The URL can be used to link to this page

2011, 08-31 Special Joint Meeting with Spokane BOCCCITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY AGENDA SPECIAL JOINT MEETING Spokane Valley City Council Spokane County Board of County Commissioners Wednesday, August 31, 2011 9:00 a.m. —12:00 p.m. Spokane County Fair and Expo Center Conference Facility located in Expo Complex 404 N Havana Street Agenda Items will be addressed as time permits DISCUSSION AGENDA ITEMS INCLUDE (but are not limited to): 1) Solid Waste Alliance Interlocal Agreement 2) Animal Control 3) Milwaukee Right -of -Way Update 4) Transportation Benefit District 5) Jail ADJOURN During meetings held by the City of Spokane Valley Council, the Council reserves the right to take "action" on any item listed or subsequently added to the agenda_ The term "action" means to deliberate, discuss, review, consider, evaluate, or make a collective positive or negative decision. 08/31/2011 Joint Meeting, Council & Spokane County Board of County Commissioners Agenda Item # 1 MY OF SPOKEVALLEY Request kw Courncca9 Acton Meeting Date: August 31, 2011 Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ information ❑ admin. report AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Solid Waste Discussion GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Department Director Approval: ❑ ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session BACKGROUND: Attached is Chapter 13 from the adopted 2009 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. This chapter discusses the current system, the jurisdictions involved, key issues, alternatives, and recommendations for restructuring the system. Also attached is an updated copy of the Solid Waste Management Alliance Interlocal received from the County on August 15, 2011. OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Neil Kersten ATTACHMENTS: Chapter 13 from the adopted 2009 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan, Solid Waste Management Alliance Interlocal dated August 11, 2011 SECTION 13 d ini tration r nf• rc 13.1 Introduction and Goals Two important elements of solid waste management plans are to review the existing administration structure and practices, and discuss solid waste enforcement policies and responsibilities. Administrative and enforcement goals of Spokane County's solid waste programs are: • Maintain an institutional framework that delineates the roles and responsibilities of Spokane County, the City of Spokane, the other regional cities, Fairchild Air Force Base, Spokane Regional Health District (SRHD), and the private sector. • Avoid duplication of solid waste planning, programs, or administrative support services. • Ensure that the responsibilities and authorities granted to implementing agencies allow them to function in an efficient manner. • Develop and implement efficient programs that work and address the needs and desires of the citizens in achieving solid waste management goals and objectives. • Ensure future financial integrity of solid waste management in the county to include: — Maintaining sufficient funding mechanisms. — Maintaining financial clarity and established measures of accountability. • Ensure that proper monitoring, regulatory procedures, and management accountability are in place to adequately manage the various solid waste streams generated in Spokane County. • Ensure that enforcement agencies are adequately staffed and sufficiently funded. 13.2 History of Current System The first county -wide solid waste management plan for Spokane County was prepared in 1971, with subsequent updates in 1984, 1992, and the current 1998 update. A summary of how these plans shaped the current administrative structure and responsibilities is provided below. 13.2.1 1984 Solid Waste Management Plan After considering alternatives for the development of an integrated, county -wide solid waste management system, Spokane County recommended the current system in the 1984 Solid Waste Management Plan. Actions were taken by the County and cities in Spokane County ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-1 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT with the aim of developing an efficient, stable system for the management of solid waste. The primary administrative instruments that were developed were: ® The 1988 Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between the City of Spokane and Spokane County, Washington, Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management System, and subsequent amendments ("Interlocal Cooperation Agreement"). An agreement between the County and the City of Spokane for the financing, operation, and management of the Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management System Solid Waste System. ® The 1985 County Waste Flow Control Ordinance and subsequent amendments. A law established by the County to ensure disposal of waste generated in unincorporated areas at System facilities. ® Regional City Interlocal Agreements. Cooperative agreements between Spokane County and the City of Spokane with the other cities within Spokane County signed between 1989 and 1991 for developing a coordinated solid waste management plan, providing a regional tipping fee, and for ensuring disposal of waste generated in incorporated areas at System facilities. A similar interlocal agreement was established between the County and the City of Spokane with Fairchild Air Force Base. The cities of Spokane Valley and Liberty Lake signed interlocal agreements in 2003 shortly after their incorporation (see Exhibit 13-1). These administrative documents provide the framework by which the solid waste system in Spokane County now operates. They delineate the roles and responsibilities of each entity, and establish clear financial responsibilities for developing and maintaining an integrated and regional solid waste system. 13.2.2 1992 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement The 1992 Plan included a thorough review of administration and enforcement needs just as the System was beginning operations and many new waste reduction and recycling programs were being implemented. A summary of the 1992 Plan's recommendations: ® The System should continue and, if necessary, expand upon its efforts toward waste reduction, recycling, solid waste planning, special wastes handling, financial planning and management, and litter control. The System should continue to act as the primary implementing agency for solid waste capital improvement programs. ® The System should work with the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission and refuse collectors to ensure that minimum service levels and preferential rates for recycling services are maintained in unincorporated areas. The County Interlocal Agreement should be modified to clarify the role the System will take for overseeing waste reduction and recycling programs in unincorporated areas of Spokane County. ® The coordinated approach to litter enforcement and illegal dumping cleanup between the System and the SRHD should continue. Improvements in the working relationship should take place to eliminate duplication of services. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-2 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT • The County Interlocal Agreement should be amended to provide limited decision -making authority to the liaison board for reviewing and approving amendments to the solid waste plan that do not have significant cost or policy implications. • The SRHD should continue assessing its budgetary priorities; if additional resources are needed, it should request them from the Board of Health. • The Spokane County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan should be reviewed and revised every 5 years. 13.2.3 1998 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan Update The 1998 Plan built on the planning framework established in the 1992 Plan and was prepared in accordance with the new planning requirements set forth in RCW 70.95 and outlined in the state planning guidelines. Key issues of the 1998 Plan are listed below. • The System should continue to monitor waste flows within the System and national developments in flow control legislation. Should the need for additional revenues materialize because of waste flows leaking or leaving the System, the System should take steps to stabilize its revenue base. • The System should prepare an annual report for the 1997 calendar year, beginning in early 1998. The annual report should be scheduled into the System's roster of tasks that need to be completed each year. • The SRHD should work closely with System staff and inform them of any pending changes to existing solid waste facility permits, and involve them in the decision -making process when evaluating any potential new solid waste facility. • The System should create a capital improvement fund in which funds would be collected to pay for major improvements to System facilities. • The County Interlocal Agreement should be reviewed to determine the need for revision or amendment, including a procedure for approving amendments to the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan that do not have significant cost or policy implications. • No changes will be made to the existing solid waste administrative structure without undergoing a study by SWAC. • The System should prepare a catastrophic waste management plan. • The County should actively consider forming a disposal district to pay for solid waste management services. 13.3 Existing Conditions 13.3.1 Solid Waste System Administration An integrated, county -wide solid waste management program in Spokane County is currently managed by the System. There are, however, a number of different governing jurisdictions ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-3 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT who are responsible for administering aspects of solid waste management activities in Spokane County, and whose coordinated activities are important to the success of this program. Jurisdictions involved in Spokane County solid waste management include: • Washington State. • Spokane County. • Spokane Regional Solid Waste System. • City of Spokane. • Regional Cities (Airway Heights, Cheney, Deer Park, Fairfield, Latah, Liberty Lake, Medical Lake, Millwood, Rockford, Spangle, Spokane Valley, Waverly). • Fairchild Air Force Base. In addition, the following entities have specific roles in solid waste management: • Spokane Regional Solid Waste System Liaison Board ("Liaison Board," originally called the Spokane Regional Solid Waste Disposal Project Policy Committee). • Spokane County Solid Waste Advisory Committee. • Spokane Regional Health District. Furthermore, private businesses have specific, important solid waste management roles in the county. These businesses include solid waste reuse and recycling, collection, and disposal businesses and are described in the previous sections of this Plan. A brief description of the roles and responsibilities of each jurisdictional participant follows. 13.3.2 Washington State RCW 70.95 gives the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) authority to promulgate solid waste regulations, review and appeal facility permits, and approve solid waste management plans. These regulations are set forth in Chapter 173-350 WAC' and are called the Minimum Functional Standards. Regulations are also included in Chapter 173-350 WAC" Solid Waste Handling Standards, and Chapter 173-351 WAC"' Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills. Jurisdictional health depaitiuents have the authority to permit solid waste handling facilities and to set standards that must be at least as strict as the state standards. No permit may be issued for a facility that is inconsistent with an approved solid waste management plan. The state has provided partial funding for various solid waste planning and project development activities through grant programs administered by Ecology. In Spokane County, grant funding was made available to assist in funding construction of the WTE Facility and for development and implementation of waste reduction, recycling, moderate risk waste, and comprehensive solid waste planning programs. State funds are also made available to the SRHD for solid waste disposal facility inspections and related administrative expenses. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-4 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT The State also regulates certain solid waste collection services through the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC). Private garbage collection companies serving unincorporated areas and those municipalities that default to the County's authority on solid waste collection are regulated by the WUTC. The WUTC grants certificates and sets rates and types of service. WUTC authority does not automatically extend to collection in cities and towns. The WUTC also reviews portions of the comprehensive solid waste management plans. Details on the role of the WUTC are included in Section 6, Collection. 13.3.3 Spokane County Spokane County is responsible for overseeing closure and post -closure activities at the Mica Landfill, Colbert Landfill, and Greenacres Landfill. With the signing of the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement with the City of Spokane, the County no longer owns or operates active waste handling facilities. Under that agreement, the County is responsible for ensuring delivery of waste from unincorporated areas to the System facilities and may not site or permit any new disposal facility, such as a landfill, unless it is designated as a System facility. The County reviews the System's budget each year, and any of the following "major decisions" faced by the System must be agreed to by both the City and the County: • An expansion of the System's service territory to include use of the System by entities located outside the County. ® Discretionary modifications of the System costing in excess of $1 million. • Major changes in the construction contract for the WTE Facility. ® Any change in tipping fee amounts or components other than changes made to fulfill bonding or closure requirements. ® Siting and selection of any publicly owned transfer stations. ® Adoption and implementation of a county -wide solid waste reduction, recycling, litter control. • Siting and selection of any regional landfill used for solid waste. ® The adoption, development, and implementation of a county -wide dangerous waste disposal program. The Interlocal Cooperation Agreement contains language which provides that it automatically renews in 2014 for another 20-year term unless the City of Spokane and Spokane County agree not to renew it. This interlocal agreement can be revised or terminated only if both the City of Spokane and the County agree to the revision or termination of the agreement. As long as jurisdictions continue to be a part of the System through their interlocal agreements, the City of Spokane must provide to those jurisdictions' citizens the same disposal services as City of Spokane constituents and at the same costs. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-5 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT 13.3.4 The Spokane Regional Solid Waste System The Spokane Regional Solid Waste System, a department of the City of Spokane, was created by the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between Spokane County and the City of Spokane on October 11, 1988. System facilities consist of all property owned or acquired by the City for the following purposes: • Disposal of solid waste generated within the Spokane County's boundaries for the benefit of the County and all jurisdictions within. • Management of solid waste generated and collected elsewhere and delivered to System facilities for disposal or recycling. The System includes: • The Northside Landfill. • The WTE Facility. • The Colbert and Valley transfer stations. • Recycling and household hazardous waste facilities located at the WTE Facility and transfer stations. • The Malloy Prairie ash landfill site. • The Colbert regional compost facility site (currently inactive). • The City of Spokane refuse collection system. • The rights of the City to dispose of ash, bypass, and nonprocessible waste from the System facilities at non -System landfill sites (i.e., agreement with RDC for disposal at the Roosevelt Regional Landfill). The System is a department of the City of Spokane's government under provisions of Spokane Municipal Code 13.02.0112.1' It is under the general direction of an executive director, who is appointed by the Mayor. The executive director is responsible for all System operations except for direct supervision of System facility operations staff. System facilities are staffed by City of Spokane Solid Waste Management employees who are under the direct supervision of the director of the Solid Waste Management department. 13.3.5 The City of Spokane The chief executive of the City of Spokane is an elected Mayor, who performs the normal functions of an elected chief executive, including powers of appointment, supervision and dismissal of the director who directly manages the System. The Mayor proposes the annual budget for the City, which includes the System budget and System rates. The Mayor also has veto power over ordinances passed by the Spokane City Council affecting the System's operations and policies. The City of Spokane's legislative function is performed by the Spokane City Council. The Spokane City Council confirms the Mayor's appointment of the System director and approves the System's budget and rates, except for tipping fees which are subject to final ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-6 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT approval by Spokane County as a "major decision" under the 1988 City -County Interlocal Cooperation Agreement. The Spokane City Council also enacts ordinances governing System operations, subject to the Interlocal Agreement. The City of Spokane is obligated under the 1988 Interlocal Agreement to finance certain System capital improvements and to handle solid waste disposal and related functions for the City of Spokane and other participating local government jurisdictions in incorporated and unincorporated areas of Spokane County. Besides tipping fees, the Interlocal Agreement lists other "major decisions" that must be approved by Spokane County. The Spokane Regional Solid Waste System operates as a separate administrative department of Spokane City government from the City Department of Solid Waste Management. Each department has a separate director and a separate budget. The System budget and the Solid Waste Management budget are accounted for in separate enterprise fund accounts. Collection revenues and costs of the City's Solid Waste Management Department are not included in the calculation of System tipping fees, and System revenues and costs are not included in the calculation of the City's Solid Waste Management Department's collection utility rates. The City of Spokane is responsible for making operational decisions for the System other than the "major decisions" that must be agreed to by the County. The City of Spokane prepares the annual System budget. The System budget and the Solid Waste Management budget are accounted for in separate enterprise fund accounts. Collection revenues and costs are not included in the calculation of System tipping fees, and System revenues and costs are not included in the calculation of Spokane's collection utility rates. 13.3.6 Regional Cities and Fairchild Air Force Base The term "regional cities" refers to the incorporated cities and towns within Spokane County, excepting the City of Spokane, that have entered into Regional City Interlocal Agreements. This includes the Cities of Airway Heights, Cheney, Deer Park, Liberty Lake, Medical Lake, and Spokane Valley; and the Towns of Fairfield, Latah, Millwood, Rockford, Spangle, and Waverly. Fairchild Air Force Base also holds an interlocal agreement with Spokane County and the City of Spokane. Each of the regional cities and Fairchild Air Force Base are responsible for making arrangements for their constituents' solid waste collection services, either by allowing for collection by a relevant WUTC-certified collection firm; or through its own crews; or by contracting directly with a private collection firm. Waste disposal and opportunities for recycling and household hazardous waste drop-off are provided at System transfer stations and the WTE Facility. In addition, some towns provide specific services: Airway Heights, Cheney, Medical Lake, and Spangle provide recycling, and Cheney has a yard waste facility. Each of the Regional Cities located within Spokane County executed an interlocal agreement with the City and County of Spokane. Fairchild Air Force Base executed a waste commitment agreement with the City and County of Spokane. The Regional City Interlocal Agreements and the Fairchild AFB agreement ensure that they will receive consistent, high quality waste management and disposal facility services, program services for moderate risk waste, waste reduction and recycling activities, and the administrative support services ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-7 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT necessary to implement those operations and programs from the System. The interlocal agreements also direct each entity's waste to System facilities. Except for Liberty Lake and Spokane Valley, these interlocal agreements automatically renew for 20 years at the end of the initial terms (between 2014 and 2016) unless either party chooses not to renew. All System participants receive the same services as City of Spokane constituents and at the same costs. Shortly after the cities of Liberty Lake and Spokane Valley and Liberty Lake were formed in 2001 and 2003, respectively, they also executed Regional City Interlocal Agreements with the City of Spokane and Spokane County; however, their terms are somewhat different. Their interlocal agreements expire in 2011 or when the bonds are paid off. The cities of Liberty Lake and Spokane Valley will need to negotiate new disposal agreements at the end of their agreement terms. The Regional City Interlocal Agreements authorize the System to prepare updates to the solid waste management plan. Each Plan Update must be provided to the County, each city and Fairchild Air Force Base for adoption. A city that does not adopt the prepared Plan Update is required under Chapter 70.95 RCW to prepare its own. Exhibit 13-1 lists the expiration dates of the various interlocal agreements. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-8 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT EXHIBIT 13-1 Interlocal Agreement Renewal Provisions (Directs Solid Waste to System and Provides Program Benefits to Participants) Entity Date Term Term End Date Renewals Automatic Renewal unless either Party chooses to not renew Responsibility for Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan To County or Its Designee To Regional System Airway Heights 10/10/89 25 Years 10/10/2014 Successive 20-Year Terms Cheney 9/1/89 25 Years 9/1/2014 Successive 20-Year Terms 4 4 Deer Park 4/16/91 25 Years 4/16/2016 Successive 20-Year Terms 4 -* J Fairchild AFB 10/16/90 25 Years 10/16/2015 Successive 20-Year Terms .q —* g Fairfield 10/9/90 25 Years 10/9/2015 Successive 20-Year Terms •4 Latah 6/4/91 25 Years 6/4/2016 Successive 20-Year Terms Al — NI Liberty Lake 9/24/03 8 Years 12/1/2011 No Provision Agreement expires — Medical Lake 9/1/89 25 Years 9/1/2014 Successive 20-Year Terms Al g Millwood 5/7/91 25 Years 5/7/2016 Successive 20-Year Terms 11 —> 4 Spangle 10/9/90 25 Years 10/9/2015 Successive 20-Year Terms 1 Spokane Valley 7/15/03 8 Years 12/1/2011 No Provision Agreement expires —> Waverly 12/11/89 25 Years 12/11/2014 Successive 20-Year Terms —* Spokane County 4/10/89 25 Years 4/10/2014 Successive 20-Year Terms Both City & County Must Agree Not to Renew —> 4 ' Per Interlocal Agreement dated 7/18/88, Spokane County has delegated this to the Regional System. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-9 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT 13.3.7 Spokane Regional Health District The SRHD issues permits for solid waste facilities and enforces solid waste handling regulations in the county. The SRHD's Solid Waste Handling Standards" are implemented through the permitting process. The SRHD issues, renews and, when necessary, suspends permits for solid waste handling and disposal facilities. Landfills, transfer stations, waste -to - energy facilities, drop -boxes, and incinerators must have permits in order to legally operate. Recycling facilities may be exempt from solid waste handling permitting if they comply with the exemption provisions in Chapter 173-350-210 WAC."' All solid waste handling facility permits must conform to an approved Solid Waste Management Plan. Ecology has authority to appeal a permit to the Pollution Control Hearings Board. All solid waste facilities are inspected on a regular basis by the SRHD for conformance with solid waste regulations and permit requirements. 13.3.8 Spokane Regional Solid Waste Liaison Board This board was formed in 1988 as the "Spokane Regional Solid Waste Disposal Project Policy Committee" through the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement. It originally consisted of two City of Spokane representatives and two Spokane County representatives. The name was changed in the 1987 interlocal agreement to the "Policy Liaison Board." According to the 1987 interlocal agreement (OPR No. 88-864), the Liaison Board was created to be a "forum for discussion among the City [of Spokane] and the County concerning the [Waste -to -Energy] Facility and to create a body to whom information concerning the Facility can be provided." The Liaison Board has no independent decision making authority, but makes recommendations to the City of Spokane and Spokane County for their legislative consideration. Individual authorities and responsibilities for operational and policy decisions of the County and the City of Spokane are detailed in other parts of the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement. The Liaison Board's purpose was restated in 1989, adding a fifth non -voting member to represent the Regional Cities. In 1992, an amendment changed the Regional City representative to a voting member. In 2003, a City of Spokane Valley representative was added to the Liaison Board through the City of Spokane Valley's interlocal agreement. The board is required to meet at least quarterly or as agreed to by the members after the facility became operational in 1991. Currently, the board meets six times per year. 13.3.9 The Solid Waste Advisory Committee The SWAC has been in place in Spokane County since May 1985. The SWAC played an active role in developing the 1984, 1992, and 1998 Spokane County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management plans. The committee is an ongoing advisory panel composed of representatives of solid waste industry, businesses, and citizens appointed by the County Commissioners. The chairperson of the SWAC reports to the County Commissioners to apprise them of views and positions on various issues. The System provides support staff to this committee and uses the committee as a sounding board on solid waste policies and programs. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-10 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT The SWAC has been actively involved in the development of this Plan by identifying issues of concern to SWAC members and by providing comment and input throughout the planning process. 13.3.10 Waste Flow Control The County is authorized by Chapter 36.58 RCW' to designate disposal sites for all solid waste collected in the unincorporated areas of the county. In 1985, the County established a flow control ordinance (Ordinance No. 85-0395) as Chapter 8.56°111 of the Spokane County Code. The original ordinance has been modified three times (Ordinance Numbers 88-1268, 92-1500, and 95-0481). The flow control ordinance provides, in essence, that all solid waste generated and collected in the unincorporated areas of Spokane County shall be disposed of at sites designated by the County. In the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement, the County designated the System as its sole disposal site at all times that the System is in operation. The agreement directs that the County shall not, directly or indirectly, site or permit to be sited any solid waste disposal site other than the System, and shall enforce the Flow Control Ordinance continuously. Waste flow control in the regional cities and Fairchild Air Force Base is established through the Regional Cities Interlocal Agreements. These agreements state that solid waste collected within the boundaries of each city or the base will be delivered to the System for disposal. 13.3.11 Monitoring and Measurement Currently, a number of entities are involved in monitoring and measuring solid waste management activities in Spokane County: • Ecology is responsible for reviewing this solid waste management plan and ensuring that the process and content of the Plan are consistent with state laws and regulations. Ecology also prepares annual estimates of recycled material quantities for each county in the state, including Spokane. • The WUTC is responsible for reviewing the cost assessment section of this Plan to ensure it provides the information needed to determine impacts the Plan may have on rates of certificated waste collection companies. • The System prepares monthly and annual records of material quantities received at all System facilities. Materials tracked include disposed waste, recyclables, household hazardous waste, and yard waste at the WTE Facility, North County and Valley transfer stations, and Northside Landfill. The System also maintains records of yard waste sent out -of -county to the regional composting facility, and ash and other solid waste sent to the Roosevelt Regional Landfill. The System also keeps records of the number and type of calls received on its recycling hotline. Additionally, the System publishes an annual report. • Private haulers maintain records of waste and recyclables collected from their residential and commercial customers in the unincorporated areas of the County and regional cities. • Fairchild Air Force Base maintains records of its waste'collection and recycling programs. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-11 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT • The SRHD maintains a record of wastes received at solid waste handling facilities in the county. It also monitors illegal dumping in the county. 13.3.12 Solid Waste Management System Evaluations Three surveys were conducted as part of this Plan update. The first survey included interviews with representatives of the County, City of Spokane, and the Regional Solid Waste Liaison Board to obtain input on current administrative practices and recommendations for improvement. The second survey included interviews with representatives of solid waste management agencies across the country to obtain information on their administrative and operational structures to compare with the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System. The third survey included interviews with other Washington Counties regarding their Solid Waste Advisory Committees. 13.3.12.1 Interviews with County, City of Spokane, and Liaison Board Representatives Local interviews were conducted to identify goals for System administration and governance, which included descriptions of a "perfect system," what works well under the current System, what could be improved before and after interlocal agreements expire or come up for renewal, how well the System, the Liaison Board and SWAC integrate with one another, and any other comments related to System functions.' Representatives chosen for interviews included Spokane County Commissioners (Phil Harris, Mark Richard, Todd Mielke), City of Spokane Council Members (Nancy McLaughlan, Rob Crow, and Al French), and Cheney and Spokane Valley Council Members (Curt Huff and Gary Schimmels, respectively), and System staff (Dennis Hein, Joyce Smee, Damon Taam). Richard, Mielke, McLaughlin, Crow, Huff, and Schimmels comprise the members of the Liaison Board. Questions that were asked and a summary of responses are provided: 1. We are examining the potential for enhancing the governance, administration, and operational structure of the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System. Imagine that you've been tasked with developing a new organizational structure. What would your "perfect system" look like? • Keep the System administration as it is currently — there are cost efficiencies with using one director for both the Regional Solid Waste System and the City of Spokane Solid Waste Management Department. Also, there are efficient plant operations with no debt, experienced management, infrastructure in place, and protection of the environment. • Hire a second director so that the System and the City's collection operations would have separate managers/directors. • Change the make-up of the SWAC to improve balance by including representatives from environmental groups, interested citizens, and non -waste industry businesses. • Form a Public Utilities District (PUD) where all participate in decisions and oversee operations, which would allow policy makers from cities/County to be more engaged in detailed day-to-day operations and budget management. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-12 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT ® Protect the City of Spokane's financial position because the City of Spokane took on all of the financial risks, and looked out for the welfare of others in the region, not just City of Spokane citizens. 2. What aspects of the current solid waste management system work well? ® Functions as a regional system. ® Uses good technology and best available science with the WTE Facility. ® Has a comprehensive program that includes solid waste disposal; recycling; household hazardous waste; construction, demolition, and landclearing materials; inert materials; and yard waste. ® Has a combined management position that works well from an administrative viewpoint (e.g., administration of employees is cost-effective). ® Integrates transfer stations with the WTE Facility in an efficient manner. ® Takes care of Spokane County communities' wastes and doesn't burden non -local communities with waste disposal sites. ® Revenue stream is tied directly to the program incurring the expenses, which is the way all programs should be managed. 3. What aspects of the current system could be improved? Before interlocal agreements expire or come up for renewal (2011 — 2016) ® Establish two director positions, one for the System and one for the City of Spokane's Solid Waste Management Department. ® Change make-up of the SWAC so that the representation is more balanced. ® Improve working relationships between the County, Cities, and the System. ® Consider options presented by others (other than City of Spokane). ® Take steps today to plan for future options (e.g., capital -intensive projects need to be planned for ahead of need). ® Revise System only if revenue bonds are secure. ® Look at how landfill post -closure costs for the County and City can be funded through the System. After interlocal agreements expire or come up for renewal (2011 - 2016) ® Make System director independent of governmental jurisdiction; that is, not a City or County employee (e.g., create a disposal district or possibly hire a person or a company to manage the System). ® Merge the SWAC and Liaison Board, include other stakeholders and governmental jurisdictions, and give them more authority than just being advisory. ® Allow other jurisdictions to have an equal say in the governance of the System by purchasing proportional shares of System assets from the City. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-13 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT • Create a governing board made up of all participants that would have a say on operational matters, capital improvements, and budgeting. • Sell the System to a private party (may be more feasible for a government to own and have private sector operate). • Eliminate the Liaison Board. • Obtain new interlocal agreements with the City of Liberty Lake and the City of Spokane Valley and renew other interlocal agreements. • Lower tipping fees if feasible when revenue bonds are paid. 4. How do the System, Liaison Board, and SWAC integrate with one another? • Confrontational and uncooperative manner — as individuals, all parties do their work well; however, when all parties work together as a group, they operate in a dysfunctional manner. • System lacks understanding of the Liaison Board's needs — all (System, SWAC, and Liaison Board) need to improve communications and relationships. • Not inclusive of other governments in System decisions. • There is a perception that the City may be taking advantage of other jurisdictions while managing System operations. 5. Any additional comments about the solid waste management system, or how the System coordinates their program with the participating governmental jurisdictions? Operational comments: • Provide an inert materials management program that is convenient and meshes well with private business operations. • Coordinate the litter control program so that roadside cleanups are distributed between the City and areas outside of the City of Spokane in an equitable manner. • Add compactors at the transfer stations; compacted waste could be loaded into trucks and then transported to the WTE Facility. • Evaluate other methods of ash disposal (i.e., shipping ash to Rabanco may not be the cheapest method of ash disposal). • Install a third boiler, but only if needed to take care of Spokane County's waste. • Evaluate and consider integrating a proposed county transloader into System operations. • Review contract requirements with Wheelabrator. • Evaluate and consider an ash mono -fill located in Spokane County for WTE facility ash disposal. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-14 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT • Evaluate operating the WTE Facility without certain specific waste streams (e.g., construction, demolition, and landclearing materials; City of Spokane Valley or City of Liberty Lake wastes) to determine viability. • Look for technology pursuits that lead to the lowest possible rates for residents, and that are predictable for the long term (e.g., long haul would not be a predictable option if the contract expired in 6 months). • Look at other solid waste system operations; however, any proposal that replaced existing operations after the bonds are retired would have to be something compelling that must be both less costly and environmentally sensitive. • Show accountability in regards to the System's operations. 13.3.12.2 Interviews with Other Regional Solid Waste Management Systems Interviews were conducted with other organizations (Greater Vancouver Regional District, BC; Los Angeles Sanitation Districts, CA; Palm Beach, FL; Pinellas County, FL; and NE Maryland Disposal Authority, MD) comparing their solid waste management operations or systems' (Exhibit 13-2) with the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System. Regional system comparisons looked at differences between: • Jurisdictions. • Governance. • Day-to-day administration. • Operations. • Debt/financing. • What works well • Improvements. All regional systems had county/city jurisdictions as participants. In one case, seven counties and only one city participated; in most cases, 21 to 78 cities participated, with only one county The population of these systems ranged from 1 to 5 million, all larger than the population served by the System (432,000). All interviewed systems had only one governing board, compared to the System's dual governing roles on "major decisions" by the Spokane County Board of Commissioners and the City of Spokane Council. The boards were governed primarily in two ways: county commissioners governing alone or a board/authority comprised of primary decision makers from each participating jurisdiction. With few exceptions, the governing boards and decision makers were those entities responsible for debt repayment. Governing documents varied, from joint agreements among participants to governmental rules established by a special district, county ordinance, or state legislation. Day-to-day administration was always conducted by staff under the governing board. Operations varied from government -operated only, to a board/authority operating some functions and contracting out other functions, as with the System. In one case, operations were conducted solely by private contractors. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-15 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT Only one system was without capital debt because their debt had been recently retired. Bond holders ranged from a specific governing jurisdiction such as a city or county to a board/ authority, to a private facility responsible for its own debt in concert with public facilities operated by an authority which holds the debt for those specific facilities. Revenue sources for repayment of debt included tipping fees, property assessments (not property value -based or taxed -based), electrical revenue, recycling sales, and/or interest income. What works well from these regional systems are that they are integrated disposal systems with many options for solid waste handling. The systems are flexible and the participants work well together and support each other. In some cases, a balance of public and private facilities keeps costs low. In most cases, the tipping fee has not increased because of recycling programs or efficiency. Few improvements to their own solid waste systems were suggested by these regional system managers. One system had a need to increase their system capacity to manage their population growth rate. Another system under a County Board was considering revising their administrative authority from the County Board to a Solid Waste Authority because an authority may work more effectively than county government in their situation. 13.3.12.3 Comparison of County SWACs To assist Spokane County in the evaluation of their Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SWAC), representatives from seven Washington counties were interviewed in July 2006: Clark, Douglas, Pierce, Snohomish, Thurston, Whatcom, and Yakima Counties!" This report presents the results of those interviews. Descriptions of each County SWAC are presented according to prescribed roles and duties, membership, and level of involvement in solid waste planning. Membership Local county SWACs are established by Chapter 70.95.165 (3) RCW."" This code requires that each committee consist of at least nine members, selected by the county legislative authority, and represent a balance of interests, such as citizens, public interest groups, business, the waste management industry, and local elected public officials. The specific details of the interviewed county SWACs are shown in Exhibit 13-3. Consistent with the code, Clark County SWAC has only nine members. Spokane County amended their County resolution in 2006, expanding their membership to 15 members, 3 from each of the interests suggested in the RCW. Of the other counties that have more than nine members, some of the additional positions include representatives from business, health districts, solid waste disposal facilities, and hospitals. Pierce and Snohomish County also have non -voting positions. Douglas County, which has 12 members, is the only SWAC that is divided into an executive committee and technical advisory committees. For all of the SWACs, term limits vary from 2 to 4 years, with three years being the most common. Spokane, Pierce, and Whatcom Counties limit the number of terms members can serve. Meetings Most SWACs interviewed are scheduled to meet monthly, although Whatcom County SWAC occasionally cancels meetings. Pierce County SWAC meets monthly during the Solid Waste ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-16 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT Management Plan (SWMP) development process and quarterly otherwise. Snohomish County SWAC is scheduled to meet ten times per year and generally meets eight times. Douglas County only meets quarterly, although its technical advisory committees meet more frequently. The Yakima County SWAC is the least consistent, having not met since the SWMP was adopted September 2005. Duties and Responsibilities For most counties interviewed, SWAC bylaws or local legislation reflect the same basic duties as described in the RCW: "To assist in the development of programs and policies concerning solid waste handling and disposal, and to review and comment upon proposed rules, policies, or ordinances prior to their adoption." Clark, Pierce, and Snohomish County SWACs are also required to facilitate communication between citizens, industry, and the County. Clark and Douglas County SWACs have more extensive lists of duties. Some of the duties unique to Clark County SWAC are advising the Health District on their evaluation of permits for solid waste facilities, and advising the Board of County Commissioners on matters such as facility development and siting. Douglas County SWAC advises on a number of non- traditional solid waste issues, including litter, abandoned automobiles, disposal site pest trapping, and agricultural pests. Unique to Pierce County SWAC is the prescribed role of acting as a sounding board for research and discussion of solid waste topics. Involvement in Planning Process In terms of the level of involvement in the solid waste planning process, the SWACs varied considerably. All the SWACs interviewed act in advisory roles regarding solid waste policy. While Thurston and Yakima County SWACs deal directly with budget recommendations, the Whatcom County SWAC is precluded from dealing with budget issues. Clark, Pierce, Snohomish, and Thurston County interviewees mentioned that those SWACs are used as "sounding boards" for policy decisions. For both Clark County and Douglas County, SWAC support of policy recommendations lends more weight with the county legislative authorities. Whatcom and Thurston County interviewees reported that there is sometimes tension surrounding the SWAC's role when they try to direct rather than just advise, or for Whatcom County, when they try to deal with budget issues. Given that the Yakima County SWAC has not met since their SWMP was adopted, it appears they are the least active in planning, although the new Pierce County SWAC has not met by the time of drafting this section, so it is difficult to predict what their level of involvement will be. Other Boards Two counties other than Spokane have boards in addition to the SWAC that deal with solid waste issues. Spokane County has a Regional Solid Waste Liaison Board and a newly formed Stakeholder Input Committee that was created specifically for the 2009 SWMP Update. Similarly, Clark County has a Solid Waste Handling Steering Committee and Whatcom County has an Executive Committee. 13.3.13 Financial Structure The Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between the County and the City of Spokane specifies financing along with operations and management of the solid waste system. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-17 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT Revenue bonds were issued by the City of Spokane to pay for System capital purchases, including the WTE Facility and transfer stations. In addition, the City of Spokane issued bonds to pay for closure of existing County and City of Spokane landfills, and purchase the Malloy Prairie ash landfill site and the Colbert regional compost site. 13.3.13.1 Financial Obligations The revenue bonds have administrative requirements that are directed to the City of Spokane. The City of Spokane borrowed money and must make bond payments twice a year. The bonds are rated AAA, achieved by the City of Spokane's mandatory collection of solid waste and the billing collection powers, and agreements with Spokane County, the regional cities and Fairchild Air Force Base that direct solid waste to System facilities. In the event that there were not enough revenues generated from System tipping fees to make bond payments, City of Spokane utility rate payers would need to pay for any shortfall. Spokane County guarantees revenue through the County's Flow Control Ordinance backed by the County's general fund. The Regional City Interlocal Agreements guarantee revenue by directing the regional cities to bring their solid waste to System facilities. To assure that bond holders are paid, the bonds have the following policy requirements for the System to accomplish: • Make certain that revenues will be coming in (i.e., enforce interlocal agreements and ensure billing collection ability of City of Spokane ratepayers). • Pay bills. • Ensure a functioning system. • Monitor System's operations to make sure the System is doing what it agreed to do, and under agreed -upon conditions (burn garbage, sell electricity, etc.). • Notify bond holders (through bond counsel) of any changes in the operations, any System leakage (because waste leaving the County could cause tipping fees to increase), permitting issues that could allow leakage or create any other unfavorable situation, anticipated System revenue and expenses, deficits expected, reliability (e.g., assurance that County is enforcing flow control ordinance), other County actions that could influence receipt of revenues, or explain any other actions that would jeopardize the security of revenues. • Provide a 1-year reserve account or fund that can pay 1 year of debt service ($17.5 million) that can be used only if regular collection of revenue is not sufficient to cover costs. Revisions to existing interlocal agreements that affect revenue prior to 2011 would be possible only if bond counsel (bond underwriter and bond insurance carrier) and both the City of Spokane and Spokane County concurred with any revisions. Documentation or a proposal for why the change is requested and how it would affect revenue and the System would be submitted to bond counsel. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-18 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT Bond counsel could say no and decide whether or not the issue should be presented to bond holders, who have the right to vote and decide on the acceptability of the proposal. The Counsel would provide recommendations back to the System based on the views of the underwriter, insurance carrier, and bond holders. 13.3.13.2 Solid Waste System Funding Mechanisms In accordance with RCW 70.95.090, this Plan includes an assessment of the financial impacts of the recommended solid waste management alternatives over a 6-year period. The discussion that follows provides an overview of the sources of funding that are currently being used to pay for the recommended solid waste management program. The System operates out of an enterprise fund. Fund 4490 has the following funding sources: • Disposal fees. • Electricity sales. • Interest. • Grants. • Sales of recyclables. Disposal fees are collected from residents, businesses, and haulers, including the City of Spokane, at the WTE Facility and System transfer stations. Revenues from electricity sales are received from Puget Sound Energy. Interest revenues are received from investments. Grants from the Department of Ecology are used for funding waste reduction, recycling, and household hazardous waste programs. Revenues are also received from the sales of recyclables collected from drop-off programs at System transfer stations. The System has restricted cash that is used to manage replacement of its equipment and transfer fleet. A rate stabilization fund was established in 1988 to manage the increase in tipping fees resulting from System improvements. 13.3.14 Enforcement Practices Multiple agencies in Spokane County have the responsibility of enforcing solid waste management regulations and programs: the City of Spokane; Spokane Regional Health District; Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority; Spokane County; and the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission. A summary of the responsibilities that each agency has for enforcing solid waste regulations and programs follows. 13.3.14.1 Spokane Regional Solid Waste System The System is responsible for implementation of the Solid Waste Management Plan and coordination with other enforcement agencies. The System reimburses the City of Spokane's Code Enforcement Department for their county -wide enforcement activities pertaining to illegal dumping and litter control functions. 13.3.14.2 City of Spokane Code Enforcement Department The Code Enforcement Department is responsible for a range of solid waste enforcement functions in all areas of Spokane County. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-19 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT Enforcement activities cover illegal dumping, litter control, and special projects. The Department currently employs individuals for county -wide cleanup activities who form cleanup crews, with one crew devoted exclusively to illegal dumping sites. In addition to actual cleanup activities for illegal dumping, the Code Enforcement Department has one individual processing and investigating complaints of illegal dumping in Spokane County. Fines and cleanup orders are also issued by the Department, and "No Dumping" signs may be posted. The Department is responsible for cleaning up illegal dumping sites that are located in areas such as County and city road rights -of -way, vacant lots owned by the County and cities, dead end or vacant roads, abandoned railroad rights -of -way, and unoccupied private property where the System is reimbursed for cleanup costs. The Code Enforcement Department also enforces litter control regulations in Spokane County and conducts litter cleanup programs. These litter cleanup activities are conducted in a variety of areas: County road rights -of -way, city street rights -of -way, alleys, freeway on/off ramps, undeveloped lots near high traffic areas, and special high visibility areas such as parts of Centennial Trail. The Department also cleans litter from streets in incorporated cities in Spokane County. Funding for these regional clean up activities comes through interfund transfers from the System. 13.3.14.3 City of Spokane Solid Waste Management Department Within the City of Spokane, the Solid Waste Management Department is responsible for enforcing compliance with its refuse collection regulations regarding residential and commercial collection operations in the city. The Solid Waste Management Department is also involved in other solid waste cleanup activities, including assisting in special neighborhood and school cleanup campaigns. The City of Spokane's Code Enforcement Department works within the City of Spokane on solid waste and nuisance enforcement and cleanup activities. These activities include abatement of solid waste violations on private property, removal of illegal dumps from right of ways. Enforcement and cleanup activities within the City of Spokane are funded by user fees from the Solid Waste Management Department. 13.3.14.4 Spokane Regional Health District (SRHD) The Spokane Regional Health District enforces solid waste regulations in Spokane County. SRHD staff is responsible for making recommendations on permits for proposed facilities such as tire, demolition, and inert waste disposal sites. Chapter 70.95.180 RCW"` describes the process for jurisdictional health departments to evaluate solid waste permit applications for compliance with all existing laws and regulations and for their conformance with the Solid Waste Management Plan and all zoning requirements. SRHD's enforcement responsibilities extend to the following areas of solid waste management: ® Illegal dumping. SRHD receives and investigates complaints of illegal dumping and issues cleanup orders in conjunction with the System. ® Solid Waste Facilities. SRHD permits and makes periodic inspections of existing waste handling facilities and is responsible for inspecting the WTE Facility and transfer stations. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-20 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT ® Landfills. SRHD inspects all landfills in Spokane County at least twice yearly for compliance with State and SRHD regulations. ® Special Wastes. Permits are issued by SRHD for a variety of solid waste facilities, including demolition and inert waste landfills, composting facilities, tire disposal sites, and the City of Spokane's biosolids land spreading operation. SRHD also inspects each of these facilities twice yearly. 13.3.14.5 Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency (Spokane Clean Air) The Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency (previously Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority) is responsible for monitoring the emission of air contaminants from sources in Spokane County. In terms of solid waste management, this agency monitors emissions from the WTE Facility, landfills, recycling/transfer facilities, and composting sites. The agency is responsible for the regulation of asbestos abatement activities within Spokane County. Spokane Clean Air also permits and regulates open burning in the county, which affects the flow of yard debris as a solid waste. 13.3.14.6 Spokane County Spokane County Utilities administers the Flow Control Ordinance for the County by granting or denying facility permits. Spokane County Planning Department has a code enforcement branch with duties that include enforcement activities to monitor and control illegal dumping on private property. 13.3.14.7 Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC) The WUTC regulates the collection of solid waste in unincorporated areas throughout the state and in those incorporated areas that have not established their own their solid waste collection authority. Certificates are issued by the WUTC allowing private collection companies to operate in a specified area, at a fixed rate, and under certain service conditions. The WUTC's enforcement mechanisms include fines and the revoking of a private collector's right to collect solid waste. The WUTC also approves collection rates for collection companies in unincorporated areas within Spokane County. Chapter 70.95.090 RCW"1° requires the Commission to establish guidelines for assessing rate impacts created by solid waste management plans. These guidelines, Cost Assessment Guidelines for Local Solid Waste Management Planning,7° were originally published in September 1990 and updated in 2001. The Commission also advises counties and cities submitting solid waste management plans and the Department of Ecology of the probable effect of the plan's recommendations on the solid waste rates charged by collection firms regulated under Chapter 81.77 RCW."°' 13.3.14.8 Washington Department of Ecology (DOE) The Department of Ecology is responsible for making recommendations on permits for ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-21 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT proposed septage and sludge facilities. DOE also reviews and has the right to appeal permits issued by SRHD. 13.4 Key Issues A portion of the tipping fee received at System facilities goes toward repayment of the revenue bonds that paid for closure of the City of Spokane's and Spokane County's landfills. The residents of the cities of Airway Heights, Cheney, and Medical Lake, and Fairchild Air Force Base did not use those landfills during their operation. To compensate those cities for the costs of landfill closure in their tipping fees, the System allocates to those cities and Fairchild Air Force Base a portion of the revenues from the landfill closure component of the System's tipping fee based on each entity's population. After those bonds are retired, the rebate will no longer be paid out. The tipping fee could be reassessed to include a solid waste rebate to all regional cities, the county, and Fairchild Air Force Base that each could use for their own solid waste program purposes. A common topic during the SWMP Update process was the administrative structure of the System after the retirement of System bonds in 2011, and the ending term or renewal of interlocal agreements shortly thereafter. It is important to acknowledge that decisions affecting the structure of the System at the end of interlocal agreement terms will be decided by each jurisdiction's elected officials, and will not be resolved in this Plan update. The update process provides a forum to document current conditions and key issues as foundations for discussions among elected officials in the future. The System will provide solid waste disposal facility services and associated programs for jurisdictions for as long as they choose to be a part of the System (see Exhibit 13-1 for details on interlocal agreement dates). When the Regional City Interlocal Agreements come to the end of their terms, each city will have the option of renewing or negotiating new interlocal agreements with the System. Spokane County and the City of Spokane will automatically be renewed unless both agree to terminate or renegotiate the Agreement. With renewal or negotiation of a new interlocal agreement, the System would continue to provide disposal facility services as well as the other solid waste programs and planning services such as moderate risk waste, waste reduction and recycling, and the administrative support staff to implement those programs and planning activities. Each City jurisdiction also has the option to not renew their interlocal agreement with the System and either construct their own disposal facility or transfer station, or contract with another disposal facility or transfer station. Jurisdictions could partner with one another through interlocal or other formal agreements for disposal facility services. From the revenue of those operations, they would fund their own moderate risk waste, waste reduction, recycling, and other solid waste programs and planning activities, either with their own administrative support staff or those of another jurisdiction or private contractor. During the 2009 Plan meetings, several regional solid waste administrative designs were discussed. The System's design is described below followed by three designs proposed by the SWAC and the SIC: the creation of a Solid Waste Disposal District, the creation of a Solid Waste Disposal District with an Executive Advisory Committee, and the creation of an ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-22 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT Independent Regional Authority. A fifth design describes an individual municipal solid waste administrative structure. The first and second versions call for the creation of a Solid Waste Disposal District. Solid Waste Disposal Districts are authorized by Chapter 36.58.100 RCW"°" and have been effectively implemented in both Lewis and Whatcom Counties. Both of these versions call for a County Solid Waste Director to report to the Board of County Commissioners. In addition, the second version includes an Executive Advisory Committee. The SWAC/SIC designs require that the County own or contract for the services of a solid waste disposal facility. These proposals would require not renewing the current interlocal agreements with Spokane County and the City of Spolcane. Then, in order assure revenue to pay for the debt and operation of the new County disposal facility or contracted disposal services, waste delivery agreements would need to be negotiated with the County. 13.5 Alternatives 1. Spokane Regional Solid Waste System The Spolcane Regional Solid Waste System is the current regional solid waste administrative design. The System's administrative and governance structure is maintained within bond contracts and interlocal agreements. Revenue bonds debt is scheduled to be paid off in 2011. The majority of the interlocal agreements come up for renewal from 2014 to 2016, with the exception of Spokane Valley's and Liberty Lake's, which expire in 2011. Governing Authority The City of Spokane has legislative and operational authority over the System except for "major decisions" defined in the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between the City and County of Spokane. Purpose/Responsibility Through the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement and Regional Cities Interlocal Agreements, the System is responsible for providing all aspects of disposing of solid wastes in Spokane County. Description of the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System o Authority and Duties: Spokane City Council has the power to appoint the executive director after consultation with the County; develop and implement the County Spokane City Council System Director County -wide Program and Facility Staff Major Decisions Board of County Commis- sioners • Regional Solid Waste Liaison Board ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-23 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT Comprehensive Solid Waste Plan, approve annual operating budgets, and establish rates and fees. The Interlocal Cooperation Agreement calls out certain "major decisions" in which the Board of County Commissioners also has approval authority. In addition, the System is authorized to acquire funding to construct, contract for, maintain, and operate System disposal facilities. The System is advised by the SWAC and the Liaison Board. • Facilities: Owned and managed by the City of Spokane. • Membership: One City Council President and six Council members. • Appointed by: Elected by public. • Terms: Four years. • Relationship among Cities and County: The County and Regional Cities have engaged in interlocal agreements with the County to be part of the System. Cities can apply for representation on the County SWAC through the County. 2. Solid Waste Disposal District This proposal was recommended by the SWAC and calls for the Director of the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System to report to the Spokane County Board of County Commissioners. Since the System Director is an employee of the City of Spokane, the proposal was modified to reflect an Executive Director of a newly developed County disposal district, similar to the existing System, who reports to the County. Board of County Commissioners Executive Director Program and Facility Staff SWAC Governing Authority The Board of County Commissioners would have legislative authority over the solid waste disposal district, as required by RCW 36.58.100. Purpose/Responsibility The District would be responsible to provide for all aspects of disposing of solid wastes within the disposal district in Spokane County Chapter 36.58.130 RCW.'"' Description of Solid Waste Disposal District • Authority and Duties: The Board of County Commissioners would have the power to appoint an executive director; develop and implement the County Comprehensive Solid Waste Plan, approve annual operating budgets and capital improvements; and establish rates and fees for Disposal District facilities. In addition, the board would be authorized to acquire funding to contract for or construct, operate, and maintain disposal facilities. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-24 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT ® Facilities: Owned and managed by the County. ® Membership: Three County Commissioners. ® Appointed by: Elected by public. ® Terms: Four years. ® Advisory Committees: The Board of County Commissioners would be advised by the SWAC. ® Relationship among Cities and County: Cities would be required to engage in interlocal agreements with the County to be part of the Solid Waste District, and could apply for representation on the County SWAC or be represented through interlocal agreements on the SWAC. 3. Solid Waste Disposal District with an Executive Advisory Committee This proposal was also develop by the SWAC and was modified to reflect the Executive Director of a newly developed County disposal district to report to the County. This is very similar to the current System, only the governing authority lies solely with the County. Governing Authority The Board of County Commissioners would have legislative authority over the solid waste disposal district, as required by RCW 36.58.100. Executive Advisory Committee Board of County Commissioners Executive Director Program and Facility Staff SWAG PurposelResponsibility The District would be responsible to provide for all aspects of disposing of solid wastes within the disposal district in Spokane County (RCW 36.58.130). Description of Solid Waste Disposal District with Executive Advisory Committee In Lewis County, the County Commissioners established an Executive Advisory Committee to act as an advisory board to the District Governing Board (Board of County Commissioners). ® Authority and Duties: The Board of County Commissioners would hold the power to appoint an executive director; develop and implement County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plans, approve annual operating budgets and capital improvements; establish rates and fees; and acquire funding to construct, contract for, maintain, and operate disposal facilities. ® Facilities: Owned and/or managed by the County. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-25 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT o Membership: Three County Commissioners. ® Appointed by: Elected by public. • Terms: Four years. • Advisory Committees: The Board of County Commissioners would establish an Executive Advisory Committee consisting of elected officials appointed from each city within the disposal district and the County, which functions in an advisory capacity to the Board. Responsibilities include considering direct implementation of Plans, including funding allocations; reviewing and recommending annual changes to rates of any taxes or other fees imposed; advising the County Board on county -wide issues involving solid waste; and reviewing and commenting on any proposed amendments to the County flow control ordinance. SWAC would also advise the Board of County Commissioners. o Relationship among Cities and County: Cities would be required to engage in interlocal or other formal agreements with the County for inclusion in the solid waste district boundaries, and could apply to the County for appointment on the Executive Advisory Committee or be represented through their interlocal agreements. Cities could also apply to the County for membership on the SWAC or be represented through their interlocal agreements. 4. Independent Regional Authority This proposal was discussed at an SIC meeting. It calls for an Executive Director to report to an Independent Regional Authority, a management structure that does not appear to have specific legislative authority under Title 36 of the Revised Code of Washington. As such, the structure of the third version would require further review by legal counsel to determine whether it is feasible under current state law and whether it could be implemented through interlocal agreements or other local mechanisms. If permissive State authority does not currently exist, special State legislation would have to be developed to establish such an entity. Governing Authority This body would be an independent governing body similar to a port district, as authorized by Chapter 53.04.010 RCW,'" or Metro in Oregon. Metro is an elected regional government for the Portland area metropolitan service district. Established by charter, this governing body manages the region's solid waste system. Regional Solid Waste Authority Executive Director Program and Facility Staff Purpose/Responsibility The Independent Regional Authority would be responsible for managing all aspects of solid waste of authority participants in Spokane County. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-26 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT Description of Independent Regional Authority • Authority and Duties: This authority would have the power to appoint an executive director; develop and implement County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plans, annual operating budgets, and capital improvements; and establish rates and fees. In addition, the authority would be authorized to acquire funding to construct or contract with, maintain, and operate disposal facilities. In this design, the authority would be advised by the County SWAC. • Facilities: Owned or managed by the Independent Regional Authority. • Membership: All members would be elected official of authority participants and could include any variation of representatives. • Appointed by: City representatives would be appointed by mayors with approval from the city councils. County representative would be appointed by the Board of County Commissioners. • Terms: Four years. • Advisory Committees: In this design, the Regional Solid Waste Authority would be advised by the SWAC. • Relationship among Cities and County: Cities and the County could participate through interlocal agreements or other formal mechanisms to secure delivery of solid waste to Regional Authority facilities. Cities and the County could also be represented through interlocal agreements on the SWAC. 5. City -Operated Disposal Facility In addition to regional solid waste administrative designs, a city may own and operate its own disposal facility or transfer station or administer a contract for the services of another disposal facility or transfer station. Governing Authority The governing body would be the municipality that owns the disposal facility or administers the contract with a disposal facility. PurposelResponsibility The municipality would be responsible for managing all aspects of solid waste within its jurisdiction. Municipal Disposal Facility Operations Director Program and Facility Staff City Advisory Committee Description of City -Operated Disposal Facility • Authority and Duties: The municipality would have the power to appoint an operations director; develop and implement their municipal solid waste plan and incorporate it into the County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plans; develop annual operating ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-27 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT budgets and capital improvements; and establish rates and fees. The municipality would be authorized to acquire funding to construct or contract, maintain, and operate disposal facilities. In addition, the facility could contract directly with organizations other jurisdictions for waste disposal facility services. • Facilities: Owned and/or contracted by the municipality. • Membership: City Council members. • Appointed by: Elected by public. • Terms: Four years. • Advisory Committees: The municipality would establish its own advisory committee. • Relationship among Cities and County: A city with its own disposal facility could contract with other cities or the County through interlocal agreements or other formal mechanisms to secure delivery of solid waste to its disposal facility. Contracted jurisdictions could apply for membership on an advisory committee or could be represented through interlocal agreements on an advisory committee. 6. Regional Solid Waste Planning Committee Decisions affecting the structure of the System regarding interlocal agreements will be decided by the elected officials of each jurisdiction. Whether the management of solid waste within Spokane County is maintained within one cohesive system, or broken up into several systems, each system would have to own or contract for the services of a disposal facility, and non -owner participants would be required to enter into interlocal agreements or other waste delivery contracts for use of that system's disposal facility, similar to the interlocal agreements currently in place with the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System. Because of the legal and political complexities involved in understanding and designing regional solid waste disposal systems, further study and legal expertise is essential to flesh out advantages and challenges to these or any other designs. County and city elected officials could form a Regional Solid Waste Planning Committee to study and discuss issues and options regarding the future structure of solid waste management and disposal administration within Spokane County. 7. Solid Waste Program Tipping Fee Rebate When the revenue bonds are retired after 2011 and the landfill closure component is no longer included in the tipping fee, the System should assess adding a solid waste program component to the tipping fee. The solid waste program component would be rebated to the City of Spokane, Spokane County, each regional city, and Fairchild Air Force base, based on their population. The solid waste program rebate could be used by each entity for any solid waste program cost, such as neighborhood cleanups or subsidizing curbside recycling collection costs, etc. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-28 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT 13.6 Recommendations During the planning process, input on recommendations was sought from a wide variety of participants throughout the County: SWAC, SIC, Spokane County, each municipality, and the general public. The Plan recommends maintaining support for required regulatory and enforcement activities. The Plan supports cooperative efforts in reducing illegal dumping throughout the County and the abatement of solid waste nuisances on public and private property. The Plan supports high level collaboration and representation by all affected jurisdictions within Spokane County regarding regional solid waste management and disposal administrative issues, both before and after interlocal agreements expire or are renewed. Careful evaluations of all administrative designs should be conducted in an open, transparent atmosphere to clearly identify the benefits, responsibilities, and commitments of each option. From a governance and administrative perspective, the Plan recommends the current system be restructured into a system that is governed by a board comprised of membership that is proportionally representative of the overall region. Other regional governance boards already exist and so this would be consistent with other programs managed on a regional basis. Examples of existing boards are the Regional Public Health Board, Airport Board, Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency Board, and the Spokane Transit Authority Board. Suggested representation would be three elected officials from the City of Spokane, two elected officials from the City of Spokane Valley, two elected officials from the Association of Small Cities, and two elected Spokane County Commissioners. Among options for administrative design, the Liaison Board could be eliminated or considered as the basis for establishment of a regional governing board with real authority for establishing policy and making final decisions in regard to system management and budgetary issues that are regional in nature. The SWAC recommends that the Solid Waste Advisory Committee, under any revised system of governance, continue to serve in its role as an advisory body to the new board of authority. Their input could be of greater weight than the current reporting structure in which they report to the Board of County Commissioners. Additionally, that body could consider the creation of two sub -committees to help in the formulation of advice regarding 1) policy matters, and 2) technical matters. SWAC further strongly supports that practical matters along with potential legislative actions to authorize the above recommended system dictate that the transition to a regional governance structure be planned for implementation to coincide with either expiration of existing interlocal agreements or at such time as the existing agreements can be renegotiated. The Solid Waste Advisory Committee, however, recommends that a new governance system be implemented in the most expeditious manner reasonably achievable, but not later than 2011. Because of the legal and political complexities involved in understanding and designing regional solid waste disposal systems, the Plan recommends further study and legal expertise ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-29 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT to flesh out advantages and challenges to any proposed designs. The Liaison Board could facilitate the formation of a Regional Solid Waste Planning Subcommittee to study and discuss issues and options regarding the future structure of solid waste management and disposal administration within Spokane County, as described in Alternative 6. 6. Regional Solid Waste Planning Subcommittee The Liaison Board should establish a Regional Solid Waste Planning Subcommittee within 90-days of final Plan approval, comprised of County and municipal jurisdictions, Fairchild Air Force Base, and where appropriate, agencies and stakeholders, to discuss and further research options for future regional solid waste management administrative structures, including but not limited to: • Liaison Board assumes administration of the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System. • Transfer of the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System administration to the Board of County Commissioners. • Transfer of the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System administration to a Regional Board made up of county -wide stakeholders. • Spokane Regional Solid Waste System. • Solid Waste Disposal District. • Solid Waste Disposal District with an Executive Advisory Committee. • Independent Regional Authority. • Municipal -Operated Disposal Facility(ies). • Metropolitan Municipal Corporation 7. Assess a solid waste program tipping fee rebate. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-30 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT EXHIBIT 13-2 Comparison of Other Regions' Solid Waste Management Systems Spokane Regional SW System, WA Greater Vancouver Regional District, BC Los Angeles Sanitation Districts, CA Palm Beach, FL Pinellas County, FL NE Maryland Disposal Authority, MD Jurisdictions Number of Cities / Counties / Other County, 13 cities, 1 AF Base 21 cities, 1 electoral area County, 78 cities County, 36 cities County, 24 cities 7 counties, 1 city Population 432,000 2 million —5.1 million 1.4 million 990,000 -1.2 m Governance Governing Board Spokane City Council, Spokane County Commission GVRD Board Each district is governed by a Board of Directors Solid Waste Authority of Palm Beach Governing Board Pinellas County Board of Commissioners Authority Board of Director members, recommended by Board Executive, appointed by Governor Board Constitution Legislators 35 elected members from participating jurisdictions Each mayor of each city within that District and Chair of the Board of Supervisors for the county unincorporated territory 7 elected Palm Beach County Commissioners Elected County Commissioners Representatives of each participating jurisdiction Voting Members City of Spokane (Spokane County)* Board of Directors Governing Board County Commissioners Authority Board of Directors Governing Document(s) Interlace! Agreements, Bond contracts Joint Administrative Agreement between each District Dependent Special District Rules of Governance County ordinance Enabling State legislation and Bylaws Primary Decision - making City of Spokane GVRD Board Administrative District Governing Board BoCC ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-31 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT EXHIBIT 13-2 Comparison of Other Regions' Solid Waste Management Systems Spokane Regional SW System, WA Greater Vancouver Regional District, BC Los Angeles Sanitation Districts, CA Palm Beach, FL Pinellas County, FL NE Maryland Disposal Authority, MD Day -to -Day Administration Public/ Private City of Spokane GVRC Office of Opera- tions staff, and Construc- tion, Office of Policy, and Planning staff District administrative staff Authority staff County staff Authority staff Operations Public/ Private City of Spokane GVRC staff (3 disposal sites, 7 transfer stations) Mostly public with some private contracts Authority staff and private contracts Private except for County scalehouse staff Private contractors Debt / Financing Capital Debt Yes Yes Yes No Yes Bond Holder City of Spokane GVRD Authority Debt recently retired Each facility is respon- sible for its own debt. Some facilities are privately owned, some are owned by the facility. Repayment System Tipping fees / City of Spokane Tipping fees Primarily special property assess- ments, (not property value -based); tipping fees, electrical revenue, recycling sales, and interest income Tipping fees, capacity payments from Progress Energy Florida (PRF), electrical revenues, and recovered metals Depends on facility: tipping fees, taxes, fees on tax bill, user fees Prorated among participants Through tipping fees Through tipping fees Through special assessment and user fees Through tipping fees Through tipping fees or tax base ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-32 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT EXHIBIT 13-2 Comparison of Other Regions' Solid Waste Management Systems Spokane Regional SW System, WA Greater Vancouver Regional District, BC Los Angeles Sanitation Districts, CA Palm Beach, FL Pinellas County, FL NE Maryland Disposal Authority, MD What Works Well? Integrated disposal system works very well - residents have many options for disposing of trash, recyclables, etc. The system is flexible and the municipalities work well together and support each other. The tipping fee has not been increased since 1991, due to a 50% recycling rate. Balance of public and private facilities keeps pressure on private profit margins. Everything. Maintained same rate since early 90's; Cities satisfied; rebate "grant" to cities to fund WRR programs. Fulfilling member needs: The Authority acts as an agent of the members and handles what they want upon request. Improvements? Managing 10% annual growth rate. The system needs more capacity and is looking at other landfill options. Waste by rail Considering going to a Solid Waste Authority, separate from County government. The current institutional arrangements are work - ing well. Feedback from members has been positive and they have indicated that they are pleased with the way the Authority operates. Other Comments None ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-33 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT EXHIBIT 13-2 Comparison of Other Regions' Solid Waste Advisory Committees Spokane Regional SW System, WA Regional Solid Waste, ME East Central SW Commission, MN Fairfax County, VA Windham SWM District, VT Clark County, WA Jurisdictions Number of Cities / Counties / Other County, 13 cities, 1 AF Base 21 corporate member cities, 6 associate member cities 5 counties 1 county and 3 cities /communities within 18 towns 1 county and 7 cities Population 432,000 136,000 1 million 33,300 350,000 Governance Governing Board Spokane City Council, Spokane County Commission Non-profit corporation: SWA Board of 29 corporate members representing the 21 corporate -member cities across 3 counties ECSWC Fairfax County Board of Supervisors Clark County Board of Commissioners Board Constitution Legislators Staff and legislators Commissioner from each member county Fairfax County Representative and alternate from each member town, selected by their boards BoCC Voting Members City of Spokane (and Spokane County for major decisions) Corporate board members Joint Powers Agreement (rnultijurisdictional con- sortiums that provide a range of services, but maintain some local autonomy) Commonwealth permission allows County to provide disposal services. Charter through the State of Vermont Interlocal Agreements between county and cities direct waste to privately contracted County -designated disposal facility Governing Document(s) Interlocal Agreements, Bond contracts Interlocal Agreements, Waste Handling Agreements, Articles of Incorporation Private hauler contracts require waste to be brought to County WTE facility. WSWMD is respon- sible for design, implementation, and administration of the pro -grams necessary for disposing of the solid waste generated by the residents of member municipalities. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-34 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT EXHIBIT 13-2 Comparison of Other Regions' Solid Waste Advisory Committees Spokane Regional SW System, WA Regional Solid Waste, ME East Central SW Commission, MN Fairfax County, VA Windham SWM District, VT Clark County, WA Primary Decision - making City of Spokane ECSWC Fairfax County Board of Supervisors BoCC Day -to -Day Administration Public/ Private City of Spokane RSW staff ECSWC staff Fairfax County Public Works staff WSWMD staff Clark County staff (disposal contracts, planning activities, MRW contracts, WRR education) Operations Public/ Private City of Spokane and contracts administered by the City of Spokane RSW staff (Office, WTE Facility, Recycling center, Landfill) ECSWC (landfill and scalehouses, MRW & HHW programs) and contracts administered by ECSWC (transfer stations) Fairfax County Public Works (WTE Facility, transfer station, ash landfill, collection services, and recycling operations) The District provides services other than handling and disposal of MSW. WSWMD (community recycling roll offs, landfill closure, transfer station, drop-off recycling center, Swap shop, MRF, drop-off recycling depots in each member community, mobile collection of materials not collected at individual transfer stations). Private (refuse hauling, individual community transfer stations) No publicly run disposal operations, private contractors through contracts with Clark County (2 transfer stations, long haul landfill, including hauling, recycling MRF at one of the transfer stations - all operated by Waste Connections) ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-35 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT ExHierr 13-2 Comparison of Other Regions' Solid Waste Advisory Committees Spokane Regional SW System, WA Regional Solid Waste, ME East Central SW Commission, MN Fairfax County, VA Windham SWM District, VT Clark County, WA Debt / Financing Capital Debt Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Bond Holder City of Spokane RSW ECSWC, guaranteed by county Fairfax County District bond Repayment System Tipping fees / City of Spokane Tipping fees, electric revenue, sale of recyclables, cell phone tower / prorated member jurisdictions Tipping fees and individual County fees Tipping fees Assessments to member towns and user fees. Special programs from grants & recycling revenue Revenues for County administration and programs come from a flat administrative fee collected by disposal contractor from haulers, then paid to County. Regional cities collect admin. fee from col- lection contract. City of Vancouver includes a "franchise fee" in the collection bill. Prorated among participants Through tipping fees Through tipping fees Through tipping fees and County fees Flat contractual fee from each hauler What Works Well? All of the communities came together voluntarily to create a program to manage solid waste in the region. Counties work together well. The Commission Board works together well. Exec. Director has a strong solid waste operations background. WTE works very, very well. Expanding recycling commodities. Two streams, they will never go to single stream. 30% recy- cling rate. The 24- hour drop-off centers in the communities. The cooperative effort of the member corn- munities. One company for disposal and collection. Flat administrative fee for program revenues is not dependent on solid waste tonnage quantities. ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-36 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT Exton-13-2 Comparison of Other Regions' Solid Waste Advisory Committees Spokane Regional SW System, WA Regional Solid Waste, ME East Central SW Commission, MN Fairfax County, VA Windham SWM District, VT Clark County, WA Improvements? Single -stream recycling collection, Landfill expan- sion for MSW bypass, name change to Eco Maine: members agreed to new contracts with no closing date. Inconsistency in programs between counties. Commission needs educator on staff. Expanding curbside collection of recyclables, but fuel costs are affecting refuse and recycling collection programs. Hard to find good drivers because of competition from higher -paying jobs. People relocating to the area don't come with a "recycling or trash collection ethic." Targeting organics for material that is not backyard composted: food, contaminated paper waste. Complaints from customers about recycling other materials. Inconsistent levels of service throughout County because of separate municipal collection contracts causes confusing messaging in education programs. Considering creating consistent guidelines within SWMP for municipalities to follow when contracts are renewed. Other Comments Maine has 4 WTE facilities — more than any other state The solid waste community can learn a lot from each other. We need to continue to share information and ideas. Start mobile HHW pickup 2007. Single -stream study due November 2007, then possibly pilot program 10 - 50% recycling rate depending on community Considering disposal district to allow for taxing authority and other RSW does a small amount of recycling collection — siting 30-40 cy containers RSW does not operate permanent HHW site; City of Portland shares its facilities ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-37 SECTION 13 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT EXHIBIT 13-2 Comparison of Other Regions' Solid Waste Advisory Committees Spokane Regional SW System, WA Regional Solid Waste, ME East Central SW Commission, MN Fairfax County, VA Windham SWM District, VT Clark County, WA "Clean Green" is not a primary program for RSW - most of the municipalities have their own programs, and RWS does take some compostables occasionally at its landfill. Communities in the area that are not members of RSW contract with a private hauler (Waste Management and Casella are the largest) to haul that waste to landfills. i xv xvi xvii xviii xix Chapter 173-304 WAC http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=173-304. Chapter 173-350 WAC http://apps.lee.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=173-350. Chapter 173-351 WAC http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=173-351. Spokane Municipal Code 13.02.0112 http://www.spokanecity.org/services/documents/smc/?Section=13.02.0112. SRHD Solid Waste Handling Standards: http://www.srhd.org/downloads/safety environment/SolidWasteHandlingStandards2004.pdf Chapter 173-350-210 WAC http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=173-350-210 Chapter 36.58 RCW http://apps.leg. wa. aov/RCW/d efault. aspx? cite=36.58 Spokane County Code 8.56 http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/spokaneco/index.htm. CH2M HILL, Inc. 2006. Interviews of local County, City of Spokane, and Liaison Board representatives. Spokane Regional Solid Waste System, 2006. Interviews with representatives of regional solid waste systems. Cascadia Consulting Group, 2006. Interviews with representatives of Washington State county SWACs. Chapter 70.95.165 (3) RCW http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=70.95.165 Chapter 70.95.180 RCW http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=70.95.180 Chapter 70.95.090 http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=70.95.090 WUTC Cost Assessment Guidelines for Local Solid Waste Management Planning, 2001. http://www.wutc.wa. gov/web image.nsf/0/527 c002076feb44a8 825 6daa00785bf6/$FILE/CA%20 aug%202001.pdf Chapter 81.77 RCW http://apps.leg.wa.aov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=81.77 Chapter 36.58.100 RCW http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=36.58.100 Chapter 36.58.130 RCW http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=36.58.130 Chapter 53.04.010 RCW http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=53.04.010 ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2009 13-38 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force [FINAL DRAFT OF AUGUST 11, 20111 INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT AGREEMENT FOR SOLID WASTE HANDLING, TRANSFER AND DISPOSAL BY THE SPOKANE REGIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ALLIANCE by and among City of Airway Heights, City of Cheney, City of Deer Park, City of Fairfield, City of Latah, City of Liberty Lake, City of Medical Lake, City of Millwood, City of Rockford, City of Spangle, City of Spokane Valley, City of Waverly, and Spokane County 2011 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ARTICLE I RECITALS 1 ARTICLE II PURPOSE AND SCOPE 2 SECTION 2.1 PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT 2 SECTION 2.2 COMMITMENT & ACCESS TO JOINT FACILITIES 2 SECTION 2.3 CONTRACT DOCUMENTS 3 SECTION 2.4 DEFINITIONS 3 ARTICLE III NONPROFIT CORPORATION GOVERNANCE 4 SECTION 3.1 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ALLIANCE 4 SECTION 3.2 POWERS 4 SECTION 3.3 PUBLIC AGENCY ACCOUNTABILITY 5 SECTION 3.4 No EFFECT ON MEMBER POLICE POWERS 6 SECTION 3.5 SWMA BOARD 6 SECTION 3.6 SWMA VOTING 6 SECTION 3.7 LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVIEW AND COMMENT 8 SECTION 3.8 COMMITTEES 8 SECTION 3.9 BOOKS AND RECORDS 8 ARTICLE IV SWMA FINANCE 8 SECTION 4.1 SWMA RATES & CHARGES 8 SECTION 4.2 MEMBER COVENANTS TO EXERCISE FLOW CONTROL AND MAKE PAYMENTS 8 SECTION 4.3 MEMBER COVENANTS TO MAINTAIN CHARGES 9 SECTION 4.4 MEMBER BONDS 9 SECTION 4.5 SWMA BILLINGS AND PAYMENTS 9 SECTION 4.6 TAXEs 9 SECTION 4.7 ADMINISTRATIVE AND TREASURY SERVICES 9 SECTION 4.8 SWMA BUDGETING 10 ARTICLE V SOLID WASTE TRANSFER, DISPOSAL AND RECYCLING 11 SECTION 5.1 SWMA SERVICE OBLIGATION IN SERVICE AREA 11 SECTION 5.2 MEMBER OBLIGATION TO DELIVER FLOWS 11 SECTION 5.3 SWMA SYSTEM CAPACITY 11 SECTION 5.4 MEMBER OPTIONS IN THE EVENT OF CAPACITY CONSTRAINT 12 SECTION 5.5 COMMITMENT TO SUPPORT WASTE REDUCTION 12 SECTION 5.6 INTEGRAL INVOLVEMENT OF SWAC 12 -1- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force Page ARTICLE VI SWMA COOPERATION IN MANAGEMENT & DEVELOPMENT OF SOLID WASTE FACILITIES 13 SECTION 6.1 RESPONSIBILITY FOR JOINT FACILITIES AND LOCAL SYSTEMS 13 SECTION 6.2 RELATIONSHIP TO LOCAL PLANNING 13 SECTION 6.3 MEMBER COMMITMENTS TO ASSIST SWMA 14 ARTICLE VII STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT 14 SECTION 7.1 COORDINATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW & SEPA REQUIREMENTS 14 SECTION 7.2 SEPA COMPLIANCE 14 SECTION 7.3 RETENTION OF SUBSTANTIVE AUTHORITY 15 ARTICLE VIII LEGAL RELATIONS 15 SECTION 8.1 EFFECTIVE DATE & TERM OF AGREEMENT 15 SECTION 8.2 MEMBER WITHDRAWAL AND REMOVAL 15 SECTION 8.3 ADDITION OF MEMBERS 15 SECTION 8.4 AMENDMENT OF AGREEMENT AND ORGANIZATION 16 SECTION 8.5 NOTICE 16 SECTION 8.6 RESOLUTION OF LEGAL DISPUTES 16 SECTION 8.7 ARBITRATION. 17 SECTION 8.8 MEMBER OBLIGATION PENDING RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES 18 SECTION 8.9 SURVIVAL OF OBLIGATIONS 18 SECTION 8.10 INTERPRETATION OF AGREEMENT 18 SECTION 8.11 WAIVER 18 SECTION 8.12 REMEDIES 19 ARTICLE IX COOPERATION THROUGH CONSOLIDATION PERIOD 19 SECTION 9.1 COORDINATION: SWMA BOARD & THE COUNTY 19 SECTION 9.2 ADMINISTRATIVE AND TREASURY SERVICES CONTRACT WITH SPOKANE 19 SECTION 9.3 CONSOLIDATION PRINCIPLES AND OBJECTIVES 19 SECTION 9.4 CONSOLIDATION EVENT 20 ARTICLE X APPROVAL AND EFFECTIVE DATE 20 SECTION 10.1 EXECUTION AND APPROVAL 20 SECTION 10.2 IMPLEMENTATION 20 -11- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT AGREEMENT FOR SOLID WASTE HANDLING, TRANSFER AND DISPOSAL BY THE SPOKANE REGIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ALLIANCE THIS INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT AGREEMENT FOR SOLID WASTE HANDLING, TRANSFER AND DISPOSAL BY THE SPOKANE REGIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ALLIANCE ("Agreement") is entered into by and among the City of Airway Heights, Washington ("Airway Heights"), the City of Cheney, Washington ("Cheney"), the City of Deer Park, Washington ("Deer Park"), the City of Fairfield, Washington ("Fairfield"), the City of Latah, Washington ("Latah"), the City of Liberty Lake, Washington ("Liberty Lake"), the City of Medical Lake, Washington ("Medical Lake"), the City of Millwood, Washington ("Millwood"), the City of Rockford, Washington ("Rockford"), the City of Spangle, Washington ("Spangle"), the City of Spokane Valley, Washington ("Spokane Valley"), the City of Waverly, Washington ("Waverly") and Spokane County, Washington ("County") pursuant to Chapter 39.34 RCW. The parties are individually referred to as "Member" and collectively as the "Members." The Members agree as follows: ARTICLE I RECITALS Section 1.1 Under the broad governmental authority granted to cities and counties over solid waste, including Act XI, §11 of the State Constitution and RCW 35.21.156 and 36.58.040, certain incorporated cites in the County, together with the County, desire to enter into an interlocal cooperation agreement allowing for the formation of a new entity to manage solid waste transfer, disposal and recycling services. Section 1.2 The Members in this endeavor have concluded that the most efficient and equitable way to come together to operate this new solid waste management entity is to form a non-profit corporation under the authority of RCW 39.34.030(3)(b). Section 1.3 The Members have agreed that an independent, public, nonprofit corporate entity should be established pursuant to Chapter 24.06 RCW to enable the Members to engage in coordinated solid waste handling and disposal, recycling, and other activities including the ownership, operation and maintenance of joint use facilities, in response to the current and future Solid Waste Management Plan for Spokane County. Section 1.4 The Members will exercise control of the new non-profit corporate entity, called the "Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management Alliance" ("SWMA"), through appointment of board members by and from their legislative bodies, who will represent their respective local governments. Section 1.5 While the County will remain responsible under RCW 70.95.080 for preparing a Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan for the County, the Plan will be prepared with the participation of the SWMA Members and an expanded Solid Waste Advisory Committee. Section 1.6 The SWMA Members will enforce municipal flow control powers to effect the transfer and disposal and recycling components of the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. -1- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force Section 1.7 When not otherwise supported by rate revenues, the SWMA Members individually will fund proportional shares of capital investments of the SWMA, by population until such time as the public non-profit corporation formed pursuant to this Agreement is authorized to and has issued tax exempt municipal bonds or other forms of indebtedness in its own name. Additionally, the SWMA Members individually will fund proportional shares of operation expenses of the SWMA through payment obligations set forth in this Agreement. ARTICLE II PURPOSE AND SCOPE Section 2.1 PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT 2.1.1 The purpose of this Agreement is to provide for a new governance structure to contract for the services and construction necessary to develop and manage new joint use facilities in response to the current and future Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan for Spokane County. 2.1.2 The Members shall form a new public, nonprofit corporate entity, to be known as the Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management Alliance ("SWMA"), pursuant to chapters 39.34 and Chapter 24.06 RCW. The SWMA shall be solely controlled by Member representatives and its primary function shall be to carry out the public purposes expressed in the Solid Waste Management Plan for Spokane County and this Agreement, as both may be amended or supplemented from time to time. The Members intend for the SWMA to function as a regional agency that provides regional solid waste services, including transfer; transportation; disposal; collection, as may be authorized by separate contract with a member or members authorized to engage in solid waste collection; recycling; and, certain financial resources for closed landfills under adopted closure and post -closure plans. Section 2.2 COMMITMENT & ACCESS TO JOINT FACILITIES Consistent with the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan for Spokane County and with this Agreement, the Members shall and hereby commit to direct all solid waste in their local systems or under regulatory control to the transfer and disposal and recycling facilities designated by the SWMA. Each Member foregoes the opportunity to plan for and individually transfer or dispose of its solid waste. Because this Agreement and the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan for Spokane County contemplate that all Members will be using joint facilities and because most, if not all, Members will be transporting, or otherwise regulating, solid waste subject to their local systems through the political jurisdictions of one or more other Members, the Members declare and confirm. 2.2.1 that this Agreement is not intended as an instrument to permit one Member to control the solid waste collection services of another Member; and, 2.2.2 that each Member will cooperate to provide the others with access for solid waste transport and transfer to joint facilities. -2- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force Section 2.3 CONTRACT DOCUMENTS The following exhibits are incorporated by reference into this Agreement as though fully set forth herein: Exhibit A — Articles of Incorporation of SWMA Exhibit B — Bylaws of SWMA Exhibit C — Administrative and Treasury Services Contract Section 2.4 DEFINITIONS For purposes of this Agreement, the following terms shall have the meanings set out below. 2.4.1 "Alliance" means the SWMA. 2.4.2 "Closed Landfill" means each of the Spokane County Colbert, Greenacres and Mica landfills. 2.4.3 "Consolidation" means the point at which the SWMA has been formed and is capable of functioning as an independent agency. 2.4.4 "Debt Service" means the principal of, interest on, sinking fund requirements, reserve account requirements and any coverage requirement required by a resolution authorizing the issuance of SWMA debt. 2.4.5 "Executive Director" shall mean the chief executive officer or other person identified by the SWMA Board to be the head of the SWMA. 2.4.6 "Joint Facilities" means transfer, disposal and recycling facilities developed by or under contract to SWMA. 2.4.7 "Joint Facilities Maintenance and Operation Expenses" means all costs and expenses relating to and properly chargeable to the operation and maintenance of the Joint Facilities, whether directly or by contract, including taxes and "in lieu of taxes" chargeable to the operations of the Joint Faculties plus administrative overhead expenses, and any other similar costs chargeable to the Joint Facilities. 2.4.8 "Local Collection System" means solid waste collection systems that are operated by or under contract with one of the SWMA Members or by a municipality that is not a SWMA Member. 2.4.9 "Plan" means the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan for Spokane County dated September 15, 2009 and as may be amended from time to time. 2.4.10 "SWMA" means the SWMA created by this Agreement, and the non-profit corporation to be created by the Members pursuant to Chapter 24.06 RCW. -3- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force 2.4.11 "SWMA Board" or "Board of Directors" means the board of directors created pursuant to Chapter 24.06 RCW to manage and oversee the SWMA non-profit corporation. 2.4.12 "SWMA Debt" means any notes, bonds or other obligation of the SWMA issued to finance or refinance improvements, betterments, or extensions to Joint Facilities or any other costs related to the SWMA System. 2.4.13 "SWMA System" means all Joint Facilities that are owned, managed, operated, or controlled by one or more of the Members or by SWMA or that are used or useful in the performance of SWMA's functions, 2.4.14 "Solid Waste" means solid waste as defined by RCW 70.95.030(22). 2.4.15 "Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management Alliance" or "SWMA" means the non-profit corporation to be created by the Members pursuant to Chapter 24.06 RCW and this Agreement. 2.4.16 "SWAC" means the Solid Waste Advisory Committee mandated under RCW 70.95.165, that will be involved in providing continuing advice to SWMA in addition to its advice on the development of the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. 2.4.17 "Tipping Fees" means the fees established by SWMA for use of Joint Facilities or other solid waste transfer, disposal or recycling facilities under contract with the SWMA. ARTICLE III NONPROFIT CORPORATION GOVERNANCE Section 3.1 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ALLIANCE As soon as practical after this Agreement takes effect, the Members shall act to form a nonprofit corporation under Chapter 24.06 RCW to be formally called the "Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management Alliance." A foiru of articles of incorporation and bylaws are attached as Exhibits A and B respectively, and the Members shall use articles of incorporation and bylaws substantially in the form set out in Exhibits A and B to create the nonprofit corporation. Section 3.2 POWERS The SWMA, an independent legal entity, acting through its Board of Directors and duly authorized employees and agents, shall have all the powers of an agency under Chapter 39.34 RCW, a nonprofit corporation organized under Chapter 24.06 RCW, and as a tax-exempt organization pursuant to Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as amended. Among its powers, the SWMA shall have the full power and authority to: 3.2.1 Acquire, construct, receive, own, manage, lease, sell, and otherwise dispose of real property, personal property, intangible property, and Joint Facilities; 3.2.2 Plan, develop, replace, operate and maintain Joint Facilities; -4- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force 3.2.3 Enter into contracts with a SWMA Member or any person or entity for goods, services, work, or other benefits to the SWMA; 3.2.4 Borrow money and issue debt instruments or provide for the borrowing of money and issuance of debt instruments; 3.2.5 Receive gifts or grants for the planning, design, development, construction, or operation of Joint Facilities, or assets or programs to further SWMA's purposes, or for other purposes necessary to carry out SWMA's purposes; 3.2.6 Lend money or provide services or facilities to any Member or other governmental utility or governmental service provider in furtherance of SWMA's purposes; 3.2.7 Invest its funds; 3.2.8 Sue and be sued; 3.2.9 Hire and fire employees of the SWMA; 3.2.10 Fix salaries, wages and other compensation of officers and employees; 3.2.11 Employ or retain engineering, legal, financial or other specialized personnel and consultants as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of the SWMA; 3.2.12 Impose, alter, regulate, control, and Tipping Fees at its Joint Faculties; 3.2.13 Purchase insurance and participate in pooled insurance and self-insurance programs; 3.2.14 Indemnify the Members and their officers and employees in accordance with law; 3.2.15 Establish policies, guidelines, or rules to carry out its powers and responsibilities; 3.2.16 Exercise all other powers within the authority of and that may be exercised individually by all of the Members with respect to solid waste transfer, disposal or recycling or other SWMA purposes or functions as set forth herein; and 3.2.17 Take any other actions as the SWMA Board deems necessary to implement the Plan, to protect and advance the interests of the SWMA System, its Members, and its ratepayers that are consistent with this Agreement, Chapter 39.34 RCW, and other applicable law. Section 3.3 PUBLIC AGENCY ACCOUNTABILITY The Members intend for the SWMA to operate and function as a public agency. The SWMA Board shall conduct its deliberations and take action openly. Therefore, the SWMA shall operate and conduct its business subject to the Open Public Meetings Act (Ch. 42.30 RCW, as may be amended), the Public Records Act (Ch. 42.56 RCW, as may be amended), local government accountancy statutes (RCW 43.09.200 et seq., as may be amended), and other applicable laws, regulations, and self-imposed policies. -5- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force Section 3.4 No EFFECT ON MEMBER POLICE POWERS Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to limit the exercise of a Member's police or regulatory powers as may be required or allowed by law. The Members confirm that the SWMA Board has no local solid waste collection authority within each Member's jurisdiction, unless SWMA enters a separate contract with a member or members. However, the SWMA Board will have a central role in developing the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan and exercising flow control to effect the objectives of that Plan. In addition, the SWMA Board may comment on proposed changes by Members to their solid waste collection plans where such changes could affect the amount, timing or characteristics of solid waste to be handled in the SWMA System. Section 3.5 SWMA BOARD 3.5.1 Composition. The Board of Directors for the SWMA shall consist of one Director from each Member. A Director shall be appointed by and from each Member, and shall be an elected official of the Member. 3.5.2 Alternate Director. Each Member shall appoint an Alternate Director to serve when the Member's Director is not available. The Alternate Director is not required to be an elected official of the Member. 3.5.3 Removal. The Director and alternate Director of each Member appointed to the SWMA Board shall serve at the will and discretion of the legislative body of that Member. Any Member may remove its Director or Alternate Director from the SWMA Board at any time. In the event that a Member's Director or Alternate Director is so removed, is no longer qualified to serve on, or otherwise departs from the SWMA Board, that Member's legislative body shall promptly appoint a new Director or Alternate Director to the SWMA Board. It is the Members' intent that a Director on the SWMA Board will represent his or her Member local government in voting and acting as a SWMA Board member. 3.5.4 Joint Representation. It is the Members' intent that a representative on the SWMA Board will represent his or her Member local government in voting and acting as a SWMA Board member. Upon request to, and approval by the Board, one or more Members may agree to be represented at SWMA by another Member's Director (a "representative Director"). A representative Director shall be an elected official. Such an agreement shall be in writing and approved by a Member's legislative authority. 3.5.5 Local Government Representation. The Members hereby agree that legislative oversight by their respective local governments shall not be required for any SWMA Board decisions in the management and operation of the SWMA System, except as expressly provided herein. SWMA Board Directors shall represent the interests of their respective local governments in carrying out their responsibilities to act in the best interests of the SWMA. Section 3.6 SWMA VOTING 3.6.1 Procedures and voting. A Member's alternate Director shall vote in place of that Member's Director when the Director is absent or unavailable or when the Director position is -6- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force vacant; provided, an alternate Director shall not participate in super majority votes. The SWMA Board shall establish procedures for conducting its meetings consistent with Roberts Rules of Order or other rules deemed appropriate, and its decisions shall be by a majority vote except when a super majority vote is required, as provided below. 3.6.2 Majority Voting. Each action of the SWMA Board shall be by majority vote, or by super majority vote under Section 3.6.3. A majority vote shall consist of the votes of Directors (or alternative or representative Directors) representing A) at least forty-five percent (45%) of the total population of all Members; and B) a majority of all Members. 3.6.3 Super Majority Votes. A supermajority vote shall consist of the votes of Directors (or representative Director who is an elected official) representing A) at least forty-five percent (45%) of the total population of all Members; and B) a minimum of sixty percent (60%) of all Members. 3.6.4 Super Majority Actions. The following actions shall require a super majority vote by the SWMA Board A) Approval or amendment of the Plan; B) Revisions to the Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws or dissolution of the SWMA non-profit corporation; C) Issuance of bonds or other indebtedness; D) Establishment of tipping fees and rates; E) Establishment of any payment requirements directly from Members, in addition to Tipping Fees for use of the SWMA System; F) Employment of an executive director; G) Approval of a contract providing for SWMA expenditures in excess of $100,000 H) Member removal; and I) Member addition; provided, initial membership shall not require super majority approval. 3.6.5 Member Population. For purposes of this Section 3.6, a Member's population shall be determined from information maintained by the State of Washington Office of Financial Management (or successor agency) as of December 31 of the calendar year before the year in which a vote is taken. -7- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force Section 3.7 LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVIEW AND COMMENT The SWMA Board shall, in a timely manner, solicit the review and comment by its Member local governments and the SWAC of proposed changes in Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan, annual budgets and annual capital programs. The SWMA Board shall consult with a Member local government on any specific Joint Facility capital project proposed within the Member jurisdiction prior to approving the final design for such project. Section 3.8 COMMITTEES The SWMA Board may form and convene committees and advisory bodies as it deems appropriate for Member review and comment, public input, efficient staff and Board work, and other purposes. Section 3.9 BOOKS AND RECORDS Any Member of the SWMA Board or a representative of such Member may examine the books and records of any Member or of SWMA that relate to the Joint Facilities, to the administration thereof, or this Agreement. After provision of reasonable notice, such books and records may be examined at the Member's sole expense at any reasonable time during SWMA business hours or of that of the Member subject to examination. The SWMA Board may appoint an auditor or accountant to review any such books and records and the costs of such review shall be charged to SWMA which in turn may include such costs as a Joint Facilities Maintenance and Operations Expense. ARTICLE IV SWMA FINANCE Section 4.1 SWMA RATES & CHARGES The SWMA shall establish rates and collect Tipping Fees for solid waste transfer, disposal and recycling that will be at least sufficient to pay the expenses of maintenance and operation of the SWMA System and will meet the principal, interest and coverage requirements and other bond covenants of all obligations issued by the SWMA or by a Member on behalf of the SWMA that are related to improvements and extensions to the SWMA System and that constitute a charge upon the revenue of such system. Section 4.2 MEMBER COVENANTS TO EXERCISE FLOW CONTROL AND MAKE PAYMENTS 4.2.1 Covenants to exercise flow control. In consideration for the SWMA and operating the Joint Facilities and as a condition for use thereof and service therefrom, each Member irrevocably covenants, obligates and binds itself to direct solid waste collected within or subject to its jurisdiction to transfer, disposal and recycling facilities designated by the SWMA pursuant to the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. 4.2.2 Covenants to make payments. In addition, each Member irrevocably covenants, obligates and binds itself to pay any additional payments, in addition to Tipping Fees, required of all Members pursuant to a super majority vote of the Board. -8- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force Section 4.3 MEMBER COVENANTS TO MAINTAIN CHARGES Each Member irrevocably covenants and agrees to establish rates and collect fees for solid waste collection in the case of a Member's operation of or contract for a collection system within its jurisdiction, or otherwise collect fees and taxes that will be at least sufficient to pay any Tipping Fees or direct charges established by the SWMA and to pay the other maintenance and operation expenses of their respective local solid waste collection systems. Section 4.4 MEMBER BONDS On and after the effective date of this Agreement, no Member shall issue any debt secured by existing or future Tipping Fees, Joint Facilities, or any other SWMA revenues or assets. However, with the approval of the SWMA Board, a Member may issue such debt on behalf of or for the benefit of the SWMA; or debt secured by revenues from SWMA payments to a Member pursuant to separate contract. Section 4.5 SWMA BILLINGS AND PAYMENTS For any direct charges to the Members that may be adopted by supermajority of the Board, the SWMA shall bill each Member on the first day of each calendar month for charges accrued to the first day of the immediately preceding month, unless already paid as provided in Section 4.1. Each Member shall pay such charges so billed by the twentieth day of the month such bill is received, after which time such billing shall be delinquent. Charges omitted in one month may be billed in the following months. Delinquent charges shall accrue interest on the unpaid balance at a rate, and pursuant to policy, to be established from time -to -time by the Board. Section 4.6 TAXES In recognition of the SWMA as a public entity, the Members shall not impose any tax on the gross receipts of the SWMA. Each Member, however, may levy a gross receipts tax on its own solid waste collections and other non-SWMA solid waste operations in its jurisdiction, including receipts representing funds collected to pay any direct charge to the Members that may be adopted by the SWMA. Section 4.7 ADMINISTRATIVE AND TREASURY SERVICES 4.7.1 Interim Services. For an interim period of up to one year, SWMA will enter into an Administrative and Treasury Services Contract with Spokane County to provide for Spokane County to provide administrative and treasury services to SWMA for an initial period of time. Within the first year of its incorporation the SWMA shall, in its sole discretion, decide how to operate and maintain the administrative and treasury services through, either through its own staff or through a contract or contracts with others, including any of the Members. 4.7.2 Separate Funds. The SWMA Board shall control and direct the disposition of all SWMA funds and monies. Spokane County and any successor contractor shall establish a separate fund to hold SWMA funds, establish special accounts within the SWMA Fund, and keep separate and adequate books and records of the same, all as required by law and regulations of the State Auditor -9- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force and as the SWMA Board may direct. The contractor shall also be responsible for investment of SWMA funds consistent with the investment policy adopted by the SWMA Board. Section 4.8 SWMA BUDGETING 4.8.1 Annual SWMA budget. A) By each June 1, the SWMA Board shall notify each Member of its proposed budget and capital improvement program for the Joint Facilities showing its estimate of the debt service and reserve requirements for debt obligations incurred to finance the SWMA System. Each Member shall furnish SWMA with its recommendations and comments by July 31. Thereafter SWMA shall adopt its final annual budget and capital improvement program for the forthcoming calendar year on or before August 31. Subject to adjustment as provided in this subparagraph, any direct charges to the Members over and above Tipping Fees shall be based on the final budget. B) By March 1 of each year, SWMA shall determine and notify the Members of the actual debt service and reserve requirements of the SWMA Debt, the actual Joint Facilities Maintenance and Operation Expenses, the actual requirements for SWMA contract obligations and any other payment requirements for the immediately preceding calendar year, or part thereof, covered by this Agreement. C) The annual schedule of budget events is summarized as follows: March 1st Notice of previous year's reconciliation March 15th Preliminary solid waste generation estimate for next calendar year provided by SWMA April 15th Members respond to preliminary solid waste generation for next calendar year May 1st SWMA provides final solid waste generation estimate for next calendar year June 1st SWMA provides proposed budget, Tipping Fee levels and capital improvement program for next calendar year July 31st Members and public comment on proposed SWMA budget, Tipping Fee levels and capital improvement program for next calendar year August 31st SWMA adopts budget and capital improvement program for next calendar and advises Members of Tipping Fees and any direct charges to Members to take effect January 1st D) To respond to special circumstances, the SWMA Board shall have the authority to amend the annual budget schedule in a given year. 4.8.2 SWMA Joint Facilities budget adjustments. The SWMA shall operate within its annual budget. Should debt service and reserve requirements for the SWMA debt, or Joint Facilities Maintenance and Operation Expenses, or contract requirements increase above budget estimates, or should the money in the operations account or capital account of the SWMA be insufficient to meet and pay those requirements and expenses in that calendar year, the SWMA may amend its -10- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force budget and increase the Tipping Fees or direct charges to the Members after first submitting the proposed budget amendment and proposed increases to the Members for comment. ARTICLE V SOLID WASTE TRANSFER, DISPOSAL AND RECYCLING Section 5.1 SWMA SERVICE OBLIGATION IN SERVICE AREA SWMA shall accept all Member solid waste that is approved for delivery to Joint Facilities within the SWMA System, subject to the conditions and limitations established by the SWMA. The SWMA is established to provide solid waste transfer, disposal and recycling services for solid waste generated throughout Spokane County, but it may also accept solid waste from other jurisdictions, provided such acceptance is in accord with the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan for Spokane County. Section 5.2 MEMBER OBLIGATION TO DELIVER FLOWS Each Member shall enact and enforce such ordinances as necessary to assure solid waste flow control and for delivery of solid waste collected by its Local Collection System, or within its jurisdiction, to the SWMA System. Each Member shall direct solid waste to such locations in the SWMA System and pursuant to procedures and other terms and conditions as may be established by the SWMA Board and in accordance with the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan for Spokane County. Except as otherwise provided by law, a Member shall not direct solid waste generated in its jurisdiction to an agency other than SWMA; a SWMA contractor, designated for such purposes; or, without the consent of the SWMA Board. Section 5.3 SWMA SYSTEM CAPACITY 5.3.1 Annual solid waste predictions. The SWMA Board shall annually provide to the Members by March 15th a preliminary estimate of solid waste that is expected to be generated within each Member local government based on data relating to population and employment, and economic development Each Member, within thirty (30) days of receipt of the estimate, shall a) estimate and provide to SWMA the expected building activity within its jurisdiction for the following calendar year based on plats and/or building permits approved or pending immediate approval and b) provide to SWMA any other information that it would like SWMA to consider in establishing a final estimate of the transfer, disposal and recycling capacity available during the following calendar year. After receiving such comments and information from the Members, the SWMA Board shall publish a final estimate no later than each May 1st identifying the total estimated capacity available for the following year in the SWMA System and the percentage of such capacity expected to be utilized during such year. 5.3.2 No default. The SWMA shall not be in default of its obligations under this Agreement or any other intergovernmental contract in the event that the SWMA Board determines that insufficient capacity exists to accept, transfer, dispose, or recycle all solid waste generated within the Members' jurisdictions, despite using best efforts to develop sufficient capacity. The existence of a capacity constraint or the unavailability of additional capacity shall not excuse or reduce any Member's obligation to exercise flow control or to make any required payments to the SWMA under this Agreement. -11- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force Section 5.4 MEMBER OPTIONS IN THE EVENT OF CAPACITY CONSTRAINT 5.4.1 In the event that the SWMA Board limits additional solid waste generated within the Member's jurisdiction to the SWMA System pursuant to Section 5.3, the following exclusive remedies are available to the Members, but only for the duration of such limitation. A) A Member may deliver additional solid waste to an agency other than the SWMA System for transfer, disposal or recycling; and B) A Member may develop its own solid waste facilities for transfer, disposal or recycling; provided that such facilities are sized no larger than reasonably necessary to serve customers during the expected duration of the capacity constraint in the SWMA System. 5.4.2 The foregoing remedies are the exclusive remedies available to a Member as to the SWMA and the other Members in the event of an SWMA System capacity constraint, except that the Members shall not be limited to such exclusive remedies in the event the SWMA is in default of its obligations under this Agreement. Section 5.5 COMMITMENT TO SUPPORT WASTE REDUCTION As early as practical, but in no event later than one year after consolidation, the SWMA Board will develop economic and other incentives that assist individual Members to implement rates and other incentives to reduce the generation of solid waste in their respective jurisdictions and throughout the County. Section 5.6 INTEGRAL INVOLVEMENT OF SWAC 5.6.1 The SWAC will be integrally involved in developing plans for SWMA facilities, amendments to the Spokane County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan and economic and other incentives for the reduction of solid waste generation throughout the County. 5.6.2 In order to encourage the broadest participation by the SWAC, the SWMA will take steps to expand the membership beyond the minimal number and representative membership prescribed under RCW 70.95.165 by suggesting a broad membership for appointment by the Spokane County Board of Commissioners. 5.6.3 The primary responsibilities of the SWAC are to provide both technical and policy advice to the SWMA in the development of the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan, development of facilities for transfer, disposal and recycling of solid waste, and economic and other incentives for the reduction of waste generation throughout the County. 5.6.4 The SWAC will be responsible for its own internal organization, but it is anticipated that as part of its work the SWAC will create standing technical advisory committees to review specific issues that come before them and to assist the SWMA in its deliberations. 5.6.5 The SWAC costs and fees, including costs and fees relating to Solid Waste Management Plan amendments, adoption and implementation, shall be included as SWMA Joint Facilities Maintenance and Operation Expenses. -12- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force ARTICLE VI SWMA COOPERATION IN MANAGEMENT & DEVELOPMENT OF SOLID WASTE FACILITIES Section 6.1 RESPONSIBILITY FOR JOINT FACILITIES AND LOCAL SYSTEMS 6.1.1 Joint Facilities. The SWMA shall in its sole discretion determine the name, location, and time of construction of any SWMA Joint Facilities. The SWMA shall maintain through responsible insurers including insurance pools public liability insurance for Joint Facilities operations and responsibilities in accordance with industry standards. 6.1.2 Local Systems. The Members shall maintain and operate their respective local collection systems and facilities in accordance with high engineering standards and in conformity with the standards established by the state and federal agencies having jurisdiction over them. The Members shall secure and maintain with responsible insurers including insurance pools all such insurance as is customarily maintained with respect to solid waste systems and facilities of like character against loss of or damage and other liability to the extent that such insurance can be secured and maintained at reasonable cost. 6.1.3 Closed Landfills. SWMA shall include within its system of rates and charges, such amounts as maybe necessary to provide funding to Spokane County for the ongoing closure and post -closure operation, maintenance and monitoring of a Closed Landfill consistent with closure and post -closure plans in existence at the time of this Agreement. Except as otherwise provided in this Section 6.1.3, SWMA shall have no responsibility for any cost, expense or liability for environmental clean-up and/or damages at or caused by a Member's Closed Landfill or other landfill or a closed or other landfill within a Member's jurisdiction. Provided, nothing in this Section 6.1.3 shall limit SWMA's authority and responsibility (if any) for solid waste handling under SWMA management and control. 6.1.4 Liability. Any liability incurred by the SWMA as a result of the operation of the SWMA System shall be the sole liability of the SWMA and any liability incurred by a Member as a result of the operation of its local collection systems and facilities shall be the sole liability of that Member. Section 6.2 RELATIONSHIP TO LOCAL PLANNING The Plan shall be consistent with and responsive to solid waste management plans adopted both individually and collectively by the Members at the time this Agreement is adopted and whenever the Plan is amended. Future solid waste management plans proposed individually or collectively by the Members that affect solid waste transfer, disposal and recycling shall be offered to the SWMA Board for review and comment regarding their relationship to current SWMA plans prior to their adoption. Before adopting any new or modified solid waste management plan to be integrated with the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan for the County, each Member shall forward any such plan proposal to the SWMA Board and to the SWAC for review and comment prior to the Plan being processed consistent with Chapter 70.95 RCW. -13- 51151049.E Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force Section 6.3 MEMBER COMMITMENTS TO ASSIST SWMA To the extent legally feasible, each Member agrees to give good faith consideration to SWMA requests for necessary zoning, land use, eminent domain proceedings and other permits and approvals to implement the Plan. In the event that a Member completes an eminent domain proceeding for the benefit of the SWMA to secure property or property rights for Joint Facilities, the SWMA shall compensate the Member for its expenses and for just compensation paid for such property and property rights. ARTICLE VII STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT Section 7.1 COORDINATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW & SEPA REQUIREMENTS The Members and the SWMA are obligated to identify and consider environmental impacts, alternatives and mitigation measures in the development of plans, programs and facilities relating to solid waste management. The State Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW, and the regulations and ordinances promulgated under it ("SEPA"), establishes procedures for preparing environmental documents and obtaining input from citizens and agencies, and requires identification of a lead agency to prepare the environmental documents and administer the environmental review process. SEPA also requires agencies to integrate environmental review at the earliest time in the decision making process to ensure that planning and decisions reflect environmental values. The Members agree that it is generally in the public interest for the SWMA to directly manage environmental review of SWMA proposals and actions to assure the early consideration of environmental factors. For purposes of this Article VII, "action" has the meaning given it in WAC 197-11-704, and "proposal" has the meaning provided in WAC 197-11-784. Section 7.2 SEPA COMPLIANCE 7.2.1 SWMA as an Agency under SEPA. The SWMA shall fulfill the responsibilities of an agency pursuant to SEPA in connection with all proposals and actions which it undertakes. By carrying out the responsibilities of an agency under SEPA, the SWMA shall satisfy any SEPA obligations that apply directly to the SWMA as well as any that may apply to indirectly due to SWMA acting on a Members' behalf. 7.2.2 Procedural Responsibilities as Lead Agency. With respect to SWMA proposals and actions, the SWMA shall carry out the Members' lead agency procedural responsibilities under SEPA, including the procedural functions of a "lead agency" under SEPA, WAC 197-11-758. This includes, without limitation, authority to adopt agency SEPA rules, to establish an administrative appeals process, to enter into lead agency agreements pursuant to WAC 197-11-944, and to appoint a "responsible official." However, the Members retain their legal authority to assert lead agency status for projects located within their respective jurisdictions as permitted under SEPA, including, for example, by WAC 197-11-340(2)(e) and 197-11-948. -14- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force Section 7.3 RETENTION OF SUBSTANTIVE AUTHORITY The SWMA's authority under this Article VII is to implement the procedural requirements of SEPA for SWMA proposals and actions. The Members retain their respective substantive authorities to condition or deny such proposals and actions in their respective jurisdictions as part of their zoning, land use, SEPA, or other permitting processes. In addition, pursuant to its responsibility under Chapter 70.95 RCW, the County retains its lead responsibility for the Spokane County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. ARTICLE VIII LEGAL RELATIONS Section 8.1 EFFECTIVE DATE AND TERM OF AGREEMENT 8.1.1 Effective date. This Agreement shall become effective on the first date when all of the following events have occurred: A) the Agreement has been executed by those Members choosing to join by October 3, 2011; and B) the Agreement has been filed with the Spokane County Auditor pursuant to RCW 39.34.040. 8.1.2 Duration. Commencing on the effective date specified above, this Agreement shall be for a term of thirty-five (35) years or such longer period as any SWMA Debt is outstanding or the payment thereof is not fully provided for, secured and funded. Section 8.2 MEMBER WITHDRAWAL AND REMOVAL 8.2.1 Withdrawal. Any Member, upon at least two (2) years' written notice to the Board, may individually withdraw from the obligations of this Agreement with the consent of all of the other Members, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, after all of that Member's proportionate share of SWMA Debt is retired or payment thereof is fully provided for, secured and funded, and the remaining Members shall continue to be bound by this Agreement as it may be amended. 8.2.2 Removal. Any Member may be removed from SWMA upon: A) the final action on a dispute under Section 8.6; and, B) the Member's non-compliance with the order and/or judgment arising out of the dispute. A Member shall be given no less than sixty (60) days written notice of the SWMA Board's consideration of a Member's removal. The Member shall have a right to be heard by the SWMA Board prior to action on the Member's termination. Upon termination of a Member by the SWMA Board, the Member shall remain subject to that Member's proportionate share of SWMA Debt incurred by SWMA incurred prior to the sixty (60) day notice provided by this Section 8.2.2. Section 8.3 ADDITION OF MEMBERS 8.3.1 A new city incorporating within the County after October 3, 2011, upon at least one hundred eighty (180) days' written request to the Board, shall be automatically added as a Member to this Agreement and as a member of the Board of the SWMA. -15- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force 8.3.2 An existing city not joining SWMA prior to October 3, 2011 shall only be added as a new Member with the consent of a majority of the other Members, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 8.3.3 Any Member city or the County that has previously withdrawn from SWMA, shall only be added as a new Member with the consent of a super majority of the other Members, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Section 8.4 AMENDMENT OF AGREEMENT AND ORGANIZATION This Agreement may be amended with the approval of the legislative bodies of the Members. The SWMA may be converted from a non-profit corporation, with the approval of the legislative bodies of the Members, into a separate municipal corporation if and as permitted by law. Upon the creation of such a separate municipal corporation, all SWMA rights and obligations under this Agreement shall transfer to that new municipal corporation. Section 8.5 NoTICE Notices required to be given to Members shall be deemed given when served on the respective City Clerks and the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners. When members of the SWMA Board must be notified, notice to one Director thereof from each Member shall be sufficient compliance, but reasonable efforts shall be made to give notice to every alternate Director as well. Section 8.6 RESOLUTION OF LEGAL DISPUTES 8.6.1 Exclusive Process. To effect a quick and efficient resolution of legal disputes that may arise under this Agreement, the Members establish the following procedure. All claims or disputes concerning the interpretation or application of this Agreement or breach thereof ("Dispute") shall be decided exclusively by the following dispute resolution procedure unless all Members agree in writing otherwise. This dispute resolution procedure applies only to disputes of a legal nature that arise under this Agreement, and shall not be construed to apply to legislative or policy matters that are within the discretion or authority of the SWMA Board or individual Members. 8.6.2 Notice of Dispute. Each Member shall use its best efforts to resolve issues prior to giving Notice of Dispute and invoking the procedures set forth in this Section. In the event that any Member is not satisfied with the results of the resolution, that Member, acting through its representative on the SWMA Board, shall give prompt written notice of any Dispute to SWMA. If the Dispute is between Members, the notice shall provide a copy of the notice to the other Members' representatives on the SWMA Board, with a copy to the SWMA Executive Director. This notice, herein referred to as a "Notice of Dispute," shall clearly state the subject matter of the unresolved issues and the relief requested. 8.6.3 Level I. Within ten (10) working days of receipt of a Notice of Dispute, each Member's representative on the SWMA Board shall designate a representative and the designated representatives shall meet and confer and attempt to resolve the Dispute for a period not to exceed five (5) working days. If the Dispute is not resolved at the close of the Level I meeting, the -16- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force designated representatives shall prepare before adjournment of the meeting a written memorandum summarizing the matters that remain at issue. 8.6.4 Level II. If the Dispute is not resolved within 48 hours of the close of the Level I meeting, each designated representative shall meet with that Member's representative on the SWMA Board to discuss the Dispute and the memorandum. Within ten (10) working days of the close of the Level I meeting, the designated representatives of the Members shall meet and confer and attempt to resolve the Dispute for an additional period not to exceed five (5) working days. Attendance by SWMA Board members at the Level II meeting is optional. If the Members are not able to resolve the Dispute in the Level II meeting, the designated representatives shall discuss the use of mediation, arbitration, or other alternative dispute resolution process before concluding the Level II meeting. 8.6.5 Documentation. The terms of the resolution of all Disputes concluded in Level I or II meetings shall be memorialized in writing and signed by each Member's representative on the SWMA Board, and a SWMA Board representative. 8.6.6 Level III. If the Dispute is not resolved within 48 hours of the close of the Level II meeting, then A) the Members may mediate the issue; B) the Members may submit the dispute to arbitration as provided in Section 8.7; or C) SWMA or any Member may commence a civil action to resolve the Dispute, unless the Parties agree otherwise in writing. Mediation and arbitration shall require the prior written consent of SWMA and Member(s) involved with the Dispute. Section 8.7 ARBITRATION. 8.7.1 Arbitration shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington, including Chapter 7.04A RCW, in accordance with the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association. Provided, the American Arbitration Association shall not administer or otherwise have any involvement in arbitration matters. 8.7.2 All arbitrated disputes shall be heard and decided in Spokane County by one arbitrator selected by the Parties. If the Parties are unable to select an arbitrator, the presiding judge of Spokane County shall select an arbitrator from a list of three (3) arbitrators, each list submitted by a Party. 8.7.3 There shall be no consolidation of any arbitration with any other arbitration involving, arising from, or relating to this Agreement, except as otherwise agreed in writing by the Parties. 8.7.4 Any Dispute shall be limited to the interpretation and application of this Agreement and may not impair the contract and debt obligations of SWMA or the powers of SWMA to fix the budget for and determine the methods used in the management of the Joint Facilities. 8.7.5 Costs and Fees. In the event suit or action or arbitration is instituted to enforce any right granted herein, each Member shall be responsible for payment of its own attorney fees and costs. SWMA attorney fees and expenses shall be a Joint Facilities Maintenance and Operation Expense. -17- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force Section 8.8 MEMBER OBLIGATION PENDING RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES The initiation or existence of a dispute between the Members or between one or more Members and the SWMA arising out of or relating to this Agreement shall not relieve or authorize the deferral of the Members' duty to exercise flow control of solid waste or make payments to the SWMA as provided herein. Section 8.9 SURVIVAL OF OBLIGATIONS The Members' obligations under Section 8.2 of this Agreement shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. Section 8.10 INTERPRETATION OF AGREEMENT 8.10.1 Governing law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington. The exclusive jurisdiction and venue for any lawsuit between the Members arising out of this Agreement shall be in Spokane County Superior Court. 8.10.2 Assignment. This Agreement shall be binding on each Member and the successors to them and may not be assigned in any respect without the consent of all Members. 8.10.3 Third party beneficiaries. The Members expressly do not intend to create any right, obligation or liability, or promise any performance, to any third party. The Members have not created any right for any third party to enforce this Agreement. 8.10.4 Severability. It is the belief of the Members that all provisions of this Agreement are lawful. If any covenant or provision of this Agreement shall be finally adjudicated by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, such adjudication shall not affect the validity, obligation or performance of any other covenant or provision, or part thereof, which in itself is valid if such remainder conforms to the terms and requirements of applicable law and the intent of this Agreement. In such event, the Members shall enter into immediate negotiations for the purpose of arriving at a mutually satisfactory replacement of such covenant or provision. 8.10.5 Entire Agreement. This Agreement embodies the Members' entire agreement on the issues covered by it, except as supplemented by subsequent written agreements that the Parties make. All prior negotiations and draft written agreements are merged into and superseded by this Agreement. 8.10.6 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be considered for all purposes as an original. Section 8.11 WAIVER No waiver by any party of any term or condition of this Agreement shall be deemed or construed as a waiver of any other term or condition, nor shall a waiver of any breach be deemed to constitute a waiver of any subsequent breach whether of the same or a different provision of this Agreement. -18- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force Section 8.12 REMEDIES In addition to the remedies provided by law, this Agreement shall be specifically enforceable by any party. ARTICLE IX COOPERATION THROUGH CONSOLIDATION PERIOD Section 9.1 COORDINATION: SWMA BOARD & THE COUNTY The Members recognize that, during at least the initial twelve (12) months after the effective date of this Agreement, extraordinary cooperative efforts will be required to coordinate the legal and service obligations of the SWMA System and to complete all of the legal and administrative steps necessary to consolidate SWMA operations. Section 9.2 ADMINISTRATIVE AND TREASURY SERVICES CONTRACT WITH SPOKANE To provide for an orderly transition of administrative and treasury services, SWMA and Spokane County shall enter into an Administrative and Treasury Services Contract generally in the form set out in Exhibit C. The term of the Administrative and Treasury Services Contract shall commence on the date of Consolidation and terminate six months after the SWMA Board provides notice of termination to Spokane County, which notice shall not be given earlier than December 31, 2011. This Section shall not preclude other contracts with Spokane County at the SWMA Board's discretion. Section 9.3 CONSOLIDATION PRINCIPLES AND OBJECTIVES The Members shall use their best efforts and work together in good faith to achieve Consolidation by meeting the following objectives: 9.3.1 SWMA. The SWMA shall have been formed; confirmed Section 501(c)(3) status with the Internal Revenue Service, and demonstrated its capability of carrying out its responsibilities under this Agreement. 9.3.2 Flow control and Tipping Fees. Each Member shall have approved and imposed flow control requirements and Tipping Fees, and the proceeds are under the control of and available for use by the SWMA. 9.3.3 Administrative and Treasury Services Contract. The SWMA and Spokane County shall have entered the Administrative and Treasury Services Contract to take effect upon Consolidation. 9.3.4 Other necessary steps. As determined by the SWMA Board, the Members shall take such other steps and actions as are necessary and appropriate to enable the SWMA to function as a comprehensive management entity for solid waste transfer, disposal and recycling. -19- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force Section 9.4 CONSOLIDATION EVENT When it determines that the Consolidation objectives set out in Section 9.3 have been substantially achieved, the SWMA Board shall adopt a resolution by super majority vote that finds and declares that Consolidation has been achieved. The Members acknowledge that the SWMA Board may make a finding of Consolidation that reflects substantial attainment of the objectives. ARTICLE X APPROVAL AND EFFECTIVE DATE Section 10.1 EXECUTION AND APPROVAL 10.1.1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each Party has caused this Agreement to be signed by its duly authorized officer or representative as of the date set forth below its signature. 10.1.2 Each Member warrants that it is authorized to and has executed this Agreement for and on behalf of the Member. Section 10.2 IMPLEMENTATION This Agreement shall take effect and be in force consistent with Agreement Section 8.1.1. Provided, a Party or Parties executing the Agreement may take such steps as appropriate prior to the Agreement Effective date to prepare for the implementation of this Agreement. CITY OF AIRWAY CITY OF CHENEY HEIGHTS By Its: Date: Attest: By Its: Date: Attest: CITY OF DEER PARK CITY OF FAIRFIELD By By Its: Its: Date: Date: Attest: Attest: -20- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force CITY OF LATAH CITY OF LIBERTY LAKE By By Its: Its: Date: Date: Attest: Attest: CITY OF MEDICAL LAKE CITY OF MILLWOOD By By Its: Its: Date: Date: Attest: Attest: CITY OF ROCKFORD CITY OF SPANGLE By By Its: Its: Date: Date: Attest: Attest: -21- 51151049.7 Prepared by Solid Waste Summit Task Force CITY OF SPOKANE SPOKANE COUNTY VALLEY By Its: Date: Attest: By Its: Date: Attest: -22- 51151049.7 Prepared by Spokane County Exhibit A ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION of the SPOKANE REGIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ALLIANCE The undersigned, to form a nonprofit corporation under the provisions of the Nonprofit Miscellaneous and Mutual Cooperation Act (Chapter 24.06 of the Revised Code of Washington), as amended, hereby submit the following Articles of Incorporation. Article 1. NAME The name of the corporation shall be the Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management Alliance (the "Corporation"). Article 2. DURATION The Corporation shall have perpetual existence. Article 3. PURPOSES AND POWERS Section 3.1 Purposes. 3.1.1 This Corporation is organized exclusively for one or more of the purposes specified in Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. The Corporation shall exist for the primary purpose of providing for the services and construction necessary to develop and manage joint use facilities in response to the current and future Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan for Spokane County The Corporation was created pursuant to that certain Interlocal Cooperation Act Agreement for Solid Waste Transfer and Disposal by the SWMA, dated , 2011, by and between the City of Airway Heights, Washington ("Airway Heights"), the City of Cheney, Washington ("Cheney"), the City of Deer Park, Washington ("Deer Park"), the City of Fairfield, Washington ("Fairfield"), the City of Latah, Washington ("Latah"), the City of Liberty Lake, Washington ("Liberty Lake"), the City of Medical Lake, Washington ("Medical Lake"), the City of Millwood, Washington ("Millwood"), the City of Rockford, Washington ("Rockford"), the City of Spangle, Washington ("Spangle"), the City of Spokane Valley, Washington ("Spokane Valley"), the City of Waverly, Washington ("Waverly") and Spokane County, Washington 3.1.2 In furtherance of such purposes, this Corporation shall have all power available under Chapters 24.06, Chapter 39.34, 35.21 and 36.58 RCW, to include and not be limited to the following purposes and powers: (A) implement and otherwise effectuate the Agreement; A-1 51151049.7 Prepared by Spokane County (B) administer property, including without limitation, selling, leasing, exchanging or otherwise distributing real and personal property; (C) contract for services and work and enter into other legal instruments binding the Corporation or provide for benefits to be secured by the Corporation; (D) aid, support, and assist by contributions or otherwise, other organizations organized and operated exclusively for purposes specified in Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual, and no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting to influence legislation; and (E) engage in any and all lawful activities which may be necessary, useful or desirable for the furtherance, accomplishment, fostering or attainment of the foregoing purposes, either directly or indirectly and either alone or in conjunction or cooperation with others, whether such others be persons or organizations of any kind or nature, such as corporations, firms, associations, trusts, institutions, foundations, or governmental bureaus, departments, or agencies. Section 3.2 General Corporate Powers. In general, and subject to such limitations and conditions as are or may be prescribed by law, these Articles of Incorporation or the Corporation's Bylaws, the Corporation shall have all powers which now or hereafter are conferred by law upon a corporation organized for the purposes set forth above, are necessary or incidental to the powers so conferred, or are conducive to the attainment of the Corporation's purposes. Article 4. LIMITATIONS Section 4.1 Exercise of Authority. All of the purposes and powers of the Corporation shall be exercised in such manner that the Corporation shall qualify as an exempt organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 or the corresponding provision of any future United States Internal Revenue law, and that contributions to the Corporation shall be deductible under Section 170(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, or the corresponding provision of any future United States Internal Revenue law. Section 4.2 Political Affairs. No substantial part of the activities of the Corporation shall be the carrying on of propaganda, or otherwise attempting to influence legislation, except as otherwise permitted by an organization described in Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, or the corresponding provision of any future United States Internal Revenue law. The Corporation shall not participate in, nor intervene in any political campaign, including the publishing or distribution of statements, on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office. A-2 51151049.7 Prepared by Spokane County Section 4.3 Internal Revenue Code Compliance. Notwithstanding any other provisions of these Articles, the Corporation shall not carry on any activities not permitted to be carried on (a) by a corporation exempt from federal and state income taxes under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 or the corresponding provision of any future United States Internal Revenue law, or (b) by a corporation, contributions to which are deductible under Section 170(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, or the corresponding provision of any future United States Internal Revenue law. Section 4.4 Restrictions on Distributions. No part of the net earnings of the Corporation shall inure to the benefit of, or be distributable to, its members (if any), directors, trustees, officers, or other private persons, except that the Corporation is authorized or empowered to pay reasonable compensation for services rendered and to make payments and distributions in furtherance of its purposes. Article 5. DISSOLUTION Upon the winding up and dissolution of the Corporation, the assets of the Corporation remaining after payment, or provision for payment, of all debts and liabilities of the Corporation, shall be distributed proportionately to the Members of the SWMA in such a manner as to best accomplish the goals of the Corporation as provided in a plan of final liquidation and dissolution as may be approved by the Corporation's Board of Directors. If, however, (i) such distribution would not be in compliance with Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; (ii) no such governmental entity or municipal corporation is willing or able to accept the distribution; or (iii) if such distribution is not otherwise possible, then the distribution shall be made to an organization or organizations recognized as exempt from taxation under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, or the corresponding provision of any future United States Internal Revenue law (to be used exclusively to accomplish the purposes for which this Corporation is organized) as may be provided in a plan of final liquidation and dissolution approved by the Corporation's Board of Directors. Article 6. MEMBERS The qualifications of members, the property, voting and other rights, privileges, and responsibilities of members shall be set forth in the Bylaws. Article 7. DIRECTORS Section 7.1 Management. The management of the Corporation shall be vested in a Board of Directors pursuant to the Nonprofit Miscellaneous and Mutual Cooperation Act, these Articles of Incorporation and the Corporation's Bylaws. The Board shall consist of directors and alternate directors. The powers, duties, number, qualifications, terms of office, manner of election, time and criteria for removal, and time and place of meetings of the directors and alternate directors shall be as set forth in the Bylaws of the Corporation. A-3 51151049.7 Prepared by Spokane County Section 7.2 Initial Directors. The names and addresses of the persons who are to serve as the initial directors of the Corporation are as follows: Name Address Jurisdiction For purposes of these Articles of Incorporation, and unless the context otherwise clearly indicates, the term "director" shall include both directors and alternate directors. Article 8. DIRECTOR LIABILITY LIMITATIONS Section 8.1 No Director Liability. A director shall have no liability to the Corporation for monetary damages for conduct as a director, except for acts or omissions that involve intentional misconduct by the director, or for any transaction from which the director will personally receive a benefit in money, property or services to which the director is not legally entitled. If the Nonprofit Miscellaneous and Mutual Cooperation Act is hereafter amended to authorize corporate action further eliminating or limiting the personal liability of directors, then the liability of a director shall be eliminated or limited to the full extent permitted by the Nonprofit Miscellaneous and Mutual Cooperation Act, as so amended without need for further amendment of these Articles by the Corporation's Board of Directors. Any repeal or modification of this Article shall not adversely affect any right or protection of a director of the Corporation existing at the time of such repeal or modification for or with respect to an act or omission of such director occurring prior to such repeal or modification. Section 8.2 No Personal Liability. Directors of the Corporation shall not be personally liable to the Corporation or its members, if any, for monetary damages for conduct as a director, except for acts or omissions that involve intentional misconduct by a director or a knowing violation of law by a director, where the director votes or assents to a distribution which is unlawful or violates the requirements of these Articles of Incorporation, or for any transaction from which the director will personally receive a benefit in money, property, or services to which the director is not legally entitled. A-4 51151049.7 Prepared by Spokane County Article 9. INDEMNIFICATION Section 9.1 Right to Indemnification. Each person who was, or is threatened to be made a party to or is otherwise involved (including, without limitation, as a witness) in any actual or threatened action, suit or proceeding, whether civil, criminal, administrative or investigative, by reason of the fact that he or she is or was a director or officer of the Corporation or, while a director or officer, he or she is or was serving at the request of the Corporation as a director, director, officer, employee or agent of another corporation or of a Membership, joint venture, trust or other enterprise, including service with respect to employee benefit plans (whether the basis of such proceeding is an alleged action in an official capacity as a director, trustee, officer, employee or agent or in any other capacity while serving as a director, trustee, officer, employee or agent), shall be indemnified and held harmless by the Corporation, to the full extent permitted by applicable law as then in effect, against all expense, liability and loss (including attorney's fees, judgments, fines, ERISA excise taxes or penalties and amounts to be paid in settlement) actually and reasonably incurred or suffered by such person in connection therewith, and such indemnification shall continue as to a person who has ceased to be a director, trustee, officer, employee or agent and shall inure to the benefit of his or her heirs, executors and administrators; however, except as provided in Section 9.2 with respect to proceedings seeking solely to enforce rights to indemnification, the Corporation shall indemnify any such person seeking indemnification in connection with a proceeding (or part thereof) initiated by such person only if such proceeding (or part thereof) was authorized by the Board of Directors of the Corporation. The right to indemnification conferred in this Section 9.1 shall be a contract right and shall include the right to be paid by the Corporation the expenses incurred in defending any such proceeding in advance of its final disposition; however, the payment of such expenses in advance of the final disposition of a proceeding shall be made only upon delivery to the Corporation of an undertaking, by or on behalf of such director or officer, to repay all amounts so advanced if it shall ultimately be determined that such director or officer is not entitled to be indemnified under this Section 9.1 or otherwise. Section 9.2 Right of Claimant to Bring Suit. If a claim for which indemnification is required under Section 9.1 is not paid in full by the Corporation within sixty (60) days after a written claim has been received by the Corporation, except in the case of a claim for expenses incurred in defending a proceeding in advance of its final disposition, in which case the applicable period shall be twenty (20) days, the claimant may at any time thereafter bring suit against the Corporation to recover the unpaid amount of the claim and, to the extent successful in whole or in part, the claimant shall also be entitled to be paid the expense of prosecuting such claim. The claimant shall be presumed to be entitled to indemnification under this Article upon submission of a written claim (and, in an action brought to enforce a claim for expenses incurred in defending any proceeding in advance of its final disposition, where the required undertaking has been tendered to the Corporation), and thereafter the Corporation shall have the burden of proof to overcome the presumption that the claimant is not so entitled. Neither the failure of the Corporation (including its Board of Directors, independent legal counsel or its members, if any) to have made a determination prior to the commencement of such action that indemnification, or the reimbursement or advancement of expenses of the claimant is proper in the circumstances, nor an actual determination by the Corporation (including its Board of Directors, A-5 51151049.7 Prepared by Spokane County independent legal counsel or its members, if any) that the claimant is not entitled to indemnification or the reimbursement or advancement of expenses, shall be a defense to the action or create a presumption that the claimant is not so entitled. Section 9.3 Nonexclusivity of Right. The right to indemnification and the payment of expenses incurred in defending a proceeding in advance of its final disposition conferred in this Article shall not be exclusive of any other right which any person may have or hereafter acquire under any statute, provision of these Articles of Incorporation, Bylaws, agreement, vote of members, if any, or disinterested directors or otherwise. Section 9.4 Indemnification of Members. The Corporation shall hold Corporation members harmless and defend all claims for personal injury or property damage arising out of the Corporation's activities in the same manner as provided for directors and officers under Sections 9.1, 9.2, and 9.3, and only to the extent that such claims, damages, and injuries are not caused by the negligent act or omission of a member to perform required maintenance or other operations or by any member violation of applicable laws or regulations. Section 9.5 Insurance, Contracts, and Funding. The Corporation may maintain insurance at its expense to protect itself and any director, trustee, officer, employee, agent or member of the Corporation or another corporation, Membership, joint venture, trust or other enterprise against any expense, liability or loss, whether or not the Corporation would have the power to indemnify such persons against such expense, liability or loss under the Washington Business Corporation Act, as applied to nonprofit corporations. The Corporation may, without further action of the Corporation's members, enter into contracts with any director or officer of the Corporation in furtherance of the provisions of this Article and may create a trust fund, grant a security interest or use other means (including, without limitation, a letter of credit) to ensure the payment of such amounts as may be necessary to effect indemnification as provided in this Article. Section 9.6 Indemnification of Employees and Agents of the Corporation. The Corporation may, by action of its Board of Directors, provide indemnification and pay expenses in advance of the final disposition of a proceeding to employees and agents of the Corporation with the same scope and effect as the provisions of this Article with respect to the indemnification and advancement of expenses of directors and officers of the Corporation or pursuant to rights granted pursuant to, or provided by, the Washington Business Corporation Act, as applied to nonprofit corporations, or otherwise. Article 10. BYLAWS Bylaws of the Corporation may be adopted by the Board of Directors at any regular meeting or any special meeting called for that purpose, so long as they are not inconsistent with the provisions of these Articles of Incorporation. The authority to make, alter, amend or repeal A-6 51151049.7 Prepared by Spokane County Bylaws is vested in the Board of Directors and may be exercised at any regular or special meeting of the Board of Directors. Article 11. INCORPORATORS The name and address of the incorporators of the Corporation are: Name Address Jurisdiction Article 12. REGISTERED OFFICE AND AGENT The address of the initial registered office of the Corporation shall be , Washington 99 . The name of the initial registered agent of the Corporation at such address shall be Article 13. AMENDMENTS These Articles of Incorporation may be amended as allowed by the Washington Non-profit Corporation Act and pursuant to a unanimous vote of the Board of Directors. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have signed these Articles of Incorporation: (Signature) (Signature) Print name: Print name: Date: Date: (Signature) (Signature) Print name: Print name: Date: Date: [add others as appropriate] 51151049.7 A-7 Prepared by Spokane County CONSENT TO SERVE AS REGISTERED AGENT I, , hereby consent to serve as Registered Agent in the State of Washington for the SWMA. I understand that as agent for the corporation, it will be my responsibility to receive service of process in the name of the corporation; to forward all mail to the corporation; and to immediately notify the Office of the Secretary of State in the event of my resignation or of any changes in the registered office of the corporation for which I am agent. DATED: (Signature of agent) Address of Registered Office and Agent: A-8 51151049.7 Prepared by Spokane County Exhibit B BYLAWS of the SPOKANE REGIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ALLIANCE The Board of Directors of the Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management Alliance (the "Corporation") hereby adopts the following Bylaws: Article 1. OFFICES Section 1.1 Principal Office. The principal office of the Corporation shall be located at its principal place of business or such other place as the Board of Directors may designate. The Corporation may have such other offices, either within or outside of the State of Washington, as the Board of Directors may designate or as the business of the Corporation may require. Section 1.2 Registered Office and Agent. The Corporation's initial registered office and registered agent shall be as set forth in the Articles of Incorporation. The registered agent and the address of the registered office may be changed by the Board of Directors. Article 2. MEMBERSHIP Section 2.1 Members. The Corporation shall have one class of members consisting the following initial members: the City of Airway Heights, Washington ("Airway Heights"), the City of Cheney, Washington ("Cheney"), the City of Deer Park, Washington ("Deer Park"), the City of Fairfield, Washington ("Fairfield"), the City of Latah, Washington ("Latah"), the City of Liberty Lake, Washington ("Liberty Lake"), the City of Medical Lake, Washington ("Medical Lake"), the City of Millwood ("Millwood"), the City of Rockford, Washington ("Rockford"), the City of Spangle, Washington ("Spangle"), the City of Spokane Valley, Washington ("Spokane Valley"), the City of Waverly, Washington ("Waverly") and Spokane County, Washington Members may withdraw pursuant to the provisions of Section 8.2 of the Interlocal Cooperation Act Agreement for Solid Waste Handling, Transfer and Disposal, dated , and added pursuant to Section 8.3 of that Agreement. Section 2.2 No Voting Rights. Except as expressly provided in this Section 2.2, the Members of the Corporation shall not be members within the meaning of Chapter 24.06 RCW and shall not have the authority to manage B-1 51151049.7 Prepared by Spokane County or vote on any matters related to the business and affairs of the Corporation. Each Member shall have the right to appoint one Director and one Alternate Director to represent such Member on the Board of Directors pursuant to the terms of the Interlocal Cooperation Act Agreement for Solid Waste Handling, Transfer and Disposal, dated . Voting shall be pursuant to Section 3.6 of that Agreement. Section 2.3 Meetings. Because Members do not have voting rights and because each Member appoints a representative Director and Alternate Director to the Board of Directors, there shall be no annual or special meetings of the membership. Article 3. BOARD OF DIRECTORS Section 3.1 General Powers. The business and affairs of the Corporation shall be managed by a Board of Directors. The actions of the Board shall be consistent with and shall effectuate the terms of that certain Interlocal Cooperation Act Agreement for Solid Waste Transfer and Disposal, dated ("Agreement"). The Board shall have the power to do, but shall not be limited to, the following: (A) Acquire, construct, receive, own, manage, lease, sell, and otherwise dispose of real property, personal property, intangible property, and the facilities of the Corporation; (B) Plan, develop, operate, replace, and maintain the facilities of the Corporation; (C) Enter into contracts with a Member or other person or entity for goods, services, work, or other benefits to the Corporation; (D) Borrow money and issue debt instruments or provide for the borrowing of money and issuance of debt instruments; (E) Receive gifts or grants for the planning, design, development, construction, or operation of the facilities of the Corporation, or for the assets or programs to further the Corporation's purposes, or for other purposes necessary to carry out the purposes of the Corporation; (F) Lend money or provide services or facilities to any Member or other governmental utility or governmental service provider in furtherance of the Corporation's purposes; (G) Invest Corporate funds; (H) Sue and be sued; (I) Hire and fire employees of the Corporation; B-2 51151049.7 Prepared by Spokane County (J) Fix salaries, wages and other compensation of officers and employees; (K) Employ or retain engineering, legal, financial or other specialized personnel and consultants as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of the Corporation; (L) Impose, alter, regulate, control, and collect rates, charges, and assessments; (M) Purchase insurance and participate in pooled insurance and self-insurance programs (N) Indemnify Members, officers, and employees in accordance with applicable law; (0) Establish policies, guidelines, or rules to carry out the Corporation's powers and responsibilities; (P) (Q) Convene or appoint committees and advisory bodies as the Board deems appropriate for Member or public review and comment on Corporate matters, efficient staff and Board work, or any other purpose in the best interests of the Corporation and consistent with applicable law; Exercise all other powers within the authority of, and that may be exercised individually by all of, the Members with respect to sewage or wastewater conveyance, treatment, disposal, reclamation, reuse, conservation, or other Corporate purposes or functions as set forth in the Agreement; and (R) Take any other actions as the Board deems necessary to implement a comprehensive plan and to protect and advance the interests of the Corporation, its property and other assets, its Members, and its ratepayers that are consistent with the Agreement, Chapter 39.34 RCW, and other applicable law. Section 3.2 Number and Types. The Board of Directors shall consist of one Director from each Member appointed by the legislative body of each Member. Section 3.3 Qualification and Representation. Subsection 3.3.1 Director Qualification. Each Director must be an elected official of the Member that has appointed that Director. Subsection 3.3.2 Alternate Director. Each Member shall appoint an Alternate Director to serve when the Member's Director is not available. The Alternate Director is not required to be an elected official of the Member. B-3 51151049.7 Prepared by Spokane County Subsection 3.3.3 Director Removal. The Director and alternate Director of each Member appointed to the SWMA Board shall serve at the will and discretion of the legislative body of that Member. Any Member may remove its Director or Alternate Director from the SWMA Board at any time. In the event that a Member's Director or Alternate Director is so removed, is no longer qualified to serve on, or otherwise departs from the SWMA Board, that Member's legislative body shall promptly appoint a new Director or Alternate Director to the SWMA Board. Subsection 3.3.4 Joint Representation. It is the Members' intent that a representative on the SWMA Board will represent his or her Member local government in voting and acting as a SWMA Board member. Upon request to, and approval by the Board, one or more Members may agree to be represented at SWMA by another Member's Director (a "representative Director"). A representative Director shall be an elected official. Such an agreement shall be in writing and approved by a Member's legislative authority. Section 3.4 Appointment of Directors. Subsection 3.4.1 Initial Directors. Each initial Director and Alternate Director named in the Articles of Incorporation shall serve until he or she resigns, becomes disqualified to serve as a Director or Alternate Director, or is removed or replaced by the Member that he or she represents. Subsection 3.4.2 Successor Directors. Each Director and Alternate Director shall be appointed by the legislative body of the Member that each respective Director and Alternate Director is to represent. Section 3.5 Vacancies. A vacancy in a Director or an Alternate Director position shall be filled promptly by the Member who appointed the predecessor Director or Alternate Director. Vacancies may occur or arise by removal, disqualification, or resignation, as described below, or by other means. Subsection 3.5.1 Removal. A Director or Alternate Director may be removed at any time by, and at the sole discretion of, the Member that appointed the respective Director or Alternate Director. The removal of a Director or Alternate Director shall constitute a vacancy of that position. Subsection 3.5.2 Disqualification. Whenever a Director or Alternate Director is no longer qualified to serve as a Director or Alternate Director pursuant to these Bylaws, that Director or Alternate Director shall cease to be a Director or Alternate Director and his or her position shall be considered vacant. B-4 51151049.7 Prepared by Spokane County Subsection 3.5.3 Resignation. Any Director or Alternate Director may resign at any time by delivering written notice to the Chairperson or the Secretary of the Corporation at the principal office or registered office of the Corporation, or by giving written notice at any meeting of the Board of Directors. Any such resignation shall take effect at the time specified in the notice, or if the time is not specified, upon delivery of the notice. Upon the effective date of the resignation, that position shall be considered vacant. Unless otherwise specified in the notice, the acceptance of such resignation shall not be necessary to make it effective. Section 3.6 Compensation and Expenses. Directors and Alternate Directors shall not receive compensation for their service as Directors and Alternate Directors. Consistent with any applicable law, Directors and Alternate Directors may receive reimbursement for expenditures incurred on behalf of the Corporation. Article 4. ACTIONS OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS Section 4.1 Regular Meetings. Regular meetings of the Board of Directors shall be specified as to the date, time and place for the holding of such regular meetings by the adoption of a resolution of the Board of Directors. Section 4.2 Special Meetings. Special meetings of the Board of Directors may be called by or at the written request of the Chairperson or a majority of Directors. Notice of special meetings of the Board of Directors shall be made as set forth in Section 4.5. Section 4.3 Meetings by Telephone. Members of the Board of Directors may participate in a meeting of such Board of Directors by means of a conference telephone or similar communication equipment if all persons participating in the meeting can hear each other at the same time and the participation complies with the Open Public Meetings Act, Chapter 42.30 RCW, as may be amended. Participation by such means shall constitute presence in person at a meeting. Section 4.4 Place of Meetings. All meetings shall be held at the principal office of the Corporation or at such other place within the State of Washington designated by the Board of Directors, by any persons entitled to call a meeting, or by a waiver of notice signed by all of the Directors and Alternate Directors. Section 4.5 Notice of Meetings. Where notice of a meeting of the Board of Directors is required by the Articles of Incorporation or these Bylaws, such notice shall be given to each Director and Alternate Director in writing or by personal communication with Director or Alternate Director not less than five (5) B-5 51151049.7 Prepared by Spokane County calendar days before the meeting. Notices in writing may be hand delivered or sent by U.S. mail, or facsimile transmission to the Director or Alternate Director at his or her address shown on the records of the Corporation. Neither the business to be transacted at, nor the purpose of, the meeting need be specified in the notice of such meeting, unless specifically required by the Articles of Incorporation or these Bylaws. If a notice is delivered by mail, the notice shall be deemed effected when deposited in the official government mail properly addressed with postage prepaid. If notice is given by facsimile transmission, the notice shall be deemed effective upon receipt of the facsimile transmission confirmation showing the facsimile transmission was received at the Director's or Alternate Director's facsimile number shown on the records of the Corporation. Facsimile transmission of any signed original document, and retransmission of any signed facsimile transmission shall be the same as delivery of an original document. At the request of the Secretary, any person will confirm facsimile transmitted signatures by signing an original document. Section 4.6 Waiver of Notice. Subsection 4.6.1 Written Waiver of Notice. Whenever any notice is required to be given to any Director or Alternate Director under the provisions of these Bylaws, the Articles of Incorporation or applicable Washington law, a waiver thereof in writing, signed by the person or persons entitled to such notice, whether before or after the time stated therein, shall be deemed equivalent to the giving of such notice. Neither the business to be transacted at, nor the purpose of, any regular or special meeting of the Board of Directors need be specified in the waiver of notice of such meeting. Subsection 4.6.2 Waiver of Notice by Attendance. The attendance of a Director or Alternate Director at a meeting shall constitute a waiver of notice of such meeting, except where a Director or Alternate Director attends a meeting for the express purpose of objecting to the transaction of any business because the meeting is not lawfully called or convened. Section 4.7 Quorum. The attendance of a majority of Directors (or their respective Alternate Directors) shall constitute a quorum at any meeting of the Board of Directors. For purposes of these Bylaws, "majority" shall mean a number more than one-half of Members represented by Directors. If a quorum is not present at a meeting, any one Director present may adjourn the meeting. Section 4.8 Manner of Acting. The act of the Directors (or their respective Alternate Directors) present at a meeting at which there is a quorum shall be the act of the Board of Directors, when enacted pursuant to the following B-6 51151049.7 Prepared by Spokane County Subsection 4.8.1 Procedures and voting. A Member's alternate Director shall vote in place of that Member's Director when the Director is absent or unavailable or when the Director position is vacant, except as provided in Section 4.8.3. The SWMA Board shall establish procedures for conducting its meetings consistent with Roberts Rules of Order or other rules deemed appropriate, and its decisions shall be by a majority vote except when a super majority vote is required, as provided below. Subsection 4.8.2 Majority Voting. Each action of the SWMA Board shall be by majority vote, or by super majority vote under Section 4.8.3. A majority vote shall consist of the votes of directors (alternate or representative Directors) representing (A) at least forty-five percent (45%) of the total population of all Members; and (B) a majority of all Members. Subsection 4.8.3 Super Majority Votes. (A) A supermajority vote shall consist of the votes of Directors (or representative Directors) representing (1) at least forty-five percent (45%) of the total population of all Members; and (2) at least sixty percent (60%) of all Members. (B) Super Majority Required. The following actions shall require a two-thirds weighted vote by the SWMA Board: (1) Approval or amendment of the Plan; (2) Revisions to the Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws or dissolution of the SWMA non-profit corporation; (3) Issuance of bonds or other indebtedness; (4) Establishment of tipping fees and rates; (5) Establishment of any payment requirements directly from Members, in addition to Tipping Fees for use of the SWMA System; (6) Employment of an executive director; (7) Approval of a contract providing for SWMA expenditures in excess of $100,000; (8) Member removal; and 51151049.7 B-7 Prepared by Spokane County (9) Member addition; provided initial membership shall not require super majority approval. (C) Dissolution. Subsection 4.8.4 Member Population. For purposes of this Section 4.8, a Member's population shall be determined from information maintained by the State of Washington Office of Financial Management (or successor agency) as of December 31 of the calendar year before the year in which a vote is taken. Section 4.9 Presumption of Assent. A Director (or, where authorized by these Bylaws to cast a vote, an Alternate Director) of the Corporation present at a meeting of the Board of Directors at which action on any corporate matter is taken shall be presumed to have assented to the action taken, unless the Director's or Alternate Director's dissent or abstention is entered in the minutes of the meeting or the Director or Alternate Director files a written dissent or abstention to such action with the person acting as secretary of the meeting before the adjournment of the meeting or forwards such dissent or abstention by registered mail to the Secretary of the Corporation immediately after the adjournment of the meeting. Such right to dissent or abstain shall not apply to a Director or Alternate Director who voted in favor of such action. Section 4.10 Open Public Meetings. Meetings of the Board are subject to the Open Public Meetings Act, Chapter 43.20 RCW. Accordingly, the Board shall ensure that its deliberations are conducted openly and that the actions of the Corporation are taken openly. Section 4.11 Procedure. The Board shall conduct its meetings consistent with Robert's Rules of Order on Parliamentary Procedure, so far as applicable and when not inconsistent with these Bylaws, the Articles of Incorporation, the Agreement, or any resolution of the Board. The Board may adopt additional rules of procedure to govern the conduct of its meetings. Article 5. OFFICERS Section 5.1 Officers. The officers of the Corporation shall be a Chairperson, one Vice Chairperson, a Secretary and a Treasurer, each of whom shall be elected by the Board of Directors. Other officers and assistant officers may be elected or appointed by the Board of Directors, such officers and assistant officers to hold office for such period, have such authority and perform such duties as are provided in these Bylaws or as may be provided by resolution of the Board of Directors. Any officer may be assigned by the Board of Directors any additional title that the Board of Directors deems appropriate. Any two or more offices may be held by the same person, except the offices of Chairperson and Secretary. B-8 51151049.7 Prepared by Spokane County Section 5.2 Election and Term of Office. The officers of the Corporation shall be elected annually by the Board of Directors. Unless an officer resigns or is removed or replaced, he or she shall hold office until the next annual election by the Board of Directors or until the officer's successor is elected and assumes the office, whichever is later. Section 5.3 Vacancies. A vacancy in any office created by the resignation, removal, replacement, or any other cause may be filled by the Board of Directors for the unexpired portion of the term or for a new term established by the Board of Directors. Section 5.4 Resignation. Any officer may resign at any time by delivering written notice to the Chairperson, a Vice Chairperson, the Secretary or the Board of Directors or by giving oral or written notice at any meeting of the Board of Directors. Any such resignation shall take effect at the time specified in the notice, or if the time is not specified, upon delivery of the notice and, unless otherwise specified in the notice, the acceptance of such resignation shall not be necessary to make it effective. Section 5.5 Removal. Any officer or agent elected or appointed by the Board of Directors may be removed from office by the Board of Directors whenever in its judgment the best interests of the Corporation would be served thereby. Such removal shall be without prejudice to the contract rights, if any, of the person so removed. Section 5.6 Chairperson. The Chairperson shall preside over meetings of the Board of Directors. The Chairperson may sign deeds, mortgages, bonds, contracts or other instruments, except when the signing and execution thereof have been expressly delegated by the Board of Directors or by these Bylaws to some other officer or agent of the Corporation or are required by law to be otherwise signed or executed by some other officer or in some other manner. In general, the Chairperson shall perform all duties incident to the office of Chairperson and such other duties as are assigned to him or her by the Board of Directors. Section 5.7 Vice Chairperson. In the event of the death of the Chairperson or his or her inability to act, the Vice Chairperson shall perform the duties of the Chairperson, except as may be limited by resolution of the Board of Directors, with all the powers of, and subject to, all of the restrictions upon the Chairperson. The Vice Chairperson shall have, to the extent authorized by the Chairperson or the Board of Directors, the same powers as the Chairperson to sign deeds, mortgage, bonds, contracts or other instruments. The Vice Chairperson shall perform such other duties as from time to time may be assigned to him or her by the Chairperson or the Board of Directors. B-9 51151049.7 Prepared by Spokane County Section 5.8 Secretary. The Secretary shall: (a) keep the minutes of meetings of the members and the Board, and minutes which may be maintained by committees of the Board; (b) see that all notices are duly given in accordance with the provisions of these Bylaws or as required by law; (c) be custodian of the corporate records of the corporation; (d) keep records of the post office address of each member and Director and of the name and post office address of each officer; (e) sign with the Chairperson, or other officer authorized by the Chairperson or the Board, deeds, mortgages, bonds, contracts, or other instruments; and (f) in general perform all duties incident to the office of Secretary and such other duties as from time to time may be assigned to him or her by the Chairperson or the Board. Section 5.9 Treasurer. The Treasurer shall have charge and custody of and be responsible for all funds and securities of the corporation; receive and give receipts for moneys due and payable to the corporation from any source whatsoever, and deposit all such moneys in the name of the corporation in banks, trust companies or other depositories selected in accordance with the provisions of these Bylaws, the Agreement, and applicable law; and in general perform all of the duties incident to the office of Treasurer and such other duties as from time to time may be assigned to him or her by the Chairperson or the Board. Section 5.10 Salaries. The officers shall serve without salary unless they are employees of the Corporation. No officer shall be prevented from receiving a salary by reason of the fact that he or she is a Director or Alternate Director of the Corporation. Consistent with any applicable law, officers may receive reimbursement for expenditures incurred on behalf of the Corporation upon approval of the Board of Directors. Article 6. EMPLOYEES Subject to the other provisions of these Bylaws, the Board of Directors may establish such positions of employment as it deems desirable and shall fix the salaries for such positions; provided, there shall be created and maintained the position of Executive Director. This position shall be responsible for implementing Board policy and for general administration of the Alliance functions. The Executive Director shall have sole authority to appoint persons to fill other positions created by the Board, or to dismiss or discipline such persons. The appointments shall be based on ability and training appropriate for the position. Except for the purpose of inquiry, the Board and its members shall deal with policy implementation or administrative services solely through the Executive Director and neither the Board nor any of its members shall give directions or orders to employees subordinate to the Executive Director. Nothing in this Article shall prevent the Board from freely and fully discussing with the Executive Director anything pertaining to appointments and removals of subordinate employees. B-10 51151049.7 Prepared by Spokane County Article 7. ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS Section 7.1 Books and Records of the Corporation. The Corporation shall keep at its principal or registered office copies of its current Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws; correct and adequate records of accounts and finances; minutes of its proceedings; records of the name and address of each Member, Director, Alternate Director, and officer; and such other records as may be necessary or advisable. All books and records of the Corporation shall be open at any reasonable time to inspection by any Director or Alternate Director. Section 7.2 Books and Records of Members. Any Director or a representative of that Director may examine the books and records of any Member which relate to the Corporation (including, but not limited to, the Corporation's assets, property, facilities, governance, and finance). After provision of reasonable notice, such books and records may be examined at any reasonable time during business hours of that Member. The Board may appoint an auditor or accountant to review any such books and records and the costs of such review shall be charged to the Corporation, which in turn may include such costs as an expense to be shared jointly among all Members. Section 7.3 Accounting Year. The accounting year of the Corporation shall be the twelve months ending December 31 of each year. Article 8. AMENDMENTS These Bylaws may be altered, amended or repealed and new Bylaws may be adopted by a super majority vote of the Board of Directors. THE FOREGOING BYLAWS were adopted by the Board of Directors on f Secretary B-11 51151049.7 Prepared by Spokane County Exhibit C ADMINISTRATIVE AND TREASURY SERVICES CONTRACT WITH SPOKANE COUNTY C-1 51151049.7 Agenda Item #4 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: August 31, 2011 Department Director Approval: ❑ Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Transportation Benefit District GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: Several documents are attached to aid in the discussion. OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS: 1. Washington State Licensing, TBD info (shows 12 districts with TBDs) 2. AWC September 2009 Article on Street Utility 3. AWC July 2010, Article on TBD Legislation in Effect 4. August 17, 2010 Spokane Valley Request for Council Action form re TBD, with attached information from Washington Department of Licensing concerning affected vehicles WA State Licensing: Local transportation benefit district fees Page 1 of 2 Local transportation benefit district fees A law passed in 2007 allows city or county governments to create local transportation benefit districts and impose a local vehicle registration fee to fund local transportation projects. Transportation benefit districts and fees If you live in any of the following locations, you must pay an additional local transportation benefit district fee when you renew your vehicle tabs: District Fee Effective(Tabs daaefter...) Burien No. 1 $10 Des Moines $20 Edmonds $20 Grandview $20 Lake Forest Park $20 Lynnwood $20 Olympia $20 Prosser $20 Seattle $20 Shoreline $20 Snoqualmie $20 City of Spokane $20 February 1, 2011 September 1, 2009 September 1, 2009 February 1, 2012 September 1, 2009 July 1, 2011 October 1, 2009 November 1, 2009 May 1, 2011 February 1, 2010 March 1, 2011 September 1, 2011 Location code 17-34 17-09 31-04 39-01 17-17 31-10 34-03 03-03 17-26 17-37 17-28 32-10 Contact phone 206-241-4647 206-870-7586 425-771-0260 509-882-9200 206-368-5440 425-670-5020 360-570-3727 509-786-2332 206-233-5005 206-801-2302 425-888-1555, Ext. 1135 509-625-6255 Vehicles subject to fees • Passenger vehicles • Trucks that weigh 6,000 pounds or less • Motorcycles • Commercial passenger vehicles and trucks that weigh 6,000 pounds or less • Combination trucks that weigh 6,000 pounds or less • Tow trucks • House moving dollies • Trucks used exclusively for hauling logs that weigh 6,000 pounds or less • Taxicabs • For -hire or stage vehicles with 6 seats or less • For -hire or stage vehicles with 7 or more seats that weigh 6,000 pounds or less • Private use trailers over 2,000 pounds • Motorcycle trailers • Travel trailers • Fixed load vehicles that weigh 6,000 pounds or less • Mobile homes licensed as vehicles Exempt vehicles • All farm vehicles • Campers ® Off -road vehicles • Snowmobiles • Mopeds ® Personal use trailers with a single axle and less than 2,000 pounds scale weight • Commercial trailers • Combination trailers • Trailers used exclusively for hauling logs • Horseless carriage, collector, or restored -plate vehicles • Converter gear • Government vehicles • Private school vehicles httn://www.dol.wa.gov/vehiclereaistration/localfees.html 8/22/2011 WA State Licensing: Local transportation benefit district fees Page 2 of 2 ® Vehicles properly registered to disabled American veterans How a transportation benefit district works Once a local transportation benefit district is set up, the district's board of directors may vote to charge a local vehicle licensing fee due when a vehicle owner buys new tabs. ® The transportation benefit district board has the authority to impose a fee of up to $20 per vehicle without voter approval. o A transportation benefit district may impose a vehicle renewal fee of up to $100 per vehicle or seek other sources of funding if approved by voters. Related laws o RCW: 36.73: Transportation benefit districts e RCW 82.80.140: Vehicle fee — Transportation benefit district — Exemptions CONTACT US Office locations Contact us Tell us how we're doing! ABOUT US DO MORE ONLINE What we do Renew your tabs Rulemaking activity Replace your license or ID card News center Report the sale of vehicle Reports and data Check the status of a driver license Jobs Get a form ...more ...more Home I Privacy I Conditions of Use I Copyright © 2011 DRIVER GUIDE English Eepanol Viet EF,O1 t=*3 STAY CONNECTED http://www.dol.wa.gov/vehicleregistration/localfees.html 8/22/2011 September 2009 WROATIO�sys'. �.EMILVIZz 3Y�A.etw t`,sz._aaw�fi,,,. ...,-r. Basic Question and Answer What is it? A street utility is just that, a utility. Most utilities work the same: if a citizen or business benefits from the use of the utility, then they pay for it. Usually the more they use the utility, the more they pay. For example, customers are charged by the amount of power or water they consume. The street utility is being successfully used in other states such as Oregon, and was previously used in Washington. The street utility option being prepared for the 2010 Legislature is designed to be constitutionally sound and fair — costing only a few dollars a month for homeowners. Why is a dedicated street utility funding option necessary? Cities are seeing more traditional sources of revenue either reduced or eliminated, and the economic downturn has made it difficult if not impossible for cities to use their general funds to keep street maintenance and preservation funding alive. Consider: • City revenues are depleted: Currently, nearly three of every four city transportation dollars comes from the operating budget that often must compete for other city services such as police and fire protection. In this economy, many cities simply do not have the resources to fund transportation. • Initiatives have stripped traditional transportation revenues: 1-695,1-747, and 1-776 stripped away revenue that cities used to maintain, operate, replace, and improve their transportation systems. For the City of Kent, as an example,the amount is approximately $4,000,000 per year.The cumulative effect for Kent is $35,000,000 since 1999. ASSOCIATION OF WASHINGTON Ci I i ES • State Assistance is declining: The Transportation Improvement Board's ability to partner is reduced due to declining gas tax receipts- some of theTlB's programs have been shelved, to the point that its executive director has predicted "corridor" grant funding will not be available for at least the next four years. Another potential resource, the Public Works Assistance Account, was dried up in 2009 when the legislature redirected $368 million in local government low -interest loan funds to the state's general fund. • Maintaining and preserving streets is far more cost-effective than completely rebuilding them: The transportation system is not unlike your house or your roof — it must be maintained, operated, and replaced as it ages to assure the continued use of the system to the level of service that residents and businesses expect and deserve. And maintenance and repairs are cost- effective — transportation engineers estimate it can cost as much as 15 times more to completely rebuild and replace a roadway than it costs to maintain and repair it. • The proposal is premised on fairness: Finally, it is also important to note that the Street Utility is being considered because it is based on a system of fairness. Those who utilize, benefit from, and impact the street system are the ones who pay for the maintenance and upkeep of that system. Association of Washington Cities o 1076 Franklin St SE 0 Olympia,WA 98501 o www.awcnet.org continued What would a street utility be used for, and what do you use as the basis for determining rates? AWC joined by several individual cities, is designing a street utility option that would be used for "curb -to -curb," basic street maintenance and preservation. With a street utility, the costs of a street system are more closely matched to how street users benefits from the system. A charge is based on how many trips a customer uses in the system. In most cases, the trips charges are based on a trip generation manual developed by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, and the trips factors are very accurate. In addition, cities can tailor the trip factors for their community and be sure charges are apportioned fairly. Can you give more specific details about how costs are determined and what is included? The cost per trip must be equal for all users or customer classifications, and the fees generated can only be used to fund the operation, maintenance, and replacement of the transportation system. That would not include trails, new construction, or bike lanes that are not imbedded into the street network. Under this proposal, it would include: • Pavement management and maintenance; • Signs and markings; ▪ Non -motorized facilities as part of the street network; and • Traffic control and signalization. Unlike general taxes and like utility rates from other utilities, street utility charges are proportionate to the benefits or burdens created by identified user classes.Again, unlike general taxes and like utility rates, street utility charges are dedicated solely to that purpose and cannot be redirected for other city services. In this way, they are similar to the I8th Amendment protections the State of Washington provides to ensure dedicated funding of the state transportation system. Who would be allowed to implement the street utility? The street utility would be an option, just like municipal power, water, sewer or solid waste utility service. A city would be authorized to implement a street utility authority if it finds doing so to be in the interest of public health and safety. A city would need to find that city streets are failing to meet, or in danger of no longer meeting, established criteria for pavement ratings and other safety standards. A city would also use an ordinance development process for the street utility, which ensures input and information from community groups and stakeholders. How are specific rates determined? Rates apply to residents and businesses within a street utility area or areas.They are based on household unit or type (classification) of business and must be uniform for the same class of person receiving transportation services or imposing burdens on the transportation system. Other factors are: • The correlation between property uses and the estimated number of automobile trips; • User location, i.e. proximity to arterial streets and residential streets; • Incidental trips vs. destination trips; • Reductions or credits on residential properties to the extent of their occupancy by low-income senior citizens; • Potential credits to governmental entities and school districts to the extent they demonstrate funding of the city transportation system or mitigation of their impacts to the transportation system; • Potential user rate credits based on mitigation through impacts fees; and • Potential user rate reductions or credits where there are demonstrated trip reduction measures, i.e. carpool, vanpool arrangements. continued 1076 Franklin St SE A , Olympia,WA 98501 ASSOCIATION www.awcnet.org OF WASHINGTON Ci 1 iES Are rates predictable? How much are they? Yes. Each rate classification is required to be established using trip generation tables. As is the case with other municipal utilities, a city is accountable to its ratepayers to demonstrate that rates are appropriately based on utility needs and expenses. Each city establishes its own rates. For a typical urban city experiencing over 500,000 trips on its system and experiencing a failing transportation system: • Single family residence: $2 to $8 a month (Oregon cities are about $3-$4 a month) • Senior housing and multifamily housing ranges from 10% to 60% of a single family residence. • Industrial and manufacturing buildings and parks could expect $10 a month for every 10,000 square feet. • Commercial building categories, such as restaurants, office buildings, and general commercial buildings could expect $ I5 to $35 a month per 10,000 square feet. • Shopping centers, could expect $150 a month per 10,000 square feet (which would be apportioned among the many businesses within the shopping center). What about citizen and business accountability? • Street utility charge funds are required to be used for transportation purposes only- they cannot be redirected to a city's operating budget. • A hearings examiner is required under the proposal being developed by the AWC and individual cities. • A street utility advisory board must be included as part of the ordinance. • The street utility charge will be identified as a line item as part of a residential or business overall utility bill. For questions or more information Ashley Probart, Municipal Policy Analyst ashleyp@awcnet.org (360) 753-4137 1076 Franklin St SE Olympia,WA 98501 ASSOCIATION www.awcnet.org OF WASHINGTON CITIES July 2010 ASSOCIATION OF WASHINGTON CiTiES IES Fu`BlaTT ZFIE MITZEGH EWE I IEEta, .,?rL :v llERT<<, ETSFEMMEE eiIc J c'`ia EZET i i_x a ;.t :ctTLi T LTE<! MI ERWEff :gtarial c' ;' '`' i7'. r1E Through the cooperative efforts of the Association ofWashington Cities (AWC) and the Washington State Associations of Counties (WSAC), significant legislation went into effect in 2007, which resulted in the most important local transportation tool for cities and counties in sixteen years —Transportation Benefit Districts (TBDs). Newly enacted 2010 legislation enhanced theTBD's authority. TBDs are independent taxing districts that can impose an array of taxes or fees either through a vote of the people or through district board action.TBDs are flexible-- they allow cities and counties to work independently or cooperatively on addressing both local and regional transportation challenges. Frequently Asked Questions Background In I987,the Legislature created TBDs as an option for local governments to fund transportation improvements. In 2005, the Legislature amended theTBD statute to expand its uses and revenue authority. In 2007, the Legislature amended theTBD statute to authorize the imposition of vehicle fees and transportation impact fees without a public vote. In 2010, the Legislature amended the TBD statute again to clarify project eligibility, the use of impact fees, and sales tax expenditures, and make TBD governance more.flexible. What is aTransportation Benefit District (TBD)? ATBD is a quasi -municipal corporation and independent taxing district created for the sole purpose of acquiring; ' constructing, improving, providing, and funding transportation improvements within the district. Who may create aTBD? The legislative authority of a county or city may create1a�aTBD by ordinance following the procedures set forth in'Ciapter 36.73 RCW.The county or city proposing to create aTBD may include other counties, cities, port districts, or transit districts through interlocal agreements. Who governs theTBD? The members of the legislative authority (county or city) proposing to establish aTBD serves as the governing body of the TBD.The legislative authority is acting ex officio and independently as theTBD governing body. If aTBD includes additional jurisdictions through interlocal agreements, then the governing body must have at least five members, including at least one elected official from each of the participating jurisdictions, or may be the governing body of a metropolitan planning organization if the TBD boundaries are identical to the boundaries of the metropolitan planning organization serving the district. What are the boundaries of aTBD? The boundaries of aTBD may be Tess than the boundaries of those jurisdictions participating in theTBD. For example, a county or city may choose to have theTBD boundaries identical with the county or city, or it may choose just to include a portion of the county or city. However, if aTBD chooses to exercise the tax authority that does not require a public vote (e.g. vehicle and impact fees), the boundaries of theTBD must be countywide, citywide, or unincorporated countywide. Why create aTBD if the county or city legislative authority is the governing board? ATBD is an independent legal creature.Although aTBD has many of the powers of a county and city (impose taxes, eminent domain powers; can contract and accept gifts, etc.), - it is a separate taxing district.Additionally, by being a separate legal and taxing entity,TBDs have more flexibility. For example, more than one type of jurisdiction can be part of aTBD and the boundaries can be less than countywide or citywide. Association ofWashington Cities o 1076 Franklin St SE e Olympia,WA 98501 o www.awcnet.org continued Can aTBD be created without imposing fees or proposing voter approved revenue options? Yes.A county or city takes legislative action through the ordinance process to create aTBD.The ordinance must include a finding that the creation of aTBD is in the public's interest, describe the boundaries of the TBD, and specify the activities or functions to be implemented or funded by the district.The county or city ordinance creating the TBD may also specify and authorize what fees or revenues that the TBD may pursue.TheTBD,acting in its own official capacity, has the authority to identify proposed fees or revenue options. Are TBD revenues required to be spent as they are collected? No.The governing body which creates aTBD must develop a plan that specifies the transportation improvements to be provided or funded by the TBD.As part of this plan, the TBD's governing board can indicate if the funds will be used immediately, or if they will be collected for a specified period, prior to spending the accumulated funds.Typically, funds that are collected for a specified period before being expended are used to fully fund large projects, when bonding, or serve as a match for state or federal funds that may only become available in a specified time frame. Does aTBD have to meet certain tests? There are three threshold tests for transportation improvements in aTBD: I) the type of transportation improvement contained within the boundaries of the TBD, 2) whether the improvements are identified in any existing state, regional, county, city or eligible TDB jurisdiction's (port or transit) transportation plan and that the improvements are 3) necessitated by existing or reasonably foreseeable congestion levels. The definition of "congestion" does not have a set standard in law; each TBD has the discretion to tailor and make its own determination of congestion levels when implementing its TBD ordinance. What transportation improvements can be funded by aTBD? The definition of transportation improvements is broad.This can include maintenance and improvements to city streets, county roads, state highways, investments in high capacity transportation, public transportation, transportation demand management and other transportation projects identified in a regional transportation planning organization plan or state plan. In developing criteria for a transportation improvement, it can include one or more of the following: reduced risk of transportation facility failure and improved safety; improved travel time; improved air quality; increases in daily and peak period trip capacity; improved modal connectivity; improved freight mobility; cost-effectiveness of the investment; optimal performance of the system through time; and other criteria, as adopted by the governing body. Note: In 2010, cities within King County are specifically authorized to provide or contract for supplemental public transportation improvements to meet the mobility needs of the city, and may contract for such improvements with private and nonprofit entities and may also form public - private partnerships. If a jurisdiction uses the SEPA process to collect impact fees, would this preclude aTBD from using impact fees? No. However, the law requires the jurisdiction to provide a credit to commercial or industrial developments that are subject to SEPA, or transportation impact fees authorized under GMA.This is commonly called a"no double-dipping" provision. continued What revenue options do TBD's have? TBD's have several revenue options subject to voter approval: • Property taxes — a I -year excess levy or an excess levy for capital purposes; • Up to 0.2% sales and use tax; • Up to $100 annual vehicle fee per vehicle registered in the district; and • Vehicle tolls. Please Note:There are exemptions or unique requirements when using the vehicle fee or vehicle tolls. TBD's have two revenue options that do not require voter approval, but are subject to additional conditions: I. Annual vehicle fee up to $20.This fee is collected at the time of vehicle renewal and cannot be used to fund passenger -only ferry service improvements. 2. Transportation impact fees on commercial and industrial buildings. Residential buildings are excluded. In addition, a county or city must provide a credit for a commercial or industrial transportation impact if the respective county or city has already imposed a transportation impact fee. Please Note: Foregoing a vote is an option only. A county or city still has the option of placing either the annual fee of up to $20 or the impact fees to the vote of the people as an advisory vote or an actual requirement of imposition. What are the additional conditions required to impose revenue options not subject to voter approval? To impose either fee, the TBD's boundaries must be countywide or citywide, or if applicable, in the unincorporated county. Vehicle Fees: When the Legislature revised the TBD authority in 2007 to enable councilmanic vehicle fees, it was intended to ensure a county -wide or regional approach for first consideration of this new option.That is why counties had the exclusive authority of the $20 vehicle fee for the first six months after enactment of the 2007 legislation.Today, a county that creates a countywideTBD (incorporated and unincorporated areas) and proposes to impose up to a $20 non -voted vehicle fee should first attempt to impose a countywide fee to be shared with cities by interlocal agreement. Sixty percent (60%) of the cities representing seventy-five (75%) of the incorporated population must approve the interlocal agreement for it to be effective.The Legislative expectation is that if an interlocal agreement cannot be reached between a county and city or cities, the county is authorized to create a TBD and impose the fee only in the unincorporated area of the county. Credits must be provided for previously imposed TBD vehicle fees. Credits are not required for voter approved vehicle fees. Commercial and Industrial Transportation Impact Fees: ATBD that is either countywide or citywide must provide a credit for a commercial or industrial transportation impact fee if the respective county or city has already imposed a transportation impact fee.This is commonly called a "no double-dipping" provision. If we create a countywideTBD for the up to $20 vehicle fee, how is the revenue distributed to cities? The revenue must be shared according to the interlocal agreement.The law does not prescribe what the interlocal agreement contains. Consequently, the revenue can be shared by population, number of vehicles within each jurisdiction, project list, a combination of these, or whatever the county and cities can reach agreement on. What happens if a city imposes the up to $20 vehicle fee and then the county imposes a countywide fee without voter approval? The law requiresTBDs to provide a credit for vehicle fees previously imposed by aTBD. continued For example, if a city was the first to create aTBD and impose a $20 vehicle fee and subsequently its county creates a countywideTBD imposing a $20 vehicle fee, the countyTBD must provide a $20 credit against its fee for vehicles registered within the city.As a result, no fee would be collected by the countyTBD from vehicles registered within the city.Additionally, the city would not be part of the interlocal agreement with the county or be included in the number/percentages needed for the interlocal agreement to be effective. However, if in the same example, the city TBD imposed only $10 of the $20 vehicle fee and the countyTBD imposed a countywide $20 vehicle fee, only a $10 credit would be provided for vehicles registered within the city.The county TBD would collect $10 from vehicles registered in the city. Consequently, the countyTBD would need to include the city in the interlocal agreement discussions and the city is included in the number/percentages needed for the interlocal agreement to be effective. If a county or city is considering the $20 vehicle fee, how does a county or city estimate revenues? Currently, no TBD has been in effect for an entire year and therefore revenue estimates and histories are incomplete. WhatTBDs around the state have learned to date: vehicles per household calculations vary significantly around the state. Statistical data shows that there tends to be about one vehicle per person in rural areas and 0.8 vehicles per person in urban areas. Another factor to strongly consider is seasonality; vehicles sales are not evenly distributed throughout the year and this will affect monthly receipts. Finally, a city or county must understand and recognize that other factors such as people failing to register their vehicles, and data accuracy can affect actual revenues when compared to forecasted revenues. What other requirements should 1 be aware of? Revenue rates, once imposed, may not be increased, unless authorized by voter approval. If project costs exceed original costs by more than 20 percent, a public hearing must be held to solicit public comment regarding how the cost change should be resolved. This is typically called a material change policy. TheTBD must issue an annual report to include the status of project costs, revenues, expenditures, and construction schedules. TheTBD must be dissolved upon completion of the project(s) and the payment of debt service. Who has imposed aTBD? The cities of Lake Forest Park, Edmonds, Des Moines, Olympia, Prosser, and Shoreline imposed the $20 vehicle fee. Ridgefield and Sequim passed the 2/10% sales tax. Point Roberts and Liberty Lake formedTBD's prior to the legislative changes in 2005. Checklist For a checklist that highlights many of the important considerations when creating a Transportation Benefit District (TBD), please see www.awcnet.org/tbd. Eligibility requirements vary. For additional questions on Transportation Districts, please contactAWC staff Ashley Probart at ashleyp@awcnet.org Sheri Sawyer at sheris@awcnet.org. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: August 17, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: (1 consent n old business new business ❑ public hearing (] information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Transportation Benefit Districts — informational update for potential City -only TBD GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.73 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TARN: Discussion at winter retreat January 12, 2008; administrative report January 15, 2008; administrative report February 12, 2008; Council discussion about infrastructure funding options, instruction to staff to proceed with drafting legislation allowing for establislunent of a transportation benefit district; April 8, 2008 discussion and update on formation of TBD, discuss draft ordinance; April 15, 2008; administrative update June 10, 2008; July 1, 2008 to update Council on proposed language change to the Spokane Regional Transportation Council's (SRTC) 2007 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) regarding use of TBD funds for maintenance of existing City road system; July 29, 2008 administrative report and update; December 2, 2008; information only February 17, 2010; administrative report April 6, 2010; administrative report regarding potential interlocal agreement for regional 1BD on July 6, 2010. BACKGROUND: On July 6, 2010, staff presented information to the Council regarding the potential for a regional TBD. The Council has now asked staff to present information on utilizing a City -only TBD option, including what that would entail, and how much potential revenue could be generated. This RCA contains information based upon a review of RCW 36.73, a joint informational memorandum from AWC and WSAC (Washington State Association of Counties), and numerous discussions with Ashley Probart of AWC and Julie Murray of the WSAC. A. Introduction - A TBD is a quasi -municipal corporation and independent taxing district created for the sole purpose of acquiring, constructing, improving, providing, and funding transportation improvements within a defined district, or area. If the TBD is entirely within one jurisdiction, the legislative body of that jurisdiction comprises the TBD governing board. B. Adoption mechcnzism - The creation of a TBD is done following a public hearing and through adoption of an ordinance which includes the following: a description of the boundary of the district, a statement that it is in the public's interest to form, a description of the improvements to be done by the TBD, and a statement of the proposed taxes/fees/charges that the '1BD will impose to raise revenue for the improvements. Page 1 of 4 C. TBD finding limits — Subject to voter approval - There are four funding options available that are subject to voter approval: 1. Imposition of property tax — a 1-year excess levy or an excess levy for capital purposes; 2. Up to 0.2% sales and use tax which may not exceed a 10 year period without voter reauthorization; 3. Up to $100 annual vehicle fee per vehicle registered in the district. The fee is collected at the time of vehicle tab renewal. If a county creates a TBD to impose up to a $20 fee, it must first attempt to impose a countywide fee to be shared with cities by interlocal agreement. 60% of the cities representing 75% of the incorporated population must approve the interlocal agreement for it to become effective. If such an interlocal agreement cannot be reached, then the county is authorized to create a TBD and impose the fee, but only in the unincorporated portion of the county; and 4. Vehicle tolls on specified roads. Not subject to voter approval - There are two options that are not subject to voter approval, but which are subject to additional conditions. Please note that while a vote is not required, a city may still choose to put it to vote. 1. Annual vehicle fee up to $20 per vehicle registered in the district. 2. Transportation impact fees on commercial and industrial buildings. Residential buildings are excluded. In addition, a city must provide a credit for a commercial or industrial transportation impact if the city has already imposed a transportation impact fee. In other words, no double dipping on impact fees. D. Projects that are "gualffving transportation improvements" — For a project to qualify for TBD funding, it must meet several criteria. A TBD exists solely for the purpose of acquiring, constructing, improving, providing, and funding "transportation improvements" within the district. The ordinance adopting the TBD must identify the transportation improvements that would be subject to 1'BD. To be a "qualifying transportation improvement" within the contemplation of RCW 36.73, it must meet the following: 1. The improvement must be located within the boundary of the TBD; 2. The improvement is necessitated by existing or reasonably foreseeable congestion levels; 3. The improvement is contained in a state, regional or local transportation plan; 4. When selecting the improvement, the TBD governing board must consider the following criteria, to the extent practicable: Page 2 of 4 - reduced risk of transportation facility failure and improved safety; - improved travel time; - improved air quality; - increases in daily and peak period trip capacity; - improved modal connectivity; - improved freight mobility; - cost-effectiveness of the investment; - optimal performance of the system through time; and - other criteria as adopted by the governing body. It is also important to remember that the statutory definition of a "transportation improvement" under RCW 36.73.015(3) is quite broad, and includes state, regional, and local transportation facilities. Examples include: - new or existing highways of statewide significance; - principal arterials of regional significance; - high capacity transportation; - public transportation; - transportation demand management; - other transportation projects and programs of regional or statewide significance as defined or amended into the respective regional or statewide transportation plan); or - may include the operation, preservation, and maintenance of these facilities or programs. While '1'BDs have traditionally (although rarely) been used for street capital projects, recent amendments by the Legislature provided jurisdictions the opportunity to use l'BD funds for maintenance of the existing street system. Such use would fall under "other transportation projects and programs", and would have to be provided for in one of the following: the state transportation plan, SRTC's current Metropolitan Transportation Plan, or the City's Comprehensive Plan. All three current documents provide for the importance of maintaining the current road system, and thus meet this requirement. E. Is the_ for oration of cr TBD sribject to a referendum vote? Pursuant to RCW 35A.11.090, there are a number of actions which are exempt from referendum. It may be that formation of a TBD by the City is expressly statutorily exempt under RCW 35A.11.090, but it is not certain. There are additional means by which a legislative action is determined exempt. Here, the authority to form a TBD is expressly set forth in RCW 36.73.020, and is granted to "the legislative authority of a county or city". As such, the power to establish or de -establish is reserved exclusively to the city council. If the authority was for "the people of a city", or "a city", then it most likely would be subject to referendum. As such, the formation of a TBD is not subject to referendum. Page 3 of 4 F. Administration of the TBD — 1. In the event of proposed major changes to the plan adopted by the TBD Board, the TBD must develop a material change policy to address the delivery of the improvement or the ability to finance the plan. The policy must include a public hearing to solicit comments on how the cost changes should be resolved should anticipated costs exceed its original cost by more than 20%. 2. A TBD must issue an annual report indicating the status of transportation improvement costs, expenditures, revenues, and construction schedules to the public and to newspapers of record located in the TBD. 3. If the TBD proposes functions or transportation improvements that are outside those specified in the original notice of hearing establishing the TBD, the TBD must go through the notice, public hearing, and ordinance process again. G. Anticipated revenue tune license tab — In an attempt to better understand the potential revenue that could be generated by a TBD utilizing the vehicle license tab fee option, staff contacted the Washington State Department of Licensing and obtained a list of all qualifying vehicles licensed in Spokane County for 2009. The City's Geographic Information System (GIS) staff then isolated those registrations within our City by cross-referencing the county -wide list against our full City-wide address list database. As a result, there are approximately 60,000 registered qualifying vehicles in Spokane Valley, with a reasonable error factor included due to potential data errors within the list. Using this figure, it is then easy to determine how much funds could be generated since every $10 of license tab fee would generate roughly $600,000. $10 fee $600,000 $20 fee $1.2 million $30 fee $1.8 million $40 fee $2.4 million $50 fee $3.0 million $60 fee $3.6 million OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: NA BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: NA STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: 1. Washington Dept. of Licensing document showing affected vehicles. Page 4 of 4 WA State Licensing: Local ix ortation benefit district fees Local transportation benefit district fees A law passed in 2007 allows city or county governments to create local transportation benefit districts and impose a local vehicle registration fee to fund local transportation projects. Flow a transportation benefit district works Once a local transportation benefit district is set up, the district's board of directors may vote to charge a local vehicle licensing fee due when a vehicle owner buys new tabs. . • The transportation benefit district board has the authority to impose a fee of up to $20 per vehicle without voter approval. • , A transportation benefit district may impose a vehicle renewal fee of up to $100 per vehicle or seek other sources of funding if approved by voters. Vehicles subject to fees • Passenger vehicles • Trucks that weigh 6,000 pounds or less • Motorcycles • Commercial passenger vehicles and trucks that weigh 6,000 pounds or Tess • Combination trucks that weigh 6,000 pounds or less • Tow trucks • House moving dollies • Trucks used exclusively for hauling Togs that weigh 6,000 pounds or Tess • Taxicabs • For -hire or stage vehicles with 6 seats or less • For -hire or stage vehicles with 7 or more seats that weigh 6,000 pounds or less • Private use trailers over 2,000 pounds • Motorcycle trailers • Travel trailers • Fixed load vehicles that weigh 6,000 pounds or less • Mobile homes licensed as vehicles Exempt vehicles • All farm vehicles • Campers • • Off -road vehicles • Snowmobiles • Mopeds • Personal use trailers with a single axle and Tess than 2,000 pounds scale weight Page 1 of 2 htfn./1www tin] wa Qnv/vahinip.rpvi.afratinri/lnnalfeeF. html hnn4 VVt.OW.LC Lleeuslug: LUUiL1 Lliy- 1 )U1LULIUll UG11G111 UINUILA1GGJ r age .G W. .4 • Commercial trailers • Combination trailers • Trailers used'exclusively for hauling logs ® Horseless carriage, collector, or restored -plate vehicles o Converter gear ® Government vehicles • Private school vehicles ® Vehicles properly registered to disabled American veterans Districts and fees No cities or counties are currently charging local transportation benefit district fees. Eligible vehicles The'lTransportation Benefit District Eligibility Report provides useful estimations to help cities and counties interested in setting up a transportation benefit district. The report includes: ® Information about transportation benefit district laws. ® A list of the types of vehicles subject to transportation benefit district fees. ® Estirnated data showing the number of vehicles eligible for the $20 fee in fiscal year 2008 — sorted by zip code, city, or county. If you need more information after viewing the report, call us at (360) 902-3606 or send an email to KMathis@ dol.wa.gov. htip://www.doh.wa.gov/vehicleregistration/localfees.html ' 3/21/2008