Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFS 2016-02-17 Item 2D - Discussion - Annexation to Kent Regional Fire Authority (RFA)City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor To: Mayor Ekberg Finance and Safety Committee From: Verna Seal, Chair, Finance & Safety Committee Date: February 11, 2016 Subject: Annexation to the Kent Regional Fire Authority ISSUE Should the City of Tukwila move forward with the process to annex into the Kent Regional Fire Authority at this time? BACKGROUND On November 23, 2015, the Regional Fire Authority Annexation Steering Committee presented to the Council its formal recommendation to proceed with annexation into the Kent Regional Fire Authority. At the City Council meeting on December 7, 2015, Council directed staff to prepare a schedule of the proposed annexation including the Kent Regional Fire Authority building three Tukwila fire stations. On December 14, 2015, Council asked the Administration to prepare a second version of the Facilities Plan that included the City rebuilding fire facilities. The January 14, 2016 Memorandum from the Administration to the Finance & Safety Committee presented the Facilities Plan with two options: one with fire and one without. At the February 2, 2016 Finance & Safety Committee meeting, the Committee tabled the discussion to allow the Chair to gather more information and to consider the separation of the two issues. This memo proposes separation of the issues, and asks the Committee to consider a recommendation on the annexation prior to additional work on the Facilities Plan. DISCUSSION The following timeline reflects a proposed Finance & Safety Committee recommendation and Council decision: Date Event Details February 17 Finance and Safety Provide preliminary direction or recommendation regarding whether to move forward with the RFA February 22 Committee of the Whole Review Committee direction or recommendation March 14 Special Meeting to follow Preliminarily approve or reject the Committee of the annexation into Kent RFA at this Whole that same night time If the Council decides to continue to investigate the annexation option, between March and June, the Council needs to proceed with a review of budget impacts of RFA funding and annexation, draft outreach plan, review draft Kent RFA Plan and Interlocal Agreement, review revisions to Draft Kent RFA Plan and Interlocal Agreement, hold outreach and public hearing regarding the proposed annexation to the Kent RFA, and take final action on annexation resolution. 101 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 In June, the Kent RFA will need to take action on Tukwila's resolution requesting annexation. August 1 is the last council meeting to conclude any outstanding items since August 2 is the last day to file a resolution with King County Elections for the November election. The election would be November 8. Should the Council decide not to move forward with the RFA at this time, this option would remain open to the City in the future and may be revisited at another time. RECOMMENDATION Forward the recommendation to the February 22, 2016 Committee of the Whole for discussion and then to the March 14, 2016 Special Meeting (to follow the C.O.W. that same night) for the Council to take a preliminary vote as to whether or not at this time it is feasible for the city to proceed with the annexation process. ATTACHMENTS • Draft Review Schedule • RFA Annexation Steering Committee Recommendation dated November 18, 2015 • Matrix of Council questions dated February 9, 2016 1 DRAFT Review Schedule Facilities with Fire Annexation OR with Facilities with Fire Retention Assumes a November Election Date Event Details . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . January 20 Finance and Safety Review and Choose one of the scenarios ... . ................................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interim Staff work Staff refines Facilities plan, compiles responses to Week of Februar 8 Workshop Review draft Facilities Plan ................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Week of Februar 15 Workshop Review Fire operations and facilities .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interim Staff work Staff refines Facilities plan, compiles response to • Open houses at fire stations, other locations • Meetings with key groups • Media and social media articles • Mailing to residents • Hazelnut article (mailed to every home and business) • TukTV & website August 1 Council meeting August 2 King County Last Council meeting to meet King County Elections' deadline. Resolutions„ could ._be..passed earlier.................. Last day to file a resolution with King County Elections for the November election. Interim Cam ai n Campaign ........................................................................................................................................................................... ............................... p........... 9...................................................................................................... ............................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ............................... November 8 General Election Voters to approve issuance of a fixed amount of bonds and to levy the additional tax to repay the bonds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . November 8 General Election Voters to approve the Kent RFA Plan and annex to the Kent RFA for fire services White + Green Facilities Plan with Fire Retention Green +Yellow Facilities Plan with Fire Annexation 103 104 Regional Fire Authority Annexation Steering Committee Recommendation March 2015 - November 2015 To: Mayor Haggerton & Tukwila City Council From: Regional Fire Authority Annexation Steering Committee Date: November 18, 2015 Subject: Potential annexation to the Kent regional fire authority Recommendation We find that the positives outweigh the negatives and while not a consensus decision, the majority of the Committee members recommend moving forward with annexation to the Kent RFA. Issue We are the advisory committee created by the Tukwila City Council in September 2014, and implemented by the Mayor in February 2015 to further explore the feasibility of annexing to the Kent Regional Fire Authority (RFA). Our committee work is built on the work of at least two previous committee efforts that provided preliminary investigations into the long -term provision of fire - related services in the City of Tukwila. Per the direction from the City Council, the Committee was made up of representatives from the residential, business, and firefighter communities, as well as two Council representatives. Non - voting Kent RFA staff were represented as well as Tukwila staff who provided information and support. The Committee members include: Tukwila City Council Representatives: • Joe Duffie • Verna Seal Resident Representatives: • Jessica Jerwa • Jerry Thornton • Kathleen Wilson Business Representatives: • Genevieve Christensen /Becky Smith, Westfield Southcenter • Roxanne Knowle, CBRE • Mark Segale, Segale Properties Firefighter Representatives: • Merle Brooks • Alan Codenys • Dawn Judkins, Tukwila Fire Department Union President November 19. 2015 Page 1 of S Regional Fire Authority Annexation Steering Committee Recommendation March 2015 - November 2015 Non - Voting Kent RFA Representatives: • Mike Denbo, KCFPD 37 Commissioner and Kent RFA Board member • Jim Schneider, Kent RFA Chief • Ray Shjerven, Kent RFA Union President • Brian Snure, Kent RFA Board attorney Non - Voting City of Tukwila Staff: • Moira Bradshaw, Project Manager • Vicky Carlsen, Deputy Finance Director • David Cline, City Administrator • Chris Flores, Interim Fire Chief Process of Review We met monthly from March 2015 to November 2015 and studied the service levels, programs, operations, facilities, budgets of the Tukwila Fire Department and the Kent RFA. There were two sub - committees - Finance and Governance - that provided the full committee with their work and recommendations. We toured the fire stations and support facilities of both organizations, Deliberation The decision is difficult and the issue is complicated. Findings are listed below that summarize both the positives and negatives that we found when studying the issue. We also reviewd the Draft of the Kent Fire Department Regional Fire Authority Plan - Tukwila Amendment. This document is a "charter" for the RFA and outlines how the organization operates, governs, is funded and the intricacies of the annexation. The Tukwila Amendment contains the substance of and details associated with the potential annexation. November 19. 201%9N,emher 18.. 2015 106 Page 2 of 5 l Regional Fire Authority Annexation Steering Committee Recommendation March 2015 - November 2015 Findings YES Kent RFA as a partner agency We believe that moving Tukwila from a local to a regional provider of fire and emergency medical (EM) services is good for the community. Specifically, we believe that the Kent RFA is an organization that will provide excellent service and management of those services and that moving to this model will provide better services to the Tukwila community. 2. The Kent RFA is a successful, highly competent, nationally accredited regional service provider. 3. A regional model can be more geographically efficient in distributing fire resources, and is more economical because of the dollar savings that come from purchasing in larger quantities and having a smaller overall number of administrators. 4. For decades, the City of Tukwila has been successfully collaborating with the Kent RFA, through such programs as the Zone 3 partnership and mutual aid agreements. Formalizing this relationship through merging into the RFA seems like a natural next step. 5. Since 2012, the City of Tukwila has enjoyed enhanced collaboration with the Kent RFA through the South King County Fire Training Consortium, sharing training personnel, systems and methods. 6. The RFA allows the City to better collaborate with other local communities -Kent, Covington, and unincorporated King County - in providing fire services to our communities and will share governance. 7. The City of Tukwila will have three voting members on the Governing Board and will become an owner partner in the organization similar to other successful partnerships such as the South Correctional Entitey (SCORE) and Valley Communication Center. Regional fire authority funding model B. To ensure that fire and emergency services continue to be delivered to the City of Tukwila community at existing or improved levels, there is a shared belief that proportionally allocating cost is more equitable for the community. To that end, the Kent RFA utilizes a benefit charge funding system that may be used to fund up to 60% of the RFA's operating expenses. November 19. 201 November- 18, 2015 Page 3 of 5 Regional Fire Authority Annexation Steering Committee Recommendation March 2015 — November 2015 The Kent RFA approaches capital funding through an annual dedication of money into a reserve fund to ensure there is a financial plan for the agency's capital needs. The funding package prepared for the potential annexation includes a 20 year capital improvement plan that includes the reconstruction and enlargement of three of the City's fire stations and significant remodel and maintenance of the fourth station as well as equipment and apparatus replacement and additions to meet growth. Given the significant capital needs associated with the provision of fire service in the City of Tukwila, and the fact that the City does not currently have a plan to address them, the annexation to the RFA meets this critical need. 10. Through annexation to the RFA for fire services, the City has greater financial flexibility and resources are available to address its on -going operational and long term financial needs. 11. The need to go out to voters every six years ensures accountability and agreement on fire service levels. 12. The City of Tukwila will not need to ask the community for approval of a Fire Station construction bond. Service levels 13. Consolidation of the City of Tukwila and the Kent RFA provides greater flexibility in designing and opportunity for deploying an effective response force and provides additional services to the Tukwila community, such as non - emergency medical services. 14. The RFA will be able to provide more staff resources to back -up vacation, sick and disability, thereby reducing overtime stress, cost and increasing service in Prevention and EM. 15. The Kent RFA is in the forefront of providing a non- emergency medical program called FD cares that will enhance services within the Tukwila community. Findings NO City fire department vs. regional 1. Tukwila can be better served by continuing to operate as a local provider of fire suppression and emergency management services. Although the Kent RFA is an excellent organization, the higher cost and lack of full community control outweighs the benefits. November 19. 2015�;evecnbef 18, 2015 1: Page 4 of 5 Regional Fire Authority Annexation Steering Committee Recommendation March 2015 - November 2015 2. Having a municipal fire department as one of the many overall functions within the City sets up appropriate checks and balances to costs and allows better coordination of services. 3. Although for the past five years the City and the Tukwila Fire Department have been searching for alternatives to service provision, refocusing and committing to the City as a provider is a viable solution. We think that the City can overcome challenges through adequate funds and direction. 4. The governance of the Kent RFA includes a majority of people from outside the City of Tukwila. The need to involve City Councilmembers in one more function means they have less time and focus for City related issues. Loss of affordability, competitiveness, and control S. The overall cost of the regional provider is more expensive. The fire benefit charge will make Tukwila less competitive and less attractive a business location than other areas outside of the Green River Valley. 6. The need to pay for a ballot measure to renew the fire benefit charge every six years is an additional expense and creates uncertainty for the provision of fire services. 7. The fire benefit charge will make affordable housing less so. 8. The overall cost of the Kent RFA versus Tukwila is five cents per $1,000 assessed value. Some of that community-wide savings could put towards the identified needs of the Department. 9. We believe that Tukwila's identity in the region and within the community will be diminished if the City no longer has its own fire department Service levels 10. The loss of the current routine business inspections, which is not a service of the RFA, will result in a less safe community. November 19. 201 , Page 5 of 5 110 City of Tukwila - City Council — DRAFT - Q &A RFA Annexation Matrix February 9, 2016 1. 10/14/1 5 Quinn; Seal What happens to the City's budget - Attachment A - with and without the Fire Department? We would like to see what happens with the "do nothing option." Attachment A has been updated to show the end -of -the -year (2015) budget amendments and show the "do nothing" option and is attached. An Attachment A — W/O Fire has not been produced and needs direction from the City Council on assumptions; for example on the financing mechanisms to be used for capital facility replacement. 2. 12/7/15 Quinn What is the City's financial situation? As shown in Attachment A, changes have been made to reflect updated costs — both operational and changes to capital for street projects - and revenues as of January 2016. The end result is that there is a reserve fund balance of $1.8 million. This does not adequately address the identified capital needs that must be addressed per recommendations in the Draft Essential Facilities Plan. 3. 12/4/15 email Hougardy Who voted for, and who voted against the RFA? Tukwila City Council Joe Duffie, City Councilmember — No — wanted to get broad public feedback before deciding Verna Seal, City Councilmember - Yes Fire Union Members Dawn Judkins, President Local 2088 - Yes Alan Codenys - Yes Merle Brooks - Yes Residential Community Members Jessica Jerwa - Yes Jerry Thornton - Yes Kathleen Wilson — Yes, but with a limitation on City property taxes Business Community Members Roxanne Knowle, Senior Real Estate Manager, CBRE Yes —but with a limitation on City property taxes Mark Segale, Segale Business Park - No Becky Smith, Westfield - No 4. 12/4/15 email Hougardy What were the RFA Annexation Steering Committee's primary arguments (briefly)? Moving from local fire service to the Kent RFA would be good for the community because they are a national leader and would provide excellent management and service to Tukwila. This recommendation is located in the later part of the Council Updates section of your binder. 5. 12/4/15 email Hougardy What kinds of impacts or changes would there be for current firefighters regarding - Contracts - Salaries - Benefits There are three categories of employees within Fire Department (9/15) — (3) non - represented, (4) Teamsters and (63) IAFF 2088. The Union firefighters will be asked to vote on a contract that is essentially the current Kent RFA contract with amendments yet to be drafted. A salary and benefits comparison table is attached. — Attachment B 6. 12/7/15 Do the Rank and File want to do this? Have they been included? The IAFF 2088 are working with their counterparts at the Kent RFA. They will hold a vote when they have resolved their issues with the Kent RFA. The President of the Local and two members of IAFF 2088 were part of the City's Kent RFA Annexation Steering Committee and voted Yes to support annexation to the RFA. Copies of the Kent firefighter's contract and operating procedures as well as Tukwila's Kent RFA Annexation Steering Committee binders are in each of the fire stations. There have been two series of meetings with all three shifts of the Tukwila Firefighters that included discussions with Chiefs, Union presidents and Deputy Operations Chief 7. 12/4/15 email Hougardy Financial impact to residents: Explain the two parts of the RFA fees (Fire benefit charge, and property taxes) Washington State fire districts and regional fire authorities are authorized to levy up to $1.50 per $1,000 AV. They may choose to levy up to $1.00 per $1,000 AV and a benefit charge (hereinafter referred to as an FBC,) which is not a funding source that is available to cities. (Unless a city were to annex an existing fire district. RCW 35.13.256) N City of February 9, 2016 8. • Do these two Kent RFA revenue sources include bonding for Tukwila's capital project needs? • If a bond is needed, will that increase taxes and fees? Will the public be able to vote to approve the bond? The Kent RFA Governing Board's financial policy is to pay for capital needs with its basic source of revenue, which are property tax plus FBC. They propose to issue a non -voted bond for construction of Tukwila stations but the income from the City property owners, developers and the City itself would be used to finance the bond. The Kent RFA has increased the proposed FBC to include the repayment of the bond principal. All capital costs are incorporated into the estimates that are provided and available. 9. 12/7/15 email Hougardy Briefly explain the FBC formula (I get the gist of it) The square root of structural square footage x 18 x the type of use x fire flow factor x response factor x risk/regional use factor x discount for alarms /sprinklers. 10. 12/7/15 email Hougardy "FBC Formula shall be reasonably proportioned to the measureable benefits to property." Explain this. A benefit charge is authorized by state law and is defined as, the actual benefits resulting from the degree of protection, which may include, but is not limited to, the distance from regularly maintained fire protection equipment, the level of fire prevention services provided to the properties, or the need of the properties for specialized services„" 11. 12/7/15 email Hougardy The FBC takes the place of the third 50 cent property tax levy. Explain this. It's imposed on improvements to real property. What does this mean? Regional fire authorities and fire protection district have the option of levying a $1.50 per $1,000 of AV or levying up to $1.00 of property tax and asking its voters to approve a FBC. The FBC calculation is based upon the type and size of structures on a parcel and not on the size or value of the land upon which the structure sits. The FBC must be renewed by voters every 6 years. If a renewal fails at the polls, the maximum statutory rate would go back up to $1.50 until such time as the FBC would be renewed by 60% of the voters. 12. 12/4/15 email Hougardy How is the fire benefit charge assessed for residential properties? How much will be assessed? The last page of the finance section of the notebooks is the table that shows the formula for the FBC calculation. It includes five different size categories for single family homes. The larger the category the higher the FBC. Homes that have alarms and sprinklers receive a discount and low income seniors and disabled continue to receive the same discount they receive on property taxes. 13. 12/4/15 email Hougardy How is the fire benefit charge assessed for commercial properties? How much will be assessed? The square footage of all structures on a parcel are aggregated and placed into one of 21 different square feet size categories. Each structure is assigned one of five "hazard" categories that address the amount of flammables and gases stored on site. Discounts are also given for automatic and manual alarm and sprinkler systems. See the "Kent Regional Fire Authority — Tukwila Service Area Benefit Charge Formula table on the last page of the finance section of the binder. 14. 12/4/15 email Hougardy • By what amount can the FBC be increased in the future? • Does it require taxpayer approval? • If not, who approves the tax increases? • How often can it be raised? • What is the ceiling on the amount that can be charged? Can that ceiling be raised? How? There is no limit on how much the FBC can increase. However, the control is that the total FBC cannot be more than 60% of the overall operating budget. The taxpayer is given an opportunity every six years to vote on the use of a benefit charge. The Governing Board may change the formula on an annual basis during the budget process provided it does not exceed 60% of the operating budget. The ceiling is 60% of the budget and cannot be raised. 15. 12/4/15 email Hougardy If voters do not approve the FBC during a 6 year renewal, what process would take place to ensure Tukwila had fire services? The Kent RFA would make more than one attempt to renew the benefit charge. It is appeared that the voters were unwilling to approve the benefit charge then the Governing Board could modify the level of service to what can be provide with their current property tax levy rate. In order to levy the full $1.50 they would need voter approval for a levy lid lift. This is because even though their maximum statutory levy rate would increase City of Tukwila - City Council — DRAFT - Q &A RFA Annexation Matrix February 9, 2016 to $41.0, the total increase in revenue is still limited to the 1% increase per "Limitations Upon Regular Property Taxes" RCW 84.55 16. 1/20/16 F &S Kruller Is it true that the RFA can increase costs dramatically within the six year authorization window? The benefit charge may be changed each year by the Governing Board (up to 60% of the operating budget) to balance the budget of the RFA. 17. 11/10/1 5 Work session; 12/4/15 email; 12/7/15 Kruller Hougardy What kinds of financial relief can the city provide for property owners, both business and residential, if the RFA is approved? Is there a way to provide City tax relief in order for there to be a net cost neutral impact on citizens? The City may change any of its revenue raising mechanisms; however, the property tax is the vehicle that is universal to all taxpayers within the City. In the Finances section of your binders, are 13 examples of Initial Cost Analysis for Fire Services. They show the results if the City reduces its property tax levy rate to create an option that is as "cost neutral" as possible. 18. 12/4/15 email Hougardy It has been said that the RFA assessment is a detraction to businesses, because of the increased costs. What is the cost benefit that can be presented to a business locating in a jurisdiction with an RFA? For most companies, locational decisions are complicated and a variety of factors are used in making a decision. The costs and benefits are similar to those for any taxpayer in the City and are reflected in the Pro and Con statement. In looking at the table for the benefit charge, certain types of businesses will have higher costs associated with the RFA. 19. 12/4/15 email Hougardy What services will Tukwila still need to budget for and provide (such as business inspections)? • Administration and enforcement of the International Fire Code; • Investigation of cause and origin of fires and prosecution; and • Emergency management. Annual business inspections are typically conducted by the Operational shifts and in the Kent RFA the operational shifts do not conduct annual inspections. 20. 12/7/15 email Hougardy Explain the Levy limits, how it is calculated, and its parameters. Please refer to your binders. The first presentation in the Finance tab has a section on the basics of property taxes including limits and calculations. The property tax section starts on slide 21 of the presentation. 21. 12/7/15 Hougardy Would a later election be better in order to get a better voter turnout? The general election typically has a higher voter turnout and voters who are less cost sensitive. During the last Presidential election in 2012 there was a minimum of 70% voter turnout whereas in the last November 2016 election voter turnout was 35 %. In addition to voter turnout, the cost of the election varies. An August election will cost from $10,000 to $12.000 whereas a November election will cost from $8,000 to $10,000. 22. 12/7/15 Ekberg Should Tukwila wait on its decision until after the Kent RFA FBC reauthorization vote? There is no deadline for the City of Tukwila decision. The information that is part of the discussion and public outreach are based upon 2016 figures. 23. 12/7/15 Kruller What are the risks if we miss August, November, April All three dates allow the City and Kent to proceed to an operational effective date of January 2018. As time continues the information generated becomes outdated and will need to be revised. 24. 12/7/15 Quinn If we don't go to an April vote — who will be providing ballot information — is for example the Firefighter Union in a position to advocate in an election. Dawn Judkins, President of the Local IAFF 2088 stated at the 12/7/2015 Council meeting that they are a small local and that their campaign would benefit from the April 2016 Renton RFA incorporation vote and the Kent RFA FBC vote because they could combine other resources with other jurisdictions. Staff is unable to speak to if and how the Union could support a non -April 2016 ballot measure. The City has the ability to provide factual information to residents and other stakeholders. 25. 12/7/15 Kruller What is likelihood of getting to a NA City of February 9, 2016 decision by end of February? 26. 12/7/15 Seal If the RFA isn't the solution, what is? Where /how is Tukwila going to provide additional/adequate funding to maintain fire facilities and operations? A voted bond option has been created to show how the three fire stations and upcoming apparatus purchases can be financed by the community if the Kent RFA annexation option is not selected. In general, assessed valuation and sales tax revenue increases in growth years and reserves during non - growth years are able to sustain the current operations of the City; however, the City has not been adequately funding its capital improvement program. The City is now engaged in a process to replace multiple facilities in a fairly compressed time frame. 27. 12/7/15 Quinn What are we going to do with fire service if we don't annex to the RFA? The Kent RFA Annexation Steering Committee agreed that changes should be considered; such as support, improved facilities, and stable leadership. Administration is committed to having a world class fire service and will come back to the City Council with proposed changes. 28. 12/7/15 Duffie Can the Tukwila Fire Department be better and make changes that include some of the advantageous programs of the Kent RFA and how much will it cost? How to change and improve the Fire Department are unknown and would require a different type of study and review. If the Kent RFA is not chosen as an option, then proposals for change will be brought back to the Council for their consideration. 29. 12/7/15 Ekberg What additional information will the Council receive prior to their workshop on this issue? This matrix and its Attachments is the first version of the questions submitted so far. As Council submits additional questions, matrix updates will be provided. 30. 12/7/15 Ekberg Do the Cost Example sheets include all the costs, such as the Fire Marshall's division? How does this impact the financial assessment? The "Initial RFA Cost Analysis for Fire Services" examples do include the costs for the Fire Marshal's services and Emergency Management. Those costs will continue to be paid for by the City and are calculated with an expectation of contracting with the RFA for those services. 31. 12/7/15 Robertson What will the staff cost be in 2016 be to continue this RFA investigation and review? Dedicated staff time for the year would be about $100,000 and includes a project manager and finance department analysis. 32. 1/20/1 6 F &S What is the cost of outreach; hard and soft costs? Most of the hard cost associated with an outreach effort is folded into existing publications and methods; however, we anticipate two specific mailings that would cost up to $8,000 - $10,000. The soft costs are primarily lost opportunity costs of staff time devoted to these issues as opposed to other priorities of the City. 33. 12/7/15 Robertson Would like any fact sheets and mailings to the public to be approved by Council before they are distributed. Comment noted 34. 12/7/15 Duffle How are we going to reach out to residents and get their input? A broad outreach plan that includes, print, open houses, and video would be conducted. See Attachment C for a Draft Outreach Plan. 35. 12/7/15 Kruller What is the return to the average tax payer for the additional cost? A higher response force (15 -17 firefighters versus 14) will be immediately dispatched to a fire. Access to FD Cares a non - emergency medical assistance program will be available for residents. There will be enhanced regional cooperation in the event of a large disaster and for on -going planning and preparation. The three oldest Tukwila fire stations will be replaced and a dedicated reserve of capital will be created for apparatus replacement. 36. 12/7/15 Kruller Hougardy Are the "No RFA" statements and calculations correct? Who is wrong and why? Should Bernard's statements be added to the matrix? With a response yes or no. We are reviewing the video, print media and public comments that Mr. Bernard has made and distilling the opinions from facts. When completed, that summary will be provided to the Council. 37. 1/20/16 F &S Kruller What is real in what Mr. Bernard says and what is not true? Until Tukwila policy decisions are made, it is difficult to address cost assertions directly as there are multiple choices before the City Council. Statements by Mr. Bernard on cost are different from City estimates. At a City of Tukwila - City Council — DRAFT - Q &A RFA Annexation Matrix February 9, 2016 minimum, he makes assumptions about the City property tax rate, which are inaccurate and premature. 38. 12/7/15 Kruller, Quinn What is the actual cost to operate For 2015, operation actual costs were $10,205,000 (which includes indirect costs) Attachment D is a Cost 1/20/16 the Tukwila Fire Department as it Comparison Worksheet that provides the "apples to apples" comparison with the Kent RFA as well as capital F &S exists today (versus the regional model) and how does it affect this discussion costs. 39. 12/7/15 Quinn What is the true cost of providing fire service (including capital) over a projected six year period? Attachment D - A Cost Comparison Worksheet (1/26/2016) - has been updated with City of Tukwila actuals for 2015 and includes the indirect costs and capital needs. The City's multiplier shows that in six years operational costs will increase to $11,886,856. 40. 12/7/15 Quinn When is the drop dead time frame for major capital costs needs? Although there is no deadline for when the facilities must be done, a structural crisis could occur at any time due to an earthquake and impact the ability of the City emergency responders to survive and respond. 41. 12/7/15 Quinn Why is the City still considering the RFA now? The desire to maintain the high level of service in the face of declining revenue and increasing costs. 42. 12/7/15 Kruller What is the important information that we are missing or not asking? The Council are asking the important question: if not the RFA, than what changes and costs will the City incur in order to maintain the current fire services and how will the City pay for the capital needs of fire service? 43. 11/10/1 Quinn What happens to taxes if we don't No tax changes are proposed if the City does not annex to the Kent RFA, unless the City chooses to fund the 5 work annex to RFA? proposed capital facility needs including fire station replacement. session; 44. 1/20/16 Kruller How did public safety end up in The Facilities Steering Committee made public safety the first priority for the facilities plan. However, the F &S front of public works in the Facilities Plan recommendation? public works shops are scheduled as a part of the plan to go forward only one year after the public safety building is initiated. 45. 1/20/16 In the past, haven't we done pay as Yes, we have done `pay as you go' in the past. However, there are significant equipment and apparatus costs F &S you go for equipment as opposed to bonding for it as shown in upcoming and because of opportunity to do a public safety bond, those Fire capital costs could be paid with the bond proceeds. Option B? 46. 1/20/16 What should be the real property Zillow Summary: The median home value in Tukwila is S263,200. F &S assessment on the comparison table for an average Tukwila homeowner? Trulia Summary: The median sales price for homes in Tukwila WA for Oct 15 to Jan 16 was $237,000 based on 41 home sales. Redfin Summary: As of January 25, 2016, the last 90 days of Tukwila real estate trends show the median sale price at S273,000. 47. 1/20/16 How much Tukwila tax revenue Personal property is about 18% of the total taxable assessed value of the City and according to 2015 tax year F &S results from personal property? values, the City received $2.5 million in tax from personal property. 48. 1/20/16 Kruller What would the cost be for The amount is unknown at this time, as well as whether Tukwila's call volume would warrant such a program. F &S Tukwila if we decided to implement FD Cares here? 49. F &S Kruller How many people are in the KRFA Logistics Division? Logistics is located within the Support Services Division of the Kent RFA. The Logistics section is comprised of 5.7 FTE. Support Services also include a 2.0 FTE Planning section, a Communications and Government Relations Manager, and a Grant Coordinator. 50. 1/20/16 If voters say no on bonds to If the voters say no to financing City facilities with a voted bond, the City would need to look at alternate F &S construct public safety building(s,) what's the impact to property owners? revenue options to pay for capital facilities. 12/7/15 Seal A 19% increase in call volume between 2011 and the end of 2015 frequently requires response from units outside of -la) City of February 9, 2016 (-5 their response areas, for example, Station 52 responding to a call in the Southcenter area instead of Station 51. and attempts to manage funding within budget have had the greatest effect on response time and staffing levels. 2/8/16 Hougardy; New Councilmember Briefing Are calls for service going up higher in commercial versus residential areas? 2/8/16 Hougardy; New Councilmember Briefing What would City pay in FBCs for City facilities? Attachments A Financial Planning Model with Fire Department — (Attachment A) B Salary and Benefits Comparison Table C Draft Outreach Plan D Updated Cost Comparison Worksheet (1/26/16) (-5