HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2004-10-25 Item 4E - Contract Supplement #2 - Tukwila Urban Center Services with ECONorthwest for $26,000 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS
tc Initials ITEM No.
411/41401x, fi I DleetiuR /mac Date I P[eDated 1 Mayor's Mayor's review 1 C�ui! avian
I
i 61 ,'Gf 1
�t r% Q' I 10.25.04 I Sll/r I 1' 13/s /1
1
sa
rsos_ I 1 1 I
I I 1 1
ITEM INFORMATION 1
CAS NUMBER: 04-147 I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: October 25, 2004
AGENDA ITEM TITLE Proposed contract supplement with ECONorthwest for services related to the TUC plan
CATEGORY X Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other
Mtg Date 10.25.04 Mtg Date Aft Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date
SPONSOR Council Mayor
Adm Svcs X DCD Finance Fire Legal P&R Police PW
SPONSOR'S This contract supplements ECOs previous work on the TUC Plan, providing more detailed analysis on: 1) at
SUMMARY a policy level, potential financial strategy packages; and 2) the extent to which City investments could pay
for themselves. ECO will also summarize previous reports for the Final TUC plan. The $26,000 contract will
be 100% funded by the City's federal grant for TUC /TOD planning.
REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. X CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte
Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm.
DAlh: 10.12.04
RECOMMENDATIONS:
SPONSOR /ADMIN. Recommend approval of contract supplement.
COMMITTEE Forward to Committee of the Whole for discussion.
COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED
$26,000 $26,000
Fund Source: Federal grant for preparing the TUC/TOD plan.
Comments:
MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION
MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS
10.25.04 Staff memo to COW RE: Proposed contract supplement with ECONorthwest
Proposed ECONorthwest Contract Supplement
Staff Memo to CAP RE: Proposed contract supplement with ECONorthwest
Copy of minutes of CAP meeting, October 12, 2004
City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Depari.~ent of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Committee of the Wholer~L~'-
FROM: Steve Lancaster, DCD Directo
RE: Proposed Supplemental Contract with ECONorthwest f~r services related to the
Tukwila Urban Center (TUC) Plan
DATE: October 20, 2004
RE: TUC ECONorthwest contract supplement#2
Background
As part of our staff/consultant TUC planning team, ECONorthwest (ECO) has provided
technical assistance with economic and fiscal issues related to the planning of the Tukwila Urban
Center (TUC) and the transit-oriented development (TOD). ECO's original contract amount for
$59,928.26 was approved in February 2003. A $20,000 contract supplement was approved in
March 2004 for additional economic analysis related to the "catalyst" project. However, the
project has continued to evolve and additional economic analysis is needed.
Discussion
The Tukwila community has selected a preferred land use scenario for the Tukwila Urban Center
(TUC) plan. This plan has been presented to the Tukwila City Council and Planning
Commission. Like any major investment, detailed economic analysis is warranted to ensure that
these specific capital investments can be paid for. At the last joint Council/Planning Commission
worksession, ECO identified the initial TUC catalyst projects and their rough costs, as well as
the types of funding soumes typically available to a jurisdiction.
The remaining work to be done builds upon this information and explores how these projects
could be paid for. In Task 1, ECO will prepare preliminary financial strategy packages at a
p(~licy level for consideration. In Task 2, ECO will simulate the extent to which the City's
investment in the catalyst project "pays for itself". ECO will attend one worksession with the
Council to present their findings on Tasks 1 and 2. In Task 3, ECO will summarize their
economic and financial factors reports prepared over the last two years into an appendix to the
final TUC plan. These tasks are anticipated to be completed during the winter 2004/05.
This $26,000 contract supplement will be funded by the existing TUC/TOD grant.
Washington 98188 Phone: 206-431-3670 *
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND PARKS COMMITTEE ACTION
Reviewed ECO's proposed scope of work and sent it to the COW for consideration.
REQUESTED ACTION
Forward to the full Council for their consent agenda at the November 1, 2004 meeting.
p:\LYNNM\TUC\Contmcts\Market analysis\administrative\supplement 7.04\COW10.25.04memo. DOC
Page 2
~ Washington State
Department of Transportation
Organization and Address
Supplemental Agreement ECONo.hwest
99 W. 10th
JAgreement Suite 400
Number
Eugene, OR 97401
LA 5377
Project Number Phone
TCSP-TCSP (010) 541.687.0051
Project Title New Maximum Amount Payable
Tukwila Transit Oriented Development atLongacres $ 105,938.26
Description of Work
Prepare plans, market and fiscal analyses, and resource allocation studies.
The Local Agency of City of Tukwila, Washington
desires to supplement the agreement entered into with ECONorthwest
and executed on 3.18.2003 and identified as Agreement No. LA 5377
All pmwsions in the basic agreement remain in effect except as expressly modified by this supplement.
The changes to the agreement are described as follows:
I
Section 1, SCOPE OF WORK, is hereby changed to read:
See.~ittached Exhibit B-1
II
Section IV, TIME FOR BEGINNING AND COMPLETION, is amended to change the number of calendar days for
completion of the work to read: En(;~:JaJ. e_has~z~n changed from D~e~_3.]~ZQOAJn
III
Section V, PAYMENT, shall be amended as follows:
T~_JRclude hQur3, and expenses as3e, tXotth, in the attached.D_- 1. IV ~ctiorLXZI, SL[RCO~TRA_CTING: shall he
amended.tQ_indudeJlzose items_ofworkaad_expenses_as ~et forth ln_Jhe~Rache~G~C~L- and G-~2
and by this reference made a part of this supplement.
If you concur with this supplement and agree to the changes as stated above, please sign in the appropriate spaces
below and return to this office for final action.
By: ............. ECOBIo~hwest ................... By: ............ City .of Tuk~v/la
Consultant Signature Approving Authority Signature
DOT Form 140-063 EF
Revised 10/97
EXHIBIT B-1
ECONorthwest
Contract Supplement
Proiect Status
The community has selected a preferred land use scenario for the Tukwila Urban Center
(TUC) plan. This plan, including the initial catalyst projects and associated costs, has
been presented to the Tukwila City Council and Planning .~ommission. Concerns of the
Council regarding plan implementation include the costs and benefits of the
recommended investments, and the financial strategy needed to pay for them.
ECONorthwest has been doing the technical work for the TUC plan related to economics
and financing. ECO's contracted obligations and budget were completed in May 2004
with its presemation to the City Council. This contract supplement allows ECO to
continue the financial work, adding more detail to the financial alternatives and
strategies.
Supplemental Tasks for ECONorthwest
Task 1. Preliminary Evaluation of a Financial Strategy to Implement the TUC Plan
Prepare a preliminary funding strategy to finance those transportation and land
use/amenity improvements identified as necessary for implementing the TUC plan.
Memo should address:
· Recommended list of projects/improvements needed to implement the TUC plan and
their approximate costs and timing.
· Potential sources of funding.
· At a policy level for Council consideration, a financing strategy consisting of a
package of funding sources the City could choose (considering tools such as bonds,
likely grant sources, LIDs, and impact fees).
ECO will need the assistance of the City's finance director or staff, at a minimum, as
follows: (1) to answer questions by phone as ECO prepares the strategy, and (2) to
comment in writing on the draft of the strategy.
ECO will attend one City Council work session to discuss the preliminary funding
strategy.
Product: Memorandum
Meetings: One City Council/Planning Commission work session
Schedule: Winter 2004/05
Budget: $15,000
ECO will bill for this task as follows: · $4,000 upon approval of the City of an outline of the memorandum
· $7,000 upon delivery of a draft of the memorandum
· $2,000 upon delivery of a final memorandum
$2,000 after attendance and presentation at a joint Council / Planning Commission
work session.
Task 2: Simulation of Returns to the City
One reason (not the only one) for the City to invest in the TUC and in what is referred to
as the "catalyst" project is so the TUC will grow, more than it would otherwise, and
potentially m a more diversified way, in order to generate additional revenue for the City.
In particular, any additional development that the City investment generates should
generate property tax and, for retail development, sales tax.
ECO has done earlier simulations as part of this project, and has made it clear that such
simulations are exactly that: simulations, not predictions. No one can predict with any
confidence how the TUC retail sales will be different over a 20-year period with and
without the investment. Thus, ECO and City staff agreed to the following simulation:
1. Estimate what the City will be investing.
2. Estimate how much the City would need to get repaid on that investment. Say the
City's marginal (extra; new) investment in the catalyst project is $10 million in
2004 dollars. Assume that the City has patient capital: it does not want a big rate
of return on its investment, but it would like to recover that money over a 20-year
period at a low (possibly zero) rate of return. Say that works out to a need for an
extra $600,000 per year.
3. Estimate, crudely, the amount of property tax or sales tax revenue that goes to
servicing a new development, tn other words, we are looking for some estimate of
net cash. The professional literature and our prior work suggest that the residential
component of new development is not going to generate net cash. That does not
mean the City should not support residential development in the TUC: such
development supports GMA and regional requirements, the City's goal of
creating a sense of place in the TUC, and ultimately, may create revenue to the
City via property and sales taxes paid by business that now operate better because
of the combined retail/residential base. So ECO would be making some rough
estimate of net revenue contributions by type of business development.
4. Make assumptions about the amount of new business development (divided by
retail and office) that would occur because of the investment.
5. Using the results of 3 and 4, estimate the present value of the new net revenue
generated.
6. Using the results of 2 and 5 describe the extent to which the investment "pays for
itselF' (given the assumptions in the simulation).
Attend one work session with City Council/Planning Commission members to discuss
outcomes. Discuss other fiscal issues or concerns raised by the Council.
Product: Memorandum
Meetings: One presentation (occurring at the same Council/Planning Commission
Workshop in Task 1)
Schedule: Winter 2004/05
Budget: $6,000
Task 3: Preparation of Economic Materials for the Final TUC Plan
This project comprises two years of technical work and almost 10 memoranda or reports
on some aspect of the economic or financial factors related to the TUC. The final plan
adopted for the TUC will have an appendix summarizing all this work. ECO will work
with City staff on developing an outline for the appendix, prepare the draft of that
appendix, and revise it based on a single, consolidated set of City comments in writing.
The City will be responsible for final formatting in a manner consistent with the plan
document.
Also, ECO will review and edit a section on Market Conditions in the Existing
Conditions portion of the draft TUC Plan, to be written by Freedman Tung & Bottomley.
Product: Appendix to final TUC Plan
Meetings: None
Schedule: Winter 2004/05
Budget: $5,000
Exhibit D-1
Consultant Fee Determination - Summary Sheet
(Lump Sum, Cost Plus Fixed Fee, Cost Per Unit of Work)
Project: Transit Oriented Development at Longacres/Tukwila Urban Center Plan
Direct Salary Cost (DSC):
Classification Man Hours Rate -- = Cost
Project Manager 68.0 X .43.50 $ 2,958.00
Research Analyst 38.0 X " 18.50 703.00
Tech Assistant 22.0 X 13.00 286.00
Clerical Support 17.0 X 13.16 223.72
X
X
X
X
X
Total DSC = $ 4,170.72
Overhead (OH Cost -- including Salary Additives):
OH Rate x DSC of 2.1095 % x $ 4,170.72 8,798.13
Fixed Fee (FF):
FF Rate x DSC of .3109 % x $ 4,170.72 1,296.68
Reimbursables:
Itemized 1,734.47
Subconsultant Costs (See Exhibit G): 10,000.00
Grand Total 26,000.00
Prepared By: Roberta Smythe Date: October 13, 2004
EXHIBIT G
Scope of Work for Berk and Associates
as subcontractor to
ECONorthwest
Berk and Associates will be assisting ECONorthwest with all aspects of ECO's scope of
work. In particular, Brett Sheckler will be doing most of the work for Berk and
Associates. ECO will have primary responsibility for all project management, quality
control, and presentations. Berk will assist with all aspects, of the technical analysis
described below.
Overview
The community has selected a preferred land use scenario for the Tukwila Urban Center
(TUC) plan. This plan, including the initial catalyst projects and associated costs, has
been presented to the Tmkwila City Council and Planning Commission. Concems of the
Council regarding plan implementation include the costs and benefits of the
recommended investments, and the financial strategy needed to pay for them. Those
concerns are the focus of this scope of work.
Tasks for ECONorthwest
Task 1. Preliminary Evaluation of a Financial Strategy to Implement the TUC Plan
Scope for Berk and Associates
ECO will work with the City staff to refine the scope of work and products. ECO
will outline the memorandum, and make initial data requests to the City. Sheclder
will conduct or assist with various aspects of the technical analysis and contribute
to the memorandum. Berk will bill for Sheckler's service based on time and
expenses. The expected level of effort is $5,000.
Task 2: Simulation of Returns to the City
Scope for Berk and Associates
ECO will have primary responsibility for the review and formatting of the final
product, and the presentation. Sheckler will have primary responsibility for a draft
of the analysis. ECO and Berk will collaborate on defining the analytical strategy
and refining it during the development of the memorandum. The expected level of
effort is ~;4,000.
Task 3: Preparation of Economic Materials for the Final TUC Plan
Scope for Berk and Associates
This is primarily a task for ECO. Scheckler ~vill review and comment on ECO's
draft. The expected level of effort is $1,000.
The total budget for Berk and Associates is $10,000.
Exhibit G-1
Subconsultant Fee Determination - Summary Sheet
PrOject: Transit Oriented Development at Longacres/Tukwila Urban Center Plan [Berk Associates)
Direct Salary Cost (DSC):
Classification Man Hours Rate = Cost
Economist [Berk Assoc.) 100.0 X 32.10 $ 3,210.00
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Total DSC = $ 3,210.00
Overhead (OH Cost -- including Salary Additives):
OH Rate x DSC of 1.8267 % x $ 3,210.00 = 5,863.71
Fixed Fee (FF):
FF Rate x DSC of .2825 % x $ 3,210.00 = 906.83
Reimbursables:
Itemized = 19.47
Grand Total = 10,000.00
Prepared By: Roberta Smyth Date: October ]9, 2004
Exhibit G-2
Breakdown of Subconsultants Overhead Cost
Account Title $ Beginning Total % of Direct Labor
Direct Labor : 241,276.00 ] 00.00%
Overhead Expenses: :
FiCA
~ 18,458.00 7.65%
Unemployment I 6,438.00 . 2.67%
I
Health/Accident Insurance i
33,603.00 13.93%
I
Medical Aid & Industrial Insurance
HolidayNacation/Sick Leave 2,988.00 ! 1.24%
Commission/Bonus/Pension 103,354.00 i 42.84%
Total Fringe Benefits 164~841.00 i 68.32%
General Overhead:
State B&O Taxes 19,875.001 8.24%
Insurance 1,867.00 0.77%
Administration & Time Not Assignable 155,393.00 64.40%
Printing, Stationery & Supplies 6,493.00 2.69%
Professional Services 2,277.00 0.94%
Travel Not Assignable 3,230.00 1.34%
Telephone & Telegraph Not Assignable 9,162.00 3.80%
Fees, Dues & Professional Meetings _ _~,394.00 , 0.99%_
I
Utilities & Maintenance t 2,134.00 .i ....... 0.88%
Professional Development L .... 2,_9 _9_6.._0__0_ .l~ ....... 1.24%
Rent i __37,58_6.O0 t _ _ _ 14.75%
Equipment Suppod ( .... _28,_763 00 _ 11.92%
Office, Miscellaneous & Postage
5,716.00 2.37%
Total General Overhead 275,886._00 .. 114.34o~/~o.
Total Overhead (General + Fringe) 440,727.00 182.67%
Overhead Rate (Total Overhead / Direct Labor) 182.67%
City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Department of CommunitY Development Steve Lancaster, Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Community Affairs and Parks Committee
FROM: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director ' ",~/~t~-
RE: Proposed Contract with ECO Northwest
DATE: October 6, 2004
RE: TUC ECONorthwest contract amendment742
Background
As part of our staff/consultant TUC planning team, ECONorthwest (ECO) has provided
technical assistance with economic and fiscal issues related to the planning of the Tukwila Urban
Center (TUC) and the transit-oriented development (TOD). ECO's original contract amount for
$59,928.26 was approved in February 2003. A $20,000 contract supplement was approved in
March 2004 for additional economic analysis related to the "catalyst" project. However, the
project has continued to evolve and additional economic analysis is needed.
Discussion
The Tukwila community has selected a preferred land use scenario for the Tukwila Urban Center
(TUC) plan. This plan has been presented to the Tukwila City Council and Planning
Commission. Like any major investment, detailed economic analysis is warranted to ensure that
these specific capital investments can be paid for. At the last joint Council/Planning Commission
worksession, ECO identified the initial TUC catalyst projects and their rough costs, as well as
the types funding sources typically available to a jurisdiction.
The remaming work to be done builds upon this intbrmation and determines how these projects
could be paid for. In Task 1, ECO will prepare preliminary financial strategy packages at a
policy level for consideration. In Task 2, ECO will simulate the extent to which the Cit~ 's
investment in the catalyst project "pays for itself". ECO will attend one worksession with the
Council to present their findings on Tasks I and 2. In Task 3, ECO will summarize their
economic and financial factors reports prepared over the last two years into an appendix to the
final TUC plan.
This $26,000 contract sopplement will be funded by the existing TUC/TOD grant.
Recommendation
Review the draft contract and forward to the Committee of the Whole ~br consideration.
EXHIBIT B-1
ECONorthwest
Contract Supplement
Proiect Status
The community has selected a preferred land use scenario for the Tukwila Urban Center
(TUC) plan. This plan, including the initial catalyst projects and associated costs, has
been presented to the Tukwila City Council and Planning .Commission. Concerns of the
Council regarding plan implementation include the costs and benefits of the
recommended investments, and the financial strategy needed to pay for them.
ECONorthwest has been doing the technical work for the TUC plan related to economics
and financing. ECO's contracted obligations and budget were completed in May 2004
with its presentation to the City Council. This contract supplement allows ECO to
continue the financial work, adding more detail to the financial alternatives and
strategies.
Supplemental Tasks for ECONorthwest
Task 1. Preliminary Evaluation of a Financial Strategy to Implement the TUC Plan
Prepare a preliminary funding strategy to finance those transportation and land
use/amenity improvements identified as necessary for implementing the TUC plan,
Memo should address:
· Recommended list of projects/improvements needed to implement the TUC plan and
their approximate costs and timing.
· Potential sources of funding.
· At a policy level for Council consideration, a financing strategy consisting of a
package of funding sources the City could choose (considering tools such as bonds,
likely grant sources, LIDs, and impact fees).
ECO will need the assistance of the City's finance director or staff, at a minimum, as
follows Il) to answer questions by phone as ECO prepares the strategy, and (2) to
comment in writing on the draft of the strategy.
ECO will attend one City Council work session to discuss preliminary funding strategy.
Product: Memorandum
Meetings: One City Council/Planning Commission work session
Schedule: Fall/winter 2004, prior to the Council/Planning Commission ~vork session
on the draft TUC plan.
Buciget:$15,000
ECO will bill for this task as follows: · $4,000 upon approval of the City of an outline of the memorandum
· $7,000 upon delivery ora draft of the memorandum
· $2,000 upon delivery of a final memorandum
· $2,000 after attendance and presentation at a joint Council / Planning Commission
work session.
Task2: Simulation of Returns to the City
One reason (not the only one) for the City to invest in the TUC and in what is referred to
as the "catalyst" project is so the TUC will grow, more than it would otherwise, and
potentially in a more diversified way, in order to generate ~dditional revenue for the City.
In particular, any additional development that the City investment generates should
generate property tax and, for retail development, sales tax.
ECOhas done earlier simulations as part of this project, and has made it clear that such
simulations are exactly that: simulations, not predictions. No one can predict with any
confidence how the TUC retail sales will be differem over a 20-year period with and
without the investment. Thus, ECO and City staffagreed to the following simulation:
1. Estimate what the City will be investing.
2. Estimate how much the City would need to get repaid on that investment. Say the
City's marginal (extra; new) investmem in the catalytic project is $10 million in
2004 dollars. Assume that the City haspatient capital: it does not want a big rate
of return on its investment, but it would like to recover that money over a 20-year
period at a low (possibly zero} rate of return. Say that works out to a need for an
extra $600,000 per year.
3. Estimate, crudely, the amount of property tax or sales tax revenue that goes to
servicing a new development. In other words, we are looking for some estimate of
net cash. The professional literature and our prior work suggest that the residential
component of new development is not going to generate net cash. That does not
mean the City should not support residential development in the TUC: such
development supports GMA and regional reqmrements, the City's goal of
creating a sense of place in the TUC, and ultimately, may create revenue to the
City via property and sales taxes paid by bus~ness that now operate better because
of the combined retail/residential base. So ECO would be making some rough
estimate of net revenue contributions by type of business development.
4. Make assumptions about the amount of new business development (divided by
retail and office} that would occur because of the investmem.
5. Using the results of 3 and 4, estimate the present value of the new net revenue
generated.
6. Using the results of 2 and 5 describe the extent to which the investment "pays for
itself' (given the assumptions in the simulation).
Attend one ~vork session with City Council/Planning Commission members to discuss
outcomes. Discuss other fiscal issues or concerns raised by the Council.
Product: Memorandum
Meetings: One presentation (occurring at the same Council/Planning Commission
Workshop in Task 1)
Schedule: Fall 2004
Budget: $6,000
Task 3: Preparation of Economic Materials for the Final TUC Plan
This project comprises two years of technical work and almost 10 memoranda or reports
on some aspect of the economic or financial factors related to the TUC. The final plan
adopted for the TUC will have an appendix summarizing all this work. ECO will work
with City staff on developing an outline for the appendix, prepare the draft of that
appendix, and revise it based on a single, consolidated set of City comments in writing.
The City will be responsible for final formatting in a manner consistent with the plan
document.
Also, ECO will review and edit a section on Market Conditions in the Existing
Conditions portion of the draft TUC Plan, to be written by Freedman Tung & Bottomley.
Product: Appendix to final TUC Plan
Meetings: None
Schedule: Fall 2004
Budget: $5,000
Community and Parks Committee
October 12, 2004
Present: Pam Linder, Chair; Joe Duffle, Dave Fenton.
Stephen King, Steve Lancaster, Maggie Lubov, Lyrm Miranda, Jack Pace,
Joyce Trantina, Lisa Verner.
Sue Carlson (Segale Properties), Martin Dicker (King County).
Southwest King Count. Economic Development InitiatiVe (SWKCEDD
Presentation.. Jack Pace provided some background on ,Tukwila's participation in the
SWKCEDI, and introduced Martin Dicker. Martin is a Senior Economic Development
Specialist with King. Martin Dicker. Martin is a Senior Economic Development
Specialist with King County. He described the goals of the Economic Development
Initiative as increasing employment opportunities and household incomes throughout
southwest King County. He recognized Pam Linder's contributions to the organization
as a member of the Steer/ng Committee, and Jack Pace's contributions as a member of
the Executive Committee. Martin described two significant programs of the Economic
Development Initiative: the small Business Assistance Center located at highline
Community College; and the Export Promotion Program. He also described how the
relatively modest but critical financial support provided by Tukwila and other cities has
been successful in leveraging significant financial support form other sources.
Forwarded to November 1~ 2004 Citw Council meeting as a Special Presentation.
Approval of Metro Implementation Contract for Commute Trip Reduction
Program. Maggie Lubov distributed information relating to the City's Commute Trip
Reduction (CTR) program and briefed the Committee concerning program status and
funding. She described services to be provided by King County Metro under the
proposed implementation contract. Tukwila has contracted for these services with Metro
since 1995, and this has been a very beneficial relationship. Forward to COW with
recommendation to approve..
TUC/ECONorthwest contract amendment #2. Lynn Miranda described the next
of ECONorthwest's work the Tukwila Urban Center Plan identification
phase
on
as:
1)
of
potential infraslructure funding strategies; 2) preparation of an "economic simulation" to
provide information on the ability ofg!'oposed City investments to "pay for themselves"
over time; and 3) preparation of a sunhuary of previous economic and financial factors
reports, to be included in the proposed TUC plan. The proposed amendment increases
ECONorthwest's contract by $26,000. Forward to COW with recommendation, to,
approve.' ~ . .
x"'~'~'~C~ Eode Enforcement Tax Lien Ordinance. Jack Pace introduced Stephen King of
Kenyon/Disend. Stephen is DCD's primary legal resource for code enforcement.
Stephen explained that under the City's current code enforcement regulations we have the
abd~ty to undertake certain kinds of nmsance abatement wi~.k if the property owner
~'.