HomeMy WebLinkAboutFS 2010-06-08 Item 2E - Interlocal Agreement - Animal Control Services (Pet License)City of Tukwila
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Haggerton
Finance and Safety Committee
FROM: Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director
DATE: June 2, 2010
SUBJECT: Animal Care Interlocal Agreement
ISSUE
The City of Tukwila has received animal control services through an interlocal
agreement with King County for many years. The City also shares the cost of an animal
control officer with the City of SeaTac for enhanced services. Due to budgetary
constraints and a desire on the part of the King County Council to pursue a full -cost
recovery model, King County will fundamentally alter how they provide animal control
services to cities that continue to contract with them. Specifically, the County will close
their animal shelter to cities by June 30, 2010 unless a regional strategy to provide
animal control services can be created, negotiated and implemented. The County has
finalized what they consider to be their best, lowest cost, option for cities to participate
in a regional animal services model. The new model forms the basis of the interlocal
agreement that Council is being asked to hereby consider and approve.
BACKGROUND
The County's new model for animal care and control was presented to the Committee of
the Whole meeting on April 26, 2010. The attached interlocal agreement and supporting
documents incorporate changes from that date. The most significant change is the
removal of certain cities that have opted out of the regional model altogether, or have
expressed an intent to only participate through the end of 2010 as they put their own
animal services model together. Cities opting out of the regional model include Bothell
and Burien.
The removal of Burien impacted the costs for Tukwila because each district shares the
burden of certain costs like animal control field services. With Burien removed, there
were fewer cities in the south county area to spread these costs over. The annual
increase in costs from what was presented on April 26 is approximately $11,000. (The
actual impact is not known at this time as costs will depend on shelter intake, calls for
service, etc). Relatively all other terms of the new animal control model remain the
same as what was presented at COW on April 26
DISCUSSION
The County has provided overall cost information to the cities for field services,
sheltering and licensing under the new regional model recently developed. The total
estimated cost for animal services is $5,601,800, broken down into $1,698,500 for field
services, $3,004,900 for sheltering and $898,400 for licensing.
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 2
The County's estimated cost for Tukwila for field services ($47,153) assumes one
animal control officer for forty hours per week to cover the "240" district, which includes
Kent, Tukwila, SeaTac and Vashon Island. The County estimates that services to
Vashon Island are minimal, essentially making the service delivery to just the three
cities and small portions of unincorporated area near Tukwila. Animal control for the
entire County would include one animal control officer in each of the four districts, plus
two other officers for backup coverage during sick leave, vacations, training, etc. Some
additional resources would be shared county -wide, such as a field sergeant, an animal
cruelty sergeant and three FTE positions in dispatch. Off -duty hours would be covered
by either on -call animal control officers who are called back to duty, or King County
Sheriff's Office deputies. Total estimated costs for Tukwila for field services are based
on a three -year average of 373 calls for service from 2007 -2009.
Estimated sheltering costs for Tukwila ($84,411) are based on a 50/50 allocation of
usage at the Kent shelter and City population. The combination of usage and population
effectively spreads the cost of the Kent shelter over a larger number of King County
cities. Had the costs been allocated strictly based on shelter usage, the amounts
allocated to south King County cities would have been considerably higher. Despite the
fact that several north King County cities will be contracting with PAWS for sheltering
services, they would still contribute to system -wide sheltering costs. The County's cost
estimate for Tukwila is based on an average intake for the last two years of 268 animals
at the Kent shelter.
Estimated licensing costs for Tukwila ($12,915) are allocated based on total system
costs divided by a three -year average for licenses issued (1,207 for Tukwila). The cost
of licensing system -wide include issuance of the licenses, maintenance of owner
information to assist with tracking and placement of lost pets, preparation and
distribution of marketing materials for licensing purposes, pet owner education
programs, and public outreach in an attempt to increase licensing rates within each city.
The County has a deadline of June 30 for cities to opt in to the regional model and
formally approve and execute the new interlocal agreement.
RECOMMENDATION
The administration is requesting authorization for the Mayor to execute the interlocal
agreement with King County for animal care services. The interlocal agreement will be
for a two and a half year term, effective July 1, 2010.
This item is scheduled to be discussed at the June 8, 2010 Finance and Safety
Committee meeting, the June 14 Committee of the Whole meeting, and the June 21
Regular meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
Animal Services Interlocal Agreement
W:12010 InfoMemos\AnlmalServices LA.docx
Animal Services Interlocal Agreement,
This AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 1St day of July, 2010, 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 system access
for the public; 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 all cities in King County other than the City of Seattle, and has received a statement of
intent to sign such agreement from all Cities listed in Exhibit C -1 to this Agreement;
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 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
Contracting Parties.
b. "Animal Services" means Control Services, Shelter Services and Licensing
Services combined, as these services are described in Exhibit A.
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
1
2. Services Provided. 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 shall have sole discretion as
to the staffing assigned to receive and dispatch calls and shall be the sole judge as to
the most expeditious, efficient and effective manner of handling and responding to
calls for Animal Services. Except as set forth in Section 9 (Indemnification and
Hold Harmless), services to be provided by the County pursuant to this Agreement
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
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 Animal Services
Interlocal Agreement that has gone into effect as of July 1, 2010, per Section
15.
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
formulas set forth in Exhibit C. The Estimated Payment calculation may
result in a credit to the City payable by the County.
h. "Preliminary Estimated 2010 Payment" means the preliminary estimate of
the amount that will be owed by (or payable to) each Contracting Party on
January 15, 2011, as shown on Exhibit C -1.
i. "Final Estimated 2010 Payment" means the amount finally determined and
owed by each Contracting Party, on January 15, 2011, based on the number
of Contracting Cities with respect to which the Agreement goes into effect
per Sectionl5.
j. "Control District" means one of the four geographic areas delineated in
Exhibit B for the provision of Animal Control Services.
k. "Reconciliation Adjustment Amount" means the amount payable each
August 15 (commencing 2011) by either the City or County as determined
per the reconciliation process described in Exhibit D in order to reconcile the
Estimated Payments made for the prior Service Year as compared to actual
cost, revenue, population and usage data for such Service Year, so that Cities
pay for Animal Services based on actual (rather than estimated) data.
1. "Service Year" means the calendar year in which Animal Services are or
were provided; provided that in 2010, the Service Year is the period from July
1, 2010 December 31, 2010.
2
do not include legal services, 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 at any time
before August 1, 2011. Enhanced Services will be provided subject to the
terms and conditions described in Exhibit E. As further detailed in Exhibit
E, if a request for Enhanced Control Service is made after the commencement
of this Agreement, the County shall decide when and if the service begins
based on the necessity for and ability of the County to hire additional staff to
provide the service and the increment of service requested.
3. City Obligations.
a. Animal Regulatory Codes Adopted. 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 City. 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 alleged violations of City ordinances.
c. Cooperation and Licensing Support. 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
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
3
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
4. Term. This Agreement will take effect on July 1, 2010 and unless extended pursuant
to Subparagraph 4.a below, shall remain in effect for a term of two and one -half
years ending on December 31, 2012. Notwithstanding anything in this section to the
contrary, this Agreement shall remain in effect for only 60 days if the Minimum
Contracting Requirements in Section 15 (Terms to Implement Agreement) are not
met. The Agreement may not be terminated for convenience.
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
mechanisms such as utility 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 accurate and timely records regarding
all pet license sales processed by the City to the County; 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).
a. Extension of Term.
i. Automatic Extension of Agreement. This Agreement shall be
automatically extended for an additional two year term, ending on
December 31, 2014; provided that such an automatic extension shall
not occur if any Contracting Party has provided a written Notice of
Intent to Not Automatically Extend as provided in subsection (ii)
below.
ii. Notice of Intent to Not Automatically Extend. Any Party may chose to
not automatically extend its Agreement by providing a written notice
of such intent to the other Party no later than May 1, 2012. The County
will include a written reminder of this May 1 deadline when
providing the City notice of its 2012 Estimated Payments (notice due
December 15, 2011 per Section 5).
iii. Process for Agreed Extension. Upon receiving or issuing a Notice of
Intent to Not Automatically Extend pursuant to subsection (ii), the
County shall arrange for the Contracting Parties to meet no later than
June 1, 2012, in order to confer on whether they wish to extend their
respective Agreements given revised costs and other implications
resulting from the potential reduced number of Contracting Parties.
Contracting Parties wishing to extend their respective Agreements
through December 31, 2014 may mutually agree in writing to do so by
no later than July 1, 2012. Absent such an agreed extension, the
Agreement shall terminate on December 31, 2012.
4
payment information to the City according to the schedule described below. The
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 and when
described as follows (a list of all payment related notices and dates is included at
Exhibit C -7):
a. Service Year 2010: Animal Services Provided from Tuly 1 through December
31. 2010. On or before August 1, 2010, the County shall provide notice to
each Contracting Party of the Final Estimated 2010 Payment schedule. The
Final Estimated 2010 Payment will be derived from the Preliminary
Estimated 2010 Payment Amount set forth in Exhibit C -1, adjusted based on
the final Contracting Cities. The City shall pay the County the Final
Estimated 2010 Payment on or before January 15, 2011; provided that, if the
calculation of the Final Estimated 2010 Payment shows the City is entitled to
receive a payment from the County, the County shall pay the City the
amount owing on or before such date. The County will issue a notice of the
City's Reconciliation Adjustment Amount for Service Year 2010 on or before
June 30, 2011. The Reconciliation Adjustment Amount shall be payable on or
before August 15, 2011.
b. Service Years after 2010.
i. Initial Estimate by August 1. To assist the City with its budgeting
process, the County shall provide the City with a non binding,
preliminary estimate of the Estimated Payments for the upcoming
Service Year on or before each August 1.
ii. Estimated Payment 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 Payments Due Each Tune 15 and December 15. The City
shall 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 shall pay the City such amount on or before each
June 15 and December 15.
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
5
iv. The Reconciliation Adjustment Amount for the prior Service Year
shall be payable on or before August 15 of the following calendar
year, as described in Section 6.
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 which shall have ten (10) days to cure
non payment. In the event the Party fails to cure its nonpayment, the
amount owed shall accrue interest thereon at the rate of 1% per month
from and after the original due date and, in the event 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. In the event 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.h.
c. Payment Obligation 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, 2010, the Final Estimated 2010 Payment is nevertheless due
on or before January 15, 2011, and the Reconciliation Adjustment Amount
shall be payable on or before August 15, 2011.
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 system
based on their actual, rather than estimated, use of Animal Services, there will be an
annual reconciliation of actual costs and usage. 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 cost,
revenue, usage and population data for such Service Period as detailed in Exhibit
D. The County shall provide the results of the reconciliation to all Contracting
Parties in writing on or before June 30. The Reconciliation Adjustment Amount
shall be payable on August 15 of the then current year, regardless of the prior
termination of the Agreement as per Section 5.c.
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
6
7. Transitional Licensing Revenue Support Services. The County will provide
enhanced licensing marketing services in 2010 as described in this section to the five
cities with the lowest per- capita rates of licensing revenue shown on Exhibit C -5
(the "Licensing Revenue Support Cities but any such city shall receive these
services only if the effective term (determined per Section 15) of its specific
Agreement is for two- and one half years.
a. The marketing support services include, on a "per unit" basis, approximately
$20,000 in County staff and materials support (which may include use of
volunteers or other in -kind support) and is estimated to generate 1,250 new
licenses (equivalent to approximately $30,000 in licensing revenue).
i. Licensing Revenue Support Cities over 100,000 in population will each
receive two units of enhanced licensing marketing support.
ii. Licensing Revenue Support Cities less than 100,000 in population will
share in one unit of enhanced licensing marketing support.
b. Receipt of a unit of licensing revenue support is subject to the receiving 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; assistance in recruiting
canvassing staff, if applicable; and providing information to the County to
assist in targeting its canvassing activities, if applicable.
8. Mutual Covenants/Independent Contractor. Both 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 regarding citizen complaints, service
requests and general information on animal control services is the Manager
of Regional Animal Services.
9. Indemnification and Hold Harmless.
a. City 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
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
7
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
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. County 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
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.
c. Liability Related to City Ordinances. Policies. Rules and Regulations. 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
8
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 between 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
representative from each City that has signed a like Agreement and chooses to
appoint a representative shall meet not 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:
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.
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
9
12. Reporting. The County will provide the City with an electronic report not less
than twice each year summarizing call response and system usage data for each of
the Contracting Cities and the County and the Animal Services system. 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 may be amended upon approval of the County and at least two thirds
(66 of the legislative bodies of all other Contracting Parties to this Agreement (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 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 shall require consent of the legislative authorities of all Parties.
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
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
d. Promoting licensing through joint marketing activities of cities and the
County, including recommending where the County's marketing efforts will
be deployed each year.
e. Exploring options for increasing service delivery efficiencies across the
board.
f. Studying options for repair and /or replacement of the Kent Shelter.
g. Reviewing results of a compensation and classification study which the
County agrees to complete by July 1, 2011, benchmarking the County's
Animal Services staffing policies as compared to other publicly operated
animal services systems.
h. Review the results of the County's calculation of the Reconciliation
Adjustment Amounts.
i. Reviewing preliminary proposed budgets for Animal Services.
j. Providing input into the formatting, content and details of periodic system
reports as per Section 12 of this Agreement.
k. Reviewing and providing input on proposed Animal Services operational
initiatives.
10
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
shelter for purposes of addressing shelter overcrowding or developing other
means to enhance the effectiveness, efficiency or capacity of the animal care
and sheltering system within King County.
b. Severabilitv,. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision,
section or portion thereof, shall not affect the validity of the remaining
provisions of the Agreement.
c. Survivability. 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.
d. 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 perfoimance 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.
e. 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 Animal
Services programs and the care and treatment of animals in those programs.
f. 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.
g. 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.
h. Notices. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, any notice
required to be provided under the terms of this Agreement shall be delivered
by certified mail, return receipt requested or by personal service to the
following person:
For the City: CITY OF TUKWILA
6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD.
TUKWILA, WA 98188
ATTN: SHAWN HUNSTOCK, FINANCE DIRECTOR
11
For the County: Caroline Whalen, Director
King County Dept. of Executive Services
401 Fifth Avenue, Suite 610
Seattle WA. 98104
i. Assignment. No Party may sell, transfer or assign any of its rights or benefits
under this Agreement without the approval of the other Party.
j. Venue. The Venue for any action related to this Agreement shall be in
Superior Court in and for King County, Washington.
k. 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.
1. No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is for the benefit of the Parties
only, and no third party shall have any rights hereunder.
m. 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
for the full proposed two and a half year term only if certain Minimum Contracting
Requirements are met or waived as described in this section; provided further, that if
such conditions are not met, then the Agreement will go into effect for a six month
term per subparagraph (c) or a 60 -day emergency period as provided for below
under subparagraph (d). The Minimum Contracting Requirements include:
a. For both the City and the County:
i. 2010 Payment Test: The Final Estimated 2010 Payment, calculated
including the County and all Cities that have executed the Agreement
prior to July 1, 2010 (regardless of whether such Contracting Parties
have opted for a 6 month or 2.5 year initial term), does not exceed the
Preliminary Estimated 2010 Payment as set forth in Exhibit C -1 by
more than five percent (5 or $3,500, whichever is greater. Either
Party may waive its failure to meet this test in order to allow the
Agreement to go into effect for the 6 month term.
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
12
16. Administration. This Agreement shall be administered by the County
Administrative Officer or his/her designee, and by the City
TUKW I LA or his/her designee.
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
ii. Implied 2011 Payment Test: In addition, if the City has agreed to an
initial term of 2.5 years, the Final Estimated 2010 Payment, calculated
including the County and those Cities that have similarly opted for an
Initial Term of 2.5 years, does not exceed the Preliminary Estimated
2010 Payment shown for the Party in Exhibit C -1(A) by more than
five percent (5 or $3,500, whichever is greater. Either Party may
waive its failure to meet this test in order to allow the Agreement to
go into effect for the 2.5 year term.
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.
c. Term of Agreement Limited to Six Months if Implied 2011 Payment Test
Not Met: If the County's Minimum Contiguity of Service Requirement is
met or waived by the County and the 2010 Payment Test with respect to both
Parties is met or waived, but the 2011 Test is not met or waived for both
Parties, then the Agreement shall take effect for a term of only six months
(expiring December 31, 2010).
d. Emergency 60 -day agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the 2010
Payment Test is not met, then regardless of whether the County's Minimum
Contiguity of Service Requirement is met, this Agreement shall go into effect
on July 1, 2010, on an emergency basis for a period of 60 -days, terminating
August 31, 2010. The City shall by January 15, 2011, pay the Final Estimated
2010 Payment calculated in accordance with Section 6.a, pro -rated to reflect
the 60 day (rather than 6- month) term, provided further that there will be no
reconciliation of the Estimated Payment amounts so paid.
13
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed effective as of July 1, 2010.
King County
Date Date
King County City Attorney
Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
Date Date
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
City of TUKW I LA
JIM HAGGERTON, MAYOR
Dow Constantine
King County Executive City Manager Mayor
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form:
14
Exhibit A: Animal Services Description
List of Exhibits
Exhibit B: Control Services District Map Description
Exhibit B Map of Control Service District, as initially applicable
Exhibit B Map of Control Service Districts beginning January 1, 2011
Exhibit C: Calculation of Estimated Payments
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
Exhibit C -1: Preliminary Estimated 2010 Payment (Annualized) (showing
participation only by those jurisdictions that have expressed interest as of May 27,
2010 in contracting for either 6 months or 2.5 years))
Exhibit C -1(A): "Implied 2011" Estimated Payments for purposes of
Section 15.a.2 (2010 Estimated Payment (Annualized) showing
participation only of those jurisdictions that indicated they are seeking a 2.5
year Agreement— Actual Estimated 2011 Payments will be different, based
on adjustments for 2011 Budgeted Total Allocable Costs, revised Revenue
estimates, and application of Budget Inflator Cap)
Exhibit C -2: Population, Calls for Service, Shelter Use and Licensing
Data for Jurisdictions, Used to Derive the Preliminary and Final
Estimated 2010 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 2010
Exhibit C -4: Transition Credit, Resident Usage Credit and Impact
Mitigation Credit Calculation and Allocation
Exhibit C -5: Cities receiving Transitional Licensing Revenue Support in
2010
Exhibit C -6: Summary of Calculation Periods for Use and Population
Components
Exhibit C -7: Payment and Calculation Schedule
15
Exhibit D: Reconciliation
Exhibit D -1: Calculation of Support Cost Adjustment Factor
Associated with Enhanced Control Service ("0")
Exhibit E: Enhanced Control Services Contract (Optional)
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
16
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
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 Monday through
Friday every week (excluding holidays and County- designated furlough
days, if applicable) for a minimum of eight hours per day (normal business
hours). The County may adjust the days of the week the call center operates
based on 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 Control
Districts. Each of the geographic Control Districts, as shown on Exhibit B
will be staffed with one Animal Control Officer (ACO) five consecutive days
per -week. (such days to be selected by the County) for not less than eight
hours per -day "Regular ACO Service Hours subject to the limitations
provided in this Section. Except as the County may in its sole discretion
determine is necessary to protect officer safety, Animal Control Officers 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 for the period from July 1
through December 31, 2010; Exhibit B -2 shows the map of Control Districts
for the period after 2010. The daily eight -hour service period shall be
determined by the County and shall start not earlier than 7 a.m. and end not
later than 7 p.m. Countywide, the County will have a total of not less than
6 Animal Control Officers (Full -Time Equivalent employees) on staff to
maximize the ability of the County to staff each Control District
notwithstanding vacation, sick leave, and other absences, and to respond to
17
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
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 Animal
Control Officers in order to minimize any such gaps in coverage. In the
event of extended absences among the 6 Animal Control Officers, the County
will re- allocate remaining Animal Control Officers as practicable in order to
balance the hours of service available in each Control District.
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 provide for a
location for Animal Control vehicles to be stationed overnight in both north
and south King County.
c. The County will use its best efforts to ensure that High Priority Calls are
responded to by an Animal Control Officer 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 Animal Control Officer),
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 Animal Control Officer as
necessary oravailable, all as determined necessary and appropriate in the
sole discretion of the 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 (Animal Control Officer requested to patrol a
specific area due to possible code violations),
3. Trespass,
4. Stray Dog /Cat /other animal confined,
18
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.
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
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
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. In addition to the Animal Control Officers 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 Animal Control Officers five days per week at least 8
hours /day (subject to vacation /sick leave /training /etc.).
2. An Animal Cruelty Sergeant will be on staff at least 40 hours
per week to respond to animal cruelty cases and prepare
related reports (subject to vacation /sick leave /training /etc.).
3. Two Animal Control Officers will be on call every day at times
that are not Regular ACO Service Hours (including the two
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.
f. The Parties understand that rural areas of the County will generally receive a
less rapid response time from ACOs than urban areas.
g. Cities may contract with King County for "Enhanced Control Services"
through separate agreement (as set forth in Exhibit E).
19
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 coordinator 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 specialist at the Shelter to
provide for and manage adoption events and other activities leading to the
placement of animals in appropriate homes.
e. One veterinarian and one veterinarian technician will be scheduled to work
at the Shelter six -days per week, during normal business hours. Veterinary
services provided include animal exams, treatment and minor procedures,
spay /neuter and other surgeries Limited emergency veterinary services
will be available in non business hours, through third -party contracts, and
engaged if and when the County determines necessary.
f. Targeted animal operating capacity at the Shelter is 7,000 per year. 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 Cities contracting with PAWS (Potentially including Shoreline,
Bothell, Woodinville, 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
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
20
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 control officers in the Northern #200) district of the County.
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: Licensing Services
Licensing services include the operation and maintenance of a unified system to license
pets in Contracting Cities.
1. The public will be able to purchase pet licenses in person at the County Licensing
Division public service counter in downtown Seattle (500 4th 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 will 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 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.
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
21
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.
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
22
District #200 (Northern District)
Shoreline
Lake Forest Park
Kenmore
Bothell (only through December 31, 2010)
Woodinville
Kirkland
Redmond
Duvall
Carnation
Sammamish
District #240 (Western District)
Tukwila
SeaTac
Kent
Document Dated 5 -28 -W
Exhibit B: Control Service District Map
The attached map (Exhibit B -1) shows the boundaries of the 4 Control Service Districts as
established at the commencement of this Agreement. Exhibit B -2 shows the proposed
boundaries for the Control Service Districts to be established effective January 1, 2011.
The cities and towns included in each Control District are as follows:
District #220 (Eastern District)
Bellevue
Mercer Island
Yarrow Point
Clyde Hill
Town of Beaux Arts
Issaquah
Snoqualmie
North Bend
Newcastle
District #260 (Southern District)
Auburn
Covington
Maple Valley
Black Diamond
Enumclaw
The Districts shall each include portions of unincorporated King County as illustrated on
the Exhibits B -1 and B -2.
23
Document Dated 5-28-10
c. fesi
W
horeline
1
"it. FS
Urban Growth Boundary
A tkontract Cities
Exhibit B-1
The Control District Map, applicable through December 31, 2010
KrklanifHt
Redmond
4423lal Cats: 2,20k,
i it
4. 1 f"
385000
Po, OlaledAta".:,,.320 sq.70.
rdterOagsr ""'l
:e
l 22)V; i
Plea: "..1;1`)-sc(n):1. '1
•A.1" li.. 2.{,kZE" 1
I
l
I
1
Ti
Control Districts 2010
all volumes estimated based
on 2007 2009 averages
King County
:7
24
E
:Population: 20■5:,00
J Populate:1Na:
lop 5311111.,
fi Total Calls: 2890;
I
Document Dated 5-28-10
Veder4..,
Urban Growth Boundary
Non-Contract Cities
Exhibit B-2
Control District Map applicable January 2011 and Beyond
1 111g1i)el1k Wo9 inqle
1
---1 4-1Lre-4'1?x .4 'ir:,,,k.a pulation:...351,000 r
fr 'lb sii ,o 713,11,1akeflAre4.: 310 sq„ffli:
t Rednioricki
d.
dif.4701
iadA360 sq.mi.
Total Calls: 4200
Populat1cti. 2(.12.(DO
Popul4
Control Districts
2011 and Out Years
Call volumes estimated based
on 2007 2009 averages
King County
,ZEVS-riS
25
26
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 herein:
Control Services costs are to be equally shared among the 4 geographic Control
Districts. Each Contracting Party located within a Control District is to be allocated
a share of Control District costs based 50% on the Party's relative share of total Calls
for Service within the Control District and 50% on its relative share of total
population within the Control District.
Shelter Services costs are to be allocated among all Contracting Parties based 50%
on their relative population and 50% 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 and that charge will
be one -half the regular shelter services cost population component payable by other
cities; and
Licensing Services costs are to be allocated between all Contracting Parties, based
50% on their relative population and 50% on the number of licenses issued to
residents of each Contracting Party.
Licensing revenue is to be attributed based on the residency of the individual
purchasing the license.
Each Estimated Payment covers the cost of six months of Animal Services.
Three credits are applicable to various cities to reduce the amount of their
Estimated Payments: a Transition Funding Credit (for cities with high per- capita
costs); a Resident Usage Credit (for cities with low usage as compared to
population); and an Impact Mitigation Credit (for cities whose projected costs were
most impacted by decisions of certain cities not to participate in the regional
Agreement). Application of these Credits is limited such that the Estimated
Payment cannot fall below zero (before or after the annual reconciliation
calculation) with respect to the Transition Funding Credit, or below $2,750 or $2,850
(both amounts are annualized) with respect to the Resident Usage Credit and
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
27
Impact Mitigation Credit (depending on whether Bothell received Animal Services
in the Service Year being reconciled).
Estimated Payments are reconciled to reflect actual revenues and actual usage as
well as changes in population. The reconciliation calculation occurs in June of the
following calendar year. The reconciliation calculation and payment process is
described in Exhibit D. The receipt of Transition Funding Credits, Resident Usage
Credits, or Impact Mitigation Credits can never result in the amount of the
Estimated Payments as reconciled falling below the limits described in the
paragraph above ($0, $2,750 or $2,875 (annualized), depending on the credit and
whether Bothell received service under an Agreement during the Service Year).
Estimated Payment Formula:
EP= [EC +ES +EL- ER— T— U —M] =2
Where:
"EP" is the Estimated Payment. For Cities receiving a Transition Credit, Resident Usage
Credit or Impact Mitigation Credit, the value of EP may not be less than the amounts
prescribed in Exhibit C -4.
"EC" is the City's share of the Budgeted Net Allocable Control Services Cost for the
Service Year. See formula below for deriving "EC.
"ES" is the City's share of the Budged Net Allocable Shelter Services Cost for the Service
Year. See formula below for deriving "ES."
"EL" is the City's 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 Years 2010 and 2011, ER is derived from the number of each
type of active license issued to City residents in years 2009 (the "Calculation Period
shown on Exhibit C -2. For Service Year 2010, that number is multiplied by the cost of
those licenses in 2009 resulting in the estimated values for Service Year 2010 shown on
2009 licensing types and costs used for purposes of calculating Estimated Licensing Revenue per
jurisdiction in Exhibit C -1 include: Cat and Dog, Altered (spayed or neutered) $30; Cat and Dog, Unaltered-
$90; Cat and Dog, Juvenile (Iess than 6 months in age) $5; Dog, Senior (over 65)owner $20; Cat, Senior
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
28
Exhibit C -1, and then adding the amount of revenue estimated to be derived as a result of
the Transitional Licensing Support Services in 2010 to those five Cities identified in
Exhibit C -5 (the estimated Transitional Licensing Support Services revenue is also shown
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.
"T" is the Transition Funding Credit, if any, allocable to the City for each Service Year,
calculated per Exhibit C -4; provided however, a City identified in Exhibit C -4 is only eligible
for a Transition Credit if that City agreed to enter into this Agreement for a term through
December 31, 2012; provided further, that the amount of "T if any, for Service Year 2010
shall be applied pro rata to the calculation of the Final Estimated 2010 Payment even if,
despite the agreement of the City, the Agreement only goes into effect for 6 months or 60
days per Section 15.
"U" is the Resident Usage Credit, if any, allocable to the City for each Service Year,
calculated per Exhibit C -4; provided however, a City identified in Exhibit C -4 is only
eligible for a Resident Usage Credit if that City agreed to enter into this Agreement for a
term through December 31, 2012; provided further, that the amount of "U if any, for
Service Year 2010 shall be applied pro rata to the calculation of the Final Estimated 2010
Payment even if, despite the agreement of the City, the Agreement only goes into effect for
6 months or 60 days per Section 15.
"M" is the Impact Mitigation Credit, if any, allocable to the City for each Service Year,
calculated per Exhibit C -4; provided however, a City identified in Exhibit C -4 is only eligible
for an Impact Mitigation Credit if that City agreed to enter into this Agreement for a term
through December 31, 2012; provided further, that the amount of "M," if any, for Service
Year 2010 shall be applied pro rata to the calculation of the Final Estimated 2010 Payment
even if, despite the agreement of the City, the Agreement only goes into effect for 6
months or 60 days per Section 15.
And where:
"Budgeted Net Allocable Costs" are the estimated costs for the Service Year for the
provision of Animal Services which are allocated among the Contracting Parties for the
owner $12; Cat and Dog, Renewal, Service and Temporary, Senior owner renewal $0. License types and
costs are subject to change over time.
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
29
purposes of determining the Estimated Payment. The Budgeted Net Allocable Costs are
calculated as the Budgeted Total Allocable Costs (subject to the Annual Budget Inflator
Cap) less Budgeted Total Non- Licensing Revenue. The Budgeted Total Allocable Costs
exclude any amount expended by the County as Transition Funding Credits, Resident Use
Credits, or Impact Mitigation Credits (described in Exhibit C -4) or to provide Transitional
Licensing Revenue Support Services (described in Section 7). The calculation of Budgeted
Net Allocable Costs, Budgeted Total Allocable Costs and Budgeted Total Non Licensing
Revenue for purposes of calculating the Estimated 2010 Payments is set forth in Exhibit C-
3.
"Total Licensing Revenue" means all revenue received by the County's Animal Services
System attributable to the sale of pet licenses excluding late fees. With respect to each
Contracting Party, the amount 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.) The value of Estimated Licensing Revenue for
each Contracting Party for purposes of calculating the Estimated 2010 Payment includes
amounts estimated to be generated from Transitional Licensing Revenue Support Services,
and is shown on Exhibit C -1.
"Total Non Licensing Revenue" means all revenue from fine, forfeitures, and all other
fees and charges received by the County's Animal Services system, excluding Total
Licensing Revenue.
"Transitional Licensing Support Services" means activities to be undertaken in specific
cities in 2010 to enhance licensing revenues, per Section 7 of the Agreement.
"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 only
the unincorporated area) plus 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. Similarly, the Estimated Payment for any Party will increase or decrease
from Service Year to Service Year based on that Party's population and usage of Animal
Services from year to year
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
30
"Service Year" is the calendar year in which Animal Services are /were provided. (In 2010,
the Service Year is the period from July 1, 2010 —December 31, 2010; the Estimated
Payment calculation shown in Exhibit C is based on annualized costs).
"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. In
Service Years 2010 and 2011, the Calculation Period for Calls for Service "CFS Animals
"A or Licenses Issued ("I") (all as further defined below) is based on multiple year
averages as detailed in Exhibit C -6. For Service Year 2012 and beyond (if the Agreement
is extended into an additional 2 -year term), the Calculation Period is the year that is two
calendar years prior to the Service Year (thus, for Service Year 2012, the Calculation Period
is 2010). Exhibit C -6 summarizes in table form the Calculation Periods for the usage and
population factors for Service Years 2010, 2011 and 2012.
"Population" with respect to any Contracting Party for any Service Year means the
population number derived from the State Office of Financial Management (OFM) most
recent annually published report of population to be used for purposes of allocation of
state shared revenues in the subsequent calendar year (typically published by OFM each
July, reflecting final population estimates as of April of the same calendar uearl. The OFM
reported population will be adjusted for annexations of 2,500 or more residents. For
example, when the final Estimated Payment calculation for 2012 is provided on December
15, 2011, the population numbers used will be from the OFM report issued in July 2011
and will be adjusted for all annexations of 2,500 or more residents that occurred (or will
occur) between April 1 and December 31, 2011. By way of further example, the
reconciliation of the 2012 payment (calculated in June 2013) will incorporate adjusted
population numbers based on the OFM population report issued in July 2012 adjusted for
all annexations of 2,500 or more residents that occurred between April 1, 2012 and
December 31, 2012. Where annexations occur, the City and County population values will
be adjusted pro rata to reflect the portion of the year in which the annexed area was in the
City and the portion of the year in which the area was unincorporated. 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 King County demographer. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the
population for all potential Contracting Parties for purposes of determining the final
Estimated 2010 Payment will be based on the July 2009 OFM report, adjusted for
annexations occurring through the end of December 2010, as known as of April, 2010, and
shown on Exhibit C -2, and the reconciliation of the Estimated 2010 Payments (calculated
in June 2011) will incorporate changes to population as reflected in the 2010 U.S. Census
(results expected to be published April 2011).
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
31
Exhibit C -1 shows the preliminary of EP for July 1— December 31, 2010,
assuming that the County and all Cities that have expressed interest in signing this
Agreement as of May 27, 2010, 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.
Component Calculation Formulas:
EC is calculated as follows:
EC {[(C x .25) x .5] x CFS} {[(C x. 25) x .5] x D -Pop}
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). Budgeted Net Allocable Control
Services Cost for Service Year 2010 is $1,698,600, calculated as shown on Exhibit C -3, and
shall be similarly derived for Service Years after 2010.
"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 2010 and 2011, the Calculation Period for CFS is the 3 -year period
from 2007 -2009, resulting in an annual average number of Calls for Service for the City
and each Contracting Party as shown on Exhibit C- 2.
"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 -28 -10
32
ES 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 reduced population -based charge 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.5 x Pop) -2
If the City does not qualify for the reduced population -based shelter charge, ES is
determined as follows:
ES [Sx.5x Pop' (ESP xPop2) +(Sx.5xA)
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) in the Service Year. The
Budgeted Net Allocable Shelter Services Cost for purposes of calculating Estimated 2010
Payments is $3,004,900 as shown on Exhibit C -3, and shall be similarly derived for Service
Years after 2010.
"ESP" is the sum of all reduced shelter costs payable in the Service Year by all cities
qualifying for such reduced charge.
"Pop" is the population of the City expressed as a percentage of the Population of all
Contracting Parties.
"Pop2" is the Population of the City expressed as a percentage of the Population of all
Contracting Parties that do not qualify for the reduced population -based shelter charge.
"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
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
33
purposes of the Estimated Payment in 2010 and 2011, the Calculation Period for "A" is the
two year period of 2008 and 2009, resulting in an average annual shelter usage number for
the City and each Contracting Party as shown in Exhibit C -2.
EL is calculated as follows:
EL I(L x .5 x Pop) (L x .5 x I)]
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. The Budgeted Net Licensing Cost for purposes of
calculating Estimated 2010 Payments is $898,400, calculated as shown on Exhibit C -3, and
shall be similarly derived for Service Years after 2010.
"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 2010 and 2011, the Calculation Period for "I" is
the three year period from 2007 -2009, and the resulting average annual number of licenses
as so calculated for the City and each Contracting Party is shown on Exhibit C =2.
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
34
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
35
(Budgeted Total Allocable Costs
I Budgeted Non Licensing Revenue
!Budgeted Net Allocable Costs
Animal Control
District Number
Bothell
Carnation
Duvall
Estimated Unincorporated King County
Kenmore
N Kirkland
Lake Forest Park
Redmond
Sammamish
Shoreline
Woodinville
SUBTOTAL FOR CITIES IN 200 (excludes unincorporated area)
Beaux Ans
Bellevue
Clyde Hill
Estimated Unincorporated King County
O Hunts Point
N Issaquah
Mercer island
Newcastle (7)
North Bend
Snoqualmle
Yarrow Point
SUBTOTAL FOR CITIES IN 220 (excludes unincorporated area)
Burien (Includes North Highllne Area X Annexation)
Estimated Unincorporated King County
N Kent (Includes Panther Lake Annexation)
SeaTac
Tukwila
SUBTOTAL FOR CITIES IN 240 (excludes unincorporated area)
Algona
Auburn
Black Diamond
Covington
tO
ry Enumclaw
Estimated Unincorporated King County
Maple Valley
Pacific
SUBTOTAL FOR CITIES IN 260 (excludes unincorporated area)
(TOTAL FOR CITIES
'Total King County Unincorporated Area Allocation
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
Exhibit C -1
Preliminary Estimated 2010 Payment (Annualized) (1)
(Showing participation only of those Jurisdictions that have expressed interest as of May 27, 2010 in contracting for either 6 months or 2.5 years)
Jurisdiction I
Source: HC 0 /(Iee o(Meneeemenr and Budget and Animal Can and Control
Dale: May 27, 2010
Control
51,705,0001
56.5001
51,698,5001
Sh'el2er:>
$3.207.400i
5202,6001
53,004.9001
Estimated Control Estt'matekl Sheller
Servidae'Coet Serylcee Cost
.Alloeatlan', (Y)
Allocation(3)II
534.993
52.650
$6.806
5108.379
526,305
$51.479
$14,144
$51.589
839.496
673,664
515 121
$315;245)
525 8941
$13.931t
$9,918)
512.4481
51-0651
$253,7811'
$106.877
5208,4501
562.145t
$47 153t
$317.7461
5144.84
$10.251t
$49,589r
530.5961
$143,3891
$4596
$281,236
I $1,169,0121
$529,4881
0353.200
$18.659r
568.0631
$747,091 I
Licerisliiti_I:
$943,400,
545.0001
$898,4001
$39.2491 517.8331
619.3491 55,7651
$15,427) $4.188:
$22.0041 57.1771
$1.4611 $8531
$409,5411••• $1530161.:
/see tote) below) (see total below)
$694.3091 087.5551
8112,8311 519,605)
583.9961 512.478)
$891;1366.• 3119;6371`
549.684
53.525r
$16.3861
$57.5021 08.8851
(see Iola) below)) /see total below)
$6801/ $17749
..Estimated E4tiniated.Totat: 9
-LieelieIeg Cost ''(Aplmal Saividest is
Ailocat)on (4), Cost Atloeallofi
5665,441 '$96,328
52,257,8091 $618,2851
$280,1151
r:).TOtal ko,LP,at$V'••200.9141F9a,Jngr
vK
tteveniie; ix "r,'+
$5,866,800
$254,000
55,601.8001 $3,068,875
5123.110
582 9760
539.065)
$29.531)
$41.630)
$3,3791
58171390
(see total below) (see total below)
5990.3140 $255.3651
5194.580) 553.0651
5143.627) $30.3481
91,328,5220.:;.;, •.$338 ;7771•.'.
6547.72
$32.534)
5134.036)
596.9631
/see total be/owll
5131 726
$943,096 r -':$316;777
54,045,10611 52,040,5231
$1,558,694 J
5159415
513.0711
560.5341
522,4641
/see total below)!
062 2931
$1,029,3521
tlmated'Net
?1�.E4st
42.531,925
Eatiio`$tetl
CbhtIAlleca0pn tFuit8tri
523.5051 531.1341 589.63211 $102.0671 $12.4351 501
58.6881 51.627: 512.965) 55.7231 57.2421 51.674
$13.2701 55605) S25.681) 522.1131 $3.5681 00
/see Iota) below) /see total below)�(see total below) (see total below) I (see total below) I
514.401 019,926 660.6911 573.165 512,469,
5102.7671 040.559 5194.8040 6159,2111 535.5991 SO
59.0651 513,251 536,4611 571.9871 035.527) SO
5102.1751 542.704 5196,4681 5134,3111 562,1570 50
071.8031 535.939 $147.2371 5135.3471 511,8901 50
$38 4111 $47.910 $159.985) 5189.3471 $29,3621 $0
57.5451 59,849 032.515) $37.9181 $5,4030 SO
$391,6911. $248,5031' 5956,4400 '$931,1861, 425.255% 41.674
564,509 $58,601
$55.1131 527.863)
$10.0001 529,0650
574.3411 -$15,190)
$23.6671 -517.9631
$2984) -$5151
5453,784t.- 4363,3651
5389.310
519.4631
473,504)
574.519)
(see tote/betowll
-569 433
42,004,582
-$527,343
NA
54471 $4771 83131 51.237) 59001 -$3371 80
$145.7291 $245.5201 594 283i 8485.532) 5274.3461 5211,185) 50
$3536r 84.578) 52.5661 510.680) 08.0441 82,636) $0
5170.844 see total below see iota/ below (5881otat below /see total below see toter below NA
(r:
$20,8
9
$40,815
$61,476
$0 $0 558,601
$01 $25.1131 42.7500
001 510,9671 418,0981
$4.1721 501 411,0181
$0) $3.9581 514.005)
$5) 001 4515)
$4,1721.,,: $133,0681.:'.; ••,4226.114r
(see total below) NA
5734.9491 5334,8341
5141.5161 $22,5511
$113,279) 515,9251
4989.744)' -r $373 13091
5199,64
$3.6641
515.3641
633.9031
NAI
$18 265
$01 $124351
$0 -$5.558)
5865 52.703)
NA NA
SO 512.469
930.557 55.037)
S0 035.527)
543.060 $18097)
59,140 -$2,7501
60 529.362)
50 $5,403)
$83:6221. :•'.!4;
501
593,0301
501
NA
NA
549.065(
57.9531
$5.6441
$62 ;6631':',.
80)
60
$169
NAI
SO
5337)
0118.155)
42.636)
NA
NA NA NA
4351.0501 560,0001 5291.0501
4111,012) 510,0001 5101,0121
491.7101 $10,000) 481,71151
.4563,772%.,,... 5805091- .4473.7721
4189,66
515;1991
456,1401
540,4471
NA;
-551 16
4626,228 :$270;645 r' ;$169 4365,214
$650,000) 6279,6211 41,075,061%
Kind County Transitional Costs
One -Time Implementation Costs 181'
Other Operational and Reform Effort Costs 191
Transition Fundlna for Cities
Credits
TOTAL' FOR
Estimetad;,i
e ,',enue,fioni,
Estimated Net
Tianaltloaa Final cost=.
iLl cagelri9i
;,Support,
SO1
sot
$01
NA)
SO)
501
50)
$01
Sot
SO1
SOt
$01 $60,040
sot 4337
$60.0001 456.155
$01 42,636
NA NA
SO
$m
sot
510.000)
NA)
SO
1, :$10;0
$160,000)
$17.435
-55.555
52,7031
NA I
$12,469
$5,037
$35,527
519.097
-$2,750
529.362
95,4031
458,601
42.750
418.091
411.0181
514,00:9
-$5151
'3166;114'
$189.661
$15,7991
$58.1401
530.4471
NA
451,168
:-$345;214
$925,061
$527,343
1 1
$495,0001
6689,0001
$660,000
1 $279,521
-1
36
Valdes for northern cities anticipating using PAWS for sheltering
C01`tird, Its overall net cost
ee ExhiWt 2 ImPaU typigat'wn Credswh1Gh Omits
Moines, No
50% try total c led 50% by King Utensil? revenue. For, a is g than 85,Dg0 and 1
N
1 'm enhanc 1 poasro
2 �g poputalbn, 50.1. 2009 population.
Pant, Algona• Pa 20091 and
SX Sin/Cornish, M{aoa• Nums 07. y1 and 54 %lY1' avera9etl for 2D08-
avera9?d Uom 20 shelter volume intake (averaged
tleu0, s
andY Park. Medina, 911 volume l County a
Dea Ica pee
o 1 p gvAM cities allocated at PAWS 2p07.2009) support s% wood be
2
3
include Renton. s14 are further allocated Shelter costs ate al e per capita one net
participate: Federal Way, then costs
contracts. S towel P mode
Ms n and
1
e only to al
s do not Pa ed to each control district under separate to the five cule�ttusa9 be nd dt
a costs thei( average 0%gr
Assumes the licensg costs. dated va s
d servl °04 contraaa era revenue backs a
One quarter oI control service em cities of sheltering a net cost allocations. Licensing 20 %gwatat man the charge et King County al vet tech. however' th
fu ed do at
Ably total number of adNe licenses t ore than d Moved in
cenam per capita nom and wag con tingency This excludes the cost to northern
allocation. %bY PopulsiWa and u1a to cities with the regional mods) Mtpt G4 for more Newcastle to 2009 being a all rxdu hiring add
rwtudn only the 50 h population Ile In n two per ode1. Sea Ex s issued W N¢wo A. and vadoua sa o
y elymenle. Costs a
A reform efforts. Reform triode include .r
In an it on
t Capita limits the cost asocatwn In evious m A0p license transitional licensing support. aflons
4, licensing 009 are opting out of C lto n
Exhibit C-1, wh realer than in the W d mor markelirtg
8. Transition is allocated per 9 ovlded hate assumes trade, and rated area only adgtwislrator to support the Resident Usage etta nor more Cable W IT system up9 King unit progress, adding an
Maude 13 out of the mod to 2009. The revenue tact 0 egotiatwn ress,
6. Credits c rates aptM9 County tacitly Inane. Ks'grevrow reform pto9
increases Item license vn04 King temematton include,ern and crossroads consultants to
site did not h model imp ding sirudtae, hiring
One-t odiated brit i°r the ma1N(e clinic
S One -lime costs ass
de services es to Ili
g, Other operational costs msW i Jr
reported here. Reldrmt, reported here. changes
therefore the cost Is not reported here.
Bothell
enmore t os,X
Lake f
Shoreli
DocwTtent Dated 5-28-10
Jurisdiction
cMc, and Borten.
eP° Costs
with nctudin9 PAW S, I PAWS Shallaring
trading tea,ftnal N,er cost..
boom? e t
rsat ma tAdudln °Fie
Estimated Final Net Costs for Northern Cities COn 1� PAWS Shalterinr` As50r0109 Kleg 20%
in 20 9E Assumtn t Pote rittat Co. !t 8
Warning COUntY.2008:.2009 In Intake
a; saty 20 0 Kln 9 Incieasa lit. .•i ,and'415WAn{:nal §4
2009.2009 Intake and.' pvera9n fnteXa and'. Increaab 3.225
CouhN S /60tAntma g 83.3791 SO
Avere9e lrtake'and',SlWiAnlida -8815!
Es11(aatnd 8150rAnimai 815 0312 88114 SG
i4e1 Cost 813.0501 8c X0 532 82 272 803
8 351 87.57 S72 §6 -S2 5171
81246 831 82719U' §1197
1 8' 53 822. 97.92
82936 86.6
§5 4031
37
(Showing participation only of those jurisdictions
(Budgeted Total Allocable Costs (excluding budget Infatorl
!Budgeted Non Licensing Revenue
(Budgeted Net Allocable Costs
Animal Control
District Number,
Bothell
Carnation
Duvall
Estimated Unincorporated King County
Kenmore
N Kirkland
Lake Forest Park
Redmond
Sammamish
Shoreline
Woodinville
SUBTOTAL FOR CITIES IN 200 (excludes unincorporated area)
Beaux Arts
Bellevue
Clyde Hill
Estimated Unincorporated King County
Hunts Point
C4 Issaquah
Mercer Island
Newcastle (7)
North Bend
Snoqualmle
Yarrow Point
SUBTOTAL FOP. CITIES IN 220 (excludes unincorporated area)
Bunen (Includes North Highline Area X Annexation)
Estimated Unincorporated King County
N
Kent (Includes Panther Lake Annexation)
SeaTac
Tukwila
SUBTOTAL FOR CITIES IN 240 (excludes unincorporated'erea)
Algona
Auburn
Black Diamond
Covington
ro
C.4 Enumclaw
Estimated Unincorporated King County
Maple Valley
Pacific
SUBTOTAL FOG. CITIES IN 260 (excludes unincorporated area)
'TOTAL FOR CITIES
I Total King County Unincorporated Area Allocation
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
Jurisdiction
Source' NC Office ofManaaemenl and Budg.l and Animal Can, and Control
Bare: May 27, 2010
Exhibit C -1(A)
Implied 2011 Payments for Purpose of Section 15.a.2 (1)
that have expressed interest as of May 27, 2010 in contracting for 2.5 years actual estimated 2011 payments will be different, based on adjustments
for 2011 budgeted total allocable costs, revenues, and the application of budget inflator cap)
20
Total Allocated,. 09 ^Licensing EstimatedtNet.
I: Contioi' I Shelter Lhen51ri9_ Costs.„ I iRevenue `Gost:i
53,207,4001 $943,4001 $6,855,800
5202.5001 545.0001 5254,000
33.004,9001 5898,4001 $5,601,8001 52,967,808 $2,633,992
$1,705,0001
56,5001
$1.698.5001
'Estimated'AnimaI '''Eelinieted'. Estimated Estimated Tote!
Control Cost ,'.0 Sheltering.Cost •Licensing Gost ,Anlmal'Services :?OOD LIcensin9 'Eatlre )ed.Net 'i7raonlUon''•
Allocation (2) 'Allobatlon'(3),' ..A116411014) j Cost :Allocation 'R Pat Alloept101! i •Fupdi!10,(5).'
$2.685
$7,417
$118.143
$28,650
$56.116
$15,415
$56.251
543,070
$80,215
$16,463
.6308,4821
54471
5145.7291
$3,5361
$170,8441
540.815
025.8941
013.9311
$9.9161
512.4481
51.0651
$253 :7811
I $208.4501
I 562.1451
I 5471531
'I $317,748):.
$144.841
510.2511
$49.5891
530.5961
5143.3891
$45,960
$8,732 $1,686
513.4061 55,808
(see inlet below)! (see total below)
014.9281 020,651
5103.8861 542,012
89,3581 013.735
5103.3601 544.234
572.7321 537.235
039.6521 049,637
07,7891 510,206
$373,8431 $225,203
$484'
$281,236 $5681216
$1,159,2481 $2,250,8631
53251
0248.2741 $97,6411
$4.6431 $2,6581
ea total below)! (sae total belo
562.09
539.7661
$19.5751
515.5361
522.2261
51,4831
3414,0801,
521.560
518,4681
05.9831
54.3391
$7.4311
$8841
515912891
5354,741 551.441
818.7541 53,7551
568.4641 $16.9801
057.7641 59.2011
(see total below)! (see total below) I
568,493 518,387
$13,30
526.6311
(see total below)
564,2281
5202,0151
$38,5091
5203,8451
8153,0371
5169,5051
534,4581
$9.053291:•'
51,2561
$491,6441
810,8371
$124,46
$84,1311
539,4901
529.7901
042.1061
53,4321
S13271501..
0551.02
532,7601
5135.0331
597.5611
(see total below))
5132.840
$99;764. $949,216
6608,1421 54,018,2631
$5,723
522,113
(see total below)
$73,160
5159,211
$71,907
0134,311
$135,347
0189,347
$37,918
3829;117
$9001
$274,3461
56,0441
see total below
$64,509 $59,956
$55,1131 529,0181
$10,0001 $29,4901
$14.3411 515.4491
523,6671 518,4391
$2,8641 -$5681
$453.7841,.: -3 4373;3661
5158,415
513,0711
$60,534,
522,4641
(see total below)!
$62 293
54.5181
/see total below))
$8,9321
542,8041
533.4791
469,5331
517,6901
519,8421
5392,608
419,6891
574.4981
575,0971
(see total below) I
470 54/
$316,777 4632.439
$1,938,4561 52,079,7971
$539,2521 $754,0371 $290,258 91,583,5471 51,029,302 4554,1951
51,6
Sol
NA)
$01
$01
501
50
$01
501
53,4601 501
$76,412I:.
43561 $01
5217,2981 $01
52,7931 501
ee total below NA
$0
$01
501
54.1721
801
501
:.1. .;541.721
$199,649
53,6641
815,3641
533,9031
NA)
:5270,045 •SO
$650,0001
$81
01,693
NA
S0
537,540
$0
$48.637
$14,815
50
$O
S0)
596,5001
501
N.
$0
526,143
$10,569
SO
04,144
$35
'$137;390
5 0
S0!
$0)
$0)
NA)
$289,1191
5,825
42,8261
NA I
58,9321
45,2641
533,479,
420,8971
42.8751
018.8421
53,4601
:':.'6$28,0271'.
-$3561
4120,7981
42,7931
N
459,956
-52,8751
518,9211
411.2771
414,2951
45321 501
4231' :8041'0''
$106,877 /see total below) (see Iota/ below)
i
(see Intel below) l (see total De/owl )see total below) NA NA NA
5696.8941 $90.6701 5996.0141 5255,3651 47466491 53346341 541,5361 4364,2801
5113.4191 520.3011 5195,8641 553,0651 4142,8001 522,5511 54,645) 4115.6031
584.4111 012,9151 5144,4801 $30,3481 5114,1321 015,9251 52,7831 495,4241
'$894,7241:,.:. .$123,8861 $1.336:3 if,.. 33337771 ..,:$997.5811 :._,$373;3091" +$49,9641'• ,$575,307I.':
slip ":;a.
4192,960
416,0251
459,1341
441,1931
NAI
$18 265 $0
452 282
:.:$361.594
$1,140,6781
Klnn County Transitional Costs
One -TIme Implementation Costs (8)
Other Operational and Reform Effort Costs (9)
Transition Funding for Cities
Credits
TOTAL.•FORNINGicOUNT1';r' <`'_.4.
,'41
$150,000
SO
NA
SO
So
$0
$0
SO
So
$0
$01
360.0001
501
N.
S0
$01
501
$0)
$01
4
42.826
NA
56532
45,264
$33,479
420.897
42,875
$19,842
$3,460
-03561
460,798
$2,793
NA
459,956
42.875
410,921
411,277
414,295
-$532
$171,8041
NA NA
$60,0001 4304,2801
510.0001 4105,6031
510.000' 485.4241
$80,0001 5495,3071
SO
$01
$0)
$10,000)
NA)
$o
5192,960
416,0251
-059.1341
431.1931
NA I
452,282
-$351;594
$590,678
$994,195
$495.000
$689,0001
5650,000
$289,119
$2:677:3.14
38
Po1M. 419 °na, Paci6e, Butie, and =Ion,
n.
1 1 2009 rC9
tit C -Z�A) cont komish, Mitlon,Hed tram 007.2009 k e to
and 50'4 n avera ed lu
Exhibit i• i b Park Medina. V e lavers Kln9 G °only shell
in ke
rF er vo
Moines. mandY Ica9volum
Not 5 0.5 by rota qy hY
RanWn. pea her agocated are allocated 59
Way, S eattle coats ereau c�tracts Sheller costs t
ar saps a true cities via„ tit
participate: Federal W V rot district. th6n tour ha untlu t e usags
i st Par capda
only mod
el
Notes: titles do not P allocated to each otrrMia�s at PAW S e 2007.200 oM1 is allocated is
1, Assumes the 1o5owln9 jaw costs are ter)n9lrteir a licenses tavgfa9 lofts. ticenafn9 srtPP tits charge would gfRnskt9 CO
e. vt control aervi r tales of shat ,.,vita net cost adocat roster than n County
uda only ms a a9oGateP mr,. aUta Mm "ag the coat reviaus AOU nw�• gcem "ro
ich km Iha P es the arks
Ucensin9 ce51s ar cared pet °aPe Crad6, t OoA grtatet than m tads, and transrilon and eddi°9 an adminlstretor m s°
ResitleM Usa9 mare avltled he �Ya ysiamn uP0 County unlncorporaled area onW m
Transition lundin9l�oea° oriel to not revenue value n eva9an, tease, Km0 to9teas
Cred11s m °rude t ou t of me m m 2009. Tits ract ne9 ream P
tales opttn9 County Include coM crossroads tactlriY
creases Irom tvth King al lmPlem antatlon stems and hiring consultants to fewest t
of get effort vdm mod di structure, h 9
Newcastle d'rd n maintome sV PAWS Sheltadn8 Costs J...
costs assn is lndude services for ma ts to the clinic reporting i, One•11me Intrude changes tndud /n PAtinal Net Cost r
3 Other operenonai cos casts Contracting with PAWS ales PAWS Coats
Reform effort Had Pete ring rat)m
reported here is not mPO ern Cities Co Gost 1dilUdtn
lneretote me cost I Nat Costs tot North imate°
Estimate Fina
a e
Bothell
Kenmore
t P ^rk
,I, F ares
W lllP
Jurisdicti
gated 5 -2 8-10
.Eat, ShelleAn?
'tor PAWS Asaum• i 10'Y° g s a umh i g'0 .peaumth9 K PptaOUal Credit
PM% ,:county lnlakeand lnssoin imat
Assuming Inereasa In :Averag andise
Count 2006. 'u and s1509Antm
Finat AVaro9 lnWke end 51501Anrma1 52
oetlinated 91501An 59090 5373? ,,.1 6
Net Cdst
5
67.57
63.
922.5
966 MO
Sr OW
a7 9201
pot
91
5
41540
•St56
9.69 54,373,
47.2 4, 7S
,54,460
39
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
Exhibit C -2
Population, Calls for Service, Shelter Use and Licensing Data for Jurisdictions,
Used to Derive the Preliminary and Final Estimated 2010 Payment
Source: KC Office of Management and Budget and Animal Care and Control
Date: May 27, 2010
Proposed
District Jurisdiction
Bothell (2)
Carnation
Duvall
Estimated Unincorporated King County
Kenmore
o Kirkland
Lake Forest Park
Redmond
Sammamish
Shoreline
Woodinville
Beaux Arts
Bellevue
Clyde Hill
Estimated Unincorporated King County
Hunts Point
Issaquah
Mercer Island
Newcastle
North Bend
Snoqualmie
Yarrow Pt
Burien (includes North Highline Area X Annexation)
Estimated Unincorporated King County
N Kent (Includes Panther Lake Annexation)
SeaTac
Tukwila
Algona
Auburn
Black Diamond
Covington
N Enumclaw
Estimated Unincorporated King County
Maple Valley
Pacific
Population 3-Year Average 2 -Year Average 3 -Year Average
(1) Control Calls Shelter Intake Active Licenses
33,240 195 NAI 4,301
1,910 19 281 2061
5.980 41 201 7751
103,400 600 (see total below)I (see total below)
20.450 176 NAI 2,840
49,010 286 1361 4.995
12.820 83 NAI 1.972
51.890 268 1121 5,228
40.670 199 491 4.719
54.320 511 NAI 6,2801
10,670 108 NAI 1.344
s
3151 21 01 45
120.6001 5331 2991 10,900 1
2.815i 141 21 3461
92,800 9501 s ee total below (see total below)
26.890
22.720
9,925
4,760
9.730
965
48,200 750
113,1801 1,2021
25,7301 4671
18,1701 3731
195
861
621
591
491
31
991
231
211
391
351
O1
2,3791
2.0711
4001
548
771
112
(see total below) I (see total below)
2,4811 9.996
3511 2,197
268 1.207
67.485 672 1.191 5.325
4,1801 551 591 468
17.5301 2971 1971 2.260
11.4601 1751 1911 1.017
59,7001 7501 (see total below) I (see total below)1
20.8401 2201 1731 2.250
1
City Totals I 758,2551 6,3491 5,7691 74,954
King County Unincorporated Area Totals I 304,100 3,0501 1,3601 38,156
TOTALS:::::'..'
I..: :."9;062,355: 3,399'1;- 7,929 '993;110
1. Population and usage values have been adjusted to include 2010 annexations with effective dates of July 1, 2010 or earlier (i.e., Burien,
Panther Lake).
2. Bothell is opting for a 6 month option. They will not be included in allocations for 2011 and 2012.
40
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
General Fund Overhead Costs
Division Overhead Costs
Other Overhead Costs
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 Estimated 2010 Payments. All
values shown are based on annualized costs and revenues. The staffing levels incorporated in this
calculation are for year 2010 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 2010 (Annualized) Control Services Costs is shown below (all costs in 2010
dollars).
1 I Direct Service Management Staff Costs
2 Direct Service Field Staff Costs
3 Call Center Direct Service Staff Costs
4 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
2010 Budgeted Total Allocable Control Services Cost
17 Less 2010 Budgeted Total Non Licensing Revenue
Attributable to Control Services
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
Cost
Methodology
$109,400
I $683,300
I $209,300
$71,500
$10,200
$22,900
$45,000
$25,000
$80,000
$155,000
$35,600
$57,500
$25,400
$17,400
$111,300
$46,200
$1,705,000
$6,400
2010 Budgeted Net Allocable Control Services Cost I $1,698,600
41
NOTES:
1 Management direct service staff consists of 0.40 FTE Animal Care and Control
Manager, 0.40 FTE Operations Manager, and 0.17 Information Technology
Manager.
2 Direct Service Field Staff Costs consist of 1.00 FTE Animal Control Officer
Sergeant, 1.00 FTE Animal Control Officer Cruelty Sergeant, 6.00 FTE Animal
Control Officers.
3 Call center costs for 1.00 FTE Administrative Assistant/Lead and 2.00FTE call
takers.
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 -28 -10
42
Shelter Services: Calculation of Budgeted Total Allocable Costs, Budgeted Total Non
Licensing Revenue, and Budgeted Net Allocable Costs
The calculation of 2010 (Annualized) Shelter Services Costs is shown below (all costs in 2010
dollars).
1
2
1 3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Direct Service Management Staff Costs
Direct Service Shelter Staff Costs
Direct Service Clinic 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
14 General Fund Overhead Costs
15 Division Overhead Costs
16 I Other Overhead Costs
2010 Budgeted Total Allocable Shelter Services Cost
17 Less 2010 Budgeted Total Non Licensing Revenue
Attributable to Shelter Services
1 1 2010 Budgeted Net Allocable Shelter Services Cost
NOTES:
1 Management direct service staff consists of 0.60 FTE Animal Care and Control Manager,
0.60 FTE Operations Manager, and 0.17 Information Technology Manager.
2 Direct Service Shelter Staff Costs consist of 2.00 FTE Animal Control Officer Sergeants,
12.00 FTE Animal Control Officers, 1.00 FTE Placement Specialist, 1.00 FTE Volunteer
Coordinator.
3 Direct Service Clinic Staff Costs consist of 2.00 FTE veterinarians and 2.00 FTE
veterinarian techs.
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
Cost
Methodology
$154,900
$1,280,200
$399,100
$205,100
$150,000
$130,200
$5,000
$145,000
$200,000
$10,000
$13,200
$35,000
$33,300
$203,100
$195,500
$47,700
3,207,300
$202,500
$3,004,500
43
4 These additional salary costs support complete processing of animals received late in the
day, extra help during kitten season, and limited backfill for vet and vet techs when on
vacation.
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.
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.
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.
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 -28 -10
44
Licensing Services: Calculation of Budgeted Total Allocable Costs, Budgeted Total Non
Licensing Revenue, and Budgeted Net Allocable Costs
The calculation of 2010 (Annualized) Licensing Services Costs is shown below (all costs in 2010
dollars).
1
12
3
4
I5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
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
General Fund Overhead Costs
Division Overhead Costs
Other Overhead Costs
2010 Budgeted Total Allocable Licensing Services Cost
2010 Budgeted Net Allocable Licensing Services Cost
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
Cost
Methodology
$60,000 I
$423,900
$30,000
$13,100
$3,300 f
$166,000
$15,000
$5,000
$85,000
$2,000
$25,300
$54,800
$60,000
$943,400
14 Less 2010 Budgeted Total Non Licensing Revenue $45,000
Attributable to Licensing Services
f I
$989,400 I
NOTES:
1 Management direct service staff consists of 0.17 Information Technology Manager
and 0.33 Licensing Section Manager.
2 Direct Service Licensing Staff Costs consist of 0.5 FTE Pet License Supervisor, 1.00
FTE Sales and Marketing Manager, 2.80 FTE Customer Specialists, 1.00 FTE Fiscal
Specialist, and 1.00 Administration Assistant.
3 These additional salary costs support overtime costs as well as a limited non
jurisdiction specific marketing effort. These costs do not include the enhanced
transitional licensing support to be provided by King County to certain cities.
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.
45
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.
11 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 5-28-10
46
To determine the initial level of the Transition Funding Credit, $250,000 has been allocated
to Cities with preliminary estimated 2010 cost allocations (before considering offsetting
Licensing Revenue) exceeding $6 per capita; an additional $400,000 was allocated to the
Cities with preliminary estimated 2010 cost allocations (before considering offsetting
Licensing Revenue) exceeding $8 per capita. (The per capita cost allocations used to
qualify for this credit may be derived from Exhibit C -i in column caption "Estimated
Total Cost Allocation" divided by the population for the jurisdiction as shown in Exhibit
C -2.)
The Transition Funding Credit declines over time: 50% of the annual amount (since the
service year is six months, rather than a full year) is allocable to each qualifying City in
calculating the Estimated 2010 Payment; 100% of the amount is allocable again in
calculating the 2011 Estimated Payment; 66% of the amount is allocable in 2012. If the
Agreement is extended for an additional two years, 33% of the amount is available in 2013;
no Transition Funding Credit is allocable in 2014.
The credit is only available to a qualifying City if that City has agreed to a 2.5 Year
Agreement. 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.
1/
Exhibit C -4
Transition Funding Credit "T Resident Usage Credit "U and
Impact Mitigation Credit "M Calculation and Allocation
Transition Funding Credit
The Transition Funding Credit has been calculated to offset costs to certain cities on a
declining basis over four years. Cities qualifying for this credit, as shown below, are those
that under the basic Animal Services cost allocation formula (allocating costs generally
based half on population and half on usage), would pay the highest per capita costs in
2010.
Document Dated 5 -28- 10
47
Table 1: Transition Funding Credit Initial Contract Period and Extension Period
Jurisdiction
Carnation
North Bend
Kent
SeaTac
Tukwila
Auburn
Black Diamond
Covington
Enumclaw
Maple Valley
Notes:
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
Initial 2 112-Year Contract Period I 2 -Year Extension Period
2010 2011 2012
Transition Transition Transition
Funding Funding Funding
(1/2 year)
$836 $1,674 $1,105 I $552
$2,086 $4,172 $2,753 I $1,376
$167,417 $334,834 $220,990 I $110,495
$11,275 $22,551 $14,884 $7,442
$7,962 $15,925 $10,510 $5,255
$99,824 $199,649 $131,768 $65,884
$1,832 $3,664 $2,418 $1,209
$7,682 $15,364 $10,140 I $5,070
$16,592 $33,903 $22,376 I $11,188
$9,133 $18,265 $12,055 I $6,027
2013 2014
Transition Transition
Funding Funding
1. The transitional funding credit is the same regardless of which cities sign an Agreement.
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
Resident Usage Credit
The Resident Usage Credit has been calculated to offset the costs of certain cities agreeing
to a 2.5 year Agreement that have a low use of King County animal services relative to
their population. The amount of the credit is different depending on whether the City of
Bothell is receiving service during a given Service Year. The credit has been determined
by comparing the estimated cost Cities would pay on an annualized basis in 2010 if the
regional payment model was based solely on usage (including estimated costs payable to
PAWS by cities that will be contracting for shelter services with PAWS) to the cost payable
under the adopted model (which incorporates both usage and population, including
estimated costs payable to PAWS by Northern Cities that will be contracting for shelter
services with PAWS). The credit is set so that no City that has a Preliminary Estimated
2010 Cost Allocation after considering 2009 Licensing Revenue (as shown in Exhibit C -1 in
the column captioned "Estimated Net Cost Allocation of over $5,000 (an annualized cost)
pays more than 120% above what it would pay under a usage -based model that assumes
all cities that expressed interest in participating as of May 5, 2010 sign an Agreement;
provided that, a City must sign a 2.5 year Agreement to qualify for the credit; and provided
further, that credits are fixed in amount as shown in Table 2 below and will not change
regardless of which Cities sign the Agreement. As annualized, the credit is carried forward
each year without change through 2012. Application of the credit can never result in the
Final Estimated Payments for any Service Year being less than $2,750 for receipt of Animal
Services in that year if Bothell is served under an Agreement in such Service Year and not
48
less than $2,875 for receipt of Animal Services in that year if Bothell is not served (for
Northern Cities with PAWS contracts in effect as of July 1, 2010, calculations are made
inclusive of a City's actual payments for such year to PAWS for shelter services). These
minimum values are annualized (thus, for example, in 2010, if Bothell is served, the Final
Estimated Payments cannot be less than $2750 2 $1,375).
jurisdiction
Kirkland
Kirkland PAA(2)
Redmond
Sammamish
I Bellevue
Mercer Island
Newcastle
Snoqualmie
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
Table 2: Resident Usage Credit (Annualized Values) (1)
For Service Years in Which
the City of Bothell Is Not
Receiving Animal Services
For Service Years in which
the City of Bothell Is
Receiving Animal Services
under an Agreement
$20,084
$16,465
$34,961
$9,140
$91,697
$25,113
$8,796
$3,958
$20,433
$16,935
$35,692
$14,815
$93,703
$26,143
$9,071 1
$4,144
Notes:
1.The residential usage credit does not change with time; it only varies based on whether Bothell is
receiving services. Thus, if Bothell signs a 6 month Agreement (e.g., ending December 2010), the
credit payable in 2010 will be one half the value in column 2 above; the credit payable in 2011 will
be the amount in column 3.
2. Kirkland will receive this credit from and after the time the Kirkland PAA is annexed, in
addition to the credit noted in the row above labeled "Kirkland."
Impact Mitigation Credit
The purpose of this credit is to limit the impact to Contracting Cities signing for a 2.5 year
Agreement as a result of three cities (Burien, Algona and Pacific) deciding as of May 5,
2010, that they would not participate in the model, as compared to the costs presented to
all cities in April, 2010, and assuming all other Cities shown in Exhibit C sign the
Agreement. The amount of the credit is sized to ensure that a City's Preliminary
Estimated Payment after applying the Residential Use Credit and the Transition Funding
Credit is not greater than 10% more than the Preliminary Estimated 2010 Cost from the
April 2010 model and not greater than 15% more than such Cost if Bothell does not
contract for service past December 2010; provided that the credit amounts are fixed as
shown in Table 3 below and will not change regardless of which Cities sign the
Agreement; provided further that only Cities signing a 2.5 year agreement qualify for the
49
credit; and provided further that application of the credit can never result in the Estimated
Payment Amount, of less than $2,750 for receipt of Animal Services in that Service Year if
Bothell is served under an Agreement in such Service Year and not less than $2,875 for
receipt of Animal Services in that year if Bothell is not served (for Northern Cities with
PAWS contracts in effect as of July 1, 2010, calculations are made inclusive of a City's
actual payments for such year to PAWS for shelter services). These minimum values are
annualized (thus, for example, in 2010, if Bothell is served, the Final Estimated Payments
cannot be less than $2750 2 $1,375).
The allocation of the Impact Mitigation Credit is shown on Table 3.
Table 3: Impact Mitigation Credit (Annualized Values) (1, 2)
Jurisdiction For Service Years in For Service Years in
which the City of Bothell Which the City of Bothell
Is Receiving Animal Is Not Receiving Animal
Services under an Services
Agreement
Bothell (2) $475
Carnation I $81
Duvall $865 I $1,693
Kirkland $10,473 I $17,107
Redmond $8,098 I $12,945
Shoreline (2) $4,373
Woodinville (2) $1,585
Bellevue $1,334 $2,797
Newcastle $2,170 $1,498
Yarrow Point $35
Kent $49,065 $41,536
SeaTac $7,953 I $4,645
Tukwila $5,644 $2,783
I Enumclaw $169
Notes:
1. These credits do not change over the period of the Agreement.
2. These credits assume that these cities' costs to shelter animals at PAWS exceed their
estimated rebate by greater than $2,750 in Column 2 situation (Bothell served) and $2,875 in the
Column 3 situation (Bothell not served). At reconciliation, if a City with a PAWS shelter contract
cannot demonstrate this, it will not receive the credit. Regardless of how great a PAWS shelter
contract cost is, the credit cannot exceed the amount shown here.
Document Dated 5-28-10
50
City of Bellevue
City of Kent
City of SeaTac
City of Tukwila
City of Enumclaw
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
Exhibit C -5
Transitional Licensing Revenue Support Services Provided in 2010
The Cities that will receive Transitional Licensing Revenue Support Services in 2010 are
listed below. These Cities have been selected by determining which cities in 2009 had the
lowest per- capita licensing revenue amongst all cities to which the County was then
providing animal care and control services, and (as shown in Exhibit C -1).
The Transitional Licensing Revenue Support Services to be provided in 2010 are detailed
in Section 7 of the Agreement. The 2010 Estimated Payment for these Cities incorporates
the estimated revenue expected to result from these services.
51
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
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 2010
stmated Final
20
Payient
Same
ER
CFS
A
I
Pop, D -Pop July 2009 OFM
report, adjusted for
annexations
known approved
to occur in or prior
to 2010
/1
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
2009
2007 -2009
2008 -2009
2007 -2009
Exhibit C -6:
Same
Same
Same
Same
ecoricilat _Payment;
`A.iriouit
(d ed June 2611)
Actual 2010 (July
December)
Actual 2010 (July
December)
Actual 2010 (July
December)
Actual 2010 (July
December)
US Census (published
April 2011)
52
Calculation Periods Service Year 2011
Component Preliminary ;`Estimated 2011::
Estimated .2011 10 Payment:
publisl ed= peceiri
bhh
dA 2010)_V
ER
CFS
IA
II
Pop, D -Pop
Calculation Periods: Service Year 2012
component Preliminary
.Estimated 2012
Payment
(published August
2011)
I Actual 2010
Actual 2010
Actual 2010
I Actual 2010
ER
CFS
A
I
Pop, D -Pop July 2011 OFM
report, adjusted for
annexations
known approved
to occur in 2012.
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
ent'
(pu s e ugust
I 2007 -2009
I 2007 -2009
I 2008 -2009
2007 -2009
July 2010 OFM
report, adjusted for
annexations
known approved
to occur in or prior
to 2011.
Same
I Same
I Same
I Same
Same (corrected if
necessary for
annexations approved
after August 2010 and
effective during or
before 2011)
Estimated 2012
10 Payment
(published December
2011)
Same
I Same
Same
I Same
Same (corrected if
necessary for
annexations
approved after
August 2011 and
effective during or
before 2012)
econciliation
a ent Amount
determined June
2012)
I Actual 2011
Actual 2011
I Actual 2011
I Actual 2011
July 2011 OFM
report, adjusted for
annexations
approved after
April 2011 to take
effect in 2011
Reconciliation_
Payment. Amount
(determined June
2013)
Actual 2012
I Actual 2012
I Actual 2012
I Actual 2012
July 2012 OFM
report, corrected if
necessary for
annexations
approved after
April 2012 to take
effect in 2012
53
Exhibit C-7
Payment and Calculation Schedule
Service Year 2010 (July 1, 2010 December 31, 2010)
tiOANNEKRaireentl
Final Estimated 2010 Payment calculation August 1, 2010
provided to City by County
2010 Estimated Payment payable by City (or January 15, 2011
County, if a credit is calculated)
Reconciliation Adjustment Amount for 2010 On or before June 30, 2011
calculated by County; City notified
Reconciliation Adjustment Amount for 2010 August 15, 2011
payable by City (or County, if a credit is
calculated)
Service Year 2011
I Item
Preliminary estimate of 2011 Estimated
Payments provided to City by County
Final Estimated 2011Payment calculation
provided to City by County
First 2011 Estimated Payment due
Second 2011 Estimated Payment due
2011 Reconciliation Adjustment Amount
calculated
2011 Reconciliation Adjustment Amount
payable
I
II
/1
1/
1/
Document Dated 5-28-10
August 1, 2010
December 15, 2010
I June 15, 2011
I December 15, 2011
On or before June 30, 2012
August 15, 2012
54
Service Year 2012
It'
nwE:
Preliminary estimate of 2012 Estimated
Payments provided to City by County,
(together with notice of reminder of
deadline for giving notice of intent not to
automatically extend Agreement an
additional two years.)
Final Estimated 2012 Payment calculation
provided to City by County
Notice of Intent not to Automatically
Extend Agreement due
First 2012 Estimated Payment due
I Second 2012 Estimated Payment due
2012 Reconciliation Adjustment Amount
calculated
2012 Reconciliation Adjustment Amount
payable
Dates for remittal to County of pet license
sales revenues processed by Cities (per
section 3.c)
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
August 1, 2011
December 15, 2011
May 1, 2012
I June 15, 2012
December 2012
On or before June 30, 2013
On or before August 15, 2013
If the Agreement is extended past December 31, 2012, the schedule is developed in the
same manner as described above for years 2011 and 2012.
See Section 4 of Agreement for additional details on Extension of the Agreement Term for
an additional two years.
Quarterly, each March 31, June 30,
September 30, December 31
55
The purpose of the reconciliation calculation is to adjust payments made each Service Year
by Contracting Parties to reflect actual use, population, licensing rates and licensing and
non- licensing revenue data as compared to the Estimated Payments made. To accomplish
this, an Adjusted Payment "AP" calculation is made each June for each Contracting City,
using the same formulas from Exhibit C but substituting actual values as described below
(with one additional component calculation related to Enhanced Service Contracts).
For Service Year 2010, AP is calculated based on actual values from the six month period
of the Agreement from July- December 2010, compared against the 2010 Final Estimated
Payment for the same six month period, thus:
EP AP R
For Service Years 2011 and beyond, AP is an annualized number, and is compared to the
total Estimated Payments owed by the Party for the Service Year "EP x 2 to determine a
Reconciliation Adjustment Amount "R thus:
(EP x 2) AP R
The value of "R" can be positive or negative; provided that in no event shall a City receiving
a Transition Funding Credit for the Service Year pay less than $0 for receipt of Animal
Services in that year, and in no event shall a City receiving a Resident Usage Credit or
Impact Mitigation Credit for the Service Year pay less than $2,750 (annualized) for receipt
of Animal Services in that year if Bothell is served, nor less than $2,875 (annualized) for
receipt of Animal Services in that year if Bothell is not served in such year (for Northern
Cities with PAWS contracts in effect as of July 1, 2010, calculations are made inclusive of a
City's actual payments for such year to PAWS for shelter services).
As described in Exhibit C, the amount of the Estimated Payment(s) "EP for each Service
Year are derived from applying Budgeted Net Allocable Costs and historical
(Calculation Period) use, population and licensing data to the formulas set forth in
Exhibit C. These formulas are restated below, substituting actual value components
(denoted by an "A" in subscript) for purposes of calculating "AP." Terms not otherwise
defined here have the meanings set forth elsewhere in Exhibit C or the body of the
Agreement.
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
Exhibit D
Reconciliation
56
AP= [AC +AS +AL- AR— T —U —M]
Where:
AC {[(CA x .25) x .5] x CFSA} {[(CA x. 25) x .5] x D -PopA} 0
AS (for "Northern Cities" with shelter contracts with PAWS) (SA x .5 x PopA) 2
AS (for all other cities) SA x .5 x PopA)] (ESPA x PopzA) (SA x .5 x AA)
AL [(LA x .5 x PopA) (LA x .5 x IA)]
And where:
"AC" is the City's adjusted share of the Control Services Cost for the Service Year.
"AS" is the City's adjusted share of the Shelter Services Cost for the Service Year.
"AL" is the City's adjusted share of the Licensing Services Cost for the Service Year.
"T" is the Transition Funding Credit, if any, for the Service Year, provided that the
Transition Credit will be limited if necessary so that the value of AP is not less than zero.
"U" is the Resident Usage Credit, if any, for the Service Year, provided that the Resident
Usage Credit will be limited if necessary so that the value of AP is not less than $2,750
(annualized) for receipt of Animal Services in that year if Bothell is served and not less
than $2,875 (annualized) for receipt of Animal Services in that year if Bothell is not served
(for Northern Cities with PAWS contracts in effect as of July 1, 2010, calculations are made
inclusive of a City's actual payments for such year to PAWS for shelter services).
"M" is the Impact Mitigation Credit, if any, for the Service Year, provided that the Impact
Mitigation Credit will be limited if necessary so that the value of AP is not less than $2,750
(annualized) for receipt of Animal Services in that year if Bothell is served and not less
than $2,875 (annualized) for receipt of Animal Services in that year if Bothell is not served
(for Northern Cities with PAWS contracts in effect as of July 1, 2010, calculations are made
inclusive of a City's actual payments for such year to PAWS for shelter services).
"AR" is Actual Licensing Revenue attributable to the City, based on actual Licensing
Revenues received from residents of the City in the Service Year. (License Revenue that
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
57
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).
"CA" is Adjusted 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 Actual Total Non Licensing Revenue attributable to Control Services
in the Service Year.
"CFSA" is the actual total annual number of Calls for the Service Year for animal control
services originating within the City expressed as a percentage of the CFSA for all Contract
Parties within the Control District. Calls responded to by an Animal Control Officer
dedicated to the City per an Enhanced Service Contract are not included in the calculation
of CFSA.
"D-PopA" is the Adjusted Population of the City, expressed as a percentage of the
Population of all jurisdictions within the applicable Control District (pro- rated if
necessary to account for annexations over 2,500 occurring during the Service Year)
"PopA" is the Adjusted Population of the City expressed as a percentage of the Population of
all Contracting Parties (pro -rated if necessary to account for annexations over 2,500
occurring during the Service Year)
"0" is the Support Cost Adjustment Factor amount associated with Enhanced Control
Service, if any, as further described in Exhibit D -1.
"SA" is the Adjusted Budgeted Net Allocable Shelter Services Cost for the Service Year,
which equals the County's Budgeted Total Allocable Costs for Shelter Services less Actual
Total Non Licensing Revenue attributable to Shelter operations (i.e., adoption fees,
microchip fees, impound fees, owner surrender fees, from all Contracting Parties) in the
Service Year.
"ESPA" is the is the sum of all reduced shelter costs allocable to all cities qualifying for
such reduced charge in the Service Year (thus incorporating values of PopA).
"AA" is the sum of the actual number of animals that during the Service Year 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 Service Year.
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
58
"LA" is the Adjusted 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 Actual Total Non Licensing Revenue attributable to License Services (for
example, pet license late fees) in the Service Year.
"IA" is the actual number of active paid regular pet licenses (e.g., excluding buddy licenses
or temporary licenses) issued to City residents during the Service Year.
If the resulting calculation shows that the City's AP for the Service Year is less than EP for
Service Year 2010 (EP x 2 for Service Years 2011 and beyond), the difference "R shall be
paid to the City by the County not later than August 15; provided that R shall be limited
such that in no event shall the City pay less than zero for Animal Services for the Service
Year if the City received a Transition Credit, and not less than $2750 (annualized) in that
year if Bothell is served and not less than $2,875 (annualized) for receipt of Animal
Services in that year if Bothell is not served (for Northern Cities with PAWS contracts in
effect as of July 1, 2010, calculations are made inclusive of a City's actual payments for
such year to PAWS for shelter services).
If the resulting calculation shows that the City's AP is more than the EP for the Service
Year, the difference "R shall be paid by the City to the County not later than August 15.
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
59
Exhibit D -1
Calculation of Support Cost Adjustment Factor
Associated with Enhanced Control Service ("0")
The Support Cost Adjustment Factor is intended re- allocate certain indirect costs
associated with Animal Control Officers (ACOs) when an Enhanced Control Service
Contract is in place for any Contracting Party and the Enhanced Service is being provided
during Regular ACO Service Hours as defined in Exhibit A, Part I, Section 2.a.
If a Contracting Party purchases Enhanced Control Service during any part of a Service
Year, and that Enhanced Control Service is provided during Regular ACO Service Hours,
then a Support Cost Adjustment Factor ("0") will be calculated for all Contracting Parties
in the same Control District. This calculation will be applied as part of the reconciliation
process.
If no Contracting Party within the Control District purchased Enhanced Control Service
during any part of a Service Year, or if Enhanced Control Service was purchased but was
not provided during Regular ACO Service Hours, then there is no Support Cost
Adjustment Factor (that is, the value of "0" is zero).
If "0" is not zero, its value will be calculated as follows:
First, identify the Non Direct Service Support Costs for Control Services in a single Control
District (including the management, animal cruelty sergeant, call center and IT costs and
general overhead costs; excluding salary, benefits, vehicle and equipment costs).
Second, divide this Non Direct Service Support Cost number by 2 (since half these costs
are funded through the population -based factor in calculation of "CA to derive the
Allocable Support Costs.
Third, divide the Allocable Support Costs by 6 (the number of regular ACOs funded in the
base service model) plus the number of Enhanced Animal Control Service Officers
providing service in the Control District. For example, if a City (or Cities) in the Control
District has purchased .5 FTE equivalent of Enhanced Service, the divisor is 6.5. The
resulting dollar amount is then multiplied by the FTE equivalent for the Enhanced Service
officer (in this example, .5) to derive the Support Cost Adjustment Factor.
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
60
The Support Cost Adjustment Factor is then applied as follows to determine the value of "0"
for each Contracting Party in the Control District:
1. One Half the Support Cost Adjustment Factor multiplied by the Contracting Party's
percentage of Calls for Service (CFSA) is applied as a reduction in costs for all
Contracting Parties in the Control District.
2. One Half the Support Cost Adjustment Factor (shared pro rata if Parties are sharing
an Enhanced Control Service officer within the same Control District) is applied as
an addition in costs for the Contracting Party purchasing Enhanced Service.
A hypothetical example follows, based on 2010 Annualized Costs, assuming .5 FTE
Enhanced Control Service purchased by 1 City in a Control District:
Total Allocable Control Service Costs in the base model $1,698,500
(excluding costs of enhanced service officer):
Allocable Control Service Costs per District ($1,698,500 4) $424,625
Non Direct Service Support Costs for Control Services in a Single $196,450
Control District
Allocable Support Costs (allocable based on Use) $98,225
($196,450 2)
Support Cost Adjustment Factor $7,556
($98,225 6.5 x .5FTE
Assume 4 Parties in Control District
City A of Calls for Service, actual (CFSA) 20%
City B CFSA 30%
City C CFSA 10%
County CFSA 40%
Assume City A purchases .5 FTE Enhanced Control Service for the full Service Year.
Resulting 2010 annualized costs for "0" shown for each City and County in the rows below:
City A value of "0" is an additional cost of
($7,556= 2) [20% x ($7,556 2)1= $3,778 $75 6 $3,022 $3,022
I City B value of "0" is a cost reduction of 30% x ($7,556 2) I $1,133
I City C value of "0" is a cost reduction of 10% x ($7,556 2) I $378
I County value of "0" is a cost reduction of 40% x ($7,556 2) I $1,511
Document Dated 5 -28 -I0
61
Exhibit E
Enhanced Control Services Contract (Optional)
Between City of "City") and King County "County
The County is prepared to offer Enhanced Control Services to the City subject to the terms
and conditions as described herein. 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 the
City and the County have entered into the underlying Agreement. The Parties may
agree to enter into this Enhanced Control Services Contract "Contract at any point
during the term of the Animal Services Interlocal Agreement between the City and the
County dated effective July 1, 2010 "Agreement and prior to August 1, 2011.
A. The County shall 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 (Enhanced Service Options Matrix). Such services shall be provided for the
period of time and cost described on Attachment A and may not be for a term of less than
one year except as per subparagraph 1 below. Costs identified in Attachment A are for one
(1) year of service, in 2010 dollars, and include the cost of the employee (salary, benefits),
equipment and animal control vehicle for the employee's use. Thus, the cost for service
for July 1 through December 31, 2010 will be one -half the amount shown in Attachment A.
Annual costs are subject to adjustment each year, limited by the Annual Budget Inflator
Cap (as defined in the Agreement).
1. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a City requesting enhanced control services
beginning in July 2010 can require that its Contract term end on December 31, 2010, in
the event the County implements (at the County's expense) an additional 2 days per week
of Control Services countywide beginning in January 2011 (resulting in 7 -day per week /8
hour day minimum). If such additional service is not funded by the County, the City's
Contract for enhanced Control Services will remain in effect for such longer period as the
City has requested (not less than one -year in total).
B. 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).
However, if the City is requesting that the Enhanced Service occur during Regular ACO
Service Hours, the City will pay a Support Cost Adjustment Factor as part of the
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
62
Reconciliation Adjustment Amount, calculated per Exhibit D -1 of the Agreement, in
addition to the costs described herein.
C. The scheduling of work by the Dedicated Officer shall be determined by mutual
agreement of the contract administrators identified in Section 16 of the Agreement, and the
mutual agreement of officials of other Cities named as contract administrators that have
committed to sharing in the expense of the Dedicated Officer; provided in the event the
parties are unable to agree, the County shall have the right to finally determine the
schedule of the Dedicated Officer in order to best meet the requests of multiple cities in
light of work rules applicable to the Dedicated Officer.
D. 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.
E. The County shall 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.
F. 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, a minimum of
1600 hours per year will be provided. Similarly, a half -time FTE will provide a minimum
of 800 hours per year. The County shall submit to the City an invoice and billing voucher
at the end of each calendar 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 15th. All invoiced amounts shall be payable by the City within 30 days of the
invoice date.
G. 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 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.
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
63
H. 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 TUKW I LA
Dow Constantine B JIM HAGGERTON, MAYOR
King County Executive Mayor /City Manager
Date Date
Approved as to Form: Approved as to.Form:
Deputy Prosecuting Attorney City Attorney
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
64
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 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 as provided in Paragraph A.1 (alternate
service end date must be provided in event sales tax vote is not approved).
of Full Time Equivalent Officer (FTE) requested: (minimum request: 20
requests must be in multiples of either 20% or 25
General Description of desired services (days, hours, nature of service):
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
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.
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
65
City requests that alone or in combination with requests of other 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 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.
*(50% of a Half -Time FTE)
Request Signed as of this day of
City of
By:
Its
Document Dated 5 -28 -10
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.
*2010 annual cost; subject to annual inflator adjustment as described in Paragraph A.
2010.
66