HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2003-01-13 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETJanuary 13, 2003; 7 p.m. Tukwila City Hall; Council Chambers
1. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. SPECIAL
PRESENTATIONS
3. CITIZEN COMMENTS/
CORRESPONDENCE
4. SPECIAL ISSUES
5. REPORTS
6. MISCELLANEOUS
7. EXECUTIVE SESSION
8. ADJOURNMENT
Tukwila City Council Agenda
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
John McFarland, City Administrator
Pam Carter, Council President
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Introduction of New Employees
Parks Recreation Department:
Malcolm Neely; Aquatic Coordinator
April Heikkila, Aquatic Specialist
Robert Eaton, Facilities Maintenance Operation Tech.
At this time, you are invited to comment on items that are not
included on this agenda. If you wish to comment on an item
listed on this agenda, please save your comments until the
issue is presented for discussion.
a. Tri- Association Joint Legislative Proposal
b. Animal Control Ordinance
a. Mayor
b. City Council
c. Staff
Councilmembers: Joe Duffle Dave Fenton
Jim Haggerton Joan Hernandez
Pamela Linder Richard Simpson
d. City Attorney
e. Intergovernmental
This notice is available in alternate formats for individuals with disabilities upon advance request.
Reasonable accommodations at public hearings are available with advance notice. Tukwila City Hall is wheelchair accessible.
Please call the City Clerk's office 433 1800/TDD 248 2933 if you require assistance.
Agenda is also available at City of Tukwila's website: http: /www.ci.tukwila.wa.us
Please be advised that all Tukwila Council Meetings are audio taped.
Original Sponsor:
Timeline:
Sponsor's Summary:
ITEM INFORMATION
CAS Number: 03-001
I Original Agenda Date: 12/9/02
Agenda Item Title: Tri- Association Legislative Package
Recommendations:
Sponsor: Reach consensus on approving proposal
Committee: N/A
Administration: Same as sponsor
Cost Impact (if
known'
Fund Source (if known)
1 Meeting Date
1 12/9/02 COW
1/6/03 Regular Meeting
1/13/03
Meeting Date
12/9/02
1/13/03
COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS
Meeting Date
1/13/03
Council Admin. x
Initials
Prepared by 1 Mayor's eview 1 Cour ril review 1
LL 1
The city and county associations have together written a legislative priorities package
to use this legislative session. More information has been provided here.The Council
can again discuss the proposal, and either support it, or choose not to support it.
RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION
Action
APPENDICES
Attachments
Memo from J. McFarland dated 12/5/02
AWC, WACO and WSAC Joint Legislative Proposal
Memo from L. Lauterbach dated 1/9/03
Tri- Association proposal with staff comments included
Attachment A from Jim Morrow on Design Build Contracts
ITEM No.
4/ 7/
a
To: City Council
From: Lucy Lauterbach
Date: January 9, 2003
Subject: Tri- Association Joint Legislative Proposal
I have copied the Proposal and inserted comments on specific proposals you expressed concern
about.
!My comments are included in boxes such as this within the document.'
Jim Morrow has included detailed information about design/build in a separate Attachment A
following the document.
In speaking with AWC staff, they asked that cities recognize that this is a very general outline of
a legislative package, and that what will be taken to the Legislature are the general issues raised
here, and not each specific proposal. For example, they wouldn't ask the Public Works Trust
Fund to add in fire trucks if that fund was being completely used for public works projects. It is
only because in past years much of the fund was not being used that the fire truck proposal was
added.
If you can live with the proposals as they are now stated, a consensus approval would be
adequate. All cities and counties in the state are considering these policies now, and it's not
likely every proposal will please every reviewer. The fact that the entire package was agreed
upon not only by the county and city associations, but also on a statewide east and west basis, in
an accomplishment in itself. It's a good start in lifting that Cascade curtain.
Environmental:
Flexibility in Meeting Unfunded Regulatory Mandates: Suspend mandates for environmental
or land use planning updates if state funding is not provided (e.g. Shorelines, GMA). Local
governments need flexibility in meeting unfunded regulatory mandates, such as the stormwater
management requirements, which mandate practices with significant costs to local government.
Local Government Operations:
Efficient Purchasing: Eliminate red tape generated by outmoded purchasing and bid
requirements. Increase competition and cut costs by publishing bid requirements on a central
website.
Market Interest Rates: Reduce interest rates paid by governments (and therefore taxpayers) for
court awards. Currently, awards are set at 12 even when ordinary bank accounts are earning
about 1%.
Updating Building Codes: Adopt building codes used by other states to reduce costs for
training, documentation and building.
Because the Uniform Building Code (UBC) is no longer being updated, the Legislature will need
to adopt a new family of building, mechanical, and plumbing codes. The choice is between the
International Building Code (IBC) and the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) code.
The IBC is very similar to the UBC version; the NFPA is a different format and quite different.
Independent Audits: Reduce the cost of audits by allowing jurisdictions the flexibility to have
audits competitively bid by private firms.
Binding Interest Arbitration: Mandate that arbitrators use the implicit price deflator for cost of
living adjustments. Amend the binding interest arbitration statutes to require arbitrators to
consider a jurisdiction's ability to pay. Eliminate comparables outside the state for all interest
arbitration.
Capital Projects
Inter -local Cooperation on Construction and Maintenance: Allow local jurisdictions to bid on
each other's projects in order to increase competition and make better use of specialized
equipment and staff.
Public Works Projects: Speed up public works projects by eliminating months of delay caused
by the redundant approval process for Public Works Trust Fund projects.
Alternative Construction Bid Methods: Authorize or expand alternative construction bid
methods, such as design/build or general contractor construction management (GCCM).
ISee Attachment A from Jim Morrow following this Tri Association proposal.'
Cut the Cost of Jail Construction: Allow jail projects to qualify for low interest financing
through the Public Works Trust Fund.
Law and Justice
Local Courts: Reduce court costs by allowing jurisdictions to downsize and/or consolidate
courts to recognize changes in local government boundaries, caseload reductions, and/or to permit
economies of scale.
This proposal probably would not affect Tukwila. It would benefit some smaller, more rural
courts, especially in Eastern Washington, but also possibly in East King County.
Publicly Funded Criminal Defense: Improve standards and process for determining when
criminal defendants are entitled to free legal defense.
The process now is for people to fill out a confidential form that includes their income. The
income levels for free legal defense are the same federal guidelines we use for low income.
There is no way to determine if people are telling the truth on the form. As Darlene Heskett said,
there's no way to tell how much a prostitute or drug dealer makes, as they don't leave a paper
trail.
Tort Costs Limitation: Set reasonable limits on tort liability related to the criminal justice
system.
Government is often seen as having "deep pockets" that make them an attractive target for tort
cases with large settlements. A move to set reasonable levels for liability seems a common sense
reform.
Downsizing and Multi jurisdictional Consolidation: Permit local governments to offer early
retirement incentives for LEOFF personnel for downsizing or multi jurisdictional consolidation.
Third Degree Driving While License Suspended: Decriminalize Third Degree DWLS to
unclog criminal courts, warrant systems and jails of thousands of cases for this offense.
Darlene Heskett gave a rough estimate of Tukwila court seeing 30 cases a week of Driving
While License is Suspended (DWLS). She would be happy if it were decriminalized if the
financial penalty for the crime were kept the same or raised.
ELIMINATE STATE COST SHIFTS WITHOUT REVENUE
Election Costs: Require the state to pay its share of even -year election costs.
In 2002, Tukwila spent $6,000 on election costs and $12,000 on voter registration.)
· Jail Medical Costs: The state's failure to fund this expense has cost local taxpayers millions.
Require the state to fund the medical costs in jails.
· Tax Exemption Review: Require a periodic review of current tax exemptions to determine if
they are still in the public interest.
Equalize Impacts of Sentence Reductions: If the state reduces sentences for crimes, reduce the
corresponding sentences that impact jails operated by local governments. Share the cost savings
between state and local govermnents by adjusting the one year cutoff for felony prisoners sent to
state prisons versus county jails, potentially reducing the cost' of incarceration for both state and
local governments.
This affects County jails. The first sentence addresses reviewing penalties for crimes, and wants
the State to look not only at sentences for felons in State prisons, but also crimes that affect those
in County or City jails. The second sentence applies to felons, wl~o often spend their first year in
a County jail before going to a State prison to spend the next three or five years. When the
penalty for a crime is reduced, the County wants part of their year o f housing the felon to be cut,
and not only the State prison time.
i Attachment A!
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Mullet and City Council
FROM: Public Works Directort[~
DATE: January 7, 2003
RE: Design Build Contracts
I wanted to follow up the discussion last night with some further information on
design build contracts. I have attached a couple of information papers that defines a
design build contract and goes on to outline the advantages and disadvantages.
There are definite advantages to the concept:
· City would only work with a single point of contact;
· Hopefully the project would be completed in less time;
· Reduction in claims;
· Warranty of performance improves.
Them can be some very distinct disadvantages or difficulties:
· Defining project scope and cost can be' very difficult;
· Relationship and loyalties among the parties - the designer usually
represents the owner during construction, not any more;
· Designer's standard of care - ordinarily a designer is held
responsible for exercising the degree of skill or care that the
average engineer would employ and does not guarantee a
successful outcome for his services; However a contractor does
warrant that the result of their services will be a succeSsful project,
provided that the design was appropriate.
· No clear methodology for handling change orders - are they
allowed or not?
· Insurance/Bonding Problems
One difficulty that we face is trying to do something new. We are trying to use a
"competitively bid, firm-fixed priced" contract mechanism for some of our transportation
projects, but WSDOT is wedded to using "unit-priced" contracts. There is a big inertia
associated with innovation - See second attachment.
Hope this helps.
Design Build Construction: Advantages and Drawbacks Page 1 of 4
Design Build Construction: Advantages and Drawbacks
Mark C. Friedlander and Kenneth M. Roberts
An important part of the decision to construct a new facility is determining how to have it designed and
built. Traditionally in the United States, an owner would hire an engineer to design the facility and then
circulate the completed plans to several contractors for competitive bidding. Although there are many
variations on this theme, there is a different and better method which is rapidly growing in popularity:
design build construction, in which the same entity both designs and constructs the facility.
The design build team may be structured in many different ways. The design builder may be a single
firm with both design and construction capacity in-house, or it may be a combination of two or more
firms with complementary abilities. If there are multiple firms, they rn. ay be structured as a joint venture
or with one of the firms prime and the other(s) as subcontractor. The critical aspect is that the owner
contracts with one. entity which has the responsibility for both designing and constructing the facility.
Design build is the fastest growing method of project delivery in the United States and is even more
popular abroad. According to statistics compiled by the Design-Build Institute of America and F.W.
Dodge DATALINE2, from April 1995 to April 1996 the number of design build contracts increased
103% over the previous year. Of a total $212 billion construction market, approximately $37.2 billion
(roughly 18%) was design build. The strongest growth was in the category defined as "Industrial: plants,
refineries, factories and warehouses," in which design build was up more than 300% from the previous
year.
The growth of design build has been fueled by owners who perceive significant advantages resulting
from design build compared to more traditional project delivery methods. These advantages include:
Shortened project delivery, time, Owners perceive the shorter duration of design build projects as
being the most important advantage design build has to offer. When the same entity is both designing
and constructing the facility, procurement and initial construction can commence long prior to
completion of the design. The last months of the design phase overlap the first months of the
procurement/construction phase, resulting in time savings compared to the traditional end-to-end
sequence. This both reduces construction cost and hastens the flow of revenue.
In a traditional project structure, in which the designer and contractor are different entities, it is also
possible to begin procurement and construction prior to completion of the design. This is called fast
tracking. However, fast tracking has largely fallen into disrepute because of the potential for claims and
change order abuses. Contractors often claimed that aspects of the design were completed in an
unanticipated manner, resulting in sizeable extras.
Single t~oint responsibility.. Nearly as important to owners is the broad scope of the design builder's
resp~on~ibility for the project. In traditional construction, problems with the project often result in finger-
pointing, with the designer blaming the contractor and vice versa for problems in the plant's operation.
Often warranties would not be honored and protracted litigation was necessary to obtain remedies
because the designer and the contractor blamed each other for the problems.
In design build projects, the design builder has full responsibility for the outcome of the project, except
for matters for which the owner is responsible. If a plant fails to develop the guaranteed number of
Design Build Construction: Advantages and Drawbacks Page 2 of 4
kilowatt hours, the design builder is generally responsible, even if the parties do not know the reason for
the failure. The designer and constructor are the same entity, so blaming each other does not excuse the
design builder. Whereas in a traditional prOject, an engineer ordinarily does not guarantee the outcome
of his work, in a design build project the engineer's work is subject to and subsumed within the design
builder's warranty.
Minimized claims and changes. One of the laudable consequences of single point responsibility is the
minimization of claims for extras in design build projects. In traditional construction projects, a
contractor is ordinarily entitled to additional compensation arising out of errors, omissions or
ambiguities in the plans and specifications. However, in design build projects, the designer and
contractor are the same entity, and the design builder cannot request extra compensation on account of
its own design mistakes or assumptions.
There may still be change orders on a design build project. If the owner changes its scope or program
requirements or if the deSign builder encounters unanticipated concealed conditions, a change order is
ordinarily appropriate. However, the single largest source of claims and change orders, problems with
the design, is not available in design build projects.
Performance warranties. Another consequence of single point responsibility is that it is possible to
construct detailed overall performance warranties and to render them meaningful with coordinated
liquidated damages clauses. For example, it is common to require the design builder to warrant that the
facility will yield an output of a certain number of kilowatt hours and to link that requirement with a
liquidated damages clause in the event that the output falls short of the warranty. The liquidated
damages could be quantified as the market value, of each lost kilowatt hour, enabling the owner
essentially to guarantee a minimum revenue stream. The ability to structure the design build contract
with such meaningful remedies may be critical t6 project financing.
Overall performance warranties are generally not available in traditional construction projects because
the constructor may blame the designer and vice versa for the failure. Only with design build is a single
entity sufficiently responsible for the project to give such a warranty. However, even in design build
projects, the performance warranty will generally have exclusions for defective feedstock or other issues
for which the owner is contractually responsible.
Packaging other services. Some design builders have taken the concept of single point responsibility a
step further, assuming additional duties in their contracts. It is common for design builders to provide
turnkey services, which often include performance testing and personnel training, so that the facility is
ready to operate when the owner "tums the key." Other design builders offer financing for their projects,
either from a lending source or via ownership and leaseback agreements. In some industries, design
builders establish operating divisions, offering to design, build and operate the facility.
Continuity between designer and constructor, For some facilities, particularly those involving new
technologies, it is critical ~or both the designer and constructor to understand the technology and related
processes. Plans and specifications can communicate the design concepts, but they do not transfer
expertise from the designer to the contractor. In design build projects, the same entity that had the
expertise to design the project also constructs it.
Even for facilities that do not rely on new technology, there are often communication problems between
the designer and the contractor. Communication difficulties may result in an overly formal or adversarial
approach to the project, usually to the owner's expense and detriment. In a design build project, the
designer and contractor are the same entity, working toward the same goals, unlikely to suffer the same
Design Build Construction: Advantages and Drawbacks Page 3 of 4
kinds of communication problems.
Drawbacks and Obstacles
Experience with design build construction has shown that it suffers from some drawbacks compared to
traditional projects. Also, in some places, there are some obstacles to the use of design build project
delivery methods. These drawbacks and obstacles include:
Loss of checks and balances. In traditional construction, the owner retains the designer during the
construction phase to act as a watchdog to help ensure that the facility is built as designed. The designer
contracts directly with and owes his loyalties to the owner. In design build projects, the designer and
contractor are on the same team and are often, at least technically, adverse to the owner. The degree of
adversarialism may vary with the nature of the contract (lump sum contracts are more adversarial than
reimbursed cost contracts) and may be reduced if the design builder is hoping to do other projects for the
owner.
Nevertheless, the changed incentives may pose problems for an unsophisticated owner. Owners in
design build projects would be well advised either to have experienced engineers in-house or else to
retain an outside consultant for this purpose.
Less owner control. Because the designer is on the contractor's team in a design build project, the
owner may find itself without access to the kind of information that it would have on a traditional
project. Although the design builder may issue regular status reports, the information in them is usually
less useful to an owner than what would ordinarily be provided by an engineer loyal to the owner.
Similarly, the relationship between the designer and contractor may cause plans to be prepared with less
than the traditional degree of detail, which may adversely affect the owner's ability to understand and
control design intent.
This drawback can be overcome by advance planning. The design build contract should specify the
kinds of information and detail that the design builder must supply to the owner. The owner must have
available sufficiently knowledgeable and experienced personnel or consultants to understand and
analyze the information provided by the design builder.
Difficulty obtaining competitive bidding~ Design build projects do not lend themselves easily to
competitive bidding. The design builder is chosen at the commencement of the'Project, and there is
ordinarily little competitive pressure on the contractor. However, to some extent, competitive pressures
can be generated by requiring that each trade contract be competitively bid. And the compensating
advantage to the inability to competitively bid the project as a whole is that a fn'm price and schedule
can be guaranteed far earlier than in traditional construction.
Institutional obstacles. Particularly in some areas in the United States, state and municipal laws and
regulations severely limit or restrict the use of design build. Many states have competitive bidding
requirements for public projects or projects funded with public money. Licensing restrictions for design
professionals and contractors may restrict the types of design build business structures. Insurance and
bonding may be more complicated to arrange in a design build project. However, public laws and
regulations have been changing as the popularity of design build continues to grow, and the insurance
and bonding industries are in the process of developing new products tailored to design build.
The Design Build Contract
Design Build Construction: Advantages and Drawbacks Page 4 of 4
In design build projects, the owner's most important protection is the terms of the design build contract.
This is particularly true in light of the loss of checks and balances. It is beyond the scope of this article
to provide a list of important contract provisions, but owners should carefully consider the following
observations and advice.
Each design builder's standard proposal or contract form always favors the de~lgn builder. The very-
structure of the interactions between the parties is typically designed to favor the design builder. For
example, even seemingly innocuous provisions pertaining to owner approval of the design at various
stages can be used to transfer liability from the design builder to the owner when construction in
accordance with the plans fails to achieve the desired results.
The standard form contract documents prepared by trade organizations (such as the AIA, AGC or
EJCDC) rarely serve owners' purposes without substantial modifications. By their nature, they must be
uniformly applicable and are therefore too generic for many types of projects. Furthermore, they are
usually drafted to favor the trade organization that publishes them.
An owner embarking on a design build project would be well advised to work closely with a lawyer
experienced in projects of that type to prepare a customized design build contract. The contract should
be based in part on information and provisions in the design builder's proposal. However, it should avoid
incorporating the proposal in its entirety and should carefully craft the parties' rights and remedies so
that it reflects their actual assumptions and understandings about the project. Contrary to the practice of
many members of the construction industry, the contract should be treated as the essence and
embodiment of the parties' agreement, not as a collection of boilerplate provisions to be negotiated after
the deal has been made.
This memorandum has been prepared for the general information of clients and friends of the firm. It is
not meant to provide legal advice with respect to any specific matter. Under the Illinois Rules of
Professional Conduct, it may be considered advertising material.
~l Return to the Design Build Articles page
WSDOT Design Build
Innovative Contracting
What is Design Build?
Design-build means contracting with a single entity for performing both design and
construction on an entire project.
In a traditional WSDOT contract, the design process is completed independent of the
construction contract (Design-bid-build). This separation allows WSDOT to minimize
potential impacts to third parties by removing time as a critical component of the
design. Right-of-way environmental permits local agency agreements and utility
agreements are all either very well defined or in place prior to awarding a construction
contract. This process minimizes potential risks but requires a very linear approach
toward completing the project. Possible design improvements during construction can
become costly and time consuming since they are made after the design is 100%
complete and frequently under a very tight contractual timeline.
The attractiveness of design-build lies mainly in the promise of innovation stemming
from the designer/builder collaboration. If the process is applied to the right project
with the right controls in place the public gets a quality product in a shorter time.
Timelines
Traditional
Designers design the project
Builders build according to the design
Design improvements during construction can become costly and time consuming
Design-Build
Initial design takes place with feedback from builder partner
Design proceeds and construction begins
Feedback continues as design and then construction are completed
Design-Builder for Transportation Projects
As a result of recent pressures both public and private public agencies have
begun
experimenting with contracting methods that reduce the total project completion
timeline. Design-build is being used by state transportation agencies around the
country and has been successful for many years in Europe on some types of
transportation projects. It is widely used int his country and in Europe on plant and
facility construction projects.
The 1998 Washington State Legislature authorized a test of design-build for
transportation facilities. WSDOT is testing the design-build process on the SR 500.
Thurston Way Interchange project.
Design-build is one delivery method in WSDOT's toolbox and is not intended to replace
the standard design-bid-build method. On projects where completion time is extremely
important, design-build may be a viable alternative.
WSDOT Design-Build Program
Enabling Legislation
WSDOT's current design-build legislation is contained in the following RCW's:
RCW 47.20.780
RCW 47.20.785
The 2001 Washington State Legislature passed legislation that expanded WSDOT's
design-build authority. The minimum project size for design-build is set at $10 million.
The process will be revisited by April 2008.
The following RCW specifies how certain aspects of the design-build pilot projects must
be conducted:
RCW 39.10.051
WSDOT Design -Build
Back to the top
Design-Build Prolect Criteria
Prolect Criteria
Funding
Risk Analvsis
Environmental.
Right_ of Way
Utilities
Geotechnica lnte reements
r�ency� greem t
Public Endorsement
WorlCf orce
Opportunities
Funding must be Funding
bi ear y for the entire p ro j ect from the outset. The Project becomes a
I on and cannot be easily delayed by WSDOT.
A binding Contract t very ery
Ri Analysis aired. Are t elements
ed to the point that tile he rise the
budder
areas likely to impact either cost or schedule is re
o rrisk a of develop
accurately assigned the design-build iility for areas outside onaitionsr control of the
p ermits,
o priced? Responsibility accurately redefined changed should remain with WSDOT
right of way acquisitions).
Environmen originator should be obtained by
require WSDOT to be the orig
aired to obtain
permits e dt req point where �SDOT Sequr obtain to
Oe its cap n needs to es imated. tenever possible or commit to
WSDOT. Design estimated. over-prescribing the final solution generic can r accurately permit
permit as possible to avoid responsibility P
ene a p OT assumes for obtaining any
must also have workforce available to obtain the p
timelines in which s WSDOT
environmental permit.
under the contractual timelines.
Right of Way
..-:,,,,rract/desbuil
1/7/2003
in right of
to obta
the time requir Wheneve
point where te e uired
aced. which the
advanced to the p can be accura of way c orridor Way prior to
be approved right way plan) t he right ht of require
needs to r, a of and pro purchas of a right could r t
final of ct appr establis design it the must
wa y SDOT should din some instances, selected walling commit
which equi b to be possible, a t mus be plso be p WSp amou of time produc way OT neeescrb d
final p a c ontract may r of- a
signing Darts o rig ht of way within p
differing m° obtRe for Proposal (RP P)
workforce in the
identif
sure a pote' 1 d e ponsibility for
Utilities W SDOT can assure assume are such tha fixed
Negotiations aedule will either ontrol.
or relocation schedule builder's c
or
sgn builder that t
timelin
des +g FP
Within the prior to th both
completed P much
Geotec hnical fete or can be c significantly imp as
comp atio can s e d
either ical investigation
nve tig can vary With the complete with
e a ion �s t However, eot substantially d pendent on
Geotec in vestigation
Elemen °f the 9 NoWe be substa d cost.
Interage
issue budg Geotech ece fins design an
being schedule and
a the design b uilder, as o the
the p ental or nght °f w Y
ns for a dditiona l wok b is to limit the variability
as environm tion
pr s�o The inter
,n
ov► des ;gn. O T Wi11
tended
Agre ements the RFP being isW►1, beW° outside
Interagency a in place prior t ensure that t here
Will b is to
c agreements ad on these a greeme nts Interagen Y the With the pro j e ct.
n eed to take
interfere a gency o wnership
Public Endorsement such that NSDOT can tak own
Pub roject is
Public endorsement for the p n b,d-
desi9
a standa i
Workforce less FTEs than u s will be m due
W ro p bou the p
e on
process overall will take
v arious s u p port g t ugs aired by the
p oces as we by various stages th than for a
The design However, as welt a Also the time lficantly higher build project. rocess, a timelin will be sign
in the selection of th project engineer
early critical nature as sistant p
e more
to the engineer an project.
similar design- bid -build prof
„..r,iild htm
117120Q3
WSDOT Design -Build Page 5 of 7
Opportunities
Given the combination of designer's and contractors workforce, opportunities for
acceleration or innovation exist that could produce either a faster final project delivery
or a superior final project.
Back to the too
WSDOT Pilot Project Overview
The 1998 Washington State Legislature directed WSDOT to develop a design -build
process and construct two design -build pilot projects. WSDOT interviewed
transportation agencies nationwide in order to identify current design -build best
practices. The resulting Guidebook for_Desian -Build Highway Project Development was
used by WSDOT to develop the pilot projects.
Due to subsequent funding variations, WSDOT was able to proceed with only one
design -build project. WSDOT is currently in the process of evaluating design -build as a
contracting tool on the SR 500 Thurston Way Interchange in Vancouver, Washington.
In developing the pilot project, WSDOT made a commitment to provide a fair analysis
of the design -build process. The University of Colorado Boulder was contracted to
evaluate the process. Through a series of interviews, both inside and outside of
WSDOT, the University of Colorado Boulder contacted as many individuals involved
with the process as possible. The study has produced two interim reports. A final report
will be completed by the winter of 2002.
The first interim report focused on WSDOT's Request for Qualifications (RFQ) /Request
for Proposal (RFP) process. Companies that expressed an interest but did not submit a
statement of qualifications were contacted, as were all companies that submitted
statements of qualifications. Immediately following the analysis of the Best and Final
Proposals, both WSDOT personnel and design builder personnel were interviewed to
obtain their impressions of the process.
The second interim report focused on day -to -day contract administration. Design
builder personnel and WSDOT project personnel were interviewed to determine how
the design -build process was working.
The final report will also include interviews with personnel involved with the process.
The time required and costs for a design -build delivery will be compared to a standard
design- bid -build project. This final report will be completed by the winter of 2002.
In addition to this outside study, WSDOT has tracked all issues as they have arisen on
the project. A WSDOT -only technical team reviews these issues to determine whether
http:// www. wsdot. wa. gov /biz/InnvContract/desbuild.htm 1/7/2003
wsDG Design
to the Design -Build Guidebook.
ore information on the design
change should be *made Form pilot projects at
Piltat
V aluatirt build 0 contact p
s
ok for Design-gul�� W enter ineer
WShjo Guidebo a ev Jeff Carpenter
En9
oven Pro e o s Leff Carpe wsdotwa,9py
November 20 01 en 0) 705- 804
Novem dot Pro yect Gatp 7
esi Build o r Phone: WSDQT D In t e nm�'g° 2001
feu E May
P�a' ild Pit °t pfOlec
Ev OT DeS_ign-B_ 2002
anon: Inter.._ !m- R January
Contract AdminisT aWn4.. Sues'.
pro ect D-� Bu lnterch an9
e
Pilot_ hon Wa`
SR 5001T: urst-�
Decision
to the.toP
Back. ppT -A C -ACED n
C Team G
WSDOT- AGG-ACE combined WS of a des�g
its industry partners. A c surrounding delivery
WSD valu?�eamu created to look into State that
Design-Build program in Washington
build project. design-build p su erior product at a
develop a desig a nd produces a P
mission is to competition a projects.
The teams laying field S tandard and mega offers a level playing b on the design build
competitive price for
For at WSDOT, contact:
Jeff Ca r p enter C En 9ineer
Innovative dotty °v
Ca Pent (360)705-7804
Phone:
C.,pCEC T eam
wsoo -AC
Team Charter
Des Buila Issues
x ue list
.Team iVl
.Risk _A_l_ ►Ocation Minutes
.Team Meeting
pctotxe_ 2QS 1
15_2901
emb
Novemb
2002
FOvary. 2
N10_16,20_02
IAPcbuild•htm
W SDOT Design-Bad
esign Build
CoPYrignONSDCt 2002
t5
Current ou th st Reg Clark County
Cu t Prol We
ion
S1:t 500 Teton. WaY
Interc$ De guild. Picot Starts, in
Transportation New
E
Design -guild Links
to Design Build
Vlen9!neer giG
Window Coloradp-ED ti a
tlw wvr America
h esi Build Institute of A Contracti
pestgn orgy Center, Innovative
http t ,o_ Transfer
Utah Techn
usu.edui.
on °T projects,
�tion option
Con t a ct ►n {orm as a c ontracti n g For
information on th use °f design-build
contact
Ron Howar�ontractin9 Engineer
Inn ovative
h of wag °v
Phone
hone v 82
hone. VVSD�T Home
Back to the top. tac tWSDO T W SDOS Business
Traffic Roads Site Index Con
_4- JAPsbui
10/2003
COUNCIL A GENDASYNOPSIS
......................... Initials ......................... ITEM NO.
MeetingDatePreparedbyM~/eviewCouncilreview1/13/03 [,-(-/ -~ (?-. ~~
]:TEN ]:NFORNAT]:ON
CAS Number: 03-002 I Original Agenda Date: 1/13/03
Agenda Ttem Title: Animal Control Ordinance
Original Sponsor: Council x Admin.
Timeline:
Sponsor's Summary: The draft ordinance addresses dangerous dogs-'and how they are to be controlled, as
well as also regulating dogs, cats and to a lesser extent pot bellied pigs. It complies
with new State regulations as well as local and national animal club policies.
Recommendations:
Sponsor: Recommend adoption of ordinance
Committee: Finance and Safety recommended ordinance to Council for review
Administration: Same as sponsor
ICost Impact (if
knownS:
Fund Source (if known)
RECORD OF COUNCIL ACIqON
Meeting Date Action
1/13/03 .
APPENDICES
Meeting Date Attachments
1/13/03 Memo from L. Lauterbach dated 1/9/03 _
Draft ordinance dated 1/9/03
Finance and Safety Committee minutesdtO/7,10/21,12/2,12/16 all 2002
To: City Council
From: Lucy Lauterbach
Date: January 9, 2003
Subject: Animal Control Ordinance
Those on last year's Finance and Safety Committee had quite a time with the Animal
Control issue, The ordinance was last amended when pot bellied pigs were a fad in
1996.
The issue about controlling vicious dogs was brought to the Council by two different
cases of dogs that negatively affected their neighbors or street last year. In both these
cases the offending dogs were pit bulls. Dennis Robertson strongly urged the committee
to adopt a ban on that breed in the City.
The Committee heard from a large segment of the dog-owning community who were
generally anxious to protect their loving and obedient pets from onerous city laws. After
numerous iterations, a version of the ordinance is now ready for Council review. It
generally treats animals based on their actions, not on their breed. It also cleans up
some changes needed to update the ordinance.
Paws Ability is a dog training business in Tukwila, and they now approve of the
ordinance, It also follows the position statement of the American Kennel Club, which
states:
"...We support laws that: establish a fair process by which specific dogs are identified
as "'dangerous' based on stated, measurable actions; impose appropriate penalties on
irresponsible owners; and establish a well-defined method for dealing with dogs proven
to be dangerous. -We believe that; if necessary, dogs proven to be 'dangerous' may
need to be humanely destroyed. The American Kennel Club strongly opposes any
legislation that determines a dog to be 'dangerous' based on specific breed or
phenotypic classes of dogs."
I have included some of the minutes of last year's Committee to show the different
arguments they heard. I believe the current version should meet with the approval of
most dog owners and dog lovers.
The draft shows new lan.quage as bold and underlined and....,.......,~"'~'*~"~ ,.~,~ ......... ,~..-.~....,~',...., .....,
as~McAem, Much of the language of the current law remains untouched.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON; AMENDING TUKWILA
MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 7.04, "ANIMAL
LICENSING AND REGULATIONS," REPEALING
ORDINANCES 1812 AND 1772; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, the Tukwila City Council finds that Chapter 7.04 should be clean, inclusive,
and address known animal control issues; and
WHEREAS, regulating dangerous and potentially dangerous dogs has become an issue in
the City in recent years; and
WHEREAS, the ordinance changes are in the best interests of animal pets, their owners'
and the public's health, safety and welfare;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 7.04 entitled "Animal Licensing and
Regulations" is hereby amended to read as follows:
Chapter 7.04
ANIMAL LICENSING AND REGULATIONS
Sections:
7.04.010 Purpose.
7.04.020 Definitions.
7.04.030 General provisions and licensing.
7.04.040 Dog, cat and pot bellied Pig licenses.
7.04.050 Pot Bellied pigs - License and Restrictions.
7.04.060 Exotic animals.
7.04.070 Regulation of animals.
7.04.080 Nuisance defined - Violation.
7.04.085 Dangerous and potentially dangerous dog regulation.
7.04.087 Additional dangerous dog regulations.
7.04.090 Declaration of dDangerous and potentially dangerous dog reg'~at~.en.
7.04.100 Declaration - - impoundment and abatement.
7.04.110 Cruelty to animals - Unlawful.
7.04.120 Enforcement authority.
7.04.130 Violations - Abatement and removal authorized.
1/9/03 1
7.04.140 Penalties.
7.04.010 Purpose.
It is the public policy of the City to secure and maintain such levels of animal control as will
protect human health and safety and, to the greatest degree practicable, will prevent injury to
property and cruelty to animal life. To this end, it is the purpose of this chapter to provide a
means of licensing dogs, cats, pot-bellied pigs, exotic animals, animal shelters, hobby kennels,
kennels and pet shops, to control errant animal behavior so that it shall not become a public
nuisance, and to prevent cruelty to animals.
7;04.020 Definitions.
A. Abatement means the termination of any violation by reasonable and lawful means
determined by the director of the Animal Control Authority, in order that the owner or a person
presumed to be the owner shall comply with this chapter.
B. Animal means any living creature except Homo Sapiens, insects and worms.
C. Animal Control Authority means the department of the City charged with the
responsibility of administering the provisions of this chapter, or the department and any other
governmental body to which this responsibility is contractually delegated and which is thereby
charged with the duty of enforcing the animal control laws of the City and with the shelter and
welfare of animals.
D. Animal Control Officer means any individual employed, contracted, or appointed by the
King County Animal Control Authority for the purpose of aiding in the enforcement of this title
or any other law or ordinance relating to the licensing of animals, control of animals, or seizure
and impoundment of animals; and includes any State or municipal peace officer, sheriff,
constable, or other employee whose duties in whole or in part include assignments which involve
the seizure and taking into custody of any animal.
E. Board of Appeals means the King County .nmim"A Centre! Board of Appeals.
F. City shall mean the City of Tukwila.
G. County or King County shall mean Metropolitan King County.be !im:~ted te that peX;~en
of K:.ng ..... j .......................... J ................. ~'
H. Dangerous dog means any dog that, according to the records of the appropriate authority:
1. }~imqi,~-Bites or inflicts severe injury on a human being or a domestic animal
without provocation on public or private property; or
2. Has ki!!edln an aggressive manner, inflicts severe injury, or kills a domestic animal
or other animal protected under federal, state or local laws, without provocation while
offthe owner's property; or
3. Has been previously found to be potentially dangerous, the owner having received
notice of such, and the dog again aggressively bites, attacks or endangers the safety of
humans or domestic animals.
(See Potentitally dangerous dog definition)
I. Do~ ~uide means a dog that is trained for the purpose of j~uiding blind persons or
hearing impaired persons.
J. Dog pack means a group of two or more dogs running upon either public or private
property not that of their owner in a state in which either their control or ownership is in doubt or
cannot readily be ascertained, and when such dogs are not restrained or controlled.
K. Exotic animal means any of the following:
I. Venomous species of snakes capable of inflicting serious physical harm or death to
human beings;
1/9/03 2
2. Non-human primates and prosimians;
3. Bears;
4. Non-domesticated species of felines;
5. Non-domesticated species of canines and their hybrids, including wolf and coyote
hybrids;
6. The order Crocodylia, including alligators, crocodiles, caiman and gavials.
L. Hobby Kennel means a noncommercial kennel at or adjoining a private residence
where four or more adult dogs, four or more adult cats, or a combination of five total cats
and dogs are bred or kept for hunting, training, and exhibition for organized shows, field,
working and/or obedience trials, or for the enjoyment of the species.
M. Juvenile means any dog or cat, altered or unaltered, that is under the age of six months.
N. Owner means any person, firm, corporation, organization or department having an interest
in or right of possession to an animal, or having control, custody, or possession of an animal,
including possession by reason of the animal being seen residing consistently at a location.
O. Person means any individual, partnership, firm, joint stockcompany, corporation,
association, trust, estate, or other legal entity.
P. Pot-bellied pig means that type of American swine commonly known as Vietnamese,
Chinese, or Asian pot-bellied pig (Sus Scrofa Bittatus).
Q. Potentially Dangerous dog means any dog that when unprovoked:
tendency, ^~ ~;~p~;+;~" +~ ~v ,,? ..... vo~ , ....... ;~i .......
~ Chases, char~es at~ or tries to a~ack~ causin~ a person offthe
~ to take defensive action in order to prevent bodily in.iud; or
2. Approaches a person on the streets~ sidewal~ public or private prope~ other
than the do~ owner's prope~ in a menaein~ fashion or apparent a~itude or'
a~ack; or
3. With a known propensi~ tendenc~ or disposition to a~ack~ unprovoked~ to cause
in.iu~ or othe~ise threaten the safe~ of humans or domestic animals; or
4. Bites a domestic a, imal off the dog owner's prope~ causin~ the animal's s~n
to be broken.
.......................... p, ...... prey p ...................................
K. Rules and regulations of the Animal Control Authori~ me~s such roles ~d
regulations ~ may be adopted by the ~mal ConSol Au~odW, not inconsistem with the intern
of this chapter.
S. Running at large me~s to be offthe premises of the o~er ~d not ~der ~e i~ediate
control of the o~er or o~er competent person authorized by ~e o~er, by me~s of a leash,
1/9/03 3
cord or chain no longer than eight feet except when in or on any vehicle and securely confined to
such vehicle.
T. Severe injury means any physical injury that results in broken bones or lacerations
requiring multiple sutures or cosmetic surgery.
U. Service animal means an animal that is trained or being trained for the purpose of
assisting or accommodating a disabled person's sensory~ mental~ or physical disability.to
V. Shelter means a facility which is used to house or contain stray, homeless, abandoned or
unwanted animals, and which is owned, operated or maintained by a public body, an established
humane society, animal welfare society, society for the prevention of cruelty to animals, or other
nonprofit organization or person devoted to the welfare, protection and humane treatment of
animals.
7.04.030 General provisions and licensing.
A. General Licensing Provisions - The following sections of Chapter 11.04 Metropolitan King
County Code as now in effect, and as may be subsequently amended, are hereby adopted by
reference, except that, unless the context indicates otherwise, the word "County" and "King
County" shall refer to Metropolitan King County ,^,~ ,h~..~ pe~ion of the ..... -~-v*' .... ..-~---~*u~" ,h,...~ Ci,B' cf
Tv.k';A!a bc,'~.d~ies, and references to violations of the County code or County ordinances shall
be deemed to be references to violations of City ordinances:
11.04.020 Definitions, and in addition thereto, the definitions set forth in TMC Section 2 of this
ordinance are adopted.
11.04.040 Animal shelter, kennel, grooming service, cattery and pet shop license required.
11.04.060 Hobby kennel license-Required.
11.04.070 Animal shelters, kennels and pet shops-Reporting required.
11.04.080 Animal shelters, kennels and pet shops-Inspections.
11.04.090 Animal shelters, kennels, and pet shops-Conditions.
11.04.100 Animal shelters, kennels and pet shops-Indoor facilities.
11.04.110 Animal shelters, kennels and pet shops-Outdoor facilities.
11.04.130 Grooming parlors-Conditions.
11.04.140 Animal shelters, hobby kennels, kennels, pet shops, grooming parlors, guard dog
purveyors, guard dog trainers and guard dog owners-Additional conditions.
11.04.150 Licenses, registrations- Revocation, suspension or refusal to renew.
11.04.160 Licenses, registration- Revocation or refusal waiting period.
11.04.165 Private Animal Placement Permit-Individual.
11.04.167 Private Animal Placement Permit-Organizational.
B. General Enforcement and Procedures - The following sections of Chapter 11.04
Metropolitan King County as now in effect, and as may be subsequently amended, are hereby
adopted by reference, except that, tmless the context indicates otherwise, the word "county" and
the words "King County" shall refer to the portion of the county within the City of Tukwila
boundaries, and references to violations of the county code or county ordinances shall be deemed
to be references to violations of City ordinances:
11.04· 170 Enforcement power.
11.04.180 Violations- Deemed nuisance-Abatement.
11.04.190Violations-Misdemeanor-Penalty.
11.04.200 Violations- Civil Penalty.
11.04.210 Impounding.
1/9/03 4
11.04.220 Additional enforcement.
11.04.240 Unlawful acts against police department dogs.
11.04.280 Redemption procedures.
11.04.290 Corrective action- Vicious animals.
11.04.300 Civil penalty and abatement costs- Liability of owner.
11.04.310 Costs of additional enforcement.
11.04.320 Miscellaneous service charges.
11.04.330 Additional rules and regulations.
11.04.335 Waiver of. fees and penalties.
11.04.340 Severability.
11.04.345 Private Animal Placement Permit-Citizen Complaint Process
11.04.510 Unaltered Dogs and Cats-Advertising Requirements
11.04.520 Rabies Vaccination Required.
11.12 Rabies Control
11.28 Exotic Animals
11.32 Guard Dogs
7.04.040 Dog, eat and pot bellied pig licenses, required.
A. Applicability. All dogs, cats, and pot-bellied pigs eight weeks old and over, which are
harbored, kept or maintained in the City shall be licensed and registered annually. Dogs kept in
kennels for 30 or fewer days need not be licensed while kept at such kennel and while such
kennel is duly licensed as provided in King County Code 11.04; otherwise King County
licensing provisions shall apply.
B. Juvenile licenses. Suvenilc licenses must be obtained for all dogs and cats from eight
weeks to six months of age.
C. Dog and cat licenses, fees. Dog and cat licenses shall be issued by the Animal Control
Authority upon application and payment of an annual license fcc made payable to the county
comptroller according to thc schedule of fees adopted by the King County Council, as now or
hereafter amended.
1. Tukwila residents 65 years of age or older shall be entitled to purchase special
permanent licenses for the lifetime of cats or dogs for which they are the registered owners when
said animals are maintained atsaid owncr?s registered address. The special permanem animal
license fee will be available provided that the owner provides written proof that the animal has
been spayed or neutered.
2. The annual license fee shall become due and payable one year from the last day of thc
month of issuance.
3. Applications for a dog or cat license shall be on forms provided by the Animal Control
Authority.
4. All license tags issued under this chapter shall be securely affixed to a substantial
collar, harness or other means and shall be wom by the animal at all times.
5. The Animal Control Authority is authorized to collect a fee for a lost or stolen license
tag replacement.
D. Dog and cat licenses, penalty.
1. Penalties shall be assessed in cases of late registration and licensing of dogs and cats
kept and maintained in the City as provided in the schedule adopted by the King County Council
for such penalties, as now or hereafter amended.
2. It shall be a rebuttable presumption that an animal has not been licensed unless a proof
of purchase within the preceding 30 days is presented to the licensing officer or agent, or the
1/9/03 5
animal's owner has moved into the City within the preceding 30 days, or .the animal has been
under the age which requires a license or other proof deemed acceptable in the department's rules
and regulations.
E. Dog and cat licenses, non-applicability. The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to
dogs used by law enforcement agencies for police work, nor shall it apply to dogs or cats in the
custody of a veterinarian or animal shelter or whose owners are nonresidents temporarily within
the City for a period not exceeding 30 days.
F. Mandatory spaying and neutering.
1. No person shall own or harbor any cat or dog over the age of six months that has not
been spayed or neutered unless that person pays a special unaltered animal license fee for the
animal pursuant to King .County animal control licensing provisions.
2. Guide dog puppies in training and police service dogs are exempted from the
provisions of this section.
7.04.050 Pot bellied pigs-Licenses and Restrictions
A. Lieenses.~. Pot-bellied pig licenses shall be issued by the City of Tukwila upon application
and payment of an annual license fee made payable to the City of Tukwila according to the
schedule of fees approved by the City Council. City residents must obtain a valid license within
30 days of the pig's entry into the City, or by the effective date of this ordinance.
r-~ ................................ g .................... ~ ..... pe~ne~ ~_~m~ license fee
been spayed ......
T~xxS]a.
B. Restrictions.
1. No more th~ ~o pot-bellied pigs may be kept in ~y dwcIl~ ~t or business
csmbIis~cnt. ~y pigs in excess of~o shall be subject to a 5nc of $25.00 pc~ day pc~ pi~,
payable to ~c Ci~ of Tukwila.
2. No pot-bellied pi~s weighing mom ~ 150 ponds or havin~ a height ~rcatc~ ~ 22
inches at ~c shoulder ~c allowed.
3. Upon complaint that a pig is
compi~nt to be legitimate, thc o~cr sh~I be rcq~rcd to show p~oof of ~c height ~d weight of
· c pig in question as mcas~cd ~d certified by a licensed vctcdn~.
1/9/03 6
4. The Code Enforcement Officer of the City shall have the authority to authorize collection
of illegal pot-bellied pigs by the King County Animal Control.
7.04.060 Exotic animals.
A. The possession or maintenance of an exotic animal by private citizens within the City of
Tukwila is prohibited unless the owner possessed or maintained the exotic animal on or before
1996, and agreed to promptly act to satisfy the licensing requirements of the Animal Control
Authority as expressed in King County Code 11.28 now and as amended regarding the
maintenance of such animals.
B. The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to any facility possessing or maintaining
exotic animals as defined in this chapter which is owned, operated or maintained by any city,
county, state or the federal government, including but not limited to public zoos, nor shall it
apply to museums, laboratories and research facilities maintained by scientific or educational
institutions, nor to private or commercial activities such as circuses, fairs, or private zoological
parks which are otherwise regulated by law, nor to any recognized program engaged in the
training of exotic animals for use as service animals by disabled citizens.
C. Breeding, or allowing the reproduction of exotic animals as defined in this chapter is
prohibited, provided that this prohibition shall not apply to any governmental facility possessing
or maintaining exotic animals nor shall it apply to private or commercial activities.
D. Each exotic animal must have a license tag securely affixed to a substantial collar, harness
or other means, or a microchip implant for identification, and must show proof of such upon
request of the Animal Control Authority officer.
7.04.070 Regulation of animals.
A. Number of cats and dogs - No person shall keep more than three dogs or three cats~ or
a total of five of a combination of cats and dogs over the age of four months. If more
animals are kept, a hobby kennel license is required.
AB. Dogs at large: requirement of a leash or chain - It shall be a violation of this chapter for
any owner or custodian to cause, permit or allow any dog owned, harbored, controlled or kept by
him/her in the City to roam, mn or stray away from the premises where the dog is owned,
harbored, controlled or kept, except that while away from the premises the dog shall at all times
be controlled by means of a leash or chain not exceeding 8 feet in length by the owner or some
duly authorized and competent person, provided that such leash or chain is not required for any
dog when otherwise safely and securely confined or completely controlled while in or upon any
vehicle.
C. Offenses relating to sanitation - It is unlawful for an owner to:
1. Allow the accumulation of pig, cat, fowl or dog feces in any open area, mn cage or
yard wherein those animals are kept, and to fail to remove or dispose of feces at least once every
seven days.
2. Fail to remove the fecal matter deposited by his/her animal on public property or
private property of another before the owner leaves the immediate area where the fecal matter
was deposited.
3. Fail to have in his/her possession equipment such as a plastic bag or other means of
conveyance necessary to remove his/her animal's fecal matter when said animal deposits fecal
matter on public property, public easement or another's private property.
D. Any animal show or exhibition held out of doors or in a public building must notify
the Animal Control Authori .ty and the City of Tukwila at least 24 hours in advance of the
event.
1/9/03 7
7.04.080 Nuisance defined - Violation.
A. For purposes of this chapter, nuisances are violations of this chapter and shall be defined as
follows:
1. Any public nuisance relating to animal control known as common law or in equity
jurisprudence;
2. Any animal running at large within the City;
3. Any domesticated animal, whether licensed or not, which runs at large in any park, or
enters any public playground or school ground. However, this subsection shall not prohibit a
person from walking or exercising an animal in a public park or on a public beach when such
animal is on a leash, tether or chain not to exceed 8 feet in length. This subsection shall not apply
to any blind person using a trained ~ guide or service dog, or to animal shows,
exhibitions or organized dog-training classes.wb, ere o~ least 24 he"~s adv°~.ce netice ho~ been
e o~s, Or ........... g ........ ,
4. Any animal which enters any place where food is stored, prepared, served or sold to the
public, or any other public building or hall. However, this subsection shall not apply to any blind
person using a trained guide or service dog, to veterinary offices or hospitals, businesses offering
pet services, or to animal shows, exhibitions or organized dog-training classes, w~ere at !e~t 24
5. A female domesticated animal, whether licensed or not, while in heat, accessible to
other animals for purposes other than controlled and planned breeding;
6. Any domesticated animal which chases, runs after, or jumps at vehicles using the
public streets and alleys;
7. Any domesticated animal which habitually snaps, growls, snarls, jumps upon, or
otherwise threatens persons lawfully using the public sidewalks, streets, alleys other public ways.
8. Any animal which has exhibited vicious propensities and which constitutes a danger to
the safety of persons or property off his premises or lawfully on his premises; provided, that in
addition to other remedies and penalties, the provisions of this chapter relating to dangerous dogs
and potentially dangerous dogs shall apply;
9. Any domesticated animal which howls, yelps, whines, barks or makes other oral
noises, in such a manner as to disturb any person or neighborhood to an unreasonable degree;
10. Any domesticated animal which enters upon another person's property without the
permission of that person;
11. Animals staked, tethered or kept on public property without prior written consent of
the County Animal Control Authority;
12. Animals on any public property not under control with a leash held by the owner or
other competent person;
13. Animals kept, harbored or maintained and known to have a contagious disease unless
under the treatment of a licensed veterinarian;
14. Animals running in packs.
B. Nuisance violations shall be subject to a civil frae and enforcement necessary to abate the
violation.
7.04.085 Dangerous and potentially dangerous dol~s: registration~ prohibitions~ etc.
1/9/03 8
A. It is unlawful for an owner to have a dangerous dog or a potentially dangerous dog in
the City without fulfilling the requirements of the City of Tukwila and the Animal Control
Authority.
B. No potentially dangerous dog or dangerous dog shall go unrestricted upon the
premises of the owner. Further, no potentially dangerous or dangerous dog shall be kept on
a porch, patio or in any part of a house or structure which would allow such dog to exit the
building on its own volition.
C. All potentially dangerous and dangerous dogs shall be securely confined indoors or in
a secure enclosure with some adjustments. Such an enclosure can be a pen, dog run, or
structure, suitable to prevent the entry, of young children and designed to prevent the
animal from escaping. Such pen, structure or dog run shall have secure sides and a secure
top. The sides of the enclosure shall not directly adjoin a neighboring property. If the pen,
structure or dog run area has no bottom secured to the sides, the sides shall be embedded
not less than two feet into the ground. An enclosure with doors, windows, or other openings
enclosed solely by wire or mesh screening shall not be considered a proper enclosure as
defined in this section
D. No person owning or harboring, or having the care of a potentially dangerous or
dangerous dog shall s-ffer or permit such dog to go beyond the premises of such person
unless such dog is securely m,zzled in a manner that will not cause injury to the dog but
shall prevent it from biting any person or animal; and is restrained with a chain having a
minimum tensile strength of three hundred pounds and not exceeding three feet in length.
E. Any corrective actions available under King County's Code 11.04.290 must be made
as required by an animal control officer.
F. No person shall own or possess with intent to sell, or offer for sale, breed, or buy or
attempt to buy within the ci.ty any potentially dangerous or dangerous dog.
G. No person shall own or harbor any dog for the purpose of dog fighting, or train,
torment, badger, bait or use any dog for the purposes of causing or encouraging said dog to
unprovoked attacks upon human beings or domestic animals.
7.04.87 Additional Dangerous Dog Regulations Dangerous dogs which have been shown to
be a particular threat to the health, safe .ty and welfare of the communi .ty may be subject to
additional dangerous dog regulations as follow:
A. A dog which has been declared dangerous may be removed and destroyed if the
release of the dog would create a significant threat to the health, safety, and welfare of the
public.
B. If it is determined that a dangerous dog shall not be removed or destroyed, Animal
Control shall impose any additional conditions upon the ownership of the dog that protect
the health, safety, and welfare of the public.
C. The owner of a dangerous dog that is not removed and destroyed, shall be required to
have a surety bond issued by a surety insurer qualified under Chapter 48.28 RCW in a sum
not less than $250,000 payable to a person in.lured by the dog; or a policy of liability
in.~urance, such as homeowner's insurance, issued by an insurer qualified under RCW
Title 48 in the amount of at least $250,000, insuring the owner or keeper for personal
injuries inflicted by the dangerous dog with a certificate from the insurer providing for
written notice to the city within 30 days of cancellation, reduction of limits, or termination
of coverage.
7.04.090 Declaration of dDangerous and potential dangerous dog regu!aff, en.
1/9/03 9
en:!as~e un!~ss the deg k muzz!:d ~d restrained by a subst~tia! chain ar leash ~d -~der
tony person ~r ~2.ima!.
BA. Provision for declaring dangerous and potentially dangerous dogs. Based on
an investigation the Animal Control Authofi~ may find ~d decl~e ~ ~imal potentially
d~gerous or d~gerous if it has probable cause to believe thru ~e ~mal f~ls within the
definitions set in TMC 7.04.020,H ~d Q. For the p~oses of tbs chapter the determination of
probable cause may include:
1. ~e ~i~en complaint of a citizen who is ~lling to testi~ ~at the ~imal has acted ~
a m~er which causes it to fall wi~in the defiffition in TMC 7.04.020,H or Q; or 2. Dog bite repons filed wi~ the ~im~ ConSol Authori~; or
3. Actions of the dog Mtnessed by ~y ~mal consol officer or law e~orcement officer;
or
4. A verified repoa that the ~imal previously has been fo~d to be either potentially
d~gerous, d~gerous by any Animal Control Authofi~; or
5. O~er substanti~ evidence a~issible in a co~ of law.
B. Dogs shall not be declared dangerous if the threat? inju~, or damage was
sustained by a person who~ at the time? was commi~infi a willful trespass or other to~ upon
the premises occupied by the owner of the doff? or was tormenting? abusing or assaulting
the dog or has? in the past? been obse~ed or reposed to have tormented? abused? or
assaulted the dog or was eommiffing or attempting to commit a crime.
C. Declaration, semite to owner in writing. ~e decimation shall be in ~ting, ~d shall be
se~ed on the omer or keeper in one of the folloMng methods:
1. Ceaified mail to the omer's or keeper's last ~om address, if ~o~; or
2. Personally delivered; or
3. Posting the notice of violation and order on the front door of the living unit of the
owner or person with right to control the animal if said owner or person is not home.
4. If the omer or keeper c~ot be located by one of~e first 9e:o three me,ods, by
publicmion in a newspaper of gener~ circulaion.
The omer or keeper of ~y ~imal fo~d to be a potentially d~gerous or d~gerous dog
~der this section sh~l be assessed all service costs expended ~der this subsection.
1/9/03 10
D. Declaration, information required. The declaration set forth in this section shall state at
least:
1. A description of the animal;
2. The name and address of the owner or keeper of the animal, if known;
3. The whereabouts of the animal if it is not in the custody of the owner or keeper;
4. The facts upon which the declaration is based;
5. The availability of a hearing in case the person objects to the declaration, if a request is
made within Eve fourteen calendar days.
6. The restrictions placed on the animal as a result of the declaration; and
7. The penalties for. violation of the restrictions, including the possibility of destruction of
the animal, and imprisonment or fining of the owner or keeper.
E. Declaration appeal procedure. If the owner or keeper of the animal wishes to contest the
declaration, the following procedures shall apply:
1. The owner or keeper shall, within Eve fourteen calendar days of receipt of the
declaration, or within five fourteen calendar-days of the publication of the declaration, or within
Eve fourteen calendar days of the publication of the declaration~pursuant to 7.04.090, D,
request a hearing from the King County Animal Control Authority Board of Appeals. Failing to
exhaust this administrative appeal process shall be a bar to action in a court of law. Any appeal
decision issued by the Board of Appeals can be appealed in superior court.
2. If the Board of Appeals finds there is insufficient evidence to support the declaration, it
shall be rescinded, and the restrictions imposed thereby annulled.
3. If the Board of Appeals finds sufficient evidence to support the declaration then it shall
be affirmed.
4. If the Board of Appeals finds that the animal is not a potentially dangerous or
dangerous dog, no costs shall be assessed against the City or the Animal Control Authority or
officer.
7.04.100 Declaration--impoundment and abatement.
A. Impoundment. Following service of a declaration of potentially dangerous or dangerous
dog, and pending appeal under TMC 7.04.090 E, the Animal Control Authority may, if
circumstances require, impound the animal at the owner's or keeper's expense, until the appeal to
the Board of Appeals or a court of competent jurisdiction orders either its redemption or
destruction.
B. Abatement. Any dog or other animal which bites, attacks, or attempts to bite one or more
persons two or more times within a two-year period is declared to be a danger to public safety
and shall not be kept within the City 48 hours after receiving written notice from the director of
Animal Control~ or an authorized animal control officer. Such animal or animals found in
violation of this section will be impounded and disposed of as an unredeemed animal, and the
owner or keeper of such animal(s) has no right to redeem such dog or animal.
7.04.110 Cruelty to animals - Unlawful.
A. It is unlawful for any person to:
1. Willfully and cruelly inflict physical injury, or to kill any animal by any means causing
unnecessary fright, sUffering or pain;
2. By reason of neglect or intent, fail to provide the animal with necessary food, water,
shelter, rest, sanitation, ventilation, space or medical attention, thereby causing or allowing any
animal to endure pain, suffering or injury; or to fail or neglect to aid or attempt alleviation of
pain, suffering or injury he or she has so caused to any animal;
1/9/03 11
3. Lay out or expose any kind of poison, or to leave exposed any poison food or drink for
man, animal or fowl, or any substance or fluid whatever or wherein there is deposited or mingled
any kind of poison, or poisonous or deadly substance or fluid whatever, on any premises, or in
any unenclosed place, or to aid or abet any person in so doing, unless in accordance with the
provisions ofRCW 16.52.190;
4. Abandon any domestic animal by dropping off or leaving such animal on the street,
road or highway, or in any other public place, or on the private property of another.
5. Keep an animal in an enclosed vehicle when the temperature inside the vehicle reaches
80°F, and/or the animal appears to be in stress as a result of excessive heat or thirst.
B. Any person may lawfully kill a dangerous animal when a clear and present danger exists to
his or her own self or to the public safety and a record of complaint against the animal has been
filed with the Animal Control Authority.
7.04.120 Enforcement authority.
A. The director of the Animal Control Authority and his/her authorized animal control officers
are authorized to take such lawful action as may be required to enforce the provisions of this
chapter and the laws of the State as they pertain to animal cruelty, shelter, welfare, and
enforcement Of control.
B. The director of the Animal Control Authority or his/her authorized animal control officer
shall not enter a building designated for and used for private purposes, unless the officer has
reasonable cause to believe an animal is being maintained in the building in violation of this
chapter.
C. The director of the Animal Control Authority and his/her authorized animal control
officers, while pursuing any animal observed by the officer to be in violation of this chapter, or
during investigations for unlicensed animals, may enter upon any public or private property,
except any building designated for and used for private purposes, for the purpose of abating the
animal violation being pursued, or the licensing of animals.
D. No person shall deny, prevent, obstruct, or attempt to deny, prevent, or obstruct an officer
from pursuing any animal observed to be in violation of this chapter. Further, no person shall fail
or neglect, after a proper warrant has been presented, to promptly permit the director or his/her
authorized animal control officer to enter private property to perform any duty imposed by this
chapter. Any person violating this subsection is guilty of a misdemeanor.
E. Notwithstanding the existence or use of any other remedy, the director of the Animal
Control Authority may seek legal or equitable relief to enjoin any-acts or practices and abate any
conditions that constitute a violation of this code or other regulations herein adopted.
7.04.130 Violations - Abatement and removal authorized.
A. Whenever the director or authorized animal control officer has found an animal maintained
in violation of this title, the director of the Animal Control Authority shall commence
proceedings to cause the abatement of each violation; provided, that the abatement and removal
procedures of this section shall not apply to the dangerous dog removal procedures contained in
this chapter.
B. Any animal constituting a public nuisance as provided in this chapter shall be abated and
removed from the City by the owner or by the director of the Animal Control Authority, or
his/her authorized animal control officer, upon receipt of two King County Animal Control
Authority notices of violation and one order of confinement by the owner in any one-year period.
Where it is established by record pursuant to this chapter and no finding was entered showing
that the owner will be able to provide reasonable restraints to protect the public from repetitions
1/9/03 12
of violations, the director of the Animal Control Authority shall notify and direct the owner of
the animal to abate or remove the same from the City and County within 96 hours from the date
of the notice. If such animal is found to be within the confines of the City after 96 hours have
elapsed froTM the date of notice, the same shall be abated and removed by the director of the
Animal Control Authority. Animals removed pursuant to the provisions of this section shall be
removed from the City or be subjected to euthanasia by the Animal Control Authority.
7.04.140 Penalties.
A. Civil penalty and cost of abatement, collection. The civil penalty described in TMC
7.04.140, C., and the cost of abatement are also personal obligations of the animal owner.
Animal eontrol~ Tkev. vovw~.~e,*;"'" _.~w..v.,o~ ....., on behalf of King County, and the City Attomey~ on
behalf of the City, may collect the civil penalty and the abatement work costs by use .of all
appropriate legal remedies.
B. Cost of enforcement, collection. In addition to the costs and disbursements provided for
by statute, the prevailing party in a collective action under this chapter may, in the court's
discretion, be allowed interest and a reasonable attorney's fee. The Cityv-v~v~---~, ........
shall seek such costs, interest, and reasonable attorney's fees on behalf of the City or County
when the City is the prevailing party.
C. Violation, civil penalty. In addition to any other penalty provided in this title or by law,
any person whose animal is maintained in violation of this title shall incur a civil penalty plus
billable costs of the Animal Control Authority. The penalty shall be $2-5550.00 for the first notice
of violation, $50.9975.00 for the second violation in any one-year period, and $ ..... 200.00 for
each successive violation.
D. Violation~ dangerous dog Any dangerous dog shall be immediately confiscated by
an animal control authoritw if the dog not maintained in a secure enclosure; or if the dog is
allowed to go beyond the owner's premises without leash or muzzle restraints; or either a
required surety bond or liability insurance of $250~000 is not valid. The owner must i~ay
the costs of confinement and control. The animal control authority must serve notice upon
the dog owner in person~ to the owner's residence~ or by regular and certified mail return
receipt requested~ speci .f, ying the reason for the confiscation of the dangerous dog~ that the
owner is responsible for payment of the cost of expeditious and humane manner if the
deficiencies for which the dog was confiscated are not corrected within twenty days. The
animal control authority shall destroy the .confiscated dangerous dog in an expeditious and
humane manner if any deficiencies required by this subsection are not corrected within
twenty days of notification. In addition~ the owner shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor
punishable in accordance with RCW 9A.20.021.
Section 2. Repealer. Ordinance No. 1812 and 1772 are hereby repealed.
Section 3. Severability. Should any section, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, be declared unconstitutional or
otherwise invalid for any reason, or should any portion of this ordinance be pre-empted by state
or federal law or regulation, such decision or pre-emption shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to other persons or circumstances.
Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the
official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five (5) days after passage
and publication as provided by law.
1/9/03 13
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a
Regular Meeting thereof this day of ,2003.
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
Jane E. Cantu, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By.
Office of the City Attorney
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.:
1/9/03 14
Finance and Safety. Committee
December 16, 2002
Present: Jim Haggerton, Chair; Joan Hernandez, Dave Fenton
Bob Noe, Rhonda Berry, Lucy Lauterbach; Pat Larson, Jesse and Monte
Richardson. Dennis Robertson
Animal Control Ordinance The Committee started by tracking the changes made since
their last meeting. In talking about nuisances, they agreed to clarify, that ail dogs must be on a
leash when off their property. Jesse and Monte said their dog had been playing with neighbor
children when it was picked up by Animal Control, which seemed unnecessary to them. Dave
said he's been told his small dog needs a leash when he's walked with her, and though she's
safe, he recognized the need for the leash law. The Committee agreed the leash law should
be the rule. They then went over the Dangerous Dog regulations. They had agreed with
taking a more strict approach than the State version for the definition of dangerous dogs, but
they had comments on the section on the declaration of dangerous and .potentially dangerous
dogs. After looking at a draft new section on trespassing, they decide to use the state
language instead. They changed the time for appeals from 5 days to 14 days, including
requests. Jesse and Monte made a plea for recompense for people who won their appeals
against Animal Control, but Bob Noe said that is not usually done, though it is an option
here. The Committee declined adding the provision. Dennis requested the ordinance include
stiff penalties against people who violate the dangerous dog regulations, and the Committee
agreed to add the State penalties. The Committee then thought the changes were the best that
they could recommend, though they realized the full Council may have different ideas.
Recommend ordinance to first COW in January...
~4& Committee chair approval
~.,,~/.~
Finance and Safety Committee
December 2, 2002
Present: Jim Haggerton, Chair; Joan Hernandez, Dave Fenton
Bob Noe, David St Pierre, Alan Doerschel, Rhonda Berry, Lucy Lauterbach; Ben
Leifer-King County Animal Control; citizens Dennis Robertson, Pat Larson, Jesse
and Monte Richardson
1. Ordinance Increasing Fixed Assets Alan said this is needed as a result of the new
accounting standards the State is mandating be used. The level of fixed capital assets that need
approval is being changed from $1,000 to $5,000. As the new reporting requires showing every
general fixed asset including streets, much more work will be required, and this change will ease
Finance's work. The committee recommended the ordinance to a Regular Meeting. Recommend
ordinance to Regular Meeting.
2. Petty Cash and Change Funds Because of the new swimming pool the City is accepting,
and because the police are now the financial agents for VNET, the Valley police narcotics team,
the petty cash and change funds need to be increased. Parks and Rec's change fund was
increased from $100 to $200. Their petty cash was increased from $200 to $400. VNET's petty
cash was set at $300, while its investigation fund was set at $12,000. Recommend ordinance to
Regular Meeting.
3. Animal Control Ordinance The citizens who came had some strong feelings they expressed
at the outset of the discussion. Dennis Robertson felt strongly that certain breeds like pit bulls
deserved to be declared to be vicious by their very being, and opined that the ordinance did not
do as good a job as it could to protect citizen health safety and welfare if it did not include pit
bulls as dangerous. The committee went through the ordinance page by page, with definitions of
potentially dangerous and dangerous dogs both topics of interest. The attorneys pointed out the
State's definition of dangerous and potentially dangerous dogs were more lenient than the
drafted ordinance, but the committee agreed that the draft was preferable. They recommended
moving the two definitions of potentially dangerous dogs and dangerous dogs to be together. Ben
Leifer pointed out some changes that will be coming to the County ordinance regarding hobby
catteries., so our draft will reflect that. Jesse and Monte were concerned with the definition of
"proper enclosure" and after much discussion, the committee agreed to drop that definition, as it
is not referenced now in the ordinance, and would be difficult to apply to all dogs in the city.
Joan asked about an unaltered animal license; Ben said those animals are charged a higher
licensing fee but don't have a separate license. The attorneys recommended that one section
written to try to address a dog that threatens people in their back yards be taken out, and the
committee did that. Ms. Larson had pointed questions about Animal Control's ability to
recognize wolf breeds, which Ben answered; the Committee left it as Animal Control's
responsibility. The committee started to discuss whether dangerous dogs, which in the draft
ordinance are defined as a dog that bites severely one time, should be allowed to stay in the city
'or should be destroyed or removed. They agreed to think about that for the next meeting, which
will be December 16th. Reschedule.
~ f'lt~ommittee chair approval
ratings, as some department heads are much more lenient in giving merit than others are.
Dave said he appreciated the employees' comments, and he lamented the fact that
Tukwila has no surplus money anymore. He did say he thought the economy would turn
around sometime, and that the City will offer merit when it can. Nick said Fire employees
were happy with COLA's, and would prefer the plan remain consistent from year to
year. Viki said half the employees wanted COLA, and half wanted merit. Recommend
issue to COW.
4. Animal Control Dennis talked about a house on his cul d'sac in McMicken that has
a house',~, ~,,""" three pit ~""~,..,,s. -'L ney terrorize,,,.,~,,~,,.,,o"~';"t'~'"'~ adjoining thc back yard where the
dogs are kept, and they walk the dogs without leashes. He brought materials from the
State and other cities showing it has been upheld in [aw that a city can ban specific breeds
like pit bulls. Other ways of dealing with the dogs are naming them as dangerous and
restricting their movements. Dennis said pit bulls were bred to threaten and kill other
animals, so their very breed is threatening. He thought an ~ordinance change in Tukwila
could include breeds and reasons they are dangerous. Dennis also thought the police chief
could .become involved in deciding which animals are dangerous. Ben said King County
Animal Control regulates dogs in 30 cities and unincorporated King County. They don't
object if cities' dog reguli, tions are stricter than the County's.
The committee was willing to consider changes to the City's ordinance. Jim H raised the
th
issue of dangerous dogs on S. 160 last year that charged the fence when people walked
by. The people with' that dog have moved. Another 2001 problem dog on 57t~' Ave. S.
also scared people and sometimes got under the fence and chased neighbors going to their
cars, but that issue was resolved by animal control and the police. Reschedule
ordinance.
$. 2003 Budget Jim said they would generally try to follow the schedule for budget, but
that he preferred going as far as they can get through each meeting, which could be more
than scheduled. For the Council budget, they recommended changing the "Clean up"
references in the 2002 goals to Completed instead of Ongoing. They also reviewed the
Mayor's and Planning Commission's budgets. Budget Review.
',..~i,~. ~ ~' --'(;'Committee chair approval
Finance and Safety Committee
October 7, 2003
Present: Jim Haggerton, Chair; Joan Hernandez, Dave Fenton
John McFarland, Mayor Mullet, Rhonda Berry, Viki Jessop, Alan Doerschel,
' Nick Olivas, Jane Cantu, Lucy Lauterbach
1. I~in2 County Animal Control The Committee had asked questions about animal control at
their last meeting, and Rhonda had answered them in a memo. Addressing the issue of Tukwila's
supplemental service, Jim said he didn't see a need for the extra time. Mayor Mullet said the City
still has a problem with vicious dogs, so it's possible our ordinance needs work. Thc increased
cost of supplemental service has risen from $28/hour to $60/hour. Jim and Dave thought perhaps
that supplemental service could be cut. ~Ioan said it would depen.d on other budget prioritics and
whether the City could afford this extra service. Thc committee consensus was that the City
could not agree to thc increase for the remainder of this year, but would consider it in the budget
for next year. Having our own animal control was deemed too expensive with the cost of buying
a truck and having to put the captured animals somewhere both issues. Information.
2. Utili .ty Tax, Alan passed out a packet showing six scenarios for the Financial Planning
Model. What he's shown until now shows a $14.1 million deficit by 2007 and a $20 m. deficit by
2008. If the City implemented a 6% utility tax up front, there would be a $6.3 million surplus in
2008. Various other scenarios showed a 3% utility tax, a 3% and 6% on the two parts of the
utility tax, and two versions of a 4%, 5%, and 6% tax. The administration's recommended tax
was to start with a 4% tax for two years, then raise it to 5% for two years, and 6% starting 2007
and 2008. This gets the City out of the red through 2008. Dave pointed out that the entire
package needs to be considered. Outside elements such as war in Iraq could havc devastating
· consequences on our budget as tax revenues would plummet and oil prices would rise sharply.
The Committee generally agreed with the recommended package, and asked that the rest of the
Council also see that. The effective date of a utility tax will most likely be in February. An AWC
survey of cities showed over 95%. of cities in Washington have utility taxes.
November 4th will be the public hearing on utility tax and on the budget. Alan needs to get a
franchise agrecment from City Light, and he asked the committee if he could give them a
courtesy copy on the way to the September 28 COW. The committee agreed.
3. Ci~ Council Budget and Travel Every budget was to make a 3 ~A % cut in their budgets
this year. Because Alan had included an automatic 4 ¼% increase in budgets to account for
salary increases, the task for the Council budget was easy, as theirs did not have any automatic
increases. Travel will decrease from $22,000 in 2002 to $21,000 in 2003, and miscellaneous will
decrease from $6,000 to $5,400. Supplies will decrease by $500. The Committee agreed they
will discuss travel at their retreat. Preliminary budeet al~oroval of Council budeet.
4. Kine County Jail A~reement John relayed that negotiations on this have gone on for over a
year, with many frustrating stops and backward steps from King County in the process. In the
end, some of the jail costs for King County were negotiated downward and an agreement was
Finance and Safety Committee
September 16, 2002
Present: Jim Haggerton, Chair; Dave Fenton, Joan Hernandez
Rhonda Berry, John McFarland, Alan Doerschel, Lucy Lauterbach, Kathryn
Kertzman
1. Addendum to Yakima Jail Contract John explained that a few issues have come up since the
City signed the original agreement to use the Yakima jail for current and for future prisoners. One
issue is that Yakima is both giving and asking for a little more time for cities to fulfill their obligation
to provide prisoners for the current jail and for the planned new jail. Yakima had planned to get
funding a little earlier than they have, and now they will know if they will build their new and much
bigger jail by the year's end. They also have figured the cost for medical, dental, and psychiatric care
costs about $5/day for each prisoner. Finally, they want the right to refuse to accept the worst
behavioral or medically needy prisoners. The $5/day medical charge will start immediately, so
changes the cost of jailing prisoners. The committee did not have any problems with the new
contract, but wanted the rest of the COuncil to be aware of the changes. Recommend contract to
COW for approval.
2. Rhonda animal control has not been an issue in recent months.
Animal
Control
explained
Tukwila is the'only south end city which has enhanced service, which means we get some dedicated
hours where animal patrol spends time in Tukwila, looking for strays and problem animals. It's
unclear how many additional hours Tukwila has been getting in recent months, as Animal Control
has had some staff shortages. Dave had questions about Tukwila's animal control services: the
number of calls for service from Tukwila; the number of animals picked up; the hours animal control
serves Tukwila and other areas; the cities animal control serves and the number of officers they have;
and a revenues/expenditures analysis including how many animal licenses the city issues. Animal
Control wants to raise the rate of enhancement costs from $28/hour to $60/hour. Renton has their
own animal control, and police officers handle animal control when the officer isn't them. Rhonda
will bring information back to the next meeting. Reschedule.
3. Saie of Surplus Property The City bought property at 4501 South 134th Street hoping to put a
vactor waste station there. When neighbors protested, the' City decided to sell the property, and
OPUS has agreed to buy it. The price is just above the appraised price, and is agreeable to the City.
OPUS has asked for a 180 days earnest money period in order to conduct their "due diligence" study.
The $700,000 cost will be paid upon closing. The committee learned the money will go back to
Surface Water, where the funds that bought the property originally came from. Recommend
approval to that evening's Regular Meetinl~.
4. Seattle Southside Website One of the things joining with Sea Tac has allowed Kathryn to do is
to get a very pro fessional website that will have great capabilities and be easy to use. A committee of
the Sea Tac and Tukwila computer gums, plus the Port, a website manager and Kathryn's office, all
evaluated 20 proposals to develop this site. The one they chose was a company that will allow the
office to own the coding. The new site will allow the Chamber to make hotel reservations for all the
member hotels, and be able to show pictures of some of the advantages of the area. Kathryn will brief
the whole Council on this soon. Information only.
Committee chair approval
. · [.
TIll-ASSOCIATION
LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL
To assure the capacity of cities and counties to meet criminal justice needs, protect public health,
and provide other critical services, the Tri-Assoeiation recommends that the Legislature protect
local governments' existing revenue base and authorize the following revenue options:
RELIEF FOIl LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
· State assistance'to local governments that suffered a sizeable loss of their general fund revenues
is essential to assure that they can provide minimum levels of services. (Funding source to be
determined.)
· Continued funding for local public health is a high priority for state and local officials. The state
must find the means to meet growing demands and assure stable'program funding. Twenty-five
cents of the state levy unused capacity could be nsed to fund public health in the state.
Either of these two proposals would require funding from some unspecified source. With the
current deficit the State is facing, it is extremely unlikely that funding will be forthcoming. Even
shifting funds from Tukwila, for example, is problematical, because 1) we don't have so much
additional funds as was perceived in past years, and 2) because there aren't enough places doing
well enough to subsidize all those cities doing poorly.
LOCAL REVENUE OPTIONS PACKAGE
Sales Tax Subject to Voter Approval
· Counties are authorized to impose an additional sales tax up to 0.2%.
· If a county failed to impose such tax, a city therein may, subject to voter approval, levy
such tax.
· Countywide Distribution: Countywide sales taxes would be distributed using a formula
of 40/40/20.
o 40% for County regional services,
o 40% for City services.
o 20% for Unincorporated services.
· Within each county, the cities and county may negotiate a different distribution formula.
These are new taxes that would need voter approval to be passed. It only affects Tukwila if
passed by the State, and King County does not pass a tax. Then only if you chose to enact it, you
would put it to the Tukwila voters to decide whether they wanted to increase their sales tax.
Property Tax Subject to Voter Approval
Shift 35 cents per thousand from the unused state statutory levy capacity as follows:
· 10 cents countywide, increasing the maximum county general levy authority from $1.80
to $1.90 per thousand, for regional services.
· 25 cents to cities, increasing the maximum city levy authority from $3.60 to $3.85.
· 25 cents to unincorporated areas for police and other services. (This would require
formation of' an Unincorporated Service Area.)
IIf approved by the Legislature, this proposal would allow voters to vote on whether to increase
their property tax. You would need to decide whether Tukwila would vote on it or not.
Utility Taxes Subject to Action by the Local Legislative Authority
Cities are authorized to impose up to an additional 2% utility tax without voter approval.
Counties are authorized to have taxing powers in unincorporated areas identical to cities.
except that there is no authority to impose a business and occupation tax other than on
utility services.
· The authority to tax utility services shall apply to all such services provided to consumers
by any utility purveyor.
IMPROVE EXISTING REVENUE ELEMENTS
· Levy Lid Measures: Reduce the frequency of levy lid lift ballot measures to allow ,oters to
approve multi-year levy lid lifts.
· Flexibility for Capital Purposes: Loosen restrictions on the usage of the current Real Esta. te
Excise Tax (REET) to allow use for all capital purposes.
Current restrictions for the .5% Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) are that the first half (0.025%)
goes to park and open space capital. The second half (0.025) currently goes to Arterial SWeets
and the 104 fund. In 2002, both parks and streets got $300,000 each. The same is expected in
2003. This proposal would allow the REET to be used for all capital.
* Recognize Community Priorities: Eliminate or reduce statutory fund restrictions that xequire
local governments to spend money on lower priority programs, while higher priority programs are
being cut.
Parity for Utility Taxation within Cities: Authorize cities to impose utility taxes on special
purpose utility districts for services consumed within such cities.
If approved, this would allow Tukwila to apply a utility tax on sewer or water districts such a.s
Valvue or District 125 areas within the city without getting those special districts' permission
first. This doesn't apply to us, as Tukwila is not interested in a sewer or water utility tax at this
time.
Interest Earnings: Clarify treatment of interest earnings to permit counties to deposit interest
earnings from all county funds in the county current expense fund.
CHANGE STATE LAWS TO PERMIT CITIES AND COUNTIES TO
CUT COSTS AND MAKE MORE EFFICIENT USE OF EXISTING
RESOURCES