2020, 03-17 Study Session AmendedAMENDED AGENDA
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION FORMAT
Tuesday, March 17, 2020 6:00 p.m.
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
10210 E Sprague Avenue
(Please Silence Your Cell Phones During the Meeting)
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF AMENDED AGENDA
INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS
la. Spokane Regional Health District Update — Mayor Wick [no public comment]
ACTION ITEMS:
lb. Resolution 20-005 Ratifying City Manager Emergency Proclamation — Mark Calhoun [public comment]
lc. First Reading Ordinance 20-004 Substitute Social Security Plan Rates — John Whitehead [public comment]
ld. Motion Consideration: WSDOT Land Acquisition — Cary Driskell [public comment]
NON -ACTION ITEMS:
DISCUSSION LEADER SUBJECT/ACTIVITY GOAL
2. Jenny Nickerson
3. Jenny Nickerson
4. Mike Stone
5. Mayor Wick
Code Text Amendment, Fencing Discussion/Information
Planning Commission Rules of Discussion/Information
Procedure
Tree City USA Discussion/Information
Advance Agenda Discussion/Information
6. Information Only (will not be reported or discussed): Customer Service Survey Report, 4th Quarter
7. Mayor Wick
8. Mark Calhoun
Council Check in Discussion/Information
City Manager Comments Discussion/Information
9. EXECUTIVE SESSION [RCW 42.30.110(1)(b) and (1)(i)] Land Acquisition; Pending Litigation
ADJOURN
Study Session Agenda March 17, 2020 Page 1 of 1
AMENDED AGENDA
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION FORMAT
Tuesday, March 17, 2020 6:00 p.m.
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
10210 E Sprague Avenue
(Please Silence Your Cell Phones During the Meeting)
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
la. Spokane Regional Health District Update — [no public comment]
ACTION ITEMS:
lb. Resolution 20-005 Ratifying City Manager Emergency Proclamation -
Motion Consideration: WSDOT Land Acquisition — Cary Driskell [public comment]
NON -ACTION ITEMS:
DISCUSSION LEADER SUBJECT/ACTIVITY
GOAL
2. Jenny Nickerson
3. Jenny Nickerson
4. Mike Stone
5. Mayor Wick
Code Text Amendment, Fencing
Planning Commission Rules of
Procedure
Tree City USA
Advance Agenda
Discussion/Information
Discussion/Information
Discussion/Information
Discussion/Information
6. Information Only (will not be reported or discussed): Customer Service Survey Report, 4th Quarter
7. Mayor Wick
8. Mark Calhoun
Council Check in
City Manager Comments
Discussion/Information
Discussion/Information
9. EXECUTIVE SESSION [RCW 42.30.110(1)(b) and (1)(i)] Land Acquisition; Pending Litigation
ADJOURN
Study Session Agenda March 17, 2020 Page 1 of 1
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: March 17, 2020 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: ❑ consent
❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion consideration — property acquisition of Washington State Department
of Transportation Flora Road property.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35A.11.020; SVMC 3.49.010.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: November 12, 2019 approval of 2019 Spokane Valley Parks
and Recreation Master Plan Update; February 11, 2020 winter workshop discussion on Recreation
Conservation Office (RCO) grant opportunities; February 25, 2020 administrative report on potential
purchase.
BACKGROUND: In the course of discussions regarding the City's 2019 purchase of real property adjacent
to Sullivan Park, City staff became aware that the Washington State Department of Transportation
(WSDOT) had four additional parcels that may become available if WSDOT determined they were surplus
to their needs. Those four parcels are located immediately east of Flora Road, south of the Union Pacific
tracks, and north of the Spokane River. For further reference, the gated access road to the property is across
Flora to the east from the old SCRAPS facility.
If approved by Council, the property (45.73 acres according to WSDOT) would be used for park purposes.
The purchase price is $2,091,600, which was established by appraisal. A small section of the easterly
portion of the property abuts the Spokane River, with the rest of the property having a 225 foot strip of
property belonging to Washington State Parks between the Spokane River and the property to be purchased.
A map is attached for further reference. The property is largely in a natural state, with extensive coniferous
trees along the westerly and southerly boundaries.
If the Council authorizes this acquisition, the land would be held until such time as the City can use a public
process to identify appropriate uses on the property. The City would also need to identify funding options
for construction. This purchase is consistent with the City's Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2019 Update.
Pursuant to Council direction on February 25, 2020, staff requested that RCO allow the City to apply for a
grant of up to $1 million to repay the City for acquisition costs. RCO notified the City on March 6, 2020
that if the City receives an RCO grant, the City will be allowed to retroactively use the funds to reimburse
itself for part of the purchase price. This authorization from RCO was required to occur prior to any
purchase by the City. Now that retroactive use for the purchase price has been authorized, the City and
WSDOT can complete the acquisition with Council approval. As has been stated before, the RCO may
ultimately decline to award a grant for these purposes, in which case the City would bear the entire cost of
purchasing the property from WSDOT.
OPTIONS: (1) Motion authorizing staff to acquire the WSDOT Flora property; or (2) take other action as
appropriate.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move we authorize staff to finalize and execute any
documents necessary to acquire Spokane County parcel numbers 55072.0324, 55072.0318, 55072.0319,
and 55075.0218 from the Washington State Department of Transportation for parks and recreation
purposes.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: $2,091,600 plus associated costs such as title insurance. Staff
suggests the sources of funds to facilitate the acquisition would be comprised of the following:
- $500,000 from the Capital Reserve Fund #312 that has been earmarked for park land acquisition;
- $281,209 from the Capital Reserve Fund #312 that is currently unallocated; and
- $1,310,391 (plus any costs associated with closing) from the General Fund, which would be a
non -recurring 2020 expenditure.
The 2020 Budget for both the General Fund and Capital Reserve Fund #312 would need to be amended for
the acquisition.
STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, City Attorney; Mike Stone, Parks and Recreation Director.
ATTACHMENTS: Overhead map of the site.
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: March 17, 2020
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business
❑ information ® admin. report
Department Director Approval:
❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Spokane Regional Health District COVID-19 Update
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
BACKGROUND: A representative from the Spokane Regional Health District will provide an
update to the COVID-19 virus and the actions they are recommending.
OPTIONS: Discussion
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: n/a
STAFF CONTACT: Mark Calhoun, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
ITEM lb
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: March 24, 2020 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business Z new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion consideration — Resolution 20-005 Emergency Declaration — COVID-19.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Chapter 38.52 RCW.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None.
BACKGROUND: The City is experiencing the effects of the COVID — 19 pandemic, along with all other
areas of the region, state, and country. Governor Inslee and President Trump have already declared the
existence of emergency conditions. The regional governmental entities have similarly declared or will
declare in short order that an emergency exists locally. City Manager Mark Calhoun issued an emergency
proclamation on March 16, 2020.
The Council is now being asked to ratify those actions by City Manager Calhoun, and issue a resolution
of the City Council declaring that emergency conditions exist.
OPTIONS: (1) Adopt Resolution 20-005, or; (2) take other action as appropriate.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move to approve Resolution 20-005 declaring an
emergency relating to the COVID — 19 pandemic.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Unknown.
STAFF CONTACT: Mark Calhoun, City Manager; Cary Driskell, City Attorney.
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution 20-005; and Proclamation of City Manager Mark Calhoun dated March
16, 2020.
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, RESOLUTION 20-005
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY,
WASHINGTON, PROCLAIMING AN EMERGENCY OR DISASTER IN THE CITY OF
SPOKANE VALLEY RELATING TO THE COVID —19 PANDEMIC, AND OTHER MATTERS
RELATING THERETO.
WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 38.52.010, an "emergency or disaster" shall mean "an event or set of
circumstances which: (i) Demands immediate action to preserve public health, protect life, protect public
property, or to provide relief to any stricken community overtaken by such occurrences, or (ii) reaches such
a dimension or degree of destructiveness as to warrant the governor declaring a state of emergency pursuant
to RCW 43.06.010."
WHEREAS, the City is responsible for maintaining the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens;
and
WHEREAS, the City has authority, pursuant to RCW 38.52.070(2), "to enter into contracts and
incur obligations necessary to combat such disaster, protecting the health and safety of persons and
property, and providing emergency assistance to the victims of such disaster. Each political subdivision is
authorized to exercise the powers vested under this section in the light of the exigencies of an extreme
emergency situation without regard to time-consuming procedures and formalities prescribed by law
(excepting mandatory constitutional requirements), including, but not limited to, budget law limitations,
requirements of competitive bidding and publication of notices, provisions pertaining to the performance
of public work, entering into contracts, the incurring of obligations, the employment of temporary workers,
the rental of equipment, the purchase of supplies and materials, the levying of taxes, and the appropriation
and expenditures of public funds..."; and
WHEREAS, the City is a party to the regional Interlocal Agreement for Emergency Management
Services. That interlocal agreement was established pursuant to chapter 39.34 RCW and RCW 38.52.070
to facilitate cooperation between the City and the other local governments that are parties to the agreement
in the event of an emergency; and
WHEREAS, state and federal resources are supplemental to local jurisdiction efforts; and
WHEREAS, on February 29, 2020, the Governor of Washington State proclaimed that a state of
emergency exists for all counties in the state of Washington for the Novel Coronavirus ("COVID-19")
pandemic; and
WHEREAS, on March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared that the spread of the
COVID-19 virus had created a global pandemic; and
WHEREAS, the President of the United States and the Governor of the State of Washington issued
emergency declarations and proclamations on March 13, 2020, regarding the significant public health,
safety, and welfare impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic and necessary mandatory actions to stem and
prevent further spread of the COVID-19 pandemic within the United States and Washington State,
including the City and broader Spokane County region; and
Resolution 20-005 Relating to COVID — 19 Pandemic Page 1 of 3
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2020, the Health Officer for the Spokane Regional Health District
identified necessary actions to stem significant public health, safety, and welfare impacts from the COVID-
19 pandemic within the City and broader Spokane County region; and
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2020, Sheriff Knezovich, Director of the Greater Spokane Department
of Emergency Management, activated the Emergency Management Center to assist addressing impacts
from the COVID-19 pandemic within the Spokane County region, including the City; and
WHEREAS, an emergency or disaster currently exists that necessitates utilization of the emergency
powers granted pursuant to chapters 38.52 and/or 3 5A.33 RCW; and
WHEREAS, the emergency conditions may warrant the calling of an emergency meeting of the
City Council without prior notice pursuant to RCW 42.30.070; and
WHEREAS, significant economic loss has occurred or is occurring as a result of closures of
businesses and various governmental agencies.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON
ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1— Purpose and intent. As a result of the aforementioned conditions, it is the purpose
and intent of this Resolution to formally proclaim the existence of an emergency or disaster in the City of
Spokane Valley due to the COVID — 19 pandemic.
SECTION 2 — Definitions.
"Emergency or disaster" (except RCW 38.52.430) as used in all sections of this Resolution shall
mean an event or set of circumstances which: (i) Demands immediate action to preserve public health,
protect life, protect public property, or to provide relief to any stricken community overtaken by such
occurrences, or (ii) reaches such a dimension or degree of destructiveness as to warrant the governor
declaring a state of emergency pursuant to RCW 43.06.010.
SECTION 3 — Emergency Proclamation.
A. The action by City Manager Mark Calhoun in proclaiming an emergency at 12:53 p.m. on
March 16, 2020, is ratified by the City Council. The City Manager is authorized to amend City programs
and change hours of operation of City facilities, including closing facilities as appropriate and necessary
under the circumstances.
B. It is hereby declared that there has been an emergency since February 29, 2020, and
continues to be an emergency or disaster as a result of the aforementioned conditions in the City of Spokane
Valley, Spokane County, Washington; therefore, designated departments are authorized to enter into
contracts and incur obligations necessary to combat such emergency to protect the health, safety and welfare
of persons and property, and provide emergency assistance to the victims of such disaster pursuant to
chapters 38.52 and/or 35A.33 RCW.
C. Each designated department is authorized to exercise the powers enumerated in this
Resolution in light of the demands of an extreme emergency situation without regard to time consuming
procedures and formalities prescribed by law (except mandatory constitutional requirements).
Resolution 20-005 Relating to COVID —19 Pandemic Page 2 of 3
SECTION 4 Effective Date. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect upon adoption,
and shall remain in effect until subsequent action by the City Council stating the conditions giving rise to
this Emergency Proclamation have subsided.
DATED this 17th day of March, 2020.
Ben Wick, Mayor
AllEST:
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Office of the City Attorney
Resolution 20-005 Relating to COVID —19 Pandemic Page 3 of 3
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
PROCLAMATION OF EMERGENCY OR DISASTER RELATING TO THE NOVEL CORONA
VIRUS (COVID — 19) PANDEMIC IN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON, BY
THE CITY MANAGER, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO.
WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 38.52.010, an "emergency or disaster" shall mean "an event or set
of circumstances which: (i) Demands immediate action to preserve public health, protect life, protect public
property, or to provide relief to any stricken community overtaken by such occurrences, or (ii) reaches such
a dimension or degree of destructiveness as to warrant the governor declaring a state of emergency pursuant
to RCW 43.06.010."
WHEREAS, the City is responsible for maintaining the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens;
and
WHEREAS, the City has authority, pursuant to RCW 38.52.070(2), "to enter into contracts and
incur obligations necessary to combat such disaster, protecting the health and safety of persons and
property, and providing emergency assistance to the victims of such disaster. Each political subdivision is
authorized to exercise the powers vested under this section in the light of the exigencies of an extreme
emergency situation without regard to time-consuming procedures and formalities prescribed by law
(excepting mandatory constitutional requirements), including, but not limited to, budget law limitations,
requirements of competitive bidding and publication of notices, provisions pertaining to the performance
of public work, entering into contracts, the incurring of obligations, the employment of temporary workers,
the rental of equipment, the purchase of supplies and materials, the levying of taxes, and the appropriation
and expenditures of public funds..."; and
WHEREAS, the City is a party to the regional Interlocal Agreement for Emergency Management
Services. That interlocal agreement was established pursuant to chapter 39.34 RCW and RCW 38.52.070
to facilitate cooperation between the City and the other local governments that are parties to the agreement
in the event of an emergency; and
WHEREAS, state and federal resources are supplemental to local jurisdiction efforts; and
WHEREAS, on February 29, 2020, the Governor of Washington State proclaimed that a state of
emergency exists for all counties in the state of Washington for the Novel Coronavirus ("COVID-19")
pandemic; and
WHEREAS, on March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared that the spread of the
COVID-19 virus had created a global pandemic; and
WHEREAS, the President of the United States and the Governor of the State of Washington issued
emergency declarations and proclamations on March 13, 2020, regarding the significant public health,
safety, and welfare impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic and necessary mandatory actions to stem and
prevent further spread of the COVID-19 pandemic within the United States and Washington State,
including the City and broader Spokane County region; and
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2020, the Health Officer for the Spokane Regional Health District
identified necessary actions to stem significant public health, safety, and welfare impacts from the COVID-
19 pandemic within the City and broader Spokane County region,; and
Page 1 of 2
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2020, Sheriff Knezovich, Director of the Greater Spokane Department
of Emergency Management, activated the Emergency Management Center to assist addressing impacts
from the COVID-19 pandemic within the Spokane County region, including the City; and
WHEREAS, an emergency or disaster currently exists that necessitates utilization of the emergency
powers granted pursuant to chapters 38.52 and/or 35A.33 RCW; and
WHEREAS, the emergency conditions may warrant the calling of an emergency meeting of the
City Council without prior notice pursuant to RCW 42.30.070; and
WHEREAS, significant economic loss has occurred or is occurring as a result of closures of
businesses and various governmental agencies; and
NOW THEREFORE, I Mark Calhoun, City Manager of the City of Spokane Valley, as a result of
the aforementioned situation and pursuant to RCW 35A.13.080 and RCW 38.52.070:
DO HEREBY PROCLAIM that a State of Emergency exists in the City of Spokane Valley and
direct that the plans and procedures of the currently adopted Interlocal Agreement for Emergency
Management Services be implemented. Designated departments are authorized to enter into contracts and
incur obligations necessary to combat such emergency to protect the health, safety, and welfare of person
and property, and provide emergency assistance to the victims of such disaster. Each designated department
is authorized to exercise the powers vested in this proclamation in light of the demands of an extreme
emergency situation without regard to time consuming procedures and formalities prescribed by law (except
mandatory constitutional requirements). As part of such emergency proclamation, I may amend City
programs and hours of operation for City facilities, including closing facilities as appropriate and necessary
under the circumstances. Further, I may waive such fees as are necessary to promote social distancing for
public health, safety, and welfare purposes.
DATED this jjj`-day of March, 2020.
7/ fitt*Lk
Marx Calhoun, City Manager
Page 2 of 2
ITEM lc
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: March 17, 2020 Department Director Approval: ❑
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Ordinance 20-004 Substitute Social Security plan rates
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, Internal Revenue
Code (IRC) section 3121(b)(7)(F) and Regulation 31.3121(b)(7)-2
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: In 2003 the City of Spokane Valley City Council
approved SVMC 2.50.100 electing to offer a substitute Social Security program for Regular City
employees. The Municipal Code that was adopted set the contribution rates for the City and
employees to "match FICA contribution rates and maximums..."
BACKGROUND: At times the Federal government suspends or reduces payroll taxes which
impact the contribution rates that workers and employers pay into Social Security and Medicare.
This is done without reducing coverages that are provided by these programs. The City has
chosen a substitute plan where the contributions set by, and normally paid into, Social Security
are redirected to a 401A retirement plan. Unlike workers that do not have a reduction in benefit
when these rates are reduced or eliminated, these temporary reductions or suspensions of
contributions reduce or eliminate the benefit provided to Regular City employees. This Ordinance
would allow for the City to continue to provide the same contributions during times when FICA
rates are temporarily reduced.
OPTIONS:
1. Advance Ordinance 20-004 to a second reading with or without amendments, for
consideration at a later date; or
2. Suspend the rules and approve Ordinance 20-004.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move to suspend the rules and approve Ordinance
20-004 amending SVMC 2.50.100 relating to Social Security and Medicare.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The budgetary impacts of Ordinance 20-004 are included in
the approved 2020 City Budget.
STAFF CONTACT: John Whitehead, Human Resources Manager
ATTACHMENTS Proposed Ordinance 20-004
DRAFT
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE 20-004
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY,
WASHINGTON, AMENDING 2.50.100 OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING
THERETO.
WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley previously adopted SVMC 2.50.100 in 2003 relating to
participation in a substitute Social Security program as a comparable retirement system to the one provided
through the federal government; and
WHEREAS, SVMC 2.50.100(C) states that the Social Security substitute program shall be a 401A
plan, and that City and employee contribution rates and maximums shall match FICA contribution rates
and maximums as published in the Internal Revenue Service's Employee Tax Guide, IRS publication 15;
and
WHEREAS, the federal government may from time -to -time temporarily reduce FICA
contributions from employers and employees for various reasons, which can have a detrimental effect on
the retirement benefits that employees may accrue while employed by the City; and
WHEREAS, the Council believes any short-term gain resulting from such temporary reductions to
employees are more than offset by the long-term negative impacts on accrued funds available upon
retirement; and
WHEREAS, the Council seeks to avoid these types of temporary reductions in retirement
contributions by amending the Municipal Code and identifying that any such temporary reductions will not
automatically result in a similar reduction for employees of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington ordains as
follows:
Section 1. Amendment. Spokane Valley Municipal Code 2.50.100 relating to Social Security and
Medicare is hereby amended as follows:
2.50.100 Social Security and Medicare.
A. The City of Spokane Valley shall offer a substitute Social Security program, and shall not
participate in the Social Security System (FICA) for employees covered by a qualified retirement
program.
B. Casual, part-time and temporary employees who are not covered by a qualified retirement
program shall participate in the Social Security System (FICA) as required by law.
C. The Social Security substitute program shall be a 401A plan approved by the city council. City
and employee contribution rates and maximums shall match FICA contribution rates and
maximums as published in the Internal Revenue Service's Employer's Tax Guide, IRS
Ordinance 20-004 Amending SVMC 2.50.100 — Social Security and Medicare Page 1 of 2
DRAFT
Publication 15. The City and employee rates shall not be reduced in circumstances where the
FICA rates are temporarily reduced.
D. As required by law, the City shall participate in the Medicare program.
Section 2. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance should be held to be
invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall
not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance.
Section 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after the date of
publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City.
Passed this day of March, 2020.
ATTEST: Ben Wick, Mayor
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Approved As To Form:
Office of the City Attorney
Date of Publication:
Effective Date:
Ordinance 20-004 Amending SVMC 2.50.100 — Social Security and Medicare Page 2 of 2
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: March 17, 2020 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Residential fencing regulations — CTA-2019-0004
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 22.70.020 Fencing
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None
BACKGROUND: The proposed amendment is a City -initiated code text amendment to Spokane
Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 22.70.020 to align the method in which the total height of a fence
is measured with neighboring jurisdictions, and to allow for an increased level of flexibility in the
design of a fence which is to be installed on or near an area with varying finished grade elevation
in the residential zones.
Both the City of Spokane and Spokane County limit the height of residential fences to 6 feet, but
their regulations do not describe how the height is to be measured. Liberty Lake and Post Falls
regulations require the fence be measured from the lowest grade elevation at the base of the
fence. Airway Heights and Franklin County regulations require that the height of a retaining wall
be included when measuring the height of a fence.
Current regulations require fence height be measured from the lowest finished grade elevation
within 6 feet of the fence (measured horizontally from the fence line). The minimum side yard in
the residential zones is 5 feet which means that where homes are developed on sloping lots, it is
common for a retaining wall to be constructed at the property line and, because the height of the
retaining wall contributes to the allowed height of a fence, neighboring property owners do not
have the opportunity to construct a fence which provides the typical degree of privacy common in
a neighborhood with lesser elevation differences between lots.
By allowing a fence to be measured from the finished grade elevation immediately adjacent to the
fence (as opposed to including the height of a retaining wall or lower elevation of a slope),
developers and homeowners would have the opportunity to erect a fence using standard
construction methods and materials. However, this would also render the need to allow a fence
taller than 6 feet unnecessary in the residential zones.
Non-standard installations, such as fences associated with permitted non-residential or multi-
family uses in the residential zoning districts, may be addressed through an Administrative
Exception process so as to allow for a fence of more than 6 feet in height where necessary for
public safety, security, or for screening.
The Planning Commission (Commission) conducted a study session on the proposed CTA at the
November 14, 2019 meeting. On December 12, 2019, the Commission conducted a public
hearing and deliberations. At that meeting, the Commission voted 7-0 to recommend to the City
Council that CTA-2019-0004 be approved. On January 9, 2020 the Commission adopted
Findings and Recommendation.
OPTIONS: Consensus to proceed to a first ordinance reading, as noted or modified.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Council consensus to place an ordinance on a future
agenda for first reading to consider approval of CTA-2019-0004.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A
STAFF CONTACT: Jenny Nickerson, Building Official - Community and Public Works Dept.
ATTACHMENTS:
(A) PowerPoint Presentation
(B) SVMC 22.70.020 draft language
(C) Staff report
(D) Planning Commission Findings and Recommendations
(E) Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 11/14/2019, 12/12/2019, and 01/09/2020
CTA-2019-0004 Fencing
Examples of fence heights measured pursuant to SVMC 22.70.020
March 17, 2020
1
Environmental Review
November 1, 2019
N
N
N
E
a)
0
z
N
•
Study Session
November 14, 2019
Public Hearing
December 12, 2019
Findings of Fact
January 9, 2020
1Y( v(
A A A
0
U
U
Administrative Repor
March 17, 2020
Ordinance 1st Reading
March 24, 2020
Ordinance 2nd Reading
March 31, 2020
Current language - SVMC 22.70.020
A. In residential zoning districts} the height of a fence within the front yard shall be:
1 _ Thirty-six inches or less for sight-cbstructin2 fences: or
2 _ Forr v- ei zht inches or less for non -sight -obstructing fences, such as than. link fences_
B. hi residential zonitl2 districts, fences shall not exceed eight feet in height iivhen located on a flanking_
side} or rear yard behind the minim—
' i i um required front yard setback line_ Lots with double street frontage
may have a fence on the property line not used as the main point of access (the apparent rear yard).
C _ In nonresidential zoning districts, fences n11311 not exceed eight feet in height without a conditional use
permit except as provided in SVMC 2_70_0 .O(I0_
D. The height of a fence shall be measured from the base of the fence} except as provided in SInseiC
22.70_020(4
B_ Where the elevation of the finished grade within six feet of the fence differs from one side of the fence
L
to the other (as when a fence is placed at the tap of a slope or a retaining wall), the height shall be
measured from the side with the lowest finished grade elevation_
These residential fences are not allowed under
current regulations; height measured from lowest
elevation within 6' of the fence totals more than 8'.
This fence is allowed under current regulations -
it is constructed to the maximum allowed height.
Current regulations prohibit
additional fencing atop the wall
because:
► The total height of the retaining
wall + fence = 8'
* The height of any fence separating
the two properties is measured
from the low area in the
foreground of the picture.
Proposed language - SVMC 22.70.020
A. In residential zoning districts, the height of a fence within the front yard shall be:
1_ 'Thirty-six inches of less for sight -obstructing fences; or
2_ Forth' -eight inches or less for non -sight -obstructing fences, such as chain link fences.
B. In residential zoning districts, fences shall not exceed eight six feet in height when located on a flanking, side, or
rear yard behind the n j.nimutn required front yard setback line. Lots with double street frontage may have a fence On
the property line not used as the main point of access (the apparent rear yard).
C. An administrative exception may be granted by the City Manager or designee for a fence of more than six feet in
height but no tnc're than eight feet in height where associated with a permitted non-residential or multi -family use in
a residential zoning district and necessar;t for publicsafety, security, or screeningpurposes_
GIB_ In nonresidential zoning districts, fences shall not exceed eight feet in height without a conditional use permit
except as provided in SVMC 22._70_020 .
DE. The height of a. fence shall be measured from the base of the fence, except ag pro•, iced in SVMC 2.2.70_O2O(E).
E. i `here the elevation of the ftnighed grade within gix feet of the fence diffherg from one gide of the fence to the
other (ag when a fence ig placed at the top of a slope or a retaining Nvall), the height shall be tneas-xed from the Bide
with the tow eat fit ighe d grade elevation.
Thank you for your consideration!
Spokane Valley Municipal Code Page 1/1
22.70.020 Fencing.
A. In residential zoning districts, the height of a fence within the front yard shall be:
1. Thirty-six inches or less for sight -obstructing fences; or
2. Forty-eight inches or less for non -sight -obstructing fences, such as chain link fences.
B. In residential zoning districts, fences shall not exceed six feet in height when located on a flanking, side, or
rear yard behind the minimum required front yard setback line. Lots with double street frontage may have a fence on
the property line not used as the main point of access (the apparent rear yard).
C. An administrative exception may be granted by the City Manager or designee for a fence of more than six feet in
height but no more than eight feet in height where associated with a permitted non-residential or multi -family use in
a residential zoning district and necessary for public safety, security, or screening purposes.
CD. In nonresidential zoning districts, fences shall not exceed eight feet in height without a conditional use permit
except as provided in SVMC 22.70.020(I).
DE. The height of a fence shall be measured from the base of the fence, except as provided in SVMC 22.70.020(E).
E. Where the elevation of the finished grade within six feet of the fence differs from one side of the fence to the
other (as when a fence is placed at the top of a slope or a retaining- wall), the height shall be measured from the side
with the lowest finished grade elevation.
F. In nonresidential zoning districts, barbed wire may be used for security purposes only on the upper one -quarter of
the fence unless the use is adjacent to a residential zoning district, in which case no barbed wire shall be allowed on
the portion of the fence adjacent to the residential zoning district. An administrative exception may be granted by the
city manager or designee for public utility distribution or transmission facilities seeking relief from barbed wire
requirements.
G. In residential zoning districts, barbed wire fences may only be used to confine animals if the parcel meets the
animal raising and keeping requirements contained in SVMC 19.65.020.
H. Barbed wire shall not project outside of the property line or into the public right-of-way.
I. Electric fences shall only be allowed to enclose outdoor storage areas in nonresidential zoning districts or to
confine animals in residential zoning districts. Electric fences shall not be allowed for any other purpose. Electric
fences shall:
1. Not exceed 10 feet in height when used for outdoor storage or eight feet in height when used to confine
animals;
2. Be clearly marked with warning signs at least 24 square inches in area located every 60 feet;
3. Be surrounded by a non -electrical fence located within 12 inches of the electrical fence;
4. Have an energizer driven by a commercial storage battery that does not exceed 12 volts DC; and
5. Not produce a charge upon contact that exceeds the energizer characteristics set forth in paragraph 22.108
and depicted in Figure 102 of International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) Standard 60335-2-76.
J. Fences and all sight obstructions including vegetation shall be located outside of the clearview triangle pursuant to
SVMC 22.70.030 and shall not block the view of fire protection equipment. (Ord. 17-004 § 3, 2017; Ord. 16-018 § 6
(Att. B), 2016).
The Spokane Valley Municipal Code is current through Ordinance No. 19-013, passed September 24, 2019.
Spokane
Valley
COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC WORKS
BUILDING & PLANNING
STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
CTA-2019-0004
STAFF REPORT DATE: December 3, 2019
HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: December 12, beginning at 6:00 p.m., Spokane Valley City Hall
Council Chambers, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206.
PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: The proposed amendment is a City -initiated text amendment to the Spokane
Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) amending SVMC 22.70.020 fence regulations in residential zones to
reduce the allowed fence height from 8' to 6', establish an administrative exception for non-residential uses
that allows fence height up to 8', and determines the fence height measuring point in a way which is more
consistent with other area jurisdictions such as the City of Spokane and Spokane County.
APPROVAL CRITERIA: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, SVMC 17.80.150, 19.30.040.
SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS: Staff concludes that the proposed amendments to SVMC 22.70.020 are
consistent with minimum criteria for review and approval, and consistent with the goals and policies of the
Comprehensive Plan.
STAFF CONTACT: Jenny Nickerson, Building Official
REVIEWED BY: John Hohman, Deputy City Manager
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Proposed Amendment
APPLICATION PROCESSING: Chapter 17.80 SVMC, Permit Processing Procedures. The following table
summarizes the procedural steps for the proposal.
Process
Date
Depaitnient of Commerce 60-day Notice of Intent to
November 15, 2019
Adopt Amendment
SEPA — DNS Issued
November 1, 2019
Published Notice of Public Hearing:
November 22 and 29, 2019
BACKGROUND: Current fence regulations restrict the height of fences on properties in the
residential zones to a total of 8 feet and dictate that a fence's height be measured from either the
base of the fence or, where the fence separates properties of different elevations, the lowest finished
grade elevation within 6 feet of the fence (measured horizontally).
The minimum side yard in residential zoning districts is 5 feet which means that, where homes are
developed on sloping lots, it is common for a retaining wall to be constructed at the property line
and, because the height of the retaining wall contributes to the allowed height of a fence,
Staff Report and Recommendation CTA-2019-0004
neighboring property owners do not have the opportunity to construct a fence which provides the
typical degree of privacy common in a neighborhood with lesser elevation differences between lots.
By allowing a fence to be measured from the finished grade elevation immediately adjacent to the
fence (as opposed to including a retaining wall or lower elevation of a slope), developers would
have the opportunity to erect a fence using standard construction methods. However, this would
also render the need to allow a fence of taller than 6 feet unnecessary in the residential zones.
Non-standard installations, such as fences associated with permitted non-residential uses in the
residential zoning districts, may be addressed through an administrative exception process.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE TEXT AMENDMENT:
1. Compliance with Title 17 (General Provisions) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code
a. Findings:
SVMC 17.80.150(F) Municipal Code Text Amendment Approval Criteria
The City may approve a Municipal Code Text amendment if it finds that:
i. The proposed text amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of the
Comprehensive Plan;
Staff Analysis: The proposed amendment is supported by the Comprehensive Plan
and is consistent with the following Comprehensive goals and policies:
LU-G2 Provide for land uses that are essential to Spokane Valley residents,
employees, and visitors,
LU-P1 Enable neighborhood -scale commercial uses in residential areas,
LU-P5 Ensure compatibility between adjacent residential and commercial or
industrial uses.
ii. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to public health, safety,
welfare, and protection of the environment:
Staff Analysis: The proposed amendment bears substantial relation to public health,
safety, welfare and protection of the environment. Allowing fence heights to be
measured in a way which is easily understood and consistent with other jurisdictions
in the region addresses concerns of residential developers and individual
homeowners while also allowing for the use of standard fence construction materials
and methods and providing the opportunity for an administrative exception process
where non-residential uses exist or are proposed in residential zoning districts.
b. Conclusion(s):
The proposed text amendment is consistent with the approval criteria contained in the SVMC
17.80.150(F).
2. Finding and Conclusions Specific to Public Comments
a. Findings:
No public comments have been received to date.
b. Conclusion(s):
Page 2 of 3
Staff Report and Recommendation CTA-2019-0004
Adequate public noticing was conducted for CTA-20 19-0004 pursuant to adopted public
noticing procedures.
3. Finding and Conclusions Specific to Agency Comments
a. Findings:
The City has not received any agency comments to date.
b. Conclusion(s):
No concerns noted.
A. CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth above, the proposed code text amendment to amend the fence regulations in
residential zones is consistent with the requirements of SVMC 17.80.150(F) and the Comprehensive
Plan.
Page 3 of 3
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION
CTA-2019-0004— Proposed Amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC)
Pursuant to SVMC 17.80.150(E) the Planning Commission shall consider the proposal and shall prepare
and forward a recommendation to the City Council following the public hearing. The following findings
are consistent with the Planning Commission recommendation.
Background:
1. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130, Spokane Valley adopted its 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update and
updated development regulations on December 13, 2016, with December 28, 2016 as the effective date.
2. CTA-2019-0004 is a City -initiated text amendment to the SVMC, amending SVMC 22.70.020 Fencing
regulations to clarify the method in which a fence is to be measured and amend regulatory language to
allow for fences in excess of 6 feet in height associated with non-residential and multi -family uses in
residential zoning districts to be considered through an administrative exception process.
3. The Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing and conducted deliberations on
December 12, 2019. The Commissioners voted 7-0 to recommend that the City Council approve the
amendment as presented.
Planning Commission Findings:
1. Compliance with SVMC 17.80.150(F) Approval Criteria
a. The proposed text amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of the
Comprehensive Plan.
Findings: The proposed amendment is supported by the Comprehensive Plan and is consistent
with the following goals and policies:
LU-G2 Provide for land uses that are essential to Spokane Valley residents, employees, and visitors.
LU-Pl Enable neighborhood -scale commercial uses in residential zones.
LU-P5 Ensure compatibility between adjacent residential and commercial or industrial uses.
Conclusion:
The proposed text amendment is supported by the Comprehensive Plan and consistent with
the goals and policies.
b. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to public health, safety, welfare and
protection of the environment.
Findings: The proposed amendment bears substantial relation to public health, safety,
welfare and protection of the environment. Allowing fence heights to be measured in a way
which is easily understood and consistent with other jurisdictions in the region addresses
concerns of residential developers and individual homeowner s while also allowing for the
use of standard fence construction materials and method and providing the opportunity for an
Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission CTA-2019-0004 Page 1 of 2
administrative exception process where non-residential uses exist or are proposed in
residential zoning districts.
Conclusion:
The proposed text amendment is consistent with Comprehensive Plan and bears a substantial
relation to public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment.
2. Recommendation:
The Spokane Valley Planning Commission therefore recommends the City Council approve CTA-2019-
0004 as proposed.
Attachment:
Exhibit 1 — Proposed Amendment CTA-2019-0004
Approved this 9' day of January, 2020
Ian g Commis _% Chairman
ATTEST
Deanna Horton, Administrative Assistant
Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission CTA-2019-0004 Page 2 of 2
Regular Meeting Minutes
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
Council Chambers — City Hall
November 14, 2019
1. Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
II. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance.
III. Assistant Deanna Horton called roll and the following members and staff were present:
James Johnson Jenny Nickerson, Building Official
Danielle Kaschmitter -absent excused Cary Driskell, City Attorney
Timothy Kelley
Robert McKinley
Raymond Friend -absent excused
Michelle Rasmussen -absent excused Deanna Horton, Administrative Assistant
Matt Walton
Hearing no objections Commissioners Kaschmitter, Friend and Rasmussen were excused.
After roll call Commissioner Kelley called a Point of Order, which the Chair granted, and read
a statement in which he stated he felt that the issue regarding the Commission elections had
not been addressed. The Commission's Rules of Procedure, Section 9 (B) states in the election
of officers, must have at least four affirmative votes. Commissioner Kelley's contention is that
Commissioner Johnson only received three votes. There was no official vote which gave
Commissioner Johnson the four votes necessary to be duly elected. He also stated that
Commissioner Walton, being the only person nominated for the Vice Chair, was also not duly
elected because he was appointed without anyone casting a vote. Commissioner Kelley feels
a special election needs be held in order to officially elect the Chair and Vice -Chair to their
positions. He noted that Robert's Rules of Order also state someone is not elected until they
receive the required number of votes.
City Attorney Cary Driskell reaffirmed his position from the October 24, 2019, meeting that
there was no question to the validity of the election of the officers in January. There had only
been one candidate, and the challenge is only being raised nine months later. Mr. Driskell also
concluded the Chair and Vice Chair are simply facilitators to allow the meeting to run
smoothly. There are no legal ramifications to them fulfilling these positions through the end of
the year. Commission Secretary Deanna Horton noted when Commissioner Rasmussen
withdrew her nomination, Ms. Horton had received unanimous consent from the rest of the
Commissioners that they approved of Commissioner Johnson being elected the Chair. When
Commissioner Walton was nominated for Vice Chair, there were no other nominations, and
unanimous consent was given to elect Commissioner Walton to the position for which he had
been nominated and he accepted. Commissioner Kelley feels these are inaccurate responses,
because historically a ballot has been used to vote for these positions, none was used during
this election cycle. It was noted that there is no requirement in the rules of order for a ballot
to be used in voting for these positions.
Commissioner Kelley requested that the Commission call for a special election. Mr. Driskell
stated he did not feel that the Chair was able call for a special election, since the rules only
allow for a special election when there is a vacancy. Mr. Driskell said he did not have an
answer for the subject at that time, feeling he had already addressed the subject. Commissioner
Walton requested a point of parliamentary inquiry to have the subject set aside in order to be
11-14-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 3
able to conduct the rest of the Commission business. The ruling by the Chair was to set the
subject aside in order to conduct the business of the Commission.
IV. AGENDA: Commissioner Walton moved to amend the November 14, 2019 by removing item
IX(i) Findings of Fact for CTA-2019-0003. The attending Commissioners, excluding
Commissioner Johnson have not had the opportunity to listen to the recording from the public
hearing and cannot vote on the findings at this time. There was no discussion. The vote on the
motion was four in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed.
V. MINUTES: Commissioner Walton moved to approve the October 10 and October 24, 2019
agenda as written. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was four in favor, zero
opposed, and the motion passed.
VI. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioner Walton attended the November 12, 2019 City
Council meeting. Commissioner Johnson attended the Human Rights task force executive
committee meeting, regular meeting on November 8, 2019 and the City Council meeting on
November 12, 2019. There were no other reports.
VII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Building Official Jenny Nickerson reported that staff are
working to implement a program to have the Planning Commission recordings hosted on the
website.
VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment.
IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS:
Study Session: CTA-2019-0004, a proposed amendment to SVMC 22.70.020
Fencing, fence heights in residential zones.
Ms. Nickerson gave a presentation regarding fencing regulations in the residential zones.
Ms. Nickerson said City's current language requires the height be measured at the lowest
grade elevation within six feet of the fence horizontally. The City has found that
constructing a six-foot fence when measured from the bottom of a retaining wall, or heavy
slope between two properties with differing elevation, does not provide adequate privacy.
Commissioner Johnson said that in paragraph D it states that in a non-residential zone
would be limited to eight feet. He confirmed that multifamily development would have a
six foot fence limit. There was discussion regarding a residential use being next to a non-
residential or multifamily use and wanting more privacy. Ms. Nickerson offered changing
the language in section (C) to read:
An administrative exception may be granted by the City Manager or designee for a
fence of more than six feet in height but no more than eight feet in height where
associated with a permitted non-residential I 1 I \ use in a residential zoning
district and necessary for public safety, security, or screening purposes.
Ms. Nickerson noted that transitional regulations apply when single family residential
development is abutted by a multifamily use. The current language would not allow the
City Manager to make an exception for multifamily, without the suggested language
change. Ms. Nickerson said the public hearing is scheduled for December 12, 2019.
ii. Study Session: Updating Planning Commission Rules of Procedure.
Ms. Nickerson said a marked up and clean version had been sent to the Commissioners.
Staff had hoped to send these forward for Council approval if there were no more proposed
changes. Commissioner Kelley would like to change Section 9(B) to be altered to state
that a ballot vote is required for the election of officers. Commissioner Walton stated that
part of the reason we used small board rules is the flexibility to do the work required of the
1 I-14-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 3
Planning Commission. Part of that is not having the formality of Robert's Rules of Order
and being able to streamline the processes. Commissioner Walton felt it was getting away
from thought process that the Commission is more than a recommending body. If the
Commission feels a ballot vote is necessary, then they all have the right to call for one at.
any time. Putting it in the Rules of Procedure just makes it necessary when it might not be
all of the time. Commissioner McKinley stated he felt that asking for a paper ballot for the
Chair and Vice Chair, as the leaders of the Commission, is a good idea. He felt it makes it
an official act and would allow people to write in someone else. It is a formality but it
should be implemented. Commissioner Johnson stated he agreed with Commissioner
Walton, he likes the small board rules and would like to keep them, however he feels that
the ballot vote for Chair and Vice Chair should be a ballot vote.
Commissioner Johnson requested that this subject be held until the next meeting.
Commissioner McKinley requested that the absent members receive a copy of the
evening's recording and a copy of the statement which was read by Commissioner Kelley.
Commissioner Johnson clarified in Section 5(Attendance)(A) would require a vote to
excuse people from a meeting, but unanimous consent is considered a motion and
confirmation by Robert's Rules of Order.
Commissioner Johnson noted in Section 5(C)(d)(2), says states that after a leave of
absence, the absent Commissioner shall either: but only offers one option. Ms. Horton
stated this was an insert from the Governance Manual and she would look to see what had
been removed to clean it up.
X. GOOD OF THE ORDER: Commissioner McKinley stated he was thankful for his family.
Commissioner Kelley clarified the order of the agenda. Commissioner Walton commented on
intrinsic dignity and making the choice to treat people with civility, honor and respect for the
value and worth they bring to our City.
XI. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Walton moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:03 p.m.
The vote on the motion was four in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed.
ames Johnson, Chairman
Deanna Morton, Secretary
Are/4z-e,,
Date signed
Regular Meeting Minutes
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
Council Chambers — City Hall
December 12, 2019
I. Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
H. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance.
III. Assistant Robin Holt called roll and the following members and staff were present:
James Johnson Jenny Nickerson, Building Official
Danielle Kaschmitter — late excused Cary Driskell, City Attorney
Timothy Kelley Lori Barlow, Senior Planner
Robert McKinley
Raymond Friend
Michelle Rasmussen Deanna Horton, Administrative Assistant
Matt Walton Robin Holt, Administrative Assistant
Hearing no objections Commissioner Kaschmitter was excused and arrived at 6:06 p.m.
IV. AGENDA: Commissioner Walton moved to approve the December 12, 2019 agenda as
written. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero opposed,
and the motion passed.
V. MINUTES: Commissioner Walton moved to approve the November 14, 2019 minutes as
written. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero opposed,
and the motion passed.
VI. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioner Johnson reported he attended an auction at the
Temple Beth Shalom on November 16, 2019; on November 18, 2019 he attended the
NAACP general meeting; on November 6, 2019 he attended the City Council meeting and
thanked Council Member Wood for his service; on November 3, 2019 he attended a joint
meeting between Spokane Human Rights Task Force and the Spokane Human Rights
Commission related to the planning of an awards banquet; November 4, 2019 he attended
the Spokane Human Rights Commission meeting related to developing an office of Civil
Rights and December 10, 2019 he attended the Spokane County Human Rights Task Force
regular meeting.
VII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: There was no administrative report.
VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT:
Sheri Robinson, City of Spokane Valley; Ms. Robinson asked the Commission to revisit a
code change related to multifamily housing in providing green space for playgrounds and
pools. She spoke about millennials and retirees wanting higher walkability scores. She spoke
about the concerns related to multifamily housing being located in the residential zones adding
that multifamily housing needs to be near services and transportation. She also asked the
Commission to entertain a crosswalk at 22nd Avenue and University Road near Bowdish Junior
High. She explained the middle school students cross there and it is unsafe, she gave several
examples to include a fatality.
IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS:
i. Findings of Fact: CTA-2019-0003, a proposed amendment to SVMC 22.110.0 Signs -
Aesthetic corridors.
12-12-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 4
Senior Planner Lori Barlow provided background into the proposed amendment CTA-
2019-0003, allowing wall signs in the aesthetic corridors. Ms. Barlow explained that the
findings of fact formalize the process and decisions the Commission has made. Ms. Barlow
advised this item has been before the Commission on two prior occasions. The Planning
Commission held a public hearing and conducted deliberations on October 24, 2019 voting
four to zero forwarding a recommendation of approval to City Council.
Commissioner Walton moved to approve Findings of Fact CTA-2019-0003 as presented.
There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero opposed, and
the motion passed.
ii. Public Hearing: CTA-201 9-0004, a proposed amendment to Spokane Valley
Municipal Code (SVMC) 22.70.020 Fencing, fence heights in residential zones.
Chair Johnson opened the public hearing at 6:12 p.m.
Ms. Nickerson provided a brief background and presentation related to fence height
regulations in the residential zones. Ms. Nickerson explained this item has been before the
Commission on multiple occasions for discussion and review. A Study Session was held
on November 14, 2019 and tonight the Public Hearing.
Ms. Nickerson addressed the suggested language related to an increase fence height for
multifamily use through an administrative exception discussed during the last meeting. She
continued, SVMC 22.70.020 section (c) now states that an administrative exception may
be granted for a fence of more than six feet in height, but no more than eight feet in height,
with a permitted non-residential „r nAn I 1 i 1 n 1 i 1' use in a residential zoning district.
There was some discussion regarding residential and non-residential fence heights related
to electric fence components. It was conclude those details would be addressed through an
administrative exception as listed in code.
Chair Johnson closed the public hearing at 6:16p.rn.
Commissioner Walton moved to approve CTA-2019-0004 as presented. There was no
discussion. The vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero opposed, and the motion
passed.
iii. Study Session: STV-2019-0005, a proposed street vacation of portions of 12th and 13t''
Avenues, the alley between 12'' and 13th Avenues and Chronicle Road.
Ms. Barlow provided a presentation outlining the privately initiated street vacation for
portions of 12th and 131h Avenues and the alleyway in-between as well as a portion of
Chronicle Road. Ms. Barlow explained this request is in the southwest portion of the City
near the intersection of 12th Avenue and Carnahan Road. The area to be vacated is
surrounded by residential development to the south and vacant or developing properties to
the northeast and northwest. Ms. Barlow noted the proposed area does cross over a
waterbody that was created by previous mining activities.
Ms. Barlow provided procedural overview advising the Planning Commission is currently
conducting the study session. The public hearing will be held on January 9, 2020 and the
formalization of the Commission's decision will be held on January 23, 2020 with the
Findings of Fact.
Ms. Barlow advised that in processing a street vacation staff reviews connectivity, traffic
volume, future developments and access. Potential conditions to consider would be utility
and easement access, removal of the portion of the street or streets vacated and design or
construction improvements.
12-12-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 4
Ms. Barlow explained the applicant feels the site is unconstructible and this vacation would
allow for full development. The alleys are no longer required for public use or access and
the on -site wetlands interfere with the construction of 13th Avenue.
Ms. Barlow provided an aerial view of the critical areas relative to the site. The
unimproved portions of 12th and 13th Avenues and Chronical Road are within the City's
floodplain area and a wetland. Ms. Barlow explained the request is to vacate 500 feet of
Chronical Street at a full width right-of-way of 60 feet wide. 385 feet of 13th Avenue also
at a full width ROW. Lastly, 12 feet of alleyway between 12th and 13th Avenues and 385
feet of 12th Avenue at a half width ROW of 30 feet.
Ms. Barlow detailed potential issues explaining that adjacent properties need access for
future development, as the proposed area is zones R-3. If Chronicle Road were to be
vacated the two adjacent parcels would be land locked. The other potential issues would
be the storm water system. The stormwater system is not within an easement, it would
need to either be moved or have an easement. The City has been working with the property
owner to resolve the potential issues with several options.
Commissioner Kelley confirmed the applicant owns both sides of the roads to be vacated.
The applicant also has a purchase sale agreement on the property immediately to the north.
Commissioner Johnson asked what direction the storm drain flows. There was a lengthy
discussion related to the direction of flow and the problems the system currently has and
has had. The current storm water system is a private system that the City contributes to.
City Attorney Cary Driskel explained that the system does run south to north and makes
its' way onto the property owned by the Conservation District. The City's storm water
division have been speaking with the Conservation District related to obtaining an
easement. In addition, not only city or public waters are contributing to this storm water.
There are a number of sources contributing including seepage from under the ground.
There was also some discussion related to the site not have an exclusive water service
district. Commissioner Johnson asked about compensation and it was determined that once
council makes a decision and should compensation be required, it would be determined by
resolution.
Commissioner Walton asked Ms. Barlow to provide what the maximum allowed dwelling
units are currently and what would be allowed if the streets were vacated. Ms. Barlow
advised she will have the details requested, but added that there should not be a gain as
there will still have to be access provided. The property that would be most affected is
currently zoned R-3, which is six dwelling units per acre. Commissioner Johnson asked if
the floodplain and the wetland would be included in the available property within the
calculations. Ms. Barlow stated that in theory the wetland could not be developed however,
the floodplain could be developed as long as it met the standards.
iv. Study Session: Updating PIanning Commission Rules of Procedure.
Ms. Nickerson introduced the subject of the Planning Commission Rules of Procedure
(ROP) and provided background into the discussions from the six previous visits related to
this topic. The Commissioners were provided a clean and a redline version of the ROP to
date.
Commissioner Kelley spoke to the voting section; he explained it used to read: "four
affirmative votes must be cast for comprehensive plans or the election of officers". The
language related to the election of officers was redlined, he asked when and why that was
changed. Administrative Assistant Deanna Horton explained that after the Iast meeting she
added Section (c) Election of officers; that states: "Each Chair and Vice Chair must receive
12-12-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 4
four affirmative votes in order to be elected". She continued to explain the Comprehensive
Plan votes Section (b) and Election of Officer votes Section (c) have been separated.
There was a lengthy discussion related to what a majority vote constitutes, four votes or
the majority of the Commissioners appointed? Commissioner Johnson advised there was a
discrepancy in the language and multiple sections. Mr. Driskel advised the language
should be consistent in all sections related to voting. The language should read: "by
majority vote of the membership of the Commission".
Commissioner Johnson addressed the language related to votes being taken by paper ballot
changing from "shall be taken" to "may be taken". It was determined the language states
"may be taken" to allow for flexibility by the Commission and to alleviate public records
request concerns by requiring a paper ballot. Lastly, after some discussion, it was
concluded the Commission would impose a three -minute time limit for public testimony
or otherwise determined by Chair should more time be necessary.
X. GOOD OF THE ORDER: Commissioner Rasmussen stated she has enjoyed her last three
years on the board and this will be her last meeting. She thanked those on the board and the
staff for all of their efforts. Commissioner McKinley thanked Commissioner Rasmussen for
her service on the board. He asked everyone to enjoy the holidays. Commissioner Kaschmitter
thanked everyone for their time and wished everyone a Merry Christmas. Commissioner
Friend also thanked the Commissioners and staff for all of their hard work. Commissioner
Kelley thanked Commissioner Rasmussen for her time with the Commission. Commissioner
Walton also thanked Commissioner Rasmussen for her service and advised it has been a
pleasure serving for the last three years. Commissioner Johnson also thanked Commissioner
Rasmussen for her time and service. He was thankful for his time as Chair; he is looking
forward to the future, and read aloud a quote form Margaret Mead.
XI. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Rasmussen moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:17 p.m.
The vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed.
///4"/„OZO
James Johnson, Chairman Date signed
Robin Holt, Secretary
Regular Meeting Minutes
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
Council Chambers — City Hall
January 9, 2020
L Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p,m.
II. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance.
III. Assistant Deanna Horton called roll and the following members and staff were present:
James Johnson
Danielle Kaschmitter
Timothy Kelley
Robert McKinley
Jenny Nickerson, Building Official
Cary Driskell, City Attorney
Lori Barlow, Senior Planner
Bill Helbig, City Engineer
Deanna Horton, Administrative Assistant
IV. AGENDA: Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve the amended January 9, 2020
agenda. The election of officers had been added after the agenda was published. There was
no discussion. The vote on the motion was four in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed.
V. MINUTES: Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve the December 12, 2019 minutes as
written. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was four in favor, zero opposed,
and the motion passed.
VI. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioner Johnson reported he attended a Spokane
County Human Rights task force meeting and the January 7, 2020 meeting.
VII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: There was no administrative report.
VHI. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment.
IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS:
i. Election of Officers
Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to suspend the rules and postpone the election of
officers to a time when the full Commission has been appointed.
Commissioner Kelley stated that newly appointed members would not necessarily know
the people they were voting for if the elections were postponed. Commissioner Johnson
stated it was possible that some previously appointed members could be reappointed, and
therefore would already be aware of whom they were electing. Commissioner Kelley
confirmed that four votes are necessary to be elected to each position.
The vote on the motionwas four in favor, zero against, and the motion passed.
ii. Finding Fact: CTA-2019-0004, a proposed amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal
Code (SVMC) 22.70.020 Fencing, fence heights in residential zones.
Building Official Jenny Nickerson presented to the Commission the Findings of Fact for
CTA-2019-0004 which sutnmaries the decision the Commission made during the public
hearing for the code text amendment regarding fence heights in residential zones. Ms.
Nickerson reminded the Commissioners the proposed amendment to the municipal code is
to change where a fence is measured from, which would allow for a six foot high fence
01-09-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 5
measured from where the bottom of the fence hits the ground, regardless of where the
ground is located.
Commissioner Kelley confirmed that if there were a dirt barrier, the fence would be
measured from the top of an earthen berm. The change to the code moves the measuring
of the fence from the lowest point within six feet of the fence to the bottom of the fence
regardless of where the fence is built. Commissioners discussed the proposed change, then
moved to approve the findings.
Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve the Planning Commission findings and
recommendations regarding CTA-2019-0004. The vote on the motion was four in favor,
zero against, and the motion passed.
111. Public Hearing: STV-2019-0005, a proposed street vacation of portions of 12th and
13th Avenues, the alley between 12th and 13th Avenues and a portion of Chronicle
Road.
Chair Johnson opened the public hearing at 6:12 p. m.
Ms. Barlow provided a presentation outlining the privately initiated street vacation for a
portion of 12th Avenue, a portion of 13th Avenue, the alleyway in-between 12th and 13th,
and a portion of Chronicle Road south of 12th Avenue and north of 14th Avenue. Ms.
Barlow explained the request is located in the southwest portion of the City near the
intersection of 12th Avenue and Carnahan Road.
Ms. Barlow provided the Commissioners with additional items for their consideration
during the public hearing. She explained the items were comments from the City of
Spokane, one new slide for the PowerPoint presentation, and updated recommendations to
the staff report based on the new comments received. Ms. Barlow stated a review of the
water district service areas indicated that the area was outside of an identified service area,
but that the City of Spokane had reached out to let staff know that Spokane Water District
#3 considers it to be in their "retail water service area." These properties are in Spokane's
Comprehensive Water System Plan and therefore are considered part of the Spokane
system for now. There is also a Spokane sewer line located in the parcels which Spokane
is requesting an easement for. She stated she had corrected the parcel numbers on the
recommendation, and added a new condition based on the received comments from the
City of Spokane.
Ms. Barlow explained some of the potential issues with the vacation. The zoning to the
south and west is single family residential, (R-3), while the rest of the parcels and area to
the north is zoned multifamily residential, (MYR). Two of the parcels would be land locked
if the whole request was permitted. There is a stormwater piping system which currently
is located in the right-of-way (ROW) and on private property which the City needs
easements to access. City staff is currently working to obtain the easements for this
stormwater system, and it is possible that the system could be moved to accommodate
development. The City of Spokane has a sewer main going through the properties and has
requested a 30 foot wide easement if any portion of the sewer line is located outside of an
easement on the subject properties.
Ms. Barlow stated the City's recommendation is to maintain 12th Avenue ROW, but allow
the vacation of the rest of the requested ROWs. The reason 12th Avenue should be retained,
is all of the properties to the north of 12th Avenue are zoned MFR and this would allow
adequate access to the property. While it is only a half ROW at this time, through the
01-09-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 5
development process further ROW could be obtained if it is needed for development of the
property(s).
Ms. Barlow stated the approval criteria was in the staff report, however she wanted to cover
a question from the study session. The question was what would the difference in allowed
density on the affected properties be if ttie ROW is retained over vacating it. Currently the
properties involved in the request equal 6.82 acres, which would allow for 41 dwelling
units; if the ROW were vacated the area would increase to 8.39 acres, and allow 50
dwelling units. This is a gross calculation and there is a difference when development
actually occurs. If an applicant applied for a planned residential development or cottage
development which could increase the density depending on existing zoning. These
calculations were not figured with the wetland or the floodplain considerations taken into
account. Commissioner Johnson confirmed that this would be the facts in any other zoning
district.
Commissioner Kelley confirmed that a boundary line adjustment of the two parcels owned
by the same property owner could prevent the three parcels on the west side of Chronicle
Road from becoming land locked. Ms. Barlow stated the conditions of the vacation state
there should be a boundary line adjustment or elimination for the parcels. Commissioner
Kelley asked if the applicant's development plans suggested that 12th Avenue could
function better for them in another place, would it make sense to vacate 12th Avenue now
and allow the applicant to offer a suggestion for an alternative later. Ms. Barlow responded
it was possible, but at this time there is no development plan which suggests that possibility.
Commissioner Johnson confirmed that should the applicant want to change the zoning on
the properties they own to the south of the vacation requests, they would need to go through
a Comprehensive Plan amendment, as well as a zoning change. Ms. Barlow shared that
the applicants had made a request to change the Comprehensive Plan designation on the
parcels to the south, which are currently designated as Low Density Residential, and the
City Council made the decision to remove the request from the docket.
Commissioner Johnson stated he was concerned that no water district was taking
responsibility for water service on the property. Ms. Barlow stated when staff determined
which agencies staff should contact regarding this proposal, there was no specific water
district providing service to the parcels. This information came from Spokane County
records. Both adjacent water districts stated they were not responsible, but recently the City
of Spokane had reached out and stated they considered the area to be within their retail
water service area. This means that while the area is not specifically in their service area,
they can petition to service the area based on their Comprehensive Water Plan. It is in an
area where they are allowed to grow based on their service plan. City Engineer Bill Helbig
also commented that the City was responsible for the stormwater and surface water and
had conditions for these waters in the findings.
Commission accepted public testimony.
Brad Sharp, Spokane, WA: Mr. Sharp stated he was appearing on behalf of legal council,
Taudd Hume for the applicant. Mr. Sharp stated he was in support of the vacation in its
entirety. Mr. Sharp said the conditions in the staff report are appropriate for the project.
The boundary line elimination is one of the conditions which the applicant is currently
working on now. He said after consulting with the lead attorney, the consulting engineer
and the owner, they are looking at providing connectivity to those parcels in question
through the project so that the concerns raised in the staff report are addressed, which
included increased traffic and general access to the property. Mr. Sharp stated that he felt
those concerns would be addressed with adequate or equal access, either through 12th
0I-09-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 5
Avenue, through the aggregated parcel as an easement, or dedication, to mitigate the
concerns. The applicant would be agreeable to final plat approval be conditioned ensure
connectivity being provided through 12th Avenue or another adequate ROW.
Susan Moss, Whipple Consulting Engineers, Spokane Valley, WA: Ms. Moss stated
she agreed with everything in the staff report, except for the removal of 12th Avenue from
the request. She offered that the applicant would be agreeable to conditions in order to
meet accessibility for the multifamily property. She felt conditions could be added to the
approval of the vacation in order to allow the vacation of 12tt' Avenue.
Roger Repp, Spokane Valley, WA: Mr. Repp stated his concern was the pond on the
property. He said he thought that the water in the pond is aquifer water, and he is concerned
about protecting the water and the aquifer. He said that when: Target developed on the
south hill, they built on what he thought was a wetland that could not be developed. He
said they took a bulldozer and filled in the wetlands and it would not take much for
someone to do the same thing to the pond on this property. He is concerned about the water
quality. He said as an individual, he can't fight the developer's attorney. He was surprised
someone was trying to develop it.
Matt Walton, Spokane Valley, WA: Mr. Walton stated he was not an opponent or
proponent, but wanted to bring up several items for consideration. He said that the
proponents offer to do something after an action had taken place does not guarantee they
would follow through with it. The City recommendation to retain 12th Avenue seemed to
be in good character with the surrounding neighborhood. Mr. Walton also suggested the
City retain Chronicle Road as well.
Commissioner Johnson clarified the properties to the north are not landlocked. The reason
to retain 12th Avenue is not connectivity for the Low Density Residential properties, it is
to support the land use designation of High Density Residential which the right-of-way
abuts. Commissioner McKinley asked if the pond was aquifer water. Ms. Barlow did not
know the answer, however she stated that at the time of development, the plans will be
routed to the appropriate agencies with jurisdiction, including the Aquifer Board, and staff
would take the necessary steps at that time.
Seeing no one else who wished to testify, Chair Johnson closed the public hearing at 7:05
p.m.
Commissioner Johnson moved the Planning Commission approve the recommendation for
STV-2019-0005 as presented by staff eliminating 12th Avenue from the request.
Commissioner Kelley said he felt that 12th Avenue should be vacated along with the rest
of the request, stating there could be a better place for access to the development and that
would not be known until the development plans have been submitted. He said he would
not be in favor of the motion as currently stated. Commission Johnson said he felt staff
had evaluated the request extensively, and that the applicants could work around 12th
Avenue being left in place. He commented that previous vacations have raised the question
of what happens in the future when a vacation has been allowed and the City has needed
the ROW after it is gone. He felt staff had reviewed the possibility and he wanted to
support the decision. Commissioner Kaschmitter stated she felt staff had reviewed the
proposal and she supported leaving 12th Avenue out of the request. Commissioner
McKinley stated he supported the removal of 12th from the request because of the
landlocked parcels in the development.
The vote on the motion was three in favor, one against with Commissioner Kelley
dissenting, the motion passed.
01-09-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 5
iv. Study Session: Updating Planning Commission Rules of Procedure.
Building Official Jenny Nickerson presented the latest version of the Planning Commission
Rules of Procedure with all the changes in strike -out format. This reflects all of the changes
the Planning Commission has discussed through the last few months regarding the update
to the Rules of Procedure and if there are no more changes, they would be moved forward
to the City Council for approval by resolution. Commissioners thanked staff for the work
done to assist them in updating these Rules of Procedure.
Commissioner Johnson suggested holding the approval of the Rules of Procedure for a
fully appointed Commission, as was done for the election of officers. He felt covering the
updated Rules of Procedure this would be a good for new commissioners. Commissioner
McKinley stated he was opposed, sharing he felt as many times as they have been reviewed
there was little modification which would occur and adding more voices could just
postpone the approval process. Commissioners Kaschmitter and Kelley concurred with
thought.
Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve and forward to City Council, the Planning
Commission updated Rules of Procedure.
The vote on the motion was three in favor, one against with Commissioner Johnson
dissenting.
X. GOOD OF THE ORDER: Commissioner McKinley suggested everyone be careful in the
snow, Commissioner Kaschmitter thanked staff again for the work on the Rules of Procedure.
XI. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner McKinley moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:15 p.m.
The vote on the motion was four in favor, zero opposed and the motion passed.
James Johnson, Chairman Date signed
Deanna Horton, Secretary
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: March 17, 2020 Department Director Approval: El
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Planning Commission Rules of Procedure Update
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 18.10.030
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None
BACKGROUND: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission was established in 2003 during the
incorporation of the City. The original Commission was tasked with establishing Rules of
Procedure. The current Rules of Procedure state that they should be reviewed in the odd
numbered years for any necessary updates, or at any time the Office of the City Attorney identifies
a necessary change. The Planning Commission Rules of Procedure were adopted in 2005 and
updated in 2010, 2011, and 2012.
Staff presented recommended revisions which aligned the Rules' language with the current City
of Spokane Valley Municipal Code and which were recommended by City Clerk and Office of the
City Attorney staff during the September 26, 2019 Planning Commission meeting. The Planning
Commission members reviewed the current Rules of Procedure and recommended additional
revisions to the language over the course of five additional regular Planning Commission
meetings: October 10, 2019; October 24, 2019; November 14, 2019; December 12, 2019; and
January 9, 2020. The final draft of the recommended revision to the Planning Commission Rules
of Procedure has been provided in red -line form as well as a `clean copy' for Councilmembers'
convenience.
OPTIONS: Consensus to place a Resolution on the March 24 Council Agenda to approve the
Commission Rules of Procedure, as drafted or modified.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Council consensus to place a Resolution to consider
approval of the Planning Commission Rules of Procedure, on the March 24 Council agenda.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A
STAFF CONTACT: Jenny Nickerson, Building Official - Community and Public Works Dept.
ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft Planning Commission Rules of Procedure — redline form
B. Draft Planning Commission Rules of Procedure — `clean' final draft
City of Spokane Valley
Planning Commission Rules of Procedure
Adopted by Planning Commission 02 19 05 05-28-2003; and Amended 6-25-2003
Revised by Adopted by Council Resolution 10-004, Dated 2-09-2010
Revised -by Adopted by Council Resolution 11-010, Dated 11-29-2011
Revised -by Adopted by Council Resolution 12-006,- Dated -10-30-2012
Wised by Adopted by Council Resolution 20-, Dated
On January 9, 2020July 26, 2012, these Rules of Procedure were adopted by the Planning Commission,
pending approval of City Council.
ORGANIZATION AND RULES OF PROCEDURE
1. Name
The "City of Spokane Valley Planning Commission," hereinafter referred to as the "Commission" is an
advisory body created by the City Council for purposes consistent with chapter 18.10 of the Spokane
Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 18.10.
2. Location
The Commission offices meetings arc shall be heldlocated at the City Hall of the City of Spokane Valley,
unless otherwise identified in the notice of meeting.
3. Officers
A. Unless otherwise required by a vacancy in office, the Commission shall organize every year in
accordance with SVMC chapter 18.10 SVMC.
B. Officers of the Commission shall be elected from its membership; the officers shall be Chair and;
Vice Chair., and other appropriate officers that the Commission may choose to approve and
appoint by majority vote.
C. Commission members must have served at least one full calendar year to be eligible to be elected
as an Officer.
D. C. The Chair shall preside over the Commission meetings and exercise all powers incidental
to the office, retaining however, the full right as a member of the Commission to propose
motions, second motions, and have a vote recorded on all matters of the Commission.
E. D. the absence of the Chair from any meeting, the Vice -Chair shall perform all the duties
incumbent upon the Chair, and retain the full right as a member of the Commission in the same
manner as the Chair.
4. Secretary of the Commission
A. A. The Director of the Community and Economic Development DepartmentCity Manager
shall assign aor his/her designee shall serve as the Secretary to the Commission.
B. B. Secretary shall provide for a recording of all Commission meetings, including public
hearings, and shall ensure that summary minutes of all public hearings and meetings are prepared,
approved, and filed in the public record.
Resolution 12 006 Adopting Planning Commission Rules of Procedure Page 1 of 10
C. C. The Secretary shallwill conduct and record a roll call of the Commission members at
each meeting, public hearing and study session.
5. Attendance:
A. Excused Absences: Members of the Commission may be excused from meetings with
notification to the Chair, Vice Chair, Secretary or Building Official, prior to the meeting,
and by stating the reason for the inability to attend. Following or prior to roll call, the
Presiding Officer shall inform the Commission of the member's absence, and inquire if
there is a consent motion to excuse the member. The motion shall be non -debatable.
Upon consent by a majority of members present, the absent member shall be considered
excused and the Secretary shall make an appropriate notation in the minutes.
B. Unexcused Absences: A Commissioner's responsibility to attend Commission meetings
should not be taken lightly, nor should a decision to remove a Commissioner for missing
meetings. As soon as possible after two consecutive unexcused absences, and prior to a
third consecutive unexcused absence, the absent Commissioner must request a leave of
absence if they desire to remain on the Commission. At a third consecutive meeting
where a Commissioner is not excused and there has been no request for a leave of
absence, the absent Commissioner's seat shall be forfeited effective immediately.
C. Leave of Absence:
1. A Commissioner whose serious health or physical condition would prevent them from
performing the duties of the Planning Commission may ask to be placed on a leave of
absence under the following conditions:
2. Such serious health or physical condition must be certified in writing by a medical
physician.
3. The request for a leave of absence shall be in writing, and hand -delivered or mailed to the
Secretary of the Commission or Building Official at least one week prior to the date when
such leave would commence.
4. The request for a leave of absence must state the anticipated date the Commissioner will
resume their duties.
5. By majority vote of the whole Commission, a leave of absence shall be granted as
follows:
6. The absence shall not exceed 90 days from the date the motion is passed by Commission;
7. At the end of the 90-day leave of absence, the absent Commissioner shall either:
a. Return to normal Commission duties commencing with the first Thursday meeting
following the end of the 90-day leave; or
b. Submit a letter of resignation to the Secretary of the Commission.
A leave of absence may only be granted twice during a Commissioner's three-year term, with no
less than six months between each request. Upon approval of a leave of absence, the absent
Commissioner shall not be replaced with a pro-tem Commissioner during the absence.
Election of Officers
A. A. Officers shall be elected at the first regular meeting in January of each year, by majority
vote of the membership of the Commission. Terms of office shall run from the first January
meeting until December 31, or until a successor has been elected. No Commission member shall
Resolution 12 006 Adopting Planning Commission Rules of Procedure
Page 2 of 10
serve more than two full consecutive terms as Chair of the Commission. No Commission
member shall serve as Vice -Chair for more than two full consecutive terms.
B. In the event that the Commission has no sitting Chair at the first regular meeting in January, the
Vice -Chair will preside over the Commission until officers are elected. If at the first regular
meeting in January, both the Chair and Vice -Chair are no longer Commission members, the
Secretary will preside over the meeting until Officers are elected.
C. B. A vacancy in either the Chair or Vice -Chair any office willshall be filled by a special
election, to be held at a convenient time with a majority present. In the event that the office of
Chair is vacated, the Vice-eChair shall serve in that capacity until the required special election is
held. Any member of the Commission who has served for at least one full calendar year, is
eligible to fill the vacancy. However, nNo member can hold two office positions concurrently.
76. Rules of Order
The sSecretary shall serve as the official parliamentarian for all meetings and shall keep a copy of
the most current "Robert's Rules of Order" in the Council Chambers during Commission meetings.. -
Except when they conflict with these Rules of Procedure, Robert's Rules of Order shall govern the
conduct of all public meetings of the Commission.- except when they conflict with these Rules of
Procedure.
78. Quorum
A quorum shall consist of four or more membersa majority of the Commission and no action can be taken
in the absence of a quorum except to adjourn the meeting to a subsequent date. A quorum must be
present for all meetings.
897. Voting
A. A. The affirmative vote of a majority of those present shall be necessary for the adoption of
any motion or other general matter.
B. B. For the conduct of business dealing with matters which require the adoption or changes to
the City's Comprehensive Plan, or for the election of officers, at least four affirmative votes must
be cast. Each member of the Commission is entitled to one vote. No proxy shall be allowed.
C. Commission members present when the question was called shall give their vote. If any
Commission member refused to vote "aye" or "nay" their vote shall be counted as a nay vote,
unless the Commission member has recused themselves due to actual or perceived appearance of
a conflict of interest, which shall be so stated prior to the vote at hand. Abstentions are not
permitted.
D. No member may participate or vote on a matter unless the member has been in attendance at all
public hearings regarding such matter, or has listened to the recording of the public hearing and
reviewed the written record of the matter in question.
E. Election of Officers. Each officer, Chair and Vice Chair, must receive a majority vote of the
Commission in order to be elected to the position. Voting may be taken by paper ballot.
n bstcnt ons a of .. m ttc
Resolution 12 006 Adopting Planning Commission Rules of Procedure Page 3 of 10
3108. Meetings
A. A. There shall be at least one regular meeting each month with additional meetings
scheduled as necessary, except when cancelled as noted below. Regular meetings shall be
scheduled on the 2nd ad and 4th Thursdays of the month, commencing at 6:00 p.m. and ending not
later than 9:00 p.m. Meeting ending time maye-ai be extended by a majority vote of the
Commission. Meetings may be used for general planning matters, study sessions or public
hearings as described below.
1. Meetings on General Planning Matters. General planning matters to be reviewed
by the Commission will typically be preceded by a study session of the Commission to
discuss the issues with Community and Economic Public Works Development
DepartmentCity staff. Generally, no testimony from the public shall be taken at a study
session.
2. 2. Public Hearing Meeting. A public hearing is a meeting to provideermit the
public an opportunity to comment or give testimony on a proposed action OM items
wherein general business and public hearing items, such as the Comprehensive Plan, or
and development regulations arc discussed and decided. The Commission may deliberate
upon the item immediately after the hearing, or during another scheduled meeting(s).
3. 3. Scheduled meetings may be canceled or convened at other times if deemed
necessary by the Chair or, in the absence of the Chair, by the Vice -Chair. Notice of
cancellation shall be given personally to Commission members, and to the public by
posting a notice at City Hall and on the City's website.
4. 4-The recommended order of business for meetings is:
a. Call to order by Chair.
b. Pledge of Allegiance.
c. Roll call by Secretary.
d. Approval of Agenda.
e. Approval of minutes.
f. Commission member reports.
g. Administrative reports.
4h. Public comment.
gi. Commission business.
Ncw bu ines-
j. For the good of the order.
Mk. Adjournment.
Resolution 12 006 Adopting Planning Commission Rules of Procedure Page 4 of 10
B. B. Commission meetings shall be held pursuant toin accordance with the requirements of the
Open Public Meetings Act, RCW Cchapter 42.30 RCW.
C. C. Special meetings and study sessions may be called:
1. 1. By the request of the Chair, or, in the Chair's absence, by the Vice Chair.
1.2—By athe written or verbal request to the Chair, or in the Chair's absence, to the Vice -
Chair, or by a ef thrcomaj ority of the members of the Commission, or City staff.
2. 3—By approvedagfe-e-d motion of the Commission.
3. 4—Notice of a special meeting shall be provided as required uftdefpursuant to RCW chapter
42.30.080 RCW, including posting notice of such meeting at least 24 hours before the time of
such meeting as specified in the notice.
1101. -Conduct of Hearings
A. Actions for a Commission Public Hearing.
1. —Prior to the start of the public hearing, the Chair may require that all persons wishing to
be heard sign in with the Secretary, giving their name,s and addressescity of residence, the
agenda item, and whether they wish to speak as proponent, opponent, or otherwise. Any
person who fails to sign in shall wait to speak until all those who have signed in have had an
opportunity to speak; and when they speak at the hearing, shall give their name and city of
residence. At any public hearing, persons who have signed in and wish to be heard shall be
given an opportunity to be heard. The Chair, subject to concurrence by the majority of the
Commission, may establish time limits and otherwise control presentations. Such limits shall
be established and announced prior to beginning the hearing. The Chair may change the
order of speakers so that testimony is heard in the most logical groupings, (i.e., proponents,
opponents, adjacent owners, vested interests, etc.).
2. BThe Chair shall introduce each agenda item, open each public hearing, and announce the
following Rules of Order:
a. 1 All public comments by proponents, opponents, or the public shall be made from
the speaker's rostrumpodium and; shall be directed to the Commission., and aAny
individual making comments shall first give his/hertheir name and city of
residenceaddress. This is required because an official recorded transcript of the public
hearing is being made.
2. It is not necessary to be a proponent or opponent in order to speak. Those
who are neither a proponent nor an opponent, should
b. If you consider yourself neither a proponent nor opponent, please speak during the
proponent portion and indicate that they are identify yourself as neither a proponent nor
an opponent.
c. No comments shall be made from any other location, and anyone making "out of
order" comments shall be subject to removal from the meeting as allowed by law.
d. 4. We ask that there be no demonstrations, applause or other audience participation
during or at the conclusion of anyone's presentation. It is distracting to the Commission
and takes time away from the speakersperson who is testifying.persons testifying.
e. 5. Please limit your testimony to three minutes. (unless a majority of the
Commission agrees to allow the Chair to extend time)thrcc minutcs[thc time period
established for testimony].
Resolution 12 006 Adopting Planning Commission Rules of Procedure Page 5 of 10
f. 6. These rules are intended to promote an orderly system of holding a public
hearing and to give persons all that wish to speak an opportunity to be heard.
B. C. When the Commission conducts a hearing to which the Appearance of
Fairness Doctrine applies, the the Chair (or in the abscncc or the Chair of
�B.
have:
All Commission members should now give consideration as to whether they
1. A demonstrated bias or prejudice for or against any party to the proceedings;
2. A direct or indirect financial interest in the outcome of the proceeding;
3. A prejudgment of the issue prior to hearing the facts on the record, or
4. Had ex parte contact with any individual, excluding staff, with regard to an issue prior to the
hearing. Please refer to Section 146(B) for more specific information on how to proceed
where there has been an ex parte communication.
If any Commission member should determine that items (C)(1-4) should apply to them, they
answer in the affirmative, then the Commission members should state the reason for his/her
answer so that the Chair may inquire of staff as to whether there is a conflict of interest pursuant
toas pera violation of the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine exists.consult with a member of the
legal staff, prior to the meeting, to determine if a conflict of interest violation exists pursuant to
the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine. If such a violation or a perception of a violation exists, the
Commissioner should recuse themselves.
DC. CONDUCTING THE PUBLIC HEARINGConducting the Public Hearing
1. The Chair will announce the matter and open the public hearing, stating the date and time.
2. The Chair will allow staff to describe the matter under consideration and place the issue and
any documents matters into the public record.
3. The Chair will inquire as to whether Commission members have any questions of staff. If any
Commission member has questions, the appropriate individual will be recalled.
4. The Chair will allow proponents, opponents and the public to offer testimony and evidence
on the pending matter. The Chair may allow Commission members to ask questions of any
person at the conclusion of their testimony.
5. At the conclusion of the public testimony, the Chair maywill ask staff if there is any
additional information, testimony or evidence to submit for the record.
6. The Chair will then either close or continue the public hearing and state the time for the
record.- Additional testimony may not be requested or considered after the closing of the
public hearing, however, the Chair may declare that the public hearing will remain open -until
a date certain for the purpose of receiving written testimony or materials.
7. The Chair will inquire if there is a motion by any Commission member. If a motion is made,
it shall be in the form of an affirmative motion. Affirmative motions are preferred to prevent
"approval by default" of a failed negative motion. Following the motion and its second,
discussion will occur among Commission members.
8. The Chair will inquire if there is any further discussion by the Commission members.
9. The Chair will inquire if there are any final comments or recommendations from staff.
Resolution 12 006 Adopting Planning Commission Rules of Procedure Page 6 of 10
10. The Chair will inquire of the Commission members if they are ready for the question.
11. The Chair will call for the vote on the motion and, following the vote, announce the outcome
of the vote.:
12. The Chair may dircct staff to prcparc findings for approval.
4 12 , D. Pre -filing of testimony or evidence is encouraged and may be delivered to the
Community and Economic DcvclopmcntPublic Works Department or to the Commission
SecretaryCity staff in advance of a hearing.
1420. Agenda, Staff Reports and Minutes for Regular Meetings.
A. Typically, aA copy of the agenda for every regular meeting of the Commission wily be sent
to each member up to seven days prior to the date of the meeting.
B. If available, sStaff reports will be sent to Commission members with the agenda. Agendas and
staff reports will be made available to applicants and the public at the same time.
1143. Minutes and Communications with the City Council.
Minutes of all meetings shall be kept, and the complete files of proceedings and actions taken in
connection therewith shall be considered the public record and filed with the City Clerk.
The Secretary shall provide the Commission members with a set of minutes of the previous meeting.
These minutes shall be considered for approval by the Commission at a regularly scheduled public
meeting and, upon approval, shall become part of the official record of action of the Commission.
Approved and signed minutes shall also be transmitted to the City Clerk. for the City Council.
1234. Recording of Meetings
Whenever possible, proceedings of all public hearings, meetings, study sessions and any special meetings
shall be recorded and retained in accordance with the Washington State Archives Retention Schedule.:
1345. —Statement of Ethics / Code of Conduct
A. A. Statement of Ethics.
A. It is hereby recognized and established that high moral and ethical standards of
Commission members are vital and essential to provide unbiased, open, and honest conduct
within all phases and levels of government; that rules of ethics are helpful in guiding Commission
members to eliminate or prevent actual or perceived conflicts of interest in public office, and to
improve and elevate standards of public service so as to promote and strengthen the confidence,
faith and trust of the people of the City of Spokane Valley in their local government.
B. B. Interests in Contracts Prohibited; Exceptions.
QB. No Commission member shall be beneficially interested, directly or indirectly, in any
contract which may be made by, through, or under the supervision or direction of any City of
Spokane Valley Git-y-employee, in whole or in substantial part, or which may be made for the
benefit of his or her office, or accept, directly or indirectly, any compensation, gratuity or reward
in connection with such contract from any person beneficially interested therein. The foregoing
shall not apply to the exceptions specified in RCW 42.23.030, which are incorporated herein as if
fully set forth.
DC. C. Conflicts of Interest
1. 4—A Conflict of Interest includes:
Resolution 12 006 Adopting Planning Commission Rules of Procedure Page 7 of 10
a. a. Engaging in a transaction or activity which impairs, or would to a reasonable
person appear to impair, the Commission member's independence of judgment or action
in the performance of their official duties;
b. b. A Commission member having a financial or other private or personal interest in
any matter upon which the member is required to act in the discharge of his or her official
duties;
c. c. A "Professional Conflict of Interest" includes any real or perceived conflict of
interest caused by circumstances such as a Commission member's employment, past or
present. Where the Commission member's employer or professional activity is only
tangentially related to a matter before the Commission, recusal need not occur if the
Commission member can reasonably conclude that the connection is; or was remote and
inconsequential.
d. If a Commission member is required to refrain from deliberation or participation by
his/her their employer because of a real or perceived conflict of interest, then the
Commission member will be allowed to recuse or withdraw from that deliberation.
2. —Conflict of Interest Procedure: Every Commission member who has a conflict of interest
shall publicly disclose the conflict at the next Commission meeting after the Commission
member discovers the conflict. If a discovery or determination of a conflict is made during a
Commission meeting, the Commission member shall publicly disclose the conflict at that
time. The nature and extent of such conflict of interest shall be fully disclosed, and a
summary of the same shall be incorporated into the official minutes of the Commission
proceedings.
If a Commission member feels that they cannot be unbiased because of any conflict of interest,
the Commission member shall recuse themselves from further proceedings on the issue. Such
Commission member shall make a public statement disclosing the reasons why the Commission
member believes they are disqualified, and state they are recusing themselves from the issue. The
disqualified Commission member will then leave the Council Chambers until such time as the
issue at hand has been disposed of in the regular course of business. If there are other matters on
the agenda, then the disqualified Commission member must return to the Council Chambers to
participate in the other matters as soon as the Commission ends discussion of the matter in which
the disqualified Commission member has a conflict of interest.
D. D. Other Prohibited Acts. Commission members are prohibited from:
1. Acting in a manner which would result in neglect of duty, misfeasance or malfeasance in
office.
2. 2 Acting in a manner that intentionally disrupts Commission meetings.
3. 3. Missing thrcc or morc consecutive, regularly scheduled mcctings or study sessions.'
Resolution 12 006 Adopting Planning Commission Rules of Procedure Page 8 of 10
a conflict ofintcrest
3.4—Using his or hcrtheir position to secure special privileges or exemptions for himself,
herself,themselves or others.
44k4. 5. Directly or indirectly receiving, accepting, taking, seeking, or soliciting anything
of economic value regardless of the amount, as a gift, gratuity, or favor.
4 5. 6. Engaging in or accepting private employment or rendering services for any
person or engaging in any business or professional activity when such employment, service
or activity is incompatible with the proper and faithful discharge of his/kertheir official duties
as a Commission member, or when it would require or induce the Commission member to
disclose confidential information acquired by reason of such official position.
4 6. 7. Disclosing confidential information gained by reason of ertheir
membership on the Commission or using such information for his or hcrtheir personal gain or
benefit.
4-7. 8. Engaging in any meeting that violates the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA).
The OPMA strictly forbids any meeting of a quorum of the Commission during which any
City business is discussed. The OPMA provides that Commissioners may:
a. a. meet informally in less than a quorum and discuss City business, and
b. b.meet in a quorum if City business is not discussed.
However, Commissioners are encouraged to be mindful that such meetings risk creating the
appearance of a violation of the OPMA and such meetings should be avoided.
1456. Appearance of Fairness
A. A. The Commission shall adhere to the applicable requirements of the Appearance of
Fairness Doctrine, RCW Cchapter 42.36 RCW.
B. B. During the pendency of any quasi-judicial proceeding, no Commission member may
engage in ex parte communications with proponents or opponents about any proposal involved in
the pending proceeding, unless the Commission member::
1. 4—The Commission member places on the record the substance of such oral or written
communications; and
2. —The Commission member provides4 that a public announcement of the content of the
communication and of the parties' right to rebut the substance of the communication shall be
made at each hearing where action is taken or considered on the subject. This does not
Resolution 12 006 Adopting Planning Commission Rules of Procedure Page 9 of 10
prohibit correspondence between a citizen and Commission members if the correspondence is
made part of the record, when it pertains to the subject matter of a quasi-judicial proceeding.
(RCW 42.36.060)
1567. Review of These Rules of Procedure
The Commission shall review these rules of procedure on the first anniversary of their adoption and the
every odd numbcrcdthree years thereafter. Proposed changes upon the recommendation of the City
Attorney may be brought forward as appropriate. Any amendments identified by the Commission or the
City Attorney shall be forwarded to the City Council for review and ratification.
Resolution 12 006 Adopting Planning Commission Rules of Procedure Page 10 of 10
DRAFT
City of Spokane Valley
Planning Commission Rules of Procedure
Adopted by Planning Commission 5-28-2003; and Amended 6-25-2003
Adopted by Council Resolution 10-004, Dated 2-09-2010
Adopted by Council Resolution 11-010, Dated 11-29-2011
Adopted by Council Resolution 12-006, Dated 10-30-2012
Adopted by Council Resolution 20 , Dated
On January 9, 2020, these Rules of Procedure were adopted by the Planning Commission, pending
approval of City Council.
ORGANIZATION AND RULES OF PROCEDURE
1. Name
The "City of Spokane Valley Planning Commission," hereinafter referred to as the "Commission" is an
advisory body created by the City Council for purposes consistent with chapter 18.10 of the Spokane
Valley Municipal Code (SVMC).
2. Location
The Commission meetings shall be held at the City Hall of the City of Spokane Valley, unless otherwise
identified in the notice of meeting.
3. Officers
A. Unless otherwise required by a vacancy in office, the Commission shall organize every year in
accordance with chapter 18.10 SVMC.
B. Officers of the Commission shall be elected from its membership; the officers shall be Chair and
Vice Chair.
C. Commission members must have served at least one full calendar year to be eligible to be elected
as an Officer.
D. The Chair shall preside over the Commission meetings and exercise all powers incidental to the
office, retaining however, the full right as a member of the Commission to propose motions,
second motions, and have a vote recorded on all matters of the Commission.
E. In the absence of the Chair from any meeting, the Vice -Chair shall perform all the duties
incumbent upon the Chair, and retain the full right as a member of the Commission in the same
manner as the Chair.
4. Secretary of the Commission
A. The City Manager shall assign a Secretary to the Commission.
B. The Secretary shall provide for a recording of all Commission meetings, including public
hearings, and shall ensure that summary minutes of all public hearings and meetings are prepared,
approved, and filed in the public record.
Page 1 of 8
DRAFT
C. The Secretary shall conduct and record a roll call of the Commission members at each meeting,
public hearing and study session.
5. Attendance:
A. Excused Absences: Members of the Commission may be excused from meetings with
notification to the Chair, Vice Chair, Secretary or Building Official, prior to the meeting,
and by stating the reason for the inability to attend. Following or prior to roll call, the
Presiding Officer shall inform the Commission of the member's absence, and inquire if
there is a consent motion to excuse the member. The motion shall be non -debatable.
Upon consent by a majority of members present, the absent member shall be considered
excused and the Secretary shall make an appropriate notation in the minutes.
B. Unexcused Absences: A Commissioner's responsibility to attend Commission meetings
should not be taken lightly, nor should a decision to remove a Commissioner for missing
meetings. As soon as possible after two consecutive unexcused absences, and prior to a
third consecutive unexcused absence, the absent Commissioner must request a leave of
absence if they desire to remain on the Commission. At a third consecutive meeting
where a Commissioner is not excused and there has been no request for a leave of
absence, the absent Commissioner's seat shall be forfeited effective immediately.
C. Leave of Absence:
1. A Commissioner whose serious health or physical condition would prevent them from
performing the duties of the Planning Commission may ask to be placed on a leave of
absence under the following conditions:
2. Such serious health or physical condition must be certified in writing by a medical
physician.
3. The request for a leave of absence shall be in writing, and hand -delivered or mailed to the
Secretary of the Commission or Building Official at least one week prior to the date when
such leave would commence.
4. The request for a leave of absence must state the anticipated date the Commissioner will
resume their duties.
5. By majority vote of the whole Commission, a leave of absence shall be granted as
follows:
6. The absence shall not exceed 90 days from the date the motion is passed by Commission;
7. At the end of the 90-day leave of absence, the absent Commissioner shall either:
a. Return to normal Commission duties commencing with the first Thursday meeting
following the end of the 90-day leave; or
b. Submit a letter of resignation to the Secretary of the Commission.
A leave of absence may only be granted twice during a Commissioner's three-year term, with no
less than six months between each request. Upon approval of a leave of absence, the absent
Commissioner shall not be replaced with a pro-tem Commissioner during the absence.
6. Election of Officers
A. Officers shall be elected at the first regular meeting in January of each year, by majority vote of
the membership of the Commission. Terms of office shall run from the first January meeting
until December 31, or until a successor has been elected. No Commission member shall serve
Page 2 of 8
DRAFT
more than two full consecutive terms as Chair of the Commission. No Commission member shall
serve as Vice -Chair for more than two full consecutive terms.
B. In the event that the Commission has no sitting Chair at the first regular meeting in January, the
Vice -Chair will preside over the Commission until officers are elected. If at the first regular
meeting in January, both the Chair and Vice -Chair are no longer Commission members, the
Secretary will preside over the meeting until Officers are elected.
C. A vacancy in either the Chair or Vice -Chair shall be filled by a special election, to be held at a
convenient time with a majority present. In the event that the office of Chair is vacated, the Vice -
Chair shall serve in that capacity until the required special election is held. No member can hold
two office positions concurrently.
7. Rules of Order
The Secretary shall serve as the official parliamentarian for all meetings and shall keep a copy of the
current "Robert's Rules of Order" in the Council Chambers during Commission meetings. Robert's
Rules of Order shall govern the conduct of all public meetings of the Commission except when they
conflict with these Rules of Procedure.
8. Quorum
A quorum shall consist of a majority of the Commission and no action can be taken in the absence of a
quorum except to adjourn the meeting to a subsequent date. A quorum must be present for all meetings.
9. Voting
A. The affirmative vote of a majority of those present shall be necessary for the adoption of any
motion or other general matter.
B. For the conduct of business dealing with the adoption or changes to the City's Comprehensive
Plan, at least four affirmative votes must be cast. No proxy shall be allowed.
C. Commission members present when the question was called shall give their vote. If any
Commission member refused to vote "aye" or "nay" their vote shall be counted as a nay vote,
unless the Commission member has recused themselves due to actual or perceived appearance of
a conflict of interest, which shall be so stated prior to the vote at hand. Abstentions are not
permitted.
D. No member may participate or vote on a matter unless the member has been in attendance at all
public hearings regarding such matter, or has listened to the recording of the public hearing and
reviewed the written record of the matter in question.
E. Election of Officers. Each officer, Chair and Vice Chair, must receive a majority vote of the
Commission in order to be elected to the position. Voting may be taken by paper ballot.
10. Meetings
A. There shall be at least one regular meeting each month with additional meetings scheduled as
necessary, except when cancelled as noted below. Regular meetings shall be scheduled on the 2" d
and 4th Thursdays of the month, commencing at 6:00 p.m. and ending not later than 9:00 p.m.
Meeting ending time may be extended by a majority vote of the Commission. Meetings may be
used for general planning matters, study sessions or public hearings as described below.
1. Meetings on General Planning Matters. General planning matters to be reviewed by the
Commission will typically be preceded by a study session of the Commission to discuss
the issues with City staff. Generally, no testimony from the public shall be taken at a
study session.
Page 3 of 8
DRAFT
2. Public Hearing Meeting. A public hearing is a meeting to provide the public an
opportunity to comment or give testimony on a proposed action or items such as the
Comprehensive Plan, or development regulations. The Commission may deliberate upon
the item immediately after the hearing, or during another scheduled meeting(s).
3. Scheduled meetings may be canceled or convened at other times if deemed necessary by
the Chair or, in the absence of the Chair, by the Vice -Chair. Notice of cancellation shall
be given to Commission members, and to the public by posting a notice at City Hall and
on the City's website.
4. The recommended order of business for meetings is:
a. Call to order by Chair.
b. Pledge of Allegiance.
c. Roll call by Secretary.
d. Approval of Agenda.
e. Approval of minutes.
f. Commission member reports.
g. Administrative reports.
h. Public comment.
i. Commission business.
j. For the good of the order.
k. Adjournment.
B. Commission meetings shall be held pursuant to the Open Public Meetings Act, chapter 42.30
RCW.
C. Special meetings may be called:
1. By a written or verbal request to the Chair, or in the Chair's absence, to the Vice -Chair, or by
a majority of the members of the Commission, or City staff.
2. By approved motion of the Commission.
3. Notice of a special meeting shall be provided as required pursuant to chapter 42.30.080
RCW, including posting notice of such meeting at least 24 hours before the time of such
meeting as specified in the notice.
11. Conduct of Hearings
A. Actions for a Commission Public Hearing.
1. Prior to the start of the public hearing, the Chair may require that all persons wishing to be
heard sign in with the Secretary, giving their name, city of residence, the agenda item, and
whether they wish to speak as proponent, opponent, or otherwise. Any person who fails to
sign in shall wait to speak until all those who have signed in have had an opportunity to
speak; and when they speak at the hearing, shall give their name and city of residence. The
Chair, subject to concurrence by the majority of the Commission, may establish time limits
and otherwise control presentations. Such limits shall be established and announced prior to
beginning the hearing. The Chair may change the order of speakers so that testimony is heard
in the most logical groupings, (i.e., proponents, opponents, adjacent owners, vested interests,
etc.).
Page 4 of 8
DRAFT
2. The Chair shall introduce each agenda item, open each public hearing, and announce the
following Rules of Order:
a. All public comments shall be made from the speaker's podium and shall be directed to the
Commission. Any individual making comments shall first give their name and city of
residence. This is required because an official recorded transcript of the public hearing is
being made.
b. It is not necessary to be a proponent or opponent in order to speak. Those who are
neither a proponent nor an opponent, should speak during the proponent portion and
indicate that they are neither a proponent nor an opponent.
c. No comments shall be made from any other location, and anyone making "out of order"
comments shall be subject to removal from the meeting as allowed by law.
d. We ask that there be no demonstrations, applause or other audience participation during
or at the conclusion of anyone's presentation. It is distracting to the Commission and
takes time away from the person who is testifying..
e. Please limit your testimony to three minutes. (unless a majority of the Commission agrees
to allow the Chair to extend time)
f. These rules are intended to promote an orderly system of holding a public hearing and to
give all that wish to speak an opportunity to be heard.
B. When the Commission conducts a hearing to which the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine
applies, the Commission members should give consideration as to whether they have:
1. A demonstrated bias or prejudice for or against any party to the proceedings;
2. A direct or indirect financial interest in the outcome of the proceeding;
3. A prejudgment of the issue prior to hearing the facts on the record, or
4. Had ex parte contact with any individual, excluding staff, with regard to an issue prior to the
hearing. Please refer to Section 16(B) for more specific information on how to proceed
where there has been an ex parte communication.
If any Commission member should determine that items (C)(1-4) should apply to them, they
should consult with a member of the legal staff, prior to the meeting, to determine if a conflict of
interest violation exists pursuant to the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine. If such a violation or a
perception of a violation exists, the Commissioner should recuse themselves.
C. Conducting the Public Hearing
1. The Chair will announce the matter and open the public hearing, stating the time.
2. The Chair will allow staff to describe the matter under consideration and place the issue and
any documents into the public record.
3. The Chair will inquire as to whether Commission members have any questions of staff. If any
Commission member has questions, the appropriate individual will be recalled.
4. The Chair will allow proponents, opponents and the public to offer testimony and evidence
on the pending matter. The Chair may allow Commission members to ask questions of any
person at the conclusion of their testimony.
5. At the conclusion of the public testimony, the Chair may ask staff if there is any additional
information, testimony or evidence to submit for the record.
Page 5 of 8
DRAFT
6. The Chair will then either close or continue the public hearing and state the time for the
record. Additional testimony may not be requested or considered after the closing of the
public hearing, however, the Chair may declare that the public hearing will remain open until
a date certain for the purpose of receiving written testimony or materials.
7. The Chair will inquire if there is a motion by any Commission member. If a motion is made,
it shall be in the form of an affirmative motion. Affirmative motions are preferred to prevent
"approval by default" of a failed negative motion. Following the motion and its second,
discussion will occur among Commission members.
8. The Chair will inquire if there is any further discussion by the Commission members.
9. The Chair will inquire if there are any final comments or recommendations from staff.
10. The Chair will inquire of the Commission members if they are ready for the question.
11. The Chair will call for the vote on the motion and, following the vote, announce the outcome
of the vote.
12. Pre -filing of testimony or evidence is encouraged and may be delivered to City staff in
advance of a hearing.
12. Agenda, Staff Reports and Minutes for Regular Meetings.
A. A copy of the agenda for every regular meeting of the Commission will be sent to each member
up to seven days prior to the date of the meeting.
B. Staff reports will be sent to Commission members with the agenda. Agendas and staff reports
will be made available to applicants and the public at the same time.
13. Minutes and Communications with the City Council.
Minutes of all meetings shall be kept, and the complete files of proceedings and actions taken in
connection therewith shall be considered the public record and filed with the City Clerk.
The Secretary shall provide the Commission members with a set of minutes of the previous meeting.
These minutes shall be considered for approval by the Commission at a regularly scheduled public
meeting and upon approval, shall become part of the official record of action of the Commission.
Approved and signed minutes shall also be transmitted to the City Clerk.
14. Recording of Meetings
Whenever possible, proceedings of all public hearings, meetings, study sessions and any special meeting
shall be recorded and retained in accordance with the Washington State Archives Retention Schedule.
15. Statement of Ethics / Code of Conduct
A. Statement of Ethics. It is hereby recognized and established that high moral and ethical
standards of Commission members are vital and essential to provide unbiased, open, and honest
conduct within all phases and levels of government; that rules of ethics are helpful in guiding
Commission members to eliminate or prevent actual or perceived conflicts of interest in public
office, and to improve and elevate standards of public service so as to promote and strengthen the
confidence, faith and trust of the people of the City of Spokane Valley in their local government.
B. Interests in Contracts Prohibited; Exceptions. No Commission member shall be beneficially
interested, directly or indirectly, in any contract which may be made by, through, or under the
supervision or direction of any City of Spokane Valley employee, in whole or in substantial part,
or which may be made for the benefit of his or her office, or accept, directly or indirectly, any
compensation, gratuity or reward in connection with such contract from any person beneficially
Page 6 of 8
DRAFT
interested therein. The foregoing shall not apply to the exceptions specified in RCW 42.23.030,
which are incorporated herein as if fully set forth.
C. Conflicts of Interest
1. A Conflict of Interest includes:
a. Engaging in a transaction or activity which impairs, or would to a reasonable person
appear to impair, the Commission member's independence of judgment or action in the
performance of their official duties;
b. A Commission member having a financial or other private or personal interest in any
matter upon which the member is required to act in the discharge of his or her official
duties;
c. A "Professional Conflict of Interest" includes any real or perceived conflict of interest
caused by circumstances such as a Commission member's employment, past or present.
Where the Commission member's employer or professional activity is only tangentially
related to a matter before the Commission, recusal need not occur if the Commission
member can reasonably conclude that the connection is or was remote and
inconsequential.
d. If a Commission member is required to refrain from deliberation or participation by their
employer because of a real or perceived conflict of interest, then the Commission
member will be allowed to recuse or withdraw from that deliberation.
2. Conflict of Interest Procedure: Every Commission member who has a conflict of interest
shall publicly disclose the conflict at the next Commission meeting after the Commission
member discovers the conflict. If a discovery or determination of a conflict is made during a
Commission meeting, the Commission member shall publicly disclose the conflict at that
time. The nature and extent of such conflict of interest shall be fully disclosed, and a
summary of the same shall be incorporated into the official minutes of the Commission
proceedings.
If a Commission member feels that they cannot be unbiased because of any conflict of interest,
the Commission member shall recuse themselves from further proceedings on the issue. Such
Commission member shall make a public statement disclosing the reasons why the Commission
member believes they are disqualified, and state they are recusing themselves from the issue. The
disqualified Commission member will then leave the Council Chambers until such time as the
issue at hand has been disposed of in the regular course of business. If there are other matters on
the agenda, then the disqualified Commission member must return to the Council Chambers to
participate in the other matters as soon as the Commission ends discussion of the matter in which
the disqualified Commission member has a conflict of interest.
D. Other Prohibited Acts. Commission members are prohibited from:
1. Acting in a manner which would result in neglect of duty, misfeasance or malfeasance in
office.
2. Acting in a manner that intentionally disrupts Commission meetings.
3. Using their position to secure special privileges or exemptions for themselves or others.
4. Directly or indirectly receiving, accepting, taking, seeking, or soliciting anything of economic
value regardless of the amount, as a gift, gratuity, or favor.
5. Engaging in or accepting private employment or rendering services for any person or
engaging in any business or professional activity when such employment, service or activity
Page 7 of 8
DRAFT
is incompatible with the proper and faithful discharge of their official duties as a Commission
member, or when it would require or induce the Commission member to disclose confidential
information acquired by reason of such official position.
6. Disclosing confidential information gained by reason of their membership on the
Commission or using such information for their personal gain or benefit.
7. Engaging in any meeting that violates the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA). The OPMA
strictly forbids any meeting of a quorum of the Commission during which any City business
is discussed. The OPMA provides that Commissioners may:
a. meet informally in less than a quorum and discuss City business, and
b. meet in a quorum if City business is not discussed.
However, Commissioners are encouraged to be mindful that such meetings risk creating the
appearance of a violation of the OPMA and such meetings should be avoided.
16. Appearance of Fairness
A. The Commission shall adhere to the applicable requirements of the Appearance of Fairness
Doctrine, chapter 42.36 RCW.
B. During the pendency of any quasi-judicial proceeding, no Commission member may engage in ex
parte communications with proponents or opponents about any proposal involved in the pending
proceeding, unless::
1. The Commission member places on the record the substance of such oral or written
communications; and
2. The Commission member provides a public announcement of the content of the
communication and of the parties' right to rebut the substance of the communication at each
hearing where action is taken or considered on the subject. This does not prohibit
correspondence between a citizen and Commission members if the correspondence is made
part of the record, when it pertains to the subject matter of a quasi-judicial proceeding.
(RCW 42.36.060)
17. Review of These Rules of Procedure
The Commission shall review these rules of procedure on the first anniversary of their adoption and every
three years thereafter. Proposed changes upon the recommendation of the City Attorney may be brought
forward as appropriate. Any amendments identified by the Commission or the City Attorney shall be
forwarded to the City Council for review and ratification.
Page 8 of 8
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: March 17, 2020 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative Report — Tree City USA Discussion
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: N/A
BACKGROUND: The City Council is interested in learning about the Tree City USA program.
Staff will present a discussion on the program and its requirements. The Tree City USA
program has been greening up cities and towns across America since 1976. It is a nationwide
movement that provides the framework necessary for communities to manage and expand their
public trees. More than 3,400 communities have made the commitment to becoming a Tree
City USA. They have achieved Tree City USA status by meeting four core standards of sound
urban forestry management.
The Tree City USA program provides direction, assistance and national recognition for
communities. It's the framework for a healthy, sustainable urban forestry program. Staff will
explain the program and discuss the four core standards required to achieve Tree City USA
status.
OPTIONS: (1) Council discussion; or (2) take other action as appropriate
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: N/A
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The financial impact will be the expenditure of $2 per capita
annual towards urban forestry activities, programs, etc. This amount is estimated to be
approximately $193,440 each year in order to be eligible for the program.
STAFF CONTACT: Michael D. Stone, Parks and Recreation Director
ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint Presentation
City of Spokane Valley
Tree City USA Requirements
Why Become a Tree City USA Community
• Reduce costs for energy, stormwater management, and
erosion control
• Cut energy consumption by up to 25%
• Boost property values across the community
• Build stronger ties to our neighborhoods and community
• Honor our community and demonstrate our commitment
to a healthier environment through Arbor Day celebrations
• Use the framework for action provided by the four core
standards as a way to begin caring for city trees
• Educate people living in our city about the value of trees
• Increase community pride
• Gain publicity with recognition materials
2
Eligibility Requirements to be Named a
Tree City USA
• A department or tree board
• A tree care ordinance
• A community forestry program with an annual
budget of at least $2 per capita
• An Arbor Day proclamation and observance
Process to Become a Tree City USA
• Meet all four criteria
• Apply for status
• Designation is for one year
• Status requires an annual renewal application
Standard 1: A Department or Tree Board
• Larger cities usually have a department or other
government official that is responsible for tree
care
• An alternative to a city department would be the
creation of a tree board
o Includes citizens and business owners
o Creates awareness and support for better
tree care
Standard 2: A Tree Care Ordinance
• A public tree ordinance encourages beautification,
air cooling and purification, noise abatement,
property value enhancement, and many other
attributes
• Also enables city government to prevent and
control destructive insects and diseases, avoid
unnecessary costs and liability from hazardous trees
and tree -related accidents and protects residents
from unscrupulous or careless operators
• Important tool for proper tree care — delegating
authority to a department or board and establishing
protection and regulation for public trees
Standard 3: Community Forestry Programs
with an Annual Budget of at Least $2 Per Capita
• COSV population is approximately 96,720
• A total expenditure of $193,440 would be needed to
meet eligibility requirements
• Funding Sources:
o City budget, grants, donations, utilities, etc.
o In 2020: the City plans to commit $192,000
including:
o Avista (A Tree Line Utility) does line clearing
within our City — estimated to be $41,000 in 2020
o COSV will spend an estimated $151,000 on public
tree care and related activities
7
Standard 4: An Arbor Day Proclamation
and Observance
• Mayor and City Council issue an Arbor Day
Proclamation
• Parks and Recreation create and host a community
Arbor Day Celebration
o Involve community, school, utility, fire and
environmental friendly organizations
o Encourage awareness and education on trees,
conservation and our natural environment
o Tree planting ceremony
Recommendations
• Designate a city department to oversee and manage the
City's urban forest
o Parks and Recreation or Community and Public Works
• Draft simple ordinance outlining the process for managing
the urban forest
• Continue to have an Arbor Day celebration and
proclamation
• Hire consultant to develop a forestry management plan
o Define priorities
o Define costs
• Track annual expenditures
• Submit application in late 2020 to become a Tree City USA
9
DATE: Saturday, April 18, 2020
To:
From:
Re:
DRAFT
ADVANCE AGENDA
as of March 12, 2020; 10:25 a.m.
Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative
Council & Staff
City Clerk, by direction of City Manager
Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings
March 24, 2020, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue March 171
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes)
2. First Reading Ordinance 20-003 Code Text Amendment, Fencing Regulations— Jenny Nickerson (10 mins)
3. Resolution 20-003 Adopting Planning Commission Rules of Procedure — Jenny Nickerson
4. Resolution 20-004 Authorizing Submittal of RCO Grant Application — Mike Stone
5. Motion Consideration: Bid Award, Sullivan ITS Project — Gloria Mantz
6. Motion Consideration: Mayoral Appointment, Human Rights Task Force — Mayor Wick
7. Admin Report: Electrical Inspections — Jenny Nickerson
8. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
9. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting 55 mins]
March 31, 2020, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
ACTION ITEMS:
1. Motion Consideration: Bid Award, Adams Sidewalk Project — Bill Helbig
2. Motion Consideration: Bid Award, Ella/Conklin Project — Bill Helbig
3. Motion Consideration: Bid Award, Indiana Avenue Preservation — Bill Helbig
4. Second Reading Ordinance 20-003 Code Text Amendment Fencing Regulations
NON -ACTION ITEMS:
5. Street Vacation 2019-0005 — Lori Barlow
6. End of Legislative Session Wrap-up — Briahna Murray
7. Advance Agenda
April 7, 2020, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. Urban County CDBG Requalification — Chaz Bates
2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
[due Tue March 24]
(10 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
— Jenny Nickerson(10 min)
(10 minutes)
(45 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting 95 mins]
[due Tue March 311
(20 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting 25 mins]
April 14, 2020, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue April 7]
Proclamation: National Arbor Day
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes)
2. First Reading Ordinance Street Vacation 2019-0005 — Lori Barlow (10 minutes)
3. Motion Consideration: Urban County Requalification CDBG Consortium Participation — C Bates (10 min)
4. Mayoral Appointment: Re -appoint Citizen to TPA — Mayor Wick (5 minutes)
5. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick (5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting 35 mins]
April 21, 2020, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. Police Department Quarterly Report — Mark Werner
2. New Employee Report — John Whitehead
3. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
April 28, 2020, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m.
Proclamation: Older Americans' Month
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. First Reading Ordinance Street Vacation 2019-0005 — Lori Barlow
[due Tue April 14]
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[due Tue April 211
(5 minutes)
(10 minutes)
Draft Advance Agenda 3/12/2020 10:58:37 AM
Page 1 of 2
3. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
4. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
May 5, 2020, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
May 12, 2020, Formal Meetin2 Format, 6:00 p.m.
Proclamation: Lemonade Day
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
Mav 19 2020, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
May 26, 2020, Formal Meetin2 Format, 6:00 p.m.
1. PUBLIC HEARING: 2021-2026 TIP (tentative)
2. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
3. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
4. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
June 2, 2020, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
June 9, 2020, Formal Meetin2 Format, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
June 16, 2020, Special Meetin2: 2021 Budget Workshop; 8:30 a.m.
June 16, 2020, Study Session, 6:00 p.m. meeting cancelled due to budget workshop
June 23, 2020, Formal Meetin2 Format, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
*time for public or Council comments not included
OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS:
Aging & Long Term Care Update
Appleway Trail Amenities
Artwork & Metal Boxes
CenterPlace Roof Replacement Bid Award
Donation Recognition
Fee Resolution Cost of Service Analysis
Graffiti
Health District Re SV Stats
Mirabeau Park Forestry Mgmt.
Naming City Facilities Protocol
New Employee Rpt (Jan, April, July, Oct)
Park Lighting
PFD Presentation
Police Dept. Qtr. Rpt (Jan, April, July, Oct)
SPEC Report/Update
St. Illumination (owners, cost, location)
St. O&M Pavement Preservation
Trunk or Treat
Utility Facilities in ROW
Vaping
Water Districts & Green Space
Way Finding Signs
(5 minutes)
[due Tue April 28
(5 minutes)
[due Tue Mav 51
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[due Tue Mav 121
(5 minutes)
[due Tue May 191
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[due Tue May 261
(5 minutes)
[due Tue June 21
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[due Tue June 9]
[due Tue June 161
(5 minutes)
Draft Advance Agenda 3/12/2020 10:58:37 AM Page 2 of 2
Spokane
�� Valley
Customer Service Survey Report
4th Quarter 2019
In an effort to better serve our citizens and customers, the City has instituted a customer service survey
for City Hall. Surveys were made available to those who have visited City Hall as well as those who have
applied for a permit in person or online.
Methods utilized for sending out surveys:
1. Electronic surveys sent to email addresses collected from City Hall sign -in sheet and permit
applications.
2. Paper surveys mailed to permit applicants.
3. Paper surveys handed out at City Hall front counter.
Please note:
1. The number of permits issued does not directly relate to the number of surveys sent out. This is
because a number of contractors and service companies pull multiple permits on a regular basis,
and for those contractors it was determined to only send one survey per contractor or company.
However, quarterly, the contractors will be sent a survey to continue to assess their experience
over time.
2. Spokane Valley Fire Department issues the SVFD (sprinkler system) permits so the contractors
pulling these permits were not sent surveys. In addition, ROW (right-of-way) permits were not
included since they are primarily pulled by utility companies.
3. Mailed paper surveys were sent with a self-addressed, stamped envelope for return.
Results
Total Number of Surveys sent out and returned
Paper Surveys
Electronic Surveys
Totals
Number sent out
155
2068
2223
Number returned
8
226
234
Returned as undeliverable by the USPS
18
-
18
Survey Responses
Reason for visit
Mailed
Emailed
General Information
1
2
Meeting
0
1
Code Enforcement
2
2
Commercial Permit
1
1
Residential Permit
5
9
Land Use/Planning
0
6
Development Engineering
0
1
Other
1
8
The number of survey responses does
not correlate to the number of visit
reasons since some respondents choose
multiple reasons for their visit.
Page 1 of 3
Excellent
Fair
Poor
Reception staff was friendly and courteous
34
1
0
Staff were available to assist me
35
1
0
Staff were helpful, knowledgeable, and professional
33
3
0
Staff provided clear information
31
2
1
Resources were available to address my needs
33
3
1
I am satisfied with the service provided
30
5
1
Customer Comments:
What did you like about the service provided?
The total number of survey
responses received does not
correspond with the numbers in
this chart since respondents did
not always select only one
response choice or choose to
only answer a few questions.
• Finding out about builders credentials easily
• Quick and efficient
• Not so much.
• WEBSITE EASY TO NAVIGATE
• friendly and service oriented
• all of the above
• Everyone is always concise and knowledgeable every time I stop in to get questions
answered
• Ease of use and availability of resources
• Fast and efficient...supervisor was available...maybe I got lucky...
• Friendly
• I had a pleasant interview
• quick in & out
• I was only in to pick up a permit, but it was fast.
• Friendly, quick and successful.
• Promptly addressed my needs
• Everyone i delt with was fast, helpful and friendly
• Employees are professional, knowledgeable, and helpful.
• Quick
• My experience working with Spokane Valley so far has been great. Far easier to work with
than many other jurisdictions in my experience.
• All
• The friendliness in the person at the front desk —she was a good face for our city
government
How can we improve our service?
• Shorten the length of time it takes to get permit once its applied for....
considering the city permits are issued right away (from what my builder told me)
• Staff needs to be informed about city projects.
• ???
Page 2 of 3
• haven't had a downexperience yet so don't know yet
• Have someone with code knowledge available to issue simple permits same day
• Things were great
• faster turn around time. 2x as long to get permits as city or county
• The intake process and turn over time is WAY TO LONG!!
• No suggestions at this time.
• ?
• The person giving the information was a little aggressive with it. I didn't feel it was given without prejudice.
• Make it easy for the Wabo to get back to reinspect
• Provide info about what permits are needed and why they are needed- didn't find the website
very transparent for the average resident
Any other suggestions?
• No
• can't think of any
• would love to have and follow up information
• Keep up the good work
• Change your community development requirments for paved approaches.
We have lost ten of thousands of dollars in projects because the cost addition is out of budget
for most of the folks who live in the Valley.
• None
• No
• No, I am very satisfied with our City Hall
Page 3 of 3
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: March 10, 2020
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business
❑ information ❑ admin. report
Department Director Approval
❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ pending legislation ® executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: EXECUTIVE SESSION: Land Acquisition; Pending Litigation
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 42.30.110(1)(b) and RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
BACKGROUND:
OPTIONS:
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move that Council adjourn into executive session
for approximately 30 minutes to discuss land acquisition and pending litigation and that
no action will be taken upon return to open session.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell
ATTACHMENTS: