Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2012-06-11 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETTukwila City Counci /Agenda COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Jim Haggerton, Mayor Counci /members: Joe Duff ie Dennis Robertson David Cline, City Administrator Allan Ekberg Kathy Hougardy Verna Seal, Council President De'Sean Quinn Kate Kruller EXECUTIVE SESSION 6:30 PM 7:00 PM Personnel Issue Pursuant to RCW 42.30.110(1)(g) (30 minutes) Monday, June 11, 2012, 7:00 PM Tukwila City Hall Council Chambers 1. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. CITIZEN COMMENT At this time, you are invited to comment on items not included on this agenda SPECIAL MEETING Ord #2378 Res #1770 1. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL 2. UNFINISHED Tukwila Potential Annexation Area (PAA) North Highline. Pg.213 BUSINESS 3. ADJOURNMENT Tukwila City Hall is wheelchair accessible. Reasonable accommodations are available at public hearings with advance notice to the City Clerk's Office (206- 433 -1800 or TukwilaCityClerk @TukwilaWA.gov). This notice is available at www.tukwilawa.aov, and in alternate formats with advance notice for those with disabilities. Tukwila Council meetings are audio taped. (please limit your comments to five minutes per citizen). To comment on an item listed on this agenda, please save your comments until the issue is presented for discussion. 3. PUBLIC HEARING An ordinance relating to Development Agreements. Pg.1 4. SPECIAL a. An ordinance relating to Development Agreements. Pg.1 ISSUES b. An Interlocal Agreement with the Kent Regional Fire Authority relating Pg.19 to training. c. An agreement with King County for animal control services. Pg.35 d. A supplemental agreement for the Water and Sewer Comprehensive Pg.155 Plans. e. A resolution adopting the 2013 -2018 Transportation Improvement Pg.163 Program. 5. REPORTS a. Mayor b. City Council c. Staff d. City Attorney e. Intergovernmental 6. MISCELLANEOUS 7. EXECUTIVE SESSION S. ADJOURN TO SPECIAL MEETING SPECIAL MEETING Ord #2378 Res #1770 1. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL 2. UNFINISHED Tukwila Potential Annexation Area (PAA) North Highline. Pg.213 BUSINESS 3. ADJOURNMENT Tukwila City Hall is wheelchair accessible. Reasonable accommodations are available at public hearings with advance notice to the City Clerk's Office (206- 433 -1800 or TukwilaCityClerk @TukwilaWA.gov). This notice is available at www.tukwilawa.aov, and in alternate formats with advance notice for those with disabilities. Tukwila Council meetings are audio taped. HOW TO TESTIFY If you would like to address the Council, please go to the podium and state your name and address clearly for the record. Please observe the basic rules of courtesy when speaking and limit your continents to five minutes. The Council appreciates hearing from citizens but may not be able to take immediate action on continents received until they are referred to a Committee or discussed under New Business. COUNCIL MEETINGS No Council meetings are scheduled on the 5th Monday of the month unless prior public notification is given. Regular Meetings The Mayor, elected by the people to a four -year term, presides at all Regular Council Meetings held on the 1st and 3rd Mondays of each month at 7:00 p.m. Official Council action in the form of formal motions, adopting of resolutions and passing of ordinances can only be taken at Regular Council meetings. Committee of the Whole Meetings Council members are elected for a four -year term. The Council President is elected by the Council members to preside at all Committee of the Whole meetings for a one -year term. Committee of the Whole meetings are held the 2nd and 4th Mondays at 7:00 p.m. Issues discussed are forwarded to the Regular Council meeting for official action. GENERAL INFORMATION At each Council meeting citizens are given the opportunity to address the Council on items that are not included on the agenda during CITIZENS COMMENTS. Please limit your comments to 5 minutes. Special Meetings may be called at any time with proper public notice. Procedures followed are the same as those used in Regular Council meetings. Executive Sessions may be called to inform the Council of pending legal action, financial, or personnel matters. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearings are required by law before the Council can take action on matters affecting the public interest such as land -use laws, annexations, rezone requests, public safety issues, etc. Section 2.04.150 of the Tukwila Municipal Code states the following guidelines for Public Hearings: The proponent shall speak first and is allowed 15 minutes for a presentation. 2. The opponent is then allowed 15 minutes to make a presentation. Each side is then allowed 5 minutes for rebuttal. 4. Citizens who wish to address the Council may speak for 5 minutes each. No one may speak a second time until everyone wishing to speak has spoken. 5. After each speaker has spoken, the Council may question the speaker. Each speaker can respond to the question, but may not engage in further debate at this time. 6. After the Public Hearing is closed and during the Council meeting, the Council may choose to discuss the issue among themselves, or defer the discussion to a future Council meeting, without further public testimony. Council action may only be taken during Regular or Special Meetings. COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Meeting Date 06/11/12 06/18/12 i Initials Prepared by Mayor's review BM BM Co�iivieaa� ITEM NO. 3& 4.A. ITEM INFORMATION STAFF SPONSOR: BRANDON MILES ORIGINA],A( ;1?,NDADATFG.: 6/11/12 Ac,i;NDA I'rj, Development Agreement Procedures C \'CP',GORY ®Di.rcu.crion ❑Motion Resolution ®Ordinunce ❑BidAavarzl ®Public Hearing ❑Other .l2tg Dale 06111112 APPS Date Aft g Date tlltg Date 06/18112 Alltg Date Nl/g Date 06/11112 -Alt Date ISPONSOIR Council Mayor [:].HR DCD Finunce Fire IT P &R Police PWI SPC �NSC'lz's The City Attorney's office is recommending that the City add specific language to the Suniti Tukwila Municipal Code Title 18 to codify the process for the City to enter into Development Agreements and specify the scope and content of such agreements. Ri {XlI ANT"D BY cow Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte ❑Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 6/4/12, 5/21/12 COMMITTEE CHAIR: EKBERG RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Department of Community Development COmm"171 Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EX PI ;NDI'1'URI{ RI ;QURI AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $N /A $N /A $N /A Fund Source: N/A Canimenl.s: N/A I MTG. DATE I RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 06/11/12 MTG. DATE I ATTACHMENTS 6/11/12 Informational Memorandum to Transportation Committee, dated May 30, 2012. Ordinance in Final Form. Minutes from June 4, 2012 Transportation Committee Meeting. Memorandum to the Planning Commission, dated May 18, 2012. Draft Minutes from May 24, 2012 Planning Commission Meeting. Informational Memorandum to Transportation Committee dated May 18, 2012. Minutes from May 21, 2012 Transportation Committee Meeting. 6/18/12 1 x City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: (Mayor Haggerton 'Transportation Committee FROM: Jack Pace, Director BY: Nora Gierloff, Deputy Director DATE: May 30, 2012 SUBJECT: Development Agreement Procedures ISSUE Should the City adopt an Ordinance establishing the process, scope, and content of Development Agreements? BACKGROUND As authorized by state law, the City regularly uses DAs to provide certainty in the development process. Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington provides the following narrative on what a DA is: "A development agreement is a contract between a local jurisdiction and a person who has ownership or control of property within the jurisdiction. The purpose of the agreement is to specify the standards and conditions that will govern development of the property. The development agreement provides assurance to the developer that he /she may proceed to develop the project subject to the rules and regulations in effect at the time of approval the development will not be subject to subsequent changes in regulations. Development agreements should also benefit the local jurisdiction. The city or county may include conditions (mitigation measures) that must be met to assure that a project at a specific location does not have unacceptable impacts on neighboring properties or community infrastructure. The agreement may clarify how the project will be phased, the required timing of public improvements, the developer's contribution toward funding system -wide community improvements, and other conditions. The agreement can also facilitate enforcement of requirements, since it is a contract that details the obligations of the developer and local jurisdiction"'. DAs are specifically useful for large and /or complex developments, such as Tukwila South, Westfield Southcenter and the future Tukwila Village site. The authority for the City to enter into a DA is granted to the City under Revised Code of Washington 36.70B.170. DAs are legislative acts, which means that the City has considerable discretion on whether to enter into a development agreement or not. DISCUSSION The City Attorney's office is recommending that the City add specific language to the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Title 18 to codify the process for the City to enter into Development Agreements and specify the scope and content of such agreements. The attached Ordinance reflects the processes that are currently used by the City in the process of DAs under state law. The Ordinance simply codifies the City's process within the City's Development regulations (TMC Title 18). http: /www.mrsc.org/ subjects planning /lu /developagreements.aspx 3 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 As required by TMC 18.80.050, the Transportation Committee referred the matter to the Planning Commission for their review and consideration. On May 24, 2012, the Planning Commission voted to recommend that the City Council adopt an Ordinance which establishes procedures for processing of Development Agreements. FINANCIAL IMPACT None RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the draft Ordinance be forwarded to the June 11, 2012 Committee of the Whole meeting for a public hearing and the June 18, 2012 Regular Council meeting for possible action. ATTACHMENTS Draft Ordinance Memo to Planning Commission dated May 18, 2012 4 Z:1DCD n Clerk's0randonTevelopment Agreement Ordinance\COW Matedals\Transportation Memo, 2012.05.30.doc �saT AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING NEW REGULATIONS TO BE CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 18.86 RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, RCW 36.706.170 authorizes the City to enter into "development agreements" with persons having ownership or control of real property; and WHEREAS, in adopting such statute, the Washington Legislature made the following finding: The legislature finds that the lack of certainty in the approval of development projects can result in a waste of public and private resources, escalate housing costs for consumers and discourage the commitment to comprehensive planning which would make maximum efficient use of resources at the least economic cost to the public. Assurance to a development project applicant that upon government approval the project may proceed in accordance with existing policies and regulations, and subject to conditions of approval, all as set forth in a development agreement, will strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation and comprehensive planning, and reduce the economic costs of development. Further, the lack of public facilities and services is a serious impediment to development of new housing and commercial uses. Project applicants and local governments may include provisions and agreements whereby applicants are reimbursed over time for financing public facilities. It is the intent of the legislature by RCW 36.708.170 through 36.7013.210 to allow local governments and owners and developers of real property to enter into development agreements. 1995 c 347 501, and WHEREAS, the City Council concurs with the legislative findings referenced above; and W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Development Agreements purpose and procedures 6 -5 -12 SK:bjs Page 1 of 5 5 WHEREAS, on June 11, 2012, the Tukwila City Council conducted a public hearing to consider the proposed ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that development agreements may be appropriate in certain circumstances as a means to consolidate numerous issues involved in complex development projects into a single controlling instrument, benefiting the City, its citizens, and members of the regulated public; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Regulations Established. Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 18.86, "Development Agreements," is hereby established to read as follows: Section 2. TMC Section 18.86.010 is hereby established to read as follows: 18.86.010 Development Agreements —Authorized. The City may enter into a development agreement with a person having ownership or control of real property within its jurisdiction. The City may enter into a development agreement for real property outside its boundaries as part of a proposed annexation or a service agreement. A development agreement must set forth the development standards and other provisions that shall apply to and govern and vest the development, use, and mitigation of the development of the real property for the duration specified in the agreement. Section 3. TMC Section 18.86.020 is hereby established to read as follows: 18.86.020 "Development Standards" Defined. For purposes of this chapter, the term "development standards" means and includes, but is not limited to: 1. Project elements such as permitted uses, residential densities, and non- residential densities and intensities or building sizes; W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Development Agreements purpose and procedures 6 -5 -12 SK:bjs Page 2 of 5 X CHAPTER 18.86 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS Sections: 18.86.010 Development Agreements Authorized 18.86.020 "Development Standards" Defined 18.86.030 Development Standards, Flexibility 18.86.040 Exercise of City Police Power and Contract Authority 18.86.050 Form Public Hearing Required '18.86.060 Conditions of Approval '18.86.070 Recording 18.86.080 Discretionary, Legislative Act Section 2. TMC Section 18.86.010 is hereby established to read as follows: 18.86.010 Development Agreements —Authorized. The City may enter into a development agreement with a person having ownership or control of real property within its jurisdiction. The City may enter into a development agreement for real property outside its boundaries as part of a proposed annexation or a service agreement. A development agreement must set forth the development standards and other provisions that shall apply to and govern and vest the development, use, and mitigation of the development of the real property for the duration specified in the agreement. Section 3. TMC Section 18.86.020 is hereby established to read as follows: 18.86.020 "Development Standards" Defined. For purposes of this chapter, the term "development standards" means and includes, but is not limited to: 1. Project elements such as permitted uses, residential densities, and non- residential densities and intensities or building sizes; W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Development Agreements purpose and procedures 6 -5 -12 SK:bjs Page 2 of 5 X 2. The amount and payment of impact fees imposed or agreed to in accordance with any applicable provisions of state law, any reimbursement provisions, other financial contributions by the property owner, or dedications, 3. Mitigation measures, development conditions, and other requirements under chapter 43.21 C RCW; 4. Design standards such as maximum heights, setbacks, drainage and water quality requirements, landscaping, and other development features, 5. Parks and open space preservation; 6. Phasing; 7. Review procedures and standards for implementing decisions, 8. A build -out or vesting period for applicable standards; and 9. Any other development requirement or procedure deemed appropriate by the City Council. Section .4. TMC Section 18.86.030 is hereby established to read as follows: 18.86.030 Development Standards, Flexibility. A development agreement shall be consistent with applicable development regulations to the fullest extent possible; provided, a development agreement may allow development standards different from those otherwise imposed under the Tukwila Municipal Code in order to provide flexibility to achieve public benefits, respond to changing community needs, or encourage modifications which provide the functional equivalent or adequately achieve the purposes of otherwise applicable City standards. Any approved development standards that differ from those in the Code shall not require any further zoning reclassification, variance from City standards or other City approval apart from development agreement approval. The development standards as approved through a development agreement shall apply to and govern the development and implementation of each covered site in lieu of any conflicting or different standards or requirements elsewhere in the Tukwila Municipal Code. Subsequently adopted standards that differ from those of a development agreement adopted by the City as provided in this chapter shall apply to the covered development project only where necessary to address imminent public health and safety hazards or where the development agreement specifies a time period or phase after which certain identified standards can be modified. Determination of the appropriate standards for future phases that are not fully defined during the initial approval process may be postponed. Building permit applications shall be subject to the building codes /regulations /ordinances and fire codes /regulations /ordinances in effect when the permit is applied for. W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Development Agreements purpose and procedures 6 -5 -12 SK:bjs Page 3 of 5 7 Section 5. TMC Section 18.86.040 is hereby established to read as follows: 18.86.040 Exercise of City Police Power and Contract Authority. As provided in RCW 36.706.170(4), the execution of a development agreement is a proper exercise of the City's police power and contract authority. Accordingly, a development agreement may obligate a party to fund or provide services, infrastructure, or other facilities. A development agreement shall reserve authority to impose new or different regulations to the extent required by a serious threat to public health and safety. Section 6. TMC Section 18.86.050 is hereby established to read as follows: 18.86.050 Form Public Hearing Required. Development agreements shall be consistent with RCW 36.706.170 through 36.706.210. All development agreements shall be in a form and content as approved by the City Attorney. Development agreements shall be approved by ordinance or resolution and shall be subject to review and approval by the City Council after a duly noticed public hearing pursuant to RCW 36.706.200. Section 7. TMC Section 18.86.060 is hereby established to read as follows: 18.86.060 Conditions of Approval. In approving a development agreement, conditions of approval shall at a minimum establish: 1. A site plan for the entire project, showing locations of sensitive areas and buffers, required open spaces, perimeter buffers, location and range of densities for residential development, and location and size of non residential development; 2. The expected build -out time period for the entire project and the various phases, if proposed, 3. Project phasing, if proposed, and other project- specific conditions to mitigate impacts on the environment, on public facilities and services including transportation, utilities, drainage, police and fire protection, schools, and parks, 4. Road and storm water design standards that shall apply to the various phases, if proposed, of the project; 5. Bulk design and dimensional standards that shall be implemented throughout subsequent development within the project; 6. The size and range of uses authorized for any non residential development within the project; and 7. Any sewer and /or water comprehensive utility plans or amendments required to be completed before development can occur. 8. Any other item deemed necessary by the City Council. W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Development Agreements purpose and procedures 6 -5 -12 SK:bjs Page 4 of 5 i Section 8. TMC Section 18.86.070 is hereby established to read as follows: 18.86.070 Recording A development agreement shall be recorded with the real property records of the county in which the property is located pursuant to RCW 36.70B.190. Section 9. TMC Section 18.86.080 is hereby established to read as follows: 18.86.080 Discretionary, Legislative Act. The decision of the City Council to approve or reject a request for a development agreement shall be a discretionary, legislative act. Section 10. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the City Attorney', the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section /subsection numbering. Section 11. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 12. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of 2012. ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Jim Haggerton, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Shelley M. Kerslake, City Attorney Ordinance Number: W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Development Agreements purpose and procedures 6 -5 -12 SK:bjs Page 5 of 5 E 10 Transportation Committee Minutes June 4. 2012 Paae 2 emphasize that the projects are listed in alphabetical order. This should make viewing easier for full Council. Sharon Mann inquired as to why mid -block crosswalks are not listed in the TIP. Staff explained that they are working on mid -block cross walks for Tukwila Village and wanted to ensure potential solutions are the right solution prior to implementing city -wide. Additionally, relatively small projects such crosswalks do not necessarily need to be reflected in the TIP. Ms. Mann also asked about improvements to the 42 Avenue South hill area, staff replied that this project is included in the City's Capital Improvement Plan (Project 40 -42 Avenue South) and is currently in the design phase. Committee Member Hougardy asked clarifying questions regarding project locations. The Committee inquired about the Tukwila International Boulevard speed study, which staff responded is anticipated to be complete by August. The speed study will be presented to Connnittee and full Council as appropriate. Staff will conduct public outreach on the study as necessary. Currently, a public hearing for the TIP is scheduled for .Lune 18, 2012. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO JUNE 11 COW FOR DISCUSSION. C. Development Aiareement Procedures Staff is seeking approval of a draft ordinance relating to procedures for development agreements. This draft ordinance has been reviewed by the Planning Commission and the Commission recommends Council adopt the ordinance. The draft ordinance incorporates language into the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) to provide greater transparency and set expectations for such agreements. Essentially, it codifies current processes and past practice and addresses broad sections of TMC Chapter 18 relating to the zoning code. In response to a Commmittee question, staff stated that rezones cannot be included /addressed through development agreements; however, boundary modifications /changes are allowed. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO JUNE 11 COW FOR DISCUSSION. III. SCATBd Staff briefly reviewed the SCATBd Agenda for Tuesday, June 19, 2012. A report on the meeting will be provided at the next Transportation Committee. IV. MISCELLANEOUS Meeting adjounled at 6:01 p.m. Next meeting: Monday, June 18, 2012 5:15 p.m. Conference Room #1 rte Committee Chair Approval Min wee br h': i 11 Reviewed by GL. 11 12 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission BY: Brandon J. Miles, Senior Planner DATE: May 18, 2012 SUBJECT: Development Agreement Procedures ISSUE The City Council has requested that the Planning Commission review and provide a recommendation on a draft Ordinance which will provide specific authority for the City to enter into Development Agreements (DAs). BACKGROUND As authorized by state law, the City regularly uses DAs to provide certainty in the development process. Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington provides the following narrative on what a DA is: 'A development agreement is a contract between a local jurisdiction and a person who has ownership or control of property within the jurisdiction. The purpose of the agreement is to specify the standards and conditions that will govern development of the property. The development agreement provides assurance to the developer that he /she may proceed to develop the project subject to the rules and regulations in effect at the time of approval the development will not be subject to subsequent changes in regulations. Development agreements should also benefit the local jurisdiction. The city or county may include conditions (mitigation measures) that must be met to assure that a project at a specific location does not have unacceptable impacts on neighboring properties or community infrastructure. The agreement may clarify how the project will be phased, the required timing of public improvements, the developer's contribution toward funding system -wide community improvements, and other conditions. The agreement can also facilitate enforcement of requirements, since it is a contract that details the obligations of the developer and local jurisdiction"'. DAs are specifically useful for large and /or complex developments, such as Tukwila South, Westfield Southcenter and the future Tukwila Village site. The authority for the City to enter into a DA is granted to the City under Revised Code of Washington 36.70B.170. DAs are legislative acts, which means that the City has considerable discretion on whether to enter into a development agreement or not. DISCUSSION The City Attorney's office is recommending that the City add specific language to the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Title 18 to codify the process for the City to enter into Development Agreements and specify the scope and content of such agreements. The attached Ordinance reflects the processes that are currently used by the City in the process of DAs under state law. The Ordinance simply codifies the City's process within the City's Development regulations (TMC Title 18). http: /www.mrsc.org/subjects/ planning /lu /developagreements.aspx 13 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 FINANCIAL IMPACT None. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the attached Ordinance be forwarded to the City Council for approval. ATTACHMENTS Draft Ordinance 14 Z: \DCD n Clerk's \Brandon \Development Agreement Ordinance \COW Materials \Planning Commission Memo, dated 2012.05.18.doc City of Tukwila Planning Commission Planning Commission Worksession (PC) Minutes DRAFT Date: May 24, 2012 Time: 6:30 PM Location: City Hall Council Chambers Present: Brooke Alford, Chair; Vice Chair, Thomas McLeod; Commissioners, Louise Strander, Mike Hansen, Aaron Hundtofte, and Jeri Frangello- Anderson Commissioner David Shumate arrived at 7:00 PM Staff: Nora Gierloff, Deputy DCD Director, Lynn Miranda, Senior Planner;. >and Wynetta Bivens, Planning Commission Secretary. Chair Alford called the worksession to order at 6:30 PM. °k Minutes: Commissioner McLeod made a motion to adopt minutes. Commissioner Hansen seconded the lx Request: An Ordinance establishing procedures Nora Gierloff, Deputy Director, Department of Communityal Ordinance for Development Agreement Procedures referred by t will forward their recommendation back to the k"t Council; the make a final decision. A Development Agreement is a legislativ( City. This is a process the City is authorized to dohnder is ate a City's regulations. This ordinance is a way to formaliie the A in the City's Zoning Code. T 551 ivs this pro&eess�so4t at properly owners on complex r sual p sects. Theo `reasc Agreement is because the y a pubs benefitthey entering into the develop mentaagreement Vould benefit, f brKs sta y�S exchange for benefits to the pulc. Most regulators will confirn called out to allow tlexibili foruhich;,p amt swillbe set "126, 2012 Plaifni "g Commission The motion was unanimously approved. evelopment, gave an overview of the Draft hesCity Council. The Planning Commission Ciq will hold a public hearing and item, which is voluntary on the part of the w.but which ias not been codified in the lopment.agreement process and expectations Ci?i& ca0 make agreements with private in the City would enter into a Development could not otherwise secure. Both parties .nce, flexibility in standards is allowed in ze to apply, except for those few that are Commission4" trander ngu�d a out here not being any specific language in the Development Agreement pertaining to Police anal Fire codes. Staff stated that the code is for making changes to the zoning standards n the Zoning Code, w�hcch woul�dnot affect Police or Fire related codes. But there could be certain editions of rr -codes vested, for mple certain edition of the building code. If there are life safety reasons to be heldto a newer standar;.of the code it is allowed and would override a Development Agreement. ON Commissioner Alford iWguired %here have been any concerns on the part of the Fire Department on the Ordinance. Staff has not he &`a any concerns expressed from Fire. DW Commissioner Hansen stated that using the language "person" in the ordinance does not seem appropriate, and expressed an interest in changing the word. Staff suggested that the word "person" could be changed to "entity There were no additional comments on the proposed ordinance. Page 1 of 2 15 PC Worksession Minutes May 24, 2012 Commissioner Hansen made a motion to amend references in the Development Agreement Ordinance from "person" or "persons" to "the entity" where staff thinks it makes sense. The Planning Commission is forwarding their recommendation for approval of the Development Agreement Ordinance as amended to the City Council for their approval. Commissioner Hundtofte seconded the motion. All were in favor. Submitted By: Wynetta Bivens Planning Commission Secretary 16 Page 2 of 2 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM i� FROM: BY: DATE: SUBJECT Mayor Haggerton 'Transportation Committee Jack Pace, Director Brandon J. Miles, Senior Planner May 18, 2012 Development Agreement Procedures Referral to Planning Commission Needed ISSUE Should the City adopt an Ordinance establishing the process, scope, and content of Development Agreements? BACKGROUND As authorized by State Law, the City regularly uses Development Agreements (DA) to provide certainty in the development process. DAs, which are adopted by either Ordinance or Resolution by the City Council, allow the City to provide development projects flexibility from adopted development standards. DAs are specifically useful for large and /or complex developments, such as Tukwila South, Westfield Southcenter and the future Tukwila Village site. The authority for the City to enter into a DA is granted to the City under the Revised Code of Washington 36.70B.170. DISCUSSION The City Attorney's office is recommending that the City add specific language to the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Title 18 to codify the process for the City to enter into DAs and specific the scope and content of such agreements. Staff is proposing that an Ordinance be adopted which would add a new Chapter to TMC Title 18. This is purely codifying the City's past practices. Given that amendments are being proposed to TMC Title 18, a referral to the Planning Commission from a Council Committee is required per TMC 18.80.050. In order to accommodate the Tukwila Village Project, staff would like to take the proposed Ordinance to the Planning Commission on May 24, 2012 for consideration and a recommendation. Once a recommendation is provided, the proposed Ordinance, with amendments to TMC Title 18, will go through the regular Council approval process. FINANCIAL IMPACT None. RECOMMENDATION Committee approval to refer the proposed amendment to TMC Title 18 to the Planning Commission for their consideration and recommendation as required by TMC 18.80.050. attachments: TMC 18.08.050 Z:\DCD n Clerk's \Brandon \Development Agreement Ordinance \COW Materials \Transportation Memo, 2012.05.18.docx 17 Transportation Committee Minutes Mav21, 2012 Pace 2 C. Develoomen.t Agreement Procedures Staff is seeking Committee approval to forward a draft ordinance relating to procedures for development agreements to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation to full Council. Incorporating language into the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) will provide greater transparency and set expectations for such agreements; essentially, codifying current processes and past practice. It will address broad sections of TMC Chapter 18 relating to the zoning code. FORWARD TO PLANNING COMMISSION FOR REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION. III. SCATBd No report scheduled for Committee. IV. MISCELLANEOUS Meeting adjourned at 6:01 p.m. Next meeting: Monday, June 4, 2012 5:15 p.m. Conference Room 41 �2 �F_ Committee Chair Approval :Minutes bt KAH.. Reviewed by CL. COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS ILzitialr ITEM NO. Meeting Date Prepared by ��ayor Wrew w Co review 06/11/12 NJO R 06/18/12 NJO V T u V ITEM INFORMATION S'I:- F SPONsnIz: NICK OLIVAS ORI(,INAI.AGI?NI),1 DA'1'l 06/11/12 Ac;ISNDA ITFA4 TITH; An Interlocal Agreement to join the Kent Regional Fire Authority Training Consortium. C.\'I'r("OIn' Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance ❑BidAnrard Public Nearing Otber t19tg Date 6111112 Ali Date 6 /18/12 Mtg Date Mtg Date l7tq Date Mtg Date Mtg Date I -SPONSOIZ Council Mayor .HR DCD Finance Fire IT P &R Police PIF SPONSOR'S We have been working closely with the Kent Regional Fire Authority Training consortium ;Sup- rnr,�R1' since last April or May. The official consortium consists of Kent, SeaTac and Maple Valley. Since working with the consortium, our training has improved 100 our personnel are better prepared to deal with emergencies, and their level of confidence in their abilities has increased significantly. We would like to officially join the consortium by means of an Interlocal Agreement that has been prepared by the City Attorney. cow Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 06/05/12 COMMITTEE CHAIR: QUINN RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONS(>R /ADMIN. Fire Department CO\-I,mll'fla, Unanimous Approva; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE E\PISNDITLIRF RI?(?UIRI?I) AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $300,000 $300,000 $0 Fund Source: GENERAL FUND (FIRE DEPARTMENT SALARIES AND BENEFITS) Connnwnts: The two existing training officers would remain City of Tukwila employees, IMTG.DATEI RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 6/11/12 MTG. DATE 1 ATTACHMENTS 6/11/12 Informational Memorandum dated 05/29/12 Memorandum from Captain Johnson Draft Interlocal Agreement Minutes from the Finance and Safety Committee meeting of 6/5/12 6/18/12 19 20 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Haggerton Finance and Safety Committee FROM: Nick Olivas, Fire Chief DATE: May 29, 2012 SUBJECT: An Interlocal Agreement to join the Kent Regional Fire Authority Training Consortium ISSUE Council review of an Interlocal Agreement between the Tukwila Fire Department and the Kent Regional Fire Authority (RFA) Training Consortium. BACKGROUND In late 2010 -early 2011, The Kent RFA, with the assistance of the City of SeaTac and Maple Valley (King County Fire Protection District 43) formed a training consortium. The consortium was formed because it is virtually impossible, under current economic conditions, to adequately staff a training department let alone deliver, track and document required training. Through the pooling of resources, the consortium has been able to deliver the training that is required by the Washington Administrative Code as well as adopted National Fire Protection Standards. DISCUSSION With the reorganization of the training department after Chief Grisham moved to be the City's Emergency Manager, we were approached by Kent in the spring of 2011 to participate with them in the consortium to determine whether joining the consortium would be in our best interests. Since that time, we have worked closely with them, both in the development and the delivery of training. As demonstrated by unsolicited feedback from our department members, since beginning our association with the consortium, our training has shown improvement and the crews now look forward to the positive training environment that is part of the philosophy of the training officers. We have also improved tracking and documentation of our training through the purchase of training tracker. FINANCIAL IMPACT We will dedicate 1 '/4 to 1 '/2 full time employees (FTEs) currently working in training to the consortium. They will continue to be City employees, will report to duty in Tukwila, and spend much of their time working in Kent or the other participating jurisdictions either developing or delivering training. There is no financial impact as we are not increasing or decreasing staff. We have found no downside to this proposal, and we have already experienced the benefits from working closely with the other training officers involved. Our personnel are better trained and better prepared for emergencies than they were last year at this time. RECOMMENDATION The Committee is being asked to consider this item and forward it to the June 11, 2012 Committee of the Whole Meeting and subsequent June 18, 2012 Regular Meeting. iIF_[y.l&14►11 Kent consortium memorandum prepared by Training Captain Jeff Johnson Draft Interlocal Agreement prepared by our City Attorney 21 22 To: Chief Olivas From: Captain Johnson Subject: Kent Training Consortium, Benefits and Achievements Date: May 29, 2012 Fire Department Training is mandated by the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) and the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). Meeting the requirements of these agencies can be challenging, as every fire department has limited resources, budgets, and personnel. Not only that, but the fire department must also spend time concentrating on Emergency Medical Services (EMS), Special Teams (Hazardous Materials and Rescue), and Emergency Management. The strain on an individual fire department to achieve proficiency in these disciplines with only one or two members in their Training Division can be daunting. The Kent Fire Training Consortium meets these training requirements by pooling the resources and the training personnel of three fire departments. In addition, the expense to each individual department is reduced as costs are shared. Another benefit is consistency of training among the participating departments. Each participant is taught to address fire and EMS problems in a consistent, predictable manner. The Kent Fire Training Consortium currently consists of members of the Kent, SeaTac, and Maple Valley fire departments. The Consortium is supervised by one Battalion Chief and staffed by four Captains, two firefighters, and one Administrative Assistant. Together, these members manage and track training for 266 firefighters. With the addition of the Tukwila Fire Department, this number will rise to 332 firefighters. Further, Tukwila will contribute one Training Captain to the Consortium full time and another Training Captain at half time. Having a pool of Training Officers allows specialization to occur. Currently within the Consortium two Training officers focus primarily on EMS, one Training officer has developed expertise in engineer pump operations, another specializes in Truck Company operations, and the others work on suppression related drills. Such specialization has allowed the quality and quantity of such training to increase. Appreciation for this has been expressed by firefighters and officers alike. 23 The Kent Consortium has a full time administrative assistant. This administrative assistant is responsible for the computer tracking program, scheduling of events, and other administrative tasks that would otherwise take up the time of the Training Officers. This allows for more time to design and deliver classes "in the field The Consortium uses two primary methods of instruction. The first is done by the establishment of quarterly training requirements. This training is designed by the Consortium to meet or exceed the WAC and NFPA mandates. The quarterly requirements are to be done by individual fire companies. When their training is completed, the data is entered into a computer tracking program. In this way, the Consortium can be assured that the prescribed instruction is taking place. The second method is by annual training emphases. The Consortium designs and delivers 2 -3 annual training emphasis drills during the year. These drills are meant to pull together the quarterly training objectives into a "unified whole During a quarter, the engine and ladder companies will have focused on hose deployment, ladder operations, and patient removal. During the annual emphasis drill, the participants will be doing all of these operations during a fire simulation. During 2012, the emphasis drills include: SCBA competency, Live Fire Training, and MCI (Mass Casualty Incident) drills. The Consortium takes part in other areas as well. Examples include Blue Card Training (The Incident Command System), Special Operations (Hazardous materials and Rescue), Boat operations, and Officer Development. The Tukwila Training Division has been taking part in the Consortium drills since spring of last year. Both Tukwila Training officers have benefited as have the members of our department. The Consortium has been very generous to us, investing in our department with their resources and mentorship. The Training Officers are looking forward to the opportunity to work as official members of the Consortium. It is our desire to participate, enhancing the quality of training within this Training Division and further benefiting from the expertise of others. 24 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF TUKWILA AND KENT FIRE DEPARTMENT REGIONAL FIRE AUTHORITY I. PREAMBLE This Agreement is entered into as of the day of 2012, by and between the CITY OF TUKWILA, a municipal corporation "City and the KENT FIRE DEPARTMENT REGIONAL FIRE AUTHORITY, a municipal corporation "RFA This Agreement is made pursuant to chapter 39.34 RCW (the Interlocal Cooperation Act and has been authorized by the governing body of each Party. Each of the Parties is a "public agency" as defined in the Interlocal Cooperation Act. II. RECITALS WHEREAS, the City and the RFA currently each maintain and operate their own fire departments to provide fire protection, fire suppression and emergency medical services in their respective jursidictions. WHEREAS, the purpose of this Agreement is to allow for the joint operation and administration of each entity's training divisions; and WHEREAS, this Agreement is not intended to supersede or conflict with the collective bargaining agreements of either party. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HEREBY AGREE AS FOLLOWS: III. AGREEMENT Section 1. Effective Date and Termination of Agreement. This agreement shall be effective on May 1, 2012 and shall terminate on December 31, 2012. The Agreement may be renewed for additional time periods provided that both parties must give notice of an intent to renew to the other party 30 days prior to the expiration. Either party may unilaterally terminate this Agreement with 30 days written notice to the other party. Section 2. Definitions. The following terms, when used in this Agreement, shall be defined. as follows: A. "Consolidated Operations" shall mean the operations performed under the direction of the Chief and shall include the training for personnel of both the RFA and City. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT Page 1 of 6 25 B. "FTE" shall mean full time employee. C. "Days" shall mean calendar days, unless otherwise noted. Section 3. Services Performed by the RFA for the City. 3.1 Training Services. The RFA agrees to -perform training services for the City through a training consortium as follows: (a) See Exhibit A for scope of services to be performed under this Agreement. (b) Consideration for Training Services. In consideration of the training services described herein, the City shall provide the following to the RFA: (i) The City shall assign one and a quarter to one and a half existing FTE's to the training consortium to assist in providing the training services pursuant to this Agreement. The level of service provided by the City pursuant to this Agreement shall be solely determined by the City, based on its departmental needs. (ii) In the event the person occupying these positions is on leave or works a different shift for a period of 30 days or more, the City shall, at no expense to the RFA, fill the position with another employee familiar with and adequately trained to provide the needed services. Section 4. General Provisions. 4.1 Employees of the RFA are not employees of the City. The RFA employees who provide the City services pursuant to the Agreement shall be employees of the RFA and not employees of the City. The RFA shall, at all times, be solely responsible for the conduct of its employees in performing the services called for in this Agreement. The RFA shall be solely responsible for all compensation, benefits and insurance for its employees. 4.2 Employees of the City are not employees of the RFA. All City employees who provide the RFA services called for in this Agreement shall be employees of the City and not employees of the RFA. The City shall, at all times, be solely responsible for the conduct of its employees in performing the services called for in this Agreement. The City shall be solely responsible for all compensation, benefits and insurance for its employees. Section 5. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. Each party agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the other party and each of its employees, officials, agents INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT Page 2 of 6 W and volunteers from any and all losses, claims, liabilities, lawsuits or legal judgments arising out of any negligent or willful actions or inactions by the performing party or any of its employees, officials, agents or volunteers, while acting within the scope of duties required by this Agreement. Each party shall be responsible for its own legal costs and attorney's fees. This provision shall survive the expiration of this Agreement as it related to services performed under the terms of the Agreement. It is further specifically and expressly understood that the indemnification provided herein constitutes each party's mutually :negotiated waiver of immunity under Title 51 RCW, solely to carry out the purposes of this indemnification clause. Section 6. Insurance. Each party shall carry and maintain for the duration of this Agreement property and liability insurance coverage for all operations, facilities, equipment and personnel, at not less than the amount as existing on the date of this Agreement and in a form and with a company acceptable to the other party. Section 7. Property Ownership. All property acquired by the RFA to enable it to perform the services required by this Agreement, shall remain the property of the RFA in the event of the termination of this Agreement. All property acquired by the City to enable it to perform the services required by this Agreement, shall remain the property of the City in the event of the termination of this Agreement. Section 8. No Special Relationship Created. No Third Partv Beneficiarv. The services provided under this Agreement represent an extension and expansion of duties owed to the public in general. Neither party intends to create a special relationship or duty to the other party or to the public served by either party. This Agreement is solely for the benefit of the Parties hereto and no third party shall be entitled to claim or enforce any rights hereunder. Section 9. Dispute Resolution and Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. A. If a dispute arises between the Parties concerning the performance of any provision of this Agreement or the interpretation thereof, the Parties agree to follow the procedures set forth herein. It is the goal of the parties to resolve differences as early in this step process as possible. (1) Step One Informal Discussions. Each Party shall designate a representative, who shall meet and attempt to resolve the dispute. This may involve more than one meeting. (2) Step Two Written Notification and Resolution. If informal discussions are not successful, then the aggrieved Party shall mail, via certified mail, written notice of dispute to the other Party's address shown in Section 12 of this Agreement. The notice shall set forth the nature of the dispute and the desired outcome. A written response shall be provided by the recipient of the notice within ten (10) days' INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT Page 3 of 6 27 receipt of the certified, mailed notice. The response to the notice shall include the respondent's version of the dispute and a proposed resolution. The Parties shall meet within ten. (10) business days following respondent's answer to determine whether the dispute can be resolved amicably. If the dispute is amicably resolved, the Parties shall sign a memorandum of understanding with regards thereto. (3) Step Three Mediation. If the Parties are unable to resolve their differences at Step Two, the Parties will endeavor to settle the dispute by mediation under the mediation rules of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Service of Seattle, Washington. Such mediation will be non binding but a condition precedent to having the dispute resolved pursuant to Arbitration, below. Mediation shall commence, unless otherwise agreed, within thirty (30) days of a Party's written request to the other Party for mediation of a dispute. Any resolution of the dispute at this stage shall be reduced to writing and, if the resolution involves an interpretation of the Agreement herein, the Agreement herein shall be amended to include the interpretation. (4) Step Four Arbitration. If the Parties are unable to resolve their differences at Step Three, the dispute will be resolved by arbitration. A written notice requesting, arbitration must be delivered to the other Parties. The Parties will select an arbitrator by mutual agreement. If the parties cannot agree on an arbitrator within 10 working days after the arbitration request notice has been received, then the dispute will be referred to Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. of Seattle, Washington, and an arbitrator will be selected either by mutual agreement of the Parties or, failing that, by the appointment by each Party of a non interested representative who shall jointly choose an arbitrator. Section 10. Modification. This Agreement may be amended or terminated only upon consent of both Parties hereto. Any amendment or termination shall be in writing and signed by the parties. Section 11. Non Waiver. The waiver by any Party of any breach of any term, covenant, or condition of this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of such term, covenant, or condition or any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant, or condition of this Agreement. Section 12. Impairment of Rights. Nothing in this agreement shall impair a Party's right to seek injunctive relief from the Court if immediate and irreparable injury, loss or damage to any rights arising from this Agreement will occur before Arbitration can be conducted. Section 13. Record Keeping. The records and documents with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement shall be subject to audit by the Parties during the term of this Agreement and three (3) years after termination or such other longer period as may be required by applicable law. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT Page 4 of 6 Section 14. Severabilitv. If any provision of this Agreement or application thereof to any Party or circumstance, is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Agreement which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Agreement are declared to be severable. Section 15. Counterparts. This Agreement shall be effective whether signed by the Parties on the same document or in counterparts. Section 16. Entire Agreement. The written terms and provisions of this Agreement, together with any Exhibits attached hereto, shall supersede all prior communications, negotiations, representations or agreements, either verbal or written of any officer or other representative of each party and such statements shall not be effective or be construed as entering into or forming part of or altering in any manner this Agreement. Section 17. Notices All notices or other communications shall be deemed sufficient hereunder if made in writing and delivered by facsimile, e -mail, or by first -class mail, postage prepaid, to each Party at its respective address set forth below, or such other address as such Party may hereafter designate to the others in writing: CITY OF TUKWILA KENT FIRE DEPARTMENT City Administrator REGIONAL FIRE AUTHORITY 6200 South Center Blvd. Fire Chief Tukwila, WA 98188 24611 116 Ave. S.E. Kent, WA 98030 Notices sent by mail shall be deemed given when properly mailed, and the postmark affixed by the United States Post Office shall be conclusive evidence. Section 18. Filina/Posting. This Agreement shall be filed with the County Auditor or posted on the websites of the Parties as authorized by law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed by each Parry as set forth below: CITY OF TUKWILA KENT FIRE DEPARTMENT /REGIONAL FIRE AUTHORITY M INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT Page 5 of 6 By: ,J. o%.. d40 Tin SC64A/0' 10 s.e jq.44; eN1s&4 29 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the City Attorney By: Q City Attorn INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT Page 6 of 6 30 EXHIBIT A Training Services 1. Services Provided to Citv. The RFA, as part of the Training Consortium with SeaTac, Maple Valley Fire and Life Safety and Tukwila shall provide the following Training Services to the City: 1.1.Trainin2 services provided: (a) Officer training to comply with WAC 296- 305- 05501, to include "Blue Card" Command Training. Training to include certification of officers and training of acting officers. (b) Quarterly Tactical Scenarios (c) Conduct quarterly Chief's Training (d) Emergency Vehicle Accident Prevention (EVIP) training. (e) Recertification of Emergency Medical Technicians (EMT's). (f) Competency Based Training (CBT) modules delivered. (g) Competency Based Training (CBT) manipulative skill evaluations. (h) Conduct annual live fire training. (i) Conduct Mod and Step Tests 0) Conduct Firefighter II Certification Exam (k) Conduct annual SCBA practicals (1) Deliver make -up training for missed lessons. (m) Plan, monitor and conduct Return to Work refresher training. (n) Semi annual apparatus pump academy. (o) Apparatus operator evaluation /refresher training (p) Provide Aid Car training (q) Provide Competency Based Training (CBT) Instructor training (r) Collect and review CPR outcomes with crews A -1 31 (s) Conduct semi- annual company evaluations. (t) Vehicle extrication rodeo and training session (u) Conduct Commercial Ventilation Training (v) Participation in Zone 3 training activities (w) Training and Continuing Education in specialty areas. (e.g. confined space) 1.2.Mana2erial Tasks Provided: (a) Planning, Budget and Program Management (b) Facilities Scheduling, Quarterly, Annual Training Calendar Development (c) Develop emergency response tactical scenarios. (d) Develop training DVDs /films (e) Training Tracker Records Management (f) Complete transfer of paper records into data base. (g) Class Registration, Disbursement, Purchase Orders (h) JATC program document review /revision (i) Review and revise drill manuals, classes, Mod and Step tests, 0) Schedule and support multi company drills (k) Attend Zone 3 meetings (1) Training facilities maintenance. A -2 32 FINANCE AND SAFETY COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes .Lune 5, 2012 5:1519.727.,' Conference Room 93 City of Tukwila Finance and Safety Committee PRESENT Councilmembers: De'Sean Quinn, Chair; Dennis Robertson and Kate Kruller Staff: Nick Olivas, Chris Flores, Ben Haymen, Jeff Johnson, Tracy Gallaway, Katherine Kertzrnan, Peggy McCarthy, Derek Speck, David Cline, Mike Villa, Kristina Thorne, Ashley Comar, Meilee Anderson, and Kimberly Matej Guests: Deanna Gregory, Pacifica Law Group; Lynn Wallace, SWKCC; Jeff Robinson, City of SeaTac; Mike Schabbing, Courtyard Seattle Southcenter; Hyon Sak Lee, Comfort Suites; Allison Jeong, Comfort Suites; Maureen Huffinan, Embassy Suites: and Charles Lee, Comfort Suites CALL TO ORDER: Chair Quinn called the meeting to order at 5:17 p.m. *Items changed order from that outlined on the agenda front sheet in order to accommodate schedules and room size. I. PRESENTATIONS No presentations. II. BUSINESS AGENDA A. Event Update: Family 4` at the Fort Per the request of the Committee, staff prepared an informational memo, included in the agenda packet, wl provided additional details about the Family 4,h at the Fort event as a result of the Fireworks Permit Application which recently came to Committee. The memo covered specifics which include: new pyrotechnic vendor, signage and public information regarding event changes, financial impacts, parking and restroom concerns. The information memo covered the majority of questions and therefore discussion was minimal. Committee Members thanked staff for the follow -up. INFORMATION ONLY. B. Interlocal Agreement: Fire Trainine Consortium Staff is seeking Council approval to enter into an interlocal agreement with the Kent Regional Fire Authority (RFA) to participate in a fire training consortium. Staff provided a brief history of formation of the fire training consortium and shared Tukwila's experience with joint training opportunities as well as the benefits of such a consortium. Those benefits include but are not limited to: pooling of resources, documentation of training, availability of training, degree of specialties, and teaching of service delivery in a consistent and predictable manner. This interlocal agreement will allow Fire Department Training Division personnel to work directly with the training consortium which is comprised of the following entities: Kent Regional Fire Authority, Maple Valley, SeaTac and Tukwila. The effective date on the agreement will be changed to reflect an appropriate date that reflects Council approval. Currently, the draft agreement states that it will take effect on May 1, 2012; this was due to staff anticipating this item coming forward through Committee sooner. After discussion, Committee Members expressed an interest in making this agreement valid for more than 6 months in order to increase efficiency and reduce the number of tirnes this item needs to be reviewed for renewal. Staff does not foresee an issue With such an extension and will discuss this with representatives from the Kent RFA. Additionally, Committee Chair Quinn requested the Fire Department report back to the Committee on the benefits and /or concerns as well as program outcomes that have resulted from the training consortium. There is no financial impact of this interlocal agreement to the City. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO JUNE 11 COW FOR DISCUSSION. 33 34 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Meeting Date I Prepared by I Mayors review 06/11/12 PMc 06/18/12 PMc f/ V ITEM INFORMATION ISTAFF' SPONSOR: PEGGY MCCARTHY Canal review ITEM NO. 4.C. 0RIC3IN,\I Ac F;NDA DA'rI 06/11/12 A(;FNDA Trrl,l: Animal Services Interlocal Agreement for 2013 Through 2015 Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance .Bid-4ward Public.Hearing ❑Other Alt Date 06111112 Mtg Date 06118112 A4tg Dale tlltg Date Mtg Date tl ltd Date -Aft g Date SPO NSOR Council Mayor HR DCD .Finance .Fire IT P &R Police PUI SPONSOR'S Approve the new Animal Services Interlocal Agreement with King County for provision of SI'`In animal control, sheltering and licensing services for 2013 -2015. RliVll?Wf?D BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 06/05/2012 COMMITTEE- CHAIR: QUINN RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONS( )lt /ADM1N. Finance Department CO NINIVI"T'F Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE Exn RI?c?UIRI?D AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $69,705 $0 $69,073 Fund Source: 000.10.539.300.51.00 Comments: The cost for the three -year contract is estimated not to exceed $225,000 or $75,000 per year MTG. DATE I RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 06/11/12 06/18/12 I MTG. DATE I ATTACHMENTS 06/11/12 Informational Memorandum dated 05/30/12 (revised after 6/5/12 FS Meeting) Animal Services Interlocal Agreement for 2013 Through 2015 King County /Cities Work Group for Animal Services Interlocal Agreement Briefing Materials, May 16, 2012 Minutes from the Finance and Safety Committee meeting of 6/5/12 06/18/12 35 36 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Haggerton Finance and Safety Committee FROM: Peggy McCarthy, Finance Director DATE: May 30, 2012 SUBJECT: Animal Services Interlocal Agreement for 2013 Through 2015 (Revision on Page 3 following June 5 Finance and Safety Committee) ISSUE Approve the Animal Services Interlocal Agreement (ILA) with King County for 2013 through 2015. This excludes the optional Enhanced Control Services Contract contained in Exhibit E of the ILA and also excludes the optional Licensing Support Contract contained in Exhibit F of the I LA. BACKGROUND Effective July 1, 2010, the City entered into a 2.5 year interlocal agreement with Regional Animal Services of King County (RASKC) for sheltering, animal control and licensing services. This agreement will expire on December 31, 2012. A two -year extension was built into the agreement and was available unless a member of the system dropped out. In the fall of 2011, the City of Auburn, a high user of services, notified the County of their intent to depart the system at the end of 2012. As Auburn's departure would cause unsustainable cost shifts for the remaining cities under the existing agreement structure, a new agreement was developed. King County and member city representatives began working in November 2011 to reach agreement in principle on changes to the current Animal Services ILA. The new ILA is attached to this memorandum drafted and the City has until July 1, 2012 to sign it. A summary of the components of the new ILA follows: SERVICES: Control Services. Call Center The animal control call center will be operated five days a week for a minimum of eight hours per day possibly including at least one weekend day (contingent on union negotiations). Animal Control Officers (ACOs) The geographical area receiving control services has been divided into three control districts (see Exhibit B -1 of the ILA for the Control District Map). Control district 500, comprising the cities of Tukwila, Kent, SeaTac, Maple Valley, Enumclaw, Black Diamond and Covington, will be staffed by two ACOs; control district 200 and 220 will each be staffed with one ACO. Countywide, a total of not less than 6 ACOs will be available daily to maximize response to high workload areas. The County will use its best efforts to ensure that high priority calls are responded to by an ACO during regular ACO service hours on the day the call is received. High priority calls include those calls that pose an emergent danger to the community, including: 1. Emergent animal bite 2. Emergent vicious dog 37 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 3. Emergent injured animal 4. Police assist calls (police officer on scene requesting assistance from an ACO) 5. Emergent loose livestock or other loose or deceased animal that poses a potential danger to the community and 6. Emergent animal cruelty. In addition to the ACOs serving specific districts, the following resources will be available on a shared basis for all parties. 1. An animal control sergeant will provide oversight of and backup for ACOs five days per week at least 8 hours day. 2. Staff will be available to perform animal cruelty investigations, to respond to animal cruelty cases, and to prepare related reports. 3. Not less than 1 ACO will be on call every day during non regular ACO service hours to respond to high priority calls posing an extreme life and safety danger. Shelter Services Shelter services will be provided 7 -days per week, 365 days per year at the County's animal shelter in Kent or other shelter locations utilized by the County. Page 21 of the ILA provides a complete list of the shelter services. Licensinq Services Licensing services will include the operation and maintenance of a unified system to license pets in contracting cities. Page 23 of the ILA lists the licensing services. COST PAYMENT FOR SERVICES: The pre commitment estimated 2013 payment for services for the City of Tukwila is $69,705, comprised of the following components: Estimated cost allocations: animal control 49,635 sheltering 110,787 licensing 9,229 Total Estimated Cost Allocation 169,651 Estimated licensing revenue 32,705 Estimated Net Cost Allocation 136,946 King County 2013 -2015 Funding Transition 5,255 Sheltercredits 61,987 Total King County 2013 -2015 Funding 67,242 ESTIMATIDEINALCOST 69,705 The County will calculate a preliminary estimated payment amount on or before August 1, 2012 to include the County and all cities that have executed the ILA; however, the amount shall not exceed 5% of the pre- commitment estimated payment or $3,500. The maximum increase in 2014 and 2015 payments will be limited to the rate of inflation (defined on page 28 of the ILA) plus the rate of population growth for the preceding year for the County. OPTIONAL CONTRACTS: Optional contracts for Enhanced Control Services and Licensing Support are contained in Exhibit E and F respectively. Based on feedback from City staff including the Police INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 Department and the City Clerk regarding their observations and citizen comments received on animal control services, and considering the additional cost, the staff does not recommend contracting for the enhanced control services at this time. The Citv does not have enhanced services under the existina contract. The Licensing Support contract requires a commitment of city staff time. The staffing would come from the City Clerk staff and it is determined that insufficient staffing resources exist to commit to the number of hours required in the Licensing Support contract. Therefore, staff does not recommend contracting for the optional Licensing Support services. DISCUSSION The new ILA maintains or increases the level of service currently provided under the existing agreement and at a reduced cost to the City. The estimated payment amount for 2013 of $69,705 under the new agreement is $20,628 less than the 2011 actual animal services charge of $90,333 and $40,295 less than the $110,000 cost budgeted for 2012. In addition, the regional system provides many benefits including: Consistent level of service. Uniform regional licensing system. Economies of scale for marketing /licensing, field services and shelter operations. Pet adoption shelter open to public 7 days a week. The County has reduced costs and has enhanced revenue generating efforts including rebranding and promoting a licensing campaign. The County has been responsive to the concerns and requests of member cities and invites member cities to work with them on refining service protocols. FINANCIAL IMPACT The 2013 cost of animal services is estimated at $69,705, which is $20,628 less than the actual 2011 animal services costs and $40,295 less than the $110,000 budget for 2012. The cost for the three year agreement is estimated not to exceed $225,000. RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to approve the Animal Services Interlocal Agreement and consider this item at the June 11, 2012 Committee of the Whole meeting and subsequent June 18, 2012 Regular Meeting. ATTACHMENTS Animal Services Interlocal Agreement for 2013 Through 2015 King County /Cities Work Group for Animal Services Interlocal Agreement Briefing Materials, May 16, 2012 39 .m Animal Services Interlocal Agreement for 2013 Throueh 2015 This AGREEMENT is made and entered into effective as of this 1s' day of July, 2012, by and between KING COUNTY, a Washington municipal corporation and legal subdivision of the State of Washington (the "County and the City of Tukwila, a Washington municipal corporation (the "City WHEREAS, the provision of animal control, sheltering and licensing services protects public health and safety and promotes animal welfare; and WHEREAS, providing such services on a regional basis allows for enhanced coordination and tracking of regional public and animal health issues, consistency of regulatory approach across jurisdictional boundaries, economies of scale, and ease of access for the public; and WHEREAS, the Contracting Cities are partners in making regional animal services work effectively, and are customers of the Animal Services Program provided by the County; and WHEREAS, in light of the joint interest among the Contracting Parties in continuing to develop a sustainable program for regional animal services, including achievement of sustainable funding resources, the County intends to include cities in the process of identifying and recommending actions to generate additional revenues through the Joint City- County Committee, and further intends to convene a group of elected officials with a representative from each Contracting City to discuss and make recommendations on any potential countywide revenue initiative for animal services requiring voter approval, the implementation of which would be intended to coincide with the end of the term of this Agreement; and WHEREAS, by executing this Agreement, the City is not implicitly agreeing to or supportive of any potential voter approved levy initiative in support of animal services; and WHEREAS, the City and the County are parties to an Animal Services Interlocal Agreement dated July 1, 2010, which will terminate on December 31, 2012 (the "2010 Agreement and WHEREAS, the City and County have negotiated a successor agreement to the 2010 Agreement in order to extend delivery of Animal Services to the City for an additional three years beginning January 1, 2013; and Document Dated 5 -29 -12 41 WHEREAS, certain notification and other commitments under this successor Agreement arise before January 2013, but the delivery of Animal Services under this Agreement will not commence until January 1, 2013; and WHEREAS, nothing in this Agreement is intended to alter the provision of service or manner and timing of compensation and reconciliation specified in the 2010 Agreement for services provided in 2012; and WHEREAS, the City pursuant to the Interlocal Cooperation Act (RCW Chapter 39.34) is authorized and desires to contract with the County for the performance of Animal Services; and WHEREAS, the County is authorized by the Interlocal Cooperation Act, Section 120 of the King County Charter and King County Code 11.02.030 to render such services and is willing to render such services on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; and WHEREAS, the County is offering a similar form of Animal Services Interlocal Agreement to cities in King County listed in Exhibit C -1 to this Agreement, and has received a non- binding statement of intent to sign such agreement from those cities; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises, covenants and agreements contained in this Agreement, the parties agree as follows: 1. Definitions. Unless the context clearly shows another usage is intended, the following terms shall have these meanings in this Agreement: a. "Agreement" means this Animal Services Interlocal Agreement for 2013 Through 2015 between the Parties including any and all Exhibits hereto, unless the context clearly indicates an intention to reference all such Agreements by and between the County and other Contracting Cities. b. "Animal Services" means Control Services, Shelter Services and Licensing Services combined, as these services are described in Exhibit A. Collectively, "Animal Services" are sometimes referred to herein as the "Program." c. "Enhanced Control Services" are additional Control Services that the City may purchase under certain terms and conditions as described in Exhibit E (the "Enhance Control Services Contract d. "Contracting Cities" means all cities that are parties to an Agreement. e. "Parties" means the City and the County. f. "Contracting Parties" means all Contracting Cities and the County. g. "Estimated Payment" means the amount the City is estimated to owe to the County for the provision of Animal Services over a six month period per the Document Dated 5 -29 -12 2 42 formulas set forth in Exhibit C. The Estimated Payment calculation may result in a credit to the City payable by the County. h. "Pre- Commitment Estimated 2013 Payment" means the preliminary estimate of the amount that will be owed by (or payable to) each Contracting Party for payment June 15, 2013 and December 15, 2013 as shown on Exhibit C -1. i. "Preliminary Estimated 2013 Payment" means the amount estimated by the County on or before August 1, 2012 per Section 5, to be owed by each Contracting Party on June 15, 2013 and December 15, 2013 based on the number of Contracting Cities with respect to which the Agreement goes into effect per Section 15. This estimate will also provide the basis for determining whether the Agreement meets the "2013 Payment Test" in Section 15. j. The "Final Estimated 2013 Payment" means the amount owed by each Contracting Party on June 15, 2013 and December 15, 2013, notice of which shall be given to the City by the County no later than December 15, 2012. k. "Control District" means one of the three geographic areas delineated in Exhibit B for the provision of Animal Control Services. 1. "Reconciliation Adjustment Amount" means the amount payable each August 15 by either the City or County as determined per the reconciliation process described in Exhibit D. "Reconciliation" is the process by which the Reconciliation Adjustment Amount is determined. m. "Service Year" means the calendar year in which Animal Services are or were provided. n. "2010 Agreement" means the Animal Services Agreement between the Parties effective July 1, 2010, and terminating at midnight on December 31, 2012. o. "New Regional Revenue" means revenue received by the County specifically for support of Animal Services generated from regional marketing campaigns (excluding local licensing canvassing efforts by Contracting Cities or per Section 7), and new foundation, grant, donation and entrepreneurial activities, except where revenues from these sources are designated for specific purposes within the Animal Services program; provided that New Regional Revenue does not include Licensing Revenue, Non Licensing Revenue or Designated Donations, as defined in Exhibit C. The manner of estimating and allocating New Regional Revenue is prescribed in Exhibit C -4 and Exhibit D. p. "Latecomer City "means a city receiving animal services under an agreement with the County executed after July 1, 2012, per the conditions of Section 4.a. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 43 2. Services Provided. Beginning January 1, 2013, the County will provide the City with Animal Services described in Exhibit A. The County will perform these services consistent with governing City ordinances adopted in accordance with Section 3. In providing such Animal Services consistent with Exhibit A, the County will engage in good faith with the Joint City County Committee to develop potential adjustments to field protocols; provided that, the County shall have sole discretion as to the staffing assigned to receive and dispatch calls and the manner of handling and responding to calls for Animal Service. Except as set forth in Section 9 (Indemnification and Hold Harmless), services to be provided by the County pursuant to this Agreement do not include services of legal counsel, which shall be provided by the City at its own expense. a. Enhanced Control Services. The City may request Enhanced Control Services by completing and submitting Exhibit E to the County. Enhanced Services will be provided subject to the terms and conditions described in Exhibit E, including but not limited to a determination by the County that it has the capacity to provide such services. 3. Citv_ Obliizations. a. Animal ReQulatory Codes Adopted. To the extent it has not already done so, the City shall promptly enact an ordinance or resolution that includes license, fee, penalty, enforcement, impound/ redemption and sheltering provisions that are substantially the same as those of Title 11 King County Code as now in effect or hereafter amended (hereinafter "the City Ordinance The City shall advise the County of any City animal care and control standards that differ from those of the County. b. Authorization to Act on Behalf of Citv. Beginning January 1, 2013, the City authorizes the County to act on its behalf in undertaking the following: i. Determining eligibility for and issuing licenses under the terms of the City Ordinance, subject to the conditions set forth in such laws. ii. Enforcing the terms of the City Ordinance, including the power to issue enforcement notices and orders and to deny, suspend or revoke licenses issued thereunder. iii. Conducting administrative appeals of those County licensing determinations made and enforcement actions taken on behalf of the City. Such appeals shall be considered by the King County Board of Appeals unless either the City or the County determines that the particular matter should be heard by the City. iv. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to divest the City of authority to independently undertake such enforcement actions as it deems appropriate to respond to violations of any City ordinances. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 4 c. Cooperation and LicensinLy Suvnort. The City will assist the County in its efforts to inform City residents regarding animal codes and regulations and licensing requirements and will promote the licensing of pets by City residents through various means as the City shall reasonably determine, including but not limited to offering the sale of pet licenses at City Hall, mailing information to residents (using existing City communication mechanisms such as bill inserts or community newsletters) and posting a weblink to the County's animal licensing program on the City's official website. The City will provide to the County accurate and timely records regarding all pet license sales processed by the City. All proceeds of such sales shall be remitted to the County by the City on a quarterly basis (no later than each March 31, June 30, September 30, and December 31). 4. Term. Except as otherwise specified in Section 15, this Agreement will take effect as of July 1, 2012 and, unless extended pursuant to Subparagraph 4.b below, shall remain in effect through December 31, 2015. The Agreement may not be terminated for convenience. a. Latecomers. The County may sign an agreement with additional cities for provision of animal services prior to the termination or expiration of this Agreement, but only if the later agreement will not cause an increase in the City's costs payable to the County under this Agreement. Cities that are party to such agreements are referred to herein as "Latecomer Cities." b. Extension of Term. The Parties may agree to extend the Agreement for an additional two -year term, ending on December 31, 2017. For purposes of determining whether the Agreement shall be extended, the County will invite all Contracting Cities to meet in September 2014, to discuss both: (1) a possible extension of the Agreement under the same terms and conditions; and (2) a possible extension with amended terms. i. Either Party may propose amendments to the Agreement as a condition of an extension. ii. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to compel either Party to agree to an extension or amendment of the Agreement, either on the same or different terms. iii. The County agrees to give serious consideration to maintaining the various credits provided to the Contracting City under this Agreement in any extension of the Agreement. c. Notice of Intent to Not Extend. No later than March 1, 2015, the Parties shall provide written notice to one another of whether they wish to extend this Agreement on the same or amended terms. The County will include a written reminder of this March 1 deadline when providing the City notice of. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 45 its 2015 Estimated Payments (notice due December 15, 2014 per Section 5). By April 5, 2015, the County will provide all Contracting Cities with a list of all Contracting Parties submitting such notices indicating which Parties do not seek an extension, which Parties request an extension under the same terms, and which Parties request an extension under amended terms. d. Timeline for Extension. If the Contracting Parties wish to extend their respective Agreements (whether under the same or amended terms) through December 31, 2017, they shall do so in writing no later than July 1, 2015. Absent such an agreed extension, the Agreement shall terminate on December 31, 2015. e. Limited Reonener and Termination. If a countwide, voter approved property tax levy for funding some or all of the Animal Services program is proposed that would impose new tax obligations before January 1, 2016, this Agreement shall be re- opened for the limited purposes of negotiating potential changes to the cost and revenue allocation formulas herein. Such changes may be made in order to reasonably ensure that the Contracting Cities are receiving equitable benefits from the proposed new levy revenues. Re- opener negotiations shall be initiated by the County no later than 60 days before the date of formal transmittal of such proposal to the County Council for its consideration. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, if the re- opener negotiations have failed to result in mutually agreed upon changes to the cost and revenue allocation formulas (as reflected in either an executed amendment to this Agreement or a memorandum of understanding signed between the chief executive officers of the Parties) within 10 days of the date that the election results confirming approval of such proposal are certified, either Party may terminate this Agreement by providing notice to the other Party no sooner than the date the election results are certified and no later than 15 days following the end of such 10 -day period. Any termination notice so issued will become effective 180 days following the date of the successful election, or the date on which the levy is first imposed, whichever is sooner. f. The 2010 Agreement remains in effect through December 31, 2012. Nothing in this Agreement shall limit or amend the obligation of the County to provide Animal Services under the 2010 Agreement as provided therein and nothing in this Agreement shall amend the obligations therein with respect to the calculation, timing, and reconciliation of payment of such services. 5. Compensation. The County will develop an Estimated Payment calculation for each Service Year using the formulas described in Exhibit C, and shall transmit the payment information to the City according to the schedule described below. The Document Dated 5 -29 -12 on M County will also calculate and inform the City as to the Reconciliation Adjustment Amount on or before June 30 of each year, as described in Section 6 below and Exhibit D, in order to reconcile the Estimated Payments made by the City in the prior Service Year. The City (or County, if applicable) will pay the Estimated Payment, and any applicable Reconciliation Adjustment Amounts as follows (a list of all payment related notices and dates is included at Exhibit C -7): a. Service Year 2013: The County will provide the City with a calculation of the Preliminary Estimated Payment amounts for Service Year 2013 on or before August 1, 2012, which shall be derived from the Pre Commitment Estimated 2013 Payment Amount set forth on Exhibit C -1, adjusted if necessary based on the Contracting Cities and other updates to Calendar Year 2011 data in Exhibit C -2. The County will provide the City with the Final Estimated Payment calculation for Service Year 2013 by December 15, 2012. The City will pay the County the Preliminary Estimated Payment Amounts for Service Year 2013 on or before June 15, 2013 and December 15, 2013. If the calculation of the Preliminary Estimated Payment shows the City is entitled to receive a payment from the County, the County will pay the City such amount on or before June 15, 2013 and December 15, 2013. The Reconciliation Adjustment Amount for Service Year 2013 shall be paid on or before August 15, 2014, as described in Section 6. b. Service Years after 2013. i. Initial Estimate by September 1. To assist the City with its budgeting process, the County will provide the City with a non binding, preliminary indication of the Estimated Payments for the upcoming Service Year on or before each September 1. ii. Estimated Pavment Determined by December 15. The Estimated Payment amounts for the upcoming Service Year will be determined by the County following adoption of the County's budget and applying the formulas in Exhibit C. The County will by December 15 provide written notice to all Contracting Parties of the schedule of Estimated Payments for the upcoming Service Year. iii. Estimated Pavments Due Each Tune 15 and December 15. The City will pay the County the Estimated Payment Amount on or before each June 15 and December 15. If the calculation of the Estimated Payment shows the City is entitled to receive a payment from the County, the County will pay the City such amount on or before each June 15 and December 15. iv. The Reconciliation Adjustment Amount for the prior Service Year shall be paid on or before August 15 of the following calendar year, as described in Section 6. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 7 47 v. If a Party fails to pay an Estimated Payment or Reconciliation Adjustment Amount within 15 days of the date owed, the Party owed shall notify the owing Party that they have ten (10) days to cure non- payment. If the Party fails to cure its nonpayment within this time period following notice, the amount owed shall accrue interest thereon at the rate of 1% per month from and after the original due date and, if the nonpaying Party is the City, the County at its sole discretion may withhold provision of Animal Services to the City until all outstanding amounts are paid. If the nonpaying Party is the County, the City may withhold future Estimated Payments until all outstanding amounts are paid. Each Party may examine the other's books and records to verify charges. vi. Unless the Parties otherwise direct, payments shall be submitted to the addresses noted at Section 14.g. c. Pavment ObliL-ation Survives Expiration or Termination of Agreement. The obligation of the City (or as applicable, the County), to pay an Estimated Payment Amount or Reconciliation Adjustment Amount for a Service Year included in the term of this Agreement shall survive the Expiration or Termination of this Agreement. For example, if this Agreement terminates on December 31, 2015, the Final Estimated 2015 Payment is nevertheless due on or before December 15, 2015, and the Reconciliation Adjustment Amount shall be payable on or before August 15, 2016. d. The Parties agree the payment and reconciliation formulas in this Agreement (including all Exhibits) are fair and reasonable. 6. Reconciliation of Estimated Payments and Actual Costs and Revenues. In order that the Contracting Parties share costs of the regional Animal Services Program based on their actual, rather than estimated, licensing revenues, there will be an annual reconciliation. Specifically, on or before June 30 of each year, the County will reconcile amounts owed under this Agreement for the prior Service Year by comparing each Contracting Party's Estimated Payments to the amount derived by recalculating the formulas in Exhibit C using actual revenue data for such Service Period as detailed in Exhibit D. There will also be an adjustment if necessary to account for annexations of areas with a population of 2,500 or more and for changes in relative population shares of Contracting Parties' attributable to Latecomer Cities. The County will provide the results of the reconciliation to all Contracting Parties in writing on or before June 30. The Reconciliation Adjustment Amount will be paid on or before August 15 of the then current year, regardless of the prior termination of the Agreement as per Section 5.c. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 8 W 7. Regional Revenue Generation and Licensing Revenue Support a. The Parties intend that the provision of Animal Services becomes significantly more financially sustainable over the initial three year term of this Agreement through the development of New Regional Revenue and the generation of additional Licensing Revenue. The County will develop proposals designed to support this goal. The County will consult with the Joint City- County Committee before proceeding with efforts to implement proposals to generate New Regional Revenue. b. The Parties do not intend for the provision of Animal Services or receipt of such Services under this Agreement to be a profit- making enterprise. Where a Contracting Party receives revenues in excess of its costs under this Agreement (including costs of PAWS shelter service and Enhanced Control Service, if applicable), they will be reinvested in the Program to reduce the costs of other Contracting Parties and to improve service delivery: the cost allocation formulas of this Agreement are intended to achieve this outcome. Licensing Revenue Support. i. In 2013, the County will provide licensing revenue support to the nine Contracting Cities identified on Exhibit C -5 (the "Licensing Revenue Support Cities ii. The City may request licensing revenue support from the County in 2014 and 2015 by executing Attachment A to Exhibit F. The terms and conditions under which such licensing revenue support will be provided are further described at Exhibit C -5 and Exhibit F. Except as otherwise provided in Exhibit C -5 with respect to Licensing Revenue Support Cities with a Licensing Revenue Target of over $20,000 (per Table 1 of Exhibit C -5), provision of licensing revenue support in 2014 and 2015 is subject to the County determining it has capacity to provide such services, with priority allocation of any available services going first to Licensing Revenue Support Cities on a first -come, first served basis and thereafter being allocated to other Contracting Cities requesting service on a first -come, first served basis. Provision of licensing revenue support is further subject to the Parties executing a Licensing Support Contract (Exhibit F). iii. In addition to other terms described in Exhibit F, receipt of licensing revenue support is subject to the recipient City providing in -kind services, including but not limited to: assisting in communication with City residents; publicizing any canvassing efforts the Parties have agreed should be implemented; assisting in the recruitment of canvassing staff, if applicable; and providing information to the County to assist in targeting its canvassing activities, if applicable. Document Dated 5-29-.12 i S. Mutual Covenants /Independent Contractor. The Parties understand and agree that the County is acting hereunder as an independent contractor with the intended following results: a. Control of County personnel, standards of performance, discipline, and all other aspects of performance shall be governed entirely by the County; b. All County persons rendering service hereunder shall be for all purposes employees of the County, although they may from time to time act as commissioned officers of the City; c. The County contact person for the City staff regarding all issues arising under this Agreement, including but not limited to citizen complaints, service requests and general information on animal control services is the Manager of Regional Animal Services. 9. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. a. Citv Held Harmless. The County shall indemnify and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent act or omission of the County, its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them relating to or arising out of performing services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that any such suit based upon such a claim, action, loss, or damages is brought against the City, the County shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense; provided that the City reserves the right to participate in said suit if any principle of governmental or public law is involved; and if final judgment in said suit be rendered against the City, and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them, or jointly against the City and the County and their respective officers, agents, and employees, or any of them, the County shall satisfy the same. b. Countv Held Harmless. The City shall indemnify and hold harmless the County and its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by any reason of or arising out of any negligent act or omission of the City, its officers, agents, and employees, or any of them relating to or arising out of performing services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that any suit based upon such a claim, action, loss, or damages is brought against the County, the City shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense; provided that the County reserves the right to participate in said suit if any principle of governmental or public law is involved; and if final judgment be rendered against the County, and its officers, agents, and Document Dated 5 -29 -12 U 50 employees, or any of them, or jointly against the County and the City and their respective officers, agents, and employees, or any of them, the City shall satisfy the same. Liabilitv Related to Citv Ordinances, Policies. Rules and Reizulations. In executing this Agreement, the County does not assume liability or responsibility for or in any way release the City from any liability or responsibility that arises in whole or in part as a result of the application of City ordinances, policies, rules or regulations that are either in place at the time this Agreement takes effect or differ from those of the County; or that arise in whole or in part based upon any failure of the City to comply with applicable adoption requirements or procedures. If any cause, claim, suit, action or administrative proceeding is commenced in which the enforceability and /or validity of any such City ordinance, policy, rule or regulation is at issue, the City shall defend the same at its sole expense and, if judgment is entered or damages are awarded against the City, the County, or both, the City shall satisfy the same, including all chargeable costs and reasonable attorney's fees. d. Waiver Under Washington Industrial Insurance Act. The foregoing indemnity is specifically intended to constitute a waiver of each party's immunity under Washington's Industrial Insurance Act, Chapter 51 RCW, as respects the other party only, and only to the extent necessary to provide the indemnified party with a full and complete indemnity of claims made by the indemnitor's employees. The parties acknowledge that these provisions were specifically negotiated and agreed upon by them. 10. Dispute Resolution. Whenever any dispute arises between the Parties or between the Contracting Parties under this Agreement which is not resolved by routine meetings or communications, the disputing parties agree to seek resolution of such dispute in good faith by meeting, as soon as feasible. The meeting shall include the Chief Executive Officer (or his/her designee) of each party involved in the dispute and the Manager of the Regional Animal Services Program. If the parties do not come to an agreement on the dispute, any party may pursue mediation through a process to be mutually agreed to in good faith by the parties within 30 days, which may include binding or nonbinding decisions or recommendations. The mediator(s) shall be individuals skilled in the legal and business aspects of the subject matter of this Agreement. The parties to the dispute shall share equally the costs of mediation and assume their own costs. 11. Joint City- County Committee and Collaborative Initiatives. A committee composed of 3 county representatives (appointed by the County) and one Document Dated 5 -29 -12 51 representative from each Contracting City that chooses to appoint a representative shall meet upon reasonable request of a Contracting City or the County, but in no event shall the Committee meet less than twice each year. Committee members may not be elected officials. The Committee shall review service issues and make recommendations regarding efficiencies and improvements to services, and shall review and make recommendations regarding the conduct and findings of the collaborative initiatives identified below. Subcommittees to focus on individual initiatives may be formed, each of which shall include membership from both county and city members of the Joint City- County Committee. Recommendations of the Joint City County Committee are non binding. The collaborative initiatives to be explored shall include, but are not necessarily limited to: a. Proposals to update animal services codes, including fees and penalties, as a means to increase revenues and incentives for residents to license, retain, and care for pets. b. Exploring the practicability of engaging a private for profit licensing system operator. c. Pursuing linkages between County and private non profit shelter and rescue operations to maximize opportunities for pet adoption, reduction in homeless pet population, and other efficiencies. d. Promoting licensing through joint marketing activities of Contracting Cities and the County, including recommending where the County's marketing efforts will be deployed each year. e. Exploring options for continuous service improvement, including increasing service delivery efficiencies across the board. f. Studying options for repair and /or replacement of the Kent Shelter. g. Reviewing the results of the County's calculation of the Reconciliation Adjustment Amounts. h. Reviewing preliminary proposed budgets for Animal Services. i. Providing input into the formatting, content and details of periodic Program reports as per Section 12 of this Agreement. j. Reviewing and providing input on proposed Animal Services operational initiatives. k. Providing input on Animal Control Services response protocols with the goal of supporting the most appropriate use of scarce Control Services resources. 1. Establishing and maintaining a marketing subcommittee with members from within the Joint City- County committee membership and additional staff as may be agreed. m. Collaborating on response and service improvements, including communication with 911 call centers. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 12 52 n. Developing alternative dispute mechanisms that may be deployed to assist the public in resolving low -level issues such as barking dog complaints. o. Working with Contracting Cities to plan disaster response for animal sheltering and care. p. Ensuring there is at least one meeting each year within each Control District between the County animal control officer representatives and Contracting Cities' law enforcement representatives. q. Identifying, discussing and where appropriate recommending actions to implement ideas to generate additional revenue to support operation and maintenance of the Animal Services Program, including but not limited to providing input and advice in shaping the terms of any proposed Countywide voted levy to provide funding support for the Animal Services Program. 12. Reporting. The County will provide the City with an electronic report not less than monthly summarizing call response and Program usage data for each of the Contracting Cities and the County and the Animal Services Program. The formatting, content and details of the report will be developed in consultation with the Joint City- County Committee. 13. Amendments. Any amendments to this Agreement must be in writing. This Agreement shall be deemed to incorporate amendments to Agreements between the Contracting Parties that are approved by the County and at least two thirds (66 of the legislative bodies of all other Contracting Parties (in both number and in the percentage of the prior total Estimated Payments owing from such Contracting Parties in the then current Service Year), evidenced by the authorized signatures of such approving Parties as of the effective date of the amendment; provided that this provision shall not apply to any amendment to this Agreement affecting the Party contribution responsibilities, hold harmless and indemnification requirements, provisions regarding duration, termination or withdrawal, or the conditions of this Section. 14. General Provisions. a. Other Facilities. The County reserves the right to contract with other shelter service providers for housing animals received from within the City or from City residents, whose levels of service meet or exceed those at the County shelter for purposes of addressing shelter overcrowding or developing other means to enhance the effectiveness, efficiency or capacity of animal care and sheltering within King County. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 13 53 b. Survivabilitv. Notwithstanding any provision in this Agreement to the contrary, the provisions of Section 9 (Indemnification and Hold Harmless) shall remain operative and in full force and effect, regardless of the withdrawal or termination of this Agreement. c. Waiver and Remedies. No term or provision of this Agreement shall be deemed waived and no breach excused unless such waiver or consent shall be in writing and signed by the Party claimed to have waived or consented. Failure to insist upon full performance of any one or several occasions does not constitute consent to or waiver of any later non performance nor does payment of a billing or continued performance after notice of a deficiency in performance constitute an acquiescence thereto. The Parties are entitled to all remedies in law or equity. d. Grants. Both Parties shall cooperate and assist each other toward procuring grants or financial assistance from governmental agencies or private benefactors for reduction of costs of operating and maintaining the Animal Services Program and the care and treatment of animals in the Program. e. Force Maieure. In the event either Party's performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement becomes impossible due to war, civil unrest, and any natural event outside of the Party's reasonable control, including fire, storm, flood, earthquake or other act of nature, that Party will be excused from performing such obligations until such time as the Force Majeure event has ended and all facilities and operations have been repaired and /or restored. f. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire understanding of the Parties and supersedes any oral representations that are inconsistent with or modify its terms and conditions. g. Notices. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, any notice required to be provided under the terms of this Agreement shall be delivered by E -mail (deemed delivered upon E -mail confirmation of receipt by the intended recipient), certified U.S. mail, return receipt requested or by personal service to the following person (or to any other person that the Party designates in writing to receive notice under this Agreement): For the City: For the County: Caroline Whalen, Director King County Dept. of Executive Services 401 Fifth Avenue, Suite 135 Seattle WA. 98104 Document Dated 5 -29 -12 14 54 h. Assienment. No Party may sell, transfer or assign any of its rights or benefits under this Agreement without the approval of the other Party. i. Venue. The Venue for any action related to this Agreement shall be in Superior Court in and for King County, Washington. j. Records. The records and documents with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement shall be subject to inspection and review by the County or City for such period as is required by state law (Records Retention Act, Ch. 40.14 RCW) but in any event for not less than 1 year following the expiration or termination of this Agreement. k. No Third Partv Beneficiaries. This Agreement is for the benefit of the Parties only, and no third party shall have any rights hereunder. 1. Counterparts. This Agreement and any amendments thereto, shall be executed on behalf of each Party by its duly authorized representative and pursuant to an appropriate motion, resolution or ordinance. The Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be an original, but those counterparts will constitute one and the same instrument. 15. Terms to Implement Agreement. Because it is unknown how many parties will ultimately approve the Agreement, and participation of each Contracting Party impacts the costs of all other Contracting Parties, the Agreement will go into effect as of July 1, 2012, only if certain "Minimum Contracting Requirements" are met or waived as described in this section. These Minimum Contracting Requirements will not be finally determined until August 15, 2012. If it is determined on or about August 15 that Minimum Contracting Requirements are not met and not waived, then the Agreement will be deemed to have never gone into effect, regardless of the July 1, 2012 stated effective date. If the Minimum Contracting Requirements are met or waived, the Agreement shall be deemed effective as of July 1, 2012. The Minimum Contracting Requirements are: a. For both the City and the County: 1. 2013 Payment Test: The Preliminary Estimated 2013 Payment, calculated on or before August 1, 2012, to include the County and all cities that have executed the Agreement on or prior to July 1, 2012, does not exceed the Pre Commitment Estimated 2013 Payment as set forth in Exhibit C -1 by more than five percent (5 or $3,500, whichever is greater. If the 2013 Payment Test is not met, either Party may waive this condition and allow the Agreement to go into effect, provided that such waiver must be exercised by giving notice to the other Party (which notice shall meet the requirements of Section 14.g) no later than August 15, 2012. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 15 55 b. For the County: The Minimum Contiguity of Service Condition must be met, such that the County is only obligated to enter into the Agreement if the County will be providing Animal Services in areas contiguous to the City, whether by reason of having an Agreement with another City or due to the fact that the City is contiguous to unincorporated areas (excluding unincorporated islands within the City limits). The Minimum Contiguity of Service Condition may be waived by the County in its sole discretion. The County shall provide the City notice meeting the requirements of Section 14.g no later than July 21, 2012 if the Minimum Contiguity of Service Condition has not been met. c. On or before August 21, 2012, the County shall send all Contracting Cities an informational email notice confirming the final list of all Contracting Cities with Agreements that have gone into effect. 16. Administration. This Agreement shall be administered by the County Administrative Officer or his/her designee, and by the City Manager, or his/her designee. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed effective as of July 1, 2012. King County City of Tukwila Dow Constantine King County Executive City Manager/Mayor Date Date Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form: King County City Attorney Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Date Date Document Dated 5 -29 -12 56 List of Exhibits Exhibit A: Animal Services Description Exhibit B: Control Service District Map Description Exhibit B -1: Map of Control Service District Exhibit C: Calculation of Estimated Payments Exhibit C -1: Pre Commitment Estimated 2013 Payment (showing participation only by jurisdictions that have expressed interest in contracting for an additional 3 year term) Exhibit C -2: Estimated Population, Calls for Service, Shelter Use and Licensing Data for Jurisdictions, Used to Derive the Pre Commitment Estimated 2013 Payment Exhibit C -3: Calculation of Budgeted Total Allocable Animal Services Costs, Budgeted Total Non Licensing Revenue and Budget Net Allocable Animal Services Costs for 2013 Exhibit C -4: Calculation and Allocation of Transition Credit, Shelter Credit, and Estimated New Regional Revenue Exhibit C -5: Licensing Revenue Support Exhibit C -6: Summary of Calculation Periods for Use and Population Components Exhibit C -7: Payment and Calculation Schedule Exhibit D: Reconciliation Exhibit E: Enhanced Control Services Contract (Optional) Exhibit F: Licensing Support Contract (Optional) Document Dated 5 -29 -12 17 57 Exhibit A Animal Service Description Part I: Control Services Control Services include the operation of a public call center, the dispatch of animal control officers in response to calls, and the handling of calls in the field by animal control officers, including the collection and delivery of animals to the Kent Shelter (or such other shelters as the County may utilize in accordance with this Agreement). 1. Call Center a. The County will operate an animal control call center five days every week (excluding holidays and County- designated furlough days, if applicable) for a minimum of eight hours per day (normal business hours). The County will negotiate with applicable unions with the purpose of obtaining a commitment for the five day call center operation to include at least one weekend day. The County may adjust the days of the week the call center operates to match the final choice of Control District service days. b. The animal control call center will provide callers with guidance, education, options and alternative resources as possible /appropriate. c. When the call center is not in operation, callers will hear a recorded message referring them to 911 in case of emergency, or if the event is not an emergency, to either leave a message or call back during regular business hours. 2. Animal Control Officers a. The County will divide the area receiving Control Services into three Control Districts as shown on Exhibit B. Subject to the limitations provided in this Section 2, Control Districts 200 and 220 will be staffed with one Animal Control Officer during Regular ACO Service Hours and District 500 will be staffed with two Animal Control Officers (ACOs) during Regular ACO Service Hours. Regular ACO Service Hours is defined to include not less than 40 hours per week. The County will negotiate with applicable unions with the intention of obtaining a commitment for Regular ACO Service Hours to include service on at least one weekend day. Regular ACO Service Hours may change from time to time. i. Except as the County may in its sole discretion determine is necessary to protect officer safety, ACOs shall be available for responding to calls within their assigned Control District and will not be generally available to respond to calls in other Control Districts. Exhibit B -1 shows the map of Control Districts. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 18 i ii. Countywide, the County will have a total of not less than 6 ACOs (Full -Time Equivalent employees) on staff to maximize the ability of the County to staff all Control Districts notwithstanding vacation, sick leave, and other absences, and to respond to high workload areas on a day -to -day basis. While the Parties recognize that the County may at times not be able to staff all Control Districts as proposed given unscheduled sick leave or vacancies, the County will make its best efforts to establish regular hourly schedules and vacations for ACOs in order to minimize any such gaps in coverage. In the event of extended absences among the 6 ACOs, the County will re- allocate remaining ACOs as practicable in order to balance the hours of service available in each Control District. In the event of ACO absences (for any causes and whether or not such absences are extended as a result of vacancies or other issues), the first priority in allocating ACOs shall be to ensure there is an ACO assigned in each Control District during Regular ACO Service Hours. b. Control District boundaries have been designed to balance work load, correspond to jurisdictional boundaries and facilitate expedient transportation access across each district. The County will arrange a location for an Animal Control vehicle to be stationed overnight in Control Districts "host sites in order to facilitate service and travel time improvements or efficiencies. c. The County will use its best efforts to ensure that High Priority Calls are responded to by an ACO during Regular ACO Service Hours on the day such call is received. The County shall retain full discretion as to the order in which High Priority calls are responded. High Priority Calls include those calls that pose an emergent danger to the community, including: 1. Emergent animal bite, 2. Emergent vicious dog, 3. Emergent injured animal, 4. Police assist calls (police officer on scene requesting assistance from an ACO), 5. Emergent loose livestock or other loose or deceased animal that poses a potential danger to the community, and 6. Emergent animal cruelty. d. Lower priority calls include all calls that are not High Priority Calls. These calls will be responded to by the call center staff over the telephone, referral to other resources, or by dispatching of an ACO as necessary or available, all as determined necessary and appropriate in the sole discretion of the Document Dated 5 -29 -12 59 County. Particularly in the busier seasons of the year (spring through fall), lower priority calls may only receive a telephone response from the Call Center. Lower Priority calls are non emergent requests for service, including but not limited to: 1. Non emergent high priority events, 2. Patrol request (ACO requested to patrol a specific area due to possible code violations), 3. Trespass, 4. Stray Dog /Cat /other animal confined, 5. Barking Dog, 6. Leash Law Violation, 7. Deceased Animal, 8. Trap Request, 9. Female animal in season, and 10. Owner's Dog /Cat /other animal confined. e. The Joint -City County Committee is tasked with reviewing response protocols and recommending potential changes to further the goal of supporting the most appropriate use of scarce Control Service resources countywide. The County will in good faith consider such recommendations but reserves the right to make final decisions on response protocols. The County will make no changes to its procedures that are inconsistent with the terms of this Exhibit A, except that upon the recommendation of the Joint City- County Committee, the County may agree to modify response with respect to calls involving animals other than horses, livestock, dogs and cats. In addition to the ACOs serving specific districts, the following Control Service resources will be available on a shared basis for all Parties and shall be dispatched as deemed necessary and appropriate by the County. 1. An animal control sergeant will provide oversight of and back- up for ACOs five days per week at least 8 hours /day (subject to vacation /sick leave /training /etc.). 2. Staff will be available to perform animal cruelty investigations, to respond to animal cruelty cases, and to prepare related reports (subject to vacation /sick leave /training /etc.). 3. Not less than 1 ACO will be on call every day at times that are not Regular ACO Service Hours (including the days per week that are not included within Regular ACO Service Hours), to respond to High Priority Calls posing an extreme life and safety danger, as determined by the County. g. The Parties understand that rural areas of the County will generally receive a less rapid response time from ACOs than urban areas. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 20 N h. Contracting Cities may contract with King County for "Enhanced Control Services" through separate agreement (as set forth in Exhibit E); provided that a City may not purchase Enhanced Control Services under Option 1 as described in Exhibit E if such City is receiving a Transition Funding Credit, Shelter Credit, or licensing revenue support the cost of which is not reimbursed to the County. Part II: Shelter Services Shelter services include the general care, cleaning and nourishment of owner released, lost, or stray dogs, cats and other animals. Such services shall be provided 7 -days per week, 365 days per year at the County's animal shelter in Kent (the "Shelter or other shelter locations utilized by the County, including related services described in this section. The County's Eastside Pet Adoption Center in the Crossroads area of Bellevue will be closed to the public. During 2013 -2015, major maintenance of the Shelter will continue to be included in the Program costs allocated under this Agreement (as part of the central County overhead charges allocated to the Program), but no major renovation, upgrades or replacements of the Shelter established as a capital project within the County Budget are anticipated nor will any such capital project costs be allocated to the Contracting Cities in Service Years 2013 -2015. 1. Shelter Services a. Services provided to animals will include enrichment, exercise, care and feeding, and reasonable medical attention. b. The Public Service Counter at the Shelter will be open to the public not less than 30 hours per week and not less than 5 days per week, excluding holidays and County designated furlough days, for purposes of pet redemption, adoption, license sales services and (as may be offered from time to time) pet surrenders. The Public Service Counter at the shelter may be open for additional hours if practicable within available resources. c. The County will maintain a volunteer /foster care function at the Shelter to encourage use of volunteers working at the shelter and use of foster families to provide fostering /transitional care between shelter and permanent homes for adoptable animals. d. The County will maintain an animal placement function at the Shelter to provide for and manage adoption events and other activities leading to the placement of animals in appropriate homes. e. Veterinary services will be provided and will include animal exams, treatment and minor procedures, spay /neuter and other surgeries. Limited Document Dated 5 -29 -12 MA A emergency veterinary services will be available in non business hours, through third -party contracts, and engaged if and when the County determines necessary. f. The County will take steps through its operating policies, codes, public fee structures and partnerships to reduce the number of animals and their length of stay in the Shelter, and may at times limit owner surrenders and field pick -ups, adjust fees and incentivize community -based solutions. 2. Other Shelter services a. Dangerous animals will be confined as appropriate /necessary. b. Disaster /emergency preparedness for animals will be coordinated regionally through efforts of King County staff. 3. Shelter for Contracting Cities contracting with PAWS (Potentially including Woodinville, Shoreline, Lake Forest Park, Kenmore "Northern Cities For so long as a Northern City has a contract in effect for sheltering dogs and cats with the Progressive Animal Welfare Society in Lynnwood (PAWS), the County will not shelter dogs and cats picked up within the boundaries of such City(s), except in emergent circumstances and when the PAWS Lynwood shelter is not available. Dogs and cats picked up by the County within such City(s) will be transferred by the County to the PAWS shelter in Lynnwood for shelter care, which will be provided and funded solely through separate contracts between each Northern City and PAWS, and the County will refer residents of that City to PAWS for sheltering services. The County will provide shelter services for animals other than dogs and cats that are picked up within the boundaries of Northern Cities contracting with PAWS on the same terms and conditions that such shelter services are provided to other Contracting Parties. Except as provided in this Section, the County is under no obligation to drop animals picked up in any Contracting City at any shelter other than the County shelter in Kent. 4. County Contract with PAWS. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to preclude the County from contracting with PAWS in Lynnwood to care for animals taken in by County ACOs. 5. Service to Persons who are not Residents of Contracting Cities. The County will not provide routine shelter services for animals brought in by persons who are not residents of Contracting Cities, but may provide emergency medical care to such animals, and may seek to recover the cost of such services from the pet owner and /or the City in which the resident lives. Part III: Licensine Services Licensing services include the operation and maintenance of a unified system to license pets in Contracting Cities. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 22 M 1. The public will be able to purchase pet licenses in person at the County Licensing Division public service counter in downtown Seattle (500 4t" Avenue), King County Community Service Centers and the Kent Animal Shelter during regular business hours. The County will maintain on its website the capacity for residents to purchase pet licenses on -line. 2. The County may seek to engage and maintain a variety of private sector partners (e.g. veterinary clinics, pet stores, grocery stores, city halls, apartment complexes) as hosts for locations where licenses can be sold or promoted in addition to County facilities. 3. The County will furnish licenses and application forms and other materials to the City for its use in selling licenses to the public at City facilities and at public events. 4. The County will publicize reminders and information about pet licensing from time to time through inserts in County mailings to residents and on the County's public television channel. 5. The County will annually mail or E -mail at least one renewal form, reminder and late notice (as applicable) to the last known addresses of all City residents who purchased a pet license from the County within the previous year (using a rolling 12 -month calendar). 6. The County may make telephone reminder calls in an effort to encourage pet license renewals. 7. The County shall mail pet license tags or renewal notices as appropriate to individuals who purchase new or renew their pet licenses. 8. The County will maintain a database of pets owned, owners, addresses and violations. 9. The County will provide limited sales and marketing support in an effort to maintain the existing licensing base and increase future license sales. The County reserves the right to determine the level of sales and marketing support provided from year to year in consultation with the Joint City- County Committee. The County will work with any City in which door -to -door canvassing takes place to reach agreement with the City as to the hours and locations of such canvassing. 10. The County will provide current pet license data files (database extractions) to a Contracting City promptly upon request. Data files will include pets owned, owners, addresses, phone numbers, E -mail addresses, violations, license renewal status, and any other relevant or useful data maintained in the County's database on pets licensed within the City's limits. A City's database extraction will be provided in electronic format agreed to by both parties in a timely fashion and in a standard data release format that is easily usable by the City. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 23 63 Exhibit B: Control Service District Map The attached map (Exhibit B -1) shows the boundaries of the 3 Control Service Districts as established at the commencement of this Amended and Restated Agreement. The cities and towns included in each Control District are as follows: District 200 (Northern District) Shoreline Lake Forest Park Kenmore Woodinville Kirkland Redmond Sammamish Duvall Carnation District 220 (Eastern District) Bellevue Mercer Island Yarrow Point Clyde Hill Town of Beaux Arts Issaquah Snoqualmie North Bend Newcastle District 500 (Southern District) Tukwila SeaTac Kent Covington Maple Valley Black Diamond Enumclaw The Districts shall each include portions of unincorporated King County as illustrated on Exhibit B -1. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 24 Q r I ii CV ALI C4 C.4 C-4 c MP LO MI N, Lc) 1. is f 7 r CO (D HE i C N 0 0 0 62 0 Of N CL c MP LO O 65 Lc) O 65 Exhibit C Calculation of Estimated Payments The Estimated Payment is the amount, before reconciliation, owed by the City to the County (or owed by the County to the City if the amount calculated is less than $0) for the provision of six months of Animal Services, based on the formulas below. In summary and subject to the more detailed descriptions below, an initial cost allocation is made for Service Year 2013 based on the cost factors described in Part 1 below; costs are offset by various revenues as described in Part 2. An annual reconciliation is completed as described in Part 3. In Service Years 2014 and 2015, the Contracting Parties' allocable costs are adjusted based on: (1) the actual change in total allocable costs over the previous Service Year (subject to an inflator cap), (2) changes in revenues, and (3) to account for annexations (in or out of the Program service area) of areas with a population of 2,500 or more, and for changes in relative population share of all Contracting Parties due to any Latecomer Cities. If the Agreement is extended past 2015, the cost allocation in 2016 will be recalculated in the same manner as for Service Year 2013 and adjusted in 2017 per the process used for Service Years 2014 and 2015. Based on the calculation process described in Parts 1 and 2, an "Estimated Payment" amount owed by each City for each Service Year is determined. Each Estimated Payment covers six months of service. Payment for service is made by each City every June 15 and December 15. Part 1: Service Year 2013 Cost Allocation Process Control Services costs are to be shared among the 3 geographic Control Districts; one quarter of such costs are allocated to Control District 200, one quarter to Control District 220, and one half are allocated to Control District 500. Each Contracting Party located within a Control District is to be allocated a share of Control District costs based 80% on the Party's relative share of total Calls for Service within the Control District and 20% on its relative share of total population within the Control District. Shelter Services costs are to be allocated among all Contracting Parties based 20% on their relative population and 80% on the total shelter intake of animals attributable to each Contracting Party, except that cities contracting for shelter services with PAWS will pay only a population -based charge. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 26 Licensing Services costs are to be allocated among all Contracting Parties, based 20% on their relative population and 80% on the number of licenses issued to residents of each Contracting Party. Part 2: Revenue and Other Adjustments to the 2013 Cost Allocation. In 2013 and each Service Year thereafter, the costs allocable to each Contracting Party are reduced by various revenues and credits: Licensing revenue will be attributed to each Contracting Party based on the residency of the individual purchasing the license (see Part 3 for reconciliation of Licensing Revenues). As Licensing Revenue and Non Licensing Revenues change from year to year, the most recent historical actual data for these amounts will be incorporated to offset costs (See Exhibit C -6 for calculation periods). Two credits are applicable to various Contracting Cities to reduce the amount of their Estimated Payments: a Transition Funding Credit (fixed at 2013 level, payable annually through 2015) for cities with high per- capita costs and a Shelter Credit (for Contracting Cities with the highest per capita intakes (usage)) (also fixed at a 2013 level, payable annually through 2015). Application of these Credits is limited such that the Estimated Payment cannot fall below zero (before or after the annual Reconciliation calculation). In addition to the Transition Funding and Shelter credits, in 2013 the County will provide Licensing Revenue Support to nine identified Contracting Cities (selected based on the general goal of keeping 2013 costs the same or below 2012 costs). In exchange for certain in -kind support, these "Licensing Revenue Support Cities" are assured in 2013 of receiving an identified amount of additional licensing revenue or credit equivalent (the "Licensing Revenue Target In 2014 and 2015, all Contracting Cities may request licensing revenue support by entering into a separate licensing support contract with the County (Exhibit F): this support is subject to availability of County staff, with priority going to the nine Licensing Revenue Support Cities, provided that, Licensing Revenue Support Cities with a Licensing Revenue Target over $20,000 /year will be assured such service in 2013 -2015 by entering into a licensing support contract by September 1, 2012. As New Regional Revenues are received by the County to support the Animal Services Program, those Revenues shall be allocated as follows: Document Dated 5 -29 -12 27 67 Half of New Regional Revenues shall be applied to reduce allocable Control Services Costs, Shelter Services Costs, and Licensing Services Costs (in 2013, by 17 27% and 6 respectively, of total New Regional Revenues; in 2014 and 2015 the 50% reduction is simply made against Total Allocable Costs). The remaining half of New Regional Revenues shall be applied in the following order of priority: (a) to offset amounts expended by the County as Transition Funding Credits, Shelter Credits and unreimbursed licensing revenue support; (b) to offset other County Animal Services Program costs that are not allocated in the cost model; (c) to reduce on a pro -rata basis up to 100% of the costs allocated to each Contracting Party by the population factor of the cost allocation formulas (20 with the intent of reducing or eliminating the population -based cost allocation; and (d) if any funds remain thereafter, as an offset against each Contracting Party's final reconciled payment obligation. Items(c) and (d) above are unlikely to arise during the 3 year term of the Agreement and shall be calculated only at Reconciliation. In Service Years 2014 and 2015, allocable costs are adjusted for each Contracting Party based on the actual increase or decrease in allocable costs from year to year for the whole Program. Total Budgeted Allocable Costs cannot increase by more than the Annual Budget Inflator Cap. The Annual Budget Inflator Cap is the rate of inflation (based on the annual change in the September CPI -U for the Seattle- Tacoma Bremerton area over the rate the preceding year) plus the rate of population growth for the preceding year for the County (including the unincorporated area and all Contracting Cities). In all Service Years, costs are also adjusted for annexations (in or out of the Program service area) of areas with a population greater of 2,500 or more and the shift in relative population shares among all Contracting Parties as a result of any Latecomer Cities. Part 3: Reconciliation Estimated Payments are reconciled to reflect actual revenues as well as changes in population attributable to annexations of areas with a population of 2,500 or more (in or out of the Program) and the shifts in relative population among all Contracting Parties as a result of any Latecomer Cities. The Reconciliation occurs Document Dated 5 -29 -12 28 i by June 30 of the following calendar year. The Reconciliation calculation and payment process is described in Exhibit D. The receipt of Transition Funding Credits or Shelter Credits can never result in the amount of the Estimated Reconciliation Adjustment Payment falling below $0. If a jurisdiction's licensing revenues exceed its net costs payable under this Agreement, then in the annual reconciliation process, the excess licensing revenue is reallocated pro rata amongst all Contracting Parties which will otherwise incur net costs; provided that, the determination of net costs shall be adjusted as follows: (1) for a Contracting City purchasing shelter services from PAWS, net costs includes consideration of the amounts paid by such City to PAWS; and (2) for a Contracting City purchasing Enhanced Control Services per Exhibit E, net costs includes consideration of the amounts paid for such services. Part 4: Estimated Pavment Calculation Formulas For Service Year 2013: EP [(EC ES EL) (ER T V)] 2 For Service Years 2014 and 2015: EP [(B x LF) (ER +T V)] 2 Where: "EP" is the Estimated Payment. For Contracting Cities receiving a Transition Credit or Shelter Credit, the value of EP may not be less $0. "EC" or "Estimated Control Services Cost" is the City's estimated share of the Budgeted Net Allocable Control Services Cost for the Service Year. See below for deriving "EC." "ES" or "Estimated Shelter Services Cost" is the City's estimated share of the Budged Net Allocable Shelter Services Cost for the Service Year. See formula below for deriving "ES. 1 This formula also applies to Service Year 2016 if the Agreement is extended. The EP formula for Years 2014 and 2015 would apply to Service Years after 2016. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 29 "EL" or "Estimated Licensing Services Cost" is the City's estimated share of the Budgeted Net Allocable Licensing Services Cost for the Service Year. See formula below for deriving "EL. "ER" is Estimated Licensing Revenue attributable to the City. For purposes of determining the Estimated Payment in Year 2013, ER is based on the number of each type of active license issued to City residents in years 2011 (the "Calculation Period Exhibit C -2 shows a preliminary estimate of 2011 Licensing Revenue; the numbers in this exhibit are subject to Reconciliation by June 30, 2012. For Licensing Revenue Support Cities identified in Exhibit C -5, or other Contracting Cities which have entered into a Licensing Support Contract per Exhibit F, ER is increased by adding the amount of revenue, if any, estimated to be derived as a result of licensing revenue support provided to the City (the "Licensing Revenue Target" or "RT this amount is also shown in the column captioned "Estimated Revenue from Proposed Licensing Support" on Exhibit C -1). License Revenue that cannot be attributed to a specific Party (e.g., License Revenue associated with incomplete address information), which generally represents a very small fraction of overall revenue, is allocated amongst the Parties based on their respective percentages of ER as compared to Total Licensing Revenue. Notwithstanding the foregoing, "ER" may be based on a estimated amount of licensing for the Service Year for the City if, in the reasonable judgment of the County, an estimated Licensing Revenue amount can be proposed that is likely to more closely approximate the actual Licensing Revenue for the Service Year than the data from the Calculation Period; provided that the use of any estimates shall be subject to the conditions of this paragraph. The County shall work with the Joint City- County Committee to develop estimated Licensing Revenue amounts for all Contracting Cities for the upcoming Service Year. If the Joint City County Committee develops a consensus proposal (agreement shall be based on the consensus of those Contracting Cities present at the Joint City /County meeting in which Licensing Revenue estimates are presented in preparation for the September 1 Preliminary Estimated Payment Calculation notification), it shall be used in developing the September 1 Preliminary Estimated Payment Calculation. If a consensus is not reached, the County shall apply the actual Licensing Revenue from the Calculation Period for the Service Year to determine the Preliminary Estimated Payment. For the Final Estimated Payment Calculation (due December 15), the County may revisit the previous estimate with the Joint City- County Committee and seek to develop a final consensus revenue estimate. If a consensus is not reached, the County shall apply the Actual Licensing Revenue from the applicable Calculation Period in the calculation of the Final Estimated Payment. "T" is the Transition Funding Credit, if any, allocable to the City for each Service Year calculated per Exhibit C -4. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 30 FEB "V" is the Shelter Credit, if any, allocable to the City for each Service Year calculated per Exhibit C -4. "B" is the "Budgeted Total Net Allocable Costs" estimated for the Service Year for the provision of Animal Services which are allocated among all the Contracting Parties for the purposes of determining the Estimated Payment. The Budgeted Total Net Allocable Costs are calculated as the Budgeted Total Allocable Costs (subject to the Annual Budget Inflator Cap) less Budgeted Total Non Licensing Revenue and less 50% of Estimated New Regional Revenues. The Budgeted Total Allocable Costs exclude any amount expended by the County as Transition Funding Credits, or Shelter Credits (described in Exhibit C -4), or to provide Licensing Revenue Support (described in Section 7 and Exhibit C -5). A preliminary calculation (by service area Control, Shelter, Licensing) of Budgeted Total Net Allocable Costs, Budgeted Total Allocable Costs and Budgeted Total Non Licensing Revenue for purposes of calculating the Pre Commitment Estimated 2013 Payments is set forth in Exhibit C -3. "LF" is the "Program Load Factor" attributable to the City. LF has two components, one fixed, and one subject to change each Service Year and at Reconciliation. The first, fixed component relates to the City's share of Budgeted Total Net Allocable Costs: it is the City's 2013 Service Year Total Animal Services Cost Allocation (See Column 6 of Exhibit C -1) expressed as a percentage of the Budgeted Total Net Allocable Costs for 2013. The pre commitment estimate of LF appears in column 7 of Exhibit C -1. This component of LF (as determined based on the Final 2013 Estimated Payment) remains constant for Service Years 2014 and 2015. The second component of LF relates to annexations of areas with a population of 2,500 or more or to Latecomer Cities. This second component is calculated as described in the definition of "Population," below. "Total Licensing Revenue" means all revenue received by the County's Animal Services Program attributable to the sale of pet licenses excluding late fees. With respect to each Contracting Party, the amount of "Licensing Revenue" is the revenue generated by the sale of pet licenses to residents of the jurisdiction. (With respect to the County, the jurisdiction is the unincorporated area of King County.) "Total Non Licensing Revenue" means all revenue from fine, forfeitures, and all other fees and charges imposed by the County's Animal Services program in connection with the operation of the Program, but excluding Total Licensing Revenue, Estimated New Regional Revenues and Designated Donations. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 31 71 "Estimated New Regional Revenues" "ENR are revenues projected to be received by the County specifically for support of Animal Services which result from regional marketing campaigns (thus excluding local licensing canvassing efforts pursuant to Section 7), and new foundation, grant, donation and entrepreneurial activities, except where revenues from these sources are designated for specific purposes within the Animal Services Program. Calculation and allocation of Estimated and Actual New Regional Revenues are further described in Exhibit C -4. For Service Year 2013, Estimated New Regional Revenues are assumed to be zero. If New Regional Revenues are received in 2013, they will be accounted for in the reconciliation of 2013 Payments. ENR excludes Designated Donations, Total Non Licensing Revenue and Total Licensing Revenue. "Designated Donations" mean donations from individuals or other third parties to the County made for the purpose of supporting specific operations, programs or facilities within the Animal Services Program. "Licensing Revenue Support" means activities or funding to be undertaken in specific cities to enhance licensing revenues, per Section 7, Exhibit C -5 and Exhibit F. "Annual Budget Inflator Cap" means the maximum amount by which the Budgeted Total Allocable Costs may be increased from one Service Year to the next Service Year, and year to year, which is calculated as the rate of inflation (based on the annual change in the September CPI -U for the Seattle- Tacoma Bremerton area over the rate the preceding year) plus the rate of population growth for the preceding year for the County (including the unincorporated area and all Contracting Cities), as identified by comparing the two most recently published July OFM city and county population reports. The cost allocations to individual services (e.g. Control Services, Shelter Services or Licensing Services) or specific items within those services may be increased or decreased from year to year in so long as the Budgeted Total Annual Allocable Costs do not exceed the Annual Budget Inflator Cap. "Service Year" is the calendar year in which Animal Services are /were provided. "Calculation Period" is the time period from which data is used to calculate the Estimated Payment. The Calculation Period differs by formula component and Service Year. Exhibit C -6 sets forth in table form the Calculation Periods for all formula factors for Service Years 2013, 2014 and 2015. "Population" with respect to any Contracting Party for Service Year 2013 means the population number derived from the State Office of Financial Management (OFM) most recent annually published report of population used for purposes of allocating state shared revenues in the subsequent calendar year (typically published by OFM each July, Document Dated 5 -29 -12 32 72 reflecting final population estimates as of April of the same calendar year). For each Service Year, the OFM reported population will be adjusted for annexations of 2,500 or more residents known to be occurring after April, 2012 and before the end of the Service Year. For example, when the final Estimated Payment calculation for 2013 is provided on December 15, 2012, the population numbers used will be from the OFM report issued in July 2012 and will be adjusted for all annexations of 2,500 or more residents that occurred (or are known to be occurring) between April 2012 and December 31, 2013. In any Servicd Year, if: (1) annexations of areas with a population of 2,500 or more people occurs to impact the population within the jurisdiction of a Contracting Party; or (2) a Latecomer City is brought under contract with the County, these changes shall be accounted for in the calculation of the Estimated Payment for such Service Year by adjusting the "Program Load Factor" (or "LF for each Contracting Party. Such adjustment shall be made at the next occurring possibility (e.g., at calculation of the Preliminary Estimated Payment, Final Estimated Payment, or Reconciliation, whichever is soonest). The adjustment in LF will be made on a pro rata basis to reflect the portion of the year in which the population change was in effect. In the case of an annexation, the LF calculation will consider the time the annexed area was in the Contracting Party's jurisdiction and the portion of the year in which the area was not in such Party's jurisdiction, as well as the relative shift in population (if any) attributable solely to the annexation as between all Contracting Parties, by adding (or subtracting) to the LF for each Contracting Party an amount that is 20% (reflecting the general allocation of cost under the Agreement based on population) of the change in population for each Contracting Party (expressed as a percentage of the Contracting Party's population as compared to the total population for all Contracting Parties) derived by comparing the Final 2013 Estimated Payment population percentage (LF) to the population percentage after considering the annexation. The population of an annexed area will be as determined by the Boundary Review Board, in consultation with the annexing city. The population of the unincorporated area within any District will be determined by the County's demographer. In the case of a Latecomer City, the population shall be similarly adjusted among all Contracting Parties in the manner described above for annexations, by considering the change in population between all Contracting Parties attributable solely to the Latecomer City becoming a Contracting Party. Exhibit C -1 shows the calculation of Pre Commitment EP for Service Year 2013, assuming that the County and all Cities that have expressed interest in signing this Agreement as of May 16, 2012, do in fact approve and sign the Agreement and as a result the Minimum Contract Requirements with respect to all such Cities and the County are met per Section 15. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 33 73 Component Calculation Formulas (used in Service Year 2013): EC is calculated as follows: EC {[(C x .5) x .81 x CFSJ {[(C x.5) x.21 x D -PopJ Where: "C" is the Budgeted Net Allocable Control Services Cost for the Service Year, which equals the County's Budgeted Total Allocable Costs for Control Services in the Service Year, less the Budgeted Total Non Licensing Revenue attributable to Control Services in the Service Year (for example, fines issued in the field) and less 17% of Estimated New Regional Revenues "ENR For purposes of determining the Pre Commitment Estimated Payments for 2013, the Budgeted Net Allocable Control Services Cost is $1,690,447, calculated as shown on Exhibit C -3, and shall be similarly derived to determine the Preliminary and Final Estimated Payment for 2013 and for Service Year 2016 if the Agreement is extended beyond December 31, 2015. "CFS" is the total annual number of Calls for Service for the Service Year for Control Services originating within the City expressed as a percentage of the CFS for all Contract Parties within the same Control District. A Call for Service is defined as a request from an individual, business or jurisdiction for a control service response to a location within the City, or a response initiated by an Animal Control Officer in the field, which is entered into the County's data system (at the Animal Services call center or the sheriff's dispatch center acting as back -up to the call center) as a request for service. Calls for information, hang -ups and veterinary transfers are not included in the calculation of Calls for Service. A response by an Animal Control Officer pursuant to an Enhanced Control Services Contract will not be counted as a Call for Service. For purposes of determining the Estimated Payment in 2013, the Calculation Period for CFS is calendar year 2011 actual data. Exhibit C -2 shows a preliminary estimate of 2011 CFS used to determine the Pre Commitment Estimated 2013 Payment; the numbers in this Exhibit C -2 are subject to Reconciliation by June 30, 2012. "D -Pop" is the Population of the City, expressed as a percentage of the Population of all jurisdictions within the applicable Control District. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 34 74 ES for Service Year 2013 is calculated as follows: If, as of the effective date of this Agreement, the City has entered into a contract for shelter services with the Progressive Animal Welfare Society (PAWS) in Lynnwood, WA, then, for so long as such contract remains in effect, the City will not pay a share of shelter costs associated with shelter usage "A" as defined below) and instead the Estimated Payment will include a population -based charge only, reflecting the regional shelter benefits nonetheless received by such City, calculated as follows (the components of this calculation are defined as described below). ES (S x.2 x Pop) If the City does not qualify for the population -based shelter charge only, ES is determined as follows: ES= (Sx.2x Pop) (S x.8 x A) Where: "S" is the Budgeted Net Allocable Shelter Services Cost for the Service Year, which equals the County's Budgeted Total Allocable Costs for Shelter Services less Budgeted Total Non Licensing Revenue attributable to Shelter operations (i.e., adoption fees, microchip fees, impound fees, owner surrender fees, from all Contracting Parties) and less 27% of Estimated New Regional Revenues (ENR) in the Service Year. For purposes of determining the Pre Commitment Estimated Payments for 2013, the Budgeted Net Allocable Shelter Services Cost is $2,707,453, calculated as shown on Exhibit C -3, and shall be similarly derived to determine the Preliminary and Final Estimated Payments for 2013 and for Service Year 2016 if the Agreement is extended beyond December 31, 2015. "Pop" is the population of the City expressed as a percentage of the Population of all Contracting Parties. "A" is the total number of animals that were: (1) picked up by County Animal Control Officers from within the City, (2) delivered by a City resident to the County shelter, or (3) delivered to the shelter that are owned by a resident of the City expressed as a percentage of the total number of animals in the County Shelter during the Calculation Period. For purposes of the 2013 Estimated Payment, the Calculation Period for "A" is calendar year 2011. Exhibit C -2 shows a preliminary estimate of "A" for 2011 used to determine the Pre Commitment Estimated 2013 Payments; the numbers in this exhibit are subject to Reconciliation by June 30, 2012. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 35 75 EL for Service Year 2013 is calculated as follows: EL= (Lx.2x Pop) +(Lx.8xI) Where: "L" is the Budgeted Net Licensing Services Cost for the Service Year, which equals the County's Budgeted Total Allocable Costs for License Services in the Service Year less Budgeted Total Non Licensing Revenue attributable to License Services (for example, pet license late fees) in the Service Year and less 6% of Estimated New Regional Revenues (ENR) in the Service Year. For purposes of determining the Pre Commitment Estimated Payments for 2013, the Budgeted Net Licensing Cost is $660,375, calculated as shown on Exhibit C -3, and shall be similarly derived to determine the Preliminary and final Estimated Payments for 2013 and for Service Year 2016 if the Agreement is extended beyond December 31, 2015. "Pop" is the Population of the City expressed as a percentage of the population of all Contracting Parties. "I" is the number of active paid regular pet licenses (e.g., excluding'buddy licenses" or temporary licenses) issued to City residents during the Calculation Period. For purposes of calculating the Estimated Payment in 2013, the Calculation Period for "I" is calendar year 2011. Exhibit C -2 shows a preliminary estimate of "I" to be used for calculating the Pre Commitment Estimated 2013 Payments; the numbers in this Exhibit are subject to reconciliation by June 30, 2012. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 36 76 iE X W C O U a C Y 0 O D) V C Q �II C 0 a m E A N n E �2 2 www ola_ -mZUw- C E. m :a �g _____m 7 7 a W U F w w° Z° w o 2 p p p w w p rp ww N L w w `z° w w� w p— wzww mZOm� Mc o _gym 3u"i 7 7 37 y r r e o I 0 3 n E 0# Uw w oV.-- vo ?N IF 0 CL Q Ewa w w w w p m a E w 0 1 Q� Pm Ne U N 0 J o r o g 12 W �ci" ci O aj o —�m mM D ro E o w w w w w w w w wwww w w w y M a" a`a 0 F W flE c W If I Z m R 'a B E a a r o m m Z 'Q C1�K 0 E 2 E m Z LL a�a owrrJZ,mN�u mm wv.�zzm >u rm m ww�u� 00 v 3'i bG O O O O Fzzz �E OOZ a ON o 009 0 C m m m m 3 E a e oz r r� N n 7 7 a\ �k \,i &t I w Exhibit C -2 Population, Calls for Service, Shelter Use and Licensing Data for Jurisdictions, Used to Derive the Pre Commitment 2013 Estimated Source: Wash. St. Office of Financial Management, KC Office of Management and Budget Regional Animal Services of KC Date: February 22, 2012 Proposed Estimated 2013 District Jurisdiction Population (Bothell Intakes (Carnation I 1,7801 Duvall I 51 Estimated Unincorporated King County 6,7151 Kenmore 0 0 Kirkland N Lake Forest Park (see total below) I(see total below) Redmond 1161 Sammamish 2,021 Shoreline 2301 Woodinville 7,8551 (Beaux Arts 701 Bellevue 1,666 Clyde Hill 871 (Estimated Unincorporated King County CD Issaquah N Mercer Island 3,9701 Newcastle 2811 North Bend 4,967 Snoqualmie 341 Yarrow Pt Kent (Includes Panther Lake Annexation) SeaTac (Tukwila 0 (Auburn !Black Diamond Ln Covington Enumclaw !Estimated Unincorporated King County IMaple Valley City Totals Kinq County Unincorporated Area Totals TOTALS 2011 Estimated 2013 Estimated 2013 Estimated 2013 Population Calls Intakes Licenses I 1,7801 I 131 I 51 1601 6,7151 341 231 7121 65,6421 2401 (see total below) I(see total below) 20,7801 1161 01 2,021 80,7381 2301 1091 7,8551 12,6101 701 01 1,666 55,1501 871 471 3,980 46,9401 851 361 3,9701 53,2001 2811 01 4,967 10,9401 341 01 998 3001 01 01 331 123,4001 3171 1851 9,3801 2,9851 31 31 2481 87,5721 4181 (see total below) I(see total below) 1 30,6901 1321 581 1,9421 22,7101 211 111 1,7271 10,4101 401 131 520 5,8301 421 261 535 10,9501 271 101 842 1,0051 11 01 100 118,2001 6141 1,4541 8,5551 27,1101 2001 3391 1,5441 19,0501 1211 2001 1,065 01 01 01 0 4,1601 181 241 340 17,6401 1321 1451 1,6421 10,9201 1101 1011 8721 100,3331 7831 (see total below) I (see total below) 22,9301 891 1111 1,919 782,7851 2,8171 2,9001 57,593 187,9051 1,4411 1,4251 27,1751 970,6901 4,2581 4,3251 84,7681 Note: Usage data from 2011 activity. License count excludes Senior Lifetime Licenses Document Dated 5 -29 -12 39 79 Exhibit C -3 Calculation of Budgeted Total Allocable Costs, Budgeted Total Non Licensing Revenue, and Budgeted Net Allocable Costs This Exhibit Shows the Calculation of Budgeted Total Allocable Costs, Budgeted Total Non Licensing Revenue, and Budgeted Net Allocable Costs to derive Pre Commitment Estimated 2013 Payments. All values shown are based on annualized costs and revenues. The staffing levels incorporated in this calculation are for year 2013 only and except as otherwise expressly provided in the Agreement may change from year to year as the County determines may be appropriate to achieve efficiencies, etc. Control Services: Calculation of Budgeted Total Allocable Costs, Budgeted Total Non Licensing Revenue, and Budgeted Net Allocable Costs The calculation of Pre Commitment Estimated 2013 Control Services Costs is shown below (all costs in 2012 dollars). Cost Methodology 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Direct Service Management Staff Costs Direct Service Field Staff Costs Call Center Direct Service Staff Costs Overtime, Duty, Shift Differential and Temp Costs Facilities Costs Office and Other Operational Supplies and Equipment Printing, Publications, and Postage Medical Costs Other Services Transportation Communications Costs IT Costs and Services Misc Direct Costs General Fund Overhead Costs Division Overhead Costs Other Overhead Costs 2010 Budgeted Total Allocable Control Services Cost 17 Less 2010 Budgeted Total Non Licensing Revenue Attributable to Control Services 18 Less 17% of Estimated New Regional Revenues for 2013 2010 Budgeted Net Allocable Control Services Cost Document Dated 5 -29 -12 $148,361 I $725,879 $229,697 $80,891 $8,990 $17,500 $34,000 $22,500 $80,000 $141,904 $38,811 $50,626 $41,900 $15,842 $110,490 $23,096 $1,770,487 $80,040 0� $1,690,447 U11 i NOTES: 4 These additional salary costs support complete response to calls at the end of the day, limited response to emergency calls after hours, and extra help during peak call times. 5 Facilities costs include maintenance and utilities for a portion (5 of the Kent Shelter (which houses the call center staff operations and records retention as well as providing a base station for field officers). Excludes all costs associated with the Crossroads facility. 6 This item includes the office supplies required for both the call center as well as a wide variety of non computer equipment and supplies related to animal control field operations (e.g., uniforms, tranquilizer guns, boots, etc.). 7 This cost element consists of printing and publication costs for various materials used in the field for animal control. 8 Medical costs include the cost for ambulance and hospital care for animals requiring emergency services. 9 Services for animal control operations vary by year but consist primarily of consulting vets and laboratory costs associated with cruelty cases. 10 Transportation costs include the cost of the maintenance, repair, and replacement of the animal care and control vehicles and cabs, fuel, and reimbursement for occasional job- related use of a personal vehicle. 11 Communication costs involve the direct service costs for telephone, cell phone, radio, and pager use. 12 Information technology direct costs include IT equipment replacement as well as direct services costs. Excludes approximately $50,000 in service costs associated with mainframe systems. 13 Miscellaneous direct costs consist of all animal control costs not listed above including but not limited to contingency, training, certification, and bad checks. 14 General fund overhead costs included in this model include building occupancy charges and HR/personnel services. No other General Fund overhead costs are included in the model. 15 Division overhead includes a portion of the following personnel time as well as a portion of division administration non -labor costs, both based on FTEs: division director, assistant division director, administration, program manager, finance officer, payroll /accounts payable, and human resource officer. 16 Other overhead costs include IT, telecommunications, finance, and property services. 17 Non licensing revenue attributable to field operations include animal control violation penalties, charges for field pickup of deceased /owner relinquished animals, and fines for failure to license. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 m i Shelter Services: Calculation of Budgeted Total Allocable Costs, Budgeted Total Non Licensing Revenue, and Budgeted Net Allocable Costs The calculation of Pre Commitment Estimated 2013 Shelter Services Costs is shown below (all costs in 2012 dollars). Cost Methodology 1 Direct Service Management Staff Costs 2 Direct Service Shelter Staff Costs 3 Direct Service Clinic Staff Costs 4 Overtime, Duty, Shift Differential and Temp Costs 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Facilities Costs Office and Other Operational Supplies and Equipment Printing, Publications, and Postage Medical Costs Other Services Transportation Communications Costs IT Costs and Services Misc Direct Costs General Fund Overhead Costs Division Overhead Costs Other Overhead Costs 2010 Budgeted Total Allocable Shelter Services Cost 17 Less 2010 Budgeted Total Non- Licensing Revenue Attributable to Shelter Services 18 Less 27% of Estimated New Regional Revenues for 2013 2010 Budgeted Net Allocable Shelter Services Cost NOTES: $214,815 $1,168,436 $286,268 $159,682 $170,814 $94,200 $20,000 $127,500 $122,500 $10,566 $6,200 $51,360 $60,306 $113,614 $176,572 $37,124 $2,819,960 $112,507 0� $2,707,453 5 Facilities costs include maintenance and utilities for the majority (95 of the Kent Shelter (which also houses the call center staff operations and records retention as well as providing a base station for field officers). It excludes all costs associated with the Crossroads facility. 6 This item includes the office supplies as well as a wide variety of non computer equipment and supplies related to animal care (e.g., uniforms, food, litter, etc.). 7 This cost element consists of printing and publication costs for various materials used at the shelter. 8 Medical costs include the cost for ambulance and hospital care for animals requiring emergency services as well as the cost for consulting vets, laboratory costs, medicine, and vaccines. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 42 9 Services for animal control operations vary by year but include costs such as shipping of food provided free of charge and sheltering of large animals. 10 Transportation costs include the cost of the maintenance, repair, and replacement of and fuel for the animal care and control vehicles used by the shelter to facilitate adoptions, as well as reimbursement for occasional job- related use of a personal vehicle. I 1 Communication costs involve the direct service costs for telephone, cell phone, radio, and pager use. 12 Information technology direct costs include IT equipment replacement as well as direct services costs. 13 Miscellaneous direct costs consist of all animal care costs not listed above including but not limited to contingency, training, certification, and bad checks. 14 General fund overhead costs included in this model include building occupancy charges and HR/personnel services. No other General Fund overhead costs are included in the model. 15 Division overhead includes a portion of the following personnel time as well as a portion of division administration non -labor costs, both based on FTEs: division director, assistant division director, administration, program manager, finance officer, payroll /accounts payable, and human resource officer. 16 Other overhead costs include IT, telecommunications, finance, and property services. 17 Non licensing revenue attributable to sheltering operations include impound fees, microchip fees, adoption fees, and owner relinquished euthanasia costs. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 43 Licensing Services: Calculation of Budgeted Total Allocable Costs, Budgeted Total Non Licensing Revenue, and Budgeted Net Allocable Costs The calculation of Pre Commitment Estimated 2013 Licensing Services Costs is shown below (all costs in 2012 dollars). Cost Methodology 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Direct Service Management Staff Costs Direct Service Licensing Staff Costs Overtime, Duty, Shift Differential and Temp Costs Facilities Costs Office and Other Operational Supplies and Equipment Printing, Publications, and Postage Other Services Communications Costs IT Costs and Services Misc Direct Costs 11 General Fund Overhead Costs 12 Division Overhead Costs 13 Other Overhead Costs 2010 Budgeted Total Allocable Licensing Services Cost 14 Less 2010 Budgeted Total Non- Licensing Revenue Attributable to Licensing Services 15 Less 6% of Estimated New Regional Revenue 2010 Budgeted Net Allocable Licensing Services Cost $52,917 $346,523 $26,295 $13,100 $3,300 $74,600 $14,500 $2,265 $77,953 $2,000 $9,884 $39,280 $11,023 $673,640 $13,265 -0- $660,375 NOTES: 4 Facilities costs include maintenance and utilities for the portion of the King County Administration building occupied by the pet licensing staff and associated records. 5 This item includes the office supplies required for the licensing call center. 6 This cost element consists of printing, publication, and distribution costs for various materials used to promote licensing of pets, including services to prepare materials for mailing. 7 Services for animal licensing operations include the purchase of tags and monthly fees for online pet licensing hosting. 8 Communication costs involve the direct service costs for telephone, cell phone, radio, and pager use. 9 Information technology direct costs include IT equipment replacement as well as direct services costs. Excludes approximately $120,000 in service costs associated with mainframe systems. 10 Miscellaneous direct costs consist of all pet licensing costs not listed above including but not limited to training, certification, transportation, and bad checks. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 44 M I 1 General fund overhead costs included in this model include building occupancy charges and HR/personnel services. No other General Fund overhead costs are included in the model. 12 Division overhead includes a portion of the following personnel time as well as a portion of division administration non -labor costs, both based on FTEs: division director, assistant division director, administration, program manager, finance officer, payroll /accounts payable, and human resource officer. 13 Other overhead costs include IT, telecommunications, finance, and property services. 14 Non licensing revenue attributable to licensing operations consists of licensing late fees. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 45 Exhibit C -4 Calculation and Allocation of Transition Funding Credit "T Shelter Credit "V and Estimated New Regional Revenue "ENR A. Transition Funding Credit The Transition Funding Credit as originally calculated in the 2010 Agreement offset costs to certain Contracting Cities that would have otherwise paid the highest per capita costs for Animal Services in 2010. The credit was scheduled on a declining basis over four years (2010- 2013). In this Agreement, the Contracting Cities qualifying for this credit are listed in Table 1 below; these cities will receive the credit at the level calculated for 2013 in the 2010 Agreement for Service Years 2013, 2014 and 2015, provided that, application of the credit can never result in the Estimated Payment Amount being less than zero ($0) (i.e., cannot result in the County owing the City an Estimated Payment). The allocation of the Transition Funding Credit is shown in Table 1 below. Table 1: Transition Funding Credit Annual Amount to be allocated each year in the period from 2013 -2015 Jurisdiction Transition Covington Funding Enumclaw Credit Carnation $552 North Bend $1,376 Kent I $110,495 SeaTac I $7,442 Tukwila I $5,255 Black Diamond $1,209 Covington $5,070 Enumclaw $11,188 Maple Valley I $6,027 Note: The Transitional Funding Credit is the same regardless of which cities sign the Agreement. B. Shelter Credit The Shelter Credit is designed to offset costs for those Contracting Cities whose per capita shelter intakes "A exceed the average for all Contracting Parties. A total of $750,000 will be applied as a credit in each of the Service Years 2013 -2015 to Contracting Cities whose per capita average shelter intakes "A exceeds the average for all Contracting Parties; provided that application of the Shelter Credit can never result in the Estimated Payment amount being less than zero ($0) (i.e., cannot result in the County owing the City an Estimated Payment.) The 2013 Shelter Credit was determined based on estimated animal Document Dated 5 -29 -12 46 i• intakes "A for Calendar Year 2011 as shown on Exhibit C -2. The $750,000 was allocated between every Contracting City with animal intakes over the estimated 2011 Program average, based on each Contracting City's relative per capita animal intakes in excess of the average for all Contracting Parties. The Shelter Credit will be paid at the 2013 level in Service Years 2014 and 2015. The County will consider providing the Shelter Credit in Service Years 2016 and 2017 at the same level as for Service Year 2013. Table 3: Annual Shelter Credit Allocation -2013 through 2015 City North Bend Kent SeaTac Tukwila Black Diamond Covington Enumclaw Maple Valley Shelter Credit $586 $495,870 $116,611 $61,987 $3,263 $36,409 $28,407 $6,867 C. New Regional Revenue: Estimation and Allocation Goal New Regional Revenue for each Service Year shall be estimated as part of the development of the Estimated Payment calculations for such Service Year. The goal of the estimate shall be to reduce the amount of Estimated Payments where New Regional Revenue to be received in the Service Year can be calculated with reasonable certainty. The Estimated New Regional Revenue will be reconciled annually to account for actual New Regional Revenue received, per Exhibit D. Calculation of Estimated New Regional Revenue (ENR) 1. The value of the Estimated New Regional Revenue for Service Year 2013 is zero. 2. For Service Years after 2013, the Estimated New Regional Revenue will be set at the amount the County includes for such revenue in its adopted budget for the Service Year. For purposes of the Preliminary Estimated Payment calculation, the County will include its best estimate for New Regional Revenue at the time the calculation is issued, after first presenting such estimate to the Joint City County Committee for its input. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 47 Application of ENR For Service Years 2013 and 2016, 50% of the Estimated New Regional Revenue is incorporated into the calculations of EC and ES and EL as described in Exhibit C, specifically: a. 17% of total Estimated New Regional Revenue is applied to reduce the total Budgeted Net Allocable Control Services Cost. b. 27% of total Estimated New Regional Revenue is applied to reduce the total Budgeted Net Allocable Shelter Services Cost. c. 6% of total Estimated New Regional Revenue is applied to reduce the total Budgeted Net Allocable Licensing Services Cost. These amounts are reconciled as against actual New Regional Revenue (ENRA) in the annual Reconciliation process. In 2014, 2015 and 2017 the 50% is simply deducted against Budgeted Total Allocable Costs to derive Budgeted Total Net Allocable Costs. 2. For each Service Year, the remaining 50% of Estimated New Regional Revenue is first applied to offset County contributions to the Program, in the following order of priority. a. Offset payments made by the County to fund Transition Funding Credits, Shelter Credits, Impact Mitigation Credits (if any) and un- reimbursed Licensing Revenue Support. b. Offset County funding of Animal Services Program costs that are not included in the cost allocation model described in Exhibit C, specifically, costs of: i. The medical director and volunteer coordinator staff at the Kent Shelter. ii. Other County- sponsored costs for Animal Services that are not included in the cost models described in Exhibit C. c. In the event any of the 50% of Estimated New Regional Revenue remains after applying it to items (a) and (b) above, the remainder "Residual New Regional Revenue shall be held in a reserve and applied to the benefit of all Contracting Parties as part of the annual Reconciliation process, in the following order of priority: i. First, to reduce pro -rata up to 20% of each Contracting Party's Estimated Total Animal Services Cost Allocation (6t" column in the spreadsheet at Exhibit C -1), thereby reducing up to all cost allocations based on population. This is the factor "X" in the Reconciliation formula. ii. Second, to reduce pro rata the amount owing from each Contracting Party with net final costs 0 after consideration of all other factors in the Reconciliation formula. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 48 Offsets described in (a) and (b) above do not impact the calculation of Estimated Payments or the Reconciliation of Estimated Payments since they are outside the cost model. The allocations described in (c) above, if any, will be considered in the annual Reconciliation as described in Exhibit D. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 EE Exhibit C -5 Licensing Revenue Support A. The Contracting Cities that will receive licensing revenue support in 2013 are listed below (collectively, these nine cities are referred to as the "Licensing Revenue Support Cities These Cities have been selected by comparing the estimated 2013 Net Final Costs shown in Exhibit C -1 to the 2012 Estimated Net Final Cost. Where the 2013 Net Final Cost estimate was higher than the 2012 estimate, the difference was identified as the 2013 Licensing Revenue Target. B. For any Licensing Revenue Support City in Table 1 whose Preliminary 2013 Estimated Payment is lower than the Pre Commitment Estimate shown in Exhibit C -1, the Licensing Revenue Target "RT and the Revenue Goal "RG will be the reduced by an amount equivalent to the reduction between the Pre Commitment and Preliminary Estimated Payment amounts for 2013. Table 1: 2013 Licensing Revenue Support Cities, Licensing Revenue Targets and Revenue Goals* City 2013 Base Year Revenue Revenue Goal Licensing Revenue (2011 Estimate per "RG" (total) Target "RT" Exhibit C -2) (increment) 'Base Amount" City of Carnation $966 $4,752 $5,718 City of Duvall $7,658 $21,343 $29,001 City of Kirkland $23,853 $208,000 $231,853 City of Bellevue $34,449 $273,931 $308,380 City of Newcastle $2,599 $15,271 $17,870 City of North Bend $6,463 $15,694 $22,157 City of Black Diamond $2,001 $10,185 $12,186 City of Enumclaw $5,973 $25,307 $31,280 City of Maple Valley $6,956 $56,628 $63,584 *Amounts in this table are subject to adjustment per Paragraph B above. C. The 2013 Licensing Revenue Target "RT is the amount each City in Table 1 will receive in 2013, either in the form of additional licensing revenues over the Base Year amount or as a Licensing Revenue Credit "LRC") applied at Reconciliation. 2 For Contracting Cities that purchase shelter services from PAWS, the target was based on the Pre Commitment 2013 Estimated Payment calculated in February 2012 during contract negotiations. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 50 0 D. As further described in Section 7 and Exhibit C -5, licensing revenue support services include the provision of County staff and materials support (which may include use of volunteers or other in -kind support) as determined necessary by the County to generate the Licensing Revenue Target. E. In 2014 and 2015, any Licensing Revenue Support City or other Contracting City may request licensing revenue support services from the County under the terms of Exhibit F. Provision of such services is subject to the County determining it has capacity to perform such services. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a Licensing Revenue Support City for which RT is in excess of $20,000 per year may receive licensing revenue support service in all three years, but only if by September 1, 2012, it commits to providing in -kind support in all three Services Years by executing the contract in Exhibit F with respect to all 3 Service Years (2013, 2014 and 2015). Allocation of licensing revenue support services in 2014 and 2015 will be prioritized first to meet the County's contractual commitment, if any, to a Licensing Revenue Support City that has entered into a 3 -year agreement for such service. Thereafter, service shall be allocated to Licensing Revenue Support Cities requesting such service on first -come, first served basis; and thereafter to any other Contracting City requesting such service on a first -come, first served basis. Table 2: Calculation of Estimated Payments and Licensing Revenue Credits for Licensing Revenue Support Cities For Service Year 2013: The Estimated Payment calculation will include the 2013 Licensing Revenue Support Target "RT if any, for the City per Table 1 above in the calculation of Estimated Licensing Revenues "ER (these amounts are shown in separate columns on Exhibit C -1). At Reconciliation: For Cities with a RT $20,000, Actual Licensing Revenue for 2013 "AR2013 will be determined by allocating 65% of Licensing Revenues received (if any) over the Base Amount to determine AR2013 if Actual Licensing Revenue for 2013 "AR2013 Revenue Goal "RG then no additional credit is payable to the City "LRC" $0) If AR2013 RG, then the difference (RG -AR) is the Licensing Revenue Credit "LRC included in the Reconciliation Adjustment Amount provided that, for Cities whose RT >$20,000, 35% of Licensing Revenues over the Base Amount shall be allocated to increase LRC when the value of ANFCo is being calculated at Reconciliation, and provided further, that in all cases LRC cannot exceed the 2013 Licensing Revenue Target for the City. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 51 91 For Service Year 2014, if the City and County have executed a Licensing Support Contract per Exhibit F, and the City is therefore providing additional in -kind services in order to generate licensing revenue support in 2014, then: The Estimated Payment for 2014 will include Estimated Licensing Revenues calculated at the amount of Actual Revenue "AR for 2012 or the Revenue Goal (RG), whichever is greater. RG will be the amount in Table 1 for Licensing Revenue Support Cities, or such other amount as the Parties may agree in the Licensing Support Contract. At Reconciliation: For Cities with a RT $20,000, AR 2014 will be determined by allocating 65% of Licensing Revenues received (if any) over the Base Amount to determine AR2oi4 If Actual Licensing Revenue in 2014 is greater than the Revenue Goal (AR2014 RG), then no Licensing Revenue Credit is payable to the City (LRC $0), and The County shall charge the City for an amount which is the lesser of (a) the cost of County's licensing support services in 2014 to the City (as defined in the Licensing Support Contract for 2014), or (b) the amount by which AR2014 >RG. If AR2014 RG, then the difference (RG- AR2014) is LRC. The LRC amount is added to reduce the City's costs when calculating the Reconciliation Adjustment Amount, provided that, for Cities whose RT >$20,000, 35% of Licensing Revenues over the Base Amount shall be allocated to increase "LRC a when the value of ANFCo is being calculated at Reconciliation, and provided further that in all cases LRC cannot exceed the 2013 Licensing Revenue Target for the City. For Service Year 2015, the process and calculation shall be the same as for 2014, e.g.: if the City and County have executed Exhibit F, and the City is therefore providing additional in -kind services in order to generate Licensing Revenue Support in 2015, then: The Estimated Payment for 2015 will include Estimated Licensing Revenues calculated at the amount of Actual Revenue "AR for 2013 (excluding LRC paid for Service Year 2013) or RG, whichever is greater. RG will be the amount in Table 1 for Licensing Revenue Support Cities, or such other amount as the Parties may agree in the Licensing Support Contract. At Reconciliation: For Cities with a RT $20,000, AR 2015 will be determined by allocating 65% of Licensing Revenues received (if any) over the Base Amount to determine AR2o15 If Actual 2015 Licensing Revenue is greater than the Revenue Goal (AR2015 Document Dated 5 -29 -12 52 92 RG), then no Licensing Revenue Credit is payable to the City (LRC $0), and The County shall charge the City for an amount which is the lesser of (a) the cost of County's licensing support services in 2015 to the City (as defined in the Licensing Support Contract for 2015), or (b) the amount by which AR2015 >RG. o If AR2ms RG, then the difference (RG- AR2015) is LRC. The LRC amount is added to reduce the City's costs when calculating the Reconciliation Adjustment Amount; provided that, for Cities whose RT >$20,000, 35% of Licensing Revenues over the Base Amount shall be allocated to increase "LRC when the value of ANFCo is being calculated at Reconciliation, and and provided further that in all cases LRC cannot exceed the 2013 Licensing Revenue Target for the City. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 53 93 Exhibit C -6: Summary of Calculation Periods for Use and Population Components This Exhibit restates in summary table form the Calculation Periods used for calculating the usage and population components in the formulas to derive Estimated Payments. See Exhibit C for complete formulas and definitions of the formula components. ER is estimated Licensing Revenue attributable to the City CFS is total annual number of Calls for Service originating in the City A is the number of animals in the shelter attributable to the City I is the number of active paid regular pet licenses issued to City residents ENR is the New Regional Revenue estimated to be received during the Service Year Pop is Population of the City expressed as a percentage of all Contracting Parties; D -Pop is Population of the City expressed as a percentage of the population of all jurisdictions within a Control District Calculation Periods Service Year 2013 Component Preliminary Estimated 2013 Reconciliation Payment Estimated 2013 Payment (final) Amount Payment (published (published December 15 (determined June 2014) August 2012) 2012) ER Actual 2011 Same Actual 2013 (Estimated Revenue) CFS Actual 2011 Same N/A (Calls for Service) A Actual 2011 Same N/A (Animal intakes) I (Issued Pet Actual 2011 Same N/A Licenses) ENR Estimated 2013 ($0) Estimated 2013 ($0) Actual 2013 (Estimated New Regional Revenue) Pop, D -Pop July 2012 OFM report, Same, adjusted for all Same, adjusted for all (Population) adjusted for annexations 2:2,500 annexations 2,500 annexations 2,500 occurring (and occurring (and Latecomer occurring (and Latecomer Cities joining) Cities joining) after April Latecomer Cities after April 2012 and and before the end of 2013 joining) after April before the end of 2013 2012 and before the Document Dated 5 -29 -12 54 end of 2013. Calculation Periods: Service Year 2014 Estimated 2015 Component Preliminary Estimated 2014 Reconciliation Payment (published Estimated 2014 Payment (published Payment Amount Payment (published December 2013) (determined June 2015) Actual 2015 September 2013) N/A N/A ER Actual 2012 Same Actual 2014 CFS N/A N/A N/A A N/A N/A N/A I N/A N/A N/A ENR Estimated 2014 Estimated 2014 Actual 2014 Pop, D -Pop July 2012 OFM report, Same, adjusted for all Same, adjusted for all after April 2012 and adjusted for all annexations 2,500 annexations 2,500 (and before the end of 2015 annexations 2,500 known to take effect (and Latecomer Cities joining) end of 2015. known to take effect Latecomer Cities joining) occurring after April 2012 for an additional 2 years, the calculation periods (and Latecomer Cities after April 2012 and and before the end of shall be developed in a manner comparable to year 2014. joining) after April before the end of 2014 2014 2012 and before the end of 2014. Calculation Periods: Service Year 2015 Component Preliminary Estimated 2015 Reconciliation Estimated 2015 Payment (published Payment Amount Payment (published December 2014) (determined June 2016) September 2014) ER Actual 2013 Same Actual 2015 CFS N/A N/A N/A A N/A N/A N/A I N/A N/A N/A ENR Estimated 2015 Estimated 2015 Actual 2015 Pop, D -Pop July 2012 OFM report, Same, adjusted for all Same, adjusted for all adjusted for all annexations 2,500 annexations 2,500 annexations 2:2,500 known to take effect (and occurring (and known take effect Latecomer Cities joining) Latecomer Cities joining) (and Latecomer Cities after April 2012 and after April 2012 and joining) after April before the end of 2015 before the end of 2015 2012 and before the end of 2015. If the Agreement is extended past 2015 for an additional 2 years, the calculation periods for 2016 shall be developed in a manner comparable to Service Year 2013, and for 2017 shall be developed in a manner comparable to year 2014. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 55 95 Exhibit C -7 Payment and Calculation Schedule Service Year 2013 Item Date Preliminary estimate of 2013 Estimated August 1, 2012 Payments provided to City by County Final Estimated 2013 Payment calculation December 15, 2012 provided to City by County First 2013 Estimated Payment due June 15, 2013 Second 2013 Estimated Payment due December 15, 2013 2013 Reconciliation Adjustment Amount On or before June 30, 2014 calculated 2013 Reconciliation Adjustment Amount On or before August 15, 2014 payable Service Year 2014 I Date Item Date Preliminary estimate of 2014 Estimated September 1, 2013 Payments provided to City by County December 15, 2014 Final Estimated 2014 Payment calculation December 15, 2013 provided to City by County June 15, 2015 First 2014 Estimated Payment due June 15, 2014 Second 2014 Estimated Payment due December 15, 2014 2014 Reconciliation Adjustment Amount On or before June 30, 2015 calculated August 15, 2016 2014 Reconciliation Adjustment Amount August 15, 2015 Payable Service Year 2015 Item I Date Preliminary estimate of 2015 Estimated September 1, 2014 Payments provided to City by County Final Estimated 2015 Payment calculation December 15, 2014 provided to City by County First 2015 Estimated Payment due June 15, 2015 Second 2015 Estimated Payment due December 15, 2015 2015 Reconciliation Adjustment Amount On or before June 30, 2016 calculated 2015 Reconciliation Adjustment Amount August 15, 2016 Payable Document Dated 5 -29 -12 56 M If the Agreement is extended past December 31, 2015, the schedule is developed in the same manner as described above for years 2016 and 2017. Additional timelines are in place to commence and complete negotiations for an extension of the Agreement: County convenes interested Contracting September 2014 Cities to discuss (1) a possible extension on the same terms and (2) a possible extension on different terms. Notice of Intent by either Party not to renew March 1, 2015 agreement on the same terms (Cities also indicate whether they wish to negotiate for an extension on different terms or to let Agreement expire at end of 2015) Deadline for signing an extension (whether July 1, 2015 on the same or amended terms) See Section 4 of Agreement for additional details on Extension of the Agreement Term for an additional two years. Dates for remittal to County of pet license Quarterly, each March 31, June 30, sales revenues processed by Contracting September 30, December 31 Cities (per section 3.c) Except as otherwise provided for Licensing Revenue Support Cities with a Licensing Revenue Target greater than $20,000 /year, requests for Licensing Revenue Support in Service Years 2014 or 2015 may be made at any time between June 30 and October 31 of the prior Service Year. (See Exhibit C -5 for additional detail). Document Dated 5 -29 -12 57 97 Exhibit D Reconciliation The purpose of the reconciliation calculation is to adjust payments made each Service Year by Contracting Parties to reflect actual licensing and non licensing revenue, various credits, and New Regional Revenue, as compared to the estimates of such revenues and credits incorporated in the Estimated Payment calculations, and to adjust for population changes resulting from annexations of areas with a population of over 2,500 (if any) and the addition of Latecomer Cities. To accomplish this, an "Adjusted Net Final Cost" "ANFC calculation is made each June for each Contracting Party as described below, and then adjusted for various factors as described in this Exhibit D. As noted in Section 7 of the Agreement, the Parties intend that receipt of Animal Services should not be a profit- making enterprise. When a City receives revenues in excess of its costs under this Agreement (including costs of PAWS shelter service, if applicable), such excess will be reinvested to reduce costs incurred by other Contracting Parties. The cost allocation formulas of this Agreement are intended to achieve this outcome. Terms not otherwise defined here have the meanings set forth in Exhibit C or the body of the Agreement. Calculation of ANFC and Reconciliation Adjustment Amount The following formula will be used to calculate the Reconciliation Adjustment Amount, which shall be payable by August 15. The factors in the formula are defined below. As described in paragraphs A and B, the subscript "0" denotes the initial calculation; subscript "1" denotes the final calculation. ANFCo (AR T V X LRC) (B x LF) A. If ANFCo 0, i.e., revenues and credits are greater than costs (adding the cost factor "W" in the formula for Contracting Cities purchasing shelter services from PAWS or purchasing Enhanced Control Services), then: ANFC1 0, i.e., it is reset to zero and the difference between ANFCo and ANFC1 is set aside by the County (or, if the revenues are not in the possession of the County, then the gap amount is payable by the City to the County by August 15) and all such excess amounts from all Contracting Parties where ANCFo 0 are allocated pro -rata to parties for which ANFC1 0, per paragraph B below. Contracting Parties for which ANFCo 0 do not receive a reconciliation payment. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 58 B. If ANFCo 0, i.e., costs are greater than revenues (without considering "W" for those Contracting Cities purchasing shelter services from PAWS or purchasing Enhanced Control Services), then the negative dollar amount is not "reset" and ANFC1 is the same as ANFCo. Contracting Parties in this situation will receive a pro -rata allocation from the sum of excess revenues from those Parties for which ANFCo 0 per paragraph A. In this way, excess revenues are reallocated across Contracting Parties with net final costs. C. If, after crediting the City with its pro rata share of any excess revenues per paragraph B, ANFC1 Total Estimated Payments made in the Service Year, then the difference shall be paid by the County to the City no later than August 15; if ANFC1 Total Estimated Payments made in the Service Year, then the difference shall be paid by the City to the County no later than August 15. Where: "AR" is Actual Licensing Revenue attributable to the City, based on actual Licensing Revenues received from residents of the City in the Service Year, adjusted for Cities with a Licensing Revenue Target $20,000 as described in Exhibit C -5. (License Revenue that cannot be attributed to a specific Party (e.g., License Revenue associated with incomplete address information), will be allocated amongst the Parties based on their respective percentages of total AR). "T" is the Transition Funding Credit, if any, for the Service Year. "V" is the Shelter Credit, if any, for the Service Year. "W" is the actual amount paid by a City receiving shelter services to PAWS for such services during the Service Year, if any, plus the actual amount paid by a City to the County for the purchase of Enhanced Control Services during the Service Year, if any. "X" is the amount of Residual New Regional Revenue, if any, allocable to the City from the 50% of New Regional Revenues which is first applied to offset County costs for funding Shelter Credits, Transition Funding Credits and any Program costs not allocated in the cost model. The residual is shared amongst the Contracting Parties to reduce pro rata up to 20% of each Contracting Party's Estimated Total Animal Services Cost Allocation (See column titled "Estimated Total Animal Services Cost Allocation" in the spreadsheet at Exhibit C -1). "LRC" is the amount of any Licensing Revenue Credit or Charge to be applied based on receipt of licensing support services. For a Licensing Revenue Support City designated in Exhibit C -5, the amount shall be determined per Table 2 of Exhibit C -5 and the associated Document Dated 5 -29 -12 59 w e Licensing Support Contract, if any. Where a Licensing Revenue Support City is due a Licensing Revenue Credit, the amount applied for this factor is a positive dollar amount (e.g., increases City's revenues in the amount of the credit); if a Licensing Revenue Support City is assessed a Licensing Revenue Charge, the amount applied for this factor is a negative amount (e.g., increases City's costs). For any Contracting City receiving licensing support services per a Licensing Support Contract/ Exhibit F other than a Licensing Revenue Support City, LRC will be a negative amount (increasing the City's costs) equal to the County's cost of the licensing support set forth in the Attachment A to the Licensing Support Contract. "B" is the "Budgeted Total Net Allocable Costs" as estimated for the Service Year for the provision of Animal Services to be allocated between all the Contracting Parties for the purposes of determining the Estimated Payment, calculated as described in Exhibit C. "LF" is the "Program Load Factor" attributable to City for the Service Year, calculated as described in Exhibit C. LF will be recalculated if necessary to account for annexations of areas with a population of 2,500 or more people, or for Latecomer Cities if such events were not accounted for in the Final Estimated Payment Calculation for the Service Year being reconciled. Additional Allocation of New Regional Revenues after calculation of all amounts above: If there is any residual New Regional Revenue remaining after allocating the full possible "X" amount to each Party (to fully eliminate the population based portion of costs), the remainder shall be allocated on a pro rata basis to all Contracting Parties for which ANFC1 0. If there is any residual thereafter, it will be applied to improve Animal Services. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 fll Mrs Exhibit E Enhanced Control Services Contract (Optional) Between City of "City and King County "County The County will to offer Enhanced Control Services to the City during Service Years 2013, 2014 and 2105 of the Animal Services Interlocal Agreement for 2013 Through 2015 between the City and the County dated and effective as of July 1, 2012 (the "Agreement subject to the terms and conditions as described herein. The provisions of this Contract are optional to both Parties and shall not be effective unless executed by both Parties. A. The City may request services under two different options, summarized here and described in further detail below: Option 1: for a period of not less than one year, the City may request service from an Animal Control Officer dedicated to the City "Dedicated Officer Such service must be confirmed in writing through both Parties entering into this Enhanced Control Services Contract no later than August 15 of the year prior to the Service Year in which the service is requested. Option 2: for a period of less than one year, the City may request a specified number of over -time service hours on specified days and time from the 6 Animal Control Officers staffing the three Control Districts. Unlike Option 1, the individual officers providing the service will be determined by the County and may vary from time to time; the term "Dedicated Officer" used in context of Option 2 is thus different than its meaning with respect to Option 1. Option 2 service must be requested no later than 60 days prior to the commencement of the period in which the service is requested, unless waived by the County. The City shall initiate a request for enhanced service by completing and submitting Attachment A to the County. If the County determines it is able to provide the requested service, it will so confirm by completing and countersigning Attachment A and signing this Contract and returning both to the City for final execution. B. The County will provide enhanced Control Services to the City in the form of an Animal Control Officer dedicated to the City "Dedicated Officer as described in Attachment A and this Contract. 1. Costs identified in Attachment A for Option 1 are for one (1) year of service in 2010, in 2010 dollars, and include the cost of the employee (salary, benefits), equipment and animal control vehicle for the employee's use). Costs are subject Document Dated 5 -29 -12 ff 101 to adjustment each year, limited by the Annual Budget Inflator Cap (as defined in the Agreement). 2. Costs for Option 2 will be determined by the County each year based on its actual hourly overtime pay for the individual Animal Control Officers providing the service, plus mileage at the federal reimbursement rate. The number of miles for which mileage is charged shall be miles which would not have been traveled but for the provision of the enhanced service. 3. Costs paid for enhanced services will be included in the Reconciliation calculation for each Service Year, as described in Exhibit D of the Agreement. C. Services of the Dedicated Officer shall be in addition to the Animal Services otherwise provided to the City by the County through the Agreement. Accordingly, the calls responded to by the Dedicated Officer shall not be incorporated in the calculation of the City's Calls for Service (as further described in Exhibit C and D to the Agreement). D. The scheduling of work by the Dedicated Officer will be determined by mutual agreement of the contract administrators identified in the Agreement, and (in the case of a purchase of service under Option 1) the mutual agreement of officials of other Contracting Cities named as contract administrators that have committed to sharing in the expense of the Dedicated Officer. In the event the parties are unable to agree on scheduling, the County shall have the right to finally determine the schedule of the Dedicated Officer(s). E. Control Services to be provided to the City pursuant to this Enhanced Services Contract include Control Services of the type and nature as described under the Agreement with respect to Animal Control Officers serving in Control Districts, and include but are not limited to, issuing written warnings, citations and other enforcement notices and orders on behalf of the City, or such other services as the Parties may reasonably agree. F. The County will provide the City with a general quarterly calendar of scheduled service in the City, and a monthly report of the types of services offered and performed. G. For Services purchased under Option 1: An FTE will be scheduled to serve 40 hour weeks, however, with loss of service hours potentially attributable to vacation, sick leave, training and furlough days, not less than 1600 hours per year will be provided. Similarly, a half -time FTE will provide not less than 800 hours per year. The County shall submit to the City an invoice and billing voucher at the end of each calendar Document Dated 5 -29 -12 62 102 quarter, excepting that during the 4th quarter of each year during the term of this Contract, an invoice shall be submitted to the City no later than December 15 All invoiced amounts shall be payable by the City within 30 days of the invoice date. H. For Services vurchased under Option 2: The County shall submit to the City an invoice and billing voucher at the end of each calendar quarter. All invoiced amounts shall be payable by the City within 30 days of the invoice date. I. The City or County may terminate this Enhanced Services Contract with or without cause upon providing not less than 3 months written notice to the other Party; provided that, if the City has purchased services under Option 1 and is sharing the Enhanced Control Services with other Contracting Cities, this Contract may only be terminated by the City if: (1) all such other Contracting Cities similarly agree to terminate service on such date, or (2) if prior to such termination date another Contracting City or Cities enters into a contract with the County to purchase the Enhanced Control Service that the City wishes to terminate; provided further: except as provided in Paragraph A.1, a Contract may not be terminated if the term of service resulting is less than one year. J. All terms of the Agreement, except as expressly stated otherwise in this Exhibit, shall apply to this Enhanced Control Services Contract, Capitalized Terms not defined herein have those meanings as set forth in the Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Enhanced Services Contract to be executed effective as of this day of 201_. King County City of Dow Constantine By: King County Executive Mayor /City Manager Date Date Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form: Deputy Prosecuting Attorney City Attorney Document Dated 5 -29 -12 M 103 Exhibit E: Attachment A ENHANCED CONTROL SERVICES OPTION REQUEST (to be completed by City requesting Enhanced Control Services; final service terms subject to adjustment by County and agreement by City and will be confirmed in writing executed and appended to Enhanced Control Service Contract /Exhibit E) City Requested Enhanced Control Services Start Date: Requested Enhanced Control Services End Date: *term of service must be at least one year, except if purchasing services under Option 2. Please indicate whether City is requesting services under Option 1 or Option 2: Option 1: of Full Time Equivalent Officer (FTE) requested: (minimum request: 20 requests must be in multiples of either 20% or 25 Option 2: Overtime Hours purchase from existing ACO staff: hours per (week /month) General Description of desired services (days, hours, nature of service): For Option 1: Contracting Cities with whom the City proposes to share the Enhanced Control Services, and proposed percentages of an FTE those Cities are expected to request: On behalf of the City, the undersigned understands and agrees that the County will attempt to honor requests but reserves the right to propose aggregated, adjusted and variously scheduled service, including but not limited to adjusting allocations of service from Document Dated 5 -29 -12 M 104 increments of 20% to 25 in order to develop workable employment and scheduling for the officers within then existing workrules, and that the City will be allowed to rescind or amend its request for Enhanced Control Services as a result of such proposed changes. Requests that cannot be combined to equal 50% of an FTE, 100% of an FTE, or some multiple thereof may not be honored. Service must be requested for a minimum term of one -year, except as permitted by Paragraph A.1. Service may not extend beyond the term of the Agreement. City requests that alone or in combination with requests of other Contracting Cities equal at least 50% of an FTE will be charged at the rate in Column 1 below. City requests that alone or in combination with other requests for Enhanced Control Services equal 100% of an FTE will be charged at the rate in Column 2 below. Cities may propose a different allocation approach for County consideration. An FTE will be scheduled to serve 40 hour weeks, however, with loss of hours potentially attributable to vacation, sick leave, training and furlough days, a minimum of 1600 hours per year will be provided. A half -time FTE will provide a minimum of 800 hours per year. For example, a commitment to purchase 20% of an FTE for enhanced service will result in provision of not less than 320 hours per year. Hours of service lost for vacation, sick leave, training and furlough days will be allocated on pro rata basis between all Contracting Cities sharing the services of that FTE. Column 1: Aggregate of 50% of an FTE Requested by all Participating Cities Cost to City: of Half -Time FTE requested) x $75,000 /year in 2010* Example: if City A requests 25% of an FTE and City B requests 25% of an FTE then each city would pay $18,750 for Enhanced Control Services from July 1, 2010 through December 31, 2011 (6 months). Column 2: Aggregate of 1 FTE Requested by all Participating Cities Cost to City: of FTE requested) x $115,000 /year in 2010 Example: If City A requests 25% of an FTE and City B requests 25% of an FTE and City C requests 50% of an FTE, Cities A and B would pay $14,375 and City C would pay $28,750 for Enhanced Control Services from July 1, 2010 through December 31, 2011 (6 months) *(50% of a Half -Time FTE) This example is based on 2010 costs. Actual costs will be based on actual Service Year FTE costs. Document Dated 5 -29 -12 65 105 For Option 2: On behalf of the City, the undersigned understands and agrees that the County will confirm what services, if any, it can provide, and at what costs, by completing this Attachment A, and the City must signify whether it accepts the County's offer by signing the Enhanced Services Contract. Request Signed as of this day of 201_. City of By: Its To be comvleted by Kine Countv: Option 1: The County hereby confirms its ability and willingness to provide Enhanced Control services as requested by the City in this Attachment A, with adjustments as noted below (if any): The FTE Cost for the Service Year in which the City has requested service is: Option 2: the County confirms its ability to provide control service overtime hours as follows (insert description— days /hours): Such overtime hours shall be provided at a cost of (may be a range) per service hour, with the actual cost depending on the individual(s) assigned to work the hours, plus mileage at the federal reimbursement rate. King County By: Its Date: Document Dated 5 -29 -12 106 Exhibit F Licensing Support Contract (Optional) Between City of "City and King County "County The County is prepared to offer licensing revenue support to the City subject to the terms and conditions described in this Licensing Support Contract "Contract The provisions of this Exhibit are optional and shall not be effective unless this Exhibit is executed by both the City and the County and both parties have entered into the underlying Animal Services Interlocal Agreement for 2013 Through 2015 (the "Agreement A. Service Reauests. Submittal: Requests to enter into a licensing support contract should be made by submitting the Licensing Revenue Support Services Request (Attachment A to this Exhibit F) to the County between June 30 and October 31 of the calendar year prior to year in which such services are requested "Service Year A separate Request shall be submitted for each Service Year, excepting that a Licensing Support City with a revenue target in excess of $20,000 /year may submit a request by September 1, 2012 in order to receive service in all three Service Years (2013, 2014 and 2015). B. Countv to Determine Service Availabilitv: The County will determine whether it has capacity to provide the requested service based on whether it has staff available, and consistent with the priorities stated in Section 7.c and Exhibit C -5 of the Agreement. C. Services Provided by County. Cost: The County will determine the licensing revenue support activities it will undertake to achieve the Licensing Revenue Target. Activities may include, but are not limited to canvassing, mailings, calls to non renewals. In completing Attachment A to confirm its ability to provide licensing support services to the City, the County shall identify the cost for such service for each applicable Service Year. If the City accepts the County's proposed costs, it shall so signify by countersigning Attachment A. D. Services Provided by City: In exchange for receiving licensing revenue support from the County, the City will provide the following services: 1. Include inserts regarding animal licensing in bills or other mailings as may be allowed by law, at the City's cost. The County will provide the design for the insert and coordinate with the City to deliver the design on an agreed upon schedule. 2. Dedicate a minimum level of volunteer /staff hours per month (averaged over the year), based on the City's Licensing Revenue Target for the Year (as Document Dated 5 -29 -12 67 107 specified /selected in Attachment A) to canvassing and /or mailings and outbound calls to non renewals. City volunteer /staff hour requirements are scaled based on the size of the Licensing Revenue Target per Table A below: Table A: Volunteer /Staff Hours to be Provided by City If the Licensing Revenue Target The City shall provide volunteer /staff hours for the Service Year is between: support (averaged over the year) $0 and $5,000 $5,001410,000 $10,000 $20,000 $20,001 and $40,000 >$40,000 9 hours per month 18 hours per month 27 hours per month 36 hours per month 45 hours per month 3. Provide representation at a minimum of two public events annually to inform City residents about the Animal Services Program and promote pet licensing. 4. Inform City residents about the Animal Services Program and promote pet licensing utilizing print and electronic media including the city's website, social media, community brochures and newsletter ads /articles, signage /posters and pet licensing applications in public areas of city buildings and parks. 5. Appoint a representative to serve on the joint City County marketing subcommittee; this representative shall attend the quarterly meetings of the subcommittee and help shape and apply within the City the joint advertising strategies developed by consensus of the subcommittee. E. Selection of Licensine Revenue Target and Pavment for Licensing Revenue Suvvort: 1. For Licensing Revenue Support Cities (those identified in Exhibit C -5 of the Agreement): In 2014 and 2015, Licensing Revenue Support Cities may receive licensing revenue support intended to generate total annual Licensing Revenue at or above the Revenue Goal in Table 1 of Exhibit C -5. The City will receive a Licensing Revenue Credit or Charge at Reconciliation in accordance with the calculations in Table 2 of Exhibit C -5. A Licensing Revenue Support City may request service under subparagraph 2 below. 2. For all other Contacting Cities: The City will identify a proposed Licensing Revenue Target in Attachment A. The County may propose an alternate Revenue Target. If the Parties agree upon a Licensing Revenue Target, the County shall indentify its annual cost to provide service designed to achieve the target. At Reconciliation, the City shall be charged for licensing support service at the cost specified and agreed in Attachment A (the "Licensing Revenue Charge Document Dated 5 -29 -12 68 W •11 regardless of the amount of Licensing Revenue received by the City during the Service Year (see Exhibit D of the Agreement for additional detail). F. Other Terms and Conditions: 1. Before January 31 of the Service Year, each Party will provide the other with a general calendar of in -kind services to be provided over the course of the Service Year. 2. Each Party will provide the other with a monthly written report of the services performed during the Service Year. 3. Either Party may terminate this Contract with or without cause by providing not less than 2 months' advance written notice to the other Party; provided that all County costs incurred to the point of termination remain chargeable to the City as otherwise provided. 4. All terms of the Agreement, except as expressly stated otherwise herein, shall apply to this Contract, and Capitalized Terms not defined herein have the meanings as set forth in the Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Contract for Licensing Support Services to be executed effective as of this day of 201_. King County City of Dow Constantine King County Executive Date Approved as to Form: Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Document Dated 5 -29 -12 By: Mayor /City Manager Date Approved as to Form: City Attorney 11 109 Exhibit F: Attachment A LICENSING REVENUE SUPPORT SERVICES REQUEST (to be completed by City requesting licensing support services; one request per Service Year except for a Licensing Support City with a Licensing Revenue Target over $20,000 /year; final terms subject to adjustment by County and agreement by City confirmed in writing, executed and appended to the Contract for Licensing Support Services Exhibit F of the Animal Services Interlocal Agreement for 2013 Through 2015 "the Agreement dated effective as of July 1, 2012.) 1. City Date of Request: 2. Licensing Revenue Target (the amount by which the City seeks to increase its revenues in the Service Year): Note: For Licensing Revenue Support Cities, the Licensing Revenue Support Target is defined in Table 1 of Exhibit C -5 of the Agreement, unless the Parties otherwise agree. The amount of volunteer /staff hours and other in -kind services required of the City in exchange for receipt of licensing support services is based on the size of the Licensing Revenue Target (see Licensing Support Contract/ Exhibit F of Agreement). 3. Contact person who will coordinate City responsibilities associated with delivery of licensing support services: Name: Title: Phone: Fax: I understand that: A. provision of licensing revenue support services is subject to the County determining it has staff available to provide the services; B. For Contracting Cities other than Licensing Revenue Support Cities, the County may propose an adjustment in the requested Licensing Revenue Target; C. the County will, by September 1 of the current calendar year, provide the City with a firm cost to provide the amount of licensing support services the County proposes to provide by completing this Attachment A; D. the County cannot verify and does not guarantee a precise level of Licensing Revenues to be received by the City as a result of these services; E. Receipt of service is subject to County and City agreeing on the Licensing Revenue Target and County charge for these services (incorporated in Document Dated 5 -29 -12 70 110 calculation of the Licensing Revenue Credit/Charge per the Agreement), and executing the Licensing Support Contract (Exhibit F of the Agreement). Request signed as of this day of 201 City of By: Its: To be completed by King County: The County offers to provide the City licensing revenue support services in Service Year 201 intended to generate (the "Licensing Revenue Target in additional Licensing Revenue for a total Service Year cost of some or all of which cost may be charged to the City in calculating the Licensing Revenue Charge, as further described in the Licensing Support Contract and Exhibits C -5 (for Licensing Support Cities) and D of the Agreement. King County By: Its: Date: To be comvleted by the Citv: The County offer is accepted as of this City of By: Its: Document Dated 5 -29 -12 day of 201 /AI 111 112 King County /Cities Work Group for Animal Services Interlocal Agreement Briefing Materials May 16, 2012 The King County /Cities Workgroup has reached consensus on a Final Proposed Animal Services Interlocal Agreement (ILA) for 2013 through 2015. This Final Proposed ILA has been reviewed by a group of city and county attorneys. ILA: The ILA is summarized on Attachment A "Summary of Key Provisions" and Attachment C "Outline of Terms for Agreement." It will be an amended successor ILA to the current Agreement. ESTIMATED INDIVIDUAL CITY COSTS: A model showing the estimated cost allocation for 2013 is provided in Attachment B "Draft 2013 Estimated Payment Calculation It includes all cities currently in the system, except Auburn, reflecting this city's notice that it will leave the regional system. This document will be updated if Auburn decides to remain in the system. KEY CHANGES PROPOSED: (1) shift to a cost allocation method based more on use, and less on city population in year 1 to establish the base costs; (2) provide cost stability for jurisdiction in years 2 and 3 by capping the total net allocable costs in 2013 to a level similar to the system inflationary cap (CPI population growth); (3) increase the County's level of financial support to the system and hold that support steady over the 3 -year contract term (2013- 2015); (3) adjust animal control district boundaries to maintain service levels and control costs; (4) increase focus on system revenue generation and future regional revenue possibilities; and (5) implement efficiencies and other changes to reduce allocable costs while maintaining service levels. PROCESS /TIMELINE: City representatives and King County began working in November 2011, meeting weekly, in order to reach agreement in principle on changes to the current Animal Services Interlocal Agreement necessitated by Auburn's indication in September 2011 of its intent to depart the system. Auburn's notice required a renegotiation discussion per the ILA. The current ILA will not be extended beyond December 31, 2012, and the parties have until July 1, 2012, to sign a new ILA. Timeline as follows: February 1, 2012: Completed and circulated Agreement in Principle and process timeline February 14, 2012: First non binding statement of interest from Cities April 6, 2012: Completed final draft of amended ILA for distribution May 1, 2012: Second non binding statement of interest. This will provide parties greater assurance regarding their expected share of system costs moving forward May 17, 2012: Final cost estimates and ILA circulated based on second non binding statement of interest July 1, 2012: Both parties will have executed the Animal Services Interlocal Agreement for 2013 through 2015. Attachment A: Summary of Key Provisions Attachment B: Draft 2013 Estimated Payment Calculation Attachment C: Outline of Terms of Agreement Attachment D: Benefits of a Regional Animal Services System Attachment E: Districts Map Attachment F: RASKC ILA Revenue Work Plan Attachment G: ILA Negotiations Joint Work Group Attachment H: May 16, 2012 PowerPoint Presentation Final Proposed Animal Services Interlocal Agreement for 2013 Through 2015 113 King County /Cities Work Group for Animal Services Final Proposed Interlocal Agreement May 16, 2012 The King County /Cities Workgroup has reached consensus on a Final Proposed Animal Services Interlocal Agreement (ILA) for 2013 through 2015. This Final Proposed ILA has been reviewed by a group of city and county attorneys. ILA: The ILA is summarized on Attachment A "Summary of Key Provisions" and Attachment C "Outline of Terms for Agreement." It will be an amended successor ILA to the current Agreement. ESTIMATED INDIVIDUAL CITY COSTS: A model showing the estimated cost allocation for 2013 is provided in Attachment B "Draft 2013 Estimated Payment Calculation It includes all cities currently in the system, except Auburn, reflecting this city's notice that it will leave the regional system. This document will be updated if Auburn decides to remain in the system. KEY CHANGES PROPOSED: (1) shift to a cost allocation method based more on use, and less on city population in year 1 to establish the base costs; (2) provide cost stability for jurisdiction in years 2 and 3 by capping the total net allocable costs in 2013 to a level similar to the system inflationary cap (CPI population growth); (3) increase the County's level of financial support to the system and hold that support steady over the 3 -year contract term (2013- 2015); (3) adjust animal control district boundaries to maintain service levels and control costs; (4) increase focus on system revenue generation and future regional revenue possibilities; and (5) implement efficiencies and other changes to reduce allocable costs while maintaining service levels. PROCESS /TIMELINE: City representatives and King County began working in November 2011, meeting weekly, in order to reach agreement in principle on changes to the current Animal Services Interlocal Agreement necessitated by Auburn's indication in September 2011 of its intent to depart the system. Auburn's notice required a renegotiation discussion per the ILA. The current ILA will not be extended beyond December 31, 2012, and the parties have until July 1, 2012, to sign a new ILA. Timeline as follows: February 1, 2012: Completed and circulated Agreement in Principle and process timeline February 14, 2012: First non binding statement of interest from Cities April 6, 2012: Completed final draft of amended ILA for distribution May 1, 2012: Second non binding statement of interest. This will provide parties greater assurance regarding their expected share of system costs moving forward May 17, 2012: Final cost estimates and ILA circulated based on second non binding statement of interest July 1, 2012: Both parties will have executed the Animal Services Interlocal Agreement for 2013 through 2015. Attachment A: Summary of Key Provisions Attachment B: Draft 2013 Estimated Payment Calculation Attachment C: Outline of Terms of Agreement Attachment D: Benefits of a Regional Animal Services System Attachment E: Districts Map Attachment F: RASKC ILA Revenue Work Plan Attachment G: ILA Negotiations Joint Work Group Attachment H: May 16, 2012 PowerPoint Presentation Final Proposed Animal Services Interlocal Agreement for 2013 Through 2015 114 Attachment A Summary of Key Provisions: Final Proposed ILA Current ILA (June 2010 December 31,2012 provides for extension through 2014) 2012 Costs distributed through model $5.84 m (2012) Final Proposed Animal Services Interlocal Agreement for 2013 Through 2015 $5.26 m (2013) General cost allocation model 50% usage, 50% 80% usage, 20% population sets base for shelter, licensing and control population in 2013. Total net allocable costs are essentially capped to a level similar to the system inflationary cap (CPI population growth) for 2014 and 2015. 2013 base share is adjusted only for changes in revenues from year to year and by major annexations, and latecomers. Jurisdictional Cost stability Costs change each year To provide more cost predictability based on actual system from year to year, costs in 2014 and use and revenues of each 2015 will be based on the 2013 costs, jurisdiction. adjusted for growth in the total program budget (subject to a cost inflator cap), changes in revenues, and changes in population attributable to annexations over 2,500 and latecomers. Service term 2.5 years, possible 2 year 3 years, re- opener with possible 2 extension year extension (effective 7/1/12, service begins 1/1/13); limited re- opener for cost /revenue allocation provided if a voter approved regional levy is proposed that generates revenues before 2016.Termination allowed if such a measure were to be approved and either party not satisfied with the results of the re- opener discussions. 1 May 16, 2012 115 Attachment A Summary of Key Provisions: Final Proposed ILA Total County sponsored and $1.37m (2012) $1.76 m (2013) mitigation contribution *does not include potential costs of licensing support which would be additional to this amount and potentially recoverable through license revenues. Revenue Focus County commits to working with joint city county workgroup and elected officials if a regional levy is considered Shelter replacement Licensing Bridge to sustainability: Joint commitment to aggressively explore variety of specific mechanisms to increase system revenues and achieve sustainability at the end of the 3 years Not Included Not included New regional revenues Not included New revenues from donation, foundation, marketing, entrepreneurial activities or grants that are not designated for specific purposes will be used to reduce allocable costs for all jurisdictions and to help offset costs to the county for credits and non allocable costs Service Days 5 days (Monday- Friday) Will include at least one weekend day; coverage may be provided 7 days per week, with 40 hours per week guaranteed in agreement to control costs Service Protocols Established in ILA Cities to be involved in developing service protocols 2 May 16, 2012 116 Attachment A Summary of Key Provisions: Final Proposed ILA Control Districts 4 Districts 3 Districts Officers home base at Officers hosted in each district Shelter May 16, 2012 117 Attachment A Summary of Key Provisions: Final Proposed ILA Goal of model: maintain or lower costs for cities from the estimated 2012 levels o Increasing county support, adjusting the cost allocation formula, providing credits and licensing support Cost efficiencies included for 2013, or sooner if possible o Reduce costs by aligning staffing with current operations i. Shelter: $276,000 reduction due to projected lower number of animals in the shelter ii. Licensing: Program efficiencies resulting in reductions of $121,000. iii. Developing a project to bring laundry in -house instead of using commercial services $65,000 budget savings annually Key changes from current ILA: o Shifted cost allocation model to (80% use /20% population) to place more emphasis on system use rather than population responsive to low use cities o Cost stability provided in 2014 and 2015 by capping the total net allocable costs in 2013 to a level similar to the system inflationary cap (CPI population growth) for 2014 and 2015. (2013 base is adjusted only for changes in revenues from year to year and by major annexation and latecomers. o Removed additional shelter staff from the cost allocation model: County will fund additional $240,003 annually o Included licensing support for cities to generate license revenues and lower net costs with cities providing in -kind support o Provide County financial contribution to higher use cities over 3 year contract term to provide cost stability o Reduced control districts from 4 to 3 by collapsing two south districts into one in response to Auburn indicating it will leave the system Service levels: o No shelter capital upgrades included in the cost model for the 3 year period o High quality shelter service levels retained, costs decreased o Control service levels maintained and coverage extended to at least one weekend day o Licensing service levels retained, costs decreased System Revenues: Joint commitment to aggressively explore variety of specific mechanisms to increase system revenues and achieve system stability by end of 3 years Northern PAWS cities assumed to continue to purchase shelter services from PAWS 4 May 16, 2012 118 cc im, z 51 2 J; Q° C-4 P 2 1 A T 5 S N 10 v 2 2 2 O IS c, -5 W Z 4 0 'a 2 -m o 2 s 0 w N Zx; ,T C I t m a a .R 2 CL Ot Q) m F C4 N U) a I 4 V -?t 2 6 cri VI o m o ;7, m ci S o 04 l o 1 12 `p 0 Lj- 0) al 1 (D lool �2 �2 11 U E -6 V LIL I o LL 0 E z Z Z r4 0 LL 0 2 22 2 L) z ooz o ozz o 009 m m im, f Z k «j! 2 \f E!! �ma= •5 $7!{ %a }a! ±4 k) }k\\ \k §k\ 5 7\t! }ie }k t f #$i \(j c I a v a 0 0 M c O N O a a a o 0 ,o o sza c C3 o 't3 0 0 0 t�OJ C-4 c co O z3 O o O u O 0 o b CL o -o a L O O S N U o 4 a a, 0 3 o o a I O co da u O c 3 o y a Q v, CO 4- U U ti3 y" t4 63 N y ZS v1 to L kn o a c a d M tt7A L is w QJ u OD v O �qp C d O O 41 r+ c co O a a Ln I IO L O S n O O L Q a o O t rl O Q y 0 Q c o i p s c �1 Q s� p C* r p O cu O O tS y O N V O L Io Q. o 3 q d a m an 0 41 c I a v a 0 0 M c O N O a a a o 0 ,o o sza c C3 o 't3 0 0 0 t�OJ C-4 c co O z3 O o O u O 0 o b CL o -o a L O O S N U o N G u 0 U d Q W 3 0 co �7 Qi iJ1 Uj W r, CL- 1 e-i N 0 c�a G C 4 a, 0 3 o o a I y a Q v, U U ti3 y" t4 63 N y ZS v1 to L kn N d tt7A QJ 1G f ir, v O d p O 41 r+ c 0 a a Ln I IO L O S n O O L N o O t rl O Q y 0 Q c o p s c �1 Q s� p C* r p O cu O O tS y O N V 4.+ O L o 3 q d a O a 0 41 N O B u "O C O vi 0) d v0 a C B un Q a v, is d o� ,n C a-+ O O CL o o a ;A N G u 0 U d Q W 3 0 co �7 Qi iJ1 Uj W r, CL- 1 e-i N 0 c�a G C N I L W L L- 0 uj V) c `n c c o X CL 4 a C v; u "Z o 3 O u c a v a V) O QJ c is u c O VI M "a vi u u O a L 1 O 7 L. I •F, S kA kn kA a a c B rs n 14- cv Y c O C u O C O 44 a Q v 41 N a a CA) a w o o a u c 4 a cs a cv o u o c m L o CL C p v p v-. 'a O -0 c w a '4 v_ 1 o u p n� u cu E a a o L 0 p o V) CIA 41 c u 3 Q% T C d7 t3 O o p �1 v a o CU c s: o a o g- a of c o M o) a, v u u a u v a c o c' g c a t MD C v= o t o, O a '4. O a t c u u s Sri asp o c L v a y v, a, O cv W c E w a M a '3 m c '3 a o 0 0 a, V) p a O a 4-, E E° v a v o o a Q a u, c O c o u i a s O a Q N a J O a O Gi u O N 4; a L2 C O t a g N N a-+ C 'a c o O, c c� p o a a ..t a a 3 Un d N O c� O N u k c a> u m� Im aC I P a z a 0 w e o� a u Z N Q6) 47 a u ZS a 0 CL c B C) c 3 3 U O r 0 v� N u 0 0 kD 7 0 L Q X O Q n N 0 N tD 7• G m 1� 0 C3 W O Y O Q T v cn 3 o c a qJ o O u O N V a Q) O O C L ►r� as a o_ o n, a Q c a o CL S a o U w a v o T m a s a L ca w-, 34� Q T W g m v o a v M v o a o 4 o c L a m a o c r N O N u O O U D d Q. o v a Q C p O °c Q Q. v C O cu O a v u V1 u 41 c Ln O 0 a 0 m U a a y O a u -a 3 O CL 4- (V w a0i s o f° c a a CA� c o F 4 a ca 3 a V O a +r c N a) O c is 3 rn c sz w n� a O -0 v 4- v� cu F m O y p L a u :3 v 'r c c t w a v E I u, a 3 m a w to `Q Qj M 0 z r p O O O 3 m a� c ti� a, c c O o a i o t n� v 3 o W v o w a o LL is z v) CL fun w O 0 E M N O n Ln a a) -0 Q o (V W o a -a o W o O o x Q. E v V V W U T a) a) O N 0 N tD 7• G m 1� N 0 N a v 194 a v o o k a w o o v u v z3 c a 3 a CL w N O u1 w 3 a' a ti Q -L t a c s<1 NQ6) o v u a o W a r I L m v 4-., L O E u a ti h cn o c c_ o 3 is c v° a v a o c o. s O o kn o a 1r a C a cm w w t o V) C C3 a V, o o v E v N L w 3 ,G v H Lri O a 5. o ti CA c p v 0 o a oz 0 s c r+ o I ca a' C3 0 u v w c C.3 v v c o v o'o a 1 o w 'Q tin w v w c M i v Q) Q n O H O Qj o v a o 4-1 F- Qj iC TS C E O 4.1 a N e�y a a� a w p w a p U u L N N a) O= 4-0 C v N a a o c 'v a 4- o a au o u w w ti r, o w v w a o W 4-1 G u L w 0 t O fC a u v O 4 v° 4� U Z n 4. Qj L v) w C O a 4 Y Q O C 01 a W O u m w a Ln OC L Vf C G Ln v 'v) O v c a o `v 0 Q N Q O N 0 N a v 194 �T G N v a Q v of O Q .3 i L 3 u O o� zs a V LM N t OD n O L t r M O N O w- a 47 d 4 V O L d C v d LA Q d p r .V r•1 QJ C v t iZ w L is o n, a a, �A v m 4- a a w C) 'a Ln U p L1 u m p s]. q v a s a a O Q `r C, W N a _Z3 rz i Q 4 L3 m t 41 a v 4- a U O L O i N N O v) O 'a vn v a u a C) 4 O 7+ qxj O p 5` L O N CL is E w fl. u N N q o w cL c z N O N C p= u V N N x 3 a ti' O a1 O p U C2 L O to Q1 Ltl V o O. q VI W O a N U a O l+? N N O L 3 lt1 a O 7 �n p to 4] 4 N p u p v, s 'Cs n, tZ oi t3 L a w a u a a u W a w Cu a a s w a a a ti o f E w a o a o a V w C3 s3 v, a a a c X_ a O 07 ti %n a C3) Li rm-1 N O LS t1 V m o� p rN V) u w a 0 u a1 N q csi U p s t3 a L C p N o CL cl) 3 y v a c a v o QJ U U U 3 a p O V i O q p in V X N N dJ L U N O L u m CU txD O C a1 7 N C v N G 0 0 In m an c a� w C T 0 u rr L O C d O- a) u 0 V N N V-4 O N G Ln t o� v a a c o r Q L LZ C O -0 u V o i o V tm c 4 g QJ w a o V N c 41 rn w t N o v 3 i o rs d N CL J G Q� O Q n. N O a v 44 V N u c o`� x v a a t w C3 a 4� o s O vi v u vi o m p CL CL E c o a CL c VI to 0 1 p -p CL O 0. N O v o a_ O s S= N O V w o� O C L3 O p C+ d Q O N$ �II O v) O N d Op Q CL C ZS CL CM N o VA a) m o c N 7 w fl- s w w v II Q a U 3 a LS1 Q O cL d N O v L> v', a n, O C a� CO a>i (3) c f�6 3 a Q6 o w CC p u L 7 O O OA 0 C C 2 V w 00 4 �f0 lD Nj �t G Q N O C m v N a. d -C3 N N f�6 y p :t:! O o o O N 0 G 0 16 wi wi -4 s on C 0 W U. 0 0 7 1 0 a 0 a. 4 1 O A. I 's I 0 C 0 .3 i l� Attachment D Benefits of a Regional Animal Services System Effective and Efficient Service Provides a consistent level of service, common regulatory approach, and humane animal care across the region. Allows local police agencies to focus on traditional law enforcement instead of civil animal offenses (barking, off leash, unlicensed animals). Builds economies of scale to provide a full range of services, making it less expensive to develop operations, training, licensing and care programs than it would be for cities to duplicate services at the local level. Provides a low -cost spay and neuter program which is key to reducing the population of homeless animals and thus reducing the costs of the system over time. Reduces the demand on individual jurisdictions to respond to communications from the media, advocacy groups and other interested parties (public disclosure requests). Use of volunteers and partnerships with private animal welfare groups increases humane animal treatment with minimal public cost: In 2011, volunteers contributed over 60,000 hours of support to the County animal services system, equivalent to 30 full time employees. Takes advantage of current technology offices can access calls and database in the field; customers receive email notices prior to mailed renewal notices; citizens can locate lost pets online or by phone; cities get detailed, monthly reports on level and types of activity in their jurisdiction. King County Board of Appeals hears appeals to civil offenses thus centralizing the adjudication to a forum that is familiar with the issues. Customer Service Provides a single access point for residents searching for a lost pet or seeking animal control help. Provides one single point of contact for citizen complaints. Pet Adoption Center is open and provides services 7 days a week. A regional, uniform pet licensing program that is simpler for the public to access and understand, with a broad range of accompanying services to encourage licensing; marketing, partnering with third parties to encourage license sales, and database management. Online licensing sales increase the ease of compliance for pet owners. Public Health and Safety Provides the ability to identify and track rabies and other public health issues related to animals on a regional basis. Reduces public health threats through routine vaccination of animals. Provides capacity to handle unusual and multi jurisdictional events involving animals that often require specialized staff, such as: horse cruelty, animal hoarding, loose livestock, dog- fighting, May 16, 2012 129 Attachment D animal necropsies and quarantine, holding of animals as evidence in criminal cases and retrieval of dead animals. Provides consistent and knowledgeable services to over 4800 callers per year. Calls are dispatched on a prioritized basis. Emergency response services are available 24 hours per day. Animal Welfare Reduces pressure on non profit shelters through capacity at public shelter. Non profit animal welfare groups contribute by accepting transfers of publicly sheltered animals for care and adoption. Animals find new homes and are not euthanized for capacity. Euthanasia rates have been reduced. Engages citizens through foster homes and other volunteer programs (on -site and adoption events). Provides regional response to animal cruelty cases. Provides regional preparedness planning and coordination for emergency and disaster response. Provides regional capacity for seasonal events (kitten season). Avoids competition across jurisdictions for sheltering space and comparisons across jurisdictions on animal welfare outcome statistics. Benefit fund allows private donors to contribute to the heroic care of animals —these services are not publicly funded and are not usually available in publicly funded animal service programs. May 16, 2012 2 WE LLI 4- E Al C%4 0 s Tc C z 04 C D o C() CL sat U') 8 c) v C: 04 0 A CL 0 ry C IL tJ JL C:l CN 9 C%4 0 s Tc C z 04 C D o C() CL sat U') 8 c) v C: 04 0 A CL 0 ry C IL tJ JL 131 r 131 132 Attachment: F RASKC ILA Revenue Workplan Revenue Sustainability All partners in RASKC share the goal of creating revenue sustainability for the regional system. Revenues from license sales have historically provided less than 50% of the funding for the system. The majority of additional funding under the current interlocal agreement is provided by the jurisdictions. The items listed below reflect the partners current thinking of items that could increase revenues for the RASKC model and should be implemented or further evaluated. New ideas may emerge and /or items on the list may be removed if determined not cost efficient or effective. The County will take the lead on the items and work in conjunction with the Joint City County Committee. Near term Potentially Implementable in 2012 Create licensing tool -box for cities Increase canvassing effort Improve the RASKC website and promote linkages to it from city websites Increase public service announcements, media spotlight opportunities Utilize e-mail to reach out to supporters Consider implementing a second penalty -free licensing period Medium Term Potentially Implementable in 2012 -2015 Review /Analyze Licensing fee pricing structure and amount Improve options for making donations through the licensing program Investigate creation of entrepreneurial options with pet stores to provide discounts on pet items to people with licenses Targeted partnerships with private sector businesses that provide high volume license sales (e.g. license sales in exchange for a share of the license fee) Create 501(c)3 for donations and improve efforts to secure donations Evaluate feasibility of regional levy to support all, or components of the system Evaluate feasibility of new legislative authority to levy a regional sales tax on pet related items May 16, 2012 133 134 Attachment G Regional Animal Services of King County Interlocal Agreement Negotiation Joint Work Group Cities representatives City of SeaTac, James Graddon City of Kirkland, Lorrie McKay City of Issaquah, Ross Hoover City of Lake Forest Park, Cheryl Niclai City of Newcastle, Melinda Irvine City of Kenmore, Nancy Ousley City of Woodinville, Sydney Jackson City of Lake Forest Park, Dennis Peterson City of SeaTac, Annette Louie City of Redmond, Nina Rivkin City of Mercer Island, Dave Jokinen City of Bellevue, Sheida Sahandy City of Enumclaw, Michael Thomas City of Kent, Jeff Watling City of Covington, Derek Matheson City of Sammamish, Mike Sauerwein City of Tukwila, Peggy McCarthy Snoqualmie Countv representatives Diane Carlson, Executive Office Sean Bouffiou, Records and Licensing Services Division Norm Alberg, Interim Director, Records Yiling Wong, Office of Performance and Licensing Services Division Strategy Budget Eric Swansen, Records and Licensing Services Division —Shelter Operations Neutral facilitator, Karen Reed Cities represented in Interlocal Agreement District 200 District 220 District 500 Carnation Beaux Arts Covington Duvall Bellevue Black Diamond Kenmore Clyde Hill Enumclaw Kirkland Issaquah Kent Lake Forest Park Mercer Island Maple valley Redmond Newcastle SeaTac Sammamish North Bend Tukwila Shoreline Snoqualmie Woodinville Yarrow Point May 16, 2012 135 lsH." 1 mo w 0 w I 137 0 N IM T rz c) C: m MOM W W V) 0 ,ate 0 N IM L U (J J Q t 7Z E .c i✓ J V Q Q J p C]1 4-j to O (1) (3) V�1 4-J a L Yi 4-J W E U E W V/ V f W 0 N IM ,At, W, 0 139 ISO 2% E 4--J Ln C- 0 E 4-J.— V) O)o 0 4--J 0 t4- 04— 0 m 1 0 4w Oo 1 V 91 r\j :3 0 E Ln 0 L- n 0 4--J 4- C rlj 0 0 u %W 4--J cn rz m 1 0 4w Oo 1 V 91 r\j :3 0 Ln 0 C) n Ln M rlj (V u 0 4- (Z C u 0 E u rn u 0 E 0) ro cn 4--J 0.0 O:t E 0 0-0 u c r o 0 Ln C V) 4- C -1 o u c E V) Ln 4-J 4-J E o 0 C- V) Ln u 0 0 V) m 1 0 w 0 r"i rd :E Mrs, Oo C: tl"1 V1 w 0 r"i rd :E Mrs, C 0 u rn E 0 00 0.0 O:t E 0 C) C) 0 u C r o C V) C -1 c E V) Ln 2!- 0 C- V) Ln u 0 0 V) 4-J 0 0 w 0 r"i rd :E Mrs, t kk o w R i t 0 un t Ln r O N 0 O Ln 4-J O u rz m V D rz V V r j 1 rz W Ln Ln Ln tn i 0 0 Ln ZD kA cn Ln i un 0 I&I w 0 N lO rtS 141 w 0 N r� "m i oll 1 r i� t i 0 „Jrv, t i 143 R -0 (3) 4-j X 0) (3) (3) (A E E 00 4-J CD 4--J V) V) 0- L 4- u rz 4--J L- C 0 U 4- 0 4- O:E 0 V) U -1 _0 V) G) 0 C: 0 a) :D c E 4--d 4-1 0 r V) V) V) 4- 00 N Ln CU 4- Q) un O _0 rd Q 4- C- 73 5 E E 4--J '-0 L4- rz 0 0- 4-d 4- 0 4-1 V) 0 V) c fV 0 0 V E v) N O C: 0 0 Z 4 V) I- 0 E L- V) 0 0) 4-.� C V) QS V) 0 L- M 0 4- 0 V) 0 C 0 C: 0 L- 0 n 0 (V 0 0 ME U L- V) a) V) cz C: C.- 0 :3 Ln 0 U ®4- V) 0 V) 0 A WN CD IT rl. NO a. ort, nosc= m -W ml 4p ON m C7 0 V; (3) 5 0 O 00 1- 0 I LI) (3) 4-J 0 (3) Ln Wo >-4-d V) 4--J C Lr) N (3) 42'If u I V) 4-J V) 0 u _0 c Q) 0 0 _0 4--J 00 (3) ro 0 X 0 rz O 0 E o o o 4-d m 4--J U CD ro 0 rlj m u b ,o 4-.J V) V; V) Ln Ln 00 w IT 9, V) 0 _0 4--J 0 4--J 0 u E 4-.J V) V; V) Ln E r Ln 4-J L4- 4— U f CS w 0- t4- w IT 9, Q) V) V) C- 0 (3) C 0 0 4- V) 4--J I- un L- 4-J w V) c 0 4-J C-) 0 0 4-J 0 a) r) k4- 4-J cy) 6) 2- V) _0 C V) C 0 C Ln Ln 4--J Ln c- 4 4 4 4 4 4 0 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4-J Ln V) Ln C 4 4 4 E 4- 0 -J 4EJ 0 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 O IT F. 4 4 Fol 4- 4 (3 4-j V) 0 L) 4-J L- V) =3 0 4-J V) U (3) 0 L- 4--J 0 (3) L- L) 4-J L- C V) un C t4- V) 0 0 (3) 0 V) rl V) U :3 V) (3) Lf) L- 4--J rl• u 0 7- C- 4--j o 4- (3) (3) L- C 4--J E 0 0 J"4 II 0 �o 0 IT YA V) 0 U V� 4-J 0 U L- 4-J V) u U E E v) u v u C Ln a) 4-j V) 0 L) 4-J L- V) =3 0 4-J V) U (3) 0 L- 4--J 0 (3) L- L) 4-J L- C V) un C t4- V) 0 0 (3) 0 V) rl V) U :3 V) (3) Lf) L- 4--J rl• u 0 7- C- 4--j o 4- (3) (3) L- C 4--J E 0 0 J"4 II 0 �o 0 IT YA W 0 N IT,: pjt d t `vj j 3tU1 L r91 a—J t Ln O rllj 4— L' z O N O Ln _0 V r y— 0 p y O V y V) C O N CL F N v O Q ml OR rd (j/ O U O u O- N S te. N N CU L O Al 4 o UO L- O Ol r— V) I CD N l9 k '.{�J L/) V) r iM rz rz N N a Ln U O Q C- >b O O O O M c� 00 U rd U u rz i �tY �3Y�Ui 1p�;♦C� T I V 1 Ln V pp Vyy T E -d O 0 i V) {may} if— y _O d-J l d v's �J 4-+ E L N O U W 0 N IT,: N O N IT Fe 07 0 0 4 4 4 4 4--d rZ N E a) a) V) a) 0 C: 4 1 Ln 4- 4--J 0 Ln 4-J E E E ry V) N M C 0 rIj 0 to M n E 4- 0 E a) 4--J Ln 4-✓ 0 U 0 ll Ln l N 0 4--d I 0* 4--J V) Ln Q) 4-J rz Ln (V 4--J Ln Ln 0 0 w Ows, r, T w 0 N l.0 151 152 Finance Safety Committee Minutes June 5, 2012 Pace 2 C. Tourism Promotion Area As information only, staff provided the Committee information regarding state law, which allows the formation of a tourism promotion area (TPA) that permits hoteliers, with 40 or more lodging units, the ability to charge up to $2 per hotel room per night specifically for tourism promotion. This new source of revenue would be used in conjunction with current lodging tax funding for tourism promotion services. Committee Members were complimentary of the information memo provided, stated that it provided a good introduction, and are generally supportive of the TPA idea. However, they stated there are many questions that need to be answered and feel that additional, specific information needs to be provided prior to sending this to full Council for discussion. Committee Chair Quinn reminded the group that it is the Committee's responsibility to ensure due diligence has been conducted, and whenever possible, move items forward with a recommendation. The Committee would like staff to return to Committee with additional information including: What does the City of Tukwila Administration recommend and why? Who should belong to this organization, and who runs it? How does the organization work? What legislative authority involved? What will be required from the City in order to administrate it? What is the timeline for implementation? What are the staffing requirements? Provide specific examples from other jurisdictions and identify the jurisdictions that would participate in this TPA. Many guests were in attendance at the meeting, so rather than delay additional discussion, Committee Chair Quinn asked those in attendance if there was any information they would like to share. Comments are summarized below. Charles Lee with Comfort Suites stated that he was not in favor of the TPA, and that, as a hotelier with over 60 rooms, he is concerned about the impact. Mike Schabbing with the Courtyard and as a member of the Tukwila Lodging Tax Advisory Board commented that outreach has been made with hotels since October, and about 75% of hotels would like to pursue this further. These hotels understand the importance and value in the charge. He also stated that this is a common practice throughout the area, including Pierce County, Spokane, and Seattle. Lynn Wallace with the Southwest King County Chamber of Commerce stated that the Chamber is in support of the TPA, noting that it will help southwest King County to be a player in the region. Ms. Wallace was working for the Best Western in Puyallup when Pierce County formed a TPA. She commented that once the fee was explained to patrons, no one objected to incurring the charge. Jeff Robinson, City of SeaTac Economic Development Manager, stated that the State of Washington is basically out of the tourism business; therefore, we have lost that ability to get the State to market on the hoteliers' behalf. Katherine Kertzman commented that this would be the first TPA in King County. RETURN TO FUTURE FINANCE SAFETY COMMITTEE WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. D. Interlocal Agreement: Animal Control Services Staff is seeking Council approval to enter into an Interlocal agreement with Regional Animal Services of King County (RASKC) effective 2013 -2015. The current agreement will expire on December 31, 2012, and due to notification from the City of Auburn that they will not be renewing, a new contract has been developed. 153 Finance Safety Committee Minutes June 5, 2012 Pape 3 The new agreement at minimum, will maintain, but more than likely, increase the current level of service provided by King County. The cost of this three year agreement is estimated not to exceed $225,000. The estimated annual cost for 2013 is less than actual costs for 2011. Annual increases will be limited to the rate of inflation plus the rate of population growth for the preceding year for the County. Highlights and services of the new contract include: Call center and animal control officers Sheltering provided 7 days per week, 365 days per year, open to public Operation and maintenance of unified licensing Consistency is service due to regional system and economy of scale Jurisdictional cost stability New revenues and revenue focus Staff reported that there are two optional additions to the interlocal agreement: an Enhanced Control Services Contract and a Licensing Support Contract; however, there is not a recommendation to pursue either of these options at this time. The options can be selected on a periodic basis at a later time if the City identifies a need for such. According to feedback received from the Police Department and the City Clerk's Office, the City has not recently received complaints regarding King County animal control services and /or responses. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO JUNE 11 COW FOR DISCUSSION. E. Ouarterly Update: Police Department As information only and per Committee request, staff gave a PowerPoint presentation on public safety activities and policing issues during the I quarter of 2012. The presentation included information on: crime statistics, strategic approaches for solving and mitigating problems, the police department vision, I` quarter goals and objectives and achieving such, staffing, equipment, budget, training, and the way ahead. See agenda packet for detailed PowerPoint slides. INFORMATION ONLY. F. Update: Financial Planning Model and Capital hnprovement Plan (CIP) Due to time, the Committee was unable to discuss this item, and requested it be moved to the next regularly scheduled Finance Safety Committee. In the meantime, Committee Member Robertson suggested Committee Members review the information provided in the agenda packet and contact Peggy McCarthy with any comments /suggestions. RETURN TO COMMITTEE. III. MISCELLANEOUS Meeting adjourned at 8:23 p.m. Next ineeting: Tuesday, June 19, 2012 5:15 p.m. Conference Room #3 Committee Chair Approval Minutes by KAM. Reviewed by DS. 154 CouNuLAGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials ITEM NO. Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor_'s repi f I ;omW'l review 06/11112 BG f{' 4.D. 06/18/12 BG ITEM INFORMATION STAFF SPONSOR: BOB GIBERSON I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 06/11/12 AGENDA I rLM TITLE Water and Sewer Comprehensive Plans Consultant Supplemental Agreement No. 2 with Carollo Engineers CATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing ❑Other Mt g Date 06111/12 Mtg Date 06/18/12 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date (SPONSOR Council Mayor HR DCD Finance .Fire IT P&R Police PW SPONSOR'S Carollo Engineers were hired as the consultant for the Water and Sewer Comprehensive SUMMARY Plans in 2010. Due to additional requirements on the Water Comprehensive Plan, Supplement No. 2 with Carollo is required to add to the scope of work. Additional water funds will come from the Interurban Water Reuse Project with $25,000.00 budgeted. Council is being asked to approve Supplement No. 2 with Carollo Engineers in the amount of $21,721.50. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 05/30/12 COMMITTEE CHAIR: DENNIS ROBERTSON RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONsoR /ADMIN. Public Works Department COMMI'I'ITE Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE RE-'QUIRE-11) AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $21,721.50 $328,000.00 $0.00 Fund Source: 401 WATER (PGS 86 &90, 2012 CIP) Comments: MTG. DATE J RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 06/11/12 06/18/12 MTG. DATE 06/11/12 06/18/12 ATTACHMENTS Informational Memorandum dated 05/25/12 Carollo Engineers' Supplement No. 2 to Contract 10 -055 Minutes from the Utilities Committee meeting of 5/30/12 155 W1 1 11 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Haggerton Utilities Committee FROM: Bob Glberson, Public Works Director 10 BY: Mike Cusick, Senior Engineer DATE: May 25, 2012 SUBJECT: Water and Sewer Comprehensive Plans Project No. 91040101, Contract No. 10 -055 Supplement No. 2 ISSUE Approve Supplement No. 2 to Contract No. 10 -055 with Carollo Engineers for the Water /Sewer Comprehensive Plan. BACKGROUND The Departments of Health and Ecology require the City of Tukwila to update the Water and Sewer Comprehensive Plans every six years. In 2010, the City contracted with Carollo Engineers to update the Water and Sewer Comprehensive Plans. DISCUSSION Carollo Engineers completed the work draft of Chapter Two, "Demographic Analysis and Demand Projections," for the Comprehensive Plan in October 2010 using current population data. In November 2010, DCD requested that the Public Works department rerun the population study model with 4,800 new housing units and 15,500 net new jobs by the year 2031. In the 2005 water model, most areas of the City had more than adequate fire flows in excess of 4,500 gpm. In May 2011, the Tukwila Fire Marshal requested that the fire flows in the Commercial Business District (CBD) be increased from 6,000 gpm to 8,000 gpm. The increased fire flows resulted in most of the CBD not having adequate fire flows and would require costly upgrades to existing water lines. In April 2012, the Fire Marshal revised the required fire flows in all areas of the CBD except north of Strander Blvd to 6,000 gpm. The Consultants scope of work was to prepare a sewer system map book for the Public Works field crews to carry in their vehicles. The task went over budget due to City staff finding multiple discrepancies in the existing sewer pipe maps. FINANCIAL IMPACT Supplement No. 2 will increase the Consultant's scope of work for Task 300 Planning Considerations for $5,721.50, Task 700 Distribution System Analysis and Task 900 Capital Improvement Program for $10,000, and Task 060 Hydraulic Model and Mapping for $6,000, for a total Supplement of $21,721.50. Funding for the additional work will come from the Interurban Water Reuse Project, page 86, 2012 CIP, EXPENDITURES Fundinq Budget Original contract $291,000.00 Water Comp Plan 160,000.00 Supplement No. 1 12,662.00 Sewer Comp Plan 143,000.00 Supplement No. 2 21,721.50 Interurban Water Reuse 25.000.00 Total $325,383.50 $328,000.00 RECOMMENDATION Council is being asked to approve Supplemental Agreement No. 2 to Contract No. 10 -055 with Carollo Engineers in the amount of $21,721.50 and consider this item at the June 11, 2012 Committee of the Whole meeting and subsequent June 18, 2012 Regular Council meeting. Attachment: Supplemental Agreement No. 2 W:\PW Eng \PROJECTS\A- WT Projects \Water Comprehensive Plan Water (91040101) \InfoMemo Water Comp Plan Sup #2 052512- sb.doc 157 158 SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NUMBER 2 To CONSULTANT AGREEMENT NUMBER 10 -055 C\D) THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT is entered into between the City of Tukwila, Washington, herein-after referred to as "the City and Carollo Engineers Washington, P.C., hereinafter referred to as "the Consultant in consideration of the mutual benefits, terms, and conditions hereinafter specified. The City desires to supplement the agreement entered into with the Consultant and executed on, May 19, 2010, and identified as Agreement No. 10 -055. All provisions in the basic agreement remain in effect except as expressly modified by this supplement. The changes to the agreement are described as follows: 1. Scope of Services, for Supplemental Agreement #2 to the Comprehensive Sewer and Water Plans (Plans) for the City of Tukwila. The purpose of this supplement is to add: a. $5,721.50 for Task 300 Planning Considerations Section 304 Population. The Consultant to rerun population growth model using revised data from the PSRC for the year 2010. b. $10,000.00 for Task 700 Distribution System Analysis and Task 900 Capital .Improvement Plan. The Consultant to reanalyze the water system in the CBD south of Strander Boulevard for a reduced fire flow of 6,000 gpm and required Capital Improvement Program. c. $6,000.00 for Task 060 Hydraulic Modeling and Mapping of the Sanitary Sewer System. The Consultant is to reconcile the existing pipe data with current piping inventory. 2. Deliverables a. Revised Chapter 2 of the Comprehensive Plan with increased population numbers based on November 2010 PSRC data. b. Revised Chapter ,6 of the Comprehensive Plan "Distribution System Analysis" for the CBD south of Strander Boulevard. c. Revised Chapter 8 of the Comprehensive Plan "Capital Improvement Plan" for the CBD south of Strander Boulevard. d. Revise sanitary sewer map books. 3. Time for Performance, is amended to change the number of calendar days for completion of the work to read an additional 90 days for a total of 980 days. (W PW [ng/Olher/ Projects /A- WT /10 -WT01 /Supplemental Agreement 2 earollo 051512.doc) 159 4. Payment, shall be amended as follows: Payment for the work provided by the Consultant as part of this supplement shall be made for an additional $21,721.50. The total amount for the Consultant for this contact shall not exceed $325,383.50 without express written modification of the Agreement signed by the City. DATED this day of CITY OF TUKWILA Jim Haggerton, Mayor (W.PW Eng/ Other /ProjectslA- WT /10 -WTO1 /Supplemental Agreement 2 carollo 051512 do,) 7 2012. CAROLLO ENGINEERS WASHINGTON, P.C. -4-Irm- V'D-WW"^"jr' Lara Kammereck, Associate Vice President 160 UTILITIES COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes Citv of Tukwila Utilities Committee May 30, 2012 5: 00 p.m. —Conference Room I *Wednesday Due to Holiday PRESENT Councilmembers: Dennis Robertson, Chair; Joe Duffie and Kate Kruller Staff: Bob Giberson, Frank Iriarte, Robin Tischmak, Mike Cusick, Mike Ronda, and Gail Labanara CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:04 p.m. L PRESENTATIONS No presentations. II. BUSINESS AGENDA A. Proiect Completion and Acceptance: Interurban Avenue South Gravitv Sewer Staff is seeking Council approval for project completion, closeout and release of retainage to R. L. Alia Construction of Renton in the amount of $664,401.62 for the construction of the Interurban Avenue South Gravity Sewer Project. This project replaced a failing sewer lift station with a gravity feed sewer line. Ten (10) change orders in the amount of $28,580.38 were issued during this project, but were offset by under runs. The project was completed under budget by approximately $17,000 without using the contingency. Photos from the project were presented to the Committee in order to understand the need for the changes orders. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO JUNE 4 CONSENT AGENDA. B. Water and Sewer Comprehensive Plans: Consultant Supplement No. 2 with Carolla Engineers Staff is seeking Council approval for Supplement No. 2 with Carollo Engineers in the amount of $21,721.50 for updates relative to the 2010 Water and Sewer Comprehensive Plans, specifically Tasks 300, 700, 900 and 060 of the Water Comprehensive Plan. The consultant's scope of work needs to be increased due to multiple discrepancies in existing sewer pipe maps; over estimation of the multi family population results in the Commercial Business District, and changes to the fire flow requirements. Also part of the Water Comprehensive Plan is that the Department of Health has notified us of their concern with the size of our water storage capacity. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO JUNE 11 COW FOR DISCUSSION. C. Educational ODDortunity: CIP 102 Per the request of Committee Chair Robertson (see Utilities Committee minutes dated 02/28/12), staff utilized extra time at the Committee meeting to review the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and accompanying Attachments D, E and F, including the rate matrix. Committee Members will find this information useful when utility rate increases are brought to Committee later this year. INFORMATION ONLY. III. MISCELLANEOUS Meeting adjourned at 6:20 p.m. Next meeting: Next meeting: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 5:00 p.m. Conf. Room No. 1. Committee Chair Approval Minutes by Reviewed by KAM. 161 162 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS CAS NUMB] AGENDA ITEMTPFLE Initials ITEM NO. Meetinu Date Prepared b l Mayor's rev f w n 7 review 06/11/12 I BG-, I Co 0. 1 06/18/12 I BG Y/ I `J 4. E. ITEM INFORMATION STAFF SPONSOR: BOB GIBERSON ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 6/11/12 Resolution adopting the Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program 2013 2018 CATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other Mtg Date 06/11/12 Mtg Date Mtg Date 06/18/12 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mt Date 06118112 Mt g Date (SPONSOR Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P &R Police PW SPONSOR'S The Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is required by RCW to be updated SUMMARY annually. The TIP is primarily a finanical planning document for projects competing for grants. A Public Hearing is scheduled on June 18, 2012 for the 2013 2018 TIP. After the Public Hearing, the TIP is adopted by resolution and is then incorporated into the Regional and State TIPs. RI_vIEW1�_ BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 6/04/12 COMMITTEE CHAIR: ALLAN EKBERG RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR/ADMIN. Public Works COMMIT °FEE Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRI�D AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Fund Source: Comments: I MTG.DATEI RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 6/11/12 6/18/12 MTG. DATE I ATTACHMENTS 6/11/12 Informational Memorandum dated 06/01/12 Draft Resolution Draft 2013 2018 TIP Spreadsheets Current Adopted 2012 2017 TIP Minutes from the Transportation Committee meeting of 06/04/12 6/18/12 163 164 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: BY: DATE: SUBJECT Mayor Haggerton Transportation Committee Bob Giberson, Public Works Director Cyndy Knighton, Senior Engineer June 1, 2012 Resolution for Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program (2013 2018) ISSUE Resolution to adopt the annual update of the Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for 2013 2018. BACKGROUND The TIP is updated annually as required by the Revised Code of Washington (RCW). The TIP is adopted by resolution after a public hearing at the local agency level and incorporated into the regional and state TIPs, The TIP is primarily a financial planning document for projects competing for grants. Any project submitted for Federal grant funding must be included in the local, regional and state adopted TIP's. The TIP is a rolling plan showing various funding sources: grants, developer, and local funds. Projects "roll" as funds or stages occur (design report, final design, and construction). Tukwila's TIP and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) list many of the same transportation- related projects. The TIP lists only those transportation- related projects planned within the next six years that are deemed regionally significant. The City's CIP lists transportation projects planned in the next six years and beyond, as well as water, sewer, surface water, and capital facilities. The TIP is required to be adopted by June 30 on an annual basis, while the CIP is prepared during Summer /Fall, in conjunction with the City's budget preparation. Differences between the two may be due to priority changes, funding availability changes, or other factors that normally occur during the time between adoptions of each document. ACTION TAKEN The attached spreadsheet is the "Draft" 2013 2018 TIP and was created by modifying the 2012 2017 TIP to add or remove projects, adjust project costs, and reprioritize the list of projects. Added: Cascade View Safe Routes to School (new Residential Street CIP page) Thorndyke Safe Routes to School (new Residential Street CIP page) Tukwila MIC "Street Smart" Non Motorized Project RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to approve the resolution for the 2013 2018 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program and consider this item at the June 11, 2012 Committee of the Whole and subsequent June 18, 2012 Regular Meeting with a Public Hearing. Attachments: Resolution 2013 2018 "Draft" Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Spreadsheet Current Adopted 2012 2017 TIP W:\PW Eng \PROJECTS\A- RW RS Projects \TIP \Info Memo TIP 2013 sb.docx 165 166 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING A SIX -YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (2013- 2018), AND DIRECTING THE SAME TO BE FILED WITH THE STATE SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT BOARD. WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of RCW Chapters 35.77 and 47.26 as amended, the City Council of the City of 'Tukwila has previously adopted a Transportation Improvement Program and thereafter periodically modified said Transportation Improvement Program by resolution; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the work accomplished under said program, determined current and future City street and arterial needs and, based upon these findings, has prepared a Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program for the ensuing six calendar years (2013 2018); and WHEREAS, on June 18, 2012, a public hearing was held regarding the City's Six Year Transportation Improvement Program; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Program Adopted. A six -year Transportation Improvement Program for the calendar years 2013 -2018 is hereby adopted. Section: 2. Filing of Program, The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file a copy of this resolution, together with the exhibit attached hereto, with the Secretary of Transportation and the Transportation Improvement Board of the State of Washington. W: \Word Processing City \Resolutions \TIP 2013 -2018 5 -30 -12 CK:bjs Page 1 of 2 167 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of 2012. ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Verna Seal, Council President APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Resolution Number: Shelley M. Kerslake, City Attorney Exhibit: City of Tukwila Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program from 2013 to 2018 W:1Word Processing- City\ResolutionsUIP 2013 -2018 5 -30 -12 CK:bjs Page 2 of 2 O M I- 0 0 0 0 0 O (O O O O O N O V' 0 0 0 (O 0 0 LO (O O (O O N O O N O (O M 0 M O co 0 O O O I- M O V M O (O O O Il- I` M O V O 00 1, M N (D 'Cl M (o M (D N M 0 O N cc (0 00 r' 0 (O o0 :tf O N N r- O N U a coo 00 0 t- aOOO(oo O r N I- O (0 O O (O O O O O Cl) Il- V I M V O V N (O (O 0 I- O V 00 N U M (fl 00 fn a) r O W (n N U c Lo LO LO O (O O N O M O LC) O ti C Q d I- LO N N M� M N (O r M O O N 0 r O 0 r N r Z N Z m v o LD m F o o (n m m U) O O o o o O C 70 o L m ro tl LO M N 0 0 0 I O O O P- M O O O M O q N O O N O O (O M (fl N I` O O n _J I- 'T 0 M O M (O (O O N N O (O O V M O O O O I� M I- •M O d' M le V M (O N M N M M M N N O f� O Lo (O 1- O O M r a CO 0 O M V V M V N a) CN r C L 0 z O (o O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (O O O O O O 4- N O O O O O (O O O O N O O CO O M M O V M O O O O I- Cl) M r T (O (D N M M M V N M r- N Cl) N O O (O (O O (fl O -p r M M (0 O O N N U) /z N \v cn a U 0000 '000000'0000000000000000000000 LO N p IN M M n O r N CO co CV O r O C N C O J w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O M r i V 1 (n Il- CO 7 w N M ro O r r E L C C N C a) (n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V' O O O O O M O O O O O L r M <t tD (n T (n I` M ro U N (O O p c a) U N C) C O D U 2 O Q tO O (o (0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 9 a) U N V O 0 0 0 (O O (O O 00 0 .ro M LL m r O r O r N j 7 a) 0@ N o 0 m� a Cf (n- av (O M (o (0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O M O O O O Cl M O 0 0 0 (o O N (O O O 00 (1) M N V V V I-- co U Cl) (6 p C/) C C M U) Q' U cn U U CD p ro p m N N c0 U> c c U) U Q Q 9 d 6 a) Y Q c D D U z ca a m (n co CO (O O M V O M M N N (O M 0 M N M 'q O (O f� (O U C C_ 7 LL 0 r' N r N (O N N CO M N N V' M V co M M N M Cl) N N M 3 (n O Y N N Y Y N a z U F- co a) ro m m a O N p (n C> E C Y O a N CA 'co: a O p O a co U) U m 0 O a C m N H (if N O ro U C- d F- (n Q) E_ U N 0 W Q o s o m a) m ro m o W to m�� (a CO 10 C) o L m E U o_ U a a i a N 2 S 00 Y o o U C Y m (n m o c Q U z m (n N w CO co p of d c YQ n(nd pj� a (o o(n J O Of d 2 n U) (n E U) p O 6 Q v a) LL Y m C 0 LL N M 0'm� oQ oCw c U E a cY c E (n(fl Ed In c(n F- p m 11J FV a) U 2' m d V U U ro p CO a) d M 7 CO C L r U) N (fl O O W W �p Lo M J C N C a) Co T Q� r tF cO (n Y C v O a) C C Z U) LL (V T" a> c (a co O CD D ro 0> m a) n a) a> a) (n c m N O �w��- N�� Oo �(nHCn O O'c ca 2!U) co w Oo N wan_a 0> p >_c06<Of °o �(�n�CO��Q cammUAA= o U ro ro Y a ro p LL O a� �mOQ- mm�a(n(ns(ntl� >,U)0 ro co m m ca ��S> U U LU a/ a p p o n n .c U a> E a of m q M O I-- o m E 0 3 3 3 3 3 Y v� O O of a a a c c a> p n E a� ro c m r U s 6 S� ro ro 0 Q Q Q m U W C 7 z z 0 0 w w 0 0 In H H H U M 0 (V d O N M V (O M M 0 0 N M V (O (D I` M 0 0 N (ry N M V (o CO I� M 0 r N N N N N N N N N N M M Cl) O N 1 C.9 170 a N 0 U. 1+. 0 0 y S.� 0 N ti. W rm 1 Am endme nkl 1 v 1, V 3 O z �o A d o pted' Nearing d v a d� Q [L to 1 o o 1 L 1 1 N O O O 1 0 y C 1 3 1 1 I 9 1 MI N LL N !O 0 Y O U r 9 1 N 4 1 1 LL o U Y 0 O d t4 G Y p O U N RW�d Z o I n I E n vironm entalTyPe y h I N O jotal Length .LL o Y Utility Codes U o o a TYP o 1mP {OVelpent u. Resolution No' N= d W O 1 Am endme nkl 1 v 1, V 3 O z �o A d o pted' Nearing d v a d� Q [L to 1 o o 1 L 1 1 N O O O 1 0 y C 1 3 1 1 I 9 1 MI N LL N !O 0 Y O U r 9 1 N 4 1 1 LL o U Y 0 O d t4 G Y p O U N LM N trr O C N io O C� �U3 N= d W O IS1 0 ul n- m r m O o V m n N Number Priority r 7 o d ctional t D Fun a u o Class LM N trr O C N io O C� E 0 0 RW Requiredl Z r c) Environmental Typel N w U 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O o 0 0 0 0 rn a M c Total Length 0 ro G) N E E Utility Codes O 0 0 o 0 0 Q LL Improvement Typela c 0 N ci N r N O r /L/-� CL E C 7 LL Resolution No. U O O i� o 0 77 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 {J m Q.. Amendment N u N 06 L w N L L Adopted 0 0 0 m v m O O U 9 Z Hearing C LL L V V/ A 0 0 N M F- o U) u Q 0 0 0 0 0 rri 2 o 0 (n N 'O LL ro d d 7 M O� C LL m 0 c ro o U 0 o LLl 0 0 N N a E E d C LL m o a v v c E ro C m LL N N U C N O O O O O C 0 0 0 0 w N N N o d N 'E 0 m m s E vii ro z„ a c 2 a d ors Z°'mvoi w w w c� O to N (0 U aao�m d d m �E y i3 z o o d'o `m rn� w r d w z a U R m aao:ma` F U QUOuiLL Q Q O m Y a Priority Number o N I w t a z v c a c o K rn w v) a d Q U 0 v N m a Functional co c n Class LL w N c c6 (1 �i CD N m C N 0 0 N 172 W 0 N O 0 LL M y N O 13. IV r Y r •O Q. r w W Y 1 RN Required Z Environm 7ype v P 0 Total Length N n- 0 utility Codes U 3 r ImprovementType o Resolution No. y O Z Amendmen u p d N r Adopted }learin9 O N 2 m N m U c N r Y d Y O c o q U O f v n� 3 E Z m 6 d orc z6 °�d 0 u' 0 UZop u Q Li uj Priority Numher Functional class` N U o. d a w G u co O a 7 N lj) O c ai A O C, O O P O m 0 Y o I O O, c7 N 9 LL V O J o P o G 7 w R N O P m U G m v c r b N c m 0 4 m O LL C O N N V O F- P ga v v c G O 3 11- E ao v N C LL O pi _T v p o U N T y a C rn Q rn N r ornw a 0. N rn L U Y Z a O Functional class` N U o. d a w G u co O a 7 N lj) O c ai A O C, O a N C i O 41 L- y O L O K R W R o 1 r+. co O 'Environm ental TYPe o N t'd a to G O O W Total Length m a M .N r" Utility Codes o' o 0 o O Improvement Type o N o v r i U I J p i� e Resolution No. O o 0 0 1 O L N 0 C O Amendment 7 L LL Q, u' Adopted O O O O N v 0 v L Z Hearing LL m N .r n o o_ o N N a LL N m a m b c� LL w F O p P N 0 O T V 9 C N C LL O n o N N C 0 9 C N N ro L d N LL 3 ro N N O Y N N N d 7 Y c y K C N d II G C C U t E o a rn a Z a o G (N 0 ro O C N J d! a. m L) 0 0 J La 4 40- m '00 Z 'o od o �Q. m v w d p ca o- o Q Q m d Q V 0 L u. N L Q ro U Y N m d i Priority Number N G G G K a 0 t Functional a W Class a N C i O 41 L- y O L O K r a� m m d V 0 CIj O c 7 c6 0 O O lY 175 RW Required Z E 00 L Environmental Type l 0 0 O O L M Total Length LL U) G> N LL E o G Utility Codes 0 O O F o 0 O L LL improvement Type l 0 0 0 0 0 L CL E LL Resolution No. O O 0 7 0 C N N O Amendment N M M M M M LL VI W L N (n L Adopted c o m v U O II Z Hearing C u t o 0 0 EL m F o 0 0 Ed fn v 0 0 o 0 C LL N d II M r V M E y LL o d N C m o V II LL O o O o O O O O O O V C N d N LL II N N N O O O O o 0 m U m M v v N rn a E E E o o m r Z n a o` 6 N E w a Z otl F d. d II C d N J N y v Z Oo 6M m QUO Wei Q a 75 U Priority Number u) a q�E R T T p N m O K m« N c Q U II N a IL Functional Class r ii w r a� m m d V 0 CIj O c 7 c6 0 O O lY 175 E Q RW Required) z r N Environmental Type l 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 O O N N 0. M 9 Total Length r Q o Utility Codes a O o 0 -6- 0 0 0 0 0 LJL Improvement Type o 0 0 0 0 L N N V N N N N i�L C U u Resolution No. O O 0 0 0 0 M 0 0 0 0 L Nom Lo Q. Amendment LL oa N L Adopted L 0 0 0 0 d a Y v O o U O v z Hearing c LL L v o °o N o O O c (n 0 0 o 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'o LL m d v m LL cc c �n m 0 U v m o F o 0 0 0 o 0 0 c LL m m m o 0 LL V c N O O O O R M M O O O b O a -c E'E m` m o z„a o o N O dr Lu m m Q z. U Q U m Q rh O (L.vS Z O C m 'o O 'C c a R a K U m aa`�mn` o .o a m a F U Q U❑ W LL m m Q K 3 u Priority Number Number d d a ae v O m rn o O a U N t d Functional v c n i Class) CD m m d W 0 O a) C N O 0 0 CL of 177 RW Required) Z r m 0 CO L Environmental Type d N w U o 0 0 0 0 Q Q 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 N Total Length LL O A G1 N Utility Codes Q Q L LL Improvement Type L N w ro Q o LL C Resolution No. U O Q 0 o 27 o 0 7T o o 0 o 0 0 Q N N r r L Q. Amendment N o V d L_ Y N N LL L I� L Adopted 7777-- 7777 0 0 0 0 0 Q� 0 o O U Z Hearing v 0 c 0 N o 0 0 0 o L m O 0 m N M U) u Q 0 0 0 0 0 7777 0 0 0 0 0 r/1 N V d LL m d d LL M N 16 N O U v j o o I T o O o rn N o o o M N C (U N LL jp W V V C N f6 3 m a d LL a` Y L Y o 00 0 0 0 0 0 o N L M M M t0 N C N N N N N d E o 1 K N 2 N Q d N L r Z mn m v LL o Z C F m Q w M C N E 5 N N Ow O N JG!O� 0 o.. ZNS M a m p N O LL d 9 d Z O d 0 L IO p 7 U y N W L a Z J U J 7777--- N Lr N O aa`o ma` Q d m Q U O Ul la. U v> U c 7 N e➢ F Y a u m W 3 Z J Priority Number a E U Q w o a c o, c a 'o j w a a a a o a U c CL a Functional m c M Of Class) LL' i w 7777 177 E Q RW Required) z r L Q Environmental Type IN W U o 0 0 0 0 o O O o ro O o Ct 0 c A N M Total Length T— u U. cu '6 0 d IN E Utility Codes N o o (S o 0 0 Q U Improvement Type Mo c 0 0 0 0 N n M o E c 7 LL Resolution No. U O O •FJ I!( O O O O O O O O O a Or O O O O V i Q Amendment N L a t N M N LL d W L_ M N L L Adopted 0 0 0 0 M m m j O 0 O U x Z Hearing v C LL L C v N A a M F- u Q o 0 0 3 o o ro 2� V) y 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V J LL A d O M M D M Y m m LL N ii 0 0 0 0 v_ N N 0 0 U C d F 0 o o N 0 0 0 N LL co C_ N LL C N p� o C C O r r c m� 0 0 0 0 M C r N t ry C N N N N a c o N R E E Ec 0 °3 u Z E O Z N N O. Z d 0 u N 0: G U N d C N N F E W O C y V Z rn m u a ac S u m d Vi O z o o s 'o O1 rn c a d of U aa0 M EL N w M m o m a. d o r QU 6 u U_ W I m a Y O of y F C co Y O Priority Number N a w o_ Z U c o m c m 0 z c U C a N Functional c n iii Class) u- w M m IL T O N O N C 7 ai m 0 C C L WO, E 00 L N O O o. M r Q N E E 0 L 0- U L Q. E r- 0 O ICU Q. N L L x i5 d N O z U c RW Required) z o Environmental Typel yy RT7 R 0 0 00 Total Length I� v O N N Utility Codes m J F 0. Q U O Improvement Type lo� N V c 7 0 0 N M g d N O z U c RW Required) z o Environmental Typel W 0 0 00 Total Length y V u. m `o M N N Utility Codes Improvement Type lo� N V c 7 0 0 N M 77 C o N N Resolution No. LL t0 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 Amendment a c 0 0 0 0 in 0 0 C N N LL y (n L N Adopted 0 U Hearing a C LL a s M m Cl) a m M N u Q m 2 3 o 0 0 o 0 0 V/ y D C J LL R d v d LL V �y C t0 C 41 a m N V O U V y O o 0 0 O E J LL O a� m j v N (0 ao 0 o E y c J O y o 0 0 O 6 N C M N N c C F U N E d E o a d if y m zo` L Zo m v v O w o O O W U N E z o g m o ddK Co C N y W a a Z v N c QUOUI U: U' Oa m F- Priority Number m rn a U y 2 a Functional) o m w CO a to N .J. c m Cla ss O c J LL X W m rn m a R O N ui O d C ai c0 0 tY 179 0 m m m n. V O N O N N Q V- 0 CL IY a RW Required i E 00 M L CD Environmental Type N w U 0 0 7 7 0 0 O O 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 0 O O C q a M c o1: 4-J T— Total Length LL N C1 N U' o Utility Codes E p U 3 o o 0 0 0 O LL Improvement Type m 0 0 0 0 L Q 0 N V C LL r r N Resolution No. R u 0 O o o E o 0 0 0 0 L o 0 O o 0 Q Amendment v v e N LL ,y 2 w z N N L r L Adopted o Is 0 ICU m a m O U v Z Hearing C m L O O n N a e c� N m 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (n N O O O O O C LL N 9 y t0 d d LL VI O 90 R F O O O 0 O C E v o 0 0 0 V d F- U) O O C m C (0 A y LL C c N d 4r n U 0 O 0 0 O 0 O C c2 O N N O a Y O N O N O N N r O d m m N E E E o d t Z y a D a O Z N N o m rn d` Ewa F m p a w s Na co 1 0 Q v Z-a c c N y m Z z o o d o a a c a� O m aao ma d U aUO Ui Li 'E y K Priority Number y t a U p d a m rn o' 95 C c a U O a Functional N n Class LL w 0 m m m n. V O N O N N Q V- 0 CL IY a E 0 0 RW Required) z r a) m L N Environmental Type w l U o 0 D o D o D o 0 0 0 C C 0 0 0 Total Length J 4—P r LL Q ro G) N E Utility Codes 0 7 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL Improvement Type lo of 0 0 C 0C Li c LL Resolution No. U O 0 i+ 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V L Q Amendment N LL ,y L C N CO L L Adopted 0 0 0 0 ro y v O o U v X Z Hearing LL O 'rt N O D fn M V) U 0 0 0 0 0 V) N 0 0 0 0 V j LL ro d W LL M v d p U V S A F O O O o N C C LL N d LL _N C U O O y 0 N N ro O O O O y t ro N .E o v ro d O o_ L r M NNN R°o 0 0 m m o O W z N u u E E N� D H w w 3 z y j C z o O o aa�ma` m m a c a ro a a a U Y o 0 QUCi uiLL 2 U) J J r a Priority Number w n. z ai U T u T o d EL C c o. o E Y a a a C r o Q U a Functional N n lY Class i w 181 E 00 M P L N 0 0 0 N E 9 0 i 0 U L Q E r- 0 0 ,A V i� L L I 65 1 0 1� m rn U) F c N H Y O. r O c c O_ m 0 w Q U C O E m N O z m II y C RW Required z Environmental Type l U a Total Length Utility Codes U�) o_ Improvement Type M 0 Resolution No. Amendment Adopted Hearing O a m u rri 2 (n d V o> m CL V O N O N ai R O 0 O D C N m l0 N D 0 0 z m 3 m D N m Y n U rn N a U N m m E C E o O M O d m C z C T u w c a m� W O d D a z O. a II� K L 6 m a c c o o c Q U G ul Li U U Priority Number Functional Class V o> m CL V O N O N ai R O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL R O 000 c LL U J 0 0 0 c o o m N L e LL m L !Q II U 9 c u. V LL y m R N 0 0 0 o 0 0 N a c LL m as II II m LL M II m O O O U D c LL m y II II C Y r m H N m m a N w t o z U 0 a o v v O u m w z N L a o. U m w d a M N c C n LL W V o> m CL V O N O N ai R O 0 O E cO C L p� N O p 0. cn O N E E 0 Q L O U L E c O :r" y IM L 0 Q. N L L x_ co m N O Z d V G Q m y K F Y d O m 0 Q U K O f RW Required) o Environmental Type Total Length w D LL O Utility Codes Improvement Type v V r N D C Resolution No. LL U U 0 c Amendment 0 o a c L �o LL d N t N Adopted 0 0 d D U Hearing 9 LL d t O O m N h CL E 16 2 N O O C7 N c LL `y D b >i D N d O N 6 m E c m o D 0 0 y m Oj OI o U D o c c N c o m w m y a O 9 C d O LL U C C 0 o T E o o Y 2 LL 90 c o d M 0 c O` m E L m c c o E o c o o c Z `o F- m m o m t d y C y F d F E W O N w Q C aa `o E d Zood'o t m> o n m a 0 QLid j D Priority Number c o U t Q N m a c a v Functional rn H c Class LL D. w M a� a� n. 1 O cli ui 0 0 0 O 183 E 00 RW Required) z o V L 0 N Environmental Type o S o 0 0 0 0 0 0 .FJ N W O L CL M N II r N Total Length Q m N r E Utility Codes 0 LO !L Improvement Type o 0 0 0 L y N W ry CL E II C LL u U Resolution No. 0 0 L 6 O o O O o N N O 0 N Q Amendment LL 06 L N L L Adopted 0 0 0 CD d v O V II z Hearing t v/ LL m A v o O Q. a F o N (7 h c LL m y y II t%f c 0 E LL m y m p> a g II O U II C r o 0 0 u) C C II LL N d y II C N N N LL N m T r W U 01 N N E o. H Q E o Z d d o L? 65 m L a iM EW �P D U 06 V w 0 U 15 Z rn'o c 'aa�ma c w a a z v 0 m U Q U 0 ui u: Z 2 ur O m G x c U) a' T T 0 Priority Number y z a 0 U a w a d G 'o a u w o a d Functional rn Class' a w v a� N 0 a) c N m r 0 aa) K i, E 00 r L 04 O O d N E E 0 O L O LL L Q E C O O V/ L L y x Cn d w O z v _C RW Required) Z Environmental Type U O O Total Length o Utility Codes 0 U F Improvement Type l o 0 Resolution No. Amendment Adopted Hearing m a d F o ro 2 3 vl t0 C m N N 3 c t0 U E c E o o m n E c c O p U E N m m 2 rn E N N (r U 0 N N N N V) U) O o o O o 0 N O a E c c E o 0 0 0 O Z N d it b o Z C O C y ru LL N d m E N ZM a y v c y z aa� 9 dc5 6 uj LL r m K p D T U r a O c a Priority Number c Q U 0! O Functional o Class' t0 C m N N 3 c t0 U E c E o o m n E c c O p U E N m m 2 rn E N N (r U 0 N N N N V) U) O All a) a> m a 7 0 N 0 N c Z3 d O tf O CL of 185 o o O o 0 O O O 6 0 N 0 0 0 O N it b C LL N O 0 0 0 0 V C LL N v J 7D o c O O O C C O O N tp L c C m LL N L 2 rn 0 0 0 v v v c L LL m A N 0 c 0 1 0 'E 0 0 V C V O LL N d V d LL a m p H o 0 0 U v c LL CO LL CO N d y 9 C N LL Y 0 m o 0 0 O O O N N N N in a m w w z a o u F m N w Z z Q U d a w a 9 y c v c a LL W All a) a> m a 7 0 N 0 N c Z3 d O tf O CL of 185 E cO r L N O p d M r C p d N E E d O L 0- u. L Q E Y O �J y M O Q N L L L- 4 d a 0 O z d a C Y l0 m K r O d o O RW Requiredl z Environmental Type U N O Total length Utility Codes Improvement Typel N Resolution No. Amendment Adopted Hearing O p N EL N u Q ai 2 3 in t7 CO N Q U M U w m w N C N d 3 N N 'o Y m v 2i C z' E v_ i 0 C, v v u T. d C N N W a N dP O Z o6 u w ama�v L L m Z o o m° v a¢ c N Q U ci W ll N U 0 N Priority Number Functional Class o o 0 0 O O L LL R 0 r 0 0 CL C o o v c LL A O J O O O O O O O O O O v C O LL d L N l9 o U v C L LL O m m in 0 0 0 0 N U C LL R d d LL y A O U V c LL LL W d C y N LL r `m o N N d a N a. W a a o d V d N L a a w y c LL Lu m M a W CD N 0 N m r O CL [Y S E 00 RW Required) Z L Environmental Typel —.0 t1 N w U °o 0 0 00 O O o rn 0 0 0 0 0 a M Total Length C O O A Y/ N Q- Utility Codes 0 Q v I o o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 O L Improvement Type M c o 0 0 0 L y6 c LY O m O Resolution No. O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 }I O 0 O o O o M a N N Q Amendment c N LL m N L f" Adopted L o 0 0 m a w m 0 O U O 4 X Z Hearing LL m m m 0 0 in M F- N u Q 0 0 0 0 0 m 2 N u o o a o V LL m m G O o m C p m C u m M o 0 0 0 0 m U d E m a O c N C m LL v m N Y r m m w O o (0 �D �D C a m 0 m M OD W ep O O O O E m y a c m O C m U m aoy n y �'E Z m N m 3 m r a, o p f. Z m Y «D� m m V u N F C m N m F+ Z C O z o p d iS v W 3 Z y O an.o'ma v� rn m^, E a QU 6 U ii v7 (n v O o m m O c 7 U m K y Priority Number n a d v u a Q c cn a a a c n S a Functional r` n Classy w 187 co a) ro 0_ 71 O N wD d m C O CL IN RW Required E 00 M N Environmental Type w U O 0 O C c 0 0 OR N M N M N //L� .i.+ Total Length i Q A N a Utility Codes O O O 0 0 L LL Improvement Type o C i p C i N C O LL M N M Resolution No. U O i+ 0 0 o 0 o o 0 0 o 0 o 0 M N M O Q Amendment N t r o O N .A V/ LL d at L N L L Adopted 0 o O o d v d O O 0 U v x z Hearing L v/ N m w (n a m M V) v Q 0 0 0 0 m 2� o 0 0 0 N N V C7 LL A d d LL M d OI f0 f0 m p1 d O U N O O O O 3 v N O O) N y N off} U C O J LL U C O1 C w C U N T N 0 w N N N 1 C d 'E o Q C m Z a 2 d r a o z `o y; U E c a Y d$ C o O «ZatS� c o adv5aui L L E z o o s iS w z m r yr o K C Q U❑ W LL [n (n (n m J Z J (n Y LL z u N N 3 Priority Number V a n- U w 0 c a y, C m rn a F o a U a Functional oo E 2 c N a d a p Cr Class LL W co a) ro 0_ 71 O N wD d m C O CL IN E co r L O N O O L a.+ O. c� a 0 N E E 4? O 0 LL E C 0 O L 0 L L X N t+ a 4i 1i RW Required`` 0 Environmental Type` II o o o c M h O Total Length N 0 r Utility Codes 0 0 Improvement Type la C M M LL Resolution No. l0 J p O N N v 0 O z 3 F- U C m 4 a) m d T O N c6 fl r 0 C i m O C O O M M Amendment y �p tp V N i0 c IL d R V1 L t0 a3 L N Adopted —`P o 0 U c L Hearing O R N F" O O to u Q m m d M O O ro 9 y LL N O N O U V D d c C 7 ct) 0 c o Y Y Y -07 0 n y 0 J C U N E =Eg E oa o a Z O d C T UJ m O V Z O d nWp w Zo1S dwa�a�+ •o N C c w u rnd L U o o a ro �L N o_ r adKma N <n V) Q OO ui u-, m U o� N Y a Priority Number m m y u o Functional x W Class v 0 O z 3 F- U C m 4 a) m d T O N c6 fl r 0 C i m co Q N 0 0 a M d N E E 0 O LL S1 E C 0 c� 0 VI C 4 Ir W r Rz RW Re9uiredl Z 0 N qt a I N N U5 O N c 7 d a 1~ O —s EnvironmentalTYPe u o p o N V O Total Length C r Utility Codes 0 o p o lmprovementTYPe1 a co Resolution No. 0 J 0 o a o p p o N O C Amendment 1 a r LL N d N Adopted m p p p O a N II o U 9 y O C i Z Nearing N a M o N U 4 N UI C 7 (7 LL d II N LL 9 b y O U II C LL L C C Y II d LL O r N v Y p N C a C N N C i N r N g O pF•U z O 2i L U E W pyZaO N A U o F- u c w Y Y R K z Q O d6 pW m 9 D. atjpui u. N m u3 K O lit a N r d o x a Priority Number y c 1 V 0 4' o v O Functional c W 3 "af Glass i 0 N qt a I N N U5 O N c 7 d a 1~ O 191 RW Required N E 00 r m L, N Environmental Type CO O O 0 0 0 0 a r a rn o c 4 t Total Length LL O m a E O Utility Codes E p U 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q LL Improvement Type o 0 0 0 0 0 L ids C LL 10 O N E Resolution No. U O O o 77 0 0 0 0 0 0 C ro Q Amendment 0 /N V� LL y od t w N M N L L Adopted 0 0 0 0 m O U O v X Z Hearing L V O N N a n M N v Q 0 0 0 0 m 2� fn o 0 0 0 C7 D LL 70 U EF m d d LL v n N c j w U m c D m N O U D LL m A H O O O O m D d c y T N Q o 0 S d e2 N W Y N N N D m c C D y m E 'E o m Z`wa ?i m a Z G E W d m m> H m O Z O 7� Q Z 2 m Of 0 d U tD N t W r Z N m O m aan:ma o m" D o a a U QUO W Li o"o N M rn v C Y n b w 3 z o Priority Number a U p T w O a a a U K c a a a c n Q p IL Functional a C y n Class i i x 191 N N N ll5 a N u7 0 C 3 0 O C( Required z I R W O O Environmen W O o O U N o o t en9th 0. T otal o r Utility Codes o v C w ImprovementTyPe N N N N v c 0 w L CL u J E Resolution No. C v v O r- o fi c °a y L Amendmen o N N Adopted o U LL z µearing 1 a/ N N u 4 N N C7 ll. R 9 m M O_ d N U C 0 W C O m O N 0 Y N O O to ti 9 tND Y d C 3 w d N C 111 d y T9 Il. iy V cod 4 tn p O L Ndc omEN N E o m m as 2 roue L uu m Ta ooAo v E w E N N W z o a aao°cma h N F UN m r m w z QUOwu. r N L a. U m U d d cr tn Y a Priority Number a o. c r T O v N x G Boa 4 U p Functional T W o. class N N N ll5 a N u7 0 C 3 0 O C( N N a O N u7 O d �i ai m a 0 a 19 RW Re4uiredl Z I O P EnvirOnm entai Type o 0 o P o L N o o O N 0 0 G 3 L Total Length a C O utility Codes i o O 7 L Improvement Type O N M N v O U- L LL U J Resolution No. o N M 9 G Amendment L LL N O w N N L Adopted f o m 4 U a r o LL z Heating d w 0 0_ 3 R. 0 N ED N V r C) LL m p� V a v M LL d o U u r r LL N v '6 3 LL E m N Y n c E d v Y o o C E E E -G vE� C c o V G L m°' a Lv Ld N 7i E Q d °wZ�Q p U v m mp n Lu z U o r aaKNO. 4 d ui�f u w z m U N s 4 U a Priority Number N w v yy.. C G F f N X Ta o (Y O Functional) r G 1yJ Class, f N N a O N u7 O d �i ai m a 0 a 19 V N U m d V 0 N CD N C 7 O 0 0 N RW Required E 00 M P I- N Environmental Type w O 0 0 0 o 0 0 o 0 a M 9 c Total Length O N N E E Utility Codes 1 O o 0 0 0 Q LL Improvement Type N o 0 0 0 M N O D 6f. E C J LL C Resolution No. U O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q. Amendment J LL otl L N N L L Adopted 0 0 0 0 M m o O U v x z Hearing LL L a u m O N N a r M Y) U Q O O O O O O m 2� o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (n N O O J LL m f0 v m LL M 3 d N m p U FO- O O O O d N V a N C O U d d LL C N C {Q 00 O c 0 Y 7 0 0 0 E t j 'E a N N N n c O E J Y fI u J E o c J w E r Z y` a E a 0 F- Z m U t- E w 0 z a m (L d v d o m `m 0 0 w z w j0 zoom C 'o rnd z a U aao:ma U x 'w c LL o m U Q UOLLi Li H m Q DU Y a T Priority Number t a U Q c a j a Q1 U 0 O) Y a a a c Q O a 6 N Functional a Class ii w V N U m d V 0 N CD N C 7 O 0 0 N a 1 r RW Required'.°Z co i► v EnvironmentalTYp W N y N P LL. O t7 Leng o -(ota th l r M Y O es d p O d N Util "+ty w N N e ntTYP e o O l LL I p R p O N �rj M p8 Amen dmen t d O N Sim o O Adop a L► U r 'o m 1 L r d r,Q.,�. O Hearing N 1 Z Q e o a N c 3 N 111 I d w rn N m r y o R U u N 7 LL C tn N I 1 O G U V y O o Y a N m U R G C m m v u E d o ro c o R o or u c N v o w d R 0 7 i y o N L N Z a Y F' m n N L W w U a tuber r e' r o Priority Nu a v N W Functional 4 4 0 u N In O C 7 d O C�- lX N N 8 0 Q- RW Re quired' Z o O of I r co rn e P ental TYP N IEnviron V y Total Length r u 06. Utility Codes a o N h em ent YPe o 3 Q 1mPrOV LL OI 0 1 p u Resolution Ho. O O y LL Amendm 0 N Adopte TS m C wrt 4 1 u- 1 \V y N Q"I o Hearing o cl' o O O m M O O V� p o a 3 4 N T ca N LL 1 9 i7 m 1 I n d rn LL c p r o 0 c� m c v r 0 0 N 9 0- c U r t NI N N d N 6 rn O (!J E 7 IN d o ,y O p U N C r', V r p uZC m m a 'v N tuber 3 0. a. c Y a Priority Nu N w V g T 6 7 1 a F ol 0 o Class' M O N ui O 6Y c v cis O O r1 N 61 tT R Q- S T N 0) O 0 4 a d VA 7 0 0 ll. i Y 0 0 g L r d RW Uire o o ental TYPe U E vN c i LL 0 Total t en9th r Utility Codes N V C e ntTYPe N tmProl u u IJ o O Resolution N� 1 °o. o o y N pa LL d pn,endme N I o Adopte o U r rt 9 z i r r A I N N y o 0 p O O O 1 C m N LL b �p M d 1 N d u- d Y U is o I o C oWw o n. Q1 1 U N c p o 0. V i6 v N d N N O m C a O aC O N M M 9 Cep d C p. G O d d p 0 U t0 9� N m— y d d c d c p an d rnv o m a p m di Zoo No�NN a v m Lu o 4oUwLL 1� m x ffi r a Priority Nu ye J` c 'n I ui y W P o �'�r u O Fun C1uss r �l� 4 a N O C) P 0 a- A R ReQuired m M I O P W C Environmental TYPe' v a H O O RI Total t.en9th I I Y a. c7 N 0 C7 1 0 y N 1 utuity Codes, N ht O lmprpyementTyPe N LL 1 0 ►J- 1 0 J I Resoluti on M Amendment) m 1 Adopted m 4 Iu c D c p 3 N iA LL j m o H Z N i O M V r p O P d r O p P td LL 1 I b b LL P n r m LL I I 1�1 °1 C N m d 1 LL 1 1 Y 1 O! C Y c a m l y 1 m m 1 a y Z O and c N m LL 0- L K pert 3 N d F Y a Priority Num N K T LL 0 o Fun ctional j® 4 U a I Class N N c6 N 0 v c 7 N N O 0 N 6i rn m a W r N o 0 Q W 0 0 U. 0 0 VI V N N R''N ReQuiredl ro �E V 1 0 Total Length Utility Codes ImPrOVement TYPeI N R N 1 Arrlendm Adopted b y o N iC Nearing Z U t Re O O m L d 7 u Z IS N 1 0 0 0 t7 9 Y W o N iC C 3 U t Re K Y T 1 a U 0. IS f O M C �11�1 i J v vim°% U W1 9 3 d j a Y [O F N N UO ILL t m N d 0 p Q L N C L of m c n U o n 'O lU d N G L y v O cam m M U N m OC+'3 9 Y N pl N d m m m o i s c u Z C ro 0 ,n J Q p, ZO d° M Y Q U 6 ui priority Number F o Ciass o 0 C' o G i H o_ o� M M 1 r N r N L6 o N Y i6 v' >7 d d a r V c a Ul D N c o N iC C 3 LL t0 V t`y o o 0 1 0 0 0 1 LL m 1° 1 m v I v o c N w 1 r N t 9 c LL. R m 9 M 1 i J v vim°% U W1 9 3 d j a Y [O F N N UO ILL t m N d 0 p Q L N C L of m c n U o n 'O lU d N G L y v O cam m M U N m OC+'3 9 Y N pl N d m m m o i s c u Z C ro 0 ,n J Q p, ZO d° M Y Q U 6 ui priority Number F o Ciass o 0 C' o G i H o_ o� M M 1 r N r N L6 o N Y i6 v' >7 d d a r V c a Ul D N c E tco Q s.. N U1 O O c. cM 4.8 TI co G1 N E E 0 O O L I— a E C O .FJ O Q. N C L L A W a R Ri O i s IE RW Requiredl z Environmental Type Total Length Utility codes Improvement Typel N Resolution No. V N J O Z d V l0 Y a c N O c c d 0 C. Q U O Amendment Adopted Hearing o F O o u) u Q m 2 V) d Functional Class N 3 m II_ t6 N LL c 0 a rn C U U C o m d G a v F N N n 'c E c O O E c E o E o c w d oHn OT w E w a d N 0 o a w aao m m (3 CS Ui ILL 3 o Priority Number Functional Class II Y N Y O O O E m G N U n N y� c i p o a c rn II N a W N a N C 9 m N U W N L d a! o. C w d v C d G K W 0 M m d V 0 N _N Q 5 e) 0Y 200 o o a v II c LL n 0 r 0 0 c y c c LL O 1 �r o o o 0 N a m m 3 o olS LL r r N N N w N O U c i i LL a rn p Q 0 0 N c LL A I II d �O M M d LL O F O O U c a LL b I II d C C d LL 0 M m d V 0 N _N Q 5 e) 0Y 200 M N CD N a 1 CD N C) O ai 0 O RW Require z Typ Environmental e w U M N O N 9 C 0 0 J LL L Total Length M r .V 'r N Utility codes O o 0 4 W 0 Improvement Type Mo w 0 LL V iV Resolution No. o p o O N 0 N L y C Amendmen L 0 d R a. N N Adopted Y v m a o U V L N j G 7 Z Hearing LL m N N a LL b y 9 d 4 M LL m 0 r 3 0 U N C 7 LL C C N .6 N 9 p d N C Y 3 LL 9 Y r CL o 7 Ew 6 N b y d 2j- N uJ O y O N 3 p p O ur Z W U x c N m R et r Y o- Priority Number o a M p c T O C N N X r o d Lu Q u p a Class M N CD N a 1 CD N C) O ai 0 O N CO N zT I]- a 6� RW Required O c i t olp_ r smental TYPe t Enviro v m I- C%a O i tr O Total Leng 4. ce) 'C N 0 N Utility Godes o N O VmP U L 111 p 1 R es No. .s p o°� 1 co N aS m a �n IN LL Amendment I m (6 A d o pted 1 m V c O Hearing 1 r+ Z m 2 zj c m rg d 9 7 w A O 3 I m h t Tl N O o c 4 h m LL V v d C I r m G N Y A I 1 0 Y ,n C v F N 4 y N r A l m 1 1 I L A r Z m C y or W Z h U 9 G d 7 C C a t Z °o°�'d m n N C) W p, U a aar 0 N N z V i tuber N a Priority T i 0 c h Q U 0 Functional Glass N O G 7 d C6 0 N C O N 7 O L Q N d m (D H CL N n LO a� m R a rn N cli L t6 N m 0 r CL cr 203 N Z N 'r a O Q Q N O N N L Q. co a N W U w U Q C a }r LL W 0 L_ L_ N W M n C W Cl c N vrm Q> N C O 7 O N O y V C M 0 Qa: dtz p O p C C u. N o x W m N N r L (O O p D O a1 M ON N t^O i�i V/ Q) t4 O j M r N p n ~LL O OR a ON C a U r O C D L d N E J LL t N lC C ti C N -O 00 (n c v moo N 05 LL U C w D N N o o N m N N O C y N r O L N N H m LL U Li c L y LL v a a¢ -0 W o mm m LL m Li U p LL a N N N N a N N N N N N y O J 0 wZ a v 2 iZ O h fa m asegd load sepoo All an I F- a O giBua 10401 to 0 o 0 p snie1S I L' I v7 CL I d (s)ad/tl I Q I p N o0 Cl) O Iuawanoidwi c 0 d mo d m to y o g O Z R 01 O tm to N m U c c ro v d C 3 c f U a w E g y D o c o o g U g g Y d Z G ch o a m g' 2 m x cr d G C y Q c E 8 c N c N a c N N x C m c E 0 roc m y a O 10 E a R f.. Z m W v Z a Y o, E 5 d Z .,v a v 3 Ed n g c a o rc a e i d m 0 0 tea O a N 0 3'� m mD U d N 2 aN a >y 0 m& y C y a N D m m a m a e c a 3 G ns o. OD s E,. 'm 'm E 8 m -Y Ea Y N d U C IlJ li 2> o f Q j° a c to m° x a e 1 3 a o r aagwnN N M 3 c N Aluoud T c Z Z O leuollound o!lou Q U U N C O N 7 O L Q N d m (D H CL N n LO a� m R a rn N cli L t6 N m 0 r CL cr 203 E =7 m 2 N (L a/ i 2 -E f u o 2 0 U- f E 6 `ƒ z 2_ 2 m 7 CM /0 Z 2 t: d 2 o 0 0 C 0 o CL 7 E r 4 C 22 cn© f �i o c )f ƒ� ,2 :E ,q_N m r 2 A! and U 2 x R �dJ a o M (D LO m �Q E LL d ul E x 00 «22 J «zG k� A) F ffi 0 o LL LL _aaa= /3 o kr w� 000=;eR eRCL +UO-1 s_s U) C/) U) c,dAi m__d ]L kj CD /r o(D CL =e3: \k Q) 0 k3: -ZE zCL \)j\ 2 2) U) \a e k CL 2 m CD CD cli A ƒ 204 C 9 f f E 6 `ƒ C 2 m 7 /0 Z CL 0 o CL 7 E r 4 U) f 0) t; I o o �i o c ƒ� ,2 :E ,q_N m r 2 A! and a 2 f �dJ 7ue ]L kj CD /r o(D CL =e3: \k Q) 0 k3: -ZE zCL \)j\ 2 2) U) \a e k CL 2 m CD CD cli A ƒ 204 205 v a N r Z �0 cr 0 N Z Z Z O C) N a� L C- N L0 ch ro o i W W W y O r Q) c a LL W N U U U 7 O t+ O O N O M Z L_ 2= o) N N O O M CN') N O F c y m O a r -0 N o M co 0 a oc N w as d E m E �Q N O C O N 1 O N J CL v LL N x ll.1 coo Lf3 N (D L (O O (D O GO h O h N N N N i ,A i Y/ c ~LL R 10 ro Q N O a0 I� O h N N N N f C L O tO n m <n c d E 0 C LL d Q y C N 0 0 T 6 _N cn LL M r x O O N d� o) O d N j 0 Q y 2 v)LL U v c O fn N a N co a v v a 7 U co L C O O a F y m LL U c S Y c LL c� N 0 O U ro m 0 d d m c a d U o a LL LL O LL a` N N n C2 O (6 co d N N N N N y N N N y y ase4d lo a(ad eo I a. Q a v sopoo Aman n I a F- 3 cn (7 v f a 41bua 18101 (D v sn1e1S -1 d d U) 4. (s)adAi, Mo o N luawanadwl F m g S O O 0 z ti m rn d c O 'O N d M O7 O U 0 CL m y o c E y m N N lL cn V C Y a O d O W N 1 U a W_ O U) 7 c Y O_ Z p r) m m V t r F d E ei R c a �g y g a v O E O o E o H A CL a Z z z a Y >F A s Y L dd c 8 d V Q d �2 O n o U a S C m m W o a m o N r O cc G 41 'v C lL G) C) N u E Q Q LL 002 L M N V y y `n�v'°� Q a c o v N E 4 p m o L p a� a a N m o a- c°n;o `m C Y I� N v e Eoy m c m m o c o d D H� 0 0 co a v)v) `3 0 _0a: t Fes- _o= jagwnN N rn r o biuoud c z Z o a Q :I- U 6 leuoilound Silo' T f T cr 205 5 0. N N N N r J C, '0 0 0 N L R r a J asE4d loa(o�d tO a r saPOD AwRn I O 0 O o ylbual 1 01 a snlelS D N (s)adRl luawanoid 9 d Og O L L r r "O C i0 N Z CFO d LLo S r Q N z-1 o O N N M 10 >C- c U a m° r 'L~ m C _c: O N nc '0 J W U E c Z A 7 0 N v M U O p M co 0 0 o o r d N 81 N O O p1N Q s C O r d ti O Q O O i.. U. N 0 W N N It M r 10 p R� p C r (A r y u 0 0 U 6 C o N C C J LL i o w E Q N m e W O fi E N 11 0 O p O q U U 6 j 0 r N LL U a` a a r 4 O N O 0 O rn LL o N l- N c N L N LL O A 'a -O N O LL 0) U- LL O n`. 5 0. N N N N r J C, '0 0 0 N L R r a J asE4d loa(o�d tO a r saPOD AwRn I O 0 O o ylbual 1 01 a snlelS D N (s)adRl luawanoid N d R 0 O r d o Z Z m C W m C W R F W U E c Z A U v M U O p M co 0 0 o o r d N 81 N O O p1N 0 0 2 0 p p r N La N M r ~aria yy m❑ O O O 0 l9 0 O i0 ,00 0 O N N o�jd Z SSEI`J O 0 O q U U r N a` a a 4 0 O p o N l- N 5 0. N N N N r J C, '0 0 0 N L R r a J asE4d loa(o�d tO a r saPOD AwRn I O 0 O o ylbual 1 01 a snlelS D N (s)adRl luawanoid CL N C d E O d E O o S O m O RS oL c V5 o 0 0 x w c O W o LL aa o"� 4 9 w 1 T N S a N N� N N r 4— w a U a U) CL. 0 .9 C U C O c U .y m C y 0 0 U h E 4? o c E m N N u LL (f5 N r 0 r a 5 0 N N N m O J 1— Q 3rnac7U 0 LL Cl) A 3 of w o C d G j v 0 .o m N 3 T d G 3: 4 c c c '0 n W W o m Q O r 0 N C O V d N 7 d N N d N Q.. N r; to 7 c b C� 9 Q N a d) O g' g' c N N N �g N a O� N a 0 N v ei 0 t R 0 d Q m C m C W R F U E c Z A v M t Y 4 p d d 81 N 0 0 2 0 N O G d a U. c m y m N ~aria yy m❑ ti- uln ��q o�jd V Z SSEI`J 0 leuo!1 q U U CL N C d E O d E O o S O m O RS oL c V5 o 0 0 x w c O W o LL aa o"� 4 9 w 1 T N S a N N� N N r 4— w a U a U) CL. 0 .9 C U C O c U .y m C y 0 0 U h E 4? o c E m N N u LL (f5 N r 0 r a 5 0 N N N m O J 1— Q 3rnac7U 0 LL Cl) A 3 of w o C d G j v 0 .o m N 3 T d G 3: 4 c c c '0 n W W o m Q O r 0 N C O V d N 7 d N N d N Q.. N r; to 7 c b C� 9 Q N a d) O g' g' c N N N �g N a O� N a 0 N v ei 0 t 0 I z 'a o d Z N 0 0 Z p LU I d _T O 6 O N z U C1 `21 7� 11 T Y a LIJ W r o N 0 0 r LO I; 00 ��i NI 0 d U P 0 it fl1 'O J LL r d m N y o d P A C o N LL V d u u o U d. 4!- LL A I A J J J 00 o SapOO N I I u 18ua'1 1 r SnAuls 0 CV 9 c I d M O s orn `SUasadA uil —r 3 a 1 rn I 2 9 N c y O r a Jg 0 0. n a� '1i U c m w 0 m v o CL CL C m o c m d 3V O Z 9 O M c d C O F' Q a Dm mm c yy E mm C� d V 0. y m C odcia U1 ti 00 jagwnN N (0 p r Z 'EUQ11�Un� Q V C j Cl) LLl LL. w 0 03m F-r ._O a co N a Y aagwnN N N N N N 3 c A)uoud a G Z Z sselo U V leuolloun3 i Q N G1 N O d N d 'C G1 rn a. N ui i D 01 N a- m N r U ai 0 t N 2 i n o o E r, N N N N N O N N` Z Z f N N Y m m N N O N N N N� w o 5 c o W U w CL C CO r 0 o w U O L LL w~ v v W R R Z m E 0 04 O O c d d o d T T o d N 0 0 (A (A u ul a Q a ax d dQ E Y Y c N O b b- N C L N C N m O m o r a m e d F m D N v o r C c J J li N E t t (D N N t6 c�0 G fn x o 0 0 N O O Ol R 3 0 r (n wU 9 0 0 N m b d y R O c m oa C p C N 3 y U- 0 0 0 o U U) avi m d ii 0 p L a N N N N N N N N N N O F O J O O J O a a a 0- r3v) c cn(L0 sapo0 A3!Illfl I I 0 0_ m 13: (L 0 0 o 416uallelol CL O_ snlalS LO C (s)adAl 0 0 0 0 0 ivawanwdwl v 0 N N u c c O Z Za3 t v v a o o o o g a a 3 m m CL m m C j ja H m m C c cri V G G m` °o_ E F Q Q W {p r r m m N N Y a a- Z 9 Q oM r r v v g g C O I O U 0) d d m 0 0 0 2 E c 3 m d 3 G 0 03 f f- m m a cn a�i 3 3 E R O O cm a aL m a v o �F- tON 2 22 HC d V V d C o mm m m m07 u v y w mm �N� �.c lo L y O v y d� w m� m E E N G1 N O d N d 'C G1 rn a. N ui i D 01 N a- m N r U ai 0 t N 2 i 209 L- T z D Z c r O O c O O- LL m g N Z Z 0 N O U a L zi5 M a) d .o a) W w W cn r LL a W H N U U U C Q a, d o S C F N N N N y CN c OL o o N o y M °r a N (D E o 0 a :3 m c T cn C c C N 1 0 L O '�r LL N x N W G O N iA CL Lo N N N N N N r w a5 F LL aS r 0 T N L (D E J LL c a Q a m E �LL x 2 F 0) '0 o d =o r N i U)LL U c O c p t F L 01 LL C) I c =p N n N LL U m d a m L d d c 0 o d LL LL LL U n 0 a` n n n N t6 N N N N ase4d 1000M ao l a H Q H a F es a H sepoo (imin N I 3 a U 0 a (n r 3 416ua 1e1ol w ti o o o u N o snlelS U) I CL d d t1 (s)adRl luawanadwI v I C> o CO v m 9 (0 a n C O Z m m m w m A A 4 O U O 9 N o n (n D H c m 'O u7 m N d LL m d E L U d W U a G O (7 a> O C o= y o o o y Y CL 2 v p m E y E to N O E C C Z A O« 3 o No m CL tL m is v Z a A t x g c d O Z CC V a a) -O O r 3 n ;o m o Q L_ 0 S O U a m R rn c a o N N r o cli cli z 'o an d aa c o m ay N� v G a) a a` u> m a N A O N 7 a N m Of Y i d U O LLl li y d o y E o a o a m N E .o E 3 1� N M d 2Z._o= (n 3 (n (n ._3 C7 _a`E ai A 3 aagwnN �(li�oud N N N N N cc D T 0 0 0 r Z sselo I T m T o Q w 6 U leuoilound 209 U) k k k CL co k I ƒcr)/ 2 r CC O a 2® U k E Cf2 7 cq O k\ }Q 0 m 3 a cc c 0 u LL. a e» �r k E 4 co 7 i o %f k o CE x I 2 m S go co C i n f 2 LL 0) LL «5 ,k asu i 4d n f Im1f) +uel 10101 s_s c �_m k\ 0 2 7 0 k kW En tm k'0 0 {\e 7 22 2 )J2��$ {&a as \Iƒkaa e ±f a &n kdadU: J mnN m co VI wd cZ 41 a o ea Q e U) k k k CL co k I Citv of Tukwila Transportation Committee TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes June 4, 2012 5:15 p.m. Conference Room No. I PRESENT Councilmembers: Allan Ekberg, Chair; Kathy Hougardy and De' Sean Quinn Staff: David Cline, Bob Giberson, Frank Iriarte, Robin Tischmak, Cyndy Knighton, Jack Pace, Nora Gierloff, Brandon Miles, Shelley Kerslake, Gail Labanara and Kimberly Matej Guests: Chuck Parrish, resident; and Sharon Mann, resident CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:18 p.m. I. PRESENTATIONS No presentations. II. BUSINESS AGENDA A. Grant Applications: WSDOT Pedestrian Bicycle Program Staff is seeking Council approval to submit two grant applications to the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Pedestrian and Bicycle Program. Applications are due by June 30, 2012. No City matching funds are required. If approved by Committee, staff will submit the following two projects for grant funding: Purchase of right -of -way acquisition for the Tukwila Urban Center Access Pedestrian /Bicycle Bridge, funding request in the amount of $870,000. Costs of the Boeing Access Road Corridor Study associated with the Tukwila Manufacturing Industrial Center (MIC) "Street Smart" Non Motorized Project in the amount of $200,000. Staff commented that this funding has been available previously, but has been modified since previous grant cycles. It is unknown how projects will be reviewed for funding awards. COMMITTEE APPROVAL. SUBMIT GRANT APPLICATIONS. B. Resolution: Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program 201.3 -2018 Staff is seeking Council adoption, via resolution, of the 2013 -201.8 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The TIP is a list of regionally significant transportation projects that have grant funding potential. This list does not commit the City to implement or construct any project. Generally, significantly large projects ghat are not listed in the TIP, are not eligible for grant funding. An annual update to the TIP is required by the Revised Code of Washington (RCW). This annual rolling program is generally modified to reflect the City's CIP, as the two are updated at different times of the year. Differences between the two plans are often based on and reflective of the time between the adoptions of each document as well as changes in priority and funding availability. There are three project additions to this year's plan: Cascade View Safe Routes to School Thorndyke Safe Routes to School Tukwila. MIC "Street Smart" Non Motorized Project Projects listed in the TIP are not listed in priority order as in years past; they are simply listed in alphabetical order. Committee Chair Ekberg requested that staff summarize the project list on one page and 211 Transportation Committee Minutes June 4, 2012 Pace 2 emphasize that the projects are listed in alphabetical order. This should make viewing easier for full Council. Sharon Mann inquired as to why mid -block crosswalks are not listed in the TIP. Staff explained that they are working on mid -block cross walks for Tukwila Village and wanted to ensure potential solutions are the right solution prior to implementing city -wide. Additionally, relatively small projects such crosswalks do not necessarily need to be reflected in the TIP. Ms. Mann also asked about improvements to the 42 t/ Avenue South hill area, staff replied that this project is included in the City's Capital Improvement Plan (Project 40 -42 Avenue South) and is currently in the design phase. Committee Member Hougardy asked clarifying questions regarding project locations. The Committee inquired about the Tukwila International Boulevard speed study, which staff responded is anticipated to be complete by August. The speed study will be presented to Committee and full Council as appropriate. Staff will conduct public outreach on the study as necessary. Currently, a public hearing for the TIP is scheduled for June 18, 2012. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO JUNE 11 COW FOR DISCUSSION. C. Development Aereement Procedures Staff is seeking approval of a draft ordinance relating to procedures for development agreements. This draft ordinance has been reviewed by the Planning Commission and the Commission recommends Council adopt the ordinance. The draft ordinance incorporates language into the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) to provide greater transparency and set expectations for such agreements. Essentially, it codifies current processes and past practice and addresses broad sections of TMC Chapter 18 relating to the zoning code. In response to a Commmittee question, staff stated that rezones cannot be included /addressed through development agreements; however, boundary modifications /changes are allowed. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO JUNE 11 COW FOR DISCUSSION. III. SCATBd Staff briefly reviewed the SCATBd Agenda provided at the next Transportation Committee. for Tuesday, June 19, 2012. A report on the meeting will be IV. MISCELLANEOUS Meeting adjourned at 6 :01 p.m. Next meeting: Monday, June 18, 2012 5:15 p.m. Conference Room #1 Committee Chair Approval Minwc,, i KA i/. Reviewed h 1 GL. 212 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Meetitzg Date 06/11/12 i i i Initials Prepared by Mayor's review JP Council review I i ITEM NO. SPE 2 ITEM INFORMATION STArrSPONSOR: MINNIE DHALIWAL ORIGIN,\L AGENDA DAT13: 6/11/12 AG FIND,\ ITr ;M Tn'1_I Tukwila Potential Annexation Area (PAA) North Highline C.A'I'I?Gt>ItY Discus,ion Motion Resolution Ordinance .Bidfiwa7d Public Hearing Other tlft Date 06111112 Mtg Date 112tg Date 14tg Date Mtg Date Mth Date Mtg Date SPONSOR Council Mayor HR DCD El Finance .Fire IT P &R Police PWI SPONSOR'S Tukwila Potential Annexation Area (PAA) North Highline SUM'M \RY RI ;.\'IFW 'D BY cow Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: COMMITTEE CHAIR: RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Department of Community Development CoN1MI'rl'uT'1 COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE Ell'1 ;NDl't'URI? RI,(?UIRI?D AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED Fund Source: Comments: MTG.DATE1 RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 6/11/12 MTG. DATE 6/11/12 ATTACHMENTS 213 214 Upcomin M June 2012 1 11th (Monday) 12th (Tuesday) 13th (NA ednesday) 14th (Thursday) 15th (Frida}) Community Affairs Parks Cite, 5: 00 Pm (Cl? 93) City Council Executive Session, 6.30 PM r Cty Council Committee of the Whole Mta._ 7:00 PM (Council Chamhers) Utilities Cite, 5:00 Pyt (CR =1) Tukwila International Boulevard Action Cmte, 7:00 PM (Communitl Center) 18th (Monday) 19th (Tuesday) 20th (Wednesday) 21st ('Thursday) 22nd (Friday) r Transportation Finance Parks Tukwila Cmte. Safety Cmte. Commission, Historical 5 15 PM 5:15 PM 5 30 PM Society, (CR `1) (CR =3) (Commm7rtt 7'00 pm Center) (Tuk,i ila Hernage ^r Tukwila 'ulturul Center i Library 144 i 59 Ave Metropolitan Advisory S.) Park District Board Board of 7'00 PM Commissioners Foster Library Meeting, 6'00 PM (Council Chambers) City Council Regular Mtg.- 7:00 Prim (Council Chambers) Summer Kickoff Festival (Tukwila Co munitl- Center) Noon 5'00 PM This free event is for teens in grades 6-1 There will be food. bouncers. vendors, and various games! Don t miss this once a ear event. For more information. contact the Tukwila Community Center at 106 -76S -2822 Q Annual Curbside Clean -up Event Week of June 18 through 22 Available to single- jnnily and duplex home residents who are customers of Allied Haste. Place items out with _tour trash on your regular pickup dc�v this week. and then will he collectedfor free! Click on "Headlines at ii wiv. ntk rikni a. goy f i a link to a fiver with restrictions and other guidelines (or call Allied Waste at 306- 682 9735). 16th (Saturday) 23rd (Saturday) Touch a Truck Event (Foster High School parking lot 4242 S. 144th) 11:00 Ari to 300 PM Children ofall ages will have a hands -on chance to honk horns and kick the tires of an assortment of big rigs. A variety of exhibitors will also be on site to distribute free summer safety tips as vNell as emergence preparedness informal loll. i Arts Commission: Ist Tues.. 5.30 Pm Tukwila Communit Cuter Contact Stephanie Gardner at 206 -76' -2342. r' City Council Committee of Whole (C.O.W.) Meeting: 2nd 4th Mon., 7'00 Pfd. Council Chambers at City Hall. City Council Regular:l4eeting: Ist 3rd Mon., 7:00 Pal, Council Chambers at City Hall Community Affairs Parks Committee: 2nd 4th Mon., 5'00 PM, Conf Room 43 (A) An Interlocal Agreement iruh the 011- of Seattle for Hearing Fxannner services. (B) _4n aniendmew to the Interlocal_4greement xith King Counh- jor open space acgm.wio1 Projects. Equity Diversity Commission: IstTllurs., 5.15 PM, Conf Room #3. C'ontactJgrce 7i at 106 433 -1850. Finance Safety Committee: 1st 3rd Tues., 5.15 PM, Conf Room #3 ➢Human Services Advisory Brd: 2nd Fri of even months, 10'00 AM, Human Sere ices Office. Contact Erie Bgvkcln at?06 -433 -7180. r Library Advisory Board: 3rd Wed., 7'00 PM, Foster Library. Contact Stephanie Gardner at _-'06- 767 -'34'. Parks Commission: 3rd Wed., 5:30 PM, Senior Game Room at Community Center. Contact Dai cu 206 76' ?308. Sister City Committee: Quarterly, 5.30 PM, Tuksa ila ComnwllAN Center_ Contact Traci- Gallaway at '06- 767 -23 5 Committee: Ist 3rd Mon., 500 PM, Conf. Room #1 r Tulavila Historical Soviet}': 3rd Thurs_, 7 00 PM Tukwila Ventage &Cultural Center, 14475 54 °i Avenue S Coatuct PatBrodirr at 106 -433 -1861. Tukwila Int'I. Blvd. Action Cmte: 2nd Tues TOO PM, Tukwila Community Center. Contact Chief Filla at _'06 -433 -1815. Utilities Committee: 2nd 4th 'Dues., 5 00 PM, Conf, Room 91 (A) Cascade liater,41hance Resolwion ApprovurgJoint AAmucipal UWitt= Services _4uthorim 215 um 1 July 11 2 S Presentation: COPCAB Yearend Report and Awards. 2011 Police Annual Report. 11 18 See agenda packet Consent Agenda: CM Cr sheet for this Authorize the Mavur to week's agenda enter into an Interlocal /um° 11, 2012 Agreement with the Committee of the llVhotl Citv of Seattle for M"etitt,t 1 Hearing Examiner Services. Public I ivarinw�: A resolution adopting a six -year Transportation Improvement Pro for-')013-2018. Unfinished BUS]nCSS: A resolution adopting; a six year Transportation Improvement Program for 2013 -2015. Authorize the Mavur to sign Sup},lement No. 2 to Contract No. 10 -057 with Carulto Engineers for the Water and Sewer Conlprehensi� e Plans in the aIl1UUnt of 521,721.50. An ordinance establishing new regulations relating to Development Agreements. Authorize the Mayor to enter into an Interlocal Agreement with the Kent Fine Department Regional Fire Authoritv relating to a training consortium. Authorize the %lavor to enter into a three- Interlocal Agreement with King County for animal control services in an amount not to exceed 5225,000. 9 16 No 23 216