2009, 08-11 Regular Meeting
AcENnA
SPOKANE VAi.LEY CITY COUNCII.
RFGULAR MEETING
Council iNZeeting #165
Tuesday, August 11, 2009 6:00 p.m.
Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers
11707 F Sprague Avenue
Council Requests Please Silence Your Cel! Plrones During Council Afeeting
CALL TO ORDER:
INVOC 4TION: E'astor Darrell Cole, Spokane Valley Wesleyan Church
PLEDGE OF ALLEGLANCE:
ROLL C A LL:
APPROVAI.. OF AGENDA:
INTRODUCTIOH OF SPECIAL GUESTS A,ND YItESENI'ATIONS:
COMMITTF E, BUARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS:
MAYOR'S REPORT:
YUBLIC C()N111'IENTS: This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any subject not on the agenda
for action. When you come to the pociium, please state your name and address for the record and limit
remarl:s to three minutes.
1. PUBGiC HE 4R1NG: 201 0 Budget Hearing - Ken Thompson
l. PUBLIC HE.ARING: Cable Franchise - Morgan Koudelka ~
3. COriSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any
member of Council may ask that an item be removed hom the Consent Agenda to be considered
separately.
a. Approval of the follawing claim vouchers:
VOUC1-EIZ LIST DA'I`E WNOUCI-IER NUMBFRS: ~ TOTAL AMOUNT
07-23-2009 17924-17980, & 722090008 ~ $11235,723.53
~
07-24-2009 ~ 17981-17993 ~ $247,169.30
07-34-2409 ~ 17994-18055 ~ $752,047.96
07-30-2009 ~ 18056-18064 ~ $49,295.26
08-03-2009 ~ 18061-18068 ~ $19,33 8.26
~ GRAN"D TOTAL ~ $2,303.574.31
b. Approval of Payrall for pay period ending July 31, 2009: $368,893.23
c. Approval of July 21, 2009 Council Study Session Meeting Minutes
d. Approval of July 23, 2009 Council Minutes ot'Joint Meeting with Spokane City
e. Approval of July 28, 2009 Regular Council Mzeting Minutes
f. Approval of August 4, 2009 Special Council Meeting Minutes, Executive Session
g. Approval of August 4, 2009 Council Study Session Meeting Minutes
Council Agenda 08-11-49 Regulnr Meeting Page 1 af 2
rEw svsnvESS:
4. Second Reading I'roposed Interim Ordinance 09-015, Development Agreement (CPA 01-09) -
Mike Connelly [public eomment]
5. rirst Reading Proposed Ordinance 09-01 fi to Amend SVMC 3.50, Small Works - Cary Driskell
[public comnient)
6. Motion Consideration: Mayoral Appointment, Ian Robertson to the Convention Center and Visitor's
Bureau - Mayor Munson (public comment)
7. Motian Consideration: Bai)ot Proposition - Mayor Munson
"Spokane County Proposition No. l: Renewal of Spokane County Criminal Justice and
Public Safety Sales Tax.
State law authorizes voters to approve the imposition of a one-tenth of one percent counry- ~
wide sales and use tax, the proceeds to be used bv 5pokane County and the Cities and towns ~
therein exclusivzly for Criminal Justice and Public Safety purposes. Should the Board of ~
County Commissioners of Spokane County, as authorized by RCW $2.14.450, renew the
imposition of a one-tenth of one percent couoty-wide sales and use tax commencing January 1,
2010 and terminating March 31, 2020, the proceeds ta be used by Spokane County and the
Cities and Towns therein exclusively for Criminal Justice and Public Safety Purposes'?"
(public commentj I'
h
I~
PLTBLIC COMMENTS: This is an oppvrtunity for the public to speak on any subject not on the agenda
for action. When you come to the podium, please state your name and address for the recorcl and limit "
rcmarks to three minutes. ~
ADMINISTI2.aTIVE REPORT:
8. Preliminary Budget Prescntation - Uave Mercier
9. Code Amendment G'TA-0 1-09 - Karen Kendail
10. Site Selector llgreement - Scatt Kuhta
11. Proposed Panhandling Ordinance - Cary Driskell ~
INFORMATION ONLY: (1011,rc?i be reporrecl or d11C1lSSPd)
12. Tourism Promotion Agency lnterlocal Agreement
13. EXECUTIYE SESSION: Labur Negotiations
ADJOURNIVIENT
FUf URE SCHEDULE (»ieeti»g sclreclrrl~.~ is al►s,ay:s subject to chvtige)
Regular CouncilMeetings are generally Iteld lnd anJ 4~"' Titesdays, beginning at 6: 00 p.in
Council Study Sessioiis are generally held 1"; 3'd and Stlr Titesdays, begrnning at 6:00 p.nr.
NOTICE: Individuals planning tn attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing, or other
impairments, picasc cantact the City Clcrk at (509) 921-1040 as socm as possible so that arrangements may be made.
Cauncil Agenda 08-11-09 Rcgutar Mecting Page 2 of 2
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: August 11, 2009 City Manager Sign-off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ~ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: 2010 Budget.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: State budget law
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: No formal council action has been taken on the 2010
budget. A proposed budget is being reviewed by the City Manager. The City Manager is
expected to present his preliminary budget to the council later this evening. This information I
was discussed at the July 28, City Council meeting.
BACKGROUND: Each year staff prepares estirnates of proposed revenues and expenditures
for the coming year. These estimates are presented to the City Council at a public hearing.
State budget law requires we make our projections known and conduct a public hearing to
consider input from the public. Special mention is required of the property tax levy. The
comparison below reflects the 2009, and estimated 2010 property tax levies. The tax rate is
expected to be near $1.54/thousand dollars of assessed value with an assessed value near
$7.06 billion.
2009 2010
Prop. tax levy $10,500,000 $10,799,500
These 2010 estimates reflect an increase in the dollars levied of $299,500 (2.9%) over 2009.
The City's actual 2010 levy may be more or less than shown. Other significant changes in
General Fund revenue estimates include an estimated decrease in sales tax receipts of
$3,480,000 and an estimated decrease in planning/building fees of $388,000. Total ,
expenditures are expected to be down in 2010 because the economy has slowed and less real
estate excise tax is available for city match on capital improvements. Capital improvements
comprise about 20% of the total budget. This is the first of three public hearings on the 2010
budget.
OPTIONS: State law requires a hearing on 2010 estimated revenues and expenditures, to
gather input from citizens.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: No action is needed at this time. '
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This information will be incorporated into the 2010 city
budget and may be modified prior to budget adoption
STAFF CONTACT: Ken Thompson, Finance Director
2 oio BUDGET 9
200
AUGUST J 1 ~
■
PUBLIC ■ E DIRECTOR
pso FINANC
N
~
KEN THO
1 m+ ion
about$1o
Resources „ ota 101 m~ ~
- ion
ota Expenditures -ab~ut $
p or 2.9%
Q:.ah:r5,:io~
u 300
_ evy p
r : tax
prop. .
~o
3.q. mi
x down . n
$
000
sa es ta , d
~ .g $388,
ing J ees do~n
n f
bu~
p ann,
`nter Weather ops.
udeS ~ ,
f und inc pro.ects
Street ita dwn
~ down,
esta cap
e
cise tax we f, ~ne tun
t~ eX Rea as
s tO change nu~ber nput
tfhe Expect ic s
dd~ ~tion pub ta g ather ' ~ heari-
g
a ,
wo a
City of Spokane Valley
Proposed Budget
2010
2010
2008 2009 Proposed
Actuals Budget Budget
001 - General Fund
General Fund Resources:
Beginning Balance $ 13,747,197 $ 12,116,644 $ 20,475,606
Property Tax 9,836,088 10,675,000 10,969,500
Sales Tax 18,322,110 19,380,000 15,900,000
Gambling Tax 846,201 525,000 425,000
Franchise Fees/Business Registration 1,006,842 964,550 1,100,000
State Shared Revenues 1,455,393 1,257,550 1,450,000
Service Revenues 2,094,328 1,965,000 1,500,000
Fines and Forfeitures 1,750,064 1,300,000 1,600,000
Recreation Program Fees 599,726 512,070 650,000
Miscellaneous &(nvestment Interest 662,956 418,241 561,350
Transfers 158,890 174,900 960,000
Total General Fund Resources $ 50,479,795 $ 49,288,955 $ 55,591,456
General Fund Expenditures
Legislative Branch 261,778 330,900 322,120
Executive and Legislative Support 883,300 1,033,321 1,063,842
Public Safety 17,814,952 20,841,084 22,062,268
Deputy City Manager 447,928 661,420 670,970
Finance 653,432 878,437 1,023,373
Human Resources 162,956 236,285 248,435
Public Works 767,709 817,068 893,793
Community Development Admin 270,000 e 331,284 323,205
Planning 950,000 e 1,062,143 1,124,206
Building 1,159,808 e 1,325,213 1,338,320
Engineering 770,000 e 870,199 791,719
Library 6,666 20,000 -
Parks & Rec. Admin. & Maint. 858,179 956,933 987,556
Recreation 220,560 232,187 237,846
Aquatics ' 294,649 403,616 422,550
Senior Center 78,931 94,194 85,503
CenterPlace 1,058,519 1,125,110 1,262,578
General Government 23,820,428 18,069,561 22,733,173
Total General Fund Expenditures 50,479,795 49,288,955 55,591,456
e these divisions estimated, total is correct
08/05/2009 2:03 PM
CIty Of Sp4k811E V8lle}I
2010 Budget
zvia
2808 2009 Prapased
Ikctuals Budgek Budqet
101 -$treet Fund 9eginning Fund 8alance ~ 3,779,759 $ 1,542,000 $ 2,277,0130
Street Fund Revenues
Property Taxes 1,025 - -
Matdr Fuel (Gas) Tex 2,093,6UB 2,050.000 1,904.440
Intertund Interest - - -
Inveslmenl lnlerest 53.103 125,004 15,000
Inserfund Transters 434,000 1,175,000 -
Insurance Premiums & RecuveCies 4,646 - -
UlililyT6x - 2,500,000 2,800,000
M3scellaneous Revenue 26,455 - 712,fl5Cl
Tatal Street Fund Revenues 6.327,676 7.392,000 7,704,050
Street Fund Expsnditures
5alaries, Vti+ages, 8 Benefits 338,101 413,112 515,868
5uppries 63.492 27.784 29e200
Services & Charges 4.559.593 3,724.204 5,106,346
Infergavemmentak Paymenls - - -
Inkerfund Transfers 59,3110 5,226,900 1.992,636
Capii2d Outlay 24.594
Total Stmv# Furad Expvnditures 5,045,976 7,392,000 1.704.O50
Street Fund Estimated Fund Balance $ 1,282,560 S - 5 2,277,000
2014
2048 2009 PropGSCd
Actuals Budcl2t Budgei - - •
IC2 - Arterkai 5treet Fund fleginning Fund Balance $ 641,095 ~ 599,000 $ - . .
Arterial Street Fund Revenues
Hfofor Fuel (Cas) Tax - - -
Invesirnent Interesl 16,431 10,000
-
From 5pokane Couniy 50,02 - -
Tokal Aeterlaf Street Revenues 677,628 591,004 -
Arterial Street Fund F-xpendRkures
Capital 4uUay - • -
Interfund Transfers 316,821 597.004 -
Totak Arterlal Sireet Fund E xpenditures 318,621 891,006 -
Arterial Street Estim ated F u n d Balance $ 360,807 $ - $ -
09I05l2009 2,03 PM 1lSV-FS2llJserslcbainbridgelagendapacl(el 08-11-0912O14 Praposed Budgel hearing"409,x1s
. City af Spokane Valley
2010 Budget
2470
2408 2069 Prnposed
Actuals Budpet Budpet
143 - Trails & Paths Beginn]ng Fund Balance S 33,744 ~i 34,000 $ -
7rails & Paths Revenues
Motor Fuel (Gas) Tax - Slreet Transfer 9,692 - -
Yransfer from SEreel Fund 8,000 8,000
Inveslmen! [nterast 974 1,000 -
Tatal Trafls & Paths Revenues 44,608 43,000 8,400
Trails & Pakhs Expenditures
IF Tfansfer for TreilslPaEhs Cap Prj 12.167 43,000 8,000
Capiial puilay - - -
Total TralCs 8 Paths Expenditures 12,187 43,000 $,pOD
7ra9fs & Pakhs Estimated Fund balance $ 32,419
$ - $ -
2070
2408 2aD9 Praposed
Ac#uals Budqet 6udpet
'145 - HateTlMatel Beg inning Fund BaTance s 391,093 $ 60,000 $ 20,000
HatellMotel R¢venues
HoteVMatel Yax 467.089 512,000 380,400
• InveslmenC [nterest 10,280 9,000 -
Total HotellNlotel Ravenues 477,3$9 600,000 400,000
HoteTlMutef Expenditures
Cnterfund Transfers 121,248 90,000 90,000
Tounsm PromotLan 488,363 510.000 310,000
To#al FiOteUMa#e! Expenditures 809,571 644,000 404,000
HotellMate1 Est;mat,ed Fund Balance $ 258.891 $ - $ -
2010
2008 2009 Propased
actuais au~qcrt eudq$e
120 - GenterRlate Operaking Reserva Beg Fund Balance 3 338,568 $ 330,400 $ 947,400
Cen#erPlace Operating Fteserwe Revenues
lnveslmenllnlerest 8,228 10,000 5,400
Interfund TranSfer - - -
Tokal CenterPlace Operating Reserve Revenues 8,22$ 340,000 352,D04
CenterPlace Operating Reserve Ea¢penditures
Reserue far CenkerPlace Operations - 340,DC0 352,000
Total C enterPlace OperatTng Reserve Ezpenditures - 340,006 352,000
CenterPlace Qperating Reserve Estimated Fund 9alanca 3 346.794 ~ - ~ -
08105f2049 2_03 PM IISV-FS21Uurslcbainbndgelagendapacket 08-11-49L2010 Proposed BudgeC hearing13-04-0$.x1s
City of Spokane Valley
2010 Budget
2010
2008 2009 Proposed
Actuals Budqet Budpet
121 - Service Level Stabilization Reserve Beg Fund Balance $ 5,242,901 $ 5,300,000 $ 5,300,000
Service Level Stabilization Reserve Revenues
Investment Interest 127,078 100,000 100,000
Interfund Transfer - - -
Total Service Level Stabilization Reserve Revenues 127,078 5.400,000 5,400,000
Service Level Stabilizatlon Reserve Expenditures
Reseive for Service Level Stabilization - 5,400,000 5,400,000
Total Servlce Level Stabilization Reserve Expendltures - 5,400,000 5,400,000
Service Level Stabilization Raserve Est. Fund Balance $ 5.369,979 S - $ -
2010
2008 2009 Proposed
Actuals Budqet Budqet
122 - Winter Weather Reserve Beg Fund Balance 5 561,429 S 500,000 5 500,000
Winter Weather Reserve Revenues
Investment Interest 13,608 - -
Intertund Transfer - - -
Total Winter Weather Reserve Revenues 575,037 500,000 - '
Winter Weather Reserve Expenditures
Reserve for Winter Weather 430,000 500,000 500.000
Total Winter Weather Reserve Expenditures 430,000 500,000 500,000
Winter Weather Reserve Estimated Fund Balance $ 145,037 $ - $ -
2010
2008 2009 Proposed
Actuals Budget Budget
123 - Civic Facil. Replacement
Civic Facil. Replac. Beg Fund Balance S - $ 355,000 S 825,000
Civic Facit. Replac. Revenue
Investment Interest $ 9,726 $ 5,000 $ 5,000
Transfers In $ 397,000 $ 407,000 $ 407,000
Civic Facfl. Replac. Revenue $ 408,728 $ 767,000 $ 1,237,000
Civic Facil. Replac. Expenditures
Capital Replacement $ - 5 767,000 $ 1,237,040
Civic Facil. Reptac. Est. Fund Balance $ 406,726 S - $ -
08105/2009 2.03 PM 1\SV-FS21Userslcbainbridgelagendapacket 08-11-09\2010 Proposed Budget hearing8-04-09.x1s
City of Spokane Valley
2010 Budget
2010
2008 2009 Proposed
Actuals Budqet Budqet
204 - Debt Service Beginning Fund Balance $ . $ . $ _
Debt Service Revenues
FaciliGes DisUict Payment 412.520 440,000 440,000
Interfund Transfers 785,127 210,000 210.000
Total Debt Sarvice Revenues 597,647 650,000 650,000
Debt Service Expenditures
Debt Senrice Payments 597,647 650,000 650,000
Total Debt Service Expenditures 597,647 650,000 650,000
Debt Service Estimated Fund Balance g _ $ _ $ _
0810512009 2:03 PM \1SV-FS21Userslcbainbridgelagendapacket 08-11-0912010 Proposed Budget heanng&04-09.x1s
City of Spokane Valley
2010 Budget
2010
2008 2009 Proposed
Actuals Budget Budpet
301 -Capital Projects Beginning Fund Balance $ 4,447,597 $ 4,848,000 $ 1,568,000
Capital Projects Revenues
REET1-Taxes 1,001,137 1,000,000 380,Q00
Investment Interest 101,533 - -
Total Capital Projects Revenues 1,702,670 5,948,000 1,948,000
Capital Projects Expenditures
Intergovernmental Services 2,998,878 - -
Capital Outlay - - -
Interfund Transfers - 5,948,000 1,948.000
Total Capital Projects Expenditures 2,996,878 5,948.000 1,948,000
Capital Projects Estimated Fund Baiance $ 2,553,389 $ - S -
2010
2008 2009 Proposed
Actuals Budpet Budget
302 - Spec Capital Projects Beglnning Fund Balance S 5,138,480 S 1,880,000 $ 232,000
SpQC Capital Projects Revenues
REET 2- Taxes 985,625 1,000,000 380,000
Investment Interest 114,264 100,000 -
Total Spec Capital Projects Revenues 1,099,889 2,980,000 612,000
Spec Capital Projects Expenditures
Capital Outlays - - -
Interfund Transfers 1,449,097 2,980,000 612.000
Total Spec Capital Projects Expenditures 1,449,097 2,980,000 612,000
Spec Capital Projects Estimated Fund Balance $ 4,787,253 5 - $ -
08105l2009 2 03 PM 11SV-FS21Userslcbainbridgelagendapacket 08-11-0912010 Propased BudQet hearing8-0409.x1s
City of Spokane Valley
_ 2010 Budget
2010
2008 2009 Proposed
Actuals Budget Budqet
303 - Street Capital Projects Beginning Fund Balance S (120,260) $ - $ -
Street CapiWl Prajects Revenues
Com Dev. Grants - 300,000 300,000
Developer Contribution 815,635 - 200,000
Contributions - Granls 2,224,276 8,803,000 7,779,000
Interfund Transfer 2,879,393 7,622,000 2,293,000
Total Street Capital Projects Revenues 5,919,304 16,725,000 10,572,000
Streat Capital Projects Expenditures
16th Avenue - Projecl 2 2,895 - -
Appleway- University- Evergreen - 937,000 -
Broadway - Fancher 6,083 608,000 -
Broadway Avenue Safety Project P[nes- Park - 933,000 834,000
Argonne Road -190 to Trent 576,000
Indiana ext. 3600' w/o Sullivan 1,874,000
Sullivan Rd., PE oniy 298,000
Park Road -#2 PE only 246,000
Evergreen /Sprague Intersectian PCC 19,562 1,133,000 -
Indiana /Suflivan tntersecUan PCC - 1.342,000 1,342,000
Broadvrayl5ullivan IntersecUon - - 1,230,000
Park Road -#2 (PE Only) - Braadway to Indiana - 352,000 -
Pines/Mansfield. Wilbur Rd. to Pines 3,041,226 3,368,000 -
Pines/Sprague Intersection PCC 19,818 742,000 -
Sprague Resurface - E'green to Sull. ADA - 2,856,000 1,944,000
SpraguelConklin Signal 3,558 - -
SpragueRvicOonald PCCP Intersection 18,230 - -
SulhvaNSprague PCC - 861.000 1,678,000
WSDOT Urban Ramp Projects 26,945 300,000 -
Other Preservation Projects 505,627 1.293,000 -
Contingenq - 500,000 250,000
241h Avenue - Sullivan to 22nd 1,050,828 - -
PAisc. Road Paveback Projecis 1,030,717 1,500,000 300.000
Total Streot Capital Projects Expenditures 5,725.589 16,725,000 10,572,000
Street Capital ProJects Estimated Fund Balance S 73,455 S - $ -
2010
2008 2009 Proposed
Actuals Budqet Budget
304 - Mlrabeau Projects Boginning Fund Balance $ 396,511 $ 360,000 $ -
Mirabeau Projects Revenues
Donations - -
Proceeds from LT Debt - - -
Insurance Recoveries - - -
Other Misce[laneous Revenue -
Investment Interest 8,859 10.000 -
Total Mirabeau Projects Revenues 8,859 10,000 -
Mirabeau Projects Expenditures
Capital0utlays - 370,000 -
Total Mirabeau Projects Expenditures - 370,000 -
Mirabeau Projects Estimated Fund Baiance S 405,370 S - $ -
0810512009 2:03 PM 1\SV-FS21Userslcbainbridgelagendepacket 08-11-0912010 Proposed Budget hearing8-04-09.x1s
City of Spokane Valley
2010 Budget
2010
2008 2009 Proposed
Actuals Budget 8udget
306 - CDBG Fund Beglnning Fund Balance $ - $ - $ -
CDBG Fund Revenues
Grant Proceeds - 300,000 300,000
Miscellaneous Revenue - - -
Interfund Transfer - - -
Investrnent Interest - - -
Total COBG Fund Revenues - 300,000 300,000
CDBG Fund Expenditures
Transfer to Capital - 300,000 300,000
ToWI COBG Fund Expenditures - 300,000 300,000
CDBG Fund Estimated Fund Balance S - $ - $ -
2010
2008 2009 Proposed
Actuals Budget Budget
307 - Capital Grants Fund Beginning Fund Balance $ (17,365) $ - $ -
Capital Grants Fund Revenues
Grant Proceeds 6,071,579 1,098,000 1,748,000 '
Develaper - - 648,000 .
Interfund Transfer 725,705 475,000 68,000 .
Total Capital Grants Fund Revenues 6,797,284 1.573,000 2,465,000
Capital Grants Fund Expenditures
44th Ave Pathway° Woodruff Rd. to Sands Rd. 21,495 328,000 -
Appleway Blvd - Tschirley Road to Hodges 4,970,634 - -
Appleway/SpraguelDishman ITS 190-Dishman-066 32,577 124,000 -
Argonne Road Overtay - Indiana to Monigomery 548 - -
BroadwayAvenue Inlay: I-90 EB Ramps to Park Rd. 551,785 - -
Broadvray Fancher PCC -067 58.160 761,000 -
Broadway - Moore to Flora 83,992 80,000 2,485,000
Contingency 30.510 300,000 -
Park Road - Project 2: Broadway to Indiana 354 - -
Signal Controlter Upgrades (SRTC 06-22) 179,142 - -
Sprague Ave ADA 4,232 - -
SpraguelBowdish PCC Intersec6on 646,030 - -
Sullivan Road PCC. Mission to I-90 EB Ramps 410 - -
Totai Capital Grants Fund Expenditures 6,779,869 1,573,000 2,465,000
Capital Grants Fund Estimated Fund,Balance $ 50 $ - $ -
08/0512009 2:03 PM 11SV-FS21Userslcbainbridgelagendapacket 08-11 -09\201 0 Proposed Budget hearing8-04-09.x1s
Gity of Spokane Valley
, 2010 Budget
I
2010
2008 20179 Proposed
Actuals Budnet Budqet
308 - Barker Bridge Fund Beginnirlg Fund Balance $ - $ - $ -
Barker Bridge Fund Revenues
GeankPraceeds 1,988,235 5.765.400 1.470,000
Tr'i~ngfer frOrn Spe~ciak Gapital Pnaj Fund 14,099 812,000 239,Od0
Qavelaper - 58,000
Tota kOarker8ridge Fu nd Revenues 2.002.334 5.977,040 1.787,040
Barker Bridge Fund Expenditures
Bridge Rewnstruelion 2,002,334 5,977,000 1.767,040
Tatal Barker Bridge Fund Expenditures 2.002.334 5,977,000 1,767,040
Barkur BrRdge F und Estimated Fund BaEance $ - $ - ~ -
2010
2008 2009 Prapased
ACkuals BLtdget Budget
309 -Parks Gapitial Projects Fund Beginning Fund ealanca 5 1,346,036 $ 550.004 S 523.000
Parks Capital Projects Fund Rerenues
Parks GranE - - 200,40D
State Ree & CQnservation GranY Rev 1,453,059 -
Cantributianf'rom Spokane Caunty - - -
Transferfrrn Ihe General Fund 20,000 70,000 97,000
Interfund Transfers 1,350,225 600,00a -
Investrnent lnteresl 45,416 - -
Total Parks Gapikal Prajects Fund Revenues $ 2.838.700 $ 1,220.000 $ 820,400
Parbcs Capital projects Fund Expend3turas
Park Land Acqu€sifian - - 225,000
7errace View Shelter - - 80,000
Greeriacres - - 364.1740
Contingency - - i5,~Q0
Swimming Pao1s 2,fifl0,T27 555,000 -
Various lmprovements 1C3,577 175,040 -
Greenacres - 204,000 -
Valley Mission Park , 108,993 750,000 -
Dkscovery (UnIversao Park 25,4E3 200,00D 200,000
Tatal Parks Capftal Projects Fund Expenditures 2,839,700 , 1,220.D00 $24,004
parks Gapital Prajects Fursd Estimated F und 8 alAnce S 1,346,038 6 - $ -
08f05#24{}9 2 03 PM 11SV-F521Userslabainbridgelagendapacket 08-11-09=10 Prnpased Budget ~earirig6-0409.x1s
City of Spokane Valley
2010 Budget
2010
2008 2009 Proposed
Actuals Budqet Budget
310 - Civic Facilities Capital Projects Fund Beginning Balance 5,782,478 5.800,000 5,770.000
Civic Buiidings Capital Projects Fund Revenues
Interfund Transiers - ' '
Investment Interest 138,410 - 30,000
Total Civic Buildings CapiWl ProJects Fund Revenues $ 138,410 $ 5,800,000 $ 5,800,000
Civic Buildings Capital Projects Fund Expenditures
Public Facilities 128,771 5,800,000 5,800,000
Total Civic Buildings CapiWl ProJects Fund Expenditures 128,771 5,800,600 5,600,000
Civic Buildings Capital Projects Estimated Fund Balance S 5.792,117 $ - $ -
2010
2008 2009 Proposed
Actuals Budpet Budget
402 - Stormwater Fund Beginning Balance $ 2,721,432 $ 1,800,000 $ 2,758,015
Stormwater Fund Revenues
Dept Ecology ' ' "
State Grants 25,495 - -
County Reimbursement - ' '
Stomnvater Management Fees 1,686,936 1,600,000 1,600,000
Investment Interest 57.820 40,000 40,000 Total Stormwater Fund Revanues 4,485,683 3,440,001) 4,398,015 Stormwater Fund Expenditures
Salaries & Wages 222,506 360,317 402,590
Supplies 27,719 25,980 29,980
Services & Charges 909,729 1,086,899 1,545,045
Capital0utlays 19,724 393,075 403,600
7ransfers and Endg BaL 234,748 1,573,729 2,016,600
Total Stormwater Fund Expenditures 1,414,426 3,440,000 4,398,015
Stormwater Estimated Fund Balance $ 3,071,257 $ - S -
08105/2009 2:03 PR4 1\SV-FS2\Userslcbainbridgelagendapacket 08-11-09U010 Proposed Budgei hearing8-0409.x1s
City of Spokane Valley
2010 Budget
2010
2008 2009 Proposed
Actuals Budpet Budpet
501 - ER&R Fund Beginning Balance 867,845 700,000 900,000 ,
ER&R Fund Revenues
Interfund Transfers - 50,000 10,000
Investment Interest 32.960 30,000 30,000
Totai ER&R Fund Revenues $ 900,805 $ 780,000 $ 940,000
ERBR Fund Expenditures
Computer replacement lease - - 35,000
Sofiware/Hardware replacement - - 37,000
Vehicle Reptacement - - 22,000
All other - 780,000 848,000
Oepreciation Expense - - -
Capital Outlay - - -
Total ER&R Fund Expenditures - 780,000 940.000
ERBR Estimated Fund Balance $ 900.805 s - $ -
2010
2008 2009 Proposed
Actuals Budget Budget
502 - Rlsk Management Fund Beginning Balance 15,434 30,000 28,000
Risk Management Fund Revenues
Investment Interesl 349 - 8,000
InteKund Transter 188,000 200.000 222.000
Total Risk Management Fund Revenues 5 203,783 $ 200,000 $ 258,000
Risk Management Fund Expenditures
Services & Charges 187,044 230,000 258,000
Total Risk Management Fund Expenditures 187,044 230,000 258,000
Risk Management Estimated Fund Balance $ 16,739 $ - $ -
08105I2009 2:03 PM \1SV-FS21Userslcbainbridgelagendapadcet 08-1 1-091201 0 Proposed Budget hearing&0409.x1s
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: August 11, 2009 City Manager Sign-off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business 0 public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Cable Franchise Public Hearing
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Federal Cable Act of 1984
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
Resolution 04-015 regarding cable franchise renewal proceedings and continuation of existing
franchise agreement; Update to Council June 9, 2009
BACKGROUND:
Cable franchises and the franchise renewal process are regulated by the federal government.
The Cable Act of 1984 allows for both a formal and informal renewal process.
The City has completed the ascertainment phase and needs assessment of the formal process
while continuing to negotiate with Comcast informally.
The attached draft franchise agreement is the result of negotiations between both parties.
OPTIONS: N/A
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Receive comments from public
BUDGETIFINANCIAL IMPACTS: 5% franchise fees ($900K in 2009 for general fund use),
Reimbursement for capital expenses related to public, educational, and governmental
programming, $.35/subscriber/month equal to approximately $100K per year.
STAFF CONTACT: Morgan Koudelka, Senior Administrative Analyst
ATTACHMENTS
Draft Cable Franchise Agreement with Comcast
CitvlComcast Revised Draft a, Date: 7114!2009
CI'Y'~ OF SPOKANE VA,LLEY
SP(]KANE C[}UNTY,'VVASHINGTON
ClRDT1HANCE N(). 09-
AN ORDIlNANCE Ok' T~ ~ITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COLTNTY,
WASBINGTON, GRANTIlNG A NDN-EXCLUSWE FRANCffiSE TO C[JMCAST QF ,
PFNNSYLVAIVIAIWASH1NGT0NIVEST VTRGIlVIA, LP, T~ CONSTRUCT,MAIINTAIlN AND
ClPERATE CERTAI1V F~CIELYTIES 'VVI'TIHN TIHE PUBLIC RIGH'TS-OF-WAY AND PUB.LIC
PROPER'TIES OF TELE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY.
WHEREAS, RCW 35A.47.040 autharizes the City ta grant, permit, and regLiiate nan-exclusive
franchises for the use of public streets, bridges or other public'ways, structures or places above vr be'low
tho sLlrface of the ground for railroads and other roufies and facilities far public canveyances, for poles,
conduits, ttEnnels, towers and structures, pipes and wires and appurtenances thereof f.or transmissian and
distribution of electf3cal energy, signais and ather methads of com,munication, for gas, steam and liquid
fiiels, for water, sewer and ather private and publicly owmed and operated facilities fcrr public service; and
VaEREAS, the gran# of such non-emolusive -franchises requires the appraving vote of at least a
rnajority of the entire City Council and publicativn at least ance in a newspaper of general circulation in
the Citys and
VVHEREAS, the Council finds that the grant ofthe Francbise cvntainad in ihis Ordinance, subject
to its terrns and canditions, is in the best in#erests of the gublic; and
VIIHEREA.S, in accordance vvith Sec#ion 626 of the Cable Comrnuntcations Policy A.c# o,f, 1954,
Grantee has requested renewal of its Cable Cornmunications Franchise Agreement, and after negotiak[ons
with Grantee, the City has determined that it is in the bes-t in#erest of the City and ats residents to renew
the Franchise Agreement with ~rantee; and,
WHMREAS, the City has, £ollowing required and reasona6le notice, conducted a full public
hearing, affarding all persons concerned with the analysis and consideration of the t~chnical ability,
financial coildition, legal qualifications and generai character ofthe Grantee; aiid,
V4IEREAS, the City, after stlch consideration, analysis and deliberation, has apprnved and found
suf,fi cieut the technical ab ility, fnanciai condition, lega1 qualificati on and character afthe Gra-nte e; an d,
V4HREAS, the City has also considered and analyzed the plans of the Ciratatee for the conl:inued
operation of a Gable 5ystem and found the same #o be adeguate and feasible in view of the needs and
requirernents of the City; anc~,
WHEREA,S, the City has determined that it is in the best interests of and consistent with ttle
health, safety and vvelfare of the citizens of the City to renew the Fra.nchi~e Agreement to the xr•antee to
Qperate aCable System within the conf nes of #he City and on the tezrns and conditions hereina.fter set
forth; and,,
WHEREAS, the Grantee has agteed to be bound by the condit.ians hereinafter set forth
_ NOW, Ti-1EREFO 1~, the City. Counci] Qf, the City of Spnkane VaiYey, Spokane County,
Washingtan, does ordain as foilows: Clydinance 09- Drafl C-able Franchise Pape 1of 29
Section 1. Definitions. For the purpose of this Ordinance, the following words and tertns ;
shall have the rneaning set forth beiaw:
"Basic Cable Service" shall mean any Service Tier which includes the lawful retransmission o-f local
teIevision broadcast signals and any public, educational, and governmental access pragramming
required by this Franchise Agreemen# ta be carried vn the basEC tier,
"CabIe Act" means the Cab1e Cornmunications 1'olicy Act of 1984, as amended by the Cabie Televisipn
Cansumer :Protectian and Competition Act of 1992, a.nd the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and any
amendments theretQ. .
"Cab1e Advisory Baard" sha]1 mean a City or regiona,l Cable Advisary Board as established by
ordinance or interlocal agreernent. "
"Cabxe Service" or "Service" shali mean (A) the one-way ixansrnission to Subscribers of {i} Video
Programming or (ii) Other Prograrnrning Service, and (B) Subscriber iilteraction, if any, which is
required far the selection or use of such Video Programming or Other Prvgramming Service.
iiCable System" ar "Sys#em" shall mean a Facility, cansisting ❑f aset of closed transmission pafhs
and associated signal generation, reception, and control equipment that is desi,gned to provide Ca'ble
Service which includes Video Prograrnrning and which is provided #o multiple Subscribers within a
corrtmunity, but sLich term shall not include:
(l) a facility fihat serves only to xerransmit the televisian signals of one (1) or rnare te]evasion
broadcast stations; . (2) afacility tiiat sez-ves only Subscr'kbers vvithout using any Public Right of Way;
(3) a facility of a carnmnn aarrier which is subject, in whole or in part, to the pravisions of 47
U.S.C. § 201 et seq., except #hat such facility shall be eansidered aCable System (other than for
purpases of 47 U',&C, § 541(c)) to the extent such facility is used in the transniission of Videa
Pro~rarr-r~nir~g directiy ta Subscribers, unless the exter~t af such use is solely ta provide interactive
on-demand services;
(4) an apen video system that camplies wi#h 47 U.S.C. § 573; nr
(5) a.ny facilities of any electric utility used salefy for aperating its electric utility system.
For the purpose of this Franchise, Cablr: Systern sba.ll rnean the Grantee's cable Facilities servicing
the C ity.
"Channel" shall mean a portion of the elecixomagnetic frequency spectrum which is used in a cable
system and which is capahle ofa televisian Channels as #elevision Channel is defined by the FCC.
"City" Yneans the City of Spokane Va11ey, aWash'mgton municipal corparation.
"City Manager" means the City Manager or designee.
"Complaint" shall mean a Subscriber contact with the C~xrantee t~ express a grievance or •
dissatisfactian concerning Cab]e Service. Conipiaints do not include matters not within the scope of '
Ordinance 09- Draft Cable Franchise Page 2 of 28
this Franchise Agreement. A Complaint may be verbal or in writing but need not include initial
contacts where an issue is promptly resolved to the Subscriber's satisfaction.
"Construction" or "Construct" shall mean digging, excavating, laying, extending, upgrading,
removing, and replacing of Facility.
"FCC" shall mean the Federal Communications Commission or any legally appointed or designated
agent or successor.
"Facility" or "Facilities" means all of the plant, equipment, fixtures, appurtenances, and other related
property necessary to furnish and deliver cable television services, including but not limited to wires,
cables, conductors, ducts, conduits, vaults, manholes, pedestals, amplifiers, appliances, and attachments,
necessary or incidental to the distr-ibution and use of cable television services.
"Franchise" shall mean the nonexclusive right and authority to Construct, Maintain, and operate a
Cable System through use of Public Rights of Way in the City pursuant to a contractual agreement
approved by the City Council and executed by the City and the Grantee.
"Franchise Area" shall mean the entire geographic area within the City as it is now constituted or may
in the future be constituted.
"Grantee" Comcast of Pennsylvania/Washington/West Virginia, LP, including any lawful successor,
transferee, or assignee of the original Grantee.
"Gross Revenues" means all revenue derived directly or indirectly by the Grantee, or by Grantee's
Affiliates, from the operation of Grantee's Cable System to provide Cable Services in the Franchise
Area. Gross Revenues include, by way of illustration and not limitation, monthly fees charged
Subscribers for Cable Services including Basic Service and all other Tiers of Cable Service; Pay-Per-
View Service; Cable Service installation, disconnection, change-in-service and reconnection fees, Leased Access Channel fees, late fees, payments received by the Grantee f.rom programmers for
carriage of Cable Services on the Cable System and recognized as revenue under generally accepted
accounting principles ("GAAP"), revenues from rentals of Cable System equipment such as
converters; advertising revenues (including local, regional, and a pro rata sbare of national advertising
carried on the Cable System in the Franchise Area) net of commissions due to advertising agencies
that arrange for the advertising buy and as recognized as revenue under GAAP; additional outlet fees,
Franchise Fees, and revenues from home shopping Channels. Gross Revenues shall not include (i)
Bad Debt, provided, however, that all or part of any such Bad Debt that is Nvritten off but
subsequently collected shall be included in Gross Revenues in the period collected; (ii) any Capital
Contribution referenced in subsections 13.8; (iii) any payments by the City to Grantee for I-Net
maintenance or expansion; or (iv) any taxes on services furnished by the Grantee which are imposed
directly on any Subscriber or user by the State, City or other governmental unit and which are
collected by the Grantee on behalf of said governmental unit. The Franchise Fees are not such a tax
and are therefore included in Gross Revenues.
"L,ockout Device" shall mean an optional mechanical or electrical accessory to a Subscriber's
terminal which inhibits the viewing of a certain program, certain Channel, or certain Channels
provided by way of the Cable System.
' "Maintenance or Maintain" shall mean repair, restoration, replacement, renovation and testing of the
_ Cable System or components thereof so as to ensure that it operates in a safe and reliable manner and
as required by this Franchise. .
Ordinance 09- Draft Cable Franchise Page 3 of 28
"Non-commercial" shall mean, in the context of PEG Channels, that products and services are not
sold via the PEG Channel. The term will not be interpreted to prohibit an PEG Channel operator or
programmer from independently (i.e. not in the context of any televised programming) soliciting and
receiving financial support to produce and transmit Video Programming on an PEG Channel, or from
acknowledging a contribution, in the manner of the corporation for public broadcasting. An PEG
Channel operator or programmer may cablecast informational programming regarding City events,
projects and attractions of interest to residents so long as the format for such programming is
consistent tivith the purposes for which PEG resources may be used.
"Normal Business Hours" shall mean those hours during which most similar businesses in City are
open to serve customers. in all cases, "Normal Business Hours" must include some evening hours, at
least one (1) night per week andlor some weekend hours.
"Nonnal Operating Conditions" shall mean those Service conditions which are within the control of
Grantee. Those conditions which are not within the control of a Grantee include, but are not limited
to, natural disasters, civil disturbances, power outages, telephone nehvork outages, and severe
vveather conditions. Those conditions which are ordinarily within the control of Grantee include, but
are not limited to, special promotions; pay-per-view events, rate increases, regular peak or seasonal
demand periods, and Maintenance or upgade of the Cable System.
"PEG" shall mean any Channel set aside for public use, educational use, governmental use without a
Channel usage charge.
"Person" shall mean an individual or legal entity, such as a corporation or partnership. "
"Premium Service" shaU mean pay television offered on a per Channel or per program basis.
"Public Property" shall mean any real estate or any facility owned by the City.
"Public Works Director" shall mean the Spokane Valley Public Works Director or his/her designee.
"Right-of-Way" shall mean all property, and the space above and below, in which the City has any
form of ownership, title, or interest, including easements and adjacent utility strips, which is held for
public roadway or dedicated for compatible utility purposes, regardless of whether or not any
roadway or utility exists thereon or whether it is used, improved or maintained for public use.
"Service Interruption" shall mean the loss of picture or sound on one (1) or more Cablc Channels.
"Service Tier" shall mean a specific set of Cable Services which are made available as, and only as, a
group for purchase by Subscribers at a separate rate for the group.
"Standard Installation" shall mean those that are located up to one hundred twenty-five (125) feet
from the existing distribution System. Grantee shall comply with applicable FCC regulations
regarding commercial installations as may now or hereafter arise.
"Subscriber" shall mean any Person who lawfully receives Cable Service via the System.
"Video Programming" shall mean programming provided by, or generally considered comparable to -
programming provided by, a television broadcast station.
Ordinance 09- Draft Cable Franchise Page 4 of 28
Section 2. Grant of Franchise. The City hereby grants unto the Grantee, a nonexclusive
Franchise authorizing the Grantee to Construct, Maintain and operate a Cable System in the Right-of-Way
such Facilities and other related property or equipment as may be necessary or appurtenant for the
deployment of Cable Services over the Cable System in the City pursuant to this Franchise and according
to the Cable Act. The term of this Franchise and all its rights, privileges, obligations and restrictions shall be
ten (10) years from the effective date. However, upon the fifth year anniversary date of the Franchise term,
the Grantee has the option to provide written notice to the City opting out of the remaini.ng five (5) years
given a change in federal or State law which negatively impacts the City's ability to regulate this Franchise.
To exercise the option, the Grantee shall give the City such Nvritten notice at least six (6) months prior to the
fifth year anniversary date of the Franchise term.
Section 3. Non-Exclusivitv. The grant of authority for use of the City's Rights-of-Way is not
exclusive and does not establish priority for use over other franchise holders, permit holders and the City's
own use of Public Property. Nothing in this Franchise agreement shall affect the right of the City to grant to
any other Person a similar franchise or right to occupy and use the Rights-of-Way or any part thereof:
OPEN: Both parties reviewing proposed revision and move from ROW section to new location after the
grant.
Section 4. Fee.
1. From and after the effective date of this Franchise Agreement and throughout the full term of this Franchise Agreement, the Grantee shall pay to the City five percent (5%) of its annual Gross
Revenues in the City, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 542. Payment shall be due no later than 30 days from the
end of each calendar quarter after which interest shall accrue at the rate of 1% per month. Tn the event all
I or a portion of the franchise fee has not been paid within 45-60 days of the end of each calendar quarter, a
penalty in the amount of 10% of the delinquent amount shall be added to the outstanding amount. All
franchise fees and interest and penalties shall constitute a debt of the City and may be collected by any
means allowed under the law.
2. No acceptance by the City of any payment from Grantee shall be construed as an accord that
the amount paid is in fact the correct amount, nor shall such acceptance of payment be construed as a
release of any claim the City may have for further or additional sums payable under the provisions of this
Franchise Agreement. All amounts paid shall be subject to auditing and recomputation by the City.
3. Grantee acknowledges and agrees that the franchise fees payable by Grantee to City pursuant
to this Franchise Agreement as well as capital support provided by Grantee for PEG equipment and
facilities are authorized under the Federal Cable Act and shall not be deemed to be in the nature of a
federal, state or local tax.
4. Franchise Fees Subject to Audit. Upon reasonable prior written notice, during Normal
Business Hours, at the Grantee's principal business office in the City, the City shall have the right to
inspect the Grantee's financial records used to calculate the City's franchise fees. The City shall provide
to the Grantee a final report setti.ng forth the City's findings in detail, including any and all substantiating
documentation. In the event of an alleged underpayment, the Grantee shall have thirty (30) days from the
receipt of the report to provide the City with a Nvritten response agreeing to or refuting the results of the
audit, including any substantiating documentation. Grantee shall review and the City shall be entitled to
review Grantee's historical financial records used to calculate the City's franchise fees consistent with the
currently applicable state statute of limitations.
~ 5. Failure to comply with this section, excent alleized underoavments under subsection 4. shall
_ constitute a material breach of the Franchise Agreement pursuant to Section 40.
Ordinance 09- Draft Cable Franchise Page 5 of 28
.
Sectiun 5. Cornnetitive ;Eauitv. 1. The City reserves the right to girant arae (1) or mare additianal francMses, The City shall
amend f}iis franchise, as requested by the Grantee, if it grants additional Cable Service franchises or
simiJar multiple channels of Video Frogramming autharizations that contain material tetms or conditions
which are substantially more favnrable or less bu.rdensorne to fhe competitive entity than the -material
terms and conditians herein. A word ior word identical franchise or authorization for a competitive entity
is not required so long as the regulatory and fnancial burdens on each entity are generally equivalent
taking into accouat any difFerence in the number of subscribers served, the number of PECi channels and
aggregate support provided, tl-ie level of fees and taxes imposed, the term of the franchise, and all othsr
circurnstances affecting the relative burdens.
2. Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, at any time prior to the commencement of the
Grantee's thirty-six (36) manth reneNval vvindow provided by Section 626 of the Cabie Act, that a nQn-
wireless facilities based entity, legally authnrized 6y state ❑r federal law, makes available for purchase by
5u6saribers or customers, Calale Services or multiple channels of Video Programming within the
Franchise Area without afranchisc or ot-her similar law.ful authorization g-anted by the City, then the
Grantee shat I have a righ t to request Fran chise amendments that relieve the Grantee of regulatvey burdens
that create a coznpetitive disadvantagc to the ,f,rarichisee. In requesting arnendments, the Grantee shall fiae
apetii:ion seeking to arnend the franchise. Such petition shall: (1) indicate the presence of such wireline
competitor; and (2) identify al1 material terms or canditions which are substantially mare favorable or less
burdensome to the competitive entity. 7'he City shall act on the petition within 120 days.
3. In the event an application for a new cable televisian franchise is filed with the City
propasing to serve the frazichise area, an wbole ax in part, #he City shaZl nvtify the Grantee. _
.
Section 6. Previaus Ris4hts Abandaned. This Franchise Agreement is in lieu ❑f any and all
-at.her cotttractua] rights, privileges, pawers, immunities, and authorities owned, possessed, contralled, ar
exercisable by Grantee or any successor pertaining to #he Cans#ructian, opexation, modification or
Maintenanee o-f a, Cable System in the City. The aecsptancc of t-iis Fra.nchise Agreement sha'll operate as
behveen Grantee and the City as an abandonment of any and all such c4iltractual rights, privileges,
pawers, i.mmunities, and aUthorities within tlze Cif}f. A11 ConsiTuction, operation, modification, and
NlainteDance by the Crantee of aay Cable System in the City to provide Cable Service sha31 he uader this
Franchise agreement and not under any o1:her cantra.ctual right, privilege, Rower, immunity, or a~ithorify.
Sectinn 7. Time 'ls C3f The Essence To Ws Avreement. Whenever this FranGhise
Agreement shall set forth any time for an act to be performed by ar on behalf o-f the Grantee, such tirne
sball 6e decmed of the essence. Any failure of the Grantee ta per#"orrn withir► the tirne allntted shall
always be sufficient grounds for the City to invoke any appropnate remedy, including, withvut limitation,
termination af this Franchise A.greement.
Section 8. Taxes. As is cansistent with applicable 1aw, nothing contained in this Franchise
A,m-eement sha11 be constTued to except the Grantee from any applicable tax, 1iabi[ity or assessment
authorized by law.
5ectinn 9. Cable Svstem SDecifications.
1. Prior ta #he effec#ive date of this Franchise Agreement, the Grantee connpleted avoluntary
upgrade a-f its Cabie System. Concurrently, the C''xrantee madified its Cable System to ahybrid fiber
coaacial, fber-to-zhe-node System architecture, witli fi'ber-optic cable deplayed fratn the, lieadend to the
nodc and coaxial cabEe deployed from the node to Subscribers' homes. Ac#ive and passirre devices are
capable of passing a minimum of 750 NLHz and capable of detivering hig,h-quality analog of digital video signals meeting, or exceeding ;F'CC technical quality standards. Cable Sys#em rtodes are desi~ned for
Ordinanc:e 09- Draft- Cable F=chise Page 6 of 28
future segmentation as necessary to maacimize shared bandwidth. During the term of this Franchise
Agreement, the Grantee agrees to Maintain the Cable System in a manner consistent with these
specifications or better.
2. The Grantee shall comply with all applicable technical standards of the FCC as published in
subpart K of 47 C.F.R. § 76. To the eactent those standards are altered, modified, or amended during the
term of this Franchise Agreement, the Grantee shall comply with such altered, modified or amended
standards within a reasonable period after such standards become effective. The City shall have, upon
written request, the right to review tests and records required to be performed pursuant to the FCC's rules.
3. In accordance with applicable law, the City shall have the right to regulate and inspect the
Construction, operation and Maintenance of the Cable System in the public Rights-of-Way. Upon
reasonable prior mTitten notice and in the presence of the Grantee's employee, the City may review the
Cable System's technical performance as necessary to monitor the Grantee's compliance with the
provisions of this Franchise Agreement. All equipment testing under a technical performance review
shall be conducted by the Grantee.
Section 10. Cable Service.
1. Subject to the density considerations listed below, except in areas reserved for public travel or
utilifiy access not yet opened and accepted by the City as public Right-of-Way that the Grantee is
specifically and la«rfully prohibited from deploying its Cable System by the owner/developer, the Grantee
shall provide Cable Service throughout the entire City. Areas subsequently annexed shall be provided
with Cable Service within twelve (12) months of the time of annexation.
2. Access to Cable Service shall not be denied to any group of potential cable subscribers
because of the income of the potential cable subscribers or the area in tivhich such group resides. All
residents requesting Cable Service and living within a Standard Installation of one hundred twenty-five
(125) feet shall have the cable installed at no more than the prevailing published installation rate. In the
event a request is made for Cable Service and the residence is more than a Standard Installation of one
hundred twenty-five (125) feet, such installation shall be completed on a time and material cost basis for
that portion of the service line extending beyond one hundred twenty-five (125) feet.
3. Upon request through the designated City representative, the Grantee shall provide, without
charge and throughout the term of this Franchise Agreement, one (1) outlet, one (1) Converter, if
necessary, and Basic Cable Service and expanded Basic Cable Service (i.e. together the equivalent of
sixty (60) Channels of programming) or the future analog or digital equivalent of such Service Tiers
offered by Grantee to the City's administrative buildings as designated by the City, fire station(s), police
station(s), libraries and state accredited K-12 public and private school(s).
a. If the drop line to such building exceeds a Standard Installation drop one hundred twenty-five
(125) feet, the Grantee will accommodate the drop up to three hundred (300) feet if the City or
other agency provides the necessary attachment point for aerial service or conduit pathway for
underground service. If the necessary pathway is not provided the City or other agency agrees to
pay the incremental cost of such drop in excess of one hundred hventy-five (125) feet or the
necessary distribution line extension of the Cable System, including the cost of such excess labor
and materials. The recipient of the Service will secure any necessary right of entry.
b. The Cable Service will not be used for commercial purposes, and the outlets will not be located
in areas open to the public excepting one (1) outlet to be located in a public lobby of any
. government building that will be used by the public for viewing public, governmental, or
educational access Channels. The City will take reasonable precautions to prevent any use of the
Ordinance 09- Draft Cable Franchise Page 7 of 28
Grantee's Cable System in any manner that results in inappropriate use, loss or damage to fihe
Cable System. Grantee hereby reserves all rights it may have under the law to seek payment from City for liability or claims arising out of the provision and use of the Cable Service required by
this section.
c. If additional outlets of Cable Service are provided to such buildings, the building occupant will
pay the usual Installation fees, if any.
4. Grantee shall extend the System to any portion of the City after the date of the Franchise
Agreement, when dwellings can be served by extension of the System past dwellings equivalent to a
density of seven (7) dwellings per one-quarter (1/4) mile of cable contiguous to the System. Grantee may
petition the City for a waiver of this requirement, such waiver to be granted for good cause shown. Such
extension shall be at Grantee's cost. In areas not meeting the requirements of seven (7) or more dwellings
per one-quarter (1/4) mile, for mandatory extension of Service, Grantee shall provide, upon the request of
any potential subscribers desiring Service, an estimate of the costs required to extend Service to such
Subscribers. Grantee shall then extend Service upon request and upon payment of an amount equal to the
reasonable value of actual time and materials to be incurred by Grantee for such extension. Any customer
drop not exceeding a Standard lnstallation drop of one hundred tu~enty-five (125) feet will be free of
charge to the customer other than normal installation fees. h,or drops in excess of one hundred twenty-
five (125) feet, Grantee may assess an amount equal to time and materials.
Section 11. Programming.
l. All final programming decisions remain the discretion of Grantee in accordance with this
Franchise Agreement, provided that Grantee notifies City and Subscribers in writing thirly (30) days prior _
to any Channel additions, deletions, or rEalignments, and further subject to Grantee's signal carriage
obligations hereunder and pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 531-536, and further subject to City's rights pursuant
to 47 U.S.C. § 545.
2. Grantee will provide at least the following initial broad categories of programming to the
extent such categories are reasonably available:
a. Educational programming;
b. News, weather and information;
c. Sports;
d. General entertainment including movies;
e. Children, family oriented;
f. Arts, culture and performing arts; g. Foreign language probramming; and
h. Science/documentary.
3. The Grantee shall offer to all Subscribers a diversity of Video Programming services and it
will not eliminate any broad categories of programming without fixst obtaining the written approval of the
City, such approval not to be unreasonably wifihheld.
4. Grantee shall notify in writing the City of its intent to eliminate any broad category of
programming noted in 11.2. The City, or its designee, shall make a determination on such request not
later than sixiy (60) days after receipt of the request by Grantee. In the event that the City makes an
adverse determination, such determination shall be in writing, along with a concise statement of the
reasons therefore. Ia the event the City fails to make a determination within sixty (60) days after receipt
of a request from Grantee, Grantee shall have the right to make the deletion contained in its written request.
Ordinance 09- Draft Cable Franchisc Page 8 oE'28
5eetion 12. Rakes.
1, Throughout the term of this Franchise Agreement and upon request by the City, the Grantee
shall provxde an updated rate card ta the City that details applicable rates and charges far Cable Serv,ices
provided under this Franchise Agreement. `I'his does not xequire the Grantee ta fiXe rates and charges
under temporary reductions or waivers of rates and charges in conju.nctian with promotianal campaigns.
2. Grantee s'ha11 provide a minimum of thirty (30) days' written notice to the City and each
Subscriber before changing any rates and charges.
3. City may regulate rates far the pravisiora of Cable Service pravided over the System in
accordance with applicable fedexal 1aw, an particuiar 47 C.F.R. Part 76 su,bpart N. In the event the City
chooses to regulate rates it sha11, in accordance with 47 C.F.R. § 76.3 J0, obta,in certif catiort fram the
FCC, if apRlicabxe, The City sha.ll fallouv a1l applicable FCC rate regulations and sball ensure that
appropriate personnel aee in place to adrninister such regutations. City reserves the right to regulate rates
for any f.uture Cable Services to the maximum extent allawed by ]aw.
Secfion 1,3. PEG and Local Praarammina.
1. Cammencing on the effective date ofthis Franchise Agt-eemont, Grantee shaIl make available
one (1) full-time Non-cvmmercial multijurisdic#ional ,~EG Channel (the "Govexnment Chanriel") far
future activation and joint use by the City, the City of Spakane andlor Spokane County for gavernmental
access programrning. The City shall pravide Grantee with arnirairnum of -forty-fiue (45) days prior
written notice ofan -initeal rneeting to develop an irriplementatinn plan for activation af the Gavernment
Channel. -
2, C"ra-antee ha,s historically delivcred all PEC_;- Channe'ls available nri it~ Cable System to its
-customers in the City whether ar not such Channels were direc#;ly controlled by the City. Cammencing
an the effective dat-e af this Franchise, and throughout the term of this Franchise, Grantee shall del9ver
those PEG Chan,nels with wham the City has contracted for service, ug ta a rxlaximum of six (6)
Channels. C7rantee shall con#inue ta deliver thase PEG Cha,nnels sa long as the City's coniracts are va1id
a.nd the PEG Chan.nels have cantent to distribute. The City shall prvuide copies ofall PEG Channel
contracts, and contrack re[iewals, to Grantee within thirty (30) days of execution,
3. The City acknowledges that Grantee prvvides additional beneits to PEG pragramrning needs
beyond the requirement lis#ed above. This is accomplished th.rough the inclusion of other regional PEG
progra,mming within the areg,ional Channel line-up that services the Franchise Area, The Grantee will
endeavor ta provide the Subscribers in the Fra.ncMise A-rea with the other regional PEG Channels so lcang
as I:rie PEG prograriamers offer them far use on the Cable System.
_ 4. All PEG Channels provided ta Subscribers under this Franchase shall be included by Grantee
subject to applicable law. For a11 'PEC Channels not under Grantee's contral, Grantee shall insure t.iat
tzere is no material degradation in tfie signal fhat is received by Grantee for distribution by Grantee over
the Cable System.
5. The City shall be responsible for all programrning requirements for the Government Charxnel, .
including but not limited to scheduling, Flayback, training, staffing, copyright clearances, and equipment,
maintenance and repa[r, unless responsibility fax administering the Gavernment Channel has been
designated to a third party, which shall #hen becorrie respansible for alI programrning requiremen#s under
this sectian.
-
. 6. The Grantee shall provide the PEG Channels as par#: oft17e Cable Service provided to any
Subscriber, at no additional charge. If Channe'ls are selected thrvugb a menu, system, the PEG Channels
Ordinance 09, Draft Cable Franchise Page 9 n#`28
shal] be dispXayed as prominently as cammercial programming clioices offered 6y Gran'tee. Comcast wil] ;
_n,mer,ts and maintain .
use reasonable eff'orts to minamize the movernent ❑f Citytdesignated PJEG Channel assig
cornmon Channel assignments for compatible PEG progra,mming.
7. At such time as the Grantee converfis its Bastc Cable Service Tier from an analog to a digital
format, the City's PEG Channels wil] be carried vn the digital platfarm and Crantee shall instaIl, at its
sole cost, such beadend equipment ta accommodate such Channels. Such PEG Cha.nnels shall be
accessed by Subscribers thraugh use of standard digjtal equipment compatible with Grantee's Cable
5ystem.
Withon ninety (90) days of Grantee's acceptance of the Franchise, Grantee will remit to the
-Caty as a capita] cantributian in support of PFG capital requErements: (1) one hundred fifty thousand
dollars ($154,040) and (2) an amount equa] to thirty fve cents ($0.35) per Subscriber per month ta be
paid to the City on a quarterly basis for the life of tbe Franchise. Grantee will recaup the initial one
hundred fiity thousartd dallaa-s l, 50,QO0) in an amaunt equal to twenty f ve cents ($0.25) per Subscraber
per manth until the amount is recovered ira full. To be clear, during i:he recovery period, the Grantee will
remit to the City an amaunt equal to ten cents ($0.1 0) per Subscxiber per month until t~e recvvery of the
initial PEG capitial ctintribution is cotnpleted. After conipletion of #he initial PEC'x capital contribution
recovery, the Grantee will -remit the entire thirty fve cents ($0.35) per Subscriber per mor~tli ta the City
Lmtil the f.ifdi year o-f the Franchise. Upon the fifth year anniversary date of the Franchise term, if the
.~'.~rantee accepts the fu11 continuatian o#' tbe ten (10) year term, the Grantee will remit ta the City, within
ninety {90} da,ys of the anniversary date, another uJafrozit 'PEG capital coiitfiibution payment o-f ane
hundred fifty thousand doflars 5Q,D0O), wl71Ch 'UV11l I7e T'eCOV6I'Ed, recouped, and rem,ifted to the City in
the se-ime manner as the initia] PEG capital contribution payment.
The City shall allocate a11 arriaunts under this subsection to PFG capital -uses exclusively. Grantee shall .
not be responsible for payinfy PEG capital contribution with respect to gratis or bad debt accounts.
Consistent with 47 C.F.R. § 76.922, Grantee may, in its sale discretion, add the cast of the PEG capital
contribution to the price o-F C ab 1e Serv ices,and to co llect the PE, C capi-tai confribution fram 5ubscribers.
In addition, consistQnt with 47 C.F.R. § 76.985, all amounts paid as the PEG capital contribution may be
separately stated on Subscribers' bills as aCity of Spokane Valley PEG capital con#ribution. Upon
Grantee's written request and due as agreed upon by both parties, the City shall pravide the C•rantee with
documentation showing expeinditures for PEG capital use of the previnus f scal years' PEG capital
cnntz`ibution and shawing the budg~Aed use of k1ie current year's REG fiunding. In the event the City
canilot demonstrate t11a€ YEG capital funding was used or bu,dgeted far PECr capital needs, Grantee's I'EG
fundi,ng obligations going farward shall be reduced by an equivalent arnount.
9. Wit-hin ni,nety (90) days of request, the Grantee shall provide an estimate of costs associated
wi1:h the canstruction arad activatian o-f ona return path capable of transmitting Videa Programming to
enable the distributton afthe City's speci-Cc government access programming ta Subscribers on #he mu1ti-
jurisdictianal PEG C-hannel. 7'he return line shall run from a location to be deternlined by the City to the
C'rrantee's Facilities. Within tvvo hund,red seventy (270) days of the City's directive, the Grantee shall
Construct and activate a retunn ]`rne in accordance with the c-ost estimate previausly provided. The City
agrees to pay the cvsts of the return line within six.ty (FO) days of Constructia❑ 1 activation arrd receipt of
an invoice fram the Grantee.
Section 1.4. Tristitufional Netwark Connections. '[Jpon request of the C'i€y, the Crantee shall
investigate and provide the City a plan with a cost estimate based on either a managed netwoxk ar the
most cost efficient connection ut.ilizing current technalogy to accommodate the City's reasonable ,
broadband capacity needs for a non-cornmercial connection between the City's facilities. Far the purposes of this sectiolo, non-crammercial means private netwark cammu.nicatians from and amQng the
C]rdinance 09- Deaft Cab1e Franchise Page 10 of 28
: City and other gublic agencies and excludes leasing or reselling the broadband capacity to a third party
for any purpase. After receiving a request frorn #he City, Grantee shall provide the City a plan, including
an estimate of the Canstruotion costs, within ninety (90) days. The cost estimate shall include the f~ully
a1lacated Cvnstruction cvst -fram the nearest Grantee identified fiber access location to the requested
site(s), inciuding, but not limited to, site construction, fiber, labor, materials and Crrantee provided
equipment. The City shall pay ali of Grantee's design engineering ccasts associated w-ith development of
the reqLtested plan and cost esiimate(s), if the City dves not accepted the glan for CQnstruction. To
apprvve the Grantee ta per.form the wark, the City shall pravide the Grantee with written authoriza#ion to
complete the connectivity Constructian and a purchase order in the amount o£ the cost estimate. Any
connectiuity Construction shall be perfnrmed and cornpleted wit,hin six (6) rnonths after the City
authorizes the work be performed, unless the parties agree in writing to a different completion date prior
to cammencement of the work in arder to acccrmmadate speciai considerations of the, City.
Sec#ion 15. Parental Cvntral.
I. Grantee shall provide Subscriber contralled Lockvut Devices {audio and visual} at a
reasonabie charge to Subscribers upon their request.
2. As to aray -program which is transmitted on aChe-Lnnel offered an aper Channel or per progra.ra
basis, Grani:ee shall block entirely the audio and videa pvrtion of such program from reception by any
Subscriber wha so requests. Scrarrabling of the signal shall nat be sufFicient ta camply vvith this
provision.
Sectinn 16, Recoverv of, Costs. Grantee shall reimburse the City fo-r all costs ofane publication
of this Franchise in a local newspaper, and required legal notices prior to any public hearing regarding this
Franchise, contempora-neaus vvith its acceptance of this Franchise.
Se+etian 17. Least Interference. The City sha11 have prior and sugeriar right to the use of its
Rights-of-Way for ins#allativn and maintenance of its facilities arrd other governmental purposes. Work
by Grank+ee in the Right-af Way shail be d,one in a manner that causes the least iriterference witla the rights
and reasanable cQnvera;ence of praperty owners and residents. The owners of all facalities, public or
private, installed in or on such public prnperties prior to the instal'lation of the k'acilities ~f the Grant",
shall have preference as #o the positioning and locakion cafsuch utilities with respect to the Grantee. Such
preference sba11 continue in the event of the necessiiy of relocating ❑r cbanging the grade of any such
Right-of-Way. Disputes between the ~'irantee and other parties over the use, pursLiant to this Franchise
agreemeni:, of the Rights-of-W ay s'hall be submitked to the City for recarnmended resolu#ion_
Thx~ Franchise shall, in no way, prevent or prohibi't the Cxty ftom using any of i#s Righfis-vf Way,
or affect its jurisdiction over them or any part of them. The City hereby retains its full golic.e power to
tnake al] changes, reiocations, repairs, maintenance, estalalishments, improvements, dedications or
vacation of same, including fihe dedicatioIi, establishment, maintenance, and improvement of all new
Rights-af.-Way.
Sec#ion 1$. Canstructian Standards. Afl wark authorized and required hereunder shall coznply
. with all generally apglicable Citp codes and regulations. Grantee sha11 aiso comp1y with a.ll applicable federal
and state regulationS, yaws and practices. Grantee is respansible far the supervision, condition, and quality
of the wQrk done, wliether it is by itseLf or by contractars, assigns or agencies.
Sectinn 19. Restoration Aftet' Construction. I#' in conlaection with the Construction, opeeation,
, Maintenance, upgrade, repair or replacement of the Cable System, the Gmntee distur6s, alters, ar damages
any publac ar private properiy, the Grantee a,geees that it shall at its owrt cost and exgen se pay for a.ny damage
and repiace and restore any such property to a canditivn reasonably comRarable to the conditinn exis#ing
Ordinance 09- Draft Cahle Franchise Page 1 I of28
immediately prior to the disturbance. Whenever Grantee disturbs or damages any Right-of-Way or other Public Properly, Grantee shall complete the restoration work within a reasonable time as authorized by the
City's Public Works Director.
Section 20. Obstruction Permits Required. Grantee shall apply for and obtain appropriate
obstruction permits from the City pursuant to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. Grantee shall pay all
generally applicable permit fees for the requisite City permits and reimburse the City for all generally
applicable fees incurred by the City in the examination, inspection, and approval of Grantee's work.
Section 21. Emerp-encv ResDonse. The Grantee shall maintain with the City an emergency
response number providing an emergency 24-hour response for the City to use in case of an emergency.
After being notified of an emergency, Grantee shall cooperate with the City and make every effort to
immediately respond with action to aid the protection the health and safety of the public.
Section 22. Hazardous Substances. Grantee shall comply with all applicable state and federal
laws concerning hazardous substances relating to Grantee's Facilities in the Right-of-Way.
Section 23. Environmental. Grantee shall comply with all applicable state and federal laws
concerning environmental protection relating to Grantee's Facilities in the Right-of Way.
Section 24. Movement and Relocation of Facilities. The following shall apply when it is
necessary to relocate Grantee's Facilities:
1. Relocation of Facilities at the request of a third party. .
,
a. If any removal; replacement, modification or disconnection of the Cable System is required to '
accommodate the construction, operation or repair of the facilities or equipment of another City
franchise holder(s), Grantee shall, after at least thirty (30) days advance written notice, take
action to effect the necessary changes requested by the responsible entity, as long as the other
franchise holder(s) pay for the Grantee's time and material costs associated with the project and
Grantee is issued a permit for such work by the City.
b. The Grantee shall, upon reasonable prior «7itten request of any Subscriber, relocate its aerial
distribution cable Facilities underground, as long as the Subscriber pays for the Grantee's time
and material costs associated with the project and Grantee is issued a permit for such work by the
City.
c. In the event an underground conversion of cable Facilities is requi_red as part of the street
improvement condition(s) of a new land use development, not associated with a City designated
capital improvement project, this Franchise shall in no way limit the Grantee's right to bill and
collect in advance all time and material costs associated with the underground conversion of the
Cable System from the Person responsible for the project.
d. At the request of any Person holding a valid permit and upon reasonable advance notice and
payment by the permit holder of Grantee's expenses of such temporary change, Grantee shall
temporarily raise, lower or remove its Facilities as necessary to accommodate a permittee of the
C ity.
2. Relocation at Request of the City. .
Ordinance 09- Draft Cable Fr3nchise Page 12 of 28
a. Upon at least sixty (60) days prior written notice to Grantee, the City shall have the right to
- require Grantee to relocate any part of the Cable System within the Rights-of-Way when the
safety, health or welfare of the public requires such change, and the expense thereof shall be paid
by Grantee. The City may, at its option, provide more than sixty (60) days notice. After receipt
of such notice, Grantee shall complete relocation of its Facilities at least five (5) days prior to
commencement of the project or an agreed upon date by both parties. Should Grantee fail to
remove or relocate any such Facilities by the date established by the City, the City may effect
such removal or relocation, and the expense thereof shall be paid by Grantee, including all costs
and expenses incurred by the City due to Grantee's delay. If the City requires Grantee to relocate
its Facilities located within the Rights-of-Way, the City shall make a reasonable effort to provide
Grantee with an alternate location within the Right-of-Way. If public funds are available to any
Person using such Rights-of-Way for the purpose of defraying the cost of any of the foregoing,
the Grantee may make application for such funds.
b. Zn the case of relocation projects where the conversion of overhead utilities is within a City
capital improvement project, then the Grantee shall participate in the joint trenching portion of
the project, and Grantee shall pay to the City Grantee's portion of the traffic control and trench
costs, including excavation and other associated costs, trench bedding, and backf'ill commensurate
with Grantee's proportionate share of trench usage. However, if bids from the City or it's
designated contractor for placement of Grantee's conduits and vaults/pedestals in the supplied
joint trench, in the reasonable estimation of the Grantee are not acceptable, the Grantee shall have
the option to utilize contractor(s) of its choice to complete the required work, so long as use by
Grantee of its contractor(s) does not delay the City project. The City or it's designated contractor
shall coordinate with the Grantee's contractor(s) to provide reasonable notice and time to
complete the placement of the Grantee's Facilities in the supplied joint lrench.
c. Nothing in this Franchise shall prevent the City from constnicting any public work or capital
improvement. Further, the City shall have the right to require Grantee to relocate, remove,
replace, modify or disconnect Grantee's Facilities and equipment located in the Rights-of-Way or
on any other property of the City in the event of an emergency or when-necessary to protect or
further the health, safety or welfare of the general public, and such work sha11 be performed at
Grantee's expense. Following notice by the City, Grantee shall relocate, remove, replace, modify
or disconnect any of its Facilities or equipment within any Right-of-Way, or on any other
property of the City. _
d. If the Grantee fails to'complete the above work within the time prescribed by the City, given
the nature and eatent of the work, or if it is not done to the City's reasonable satisfaction, the City
may cause such work to be done and bill the reasonable cost of the work to the Grantee, including
all reasonable costs and expenses incurred by the City due to Grantee's delay. In such event, the
City shall not be liable for any damage to any portion of Grantee's Cable System. Grantee shall
pay the City within ninety (90) days of receipt of an itemized list of those costs. The City shall
give consideration to any circumstances outside the Grantee's control preventing Grantee's
completion of work.
Section 25. Tree Trimmin2. The Grantee shall have the authority to conduct pruning and
trimming for access to Cable System Facilities in the Rights-of-Way subject to compliance with the City
Code. All such trimming shall be done at the Grantee's sole cost and expense. The Grantee sha11 be
responsible for any damage caused by such trimming.
Section 26. Vacation. The City may vacate any City road, Right-of-Way or other City
property which is subject to rights granted by this Franchise, but the Grantee shall be provided notice of
Ordinance 09- Drafl Cable Franchise Page 13 of 28
such vacation proceedings and the opportunity to secure future use rights as allowed under the City's .
Municipal Code. "
Section 27. Abandonment of Grantee's Facilities. No Facility Constructed or owned by
Grantee may be abandoned without the express written consent of the City.
Section 28. Maps, Books, and Records.
1. Grantee shall provide to the City upon request:
a. A route map that depicts the general location of the Cable System Facilities placed in the FZights-
of-Way. The route map shall identify Cable System Facilities as aerial or underground and is not
required to depict cable types, number of cables, electronic equipment, and service lines to individual
Subscribers. The Grantee shall also provide, if requested, a.n electronic format of the
aeriaVunderground Facilities in relation to the Right-of-Way centerline reference to allow the City to
add this i.nformation to the City's GIS program; and
b. A copy of all FCC filings which relate to the operation of the Cable Sysfiem in the Franchise Area.
2. To the extent such requests are limited to specific Facilities at a given location within the
Franchise area in connect7on with the construction of any City project, Grantee shall cooperate with the
City , upon the City's reasonable request, to field locate its Facilities in order to facilitate design and
planning of City improvement projects.
3. The City has the right to inspect books and records of Grantee, which are reasonably necessary
to monitor the Grantee's compliance with the provision of Cable Services under this Franchise .
Agreement. Within receipt of written notice from the City to inspect the Grantee's books and records _under this section, the Grantee shall within five (5) business days or a mutually agreeable date and time,
accommodate the City's request at the Grantee's business office in the City, during Normal Business -
Hours, and without unreasonably interfering with the Grantee's business operations. All such documents
pertaining to financial matters shall be preserved and maintained in accordance with Grantee's standard
rccord retention policy except for financial records which are governed by Section 4.4.
4. The City has the right to request a copy of the books and records that are not identified as
proprietary or confidential. For purposes of this section, the terms "proprietary or confidential" include,
but are not limited to, information relating to the Cable System design, customer lists, marketing plans,
financial information unrelated to the calculation of franchise fees or rates pursuant to FCC rules, or other
inf_ormation that is reasonably determined by the Grantee to be competitively sensitive.
a. The City shall have a right to inspect but the Grantee shall not be required to release
information that it reasonably deems to be proprietary or confidential in nature provided that this
shall not prevent the release of such proprietary or confidential documents for purposes of any
enforcement proceeding where appropriate legal steps are available to address Grantee's concerns
regarding confidentiality. The City agrees not to oppose any of the Grantee's reyuests for
confidentiality. In the event the Grantee asserts that certain information is proprietary or
confidential in nature, the Grantee shall identify generally the information which it deems
proprietary and confidential and the reasons for its confidentiality in writing to the City. Each
page of such information provided will be clearly marked as "proprietary and confidential." The
City agrees to treat any information disclosed by the Grantee as confidential and only to disclose
it to those employees, representatives, and agents of the City that have a need to know in order to -
enforce this Franchise Agreement and who agree to maintain the confidentiality of all such
Ordinance 09- Drafi Cable Franchise 1'age 14 of 28
. information. The Grantee shall not be required to provide customer information in violation of
Section 631 of the Cable Act or any other applicable federal or state privacy law.
b. Grantee acknowledges that information submitted to the City may be subject to inspection and
copying under the Washington Public Disclosure Act codified in RCW 42.56. The City agrees to
timely provide the Grantee with a copy of any public disclosure request to inspect or copy
documentation/information which the Grantee has provided to the City and marked as
"proprietary and confidential" prior to allowing any inspection and/or copying as well as provide
the Grantee with a time frame, consistent with RCW 42.56.520, to provide the City with its
written basis for non-disclosure of the requested documentation/information. In the event the
City disagrees with the Grantee's basis for non-disclosure, the City agrees to withhold release of
the reyuested documentation/information in dispute for a reasonable amount of time to allow
Grantee an opportunity to file a legal action under RCW 42.56.540.
Section 29. Reports.
1. File for Public I.nspection. Throughout the term of this Franchise Agreement, the Grantee
shall maintain at its business office, in a file available for public inspection during NOrmal Business
Hours, those documents required pursuant to the FCC's rules and regulations.
2. Complaint File and Reports. Grantee will keep an accurate and comprehensive file of all
Complaints regarding the System and Grantee's actions in response to those Complaints in a manner
consistent with the privacy rights of Subscribers. Upon thirty (30) days written request, Grantee will
provide a report to the City that contains total number and summary of all Complaints received by
category, length of time taken to resolve and action taken to provide resolution.
3. Annual Report. No later than ~.Vlarch 31 st of each year, if requested by the City, Grantee shall
file a written report with the City, which shall include:
a. a summary of the previous calendar year's activities in development of this System, including
but not limited to Services begun or dropped, number of Subscribers (including gains and losses),
homes passed, and miles of cable distribution plant in service (including different classes if
appl icable);
b. an audited financial statement, including a statement of income, a statement of retained
earnings, a balance sheet, a statement of sources and applications of funds, a fiaced asset statement
showing for each account or category, the original cost and accumulated depreciation balances
and activity, and a depreciation statement showing the detailed calculation of depreciation
expense for the year. The statement shall include notes that specify all significant accounting
policies and practices upon which it is based (including, but not limited to, depreciation rates and
methodology, overhead and intrasystem cost allocation methods, and basis for interest expense).
A summary shall be provided comparing the current year with previous years since the beginning
of the Franchise. The statement shall contain a summary of franchise fee payments and any
adjustment thereto as specified in City Code. Tn any year the City requires an audited financial
statement pursuant to this subsection, and an audited financial statement in compliance with this
subsection is provided by a Grantee, that Grantee shall not be required to submit another audited
financial statement for that year which otherwise may be required.
c. a current statement of cost of any Construction by component category;
• d. a summary of Complaints, identifying the number and nature of Complaints and their
disposition;
Ordinance 09- Draft Cable Franchise Page 15 of 28
~
e. if a Grantee is a corporation, a lisi of officers and members of the board and the officers and
board members of any parent corporation;
f. a list of all parMers or stockholders holding one percent or more ownership interest in a Grantee
and any parent corporation; provided, however, that when any parent corporation has in excess of
one thousand shareholders and its shares are publicly traded on a national stock exchange, then a
list of the twenty largest stockholders of the voting stock of sucb corporation shall be disclosed;
g. a copy of all of a Grantee's written rules and regulations applicable to Subscribers and users of
the Cable System;
h. any additional information related to operation of the Cable System as reasonably requested by
the City.
4. Customer Service Reports. Grantee shall maintain a quartcrly compliance report specific to the
System in the Franchise Area and shall provide such report to the City at the request of the City. Such
report shall demonstrate Grantee's compliance with the customer service standa.rds set forth herein.
5. Grantee shall, upon request of the City, make available to the Public `Vorks Director a
description of Construction plans for the following twelve months.
6. Grantee shall, upon request of the City, make available a copy of the final report on each proof
of performance test of each technical parameter defined in Part 76 of the Rules and Regulations of the
FCC.
Section 30. Customer Service Standards
1. The Grantee shall comply in all respects with the customer service standards contained herein.
2. Grantee shall comply at all times with all applicable federal, state and local laws and
regulations regarding discrimination, as adopted or amended.
3. In providing Service, Grantee shall maintain a convenient local customer service location in
either the City of Spokane or the City for receiving Subscriber payments, handling billing questions,
equipment replacement and dispensing customer service information. Also, the Grantee will endeavor to
accommodate a bill payment location in the City as long as there is an acceptable 3`d party vendor
available to support the service in accordance witll the Grantee's business practices.
4. When similar Complaints have been made by a number of Subscribers, or where other
evidence exists which, in the reasonable judgment of the City, casts doubt on the reliability or quality of
the Cable Service, the City, notwithstanding any other provisions of this Franchise Agreement, shall have
the right and authority to require that Grantee test, analyze and report on the performance of tlie System
relative to applicable technical standards of the FCC. Upon 30-day prior written notice from the City, the
Grantee shall fully cooperate with the City in performing such testing and shall prepare a written report of
the results, if requested.
5. Grantee shall satisfy the consumer protection and service standards as outlined below during
the term of this Franchise Agreement.
a. Cable System office hours and telephone availability: '
Ordinance 09- Draft Cable Franchise Page 16 of 28
i. Grantee will maintaiin a lacal, tallrfree or ccr1lec-t call teleplinne access line which will
be available to its Subscribers tvventy-four hours a da.y, seven days aweek.
1. Tz-ained Grantee representatir►es will be available ta respond to customer
telephone inquiries during Normal Business ;I~Ioltrs.
2. After Normal Business Hours, the access line rnay be answered by a service
ar an automated respo.nse system, including an answen'ng machine. inquiries
received after 1Varma1 Susiness Hours must be responded to by a trained Grantee
representatirre on tlie next business day. •
ii. Under Normal Qperating Conditions, telephone answer time by acustorner
representat-ive, including wait time, shall not exceed thirty seconds vvhen the connectinn
is made. If the call needs to be transferred, tratisfer time sha]l not exceed thirky seconds.
These standards shali be met no less then ninety percent of #he time under Norrnal
Operating Conditians, measured on a quarterly basis.
iii. Grantee shall possess equipment to measu.re compliance with the telephone
an5wering Standards abave.
iv. 'Under N'ormal Operatino- Cvnditions, the customer will receive a busy signal less t:han
three percent o,f the time.
v. Customer service center and hill payment locations will be open at least dunng
Narrnal Business H,aurs.
a. Installations, Dutages and Service Ca11s. Under TTarma,l Operating Conditians, each of the
foilowing standards will be met no less than ninety--five percent of the time measured an a
quarterly basis;
i. Standard Installations will be performed Nvithin seven business days after an order has
been placed,
1. The "appnintment windaw" alternatives for installations, service calls and
other anstallatian activities wi ll be either a specif c time or, at rnaximum, a four-
hour time block during Normal BLIsiness Haurs. (Grantee may schedule service
calls and ofiher installation activities outside a-f 'Kormal Business Hours for the
express convenience af the custorner,) 2. Graniee may nat c$nce] an appoi.nhment with acustomex aftex the clcase of
business on the busaness day prior to the scheduled appainhnent.
3. If Grantee's represenfiative is running late for an appointment with a customer
and will not he able ta keep the appaintment as scheduled, the Grantee shall use
its 'best effarts to contact the customer prior to the time af the scheduled
appointmen#. The appoint3nent will be rescheduled, as necessary, at a time which
is canvenient for #he customer.
, 4. Under Norrtlal Operating Conditians, if Grantee catinnt perform installations
. widiin the times specified in applicable custamer standards, the Grantee shall
affer the Subscriber a credit equal to the charge for a Standard It7stallation or
Ordinatlce 09- Draft Cable Franchise Page 17 of28
other compensation of equal or greater value. For non-Standard Installation, .
Grantee shall attempt to contact a Subscriber requesting an estimate of charges -
within seven business days of receiving the request by the Subscriber. This
subsection does not apply to the introduction of new products and services when
Grantee is utilizing a phased introduction.
ii. Excluding conditions beyond the control of Grantee, Grantee will begin working on
"Service Interruptions" promptly and in no event later than twenty-four hours after the
interruption becomes known. Grantee must begin actions to correct other Service
problems the next business day after notification of the Service problem. Grantee shall
resolve all Service Intenuptions to the extent reasonably possible within forty-eight hours
under Normal Operating Conditions.
1. In those cases where Service is not restored within twenty-four hours due to
unusual circumstances, the reasons for the delay shall be fully documented in an
outage log.
2. Under Normal Operating Conditions, if after twenty-four hours Service is not
restored to a Subscriber, Grantee shall, upon a Subscriber's request, provide a
refiind or credit or other compensation of equal or greater value.
3. As Subscribers are connected or reconnected to the System, Grantee shall, by
appropriate means such as a card or brochure, furnish general Subscriber
information (including, but not limited to, terms of Ser-vice and proccdures for
making inquiries or Complaints, including the name, address and local telephone ,
number of the employee or employees or agent to whom such inquiries or
Complaints are to be addressed) and funlish information concerning the City
office responsible for the administration of the Franchise Agreement, including
the address and telephone number of said office.
c. Communications between Grantee and Subscribers.
i. Notifications to Subscribers.
1. Grantee shall provide Nvritten information on each of the following areas at the
time of installation of Service, at least annually to all Subscribers, and at any time
upon request to Subscriber or the City:
a. Products and Services offered.
b. Prices and options for programming services and conditions of
subscription to programming and other services.
c. Installation and Service Maintenance policies.
d. Jnstructions on how to use the Cable Service.
e. Channel positions of the programming carried on the System; and
f. Billing and Complaint procedures, including the address and '
telephone number of the City.
Ordinance 09- Draft Cable Franchise I'age 18 of 28
ii. Rate/Programming Changes.
1. Subscribers will be notified of any changes in rates, programming services or
Channel positions as soon as possible in writing. Notice must be given to
Subscribers a minimum of thirty days in advance of such changes if the changes
are within the control of the Grantee. In addition, the Grantee shall notify
Subscribers thirty days in advance of any significant changes in the other
information required by this sectioa. Grantee shall not be required to provide
prior notice of any rate changes as a result of a regulatory fee, franchise fee or
other fees, tax, assessment or charge of any kind imposed by any federal agency,
state or City on the transaction between the Grantee and the Subscriber.
2. The City recognizes that the Grantee voluntarily provides a qualified discount
program for senior and disabled customers. The Grantee commits that it will
continue the program over the term of the Franchise. The Grantee will notify the
City and customers regarding changes to the existing qualified discount program
consistent with the above notification requirements.
3. All programming decisions remain the discretion of Grantee in accordance
with this Franchise Agreement, provided that Grantee notifies City and
Subscribers in writing thirty days prior to any Channel additions, deletions or
realignments directed to each Subscriber individually througll mailed notice or as
an insert or addendum to the Subscriber's monthly bill, email or other means
reasonably calculated to give the Subscriber and the City advanced notice, and
further subject to Grantee's signal"carriage obligations hereunder and pursuant to
47 U.S.C. § 53 l-536, and further subject to City's rights pursuant to 47 U.S.C. §
545. Location and relocation of the PEG Channels shall be governed by this
Franchise Agreement, and further to the programming category reyuirements
contained within this Franchise Agreement.
iii. Billing.
1. Bills will be clear, concise and understandable. Bills must be fully itemized,
with itemizations including, but not ]imited to, basic and Premium Service
charges and equipment charges. Bills will also clearly delineate all activity
during the billing period, including optional charges, rebates and credits.
2. Billing Complaints shall be responded to promptly, but in no event later than
within seven days of receipt.
iv. Refunds. Refund checks will be issued prornptly, but no later than either:
1. the Subscriber's next billing cycle following resolution of the request or thirty
days, whichever is earlier; or
2. the return of the equipment supplied by Grantee if Service is terminated.
v. Credits. Credits for Service will be issued no lafier than the Subscriber's next billing
cycle following the determination that a credit is warranted.
Ordinance 09- Draft Cable Franchise Page 19 of 28
' vi. Subscriber Charges. A list of Grantee's current Subscriber rates and charges for
Cable Service shall be mainta.ined on file with City and shall be available for public
inspection.
6. The Grantee shall comply with all applicable f.ederal and state privacy laws, including Section
631 of the Cable Act and regulations adopted pursuant thereto.
Section 31. Cable Advisorv Board. City reserves the right to maintain a Cable Advisory
Board over the term of this Franchise Agreement for advisory purposes only. The Grantee agrees to
cooperate with reasonable requests for information, through the designated City representative, to support
the Cable Advisory Board.
Section 32. Citv Ordinances and lZe2ulations. Grantee, through this Franchise, is granted the
right to operate its Cable System using the .EZights-of-Way within the Franchise Area. Such use must be in
compliance with generally applicable Municipal Code and Regulations.
In the event of a conflict between the Municipal Code and Regulations and this Franchise, this Franchise shall
control subjecfi to the limitation of the City's exercise of the police powers set forth below. Subject to federal
and state preemption, the material terms and conditions contained in this Franchise may not be unilaterally
altered by the City through subsequent amendments to any ordinance, regulation, resolution or other
enactment of the City, except within the lawf.iil exercise of the City's police power. Grantee has the right to
challenge any City ordinance or regulation that conflicts with its rights under this Franchise. Grantee
acl:nowledges that its rights hereunder are subject to the police powers of the City to adopt and enforce
ordinances necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public, and Grantee agrees to comply
witll all applicable laws and ordinances enacted by the City pursuant to such power so long as the same do
not unduly discriminate against Grantee. _
Section 33. Franchise Aizreement and Modification. This Franchise Agreement is a contract
between the City and the Grantee, negotiated in good faith and binding upon both parties. The City and
Grantee hereby reserve the right to alter, amend or modify the terms and conditions of this Franchise upon
Nk,ritten agreement of both parties.
Section 34. Indemnification. The Grantee shall, at its sole cost and expense, indemnify and
hold harmless the City, its officials, boards, commissions, agents and employees against any and all third
party claims, suits, causes of action, proceedings, and judgments for injury, loss, or damage arising out of
the Construction, reconstruction, use, operation, ownership and Maintenance of the Cable System under
this rranchise Agreemenfi, except that no such requirement shall apply where such claims, suits, causes of
actions, proceedings, and judgments f.or damage are occasioned by the active negligence, gross
negligence or intentional acts of fihe City or its officials, boards, commissions, agents and employees
while acting on behalf of the City. These damages shall include, but not be limited to, claims made
against the City by the Franchisee's employees from which the Franchisee would otherwise be immune
under Title 51 RCV11, penalties arising out of copyright infringements and damages arising out of any
failure by the Grantee to secure consents from the owners, authorized distributors or licensees of
programs to be delivered by the Grantee's Cable System whether or not any act or omission complained
of is authorized, allowed, or prohibited by this Franchise Agreement. lndemnified expenses shall include,
but not be limited to, all out-of-pocket expenses, such as costs and attorneys' fees, and shall also include
the reasonable value of any services rendered by the City Attorney, Assistant City Attorneys or any
outside consultants employed by the City. Grantee shall not be required to provide indemnification to
City for programming cablecast over the Access Channel administered by City.
The City shall give the Grantee timely written notice of any claim or of the commencement of any action,
Ordinance 09- Draft Cable l=ranchise Page 20 of 28
suit or other proceeding covered by the indemnity in this section, but failure to give notice is not a defense
to the indemnification obligations except to the extent of actual prejudice. In the event any such claim
arises, the City or any other indemnified party shall tender the defense thereof to the Grantee and the
Grantee shall have the obligation and duty to defend, through services of competent counsel satisfactory
to the City, settle or compromise any claims arising thereunder. If the City determines that it is necessary
for it to employ separate counsel, the costs for such separate counsel shall be the responsibility of the
City.
Section 35. lnsurance.
1. Upon the granting of this Franchise Agreement and following simultaneously with the filing of
the acceptance of this Franchise Agreement and at all times during the term of this Franchise Agreement,
the Grantee shall obtain, pay all premiums for, and deliver to the City, written evidence of payment of
premiums for and a certificate of insurance, naming the City as an additional insured, with a company
licensed to do business in the State of Washington with a rating by A.M. Best and Co. of not less than
"A" or equivalenfi, for the following:
a. A comprehensive commercial or general liability insurance policy or policies, issued by an
insurance carrier licensed to do business in the State of Washington. Said policy or policies shall
pay on behalf of and defend the City, its officials, boards, commissions, agents or employees
from any and all claims by any Person whatsoever (including the costs, defense cosfis, attorneys'
fees and interest arising therefrom) on account of personal injury, bodily injury or death of a
Person or Persons or damages to property occasioned by the operations of the Grantee under this
Franchise Agreement, or alleged to have been so caused or occurred, with a minimum combined
single limit of One Million and No/100 Dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence and $2,000,000
general aggregate for personal injury, bodily injury and property damage.
b. A comprehensive automobile liability insurance policy or policies, issued by an insurance
carrier licensed to do business in the State of Washington. Said policy or policies shall pay on
behalf of and defend the City, its officials, boards, commissions, agents or employees from any
and all claims by any Person whatsoever (including the costs, defense costs, attorneys' fees and
interest arising therefrom) for bodily injury and properiy damage occasioned by any vehicle
operation of the Grantee, or alleged to have been so caused or occurred, with a minimum liability
of One Million and No/100 Dollars ($1,000,000) per Person and Five Million and No/100 Dollars
($5,000,000) in any one (1) accident or occurrence.
2. Not less than thirty (30) days prior to its expiration, Grantee shall deliver to City, a substitute,
renewal or replacement policy or bond conforming to the provisions of this Franchise Agreement.
Section 36. Performance Bond.
1. Within sixty (60) days of the effective date of this Franchise, Grantee will provide a
performance bond to the City, in the total sum of $250,000.00 which will remain in effect for the term of
this Franchise. The performance bond is to ensure the faithful performance of Grantee's obligations -
under the Franchise including the payment by the Grantee of any penalties, claims, liens, fees, or taxes
due the City which arise by reason of the operation, Maintenance, or Construction of the Cable System
within the Franchise Area.
2. If the Franchise is terminated, or upon expiration or renewal, or transfer of the Franchise, the
City will return the original bond or sign the necessary documentation to release the bond promptly if
Grantee does not owe funds to the City or is not in default of a material provision of the Franchise.
Ordinance 09- Draft Cable Franchise Page 21 of 28
Section 37. Remedies to Enforce Comqliance. 1. This section does not apply to revocation of the Franchise Agreement. Whenever the City
seeks to enforce the Franchise Agreement, it sha(1 first provide written notice to the Grantee of the nature
of the problem and requested action, together with any applicable time frame for response. Any time
limits here or elsewhere in the Franchise Agreement may be modified by written stipulation of the City
and Grantee, except time limits relating to revocation of this Franchise Agreement or where otherwise
required by law must be approved by the City Council.
2. Except in case of urgency or public need relating to management of the public Right-of-Way
as reasonably determined by the City, the Grantee has thirty (30) days from receipt of such notice to
respond in writing to the City official sending the notice:
a. contesting it; or
b. accepting it and agreeing to cure as reyuested within time limits specified; or
c. requesting additional time or other modifications. I.n such event, Grantee shall promptly take
all reasonable steps to cure the default, keeping the City informed as to the steps to be tal:en and a
projected completion date.
3. If the City is not satisfied with the Grantee's response, both parties shall meet informally to
discuss the matter. If these discussions do not lead to resolution of the problem, the City shall notify the
Grantee in writing. Grantee may thereafter request a hearing thereafter as provided in this Franchise.
4. No provision of this Franchise affects the right of either party to seek judicial relief from a violation of any provision of this Franchise, or any regulation or directive under this Franchise. The existence of other remedies under this Franchise does not limit the right of either party to recover
monetary damages, or to seek judicial enforcement of obligations by specific performance, injunetive
relief or mandate, or any other remedy at law or in equity.
Section 38. LiQuidated Dama2es.
Because Grantee's failure to comply with the provisions of this Franchise Agreement will
result in damage to the City and because it will be impractical to determine the actual amount of such
damages, the City and Grantee hereby agree upon and specify certain amounts set forth hereafter in this
section which represent both parties' best estimate of the damages. Dama2es associated with Franchise
Fee non-oavment are not subiect to this section.
2. The City shall specify any damages subject to this section and shall include such information in
the notice sent to Grantee required under Section 37. Such a notice may provide for damages sustained
prior to the notice where so provided, and subsequent thereto pending compliance by Grantee.
3. To the extent that fihc City elects to assess liquidated damages as provided in this section and
,
such liquidated damages have been paid, the parties agree that this shall be the City s sole and exclusive
damage remedy in lieu of actual damages; provided, that this shall not limit the right of the City to seek
equitable or other relief as reserved in Section 39.
4. Unless otherwise provided, liquidated damages do not accrue after the timely filing of a
request for hearing by Grantee unti( the time of a decision from the hearing. Nothing in this section
prevenfis the parties from settling any dispute relating to liquidated damages by mutual stipulation.
Ordinance 09- Draft Cable Franchise Page 22 of 28
5. Grantee may cure the breach or violation within the time specified to petition for review to the
City's satisfaction, whereupon no liquidated damages are assessed.
6. After fulfilling the procedure required under Section 37, Grantee has thirty (30) days to pay
such amounts, or Grantee may seek review of any assessment of liquidated damages under Section 39.
Liquidated damages shall be immediately payable from the performance bond, if review is not sought or
if not paid within the thirty (30) day period by the Grantee.
7. Schedule of Liquidated Damages. Liquidated damages are set as follows. All amounts accrue
per day but not beyond the number of days to exceed the amount of $10,000 per twelve (12) month period
unless specifically provided. Nothing requires the City to assess liquidated damages, acfiing in its sole
discretion, but such event does not operate as waiver or estoppel upon the City.
8. Pursuant to the requirements outlined herein, liquidated damages shall not exceed the
following amounts:
a. five-hundred dollars ($500.00) per day for failure to provide cable service as promised in
Section 9 of this Franchise Agreement; one-hundred dollars ($100.00) per day for material
departure from the FCC technical pcrformance standards; fifty dollars ($50.00) per day for failure
to provide the PEG Channel or any PEG Fee related thereto which is required hereunder; one-
hundred dollars ($100.00) per day for each material violation of the Customer Service Standards;
twenty f ve dollars ($25.00) per day for failure to provide reports or notices as required by this
Franchise; and one hundred dollars ($100.00) per day for any material breaches or defaults not
enumerated herein.
b. Where Grantee has three (3) or more of the same violation or breach events (an "event" may
involve multiple customers, but is discrete in time or circumstances) within any twelve (12)
month period, all applicable damages amounts are doubled.
Sectioa 39. Hearinpas. Grantee may request a hearing as follows:
1. Grantee files a written request within fourteen (14) days of receipt of a decision it wants
reviewed with the City Manager. The request does not stay the effect of the decision or obligation to
comply or exercise of any remedy avai(able to the City except as otherwise provided. The City Manager
may conduct the hearing or appoinfi an alternate hearings officer, who shall not be the Person issuing the
order or such Person's subordinate. For matters exceeding $25,000 reasonably estimated value in
controversy as determined by the City Manager, the Grantee may file a request that the City Hearings
Examiner conduct the hearing. A reasonable filing fee may be set by the Hearings Examiner or generally
applicable ordinances.
2. The hearing may be informal and shall be conducted within tweniy (20) days, with at least ten
(10) days prior notice to both sides. The official conducting the hearing is responsible to keep a record of
any materials submitted and shall record the hearing by video or audio tape, for matters exceeding
$25,000 reasonable estimated value amount in controversy. A written decision shall be issued within ten
(10) days. Either party may appeal the decision to a court of competent jurisdiction within thirty (30)
days.
3. Except where otherwise provided, at the conclusion of the City hearings process, if Grantee
remains in default, it shall correct said default in fifteen (15) days or as otherwise ordered by the City. I:n
the event the Grantee does not cure within such time to the City's reasonable satisfaction, the City may:
Ordinance 09- Draft Cable Franchise Page 23 of 28
a. seek specific performance of any provision that reasonably lends itself to such remedy as an ,
alternative to damages, or seek other equitable relief; and/or
b. assess liquidated damages resulting from Grantee's default if not already done or await the
conclusion of the judicial process.
4. Where Grantee seeks judicial review and ultimately prevails, any money judgment against the
City shall be paid or may thereafter be offset by Grantee, in Grantee's discretion, against further franchise
fee payments due to the City. In such event, Grantee shall notify the City at least sixty (60) days prior to
apply the offset.
5. Nothing herein limits the City's right to seek to revol:e this Franchise Agreement in accordance
with Section 40.
Section 40. Revocation.
1. The City may revoke this Franchise Agreement and rescind all rights and privileges associated
with this Franchise Agreement in the following circumstances:
a. Grantee abandons the Cable System, fails to cure a non-payment of a quarterly franchise fee
within 30 days of the required payment date, or terminates the Cable System's operations; or
b. Grantee has a pattern of failing to perform the material obligations listed under Section 38.8 of
this Franchise Agreement; or
c. Grantee attempts to cvade any material provision of this Franchise Agreement or practices any ,
fraud or deceit upon the City or Subscribers.
2. Prior to revocation of the Franchise Agreement, the City shall give tivritten notice to the
Grantee of its intent to revoke the Franchise Agreement, setting forth the exact nature of the
noncompliance. The Grantee shall have thirty (30) days from such notice to object in writing and to sta.te
its reasons for such objection and provide any explanation. In the event the Ciiy has not received a timely
and satisfactory response from the Grantee, it may then seek a revocation of the Franchise Agreement by
the City Council in accordance with this section.
3. The Grantee may file a revocation hearings request within 14 days of the City's written notice
of intent to revoke the franchise tivith the City Hearings Examiner. A reasonable filing fee may be
required pursuant to generally applicable ordinances. Any revocation hearing under this subsection shall
be consistent with Spokane Valley Municipal Code 17.90, except as specifically set forth below. This
shall provide the Grantee a fair opportunity for full participation, including the right to be represented by
legal counsel, and to introduce evidence. Within 20 days of the hearing, the Hearing Examiner shall issue
a recommendation to the City Council. At the next available City Council meeting with notice provided
to the Grantee, the City Council shall review the City Hearing Examiner's record and recommendation,
allowing the Grantee an opportunity to state its position on the matter reserving the right to set reasonable
time limits. Within sixty (60) days after the review, the City Council shall determine whether to revoke
the Franchise Agreement; or if the breach at issue is capable of being cured by the Grantee, direct the
Grantee to take appropriate remedial action within the time and in the manner and on the terms and
conditions that the City Council determines are reasonable under the circumstances. The City Council
shall issue a written decision and shall transmit a copy of the decision to the Grantee. Any appeal of the
decision by the City Council shall be to Spokane County Superior Court within thirly (30) days of
adoption of the decision. Upon timely appeal, the effect of the revocation is stayed pending final judicial "
Ordinance 09- Draft Cable Franchise Page 24 of 28
resolution, but this shall not affect accrual of penalties or the right of the City to take any other
enforcement action, including curing the default at Grantee's expense and liability, also subject to judicial
review. The parties shall be entitled to such relief as the court may deem appropriate.
4. The Council may in its sole discretion take any lawful action that it deems appropriate to
enforce the City's rights under the Franchise Agreement in lieu of revocation.
Sectioo 41. Conditions of Sale. If a renewal of this Franchise Agreement is denied or the
Franchise Agreement is lawfully terminated, and the City lawfully acquires ownership of the Cable
System or by its actions lawfully effects a transfer of ownership of the Cable System to another Person,
any such acquisition or transfer shall be at a price determined pursuant to the provisions of the Cable Act.
Section 42. Transfer of Ri2hts. This Franchise may not be assigned or transferred without
the written approval of the City pursuant to the provisions of the Cable Act. However, Grantee can assign
or transfer this Franchise withoLrt approval of but upon notice to the City to any parent, affiliate or
subsidiary of Grantee or to any entity that acquires all or substantially all the assets or equity of Grantee,
by merger, sale, consolidation or otherwise and for transfers in trust obtained to finance Construction or
operations of a Cable System by pledging the System as collateral..
Section 43. Acceptance. Not later than sixty days after passage and publication of this
Ordinance, the Grantee must accept the Franchise herein by filing with the City Clerk an unconditional
written acceptance thereof. Failure of Grantee to so accept this Franchise within said period of time shall
be deemed a rejection thereof by Grantee, and the rights and privileges herein granted shall, after the
expixation of the sixty days period, absolutely cease, unless the time period is extended by ordinance duly
passed for that purpose.
Section 44. Force Maieure. The Grantee shall not be held in default under, or in
noncompliance with, the provisions of this Franchise agreement due to acts of God or impossibility of
performance as recognized in the common law of the State of Washington, to the extent and for such
period as such conditions persist. For purposes of enforcement, conditions outside of Normal Operating
Conditions are a basis to excuse Grantee's performance, but only to the extent and for such period as such
conditions persist. Conditions outside Normal Operating Conditions may also excuse other Franchise
obligations where they effectively render performance infeasible or impossible, to the extent and for such
period as such conditions persist, but this does not apply as to conditions within the Grantee's reasonable
contYOl.
Section 45. Severabilitv. 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. In the event that any of the provision of the Franchise are held to be invalid by
a court of competent jurisdiction, the Franchise may be modified upon agreement by both parties.
SecNon 46. Renewal. Any renewal of this Franchise Agreement shall be govemed by and
comply with the provisions of the Cable Act (47 U.S.C. § 546), as amended.
Section 47. Notice. Any notice or information required or permitted to be given by or to the
parties under this Franchise may be sent to the following addresses unless otherwise specified, in writing:
The City: City of Spokane Valley
Attn: City Clerk
11707 E. Sprague, Suite 106
Ordinance 09- Drafl Cable Franchise Page 25 of 28
Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Grantee: Comcast of Penn sylvan ia/Washington/West Virginia LP -
Attn: Ken Watts, General Manager
1717 East Buckeye Avenue
Spokane, Washington 99207
With a copy to:
Comcast of Washington IV, Tnc.
PO Box 3042
Bothell, WA 98041-3042
Attention: Franchising Depac-tment
Section 48. Choice of Law. Any litigation between the City and Grantee arising under or
regarding this Franchise shall occur, if in the state courts, in the Spokane County Superior Court, and if in
the federal courts, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington.
Section 49. Non-Waiver. The failure of either party at any time to require performance by
the other of any provision of this Franchise will in no way affect the right of the other party to enforce the
Franchise. The waiver by either pariy of any breach of any provision is not a waiver of any succeeding
breach of such provision, or as a waiver of the provision itself or any other provision.
Section 50. Entirc Aareement. This Franchise constitutes the entire understanding and
agreement bettiveen the parties as to the subject matter herein and no other agreements or understandings,
written or otherwise, shall be binding upon the parties upon execution and acceptance hereof. This
Franchise shall also supersede and cancel any previous right or claim of Grantee to occupy the Right-of-
Way as herein described.
Section 51. Counternarts. This Franchise Agreement may be executed in several
counterparts, each of which when so executed shall be deemed to be an original copy, and all of which
together shall constitute one agreement binding on all parties hereto, notwithstanding that all parties shall
not have signed the same counterpart.
Secdon 52. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after
publication of the ordinance or a summary thereof occurs in the official newspaper of the City of Spokane
Valley as provided by law.
PASSED by the City Council this day of 12009.
Mayor, Richard Munson
ATTEST:
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Office of the City Attorney
Ordinance 09- Draft Cable Franchise 1'age 26 of 28
- - Dat~ of Publicatian;
- " Effective ]3ate_
Ordinartce 09- Dra#t Cable Franchise Page 27 of 28
Accepted by Comcast of PennsylvanialWashington/West Virginia-LP,
By:
By:
The Grantee, Comcast of Pen nsylvan ia/Wash ington/West Virginia. A limited partnership
company, for itself, and for its successors and assigns, does accept all of the terms and conditions of the
foregoing Franchise.
IN WITNESS NVBEIZEOF, has signed this day of _
, 2009.
Subscribed and sworn before me this day of , 2009.
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington,
residing in
My commission expires
Ordinance 09- Draft Cable Franchise Page 28 of 28
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: 08-11-09 City Manager Sign-off:
Item: Check all that apply: 0 consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Approval of the Following Vouchers:
VOUCHER LIST DATE ~ W/VOUCHER NUlVIBERS: I TOTAL AMOUNT
07-23-2009 ~ 17924-17980, & 722090008 ~ $1,235,723.53
07-24-2009 ~ 17981-17993 ~ $247,169.30
07-30-2009 ~ 17994-18055 ~ $7521047.96
07-30-2009 ~ 18056-18060 ~ $49,295.26
08-03-2009 ~ 18061-18068 ~ $19,338.26
~ GR.AND TOTAL ~ $2,303.574.31
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION:
Approve claims for vouchers as listed above.
BUDGETIFINANCIAL IMPACTS:
STAFF CONTACT: Ken Thompson, Finance Director
ATTACHMENTS Voucher Lists
vchlist Voucher List Page: 1
07123l2009 4:57:43PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
,Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
17924 7123l2009 000921 A TO Z RENTALS 191968 . RENTAL OF A MANLIFT-CP 44.13
Total : 44.13
17925 7123/2009 000648 ABADAN 133981 PLANSISPECS #09-031 163.18
Total : 163.18
17926 7/23/2009 001873 ACME CONCRETE PAVING INC Pay App #1 42397 0104 SPRAGUEIMCDONALD INT C( 125,972.10
Total : 125,971.10
17927 7/23/2009 002050 ADDUS HEALTHCARE Refund DEPOSIT REFUND 52.00
Total : 52.00
17928 7/23/2009 000150 ALLIED FIRE & SECURITY SVC1010907 SERVICE CALL 53.27
Totai : 53.27
17929 7123/2009 001081 ALSCO LSP0641770 FLOOR MATS 15.35
Total : 15.35
17930 712312009 000334 ARGUS JANITORIAL LLC 003937 JANITORIAL SVCS: JUNE 2009 2,165.23
Total : 2,165.23
17931 7I2312009 001012 ASSOC BUSINESS SYSTEMS 318976 COPIER COSTS: CD 181.07
325946 COPIER COSTS; LEGAL 48.40
Total : 229.47
17932 7123/2009 000277 AWC July 1919 CONFERENCE REGISTRATION 40.00
Total : 40.00
17933 7123/2009 000485 BARTON JEEP INC. 01678 VEHICLE REPAIR 594.43
Total : 594.43
17934 712312009 001409 BEST LINE 053107092009 ANSWERING SVC: CP 20.40
Total : 20.40
17935 7/2312009 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC 9035552 LINEN SUPPLY AND SERVICE 355.50
Total : 355.50
Page: 1
vchlist Voucher List Page: 2
0712312009 4:57:43PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
17936 7l2312009 000796 BUDINGER & ASSOC INC M08218-6 42110 GEOTECH & MATERIALS TESTING 2,369.69
Total : 2,369.69
17937 7123l2009 001122 CAMERON-REILLY, LLC Pay App #3 42344 BROADWAY FANCHER PCC CONS' 20,695.75
Total : 20,695.75
17938 712312009 000544 CAT TALES 616144CT 42290 KINDERCAMP FIELD TRIP ENTRY F 45.00
Total : 45.00
17939 712312009 000863 CENTURY WEST ENG CORP 024344 42291 CONTRACT N0. 09-001 9,257.51
Total : 9,257.51
17940 712312009 000143 CITY OF SPOKANE May09 UTILITIES-CODE ABATEMENT 397.58
Total : 397.58
17941 712312009 002036 CITY OF SPOKANE, COUNCIL FEB.9, 2009 REIMURSMENT 112.19
Total : 112.19
17942 7123I2009 002045 CUMMINGS, GARY Refund DEPOSIT REFUND 52.00
Total : 52.00
17943 7/2312009 000409 DEPT OF REVENUE 2nd Qtr 2009 LEASEHOLD EXCISE: 600 202105 192.60
Total : 192.60
17944 7/2312009 002046 DOYLE, ALEC PATRICK Refuntl CANCELLATION REFUND 95.00
Total : 95.00
17945 712312009 001846 ECOPLAN-DESIGN 170 42177 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL SEf 14,070.95
Total : 14,070.95
17946 7/2312009 000106 FEDEX 9-250-41325 SHIPPING CHARGES 47.50
9-266-04222 SHIPPING CHARGES 30.49
Total : 77.99
17947 7/23/2009 001859 FINANCIAL FORENSICS 3183 JULY 09: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 937.00
Total : 937.00
17948 7I2312009 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 32492 LEGAL PUBLICATION 67.20
Page: 2
vchlist VOlluner LISt 4-ayC. 3
0712312009 4:57:43PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
17948 7/23/2009 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC (Continuetl)
32537 LEGAL PUBLICATION 30.40
32540 LEGAL PUBLICATION 25.00
32541 LEGAL PUBLICATION 80.75
Total : 203.35
17949 7/2312009 001003 GEOENGINEERS INC 0101376 42214 GEOTECHNICAL EXPL & PAVEMEN 3,590.50
0101376 42215 GEOTECHNICAL EXPL & PAVEMEN 20,876.00
42215
Total : 24,466.50
17950 712312009 001983 GLOBAL EQUIP CO 103091275 42381 RECYCLING CONTAINERS 963.40
Total : 963.40
17951 7123/2009 001253 GORDON THOMAS HONEYWELL June 1042 JUNE 09: LOBBYIST SERVICE 3,010.00
Total : 3,010.00
17952 7/2312009 000007 GRAINGER 9031926430 GRAINGER BLANKET PO 208.21
42246
9031926448 42246 GRAINGER BLANKET PO 102.22
9881894464 42246 GRAINGER BLANKET PO -13.76
Total : 296.67
17953 7/2312009 000011 GREATER. SPOKANE VALLEY Grant 09 OUTSIDE AGENCIES GRANT 2009 2,876.96
Total : 2,876.96
17954 7I2312009 001723 HEDEEN & CADITZ, PLLC 6188 PROFESSIONAL SVCS 2,062.50
Total : 2,062.50
17955 7/2312009 000741 HONEY BUCKETS 0968685 WEEKLY RENTAL- PARKS 10.00
Total : 10.00
17956 712312009 001908 HP EXPRESS SERVICES INC HPE743024 42391 HP EXPRESS SERVICES FOR EDEI 835.00
Total : 835.00
17957 712312009 000313 INLAND ASPHALT COMPANY INC. Pay App #10 42102 PROJ #005 - PINES/MANSFIELD CC 374,629.39
42102
Page: 3
vchlist Voucher List Page: 4
07l2312009 4:57:43PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
17957 7123l2009 000313 000313 INLAND ASPHALT COMPANY INC. (Continued) Tdtal : 374,629.39
17958 712312009 000388 IRVIN VUATER DIST. #6 067900.01 PINES/MANSFIELD #0005 22.70
067900.2 PINESlMANSFIELD #0005 50.05
067900.3 PINESIMANSFIELD WATER #005 32.24
112500.0 MIRABEAU PKWY 1,376,52
Total : 1,481.51
17959 712312009 001635 ISS FACILITY/EVENT SERVICES 21167 CARPET CLEANING-CP 237.12
21192 EVENT SVCS- CP 244.29
21224 EVENT SVCS-- CP 78.80
Total : 560.21
17960 7/2312009 000812 MIRABEAU CHAPEL Refund DEPOSIT REFUND 52.00
Total : 52.00
17961 7/23l2009 001130 MPLC 12567030 LICENSE N012567030 499.00
Total : 499.00
17962 7/23/2009 002048 NAGY, JENNIFER Refund DEPOSIT REFUND 52.00
Total : 52.00
17963 7/2312009 001428 NARFE - CHAPTER 32 Refuntl DEPOIST REFUND 52.00
Total : 52.00
17964 712312009 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 480475831001 42415 OFFICE SUPPLIES 14.76
481130631001 OFFICE SUPPLIES 15.74
Total : 30.50
17965 7/23/2009 000512 OFFICETEAM 24049318 STAFFING SVC: LASERFICHE 513.45
24049319 STAFFING SVC; LASERFICHE 652.00
Total : 1,165.45
17966 7/23/2009 001089 POE ASPHALT PAVING, INC. 42969 STREET AND STORMWATER MAIN' 246.87
42970 STREET AND STORMWATER MAIN' 159,785.33
42971 STREET AND STORMWATER MAIN' 14,875.08
42972 STREET AND STORMWATER MAIN' 1,384.97
42973 STREET & STORMWATER MAINT R 15,530.56
Page: 4
vChllSt Voucner List rage: 5
0712312009 4:57:43PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
17966 7/2312009 001089 POE ASPHALT PAVING, INC. (Continued)
42974 STREET AND STORMWATER MAIN' 190.00
42975 STREET AND STORMWATER MAIN' 1,068.75
Total : 193,081.56
17967 7l23I2009 000291 PROJECT ACCESS, INC. 101 2ND QTR CONTRIBUTION 3,750.00
Total : 3,750.00
17968 7J2312009 000322 QWEST 509-924-4707 740B PHONE SERVICE- TERRACE VIEW 109.30
Totai : 109.30
17969 7123l2009 001276 RANDALL, DAVID 1334 42211 SW ANALYSIS FOR CONSTRUCTIC 6,000.00
Total : 6,000.00
17970 712312009 002049 ROBERSON, TERESA Refund DEPOSIT REFUND 52.00
Total : 52.00
17971 712312009 002044 SMART SIGN MAT-8603 SUPPLiES 354.95
Total : 354.95
17972 712312009 000451 SPOKANE REG SPORTS COMMISSION 2nd Qtr 2009 LODGING RAX REIMBURSMENT 27,500.00
Total : 27,500.00
17973 712312009 001083 STANDARD PLBG HEATING CONTROLS 26535 ANNUAL MAINT; CP 7,022.24
26536 JUNE 09 MAINTENANCE 506.63
Total : 7,528.67
17974 7J2312009 002047 STORY, SARAH Refund DEPOSIT REFUND 257.00
Total : 257.00
17975 712312009 001248 USKH, INC. 01151800-1 SURVEYS: SPRAGUEIMCDONALD 300.00
Total : 300.00
17976 7123/2009 000964 VOLT 20981195 STAFFING SVCS: IT 537.60
21025091 STAFFING SVCS: IT 716.80
Total : 1,254.40
17977 712312009 000136 WA DEPT OF INFO SERVICES 2009060222 42406 EXCHANGE SERVER 2007 STANDP 7,965.32
Page; 5
vchlist Voucher List Page: 6
0712312009 4:57:43PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
17977 7/23/2009 000136 000136 WA DEPT OF INFO SERVICES (Continued) Total : 7,965.32
17978 7/2312009 002051 WAYNE'S TOWING June 09 JEEP TOWING 65.22
Total : 65.22
17979 7/2312009 000089 XO COMMUNICATIONS 0230770758 INTERNETI DATA LINES 178.19
Total : 178.19
17980 7/23/2009 000766 YMCA OF THE INLAND NW June 2009 JUNE MGMT FEESI OPERATING EX 56,876.00
Total : 56,876.00
722090008 7/22/2009 001865 MORGEN & OSWOOD CONSTRUCTION Pay App #8 42219 BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION 339,195.96
Total : 339,195.96
58 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 1,235,723.53
58 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 1,235,723.53
I, the undersigned, do ceRify under penalty of perjury,
that the materials have been furnished, the seroices
rendered, or the labor performed as described herein
and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation
against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am
authorized to authenticate and ceRify to said claim.
Finance Director Date
Page: 6
. i
vchlist Voucher List Page: 1
0712412009 9:01:18AM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Qate Vendnr Invoice PQ # DescriptionlAccount Amaunt
97981 712412009 000958 PAA SWEEPIAIG, LLC 42885 SWEEPING CQNTRACT: PW 24,402.18
Tatal : 24,402.18
17982 7/2412009 001122 CAMERON-REILLY, LLC PAY,4PP #1 42363 SPRAGl1E ADA # 0098 47,297.99
Total : 47,297.91
11983 712412009 000746 EMRLOYMENT SECIlRITY DEPT 2r~d Q7R 09 2ND QTR 2009: l~t TAX 459.43
' 7otat : 459.43
17984 712412009 002053 GIANNfNI, IRENE Refund AQUATICS REFUND 30.00
Tatal : 30A0
17955 7124l2009 002055 GOETTEL, SARAH Refund PERMIT FEE REFUND: PLANNING 84.00
Tota! : 84.D0
17986 7124l2009 002052 HOGBERG, JEANNE Refund AQUAT6C5 REFUND $0.00
Total : 80.00
17987 712412009 000715 NSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 002024 SUPPLIES: CENTERPLACE 158.52
7atal : 15$.52
17988 712412009 001649 KILGORE CaNSTRUCTfON INC PAY APP #13 POQL UPGRADES 106,488.05
Tatal : 106,488.05
17989 712412009 000132 MQDERN ELECTRIC 1NA7ER CO June 2009 U71LI71ES 12,516.09
total : 12,516.09
17990 1J2412009 000062 MlJN50N, RICHARD Expenses aWC, NLC REIMBURSEMENT 777.24
7ntal : 777.24
17997 7/2412009 002054 NESS, TAMMY Refund AQIJATICS REFUND 30.00
Tota9 : 30,00
17992 7124l2009 000709 SENSKE LAWN & 7REF CRRE INC. 3193396 CON7RAGT MAINTENANCE: CENTE 51,859.00
3193397 CONTRACT MAINTE1dANCE: CEN 7 2,018.68
3544523 COlVTRACT MAIIVT: PRECINCT 453.20
Page: 1
vchlist Voucher List Page: 2
0712412009 9:01:18AM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
17992 7124/2009 000709 000709 SENSKE LAWN & TREE CARE INC. (Continued) Total : 54,330.88
17993 7/2412009 000779 SOUTHARD, BRAD 301274 42269 DEAD ANIMAL PICKUP - MAYIJUNE 515.00
Total : 515.00
13 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 247,169.30
13 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 247,169.30
I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury,
that the materials have been furnishetl, the services
rendered, or the labor performed as described herein
and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation
against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am
authorized to authenticate and certify to said claim.
Finance Director Date
Page: 2
vchlist Voucher List Page: 1
0713012009 3:36:56PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
17994 7/30/2009 000648 ABADAN 134762 SUPPLIES 9.78
Total : 9.78
17995 7I30J2009 001873 ACME CONCRETE PAVING INC Pay App #2 42371 CONSTRUCTION SVCS FOR SPRAc 523,469.15
Total : 523,469.15
17996 7/3012009 001972 ALL PHAZE INSTRUMENT `SUPPLY 5313 SUPPLIES 104.03
Total : 104.63
17997 7/30/2009 001534 ALL PRINT 12163 BUSINESS CARDSINAME PLATES 40.76
Total : 40.76
17998 7I30l2009 001081 ALSCO LSP0648855 FLOOR MATS 15.35
Total : 15.35
17999 7I3012009 000335 ALTON'S TIRE INC. 6-42319 TOWING CHARGE 65.22
8080000305 OILE CHANGE- 355185D 34.10
Total : 99.32
18000 713012009 002060 AMERICAN LEGION 8TH DISTRICT Refund . DEPOSIT REFUND 257.00
Total : 257.00
18001 713012009 001310 ARROVU CONCRETE & ASPHALT 60276 STREET MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 79.85
Total : 79.85
18002 713012009 000841 BCI CREATIVE INC 9324 WEBSITE HOSTING: CP 240.00
Total : 240.00
18003 713012009 001950 BEN MEADOWS SC05194390 42408 STORM WATER SUPPLIES FOR INl 134.41
Total : 134.41
18004 7/3012009 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC 9016970 LINEN SUPPLY AND SERVICE:CP 64.27
9037391 LINEN SUPPLY AND SERVICE:CP 292.53
9039244 LINENE SUPPLY AND SERVICE: CF 303.70
9041076 LINEN SUPPLY AND SERVICE: CP 347.44
S0072595 LINEN SUPPLY AND SERVICE: CP 120.07
Page: 1
vchlist Voucher List Page: 2
0713012009 3:36:56PM • Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
18004 713012009 000918 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC (Continued) Total : 1,128.01
18005 713012009 002056 BROMMER, 7JaCHARY Refund CANCELLATION REFUND 95.00
Total : 95.00
18006 713012009 000544 CAT TALES 616145CT 42290 KINDERCAMP FIELD TRIP ENTRY F 218.00
Total : 218.00
18007 713012009 000101 CDW-G PPH6891 42410 NEW MONITOR FOR DAVE MERCIE 503.72
PPH8312 42410 NEW MONITOR FOR DAVE MERCIE 188.73
PRL9036 42423 WIRELESS KEYBOARDS FOR CON 302.88
Total : 995.33
18008 713012009 000109 COFFEE SYSTEMS INC 3820:030366 COFFEE SUPPLIES 11.45
Total : 11.45
18009 7130l2009 000429 COFFMAN ENGINEERS 905762 42427 COFFMAN ENGINEERS 09-032 EEC 5,812.00
906832 42427 COFFMAN ENGINEERS 09-032 EEC 3,654.00
Total : 9,466.00
18010 713012009 000326 CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION #19 05859.0 UTILITIES JULY 09: CP 132.60
06377.0 UTILITIES JULY 09:CP 65.47
06377.2 UTILITIES JULY 09: CP 592.26
11534.2 UTIUTIES JULY 09:CP 20.00
Total : 810.33
18011 713012009 001157 COUNTRY HOMES POWER EQUIP 510139 42411 COUNTRY HOMES POWER EQUIP 184.24
68017 42411 COUNTRY HOMES POWER EQUIP 28.24
Total : 212.48
18012 713012009 001926 DAVENPORT, SARAH July 2009 EXPENSES 19.25
Total : 19.25
18013 713012009 000912 DEX MEDIA WEST July 2009 ADVERTISING: CP 40.40
July 2009 ADVERTISING: CP 260.00
Total : 300.00
18014 713012009 000246 EAST SPOKANE WATER DIST #1 02051000 UTILITIES- JULY 2009:CP 1,666.31
Page: 2
vchlist Voucner List Page: 3
07I3012009 3:36:56PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
18014 713012009 000246 000246 EAST SPOKANE WATER DIST #1 (Continued) Total : 1,666.31
18015 7130/2009 000999 EASTERN WA ATTORNEY SVC, INC 27532 LEGAL SERVICE 40.00
Total : 40.00
18016 7/3012009 001232 FASTENAL CO PURCHASING Credit IDLEW62294 CREDIT FOR INVOICE# IDLEW622c- -46.19
IDEW62500 42245 FASTENAL BLANKET PO 79.18
Total : 32.99
18017 7l3012009 000858 FOOD EQUIPMENT INT'L, INC. 7226 FOOD EQUIPMENT: CP 285.77
Total : 285.77
18018 7/3012009 000011 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY 202841 ADVERTISING 350.00
Totai : 350.00
18019 7/30/2009 001635 ISS FACILITYIEVENT SERVICES 21244 MONTHLY CLEANING: CP 7,136.00
21245 EVENT SVCS: CP 216.70
21274 EVENT SVCS: CP 59.10
Total : 7,411.80
18020 713012009 001439 K&L GATES LOCKHART 2004339 LEGAL SERVICES THROUGH 07/10 1,665.00
Total : 1,665.00
18021 713012009 002061 KICK N' FUN Refund REFUND DEPOSIT 52.00
Total : 52.00
18022 7130I2009 001914 KIPP, RYAN July 2009 EXPENSES 28.85
Total : 28.85
18023 7l30/2009 001684 MARKETING SOLUTIONS NW CP 7-20-09 Media ADVERTISING: CP 2,238.50
CP 7-20-09 P&P ADVERTISING: CP 1,535.00
Total : 3,773.50
18024 713012009 002057 MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION Refund DEPOSIT REFUND 80.00
Total : 80.00
18025 7130/2009 000469 NORTHWEST PIAYGROUND EQUIP INC 31262 PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT 56.96
Total : 56.96
Page: 3
vchlist VQUCher Lisf Pa9e: 4
0713012009 3:36:56PM Spakane ValEey
Bankcade: 8pbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invaice PO # aescriptian/Account Amount
18026 ~ 7/3012009 000652 QFFICE DEPOT INC. 4$0541401001 42420 OFFICE DEPCIT QRDER 278.14
480541432001 42420 Sl1PPLEES-PW 6.00
481130613001 OFRIE SiJPPLIES 9.60
4$1226172001 OFFICE SUPPL1E5- FINANCE 3.13
481249869001 OFFICE SUPPLIES 41.09
Total : 337.96
18027 713012009 000512 OFFICETF-AM 240$25$2 STAFFING SVC: LASERFICFfE 652.00
24082583 STAFFING SVC: LASERFIC}!E 652.00
Tota1: 1,304.40
18028 713012Qa9 001334 DLYMPIC FQUNDRY INC. 58969 STORM WATER- GRATE COVERS 434.80
Total : 434.E0
18029 713012009 004860 PLATf 6381067 SUFPLIES: CP 199,65
Total : 199.65
18030 7l3012009 001O89 P0E ASPFiAI.T PAVING, INC. 42972 Correctian STREE7 ANQ STORMWATER MAEH 5.00
To#a1: S.U0
18031 7130l2009 002058 PSOMAS & BpUREKIS, DDS Rerund DEPOSIT REFUNQ 52.00
Total : 52.00
18032 713412009 000322 p1NEST 509-921-6787 5116 PHONE SERVICE 46.44
509-922-70910608 PWONE SERVICE- MIS510N PaOL, 109.38
509-926-1840-194B PHaNE SERVICE- PARK ROAQ PD 109.50
Total : 265.32
18033 713012009 000415 ROSAUERS 689107 SUMMER PRDGRAM SUPPLIES 43.46
Total : 43.46
18034 7130I2009 002042 RUSSELL, KELSEY Refuntl DEPOSIT REFUNa 255.00
Total : 255.00
18035 713012009 001957 SfCYLINE CON7RACTORS INC Pay App 93 CONSTRUCTIO9V CONTRACT 21,581.18
42364
Total : 21,581.48
Page: 4
, ,
vchlist Voucner List Page: 5
0713012009 3:36:56PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
18036 713012009 001140 SPECIAL ASPHALT PRODUCTS C046540 42382 COLD MIX 3,521.88
Total : 3,521.88
18037 713012009 000184 SPLASH DOWN 071509 42296 SUMMER DAY CAMP FIELD TRIP EI 645.84
Total : 645.84
18038 7/30/2009 000172 SPOKANE CO ENGINEER VLY0906 COUNTY SERVICES 125,557.56
Total : 125,557.56
18039 7130/2009 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 41501013 JUNE 09: WORK CREW 6,170.32
Total : 6,170.32
18040 713012009 000324 SPOKANE CO WATER DIST #3 170-0040-03 UTILITIES JULY 09 348.82
Total : 348.82
18041 7/30/2009 000898 SPOKANE PROCARE 2009-06 JUNE 09: LANDSCAPING SVC 12,642.68
Total : 12,642.68
18042 713012009 000420 SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DIST 3241440 2ND QTR 09: WATER TESTING 159.00
Total : 159.00
18043 713012009 001903 SPOKANE TRAFFIC CONTROL May 2009 42256 INDIANAIARGONNE TRAFFIC CONI 782.00
Total : 782.00
18044 7130/2009 000311 SPRINT 326088106-020 WAPS FOR LAPTOPS 549.89
959698810-020 SPRINT CELL PHONES 1,024.74
Total : . 1,574.63
18045 7130I2009 001791 STONE, MIKE Expenses MISC EXPENSE 159.46
Total : 159.46
18046 7/3012009 001464 TW TELECOM 03030319 INTERNET/DATA LINES 1,690.85
Total : 1,690.85
18047 7130/2009 002059 UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD Refuntl DEPOSIT REFUND 52.00
Total : 52.00
18048 713012009 001398 UNITED CHURCH OF GOD Refund DEPOSIT REFUND 52.00
Page: 5
vchlist Voucher List Page: 6
0713012009 3:36:56PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
18048 7/3012009 001398 001398 UNITED CHURCH OF GOD (Continued) Total : 52.00
18049 7l30I2009 001444 UNITED LABORATORIES 20868 JANITORIAL SUPPIES: CP 275.21
Total : 275.21
18050 713012009 001752 VALLEY MEALS ON WHEELS Refuntl DEPOSIT REFUND 52.00
Total : 52.00
18051 7/3012009 000295 VALLEYFEST 739 PUBLICATION 1,515.00
Total : 1,515.00
18052 7I3012009 001663 VISION TECHNOLOGY LegoCrazy LEGO CRAZY DAYCAMP: CP 836.00
Total : 836.00
18053 713012009 000964 VOLT 21068407 STAFFING SVCS: IT 728.00
Total : 728.00
18054 713012009 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 0048461-1518-5 WASTE MGT:PW 3,476.41
2516167-2681-5 WASTE MANAGEMENT:CP 732.12
2516168-2681-3 WASTE MGMT-JULY 2009 285.27
Total : 4,493.80
18055 713012009 000152 WSDOT RE-313-AT690710105 SIGNAL AND ILLUM. MAINT 11,707.01
RE-313-ATB90710106 STATE ROUTE ROADWAY MAINT. 1,456.85
Total : 13,163.86
62 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 752,047.96
62 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers: 752,047.96
Page: 6
vchlist Voucner List rage: 7
0713012009 3:36:56PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury,
that the materials have been fumished, the services
rendered, or the labor performed as described herein
and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation
against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am
authorized to authenticate and certify to said claim.
Finance Director Date
Page: 7
vchlist Voucher List Page: 1
07;3012009 4:09:02PM Spokane Vailey
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
18056 7l3012009 000030 AVISTA 010119017 UTILITIES: PARKS MASTER AVISTP 13,601.53
410069444 UTILITIES: PW MASTER AVISTA 21,596.42
' Total : 35,197.95
18057 713012009 001606 BANNER BANK 0620 JUNE 09: 0620 406,50
0638 JUNE 09: 0638 455.00
2674 JUNE 09: 2674 151.55
2682 JUNE 09: 2682 1,119.54
4359 JUNE 09: 4359 5.00
4375 JUNE 09: 4375 455.00
4383 JUNE 09: 4383 490.00
4458 JUNE 09: 4458 1,035.82
4474 JUNE 09: 4474 990.00
4720 JUNE 09: 4720 828.31
5579 JUNE 09: 5579 2,266.60
Total : 8,203.32
18058 7130I2009 000508 CONOCOPHILLIPS FLEET 870166725906 JUNE 09: FLEET FUEL BILL 2,537.61
Total : 2,537.61
18059 713012009 000709 SENSKE LAWN & TREE CARE INC. 3549679 BARK INSTALLATION - TERRACE V 1,934.86
3562568 VOLUNTEER WORK AT PARK 1,396.52
Total : 3,331.38
18060 713012009 000295 VALLEYFEST 2009 STORMWATER BOOTH 25.00
Total : 25.00
5 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 49,295.26
5 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 49,295.26
Page: 1
vchlist VouCher List Page: 2
0713012009 4:09:02PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
I, the undersigned, do certify under penalry of perjury,
that the materials have been fumished, the services ,
rendered, or the labor performed as describetl herein
and that the claim is just, due antl an unpaid obligation
against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am
authorized to authenticate and certify to said claim.
Finance Director Date
Page: 2
vchlist VouCher LiSt Page: 1
0810312009 4:22:09PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
18061 813J2009 001938 BERGERlABAM ENGINEERS INC 15510 PROFESSIONAL SCVS: PLANNING 4,645.47
15649 PROFESSIONAL SVCS: PLANNING 10,046.50
Total : 14,691.97
18062 8/312009 002056 BROMMER, PAT Refund CANCELLATION REFUND 95.00
Total : 95.00
18063 8/312009 001169 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY July 2009 PETfY CASH: 6930 11.14
Total : 11.14
18064 813/2009 000505 H& H FINANCIAL SERVICES INC. July 09 LEASE PAYMENT 954.39
Total : 954.39
18065 81312009 000239 NORTHWEST BUSINESS STAMP INC. 72072 STAMPS: CD 7.50
Total : 7.50
18066 813I2009 000067 SIGNS NOW 116 22888 SIGNAGE 1,180.15
Total : 1,180.15
18067 81312009 000230 SPOKANE CO AUDITORS OFFICE June 2009 RECORDING FEES 539.00
May 2009 FILING/ RECORDING FEES 1,157.00
Total : 1,696.00
18068 81312009 000065 STAPLES BUSINESS ADVANTAGE 8012820858 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CD 151.22
8012871911 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CD 165.00
8012984931 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CD 385.89
Total: 702.11
8 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 19,338.26
8 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 19,336.26
Page: 1
vChlist Voucner List Hage: 2
0810312009 4:22:09PM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount
I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury,
that the materials have been fumished, the senrices
rendered, or the labor performed as descnbed herein
and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation
against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am
authorized to authenticate and cerfify to said claim.
Finance Director Date
Page: 2
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: 8-11-09 City Manager Sign-off:
Item: Check all that apply: 0 consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE :
Payroll for Period Ending July 31, 2009 GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
BACKGROUND:
OPTIONS:
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION:
BUDGETIFINANCIAL IMPACTS:
Gross: $ 244,137.40
Benefits: $ 124.755.83
Total payroll $ 368,893.23
STAFF CONTACT: Raba Nimri ATTACHMENTS
DRAFT
MIlq-UTES
STUDY SESSION MEETING
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL .
Spokane Valley City Hall
Spokane Valley, Washingtoa
July 21, 2009 6:00 p.m.
Attendance:
Councilmembers Staff
Rich Munson, Mayor Dave Mercier, City Manager
Dick Denenny, Deputy Mayor Mike Jackson, Deputy City Manager
Rose Dempsey, Councilmember Mike Connelly, City Attorney
Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Ken Thompson, Finance Director
Gary Schimmels, Councilmember Mike Stone, Parks & Recreation Director
Diana Wilhite, Councilmember Kathy McClung, Community Development Dir.
Neil Kersten, Public Works Director
Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer
Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk
Mayor Munson opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m. and welcomed everyone to the study session. Mayor
Munson explained that Deputy Mayor Denenny is not feeling well and therefore requests to move agenda .
item #4 to be addressed second, then continue as originally noted. There were no objections.
ACTION ITEMS: 1. Motions for Interviews on Julv 28, 2009, Council Position #2 Vacancv - Mavor and
Councilmembers
Mayor Munso❑ explained that Council members will make a nomination, that each nominafiion must be
seconded, and that upon voting, if the nominee receives four or more votes, that person will be
interviewed; and any noininee who receives less than four votes, will not be interviewed. Mayor Munson
thanked all the candidates for their civic commitment, and reminded everyone that there will be at least
one upcoming opening on the Planning Commission, and he encouraged the candidates to apply for that
position and encouraged each candidate to register for the November race. Mayor Munson opened the
floor for nominations.
Fred Beaulac was nominated by Councilmember Gothmann and seconded by Deputy Mayor Denenny.
Vote for Fred Beaulac: Mayor Munson, Deputy Mayor Denenny; a.nd Councilmembers Schimmels,
Gothrnann and Dempsey. Opposed: Councilmember Wilhite. Mr. Beaulac will be intervicwcd.
Ian Robertson was nominated by Mayor Munson and seconded by Councilmember Gothmann.
Vote for Ian Robertson: Unanimous. Mr. Robertson will be interviewed.
Ben Wick was nominated by Councilmember Wilhite and seconded by Councilmember Dempsey.
Vote for Ben Wick: Unanimous. Mr. Wick will be interviewed.
Richard Maver was nominated by Deputy Mayor Denenny and seconded by Councilmember Wilhite.
Vote for Richard Mayer: Councilmembers Gothmann and Wilhite, and Deputy Mayor Denenny.
iIr. Mayer will not be interviewed.
Stanlev Courchaine was nominated by Councilmember Dempsey and seconded by Mayor Munson.
Vote for Stanley Courchaine: Deputy Mayor Denenny; and Councilmembers Dempsey and Wilhite.
Mr. Courchaine will not be interviewed.
Council Meeting Minutes: 7-21-09 Page 1 of 6
Appr•oved by Council:
DRAFT
Diana Sanderson was nominated by Deputy Mayor Denenny and seconded by Mayor Munson. Vote for Diana Sanderson: Unanimous. Ms. Sanderson will be interviewed.
John Tvson was nominated by Councilmember Dempsey. There was no second so Mr. Tyson will not be
interviewed.
Dean Grafos was nominated by Councilmember Schunmels and seconded by Councilmember Wilhite.
Vote for Mr. Grafos: Deputy Mayor Denenny; and Councilmembers Schimmels and Wilhite. Mr. Grafos
will not be interviewed.
After Mayor Munson called twice for additional nominations, no additional nominations were offered and
it was moved by Deputy 1l7ayor Denenny, seconded by Councilmember Gothmann and unanimously
agreed to close the nominations. Mayor Munson asked City Clerk Bainbridge to read the list of
nominations; and she read the names of Fred Beaulac, Ian Robertson, Ben Wick, and Diana Sanderson.
Mayor Munson said the Clerk will notify these individuals to ask them to attend the meeting next week
for the interview process. Mayor Munson again thanked everyone for submitting applications.
Councilmember Gothmann asked if it would be acceptable to question the candidates about information
from their resume and application, and Mayor Munson said that would be up to the individual
councilmember, and that it would be fair to ask questions from the resume and/or application.
4. Motion Consideration: Wastewater Treatment Plant Interlocal Agreement - Mike Connellv
Because Councilmembers were just given the most recent rendition of the interlocal, Mayor Munson
asked if councilmembers would take a few moments to read the new interlocal. It was then moved by
Deputy Mayor Denenny and seconded to authorize the City Manager or designee to execute the proposed
Interlocal Agreement between Spokane County and the City of Spokane Yalley regcn-ding wastewater treatment. City Attorney Connelly explained that this agreement came about as a result of cautions and
recommendations by the various individuals involved witll the sale of bonds for the new wastewater
treatment plant tllat indicated that without an agreement, the rates and interest to be charged for the
. facility could be higher; that financing agencies supplied us with specific estimates if this were not in
place; once that became known to us and to the Board of County Commissioners, he worked to arrive at
terms and negotiate an agreement which would be acceptable to staff and county, and said that agreement
is here now for Council's review. Mr. Connelly explained that in the agreement the County agrees to
provide wastewater collection, handling, treahnent, disposal and to collect charges; and the City agrees it
will not create a competing wastewater utility or cotnpeting system for the purpose of providing services
as long as the County's bonds are outstanding; he said that if an existing user wants to expand, or a new
user wants service and the County can't provide that service, we can use any means we desire to provide
that. Further, Mr. Connelly said if the County can't provide treatment for any of our existing users, like a
catastrophe or something else occurs to extend non-treatment for more than six months, that we can
terminate the agreement and go wherever we choose. Mr. Connelly reminded everyone that it's still the
county's system and pipes that we'd have to use so there would have to be subsequent agreements
regarding those issues. Mr. Connelly said the Commissioners and the City agreed to set up a rate
advisory board to make recommendations regarding budget and charges to charge the users, and when the
new plant comes on line, the rates will be adjusted to pay off bonds and pay costs of operation.
Mr. Connelly then explained some of the specific changes which occurred over the last week: page one,
the last paragraph and the last "whereas" that originally after "facility" it said "as currently contemplated"
and Mx. Connelly said those words were removed as it was not definable; on the top of page two a clause
was added at our request to be clear that t11is is to serve a specific purpose and is not an overall agreement
dealing with all aspects of the sewer system, but is an agreement to accomplish those three things: they
supply, we agree not to compete; and the committee is formed. Further, he explained that page tvvo Council Meeting Minutes: 7-21-09 Page 2 of 6
• Approved by Council:
DRAFT
contained a definition of agreement that originally said pertaining to planning, construction, ownership
etc, dealing with every issue, but noted it pertains solely to those matters contained herein. Page three
discussed County bonds that were defined as the bonds that were going to be let in 2009 and any
additional bonds that may be necessary with no specified term or cap on subsequent bonds; and he
explained that we mirrored the language set forth in the bond resolution that they will be secured by this
agreement. Mx. Connelly said the twenty-year bonds will likely go on sale in August and that the scope
of the bonds is set forth in the bond resolution.
There was discussion concerning the current bond market, that we don't know the exact cost yet and City
Attorney Connelly said we might be looking at a.riother interlocal, or some instrument to fill in the holes;
that we didn't want this to be an all-encompassing document but to use this as a non-competing clause;
that regarding the advisory board, Mr. Connelly said the initial concern was that there were more county
appointments then the city so they made it a 50/50 board with two commissioners, two elected officials
from Spokane Valley and the fifth person selected by the other four. Mr. Connelly said this advisory
board will continue as long as the agreement is in effect, and the agreement is in effecfi as long as the
bonds are outstanding and that we would have to have a new structure for some kind of rate advisory
board, so we need to think what we would do if this agreement dies and what kind of board do we want.
Attorney Connelly said page six, section 3.2 has the most recent changes where it formerly had language
that in the event the County doesn't have capacity and fails to serve, and that was removed and it now
states if the County fails to serve for any reason. Under section 2.5 section 3.2.d, Mr. Connelly said if the
County tells us they can't serve and don't have any more capacity, then this agreement terminates; and
that he and Mr. Emacio agreed that section 3.6 concerning formal mediation procedure was needed. Mr.
Connelly said if this agreement is approved, it will be part of a rate setting procedure that starts tomorrow
in San Francisco; adding fihat the Board of County Commissioners has already signed their agreement.
Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were offered. Deputy Mayor Denenny asked
Council to keep i❑ mind that this agreement is trying to address a single issue: the bond of the facility and
our relationship to that and our ability to have some kind of an out if the facility doesn't go on line; but
that it doesn't try to answer all the questions. Mr. Connelly said he feels there are still significant
questions not yet resolved. Yote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions:
None. Motion passed. ,
Mayor Munson and Councilmembers excused Deputy Mayor Denenny from the remainder of the
meeting. Mayor Munson called for a recess at 7:45 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 7:55 p.m.
2. Second Readine Proposed Ordinance 09-014 Amending Eminent Domain Ordinance, Citv of
Spokane, Havana Bridge - Mike Connellv
After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Councilmember Wilhite and
seconded to approve Ordinance 09-014, amending Ordinance 09-007. City Attorney Connelly explained
that as discussed previously, Spokane Ciiy now wishes to use the entire'Hite property; so the change from
the initial ordinance is the new legal description of the property, which also references the amended
interlocal agreement. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were offered. Yote by
Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Qpposed: None. Abstentiorrs: None. Motion passed.
3. Motion Consideration: First Amendment, Interlocal Agreement City of Spokane, Havana Bridge
- Mike Connellv
It was moved by Councilmember Wilhite and seconded to approve the First Amendment to Interlocal
Agreement betweefz the City of Spokane and the City of Spokane Valley regarding acquisition of property
by eminent domain, and authorize the City Manager or designee to execute said documefit. City Attorney
Connelly explained that this is a revision to the interlocal to reflect the change in the territory of the
property; and said that we agree to deed that over to the City of Spokane; and after the exchange of the
deed the entire right-of-way will all be under the jurisdiction of one entity, the City of Spokane, which
Council Meeting Minutes: 7-21-09 Page 3 of 6
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
will also be responsible for the maintenance. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were .
offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion passed. 5. Motion Consideration: Change Order for Pines/SQrague Intersection Proiect - Neil Kersten
It was moved by Councilmember Wilhite and seconded to authorize the City Manager an additional
,$140, 000 in change order authority for the completion of the Pines/Sprague Intersection project. Public
Works Director Kersten explained that the Pines/Sprague Interscction project was approved a few months
ago at $634,428.25; that the City Manager has change order authority of $95,164; but they now have
some additional overruns as during construction, it was discovered that construction debris including old
toilets, broken pipes, and rotting railroad ties had been used as fill under the existing road. Mr. Kersten
also mentioned there were some errors in some of the bid estimate quantities of about $42,000 as noted on
the July 14, 2009 memorandum from Craig Aldworth. Mr. Kersten said the project is almost complete
and a total of $393,069 is still anticipated to be left over from the STA grant after completion of all three
intersections. Mayor Munson invited public comment. Dick Behm, 3626 S Ridaeview Drive: said that
the County took over the old railroad and back in the 20's and 30's light rail ran from Spokane to Coeur
d'Alene on that roadway so about every 100 to 200' there were huge concrete footings for the old electric
line. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion passed.
6. Motion Consideration: Waste Maoaeement Lease Agreement - Neil Kersten
It was moved by Councilmember Wilhite and seconded to authorize the City Manager or designee to
negotiate and sign the lease with Waste Mcmagernent in an arnount of $53,865. Public Works Director
Kersten asked that Council consider amending the motion to an amount not to exceed $57,888 as he is
sfiill negotiating with Waste Management, and the appraisal was based on 9% of the value and Waste
Management would like to have it at 10%; adding that staff will continue to negotiate. It was then moved
by Councilrnember Wilhite, seconded and unanimously agreed to amend the motion to raise the dollar -
amount not to exceed S57,888. Mr. Kersten said staff will continue to work at the original number in the
appraisal, and will give Council an up-date on the status as the process proceeds. Councilmember Gothmann asked about insurance and Mr. Kersten said Deputy City Attorney Driskell is reviewing that
language as well. Mr. Mercier stated that $2 million is the general amount; and Councilmember
Gothmann said that section is somewhat awkward and Mr. Driskell agreed and said he will make a
change. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were offered. Councilmember Gothmann
said this is a great achievement and demonstrates we are moving along and have a plan in place; and said
this is the second of three steps to get the matter of winter snow removal moving; a.nd Mr. Kersten added
that we were fortunate to find suc11 a facility which needs only minimal work to have it ready to go, and
said that the location is also ideal. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None.
Abstentions: None. Motion passed.
7. Motion Consideration: Purchase of WSDOT Surqlus Trucks - Neil Kersten
It was fnoved by Councilmember Wilhite and seconded to authorize the City Manager to purchase five
WSDOT surplus trucks and sander units for a total amount of $92, 700. Public Works Director Kersten
explained that this price actually went down a little from the original anticipated amount; that WSDOT
has five units which is the minimum we need to do the job; that our staff inspected three units in detail
and rivo more are coming in and when they arrive, staff will inspect them as well and proceed to purchase
if the equipment is acceptable. Mr. Kersten said he is working on a change order with Poe Contractors
who will maintain and assemble this equipment as when the equipment arrives, the plows and sanders
will not be on so we'll need to haul them to a site where Poe staff will assemble the trucks and make sure
they will be 100% ready for action. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were offered.
Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed.• None. Abstentions: None. Motion passed.
Mavor Munson invited 2eneral public comments; no comments were offered. `
Council Meeting Minutes: 7-21-09 Page 4 of 6
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
REGULAR STUDY SESSION ITEMS:
8. Winter Road Maintenance - Neil Kersten
Mr. Kersten said in keeping with providing Council an update about every two weeks, tonight in addition
to the two prior agenda items, Mr. Kersten said that Poe Contract has agreed to supply the needed labor,
they have given us a commitment and we are working to put together the numbers; that part of this
segment of the winter road services includes an understanding of what needs to be done, and Mr. Kersten
said he hopes to have that within the next two to three weeks; and Mr. Kersten then explained his 7-14-09
update of those items "in process" and of what remains to be done; adding that he anticipates having the
Poe change order at the August 18 meeting. Mayor Munson said we need to develop an altemative plan
in case we need the County's assistance; and said he asked them to contact us to start that negotiation for
a backup plan; and Mayor Munson asked Mr. Kersten if he has heard from the County, and Mr. Kersten
replied that he had not. Councilmember Gothmann remarked that after the last Health Board meeting, he
discussed this topic with Commissioner Richard and told Mr. Richard we likely won't need their
assistance, and Mr. R.ichard told Councilmember Gothmann and that they are there for us and willing to
back us up.
Mr. Kersten said staff will put out a notice for those who have road graders and will put out a bid; that he
anticipates needing to set up some training, and develop a plan, so if we need them, they'll be on call and
ready to go for us for backup. Regarding the site plan, Mr. Kersten said the area is very operational and
requires very minor work, such as painting, and building a few pads to stockpile sand and materials. Mr.
Kersten also said he doesn't have an estimate on cost yet for next winter, but to assemble the equipment,
and the work on the site, and depending on the weather, he estimated in the area of $200,000; and said the
cost could vary from $200,000 to a million dollars, that it is a large variation, but it depends on the
harshness of the upcoming winter. Mayor Munson asked about any unanticipated stress to our budget, and
Mr. Mercier said he does not anticipate any stress we can't withstand, and as we customarily do, we will
likely offer a budget amendment later in the year. Mr. Kersten said we had about $400,000 for this year;
and a reserve of $500,000; that we didn't spend a lot after the first of the year as the bulk of the expense
was in December, and said he can research those numbers and said we will be close to having enough
funds in the budget to get ready.
9. Draft Leizislative Aeenda/2010 Council Goals - Mavor Munson
Concerning the draft legislative agenda, Councilmember Wilhite mentioned that she will be meeting with
Senator Brown next week to discuss transportation issues and said if anything comes from that, she'll
report such to Council. Mayor Munson stated that Senator Brown had promised she' 11 be looking to
amend the Transportation Benefit District (TDB) legislation and use the white paper he recently
submitted as a model. Mayor Munson also mentioned there could be higher state taxes forthcoming and
said that 911 funding hasn't increased since the 1980's but the cost for providing 911 services increased
about 7% annually; and said the state will be looking at a deficit in 2010 as a result of those increases in
costs for equipment and personnel. The proposed street utility fee was mentioned and Mayor Munson said
' there was no provision last year for a vofie, that Spokane Valley supported the provision and the bill will
be co-sponsored or sponsored by the House Transportation Chair; and he said the biggest problem locally
is the delegation voted against this on the principle of no new taxes; but said Spokane Valley supports the
concept of a vote first. Regarding the City Hall City Center, Mr. Mercier said he is looking for the
opporiunity to make the project a demonstration project as to-date, there are no public buildings in the
state that meet the "living building" standard, that the "living building" is a notch above all the LEEDS
["Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design" (an internationally recognized green building
certification system)] programs that provides an opportunity for sophisticated systems to allow a building
to be a net zero building, that is, not consume any more utility then what is generated; and said we would
still have to research how much it would cost to operate. Fractionalized billing was mentioned and Mr.
Mercier said that Spokane County is in the process of acquiring software to allow it to distribute the cost
for incarceration and booking and we are trying to determine the timeframe for the application; and said
Council IYfeeting Minutes: 7-21-09 Page 5 of 6
Approved by Council:
D.RAFT
this will likely impact all user communities which rely on jail services. Mayor Munson mentioned the -
upcoming ballot issue of the 1/10 of 1% sales tax. Mayor Munson said the reverse 911 system is going to , be more expensive then thought and will be contracted out per responses to Requests for a Proposal.
Concerning the 2010 goals, Mayor Munson asked if Council has any questions or comments; and hearing
none, Mr. Mercier said staff will incorporate those into the formulation of the 2010 budget which council
will see within a few weeks.
10. Advance A2enda - Mavor Munson:
Mayor Munson said that next week Council will conduct interviews with the four finalists chosen tonight,
with questions limited to the applications, resumes, and those questions previously submitted; and said
there will be a maximum of thirty minutes per interview, with a selection scheduled for August 4. Mayor
Munson also mentioned the idea of a press conference on August 19 after the August 18 meeting which
will include the winter road maintenance issue. Councilmember Gothmann reminded Councilmembers of
the upcoming joint meeting with the Spokane City Council this Thursday. Mayor Munson and
Councilmember Wilhite asked to be excused from that meeting as they attend an Association of
Washington Cities meeting in Leavenworth.
11. Council External Committee Reports - Councilmembers
Mr. Mercier reminded Councilmembers that this agenda item is not for those typical weekly meeting
reports, but if any board is facing significant policy decisions, this is an opportunity to solicit input from
fellow councilmembers. Councilmember Schimmels mentioned that the results of the audit with Solid
Waste is now among the public; and the Solid Waste Advisory group will be meeting tomorrow, and the
liaison board will meet August 3. Mayor Munson asked if either board would consider Mayor Verner's
proposal, and Councilmember Schimmels said he is not aware of that, and said he doesn't know of any
kind of agreement before the bonds are scheduled to be paid off; and he asked Public Works Director
Kersten to comment on the technical committee group on the facility request. Mr. Kersten said that group -just started and they are scheduled to meet August 3; that the technical group met in the morning and the
liaison group in the afternoon to go through the first audit analysis, he said the addendum will not be
included, and said he will get the groups' schedule. Mayor Munson said Council would like to talk about
this as the interlocal is being developed instead of seeing it as a final draft; and Mr. Kersten said he has
not seen any draft interlocal and does not know the timing as he is not- part of the liaison board. Mr.
Mercier said he has a meeting next week with Russ Menke and hopes to get more information thcn.
12. Council Check-in - Mavor Manson:
Councilmember Gothmann asked in relation to the State Auditor and the charges on the Sheriff s Office
contract, if we have received the wanted data. Mr. Mercier responded that through our legal department
last week, he received a copy of the material from the auditor's office in response to our public record
request; that the County received the same information and we forwarded the information to Financial
Forensics and a conference call is scheduled with them for Friday morning; after which he said they will
try to bring representatives of both offices to together.
13. City Manaeer Comments - Dave Mercier: N/A
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:03 p.m.
ATTEST:
Richard Munson, Mayor
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk -
Council Meeting Minutes: 7-21-09 Page 6 of 6
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
- MINUTES
Joint Spokane Valley City CounciU
Spokane City Council Meeting
Thursday, July 23, 2009
3:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
Spokane City Council Briefing Center, 808 West Spokane Falls Blvd.
Attendance:
Citv of Snokane Vallev Spokane Citv
Dick Denenny, Deputy Mayor Mary Verner, Mayor
Rose Dempsey, Councilmember Joe Shogan, Council President
Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Mike Allen, Councilmember
Gary Schimmels, Councilmember Bob Apple, Councilmember
Steve Corker, Councilmember
Al French, Councilmember
Absent: Absent:
Mayor Munson Nancy McLaughlin, Councilmember
Diana Wilhite, Councilmember Richard Rush, Councilmember
Staff: Spokane Citv Staff
Dave Mercier, City Manager Ted Danek, City Administrator Mike Connelly, City Attorney James Richman, Attorney
Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Michael Taylor, City Engineer
Neil Kersten, Public Works Director
Greg McCormick, Planning Manager Others Present:
Morgan Koudelka, Senior Administrative Analyst Judge Delaney
Rick VanLeuven, Police Chief Judge Logan
Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk Frank Tombari
Council President Shogan welcomed everyone to the meeting.
11 Tonics of Interest:
a. Municipal Courts. Objective: Discuss Citv of Spokane's Municipal Courts Svstem includine whether
it is oossible to exnand that svstem to include the Citv of Snokane Vallev
Deputy City Mayor Denenny said the purpose of this topic is to discuss how the system is working for
Spokane, if there are any plans for expansion, and if so, would those plans include Spokane Valley; aad
he asked Spokane Valley's Deputy City Attorney Driskell and Senior Administrative Analyst Koudelka
to give some background on the topic; adding that we are not seeking any action on any item today, but
are here for the information and discussion. Mr. Driskell explained that in December 2008, Spokane
Valley had an opportunity to do some alternative planning on some contracts, and we looked at applicable
timeframes and determined there was an immediate need to address district court, that we had to give the
district court notice of termination by the end of January 2009 for it to be applicable two years ahead of
time; that staff started work to secure an agreement with Spokane County for district court and the two
entities agreed that if we gave notice to terminate, we could withdraw such notice by December 2009,
which would allow time to do the alternative analysis; that some of the work was done in-house, and we
contracted with a consultant from CTED to most of the work as they had background in working on
similar analysis; and he said that one option from our standpoint was contracting with another entity, and
logically that would be the City of Spokane. Regarding the original agreement with Spokane County, Mr.
Driskell explained that we did a rolling, one-year agreement with automatic renewals unless one were to
give the other six month's notice; but he said Spokane Valley staff felt that the one-year agreement runs
afoul of the statutory provisions regarding election of judges cycles, so it was determined we had to give
Joint City/ Spokane City Meeting Minutes 07-23-09 Page 1 of 7
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
notice by January 31, 2009. Mr. Koudelka said that we asked CTED to explore all options, and added -
that CTED's research division has preformed many studies for other jurisdictions; he said that the City of
Spokane staff has also been very cooperative as CTED identified the City of Spokane and in-house
service provisions as the altemative options to Spokane Valley's existing service with Spokane County
District Court; and he said this study will be completed this September and given to our council for their
review so that decisions can be reached regarding long-term service provision, which will be made prior
to December 1 of this year. In response to Mr. Shogan's question about a facility, Mr. Koudelka said there
is a courtroom in the Valley Precinct which mainly deals with traffic infractions, and said most
misdemeanors are handled at the County Courthouse.
Mr. Shogan asked Judge Delaney, Judge Logan and City Administrator Danek to explain how the present
systern is functioning. Judge Delaney said in 1962 as part of the then revised court's Eliminated
Jurisdiction Act, the City elected to become part of Spokane City District Court, that they operated that
way until 1993 when there was a substantial change in the statute regarding election of judges, which
statute become effective in 1995, that had required judges to be elected for the municipal department by
city residents only and that wasn't done; that this was ultimately raised in a case and the City of Spokane
began looking at alternatives if we were not properly electing judges. He explained that they reviewed
various options for a court formation, or acquisition of court services, that there were a few differennces
with Spokane County over the reading of a few statutes, and the Supreme Court validated Spokane
County's interpretation of the statutes; so a task force was formed but the ultimate decision was that the
municipal department was eliminated by the legislature; so he said they elected to form their own Court
as per RCW 3.50, which court became effective January 1, 2009; he said judges were appoinfied on that
day and stood for election in November; that they are now funetioning as an autonomous municipal court;
that they have some inter-regional relationships with Spokane County; but other than that, they function
completely autonomously; and said they are functioning well and met the early case resolution goals; that
they are researching various alternatives to incarceration including working on an agreement with the Department of Corrections for a work crew-oriented public service contract. Judge Delaney mentioned
thafi their first jury trial was within ten days of operation. Judge Logan said their facility needs help as
they are jammed in; that they are working with the Garner Street Building, but she said they need space.
The issue of dealing with in-custody court cases a.nd transportation to the courthouse was discussed and
Police Chief VanLeuven said that the holding portion of Spokane Valley's precinct was closed but they
have a functional holding cell, which is not for long term but rather used in the initial portion until people
can be transported downtown; that there are seven cells there for storage, and the only operational portion
is processing DUI suspects, not housing anyone. Deputy Mayor Denenny mentioned that Spokane Valley
purchased the building from Spokane County. Mr. Shogan asked if Spokane Valley wants to get into the
transportation of prisoners and Judge Delaney mentioned that jail transport issues are a driving factor in
all their cases. In response to question, Judge Logan mentioned they have a forty-five member staff.
Councilmember Gothmann asked if Spokane Valley is also required to have elected judges in its own
municipal court system, and Judge Delaizey responded no, that under the current operation, Spokane
Valley has the option to contract or have their own, and Spokane Valley City Attorney Connelly added
that Spokane Valley's current system is lawful. Mr. Shogan extended his thanks to the judges and
Dorothy `Vebster and Cindy Marshall and said they have a well run functioning municipal court, and if
this issue needs to be further pursued, the more likely process would be on a department-to-department
level. Deputy Mayor Denenny asked about the benefit of having another municipality participate in the
cost and if Spokane is willing to pursue this in the neact year or so, and Mayor Verner said they have the
capacity to contract with other jurisdictions, that they are not soliciting contracts, but as a professional
courtesy they will open their offices and staff to answer questions of Spokane Valley's consultant and
would entertain, if needed, the idea of negotiating a contract. _
Joint City/ Spokane City Meeting Minutes 07-23-09 Page 2 of 7
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
b. Reeiana.l Trans oortationJTr-ansvartation Benefit District (TBD). Obiective: Discuss vossibXe chanizes
to the °TBD. (See Mavor Munson's attached "white vaper")
11}ir. Shogann hrought atteritiOri to May0r MuriSOri'S "wh1te paper77 which contains issues for discussian.
Mr. Shogan said Spokane City has an approximate $7 million def cit in their upcoming budget, about haif
af which is for street maintenance; he said those expenses wauld have been covered by REET, but as in
othex communities, those revenues are about depleted; that pursuit for support of the street utility fee
came close hut it didn't pass; that they have problems in the debt naw to deal with even thaugh in the
1ot19 term a street utility vvould be bettet; and he said he'd like to hear comments on the idea af a county-
wide TBD as opposed to several citzes working andependently. Tleputy Mayor Denenny said that the
whi#e papeE re-states Spokane Valley's Council's discussions; that the TBD creates a false sense of
security and gives the impression we are fixing a prablem, but it lacks flexibility and doesn't address
ongoin.g maintenance axnd operatxan cQSts (,M&C}) and lae said that nceds to 6e fix,ed be#'ore going to the
public; as he feels if the public were to vote on i#, it would be difficult to bring it back again later as
presentjy, escalation costs are nat included, thete are no mechaiiisms to increase cost factors, and that
cambined with t-ie sunset provision are factors why Spokane Valley Cauncil did not suppork it at this
t11fi1e.
Discussion turned to the ability of the County to impose a$20 per vehic.le fee, and M.r. Shogan sajd if the
Board of Caunty Commissioners imposed such $20 fee if could do so without a vote; but it vvauId nat be
a lang term solutaan; he said the timeframe for a TBD is 10 yea.rs; so within that lifespan we should know
if there wvuld be a street utility fee ar not; and NIr. ShOgaII addeC~ th&t he d0es I10t t11L1k V4ters woEild VO#e
for anything naw, and said he xs concerned about a two-year gap in getting a street u#ility through the
legislature and the $20 fee; that he understatnds the County Cammissianers wan't do anything unless a
larg~ ~aj'ority would suppart fihe action far an annual $ZD vehicle fee. Mr. Shogan said he read Mayor
Munson's cvncerr►s, and added that he is hvpeful Senator Brown might be able to clean up sorne o'f the
. language; that he'd prefer some discussion on the annual $20 fee which might bring maybe $4-5 million;
and safd there'd have to be same agreernent abaut a11ocation af funds before maving it just on xegistered
vehicles.
N1.ayor Verner distributed copies of the Senate Transpartafiion Comrnittee's Septernber 24, 200$ "Spokane
County Lacal Optivn Tax Yields" supplied by k'xank Tambari; she sa.id she spoke to the House deZegate
about sponsonng an amendment to fihe legislation and what it would take fvr our jurisdictivns to suppart
an imposition af thase; and said this sheet answexs b~sic questions of haw much revenue would be
generated. Mr. Tombaxi said these figures represent about the maximum per category county-wide; that
they are not braken dawn but are more of a gross nwmber across the counfy; he said he asked C"rlenn IVliles
if we could get closer on how much sales and use tax fram Sgokane Valiey versus the unincorporated
area, and tearned, that woutd be very problen7atic and said they are trying to corrre up with mechanisrns
that wouId allocate dolfars in those categories by ju.risdictions; that this is ufhat we have to deal with naw
regardless of what legislatian may come up with later; and he said they are irying to deterrriine quitable
distribution of those numbers and aXsa dea1 with M&D and capital prajects; and when this was drafted,
the philosophy was for fuzads from capitaT projects, that frorn a business standpoixat they wvuld like to see
50f50 for capitaI and M&O; adding that the $20 is the anly thing allovved to be enacted now. Mr. Tambari
said that members of rhe business catxmunity have asked that we cansider this countywide as emplayees
and employers cross boundaries; and said they are trying to come up with a reasana6le and fair way to
divide the funds by jurxsdxction. Mr. Shogan said that a city utiIi€y wauld like]y be supparted, but the
cancern is the need for svmething in the interim, and added that there is nothing to sa}r this utility fee
wauld be permanent.
. Further discussiQn included cvmment ftom Cou.ncitrriember Allen that there needs to be more
conversation about the issue of no escalatio-n xn the TBD, as it is a critical flaw not to consider that $10
millxon today would lik~ly be half o#' that in t-ie -future; and Mayor 'Verner agreed that there are three
Joint City! Spokane City Meeting'M:inutes 07-23-09 Page 3 af 7
Apprvved b}r CoLncil: .
DRAFT
major flaws: (1) the sunset provision of ten years; (2) inflation; and (3) the lack of flexibility on the
project list, including whether M&O projects can be added. Councilmember Gothmann said that Spokane
Valley's study showed we had a$4 million gap between what we are doing and should be doing, and the
projected $2 million from this won't take care of that; so we would have to go to the voters again, and
said the idea of listing projects, even with an orderly plan, that $2 million would not do it as we'd have to
spend some of that on capital projects; and said the pavement preservation program is one of Spokane
Valley's highest priority, and said we are reluctant to support something that won't solve our problem.
Mr. Tombari responded that they asked jurisdictions to give them a rollout of the pavement, maintenance
and reconstruction annual cost and it appears the countywide issue is $44 million. Mr. Shogan said at an
immediate level, the $20 would help, but if this goes to the voters for a TBD or street utility, we would
have to decide if the $20 hurts or not as he said the County Commissioners said unless Spokane Valley
and the City of Spokane back the $20 vehicle fee, they wont' do it; which puts him in a quandary on how
to solve their shortfall now with a short-term measure, yet keep an eye on the long term. Councilmember
Allen said his concern with the $20 is it won't fix the problem, it creates voter confusion, and the County
Commissioners will get a small chunk and take the biggest hit; and said he prefers a street utility and
prefers working to get the legislative fix; adding that he doesn't like some aspects of the TBD and said ifi
will be harder on businesses; and both Councilmember Gothmann and Deputy Mayor Denenny said the
prefer to go to the voters with something that will solve the problem.
Mayor Verner stated that they are getting feedback from their delegation in Olympia and from members
of the Transportation Committee who will work on the street utility, that they don't know how long it will
take, there is a sense the TBD legislation has been on the books and we haven't been using the tools given
to us; and questioned if we are approaching the state and federal funding the way we should, that perhaps
we are trying to use it for everything like M&O and capital, and maybe we should go to the state and
federals for capital projects, and forget the 50/50 split, and instead try for 100% for state capital projects;
then alter 100% of local funding for local needs. Councilmember Allen remarked that if the tool is the wrong tool, we need the right one, and so we pass it to the voters to decide which tool is right and break down the barrier. Councilmember Apple said he supports the imposing a on vehicles only if it is regional;
that he prefers going to voters; that this has been languishing for two years with no action; and that the
street bond will run out soon; that we won't ever get the backlog for the deficit; but he would like to put
on the ballot. Mr. Shogan said he agrees, adding that the EMS measure and the mail measure will be
coming up in 2010, so perhaps a spring 2011 election would be preferred; and if the street utility does not
make it through the legislature, we need an Plan B and should keep the TBD as an option.
Mayor Verner said there are numerous options and tools; and she would request the city councils to
advocate for the County to have a county-wide street utility as we need a regional solution; and to keep
working with Glenn Miles to see about the possible formulas to distribute the funds money, whether by
population or by number of registered vehicles registered or assessed valuation; and fio ask Mr. Miles to
use the $44 million in revenue as an assumption, and to try to think of which formula would be most fair
county-wide. Mr. Tombari said if everyone could come to agreement as to a revenue distribution formula,
then we would have that as the crux of the interlocal; then find a way to put the TBD together and put it to
a vote; adding that he does not share optimism on the State's ability to pass a street utility fee and until
that occurs, he recommends moving ahead with what we have to chip away some of the backlog, and said
that everyone has the same issue dealing with backlog, and wondered how much construction can we take
in our six months' time period before we shut down businesses due to lack of access or difficulty in
accessing businesses. Councilmember Corker said the election next year will make it harder for the
legislature to move, and the general economy rnakes it difficult; that we need to look locally and said he
can't image anything happening at the state level to give us resources within the next three to four years.
Deputy Mayor Denenny said he now has a sense of what Spokane needs and hopefully Spokane realizes
why Spokane Valley takes the position they are taking, as we try to avoid that huge million problem and Joint City/ Spokane City Meeting Minutes 07-23-09 Page 4 of 7
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
said if we maintain the roads now, we save eight dollars for every one dollar spent, and said he would
rather not go to the voters multiple times, yet he hesitates implementing a tax which would create the
need to go back for a unfunded situation over years. Council President Shogan said the language of the
TBD needs refining, and concerning the street utility, we'll see what we're looking at after the legislature
is finished, and said at least we have options, adding that he doesn't see the County Commissioners
implementing a vehicle fee. Councilmember Gothmann said the needs in Spokane seem to hover on street
reconstruction, but the Spokane Valley's emphasis is on preservation, to extend life not reconstruct, and
asked would one tool work for Spokane City and another tool for Spokane Valley? Mr. Shogan said that
perhaps some of that would be inserted in the flexibility of the language of the TBD. Mr. Corker
reiterated about the concern of the legislature telling municipalities they are not taking advantage of
taxing resources; that we got into the cunent position because we constantly postponed issues and waited
for other to come up with solutions; and said part of the issue is taking some ownership and actions
independent f what we would expect from Olympia. Councilmember Allen agreed and said by the time
we meet in the spring, a Plan B should be mapped out; Councilmember Apple said he prefers putting the
$20 on the ballot sooner then later, and to sit down and figure out how to distribute the revenues; as
whether for maintenance or reconstruction, it still benefits the public. Councilmember French said the
City is committed to press to get the issue through the legislature, that we need to carry the ball, and he
thanked Spokane Valley for their assistance. Council President Shogan said he projects in the future that
next spring we'll know what is the strongest proposal to come out of the legislature; that we can't ask
them twice do one or the other. Mr. Tombari expressed his thanks to all the elected officials for
participating in this process, as well as to staff . City Engineer Taylor asked if there was consideration
concerning the recent issue of the split of gas tax urban and rural and said he hasn't been adjusted for a
long time; and said that urbanization happens every time there is a recession; that there has been no
reallocation of the split dollars; that he would propose asking for proper allocation and not asking for
more; and said it might be easier to work with the legislature on that topic and he'd lobby for doing
something in that regard.
c. Growth Mana2ement Act (GMA) Joint Planninsz Policies and Implementation. Obiective: Discuss
how to work toaether in the future
Council President Shogan said Spokane has no issues concerning this now; and Deputy Mayor Denenny
said Spokane Valley was seeking information on the background of Spokane's process in dealing with
Airway Heights, and of conversations and working with the County Commissioners in doing re-
distribution; and maybe something that Spokane has done to allow Spokane Valley to use as a template
for ongoing ventures with the County, or inputs for a process. Mayor Verner said she many of us have
been to the meetings with Susan Winchell and are familiar with the CTED funded process they have
come up with for a regional approach to annexation; she said it is important to build communication with
the County Commissioners, that the issue is the money and not the land use or the jurisdiction; that we
need to ensure the County doesn't loose all those funding streams, that we need the County's Auditor and
Assessor, but we have our own budget needs, and «Je suffer on urban development just outside our
borders; and that we need to receive acknowledgment that we are trying for equitable distribution of
funding; that annexation on the West Plains is complicated and the County is a major partner in this issue;
that al three parties could spend a lot on litigation, or we could sit down with the knowledge that we all
need to make money and remain whole; that revenue sharing is complex; that a better solution is time
instead of money, so if we get all the agreement in place so we all have an understanding of what land
uses will look like, who will provide what services; and suggested postponing the effective date so the
County will know that deadline is coming; and in the interim period, the county retains the responsibility
and the authority, and proposed to the county that they include them during that two-year period; to
choose a subjective date two years out which seems reasonable for all jurisdictions to make the necessary
preparation. City Planning Manager McCormick said they have been monitoring the interlocal process
and are keeping up to date on what's going on.
Joint City/ Spokane City Meeting Minutes 07-23-09 Page 5 of 7
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
Mayor Verner said the legislature gave us a new tool, the interlocal method of annexation, and said they are striving toward mutually agreed solutions; but said it is new law and will be tested; so they need to be ,
prepared to fall back on the standard petition method. Mr. Danek said working on this issue once a week
builds relationships, that this process has completely laid open some of the problems in regional funding; ,
adding that it is a transparent process which lends to more mutual trust. Deputy Mayor Denenny said he
would appreciate it if Spokane finds ways to give us input and interaction; and if anything Spokane does .
that can help mitigate any of the misunderstandings, it would be helpful; and mentioned that Mayor
Verner came to the SWAC meeting yesterday which was very beneficial; and said we will be wanting to
talk about that in the not-too-distant future, as regarding the solid waste interlocal, Spokane Valley's
interlocal expires in 2011 before anyone else's; and said there is concern on our part regarding which
direction to go; and said perhaps we could just have an extension in the interim if needed.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 4:15 p.m.
ATT'EST: Richard Munson, Mayor
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
~
Joint City/ Spokane City Meeting Minutes 07-23-09 Page 6 of 7
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
White Paper describing the changes needed to the current Transportation Benefit District Legislation.
1. Remove the Sunset provision or extend the time frame for the Sunset Provision to allow for long
term bonding for capital projects.
2. Provide flexibility to fund emergency repairs that are not covered in the approval given in the
initial ballot issue. For example, damage caused during a declared state of emergency or severe
winter break up damage that could not be anticipated when the original voter approval ballot
process takes place. Wording could be introduced that would identify a specific portion of the
funding for such events or require a new voter approval process for new emergency projects or
emergency funding authorization for a specific list of general emergency situations (flooding,
winter breakup, snow removal or fire).
3. With voter approval, the ability to extend the life of a TBD that allows revisions or additions to
the project list stated in the original voter ballot issue. For example, in year 5 of a TBD the need
to add a new capital project (street rehabilitation) that was not anticipated in the original voter
approval ballot. This voter approved action would allow the TBD to issue new bonds to pay for
the capital project and automatically extend the life of the TBD to provide funding for the project.
Currently, a new TBD would have to be established to deal with this situation.
4. Enhanced funding mechanisms that provide sustainable funding. The ability to provide funding
that will be able to be increased as costs increase is essential. An example would be the Street
Utility Authority. Static measures such as the Vehicle Tab fee will only work until increasing
costs catch up with and surpass the revenue stream. It is essential we go to the voters once with a
funding mechanism that will solve t.he funding problem without having to go to them and ask for
more money to complete ongoing M&O and regional transportation projects.
5. Our initial ask list will be based on estimates. We all know the initial estimates for capital
projects are not necessarily what the actual costs are at the end of the process. Sometimes costs
are more and sometime they are less than the initial ask. The TBD must have some mechanism to
deal with unanticipated cost over-runs and leftover funds that were not expended because of
various cost savings successes. Even if we build in a contingency percentage to cover cost over
runs, many times it is not enough during periods of escalating inflation. Municipal Councils have
the ability to adjust their budgets to deal with these situations. The current TBD does not.
6. The ability for Municipalities to confiinue sustainable funding tools after the TBD period of
existence ends. The need for local M&O funding will not end with the termination of a TBD. If
we can provide for an unlimited life span of a TBD whose scope can be expanded with a series of
voter approved project lists than this provision is not necessary.
Joint City/ Spokane City Meeting Minutes 07-23-09 Page 7 of 7
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
MINUTES
City of Spokane Valley
City Council Regular Meeting
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Mayor Munson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and welcomed everyone to the 164th meeting.
Attendance: City Staff ,
Rich Munson, Mayor Dave Mercier, City Manager
Dick Denenny, Deputy Mayor Mike Jackson, Deputy City Manager
Rose Dempsey, Councilmember Mike Connelly, City Attorney
Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Mike Stone, Parks & Recreation Director
Gary Schimmels, Councilmember Kathy McClung, Community Development Dir.
Diana Wilhite, Councilmember Neil Kersten, Public Works Director
Ken Thompson, Finance Director
Rick VanLeuven, Police Chief
Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer
Bill Miller, IT Specialist
Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk
INVOCATION: Father John Steiner of St. Mary's Catholic Church gave the invocation.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Munson led 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 Denenny, seconded and unanimously
agreed to approve the agenda.
INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS:, nla
COMNIITTEE, BOARD. LIAISON SLfP►fMARY REPORTS:,
Councilmember Wilhite: reported that in preparation for budget review in October, the Finance
Committee met to discuss the 2010 budget; that she made a presentation to Spokane Regional
Transportation Council regarding the structure of the committee and she met with Senator Brown
regarding transportation issues for Eastern Washington; she attended the groundbreaking for Discovery
Playground, and attended the Spokane Valley Employee Barbeque.
Councilmember Schimmels: said he attended the joint meeting with the Spokane City Council; and sat as
an extra on the Solid Waste Advisory Committee.
Councilmember Dempsev: reported that this morning she joined the Mayor and Councilmember
Gothmann and others at the re-opening of the Pines/Mansfield interchange; attended the joint meeting
with the City of Spokane; attended a groundbreaking for a new townhouse complex with Community
Frameworks; tivent to an emergency management training today where she learned the importance of
managing community contacts.
Deputv Mavor Denennv: said that he attended the STA Board meeting where they had a presentation on
a program regarding Washington State University's creation of a website with overlay of transit routes; in
the Mayor's absence, chaired the joint meeting with the City of Spokane; attended the Solid Waste
Advisory Committee meeting where they were briefed on a Moses Lake meeting regarding recycling and
what may be needed on the eastern side of the state.
Councilmember Gothmann: reported that he attended a Board of Health strategic planning meeting and
said they are trying to move toward statistic-driven issues like a higher mortality rate of infants in some
Council Regular Meeting: 7-28-2009 Page 1 of 18
Annrnvetl hv ('.nnnr.il-
DRAFT
areas of the county correlates with higher smoking in those areas; attended a party for community members of the Ponderosa area; attended the opening of Discovery Place; the City employee barbeque;
the Spokane Regional Health Department meeting where they discussed trial swine flue vaccinations as
well as their fee schedule for next year; attended the joint City of Spokane and Spokane Valley Council
meeting and the re-opening of Pines this morning at 6 a.m.
MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Munson reported that he went to the 911 meeting which discussed the
process for declaring a state of emergency; that last week Clear Channel Radio got a group of community
leaders together in an effort to help get the word out about how to make this a better place to l ive;
mentioned he was interviewed by Mike Fitzsimmons; went to a meeting where several elected officials
were interviewed and shared information with the Secretary of the Department of Commerce (formerly
CTED); mentioned the STA meeting; attended the Special Olympics where he was a dunk tank target;
attended the Discovery Playground groundbreaking; the Valley Chamber meeting, and an Association of
Washington Cities retreat in Leavenworth.
YUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Munson invited general public comments. No comments were offered.
1. CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any
member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered
separately.
a. Claim Vouchers, Voucher # 17798 through # 17922; 70909004: total: $613,447.05
b. Payroll f.or pay period ending July 15, 2009: $269,482.70
c. Approval of June 30, 2009 Regular Council Meeting Minutes
d. Approval of July 7, 2009 Council Study Session Meeting Minutes
e. Elpproval of July 14, 2009 Regular Council Meeting Minutes
f. Approval of July 21, 2009 Special Council Meeting Minutes -
It was moved by Councilmember Wilhite, seconded, and unanimozcsly agreed to approve the consent
agenda.
NEW BUSINESS:
2. First Readinfz Pronosed Ordinance 09-015 Interim Ordinance Regarding CPA 01-09 and Development
Aareement - Mike Connellv '
After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Councilmember• Wilhite anal
seconded to advance Ordinance 09-01 S to a second yeading. City Attorney Connelly explained that this
ordinance does two things: it amends the Uniform Development Code (UDC) and adds a section that sets
forth rules for using a developer's agreement, which is allowed by State law but not presently addressed
in our Municipal Code; and said that this simply sets forth the rules and does not address the specific
comp plan zone change and said if this passes, it would adopt the change to the UDC on an interim basis.
Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor:
Unanimous. Opposed: 1Vone. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
3. Motion Consideration Shoreline lnventorv Contract - Kathv McClunp-
It was moved by Depzrty lVfayor Depury Denenny and secorided to authorize staff to negotiate a final
scope of work and enter into a conn•act with URS Corporation to zrpdate the city's shoreline master
program. Community Development Director McClung explained that staff interviewed four consultants
and based on the proposals submitted and the interview process, staff selected URS Corporation as the top
firm, which firm also completed the City of Spokane's shoreline master program. Mayor Munson invited
public comments; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor.• Unanimous. Opposed.•
None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
Council Regular Meeting: 7-28-2009 Page 2 of 18
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
A.DMINISTRATIVE REPORTS:
4 Revenues and Exaenditures Report - Ken Thompson
Finance Director Thompson explained that each year about this time we start budgeting for the coming
year; that the first hearing is set for August 11 to give the public opportunity to respond to revenues and
expenses; that the budget for 2010 is estimated at $93 million which was accurate as of last week, but the
numbers change and we are now closer to $101 million when you add in the capita( projects; but he
explained that is still down about $9 million from the current year. Mr. Thompson said the County
advises that our assessed value will be close to the current year; he said real estate excise taxes are down
dramatically which will crimp us on additional street projects, but he said we have enough funds to see us
though this year, but will scale back for 2010 as needed. Councilmember Gothmann asked about new
construction versus existing homes, and Mr. Thompson said there is about $100,000 for new construction,
but said this is an unusual year as the County advises there will be no increase in assessed value; and he
said we don't automatically get the 1% and said we expect it to be flat or even decreased; that we plan on
the first $100,000 and the 1%; and said the Cifiy Manager will present his balanced budget August 11.
Mayor Munson called for a recess at 6:37 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 6:49 p.m.
5. COUNCIL POSITION #2 CANDIDATE INTERVIEWS:
a. Mr. Ian Robertson
Councilmember Schimmels: Mr. Robertson, Z'll ask you question #2, What do you think is the biggest
challenge facing the City Council?
Mr. Ian Robertson: I think there are several challenges. I think number one is re-development and
making our city more beautiful and functional and shiff we've been working on for the last six plus years;
and I'm real encouraged when I see cities like Leavenworth that have just re-invented themselves over the
years when they had a new vision, and I think with our new vision we can do the same, and I think that's
one of the big needs. Another challenge is the $4 million we need for street preservation. I think those are
there. And number three I think I'd list solid waste management. We know that's coming up next year
and there's gong to be some critical decisions that need to be made in the right direction. So I would say
those would be the three biggest challenges that I see today, and maybe the economy. I should add the
fact that knowing how to go forward when times are tough as they are right now.
Mayor Munson: Two more questions, Gary.
Councilmember Schimmels: Thank you.
Mavor Munson: Go ahead, you have two more questions if you want.
Councilmember Schimmels: If I wani? Let me, let's make a round and then
Mavor Munson: That's fine. Whatever you guys want to do.
Deputv Mayor Denennv: Mr. Robertson, I know that you've been involved in various pieces of this city
since the beginning, and I'm sure you've seen the activities we've been involved in, so I'd like to go to
the question on the time element and your ability to participate in other committees and boards and the
commitment I think to the additional task that's over and above just the council.
Mr. Ian Robertson: Yea, I'm heavily involved; and I know, in fact I do plan to give up three boards and
groups that I'm working with in order to do this, yea it would definitely mean an adjustment, but I just
want to focus and focus all my energy in working on the city, so yes, I' 11 give you 110% and do the best
Council Regular Meeting: 7-28-2009 Page 3 of 18
Annroved hv Council:
DRAFT as I've done in everything I've tried to do as Planning Commission or whatever; so, and if you give me .
choices on which committees, I do have a list but I won't give you that tonight. -
Deputv Mavor Denennv: And the general open question on #11, is you know, what do you think is the
most important function of a city council member?
Mr. Ian Robertson: Okay, if T had my teleprompter I could move a little faster, but most important
function of a city council member, ABC comes to mind: I want to be an advocate, #2 budget, and #3 is
constituency. By an advocate I mean it's our job to publicly support and recommend causes and policies
particularly, I think that's number one. Number hvo is what you're already doing is present a balanced
budget and make sure we have a positive cash flow and those things; and number three constituency, we
represent the whole city not just an area o€ the city, but we are elected at-large, you're elected at-large,
and we need to keep that in mind all the time. Listen, listen, listen. I think that's what hopefully I've been
good at that at the Planning Commission, and I think that's the most important function as far as city '
council members are concerned.
DeputN, Mavor Denennv: And, 1 think I' 11 leave it at that.
Mavor Munson: I have hvo questions I'd like you to respond to. Local residents of the valley paid about
70%, this is #6, 70% of the MilwaLikie right-of-way before the City was incorporated; that's that $3.1
million that was paid for the entire right-of-way. Should the city etpend any funds to purchase the
eYtension of Appleway?
Mr. lan Robertson: Now what number was that were you giving me?
Mavor Munson: 6
Mr. Ian Robertson: Number six, olcay, yeah, my short answer is no. I think we've got enough to keep us
busy for the neYt twenty years with other areas of the city without going after something that we don't
have as of today. So I think if we do not have that particular street there are other alternatives that we
could, like 4`" Street perhaps, or some other things that we could go that route. And actually; the, today
the freeway's the best easdwest way to get through the city. When we started, back you know, before the
city, we didn't have six lanes on the freeway. We do now. Totally different, so, I think we can get along
fine without spending more money on that.
Mavor Munson: What if any concessions do you think the City of Spokane Valley should agree to so we
may acquire the Milwaukie right-of-way?
Mr. Ian Robertson: None. Short answer. I think I'll elaborate if you want me to, but no, I just think
we've got plenty on our plate right now at these times to be concerned about those things.
Mavor Munson: Alright. Mr. Gothmann?
Councilmember Gothmann: Question, there we go; 9uestion 24. We spend about $450,000 annually on
leasing our present city facility, city hall facility. In addition a city hall building would add to the
attractiveness of a city center. Should we build a city hall?
Mr. Ian Robertson: Should a city hall be built? Yes. Should we build a city hall, I'm not quite so sure. I
think the, what will happen with a city hall, number one is the same thing that happened with CenterPlace. CenterPlace started before we were a city, but that beautiful building has been an attraction,
and it's attracted tllree other beautiful buildings beside it. So I think a city hall will attract something
Council Regular Meeting: 7-28-2009 Page 4 of 18
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
once an inveshnent's been made. Number two, I feel very strongly that we do not want to take as any
property unless we have to off the tax rotls, so I would absolutely suggest a public/private partnership. .
There is no tax benefit for a city or a church or a non-profit owned property, and T think if we can work
out something with developers where they can pay taxes on it I would, would prefer that. I also really
iike what the City Manager said a week or so about let's go green. You know the federal government is
just determined there're going to give the funds to somebody, and if we turn it down as a state, some other
state is going to get it. So I think there are some funds available and I hope we've got the right whoever
in Washington looking into those things. I think that, that's tremendous possibilities for the future.
Councilmember Gothmann: Ok. Very good. Question 23: Contracts are negotiated by our city manager.
Contract disputes are also handled by him. Given these facts, how can we move toward better contract
resolution between the County and the city?
Mr. Ian Robertson: Oh, you know, we have a very knowledgeable city manager, fully capable of
' handling negotiations and possible contract disputes. And when you have disputes, sometimes you've got
to go to a third party to resolve them, and that's just life. And I think a current example is the Sheriffs
Department billing dispute with the County. We had a disagreement. The County went to a state group,
we went to a national group. One said the County was right. The other said the City was right. Now the
two are going to get together, compare notes and work these things out. This is standard conflict
negotiation whether it's on a high school campus and it's going to be solved by the principal, or whether
us in city hall; and I think just let it run its course, and I think we're on the right; now what often happens
is somebody goes to the media or somebody, the only exercise is you know, jumping to conclusions, and
can escalate it, you know just like kids we, a few will tend to take sides ...[tape switches to side two]
you shouldn't be the wheeler-dealer; I mean even if you wanted to go out and buy a race track or
something, we don't want him to have that authority.
Counci(member Gothmann: Ok, very good. Thank you. .
Mavor Munson: Rose? .
Councilmember Dempsev: What do you hope to accomplish as a council member and what do you offer
the city? This is question 910.
Mr. Ian Robertson: The thing on the planning commission more and more, if we're thinking, hey this is a
twenty-year plan. What is going to be best in this place for my grandchildren and your grandchildren;
that was the thing that we just kept thinking on the plans, or what, whatever we were doing. So what we
hope to accomplish I think just, I've been a dedicated voice in the community. What I want to accomplish
is just bring the community together more and more, and I think I've done it; we're working with the
school district, facilities option committee, business groups, the Chamber giving me the Community
Caring Award, the Citizen-of-the-year Award; good things, on that, and just say we've got to be able to
work with all different diversity throughout our entire area; and I think with the founding of the HUB,
you know, working with the sports community; and all of that; pulling, and it's great what can happen
you know when everybody's pulling in the same direction at the same time, and I think that's what we
need more and more at this particular time. So, I'm not saying I'm going to do it alone, but tive're a team,
and we're going to work in that with, for the betterment of the city. Yes.
Councilmember Demqsev: Ok, and question #17: How do you feel about the telephone utility tax that
was implemented by the City Council?
Mr. Ian Robertson: Okay. Um, you know, the, it was clear in the survey that was taken this year and in
previous surveys, that streets were to be a major concern of what we are doing; and frankly, you know,
Council Regular Meeting: 7-28-2009 Page 5 of 18
A.....n.n`i 4%v rnsinrd•
DRAFT
some, we don't want to get like some other city where streets have not been maintained for twenty years. And let me say, I really appi•eciate, when I see all the work that's going on this summer on Sprague and "
on all the infiersections, and Argonne, and the Barker Bridge, and all of these things, you know,
sometimes we forget all the good things that are happening. And I've forgotten what the question is now.
Councilmember Dempsev: The telephone utility tax.
Mr. Ian Robertson: Get me off on a.... 4h yea, the tax, that's what that was for; for that particular
thing, yes. I think sometimes, you know, everybody wants great service and nobody wants to pay for it;
that's life and that's why you as council members have to make those, those tough decisions; that
sometimes we do need to do that; and there maybe are some other ways of funding some things, but that's
the way it is just now.
Councilmember Demosev: Okay. And how do you, what do you feel about extended mass transit?
Mr. Ian Robertson: Oh I'm for it, particularly to the airport early at morning and late at night so my wife
doesn't have to go on that; that kind of thing, and sornetirne Dr. Rudy and I will talk to you about
monorail and some of our; you know, there's a great big difference between doing nothing and high-
speed bullet trains; I mean there's a lot of choices we have behind, bctween that; I' m not for one or the
other extreme, but I think, you know, particularly for all the people who may not have the transportation, I
think it's very important. I think it's very important for students with our universities in this metropolitan
area. 1 think for poorer people especially that it is an absolute necessity; and I guess my British
background is coming out on that also, yes.
Councilmember Dempsey. Thanl: you.
Mavor Munson: Diana?
Councilmember Wilhite: Good evening. My first question to you is, what are the three highest priorities a
city needs to address and how do you propose to address those issues?
Mr. Ian Robertson: I think communication with the community is number one. We have donc, we, I
include myself as being part of the team all of this time; I think a fantastic job in moving from the county
environment to where we are today. You have led in a lot of the heavy lifting, and some of the non-
glamorous shiff and all the changes; and I remember when we started the HUB and cry about all of those
things. I really feel we need to seriously talk about video taping council meetings so that not just a few of
us know the good things that are going on; not just council meetings, but presentations that I've really
appreciated. And I'll tell you, we've got the tools today, streaming video where people can look at that
kind of stuff, and 1 think this area of communications, call it selling if you want, that really
communications, we've just got to do a better job of marketing what we are doing, and the transparency
in government. Number rivo, and you've heard me talk about public/private partnerships; we've got to
figure more ways, not just the government working with business in the support of business, but also the
NGO's, and non-government organizations like the faith. Just two weeks ago, where we had three
hundred people from four churches working seven projects for the city and for Central Valley School
District. I get excited about that; well you know, we can save money, but involvement of people; so I
would be one that would definitely say let's work out more of these partnerships; and let's make sure, ah,
City Manager, that nobody's going to lose their job because we've got too many volunteers doing that
because you've got to make that commitment to, or somebody is saying, you know, am I going to be out
of work because we've got too many volunteers around here; so those are caveats. And number thrce I
think would be, you said three didn't you? A sustainable community. Now 1 use the word sustainable and you know, we don't like that word on there, but I tell you, we have to protect the environment, and
Council Regular Meeting: 7-28-2009 Page 6 of 18
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
aquifer, the air quality, the open space and move to alternate, clean energy sources now. We need to get
away from our dependence on Middle East oil, and we're not going to rely on, to Washington to do it, we
need to set soine examples, and I believe on technology that I'm familiar with that we can move in that
direction as soon as possible. So that may be a hot button and I won't go into more detail now.
Councilrriember Wilhite: Thank you. My next question is, if a majority of the Council took a position
that you were against, how would you handle your response to the public?
Mr. Ian Robertson: You already know the answer to that because I did disagree with one thing, and you
knew nothing about it. But I did, and I'm not going into what it is because, I did talk to the Mayor on this
particular thing. I did talk to Councilmember Bill Gothmann on that particular thing, and they told me
why they voted that way, and you know, it's just like with my wife, the times we disagree I have to admit,
she could be right; and I have to admit they could be right, but I don't; that's it; and you're wondering
which one it is.
Mavor Munson: Not really. I think I know.
Councilmember Wilhite: And then, do you think the City should contract with the County for services,
utilize private companies, or hire city personnel, and there were three that we had: Animal control, Street
Sweeping, Stormwater maintenance? That's question #19.
Mr. Ian Robertson: Okay. You know, my philosophy really is, basicatly what you, what you, what we
have been doing as a city; that we have been hiring out to private companies wherever we possibly can.
And I think when we look at the fact that we have only 84 full time employees in this city; smaller cities
like Kent have 771, Yakima 708, and all of those things; so we have the flexibility so much more in
keeping there; so um, I just learned this, allows us greater flexibility in good times and bad times, and I
think you've dong an excellent job in doing that up to this point; and let's keep moving that same
direction.
Councilmember Wilhite: Thank you very much.
Mavor Munson: Gary do you want to ask another question?
Councilmember Schimmels: Ian, I would address question #4, the first statement says have you read the
Sprague/Appleway Plan, well I know you have; but my question is, what is your opinion of the SARP as
it stands today?
Mr. Ian Robertson: yes, I've read it.
Councilmember Schimmels: I know you have.
Mr. Ian Robertson: I'm not a congressman that's passing on something that they've never read, and I've
not only read, learned inwardly digested and all that, but as chair of the planning commission, I've lead
the hearings and all of those things; and I've read every comment. As a Planning Commission, 1've
emphasized to them that our job is to come up with the ideal plan, knowing that there wi11 be changes
when it gets into the political arena and changes would be made. It's such a massive plan that you know,
half of it could be left out and we've still got plenty, plenty to do; so that was my initial sense going in. I
think what has happened over time is we've forgotten the purpose of the plan. It was to bring about new
vitality in our city particularly the areas that you know, nothing's going on just now; functionality and
beauty. It's hard to put a price on beauty; but those are the areas, we've, I think looking back, and this
was the thing that, boy, Fred Beaulac was one, and, that I think we made some mistakes in not notifying
Council Regutar Meeting: 7-28-2009 Page 7 of 18
Anoroved bv Councii:
DRAFT
people that change is possible, change could happen to their, um, to their property; and I know we discussed that with the staff and I said you've got to do, because, that was the cornplaint they had against -
the County before we became a city; and looking back, I think we could have saved ourselves and, we
just didn't, and you know, look, hindsight is great isn't it? On that kind of a thing; but 1 think the dis, the
advantage is, that we have a plan and we can move fonvard with a plan, whatever it is; and I think we've
had some of the best people in the, in the nation helping us in these things; and that's, yea, there'll be
changes. You know what? I was bugged, I guess I'll just start it now, that you left out the sustainabiliry
things; and a good reason because it runs, right at the last minute there, I mean, there was enough on your
plate at that particular time, but that left the whole people aspect out of it; where the plan looks like it's
just buildings; the whole; when Kathy McClung came as our Community Development Director, I
remember talking with her philosophy, and I says, what's your philosophy of community development,
she said you know, it's more about people then buildings. I said Kathy you and I are talking the same
language; and I think when we left out the standards of how we measure a plan, the progress of a plan,
and, I hope that at some future time when we're doing some mid-course corrections, that we can talk a
little bit more about those, those, ten things that I think are essential for quality of life, but, I won't go into
more details then that just now.
Mavor Munson: Dick did you have a question?
Deputv Mavor Denennv: I really don't.
Mavor Munson: Well, I just have one more. Ian, are you aware and knowledgeable about the Open
Meeting Act? The Open Public Meeting Act?
Mr. Ian Robertson: Yes, we operate on the planning commission and our good attorney briefed us on
what we could, what we couldn't do, who we could talk to, who we couldn't, and all of those things, and yea, the RCW, the Revised Code of Washington that you know, that governs all of that; yes, yeah.
Mavor Munson: Bill?
Councilmember Gothmann: Are you lcnowledgeable about the Public Disclosure Act?
Mr. Ian Robertson: Oh yes, my, all my finances will be out in the open and um, disclosing conflicts of
interest and those kind of things, and the meetings and all of ihose things that you know, are really good.
Transparency in what we're doing is absolutely for building trust in a community, and these are good
things, yea.
Councilmember Gothmann: I agree.
Mr. Ian Robertson: And I think I only fell afoul once with the City Manager years and years ago, that he,
I won't get into detail
Mavor Munson: That's a pretty good record. I've gotten a lot more then that.
Mr. Ian Robertson: No, I'll tell you what it was. It was a couple of us on the planning commission, you
know, something was in f.ront of us, and we said man there's a simple solution; and we went down and
told the guy how he could, you know, solve it right then; and that was not our job; so 1 understand that,
guilty once and I hope I don't do that again.
Mayor Munson: Rose?
Council Regular iVleeting: 7-28-2009 Page 8 of 18
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
' Councilmember DemQSev: No 1'm fine.
Mavor Munson: Diana?
Councilmember Wilhite: Well, just one question, tell us why you want to be on the City Council.
Mr. Ian Robertson: Why? Basically I've got three reasons why and umm, Meagan, Kelsey and Ian my three grandchildren. When we moved up from Los Angeles you know, I almost cried the first Wednesday
night when I saw parents actually taking their children to activities at a church. I looked at the schools and
said what's different about the schools, something was different. They had grass around them.
Sometimes we don't realize because we've lived here forever perhaps the tremendous benefits that we
have as this community, a small-knit community, those values. When I looked at the survey, ihis survey
that the city took in January of this year, the opportunities for the faith community, the opportunities for
volunteering that we have in this, there are so many good things Oh we've got some things that need
fixing, but all in all, I think having been a, you know, on a planning commission you're supposed to sit
there and have no opinion on anything until everything else is, you know, already taken place, and then
like a judge, you come and pronounce whatever. I'm ready to talk about some of these issues that I really
feel are important, the direction that we're going, and look forward to a little, a little different perspective.
But I think we've just got to look at the long-range view; it's, we've got a lot of good things going for us
and I appreciate the leadership of just being a city, but we need mid-course, tweaking, continuous
improvement, we' 11 be doing that forever. Thank you.
Mavor Munson: Any further questions from council? I hope this wasn't an inyuisition for you; we tried
not to make it that way. Mr. Ian Robertson: No, and let me say on behalf of the three of us here, I am so glad that there were
sixteen that applied, and that we know interest is good and whoever you choose, we're going to be a part
of the city as we move forward toward. Thank you Mr. Mayor.
U. Diana Sanderson
Mavor Munson: NeYt, Mrs. Sanderson. And again, Mrs. Sanderson, this really is not an inquisition.
Ms. Sanderson: I might get water though as I tend to run out of
Mavor Munson: Well, Diana, Gary started off the first time, it's your turn to start.
Councilmember Wilhite: Good evening. Nice to have you here. My first question is what are the three
highest priorities the city needs to address, and how do you propose to address those issues?
Ms. Sanderson: My first I think concern, or need I see for the city is, identity, and it is that identity of
having us know we're not just a small little farm community that we once upon a time were, but now are
80,000 and more people; and I see that we've had people live here as much as I have the last 30 some
years, and it has said this is home, and kind of do the umm, sitting back, that's why I'm here; not to sit
back. But I think we need to have people say how can we have a city that we all believe in, some initiative
piece that is going to be open for diversity and for a lot of new growth. I think we are going to continue to
grow; it's a beautiful place. Lately I went to Kirkland and I just happened to drive through for an hour
because I wanted to see, ok, what is this city doing, and they have about less then us, a few less people,
but they're annexing a large group. And they have done a great job of what they had in place there and
yet they had kind of a fi►sion of how to unite each of the different communities, even by sign, similar
signs, ways of having us say we are part of a larger, larger city.
Council Regular Meeting: 7-28-2009 Page 9 of 18
Aunroved bv Council:
DRAFT
Mavor Munson: We're not going to annex the City of Spokane until they fix their roads. Ms. Sanderson: Ok, ok. Oh, the other two, I'm sorry, the other two where really community interest in
having, having us pay attention to people, the people of our city and the needs that arise. I think that we
have to deal with the meth problem. We need to have ways to have young people who have been trapped
into this, have ways to come off so we can be pro-active. I, I tried to call or talk to people wherever 1 was
the last week; and I, the younger people are saying the meth is the problem, and one out of three kids not
graduating from high school, we have got to do something to make that somewhat better for our
community.
Councilmember Wilhite: Ok. My next question is, if the majority of the Council took a position that you
were against, how would you handle your responses to the public?
Ms. Sanderson: For many years I've worked in, on committees and commissions, I truly believe in a
consensus model. So that if we as a group were to decide something and the majority said it was to be,
then we are that group, and we buy fihat; we say and we stand by it and we don't backbite and we do not
come after each other; that doesn't help our city.
Councilmember VVilhite: Ok. And what do you think is the biggest challenge facing the City council?
Ms. Sanderson: I really think it is the extension of what you're doing into our homes. Because we in the
home place are not always knowing how it's touching our heart or our lives. I know that in the paper, I
read the paper, but that isn't giving the whole synopsis, and I'm sorry I don't go on the Internet and look
at what decisions have been made and why. But 1 think we have to really try to see how many more single
households we have then we used to have. You know, I just go on the premise of the 1700 households that worked with and many more single households; so I think we have to have some way to draw those -
people.
Councilmember Wilhite: Thank you.
Mavor Munson: Rose.
Councilmember Demasev: How do you feel about the telephone utility tax?
Ms. Sanderson: You know, I think it's fine. I think that it was a way to say, you l:now, we're using a cell
phone now a days, and it is a way to say, I have this little piece of luxury and I guess we've applied some
taxes, sin-taxes so much I think we need to say everyone has to have a part in how we can have this
government work.
Councilmember Demosey: What do you hope to accomplish as a city councilmember?
Ms. Sanderson: Well, first of all, I hope to bring an enthusiasm for the city to have ways to meet and talk
with people; to have their, somewhere, to listen to what they're saying, but also to say what part of it are
you working on; and encourage a participation to have things happen. I know quite a few pcople that are
good friends that are on the disincorporation group, and they're my dear friends; they're good friends.
But, 1, 1 at least appreciate that they are not apathetic; they are truly energetic for the most part, and I hope
too that this city be a valuable piece for all of us; so that would be one of mine.
Councilmember Demosev: And why do you want to be on the city council? Council Regular Meeting: 7-28-2009 Page 10 of 18
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
Ms. Sanderson: Well, 1 think it offers an opportunity to see the nuts and bolts of how things are put
together, but also to say how can we do this with our region. We are not an isolafied group, and I was very
impressed with how many committee meetings each of you are involved in that are touching the other
parts of our whole aquifer area of things we have to do together, to make the good happen; so I would
love to be a part of that. I can come up with ways to solve problems that maybe are different from other
people's doing it, but I think we do best by drawing each other together, and hearing other people.
Councilmember Dempsev: Thank you.
Mavor Munson: Bill?
Councilmember Gothmann: The city requires an additional $4 million per year in order to preserve
streets, that is, increase their life so that complete reconstrucfiion will not have to occur so soon. I'm on
number 22. In so doing, we can spend $1 notiv or $12 in the future. What solutions would you propose?
Ms. Sanderson: I have given this one a lot of thought, and I've come up with the thought that I don't
know has happened in our area at all, but I know no one likes a new tax. But I think we could have a tax
on every garage door in a dwelling, and it would be $50 for every garage door you've got; and I think that
would cause us to remember we are providing houses for our cars, and if we're going to use them, we
should pay for the street, it's a direct correlation. And I don't know how much money that's going to
make, maybe somebody has a better ballpark figure, but I truly think we can't keep doing the tabs when
we have had people vote down they wanted them raised; I don't think we can keep doing things like
adding to the, you know, the cigarette tax, and all this. I think we have to come up with a new one, and I
don't know what, how long that takes. We used to have a wardrobe created in England because they taxed
you for every room in the house, do you recall that, that's why that sort of sparked my mind.
Councilmember Got.hmann: Yea, Rose had an interesting question. Would you tax carports?
Ms. Sanderson: No. I'd figure you can't keep too much valuable under it; you protect something, but you
cannot store stuff; I guess I'm noticing as you move into the 60s you had accumulated maybe more than
you need.
Councilmember Gotlunann: We spend, number 24 question, we spend about $450,000 annually on
Ieasing our present City Hall facility. In addition, a City Hall building would add to the attractiveness of a
city center. Should we build a city hall.
Ms. Sanderson: Well, what 1'd like to l:now is how much it's going fio cost us to lease something from
someone. Is it gaing to be the same price the $450,000? I mean, tivhat tivould we, what would be our
ballpark number of a lease with anyone. Ts there any piece of property that is open to being bought? 1 do
know it would come off the tax thing, but I do think it means we don't have to pay as much all the time.
Umm, I'm unrealistic my husband says, so he's my good counterpart on some things that no one wants to
sell that land; but, I think there's something about um, having something that is our city hall. I read the
wonderful rejuvenation plan; I see that there is a potential for that location; umm, 1 don't know that
everybody who comes through our city is going to come see the city hall; but I guess you know, you're in
a good pattern here; so it isn't a life and death issue for me. I think you've done a plan and you've worked
on it and if it can happen, we should have it happen.
Councilmember Gothmann: Ok. Very good. Thank you.
Mavor Munson: Do you plan to run in November win or lose this particular contest?
Council Regular Meeting: 7-28-2009 Page 11 of 18
A«..,.,,.,n.l hv (`ntinril•
I
DRAFT
Ms. Sanderson: Well, I would say I would try this and then I'm going to support whoever is the final
person in their election.
Mavor Munson; And if you are chosen you will run?
Ms. Sanderson: I will, I will.
Mavor Munson: Have you read the final Sprague/Appleway Revitalization Plan?
Ms. Sanderson: I have, and it's amazing. lt is, I'm sure every piece in it has been very long, to come to.
One part that I was very intrigued by is why you wanted only two people to live above a business. It
made me think of many of the communities that started in our country like the Little Italy in New York or
the Hispanic neighborhood that grew out of, you know, people living in their own restaurant until they
could afford a house. So, I, I just found that a little a piece; and I do think that if, if I were to want to
change something, I tivould maybe move your street over a ways to Bowdish that you want to close. I
think University is a tremendously big arterial and you've got to have people come into this with a buy-
in; and I think that a lot of them go up you know, go south to Ponderosa, or wherever, and umm, I don't
know if all of that is alxeady in stone; so I would just speak that on my behalf.
Mavor Munson: One last question for you from me: Local residents paid for about 70% of the Milwaukie
right-of-way before this city was incorporated. Should the city expend any funds to purchase the
extension of Appleway?
Ms. Sanderson: Yes. All the way to our City limits; Barker Road.
Mavor Munson: We should buy it?
Ms. Sanderson: Yes.
Mavor Munson: What concessions do you think we'd have to make to be able to buy it?
Ms. Sanderson: I think if we are working with the CounYy and we know some day we will have a light
rail, then we have them come in on some percentage of that light rail, something, they're not going to
want to give it to us, but I think we, in stages in days ahead, ten years down the road, we're going to want
that Iand. I come from a somewhat background, after being marrzed for 37 years to a fartn person, land is
important; very important.
Mavor Munson: tiVhat's all I have. Dick?
Deputv Mavor Denennv: I'm going to go to question #9 and change it just a little bit; but what is your
understanding of our form of government? I'd like you to kind of tell me what you think you're stepping
into; how we operate.
Ms. Sanderson: I would, the way I understand it, the Council is advisory and policy-making. They hire
the City Manager. The City Manger is your administrator and needs to have room, needs to administrate
and carry out the details. I think that form is very helpful rather than one of us, one of the people on your
group being mayor having to have all that information and knowledge and precision. So I think, I like this
form. 1 think it gives us the possibility of hiring somebody with great skills that can help us to move
forward, but we also have to have that person know we are the boss too; I mean, I've worked in a
different sector and I've always been in more of a advisory capacity; but I do know a(ot can be done with '
that. -
Council Kegu(ar Meeting: 7-28-2009 Page 12 of 18
Approved by CounciL•
DRAFT
Deputv Mavor Denennv: And I guess foilowing along with that question eleven, what are the most
important functions of a city councilmember; what do you find, think that is going to be your most
important function in this position?
Ms. Sanderson: I think, I read throu ;h what you are trying, the areas you are trying to cover from the
aquifer to the policing, the services provided, the roads, all of this; but I think it's connection to people. I
think we've got to do some connecting to people; and one of the examples that came to my mind; I have,
you're going to deal with a person who's gotten to be right-brained for a year of being retired. My
daughter and a group of people over in Seattle would start at one bar with a putter, and you had to putt all
the way to the next one. And it was a continuous thing to find all these different neighborhoods. I think
we should do something to involve people to say, let's go up and down that corridor, let's have a putting
day and see what can happen to have people, young people, middle-aged people, everyone come and say
what do you think of this spot? What can we do? I just, I believe in the creativity of people.
Deputv Mavor Denennv: Those were the two main questions I had.
Councilmember Schimmels: I would go to item 15, what do you envision the City of Spokane to be like
in ten, possibly twenty years down the road?
Mavor Munson: Spokane Valley.
Councilmember Schimmels: Excuse me.
Ms. Sanderson: That's ok, I know which one. I look, you know, I grew up in Spokane City; and I never
imagined that when I was a little girl and walked under railroad trestles the park with my Grandma, that it
would be a beautifi.il park, River Park; and I think we have potential here to piggyback on with even the
cities we're with, in union and different times not in union, to jump on board with the sports programs
that are coming here; use our facilities, get some of this open so that our, our, umm, people that tried to be
a competitive piece can be part of it; there's new marathons, rallies, that people run 180 miles just in
relay, and somehow all of that is perfect for this location; we have great things. We have the centennial
trail; why not see how we can move ten years from now to have some of that be part of our core piece that
draws more people here. I hope that answers, I think it can change so much; look what happened to the
year we got the computer. I mean now you don't need to have o~fice buildings as often sometimes as you
did before you go could do it on a computer. I think it's amazing to me.
Councilmember Schimmels: Thank you. Go to number 3: the seven of us serve on over 20 boards,
committees and task forces. Does your life style allow you to serve on at least four outside committees
and share these responsibilities?
Ms. Sanderson: Yes it does; the number one thing after we retired was we wanted to have time for each
other; so we kind-of kept the end of the week for that and we do some different things, and I've helped
with the schools with the grandchildren. But I, I truly believe that's a potential. I can do that. I need to do
some studying because some of these issues are not as clear to me at this moment. I'll be very lionest, I
would have to do a good brush up and I would, because I can usually tackle something; so I
Councilmember Schimmels: Well, we're still in a learning mode also.
Ms. Sanderson: They say adult learners learn two things every year that demand at least ten hours of
learning; so we're good.
Council Regular Meeting: 7-28-2009 Page 13 of 18
e ___,.,.s,1 t,.. r,.,.,.•~l•
DRAFT
Councilmember Schimmels: Well that's all I have. Thank you.
Mavor Munson: That's all I have. Does anybody else wish to ask questions? Thank you very much.
Hopefully it wasn't too difficult, it didn't seem to be.
Ms. Sanderson: Thank you very much for what you're doing. Thank you very much. .
c. Ben Wick
Mayor Munson: Mr. Ben Wick. Welcome back to the arena.
Mr. Wick: I think this is a hot seat here.
Mavor Munson: Well, Ben, we' 11 start with Rose Dempsey.
Councilmember Dempsey: Okay. Let's start with the telephone utility tax.
Mr. Wick: The telephone utility tax huh? Well, the telephone utility tax definitely went to a good cause
helping our street fund out. I think actually back in, before there was a city when I was participating on
the Boundary Review Board financial feasibility study for the city, we actually kind of decided in that
group, that um, it made more financial sense for the city to actually impose the same tax that you guys
actually went fortivard and imposed with the telephone excise tax - utility tax sorry; and so, umm, I do
agree it was a good and needed decision; um, and it was to a good cause dedicating it to the street fund.
Councilmember Dempsev: What do you hope to accomplish as a city councilmember?
Mr. Wick: VVhat do I hope to accomplish? I hope to accomplish some, well, I hope to help you guys out;
and increase communication. I think that a lot of problems can be resolved, issued can be helped just by
going through talking, opening more lines of communication, and working through the issues.
Councilmember Dempsev: Ok. And why do you want to be on the City Council?
Mr. Wick: VVhy do Iwant to be on the City Council? We11, I actually was a long time, I always wanted
to be part of the city before there was a city actually. 1 remember coming home and asking my parents
why do we write Spokane on our mailing address, and at the same time there was a meeting for the
incorporation effort; and I went down and got involved with that and helped collect signatures to form a
city and get involved
Councilmember Dempsev: How old were you then?
Mr. Wick: I was 18, 19 something like that. I was the youngest of the 52 that first ran; and I signed
up against Mr. Munson, no hard feelings; I didn't say how it was for me. But I altivays kind of wanted to
help make it a better place and really be proud of where I live in the Spokane Valley; even through
college. I went out to Eastern Washington University to get my degree, but I didn't move out there; I
really like the Valley so I chose to commute my long-haul days back and forth every day, especially
through winter time when it was the most trying; but, I made it back all four years through there; so I'm
really proud of where I live and want to help make it a better piace.
Councilmember Dempsev: Okay. Thank you.
Mavor Munson: Any others? .
Councit Regular Meeting: 7-28-2009 Page 14 of 18
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
Councilmember Dempsey: No, that's all for now.
Councilmember Gothmann: The City, #22, the City requires an additional $4 million per year in order to
preserve streets, what solutions do you propose and you know, that increase the life of the streets so
complete reconstruction will not occur so soon, and in so doing we can spend $1 dollar now or $12 in the
future; so what solution would you
Mr. Wick: Well, this is kind of like the million-dollar question, or the multi-million dollar question as it
is huh? I don't know, the garage door tax was pretty interesting one that came up earlier, but right now
with the current economy, I think we definitely have to be good stewards of our budget, kind of scale
back as the economy scales back; and then hope to increase our tax base as opposed to increasing our
taxes. Maybe look at how we can increase more businesses moving here, streamline our permitting
process or something of that nature to kind of encourage more growth, so that we have a bigger base so
that way we don't have to charge as much per individual.
Councilmember Gothmann: Yea, that's a very tough question. We spend about $450,000 annually on
leasing our present City Hall facilities; in addition a city hall building would add attractiveness to a city
center; should we build a city hall?
Mr. Wick: Well, it would definitely increase the attractiveness of the city, especially in looking through
the Sprague/Appleway Revitalization Plan; however, it's kind of hard to say if we should buy one or not
not knowing ho-vv big we want to build one, how much it's going to cost, things of that nature. I would
definitely be for trying to acquire the land to build one on now, definitely include it in our plans, but as far
as jumping right out and saying, yea, we definitely should build one or no we shouldn't build one, I think
it's kind of early. I mean, are we' going to build a thirty-story building, probably not, I wou(dn't go for
that one; but something that makes sense at the right time. I definitely think we should plan for it though,
and try and acquire the land for it.
Councilmember Gothmann: You're not a Sears Towers advocate I take it?
Mr. Wick: Yea, a Sears Tower of Spokane Valley
Mavor Munson: A Sears Tower that is no longer
Mr. Wick: The space needle of Spokane Valley.
Councilmember Gothmann: Okay, thank you very much.
Mavor Munson: Have you read the final Spraglte Appleway Revitalization Plan? Mr. Wick: I have read it though actually I went on to your guys' website; and this is another one dhat I
kind of went through, communication. I was amazed at how'hard it was to kind of get off your website; I
kind of feel that I was a computer science person I should be able to get this preriy easily; and in going
through there downloading it, I actually got, I think it's the final draft, but it was still with marked-up, so
you had a bunch of comments, cross-outs, adds, and so it was kind-of hard to go through but I was able to
read through it and see some of that.
Mavor Munson: What's your opinion of the SARP? What are the strong points and weak points?
Mr. Wick: Well, I definitely think it is a vision for the future; the strong points is that it definitely sets a
atmosphere and presence for identity for our city of Spokane Valley; some of the disadvantages of course,
Council Regular Meeting: 7-28-2009 Page ] 5 of 18
- - .
DRAFT
as with any long range plan, it definitely is going to cost money; it's definifiely change which is going to
be a little hard for some people to accept; so it's kind of, I guess that would be kind of the disadvantage is - that it is going to cost us money; communication is going to be definitely key to try and get it out there;
hopefully maybe we can revise our website a little bit more to get more information out there; clean it up
so that way we bave more of a final draft or an appearance of a final draft on our website, something easy
to follow; I think that would definitely smooth the tivay with it.
Mavor Munson: I think Carolbelle's making copious notes on this. One last question for you, two
actually, win or lose this particular contest, do you plan to run for office in November.
Mr. Wick: I do.
Mavor Munson: And last, local residents paid for about 70% of the Milwaukie right-of-way before the
city incorporated. Should the city expend any future funds to purchase the extension of Appleway?
Mr. Wick: WEII, I think this debate back and forth on the Milwaukie right-of-way is another example
where, umm, I think our community of regional relations kind of comes into play. I think the County is a
little, um, we have strained relations that are kind of rea[ly coming through in this Milwaukie right-of-
way judgment. I knotiv that they said that they would give the land to the Spokane Val(ey if they Would
help pay 70% of the additional right of way needed to support mass transit, but I think the City is already
thinking toward mass transit, and I would say that we would already be proponents of including mass
transit in our plans for that property; so this is where I think the communication break do4vn between the
County and the City is kind of coming to light in fihat; would we come up with any concessions, it's kind
of hard to l:now. T know that Mr. Connelly was saying that we, we haven't even gotten feedback from the
County on what our current status is with that; but I think increased communication and really ,
undersfianding that there are, the City of Spokane Valley isn't going to go against mass transit; we are
very big proponents as Pve learned from different city council meetings; but, so I think it will work itself
out.
Mavor Munson: Dick?
Deputv Mavor Denennv: T want to go back on why you would want to be on the council, but ask it in a
little different way; and, what do you think you, your personality, your age, what will you bring to this
counci 1 that others may not?
Mr. Wick: Well, I am of a slightly different generation. I have a different way of dlinking and looking at
things. I also really want to get involved and be out there; I've already been on some of the county
commissions, like the Fair and Expo Advisory Board, and have worked with Commissioner Richard and
some of the other commissioners there on that; and so I would really like to kind of build up community
relations and be going on that; also being a computer scientist I like the technology of the blackberries or
whatever phones you were playing with, laptops, I do that as a day job, so kind of increase our utilization
of technology as a tool. I definitely am a little more out there on the edge then some; I've been immersed
wifih it longer.
Deputv Mavor Denennv: And the other question back to the number of boards, etc. that we are on and the
number of hours that this job, being more than as I think you probably picked up on, then coming to a
Tuesday night meeting, how will your current status, your place in life currently, allow you to do that?
Mr. Wick: Well, I know, I thought long and hard; and earlier I've been on, actually, fihroughout my life
I've always been on more boards and being always very involved in things and giving 110%; right now I would really want to stay on the Fair and. Expo Advisory Board; but before I applied to this position I
Council Regular Meeting: 7-28-2009 Page 16 of 18
Annroved bv Council:
DRAFT
actually went to my work and seeing what their flexibility is, and they were very willing and flexible in
my hours with that and would like to cut back my travel for job-related; but I would keep my day job.
My hours there though, are fairly early in the morning, so I go to work at six or five in the morning, and
get done at two or three in the afternoon; so I would have the ability to come to some of the later
meetings; or as well, they would be willing to let me work on nights or weekends if possible to go
through that. Also my fiancee is holding a job and plans to go to school at the same time, so my home
life is sitting at home. [tape changes]
Councilmember Schimmels: What do you think is the biggest challenge, so I'd say #2 would be the first
thing you could answer, then finish off with
Mr. Wick: Finish off with huh? Ok. Well the three highest priorities that I see for the city would be the
street fund is definitely one of the top three, and these are in no particular order; trying to figure out a
secured funding to maintain our streets is definitely of high importance; that is a big budget challenge that
you guys have in front of you so that is definitely a high priority. Being diligent in our budgeting way and
expanding our tax base for the future is how to remedy that. The second one would be regional relations.
Trying to improve communication is kind of the key there; working more with each other. 1 know you
guys are trying to do more with the County and other boards across the region; that is definitely a big one
there so I think a lot of our other issues, like the Milwaukie right-of-way and some of those things, will
kind of work themselves out if we had better relations and communication back and forth, especially like
contracts, is another example with that. T think there's a lot of miscommunications going on between the
city and the county, and so, improving dialogue and relationships there would definitely kind of ease
some of those situations. And the last one I have is, which I hate to sound like a broken record, is kind of
like the disincorporation effort. I know that it seems to be gaining momentum, there seems to be more
signs out there; but everybody that I talked to about that, doesn't seem to understand or doesn't have the
whole picture behind it; and so it kind of relates back to the communication issue. They, I know a number
of people that work for the County are kind of fearful of the city and they think that they're going to
potentially lose their jobs or support disincorporation to kind of keep their jobs; and so communication is
a big key on that one. And so with that, I go to the next question, of what's the biggest challenge right
now for the city, and I would say communication; and I would definitely want to work on getting out
there, working with the other boards, and the public in making sure that all the sides and all the
information is being disseminated.
Councilmember Schimmels: Could I ask one more?
Mavor Munson: Elbsolutely.
Councilmember Schimmels: Go down to question 19, do you think the City should contract with the
County for services, utilize private companies, or hire City personnel for animal control, street sweeping,
stormwater maintenance?
Mr. Wick: I would say if it makes sense. Currently like your city council does, we step back and look at
how much it's going to cost, if the contracts are fair, make sure that everybody understands what we're
looking for in the contracts; and if it makes the most sense for our city, then yea, I would support
contracting out to private business or the County or whatever makes the most sense; kind of a little vague
but that's it.
Mavor Munson: Any other questions? Thank you very much, we appreciate your coming and talking to
us. Oh, I'm sorry, I'm sorry Diana.
Councii Regular Meeting: 7-28-2009 Page 17 of 18
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
Councilmember Wilhite: If the majority of the council took up a position that you were against, how would you handle your response to the public? Mr. Wick: To the public? Well, while at the council meeting I could raise my opinions; and hope to
share my insight of what my thoughts were on the issue, but once the majority of the council decides,
that's the council's position; and it would be carried fonvard from there unless there's something new that
comes out, then I'd bring it back to council.
Councilmember Wilhite: What do you think are the important functions of a city councilmember?
Mr. Wick: Well, there's two major functions that I see as a city councilmember: number one is they are
the ones that have to be the most informed; I think they need to do the homework, know what the
decisions, or what the issue or topic is that's being discussed; and make the informed decision. I know a
lot of the public don't take the time to understand the whole story or get all the information and so I'd say
that's the number one priority of a councilmember is to get all the information, spend the time, or take the
time to really understand the topic before making a decision. And the other onc is communication.
Getting back out there, letting everybody know what is going on so everybody has the full story and
working together; and getting their input into it as well.
Councilmember Wilhite: Okay. Thank you.
Mayor Munson explained that Council can move forward with the proposed agenda for August 4, or can
vote on a choice tonight. Tt was then moved by Councilmember Schimmels and seconded by
Councilmember Gothmann that the Council evaluate the qualifications of the candidates and vote tonight.
Deputy Mayor Denenny said he would prefer to have time to absorb the information received tonight and
not vote tonight but as previously scheduled for August 4. With that statement, Councilmember ,
Gothmann withdrew his second, and with no second, the motion was not acted upon. Mayor Munson also
asked the City Clerk to provide a transcript of this section of the meeting. Council decided to cancel the
August 4 executive session but keep the Augusfi 4`", 6:00 p.m. meeting, adding that it will be a short
ineeting as that is National Night Out Against Crime in which several councilmembers participate.
INFORMATION ONLY: The following items were for information only and were not reported on or
cliscussed: Small Works Roster Update, Approval of Community Re-Licensing Agreement, Fire
Department Quarterly Report, Library District Quarterly Report, and Department Reports.
It was moved by Coarncilmember Wilhite, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting
adjourned at 8:55 p.m.
Richard Munson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Council Regular Meeting: 7-28-2009 Page 18 of 18
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
. MINUTES
City of Spokane Valley
l City Council Executive Session
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Attendance:
Councilmem6ers: Staff:
Rich Munson, Mayor Dave Mercier, City Manager
Dick Denenny, Deputy Mayor Mike Connelly, City Attorney
Rose Dempsey, Couocilmember
Gary Schimmels, Council.member
Bill Gothmann, Councilmember
Diana Wilhite, Councilmember
EXECUTIVE SESSION: Mayor Munson called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m: It was moved by Councilmember Wilhite, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn into Executive Session for
approximately one hour to discuss land acquisition and pending litigation; and that no action is
anticipated thereafter. Council adjourned into executive session at 5:01 p.m.
At approximately 6:00 p.m. Mayor Munson declared Council out of Executive Session; and adjourned the
Executive Session.
Richard Munson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Council Minutes: 08-04-09 Page 1 of 1
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
MINUTES
STUDY SESSION MEETING
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers
Spokane Valley, Washington
August 4, 2009 6:00 p.m.
Attendance:
Councilmembers Staff
Rich Munson, Mayor Dave Mercier, City Manager
Dick Denenny, Deputy Mayor Mike Jackson, Deputy City Manager
Rose Dempsey, Councilmember Mike Stone, Parks & Rec Director
Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Mike Connelly, City Attorney
Gary Schimmets, Councilmember Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
Diana Wilhite, Councilmember Rick VanLeuven, Police Chief
Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer
Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk
Mayor Munson opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m. and welcomed everyone to the study session.
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Denenny, seconded and unanimously agreed to accept the amended
agenda as presented.
ACTION ITEM:
1. Mavor and Councilmembers: Avnointment of Candidate to Council Position #2
a. Nomination and second of candidate; vote
b. City Clerk Administers Oath of Office
c. New Councilmember Takes Position at the Dais
After Mayor Munson explained the procedure for nominations, he opened the floor for nominations and
the following candidates were nominated: Ian Robertson was nominated by Councilmember Wilhite and
seconded by Deputy Mayor Denenny; Ben Wick was nominated by Councilmember Dempsey and
seconded by Councilmember Schimmels; and Diana Sanderson was nominated by Mayor Munson and
seconded by Councilmember Dempsey. Mayor Munson then opened the floor for comments. Each
Councilmember commented that the decision was difficult as the candidates were great candidates and
each had something to bring to the council; they each thanked the candidates for stepping forward, for
participating in the interview process, and for their dedication and commitment.
Results of the votes by show of hands are as follows: For Ian Robertson: Mayor Vlunson, Deputy
Mayor Denenny, and Councilmembers Gothmann and Wilhite. For Ben Wick: Councilmembers Dempsey
and Schimmels; and for Diana Sanderson: there were no votes. Ian Robertson was declared the new
Councilmember and after the City Clerk administered the oath of office, Councilmember Robertson was
welcomed by all and took a seat at the dais.
Motion ~'on
sideration: "Spc.I kane.:;
Justice and Puhlic Safetv Salcs Tax.
State law authorizes voters to appc-ove the imposition of a one-tenth of one percent county-wide sales and
use tax, the proceeds to be used by Spokane County and the Cities and towns therein exclusively for
Criminal Justice and Public Safety purposes. Should the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane
County, as authorized by RCW 82.14.450, renew the imposition of a one-tenth of one percent county-
wide sales and use tax commencing January 1, 2010 and terminating March 31, 2020, the proceeds to be
Council Meeting Minutes: 08-04-09 Page 1 of 2
Approved by Council:
DRAFT
used by Spokane County and the Cities and Towns therein exclusively for Criminal Justice and Public
Safety Purposes?"
Mayor Munson explained that this proposition is about the renewal of this sales tax for public safety; and
he asked if Council wanted to consider passing a motion in support of that renewal. Mr. Mercier said that
six years ago voters approved this 1/10 of 1% on sales tax; and the division of assets resulted in 60% to
Spokane County, and 40% distributed among the remaining communities, with Spokane Valley's share
approximately $750,000; and that in the last six years those funds were all allocated to the law
enforcement contract. Mr. Mercier said expenses have risen annually well in excess of funds generated
and said that public safety has been identified by this Council as their top priority for Spokane Valley.
Councilmember Gothmann said he was under the impression that considering a ballot provision requires a
hearing with opportunity for proponents and opponents to speak. City Attorney Connelly said that the
Statute requires that an opportunity be provided for members of the public to speak for and against the
issue, and his concern is that notice of tonight's meeting did not include this item. After brief council
discussion, council determined not to take action on this issue tonight, but rather schedule it for the
August 11 meeting.
There being no further business, it was moved by Councilmember Wilhite, seconded and unanimously
agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 6:24 p.m.
ATTEST: Richard Munson, Mayor
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Council Meeting Minutes: 08-04-09 Page 2 of 2
.Approved by Council:
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
- Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: August 11, 2009 City Manager Sign-off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business 0 new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 09-015
GOVERNING LEGISLATIO(V: RCW 36.70A, 7013, SVMC Chapter 17 and 19.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council previously considered a number of annual
amendments to the comprehensive plan. This specific matter was continued to allow staff time
to explore the viability of entering into a developers agreements to condition the request for high
density residential on the property immediately adjacent to single family homes in the Shelly
Lake development. The staff has prepared an amendment to the zoning code which would
allow such a developers agreement and which is consistent with the provision of 36.70B.170-
201. Essentially the amendment would require that developer's agreement and its terms to be
presented to the city council in a public hearing with appropriate notice to those properties within
400'. An appeal from your decision approving or disapproving the agreement would be
appealed to the superior court.
This amendment can be adopted by an interim ordinance on an emergency basis to all you to
proceed with the current proposal for the specific amendment under consideration or it can be
referred to the planning commission and adopted pursuant to our normal processes.
First reading was conducted July 28, 2009; there have been no changes since the first reading.
BACKGROUND: See above
OPTIONS: Council direction
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to adopt Interim Ordinance 09-015
BUDGETIFINANCIAL IMPACTS: NA
STAFF CONTACT:
ATTAC H M ENTS
Proposed ordinance 09-015
DRAFT
~
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY ~
~
~
SPOKANE COUNfiY, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. 09-015
AN IN'I'ERIM URDINANCE UF"I'HECITY UF SPUkE1NE VAL:LCY, SPUKANI: C;OUNTY,
WASHINGTON A.DOPTING A NEW SECTION OF THE UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT CODE,
SPECIFICALLY SECTION 19.30.015, AND AMENDING EXISTiNG SECTION 17.80.030
AND 17.84.140 TO ESTABLISH A PROCEDURE FOR CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPER
AGREEMENTS IN CONIUNCTION W1TH AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSNE
PLAN AND THE COMPANION ZONE CHANGE ON AN INTERIM BASIS PURSUANT TO
RCW 36.70A.390 AND RCW 35A.63.220 AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING.
WFIEREAS, The City of STokane Valley adopted the Uniform Development Code (UDC) pursuant to
Ordinance 07-015 on the 24 day of September, 2007; and
WAEREAS, the UDC became effective on the 28`h day of October, 2007; and
WHEREAS, the adopted UDC does not specifically provide for the consideration of a developcr
agreement in conjunction with a comprehensive plan acnendment and companion zone change pracessed
as part of the City of Spokane Valley's annual amendment to the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, such an agreemcnt is authorized by RCW 36.70B.170-210; and
VVHEREAS, one npplication considered by the City Council of City of Spokane Valley- in conjunetion
with the annual amendment process contemplated such an agreement but cansideration of'the same could
not move forward witbout such a process being established; arid
WHEREAS, an interim regulation allowing consideration of such a process wuuld allotiv the timely and
consistent consideration of the specific application, requiring immediflte consideration and action by
council to avoid significant delays.
NOW, THFItEFORE, THF. CITY COUNCIL SPF.CIFICALLY ORDALNS AS SET FURTH
BELOW:
Section one: Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.390 and RCW 35A.63.220 the city adopts this interim zoning
ordinance adding section 19.30.015 as sei forth belo«• and amending sectian 17.80.030 and 17.80.140 as
set forth below. This interim ordinance shall be effective for six (6) months from the effective date of
adoption.
Section two: Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.390 and RCW 35A.63.220 a public hearing before the City
Council to consider this interim development code amendment sball be set for September 8, 2009..
Section three. amending SVMC 17.80.030: Section 17.80.030 shal) be amended as follows:
Ordinance 09-015 Developer Agreement Page 1 of 7
DRAFT
DRAFT
17.80.030 Assignment of Development Applicatioa ClassificaNon
1. Assignment by Table. Land use and development applications shall be classified pursuant to
the following table.
TaWe 17.80-1 Permit T}'pe aad i.aad tise Application
Typc Land Use and Deveiopmcnt Application Cross Rcfrrena-
SYMG Chaptcr
Arcrs-surv Dwellins-, Unit~ 19-100
Adm'rnisvativc Detcrminations by Community Dcvelopmcnt Director, Public Worics Uirecior, ar Building Multiple
Official.
Administrative Escepdon 19.140
Administrative Interprctation 17.50.010
Boundary Linc Adjustments and Qiminaiioas 20.80
! iome Occupaiioa PcRnit 19.144
Right-of-Way Pcrmits 22.130.060
21.50
Shorelinr Perntit Exemption (dodc permit)
Ty,pe '
Site Ptan Review 19.130
1
7emporary Use Fermit 19.160
Time Extcnsions for prelirainary subdivision, shart subdivision of binding site plan 20.30.060 .
Floocfplain development 2130
Building Pcrmits no1 subject to SEPA 21.20.040
Minor modificatioas of devdonmcAt azrecmeals 19.30A15([~
Gmding Pcxmits 24.50
I3 inding Sitc Plan - Pmliminary aad Final 20.50
I3inding Site I'Ifui -('hwige of Coodiuons 20.50
Wirclcss Communicntion Facilities 22.120
o
Subdivision - Final 20.40
Typr 11 I'tat Alleratiatts - Final 20.60
SEPA Threshold Dcterminatian 21.20.060
Prcliminary Short Subdivision, Binding Site Plan - Change of Conditiocu 20.30
Sharcline Subsiantial Development Permit 21.50
ShQrt Subdivisivn - Preliminary and Final 20.30, 20.40
Type Conditianal Usc Pcrmits 19.150
Ill
Subdivi5ions - Pr+eliminary 20.30
Variancc 19.170
1
Ordinance 09-015 Devc;loper Agreernent Page 2 of 7
DRAF?'
TaWe 1724-1 Permit TYpe ied lind tlse AppUcatioo
Cma.s Rcfcrcncc -
Type LanG Usc and [kvelopmtnt Applicatian SVMC C'haptcr
Preliminary Subdiviiiun - Ch:uige of Condipons 2 0.5 0
19.30.030
T.oning Map Amendments (site speci5c tczoacs)
17.80.140 .
Annual Comprchcnsivc Plan Arncndments (tcxt and/or map)
Area_-*ride Zoning Map prwndments 17.80.140
Type
I rv -^cvclcwm0i Agmmmts asociatsd with ComQrchensive Plan Amendmws 17.80.140
Dc;vclopment Codc Text Amcndments 17.80.150
f J
Section four. amending SVMC 17.80.140: 17.80.140 shall be amended as follows:
17.80.140 Type IV Applications - Compre6ensive Ptan Amendmeats, Develoament
Atreements associateci with a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and Area- wide
Rezoncs
A. Initiation. Comprehecisive Plan Amendments and Area Wide Rezones may be initiated by any
of the following:
1. Praperty owrter(s) or their representatives;
2 L))?,4rr
. An ~ citizen enc nei hborhood association, or other party; or y , ~y, g 3. The Department, Planning Commission, or City Council.
B. Applications. Applications shall be made on forms provide by the City.
C. Application Submittal:
1. Applicant initiated: Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Area-Wide Rezones shall
be subject to a pre-appiication confe-rence, counter-complete, and fully-complete
determinations pursuant to SVMC 17.80.080, 090, and 100. The date upon fully-
complete determination shall be die daie of registration with the Department.
2. Non-applicant initiated: After submittal of a non-applicant initiated application, the
applicatio❑ shall be placed on the register.
D. Register of Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Area-wide Rezones. The Department shall
establish and maintain a register of all applications.
E. Concurrent and Annual Review of Register.
1. Sixty (60) days prior to November 1 st in each calcndar year, the City shall notify the
public that the amendment process has begun. Notice shall be distributed as follows:
ai. Notice published in an appropriate regional or neighborhood newspaper or
trade joumal;
b. Notice posted on all of the City's official public notice boards; and
c. Copy of the aotice sent to a11 agencies, organizations, and adjacent jurisdictions
with an interest.
Ordinance 09-015 Developer Agreement Page 3 of 7
DRAFT DRAFT
2. All registered applications shall be reviewed concurrently, on an annua] basis and in a
manner consistent with RCW 36.70A.130(2). Applications registered after November
1 st of the previous calendar year and before November 1 st of the currc:nt calendar year,
stiall be included in the annual review. Those registered after November 1 st of the
calendar year shall be placed on the register for review at the following annual review.
3. Emergency Amendments: The City may review and amend the Comprehensive Plan
when the City Council determines that an emergency exists or in other circumstances
as provided for by RCW 36.70A.130 (2)(a).
F. Notice of Public Hearing. Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Area-Wide Rezones require
a public hearing before the Planning Commission.
1. Contents of Notice. A Notice of Public Hearing shall include the following:
a. The citatioa, if any, of the provision that would be changed by the proposal
along with a brief description of that provision;
b. A statement of how the proposal would change the affecteti provision;
c. A statement of what areas, Comprehensive Plan designations, zones, or
locations will be directly affected or changed by the proposai;
d. The date, time, and place of the public hearing;
e. A statement of the availability of the official file; and
fi. A statement of the right of any persoa to submit written comments to the
Planning Commission and to appear at the public hEaring of the Planning
Commission to give oral comments on the proposal.
2. Distribution of Notice. The Department shall distribute che notice pursuant to SVMC
17.80.120(2).
G. Planning Commission Recommendation - Procedure. Following the public hearing, the
Planning Commission shall coasider the applications concurrently, and shall prepare and
forward a recommendatioa of proposed action for all applications to the City Council. The
Planning Commission shall take one of the following actions:
1. If the Planning Commission determincs that the proposal should be adopted, it
may, by a majority vote, recommend that the City Council adopt the proposal.
The Planning Commission may make modifications to any pruposal prior to
recommending the proposal to City Council for adoption. lf the modification
is substantial, the Planning Commission must conduct a public hearing on the
modified proposal;
if the Planning Commission determines that the proposal should not be
adopted, it may, by a majority vote, recommend that the City Council not adopt
the proposal; or
3i. If the Planning Commission is unable to take either of the actions specified in
subsections (Gxl) or (2) above, the proposal will be sent to City Council writh
the notation that the Planning Commission makes no recommendation.
H. Approval Criteria.
l. The City may approve Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Area-Wide Zone Map
Amendments if it finds that:
a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health,
safety, welfare, and protection of the environment;
b. The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A
and wit}1 the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment;
Ordinance 09-0 l 5 Developer Agreement Pagc 4 of 7
DJUFT DRAFT
c;. "I-he proposed amendment responds to a substantial chwige in coaditions
beyond the propert}r owner's control applicable to the area within which the
subject property lies;
d. "rhe proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error, or
e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the
Comprehensive Plan.
2. `I'he City must also consider the following factors prior to approving Comprehensive
Ylan Amendments:
a. The effect upon the physical environment;
b. The effect on open space, streams, rivers, and lakes;
c. Tbe compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding
neighborhoods;
d. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads,
public transportation, parks, recreation, and schools;
e. The benefit to the neigliborhood, City, and region;
f. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and
density and the demand for such land;
g. The current and projected population density in the area; and
h. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan.
1. Gity Council Action.
Within sixty (60) days of receipt of the Planning Commission's findings and recommendations,
the City Council shall consider the findings and recommendatioas of the Commission
concerning the application and may hold a public hearing pursuant to Council rules. The
Department shall distribute notice of the Council's public hearing pursuant to SVMC
17.80.120(2). All annual amendments to the Gomprehensive Plan shall be considered
concurrently. By a majority vote of its membership, the City Council shall:
1. Approve the application;
2. Disapprove the application;
3. Modify the application. If the modificaiioo is substantial, the Council must either
conduct a public hearing on the modif ed proposal; or
4. Refer the proposal back to the Planning Commission for furcher consideration.
J. Transmittal to the State of Washington. At least sixty (64) days prior to final action being taken
hy the City Council, the Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic
Development (CTED) shall be provided with a copy of the amendments in order to initiate the
sixty (60) day comment period. No later than ten (10) days after adoption of the proposal, a
cup}• of the final decision shall be forwarded to CTF,D.
Section five. amending SVMC 19.30: SVMC Chapter 19.30 shall be amended by adding a new scction
19.30.015 as follows:
19.30 Changes & Amendments
1930.010 Comprehensive Plan Tezt & Map Amendments
Pursuant to RCW 36.70.130(2xa) proposed updates to the Comprehensive Plan will be processed onlv
once a year except for the adoption of original sub-area plans, ameodments to the Shoreline Master
program, the amendment of the Capital Facilities Chapter concurrent with the adoption of the City
Ordinance 09-015 Developer Agreement Page 5 of 7
DRAFT
budget, in tlie event of an emergency or to resolve an appeal of the Comprehensive Plan filed with the
Growth Management Hearing Board.
~ Comprehensive Plan text and map amendments are classified as Type N development applications and
shall be processed pursuant to SVMC Chapter 17.80.140.
1.34. 15 Develonmeat A~reernents a&wciated with a Comarehensive Plan Amendment
A. Pursuant to RCW 36.70B.170 - 210, the citv mav enter into a development a geernent with a person
having ownership or control of real r~opertv within its 'u~ risdiction as part of a comprehensive plan
amendment and associated rezone. A development agreement and subsequent rezone shall be
consistent with aQplicable development reeulations set forth in the UDC, SVMC Chapters 17-24.
B. Development Astreements associated with a Comprehensive Plan Amendment are clas$ifted as
Type IV development aQplicatians and shall be processed in cam_,pliance with ihe Comprehensive
Plan Amendment and the reeulations of RCW 36.70B.170 - 210.
C. Development aereements associated with a comprehensive olan amendment and subseaiuent rezone
mav be used at the citv council's discretion. DeveloQment agreements mav be used to place
restrictions on a Qroposed amendment to minimize the imQacts of future development.
I:). Development aQreement contents
1. For the pur7pose of this sectioo, development standards mav include, but are not limited to the
followin&
a. Project etements such as permitted uses, residential densities. and nonresidential
densities and intensities or buildin¢ sizes:
b. The amount and Qavment of imQact fees imoosed or agreed to in accordance with any
applicable provisions of state law. anv reimbursement provision, other financial
contributions bv the proQertv ovmer, inspection fees. or dedications:
c. Mitigation measures, development conditions, and other requirements under 43.21C
RCW:
d. Uesian standards such as maximum heiehts. setbacks, drainaue and water aualitv
reQUirements, landscapinQ, and other development feaiures;
e. Affordable housins~:
f. Parks and oipen space preservation1 ~
,
g. Phasings
h. Review pracedures and standards for implementine decisions; ~
i. A build-out or vestinQ period for aQplicable standards; and
j. Any other a ro riate development requirement procedure.
E. Z-he final decision authoritv for aQproval of the development agreement and development Qlan shall
be the Citv Council set forth in SVMC Chapter 17.80.060 (D).
F. The decision of citv councii on a development agreement and Qlan in conjunction with a
comprehensive plan amendment and subseQuent zoninQ chanQe is the final decision of the city and
mav be appealed Qursuant to RCW 36.70C.
G. E1 development agreement shall be recorded with the Spokane Countv Auditor at the analicant's
expense. DurinQ the term of the development agreement, the agreement is bindinQ on the parties
and their successors.
Ordinance 09-015 Developer Agreement Page 6 of 7
DRAFT
H. "rhe ci will rp -ss,and decidc; u on an aQalicaiion for an amendment as if it were an application
for a new development agreement in a manner sct forth above unless it is deemed a minor
modification as set forth in (n below.
1. Modificaiions of development plan
1. The director of communitv developnient mav auurove minor modificaiians to the development
plan pursuant to Chapter 17.80.030.
2. Criteria for approving minor modif cations include but are nQt limited to the followine:
a. Shall conform to the terms of the develovment aW,ement
b. Shall not reduee landsca in buffering, or open space areas
c. Shall not reduce setback requirements
d. Shali not tesuh in an increase in height of an ~y structure
e. Shall not result in a chan~e~ in iny-ress or egress
f. Sball not increa.se anv adverse impacts or undesirable eflect>
Shall not significantly alter the Qro1ect
Sectioo six: Severability. If any section, sentence clause or phase of this Ordinance should tx~ held to be
invalid or unconstitutiona) by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall
not affect the validity ar constitutionality of any other section, clause or phrase of this Ordinances.
Section seven: Effective date. This ordinance shall be full force and effect five (5) days after the
publication of the Ordinance, or a summary thereof, occurs in the official newspaper of the City as
provided by law. I
Passed by the City Council this da), of , 2009.
O
~
I
Mayor, Richard Munso
ATTEST:
City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge
Approved as to Form:
Off'ice of the City Attorney
Date of Publication:
Effective Date:
Expiration Date:
Ordinance 09-015 Developer Agreement Page 7 of 7
r CIT1E' OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Cvuncil Ac#ion
Meeting Date: August 11, 2009 City Manager Sign-off:
IterrE: CheCk a11 that apply: E consent ❑ ald business X new business ❑ public hearing
❑ inforrnativn admin. report 0 pend4ng legislation
AGEh1DA ITENi TITLE: First Reading Proposed Ordinance 09-016 reussing S11MC 3.50 - Smal1
1Narks Roster limits.
GOVERN1NG LEGISLATlON: RCVII 39.04.155 (1)
PREVlOUS COUNCiL ACTION TAKEN: Adaptivn of small enrorks roster purchasing provisions
in 2002, revisian in 2007. 6nformatian only item ,luly,28, 2009.
BA~KGROUIVD: The Counc+6 previvusiy adopted Code prQVisians providing for autharity to
contract for certain public works (~hose under $200,000) by way of a"sma11 works roster" as
authorized in RCW 39.04.155. The purpose o€ #he provisivrts is to provide some flexibility in
providing for the needs af jurisdictions in the state for getting Iower dollar public works under
contract in a shorter amount of time. Going through the farmal bidding requiremen#s for louver
dollar projects is not cost effec#ive, and can often cost more than the actual tnrvrk itself.
The statutory ~imit for such purchases is set at $200,000 per praject. In 2009, the Legislature
aEr'xended this limit by incr~assng it tv $300,(}00 per project, This limit had not been incrteased
since 2000,
Staff recamrn~nds increasing the limit set farth in SIIMC 3.50.040 to coincide vuith the new limit
set for#h in state law, which vvent into effe~t Jufy 26, 2009.
OPTIDNS: Decline to amend S1IMC 3.50; place on a subsequent agenda for second reading; or
suspend rules and adapt amendrnent.
R~COMMENDEQ ACTl+DIV OR iVfOTION: Illlave to advance ordinance 09-016 to a secvnd
reading.
BUDGETfF1NANCfAL IMPACTS:
S1'AFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, Deputy Cyty A►ttvrney
; A1`TACHMENTS: F'ropvsed Lrdinande 09-016 amendin~ SVMC 3.50.
DRAFT
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. 09-016
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY,
WASHINGTON, AMENDING SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION
3.50. RELATING TO SMALL WORKS PURCHASES AND OTHER MATTERS
RELATING THERETO.
WIMREAS, the City of Spokane Valley adopted Ordinance 07-004 in 2007, which included
establishing dollar limits for small works roster projects at $200,000.00 per project; and
VVHEREAS, during the 2009 Legislative Session, House Bill 1196 was passed, increasing dollar
limits for small works roster projects from $200,000.00 per project to $300,000.00; and
WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley desires to keep its Code current and consistent with
state law with regard to establishing dollar limits for its small works roster.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County,
Washington, ordains as follows:
Section 1. Pumose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to update the Spokane Valley
Municipal Code regarding small works roster limits so they are current and consistent with state laNv for
small works purchases.
Section 2. Amendiniz Spokane Vallev Municinal Code section 3.50.010: SVMC 3.50.010 is
amended as follows:
3.50.010 Small works roster.
The city clerk shall maintain a small works roster comprised of contractors who (1) have
requested to be on the roster, and (2) are properly licensed or registered to perform contracting work in
the state of Washington. The small works roster may be used in lieu of formal sealed competitive bid
procedures to award contracts for public work where the estimated cost of the work is $299;899
$300.000 or less. The small works roster is created and maintained pursuant to the laws of the state of
Washington as now enacted or hereafter amended. Section 3. Amending Spokane Vallev Municipal Code section 3.50.040: SVMC 3.50.040 is
amended as follows:
3.50.040 Use of roster.
A. The City may utilize the small works roster when seeking to construct any public work or
improvement with an estimated cost including labor, material, supplies and equipment of
~ $2$9;889$300,000 or less.
Section 4. Severabilitv. 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.
(lrt1inanra 00_01 A Amanrlina QVMC' 'I Sn PaQe 1 of 2
DRAFT
Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect '
five days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof occurs in the official newspaper of the
City as provided by law.
Passed by the City Council this day of August, 2009
City of Spokane Valley
Mayor, Richard Munson
ATTEST:
City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge
Approved as to Form:
Office of the City Attorney
Date of Publication:
Effective Date:
Ordinance 09-016, Amending SVMC 3.50 Page 2 of 2
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY .
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: 08-11-09 City Manager Sign-off
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business 0 new business E] public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Confirmatioo of Mayoral Appointment of Ian
Robertson to the Spokane Regional Convention & Visitors Bureau Board of Directors
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: As per Article IV of the Spokane Regional Convention & Visitor's
Bureau Bylaws, one director shall be appointed annually from the City of Spokane Valley; with each
appointed Director holding office for the term for which he or she is appointed or until his or her
successor shall have been appointed by each respective entity.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Resigning Councilmember Steve Taylor was previously
appointed by the Mayor as the Spokane Valley representative on this board for calendar year 2009. This
appointment will fill that vacancy for the remainder of the calendar year.
BACKGROUND: Mayor Munson intends to appoint Ian Robertson to the Spokane Regional Convention
& Visitors Bureau Board of Directors
OPTIONS:
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to confirm the Mayoral appointment of
Councilmember Robertson to the Spokane Regional Convention & Visitors Bureau Board of Directors.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IlVIPACTS:
STAFF CONTACT:
ATTACHMENTS
- CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: August 11, 2009 City Manager Sign-off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ~ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report Z pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Ballot Measure
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
BACKGROUND:
"Spokane County Proposition No. 1: Renewal of Spokane County Criminal Justice and
Public Safety Sales Tax.
State law authorizes voters to approve the imposition of a one-tenth of one percent county-
wide sales and use tax, the proceeds to be used by Spokane County and the Cities and towns
therein exclusively for Criminal Justice and Public Safety purposes. Should the Board of
_ County Commissioners of Spokane County, as authorized by RCW 82.14.450, renew the
imposition of a one-tenth of one percent county-wide sales and use tax commencing January 1,
2010 and terminating March 31, 2020, the proceeds to be used by Spokane County and the
Cities and Towns therein exclusively for Criminal Justice and Public Safety Purposes?"
OPTIONS: Consideration of endorsing the ballot proposition.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION:
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
STAFF CONTACT:
ATTAC H M E NTS
. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
- Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: August 11, 2009 City Manager Sign-off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information 0 adrnin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Preliminary 2010 Budget
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
BACKGROUND:
As part of the ongoing budget process, and in keeping with the requirements of RCW
35A.33.0521 City Manager Mercier will present the 2010 Preliminary Budget for council review
and discussion.
OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION:
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
STAFF CONTACT: Dave Mercier
ATTACHMENTS Complete 2010 Preliminary Budget distributed under separate cover
City of Spokane Valley
' Introduction of the FY 2010 Preliminary Budget
Prepared By David Mercier, City Manager
August 11, 2009
A. It is my pleasuYe to continue our practice of submitting a balanced preliminary
budget for Council consideration. Thfs budget proposal acknowledges the fiscal
constraints of the City and concentrates on sustarning core program responsibilities,
consistent with direction from the City Council.
B. Once again this year, the City Council Finance Committee has worked closely
with administrative staff in examining and understanding the budget construction
process, the cost control methods applied to the emerging budget, and the financial data
upon which the budget is based.
C. As prescribed by City Council, the seven (7) specific goals for Council and staff
focus and accomplishment in 2010 are to:
Continue monitorine wastewater issues, including governance of wastewater
facilities, and pursuit of the most efficient and economical methods to ensure the
continuation of wastewater discharge licenses.
2. Implement records indexing and phase in a document ima2in2 svstem City
department by City department with the goal of achieving city-wide implementation in
2010.
3. Implement and Evaluate regulations specified in the Sprague/Appleway
Revitalization Plan as adopted and amended by City Council.
4. Develop a Sboreline Master Program to provide appropriate regulatory protection
for waters of statewide significance as required by state statute.
5. Pursue a legislative capital budget request for state funding for the acquisition of
parkland adj acent to the Park Street Pool.
6. Develop and implement a multi-vear winter roads maintenance plan including
availability, costs and effects of private sector vendors performing winter road
maintenance for the City.
7. Pursue state fundinLy of a demonstration project that constructs a city hall in
accordance with "living building" standards.
D. Conservative fiscal policies geared toward the attainment of long-term financial
health for the City are recomrreended for adoption in the Final Budget. Meeting the
targets established by these fiscal policies require a commitment to fund only those levels , of service that arefiscally sustainable.
E. This Preliminary Budget adheres to the fiscally responsible principles established
in 2004. Several measures worthy of comment are:
1. The utilization of conservative revenue projections and realistic expenditure
forecasts in the construction of this budget proposal-as we guard against fiscal
disappointments.
2. The constraint of programmatic growth-no new programs.
3. A commitment to end the year with a positive fund balance in all fiulds.
4. Marketing CenterPlace rental opportunities striving to "break even" on
operational expenses.
5. Periodically updating the six-year financial forecast to alert the city to fiscal _
trends. F. SeveYal negative fiscal indicators aYe reflected in the proposed Preliminary
Budget. They include:
1. A sustained downturn in the economy has reduced estimated sales tax
receipts by $3,480,000 in the city's most significant revenue source.
2. Initiating winter roads services on short notice creates uncertainty about cost
projections for providing the service and cost impact on the Street Fund, which
pays for basic street maintenance services. _3. Planning and Building revenues are off by $388,540 and an offset plan has
been developed for use if demands for building services do not rebound.
4. There is not enough revenue in the Street Fund to capture the leveraging
opportunities for matching grant dollars or full-width paving in the Septic
System Elimination Program areas in 2010.
5. There is no provision in the 2010 budget for an ongoing pavement management
program.
G. There r•emain sevej•al positive indicators of fiscal viability in the budget.
1. No new debt-we continue to operate on a pay-as-you go basis.
2. Continued leveraging of state and federal funds to reduce the cost of local capital
improvements borne by city residents resulted in a 72% savings.
3. The number of new employee positions required to keep pace with service
demands is very.low. Just 2.0 new full-time equivalent positions and two part-
time winter seasonal positions have been included in the proposed FY 2010
budget.
H. The action steps toward adoption of the budget include:
1. July 28: Estimated revenues and expenses presented
2. August 11: Public hearing on 2010 preliminary budget
3. August 11: FY 2010 preliminary budget presentation
4. August 25: Outside agencies presentations (social services)
5. August 25: Outside agencies presentations (economic development)
6. September 8: Public Hearing on 2010 proposed budget
First reading of the Proposed Property Tax Levying
Ordinance
First reading of Ordinance confirming excess Property Tax
Outside Agencies Funding Decisions
Fee Resolution discussion .
7. September 22: Final public hearing on 2010 proposed budget
Second reading of property tax levying ordinance
Second reading of property tax confirmation ordinance
First Reading Proposed 2010 Budget ordinance.
Departmental highlights and work program
General budget discussion
8. October 13: Second reading of the Proposed 2010 Budget Ordinance
Adopting the FY 2010 Budget
9. October 27: Adoption of Fee Resolution
H. As a budget adoption follow-up activity, a Cfty Council-Staff Retreat is routinely
scheduled each January, at which time an updated six year financial forecast will be
reviewed.
1. The FY 2011 budget pYOCess begins in Maych with a tay-geted adoption date in
mind of October 26, 2010.
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: August 11, 2009 City Manager Sign-off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business
❑ public hearing ❑ information 0 admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGEIVDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative Report regarding proposed amendments to Title 19 and
Appendix A(Definitions) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC):
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A.390 and RCW 35A.63.220.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None
BACKGROUND: The City adopted the annual amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for
2009 on May 12, 2009 in Ordinance 09-008 and 09-009. The Comprehensive Plan amendment
known as CPA-05-09 removed the Community Facilities comprehensive plan and zoning
designation and added Parks/Open Space comprehensive plan and zoning designation. Staff
is updating the Spokane Valley Municipal Code to become consistent with the most recent
zoning designation change. In addition, staff modified sections of the code to correct
inconsistencies and errors.
The Spokane Valley Planning Commission held a study session on these items on July 9, 2009
and a Public Hearing on July 23, 2009. Based upon staff's recommendation, the Planning
Commission made a motion 5 to 0 to add language received by Vera Water and Power at the
public hearing. The language added can be found in Sections 19.40.101, 19.60.010, 19.70.101
and 19.70.020 and states except power poles and underground transformers...
ANALYSIS: Below is a summary of changes being recommended by the Planning Commission:
1. Chapter 19.20.110 - Remove Community Facilities District (CF) zone and replace
with Parks/Open Space (P/OS).
2. Chapter 19.40.010 - Add screening/landscape requirements for community facilities
and Public Utility Distribution Facilities and move Public Utility Transmission Facility
development standards.
3. Chapter 19.40.030 - Remove the Supplemental Permitted Use Regulations. Moved
to Chapter 19.40.010.
4. Chapter 19.60 - Remove Community Facilities District (CF) and replace with
Parks/Open Space (P/OS).
5. 19.60.010 - Add development standards for mobile food vendors.
6. 19.60.010 - Add screening/landscape requirements for community facilities and
Public Utility Distribution Facilities and Public Utility Transmission Facility
development standards.
7. 19.60.020 and 19.60.040 - Remove development standards for mobile food vendors.
8. 19.60.100 - Remove definition of Community Facilities district and replace with
ParkslOpen Space.
9. 19.70.010 - Add screening/landscape requirements for community facilities and
Public Utility Distribution Facilities and Public Utility Transmission Facility
development standards.
-10. 19.70.020 - Add screening/landscape requirements for community facilities and
Public Utility Distribution Facilities and Public Utility Transmission Facility
development standards.
11. Minor correction of errors.
12. Chapter 19.120 (Schedule of Permitted Uses) -
a. Add Parks/Open Space column.
b. Remove Community Facilities column and all uses. -
c. Change `P' (permitted) to `S' (conditions apply) for Community Facilities use.
d. Remove `recreational facility' from Community hall, club or lodge use.
e. Allow Community hall, club or lodge in P/OS.
f. Allow Entertainment/recreation facilities, indoor in P/OS.
g. Allow Entertainment/recreation facilities, outdoor in P/OS.
h. Allow Gift shop as an accessory use in P/OS.
i. Allow Golf course in P/OS.
j. Changed `P' (permitted) to `S' (conditions apply) for Golf course use in
residential zones to comply with Chapter 22.60.
k. Allow Golf driving range/training center in P/OS. Added development
standard to comply with Chapter 22.60.
1. Allow a Market, outdoor for temporary use in P/OS.
m. Allow Mobile food vendors with conditions found in Chapter 19.60.010 (H).
n. Changed `P' (permitted) to `S' (conditions apply) for Public utility distribution
facility use in residential zones, CMU and MUC to comply with development
standards in zoning district.
o. Added development_ standard reference for public utility transmission facility.
p. Allow a Riding stable as a conditional use in P/OS.
q. Allow a Theater, outdoor in P/OS.
r. Minor correction of errors.
13. Appendix A(Definitions) - Modify the Community Facilities definition.
OPTIONS: Proceed as proposed, or as modified; or direct staff further.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Council Consensus to bring this forward for an
ordinance first reading at the August 25, 2009 Council meeting.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None.
STAFF CONTACT: Karen Kendall - Assistant Planner
ATTACHMENTS:
(1) Amended Text
(2) Planning Commissions Findings and Recommendations
(3) Staff report and exhibits to Planning Commission for 7-23-09 pubic hearing
(4) Public comment from 7-23-09 public hearing
F4;OO*Department of Community Develol~r~~ci~t vallc Planning Division
~:1. Counci*l
Administrative Report
Amendments to the Spokane Va-_eY Municipa- Code
August 11, 2009 ,
S(~~n~~. Department of Community Development
n["'
jVal l Planning Division
Proposed Amendments
T~tle 19
19.40
Section Section 19.6C
Section 19.70
➢
Chapter 19.120
Uses)
(Schedule Permitted of ➢And~x. .
e A (Definitions)
pp
1Department of' Community Developnieiit 7aile
.
jVal le Planning Divislan
TI*tIe 19
New language located in Sections 19.40.010,19.60.010,19.70.010 and 19.70.020.
F. Communihv Facilitics and Public Utilitv Distribution Facilitv(ies), except power poles And underground
transformers shall compiv with the following conditions:
1. Thc rcquirements for landscaping, signaQe" l~hting and othcr rc4uirement shall a~ly..
2. Tvpe I landscape screening is requircd along propertv line(s) adjacent to a residential usc or zone.
Already exists in code. Moved from 19.40.030
Proposed locations in Sections 19.40.010, 19.60.010, 19.70.010 and 19.70.020.
,
G. Public Ut11tv Trmsmissfcm Facilitv shatl com-olv with the follo%x~he eondifiions:
1. The utilitv comDmv sball sectte tie neeessarv DroDertv or rieht-of-wav ro assure for the trop ertv constuctien.
cantmued mamtenance. aad Lreneral saferv to the vroner~y adioinmg the nublic utgitv trzLsmission facilrtv;
2. AIl support stuctures far electrn trmnsmission lmes shall have their meams of access located a minimum of 10 fertt
abave grrnmd;
The facil ities sh.all be comvatble n~i~ th~e sunfltmdin~ us~ either l• d~sta~c~e. la~dsc2pim~. bufferiq,g, ~desi,gn. as
. ,
determmed bv the dire-ctor; and
4. The heieht of anv structure abave erotmd dQes no~t exreed 125 feet.
~ rt1r Department of Community Developmcnt r f
e Plann.ng D.v.sion
E:1
Tit] e 19 cont...
19.60.020 G0~ Gaben Offke district.
2. Dweiing unfts shall be allowed only in a building astrucxure with nonresidentiai on the entire ground floor.
Parking ta residects must be resenred and clearly marked. exoept housing provided as part of an insttutional "continuum
of care" concept to encaurage independent Irving.
'tt?lyll?-rG7~~t1YJ'~t'tt9Y~-t:t`-~XttC-4i'~~i-lirr-t~~`:71~~'trtiCt~-c'r~..,i.'.-ri'th:.i-ili~i•r;,..-.r~~r',-''-n :rt~-~,F~St.r~+
~ }C
~ i , lt1;'~:LTttttC4te~C7'TTfft"
42. Traific fiom the proposed use on a side sVeet shall be direcUed to the nearest artenal or collector street and
shall nQt be routed ttxough an adjoinng neighborhood. Oro
I
OOW:
A. T~.e Neignborhood Commerual designatian is ntended to provide a IimKed number of oommeraal goods and
seroioes to stxrounding residential neighbahoods.
B. Supplemental Permitted Use Regulalions
1, Anlmal Ginlclveterinary limfted to Smal1 animals.
2. Carwash limited to a single bay.
3. Groaery or spedalty iood store limfted to no more than 25,000 square feet of net retall space.
4. N40biIe 4$9d VeRd9FS 'Vr1L4-pE4444&54'-R-9f-~~~3~j~fl~F--l~::,;!I? 7;41 ~4. Bebw ground storage of fuet hcidental to netail sales ony.
Added to Section 19.60.010 (General provisions)
,
d. On lots th= slope dcmm fram the street, cehicular and pedestrim entry bridges that are na more than 42 inches abQve
the z•erage skiewaljc elrvatwn may fgllti• extend mto a requued structute setback-.
e. B21canits n2y extmd mm public rights--of-way as alloured in the building code and 2dopted street stand2rds.
f Attached mechaiical equi}ment snch as beatpumgs, tir cQnditioners, energency gener=rs =d water ptmlps are
21lowed tD projert mtD tbe side of rear yard setb=k only.
H. Mabde food vendars with Dermission of the nromtc• owner- health rereTr-at3e 2ad nermit.
TI*tle Dep~~rkment of'Community Develo~~n~~~iit
Vall Plannr .ng Divl .sl .on
F-
19 cont...
18.60.100 " , -%.C~sr.Parksl0pen Space
A. - A~0 is intended to pr-elecA e'
, r T! y
1
AGtiGRs '-1 v r4r- ruist-,italu rnnR6GFed G.
.
. pratects oarks. oDen sqace and other natural ohvsical assets of the
r~
6ac in 4hasn arnac m~~r inrl~.~rl. t i~ ~~~f ~~~r{ ~.~r ecccn t= ~!,a~'4~-s
communi~. 1 I _ a ~ ~
+'i;,,a
. 1' y~ ~ ~ ;.u ~-.~r I ~-7 t „r , r+ - , l"d
~ji f Q T'i~~ Ta~ j'1TC~'{~~I"'J~'i i~ ir"i~ •C ~"~7f-~~i ~ ~".-Z7f°t~' 'TL~,~, ] 7 ~J~ T~~7Tf7~7.'1~,"~11VY17C17'c1'7C
S , ~ •
r , r ~'ect ~1, f t n ~-?rr~?Pot~+7 t 1'RA 7
` . ~ j - ~ ?-0
S'"kan~ Department of Community Development .
<
j~tae Plann. ~ng Divrsion
Proposed Amendments TI*tle 19.
Corrections to errors or inconsistencies
i~ Removal of `mobile food vendors' special conditionslrequirenlents in section
19.60.020 and 19.60.040 and put in general requirements 19.60.010(H) and
added code section in schedule of permitted uses table (Appendix 19-A),
➢ Remove column Cor "NAICS in Chapter 19.120.
r Remove "s" ul colw-nn tor NAICS specific number in Chapter 19.120.
➢ Spell out "Gross Leasable Floor Area" for clarification in Chapter 19.12O.
''06 ' Department of Community Dcvelopment F Vi»a Planning Division -
t
Chapter 19.120
t
90 0 m I
0 2- ,
x ~ v 1 0
0 w
~ N y~ ~a eo ~ Z' ~ c ~ C
~ ~ i 3 G ~
~ ~ 3 ~ X d m ~ C 0 m
~ u. u. V d aC L~n" o m d pm O~ t~f L~
c~ oC aC aC ~ ~ X~ ~
~ Z r
~ ~ 01 o ~ ~ 'X ~ ~ ~
€ ~ S ~ _o 0 o ti~'i ~
H 0~ a 0 V~ ZU VU U~, Irr ~ N
a ~(3
Q ~ -
445281 Bakery, reO P P P 3 S P P P A A Floor area ~
Gmited to 10%
of Gross
Leasahle Flnpr
Are3 (GLFA)
not to exceed
I 1,000 sf.
6r 921- Commwnity facilities SR SP SP SP SP S~ f= lSp ISee zonina
Nicol ~p' ~R 9~ ~ ~ SF ; SR disincts for
~ ~P
1' COndi:i0ns.
p
P P P£~I- 6134 Communky ha1l, club,,Q lodqe P P P P P p p
713 Entertainmcrttlrecreabon PP P P P
. faalities, indoor -
- ~
~4 ?138 Enterta4anentlrecreaticn P P P P P • P P
faalitles, outdoor -
~
45 453 Gift shop P P P A A P P P g n
q aP i4Q gp SR SR 74 71391 Goff course , p S ~ P P SVMC 22.60
~ I
I -
F -
C C~ C C C,-~ 71391 'I Gdf driving rangeltrafning P C S = P SVM_ C 22.60
P center ~
P Permitted Use A Accesaory Only
R Regional Siling T Tempotery Permit
S Candftions Apply C Conditianal Use pcrmit
I
Fvalla ~ "A If ;.ADepartment of Community Developmenr ~
Planning Division
Chapter 19.120 continued...
~
oa 4 m ~ ` ~ y
o~ ? o•- d Z' a
c c ~
~ N l'~ ~ ~ N y ~p X c O p 8 ~ ~ m ~ m r>
i 1 1, I L f V ~ 0 1 ' D = 00 C i k .a E E E t`n R a.
~ ~ ~ ~ Z s ~ ~ X(j ~ 0 mE O E a~ E 00
fJ~a a 9 ``0, Vm ZU C)U ~(pj a. ~.D _ N ~V
Q
45 1453898 Markat, outdoor T T T T T I T T
74 722330 N4obae food vendors S S S S S S S S - S S
^
U' /lJi l I)
Yvmc
19.60.010 H
~
S Sr 8P Sw St-
St•'- 221 221 Public utility distnbution facility~ ~P aP P P P P P P P P Pswc
49-44034-See
zoninq districts
~ for conditions.
S S S S S2 3 237 PubUc ublity transmission S S S S S S S S S S3 S S SwoC
f2ditY 030-See
. ~ zoni districts
for condilions
t
74 71399 Riding stable C P P
:74 711 Theafer, outdoar ~ P P P P
P Permitt~d Use A Avicessay Only R Region~l Siting T Temporary Pemtit
S Condtti4ns Apply C Conditianal Use permit
ane
Department of Community DevelopmE~Valle - Planning Divisio~:
F
Appendi*x A (Derini*ti*ons)
Appendix A (Definitions) of the Spokane Vailey Municipal Code (SVMC)
Communifjr fac ili#ies: The facilifies of local governmerft, other pubNic agenaes
or nonprafit organizabans inducingt but not limited xo, polEae stabonst frre
stabons. govemment offices. court roams. water/uastewater starage and
treatm~er~t faa~ies, elec~c and other utility distributicx~/cdi~ecton linesr
Iednc subs#aticns. transmisst-on fines. except firansit station$.
churches. and schvds.
.
19.20.010 Zoning districts.
The City has established the following zoning distdcts:
R-1 Single-Family Residential Estate District
R-2 Single-Family Residential Suburban District
R-3 Single-Family Residential District
R-4 Single-Family Residential Urban District
MF-1 Multifamily Medium Densjty Residential
District
MF-2 Multifamily High Density Residential District
MUC Mixed Use Center District
CMU Corridor Mixed Use District
CC City Center District
GO Garden Office District
O Office District
NC Neighborhood Commercial District
C Community Commercial District
RC Regional Commercial District
I-1 Light Industrial District -
1-2 Heavy Industrial District
~ GF- GeFn FAunity-F-as+lities-0istfirA
~ P/OS Parks/Oaen Space
19.40.010 General provisions.
A. No principal or accessory structure shall be located within the clearview
triangle (Chapter 22.70 SVMC).
B. In the districts where the height of buildings is restricted to 35 feet, cooling
towers, roof gables, chimneys and vent stacks may extend for an additional
height, not to exceed 44 feet, above the average grade line of the building. Water
stand pipes and tanks, church steeples, domes and spires and school buildings
and institutional buildings may be erected to exceed maximum height
requirements; provided, that one additional foot shall be added to the width and
depth of front, side and rear yards for each foot that such structures exceed the
required height.
C. No structure may be erected to a helght in excess of that permitted by
applicable airport haiard zoning regufations.
D. Recreational vehic(es shall not be used as permanent or temporary dwelling
units in any residential zone. Guests may park and/or occupy a recreational ,
vehicle while visit:ng the occupants of a dws!l:ng unit located on ths sarne lot for
not more than 30 days in one consecutive 12-month period. The intent is to
' accommodate visiting guests and not to allow the recreational vehicle to be used
as a dwelling unit.
E. The following features attached to structures are allowed as exceptions to
fhe setback standards:' .
1. Minor Projections Allowed. Minor features -of a s#ructure, such as ;
eaves, chimneys, fire escapes, bay windows no more than 12 feet (ong and ;
which cantilever beyond the foundation of the structure, uncovered stairways,
and uncovered decks or balconies, may extend into a required setback up to 20
percent of the depth of the setback. However, they may not be within three feet
of a lot line when a setback is required. Wheelchair ramps are allowed to project
into the setback based on SVMC Title 24, Building Codes. Attached mechanical E
equipment such as heat pumps, air conditioners, emergency generators and water pumps are allowed to project into the side or rear setback only. F. Community Facilities and Public Utilitv Distribution Facilitv(ies) shall complv
with the followinq conditions:
. 1. The requirements for landscapinq, siqnaqe, liQhtinq and other
requirement shall apply.
2. Type I landscape screeninq is required alonq propertv fine(s) ,
adiacent to a residential use or zone. G. Public Utilitv Transmission Facilitv shall complv with the followinq
conditions; - 1. The utilitv companv shall secure the necessarv propertv or riqht-of-
. way to assure for the property construcfion, continued
maintenance, and qeneral safety to the propertv adioininq the
public utilitv transmission facilitvi ,
2. All support structures for electric transmission liries shall have their
means of access located 'a minimum of 10 feet above qround; .
3. The facilities shall be compatible with the surroundinq uses either ;
by distance, landscapina, bufferinq, or desiqn, as deterrnined bv the ;
director; and
4. The heiqht of anv structure above qround does not exceed 125 '
feet.
19.40.030 R-'i - Single-Family Residential Estate district.
A. Low density residential development intended to preserve the character of
existing development and to allow for a limited number of horses and other large
animals, and subject to the dimensional standards of this chapter.
$_C~upplomenfnl Darmifforl l 1so G7nnuIati$RG_ 1
D ~
= W$~lwfl~--sBFHd+tFen£r.
a Thn i iiili~C~r'~~ e'ri
Q~ I G04 J 3 aRd
.
. ~t ! irn t{~~+ r~M1nl7!lCI~rl rticti~~ ~1./'
OirA..t..! Saletl! tnZ~cz r..n.,....-~. r}
- " -~t?tt~-~"[7'iG~Ctt7tt tt~ 'f~ri-rrssvj
,
if-Y'YSU'P GFt 6tFHG tte6--t~F e!etrtYtG-t~t~'f
fh~ma„►,s „f .,~~12~asat~d-a-m+~~~~u -m-o# -1.4-€eet-above-~~n4--,
s--Th c-hall e-Gempa#la# g ses °4
, , r ~es}~; e-&-es4*,and
dt-t'~~e-heig1-t-t-8P--te-~~~t4re'^c~~ave-gFouncsdv,os nn4 125
teet-.
2. =tt#fttr-ttttlitY DitibLAaPr~y . Q 1
GGRd'41 . (QFd. 7-015 § 4, 20974-.
Chapter 19.60
Sections: '
19.60.010 General requirements. '
19.60.020 GO, Gardert Office district.
19.60.030 O, Office district.
19.60.040 NC, Neighborhood Corrimercial district.
19.60.050 C, Community Commercial district.
19.60.060 RC, Regional Commercial district.
19,60.070 MUC, Mixed Use Center district. 19,60.080 CMU, Corridor Mixed Use district.
19.60.090 CC, City Center district.
19.60.100 , . P/OS, Parks and Open Space
19.60.010 General requirements.
A. Nonresidential development shall meet the minimum setback and fhe
maximum height requirements shouvn in Table 19.60-1. ,
B. Parking areas shal( be paved and landscaped in accordance with Chapter
22.50 SVMC.
~
C. New development exceeding three stories in height shall be pravided with paved service lanes not iess than 16 feet in width.
D. All new development shall provide for shared access with adjacent
properties.
E. All outdoor trash, garbage and refuse storage areas shall be screened on all
sides visible to public views or rights-of-way with a minimum five-and-one-haff-
foot-high concrete block or masonry wafl or sight-obscuring fence with a sight-
obscuring gate and two feet of Type Il landscaping in accordance with Figure
22.70-8 SVMC.
F. The fol(owing strucfures may be erected above the height limits of this code
in the Office, Commercial, and Mixed Use zones, provided: (1) the structure is ~
accessory to or part of a building which is a permitted use in the zone; (2) the 3
structure complies with the height limits in the Airport Overlay zone; and (3) no =
,
residential use of the structure shall occur above the height limiis prescribed in the zone:
,
1. Penthouses or roof structures for the housing of elevators, stairways,
tanks, ventilating fans, or similar equipmenr to opera#e and maintain a building. ~
' 2. Fire or parapet walls, skyiights, fiagpoles, chimneys, church steeples, ~
belfries, wireless masts, and similar structures. 3. Structures such as silos, feed mills, batch plants, and fixed cranes
which are used in a manufacturing process which utilizes verticai processing and ~
storage of materials. ~
. 4. Water stand pipes and tanks. .
G. The following features attached to structures are allowed as exceptions to
the setback standards:
1. Minor Projections Allowed. Minor features of a structure, such as eaves, chimneys, fire escapes, bay windows no more than 12 feet long and which cantilever beyond the foundation of the structure, uncovered stairways,
wheelchair ramps and uncovered decks or balconies, may extend into a required E
structure setback up to 20 percent of the depth of #he setback. However, they , may not be within three feet ofi a lot line when a setback is required.
2. Fu11 Projections Allowed. In addition to subsection (G)(1) of fhis section,
the folfowing features are allowed to project farfher into the required structure
setback: .
a. Canopies, marquees, arivnings and similar features may fully extend into a street setback and may extend into the public right-of way subject
tathe requirements of fhe building code and adopted street standards.
b: Uncovered stairways and wheelchair ramps that lead to one
entrance on the street-facing facade of a building may fulfy extend into a street
. , setback. .
c. Uncovered decks and stairways that are no more than 42 inches
` above the ground may fully extend into a'required structure setback.
d. On lots that slope down from the street, vehicular and pedestrian ~
entry bridges that are no more than 42 inches above the average sidewalk
elevation may fully extend into'a required structure setback. .
e. Balconies may extend into pubiic rights-of-way as al(owed in the
building code and adopted stree# standards.
f. Attached mechanical equipment such as heat pumps, air
conditioners, emergency generators and water pumps are allowed to project into
, the side or rear jrard setback onfy.
H. Mobile food vendors with permission of the property owner, health
certificate and permi#.
1. Community Facilities and Public Utility Distribution Faci(ity(ies) shall
complv with the followinq conditions:
1. The requirements for landscapinq, siqnaQe, liqhtinq and other
reauirement shall applv. '
2. -Type I landscape screeninq is required alonq property (ine(s) °
E
adiacent to a residential use or zone. `
;
J. Public Utilitv Transmission Facility shail complv with the followinq conditions: ' 3
,
1. The utilitV companv shall secure the necessarV propertV or riqht-of-
Way io assure Tor ine propeRw consiruction, coniinuea
.
maintenance, and peneral safetv to the propertv adioininq the public utilitv transmission facilitv;
2. All suqport structures for efectric transmission lines shall have their
means of access located a minimum of 10 feet above qround;
3. The facilities shall be cornpatible with the surroundincl uses either
bv distance, landscapinq, bufferinq, or desiqn, as deterrnined bv the
director; and 4. The heiqht of anv structure above around does not exceed 125 feet.
19.60.020 GO, Garden Office clistrict.
A. The Garden Office designation is intended primarily for low-rise office ,development with limited retail or commercial uses. Retail and commercial uses ;
are limited to those that are clearly subordinate to the primary office use or the ~
retail function primarily serves the office uses in close proximity to the retai( or '
commercial use. Garden 4ffice uses provide a buffer betv,reen residential uses
and commercial uses. Primary uses inciuding medical and dental facilities,
education services, insurance, real estate, financial institutions, design firms, and
legal services are representative of this Comprehensive Plan category,
B. Supplemental Permitted Use Regulations. 1. Convenience Store.
a. Exterior loudspeakers, public address systems or similar audio equipment shall not be permitted; and .
b. The proposed location shall be directly adjacent to at least a principal or minor arterial street or collector street.
2. Dwelling units shall be allowed only in a building or structure with
nonresidential on the entire ground floor. Parking for residents must be reserved
and clearly marked, except housing provided as part of an institutional
"continuum of care" concept to encourage independent living.
. . FS-sha!l be-1ee 't . , feg" ~
vwT°r , a hoo14h noriifiQato anrl a peFFni4
43. Traffic from the proposed use on a side street shall be directed to the
nearest arterial or collector street and shall not be routed through an adjoining
neighborhood. (Ord. 07-015 § 4, 2007).
. 19.60.040 NC, Neighborhood Commerciat district.
A. The Neighborhood Commercial designation is intended to provide a limited
number of commercial goods and services to surrounding residentiaf
neighborhoods.
B. Supplemental Permitted Use Regulations. ~
1, Animal cfinic/veterinary limited to sma(I animals. ;
2. Carwash limited to a single bay. 3, Grocey ~r sr~ci~!t~ food store fimited to no more than 25,400 square
feet of net retail space. -
, - , • • ~ ~t't,F--FftiAV reF, hLm
6@#i4Gate--a RE-p,e{f*t-
54. Below ground storage of fuel incidenta! #o retail sales only.
65. All storage in the NC dis#rict shall be wifhin an enclosed building;
provided, that retail products which are for safe or rental may be displayed ~
outdoors during business hours only, so long as the storage does not occur
within any required front or flanking street yard or in any public street or right-of- ~
way. !
7-6. (ndoor kennels, doggie day care facilities and kennels associated with
veterinarian c(in'res; provided, that:
a. There are no outside runs or areas;
b. The structure(s) housing animals is adequately soundproof ta
meet the requirements of Chapter 173-060 WAC; '
c. One parking stall provided for every 10 animal confinement areas;
and
d. Compliance with noise standards for a commercial noise source as identified by WAC 173-60-040 has been demonstrated by the applicant. (Ord.
08-002 §1, 2008; Ord, 07-015§ 4, 2007).
19.60.100 CF, Ce~plat"m4~-a~i~s dic¢ri^tP/QS, ParkS/Open Space
A. Th '-~~+Str-+st designation is intended to pr
.
imGiitl , ~ `944a-~,-aRd eiRilaf
r f +
I
" G9F4FAL4Rj.%j 6 -th8se ~-'1--e-edS-Felate-~6-f3UIftl1 , 6@-an4-+pst4i0spS
whet ef they @Fe publiGl . MeFeever, this
desigi; e~~~de64aF-aRd-protects parks, open space and other natural
phvsical assets of the community. IJ6es i-,Tes° °Fn2e m.,,, ;n„l,,de thnse
ittC'F'ttittnd n c+ a c c+ nRtial pLibltb'tCtbtfttt~
B.„Sq~i~,n,amontnl I~c~~~latinnc~. ,
r, r..
. d-a~~~--a~lisa~3-Ip° f~
g#-.#-h i pFavided, °Ft'4la.G+a n
, , the V feF GUs, ianris~^a nn~'nn
~g-,
s~pag ,
, (QFd. ,
19.70.010 I-1, Light Industrial district,
A. The Light Industrial designation is a planned industrial area with special
emphasis and attention given to aesthetics, landscaping and internal and
community compatibility. Typical uses would include technology and other low- ~
f
impact industries. Light Industrial areas may also include office and commercial j
uses as ancillary uses within an averall plan for industrial deve(apment. `
B. Supplementa) Regulations. ;
1. The outdoor storage provisions ,contained in SVMC 19.60.060(B) shall
apply to the I-1 dis#rict.
°
2. Mobile food vendors shall be located on/withiti designated areas which do not interfere with parking or internal circulation wifh permission of the property ;
owner, health certificate and permit. . {
3. Setbacks.
a. Front and flanking street yard setbacks shall be 20 feet; and
b. Side and rear yard setbacks of 35 feet are required only adjacent ~
to residential zoning districts. .
4. The following structures may be erected above the height, limits of this
code, provided: (A) the structure is accessory to or part of a building which is a
;
permitted use in the zone; (B) the structure complies with the height limits in the Airport Overlay zone; and (C) no residentiaf use of the structure shall occur ~
above the height limits prescribed in the zone:
a. Penthouses or roof structures for the housing of elevators, stairways, tanks, ventilating fans, or similar equipment to operate and mainfain a
bui(ding.
b. Fire or parapet wal(s, skylights, flagpoles, chimneys, church
steeples, belfries, wireless masts, and similar structures.
c. Structures such as silos, feed mills, batch plants, and fixed cranes
which are used in a manufacturing process which utilizes vertical processing and
storage of materials.
d. Water stand pipes and tanks.
5. The following features attached to structures are allowed as exceptions
to the setback standards: ~
a. Minor Projections Allowed. Minar features of a structure, such as
eaves, chimneys, fire escapes, bay windows no more than 12 feet long and -
wFiich cantilever beyond the foundation of the structure, uncovered stairways,
wheelchair ramps and uncovered decks or balconies, may extend into a required
structures setback up to 20 percent of the depth of the setback. However, they '
~
may not be within three feet of a lot line when a setback is required.
b. Full Projections Allowed. (n addition to subsection (B){5}(a) of this
section, the following features are allowed to project farther into the required
structure setback:
i. Canopies, marquees, awnings and similar features may fully
extertd into a street setback and may extend into the public right-of-way subject
to the requirements of the bui(ding code arid adopted street standards.
ii. Uncovered stairways and wheelchair ramps that lead to one
entrance on the street-facing facade of a building may fully extend into a street
setback.
iii. Uncovered decks and stairways that are no more than 42 -
inches above the ground may fully extend into a required structure setbaek.
iv. On lots that slope down from the street, vehicular and pedestrian entry bridges that are no more than 42 inches above the average .
sidewalk elevation may fully extend into a required structure setback. v. Balconies may extend into public rights-of-way as allowed in
the building code and adopted street standards.
~
vi. Attached mechanical equipment such as heat pumps, air
conditioners, emergency generators and water pumps are allowed #o project into
the side or rear yard setback only.
6. Communitv Facilities and Public Utility Distribution Facility(ies) shail ~
complv with the followinq conditians: ~
a. The reQUirements for landscapinq, siqnaqe, liqhtinq and other
requirement shall applv.
b. Tvpe { landscape screeninq is required alonq prapertv line(s) ~
adiacent to a residential use or zone. I
7. Public Uti(itv Transmission Facilitv shall camplv with the followinq ~
conditions:
a. The utilitV companv shall secure tne necessarv propertv or riaht-
of-wav to assure for the property construcfion, continued maintenance, and
aeneral safetv to the propertv adioininq the public utility transmission facility;
b. All support structures for electric transmission lines shall have
their means of access located a minimum of 10 feet above qround;
c. The facilities shall be compatible with the surroundinq uses either
bv distance, landscapinq, bufferinp, or desiqn, as determined bv the director; and
d. The heiqht of anv structure above qround does not exceed 125 -
feet.
19.70.020 1-2, Heavy Industriai district.
- A, Heavy Industrial designated property is characterized by intense industria)
activities which include manufacturing, processing, fabrication, assembly, freight
handling and similar operations. Heavy industry may have significant noise, odor
or aesthetic impacts.
B. Supplemental Regulations.
1. 1-2 allows any use permitted in the I-1 zoning district, except as
specifically provided in Appendix 19-A.
2. Mobile food vendors shall be located on/within designated areas which
do not interfere with parking or internal circulation with permission of the propetty
owner, health certificate and permit.
3. The following structures may be erected above the height lirrmits of this
code, provided: (A) the structure is accessory to or part of a building which is a
permitted use in the zone; (B) the structure compiies with the height limits in the
Airport Overlay zone; and (C) no residential use of the structure shall occur
above the height lirrmits prescribed in the zone:
a. Penthouses or roof structures for the housing of elevators, ,
stairways, tanks, ventilating fans, ot similar equipment to operate and maintain a ;
building. ~
b. Fire or parapet wa11$, skylights, flagpoles, chimneys, church
steeples, belfries, wireless masts, and similar struetures.
c. Structures such as silos, feed mills, batch piants, and fixed cranes which are used in a manufacturing proc-css Y~hich utilizes vertical processiry and ;
storage of materials. '
~i
~
~
d. Water stand pipes and tanks. r4. The following features attached to structures are allowed as exceptions
to the setback standards: a. Minor Projections Ailowed. Minor features of a structure, such as !
eaves, chimneys, fire escapes, bay windows na more than 12 feet long and ~
which cantilever beyond the foundation of the structure, uncovered stairways,
wheelchair ramps and uncovered decks or balconies, may extend into a required
structures setback up to 20 percent af the depth of the setback. However, they
may not be within three feet of a lot line when a se#back is required. :
. b. Full Projections Allowed. In addition to subsection (13)(4)(a) of this ,
;
section, the following features are allowed to project fiarther into the required structure setback:
i. Canopies, marquees, awnings and similar features may fully
extend into a street setback and may extend into the public right-of-vuay subjec#
to the requirements of the building code and adopted street standards.
ii. Uncovered stairways and wheelchair ramps that lead to one
entrance on the street-facing facade of a building may fully extend into a street setback.
iii. Uncovered decks and stairways that are no more than 42
inches above the ground may fu11y extend into a required structure setback.
iv. On lots thafi slope down from the street, vehicular and
pedestrian entry bridges that are no more than 42 inches above the average
sidewalk elevation may fully extend into a required structure setback. ~
v. galconies may extend into public rights-of-way as ailowed in
the building code and adopted street standards. -
5. Community Facilities and Public Utility Distribution Facilitv(ies) shall
complv with the followinq conditions:
a. The requirements for landscapinq, siqnaqe, liqhtinq and ather
reauirement shall applv. . ~
b. Tvpe I landscape screeninq is required alonq propertV line(s)
adiacent to a residential use or zone.
6. Public Utilitv Transmission Facility shall complv with the followinq
conditions:
a. The utility companv shall secure the necessary property or riqht-
of-wav to assure for the property construction, continued maintenance, and
qeneral safetv to the propertv adioinina the public utility transmission facilitv;
b. All support structures for electric transmission lines shall have
~
their means of access located a minimum of 10 feet above qround; ;
c. The facilities shall be compatible with the surroundinq uses either ~
bv distance, landscapinq, bufferinq, or desiqn, as determined by the director; and ~
d. The heiqht of anv,structure above qround daes not exceed 125 feet.
1 \
1 i
Chapter 19.120
PERMITTED AND ACCESSORlf USES
Sections:
19.120.010 General.
19.1 20.010 Generat.
Uses are classified using the 2002 North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) published by the U.S. Census Bureau
based on category and subcategory. Subcategories include all uses not identified separately by specific number. Uses may be
permitted, be subject to conditions, or require conditional or temporary use permits as shown in Appendix 19-A, the schedule of
permitted and accessory uses.
v ~
o y a ~ k
~ co a) D
N CIO C
lL li. C9 X 'Y7 C L N ~ O V 0~ 0~ 4 > d+► '
m ~ ,ov ~ E E E ~E cn ~
2 v~ GI xV 'L ~ 'a Q ~E ~E i'E~ _ ~0
cnaQ ~ U Um .~0 ~v o a0 _ c~
~
-74 711 Adult entertainment S S Chapter 19.80
establishment SVMC
45 453 Adult-retail use establishment S S Chapter 19.80
SVMC
3-1- 311 Agricultural processing plant, p p
warehouse
~ .33 336411 Aircraft manufacturing p
~ 48 481219 Airstrip, private p P
~ 62 62191 Ambulance service P P P P P P P P
.54 54194 Animal clinic/veterinary P S P P P SVMC
19.60.040(B)(1)
~ 34 311613 Animal processing facility P
S S~ S S S44 112 Animal raising and/or keeping S S Excluding
NAICS 1122,
I page 1 of 34-4
Swine. SVMC
19.40.150.
~ 94 81291 Animal shelter P P
34 31161 Animal slaughtering and P
processing
~ 45 45392 Antique store P P P P P P -
~ 44 448 AppareUtailor shop P P P P P P P P -
44 443111 Appliance saleslservice P P P P - A A Only if
manufactured/
assembled an
premises.
~ 33 33522 Appliances manufacturing - P P
~ 45 45392 Art galleryfstudio P P P,P ' P P P P -
~ 32 32412 Asphalt planUmanufacturing - p
~ 33 333 Assembly - heavy p
( 33 334 Assembly- light P P p p _ p p
~ P P P62 623312 Assisted living facility P P P P -
( 45 4533 Auction house P p p
45 4533 Auction yard (excluding p p
livestock)
~ 44- 1152 Auction yard, livestock p
( 33 3361 Automobile assembly plant p
( J94 922 Automobile impound yard p p
44 441 Automobilellight truck sales and P P P, p
senrice
( 48 4853 Automobileltaxi rental P P P P P p p p
9-1- 811121 Automobile/truck/RVJmotorcycle S P P P Enclosed
painting, repair, body and structure only,
~ Page 2 of 3k4
~ i
\
fender works . SVMC
19.60.050(B)(3).
44 4413- Automotive parts, accessories P P P P - P P
and tires
~ 34 31181 Bakery products manufacturing P P
44 445291 Bakery, retail P P P S S P P P A A Floor area
Iimited to 10%
of Gross
Leasabte Floor
Area lGLFAI
not to exceed;
1,000 sf.
52 52211 Bank, savingslloan and-other P P P P P P P P P P
financial institutions
~ 94 8121 Barberlbeauty shop P P P A P P P P P33 33591 Battery p p
rebuildinglmanufacturing
P P~ P P P7-2 721191 Bed and 6reakfast P P P
~ 4-1- 11291 Beekeeping, commercial . P
S S~ 44- 11291 Beekeeping, hobby SVMC
19.40.150(C)
~ 45 4511 Bicycle sales/service P P P P P P P - P P
33 3366,11 Boat building, repair and , P P.
maintenance ( 44 441222 Boat saleslservice P` P
~ 4,5 4512 Book/stationery store P P P P P P P P
~ 34 3121 Bottling plant . p P
~ -74 71395 Bowling alley p p P p p
~ 7-22 722 Brewery, micro P P P P P P P -P P
Page 3 oI' 34-4
~ 34- 3121 Brewery, winery andlor distillery P P Pp P p'p
~ 33 339994 Broom-manufacturing p p
44 4441 Building supply and home P p p
improvement ,
~ 44 445292 Candy-and confectionery P P P P P P P p
~ -74 71399 Camival, circus T T T T T T T T
~ 32 3219 Carpenter shap P P P P
~ 56 561740 Carpet and rug cleaning plan#s P P
~4 811192 Carwash P P S P P P P SVMC
19.60.040(B)
( 74 7132 Casino P P P P P -
~ 45 454113 Catalog and mail order houses P P p _ p p
~ P P;L2 722-32 Catering services P P P P P. P P -
P P p P 84- 8122 Cemetery, and crematories p _
~ 4,5 451112 Ceramics shop P P P P. P P P -
( 32 325 Chemical manufacturing _ p
P P~ P P Pt14 813 Church, temple, mosque, P P P P P P P p- .
synagogue and parsonage
~ 44 4481 Clothes, retail sales P P P P P -
~ 49 49312 Cold storagelfood locker p p
~ 64- 6113 College or university P p p p p p p ~
~ 5-1- 517 Communication serviceJsales P P P P P P _ p p
33 3342 Communications equipment P P _ p p
manufacturing
,W 921- Community facilities SP SR SR SP SP Sp- SR See zoninq
SP SP P SP S~ SP 922 ^ SR S~ SR SR districts far
conditions.
~ Page-4 af 344
,
P P P~ 81 34 Community half, cEub, or lodge P. P P P P P P P -
P P &2 6232 Community residential facility (6 . a ~
or less residents)
~
P Pp 62+ 6232 Comrriun~y residential facifity p
(9reater than 6 residen#s, no ,
more than 25)
-56 56173 Compasting p
storagelprocessing, GommerciaC
~ ~4 54151 Computer services P. P P' p.p P P P - P P
-2-3- 2373 - Contractar's yard ~ - P P
238
P P P62- 623 Cohvalescent hame, nursing P ~
home ~
~ 44 44512 Convenience store P P A , A P P P - P P .34 339 Cosmetic artd miscelianeous ~ P P
manufacturing
PP~ P P P62 6233 Day care,.aduit P P P A P p P~ A A A
C CC R-P92 62441 0 bay care, child (t 3children ar p PA A P A
~ A.
more)
- _
P-P ~ P P P64- 624410 Day care, chifd (12, children ar- P P P; A A P P P A- A A
_ fewer)
. ~ 451 4521 Departmerrtlvariety store p P . P. P
44 44611 Drug store P. F" P A.P R P, p A P .
8:1- 8123 fDry cleaners P P P AP P P~ p-
9* '812332 pry cleanEng; faundry, fineri. . p. p
~ supply plant, commercia!
k ,
. ~ 32 3211114 Dry kiln ~ I p
s S ~ 84 ~ 814 ouveflang, accessary'apartrnents SvmC
I Pagre 5 af34-4
( 19.40.9 00
8-1- 814 Dwelling, caretakees r.esidence S S S SVMC
19.60.060(B)(1)
~ P P7-2 7213 Dweiling, congregate P P P p b
p P P, P94 814 Dwelling, duplex P P _
P P P 84 814 Dwelling, multifarnily P P P S S - SVMC
19.60.020(B)
P Pb P P P94 814 Dwelling, single-family P P S S - SVMC
, 19.60.020(B)
( P P P 8-4. 814 Dweiling, townhouse P P P p
33 334 - Electricaflelectroniclcomputer P P P P P - P P
335 component and system
manufacturinglassembly
32 322226 Emery clath and sandpaper _ p p
manufacturing
74 713 Entertainmentlrecreation P P P P P P -
facilities, indoor -
74 7139 Entertainment/recreation P P P p p _ p p
facilities, outdaor -
~ 53- 5323 Equipment rental shop P p p _ p p
84- 8113 Equipment sales, repair, and P p p p p
maintenance
~ -72 7222 Espressallatte retail service P P-P P P P P P p- p p
R R~ R R R 92 92 Essential public facilities R R R R R R R Chapter 19.90
SVMC
.A A-74 71394 Exercise facilitylgym/athletic P P P A A P P P: PO A A
club
( 3-2 32592 Explosive manufacturing _ p
~ 49 493190 Explosive storage _ p P
I Page 6 of 1~4
P P p P P P84 814 Famiiy home, adult P P P P P
P PP P P P8-t 814 Family home, child P P P p
44 441222 Farm machinery sales and P - P P
repair ~ 44 112112 Feed lot " P
( 34 311211 Feedlcereallflour mili ` P P
~ 32 3253 Fertilizer manufacturing ~ P
~ e4 81292 Fi1m deueloping P P'P A A P P P 44 44313 Filmlcamera saleslservice P P P A A P P P
~ 45 4531 Florist shop P P P A A P P P - P
34- -311 Foad product ' P
manufacturinglstorage
44 44521 Food sales, specialtylbutcher P P P S P P SVMC
shoplmeat market/specialty 19.60.040(B)(3)
foods
~ 48 484 Freight forwarding P P
~ 44 447 Fueling station P P P A P P - P P
~ 81221 Funeral home P P P, -
~ 33 337 Furniture manufacturing P P
~ 34- 315 Garment manufacturing P P
~ 45 453 Gift shop P P P A A P P P AA
74 71391 Golf course P SP P P SVMC 22.60
SP- 5P- ap- Sp- Sp SR
C C C C C:74 71391 Golf driving rangeltraining P C SP P P SVMC 22.64
center ~ 49 49313 Grain elevator - P P
` 44 44422 Greenhouse, nursery, garden P P P. P - P P
I Page 7 of I-IA
,
~ center, retail 14 1114 Greenhouse, nursery, S S - P P. SUMC
commercial 19.60.050(B)(3)
44 4451 Grocery store P P P S P P - SVMC
19.60.040(B)(3)
44 44413 Hardware store P P P S P P - SVMC
19.60.040(B)(3)
562211 Hazardous waste treatment and , S S SVMC
storage 21.40.060
~ 48 4812 Heliport - P P
~ 4-9 4812 Helistop C C C G C P
~ 45 45112 Hobbyshop P P P A P P P
~ 44 442 Home furnishings, retail sale P p PP -
~ &2 6221 Hospital P P P PP p-
R R11 R R R6-? 622210 Hospital, psychiatric and R R R R R R 4Z R R
substance abuse
~ 62 622310 Hospital, specialty P P P P P P P A A
~ -72 7211 Hotel/motel P P P P P P p- P
~ 34 312113 Ice plant p p
~ 3-2 32591 ink manufacturing P
45 45322 Jewelry, clock, musical P P P A P P P - P P
instrument assembly,
saleslservice
84 81291 Kennel, indoor kennel, doggie . S S S S - P P See zoning
day care facility districts .for
conditions.
54 54138 Laboratories (Bia Safety Level P P p
.2)
~ Page 8 of 34-4
\
1
54 54138 Laboratories (Bio Safety Level P P P
3)
94 54138 Labnratories (Bio Safety Level P P
4) ,
62 62151 Laboratories, medical and P P P P P P
diagnostic
~ 44 44419 Landscape materials- sales P P P - P
~ A A A 8-1- 812310 Laundromat P P A P P P P
~ 44 4453 Liquor store P P P AA P P -
~ W 561622 Locksmith P P. P A A P P P -
32 3211 Lumbermill, sawmill, shingle ~ P
mill, plywood mill
~ 33 33271 Machine shop P - P P
-33 333 Machinelmachinery p P
manufacturing
~ 2,3 236115 Manufactured home fabrication p P
S13- S S S8-1. 814 Manufactured home park SVMC
19.40.130
~ 45 45393 Manufactured home sales P P - P
32 327 Manufacturing, nonmetallic - p P
metal products , 45 453998 Market, outdoor T T T T T T- T
( 62 621498 Massage therapy p P P P P P P P -3-1- 3116 - MeaUfish canning, culting, P P
3117 curing and smoking
33 3391 Medical and laboratory P P P
instrumenUapparatus
manufacturing
I Page 9 0f 344
4.2- 42345 Medical, dental, and hospital P P P A P
equipment supplylsales.
( 62 6214 MedicaUdental clinic P P P P P P P P- P
~ 62 621 Medicalldental office P P P P P P, P P ~
` 33 332 Mefial fabrication Pp
33 332 Metal plating P
~ 33 332 Metal processes, hot P
- Mineral product manufacturing, p
nonmetallic
~ 24- 212 Mining P
7-2 722330 Mobile food vendors S S SIS S S S S - S S'See-zssing
sefl~ie~s-
SVMC
19.60.010(H)
T T~f T T T2-3 236115 Model home units
~ 74 71211 Museum P P P P P P P p-
~ 45 45114 Music store P P P A P P P -
~ A A 56 561 Office P P P P P P P. P p- P P
~ 4.5 45321 Office and computer suppfies P P P A P P - P P
99 999 Off-road recreational uehicle P P
use
44 1113 Orchard, tree farming, P P
commercial ,
( 32 32211 Paperlpulp mills P
~ 48 4859 Park-and-ride facility P P P P P P p- P P
~ 45 522298 Pawnshap P P P P -
i f4 812 Persanal service P P P P P P P P - I Page 10 of 344
.
, I 4-5 45391 Pet 5hQp p p p A P P P w
32 32411 Petroleum ar€d cQal-praducts P
manufactunng 54 54192 Photographic studio p P-'P A A P P P
42. 32511 Plastic and rubber productz ~ p
manufacturing 32 326199 Plastic injecfion molding,. p
thermnset. ,
3? 326199 Pfastic injection mo[ding, p P ' p P p~
therR10pl85tIC
~ 32- 326199 PEastic injection solvent mo[ding
p
~ 4-9 ,491 Pos~ ofFice, postal center P~P P P p p P- P p- P P
' 24 221 Pawer plant (excluding pub9ic - p
~ utility facilities)
, ,
gra 56143 Print sYsvp P P P-. A.. P P P u~ P P
32 323 Printing, reprographics, P P
boakbinding services,
commercial
~ 48 48849 Public pay parking garagellot P~ p -P P P p _J ^
SP SR $9 S-R SP S~ 2-2- 221 Public utiZify distributian facility SP- SP- p p P P' P P Pp- PP SVAG
4949-.099--5ee
zonlnq dlStriCts
fiQC Cond1tI0f1S.
S S13 SS S24 237 Public utility transmissiart facility S Ss Ss S S' s 8- s s S~mc
~ 4-9-~0--.5ee
zortinq distrtcts
. . . for conditions.
~ -74~71399 Racecourse ~ P ~ P - p~
~ 44 71 1212 Racetrack ~ P P ~
~ Page 11 0f 34-4
~ 5-1- 5151 Radio/TV broadcasting studio P P P P P p-
49 4821 Railroad yard, repair shop and p
. roundhouse
-7-2 7212 Recreational vehicle C S' - SVMC
park/campground 19.60.060
44 44121 Recreafional vehicle saEes and p - p
service
PP ~ P P P54 59511 Repeater facility P P P. P p- P P ~ 7-2 7222 Restaurant, drive-in p p p p _ p p
~ -7-2- 7222 Restaurant, drive-through P P A C P P - P P
~ 72 722 Restaurant, fu11 service P. P P A P P P P - P P
45 452 - Retail sales P P P A P P P - A A Limited to ifiems
453 manufactured
on the
premises:
~ -74 71399 Riding stable C P P
~ ~3 33122 Rolling mil) p
~ 3-1- 314991 Rope manufacturing p p
32 325212 Rubber reclamation, P
manufacturing/fabrication P P p P P P64 6111 Schools, pubfic and private, X P P P P P P p-
through 12
P64 6114 Schoals, professional, P P P P P P P R P P
vocational and trade schools
~ - Showroom P P P P P - P
~5 4533 Secondhand store, P P p p p p _
consignment sales
( 33 33995 Sign manufacturing/repair _ p. p
~ Page 12 of 344
;
~ 33 33995 Sign. painting shop P P P P - P
32 32561 Soap and cleaning compound - P.
manufacturing
56292 Solid waste recyclingltransfer S S S SVMC
site 19.60.060(6)
64 6116 Specialized traininglleaming P P P P S P P R Adaptive reuse
schools orstudios of existing
. structures only.
No expansion
allowed.
~ P P 48 49319 Storage, self-service facility P' p p p
49 493 Storage, general - outdoors S S S -.S P See zoning
districts far
conditions.
- Tank..storage, LPG above S S S S. S S S S S SUMC
ground 21.40.060
24 213112 Tank storage, critical material - S S SVMC
above ground . 21.40.060
24 213112 Tank storage, critical material S S - S S SVMC
below ground 21.40.060
34 3161 Tanning, curing of hides and _ p
skins
( 7-2 7224 Tavern P P P- P P 'P -
( - TaxidermY P P -
S S~ S S S54 5172 Telecommunication wireless S S S C SS S G S S Chapter 22.120
antenna array SVMC
C C C C C5-1- 5172 Telecomrnunication wireless S S S C S' S S G S S Chapter 22.120
support tower SVMC
~ ~34 31411 Textile manufacturing _ p p
~ 74 711 Theater, indoor P P P P P P p-
I Page 13 of 34-4
(-74 711 Theater, outdoor P P P P
56 56292 Tire, recap and retread p
manufacturing S S13 S S-S 54 '5179 Tower, ham operator S S S C S S 6 S S SVMC
19.40:110(A)
22 221119 Tawer, wind turbine support C S S S G S S SVMC
19.40.110(B)
~ 4S 4851 Transit cenfer P P P P P P p P P
~ C-7-2 7213 Transitional housing _
44 441222 Truck sales, rental, repair- and _ p p
maintenance
44 445 - Truck stop p p
447 ~
~ 94 81142 Upholstery shap P P P - P P
49 49311 Warehousing A S P A P P Adaptive reuse
of existing
structures. Na
expansion
allawed.
~ 32 321 Wood product manufacturing P P
56 56292 Wrecking, recycling, junk and C S SVMC
salvage yards 19.60.060(B)
P Permit* Use A Accessory Only
R Region~l Siting T Temporary Permit
S Conditi6ns Apply C Conditional Use
Permit
Page 14 of 3 14
Appendix A(Definitions) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVNiC) ;
Communify facilities; Tne facilities of local government, other pubiic agencies or nonprofit organizations including, but not limited to, police stations, fire
stations, government offices, court rooms, water/wastewater storage and
treatment facilities, electric and other utility distribution/collection lines, tr;a-nsi
stat+8Rs,electric substations, transmission lines, except transit stations,
churches, and schools.
~
~
~
. ,
;
E
t
FINDiNGS AND RECOMlUIENDATIONS OF THE SPOKAME VALLEY PLANNING CQIVIMISSION ~
July 23, 2009
The following findings have been prepared by Staff for the Planning Commission in the event there is concurrence with the recommended approvai. :
Background:
A. The Spokane Va11ey Municipal Code was adapted in September 2007 and became
effective on October 28, 2007.
B. The Comprehensive Plan amendment known as CPA-05-09 rei-noved the Community
Facilities zoning designation and added Parksl0pen Space zone. The amendments are
updating the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) to become consistent with the most
recent zoning designation change,
C. Some of the amendments outlined carrect errors or inconsistencies recommended by staff:
D. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 23,* 2009. The Planning
Gommission approved the following amendments to the Spokane Valley Municipa( Code, .
Title 19 and Appendices A(Definitions):
1. Chapter 19.20.110 - Remove Community Facilities District (CF) zone and replace with
Parks/Open Space (P/OS).
2. Chapter 19.40.010 - Add screening/landscape requirements for community facilities .
and Public Utility Distribution Facilities and move Public Utility Transmission Facility `
development standards. `
3. Ghap#er 19.40.030 - Remove the Supplemental Permitted Use Regulations. Moved to
Chapter 19.40.010.
4. Chapter 19.60 - Remove Community Facilities District (CF) and replace with
Parks/Open Space (P/OS).
5. 19.60.010 Add development standards for mobile food vendors.
6. 19.60.010 - Add screeningllandscape requirements for community facilities and Public
Utility Distribution Facilities and Public Utility Transmission Facility deveiopment
standards.
7. 19.60.020 and 19.60.040 Remove development standards for mobile food vendors.
8. 19.60.100 Remove definition of Community Facilities district and replace with
ParkslOpen Space. 9. 19.70.010 - Add screeningllandscape requirements for community facilities and Public Utility Distribution Facilities and Public Utility Transmission Facility development
standards.
10.19.70.020 - Add screeningllandscape requirements for community facilities and Public
Utility Distribution Facilities and Public Utifity Transmission Facility development
standards.
11. Minor correction of errors.
12. Chapter 19.120 (Schedule of Permitted Uses) -
a. Add Parks/Open Space column.
b. Remove Community Facilities column and all uses.
C. C1iai iy2 'P' (permitted) to `S' (cvnditions appiy) ior C%ommunity Facilities use.
d. Remove `recreational facility' from Community hali, club or fodge use.
~
e. Allow Community hail, ciub or lodge in P/OS.
f. Allow Entertainmentlrecreation facilities, indoor iri P/OS.
g. A11ow Entertainment/recreation facilities, outdoor in P/OS.
h. Allow Gift shop as an accessory use in P/OS. .
i. Allow Golf course in P/OS.
j. Changed `P' (permitted) to `S' {conditions apply} for Golf course use in residential
zones to comply with Chapter 22.60-. ,
k. Allow Goff driving range/training center in P/OS. Added development standard to
comply with Chapter 22.60.
1. Allow a Market, outdoor for #emporary use in P/OS.
m. Allow Mobile food vertdors with conditions found in Chapter 19.60.010 (H}.
n. Changed 'P' (permitted) to `S' (conditions apply) for public utility distribution
facility use in residential zones, CMU and MUC to comply with development
standards in zoning district.
o. Added development standard reference for public utiiity transmission facility. ;
p. Allow a Riding stable as a conditional use in P/OS.
,
q. Allow a Theater, outdoor in P/OS.
r. Minor correction of errors.
13.Appendix A(Definitions) - Modify the Community Facilities definition.
Find.ings:
SVMC 17.80.150(F) states that the City may approve amendments to the UDC if it finds that:
(1) The proposed amendmen# is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive
Plan; and a. EDG-7 works to maintain a regulatory environment that offers flexibility, consistency, predictability and clear direction. Corrections to the development standards will provide
clear direction and consistency.
b. Goal NG-2: Preserve and proteGt the character of Spokane Valley's residentia)
neighborhoods. The addition of screening and landscape standards adjacent to residential
uses and/or zanes wifl provide a visual, sound and light barrier to protect and preserve
residences adjacent to community facility uses.
c. Goal PRG-5: Identify, evaluate, and preserve as open space selected undeveloped lands within Spokane Valley, The new zoning designation (Parks/Open Space) has identified areas to preserve. The development standards established are to presenre and protect the
current and future uses to be consistent wi#h the City's park and recreation goals and
policies.
(2) The proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to 'the public health, safety, welfare,
and protection of the environment.
(3) Lastly, the following amendments are being proposed strictly to correct errors or
inconsistencies:
a. Removal of 'mobile food vendors' special conditions/requirements in section 19.60.020 and
19.60.040 and put in general requirements 19.60.010(H) and added code section in
schedule of permitted uses #able (pppendix 19-A). ,
b. Remove column for "NAICS in Chapter 19.120. _ j
c. Remove "s" in column for NAICS specific number in Chapter 19.120. j
d. Spell out "Gross Leasabie t=ioor Area" for clarification in Chapter 19.120.
i
The proposed amendmerits to the zone meet the above outlined goals, and are thus consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan. Conclusions:
The proposed amendments meet the applicable provisions of the Spokane Va11ey Comprehensive
Plan Recommendations: -
The Spokane Valley Planning Commissioh therefore recommends approval to the City Council of
proposed amendments to Title 19 and Appendices A(Definitions) of the Spokane Valley Municipa! i
Code. 3
Approved this 23Td day of Ju1y, 2009 lan Robertson, Chairrnan
ATTEST Deanna Griffith, Administrative Assistant
c1TY oF SPOKANE vALLEY
Request for Planning Commission Action Meeting Date: July 23, 2009
Item: Check ail that apply: ❑ consent ❑ oid business ❑ new business ;
0 public hearing ❑ i'nformation ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGEfVDA ITEIVI TITLE: Public Hearing to amend Spokane Valley Municipal Code as
foilows: 1. Chapter 19.20.1 10- Remove Community Facilities District (CF) zone and
repiace with Parks/Open Space (P/OS). ,
2. Chapter 19.40.010 - Add screening/iandscape requirements for communify
facilities and Public Utility Distribution Facilities 'and move Public Utility ,
Transmission Facility development standards, :
3. Chapter 19.40.030 - Remove the Supplemental Permitted Use Regulations. =
Moved to Chapter 19.40.010.
4. Chapter 19.60 - Remove Community Facilities District (CF) and replace with
ParkslOpen Space (P/OS).
5. 19.60.010 - Add development standards for mobile food vendors.
6. 19.60.010 - Add screening/landscape requirements for community facilities
and Public Utility Distribution Facilities and Public Utili#y Transmission Facility
development standards. 7. 19.60.020 and 19.60.040 - Remove development standards for mobile food '
vendors.
8. 19.60.100 - Remove definition of Community Facilities district and replace
with ParkslOpen Space.
9. 19.70.010 - Add screening/landscape requirements for community facilities
and Public Utility Distribution Facilities and Public Utility Transmission Facility development standards. ~
10.19.70.020 - Add screening/landscape requirements for community facilities
and Public Utility Distribution Facilities and Public Utility Tt`ansmission Facility
deve(opment standards.
11. Minor correction of errors.
12. Chapter 19.120 (Schedule of Permitted Uses)
a. Add Parks/Open Space coiumn.
b. Remove Community Facilities column and all uses. ;
c. Change 'P' (permitted) to `S' (conditions apply) for Community Facilities use.
d. Remove `recreationa( facility' from Community hall, cfub or lodge use.
e. Allow Community hall, club or lodge in P/OS.
f. Allow Entertainmentlrecreation facilities, indoor in PIOS. g. Allow EntertainmenUrecreation facilities, outdoor in P/OS.
h. Allow Gift shop as an accessory use in P/OS.
i. Allow Golf course in P/OS.
, j. Changed `P' (permitted) to `S' (conditions apply) for Golf course use in
residential zones to comply with Chapter 22.60. ~
f
k. Allow Golf driving range/training center in P/OS. Adde.d development !
standard to comp(y with Chapter 22.60.
1. Allow a Market, outdoor for temporary use in PI4S. rn. Allovu Mobile food vendors with conditions found in Chapter 19.60.010
(H)• -
n. Changed `P" (permitted) to `S' (conditians apply) for Public utility .
distribution facility use in residential zones, CMU and MUC to compiy ,
uvith deVelopment standards in zoning district. o. Added development standard reference for public utility transmission !
facility. '
p. Ailow a Riding stable as a conditiona) use in PIOS.
q. Allow a Theater, outdaor in P/OS.
r. Minor correction of errors.
13.Appendix A(Definitions) - Modify the Community Facrlities definition.
GOVERNIMG LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A.390 and RCW 35A.63.220 ~
PRE1lIOUS PLANMING COMMISSt0N ACTION TAKEN: fVone
~
BACKGROUND: The Gity adopted the annual amendments to the Comprehensive Plan ~
for 2009 on May 12, 2009 fn Ordinance 09-008 and 09-009. The Comprehensive Plan
amendment known as CPA-05-09 removed the Community Facilities comprehensive
plan and zoning designation and added Parks/Open Space zone. Staff is updating the
Spokane Valley Municipal Code to become consistent with the most recent zoning
designafiion change. ln addition, staff modified sectioiis of the eode for easier reference and clarification. ANALYSIS: Spokane Valiey Municip,al Code Section 17.80.150(6) provides approval
criteria tha# amendments. of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code must -meet. Those
criteria incfude: . 1. The proposed amendment(s) are consistent with the applicable, provisians of
the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed amendment(s) bear a substantial relation to the public health,
safety, welfare and protection of the environment.
Staff Comment: The removal of the community facilities zone allows for cansistency ,
with development standards and to address impacts of such use(s). The Parks/Opens
Space zone designates the City's park land and preserves such areas. The schedule ~
of permitted uses has been updated to reflect the removal of the Community Facilities `
zone and add Parks/Open Space zoning designation. Appropriate 'uses were denoted
for the Parks/Open Space zone in the schedule of permitted uses. In addition, the
community facilities definition was updated to correct inconsistencies and criteria was
estabiisfned to buffer residential uses. ~
Lastly, the following amendments are being proposed strictLy to correct errors or
inconsistencies:
1. Remaval of `mobile food vendors' special conditions/requirements in section
19.60.020 and 19.60.040 and put in general requirements 19.60.010(H) and
added code section in schedule of permitted uses table {Appendix 19 A},
2. Remove column for "NAICS in Chapter 19.120.
i
,
~
;
3. Remove "s" in column for NAICS specific number in Chapter 19.120.
4, Spell out "Gross Leasabie Floor Area" for clarification in Chapter 19.120.
Conclusion: SVMC 17,80.150(F) states that the City may approue arriendments to the
UDC if it finds that: . (1) The proposed amendments are consistent with the applicable provisions of the
Comprehensive Pian; and
a. EDG-7 works to maintain a regulatory environment that offers flexibility,
consistency, predictability and clear direction. Corrections to the
development standards will provide clear direction and consistency.
b. Goal NG-2: Preserve and protect the character of Spokane Valley's
residential neighborhoods. The addition of *screening and landscape
~
standards adjacent to residential uses and/or zones will provide a visual, -sound and light barrier to protect and preserve residences adjacent to
community facility uses. _
c. Goal PRG-5: Identify, evaluate, and preserve as open space selected
undeveloped lands within Spokane Vailey. The new zoning designation
(Parks/Open Space) has identified areas to preserve. The development ,
standards established are to preserve and protect the current and future
uses to be consistent with the City's park and recreation goals and !
policies. _
(2) The proposed amendments bears a substantial relation to the public health,
safety, welfare, and protection of the environment.
The proposed amendments to the zone meet the above outlined goals, and are thus
consistentwith the Cornprehensive Plan,
. C)PTIaNS: Review and recommend approval or non-approval as drafted o*r amended.
RECOMMENDEQ ACTtON OR MOTION: Staff's opinion is that the proposed
amendments meeis the above noted criferia and recommend that the Planning
Commission forward a recommendation to amend the rVlunicipal Code as stated above.
BUDGETIFINANCIAL IMPACTS: NA
STAFF CONTACT: Karen Kendall-Assistant Planner
!
A7TACHNiENTS:
(1) Planning Commissions Findings and Recommendations
(2) Amended Title 19
(3) Amended Chapter 19.120 (Permitted and Accessory Uses)
(4) Amended Appendices A (Definitions)
I
Y~ .i ~.f~~/~ ~~a!Y••a.lA.,o~1~
~ ~ ~ • j~. y~ :L'~~
- ~ _ Y '✓r~ F ~I'1 f7 y .
_ ~ i .
~ ; " ~ . ~~R ' ~l : .
Y..',_. ~ ! r t' K~'~'
~ ~
Prn cjdiy ser v ing
Spoliil!'1F, 'Vallcy s9ncc: 1908'
July 16-, 2009
Ms. Kendafl, Assistant Planner RECEIVED
City of Spokane Valley
11707 East Sprague Ave. JU L 20 2009
Spokane Val(ey,1NA 99246
Sp ~p~~MVN7 ~F
COt~1~4UPdITY U~VELOPtNF.~i1`
~.e: Spokane Valle;~ MLsnicipal Code updates
Ms. Kendall,
i am sure that the intent of Spokane Valley is to exclude power poles and underground transformers from the new landscape requirements as defined in
the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. However, the definitions as they appear in
the code clearly include this part of distribution*system. 1Ne a,t Vera Water and
Powcr strongly urgc that the definEtion for Public Utilify Disfributian Facilities and Public Utility Transmissior7 Facility either be rewritten to define the items of a
public distribution system that does not require landscaping or rewrite the
definition so that it clearly states what daes require landscaping.
We also wauld like to see the reguirements written sd that planning directar has
the latitude or flexibility to wa>>e the requirements after reviewing utilities
fandscaping plans. Officers from the Spokane Vafley police Department have
informed us one of the best ways for added security at our substations, welCs and
reservoirs~ are ta NaT allow tize vegetation to grow to the point of "hiding" the
facilities. Safefy and security for us is paramount,
ReyariJs,
Vera Vljater & Power
t, em
Mike DeVleming
P.O. Box 630, yPolc,)ro Va11rV. W!1 9h037 f'hone 509-924-3800 Fax 509-922-3929 wm•r,vcrawatorandpowcr.r,oni
CITY OF SPOKAIVE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: August 11, 2009 City Manager Sign-off: .
Item: Check all that apply: p Consent ❑ Old business ❑ New business ❑ Public Hearing
❑ Information 0 Admin. Report ❑ Pending Legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Spokane Regional Site Selector Agreement
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A .
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: City Council provided funding for the Site Selector web site
in 2009. On July 7, 2009, City Council directed staff to present a new Site Selector agreement.
BACKGROUND: The Spokane Regional Site Selector web site is an economic development tool that
. provides a wealth of information for anyone interested in researching commercial property for sale or
lease in the Spokane region. The web site allows users to view property listings, generate economic
and census reports, provides data on competitive businesses and includes interactive maps that
display geographic information such as the location of streets, water bodies, parks and other points of
interest.
In the fall of 2007, Spokane Valley signed an agreement to participate as a member of the Spokane
Regional Site Selector Consortium, which includes Spokane County, the City of Spokane, Liberty
Lake, Avista and Greater Spokane Inc. The Consortium is working on adding more cities which will
result in lower costs for all members. The original agreement terminated on December 31, 2008, but
was extended by all parties until August 2009. The Consortium members are working on a new, more
permanent agreement that will renew annually upon approval of the Spokane Regional Site Selector
. Consortium Oversight Committee, provided that sufficient funding is secured to keep it running for the
next year.
The Site Selector agreement sets forth the responsibilities of the Consortium members and
establishes the financial commitment of each member. It specifies that mernbers are either "public" or
"private" entities. In order to host land management information on the Site Selector web site the
agreement states that "an agency must be a member of the Consortium." This Agreement is with
WSU Spokane and is approved by all participating organizations. In turn, WSU-Spokane administers
a contract with GIS Planning, the contractor responsible for the Site Selector web site.
On July 7, 2009, City Council authorized staff to bring back a new agreement for consideration.
Further, Council decided that the Consortium would not be treated as an Outside Agency during
annual budget proceedings.
OPTIONS:
1. Authorize Staff to place agreement on next available Council agenda for motion approval.
2. Move agreement forward for approval with revisions.
3. Return agreement to Consortium for revisions.
4. Decline participation as Consortium member.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Direct staff to place the Site Selector agreement on next
- available agenda for approval as presented. ,
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Council allocated $16,500 in the 2009 budget to the Regional Site
Selector project.
STAFF CONTACT: Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner
AGREEMENT FOR THE
SPOKANE REGIONAL SITE SELECTOR
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and among WASHINGTON
STATE UNIVERSITY, an institution of higher education and an agency of the State of
Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at P.O. Box 643140,
Pullman, WA 99202, hereinafter referred to as "University", SPOKANE COUNTY, a
political subdivision of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of
business at 1116 West Broadway Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99260, hereinafter
referred. to as "County," the CITY OF SPOKANE, a municipal corporation of the State
of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 808 West Spokane Falls •
Boulevard., Spokane, Washington 99201, hereinafter referred to as "City of Spokane",
the CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington,
having offices for the transaction of business at 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane
Valley, Washington, 99206, hereinafter referred to as the City of Spokane Valley and
AVISTA CORPORATION dba Avista Utilities, a corporation organized under the laws of
the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 1411 East
Mission Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99220-3727, hereinafter referred to as "Avista",
and the GREATER SPOKANE INCORPORATED, a federal 501 c(6) entity, defined as
a business league as an association of persons having common business interest
whose purposes is to promote the common business interest, having offices for the
transaction of business at 801 West Riverside Avenue, Suite 302, Spokane,
Washington 99201, hereinafter referred to as "GSI"; jointly hereinafter referred to as the .
"Parties."
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 36.32.120(6), the Spokane County
Board of County Commissioners has the care of County property and the management of
County funds and business; and
WHEREAS, it is in the interests of the Parties to mutually participate in this project;
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual promises set forth
hereinafter, the Parties do mutually agree as follows:
1. CONTINUATION OF SPOKANE REGIONAL SITE SELECTOR CONSORTIUM:
The Parties hereto are constituent members of the Spokane Regional Site Selector
Consortium (hereinafter referred to as the "Consortium"). The role of the Consortium is
to coordinate a community partnership that facilitates development and operation of an
economic development web site. The Consortium Oversight Committee (see Section 5B
below) establishes the responsibilities of each Consortium member with regards to the
implementation and the maintenance of the Spokane Regional Site Selector application
and associated data and establishes the financial commitment of each Consortium
member to the Spokane Regional Site Selector. The Consortium's purpose is also to
ensure the products of the Consortium are effective and useful.
1
2. HISTORY OF GIS WEB BASED SITE SELECTOR: A GIS web enabled site selector tool has been established for use in attracting and
retaining companies in the region. In order to meet growing demands for immediate
access to data that site selectors require, as well as to assist GSI in preparing proposals
for prospective clients, the Consortium contracts with GIS Planning Inc. for an off-the-
shelf site selector application. For clarification purposes, this is NOT the State of
Washington's limited version of a GIS Planning web-based site selection tool. Support
for this tool and its implementation and local maintenance is provided by the University,
with University faculty leading and supervising these efforts as further described in
Section 5C.
3. OVERVIEW OF SPOKANE REGIONAL SITE SELECTOR:
The Spokane Regional Site Selector project is a GIS based Site Selector website which
allows citizens and businesses access to available commercial properties, business
locations, land based GIS information, demographic and market information. The
Spokane Regional Site Selector website is a resource to local and imported businesses
and regional economic development. The project leverages the communities' existing
investments in GIS to foster economic development, empower developers and investors
with information, and improve regional economic development capacity.
4. CONSORTIUM MEMBER COMMITMENTS FOR THE SITE SELECTOR:
A. The Consortium is an open group of public and private organizations committed
to the creation and ongoing maintenance of the Spokane Regional Site Selector.
As an open consortium, it can be expanded to include new members and will
actively solicit new members during its existence. There are two types of
Consortium members, public sector organizations and private sector
organizations. New public sector rnembers of the Consortium with populations
above 20,000 may be added anytime by a majority vote of the voting members of
the Consortium Oversight Committee, in accordance with Section 5.13 of this
agreement. Upon approval, the new member shall execute a new membership
agreement; on behalf of the Spokane Regional Site Selector Consortiurn. The
new membership agreement will automatically become an addendum to this
agreement. By executing the new membership agreement, the new member
agrees to be bound by all terms and conditions of this Agreement for Spokane
Area Site Selector. All other public sector members will be categorized as small
communities. New private sector members will be managed by GSI as further
described in Section 4C. To host locally relevant infrastructure and land
management information on the Spokane Regional Site Selector, an agency
must be a member of the Consortiurn. Consonant with the membership types,
there are two models for the distribution of costs to support the Spokane
Regional Site Selector, as described in Sections 4B and 4C.
B. PUBLIC SECTOR FUNDING COMMITMENTS:
2
The distribution of costs for Public Sector organizations will be based on the
official annual population count as defined by the appropriate federal or state
entity (i.e., the Office of Financial Management in Washington State) for the
respective geographic area that public sector organization serves. For instance,
the City of Spokane's percentage share is based on its population share of the
entire county's population. Spokane County's share is County population less
that of the incorporated areas and so forth. New members that join the
Consortium on dates other than the Consortium annual renewal date will be
billed based on their population share of the entire Consortium pro-rated by the
percent of the year remaining. Existing Consortium members will receive a credit
on their next annual bill. The credit will be in the amount equivalent to the
incremental difference in their annual contribution prior to and after the addition of any new public sector members that join mid-year of this agreement. This
arrangement will be revisited annually through budgetary analysis and can be
modified by an amendment to this agreement.
The distribution of costs for 1) software acquisition and online application
maintenance and service, 2) data acquisition integration and maintenance, 3)
real estate data management, and 4) fiscal management shall be as established
annually by the Consortium Steering Committee.
C. PRIVATE SECTOR FUNDING COMMITM-ENTS:
At this time private sector organizations will not have a similar metric for their
contribution. Instead, private sector contributions to the Consortium will be
managed by the GSI and its public and private member community. Additional
Private Sector funds to be applied to site-selector implementation and
maintenance will be the responsibility of the GSI to solicit and obtain from other
Private Sector sources in the region.
Any additional private sector contributions will serve to reduce public sector
Consortium member costs and existing Consortium members will receive a credit
on their next annual bill reflecting the lower cost per member. The credit will be
in the amount equivalent to the incremental difference in their annual contribution
prior to and after the addition of any new private sector members that join mid-
year of this agreement. This arrangement will be revisited annually through
budgetary analysis and can be modified by an amendment to this agreement.
5. CONSORTIUM MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY:
A. The University will serve as the Manager for the Spokane Regional Site Selector.
Dr. Kerry Brooks, Director of the GIS and Simulation Lab, or his successor, will
oversee a staff member funded by the Consortium who is responsible for the
day-to-day management of the Spokane Area Regional Site Selector.
B. CONSORTIUM OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE:
3
A Consortium Oversight Committee is hereby established. The Oversight Committee is constituted by one official representative from each member public
sector organization. Small communities are represented by the Spokane County
member. The Oversight committee will also constitute one member representing
each original Private Sector Consortium member. The GSI will represent all
future private sector Consortium members. Meetings of the Committee are open
to others, but only the official representative may vote on decisions of the
Oversight Committee. The Oversight Committee shall convene at least once per
calendar quarter by the Director of the GIS and Simulation Laboratory within
University who may vote to break ties. All oversight Committee decisions shall
be by majority vote of a quorum, with the quorum being 60% or more of the
Oversight Committee membership. The major business of the Oversight
Committee is to annually evaluate the status of the Site Selector and, by majority
vote, agree that it shall continue for the next year. The annual meeting shall take
place on or about 15 May annually. _ Additional roles of the Oversight Committee
include the approval of new members, advice and approval on the look, feet, and
functionality of the Site Selector GIS web site, and determination of the annual
operating budget for the following calendar year.
C. UNIVERSITY CONSORTIUM MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES:
University consortium management responsibilities under this Agreement are as
follows: 1. Manage the temporal accuracy of Commercial Real Estate Broker Data,
as needed.
2. Provide training and technical support to Commercial Real Estate Brokers
in the entry of new and the removal of old Commercial Real Estate data,
as needed.
3. Provide written quarterly summaries of the project to Consortium
members.
4. Coordinate and manage the temporal accuracy of Public Sector GIS Data
used with the regional site selector.
5. Support the evaluation, standardization, and quality control of any newly
requested attribute or spatial data additions to the regional site selector.
6. Serve as primary fiscal agent for the Consortium, specifically including
invoicing each member, as detailed in Section 11 below, as well as
reimbursing GIS Planning for site selector web services and other fiscal
duties as required.
7. Act as Director of the Site Selector Oversight Committee.
4
6. CONSORTIUM MEMBER RESPONSIBILITIES: It is agreed between University and Consortium members that members shall carry out
the following responsibilities:
A. PUBLIC SECTOR MEMBERS SHALL:
1. Provide and maintain the temporal accuracy of their respective entity's
data used for purposes related to the Spokane Regional Site Selector.
2. Coordinate with the University to integrate municipal and/or regional data
sources into a contiguous data set. .
3. Facilitate and promote the addition of new public sector members for the
Consortium.
B. PRIVATE SECTOR MEMBERS SHALL:
1. Provide and maintain the temporal accuracy of their respective entity's
data used for purposes related to the Spokane Regional Site selector.
2. Coordinate with University to appropriately integrate privately owned data
sources into contiguous data set in accordance with applicable copyright
laws.
3. Facilitate and promote the addition of new private sector members for the
Consortium.
7. AMENDMENT:
This Agreement may be amended at any time by mutual written consent of Consortium
members and University.
8. TERM:
This Agreement will become effective upon signature by all Consortium members and
University. Unless terminated as provided below, this Agreement will renew annually
upon approval of the Consortium Oversight Committee at the designated Consortium
annual meeting, in accordance with Section 5.13 of this Agreement; provided annual
renewal is subject to the availability of appropriated funds and administrative approvals.
This Agreement is null and void in the event project funding cannot be obtained from
any of the previously defined Consortium members, or if data provision commitments
discussed in Sections 6A through D, are not met by any Consortium member.
5
9. TERMINATION:
A. Termination for Convenience. This Agreement may be terminated by any party
hereto upon written notice delivered to the other parties at least thirty (30) days
prior to the intended date of termination. By such termination, no party may
nullify obligations already incurred prior to the date of termination.
B. Termination for Cause. In the event any party shall commit any material breach
of or default in any terms or conditions of this Agreement, and also shall fail to
remedy such default or breach within sixty (60) days after receipt of written notice
thereof, the non-breaching parties may, at their option and in addition to any
other remedies which they may have at law or in equity, terminate this
Agreement by sending notice of termination in writing to the other party to that
effect. Termination shall be effective as of the day of receipt of such notice.
C. In the event of either Termination for Convenience or Termination for Cause of
this Agreement University shall retain advanced payments made by Consortium
members in an amount sufficient to pay for all costs and/or liabilities incurred by
University in its performance of this Agreement.
10. CONTRACT SUM:
In consideration for performance of this Agreement, Consortium members shall pay
University as determined at the annual meetinq and by this aqreement. The payments,
subject to the availability of appropriated funds and administrative approvals, shall be
made in accordance with the provisions stated in Section 11 below.
11. PAYMENTS:
University shall submit annual advance invoices to Consortium members. Invoices shall
be distributed no later than July 15th, annually. Consortium members shall make full
advance payment of the amount stated in any undisputed invoice no later than thirty
(30) days after the date the invoice is received by Consortium members.
12. EQUIPMENT:
Equipment purchased under this Agreement shall be used specifically for the life of the
project covered herein, with ownership of the equipment remaining with University upon
completion of this contract period and any subsequent contract periods.
13. INDEMNITY:
Each party to this Agreement shall be responsible for its own acts and/or omissions and
those of its officers, employees and agents. The Consortium and each Consortium
member shall fully indemnify and hold harmless University against all claims arising out -
of the Consortium's use, commercialization, or distribution of any intellectual property or products that result in whole or in part from this Agreement.
6
r - - .
~ . 'I 4. R I G HTS I N DATA: Any da#a developedldelivered by Consortium hliembers for the Spokane Regional S'Ite
Se1ector is onl}r for use within the Site Selectvr G[5 web-based applica#ion. University
licensing natvuithstanding, all data acquired frvm Consortium members or licensed frarn
commercial entities shall re#ain its original licensing status. Any GIS data requests
initiated by users af the GIS weh-based applicatian to fhe University uvill be referred
back to the original Consortium Nlember wha prvvided said data.
Any data developed/delivered by the Universi#y under this Agreement shall be
transferred to Consortium vvith a nonexclusive, rvyalty-free, irrevocable license ta
publish, translate, reproduce, delEver, perfarm, dispose vf, and #o authorize o#hers to do
so; pravided, tha# such Iicense shalf be ]imited ta the extent vvhich University has a right
ta gran# such a [icense.
The University shall exert al# reasonable effort to advise Cansortium, at the time of
delivery o# data furnished under #his agreement, of alI known or potentiaf invasrans af
privacy can#ained therein and of any portion of such document, which was not praduced
in the perFormance of this agreement. Consortium shal1 receive prompt wriften notice af
each notice or claim ar copyrigh# infringement received by University vuith respect to any
data delivered underthis Agreement.
ln making GIS data available to the web based Spokane Regivnal Site Selectar,
Consortium Niem'bers make no warran#y af data accurac}r. Consortium Members GIS
data is created for informational purposes and as a general pianning and management
tool. Care uvas used by Consortium Mernbers during cornpilation of GIS data and
products to insure accuracy, but it rnay be subject to, in whale or in part, the quality of
the source data and outside sources af informa#ian. A given Consortium Niember rnay
on occasian be shif#ing GIS data to irnprove #he geographic accuracy. Any data that
other Consortium Members buiEd vn top of the existing Consortium Mernber data rnay
require adjustment. The Consortium assumes responsibility far a1igning and registering
data to the existing Site Selectar data, if necessary. GIS +data and praducts may nat
have been prepared for, ar be suitable #or, legal, engineering, or sunreying purpases.
The Consortium Members do na# accept respansibili#y far errors and amissions, and
therefore, there are no warranties that accornpany this Site Selectar data. Users of this
Enformatian should consult the primary data and information sources to ascettaira the
usability of #fnis in#ormatian. This infarmation may be periadically updated.
Consortium Members wali make every effork to ensure that the Spokane Regional Site
Selector has #he latest revision af i#s data.
15. ENTlRE ,AGiREEMENT:
This Agreernent contains afl the terms and candi#ians agreed upan byr the par#ies. No
other understandings„ oral or atherwise, regarding the subject rnatter of this Agreement
sha1l be deerned ta exist or ta birrd any of the parties heretv.
7
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed as of the date set forth herein by their duly authorized representatives. 8
' AGREEMENT FOR THE SPOKANE REGIONAL SITE SELECTOR
- (Signature Page)
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY:
Dated:
Richard Munson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
Office of the City Attorney
9
i
Agreement For the Spokane Regionai Site Selector '
1
(Signature Page) ~
For UNIVERSITY
Dan Nordquist
Director (Print)
(Signature)
Dated:
10
AGREEMENT FOR THE SPOKANE REGIONAL SITE SELECTOR
(Signature Page)
For Avista Utilities
(Print) (Signature)
Dated:
11
;
AGREEMENT FOR THE SPOKANE REGIONAL SITE SELECTOR
(Signature Page) ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Clerk of the Board OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
By: TODD MIELKE, Chair
DANiELA ERICKSON
MARK RICHARD, Vice-Chair
BONNIE MAGER, Commissioner
Approved as to form: Dated:
Deputy Civil Prosecuting Attorney
12
AGREEMENT FOR THE SPOKANE REGIONAL SITE SELECTOR
(Signature Page)
CITY OF SPOKANE
By:
City Administrator
Attest: Approved as to form:
City Clerk Assistant City Attorney
Dated:
13
AGREEMENT FOR THE SPOKANE REGIONAL SITE SELECTOR ,
(Signature Page)
GREATER SPOKANE INCORPORATED
(Print)
Signature)
Dated:
1
4
14 i
~
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
- Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: August 11, 2009 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
- ❑ information N admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Update on draft Panhandling Code
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: First Amendment of the Washington and US Constitutions.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Numerous meetings by the Council and the temporary
Panhandling Committee; Administrative report July 14, 2009.
BACKGROUND: Staff provided Council with a proposed code restricting panhandling on July
141 2009. Staff advised the Council that it had provided a copy of the draft to the Center for
Justice to seek their input on whether the proposed code met Constitutional requirements. The
City received a letter and opinion from Bonnie Beavers, an attorney for CFJ on July 16, 2009.
The opinion letter analyzed our draft under existing and new Constitutional case decisions
OPTIONS: Move proposed ordinance forward to a first reading; make changes to proposed
ordinance; don't move proposed ordinance forward at this time, and instead focus on
implementing education program.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Council concensus not to move forward with adoption
of additional panhandling restrictions at this time, and instead implement the educational
program previously discussed by the Council.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: NA
STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1- Memorandum of Cary Driskell, with attached opinion from
Center for Justice Attachment 2- Draft proposed ordinance.
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
S CrFYMICHAEL F. CONNELLY - CITY ATTORNEY
poRane CARY P. DRISKELL DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY
Valley 11707 East Sprague Avenue Suite 103 ♦ Spokane Valley WA
99206
509.688.0235 ♦ Fax: 509.688.0299 ♦
cityattorney@spokanevalley.org
demorandum
To: City Council
From: Cary Driskell, Deputy City lAttorney; Jeana Poloni, Legal Intern
CC: Dave Mercier, City Manager; Mike Connelly, City Attorney
Date: August 4, 2009
Re: Panhandling update
This update is being provided to the Council to give current information about an opinion from the Center for
Justice regarding the proposed ordinance, which incorporates discussion of a new case out of the 9`h Circuit Court
of Appeals, and to provide you with a recommendation for proceeding at this point in time. A copy of Ms.
Beavers' opinion is attached to this memo for yow reference.
As the Council is aware, staff drafted a proposed ordinance that would regulate some forms of panhandling, and
would have placed some time, place and manner restrictions on panhandling. The proposed ordinance was based
very closely on the regulations adopted by the City of Spokane in 2008. As Spokane did, staff sent a copy of the
draft regulations to the Center for Justice for their review and comment, as any challenge to tlle proposed
regulations would most likely come from their office.
The City received a letter and memorandum on July 16, 2009 from Bonnie Beavers of the Center for Justice. The
memo provides a general analysis of the constitutional caselaw surrounding panhandling and first amendment
regulations (pages 2 and 3), and asserts that the proposed ordinance is likely an illegal content-based restriction of
speech. They reach this conclusion because not al( speech in the public areas (sidewalks) is banned, only that
which seeks contributions. Because it is content-based, it must be narrowly tailored to a compelling
governmental interest, such as public safety. Case law, including the new BergeY v. City of Seattle, 569 F.3d
1029 (9`" Cir. 2009) case, make clear that solicitation from a"captive audience" who may not want to give
money, but feel compelled to because they cannot easily walk away, otherwise disengage, or avert their eyes,
does not rise to the level of a compelling governmental interest. There would have to be something like an
identifiable public safety concern, supported by statistical data, to implement such regulations.
Ms. Beavers' memorandum does clearly recognize that cities have the ability to enforce provisions such as our
prohibitions on obstructing traffic or on aggressive panhandling. There is an opportunity to be more active in
enforcing the existing prohibitions on obstructing traffic, if the fachtal conduct in the individual case meets the
criteria as a violation of law.
Staff has a call in to the City of Spokane to determine how they intend to proceed in light of the Berger case, but
had not heard back by the time this memo was due to Council.
Based on these developments, staff recommends not proceeding with consideration of the proposed ordinance,
and instead focus on implementing the educational program previously discussed until a more favorable legal
environment is present.
,
DRA FT
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
SPOKANEi COUNTY, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. 09-* * *
AN ORDINANCE REGULATING SOLICITATION ACTIVITIES IN PUBLIC PLACES,
AND O'CHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO
WHEREAS, consistent with the fiuldings of other Washington State cities, the City Council finds
that it is important to the general welfare of the citizens and residents of the City to implement minimal
restrictions on solicitations in public places that are applicable to all people within the City ; and
W][IEREAS, the City Council further finds that any limitations on solicitation must be consistent
with state and federal constitutional protections, including those relating to freedom of speech and
expression; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that is in the best interest of its citizens to restrict solicitation
activity under circumstances where people are likely to feel uncomfortable or unable to easily disengage
the contact due to their physical location, which will help ensure that donations arising from such
contacts are less likely to be coerced.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County,
Washington, ordains as follows:
Section 1. Purqose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to regulate certain solicitation activities in
public places within the City.
Section 2. Adoptinia Spokane Valley Municipal Code Section 7.40.010. Spokane Valley
Municipal Code Section 7.40.010 is adopted as follows:
7.40.010 Definitions.
A. The following definitions apply in this chapter:
1. "Automated tellcr machine" means a nlachine, other than a telephone:
a. that is capable of being operated by a customer of a financial institution;
b. by which the customer may communicate to the financial institution a request to
withdraw, deposit, transfer funds, make payment, or othei-wise conduct financial
business for the customer or foi- another person directly from the customer's
account or from the customer's account under a line of credit previously authorized
by the financial institution for the customer; and
c. the use of which may or may not involve personnel of a financial institution.
2. "Public place" means an area generally open to the public and includes alleys, bridges,
buildings, driveways, parking lots, parks, plazas, sidewalks, and streets open to the general
public, including those that serve food or drink or provide entertainment, and the doors and
entrances to buildings or dwellings and the grounds enclosing them.
3. "Public transportation facility" means a facility or designated location that is owned,
operated, or maintained by a city, county, county transportation authority, public
transportation benefit area, regional transit authority, or metropolitan municipal corporation
within the state.
DRAFT CODE LIMITING SOLICITATIONS 1N PUBLIC PLACES - 1-
4. "Public transportation stop" means an area officially marked and designated as a place to
wait for a bus, a mass transit vehicle, or any other public transportation vehicle that is
operated on a scheduled route with passengers paying fares on an individual basis.
5."Public transportation vehicle" has the meaning given that term in RCW 46.04.355, as
currently adopted or as it may be amended in the future.
6."Roadway" shall have the meaning set forth in RCW 46.04.500.
7. "Self-service fuel pump" means a fuel pump:
a. from which a vehicle may be manually filled with gasoline or other fuel directly
by its owner or operator, with or without the aid of an employee or attendant of the
premises at which the fuel pump is located; and
b. that is accessible and available for use by members of the general public.
8. "Solicit" and all derivative forms of "solicit" means to ask, beg, or plead, whether orally,
non-verbally or in a written or printed manner, for the purpose of immediately receiving
contributions, alms, charity, or gifts of items of value for oneself or another person.
Section 3. AdoatinR Snokane Vallev Municipal Code Section 7.40.020. Spokane Valley
Municipal Code Section 7.40.020 is adopted as follows:
7.40.020 Limitations on Solicitatioas.
A. It is unlawful for any person to solicit another person within fifteen feet of:
1. an automated teller machine;
2. fihe entrance of a building, unless the solicitor has permission from the owner or
occupant;
3. a self-service fuel pump;
4. a public transportation stop;
5. any parked vehicle as occupants of such vehicle enter or exit such vehicle when the
occupants are the subject of the solicitation; or designated loadi n g/un loading, for-hire
vehicle, or taxi zones.
B. For purposes of this section, measurement will be made in a straight line, without regard to
intervening structures or objects, from the nearest point at which a solicitation is being conducted to
whichever is applicable of the following:
1. The nearest entrance or exit of a facility in which an automated teller machine is enclosed
or, if the machine is not enclosed in a facility, to the nearest part of the automated teller
machine.
2. The nearest entrance or exit of a building.
3. The nearest part of a self-service fuel pump.
4. The nearest part of any sign or marking designating an area as a public transportation
stop; or
5. Any door of a parked vehicle that is being used by an occupant of such vehicle to enter
or exit such vehicle.
C. It is unlawful for any person to stand in the roadway for the purpose of engaging in solicitation. No
person may engage in solicitation activities that would obstruct traffic in violation of SVMC 8.25.030.
DRAFT CODE LIMITING SOLICITATIONS I'~i T PUBLIC PLACES - 2-
D. This chapter shall not prohibit lawful solicitations, including those individuals and organizations that
have obtained a special events permit, pursuant to SVMC 5.15.
E. A violation of subsection A or C of this section is a simple misdemeanor.
Section 4. Severabilitv. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance should
be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competeat jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not afFect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause
or phrase of this Ordinance.
Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty days after
publication of the Ordinance, or a summary thereof, in the official newspaper of the City.
Adopted this day of , 2009.
City of Spokane Valley
Mayor, Richard Munson
ATTEST:
City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge
Approved as to Form:
Office of the City Attorney
DRAFT CODE LIMITING SOLICITATIONS IN PUBLIC PLACES - 3-
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: August 11, 2009 City Manager Sign-off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
0 information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Amendment of interlocal agreement - Tourism Promotion Agreement
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35.101
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adoption of Tourism Promotion Agreement with
Spokane County and City of Spokane in 2004. Amendment in 2006 to remove two year sunset
clause.
BACKGROUND: The Council became party to the Tourisrn PromotLon Agreement, whereby local jurisdictions impose a set amount of per night tax on 1lotel/motel stays. At the time the
TPA was adopted in 2004, the rate was set at $1.50 per room per night for the urbanized areas
of Spokane County (generally speaking).
The hoteliers that are subject to the tax have requested that the nightly rate be increased from
$1.50 to $2.00. This increase was approved by Spokane County on June 23, 2009, and we are
now requested to do the same. The City of Spokane will be considering adoption in the next
month as well. The effective date would be the date the last signatures are affixed.
OPTIONS FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION: Approve increase from $1.50 per night to $2.00 or
not.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Place this on an upcoming Council agenda for a short
discussion at a subsequent meeting, followed by placement on consent agenda at a follow up
meeting.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: NA
STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution 09-0586 adopted by Spokane County June 23, 2009.
No. q --a ~ ~
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY CONIlVIISSIOrTERS
OF SPOK;ANE COUNTY, WASHNGTON
IlN THE MATT'ER OF EXECU'IING )
AMBNDMENT NO. 2 TO INTERLOCAL ) R E S O L U T I O N
COOPERATION ACT AGREEMENT FOR )
ESTABLISHMENT OF SPOKANE )
COUNTY TOURISM PROM4TION AREA ) WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 36.32.120(6), Spokane County, through
the Board of Couaty Commussioners of Spokane County, has the care of coun.ty properly and the
management of coun.ty funds and busin.ess; and
WHEREAS, i.n. 2003, the Washington State Legistature recognized the i.mportance of
tourism promotion and passed Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill No. 6026, now codified as
chapter 35.101 RCW. That legislation authorized the establishment of a Tourism Promotion
Area by a county and the levy of special assessments on lodging businesses to fund tourism
promotion therein; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 35.101.080, the Board of County
Commissioners of Spokane County adopted Ordinance No. 04-021 -1 which established a Tourism
Promotion .Area having certaan boundaries to include the unincorgorated area of Spokane
County, the City of Spokane, and City of Sgokane Valley. Ordinance No. 04-0211 also
established a Special Assessment on operators of Lodging Business within the Tourism
Promotion Area on the furnishing of lodging. Ordinance No. 04-0211 was amended to modify
the Special Assessments on operators of Lodging Business within the Tourism Promotion Area
on the fiunishing of lodging as follows:
(LJnderlined language added, lined out language deleted.)
Zone A: $4-.58 $2.00 per room/day u
Zone B: $1.25 $2.00 per roona/day
Zone C: $-1.89 $2.00 per mom/day
Page 1 of 2
. . ,
WBEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 35.101.040(2), the Parties entered into
an interlocal agreement dated March 9, 2004 entitled "INTERLOCAL COOPERATTON ACT
AGREEMEENT FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF SPOKANE COUNTY TOURISM PROMOT'ION
AREA" (the "Agreement") wherein a Tourism Promotion Area was formed to include properties
within the boundaries of the unincorporated area of Spokane County, City of Spokane, and City
of Spokane Valley. Secti.on No 3(Rate) of Agreement established a Special Assessment on
operators of Lodgin;g Business within the Tourism Promotion Area on the fin-ushing of lodging.
Consistent with Ordinance No. 04-0211, the Parties desire to modify the Agreement to recognize
the new rates approved under said Ordinance No. c1 -0SW
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Board of County
Commissioners of Spokane County, pursuant to the provisions of 35.101.040, that either the
Chauperson of the Board or a majority of the Board be and are hezeby authorized to execufe that
document entitled "ASdiENDMENT NO. 2 TO INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT
AGREEMENT FOR ESTABLISHMLNT OF SPOKANE COUNTY TOURISM PROMOTION
AREA" wherein Spokane County, City of Spokane and City of Spokane Valley will amend
. Section No. 3(Rate) of that in.tearlocal agreement dated March 9, 2004 entitled "INTERLOCAL
C40PERATION ACT AGREEMENT FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF SPOKANE COUN'IY
TOURISM PROMO'TYON AREA so that it is consistent with the new rates approved under
Ord.ulance No. 09 - 059 S . -P,ASSED AND ADOPTED this c~cr&day of , 2009.
, .
BOARD OF COUNTY COIVIlVIISSIONERS
OF SPOK:ANE, COUN'I'Y, WASHINGTON
AT°TEST: ~
- TODD MIE~E
By: La%t~ Daniela Erickson
Clerk of the Boar o~ CoMAt~s RIC , Vice-Chair
s
~O O..•:1•'tBC'p'G.~~,2
ij~ ~y
c' ~BONN]E MAGER, Commiesioner
• . ,
o . SF-AL ~
c.,
. ~
Page 2 of 2
EiMENDMENT NO. 2 TO INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT AGREEMENT FOR
ESTABLYSFIMENT OF SPOKANE COUNTY TOURYSM PROMOTION AREA
TffiS AN.LENDMENT NO. 2 AGREEMENT, made and entered into arm.ong Spokane
County, a palitical subdivision of the State of Washi.n.gton, having offices for the transaction of
business at 1116 West Broadway Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99260, hereinafter refeired to as
the "County," the City of Spokane, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington having
offices for the trazisaction of business at 808 West Spokane Falls Blvd. Spokane, Washington
99201, hereina$er referred to as the "City", and the City of Spokane Valley, a municipal
corporation of the State of Washington, having off ces for the transaction of business at the
. R.edwood Plaza, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Va11ey, Washington 99206,
hereinafter referred to at "Spoka.ne Valley" jointly referred to as the `Tarties: '
' WITNESSETH:
~ WHEREAS, putsuant to the provisions of RCW 36.32.120(6), Spokan.e County, through
i the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, has the care of county property and the ~
,
I management of county funds and busin.ess; and ~
' i
i
i WHEREA►.S, in 2003, the Washington State Legislatlure recognized the unportance of I tourism promotion and passed Engrossed Substi.tute Senate Bill No. 6026, now codified as .
chapter 35.101 RCW. That legislation authorized the establishment of a Tourism Promotion
Area by a county and the levy of special assessments on lodging businesses to fund tourism
promotion therein; and WHEItEAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 35.101.080, the Boazd of Cowaty
Comnaissioners of Spokane County adopted Ordinance No. 04-0211 which established a Tourism
Promotion .Area having certain boundaries to include the unincorporated area of Spokane
County, the City of Spokane; and City of Spokane Va11ey, Orciina.n.ce No. 04-0211 also
established a Special. Assessment on operators of I.odging Business within the Tourism
Promotion Area on the fusnishing of lodging. Ordinance No. 04-0211 was amended to modify
the Special Assessments on.operators of Lodging Business within the Tourism Promotion Area
on the fiunishing of lodging as follows:
(Underlined language added, lined out language deleted.)
Zone A: $440 $2.00 per
room/day
Zone B: $1.25 $2.00 peT
i room/day
~ Zone C: $1.0 A $2.00 per
E room/day
~
3
. Page 1 of 5
~
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 35.101.040(2), the Parties entered i.nto
an interlocal agreement dated March 9, 2004 entitled "INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT
AGREEMENT FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF SPOKANE COUNTY TOURISM PROMOTION
AItEA" (the "AgreemenY") wherein a Tourism Promotion Area was formed to include properties
witbin the boundaries of the unincorporated area of Spokane County, City of Spokane, and City
of Spokane Valley. Section No 3(Rate) of Agreement esta.blished a Special Assessment on
operators of Lodging Busu.tess wi.thin the Tourism Promotion Area on the furnishing of lodging.
Consistent with Ordinance No. 04-0211, the Parties desire to modify the Agreemeut to recognize
the new rates approved under said Ordinance Naq~'b%5.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY AGREED among the Parties hereto that the
agreement entexed into among the Parties dated March 9, 2004 and entitled 'TNTERLOCAL
COOPERATTON ACT AGREEMEr1'I' FOR ESTA.BLISHMLNT OF SPOK:ANE COUNTY
TOURISM PROMOTION AREA" as amended by th.at agreement entered into among the Parties
and entitled "AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO 1N'TERLOCAL COOPER.ATION ACT AGREEMENT
FOR ESTABLISHMENT -OF SPOKANE COUNTY TOURISM PROMOTT4N AREA" be and
is hereby modified as follows:
,
*~~*~~~x~*~***********~~**
i
. (Underlined and highlighted language a.dded, Lined out and highlighted language deleted.)
; 3. Levy of Special Assessments on Lodging Businesses within the Spokane County Tourism
' Promotion Area.
,
A. The Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County will levy Special
Assessments on the Operators of Lodging Businesses within the Spokane County Tourism
Promotion .Area in accordance with the zones and levels of Special Assessments as set forth in
Resolution No. 04-0I40.
B. IY is understood and agre,ed by and between Spokane County, Spokane and
Spokane Valley that the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area sha11 include the following
five (5) zones:
Zone A. Zone A encompasses those Lodging Businesses located withi.n
the area of the incorpoxated city limits of the City of Spokane defined as follows:
Downtown core bordered by Interstate 90 to the south, Hamilton Street to the east,
In.d.iana Avenue to the north, and Monroe Street to the west.
Page 2 of 5 '
~
;
Zone B. Zone B encompasses those Lodging Businesses located within ,
the area of the incorporated city limits of Spokane and the City of Spokane Valley
except those Lodging Businesses located in Zone A.
Zone C. Zone C encompasses a11 Lodging Busi.nesses located outside
Zones A and B, but within the unincorporated azea of Spokane County.
Zone D. Zone D encompasses all Lodgi.ng Businesses with room revenue
under $500,000 per year, situated within the Spokane County Tourism Promotion
,A.rea, regardless of their specific location. Zone E. Zone E en.compasses Lodging Businesses located within tb.e
Tourism Promotion Area, as that tetm is addressed in WAC 458-20-166 as it
presently exists or may be hereinafter amended, other tb.an hotels, motels, and bed
and breakfast facilities. Lodging Businesses within this zone, as addressed in
WAC 458-20-166, would i.n.clude only (i) trailer camps and recreational vehicle
parks which charge for the rental of space to transients for locating or parking
house trailers, campers, recreational vehicles, mobile homes, and tents; (u)
. educational institutions which sell ovetnight lodging to person other than
~ students; (iii) private lodging houses, dormitories and bunkhouses operated by or
on behalf of businesses and industrial firms or schools soley for the
,
accommodation of employees of such firms or student wb.ich are not held out to
the public as a place where sleeping accommodahons may be obtained; and (iv)
guest ranches or summer camps which, i_n addition to supplying meals and lodging offer special recreational facilities and instrucbion in sports boating, riding,
~ outdoor facilities and instruction in sports, boating, riding, and outdoor livi.ng.
i ~ The charge(s) imposed under this section are not a tax on the "sale of lodgi.ng" for the ,
; purposes of RCW 82.14.410
I
, C. It is understood and agreed by and between Spokane County, Spokane and
~ Spokane Va11ey that the Operators of Lodging Businesses within the Spokane County Tourism
~
~ Promotion Area operatYng in the above-described zones will be subject to Special Assessments to
' be levied as follows:
Zone A: per room/day
Zone B: per room✓day
Zone C: per room/day
Zone D: $0.50 per room/day
Zone E: $0.00 per roorn oar space /day
Page 3 of 5
"
D. Any change in the Special Assessment rates for any zone as set forth hereinabove
shall be made only by amendment of the resolution by the Board of County Commissioners, with
the approval of the City Council of the City of Spokane and the City Council of the City of
Spokane Valley. No increa,se in the Special Assessnaent rates for any zone or change in the
boundaries of any zone shall be made by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane
County except upon the affirmative recommendation of the Spokane Hotel and Motel
Commission.
BE TT FLTRTHER RESOLVED among the Pazties hereto, that but for tbat change to
Paragraph 3 as set forth herein ahove, all other ternas and conditions within the agreement dated
March 9, 2004 and entitled "IN'TERLOCAL COOPERATION AC'T AGI:tEE;MENT FOR
ESTABLISHViENT OF SPOKANE CO'UNI`Y TOURISM PROMOTTOrT AREA" as amended
by that document entitled "AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT
AGREEMENT FOR ESTABLISHQVIENT OF SPOKANE COUNTY TOURISM PROMOTION
AREA" shall remain in full force and effect without any change or modification whatsoever.
' IN NVITrTESS WMREOF the Parties have caused this Agreement No. 2 to be executed
on the date and yeaz opposite their respective signature blocks. This Agreement No. 2 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 an.d the same. The effective date of
Agxeement No. 2 shall be the last signature date.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COIVIlVIISSIONERS
OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
~
00,
a&&;J-o cot`uG
TODD MIE Ch~' ~ o~" E c'o s'ti
By:
DANIELA ERICKSON
y N
Clerk of the Board
~ . ~ .o
RICHA.RD, V' air ~ .
Q sEw.. ~e
DATED
BONNIE MAGER., Commissio
DATED: CITY OF SPOKANE
By:
rrs:
Page 4 of 5
Attest: Approved as to form:
City Clerk Assistant City Attomey
CITY OF SPOK:ANE VALLEY
By:
DATED:
Title:
ATTEST: Appzoved as to form:
City Clerk City Attorney
Page 5 of 5
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: August 11, 2009 City Manager Sign-off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation Z executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: EXECUTIVE SESSION: Labor Negotiations
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
BACKGROUND:
OPTIONS:
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to adjourn into executive session for
approximately minutes to discuss Labor Negotiations; and that no action is
anticipated thereafter.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
STAFF CONTACT:
ATTAC H M ENTS: