Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2016-02-22 Item 4C - Discussion - Annexation to Kent Regional Fire Authority (RFA)COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Iniliuls -- Meeting Date Prepared by .11 ar's re Cun4i1 reviela 02/22/16 CO Ci4 C :.vii':G(7RV @ Discussion 03/14/16 CO ❑ Resolution .11tg Date ❑ Ordinance :lltg Date ❑ Bid Award Mfg Date • Public Nearing ❑ Other tlltg Date MIs Dare AN Dare 3/14/16 Altg Date SPONSOR Coll r ii 0 Alluj'or ❑ HR ❑ DCD ❑ Finance ❑ Fir ❑ TS • Peril ❑ Poiwe ❑ PIK' ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. STAFF SPONSOR: MOIRA BRADSHAW ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 02/22/16 _\(;N\ DA ITEM t TITLE Annexation to the Kent Regional Fire Authority C :.vii':G(7RV @ Discussion 2/22/16 nv Motion ❑ Resolution .11tg Date ❑ Ordinance :lltg Date ❑ Bid Award Mfg Date • Public Nearing ❑ Other tlltg Date MIs Dare AN Dare 3/14/16 Altg Date SPONSOR Coll r ii 0 Alluj'or ❑ HR ❑ DCD ❑ Finance ❑ Fir ❑ TS • Peril ❑ Poiwe ❑ PIK' SP()NSOR's Should the City move forward with the process to annex into the Kent Regional Fire Sl'\I1I.1R1 Authority at this time. Ri;1'II':t1'I•:17 14Y ❑ COW Mtg. ❑ CA &P Cmtc E F&S Cmtc ❑ Transportation Cmte Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. CI -IAIR: SEAL ❑ Parks COMMITTEE • Utilities Cmtc • Arts Comm. DATE: 2/22/16 RECOMMENDATIONS: SPt )NS()R Cc) /A17MIIN. N/A A MMrrrI I Majority Approval; Forward to C.O.W. COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE Etil'1:Ni ?ITURl; REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED so so so Fund Source: N/A C'r)t?1117e11ts: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 02/22/16 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 02/22/16 Informational Memorandum dated 2/11/16, with attachments (Changed after FS) Minutes from the Finance and Safety Committee meeting of 2/17/16 3/14/16 183 City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM 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 (Updated following 2/17 F&S) ISSUE Should the City of Tukwila move forward with the process to anncx review and public outreach of annexation 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. At its February 16, 2016 meeting, the Finance and Safety Committee agreed to consider the matter of RFA annexation separately, and to forward the matter for discussion to the Committee of the Whole. 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 GSB:7539677,1 [99991.707461 185 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 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, rev 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. 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 and fire stations will be included in the Facilities Plan. RECOMMENDATION Forward the eeemmenrlation issue 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 dated February 18, 2016 • RFA Annexation Steering Committee Recommendation dated November 18, 2015 • Matrix of Council questions dated February 189, 2016 o A Financial Planning Model with Fire Department — (Attachment A) o B Salary and Benefits Comparison Table o C Draft Outreach Plan o D Updated Cost Comparison Worksheet (1/26/16) 186 the RFA review and public outreach. February 22 Committee of the Whole Discuss whether to proceed with a 2016 RFA annexation review and public outreach. March 14 Special Meeting to follow the Committee of the Whole that same night Preliminarily approve or reject annexation into Kent RFA at this 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, rev 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. 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 and fire stations will be included in the Facilities Plan. RECOMMENDATION Forward the eeemmenrlation issue 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 dated February 18, 2016 • RFA Annexation Steering Committee Recommendation dated November 18, 2015 • Matrix of Council questions dated February 189, 2016 o A Financial Planning Model with Fire Department — (Attachment A) o B Salary and Benefits Comparison Table o C Draft Outreach Plan o D Updated Cost Comparison Worksheet (1/26/16) 186 DRAFT Review Schedule Assumes a November Election No shading Dates same regardless of Council direction on further RFA review Yellow Fire annexation and facilities plan Blue Faciliities plan with fire facilities included Date February 22 March 14 Event COW Council special meeting (due to 5 °h Mon. & NLC) Details Discuss whether to proceed with review of RFA annexation Determine whether to proceed with review of RFA annexation March Workshop 1 March Workshop 2 March Workshop April Workshop 1 A ril Worksho 2 Review facilities plan (with fire included) details, methodology, and policy Review facilities plan (with fire included) financial data Review impacts of RFA annexation Review facilities plan (no fire) details, methodology, and policy p p Review facilities plan i,no fire) financial data Review Draft Kent RFA Plan and Interlocai Agreement _ Review revisions to Draft Kent RFA Plan and Interlocal Review outreach plan and materials for facilities plan (with fire) Review RFA outreach plan and facilities outreach plan (no fire) Includes: • 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 April April April April May COW COW F &S and CAP F &S and CAP Outreach to residents on both RFA and Facilities plan (no fire) May - July Outreach to residents on facilities plan (with fire) Includes: • 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 May 23 June 6 June 15 or July 20 Council Public Hearing Council Meeting Kent RFA Board Proposed annexation to Kent RFA Action on annexation resolution Action on Tukwila resolution and Draft RFA Plan requesting annexation Jui 11 Council Public Hearin On Draft Facilities Plan with fire July 11 Council Public Hearing On Draft Facilities Plan (no fire) July 25 COW Deliberation on Draft Facilities Plan (with lire) July 25 COW Deliberation of Draft Facilities Plan (no fire) August 1 August 2 Council meeting 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 Page 1 of 2 187 Interim Campaign Campaign November 8 General Election Voters to approve issuance of a fixed amount of bonds for public safety to include court, police, and three fire stations and to levy the additional tax to repay the bonds November 8 General Election Voters to approve issuance of a fixed amount of bonds for a criminal justice facility 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 Updated February 18, 2016 Page 2 of 2 189 Regional Fire Authority Annexation Steering Committee Recommendation March 2015 - November 2015 To: Mayor Haggerton & TukwiIa 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 (RFAJ. Our committee work is built on the work of at ]east 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, CBRF • Mark Segale, Segale Properties Firefighter Representatives: • Merle Brooks • Alan Codenys • Dawn judkins, Tukwila Fire Department Union President November 18, 2015 Page 1 of5 191 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 18, 2015 Page 2 of 5 192 Regional Fire Authority Annexation Steering Committee Recommendation March 2015 - November 2015 Findings YES Kent RFA as a partner agency 1. 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 8. 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 18, 2015 Page 3 of 5 193 Regional Fire Authority Annexation Steering Committee Recommendation March 2015 - November 2015 9. 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 18, 2015 Page 4 of 5 194 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. . 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 5. 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 Tess 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 18, 2015 Page 5 of 5 195 February 18, 2016 City of Tukwila - City Council — DRAFT - Q &A RFA Annexation Matrix 197 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. 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 adequatelyaddress the identified capital needs that must be addressed per recommendations in the Draft Essential Facilities Plan. :y property taxes RE Yes —but with a limitation on City property taxes ;iii; 1 IQuing from local fire service to the Kent RFA would be good for the community because they are a national leader and wo Id provide excellent management and service to Tukwila. This recommendation is located in the later part of the ('ouncil Updates section of your binder. There Afe are three categories of employees within Fire Department (2/16) — (3) non - represented, (4) Teamsters and (60)1AFF:2088 and (3) IAFF Represented Pipeline Firefighters. 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 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. 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) 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 o .tion." What is the City's financial situation? b a) 0 0 0 D .4. g What were the RFA Annexation Steering Committee's primary arguments (briefly)? What kinds of impacts or changes would there be for current firefighters regarding - Contracts - Salaries - Benefits Do the Rank and File want to do this? Have they been included? Financial impact to residents: Explain the two parts of the RFA fees (Fire benefit charge, and property taxes) Quinn; Seal 4 a b 0 Hougardy Hougardy Hougardy °tr, N � C8 12/4/15 email in 4. .Fa, N In �� 197 February 18, 2016 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. 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. 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, ," 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. 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. 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. 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. 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 • 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? Briefly explain the FBC formula (I get the gist of it) "FBC Formula shall be reasonably proportioned to the measureable benefits to property." Explain this. 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? How is the fire benefit charge assessed for residential properties? How much will be assessed? How is the fire benefit charge assessed for commercial properties? How much will be assessed? • 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? If voters do not approve the FBC during a 6 year renewal, what process would take place to ensure Tukwila had fire services? Hougardy Hougardy Hougardy Hougardy Hougardy 72 c an 0 Hougardy 12/7/15 email t N 5 N N N N N 5 06 c O -+ N - . February 18, 2016 c O 0 C x 0 w 0 cd0 0 O .3 0 O U 199 to $41.0, the total increase in revenue is still limited to the 1% increase per "Limitations Upon Regular Property Taxes" RCW 84.55 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. 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. plicated and a variety of factors are used in making a ;e for any taxpayer in the City and are reflected in the Pro in types of businesses will have higher costs associated with Is and prosecution; and acted by the Operational shifts and in the Kent RFA the tions. Please refer to your binders. The 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. Is it true that the RFA can increase costs dramatically within the six year authorization window? residential, if the RFA is approved? 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? need to budget for and provide (such as business inspections)? ,. Explain the Levy limits, how it is calculated, and its parameters. Would a later election be better in order to get a better voter turnout? Should Tukwila wait on its decision until after the Kent RFA FBC reauthorization vote? What are the risks if we miss August, November, April 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. a ›, >, b cd 0 Hougardy Hougardy Ekberg a) Quinn VD O- C/; \—I .—. , --, kn O ''' tr) cu tr) , kr) . - kr) .N1 cC 12/7/15 email v-) N In N � N tn N li - - o N N N N Cr; N N 199 February 18, 2016 0 tEi U mt. H 0 200 d`. z 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. 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. How to change and improve the Fire Department ire 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 ; ,;, i I This matrix and its Attachments i5 the first version of the questions submitted so far. As Council submits additional questions, matrix updates will be pt`dvided. Fi for Fire; tSer.,vices" examples do include the costs for the Fire Marshal's ;ment. Those :costs will continue to be paid for by the City and are calculated rg with the RFA .,.for those services. Dedicated staff time for the year would be about $100,000 and includes a project manager and finance department analysis. 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. Comment noted • A broad outreach plan that includes, print, open houses, and video would be conducted. See Attachment C for a Draft Outreach Plan. 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. 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. What is likelihood of getting to a decision by end of February? 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? What are we going to do with fire service if we don't annex to the RFA? 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? What additional information will the Council receive prior to their workshop on this issue? Do the Cost Example sheets include all the costs, such as the Fire Marshall's division? How does this impact the financial assessment? What will the staff cost be in 2016 be to continue this RFA investigation and review? What is the cost of outreach; hard and soft costs? Would like any fact sheets and mailings to the public to be approved by Council before they are distributed. How are we going to reach out to residents and get their input? What is the return to the average tax payer for the additional cost? 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. i.4 0 0. ct c4 Quinn Duffie Ekberg Ekberg Robertson Robertson 1=1 Kruller Hougardy 4 -, N N —, N N 1-1 N N In Il N N N N kn N N N N O �° N ��°Q N N N N N In N N .O N l� N 00 N O■ N O M r + M cV M M M 4 M M Cr) February 18, 2016 201 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 minimum, he makes assumptions about the City property tax rate, which are inaccurate and premature. For 2015, operation actual costs were $10,205,000 (which includes indirect costs) Attachment D is a Cost Comparison Worksheet that provides the "apples to apples" comparison with the Kent RFA as well as capital costs. 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. 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. The desire to maintain the high level of service in' the face of declining revenue and increasing costs. The Council are asking the' iinpbrtant 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? No tax changes are proposed if the City does not annex to the Kent RFA, unless the City chooses to fund the proposed capital facility needs including fire station replacement: . The Facilities Steering Committee made public safety the first priority for the facilities plan. However, the public works shops are sch'edul'ed as a part of they flan to go forward only one year after the public safety building is initiated. Yes, we haye; done `pay as you go' in the past. However, there are significant equipment and apparatus costs upcoming and because of opportunity to do a public safety bond, those Fire capital costs could be paid with the bond proceeds. unary: The median home value in Tukwila is $263,200. Iary: The' mcdta sales price for homes in Tukwila WA for Oct 15 to Jan 16 was $237,000 based sales. umary: As of January 25, 2016, the last 90 days of Tukwila real estate trends show the median sale 3,000. Personal property is about 18% of the total taxable assessed value of the City and according to 2015 tax year values, the City received $2.5 million in tax from personal property. The amount is unknown at this time, as well as whether Tukwila's call volume would warrant such a program. 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. If the voters say no to financing City facilities with a voted bond, the City would need to look at alternate revenue options to pay for capital facilities. What is real in what Mr. Bernard says and what is not true? What is the actual cost to operate the Tukwila Fire Department as it exists today (versus the regional model) and how does it affect this discussion What is the true cost of providing fire service (including capital) over a projected six year period? When is the drop dead time frame for major capital costs needs? Why is the City still considering the RFA now? What is the important information that we are missing or not asking? What happens to taxes if we don't annex to RFA? How did public safety end up in front of public works in the Facilities Plan recommendation? In the past, haven't we done pay as, you go for equipment as opposed to bonding for it as shown in Option B? What should be the real property assessment on the comparison table for an average Tukwila homeowner? How much Tukwila tax revenue results from personal property? What would the cost be for Tukwila if we decided to implement FD Cares here? How many people are in the KRFA Logistics Division? If voters say no on bonds to construct public safety building(s,) what's the impact to property owners? —, Kruller, Quinn .. 0' Quinn z • ,-, = CY ‘•• -, 0 • -I 0' ;•-• 5 ;-, ,—, ;•-• 75 4 1 1 VD „ 0 00 -, r-I 4.1 tc) VD •••, ,, r- c) 00 „ 1-1 1-1 LLI 1,-) ..., r- N 1-1 u") ••,_. r- N 1-1 14-) ..., r- N 1-1 un ....... N „ N 1-1 -, k.„ .6' e., 7: 0 s'-' 0 • r,-,, ,- ,„. r„ —1 - a) 1-1 In CID VD -, -6 v) ---• rr''CI `-', 1-.-1 VD -. 6 cl) ..., 1-1 V■,1 ■C) ,, ?:, vp ,--, 4, ■•0 a3 DO --1 4.4 ■•0 Cf5 GO --I 4.1 uo 4, ■c) a3 00 --I V-1 N cn 00 en a; cn ci m- ,-4 71- c.i 71- cf-; 71- 4 ye; .6 N 00 Cr■ 6 201 February 18, 2016 A 19% increase in call volume between 2011 and the end of 2015 frequently requires response from units outside of their response areas, for example, Station 52 responding to a call in the Southcenter area instead of Station 51. Financial Planning Model with Fire Department - (Attachment A) Salary and Benefits Comparison Table 1:<< Draft Outreach Plan Why are service levels declining and response time increasing? Are calls for service going up higher in commercial areas than in residential areas? What would City pay in FBCs for City facilities? Attachments < PP U 77d (1) 00 Hougardy; New Councilmember Briefing Hougardy; New Councilmember Briefing kr) N--... ---. ,—i 00 (NI --.. 00 C■ls.. CV vl Cr) kr) 71- tr) 2015 -2020 Analysis in 000's Revised for Budget Amendments p is a g,7-N4 ri W Lie h, 1n cn ma • N 3- r, CN a r. r+ en n N yb FR ire PROJECTIONS N ff1 UY CO Ch IN Z KS' r4 51- Cd rT S'^T r. N C M D N ^r a rr $ rT Ch a Em r7 N r4 tri ri c'l 1n w rn `0":: .`4o E fr, c n rn c, O p h.; 3 Ln • OaL' n t• ill +6 N in a M IA • Cam. aG .c ea rn ea a N In a, r'1 'J en N N N N N ri t, M WI 4 n `n rl an M r+ N t'fi t-4 ri r7 ri rT G3 ch Ca ec In 0 n 1r 1n 1 6ti t^. T � C m In Lle LC- ct N. ' 0 Ch el r' Tr Hi H 0 c try 0 1M11 0 w in a 4 13 fi 1n In N M — r N a a hl — to O d V' O Ln 0 rr SV tti rG 7 t!1 H1 srl $ 13,626 $ 10,788 in {!1 iJ1 in 49 In -r c 11} PR PR h b Ln Irf 6- S 16,491 S 13,087 Ler -r LC cn ul 5 . t± vl z ers P]5 § s' inn �'�r;� �C�rr97l drryy. Ln �N�++ 1{i lU) O CO N E' O N§ I^ 7 r ri 1 rT r4 rT ri rT r7 N g 2 en 0�6 E4 LA N 1n u7°5� tti I rn tf1 rT N n ea ,°,3P„ Lr rri I- N •7 REVENUES re re J 1 TOTAL REVENUES a. w 11 Sub-Total Capital Lrl 11 3 thl 0 1n In' n Irn Change in Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance Reserve Fund Balance ry TOTAL. FUND BALANCE 203 204 Attachment 13 City of Tukwila 2615 Fire Department Salary and Benefits d I Asa E 2 R E c "u 2 d q® a E e A e G a m 1 E. e 1 d N r & 4 G M W w ,p� 4 C C Ti � C J O [i 4 c V q� O N 1 t. ' O n ro G 4 t y nq & 1 v o X87. Q - 2 x° ��A N f r. Z L= A C deoJr -4 C d a a a w ai VIN iii g 1.. 6 W in . g v c 47 4 c c W d b 6 E d r , N .v ,' .�. .w N F.. ,9 a rr S 2- y O g, P r M u, h b = O c i x Rt e 4. FY r m S M O 3 2 N O A N N p 8 8 u e g R 3 bs 1Z �N = umffe71 u Si 68 v b v u r tiL5, d o 205 a 9 g a V C T y a Ma Mae Team 5t TM a 0 5 Tit O' 2J CI U C -J . to m c t d !ill ? n c ro E y g = G . ry rigZ a ry v w 7a 9 G g 206 1,1 Sr •n v, can srtn YI 4 w3 ti gggg g _ O t3 a U w z - (1 4: 557,729. 571,269. 549,5131- 555.091 574,2x9- $91,627 E m ry .8 5t• ° d o e % iP7 'u ri r + g 4E :i l B ° ¢ N z ▪ a �, s % w _ r 559,s7eS - 571319 Iffne-#446 rc. DRAFT OUTREACH PLAN Assumes a November Election December 24, 2015 This is a generalized draft outreach plan that would be used for either or the Facilities Plan or the proposed annexation of fire services to the Kent Regional Fire Authority. Background The City of Tukwila wishes to ensure a robust and transparent outreach process as it deliberates on its potential facilities plan and fire services question. Should the City choose to place a measure on the August ballot, the Council would need to pass a resolution prior to May 13, 2016 in order to meet King County Elections' timeline. In order to ensure proper Council and public review of the potential ballot measure, the attached timeline was developed. Objectives Ensure Tukwila residents and other stakeholders have the opportunity to review and provide feedback on the potential ballot measure. Provide the City Council with a comprehensive report on community feedback. Tactics January 20 Finance and Safety 1 Review draft plan February wfo 8 or 15 Council workshop Review draft plan March 1 Finance and Safety Review outreach plan and provide comment 7 COW Review outreach plan and provide comment 15 Hazelnut Article included in the publication that is mailed to every resident and business in Tukwila 28 Website Website continually, includes outreach plan and key dates 28 E- Hazelnut Publicize outreach plan 28 Utility bill insert Highlights of issue, announcements of open houses 28 Social media Posts on Facebook and Twitter regarding upcoming open houses, pointing people to website materials April 4 Presentations Begin scheduling presentations to specific groups 4 TukTV Narrated presentation used for the groups rotating every other day on Channel 21 at various hours to maximize viewership 4 Fliers Fliers developed and available at TCC, City Hall, Foster Library 13 Tukwila Reporter Work with the Tukwila Reporter to include an article about the plan, open houses, etc. 13 Tukwila Reporter City Pages Include article in the City Pages on the proposal 15 Mailing _ Mailing to every resident announcing open houses 15 Kid mail Flyer sent home with all elementary school kids in the Tukwila School District hi•hli•htin• the •Ian, announcin• o +en houses Page 1 of 3 207 Page 2 of 3 208 ?? TSD E- ktewsletter Work with Tukwila School District to have article included in their e- newsletter 26, 7pm 1 -30 Open House #1 Meetings /Presentations Station 51 Give presentations as schedules allow to the following groups: • Tukwila School District • Sustain Tukwila Pool • Southwest King County Chamber • Southcenter Rotary • Parks Commission • Planning Commission • Library Advisory Board • TIBAC • Arts Commission • Equity & Diversity Committee • Tukwila Historical Society • COPCAB • Other groups as requested 1 -30 Social media As needed to promote activities, plan, etc. May 2 Online survey _ Online survey to request feedback on potential Faciliites plan 2 TukTV /Channel 21 New episode of Tukwila: Your Community focused on the plan; interviews with Mayor, facilities steering committee members and RFA committee members 7, f Oam Open House #2 Station 53 11, 7pm Open House #3 Station 52 22, 2pm Open House #4 Station 54 1 -31 Meetings /Presentations Give presentations as schedules allow to the following groups: • Tukwila School District • Sustain Tukwila Pool • Southwest King County Chamber • Southcenter Rotary • Parks Commission • Planning Commission • Library Advisory Board • TIBAC • Arts Commission • Equity & Diversity Committee • Tukwila Historical Society • COPCAB • Other groups as requested 1 -30 Social media As needed to promote activities, plan, etc. June 15, 7pm Open House #5 Church by the Side of the Road /Riverton Park Methodist Church 25, 10am Open House #6 TCC ? Utility bill inserts Reminder about upcoming public meeting 27 E- Hazelnut Reminder about upcoming public meeting 1 -30 Meetings /Presentations Give presentations as schedules allow to the following groups: _ Page 2 of 3 208 Page 3 of 3 209 • Tukwila School District • Sustain Tukwila Poo! • Southwest King County Chamber • Southcenter Rotary • Parks Commission • Planning Commission • Library Advisory Board • TIBAC • Arts Commission • Equity & Diversity Committee • Tukwila Historical Society • COPCAB • Other •rouss as re•uested 1 -30 Social media As needed topromote activities, plan, etc. July 5 Social media Reminder about upcoming public meeting 11 COW Public Hearing 25 COW Deliberations 25 E- Hazelnut Article about upcoming Council meeting, review COW deliberations August 1 Council meeting Last council meeting to meet King County Election's deadline. Resolution could be passed earlier. 2 King County Last day to file a resolution with King County Elections for the November election. Page 3 of 3 209 210 Cost Comparison Worksheet Rounded to thousands City RFA 1 * Operational Costs 2 Equivalent Levy Rate for Operational Costs 2015 Projected Proposed Actuals Budget Difference 10,205 10,538 333 2.03 2.10 0.07 Capital 3 Equipment 150 133 -17 4 Apparatus 900 405 -495 5 Facilities 1,300 1,642 342 2,350 2,180 -170 6 Equivalent Levy Rate for Capital 0.47 0.43 (0.03) 7 Total Operational & Capital Costs 12,555 1 2,718 163 8 Equivalent Levy Rate for Operational & Capital Interlocal Agreement 9 Prevention & Investigation 10 ** Emergency Management 2.50 2.53 0.03 11 Equivalent Levy Rate for Prev, investigation, EM 12 13 836 902 66 338 339 1 1,174 1,242 68 0.23 0.25 0.01 Total Operational & Capital, Prev, Investigation, EM Costs 13,729 13,959 230 Equivalent Levy Rate for Operational, Capital, Prev, Investigation, EM 2.74 2.78 0.05 * Operational costs for the City include $797K in indirect (soft) costs, does not include LEOFF 1 or firemen's pension costs City: Assumes 10 year replacement admin -type vehicles, 15 years replacement for heavy -duty apparatus RFA: Assumes 7 -10 year replacement for admin -type vehicles, 20 years for heavy -duty apparatus Users\Vicky\Fire\Fire Budget Only LR Revisions 1- 26- 16.xlsx Exp 10 -15 -15 1/26/2016 2;06 PM 211 212 Finance and Safety Committee Minutes February 17, 2016 C. Financial Reports Pursuant to requests previously made by the full Council, staff presented preliminary 2015 General Fund financial results and January 2016 expenditure reports for the Police and Fire Departments. Before factoring in the 2015 mid - biennium amendments, ongoing revenues came in at 103% of budget and total revenue came in at 100% of budget. Total departmental expenditures were under budget by $238,692. With the mid - biennium amendments, ongoing revenues were at 99% and total departmental expenditures were under budget by $453,692. For January 2016, the Police Department is over budget by $17,619, as two revenue backed positions added last summer were not factored in and will be added as an amendment later this year. By the end of January, the Fire Department is under the allocated budget by $17,370. Committee members asked clarifying questions and reasserted the need to discuss financial policies. The Committee expressed approval of the level of detail provided and requested that the presentation and packet material be distributed to the entire Council. INFORMATION ONLY. D. Annexation to the Kent Regional Fire Authority (RFA1 On November 23, 2015, the Regional Fire Authority Annexation Steering Committee presented its formal recommendation to proceed with annexation. Since then, the Council has had additional opportunities to review and discuss the issue, including a presentation in committee of the proposed Facilities Plan including and excluding the fire stations. Chair Seal asked the Committee for concurrence to move forward with a discussion and potential decision on the annexation prior to any further review of facilities. The Committee agreed to take on the issue of annexation separately, and to forward the discussion to the Committee of the Whole on February 22, 2016. If the Council chooses to move forward, they will need to spend time this spring reviewing budget impacts, an outreach plan, a draft Kent RFA Plan and ILA, and then conduct extensive public outreach including a public hearing. This would be a preliminary decision to move forward, as final action to place the annexation on the November ballot would not occur until this summer after robust public outreach and information gathering was complete. Chair Seal stated that the February 22 Committee of the Whole meeting will be an opportunity for Councilmembers to express if they have received enough information or need anything further. FORWARD TO FEBRUARY 22, 2016 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE III. MISCELLANEOUS The Finance and Safety Committee Meeting adjourned at 7:57 p.m. Next meeting: Tuesday, March 8, 2016 _Committee Chair Approval Minutes by LH 213