HomeMy WebLinkAboutFS 2008-11-18 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKET1. PRESENTATIONS
2. BUSINESS AGENDA
g.
City of Tukwila
Finance Safety Committee
Dennis Robertson, Chair
Pam Linder
Kathy Hougardy
AGENDA
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 2008
CONFERENCE Room #3; 5 PM
Action to be Taken
Item
a. Final 2008 Budget Amendment;
Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director.
b. An ordinance adopting the 2009 2010 Budget;
Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director.
c. Eden System Site License proposal;
Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director.
d. Impact Fee Ordinances for Fire and Parks;
Lisa Verner, Project Manager.
e. Interlocal Agreement to provide tourism and
marketing services to the City of Des Moines;
Katherine Kertzman, Tourism Manager.
f. A resolution regarding Non Represented
Employee Wages and Benefits for 2009;
Viki Jessop, Aministrative Services Director.
South Correctional Entity (S.C.O.R.E.)
Interlocal Agreement;
Rhonda Berry, City Administrator.
3. ANNOUNCEMENTS
4. MISCELLANEOUS
Next Scheduled Meeting: Tuesday, December 2, 2008
6 The City of Tukwila strives to accommodate individuals with disabilities.
Please contact the City Clerk's Office at 206 433 -1800 for assistance.
Distribution:
J. Duffle
P. Linder
D. Robertson
K. Hougardy
Mayor Haggerton
R. Berry
C. O'Flaherty
B. Fletcher
D. Haynes
S. Hunstock
M. Hart
V. Jessop
S. Kerslake
T. Kinlow
K. Matei
M. Miotke
J. Morrow
G. Labanara
N. Olivas
J. Pace
D. Speck
R. Still
D. Tomaso
Judge Walden
C. Parrish
B. Arthur
K. Narog(cover)
S. Kirby (email)
5. Norris (email)
L. Verner
K. Kertzman
Page
a. Forward to 11/24 C.O.W. Pg.1
and 12/1 Regular.
b. Forward to 11/24 C.O.W. Pg.3
and 12/1 Regular.
c. Forward to 11/24 C.O.W. Pg.15
and 12/1 Regular.
d. Forward to 11/24 C.O.W. Pg.21
and 12/1 Regular.
e. Forward to 11/24 C.O.W. Pg.75
and 12/1 Regular.
f. Forward to 11/24 C.O.W. Pg.79
and 12/1 Regular.
g. Forward to 11/24 C.O.W. Pg.89
and 12/1 Regular.
Future Agenda Items:
Council Goal #3; work together in cooperation with nearby cities to address common problems (safety)
in the Highway 99 corridor and Military Road.
Animal Control status monitoring.
Safety in Overnight Lodging (on hold pending outcome of court case).
Panhandle ordinance.
To:
City of Tukwila
Finance Department
Mayor Haggerton
Finance Safety Committee
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Shawn Hunstock, Director
From: Shawn Hunstock, Finance Directo
Date: November 13, 2008
Subject: Final 2008 Budget Amendment
As we near the end of 2008, we typically assess the actual financial performance versus the
adopted budget. As part of that analysis, an amendment to the 2008 budget is proposed, as
detailed below. The amendment will be reviewed at the Finance and Safety Committee meeting
on November 18 and upon recommendation by the committee, forwarded to Committee of the
Whole on November 24 then City Council on December 1
General Fund 000
Expenditures:
Finance
Claims and Judgements
City Attorney
Contracted Prosecution Services
Dept. 20
Professional Services
Self- Insured Medical Dental
Repair Demolition Fund
Professional Services
Professional Services
Centennial Celebration
Emergency Generators
cc: Rhonda Berry, City Administrator
05.514.230.49.03
06.515.200.41.02
20.513.100.41.00
20.517.360.25.97
20.531.900.49.01
20.557.302.41.00
20.559.600.41.00
20.573.900.41.00
20.594.250.62.00
280,000
340,000
(50,000)
(40,000)
(100,000)
(15,000)
(40,000)
(51, 000)
(324,000)
(620, 000)
City of Tukwila
AUTHORIZATION FOR
TRANSFER OF FUNDS
Department: ~i. j/\a ltlCe.--
Date:
/III} fu<('
Under the provisions of Ordinance No. 2010, the following transfer of funds within the budget class is requested:
From:
Bud et Line Item Number/BAR
000.20.513.100.41.00
000.20.517.360.25.97
000.20.531.900.49.01
000.20.557.302.41.00
000.20.559.600.41.00
000.20.573.900.41.00
000.20.594.250.62.00
Total
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Amount
50,000
40,000
100,000
15,000
40,000
51,000
324,000
620,000
To:
Bud et Line Item Number / BAR
000.05.514.230.49.03
000.06.515.200.41.02
Total
$
$
$
Amount
280,000
340,000
620,000
Detailed justification for transfer: Reallocate unspent appropriations to budgets with potential
deficits. Budgets increased are Finance, related to unbudgeted claims and judgements of $299,000,
and Legal, related to unexpected legal representation, prosecutorial and other expenses of
$340,000.
APPROVED BY THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL AT A MEETING THEREOF:
the
day of
,20
APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD:
Signature:.Ll-~
Date:
/1 I i3 /0<6
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR:
Signature:
Date:
U:\ Budget\ Authorization for Transfer of Funds.doc
CO:ksn 11/13/2008
City of Tukwila
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Shawn Hunstock, Director
FinancelJepartn1ent
From:
Mayor Haggerton
Finance & Safety Committee
Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director M-
November 13, 2008
To:
Date:
Subject:
Draft 2009-2010 Budget Ordinance & 2009-2014 CIP Resolution
The accompanying draft ordinance represents the total appropriations by fund included in the
Proposed Budget, as well as changes since then, included in the attached Budget Errata
document.
The Budget Errata attachment is a detail of adjustments by fund identified after the Proposed
Budget was distributed. As an aid in your review of this information, please note I have
specifically distinguished the corresponding page from the operating budget or CIP.
The draft bud~et ordinance will be reviewed at the Finance and Safety Committee meeting on
November 18t , and upon recommendation by the committee, forwarded to Committee of the
Whole on November 24th, then City Council on December 1st.
cc: Rhonda Berry, City Administrator
Attachment - 2009-2010 Budget Adjustments
Draft Ordinance and Resolution
2009 -2010 Budget Adjustments
General 000
Revenues:
Page 6
Expenditures:
Page 32
Page 32
Page 52
Page 52
Page 52
Page 64
Page 72
Page 72
Page 72
Page 88
Page 94
Page 112
Page 112
Page 122
Page 142
Page 142
Page 142
Page 144
Page 144
Page 144
Page 144
Page 144
Page 144
Page 144
Page 144
Page 144
Transfer In from Fund 303
Total Revenues
Mayor's Office Other Services Charges
Mayor's Office Other Services Charges
Information Technology Salaries Wages
Information Technology Benefits
Information Technology Capital Outlays
Finance Unemployment Compensation
Parks Rec Other Services Charges
Parks Rec Other Services Charges
Parks Rec Other Services Charges
DCD Other Services Charges
Police Admin Other Services Charges
Fire Suppression Salaries Wages
Fire Suppression Capital Outlay
Fire Ambulance, Rescue, Emerg. Capital Outlay
Public Works Street Maint Extra Labor
Public Works Street Maint Benefits
Public Works Street Maint Capital Outlay
Dept. 20 Unemployment Compensation
Dept. 20 Other Services Charges
Dept. 20 Other Services Charges
Dept. 20 Other Services Charges
Dept. 20 Other Services Charges
Dept. 20 Other Services Charges
Dept. 20 Other Services Charges
Dept. 20 Other Services Charges
Estimated Ending Unreserved Fund Balance
Total Expenditures
397.19X.XX
130,000 (a)
130,000
03.513.100.41.02 340,000 (b)
03.513.100.49.01 31,000 (c)
12.518.880.11.00 81,000 (d)
12.518.880.2X.XX 32,000 (d)
12.518.880.64.01 130,000 (a)
05.517.780.26.00 40,000 (e)
07.574.204.4X.XX 30,000 (f)
07.574.204.4X.XX 20,000 (g)
07.574.204.4X.XX 150,000 (h)
08.559.600.49.01 100,000 (i)
10.521.100.51.00 (12,800) (j)
11.522.200.11.00 160,000 (k)
11.594.222.64.00 17,000 (I)
11.594.222.64.00 (17,000) (I)
16.542.900.12.00 7,300 (m)
16.542.900.2X,XX 700 (m)
16.594.430.64.00 57,500 (n)
20.517.780.26.00 (40,000) (e)
20.513.100.41.00 (120,000) (o)
20.531.900.49,01 (100,000) (j)
20.532.200.41.00 (340,000) (c)
20.557.302.41.00 (30,000) (g)
20.571.230.49.00 (150,000) (i)
20.573.900.41.00 (20,000) (h)
20.573.900,41.00 (80,000) (p)
291.840.00 (156,700)
130,000
Page 1 of 6
2009 -2010 Budget Adjustments (Cont'd)
Hotel/Motel Tax 101
Revenues:
Page 9
Page 9
Expenditures:
Page 145
Page 145
Page 145
Page 145
Page 145
Page 145
Page 145
Page 145
Arterial Street 104
Revenues:
Page 10
Page 10
Expenditures:
CIP Page 29
CIP Page 35
CIP Page 40
CIP Page 43
CIP Page 44
CIP Page 53
Estimated Beginning Unreserved Fund Balance
SeaTac Costs
Total Revenues
Overtime
Benefits
Other Services Charges (fulfillment services)
Other Services Charges (printing)
Other Services Charges (office space)
Other Services Charges (media buy general)
Other Services Charges (media buy special projects)
Estimated Ending Unreserved Fund Balance
Total Expenditures
Federal Grant Carryover Interurban Avenue
Estimated Beginning Unreserved Fund Balance
Total Revenues
Carryover Annual Bridge Inspections
Carryover TUC Access Klickitat
Carryover Annual Overlay Repair
Carryover TUC Transit Center
Carryover Andover Park West
Carryover Interurban Ave S
Total Expenditures
291.740.00
338.570.00
101.00.557.300.13.00
101.00.557.300.2X.XX
101.00.557.300.41.03
101.00.557.300.49.01
101.00.557.300.41.03
101.00.557.301.44.10
101.00.557.301.44.12
291.840.00
333.203.21
291.740.00
01.595.500.63.26
02.595.200.61.20
02.595.300.63.85
02.595.101.42.22
02.595.101.41.47
02.595.101.41.14
(229,503)
300,000
70,497
8,745
850
(2,000)
9,000
2,000
50,000
250,000
(248,098)
70,497
64,000
685,000
749,000
40,000
72,000
200,000
172,000
150,000
115,000
749,000
Page 2 of 6
2009 -2010 Budget Adjustments (Cont'd)
Land Acquisition, Rec. Park Development 301
Revenues:
Page 14
Page 14
Page 14
Expenditures:
CIP Page 7
CIP Page 8
CIP Page 8
CIP Page 11
CIP Page 11
CIP Page 13
CIP Page 22
CIP Page 23
Facility Replacement 302
Revenues:
Page 14
Expenditures:
CIP Page 71
CIP Page 73
Page 158
General Government Improvements 303
Revenues:
Page 16
Expenditures:
CIP Page 69
King Co. Open Space Grant Greenbelt Trails
Carryover Duwamish Gardens
Estimated Beginning Unreserved Fund Balance
Total Revenues
Carryover Codiga Farm
Carryover Duwamish River Bend Hill
Carryover Duwamish River Bend Hill
Carryover Tukwila Pond
Carryover Tukwila Pond
Greenbelt Trails
Duwamish Gardens
Riverton Creek Flap Gate
Total Expenditures
Estimated Beginning Unreserved Fund Balance
Total Revenues
Carryover Tukwila Village
South County Regional Jail
Estimated Ending Unreserved Fund Balance
Total Expenditures
Estimated Beginning Unreserved Fund Balance
Total Revenues
Carryover Facility Improvements (generators)
Total Expenditures
337.070.20
337.070.18
291.740.00
00.594,760.63.50
00.594.760.41.69
00.594.760.63.69
00.594.760.41.52
00.594.760.63.52
00.594.760.41.37
00.594.760.61.35
00.594.760.41.61
291.740.00 40,000
40,000
00.594.190.63.01 40,000
00.594.190.41.39 150,000
291.840.00 (150,000)
40,000
291.740.00
00.594.190.62.72
12,000
1,900,000
392,000
2,304,000
25,000
11,000
75,000
53,000
(100,000)
12,000
2,203,000
25,000
2,304,000
576,000
576,000
576,000
576,000
Page 3 of 6
2009 -2010 Budget Adjustments (Cont'd)
Water 401
Revenues:
Page 16
Expenditures:
Page 162
Page 162
New CIP Page 77
Page 162
Sewer 402
Expenditures:
Page 166
Page 166
Page 166
Page 166
Surface Water 412
Revenues:
Page 20
Page 20
Carryover Interurban Water Reuse
Total Revenues
Water telemetry programming
Water capital 1/4 loader
Carryover Interurban Water Reuse
Estimated Ending Unreserved Fund Balance
Total Expenditures
337.070.01 110,000
110,000
01.534.800.41.00 4,000
01.594.340.64.00 192,300
02.594.343.63.21 110,000
291.840.00 (196,300)
110,000
Sewer supplies 01.535.800.31.02 1,200
Sewer utilities 01.535.800.47.00 3,050
Sewer capital (1/4 loader) 01.594.350.64.00 57,500
Estimated Ending. Unreserved Fund Balance 291.840.00 (61,750)
Total Expenditures
Estimated Beginning Working Capital
Investment Income
Total Revenues
293.700.00 50,000
361.110.00 110,000
160,000
Expenditures:
CIP Page 133 Carryover Storm Lift Station No. 18 02.594.381.41.36 50,000
Page 176 Salaries Wages NPDES position 02.594.382.11.00 187,272
Page 176 Personnel Benefits NPDES position 02.594.382.2X.XX 80,833
Page 176 Surface Water supplies 01.538.380.31.02 13,710
Page 176 Surface Water rental leases 01.538.380.45.00 5,000
Page 176 Surface Water capital (1/4 loader) 01.594.380.64.00 57,500
Page 176 Estimated Ending Unreserved Fund Balance 291.840.00 (234,315)
Total Expenditures 160,000
Page 4 of 6
2009 -2010 Budget Adjustments (Cont'd)
Equipment Rental 501
Revenues:
Page 22
Expenditures:
Page 181
insurance Fund 502
Revenues:
Page 22
Expenditures:
Page 185
Fireman's Pension Fund 611
Revenues:
Page 22
Expenditures:
Page 187
Other Charges Depreciation
Total Revenues
Estimated Ending Unreserved Fund Balance
Total Expenditures
Estimated Beginning Working Capital
Total Revenues
Estimated Ending Unreserved Fund Balance
Total Expenditures
Fire Insurance Premium Tax
Total Revenues
Estimated Ending Unreserved Fund Balance
Total Expenditures
348.301.00
291.840.00
293.700.00
291.840.00
336.060.91
291.840.00
220,001
220,001
220,001
220,001
(935,000)
(935,000)
(935,000)
(935,000)
54,000
54,000
54,000
54,000
Page 5 of 6
2009 -20' Budget Adjustments (Cont'd)
rn is from Dept. 20 to Mayor's Office.
doteT:, urchases from Fund 303 to
on, D C and Oly p L of Cities ($2,
(a Transfer network technology p rise Seattle ($20,000), and National Leag
(b) Move professional services 9,0000 Enterprise Washing
(c) Increased dues for Aposition.
g eases to Finance.
(d) Added IT A nee lo compensation exp
Move City Fourth Y expenses from Dept. 20 to Parks Rec.
(f) Transfer Fourth of July p erases for 2009 to parks Rec.
0 to Parks &Rec•
Schools Collaboration expenses from Dept.
(g) Transfer Centennial Celebration expenses
Transfer Community
Transfer Building Abatement Program DCD•
(i) to to wireless data hub
(i) for DIGS (King
Decrease fun ding funding for two aid car personnel.
(k) Add second year
bunker gear.
I) Move funding (offset by decrease to 16.543.300.3X.XX
in Mayors Office on pg 32).
(m) Add Extra s share and d e cost duplication of funding
Add
1(4 share of Loader cost for Street Maintenance division.
Decrease Green initiatives tenniat Celebration.
(p) Decrease funding
Page 6of6
DRAFT
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWlLA,
WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE ANNUAL BUDGET OF THE CITY OF
TUKWlLA FOR THE 2009-2010 BIEr-.TNIUM; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;
AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the preliminary budget of the City of Tukwila for the year 2009-2010
biennium was submitted to the City Council in a timely manner for their review; and
WHEREAS, a Public Hearing on the proposed budget was advertised and held on
November 17,2008;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWlLA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council hereby adopts the document entitled "City of TukwiIa 2009-
2010 Budget," incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein, in accordance VYith
RCW 35A.34.120.
Section 2. The totals of the estimated revenues and appropriations for each separate fund
and the aggregate totals are as follows:
FUl\'D
000 General
101 Hotel/Motel Tax
103 City Street
104 Arterial Street
105 Contingency
107 Fire Equipment Cumulative Reserve
207 Limited Tax e.O. Bonds, 1999
208 Limited Tax e.O. Bonds, 2000
209 Limited Tax G.O. Bonds, 2003
210 Limited Tax G.O. Refunding Bonds, 2003
301 Land Acquisition, Recreation & Park Develpmt.
302 Facility Replacement
303 General Government Improvements
401 Water
402 Sewer
404 Water/Sewer Revenue Bonds
405 Bond Reserve
411 Foster Golf Course
412 Surface Water
501 Equipment Rental
502 Insurance Fund
503 Insurance - LEOFF 1 Fund
611 Firemen's Pension
TOTALALL~~SCOMrnThffiD
EXPENDITURES
$99,497,000
3,597,148
877,000
91,553,000
892,187
767,797
1,886,000
735,000
1,531,000
1,233,000
11,272,000
7,939,000
2,276,000
15,151,301
15,862,365
1,241,435
411,000
5,137,534
11,984,134
10,324,969
13,155,217
2,282,562
1,578,000
$301,184,649
C:\Doruments and Settings\All Users\Desktop\Kelly\MSDATA \Ordinances\Budget 2OD9-201O.doc
KF:ksn 11/13/2008.
REVENUES
$99,497,000
3,597,148
877,000
93,553,000
892,187
767,797
1,886,000
735,000
1,531,000
1,233,000
11,272,000
7,939,000
2,276,000
15,151,301
15,862,365
1,241,435
411,000
5,137,534
11,984,134
10,324,969
13,155,217
2,282,562
1,578,000
$301,184,649
Page 1 of2
Section 3. A complete copy of the final budget for 2009-2010, as adopted, together v.'ith a
copy of thls adopting ordinance, shall be kept on file in the City Clerk's Office, and a copy shall
be transmitted by the City Clerk to the Division of Municipal Corporations of the Office of the
State Auditor and to the Association of Washington Cities.
Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase
of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or
unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of
this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation.
Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance or a surrunary thereof shall be published in the
official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force and effect five days
after passage and publication as provided by law.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUK\VILA, WASHINGTON, at a
Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2008.
ATTEST/ AUTHENTICATED:
Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Published:
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number:
Office of the City Attorney
Attachment: City of Tukv.'ila 2009-2010 Budget
C\Docurnenfs and Settings\All Users\Desktop\Kelly\MSDATA \Ordinances\Budget 2D:J9-201O.doc
KEksn 11/14/2lY.J8
Page 2 of 2
DRAFT
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE 2009-2014 FINANCIAL PLAl\T1\TJNG
MODEL AND THE CAPITAL Th1PROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR GENERAL
GOVERNMENT Al\TJ) THE CITY'S ENTERPRISE FUNDS.
WHEREAS, when used in conjunction with the annual City budget, the Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) and the Financial Planning Model for the period 2009-2014
are resource documents to help plan directions the City will consider for the future; and
WHEREAS, the Financial Planning Model and CIP are not permanent fixed plans,
but are rather guidelines or tools to help reflect future goals and future resources at the
time annual budgets are being planned; and
WHEREAS, the commitment of funds and resources can only be made through the
annual budget process;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council hereby adopts the 2009-2014 Financial Planning Model
and accompanying Capital Improvement Program, incorporated by this reference as if
fully set forth herein.
Section 2. A copy of the 2009-2014 Financial Planning Model and accompanying
Capital Improvement Program shall be kept on file in the City Clerk's Office and is hereby
attached.
Section 3. The assumptions, revenues and expenditures will be reviewed and
updated annually or as necessary by the City Council.
Section 4. The detail of CIP projects v>'ill be reflected in the published Financial
Planning Model and Capital Improvement Program 2009-2014.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKvVILA, iV ASHINGTON,
at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2008.
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
Joe Duffie, Council President
Christy O'Flaherty, CMc, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Office of the City Attorney
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Resolution Number:
Attachment: 2009-2014 Capital Improvement Program
C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Desktop\Kelly\MSDATA \Resolutions\Finandal Pl1l1L'Iing Model & OP 2009-2014.doc
SH:ksn 11/13/2008 Page 1 of 1
City ofTukwila
lirn Haggerton, Mayor
Shmvn Hunstock, Director
Finance Department
From:
Mayor Haggerton
Finance & Safety Committee
Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director JA\
To:
Date:
November 12,2008
Subject:
EDEN Site License
ISSUE
The EDEN Financial Systems application, used for purchasing, accounts payable,
payroll, travel claim and petty cash reimbursements, and financial reporting, is currently
limited to a small number of users throughout the city. Some departments do not have a
single user of EDEN, and a few departments have just one or two users. The purchase of
a site license for EDEN will give us the ability to have an unlimited number of users.
BACKGROUND
Departments currently rely on the Finance department to distribute, or post on the
intranet, information related to year-to-date expenditures. There can at times be delays in
getting this information out to departments depending on the workload within the Finance
department. This information is also at a very high level and is helpful for monitoring the
overall status of a budget, but not for answering specific questions, such as determining
\vhat exactly was charged to a specific budget number.
The purchase of a site license for EDEN will provide the city with the following benefits:
. Departments will be able to access financial information at any point in time and
will be able to drill-down to specific documents, vendors and journal entries. This
will improve the timeliness and relevance of information directors and managers
need to administer their budgets
. The Finance department will be able to implement a requisitioning process for
city purchases. This will give departments the ability to enter Purchase Orders at-
will, rather than waiting for Finance to enter them.
. The above requisitioning process will also give the city the ability to route
Purchase Orders electronically rather than manually for approval. Currently,
Requests for PO's are printed in hardcopy form and routed through managers and
departments for approval. Electronic approval routing, utilizing existing
purchasing authority limits, will allow for timely processing of PO's, will save the
cost needed for staff time in routing hardcopy documents to different people, as
well as save the cost needed for printing these documents.
Finance & Safety Committee - EDEN Site License
Page 2
· As other modules of EDEN are implemented, such as Cashiering and Human
Resources having a site license will give us the ability to add additional users of
the system with no incremental costs for individual user licenses. This will also
save on licensing costs when online timesheets are eventually implemented.
Finally, EDEN is offering a discount of $7,300 on the cost of the site license if we
purchase it before year-end. EDEN is offering the discount in light of our previous
commitment to EDEN products and our planned purchase of other modules, such as
Cashiering and HR.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommendation is to approve reallocation of appropriations in the Finance and
Depmtment 20 budgets in the amount of $32,700 for the purchase of an EDEN site
license.
cc: Rhonda Berry, City Administrator
Mary Miotke, Informatiop Technology Director
Attachment: Email and Quote from EDEN.
Shawn Hunstock Fwd: RE: Site License Quote
From: Shawn Hunstock
Subject: Fwd: RE: Site License Quote
"Hughes, Carrie" <Carrie.Hughes @tylertech.com> 11/04/2008 5:19 PM
Hi Shawn We haven't done the site license promotion this year, but given our history, we do want to
do something.
Attached is a quote for the site license with a 25% discount if the PO is received prior to the end of
year We hope you are as excited as we are to offer this. If you have any questions or would like to
discuss. please give me a call.
Sorry it s taken me so long to get back you: i User Conference y g ba k to y� a_m busy with �o .f. once folIow-up I will be in all
day tomorrow.
Thanks.
Carrie Hughes
25 f
www.tvlertech.com
Page 1 of 1
about:blank 11/12/2008
Financial and Administrative
Information Systems Proposal
City of Tukwila
Shawn Hunstock
Phone: 206 433 1835
FAX: 206 433 1833
shunstock@ci.tukwila.wa.us
Prepared By:
Tyler Technologies I EDEN Division
Carrie Hughes
carrie.hughes@tylertech. corn
Phone: 800-328-0310
November 4, 2008
License Fees
Training and Conversion
Premier Project Management
Estimated Travel Expenses
Estimated Tax
1100 Oakesdale Avenue SW Customer Name: City of Tukwila
Renton, WA 98057 Contact: Shawn Hunstock
canie.hughes @tylertech.com Date: November 4, 2008
800 328 -0310 Salesperson: Carrie Hughes
Summary Investment
30,000
0
0
0
2,700
Total Purchase Price 32,700
For existing EDEN Clients, the fees are billed as follows:
100% of Application Software License Fees upon delivery of the software products
1 00 of the Year 1 Application Software Maintenance Fees are billed upon Initiation (first day of training)
100% of the Third Party Product License Fees/Purchase Price upon delivery of the third party products
100% of the Year 1 Third Party Product Maintenance Fees upon delivery of the third party products
Services and associated expenses as provided/incurred.
Payment is due within 30 days of invoice receipt. Quote is subject to existing Contract.
TAXES
For Washington agencies, the fees set forth in the Investment Summary include estimates for sales taxes.
Actual taxes vary by locale and may be more or less than the amount estimated.
All applicable taxes (including, without limitation, sales, use, or excise tax) shall be paid by Tyler to the proper authorities
and shall be reimbursed by Client to Tyler. In the event Client possesses a valid direct -pay permit,
Client shall forward such permit to Tyler on the Effective Date of this Agreement. In such event,
Software Maintenance 8,000
Total Annual Fees 8,000
Product Description
Other Products Services
EDEN Site License
SubTotai
5 40.000.00 I 25 %I S 30.000.00 I S I$ I$ 30,000.00 I
N 540.000.0011 11$ 30,000.0011 S 11 11 30,000.00
11 11S 2,700.0011$ 2,700.00
q b It s 30.000.00 11 11$ 2700.0011 S 32 700.00
Eden Standard Support All Products 11 5 8,000.00 tr
Third Party Direct Support 1
Crystal Software Assurance 5 I
Disaster Recovery Services (DRS) 5 I
Escrow Service for Source Code 5
Support Plus p
OSIDBA (Ops System and DataBase Support) 5
All prices except for those marked as 'Estimated' are good for 120 days from the above date. "Estimated' quotes are subject to immediate change without notice. Tyler
offers software support on items under the 'Eden' categories. Software support begins upon onset of training of the software module. Support and maintenance on all
other items is offered directly by the supplier or manufacturer. All client computers must meet the minimum client hardware and software requirements defined by Tyler.
Sales taxes estimated above will be charged to Washington customers per the purchasing agreement Estimated costs of Travel and Expenses includes estimated
charges for travel to and from the customer site.
Applicable Taxes
Grand Total
Tyler Technologies; 1100 Oakesdate Ave SW; Renton, WA 98057; (800) 328 -0310; eden.sales@tylertech.com
Customer Price Quotation Standard implementation
Customer Name: City of Tukwila
Concurrent Users: Site License
Date: November 4, 2008
csornareu
Service
Charges
License Fee (Training, Data Estimated
Support Discount Total Product Conv, Proj Expenses
Basis Percent Fees Mgmt) Taxes Total
INFORl\1ATION l\1EMORANDUl\1
To:
Finance and Safety Committee (action)
Community Affairs and Parks (information)
CC:
Mayor Haggerton
Rhonda Berry
FROM:
Lisa Verner, Mayor's Office
Nick Olivas, Fire Chief
Bruce Fletcher, Parks Director
DATE:
November 18, 2008
RE:
Proposed Fire and Parks Impact Fees
ISSUE
Adopt an ordinance for Fire impact fees and an ordinance for Parks impact fees, both for funding
of capital facilities needed by Fire services and Parks services due to anticipated new growth and
development.
BACKGROU1\TD
The Administration is evaluating new sources of revenue for the City. One such source is
"impact fees" through which new development helps to pay for capital facilities necessitated due
to the new growth. Mayor Haggerton's goal is to analyze options and to adopt impact fees by
the end of2008.
The Growth Management Act allows impact fees for parks services and for fire services, in
addition to the traffic impact fees the City has already enacted. In order to consider and adopt
impact fees, the City needs to have adopted a Fire Master Plan and identified a level of service
goal for fire services. The 2008 Fire Master Plan, the Mayor's recommendations on
implementation, and the Level of Service for the Fire Department are scheduled for adoption by
Council on December 1,2008.
The City also needs to have an adopted Parks master plan and identified level of service. The
Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan was adopted in June, 2008. The Parks Level of Service
is scheduled for adoption by the Council on November 17,2008.
Additionally, RCW 82.02.050 (4) says, in part:
Impactfees may be collected and spent only for the public facilities defined in
RCW 82.02.090 which are addressed by a capital facilities element of a
F&S, CAP Info Memo dtd 11-18-08
Page 2
comprehensive land use plan adopted pursuant to the provisions ofRCW
36.70A070.. .
An ordinance to amend the Capital Facilities Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan is before
the COW on November 10 for public hearing and discussion. It is scheduled for adoption on
December 1. Among other things, the amendment will incorporate by reference the 2008 Fire
Master Plan and the 2008 Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan, as amended. The Parks LOS
ordinance includes list of Parks capital projects (some of\vhich will be paid for through impact
fees) amends the Parks Plan and is scheduled for discussion at the November 10 COW and for
adoption on November 17. The Fire Master Plan, \vhich includes Fire capital projects (some of
which will be paid for through impact fees) is scheduled for adoption on December 1. Then the
City will be consistent with RCW 82.02.050 (4).
A public hearing on impact fees is advertised for November 24, 2008.
DISCUSSION
The State Legislature authorized impact fees when it adopted the Growth Management Act in
1990 as one mechanism to help communities address growth. According to RCW 82.02.050 (1),
it is the intent of the State Legislature:
(a) To ensure that adequate facilities are available to serve ne\v growth and
development;
(b) To promote orderly growth and development by establishing standards by
which counties, cities, and towns may require, by ordinance, that new gro\\rth
and development pay a proportionate share of the cost of new facilities needed
to serve new gro\\rth and development; and
(c) To ensure that impact fees are imposed through established procedures and
criteria so that specific developments do not pay arbitrary fees or duplicative
fees for the same impact.
Impact fees can be assessed for traffic, parks, fire and schools. The City already assesses a
traffic impact fee. The Mayor is asking the Council to consider assessing a parks impact fee and
a fire impact fee. None of the school districts which serve Tukwila have asked the City to collect
a school impact fee on their behalf.
Impact fees are used to provide funds for capital projects or capital facilities which are needed
because of new gro\\rth. They are used to fund projects which maintain the same level of service
for new growth as is provided for existing development. They may not be used for projects
which are needed due to current deficiencies in public facilities serving existing development.
In essence, impact fees are a mechanism for "growth to pay for growth."
For consideration are two ordinances, one for impact fees for fire services and one impact fees
for parks services. The text of the ordinances is similar. The ordinances address the fee formula,
adjustments, credits, appeals, refunds and exemptions as well as use of the impact fees.
F&S, CAP Info Memo dtd 11-18-08
Page 3
Also, each ordinance lncludes a spreadsheet for calculating an impact fee and a list of projects
for which the impact fee would be collected. .
Conceptually, the fee formula identifies the anticipated gro\"vth between 2009 and 2020 (12
years) in several land use categories and the cost of capital facilities needed to serve that gro\vth
and divides the two. The variables include the request for service (either calls for fire/aid service
per land use category or amount of parks needed per resident) and the growth anticipated in each
land use category. Because the City has a strong track record of both residents and employees
using park facilities and fire services, an impact fee for commercial/industrial uses as well as an
impact fee for residential uses is proposed.
Attached are two pages of Options for impact fees (kind of a sensitivity analysis). One is for
parks (Attachment A) and one is for fire (Attachment B). At the bottom of each sheet is
information on the relevant impact fees assessed by other jurisdictions.
Each Options page compares differing project totals, differing City contributions, and differing
impact fees for several different land use categories. For example, the Parks Impact Fee
Options page shows $12,250,000 as the total amount ofprojects. Next it shows what the impact
fees would generate over 12 years if impact fees paid for 90% of the total and what the City's
10% contribution would be. Belo\v that is shown the impact fee per single family house, per
multi-family dwelling unit, per 1,000 gsf of office use, per 1,000 gsfretail use and per 1,000 gsf
of industrial use. The next block to the right shows the results of impact fees generating 80% of
the funds and the City contributing 20%. The block on the far right shows a 70%-30% split.
Finally, the same 90%-10%/ 80%-20%/ 70%-30% splits are shown if$8,750,000 is the total
amount of the projects.
The same kind of comparison is offered on the Fire Impact Fee Options page. Council
members may choose which impact fee/city contribution split results in acceptable levels of
impact fees.
RECOMMENDATION
· Adopt an ordinance which authorizes assessment of impact fees for capital facilities for
Fire services needed due to new grO\vth
· Adopt an ordinance which authorizes assessment of impact fees for capital facilities for
Parks services needed due to new growth
Attachment A:
Attachment B:
Attachment C
Parks Services Impact Fee Options
Fire Services Impact Fee Options
State Auditor's Impact Fee Performance Audit Report (Section on Parks &
Fire Impact fees)
Draft Ordinances
Attachment D
ATTACHMENT A
PARKS Impact Fee OPTIONS
Total Project
Amount over 12
years (through
2020)
Fees City Fees City Fees City
90% 10% 80% 20% 70% 30%
$17,000,000
$15,300,000 $1,700,000 $13,600,000 $3,400,000 $11,900,000 $5,100,000
$2,235 SF $1,987 SF $1,739 SF
$2,191 MF $1,948 MF $1,704 MF
$3,203 Office $2,847 Office $2,491 Office
$1,602 Retail $1,424 Retail $1,246 Retail
$1,001 Industrial $890 Industrial $779 Industrial
90% 10% 80% 20% 70% 30%
$12,250,000
$11,025,000 $1,225,000 $9,800,000 $2,450,000 $8,575,000 $3,675,000
$1,611 SF $1 ,432 SF $1,253 SF
$1,579 MF $1,404 MF $1,228 MF
$2,308 Office $2,052 Office $1,795 Office
$1,154 Retail $1,026 Retail $898 Retail
$721 Industrial $641 Industrial $561 Industrial
90% 10% 80% 20% 70% 30%
$8,750,000
$7,875,000 $875,000 $7,000,000 $1,750,000 $6,125,000 $2,625,000
$1,151 SF SF SF
$1,128 MF MF MF
$1,649 Office Office Office
$824 Retail Retail Retail
$515 Industrial Industrial Industrial
Key:
Per Single Family
SF Dwelling
MF Per Multi-Family Dwelling
Office Per 1,000 gsf Retail Uses
Retail Per 1,000 gsf Office Uses
Indust Per 1,000 gsf Industrial Uses
Bonney
Redmond Issaquah Renton lake Edgewood Kent*
Parks (2006) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2008) Auburn Bellevue*
Single Family $2,812.00 $6,168.70 $530.76 $2,893.00 $2,939.00 $3,500.00
Multi Family $2,261.00 $3,885.79 $354.51 $2,893.00 $2,939.00 $3,500.00
Office
Retail
Industrial
$957.00
$420.00
$415.00
Awe Averages (2008)
High
$
Single Family 4,632.00
$
Multi-Family 3,912.00
Low
* do not
collect parks
impact fees
$ 316.00
$ 175.00
$14,4 79,500
$13,031,550 $1,447,950 $11,583,600 $2,895,900 $10,135,650 $4,343,850
$2,060 SF $1,831 SF $1,602 SF
$2,683 MF $2,385 MF $2,082 MF
$3,628 Office $3,225 Office $2,822 Office
$1,297 Retail $1,153 Retail $1,009 Retail
$283 Industrial $251 Industrial $220 Industrial
ATTACHMENT B
FIRE Impact Fee OPTIONS
Total Project Amount
over 12 years
(through 2020)
Fees
90%
City
10%
Fees
80%
City
20%
Fees
70%
City
30%
90%
10%
30%
$10,000,000
$9,000,000 $1,000,000 $8,000,000 $2,000,000 $7,000,000 $3,000,000
$1,423 SF $1,265 SF $1,107 SF
$1,853 MF $1,647 MF $1,441 MF
$2,506 Office $2,227 Office $1,949 Office
$896 Retail $796 Retail $697 Retail
$195 Industrial $174 Industrial $152 Industrial
Key:
SF
MF
Office
Retail
Industrial
Per Single Family
Dwelling
Per Multi-Family Dwelling
Per 1,000 gsf Office Uses
Per 1,000 gsf Retail Uses
Per 1,000 gsf Industrial Uses
80%
20%
70%
Issaquah
FIRE (2006) Renton Kent*
Single Family $622.25 $488.00
Multi Family $853.42 $388.00
All Commercial $520.00 **
Office $200.00
Retail $640.00
Industrial $200.00
Hotel/Motel/Resort $280.00
Hospital/Nursing
Home $9,610.00
Medical/Dental $6,680.00
Leisure Facilities $2,090.00
Restaurant/Lounge $6,090.00
Church/Non-profit $390.00
BeIJevue*
Redmond
(1999)
Auburn***
$94.48
$132.73
$362.66
$383.09
$110.80
$126.76
$13.07
Education $810.00
Special Public Facil $3,120.00
AWe Averages Per
(2008) Dwelling
High Low
Single Family $622.00 $104.00
Multi-Family $853.00 $104.00
* does not have Fire impact fees
** $0.52 per gsf
*** no com'l assm't since 1/1/08; Fire
Authority
ATTACHMENT A
PARKS Impact Fee OPTIONS
Total Project
Amount over 12
years (through
2020)
Fees City Fees City Fees City
90% 10% 80% 20% 70% 30%
$17,000,000
$15,300,000 $1,700,000 $13,600,000 $3,400,000 $11,900,000 $5,100,000
$2,235 SF $1,987 SF $1 ,739 SF
$2,191 MF $1,948 MF $1,704 MF
$3,203 Office $2,847 Office $2,491 Office
$1,602 Retail $1 ,424 Retail $1,246 Retail
$1,001 Industrial $890 Industrial $779 Industrial
90% 10% 80% 20% 70% 30%
$12,250,000
$11,025,000 $1,225,000 $9,800;000 $2,450,000 $8,575,000 $3,675,000
$1,611 SF $1 ,432 SF $1,253 SF
$1,579 MF $1,404 MF $1,228 MF
$2,308 Office $2,052 Office $1,795 Office
$1 ,1 54 Retail $1,026 Retail $898 Retail
$721 Industrial $641 Industrial $561 Industrial
90% 10% 80% 20% 70% 30%
$8,750,000
$7,875,000 $875,000 $7,000,000 $1,750,000 $6,125,000 $2,625,000
$1,151 SF SF SF
$1,128 MF MF MF
$1,649 Office Office Office
$824 Retail Retail Retail
$515 Industrial Industrial Industrial
Key:
Per Single Family
SF Dwelling
MF Per Multi-Family Dwelling
Office Per 1,000 gsf Retail Uses
Retail Per 1,000 gsf Office Uses
Indust Per 1,000 gsf Industrial Uses
Bonney
Redmond Issaquah Renton lake Edgewood Kent*
Parks (2006) (2008) (2008) (2008) (2008) Auburn Bellevue*
Single Family $2,812.00 $6,168.70 $530.76 $2,893.00 $2,939.00 $3,500.00
Multi Family $2,261.00 $3,885.79 $354.51 $2,893.00 $2,939.00 $3,500.00
Office
Retail
Industrial
$957.00
$420.00
$415.00
Awe Averages (2008)
High
$
Single Family 4,632.00
$
Multi-Family 3,912.00
Low
* do not
collect parks
impact fees
$ 316.00
$ 175.00
Issaquah
FIRE (2006) Renton Kent*
Single Family $622.25 $488.00
Multi Family $853.42 $388.00
All Commercial $520.00 **
Office $200.00
Retail $640.00
Industrial $200.00
Hotel/Motel/Resort $280.00
Hospital/Nursing
Home $9,610.00
Medical/Dental $6,680.00
Leisure Facilities $2,090.00
Restaurant/Lounge $6,090.00
Church/Non-profit $390.00
Bellevue*
Redmond
(1999)
$94.48
$132.73
$110.80
$126.76
$13.07
Auburn***
$362.66
$383.09
Education $810.00
Special Public Facil $3,120.00
AWe Averages Per
(2008) Dwelling
High Low
Single Family $622.00 $104.00
Multi-Family $853.00 $104.00
* does not have Fire impact fees
** $0.52 per gsf
*** no com'l assm't since 1/1/08; Fire
Authority
Performance Audit Report
Use of Impact Fees in
Federal Way, Olympia, Maple Valley,
Redmond and Vancouver
Report No. 1000014
October 14, 2008
Washington State Auditor Brian Sonntag, CGFM
www.sao.wa.gov
C
he Puget Sound Region experienced an
unprecedented building boom during this decade.
Impact fees' purpose is to help offset the costs of
services associated with new development, such as
roads, schools, fire facilities and parks.
We chose this audit to examine whether cities are
effectively and efficiently using of this revenue source.
We selected the five cities with the state's highest
impact fee revenue from fiscal years 2004 to 2006 to
Brian Sonntag, CGFM find out if:
Washington State Auditor. Cities are collecting and administering impact fees
appropriately and in accordance with state law.
· The public is getting what it is paying for.
Performance audits are conducted under the
provisions of citizens Initiative 900. This audit
was conducted on our behalf by Ernst & Young in
accordance with Generally Accepted Government
Auditing Standards.
Cities have an opportunity to improve transparency
and access to public information by posting their
annual impact fee reports on their Web sites.
While cities are required by state law to report the
information annually, not all cities are posting the
information on their Web sites. It is good policy to
make that information readily available to citizens.
We hope all cities and counties that impose imact fees
will take advantage of the best practices identified in
this audit.
If you are interested in following up on the audit
resolution or public hearings, please check
our Web site at: http://www.sao.wa.gov/
PerformanceAuditjaudiCreports. htm.
JiG
What is an impact fee? A
one-time fee to offset the cost
of services associated with
new development. Cities can
collect four types of impact
fees: School, fire, park and
transportation impact fees.
Impact fees are intended to
supplement other funding
sources and state law requires
that they be spent on the
facilities for which they are
collected.
How are they administered?
State law allows municipalities
that are required to or choose
to plan under the Growth
Management Act to assess
impact fees. Cities set the rate
for and collect the impact fees.
Who pays impact fees?
Impact fees are charged to
builders as part of the building
permit process. Impact fees are
typically passed invisibly from
the builder to the customer.
Mission Statement
The State Auditor's Office independently serves the citizens of Washington
by promoting accountability, fiscal integrity and openness in state and local
government. Working with these governments and with citizens, we strive to
ensure the efficient and effective use of public resources.
1
Objectives
The audit was designed to determine:
1. The method each city uses to calculate impact fees based on the direction in
state law (RCW 82.20.050);
2. How each city demonstrates that these fees are appropriate; and
3. How effectively each city uses impact fees to pay for public facilities that:
· Correspond to the demand for public facilities from new development.
· Benefit new development proportionate to its share of the financing of new
or expanded facilities; and are consistent with a comprehensive plan or a
capital element of a comprehensive land use plan that has been adopted in
accordance with state law.
If the city does not meet these objectives, what are the resulting costs to all residents
and what can be done to reduce those costs?
Additionally, the audit addressed the nine elements contained in Initiative 900,
outlined on page 5 of this summary.
The audit cost $726,466.
The complete text of
Initiative 900 is available
at www.sao.wa.gov/
PerformanceAudit/
PDFDocuments/i900.
pdt.
Legislature
Several of the issues identified during the audit are caused by a lack of clarity in
laws governing impact fees, particularly regarding the items cities may purchase
with impact fee money. For instance, Olympia interpreted the law regarding road
impact fees to allow it to spend the money on bike trails. Redmond interpreted the
law regarding fire impact fees to allow the City to purchase fire trucks. The law states
the fees can only be spent on fire "facilities;" however the law does not define a
fire facility. The Legislature has an opportunity to empower cities to improve their
performance and definitively comply with state law.
Issues
The audit identified three main conclusions regarding the five cities' collection and use
of impact fees.
· Lack of clarity in state law may be causing some cities to calculate and spend
impact fees in a manner that could be inappropriate.
· One city is charging builders higher impact fees than they should and their fees
are not supported by a capital facilities plan as prescribed by law. We recommend
that city discontinue charging the fees until they are supported.
· New developments in some cities are receiving questionable benefits for the
impact fees paid.
Best Practices Identified for All Municipalities
The audit identifies a number of best practices that streamline or improve the
collection, assessment and use of impact fees in order to minimize the costs and
maxiniize the benefits associated with them.
Visit www.
sao.wa.gov/
PerformanceAudit/
audiCreports.htm
for:
Full report
Cities 'responses,
action plans
Public hearings
Cities' annual
status reports
2
Audit Issues Audit Recommendations Financial Impacts
1. Capital Facilities The Washington Legislature should amend $876,709
State law defines capital facilities for RCW 82.02.090 to better define capital
fire, transportation, park and school facilities and the following terms:
impact fees. However, the definitions are 1. "Fire protection facilities"
ambiguous, resulting in cities applying 2. "Public streets and roads"
varying interpretations of the term. 3. "School facilities"
4. Address whether transportation impact
fees can be spent on multimodal
transportation (i.e., biking, walking, etc.).
2. Fire Districts Washington cities should be aware of the A more accurate
The City of Redmond Fire Department City of Redmond's leading practice in its allocation of costs
has developed a leading practice in its relationship with Fire District 34 and attempt between a city and
relationship with Fire District 34. The fire to institute a similar contract if that city has a related fire districts.
department's method of allocating costs relationship with a neighboring fire district.
of new capital facilities between the city
and Fire District 34 should be evaluated
for use by other cities and districts.
3. Park Zoning . Olympia should consider removing $36,974
Olympia may not be spending park impact the "one-half to one mile" and "10- to
fees as effectively as it could, based on 20-minute walk" from its definition of a
the results of a citizen survey and based "Neighborhood Park."
on other cities' use of multiple park . Olympia should consider dividing the City
zones. into two park zones to demonstrate a clear
relationship between where impact fees are
collected and spent. Two zones for park
impact fees would appear to be reasonable,
as the City is approximately six miles across.
4. Interest-Bearing Accounts 0 Cities should consider using technology e Using an
. Each city uses a different method to similar to Vancouver's system that automated system
allocate interest payments to impact allows for daily allocation of interest and will reduce staff
fee general ledger accounts. minimizes manual data entry. time currently
. The City of Vancouver's method . Cities should not allocate interest based used in manual
of allocating interest is a leading on a rate that is not equal to actual processes.
practice among the Cities. interest earned. . Accurately
. The Legislature should consider modifying tracking interest
RCW 82.02.070 to better define "separate income reduces
interest-bearing accounts." the risk of errors
or fraud.
. Clarifying an
ambiguous law will
help cities.
5. School Impact Fee Interest Cities should allocate actual interest earnings $9,469
Olympia and Federal Way do not remit any on school impact fees collected and remit
interest they earn on school impact those interest earnings to the appropriate
fees to the school districts; therefore, school district{s) so the interest earned on
the interest income is not spent on the impact fees can be spent in accordance with
purpose for which the impact fee was state law.
imposed, as required by state law.
3
- - - --
Audit Issues Audit Recommendations Financial Impacts
6. Fire Impact Fee Schedulej
Calculation
· Olympia's fire impact fee schedule/
calculation does not effectively
demonstrate the connection between
growth and system improvements.
Olympia does not take into
account the cost of public facilities
necessitated by new development or
the availability of other financing.
· Redmond has developed a leading
practice in its fire impact fee
schedule/calculation, specifically the
method it uses to take into account
the impacts of fire and aid calls by
land use type, projected growth by
land use type and the fire Capital
Facilities Plan.
7. School Impact Fee Schedulej
Calculation
Some cities that collect school impact fees
are not consistently reviewing impact fee
. calculations prepared by school districts.
8. Transportation Impact Fee
SchedulejCalculation
Redmond uses several leading practices
in calculating, charging and maintaining
its transportation impact fee.
9. Permit System
· Redmond inputs collection, interest
earnings, and expenditure of each
impact fee in a database and in the
City's cash receipt system. The City is ·
duplicating work by entering the same
information twice.
· Vancouver and Olympia integrated their
permitting systems with their accounting
systems. This is a leading practice that
results in more effective internal controls
and limits manual data entry.
· Cities should be aware of Redmond's
leading practice for the fire impact fees
schedule/calculation.
· The City of Olympia should revisit its fire
impact fee schedule and consider if it
is suitable to continue charging the fire
impact fee. Specifically, Olympia should
more effectively address RCW 82.02.050
and 82.02.060 in its calculation and
demonstrate the fire impact fee it charges
reasonably relates to system improvements
that are reasonably attributable to growth.
· Additionally, the City of Olympia should
consider implementing a periodic review
of its fire impact fee calculation and
schedule to determine if the fee is still
adequate, given the city's capital facility
needs and anticipated growth.
Cities should revisit their review process Cities benefit
of the school impact fee calculation/schedule by having more
and capital facilities plan, knowing they confidence that the
may be involved if litigation results from the school impact fee they
school impact fee assessed. charge is appropriate.
· Cities should consider a construction cost · Impact fees will
adjustment to align transportation impact more closely
fees with the cost of projects they fund. match the costs
· Cities that ~alculate impact fees based on they support.
a short-term project list should consider · Cities may charge
expanding that list to include projects a fee that better
farther in the future that will be needed to represents the cost
accommodate growth. of growth.
· Cities should adopt a transportation · Developers will be
impact fee schedule that allows able to calculate
developers to easily determine the impact and understand
fee to be paid upon building permit their transportation
issuance. The transportation fee schedule impact fee
should be based on typical land uses and without outside
trips per land use. assistance.
· Redmond should eliminate database $76,280
tracking of individual impact fee collection,
expenditures, and interest allocation to
save staff time.
All cities should maintain a permit system
that automatically interfaces with its
accounting system. Leading practices are
in place in Vancouver and Olympia.
$185,565 -
$345,313
Total financial impacts: $1.18 million to $1.34 million
- - -
- - - -
4
ii nitiative 900 requires the State Auditor's Office to identify best practices
U during each performance audit. The following best practices were in place at
the cities during the audit:
Redmond
· The City of Redmond Fire Department's method of allocating costs of new
capital facilities between the City and Fire District 34 should be evaluated for
implementation in other cities and districts.
· The City of Redmond's fire impact fee calculation and schedule met all
aspects of the related state laws and demonstrates a leading practice by
taking the following items into consideration:
· System improvements that are reasonably related to growth
· The proportionate share of the costs of system improvements related to
new development
· Redmond employs several leading practices with respect to calculating,
charging, and maintaining its transportation impact fee.
These leading practices include:
· Inflation indexing
· Costs based on a long-range plan
· Adopted fee schedules by land use
Vancouver
· The City of Vancouver uses the Emphasys SymPro system to assist in
managing the city treasury function, including interest allocation. The system
tracks investment earnings and interfaces with the city's general ledger
to retrieve the daily balances for all accounts to which to allocate interest.
Investment earnings are then allocated across the general ledger accounts
based on their average daily balances.
· The City of Vancouver's school impact fee review process is a leading
practice, as the City demonstrates the most in-depth and comprehensive
review of the school impact fee calculation and schedule.
Vancouver and Olympia
· The cities of Vancouver and Olympia integrated their permitting systems with
their accounting systems. This was identified as a leading practice among
the Cities due to the tighter internal controls and minimal manual entry.
About Initiative 900
Washington voters approved
Initiative 900 in November
2005, giving the State
Auditor's Office the authority
to conduct independent
performance audits of
state and local government
entities on behalf of citizens
to promote accountability
and cost-effective uses
of public resources.
1-900 directs the Office
to address the following
elements in each
performance audit:
1. Identification of cost savings.
2. Identification of services that
can be reduced or eliminated.
3. Identification of programs or
services that can be transferred
to the private sector.
4. Analysis of gaps or overlaps
in programs or services and
recommendations to correct them.
5. Feasibility of pooling auditee's
information technology systems.
6. Analysis of the roles and
functions of the auditee and
recommendations to change or
eliminate roles or functions.
7. Recommendations for statutory
or regulatory changes that may
be necessary for the auditee to
properly carry out its functions.
8. Analysis of the auditee's
performance data,
performance measures and
self-assessment systems.
9. Identification of best practices.
Initiative 900 provides no
penalties for auditees that do
not follow recommendations in
performance audit reports.
The com plete text of
the Initiative is available
at: www.sao.wa.gov/
PerformanceAudit/
PDFDocuments/i900.pdf.
5
We made the following recommendations to the Washington Legislature:
· Amend RCW 82.02.090 to better define capital facilities and alleviate ambiguity.
· Consider modifying RCW 82.02.070 to better define "separate interest-bearing
accounts."
'i nitiative 900 requires the legislative bodies for the governments in this report
d to hold at least one public hearing to consider the audit results and receive
comments from the public within 30 days of this report's issue.
The corresponding legislative body must consider this report in connection with
its spending practices. A report must be submitted by the legislative body by
July 1 each year detailing the status of the legislative implementation of the State
Auditor's recommendations. Justification must be provided for recommendations
not implemented. Details of other corrective action must be provided as well.
The state Legislature's Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee (JLARC) will
summarize any statewide issues that require action from the Legislature and will
notify the appropriate fiscal and policy committees of public hearing agendas.
Follow-up performance audits of any state or local government entity or program
may be conducted when determined necessary by the State Auditor.
Initiative 900 provides no penalties for state agencies or local governments that do
not follow recommendations made in performance audit reports.
JLARC posts its 1-900
public hearings and
agendas at: http://
www.leg.wa.gov/
lLARC/i-900.htm
To receive electronic notification
of audit reports, sign up at:
https://www.sao.wa.gov/applkations/
su bscri pti 0 n servi c.es/
6
Washington State Auditor
Brian Sonntag, CGFM
Director of Performance Audit
Linda Long, CPA, CGFM, CGAP
sonntagb@sao.wa.gov
(360) 902-0360
longl@sao.wa.gov
(360) 902-0367
Communications Director
Mindy Chambers
chamberm@sao.wa.gov
(360) 902-0091
To request a public record from the State Auditor's Office:
Mary Leider, Public Records Officer leiderm@sao.wa.gov
For general information from the State Auditor's Office:
Main phone number
Web site
(360) 725-5617
(360) 902-0370
http://www.sao.wa.gov
Toll-free hotline for reporting government waste and abuse
(866) 902-3900
To find your legislator http://apps.leg.wa.gov/districtfinder
To contact the City of Federal Way:
Mayor Jack Dovey jack.dovey@cityoffederalway.com (253) 835-2401
To contact the City of Olympia:
Mayor Doug Mah dmah@cLolympia.wa.us
(360) 753-8447
To contact the City of Maple Valley:
Mayor Laure Iddings council@cLmaple-valley.wa.us
(425) 413-8800
To contact the City of Redmond:
Mayor John Marchione mayor@redmond.gov
(425) 556-2101
To contact the City of Vancouver:
Mayor Royce Pollard mayor@cLvancouver.wa.us
(360) 696-8211
/
Americans with Disabilities
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, this document will be made available in alternate formats.
Please call (360) 902-0370 for more information.
7
State of Washington
Performance Audit of Impact Fees
ERNST &YOU
Quality In Everything We Do
State of Washington Performance Audit of Impact Fees
AUDIT AREA 3 - PARK ZONING
FINDING
The use of multiple zones is seen as an effective way to reasonably relate the collection and
expenditures of park impact fees to areas experiencing growth as discussed at the end of this
page. Based on the use of one zone, the City of Olympia is potentially spending neighborhood
park impact fees that are inconsistent with its definition of a neighborhood park and results of a
citizen survey. Therefore, the City of Olympia may not be spending park impact fees as
effectively as it could using multiple zones.
BACKGROUND
Original Finding Identification
During Phase 1 of the performance audit, Ernst & Young noted that the City of Olympia and the
City of Redmond use only one zone for the assessment, collection, and expenditure of park
impact fees. The City of Vancouver uses multiple park zones in an effort to demonstrate a
reasonable relationship between the fee charged to the developer and the park needs
generated by growth in that zoning area.
According to RCW 82.02.050 3 (a), impact fees "Shall only be imposed for system
improvements that are reasonably related to the new development." While there are no
requirements in Washington State law to have multiple park zones, Ernst & Young noted that
other cities find zoning to be an effective way to make the impact fee relationship, a reasonable
relationship.
Audit Work Conducted
During Phase 3 of the audit, Ernst & Young examined the potential finding further. First, Ernst &
Young met with the City of Vancouver to gain an understanding of how multiple park zones work
for Vancouver. Next, Ernst & Young met with the City Olympia to gain an understanding of why
one zone was selected for assessing, collecting, and spending park impact fees in Olympia.
Finally, Ernst & Young sampled some park impact fees that were collected to determine where
they were potentially spent within the City of Olympia.
Ernst & Young LLP
Page 26 of 67
State of Washington Performance Audit of Impact Fees
Vancouver's Rationale for Multiple Park Zones
Ernst & Young noted that the City of Vancouver has chosen to implement ten different park
zones (or districts) so as to provide a clear demonstration between where fees are spent and
where fees are collected. The size of each zone is large enough so that an adequate amount of
funding can be collected in each area. The ten park zones span the urban unincorporated area
of the county, as the City of Vancouver and Clark County operate under the same parks
department. If one were to look at the city limits of Vancouver, there would be approximately
four park zones within the City limits. In addition to multiple zones effectively demonstrating the
connection between where fees are spent and where they are collected, the City offered the
following other benefits of having multiple park zones:
· The impact fees assessed vary by zone to account for the differences in land value
across the city. Therefore, a developer building a house in zone one, where land is
more expensive, will pay a higher impact fee, where as a developer building a home in
zone ten, where land is cheaper, will pay a smaller impact fee.
· Multiple park zones allow the City to have the ability to not collect impact fees in a zone
if the zone at some point contains all necessary parks to meet the level of service
standards and there is not significant anticipated growth in the zone.
The City of Vancouver did provide some disadvantages to having multiple park zones, which
included the following:
· Accounting is more difficult with multiple park zones.
· There is less flexibility with spending the park impact fees collected.
· Spending the impact fees within the six-year time period (as required by law) is more
difficult.
City of Olympia One Zone Research
Ernst & Young met with the City of Olympia to gain an understanding of how one park zone
works for the City and how effectively the single zone demonstrates the connection between
where fees are collected and where they are spent. Ernst & Young noted that because the City
operates its parks system as a single zone, Olympia may spend park impact fees collected in
the City on any park within the City limits.
Emst & Young LLP
Page 27 of 67
State of Washington Performance Audit of Impact Fees
Types of Parks in Olympia
First, Ernst & Young noted that the City of Olympia develops the following types of parks using
park impact fees, as per the City's Capital Facilities Plan9:
· Neiqhborhood Parks: Neighborhood parks are a common gathering place for families
and children, all within a 10-20 minute walk from home.
· Community Parks: Community parks are places for organized recreation programs and
sports activities. Community parks will include athletic fields and picnic shelters or other
facilities for large-scale community use.
· Special Use Parks: Special use parks offer unique features and are typically more
special-interest oriented. Examples of these parks are the Japanese Garden and
Heritage Fountain. These parks are used by the entire community and become
treasured places in the community.
· Open Space Parks: Open space is for passive use, nature trails, and wildlife habitat.
Questions Regarding the Neighborhood Park Designation
After gaining an understanding of the various types of parks, Ernst & Young became concerned
about the neighborhood park designation. All other parks (community, special use, and open
space) in the City of Olympia are built for use by the entire City (as per their definition shown
above); thus, implementation of a single park zone appears reasonable, as the entire
community benefits from the development of these parks regardless of where a home is built.
However, neighborhood parks are built specifically for neighborhoods, as the definition in
Olympia's capital facility plan indicates that they are a 10-20 minute walk from a home.
Furthermore, Olympia's Park and Open Space Standards and Definitions documene describes
neighborhood parks as n. . . generally small in size and serve an area of approximately one-half
to one mile radius but serve all residents in the community." Based on this understanding, Ernst
& Young noted that one park zone might allow a park impact fee to be collected on one side of
the City, yet be spent on building a neighborhood park across town, outside of the City's own
definition of neighborhood parks. In this scenario, the neighborhood park may not benefit the
citizens and developers who paid the park impact fee, as the neighborhood park is built further
than a 10-20 minute walk and further than one-half to one mile away.
The City of Olympia's Justification for One Zone
The City of Olympia implemented park impact fees in 1993 and has utilized one zone since its
implementation. The justification for the City's determination to use one zone in 1993 is based
Ernst & Young LLP
Page 28 of 67
Slale of Washington Performance Audit of Impact Fees
on reasoning similar to that identified by the City of Vancouver as disadvantageous to having
multiple park zones (noted above). The City of Olympia further explained to Ernst & Young that
the "reasonableness" of one zone can be understood based on the outcome of an Olympia
citywide survey conducted in 2006.4 The survey was conducted by the City to assess residents'
opinions and behaviors regarding City services. The survey included the following City
government programs and services:
. Communication with citizens
. Garbage and recycling
. Sewer
. Drinking water
. Storm and surface water
. Parks
. Public safety
· Transportation services
The survey selected 400 residents, at random, from a list of utility customers. The survey was
conducted over the phone and has a margin of error of +/- 5% at the 95% confidence interval.
The direct results of the parks portion of the survey included the following:
· "39% visited a park in Olympia 12 or more times in the past year.
· 7 in 10 were "very satisfied" with their park experiences.
· Majorities were "definitely" willing to travel up to six miles to get to an open space area
(59%) and a special use park (52%); 44% were "definitely" willing to travel to a
community park.
· 3 in 5 were "definitely" (36%) or "probably" (25%) willing to travel three miles to a
neighborhood park.
· 1 in 3 respondents (or someone in their household) had participated in a recreational
activity provided by the City.
· 9 in 10 agreed that art events are valuable to the quality of life in the City."4
Ernst & Young's Views on the Survey Results
The survey results for the special use, open space, and community parks (bullet three above)
do support the City's definition and plan for usage of these parks by citizens across the City in a
single park zone. .However, the survey results (bullet four above) do not support the City's
definition and/or implementation of a single park zone for neighborhood parks. The survey
Ernst & Young LLP
Page 29 of 67
State of Washington Performance Audit of Impact Fees
shows that a total of 61 % of Olympia residents would "definitely" or "probably" travel up to three
miles to visit a neighborhood park. The City of Olympia is approximately six miles across;
therefore, survey results for neighborhood parks do not correlate to the City's approach of one
zone.
Testing of Park Impact Fees Collected
Ernst & Young conducted an analysis of park impact fee collections during the audit period 2004
- 2006 and the expenditure of the 2004 and 2005 collections.. Ernst & Young found that
although there were community, special use, or open space park systems located close to
where the impact fees were gathered, roughly 96% of the neighborhood parks were not built
within the one-half to one mile radius of where the impact fees were gathered. Ernst & Young
also found that the average distance between the location where an impact fee was collected
and the location where the impact fee was potentially used (the average distance of the impact
fee collection to the three possible parks where the impact fee was spent) on a neighborhood
park was approximately four and one-half miles. This four and one-half mile average shows
that neighborhood parks are not built within the one-half to one mile radius or 10 to 20-minute
walking distance from the location of the development, based on Olympia's definition of
neighborhood parks. Given that neighborhood parks are constructed at locations that on
average may be several miles from the impact fee collection development site, neighborhood
parks are being developed in current neighborhoods lacking parks, raising the question of
whether the single zone approach most effectively demonstrates the connection between the
impact fees and the growth that paid them.
System Approach to Parks in Olympia
To support its neighborhood park definition, City planners in Olympia explained the one-half to
one mile distance is a goal for the City's system of parks. This goal is based on a standard level
of service of neighborhood park acres for 1,000 residents. Olympia has a goal of 1.44 acres per
1,000 residents. Olympia utilizes a 20-year plan for its parks system. In the next 20 years, the
City hopes to realize its current definition of a neighborhood park.
Olympia explained to Ernst & Young that its park planning utilizes a "systems approach."
According to RCW 82.02.050 3(c) , Impact fees are permitted to be "used for system
improvements that will reasonably benefit the new development." Olympia's parks may be
considered appropriate improvements given the definition of System Improvements in RCW
Ernst & Young LLP
Page 30 of 67
State of Washington Performance Audit of Impact Fees
82.02.090: "public facilities that are included in the capital facilities plan and are designed to
provide service to service areas within the community at large, in contrast to project
improvements. "
RECOMMENDATIONS
Cities should consider the use of multiple zones to more effectively demonstrate a clear
relationship between where impact fees are collected and spent. Ernst & Young recommends
that the City of Olympia take both of the following actions in its approach to park planning:
1. Consider revising the "one-half to one mile" and "10-20 minute walk" statements from its
definition of a "Neighborhood Park" if the City's intent is to build these neighborhood
parks for the entire City rather than for a more localized neighborhood.
2. Consider dividing the City into two park zones to more effectively demonstrate a clear
relationship between where impact fees are collected and spent. Two zones for park
impact fees would appear to be reasonable, as the City is approximately six miles across
and according to the survey:
"3 in 5 were "definitely" (36%) or "probably" (25%) willing to travel three miles to a
neighborhood park."
If 61 % of the citizens are "definitely" or "probably" willing to travel three miles to a
neighborhood park, then dividing the City into 2, three-mile wide zones would appear to
be appropriate to meet the demands of the City residents.
Note: The City of Redmond uses only one park zone as well; however, the audit focused on the
City of Olympia because it exhibited the greatest opportunity during the Phase 1 planning
process. No detailed performance audit work was conducted at the City of Redmond; however,
the City of Redmond should consider the above recommendations as well.
POTENTIAL COST SAVINGS AND/OR OTHER IMPACTS
There is no direct potential cost savings associated with the recommendations above.
However, with the current definition of a neighborhood park, Ernst & Young calculated the dollar
amount of impact fees that were collected during the performance audit period (2004-2006) that
Ernst & Young LLP
Page 31 of 67
State of Washington Performance Audit of Impact Fees
were potentially spent more than three miles away (Note: Ernst & Young used three miles,
rather than one-half to one mile, due to the results of the survey discussed above). This dollar
figure was calculated by performing the following steps:
1. Randomly selected a sample of 50 neighborhood park impact fees collected during the
period (12% of the entire population). A total of 417 neighborhood park impact fees
collected during the performance audit period have been expended.
2. Determined the distance between the address where the impact fee was collected and
where the impact fee could have potentially been spent within the City on a
neighborhood park. Ernst & Young used Google Maps to perform this function.
3. Out of 50 samples selected, Ernst & Young noted that 80% of impact fees were
potentially spent on a neighborhood park more than three miles away.
4. Ernst & Young then extrapolated the results of the testing to the remaining 417 impact
fees collected for the period by determining that 80% of the entire amount was
potentially spent on neighborhood parks greater than three miles away. The total dollar
figure came to $36,974.
5. Finally, Ernst & Young noted that park impact fees have been collected in the City of
Olympia since 1993 under the same methods and park definitions. However, Ernst &
Young did not obtain data outside of the performance audit period (Le., outside the
scope of the audit) and was therefore unable to calculate the total dollar amount of park
impact fees spent on neighborhood parks in areas that did not experience growth since
the inception of the fee in 1993.
Refer to Appendix E - Olympia Park Impact Fee Collection and Spending for a detailed
map of the sample of 50 park impact fees tested.
Exhibit 7 - Estimated Olympia Park Impact Fees Potentially Spent on Neighborhood Parks Greater Than Three Miles Away
During the Performance Audit Period of 2004-2006
, ' . , 2004-2006
" , ,.' ,
Estimated Olympia Park Impact Fees
Potentially Spent on Neighborhood Parks
Greater Than Three Miles Away $36,974
Ernst & Young LLP
Page 32 of 67
State of Washington Performance Audit of Impact Fees
AUDIT AREA 6 - FIRE IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE/CALCULATION
FINDING
The City of Redmond has developed a leading practice in its fire impact fee
schedule/calculation. Specifically, the schedule/calculation takes into account the impacts of
fire and aid calls by land use type, projected growth by land use type and the fire Capital
Facilities Plan (CFP).
The City of Olympia's fire impact fee schedule/calculation does not appear to effectively
demonstrate the fee's connection to system improvements related to growth, the cost of public
facilities necessitated by new development or the availability of other financing.
BACKGROUND
Original Finding Identification
During Phase 1 of the performance audit, Ernst & Young noted that the City of Olympia collects
fire impact fees at a flat per-square-foot rate ($0.159 per square foot), regardless of the land use
type. Therefore, a single-family home pays the same rate per square foot as a restaurant or
manufacturing facility. The fire impact fee rate was determined by an outside consultant in
1994. Ernst & Young noted that the fire impact fee has not been updated since its adoption in
1994.
During Phase 1, Ernst & Young noted that the City of Redmond assesses fire impact fees based
on the type of land use. To determine the fire impact fee that each type of land use pays, the
City of Redmond takes into consideration the number of historical fire and aid calls based on the
type of land use (Le., multi-family vs. retail, etc.).
Audit Work Conducted
During Phase 3 of the performance audit, Ernst & Young spent more time working with the cities
of Redmond and Olympia to gain a better understanding of how the impact fee calculation and
schedule were determined.
Ernst & Young LLP
Page 41 of 67
State of Washington Performance Audit of Impact Fees
Fire Impact Fees in the City Olvmpia
City of Olympia Planning and Fire Deparlment
Ernst & Young met with the City of Olympia's Fire Department and Planning Department to gain
a better understanding of the impact fee calculation that what was prepared in 1994 to
determine the reasoning behind a flat rate for all land uses. The City of Olympia was initially
unable to explain how the calculation was determined in 1994, as there were no individuals
currently within the City who were working when the calculation was determined. Further
information was later provided by the City to speak to the independent study that was conducted
in 1994 to determine the impact fee rate. The information provided explained how the City's
approach was standards-driven, using prior years' costs against the total area of fire coverage
to define a per-square-foot fee for any new development in the City to maintain that standard
level of service. The City maintained that this method allows it to forecast the cost of new fire
protection based on prior years' incurred expenses. However, the City did state that this
method did not directly relate to its forecasted expenses for fire protection facilities in its capital
facilities plan. The City of Olympia also explained to Ernst & Young that there have been very
few (if any) developer complaints regarding the fire impact fee requiring a detailed explanation
of the study.
Rate Study
Ernst & Young was able to obtain a copy of the fire impact fee study prepared for the City by an
independent consultant in 19947. Ernst & Young reviewed the study to gain an understanding
of how the calculation was prepared, and the rate was ultimately determined. Ernst & Young
noted that the fire impact fee rate per square foot was calculated by the independent consultant
using the following steps:
1. Determined the City of Olympia's fire protection facilities inventory as of June 1992 and
the 1992 square feet of development served by the current inventory. Using these
figures, a fire apparatus per square foot was determined for the City for 1992. See
Exhibit 9 below.
Emst & Young LLP
Page 42 of 67
Exhibit 9 - Fire Apparatus per Square Foot of Developmene
Stations
Pum ers
Rescue Units
Aerial Units
Hazardous Materials Units
Number of
Apparatuses
3
6
3
1
1
State of Washington Performance Audit of Impact Fees
Square Feet of
Development
Served
38,171,851
38,171,851
38,171,851
38,171,851
38,171,851
Apparatus Per
Square Foot
.000000078
.000000157
.000000078
.000000026
.000000026
2. Next, the 1992 cost per inventory item was determined, as well as a cost per square
foot. See Exhibit 10 below.
Exhibit 10 - Capital Cost per Square Foot of Developmene
Co. mponentApPClratusPer
S Uare Foot
Stations .000000078
Pum ers .000000157
Rescue Units .000000078
Aerial Units .000000026
Hazardous Materials Units .000000026
Total Cost/S Ft
Cost Per.
A aratus
$ 1,684,000
275,000
55,000
400,000
80,000
Capital Cost Per
S uare Foot
$.131352
.043175
.00429
.0104
.00208
$ 0.191297
3. Previous years' expenditures for tire protection facilities were then determined. See
Exhibit 11 below.
Exhibit 11 - Previous Expenditures for Fire Protection Facilities'
Year Expenditures
1985 $ 37,870
1986 285,940
1987 137,530
1988 47,120
1989 47,280
1990 42,460
1991 109,780
1992 28,308
1993 36,410
9- Year Total $772,698
4. An annual average of the nine-year total was calculated ($85,855). Using this number,
along with the 1992 square feet of development (38,171,851), an annual average per
square foot of development was computed: $0.0022491.
Ernst & Young LLP
Page 43 of 67
State of Washington Performance Audit of Impact Fees
5. Using a discount rate of 7%, the net present value of 27.5 years of future payments (at
$0.0022491) will total $0.032157 per square foot.
6. Therefore, the impact fee rate is $0.159140 per square foot ($0.191297 (from
Exhibit 14) minus $0.032157.))
Upon completion of reviewing Olympia's fire impact fee calculation to arrive at the $0.159 per
square foot assessed to developers, Ernst & Young could not determine whether Olympia's rate
study meets the following requirements by Washington State law:
· "Should only be imposed for system improvements that are reasonably related to the
new developmenf' (RCW 82.02.050). Furthermore, "system improvements" are
defined in RCW 82.02.090 as ". . . public facilities that are included in the capital
facilities plan and are designed to provide service to service areas within the
community at large, in contrast to project improvements."
· "Should not exceed a proportionate share of the costs of system improvements that
are reasonably related to the new development" (RCW 82.02.050).
· A schedule of impact fees adopted for each type of development activity subject to
impact fees, including (RCW 82.02.060):
~ The amount of the impact fee to be imposed for each type of system
improvement
~ The schedule should be based on a formula or other calculation method
~ The formula should take into account proportions including, but not limited
to:
1. The cost of public facilities necessitated by new development
2. The methods by which public facilities were financed
3. The availability of other means of funding public facility improvements
4. An adjustment to the cost of the public facilities for past or future
payments either made or anticipated to be made, including payments
proratable to the system improvement, along with:
a. User fees
b. Debt service payments
c. Taxes
Ernst & Young noted that the City of Olympia's fire impact fee calculation does not appear to
include all required considerations:
Ernst & Young LLP
Page 44 of 67
State of Washington Performance Audit of Impact Fees
1. System improvements that are needed due to growth (a requirement of RCW 82.02.050);
rather, the calculation uses previous years' expenditures.
2. Proportionate share of the costs of system improvements related to new development (a
requirement of RCW 82.02.050), as no such information related to new development is
mentioned in the calculation.
3. The formula used to determine the fire impact fee amount does not appear to take the
following items into consideration (a requirement of 82.02.060):
· The cost of public facilities necessitated by new development
· The methods by which public facilities have been financed
· The availability of other means of funding public facility improvements
4. The calculation was conducted in 1994 and has not been revised or updated since
implementation, even though costs and growth patterns have changed.
5. The calculation includes capital facilities that are currently ambiguous under RCW
82.02.090. As stated in Audit Area 1 of this report, RCW 82.02.090 defines the term
capital facilities for fire, transportation, park and school impact fees. However, the
definitions provided are ambiguous, resulting in the Cities applying varying
interpretations of the definition of a "fire protection facility." Under the same guidelines
as those defined in Audit Area 1 of this report, the City of Olympia's use of fire apparatus
(Le., pumpers, rescue units, aerial units and hazardous materials units) as components
to its fire impact fee calculation should be considered.
Fire Impact Fees in the City of Redmond
Next, Ernst & Young met with the City of Redmond to gain an understanding of the formula it
used to calculate the City's fire impact fee schedule. Exhibit 12 below shows the City of
Redmond's fire impact fee schedule for the performance audit period.
Exhibit 12 - City of Redmond's Fire Impact Fee Schedule 1999-2006
Land Use Impact Fee
SinQle-family $94.48 per residential unit
Multi-family $132.73 per residential unit
Office $0.11 per square foot
Retail $0.13 per square foot
Industrial $0.01 per square foot
In order to develop the different rates for land use categories as shown above, the City of
Redmond used historical data to determine the number of emergency (fire and aid) calls per
Ernst & Young LLP
Page 45 of 67
State of Washington Performance Audit of Impact Fees
land use type. Ernst & Young noted that national emergency call data is available; however, it
was important for Redmond to use Redmond data instead of national data, given that the
jurisdiction has unique fire safety requirements.
The City of Redmond determined its fire impact fee schedule (Exhibit 12) by performing the
following calculation steps in 1999:
1. Determined the capital facility needs for the fire department as of 1999. Once the capital
facility needs were identified, the City of Redmond determined the percentage of those
needs that arose due to growth.
2. Obtained 1997 historical incident response (fire and aid) data from the City fire
department. Response data is logged by the City of Redmond according to 13 land use
categories. The land use incident response data was further organized into the following
land use categories:
a. Single-family
b. Multi-family
c. Office
d. Retail
e. Industrial
3. Determined the increase in annual incident responses due to growth, by land use type.
4. Allocated the capital facility needs by incident responses due to growth (calculated in
step one above) to each land use type, based on the proportionate number of incident
calls per land use type.
5. Calculated the anticipated growth per land use type over a 17-year period.
6. Determine the impact fee to be paid by each land use type (Exhibit 16) by dividing the
capital costs allocated to each land use type (step four) by the anticipated growth per
land use type (step five).
Ernst & Young noted that the City of Redmond's fire impact fee calculation and schedule met all
aspects of RCW 82.02.050 and 82.02.060 and demonstrates a leading practice. Redmond's fire
impact fee calculation and schedule takes the following items into consideration:
· System improvements that are reasonably related to growth
· The proportionate share of the costs of system improvements related to new
development
Emst & Young LLP
Page 46 of 67
State of Washington Performance Audit of Impact Fees
Finally, the City of Redmond reviewed its fire impact fee schedule in 2006 and noted that
updates were needed. Therefore, the schedule was updated in 2006, and new rates were
charged for fire impact fees.
RECOMMENDATION
Other cities within the State of Washington should be aware of the City of Redmond's leading
practice for the fire impact fees schedule/calculation.
The City of Olympia should revisit its fire impact fee schedule and consider if it is suitable to
continue charging the fire impact fee. Specifically, Olympia should more effectively address
RCW 82.02.050 and 82.02.060 in its calculation and demonstrate that the fire impact fee
charged reasonably relates to system improvements that are reasonably attributable to growth.
Additionally, the City of Olympia should consider implementing a periodic review of its fire
impact fee calculation and schedule to determine that the fee is still adequate, given the yearly
changes in growth expectations and capital facility needs.
POTENTIAL COST SAVINGS AND OTHER IMPACTS
There are no direct potential cost savings associated with this finding and recommendation.
However, Ernst & Young looked at and compared the City of Olympia's fire impact fee in two
ways:
1. Scenario 1: Ernst & Young used the City of Redmond's calculation and growth data to
project what the City of Olympia's fire impact fee schedule could have potentially been
during the audit period, based on actual costs defined in the City of Olympia's 2003
capital facilities plan.
2. Scenario 2: Ernst & Young took the City of Olympia's current fire impact fee calculation
and removed the capital facilities in question (Le., fire apparatus).
Ernst & Young then took the above two scenarios and compared them to the amount of fire
impact fees that were collected during the audit period.
Ernst & Young LLP
Page 47 of 67
State of Washington Performance Audit of Impact Fees
Scenario 1: Fire Impact Fee Schedule Calculation Based on the City of Redmond's
Calculation
Ernst & Young used the City of Redmond's calculation, noted as a leading practice in our finding
in this audit area, as a way to demonstrate what the City of Olympia's fire impact fee might have
been if it was directly tied to its fire CFP. Ernst & Young also used the City of Redmond's
growth data and historical statistical tire and aid response data to develop a potential tire impact
fee schedule for the City of Olympia. To do this, Ernst & Young performed the following steps:
1. Used the City of Olympia's Fire CFP from 2003 as a basis for the needed capital
facilities. (Note: Ernst & Young could not determine the capital facilities in the 2003 CFP
that were due to growth; therefore, Ernst & Young used 100% of the tire capital facilities
from the plan for purposes of this calculation.)
2. Inserted Olympia's CFP data into Redmond's calculation. Olympia did not have
sufficient historical incident response data (determines the fee each land use type pays)
or anticipated growth data to use in the calculation. Therefore, for purposes of this
calculation, Ernst & Young used Redmond's historical incident response data and
Redmond's anticipated growth with the following adjustments. Ernst & Young noted that
the City of Redmond is a high-growth city, where as the City of Olympia is somewhat of
a low-growth city; therefore, Ernst & Young did not use 100% of the City of Redmond's
growth in the calculation for the City of Olympia. Rather, Ernst & Young looked at the
population growth between the two cities during the period 2000-2007 and noted that
the City of Olympia's growth was 36% of the City of Redmond's growth, based on
population statistics. Therefore, Ernst & Young used 36% of Redmond's growth in the
calculation and applied this to the growth rates by land use type noted below.
Note: The City of Redmond's anticipated growth over the 17-year period varies by
land use type. The information below details the City of Redmond's anticipated
growth rate by land use type for the 17-year period and the City of Olympia's
estimated growth rate by land use type at 36% of Redmond's anticipated growth.
Land Use Type City of Redmond's City of Olympia's Estimated
Forecasted Growth Forecasted Growth
SinQle-familv 54% 19%
Multi-family 63% 23%
Office 133% 48%
Retail 65% 23%
Industrial 24% 9%
Ernst & Young LLP
Page 48 of 67
State of Washington Performance Audit of Impact Fees
After performing the above steps, Ernst & Young estimated the potential fire impact fee
schedule for the City of Olympia for the performance audit period. Exhibit 13 below shows the
potential fire impact fee schedule for the City of Olympia.
Exhibit 13 - Potential Olympia Fire Impact Fee Schedule Based on Anticipated Growth Equal to 36% of Redmond's
Anticipated Growth
Land Use .... ... .. . Impact Fee .
SinQle-family $82.73 per residential unit
Multi-family $116.22 per residential unit
Office $97.02 per 1,000 sq. ft.
Retail $110.99 per 1,000 sq. ft.
Industrial $11.45 per 1,000 sq. ft.
Next, Ernst & Young obtained a list of all fire impact fees collected for the performance audit
period (2004-2006) (Note: A total of $491,036 in fire impact fees was collected for the period.)
Using this data, Ernst & Young recalculated each fire impact fee collected. Using the above fire
impact fee schedule, it shows that the City of Olympia under this scenario would have
potentially collected $145,723 in fire impact fees, which is $345,313 less than what the City
charged under its current calculation.
Scenario 2: Recalculation of the City of Olympia's Fire Impact Fee Calculation
Ernst & Young used the fire impact fee study prepared for the City by an independent consultant
in 19947 to recalculate the fire impact fee schedule by removing the capital facility items in
question (Le., fire apparatus, etc.).
1. Ernst & Young determined the City of Olympia's fire protection facilities inventory as of
June 1992 and the 1992 square feet of development served by the current inventory.
This was done by removing the capital facilities (Le., fire apparatus) in question, as seen
in Exhibit 14 below.
Ernst & Young LLP
Page 49 of 67
State of Washington Performance Audit of Impact Fees
Exhibit 14 - Fire Apparatus per Square Foot of Development"
. Component
Stations
Pumpers
RecQue Units
Aerial Unitc
Hazardous Materials Units
~quare Feet of
Development
Served
38,171,851
38,171,851
38, 171,851
38, 171,851
38, 171,851
Apparatus Per
Square Foot
.000000078
.000000157
.000000078
. 000000026
.000000026
2. Next, the 1992 cost per inventory item was determined, as well as a cost per square
foot. See Exhibit 15 below.
Exhibit 15 - Capital Cost per Square Foot of Development"
Com poneflt
Stations
Capital Cost Per
S uare Foot
$.131352
$ 0.131352
3. Previous years' expenditures for fire protection facilities were then determined. See
Exhibit 16 below (same as Exhibit 15 shown above).
Exhibit 16 - Previous Expenditures for Fire Protection Facilities7
. Expenditures
Year.
1985 $ 37,870
1986 285,940
1987 137,530
1988 47,120
1989 47,280
1990 42,460
1991 109,780
1992 28,308
1993 36,410
9- Year Total $772,698
4. An annual average of the nine-year total was calculated ($85,855). Using this number,
along with the 1992 square feet of development (38,171,851), an annual average per
square foot of development was computed as $0.0022491.
5. Using a discount rate of 7%, the net present value of 27.5 years of future payments (at
$0.0022491) will total $0.032157 per square foot.
Ernst & Young LLP
Page 50 of 67
State ofWasnington Performance Audit of Impact Fees
6. Therefore, the fire impact fee rate is $0.099 per square foot ($0.131352 [from
Exhibit 19] minus $0.032157).)
Ernst & Young took the new fire impact fee calculation of $0.099 per square foot of development
and recalculated under this scenario what should have been collected in fire impact fees over
the audit period. Ernst & Young calculated that $305,470 would have been collected; which is
$185,656 less than what the City charged under its current calculation.
Comparison of Scenarios 1 and 2 above to the Actual Fire Impact Fees Collected
Finally, Ernst & Young compared the above two fire impact fee calculations to the actual amount
of fire impact fees collected by the City of Olympia during the audit period (2004-2006).
Exhibit 17 - Comparison of Potential Fire Impact Fees Collected During the 2004-2006 Performance Audit Period
Potential Fire
ImpactFees
Collected Under
Scenario 2
Potential Fire
Impact Fees
Collected Based
on Use of
U dated CFP
Actual Fire 1m pact Feesj:)otential. Fire 1m pact
Collected by the Cjtyof . Fees Collected Under
OlyrnpiaScenari01 .
$ 491,036
Potential Overchar e
Potential Underchar e
$ 145,723
$ 345,313
$ 305,470
$ 185,565
?
In looking at the above table, the City of Olympia has potentially overcharged for fire impact fees
anywhere from $185,565 to $345,313; however, please note the potential for an undercharge,
as stated below in the final comments to this audit area.
Lastly, Ernst & Young noted that the City of Olympia's fire impact fee schedule/calculation has
been the same since its inception in 1994; however, since Ernst & Young only had fire impact
fee collection data for the audit period, it was unable to calculate an overcharge for the life of the
fire impact fee (Le., 1994 - 2008).
Please note that this is simply an estimated fire impact fee schedule for the City of Olympia, as
growth and historical fire and aid call data was not sufficient from the City. The City asserts it
has undercharged the fire impact fee. Ernst and Young believes this assertion may be possible
based on the fire impact fee calculation the City uses not being tied to its Capital Facilities Plan
(CFP) and the City's CFP appears to not be up-to-date. The City is planning on building a new
fire station that costs roughly $7.9 million; however, this facility was not included on the 2003
Ernst & Young LLP
Page 51 of 67
State of Washington Performance Audit of Impact Fees
CFP. Had the City tied its impact fee calculation to its CFP and updated its CFP, it is possible
that the City may have undercharged, rather than overcharged. Although, the City provided
Ernst & Young population statistics, fire and aid call data, and construction data, it was
insufficient to validate the City's assertion.
Ernst & Young LLP
Page 52 of 67
ATTACHMENT D
DRAFT
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING THE ASSESSMENT OF PARKS
IMPACT FEES ON NEW RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, AND
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Growth Management Act of the State of Washington
and RCW 36.70A, the City of Tukwila has an adopted Comprehensive Plan, which
includes provisions for parks facilities as part of its Capital Facilities Element; and
WHEREAS, Rei^! 82.02.050 authorizes cities to impose impact fees on development
activity as part of the financing for public facilities, including parks facilities; and
WHEREAS, the Tukwila City Council desires to provide funding for parks
facilities, as referenced in the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan,
through the imposition of residential and non-residential development impact fees;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUIOVILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings. The City Council finds and determines that new growth and
development in the City creates additional demand and need for public parks facilities
in the City, and the City Council finds that new growth and development should pay its
proportionate share of the costs for new parks facilities to serve new growth and
development in the City. The City Council believes that this can be accomplished by the
assessment of parks impact fees on new residential, commercial, and industrial
development in the City. It is the Council's intent that the provisions of this ordinance
be liberally construed in establishing the parks impact fee program.
Section 2. Definitions. Terms or words not defined herein shall be defined
pursuant to RCW 82.02.090 when given their usual and customary meaning. For the
purposes of this ordinance, unless the context or subject matter clearly requires
otherwise, the words or phrases defined in this section shall have the following
meanings:
1. The" Act" means the Growth Management Act, Chapter 17, Laws of 1990,
First Extraordinary Session, Chapter 36.70A RCW et seq. and Chapter 32, Laws of 1991,
First Special Session, as now in existence or hereinafter amended.
2. "Building permit" means an official document or certification of the City
of Tukwila issued by the City's building official which authorizes the construction,
alteration, enlargement, conversion, reconstruction, remodeling, rehabilitation, erection,
placement, demolition, moving, or repair of a building or structure.
3. "City" means the City of Tukwila, Washington, County of King.
4. "Development activity" means any construction of a building or structure
that creates additional demand and need for parks facilities.
5. "Development approval" means any written authorization from the City,
which authorizes the commencement of the "development activity."
C:\Documents and Settings\A1I Use.-s\Desktop\Kelly\MSDATA \Ordinances\Parks Impact Fees.doc
LV:ksn 11/13/2008
Page 1 of 5
6. "Encumber" means to reserve, set aside, or earmark the parks impact fees
in order to pay for commitments, contractual obligations, or other liabilities incurred for
the provision of parks services.
7. "Fee payer" is a person, corporation, partnership, an incorporated
association or governmental agency, municipality, or similar entity commencing a land
development activity, which requires a building permit and creates a demand for
additional parks capital facilities.
8. "Impact fee" means the payment of money imposed by the City on
development activity pursuant to this Ordinance as a condition of granting
development approval.in order to pay for the parks facilities needed to serve new
growth and development that is a proportionate share of the cost of parks capital
facilities that is used for facilities that reasonably benefit new development. Impact fees
do not include a reasonable permit fee, an application fee, and the administrative fee for
collecting and handling parks impact fees or cost of revievving independent fee
calculations. -
9. "Otvner" means the OV,'Tler of record of real property, as found in the
records of King County, Washington, or a person with an unrestricted written option to
purchase property; provided, that if the real property is being purchased under a
recorded real estate contract, the purchaser shall be considered the owner of the
property.
10. "Proportionate share" means that portion of the cost for parks facility
improvements that are reasonably related to the service demands and needs of new
development.
11. "Public facilities" means the folloV\ing capital facilities ovvned or operated
by governmental entities: (1) public streets and roads; (2) publicly ovvned parks and
open spaces and recreational facilities; (3) school facilities; (4) fire protection facilities
not part of a fire district; and (5) police facilities and essential public facilities as defined
by Chapter 36.70A RCW.
Section 3. Parks Impact Fee Assessment.
A. The City shall collect parks impact fees from applicants seeking development
approvals from the City for any development activity in the City for which building
permits are required. This will include the expansion of existing uses, which create the
demand for parks services.
B. Parks impact fees shall be assessed at the time of a technically-complete
building permit application that complies with the City's zoning ordinances and
building and development codes. Parks impact fees shall be collected from the fee
payer at the time the building permit is issued.
C. Except if otherwise exempt, the City shall not issue the required building
permit unless or until the parks impact fees are paid.
Section 4. Use of Parks Impact Fees.
A. Pursuant to this Ordinance, parks impact fees shall be used for parks facilities
that will reasonably benefit the City and its residents.
B. Fees shall not be used to make up deficiencies in City facilities serving an
existing development.
C. Fees shall not be used for maintenance and operations, including personnel.
D. Parks impact fees shall be used for but not limited to land acquisition, site
improvements, engineering and architectural services, permitting, financing,
administrative expenses and applicable mitigation costs, and capital equipment
pertaining to parks facilities.
C:\Dorumenls and Settings\All Users\Desktop\Kelly\WBDATA \Ordinances\Parks Impact Fees.doc
LV:ksn 11/13/2008
Page 2 of 5
E. Parks impact fees may also be used to recoup public improvement costs
incurred by the City to the extent that new growth and development will be served by
the previously constructed improvement.
F. In the event bonds or similar debt instruments are or have been issued for
parks facility improvements, impact fees may be used to pay the principal on such
bonds.
Section 5. Parks Impact Fee Capital Facilities Plan. In order to collect parks
impact fees, the City must first adopt a parks capital facilities plan as an element of the
City's Comprehensive Plan. The City's capital facilities plan for parks services shall
consist of the following elements:
1. The City's capacity over the next six years, based on an inventory of the
City's parks facilities both existing and under construction;
2. The forecast of future needs for parks facilities based upon the City's
population projections;
3. A six-year financial plan component, updated as necessary, to maintain at
least a six-year forecast for financing needed within projected funding levels;
4. Application of the formula set forth in this Ordinance based upon the
information in the capital facilities plan; and
5. City Council Action. No new or revised impact fee shall be effective until
adopted by the City Council follov-.>ing a duly advertised public hearing to consider the
City's capital facilities plan or plan update.
Section 6. Parks Impact Fee Formula. The impact fee formula is based on the
assumptions found in Tuk\\>ila Parks Impact Fees, 2008, Exhibit A, and Tukwila Parks
Capital Facilities List, Exhibit A, attached hereto and by this reference fully
incorporated herein.
PARKS IMP ACT FEE CALCULATIONS
Impact Fee
Land Use Per Residential Unit I Per 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA
Single Family
Multi-Family I
Office
Retail
Industrial
Section 7. Parks Impact Fee Adjustments.
A. The City may adjust a parks impact fee at the time the fee is imposed to
consider unusual circumstances in specific cases to ensure that impact fees are imposed
fairly.
B. In calculating the fee imposed on a particular development, the City shall
permit consideration of studies and data submitted by a developer to adjust the amount
of the fee. The developer shall submit an independent fee calculation study to the
Director of Parks and Recreation, who shall review the study to determine that the
study:
1. is based on accepted impact fee assessment practices and methodologies;
2. uses acceptable data sources and the data used is comparable ,-vith the
uses and intensities planned for the proposed development activity;
3. complies ,-vith the applicable state laws governing impact fees;
4. is prepared and documented by professionals who are mutually agreeable
to the City and the developer and are qualified in their respective fields; and
5. shows the basis upon which the independent fee calculation was made.
C\Documenls and Settings\All Users\Desk!op \Kelly\MSDATA \Ordinances\Parks Impact Fees.doc
LV:ksn 11/14/2008
Page 3 of 5
C. In reviewing the study, the Director of Parks and Recreation may require the
developer to submit additional or different documentation. If an acceptable study is
presented, the Director of Parks and Recreation may adjust the fee to that appropriate
for the particular development activity. If an acceptable study is not presented, the
developer shall pay the impact fees required prior to submitting the study.
D. A developer requesting an adjustment or independent fee calculation may pay
the impact fees imposed by this Ordinance to obtain a building permit while the City
determines whether to partially reimburse the developer by making an adjustment or
accepting the independent fee calculation.
Section 8. Credits. A fee payer can request that a credit, or credits, be awarded to
the fee payer for the value of dedicated land, improvements to, or new construction of
any system improvements provided by the developer to facilities that are identified in
the capital facilities plan and that are required by the City as a condition of approving
the development activity.
Section 9. Appeals.
A. Any fee payer may pay the impact fees imposed by this Ordinance under
protest in order to obtain a building permit.
B. Appeals regarding parks impact fees imposed on any development activity
may only be taken by the fee payer of the property where such development activity
will occur. No appeal shall be permitted unless and until the impact fee at issue has
been paid.
C. Determinations of the City staff with respect to the applicability of parks
impact fees to a given development activity, or the availability of a credit, can be
appealed to the City's Hearing Examiner pursuant to this Section.
D. An appeal shall be taken within 10 working days of payment of the impact fees
under protest or 'within 10 working days of the City's issuance of a written
determination of a credit or exemption decision by filing with the City Clerk a notice of
appeal giving the reasons for the appeal with an accompanying appeal fee as set forth
in the existing fee schedule for land use decisions.
Section 10. Refunds.
A. If the City fails to expend or encumber the impact fees within six years from the
date the fees were paid, unless extraordinary circumstances or reasons exist, the current
O\^lI1er of the property on which the irnpact fees were paid may receive a refund of such
fees.
B. The City shall notify potential claimants by first class mail that they are entitled
to a refund. In determining whether impact fees have been expended or encumbered,
impact fees shall be considered expended or encumbered on a first-in, first out basis.
C. Ov.'Ilers seeking a refund must submit a written request for a refund of the fees
to the City ,-vithin one year of the date the right to claim a refund arises or notice is
given, whichever comes later.
D. Any impact fees for which no application has been made within the one-year
period shall be retained by the City and expended on appropriate parks facilities.
E. Refunds of impact fees shall include any interest earned on the impact fees by
the City.
Section 11. Exemptions. The parks impact fees are generated from the formula for
calculating the fees as set forth in this Ordinance. The amount of the impact fees is
determined by the information contained in the adopted parks master plan and related
documents, as appended to the City's Comprehensive Plan. All new development
located in the City will be charged a parks impact fee; provided, that the following
exemptions shall apply. Any development activity or project which has submitted a
technically complete building permit application prior to the effective date of this
C:\Documents and Setlings\AlI Users\Desktop\KelIy\MSDATA \Ordinances\Parks Impact Fees.doc
LV:ksn 11/13/2008
Page 4 of 5
Ordinance shall be exempt from the payment of parks impact fees. The following shall
be exempt from parks impact fees:
1. Replacement of a structure with a new structure having the same use, at
the same site, and when such replacement is v..'ithin 12 months of demolition or
destruction of the previous structure;
2. Alteration or expansion of or remodeling of an existing dwelling or
structure where no new units are created and the use is not changed;
3. Construction of an accessory residential structure;
4. Miscellaneous improvements including, but not limited to, fences, walls,
svdmming pools, and signs;
5. Demolition of or moving an existing structure within the City from one site
to another;
6. Low-income housing developed by individuals, nonprofit corporations, or
a housing authority may be exempted from impact fees at the discretion of City staff
subject to:
a. Fiscal impact analysis of the effect of impact fees upon low-income
housing and how exempting housing from impact fees would forward the goals for
low-income housing in the City and King County;
b. That adequate documentation be provided that the housing will
remain available for lmv-income persons for a 10-year period of time at affordable rents;
and
c. In the case of owner-occupied dwellings, that such housing will be
sold or leased at affordable rates to low-income households for a period of 10 years; and
d. The impact fee for exempt development shall be calculated as
provided by this Ordinance and paid with public funds. Such payments may be made
by including such amounts in the public share of the system improvements undertaken
\\'ithin the City for parks services and facilities.
Section 12. Authority Unimpaired. Nothing in this Ordinance shall preclude the
City from requiring the fee payer to mitigate adverse and environmental affects of a
specific development pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapters 43.21C
RCW and/ or Chapter 58.17 RCW, governing plats and subdivisions, provided that the
exercise of this authority is consistent with Chapters 43.21C and 82.02 RCW.
Section 13. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or
phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to
be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the
remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation.
Section 14. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be
published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force
five days after passage and publication as provided by law.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWlLA, WASHINGTON,
at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of . 2008.
ATTEST I AUTHENTICATED:
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Christy O'Flaherty, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Filed \\'ith the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Published:
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number:
Office of the City Attorney
Attachment: Tukwila Parks Impact Fees, 2008, Exhibit A
Tub\'i1a Parks Capital Facilities List, Exhibit B
C,\Docurnenls and Settings\All Users\Desklop\Kelly\MSDATA \Ordinances\Parks Impact Fees.doc
LV,ksn 1l/14/2(f38
Page 5 of 5
EXHIBIT A
Tukwila Parks Impact Fees, 2008
TABLE 1: 2008 Park Impact Fee Calculations
Land Use
2007 2007. 2007 Building 2020 Housing
Housing Employment. Area -3 Units
Units -1 2
2020 2020 Building
Employme Area
nt
Single-familv 3,822 4,338
Multi-familv 4,107 6,491
Office 6,245 1,561,250 7,727 1,931,750
Retail 20,384 10,192,000 25,220 12,610,000
Industrial 20,343 16,274,400 25,169 20,135,200
TOTALS 7,929 46,972 28,027,650 10,829 58,116 34,676,950
1. OFM
2. PSRC 2007 Covered Emplooyment Estimates
3. Retail: 500gsfper emp; Office: 250gsfper emp; Industrial: 800gsfper emp; X emp growth
4. 43 SF du/yr; rest is MF from 2007 Buildable Lands Report
5. 90% of Buildable Lands Report estimates, at same % as 2007 employment
6. TulG",i1a ResidentINon- TulG",iIa resident breakdown based on 2000 census data
In 2000, the number of residents who live and work in TulG",ila is 1 ,502, out of a population of 17,1 81
9%
Net Growth, 2008 - 2020
Housing Units - Employment Building Employment: Employment:
4 -5 Area - 3 Tukwila Non-Tukwila
Residents - Residents -
9%-6 91%-6
516
2,384
1,482 370,500 133 1,349
4,836 2,418,000 435 4,401
4,826 3,860,800 434 4,392
2,900 11,144 6,649,300 1,003 10,141
mDactee
Persons per Hours per Total % Hours Cost Per Housing Per 1,000 Rounded
Housing Unit Week Hours Allocation Unit GFA**
2.54 2.54 3,329 11. 78% $0 $0.00 $0
2.49 2.49 14,781 52.32% $0 $0.00 $0
1.00 1,349 4.77% $0 $0.00 $0
1.00 4,401 15.58% $0 $0.00 $0
1.00 4,392 15.55% $0 $0.00 $0
28,251 100.00%
I F
Note: $11,025,000 is 90% of$12,250,000
EXHIBIT B
Tukwila Parks Capital Facilities List
Project List - Impact Fees 2009 to 2015
Duwamish Riverbend Hill
Trail Connections
Tukwila Pond
Southgate Park
City of Tukwila Pool
Boat Launch
TOD Pedestrian Bridge
Develop Phase II
Green River Trail to Renton Black/Cedar River
Development - Phase II
Expand and Develop
[Extend land lease]; expand features and services
Christianson, Codiga, Fort Dent, Log Cabin
Sounder Connection
Total
C:\Documents and SettingsWI Users\Deshop\KelIyIMSDATA\Ordinances\Parks Impact Exhibit Rdoc
LV:ksn 11/1412008
Page 1 of 1
Project
Cost
3,000,000
1,000,000
3,000,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
750,000
2,000,000
12,250,000
DRAFT
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKvVILA,
WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING THE ASSESSMENT OF FIRE IMPACT
FEES ON NEVv RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, AND INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND
ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
.WHEREAS, pursuant to the Growth Management Act of the State of Washington
and RCW 36.70A, the City of Tukwila has an adopted Comprehensive Plan, which
includes provisions for fire protection facilities as part of its Capital Facilities Element;
and
vVHEREAS, RCW 82.02.050 authorizes cities to impose impact fees on development
activity as part of the financing for public facilities, including fire protection facilities;
and
WHEREAS, the Tubvila City Council desires to provide funding for fire protection
facilities, as referenced in the Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan,
through the imposition of residential and non-residential development impact fees;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASITh'J"GTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings. The City Council finds and determines that new growth and
development in the City creates additional demand and need for public fire protection
facilities in the City, and the City Council finds that new growth and development
should pay its proportionate share of the costs for new fire service facilities to serve new
growth and development in the City. The City Council believes that this can be
accomplished by the assessment of fire impact fees on new' residential, commercial, and
industrial development in the City. It is the Council's intent that the provisions of this
ordinance be liberally construed in establishing the fire impact fee program.
Section 2. Definitions. Terms or words not defined herein shall be defined
pursuant to RCW 82.02.090 when given their usual and customary meaning. For the
purposes of this ordinance, unless the context or subject matter clearly requires
otherwise, the words or phrases defined in this section shall have the following
meanings:
1. The "Act" means the Growth Management Act, Chapter 17, Laws of 1990,
First Extraordinary Session, Chapter 36.70A RCVv et seq. and Chapter 32, Laws of 1991,
First Special Session, as now in existence or hereinafter amended.
2. "Building permit" means an official document or certification of the City
of Tukvvila issued by the City's building official which authorizes the construction,
alteration, enlargement, conversion, reconstruction, remodeling, rehabilitation, erection,
placement, demolition, moving, or repair of a building or structure.e
3. "City" means the City of Tubvila, Washington, County of King.
4. "Development activity" means any construction of a building or structure
that creates additional demand and need for fire safety facilities.
5. "Development approval" means any v.nitten authorization from the City,
which authorizes the commencement of the" development activity."
C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Desktop\Kelly\MSDATA \Ordinances\Fue Impact Fees.doc
LV:ksn 11/14/200-8
Page 1 of 5
6. "Encumber" means to reserve, set aside, or earmark the fire impact fees in
order to pay for commitments, contractual obligations, or other liabilities incurred for
the provision of fire protective services.
7. "Fee payer" is a person, corporation, partnership, an incorporated
association or governmental agency, municipality, or similar entity commencing a land
development activity, which requires a building permit and creates a demand for
additional fire capital facilities.
8. "Impact fee" means the payment of money imposed by the City on
development activity pursuant to this Ordinance as a condition of granting
development approval in order to pay for the fire facilities needed to serve new growth
and development that is a proportionate share of the cost of fire capital facilities that is
used for facilities that reasonably benefit new development. Impact fees do not include
a reasonable permit fee, an application fee, and the administrative fee for collecting and
handling fire impact fees or cost of reviewing independent fee calculations.
9. "Ovvner" means the owner of record of real property, as found in the
records of King County, Vlfashington, or a person with an unrestricted written option to
purchase property; provided, that if the real property is being purchased under a
recorded real estate contract, the purchaser shall be considered the owner of the
property.
10. "Proportionate share" means that portion of the cost for fire facility
improvements that are reasonably related to the service demands and needs of new
development.
11. "Public facilities" means the following capital facilities owned or operated
by governmental entities: (1) public streets and roads; (2) publicly owned parks and
open spaces and recreational facilities; (3) school facilities; (4) fire protection facilities
not part of a fire district; and (5) police facilities and essential public facilities as defined
by Chapter 36.70A RCW.
Section 3. Fire Impact Fee Assessment.
A. The City shall collect fire impact fees from applicants seeking development
approvals from the City for any development activity in the City for which building
permits are required. This will include the expansion of existing uses, which create the
demand for fire protection services.
B. Fire impact fees shall be assessed at the time of a technically-complete building
permit application that complies with the City's zoning ordinances and building and
development codes. Fire impact fees shall be collected from the fee payer at the time
the building permit is issued.
C. Except if othenvise exempt, the City shall not issue the required building
permit unless or until the fire impact fees are paid.
Section 4. Use of Fire Impact Fees.
A. Pursuant to this Ordinance, fire impact fees shall be used for fire facilities that
,vill reasonably benefit the City and its residents.
B. Fees shall not be used to make up deficiencies in City facilities serving an
existing development.
C. Fees shall not be used for maintenance and operations, including personnel.
D. Fire impact fees shall be used for but not limited to land acquisition, site
improvements, engineering and architectural services, permitting, financing,
administrative expenses and applicable mitigation costs, and capital equipment
pertaining to fire protection facilities.
E. Fire impact fees may also be used to recoup public improvement costs incurred
by the City to the extent that new growth and development will be served by the
previously constructed improvement.
C:\Documenls and Settings\All User.\Desktop\Kelly\MSDATA \Ordinances\Fire Impact Fees.doc
LV:ksn 11/14/2008
Page 2 of 5
F. In the event bonds or similar debt instruments are or have been issued for fire
facility improvements, impact fees may be used to pay the principal on such bonds.
Section 5. Fire Impact Fee Capital Facilities Plan. In order to collect fire impact
fees, the City must first adopt a Fire Capital Facilities Plan as an element of the City's
Comprehensive Plan. The City's capital facilities plan for fire protection services shall
consist of the follov;wg elements:
1. The City's capacity over the next six years, based on an inventory of the
City's fire facilities both existing and under construction;
2. The forecast of future needs for fire facilities based upon the City's
population projections;
3. A six-year financial plan component, updated as necessary, to maintain at
least a six-year forecast for financing needed v\'ithin projected funding levels;
4. Application of the formula set forth in this Ordinance based upon the
information in the capital facilities plan; and
5. City Council Action. No new or revised impact fee shall be effective until
adopted by the City Council following a duly advertised public hearing to consider the
City's capital facilities plan or plan update.
Section 6. Fire Impact Fee Formula. The impact fee formula is based on the
assumptions found in Tukwila Fire Impact Fees, 2008, Exhibit A, and Tukwila Fire
Department Capital Facilities List, Exhibit B, attached hereto and by this reference fully
incorporated herein.
FIRE L\1P ACT FEE CALCULATIONS
Impact Fee
Land Use Per Residential Unit I Per 1,000 Sq. Ft. GFA
Single family I
Multi-family
Office
Retail
Industrial
Section 7. Fire Impact Fee Adjustments.
A. The City may adjust a fire impact fee at the time the fee is imposed to consider
unusual circumstances in specific cases to ensure that impact fees are imposed fairly.
E. In calculating the fee imposed on a particular development, the City shall
permit consideration of studies and data submitted by a developer to adjust the amount
of the fee. The developer shall submit an independent fee calculation study to the Fire
Chief who shall review the study to determine that the study: .
1. is based on accepted impact fee assessment practices and methodologies;
2. uses acceptable data sources and the data used is comparable with the uses
and intensities planned for the proposed development activity;
3. complies with the applicable state laws governing impact fees;
4. is prepared and documented by professionals who are mutually agreeable
to the City and the developer and are qualified in their respective fields; and
5. shows the basis upon which the independent fee calculation was made.
C. In reviewing the study, the Fire Chief may require the developer to submit
additional or different documentation. If an acceptable study is presented, the Fire
Chief may adjust the fee to that appropriate for the particular development activity. If
an acceptable study is not presented, the developer shall pay the impact fees required
prior to submitting the study.
C:\Docurnents and Settings\All Users\Desktop\Kell}'\MSDATA \Ordinances\FlIe Impact Fees.doc
LV:ksn 11/14/2008
Page 3 of 5
D. A developer requesting an adjustment or independent fee calculation may pay
the impact fees imposed by this ordinance to obtain a building permit while the City
determines whether to partially reimburse the developer by making an adjustment or
accepting the independent fee calculation.
Section 8. Credits. A fee payer can request that a credit, or credits, be awarded to
the fee payer for the value of dedicated land, improvements to, or new construction of
any system improvements provided by the developer to facilities that are identified in
the capital facilities plan and that are required by the City as a condition of approving
the development activity.
Section 9. Appeals.
A. Any fee payer may pay the impact fees imposed by this Ordinance under
protest in order to obtain a building permit.
B. Appeals regarding fire impact fees imposed on any development activity may
only be taken by the fee payer of the property where such development activity will
occur. No appeal shall be permitted unless and until the impact fee at issue has been
paid.
C. Determinations of the City staff with respect to the applicability of fire impact .
fees to a given development activity, or the availability of a credit, can be appealed to
the City's Hearing Examiner pursuant to this Section.
D. An appeal shall be taken within 10 working days of payment of the impact fees
under protest or within 10 working days of the City's issuance of a written
determination of a credit or exemption decision by filing with the City Clerk a notice of
appeal giving the reasons for the appeal with an accompanying appeal fee as set forth
in the existing fee schedule for land use decisions.
Section 10. Refunds.
A. If the City fails to expend or encumber the impact fees within six years from the
date the fees were paid, unless extraordinary circumstances or reasons exist, the current
OV-iller of the property on which the impact fees were paid may receive a refund of such
fees.
B. The City shall notify potential claimants by first class mail that they are entitled
to a refund. In determining whether impact fees have been expended or encumbered,
impact fees shall be considered expended or encumbered on a first-in, first out basis.
C. Owners seeking a refund must submit a written request for a refund of the fees
to the City within one year of the date the right to claim a refund arises or notice is
given, whichever comes later.
D. Any impact fees for which no application has been made within the one-year
period shall be retained by the City and expended on appropriate fire facilities.
E. Refunds of impact fees shall include any interest earned on the impact fees by
the City.
Section 11. Exemptions. The fire impact fees are generated from the formula for
calculating the fees as set forth in this Ordinance. The amount of the impact fees is
determined by the information contained in the adopted fire department master plan
and related documents, as appended to the City's Comprehensive Plan. All new
development located in the City v\Till be charged a fire impact fee; provided, that the
following exemptions shall apply. Any development activity or project which has
submitted a technically complete building permit application prior to the effective date
of this Ordinance shall be exempt from the payment of fire impact fees. The follovving
shall be exempt from fire impact fees:
1. Replacement of a structure v\Tith a new structure having the same use, at
the same site, and when such replacement is v-.ithin 12 montl1S of demolition or
destruction of the previous structure;
C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Desktop\Kelly\MSDATA \Ordinances\Fire Impact Fees.doc
LV:ksn 11/14/2008
Page 4 of 5
2. Alteration or expansion of or remodeling of an existing dwelling or
structure where no new units are created and the use is not changed;
3. Construction of an accessory residential structure;
4. Miscellaneous improvements including, but not limited to, fences, walls,
swimming pools, and signs;
5. Demolition of or moving an existing structure within the City from one site
to another;
6. Low-income housing developed by individuals, nonprofit corporations, or
a housing authority may be exempted from impact fees at the discretion of City staff
subject to:
a. Fiscal impact analysis of the effect of impact fees upon low-income
housing and how exempting housing from impact fees would forward the goals for
low-income housing in the City and King County;
b. That adequate documentation be provided that the housing will
remain available for low-income persons for a 10-year period of time at affordable rents;
and
c. In the case of ov....ner-occupied d'wellings, that such housing will be
sold or leased at affordable rates to low-income households for a period of 10 years; and
d. The impact fee for exempt development shall be calculated as
provided by this Ordinance and paid with public funds. Such payments may be made
by including such amounts in the public share of the system improvements undertaken
within the City for fire protection services and facilities.
Section 12. Authority Unimpaired. Nothing in this ordinance shall preclude the
City from requiring the fee payer to mitigate adverse and environmental affects of a
specific development pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapters 43.21C
RCW and/ or Chapter 58.17 RCW, governing plats and subdivisions, provided that the
exercise of this authority is consistent 'with Chapters 43.21 C and 82.02 ROV.
Section 13. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or
phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to
be invalid or unconstitutibnal for any reaSon by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the
remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation.
Section 14. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be
published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force
five days after passage and publication as provided by law.
PASSED BY TIIE CITY COUNCIL OF TIIE CITY OF TUKiVILA, WASHINGTON,
at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of . 2008.
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Christy O'Flaherty, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Published:
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number:
Office of the City Attomey
Attachments: Exhibit A - Tubvila Fire Impact Fees, 2008
Exhibit B - Fire Department Capital Facilities List
C:\Documenls and Sellings\All Users\Dasktop\KelIy\MSDATA \Ordinances\Hre Impact Fees.doc
LV:ksn 11/14/20D8
Page 5 of 5
EXHIBIT A
Tukwila Fire Impact Fees, 2008
TABLE 1. Tuk"WiIa Fire Impact Fee Calculation, 2008
Net Growth, 2008-2020 . Imnact Fee
2007 2007 Housing Building Employrne Per
Land Use Housing Employme Residential Per GFA Per 1,000
Units-1 nt- 2 Units - 3 Area - 4 nt - 5 Unit Sq. Ft GFA
Sin"le family 3 822 516 $0
Multi-familv 4,107 2,384 SO
Office 6245 370,500 1,482 SO.OO $0
Retail 20,384 2,418,000 4,836 SO.OO $0
Industrial 20343 3,860,800 4,826 SO.OO $0
TOTALS 46 972 6,649,300 11,144
L OFM numbers
2. PSRC 2007 Covered Employment Estimates
3. 43 SF du/yr; rest is MF from 2007 Buildable Lands Report
4. Retail: 500gsfper emp; Office: 250gsfper emp; Industrial: 800gsfper emp; X emp growth
5. 90% of Buildable Lands Report estimates, at same % as 2007 emplo}ment
TABLE 2. TukwiIa Fire Service Demand Calculation, 2008
2007 Responses
Revised
2007 Responses
Land Use
Incident
Responses
%
% Based
on Net
Total
Proportion
al
Reallocatio
n of
II Other"
Incident
Responses
0/0
Incident
Responses
per 1,000
Units
Incident
Responses
per 1,000
Employees
Increase in Annual Incident
Responses due to Growth
Capital Costs
Allocated hy
Incident
Responses due
to Growth
Incident
Responses
%
Sinl'le family 619 13% 19% 249 868 19% 227 117 8% $0
Multi-family 866 19% 26% 349 1,215 26% 296 705 49% $0
Office 445 10% 13% 179 625 13% 100.0 148 10% $0
Retail 1039 22% 31% 418 1,458 31% 71.5 346 24% $0
Industrial 362 8% 11% 146 508 11% 25.0 120 8% $0
NET TOTAL 3332 71% 100% 1,341 4,673 100% 1,437 100% $0
Other 1341 29%
TOTAL 4673 100% 100% 1,341 4,673 100% 100%
Note: The $13,031,550 capital cost is 90% of$14,479,500 (the growth related fu~ capital cost).
TABLE 3. 2007 Incident Responses by Property Type & Allocation to Impact Fee Categories
IMPACT FEE CATEGORIES
Fire Dept Land Fire Aid Total Sing1e- Mu1ti- Office Retail Industrial TOTAL
Use Catel'ories familv familv
Public Assemhly 12 42 54 54
Educational 18 30 48 48
Health Care" 27 90 117 70 47
Sinl'le-familv 159 460 619 619
Apartments 224 570 794 794
Boardinl' House 0 2 2 2
Hotels 102 203 305 305
Business"" 441 590 1.031 351 680
Industrial 12 2 14 14
Manufacturino- 57 47 104 104
Stora"e 81 163 244 244
SUBTOTAL 1 133 2,199 3 332 619 866 445 1,039 362 3,332
PERCEJI.'T OF 19% 26% 13% 31% 11% 100%
SUBTOTAL
SDecial ProDertv 275 855 1130
Unclassified 148 63 211
SUBTOTAL 423 918 1341
Reallocation of
Special Property 249 349 179 418 146 1,341
& Unclassified
TOTAL
INCIDEJI.'T
RESPONSES BY 868 1,215 625 1,458 508 4,673
IMP ACT FEE
CATEGORY
· split 60% Multi-family, 40% Office (Redmond)
*. split 34% Office, 66% Retail (2007 Tukwila)
EXHIBIT B
Fire Department Capital Facilities List
Capital Facility
1.
Construct/build relocated Station 51 - 25,000 sf
station; existing 15,000 sf station replacement due
to growth, including bays for ladder truck and new
aid car
Purchase aid car for Station 51 (new)
Purchase engine for Station 54 to replace aerial
ladder truck
Purchase land for relocated Station 52, if Station 51
is relocated
Construct/build relocated Station 52, if Station 51 is
relocated
2.
3.
4.
5.
TOTAL
125,000 gsfbuilding x $400/psfbui1ding construction cost
2 ~ acre site (21,780 sf) x $25/psfland cost
37,500 gsfbui1ding x $400/psfbuilding construction cost
C:\Documents and SettingsWI Users\Desl.'top\Kelly\MSDATA\OrdinanceslFire Exhbit B.doc
L V:ksn 11/1412008
Cost
$ 10,000,0001
$ 185,000
$ 750,000
$ 544,5002
$ 3,000,0003
$ 14,479,500
Page 1 of 1
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard · Tukwila} Washington 98188
Jim Haggerton} Mayor
FROM:
Mayor
Finance and Safety Committee ~ ,7 ,If
Tourism & Marketing Program Managerlh, r)./
October 31, 2008
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Des Moines Interlocal Agreement
ISSUE
This agenda item is to approve an interlocal agreement to provide tourism and marketing
services to the City of Des Moines.
BACKGROUND
In 2005, the City of Des Moines entered into an agreement with the City of Tukwila to purchase
tourism and marketing services for increasing awareness of Des Moines as a travel destination.
The City of Tukwila provides these services under the Seattle Southside Visitor Services brand.
SSVS is the official convention and visitor bureau for the Cities of Tukwila, SeaTac, Kent and
Des Moines. The agreement with Des Moines had a three-year term that expires on January 1,
2009. It is time to renew the agreement.
DISCUSSION
The proposed agreement is very similar to the previous one. The main change is the new term is
for one year commencing on January 1, 2009. It shall renew for subsequent one-year terms
unless otherwise terminated for cause or with 120 days notice. Des Moines's payment to SSVS
will remain the same at 100 percent of Des Moines lodging tax collected per year.
The City's Lodging Tax Advisory Committee has reviewed the opportunity and recommends
that it be renewed.
FISCAL IMP ACT
Des Moines's annual lodging tax collected is approximately $20,000 and was approved for
SSVS for 2009-2010. Both City Councils review this program annually as part of the Cities'
regular budget process. This proposed agreement is already reflected in the City of Tubvila's
proposed 2009-2010 budget and no additional budgetary authority is necessary.
ATTACHMENTS
Draft Inter-local Agreement for Tourism and Marketing Services between the City of Tukwila
and the City of Des Moines.
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize Mayor to sign a new Inter-local Agreement.
Phone: 206-433-1800 .. City Hall Fax: 206-433-1833" www.ci.tukwila.wa.us
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
FOR
TOURISlVI AND l\1ARKETING SERVICES
BETWEEN CITY OF TUKWILA AND CITY OF DES l\10INES
THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into pursuant to the
Interlocal Cooperation Act, Chapter 39.34 of the Revised Code of\Vashington, by and between
the City of Tukwila, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "Tubvila" and the City of Des
Moines, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "Des Moines".
RECITALS
WHEREAS, Des Moines desires to acquire professional tourism and marketing services for the
purpose of increasing awareness of Des Moines and the surrounding areas as a tourist
destination;
\VHEREAS, Tukwila is designated as the Administrator responsible for administering Interlocal
Agreements with the Cities of Des Moines, SeaTac, and Kent to provide tourism and marketing
services under the program name Seattle Southside Visitor Services ("SSVS");
WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the citizens of Des Moines to continue its participation
in the SSVS program;
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained in this agreement, the
parties agree as follows:
AGREEMENT
1. Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to continue to include Des Moines in
SSVS's tourism and marketing program, as administered by Tukwila, to promote
tourism in Des Moines.
2. Scope of Services. The City of Tukwi1a and SSVS agrees to provide the following
tourism and marketing services to Des Moines:
a) Incorporate Des Moines's tourism businesses into the existing SSVS Tourism
Networking Committee for the purposes of creating awareness, support and
participation in SSVS's various marketing activities;
b) Facilitate input from Des Moines's tourism businesses for the purposes of
developing, implementing and evaluating annual marketing strategies;
c) Attend Des Moines's Lodging Tax Advisory Committee meetings;
d) Submit quarterly reports to Des Moines's Lodging Tax Advisory Committee
regarding marketing budget information, implementation schedules, and
marketing strategies;
e) Implement annual marketing and media plans incorporating Des Moines's
tomism businesses
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR
TOURISM AND MARKETING SERVICES - 1
f) Incorporate Des Moines hotels, major tourist attractions and Des Moines
sponsored events and venues into SSVS's vacation planner, web site, coupon book
and restaurant concierge book. Shopping destinations, restaurants, tourist
attractions, and other tourism businesses located in Des Moines will be offered
the opportunity to be included in these materials for a fee;
g) Create and distribute tourism materials, including but not limited to those
identified in subsection "f' above, regarding Des Moines related tourism
businesses
h) Provide Annual Economic Impact Report as required under SBH 3206, chapter
28, laws of 2008, to the City of Des Moines each year until this section expires in
2013 no later than April 1 for submittal to the State of \Vashington Department of
Community, Trade and Economic Development, no later than May 1.
The scope of services described above may be increased or decreased from time to time by
mutual written agreement by this Agreement's Administrators. The scope of services shall not
include implementation of Des Moines's specific tourism projects. At such time as Des Moines
and SVSS mutually agree, SSVS may advise or assist Des Moines regarding Des Moines's
specific projects.
3. Compensation. As its proportionate share of SSVS' program, Des Moines will contribute
100% of its Hotel-Motel Tax revenue for so long as this agreement remains in effect, for
the services provided for by this Agreement. SSVS shall invoice Des Moines monthly.
4. Tenn. The term of this Agreement shall be for one year commencing on January 1, 2009.
Unless written notice of non-renewal is given by either party 120 days before the end of
the term, this Agreement shall automatically renew for one-year terms until terminated as
set forth below.
5. Records. SSVS, as administered by Tukwi1a, shall maintain or cause to be maintained
books of accounts concerning the total operation of this Agreement, in \vhich books shall
be entered, fully and accurately, each transaction pertaining to this Agreement. All the
books will be open during normal business hours for inspection and examination by Des
Moines.
6. Termination. Tukwi1a or Des Moines may terminate this Agreement in \vriting with 120
days written notice. The terminating party shall be liable for its share of financial
obligations entered into on its behalf prior to tennination including but not limited to
printing costs and media buys.
7. Ownership. SSVS shall maintain ownership of all propeliy acquired pursuant to this
Agreement.
8. Amendment. This Agreement may be amended or modified in writing at any time with
the mutual consent of both parties.
9. Hold Hann1ess. Tukwila and Des Moines agree that each party shall defend, indemnify,
and hold harmless the other party and its officers, officials, agents employees, and
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR
TOURISM AND MARKETING SERVICES - 2
volunteers from any and all claims, injuries, actions, damages, losses or suites including
reasonable attorney's fees, which arise out of or are connected with any errors,
omissions or negligent acts in the performance of this Agreement.
10. Notices. Notices to the City of Tukwila shall be sent to the following address:
City Clerk
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, WA 98188
Copies of notices to the City of Tukwila shall be sent to the following address:
Katherine Kertzman, Tourism and Marketing Program Manager
Seattle Southside Visitors Center
14220 interurban Avenue South, Ste 130
Tukwila, W A 98168
Copies of notices to the City of Des Moines shall be sent to the following address:
Patrice Thorell, Parks and Recreation Director
1000 South 220th Street
Des Moines, WA 98198
IN \VITr.fESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed.
CITY OF TUKWILA
CITY OF DES MOll\TES
, Mayor
Dated:
, Mayor
Dated:
Attest:
Attest:
City Clerk
City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Approved as to Form:
City Attorney
Assistant City Attorney
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR
TOURISM AND MARKETING SERVICES - 3
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard. Tukwila} Washington 98188
Jim Haggerton} Mayor
Memo
To:
Finance & Safety Committee Members
Mayor Jim Haggerton
Rhonda Beny, City Administrator
Shawn Hunstock, Director of Finance I. .
Viki L. Jessop, PHR, Administrative Services Director !-rj
11/13/2008
cc:
From:
Date:
Re:
Recommendation for 2009 Non-Represented Wages & Benefits Package
Mayor Haggerton, Rhonda Berry and I have had a number of conversations over the past few months
regarding the state of the economy~ the overall regional financial situation, and the City of Tukwila's
budgetary concerns. Though many of the City's neighbors are implementing hiring freezes and layoffs,
the City of Tukwila has made a conscious decision to maintain equitable wages and benefits by
adhering to its philosophy of being at the average of comparables in the market.
This year the Consumer Price Index All Wage Earners (CPI-W) for Seattle- Tacoma-Bremerton (first
half of calendar year 2007-first half of calendar year 2008) came in at 4.9%. CPI-W reflects the
instability of the economy over the past year. The data for the first half of 2007 to the first half of 2008 is
calculated as:
Reporting period ending in February: 5.1 %
Reporting period ended in April: 3.8%
Reporting period ended in June: 6.2%
For an average of 4.9%
In a departure from a wage increase based on a percentage of the CPI-W, the Mayor is recommending
the following compensation package for the Non-Represented Employees for calendar year 2009:
1) A flat rate 4.5% increase to the non-represented wages, effective January 1, 2009; and
Phone: 206-433-1800 · City Hall Fax: 206-433-1833. www.cUukwila.wa.us
2) Updated benefits schedule; and
3) Implementation of a longevity schedule, effective January 1, 2009
The addition of a longevity schedule brings the Non-Represented employees into an area of
compensation that rewards the Non-Represented employees for their institutional knowledge,
commitment and dedication to the City of Tukwila, and is more in alignment with intemal compensation
equity. The longevity schedule benefits the City by recognizing, rewarding and enhancing the retention
of our valuable City resource.
The Mayor believes this combination of base wage increase, benefits, and longevity pay, provides a fair
and equitable package to the Non-Represented employees while staying within the boundaries of the
Mayor's recommended biennial budget.
Mayor Haggerton requests that the Finance & Safety Committee forward the Non-Represented
compensation and benefit resolution to the November 24th Council of the Whole meeting, with a
recommendation for approval. A sample of the format used for the Non-Represented Salary schedule
is attached to the resolution. Attachment "An, the actual wage schedule, will be updated with the
. recommended 2009 Non-Represented wages prior to the Council of the Whole meeting based on the
outcome of the Finance & Safety meeting discussion.
Thank you for your consideration. If you have questions or need additional information regarding this
memo, please do not hesitate to contact me. I will be in attendance at the Finance & Safety Committee
meeting on November 18th.
. Page 2
n~ ;l!, ~T
~~ -":'b~-r.D !J
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKvVILA,
WASHINGTON, UPDATING Al\.TD CLARIFYING THE NON-
REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION AND ADOPTING THE
NON-REPRESENTED SALARY SCHEDULE AND BE!\TEFITS SUMMARY,
EFFECTIVE JAl\.TUARY 1,2009.
vVHEREAS, the Tukwila City Council approved Resolution No. 1537, dated
December I, 2003, which provided that a COLA would be applied to the non-
represented employee wage schedule in odd-numbered calendar years; and
WHEREAS, the COLA in previous years has been based on the Consumer Price
Index, All Wage Earners (CPI-W) Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton Area Semi-Annual
Average (first half of calendar year to first half of following calendar year); and
vVHEREAS, the CPI-W average for the above-stated period of time (first half of
2007 compared to first half 2008) is 4.9%; and
vVHEREAS, a percentage of the CPI-W, as stated above, has been used to make
wage adjustments in previous years; and
WHEREAS, due to the unpredictability of the economy, internal equity
considerations, and the funding within the recommended 2009-2010 City budget, the
Mayor recommends the Council provide a flat-rate increase of 4.5% to base wage
effective January I, 2009 for non-represented employees.
WHEREAS, in recognition of the commitment and expertise that long-term
employment brings to the City, the Mayor also recommends a longevity pay plan for
the non-represented employees. This plan recognizes internal equity and values the
institutional knowledge that is inherent in retaining long-term employees. In this
uncertain economy, and with the impending retirement of many of the Baby Boom
generation, retaining long-term employees becomes crucial for achieving our mission to
preserve and enhance the quality of life for the citizens in Tukwila.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Non-Represented Vvage Plan.
A. The 2009 wage schedule for non-represented employees shall be increased by a
flat rate of 4.5%.
B. Employees currently above the top step of the 2009 wage schedule shall also
receive a 4.5% increase for 2009. The 4.5% shall be applied to their actual wage that is
above the control point.
C Longevity pay will be added as described in "Attachment C"
D. Merit will continue to be eliminated from the plan at this time due to economic
conditions, as well as a desire that the wage schedule for non-represented employees
C:\Documenls and Settings\All Users\Desktop\Kelly\MSDATA\Reso]ulions\2009 Non-rep salary.doc
KG:ksn 11/13/2008
Page 1 of 7
better reflect the wages offered by those jurisdictions determined to be comparable, and
may be reconsidered as a plan element in subsequent years.
Section 2. Non-Represented'Vage Schedule, Benefits Summary and Longevity Pay
Plan.
A. The non-represented wage schedule, "Attachment A" hereto, shall be
approved, effective January 1, 2009.
B. The non-represented benefits summary, "Attachment B" shall be approved,
effective January 1, 2009.
C. The non-represented longevity pay plan, "Attachment C" shall be approved,
effective January 1, 2009.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TlJKV\l1LA, WASHINGTON,
at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2008.
ATTEST! AUTHENTICATED:
Joe Duffie, Council President
Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Office of the City Attorney
Filed \^,'ith the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Resolution Number:
Attachments: Attachment A, Non-Represented Salary Schedule and Structure - 2009
Attachment B, Non-Represented Employee Benefits - 2009
Attachment C, Non-Represented Longevity Pay Plan
C:\Documents and Settings\All Use...,,\Desktop\Kelly\MSDA T A \Resolutions\2009 Non-rep salOI)'.doc
KG:ksn 11/13/2008
Page 2 of 7
ATT ACHNffii\.TT A, Page 1
CITY OF TUKV\'lLA
NON-REPRESENTED SALARY SCHEDULE - 2009
Classification Title Job Title Range
,
Administrative Support Technician Administrative Support Technician Al2
Office Technician Personnel Technician B21
Office Specialist Administrative Secretary B22
Civil Service Secretary /Exarniner !
Administrative Assistant Deputy City Clerk B23
Executive Secretary
Administrative Secretary I
Council Administrative Assistant
Program Coordinator Systems Administrator C41
Personnel Assistant
Management Coordinator City Clerk C42
Court Administrator
Police Records Manager
Management Analyst Legislative Analyst
Personnel Analyst i
Public Works Analyst
Assistant to the City Administrator i
I
I
Program Administrator Internal Operations Manager C43 I
Public Works Coordinator I
EmergencyA1anagementCoordinator i
Program Manager Assistant City Administrator D61
Senior Engineer
Building Official ,
IT Manager ;
i
Administrative Manager Maintenance Operations Manager D62
Police Commander
Assistant Director Deputy Community Development Director D63
Deputy Finance Director i
Deputy Public Works Director
Deputy Parks & Recreation Director
Department Manager Assistant Fire Chief D72
Assistant Police Chief
City Engineer
Department Administrator Economic Development Administrator E81
Department Head Administrative Services Director E83
DCD Director ,
Finance Director
IT Director
Parks & Recreation Director
Department Director Fire Chief E91
Police Chief
Public Works Director
City Administrator City Administrator FlO2
C:\Docwnenls and Settings\All Users\Desktop\Kelly\MSDATA \ResoJutions\2000l Non-Tep saiar)'.doc
KG:ksn 11/13/2008
Page 3 of 7
SAMPLE
ATIACHIvIENT AT Page 2
2009 NON-REPRESEhTTED SALARY STRUCTURE (MONTHLY)
DBM (Minimum)
Rating Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 7
All XXXX XXXXI XXXX XXXX XXXXI
A12 XXXX XXXXI XXXX XXXXI XXXX
A13 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
B21 XXXX XXXXI XXXXI XXXX XXXXI
B22 XXXX XXXXI XXXX XXXXI XXXX
B23 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXI XXXXI
B31 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
B32 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXI I
C41 I XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXI XXXX
C42 XXXX XXXX XXXXI XXXXI XXXXI XXXX
C43 I XXXX XXXX XXXXI XXXX XXXX XXXX
C51 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXI XXXXI XXXX
C52 XXXX XXXX XXXXI XXXX XXXXI XXXX
D61 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
D62 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
D63 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
D71 XXXX XXXX XXXXI XXXX XXXX XXXX
D72 XXXX XXXX XXXXI XXXX XXXX XXXX
E81 XXXX XXXXI XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
E82 XXXX XXXXI XXXX XXXX XXXXI XXXX XXXX
E83 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXI XXXX XXXX
E91 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXI XXXX XXXXI XXXX
E92 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXI XXXX
Fl01 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Fl02 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXI XXXX XXXX XXXX
The salary grid provides a flat rate 4.5% increase for 2009.
C:\Docurnenls and Settings\All Users\Desktop\Kelly\MSDATA \Resolutions\2009 Non-rep salary.doc
KG:ksn 11/13/2008
Page 4 of 7
ATT ACHMThTT B
NON-REPRESEI\.TTED EMPLOYEE BENEFITS - 2009
SOCIAL SECURITY (FICA): Social Security benefits shall be provided as contained in
Section 2.52.010 of the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC).
STATE-\VIDE EMPLOYEE RETillEMENT SYSTEM (PERS): Retirement shall be
provided as contained in Section 2.52.020 of the TMC
HOLIDAYS: Holidays shall be provided as contained in Section 2.52.030 of the TMC
Regular part-time employees shall be entitled to benefits on a pro-rata basis.
SICK LEAVE: Sick leave shall be provided as contained in Section 2.52.040 of the TMC
Regular part-time employees shall be entitled to benefits on a pro-rata basis.
MEDICAL INSURANCE: The City shall pay 100% of the 2009 premium for regular
full-time employees and their dependents under the City of Tukwila self-insured
medical/ dental plan. Premium increases above 10% per year shall result in a modified
plan document to cover the additional cost above 10%, or a premium shall be
implemented for the difference, at the City's discretion. The City reserves the right to
select all medical plans and providers. Regular part-time employees shall be entitled to
benefits on a pro-rata basis. Employees who choose coverage under the Group Health
Cooperative plan shall pay the difference between the City of Tukwila plan full-family
rate and the rate charged to them by Group Health.
DENTAL INSURANCE: The City shall provide 100% of the 2009 premium for the
regular full-time employees and all dependents under the City of Tukwila self-insured
medical/ dental plan for dental coverage. Regular part-time employees shall be entitled
to the same benefits on a pro-rata basis.
LIFE INSURANCE: For regular full-time employees, the City shall pay the premium
for Plan C (Multiple of annual earnings) or similar group life and accidental death and
dismemberment insurance policy. Said plan shall be at 100% of annual earnings
rounded up to the next $1,000. Regular part-time employees that work at least 20 hours
per week shall be entitled to benefits on a pro-rata basis (per insurance program
requirements) .
VISION/OPTICAUHEARING CARE: The City shall provide coverage for eye
examinations, vision, optical and hearing care to non-represented regular full-time
employees and their dependents at the rate of $200 per person, to a maximum of $400
per family unit, each year. Regular part-time employees and their dependents shall be
entitled to benefits on a pro-rata basis.
DISABILITY INSURANCE: The City shall provide 100% of the premium for regular
full-time employees for a comprehensive long-term disability policy. Regular part-time
employees that work at least 20 hours per week shall be entitled to benefits on a pro-
rata basis (per insurance program requirements).
HEALTH REIMBURSEMENT ARRANGMENTfVOLUNTARY EMPLOYEE
BENEFIT ASSOCIATION (HRAfVEBA): VEBA benefits shall be provided as
contained in Resolution 1445, and as amended.
VACATION: Follov..>ing the 6th month of continuous employment, annual vacation
leave of 6 full days (each day is calculated at 8 hours, regardless of schedule worked)
shall be granted. Thereafter, an additional day of annual leave shall accrue each month,
up to a total of 12 days. Three additional days of annual leave shall be granted on the
employee's anniversary date after the 3rd, 4th, and 5th years. After 6 years, the
employee shall be granted 1 day per year additional annual leave to a maximum of 24
days per year. The maximum number of accrued hours is 384, or 48 days.
C\Doc"UlIlrnts and Setlings\Al1 Users\Deskrop\Kelly\MSDATA \Resolunons\2i.Xl9 Non-rep salary.doc
KG:ksn 11/13/2003
Page 5 of 7
Years
of Service
0-1 years
1-2 years
3-6 years
7 years
8 years
9 years
Vacation
Accrual
12 days*
12 days
15 days
16 days
17 days
18 days
Years
of Service
10 years
11 years
12 years
13 years
14 years
15 years
Vacation
Accrual
19 days
20 days
21 days
22 days
23 days
24 days
(maximum)
*Six full days will be granted following the sixth month of continuous
employment. (Days accrue at 8 hours, regardless of schedule worked.) Regular part-
time employees shall be entitled to benefits on a pro-rata basis.
UNIFORM ALLOWANCE: An annual uniform allowance of $350 shall be granted to
the following employees: Fire Chief, Assistant Fire Chief, Police Chief, Assistant Police
Chief, Police Commander, and Records Manager.
C:\Documents aI,d Settings\All Users\I?..sktop\Ke!ly\MSDAT A \Resolutions\2009 Non-rep salary.doc
KG:ksn 11/13/20038
Page 6 of 7
AITACHMENT C
LONGEVITY PAY PLAN FOR NON-REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES
The monthly longevity flat rates shall be as follows for regular full-time employees after
the completion of the number of years of full time employment vdth the City set forth
below. Regular part-time employees shall receive longevity on a pro-rata basis.
Completion of 5 years $75
Completion of 10 years $100
Completion of 15 years $125
Completion of 20 years $150
Completion of 25 years $175
Completion of 30 years $200
C\Documents and Settings\All Users\Deskrop\KelJy\MSDATA \Reso]ulions\2())9 Non-rep salary_doc
KG:ksn 11/13/20JS
Page 7 of 7
MEMORANDUM
TO: Finance and Safety Committee
FROM: Mayor's Office
DATE: November 12, 2008
SUBJECT: SCORE Jail Documents
Attached for Committee review and recommendation are the following documents:
1) An Ordinance authorizing execution of an interlocal agreement
Relating to the South Correctional Entity (SCORE) facility and formation
of the SCORE Development Authority
2) SCORE Interlocal Agreement
3) Charter of the SCORE Public Development Authority
4) SCORE By-laws
Also included for informational purposes is an ordinance that the Renton City Council
will need to pass authorizing the creation of the SCORE PDA. As you will remember, the
City of Renton has been the lead agency on this partnership because of Renton staffs
experience and expertise in jail matters.
The SCORE project is on an aggressive timeline. A potential site has been determined
and due diligence on the property is in process. Council's swift consideration of this
matter is critical to our ultimate deadline of having the facility operational by 3rd quarter
2011. Swift action, however, is not intended to short-circuit Council having a complete
understanding of the City's obligations to this project.
At this writing the question of the upper limit of the financial obligation and a question
relating to future annexations are still being worked out. It is anticipated that those
questions will be answered prior to the Committee meeting. If not, committee members
can determine if there is enough substantive information to move this topic forward for
discussion at COW.
W:SCOREcovermemo _F&S.doc
DRAFT
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN INTERLOCAL
AGREEMENT RELATING TO THE SOUTH CORRECTIONAL ENTITY
FACILITY AND THE FORMATION OF THE SOUTH CORRECTIONAL
ENTITY FACILITY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY.
WHEREAS, the City of Tubvila, Washington (the "City") is authorized by Chapter
70.48 RCW to contract for, establish and maintain correctional facilities in furtherance of
public safety and welfare; and
l'\THEREAS, the City currently contracts v,>ith other local governments within the
State of Washington for correctional services at a great expense to the City; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 39.34 RCW, the Interlocal Cooperation Act, authorizes
municipalities in Washington to enter into agreements for the joint undertaking of
certain projects as provided therein; and
vVHEREAS, the Cities of Auburn, Federal Way, Des Moines, Renton, Burien,
SeaTac, and Tulm>ila, Washington (the "Member Cities") recognize and find that there
is a public need for a new correctional facility to serve the South King County region
and to provide correctional services at a lower total cost to the participating Member
Cities than currently available alternatives or than the participating Member Cities
could individually provide; and
WHEREAS, the Member Cities now desire to enter into an interlocal agreement
(the "Interlocal Agreement") to form a governmental administrative agency known as
the South Correctional Entity ("SCORE") to establish and maintain a consolidated
correctional facility (the "SCORE Facility") to serve the Member Cities and federal and
state agencies and other local governments that may contract with SCORE in the future
to provide correctional services essential to the preservation of the public health, safety
and welfare; and
WHEREAS, the Member Cities are considering the formation of a public
corporation for the purpose of issuing and servicing bonds that are secured by the full
faith and credit of the Member Cities in order to provide for the financing of the SCORE
Facility; and
WHEREAS, the City of Renton, Washington has agreed to act as the host city for
the formation of the public corporation, subject to the approval of each Member City;
and
l'\THEREAS, the establishment and maintenance of the SCORE Facility will be of
substantial benefit to the Member Cities and the public in general;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKvVILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Approval of Interlocal Agreement. The Mayor of the City is hereby
authorized to execute the interlocal agreement ffith the Cities of Renton, Auburn,
C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Desktop \Kelly\MSDAT A \Ordinances\SCORE.doc
RB:ksn 11/13/2008
Page 1 of3
Federal Way, Des Moines, Burien- and SeaTac, Washington- substantially in the form as
attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Interlocal
Agreement"), for the creation of a governmental administrative agency pursuant to
RCW 39.34.030(3) to be knOVvil as the South Correctional Entity ("SCORE"). The Mayor
and other appropriate officers of the City are authorized and directed to take any and
all such additional actions as may be necessary or desirable to accomplish the creation
of SCORE.
Section 2. Approval of Formation of the Authority. Pursuant to Chapter 39.34
ROV and RCW 35.21.730 through RCW 35.21.755, the City hereby approves the
creation of a public corporation by the City of Renton to be designated as the South
Correctional Entity Facility Public Development Authority (the "Authority"). The
purpose of the Authority is to provide an independent legal entity under State law to
issue debt to finance and refinance the acquisition, construction, improvement and
equipping of a correctional facility (the "SCORE Facility"). Such debt may be issued in
one or more series, may be in the form of bonds, notes or other evidences of
indebtedness to provide interim and permanent financing for the SCORE Facility and
thereafter, to finance or refinance equipment, completion, expansion and other capital
improvements essential to maintain the SCORE Facility's functionality. Such bonds,
notes, and other evidences of indebtedness are collectively referred to herein as the
"Bonds." The proposed form of ordinance. to be considered by the City Council of the
City of Renton, along with the Charter and the Bylaws of the Authority, drafts of which
are attached hereto, as Exhibits B, C and D, respectively, are hereby approved. The City
Council hereby approves the formation by the City of Renton of the Authority by the
approval of such ordinance, Charter and Bylaws substantially in the forms presented to
this Council.
Section 3. Limited Liability; Independent Obligations. The Authority shall be an
independent legal entity exclusively responsible for its ovm debts, obligations and
liabilities. All liabilities incurred by the Authority shall be satisfied exclusively from the
assets and credit of the Authority. No creditor or other person shall have any recourse
to the assets, credit, or services of the City on account of any debts, obligations,
liabilities, acts, or omissions of the Authority.
Section 4. City Contributions to Operations and Bonds.
A. The Member Cities shall pay an allocable portion of the budgeted expenses of
maintenance and operation of the SCORE Facility not paid from other sources, which
allocable portion shall be determined as provided in the Interlocal Agreement. In
addition to the foregoing commitment, each Member City shall contribute funds in the
percentages provided for in the InterlocalAgreement, which for the City is equal to 8%,
to pay debt service on Bonds as the same shall become due and payable and to pay
administrative expenses of the Authority with respect to the Bonds (the "Capital
Contribution"). The authorization contained in this ordinance is conditioned upon the
issuance of Bonds not exceeding the aggregate principal amount of $ (not
including any bonds or notes to be refunded >vith proceeds of such Bonds) without
obtaining additional Council approval.
B. No Member City shall be obligated to pay the Capital Contribution of any
other Member City; the obligations of the City with respect to the Bonds shall be limited
to its 8% allocable share of such obligations; all such payments shall be made by the
City without regard to the payment or lack thereof by any other jurisdiction; and each
Member City shall be obligated to budget for and pay its Capital Contribution unless
relieved of such payment in accordance with the Interlocal Agreement. All payments
with respect to the Bonds shall be made to SCORE in its capacity as administrator and
servicer of the Bonds to be issued by the Authority. The obligation of the City to pay its
Capital Contribution shall be an irrevocable full faith and credit obligation of the City,
payable from property taxes levied within the constitutional and statutory authority
provided without a vote of the electors of the City on all of the taxable property V\rithin
C:\Documenls and Settings\All Users\Desktop\Kelly\W.5DATA \Ordinances\SCORE.doc
RB:ksn 11/13/2008
Page 2 of 3
the City and other sources of revenues available therefore. The City hereby obligates
itself and commits to budget for and pay its Capital Contribution and to set aside and
include in its calculation of outstanding non-voted general obligation indebtedness an
amount equal to the principal component of its Capital Contribution for so long as
Bonds remain outstanding.
Section 5. Preliminary Costs; Reimbursement. The City is hereby authorized to
finance costs associated with the design, acquisition, construction, improvement and
equipping of the SCORE Facility prior to the issuance of Bonds by the Authority
pursuant to the terms of the InterIocal Agreement. Pursuant to U.S. Treasury
Regulation Section 1.150-2(e), the City reasonably expects to be reimbursed for such
expenditures with proceeds of Bonds issued by the Authority. The maximum principal
amount of Bonds expected to be issued for the SCORE Facility. described in Section 2 is
$
Section 6. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or
phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to
be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the
remaining pO'rtions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation.
Section 7. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published
in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five days
after passage and publication as provided by law.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA WASHINGTON,
at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of ,2008.
ATTEST / AUTHENTICATED:
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Christy O'Flaherty, CMC City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Published:
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number:
City Attorney's Office
Attachment: Exhibit A - Interlocal Agreement
Exhibit B - City of Renton Ordinance
Exhibit C - Charter of the Authority
Exhibit D - Bylaws of the Authority
C:\Documents and Seltings\AU Users\Desklop\KeUy\JvfSDATA \Ordinances\SCORE.doc
RB:ksn 11/14/2008
Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT A
SCORE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this , 2008 by and among the Cities
of Auburn, Des Moines, Federal Way, Renton, Tukwila, Burien and SeaTac, Washington (the
"Member Cities"), all of which are municipal corporations under the laws and statutes of the
State of Washington:
RECITALS:
WHEREAS, the Member Cities are authorized by chapter 70.48 RCW to contract for,
establish and maintain correctional facilities in furtherance of public safety and welfare; and
WHEREAS, the Member Cities currently contract with other local governments within
the State of Washington for correctional services at a great expense to the City; and
WHEREAS, chapter 39.34 RCW, the Interlocal Cooperation Act, authorizes
municipalities in Washington to enter into agreements for the joint undertaking of certain
projects as provided therein; and
WHEREAS, the Member Cities now desire to form a governmental administrative
agency pursuant to RCW 39.34.030(3) known as the South Correctional Entity ("SCORE") to
establish and maintain a consolidated correctional facility (the "SCORE Facility") to serve the
Member Cities and federal and state agencies and other local governments that may contract with
SCORE in the future to provide correctional services essential to the preservation of the public
health, safety and welfare; and
WHEREAS, the Member Cities have determined that the SCORE Facility will provide
improved correctional facilities within the boundaries of the consolidated service areas at a lower
total cost to the participating Member Cities than currently available alternatives or than the
participating Member Cities could individually provide; and
WHEREAS, financing for the acquisition, construction, equipping, and improvement of
the SCORE Facility will be provided by bonds issued by a public corporation created in
accordance with this Agreement and pursuant to RCW 35.21.730 through 35.21.755 and secured
by the full faith and credit of the Member Cities; and
WHEREAS, the City of Renton has agreed to act as the host city for the formation of a
public corporation to be known as the South Correctional Entity Facility Public Development
Authority (the "SCORE Facility Public Development Authority") subject to the approval of each
Member City; and
WHEREAS, the establishment and maintenance of the SCORE Facility will be of
substantial benefit to the Member Cities and the public in general;
NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed and covenanted among the undersigned as
follows:
Page I of 12
P:\20358 _DG\20358 _ OIX
Section 1.
SCORE Facility; Authority
(a) Administrative Agency. There is hereby established a governmental
administrative agency pursuant to RCW 39.34.030(3) to be known as the South Correctional
Entity ("SCORE"). SCORE shall initially consist of the Cities of Auburn, Des Moines, Federal
Way, Renton, Tukwila, Burien and SeaTac, Washington (the "Member Cities").
(b) Powers of SCORE. SCORE shall have the power to acquire, construct, own,
operate, maintain, equip, and improve a correctional facility (the "SCORE Facility") and to
provide correctional services and functions incidental thereto, for the purpose of detaining
arrestees and sentenced offenders in the furtherance of public safety and emergencies within the
jurisdiction of the Member Cities. The SCORE Facility may serve federal and state agencies as
well as other municipal corporations ("Subscribing Agencies") which are in need of correctional
facilities. Any agreement with a Subscribing Agency shall be in writing and approved by
SCORE as provided herein.
(c) Administrative Board. The affairs of SCORE shall be governed by an
administrative board (the "Administrative Board") formed pursuant to Section 4 of this
Agreement. The Administrative Board shall have the authority to:
9.
Page 2 of 12
1.
Recommend action to the legislative bodies of the Member Cities;
2.
Establish a budget and approve expenditures;
3.
Establish policies for investing funds and incurring expenditures of budget
items for the SCORE Facility;
4.
Review and adopt a personnel policy for the SCORE Facility;
5.
Establish a fund, or special funds, as authorized by chapter 39.34 RCW for
the operation of the SCORE Facility;
6.
Conduct regular meetings as may be designated by the Administrative
Board;
7.
Determine what services shall'be offered at the SCORE Facility and under
what terms they shall be offered;
8.
Enter into agreements with third parties for goods and services necessary
to fully implement the purposes of this Agreement;
Establish rates for services provided to members, subscribers or
participating agencies;
10.
Direct and supervise the activities of the operations board created pursuant
to Section 5 and the facility director selected pursuant to Section 6;
P:\20358 _DG\20358 _ OIX
11. Enter into an agreement with a public corporation or otherwise to incur
debt;
12. Make purchases or contract for services necessary to fully implement the
purposes of this Agreement;
13. Enter into agreements with and receive and distribute funds from any
federal, state or local agencies;
14. Receive and account for all funds allocated to the SCORE Facility from its
members;
15. Purchase, take, receive, lease, take by gift, or otherwise acquire, own,
hold, improve, use and otherwise deal in and with real or personal
property, or any interest therein, in the name of the SCORE Facility;
16. Sell, convey, mortgage, pledge, lease, exchange, transfer and otherwise
dispose of property and assets;
17. Sue and be sued, complain and defend, in all courts of competent
jurisdiction in its name;
18. Make and alter bylaws for the administration and regulation of its affairs;
19. Enter into contracts with Subscribing Agencies to provide correctional
servIces;
20. Employ employees as necessary to accomplish the terms of this
Agreement; and
21. Engage in any and all other acts necessary to further the goals of this
Agreement.
Section 2.
Duration of A1!reement
The initial duration of this Agreement shall be for a period often (10) years from its
effective date and, thereafter, shall automatically extend for additional five (5) year periods
unless terminated as provided in this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Agreement
shall not terminate until all bonds or other obligations issued by the South Correctional Entity
Facility Public Development Authority (the "SCORE Facility Public Development Authority")
as provide in Section 14 of this Agreement are no longer outstanding.
Section 3.
Withdrawal and Termination
(a) Subject to Section 3(g) below, any Member City may withdraw its membership
and terminate its participation in this Agreement by providing written notice and serving that
notice on the other Member Cities on or before December 31 in anyone-year. After providing
appropriate notice as provided in this Section, that Member City's membership withdrawal shall
Page 3 of 12
P:\20358 _DG\20358 _ OIX
become effective on the last day of the year following delivery and service of appropriate notice
to all other Member Cities.
(b) Subject to Section 2 above, four (4) or more Member Cities may, at anyone time,
by written notice provided to all Member Cities, call for a complete termination of SCORE and
this Agreement. Upon an affirmative supermajority vote (majority plus one) by the
Administrative Board, SCORE shall be directed to terminate business, and a date will be set for
final termination, which shall be at least one (1) year from the date of the vote to terminate this
Agreement. Upon the fmal termination date, this Agreement shall be fully terminated.
(c) Subject to Section 3(g) below, in the event any Member City fails to budget and
provide the required annual funding requirements for SCORE as provided in Section 14 hereof,
the remaining Member Cities may, by majority vote, immediately declare the underfunding City
to be terminated from this Agreement and to have forfeited all its rights under this Agreement as
provided in Section 3(e). The remaining Member Cities may, at their option, withdraw
SCORE's correctional services from that City, or alternatively, enter into a Subscribing Agency
agreement with that City under terms and conditions as the remaining Member Cities deem
appropriate.
(d) Time is of the essence in giving any termination notice.
(e) If an individual Member City withdraws its membership in SCORE, the
withdrawing City will forfeit any and all rights it may have to SCORE's real or personal
property, or any other ownership in SCORE, unless otherwise provided by the Administrative
Board.
(f) Upon termination of this Agreement, all property acquired during the life of this
Agreement shall be disposed of in the following manner:
1. All real and personal property acquired pursuant to this Agreement shall
be distributed to the Member Cities based on the Base Percentages (as defined in
Section 14); and
2. All unexpected funds or reserve funds shall be distributed based on the
percentage of average daily population at the SCORE Facility for the last three (3)
years prior to the termination date of those Member Cities still existing on the day
prior to the termination date.
(g) Notwithstanding any of the other rights, duties or obligations of any Member City
under this Section 3, the withdrawal of any Member City from this Agreement shall not
discharge or relieve the Member City that has withdrawn pursuant to Section 3(a) or been
terminated pursuant to Section 3( c) of its obligation to pay debt service on the bonds issued by
the SCORE Facility Public Development Authority. A Member City may be relieved of its
obligation under this Agreement to make payments with respect to its Capital Contribution (as
defined in Section 14) if the Administrative Board, by supermajority vote (majority plus one),
Page 4 of 12
P:\20358 _ DG\20358 _ OIX
authorizes such relief based on a fmding that such payments are not required to pay debt service
on bonds issued by the SCORE Facility Public Development Authority.
Section 4.
Administrative Board
(a) Formation. An Administrative Board composed of the Mayor or his or her
designee from each Member City shall govern the affairs of SCORE.
(b) Allocation of Votes. Each Board member shall have an equal vote and voice in
all Board decisions.
( c) Voting Requirements. Votes regarding debt, approval of the budget, employment
ofthe Facilities Director, and approval oflabor contracts shall require an affirmative vote of a
supermajority (majority plus one) of the Member Cities, two (2) of which shall have the highest
and the second highest average daily population at the SCORE Facility calculated at the time of
the vote.
(d) Parliamentary Authority. Unless otherwise provided, Robert's Revised Rules of
Order (newly revised) shall govern all procedural matters relating to the business of the
Administrative Board.
( e) Officers of the Administrative Board. Members of the Administrative Board shall
select a Presiding Officer from its Members, together with such other officers as a majority of
the Administrative Board may determine. Subject to the control of the Administrative Board, the
Presiding Officer shall have general supervision, direction and control of the business and affairs
of SCORE. On matters. decided by the Administrative Board, the signature of the Presiding
Officer alone is sufficient to bind SCORE.
(f) Meetings of the Administrative Board. There shall be a minimum of two (2)
meetings each year, and not less than fifteen (I5) days notice shall be given to all members prior
to any such meeting. Unless otherwise designated by the Presiding Officer, the first meeting
shall be held on the second Tuesday of February of each year to review the prior year's service.
The second meeting shall be on the second Tuesday of September of each year to consider and
adopt a budget for the following fiscal year. Other meetings may be held upon request of the
Presiding Officer or any two members. All meetings shall be open to the public to the extent
required by chapter 42.30 RCW.
Four (4) members of the Administrative Board must be present at any meeting of the
Administrative Board to comprise a quorum, and for the Administrative Board to transact any
business. Proxy voting shall not be allowed. Members of the Administrative Board may
participate in a meeting through the use of any means of communication by which all members
and members of the public participating in such meeting can hear each other during the meeting.
Any members of the Administrative Board participating in a meeting by such means is deemed
to be present in person at the meeting for all purposes including, but not limited to, establishing a
quorum.
Page 5 of 12
P:\20358 _ DG\20358 _ OIX
(g) Bylaws. The Administrative Board shall be authorized to establish bylaws that
govern procedures of that Board and the SCORE Facility's general operations.
(h) Administrative Board Review. A general or particular authorization or review
and concurrence of the Administrative Board by majority vote shall be necessary for all capital
expenditures or contracts in excess of $50,000.
Section 5.
Operations Board
(a) Formation. There is further established an operatio"ns board (the "Operations
Board") which shall consist of the Police Chief of each Member City or his or her designee.
Additionally, the Police Chiefs of the Subscribing Agencies shall, by majority vote, elect up to
two (2) at-large member to represent the police departments of the Subscribing Agencies. At the
time set for election of the at-large members, only the Subscribing Agencies representatives, then
in attendance, will participate in the election. The Member Cities' Operations Board
representatives shall not participate in the at-large member elections. The at-large members shall
serve one-year terms, unless otherwise determined by majority vote of the Operations Board.
The purpose and duties of the Operations Board shall be established by the Administrative
Board.
(b ) Voting and Meetings of the Operations Board. Each Operations Board member
shall have an equal vote in all Operations Board decisions. The Operations Board shall be
authorized to establish bylaws that govern its procedures. Unless otherwise provided, Robert's
Revised Rules of Order shall govern all procedural matters relating to the business of the
Operations Board. The Operations Board shall elect a Presiding Officer from its members and
shall likewise determine the time and place of its meetings; at least one (1) regular meeting shall
be held each month at a time and place designated by the Presiding Officer or a majority of its
members. Special meetings may be called by the Presiding Officer or any two (2) members
upon giving all other members not less than 24 hours prior written notice (electronic or facsimile
notice acceptable). In an emergency, the Operations Board may dispense with written notice
requirements for special meetings, but must, in good faith, implement best efforts to provide fair
and reasonable notice to all of the Operations Board Members. All meetings shall be open to the
public to the extent required by chapter 42.30 RCW.
Five (5) members of the Operations Board must be present at any meeting of the
Operations Board to comprise a quorum, and for the Operations Board to transact any business.
Proxy voting shall not be allowed. Members of the Operations Board may participate in a
meeting through the use of any means of communication by which all members and members of
the public participating in such meeting can hear each other during the meeting. Any members
of the Operations Board participating in a meeting by such means is deemed to be present in
person at the meeting for all purposes including, but not limited to, establishing a quorum.
Section 6.
Facility Director.
Not later than one hundred eighty (180) days prior to the completion of the SCORE
Facility, the Operations Board shall recommend to the Administrative Board a person to act as
Page 6 of 12
P:\20358 _DG\20358_ OIX
the Facility Director (the "Director"). The Administrative Board may accept or reject the
Operations Board reCOnimendation. Such Director shall be responsible to the Administrative
Board, shall advise same from time to time on a proposed budget and other appropriate means in
order to fully implement the purposes oftrus Agreement. The Director shall administer the
program in its day-to-day operations consistent with the policies adopted by the Administrative
Board. Such Director shall have experience in technical, fmancial and administrative fields, and
such appointment shall be on the basis of merit only.
Section 7.
Personnel Policy
(a) The Operations Board shall submit to the Administrative Board within one
hundred eighty (180) days prior to the completion of the SCORE Facility, a proposed personnel
policy for the SCORE Facility for its approval, rejection or modification. All of such
modifications or revisions shall be subject to the final approval of the Administrative Board.
(b) Such personnel policy shall provide for the initial appointment to the SCORE
Facility's staff from the personnel presently, permanently appointed or assigned as corrections
officers in the Member Cities. Additional employees shall be appointed by the Director upon
meeting the qualifications established by the Operations Board and adopted by the
Administrative Board. None of such employees shall be commissioned members of any
emergency service, but may be eligible for membership under the Public Employees Retirement
Systems (PERS), or Public Safety Employees Retirement System (PSERS), as provided by law.
Section 8.
Operations and Bud2:et
(a) The Director shall distribute a proposed budget to the Operations Board on or
before August 1 of each year, which said budget shall then be provided to the Administrative
Board no later than September I of such year. Thereafter, the Member Cities shall be advised of
the programs and objectives as contained in said proposed budget, and of the required fmancial
participation for the ensuing year.
(b) The allocation of prorated financial participation among the Member Cities shall
be calculated as provided in Section 14 hereof. Each Member City shall be unconditionally
obligated to provide its allocable share of costs as provided in this Agreement.
Section 9.
Contracts and Support Services
(a) The Administrative Board (or the Operations Board or the Director, ifso
designated by the Administrative Board) shall, as necessary, contract with local governments for
the use of space for its operations, auxiliary services including but not limited to records, payroll,
accounting, purchasing, and data processing, and for staff prior to the selection of a Director for
the SCORE Facility.
(b) The Member Cities hereby agree to furnish legal assistance, from time to time, as
approved by the Administrative Board. The Administrative Board may contract with the City
Attorney of a Member City, other local government, or independent legal counsel as necessary.
Page 7 of 12
P;\20358 _ DG\20358 _ OIX
Section 10. Policy and System Evaluation
The Director shall actively and continually consider and evaluate all means and
opportunities toward the enhancement of operations effectiveness for correctional services so as
to provide maximum and ultimate benefits to the members of the general public. The Director
shall present his or her recommendations to the Operations Board from time to time. Any
substantive change or deviation from established policy shall be subject to the prior approval of
the Administrative Board.
Section 11. Additional Services Authorized
The Administrative Board shall evaluate and determine the propriety of including
additional correctional services for local governments, whenever so required, and shall determine
the means of providing such services, together with:its costs and effects. These additional
services may include, but shall not be limited to the following: alternatives to incarceration,
inmate transportation systems, and consolidated court services.
Section 12. Inventory and Property
(a) Equipment and furnishings for the operation of the SCORE Facility shall be
acquired by SCORE as provided by law. If any Member City furnishes equipment or furnishings
for SCORE's use, title to the same shall remain with the respective local entity unless that
equipment is acquired by SCORE.
(b) The Director shall, at the time of preparing the proposed budget for the ensuing
year, submit to the Operations Board a complete inventory together with current valuations of all
equipment and furnishings owned by, leased or temporarily assigned to SCORE. In case of
dissolution of SCORE, such assigned or loaned items shall be returned to the lending
governmental entity and all other items, including.real property, or funds derived from the sale
thereof, shall be distributed to Member Cities in accordance with Section 3(f) above.
(c) Title to real property purchased or otherwise acquired shall be held in the name of
SCORE; provided however, that for valuable consideration received, SCORE may convey
ownership of any real property as may be approved by supermajority vote (majority plus one) of
the Administrative Board.
Section 13. Local Control
Each Member City and Subscribing Agency shall retain the responsibility and authority
for the operation of its police departments, and for such equipment and services as are required at
its place of operation to utilize the SCORE Facility.
Page 8 of 12
P:\20358 _ DG\20358 _ OIX
Section 14. SCORE Facility Financine and Construction: SCORE Facility Public
Development Authority
(a) SCORE Facility. In order to provide necessary services for the Member Cities
and the Subscribing Agencies, SCORE shall acquire, construct, improve, equip, maintain and
operate the SCORE Facility. The SCORE Facility is expected to be located in the City of Des
Moines, Washington. Pursuant to RCW 35.21.740, the City of Des Moines hereby authorizes
the City of Renton to operate the SCORE Facility Public Development Authority within the
corporate limits of the City of Des Moines in a manner consistent with the terms of this
Agreement.
(b) Contracts for the SCORE Facility. The Administrative Board shall authorize, and
the Presiding Officer of the Administrative Board, or his or her approved designee, will execute
contracts for the development of the SCORE Facility. These contracts shall include, without
limitation, contracts for architectural design and engineering, project management services; real
estate acquisition, and construction.
( c) SCORE Facility Public Development Authority. In order to finance costs of
acquiring, constructing, improving and equipping the SCORE Facility, the City of Renton has
agreed to form a public corporation pursuant to RCW 35.21.730 through 35.21.755 known as the
South Correctional Entity Facility Public Development Authority. The purpose of the SCORE
Facility Public Development Authority is to issue debt to fmance and refmance the acquisition,
construction, improvement and equipping of the SCORE Facility. Such debt may be issued in
one or more series, may be in the form of bonds, notes or other evidences of indebtedness to
provide interim and permanent fmancing for the SCORE Facility and thereafter, to fmance or
refinance equipment, completion, expansion and other capital improvements essential to
maintain the SCORE Facility's functionality. Such bonds, notes, and other evidences of
indebtedness are collectively referred to herein as the "Bonds." The Administrative Board shall
serve ex officio as the Board of Directors of the SCORE Facility Public Development Authority
as further provided in the Authority's organizational charter. Upon issuance of Bonds by the
SCORE Facility Public Development Authority, Bond proceeds shall be deposited on behalf of
SCORE and used for the purposes set forth herein. SCORE shall be obligated to make payments
to the SCORE Facility Public Development Authority at the time and in the amounts required to
pay principal of and interest on the Bonds and any administrative costs of the SCORE Facility
Public Development Authority as a first priority and pledge of the revenues of SCORE.
(d) SCORE Facility Financing. The Member Cities shall each pay an allocable
portion of all aggregate capital and operating costs related to the SCORE Facility, less revenue
received from Subscribing Agencies or other sources, as provided in this Agreement. Each
Member City shall be billed for its total allocable capital and operating costs on a semiannual
basis, or more frequently as determined by the Administrative Board, calculated as provided for
in this Section.
(1) Capital Contribution. Each Member City shall be obligated to pay an
amount equal to its Base Percentage multiplied by the principal of and interest on Bonds
as the same shall become due and payable and administrative expenses of the SCORE
Page 9 of 12
P:\20358 _DG\20358 _ OIX
Facility Public Development Authority with respect to the Bonds (the "Capital
Contribution") without regard to the payment or lack thereof by any other Member City.
The "Base Percentage" is defined as a percentage equal to the 2007 average daily
population allocable to the Member Cities in all correctional facilities. Those
percentages are as follows:
(i) Auburn - twenty-nine (29%)
(ii) Des Moines - five (5%)
(iii) Federal Way - seventeen (17%)
(iv) Renton - thirty-four (34%)
(v) Tukwila - eight (8%)
(vi) Burien - four (4%)
(vii) SeaTac - three (3%)
No Member City shall be obligated to pay the Capital Contribution of any other
Member City, and each Member City shall be obligated to budget for and pay its Capital
Contribution unless relieved of such payment in accordance with Section 3(g). The
obligation of each Member City to pay its Capital Contribution shall be an irrevocable
full faith and credit obligation of such Member City, payable from property taxes levied
within the constitutional and statutory authority provided without a vote of the electors of
the Member City on all of the taxable property within the Member City and other sources
of revenues available therefor. Each Member City has or will agree to set aside and
include in its calculation of outstanding nonvoted general obligation indebtedness an
amount equal to the principal component of its Capital Contribution for so long as Bonds
remain outstanding.
(2) Costs of Maintenance and Operation. Until the end of the first calendar
year of operations of the SCORE Facility (estimated to be December 31,2012), the
allocable portion that each Member City shall be obligated to pay of costs of maintaining
and operating the SCORE Facility and all costs of administering SCORE (the "Costs of
Maintenance and Operation") in such year shall be equal to the City's Base Percentage
multiplied by the Costs of Maintenance and Operation. Commencing with the calendar
year following the first calendar year of operations, the allocable portion that each
Member City shall be obligated to pay of Costs of Maintenance and Operation shall be
based on the Member City's average daily population in the SCORE Facility, as
supplemented as necessary with the average daily population allocable to the Member
Cities in all correctional facilities, for the 12-month period ending June 30 of the
preceding year. Commencing with the third calendar year of operations, the allocable
portion that each Member City shall be obligated to pay of Costs of Maintenance and
Operation shall be based on the Member City's average daily population in the SCORE
Facility for the 12-month period ending June 30 of the preceding year. [question for the
working group - how should extraordinary operations and maintenance costs (e.g. as a
result of annexation) be allocated in the year that they are incurred?]
(e) Allocation of Revenues. Revenues received in a calendar year from Subscribing
Agencies or from sources other than the contributions described in Section l4( d) above shall be
Page 10 of 12
P:\20358 _ DG\20358 _ OIX
used to reduce the Costs of Maintenance and Operation in the subsequent calendar year. Each
Member City shall receive creditlbenefit of the revenues discussed in this section based on that
Member City's proportional average daily population.
(f) Special Facility Designation. The SCORE Facility, including all equipment,
furnishings, and fixtures is critical to the ability of the Member Cities and the Subscribing
Agencies to provide necessary and secure correctional services and assure public safety.
Consequently, the SCORE Facility is essential to the preservation of the public health, safety,
and welfare. As a result, the SCORE Facility's equipment, furnishings, and fixtures are special
facilities subject to unique standards. Accordingly, based on the facts presented in this
subsection, it is herby resolved that the established policy of the Member Cities is that the
SCORE Facility constitutes a "special facility" under RCW 39.04.280(1)(b), and all purchases of
any kind or nature for the SCORE Facility shall be exempt from competitive bidding
requirements as prescribed by Washington State statute but shall be governed by the
procurement policy established by the Administrative Board as amended from time to time.
Section 15. Preliminary Costs of the SCORE Facility: Bellevue Property
The Administrative Board shall allocate costs associated with the design, acquisition,
construction, improvement and equipping of the SCORE Facility prior to the issuance of the
Bonds by the SCORE Facility Public Development Authority among the Member Cities by an
affIrmative vote of a supermajority (majority plus one) of the of the Member Cities, two (2) of
which shall have the highest and the second highest average daily population in all correctional
facilities calculated at the time of the vote. Any costs of the SCORE Facility paid by a Member
City pursuant to this section may be reimbursed out of proceeds of Bonds to the extent permitted
by law.
The Member Cities hereby agree that any net proceeds received from the sale of the
property located at 1440 116th Avenue NE, Bellevue, Washington and 1412 116th Avenue NE,
Bellevue, Washington (estimated to be approximately $3,180,000) shall be deposited with
SCORE and used to finance costs associated with the design, acquisition, construction,
improvement and equipping of the SCORE Facility.
Section 16. Filinl! of Al!reement
Upon execution, this Agreement shall be filed as required in RCW 39.04.040.
Section 17. Severability
If any part, paragraph, section or provision of this Agreement is adjudged to be invalid by
any court of competent jurisdiction such adjudication shall not affect the validity of any
remaining section, part or provision of this Agreement.
Page 11 of 12
P:\20358 _ DG\20358 _ OIX
Section 18. Execution
This Agreement, or amendments hereto, shall be executed on behalf of each Member
City by its duly authorized representative and pursuant to an appropriate motion, resolution or
ordinance of each Member City. This Agreement, or any amendment, shall be deemed adopted
upon the date of execution by the last so authorized representative.
Section 19. Hold Harmless
The parties to this Agreement shall defend, indemnify and save one another harmless
from any and all claims arising out of the performance of this Agreement, except to the extent
that the harm complained of arises from the sole negligence of one of the participating members.
Any loss or liability resulting from the negligent acts errors or omissions of the Administrative
Board, Operations Board, Facility Director and or staff, while acting within the scope of their
authority under this Agreement shall be borne by SCORE exclusively.
Section 20. Counteruarts
This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of whom shall be
an original, but those counterparts will constitute one and the same instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day and
year fIrst written above.
CITY OF AUBURN
CITY OF RENTON
By: Mayor
By: Mayor
CITY OF DES MOINES
CITY OF TUKWILA
By: Mayor
By: Mayor
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY OF BURIEN
By: Mayor
By: Mayor
CITY OF SEATAC
By: Mayor
Page 12 of 12
P;\20358 _ DG\20358 _ OIX
EXHIBIT B
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RENTON, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE CREATION
OF A PUBLIC CORPORATION TO BE KNOWN AS THE
SOUTH CORRECTIONAL FACILITY PUBLIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY; APPROVING A CHARTER
AND BYLAWS; ESTABLISHING A BOARD OF DIRECTORS
TO GOVERN THE AFFAIRS OF THE AUTHORITY; AND
APPROVING PROCEDURES FOR THE CONDUCT OF ITS
AFFAIRS.
WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 35.21.730 through 35.21.755, the City Council (the
"Council") of the City of Renton, Washington (the "City") may authorize the creation ofa public
corporation as a separate legal entity to perform any lawful public purpose or public function as
therein authorized; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to chapter 39.34 RCW, the City has entered into the SCORE
Interlocal Agreement (the "Interlocal Agreement") with the Cities of Auburn, Des Moines,
Federal Way, Tukwila, Burien and SeaTac, Washington (together with the City, the "Member
Cities") for the formation of a governmental administrative agency known as the South
Correctional Entity ("SCORE"); and
WHEREAS, SCORE is responsible for the establishment and maintenance of a
consolidated correctional facility (the "SCORE Facility") to serve the Member Cities and federal
and state agencies and other local governments that may contract with SCORE in the future to
provide correctional services essential to the preservation of the public health, safety and
welfare; and
WHEREAS, the Member Cities have determined that the SCORE Facility will provide
improved correctional facilities within the boundaries of the consolidated service areas at a lower
total cost to the participating Member Cities than currently available alternatives or than the
participating Member Cities could individually provide; and
WHEREAS, the Interlocal Agreement contemplates that the City will create a public
corporation for the purpose of issuing and servicing bonds that are secured by the full faith and
credit of the Member Cities in order to finance the acquisition, construction, equipping, and
improving of the SCORE Facility; and
WHEREAS, the City will act as the host city for the formation of the public corporation,
subject to the approval of each Member City; and
WHEREAS, the City has determined that chartering a public corporation to function on
its behalf in undertaking the acquisition, construction, equipping, and improvement of the
SCORE Facility will create a highly focused and dedicated entity that will accelerate progress,
provide for fmancing, pool limited resources and enhance opportunities to work with the
Member Cities and others critical to the successful construction and operation of a regional
correctional facility, all while ensuring appropriate public oversight and accountability; and
WHEREAS, the Council has been presented with drafts of a proposed charter (the
"Charter") and bylaws (the "Bylaws") for the establishment and chartering of a public
corporation to be known as the South Correctional Entity Facility Public Development
Authority, which will have as its purpose the issuance and servicing of one or more series of
bonds or other obligations to provide fmancing for the acquisition, construction, equipping, and
improving of a correctional facility pursuant to the terms of this ordinance and the Charter; and
WHEREAS, it appears in the best interest of the City to approve the Charter and Bylaws
for the South Correctional Entity Facility Public Development Authority as now proposed;
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Renton:
Section 1.
Authority Created-City Liability Limited.
A. Authority Created. The Council hereby authorizes the creation of a public
corporation pursuant to RCW 35.21.730(5). The public corporation shall have all of the powers
set forth in this ordinance, RCW 35.21.730 through 35.21.755, and its charter necessary to
fmance and refinance the acquisition, construction, equipping, and improvement of a regional
correctional facility known as the South Correctional Entity Facility (the "SCORE Facility")
through the issuance and servicing of one or more series of bonds, notes or other obligations
(collectively, the "Bonds"), and to perform any other function specified in its charter.
B. Name. The name of the public corporation shall be the "South Correctional
Entity Facility Public Development Authority" (hereinafter the "Authority").
C. Seal. The corporate seal of the Authority shall carry the name of the Authority.
D. City Liability Limited. The Authority is an independent legal entity exclusively
responsible for its own debts, obligations and liabilities. Except as specifically agreed in writing
by the City, the Authority shall take no action that might impose liability upon the City. All
liabilities incurred by the Authority shall be satisfied exclusively from the assets, credit, and
properties of the Authority, and no creditor or other person shall have any right of action against
or recourse to the City, its assets, credit, or services, on account of any debts, obligations,
liabilities or acts or omissions ofthe Authority.
The charter of the Authority shall provide that the Authority is organized pursuant to this
ordinance and RCW 35.21.730 through 35.21.755 and state as follows: "[A]llliabilities incurred
by such public corporation, commission, or authority shall be satisfied exclusively from the
assets and properties of such public corporation, commission, or authority and no creditor or
-2-
P:\20358 _ DG\20358 _OJ 1 11/12/08
other person shall have any right of action against the city, town, or county creating such
corporation, commission, or authority on account of any debts, obligations or liabilities of such
public corporation, commission, or authority." Such statement shall be displayed in a prominent
location in the principal office or other offices of the Authority. It shall also be printed or
stamped on all contracts, bonds, and other documents that may entail any debt or liability by the
Authority.
E. Contributions of the Cities. The City and the Cities of Auburn, Des Moines,
Federal Way, Tukwila, Burien, and SeaTac, Washington (together with the City, the "Member
Cities") shall pay an allocable portion of the budgeted expenses of maintenance and operation of
the SCORE Facility not paid from other sources, which allocable portion shall be determined as
provided in the Interlocal Agreement. In addition to the foregoing commitment, each Member
City shall contribute funds in the percentages provided for in the Interlocal Agreement to pay
debt service on Bonds as the same shall become due and payable and to pay administrative
expenses of the Authority with respect to the Bonds (the "Capital Contribution"). No Member
City shall be obligated to pay the Capital Contribution of any other Member City; the obligations
of each Member City with respect to the Bonds shall be limited to its allocable share of such
obligations; all such payments shall be made by the Member City with out regard to the payment
or lack thereof by any other jurisdiction; and each ,Member City shall be obligated to budget for
and pay its Capital Contribution unless relieved of such payment in accordance with the
Interlocal Agreement. All payments with respect to the Bonds shall be made to SCORE in its
capacity as administrator and servicer of the Bonds to be issued by the Authority.
The obligation of each Member City to pay its Capital Contribution shall be an
irrevocable full faith and credit obligation of such Member City, payable from property taxes
levied within the constitutional and statutory authority provided without a vote of the electors of
the Member City on all of the taxable property within the Member City and other sources of
revenues available therefor. Each Member City has or will obligate itself and commit to budget
for and pay its Capital Contribution and to set aside and include in its calculation of outstanding
nonvoted general obligation indebtedness an amount equal to the principal component of its
Capital Contribution for so long as Bonds remain outstanding.
Section 2. Powers--Generallv. Except as limited by the state constitution, state
statute, this ordinance or the Charter of the Authority, the Authority shall have and may exercise
all lawful powers necessary or convenient to effect the purposes for which the Authority is
organized and to perform authorized corporate functions, as provided in its Charter. Pursuant to
the Interlocal Agreement, the Authority may operate within the corporate limits of the City of
Des Moines, Washington to accomplish the purposes set forth therein.
Section 3. Limitation of Powers. The activities and transactions of the Authority
shall be limited in the following respects:
A. The Authority shall have no power of eminent domain nor any power to levy
taxes or special assessments.
-3-
P:\20358_DG\20358_0J1 11/12/08
B. Except as otherwise agreed to by a Member City, the Authority may not incur or
create any liability that permits recourse by any contracting party or member of the public to any
assets, services, resources, or credit of a Member City.
C. No funds, assets, or property of the Authority shall be used for any partisan
political activity or to further the election or defeat of any candidate for public office; nor shall
any funds or a substantial part of the activities of the Authority be used for publicity or
educational purposes designed to support or defeat legislation pending before the Congress of the
United States, or the legislature of the state or the Council of the Member Cities; provided,
however, that funds may be used for representatives of the Authority to communicate with
members of Congress, state legislators or city council members concerning funding and other
matters directly affecting the Authority, so long as such activities do not constitute a substantial
part of the Authority's and unless such activities are specifically limited in its charter.
D. All funds, assets, or credit of the Authority shall be applied toward or expended
upon services, projects, and activities authorized by its charter. No part of the net earnings of the
Authority shall inure to the benefit of, or be distributable as such to, the board members or other
private persons, except that the Authority is authorized and empowered to:
(i) Reimburse Board Members, employees and others performing services for
the Authority reasonable expenses actually incurred in performing their duties, and
compensate employees and others performing services for the Authority a reasonable
amount for services rendered;
(ii) Assist board members or employees as members of a general class of
persons to be assisted by a corporate approved project or activity to the same extent as
other members of the class as long as no special privileges or treatment accrues to such
board members or employees by reason of his or her status or position in the Authority;
(iii) Defend and indemnify any current or former board member or employee
and their successors against all costs, expenses, judgements, and liabilities, including
attorneys' fees, reasonably incurred by or imposed upon him or her in connection with or
resulting from any claim, action, or proceeding, civil or criminal, in which he or she is or
may be made a party by reason of being or having been a board member or employee, or
by reason of any action alleged to have been taken or omitted by him or her in such
position, provided that he or she was acting in good faith on behalf of the Authority and
within the scope of duties imposed or authorized by law. This power of indemnification
shall not be exclusive of other rights to which board members or employees may be
entitled as a matter of law;
(iv) Purchase insurance to protect and hold personally harmless any of its
board members, employees and agents from any action, claim, or proceeding instituted
against the foregoing individuals arising out of the performance, in good faith, of duties
for, or employment with, the Authority and to hold these individuals harmless from any
expenses connected with the defense, settlement, or monetary judgements from such
actions, claims, or proceedings. The purchase of such insurance and its policy limits shall
be discretionary with the board, and such insurance shall not be considered to be
-4-
P:120358_DGI20358_OJ1 11/12/08
compensation to the insured individuals. The powers conferred by this subsection shall
not be exclusive of any other powers conferred by law to purchase liability insurance; and
(v) Sell assets for a consideration greater than their reasonable market value
or acquisition costs, charge more for services than the expense of providing them, or
otherwise secure an increment in a transaction, or carry out any other transaction or
activity, as long as such gain is not the object or purpose of the Authority's transactions
or activities and is applied to or expended upon services, projects, and activities as
aforesaid.
E. The Authority shall not issue shares of stock, pay dividends, make private
distribution of assets, make loans to its board members or employees or otherwise engage in
business for private gain.
Section 4. Charter. The charter of the Authority (the "Charter") is hereby approved
in the form set forth at Exhibit A. The Charter shall be issued in duplicate originals, each signed
by the City Mayor and bearing the City seal attested by the City Clerk. One original shall be
filed with the Clerk of the Council and filed as a public record. A duplicate original shall be
provided to the Authority.
Amendments to the Charter may be initiated by the Board Members or by the Renton
City Council. All amendments to the Charter initiated by the Renton City CounCil shall be
presented to the Board for consideration and approval and shall not become effective unless
approved by a majority vote of the Board. All amendments to the Charter, regardless of how
initiated, shall become effective only following approval by ordinance approved by the Renton
City Council and the Councils of at least three other Member Cities. After adoption of a Charter
amendment, the revised Charter shall be issued and filed in the same manner as the original
Charter.
Section 5. Effect of Issuance of Charter. The Authority shall commence its existence
effective upon fulfillment of the following:
(a) Each of the Councils of the Member Cities has approved the creation of the
Authority by the City;
(b) This ordinance has become effective; and
( c) The charter shall have been executed, and the Charter and bylaws of the Authority
(the "Bylaws") shall be on file with the City Clerk.
Except as against the state or the City in a proceeding to cancel or revoke the Charter,
delivery of a duplicate original Charter shall conclusively establish that the Authority has been
established in compliance with the procedures of this ordinance.
Section 6. Board of Directors; Officers. The SCORE Administrative Board
established pursuant to Section 4 of the Interlocal Agreement shall act ex officio as the board of
-5-
P:\20358_DG\20358_0J1 11/12/08
the Authority (the "Board"). All corporate powers of the Authority shall be exercised by or
under the authority of the Board; and the business, property and affairs of the authority shall be
managed under the supervision of the Board, except as may be otherwise provided by law or in
the Charter. The Board shall have officers as provided in the Charter.
Section 7. Meeting. Within ninety (90) days after issuance of the Charter, the City
Mayor shall call an organizational meeting of the initial Board, giving at least ten (10) days'
advance written notice to each, unless waived in writing. At such meeting, the Board shall
organize itself, appoint officers, and select its place of business. All Board meetings, including
executive, all other permanent and ad hoc committee meetings, shall be open to the public to the
extent required by chapter 42.30 RCW.
Section 8. Bylaws. The Bylaws of the Authority are hereby approved in the form set
forth at Exhibit B. The power to alter, amend, or repeal the Bylaws or adopt new ones shall be
vested in the Board except as otherwise provided in the Charter. The Bylaws shall be consistent
with the Charter. In the event of a conflict between the Bylaws and this ordinance or the Charter,
this ordinance or the Charter, as the case may be, shall control.
Section 9. Funds of the Authority. All money belonging to or collected for the use of
the Authority coming into the hands of any officer thereof shall immediately be deposited with a
legal depository to the credit of the Authority for the benefit of the funds to which they belong.
The use of funds of the Authority for any purpose not authorized by law by any officer having
possession or control thereof is prohibited.
Section 10. Bonds and Notes. Bonds issued by the Authority may be secured by the
full faith and credit of the Authority or may be made payable solely out of certain revenues and
receipts as may be designated in the proceedings under which the issuance of the bonds or notes
are authorized. All Bonds issued shall carry in a prominent place thereon the statement set forth
in Section leD) of this ordinance. All Bonds or liabilities occurring thereunder shall be satisfied
exclusively from the assets or credit of the Authority, and no creditor or other person shall have
any recourse to the assets, credit, or services of the City thereby, unless the City shall expressly,
in writing, guarantee such debt.
Bonds of the Authority may be sold at such price or prices, at public or private sale, in
such manner and from time to time as may be determined by the Authority. The Authority may
issue Bonds from time to time that are secured by the full faith and credit of the Member Cities
in the aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $ (not including any bonds or
notes to be refunded with proceeds of such Bonds) for the purposes set forth in the lnterlocal
Agreement. Bonds issued in excess of such amount shall require additional council approval by
each Member City. Bonds may be payable at such place or places whether within or without the
State, may bear interest at such rate or rates, may be in such form and denominations and of such
tenor and maturities, may be in bearer form or in registered form as to principal and interest or as
to principal alone, reserve such rights to redeem at such price or prices and after such notice or
notices and on such terms and conditions, all as the Authority may determine and provide in tp.e
proceedings under which such Bonds shall be issued.
-6-
P:\20358_DG\20358_0J1 11/12/08
The Authority may at the time of the issuance of such Bonds make such covenants with
the purchasers and holders of said Bonds as it may deem necessary to secure and guarantee the
payment of the principal thereof and the interest thereon, including but not limited to: covenants
to set aside adequate reserves to guarantee payment of principal and interest; to appoint a trustee
or trustees to safeguard the expenditure of the proceeds of sale of such Bonds and to rake
possession and use or operate and manage corporate assets securing the Bonds in event of default
or insolvency or the Authority, with such powers as maybe contained in any covenants relating
to the Bonds; and to limit the amount, time, and conditions under which additional Bonds may be
issued or debts incurred.
The Authority may pay expenses, premiums and comrmSSlOns which it may deem
necessary in connection with the issuance and sale of its Bonds and take such other actions or
make such commitments as are necessary or convenient in the issuance and servicing of such
Bonds and as are consistent with this ordinance although not enumerated herein.
Section 11. Discrimination Prohibited. Membership to the Board shall not be directly
or indirectly based upon or limited by age, race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or the
presence of any physical handicap. Furthermore, the Authority shall not discriminate in any
matter related to employment because of age, race, color, sex, national original, or the presence
of any physical handicap. The Authority shall, in all solicitation or advertisements for employees
placed by or on behalf of the Authority, if any, state that all qualified applicants will receive
consideration for employment without regard to age, race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or
the presence of any physical handicap.
Section 12. Dissolution.
A. If five of the Councils of the Member Cities, each by ordinance, make an
affirmative finding that dissolution is warranted for any reason, the existence of the Authority
shall be terminated by ordinance of the Renton City Council. Dissolution shall be accomplished
as provided in the Charter, and shall not take effect until proper provision has been made for
disposition of all Authority assets, if any.
B. Upon enactment of an ordinance by the Renton City Council for dissolution of the
Authority, the Authority shall file a dissolution statement signed by its president setting forth:
(i) The name and principal office of the Authority;
(ii) The debts, obligations and liabilities of the Authority, and the property and
assets available to satisfy the same; the provisions to be made for satisfaction of
outstanding liabilities and performance of executory contracts; and the estimated time for
completion of its dissolution;
(iii) Any pending litigation or contingent liabilities;
(iv) The Board resolution providing for such dissolution and the date(s) and
proceedings leading toward its adoption, whenever the dissolution be voluntary; and
-7-
P:\20358 _ DG\20358 _OJ 1 11/12/08
(v) A list of persons to be notified upon completion of the dissolution.
The City Mayor shall review the dissolution statement filed and oversee the dissolution to
protect the public interest and prevent impairment of obligation, or if so authorized by law,
authorize or initiate proceedings in the Superior Court for the appointment and supervision of a
receiver for such purposes.
Upon satisfactory completion of dissolution proceedings, the City shall indicate such
dissolution by inscription of "charter cancelled" on the original Charter of the Authority, on file
with the Clerk of the Council and, when available, on the duplicate original of the Authority, and
the existence of the Authority shall cease. The City shall give notice thereof pursuant to
Washington State law and to other persons requested by the Authority in its dissolution
statement.
C. Upon dissolution of the Authority or the winding up of its affairs, title to all
remaining assets or property of the Authority shall vest in SCORE as provided in the Charter.
D. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Authority shall not be dissolved until all
Bonds issued by the Authority are no longer outstanding. [question for the working group -
would you like to add a provision that automatically dissolves the Authority once the debt is paid
off?]
Section 13. Public Corporation. The Authority is a public corporation created
pursuant to RCW 35.21.730 through 35.21.755 as a separate legal entity from the City.
Section 14. Ancillary Authority. The administrative staff of the City are granted all
such power and authority as reasonably necessary or convenient to enable each of them to
administer this ordinance efficiently and to perform the duties imposed in this ordinance or the
Charter.
Section 15. Liberal Construction. This ordinance shall be liberally construed so as to
effectuate its purposes and the purposes ofRCW 35.21.730 through 35.21.755.
Section 16. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and
after passage and publication as provided by law.
PASSED by Council this
day of
, 2008.
By
Council President
-8-
P:\20358_DG\20358_0J1 11/12/08
APPROVED by the Mayor this
[SEAL]
ATTEST:
City Finance Director
Approved as to form only:
City Attorney
Date of Publication of
Notice of Public Hearing:
Effective Date of Ordinance:
day of
,2008.
By
-9-
City Mayor
P:\20358_DG\20358_OJ1 11/12/08
Exhibit C
CHARTER
OF
SOUTH CORRECTIONAL ENTITY FACILITY
PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ARTICLE I
ARTICLE II
ARTICLE III
ARTICLE IV
ARTICLE V
ARTICLE VI
ARTICLE VII
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pa2:e
NAME AND AUTHORITY SEAL ................................................................. 1
AUTHORITY FOR SOUTH CORRECTIONAL ENTITY FACILITY
PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY; LIMIT ON LIABILITY ........... 1
Section 1. Authority ............................... ........................................................ 1
Section 2. Limitation on Liability .................................................................. 1
Section 3. Mandatory Disclaimer.................................................................. 2
DURATION OF AUTHORITY ............................... ..................... ...................3
PURPOSE OF AUTHORITY ..........................................................................3
POWERS OF AUTHORITY ........................................................................... 3
LIMITS ON AUTHORITY POWERS ............................................................4
ORGANIZATION OF AUTHORITY ............................................................. 5
Section 1. Board of Directors and Tenure ..................................................... 5
Section 2. Board Concurrence and Quorum Defined .................................... 6
Section 3. Right to Indemnification .................. ............ ............ ........ ............. 6
Section 4. Conflict of Interest and Code of Ethics ........................................6
ARTICLE VIII OFFICERS OF AUTHORITY... ................................. ........ ........ ........ ............. 6
Section 1. Officers and Division of Duties .................................................... 6
Section 2. Committees. ...... ............. ............................... ................................ 7
ARTICLE IX
ARTICLE X
ARTICLE XI
ARTICLE XII
ARTICLE XIII
Charter - i
COMMENCEMENT OF AUTHORITY .......................... ............................... 7
BYLAWS.. ............. .......................................................................................... 7
MEETINGS OF THE AUTHORITY.... ........................................................... 7
Section 1. Time and Place of Meetings ......................................................... 7
Section 2. Notice of Meetings........................................................................ 7
Section 3 . Notice of Special Board Meetings................................................ 8
Section 4. Waiver of Notice....................... .................................... ................ 8
Section 5. Notice to City Council........... ................. ................. .......... ........... 8
Section 6. Open Public Meetings..... ............................... ........................ ....... 8
Section 7. Telephonic Participation............................................................... 9
Section 8. Parliamentary Authority .. ............................................................. 9
Section 9. Minutes......................................................................................... 9
CONSTITUENCy.................................. ......................................................... 9
AMENDMENTS TO CHARTER AND BYLAWS ........................................ 9
Section 1. Proposals to Amend Charter and Bylaws ..................................... 9
Section 2. Proposals Initiated by the Board................................................... 9
Section 3. Board Consideration of Proposed Amendments......................... 10
Section 4. Vote Required for Amendments to Charter or Bylaws............... 10
P;\20358_DG\20358_0IY 11/12/08
Section 5. City Council Approval of Proposed Charter Amendments ........10
ARTICLE XIV MISCELLANEOUS...................................................... ................................. 10
Section 1. Geographic Limitation ................................................................ 10
Section 2. Safeguarding of Funds................................. ......... ...................... 11
Section 3. Public Records ...... ...... ................. ................. .............................. 11
Section 4. Reports and Information; Audits ................................................ 11
Section 5. Dissolution..... .................. ........................................................... 11
Section 6. Nondiscrimination ................ ...................................................... 12
Section 7. Nonexclusive Charter .... ............................................................. 12
ARTICLE XV APPROVAL OF CHARTER ......................................................................... 12
Charter - ii
P:\20358_DG\20358_0IY 11/12/08
CHARTER
OF
SOUTH CORRECTIONAL ENTITY FACILITY
PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ARTICLE I
NAME AND AUTHORITY SEAL
The name of this corporation shall be the "South Correctional Entity Facility Public
Development Authority" (hereinafter referred to as the "Authority"). The corporate seal of the
Authority shall be a circle with the name of the Authority and the word "SEAL" inscribed
therein.
ARTICLE II
AUTHORITY FOR SOUTH CORRECTIONAL ENTITY FACILITY PUBLIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY; LIMIT ON LIABILITY
Section 1.
Authority.
The Authority is a public corporation organized pursuant to Revised Code of Washington
("RCW") 35.21.730 through 35.21.755, as the same now exist or may hereafter be amended, or
any successor act or acts (the "Act") and Ordinance No. of the City of Renton,
Washington, passed on ,2008 (the "Ordinance"). Formation of the Authority
was approved by Ordinance No. _ of the City of Auburn, passed on , 2008,
Ordinance No. _ of the City of Des Moines, passed on , 2008, Ordinance
No. _ of the City of Federal Way, passed on ,2008, Ordinance No. _ of the
City of Tukwila, passed on , 2008, Ordinance No. _ of the City of Burien, passed
on , 2008, and Ordinance No. of the City of SeaTac, passed on
-
2008.
Section 2.
Limitation on Liability.
All liabilities incurred by the Authority shall be satisfied (a) in the case of obligations or
liabilities of the Authority which are not limited recourse in nature, exclusively from the assets,
credit, and properties of the Authority, or (b) in the case of obligations or liabilities of the
Authority which, by their terms, are limited recourse obligations, from such assets, properties or
revenues of the Authority as shall be specifically pledged thereto or otherwise identified as being
the source of payment of such limited recourse obligations or liabilities, and no creditor or other
person shall have any right of action against or recourse to the Cities of Renton, Auburn, Des
Moines, Federal Way, Tukwila, Burien and SeaTac, Washington (collectively, the "Member
Cities"), its assets, credit, or services, on account of any debts, obligations, liabilities or acts or
omissions of the Authority.
Section 3.
Mandatory Disclaimer.
The following disclaimer shall be posted in a prominent place where the public may
readily see it in the Authority's principal and other offices. It shall also be printed or stamped on
all contracts, bonds, and other documents that may entail any debt or liability by the Authority.
The South Correctional Entity Facility Public Development
Authority is organized pursuant to Ordinance No. _ of the City
of Renton, Washington adopted on , 2008, and
approved by Ordinance No. _ of the City of Auburn,
Washington adopted on , 2008, Ordinance No. of
the City of Des Moines, Washington adopted on
2008, Ordinance No. _ of the City of Federal Way, Washington
adopted on , 2008, Ordinance No. _ of the City of
Tukwila, Washington adopted on , 2008, Ordinance
No. _ of the City of Burien, Washington adopted on
2008, and Ordinance No. _ of the City of SeaTac, Washington
adopted on , 2008, each as existing or as hereinafter
amended, and RCW 35.21.730 through 35.21.755.
RCW 35.21.750 provides as follows: "[A]llliabilities incurred by
such public corporation, commission, or authority shall be satisfied
exclusively from the assets and properties of such public
corporation, commission, or authority and no creditor or other
person shall have any right of action against the city, town, or
county creating such corporation, commission, or authority on
account of any debts, obligations or liabilities of such public
corporation, commission, or authority."
In no event shall the obligations of the Authority be payable by
recourse against any properties, assets or revenues of the Cities of
Renton, Auburn, Des Moines, Federal Way, Tukwila, Burien or
SeaTac, Washington or any other political subdivision of the State
of Washington. No person to whom such obligations are owed
shall have any recourse or right of action against the Cities of
Renton, Auburn, Des Moines, Federal Way, Tukwila, Burien, or
SeaTac, Washington, the State of Washington or any other
political subdivision thereof on account of such obligations, except
to enforce the payments obligated to be made by ordinance by each
of the Cities of Renton, Auburn, Des Moines, Federal Way,
Tukwila, Burien or SeaTac, Washington.
Any of the Member Cities may, by ordinance or contract or pursuant to interlocal agreement,
agree to pay (on a contingent basis or otherwise), all or any portion of the obligations of the
Authority; however, (1) no Member City shall be obligated beyond the proportion or sum
specified by ordinance or contract, and (2) no Member City shall be obligated, directly or
indirectly for the obligations of any other Member City.
Charter - 2
P:\20358_DG\20358_0IY 11/12108
ARTICLE III
DURATION OF AUTHORITY
The duration of this corporation shall be perpetual.
ARTICLE IV
PURPOSE OF AUTHORITY
Pursuant to chapter 39.34 RCW, the Member Cities have entered into the SCORE
Interlocal Agreement (the "Interlocal Agreement") for the formation of a governmental
administrative agency known as the South Correctional Entity ("SCORE"). SCORE is
responsible for the establishment and maintenance of a consolidated correctional facility (the
"SCORE Facility") to serve the Member Cities and federal and state agencies and other local
governments that may contract with SCORE to provide correctional services essential to the
preservation of the public health, safety and welfare. The purpose of the Authority is to provide
an independent legal entity under RCW 35.21.730-.755 and the Ordinance to issue debt to
finance and refinance the acquisition, construction, equipping and improvement of the SCORE
Facility. Such debt may be issued in one or more series, may be in the form of bonds, notes or
other evidences of indebtedness to provide interim and permanent financing for the SCORE
Facility and thereafter, to fmance or refinance equipment, completion, expansion and other
capital improvements essential to maintain the SCORE Facility's functionality as deemed
necessary by the Board. Such bonds, notes, and other evidences of indebtedness are collectively
referred to herein as the "Bonds." Bonds may be issued from time to time by the Authority
upon a supermajority vote of the Board. A "supermajority vote of the Board," as used in this
Article, may be obtained at any regular or special Board meeting by an affirmative vote of a
majority plus one of the Board members, two of which shall have the highest and the second
highest average daily population at the SCORE Facility calculated at the time of the vote.
For the purpose of securing the exemption from Federal income taxation for interest on
obligations of the Authority, the Authority constitutes an authority and instrumentality of the
City of Renton, Washington (within the meaning of those terms in regulations of the United
States Treasury and rulings of the Internal Revenue Service prescribed pursuant to Section 103
and Section 115 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended).
ARTICLE V
POWERS OF AUTHORITY
The Authority shall have and may exercise all lawful powers conferred by State laws, the
Ordinance, this Charter and its Bylaws. The Authority in all of its activities and transactions
shall be subject to the powers, procedures, and limitations contained in the Ordinance.
Charter - 3
P:\20358_DG\20358_0IY 11/12/08
ARTICLE VI
LIMITS ON AUTHORITY POWERS
The Authority in all activities and transactions shall be limited in the following respects:
1. The Authority shall have no power of eminent domain or any power to levy taxes
or special assessments.
2. Except as otherwise agreed to by a Member City, the Authority may not incur or
create any liability that permits recourse by any contracting party or member of the public to any
assets, services, resources, or credit of a Member City.
3. No funds, assets, or property of the Authority shall be used for any partisan
political activity or to further the election or defeat of any candidate for public office; nor shall
any funds or a substantial part of the activities of the Authority be used for publicity or
educational purposes designed to support or defeat legislation pending before the Congress of
the United States, or the legislature of the State or the Council of a Member City; provided,
however, that funds may be used for representatives of the Authority to communicate with
members of Congress, State legislators or members of the Councils of the Member Cities
concerning funding and other matters directly affecting the Authority, so long as such activities
do not constitute a substantial part of the Authority's activities.
4. All funds, assets, or credit of the Authority shall be applied toward or expended
upon services, projects, and activities authorized by this Charter. No part of the net earnings of
the Authority shall inure to the benefit of, or be distributable as such to, Board Members, officers
or other private persons, except that the Authority is authorized and empowered to:
(A) Reimburse Board Members, employees and others performing services for
the Authority reasonable expenses actually incurred in performing their duties, and
compensate employees and others performing services for the Authority a reasonable
amount for services rendered;
(B) Assist Authority Board Members or employees as members of a general
class of persons to be assisted by a corporate-approved project or activity to the same
extent as other members of the class as long as no special privileges or treatment accrues
to such Board Member or employee by reason of his or her status or position in the
Authority;
(C) Defend and indemnify any current or former Board Member or employee
and their successors against all costs, expenses, judgments, and liabilities, including
attorneys' fees, reasonably incurred by or imposed upon him or her in connection with or
resulting from any claim, action, or proceeding, civil or criminal, in which he or she is or
may be made a party by reason of being or having been a Board Member or employee or
by reason of any action alleged to have been taken or omitted by him or her in such
position, provided that he or she was acting in good faith on behalf of the Authority and
Charter - 4
P:\20358_DG\20358_OIY 11/12/08
within the scope of duties imposed or authorized by law. This power of indemnification
shall not be exclusive of other rights to which Board Members or employees may be
entitled as a matter of law;
(D) Purchase insurance to protect and hold personally harmless any current or
former Board Member or employee and their successors from any action, claim, or
proceeding instituted against the foregoing individuals arising out of the performance, in
good faith, of duties for, or employment with, the Authority and to hold these individuals
harmless from any expenses connected with the defense, settlement, or monetary
judgments from such actions, claims, or proceedings. The purchase of such insurance
and its policy limits shall be discretionary with the Board Members, and such insurance
shall not be considered to be compensation to the insured individuals. The powers
conferred by this subsection shall not be exclusive of any other powers conferred by law
to purchase liability insurance; and
(E) Sell assets for a consideration greater than their reasonable market value
or acquisition costs, charge more for services than the expense of providing them, or
otherwise secure an increment in a transaction, or carry out any other transaction or
activity, as long as such gain is not the object or purpose of the Authority's transactions
'or activities and is applied to or expended upon services, projects, and activities as
aforesaid.
5. The Authority shall not issue shares of stock, pay dividends, make private
distribution of assets, make loans to its Board Members or employees or otherwise engage in
business for private gain.
ARTICLE vn
ORGANIZATION OF AUTHORITY
Section 1.
Board of Directors and Tenure
The management of all Authority affairs shall reside in a Board of Directors. The
SCORE Administrative Board created pursuant to Section 4 of the Interlocal Agreement,
including all amendments, shall act ex officio as the Board of the Authority. Board Members
shall have terms coextensive with their terms as members of the SCORE Administrative Board.
Charter - 5
P:\20358_DG\20358_OIY 11/12/08
Section 2. Board Concurrence and Quorum Defined. "Board concurrence" may
be obtained at any regular or special Board meeting by an affIrmative vote of a majority of the
Board Members voting on the issue, provided that such majority equals not less than four (4)
votes. Four (4) voting Board Members must be present at any regular or special meeting of the
Board to comprise a quorum, and for the Board to transact any business. Proxy voting shall not
be allowed. The Bylaws of the Authority may prescribe Board quorum restrictions that equal or
exceed the quorum restrictions imposed in this Section. Board Members present at a duly
convened meeting may continue to transact business notwithstanding the departure of enough
members to leave less than a quorum.
Section 3.
Right to Indemnification.
To the extent permitted by law, the Authority may protect, defend, hold harmless and
indemnify any person who becomes a director, offIcer, employee or agent of the Authority, and
who is a party or threatened to be made a party to a proceeding by reason related to that person's
conduct as a director, offIcer, employee or agent of the Authority, against judgments, filles,
penalties, settlements and reasonable expenses (including attorneys' fees) incurred by him or her
in connection with such proceeding, if such person acted in good faith and reasonably believed
his or her conduct to be in the Authority's best interests and if, in the case of any criminal
proceedings, he or she had no reasonable cause to believe his or her conduct was unlawful. The
indemnification and protection provided herein shall not be deemed exclusive of any other rights
to which a person may be entitled as a matter of law or by contract or by vote of the Board of
Directors. The Authority may purchase and maintain appropriate insurance for any person to the
extent provided by the applicable law.
Section 4.
Conflict of Interest and Code of Ethics.
The Authority shall, in the Bylaws, adopt a code of ethics policy for Board Members. All
Board Members will be required to disclose any information concerning actions or activities of
the candidate or his/her immediate family that present a potential conflict of interest as a Board
Member.
ARTICLE VIII
OFFICERS OF AUTHORITY
Section 1.
Officers and Division of Duties.
The Authority shall have at least one offIcer, the President, selected as provided in the
Bylaws. Subject to the control of the Board, the President shall have general supervision,
direction and control of the business and affairs of the Authority. The President shall be the
agent of the Authority for service of process. On matters decided by the Authority, unless
otherwise required under the Ordinance or by this Charter, the signature of the President alone is
suffIcient to bind the corporation.
Charter - 6
P:\20358_DG\20358_OIY 11/12/08
The Bylaws may designate additional corporate officials as agents to receive or initiate
process. The Board also may provide for additional officers, e.g., Vice President, Secretary,
and/or Treasurer. The President and the Treasurer may not be the same person. The day to day
affairs of the Authority, including debt administration, shall be managed by the Facilities
Director of the SCORE Facility, in the manner provided in the Interlocal Agreement.
Section 2.
Committees.
The Bylaws may provide for an Executive Committee, which shall be appointed and/or
removed by the Board, and shall have and exercise such authority of the Board in the
management between meetings of the Board, as may be specified in the Bylaws. The
appointment of other committees shall be provided for in the Bylaws.
ARTICLE IX
COMMENCEMENT OF AUTHORITY
The Authority shall commence its existence effective upon the issuance of its Charter as
sealed and attested by the City Clerk ofthe City of Renton as provided in the Ordinance.
ARTICLE X
BYLA WS
The initial Bylaws may be amended by the Board to provide additional or different rules
governing the Authority and its activities as are not inconsistent with this Charter. The Board
may provide in the Bylaws for all matters related to the governance of the Authority, including
but not limited to matters referred to elsewhere in the Charter for inclusion therein.
ARTICLE XI
MEETmGSOFTHEAUTHORITY
Section 1.
Time and Place of Meetings.
Regular meetings of the Board shall be held at least two times per year at a regular time
and place to be determined by the Board by resolution. At the last regular meeting of the
calendar year, the Board shall adopt a resolution specifying the date, time and place of regular
meetings for the upcoming calendar year. A copy of the resolution shall be distributed in the
same manner as notice of special meetings is provided pursuant to Section 3 below. Special
meetings of the Board may be held at any place at any time whenever called by the President or a
majority of the Board Members.
Section 2.
Notice of Meetings.
Charter - 7
P:\20358_DG\20358_OIY 11/12/08
No notice of regular meetings shall be required, except for the fIrst regular meeting after
any change in the time or place of such meeting adopted by resolution of the Board as provided
above. Notice of such changed regular meeting shall be given by the President or by the person
or persons calling the meeting by email or by personal communication over the telephone to each
Board Member least 24 hours prior to the time of the meeting or by at least three (3) days' notice
by mail, telegram, electronic or written communication. If mailed, notice shall be mailed by
United States mail, postage prepaid, to the last known address of each Board Member.
Section 3.
Notice of Special Board Meetings.
Notice of all special meetings of the Board of Directors shall be given by the President or
by the person or persons calling the special meeting in accordance with RCW 42.30.080 by
delivering personally, by electronic means or by mail written notice at least 24 hours prior to the
time of the meeting to each Board Member, to each local newspaper of general circulation and to
each radio or television station that has requested notice and to any other individual specifIcally
requesting it in writing. The call and notice of all special meetings shall specify the time and
place of all special meetings and the business to be transacted. Final disposition shall not be
taken by the Board on any other matters at such special meetings. At any regular meeting of the
Board, any business may be transacted and the Board may exercise all of its powers.
Section 4.
Waiver of Notice.
Notice as provided in Sections 2 and 3 hereof may be dispensed with as to any member
of the Board who at or prior to the time the meeting convenes fIles with the Board of the
Authority a written waiver of notice or who is actually present at the meeting at the time it
convenes. Such notice may also be dispensed with as to special meetings called to deal with an
emergency involving injury or damage to persons or property or the likelihood of such injury or
damage, where time requirements of such notice would make notice impractical and increase the
likelihood of such injury or damage. Notice, as provided in Article XIII of this Charter
concerning proposed amendments to this Charter or Bylaws and votes on such amendments, may
not be waived.
Section 5.
Notice to City Council.
Notice of all meetings and minutes of all meetings of the Board shall be given to the City
Council of the Member Cities by giving notice to the City Clerk of each of the foregoing
Member Cities.
Section 6.
Open Public Meetings.
All Board meetings, including executive, all other permanent and ad hoc committee
meetings, shall be open to the public to the extent required by chapter 42.30 RCW. The Board
and committees may hold executive sessions to consider matters enumerated in chapter 42.30
RCW or privileged matters recognized by law, and shall enter the cause therefor in its offIcial
journal. Notice of meetings shall be given in a manner consistent with the Ordinance and
chapter 42.30 RCW. In addition, the Authority shall provide reasonable notice of meetings to
Charter - 8
P:\20358_DG\20358_0IY 11/12/08
any individual specifically requesting it in writing. At such meetings, any person shall have a
reasonable opportunity to address the Board either orally or by written petition.
Section 7.
Telephonic Participation
Board Members may participate in a regular or special meeting through the use of any
means of communication by which all Board Members and members of the public participating
in such meeting can hear each other during the meeting. Any Board Member participating in a
meeting by such means is deemed to be present in person at the meeting for all purposes
including, but not limited to, establishing a quorum.
Section 8.
Parliamentary Authority.
The rules in Robert's Rules of Order (newly revised) shall govern the Authority in all
cases to which they are applicable, where they are not inconsistent with this Charter or with the
special rules of order of the Authority set forth in the Bylaws.
Section 9.
Minutes.
Copies of the minutes of all regular or special meetings of the Board shall be available to
any person or organization that requests them. The minutes of all Board meetings shall include a
record of individual votes on all matters requiring Board approval.
ARTICLE Xli
CONSTITUENCY
There shall be no constituency ofthe Authority.
ARTICLE XllI
AMENDMENTS TO CHARTER AND BYLAWS
Section 1.
Proposals to Amend Charter and Bylaws.
Proposals to amend this Charter may be initiated by the Renton City Councilor by the
Board Members. Proposals to amend the Bylaws may be initiated by the Board Members.
Proposals to amend the Charter initiated by the Renton City Council shall be presented to the
Board in a format as provided in Section 2(1), in accordance with the terms of the Ordinance.
Proposals to amend the Charter or the Bylaws may be initiated by the Board in the manner
described in the following Sections 2 and 3.
Section 2.
Proposals Initiated by the Board.
Charter - 9
P:120358_DGI20358_OIY 11/12/08
1. Proposals to amend the Charter or Bylaws shall be presented in a format which
strikes over material to be deleted and underlines new material.
2. Any Board Member may introduce a proposed amendment to the Charter or to the
Bylaws (which may consist of new Bylaws) at any regular meeting or at any special meeting of
which 30 days advance written notice has been given to members of the Board. Any notice
required by this Article may be given by telegram, electronic or written communication. If
mailed, notice shall be mailed by United States mail, postage prepaid, to the last known address
of each Board Member.
Section 3.
Board Consideration of Proposed Amendments.
. If written notice of a proposed amendment to the Charter or to the Bylaws, and
information, including the text of the proposed amendment and a statement of its purpose and
effect, is provided to Board Members at least 30 days prior to any regular Board meeting or any
special meeting of which advance notice has been given, then the Board may vote on the
proposed amendment at the same meeting as the one at which the amendment is introduced.
Germane amendments to the proposed amendment within the scope of the original amendment
will be permitted at the meeting at which the vote is taken.
Section 4.
Vote Required for Amendments to Charter or Bylaws.
Resolutions of the Board approving proposed amendments to the Charter or Bylaws
require an affirmative vote ofa majority of the Board members voting on the issue, provided that
such majority equals not less than four (4) votes. Amendments to this Charter shall be effective
as provided in Section 5 of this Article. Amendments to the Bylaws shall be effective upon
adoption by the Board.
Section 5.
City Council Approval of Proposed Charter Amendments.
Proposed Charter amendments initiated and approved by the Board shall be submitted to
the each of the Councils of the Member Cities; provided, however, that no amendment to the
Charter shall be effective until approved by the Renton City Council and the Councils of four (4)
of the other Member Cities.
ARTICLE XIV
MISCELLANEOUS
Section 1.
Geographic Limitation.
The Authority may conduct activities outside of the boundaries of the City of Renton,
Washington, including but not limited to acquiring, equipping, constructing, improving and
maintaining the SCORE Facility located in the City of Des Moines, Washington, upon
Charter - 10
P:\20358_DG\20358_OIY 11/12/08
determination by the Renton City Council that each such activity will further the purposes of the
Authority, subject, however, to the applicable limitations set forth in RCW 35.21.740.
Section 2.
Safeguarding of Funds.
Authority funds shall be deposited in a qualified public depository as determined by the
Washington Public Deposit Protection Commission.
Section 3.
Public Records.
The Authority shall maintain all of its records in a manner consistent with the
Preservation and Destruction of Public Records Act, chapter 40.14 RCW. The public shall have
access to records and information of the Authority to the extent as may be required by applicable
laws.
Section 4.
Reports and Information; Audits.
Within three (3) months after the end of the Authority's fiscal year, the Authority shall
file an annual report with the Finance Director and Council of each Member City containing an
audited statement of assets and liabilities, income and expenditures and changes in the
Authority's [mancial position during the previous year; a summary of significant
accomplishments; a list of depositories used; a projected operating budget for the current fiscal
year; a summary ofprojects and activities to be undertaken during the current year; a list ofa list
of officers of the Board; and a list of individuals, if any, that are bonded pursuant.
The Authority shall, at any time during normal business hours and as often as each City
Finance Director or the State Auditor deem necessary, make available to each City Finance
Director and the State Auditor for examination all of the Authority's financial records, and shall
permit the each City Finance Director and State Auditor to audit, examine and make excerpts or
transcripts from such records, and to make audits of all contracts, invoices, materials, payrolls,
records of personnel, conditions of employment .and other data relating to all the aforesaid
matters.
Section 5.
Dissolution.
Dissolution of the Authority shall be in the form and manner required by this Charter,
Washington State law, the Ordinance, and the Bylaws. Dissolution proceedings may be initiated
by the Council of any of the Member Cities or, if the Board makes an affirmative finding that
dissolution is necessary or appropriate, the Board may adopt a resolution requesting Councils of
the Member Cities to adopt an ordinance dissolving the Authority. In either case, if five (5) of
the Councils of the Member Cities, each by ordinance, make an affirmative finding that
dissolution is warranted for any reason, then the existence of the Authority shall be terminated
by ordinance of the Renton City Council.
Upon dissolution of the Authority and the winding up of its affairs, the Board shall file a
dissolution statement as provided in the Ordinance. Title to all remaining property or assets of
Charter - 11
P:120358_DGI20358_0IY 11/12/08
the Authority shall vest in SCORE or if there is no SCORE in existence at the time, then all
property and assets shall be distributed to the Member Cities in an allocable amount calculated
as provided in the lnterlocal Agreement.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Authority shall not be dissolved until all Bonds issued
by the Authority are no longer outstanding. [question for the working group - would you like to
add a provision that automatically dissolves the Authority once the debt is paid off?]
Section 6.
Nondiscrimination.
Membership to the Board shall not be directly or indirectly based upon or limited by age,
race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or the presence of any physical handicap. Furthermore,
the Authority shall not discriminate in any matter related to employment because of age, race,
color, sex, national original, or the presence of any physical handicap. The Authority shall, in all
solicitation or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of the Authority, if any, state
that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to age,
race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or the presence of any physical handicap.
Section 7.
Nonexclusive Charter.
This Charter is nonexclusive and does not preclude the granting by Member Cities of
other charters to establish additional public corporations pursuant to City ordinance.
ARTICLE XV
APPROVAL OF CHARTER
ORIGINAL CHARTER APPROVED by Ordinance adopted by the City Council
of the City of Renton, Washington on ,2008; Ordinance _ adopted by the City
Council of the City of Federal Way, Washington on , 2008; Ordinance
adopted by the City Council of the City of Auburn, Washington on , 2008;
Ordinance adopted by the City Council of the City of Des Moines, Washington on
, 2008; Ordinance _ adopted by the City Council of the City of Tukwila,
Washington on ,2008; Ordinance _ adopted by the City Council of the City of
Burien, Washington on ,2008; and Ordinance _ adopted by the City Council
of the City ofSeaTac, Washington on ,2008.
This Charter is APPROVED this _ day of
,2008.
ATIEST:
Mayor, City of Renton
City Clerk
Charter - 12
P:120358_DGI20358_0IY 11/12/08
EXHIBIT D
BYLA WS
OF
SOUTH CORRECTIONAL ENTITY FACILITY
PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ARTICLE I
MEMBERSIDP
Section 1.1 Board Tenure. For the purpose of determining members of the South
Correctional Entity Facility Public Development Authority (the "Authority") Board of Directors
(the "Board") the procedures set forth in the Authority Charter (the "Charter") and the SCORE
Interlocal Agreement (the "Interlocal Agreement") by and among the Cities of Renton, Auburn,
Federal Way, Des Moines, Tukwila, Burien, and SeaTac, Washington (the "Member Cities"),
shall govern.
ARTICLE II
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES
Section 2.1 Officers Designated. The Presiding Officer of the Administrative Board
selected in the manner provided in Section 4( e) of the Interlocal Agreement shall be the
President of the Board. Such other officers and assistant officers as may be deemed necessary
may be elected or appointed by the Board. No person may simultaneously hold more than one
office. In addition to the powers and duties specified below, the officers shall have such powers
and perform such duties as the Board may prescribe.
Section 2.2 Qualification and Term of Office. The additional officers shall be
members of the Board or any other person designated by the Board who is at the time an official
or employee of at least one of the Member Cities or the SCORE Facility. The additional officers
shall be elected or appointed by the Board and shall hold office for terms established as a part of
the original appointment or for terms established in accordance with the Interlocal Agreement.
Section 2.3 Removal From Office. Upon reasonable prior notice to all" Board
Members of the alleged reasons for dismissal, the Board by an affirmative vote of the majority of
the Board Members may remove any officer of the Board from his or her office whenever in its
judgment the best interests ofthe Authority will be served thereby.
Section 2.4 Vacancies. The Board shall fill any office which becomes vacant with a
successor who shall hold office for the unexpired term and until his or her successor shall have
been duly appointed and qualified.
Section 2.5 Reimbursement. The Board may reimburse Board Members, employees
and others performing services for the Authority reasonable expenses actually incurred in
performing their duties.
Section 2.6 Establishment of Committees. The Board may, by resolution, designate
one or more other committees, including an Executive Committee, each consisting of one or
more members, to advise the Board or, on matters other than those described in the Charter to act
for and on behalf of the Board. The designation of any such committee and the delegation
thereto of authority shall not operate to relieve any Board Member of any responsibility imposed
by law. The Executive Committee, if any, shall have and exercise such powers of the Board as
the Board shall from time to time provide by resolution.
Section 2.7 Code of Ethics.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, no Board Member or employee of
the Authority may:
(1) Participate in a decision of the Authority in which that person or a member
of that person's immediate family has a financial interest, unless the financial interest is a
remote financial interest and participation is approved under subsection (b) of this
section;
(2) Use his or her position to secure special privileges or exemptions for
himself, herself, immediate family members, or others;
(3) Directly or indirectly, give or receive or agree to receive any
compensation, gift, reward, or gratuity from a source except the Authority for a matter
connected with or related to such individual's services in his or her position unless
otherwise provided for by law;
(4) Accept employment or engage in business or professional activity that
such individual might reasonably expect would require or induce him or her by reason of
his or her position with the Authority to disclose confidential information acquired by
reason of his or her position; or
(5) Disclose confidential information gained by reason of such individual's
position with the Authority, or otherwise use such information for his or her personal
gain or benefit.
(b) A Board Member or employee of the Authority may participate in a decision
described in (a)(l) above if that person or a member of that person's immediate family has only a
remote fmancial interest, the fact and extent of such financial interest is disclosed to the Board in
a public meeting, and is noted in the minutes of the Board before any participation by the Board
Member in the decision, and thereafter in a public meeting the Board by vote authorizes or
approves the participation. If the person whose participation is under consideration is a Board
-2-
P:\20358_DG\20358_OIZ 11/12/08
Member, that person must recuse him or herself and may not participate in a decision under this
subsection. Any Board Member with an ownership interest in property located within the
Authority area shall recuse him or herself from participating in a decision if such property is
directly benefiting from such action. For purposes ofthis subsection, "remote financial interest"
means:
(1) That of a nonsalaried officer of a nonprofit corporation;
(2) That of an employee or agent of a contracting party where the
compensation of the employee or agent consists entirely of fixed wages or salary and the
contract is awarded by bid or by other competitive process;
(3)
the property
corporation;
That of a landlord or tenant of a contracting party, except in cases where
subject to the lease or sublease is owned or managed by the public
(4) That of a holder of less than one percent of the shares of the corporation or
cooperative that is the contracting party; or
(5) That of an owner of a savings and loan or bank savings or share account or
credit union deposit account if the interest represented by the account is less than two
percent of the total deposits held by the institution.
(c) A Board Member or employee of the Authority is not considered to be
fmancially interested in a decision when the decision could not affect that person in a manner
different from its effect on the public at large.
(d) All Board Members shall disclose any information concerning actions or
activities of the candidate or his/her immediate family that present a potential conflict of interest
as a Board Member.
(e) For purposes of this section, "participate in a decision" includes all discussions,
deliberations, preliminary negotiations, and votes.
(f) For purposes ofthis section, "immediate family" means:
(1) A spouse or domestic partner;
(2) Any dependent parent, parent-in-law, child, son-in-law, or daughter-in-
law; and
(3) Any parent, parent-in-law, child, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, sibling,
uncle, aunt, cousin, niece or nephew residing in the household of the
Board Member or employee.
-3-
P;\20358_DG\20358_OIZ 11/12/08
(g) The Board may adopt additional conflict of interest and ethical rules it considers
appropriate.
ARTICLE ill
ADl\1INISTRATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 3.1 Books and Records. SCORE, on behalf of the Authority, shall keep
current and complete books and records of account and shall keep minutes of the proceedings of
its Board and its committees having any of the authority of the Board. The proceeds of any
borrowing by the Authority shall be held, invested and disbursed by SCORE, subject to the
terms and limitations established pursuant to the Interlocal Agreement. SCORE shall provide a
regular accounting of the financial affairs of the Authority to the Board at each regular Board
meeting. The obligations of the Authority shall be administered by SCORE, and SCORE is
hereby designated and delegated with full authority to administer such obligations, all in a
manner consistent with the lnterlocal Agreement.
Section 3.2 Indemnification. The Authority elects to defend and indemnify its present
and former Board Members and employees and their successors, spouses, and marital
communities to the full extent authorized by law and the Charter. This right of indemnification
shall inure in perpetuity to each Board Member and employee, and his or her spouse and marital
community, commencing as soon as he or she has the full powers and responsibilities of his or
her position, and in the event of his or her death shall extend to his or her heirs, legal
representatives, and estate. Each person who shall act as a Board Member or employee of the
Authority shall be deemed to do so in reliance upon such indemnification, and such rights shall
not be exclusive of any other right which he or she may have.
Section 3.3 Principal Office. The principal office of the Authority shall be [1055
South Grady Way], Renton, Washington 98055.
Section 3.4 Fiscal Year. The Fiscal Year of the Authority shall begin January 1 and
end December 31 of each year, except the first fiscal year which shall run from the date the.
Charter was issued to December 31,2008.
ARTICLE IV
APPROVAL OF BYLAWS
APPROVED by Ordinance adopted by the City Council of the City of Renton,
Washington on ,2008; Ordinance _ adopted by the City Council of the City of
Federal Way on ,2008; Ordinance adopted by the City Council of the City
of Auburn on , 2008; Ordinance _ adopted by the City Council of the City of
Des Moines on ,2008; Ordinance _ adopted by the City Council of the City of
Tukwila on , 2008; Ordinance adopted by the City Council of the City of
Burien on , 2008; and Ordinance adopted by the City Council of the
City of SeaTac on , 2008.
-4-
P:\20358_DG\20358_0IZ 11/12/08