Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2011-03-28 Item 4C - Resolution - North Highline Annexation Area COUNCIL A GENDA SYNOPSIS t rs icAth,,, Initials ITEM NO. O 1 Meeting Date Prepared by 1 Mgy eview 1 Co ;rncil review :1.1 GI 1 03/28/11 1 JP I (a.)) UZL 1 's 2 04/04/11 I JP 1 ,st;,, ITEM INFORMATION CAS NUMBER: 11-040 STAFF SPONSOR: LYNN MIRANDA I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 3/ 28/11 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Resolution to Commence Negotiations with King County for the North Highline Annexation Area CATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other Mtg Date 03/28/11 Mtg Date Mtg Date 04/04/11 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date SPONSOR Council Mayor HR II DCD Finance Fire IT P&R Police PW SPONSOR'S To initiate the annexation of Tukwila's Potential Annexation Area (PAA) in the North SUMMARY Highline area using the Interlocal Agreement method, Tukwila must adopt a resolution commencing negotiations with King County. This resolution will not commit the City to annexation, but initiates the process per RCW 35A.14.470. The City Council is being asked to approve and adopt the proposed resolution. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DA I E: 3/14/11 COMMITIEE CHAIR: VERNA SEAL RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Department of Community Development COMMIT TEE Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED S 0 So Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 03/28/11 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 03/28/11 Informational Memorandum dated 03/09/11 with Exhibit A thru F including draft resolution. Addendum to Informational Memorandum dated 3/24/11, and City of Seattle resolution Minutes from the Community Affairs and Parks Committee meeting of 03/14/11 04/04/11 89 90 1 -.4..0 ILA y City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor a 9oa° INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM To: Mayor Haggerton Community Affairs Parks Committee From: Jack Pace, Community Development Director Date: March 9, 2011 RE: Resolution to Commence Negotiations with King County for the North Highline Annexation Area ISSUE To initiate the annexation of Tukwila's Potential Annexation Area (PAA) in North Highline using the Interlocal Agreement method, Tukwila City Council must adopt a resolution commencing negotiations with King County. BACKGROUND Tukwila designated the North Highline area as a potential annexation area (PAA) in the City's Comprehensive Plan in 1995. Preliminary studies indicate that the additional revenue generated by property and utility taxes may exceed the costs associated with annexation. The City of Seattle has also designated a PAA that includes a much larger area of unincorporated North Highline that overlaps with Tukwila's PAA (see Exhibit A PAA map). Seattle has initiated a negotiation process with the surrounding jurisdictions and King County to resolve overlap issues prior to initiating annexation. Seattle's Regional Development and Sustainability Committee (Council subcommittee) will make a preliminary recommendation on whether to move forward with a November ballot measure for annexation on March 18, 2011. There are a number of methods of annexation including election, petition or Interlocal Agreement method. The Tukwila City Attorney is recommending using an Interlocal Agreement process to annex the PAA. To move forward with annexation under this method, the Tukwila City Council needs to adopt a resolution pursuant to RCW 35A.14.460(1) commencing negotiations with King County (see Exhibit B draft resolution). A summary of issues regarding land use, potential costs /revenues, effect of annexation on services, and the PAA overlap between Tukwila and Seattle is provided below. LAND USE Area is approximately 135 acres in size and zoned Industrial by King County. 24 parcels $91,297,600 in total assessed value Largest property owner is Seattle City Light (28.5 acres), consisting of a substation and vacant, undevelopable property containing the Hamm Creek Restoration project. Remaining uses are primarily light industrial, with some office retail. Latest census shows 41 residents, including 22 households in 47 units, most likely living on boats at the Duwamish Yacht Club. Surrounding area zoning. Property across the Duwamish River in Tukwila is zoned MIC /H. To the north, Seattle zoning is Single Family with Commercial and Industrial along the Duwamish, and to the west of W. Marginal Way S., King County zoning is Industrial and Regional Business with some higher density single family residential. 91 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL COSTS /ISSUES FOR TUKWILA (See details in Exhibit C Potential Costs Revenues) Response times to this area by Tukwila Police and Fire Departments are anticipated to be longer than preferred standard. Public Works estimates road maintenance catch basin cleaning costs at $22,400 /year. SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL NEW REVENUE FOR TUKWILA (See details in Exhibit C Potential Costs Revenues. Also see Table A) An estimated $454,431 /year in new revenue could be generated by utility taxes, storm drainage fees stormwater utility taxes, sales tax, business license fees, RGRL fees, and property taxes. EFFECT OF ANNEXATION ON SERVICES FOR BUSINESSES RESIDENTS IF ANNEXED TO TUKWILA (Exhibit C Potential Costs Revenues, Tables B -D) Levy Rates will be lower in the annexed portion of Tukwila than in King County, primarily due to no road or fire levies in Tukwila ($9.98 v. $10.96, based on 2011 levy rates). Utility Services o Sewer water providers /rates will remain the same. o Storm drainage rates will decrease by approximately 49% for most developed commercial sites. o Utility taxes ranging from 6 -10% will be levied on providers. Government Services o Schools, libraries, animal control and bus service providers will not change. o Other services, such as permitting, fire police, road maintenance, and court services will be provided by the City of Tukwila. PAA OVERLAP ISSUES City of Seattle's PAA, Area Y, is a 3.55 square -mile area that includes White Center and North Highline. Area Y overlaps with Tukwila's much smaller PAA. See Exhibit A PAA Map. Seattle has been considering annexation of Area Y, and recently prepared a detailed annexation report evaluating the costs and revenues associated with the area. The report identifies a significant financial shortfall if Area Y is annexed due to insufficient resources to meet existing and future demands for services required by annexation. At this time, Seattle Mayor McGinn's recommendation is to not move forward on annexation. On March 18, 2011, the Seattle City Council's Regional Development and Sustainability subcommittee is scheduled to deliberate on whether to recommend moving forward with a November ballot measure on annexation. They must notify the Boundary Review Board of this decision by April 1 in order to proceed. (Seattle anticipates using the Election Method of annexation.) King County Countywide Planning Policy LU -32 encourages using a negotiation process to resolve PAA overlaps in the North Highline area, prior to filing Notice of Intent to annex with King County Boundary Review Board. This process is outlined in Exhibit D. On February 25, 2011 Seattle initiated this process by notifying Tukwila of their intent to annex and requesting a meeting or formal mediation to discuss PAA boundary alternatives. Tukwila has responded and expressed interest in participating in the 92 W: \2011 Info Memos \NorthHighlineAnnex.docPage 2 of 4 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 negotiation process. Exhibit F includes the letter from Seattle and Tukwila's response letter. Per King County Countywide Planning Policy LU -32, absent a negotiated settlement to the overlap within 60 days of receipt of the notice, a city may file a Notice of Intent to Annex with the King County Boundary Review Board for territory within its designated portion of a PAA overlap. As of this date, no negotiation meeting date has been set, although King County is proposing using a Dispute Resolution Program and external mediator, similar to the process used in the Burien /Seattle PAA overlap dispute. City of Burien's annexation of the southern portion of the North Highline area became effective April, 2010. Burien will consider annexing the remaining N. Highline area when their annexation agreement with Seattle /King County expires, if Seattle has chosen not to move forward with annexation. ANNEXATION PROCESS See attached Exhibit D for the process associated with LU -32 and attached Exhibit E for the Interlocal Agreement Method of Annexation (RCW 35A.14.470). CONCLUSIONS A preliminary fiscal analysis of annexation of Tukwila's PAA shows that revenues appear to outweigh costs. Per King County Countywide Planning Polices, negotiations to resolve overlap issues in the North Highline area will take place between Tukwila, Seattle, King County and the North Highline Fire Department, and must be completed by April 25, 2011. It is not clear what the outcome of this process will be, or how the Interlocal Agreement and overlap negotiation process will work together. It is not clear yet whether Seattle will be interested in annexation, given insufficient resources needed to serve the area. A Council Subcommittee will deliberate on whether to recommend proceeding with a November ballot measure on annexation on March 18. NEXT STEPS 1. City Staff will participate in the upcoming negotiation process with Seattle and King County to resolve boundary issues, as set forth by King County Planning Policy LU -32. 2. At the same time, City Council should adopt a resolution commencing negotiations with King County, as required under the Interlocal Agreement method of annexation. This does not commit the City to annexation, but initiates the required process per RCW 35A.14.470. 3. Once Tukwila City Council makes a decision to move forward, staff will prepare a more detailed cost/benefit analysis of annexation, and concurrently move forward with the Interlocal Agreement annexation process. RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to consider the attached resolution to commence annexation negotiations with King County, and forward the item to the March 28, 2011 Committee of the Whole meeting and to the April 4, 2011 Regular meeting for adoption. W: \2011 Info Memos \NorthHighlineAnnex.docPage 3 of 4 93 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 4 ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A Potential Annexation Areas North Highline Exhibit B Draft Resolution stating interest in commencing negotiations for an Interlocal Agreement with King County to annex a certain unincorporated island of territory known as the "North Highline Potential Annexation Area" in Tukwila's comprehensive plan. Exhibit C Potential Cost Revenue Details Table A. Tax/Fee comparison between King County Tukwila Table B. 2010 Levies: King County Taxing Districts Table C. How will annexation affect utility service /fees? Table D. How will annexation affect government services? Exhibit D Annexation Process set forth by King County Countywide Planning Policy LU -32 Exhibit E RCW 35A.14.470 Interlocal Method of Annexation Exhibit F- Letter dated February 23, 2011, from Seattle to Tukwila, requesting meeting /mediation to resolve PAA issues; and Tukwila's response letter dated March 4, 2011. 94 W: \2o11 Into Memos \NorthHighlineAnnex.docPage 4 of 4 '1 i 1 14--1- cr s• 1 '1--- id .._.----4 L 1 ;1 r i U or i I--- 1 1 1 i 4 I 1 N.„ 1 am x_- 1 1 4- .7 w•'' ,..2. ..1- d 18au it e r,e4FI:';; i t' 141-Yii../ :,;:•„,40.ZU:7::..;.,..„ s'''` sN't.' ,st• s' ffl Iii A ,-:-:::-....::.k;'"'s ::.,■5 tt .,its \Z s' ttj, „.,..j.;:5!:/:* \`..,\St;.^.1';';:-K-4--s,V,9.;...::' e. 7r_ 4 •-.s. -15. N.N\so:'''-`,, CO q .t. .,,,r 1 0 N.N., 4 Itli A or r NS "..1.7•7 V Z 14 „Ar i i i, uel.: .•?1i is. v 0 ti" 11 -11 fL!\\.'•\ .-s\. (0`• r ii 4 .4 u, 4 42,11 ,,,SO4, ,..--:p -*4 7 1 4 7; $or ,a.: r P z 'IN\ s• a -,..etNK.:\ \\A-.1.,,-,, e' 1 3 i II :hir 1., t. A At I., v) s a itt A M 4 4 1 A N.I. r i jr o' N e4 .-Z Ali 7' O I i 41f ie tf A' fo r 7 if, LA aAXI,P.7;«\N —1- 4 1 11.:....*: N\-. tn sN. r4 7.:• 31-1-7. Z .4' 4 V VI: ':"..Y;;\?;:"."‘N t'•■••: 1 cn f '4.: .3 \,:;\`3:::Alf ess 3• s 49' ,i• (0 V 0/1111,1, (Vv \\N:" 1 ,:i. v.4 1 „-/i J../ 4, •,-,'\-.4-.: „sc:: .1 1 1 1 A 1 1 I F .'&.\\•"■st,:',$.. 1 11:C ,`'s 1 --(17 0 1 ta 111,111 Al II 0 A... 60S US v Ill MI en, cn 1 4,, ':-,,N,-. 41) e 60S NS oil 17. •r 0 al ,jr c al 'A/0AI WM l ;k1Z :oil I 0 IMMilr p iriardreA, (1349 ,V,\, 7dEl s I 03 i 0 MEW SS V4 JO fy Pi Z. twl A',\\taj i sts, i h (13 :1` ga ,x;„.\\ v \I .c 4 o A g :;ii. _I< a .1.--, N e A ATroAro ,N='-N fia,.,:,.. III a yir rA Imi 4,, vil #.1•10%.4 AlrA Ow 11 k■ C4,- s 4: 0 r....,,........) CI Pk .,,v4wir r 4., s,t j i ll, 1 1 1 WA l......1 rez 4. P 1 SW 477,01 'will', im Ilis III w _____.r ,,r// e ...m go NwP-1..0 1 A 49; A e. ''',:•4 1 II 4=y 7 ..z.,,,,, 1 i Ar 7 4 .s.,.ms ow's, ,■,..0,111.m. 4 a ms ..Av 2. a o sommla rum= -PrilmoninoLv Ai dr ArA N4 ZN.' V .7109iy CD .4% •rormir' s .‘".06 'N1/4-7..\\ kilaili,..z. \\AssIN. 41 1.1111111TIM CO =FT" ar, r i i s- pitia tu cII MI y...., A Aas- 0 t i 11110 Mr O all MS e f IL 111111111111111111111111111 a gt 111111 6 4 rr O r 4 0, 4 1 V S A A- gl 4 1. P 9 1 gi) INEMMINMEN di IMMIlt-3 r V) ca i!) NI IMMOMMENNI IlrillagreA026. Tex ti; AK/ i, ,...Irary, 111111111111111111111111111 ..a111111MLOW.,74, 10; I J'Zir v 1 lig co c: 4 al vi- ..........1....mcwrgo ,.>...ii.A M. 1111.11111M""ri=gir AA .r0,r,u' A,' OP I ark 2 ',A. 111 111.1111111111111MANIMEKWAr Ai Aor AKA A MR 11111bre4W; A AgfriAr 4 I t li a MEM My MS.OAY 9I For I '.:s\- Cs/ c .4 4,10".. .r...... is ' pregrot En MIIIIII "%rid &L. ‘7 I 4.4 V 7 S f... =111111111111.11111.11111111 1 I iii s.,. 17 i• 0 0 -1-e INMENIMMINIINUOI .•,z ,O; c 0 j 5 0 X w 1 1 ,i.,, 0 MONOMMONMIME woo m :!E 111111111111111 1.1111161‘1 M /i: 44'Pall''' Xs t 0 11111111111 11110 11# -"•-iCY6t;* .4 .:..e.,:- 4 .Z 111110010V" 11.111111111111611111.11 !.■%t 1 ...Z iil ...i.O.: i N.. ;3!4.. ii 1.1111 11111.11111 95 96 Exhibit B DRAFT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, STATING INTEREST IN COMMENCING NEGOTIATIONS FOR AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH KING COUNTY TO ANNEX A CERTAIN UNINCORPORATED ISLAND OF TERRITORY KNOWN AS THE "NORTH HIGHLINE POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA" IN TUKWILA'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WHEREAS, the Washington State Growth Management Act and King County Countywide Planning Policies anticipate all unincorporated areas within a City's urban growth area boundaries will eventually be annexed; and WHEREAS, in 1995 Tukwila adopted Ordinance No. 1757, which adopted a Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Map for the City of Tukwila that identified approximately 135 acres within the unincorporated North Highline area as a potential annexation area (PAA) for the City; and WHEREAS, the City of Seattle has designated a PAA that includes all of the unincorporated North Highline area, and which overlaps with Tukwila's PAA; and WHEREAS, in 2010 the City of Seattle adopted Resolution 31198 stating their interest in holding a November 2011 election in their PAA, and outlining a work program, deliverables, and timeline to help the Mayor and the City Council determine whether Seattle should pursue annexation of this area at this time; and WHEREAS, per King County Countywide Planning Policy LU -32, and prior to adopting a "Notice of Intent to Annex" resolution, a city must notify neighboring jurisdictions of their intent; and WHEREAS, on February 25, 2011 Tukwila received notice from the City of Seattle of their intent to annex and request for a meeting or formal mediation to discuss non overlapping boundary alternatives; and WHEREAS, on March 4, 2011 Tukwila sent a response to the City of Seattle requesting participation in such a discussion; and W: \Word Processing \Resolutions \No Highline PAA— Interest in negotiations.doc LM:bjs Page 1 of 2 97 WHEREAS, per King County Countywide Planning Policy LU -32, absent a negotiated settlement to the overlap within 60 days of receipt of the notice, a city may file a Notice of Intent to Annex with the King County Boundary Review Board for territory within its designated portion of a PAA overlap; and WHEREAS, the outcome of the negotiation process with the City of Seattle is not yet known; and WHEREAS, RCW 35A.14.460 provides for the annexation of territory when at least 60 percent of the boundaries of the territory proposed for annexation are contiguous to the annexing city or town or one or more cities or towns, and Tukwila's North Highline PAA satisfies these conditions; and WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila is willing to annex the North Highline PAA and desires to take the necessary steps required by RCW 35A.13.460 to initiate the annexation process now by adopting a resolution pursuant to RCW 35A.14.460(1) commencing negotiations for an Interlocal Agreement with King County; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: The City of Tukwila hereby resolves to "commence negotiations" for an Interlocal Agreement with King County for annexation of the North Highline PAA, as identified in the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan and depicted on the map which is attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of 2011. ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk Allan Ekberg, Council President APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Resolution Number: Shelley M. Kerslake, City Attorney Exhibit A: Map of Potential Annexation Areas —North Highline W: \Word Processing \Resolutions \No Highline PAA— Interest in negotiations.doc LM:bjs Page 2 of 2 98 Exhibit C Potential Costs Revenue Details 1. Potential Costs/Issues for Tukwila Public Works Road maintenance costs (1/2 mile public streets) $6,400 /year Cleaning catch basins $15,960 /year King Co. Transportation Needs Report for this area shows only South Park Bridge demolition replacement. Annexation area includes l of the Hwy 99/Marginal Wy Des Moines Memorial Dr interchange does not make sense to split responsibility in half. Unsure of what level of cost to the City would be associated with Hamm Creek maintenance. Fire Anticipate long response times for the PAA area (10 -12 minutes v. 5 minutes currently provided by N. Highline Fire District. 5 minute estimate for N Highline District represents travel time only). Seattle does not provide mutual aid would need to rely on Fire District 2 or N. Highline Fire District. Fire needs to determine how many buildings are sprinkled and determine fire flow/hydrant availability. Police Anticipate long response times no staff assigned to north end of Tukwila. Difficult to obtain crime statistics from King Co Sheriff. Marina could be a significant generator of calls. Parks No issues /costs anticipated. Other Annexation costs incurred by Tukwila would include staff time for negotiating agreements with King County and other jurisdictions /agencies, attending public hearings, and preparing reports. 2. Potential New Revenue for Tukwila (see Table A) Estimated Taxes or Fees 6% utility tax on telephone, gas, electricity, cable solid waste providers. 10% utility tax on stormwater, water sewer. Need more detailed study to determine revenue. $75,039 per year in Stoini Drainage fees stoluiwater utility tax Sales Tax City will receive 0.84 of revenue generated by sales tax within the area. For example, based on taxable sales in 2009, the City received $120,120. $900+ per year in Business License fees 99 Revenue Generating Regulatory License fee (RGRL) on full time employees. Need to more detailed information on number of full time employees to deteuuine revenue. Approximately $258,372 in property taxes ($2.83/$1000 AV in 2011). Estimated yearly revenue: $454,431+ /year 100 Table A. Tax /Fee Comparison Between King County Tukwila E stimate of' W:Potental King Co. If Tukwila Annexed b p Notes Revenue. for h. b -P Tu4 's ;j Yr i i kwila4 .L Tax or Fee 1 i If M,-3 Utility Tax: Telephone 6% a' Tax: Gas s NV Utility Y 6% N o t a b g to If Seattle City Light de ni e since service, city imposes a 6 /o dont k franchise fee, but does no r q u 'sa ge not collect a utility tax. Utility Tax: Electricity r� K Cable franchise fee 5% 1 6% Utility Tax: Solid Waste 6% 2 ,A,.. Utility Tax: Water 1 10% Vit Oo',$STI Utility Tax: Sewer 1 10% no;3, Y Z i represents 10% of total i stormwater utility fees 10% 7a x a k collected ($75039.39/yr). Utility Tax: Stormwater $7504 �y Surface Water Utility Rates Per acre charge Per acre charge I,t1 This amount reflects the based on amount based on amount of��� total stormwater fees of developed developed y collected minus the 10% (impervious) (impervious) surface. 4 qe for stormwater utility tax. ie surface. Ranges Ranges from $101.80 :5lyear from $111.00 to to $850.50 per acre 4 i $1,737.74 per (commercial use) v k :si acre. (commercial use) t s$tre 12; Tukwila will receive .84% 9.50% 9.50% (ba O 200 a a e (.084) of revenue Sales Tax *--.*.A. 1 g ale t generated by sales tax Sales tax on food tf`tot`�able to 10% 10% -"A' st,.: beverages (restaurants) determ ei i This is a very only required for t t' Business license regulated $100 (0 -10) 431 conservative estimate r s- based on 9 known businesses businesses with an i4 �x 5 7 :4 unknown of 4 v ge O a1i.i' employees. There are $150 (11 -20) 00 +�/yea� also 2 -3 large business �r -4 0- x s 1 parks containing multiple $300 (21 50) i ;7 t�S, LI businesses which are not w 041 1 $400 (51 -100) r s included in this figure $600 (101 -tb f gi g $0.028646 per hr =x Businesses with less worked for a full time y? than $12k average 4,0 .05 Revenue Generating employee K� annual gross receipts Regulatory License fee I (Businesses with less 'unkho. -n exempted. Accurate (RGRL) than $12k average t�k number of full time annual gross receipts employees is not known exempted)` ti t at this time Property Tax (per $1,000 2.83/$1000 AV iti based on total AV of AV) levy (City total lev portion of 258r37>2 $91,297,600 Y Lev YP $9.98 total levy) fiv f v �k k a ifin 7 X PVIA Total Potential Revenue �.�..�e:.<,� �:�.-�-:�;�y��.�.r,z:� �;�r�;��.�_�,.., Il. _�.�:�_n... I 101 Table B. 2011 Levies: King CO Taxing Districts Unincorporated If Tukwila Annexed King County* Notes Lower than the $12.68 applied to Tukwila Total levy 10.96 9.98 because the area is served by Seattle school district State /County /Port Districts 4$ 3.84 3.84 Road levy 1 2.19 0 no road levy in Tukwila School Levy i 2.34 2.34 Seattle Public School District, levy district #10 Fire Levy i 1.60 0 assumes served by Tukwila Fire Dept Library Levy 0.56 0.56 assumes Tukwila Library levy applies EMS Levy 0.30 0.30 1 Flood Levy 0.11 0.111 Ferry Levy 0.004 0.004 City levy 2.831 1* for King CO tax districts 3015, 3018 3030 102 Table C. How will Annexation Affect Utility Service /Fees? (2010 Fee rates) Service I Served Now By... If annexed to Now If annexed to Tukwila Higher or Tukwila Lower I than KCo? Solid Waste (Cmme� �Waste Allied Waste $253.91 I 268.21 servtc'e' for 6 ct bi,c' yd Management containerlonce a week)* Storm drainage 90% 'King County Tukwila 438.78 $212.62 impervious 3.03 acre site Sewer (metro sewage Val Vue sewer No change $40.90 1st 750 same same disposal) cubic feet; $5.45 every add'I 100 cubic feet. Water (based on 1.5" Water District #20 No change $54 $1.45 /ccf same same meter size winter rates) E1 s.! Seattle City Light SCL, but rate 5 F. i� (SCL) changes Commercial: Small $6.68 /kWh $6.82 /kWh Commercial: Medium $5.85 /kWh $5.97 /kWh Commercial: Large $6.73 /kWh $6.94 /kWh 1 Small general service is provided to customers who are not metered, or in the last calendar year more than half their normal billings have been at less than 50 kW of demand. Medium general service is provided to customers who in the last calendar year more than half their normal billings have been at less than 50 kW of demand and half at less than 1000 kW of max demand.. Large general service is provided to customers whose maximum monthly demand is equal to or greater than 1000 kW but less than 10,000 kW. 103 Table 0. How will Annexation Affect Government Services? Service Served Now By... If annexed to Tukwila Schools Seattle School District No change Library 0nBCounh/Lib/arySystem No change Metropolitan |it King County Council Tukwila Cib/Counoi| (7 members) Legislative (Council) eropo an ng oung/ uuno Parks King County Parks Recreation Tukwila Parks Recreation Permitting Zoning King County Development City of Tukwila Deptof Community Environmental Services (DDES) Development Fire &Ennergency N High|ineFireDinth(t {�dyof Tukwila Fire Dept Medical 5 (travel time only) 10 (niDutes): Animal Control King County no change King County (by contract) Police Services King County Sheriff City of Tukwila Police Dept Local Roads King County Dept ofTransportation City of Tukwila Dept of Pubic Works Court Sery King County District Court Tukwila Municipal Court (misdemeanors) /miodemeanom, small claims) King County District Court (small claims) 1 04 Exhibit D Annexation Process set forth by King County Countywide Planning Policy LU -32 Tukwila designated the PAA in 1995; Seattle in 1996. King County Countywide Planning Policy LU -32 establishes a process for resolving PAA overlaps in the North Highline area: 1. The cities and county should attempt to establish alternative non overlapping PAA boundaries through a process of negotiation. 2. Absent a negotiated resolution, a city may file a Notice of Intent to Annex with the Boundary Review Board for King County after the following steps have been taken: a. The city proposing annexation has, at least 30 days prior to filing a Notice of Intent to annex with the Boundary Review Board, contacted in writing the cities with the PAA overlap and the county to provide notification of the city's intent to annex and to request a meeting or formal mediation to discuss boundary alternatives, and; b. The cities with the PAA overlap and the county have either: i. Agreed to meet but failed to develop a negotiated settlement to the overlap within 60 days of receipt of the notice, or; ii. Declined to meet or failed to respond in writing within 30 days of receipt of the notice. Exhibit E RCW 35A.14.470 Annexation of territory within urban growth areas County may initiate process with other cities or towns Interlocal agreement Public hearing Ordinance Referendum Election, when necessary. (1) The legislative body of any county planning under chapter 36.70A RCW and subject to the requirements of RCW 36.70A.215 may initiate an annexation process with the legislative body of any other cities or towns that are contiguous to the territory proposed for annexation in RCW 35A.14.460 if: (a) The county legislative body initiated an annexation process as provided in RCW 35A.14.460; and (b) The affected city legislative body adopted a responsive resolution rejecting the 105 proposed annexation or declined to create the requested interlocal agreement with the county; or (c) More than one hundred eighty days have passed since adoption of a county resolution as provided for in RCW 35A.14.460 and the parties have not adopted or executed an interlocal agreement providing for the annexation of unincorporated territory. The legislative body for either the county or an affected city may, however, pass a resolution extending the negotiation period for one or more six -month periods if a public hearing is held and findings of fact are made prior to each extension. (2) Any county initiating the process provided for in subsection (1) of this section must do so by adopting a resolution commencing negotiations for an interlocal agreement as provided in chapter 39.34 RCW between the county and any city or town within the county. The annexation area must be within an urban growth area designated under RCW 36.70A.110 and at least sixty percent of the boundaries of the territory to be annexed must be contiguous to one or more cities or towns. (3) The agreement shall describe the boundaries of the territory to be annexed. A public hearing shall be held by each legislative body, separately or jointly, before the agreement is executed. Each legislative body holding a public hearing shall, separately or jointly, publish the agreement at least once a week for two weeks before the date of the hearing in one or more newspapers of general circulation within the territory proposed for annexation. (4) Following adoption and execution of the agreement by both legislative bodies, the city or town legislative body shall adopt an ordinance providing for the annexation. The legislative body shall cause notice of the proposed effective date of the annexation, together with a description of the property to be annexed, to be published at least once each week for two weeks subsequent to passage of the ordinance, in one or more newspapers of general circulation within the city and in one or more newspapers of general circulation within the territory to be annexed. If the annexation ordinance provides for assumption of indebtedness or adoption of a proposed zoning regulation, the notice shall include a statement of the requirements. Any area to be annexed through an ordinance adopted under this section is annexed and becomes a part of the city or town upon the date fixed in the ordinance of annexation, which date may not be less than forty five days after adoption of the ordinance. (5) The annexation ordinances provided for in RCW 35A.14.460(4) and subsection (4) of this section are subject to referendum for forty -five days after passage. Upon the filing of a timely and sufficient referendum petition with the legislative body, signed by registered voters in number equal to not less than fifteen percent of the votes cast in the last general state election in the area to be annexed, the question of annexation shall be submitted to the voters of the area in a general election if one is to be held within ninety days or at a special election called for that purpose according to RCW 29A.04.330. Notice of the election shall be given as provided in RCW 35A.14.070 and the election shall be conducted as provided in the general election law. The annexation shall be 106 deemed approved by the voters unless a majority of the votes cast on the proposition are in opposition thereto. After the expiration of the forty -fifth day from but excluding the date of passage of the annexation ordinance, if no timely and sufficient referendum petition has been filed, the area annexed shall become a part of the city or town upon the date fixed in the ordinance of annexation. (6) If more than one city or town adopts interlocal agreements providing for annexation of the same unincorporated territory as provided by this section, an election shall be held in the area to be annexed pursuant to RCW 35A.14.070. In addition to the provisions of RCW 35A.14.070, the ballot shall also contain a separate proposition allowing voters to cast votes in favor of annexation to any one city or town participating in an interlocal agreement as provided by this section. If a majority of voters voting on the proposition vote against annexation, the proposition is defeated. If, however, a majority of voters voting in the election approve annexation, the area shall be annexed to the city or town receiving the highest number of votes among those cast in favor of annexation. (7) Costs for an election required under subsection (6) of this section shall be borne by the county. 107 108 Exhibit F r/ t Office of the Mayor City of Seattle February 23, 2011 A E The The Honorable Dow Constantine King County Executive 401 5` Avenue Suite 800 Seattle, WA 98104 The Honorable Joan McGilton Mayor of Burien 400 SW 152 "d Street Suite 300 Burien, WA 98166 The Honorable Jim Haggerton Mayor of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA .98188 The Honorable Wayne Alishokis Chair, North Highline Fire District 1243 SW 112 Street Seattle, WA 98146 RE: Notification of Seattle's Intent to Annex Formal Request for Meeting Dear Executive Constantine, Mayor McGilton, Mayor Haggerton, and Commissioner Alishokis: The City of Seattle is considering annexing the unincorporated North Highline area. commonly known as "White Center" (identified as Area Y in the attachment). Under King County Countywide Planning Policies LU -32 which states in part: "1. The city proposing annexation has, at least 30 days prior to filing a Notice of Intent to annex with the Boundary Review Board, contacting in writing the cities with the PAA overlap and the county to provide notification of the city's intent to annex and to request a meeting or formal mediation to discuss boundary alternatives, and; 2. The cities with the PAA overlap and the county have either: a. Agreed to meet but failed to develop a negotiated settlement to the overlap within 60 days of receipt of the notice, or b. Declined to meet or failed to respond in writing within 30 days of receipt of the notice." Seattle City Hall, 7th Floor Tel (206) 684 -4000 600 Fourth Avenue Fax (206) 684 -5360 PO Box 94749 www.seattlegov /mayor Seattle, WA 98124 -4749 mike.mcginn @seattle.gov 109 Executive Constantine, Mayor McGilton, Mayor Haggerton February 23, 2011 Page 2 This letter shall serve as the City of Seattle's formal notice of its intent to annex and request for a meeting or formal mediation with the cities of Burien and Tukwila and King County to discuss boundary alternatives. This letter does not represent a decision by the City of Seattle to seek annexation. As elected officials you are aware of the financial realities that many of our jurisdictions are facing. Many of us have had to make difficult decisions that resulted in reductions in services and in some cases core services to our residents. With the uncertainty of the future financial picture, I want to stress that any decision to proceed with the annexation process will depend upon its impact on Seattle's financial future. I have designated: Marco Lowe, Director, _Office of Intergovernmental Relations as the City of Seattle's contact person on this matter. Please direct all correspondence on this matter him. If you. have further questions, you can contact Kenny Pittman, Office of Intergovernmental Relations at (206) 684 8364 or kennv.oittman[7a.seattle.aov. Sincerely, t Michael McGinn Mayor of Seattle Attachment cc: The Honorable Richard Conlin, President, Seattle City Council Fred Jarrett, Deputy County Executive Mike Martin, Burien City Manager Steve Lancaster, Tukwila City Administrator Karen Freeman, King County, OSPPM Marco Lowe, Director, Seattle Office of Intergovernmental Relations Kenny Pittman, Seattle Office of Intergovernmental Relations 110 i z Citjiofruk Q 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Jim Haggerton, Mayor 49Q8 March 4, 2011 Mr. Marco Lowe Director, Office of Intergovernmental Relations City of Seattle PO Box 94746 Seattle, WA 98124 -4746 RE: Notification of Seattle's Intent to Annex Formal Request for Meeting Dear Mr. Lowe: Thank you for the notice of Seattle's intent to annex the unincorporated North Highline area (Area Y). The City of Tukwila is also considering annexing a smaller portion of the unincorporated North Highline area that overlaps with Area Y (identified on the attached map). Tukwila designated the North Highline PAA in their Comprehensive Plan in 1995, and in conjunction with adjoining boundary issues, the PAA has been the subject of discussions between Tukwila, Seattle and King County since 1997. Therefore, we welcome the opportunity to discuss PAA boundary alternatives and develop a negotiated settlement. The Tukwila City Council will be considering the annexation of our North Highline PAA in the coming weeks. As such, we would like to move forward with a meeting or formal mediation between the necessary parties as soon as possible. Please contact Jack Pace, Community Development Director, at (206)431 -3686 to schedule a meeting. Sincerely, J Mayo Attachment Cc: The Honorable Dow Constantine, King County Executive The Honorable Joan McGilton, Mayor of Burien The Honorable Wayne Alishokis, Chair, North Highline Fire District The Honorable Richard Conlin, President, Seattle City Council Fred Jarrett, Deputy County Executive Mike Martin, Burien City Manager Steve Lancaster, Tukwila City Administrator Karen Freeman, King County, OSPPM Kenny Pittman, Seattle Office of Intergovernmental Affairs Phone: 206- 433 -1800 City Hall Fax: 206 433 -1833 www.ci.tukwila.wa.us 111 ,ja. y y City of Tukwila a Jim Haggerton, Mayor s 2 INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM To: Mayor Haggerton Committee of the Whole From: Jack Pace, DCD Director Date: March 24, 2011 RE: Addendum to the Community Affairs and Parks Committee memo regarding the North Highline Annexation Area. Since the Community Affairs and Parks Committee meeting on March 14, 2011, there is updated information regarding the Seattle City Council subcommittee's recommendations to the Seattle City Council. Also, King County has finalized the schedule for the mediation process to resolve the potential annexation area (PAA) overlap issues. On March 18, 2011, the Seattle City Council's Regional Development and Sustainability subcommittee deliberated on whether to recommend moving forward with a November ballot measure on annexation. A substitute resolution (see attached) was introduced at the meeting proposing making a decision by February 2012, rather than trying to hold an election this November. The Seattle City Council will deliberate on this issue on March 28, 2011. If Seattle wants the annexation vote on the November ballot it must notify the Boundary Review Board by April 1. Since Seattle City Council meetings are held during the day we will be know Seattle City Council's decision prior to our Committee of the Whole meeting the same day, March 28, 2011, and will provide an update at the meeting. If you want to attend Seattle City Council meeting online you can view it at httn /www.seattle.aov /councillive/ If Seattle City Council defers the decision until February 2012, it will be past the deadline stipulated in the agreement between Burien and Seattle. Burien's agreement with Seattle/King County allows Seattle to pursue annexation of the North Highline area until December 2011. After December 2011, if Seattle has chosen not to move forward with the annexation, Burien could consider annexing it. Also, King County Countywide Planning Policy LU -32 encourages using a negotiation process to resolve PAA overlaps in the North Highline area, prior to filing Notice of Intent to annex with King County Boundary Review Board. On February 25, 2011, Seattle initiated this process by notifying Tukwila of their intent to annex and requested a meeting or formal mediation to discuss PAA boundary alternatives. King County proposed using a Dispute Resolution Program and external mediator, similar to the process used in the Burien /Seattle PAA overlap dispute. These negotiation meetings between King County, Tukwila, Seattle, Burien and Fire Districts will be held on April 6` and April 19` 2011. Per LU -32, if a negotiated settlement to the overlap issues is not reached by April 25 2011 (within 60 days of receipt of the notice), a city may file a Notice of Intent to Annex with the King County Boundary Review Board for territory within its PAA. Attachment: City of Seattle resolution stating the intent of the City of Seattle to make a decision by February 2012. MD 3 -24 -11 C: \temp\XPgrpwise\Addendum to FINAL CAP Memo 3.142011.doc 1 12 Valles, C Anne Decision March 18, 2011 Version #2 RESOLUTION 1 2 A RESOLUTION stating the intent of the City of Seattle to make a decision by February 2012 whether to call for the annexation, by election, of contiguous unincorporated territory to 3 the City of Seattle, referenced as the North Highline Annexation Area, and stating the City's intent to withdraw its designation of this area as a Potential Annexation Area in the 4 City's Comprehensive Plan if a decision is made not to hold an annexation election in 5 2012. 6 WHEREAS, the Washington State Growth Management Act and the King County Countywide Planning Policies encourage transition of unincorporated urban and urbanized areas 7 within Potential Annexation Areas from county governance to city governance; and 8 WHEREAS, the North Highline Annexation Area is within the City of Seattle's Potential 9 Annexation Area adopted pursuant to Seattle City Council Ordinance 122313; and 10 WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that, based on current information, it may be in the 11 best interest and general welfare of the City of Seattle and the North Highline Annexation Area to annex certain unincorporated territory lying generally south of the existing City 12 of Seattle corporate boundary, referenced as the North Highline Annexation Area and shown on Exhibit A to this resolution; and 13 14 WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila has requested the City of Seattle meet to discuss its overlapping Potential Annexation Area with Tukwila, which may impact Seattle's ability to adhere to 15 the necessary timeline for a November 2011 annexation election; and 16 WHEREAS, the City is faced with significant financial challenges and it is difficult for the City 17 to commit to providing the appropriate level of services for the North Highline Annexation Area if the City proceeds with annexation at this time; and 18 WHEREAS, the City has an obligation to the people in the North Highline Annexation Area to 19 reduce the uncertainty about their future and it is committed to making a decision in February 2012; NOW, THEREFORE, 20 21 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEATTLE, THE MAYOR CONCURRING, THAT: 22 Section 1. The best interest and general welfare of the City of Seattle may be served by 23 24 the annexation of contiguous unincorporated territory to the City of Seattle, referenced as the 25 North Highline Annexation Area and shown on Exhibit A to this resolution. 26 27 Form last revised on 12/11/09 1 113 Valles, C Anne Decision March 18, 2011 Version #2 Section 2. The City of Seattle shall meet with the City of Tukwila to discuss its 1 2 overlapping Potential Annexation Area. 3 Section 3. The City Council requests the Executive to verify its financial projections and 4 submit an updated financial report on providing services to the North Highline Annexation Area 5 by December 31, 2011. The City Council will provide a list of questions regarding the 6 Executive's report submitted on January 18, 2011, Analysis of the Potential Annexation of North 7 8 Highline into the City of Seattle by April 30, 2011. 9 Section 4. The City Council commits to making a final decision as to whether to proceed 10 with an annexation election by February 28, 2012 and to withdraw its Potential Annexation Area 11 designation if it decides not to proceed with an annexation election in the North Highline 12 Annexation Area in 2012. 13 14 Adopted by the City Council the day of 2011, and 15 signed by me in open session in authentication of its adoption this day 16 of 2011. 17 18 President of the City Council THE MAYOR CONCURRING: 19 20 Michael McGinn, Mayor 21 22 Filed by me this day of 2011. 23 24 25 City Clerk (Seal) 26 27 Exhibit A: Map of North Highline Annexation Area 2R Form Iast revised on 12/11/09 2 114 J• 4s o City of Tukwila y Community Affairs and Parks Committee �a" COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND PARKS COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes March 14, 2011— 5:00 p.m.; Conference Room #3 PRESENT Councilmembers: Verna Seal, Chair; Joe Duffie and De' Sean Quinn Staff: Rick Still, Robert Eaton, Shawn Hunstock, Lynn Miranda, Minnie Dhaliwal, Brandon Miles, Steve Lancaster and Kimberly Matej Guests: Michael Mays (Clear Channel), Justin Rose (Pacific Golf and Cart) CALL TO ORDER: Committee Chair Seal called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. L PRESENTATIONS No presentations. II. BUSINESS AGENDA A. Leasing of City Property for Digital Billboard Staff is seeking Council approval to enter into a lease agreement with Clear Channel Outdoor (CCO) for the City -owned property located at the northeast comer of West Valley Highway and South 180 Street. CCO will be utilizing the property to locate and operate a digital billboard. Currently, NC Power Systems is using the property, and may continue using the property provided rent is paid to the City. At this time, it does not appear as if NC Power has a need for continued use. However, if at a later time, they desire to use the property, CCO's lease agreement does not restrict other uses, and a new agreement could be discussed. Highlights of the lease agreement with Clear Channel Outdoor include: 9 Fifteen (15) year lease, termination clause and mutually renewable 9 Lease rate of $25,000 annually with a 7.5% increase every five years O CCO will provide property access, currently there is none Committee Members expressed appreciation for staff's effort to communicate intentions and processes with NC Power Systems. In relation to property access above, Committee Member Duffie commented that a driveway cut should be made in the sidewalk for vehicular access to the property in order to avoid driving over the sidewalk. Committee Chair Seal stated that it is essential that we make sure that we comply with our own codes and regulations. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO MARCH 28 COW FOR DISCUSSION. B. North Highline Annexation Staff is seeking Committee approval of a resolution that states the City's interest in commencing negotiations of an interlocal agreement with King County for the annexation of the area known as North Highline. This area was identified as a potential annexation (PAA) area in the City's Comprehensive Plan in 1995. The bulleted items below briefly describe the PAA: 6 Approximately 135 acres Twenty -four (24) parcels O $91 million accessed value Currently zoned industrial Revenues are projected to be more than the costs of annexation 115 Community Affairs Parks Committee Minutes March 14, 2011 Pace 2 The memo included in the Committee agenda packet provides additional information including new revenue and effects of annexation. Staff discussed an overlap between the City of Seattle's and Tukwila's PAA's. Seattle has notified the City of Tukwila that they are considering moving forward with an ___X__ annexation vote this fall. However, King County Countywide Planning Policies require that the two cities participate in a PAA boundary resolution mediation process prior to notifying the Boundary Review Board of intent to annex. This draft resolution in no way commits the City to annexation. It simply allows the City to initiate negotiation process with King County, and it is required per RCW 35A. 14.470, if participating entities want to use the interlocal agreement method of annexation. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO MARCH 28 COW FOR DISCUSSION. C. Bid Award for 34 Golf Carts Staff is seeking Council approval to award a bid in the amount of $114,030 to Pacific Golf and Turf for the purchase of 34 gas powered golf carts for Foster Golf Links (FGL). Staff provided background information on golf cart use at FGL including gas carts compared to electric carts, and the history of long -term cart lease to own program versus buying carts outright. Currently, FGL owns 34 carts that are six -years old. Staff is recommending trading in 10 carts and purchasing 34 additional carts which will provide FGL with a fleet of 58 carts eliminating the need for short-term lease during the high demand golf season. A significant concern of this purchase is the possibility of a resulting negative fund balance for FGL, and the need to be subsidized by the City's General Fund. Committee Members requested staff provide an explanation of the overall new business plan mentioned in the meeting and modify the memo that goes to full Council to talk about the strategic plan process outlining year by year, showing the costs savings of an outright purchase. The Committee did not make a recommendation as they feel a full Council discussion is necessary to determine the best choice for the City. NO COMMITTEE RECOMMEDATION. FORWARD TO MARCH 28 COW FOR DISCUSSION. D. Parks Recreation Annual Report As an information only item, Rick Still reviewed the 2010 Parks Recreation Annual Report with the Committee. INFORMATION ONLY. III. MISCELLANEOUS Meeting adjourned at 5:37 p.m. Next meeting: Monday, March 28, 2011 5:00 p.m. Conference Room #3 9 Committee Chair Approval Mi tes b KAM. Reviewed by MD. 116