outlay 403.000.198.595.xx.xx.xx - Sprague- Park to University LID 2,000,000 (2,000,000) 0 Capital Outlay 403.000.xxx.595.xx.xx.xx - Various capital projects 0 425,000 425,000 Total expenditures (1,575,000) Revenues Spokane County APA Fee 403.000.000.337.38.00 - Revised Estimate 500,000 (100,000) 400,000 Dept of Ecology Grant 403.000.198.334.03.10 - Grant program delayed 1,500,000 (1,500,000) 0 Total revenues (1,600,000) Totals Across all Funds Total revenues 1,676,072 Total expenditures (4,133,942) Page 6 of 6 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 25, 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: First Reading of Proposed Ordinance #16-017 Adopting the 2017 Budget. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: State budget law. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: To date the Council has heard presentations on the 2017 Budget on five previous occasions including two public hearings. Thus far no formal Council action has been taken. BACKGROUND: This marks the sixth occasion where the Council will discuss the 2017 Budget including two public hearings to gather input from citizens. The seventh and final presentation will occur on November 8th when the Council is scheduled to adopt the budget with the second reading of Ordinance #16-017: • June 14 Council Budget Workshop • August 9 Admin report: Estimated 2017 revenues and expenditures • September 13 Public hearing #1 on 2017 revenues and expenditures • September 27 City Manager's presentation of preliminary 2017 Budget • October 11 Public hearing #2 on 2017 Budget • October 25 First reading on ordinance adopting the 2017 Budget • November 8 Second reading on ordinance adopting the 2017 Budget 2017 Budget Overview: • The 2017 Budget currently includes appropriations of $80,739,873 including $23,577,550 in capital expenditures, comprised in-part of: o $7,166,649 in Fund #303 Street Capital Projects o $3,904,182 in Fund #309 Park Capital Projects o $3,000,000 in Fund #311 Pavement Preservation including $953,200 financed by the General Fund o $5,344,219 related to the new City Hall building in Fund #313 City Hall Construction o $1,970,000 in Fund #314 Railroad Grade Separation Projects for the design phases of the Barker Road and Pines Road Grade Separation projects o $980,000 in Fund #402 Stormwater Management and Fund #403 Aquifer Protection Area projects • To partially offset the $23,577,550 in capital costs, we anticipate $8,041,108 in grant revenues which results in 34.1% of capital expenditures being covered with State and Federal money. • Budgets will be adopted across 25 separate funds. • The full time equivalent employee (FTE) count will be 88.4 employees compared to 87.4 in the prior year as a result of one FTE being added for the new City Hall Operations & Maintenance Department. 1 Pertaining Specifically to the General Fund: • The 2017 recurring revenue estimate of $41,462,500 is $1,741,072 or 4.38% greater than the proposed 2016 amended budget of$39,721,428. • The 2017 recurring expenditure proposal of $40,053,822 is $346,389 or 0.87% greater than the proposed 2016 amended appropriation of$39,707,433. • General Fund recurring expenditures have been held to an increase of no greater than 1%, as was directed by Council. • Recurring revenues currently exceed recurring expenditures by $1,408,678 or 3.40% of recurring revenues. • Nonrecurring revenues total $530,925 and include: o $40,425 as a transfer in from the Solid Waste Fund #106 as a repayment to the General Fund for various studies and fees related to the Solid Waste program paid out of the General Fund in the years of 2013 and 2014. The repayment will occur over five years beginning in 2015 at an annual amount of$40,425. o $490,500 as a transfer in from the Civic Facilities Capital Projects Fund #310, which represents amounts that were set aside in Fund #310 in prior years for years in which the City would have both a lease payment and bond payment for the new City Hall building. • Nonrecurring expenditures total $2,389,850 and include: o $100,000 for Information Technology expenditures including: ■ $20,000 for four copiers to replace those that have reached end of life ■ $80,000 for IT capital items for technology set-up at the new City Hall o $513,100 for the last year of the lease at the current City Hall location o $145,000 for the Police Department CAD / RMS o $50,000 for retail recruitment services o $12,000 for repair of drain pipes and gutter lines at the pools o $345,000 for replacement of the Great Room audio/visual equipment at CenterPlace o $24,750 for carpet replacement in various rooms at CenterPlace o $1,200,000 transfer out to the Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund #314 to fund the design of the Pines Road Grade Separation project. • The total of 2017 recurring and nonrecurring expenditures exceeds total revenues by $450,247 —and this is entirely a result of the one-time/nonrecurring expenditures. • The projected ending fund balance of the General Fund at the end of 2017 is currently $22,852,588 or 57.05% of recurring expenditures. 2 Other Funds: 2017 Budget appropriations (expenditures) in the other funds total $38,296,201 as follows: Fund Fund 2017 Number Name Appropriation 101 Street Fund 4,851,244 103 Paths and Trails Fund 0 104 Hotel / Motel Tax -Tourism Facilities Fund 0 105 Hotel / Motel Tax Fund 634,000 106 Solid Waste Fund 151,800 107 PEG Fund 262,500 120 CenterPlace Operating Reserve Fund 0 121 Service Level Stabilization Reserve Fund 0 122 Winter Weather Reserve Fund 500,000 123 Civic Facilities Replacement Fund 0 204 Debt Service Fund 940,000 301 REET 1 Capital Projects Fund 1,456,986 302 REET 2 Capital Projects Fund 1,913,134 303 Street Capital Projects Fund 7,166,649 309 Parks Capital Projects Fund 3,904,182 310 Civic Facilities Capital Projects Fund 490,500 311 Pavement Preservation Fund 3,050,000 312 Capital Reserve Fund 2,321,915 313 City Hall Construction Fund 5,344,219 314 Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund 1,970,000 402 Stormwater Management Fund 2,459,072 403 Aquifer Protection Area Fund 530,000 501 Equipment Rental and Replacement Fund 0 502 Risk Management Fund 350,000 38,296,201 Primary sources of revenues in these other funds include: • Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax revenue that is collected by the State and remitted to the Street Fund is anticipated to be $2,040,300. • Telephone Tax revenues remitted to the City that supports Street Fund operations and maintenance are anticipated to be $2,200,000. • Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) revenues that are in large part used to match grant financed street projects are anticipated to total $1,600,000. • Hotel / Motel Tax revenues that are dedicated to the promotion of visitors and tourism are anticipated to be $957,000 ($580,000 in Fund #105 and $377,000 in Fund #104). • Stormwater Management Fees are estimated at $1,860,000. • Aquifer Protection Area Fees are estimated at $460,000. • Grant Revenues offsetting capital project costs are estimated at $8,041,108 o Fund #106— Solid Waste Fund - $26,800 o Fund #303 —Street Capital Projects - $3,756,320 o Fund #309 — Parks Capital Projects - $3,217,267 o Fund #311 — Pavement Preservation - $340,800 o Fund #314 — Railroad Grade Separation Projects - $489,921 o Fund #402 — Stormwater Fund - $210,000 3 The City's 2017 Budget is adopted at a fund level as follows: Estimated Estimated Beginning Ending Fund Fund Total Fund Annual Appropriation Funds No. Balance Revenues Sources Appropriations Balance General Fund 001 23,302,835 41,993,425 65,296,260 42,443,672 22,852,588 Street Fund 101 1,468,077 4,403,168 5,871,245 4,851,244 1,020,001 Paths&Trails Fund 103 37,254 8,600 45,854 0 45,854 Hotel/Motel Tax-Tourism Facilities Fund 104 559,347 377,000 936,347 0 936,347 Hotel/Motel Tax Fund 105 199,001 580,500 779,501 634,000 145,501 Solid Waste 106 42,874 151,800 194,674 151,800 42,874 PEG Fund 107 236,682 80,000 316,682 262,500 54,182 CenterPlace Operating Reserve Fund 120 300,000 0 300,000 0 300,000 Service Level Stabilization Fund 121 5,468,289 21,900 5,490,189 0 5,490,189 Winter Weather Reserve Fund 122 500,000 600 500,600 500,000 600 City Facilities Repair&Replacement 123 0 0 0 0 0 LTGO Bond Debt Service Fund 204 4,049 935,951 940,000 940,000 0 REET 1 Capital Projects Fund 301 1,383,899 801,700 2,185,599 1,456,986 728,613 REET 2 Capital Projects Fund 302 1,897,795 801,700 2,699,495 1,913,134 786,361 Street Capital Projects 303 75,538 7,166,649 7,242,187 7,166,649 75,538 Park Capital Projects Fund 309 10,561 3,939,982 3,950,543 3,904,182 46,361 Civic Facilities Capital Projects Fund 310 1,329,214 1,200 1,330,414 490,500 839,914 Pavement Preservation Fund 311 2,419,741 2,682,300 5,102,041 3,050,000 2,052,041 Capital Reserve Fund 312 4,314,601 1,000 4,315,601 2,321,915 1,993,686 City Hall Construction Fund 313 5,344,219 0 5,344,219 5,344,219 0 Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund 314 0 1,970,000 1,970,000 1,970,000 0 48,893,976 65,917,475 114,811,451 77,400,801 37,410,650 Estimated Estimated Beginning Ending Fund Working Total Working Working Capital Funds No. Capital Revenues Sources Appropriations Capital Storm water Management Fund 402 1,876,010 2,072,500 3,948,510 2,459,072 1,489,438 Aquifer Protection Area Fund 403 896,660 460,000 1,356,660 530,000 826,660 Equipment Rental&Replacement Fund 501 1,025,997 185,029 1,211,026 0 1,211,026 Risk Management Fund 502 194,383 350,000 544,383 350,000 194,383 3,993,050 3,067,529 7,060,579 3,339,072 3,721,507 Total of all Funds 52,887,026 68,985,004 121,872,030 80,739,873 41,132,157 OPTIONS: State law requires the City to adopt a budget prior to December 31. Council may adopt the budget as presented or alter it as they deem necessary. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to advance Ordinance #16-017 adopting the 2017 Budget to a second reading. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Adoption of Ordinance #16-017 concludes the 2017 Budget development process and establishes the final budget including estimated revenues and appropriations. STAFF CONTACT: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS: • Draft Ordinance #16-017 • 2017 Budget 4 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 16-017 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2017 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2017; APPROPRIATING FUNDS; ESTABLISHING SALARY SCHEDULES FOR ESTABLISHED POSITIONS; AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, State law requires the City Manager to prepare a preliminary budget for the City of Spokane Valley at least 60 days before the beginning of the City fiscal year beginning January 1, 2017 and ending December 31,2017; and WHEREAS,the City Manager, in consultation with the Finance Director and department heads, has prepared and placed on file with the City Clerk a preliminary budget, together with an estimate of the amount of money necessary to meet the expenses of the City including payment of outstanding obligations; and WHEREAS, notice was posted and published for public hearings held on September 13 and October 11, 2016. The City Council met and invited public comment in the City Council Chambers during each public hearing; and WHEREAS, proper notice was given and the preliminary budget was filed with the City Clerk September 27,2016; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt the 2017 budget, including all allowances, and an appropriation for each fund; and WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley property tax levy in 2016 for collection in 2017, will be $11,489,517.62, which represents a 0% increase in the 2017 levy. This levy is exclusive of additional revenue resulting from new construction, improvements to property, any increase in the value of State assessed property, any annexations that have occurred,and refunds made. NOW,THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley do ordain as follows: Section 1. Adoption of 2017 Budget. The budget for the City of Spokane Valley for the year 2017 is adopted at the fund level. The final budget for 2017 is attached hereto, and by this reference is incorporated herein pursuant to RCW 35A.33.075. For summary purposes, the total estimated appropriations for each separate fund,plus the aggregate total for all such funds,is set forth as follows: Ordinance 16-017 Adopting 2017 Budget Page 1 of 3 DRAFT Estimated Estimated Beginning Ending Fund Fund Total Fund Annual Appropriation Funds No. Balance Revenues Sources Appropriations Balance General Fund 001 23,302,835 41,993,425 65,296,260 42,443,672 22,852,588 Street Fund 101 1,468,077 4,403,168 5,871,245 4,851,244 1,020,001 Paths&Trails Fund 103 37,254 8,600 45,854 0 45,854 Hotel/Motel Tax-Tourism Facilities Fund 104 559,347 377,000 936,347 0 936,347 Hotel/Motel Tax Fund 105 199,001 580,500 779,501 634,000 145,501 Solid Waste 106 42,874 151,800 194,674 151,800 42,874 PEG Fund 107 236,682 80,000 316,682 262,500 54,182 CenterPlace Operating Reserve Fund 120 300,000 0 300,000 0 300,000 Service Level Stabilization Fund 121 5,468,289 21,900 5,490,189 0 5,490,189 Winter Weather Reserve Fund 122 500,000 600 500,600 500,000 600 City Facilities Repair&Replacement 123 0 0 0 0 0 LTGO Bond Debt Service Fund 204 4,049 935,951 940,000 940,000 0 REET 1 Capital Projects Fund 301 1,383,899 801,700 2,185,599 1,456,986 728,613 REET 2 Capital Projects Fund 302 1,897,795 801,700 2,699,495 1,913,134 786,361 Street Capital Projects 303 75,538 7,166,649 7,242,187 7,166,649 75,538 Park Capital Projects Fund 309 10,561 3,939,982 3,950,543 3,904,182 46,361 Civic Facilities Capital Projects Fund 310 1,329,214 1,200 1,330,414 490,500 839,914 Pavement Preservation Fund 311 2,419,741 2,682,300 5,102,041 3,050,000 2,052,041 Capital Reserve Fund 312 4,314,601 1,000 4,315,601 2,321,915 1,993,686 City Hall Construction Fund 313 5,344,219 0 5,344,219 5,344,219 0 Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund 314 0 1,970,000 1,970,000 1,970,000 0 48,893,976 65,917,475 114,811,451 77,400,801 37,410,650 Estimated Estimated Beginning Ending Fund Working Total Working Working Capital Funds No. Capital Revenues Sources Appropriations Capital Storm water Management Fund 402 1,876,010 2,072,500 3,948,510 2,459,072 1,489,438 Aquifer Protection Area Fund 403 896,660 460,000 1,356,660 530,000 826,660 Equipment Rental&Replacement Fund 501 1,025,997 185,029 1,211,026 0 1,211,026 Risk Management Fund 502 194,383 350,000 544,383 350,000 194,383 3,993,050 3,067,529 7,060,579 3,339,072 3,721,507 Total of all Funds 52,887,026 68,985,004 121,872,030 80,739,873 41,132,157 The total balance of all funds appropriated for 2017 is $80,739,873. Section 2. Transmittal of Budget. A complete copy of the budget as adopted, together with a copy of this Ordinance, shall be transmitted by the City Clerk to the Division of Municipal Corporations in the Office of the State Auditor and to the Association of Washington Cities. Section 3. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance. Section 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after the date of publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City. Ordinance 16-017 Adopting 2017 Budget Page 2 of 3 DRAFT PASSED by the City Council this day of November,2016. L.R.Higgins,Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved As To Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 16-017 Adopting 2017 Budget Page 3 of 3 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 2017 ANNUAL BUDGET CITY OF o .-- -'4\4\ ,p Kane 4,,•••.. Valley ® This page left intentionally blank. Table of Contents City of Spokane Valley, WA Spokane County January 1,2017 through December 31,2017 Summary of Councilmembers III City Manager's Budget Message 1 Finance Director's Message -About the 2017 Budget and Budget Development Process 9 Budget Summary 25-40 Revenues by Fund and Type 41-48 Expenditures by Fund and Department 49-52 General Fund Department Changes from 2016 to 2017 53-55 #001-General Fund-Expenditures by Department by Type City Council 56 City Manager 57 Public Safety 59 Deputy City Manager 62 Finance 63 Human Resources 64 Public Works 65 City Hall Operations and Maintenance 66 Community&Economic Development 67 Parks&Recreation 71 General Government 77 Special Revenue Funds #101 -Street Fund 79 #103 -Paths&Trails Fund 81 #104-Hotel/Motel Tax—Tourism Facilities Fund 82 #105 -Hotel/Motel Tax Fund 82 #106- Solid Waste Fund 83 #107 -PEG Fund 84 #120 - CenterPlace Operating Reserve Fund 85 #121 - Service Level Stabilization Reserve Fund 85 #122 -Winter Weather Reserve Fund 86 #123 -Civic Facility Replacement Fund 86 1 City of Spokane Valley 2017 Budget Debt Service Funds #204- Limited Tax General Obligation(LTGO)Fund 87 Capital Projects Funds #301 -REET 1 Capital Projects Fund 88 #302 -REET 2 Capital Projects Fund 89 #303 - Street Capital Projects Fund 90 #309-Parks Capital Projects Fund 92 #310-Civic Facilities Capital Projects Fund 93 #311 -Pavement Preservation Fund 94 #312 -Capital Reserve Fund 97 #313 -City Hall Construction Fund 98 #314—Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund 99 Enterprise Funds #402- Stormwater Management Fund 100 #403 -Aquifer Protection Area Fund 102 Internal Service Funds #501 -Equipment Rental&Replacement Fund 103 #502 -Risk Management Fund 105 Total of Capital Expenditures for 2017 106 FTE Count by Year—2011 through 2017 107 Work Force Comparison 108 Appendix A,Employee Position Classification and Salary Schedule 109 Glossary of Budget Terms 110 ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦••••••••••••••••••♦♦♦♦♦••••••♦♦ • • I • d 4 i h ,i' •• y '"rI ' , • • f-,''9.• I N` • • City Council Members • •s Rod Higgins, Mayor s • Position#1 ♦ s Arne Woodard, Deputy Mayor s s• Position#3 s s Caleb Collier Ed Pace s s• Position #2 Position#4 s s Pam Haley Sam Wood s s• Position #5 Position#6 • s Michael Munch s • Position #7 ♦ •s Staff s s• Mark Calhoun, Acting City Manager s s Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director s s John Hohman, Community and Economic Development Director s s Mike Stone, Parks & Recreation Director• s s• Eric Guth, Public Works Director s s Cary Driskell, City Attorney s s Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk s ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ CITY OF — pokane ...... vValley ° This page left intentionally blank. SCITY OF po kane Valley® Y City Manager's Budget Message 2017 Annual Budget Dear Citizens, Mayor and City Council of Spokane Valley: Sound Financial Position It is with pleasure that I present the attached 2017 Budget for the City of Spokane Valley. The City remains financially strong and continues to benefit from a history of prudent financial decisions that have been made since our 2003 incorporation. Consistently responsible budgeting and restrained spending has helped us achieve key Fiscal Policies and maintain an ending General Fund Balance equivalent to six-months of general fund operations. The City of Spokane Valley is an excellent example of how a City provides key services to the community while holding down taxes, fees and other charges. Additionally, our per capita employee count and personnel expenses are among the lowest (if not the lowest) of comparable size cities in the state and around the U.S. The City's chief budget priorities are public safety, pavement preservation, transportation and infrastructure (including railroad grade separations) and economic development. Ensuring that we've committed adequate resources to these activities accounts for much of the effort that staff collectively dedicates to the annual development of both our Business Plan and this budget document. We recognize that to ensure continued financial stability, it is imperative that recurring annual revenues be greater than or equal to recurring annual expenditures and this goal has again been achieved in the 2017 General Fund Budget. Beyond recurring operating activity however, due to our excellent financial condition, we are afforded the opportunity to use the portion of the General Fund balance that exceeds 50% for nonrecurring expenditures in pursuit of programs important to the City Council and community. Recent examples include General Fund contributions to each phase of the Appleway Trail project, Sullivan Road West Bridge Replacement project, Appleway road landscaping, a cash "down payment" for construction of a new City Hall and beginning to set money aside for future railroad grade separation projects. Fiscal Policies The Fiscal Policies adopted by the City Council are important for the long-range fiscal strength of Spokane Valley. These policies appropriately dictate if the economic conditions deteriorate, future budget reductions may be triggered. 1 Financial Management—The City proposes to: 1. Maintain basic service levels with minimal resources to achieve success. 2. Minimize personnel costs/overhead by continuing to contract for many services. 3. Continue the six-year Business Plan process. 4. Leverage City funds with grant opportunities. 5. Minimize City debt with a pay as you go philosophy. o The State of Washington sets the maximum level of allowable debt for cities based on assessed value of property. The City of Spokane Valley currently utilizes only 2.35% of its total debt capacity, and more importantly, only 11.74% of non-voted bond capacity. This reflects an exceptionally low debt burden. 6. Strive to prioritize spending in the annual budget process and minimize mid-year addition of projects and appropriations. Financial Objectives - The City's financial objectives are: 1. Adopt a General Fund Budget with recurring revenues equal to, or greater than recurring expenditures. 2. Maintain a minimum General Fund Ending Balance of at least 50% of recurring expenditures, which is the equivalent of six months of general fund operations. 3. If necessary, utilize the Service Level Stabilization Reserve Fund ($5.5 million) to maintain ending fund balance minimum. 4. Commitment to the strategy the Service Level Stabilization Reserve Fund will not reduce below $3.3 million (60% of$5.5 million). 5. Maintain the 2017 property tax assessment the same as 2016 with the exception of new construction. As in the previous seven years, the City will forego the one-percent annual increase to property tax allowable by RCW 84.52.050. We anticipate this will result in a levy of$11,489,500 plus estimated new construction of$125,000 for a total levy of$11,614,500. The allowable potential increase will be banked for future use as provided by law. This effectively makes the eighth year in a row that we have not increased our City property tax assessment. 6. Grow our economy so the existing tax base can support basic programs. Commitment— By committing to these policies and the checks and balances they afford, the City will ensure financial sustainability well into the future. 2017 Budget Highlights Moderate Growth in Recurring General Fund Expenditures: Investing in essential core services identified by the Council and community establishes the baseline costs we have included in this budget. Similar to the trend experienced in most jurisdictions, we find that the cost of providing these services typically increases at a faster rate than the moderate growth we see in the underlying tax revenues that support essential core services. With that said however, City staff have met the challenge posed by Council to prepare a recurring General Fund budget with no greater than 1% growth, and in fact, the proposed 2017 Budget reflects expenditure growth of just 0.87% while at the same time maintaining historic levels of service. Public Safety Costs: Over the years Council has consistently committed to the maintenance and at times enhancement of public safety service levels and this is again reflected in the 2017 Budget where public safety costs including law enforcement, courts and jail related services 2 total $24,950,372 which is an amount equal to 215% of anticipated property tax collections (= $24,950,372 / $11,614,500). City Hall Construction Project: Since incorporation in 2003 the City has leased City Hall space from Northwest Christian Schools and over that time frame the City, like many of our residents, has debated whether we were better off to continue renting space or owning our own home. In 2015, the City made the decision to construct a new City Hall at a then estimated cost of$14.4 million. Through the balance of 2015 and into 2016 the City acquired land, contracted with an architect for design services, and finally in June 2016 began construction. With all costs for the facility finally committed, we now know the actual cost will be $14.15 million or $250,000 less than our initial target. We are financing the project with a combination of$6.30 million in cash we set aside for this project and $7.85 million in net LTGO bond proceeds. Repayment of the bonds will take place over the 30-year period of 2016 through 2045 at a fixed average annual payment of$399,888 which is $34,712 less per year than the City's current annual lease payment of$434,600. We recognize that occupying a building we own will result in a number of costs we haven't historically borne as a tenant. This will include a variety of facility maintenance expenses including the possibility of hiring an additional employee (more fully articulated in the following discussion). In acknowledgment of this, the 2017 General Fund Recurring Budget includes a new department titled "City Hall Operations and Maintenance" that will account for the variety of costs we anticipate we will incur. The budget amount of$303,918 is included in the budget and is part of the 0.87% increase noted above. Staffing Levels: Staffing levels in 2017 are currently anticipated to increase by 1.0 full-time equivalent employee (FTE) to 88.4 FTEs from the 87.4 FTEs included in the 2016 Budget. The addition of the single FTE is directly related to the fact that in 2017 we will be in a City Hall structure that we own and operate as opposed to the space we have leased from Northwest Christian Schools since the City's incorporation in 2003. While in the leased space, we have been the tenant and relied upon the lessor/landlord to address all facility maintenance issues including snow removal from parking lots and sidewalks;janitorial services; heating and cooling system maintenance and repairs; grounds maintenance; and general facility maintenance. Once in our own facility we will be responsible for all of these services, so between now and our anticipated September 2017 occupancy we will need to determine whether we can best address our needs by either hiring an employee or contracting out the variety of services. Beyond maintenance at City Hall we believe this position could also be utilized at the City's Police Precinct, CenterPlace and our maintenance shop. At this point we consider the expenditure appropriation as a "holding-place" for the necessary budgetary authority but rest assured we will hire an additional employee only if we believe we can keep them meaningfully engaged in meeting the City's maintenance needs. Taking into consideration that we contract for police services and are served by Fire Districts and a Library District, for a major city we are operating substantially below the normal employee count at a significantly reduced cost. Spokane Valley personnel costs are approximately 20% of the total General Fund recurring expenditures. Spokane Valley staff levels average about one employee for every 1,065 citizens while comparable cities in the State of Washington with populations between 30,000 and 100,000 average one employee for every 262 citizens. While the survey is not scientific, the low employee per citizen ratio indicates the City of Spokane Valley is operating at a low, yet effective staffing level. Since incorporation, the City has taken a conservative approach to adding new staff and 3 continues to have the lowest employee count of any Washington city with a population of 50,000 or greater. By all comparisons, the City of Spokane Valley is a lean, productive City government. Pavement Preservation Fund: Beginning in 2012, the City initiated spending of general fund, special revenue fund and capital project fund revenues and reserves for the purpose of financing our street preservation efforts. In 2017, our citizens will again see an aggressive program of repaving our roadways. Some may question paving roads that "don't look so bad" but the truth is the best time to repave is before a road deteriorates to the point that full reconstruction is necessary. Full reconstruction can cost substantially more than pavement preservation treatments such as crack sealing or grinding and repaving. This is why the City of Spokane Valley has committed critical financial resources to the preservation of our transportation infrastructure. We hope you are as proud of our fine road system as we are! For 2017, projected expenditures for preservation are $3,000,000 and we will pay for this with a combination of$340,800 in grants, $367,700 in Pavement Preservation Fund #311 reserves and $2,341,500 in transfers from other City funds consisting of: • $953,200 from the General Fund • $ 67,342 from Street O&M Fund #101 • $660,479 from REET 1 Capital Projects Fund #301 • $660,479 from REET 2 Capital Projects Fund #302 While Pavement Preservation is one of our highest service and budget priorities we find that sustaining historic levels of service is becoming more of a challenge with each passing year. The following section titled "Challenges" articulates the issues we are currently facing. Challenges Beyond the annual challenge of balancing the General Fund budget, the City of Spokane Valley has a number of on-going financial challenges. 1. Declining revenues in Street O&M Fund #101 that will impact our future ability to deliver historic service levels This Fund depends upon a combination of gas and telephone tax receipts. • Because the gas tax is a flat amount per gallon, and because each generation of newer vehicles get better gas mileage, we find our gas tax revenues have recently hovered somewhere between either flat or declining. Due to the State Legislature's increase in the gas tax we are seeing a bit of an increase in 2016 and this is projected to continue into 2017. • The 6% telephone utility tax generated $3.1 million in the first year of implementation in 2009. Since that time however we have experienced a steady decline and at this point are projecting 2017 revenues of just $2,200,000. 2. Balancing the cost of pavement preservation against other transportation and infrastructure needs • Pavement preservation has historically been financed from a combination of sources including: o General Fund dollars, o Street Fund money, o real estate excise tax (REET) receipts, 4 o grants, and o Civic Facility Replacement Fund #123 (Fund #123) reserves that were dedicated towards this purpose. Because Fund #123 reserves will be fully depleted in 2016, beginning in 2017 the City will be forced to dedicate more REET receipts towards pavement preservation if we wish to maintain historic levels of funding. • Street construction and reconstruction projects are typically financed through a combination of state and federal grants plus a City match that normally comes from REET receipts. The more we apply REET dollars towards pavement preservation projects, the less able we are to leverage this revenue source towards street construction and reconstruction projects. If one assumes we are able to obtain street construction grants requiring a 20% City match, then every $1 of REET money we set aside for this purpose leverages a $5 project. 3. Railroad Grade Separation and Quiet Zone Proiects (overpasses and underpasses) Bridging the Valley is a proposal to separate vehicle traffic from train traffic in the 42 mile corridor between Spokane and Athol, ID. The separation of railroad and roadway grades in this corridor is intended to promote future economic growth, traffic movement, traffic safety, aquifer protection in the event of an oil spill, and train whistle noise abatement. The underlying study outlined the need for a grade separation at four locations in Spokane Valley including: • Barker and Trent Road Overpass (estimated cost of$36.0 million), • Pines and Trent Underpass (estimated cost of$19.8 million), • Sullivan Road Overpass improvements (estimated cost of$16.1 million), and • Park Road Overpass (estimated cost of$19.0 million) Because grade separation projects are exceptionally expensive endeavors (totaling $90.9 million) and largely beyond our ability to finance through existing sources of internal revenue, the City has pursued grant funding from both the Federal and State Government over the past several years. We anticipate this is a discussion that will continue well into the future. 4. Grants and Declining Matching Funds City staff actively pursue funding commitments from other sources to help pay the cost of needed capital improvements related to pavement preservation; transportation including street construction and reconstruction; bridges; stormwater facilities; parks that benefit the community; and railroad grade separation projects. In 2017, a total of$23.58 million is budgeted to address capital projects and of this amount we anticipate $8.04 million (or 34.1%) of these costs will be offset with grant revenues. This figure is quite low in comparison to previous years and this is largely due to the City Hall project which is being financed with a combination of cash we set aside for this project and LTGO bond proceeds. If we exclude the $5.34 million budgeted for the City Hall project in 2017, the remaining capital projects total $18.24 million, of which $8.04 million (or 44.1%) is offset by grant revenues. Following is a history of the percentage of capital projects we have been able to cover with grant revenues: • 2017 Budget = 44.1% • 2016 Budget = 56.6% • 2015 Budget = 66.2% • 2014 Budget = 70.2% • 2013 Budget = 83.0% • 2012 Budget = 65.0% • 2011 Budget = 48.0% 5 Much of the deviation from year to year revolves around the amount of cash the City applies towards projects but we are always on the lookout for grant revenues to offset our costs. The City has historically maintained a fairly aggressive capital construction program and we will strive to do so in the future. The Budget for 2017 Strong but Guarded. Recognizing that fiscal health is at the core of providing good public services, one of the most important tests of fiscal management is the ability of a municipal enterprise to maintain basic services during an economic downturn. The creation and ongoing maintenance of financial reserves since incorporation has served its intended purpose of providing Spokane Valley the means to sustain critical public services during the turbulent economic conditions that began in 2008 and only recently subsided. The 2017 budget again reflects a prudent and guarded increase in continuation of service delivery capabilities. These increases are carefully considered and well within the means of the City. Service delivery cannot grow faster than the economic development of the City. Balanced Budget: Means exactly what it says - expenses have been balanced with known or reasonably predictable revenues with no increase in property tax or in sales tax rates for the City (lodging tax rates are generally not paid by residents). The budget is designed to maintain the healthy, positive fund balance at year-end providing the City's cash flow needs without costly borrowing. In pursuit of fiscal responsibility, special attention is given to limiting the growth in new programs and financial commitments. This approach allows available resources to be put toward sustaining services consistent with the City Council's priorities for 2017 and beyond. Future Concepts: The budget process is not static and Council, the citizens, and staff must collectively remain vigilant in our observance of economic trends that may impact current and future forecasts. Even as the 2017 Budget is adopted, we must remain mindful of the future economic opportunities and threats that might influence our multi-year forecast. Examples of potential impacts and adaptive future concepts are as follows: Retail Improvement Strategy - The City is actively engaged in growing our economy and in 2016 completed a retail improvement study. The analysis provides us with a better understanding of our retail trade area, retail demand, and demographics, and it is a tool that we believe we can leverage to attract businesses and facilitate growth in the City. The plan provides the City with retail strategies to support both existing retail and encourage new retail in an effort to retain local dollars and attract spending from outside our city limits. Tourism Enhancement Study—The previously noted Retail Improvement Study indicated that tourism related spending in Spokane Valley is underperforming. In order to address that finding the City commissioned a tourism enhancement study whose purpose will ultimately be to improve tourism and lodging activity by increasing overnight stays and tourism related spending, including dining and shopping sectors. This study was split into two phases and the first phase, which was completed in the March of 2016, focused on developing strategies. The second phase, which is anticipated to be complete in the latter part of 2016, will consider the potential feasibility and return on investment of those strategies identified in the first phase. 6 Comprehensive Plan —The City is currently engaged in the process of updating its Comprehensive Plan which contains an economic development element. Included in this element will be a summary of the local economy; an assessment of strengths and weaknesses; and policies, programs and projects to foster economic growth. Additionally, strategies from the previously mentioned Retail Improvement and Tourism Enhancement studies are incorporated into the comp plan. Among other things, the plan also streamlines land uses by consolidating many zones and reducing many development requirements. Additionally the plan is also designed to provide flexibility in an effort to encourage market driven growth. Acknowledgments I would like to acknowledge the citizens, City Council and staff for a long history of conservative spending and prudent fiscal planning. By saving and conserving the taxpayers' money, and by adopting prudent long-term fiscal policies, the City can provide essential services and balance its budget for many years to come. The City Council has set a path to ensure the long-term financial sustainability of the City. The management staff and employees have worked together to develop Business Plans and 2017 budget recommendations to achieve the Council's goal of sustainability. The Citizens of Spokane Valley should be proud of the strong financial condition of their City. We invite your examination and questions regarding the 2017 Budget. Respectfully, Mark Calhoun Acting City Manager CITY OF o .-- -'4\4\ ,p Kane 4,,•••.. Valley ® This page left intentionally blank. 8 crri Of 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 S �3 kaone 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall@spokanevalley.org 40000 Valle TO: City Manager and Members of the City Council FROM: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director SUBJECT: About the 2017 Budget and Budget Development Process The budget includes the financial planning and legal authority to obligate public funds. Additionally, the budget provides significant policy direction by the City Council to the staff and community. As a result, the City Council, staff and public are involved in establishing the budget for the City of Spokane Valley. The budget serves four functions: 1. It is a Policy Document The budget functions as a policy document in that the decisions made within the budget will reflect the general principles or plans that guide the actions taken for the future. As a policy document, the budget makes specific attempts to link desired goals and policy direction to the actual day-to-day activities of the City staff. 2. It is an Operational Guide The budget of the City reflects its operation. Activities of each City function and organization have been planned, debated, formalized, and described in the following sections. This process will help to maintain an understanding of the various operations of the City and how they relate to each other and to the attainment of the policy issues and goals of the City Council. 3. It is a Link with the General Public The budget provides a unique opportunity to allow and encourage public review of City operations. The budget describes the activities of the City, the reason or cause for those activities, future implications, and the direct relationship to the citizenry. 4. It is a Legally Required Financial Planning Tool The budget is a financial planning tool, which has been its most traditional use. In this light, preparing and adopting a budget is a State law requirement of all cities as stated in Title 35A of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW). The budget must be adopted as a balanced budget and must be in place prior to the beginning of the City's fiscal year. The budget is the legal authority to expend public moneys and controls those expenditures by limiting the amount of the appropriation at the fund level. The revenues of the City are estimated, along with available cash carry-forward, to indicate funds available. The budget takes into account unforeseen contingencies and provides for the need for periodic adjustments. 9 2017 BUDGET DEVELOPMENT PROCESS Historically the City has utilized a budgeting approach that assumed for most functions of government that the current year's budget was indicative of the base required for the following year. However, with the recent volatility seen in the economy with the Great Recession, the City has moved to a Budget development process that consciously reviews service levels in each department and determines the appropriate level of funding that meets Council goals relative to available resources. The 2017 Budget development process began at the March 15, 2016 Council workshop where among other topics, Council and staff discussed the budget in general terms. In mid-April 2016 the Finance Department notified City Departments that their 2017 revenue and expenditure estimates were due by mid-May. Through the balance of May and early June, the City Manager's office and Finance Department worked to prepare budget worksheets that were communicated to the City Council at a Budget workshop held June 14, 2016. Following the workshop, the Finance Department continued work on the budget including refinements of revenue and expenditure estimates and through July and August, the Finance Department and City Manager reviewed updated budget projections. By the time the 2017 Budget is scheduled to be adopted on November 8, 2016, the Council will have had an opportunity to discuss it on seven separate occasions, including two public hearings to gather input from citizens: June 14 Council budget workshop August 9 Admin report: Estimated 2017 revenues and expenditures September 13 Public hearing #1 on 2017 revenues and expenditures September 25 City Manager's presentation of preliminary 2017 Budget October 11 Public hearing #2 on 2017 Budget October 25 First reading on ordinance adopting the 2017 Budget November 8 Second reading on ordinance adopting the 2017 Budget Once adopted, the final operating budget is published, distributed, and made available to the public. After the budget is adopted, the City enters a budget implementation and monitoring stage. Throughout the year, expenditures are monitored by the Finance Department and department directors to ensure that actual expenditures are in compliance with the approved budget. The Finance Department provides the City Manager and City Council with monthly reports to keep them abreast of the City's financial condition and individual department compliance with approved appropriation levels. Any budget amendments made during the year are adopted by City Council ordinance. The City Manager is authorized to transfer budgeted amounts within a fund; however, any revisions that alter the total expenditures of a fund, or that affect the number of authorized employee positions, salary ranges or other conditions of employment must be approved by the City Council. When the City Council determines that it is in the best interest of the City to increase or decrease the appropriation for a particular fund, it may do so by ordinance adopted by Council after holding one public hearing. 10 BUDGET PRINCIPLES • Department directors have primary responsibility for formulating budget proposals in line with City Council and City Manager priority direction, and for implementing them once they are approved. • The Finance Department is responsible for coordinating the overall preparation and administration of the City's budget. This function is fulfilled in compliance with applicable State of Washington statutes governing local government budgeting practices. • The Finance Department assists department staff in identifying budget problems, formulating solutions and alternatives, and implementing any necessary corrective actions. • Interfund charges will be based on recovery of costs associated with providing those services. • Budget amendments requiring City Council approval will occur through the ordinance process at the fund level prior to fiscal year end. • The City's budget presentation will be directed at displaying the City's services plan in a Council/constituent friendly format. • No long term debt will be incurred without identification of a revenue source to repay the debt. Long term debt will be incurred for capital purposes only. • The City will strive to maintain equipment replacement funds in an amount necessary to replace the equipment at the end of its useful life. Life cycle assumptions and required contributions will be reviewed annually as part of the budget process. New operations in difficult economic times may make it difficult to fund this principle in some years. • The City will pursue an ending general fund balance at a level of no less than 50% of recurring expenditures. This figure is based upon an evaluation of both cash flow and operating needs. BASIS OF ACCOUNTING AND BUDGETING Accounting Accounting records for the City are maintained in accordance with methods prescribed by the State Auditor under the authority of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW), Chapter 43.09.20, and in compliance with generally accepted accounting principles as set forth by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board. Basis of Presentation - Fund Accounting The accounts of the City of Spokane Valley are organized on the basis of funds, each of which is considered a separate accounting entity. Each fund is accounted for with a separate set of double- entry accounts that comprise its assets, liabilities, fund equity, revenues and expenditures or expenses, as appropriate. The City's resources are allocated to and accounted for in individual funds depending on their intended purpose. The following are the fund types used by the City of Spokane Valley: 11 Governmental Fund Types Governmental funds are used to account for activities typically associated with state and local government operations. All governmental fund types are accounted for on a spending or "financial flows" measurement focus, which means that typically only current assets and current liabilities are included on related balance sheets. The operating statements of governmental funds measure changes in financial position, rather than net income. They present increases (revenues and other financing sources) and decreases (expenditures and other financing uses) in net current assets. There are four governmental fund types used by the City of Spokane Valley: 1. General Fund This fund is the primary fund of the City of Spokane Valley. It accounts for all financial resources except those required or elected to be accounted for in another fund. 2. Special Revenue Funds These funds account for revenues that are legally restricted or designated to finance particular activities of the City of Spokane Valley. Special Revenue funds include: • #101 — Street Fund • #103 — Paths &Trails Fund • #104 — Hotel / Motel Tax—Tourism Facilities Fund • #105 — Hotel / Motel Tax Fund • #106 — Solid Waste Fund • #107 — PEG Fund • #120 — CenterPlace Operating Reserve Fund • #121 — Service Level Stabilization Reserve Fund • #122 —Winter Weather Reserve Fund • #123 — Civic Facilities Replacement Fund 3. Debt Service Funds These funds account for financial resources which are designated for the retirement of debt. Debt Service Funds are comprised of the #204 — LTGO Debt Service Fund. 4. Capital Proiect Funds These funds account for financial resources, which are designated for the acquisition or construction of general government capital projects. Capital Project Funds include: • #301 — REET 1 Capital Projects Fund • #302 — REET 2 Capital Projects Fund • #303 — Streets Capital Projects Fund • #309 — Parks Capital Projects Fund • #310 — Civic Facilities Capital Projects Fund • #311 — Pavement Preservation Fund • #312 — Capital Reserve Fund • #313 — City Hall Construction Fund • #314 — Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund 12 Proprietary Fund Types A fifth type of fund classification are the Proprietary Funds that are used to account for activities similar to those found in the private sector where the intent of the governing body is to finance the full cost of providing services based on the commercial model which uses a flow of economic resources approach. Under this approach, the operating statements for the proprietary funds focus on a measurement of net income (revenues and expenses) and both current and non-current assets and liabilities are reported on related balance sheets. Their reported fund equity (total net assets) is segregated into restricted, unrestricted and invested in capital assets classifications. As described below, there are two generic fund types in this category: 1. Enterprise Funds These funds account for operations that provide goods or services to the general public and are supported primarily by user charges. This type of fund includes: • #402 — Stormwater Management Fund • #403 —Aquifer Protection Area Fund 2. Internal Service Funds These funds account for operations that provide goods or services to other departments or funds of the City. This type of fund includes: • #501 — Equipment Rental and Replacement Fund • #502 — Risk Management Fund Basis of Accounting Basis of accounting refers to when revenues and expenditures are recognized, recorded in the accounting system and ultimately reported in the financial statements. • Modified Accrual Basis of Accounting is used for all governmental funds. Modified accrual recognizes revenues when they become both measurable and available to finance expenditures of the current period. • Accrual Basis of Accounting is used for enterprise and internal service funds. Under this system revenues and expenses are recognized in the period incurred rather than when cash is either received or disbursed. Budgets and Budgetary Accounting Annual appropriation budgets are adopted for all funds with Governmental Funds utilizing a modified cash basis of accounting for budget purposes, and Proprietary Funds utilizing a working capital approach. Budgets are adopted at the fund level that constitutes the legal authority for expenditures and annual appropriations for all funds lapse at the end of the fiscal period. EXPLANATION OF MAJOR REVENUE SOURCES General Fund #001 • Property Tax Property taxes play an essential role in the finances of the municipal budget. State law limits the City to a $3.60 levy per $1,000 assessed valuation, deducting from there the levy of up to $1.50 by the Spokane County Fire Districts #1 and #8, along with deducting up to $0.50 for the Library District, which leaves the City with the authority to levy up to $1.60 for its own purposes. The levy amount must be established by ordinance by November 30th prior to the levy year. 13 • Retail Sales and Use 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 Department of Revenue who then remits the taxes back to the various agencies that have imposed the tax. The allocation of the 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% Criminal Justice 0.10% Spokane Public Facilities District 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. • Criminal Justice Sales Tax Local Sales Tax for Criminal Justice funding is to be used solely for criminal justice purposes, such as the City's law enforcement contract. This tax is authorized at 1/10 of 1% of retail sales transacted in the County. Of the total amount collected, the State distributes 10% of the receipts to Spokane County, with the remainder allocated on a per capita basis to the County and cities within the County. • Public Safety Sales Tax Beginning in 2005, an additional 0.1% voter approved increase in sales tax was devoted to public safety purposes. This 0.1% was approved by the voters again in August 2009. Of the total amount 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. • Gambling Tax Gambling tax revenues must be spent primarily on law enforcement purposes pertaining to gambling. Funds remaining after necessary expenditures for such enforcement purposes may be used for any general government purpose. Gambling taxes are to be paid quarterly to the City, no later than the last day of January, April, July and October. The City imposes a tax on the following forms of gambling at the following rates: Bingo (5% gross, less prizes); Raffles (5% gross, less prizes); Punchboards and Pulltabs (5% gross, less prizes); Amusement Games (2% gross, less prizes); Card playing (6% gross). • Leasehold Excise Tax Taxes on property owned by state or local governments and leased to private parties (City's share). • Franchise Fees Cable TV is the only franchise fee levied in the City at a rate of 5% of gross revenues. This is a fee levied on private utilities for the right to use city streets, alleys, and other public properties. 14 • State-Shared Revenues State-shared revenues are received from liquor sales, marijuana revenues, and motor vehicle excise taxes. These taxes are collected by the State of Washington and shared with local governments based on population. State-shared revenues are distributed on either a monthly or quarterly basis, although not all quarterly revenues are distributed in the same month of the quarter. The 2016 population figure used in the 2017 Budget is 94,160 as reported by the Office of Financial Management for Washington State on April 1, 2016. This figure is important when determining distribution of State shared revenues on a per capita basis. • Fines and Forfeitures / Public Safety Fines and penalties are collected as a result of Municipal Court rulings, false alarm fees, and other miscellaneous rule infractions. All court fines and penalties are shared with the State, with the City, on average, retaining less than 50% of the amount collected. • Community Development Community Development revenues are largely composed of fees for building permits, plan reviews, and right of way permits. • Recreation Program Fees The Parks and Recreation Department charges fees for selected recreation programs. These fees offset direct costs related to providing the program. • CenterPlace Fees The Parks and Recreation Department charges fees for use of CenterPlace. Uses include regional meetings, weddings, receptions and banquets. Rental rooms include classrooms, the great room and dining rooms. • Investment Interest The City earns investment interest on sales tax money held by the State of Washington prior to the distribution of the taxes to the City, as well as on City initiated investments. Street Fund #101 • Motor Vehicle Fuel Excise Tax (gas tax) The State of Washington collects a $0.4940 per gallon motor vehicle fuel tax at the pump. Of this amount, the State remits a portion of the tax back to cities on a per capita basis. For 2017 the Municipal Research and Services Center estimates the distribution back to cities will be $21.76 per person. Based upon a City of Spokane Valley population of 94,160 (per the Washington State Office of Financial Management on April 1, 2016) we anticipate the City will collect $2,048,900 in 2017. RCW 47.30.050 specifies that 0.42% of this tax must be expended for paths and trails activities and based upon the 2017 revenue estimate this computes to $8,600. The balance of $2,040,300 will be credited to Fund #101 for Street maintenance and operations. • Telephone Utility Tax The City of Spokane Valley levied a 6% telephone utility tax via Ordinance #08-014 with collections beginning in 2009. Telephone companies providing this service pay the tax to the City monthly. Telephone tax has been estimated at $2.2 million for 2017. 15 Paths & Trails Fund #103 Cities are required to spend 0.42% of the motor vehicle fuel tax receipts on paths and trails (please see the explanation for Street Fund #101) which we anticipate will be $8,600 in 2017. Because the amount collected in any given year is relatively small, it is typical to accumulate State distributions for several years until adequate dollars are available for a project. Hotel / Motel Tax— Tourism Facilities Fund #104 The City imposes a 1.3% tax under RCW 67.28.181 on all charges made for the furnishing of lodging at hotels, motels, and similar establishments (including bed and breakfasts and RV parks) for a continuous period of less than one month. The revenues generated by this tax may only be used for capital expenditures for acquiring, constructing, making improvements to or other related capital expenditures for large sporting venues, or venues for tourism-related facilities. This tax is estimated to generate $377,000 in 2017. Hotel / Motel Tax Fund #105 The City imposes a 2% tax under RCW 67.28.180 on all charges made for the furnishing of lodging at hotels, motels, and similar establishments (including bed and breakfasts and RV parks) for a continuous period of less than one month. The tax is taken as a credit against the 6.5% state sales tax, so that the total tax that a patron pays in retail sales tax and hotel/motel tax combined is equal to the retail sales tax in the jurisdiction. The revenues generated by this tax may be used solely for paying for tourism promotion and for the acquisition and/or operation of tourism-related facilities. This tax is estimated to generate $580,000 in 2017. Solid Waste Fund #106 Under the City's contract for solid waste transfer, transport and disposal services with Sunshine Recyclers, Inc., Sunshine pays an annual contract administrative fee of $125,000 to the City. This fee is used by the City to offset contract administrative costs and solid waste management within the City, including solid waste public educational efforts. PEG Fund #107 Under the City's cable franchise, the franchise grantee remits to the City as a capital contribution in support of Public Education Government (PEG) capital requirements an amount equal to $0.35 per subscriber per month to be paid to the City on a quarterly basis for the life of the franchise. Capital contributions collected under this agreement are allocated to PEG capital uses exclusively. PEG capital uses include, in part, the set-up of equipment in the City Council Chambers that allows Spokane Valley to broadcast Council meetings both live and through subsequent reviews via digital recordings available on the City's website. LTGO Debt Service Fund #204 This fund is used to account for the accumulation of resources for, and the payment of limited tax general obligation (LTGO) bonds also referred to as councilmanic or non-voted bonds. When LTGO bonds are issued the City irrevocably pledges the full faith, credit and resources necessary to make timely payments of principal and interest, within constitutional and statutory limitations pertaining to non-voted general obligations. In 2003 the City issued $9,430,000 in limited tax general obligation (LTGO) bonds the proceeds of which were used to finance both the construction of CenterPlace and road and street improvements surrounding the facility. In 2014 the City refunded the LTGO bonds in order to take advantage of lower interest rates which resulted in a reduction in subsequent annual bond repayment (much like refinancing a home mortgage). At the completion of the bond refunding there remained $7,035,000 of LTGO bonds. Of this total: 16 • $5,650,000 remained on the original debt used towards the construction of CenterPlace. These bonds will be paid off in annual installments over the 20-year period ending December 1, 2033. Annual debt service payments on these bonds are provided by the Spokane Public Facilities District. At January 1, 2017, the outstanding balance on this portion of the bond issue will be $5,065,000. • $1,385,000 remained on the original debt used towards the road and street improvements. These bonds will be paid off in annual installments over the 10-year period ending December 1, 2023. Annual debt service payments on these bonds are provided by equal distributions from the 1st and 2nd quarter percent real estate excise tax. At January 1, 2016, the outstanding balance on this portion of the bond issue will be $995,000. In 2016 the City issued $7,275,000 in LTGO bonds, the proceeds of which will be used to finance the construction of a new City Hall building along with $6.3 million of City cash that has been set aside for this purpose. These bonds will be paid off in annual installments over the 30-year period ending December 1, 2045. Annual debt service payments on these bonds are provided by transfers in from the General Fund. At January 1, 2017, the outstanding balance on the bond issue will be $7,200,000. REET 1 Capital Projects Fund #301 Under Washington State Law, RCW 82.46.010, the City is allowed to impose an excise tax on each sale of real property at the rate of one-quarter of one percent of the selling price. The revenue generated is used for financing capital projects as specified in the capital facilities plan under the Growth Management Act. REET 2 Capital Projects Fund #302 Under Washington State Law, RCW 82.46.010, the City is allowed to impose an additional excise tax on each sale of real property at the rate of one-quarter of one percent of the selling price. The revenue generated is used for financing public works capital projects as specified in the capital facilities plan under the Growth Management Act. Stormwater Management Fund #402 A stormwater fee is imposed upon every developed parcel within the City, which is an annual charge of$21 for each single family unit and $21 per 3,160 square feet of impervious surface for all other properties. These charges are uniform for the same class of customers and service facilities. These fees are estimated to generate $1,860,000 in 2017. Aquifer Protection Area (APA) Fund #403 These are voter approved fees, the proceeds of which are applied to aquifer protection related capital construction projects. Fees are collected by Spokane County and remitted to the City twice each year. These fees are estimated to generate $460,000 in 2017. Fees include: • An annual fee of$15 per household for the withdrawal of water from properties within the APA. • An annual fee of$15 per household for on-site sewage disposal by properties within the APA. • For commercial properties an annual fee ranging from $15 to $960 depending upon water meter size. 17 Interfund Transfers Many funds receive a portion of their revenues from other funds in the form of an interfund transfer. These transfers typically represent payments for either services rendered by one fund for another or a concentration of revenues for a specific project or purpose. The following interfund transfers are planned for 2017: out: 001 101 105 106 301 302 310 312 402 Total In 001 0 39,700 30,000 40,425 0 0 490,500 0 13,400 614,025 204 397,350 0 0 0 79,426 79,425 0 0 0 556,201 303 0 0 0 0 437,002 1,173,230 0 1,760,000 0 3,370,232 309 160,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 561,915 0 721,915 In: 311 953,200 67,342 0 0 660,479 660,479 0 0 0 2,341,500 314 1,200,000 0 0 0 280,079 0 0 0 0 1,480,079 501 36,600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36,600 502 350,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 350,000 9,470,552 Total in Total Out 3,097,150 107,042 30,000 40,425 1,456,986 1,913,134 490,500 2,321,915 13,400 9,470,552 Total out 0 #001 - General Fund is budgeted to transfer out $3,097,150 including: • $397,350 to Fund #204 - LTGO Debt Service Fund for bond payments on the 2016 LTGO Bonds for the City Hall construction. • $160,000 to Fund #309 - Park Capital Projects Fund for park related projects. • $953,200 to Fund #311 - Pavement Preservation Fund for pavement preservation projects. • $1,200,000 to Fund #314 - Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund for the design of the Pines Road Grade Separation Project. • $36,600 to Fund #501 - Equipment Rental and Replacement Fund to fund a CenterPlace kitchen equipment replacement reserve. • $350,000 to Fund #502 - Risk Management Fund for the 2017 property and liability insurance premium. #101 - Street Fund is budgeted to transfer out $107,042 including: • $39,700 to Fund #001 -General Fund to cover administrative costs. • $67,342 to Fund #311 - Pavement Preservation Fund for pavement preservation projects. #105 - Hotel / Motel Tax Fund is budgeted to transfer $30,000 to Fund #001 - General Fund for the purpose of financing advertising at CenterPlace. #106 - Solid Waste Fund is budgeted to transfer $40,425 to Fund #001 under a 5-year plan to reimburse the General Fund for expenditures made during 2013 and 2014 for the solid waste program. #301 - REET 1 Capital Projects Fund is budgeted to transfer out $1,456,986 including: • $79,426 to Fund #204 - LTGO Debt Service Fund to pay a portion of the annual payment on the 2014 LTGO bonds. • $437,002 to Fund #303 - Street Capital Projects Fund that will be applied towards grant matches for street construction projects. • $660,479 to Fund #311 - Pavement Preservation Fund for pavement preservation projects. • $280,079 to Fund #314 - Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund for design services for the Barker Road Grade Separation project. 18 #302 — REET 2 Capital Projects Fund is budgeted to transfer out $1,913,134 including: • $79,425 to Fund #204 — LTGO Debt Service Fund to pay a portion of the annual payment on the 2014 LTGO bonds. • $1,173,230 to Fund #303 — Street Capital Projects Fund that will be applied towards grant matches for street construction projects. • $660,479 to Fund #311 — Pavement Preservation Fund for pavement preservation projects. #310 — Civic Facility Capital Projects Fund is budgeted to transfer $490,500 to Fund #001 — General Fund to cover lease payments for the current City Hall location in years in which the City has both a lease payment and a bond payment for the new City Hall building. #312 — Capital Reserve Fund is budgeted to transfer $1,760,000 to Fund #303 — Street Capital Projects Fund that will be applied towards the Sullivan Road West Bridge Replacement project and removal and reconstruction of Euclid Ave. (Flora to Barker) after the County's installation of the sewer system and $561,915 to Fund #309 — Parks Capital Projects Fund for the Pines to Evergreen and Sullivan to Corbin segments of the Appleway trail. #402 — Stormwater Fund is budgeted to transfer $13,400 to Fund #001 — General Fund to cover administrative costs. SIGNIFICANT ASSUMPTIONS IN THE 2017 BUDGET Budget Summary for All Funds • Based upon funding levels anticipated in the 2017 budget, City staff will strive to maintain adequate levels of service. • Appropriations for all City Funds will total $80.7 million including $23.6 million in capital expenditures, comprised in-part of: o $7.2 million in Fund #303 Street Capital Projects. o $3.9 million in Fund #309 Park Capital Projects. o $3 million in Fund #311 Pavement Preservation projects. o $5.3 million in Fund #313 City Hall Construction. o $2 million in Fund #314 Railroad Grade Separation Projects. o $450,000 in Fund #402 Stormwater Management projects. o $530,000 in Fund #403 Aquifer Protection Area projects. • To partially offset the $23.6 million in capital costs, we anticipate $8 million in grant revenues which results in 34.1% of capital expenditures being covered with State and Federal money. • Budgets will be adopted across 25 separate funds. • The full time equivalent employee (FTE) count will be 88.4 employees compared to 87.4 in the prior year as a result of one FTE being added for the new City Hall Operations & Maintenance Department. • The 2017 Budget reflects the fourth consecutive year the City will set aside City monies in an amount equivalent to 6% of General Fund recurring expenditures for pavement preservation in Fund #311 — Pavement Preservation. This 6% equals $2,341,500. • Positions and salary ranges are based on the City's compensation and classification plan. • Payroll tax and benefit amounts are based on staff benefit plans. • Contract costs for public safety, park maintenance, aquatics and street maintenance are based on estimates by City staff. • The City is setting money aside in Fund #501 — Equipment Rental and Replacement for the eventual replacement of its vehicles as well as a reserve to replace equipment in the kitchen at CenterPlace. 19 2017 General Fund Revenues • Total recurring 2017 revenues are estimated at $41,462,500 as compared to $39,721,428 in 2016. This is an increase of$1,741,072 or 4.38%. • The two largest sources of revenue continue to be Sales Tax and Property Tax which are collectively estimated to account for 82.1% of 2017 General Fund recurring revenues. • The 2017 general sales tax estimate (excluding criminal justice and public safety sales taxes) is reflective of 2016 receipts to date and are currently estimated at $19.9 million which reflects an increase of$1,371,600 or 7.42% over the 2016 estimate. • The Property Tax levy does not include the potential annual increase allowed by Initiative #747 which was approved by the voters in November 2001 through their approval of Initiative #747 and the subsequent action by the State Legislature in November 2007. o The 2017 levy is estimated at $11,614,500. o The levy assumes we start with the 2016 levy of$11,489,518, forgo the potential annual increase allowed by State law, and finally add taxes related to new construction which we estimate to be $125,000. • Franchise fees and business registrations are primarily based on projected receipts in 2016. • State shared revenues are based upon a combination of historical collections including 2016 collections through July, and per capita distribution figures reported by the Municipal Research and Services Center. • Fines and forfeitures are estimated by Spokane Valley and based on historical collections. • Building permit and land use fees are estimated by Spokane Valley and based on historic collections. 2017 General Fund Expenditures • Total 2017 recurring expenditures are budgeted at $40,053,822 as compared to $39,707,433 in 2016. This is an increase of$346,389 or 0.87%. • The City commitment of 6% of recurring General Fund expenditures to pavement preservation equals $2,341,500 and is computed by multiplying total recurring expenditures prior to adding the pavement preservation element ($2,341,500 / $39,100,622 = 6%). The $2,341,500 that is transferred to Pavement Preservation Fund #311 is comprised of the following: o $953,200 from General Fund #001 o $67,342 from Street Fund #101 o $660,479 from REET 1 Capital Projects Fund #301 o $660,479 from REET 2 Capital Projects Fund #302 • 2017 Nonrecurring expenditures total $2,389,850 and include: o $100,000 for Information Technology expenditures including: ■ $20,000 for four copiers to replace those that have reached end of life ■ $80,000 for IT capital items for technology set-up at the new City Hall o $513,100 for the last year of the lease at the current City Hall location o $145,000 for the Police Department CAD / RMS o $50,000 for retail recruitment services o $12,000 for repair of drain pipes and gutter lines at the pools o $345,000 for replacement of the Great Room audio/visual equipment at CenterPlace o $24,750 for carpet replacement in various rooms at CenterPlace o $1,200,000 transfer out to the Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund #314 to fund the design of the Pines Road Grade Separation project. 20 General Fund Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures and Fund Balance • 2017 recurring revenues are anticipated to exceed recurring expenditures by $1,408,678. • Total 2017 expenditures are anticipated to exceed total revenues by $450,247. o This is entirely due to the nonrecurring expenditures previously discussed which equal $2,389,850 and is not a result of ongoing operating costs overwhelming revenues. In fact it is because of the City's strong financial position that we're able to make these acquisitions. • The total unrestricted General Fund ending fund balance is anticipated to be $22,852,588 at the end of 2017 which is 57.05% of total recurring expenditures of$40,053,822. Our goal is to maintain an ending fund balance of at least 50.0%. Highlights of Other Funds Revenues • Motor vehicle fuel tax (MVFT) revenue that is collected by the State and remitted to the City is estimated to be $2,048,900 according to per capita estimates provided by the Municipal Research and Services Center. Of this amount, $2,040,300 will be credited to the Street O&M Fund and 0.42% or $8,600 to the Paths and Trails Fund. • Telephone taxes that are remitted to the City and support Street Fund operations and maintenance are anticipated at $2,200,000. • Real estate excise tax (REET) revenue is computed by the City and is primarily used to match grant funded street projects as well as pay a portion of the annual payment on the 2014 general obligation bonds. In 2017 we estimate these revenues to be $800,000 per each 1/4% for a total of$1,600,000. • Hotel/Motel tax revenues are computed by the City and are dedicated to the promotion of visitors and tourism. In 2017 we estimate the tax will generate $957,000, which includes $580,000 in Fund #105 Hotel / Motel Tax Fund from the 2% tax and $377,000 in Fund #104 Hotel / Motel Tax—Tourism Facilities Fund from the 1.3% tax that was effective as of July 1, 2015. • The Stormwater Management Fee is based on an equivalent residential unit (ERU) that is equal to 3,160 square feet of impervious surface that is billed at a rate of$21 per single family residence and $21 per ERU for commercial properties (an ERU for a commercial property is computed as total square feet of impervious surface divided by 3,160). In 2017 we estimate this will fee will generate $1,860,000. • The Aquifer Protection Area Fund is expected to generate $460,000 in fees that are collected on the City's behalf by Spokane County and remitted in two installments during the year. • Grant revenues that will be applied to a variety of construction projects are estimated at $8,041,108 in 2017. By fund we anticipate grant revenues as follows: o Fund #106 —Solid Waste Fund - $26,800 o Fund #303 —Street Capital Projects - $3,756,320 o Fund #309 — Parks Capital Projects - $3,217,267 o Fund #311 — Pavement Preservation - $340,800 o Fund #314— Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund - $489,921 o Fund #402 —Stormwater Fund - $210,000 Expenditures • Fund #101 — Street Fund appropriations include: o a $67,342 transfer to Pavement Preservation Fund #311 for pavement preservation projects o $75,000 for installation of durable striping at Trent and Argonne o $30,000 for spare traffic signal equipment o $15,000 for battery backups for intersections 21 • Fund #301 — REET 1 Capital Projects Fund includes a $1,456,986 appropriation to cover: o a $79,426 transfer to LTGO Bond Debt Service Fund #204 to pay one-half of the City's annual repayment of the 2014 LTGO Bonds. o a $437,002 transfer to Street Capital Projects Fund #303 to partially offset the cost of street construction / reconstruction projects. o a $660,479 transfer to Pavement Preservation Fund #311 for pavement preservation projects o a $280,079 transfer to Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund #314 for design of the Barker Road Grade Separation project. • Fund #302 — REET 2 Capital Projects Fund includes a $1,913,134 appropriation to cover: o a $79,425 transfer to LTGO Bond Debt Service Fund #204 to pay one-half of the City's annual repayment of the 2014 LTGO Bonds. o a $1,173,230 transfer to Street Capital Projects Fund #303 to partially offset the cost of street construction / reconstruction projects. o a $660,479 transfer to Pavement Preservation Fund #311 for pavement preservation projects • Fund #303— Street Capital Projects Fund includes an appropriation of$7,166,649 for a variety of street construction projects. Included in the projects are the Sullivan and Euclid PCC for which we are appropriating $2,150,000 in 2017 and the removal and reconstruction of Euclid Ave. from Flora to Barker after the County installs sewer for which we are appropriating $1,750,000 in 2017. • Fund #309— Parks Capital Projects includes a $3,904,182 appropriation to cover a variety of City park improvements that will be financed through a combination of a $160,000 transfer from the General Fund #001, a $561,915 transfer in from the Capital Reserve Fund #312, and $3,217,267 in grant proceeds. • Fund #311 — Pavement Preservation includes $3,000,000 of pavement preservation projects that will be financed through transfers from other City funds as outlined above under the heading of General Fund Recurring Expenditures. • Fund #312 — Capital Reserve includes $1,760,000 in transfers to Fund #303 — Street Capital Projects that will be applied towards the Sullivan Road West Bridge Replacement project in the amount of$10,000 and towards the removal and reconstruction of Euclid Ave. from Flora to Barker after the County installs sewer in the amount of$1,750,000. It also includes $561,915 in transfers to Fund #309 — Parks Capital Projects that will be applied toward the Pines to Evergreen and Sullivan to Corbin segments of the Appleway trail. • Fund #313— Civic Facilities Capital Projects includes a $5,344,219 appropriation to cover professional service fees related to the construction of the new City Hall building. • Fund #314— Railroad Grade Separation Projects includes appropriations in the amount of $1,970,000 which consists of$770,000 towards the design of the Barker Road Grade Separation project and $1,200,000 towards the design of the Pines Road Grade Separation project. 22 • Fund #402 - Stormwater Fund includes $710,000 for nonrecurring expenditures including: o $450,000 for various capital projects o $260,000 for the studies related to the City's Stormwater permit and the watershed • Fund #403 - Aquifer Protection Area Fund includes a $530,000 appropriation various capital projects. 23 CITY OF o .-- -'4\4\ ,p Kane 4,,•••.. Valley ® This page left intentionally blank. 24 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 2017 Budget Summary Estimated Estimated Beginning Ending Fund Fund Total Fund Annual Appropriation Funds No. Balance Revenues Sources Appropriations Balance General Fund 001 23,302,835 41,993,425 65,296,260 42,443,672 22,852,588 Street Fund 101 1,468,077 4,403,168 5,871,245 4,851,244 1,020,001 Paths&Trails Fund 103 37,254 8,600 45,854 0 45,854 Hotel/Motel Tax-Tourism Facilities Fund 104 559,347 377,000 936,347 0 936,347 Hotel/Motel Tax Fund 105 199,001 580,500 779,501 634,000 145,501 Solid Waste 106 42,874 151,800 194,674 151,800 42,874 PEG Fund 107 236,682 80,000 316,682 262,500 54,182 CenterPlace Operating Reserve Fund 120 300,000 0 300,000 0 300,000 Service Level Stabilization Fund 121 5,468,289 21,900 5,490,189 0 5,490,189 Winter Weather Reserve Fund 122 500,000 600 500,600 500,000 600 City Facilities Repair&Replacement 123 0 0 0 0 0 LTGO Bond Debt Service Fund 204 4,049 935,951 940,000 940,000 0 REET 1 Capital Projects Fund 301 1,383,899 801,700 2,185,599 1,456,986 728,613 REET 2 Capital Projects Fund 302 1,897,795 801,700 2,699,495 1,913,134 786,361 Street Capital Projects 303 75,538 7,166,649 7,242,187 7,166,649 75,538 Park Capital Projects Fund 309 10,561 3,939,982 3,950,543 3,904,182 46,361 Civic Facilities Capital Projects Fund 310 1,329,214 1,200 1,330,414 490,500 839,914 Pavement Preservation Fund 311 2,419,741 2,682,300 5,102,041 3,050,000 2,052,041 Capital Reserve Fund 312 4,314,601 1,000 4,315,601 2,321,915 1,993,686 City Hall Construction Fund 313 5,344,219 0 5,344,219 5,344,219 0 Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund 314 0 1,970,000 1,970,000 1,970,000 0 48,893,976 65,917,475 114,811,451 77,400,801 37,410,650 Estimated Estimated Beginning Ending Fund Working Total Working Working Capital Funds No. Capital Revenues Sources Appropriations Capital Stormwater Management Fund 402 1,876,010 2,072,500 3,948,510 2,459,072 1,489,438 Aquifer Protection Area Fund 403 896,660 460,000 1,356,660 530,000 826,660 Equipment Rental&Replacement Fund 501 1,025,997 185,029 1,211,026 0 1,211,026 Risk Management Fund 502 194,383 350,000 544,383 350,000 194,383 3,993,050 3,067,529 7,060,579 3,339,072 3,721,507 Total of all Funds 52,887,026 68,985,004 121,872,030 80,739,873 41,132,157 25 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/11/2016 2017 Budget 2016 2017 Difference Between As As Proposed 2016 and 2017 Adopted Amendment Amended Budget $ #001 -GENERAL FUND RECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Property Tax 11,479,200 0 11,479,200 11,614,500 135,300 1.18% Sales Tax 18,210,500 270,000 18,480,500 19,852,100 1,371,600 7.42% Sales Tax-Public Safety 867,400 0 867,400 919,000 51,600 5.95% Sales Tax-Criminal Justice 1,556,400 0 1,556,400 1,669,000 112,600 7.23% Gambling Tax and Leasehold Excise Tax 333,700 0 333,700 341,500 7,800 2.34% Franchise Fees/Business Registration 1,154,000 0 1,154,000 1,200,000 46,000 3.99% State Shared Revenues 2,024,528 0 2,024,528 2,104,600 80,072 3.96% Fines and Forfeitures/Public Safety 1,443,500 0 1,443,500 1,361,000 (82,500) (5.72%) Community Development 1,491,500 0 1,491,500 1,449,300 (42,200) (2.83%) Recreation Program Revenues 595,200 13,000 608,200 640,900 32,700 5.38% Miscellaneous Department Revenue 95,900 0 95,900 94,000 (1,900) (1.98%) Miscellaneous&Investment Interest 103,500 0 103,500 133,500 30,000 28.99% Transfers in-#101 (street admin) 39,700 0 39,700 39,700 0 0.00% Transfers in-#105(h/m tax-CP advertising) 30,000 0 30,000 30,000 0 0.00% Transfers in-#402(storm admin) 13,400 0 13,400 13,400 0 0.00% Total Recurring Revenues 39,438,428 283,000 39,721,428 41,462,500 1,741,072 4.38% Expenditures City Council 506,869 0 506,869 542,872 36,003 7.10% City Manager 717,303 0 717,303 724,435 7,132 0.99% Legal 479,951 15,000 494,951 509,694 14,743 2.98% Public Safety 24,703,749 0 24,703,749 24,950,372 246,623 1.00% Deputy City Manager 737,002 0 737,002 750,277 13,275 1.80% Finance/IT 1,253,080 0 1,253,080 1,282,460 29,380 2.34% Human Resources 255,694 0 255,694 262,417 6,723 2.63% Public Works 966,870 0 966,870 981,932 15,062 1.56% City Hall Operations and Maintenance 0 0 0 303,918 303,918 0.00% Community&Economic Dvlpmnt-Admin 272,107 0 272,107 282,962 10,855 3.99% Community&Economic Dvlpmnt-Econ Dev 545,157 0 545,157 683,632 138,475 25.40% Community&Economic Dvlpmnt-Dev Svc 1,486,637 0 1,486,637 1,418,984 (67,653) (4.55%) Community&Economic Dvlpmnt-Building 1,344,165 0 1,344,165 1,390,834 46,669 3.47% Parks&Rec-Administration 281,871 0 281,871 288,964 7,093 2.52% Parks&Rec-Maintenance 838,343 (6,300) 832,043 861,350 29,307 3.52% Parks&Rec-Recreation 228,197 13,000 241,197 235,995 (5,202) (2.16%) Parks&Rec-Aquatics 461,200 0 461,200 457,350 (3,850) (0.83%) Parks&Rec-Senior Center 95,781 0 95,781 95,916 135 0.14% Parks&Rec-CenterPlace 882,223 0 882,223 891,458 9,235 1.05% General Government 1,532,000 55,500 1,587,500 1,240,850 (346,650) (21.84%) Transfers out-#204 (2016 LTGO debt srv) 0 198,734 198,734 397,350 198,616 99.94% Transfers out-#309(park capital projects) 160,000 70,300 230,300 160,000 (70,300) (30.53%) Transfers out-#310(bond pmt) 72,500 0 72,500 0 (72,500) (100.00%) Transfers out-#310(city hall o&m costs) 271,700 0 271,700 0 (271,700) (100.00%) Transfers out-#311 (pavement preservation) 943,800 0 943,800 953,200 9,400 1.00% Transfers out-#501 (CenterPlace kitchen reserve) 0 0 0 36,600 36,600 0.00% Transfers out-#502(insurance premium) 325,000 0 325,000 350,000 25,000 7.69% Total Recurring Expenditures 39,361,199 346,234 39,707,433 40,053,822 346,389 0.87% Recurring Revenues Over(Under) Recurring Expenditures 77,229 (63,234) 13,995 1,408,678 26 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/11/2016 2017 Budget 2016 2017 Difference Between As As Proposed 2016 and 2017 Adopted Amendment Amended Budget $ #001 -GENERAL FUND-continued NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Transfers in-#106 (solid waste repayment) 40,425 0 40,425 40,425 0 0.00% Transfers in-#310 Civic Facilities 0 198,734 198,734 490,500 291,766 146.81% FEMA Grant Proceeds 0 36,400 36,400 0 (36,400) (100.00%) Total Nonrecurring Revenues 40,425 235,134 275,559 530,925 255,366 92.67% Expenditures General Government-IT capital replacements 108,000 0 108,000 100,000 (8,000) (7.41%) City Hall lease payment(2017 final year) 0 0 0 513,100 513,100 0.00% Public Safety(const offices for unit supervisors) 0 25,000 25,000 0 (25,000) (100.00%) Community&Econ Dev(comp plan update) 350,000 0 350,000 0 (350,000) (100.00%) Parks&Rec(upgrade dial-up modem at pools) 15,000 0 15,000 0 (15,000) (100.00%) Police Department-CAD/RMS 140,281 0 140,281 145,000 4,719 3.36% Police Department (security camera upgrade) 0 6,400 6,400 0 (6,400) (100.00%) CenterPlace roof repairs 0 52,000 52,000 0 (52,000) (100.00%) City Manager Severance 0 453,116 453,116 0 (453,116) (100.00%) Community&Econ Dev(retail recruitment) 0 0 0 50,000 50,000 0.00% Parks&Rec(pool drain pipe&gutter line repairs) 0 0 0 12,000 12,000 0.00% Parks&Rec(replace Great Room audio/video) 0 0 0 345,000 345,000 0.00% Parks&Rec(replace carpet at CenterPlace) 0 0 0 24,750 24,750 0.00% Transfers out-#122 (Replenish after Windstorm) 0 16,418 16,418 0 (16,418) (100.00%) Transfers out-#309(P&R Windstorm damage) 0 37,225 37,225 0 (37,225) (100.00%) Transfers out-#312('14 fund bal>50%) 0 1,828,723 1,828,723 0 (1,828,723) (100.00%) Transfers out-#314(Pines Uderpass Design) 0 0 0 1,200,000 1,200,000 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 613,281 2,418,882 3,032,163 2,389,850 (642,313) (21.18%) Nonrecurring Revenues Over(Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures (572,856) (2,183,748) (2,756,604) (1,858,925) Excess(Deficit)of Total Revenues Over(Under)Total Expenditures (495,627) (2,246,982) (2,742,609) (450,247) Beginning unrestricted fund balance 26,045,444 26,045,444 23,302,835 Ending unrestricted fund balance 25,549,817 23,302,835 22,852,588 Fund balance as a percent of recurring expenditures 64.91% 58.69% 57.05% General Fund Summary Total revenues 39,478,853 518,134 39,996,987 41,993,425 Total expenditures 39,974,480 2,765,116 42,739,596 42,443,672 Excess(Deficit)of Total Revenues Over(Under) Total Expenditures (495,627) (2,246,982) (2,742,609) (450,247) Beginning unrestricted fund balance 26,045,444 26,045,444 23,302,835 Ending unrestricted fund balance 25,549,817 23,302,835 22,852,588 27 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/11/2016 2017 Budget 2016 2017 Difference Between As As Proposed 2016 and 2017 Adopted Amendment Amended Budget $ SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS #101 -STREET FUND RECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Utility Tax 2,340,000 0 2,340,000 2,200,000 (140,000) (5.98%) Motor Vehicle Fuel(Gas)Tax 2,004,900 0 2,004,900 2,040,300 35,400 1.77% Multimodal Transportation Revenue 0 0 0 98,868 98,868 0.00% Right-of-Way Maintenance Fee 0 50,000 50,000 50,000 0 0.00% Investment Interest 3,000 0 3,000 4,000 1,000 33.33% Miscellaneous 10,000 0 10,000 10,000 0 0.00% Total Recurring Revenues 4,357,900 50,000 4,407,900 4,403,168 (4,732) (0.11%) Expenditures Wages/Benefits/Payroll Taxes 734,604 0 734,604 746,872 12,268 1.67% Supplies 111,500 0 111,500 105,000 (6,500) (5.83%) Services&Charges 2,132,754 0 2,132,754 2,168,151 35,397 1.66% Snow Operations 430,000 0 430,000 468,000 38,000 8.84% Intergovernmental Payments 771,000 0 771,000 795,000 24,000 3.11% Vehicle rentals-#501 (non-plow vehicle rental) 31,000 0 31,000 23,250 (7,750) (25.00%) Vehicle rentals-#501 (plow replace.) 40,000 0 40,000 77,929 37,929 94.82% Transfers out-#001 39,700 0 39,700 39,700 0 0.00% Transfers out-#311 (pavement preservation) 67,342 0 67,342 67,342 0 0.00% Signal Detection Replacement Program 0 0 0 40,000 40,000 0.00% Traffic Signal Replacement Program 0 0 0 200,000 200,000 0.00% Total Recurring Expenditures 4,357,900 0 4,357,900 4,731,244 373,344 8.57% Recurring Revenues Over(Under) Recurring Expenditures 0 50,000 50,000 (328,076) NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Grants 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Insurance proceeds(traffic signal cabinet) 0 46,000 46,000 0 (46,000) (100.00%) Total Nonrecurring Revenues 0 46,000 46,000 0 (46,000) (100.00%) Expenditures Durable striping at Trent&Argonne 0 0 0 75,000 75,000 0.00% Spare traffic signal equipment 0 0 0 30,000 30,000 0.00% Battery backups for intersections 0 0 0 15,000 15,000 0.00% Traffic Signal Cabinet Replacement 0 46,000 46,000 0 (46,000) (100.00%) Maintenance facility storage unit 5,000 0 5,000 0 (5,000) (100.00%) Signal detection equipment upgrades 20,000 0 20,000 0 (20,000) (100.00%) Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 25,000 46,000 71,000 120,000 49,000 69.01% Nonrecurring Revenues Over(Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures (25,000) 0 (25,000) (120,000) Excess(Deficit)of Total Revenues Over(Under)Total Expenditures (25,000) 50,000 25,000 (448,076) Beginning fund balance 1,443,077 1,443,077 1,468,077 Ending fund balance 1,418,077 1,468,077 1,020,001 Street Fund Summary Total revenues 4,357,900 96,000 4,453,900 4,403,168 Total expenditures 4,382,900 46,000 4,428,900 4,851,244 Excess(Deficit)of Total Revenues Over(Under) Total Expenditures (25,000) 50,000 25,000 (448,076) Beginning unrestricted fund balance 1,443,077 1,443,077 1,468,077 Ending unrestricted fund balance 1,418,077 1,468,077 1,020,001 28 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/11/2016 2017 Budget 2016 2017 Difference Between As As Proposed 2016 and 2017 Adopted Amendment Amended Budget $ SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS-continued #103-PATHS&TRAILS FUND Revenues Motor Vehicle Fuel(Gas)Tax 8,500 0 8,500 8,600 100 1.18% Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues 8,500 0 8,500 8,600 100 1.18% Expenditures Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Transfers out-#309(Appleway Trail-Univ-Pines) 0 9,300 9,300 0 (9,300) (100.00%) Total expenditures 0 9,300 9,300 0 (9,300) (100.00%) Revenues over(under)expenditures 8,500 (800) 8,600 Beginning fund balance 38,054 38,054 37,254 Ending fund balance 46,554 37,254 45,854 #104-HOTEL/MOTEL TAX-TOURISM FACILITIES FUND Revenues Hotel/Motel Tax 357,500 19,500 377,000 377,000 0 0.00% Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues 357,500 19,500 377,000 377,000 0 0.00% Expenditures Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Revenues over(under)expenditures 357,500 377,000 377,000 Beginning fund balance 182,347 182,347 559,347 Ending fund balance 539,847 559,347 936,347 #105-HOTEL/MOTEL TAX FUND Revenues Hotel/Motel Tax 550,000 30,000 580,000 580,000 0 0.00% Investment Interest 300 0 300 500 200 66.67% Total revenues 550,300 30,000 580,300 580,500 200 0.03% Expenditures Transfers out-#001 30,000 0 30,000 30,000 0 0.00% Tourism Promotion 560,000 (60,650) 499,350 604,000 104,650 20.96% Transfers out-#309(volleyball court award) 0 60,650 60,650 0 (60,650) (100.00%) Total expenditures 590,000 0 590,000 634,000 44,000 7.46% Revenues over(under)expenditures (39,700) (9,700) (53,500) Beginning fund balance 208,701 208,701 199,001 Ending fund balance 169,001 199,001 145,501 29 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/11/2016 2017 Budget 2016 2017 Difference Between As As Proposed 2016 and 2017 Adopted Amendment Amended Budget $ SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS-continued #106-SOLID WASTE FUND Revenues Sunshine administrative fee 125,000 0 125,000 125,000 0 0.00% Road maintenance fee 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Grant Proceeds 53,500 0 53,500 26,800 (26,700) (49.91%) Total revenues 178,500 0 178,500 151,800 (26,700) (14.96%) Expenditures Education&Contract Administration 138,075 0 138,075 111,375 (26,700) (19.34%) Transfers out-#001 40,425 0 40,425 40,425 0 0.00% Total expenditures 178,500 0 178,500 151,800 (26,700) (14.96%) Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 0 0 Beginning fund balance 42,874 42,874 42,874 Ending fund balance 42,874 42,874 42,874 #107-PEG FUND Revenues Comcast PEG contribution 90,000 0 90,000 80,000 (10,000) (11.11%) Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues 90,000 0 90,000 80,000 (10,000) (11.11%) Expenditures PEG Reimbursement-CMN 12,000 105,000 117,000 0 (117,000) (100.00%) Capital Outlay 12,500 0 12,500 12,500 0 0.00% New City Hall Council Chambers 0 25,000 25,000 250,000 225,000 900.00% Total expenditures 24,500 130,000 154,500 262,500 108,000 69.90% Revenues over(under)expenditures 65,500 (64,500) (182,500) Beginning fund balance 301,182 301,182 236,682 Ending fund balance 366,682 236,682 54,182 #120-CENTER PLACE OPERATING RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Expenditures Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 0 0 Beginning fund balance 300,000 300,000 300,000 Ending fund balance 300,000 300,000 300,000 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/11/2016 2017 Budget 2016 2017 Difference Between As As Proposed 2016 and 2017 Adopted Amendment Amended Budget $ SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS-continued #121 -SERVICE LEVEL STABILIZATION RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest 6,500 0 6,500 21,900 15,400 236.92% Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues 6,500 0 6,500 21,900 15,400 236.92% Expenditures Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Revenues over(under)expenditures 6,500 6,500 21,900 Beginning fund balance 5,461,789 5,461,789 5,468,289 Ending fund balance 5,468,289 5,468,289 5,490,189 #122-WINTER WEATHER RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest 600 0 600 600 0 0.00% FEMA Grant Proceeds 0 38,510 38,510 0 (38,510) (100.00%) Transfer in-#001 0 16,418 16,418 0 (16,418) (100.00%) Subtotal revenues 600 54,928 55,528 600 (54,928) (98.92%) Expenditures Snow removal expenses 500,000 0 500,000 500,000 0 0.00% Total expenditures 500,000 0 500,000 500,000 0 0.00% Revenues over(under)expenditures (499,400) (444,472) (499,400) Beginning fund balance 444,472 444,472 500,000 Ending fund balance (54,928) 0 600 #123-CIVIC FACILITIES REPLACEMENT FUND Revenues Investment Interest 700 0 700 0 (700) (100.00%) Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues 700 0 700 0 (700) (100.00%) Expenditures Transfers out-#311 (pavement preservation) 559,786 22 559,808 0 (559,808) (100.00%) Total expenditures 559,786 22 559,808 0 (559,808) (100.00%) Revenues over(under)expenditures (559,086) (559,108) 0 Beginning fund balance 559,108 559,108 0 Ending fund balance 22 0 0 31 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/11/2016 2017 Budget 2016 2017 Difference Between As As Proposed 2016 and 2017 Adopted Amendment Amended Budget $ DEBT SERVICE FUNDS #204-LTGO BOND DEBT SERVICE FUND Revenues Spokane Public Facilities District 380,300 0 380,300 379,750 (550) (0.14%) Transfers in-#001 0 198,734 198,734 397,350 198,616 99.94% Transfers in-#301 83,400 0 83,400 79,426 (3,974) (4.76%) Transfers in-#302 83,400 0 83,400 79,425 (3,975) (4.77%) Total revenues 547,100 198,734 745,834 935,951 190,117 25.49% Expenditures Debt Service Payments-CenterPlace 380,300 0 380,300 379,750 (550) (0.14%) Debt Service Payments-Roads 166,800 0 166,800 162,900 (3,900) (2.34%) 2016 LTGO Bond Principal&Interest 0 198,734 198,734 397,350 198,616 99.94% Total expenditures 547,100 198,734 745,834 940,000 194,166 26.03% Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 0 (4,049) Beginning fund balance 4,049 4,049 4,049 Ending fund balance 4,049 4,049 0 32 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/11/2016 2017 Budget 2016 2017 Difference Between As As Proposed 2016 and 2017 Adopted Amendment Amended Budget $ CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS #301 -REET 1 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues REET 1 -Taxes 800,000 200,000 1,000,000 800,000 (200,000) (20.00%) Investment Interest 1,000 0 1,000 1,700 700 70.00% Total revenues 801,000 200,000 1,001,000 801,700 (199,300) (19.91%) Expenditures Transfers out-#204 83,400 0 83,400 79,426 (3,974) (4.76%) Transfers out-#303 222,503 520,000 742,503 437,002 (305,501) (41.14%) Transfers out-#311 (pavement preservation) 365,286 0 365,286 660,479 295,193 80.81% Transfers out-#314(Barker Grade Separation) 0 20,000 20,000 280,079 260,079 1300.40% Total expenditures 671,189 540,000 1,211,189 1,456,986 245,797 20.29% Revenues over(under)expenditures 129,811 (210,189) (655,286) Beginning fund balance 1,594,088 1,594,088 1,383,899 Ending fund balance 1,723,899 1,383,899 728,613 #302-REET 2 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues REET 2-Taxes 800,000 200,000 1,000,000 800,000 (200,000) (20.00%) Investment Interest 1,000 0 1,000 1,700 700 70.00% Total revenues 801,000 200,000 1,001,000 801,700 (199,300) (19.91%) Expenditures Transfers out-#204 83,400 0 83,400 79,425 (3,975) (4.77%) Transfers out-#303 922,816 (540,000) 382,816 1,173,230 790,414 206.47% Transfers out-#311 (pavement preservation) 365,286 0 365,286 660,479 295,193 80.81% Total expenditures 1,371,502 (540,000) 831,502 1,913,134 1,081,632 130.08% Revenues over(under)expenditures (570,502) 169,498 (1,111,434) Beginning fund balance 1,728,297 1,728,297 1,897,795 Ending fund balance 1,157,795 1,897,795 786,361 33 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/11/2016 2017 Budget 2016 2017 Difference Between As As Proposed 2016 and 2017 Adopted Amendment Amended Budget $ CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS-continued #303-STREET CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues Grant Proceeds 8,797,263 (647,657) 8,149,606 3,756,320 (4,393,286) (53.91%) Developer 314,700 (39,613) 275,087 40,097 (234,990) (85.42%) Transfers in-#301 222,503 520,000 742,503 437,002 (305,501) (41.14%) Transfers in-#302 922,816 (540,000) 382,816 1,173,230 790,414 206.47% Transfers in-#312-Pines Underpass Pinecroft 500,000 (500,000) 0 0 0 0.00% Transfers in-#312-Euclid Ave-Flora to Barker 0 50,000 50,000 1,750,000 1,700,000 3400.00% Transfers in-#312-Sullivan Rd W Bridge 1,010,509 457,270 1,467,779 10,000 (1,457,779) (99.32%) Total revenues 11,767,791 (700,000) 11,067,791 7,166,649 (3,901,142) (35.25%) Expenditures 123 Mission Ave.-Flora to Barker 332,566 0 332,566 500,000 167,434 50.35% 141 Sullivan&Euclid PCC(PE&RW) 1,981,060 0 1,981,060 2,150,000 168,940 8.53% 149 Sidewalk Infill 5,000 0 5,000 0 (5,000) (100.00%) 155 Sullivan Rd W Bridge Replacement 5,237,650 0 5,237,650 10,000 (5,227,650) (99.81%) 156 Mansfield Ave.Connection 5,000 0 5,000 0 (5,000) (100.00%) 166 Pines Rd(SR27)&Grace Ave. Intersect Safety 491,331 0 491,331 333,224 (158,107) (32.18%) 167 Citywide Safety Improvements(bike/ped) 228,127 0 228,127 5,000 (223,127) (97.81%) 201 ITS Infill Project Phase 1 (PE START 2014) 271,357 0 271,357 300,000 28,643 10.56% 205 Sprague/Barker Intersections Improvement 0 0 0 40,097 40,097 0.00% 206 Sprague/Long Sidewalk Project 5,000 0 5,000 0 (5,000) (100.00%) 207 Indiana&Evergreen Transit Access Imp 0 0 0 5,000 5,000 0.00% 221 McDonald Rd Diet(16th to Mission) 559,200 0 559,200 5,000 (554,200) (99.11%) 222 Citywide Reflective Signal Backplates 40,500 0 40,500 36,000 (4,500) (11.11%) 223 Pines Rd Underpass©BNSF&Trent 500,000 (500,000) 0 0 0 0.00% 229 32nd Ave Preservation Project 0 0 0 2,500 2,500 0.00% xxx Seth Woodward Elem Sidewalk Improvement 361,000 0 361,000 5,000 (356,000) (98.61%) xxx Mirabeau Pkway&Pines(SR-27)Traffic Signal 350,000 0 350,000 5,000 (345,000) (98.57%) xxx Bowdish Sidewalk 8th to 12th 400,000 0 400,000 471,342 71,342 17.84% xxx N.Sullivan Corridor ITS Project(PE start 2017) 0 0 0 110,486 110,486 0.00% xxx Euclid Ave.-Flora to Barker 0 50,000 50,000 1,750,000 1,700,000 3400.00% xxx 9th Ave.Sidewalk 0 0 0 240,000 240,000 0.00% xxx Sullivan/Wellesley Intersection 0 0 0 198,000 198,000 0.00% Contingency 1,000,000 (250,000) 750,000 1,000,000 250,000 33.33% Total expenditures 11,767,791 (700,000) 11,067,791 7,166,649 (3,901,142) (35.25%) Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 0 0 Beginning fund balance 75,538 75,538 75,538 Ending fund balance 75,538 75,538 75,538 Note: Work performed for pavement preservation projects out of the Street Capital Projects Fund is for items such as sidewalk upgrades that were bid with the pavement preservation work. 34 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/11/2016 2017 Budget 2016 2017 Difference Between As As Proposed 2016 and 2017 Adopted Amendment Amended Budget $ CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS-continued #309-PARK CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues Grant Proceeds 90,000 320,132 410,132 3,217,267 2,807,135 684.45% FEMA Grant Proceeds-Windstorm 0 21,875 21,875 0 (21,875) (100.00%) Transfers in-#001 160,000 77,525 237,525 160,000 (77,525) (32.64%) Transfers in-#001 (Browns Park Splashpad water) 0 30,000 30,000 0 (30,000) (100.00%) Transfers in-#103(Appleway Trail-Univ-Pines) 0 9,300 9,300 0 (9,300) (100.00%) Transfers in-#105 0 60,650 60,650 0 (60,650) (100.00%) Transfers in-#312-Appleway(Pines-Evergreen) 14,050 58,890 72,940 561,915 488,975 670.38% Investment Interest 500 0 500 800 300 60.00% Total revenues 264,550 578,372 842,922 3,939,982 3,097,060 367.42% Expenditures City entry sign 70,000 0 70,000 0 (70,000) (100.00%) 176 Appleway Trail(Univ.-Pines) 0 9,300 9,300 0 (9,300) (100.00%) 225 Pocket dog park-phase 1 0 400 400 0 (400) (100.00%) 227 Appleway Trail(Pines to Evergreen) 104,050 102,247 206,297 1,925,957 1,719,660 833.58% 237 Appleway Trail(Sullivan to Corbin) 0 276,775 276,775 1,853,225 1,576,450 569.58% 241 Pocket dog park-phase 2 75,000 6,300 81,300 0 (81,300) (100.00%) 242 Browns Park Splashpad 82,500 64,000 146,500 0 (146,500) (100.00%) 243 Browns Park championship volleyball court 0 60,650 60,650 0 (60,650) (100.00%) 244 Park signs(3) 20,500 0 20,500 0 (20,500) (100.00%) 245 Terrace View playground equip-Windstorm 0 59,100 59,100 0 (59,100) (100.00%) Edgecliff Park Splashpad 0 0 0 125,000 125,000 0.00% Total expenditures 352,050 578,772 930,822 3,904,182 2,973,360 319.43% Revenues over(under)expenditures (87,500) (87,900) 35,800 Beginning fund balance 98,461 98,461 10,561 Ending fund balance 10,961 10,561 46,361 #310-CIVIC FACILITIES CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues Investment Interest 1,200 0 1,200 1,200 0 0.00% Transfers in-#001 Future C.H.bond pmt>$434.6k lease pmt 72,500 0 72,500 0 (72,500) (100.00%) Future C.H.o&m costs 271,700 0 271,700 0 (271,700) (100.00%) Total revenues 345,400 0 345,400 1,200 (344,200) (99.65%) Expenditures Transferout-#001 0 198,734 198,734 490,500 291,766 146.81% Total expenditures 0 198,734 198,734 490,500 291,766 146.81% Revenues over(under)expenditures 345,400 146,666 (489,300) Beginning fund balance 1,182,548 1,182,548 1,329,214 Ending fund balance 1,527,948 1,329,214 839,914 Note: The fund balance in#310 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. 35 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/11/2016 2017 Budget 2016 2017 Difference Between As As Proposed 2016 and 2017 Adopted Amendment Amended Budget $ CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS-continued #311 -PAVEMENT PRESERVATION Revenues Transfers in-#001 943,800 0 943,800 953,200 9,400 1.00% Transfers in-#101 67,342 0 67,342 67,342 0 0.00% Transfers in-#123 559,786 22 559,808 0 (559,808) (100.00%) Transfers in-#301 365,286 0 365,286 660,479 295,193 80.81% Transfers in-#302 365,286 0 365,286 660,479 295,193 80.81% Grants 0 2,063,000 2,063,000 340,800 (1,722,200) (83.48%) Total revenues 2,301,500 2,063,022 4,364,522 2,682,300 (1,682,222) (38.54%) Expenditures Pavement preservation 3,000,000 1,500,000 4,500,000 3,000,000 (1,500,000) (33.33%) Pre-project GeoTech 50,000 0 50,000 50,000 0 0.00% Total expenditures 3,050,000 1,500,000 4,550,000 3,050,000 (1,500,000) (32.97%) Revenues over(under)expenditures (748,500) (185,478) (367,700) Beginning fund balance 2,605,219 2,605,219 2,419,741 Ending fund balance 1,856,719 2,419,741 2,052,041 #312-CAPITAL RESERVE FUND Revenues Transfers in-#001 0 1,828,723 1,828,723 0 (1,828,723) (100.00%) Investment Interest 0 0 0 1,000 1,000 0.00% Total revenues 0 1,828,723 1,828,723 1,000 (1,827,723) (99.95%) Expenditures Transfers out#303(Sullivan Rd WBridge) 1,010,509 457,270 1,467,779 10,000 (1,457,779) (99.32%) Transfers out#303(Pines Rd Underpass) 500,000 (500,000) 0 0 0 0.00% Transfers out#303(Euclid Ave-Flora to Barker) 0 50,000 50,000 1,750,000 1,700,000 3400.00% Transfers out#309(Appleway Trail-Pines-Evergre 14,050 13,800 27,850 260,005 232,155 833.59% Transfers out#309(Appleway Trail-Sullivan-Cork 0 45,090 45,090 301,910 256,820 569.57% Transfers out#314(Pines Grade Separation) 0 500,000 500,000 0 (500,000) (100.00%) Total expenditures 1,524,559 566,160 2,090,719 2,321,915 231,196 11.06% Revenues over(under)expenditures (1,524,559) (261,996) (2,320,915) Beginning fund balance 4,576,597 4,576,597 4,314,601 Ending fund balance 3,052,038 4,314,601 1,993,686 #313-CITY HALL CONSTRUCTION FUND Revenues 2016 LTGO bond issue(par+premium) 0 7,946,088 7,946,088 0 (7,946,088) (100.00%) Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues 0 7,946,088 7,946,088 0 (7,946,088) (100.00%) Expenditures Capital Outlay-City Hall 294,400 7,000,000 7,294,400 5,344,219 (1,950,181) (26.74%) 2016 LTGO bond issue costs 0 96,515 96,515 0 (96,515) (100.00%) Total expenditures 294,400 7,096,515 7,390,915 5,344,219 (2,046,696) (27.69%) Revenues over(under)expenditures (294,400) 555,173 (5,344,219) Beginning fund balance 4,789,046 4,789,046 5,344,219 Ending fund balance 4,494,646 5,344,219 0 36 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/11/2016 2017 Budget 2016 2017 Difference Between As As Proposed 2016 and 2017 Adopted Amendment Amended Budget $ CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS-continued #314-RAILROAD GRADE SEPARATION PROJECTS FUND Revenues Grant Proceeds 0 230,000 230,000 489,921 259,921 113.01% Transfers in#001 (Pines underpass design) 0 0 0 1,200,000 1,200,000 0.00% Transfers in#301 (Barker overpass design) 0 20,000 20,000 280,079 260,079 1300.40% Transfers in#312(Pines land acquisition) 0 500,000 500,000 0 (500,000) (100.00%) Total revenues 0 750,000 750,000 1,970,000 1,220,000 162.67% Expenditures 143 Barker BNSF Grade Separation 0 250,000 250,000 770,000 520,000 208.00% 223 Pines Rd Underpass 0 500,000 500,000 1,200,000 700,000 140.00% Total expenditures 0 750,000 750,000 1,970,000 1,220,000 162.67% Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 0 0 Beginning fund balance 0 0 0 Ending fund balance 0 0 0 37 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/11/2016 2017 Budget 2016 2017 Difference Between As As Proposed 2016 and 2017 Adopted Amendment Amended Budget $ ENTERPRISE FUNDS #402-STORMWATER FUND RECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Stormwater Management Fees 1,870,000 0 1,870,000 1,860,000 (10,000) (0.53%) Investment Interest 1,500 0 1,500 2,500 1,000 66.67% Total Recurring Revenues 1,871,500 0 1,871,500 1,862,500 (9,000) (0.48%) Expenditures Wages/Benefits/Payroll Taxes 514,132 0 514,132 546,421 32,289 6.28% Supplies 15,900 0 15,900 15,425 (475) (2.99%) Services&Charges 1,113,683 0 1,113,683 1,111,076 (2,607) (0.23%) Intergovernmental Payments 67,000 0 67,000 50,000 (17,000) (25.37%) Vehicle rentals-#501 11,000 0 11,000 12,750 1,750 15.91% Transfers out-#001 13,400 0 13,400 13,400 0 0.00% Total Recurring Expenditures 1,735,115 0 1,735,115 1,749,072 13,957 0.80% Recurring Revenues Over(Under) Recurring Expenditures 136,385 0 136,385 113,428 NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Grant Proceeds 0 175,000 175,000 210,000 35,000 20.00% FEMA Grant Proceeds-Windstorm 0 48,800 48,800 0 (48,800) (100.00%) Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Revenues 0 223,800 223,800 210,000 (13,800) (6.17%) Expenditures Capital-various projects 500,000 (348,900) 151,100 450,000 298,900 197.82% Effectiveness study 0 175,000 175,000 210,000 35,000 20.00% Watershed studies 0 0 0 50,000 50,000 0.00% Storm-related sweeping 0 50,000 50,000 0 (50,000) (100.00%) Maintenance facility storage unit 5,000 0 5,000 0 (5,000) (100.00%) Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 505,000 (123,900) 381,100 710,000 328,900 86.30% Nonrecurring Revenues Over(Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures (505,000) 347,700 (157,300) (500,000) Excess(Deficit)of Total Revenues Over(Under)Total Expenditures (368,615) 347,700 (20,915) (386,572) Beginning working capital 1,896,925 1,896,925 1,876,010 Ending working capital 1,528,310 1,876,010 1,489,438 Stormwater Fund Summary Total revenues 1,871,500 223,800 2,095,300 2,072,500 Total expenditures 2,240,115 (123,900) 2,116,215 2,459,072 Excess(Deficit)of Total Revenues Over(Under) Total Expenditures (368,615) 347,700 (20,915) (386,572) Beginning unrestricted fund balance 1,896,925 1,896,925 1,876,010 Ending unrestricted fund balance 1,528,310 1,876,010 1,489,438 38 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/11/2016 2017 Budget 2016 2017 Difference Between As As Proposed 2016 and 2017 Adopted Amendment Amended Budget $ ENTERPRISE FUNDS-continued #403-AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA Revenues Spokane County 500,000 (100,000) 400,000 460,000 60,000 15.00% Grant DOE-Broadway SD Retrofit 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Grant DOE-Sprague Park to University LID 1,500,000 (1,500,000) 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues 2,000,000 (1,600,000) 400,000 460,000 60,000 15.00% Expenditures 198 Sprague Park to University LID 2,000,000 (2,000,000) 0 0 0 0.00% Capital-various projects 0 425,000 425,000 530,000 105,000 24.71% Total expenditures 2,000,000 (1,575,000) 425,000 530,000 105,000 24.71% Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 (25,000) (70,000) Beginning working capital 921,660 921,660 896,660 Ending working capital 921,660 896,660 826,660 39 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/11/2016 2017 Budget 2016 2017 Difference Between As As Proposed 2016 and 2017 Adopted Amendment Amended Budget $ INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS #501 -ER&R FUND Revenues Vehicle rentals-#001 23,500 0 23,500 32,500 9,000 38.30% Vehicle rentals-#101 31,000 0 31,000 23,250 (7,750) (25.00%) Vehicle rentals-#101 (plow replace.) 40,000 0 40,000 77,929 37,929 94.82% Vehicle rentals-#402 6,833 4,667 11,500 12,750 1,250 10.87% Transfer in-#001 (CenterPlace kitchen reserve) 0 0 0 36,600 36,600 0.00% Investment Interest 1,000 0 1,000 2,000 1,000 100.00% Total revenues 102,333 4,667 107,000 185,029 78,029 72.92% Expenditures Vehicle Replacement 105,000 0 105,000 0 (105,000) (100.00%) Snow Plow Replacement 225,000 0 225,000 0 (225,000) (100.00%) Total expenditures 330,000 0 330,000 0 (330,000) (100.00%) Revenues over(under)expenditures (227,667) (223,000) 185,029 Beginning working capital 1,248,997 1,248,997 1,025,997 Ending working capital 1,021,330 1,025,997 1,211,026 #502-RISK MANAGEMENT FUND Revenues Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Transfers in-#001 325,000 0 325,000 350,000 25,000 7.69% Total revenues 325,000 0 325,000 350,000 25,000 7.69% Expenditures Auto&Property Insurance 325,000 0 325,000 350,000 25,000 7.69% Unemployment Claims 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total expenditures 325,000 0 325,000 350,000 25,000 7.69% Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 0 0 Beginning fund balance 194,383 194,383 194,383 Ending fund balance 194,383 194,383 194,383 TOTAL OF ALL FUNDS Total of Revenues for all Funds 66,156,527 12,411,968 78,568,495 68,985,004 Total of Expenditures for all Funds 70,683,872 11,440,453 82,124,325 80,739,873 Total grant revenues(included in total revenues) 10,440,763 786,060 11,226,823 8,041,108 Total Capital expenditures(included in total expenditures) 18,535,022 7,282,272 25,817,294 23,577,550 40 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 2017 Budget Revenues by Fund General Fund Property Tax $ 11,614,500 Sales Tax 19,852,100 Sales Tax- Public Safety 919,000 Sales Tax-Criminal Justice 1,669,000 Gambling and Leasehold Excise Tax 341,500 Franchise Fees/Business Registration 1,200,000 State Shared Revenues 2,104,600 Service Revenues 1,543,300 Fines and Forfeitures 1,361,000 Recreation Program Fees 640,900 Miscellaneous, Investment Int., Transfers 747,525 Total General Fund $ 41,993,425 Other Funds 101 Street Fund $ 4,403,168 103 Paths&Trails Fund 8,600 104 Hotel/Motel Tax Tourism Facilities Fund 377,000 105 Hotel/Motel Tax Fund 580,500 106 Solid Waste Fund 151,800 107 PEG Fund 80,000 120 CenterPlace Operating Reserve Fund 0 121 Service Level Stabilization Reserve Fund 21,900 122 Winter Weather Reserve Fund 600 123 Civic Facilities Replacement Fund 0 204 LTGO Bond Debt Service Fund 935,951 301 REET 1 Capital Projects Fund 801,700 302 REET 2 Capital Projects Fund 801,700 303 Street Capital Projects Fund 7,166,649 309 Parks Capital Projects Fund 3,939,982 310 Civic Facilities Capital Projects Fund 1,200 311 Pavement Preservation Fund 2,682,300 312 Capital Reserve Fund 1,000 313 City Hall Construction Fund 0 314 Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund 1,970,000 402 Stormwater Management Fund 2,072,500 403 Aquifer Protection Area Fund 460,000 501 Equipment Rental & Replacement Fund 185,029 502 Risk Management Fund 350,000 Total Other Funds $ 26,991,579 Total All Funds $ 68,985,004 41 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 2017 General Fund Revenues $41,993,425 Recreation Program Fees 1% Miscellaneous Fines& Forfeitures 2% 3% Property Tax 28% Service Revenues 4% State Shared Revenues N 5% \\\ Franchise Fees/Business Registrations 3% Gambling Tax 1% Public Safety Sales Tax 2% Criminal Justice Sales Tax 4% Sales Tax 47% 42 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 2017 City Wide Revenues $ 68,985,004 Debt Service Fund 1% Other Special Revenue FundsCapital Projects Funds 2% 25% Street Fund 6% Stormwater Management Fund 3% APA Fund N_ 1% Internal Service Funds 1% General Fund 61% 43 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 2017 Budget-General Fund Detail Revenues by Type 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Proposed Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Property Tax Property Tax 10,841,559 11,129,377 11,095,009 11,479,200 11,614,500 Property Tax-Delinquent 0 0 185,138 0 0 10,841,559 11,129,377 11,280,147 11,479,200 11,614,500 Sales Taxes Sales Tax 16,587,617 17,440,083 18,209,568 18,480,500 19,852,100 Sales Tax-Public Safety 759,889 812,280 848,665 867,400 919,000 Sales Tax-Criminal Justice 1,358,956 1,455,313 1,523,588 1,556,400 1,669,000 18,706,461 19,707,676 20,581,821 20,904,300 22,440,100 Gambling and Leasehold Excise Tax Amusement Games 10,799 11,063 11,909 11,000 11,000 Card Games 382,651 429,376 336,960 249,000 260,000 Bingo&Raffles 638 1,227 950 1,200 1,000 Punch Boards&Pull Tabs 134,350 64,585 62,966 65,000 63,000 Leasehold Excise Tax 6,139 6,932 5,869 6,800 5,800 Leasehold Excise Tax(State) 770 770 770 700 700 535,347 513,954 419,424 333,700 341,500 Licenses&Permits General Business Licenses 97,889 106,741 109,076 100,000 100,000 Comcast PEG Contribution 92,642 89,121 0 0 0 Franchise Fees 1,048,803 1,053,986 1,111,616 1,054,000 1,100,000 1,239,335 1,249,848 1,220,692 1,154,000 1,200,000 State Shared Revenues Streamline Mitigation of Sales Tax 571,806 575,269 572,577 520,000 520,000 Payment in Lieu of Taxes-DNR 0 8,528 4,114 4,400 4,000 CJ-High Crime 49,505 0 0 0 0 MVET Criminal Justice-Population 22,282 23,837 24,869 26,135 29,200 CJ Contracted Services 142,180 152,133 157,282 150,000 150,000 CJ Special Programs 82,689 88,168 91,009 90,540 97,900 Marijuana Enforcement 0 0 37,912 0 54,600 DUI-Cities 16,604 16,273 13,571 16,300 13,600 Liquor Board Excise Tax 121,297 157,068 303,724 413,496 439,700 Liquor Board Profits 813,952 812,922 806,570 803,657 795,600 1,820,317 1,834,198 2,011,629 2,024,528 2,104,600 Service Revenues Airway Heights Bldg.Plan Rev. 471 0 0 0 0 Building Permits 920,921 819,234 770,288 800,000 770,000 Demolition Permits 3,860 4,836 3,840 4,000 4,000 Building&Planning Fees 001.058.059.345.83 103,645 381,282 148,962 126,400 125,500 Entertainment License 18,335 15,823 18,374 16,000 17,000 Grading Permits 3,551 4,049 4,748 3,500 3,500 Home Profession Fee 3,612 3,108 2,856 3,100 2,800 Mechanical Permits 80,927 108,759 89,975 85,000 90,000 Misc. Permits&Fees 5,203 8,168 7,229 6,100 6,600 Planning Fees 437,287 145,218 379,143 380,500 380,500 Plumbing Permits 49,688 63,667 41,784 60,000 42,000 Street Vacation Permits 0 0 0 1,000 1,000 Right of Way Permits 98,265 94,512 91,124 95,000 94,000 Code Enforcement (13,423) 6,189 12,417 6,000 6,000 Temporary Use Permit Fees 942 471 314 800 400 1,713,284 1,655,315 1,571,053 1,587,400 1,543,300 Fines and Forfeitures Public Safety False Alarm Services 183,032 0 201,638 195,000 200,000 Public Safety Grants 66,846 59,265 49,418 50,000 50,000 Fines&Forfeits-Traffic 558,378 761,179 601,189 566,000 523,600 Other Criminal-Non Traffic Fines 688,201 639,820 508,665 632,500 587,400 1,496,458 1,460,263 1,360,910 1,443,500 1,361,000 44 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 2017 Budget-General Fund Detail Revenues by Type 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Proposed Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Recreation Program Charges Activity Fees(To use a recreational facility) 78,065 197,482 143,283 136,200 140,700 Program Fees(To participate in a program) 452,000 401,920 510,971 472,000 500,200 530,065 599,402 654,254 608,200 640,900 Miscellaneous Investment Interest 61,206 41,910 73,378 45,000 73,000 Sales Tax Interest 3,120 3,978 8,682 5,000 5,000 SCRAPS pass-through/nonrecurring 0 57,259 1,100 1,000 1,300 Interest on Gambling Tax 1,937 256 66 2,000 500 Dept.of Ecology Grant 62,101 6,290 0 0 0 Office of Public Def-Public Def Impr 0 0 20,000 0 0 Police Precinct Rent&Maint. 51,530 48,558 51,653 48,500 51,700 Miscellaneous Revenue&Grants 12,265 5,343 6,434 38,400 2,000 192,158 163,594 161,315 139,900 133,500 Transfers Transfer-in-#101 (street admin) 39,700 39,700 39,700 39,700 39,700 Transfer-in-#120 50,787 0 0 0 0 Transfer-in-#105(h/m tax-CP advertising) 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 Transfer-in-#106(solid waste repayment) 0 0 40,425 40,425 40,425 Transfer-in-#310 0 0 0 198,734 490,500 Transfer-in-#402(storm admin) 13,400 13,400 13,400 13,400 13,400 133,887 83,100 123,525 322,259 614,025 Total General Fund Revenue 37,208,871 38,396,726 39,384,769 39,996,987 41,993,425 45 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 2017 Budget-Other Funds Detail Revenues by Type 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Amended Proposed Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget 101 Street Fund Utilities tax 2,562,722 2,461,060 2,257,184 2,340,000 2,200,000 Motor Vehicle Fuel(Gas)Tax 1,868,055 1,878,476 1,935,629 2,004,900 2,040,300 Multimodal Transportation Revenue 0 0 0 0 98,868 Right-of-Way Maintenance Fee 0 0 0 50,000 50,000 Investment Interest 0 2,037 3,212 3,000 4,000 Street Maintenance&Repair Charges 7,774 0 0 0 0 Other Miscellaneous Revenues&Grants 182,378 24,587 25,167 56,000 10,000 Transfers in-#302 27,375 0 0 0 0 4,648,304 4,366,160 4,221,192 4,453,900 4,403,168 103 Paths&Trails Fund Motor Vehicle Fuel(Gas)Tax 7,879 7,923 8,164 8,500 8,600 Investment interest 51 34 62 0 0 7,930 7,957 8,226 8,500 8,600 104 Hotel/Motel Tax-Tourism Facilities Fund Hotel/Motel Tax 0 0 182,236 377,000 377,000 Investment interest 0 0 111 0 0 0 0 182,347 377,000 377,000 105 Hotel/Motel Tax Fund Hotel/Motel Tax 518,672 549,267 581,237 580,000 580,000 Investment Interest 387 299 484 300 500 519,059 549,566 581,721 580,300 580,500 106 Solid Waste Sunshine administrative fee 0 0 125,000 125,000 125,000 Grant Proceeds 0 0 0 53,500 26,800 Transfers in-#001 (marketing/education) 0 60,000 0 0 0 0 60,000 125,000 178,500 151,800 107 PEG Fund Comcast PEG contribution 0 0 81,806 90,000 80,000 Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 0 Transfers in-#001 0 0 267,333 0 0 0 0 349,139 90,000 80,000 120 CenterPlace Operating Reserve Fund Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 121 Service Level Stabilization Reserve Fund Investment Interest 6,971 4,697 8,590 6,500 21,900 Transfers in 0 0 0 0 0 6,971 4,697 8,590 6,500 21,900 122 Winter Weather Reserve Fund FEMA Grant Proceeds 0 0 0 38,510 0 Investment Interest 676 456 833 600 600 Transfer-in#001 0 0 0 16,418 0 676 456 833 55,528 600 123 City Facilities Repair&Replacement Fund Investment Interest 1,607 1,083 1,323 700 0 Transfers in 0 0 0 0 0 1,607 1,083 1,323 700 0 204 Debt Service-LTGO 03 Fund 2014 LTGO Bond issue proceeds 0 7,660,694 0 0 0 Facilities District Revenue 437,120 423,844 373,800 380,300 379,750 Transfers in-#001 0 0 0 198,734 397,350 Transfers in-#301 92,951 89,559 82,150 83,400 79,426 Transfers in-#302 92,952 89,559 82,150 83,400 79,425 623,023 8,263,656 538,100 745,834 935,951 46 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 2017 Budget-Other Funds Detail Revenues by Type 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Amended Proposed Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget 301 REET 1 Capital Projects Fund REET 1 -1st Quarter Percent 707,104 790,781 1,065,789 1,000,000 800,000 Investment Interest 1,138 793 1,653 1,000 1,700 708,242 791,574 1,067,442 1,001,000 801,700 302 REET 2 Capital Projects Fund REET 2-2nd Quarter Percent 614,929 776,648 1,065,789 1,000,000 800,000 Investment Interest 1,349 909 1,662 1,000 1,700 616,278 777,557 1,067,451 1,001,000 801,700 303 Street Capital Projects Fund Grant Proceeds 3,475,351 1,825,974 8,223,959 8,149,606 3,756,320 Developer Contributions 0 541 363,894 275,087 40,097 Transfers in-#101 138 5,038 123,955 0 0 Transfers in-#301 Capital Projects 589,534 58,607 567,113 742,503 437,002 Transfers in-#302 Special Capital Projects 153,243 501,736 331,099 382,816 1,173,230 Transfers in-#311 77,720 0 0 0 0 Transfers in-#312 Appleway Landscaping 8,348 253,645 0 0 0 Transfers in-#312 Sullivan Rd W Bridge 0 443,688 42,730 1,467,779 10,000 Transfers in-#312 Pines Underpass Pinecroft 0 0 0 0 0 Transfers in-#312 Euclid Ave-Flora to Barker 0 0 0 50,000 1,750,000 Miscellaneous 77 21 87 0 0 4,304,412 3,089,249 9,652,837 11,067,791 7,166,649 309 Parks Capital Projects Fund Grant Proceeds 0 0 1,560 432,007 3,217,267 Contributions and Donations 25,000 7,850 0 0 0 Investment Interest 660 444 813 500 800 Transfers in-#001 50,000 242,298 115,575 267,525 160,000 Transfers in-#103 0 50,000 0 9,300 0 Transfers in-#105 0 0 68,000 60,650 0 Transfers in-#312 0 911,433 524,812 72,940 561,915 75,660 1,212,025 710,760 842,922 3,939,982 310 Civic Facilities Capital Projects Fund Sale of land 0 839,285 0 0 0 Investment Interest 1,771 1,193 2,113 1,200 1,200 Transfers in-#001 Future C.H.bond pmt>$424.6k lease pmt 0 0 67,600 72,500 0 Future C.H.o&m costs 0 0 271,700 271,700 0 Transfers in-#312 0 0 58,324 0 0 1,771 840,478 399,737 345,400 1,200 311 Pavement Preservation Fund Grants 35,995 2,042,715 835,224 2,063,000 340,800 Investment Interest 2,751 1,853 3,389 0 0 Transfers in-#001 0 888,823 920,000 943,800 953,200 Transfers in-#101 282,000 282,000 206,618 67,342 67,342 Transfers in-#123 616,284 616,284 616,284 559,808 0 Transfers in-#301 150,000 184,472 251,049 365,286 660,479 Transfers in-#302 150,000 184,472 251,049 365,286 660,479 1,237,030 4,200,619 3,083,613 4,364,522 2,682,300 312 Capital Reserve Fund Developer Contributions 3,180 4,675 0 0 0 Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 1,000 Transfers in-#001 7,826,207 2,443,507 1,783,512 1,828,723 0 7,829,387 2,448,182 1,783,512 1,828,723 1,000 313 City Hall Construction Fund Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 0 Transfers in-#312 0 0 5,162,764 7,946,088 0 0 0 5,162,764 7,946,088 0 47 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 2017 Budget-Other Funds Detail Revenues by Type 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Amended Proposed Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget 314 Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund Grant Proceeds 0 0 0 230,000 489,921 Transfers in-#001 0 0 0 0 1,200,000 Transfers in-#301 0 0 0 20,000 280,079 Transfers in-#312 0 0 0 500,000 0 0 0 0 750,000 1,970,000 402 Stormwater Management Fund Stormwater Management Fee 1,869,081 1,865,413 1,861,368 1,870,000 1,860,000 Grant Proceeds 233,165 76,097 423,332 223,800 210,000 Developer Contributions 0 51,492 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 4,143 1,500 0 0 0 Investment Interest 1,992 1,342 2,455 1,500 2,500 Transfer in-#403 0 0 120,000 0 0 2,108,381 1,995,844 2,407,155 2,095,300 2,072,500 403 Aquifer Protection Area Fund Spokane County 484,343 461,828 533,593 400,000 460,000 Grant Proceeds 859,310 699,913 1,036,603 0 0 Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 0 Transfers in-#402(DOE for Decant Proj) 0 50,125 0 0 0 1,343,653 1,211,866 1,570,196 400,000 460,000 501 Equipment Rental&Replacement Fund Investment Interest 1,176 792 1,449 1,000 2,000 Interfund Equip&Vehicle Lease 177,744 102,744 35,544 106,000 146,429 Transfers in-#001 (CenterPlace kitchen reser 0 0 0 0 36,600 Transfers in-#101 0 25,849 0 0 0 Transfers in- #402 0 25,843 0 0 0 178,920 155,228 36,993 107,000 185,029 502 Risk Management Fund Transfers in-#001 319,000 325,000 325,000 325,000 350,000 Investment Interest 7 5 8 0 0 319,007 325,005 325,008 325,000 350,000 Total of"Other Fund"Revenues 24,530,311 30,301,203 33,283,940 38,571,508 26,991,579 General Fund Revenues 37,208,871 38,396,726 39,384,769 39,996,987 41,993,425 Total Revenues 61,739,182 68,697,929 72,668,709 78,568,495 68,985,004 48 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 2017 Budget Expenditures by Fund and Department General Fund Council $ 542,872 City Manager 1,234,129 Public Safety 25,095,372 Operations&Administrative Deputy City Manager 750,277 Finance 1,282,460 Human Resources 262,417 Public Works 981,932 City Hall Operations and Maintenance 303,918 Community&Economic Development Administration 282,962 Economic Development 733,632 Development Services 1,418,984 Building 1,390,834 Parks&Recreation Administration 288,964 Maintenance 861,350 Recreation 235,995 Aquatics 469,350 Senior Center 95,916 CenterPlace 1,261,208 General Government 4,951,100 Total General Fund $ 42,443,672 Other Funds Street Fund $ 4,851,244 Paths&Trails Fund 0 Hotel/Motel Tax-Tourism Facilities Fund 0 Hotel/Motel Tax Fund 634,000 Solid Waste 151,800 PEG Fund 262,500 CenterPlace Operating Reserve Fund 0 Service Level Stabilization Fund 0 Winter Weather Reserve Fund 500,000 Civic Facility Replacement Fund 0 LTGO Bond Debt Service Fund 940,000 REET 1 Capital Projects Fund 1,456,986 REET 2 Capital Projects Fund 1,913,134 Street Capital Projects Fund 7,166,649 Parks Capital Projects Fund 3,904,182 Civic Facilities Capital Projects Fund 490,500 Pavement Preservation 3,050,000 Capital Reserve Fund 2,321,915 City Hall Construction Fund 5,344,219 Railroad Grade Separation Projects 1,970,000 Stormwater Management Fund 2,459,072 Aquifer Protection Area 530,000 Equipment Rental&Replacement(ER&R) 0 Risk Management Fund 350,000 Total Other Funds $ 38,296,201 Total All Funds $ 80,739,873 49 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 2017 General Fund Expenditures $ 42,443,672 Public Safety 59% Community&Economic Development 9% i Public Works----- 3% orks3% Operation &Administrative 5% Parks& Recreations Council& Executive 8% 4% General Government 12% 50 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 2017 City Wide Expenditures $ 80,739,873 Capital Projects Funds 34% General Government 6% Risk Management 0% Tourism Promotion �Debt Service 1% 1% �Stormwater&APA Funds 4% Street Fund Other Activities 1% 6% Parks& Recreations"- 4% Community& Economic Development 5% Council/Executive/Ops& Admin 7% Public Safety 31% 51 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 2017 Budget General Fund Expenditures by Department and Type Wages, Benefits Services& Capital &Payroll Taxes Supplies Charges Intergovernmental Interfund Expenditures Total City Council $ 230,922 $ 4,550 $ 307,400 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 542,872 City Manager and City Attorney 1,083,066 5,405 145,658 0 0 0 1,234,129 Public Safety 3,000 26,500 340,315 23,978,307 602,250 145,000 25,095,372 Operations&Administrative Deputy City Manager 670,977 2,000 77,300 0 0 0 750,277 Finance 1,252,460 6,000 24,000 0 0 0 1,282,460 Human Resources 237,356 730 24,331 0 0 0 262,417 Public Works 905,382 14,750 61,800 0 0 0 981,932 City Hall Operation and Maintenance 98,818 30,000 175,100 0 0 0 303,918 Planning&Community Development Admin 261,262 3,100 18,600 0 0 0 282,962 Economic Development 411,232 1,100 321,300 0 0 0 733,632 Development Services 1,119,084 16,550 263,350 20,000 0 0 1,418,984 Building 1,279,834 32,700 78,300 0 0 0 1,390,834 Parks&Recreation Administration 242,414 7,400 39,150 0 0 0 288,964 Maintenance 0 5,500 855,850 0 0 0 861,350 Recreation 168,645 8,200 59,150 0 0 0 235,995 Aquatics 0 3,200 466,150 0 0 0 469,350 Senior Center 89,416 1,600 4,900 0 0 0 95,916 CenterPlace 491,639 73,524 351,045 0 0 345,000 1,261,208 General Government 0 145,450 1,270,000 328,500 3,097,150 110,000 4,951,100 Total $ 8,545,507 $ 388,259 $ 4,883,699 $ 24,326,807 $ 3,699,400 $ 600,000 $ 42,443,672 52 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 2017 Budget General Fund Department Changes from 2016 to 2017 Difference Between 2016 and 2017 2016 2017 Increase Decrease) Budget Budget $ City Council Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 220,634 230,922 10,288 4.66% Supplies 4,550 4,550 0 0.00% Services&Charges 281,685 307,400 25,715 9.13% Total 506,869 542,872 36,003 7.10% City Manager Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 651,463 655,325 3,862 0.59% Supplies 3,350 3,300 (50) (1.49%) Services&Charges 62,490 65,810 3,320 5.31% Total 717,303 724,435 7,132 0.99% Legal Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 397,206 427,741 30,535 7.69% Supplies 2,010 2,105 95 4.73% Services&Charges 95,735 79,848 (15,887) (16.59%) Total 494,951 509,694 14,743 2.98% Public Safety Non-Departmental(Fines&Forfeits) 649,500 602,250 (47,250) (7.27%) Wages/Payroll Taxes/Benefits 6,500 3,000 (3,500) (53.85%) Supplies 27,500 26,500 (1,000) (3.64%) Other Services and Charges 394,750 340,315 (54,435) (13.79%) Intergovernmental Services 23,625,499 23,978,307 352,808 1.49% Total 24,703,749 24,950,372 246,623 1.00% Deputy City Manager Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 660,102 670,977 10,875 1.65% Supplies 2,500 2,000 (500) (20.00%) Services&Charges 74,400 77,300 2,900 3.90% Total 737,002 750,277 13,275 1.80% Finance/IT Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 1,222,580 1,252,460 29,880 2.44% Supplies 6,000 6,000 0 0.00% Services&Charges 24,500 24,000 (500) (2.04%) Total 1,253,080 1,282,460 29,380 2.34% Human Resources Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 230,698 237,356 6,658 2.89% Supplies 700 730 30 4.29% Services&Charges 24,296 24,331 35 0.14% Total 255,694 262,417 6,723 2.63% Public Works Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 876,364 905,382 29,018 3.31% Supplies 18,000 14,750 (3,250) (18.06%) Services&Charges 72,506 61,800 (10,706) (14.77%) Total 966,870 981,932 15,062 1.56% City Hall Operations&Maintenance Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 0 98,818 98,818 0.00% Supplies 0 30,000 30,000 0.00% Services&Charges 0 175,100 174,600 0.00% Total 0 303,918 303,418 0.00% (Continued to next page) 53 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 2017 Budget General Fund Department Changes from 2016 to 2017 Difference Between 2016 and 2017 2016 2017 Increase Decrease) Budget Budget $ (Continued from previous page) Community Dev.-Admin Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 250,407 261,262 10,855 4.33% Supplies 3,100 3,100 0 0.00% Services&Charges 18,600 18,600 0 0.00% Total 272,107 282,962 10,855 3.99% Community Dev.-Economic Development Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 317,257 411,232 93,975 29.62% Supplies 1,100 1,100 0 0.00% Services&Charges 226,800 271,300 44,500 19.62% Total 545,157 683,632 138,475 25.40% Community Dev.-Dev. Sery Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 1,173,837 1,119,084 (54,753) (4.66%) Supplies 21,050 16,550 (4,500) (21.38%) Services&Charges 271,750 263,350 (8,400) (3.09%) Intergovernmental Services 20,000 20,000 0 0.00% Total 1,486,637 1,418,984 (67,653) (4.55%) Community Dev.-Building Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 1,256,565 1,279,834 23,269 1.85% Supplies 28,200 32,700 4,500 15.96% Services&Charges 59,400 78,300 18,900 31.82% Total 1,344,165 1,390,834 46,669 3.47% Parks&Rec-Admin Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 246,821 242,414 (4,407) (1.79%) Supplies 5,900 7,400 1,500 25.42% Services&Charges 29,150 39,150 10,000 34.31% Total 281,871 288,964 7,093 2.52% Parks&Rec-Maintenance Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 0 0 0 0.00% Supplies 5,500 5,500 0 0.00% Services&Charges 826,543 855,850 29,307 3.55% Total 832,043 861,350 29,307 3.52% Parks&Rec-Recreation Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 161,397 168,645 7,248 4.49% Supplies 7,600 8,200 600 7.89% Services&Charges 72,200 59,150 (13,050) (18.07%) Total 241,197 235,995 (5,202) (2.16%) Parks&Rec-Aquatics Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 0 0 0 0.00% Supplies 14,000 3,200 (10,800) (77.14%) Services&Charges 447,200 454,150 6,950 1.55% Total 461,200 457,350 (3,850) (0.83%) Parks&Rec-Senior Center Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 88,481 89,416 935 1.06% Supplies 1,600 1,600 0 0.00% Services&Charges 5,700 4,900 (800) (14.04%) Total 95,781 95,916 135 0.14% (Continued to next page) 54 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 2017 Budget General Fund Department Changes from 2016 to 2017 Difference Between 2016 and 2017 2016 2017 Increase Decrease) Budget Budget $ (Continued from previous page) Parks&Rec-CenterPlace Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 475,925 491,639 15,714 3.30% Supplies 76,024 73,524 (2,500) (3.29%) Services&Charges 330,274 326,295 (3,979) (1.20%) Total 882,223 891,458 9,235 1.05% General Government Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 0 0 0 0.00% Supplies 87,600 145,450 57,850 66.04% Services&Charges 1,161,800 756,900 (404,900) (34.85%) Intergovernmental Services 295,100 328,500 33,400 11.32% Capital outlays 43,000 10,000 (33,000) (76.74%) Total 1,587,500 1,240,850 (346,650) (21.84%) Transfers out-#204 198,734 397,350 198,616 99.94% Transfers out-#309 230,300 160,000 (70,300) (30.53%) Transfers out-#310 Bond pmt>$434,600 lease pmt 72,500 0 (72,500) (100.00%) Estimated City Hall O&M costs 271,700 0 (271,700) (100.00%) Total 344,200 0 (344,200) (100.00%) Transfers out-#311 Pavement Preservation 943,800 953,200 9,400 1.00% Total 943,800 953,200 9,400 1.00% Transfers out-#501 0 36,600 36,600 0.00% Transfers out-#502 325,000 350,000 25,000 7.69% Total recurring expenditures 39,707,433 40,053,822 346,389 0.87% Summary by Category Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 8,236,237 8,545,507 309,270 3.75% Supplies 316,284 388,259 71,975 22.76% Services&Charges 4,479,779 4,283,849 (195,930) (4.37%) Transfers out-#204 198,734 397,350 198,616 99.94% Transfers out-#309 230,300 160,000 (70,300) (30.53%) Transfers out-#310 344,200 0 (344,200) (100.00%) Transfers out-#311 943,800 953,200 9,400 1.00% Transfers out-#501 0 36,600 36,600 0.00% Transfers out-#502 325,000 350,000 25,000 7.69% Non-Departmental(fines&forfeits) 649,500 602,250 (47,250) (7.27%) Intergovernmental Svc(public safety) 23,625,499 23,978,307 352,808 1.49% Intergovernmental Svc 315,100 348,500 33,400 10.60% Capital outlay 43,000 10,000 (33,000) (76.74%) 39,707,433 40,053,822 346,389 0.87% 55 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Dept: 011 Legislative Branch 2017 Budget This department accounts for the cost of providing effective elected representation of the citizenry in the governing body. The Council makes policy decisions for the City and is accountable to Spokane Valley citizens by making decisions regarding how resources are allocated,the appropriate levels of service,and establishing goals and policies for the organization. Accomplishments for 2016 • Continued to work with state and federal legislators for possible financial assistance for the Barker and Pines Road Grade Separation Projects. • Worked with Council and Staff to develop a strategic plan for funding all grade separation projects. • Continued to expand,where possible,economic development efforts. This included completing the design for a new City Hall structure,developing the necessary financing including the issuance of LTGO Bonds,and award of the construction contract;and completion of the retail improvement study and phase 1 of a tourism enhancement study. • Worked with Council and Staff to develop a strategic plan to address structural funding deficits in Street Fund#101 and Pavement Preservation Fund#311. • Evaluated and discussed increasing costs of public safety,including law enforcement. Continued to seek long-term solutions to control costs while at the same time better serving the community. This in-part involved beginning negotiations with Spokane County for Law Enforcement Services and continuing to analyze costs of all public safety related contracts. • Worked with the Community, Planning Commission and Staff to complete the Comprehensive Plan update. Goals for 2017 • Continue to work with state and federal legislators towards financial assistance for both the Barker and Pines Road Grade Separation Projects. • Develop a strategic plan for financing and completion of all grade separation projects. • Continue and expand where possible,economic development efforts. Complete the development of implementation strategies for the retail and tourism studies that were completed in 2016. • Pursue a sustainability plan in connection with the City's Street Preservation program,to include sustained funding in the Street Fund#101 and Pavement Preservation Fund#311,to address concerns beyond the year 2021. • Evaluate and discuss increasing costs of public safety,including law enforcement. Continue the ongoing process to develop long-term solutions to controlling costs while better serving the community. • Pursue financing for Browns Park, Balfour Park and Appleway Trail amenities. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Personnel-FTE Equivalents Mayor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Council 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Total FTEs 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Budget Detail Wages,Payroll Taxes&Benefits $ 174,891 $ 191,856 $ 206,705 $ 220,634 $ 230,922 Supplies 3,577 2,379 2,908 4,550 4,550 Services&Charges 161,333 211,573 157,665 281,685 307,400 Total Legislative Branch $ 339,801 $ 405,808 $ 367,278 $ 506,869 $ 542,872 56 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Dept:013 Executive Branch 2017 Budget 013-City Manager This department is accountable to the City Council for the operational results of the organization,effective support of elected officials in achieving their goals;fulfillment of the statutory requirements of the City Manager,implementation of City Council policies,and provision of a communication linkage between citizens,the City Council,City departments, and other government agencies. Accomplishments for 2016 • Worked to support the City Council's 2016 Goals as referenced under the Legislative Budget. • Prepared a balanced 2017 Budget that met City Council's goal to reflect recurring expenditure growth at less than 1%. • Worked with State Lobbyists on behalf of the interests of our City. • Prepared a proposed 2017 Council Legislative Agenda that was specifically discussed by Council on three separate occasions including their September 6,2016 adoption of the agenda itself. This was followed by an October 18,2016 meeting with our local legislative delegation where the Councilmembers and Legislators discussed areas of common interest including our legislative agenda. • Continued efforts to strengthen economic development including working with the Community and Economic Development Department to complete the Retail Enhancement Study, Phase 1 of the Tourism Enhancement a strategic economic development plan and the recruitment of an Economic Development Specialist to our City. Study and the Comp Plan. • Worked with Staff and Council on a City Hall construction project that included --completion of the design --developing the necessary financing including the issuance of LTGO Bonds --award of the construction contract Noteworthy is that this resulted in our fixed annual bond payment over the next 30-years of$399,900 is$34,700 less than our current annual lease payment of$434,600. • Provided leadership support for the strengthening and promoting of Spokane Valley's core values and fiscal policies. Goals for 2017 • Work to support City Council's 2017 Goals as referenced under the Legislative Budget. • Present Council with a balanced 2018 Budget. • Work with Federal and State Lobbyists on behalf of the interests of our City. • Prepare the Legislative Agenda for Council consideration. • Strengthen economic development. • Lead the City through a seamless move to the new City Hall building. 015-Legal Accomplishments for 2016 • Assisted in review of the Comprehensive Plan Update. • Finalized major revisions to purchasing laws and procedures. • Assisted in transition to new City Manager. • Assisted in amending state law on nuisance abatement cost recovery. • Assisted in contracting process for new solid waste collection agreement. • Led development and adoption of permanent marijuana regulations. • Assisted in major review of law enforcement contractual issues. Goals for 2017 • Have a fully operational office that proactively assists in program development,advises all departments on legal issues in a timely manner and manages all potential and existing litigation. • Work with Community and Economic Development and Finance in identifying and implementing economic development options. • Assist other departments in analyzing and mapping existing processes to determine compliance with laws and whether higher levels of customer service can be achieved. • Assist Council and staff in accomplishing items on the 2017 Legislative Agenda. (continued to next page) 57 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Dept:013 Executive Branch 2017 Budget Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Personnel-FTE Equivalents City Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 City Attorney 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 City Clerk 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Deputy City Attorney 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Deputy City Clerk 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant-Legal 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant(CC) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Executive Assistant(CM) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total FTEs 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Interns 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Budget Detail Wages,Payroll Taxes&Benefits $ 922,074 $ 953,434 $ 978,742 $ 1,048,669 $ 1,083,066 Supplies 1,811 2,787 2,869 5,360 5,405 Services&Charges 159,747 126,171 142,165 158,225 145,658 Nonrecurring expenses 0 0 3,161 0 0 Total Executive&Legislative Support $ 1,083,632 $ 1,082,392 $ 1,126,937 $ 1,212,254 $ 1,234,129 58 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Dept: 016 Public Safety 2017 Budget The Public Safety department budget provides funds for the protection of persons and property in the city. The City contracts with Spokane County for law enforcement,district court,prosecutor services, public defender services,probation services,jail and animal control services. See following page for detail information on each budgeted section. Judicial System-The Spokane County District Court is contracted $ 2,168,892 to provide municipal court services. The contract provides for the services of judge and court commissioner with related support staff. Budgeted amount also includes jury management fees. Law Enforcement- The Spokane County Sheriffs Office is 20,476,070 responsible for maintaining law and order and providing police services to the community under the direction of the Police Chief. The office provides for the preservation of life,protection of property,and reduction of crime. Jail System-Spokane County provides jail and probation 1,389,039 services for persons sentenced by any City of Spokane Valley Municipal Court Judge for violating laws of the city or state. Animal Control-Spokane County will provide animal control 294,121 services to include licensing,care and treatment of lost or stray animals,and response to potentially dangerous animal confrontations. Non-Departmental Fines and forfeitures to the State of Washington 602,250 Grant expenditures 20,000 Capital outlay-CAD/RMS-Nonrecurring 145,000 Total $25,095,372 59 City of Spokane Valley 2017 Budget 016-Public Safety 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Judicial System: District Court Contract $ 868,861 $ 820,628 $ 656,129 $ 822,076 $ 769,083 Public Defender Contract 617,999 649,831 710,289 832,182 721,630 Prosecutor Contract 406,875 410,196 479,782 448,722 542,747 Pretrial Services Contract 108,655 117,048 131,041 122,372 135,432 Subtotal Judicial System 2,002,390 1,997,703 1,977,241 2,225,352 2,168,892 Law Enforcement System: Sheriff Contract 17,701,607 17,731,187 18,205,133 19,713,401 20,036,884 Emergency Management Contract 80,428 82,237 88,070 90,558 89,371 Wages,Payroll Taxes&Benefits 3,642 6,506 2,617 6,500 3,000 Operating Supplies 3,980 3,388 2,144 4,000 4,000 Repair&Maintenance.Supplies 2,343 3,343 2,007 3,500 2,500 Professional Services 0 0 1,334 0 0 Electricity/Gas 21,865 20,887 18,953 22,000 22,000 Water 1,210 1,497 1,275 1,600 1,600 Sewer 851 850 995 900 2,500 Waste Disposal 3,460 3,462 3,372 3,500 3,500 Law Enf.Bldg Maintenance Contract 80,283 58,331 76,076 60,000 70,000 Taxes and Assessments 715 715 715 750 715 Miscellaneous Services/Contingency 0 250 550 250,000 180,000 Crywolf Charges&Fees 44,412 48,348 48,419 50,000 50,000 Umpqua Bank Fees 5,111 5,726 9,418 6,000 10,000 Subtotal Law Enforcement System: 17,949,907 17,966,727 18,461,078 20,212,709 20,476,070 Jail System: Jail Contract 713,292 996,557 1,213,502 1,301,055 1,389,039 Work Release(Geiger) 508,704 151,158 0 0 0 Subtotal Jail System: 1,221,996 1,147,715 1,213,502 1,301,055 1,389,039 Other: Fines&Forfeitures State Remittance 664,681 637,014 587,446 649,500 602,250 Animal Control Contract 295,556 287,081 290,228 295,133 294,121 Non-Capital Equipment for JAG Grant 3,272 0 4,579 20,000 20,000 Non-Capital Equip for ARRA JAG Grant 203 0 0 0 0 LEC Labor Contract Settlement 0 0 224,244 0 0 Settle&Adjust 118,273 0 (753,653) 0 0 Small Tools&Minor Equipment 0 0 4,610 0 0 Non-Capital Equipment for 2011 JAG Grant 9,297 8,010 0 0 0 Non-Capital Equipment for 2012 JAG Grant 23,978 0 0 0 0 Non-Capital Equipment for 2013 JAG Grant 0 20,495 0 0 0 Non-Capital Equipment for WASPC Grant 4,771 6,020 0 0 0 JAG-Wireless Cards 10,119 3,979 0 0 0 SVPD Wireless Cards 0 434 0 0 0 Travel/Mileage/Meals 0 0 74 0 0 Nighttime Seatbelt Patrol Overtime 1,611 1,647 0 0 0 Maintenance 0 7,468 4,253 0 0 Drive Hammered-Get Nailed Grant 10,811 19,802 8,743 0 0 Building Repair&Maintenance 0 7,679 0 0 0 Office Furniture&Equipment 0 14,480 36,823 0 0 Distracted Driving 0 0 331 0 0 Click it or Ticket 0 0 714 0 0 TZT seatbelt patrols 0 0 724 0 0 Capital outlay-CAD/RMS 0 0 294,575 140,281 145,000 Subtotal Other: 1,142,572 1,014,109 703,691 1,104,914 1,061,371 Total Public Safety $22,316,865 $22,126,254 $22,355,512 $24,844,030 $25,095,372 60 City of Spokane Valley 2017 Budgeted Contract Expenditures $25,000,000 - 20,036,884 $20,000,000 - $15,000,000 - $10,000,000 - $5,000,000 - 1,389,039 $769,083 721,630 542,747 89,371 70,000 294,121 $- District Court Public Defender Prosecutor Sheriff Contract Emergency Law Enf. Bldg Jail Contract Animal Control Contract Contract Contract Management Maintenance Contract Contract Contract 61 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Dept: 018 2017 Budget Operation&Administrative Services The Operations&Administrative Services Department is composed of three divisions,the Deputy City Manager Division, the Finance Division,and the Human Resources Division. 013-Deputy City Manager Division The Deputy City Manager(DCM)supervises the Operations&Administrative Services Department,assists the City Manager in organizing and directing the other operations of the City,and assumes the duties of City Manager in his/her absence. Accomplishments for 2016 • Worked to support the 2016 Goals of the Legislative and Executive Branch. • Continued to evaluate the Spokane Valley police department Power Shift that was implemented in 2015,including: --Response times for specific priority calls compared in days with the power shift implemented to non-power shift days. --Percentage of deputy initiated incidents including the development of trendline comparisons between power shift and non-power shift areas. --Percentage of property crime cases solved compared to unincorporated areas where changes have not taken place. • Worked towards the development of a 2017 Business Plan that is a guide to the preparation of the 2017 Budget by linking together community priorities,financial projections and City Council goals. • In conjunction with the Finance and Legal Departments,lead the effort to issue limited tax general obligation(LTGO) bonds,the proceeds of which are being used towards the construction of a new City Hall building. • Continued public information support that informed and the community about the status of various projects including: --a variety of construction projects --Sullivan Road Bridge Replacement Project --City Hall design,bond issue and construction --Comp Plan development • In conjunction with the Legal and Public Works departments,developed a Request for Proposals for solid waste collection services within the City. Goals for 2017 • Support the 2017 Goals of the Legislative and Executive Branch. • Work with the City Manager and Staff to develop the 2018 Business Plan. • Continue with the annual process of evaluating public safety contracts to ensure the City is receiving services in the most efficient,effective and cost contained manner possible. • Continue to provide public information support. • In conjunction with the Legal and Public Works departments,by the Spring of 2017,complete the process leading to the selection of a solid waste collection provider. • Coordinate the efforts of the City Hall construction and moving teams. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Personnel-FTE Equivalents Deputy City Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Senior Administrative Analyst 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Public Information Officer 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Analyst 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Office Assistant II 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Office Assistant I 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total FTEs 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Intern 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Budget Detail Wages,Payroll Taxes&Benefits $ 402,012 $ 496,278 $ 612,576 $ 660,102 $ 670,977 Supplies 1,153 2,519 1,089 2,500 2,000 Services&Charges 56,162 36,663 59,134 74,400 77,300 Total Deputy City Manager Division $ 459,327 $ 535,460 $ 672,799 $ 737,002 $ 750,277 62 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Dept: 018 Operation&Administrative Services 2017 Budget 014-Finance Division The Finance Division provides financial management services for all City departments. Programs include accounting and financial reporting,payroll,accounts payable,purchasing,budgeting and financial planning,treasury,information technology and investments.The division is also responsible for generating and analyzing financial data related to the City's operations. The department prepares Finance Activity Reports for review by the City Manager and City Council as well as the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report(CAFR)that is subject to an annual audit by the Washington State Auditor's Office. Accomplishments for 2016 • Implemented State Auditor recommendations. • Improved financial statement preparation process and accuracy. • Completed the 2015 CAFR by May 30,2016. • Acquired four vehicles included in the 2016 budget,including one small SUV for Community and Economic Development,one car and one small truck for Parks and Recreation,and one truck split half-time between the Street Fund and Stormwater Fund. • Completed the process of virtualizing servers using VMware. • Worked with all City departments to implement new purchasing procedures. • Implemented new reporting standards for pensions for preparation of the 2015 CAFR. • Replaced approximately 36 desktop computers that were at the end of their life cycle. • Completed the third and final phase of a network switch replacement project. • Worked with Parks and Recreation to upgrade the cash registers and point of sales system at the three City pools. • In conjunction with the City's Deputy City Manager and Legal departments,worked with a financial advisor and bond underwriter to issue limited tax general obligation(LTGO)bonds,the proceeds of which are being used towards the construction of a new City Hall building. • Began planning for the physical and technological transfer of operations to the new City Hall building. Goals for 2017 • Implement 2015 audit recommendations. • Work towards continued improvement and accuracy in the financial statement preparation process. • Complete the 2016 CAFR by May 30,2017,and receive a"clean audit opinion". • Maintain consistent levels of service in payroll,accounts payable,budget development,periodic financial report preparation,and information technology services. • Continue with the ongoing process of refining the replacement program for IT resources. • Work with all City departments for a seamless physical and technological transfer of operations to the new City Hall building. • Acquire and install equipment necessary for the broadcast of City Council meetings in the Council Chambers of the new City Hall building. Budqet Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Personnel-FTE Equivalents Finance Director 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Accounting Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Accountant/Budget Analyst 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 Accounting Technician 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 IT Specialist 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 GIS/Database Administrator 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Help Desk Technician 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total FTEs 10.75 11.75 11.75 11.75 11.75 Budget Detail Wages,Payroll Taxes&Benefits $ 1,008,218 $ 1,057,271 $ 1,028,666 $ 1,222,580 $ 1,252,460 Supplies 2,791 4,946 2,826 6,000 6,000 Services&Charges 21,218 36,520 30,817 24,500 24,000 Total Finance Division $ 1,032,227 $ 1,098,737 $ 1,062,309 $ 1,253,080 $ 1,282,460 63 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Dept: 018 Operation&Administrative Services 2017 Budget 016-Human Resources Division Human Resources(HR)is administered through the City Manager. The HR operation provides services in compensation, benefits,training and organizational development,staffing,employee relations,and communications.The Human Resources Office also provides Risk Management services as well as Website and Mobile App design and maintenance Accomplishments for 2016 • Redesigned recruitment materials to improve the quality of applicants considered for City positions. • Continued to build the foundation for a lasting Wellness Program through management support and employee involvement. • Redesigned the City's Mobile App to be consistent with the City's website. • Provided support to the Council in their selection of the City Manager. • Continued to provide guidance to City officials through the implementation of the Affordable Care Act. Goals for 2017 • Review City employee policies for compliance with regulations and efficiencies. • Review and archive records maintained by the Human Resources office. • Continue to support employee wellness through attainment of the AWC WellCity Award. • Support Economic Development through Mobile App and Website Support. • Provide Employee Ethics training to City Staff. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Personnel-FTE Equivalents Human Resource Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Human Resources Technician 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total FTEs 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Budget Detail Wages,Payroll Taxes&Benefits $ 197,822 $ 208,063 $ 216,518 $ 230,698 $ 237,356 Supplies 640 679 434 700 730 Services&Charges 13,645 20,941 18,648 24,296 24,331 Total Human Resources Division $ 212,107 $ 229,683 $ 235,600 $ 255,694 $ 262,417 64 Fund:001 General FundSpokane Valley Dept:032 Public Works 2017 Budget The Public Works Department oversees the City's transportation system,which includes construction and maintenance of streets and stormwater systems,operations and maintenance of traffic signs and signals and transportation planning. Accomplishments for 2016 • Implemented the approved capital projects. • Provided planning for development of the updated Transportation Improvement Plan. • Prepared and submitted grant applications for capital projects. • Completed the 2016 Pavement Preservation Projects as approved. Goals for 2017 • Prepare final design for Barker Road Grade Separation Project. • Manage the construction of a new City Hall building. • Implement approved capital projects. • Prepare and submit grant applications for capital projects. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 7 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Personnel-FTE Equivalents Public Works Director 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Capital Improvements Program Manager 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 Engineer 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 (1) Engineering Technician I 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 (1) Engineering Technician II 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 (1) MaintlConst Inspector 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 (2) Planning Grants Engineer 0.0 0.375 0.375 0.375 0.375 (3) Senior Engineer 2.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 Senior Engineer-Proj Mgmt 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 (1) Total FTEs 10.500 10.875 10.875 10.875 10.875 Budget Detail Wages,Payroll Taxes&Benefits $ 557,708 $ 647,097 $ 684,666 $ 876,364 $ 905,382 Supplies 12,975 10,481 11,149 18,000 14,750 Services&Charges 88,004 51,768 42,913 72,506 61,800 Nonrecurring expenses 0 9,540 0 0 0 Total Public Works $ 658,687 $ 718,886 $ 738,728 $ 966,870 $ 981,932 (1) Only 50%is budgeted to the public works department in the General Fund with the balance budgeted as a part of Capital Projects Funds. (2) This position is budgeted 50%as a part of Capital Projects Funds and 50%Street Fund. (3) This position is budgeted 37.5%to Public Works,37.5%to Street Fund,and 25%to Storm water fund. 65 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Dept:033 City Hall Operations and Maintenance 2017 Budget The Public Works Division provides management and oversight of the City Hall Operations and Maintenance Department. This department will be responsible for the overall operations and maintenance of the new City Hall facility,the construction of which broke ground in June of 2016 and is anticipated to be completed in the Fall of 2017.The building is located on a 3.38 acre site at the southeast corner of Sprague Avenue and Dartmouth Road.The City Hall Operations and Maintenance Department will be responsible for,among other things,the grounds maintenance,janitorial services,and maintenance of the HVAC and other building systems.This department will also be responsible for the operations and maintenance of other City facilities,such as the Valley Precinct and the Street Maintenance Shop,as time allows. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Personnel-FTE Equivalents Maint Worker-Facilities 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 Total FTEs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 Budget Detail Wages,Payroll Taxes&Benefits $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 98,818 Supplies 0 0 0 0 30,000 Services&Charges 0 0 0 0 175,100 Total Administrative Division $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 303,918 66 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Community&Economic Development Dept:050 Administrative Division 2017 Budget The Administrative Division provides overall management and oversight of the Community Development Department including the permitting operation,long-range planning,development engineering,and code compliance and provides staff support through administration of the department's budget,provides administrative support and department training. Accomplishments for 2016 • Oversaw completion of draft Comprehensive Plan,Retail Study,and Tourism Study. • Continued to implement a document control system for documents and forms. • Assisted in the selection process for the 2016 marketing consultant. • Assisted in the City Hall project. Goals for 2017 • Oversee the adoption process of development regulations. • Oversee completion of economic development strategic plan. • Oversee economic development marketing efforts. • Ensure customer service expectations are met. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Personnel-FTE Equivalents Community Development Director 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total FTEs 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Budget Detail Wages,Payroll Taxes&Benefits $ 215,537 $ 227,397 $ 237,232 $ 250,407 $ 261,262 Supplies 2,399 3,582 2,553 3,100 3,100 Services&Charges 12,449 12,022 10,785 18,600 18,600 Nonrecurring Professional Services 0 32,410 206,704 350,000 0 Total Administrative Division $ 230,385 $ 275,410 $ 457,274 $ 622,107 $ 282,962 67 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Community&Economic Development Dept:051 Economic Development Division 2017 Budget The Economic Development Division will work closely with the City Manager to pursue economic development strategies which attract and retain businesses within the City. Staff develop collaborative relationships with businesses and economic development partners,use technology to support ED programs,building marketing plans,pursue infrastructure improvements and promote the City to businesses and visitors. Accomplishments for 2016 • Prepared draft Comprehensive Plan. • Developed a retail recruitment strategy. • Completed the Tourism Study. • Continued to collaborate with economic development partners. • Developed a GIS system to promote economic development applications. • Developed tools and programs to support small business retention and expansion. • Worked with Spokane County to extend sewer to the industrial areas. • Conducted selection process for a marketing consultant. • Researched Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)program opportunities. Goals for 2017 • Develop strategic plan for economic development. • Implement the retail recruitment strategy. • Continue to pursue infrastructure improvements to foster economic development. • Continue to implement strategies to promote business growth. • Implement the strategic marketing plan. • Continue to foster relationships with our economic development partners. • Refine the online GIS system to promote economic development. • Identify grant opportunities to support economic development initiatives. • Continue to research CDBG program opportunities. • Develop tools and programs to support small business retention and expansion. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Personnel-FTE Equivalents Engineer 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.65 0.65 Senior Planner-CD 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 E.D.Project Specialist 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total FTEs 0.0 0.0 2.5 2.65 2.65 Budget Detail Wages,Payroll Taxes&Benefits $ 0 $ 0 $ 234,966 $ 317,257 $ 411,232 Supplies 0 0 6 1,100 1,100 Services&Charges 0 0 3,930 226,800 271,300 Nonrecurring Services&Charges 0 0 0 0 50,000 Total Administrative Division $ 0 $ 0 $ 238,902 $ 545,157 $ 733,632 68 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Community&Economic Development Dept:055/056 Development Services Division 2017 Budget The Development Services Division reflects the consolidation of the Engineering and Planning Divisions of the Community and Economic Development Department. The Development Services Division is responsible for providing professional policy guidance to the City Council and Planning Commission on such issues as land use,access management, Shoreline Management Act,annexation,growth targets,water quality,public works issues and more. Staff is responsible for processing land use and home business permits,reviewing environmentally sensitive areas,for the review and inspection of stormwater management in private development,reviewing access management and other public works improvements in private development applications,administering the State Environmental Protection Act(SEPA). The right of way(ROW) inspection program provides inspection services to assure the compliance with the RPCP and the durability and safety of work done in the public ROW. Accomplishments for 2016 • Submitted final Forker Draw Floodplain Application to FEMA. • Completed Water District Research. • Participated in Regional Water Resource meetings. • Provided high quality customer service by maintaining engineering/planning review times of less than 2 weeks. • Completed research for regional mineral resources. • Participated in the creation of a City GIS system. • Completed the 2016 Annual Comprehensive Plan amendments. • Participated in the review of the Municipal Code for updates. • Completed marijuana regulations update. Goals for 2017 • Continue work on permit process and customer service improvement. • Continue work on Regional Low Impact Development Standards. • Continue to work on unstudied flood zones within the City. • Stay up to date with Regional Water right issues. • Assist in the finalization of Municipal Code updates. • Process the 2017 Comprehensive Plan amendments. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Personnel-FTE Equivalents Development Services Manager 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Engineer 1.5 1.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 Assistant Engineer 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Senior Planner 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Planner 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Maint/Construction Inspector 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Code Enforcement Officer 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 ROW Inspector 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Office Assistant I 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Senior Engineer 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Engineering Technician 1.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total FTEs 8.00 7.00 11.00 11.00 10.00 Budget Detail Wages,Payroll Taxes&Benefits $ 1,488,269 $ 1,278,597 $ 1,115,465 $ 1,173,837 $ 1,119,084 Supplies 15,830 7,862 10,058 21,050 16,550 Services&Charges 246,181 257,861 246,964 271,750 263,350 Intergovernmental Payments 8,287 0 0 20,000 20,000 Total Engineering Division $ 1,758,567 $ 1,544,319 $ 1,372,487 $ 1,486,637 $ 1,418,984 69 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Community&Economic Development Dept:057 Building Division 2017 Budget The Building Division implements the Washington State Building Code. This Division is responsible for ensuring that buildings and structures comply with adopted building codes through technical plan review and inspection services. The Permit Center receives applications and coordinates the review and processing of permits. The Code Enforcement staff enforce zoning and building regulations on a complaint-driven basis. Accomplishments for 2016 • Created and implemented customer service survey. • Improved residential building review at the Permit Center Counter with increased counter reviews performed by Permit Facilitators and creation of a Multiple Use Plan Program. • Developed Swimming Pool,ROW Process&Submittal Guide as informational bulletins for public assistance. • Maintained and enhanced partnerships with Spokane,Spokane County and outside review agencies. • Implemented Code Enforcement process changes to incorporate Office Assistant and Building Inspector. • Residential Approach Inspection shifted to Building Inspectors. • Created and implemented a Regional Special Inspection and Fabricator program involvement in case creation and field investigation. • Coordinated progress reports on the Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan. • Created custom reports in the permitting system to meet the needs of outside reporting agencies. Goals for 2017 • Work on permit processes and customer service improvement plan to enhance the customer experience at the Permit Center. • Develop Performance Measures. • Coordinate on central reporting function in SMARTGov System. • Expand on-line permit system. • Incorporate data from SVFD records to facilitate re-use of existing vacant buildings and tenant spaces. • Increase efforts to establish and maintain relationships with regional jurisdictions and outside review agencies. • Implement Code Enforcement educational awareness program to inform the public. • Provide cross training of staff to facilitate coverage during times of lean staffing. • Coordinate with regional partners on the Hazard Mitigation Plan. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Personnel-FTE Equivalents Building Official 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Building Inspector ll 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Planner 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 Development Service Coordinator 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Engineering Tech 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Office Assistant I 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Permit Facilitator 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Plans Examiner 0.5 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 Senior Plans Examiner 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Code Enforcement Officer 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 Assistant Planner 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total FTEs 11.50 12.50 14.00 14.00 14.00 Budget Detail Wages,Payroll Taxes&Benefits $ 932,662 $ 1,098,561 $ 1,126,106 $ 1,256,565 $ 1,279,834 Supplies 20,139 14,196 7,230 28,200 32,700 Services&Charges 55,966 65,457 60,112 59,400 78,300 Intergovernmental Payments 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Outlays 0 0 0 0 0 Interfund Charges 0 0 0 0 0 Total Building Division $ 1,008,767 $ 1,178,214 $ 1,193,448 $ 1,344,165 $ 1,390,834 70 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Dept:076 Parks&Recreation 2017 Budget The Parks and Recreation Department is composed of six divisions including Administration,Maintenance, Recreation,Aquatics,Senior Center,and CenterPlace. The overall goal of the department is to provide quality recreation programs and acquisition,renovation,development,operation and maintenance of parks and maintenance of parks and recreation facilities. 000-Parks Administration Division The Administration Division provides direction and leadership for the Parks and Recreation Department in implementing the goals and objectives of the City Council and facilitates the general upkeep of parks and public areas of the City. Accomplishments for 2016 • Completed construction of a championship sand volleyball court and splashpad at Browns Park. • Completed construction of Phase 2 of the Pocket Dog Park at Valley Mission Park. • Installed new park signs at Edgecliff,Valley Mission and Valley Mission Dog Park. • Developed Request for Proposals for the Park Maintenance Contract. • Completed Discovery Splashpad activator renovation. • Completed all Park repairs related to the damage caused by Windstorm 2015. Goals for 2017 • Construct new splashpad and ADA pathway at Edgecliff Park. • Construct the Sullivan to Corbin section of the Appleway Trail. • Add amenities to the Valley Mission Dog Park. • Pursue land acquisitions for priority facilities such as disc golf,skateboard park,etc. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Personnel-FTE Equivalents Parks&Recreation Director 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total FTEs 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Budget Detail Wages,Payroll Taxes&Benefits $ 212,067 $ 224,275 $ 230,394 $ 246,821 $ 242,414 Supplies 6,427 2,493 2,688 5,900 7,400 Services&Charges 29,288 28,366 28,433 29,150 39,150 Nonrecurring Expenses 62,087 11,192 78,659 67,000 0 Total Parks Administration $ 309,869 $ 266,326 $ 340,174 $ 348,871 $ 288,964 71 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Dept:076 Parks&Recreation 2017 Budget 300-Maintenance Division The Parks Maintenance Division is responsible for the contracted maintenance and upkeep of our parks and public areas including the Centennial Trail. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Budget Detail Supplies $ 1,568 $ 2,903 $ 3,444 $ 5,500 $ 5,500 Services&Charges 762,614 791,348 830,641 826,543 855,850 Total Parks Maintenance $ 764,182 $ 794,251 $ 834,085 $ 832,043 $ 861,350 72 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Dept:076 Parks&Recreation 2017 Budget 301 -Recreation Division The Recreation Division coordinates and facilitates the delivery of recreation programs and service throughout the City and the City's Park system. Accomplishments for 2016 • Continued to provide quality recreation programs for the Spokane Valley community. • Designed Recreation Brochure in house utilizing Adobe Creative Suite software. • Actively looked for sponsorship opportunities within the community in regards to the Summer Outdoor Movies. • Continued to foster relationships with community partners. Goals for 2017 • Research and offer new recreation programs that serve the needs of the community. • Continue to provide quality recreation programs for the Spokane Valley community. • Foster relationships with community partners. • Offer affordable community events for families,teens,and the community. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Personnel-FTE Equivalents Recreation Coordinator 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Budget Detail Wages,Payroll Taxes&Benefits $ 151,084 $ 142,074 $ 164,092 $ 161,397 $ 168,645 Supplies 5,760 6,740 7,791 7,600 8,200 Services&Charges 54,381 50,350 65,832 72,200 59,150 Total Recreation Division $ 211,225 $ 199,164 $ 237,715 $ 241,197 $ 235,995 73 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Dept:076 Parks&Recreation 2017 Budget 302-Aquatics Division The City of Spokane Valley owns three pools: Park Road Pool,Terrace View Pool,and Valley Mission Pool. Services include open swim,swim lessons,swim team and facility rentals. In addition, the City leases a portion of Valley Mission Park to Splashdown Inc.for a water park.The City currently is contracting with the YMCA for all aquatic activities within the City. The YMCA provides the lifeguards and maintains the pools during the season. Accomplishments for 2016 • Maintained a full summer swimming program. • Researched and re-evaluated our pool rental pricing structure. • Installed pool stairs at Valley Mission Pool. • Researched marketing opportunities to more effectively promote the outdoor pools. • Updated the cash register systems at all three pools. Goals for 2017 • Maintain a full summer swimming program. • Replace main drain piping from the drain boxes at Terrace View and Park Road Pools. • Replace the gutter line running to the outdoor drain pit at Valley Mission Pool. • Explore options to the Terrace View Pool tank paint peeling problem. • Improve coordination and communication among teams for the summer swim meet season. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Budget Detail Supplies $ 9,081 $ 424 $ 351 $ 14,000 $ 3,200 Services&Charges 469,765 436,604 487,564 447,200 454,150 Nonrecurring Services&Charges 0 0 0 0 12,000 Total Aquatics Division $ 478,846 $ 437,028 $ 487,915 $ 461,200 $ 469,350 74 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Dept:076 Parks&Recreation 2017 Budget 304-Senior Center Division The City of Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Department assumed operational control of the Valley Senior Center in 2003. Accomplishments for 2016 • Offered more Tuesday evening classes in the Senior Wing of CenterPlace. • Continued relationship with YMCA to offer reduced daily rates for Senior Center members. • Developed and fostered relationship with Walgreens to bring pharmacy students to counsel seniors on medications, provide blood pressure checks and offer flu shots. • Researched and developed class for seniors needing help with IT issues. • Worked closely with the Parks&Recreation Director on programs being offered to seniors. Goals for 2017 • Continue to enhance the resource and referral information at the reception desk to be better equipped to handle calls. • Offer"Get Acquainted Open House"to allow the public to visit the CenterPlace and the Senior Center to learn about programs and activities offered by the Senior Center and the ACT 2 Community Colleges. • Continue to work with the Board on providing board training classes. • Work closely with the Parks&Recreation Director on programs being offered to seniors. • Offer more Tuesday evening classes in the Senior Wing of CenterPlace. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Personnel-FTE Equivalents Senior Center Specialist 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total FTEs 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Intern 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Budget Detail Wages,Payroll Taxes&Benefits $ 77,018 $ 79,872 $ 82,625 $ 88,481 $ 89,416 Supplies 2,157 1,460 454 1,600 1,600 Services&Charges 1,897 2,514 2,298 5,700 4,900 Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 0 Total Senior Center Division $ 81,072 $ 83,846 $ 85,377 $ 95,781 $ 95,916 75 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Dept:076 Parks&Recreation 2017 Budget 305-CenterPlace Division Construction of Mirabeau Point CenterPlace began in late 2003 and was completed mid-year 2005.The project represented the culmination of eight years of planning and fundraising by Mirabeau Point Inc.and the joint involvement of the City and Spokane County. The approximately 54,000 square foot facility houses the City of Spokane Valley Senior Center,a great room/banquet facility,numerous meeting rooms,multi-purpose rooms and a high tech lecture hall. The facility combines with Mirabeau Meadows Parks and Mirabeau Springs to form a regional focal point for Northeastern Washington and Northern Idaho. Accomplishments for 2016 • Increased rental space on second floor by adding two large meeting rooms. • Ensured a long-term catering contract. • Increased events by 10%over 2015. • Negotiated renewal lease with the Community Colleges of Spokane. • Increased number of part-time staff to cover the increasing number of events. Goals for 2017 • Upgrade the audio and visual systems and equipment in the Great Room and Small Dining Room. • Replace carpeting in Rooms 109,110 and 213. • Update existing Business and Marketing Plan. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Personnel-FTE Equivalents Customer Relations/Facilities Coordinator 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Office Assistant I 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Maintenance Worker 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Total FTEs 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Budget Detail Wages,Payroll Taxes&Benefits $ 393,283 $ 402,329 $ 442,655 $ 475,925 $ 491,639 Supplies 60,011 63,834 53,919 76,024 73,524 Services&Charges 319,699 335,273 306,138 330,274 326,295 Nonrecurring Services&Charges 0 0 0 0 24,750 Nonrecurring Capital Outlays 0 0 0 0 345,000 Total CenterPlace Division $ 772,993 $ 801,436 $ 802,712 $ 882,223 $ 1,261,208 76 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Dept:090 General Government 2017 Budget The General Government Department accounts for those activities that are not specific to the functions of any particular General Fund Department or operation. Expenditures recorded here are composed of City Hall rent/bond payments and and related utilities;information technology equipment and services;capital costs that benefit more than one department; support of agencies external to the City that provide social service programs and economic development services;and transfers to other City funds for property/casualty insurance premiums(Fund#502),park capital projects(Fund#309)and the pavement preservation program(Fund#311). Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Supplies PEG COSV Small tools&Minor Equip $ 336 $ 0 $ 0 $ 3,700 $ 0 Business Registrations 293 0 0 500 0 Employee Recognition-Operating Supplies 13 2,667 1,490 3,000 3,000 Employee Recognition&Safety Program 1,925 0 299 0 0 Office&Operating Supplies 937 0 187 0 0 Small Tools&Minor Equipment 4,114 3,738 7,443 4,000 7,250 Computer Hardware-Non Capital 35,165 30,671 38,277 26,900 107,700 Computer Software-Non Capital 6,519 32,631 5,093 34,500 12,500 Fuel 3 104 0 0 0 Office&Operating Supplies 10,313 8,418 16,753 15,000 15,000 59,618 78,229 69,542 87,600 145,450 Other Services&Charges Professional Services-Misc Studies 87,229 117,149 22,907 235,500 200,000 Accounting&Auditing 70,119 66,714 77,474 80,000 90,000 Uncollectible Accounts Expense 0 0 2,095 0 0 Postage 1,168 316 10,428 1,500 2,500 Telephone Service 9,088 8,790 8,168 9,000 9,000 Cell Phones 1,561 1,335 949 1,600 1,500 Internet Service 13,994 10,404 11,458 11,000 11,800 City Wide Records Management 0 3,610 5,870 10,000 10,000 City Hall Rent 425,246 412,681 426,964 439,000 513,100 Facility Repairs&Maintenance 1,430 1,318 8,897 5,000 5,000 Interfund Vehicle Lease 0 0 0 500 1,000 Equip Repair&Maint-Hardware Support 23,457 51,617 40,450 42,000 31,400 IT Support 71,221 13,323 20,855 28,300 72,700 Software Licenses&Maintenance 90,502 66,369 65,353 73,100 70,940 Merchant Charges(Bankcard Fees) 1,347 1,765 231 2,000 2,000 Equip Rental 3,300 3,300 1,921 3,300 4,260 Printing&Binding 432 0 536 0 500 Miscellaneous Services 5,938 2,143 5,256 10,000 10,000 Vehicle Rental 1,559 0 0 1,500 0 General Operating Leases:Computer 41,039 49,645 45,347 51,000 51,000 Economic Development-Site Selector 8,813 9,139 8,542 10,000 10,000 Professional Services-Economic Devel. 89,041 87,498 70,330 0 0 Contracted economic dev. 0 0 16,560 43,000 0 City Economic Development 202,430 196,877 153,350 0 0 Professional Services-Social Services 55,809 61,724 90,974 0 0 Alcohol Treatment:Liquor Excise Tax 1,213 3,439 5,012 0 0 Alcohol Treatment:Liquor Profits 16,279 16,258 16,131 20,000 22,000 Outside Agencies-Social Svc&Econ.Dev. 0 0 0 107,000 150,000 $ 1,222,215 $ 1,185,414 $ 1,116,058 $ 1,184,300 $ 1,268,700 (continued to next page) 77 Fund:001 General Fund Spokane Valley Dept:090 General Government 2017 Budget Budget Summary,continued 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Intergovernmental Services Election Costs $ 85,304 $ 0 $ 16,347 87,000 $ 90,000 Voter Registration 87,964 84,764 97,091 90,000 $ 100,000 Taxes and assessments 7,278 6,909 5,617 7,500 $ 7,500 Spokane County Air Pollution Authority 115,720 115,915 115,915 117,000 $ 131,000 296,266 207,588 234,970 301,500 328,500 Capital Outlays PEG COSV Broadcast-Office Fum. 2,131 0 0 0 0 PEG COSV Broadcast-Software/hardware 24,936 30,596 0 0 0 Copy Machine 0 0 21,145 3,500 0 Computer Software/Hardware 0 0 0 39,500 0 Compuer Hardware-Capital 15,035 68,956 0 0 10,000 Construction-Pavement Preservation 855,857 0 0 0 0 897,959 99,552 21,145 43,000 10,000 Debt Service:Principal Interest and Other Debt Service Costs 301 435 425 0 0 Interfund Payments for Service Transfer out-#106(solid waste educ.) 0 60,000 0 0 0 Transfer out-#204(City Hall bond payment) 0 0 0 198,734 397,350 Transfer out-#303(pines underpass design) 0 0 0 0 1,200,000 Transfer out-#309(park capital pro)) 50,000 242,298 115,575 200,300 160,000 Transfer out-#310(bond pmt>$434.6 lease) 0 0 67,600 72,500 0 Transfer out-#310(city hall o&m costs) 0 0 271,700 271,700 0 Transfer out-#311 (pvmnt preservation) 0 888,823 920,000 943,800 953,200 Transfer out-#312(capital reserve fund) 7,826,207 2,443,507 1,783,512 1,828,723 0 Transfer out-#501(CenterPlace kitchen reserve) 0 0 0 0 36,600 Transfer out-#502(risk management) 319,000 325,000 325,000 325,000 350,000 8,195,207 3,959,628 3,483,387 3,840,757 3,097,150 Miscellaneous SCRAPS pass through 0 57,259 1,099 1,100 1,300 Supplies-10th Anniversary 3,818 0 0 0 0 Advertising-10th Anniversary 12,030 0 0 0 0 City Hall Remodel 0 0 12,842 0 0 15,848 57,259 13,941 1,100 1,300 Nonrecurring-Capital Copy Machine 0 0 0 0 20,000 Computer Hardware-Capital 0 0 65,610 95,000 80,000 Computer Software-Capital 0 20,789 18,931 13,000 0 Total Governmental Division $ 10,687,414 $ 5,608,894 $ 5,024,009 $ 5,566,257 S 4,951,100 78 Fund: 101 Street Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget The Street Fund was established to account for the activities associated with the provision of efficient and safe movement of both motorized and non-motorized vehicles,as well as pedestrians within the limits of the City,and coordinate convenient coordinate convenient interconnect to the regional transportation system. Maintenance work includes snow and ice control, street pavement repairs,traffic signals and signs,landscaping and vegetation control and many other street maintenance and repair activities. Accomplishments for 2016 • Optimized traffic signals on selected corridors. • Applied for grants and worked with various schools to install flashing beacons at crosswalks. • Renewed contracts with private contractors for street maintenance services. • Continued to define and implement a fleet maintenance program. • Developed non-intrusive traffic signal detection replacement plan. • Replaced over 2,000 signs throughout the City. • Upgraded pedestrian indicators at all City traffic signals. • Upgraded traffic signal software at all City traffic signals. • Assisted with TAP/CMAW/STP/CDBG and TIB grant applications. Goals for 2017 • Update and implement the pavement management plan. • Implement and renew contracts with private contractors for street maintenance services. • Optimize traffic signal timings on selected corridors. • Enhance safety at selected traffic signals. • Use traffic signal software to obtain traffic counts on arterial roadways. • Develop a maintenance program for traffic signal components to address aging infrastructure. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Personnel-FTE Equivalents Senior Engineer-Traffic 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Public Works Superintendent 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Maintenance/Construction Inspector 2.0 2.0 2.35 2.35 2.35 * Assistant Engineer-Traffic/Planning 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Planning Grants Engineer 0.0 0.375 0.375 0.375 0.375 Total FTEs 5.0 5.375 5.725 5.725 5.725 Interns 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 For 0.5 FTE of the 2 FTEs,only 50%is budgeted to the Street Fund with the balance budgeted as part of the capital project funds (continued to next page) 79 Fund:101 Street Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget Budget Summary,continued 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Utility Tax $ 2,562,722 $ 2,461,060 $ 2,257,184 $ 2,340,000 $ 2,200,000 Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax 1,868,055 1,878,476 1,935,629 2,004,900 2,040,300 Multimodal Transportation Revenue 0 0 0 0 98,868 Right-of-Way Maintenance Fee 0 0 0 50,000 50,000 Investment Interest 2,920 2,037 3,212 3,000 4,000 Grants 172,530 15,150 0 0 0 Transfers in 27,375 23 0 0 0 Miscellaneous 14,702 9,414 25,167 10,000 10,000 Non recurring insurance proceeds 0 0 0 46,000 0 Total revenues 4,648,304 4,366,160 4,221,192 4,453,900 4,403,168 Expenditures Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 582,013 681,165 738,144 734,604 746,872 Supplies 108,110 119,742 116,659 111,500 105,000 Services&Charges 2,152,294 2,030,250 2,041,934 2,133,754 2,168,151 Snow Operation 485,717 508,353 465,064 430,000 468,000 Intergovernmental Payments 797,275 876,268 707,315 770,000 795,000 Transfers out-#001 39,700 39,700 39,700 39,700 39,700 Transfers out-#311 (pvmnt pres) 282,000 282,000 206,618 67,342 67,342 Transfers out-#501 (non-plow) 10,777 10,777 12,077 31,000 23,250 Transfers out-#501 (plow replace) 150,000 75,000 0 40,000 77,929 Signal Detection Replacement Program 0 0 0 0 40,000 Traffic Signal Replacement Program 0 0 0 0 200,000 Capital construction and equipment 205,621 100,894 155,849 0 0 Nonrecurring Expenditures Durable striping at Trent&Argonne 0 0 0 0 75,000 Spare traffic signal equipment 0 0 0 0 30,000 Battery backups for intersections 0 0 0 0 15,000 Traffic Signal Cabinet Replacement 0 0 0 46,000 0 Maintenance facility storage unit 0 0 0 5,000 0 Signal detection equipment upgrades 0 0 0 20,000 0 Total expenditures 4,813,507 4,724,149 4,483,360 4,428,900 4,851,244 Revenues over(under)expenditures (165,203) (357,989) (262,168) 25,000 (448,076) Beginning fund balance 2,228,437 2,063,234 1,705,245 1,443,077 1,468,077 Ending fund balance $ 2,063,234 $ 1,705,245 $ 1,443,077 $ 1,468,077 $ 1,020,001 80 Fund: 103 Paths&Trails Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget The State of Washington collects a$0.494 per gallon motor vehicle fuel tax at the pump.Of this amount,the State remits a portion of the tax back to cities on a per capita basis. For 2017 the Municipal Research and Services Center estimates the distribution back to cities will be$21.76 per person. Based upon a City of Spokane Valley population of 94,160(per the Washington State Office of Financial Management on April 1,2016)we anticipate the City will collect$2,048,900 in 2017. RCW 47.030.050 specifies that 0.42%of this tax must be expended for the construction of paths and trails and based upon the 2017 revenue estimate this computes to$8,600. The balance or$2,040,300 will be credited to Fund#101 for Street maintenance and operations. The portion of the motor vehicle tax allocated to the Paths and Trails Fund is by State Law restricted for the construction and/or improvement of paths and trails within the City. Because the cost of such projects is typically much greater than the funds generated in a single year,we typically leave the fund balance untouched until an adequate fund balance is available. The City transferred$50,000 in 2014 and$9,300 in 2016 to the Parks Capital Projects Fund#309 to be applied towards the Phase 2 Appleway Trail Project from University to Pines. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Motor Vehicle Fuel(Gas)Tax $ 7,879 $ 7,923 $ 8,226 $ 8,500 $ 8,600 Investment Interest 51 34 0 0 0 Total revenues 7,930 7,957 8,226 8,500 8,600 Expenditures Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 0 Transfers out- #309 0 50,000 0 9,300 0 Total expenditures 0 50,000 0 9,300 0 Revenues over(under)expenditures 7,930 (42,043) 8,226 (800) 8,600 Beginning fund balance 63,941 71,871 29,828 38,054 37,254 Ending fund balance $ 71,871 $ 29,828 $ 38,054 $ 37,254 $ 45,854 81 Fund: 104 Hotel/Motel Tax-Tourism Facilities Fund Spokane Valley il2017 Budget The Hotel/Motel Tax -Tourism Facilities Fund accounts for the receipt and expenditure of a special excise tax of 1.3%on the sale or charge made for the furnishing of lodging under RCW 82.08. These funds will be used solely for capital expenditures for acquiring,constructing,making improvements to or other related capital expenditures for large sporting venues,or venues for tourism-related facilities,which facilities generate overnight guests at lodging facilities subject to the taxes imposed. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Hotel/Motel Tax $ 0 $ 0 $ 182,236 $ 377,000 $ 377,000 Investment Interest 0 0 111 0 0 Total revenues 0 0 182,347 377,000 377,000 Expenditures Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 0 Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 0 Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 0 182,347 377,000 377,000 Beginning fund balance 0 0 0 182,347 559,347 Ending fund balance $ 0 $ 0 $ 182,347 $ 559,347 $ 936,347 Hotel/Motel Tax Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget The Hotel/Motel Fund accounts for the receipt and expenditure of a special excise tax of 2%on the sale or charge made for the furnishing of lodging under RCW 82.08. These funds will be used solely for the purpose of paying all or any part of the cost of tourism promotion,acquisition or operation of tourism-related facilities,and marketing of special events and festivals designed to attract tourists. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Hotel/Motel Tax $ 518,672 $ 549,267 $ 581,237 $ 580,000 $ 580,000 Investment Interest 387 299 484 300 500 Total revenues 519,059 549,566 581,721 580,300 580,500 Expenditures Tourism Promotion 458,904 546,545 484,968 499,350 604,000 Transfers out- #001 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 Transfers out- #309 0 0 68,000 60,650 0 Total expenditures 488,904 576,545 582,968 590,000 634,000 Revenues over(under)expenditures 30,155 (26,979) (1,247) (9,700) (53,500) Beginning fund balance 206,772 236,927 209,948 208,701 199,001 Ending fund balance $ 236,927 $ 209,948 $ 208,701 $ 199,001 $ 145,501 82 Fund:106 Solid Waste Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget In 2003,the City of Spokane Valley entered into an interlocal agreement with the City of Spokane and Spokane County to join the existing Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management System for a period of eight years. In 2011,that agreement was extended through November 16,2014. Committed to ensuring Spokane Valley citizens are provided with solid waste services that are affordable,sustainable, and environmentally responsible,in June 2014 the City of Spokane Valley opted to contract for solid waste transfer, transport and disposal services with Sunshine Recyclers,Inc.Services provided under the contract were effective November 17,2014,and continue for a period of ten years with options for two three-year extensions. Terms of the contract require Sunshine to pay the City an annual administrative fee of$125,000 that will be used by the City to offset contract administrative costs and solid waste management within the city,including solid waste public educational efforts. The contract also provides that a road maintenance fee will be paid by Sunshine at the rate of$1 per ton for each ton in excess of 45,500 tons in a single contract year. Payments will be made to the City by March 31 of the year following the calendar year being measured. During 2016,the City received a payment in the amount of$56,035,which was receipted in the Street Fund#101 to offset road maintenance costs. The contract with Sunshine Recyclers does not include curbside pickup which remains optional for citizens and is available by subscription through Waste Management and Sunshine Disposal, Inc. During the years of 2013 and 2014,the General Fund#001 funded various studies and fees related to the solid waste program and transferred$60,000 to the Solid Waste Fund#106 for the purpose of providing information materials and marketing necessary to inform residents and businesses of the change in solid waste transfer,transport and disposal.The total amount paid out of the General Fund for these expenditures was$202,121.Beginning in 2015 the Solid Waste Fund will reimburse the General Fund for these costs over a 5-year period,which equates to a payment of annually of$40,425 in the years 2015 through 2019. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Sunshine administrative fee $ 0 $ 0 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 Investment interest 0 0 0 0 0 Grant Proceeds 0 0 0 53,500 26,800 Transfer in-#001 0 60,000 0 0 0 Total revenues 0 60,000 125,000 178,500 151,800 Expenditures Education&Contract Administration 0 52,661 49,040 138,075 111,375 Transfers out-#001 (reimbursement) 0 0 40,425 40,425 40,425 Total expenditures 0 52,661 89,465 178,500 151,800 Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 7,339 35,535 0 0 Beginning fund balance 0 0 7,339 42,874 42,874 Ending fund balance $ 0 $ 7,339 $ 42,874 $ 42,874 $ 42,874 83 Fund:X107 PEG Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget Under the City's cable franchise,the franchise grantee remits to the City as a capital contribution in support of Public Education Government(PEG)capital requirements an amount equal to$0.35 per subscriber per month to be paid to the City on a quarterly basis for the life of the franchise.Capital contributions collected under this agreement are allocated to PEG capital uses exclusively.PEG capital uses include in part the set up of equipment in the City Council Chambers that allows Spokane Valley to broadcast Council meetings both live and through subsequent reviews via digital recordings available on the City's website. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Comcast PEG contribution $ 0 $ 0 $ 81,806 $ 90,000 $ 80,000 Investment interest 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer in from fund#001 0 0 267,333 0 0 Total revenues 0 0 349,139 90,000 80,000 Expenditures PEG Reimbursement-CMN 0 0 0 117,000 0 New City Hall Council Chambers 0 0 0 25,000 250,000 Capital Outlay 0 0 47,957 12,500 12,500 Total expenditures 0 0 47,957 154,500 262,500 Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 0 301,182 (64,500) (182,500) Beginning fund balance 0 0 0 301,182 236,682 Ending fund balance $ 0 $ 0 $ 301,182 $ 236,682 $ 54,182 84 Fund: 120 CenterPlace Operating Reserve Fund Spokane Valley I_ _IL 2017 Budget The CenterPlace Operating Reserve Fund was established as a result of a covenant related to the issuance of limited tax general obligation bonds initially issued in 2003 and refunded in 2014. The bonds were issued for the purpose of constructing the CenterPlace facility. As a part of the bond issuance the City agreed to establish a$300,000 operating reserve account that could be used to make debt service payments on the bonds and/or pay for operating expenses of CenterPlace. If at any time the City were to draw on these reserves it would have to prepare and follow a plan for reinstatement of those funds drawn. This reserve is required to be in place for the life of the bonds which run through December 1,2033. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Investment Interest $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Transfers-in 0 0 0 0 0 Total revenues 0 0 0 0 0 Expenditures Operations 50,787 0 0 0 0 Total expenditures 50,787 0 0 0 0 Revenues over(under)expenditures (50,787) 0 0 0 0 Beginning fund balance 350,787 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 Ending fund balance $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Fund: 121 MUM Service Level Stabilization Reserve Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget The City has committed to maintaining an ending fund balance in the General Fund of at least 50%of recurring expenditures which is equivalent to 6-months of operations. The Service Level Stabilization Reserve Fund serves as an emergency source of temporary financing to the General Fund in the event a downturn in the local economy resulted in a reduction of revenues that would otherwise compromise either the General Fund's minimum 50%reserve balance or historical levels of service. If an event such as a downturn in the economy resulted in the General Fund reserves dropping below 50%of recurring expenditures,then the Service Level Stabilization Reserve Fund could be drawn against to maintain the fund balance minimum. In no event would the Service Level Stabilization Reserve Fund be reduced to less than 60%of the current $5.5 million balance or$3.29 million. This represents a Fiscal Policy of the City that is also stated in the City Manager's 2017 Budget Message located near the front of this budget document. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Investment Interest $ 6,971 $ 4,697 $ 8,590 $ 6,500 $ 21,900 Transfer-in 0 0 0 0 0 Total revenues 6,971 4,697 8,590 6,500 21,900 Expenditures Operations 0 0 0 0 0 Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 0 Revenues over(under)expenditures 6,971 4,697 8,590 6,500 21,900 Beginning fund balance 5,441,531 5,448,502 5,453,199 5,461,789 5,468,289 Ending fund balance $ 5,448,502 $ 5,453,199 $ 5,461,789 $ 5,468,289 $ 5,490,189 85 Fund: 122 Winter Weather Reserve Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget The Winter Weather Reserve Fund was established through Ordinance No.05-018 to provide an emergency reserve for use during unusually harsh winters and storms where the Street Fund#101 budget and fund balance are inadequate to accommodate the amount of related street maintenance,including but not limited to snow plowing,sanding,and deicing,that may be necessary. In the event the City draws against this fund in any given winter,we will strive to replenish the balance back to approximately$500,000 through subsequent years'transfers. Due to the uncertainty of when this fund might be drawn upon we actually budget the same$500,000 in both 2016 and 2017 even though we recognize there exists only$500,000 to address this issue if it should arise. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Investment Interest $ 677 $ 455 $ 833 $ 600 $ 600 Transfer-in#001 0 0 0 16,418 0 FEMA Grant Proceeds 0 0 0 38,510 0 Total revenues 677 455 833 55,528 600 Expenditures Snow removal 0 0 60,381 500,000 500,000 Total expenditures 0 0 60,381 500,000 500,000 Revenues over(under)expenditures 677 455 (59,548) (444,472) (499,400) Beginning fund balance 502,888 503,565 504,020 444,472 500,000 Ending fund balance $ 503,565 $ 504,020 $ 444,472 $ 0 $ 600 Fund: 123 Civic Facility Replacement Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget This fund was initially created to set aside money for the eventual replacement of CenterPlace and the police precinct building located on East Sprague Avenue,and the source of funds had in prior years been an annual transfer from the General Fund. Beginning in 2013,however,the City made the decision to no longer set money aside in this fund for future building replacements and instead decided to commit the entire fund balance of Fund#123 to a pavement preservation program that is operated through Pavement Preservation Fund#311. This is in recognition of the fact that addressing deteriorating streets in a timely manner is a much higher priority in the present than setting money aside for buildings that will need replaced in the distant future. It was the City's conclusion that to both set money aside for the replacement of CenterPlace now while at the same time repaying the 2014 LTGO bonds(see Fund#204 discussion)that were issued to finance the construction of CenterPlace is essentially asking the same generation of taxpayers/citizens to pay for the same structure twice-the initial construction and the replacement. The$2.4 million fund balance that existed at the end of 2012 will be completely depleted due to transfers for pavement preservation in 2016. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Investment Interest $ 1,608 $ 1,083 $ 1,323 $ 700 $ 0 Transfers in-#001 0 0 0 0 0 Total revenues 1,608 1,083 1,323 700 0 Expenditures Transfers out-#311 616,285 616,284 616,284 559,808 0 Total expenditures 616,285 616,284 616,284 559,808 0 Revenues over(under)expenditures (614,677) (615,201) (614,961) (559,108) 0 Beginning fund balance 2,403,947 1,789,270 1,174,069 559,108 0 Ending fund balance $ 1,789,270 $ 1,174,069 $ 559,108 $ 0 $ 0 86 Ftid NA I Limited Tax General Obligation(LTGO)Bond-Debt Service Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget This fund is used to account for the accumulation of resources for,and the payment of limited tax general obligation(LTGO) bonds also referred to as councilmanic or non-voted bonds. When LTGO bonds are issued the City irrevocably pledges the full faith,credit and resources necessary to make timely payments of principal and interest,within constitutional and statutory limitations pertaining to non-voted general obligations. In 2003 the City issued$9,430,000 in LTGO bonds,the proceeds of which were used to finance both the construction of CenterPlace and road and street improvements surrounding the facility. In 2014 the City refunded the LTGO bonds in order to take advantage of lower interest rates which resulted in a reduction in subsequent annual bond payments(much like refinancing a home mortgage). At the completion of the bond refunding there remained$7,035,000 of LTGO bonds. Of this total: • $5,650,000 remained on the original debt used towards the construction of CenterPlace. These bonds will be paid off in annual installments over the 20-year period ending December 1,2033. Annual debt service payments on these bonds are provided by the Spokane Public Facilities District. At January 1,2017,the outstanding balance on this portion of the bond issue will be$5,065,000. • $1,385,000 remained on the original debt used towards the road and street improvements. These bonds will be paid off in annual installments over the 10-year period ending December 1,2023. Annual debt service payments on these bonds are provided by equal distributions from the 1st and 2nd quarter percent real estate excise tax(Funds#301 and#302). At January 1,2017,the outstanding balance on this portion of the bond issue will be$995,000. In 2016 the City issued$7,275,000 in LTGO bonds,the proceeds of which will be used to finance the construction of a new City Hall building along with$6.3 million of City cash that has been set aside for this purpose.These bonds will be paid off in annual installments over the 30-year period ending December 1,2045.Annual debt service payments on these bonds are provided by transfers in from the General Fund.At January 1,2017,the outstanding balance on the bond issue will be $7,200,000. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget • Revenues Spokane Public Facilities District $ 437,120 $ 441,520 $ 373,800 $ 380,300 $ 379,750 2014 LTGO Bond issue proceeds 0 7,661,000 0 0 0 Transfers in-#001 0 0 0 198,734 397,350 Transfers in-#301 92,951 93,152 82,150 83,400 79,426 Transfers in-#302 92,952 93,151 82,150 83,400 79,425 Total revenues 623,023 8,288,823 538,100 745,834 935,951 Expenditures Debt Service Payment-CenterPlace 437,120 441,520 374,083 380,300 379,750 Debt Service Payment-Roads 185,903 186,303 164,017 166,800 162,900 Debt Service Payments-City Hall 0 0 0 198,734 397,350 2003 LTGO Bond retirement 0 7,549,000 0 0 0 2014 LTGO Bond issue costs 0 112,000 0 0 0 Total expenditures 623,023 8,288,823 538,100 745,834 940,000 Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 0 0 0 (4,049) Beginning fund balance 4,049 4,049 4,049 4,049 4,049 Ending fund balance $ 4,049 $ 4,049 $ 4,049 $ 4,049 $ 0 87 Fund:301 REET 1 Capital Projects Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget This fund is used to account for the collection and expenditures of the first one-quarter of one-percent real estate excise tax (REET 1)that is authorized through RCW 82.46. This quarter percent must be expended for purposes identified in the capital facilities plan element of our comprehensive plan. RCW 82.46.010(6),defines"capital projects"as: those public works projects of a local government for planning,acquisition,construction,reconstruction,repair, replacement,rehabilitation,or improvement of streets;roads;highways;sidewalks;street and road lighting systems; traffic signals;bridges;domestic water systems;storm and sanitary sewer systems;parks;recreational facilities;law enforcement facilities;fire protection facilities;trails;libraries;administrative and judicial facilities. Revenues recorded in this fund are typically used as a matching funds for street related construction projects that are accounted for in Street Capital Projects Fund#303,Pavement Preservation Fund#311,and to pay for a portion of the annual bond payment on the City's 2014 LTGO bonds that are accounted for in the LTGO Debt Service Fund#204. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues REET 1-Taxes $ 707,104 $ 790,781 $ 1,065,789 $ 1,000,000 $ 800,000 Investment Interest 1,138 793 1,654 1,000 1,700 Total revenues 708,242 791,574 1,067,443 1,001,000 801,700 Expenditures Transfers out-#204 92,951 89,559 82,150 83,400 79,426 Transfers out-#303 589,534 58,607 567,113 742,503 437,002 Transfers out-#311(pavement preservation) 150,000 184,472 251,049 365,286 660,479 Transfers out-#314(Barker Grade Separation) 0 0 0 20,000 280,079 Total expenditures 832,485 332,638 900,312 1,211,189 1,456,986 Revenues over(under)expenditures (124,243) 458,936 167,131 (210,189) (655,286) Beginning fund balance 1,092,264 968,021 1,426,957 1,594,088 1,383,899 Ending fund balance $ 968,021 $ 1,426,957 $ 1,594,088 $ 1,383,899 $ 728,613 88 Fund:302 REET 2 Capital Projects Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget This fund is used to account for the collection and expenditures of the second one-quarter of one-percent real estate excise tax(REET 2)that is authorized through RCW 82.46. This quarter percent may only be levied by cities that are planning under the Growth Management Act and may only be expended for purposes identified in the capital facilities plan element of their comprehensive plan. RCW 82.46.035(5)defines"capital projects"as: public works projects of a local government for planning,acquisition,construction,reconstruction,repair,replacement, rehabilitation,or improvement of streets,roads,highways,sidewalks,street and road lighting systems,traffic signals, bridges,domestic water systems,storm and sanitary sewer systems,and planning,construction,reconstruction, repair,rehabilitation,or improvement of parks. Noteworthy here is that acquisition of land for parks is not a permitted use of REET 2 receipts,although it is a permitted use for street,water and sewer projects. Revenues recorded in this fund are typically used as a matching funds for street related construction projects that are accounted for in Street Capital Projects Fund#303, Pavement Preservation Fund#311,and to pay for a portion of the annual bond payment on the City's 2014 LTGO bonds that are accounted for in the LTGO Debt Service Fund#204. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues REET 2-Taxes $ 614,929 $ 776,648 $ 1,065,789 $ 1,000,000 $ 800,000 Investment Interest 1,349 909 1,662 1,000 1,700 Total revenues 616,278 777,557 1,067,451 1,001,000 801,700 Expenditures Transfers out-#101 27,375 23 0 0 0 Transfers out-#204 92,951 89,559 82,150 83,400 79,425 Transfers out-#303 153,243 501,736 331,099 382,816 1,173,230 Transfers out-#311 (pavement preservation) 150,000 184,472 251,049 365,286 660,479 423,569 775,790 664,298 831,502 1,913,134 Revenues over(under)expenditures 192,709 1,767 403,153 169,498 (1,111,434) Beginning fund balance 1,130,670 1,323,379 1,325,146 1,728,299 1,897,797 Ending fund balance $ 1,323,379 $ 1,325,146 $ 1,728,299 $ 1,897,797 $ 786,363 89 Street Capital Projects Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget The Street Capital Projects Fund accounts for monies used to finance street construction and reconstruction projects adopted in the City's 6-year Transportation Improvement Plan(TIP). Revenues to finance the projects comes from a combination of State and Federal Grants,which typically cover upwards of 80%of projects costs,with the City match portion coming from transfers from the REET 1 Capital Projects Fund#301,REET 2 Capital Projects Fund#302,and sometimes Stormwater Management Fund#402. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Grant Proceeds $ 2,870,539 $ 1,825,974 $ 8,223,959 $ 8,149,606 $ 3,756,320 Developer Contribution 0 541 363,894 275,087 40,097 Miscellaneous 78 21 87 0 0 WSDOT-Safe Routes 604,811 0 0 0 0 Transfers in-#101 138 5,038 123,955 0 0 Transfersin-#301 589,535 29,647 567,113 742,503 437,002 Transfersin-#302 153,243 530,695 331,099 382,816 1,173,230 Transfers in-#311 77,720 0 0 0 0 Transfers in-#312 Appleway Landscaping 8,348 253,645 0 0 0 Transfers in-#312 Sullivan Rd W Bridge 0 443,688 42,730 1,467,779 10,000 Transfers in-#312 Pines Underpass Pinecroft 0 0 0 0 0 Transfers in-#312 Euclid Ave-Flora to Barker 0 0 0 50,000 1,750,000 Total revenues 4,304,412 3,089,249 9,652,837 11,067,791 7,166,649 Expenditures 005 Pines/Mansfield,Wilbur Rd.to Pines 228,275 0 0 0 0 060 Argonne Rd Corridor Upgrade SRTC 06-31 33,665 206,188 1,248,474 0 0 061 Pines(SR27)ITS Improvement SRTC 06-26 1,000,462 67 0 0 0 112 Indiana Ave.Extension-3600 3,877 0 0 0 0 113 Indiana/Sullivan Intersection PCC 96,313 113 0 0 0 115 Sprague Ave Resurfacing-Evergreen to Sulliva 11,799 0 0 0 0 123 Mission Ave-Flora to Barker 5,647 40,012 37,956 332,566 500,000 141 Sullivan&Euclid PCC 0 49,556 9,848 1,981,060 2,150,000 142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan 73,792 3,564 17,771 0 0 145 Spokane Valley-Millwood Trail 429 1,924 0 0 0 146 24th Ave Sidewalk-Adams to Sullivan 270,962 0 0 0 0 149 In-House Design-Sidewalk Infill 187,148 288,304 8,177 5,000 0 154 Sidewalk&Transit Stop Accessibility 4,991 435 0 0 0 155 Sullivan Rd W Bridge Replacement 819,702 925,421 6,482,244 5,237,650 10,000 156 Mansfield Ave.Connection 137,578 669,533 712,689 5,000 0 159 University Rd/1-90 Overpass Study 170,805 32,716 2,842 0 0 160 Evergreen-16th to 32nd reconstruction 1,069 0 0 0 0 166 Pines Rd(SR27)&Grace Ave.Intersect study 28,093 50,516 47,322 491,331 333,224 167 City wide safety improvements 1,722 12,159 315,032 228,127 5,000 168 Wellesley Ave&Adams rd.sidewalk 638,773 3,318 0 0 0 169 Argonne/Mullan corridor safety-Indiana to Bro 53,463 558 0 0 0 (continued to next page) 90 1'1a?4,."'„-:, , Street Capital Projects Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Expenditures,continued 170 Argonne Rd-Empire to Knox 118,990 0 0 0 0 171 Sprague aver ADA sdwlk improvement(Havar 100,316 0 0 0 0 175 Sullivan UP Tracks UC(SB)Resurfacing 175,955 0 0 0 0 176 Appleway Trail Design 103,303 0 0 0 0 177 Sullivan Road Corridor Traffic Study 38,139 106,305 19,332 0 0 181 Citywide Traffic Sign Upgrade 100,956 96,561 0 0 0 185 Appleway Landscaping-Phase 1 8,348 253,695 0 0 0 191 Vista Rd BNSF Xing Safety 4,880 48,501 190 0 0 196 8th Avenue-McKinnon to Fancher 0 264,439 396 0 0 201 ITS Infill Project Phase 1 (PE START 2014) 0 149 37,884 271,357 300,000 205 Sprague/Barker Intersection Improvement 0 191 13,132 0 40,097 206 Sprague/Long Sidewalk Project 0 7,513 304,933 5,000 0 207 Indiana&Evergreen Transit Access Improv. 0 0 3,345 0 5,000 210 Alcazar Driveway Reconstruction 0 7,902 0 0 0 211 Sullivan Trent to Wellesley 0 3,465 100,649 0 0 213 Sprague/Thierman Intersection 0 5,038 0 0 0 220 Houk-Sinto-Maxwell St Preservation 0 0 15,555 0 0 221 McDonald Rd Diet(16th to Mission) 0 0 7,229 559,200 5,000 222 Citywide Reflective Signal Backplates 0 0 0 40,500 36,000 223 Pines Rd Underpass @ BNSF&Trent 0 0 2,000 0 0 224 Mullan Rd Street Preservation Project 0 0 133,069 0 0 229 32nd Ave Preservation Project 0 0 0 0 2,500 234 Seth Woodard Sidewalk Improvements 0 0 6,204 361,000 5,000 238 Mirabeau Pkwy&Pines(SR-27)Traffic Signal 0 0 0 350,000 5,000 239 Bowdish Sidewalk-8th to 12th 0 0 0 400,000 471,342 xxx N.Sullivan Corridor ITS Projects(PE start 201 0 0 0 0 110,486 xxx Euclid Ave.-Flora to Barker 0 0 0 50,000 1,750,000 xxx 9th Ave.Sidewalk 0 0 0 0 240,000 xxx Sullivan/Wellesley Intersection 0 0 0 0 198,000 xxx Contingency 0 0 0 750,000 1,000,000 xxx Argonne Rd.Preservation 0 0 123,955 0 0 STEP Projects(106,129,130,131,151,152) 236 0 0 0 0 Misc.Road Projects 814 0 0 0 0 Total expenditures 4,420,503 3,078,147 9,650,228 11,067,791 7,166,649 Revenues over(under)expenditures (116,091) 11,102 2,608 0 0 Beginning fund balance 177,918 61,827 72,930 75,538 75,538 Ending fund balance $ 61,827 $ 72,930 $ 75,538 $ 75,538 $ 75,538 91 FUrtds 309 Park Capital Projects Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget The Park Capital Projects Fund was created to account for park related capital improvements. The source of financing typically consists of an annual transfer from the General Fund#001;however in some years the City will utilize money set aside for capital projects in other funds. This has occurred with transfers in from the Paths and Trails Fund#103 and the Capital Reserve Fund#312,which have been applied towards various sections of the Appleway Trail project. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Grant Proceeds $ 0 $ 0 $ 1,560 $ 410,132 $ 3,217,267 FEMA Grant Proceeds-Windstorm 0 0 0 21,875 0 Transfers in-#001 (General Fund) 50,000 242,298 115,575 267,525 160,000 Transfers in-#103(Paths&Trails) 0 50,000 0 9,300 0 Transfers in-#105 0 0 68,000 60,650 0 Transfers in-#312(Capital Reserve) 0 911,433 524,812 72,940 561,915 Investment Interest 660 444 813 500 800 Contributions and Donations 25,000 7,850 0 0 0 Total revenues 75,660 1,212,025 710,760 842,922 3,939,982 Expenditures City entry sign 0 0 0 70,000 0 172 CenterPlace S.Landscape Development 9,131 0 0 0 0 176 Appleway Trail-Phase 1 (Univ.to Pines) 0 961,482 524,569 9,300 0 195 Discovery Playground equipment 16,172 51,280 0 0 0 203 5 Sand volleyball courts at Browns Park 0 14,390 241,481 0 0 208 Old Mission Trailhead 0 49,798 68 0 0 209 Park signs(3) 0 19,319 0 0 0 216 Edgecliff sewer connection 0 9,518 0 0 0 217 Edgecliff picnic shelter 0 7,297 104,257 0 0 225 Pocket dog park-phase 1 0 0 108,436 400 0 227 Appleway Trail(Pines to Evergreen) 0 0 1,803 206,297 1,925,957 231 Old Mission Trailhead Landscaping 0 0 47,066 0 0 232 Shade Structure:Discovery Park 0 0 36,341 0 0 237 Appleway Trail(Sullivan to Corbin) 0 0 0 276,775 1,853,225 241 Pocket dog park-phase 2 0 0 0 81,300 0 242 Browns Park Splashpad 0 0 0 146,500 0 243 Browns Park championship volleyball 0 0 0 60,650 0 244 Park signs(3) 0 0 0 20,500 0 245 Terrace View playground equip(windstorm 0 0 0 59,100 0 Edgecliff Park Splashpad 0 0 0 0 125,000 Total expenditures 25,303 1,113,084 1,064,019 930,822 3,904,182 Revenues over(under)expenditures 50,357 98,941 (353,259) (87,900) 35,800 Beginning fund balance 302,422 352,779 451,720 98,461 10,561 Ending fund balance $ 352,779 $ 451,720 $ 98,461 $ 10,561 $ 46,361 92 Fund:310 Civic Facility Capital Projects Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget The Civic Building Capital Projects Fund was initially set-up to accumulate resources to ultimately acquire or construct a City Hall building. The initial sources of revenue to set-up the fund reserves were transfers from the General Fund during 2005 through 2007,and as recently as December 31,2009,this fund had a fund balance of$5,828,600. During 2010 and 2011 the City determined that street repairs and reconstruction represented a more immediate City need and opted to expend nearly$2,000,000 of the fund balance for these projects. The projects themselves were part of a septic tank elimination program(STEP)initiated by Spokane County that resulted in the installation of sewer lines down many City streets. At that time the City decided to completely reconstruct the effected streets rather than patch them. In 2012 the City used this fund to finance a variety street related capital projects as well as the$2.5 million acquisition of an 8.4 acre parcel of land on Sprague Avenue that is adjacent to Balfour Park. Partially offsetting the cost of the land acquisition was the subsequent sale of 2.82 acres of this parcel to the Spokane County Library District who had planned to construct a library building consisting of no less than 30,000 square feet. In order for the Library District to actually construct a new building on this site they first had to have a successful voted bond issue to provide the necessary financing. In the event the Library District is unable to pass a bond by October 2017,they may sell the 2.82 acres parcel back to the City for the original purchase price of$839,285. In 2015 the General Fund began to make two annual transfers to this fund that were each related to the eventual construction of a new City Hall facility.These transfers continued in 2016: • The first transfer in the amount of$72,500,when added to the City's$434,600 annual lease payment for space in its current space totals$507,100 which was the amount we anticipated our annual bond repayment would be if we were to issue approximately$8,000,000 of limited tax general obligation bonds with a 2%issue cost over 30-years at 4.50%. • The second transfer was our estimate of the annual operating costs of a City Hall facility including utilities,janitorial, grounds maintenance and snow removal,and operating and maintenance supplies. The purpose behind making these transfers beginning in 2015 was to"create"this appropriation capacity within the General Fund. These amounts will be transferred out to the General Fund in 2016 and 2017 in order to cover lease payments for the current City Hall location in years in which the City has both a lease payment and a bond payment for the new City Hall building. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Investment Interest $ 1,771 $ 1,193 $ 2,113 $ 1,200 $ 1,200 Sale of Land 0 839,285 0 0 0 Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 0 Transfers in-#001: -Future C.H.bond pmt>$434.6k lease pmt 0 0 67,600 72,500 0 -Future C.H.o&m costs 0 0 271,700 271,700 0 Transfers in-#312 0 0 58,324 0 0 Total revenues 1,771 840,478 399,737 345,400 1,200 Expenditures West Gateway at Thierman 9,942 0 0 0 0 Transfers out-#001: 0 0 0 198,734 490,500 Professional services 0 22,831 0 0 0 Capital Outlay-City Hall 0 0 1,136,738 0 0 Total expenditures 9,942 22,831 1,136,738 198,734 490,500 Revenues over(under)expenditures (8,171) 817,647 (737,001) 146,666 (489,300) Beginning fund balance 1,110,074 1,101,903 1,919,550 1,182,548 1,329,214 Ending fund balance $ 1,101,903 $ 1,919,550 $ 1,182,548 $ 1,329,214 $ 839,914 93 Fund:311 Pavement Preservation Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget This fund was created during the 2011 Budget development process for the purpose of setting money aside for yet to be determined street capital improvement projects. During the 2011 Budget the City Council opted to: • Make an initial transfer of$500,000 from the Civic Facilities Capital Projects Fund#310,and additionally transfer an amount equivalent to 40%of the General Fund's audited fund balance that exceeded$26,000,000 as of December 31,2010. The 2010 ending fund balance was$27,461,703 which resulted in an additional 2011 transfer of$584,681 ((=$27,461,703-$26,000,000)x 40%)bringing the total transfers to$1,084,681. there were no pavement preservation expenditures from this fund in 2011. • In the 2012 Budget the City Council opted to transfer 100%of the General Fund unreserved fund balance in excess of$26,000,000 to Fund#311 which computed out to$2,045,203(_$28,045,203-$26,000,000). Pavement preservation expenditures in 2012 totaled$2,181,451. • In the 2013 Budget development process the City committed to finance pavement preservation at a level equivalent to 6%of 2013 General Fund recurring expenditures which computed out to$2,054,141 (_$34,235,677 x 6%). This was funded with an appropriation of$855,857 directly from the General Fund plus an additional appropriation of $1,198,284 in Fund#311. Sources of financing for the fund#311 appropriation included transfers-in from Fund#101 of$282,000;#123 of$616,284;#301 of$150,000 and#302 of$150,000. With an additional$35,945 in grant revenue this brought total 2013 pavement preservation revenues to$2,092,886,which financed$2,243,010 in projects in 2013(=$855,857 in Fund#001 and$1,387,153 in Fund#311). • In the 2014 Budget development process the City again committed to finance pavement preservation at a level equivalent to 6%of General Fund recurring expenditures which computed out to$2,156,051 (=$35,934,187 x 6%). This was financed with transfers from a number of City funds including$888,823 from the General Fund#001; $282,000 from Fund#101;$616,284 from Fund#123;$184,472 from Fund#301 and$184,472 from Fund#302. With an additional$2,042,665 in grant revenue this brought total 2014 pavement preservation revenues to $4,200,619,which helped finance$3,077,215 of projects in 2014. • In the 2015 Budget development process the City again committed to finance pavement preservation at a level equivalent to 6%of General Fund recurring expenditures which computed out to$2,245,133(=$37,418,882 x 6%). This was financed with transfers from a number of City funds including$920,000 from the General Fund#001; $206,618 from Fund#101;$616,284 from Fund#123;$251,049 from Fund#301 and$251,049 from Fund#302. With an additional$835,224 of grant revenue this brought total 2015 pavement preservation revenues to $3,083,613,which helped finance$2,400,407 of projects in 2015. • In the 2016 Budget development process the City again committed to finance pavement preservation at a level equivalent to 6%of General Fund recurring expenditures which computed out to$2,301,500(=$38,357,999 x 6%). This was financed with transfers from a number of City funds including$943,800 from the General Fund#001; $67,342 from Fund#101;$559,808 from Fund#123;$365,286 from Fund#301 and$365,286 from Fund#302. With an additional$2,063,000 of grant revenue this brings anticipated 2016 pavement preservation revenues to $4,364,522,which are anticipated to finance$4,500,000 of projects in 2016. • The 2017 Budget is again being developed to set aside City funds equivalent to 6%of General Fund recurring expenditures which computes out to$2,341,500(=$39,039,477 x 6%). This is being financed with transfers from a number of City funds including$953,200 from the General Fund#001;$67,342 from Fund#101;$660,479 from Fund #301 and$660,479 from Fund#302. With an additional$340,800 of grant revenue this brings anticipated 2017 pavement preservation revenues to$2,682,300.The 2017 Budget is anticipated to finance$3,000,000 of projects in 2017. The fund balance of Fund#123 was exhausted with the 2016 transfer of$559,808.In order to maintain the City's practice of setting aside funds for pavement preservation in an amount equivalent to 6%of General Fund recurring expenditures, the City will have to rely more heavily on the REET funds going forward.We have determined that the 2017 funding level of $2,341,500 is sustainable through 2021 assuming a General Fund contribution of$953,200,a Street Fund contribution of $67,342,and a collective contribution of$1,320,958 from the REET 1 Capital Projects Fund#301 and the REET 2 Capital Projects Fund#302.The City will take advantage of grant programs directed at pavement preservation as they become available. Because this is a Capital Project Fund whose sole purpose is to provide for Pavement Preservation projects,any money not expended in a given year will remain in the fund and will be available for re-appropriation in subsequent years. (continued to next page) 94 Fund:311 Pavement Preservation Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget Please see the following page for a list of proposed/potential projects in 2017. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Transfers in-#001 $ 0 $ 888,823 $ 920,000 $ 943,800 $ 953,200 Transfers in-#101 282,000 282,000 206,618 67,342 67,342 Transfers in-#123 616,284 616,284 616,284 559,808 0 Transfers in-#301 150,000 184,472 251,049 365,286 660,479 Transfers in-#302 150,000 184,472 251,049 365,286 660,479 Investment Interest 2,750 1,853 3,389 0 0 Grants 35,945 2,042,715 835,224 2,063,000 340,800 Miscellaneous 50 0 0 0 0 Total revenues 1,237,029 4,200,619 3,083,613 4,364,522 2,682,300 Expenditures Pavement preservation 1,387,153 3,021,922 2,358,976 4,500,000 3,000,000 Pre-project GeoTech 0 55,293 41,432 50,000 50,000 Total expenditures 1,387,153 3,077,215 2,400,407 4,550,000 3,050,000 Revenues over(under)expenditures (150,124) 1,123,404 683,206 (185,478) (367,700) Beginning fund balance 948,733 798,609 1,922,013 2,605,219 2,419,741 Ending fund balance $ 798,609 $ 1,922,013 $ 2,605,219 $ 2,419,741 $ 2,052,041 (continued to next page) 95 Fund: 311 Pavement Preservation Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget Based upon recommendations in the Pavement Management Plan Update along with field verification by Public Works staff we are recommending the following preliminary project list of pavement preservation projects in 2017: ARTERIAL STREETS FROM TO Dishman Mica(NB Lanes) 8th Appleway Blvd 8th Ave Havana Dearborn 8th Ave Carnahan McKinnon Mission Pines Evergreen Indiana Mirabeau Evergreen RESIDENTIAL STREETS FROM TO Saltese Road Houk Road McDonald Road Saltese Road McDonald Road 24th Ave Fox, Fox Ct 37th 35th 2nd Ave, Best to End Best Road East of Adam, End Contingency Prosect List ARTERIAL STREETS FROM TO University Road 16th Ave 24th Ave University Road 24th Ave Dishman Mica RESIDENTIAL STREETS FROM TO 28th Ave Dishman Mica Bowdish Road Skipworth Rd 24th Ave 16th Ave Walnut Rd 16th Ave 8th Ave Please note: Further investigation,testing and evaluation will be necessary to finalize these lists. 96 Fund:312 Capital Reserve Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget This fund was created in 2013 to be used to account for the accumulation of resources for yet to be determined capital projects. The initial source of funds was a 2013 General Fund transfer of$7,826,207 and this was followed with a 2014 General Fund transfer of$2,443,507,2015 General Fund transfer of$1,783,512,and 2016 General Fund transfer of$1,828,723. Projects approved by City Council from this fund thus far have included: • $21,139 for business route signage in 2013 • $57,601 for Balfour Park/Library site development • $261,993 for Appleway Landscaping • $2,320,000 for the City's share of the$15.3 million Sullivan Road West Bridge Replacement • $2,410,573 for construction of various sections of the Appleway Trail. • $5,199,664 for construction of a new City Hall building. Commitments to future projects include: • $700,000 towards a Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation project. • $500,000 towards a Pines Road/BNSF Grade Separation project. • $1,800,000 to remove and reconstruct Euclid Ave.from Flora to Barker after County installation of sewer. Future projects are yet to be determined. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Transfers in#001 $ 7,826,207 $ 2,443,507 $ 1,783,512 $ 1,828,723 $ 0 Developer Contribution 3,180 4,675 0 0 0 Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 1,000 Total revenues 7,829,387 2,448,182 1,783,512 1,828,723 1,000 Expenditures Business Route Signage 21,139 0 0 0 0 Balfour Park/Library site development 57,601 0 0 0 0 Transfers out#303-Appleway Landscaping 8,348 253,645 0 0 0 Transfers out#303-Pines Rd Underpass 0 0 0 0 0 Transfers out#303-Sullivan Rd WBridge 0 443,688 42,730 1,467,779 10,000 Transfers out#303-Euclid Ave-Flora to Bat 0 0 0 50,000 1,750,000 Transfers out#309-Appleway Trail-Univ to I 0 911,433 524,812 0 0 Transfers out#309-Appleway Trail-Pines-E 0 0 0 27,850 260,005 Transfers out#309-Appleway Trail-Sullivan. 0 0 0 45,090 301,910 Transfers out#310-City Hall 0 0 58,324 0 0 Transfers out#313-City Hall 0 0 5,162,764 0 0 Transfers out#314-Pines Grade Separation 0 0 0 500,000 0 Total expenditures 87,088 1,608,766 5,788,630 2,090,719 2,321,915 Revenues over(under)expenditures 7,742,299 839,416 (4,005,118) (261,996) (2,320,915) Beginning fund balance 0 7,742,299 8,581,715 4,576,597 4,314,601 Ending fund balance $ 7,742,299 $ 8,581,715 $ 4,576,597 $ 4,314,601 $ 1,993,686 97 Fund:313 City Hall Construction Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget This fund was created to account for the architectural and construction costs for a City Hall building.The building is anticipated to be completed in Fall of 2017. Funding for the construction will come from a combination of an interfund transfer from the Capital Reserve Fund#312 in the amount of$5,162,764 and bond proceeds in the amount of$7.9 million. Land for the building site was acquired in 2015 through a purchase in the Civic Facilities Fund#310. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Transfers in#312 $ 0 $ 0 $ 5,162,764 $ 7,946,088 $ 0 Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 0 Total revenues 0 0 5,162,764 7,946,088 0 Expenditures Capital Outlay-City Hall 0 0 373,718 7,294,400 5,344,219 2016 LTGO Bond Issue Costs 0 0 0 96,515 Total expenditures 0 0 373,718 7,390,915 5,344,219 Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 0 4,789,046 555,173 (5,344,219) Beginning fund balance 0 0 0 4,789,046 5,344,219 Ending fund balance $ 0 $ 0 $ 4,789,046 $ 5,344,219 $ 0 98 Fund:314 Railroad Grade Separation Projects Fund Spokane Valley L2017 Budget This fund was created to account for the design and construction costs of various railroad grade separation projects that are included in the Bridging the Valley concept.Due to the anticipated size,scope,and duration of these projects,managing them in a separate fund allows for the necessary monitoring without being obscured by the variety and quantity of the other projects in the Street Capital Projects Fund#303 as well as keeping these projects from skewing the average volume of activity in Fund#303.Revenues for this fund consist of grant proceeds and transfers in from other City funds,such as the General Fund#001,the REET 1 Capital Project Fund#301 and the Capital Reserve Fund#312.Expenditures in the years of 2016 and 2017 are related to right-of-way acquisition and design costs for the Pines Road Underpass project and the Barker Road Overpass project. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Grant Proceeds $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 230,000 $ 489,921 Transfers in#001 0 0 0 0 1,200,000 Transfers in#301 0 0 0 20,000 280,079 Transfers in#312 0 0 0 500,000 0 Total revenues 0 0 0 750,000 1,970,000 Expenditures Barker BNSF Grade Separation 0 0 0 250,000 770,000 Pines Rd Underpass 0 0 0 500,000 1,200,000 Total expenditures 0 0 0 750,000 1,970,000 Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 0 0 0 0 Beginning fund balance 0 0 0 0 0 Ending fund balance $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 99 Fund:402 Stormwater Management Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget The purpose of the Stormwater Management Fund is to account for the funds related to the maintenance,improvement and expansion of the City's storm sewer system. The revenue for this fund originates from a Stormwater fee collected on behalf of the City by Spokane County. The annual fee is$21 for each single family unit and$21 per each 3,160 square feet of impervious surface for all other properties. Each increment of 3,160 square feet is know as an equivalent residential unit(ERU). Accomplishments for 2016 • Completed small works projects per the Stormwater CIP. • Completed design and construction of stormwater capital projects in the current CIP. • Started an evaluation of the Stormwater Management Program Plan to meet permit requirements. • Worked with State agencies to provide a canopy for Spokane Valley Regional Decant Facility for year-round operations. • Led and participated with Eastern Washington jurisdictions to meet effectiveness study requirements. • Coordinated public education and outreach for stormwater quality awareness with other area agencies. • Monitored the Spokane River Toxics Task Force and the Idaho Washington Aquifer Collaborative for stormwater impacts. Goals for 2017 • Continue to work on applying for appropriate and applicable stormwater grants that will help the City keep costs low. • Provide planning and design efforts for continued disconnection of stormwater piping to creeks,streams, and drainages. • Continue work on possible stormwater upgrades and swale design along Appleway near University. • Continue to lead a coordinated effort to complete permit required effectiveness studies with the best return on investment. • Evaluate the storm drain cleaning program,recommend cost saving improvements,and bid new contract for 2018. • Complete small works project per the Stormwater CIP. • Initiate field testing of a GIS-driven maintenance management program to lower risk of mistakes and increase efficiencies. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Personnel-FTE Equivalents Engineer 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Engineering Technician II 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Assistant Engineer 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Maintenance/Construction Inspector 1.5 1.5 1.15 1.15 1.15 Planning Grants Engineer 0.0 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 4.50 4.75 4.40 4.40 4.40 Interns 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 (continued to next page) 100 Fund:402 Stormwater Management Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget Budget Summary,continued Recurring Activity 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Stormwater Management fees $ 1,869,081 $ 1,918,404 $ 1,861,368 $ 1,870,000 $ 1,860,000 Investment Interest 1,992 1,342 2,455 1,500 2,500 Miscellaneous&Grants Revenue 4,144 0 543,332 0 0 1,875,217 1,919,746 2,407,155 1,871,500 1,862,500 Expenditures Wages, Payroll Taxes&Benefits 429,853 347,503 409,709 514,132 546,421 Supplies 10,954 8,388 30,222 15,900 15,425 Services&Charges 1,169,168 985,446 1,259,766 1,113,683 1,111,076 Intergovernmental Services 25,726 204,256 241,852 67,000 50,000 Transfers out-#001 13,400 13,400 13,400 13,400 13,400 Transfers out-#501 0 0 0 11,000 12,750 1,649,101 1,558,993 1,954,949 1,735,115 1,749,072 Recurring revenues over(under) Recurring Expenditures 226,116 360,753 452,206 136,385 113,428 Nonrecurring Activity Revenues Grant proceeds 233,165 76,097 0 175,000 210,000 FEMA Grant Proceeds-Windstorm 0 0 0 48,800 0 233,165 76,097 0 223,800 210,000 Expenditures Capital-Various Projects 834,941 103,307 0 151,100 450,000 Effectiveness study 0 0 0 175,000 210,000 Watershed studies 0 0 0 0 50,000 Maintenance facility storage unit 0 0 0 5,000 0 Storm-related street sweeping 0 0 0 50,000 0 Transfers out-#303 423 0 0 0 0 Transfers out-#403(DOE for Decant Proj) 0 50,125 0 0 0 Transfers out-#403 0 120,000 0 0 0 Transfers out-#501 (new pickup) 0 25,843 0 0 0 835,364 299,275 0 381,100 710,000 Nonrecurring revenues over(under) Nonrecurring Expenditures (602,199) (223,178) 0 (157,300) (500,000) Excess(Deficit)of Total Revenues Over(Under)Total Expenditures $ (376,083) $ 137,575 452,206 (20,915) (386,572) Beginning working capital 1,444,719 1,896,925 1,876,010 Ending working capital $ 1,896,925 $ 1,876,010 $ 1,489,438 101 Fund:403 Aquifer Protection Area Fund Spokane Valley J2017 Budget In 1985 voters of Spokane County approved a ballot proposition to create the Spokane Aquifer Protection Area(APA) as well as corresponding aquifer protection area fees with both sunsetting December 31,2005. Boundaries of the APA included portions of unincorporated areas(including what is now Spokane Valley)and the cities of Liberty Lake, Millwood and Spokane. In 2004 the City of Spokane Valley approved a resolution authorizing the inclusion of its municipal boundaries within the APA. The APA program was subsequently reauthorized through 2025 with voter approval. All fees are collected by Spokane County and include: • An annual fee of$15 per household for the withdrawal of water from properties within the APA. • An annual fee of$15 per household for on-site sewage disposal within the APA. • For commercial properties an annual fee ranging from$15 to$960 depending upon water meter size. In 2004 the City of Spokane Valley(City)entered into an interlocal agreement with Spokane County(County)that authorized the County to collect and retain APA fees through 2010 for a variety of projects including: • up to$100,000 annually through 2010 to the Spokane Regional Health District to provide for data base management related to monitoring of septic tanks and their potential impact on water quality in the Spokane Valley Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer. • a septic tank elimination program(STEP)designed to replace septic tanks with sanitary sewer systems. In the 2004 interlocal agreement the City and County also agreed that for the years 2011 through 2025 the APA fees remaining after the payment of reasonable administration and billing fees incurred by the County would be distributed annually between the County,City and City of Spokane on a proportional basis relative to the amount generated in unincorporated areas,the City and City of Spokane. The fees collected on the City's behalf by Spokane County are expended entirely on stormwater related projects that are designed to protect the aquifer. These fees plus grant monies received from a number of granting agencies finance a variety of capital projects. Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Spokane County $ 484,343 $ 461,828 $ 533,593 $ 400,000 $ 460,000 Grant DOE-Decant Facility 203,609 550,710 0 0 0 Grant DOT-Decant Facility 85,221 100,000 0 0 0 Grant DOE-Broadway Retrofits 0 49,203 0 0 0 Grant DOE-Sprague UIC Elimination 570,331 0 1,036,603 0 0 Miscellaneous 150 0 0 0 0 Transfers in-#402(Stormwater) 0 170,125 0 0 0 Total Revenues 1,343,654 1,331,866 1,570,196 400,000 460,000 Expenditures Broadway Retrofit 0 41,114 0 0 0 Construction-Decant Facility 299,319 893,514 0 0 0 SE Yardley Retrofits 7,109 728,565 0 0 0 Capital-Various projects 0 0 0 425,000 530,000 Sprague Swales 0 510 0 0 0 Depreciation Expense-Cap Imp 0 0 125,599 0 0 Transfers out-#402 0 0 120,000 0 0 Total Expenditures 306,428 1,663,703 245,599 425,000 530,000 Revenues over(under)expenditures $ 1,037,226 $ (331,837) 1,324,597 (25,000) (70,000) Beginning working capital (402,937) 921,660 896,660 Ending working capital $ 921,660 $ 896,660 $ 826,660 102 Fund:501 Equipment Rental&Replacement Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget The Equipment Rental&Replacement Fund(ER&R)is an Internal Service Fund that is designed to provide the funds necessary to purchase new vehicles and equipment at predetermined life cycles. This fund operates by charging each City department a monthly rental rate for the vehicles they use. The fee is based upon the estimated useful life of the vehicle and its replacement cost. The theory behind this program is that it allows City departments to budget vehicle replacement costs as a reoccurring expense over an extended period of time rather than as an intermittent capital expense that may be difficult to afford in any single year. In the event a City department requires an additional vehicle that actually adds to the fleet rather than simply replaces an existing vehicle,then that department must budget for the initial purchase price and transfer the necessary funds to the ER&R Fund to make the acquisition. In subsequent years the department will then begin paying a replacement fee spread out over the estimated useful life of the new vehicle. The 2017 Budget includes a new CenterPlace Kitchen Reserve that will be established through a transfer in from the General Fund in the amount of$36,600 per year for 5 years to build a total reserve of$183,000,which is the estimated replacement cost of the significant kitchen appliances and equipment at CenterPlace. Snow Plow Replacement Program The snow plow fleet currently consists of nine plow trucks.Six of the trucks are equipped with sanders and three of the trucks are equipped with 1,000-gallon tanks for placement of liquid deicer.Over the past five years the City has continued to improve the snow removal operations and has updated the snow plan accordingly.These improvements in snow operations have dictated that operating nine plows is a very efficient way to remove snow from the arterial and hillside roadways.Operating nine plows allows the performance of a full city arterial and designated hillsides plow in approximately 12 hours. In the future new plows will be purchased to replace the aging fleet as noted below and older plows will serve as backups and eventually be retired from the fleet beginning in 2022.The recommended snow plow fleet consists of eleven plows with two serving as backup plows.The two backup plows ensure that arterial roadways and hillside priority roadways can be cleared of snow per the snow plan.Having backup plows provides the City with additional plows that can be deployed in case of a mechanical breakdown or an accident during a winter storm event. The 2016 Budget included the purchase of a tandem axle plow truck with a sander for approximately$225,000.Future replacements will be single axle plows with an estimated cost of$200,000 per plow. Snow Plow Fleet Truck# Model Year YR Acquired Age at Retirement Replacement Yr Notes 206 1996 2009 26 2022 207 1997 2009 28 2025 204 1995 2009 33 2028 203 1995 2009 36 2031 205 1996 2009 38 2034 Existing Fleet (9)Snow Plows 208 1997 2009 40 2037 209 1998 2011 42 2040 211 2000 2012 43 2043 210 2010 2011 36 2046 212 2016 2016 33 2049 Truck 206 becomes a backup 213 2019 2019 33 2052 Truck 207 becomes a backup 214 2022 2022 33 2055 Truck 204 becomes a backup/206 is retired 215 2025 2025 33 2058 Truck 203 becomes a backup/207 is retired 216 2028 2028 33 2061 Truck 205 becomes a backup/204 is retired 217 2031 2031 33 2064 Truck 208 becomes a backup/203 is retired 218 2034 2034 33 2067 Truck 209 becomes a backup/205 is retired 219 2037 2037 33 2070 Truck 211 becomes a backup/208 is retired 220 2040 2040 33 2073 Truck 210 becomes a backup/209 is retired 221 2043 2043 33 2076 Truck 212 becomes a backup/211 is retired (continued to next page) 103 Fund:501 Equipment Rental&Replacement Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Interfund Equip&Vehicle Lease $ 177,744 $ 102,744 $ 35,544 $ 106,000 $ 146,429 Transfers in-#001 (CenterPlace kitchen re 0 0 0 0 36,600 Transfers in-#101 (replacements) 0 25,849 0 0 0 Transfers in-#402(addtl'pickup) 0 25,843 0 0 0 Investment Interest 1,176 792 1,449 1,000 2,000 Total Revenues 178,920 155,228 36,993 107,000 185,029 Expenditures Computer replacement lease 0 0 0 0 0 Software/Hardware replacement 0 0 0 0 0 Snow plow replacement 0 0 0 225,000 0 Vehicle Replacement 48,750 9,799 16,144 105,000 0 Total Expenditures 48,750 9,799 16,144 330,000 0 Revenues over(under)expenditures $ 130,170 145,429 20,849 (223,000) 185,029 Beginning working capital 1,082,719 1,228,148 1,248,997 1,025,997 Ending working capital $ 1,228,148 $ 1,248,997 $ 1,025,997 $ 1,211,026 104 Fund:502 Risk Management Fund Spokane Valley 2017 Budget The City of Spokane Valley is exposed to risks of loss related to a number of sources including tort;theft of,damage to, and destruction of assets;errors and omissions;injuries to employees;natural disasters;and unemployment claims filed by former employees through the State of Washington. The Risk Management Fund was established to account for all such related revenues and expenses. Revenues for this fund are comprised almost entirely from an annual transfer of money from the General Fund and the single largest expense is typically the insurance premium the City pays to our insurance provider,the Washington Cities Insurance Authority(WCIA). Budget Summary 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Actual Actual Actual Budget Budget Revenues Transfers in-#001 $ 319,000 $ 325,000 $ 325,000 $ 325,000 $ 350,000 Investment Interest 7 5 8 0 0 Total Revenues 319,007 325,005 325,008 325,000 350,000 Expenditures Auto&Property insurance 263,922 272,435 284,112 325,000 350,000 Unemployment Claims 14,126 8,532 14,722 0 0 Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 278,048 280,967 298,834 325,000 350,000 Revenues over(under)expenditures 40,959 44,038 26,174 0 0 Beginning working capital 83,212 124,171 168,209 194,383 194,383 Ending working capital $ 124,171 $ 168,209 $ 194,383 $ 194,383 $ 194,383 105 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Capital Expenditures for 2017 SOURCE OF FUNDS #001 #101 #107 #301 #302 #ark #311 #312 City #402 9403 9501 2017 REET1 REET2 Park City Aquifer Equipment Expenditure Capital Capital Capital Pavement Capital Hall Stormwater Protection Rental& Developer Capital Outlay Description Budget General Street PEG Projects Projects Projects Preservatior Reserve Construction Management Area Replacemen Grants Contributions #001 General Fund -IT capital replacements 100,000 100,000 -CAD/RMS System-Police Dept. 145,000 145,000 -CenterPlace Great Room audioNisual equip. 345,000 345,000 Subtotal 590,000 590,0001 0I I 0I 0I 0I 0I 0I 0I 0I 0I 0I 0I 0 #101 Street Fund -Signal detection replacement 40,000 40,000 -Traffic signal replacement 200,000 200,000 -Durable striping at Trent&Argonne 75,000 75,000 -Spare traffic signal equipment 30,000 30,000 -Battery backups for intersections 15,000 15,000 Subtotal 360,000 0 1 360,000 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 #107 PEG Fund -PEG Capital outlay 12,500 12,500 -New City Hall Council Chambers 250,000 250,000 Subtotal 262,500 0 1 0 1 262,500 I o l o l o l o I o I o I o I o I o I 0 #303 Street Capital Projects Fund 123 Mission Ave-Flora to barker 500,000 67,500 432,500 141 Sullivan Rd/Euclid PCC(PE/RW) 2,150,000 951,730 1,198,270 155 Sullivan Rd W Bridge Replacement 10,000 10,000 166 Pines Rd(SR27)&Grace Ave.Intersection Safety 333,224 333,224 167 Citywide Safety Improvements 5,000 5,000 201 ITS Infill Project Phase 1 300,000 74,614 225,386 205 Sprague/Barker Intersection Improvements 40,097 40,097 207 Indiana&Evergreen Transit Access Imp 5,000 5,000 221 McDonald Rd Diet(16th to Mission) 5,000 5,000 222 Citywide Reflective Signal Backplates 36,000 900 35,100 229 32nd Ave Preservation Project 2,500 2,500 234 Seth Woodard Elem Sidewalk Improvement 5,000 5,000 238 Mirabeau Pkwy&Pines(SR-27)Traffic Signal 5,000 1,000 4,000 239 Bowdish Sidewalk-8th to 12th 471,342 207,342 264,000 xxx N.Sullivan Corridor ITS Project 110,486 14,916 95,570 xxx Euclid Ave-Flora to Barker 1,750,000 1,750,000 xxx 9th Ave.Sidewalk 240,000 48,000 192,000 xxx Sullivan/Wellesley Intersection 198,000 26,730 171,270 Contingency 1 1,000,000 100,000 100,000 800,000 Subtotal 7,166,6490 I 0 I 0 1 437,002 1 1,173,230 1 0 I 0 I 1,7 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 1 3,756,320 1 40,097 #309 Parks Capital Projects Fund 227 Appleway Trail-Pines to Evergreen 1,925,957 260,005 1,665,952 237 Appleway Trail-Sullivan to Corbin 1,853,225 301,910 1,551,315 - Edgecliff Park Splashpad 125,000 125,000 Subtotal 3,904,182_ 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 1 125,000 I 0 1 561,915 I 0 I 0 I 0 I o1 3,217,267 I 0 #311 Pavement Preservation Fund -Pavement preservation 3,000,000 3,000,000 Subtotal 3,000,000 0 I o I o I o I o I 0 1 3,000,000 I o I o I o I o I o I o I 0 #313 City Hall Construction Fund 215 City Hall 5,344,219 5,344,219 5,344,219 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 5,344,219 1 01 01 01 0 I 0 #314 Grade Separation Fund 143 Barker BNSF Grade Separation 770,000 280,079 489,921 223 Pines Rd Underpass @ BNSF&Trent 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,970,000 1,200,000 10 I 0 1 280,079 1 0 0 I0l.,ol., o I o I o I o I 0 1 489,921 I 0 #402 Stormwater Management Fund -Capital-various projects 450,000 450,000 Subtotal 450,000 0 I o I o I o I 01 01 o l. o I 0 1 450,000 I o I o I o I 0 c #403 Aquifer Protection Area Fund -Capital-various projects 530,000 530,000 Subtotal 530,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 530,000 0 0 0 Total Capital Expenditures and Related Financing 23,577,550 1,790,000 360,000 262,500 717,081 1,173,230 125,000 3,000,000 2,321,915 5,344,219 450,000 530,000 0 7,463,508 40,097 1 Contingency amount is to cover unforseen overruns,costs related to projects that were expected to complete in 2016 and the costs of projects that have not yet had funding sources identified. -Dollar figures in Italicized Bold font are paid from a combination of existing fund balance and fund revenue that is not attributable to a single project. 106 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Full Time Equivalent Employees Difference from Adopted Proposed 2016 to 2017 2011 2012 2013 I 2014 2015 2016 2017 +(-) #001 -General Fund City Manager/City Clerk 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 0.000 Legal 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0.000 Deputy City Manager 6 7 6 6 6 6 6 0.000 Finance 11 11 10.75 11.75 11.75 11.75 11.75 0.000 Human Resources 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.000 Public Works 7.5 7 7 7.375 7.375 7.375 7.375 0.000 City Hall Operations&Maintenance 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1.000 (1) CED-Administration 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 0.000 CED-Economic Development 0 0 0 0 2.5 2.65 3.65 1.000 (2) CED-Development Services 0 0 0 0 11 11 10 (1.000) (2) CED-Engineering 6 6 8 7 0 0 0 0.000 CED-Planning 8.5 8.5 8 8 0 0 0 0.000 CED-Building 12.75 12.75 11.5 12.5 14 14 14 0.000 Parks&Rec-Admin 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0.000 Parks&Rec-Recreation 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.000 Parks&Rec-Senior Center 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.000 Parks&Rec-CenterPlace 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 0.000 Total General Fund 73.750 74.250 72.250 73.625 73.625 73.775 74.775 1.000 #101 -Street Fund 4.5 5 5 5.375 5.725 5.725 5.725 0.000 #303-Street Capital Project Fund 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0.000 #402-Stormwater Fund 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.75 4.4 4.4 4.4 0.000 Total FTEs 86.250 87.250 85.250 87.250 87.250 87.400 88.400 1.000 (1) Reflects increase of one FTE for operations and maintenance of the new City Hall building. (2) Reflects the transfer of an employee from one division to another. 107 2016 Work Force Comparison The 31 Washington Communities with a Population of 30,000 to 100,000 CITY POPULATION FULL-TIME PART-TIME Bellingham 84,850 741 47 (1) Yakima 93,410 694 17 Redmond 60,560 608 19 Kirkland 84,680 583 24 Olympia 51,600 547 14 Richland 53,410 454 26 Auburn 77,060 425 1 Kennewick 79,120 369 4 Lynnwood 36,590 339 6 Pasco 70,560 337 2 Federal Way 93,670 308 8 Bothell 43,980 299 7 Bremerton 40,500 296 19 Longview 37,230 296 8 Marysville 64,940 261 9 Walla Walla 33,340 260 14 Lacey 47,540 260 1 Puyallup 39,850 253 10 Issaquah 34,590 235 8 (1) Edmonds 40,900 220 5 Lakewood 58,800 203 7 Mount Vernon 33,730 200 29 Pullman 32,650 199 34 Wenatchee 33,510 145 3 Shoreline 54,990 127 10 Des Moines 30,570 116 12 Sammamish 61,250 86 5 Spokane Valley 94,160 85 2 Burien 50,000 63 5 Lake Stevens 30,900 63 2 University Place 32,230 44 8 AVERAGE 294 12 Source: Association of Washington Cities Survey: 2016 Participant Data -Cities and Towns (1)Did not respond in 2016. Employee counts are 2015 statistics. 108 EMPLOYEE POSITION CLASSIFICATION MONTHLY SALARY SCHEDULE Salary Schedule Effective January 1,2017 Position Title Grade 2017 Range City Manager Unclassified Deputy City Manager 21-22 8,888.39 - 14,535.51 City Attorney 21 8,888.39 - 13,082.08 Community Development Director 21 8,888.39 - 13,082.08 Finance Director 21 8,888.39 - 13,082.08 Public Works Director 21 8,888.39 - 13,082.08 Parks and Recreation Director 19 7,199.37 - 10,597.37 Human Resources Manager 18 6,480.26 - 9,537.16 Planning Manager 18 6,480.26 - 9,537.16 Building Official 18 6,480.26 - 9,537.16 Capital Improvements Program Manager 18 6,480.26 - 9,537.16 Development Services Manager 18 6,480.26 - 9,537.16 Deputy City Attorney 18 6,480.26 - 9,537.16 Senior Engineer-Traffic and CIP 17 5,831.91 - 8,583.09 Accounting Manager 17 5,831.91 - 8,583.09 City Clerk 16 5,248.20 - 7,724.29 Engineer 16 5,248.20 - 7,724.29 Senior Plans Examiner 16 5,248.20 - 7,724.29 Public Works Superintendent 16 5,248.20 - 7,724.29 Senior Administrative Analyst 16 5,248.20 - 7,724.29 Senior Planner 16 5,248.20 - 7,724.29 Development Services Coordinator 16 5,248.20 - 7,724.29 GIS/Database Administrator 16 5,248.20 - 7,724.29 Associate Planner 15 4,724.02 - 6,952.33 Assistant Engineer 15 4,724.02 - 6,952.33 IT Specialist 15 4,724.02 - 6,952.33 Engineering Technician II 15 4,724.02 - 6,952.33 Economic Development Project Specialist 15 4,724.02 - 6,952.33 Human Resource Analyst 14 4,251.88 - 6,257.58 Accountant/Budget Analyst 14 4,251.88 - 6,257.58 Administrative Analyst 14 4,251.88 - 6,257.58 CenterPlace Coordinator 14 4,251.88 - 6,257.58 Planner 14 4,251.88 - 6,257.58 Building Inspector II 14 4,251.88 - 6,257.58 Plans Examiner 14 4,251.88 - 6,257.58 Public Information Officer 14 4,251.88 - 6,257.58 Engineering Technician I 14 4,251.88 - 6,257.58 Senior Permit Specialist 14 4,251.88 - 6,257.58 Code Enforcement Officer 14 4,251.88 - 6,257.58 Maintenance/Construction Inspector 13-14 3,826.38 - 6,257.58 Recreation Coordinator 13-14 3,826.38 - 6,257.58 Customer Relations/Facilities Coordinator 13 3,826.38 - 5,631.60 Building Inspector I 13 3,826.38 - 5,631.60 Executive Assistant 13 3,826.38 - 5,631.60 Planning Technician 13 3,826.38 - 5,631.60 Deputy City Clerk 12-13 3,445.00 - 5,631.60 Senior Center Specialist 12-13 3,445.00 - 5,631.60 Human Resources Technician 12-13 3,445.00 - 5,631.60 Permit Facilitator 12 3,445.00 - 5,068.32 Help Desk Technician 12 3,445.00 - 5,068.32 Administrative Assistant 11-12 3,099.55 - 5,068.32 Permit Specialist 11-12 3,099.55 - 5,068.32 Accounting Technician 11-12 3,099.55 - 5,068.32 Maintenance Worker 11-12 3,099.55 - 5,068.32 Office Assistant II 10-11 2,789.41 - 4,561.71 Custodian 10 2,789.41 - 4,104.59 Office Assistant I 9-10 2,510.78 - 4,104.59 Note: Slight rounding differences may exist between the figures reflected on this page and the actual payroll rates computed by the Eden Payroll System. 109 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Glossary of Budget Terms Accrual Basis — A basis of accounting Capital Improvement — Expenditures in which revenues and expenditures are related to acquisition, expansion or recorded at the time they occur as rehabilitation of an element of the opposed to when cash is actually government's physical plant; sometimes received or spent. referred to as infrastructure. Appropriation — A legal authorization Capital Outlay— Fixed assets that have granted by the City Council to make general value of $5,000 or more and expenditures and to incur obligations for have a useful economic lifetime of more a specific purpose. than one year. Assessed Valuation — The valuation set Capital Project — Major construction, upon real estate and certain personal acquisition, or renovation activities property by the County Assessor as a which add value to government's basis for levying property taxes. physical assets or significantly increase their useful life, also called capital Authorized Positions — Employee improvements. positions, which are authorized in the adopted budget, to be filled during the Capital Projects Fund—A fund created year. to account for all resources and expenditures used for the acquisition of Bond — A long-term promise to repay a fixed assets except those financed by specified amount (the face amount of the enterprise funds. bond) on a particular date (the maturity date). The most common types of bonds Contingency — A budgetary reserve set are general obligation revenue bonds. aside for emergencies or unforeseen Bonds are primarily used to finance expenditures not otherwise budgeted. capital projects. Contractual Services — Services Budget—A plan of financial activity for rendered to a government by private a specified period of time (fiscal year or firms, individuals, or other governmental biennium) indicating all planned agencies. revenues and expenses for the budget period. Debt Service — Payment of interest and principal on borrowed money according Budget Message — The opening section to a predetermined payment schedule. of the budget that provides the City Council and the public with a general Department — The basic unit of service summary of the most important aspects responsibility, encompassing a broad of the budget, changes from the current mandate of related service and previous years, and the views and responsibilities. recommendations of the Mayor. 110 Division — Can be a subunit of a that define accepted accounting department which encompasses a principles. substantial portion of the duties assigned to a department (e.g. Building Division GASB — The Governmental Accounting in the Planning and Community Standards Board, established in 1985, is Development Department). the current standard-setting board for governmental GAAP. Encumbrance — The commitment of appropriated funds to purchase an item General Fund—The principal operating or service. To encumber funds means to fund of the City used for general set aside or commit funds for a specified governmental operations. Taxes and future expenditure. fees that generally have no restriction on their use support it. Expense — Charges incurred (whether paid immediately or unpaid) for General Obligation (G.O.) Bonds — operations, maintenance, interest or This type of bond is backed by the full other charges. faith, credit and taxing power of the government issuing it. Face Value — The amount of principal that must be paid at maturity for a bond Indirect Cost—A cost necessary for the issue. functioning of the organization as a whole, but which cannot be identified Fiscal Year — A twelve-month period with a specific product, function or designated as the operating year for activity. accounting and budgeting purposes in an organization. Infrastructure — The physical assets of a government (e.g. streets, water, sewer, Full-time Equivalent Position (FTE) — public buildings, and parks). A full-time or part-time position converted to the decimal equivalent of a Interfund Transfers — The movement full-time position based on 2,080 hours of monies between funds of the same per year. For example, a part-time governmental entity. person working 20 hours per week would be equivalent of 0.5 of a full-time Levy — To impose taxes for the support position. of the governmental activities. Fund—A fiscal entity with revenues and Long-term Debt— Debt with a maturity expenses that are segregated for the of more than one year after the date of purpose of carrying out a specific issuance. purpose or activity. Mission Statement—A broad statement GAAP — Generally Accepted of the intended accomplishment or basic Accounting Principles. Uniform purpose of a program. minimum standards for financial accounting and recording, encompassing Modified Accrual Accounting — A the conventions, rules, and procedures basis of accounting in which 111 expenditures are accrued but revenues Revenue — Sources of income financing are accounted for when they become the operations of government. measurable and available. Since this type of accounting basis is a Taxes— Compulsory charges levied by a conservative financial approach, it is government for the purpose of financing recommended as the standard for most services performed for the common governmental funds. benefit. This term does not include specific charges made against particular Operating Budget — The portion of the persons or property for current or budget that pertains to daily operations permanent benefits such as special that provide basic governmental assessments. Neither does the term services. include charges for services rendered only to those who pay, for example, Ordinance — A formal legislative sewer service charges. enactment by the City Council. If it is not in conflict with any higher form of Unreserved Fund Balance — The law, such as a statute or constitutional portion of a fund's balance that is not provision, it has the full force and effect restricted for a specific purpose and is of law within the boundaries of the available for general appropriation. municipality to which it applies. User Charges — The payment of a fee Program — The smallest organization for direct receipt of a public service by that delivers a specific set of services. A the party who benefits from the service. program may be an entire department; or if a department encompasses Vision Statement — A short statement significantly diverse responsibilities or that conveys the big picture of the large work forces, a single department organization. It is general in scope, not may be divided into two or more restricting. It answers the question programs. "Why?" Reserve — An account used to either set aside budgeted revenues that are not required for expenditure in the current budget year or to earmark revenues for a specific future purpose. Resolution — A special or temporary order of a legislative body—an order of a legislative body requiring less legal formality than an ordinance or statute. Resources — Total amounts available for appropriation including estimated revenues, fund transfers, and beginning balances. 112 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 25, 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: Motion Consideration: Council Awards of Outside Agency Funding Requests for the 2017 Budget. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: This is a component of the annual budget development process. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: No previous action has been taken. BACKGROUND: The City has provided funding assistance to local social service and economic development agencies dating back to the City's incorporation in 2003, and this is again up for consideration in the 2017 Budget development process. Currently included in the 2017 Budget is $150,000 for this purpose. An additional $43,000 has been included in the Economic Development Division for a direct contract for economic development services, as was discussed by Council at the October 4, 2016 Council meeting. On September 21st Council heard 5-minute presentations from those agencies requesting funding (see below), and based upon those written requests, presentations and ensuing questions, individual Councilmembers submitted to the Finance Department their recommendations for agency funding (detail on the attached sheet). OUTSIDE AGENCY PRESENTATIONS Economic Development Agencies Social Service Agencies September 21,2016 September 21,2016 Requested Requested 1 Greater Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce 60,000 7 ALS Association Evergreen Chapter 2,400 2 Spokane Area Workforce Development Council 5,500 8 Arts Academy of Spokane 4,000 3 Spokane Valley Arts Council 99,400 9 Baskets for Babies 1,144 4 Spokane Valley Heritage Museum 3,495 10 Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Inland NW 8,000 5 SNAP Financial Access 15,000 11 Greater Spokane County Meals on Wheels 48,000 6 Valleyfest 50,000 12 Greater Spokane Substance Abuse Council 12,000 13 Spokane Valley Partners 40,000 14 Vietnam Veterans of America 40,000 15 Widows Might 20,000 16 YWCA 9,360 $233,395 $184,904 OPTIONS: We plan to employ the same methodology to make awards as was used during award processes for the years of 2013 through 2016. This process includes the following steps: 1. After agencies interested in receiving City funds for either social service or economic development purposes had submitted written application materials seeking funding assistance, each agency was given the opportunity to make a verbal presentation to the City Council. 2. Council members delivered their recommendations to the Finance Director for how much funding assistance should be provided to each agency. The total of the award amounts recommended by each Councilmember should equal no more than the amount of money included in the budget. 3. The Finance Director then prepared a summary of Councilmember recommendations that included both the number of Council votes received for each agency and the average of all the award recommendations. 4. Agencies that received four or more Council votes will be awarded the average of the Council recommendations. 5. Agencies that received fewer than four votes will not be considered for funding. 6. Any Council awards recommended to agencies that receive three or fewer Council votes will be added together and distributed evenly among those agencies that received seven Council votes. The distribution will be a simple arithmetic average of the total amount remaining to be awarded, divided by the number of agencies receiving seven votes. 7. In no event will any agency receive an allocation greater than their initial request. If the distribution referenced in #6 above causes an agency to receive an allocation greater than their initial request, that portion that would be greater than the request shall be divided equally among the other agencies receiving seven Council votes. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Based upon a written recommendation received from each Councilmember, staff prepared the attached summary to support the following proposed motion: I move to award 2017 Outside Agency funding as follows: Greater Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce - $17,143; Spokane Valley Arts Council - $48,601; Spokane Valley Heritage Museum - $3,495; Valleyfest - $22,685; Arts Academy of Spokane - $2,500; Baskets for Babies - $784; Greater Spokane County Meals on Wheels - $21,821; Greater Spokane Substance Abuse Council - $4,143; Spokane Valley Partners - $13,429; and Widows Might - $15,399. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: $150,000 is included in the 2017 Budget for this purpose. STAFF CONTACT: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS: • Spreadsheet reflecting a summary of Councilmember recommendations for outside agency funding. C:\Users\cbainbridge\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\LACZ1HVP\Council Recommended Awards for 2017 as of 201610 25 with MC edit.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/25/2016 2017 Budget Summary of Outside Agency Allocations Recommended by City Council Presented to Council Councilmember Recommendations #of 1 on Higgins Collier Woodard Pace Haley Wood Munch Votes Average Requested 10/25/2016 Economic Development Agencies 1 Greater Spokane Valley Chamber of Cc 20,000 15,000 25,000 0 0 30,000 30,000 5 17,143 60,000 17,143 2 Spokane Area Workforce Development 5,500 0 0 0 5,500 0 5,500 3 2,357 a 5,500 0 3 Spokane Valley Arts Council 29,400 60,000 35,000 100,000 25,005 48,000 25,000 7 46,058 99,400 b 48,601 4 Spokane Valley Heritage Museum 3,500 3,495 3,500 4,000 3,495 3,500 2,500 7 3,427 3,495 b 3,495 5 SNAP Financial Assistance 10,000 0 0 0 0 0 5,000 2 2,143 a 15,000 0 6 ValIeyfest 10,000 13,000 10,000 10,000 70,000 15,000 13,000 7 20,143 50,000 b 22,685 Total econ.develop.agencies 78,400 91,495 73,500 114,000 104,000 96,500 81,000 91,271 233,395 91,924 Social Service Agencies 7 ALS Association Evergreen Chapter 2,400 2,400 0 0 0 0 0 2 686 a 2,400 0 8 Arts Academy of Spokane 4,000 0 0 4,000 4,000 1,500 4,000 5 2,500 4,000 2,500 9 Baskets for Babies 1,200 1,144 0 0 2,000 0 1,144 4 784 1,144 784 10 Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Inland N' 5,000 0 0 0 0 0 8,000 2 1,857 a 8,000 0 11 Greater Spokane County Meals on WhE 25,000 20,000 20,000 22,000 20,000 15,000 12,956 7 19,279 48,000 b 21,821 12 Greater Spokane Substance Abuse Col 7,000 0 4,000 0 0 12,000 6,000 4 4,143 12,000 4,143 13 Spokane Valley Partners 10,000 10,000 40,000 0 0 20,000 14,000 5 13,429 40,000 13,429 14 Vietnam Veterans of America 0 4,961 0 0 ' 0 0 5,000 2 1,423 a 40,000 0 15 Widows Might 10,000 20,000 10,000 10,000 20,000 5,000 15,000 7 12,857 20,000 b 15,399 16 YWCA 7,000 0 2,500 0 0 0 3,000 3 1,786 a 9,360 0 Total social service agencies 71,600 58,505 76,500 36,000 46,000 53,500 69,100 58,744 184,904 58,076 Total 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,100 150,015 418,299 150,000 Remaining $0 Sum of agencies receiving fewer than 4 votes a 10,252 "+"or""average of awards<or>$150,000 (15) Balance remaining to be allocated 10,237 Allocate balance remaining among 7 vote agencies 5 Amount allocated to each agency 2,047 b Spokane Valley Heritage Museum request 3,495 Average of 7 Councilmember awards (3,427) Unallocated balance awarded to Museum 68 Initial balance remaining to be allocated 10,237 Less: Unallocated balance awarded to Museum (68 Remaining unallocated balance 10,169 Allocate balance remaining among 7 vote agencies 4 Amount allocated to each agency 2,542 I 2016 10 25 RCA - ------ --- CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 25, 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: Motion Consideration: 2017 Community Development Block Grant Program — CDBG Projects GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None. BACKGROUND: On October 18, 2016, City Council reviewed the proposed Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) sidewalk projects. On October 25, 2016, City Council held a public hearing on the CDBG sidewalk projects. The following projects have been identified based on an evaluation of sidewalk needs in CDBG target areas. # Proposed CDBG Sidewalk Projects Estimated Costs 1 8th Ave— Dickey to Thierman (north side) $522,000 la 8th Ave— Eastern to Thierman $348,000 1 b 8th Ave— Eastern to Dickey $174,000 2 Mission Ave — Bates to Union (north side) $285,000 3 Indiana Ave — Pines to Mirabeau Park and Ride (north side) $230,000 OPTIONS: Move to authorize staff to prepare grant applications as recommended or amended. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to authorize staff to prepare CDBG applications for the proposed sidewalk project 8th Avenue from Dickey to Thierman (north side), Mission Avenue from Bates to Union (north side), and Indiana Avenue from Mirabeau Park and Ride to Pines (north side). BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: CDBG grants are typically funded at 100% of the total project cost. STAFF CONTACT: Chaz Bates Economic Development Specialist Steve Worley, Senior Capital Projects Engineer ATTACHMENTS: None 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 25, 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: Motion consideration — Browns Park — proposed lease of a portion to Water District 3 for well facilities. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 3.49.020(D). PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Administrative report August 3, 2016; administrative report August 30, 2016; administrative report October 18, 2016. BACKGROUND: Soon after incorporation, Spokane Valley received Browns Park from Spokane County, along with the other parks in the City. Spokane County previously granted a 35 year lease to Water District 3's (the District) predecessor in interest, Washington Water Power, which expired in 2013. This well has been in continuous use at least since 1978. Staff for the City and District discussed the grant of either a permanent easement (requested by the District), or a renewal lease (offered by the City) to ensure continuation of the long-term relationship in Browns Park. The District stated that it needs to have a permanent easement for long-term security in the location of its well facilities. If the District chooses to move their well facilities to another location, they have advised the City that it would cost between $400,000 and $500,000. On October 4, 2016, the City received a letter from the District dated September 30, 2016, in which the District advised the City that the District was terminating its use of the well at Browns Park. A copy of the letter is attached for Council review. In that letter, the District expressed concern that the City did not get back to the District in response to the request for an easement, instead of the lease the City offered. Staff notes the following contacts since May: - Staff spoke on the phone with Joe Carroll, attorney for the District, on numerous occasions on this issue, including but not limited to May 13, July 1, July 8, July 21, August 8, August 16, August 31, September 20, and October 12. (several of these dates may be off by a day or two) - Staff sent emails to Joe Carroll May 19, June 7, June 27, July 20, July 27, July 28, August 23, August 24, September 8, September 23, and October 11. - Staff met in person with staff and counsel for the District on May 24 and July 18, including with Acting City Manager Mark Calhoun. - The Council conducted public meetings on August 3, 2016; August 30, 2016 (at which Mr. Carroll was allowed to speak during an administrative report); and October 18, 2016. OPTIONS: (1) motion to propose attached draft lease to Water District 3; or (2) take other action as appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move we authorize Acting City Manager Mark Calhoun to finalize and execute the draft lease agreement, and forward it to Water District 3 for their potential approval and execution. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Unknown. STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, City Attorney; Mike Stone, Park and Recreation Director. ATTACHMENTS: (1) Letter from Water District No. 3 dated September 30, 2016; (2) proposed lease agreement between Spokane Valley and Water District 3. SPOKANE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT No. 3 ocr 1225 N. Yardley Street• Spokane, Washington 99212-7001 Cl 4 2016 111111111111, Office: (509) 536-0121 • Facsimile:(509)534-3760EGALDEPART AN VALE y MENT September 30,2016 Mr.Mark Calhoun,Acting City Manager Mr. Mike Stone, Parks and Recreation Director City of Spokane Valley 11707 E.Sprague Ave.,Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 RE: Brown's Park Water Well Dear Mr.Calhoun and Mr.Stone: Inasmuch as Spokane County Water District No. 3 ("District") has had no response whatsoever to its September 9,2016 letter to the City Councilmembers,and the City removed the water well lease as a discussion item for its last council meeting,it appears that the City is not open at all to discussion of an easement for the Brown's Park water well. Accordingly,the District Commissioners have decided that, considering all of the factors in regard to the Brown's Park water well, it is best if the District terminates its use of that well. Based upon the angst the City appeared to have over an easement for the well and the City's desire to be able to terminate the use of the water well area in the future by requiring a lease rather than allowing an easement, it is felt to be the best for both the City and the District in the long run that the District's use of that water well be terminated. The well use has been terminated. In the near future, the District will remove the pump, portable equipment and trade fixtures and cap the well. Please contact us to discuss the date for the termination of the irrigation and restroom water service for the park. The District will continue to work with the City on the establishment of new services for Brown's Park. The new service for the splash pad has been ordered and paid for. New services will need to be set up for the additional water service to the park. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at 536-0121. Sincerely, Ty Wick General Manager cc: Michael D.Terrell Rod Higgins Cary P.Driskell Joseph G. Carroll City of Spokane Valley 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Reference Numbers of Related Documents: 427149C; Off. 394 pages 1693-1704 Grantor: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Grantee: SPOKANE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT NO. 3 Abbreviated Legal Description: Ptn SW 1/4 SW 1/4 27-25-44 Additional on page 2 Assessor's Tax Parcel ID#: Ptn 45273.9036 LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY AND SPOKANE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT NO. 3, SPOKANE COUNTY PARCEL NUMBER 45273.9036, SPOKANE VALLEY,WASHINGTON,RELATING TO PLACEMENT AND OPERATION OF A WELL PUMP HOUSE ON CITY PARK PROPERTY This Lease Agreement is entered into by the City of Spokane Valley (referred to as "City"), and Spokane County Water District No. 3 (referred to as "District"), and jointly referred to hereinafter as the "Parties"; and WHEREAS,the City is the owner of certain premises located at 3101 South Pines Road, Spokane Valley, Washington, 99016, and commonly referred to as Browns Park. The primary feature of Browns Park since its construction in the late 1970's has been a softball field, a playground for young children,three volleyball pits,a picnic shelter, and a bathroom; and WHEREAS,this property was previously owned by the Brown family, which transferred its interest to Spokane County for public park purposes; and WHEREAS, in 1978, Spokane County, executed a 35 year lease agreement ("the prior lease") for the location of the pump house with Washington Water Power, the predecessor in interest of the District; and WHEREAS, on March 31, 2003, Spokane Valley incorporated. Spokane County subsequently transferred its park holdings to Spokane Valley;and Page 1 of 7 WHEREAS, the prior lease expired June 1, 2013, and the Parties have not executed any form of subsequent agreement for the continued location of the pump house at Browns Park; and WHEREAS,the primary consideration for the prior lease agreement was that the District would not be charged for the use of the land for the pump house and related water facilities. In exchange, the District would provide "all volume of water necessary for lawn sprinkling and domestic use on the park will be furnished at no expense whatsoever to the Lessor. For the purpose of furnishing said water to the Lessor under the terms of this agreement,the Lessee shall make available a 3"water connection at the pump location;" and WHEREAS,the District has continuously located the pump house and provided water for irrigation and domestic purposes since approximately 1978;and WHEREAS, in 2015, the City began constructing a number of new amenities at Browns Park, removing the softball field and replacing it with eight sand volleyball courts to date with eight additional courts planned. The City recently constructed a splash pad water feature, and will install replacement playground and picnic shelter facilities in the near future; and WHEREAS, the Parties seek to enter into a new lease that continues to be mutually beneficial,and provides for substantially the same terms as the prior lease. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth herein, the Parties do hereby agree as follows: 1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this lease agreement ("Agreement") is to set forth the Parties' understanding regarding the terms and conditions under which the District may continue to occupy a portion of Browns Park. The District's use shall be defined as two separate areas, (1) the Facilities Area comprised of those areas where the well pump house and related water transmission facilities are located, and (2) the Sanitary Control Zone. The Parties agree those areas are as follows: Location of the pump well house facility described as follows: The North 30 feet of the South 407.0 feet of the West 198.0 feet of the Southwest Quarter of Section 27, Township 25 North, Range 44 E.W.M., City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington; Except the West 30 feet thereof. Together with the water transmission facilities location described as follows: The Sanitary Control Zone location is described as follows: Fi All located on Spokane County Assessor's parcel number 45273.9036. 2. USE OF THE PREMISES. Page 2 of 7 A. The District is hereby granted the right within the Facilities Area to install, reinstall, construct, erect, alter, repair, energize, operate, and maintain water distribution facilities consisting of vaults, manholes, main lines, distribution lines, pipes, valves, sleeves, meters and meter boxes, cables, wires, water wells, pumps, electrical lines, well house buildings, and other necessary for the purpose of a water well and associated main lines or lateral lines (collectively referred to as "water facilities"), and in connection with all the foregoing, and only after prior consultation with the City, to cut, trim or chemically treat trees, bushes and shrubs and remove any and all appurtenances necessary for the installation,operating,maintenance,removing,repairing and replacing said water system, together with a nonexclusive right of ingress and egress of the Facilities Area and Sanitary Control Zone. The right of ingress and egress shall be exercised in such a fashion as to minimize to greatest extent possible impacts to the Park and its users. No other use of the property, including any expansion of the existing use, is permitted without prior approval of the City, subject to Paragraph 7,below. B. The City shall not install any permanent structures in the Facilities Area and Sanitary Control Zone; provided, that pavement may be installed. Should the City install structures or other improvements (except pavement) on the Facilities Area and Sanitary Control Zone so as to restrict access to the any of the water facilities covered herein or interfere with the function of the Sanitary Control Zone and it is necessary to remove said structures for access to any of the water facilities covered herein for repairs,maintenance, or other reasons,the City shall be responsible for the cost for removal and replacement of said improvements. During construction and, in the event of repairs or maintenance, the District shall repair and/or replace any pavement removed by excavation. The City shall not pave or install any structures over valves or meter boxes. C. The Sanitary Control Zone described herein is an area to protect the public water supply well and is subject to measures required to protect the public water supply. The Sanitary Control Zone area may not be developed without the approval of the District, its successors, or assigns. The City and District agree to comply with any future regulations imposed by the Spokane Regional Health District or State Board of Health to protect the Sanitary Control Zone and to protect the public water supply. The well pump house has a pipe that drains externally from the pump house into a dry well located on the east side of the building. The District shall maintain the dry well in such a manner that it drains well and does not result in any negative impact to the turf surrounding the dry well. 3. TERM OF LEASE AGREEMENT. This Agreement shall be in effect upon signing, and shall expire 4:00 p.m. on November 1, ETHER THE COUNCIL WANTS Tqatirgaiminiviiikip YEAR LE unless terminated earlier by mutual written agreement. 4. PAYMENT. The consideration for this Agreement is that the City will allow the District to continue to locate its water facilities on City park property, and in exchange, the District shall provide water for irrigation and domestic purposes based on the following formula: - Take the annual gallons of water usage from January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2015 to establish the average annual usage for City purposes; -The District shall provide the average annual usage to the City at no cost; Page 3 of 7 - Any additional usage in a year over the average annual usage shall be billed to the City at the District's normal cost for domestic water usage. The Parties acknowledge that this represents fair and adequate consideration that is mutually beneficial. The District shall install three water meters at the City's cost at a size identified by the City, one for the splash pad, one for irrigation, and one for the bathroom/shower facility, and provide at least a four inch water service pipe to serve Brown's Park. 5. MAINTENANCE COSTS. The District shall be responsible for all maintenance, including costs, relating in any way to placement and use of the District's water facilities on the City's property. The City shall be responsible for maintenance, including costs, of those water service facilities which have been installed for the purpose of providing water (irrigation or domestic)to Brown's Park from the point the pipes are five feet from the exterior well house wall. 6. FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR DISTRICT FACILITIES AT END OF LEASE. The District shall be responsible for removal of all of its facilities from the City property including all costs. At the expiration or termination of this Agreement, the District shall be responsible for removal of all of its facilities, except that such facilities may be temporarily abandoned in place with express prior written approval of the City. The City has discretion and authority to allow the District to temporarily abandon underground facilities until such time that the City requests their removal. When the City subsequently requests removal of the facilities, the District shall remove them within 60 days unless emergency conditions involving a hazard to the health, safety, or welfare of the public which requires their removal in such shorter time as identified by the City. Any request to the City to allow the temporary abandonment of facilities shall be accompanied by drawings showing the location of all underground facilities. The expense of the removal, and restoration of improvements in the subject property that were damaged by the facility or by the removal process, shall be the sole responsibility of the District. If the District fails to remove the abandoned facilities in accordance with the above,then the City may incur costs to remove the abandoned facilities and restore the subject property,and is entitled to reimbursement from the District for such costs,including reasonable attorney's fees and costs. 7. MODIFICATION. The Parties may modify any term contained in this Agreement by prior mutual written agreement. 8. ALTERATIONS, ADDITIONS, OR IMPROVEMENTS. The District shall not, without first obtaining the written consent of the City, make any alterations, additions, or improvements in, to, or about the Premises. The City shall timely respond to any requests to make alternations, additions or improvements in,to,or about the Premises. 9. INSURANCE. The District shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to Premises which may arise from or in connection with the District's use of the Premises. The District is required to maintain commercial general property liability insurance policy at least in the amount of$1 million per occurrence and$2 million aggregate minimum coverage from an insurer acceptable to the City. The District shall furnish the City with a copy of the required insurance certificates and/or amendatory endorsements with this signed Agreement. Page 4 of 7 10.INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS. A. The District shall indemnify and hold harmless City and its officers, agents, and employees from all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent or intentional act or omission of the District and its officers, agents, and employees relating to or arising out of its obligations under the terms of this Agreement. In the event that any suit based upon such claim, action, loss, or damages is brought against City, the District shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense; provided that City reserves the right to participate in said suit; and if final judgment in said suit be rendered against City, and its officers, agents, and employees or jointly against the District and City and/or their respective officers, agents and employees, the District shall satisfy the same to the extent of the District's apportioned liability. B. The City shall indemnify and hold harmless District and its officers, agents, and employees from all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent or intentional act or omission of the City and its officers, agents, and employees relating to or arising out of its obligations under the terms of this Agreement. In the event that any suit based upon such claim, action, loss, or damages is brought against District,the City shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense; provided that District reserves the right to participate in said suit; and if final judgment in said suit be rendered against District, and its officers, agents, and employees or jointly against the City and District and/or their respective officers, agents and employees,the City shall satisfy the same to the extent of the City's apportioned liability. 11.NOTICES. All notices or other communications given hereunder shall be deemed given on: (1) the day such notices or other communications are received when sent by personal delivery;or(ii)the third day following the day on which the same have been mailed by first class delivery, postage prepaid addressed to the District 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: DISTRICT: General Manager Spokane County Water District No. 3 1225 North Yardley Street Spokane Valley,Washington 99012 CITY: City Manager City of Spokane Valley 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley,Washington 99206 After September 30,2017,notice shall be sent to: 10210 East Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley,WA 99206 12. 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. 13. ASSIGNMENT. Neither Party may assign in whole or part its interest in this Agreement without the written approval of the other Party. Page 5 of 7 14. WRITINGS CONTAINED HEREINBINDING EFFECT. The Parties agree that there are no other understandings, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be binding upon the Parties hereto,their successors,and assigns. 15.NO WAIVER. No officer,employee,or agent of the City or the District has the power,right, or authority to waive any of the conditions or provisions of this Agreement. No waiver of any breach of this Agreement shall be held to be a waiver of any other or subsequent breach. All remedies afforded in this Agreement at law shall be taken and construed as cumulative,that is, in addition to every other remedy provided herein or by law. The failure of either Party to enforce, at any time, any of the provisions of this Agreement or to require, at any time,performance by the other Party of any provisions shall not, in any way, affect the validity of this Agreement or any part hereof,or the right of either Party to hereafter enforce each and every such provision. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY DATED: Mark Calhoun,Acting City Manager ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge,City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM ONLY: Office of the City Attorney STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. County of Spokane ) On this day personally appeared before me Mark Calhoun, to me known to be the Acting City Manager of the City of Spokane Valley, who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act of said water district for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the said instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal the day and year first written above. NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington,residing at My commission expires: Dated: Page 6 of 7 Ty Wick,General Manager Dated STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. County of Spokane ) On this day personally appeared before me Ty Wick, to me known to be the General Manager of SPOKANE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT NO. 3, who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act of said water district for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the said instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal the day and year first written above. NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington,residing at My commission expires: Page 7 of 7 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 25, 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: Motion Consideration: City Manager Selection. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35A.13.050 "City Manager— Qualifications" PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: On June 28, 2016, the Council designated a recruitment committee and authorized John Whitehead, Human Resources Manager for the City to enter into an agreement with an external firm for the purposes of conducting the recruitment for City Manager. BACKGROUND: On October 21, 2016, the City Council, community leaders and senior staff of the City conducted interviews of candidates for the position of City Manager. At an executive session during a special meeting earlier today, the Council considered the qualifications of candidates for the City Manager position. OPTIONS: Authorize the Mayor to make an offer of employment to the City Manager position and begin negotiating the City Manager Employment Agreement; or take other appropriate action. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to authorize Mayor Higgins to offer the position of City Manager to and to begin negotiations of the Employment Agreement, subject to approval of the Employment Agreement by a majority of Councilmembers at a subsequent meeting. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This appointment is consistent with the proposed 2016 City Budget. STAFF CONTACT: John Whitehead, HR Manager ATTACHMENTS None CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 25, 2016 Department Director Approval: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Growth Management Act (GMA) chapter 36.70A RCW PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Numerous meetings since 2014 regarding various aspects of the Comprehensive Plan Update and associated development regulations. BACKGROUND: Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130(1), City of Spokane Valley is required to conduct an update of its comprehensive plan and development regulations every eight years. The City of Spokane Valley's update is due no later than June 30, 2017. On May 3, 2016, staff conducted a joint workshop with City Council and the Planning Commission to provide direction to City staff and the consultant team on the land use alternatives as well as goal and policy focus areas. On June 7, 2016, staff provided the results from the joint workshop with the City Council. Staff received feedback from City Council on the workshop results providing further direction on the development of the land use alternatives and the goals and policies. On June 28, 2016, staff provided a presentation on residential development in our region to offer context for the proposed residential development standards. On July 26, 2016, staff provided an overview of the draft land use map and the correlation to the existing conditions report, with an emphasis on the focused analysis of Medium Density Residential, Mixed Use, Office, and Neighborhood Commercial. On August 9, 2016, staff provided an overview of draft goals and policies. On August 30, 2016, staff provided an overview of the draft development regulations. On September 6, 2016, staff provided an overview of the draft Comprehensive Plan. On September 16, 2016, the City issued a Notice of Availability for the Comprehensive Plan Update, Draft EIS, and associated development regulation amendments to start a 60-day notice period required by the GMA. The notice period also meets SEPA notice requirements for the Draft EIS. On September 29, 2016, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan Update, Draft EIS, and associated development regulation amendments. The September 29, 2016 public hearing was continued to October 6, 2016. At the public hearing, 86 people provided written and verbal comments. A summary of the public comments is included with this report. After closing the public hearing, the Planning Commission began deliberations. On October 13 2016, Planning Commission continued its deliberations on the Comprehensive Plan Update, Draft EIS, and associated development regulation amendments. After deliberations, the Planning Commission voted 6-1 to recommend City Council approve the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update and amendments to the zoning map, and amendments to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code Titles 17 and 19, chapters 21.20, 21.40, 22.50, 22.70, and 22.130, and Appendix A, and Draft EIS, with the changes agreed to by Planning Commission at its October 6, 2016 and October 13, 2006 meetings. Tonight, staff will provide an overview of the Comprehensive Plan Update, Draft EIS, and development regulation amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission. The discussion will include the changes recommended by the Planning Commission at its October 6 and October 13, 2016 meetings as part of its voted recommendation. The City Council will hold a public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan Update, Draft EIS, and associated development regulation amendments on November 8, 2016. After that time, it will consider a first ordinance reading to adopt the Comprehensive Plan Update, Draft EIS, and associated development regulations. OPTIONS: Discussion RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None STAFF CONTACT: Mike Basinger, Economic Development Coordinator ATTACHMENTS: — Presentation — Zoning Map — Staff Report dated September 16, 2016 — Summary of public comments received by Planning Commission — September 22, 2016 Planning Commission minutes — September 29, 2016 Planning Commission minutes — October 6, 2016 Planning Commission minutes — October 13, 2016 Planning Commission minutes — Planning Commission Findings and Recommendations (these will be provided Friday, October 21, 2016, as Planning Commission will be voting on the specific findings on Thursday, October 20, 2016). — Comprehensive Plan Update, Draft EIS, and Development Regulations, including the Zoning Map (yellow binder— provided separately) Legislative Update Draft Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations Overview Mike Basinger, Economic Development Coordinator 1 • Legislative Update ■ 4 Public Meetings ■ 24 City Council Meetings ■ 14 Planning Commission Discussions ■ Planning Commission Public Hearing • September 29, 2016 • October 6, 2016 (continued) ■ Planning Commission Deliberations • October 6, 2016 • October 13, 2016 2 1 Community Vision ■ Increase focus and access to parks and trails ■ Consider a specific focus area around new City Hall ■ Provide for a greater variety of housing types ■ Preserve the character of the neighborhoods ■ Locate housing near amenities like retail, healthcare, parks, and transit ■ Increase business opportunities and reduce barriers Wkane j�alley 3 Council Goals ■ Streamline land uses and maximize flexibility ■ Preserve established neighborhoods ■ Provide for a variety of housing types like tiny homes/cottage houses ■ Change the mixed-use designations along Trent ■ Consolidate Office and Garden Office or change to Corridor Mixed Use ■ Expand and designate new areas of Neighborhood Commercial 4 2 Draft Comprehensive Plan Approach • Economic Development focus • Innovative and data driven • • Easy to navigate with an attractive design • Concise and understandable • Includes existing studies • Retail Recruitment Spokane Valley • Tourism Comprehensive Plan 2017-2037 • Existing conditions reports Date Adapted • Includes strategic actions • Approach Continued 0 Economic Development • Specific section for goals and policies GOALS SoMot tdceddratts,t edytymdel. LOGS Oa.adm...zOh E.t,zzywz exa r � ,ad.tr.aaat,i.•.,aeE • Includes strategies in the goals and ' . `omsdAv° `" s- eI_ policies section sed"° 'ddr.d4rdeh cd s�p � 1,46 midi.bdica 64 az m:m...Mt POLICIES InhFntawtN,M1xzra.rmta».F.CL'„iv, .S1AA100IES 047N ehama2tadarer#Gneln* `vim _r•rssr�• EGO Em.-hrer<tmz>af! *ro4,S3% Eos' E�.mue r. tl+t+taasa=Htc 5.1 emdecor a,6 jam• 3 Approach Continued • Includes an implementation matrix identifying: STRATEGY ELL ENT RILEAD& REIATEDEI.EMENHSI PAR ERRS TIMING PRIORITY UnSert.corsyrehens.aanftgaaess sateaamerleeanan8grwsoarxgwgn • ED.On 20V HIGH • Strategies t,a theCtreag� 1°.aa��a ' ' ��° ure .ee rolalsas, a • Primary Element "" °"°°""e "`�"p°` • �° `° asanomaes.,aia,ess..CgYsveserem Ew*�++s • • ax,,gap akr.s HIGH resavlmer9s peniyoep Ca,* • Related Elements Eva...tetanal • .teem & • Wok.,anclsorsardmenaa aaawenamRana r. •• • •• alta HIGH aaar®.g mV.14xig• • Lead & Partners carer ming Wand weE-Dxa14a...eoq.,to e• • • EaD1.§lan 2018 HIGH ass.lusinesseeMwlerq ba6op.nn • Timing • o-eeaWeageearer»reuwnrcaeegafs ro,n2yK ••@• 'ole MEDIUM °` • Priority " Eee,ae et kcal aNaeesen8woemen ofaewlxss • ED.u;eiaiorc .19 MEDIUM mpomemwcerat • • • Sptaatmay �� 7 Approach Cont. - Elements • Economic Development • Land Use • Housing • Transportation • Capital Facilities • Utilities • Parks, Recreation and Open Space • Natural Environment *lame 8 4 Approach Continued Introduction * WHY THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT * IS IMPORTANT ■ Elements are similarly organized: ram:*dmd..na pax.lion{ea.Wee b..ded mai-Ey acad.av craze:ad.cea moan.mattes lata be god . .uian,ee-xe let.,rre ab.e and fa,Al axe.ea a...7 eu.▪ .-d[ad afar m:i eu,aul ewer.h Lot lune.Ce • Why the element is important tura ... rel aar.e eeteelu. e empla&rs.gait,p it xdmae ia,m.matos.tri. rage aeras d .al e lag • Planning Context p� eNbaveuteuue ad�Cyt , Wee Ird e.d.uane recaddw�dWaae qWN to au, • Current Conditions �aa§.adh .reae awa.aad ee ,, 1. e ad teueruKot sad .rtrtxe.cmame,ph.aA�-t,t-.a.i'u+,.•�'aaei sximim • Approach .re abep ecreaaeuaeuneuea `U...K4aY e.auue,.p4yd.rfravtr.aaaelc sash nee u.aees staex pa6.el ad pd..m W.ae rte eau XT — Challenges and Opportunities REFERENCES KEY PLANNINGCONTEleo spate evelat Far*Deuk ad.at;et rFtuuJer 061,de< capsma4reelm e}aeyeF kRrdzn.[Haeee.+•�.iacmu,.{e Q<ctartsa • .0. Pe Rt.adpid<�e—Rue.esedu Re detdry m sub aa — Community and Economic Development Priorities �. r..,ma,.Spale «asMen tep^.a°et d° ® venW..aedd e ,a.....wwat:.<..-c1 Wea..ee..xspdsa dural, Mu It.fr a6c reabrem e1.t+_t pram eaa u.et..irh fa to — Best Practices kr al» :h pts` =L:tooliw aae dry zein aN ISa.Ikk t me se lad ad.tral Iesan.*10h recta �M_acenndnb ma ....n.c Gama, Welkalie s0,~ 9 sY• Land Use Map • Created one multifamily designation M 11 . •smut .� �� I_. rs�i11l_i I Ill��il■nin _ I Ill i ' �•. rsl.•.W. li I! -.-IIu mini■ • 4t11 �d 1 ��ni� 11 1 .IIom I .r •a�� II '�� ' �1 ��+ ■■ 1111.iry or I ■ ■■ ■lam l i fir � ■g _K Limy!•-, / 1 :■rin.�„- ■ ■ %/a i YAr5 f ��%ilii a ��_� �/ .��,•,a - Oir e [IIi!■I I I ill ■`_ � i1 .'' �� .s 4%s.• l i l�.-i 1 I -OV de VC• - I111 1111 till tai �1 1 I�RllfMII 1 -■', E_II�■y I,gas 1 • nnm1111II gun IIlI . ii _ &• eaa `2 al m- .. 1111m illfu=um N! r/ �i►��lein1■ '"—1 Il i —a. ■ '=1ui .� _ mu min iii _-,., i - - .� flll. �1 II 111 ■/f jam. 10 5 Transit Service and Multifamily im w Z 1/2 mile buffer around bus stops E Sprague Ave Q • Proposed STA till BA� ,` Ai Redline 6 minute l c-2' service Spokane Valley Public Transportation I f c hue Slops, owls®hr '.. las Stops a, owls Baer ` , ----------...._.--_-- � -----_--_-- o KO re.aaa.menara Newt w Redline —Blue UM N - —Gremlinsf Bu lRoules , - I Municipal Boundaries 1=1SoeSaneVaaev ' SpuhaneVaBey Urban Growth Ares MAO Po- 0.1 03 pun a. a O Oarals Resealanb Open Spas *aline Footer 11 jam. Land Use Map • Designated new areas for parks and open space • Land by Mirabeau A -'.--:, —, -- • Appleway Trail ROW U�IILL't�'�71�!vIS_O_ TI�}fl�. ■C�f ylJ I/��fltl�sl�pL= . �-paLI■ sC".::� to • �• / //� * k �tiUillaa �� 1/��1I.i111C{ad.i�.i%/� 74•Illilllf1��:_.J.a9Lq,�.-10 = n ra'r I l'Rll / /�" / \ 1 l-i!''filatil dill ii rroer /i ![r7,E,I 0:1,II.'/i; I/ .. ////�I i! I--- r -- F—, ". Iorami ■ IIS tl��•- n�i nu■r i I_ c . YSY f�--J/ t� ■ 1111 I1 - r ■ r i1 ( til 1� '-� --- ..;.a.laNS< Y/ .//i. L'.a� ` t ■IIL IIIII1111111llllll llll — I, -_— - ■ . s NA:--l;rsl--:-. i S . rL •rseJt�Ll��' �■i...i zr■i -l�l�� ."�u�nuuumtViiiii��. ; �• -,Ti n n1��mp '!SFtaS�►�llr�.�a'1� it■1111 nim�7iTii 81C 12 jam• 6 Land Use Map • (:.Uniinnl nutmnt:=� /sr,, ■ Changed Office to Corridor Mixed Use72 __- ir • Multifamily, office, retail, and light manufacturingUMW =t 141 'n MIN rTtt.ilatilC ptt'!!taril4q �..�, --- i�'�® :I intaYtU!IriKr ffiNII mYftll� 111141&_, _ g 511(lii 11't ;iriz� ttiiile , �F/. '� %//%/////�/�///gjppry/ .r/ /i.4:6�R�?'fifi_ ._. - _ Cll�r� QJcV rrA �1�`ii, ,. !c; I ry1�i• v ■� .�"�rs f/r-�� r- c.�ilutal{h'Y�f,�.#"s,rl .F- Py • y�euVyp�� yI ■ 1 11 �� /� u. s r P r i,.1 �P 41116tini, `" nF �W� �� - s llil : 1- �rv4�nt` �/�� uRFnu�u-�:tl s:■tiiYY1■ Is -r � �� g > >r � o u rr re %/..,u,Iu-///Ilial�1F:,umau a■V r.iI IFIUru.'�• ! amort-.-- - /� ..IIlIIU.Va 9��ii44:=v I■ n® nym thui��Inutnirp•n.i t nnnn�■ ■ n sl � v,HN ili iY_ !�"P P YFYIr �Y/IYYY / a tmmt■�' CC} a r „ P✓ i` m �1,t N nY Y[ /t11 n ■FF PIF 6�a .•%�8.�sm 1111l L / Fut V L� r ,.> : idL /.. 0l VB 7•/r' III�niu liter r� Irsi si r ✓/r ,v / ¢3� -u:� t��1(s-Ni�luYnt�VYVF� -''� �°; - `` `� _ 7 '!i ig, �IC�tu i imp/L-!!"Ii of-ten- ani! lu vs,5 1 r��,,+,_ :i� %l//� _(s :1>:'' I 4.-21MileAm�_ an•in■!i1 III3flY■=1:fe y - -- 13 jam. Land Use Map • Designated new areas for neighborhood commercial development at major intersections in close proximity to existing neighborhoods /it lin, . _ 7 pc _ _ x. t _. i s `- ..a- / - ..Af I II"fi 5`,6.. - -= Wkalle ® 14 7 Land Use Map • Created Industrial Mixed-Use designation along Trent Avenue • Allows for light industrial (contractors and tow yards) • Continues to allow for commercial uses I„ x z—) m--I Z ' - - f East V-. i/. z z !II .. . • • • E HeraYl}L- IC—.... :Li i -_ :� 4 _, - ® . 1,., r-,--,- . - ,i .rbc=L14 r f � L-_ - z �p f i �290,1-"""""` _. t1 j 15 am. Land Use Map • Consolidated the industrial designations ! Ott .ttt,tt. ,20 -101 . 4Tf//f/. d i@Irm•1 y3i7/e /f ai � 1 ,a> ,i . laffr0 i� rOlnE M , ; 51 � Eli;•-:,- - ` * n�jt 1911 /! Y � '-. .� ■I(�( L,-_ '� .I'-11 .--IIiI1lE:.�_k ►ti_s Li. 2111_L % t— laa \ ..,,.-,,. ....,,,, -I . isrli.ritirliiitiik.,-,41,44.:„,,,,,44-1- ..."`line 16 j Valley. 8 Land Use Map • Integrated Community Commercial into Corridor Mixed Use and Regional Commercial it /i Kt111 i I i 4L_r'Milli I_EL GRi 4 tam IA,. ',pp 11 !1111!' Ol1/"1 Iii!!I n %ing 10;' /�� 1J' t 2 i/,'EC 02 Ile. ,,c.fra�Rm� -1♦1w' Mme..' 1821A,rs /R 04 2- ��n IIFME':==� ,e ■ .� I%AIM o!�%0f ... ` , '�.�� ' r _ D;Vita 11111 F iir%' '�%� t Ie' G-1 .: ., 0111.2 lido i 1 .a ' `:r� %I? t i� :'s '1 ��.. !.►,r Inial nor II i III ,�J •4 .0r,. �I _ ==TI Fool ■A ri mn pit'. 1 In ai pi `'i� . r„ Any 4 Iy( fI► )i1:U r ■ f E1r4I I� :I�� I ■ i �% '' �� of 07-/,/,,,„: .r. 'p _ii14_ J a permit A , , Siki.."...'alle 17 Land Use Map • ■ New housing opportunities: - -� • North/south corridors • - •o tr • Consolidated R3 & R4 - �` F' • Consolidated MF zonesmil 1 • New mixed-use area j`Sfaaniey 18 9 Land Use Map q-AufrAdmv■ Created language in _ j - „r = & development regulations •, t to allow existing mining 4 • operations to mine r within their permitted rights ,' , ot o'~ 19 vaIley. Community Prosperity Existing Map(12 Designations, 17 zones) Proposed Map(9 Designations, 11 zones) , ' ,.7..„-„,7 ' ' • _..... .------31.1:=)----„, ,----ii-i. -.'"' i‘iii.....i--A—A, , .. 4 fr:,,,,- -- p�, mo vd�. i!- jam. 20 10 Development Regulations Revisions • Consistency with Comprehensive Plan • Compliancy with current laws • Streamline regulations � 21 j`�1�. Implementing Regulations • Title 17 General Provisions • Title 19 Zoning Regulations, including zoning map • Title 21 Environmental Controls • Title 22 Design and Development Standards • Appendix A Definitions 22 11 Title 17 General Provisions • Develop a stronger interpretation process • Modify sign requirements for Public Hearing Notice • Hearing Examiner change of conditions • Added vesting provisions Bane 23 F1CJ' Title 19 Zoning Regulations • Reorganized Title • Modified zoning district and zoning map to be consistent with the land use map • Modified permitted used matrix to reflect new zoning districts • Incorporated language for small dwellings • Modified Density and Dimensional standards • Created Transitional Standards • Modified Administrative Exceptions Wlmne 24 12 Zoning Districts ■ Created implementing zoning districts consistent with Comp Plan • R-1 preserves existing development patterns • R-2 preserves existing development patterns • R-3 promotes reinvestment in existing neighborhoods • MFR allows for multi-family housing near business and transit • MU allows for office, retail, & multi-family • CMU allows for light manufacturing, retail, multi-family and office • NC allows for small-scale retail and offices uses • RC allows retail, wholesale, and service • I allows for manufacturing, processing, assembly, and freight handling • IMU allows for retail, office, light industrial uses (contractors yards) Siffikane2s • galley Alternative Residential Development ■ Provides options & standards for non-traditional single-family development • Accessory dwellings units • Industrial accessory dwelling units • Cottage developments • Duplexes • Manufactured homes • Small residential dwellings • Townhouses *Mime 26• �illey 13 Permitted Uses ■ Modified permitted uses to reflect zoning classifications • Added - Industrial Mixed Use • Removed - Single-Family Residential Urban district (R-4), Medium Density Residential, Office, Garden Office, Community Commercial, and Light Industrial ■ Consolidated retail sales and service uses into one broad use category ■ Consolidated medical uses into one broad use category ■ Created a Marijuana broad use category 27 Supplemental Uses ■ Created a new section for supplemental uses ■ Removed supplemental uses from district descriptions ■ Related supplemental uses to broad use categories ■ Created a section for uncategorized uses such as Home Businesses s#01 \-- 28 14 Density and Dimensions • Adjusted standards in R-3 • Min lot size 5,000 sq. ft. • Eliminated min lot width and length • Retained density (6 units/acre) • Adjusted standards in MFR • Eliminated density • Eliminated building height • Eliminated non-residential dimensions except for NC .j cane 29 j . Transitional Provisions • Reduces impacts on adjacent uses rj AlT ■ Ground level setback 10' El 1,D 61 • Landscaped per 22.70.070 45' / :: t. ■ Ull setback is a 1to1 g 25' 15, ratio starting at a height of 15' at the property line of the protected Protected Zones 10'min. Zones PrasicE g Protection setback zones. Wimne 30 15 Title 21 Environmental Controls ■ Created a SEPA infill exemption to promote development ■ Consistency with the Shoreline Master Plan Critical Areas regulations ■ Updated methods and references to reflect best available science SPIcane 31 Title 22 Design & Development Standards ■ SVMC 22.50 Off-street Parking and Loading Standards ■ SVMC 22.70 Fencing, Screening & Landscaping ■ SVMC 22.130.040 Street Standards ■ Re-organize and streamline language 32 16 Appendix A Definitions • Removed unnecessary definitions • Strengthened Use Category definitions ..00033 %Iley Planning Commission Recommendation • Public Hearing on September 29, 2016 and October 6, 2016 ■ 86 people provided written (32) and verbal (54) comments • Sprague and Barker designation change to Multifamily Residential (80%of total) — 64 against — 4 supported • 3001 N Pines Road designation change to Mixed Use — 4 against — 2 supported • Other comments related to supporting elements of the plan such as parks and trails, alternative housing, impact fees, preserving neighborhoods and commercial zoning changes *lime 34 17 Planning Commission Recommendation • Deliberations occurred on October 6, 2016 and October 13, 2016 ■ Planning Commission voted 6-1 to recommend approval of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan, supporting development regulations, and zoning map with changes ■ The following slides provide an overview of the Planning Commission's recommended changes Wane 35 Planning Commission Recommendation • Add a policy in Parks and Open Space Goals and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan Update to support xeriscaping, water conservation, and sustainable park management methods. • • h SfOliane 36 s Valley 18 i Planning Commission Recommendation ■ Designate parcels 55173.1018, 55173.1019, 55173.1020, and 55173.1005 as Single Family Residential (SFR) and zone the same parcels as Single Family Residential Urban (R-3). N.----- Witi IND '0E Co\N\e Ave �aPve,/ iii e . • •n PI PI p., e = �,v---�0o`N AN �xoo Ave I. EE Riversi•e Ave m 2 WIIIIMMINISIIIIMINIMMIIIIMMINIIIIIIIM a MIIINEW $01cane 37 Sprague and Barker (current zoning) !Ira I .r /Irk \ts i zoz-•nam_'_c. t I-mi 1 . irmiisteksm.*:.-1 $1-0. -tb.- iithinashalia, � \\�e -`izig `moi s 6. • Irl l��,\, •► i`b $•=_ j� ' Via� 11 �� .i* ill t .yam,-;+A1 ,,t-, y;a , r , `, • ktib . j_ 11>� Wall IONh0 O �� _ 1 _..�'�''\�, mi mss; oar f l11111 ��,•�=•�4,�1 ■ ;l � �- /_tea mak/ aS�� IS\�+%\ W ■!� �= `llI MIli1mr SME. `.1 1%.*, ktNY S.mini'■U , c 1i::lf::i: �,m■� WSW!WO I'Jr■■■I ■■■III■ II., III MW *lime 38 ....Valley 19 Planning Commission Recommendation ■ Designate the parcels located in the area south of Bow Avenue, west of Barker Road, north of Sprague Avenue, and east of Greenacres Road as Single Family Residential (SFR) and zone the same parcels as Single Family Residential Urban (R-3). �--- 7 _ yaw . air ° • Go�`e Ave , a Pie e� I .0 PI P''\ o . /�� me. N`xo�Ave = . , , (=KO - E •Riversi•e Ave `m II Sinane 39 jVa19• Sprague and Barker (current zoning) i�i 1 wo..wiw---;,-,ii-z-..,q- �.,``:��,1•,�'��: ./`41 /rr'' .tom - t- --%44. , ttNkrs"tikki --. 0- 4*-4 ‘c31116n Ikkor w thi � ,,k..-\ ..;, w•-+3"yvo, 0 -- al i, • a ■ 1111 L I t, ta Mi x.egk \ '►�+ .4,1 Vt'PIPP :► ! ' is /�� 4 a„ P. I ' : * _ 1111 / ■ liN mft a *�M :sumV p i .vb.-.4.. ir4... "Nih.,. ""liki ma, . siA%-4ts%.. - mum IIP1111 Sawa itri tommilit-..6", t,. 1.4 II. AIM t.,ak:s..ws weill11 MIME c pri11111111111111m1in,0 r■ il WOW■ MO 111111111111111111111115111111112111111.1ME O'IE1M IC 40 20 Planning Commission Recommendation • Use the annual amendment process • Proposal to change parcel 45091.9100 as Mixed Use (MU) and zone the same parcel as Mixed Use (MU). E Mirabeau Par I Igig MINK [ 1111111111111111111 , 41 3001 North Pines (Current Zoning) 11.101120.111/11111111Iff111111.1111111PERNIAL 11111111111111115111111 11111111111111111111111LIIIIII 1•ui2 111.11101111 .� " ! 1111111111111111011114.4 IlIuuuII 1 m........ .�..j �..o iii. .. m.. 111110II jjIIIII..I. 41015210311111111111111111 Sp0lcaI!C 42 21 Planning Commission Recommendation ■ Use the annual amendment process • Proposal to allow greenhouse/nursery, commercial on the identified parcel. a te, , ,...,___ !,_ if:Aft laft _fiCi°/lini& all 1ellt*eak... . tC 43 , Sands Road (Current Zoning) I '-.'\t..'.-r.": rw,„„11‘0,,,,,, [730.710 j� %l-4El-.h1N ioiii ---- .fi,.---.a. � � (IIMNisti 1x-1.1 ; + gll.: nm" MIT isimm, mriargalil: illii .:::. ....*lianal , 44 22 Planning Commission Recommendation • Amend proposed SVMC 19.40.050 to require that industrial accessory dwelling units be inhabited by the employer or employee of the company at which the industrial accessory dwelling is located. *»"kane ns Planning Commission Recommendation • Remove SVMC 19.40.100 small residential dwellings and small residential dwellings — supportive housing • Consider through a separate future code text amendment process. i �� 46 23 Planning Commission Recommendation • Amend proposed SVMC 19.70.020 and Table 19.70-1, Residential Standards, to provide for a maximum density of 22 units per acre and a maximum building height of 50 feet in the Multifamily Residential (MFR) zone. Sane 47 lleyPlanning Commission Recommendation • Amend proposed SVMC 22.70.070(D)(1) to provide that full screening is required when a multifamily or nonresidential project abuts a single family residential zoning district or single family residential use. pO�SR,1C 48 24 Next Steps • November 8, 2016 - Public Hearing and First Reading ■ Continue to compile agency comments as received • Staff modifies documents as directed by City Council • November 22, 2016 — anticipated Second Reading jMiHey 49 Questions vie 50 25 �®�f-7-7• ``' __-"___Antoine Peak.... _. — ►e+l / �e! Conservation Area 1111 �® tv `a♦i i t CampSeka Planta. � � ..�4* `r Conservation erry p;its : II 1I �� Area ��ii�'/. i Sled; , I `,I.�1/�„i E Euclid p ^r r' Ahab ay �• -J ._ 4� Ave Empire Wa :�/f 4W4ar Q Millwood .�- i InftBAiea� ®� de Field � = �� \ ��`,1 '” 1 y:ir „ -- J � ` � ' ///��/�.�f , Liberty '''''''',,ca l� - 1 Lake O iV 90 J[ II / Y y _ _ E Mission Ave //,..-/ LL -_� a n..__ ill. rk `tea il j Spoka-ie.,,_.-� •` R a \— E Cataldo z �.- _2 East ,�=v Ave Broadwa Ave - ' Erig �. - -cc Broadway „_____ w •-rista Dr I' a -- Infill Area S r-•ue-Ave. r� i� ®Itl1 -way DMIIII I I , I t i Vii'.. a Blyd \ ----. _ 1 J� r ,. ,Ao' u EasbSpraguelu- A /��/. _I ��rii/Tire. 6J -ems, —�J �,�m u) 0 0 I: /In \ , rCarnalien, ►�► , _ ..._ --- -----�----'InfiiLA�rea % I f J Dishman Hills or N .7.5/7 ,../ '----illi*ddo Uplmtds �' Natural Arca \� .. .I � // /�� _ ion E 16 h Ave __ City of Spokane Valley Zoning 9a �,., Municipal Boundaries -_ =)Spokane Valley 1,,, % c_�1/1 Spokane Valley Urban Growth Area(UGA) E32ntl A — Parks.Recreation,&Open Space , Land the Designation Zoning / r,/4----1. r'' .._ , .. , , .7,... ,,,.. r . i_j POS R3 �j�„ \ % 010 - ` ,\ \, I� I li 2 / " ,./Fril\L 1 _CMU ...1 I' v.//i 7 ,I �, i I, , 4__ �iI i 11111 RC .IL- �' � �/ e �'^...%'� .l ' 1. I , / IMU - I • ��^,.�.� T1 C I Dishman Hills �/I • j �t / Air LU Zone Conservation �1 �T�. - ®BPA Easement - Area-South Unit i Morrow Park "-----' Yellowstone Pipeline !#44:1 � Natural 0 0.5 2 3 A \ i Area MilesY1J...1_.. � _. 1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Sill0 PLANNING DIVISION pokane STAFF REPORT TO THE ��Valley PLANNING COMMISSION 2016 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE AND ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS STAFF REPORT DATE: September 16,2016 HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: September 29, 2016, beginning at 6:00 p.m., Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers, Valley Redwood Plaza Building, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 101, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206. PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130(1) and RCW 36.70A.130(5), all cities and counties planning under chapter 36.70a RCW (the Growth Management Act or GMA) are required to review and, if needed revise their comprehensive plans and development regulations to ensure the comprehensive plans and development regulations meet the current GMA requirements. The review is referred to as a periodic update and is required to be completed by 2017 and every eight years thereafter. Based on the requirements of the GMA,the City's update is due no later than June 30th, 2017. The City has prepared the required review and revisions to update its Comprehensive Plan (Comprehensive Plan Update) and associated development regulations, which includes an integrated non-project Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS). The draft Comprehensive Plan Update and associated development regulation amendments are being presented for Planning Commission consideration pursuant to the requirements of the GMA. GENERAL OVERVIEW The Comprehensive Plan evaluates growth and land use for a 20-year planning horizon and provides a policy statement of the City Council and the City for planning over the 20-year period. Several important sources of information go into the City's Comprehensive Plan Update, including GMA-required elements, linkages to the Spokane County Countywide Planning Policies (CWPPs) and other local plans and policies, input from citizens and other stakeholders, and identified best practices based on established knowledge and recent trends. Development regulations are required to implement and be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Thus, the City has updated and is proposing amendments to development regulations so that they comply with current law as well as consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Update. A more detailed description of the Comprehensive Plan, associated development regulations, and DEIS is provided below. DRAFT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE The GMA requires that review and revision of Comprehensive Plans include early and continuous public participation. The City has engaged in extensive public participation as part of the development of the draft Comprehensive Plan Update that included input from citizens and stakeholders; hundreds of people participated in the engagement process and their feedback was essential. Engagement activities included three open house workshops to support visioning, numerous City Council and Planning Commission Staff Report Comprehensive Plan Update Associated Development Regulation Amendments Draft EIS meetings, a joint City Council/Planning Commission workshop to refine draft goals and policies, a thorough process to evaluate citizen-initiated amendment requests (CARS) and a public meeting to present the draft Comprehensive Plan Update. In the Comprehensive Plan Update, the City has included elements for Economic Development, Land Use, Transportation, Housing, Capital Facilities, Utilities, Natural Environment, and Parks and Open Space. Each element includes specific components, including goals, policies, maps and analytics. In addition, the City has included an implementation matrix with prioritized strategic actions and timelines for completion. The City has taken the periodic update as an opportunity to not only revise the Comprehensive Plan to ensure compliance with the GMA, but to also implement much of the policy direction received through the public process. As part of this development, the Comprehensive Plan Update and supporting development regulations have thus been streamlined and revised significantly from the existing Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, the Comprehensive Plan and many supporting development regulations are presented as new documents and should be considered as such rather than as mere changes to the existing Comprehensive Plan and development regulations. Below is a description of each chapter of the draft Comprehensive Plan Update. Chapter 1 —Introduction&Vision: Chapter 1 introduces the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Update and specifies the requirements for the Comprehensive Plan as set forth in the GMA. It identifies the Comprehensive Plan as the City's official statement regarding its vision for future growth and development over the next 20 years. The introduction also provides background on Spokane Valley and the process to develop the Comprehensive Plan Update, including the use of several important sources of information such as GMA- required elements, linkages to the Spokane County CWPPs and other local plans and policies, input from citizens and other stakeholders, and identified best practices based on established knowledge and recent trends. Chapter 2—Policy Plan& Strategy: The statutory goals and requirements of the GMA guide the development of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan Update are consistent with GMA requirements and provide the necessary guidance to realizing the community's vision. The Policy Plan guides the City's effort in realizing the community's vision. Chapter 2 echoes the community's vision and is consistent with the GMA. Chapter 2 contains goals that are broad statements of purpose, policies that provide specific direction to the City, and strategies that identify concrete actions for implementation. The strategies in the chapter are not binding components of the Comprehensive Plan, but rather offer opportunities for action to link to other plans and policies. Chapter 3 —Economic Development Element: Economic development creates living wage jobs, builds valued community amenities and generates additional municipal revenues that may be used to maintain service levels, infrastructure and facilities. In Page 2 of 6 Staff Report Comprehensive Plan Update Associated Development Regulation Amendments Draft EIS order to attract and retain companies, increase their productivity and grow the local and regional economy, effective policy from all other Comprehensive Plan elements is required. In that sense, the Economic Development Element is integrative, and depends on effective land use regulations, quality parks and recreation amenities, efficient transportation infrastructure, reliable utilities and infrastructure, affordable housing opportunities, sustainable resource management, and responsible fiscal policy. Proactive and innovative economic development efforts are responsible for attracting, recruiting and retaining office, industrial, and commercial and residential uses within a city. This element is therefore focused on harnessing market forces to encourage the implementation of Spokane Valley's vision. Chapter 4—Land Use Element: Land use regulations determine and balance what may be built, at what density, and in which location. In considering Spokane Valley's anticipated growth over the next 20 years, the Land Use Element provides a framework to accommodate future development while enhancing the community's quality of life. In many ways, the recommendations of the other elements in the Comprehensive Plan depend on effective planning in the Land Use Element. Chapter 5—Transportation Element: An analysis of the existing state of the transportation system is a required component of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. It identifies how the transportation network and the surrounding land uses influence the way people travel and how convenient that travel is for commuting, shopping, recreating, and other needs. Based on this analysis and an extensive public outreach component, challenges and opportunities for the transportation network are identified that will be addressed as part of the Comprehensive Plan Update. Effective transportation planning ensures that Spokane Valley continues to be accessible, enjoyable and competitive. Chapter 6—Housing Element: Housing is an important component of the economic infrastructure of a community because it ensures a balance of land uses and complements employment-generating uses by providing opportunities for workers to live near their jobs. The availability of housing types that match Spokane Valley's job profile and enhance the livability of local neighborhoods is therefore an important competitive advantage for economic development. The Housing Element leverages key data to inform the development of goals and policies, which will set a course toward the City's vision of quality, affordable housing for all Spokane Valley residents. Chapter 7—Capital Facilities Element: The Capital Facilities Element helps the City manage its investments related to facilities needed for growth, including water, sewer, solid waste, transportation, schools, libraries, stormwater, law enforcement, parks and recreation, fire and emergency services, and other capital facilities, and responds to specific GMA requirements. The element relies on a Capital Facilities Plan (CFP), which helps the City use its limited funding wisely and efficiently, and ensures that facilities are in place when growth occurs. The CFP includes a six-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) with estimated costs and proposed methods of financing. The plan also anticipates needed investments to support the City's economic development initiatives. Page 3 of 6 Staff Report Comprehensive Plan Update Associated Development Regulation Amendments Draft EIS Chapter 8—Private&Public Utilities Element: Spokane Valley residents rely on facilities and services that help define their quality of life. These facilities include those provided by several privately owned utilities in the region.Although many of these utilities are privately owned or owned by other public entities and regulated at either the state and/ or federal level, coordinated planning at the local level is essential to ensure that adequate utility service is available to all citizens. The Utilities Element is an opportunity to identify ways of improving the quality of services provided within the City. The City will use this element to identify priorities and develop implementation strategies to ensure that provision of utilities is properly coordinated with land use. Chapter 9—Parks and Open Space Element: The Parks Element provides the backbone to building formal and informal public spaces that support resident and visitor leisure time. The element provides a formal statement of the community's priorities as they relate to parks, recreation, open space, and art. Parks add to the quality of life for residents and to the value of nearby neighborhoods. The Parks Element provides the full range of urban living when combined with the other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Chapter 10—Natural Environment Element: The Natural Environment Element combines several related topics, including natural resource areas, critical areas, surface water, shorelines, and air quality. The diversity of Spokane Valley's natural environment is illustrated by ecosystems that range from the foothills of Mt. Spokane to the low-lying Rathdrum Prairie floodplains along the Spokane River. Throughout the region, lakes, rivers, wetlands, and associated riparian areas provide linkages and corridors for wildlife. Spokane Valley's natural environment also includes the Spokane Valley/Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer, one of the most productive aquifers in the United States. By ensuring the availability of clean air and water and preserving critical areas and certain natural resource areas, Spokane Valley will continue to grow as a healthy, sustainable and inviting community. The City is required to identify and designate,where appropriate,certain natural resource lands, including mineral resource lands. The City does not have many of these lands, such as agricultural and forest lands, and so such designation is not appropriate. After undertaking a review, the City has determined not to designate mineral resource lands. This element discusses natural resource lands in more detail. ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS The development regulations implement the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The City's development regulations are currently contained in Titles 17 through 24 SVMC. Development regulations are required to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In order to implement the draft Comprehensive Plan Update, City staff is proposing significant amendments to Title 17 SVMC, Title 19 SVMC, chapter 21.20 SVMC, State Environmental Policy Act, chapter 21.40 SVMC, Critical Areas, chapter 22.50 SVMC, Offstreet Parking and Loading Standards, chapter 22.70 SVMC, Fencing, Landscaping and Screening, SVMC 22.130.040, Street Standards, and Appendix A,Definitions. Title 17 SVMC, General Provisions: This title has been updated and rewritten to develop a stronger Page 4 of 6 Staff Report Comprehensive Plan Update Associated Development Regulation Amendments Draft EIS interpretation process, allow applicants to waive the rebuttal period, modify certain requirements for public hearing notice, provide clear direction on processing change of conditions applications, and provide local vesting provisions in compliance with State law. Further,numerous minor grammatical and "clean-up"changes have been made for consistency with current drafting practices(e.g.,the capitalization of"Director"). Title 19 SVMC, Zoning Regulations: The title has been updated and rewritten to modify zoning districts to reflect the new land use map, modify the permitted use matrix to reflect new zoning districts and consolidate uses, incorporate language for new housing typologies, modify density and dimensional standards, modify language to support new neighborhood commercial development, adjust residential standards to support infill development, and create transitional standards. Chapter 21.20 SVMC, State Environmental Policy Act: This chapter has been updated to remove the SEPA checklist and added a categorical exemption for SEPA infill as allowed by State law. Chapter 21.40 SVMC, Critical Areas: This chapter has been updated and rewritten to incorporate best available science,as required by Washington law. These provisions apply to any development that occurs within a designated critical area. These provisions largely track similar changes that were made as part of the City's Shoreline Master Program adopted in 2015. Chapter 22.50 SVMC, Offstreet Parking and Loading Standards: This chapter has been updated and rewritten to streamline language, add criteria for electric fencing, and update the clearview triangle area to be consistent with Street Standards. Chapter 22.70 SVMC,Fencing,Landscaping and Screening: This chapter has been updated and rewritten to provide flexibility of types of landscape and location of landscaping, remove aesthetic corridors, and add more options for visual screening. SVMC 22.130.040, Street Standards: Chapter 9 of the adopted Street Standards has been revised to clarify performance surety criteria and requirements, to allow warranty surety bonds, and to remove the requirement that form sureties be included in the adopted Street Standards. Appendix A, Definitions: This appendix has been updated and rewritten to remove unnecessary definitions, strengthen use category definitions, and combine zones to allow flexibility. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT The City of Spokane Valley, as the lead agency, has determined this proposal is likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c)and is included. An EIS that evaluates planning-level proposals, such as changes to a city comprehensive plan, is referred to as a programmatic EIS. A programmatic EIS does not evaluate the impacts associated with a specific development project; rather, it contains broader, planning level analyses that emphasize cumulative impacts, policy-level alternatives, and program-level mitigation measures. The City's Comprehensive Plan Update EIS contains programmatic analyses of potential significant impacts associated with adoption of the EIS Alternatives. Individual development projects occurring under the policies of the updated Comprehensive Plan will be subject to any SEPA review required by state,county, and City regulations. Two action alternatives are analyzed in the Draft Comprehensive Plan/EIS: Citizen Focus (Alternative 2) Page 5 of 6 Staff Report Comprehensive Plan Update Associated Development Regulation Amendments Draft EIS and Community Prosperity (Preferred Alternative), and as required by SEPA, a No Action Alternative. All the alternatives accommodate the City's population allocation for 2037 of 14,650 for a total 2037 population of 109,913 without the need for an Urban Growth Area expansion. Community Prosperity (Preferred) assumes the implementation of the Citizen Focus Alternative, the preservation of the Low Density Residential designation as presented in the No Action Alternative, and the implementation of community priorities developed in the public visioning process. The key features of this Alternative include: — Renaming of five land use designations, — Consolidated four land use designations (Medium Density Residential, Office, Community Commercial and Light Industrial)into appropriate existing land use designations. — Creating one new land use designation(Industrial Mixed Use) — The creation of transitional zoning provisions to protect single-family zones from multi-family, commercial,mixed use,and industrial zones. — Allow for a 5,000 square foot lot size in the R-3 zone but retain six units per acre density in order to allow infill within City's unique development pattern. — Proposes a corridor Level of Service (LOS) standard in addition to existing intersection LOS standards. Citizen Focus Alternative assumes the implementation of the Citizen-Initiated Amendment Requests (CARs) related to Land Use Map changes. The CARs process allowed community members to propose changes to the adopted Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Map or to existing policy language. All of the CARs considered for this Alternative are site-specific future Land Use Map amendments. As part of the analysis, some of the CARs were expanded to include nearby parcels to avoid creating unique islands of a land use designations. This Alternative also proposes changes to the existing policy framework. The key features of the proposed changes include: — Eliminating redundancies and to create clear and concise policy statements. — New policies to support the City's economic development initiatives. — Allow for a 5,000 square foot lot size in the R-3 zone but retain the six units per acre density in order to allow infill within City's unique development pattern. — Proposes a corridor Level of Service (LOS) standard in addition to existing intersection LOS standards. The No Action Alternative assumes that existing land use designations and regulations would remain in effect, the existing zoned-density in the City would not be increased and the existing UGA boundary would remain unchanged. This Alternative assumes that development would occur within the City in a manner consistent with previously adopted plans and policies. NOTICING The City issued a threshold determination for this proposal on January 29, 2016. The City issued a Notice of Availability on September 16, 2016. The comment period for this proposal will end on November 15, 2016 at 5:00pm. Public notices have been issued in accordance with the City's adopted noticing process. Page 6 of 6 Comprehensive Plan Public Comments Index Number , Date Received Name Subject A.ainst Su ort Written Comment CO 1 9/29/2016 Torres,Oscar Requesting a change in zoning at 3001 N Pines Road Support Written Comment CO2 10/4/2016 Frederiksen,Daniel&Cassandra Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment CO3 10/4/2016 Rambo,Jay City wide Commercial zoning changes Support Written Comment C04 10/6/2016 Lathan,Athlan and Rachelle Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C05 10/5/2016 Spokane Transit(Karl Otterstrom) Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations Support Supporting Transit Written Comment C06 10/5/2016 Schultz,Kevin Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C07 10/5/2016 Petersen,Larry Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C08 10/5/2016 Currier,Danyel Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C09 10/5/2016 McLean Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C10 10/5/2016 Walton,Matthew Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C11 10/5/2016 Cote,Kathryn Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C12 10/5/2016 Smith, Clyde&Zita Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C13 10/6/2016 Southern,Charles&Janice Zoning change at Barker and Laberry Support Written Comment C14 10/6/2016 Mitchell,Neldon Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C15 10/6/2016 Clark,Marshall City wide Commercial zoning changes Support Written Comment C16 10/6/2016 Riley,Meghan Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C17 10/6/2016 Arthur,Andrew Improve noticing for zoning changes and apartments Support Written Comment C18 10/6/2016 Arthur,Ashley Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C19 10/6/2016 Calvin, Casandra Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C20 10/6/2016 Willis,Ann Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C21 10/6/2016 Nelson,Doug Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C22 10/6/2016 Krajack, Scott Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Support Written Comment C23 10/6/2016 Phillipson,Andy Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C24 10/6/2016 Colombo,Barbara Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C25 10/6/2016 Alexander Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C26 10/6/2016 Crapo,Dennis Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Support Written Comment C27 10/6/2016 Olson,Ryan Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Support Written Comment C28 10/6/2016 Ewasko,Brian Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C29 10/9/2016 Smith,Clyde&Zita Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C30 10/9/2016 Vinway Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C31 10/12/2016 Kaiser,Suzan Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Written Comment C32 10/12/2016 Werden,Gene Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C33 9/29/2016 Currier,William Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C34 9/29/2016 Colombo, Stephanie Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Comprehensive Plan Public Comments Index Number Date Received Name Subject A.ainst Su ort Oral Comment C35 9/29/2016 Colombo,David Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C36 9/29/2016 Roberts,Frank Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C37 9/29/2016 Tones, Oscar Requesting a change in zoning at 3001 N Pines Road Support Oral Comment C38 9/29/2016 Ewasko,Brian Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C39 9/29/2016 Krajak, Scott Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Support Oral Comment C40 9/29/2016 Campbell,Tera Preserving Neighborhoods Support Oral Comment C41 9/29/2016 Roberts,Frank Zoning change at 3001 N Pines Against Oral Comment C42 10/6/2016 Howard,John Improve noticing for rezones Support Oral Comment C43 10/6/2016 Korn,Pat Zoning change at 3001 N Pines Against Oral Comment C44 10/6/2016 Misterek,Clara Zoning change at 3001 N Pines Against Oral Comment C45 10/6/2016 Mason,Donita Zoning change at 3001 N Pines Against Oral Comment C46 10/6/2016 Kovacs,George Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C47 10/6/2016 Haveman,Amber Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C48 10/6/2016 Currier,William Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C49 10/6/2016 Roberts,Frank Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C50 10/6/2016 Smith,Zita Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C51 10/6/2016 Board,Nancy Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C52 10/6/2016 Colombo, Stephanie Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C53 10/6/2016 Colombo,David Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C54 10/6/2016 Vinson,Wayne Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C55 10/6/2016 Shepard,Norman Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C56 10/6/2016 Moseman,Marina Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C57 10/6/2016 Lathan,Athlan Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Request to change property designation on parcel Oral Comment C58 10/6/2016 Crapo,Dennis 45333.1807 on Sands Road Support Oral Comment C59 10/6/2016 Boucher,Russ Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C60 10/6/2016 Nilson,Lee Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C61 10/6/2016 Neil,Kurt Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C62 10/6/2016 Belfry,Paul Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C63 10/6/2016 O'Shogay,Karen Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C64 10/6/2016 Gallion,Karen Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C65 10/6/2016 Cook,Gilbert Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C66 10/6/2016 McCord,William Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C67 10/6/2016 Robertson,Ian Alternative dwellings,tiny homes Support Oral Comment C68 10/6/2016 Plaggemeir,Lynn Imposing impact fees Support Comprehensive Plan Public Comments Index Number Date Received Name ' Subject Asainst Su sort .... ..... .. . . .. . Oral Comment C69 10/6/2016 Cline,Jerry Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Parks and trails,multiuse development,increase transitional Oral Comment C70 10/6/2016 Zlateff,Chariti Support provision setbacks&set multifamily height limit Oral Comment C71 10/6/2016 Williams,Dallas Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C72 10/6/2016 Hunter,Taffy Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C73 10/6/2016 Bonner,Kayloni Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C74 10/6/2016 Petibone,Kris Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C75 10/6/2016 Alexander,Kim Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C76 10/6/2016 Kroko,Caroline Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C77 10/6/2016 Harris, Raymond Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C78 10/6/2016 Olson,Ryan Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Support Oral Comment C79 10/6/2016 Stallinga,Jacque Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C80 10/6/2016 Richardson, Chuck Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C81 10/6/2016 Smith,Clyde Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C82 10/6/2016 Kautzman,Andy Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C83 10/6/2016 Lippincott,Marc Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C84 10/6/2016 Ross, Sarah Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C85 10/6/2016 Arnold,Nicole Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against Oral Comment C86 10/6/2016 Williams,Jackie Zoning change at Barker and Sprague Against 86 68 18 Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers—City Hall September 22,2016 I. Commissioner Graham called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. Secretary Elisha Heath took roll and the following members and staff were present: Kevin Anderson Erik Lamb,Deputy City Attorney Heather Graham John Holman,Community&Economic Development Director James Johnson Mike Basinger,Economic Development Coordinator Tim Kelley Gloria Mantz,Economic Development Engineer Mike Phillips Chaz Bates,Economic Development Specialist Michelle Rasmussen Suzanne Stathos Elisha Heath,Secretary for the Commission H. Agenda: Commissioner Anderson moved to accept the September 22,2016 agenda as presented. The vote was seven in favor,zero against and the motion passed. III. Minutes:Commissioner Anderson moved to approve the August 25th,2016 minutes as presented. The vote to approve the minutes was seven in favor,zero against and the motion passed. IV. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioner Johnson and Commissioner Graham reported that they attended the Comprehensive Plan Open House on September 8,2016. V. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Economic Development Coordinator, Mike Basinger reported on the schedule of future meetings including the Public Hearing scheduled for September 29th with a continuation on October 6`h,if necessary.Followed by a meeting on October 13th for deliberations and recommendations to City Council on the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Basinger stated that there is a possibility to separate the deliberations and recommendations into two separate meeting. VI. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment. VII. COMMISSION BUSINESS: a) Study Session:DRAFT Comprehensive Plan Update;Draft Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC)Proposed Updates;and SEPA Analysis for Draft Comprehensive Plan. Prior to the beginning of the presentation by Economic Development,Coordinator Mike Basinger, Commissioner Johnson inquired about the mandated date by the state in which the Comprehensive Plan needed to be completed. Staff stated the date is June 30,2017. Commission Stathos followed up with the question of why the schedule is set for the Comprehensive Plan to be completed by November 2016.Deputy City Attorney Erik Lamb replied that it is the expressed desire of the City Council for the Comprehensive Plan Update to be completed by the end of 2016. Mr. Basinger introduced Economic Development Engineer Gloria Mantz and Economic Development Specialist Chaz Bates,who were present and would assist him in answering questions the Commission might have about the document at the conclusion on his presentation on the draft Comprehensive Plan Update. He requested that Commissioners submit any housekeeping items including grammar to staff for correction.While substantial changes to the document be discussed amongst the Commission in order to forma consensus of future action. Mr. Basinger proposed discussion points for the Planning Commission in relation to the overall document including the Goals and Policies must be consistent with the community's vision and that the regulations that implement the Comprehensive Plan are consistent i.e. SVMC Title 19,Zoning. The community vision is an important piece to the Comprehensive Plan Update as it aligns closely to the City Council's vision for the plan.The plan has a strong economic development focus,it is data driven as well as easy to navigate and understand for the community and staff.The approach includes a specific section on goals and policies to have them located in one place. The 09-22-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 5 implementation matrix is completed. Mr. Basinger presented the following changes related to zoning: • Creation of one Multifamily Zone, all new Multifamily designation is located within one half mile of a bus route. • Designated new areas for parks and open spaces,Mirabeau and Appleway Trail. • Changed Office to Corridor Mixed Use, allowed for multifamily, office, retail, and light manufacturing. • Designated new areas for Neighborhood Commercial. • Created Industrial Mixed Use,allowed for contractor's yards and removed Multifamily. • Consolidated Light and Heavy Industrial into one Industrial. • Integrated Community Commercial into Corridor Mixed Use. • Consolidated R-3 and R-4 to R-3. • New Mixed Use Area,existing mining pit which in the future use could change. • Created language in the Development Regulations to allow existing mining operations to mine within their existing permitted rights. The proposed Land Use Map has 9 Comprehensive Plan designations and 11 zoning designations and the current Land Use Map has 12 Comprehensive Plan designations and 17 zoning designations. Development Regulations were reviewed to ensure they are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; compliant with current laws; in addition streamline regulations so they are easier to understand. Implementing Regulations that were reviewed for changes include SVMC Title 17 General Provisions; SVMC Title 19 Zoning;SVMC Title 20 Subdivisions; SVMC Title 21 Environmental Controls;SVMC Title 22 Design and Development Standards and SVMC Appendix A Definitions. • SVMC Title 17 General Provisions created a stronger interpretation process. Removed rebuttal period, modified sign requirements for Public Hearing notices, and reviewed Hearing Examiners'change of conditions.Added vesting provisions. • SVMC Title 19 Zoning reorganized the entire title, modified the zoning districts to be consistent with the new Land Use Map.Modified the permitted use matrix to reflect new zoning districts.Incorporate language for small dwellings i.e. tiny homes and cottage type housing.Modified the density and dimensional standards, created transitional provisions, and modified administrative exceptions. • Reconfigured the Permitted Use Matrix to have the information more accessible. • Created new section for supplemental uses and uncategorized uses within the broad use category. • Transitional provision limited uses allowed in 10 foot set back with landscaping,the upper level is a one-to-one ratio starting at 15 foot. Provision to assist with zoning within the right-of-way,it will be at the zone providing protection instead of the middle of the right- of-way. • Created a SEPA in-fill exception to promote development. • Consistent with Shoreline Master Plan • SVMC Title 22 Design and Development Standards reviewed off-street parking, loading standards,fencing,screening and landscaping,street standards. Mr.Holman addressed the question of why the Comprehensive Plan was a brand new document. He explained the first Comprehensive Plan was put together to be compatible with the Sprague- Appleway Revitalization Plan which was ultimately removed and the Comprehensive Plan was modified with the final product being a hollow shell, thus, making it more effective to start from 09-22-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 5 scratch on the current Comprehensive Plan Update. Commissioner Anderson commented on the difficulty analyzing changes when the two documents are not identical. There was additional concern expressed by many Commissioners that there was a limited amount of time available to review the Comprehensive Plan in its entirety. Discussion turned to the 5,000 square foot lot within the R-3 zone with the underlying density remaining at six lots per acre. The Commissioners opposed to the reduction of the minimum lot size to 5,000 square feet,sited the desire to preserve the feel of the neighborhood as well as lack of market in the Spokane Valley for smaller lot sizes.The Commissioners supporting the change,sited the quick sale of 5,000 square foot lots outside the City limits but within the valley area in Spokane County and the City's Urban Growth Areas.The City of Spokane's older neighborhoods have these same sized lots;this also creates an opportunity for in-fill development. Next item for discussion was the Land Use Map specifically the change of zoning on the corner of Barker and Sprague to Multifamily on staffs recommended map. The Commission expressed concern over the change due to previous public opposition to the change of the zoning for this location due to traffic issues already present on Barker. Commissioner Anderson inquired why there were areas on the Land Use Map that are currently developed are presented as a change in zoning to Neighborhood Commercial. Mr. Basinger explained that many of the properties are located on major intersections throughout the City;if they wanted to redevelop in the future it would allow more flexibility. Tiny homes became the next topic for discussion.The opposition stated that it does not encourage home ownership;does not improve prosperity of the community; Erik Lamb further explained changes in SVMC Title 17 General Provisions, as it is the general administrative practices which are applicable to SVMC Title 18 Boards and Commissions through SVMC Title 24 Building. There is a new section for code interpretation pulled over from SVMC Title 19. The goal was to strengthen and provide more direction to City staff Permit processing procedures in SVMC Section 17.80.110 the notice provision for the distribution of public hearing notices, the previous requirement to notice homes within 400 feet, added that persons outside of the 400 feet where there is criteria and circumstances to expand the noticing area. The process for processing Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Development Code Amendments found in SVMC Sections 17.80.140 and 17.80.150 added clarifying language. SVMC Section 17.100 Compliance and Enforcement changed dates for consistency. Completely new SVMC Section 17.80.170 relates to project vesting. Currently when a complete application is submitted,that application will be considered under the development regulations in affect to allow for certainty for developers.Any application set forth in SVMC Table 17.80-1 there is an option for wavier of vested rights by developers to have the project considered under the current development standards. The Commission took a break at 7:56 p.m.returning at 8;03 p.m. Ms. Mantz further explained the changes and additions made to SVMC Title 19 Zoning. SVMC Chapter 19.25 Nonconforming Uses and Structures,only minor inconsistencies were made to assist in implementing the code. SVMC Chapter 19.30 Changes and Amendments: a section was removed which addressed development agreements when used with Comprehensive Plan amendments. This process was not being used. Mr. Hohman commented this section had been used for one project and staff would not want to it used again. SVMC Section 19.30.015 is the section in the current code if the Commissioners would like to go read that section. SVMC Chapter 19.35 Residential Density Bonus,this section from the old code has been removed. This was taken out because there is no density requirement in the Multifamily zone so there is no requirement for it. The Growth Management Act does require for the City to plan for affordable housing but Mr. Lamb does not know if this would be applicable. SVMC Chapter 19.40 is a new section to address Alternative Residential Development Options such as tiny houses,cottages,duplexes,townhouses, industrial accessory dwelling units (ADU). Commissioner Anderson asked what an industrial accessory dwelling unit was. Mr. Basinger said there has been a new drive for live/work environments and being able to live where people work. Commissioner Kelley said he has a client who is currently looking for this type of set up, live/work/office use. The Commissioners are 09-22-16 Planning Commission Minutes tes Page 4 of 5 concerned about small parcels coming up with ten ADUs but it would be different than ten trailers, there was considerable discussion regarding concern over allowing these ADUs. Mr.Hohman said he understands why there would be a desire to try and look at the old and new codes side by side however trying to compare some sections,like this one,make it very difficult to do. This was one of the reasons why the old code was so confusing the staff worked to try and make sure the new one would encompass what was good of the old one but would clearly define what was important in the new one. SVMC Chapter 19.50 Planned Residential Developments(PRD),Table 19.40-1 shows which zones the PRD is allowed. Cottages are allowed in a PRD. Commissioner Phillips said he was in favor of the cottages in a PRD. Commissioner Johnson asked if there would be smaller access roads for these types of developments,or parking being hidden. Mr. Basinger said a cottage development would require a Conditional Use Permit,which requires a hearing in front of the Hearing Examiner. A PRD would still have to meet the City's Street Standards. Tiny homes as supportive housing is an issue for some of the Commissioners. Some Commissioners don't feel the tiny homes don't fit in an R-3 zone. A question came up as to how small it would be sanitary to allow a `home' to be and if the Health Department had concerns in the size. The Health Department is concerned about sanitary conditions but the Building Code's smallest allowable space is 300 square feet. Ms.Mantz continued with SVMC Chapter 19.65 Supplemental Use Regulations,this section number is new but the contents are not new because it was gathered from three sections in the old code. This addresses some uses and where they are allowed. SVMC Chapter 19.70 is a new section with the new residential standards: ■ Adjusted standards in R-3 • Min lot size 5,000 sq.ft. ■ Eliminated min lot width and length • Retained density(6 units/acre) • Adjusted standards in Multifamily Residential ■ Eliminated density ■ Eliminated building height ■ Eliminated non-residential dimensions except for Neighborhood Commercial SVMC Chapter 19.75 has the transitional regulations in it and this is new section to the code. The ground level setback is ten feet,but must be landscaped and has limited uses which are allowed in the setback. The upper level setback is a ratio of one to one starting at a height of 15 feet at the property line. The height of the building next to a protected zone may increase one foot for every foot of horizontal distance from the nearest protected zone (R-1,R-2 or R-3)boundary. If there were multiple properties in a zone, it would apply to the whole project. There are no height restrictions in the multifamily/commercial zones. The transitional regulations should control the height of the project. If there is a single family home in a multifamily zone,this protection would not apply to that single family home. Ms. Mantz said if the Commissioners wanted to concentrate on the new infoturation being added to the code in SVMC Title 19 the Chapters would be 19.40, 19.70 and 19.75. She said SVMC Chapter 19:50 had some changes to the Permitted Use Matrix and many of the categories have been condensed. Mr.Lamb stated there had been no changes to the marijuana regulations since they had been adopted earlier in the year. Commissioners asked why the line for multifamily became along 4th Avenue,instead of the other side of Sprague Ave. Mr. Basinger said it was a red line for Spokane Transit Authority (STA) which means it is served by transit on Sprague. Mr,Holman said currently there is medium and high density along 4th Avenue and it has access to the Appleway Trail currently or will in the near future. The intent is to limit amendments moving forward and to concentrate development in the smartest places, where it has been developing. Development of multifamily housing on or near Sprague makes sense for new development. 09-22-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 5 VIII. GOOD OF THE ORDER: There was nothing for the good of the order. IX. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Johnson moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:09 p.m. The vote on the motion was unanimous in favor,motion passed. Heather Graham,Chair Date signed Elisha Heath, Secretary Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers—City Hall September 29,2016 L Commissioner Graham called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. Secretary Deanna Horton took roll and the following members and staff were present: Kevin Anderson Erik Lamb,Deputy City Attorney Heather Graham Gabe Gallinger,Development Services Manager James Johnson,absent-excused Mike Basinger,Economic Development Coordinator Tim Kelley,absent-excused Gloria Mantz,Economic Development Engineer Mike Phillips Chaz Bates,Economic Development Specialist Development Michelle Rasmussen,absent-excused Marty Palaniuk,Planner Suzanne Stathos Henry Allen,Development Engineer Deanna Horton,Commission Secretary Hearing no objection, Commissioners Johnson, Kelley and Rasmussen were excused from the September 29,2016 meeting. II. Agenda: Commissioner Anderson moved to accept the September 29,2016 agenda as presented. The vote was four in favor,zero against and the motion passed. III. Minutes: There were no minutes to approve. IV. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioners had no reports. V. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT:There was no administrative report. VI. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment. VII. COMMISSION BUSINESS: a) Public Hearing: DRAFT Comprehensive Plan; Draft Spokane Valley Municipal Cade (SVMC) Proposed Amendments Title 17 General Provisions, Title 19 Zoning, Title 21 Environmental Controls,Title 22 Design and Development Standards and SEPA Analysis for Draft Comprehensive Plan. Chair Graham read the rules of a public hearing and then turned the meeting to Economic Development Coordinator Mike Basinger in order for him to give a presentation outlining the update to the Comprehensive Plan and the corresponding changes to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. Mr.Basinger began by sharing the vision gathered from the community through a public process: • Increased focus and access to parks and trails ■ Consider a specific focus area around new City Hall ■ Provide for a greater variety of housing types • Preserve the character of the neighborhoods • Locate housing near amenities like retail,health care,parks,and transit ■ Increase business opportunities and reduce barriers Which echoes the vision the City Council has for the City: ■ Streamline land uses and maximize flexibility ■ Preserve established neighborhoods ■ Provide for a variety of housing types like tiny homes cottage houses ■ Change the mixed-use designations along Trent • Consolidate Office and Garden Office or change to Corridor Mixed Use ■ Expand and designate new areas of Neighborhood Commercial 09-29-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 6 Mr.Basinger stated based on this vision the Plan has been completely rewritten in order to be: ■ Economic Development focus ■ Innovative and data driven ■ Easy to navigate with an attractive design ■ Concise and understandable ■ Includes existing studies ■ Retail Recruitment ■ Tourism • Existing conditions report ■ Include strategic actions Specific section for goals and policies ■ Includes strategies in the goals and policies section ■ Includes an implementation matrix identifying: ■ Strategies,which are included in the sidebar of the Plan ■ Primary Element • Related Elements ■ Lead&Partners ■ Timing ■ Priority The elements which will be included in the Plan are as follows however there will be a separate chapter up front which will have all of the goals and polices in it so anyone looking for them will not have to search the whole document looking for them,they can find them all in one place right in the front of the Plan.:We also made sure other documents were consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. ■ Economic Development ■ Land Use ■ Housing ■ Transportation ■ Capital Facilities ■ Utilities ■ Parks,Recreation and Open Space ■ Natural Resources Each element will be organized in a similar fashion: Why the element is important • Planning Context • Current Conditions • Approach — Challenges and Opportunities — Community and Economic Development Priorities — Best Practices Mr. Basinger continued explaining the changes to the Land Use designations. He stated staff combined the former two multifamily designations and zones into one. The medium density zone was moved into the R-4 zone or the MF-2 zone, which ever was more appropriate. The new Multifamily Residential (MFR) designation was looked at being near services and along transit routes. A buffer of one half of a mile around bus stops was considered. Spokane Transit Authority has stated their"Red Line" along Sprague Ave has the second highest ridership of all routes and they are working for six minute service. A good deal of the MFR has been concentrated near Sprague,near the Appleway Trail and near transit service. The City designated new areas for parks and open space. Designated space near Mirabeau Park and the Appleway Trail right-of-way. The Office designation has been absorbed into Corridor Mixed Use, which will allow multifamily, office, retail and light manufacturing. New areas for Neighborhood Commercial designations have been placed at major intersections in close proximity to existing neighborhoods. An Industrial Mixed Use designation was created for the land along 09-29-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 6 Trent Avenue which allows for light industrial uses such as contractors yards and towing companies and continues to allow for commercial uses. Mr.Basinger continued to explain the Spokane Valley Municipal Code has also been updated in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan. The Municipal Code is required to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan,comply with current laws and was rewritten to streamline the regulations. SVMC Title 17 General Provisions was completely rewritten to streamline the processes, to develop a stronger interpretation process, remove the rebuttal period, modify lettering size requirements for Public Hearing notices, in certain instances we will notify outside of the boundaries required,the Hearing Examiner change of conditions,and adding vesting provisions. SVMC Title 19,Zoning,is where the bulk of the changes occurred. Since the regulations must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan it has been update to reflect all of the changes in the Plan. IT has been completely reorganized to make it easier to use. The zoning districts have been modified to be consistent with the Land Use map. The Permitted Use Matrix has been update to reflect the new zoning districts,remove the old zoning districts,incorporated language for small dwellings. The density and dimension standards have been modified and transitional provisions have been added to protect residential neighborhoods when they are adjacent to a more intense zone. The Administrative Exceptions have been modified to make them clearer. Created zoning districts to implement the Plan. Residential districts R-3 and R-4 have been combined into one R- 3 zone with a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet. The MF-1 zone has,based on our studies,not been performing since before incorporation of the City.One Multifamily zone has been created and the MF-1 has been absorbed into either the MF-2 or Corridor Mixed Use (CMU)whichever was appropriate. Light Industrial and Heavy Industrial have been combined into one Industrial zone. However, a new zone has been created called Industrial Mixed Use to be able to take care of the properties along Trent Avenue where Council had requested staff look to create zoning which would be more appropriate for the uses along this corridor. Added some alternative dwelling types, such as tiny homes and cottages. The Permitted Use Matrix has been updated to reflect the removal of the Office,Garden Office,Community Commercial and Light Industrial zones from the code, . Medical,retail uses were added into broad use categories as well as creating a broad use category for marijuana uses. Supplemental uses were put in one place so they were easy to find. Uncategorized uses were also placed in its own section, such as home businesses. Density and dimension standards were adjusted in the R-3 zone to have a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and removed the minimum lot width and length but the density still remains at six units per acre. We adjusted the standards in the MFR to remove the density and the building height. We also eliminated nonresidential dimensions except in Neighborhood Commercial In order to reduce the impacts of reducing these dimensions,staff added Transitional Provisions. There is a ground level setback of ten feet. Within this setback there are limited uses allowed and it must be landscaped per the landscaping requirements. There is an upper level setback which is a one to one ratio starting at 15 feet at the property line starting at the property line. Title 21,Environmental Controls,a SEPA exemption created to promote infill development. We also make sure it was consistent with the Shoreline Master Program. We also made sure to update methods and reference to reflect best available science. In Title 22,Design and Development Standards,the off street loading requirements, clarified the clearview requirements, streamlined buffering and screening requirements, modified landscaping requirements and modified surety requirements. In Appendix A, Definitions any unnecessary definitions and strengthened the use category definitions. Mr.Basinger covered the schedule moving forward. The public hearing is tonight,the possibility to continue the public hearing or begin deliberations will be on October 6, 2016. The regular meeting and continued deliberations is scheduled for October 13, 2016. The findings and recommendations are scheduled for October,and there needs to be time for staff to put together the Commission's recommendation to the City Council. The Administrative Report to the City Council is scheduled for October 25, 2016.The City Council has scheduled a Public Hearing and the first 09-29-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 6 reading of the ordinance adopting the new Comprehensive Plan on November 8, 2016, with a second reading scheduled for November 22,2016. William Currier, 110 N Barker Rd.: Mr. Currier requested the side-by-side Land Use Map comparison which had been in the presentation be returned to the screen in order to reference it in his testimony. Mr. Currier, referring to the corner of Sprague and Barker, stated that the 'cow pasture' had already been zoned multifamily,but now his home and the land that Viking Homes had bought multifamily. He said he finds it odd that he was here a year ago fighting against and it was unanimously turned down,or recommended to the City Council to be rejected and now we are back here again.When he looks at that map and sees that'tiny brown spec',(meaning the properties designated as multifamily on the Land Use Map at Sprague and Barker),if you look at the map on the right there is nothing like it. He stated if you are trying to have a cohesive plan of things that flow,why would you not take that little spot that is a cow pasture and it is multifamily and turn it back into what it should be. It was turned into that under somewhat weird circumstances,he doesn't know all the details to that,but it doesn't make any sense to him. He said he was sure a lot of the people are going to say all kinds of things about the traffic and stuff. It just doesn't make sense and you are trying to make things flow and put things together,and it is actually a really good idea but that doesn't flow. Stephanie Colombo, 18921 E Valleyway Avenue: Ms.Colombo stated she was there to discuss the property at Sprague and Barker. She said she did not think it fits as one individual dark spot on the map. Referring to the last person who spoke,his property had been referred to as the `island property,' and how that does not work in the City development plan. She wanted to know how making a new island property made sense. She said since it was not a specific person trying to change it but the City allowing it,people did not need to be notified and she did not feel this was fair. Especially with all the previous testimony against it,how the change happened has upset her. She said at the beginning of the meeting; one of the goals was `maintain current neighborhood standards.'She said making that corner a multifamily designation is not going to help the area. She offered there are no services or good transit in the area. She appreciates the community or homeowners who put up a sign so she knew to come and dispute the changes you want to make. David Colombo, 18921 E Valleyway Avenue:Mr. Colombo said he was talking the property at Sprague and Barker. He said he felt that the change to this property had been buried in other changes and that they may need to be changed,but he didn't know anything about them they are so far away from him. But he felt this property(change)being put into this group was ridiculous and felt it should be addressed separately. He said the only way he knows about it was from a guy's homemade sign. He said'that guy'won't be able to keep his home. If you change this,you will destroy that man (pointing to the same man previously identified) right there. He said this sickened him that government, especially the Valley, could do this. He said he has lived here 40, almost 45 years now and this used to be one of the most awesome places to live. He wishes he knew the numbers but since you have buried them in all the other numbers he can't figure what it is.He said it makes him ill thinking this could actually happen where he has lived this long. There are so many other things that he did not know about. He said he has cars and now he is being told he has to give his cars up because other people don't like the looks of them even though according to the City standards they are not junk. He said"they"are still saying the cars are,and that is what is going to keep on happening if this(change)goes through. He feels this change needs to be put back on its own situation,not buried in with all of the stuff that is going on here. Obviously you did a good job,there is not as many people here this time as there was last time. He stated didn't get a letter and this would be in his back yard. He thanked the Commission for listening to him and for getting hot under the collar. Frank Roberts, 213 N Barker Road: Mr. Roberts stated he said he lives across from the post office. He said if you put the apartment complex and do the rezone you want to do, he said he would be more consumed with building up the industry in this town rather than the apartment complexes. He said it is like every piece of spare dirt you see in this valley,as soon as you see it available, it is an apartment complex. If you drive down Indiana past the mall, and see all the big apartments down there. He said a friend of mine lives down there. He said his friend now has people looking into his kitchen from three stories up. He was troubled by the prices that they charge 09-29-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 6 for rent. There needs to be two or three people or families living in one unit in order to afford to live in those apartments. Where is the $15-$20 per hour jobs in this town? There aren't any,they are all working in the service industry at Wendy's,McDonalds or WallyWorld. He has lived here 61 years and in the same house since 1975, it used to be a nice place. It used to be all pastures, farms, apples, and residential. The same people who bought that seven acres of land, they put houses a block down the street,but that is not good enough. They are out of Hayden Idaho,which is a right to work state. They can pay their workers next to nothing. They can build their three story apartment complex and it will cost them next to nothing,because they have a right to work state. We can't get out of our driveways now as it is. Oscar Torres,204 S Koren Road: Mr.Torres provided a letter, which was handed out to each Commissioner. Mr.Torres stated he was speaking on behalf of the Mirabeau Chapel Church. He said the property is located at 3001 N Pines and is approximately 7.94 acres. He stated his client was interested in having their property re-designated from Single Family Residential, to Mixed Use, which is just across the road. Mr. Torres said the request to change the designation is consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan based on the following criteria: the property is adjacent to other similarly designated properties. He said as he has studied the current and proposed Land Use map,the designations are still the same. The property is located along a main arterial and will allow for existing infrastructure to be used more efficiently. The property is located near housing and therefore will create a positive economic development impact to the area. It is also consistent with the existing transit system. Mr. Torres said this request to change the designation on this piece of property met the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and the Growth Management Plan. The new designation will encourage mixed use development where adequate facilities and services already exist. The mixed use will not adversely affect neighboring properties as it will encourage development consistent with adjacent properties and encourage economic development. Therefore, the property owners ask that the change to this property be included in the Comprehensive Plan update. Brian Ewasko,1109 S.McMillan Court:Mr.Ewasko stated he wanted to discuss the property at Barker and Sprague. Mr. Ewasko stated the last time this property was up for rezoning the room was packed. The City Council voted unanimously to keep it single family. Some of the reasons which were brought up before he felt he needed to remind everyone,were the neighborhood was determined to be more a rural urban neighborhood area. There are plenty of subdivisions,tons of development going on,but as of right now there are no sidewalks,no grocery stores or shopping centers which are relatively close by to meet all the requirements for an apartment complex. He said he was aware there are plans to make Barker bigger but right now with the existing developments happening right now, the traffic is getting ridiculous as it is. Developers are not required to have to help fix it. A new apartment complex would not help things. The impact on the schools hasn't been addressed adequately. He said it does not make sense to him,and he could speak for everyone in the Twin Bridges neighborhood as well as most of the surrounding neighborhoods around there,to put an apartment complex there. They are aware there is already going to be 10-20 homes put there and it is not ideal,but it is absorbable. But to put 100 families there,into schools which are already overcrowded is not great. There would be a negative impact that an apartment complex would have on the existing home owner's property values. He said recent construction has increase the amount of people who are not normally in the area. This in turn has brought a recent increase in break-ins in the community. Scott Krajack,19425 E Broadway Avenue:Mr.Krajack stated he was the property owner of the piece of property located at the corner of Sprague and Barker. Mr. Krajack stated in the report which has been presented,there is not enough affordable housing in Spokane Valley. He said there are a lot of residents who talk about this, and it is a statistics of the report. Not only affordable single family,but affordable multifamily is under served in the Valley. He stated the location, at Barker Road does have problems. There is too much traffic on it. He has been caught in it and he knows the people to the south have been caught in it. He commented the developments to the south,they have more homes in them and more homes are being proposed than if the corner were to be multifamily. He said the traffic is not going to stop coming up Barker Road. So the thing to do is to fix the problem. There are a lot more homes going in at Morningside,a lot more homes in 09-29-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 6 Twin Bridges and all those areas,so if you can widen the road,improve the road,put in sidewalks, you can start eliminating the problems up and down Barker Road. Tera Campbell,7603 E Mission Avenue: Ms.Campbell stated she was here to discuss preserving neighborhoods. She said she moved into an area she thought was protected by CC & Rs (Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions) and zoning laws. She said they found out later that the developer did not record any covenants for their development. She ended up in a law suit because the one of her neighbors built a large shop behind her which does not preserve the value of her property. She said she wanted other people to understand what they were getting into when they buy property. Frank Roberts, 213 N Barker Road: Mr. Roberts stated he used to live in the area (12104 E Fredrick)of the church on Pines which had been mentioned previously at 3001 N Pines Road. He said he remembered the neighborhood fighting for years,before the church bought the property,to keep apartment complex from going on that property. He said the neighbors fought it for years, some of the neighbors contributing to an attorney to fight the apartment complex. After some discussion the Commission consensus was to continue the public hearing until October 6,2016. VIII. GOOD OF THE ORDER:There was nothing for the good of the order. IX. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Anderson moved to adjourn the meeting at 6:55 p.m. The vote on the motion was unanimous in favor,motion passed. Heather Graham,Chair Date signed Deanna Horton, Secretary Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers—City Hall October 6,2016 I. Commissioner Graham called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. Secretary Deanna Horton took roll and the following members and staff were present: Kevin Anderson Kelly Konkright, Special Council Heather Graham Mike Basinger,Economic Development Coordinator James Johnson Chaz Bates,Economic Development Specialist Development Tim Kelley Mike Phillips Michelle Rasmussen Suzanne Stathos Deanna Horton, Commission Secretary IL Agenda: Commissioner Anderson moved to accept the October 6,2016 agenda as presented. The vote was seven in favor, zero against and the motion passed. III. Minutes: There were no minutes to approve. IV. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioner Johnson stated he belongs to an online neighborhood community called McDonald.Nextdoor.com and he had shared the opportunity to comment on the Comprehensive Plan with these neighbors. V. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT:There,was no administrative report. VI. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment. VII. COMMISSION BUSINESS: a) Continued Public Hearing: DRAFT Comprehensive Plan; Draft Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC)Proposed Amendments,' itle 17 General Provisions, Title 19 Zoning,Title 21 Environmental Controls,Title 22 Design and Development Standards and SEPA Analysis for Draft Comprehensive Plan. This is a continuation of the public hearing from September 29, 2016 Economic Development Coordinator Mike Basinger gave an overview of the update to the Comprehensive Plan and the corresponding changes to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. Mr.Basinger began by sharing the vision gathered from the community through an extensive public participation process: ® Increased focus and access to parks and trails • Consider a specific focus area around new City Hall • Provide for,a greater variety of housing types ■ Preserve the character of the neighborhoods • Locate housing near amenities like retail,health care,parks,and transit ® Increase business opportunities and reduce barriers Which echoes the vision the City Council has for the City: ■ Streamline land uses and maximize flexibility e Preserve established neighborhoods • Provide for a variety of housing types like tiny homes cottage houses ® Change the mixed-use designations along Trent ® Consolidate Office and Garden Office or change to Corridor Mixed Use ■ Expand and designate new areas of Neighborhood Commercial Mr. Basinger stated based on this vision the Plan has been completely rewritten in order to be: 10-06-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 8 ■ Economic Development focus ■ Innovative and data driven ■ Easy to navigate with an attractive design ■ Concise and understandable ■ Includes existing studies ■ Retail Recruitment ■ Tourism • Existing conditions report • Include strategic actions ■ Specific section for goals and policies ■ Includes strategies in the goals and policies section ■ Includes an implementation matrix identifying: ■ Strategies,which are included in the sidebar of the Plan ■ Primary Element • Related Elements • Lead&Partners • Timing ■ Priority There will be a separate chapter in the front of the document which will contain all of the goals and polices,making them easier to locate. We also made sure other City documents were consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The elements included in the Plan are as follows: • Economic Development ■ Land Use ■ Housing • Transportation ■ Capital Facilities ■ Utilities • Parks,Recreation and Open Space ■ Natural Resources Each element will be organized in a similar fashion: ■ Why the element is important ■ Planning Context • Current Conditions ■ Approach — Challenges and Opportunities — Community and Economic Development Priorities — Best Practices Mr. Basinger continued explaining the changes to the Land Use designations. He stated staff combined the former two multifamily designations and zones into one Multifamily designation and zone. MF-1 was moved into the R-4 zone or the new zone,which ever was more appropriate. The new Multifamily Residential(MFR)designation was looked at being near services and along transit routes. A buffer of one half of a mile around bus stops was considered. Spokane Transit Authority has stated their"Red Line" along Sprague Avenue has the second highest ridership of all routes and they are working for six minute service. A good deal of the MFR has been concentrated near Sprague, near the Appleway Trail and near transit service. The City designated new areas for parks and open space. Designated space near Mirabeau Park and the Appleway Trail right-of-way. The Office designation has been absorbed into Corridor Mixed Use, which will allow multifamily, office, retail and light manufacturing. New areas for Neighborhood Commercial designations have been placed at major intersections in close proximity to existing neighborhoods. An Industrial Mixed Use designation was created for the land along Trent Avenue which allows for light industrial uses such as contractors yards and towing companies and continues to allow for commercial uses. 10-06-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 8 Mr. Basinger continued to explain the Spokane Valley Municipal Code has also been updated in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan. The Municipal Code is required to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan,comply with current laws and was rewritten to streamline the regulations. SVMC Title 17 General Provisions was completely rewritten to streamline the processes, to develop a stronger interpretation process, remove the rebuttal period, modify lettering size requirements for Public Hearing notices, in certain instances we will notify outside of the boundaries required,the Hearing Examiner change of conditions, and adding vesting provisions. SVMC Title 19,Zoning, is where the bulk of the changes occurred. Since the regulations must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan it has been update to reflect all of the changes in the Plan. It has been completely reorganized to make it easier to use. The zoning districts have been modified to be consistent with the Land Use map. The Permitted Use Matrix has been update to reflect the new zoning districts, remove the old zoning districts, incorporated language for small dwellings. The density and dimension standards have been modified and transitional provisions have been added to protect residential neighborhoods when they are adjacent to a more intense zone. The Administrative Exceptions have been modified to make them clearer. Created zoning districts to implement the Plan. Residential districts R-3 and R-4 have been combined into one R-3 zone with a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet. The MF-1 zone has, based on our studies, not been performing since before incorporation of the City. One Multifamily zone has been created and the MF-1 has been absorbed into either the MF-2 or Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) whichever was appropriate. Light Industrial and Heavy Industrial have been combined into one Industrial zone. However, a new zone has been created called Industrial Mixed Use to be able to take care of the properties along Trent Avenue where Council had requested staff look to create zoning which would be more appropriate for the uses along this corridor. Added some alternative dwelling types, such as tiny homes and cottages. The Permitted Use Matrix has been updated to reflect the removal of the Office, Garden Office, Community Commercial and Light Industrial zones from the code. Medical, retail uses were added into broad use categories as well as creating a broad use category for marijuana uses. Supplemental uses were put in one place so they were easy to find. Uncategorized uses were also placed in its own section, such as home businesses. Density and dimension standards were adjusted in the R-3 zone to have a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and removed the minimum lot width and length but the density still remains at six units per acre. We adjusted the standards in the MFR to remove the density and the building height. We also eliminated nonresidential dimensions except in Neighborhood Commercial. In order to reduce the impacts of reducing these dimensions,staff added Transitional Provisions. There is a ground level setback of ten feet. Within this setback there are limited uses allowed and it must be landscaped per the landscaping requirements. There is an upper level setback which is a one to one ratio starting at 15 feet at the property line starting at the property line. Title 21, Environmental Controls, a SEPA exemption created to promote infill development. We also make sure it was consistent with the Shoreline Master Program. We also made sure to update methods and reference to reflect best available science. In Title 22, Design and Development Standards, the off street loading requirements, clarified the clearview requirements, streamlined buffering and screening requirements, modified landscaping requirements and modified surety requirements. In Appendix A, Definitions, we removed any unnecessary definitions and strengthened the use category definitions. Mr. Basinger covered the schedule moving forward. The regular meeting and continued deliberations is scheduled for October 13,2016. The findings and recommendations are scheduled for October 20, 2016, and there needs to be time for staff to put together the Commission's recommendation to the City Council. The Administrative Report to the City Council is scheduled for October 25,2016.The City Council has scheduled a Public Hearing and the first reading of the ordinance adopting the new Comprehensive Plan on November 8, 2016, with a second reading scheduled for November 22, 2016. 10-06-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 8 Commissioner Johnson confirmed multifamily is allowed in Corridor Mixed Use, there was no change to this. Chair Graham reminded the public of the rules for the public hearing and called the first person to testify. John Howard,11616 E.Jackson Avenue:Mr.Howard commented regarding why people did not receiving notices about zoning changes and about people building apartments. Pat Korn, 12103 E. Frederick Avenue: Ms. Korn stated she was opposed the request to change the zoning at the Mirabeau Chapel on Pines. Clara Misterek,12025 E Frederick Avenue: Ms.Misterek stated she was opposed to the request to change the zoning at the Mirabeau Chapel on Pines. Donita Mason,12012 E.Frederick Avenue: Ms.Mason stated she was opposed to the request to change the zoning on the property at Mirabeau Chapel on Pines Road. George Kovacs, 19122 E Valleyway Avenue: Mr. Kovacs stated he was against the rezoning of the properties at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Amber Haveman, 18722 E Sprague Avenue: Ms. Haveman stated she was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. William Currier, 110 N Barker Road: Mr. Currier stated he was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Frank Roberts, 213 N Barker Road: Mr. Roberts stated he was against the rezoning of the property at the Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Zita Smith,16 N Harmony Road:Ms.Smith testified she was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Nancy Board, 315 S Barker Road: Ms. Board testified she was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Stephanie Colombo,18921 E Valleyway Avenue:Ms.Colombo said she was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. She does not agree with the Corridor Mixed Use moving farther into the neighborhood or removing the height restrictions. David Colombo, 18921 E Valleyway Avenue: Mr. Colombo said he was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Wayne Vinson, 117 N Barker Road: Mr. Vinson testified he was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Baker to Multifamily Residential. Norman Shepard,602 S Barker Road: Mr. Shepard testified he was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Marian Moseman, 630 S Michigan: Ms. Moseman stated she was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Athlan Lathan, 1302 S McMillan Road: Mr. Lathan testified he was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Dennis Crapo,2602 N Sullivan Road: Mr. Crapo requested a piece of property he owns located on Sands Road, have the designation change to Regional Commercial to allow at use of Greenhouse/nursery commercial. Russ Boucher, 10 N Harmony Road: Mr. Boucher stated he was against the rezoning of the property located at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Lee Nilson, 101 N Barker Road: Mr. Nilson commented he was against the rezoning of the property located at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Kurt Neil,19724 E Sprague Avenue:Mr.Neil testified he was against the rezoning of the property located at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. 10-06-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 8 Paul Belfry, 18807 E Second Avenue: Mr. Belfry testified he was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Karen O'Shogay, 105 S Barker Road: Ms. O'Shogay said she was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Karen Gallion, 18605 E Turtle Creek: Ms. Gallion commented she was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Gilbert Cook,303 S Barker Road:Mr.Cook testified he was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. William McCord, 18816 E 4th Avenue: Mr. McCord stated he was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Ian Robertson,11919 E 30th Avenue:Mr.Robertson said he was supportive of allowing the small residential dwellings in Spokane Valley. It will support home ownership. Lynn Plaggemeir,11708 E 19th Avenue:Mr.Plaggemeir stated he was supportive of impact fees. Jerry Cline,18406 E 10th Avenue:Mr.Cline stated he was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Chariti Zlateff, 628 S Moen Street: Ms. Zlateff stated she was supportive of parks and trails. Supportive of multiuse functions,residential and commercial in same building. She was in support of increasing transitional setbacks,not exceed four stories,and restricting the Multifamily building height. Dallas Williams, 18903 E Sprague Avenue: Mr. Williams stated he was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Taffy Hunter, 18820 E Sprague Avenue: Ms. Hunter stated she was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Kayloni Bonner, 19124 E 2nd Avenue: Ms. Bonner stated she was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Kris Petibone,18009 E.Cowley:Ms.Petibone stated she was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Kim Alexander-Byrd, 18820 E 46 Avenue: Ms. Alexander-Byrd testified she was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Caroline Kroko,805 S Harmony Road: Ms.Kroko commented she was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Raymond Harris, 18520 E Bow Avenue: Mr. Harris stated he was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Ryan Olson, 18904 E. 12th Court: Mr. Olson stated he was in favor of changing the zoning in the area near Barker and Sprague. Jacque Stallinga, 19025 E Riverside Avenue: Ms. Stallinga commented she was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Chuck Richardson,18808 E Valleyway Court: Mr.Richardson said he was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Clyde Smith, 16 N Harmony Road: Mr. Smith testified he was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Andy Kautzman, 18502 E Sprague Avenue:Mr.Kautzman stated he was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Marc Lippincott, 19004 E 2nd Avenue: Mr. Lippincott stated he was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. 10-06-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 8 Sarah Ross, 18703 E 13t" Court: Ms. Ross testified she was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Nicole Arnold, 17322 E Alki Avenue: Ms. Arnold attested she was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Jackie Williams, 18903 E Sprague Avenue: Ms. Williams commented she was against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily Residential. Chair Graham closed the public hearing at 8:19 p.m. To summarize the evening's testimony there were: ■ 35 people testified they were against the rezoning of the property at Sprague and Barker to Multifamily residential ■ One person testified in favor of the zoning change at Sprague and Barker. ■ One person testified against Corridor Mixed Use in the Sprague and Barker area ■ Three people testified against the request to rezone the property located at 3001 N Pines to Mixed Use. ■ One person requesting a change in designation on his property located on Sands Road to Commercial. ■ One questioning why people did not receive notices for rezones and apartment construction ■ One testified supporting impact fees ■ One testified increasing the transitional provisions setbacks ■ Two people testified against unlimited heights,one requesting four story height restriction. ■ One testified in support of alternative housing, specifically tiny houses ■ One testified supporting parks and trail development ■ One testified supporting mixed use development ■ Many people commented regarding the goal of preserving the neighborhood character ■ Many spoke regarding the impact of development on schools. Schools in the area being over crowed,the need to bus local children to other schools because they are over capacity. ■ Many spoke regarding the need for infrastructure improvements to the intersection at Sprague and Barker. Several people commented it is necessary to have a traffic officer on Sunday mornings in order to handle the traffic coming from the church at that the intersection at Sprague and Barker. ■ Many spoke of the need for infrastructure improvements to Barker Road before the area would be able to handle any kind of influx of development. One person noted Spokane County is approving homes south on Barker in Twin Bridges, Turtle Creek, Morningside and the Morrison Ranch is expected to subdivide 200+ acres before too long, which all impact the same intersection and Barker Road,which has no sidewalks,is unimproved and is the only access for the area to the freeway. There was consensus between the Commissioners to begin deliberations and to start with the change of designation at Sprague and Barker. The Commissioners discussed the zoning of the properties at the northeast corner of Sprague and Barker. Commissioner Graham stated she did not think the zoning west of Barker, south of Bow Avenue and north of Sprague Avenue which had been changed to Corridor Mixed Use was right for the area. Commissioner Kelley said he was concerned about overflow parking from multifamily development, increase in noise from the development of 400+homes south of the intersection. He also commented regarding the schools not being able to handle the increase in students as well as being able to handle special needs students. The Commissioners asked staff what the plans were to improve Barker Road and this intersection. Mr.Basinger stated he could not speak to the specific improvements planned for Barker but he was aware that it was on the 6-year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). Mr. Kelley stated impact fees are a difficult sell, but they do help with improvements down the road. He also stated he was supportive of parks and trails. 10-06-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 of 8 Commissioner Rasmussen stated she felt the infrastructure needed to be in place ahead of development. She said she was concerned about the schools being over capacity. She is concerned the zoning does not seem to fit in this one place. She is not advocating no growth, but this one place does not seem to fit. Commissioner Stathos stated she was in support of impact fees. She not in favor of the change of zoning of the properties at the Sprague and Barker. She believes in a better notification system for the public. Commissioner Phillips stated the area at Sprague and Barker is a good location for multifamily because they are both arterial roads,which is why it was probably designated this way in the new plan. He also said he did not feel it was the right time for it based on the lack of infrastructure to support the additional traffic. Commissioner Graham clarified there is no density restriction in the MFR zone. Mr.Basinger said there Transitional Provisions would reduce the impacts to adjacent residential development. She then commented if the property were zoned MFR only the people to the south and east would be protected. She would not be supporting this change. Commissioner Johnson asked if the recommendation was not to support the suggested MFR what would the recommendation be for the property at Sprague and Barker. Commissioner Graham stated her recommendation would be for the property to be R-3. She said she is ok with the properties west of Barker and north of Bow Avenue being zoned CMU but not the properties south of Bow. She said if they were zoned residential previously, they should remain residential. Commissioner Johnson clarified she was considering leaving the CMU zoning west of Greenacres Road and north of Bow Avenue. Commissioner Kelley stated this would be the correct place to put multifamily in the future,because it is close to bus routes and when the infrastructure is in place, it will be an ideal place for it. Commissioner Graham stated if you drive this particular part of Appleway,businesses have a hard time staying in business. There are not supportive businesses going in this area. Commissioner Kelley offered there would be in the future. Commissioner Graham said she felt the development of those kinds of businesses would be going on the north side of the freeway, toward where a medical center had developed. She said there is a bus stop but where would it take them. Commissioner Johnson offered the Medium Density Residential has been eliminated from the Comprehensive Plan,and it could be returned. It would make more sense to have a medium density development at that corner instead of high density. Townhouses would be better than apartments he offered. He said increasing the density for medium density to 16 units per acre, which would make it more financially viable, given the increasing property values people are seeing. He feels there is a pent up demand for small reduced cost home ownership. Commissioner Johnson said he would support the CMU as was stated previously and make medium density from Greenacres Road to the east side of the parcels which have been in discussion at the corner of Sprague and Barker. Commissioner Kelley said he would support MFR up to 24 units per acre but would not support it being unlimited,but keep it just as one density not as a medium and a high. Commissioner Graham countered this would not solve the issue at Barker and Sprague. She said she was not opposed to townhomes, they promote home ownership and stability and have a nicer look than apartments. They would still change the feel of the neighborhood but not as much as apartments would. Commissioner Stathos clarified the City is required to update the Comprehensive Plan every eight years. However,there is still an annual amendment process in which a property owner is allowed to come in and request a change to their property every year if they wish. Commissioner Johnson moved to extend the meeting to 9:30 p.m. The vote on this motion was five in favor and two against with Commissioners Anderson and Phillips dissenting. Motion passed Commissioner Johnson suggested bringing back a medium density residential with a maximum density of 16 units per acre and a height restriction of two stories. It was pointed out this would allow apartments as well. Commissioner Phillips stated he was in favor of MFR on the property but not at this time,not until the road is improved. Until the road is improved,he feels it should be 10-06-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 of 8 left as residential. He said the property owner can come in and ask to change it every year,and the neighborhood asks why they have to come back in and fight it every year. He said because that is the law. There are 5 acres and he can put 30 homes on it. He is not in favor of bringing back medium density residential and redesigning the whole thing. Commissioner Anderson stated with the change in minimum lot size it would be easier to configure the lot. Commissioner Kelley commented that townhomes are not necessarily residential homes, they can also be rented. Commissioner Johnson said apartments are rarely owner occupied, but townhomes could be. Commissioner Johnson said if left residential,then there could only be six units per acre, but Mr. Basinger said there was a small difference in standards for townhomes. Mr.Basinger clarified that R-3 zoning allows townhouses. Chair Graham confirmed the consensus of the Commission was that lot at Barker and Sprague that is currently zoned R-3 remain residential, not moved to multifamily. Commissioner Graham moved to the zoning between Greenacres and Barker Road, and south of Bow Avenue. She was ready to make a recommendation on it. Commissioner Anderson looked for an explanation why this area to CMU? Mr.Basinger responded with the deletion of the Medium Density Residential, CMU was an appropriate designation for this area which allows for single family residential outright. Commissioner Anderson noted so does multifamily. Commissioner Kelley noted he could see since there is CMU along Appleway,he could understand the designation following along this path. VIII. GOOD OF THE ORDER: There was nothing for the good of the order. IX. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Kelley moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:14 p.m. The vote on the motion was unanimous in favor,motion passed. Heather Graham, Chair Date signed Deanna Horton, Secretary Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers—City Hall October 13,2016 I. Commissioner Graham called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. Secretary Deanna Horton took roll and the following members and staff were present: Kevin Anderson John Holman, Community&Economic Development Director Heather Graham Cary Driskell, City Attorney James Johnson Mike Basinger, Economic Development Coordinator Tim Kelley Erik Lamb,Deputy City Attorney Mike Phillips Chaz Bates, Economic Development Specialist Michelle Rasmussen Gloria Mantz,Economic Development Engineer Suzanne Stathos Deanna Horton, Secretary for the Commission II. Agenda: Commissioner Anderson moved to accept the October 13, 2016 agenda as presented. The vote was seven in favor, zero against and the motion passed. III. Minutes: Commissioner Anderson moved to approve the September 22,2016 minutes. The vote on this motion was seven in favor, zero against, motion passes. Commissioner Anderson moved to approve the September 29, 2016 minutes. The vote on this motion was seven in favor, zero against, motion passes. IV. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioner Graham reported she attended the debate for the candidates for the office of Superintendent for Public Instruction. V. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: There was no administrative report. VI. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment. VII. COMMISSION BUSINESS: a) Deliberations: DRAFT Comprehensive Plan Update; Draft Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC)Proposed Updates;and SEPA Analysis for Draft Comprehensive Plan. Community Development Director John Hohman began the meeting with an outline of the process for the Comprehensive Plan(Comp Plan,Plan)which began in 2014. He said it has been conducted in three phases,with the consultants who assisted in writing and compiling the document itself and associated reports. The first phase was conducted from November of 2014 to May/June of 2015 which entailed the public participation plan and community vision report. This process validated the City''s,mission statement: "A community of opportunity where individuals and families can grow and play and businesses will flourish and prosper." All public involvement which the City conducted validated this mission statement. Phase II looked at the land quantity analysis, existing conditions report, audited the goals and policies. SEPA analysis was conducted and it was determined the City needed to do an Environmental Impact Statement. The City did quite a bit of this work while it waited for the population allocation number from Spokane County. The City waited for this number until November of 2015. Phase III began in February of 2016 to start the writing of the Comprehensive Plan and associated regulations. In the beginning of September staff provided the Commissioners initial draft of the document, and then a final draft two weeks later. There have been three consultant teams working on this, Van Ness Feldman has taken the lead as project management, legal aspects as well as the drafting the regulations, Community Attributes who worked on the extra studies and wrote the draft Comprehensive Plan, and Fehr and Peers did the transportation analysis. Mr. Hohman explained all of the meetings and the subjects which had been covered with the Planning Commissioners since the beginning of the process leading up to the public hearing for the Comprehensive Plan and associated regulations. Mr.Hohman said there had been 16 meetings, 11 being specific study sessions regarding Comp Plan topics, Existing Conditions,the Comp Plan process, Retail Improvement, Tiny Homes, Comprehensive Plan Joint Workshop, Land Use standards, Goals and Policies, and changes to the development regulations. 10-13-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 8 This lead to the public hearing on September 29, 2016 and October 6, 2016 in which comments received were as follows: • 86 total written and oral comments were received o 04 of those were in favor of changing the zoning at Barker and Sprague o 64 of those were against changing the zoning at Barker and Sprague o 02 of those requested a change to the zoning at 3001 N Pines Road o 04 of those were against changing the zoning at 3001 N Pines Road o 01 of those were in favor of changing the zoning at Barker and Laberry o 02 of those were in favor of the changes in Commercial zoning changes made City- wide o 01 of those were in favor of more parks and trails,multiuse development,increased transitional setbacks and setting a multifamily height limit o 01 of those were in favor of alternative dwellings and specifically tiny homes o 01 of those were in favor of imposing impact fees o 02 of those requested a change to the zoning to property on Sands Road o 02 of those supported more noticing for rezones and building apartments o 01 of those supported preserving neighborhoods o 01 of those supported transit driven changes in the Comprehensive Plan Mr.Hohman said there had been questions from the Commissioners about why this had to be done on this schedule,why it could not wait longer to be finished. The City Council is receiving pressure from citizens and businesses who are waiting for the Plan to be finished. There are people who want to make investments in our community but they want to wait for the changes they support in the updated Comp Plan. He shared someone,just two days before this meeting,was in wanting to know when it would be done, he had a project he was waiting to complete. Realtors have sales waiting to be completed along Trent,waiting for the Plan to be finished. If there are grammatical issues please feel free to submit those to staff and we will review them to make sure they are updated. Mr. Hohman said staff is willing to meet for as many nights between now and next Thursday to work with the Commissioners to cover all of their issues, however the schedule must be maintained because the City Council's public hearing has already been noticed and published. Mr. Hohman said he was looking to the Commissioners to help maintain the schedule for the community. Commissioner Johnson stated there has been a great effort by staff and the community, and if it is possible to maintain the schedule it would be great. However,he feels that receiving the final draft three weeks ago,and if it took three more weeks to review it,that would double the time they have had to look at it and only delayed the overall process three week. If someone has already been waiting six months,another three weeks would not be a huge impact. Commissioner Stathos stated she concurred with Commissioner Johnson. She said it took two years to craft the document, and they were only allowed three weeks to review it, two of which were public comments. Mr. Hohman reiterated he was asking to work on the issues tonight and see how much forward progress could be made in the review of the document. Commissioner Johnson stated he felt there were people who left the meeting before commenting. He said he did not feel the comments received were totally representative of the community's feelings. Clearly it showed the feelings of the citizens at Barker and Sprague and that community was very organized. He doesn't feel there are other areas which are as organized in order to be able to comment. Mr. Hohman suggested the schedule should be maintained even more in order to allow those in other neighborhoods the opportunity to comment at the public hearing noticed for November 8,2016. Economic Development Coordinator,Mike Basinger offered the list of policy items and regulations the Commissioners have noted they are having issue with and the other land use changes which were brought up during the public hearing. Commissioner Graham stated she wanted to bring up four goals from the Growth Management Act which she felt were important: Encourage affordable housing and preserve existing housing, she offered this was a goal of the Council; Promote economic development throughout the state and respect regional differences, she feels respect regional differences had been lost by using out of area consultants; Respect property rights and protect property owners from arbitrary actions, she feels some of the changes to the Land Use map are arbitrary; Insure public facilities are in place 10-13-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 8 before development,she feels at Barker and Sprague'we'have not done the due diligence to make sure the facilities are in place,particularly roads. Mr. Hohman said barring some grammar and minor editorial comments, are there any major concerns regarding the Comp Plan document itself? The Commissioners generally agreed they liked the shape and feel of the document, it was easy to read and understand. Commissioner Johnson said he wanted to talk about the goals and policies in the Housing Element. He feels the identity of the Valley has always been and probably always should be a majority of the residences being owner occupied. When reviewing the goals for example he feels HG-1 states Allow for a broad range of housing opportunities to meet the needs of the community `and encourage owner occupancy"should be added. He said we are not trying to create a city of rental properties and then have those people move someplace else. There would be gains in the schools system, investments in fire, police and roads would be encouraged with owner occupancy. Commissioner Kelley does understand the concern but does not know how it would be accomplished. Commissioner Johnson said it could be a separate goal. Mr.Hohman offered the Commissioners needed to keep in mind, when you have a goal,you would have a corresponding policy;the policies lead to a development regulation. He did not know how the City could write a regulation which would enforce this goal. Commissioner Anderson and Graham supported the thought, but said that the zoning would be where to allow the development to support these types of housing. City Attorney Cary Driskell, noted for the Commissioners that based on the Growth Management Act RCW 36.70A.020(4) Goals and Policies, says housing "Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the population of this state,promote a variety of residential densities and housing types, and encourage preservation of existing housing stock." He said there a lot of competing interests listed here and the one thing the City would not want to do is to have something,which on its face looks like we are working against that goal. While it could result in a community that might be more desirable, someone could look at it and say you are putting a barrier to Goal 4 related to broad housing types. Commissioner Johnson said a broad variety of housing types does not mean rentals which are between $800 and $2,000 per month before they get to a home which might cost them $180,000. A broad variety of housing types includes homes which are between $100,000 and$125,000. The way you would accomplish this would be in a multifamily type structure, condominium or row houses. Single family residential allows row houses but you can only have six per acre and then what would you do with the rest of the land, hope it is turned into a park. However if 16 row house were on an acre,then it would be a viable situation. Mr. Basinger said staff looked at what kind of density would be allowed in certain zones and six units per acre should be allowed in a single family zone. That is the character piece that we are frying to maintain. In order to get that density other zones would have to allow this type of use. There is talk of this type of development happening in along the river, but Commissioner Johnson said he hoped that would not be the only place allowed. Commissioner Johnson said in Capital Faculties policy CF-P9 Continue planning for domestic water needs. He did not see anywhere protecting the area's water resources in some way. Mr. Hohman said that during the joint workshop the City Council did not want that type of language in the Plan. However if the Commission felt strongly enough about it, they could make a recommendation regarding this. Commissioner Johnson said the City should lead by example. Mr. Hohman explained xeriscaping,and of conservation in landscaping. Commissioner Kelley offered he would not be in favor of going back and tearing up a park, like Mirabeau Park which is a gem of a park in order to use this type of landscaping. Commissioner Phillips agreed with Mr.Kelley, he does not see the advantage to convince people to conserve in the parks and turning them into less than green. Commissioner Rasmussen stated there has been advances in parks using sustainable methods. Commissioner Graham said some of her favorite parts of the Centennial Trail which were natural states. Commissioner Anderson said he supported this idea. The Commissioners agreed this should be promoted in future City capital projects. Commissioner Graham asked about how strategies,such as a white water course would be funded. Mr.Hohman explained there is a group who went forward with the downtown Spokane whitewater course and they are looking at a place just stream of the Sullivan Bridge and expanding Sullivan Park. This came out as part of the Tourism Study which was conducted as part of the Comp Plan. 10-13-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 8 Commissioner Phillips stated he wanted to go on record this was an easy to read,well written,good plan. His only issue was the paper map included in the document was difficult to read. Mr. Basinger stated when the Comp Plan is online there will be links to an online maps from the document,but recognized this might not be perfect for everyone and there will be larger paper maps available for anyone who asks for them. The Commission discussed the two requests which were made during the public hearing for Comp Plan. One was for a change at 3001 N.Pines Road,owned by the International Foursquare Church and one for parcel 45333.1807 along Sands Road which belongs to Dennis Crapo. The Commissioner discussed and agreed to not review this items based on the fact they had not been submitted during the Citizen Action Request (CAR) process for the Comprehensive Plan. The Commission felt it would be unfair to the surrounding neighborhoods and to the people who had already submitted a CAR at the appropriate time to review these requests at this time. Mr.Driskell concurred with this. The Commissioners agreed to these requests can be submitted during an annual request period in the future. Commissioners reviewed a decision they made at the October 6, 2016 meeting. The decision was to recommend the `whole square' which includes four parcels Barker and Sprague to be changed to Low Density Residential,R-3. The discussion moved to the area between Barker and Greenacres Road,south of Bow Avenue and north of Sprague Avenue. The recommendation from staff is to change it to this area to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU). Mr. Basinger stated the intention to change this area from Medium Density Residential,which has been eliminated in the new plan,to CMU was as Barker starts to handle the traffic necessary to support the 1,000 units being planned in Spokane County,the area will change significantly. Staff wanted the people who live in the area to have options if they needed it. There will more noise,more traffic from the increase in development south of the intersection. This will increase the traffic by 10,000 trips per day. Commissioner Graham stated she said the people are expecting this but she feels the people want to maintain the residential feel of the area. The lots in the area are larger than in other parts of the City. She said she felt the CMU everywhere else it was placed in that area, but she did not feel putting it that far into the neighborhood is not appropriate. Commissioner Kelley clarified no commercial uses are allowed in the R-3 zone. Corridor Mixed Use would allow multifamily and commercial uses. Commissioner Graham said she feels that only R-3 would be appropriate in this section and would vote no on any other recommendation. Commissioners Anderson and Stathos agreed. Commissioner Johnson wondered if there would not be a time when there could not be a grocery store or something which would serve the neighborhood in the future. Commissioner Kelley said he feels there could be some kind of neighborhood commercial,mixed use development. Commissioner Phillips noted this would be a down zone to change it to R-3,and if he owned property in there he would be upset if his property was down zoned. Commissioners Rasmussen and Kelley agreed to not down zone the properties. Commissioner Graham stated if this is CMU then the owner of the property at the corner of Barker and Sprague could come in and ask for a zone change for his parcel again. Mr. Hohman said since there has been considerable testimony regarding the parcels at Sprague and Barker and staff have not made any progress on the traffic issues, Council is going to be very sympathetic regarding the citizens who live in the area. There will be another Comp Plan update in eight years,and changes in the area could have occurred by then. The Commission consensus was then to recommend the area between Barker/Greenacres/Bow/Sprague be turned to R-3. Title 19.40.100 Alternative Residential Developments,Commissioner Graham said she was having an issue with the community buildings. Mr. Basinger noted that (B)(2) 'The dwelling structure shall not exceed 900 square feet, excluding porches, and shall require a building permit.' Based on the building code you are allowed to build any size structure as long as it meets the building codes. So the size is arbitrary. The building code was changed in 2015 to require a means of sanitation, a sink and a bathroom,there is no minimum on the size of the building. Staff believes section B could be removed. The Commission had consensus to remove section B from the code. Deputy City Attorney Erik Lamb confirmed all tiny dwellings must be on a foundation. Commissioner Graham stated section (C) supportive housing, this is allowed, and Commissioner Stathos said these types of developments can then turn into places which are not desirable. The 10-13-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 8 Commission should look at the Permitted Use Matrix and think about which zones these types of housing developments should be in. Mr. Lamb stated the consultants worked to come up with regulations because this is not common on this side of the state. If section B is removed,he would suggest section A is also removed, which leaves just supportive tiny homes. `Wheels are prohibited' should be left in the code and this was agreed upon. Commissioner Phillips said he feels there should be water and sewer required in the dwelling. The requirements in section A could be moved into section C. This type of development would require a Conditional Use Permit and go to the Hearing Examiner for approval. Mr. Lamb said there could be a provision that requires a host, such as a church or a non-profit group for these supportive tiny homes. Commissioner Anderson said there has never been any discussion regarding any of these types of housing. There has little input about how this should work. Mr. Basinger said the new sections are 19.40.060 Cottages, 19.40.050 Industrial Accessory Dwelling Units, and 19.40.100 Small Residential Development. Commissioner Anderson is recommending to remove these sections from the draft and make them a separate code text amendment. He said this is completely new and we have not had any input from the community about how this should work. Commissioner Kelley clarified the regulations were written well enough now to enable staff to make good decisions moving forward. Commissioner Phillips said he supported cottages, and tiny homes if they were connected to water and sewer. Cottages can be used as buffer between multifamily and single family. Commissioner Johnson said there could be more work done on these sections. Commissioner Rasmussen said she agreed with Commissioner Phillips, she was fine with the cottages, and the industrial dwelling units, but does have a problem with the supportive housing, which need water and sewer.Commissioner Stathos stated she has questions on each of the sections and would like to see them all removed for discussion. Commissioner Kelley said there was enough instruction in order to allow staff to make the good decisions, but asked what the hang ups were. Commissioner Graham said she was good with the cottages and industrial dwelling units. She had a problem with the community facilities in the tiny homes. Those homes in the supportive housing do not have their own water, sewer or refuse receptacles, could this be a small change. Commissioner Kelley said he would agree with this. Commissioner Johnson said the idea for supportive housing was to provide extremely low cost housing,but it need to be done right,which is why he is in favor of taking this out for further review. There were discussion regarding where churches are allowed and where the tiny supportive housing could be allowed. Commissioner Anderson said cottages there is a section which said two times the density of the maximum allowed in the zone. He feels this should be discussed. There is consensus to leave the cottages 19.40.060 alone in the code. Commissioner Johnson clarified the maximum allowed industrial accessory dwelling units was ten units per site. The Commission recommended adding language to 19.40.050 to clarify they must be owner/operator or employee occupied. The Commissioners recommended 19.40.100 be removed from the draft for separate code amendment and discussion. Commissioner Anderson asked how the Neighborhood Commercial was laid out in the map. Mr. Hohman stated staff looked at intersections in the City which could be in neighborhoods which might be underdeveloped and Deputy Mayor Arne Woodard drove the City and provided a list of recommendations as to where to provide it. The possibility for redevelopment and being located on an arterial were defining factors. The Commission moved to 19.70 the Development Standards. Commissioner Graham said the residential lot size at 5,000 feet, she felt most of the Commissioner were not necessarily in agreement with it but would not stand in the way of moving it forward. She said the consensus would be to move that subject forward. Commissioner Stathos stated she wanted to go on the record she was not in agreement with this minimum lot size, but she would not fight it. The discussion turned to Multifamily Residential(MFR)standards. Commissioner Anderson is in favor of retuning to 22 units per acre and a 50 feet height maximum. Commissioner Kelley asked if builders had come in and asked for more height limits. Commissioner Johnson clarified there would be no height limit or density for multifamily in CMU and he felt this was right for this zone. He still feels there should be two multifamily zones. He discussed two CARs requesting to change from medium density to high density. The room was full of people speaking against the proposals, and only two in favor,which were the property owners. He said he feels increasing the density in an MF-1 zone would make it more viable. Commissioner Phillips was in favor of no limit on the 10-13-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 8 density or height limits in MFR. Commissioners Kelley,Rasmussen, Graham and Stathos agreed with adding back the density and height restrictions. There was consensus to recommend in the MFR a density of 22 units per acre and a height limit of 50 feet. Mr.Hohman responded to MF-1 suggestion stating the properties which have been MF-1 have been zoned as this way for years prior to incorporation of the City. This zone did not work, staff talked to several developers,there has not been a MF-1 project in the City since incorporation except for one but this project was done to maximize the density to allow for more dense development in the future. Mr. Hohman said the return MF-1 would limit the potential of those properties for another 10-15 years. He strongly recommends to not bring this back. Commissioner Johnson countered he respected the point of view but he feels there has been an economic situation over the last 10 years which has impacted growth. He has seen the east coast has more townhouse/row house situations and that there is a pent up demand which will explode and people will want to buy their own home. The City will need those low cost housing opportunities. We talk about having as many different options for housing and home ownership. Mr. Hohman said those can be built in the MFR zone. Commissioner Johnson said it isn't what they are going to build. He feels there are going to be rental properties from one end of the City to the other. Commissioner Kelley offered there is no limit to the minimum density they can build. The other Commissioners did not want to bring back the medium density residential designation. The Commission was fine with the standards in the other zones, after discussing building codes governing the building safety. Commissioner Phillips moved to extend the meeting to 11:00 p.rn. The vote on the motion was five in favor, two against, the motion passes. The dissenting votes were from Commissioners Anderson and Stathos. Commissioner Anderson stated he has a problem with the Transitional Provisions because this only applies zone to zone, not use to use in SVMC 19.75.020. Mr. Hohman explain if a residence is zone as Low Density Residential(LDR)and it abuts a MFR zone,then the Transitional Provisions would apply. However, if the same residence was in a MFR zone already and the parcel next to them was developed as a multifamily use,then these provisions would not apply. There are many instances in the Valley where a business might not be able to use their property because there are remnants of single family homes in industrial zones,example Eden and Tshirley,a heavy industrial owner might not be able to use or expand their property because of these provisions. Commissioner Anderson feels the home owner has rights and should be protected. Mr.Basinger said the only way to do this would be to do this based on use. Mr. Hohman said staff was aware that this was an overriding issue for the citizens was protecting the neighborhoods as does the Council. How do you do that? You limit the proliferation of multifamily projects into other zones. You allow those projects to occur in the zones they are supposed to occur in. If you are going to have a Multifamily or an Industrial zone then you have to be ok with the uses which are allowed there. The other properties eventually have to convert. It is more appropriate for those properties to convert or to have those projects further into an R-3 area. This is what keeps the individual requests coming in. If we are trying to put them into this corridor,then you have to allow them the flexibility to do the projects in those zones. Bringing in use to use,will limit that and then push people into the single family zones Commissioner Johnson said the problem is as a body we have agreed to eliminate the medium density, so all those in this area between the trail and Lith Avenue they could have a 50 foot structure 25 feet from their property line. Mr. Hohman said there is no intent to push these residents out, they can stay as long as they want. Commissioner Stathos clarified the properties along the north side of 4th Avenue have been zoned medium density residential since some time in the 1990's. If you put a developer in a position where he can't do what he needs to do,he will look for property in a single family zone to convert. Commissioner Kelley said these properties(MFR) are close to services and close to transit. Commissioner Graham clarified the transitional provisions would apply across the street, if the zone were different. Commissioners Kelley, Phillips, Rasmussen and Graham were in favor of leaving it zone to zone, Commissioners Anderson, Johnson and Stathos were in favor of adding changing it to zone to zone. Commissioner Phillips suggested changing the code numbering system to having the middle numbers being three digits,ie: 19.050.150 as it would make it follow better. 10-13-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 of 8 SVMC 21.40 Critical Areas, this sections of the code needed to be consistent with the Shoreline Master Program, and adopted best scientific practices. The Commissioners did not have any comments on this section. SVMC 21.20.040 categorical exemptions,this is the areas on the Land Use map which were looked at regarding transportation. Mr. Basinger stated this was specifically areas where the intent was to zone MFR. These areas were studied for transportation so when someone comes in to develop on those properties they would not have to do SEPA and the project could be expedited. These are specific infill areas. Commissioner Johnson asked about SVMC 21.20.040(B)(1), Mr. Hohman stated this is existing code and has not been changed. For a subdivision of up to 30 units and there is no requirement to do a SEPA analysis. However traffic concurrency is still required under the Street Standards for anything over 10 units. Mr. Lamb explained the steps involved in the process for a SEPA checklist and determination. The places listed in SVMC 21.20.040 will be cumulative traffic counts and not require a SEPA checklist but will require traffic study. Parking, Landscaping needed to be rewritten and reorganized these titles. Council asked to have them requirements reduced or removed. These codes were cleaned up, increased the flexibility, and raised the thresholds in certain areas and reduced the landscaping requirements in the industrial areas. The new code is easier to understand. SVMC 22.50, Parking, Off-Street Parking. Mr. Hohman addressed some concerns raised by Commissioner Anderson, for example shared use parking: no knew what it meant. Bike racks are back in the code after the Commission made an amendment to change it to bike spaces. He believes it should be back to spaces. The new maximum would be a requirement for four racks. The Commissioners had no suggested changes to this section. SVMC 22.70.070 Commissioner Johnson would like to see full screening when next to a different use. Mr. Basinger offered to add use and keep the zone. The Commissioners suggested to adding use to this code. SVMC 22.130 this Street Standard requires developer who puts in a street for public use as part of a development, they post a surety in the form of a Letter of Credit or a cash deposit in lieu of actually putting in all the improvements. After the improvement are put in,which must done before final approval,the City requires a warranty surety in case those improvements fail within two years and the developer does not go back and repair them,the City can draw from this account. This is to make sure the public improvements are maintained. The code was confusing, it didn't work well. Getting a letter of credit was getting more difficult or tying up a developer's funds for two years was not working. The City wants to allow for performance bonds. The standards were written in 2007 and adopted in 2009, these updates are to allow for updated options. The Commission had nothing to comment on regarding this code amendment. The Commissioners had no comments on Appendix A—Definitions. Commissioner Anderson asked to make sure Figure 29 on page 5-88 in the Transportation chapter regarding traffic counts was corrected. Mr. Basinger commented he had looked into this after Commissioner Anderson brought it up and an incorrect field was used in creating the map. The data and the model are correct but the map is correct, but the map will be corrected. Following are the recommendations which the Planning Commission made during their deliberations: • Recommend moving two site specific request submitted at the public hearing for 3001 N. Pines Road, parcel 45333.1807 along Sands Road and 102 N. Bolivar Road to an annual amendment process • Recommend to change the area west of Barker Road, east of Greenacres Road, south of Bow Avenue and north of Sprague Avenue to Low Density Residential,R-3 • Recommend to change the four parcels located at the corner of Barker Road and Sprague Avenue to Low Density Residential,R-3 • Recommend adding a policy regarding xeriscaping City capital projects in the future • Recommended adding language to SVMC 19.40.050 Industrial Accessory Dwelling Units to clarify the dwelling units must be owner/operator or employee occupied 10-13-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 of 8 • Recommended SVMC 19.40.100 be removed from the draft for a separate code amendment and discussion • Recommended SVMC 19.70.20 Multifamily Residential standard be change to a density of 22 units per acre and a height limit of 50 feet. • Recommended SVMC 22.70.070(D)(1)adding `uses' to this section of the code. • The Commissioners were in a four in favor of leaving the Transitional Provisions as zone to zone however three of them wanted to change it to use to use. • The Commissioners generally agreed they liked the shape and feel of the document, it was easy to read and understand. • Commissioner Phillips suggested changing the code numbering system to having the middle numbers being three digits, ie: 19.050.150 Commissioner Anderson moved to recommend to City Council approval of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan update and amendments to Title 17 and 19, Chapter 21.20, 21.40, 22.50, 22.70, and 22.130 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code and Appendix A of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code and Draft Environmental Impact Statement with the changes agreed to by Planning Commission on October 6 and October 13, 2016 meetings. The vote on this motion was six in favor, one against, Commissioner Johnson dissenting based on his issue regarding medium density zoning this has no representation of the quality of the Commission or the staff. The motion passes. VIII. GOOD OF THE ORDER: There was nothing for the good of the order. IX. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Kelley moved to adjourn the meeting at 10:22 p.m. The vote on the motion was unanimous in favor,motion passed. Heather Graham,Chair Date signed Deanna Horton, Secretary DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA as of October 20,2016; 8:30 a.m. Please note this is a work in progress;items are tentative To: Council& Staff From: City Clerk,by direction of City Manager Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings Nov 1,2016, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue,Oct 251 ACTION ITEM: 1. Proposed Resolution 16-012 Amending Governance Manual—Chris Bainbridge (10 minutes) NON-ACTION ITEMS: 2. Draft 2017 Fee Resolution—Chelsie Taylor (15 minutes) 3. Library District—Cary Driskell,Kristopher Morton (30 minutes) 4. Transportation and Infrastructure Utility Tax—Chelsie Taylor (20 minutes) 5. SRTMC Interlocal—Eric Guth (15 minutes) 6. City Hall Lease Extension—Mark Calhoun (10 minutes) 7.Appleway Trail Update—Steve Worley,Mike Stone (20 minutes) 8. City Hall Update—Eric Guth (10 minutes) 9.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) 10. Info Only: (a)Parks Maintenance Contract; (b)Police Monthly Report [*estimated meeting: 135 minutes] Nov 8,2016,Special Meeting: Formal Meeting Format, 5:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes, City Hall Lease Extension) (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 16-016,2016 Budget Amendment—Chelsie Taylor (10 minutes) 3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 16-017 Adopting 2017 Budget—Chelsie Taylor (10 minutes) 4.Motion Consideration: SRTMC Interlocal—Eric Guth (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 30 minutes] Nov 8,2016,Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue,Nov 1] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Draft Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations (-90 minutes) 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Transportation and Infrastructure Utility Tax- Chelsie Taylor (60 minutes) 3.First Reading Proposed Ordinance 16-019 Comprehensive Plan&Development Regulations— Mike Basinger (20 minutes) 4.First Reading Proposed Ordinance 16-018 Transportation&Infrastructure Utility Tax— Chelsie Taylor (20 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 190 minutes] Nov 15,2016,Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue,Nov 8] Proclamation: World Pancreatic Cancer Day ACTION ITEMS: 1. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 16-018 Transportation&Infrastructure Utility Tax (20 minutes) NON-ACTION ITEMS: 2.Marketing Study Update—John Hohman,Atlas Advertising (60 minutes) 3. Parks Maintenance Contract—Mike Stone (15 minutes) 4. CenterPlace Catering—Mike Stone (10 minutes) 5. Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Recommendations to Council—Chelsie Taylor (20 minutes) 6.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 130 minutes] Nov 22,2016,Special Meetinji,3:30-5 p.m.,2"Floor Conf Room, City Hall Council meets with Lobbyists and 4th District Legislators Draft Advance Agenda 10/20/2016 8:49:31 AM Page 1 of 2 Nov 22,2016,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue,Nov 15] Proclamation:In Support of Small Business Saturday 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 16-019 Comp Plan&Dev. Regulations —Mike Basinger(20 minutes) 3.Motion Consideration: Parks Maintenance Contract—Mike Stone (10 minutes) 4.Motion Consideration: CenterPlace Catering Contract—Mike Stone (10 minutes) 5.Admin Report: Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) 6. Info Only: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: 50 minutes] Nov 29,2016—No Meeting— Thanksgiving Holiday Dec 6,2016, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue,Nov 29] 1. District Court Presentation—Mark Calhoun,Judge Walker, Court Admin. John Witter (30 minutes) 2. Property Crimes,Wa.Assoc. of Sheriffs&Police Chiefs(WASPC)—Mike Werner (15 minutes) 3.Myrtle Point Cleanup—Cary Driskell (20 minutes) 4. City Hall Update—Eric Guth (10 minutes) 5.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 80 minutes] Dec 13,2016,Formal Meetin2 Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue,Dec 6] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Proposed 2017 Fee Resolution—Chelsie Taylor (15 minutes) 3.Motion Consideration: Funding Allocation,Lodging Tax—Chelsie Taylor (25 minutes) 4.Admin Report: Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 50 minutes] Dec 20,2016,Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue, Dec 131 1.Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 2. Info Only: Department Reports (normally due for Dec 27 mtg) [*estimated meeting: minutes] Dec 27,2016—No Meeting—Christmas Holiday January 3,2017, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue,Dec 27] 1.Mayoral Appointment: Two Planning Commissioners(3-yr.terms) (5 minutes) 2.Mayoral Appointment: Two Members for Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (1 or 2 yr.terms) (5 minutes) 3.Mayoral Appointment: Councilmembers to Various Board and Committees for 2017 (10 minutes) 4.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] January 10,2017,Formal Meetin2 Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue,Jan 3] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2.Admin Report: Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) *time for public or Council comments not included OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS: AWC Citizen Action Days(Feb 15-16,2017) Consultant Agreement Design Barker Rd/BNSF Separation Project; Oath of Office SCRAPS Update Second Amendment Sanctuary City Term Limits Undergrounding Utility Facilities in ROW Draft Advance Agenda 10/20/2016 8:49:31 AM Page 2 of 2 City of Spokane Valley Spokane ...10 Valley Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 09/30/2016 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 10/17/2016 10:45 Page 1 of 11 Community & Economic Development Spokane Monthly Report Dailey 01/01/2016 - 09/30/2016 Pre-Application Meetings Requested A Pre-Application Meeting is a service provided to help our customers identify the code requirements related to their project proposal. Community& Economic Development scheduled a total of 4 Pre-Application Meetings in September 2016. 15 0 1 11111 11 5 i 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Land Use Pre-Application = Commercial Pre-App Meeting Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Commercial Pre-App 6 6 6 11 6 7 7 7 3 0 0 0 Land Use Pre-Application Meeting 5 7 3 3 4 1 6 2 1 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 11 13 9 14 10 4 0 0 0 Annual Total To-Date: 91 Printed 10/17/2016 10:45 Page 2 of 11 Community & Economic Development SpoErn,4 kane Monthly Report Valley 01/01/2016 - 09/30/2016 Online Applications Received Community& Economic Development received a total of 212 Online Applications in September 2016. 400 200 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Trade Permit Right of Way Permit Pre-Application Meeting Request Demolition Permit Sign Permit Reroof Permit Other Online Applications = Approach Permit Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Approach Permit 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 Demolition Permit 1 2 5 2 1 3 0 1 3 0 0 0 Other Online Applications 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pre-Application Meeting Request 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reroof Permit 31 101 101 102 71 103 67 90 61 0 0 0 Right of Way Permit 24 30 47 45 41 43 44 67 72 0 0 0 Sign Permit 2 1 0 1 3 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 Trade Permit 47 55 69 54 114 100 78 99 72 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 105 190 223 205 231 250 192 259 212 0 0 0 Annual Total To-Date: 1,867 Printed 10/17/2016 10:45 Page 3 of 11 Community & Economic Development ogi'FSpokane Monthly Report Dailey 01/01/2016 - 09/30/2016 Construction Applications Received Community& Economic Development received a total of 482 Construction Applications in September 2016. 1 800 600 400 ill zoo11/1 11111111111 i 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Commercial -New Commercial TI Residential-New r Other Construction Permits Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Commercial-New 4 3 17 6 20 40 5 9 3 0 0 0 Commercial-TI 15 10 10 15 13 15 7 18 15 0 0 0 Residential-New 16 19 44 27 15 33 8 15 12 0 0 0 Commercial-Trade *28 *25 *36 *17 *46 *29 *28 *32 *45 0 0 0 Residential-Trade *109 *113 *146 *132 *137 *174 *105 *133 *95 0 0 0 Residential-Accessory 2 8 *12 22 27 12 18 10 16 0 0 0 Demolition *3 *4 *7 *3 *2 *7 4 *3 *6 0 0 0 Sign *8 *13 6 *10 *14 8 *9 *9 *12 0 0 0 Other Construction Permits *144 *245 *318 *300 *244 *319 *222 *290 *278 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 329 440 596 532 518 637 406 519 482 0 0 0 Annual Total To-Date: 4,459 *Includes Online Applications. Printed 10/17/2016 10:46 Page 4 of 11 Community & Economic Development Sth pokane Monthly Report Valley 01/01/2016 - 09/30/2016 Land Use Applications Received Community& Economic Development received a total of 49 Land Use Applications in September 2016. 100 ii I Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec iii;1 Boundary Line Adjustment = Binding Site Plan Preliminary _ State Environmental Policy -_ Short Plat Preliminary Final Platting �- " Act(SEPA) ISI Long Plat Preliminary Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment Administrative Exception/Interpretation = Other Land Use Permits Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Boundary Line Adjustment 3 5 3 4 4 5 2 5 4 0 0 0 Short Plat Preliminary 0 2 1 3 1 0 3 0 5 0 0 0 Long Plat Preliminary 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 Binding Site Plan Preliminary 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Platting 2 1 2 0 0 3 3 2 3 0 0 0 Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) 1 1 0 0 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 Administrative 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 Exception/Interpretation Other Land Use Permits 31 53 68 65 50 31 18 50 37 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 37 65 75 72 60 43 31 59 49 0 0 0 Annual Total To-Date: 491 Printed 10/17/2016 10:46 Page 5 of 11 Community & Economic Development SWIM pokane Monthly Report Val ley 01/01/2016 - 09/30/2016 Construction Permits Issued Community& Economic Development issued a total of 464 Construction Permits in September 2016. 600 400 _ r 200 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Commercial-New I_-+ Commercial-TI Residential-New = Other Construction Permits Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Commercial-New 2 4 14 2 18 2 3 16 21 0 0 0 Commercial-TI 16 9 8 10 13 11 7 19 12 0 0 0 Residential- New 19 17 27 22 20 18 10 18 15 0 0 0 Commercial-Trade 25 20 34 19 32 35 23 33 44 0 0 0 Residential-Trade 104 113 125 122 145 137 109 143 99 0 0 0 Residential-Accessory 2 6 12 18 26 13 14 14 13 0 0 0 Demolition 2 4 6 3 2 7 4 3 6 0 0 0 Sign 6 12 6 10 14 6 9 10 9 0 0 0 Other Construction Permits 120 181 291 282 230 243 211 250 245 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 296 366 523 488 500 472 390 506 464 0 0 0 Annual Total To-Date: 4,005 Printed 10/17/2016 10:47 Page 6 of 11 Community & Economic Development Spokane00" Monthly Report Valley 01/01/2016 - 09/30/2016 Land Use Applications Approved Community& Economic Development approved a total of 45 Land Use Applications in September 2016. 100 50 - 0 11111111011 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec ilai, Boundary Line Adjustment = Binding Site Plan Preliminary State Environmental Policy L_ Short Plat Preliminary Final Platting hal Act(SEPA) i!I Long Plat Preliminary Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment Administrative Exception/Interpretation = Other Land Use Permits Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Boundary Line Adjustment 2 0 1 1 2 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 Short Plat Preliminary 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 Long Plat Preliminary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Binding Site Plan Preliminary 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Platting 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 Administrative 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exception/Interpretation Other Land Use Permits 26 50 70 64 46 33 15 47 40 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 29 52 74 66 50 39 18 53 45 0 0 0 Annual Total To-Date: 426 Printed 10/17/2016 10:47 Page 7 of 11 Community & Economic Development Spokane Monthly Report Dailey 01/01/2016 - 09/30/2016 Development Inspections Performed Community& Economic Development performed a total of 1552 Development Inspections in September 2016. Development Inspections include building, planning, engineering and ROW inspections. I —r 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec - 2014 2015 2016 L • Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Totals 2016 764 959 1,333 1,390 1,445 1,564 1,284 1,452 1,552 0 0 0 L 11,743 2015 801 974 1,063 1,243 1,421 1,761 1,624 1,145 1,053 1,060 934 777■ 13,856 2014 601 633 996 1,281 1,323 1,296 1,415 1,225 1,310 1,486 972 1,027■ 13,565 Printed 10/17/2016 10:48 Page 8 of 11 Community & Economic Development Sth pokane Monthly Report Valley 01/01/2016 - 09/30/2016 Code Enforcement Code Enforcement Officers responded to 39 citizen requests in the month of September. They are listed by type below. Please remember that all complaints, even those that have no violation, must be investigated. 80 60 40i i.:: II 20 all 11111 11 -11/1 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dee in CE-Stop Work Order Environmental General Nuisance = Property Complaint, Non-Violation Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec CE-Stop Work Order 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Complaint,Non-Violation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Environmental 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 2 0 0 0 0 General 2 1 0 0 0 21 6 1 0 0 0 0 Nuisance 12 21 33 37 20 26 48 49 35 0 0 0 Property 4 1 13 14 11 8 6 6 4 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 18 23 46 51 31 59 62 58 39 0 0 0 Annual Total To-Date: 387 Printed 10/17/2016 10:48 Page 9 of 11 Community & Economic Development Sliokal<\14..` Monthly Report Valley 01/01/2016 - 09/30/2016 Revenue Community& Economic Development Revenue totaled $252,268 in September 2016. 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 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 Totals 2016 $213,319 $191,658 $383,912 $196,705 $371,319 $243,029 $128,848 $271,684 $252,268 $0 $0 $0 L$2,252,742 Trend $77,272 $72,713 $144,159 $149,274 $188,707 $202,096 $153,853 $116,015 $132,681 $131,066 $97,315 $75,414 11,540,565 2015 $74,775 $108,328 $161,174 $187,199 $123,918 $117,453 $162,551 $162,864 $99,587 $181,791 $99,627 $102,195 11,581,462 2014 $74,628 $66,134 $198,571 $160,508 $282,086 $152,637 $117,776 $127,540 $153,838 $149,197 $84,442 $97,689 11,665,046 2013 $158,912 $51,536 $102,538 $106,496 $184,176 $409,592 $277,553 $102,021 $129,174 $133,561 $98,386 $66,559 11,820,504 2012 $34,204 $60,319 $177,737 $173,932 $268,672 $223,888 $123,137 $103,703 $113,731 $112,542 $108,948 $51,745 11,552,558 2011 $43,842 $77,247 $80,774 $118,237 $84,684 $106,909 $88,247 $83,949 $167,076 $78,237 $95,172 $58,881 11,083,255 Printed 10/17/2016 10:49 Page 10 of 11 Community & Economic Development Spokane Monthly Report Valley 01/01/2016 - 09/30/2016 Building Permit Valuation Community& Economic Development Building Permit Valuation totaled $34,258,172 in September 2016. 60,000,000 40,000,000 20,000,000 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec --s-- 2016 2015 Five-Year Trend Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Totals 2016 $7.97M $28.14M $55.63M $10.09M $36.76M $19.11M $7.07M $41.60M $33.67M $0.00M $0.00M $0.00M $240.04M Trend $6.76M $4.80M $6.38M $9.26M $18.09M $18.98M $11.21M $7.48M $10.66M $9.92M $4.89M $3.48M I $111.90M 2015 $2.93M $10.71M $8.07M $18.60M $6.73M $7.53M $5.05M $8.06M $5.15M $14.42M $5.86M $5.07M I $98.18M 2014 $3.18M $2.45M $9.90M $8.92M $34.58M $7.44M $6.37M $9.47M $12.01M $7.74M $3.60M $6.30M I $111.96M 2013 $25.49M $1.92M $3.59M $7.30M $22.22M $41.88M $32.91M $6.52M $8.11M $14.22M $7.25M $2.54M I $173.95M 2012 $0.72M $2.95M $5.29M $5.32M $24.39M $33.08M $7.91M $9.89M $6.47M $8.78M $3.76M $1.66M 2M 2011 $1.46M $5.95M $5.03M $6.15M $2.53M $4.98M $3.83M $3.45M $21.54M $4.46M $3.97M $1.85M $65.20M Printed 10/17/2016 10:49 Page 11 of 11 Spokane 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, Acting City Manager From: Chelsie Taylor,Finance Director Date: October 18, 2016 Re: Finance Department Activity Report—September 2016 Following is information pertaining to Finance Department activities through the end of September 2016 and included herein is an updated 2016 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures through the end of September. 2016 Audit of the 2015 Financial Records and Annual Financial Report The 2015 books were closed during April and the annual financial report was completed in May. The State Auditor's Office completed fieldwork for the audit of fiscal year 2015, and the exit conference was held on September 19th for the financial statement and Federal single audit. The State Auditor's Office issued an unmodified opinion on the financial statements for the fiscal year 2015 on September 26, 2016. We expect the accountability audit and related exit conference will be completed in October. 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 have been 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. Through the end of September 2016, the City has received $154,857 in grant proceeds through this program. 2016 Budget Amendment As we have progressed through 2016 the need for a number of budget amendments has arisen largely as a result of capital projects. Council review will take place at the following meetings: • October 4 Admin Report • October 25 Public Hearing • October 25 First reading on proposed ordinance amending the 2016 Budget • November 8 Second reading on proposed ordinance amending the 2016 Budget P:IFinancelFinance Activity ReportslCouncil Monthly Reports1201612016 09 30.docx Page 1 2017 Budget Development The 2017 Budget development process began in the Finance Department in early March and on April 6th we sent detailed budget requests to all departments to complete by mid-May. By the time the budget is adopted on November 8th the Council will have had an opportunity to discuss the budget on seven occasions including two public hearings. • June 14 Council budget workshop • August 9 Admin report on 2017 revenues and expenditures • September 13 Public hearing #1 on the 2017 revenue and expenditures • September 27 City Manager's presentation of preliminary 2017 Budget • October 11 Public hearing #2 on 2017 Budget • October 25 First reading on proposed ordinance adopting the 2017 Budget • November 8 Second reading on proposed ordinance adopting the 2017 Budget 2017 Property Tax Levy A significant part of the budget development process includes the annual levy of property taxes which in 2017 are expected to account for approximately 28% of recurring General Fund revenues. Council discussions specifically related to this topic will take place at the following meetings: • September 13 - Review of ordinances levying 2017 property taxes and confirming tax levy • September 20 -Admin Report on proposed ordinance levying 2017 property taxes. • October 11 - First reading of ordinances levying 2017 property taxes and confirming tax levy. • October 25 - Second reading of ordinances levying 2017 property taxes and confirming tax levy. Outside Agency Funding in the 2017 Budget The City has historically provided funding for local organizations involved in either social services or economic development activities and the preliminary 2017 Budget currently has $150,000 collectively available for this, with an additional $43,000 being included in the 2017 Budget in the Economic Development Division for contracted economic development. The schedule leading to awarding funds is as follows: • July 15 - Letters mailed to agencies that have historically received funding, media release to City website and notice to newspapers. • August 12 -Agency requests are due at City Hall. • September 21 - Economic development and social service agency presentations to Council. • October 25 - Council makes final determination of awards. Lodging Tax The schedule leading to awarding funds is as follows: • August 31 - Letters mailed to agencies that have historically received funding, media release to City website and notice to newspapers. • October 7 - Grant applications due at City Hall. • October 20 - Grant applicant presentations to lodging tax advisory committee. • November 8 - Admin report to Council on results of lodging tax advisory committee meeting. • December 13 - City Council motion consideration: Award lodging tax for 2017. P:IFinancelFinance Activity ReportslCouncil Monthly Reports1201612016 09 30.docx Page 2 Fee Resolution As a part of preparing the annual budget, City Departments are asked to review the Master Fee Schedule that is currently in place and determine whether changes in fees charged and/or language used in the governing resolution should be altered. This leads to an annual update to the fee resolution that sets fees for the following year. The calendar leading to the adoption of the resolution setting 2017 fees is as follows: • November 1 -Admin report on proposed changes to the fee resolution. • December 13 - Council adoption of the fee resolution Budget to Actual Comparison Report A report reflecting 2016 Budget to Actual Revenues and Expenditures for those funds for which a 2016 Budget was adopted is located on pages 6 through 19. Because we attempt to provide this information in a timely manner, this report is prepared from records that are not formally closed by the Finance Department at month end or reconciled to bank records. Although it is realistic to expect the figures will change over subsequent weeks, I believe the report is materially accurate. 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 are reflected in our 2015 Annual Financial Report. • Columns of information include: o The 2016 Budget as amended. o September 2016 activity. o Cumulative 2016 activity through September 2016. 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 6): Recurring revenues collections are currently at 68.44% of the amount budgeted with 75.0% of the year elapsed. • Property tax 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. Property taxes received thus far in 2016 are $6,348,282 or 55.30% of the amount budgeted. • Sales tax collections represent only 8-months of collections thus far because taxes collected in September are not remitted to the City by the State until the latter part of October. Collections are currently $12,929,964 or 69.97% of the amount budgeted. • Gambling taxes are at $200,362 or 60.17% of the amount budgeted. Gambling taxes are paid quarterly with third quarter payments due by October 31. • Franchise Fee and Business Registration revenues are typically received in the month following a calendar year quarter. So far in 2016 we have received $644,526 or 55.85% of 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. Through September we've received remittances totaling $1,429,050 or 70.59% of the amount budgeted. P:IFinancelFinance Activity ReportslCouncil Monthly Reports1201612016 09 30.docx Page 3 • 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. Through September 2016 we've received remittances through the month of August with receipts of$855,651 or 59.28% of the amount budgeted. • Community Development service revenues are largely composed of building permit and plan review fees as well as right of way permits. Revenues are currently at $2,175,291 or 145.85% of 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. Currently, revenues total $590,433 or 97.08% of the amount budgeted. Recurring expenditures are currently at $26,687,343 or 67.24% of the amount budgeted with 75.0% of the year elapsed. Departments experience seasonal fluctuations in activity so they don't necessarily expend their budget in twelve equal monthly installments Regarding the City Hall Construction Fund #313 (page 16), estimated ending fund balance is currently showing a negative amount in the budget column. This is due to a journal entry that was made related to our 2015 financial statements. The negative amount will be corrected during the 2016 Budget amendment process. Investments (page 20) Investments at September 30 total $57,252,049 and are composed of$52,232,546 in the Washington State Local Government Investment Pool and $5,019,502 in bank CDs. Total Sales Tax Receipts (page 21) Total sales tax receipts reflect State remittances through September and total $14,600,486 including general, criminal justice and public safety taxes. This figure is $939,233 or 6.88% greater than the same 8-month period in 2015. Economic Indicators (pages 22—24) 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 22) provide a sense of how much individuals and businesses are spending on the purchase of goods. 2. Hotel / Motel taxes (page 23) provide us with a sense of overnight stays and visits to our area by tourists or business travelers. 3. Real Estate Excise taxes (page 24) provide us with a sense of real estate sales. Page 22 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 $832,695 or 6.88%. • 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 23 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 $17,118 or 4.58%. • Collections reached an all-time high in 2015 of$581,237, exceeding the previous high set in 2014 of$549,267. P:IFinancelFinance Activity ReportslCouncil Monthly Reportsl201612016 09 30.docx Page 4 Page 24 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 $37,017 or 2.41%. • Tax receipts peaked in 2007 at nearly $2.6 million, decreased precipitously in 2008 and 2009, and are slowly gaining ground. Debt Capacity and Bonds Outstanding (page 25) 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 and issuance of the 2016 LTGO Bonds, the City has $13,650,000 of nonvoted G.O. bonds outstanding which represents 11.74% of our nonvoted bond capacity, and 2.35% 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. o $7,275,000 remains on bonds issued for construction of the new City Hall building. The bonds are to be repaid with General Fund revenues. Street Fund Revenue Sources (pages 26 and 27) The last two charts reflect a history for the two primary sources of revenue in Street Fund#101. These include: • Page 26 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 $51,697 or 4.06%. 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 27 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, 2016 collections have decreased by $134,993 or 8.82%. 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. o The City has hired a consultant to perform an audit of providers who pay the telephone utility tax. The audit will assess whether providers are accurately remitting all taxes owed to the City, and the consultant will be paid on a contingent basis out of revenues recovered from the telephone providers. a P:IFinancelFinance Activity ReportslCouncil Monthly Reports1201612016 09 30.docx Page 5 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 09 30.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2016 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 75.0% For the Nine-Month Period Ended September 30,2016 2016 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget September September 30 Remaining Budget #001 -GENERAL FUND RECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Property Tax 11,479,200 41,585 6,348,282 (5,130,918) 55.30% Sales Tax 18,480,500 1,746,371 12,929,964 (5,550,536) 69.97% Sales Tax-Criminal Justice 1,556,400 139,636 1,074,175 (482,225) 69.02% Sales Tax-Public Safety 867,400 77,124 596,346 (271,054) 68.75% Gambling Tax and Leasehold Excise Tax 333,000 2,875 200,362 (132,638) 60.17% Franchise Fees/Business Registration 1,154,000 10,079 644,526 (509,474) 55.85% State Shared Revenues 2,024,528 354,121 1,429,050 (595,478) 70.59% Fines,Forfeitures and Penalties 1,443,500 90,681 855,651 (587,849) 59.28% Community Development 1,491,500 249,514 2,175,291 683,791 145.85% Recreation Program Fees 608,200 77,208 590,433 (17,767) 97.08% Miscellaneous Department Revenue 95,900 9,274 79,728 (16,172) 83.14% Miscellaneous&Investment Interest 104,200 15,676 222,287 118,087 213.33% Transfer-in -#101 (street admin) 39,700 3,308 29,775 (9,925) 75.00% Transfer-in -#105(h/m tax-CP advertising) 30,000 0 0 (30,000) 0.00% Transfer-in -#402(storm admin) 13,400 1,117 10,050 (3,350) 75.00% Total Recurring Revenues 39,721,428 2,818,569 27,185,922 (12,535,506) 68.44% Expenditures City Council 506,869 25,449 289,565 217,304 57.13% City Manager 717,303 46,967 438,524 278,779 61.14% Legal 479,951 42,740 372,854 107,097 77.69% Public Safety 24,703,749 1,888,016 16,596,691 8,107,058 67.18% Deputy City Manager 737,002 46,868 452,105 284,897 61.34% Finance/IT 1,253,080 98,891 873,826 379,254 69.73% Human Resources 255,694 19,159 180,915 74,779 70.75% Public Works 966,870 59,274 558,210 408,660 57.73% Community Development-Administration 272,107 21,315 199,810 72,297 73.43% Community Development-Econ Dev 545,157 25,050 299,802 245,355 54.99% Community Development-Dev Svc 1,486,637 108,968 1,031,511 455,126 69.39% Community Development-Building 1,344,165 99,000 957,310 386,855 71.22% Parks&Rec-Administration 281,871 20,806 192,341 89,530 68.24% Parks&Rec-Maintenance 832,043 66,633 558,608 273,435 67.14% Parks&Rec-Recreation 241,197 17,005 189,245 51,952 78.46% Parks&Rec-Aquatics 461,200 132,066 382,157 79,043 82.86% Parks&Rec-Senior Center 95,781 7,114 65,758 30,023 68.65% Parks&Rec-CenterPlace 882,223 63,833 641,210 241,013 72.68% General Government 1,617,500 219,890 940,562 676,938 58.15% Transfers out-#204(16 LTGO bond debt service) 198,734 28,391 113,562 85,172 57.14% Transfers out-#309(park capital projects) 200,300 19,090 143,029 57,271 71.41% Transfers out-#310(bond pmt>$434.6 lease pmt) 72,500 28,683 258,150 (185,650) 356.07% Transfers out-#310(city hall o&m costs) 271,700 0 0 271,700 0.00% Transfers out-#311 (Pavement Preservation) 943,800 78,650 707,850 235,950 75.00% Transfers out-#502(insurance premium) 325,000 27,083 243,750 81,250 75.00% Total Recurring Expenditures 39,692,433 3,190,942 26,687,343 13,005,090 67.24% Recurring Revenues Over(Under) Recurring Expenditures 28,995 (372,373) 498,579 469,584 Page 6 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 09 30.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2016 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 75.0% For the Nine-Month Period Ended September 30,2016 2016 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget September September 30 Remaining Budget #001-GENERAL FUND-continued NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Transfers in-#106(Repymt of Solid Waste) 40,425 3,369 30,319 (10,106) 75.00% Transfers in-#310(Lease in excess of bond pyi 198,734 28,391 113,562 (85,172) 57.14% FEMA Grant Proceeds 0 0 37,459 37,459 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Revenues 239,159 31,759 181,340 (57,819) 75.82% Expenditures General Government-IT capital replacements 108,000 0 87,949 20,051 81.43% Community&Econ Dev(comp plan update) 350,000 0 117,592 232,408 33.60% Parks&Rec(upgrade dial-up modem at pools) 15,000 1,674 8,443 6,557 56.29% Parks&Rec(Windstorm Park Clean-up) 0 0 49,758 (49,758) 0.00% Parks&Rec(CenterPlace Roof Repairs) 52,000 0 0 52,000 0.00% City Manager Severance 0 1,097 242,561 (242,561) 0.00% Police Department-CAD/RMS 140,281 44,463 44,463 95,818 31.70% Police Precinct(security camera upgrade) 6,400 0 6,343 57 99.12% Police Precinct(office construction) 25,000 0 1,586 23,414 6.34% Transfers out-#312('14 Fund Bal>50%) 1,828,723 0 1,828,723 0 100.00% Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 2,525,404 47,234 2,387,419 137,985 94.54% Nonrecurring Revenues Over(Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures (2,286,245) (15,475) (2,206,079) 80,166 Excess(Deficit)of Total Revenues Over(Under)Total Expenditures (2,257,250) (387,848) (1,707,501) 549,749 Beginning fund balance 26,045,444 26,045,444 Ending fund balance 23,788,194 24,337,944 Page 7 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 09 30.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2016 J Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures El psed= 75.0% For the Nine-Month Period Ended September 30,2016 2016 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget September September 30 Remaining Budget SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS #101 -STREET FUND RECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Telephone Utility Tax 2,340,000 171,909 1,396,394 (943,606) 59.67% Motor Vehicle Fuel(Gas)Tax 2,004,900 176,821 1,318,793 (686,107) 65.78% Multimodal Transportation 0 15,918 79,592 79,592 0.00% Right-of-Way Maintenance Fee 0 0 56,035 56,035 0.00% Investment Interest 3,000 504 3,888 888 129.61% Insurance Premiums&Recoveries 0 46,957 55,319 55,319 0.00% Miscellaneous Revenue 10,000 0 16 (9,984) 0.16% Total Recurring Revenues 4,357,900 412,110 2,910,037 (1,447,863) 66.78% Expenditures Wages/Benefits/Payroll Taxes 734,604 57,008 578,230 156,374 78.71% Supplies 111,500 1,049 80,132 31,368 71.87% Services&Charges 2,132,754 174,900 1,288,391 844,363 60.41% Snow Operations 430,000 11,852 307,108 122,892 71.42% Intergovernmental Payments 771,000 20,843 449,125 321,875 58.25% Interfund Transfers-out-#001 39,700 3,308 29,775 9,925 75.00% Interfund Transfers-out-#501 (non-plow vehicle 71,000 5,917 53,250 17,750 75.00% Interfund Transfers-out-#311 (pavement preservt 67,342 5,612 50,506 16,836 75.00% Total Recurring Expenditures 4,357,900 280,489 2,836,518 1,521,382 65.09% Recurring Revenues Over(Under) Recurring Expenditures 0 131,622 73,519 73,519 NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Grants 0 0 8,174 8,174 0.00% Miscellaneous 0 0 38 38 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Revenues 0 0 8,212 8,212 0.00% Expenditures Capital 0 40 1,965 (1,965) 0.00% Signal Detection Equipment Upgrades 20,000 0 21,268 (1,268) 106.34% Maintenance Facility Storage Unit 5,000 0 4,871 129 97.42% Interfund Transfers-out-#303 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 25,000 40 28,104 (3,104) 112.41% Nonrecurring Revenues Over(Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures (25,000) (40) (19,891) 5,109 Excess(Deficit)of Total Revenues Over(Under)Total Expenditures (25,000) 131,582 53,628 78,628 Beginning fund balance 1,443,077 1,443,077 Ending fund balance 1,418,077 1,496,705 Page 8 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 09 30.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2016 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 75.0% For the Nine-Month Period Ended September 30,2016 2016 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget September September 30 Remaining Budget SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS-continued #103-PATHS&TRAILS Revenues Motor Vehicle Fuel(Gas)Tax 8,500 746 5,562 (2,938) 65.44% Investment Interest 0 15 102 102 0.00% Total revenues 8,500 760 5,664 (2,836) 66.64% Expenditures Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 0.00% Capital Outlay 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 0.00% Revenues over(under)expenditures 8,500 760 5,664 (2,836) Beginning fund balance 38,054 38,054 Ending fund balance 46,554 43,718 #104-TOURISM FACILITIES HOTEL/MOTEL TAX FUND Revenues Tourism Facilities Hotel/Motel Tax 357,500 47,905 253,539 (103,961) 70.92% Investment Interest 0 145 772 772 0.00% Total revenues 357,500 48,050 254,311 (103,189) 71.14% Expenditures Capital Expenditures 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 0.00% Revenues over(under)expenditures 357,500 48,050 254,311 (103,189) Beginning fund balance 182,347 182,347 Ending fund balance 539,847 436,658 #105-HOTEL/MOTEL TAX FUND Revenues Hotel/Motel Tax 550,000 73,700 390,537 (159,463) 71.01% Investment Interest 300 128 759 459 253.05% Total revenues 550,300 73,828 391,297 (159,003) 71.11% Expenditures Interfund Transfers-#001 30,000 0 0 30,000 0.00% Tourism Promotion 499,350 13,638 215,662 283,688 43.19% Transfers out-#309(Browns Park Volleyball Court 60,650 0 0 60,650 0.00% Total expenditures 590,000 13,638 215,662 374,338 36.55% Revenues over(under)expenditures (39,700) 60,190 175,635 (533,342) Beginning fund balance 208,702 208,702 Ending fund balance 169,002 384,337 Page 9 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 09 30.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2016 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 75.0% For the Nine-Month Period Ended September 30,2016 2016 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget September September 30 Remaining Budget SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS-continued #106-SOLID WASTE Revenues Sunshine Administrative Fee 125,000 0 62,500 62,500 50.00% Investment Interest 0 23 94 (94) 0.00% Grant Proceeds 53,500 0 17,677 35,823 33.04% Total revenues 178,500 23 80,270 98,230 44.97% Expenditures Interfund Transfers-#001 40,425 3,369 30,319 10,106 75.00% Education&Contract Administration 138,075 8,941 25,220 112,855 18.27% Total expenditures 178,500 12,310 55,539 122,961 31.11% Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 (12,286) 24,731 (24,731) Beginning fund balance 42,874 42,874 Ending fund balance 42,874 67,605 #107-PEG FUND Revenues Comcast PEG Contribution 90,000 0 39,917 50,083 44.35% Investment Interest 0 98 391 (391) 0.00% Total revenues 90,000 98 40,307 49,693 44.79% Expenditures PEG Reimburse-CMN 117,000 0 33,638 83,362 28.75% PEG COSV Broadcast Capital Outlay 12,500 0 13,121 (621) 104.97% New City Hall Council Chambers 25,000 0 0 25,000 0.00% Total expenditures 154,500 0 46,760 107,740 30.27% Revenues over(under)expenditures (64,500) 98 (6,452) (5.8,048) Beginning fund balance 301,182 301,182 Ending fund balance 236,682 294,729 #120-CENTER PLACE OPERATING RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 0.00% Interfund Transfer 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues 0 0 0 0 0.00% Expenditures Operations 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total expenditures 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 10 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 09 30.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2016 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 75.0% For the Nine-Month Period Ended September 30,2016 2016 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget September September 30 Remaining Budget SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS-continued #121 -SERVICE LEVEL STABILIZATION RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest 6,500 1,818 13,509 7,009 207.83% Interfund Transfer 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues 6,500 1,818 13,509 7,009 207.83% Expenditures Operations 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 0.00% Revenues over(under)expenditures 6,500 1,818 13,509 7,009 Beginning fund balance 5,461,789 5,461,789 Ending fund balance 5,468,289 5,475,298 #122-WINTER WEATHER RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest 600 160 1,247 647 207.84% Interfund Transfer 0 0 0 0 0.00% Grant Reimbursement for Windstorm Cleanup 0 0 38,511 38,511 0.00% Subtotal revenues 600 160 39,759 39,159 6626.42% Expenditures Snow removal expenses 500,000 0 0 500,000 0.00% Total expenditures 500,000 0 0 500,000 0.00% Revenues over(under)expenditures (499,400) 160 39,759 (460,841) Beginning fund balance 444,472 444,472 • Ending fund balance (54,928) 484,231 #123-CIVIC FACILITIES REPLACEMENT FUND Revenues Investment Interest 700 0 696 (4) 99.39% Interfund Transfer-#001 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues 700 0 696 (4) 99.39% Expenditures Transfers out-#311 (pavement preservation) 559,786 46,649 419,839 139,947 75.00% Total expenditures 559,786 46,649 419,839 139,947 75.00% Revenues over(under)expenditures (559,086) (46,649) (419,144) (139,951) Beginning fund balance 559,108 559,108 Ending fund balance 22 139,964 Page 11 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 09 30.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2016 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 75.0% For the Nine-Month Period Ended September 30,2016 2016 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget September September 30 Remaining Budget DEBT SERVICE FUNDS #204-DEBT SERVICE FUND Revenues Spokane Public Facilities District 380,300 0 97,650 (282,650) 25.68% Interfund Transfer-in-#001 198,734 28,391 113,562 (85,172) 57.14% Interfund Transfer-in-#301 83,400 6,950 62,550 (20,850) 75.00% Interfund Transfer-in-#302 83,400 6,950 62,550 (20,850) 75.00% Total revenues 745,834 42,291 336,312 (409,522) 45.09% Expenditures Debt Service Payments-CenterPlace 380,300 0 97,650 282,650 25.68% Debt Service Payments-Roads 166,800 0 18,400 148,400 11.03% Debt Service Payments-'16 LTGO Bond 198,734 0 0 198,734 0.00% Total expenditures 745,834 0 116,050 629,784 15.56% Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 42,291 220,262 (1,039,306) Beginning fund balance 4,049 4,049 Ending fund balance 4,049 224,311 Page 12 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 09 30.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2016 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 75.0% For the Nine-Month Period Ended September 30,2016 2016 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget September September 30 Remaining Budget CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS #301-CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues REET 1 -Taxes 800,000 115,600 786,062 (13,938) 98.26% Investment Interest 1,000 750 3,923 2,923 392.30% Total revenues 801,000 116,350 789,985 (11,015) 98.62% Expenditures Interfund Transfer-out-#204 83,400 6,950 62,550 20,850 75.00% Interfund Transfer-out-#303 222,503 0 62,843 159,660 28.24% Interfund Transfer-out-#311 (pavement preserr 365,286 0 0 365,286 0.00% Total expenditures 671,189 6,950 125,393 545,796 18.68% Revenues over(under)expenditures 129,811 109,400 664,592 (556,811) Beginning fund balance 1,594,088 1,594,088 Ending fund balance 1,723,899 2,258,680 #302-SPECIAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues REET 2-Taxes 800,000 115,600 786,062 (13,938) 98.26% Investment Interest 1,000 802 4,269 3,269 426.94% Total revenues 801,000 116,402 790,331 (10,669) 98.67% Expenditures Interfund Transfer-out-#204 83,400 6,950 62,550 20,850 75.00% Interfund Transfer-out-#303 922,816 0 40,066 882,750 4.34% Interfund Transfer-out-#311 (pavement preserr 365,286 0 0 365,286 0.00% Total expenditures 1,371,502 6,950 102,616 1,268,886 7.48% Revenues over(under)expenditures (570,502) 109,452 687,716 (1,279,555) Beginning fund balance 1,728,297 1,728,297 Ending fund balance 1,157,795 2,416,013 Page 13 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 09 30.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2016 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 75.0% For the Nine-Month Period Ended September 30,2016 2016 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget September September 30 Remaining Budget CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS-continued #303 STREET CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues Grant Proceeds 8,797,263 6,622 3,029,729 (5,767,534) 34.44% Developer Contribution 314,700 0 0 (314,700) 0.00% Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 0.00% Transfer-in-#301 222,503 0 62,843 (159,660) 28.24% Transfer-in-#302 922,816 0 40,066 (882,750) 4.34% Transfer-in-#312 Pines Underpass 500,000 0 0 (500,000) 0.00% Transfer-in-#312 Sullivan Rd W Bridge 1,010,509 0 230,539 (779,970) 22.81% Investment Interest 0 0 29 29 0.00% Total revenues 11,767,791 6,622 3,363,205 (8,404,586) 28.58% Expenditures 060 Argonne Rd Corridor Upgrade SRTC 06-31 0 0 4,355 (4,355) 0.00% 123 Mission Ave-Flora to Barker 332,566 5,339 44,717 287,849 13.45% 141 Sullivan&Euclid PCC 1,981,060 52 46,655 1,934,405 2.36% 142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan 0 898 27,749 (27,749) 0.00% 143 Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation 0 633 1,569 (1,569) 0.00% 149 Sidewalk Infill 5,000 0 105 4,895 2.10% 155 Sullivan Rd W Bridge Replacement 5,237,650 280,017 3,352,432 1,885,218 64.01% 156 Mansfield Ave.Connection 5,000 0 513 4,487 10.27% 166 Pines Rd.(SR27)&Grace Ave.Int.Safety 491,331 2,590 100,573 390,758 20.47% 167 Citywide Safety Improvements 228,127 1,565 68,691 159,436 30.11% 201 ITS Infill Project Phase 1 (PE Start 2014) 271,357 1,600 38,292 233,065 14.11% 206 Sprague/Long Sidewalk Project 5,000 0 235 4,765 4.71% 207 Indiana&Evergreen Transit Access 0 1,609 94,775 (94,775) 0.00% 221 McDonald Rd Diet(16th to Mission) 559,200 81,246 198,901 360,299 35.57% 222 Citywide Reflective Signal Backplates 40,500 0 0 40,500 0.00% 223 Pines Rd Underpass @ BNSF&Trent 500,000 585 585 499,415 0.12% 229 32nd Ave Preservation 0 14,610 432,868 (432,868) 0.00% 233 Broadway Ave.Street Preservation 0 0 56,085 (56,085) 0.00% 234 Seth Woodard Sidewalk Improvements 361,000 329,596 380,566 (19,566) 105.42% 238 Pines RD Mirabeau Parkway Intersection 0 191,265 269,232 (269,232) 0.00% 239 Bowdish Rd&11th Ave.Sidewalk 0 255 35,164 (35,164) 0.00% 247 8th&Carnahan Intersection Improvments 0 4,477 5,354 (5,354) 0.00% xxx Maribeau Pkway&Pines 350,000 0 0 350,000 0.00% xxx Bowdish Sidewalk 8th to 12th 400,000 0 0 400,000 0.00% Construction-Small Works 0 0 0 0 0.00% Contingency 1,000,000 0 0 1,000,000 0.00% Total expenditures 11,767,791 916,338 5,159,416 6,608,375 43.84% Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 (909,716) (1,796,211) (15,012,960) Beginning fund balance 75,538 75,538 Ending fund balance 75,538 (1,720,673) 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 14 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 09 30.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2016 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 75.0% For the Nine-Month Period Ended September 30,2016 2016 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget September September 30 Remaining Budget CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS-continued #309-PARKS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues Grant Proceeds 90,000 0 90,254 254 100.28% Interfund Transfer-in-#001 200,300 19,090 143,029 (57,271) 71.41% Interfund Transfer-in-#105(Browns Volleyball Co. 60,650 0 0 (60,650) 0.00% Interfund Transfer-in#312(Appleway Trail) 14,050 0 0 (14,050) 0.00% Investment Interest 500 17 723 223 144.62% Total revenues 365,500 19,107 234,005 (131,495) 64.02% Expenditures 176 Appleway Trail-University to Pines 0 0 25,326 (25,326) 0.00% 225 Pocket dog park 0 0 379 (379) 0.00% 227 Appleway Trail-Pines to Evergree 104,050 1,049 113,866 (9,816) 109.43% 237 Appleway Trail-Sullivan to Corbin 0 690 12,241 (12,241) 0.00% 241 Valley Mission Dog Park-Phase II 81,300 0 14,722 66,578 18.11% 242 Browns Park Splashpad 116,500 16,230 23,432 93,068 20.11% 243 Browns Park Volleyball Court 60,650 0 55,748 4,902 91.92% 244 COSV Park Signs-Phase ll 20,500 0 337 20,163 1.64% 245 TV Playground Equipment Replacement 0 0 45,146 (45,146) 0.00% xxx City entry sign 70,000 0 0 70,000 0.00% Total expenditures 453,000 17,970 291,195 161,805 64.28% Revenues over(under)expenditures (87,500) 1,138 (57,190) (293,299) Beginning fund balance 98,461 98,461 Ending fund balance 10,961 41,271 #310-CIVIC FACILITIES CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues Investment Interest 1,200 442 3,169 1,969 264.12% Interfund Transfer-in-#001 -Future C.H.Bond I 72,500 6,042 54,375 (18,125) 75.00% Interfund Transfer-in-#001 -Future C.H.O&M 271,700 22,642 203,775 (67,925) 75.00% Total revenues 345,400 29,125 261,319 (84,081) 75.66% Expenditures Transfers out-#001 (Lease pymt in excess of bonc 198,734 28,391 113,562 85,172 57.14% Professional Services 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total expenditures 198,734 28,391 113,562 85,172 57.14% Revenues over(under)expenditures 146,666 734 147,757 (169,252) Beginning fund balance 1,182,548 1,182,548 Ending fund balance 1,329,214 1,330,305 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 15 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 09 30.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2016 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures _Elapsed= 75.0% For the Nine-Month Period Ended September 30,2016 2016 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget September September 30 Remaining Budget CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS-continued #311 -PAVEMENT PRESERVATION FUND Revenues Interfund Transfers in-#001 943,800 78,650 707,850 (235,950) 75.00% Interfund Transfers in-#101 67,342 5,612 50,506 (16,836) 75.00% Interfund Transfers in-#123 559,786 46,649 419,839 (139,947) 75.00% Interfund Transfers in-#301 365,286 0 0 (365,286) 0.00% Interfund Transfers in-#302 365,286 0 0 (365,286) 0.00% Grant Proceeds 0 0 30,257 30,257 0.00% Investment Interest 0 603 6,105 6,105 0.00% Total revenues 2,301,500 131,514 1,214,558 (1,086,942) 52.77% Expenditures Pre-Project GeoTech Services 50,000 0 0 50,000 0.00% Pavement Preservation 3,000,000 0 0 3,000,000 0.00% 188 Sullivan Rd Preservation Project 0 133 2,131 (2,131) 0.00% 211 Sullivan Trent to Wellesley 0 0 299 (299) 0.00% 218 Montgomery Ave Street Preservation 0 0 120 (120) 0.00% 220 Houk-Sinto-Maxwell Street Preservation 0 0 58 (58) 0.00% 221 McDonald Road Diet 0 587,083 666,407 (666,407) 0.00% 224 Mullan Rd Street Preservation 0 0 26 (26) 0.00% 226 Appleway Resurfacing Park to Dishman 0 15,749 55,396 (55,396) 0.00% 229 32nd Ave Preservation 0 504,268 899,684 (899,684) 0.00% 233 Broadway Ave St Presery-Sulliv to Moore 0 8,184 405,256 (405,256) 0.00% 235 NB Sullivan Rd Pres 0 0 4,260 (4,260) 0.00% 240 Saltese Road Preservation 0 0 15,557 (15,557) 0.00% Total expenditures 3,050,000 1,115,417 2,049,194 1,000,806 67.19% Revenues over(under)expenditures (748,500) (983,903) (834,637) (2,087,748) Beginning fund balance 2,605,219 2,605,219 Ending fund balance 1,856,719 1,770,582 #312-CAPITAL RESERVE FUND Revenues Transfers in-#001 ('14 Fund Bal>50%) 1,828,723 0 1,828,723 0 100.00% Investment Interest 0 2,053 6,852 6,852 0.00% Total revenues 1,828,723 2,053 1,835,575 6,852 100.37% Expenditures Transfers out-#303-Sullivan Rd W Bridge 1,010,509 0 230,539 779,970 22.81% Transfers out-#303-Pines Rd Underpass 500,000 0 0 500,000 0.00% Transfers out-#309-Appleway Trail(Pines to E 14,050 0 0 14,050 0.00% Total expenditures 1,524,559 0 230,539 1,294,020 15.12% Revenues over(under)expenditures 304,164 2,053 1,605,036 (1,287,168) Beginning fund balance 4,576,597 4,576,597 Ending fund balance 4,880,761 6,181,633 #313-CITY HALL CONSTRUCTION FUND Revenues 2016 LTGO Bond Proceeds-Par Value 7,275,000 0 7,275,000 0 100.00% 2016 LTGO Bond Proceeds-Premium 671,088 0 671,088 (0) 100.00% Investment Interest 0 3,652 14,575 (14,575) 0.00% Total revenues 7,946,088 3,652 7,960,663 (14,575) 100.18% Expenditures Capital Outlay-City Hall 12,649,405 29,981 1,675,730 10,973,675 13.25% 2016 LTGO Bond Issue Costs 96,515 0 96,515 0 100.00% Total expenditures 12,745,920 29,981 1,772,245 10,973,675 13.90% Revenues over(under)expenditures (4,799,832) (26,329) 6,188,417 (10,988,249) Beginning fund balance 4,789,046 4,789,046 Ending fund balance (10,787) 10,977,463 Page 16 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 09 30.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2016 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 75.0% For the Nine-Month Period Ended September 30,2016 2016 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget September September 30 Remaining Budget ENTERPRISE FUNDS #402-STORMWATER FUND 1E CURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Stormwater Management Fees 1,870,000 10,458 1,079,413 (790,587) 57.72% Investment Interest 1,500 634 4,556 3,056 303.74% Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total Recurring Revenues 1,871,500 11,092 1,083,969 (787,531) 57.92% Expenditures Wages/Benefits/Payroll Taxes 514,132 37,062 332,957 181,175 64.76% Supplies 15,900 730 10,681 5,219 67.17% Services&Charges 1,113,683 80,117 787,324 326,359 70.70% Intergovernmental Payments 67,000 0 30,564 36,436 45.62% Vehicle Rentals-#501 11,000 0 0 11,000 0.00% InterfundTransfers-out-#001 13,400 1,117 10,050 3.350 75.00% Total Recurring Expenditures 1,735,115 119,025 1,171,575 563,540 67.52% Recurring Revenues Over(Under) Recurring Expenditures 136,385 (107,933) (87,606) (223,991) NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Grant Proceeds 175,000 0 48,838 (126,162) 27.91% Developer Contributions 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Revenues 175,000 0 48,838 (126,162) 27.91% Expenditures Capital-various projects 751,100 0 0 751,100 0.00% Maintenance Facility Storage Unit 5,000 0 4,871 129 97.42% 193 Effectiveness Study 0 13,948 47,553 (47,553) 0.00% 228 Pines Rd Mirabeau Parkway Intersection 0 6,848 6,848 (6,848) 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 756,100 20,796 59,272 696,828 7.84% Nonrecurring Revenues Over(Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures (581,100) (20,796) (10,434) _ 570,666 Excess(Deficit)of Total Revenues Over(Under)Total Expenditures (444,715) (128,729) (98,040) 346,675 Beginning working capital 1,896,925 1,896,925 Ending working capital 1,452,210 1,798,885 Note: Work performed in the Stormwater Fund for preservation projects is for stormwater improvements that were bid with the pavement preservation work. Page 17 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 09 30.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2016 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 75.0% For the Nine-Month Period Ended September 30,2016 2016 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget September September 30 Remaining Budget ENTERPRISE FUNDS-continued #403-AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA Revenues Spokane County 500,000 0 172,248 (327,752) 34.45% Grant DOE-Sprague Park to University LID 1,500,000 0 0 (1,500,000) 0.00% Grant revenue 0 0 0 0 0.00% Investment Interest 0 291 1,322 1,322 0.00% Total revenues 2,000,000 291 173,570 (1,826,430) 8.68% Expenditures 198 Sprague Park to University LID 2,000,000 0 0 2,000,000 0.00% 221 McDonald Road Diet 0 187,281 187,281 (187,281) 0.00% 234 Seth Woodard Sidwalk Improvements 0 38,087 38,087 (38,087) 0.00% Total expenditures 2,000,000 225,368 225,368 1,774,632 11.27% Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 (225,078) (51,799) (3,601,062) Beginning working capital 921,660 921,660 Ending working capital 921,660 869,861 Page 18 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 09 30.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 2016 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= 75.0% For the Nine-Month Period Ended September 30,2016 2016 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget September September 30 Remaining Budget INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS #501 -ER&R FUND Revenues Transfer-in-#001 24,000 2,000 18,000 (6,000) 75.00% Transfer-in-#101 31,000 2,583 23,250 (7,750) 75.00% Transfer-in-#101 (plow replace) 40,000 3,333 30,000 (10,000) 75.00% Transfer-in-#402 11,000 917 8,250 (2,750) 75.00% Investment Interest 1,000 408 2,647 1,647 264.71% Total revenues 107,000 9,241 82,147 (24,853) 76.77% Expenditures Vehicle Acquisitions 105,000 0 103,928 1,072 98.98% Snow Plow Replacement 225,000 0 0 225,000 0.00% Total expenditures 330,000 0 103,928 226,072 _ 31.49% Revenues over(under)expenditures (223,000) 9,241 (21,780) (250,925) Beginning working capital 1,248,997 1,248,997 Ending working capital 1,025,997 1,227,217 #502-RISK MANAGEMENT FUND Revenues Investment Interest 0 52 132 132 0.00% Interfund Transfer-#101 0 0 0 0 0.00% Interfund Transfer-#001 325,000 27,083 243,750 (81,250) 75.00% Total revenues 325,000 27,135 243,882 (81,118) 75.04% Expenditures Auto&Property Insurance 325,000 0 277,298 47,702 85.32% Unemployment Claims 0 0 4,841 (4,841) 0.00% Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total expenditures 325,000 0 282,139 42,861 86.81% Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 27,135 (38,257) (123,979) Beginning working capital 194,383 194,383 Ending working capital 194,383 156,126 SUMMARY FOR ALL FUNDS Total of Revenues for all Funds 76,892,423 3,902,050 49,529,684 Per revenue status report 76,892,423 3,902,050 49,529,684 Difference 0 (0) (0) Total of Expenditures for all Funds 86,258,267 6,078,485 44,479,677 Per expenditure status report 86,258,267 6,078,485 44,479,676 0 0 1 Total Capital expenditures(included in total expenditures) 31,242,077 2,349,577 9,683,341 Page 19 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 09 30.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/17/2016 Investment Report For the Nine-Month Period Ended September 30, 2016 Total LGIP* BB CD 2 BB CD 3 Investments Beginning $ 52,066,925.62 $ 3,012,018.77 $ 2,007,483.61 $ 57,086,428.00 Deposits 2,643,605.22 0.00 0.00 2,643,605.22 Withdrawls (2,500,000.00) 0.00 0.00 (2,500,000.00) Interest 22,015.50 0.00 0.00 22,015.50 Ending $ 52,232,546.34 $ 3,012,018.77 $ 2,007,483.61 $ 57,252,048.72 matures: 6/28/2017 11/4/2016 rate: 0.45% 0.50% Earnings Balance Current Period Year to date Budget 001 General Fund $ 24,503,493.74 $ 9,422.51 $ 89,329.84 $ 45,000.00 101 Street Fund 1,311,848.07 504.45 3,888.16 3,000.00 103 Trails& Paths 37,751.01 14.52 101.97 0.00 104 Tourism Facilities Hotel/Motel 377,055.88 144.99 771.67 0.00 105 Hotel/Motel 331,876.71 127.62 759.14 300.00 106 Solid Waste Fund 60,998.48 23.46 93.52 0.00 107 PEG Fund 254,500.26 97.86 390.55 0.00 120 CenterPlace Operating Reserve 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 121 Service Level Stabilization Reserve 4,727,944.83 1,818.07 13,508.86 6,500.00 122 Winter Weather Reserve 415,697.52 159.85 1,247.04 600.00 123 Civic Facilities Replacement 0.00 0.00 695.73 700.00 301 Capital Projects 1,950,380.74 749.99 3,922.97 1,000.00 302 Special Capital Projects 2,086,238.52 802.23 4,269.42 1,000.00 303 Street Capital Projects Fund 0.00 0.00 28.76 0.00 309 Parks Capital Project 43,603.71 16.77 723.09 500.00 310 Civic Buildings Capital Projects 1,148,724.85 441.73 3,169.41 1,200.00 311 Pavement Preservation 1,568,230.63 603.04 6,104.98 0.00 312 Capital Reserve Fund 5,337,868.24 2,052.60 6,852.26 0.00 313 City Hall Construction Fund 9,496,659.34 3,651.81 14,574.62 0.00 402 Stormwater Management 1,648,960.39 634.09 4,556.10 1,500.00 403 Aquifer Protection Fund 755,693.25 290.59 1,322.28 0.00 501 Equipment Rental & Replacement 1,059,707.14 407.50 2,647.10 1,000.00 502 Risk Management 134,815.41 51.84 131.86 0.00 $ 57,252,048.72 $ 22,015.52 $ 159,089.33 $ 62,300.00 *Local Government Investment Pool Page 20 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 09 30.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/17/2016 Sales Tax Receipts For the Nine-Month Period Ended September 30, 2016 Month Difference Received 2015 2016 February 1,962,820.56 2,109,906.28 147,085.72 7.49% March 1,358,307.78 1,488,699.93 130,392.15 9.60% April 1,401,618.35 1,555,221.97 153,603.62 10.96% May 1,655,903.08 1,852,586.82 196,683.74 11.88% June 1,557,740.48 1,768,797.14 211,056.66 13.55% July 1,886,262.22 1,848,301.11 (37,961.11) (2.01%) August 1,944,085.56 2,013,841.16 69,755.60 3.59% September 1,894,514.58 1,963,131.36 68,616.78 3.62% 13,661,252.61 14,600,485.77 939,233.16 6.88% October 1,765,807.42 November 1,836,885.94 December 1,683,925.38 January 1,633,949.35 20,581,820.70 14,600,485.77 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 21 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\Sales Tax\2016\sales tax collections 2016.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WAS 9/23/2016 Sales Tax Collections- August For the years 2007 through 2016 liVk 2016 to 2015 Difference 2007 I 2008 I 2009 I 2010 I 2011 I 2012 i 2013 I 2014 I 2015 I 2016 $ % January 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 1,316,682 119,359 9.97% 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 1,378,300 143,048 11.58% 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 1,640,913 178,817 12.23% 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 1,566,178 192,468 14.01% 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 1,641,642 (51,819) (3.06%) 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 1,776,653 58,225 3.39% 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 1,746,371 61,671 3.66% Collected to date 11,469,447 11,030,471 9,558,046 9,356,166 9,798,936 10,012,952 10,911,993 11,482,994 12,097,269 12,929,964 832,695 6.88% 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 12,929,964 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 18,480,500 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 (5,550,536) 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 %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 August 65.66% 64.45% 53.52% 64.93% 68.96% 70.46% 71.55% 67.59% 68.62% 69.97% %of actual total collected through August 65.77% 68.25% 67.08% 66.37% 65.98% 64.90% 65.78% 65.84% 66.43% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of August August 14,000,000 - 12,000,000 August 10,000,000 • rJuly J i- --- ; 6,000,000 4,000,000 May 8,000,000 ' April Marchune I 111 2,000,000 I ` ■February 0 [ January 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 - Page 22 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\Lodging Tax\2016\105 hotel motel tax 2016.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA I 10/4/2016 Hotel/Motel Tax Receipts through- August Actual for the years 2007 through 2016 ...411 F � 2016 to 2015 Difference 2007 I 2008 I 2009 I 2010 I 2011 I 2012 I 2013 I 2014 I 2015 I 2016 $ % January 25,138 28,947 23,280 22,707 22,212 21,442 24,185 25,425 27,092 31,887 4,795 17.70% February 25,311 24,623 23,284 23,417 22,792 21,549 25,975 26,014 27,111 27,773 662 2.44% March 29,190 27,510 25,272 24,232 24,611 25,655 27,739 29,384 32,998 34,330 1,332 4.04% April 37,951 40,406 36,254 39,463 38,230 52,130 40,979 48,246 50,455 52,551 2,096 4.15% May 31,371 36,829 32,589 34,683 33,791 37,478 40,560 41,123 44,283 50,230 5,947 13.43% June 36,267 46,660 40,415 39,935 41,403 43,971 47,850 52,618 56,975 55,060 (1,915) (3.36%) July 56,282 50,421 43,950 47,385 49,312 52,819 56,157 61,514 61,809 65,007 3,198 5.17% August 51,121 50,818 50,147 54,923 57,452 57,229 63,816 70,384 72,697 73,700 1,003 1.38% Total Collections 292,630 306,214 275,190 286,747 289,804 312,273 327,262 354,707 373,420 390,538 17,118 4.58% September 57,260 60,712 50,818 59,419 58,908 64,299 70,794 76,100 74,051 0 October 43,970 38,290 36,784 41,272 39,028 43,699 43,836 45,604 49,880 0 November 36,341 35,583 34,055 34,330 37,339 39,301 42,542 39,600 42,376 0 December 31,377 26,290 27,131 26,777 32,523 30,432 34,238 33,256 41,510 0 Total Collections 461,578 467,089 423,978 448,545 457,603 490,004 518,672 549,267 581,237 390,538 Budget Estimate 400,000 400,000 512,000 380,000 480,000 _ 430,000 490,000 530,000 550,000 550,000 Actual over(under)budg 61,578 67,089 (88,022) 68,545 (22,397) 60,004 28,672 19,267 31,237 (159,462) Total actual collections as a%of total budget 115.39% 116.77% 82.81% 118.04% 95.33% 113.95% 105.85% 103.64% 105.68% n/a %change in annual total collected 10.67% 1.19% (9.23%) 5.79% 2.02% 7.08% 5.85% 5.90% 5.82% n/a %of budget collected through August 73.16% 76.55% 53.75% 75.46% 60.38% 72.62% 66.79% 66.93% 67.89% 71.01% %of actual total collected through August 63.40% 65.56% 64.91% 63.93% 63.33% 63.73% 63.10% 64.58% 64.25% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of August August 450,000 400,000 350,000 August 300,000 July June 250,000 - May 200,000 -- April 150,000 - March 1111 I III Ea, 11, imam ■February 11 50,000 ; , •January 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Page 23 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\REET\2016\301 and 302 REET for 2016.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/4/2016] 1st and 2nd 114%REET Collections through August Actual for the years 2007 through 2016rrn 2016 to 2015 Difference 2007 _I_ 2008 1 2009 I 2010 1 2011 I 2012 I 2013 I 2014 I 2015 l 2016 $ 0/0 January 228,897 145,963 55,281 59,887 64,128 46,359 56,898 61,192 96,141 104,446 8,306 8.64% February 129,920 159,503 45,181 64,122 36,443 56,115 155,226 67,049 103,508 83,583 (19,925) (19.25%) March 263,835 133,513 73,307 86,204 95,880 71,730 72,172 81,724 165,868 220,637 54,769 33.02% April 211,787 128,367 81,156 99,507 79,681 86,537 90,377 105,448 236,521 205,654 (30,867) (13.05%) May 222,677 158,506 77,464 109,625 124,692 111,627 116,165 198,870 165,748 192,806 27,058 16.32% June 257,477 178,203 105,021 105,680 81,579 124,976 139,112 106,676 347,421 284,897 (62,524) (18.00%) July 323,945 217,943 122,530 84,834 79,629 101,049 128,921 208,199 217,375 248,899 31,525 14.50% August 208,040 133,906 115,830 72,630 129,472 106,517 117,150 172,536 202,525 231,200 28,675 14.16% Collected to date 1,846,578 1,255,905 675,769 682,490 691,505 704,910 876,021 1,001,693 1,535,107 1,572,124 37,017 2.41% September 165,287 131,240 93,862 75,812 68,020 63,517 174,070 152,323 179,849 0 October 206,443 355,656 113,961 93,256 61,396 238,095 117,806 123,505 128,833 0 November 191,806 147,875 133,265 72,021 74,753 104,886 78,324 172,227 129,870 0 December 179,568 96,086 71,366 38,725 65,077 74,300 75,429 117,682 157,919 0 Total distributed by Spokane County 2,589,681 1,986,762 1,088,222 962,304 960,751 1,185,707 1,321,650 1,567,429 2,131,578 1,572,124 Budget estimate 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 760,000 800,000 950,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 1,600.000 1,600,000 Actual over(under)budget 589,681 (13,238) (911,778) 202,304 160,751 235,707 321,650 367,429 531,578 (27,876) 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 August 92.33% 62.80% 33.79% 89.80% 86.44% 74.20% 87.60% 83.47% 95.94% 98.26% %of actual total collected through August 71.31% 63.21% 62.10% 70.92% 71.98% 59.45% 66.28% 63.91% 72.02% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of August August 2,000,000 _ 1,800,000 1,600,000 August 1,400,000 July 1,200,000 June 1,000,000 May 800,000 - April 600,000 March 400,000 ■February 200,000 INZ -.-� J January �A I - r,-,----4 1 p{ E"'"--- - 0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Page 24 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Debt Capacity\2016\debt capacity 2016.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 6/12/2016 Debt Capacity 2015 Assessed Value for 2016 Property Taxes 7,748,275,097 Maximum Outstanding Remaining Debt as of Debt % Capacity 12/31/2015 Capacity Utilized Voted(UTGO) 1.00% of assessed value 77,482,751 0 77,482,751 0.00% Nonvoted(LTGO) 1.50% of assessed value 116,224,126 13,650,000 102,574,126 11.74% Voted park 2.50% of assessed value 193,706,877 0 193,706,877 0.00% Voted utility 2.50% of assessed value 193,706,877 0 193,706,877 0.00% 581,120,631 13,650,000 567,470,631 2.35% 2014 LTGO Bonds Road& LTGO Bonds Period Street 2016 LTGO Grand Ending CenterPlace Improvements Total _ Bonds Total Bonds 12/1/2014 225,000 135,000 360,000 0 360,000 Repaid 12/1/2015 175,000 125,000 300,000 0 300,000 400,000 260,000 660,000 0 660,000 12/1/2016 185,000 130,000 315,000 75,000 390,000 12/1/2017 190,000 130,000 320,000 150,000 470,000 12/1/2018 230,000 135,000 365,000 155,000 520,000 12/1/2019 255,000 140,000 395,000 160,000 555,000 12/1/2020 290,000 140,000 430,000 165,000 595,000 12/1/2021 320,000 145,000 465,000 170,000 635,000 12/1/2022 350,000 150,000 500,000 175,000 675,000 12/1/2023 390,000 155,000 545,000 180,000 725,000 12/1/2024 430,000 0 430,000 185,000 615,000 12/1/2025 465,000 0 465,000 95,000 660,000 12/1/2026 505,000 0 505,000 .00,000 705,000 12/1/2027 395,000 0 395,000 205,000 600,000 12/1/2028 300,000 0 300,000 215,000 515,000 12/1/2029 245,000 0 245,000 220,000 465,000 12/1/2030 225,000 0 225,000 225,000 450,000 Bonds 12/1/2031 180,000 0 180,000 235,000 415,000 Remaining 12/1/2032 130,000 0 130,000 240,000 370,000 12/1/2033 165,000 0 165,000 250,000 415,000 12/1/2034 0 0 0 260,000 260,000 12/1/2035 0 0 0 270,000 270,000 12/1/2036 0 0 0 280,000 280,000 12/1/2037 0 0 0 290,000 290,000 12/1/2038 0 0 0 305,000 305,000 12/1/2039 0 0 0 315,000 315,000 12/1/2040 0 0 0 330,000\ 330,000 12/1/2041 0 0 0 340,000\ 340,000 12/1/2042 0 0 0 355,000 355,000 12/1/2043 0 0 0 365,000 365,000 12/1/2044 0 0 0 375,000 ' 375,000 12/1/2045 0 0 0 390,000 390,000 5,250,000 1,125,000 6,375,000 7,275,000 ' 13,650,000 5,650,000 1,385,000 7,035,000 7,275,000 14,310,000 Page 25 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\MVFT12016\motor vehicle fuel tax collections 2016.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 10/4/2016 Motor Fuel(Gas)Tax Collections- August For the years 2007 through 2016 2016 to 2015 Difference 2007 I 2008 I 2009 I 2010 I 2011 I 2012 I 2013 I 2014 I 2015 2016 $ % January 172,711 165,698 133,304 161,298 154,792 159,607 146,145 152,906 152,598 163,918 11,320 7.42% February 162,079 149,799 155,832 145,869 146,353 135,208 145,998 148,118 145,455 163,037 17,582 12.09% March 156,194 159,316 146,264 140,486 141,849 144,297 135,695 131,247 140,999 145,537 4,538 3.22% April 175,010 165,574 161,117 161,721 165,019 153,546 156,529 156,269 157,994 167,304 9,310 5.89% May 173,475 162,281 156,109 158,119 154,700 144,670 151,595 156,850 156,259 171,829 15,570 9.96% June 183,410 176,085 173,954 168,146 158,351 159,827 167,479 161,965 164,872 157,737 (7,135) (4.33%) July 178,857 166,823 169,756 164,221 165,398 160,565 155,348 157,805 168,205 177,427 9,222 5.48% August 183,815 171,690 179,012 176,869 153,361 164,050 173,983 172,308 186,277 177,567 (8,710) (4.68%) Collected to date 1,385,551 1,317,266 1,275,348 1,276,729 1,239,823 1,221,770 1,232,772 1,237,468 1,272,659 1,324,356 51,697 4.06% 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 1,324,356 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) 6,953 19,875 85,193 (680,544) 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 %of budget collected through August 69.28% 61.27% 62.21% 67.20% 66.12% 64.38% 66.24% 66.58% 68.47% 66.06% %of actual total collected through August 65.99% 66.01% 66.19% 66.22% 66.74% 66.15% 65.99% 65.88% 65.47% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of August August 1,600,000 1,400,000r i r August 1,200,000 11 L_____+ ° II i- July 1,000,000 - ■June EEE! (. 200,000 - - •February 0 __ _ I JM ■January 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 -- Page 26 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\Telephone Tax\2016\telephone utility tax collections 2016.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA -• * 10/10/2016 Telephone Utility Tax Collections- August For the years 2009 through 2016 ` I 2016 to 2015 Difference 2009 I 2010 I 2011 I 2012 I 2013 I 2014 I 2015 I 2016 $ % January 128,354 234,622 241,357 193,818 217,478 210,777 177,948 182,167 4,219 2.37% February 282,773 266,041 230,366 261,074 216,552 205,953 212,845 173,971 (38,874) (18.26%) March 230,721 264,175 245,539 234,113 223,884 208,206 174,738 177,209 2,471 1.41% April 275,775 254,984 238,561 229,565 214,618 206,038 214,431 171,770 (42,661) (19.89%) May 242,115 255,056 236,985 227,469 129,270 210,010 187,856 174,512 (13,344) (7.10%) June 239,334 251,880 239,013 234,542 293,668 210,289 187,412 170,450 (16,962) (9.05%) July 269,631 250,593 244,191 226,118 213,078 205,651 190,984 174,405 (16,579) (8.68%) August 260,408 246,261 349,669 228,789 211,929 205,645 185,172 171,909 (13,263) (7.16%) Collected to date 1,929,111 2,023,612 2,025,681 1,835,488 1,720,477 1,662,569 1,531,386 1,396,393 (134,993) (8.82%) 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 1,396,393 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) (943,607) 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 %of budget collected through August 77.16% 72.27% 67.52% 61.18% 59.33% 60.46% 59.70% 59.67% %of actual total collected through August 63.16% 67.77% 67.95% 67.10% 67.14% 67.55% 67.85% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of August 2,500,000 August August 2,000,000 �- July is June ■May 1,500,000 I - 1 ■April r March 1,000,000 ■February NIA 41iiil I hinThal lib IML iiiJanuary 500,000 i. 0 _¢ 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Page 27 Operations&Administrative Services' 3rd Quarter 2016 Spokane000%.„, Operations & Administrative Services Valle " 3rd Quarter 2016 ADMINISTRATIVE: • 2014 Prosecutor Reconciliation • CAD/RMS First and Second Quarter Invoice Review • Public Defender Services Evaluation • Solid Waste Disposal Rates and Administrative Fee Evaluation • 2015 Law Enforcement Reconciliation Review • Finalize Law Enforcement Goals and Sent to County • Evaluation and Report on Solid Waste Survey • Solid Waste RFP/Contract Completion • Public Defender Grant Application • Solid Waste Industry Comments Review • Law Enforcement Staffing—Options • City Hall Move Needs Assessment HUMAN RESOURCES: Recruiting/Employment Activity to Fill Budgeted Positions Recruitment Filled or Recruiting fi Recruitment Filled or Recruiting PT Recreation Assistant– Host Recruiting Administrative Assistant—PW Recruiting Construction Inspector—CD Filled Administrative Assistant–CenterPlace Filled Engineering Technician Filled Office Assistant I—CenterPlace Recruiting Office Assistant I—CD Filled On-Call Snow Plow Operators Recruiting Special Projects: Executive Recruitment to fill City Manager position. Page 1 Operations&Administrative Services' 3rd Quarter 2016 SCITY Ors 011111°1#11\1%111114k p Public Information 4. Quarter 3rd 2016 • MEDIA RELATIONS: Media contacts: 24 • Citizen Contacts: 55 Does not include those that were subsequently referred to another City resource or multiple contacts • Media Release email distribution subscribers: 687 on same request. • Traffic Alert email distribution subscribers: 671 Media releases &traffic: 58 Including: 4 calendar requests, 31 traffic alerts, & • Snowlnfo Email subscribers: 714 25 regular • Hot Topic Community ENewsletter Subscribers: 859 Earned media stories: 73 Does not include all television/radio/web as not all are • Website Updates: 32 available online Equivalent ad value of earned media stories: $14,828.47 Areas of Significant Focus: This total is just for known broadcast coverage as not all broadcast media make copies available for online • Public Works construction season outreach retrieval, and calculates blog coverage based on one • Amendment to DOE CPG solid waste alternatives minimum ad size. grant Total media stories: 151 Does not include ads, police reports, or all television/ radio/web as not all are available online. L Page 2 Operations&Administrative Services' 3rd Quarter 2016 SpOkane Website Summary Valley K 3rd Quarter 2016 3rd Quarter 2016 July August September Year to Date Unique User Sessions 14,755 17,604 15,743 109,113 Top Five Pages Viewed Pools—SV Outdoor 5631 4037 223 18,475 Job Opening 2527 3704 3077 22,791 Permit Center 1543 1775 1427 13,981 Parks & Rec 2064 1871 753 11,603 Police 1578 1460 1286 10,745 Top Five "Referrer"Websites Google 11,175 11,304 7979 72,523 Bing 687 696 552 4079 Spokanecares.org 186 164 64 1139 Visit Spokane 140 69 40 755 Spokesman 35 41 56 296 Page 3 Operations&Administrative Services' 3rd Quarter 2016 Siiiiika CENTRAL RECEPTION Valley ' 3rd Quarter 2016 BUSINESS Registrations: 247 New & 9,955 Reactivations 3rd Qrt Business Licenses CALL LOG VOLUME: 1,796 Total Calls Reactivations - 800 New I 700 600 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 500 VISITOR VOLUME: 511 Total Visitors 400 I July 1 250 300 - • August • September 200 200 — 100 — 150 r , i I i 0 1. Ill 100 ��p o��`� Ne'a° 4c' a Q�� ' - () 50 0'Q 0 July August September Page 4 Operations&Administrative Services' 3rd Quarter 2016 CITY OF Q ane E-GOV C.A. R. E.S. REQUESTS Valley ' 3rd Quarter 2016 Total C.A.R.E.S. 3rd Quarter: 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 I ■ July • August r September 1166— —gal 1111-7.1117-01 111 ifilli-v —1 60 40 j , 20 �\Q0� ' ' '• �\�� a�\°� °�`° O. �� \et. �\' o�P" e .o P o- 44 e 0 5 QJ Page 5 S 1 k e .0•60P Valley PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT September 2016 AGREEMENTS FOR SERVICES ADOPTED AND IN OPERATION * Budget estimates ** Does not include September 2016—waiting on invoices Total %of Contract Contract Name Contractor Contract Amount Expended Expended Street Maintenance Poe Asphalt $1,366,663.00 $871,900.11 63.80% ** Street Sweeping AAA Sweeping $490,200.00 $358,475.74 73.13% ** Storm Drain Cleaning AAA Sweeping $189,990.00 $115,180.25 60.62% ** Snow Removal Poe Asphalt $70,000.00 $22,444.34 32.06% Landscaping Senske $61,178.00 $39,248.13 64.15% Weed Spraying Spokane Pro Care $19,400.00 $8,314.29 42.86% ** Emergency Traffic Control Senske $10,000.00 $2,204.42 22.04% * Litter and Weed Control Geiger Work Crew $60,000.00 $33,449.20 55.75% ** State Highway Maintenance WSDOT $265,000.00 $179,912.42 67.89% ** Traffic Signals, Signs, Striping Spokane County $632,000.00 $442,852.31 70.07% ** Dead Animal Control Mike Pederson $20,000.00 $7,940.00 39.70% * Citizen Requests for Public Works-September 2016 -Waiting=30 days+ 120 100 80 60 40 20 —Ai_ 0 M_ . _ _ I L . Dead Graffiti Land- Sign& Storm Gravel Illicit Rpt Roadway Street Weed Total Req Misc Animal City Shldring Discharge scaping Pothole Hazard Signal Drainage/ Sweeping Traffic Control Removal Property ROW Requests Erosion Submitted 102 7 10 3 0 1 9 3 19 17 1 0 32 0 In Progress 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 10 0 0 1 0 Waiting 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Resolved 0 6 10 3 0 1 7 2 16 5 1 0 30 0 *Information in bold indicates updates 1 WASTEWATER Status of the process can be monitored at: http://www.spokaneriver.net/, http://www.ecy.wa.qov/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 September 2016: • AAA Sweeping continued with arterial maintenance sweeping. • AAA Sweeping cleaned drywells and catch basins. • Geiger Work Crew mowing dryland grass areas, litter cleanup and miscellaneous requests. • Poe Asphalt completed asphalt repairs on David, Broadway, Springfield, Skipworth, Pierce, Glenn, Desmet, Marietta, 10th and Blake Roads. STORMWATER UTILITY The following is a summary of Stormwater Utility activities in the City of Spokane Valley for September 2016: • Contracted with AM Landshaper, Inc. that commenced on a Small Works Package that included improvements at Bates, Rego, and Wilbur roads. • Continued work on EW Effectiveness Study Development • Continued response to July 22 rain event, • Responded to 2 illicit discharges to storm drain facilities. • Provided cost estimates of storm drainage improvements required with potential sidewalk projects that would be applied for under CDBG. • Evaluated grant options for projects on Stormwater CIP and drafted Stormwater CIP for 2017- 2022 • Continued design support of stormwater retrofit possibilities with several CIP street and trail projects. • 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). *Information in bold indicates updates 2 CAPITAL PROJECTS " � Public Works Projects Valley Monthly Summary-Design &Construction September-2016 Bid Estimated Total Project Proposed Open %Complete Construction Project # Design&Construction Projects Funding Ad Date Date PE I CN Completion Cost Street Projects 0141 Sullivan&Euclid PCC FHWA-STP(U) 1/20/2017 2/14/2017 93 0 12/31/17 $ 2,330,475 0155 Sullivan Rd W Bridge Replacement#4508 FHWA-BR 06/27/14 07/18/14 100 85 10/05/16 $15,833,333 0166 Pines Rd.(SR27)&Grace Ave.Int Safety HSIP 01/22/17 02/13/17 95 0 10/01/17 $ 733,086 0201 ITS Infill Project-Phase 1 FHWA-CMAQ 07/29/16 Rebid 100 0 12/31/16 $ 350,402 0221 McDonald Rd Diet(16th to Mission) HSIP 05/27/16 06/17/16 100 85 12/31/16 $ 2,524,104 0238 Pines RD Mirabeau Parkway Intersection TIB-UAP 05/27/16 07/08/16 100 50 12/31/16 $ 446,338 0239 Bowdish Rd&11th Ave.Sidewalk TIB-SP 03/03/17 03/17/17 90 0 12/31/17 $ 536,342 0251 Euclid Avenue Reconstruction Project COSV 04/2017 05/2017 0 0 12/31/17 $ 1,800,000 Street Preservation Projects 0226 Appleway Resurfacing,Park to Dishman Mi FHWA-STP(U) 08/05/16 08/19/16 100 50 12/31/16 $ 1,190,000 0240 Saltese Road Preservation Project COSV 03/17/17 4/3/2017 15 0 12/31/17 $ 920,000 Traffic Projects 0167 Citywide Safety Improvements HSIP 07/31/15 08/21/15 100 90 07/31/16 $ 503,424 0222 Citywide Reflective Signal Back Plates HSIP N/A N/A 0 0 03/01/19 $ 81,000 Parks Projects 0227 Appleway S.U.P.-Pines to Evergreen FHWA-STP(U) 01/2017 02/2017 100 0 12/31/17 $ 2,134,057 0237 Appleway Trail-Sullivan to Corbin COSV 03/03/17 03/24/17 5 0 12/31/17 $ 2,130,000 Design Estimated Total Project Complete %Complete Construction Project # Design Only Projects Funding Date PE Completion Cost Street Projects 0123 Mission Ave-Flora to Barker FHWA-STP(U) 08/15/15 15 $ 917,700 0142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan FHWA-STP(U) 08/31/16 90 $ 276,301 0143 Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation FMSIB 0 $ 720,000 0205 Sprague/Barker Intersection Improvement COSV 12/31/16 5 $ 51,619 0223 Pines Rd Underpass @ BNSF&Trent COSV 0 $ 510,000 0247 8th&Carnahan Intersection Improvements 0 $ 250,000 Stormwater Projects 0193 Effectiveness Study Dept of Ecology 06/30/17 50 06/30/17 $ 600,000 0198 Sprague,Park to University LID Dept of Ecology 03/01/18 30 12/31/19 $ 20,000 0199 Havana-Yale Diversion Dept of Ecology 10/31/16 35 10/31/17 $ 20,000 0200 Ponderosa Surface Water Diversion Dept of Ecology 10/31/16 35 10/31/17 $ 20,000 *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 underway (weather permitting) and mostly complete. Pavement markings are being refreshed throughout the City in September and October (weather permitting). Specific Studies Staff is coordinating with WSDOT on 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 and the Mirabeau Sub-Area Study. PLANNING AND GRANTS Safe Routes to School (SRTS) and Pedestrian & Bicycle Program WSDOT issued a Call for projects for the statewide Pedestrian and Bicycle and the Safe Routes to School grant programs and the City submitted five projects in May, 2016. The projects submitted at that time were: Pedestrian and Bicycle Program • Indiana Ave Sidewalk Project, Pines (SR-27) to STA Park & Ride Safe Routes to School • 16th Ave Street Lighting Project, Dishman Mica to University • Mission Ave Street Lighting Project, Vercler to Sullivan • Wellesley Sidewalk Project(north side only), McDonald to Evergreen • Citywide School Zone Crossing Beacons (12 Locations) In early September, WSDOT requested city staff to accompany WSDOT Local Programs staff to review City applications making the short list. All five projects the City submitted were short listed. A field review was conducted on September 20, 2016. WSDOT staff said the purpose of their visit was to review the grant application in the field, ask questions, comment, and discuss project details with the City. After the field review, WSDOT gave the City time to revise the grant applications to refine the scope and update the project costs. The City plans to resubmit grant applications by the October 7, 2016 deadline. Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) Capital Programs and Community & Economic Development staff continued to scope out potential sidewalk projects for the upcoming CDBG Call for Projects. This year, staff identified projects a little earlier so an open house soliciting neighborhood comment would be received before presenting the projects to the City Council and ultimately prior to submitting grant applications to Spokane County for these funds. An open house is scheduled for October 5, 2016 from 5 - 7 pm. *Information in bold indicates updates 4 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 25, 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 Regional Transportation Management Center Interlocal Agreement GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Informational memorandum on SRTMC Interlocal Agreement, March 24, 2015; Administrative report on SRTMC Interlocal Agreement, March 31, 2015; Motion for consideration on SRTMC Interlocal Agreement, April 14, 2015; Administrative Report on SRTMC Interlocal Agreement Amendment No. 2, December 1, 2015; Motion for consideration on SRTMC Interlocal Agreement Amendment No. 2, December 8, 2015; Informational memorandum on SRTMC Interlocal Agreement, July 5, 2016; Administrative Report on SRTMC Interlocal Agreement, July 12, 2016; Motion passed July 26, 2016, to continue with the SRTMC through calendar year 2017 and once the Interlocal Agreement is finalized, to bring the document back to Council for approval as part of a future Council agenda item. BACKGROUND: Planning for the Spokane Regional Transportation Management Center (SRTMC) began in 1998 and led to the development of an interlocal agreement between the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), Spokane County, Spokane Transit Authority (STA), City of Spokane, and the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC). The intent of the SRTMC is to provide a multi-jurisdictional control facility for the partnering agencies to enhance and support advanced transportation management capabilities. The SRTMC was originally intended to serve as a hub for regional transportation communications and to provide a seamless coordination of intelligent transportation system (ITS) devices, including traffic signals across agency boundary lines. The center operates twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week for 365 days a year, and has done so since 2003. The SRTMC relies on federal grant funding, yearly member contributions, and WSDOT directed funds. The federal grants and member contributions fund the SRTMC Manager, the IT Manager, two operators, software maintenance contracts, operation of the website, and daily hardware maintenance and functions for the center. The City's contribution historically has been $15,000 per year. However, the member agency contributions have been waved in 2015 and 2016, and are likely to be waved in 2017 pending the 2017 SRTMC budget. The SRTMC has an Operating Board that consists of technical members from each of the partner agencies. The Operating Board is responsible for reviewing and approving SRTMC activities and has monthly board meetings. These board meetings are generally technical in nature and involve discussion of future ITS planning and implementation projects and strategies as well as the reviewing of previous monthly activities, invoices, and billings. As of today, the City of Spokane Valley has 44 traffic signals, 11 cameras, and one dynamic message sign on the City's ITS network. The City provides limited access of our system to the SRTMC, including access to the 11 cameras. Later this year the City will be collecting traffic count data from our traffic signals via the ITS network, and can provide this data to the SRTMC for regional use. The SRTMC has made great headways this year by utilizing federal funds that have been allocated to the center. The SRTMC manager has undergone a very rigorous request for proposals for a new advance transportation management system (ATMS), which is the heart of the SRTMC. The SRTMC now has a very well defined work plan and budget, and has gained positive momentum in the region to provide ITS connectivity. Another recent accomplishment is the SRTMC's recent website upgrade, which is open to the general public and located at www.srtmc.orq. The website contains information about specific corridors and has real-time video feeds from cameras throughout the Spokane region. The website also identifies travel impacts from construction activities throughout the region. Two previous amendments to the 1998 interlocal occurred in 2015. The first amendment set a trial period, added the City of Spokane Valley as an official partner, and identified WSDOT as the lead agency of the SRTMC. City Council agreed to this and approved the first amendment in April of 2015. The second amendment included a sunset clause, and established the termination date of December 31, 2017, unless terminated sooner or extended as provided within the agreement. City Council agreed to this amendment in December of 2015. The SRTMC staff is being proactive in beginning preparation of an updated interlocal agreement with intent to have approvals in 2016, well before the December 31, 2017 termination date. The City currently operates a traffic signal management software that is common to the region. The annual maintenance fee for this software is approximately $10,000 per year, and includes support from the software developer. The cost for the software annual maintenance is currently and has been historically funded through the SRTMC, which would essentially come out of our member contribution of$15,000; therefore our total annual contribution to continue our status as a regional partner in the SRTMC nets to $5,000. If the City were not part of the SRTMC, we would need to pay the annual maintenance fee for the traffic signal management software to maintain operational management of our traffic signal system. Additionally, the services performed at the SRTMC benefit the City of Spokane Valley citizens traveling on regional roadways, such as 1-90, Division Street, SR 195 and SR 395. The benefits include incident response activities, which reduced delay during a collision; accessing and transmitting messages to the variable message signs (VMS)along each roadway, allowing drivers to make decisions regarding alternate routes to avoid delays; and accessing regional cameras to view traffic on the regional roadways. As technology continues to improve, and with the deployment of new systems in the region, the SRTMC will provide more benefit to the region and to our citizens. The City of Spokane Valley is an integral piece in the continuing ITS development within the region, which benefits our citizens by improving their commute throughout the City and region. It is staff's recommendation to continue with the SRTMC while monitoring the SRTMC's annual workplan and budget. The SRTMC interlocal has an opt-out clause, which requires written notification by August 1st to be withdrawn on January 1st of the subsequent year. Staff will immediately notify Council should any changes to the SRTMC workplan or budget result in potential changes in our member contribution. The member contributions for 2017 are expected to be$0. The SRTMC management has finalized the new interlocal agreement, which is enclosed with this RCA. Please note that the City's legal counsel has reviewed and provided comments which are incorporated into the enclosed agreement. The agreement as presented has been approved and signed by the WSDOT and Spokane County and is pending signatures from the City of Spokane, STA, and SRTC in November. Staff will provide an Administrative Report to City Council on November 1, 2016. OPTIONS: Information Only. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Informational Only. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: No change to 2016 budget. STAFF CONTACT: Sean Messner, Senior Traffic Engineer Eric Guth, Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: SRTMC Interlocal Agreement, 2017 SRTMC Workplan, 2017 SRTMC Budget INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT REGARDING THE CREATION, OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT OF THE SPOKANE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT CENTER WSDOT NO. GCB 2457 This Interlocal Agreement (Agreement) is made and entered into among the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT); Spokane County, Washington; the City of Spokane, Washington (COS); the Spokane Transit Authority (STA); the City of Spokane Valley, Washington (COSV); and the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC), collectively referred to as the Members and individually referred to as a Member, for the purposes of formalizing the creation, operations and management of the Spokane Regional Transportation Management Center(SRTMC). RECITALS A. Pursuant to the provisions of chapter 39.34 RCW, two or more public entities may jointly cooperate with one another to perform functions that each may individually perform. B. The SRTC is the federally designated Metropolitan Planning Organization and the State designated Regional Transportation Planning Organization for Spokane County that plays a critical role in the regional transportation planning process. C. The Members, other than the SRTC, operate transportation facilities in the Spokane region that are necessarily interwoven and interdependent. The interest of the traveling public will best be served by coordinating the Members' transportation systems as a whole. D. The Members have been operating and maintaining the Spokane Regional Transportation Management Center (SRTMC) pursuant to WSDOT contract number GCA 1450, dated October 1, 1998, as amended by Amendment No. 1, with an effective date of April 30, 2015, and Amendment No. 2, with an effective date of December 22, 2015 (collectively referred to as GCA 1450). E. The SRTMC is a regional transportation management system that provides traveler information and traffic management services on the Spokane regional transportation system to allow a seamless multi-modal commute across the jurisdictional boundaries of the participating Members. F. The SRTMC also allows the Members to individually or collectively pursue federal and state funding for the regional transportation system, including but not limited to the funding of the SRTMC itself. G. The Members desire to continue to operate and maintain the SRTMC under this Agreement, which will replace and supersede GCA 1450. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms, conditions, covenants and performances contained herein, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: SRTMC Interlocal Page 1 of 12 AGREEMENT Section 1: Purpose; SRTMC Regional Area 1.1 Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to create and establish the framework to manage and operate the SRTMC to: 1.1.1 Continue the coordinated system management of transportation facilities of Spokane County, COS, COSV, WSDOT and STA; 1.1.2 Establish a transportation management center for the Spokane County area that complies with applicable federal and state transportation legislation; 1.13 Facilitate the storage and distribution of regional traffic data amongst the Members; and 1.1.4 Facilitate the solicitation of funding for the SRTMC. 1.2 SRTMC Regional Area 1.2.1 The regional area covered by this Agreement shall consist of all incorporated and unincorporated areas of Spokane County, Washington and may include contiguous areas across the county or state of Washington (State) boundaries, as deemed appropriate by the Operating Board, and which meet the criteria of State and/or federal transportation legislation (Regional Area). 1.2.2 WSDOT may further utilize the SRTMC for traffic operations management through the entire WSDOT Eastern Region and may coordinate with other transportation management centers that may have operational areas extending outside the Regional Area. This work shall be funded solely by WSDOT and not through use of Member• funds or grants associated with the SRTMC. Section 2: Term,Termination, Withdrawal 2.1 Term. The duration of this Agreement shall be indefinite, subject to termination as provided elsewhere herein. 2.2 Termination. This Agreement may be terminated in whole or in part by written agreement executed by the then existing Members. If the Agreement is so terminated, the Members shall be liable only for performance rendered or costs incurred in accordance with the terms of this Agreement prior to the effective date of termination. 2.3 Member Withdrawal. Any Member may withdraw from this Agreement by giving written notice to the Operating Board Chair prior to August 1 S`of any year. The withdrawal shall be effective January 1st of the subsequent year. If a Member so withdraws, the withdrawing SRTMC Interlocal Page 2 of 12 Member shall be liable only for performance rendered or costs incurred in accordance with the terms of this Agreement prior to the effective date of withdrawal. Section 3: Organization 3.1 Voluntary Association. The Members intend with this Agreement to create a voluntary association known as SRTMC amongst themselves that will be governed by a joint board comprised of professional representatives from each Member. 3.2 SRTMC Operating Board. 3.2.1. The Members hereby create the SRTMC Operating Board (Operating Board) that will govern the operations of the SRTMC as provided herein. 3.2.2 It is the intent of the Members in creating the Operating Board to meet the prerequisites of federal transportation legislation requiring the development of an integrated congestion management system to manage existing traffic congestion and help to prevent new congestion from occurring. As such, the Operating Board shall direct the functions of the transportation management center for the Regional Area, including but not Iimited to, those functions set forth in applicable federal transportation legislation. 3.2.3 Each Member shall appoint a professional representative to the Operating Board who holds a position within its organization that has authority to make decisions related to transportation operations for their respective agency/jurisdiction. 3.2.4 Alternate Operating Board representatives may serve in the absence of the designated representative so long as the alternate representative has similar authority to act on behalf of the appointing Member's parent agency. 3.2.5 The Operating Board shall adopt rules regarding the election of officers that shall include, at a minimum, a chair and vice-chair. 3.2.6 The SRTC board member shall serve in an ex officio, non-voting Member capacity. All other Members shall be voting Members. 3.3 SRTMC Executive Board. 3.3.1 The Members hereby create the SRTMC Executive Board (Executive Board) that will govern the Operating Board of the SRTMC as provided herein. 3.3.2 It is the intent of the Members in creating the Executive Board to provide oversight of the Operating Board and their duties and provide approvals of the annual budget and work plan. SRTMC Interlocal Page 3 of 12 3.3.3 Each Member shall appoint a representative to the Executive Board who holds a position within its organization that has signing authority to approve decisions on behalf of each Member agency. 3.3.4 Alternate Executive Board representatives may serve in the absence of the designated representative so long as the alternate representative has similar signing authority to act on behalf of the appointing Member agency. 3.4 Limitations. The Operating Board is not authorized, in any way, to supersede the legal authority vested in the SRTC, Spokane County, COS, COSV, WSDOT, STA, or any future entity that becomes a Member to this Agreement. 3.5 Adding new members to the Operating Board. The Operating Board with concurrence from the Executive Board may add Members to SRTMC by at least a 75%vote. Upon receiving at least a 75%vote, the new Members shall enter into this Agreement. Section 4: Operating Board Powers and Functions The functions, responsibilities, and powers of Operating Board shall be as follows: 4.1 Meetings 4.1.1 The Operating Board shall hold regular meetings. The chair of the Operating Board may call special meetings or executive sessions or shall call a special meeting at the request of a majority of the Operating Board. 4.1.2 The Operating Board shall adopt rules for the conduct of its business consistent with this Agreement and such rules shall prescribe, among other matters, the place of meetings, the methods of providing reasonable notice to Members thereof, and what constitutes a quorum for the purpose of transacting business. Such rules shall be adopted and may be amended by ratification of at least 75% of the then total number of voting Members of the Operating Board or by amendment to this Agreement as provided elsewhere herein. 4.1.3 All meetings of the Operating Board shall be open to the public as required by chapter 42.30 RCW. 4.2 The Operating Board shall direct the functions of the transportation management center for the Regional Area that are required to comply with applicable federal and state transportation legislation. 4.3 The Operating Board shall oversee the preparation and updating of the regional intelligent transportation plans, including but not limited to, the Regional Transportation Incident Management Program, and the Regional Intelligent Transportation System Architecture Plan. SRTVIC Interlocal Page 4 of 12 4.4 The Operating Board shall administer approved regional transportation projects and programs that facilitate operations of the SRTMC. 4.5 The Operating Board shall direct such other transportation systems management related function as the Operating Board may hereinafter determine to be in the best interest of the SRTMC. 4.6 Funding 4.6.1 The Operating Board may utilize funding from federal and state governmental grants-in-aid and donations in accordance with the terms and conditions of such funding and to the extent such funds further the regional transportation management systems. 4.6.2 The Operating Board shall consider and approve, as appropriate, applications for or acceptance of any grants to carry out those functions of the SRTMC. 4.6.3 The SRTMC shall be funded by Grants except for those operations which occur outside the Regional Area. These operations shall be funded wholly by WSDOT. In the event grants are not available or obtained, Members shall have a choice of determining a funding solution at that time or opting out of the Agreement. 4.6.4 Each voting Member will pay dues in the sum of up to $15,000 per year. The dues for voting Members may be modified by at least a 75%vote of the Executive Board. 4.7 Work Plan and Annual Budget 4.7.1 The Operating Board, in conjunction with the SRTMC Manager, will develop detailed work and financial plans/budget with measurable milestones for the operation and maintenance of the SRTMC. 4.7.2 The Operating Board shall recommend approval of the work plan and budget for approval by the Executive Board by November 1 of the preceding year. 4.7.3 The Operating Board may amend the SRTMC work program and financial plans/budget by a majority vote, provided such an amendment is approved by the Executive Board and is within the funding authorized for use of the SRTMC. 4.8 The Operating Board shall authorize payment of costs incurred by a Member for authorized SRTMC activities. 4.9 The Operating Board may contract for legal counsel for the SRTMC and the Operating Board, as needed. Section 5: Executive Board Powers and Functions The functions, responsibilities, and powers of the Executive Board shall be as follows: SRTMC Interlocal Page 5 of 12 5.1 The Executive Board shall hold regular meetings. The chair of the Operating Board may call special meetings or executive sessions or shall call a special meeting at the request of a majority of the Executive Board. 5.2 All meetings of the Executive Board shall be open to the public as required by chapter 42.30 RCW. 5.3 The Executive Board shall oversee the functions of the Operating Board. 5.4 The Executive Board shall approve any Member clues that the Operating Board recommends. 5.5 The Executive Board will evaluate the performance of the Operating Board and the SRTMC Manager against the work plan, budget and measurable milestones. Section 6: SRTMC Staffing and Operations 6.1 Staff necessary to perform the SRTMC work, as identified in the approved work plans and as consistent with this Agreement, shall be Member employees as designated by the respective Member. Member employees assigned to the SRTMC staff shall be hired and discharged by their respective Member. In addition, insurance will be provided for employees by their respective Member. 6.2 The SRTMC manager shall serve under the general guidance of the Operating Board and shall be responsible for conducting activities necessary to carry out the work program as approved by the Operating Board. 6.3 The Operating Board shall have input to the SRTMC Manager's evaluation. If the Operating Board is not satisfied with the performance of the SRTMC Manager, they may direct a letter of concern to the Member that employs the SRTMC Manager. That Member shall have 90 days to resolve the Operating Board's concerns. If after 90 days the concerns are not resolved, the concerns shall be raised to the SRTMC Executive Board for resolution. The performance issue shall be included in the SRTMC Manager's evaluation, but the 90 day resolution period will not delay evaluation closeout. 6.4 SRTMC staff performing work within the Regional Area shall be funded in accordance with the budget adopted by the SRTMC. SRTMC staff that also performs work duties for WSDOT outside the Regional Area shall be funded solely by WSDOT. 6.5 WSDOT is hereby authorized to make expenditures in accordance with the approved SRTMC budget and work plan as approved by the SRTMC Operating Board. WSDOT shall maintain records of expenditures, and shall report regularly to the Operating Board on budget activity. SRTMC Interlocal Page 6 of 12 Section 7: Treatment of Assets 7.1 Title to all property furnished by a Member shall remain with that Member, unless otherwise agreed to in writing. 7.2 All property that Members have installed in the field shall remain the property of that Member. 7.3 In the event the Members determine to disband SRTMC, all property that has been installed at the SRTMC may be transferred to the entity that continues to operate the SRTMC for the region. If no entity continues to operate the SRTMC for the region, all property that has been installed at the SRTMC shall be divided equally amongst the Members that have paid for equipment installation. Section 8: Maintenance of Records 8.1 The Members to this Agreement shall each maintain books, records, documents and other evidence that sufficiently and properly reflect all direct and indirect costs expended by each Member in the performance of the service(s) described herein. These records shall be subject to inspection, review or audit by personnel of each Member, other personnel duly authorized by each Member, the Office of the State Auditor, and federal officials so authorized by law. All books, records, documents, and other material relevant to this Agreement shall be retained for six years after expiration of Agreement. The Office of the State Auditor, federal auditors, and any persons duly authorized by the Members shall have full access and the right to examine any of these materials during this period. 8.2 If any litigation, claim or audit is started before the expiration of the six (6) year period, the records shall be retained for either one (1) year following the termination of litigation, including all appeals, or six (6) years from the date of expiration or termination of this Agreement, whichever is later. 8.3 Records and other documents, in any medium, furnished by one Member to this Agreement to another Member, will remain the property of the furnishing Member, unless otherwise agreed. The receiving Member shall not disclose or make available any confidential information to any third party without first giving notice to the furnishing Member and giving it a reasonable opportunity to respond. Each Member shall utilize reasonable security procedures and protections to assure that records and documents provided by the other Member are not erroneously disclosed to third parties. However, the Members acknowledge that the Members are subject to chapter 42.56 RCW, the Public Records Act. Section 9: Legal Relations 9.1 Individually, each Member shall protect, defend, indemnify, and save harmless each other Member, its officers, officials, employees, and agents from any and all costs, claims, judgment, and/or awards of damages resulting from the negligent acts or omissions of its SRTMC Interlocal Page 7 of 12 officers, officials, employees, and agents acting within the scope of their employment and arising out of or in connection with the performance of this Agreement. 9.2 In the event of liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damages to property caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of more than one Member, their officers, officials, employees, and agents, an individual Member's liability hereunder shall be only to the extent of that Member's negligence. 9.3 It is further specifically and expressly understood that the indemnification provided herein constitutes a Member's waiver of immunity under Industrial Insurance, Title 51 RCW, solely for the purpose of this indemnification provision. This limited waiver has been mutually negotiated by the Members. The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. Section 10: General 10.1 Recitals, Exhibits and Attachments. The recitals of this Agreement are hereby incorporated into this Agreement. All exhibits, attachments, and documents referenced in this Agreement are hereby incorporated into this Agreement. 10.2 Independent Capacity. The employees or agents of each Member who are engaged in the performance of this Agreement shall continue to be employees or agents of the Member and shall not be considered for any purpose to be employees or agents of the other Member. 10.3 Assignment. Neither this Agreement, nor any rights created by it, may be assigned or transferred. 10.4 Assurances. The Members agree that all activity pursuant to this Agreement shall be in accordance with all applicable federal, state and local laws, rules, and regulations as they currently exist or as amended. 10.5 Interpretation. This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the state of Washington. The titles to paragraphs and sections of this Agreement are for convenience only and shall have no effect on the construction or interpretation of any part hereof. 10.6 Amendments. This Agreement may be amended by the mutual written agreement of the Members executed by personnel authorized to bind each of the Members. 10.7 Waiver. A failure by any Member to exercise its rights under this Agreement shall not preclude that Member from subsequent exercise of such rights and shall not constitute a waiver of any other rights under this Agreement unless stated to be such in writing signed by an authorized representative of the Member and attached to the original Agreement. 10.8 All Writings Contained Herein. This Agreement contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the Members. No other understandings, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement shall be deemed to exist or to bind any of the Members. SRTMC Interlocal Page 8 of 12 10.9 Venue. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. Venue of any action brought under this Agreement shall be in Superior Court for Spokane County. 10.10 Severability. If any term or condition of this Agreement is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of the other terms or conditions of this Agreement. 10.11 Nondiscrimination. 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 because of age, sex, race, color, religion, creed, marital status, familial status, sexual orientation including gender expression or gender identity, national origin, honorably discharged veteran or military status, the presence of any sensory, mental or physical disability, or use of a service animal by a person with disabilities. The Members agree to comply with, and to require that all subcontractors comply with, federal, state and local nondiscrimination laws, including but not limited to: the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the American's With Disabilities Act, to the extent those laws are applicable to the subject matter of this Agreement 10.12 Anti-kickback. No officer or employee of the Members,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 this Agreement. Section 11: Contract Execution 11.1 Authority to Bind. The signatories to this Agreement represent that they have the authority to bind their respective organizations to this Agreement. 11.2 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts or in duplicate originals. Each counterpart or each duplicate shall be deemed an original copy of this Agreement signed by each Member, for all purposes. Section 12: RCW 39.34 Required Clauses 12.1 Purpose: See Section 1.1 of this Agreement. 12.2 Duration: See Section 2.1 of this Agreement. 12.3 Separate Legal Entity: See Sections 3.1 and 10.2 of this Agreement. 12.4 Responsibilities of the Parties: See Sections 3--6 of this Agreement. 12.5 Agreement to be Filed: The Members shall each file this Agreement with their respective clerks and/or place it on its web site or another electronically retrievable public source, provided this Agreement shall be immediately effective upon the filing and publication SRTMC Interlocal Page 9 of 12 by any one Member and the failure of any Member to comply with this requirement shall not invalidate this Agreement. 12.6 Financing: Each Member shall be responsible for the financing of its contractual obligations under its normal budgetary process, and in accordance with Sections 4.6 and 4.7 of this Agreement. 12.7 Termination: See Section 2.2 of this Agreement. 12.8 Disposal of Property Upon Termination: See Section 7.3 of this Agreement. THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK SRTMC Interlocal Page 10 off 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the Members have executed this Agreement as of the date last signed below. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts. STATE OF WASHINGTON APPROVED AS TO FORM DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION By: By: Michael R. Gribner, P.E. Patricia Nightingale Acting Regional Administrator, Eastern Assistant Attorney General Region SPOKANE COUNTY, BOARD OF COUNTY ADOPTED this day of ,2016 COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: Shelly O'Quinn, Chair By: Clerk of the Board Al French,Vice-Chair Date: Nancy McLaughlin, Commissioner CITY OF SPOKANE ATTEST: By: By: Date: City Clerk Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM Office of the City Attorney CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY ATTEST: By: By: Date: City Clerk Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM Office of the City Attorney SRTMC Interlocal Page 11 of 12 SPOKANE TRANSIT AUTHORITY ATTEST: By: By: Date: _ Clerk of the Authority Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM STA Legal Counsel SPOKANE REGIONAL ATTEST: TRANSPORTATION COUNCIL By: By: Date: Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM SRTC Legal Counsel SRTMC Interlocal Page 12 of 12 SPOKANE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT CENTER WORK PLAN 2017 • ii ., s 1 x`11 - . .y ',• f. 6 G s vn • y ;..11 __ a 1 ' i . '4'r ...A .. .,:„...,4_,...,,..,...:- weinimmilimm" ! ME ill IR MI 1 � a! ... _r -alai' ' y ... 1 a�r.f� � umi�� ,{ • °1��11 t -... n y y y I rat..., L, 1!��' 1 - _ ,ter. SPOKANERE(/ORAL Prepared by: q,6, lirrAT Spokane Regional Transportation Management Center Operations Board 221 West First Avenue Suite 310 TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT CENTER Spokane, WA 99201 VISION Aspire to facilitate for the safe and predictable movement of people and goods throughout Spokane County. MISSION The Spokane Regional Transportation Management Center(SRTMC) is a team of professionals working 24/7 with multiple jurisdictions to deliver reliable transportation information services, locally and regionally, in order to create a safe and efficient travel experience for everyone. PURPOSE -SRTMC The Spokane Regional Transportation Management Center (SRTMC) is an organization that was created to help with the safe and predictable movement of people and goods throughout Spokane County. In addition, monitoring of Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Eastern Region facilities outside of Spokane County occurs through the SRTMC. The SRTMC's main purpose is to provide traveler information and traffic management services on our transportation system to allow a seamless multi-modal commute across jurisdictional boundaries. This is accomplished through the use of intelligent transportation system (ITS) devices, the SRTMC website, twitter, Facebook, 511, and roving incident response trucks (IRT). The SRTMC is also the regional focal point for ITS architecture planning, development, and implementation. Having a single organization leading this effort allows the region to better manage current capacity and to give multiple jurisdictions one voice when it comes to pursuing limited funding. -SRTMC Operations Board The SRTMC Operations Board is a governing body comprised of professional representatives from the City of Spokane (COS), City of Spokane Valley (COSY), Spokane County, Spokane Transit Authority (STA), WSDOT and Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) as an ex-officio. The Operating Board's main purpose is to oversee the management and operation of transportation facilities within Spokane County for mutual public benefit. This is accomplished through coordination of transportation system operations between partnering agencies in an effort to optimize regional resources. Monthly meetings of the SRTMC Operating Board and regular updates to the ITS Implementation Plan support these efforts. This coordination helps to ensure the optimal use of limited local, state and federal resources. Coordination at the state level also occurs with adjacent jurisdictions such as the Idaho Transportation Department and other Washington State TMCs. PARTICIPANTS The primary public agency participants in the Spokane Regional Transportation Management Center include: Agency SRTMC Operations SRTMC Operations Board Representative Board Alternate City of Spokane Andy Schenk Valla Melvin City of Spokane Valley Sean Messner Ryan Kipp Spokane County Nathan Thompson Barry Greene Spokane Regional Eve Nelson Kevin Wallace Transportation Council Spokane Transit Authority Fred Nelson Steve Blaska WSDOT Glenn Wagemann Robert Blegen Roles and Responsibilities SRTMC Operations Board The SRTMC Operations Board is a voluntary association and joint board that consist of one representative and an alternate from each of the member agencies. Monthly meetings are held to direct the business of the SRTMC. Core functions of this Board include: ■ Determine and oversee the duties of the SRTMC Manager. ■ Elect Chair and Vice Chair whose duties include: o Schedule,set agendas for,and conduct monthly meetings ■ Work with SRTMC Manager to develop, review, and approve the Work Plan ■ Coordinate regional transportation projects and programs that facilitate operations of the SRTMC. ■ Perform such other transportation systems management related functions as the SRTMC Operations Board determines to be in the best interests of the region. SRTMC Manager The SRTMC Manager is responsible to carry out the direction provided by the SRTMC Operations Board and to maintain functional operation of the SRTMC. The core functions of this position are: ■ Develop and direct the implementation of the SRTMC work plan. ■ SRTMC staff management • Prepare and apply the ITS Implementation Plan • Consultant Management ▪ SRTMC communication liaison • Attend SRTMC Operations Board meetings • Attend other meetings at the request of the SRTMC Board. • Research and explain technical and operational issues to the SRTMC Board. 2016 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 2016 was a very productive year for the SRTMC and its Operations Board. The majority of the major objectives that were planned for the year were accomplished.The accomplishments include: • Launched the new SRTMC website. • Completed all advanced traffic management system (ATMS) systems engineering, request for proposal (REP) development, and entered into a contract with Parsons for the procurement and implementation of the new system. • Created a new Interlocal Agreement to allow long term success of the SRTMC. • Created performance measures for the 2016 work plan. Reported on the measures to the SRTMC Executive Board. • COSV completed and stood up their Traffic Operations Center. • SRTC successfully moved into their new space and SRTMC is successfully standing on its own. One major objective that was not accomplished was the implementation of the new ATMS that was projected to be completed by November 2016. There ended up being delays due to the complexity of getting all of the 380 technical requirements captured appropriately in the RFP. We did an unplanned request for information (RFI) from the vendor community to ensure that our requirements were reasonable and deliverable. Once the REP went to bid, the vendor community asked for extra time to respond due to the complex nature of the bid. We are currently under contract and are scheduled to have the new system implemented by July 2017. There are several ongoing processes that include regional operations of the ITS system, ITS architecture planning, creating and implementing standard operating procedures for incidents, incident management planning, improving traveler information, relationship building/outreach, and data warehouse management.These items are continuous and part of the day to day operations of the SRTMC. 2017 PRIORITIES AND OBJECTIVES 2017 will be another busy year for the SRTMC and its Operations Board.A major undertaking will be the implementation of the ATMS.The completion of this task will allow several other items to be decided on and then implemented. Determining hardware and software requirements for transit,arterial, bike,and pedestrian data gathering can take place after the ATMS work is completed. A fully functional ATMS will also allow the center to center communications that are necessary to support COS and COSV traffic signal operations. Once the technology decisions have been made and implemented,the SRTMC and its Operations Board will be able to more clearly define performance measures for the next priority objective of Regional Data Warehousing. There are still certain aspects of the IT connection between SRTC and SRTMC that need to be separated to make the systems completely separate. 1. Intelligent Transportation System (ITS)architecture implementation Facilitate implementation of the Spokane Region ITS Plan by providing a forum for ITS collaboration, coordinating agreements between agencies, and procuring systems for regional ITS and signal management. Updating the plan as necessary. -Implement the new regional ATMS system -Update ITS architecture plan after ATMS install -Create new Arena media feed agreement 2. Regional data warehousing Assist local and regional decision making by compiling,storing, and disseminating current and historical member jurisdictions highway, arterial, bicycle, and pedestrian data. -Determine hardware/software requirements for arterial and highway data gathering -Determine hardware/software requirements for bike and pedestrian data gathering -Initiate framework to develop policies for collecting,storing, and disseminating data 3. Coordinated incident management Identify and remediate incidents which impact transportation by utilizing ITS devices and CAD, communicating with first responders and incident response crews, and disseminating public information. -Reduce delay/congestion by use of ITS devices -Display incident/construction/maintenance information to the traveling public -Complete SRTMC video connection to STA's fixed route dispatch center 4. ITS Infrastructure support Support regional ITS operations by assisting partner agencies with installation, maintenance,and troubleshooting of ITS devices and communication infrastructure. -Assist joint venture agencies with setup of new ITS systems -Assist joint venture agencies with troubleshooting ITS networks S. Financial stewardship Operate efficiently and cost effectively by carefully controlling operational, administrative, and capital expenditures. Plan for future funding requirements. -Build manageable spend plans for each federal grant and WSDOT Traffic Operations funds -Develop monthly reports to show grant expenditures -Develop long term cost estimates for SRTMC maintenance and operations PERFORMANCE MEASURES 1. Intelligent Transportation System (ITS)architecture implementation Facilitate implementation of the Spokane Region ITS Plan by providing a forum for ITS collaboration, coordinating agreements between agencies, and procuring systems for regional ITS and signal management. Updating the plan as necessary. -Implement the new regional ATMS system PERFORMANCE MEASURE Implement and make the new ATMS system fully functional GOAL Complete by end of July 2017 REQUIRED STAFF Operations Board members, SRTMC Manager, SRTMC IT Manager,Consultant MEASURED Annual (end of year) -Update ITS architecture plan after ATMS install PERFORMANCE MEASURE Update ITS architecture plan after ATMS install GOAL Start update by end of 2017 (actual date TBD when ATMS install is complete) REQUIRED STAFF Operations Board members, SRTMC Manager MEASURED Annual (end of year) -Create new Arena media feed agreement PERFORMANCE MEASURE Complete new Arena media feed agreement GOAL Complete by end of 2017 REQUIRED STAFF Operations Board members and legal staff, SRTMC Manager,Arena staff, WSDOT AG office MEASURED Annual (end of year) 2. Regional data warehousing Assist local and regional decision making by compiling,storing, and disseminating current and historical member jurisdictions highway,arterial, bicycle, and pedestrian data. -Determine hardware/software requirements for arterial and highway data gathering PERFORMANCE MEASURE Determine hardware/software requirements for arterial data gathering based on outcome of ATMS implementation GOAL Complete by end of 2017 REQUIRED STAFF Operations Board members,SRTMC Manager, Joint Venture Agencies staff, SRTMC IT Manager MEASURED Annual (end of year) -Determine hardware/software requirements for bike and pedestrian data gathering PERFORMANCE MEASURE Determine hardware/software requirements for bike/pedestrian data gathering based on outcome of ATMS implementation GOAL Complete by end of 2017 REQUIRED STAFF Operations Board members,SRTMC Manager, Joint Venture Agencies staff, SRTMC IT Manager MEASURED Annual (end of year) -Initiate framework to develop policies for collecting,storing,and disseminating data PERFORMANCE MEASURE Creation of framework for policies and procedures for collecting,storing, and disseminating data at the SRTMC GOAL Complete by end of 2017 REQUIRED STAFF Operations Board members,SRTMC Manager, Joint Venture Agencies staff,SRTMC IT Manager MEASURED Annual (end of year) 3.Coordinated incident management Identify and remediate incidents which impact transportation by utilizing ITS devices and CAD, communicating with first responders and incident response crews,and disseminating public information. -Reduce delay/congestion by use of ITS devices PERFORMANCE MEASURE Time it takes to respond to unplanned incidents with ITS devices GOAL Respond to unplanned impacting events within 3 minutes REQUIRED STAFF Operations Board members, SRTMC Manager, SRTMC staff, SRTMC IT Manager,field units MEASURED Time for operators to respond from verification to ITS device activation. Measured and reported on quarterly basis -Display incident/construction/maintenance information to the traveling public PERFORMANCE MEASURE Time it takes to respond to unplanned incidents with 511, Facebook,twitter,websites,email/text alerts GOAL Respond to unplanned impacting events within 5 minutes REQUIRED STAFF Operations Board members, SRTMC Manager, SRTMC staff,SRTMC IT Manager,field units MEASURED Time for operators to respond from verification to traveler information posting. Measured and reported on quarterly basis -Complete SRTMC video connection to STA's fixed route dispatch center PERFORMANCE MEASURE Complete connection between SRTMC and STA's fixed route dispatch center GOAL Complete connections and verify operational capability by end of 2017 REQUIRED STAFF SRTMC Manager, SRTMC IT Manager,STA staff MEASURED Annual (end of year) 4. ITS Infrastructure support Support regional ITS operations by assisting partner agencies with installation, maintenance,and troubleshooting of ITS devices and communication infrastructure. -Assist joint venture agencies with setup of new ITS systems PERFORMANCE MEASURE Joint venture agency staff are satisfied with SRTMC Manager/SRTMC IT Manager response GOAL SRTMC Manager or SRTMC IT Manager respond to support requests within 24 hours REQUIRED STAFF SRTMC Manager,Joint Venture Agencies staff, SRTMC IT Manager MEASURED Satisfaction survey semi-annually -Assist joint venture agencies with troubleshooting ITS networks PERFORMANCE MEASURE Joint venture agency staff are satisfied with SRTMC IT Manager response GOAL SRTMC IT Manager respond to support/troubleshooting requests within 2 hours REQUIRED STAFF SRTMC Manager,Joint Venture Agencies staff, SRTMC IT Manager MEASURED Satisfaction survey semi-annually 5. Financial stewardship Operate efficiently and cost effectively by carefully controlling operational, administrative, and capital expenditures. Plan for future funding requirements. -Build manageable spend plans for each federal grant and WSDOT Traffic Operations funds PERFORMANCE MEASURE Complete work plan and spend plans by August of the calendar year GOAL Complete by August of the calendar year REQUIRED STAFF Operations Board members,SRTMC Manager, MEASURED Annual (September) -Develop monthly reports to show grant expenditures PERFORMANCE MEASURE SRTMC Operations Board satisfaction with timeliness/quality of monthly financial reports GOAL 100%SRTMC Operations Board satisfaction REQUIRED STAFF Operations Board members,SRTMC Manager, MEASURED Monthly -Develop long term cost estimates for SRTMC maintenance and operations PERFORMANCE MEASURE Long term SRTMC maintenance and operations costs are identified GOAL Complete by end of 2017 REQUIRED STAFF Operations Board members, SRTMC Manager, SRTMC staff MEASURED Annual(end of year) FUNDING SOURCES ■ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)/Surface Transportation Program (STP) Funds (infrastructure, Maintenance and Operations, SRTMC Manager position, SRTMC Supervisor position,SRTMC IT Manager, and one SRTMC Operator position) ■ WSDOT Traffic Operations Funds (5 permanent SRTMC Operator positions, and 1 permanent part time SRTMC Operator position. • Partner Funds were not collected in 2016. The remaining partner funds from previous years are being applied to Fiscal Year 2017 and are used at the Operations Board discretion for maintenance and operations of the SRTMC. Use of CMAQJSTP Funds to support SRTMC operations is approved by all joint venture agencies. The infrastructure and four staff positions are funded through federal dollars secured through agency coordination with WSDOT Toll Credits used for the match. FUND SOURCE FUNDING INITIAL AMOUNT REMAINING AMOUNT PURPOSE 2011 CMAQ SRTC 10-01 Equipment $978,500 $342,000 STP SRTC WS021 Maintenance and $1,225,000 $806,000 operations CMAQ ATMS Replacement ATMS systems $1,786,000 $1,418,056 engineering and replacement 2017-2019 STP Non- Future $1,267,900 $1,267,900 Roadway maintenance and operations WSDOT Traffic Operations Maintenance and $730,000 $372,440 funds (2015-2017 Operations biennium) Partner Funds $56,608 $56,608 SPOKANE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT CENTER BUDGET 2017 11111PP ' . �: • "-;itiri A. a .'a min :-.4 f 4 1 _v .71.,4, �a �i *V IN II.UN 0`• msµ* ' R . Mamma Mem In[IIV WINN HOMO,Ur MI .- is nom! - __i "S0.yf•. SPOKANEREC;IOWA1_ Prepared by: A ) L it i V r61) Spokane Regional Transportation 119 Management Center Operations Board - .Z. _ 221 West First Avenue Suite 310 TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT CENTER Spokane, WA 99201. VISION Aspire to facilitate for the safe and predictable movement of people and goods throughout Spokane County. MISSION The Spokane Regional Transportation Management Center(SRTMC) is a team of professionals working 24/7 with multiple jurisdictions to deliver reliable transportation information services, locally and regionally, in order to create a safe and efficient travel experience for everyone. PURPOSE -SRTMC The Spokane Regional Transportation Management Center (SRTMC) is an organization that was created to help with the safe and predictable movement of people and goods throughout Spokane County. In addition, monitoring of Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Eastern Region facilities outside of Spokane County occurs through the SRTMC.The SRTMC's main purpose is to provide traveler information and traffic management services on our transportation system to allow a seamless multi-modal commute across jurisdictional boundaries. This is accomplished through the use of intelligent transportation system (ITS) devices, the SRTMC website, twitter, Facebook, 511, and roving incident response trucks (IRT). The SRTMC is also the regional focal point for ITS architecture planning, development, and implementation. Having a single organization leading this effort allows the region to better manage current capacity and to give multiple jurisdictions one voice when it comes to pursuing limited funding. -SRTMC Operations Board The SRTMC Operations Board is a governing body comprised of professional representatives from the City of Spokane (COS), City of Spokane Valley (COSV), Spokane County, Spokane Transit Authority (STA), WSDOT, and Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) as an ex-officio member. The Operating Board's main purpose is to oversee the management and operation of transportation facilities within Spokane County for mutual public benefit. This is accomplished through coordination of transportation system operations between partnering agencies in an effort to optimize regional resources. Monthly meetings of the SRTMC Operating Board and regular updates to the ITS Implementation Plan support these efforts. This coordination helps to ensure the optimal use of limited local, state and federal resources. Coordination at the state level also occurs with adjacent jurisdictions such as the Idaho Transportation Department and other Washington State TMCs. PARTICIPANTS The primary public agency participants in the Spokane Regional Transportation Management Center include: Agency SRTMC Operations SRTMC Operations Board Representative Board Alternate City of Spokane Andy Schenk Valla Melvin City of Spokane Valley Sean Messner Ryan Kipp Spokane County Nathan Thompson Barry Greene Spokane Regional Eve Nelson Kevin Wallace Transportation Council Spokane Transit Authority Fred Nelson Steve Blaska WSDOT Glenn Wagemann Robert Blegen CY 2017 Budget Summary The SRTMC prepares and adopts a proposed budget for each calendar year. The SRTMC Operations Board recommends approval of the budget to participating agency executives. The agency executives are the approving authority for the SRTMC annual budget. The annual budget may be amended by vote of the agency executives, provided such amendment does not require additional budget appropriation, or by joint approval of the executives where such amendment does require additional member agency budget appropriation. Financial Management Practices The SRTMC prepares a budget for financial planning purposes. It is used only as a planning tool with no legal requirement to amend the budget as factors change throughout the year. The budget and Work Plan are interconnected as changes to one impact the other. Any changes are presented for review and approval by the Operations Board. The SRTMC Manager reports financial activity monthly to the Operations Board for their approval. The SRTMC is funded through multiple sources. These sources include federal grants, WSDOT traffic operation funds and partner agency dues. The SRTMC Manager as a representative of WSDOT is responsible for managing the funds through an interlocal agreement. It should be noted that an indirect cost plan is not necessary for the operations of the SRTMC. The Operations Board inquired about the need for an indirect cost plan, in which the SRTMC Manager contacted Mr. Rick Judd (FHWA Financial Manager — Washington Division) for clarification. Mr.Judd provided direction that the operation and maintenance of the SRTMC is a unique situation, and that ail associated costs for operations and maintenance can be billed directly to federal aid agreements (federal grants) identified for such purposes. Therefore, an indirect cost plan is not necessary. Dues have historically been collected from SRTMC participating agencies. The Operations Board decided that collecting dues in 2015 and 2016 wasn't necessary since there was a surplus in the account. Since the surplus has not been utilized, the Board has decided to not collect dues for 2017 as well. The current funds in that account are $56,608. They are currently being kept as a cash reserve and will be used for necessary grant matches or emergent needs as voted on by the Operations Board. It is anticipated that participating member dues will need to be collected again in the future at an annual cost of $15,000 per participant. Any future collection of dues will need at least a 75 percent approval vote by the SRTMC Executive Board. It should be noted that at the current spend rate the awarded federal grants are projected to be expended between October 2020 and March 2021. The grants were originally projected to be fully expended by December 2019. CY 2017 Operations and Maintenance Revenue Estimate The CY 2017 estimate for operations and maintenance revenue is $973,113 (Table 1). As shown below, 58% of the revenues included in the CY 2017 Budget are provided by federal sources and the remaining 42%are made up by WSDOT traffic operation funds. Table 1: CY 2017 Operations and Maintenance Estimated Revenue STP SRTC WS021 (annualized) $ 563,728 WSDOT Traffic Operation Funds 409,385 TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES $973,113 CY 2017 Operations and Maintenance Expenditure Estimate The CY 2017 estimate for operations and maintenance expenditures (Table 2) are divided into the following five divisions: 1) Labor; 2) Rent; 3) Monthly Expenses; 4) Non-engineering services; and 5) Software licenses/Hardware. Table 2 below provides a breakdown of expenses by these categories. Table 2: CV 2017 Operations and Maintenance Estimated Expenditures Labor $ 878,480 Rent 20,760 Monthly Expenses 9,000 Non-engineering services 1,225 Software licenses/Hardware 63,648 TOTAL ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES $973,113 CY 2017 SRTMC Project Revenue Estimate The CY 2017 estimate for project revenue is$1,760,056 (Table 3). Table 3: CY 2016 Project Estimated Revenue 2011 CMAQ SRTC 10-01 $ 342,000 ATMS Replacement 1,418,056 TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUE $1,760,056 CY 2017 Project Expenditure Estimate The CY 2017 estimate for project expenditures (Table 4) are divided into the following three divisions: 1) Engineering services (ATMS); 2) Equipment procurement; and 3) ATMS procurement. Table 4 below provides a breakdown of expenses by these categories. Table 4: CY 2017 Project Estimated Expenditures Engineering services (ATMS) $ 68,209 Equipment procurement 342,000 ATMS Procurement 1,349,847 TOTAL ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES $1,760,056 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 25, 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: Sullivan Road West Bridge Replacement Project Update BACKGROUND: The purpose of this memorandum is to provide Council with an update on the status of the Sullivan Road West Bridge Replacement project. The Phase 1 project was completed in 2014 and included improvements in Sullivan Park to replicate facilities that would be disrupted by the bridge construction activities, such as the picnic shelter, drinking fountain, and grass open space area. This work also included a new buried irrigation system to serve both the expanded and existing grass open space areas. Construction of the Phase 2 project began in September 2014. The project schedule has been divided into six major stages. Transition from one stage to the next generally aligns with significant traffic configuration changes. The early morning hours of this past Tuesday, October 18, 2016 marked the beginning of the sixth and final stage of the project when northbound traffic was moved back into its permanent location on the east (northbound) bridge. Traffic has been using the new west (southbound) bridge since early August 2016. With the exception of minor punch list items and permanent lane marker striping, the west bridge work is complete. The east bridge deck has been refurbished with a new concrete overlay and the cast-in-place concrete barrier between the traffic lanes and the sidewalk has been reconstructed. Reinstallation of the pedestrian rail panels along the east edge of the east bridge is in progress. Asphalt grind and overlay work was recently completed in the northbound lanes of Sullivan Road from the north end of the east bridge to Flora Pit Road. This work was added to the project via a change order and paid for through the City's Street Preservation fund (Fund 311). The change order area addresses a small gap between the Sullivan bridge project area and the 2011 Sullivan street preservation project. Some traffic lanes along Sullivan Road will be closed periodically for the next few weeks to provide construction staging areas for activities such as reconstruction of the median islands at the ends of the bridges; final concrete pavement, curb, and sidewalk work; and removal of the temporary walkway from the east bridge. The Centennial Trail realignment change order grading, paving, and retaining wall work is complete. Construction of the concrete stairway and sidewalk that connects the Trail with the street-level south overlook area is currently in progress. Construction of decorative block retaining walls to support the walkway from the street-level north overlook into Sullivan Park is in progress, as is the improved access from the park to the Spokane River for river users. Sullivan Park and roadside landscape restoration, storm water swale reconstruction work, and riverbank planting are scheduled to begin within the next week or so. Traffic signal modifications at the Sullivan/Indiana intersection have been completed and placed in service. New street lighting has been installed along Sullivan Road and pedestrian lighting has been mounted on the concrete barrier along the 10-foot wide multi-use walkway across the new west bridge. We anticipate these new lighting systems will be energized for the first time within the next few days. The new walkway will be open for use as soon as sidewalk work at each end of the bridge has been completed. Overall, the Phase 2 project is approximately 98 percent complete in terms of allotted Contract time and approximately 85 percent complete in terms of constructed value (total dollars earned versus Contract amount). The project is on track to be completed in its entirety in early December 2016. There is a possibility that weather conditions could extend some construction activities, such as final landscaping and touch up painting and staining, and final project closeout to spring 2017. Nonetheless, substantial completion (defined as the City having unrestricted use of the project facilities) is anticipated to occur in mid-November 2016. We are working with City PIO Carolbelle Branch on planning for a project completion dedication ceremony. Although final details are uncertain, the location will likely be at the new picnic shelter in Sullivan Park and we are aiming for the ceremony to occur sometime before the Thanksgiving holiday, following substantial completion. Change orders have added nearly $616,000 to the original $12.3 million Contract amount and 45 working days (about two months) to the Contract time. Centennial Trail realignment work accounts for approximately $510,000 of the added change order value. Two significant change orders account for the other $106,000. They include approximately $51,300 for Spokane County funded sewer work and nearly $54,500 for the City street preservation fund work discussed above. The total change order value represents about 5 percent of the original Contract amount. When the value of the Centennial Trail realignment work is omitted from the calculation, the total change order value represents less than 1 percent (0.86%) of the original Contract amount, which is remarkable for a project of this size and complexity. The following table provides a general summary of the current project budget status: Revenues: Expenditures: Federal BR Grant $ 8,000,000 PE $ 1,824,835 State TIB (CN) $ 3,500,000 RW $ 81,503 State FMSIB Grant (10% CN) $ 1,605,550 Phase 1 CN $ 181,145 Utilities $ 367,782 Phase 2 CN $13,846,762 City* $ 2,380,834 Total Est. Expenditures $15,934,245 CH2M $ 86,477 Total Funds Available $15,934,245 *Includes estimated revenues from Fund 311 for northbound street preservation work. OPTIONS: Information RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Information BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A STAFF CONTACT: Eric P. Guth, Public Works Director