HomeMy WebLinkAboutFS 2013-08-20 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETCity of Tukwila
Finance and Safety
Committee
O Dennis Robertson, Chair
O Verna Seal
O De'Sean Quinn
AGENDA
TUESDAY, AUGUST 20, 2013 — 5:30 PM
CONFERENCE ROOM #3 (at east entrance of City Hall)
Distribution:
D. Robertson
V. Seal
D. Quinn
K. Hougardy
Mayor Haggerton
D. Cline
P. McCarthy
C. O'Flaherty
S. Kerslake
K. Matej
L. Humphrey
R. Still
C. Flores
Item
Recommended Action
Page
1. PRESENTATION(S)
2. BUSINESS AGENDA
a. Foster Golf Links marketing and operations.
a. Information only.
Pg.1
Rick Still, Parks & Recreation Director
b. Fire Department Interlocal Agreement for Zone 3.
b. Forward to 8/26 C.O.W.
Pg.29
Chris F /ores, Acting Fire Chief
and 9/3 Regular Mtg.
c. Fire Department semi - annual report.
c. Information only.
Pg.53
Chris F /ores, Acting Fire Chief
d. Financial Planning Model, Attachment A.
d. Information only.
Pg.75
Peggy McCarthy, Finance Director
3. ANNOUNCEMENTS
4. MISCELLANEOUS
Next Scheduled Meeting: Wednesday, September 4, 2013
SThe City of Tukwila strives to accommodate individuals with disabilities.
Please contact the City Clerk's Office at 206 - 433 -1800 or (TukwilaCityClerk @TukwilaWA.gov) for assistance.
TO:
City of Tukwila
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
Mayor Haggerton
Finance & Safety
FROM: Rick Still, Parks and Recreation Director
Tracy Gallaway, Volunteer & Events Superintendent
DATE: August 14, 2013
SUBJECT: Foster Golf Links Marketing and Operations
ISSUE
Review of Foster Golf Links Marketing and Operations.
BACKGROUND
Finance & Safety requested information regarding Foster Golf Links marketing and operations.
The Council desires to reduce the general fund subsidy of Foster Golf Links operations.
DISCUSSION
Finance & Safety requested a comparison of operational data from 2011 and 2012 for select
municipal operated and privately operated golf courses. Attachment A is a comprehensive list
of golf courses in the Puget Sound area. Attachment B includes the specific courses that were
selected by Finance & Safety for comparison to Foster Golf Links. Course data has been
completed for municipally run golf courses. Course data for privately run courses has been
requested but not received.
Staff has prepared a marketing work plan identifying strategies to: 1) Retain and strengthen our
core customer group; 2) Engage lapsed golfers and attract new golfers. Detailed work plan
strategies are listed in Attachment C.
In lieu of the City of Tukwila hiring a consultant, we have attached documents from two local
municipalities that have recently hired consultants to do comparative reviews of operational
models. Attachment D is the review and recommendation by NGF Consulting on the best
operational model for the Auburn Golf Course. Attachment E is the review and summary of
operating options completed by Pro Forma, LLC for the Lynnwood Municipal Golf Course. Full
reports can be made available if desired.
RECOMMENDATION
Discussion only.
ATTACHMENT
A. Comprehensive list of golf courses in the Puget Sound Region
B. Municipal Golf Course Comparison
C. 2013 Foster Golf Links Marketing Work Plan
D. Auburn Golf Course Operation Review Recommendations by NGF Consulting
E. Lynnwood Municipal Golf Course Evaluation of Operating Options — pages 34 -43
W:\2013 Info Memos - Council \FGL Marketing and Operations 8 -14 -13 memo.docx
1
2
Golf Course Comparison
Public Private
Attachment A
PUBLIC
PUBLIC
PUBLIC
PRIVATE
1 Auburn Golf Course
City of Auburn
29630 Green River Rd SE
Auburn
253- 833 -2350
18
6,450
71
121
$24.09-
35.18
Weekend
Driving
Golf
City
City
Concession
Full
Banquet
Yes
new clubhouse a course
upgrades
Facility
Owner
Address
Location
Phone
Holes
Yards
Par
Slope
Daily 9 -18
9 -18
Range
Par 3
Lessons
Maintenance
Pro shop
Restaurant Operations
Service
Space
Catering
comments
PUBLIC
PUBLIC
PUBLIC
PRIVATE
1 Auburn Golf Course
City of Auburn
29630 Green River Rd SE
Auburn
253- 833 -2350
18
6,450
71
121
$24.09-
35.18
$27 -40
Parea
yes
City
City
Concession
Yes
Yes
Yes
new clubhouse a course
upgrades
2 Riverbed Golf Complex
City of Kent
2019 W Meeker St
Kent
253 - 8543673
18
6,701
72
121
$22 -38
$24 -42
yes
yes
yes
City
City
Concession
Yes
Tent
Yes
front 9 redesign, course also
has miniature golf
3 Lynwood Municipal Golf Course
City of Lynwood
20200 68th Ave. W
Lynwood
425- 672-4653
18
4,741
65
102
$20 -30
$20 -34
yes
yes
City
City
Columbia Hospitality
Yes
Yes
Yes
course future uncertain
4 Cedarcrest Golf Course
City of Marysville
6810 84th St NE
Marysville
360- 363 -8460
18
5,811
70
114
$21 -32
$21 -37
City
City
Concession
Grill
5 Maplewood Golf Course
City of Renton
4050 Maple Valley Hwy
Renton
425 -430 -6800
18
5,698
72
118
$24 -32
$24 -38
yes
yes
City
City
Concession
Yes
Yes
Yes
6 Foster Golf Links
City of Tukwila
13500 Interurban Ave S
Tukwila
206- 242 -4221
18
4,804
68
101
$21 -30
$24 -35
p area
yes
City
City
Concession
Yes
Yes
Yes
nines were switched last year
7 Tumwater Valley Golf Course
City of Tumwater
4311 Tumwater Valley Drive
Tumwater
360 - 943 -9500
18
7,514
72
120
$33
$37
yes
yes
City
City
Concession
Yes
Yes
Yes
PUBLIC /PRIVATE
PUBLIC or PRIVATE
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
8 Bellevue Golf Course
City of Bellevue
5500 140th Ave NE
Bellevue
425 -452 -7250
18
5,555
71
113
$34
$40
Yes
yes
City
Premier Golf
Premier Golf
Grill
lighted range
Gold Mountain Cascade Golf
9 Course
City of Bremerton
7263 W Belfair Valley Rd
Bremerton
360 -415 -5432
18
6,059
71
117
$33
$40
yes
yes
City
Columbia Hospitality
Columbia Hospitality
Yes
Yes
Yes
Gold mountain Olympic Golf
10 Course
City of Bremerton
7263 W Belfair Rd
Bremerton
360 -415 -5432
18
6,034
72
124
$45
$65
yes
yes
City
Columbia Hospitality
Columbia Hospitality
Yes
Yes
Yes
11 Enumclaw Golf Course
City of Enumclaw
45220 288th Ave SE
Enumclaw
360 -825 -2827
18
5,561
70
105
$16 -24
$16 -24
Swiftwater Golf
Management
Swiftwater Golf
Management
Swiftwater Golf
Management
Grill
12 Legion Memorial Golf Course
City of Everett
144W Marine View Dr
Everett
425 -259 -4653
18
6,111
72
121
$24 -33
$27 -38
parea
yes
City
Premier Golf
Premier Golf
Grill
13 Walter Hall Memorial Golf Course
City of Everett
1226 W Casino Rd
Everett
425 -353 -4653
18
5,808
72
114
$20 -29
$23 -35
p area
yes
City
Premier Golf
Premier Golf
Grill
14 Lake Wilderness Golf Course
City of Maple Valley
25400 Witte Rd SE
Maple Valley
425 -432 -9405
18
5,081
70
111
$20 -30
$35
Premier
Premier Golf
Premier Golf
Yes
Yes
Yes
15 Interbay Golf Center
City of Seattle
2501 15th Ave W
Seattle
206 -285 -2200
9
1,272
28
None
$15
$17
Yes
yes
City
Premier Golf
Premier Golf
course also includes miniture
golf
16 Jackson Park Golf Course
City of Seattle
1000 NE 135th St
Seattle
206- 363 -4747
18
5,841
71
114
$34
$39
Yes
yes
City
Premier Golf
Premier Golf
Grill
17 Jefferson park Golf Couse
City of Seattle
4101 Beacon AveS
Seattle
206- 762 -4513
18
5,800
70
116
$34
$39
Yes
City
Premier Golf
Premier Golf
Grill
constructing new clubhouse
18 West Seattle Golf Club
City of Seattle
4470 35th Ave SW
Seattle
206 - 935 -5187
18
6,004
72
123
$34
$39
no
City
Premier Golf
Premier Golf
Yes
Yes
Yes
downtown view
19 Sumner Meadows Golf Links
City of Sumner
14802 8th St E
Sumner
253- 863 -8198
18
6,169
72
122
$19 -27
$25 -38
yes
yes
Billy Casper Golf
Billy Casper Golf
Billy Casper Golf
Grill
20 Meadow Park Golf Couse
Metro Parks Tacoma
7108 Lakewood Drive W
Tacoma
253 -473 -3033
18
5,801
71
117
$20 -32
$22 -37
yes
yes
yes
Metro Parks Tacoma
Metro Parks Tacoma
Concession
Grill
21 Chambers By
Piece County
6320 Grandview Drive W
University Place
e77-295 -4657
18
6,011
72
130
$155
$169
yes
yes
Kemper Sports
Kemper Sports
Kemper Sports
Yes
Yes
Yes
12 holes have changed in
preparation for the 2U15 Us
open
22 Fort Steilacoom Golf Course
Piece County
8202 87th Ave SW
Lakewood
253 -588 -0613
9
2,379
34
96
$11 -16.50
$11 -16.50
9
no
Piece County
Premier Golf
Premier Golf
23 Lake Spanaway Golf Course
Piece County
15602 Pacific Ave S
Tacoma
253 -531 -3660
18
6,274
72
129
$22 -31
$24 -37
Yes
yes
Piece County
Premier Golf
Premier Golf
Grill
24 Kayak Point Golf Course
Snohomish County
15711 Marine View Drive
Stanwood
360 -652 -9676
18
6,109
72
123
$33
$43
yes
yes
Access golf
Access golf
Access golf
Yes
Yes
Yes
W
-P
Golf Course Comparison
Public Private
Attachment A
Facility
Owner
Address
Location
Phone
Holes
Yards
Par
Slope
Daily 9 -18
Weekend
9 -18
Driving
Range
Par 3
Golf
Lessons
Maintenance
Pro shop
Restaurant Operations
Full
Service
Banquet
Space
Catering
Comments
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
25 Washington National Golf Club
Oki Golf
14330 SE Husky Way
Auburn
253- 333 -5000
18
6,424
72
136
$82
$99
yes
yes
Oki golf
Oki golf
Oki Golf
tent
yes
26 Redmond Ridge
Oki Golf
11825 Trilogy Pkwy
Redmond
425 - 836 -1150
18
6,503
70
131
$80
$95
yes
yes
Oki golf
Oki golf
Oki Golf
tent
yes
27 Trophy Lake Golf and Casting
Oki Golf
3900 SW Lake Flora Road
Port Orchard
360 - 874 -8337
18
6,162
72
129
$65
$85
yes
yes
Oki golf
Oki golf
Oki Golf
Yes
Yes
Yes
28 Echo Falls
Oki Golf
20414 121st Ave
Woodinville
877- 395 -2138
18
6,000
70
122
$47
$59
yes
yes
Oki golf
Oki golf
Oki Golf
Yes
Yes
Yes
29 Harbor Pointe Golf Club
Oki Golf
11817 Harbor Pointe Blvd
Mukilteo
425 - 355 -6060
18
6,055
72
125
$55
$69
yes
yes
Oki golf
Oki golf
Oki Golf
Yes
Yes
Yes
30 Hawks Prairie
Oki Golf
8383 Vicwood Ln
Lacey
800 - 558 -3348
36
6,800
72
138/117
$40
$46
yes
yes
Oki golf
Oki golf
Oki Golf
31 Newcastle
Oki Golf
15500 Penny Lane
Newcastle
425 - 793,653
36
7,024
72
133/
$170/$125
$170/$125
yes
yes
Oki golf
Oki golf
Oki Golf
Yes
Yes
Yes
32 Capitol City Golf Club
Access golf
5225 Yelm Highway SE
Olympia
360,91 -51n
18
6,369
72
120
$24
$31
yes
yes
Access golf
Access golf
Access golf
Yes
Yes
Yes
33 Willows Run Golf Coyote Creek
Access golf
10402 Willows Rd NE
Redmond
425 -883 -1200
18
5,826
72
110
$43
$56
yes
yes
Access golf
Access golf
Access golf
Yes
Yes
Yes
!mamas
miniture golf
34 Willows Run Golf Heron Lake
Access golf
10442 Willows Rd NE
Redmond
425- 885 -5476
9
1,107
27
None
$11 -17
$13 -19
yes
yes
Access golf
Access golf
Access golf
Yes
Yes
Yes
35 Willows Run Golf Eagles Talon
Access golf
10402 Willows Rd NE
Redmond
425 -883 -1200
18
6,238
72
121
$43
$56
yes
yes
Access golf
Access golf
Access golf
Yes
Yes
Yes
36 Druids Glen Golf Course
Access golf
29925 207th Ave SE
Covington
253 -638 -1200
18
6,004
72
134
$42
$58
yes
yes
Access golf
Access golf
Access golf
Yes
Yes
Yes
37 Home Course
PNGA WGA
2300 Hoffman Blvd
Dupont
866- 964 -0520
18
6,093
72
127
$52
$62
yes
yes
PNGA WGA
PNGA WGA
38 Elk Run Golf Club
private
22500 SE 275th Place
Maple Valley
425,32 -8800
18
5,400
71
118
$22 -34
$28 -42
yes
yes
Owner
Owner
Owner
Yes
Yes
Yes
39 Brookdale Golf Club
Privately owned
1802 Brookdale Road E
Tacoma
253 - 537,400
18
6,203
71
115
$15 -20
$17 -25
Owner
40 Lipoma Firs Golf Course
Privately owned
18615 110th Ave E
Puyallup
253- 841,396
27
6,217
72
121
$17 -25
$20 -30
yes
yes
Owner
Owner
Owner
41 Kenwanda Golf Course
Privately owned
14030 Kenwanda Drive
Snohomish
360 -668 -1166
18
5,336
69
104
$18 -24
$18 -28
Owner
42 McCormick Woods Golf Course
Ryan More Golf
5155 McCormick Woods Drive SW
Port Orchard
360 - 895 -0130
18
6,165
72
124
$45
$59
yes
yes
Ryan More Golf
Ryan More Golf
Ryan More Golf
Yes
Yes
Yes
43 Oakbrook
Ryan More Golf
8102 Zircon Drive SW
Lakewood
253 - 584 -8888
18
6,290
71
126
$45
$59
yes
yes
Ryan More Golf
Ryan More Golf
Ryan More Golf
Yes
Yes
Yes
44 Classic Golf Club
Ryan More Golf
4908 208th St E
Spanaway
253 - 847,440
18
6,008
72
129
$39
$49
yes
yes
Ryan More Golf
Ryan More Golf
Ryan More Golf
Yes
Yes
Yes
45 Whispering Firs
Military
Building 895 Lincoln Blvd.
Joint base FT MC
253- 982,927
18
6,646
72
122
$35
$40
yes
yes
Military/civilian services
Military/civilian services
Military/civilian services
Yes
Yes
Yes
Eagles Pride at Joint Base Lewis -
46 McChord
Military
Interstate 5 Exit 116, Mouts Rd
Tacoma
253 -967 -6522
27
6,440
72
120
$21
$40
yes
yes
Military/civilian services
Military/civilian services
Military/civilian services
47 Battle Creek Golf Course
Private
6006 Meridian Ave N
Marysville
360 -659 -7931
18
6,153
73
117
$17.50 -27
$20 -34
yes
yes
yes
Owner
Owner
Owner
Yes
Yes
Yes
48 Course
Private
14604 149th St Ct E
Orting
360 -893 -3171
18
6,647
72
113
$36
$45
yes
yes
yes
Owner
Owner
Owner
Yes
Yes
Yes
49 Allenmore
Elks
2125 Cedar St
Tacoma
253- 627 -72n
18
5,906
71
115
$30
$35
Elks
Elks
Concession
Yes
Yes
Yes
building a new pro shop
50 Lake Padden Golf Course
Lake Padden, LLC
4882 Samish Way
Bellingham
360- 738 -7400
18
6,575
72
127
$18 -30
$19 -37
yes
yes
Lake Padden, LLC
Lake Padden, LLC
Lake Padden, LLC
Yes
Yes
Yes
51 Wayne Golf Course
Private
16721 96th Ave NE
Bothell
425,86,714
18
4,326
65
93
$17 -23
$18 -26
Owner
Owner
greens fee of ,i, nefore
noon mon and wed
52 Tyee Valley Golf Course
Port of Seattle
2401 S 192nd St
Sea Tac
206 - 878 -3540
9
3,000
36
108
$12 -15
$12 -15
concession
concession
orshunors play for 510
weekdays
53 Twin Rivers Golf Course
Privately owned
4446 Preston -Fall City Road SE
Fall City
425- 222 -7575
18
5,563
70
108
$20 -33
$21 -38
yes
yes
Owner
Owner
54 Snohomish Golf Course
Privately owned
7805 147th Ave SE
Fall City
360 -568 -2676
18
6,325
72
123
$17.50 -27
$22 -34
Owner
Owner
Owner
55 Snoqualmie Falls Golf Course
Privately owned
35109 SE Fish Hatchery Rd
Fall City
425- 392 -1276
18
5,465
71
102
$20 -31
$25 -39
yes
yes
Owner
Owner
56 Tapps Island Golf Course
Privately owned
20818 Island Parkway E
Sumner
253 -862 -7011
9
2,786
65
122
$18 -28
$21 -33
Owner
Owner
Owner
57 Jade Greens Golf Course
Privately owned
18330 SE Lake Holm Road
Auburn
253- 931 -8562
9
2,531
34
108
$17 -27
$20 -30
yes
yes
Owner
Owner
Owner
58 Mount Si Golf Course
Privately owned
9010 Boalch Ave SE
Snoqualmie
425 - 888 -1541
18
6,008
72
115
$24 -39
$31 -49
yes
yes
Owner
Owner
Owner
Yes
Yes
Yes
59 Madrona Links Golf Course
Privately owned
6304 22nd Ave NW
Gig Harbor
253 - 851 -5193
18
5,193
71
109
$20 -27
$22 -30
Owner
Owner
Owner
Yes
Yes
Yes
60 North Shore Golf Course
Privately owned
4101 North Shore Blvd
Tacoma
253- 927 -1375
18
6,039
71
123
$15 -28
$20 -35
yes
yes
Owner
Owner
Concession
Yes
Yes
Yes
61 Delphi Golf Club
Privately owned
6340 Neylon Drive SW
Olympia
360- 357 -6437
9
1,944
32
101
$13 -19
$15 -21
Owner
Owner
Owner
62 Cascade Golf Course
Privately owned
14303 436th Ave SE
North Bend
425 -888 -0227
9
2,817
36
108
$18 -27
$19 -29
yes
Owner
Owner
Concession
Yes
01
6
ATTACHMENT B
Municipal Golf Course Comparision
Course
Auburn Golf
Course
Riverbend Golf
Complex
Lynnwood
Municipal Golf
Course
Cedarcrest
Golf Course
Tumwater
Golf Course
Foster Golf
Links
Operated by
Auburn
Kent
Lynnwood
Marysville
Tumwater
Tukwila
Yardage
6,450
6,701
4,741
5,811
7,154
4,808
Acreage
150
167
75
99.6
200
77
2011 Rounds
45,968
56,900
40,302
37,380
28,000
45,947
2012 Rounds
45,704
56,700
40,803
34,366
26,000
47,392
2011 Revenues
$ 1,366,634
$ 1,214,313
$ 1,034,513
$ 912,939
$ 1,815,667
$ 1,340,416
2012 Revenues
$ 1,371,364
$ 1,240,538
$ 1,037,580
$ 890,869
$ 2,121,354
$ 1,441,050
2011 Expenses
$ 1,302,064
$ 1,269,118
$ 1,418,973
$ 1,029,000
$ 1,815,667
$ 1,544,678
2012 Expenses
$ 1,348,992
$ 1,221,537
$ 1,076,650
$ 1,042,000
$ 2,121,354
$ 1,402,686
Municipal
Employees
8 FTE
11.35 FTE
4 FTE
4 FTE
4 FTE
8.25 FTE
Information pending on the following courses:
Course
Bellevue
Municipal Golf
Course
Lake Padden
(Bellingham)
Gold
Mountain
Olympic
Gold
Mountain
Cascade
Enumclaw
Golf Course
Maplewood
Golf Course
Operated by
Premier Golf
Center
Lake Padden,
LLC
Bremerton
Bremerton
Swiftwater
Mgmt., LLC
Renton
Yardage
5,555
6,575
6,034
6,059
5,561
5,698
Acreage
107
2011 Rounds
51,337
2012 Rounds
55,045
2011 Revenues
$ 2,082,414
2012 Revenues
$ 2,140,049
2011 Expenses
$ 2,272,417
2012 Expenses
$ 2,226,071
Municipal
Employees
9 FTE
7
8
ATTACHMENT C
Foster Golf Links - 2013 Marketing Work Plan
Goals
1. Create a welcome environment for members, guests & community
2. To grow the game
3. Financially successful
4. Source of pride to the community
Strategies
1. Retain & strengthen core customer
2. Engage lapsed golfers
3. Drive new golfers to the facility
Tools
1. Cybergolf (webpage)
a. Create tournament and league microsites
b. Utilize market discounts ( "groupon" type service)
c. Integrate our social media with website
2. Text messaging services
3. Golf Now tee time booking services
Strategy #1 — Retaining & strengthening core customer
1. Build better relationship with core customer
a. Increase communication
b. Listening to wants & needs
i. Survey data base, members, league players & E- members
Developing core customer involves creating a value and developing a relationship in all
three areas of service the facility offers. This will require that all the staff members
work to create a positive experience for every customer.
1. Pro shop
2. Restaurant
3. Golf course
Developing & maintaining functional database
1. Culled
2. Update
3. Categorize
a. Customer preference
b. League players
c. Members
d. Zip codes
e. Age
f. Gender
g. Price driven customers
9
Strategy #2 & #3 — Engage lapsed golfers and attract new golfers
Foster Golf Links provides a great venue to engage lapsed golfers and promote new
players.
1. Friendly course, easy to play
2. Affordable
3. Family friendly (weekend special rate)
Get "Golf Ready" program (PGA program providing group lessons at affordable rates)
Targeted Audience
1. Ladies clinics
2. Events
3. Reorganization of the ladies club
4. Family golfers
Create loyalty program
Utilize information captured in customer database to create an incentive based
loyalty program.
Tournaments & League Play
Tournaments are a great revenue source and opportunity to develop new
customers. Provide better service to our league participants.
1. New downloadable tournament package on website
2. Tournament & league microsite for each group
3. New tournament menu
10
ATTACHMENT D
Auburn Golf Course Operational Review by NGF Consulting (November 2011)
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BASIC OVERSIGHT AND STRUCTURE
The NGF Consulting recommendation for the future operation of the Auburn Golf Course is
based on our understanding of the economic performance of the facility and the City's need to
maximize this performance. The following section summarizes the options available to the City
of Auburn by presenting descriptions of the most typical management options for public sector
golf operations, as well as advantages, disadvantages and public policy implications of each
option. Before presenting the recommended management arrangement for the City's golf
course, NGF Consulting has presented three basic options the City could consider for golf
facility operations.
Management Options
These options, which are presented in order of most direct City involvement to the least City
involvement, include:
1. Self Operation. Under this scenario, the City would continue to operate the facilities
under direct control of the Director of Recreation and through an on -site Golf
Manager who is a City employee (essentially status quo).
2. Full- Service Management Contract. Hire a management company to operate all
aspects of the Auburn GC.
3. Concession Agreements. Similar to a lease agreements and can come in several
types or combinations, the most common being:
a) Multiple Concessions would involve creating multiple contract agreements for
separate entities for each facet of the golf operation (pro shop, food / beverage,
and maintenance).
4. Lease / Concession. Lease the facility to a private operator in exchange for an
annual (or monthly / quarterly) lease payment to the City. The lease could be
established to include certain lessee requirements, including capital investment in
facility improvements. Maintenance standards and compliance policies would be
included, and some restrictions regarding setting of green fees could be included.
5. Hybrid Contract. A hybrid contract combines some of the advantages of a lease
with those of a management contract. These are usually of shorter term (3 -5 years)
than a lease and should have escape clauses that can be triggered if the operator
does not perform up to expectation.
Management contracts and operating leases are the most commonly used terms to describe a
contract between a municipality and a private golf course operator. Each has significant
differences, but also several common characteristics. A general discussion of each option,
along with key advantages and disadvantages is presented in the following paragraphs.
Option 1: Self - Operation by City
Self- operation gives the City the greatest control over golf operations. The City of Auburn would
continue to have control over all employees, course maintenance, policies and procedures,
hours of operation, fee schedules, and operating and capital budgets. All revenues would be
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. — City of Auburn Golf Operations — DRAFT Report — 44
available to pay for operating and maintaining the facilities. This option is essentially the 'status
quo' option for Auburn.
Advantages of Self- Operation
• Simplest option
• Direct City control of the assets
• All workers are City employees
Disadvantages of Self- Operation
• Golf operation may experience fiscal loss and require subsidies from other
departments (i.e., taxpayer support).
• Revenues may not cover rapidly increasing costs (particularly labor), especially when
11
the golf market is in decline.
• In the future, the City may lack necessary expertise in managing golf facilities (not
the case in 2011).
• When revenues and /or operating /capital reserves are down, needed improvements
may not be funded (or at least deferred). Auburn Golf Course has traditionally funded
capital upgrades, but recent addition of debt service has made this difficult in last few
years.
Discussion and Policy Implications
Under this option, the City will have to be prepared to fund all needed improvements, and these
needs may be in excess of the Golf Enterprise Fund balance (as at present). Providing this
funding would be consistent with the City's goal of providing affordable recreation to its citizens,
and the community benefit of having the Auburn GC would be preserved. If the City was not
willing to fund capital improvements and ever - increasing operating expenses, this could
ultimately result in a less attractive product to golfers, leading to rounds and revenue decreases.
Further, this operational scenario allows for the maximum public accommodation of the facility in
terms of access and programs in areas such as high school golf, beginner programs, senior
discounts, winter passes, league programs, and the Men's Club activities.
Option 2: Full Service Management Contract
The primary goal of a management contract or management agreement is to provide a golf
facility with experienced, professional managers who are responsible for the daily operations,
thus relieving the owner (City) of this task. In a typical management contract, the municipality
hires a firm that is charged with all management responsibility. The municipality funds all capital
improvements, and the management firm hires all employees. Because employees work for the
management firm and not the City, payroll cost may be less; thus, the operating expenses may
be reduced. Management fees paid as compensation in these agreements typically fall between
two and four percent (3% to 6 %) of total revenues, or approximately $41,000 to $82,000 for the
Auburn Golf Course without F & B, and possibly as high as $65,000 to $130,000 if the full gross
F & B is included.
Advantages of Management Contracts
• Operating costs are often significantly reduced due to labor cost reductions. These
reductions come in several forms, including staff reductions (number of positions
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. - City of Auburn Golf Operations - DRAFT Report - 45
reduced - possibly affecting service), reduction in salary, and reductions in fringe
benefits.
• It is assumed that the company hired would have individuals to staff the facility that
have experience and expertise in golf facility operations, plus the support of
(sometimes national) corporate network. Not only can this company provide help in
operations and maintenance, but also in other areas such as marketing and
merchandising.
• The City is removed from day -to -day operation in exchange for a payment of a predetermined
fee plus a percentage of gross revenues or some other formula, which is
equitable to both parties. In addition, net revenues (if any) are retained by the City.
Disadvantages of Management Contracts
• Though this option offers the City more control than with an operating lease, it offers
less control than self- operation.
• Unlike a lease, management contracts usually do not provide a guaranteed income
for the owner (the City), but rather a guaranteed income for the management entity
(operating risk remains with the City).
• The City would still be responsible for capital improvements (which NGF Consulting
believes will continue to be an important element in the case of Auburn Golf Course).
• The City would still need staff with golf course expertise who could spend a
significant amount of time overseeing the golf operation and contract compliance.
12
Discussion and Policy Implications
This is an option that is typically considered as a reaction to total system failure and the inability
of City staff to either appropriately operate the golf course (management, marketing,
maintenance, etc.), or control expenses. Still, under this option the total business risk would still
lie with the City of Auburn, and it seems very unlikely that this type of arrangement would
significantly alter the basic revenue /expense equation that is present at Auburn Golf Course in
2011. It is also expected that any agreement of this type would have to include the food and
beverage and banquet operations, as these elements are key to overall golf operations and
would be required by any private management agreement.
Further, the City of Auburn has 8 full -time and 16 seasonal (part-time) employees on the payroll,
plus volunteers. Many of these employees are long -term City employees with lengthy records of
service to the City of Auburn, and some are even unionized. It is likely that under any
privatization structure, the method used by the private sector to achieve desired economic
profitability will be to either terminate existing City golf employees, or reduce salaries and
benefits of existing employees. It is understood by NGF that replacing unionized workers
through privatization is not allowable in Auburn.
Further, NGF notes that in the last few years the golf system has experienced what can best be
described as a "perfect storm" of events including a national recession, increasing competition,
changing demographics, and extremely poor weather in 2010 and 2011, factors that would have
affected any private operator as well as City employees.
Option 3: Concession Agreements
This form of agreement is similar to a lease agreement. However, a concession agreement
usually involves granting a license to operate a facility rather than the right to occupy the
premises. It is very common in the golf industry, especially in the food and beverage service
area, and presently exists with the food and beverage concession with Copper Falls Restaurant.
The second most typical concession agreement would be for the Pro Shop, including one or
more of the cart, merchandise, lesson, and driving range revenue centers. In this case, the
municipality receives all green fees, plus an agreed upon percentage of the other revenue
centers. The municipality typically is responsible for maintenance. This was in place at Auburn
Golf Course in previous years through the 1980s and 1990s. Because of the short term of most
concession agreements, there is little incentive for the concessionaire to make major
investments.
Advantages of Concession Agreements
• The City would be removed from the day -to -day operation (if a pro shop or full facility
concession) in exchange for green fees and a pre- determined percentage of other
gross receipts.
• Concession agreements provide more control than an operating lease, but less than
a management contract.
• The term of a concession agreement is typically shorter than an operating lease.
Disadvantages of Concession Agreements
• Concession agreements do not provide guaranteed revenue to the municipality and
the City will still be responsible for facilities maintenance (operating risk remains
with the City).
• The City would be responsible for all major capital improvements.
• In most cases, the City would be expected to retain the very expensive course
maintenance function.
• There are likely to be few highly qualified management firms interested in a shortterm
concession agreement, as these agreements are most often with a single
individual (golf professional). Management firms frequently prefer to put their
resources into projects that have longer terms and have the potential to be more
financially rewarding.
13
Discussion and Policy Implications - Maintenance -Only Concession
Another area of separate concessions is in maintenance -only contracts. In this case, the pro
shop and food & beverage operations would operate under separate concession agreements, or
by the City, but the City would privatize the maintenance function to another private entity. This
model has become more common in certain areas of the country where labor costs for
maintenance are increasing too rapidly to keep under control, or where maintenance staffs have
been reduced significantly to reduce expense thereby reducing the overall quality of
maintenance. Golf course maintenance, including associated labor, is almost universally the
largest single line expense item on a golf course's operating budget. This is especially true in
public sector golf operations, when employee wage and benefit costs are often significantly
higher than in the private sector.
There are a number of companies that specialize in fixed -fee outsourced golf course
maintenance, ranging from single- contract operators to industry leaders such as ValleyCrest
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. - City of Auburn Golf Operations - DRAFT Report - 47
Golf Course Maintenance, which reports 54 total contracts, and International Golf Maintenance
(IGM), which totals 45 contracts. Maintenance companies are able to offer considerable
maintenance cost savings due to several reasons, foremost of which is the ability to employ
cost - effective manpower and scheduling strategies, which most municipalities are constrained
from doing. Additional savings are often achieved through the ability of the larger companies to
leverage national purchasing agreements for equipment, materials and supplies, and through
other economies of scale.
The advantages to this type of arrangement include a likely reduction in maintenance labor
expense with comparable quality. The disadvantages include difficulty finding good companies,
enforcing the contract, and getting the system to work well together with pro shop management.
Auburn Golf Course has a particularly strong resource in the Head Superintendent who has
been at this golf course for 35 years, a resource that may not be included in any maintenance
outsource arrangement. Again, the NGF understands that replacing unionized workers through
privatization is not allowable in Auburn.
Option 4: Operating Lease
The primary goals of an operating lease are to relieve the golf course owner (City) of all
operating concerns, to ensure a minimum rent payment to the City, and to improve and /or
protect the asset. An operating lease is similar to a management contract in that the lessee, like
the management firm, hires and fires all employees and is responsible for the day -to -day
operation of the facility. The difference between the two is that the lessee would be committed
to pay all operating expenses, supply equipment, and, typically, provide some capital for
investment in the golf facility. The ability of the selected private vendor to have control over the
labor resource at the facility, and not have to pay "municipal" wages and benefits, would be key
to making this arrangement work. These leases are typically for a longer term (longer than 10
years), especially when large lessee capital investment is involved.
In exchange for incurring all operating expenses and capital upkeep, the private lessee would
receive most (if not all) of the revenue and pay the City either a flat payment (flat lease) or a
percentage of revenue (percentage lease). It is assumed by NGF that the City of Auburn would
require the lease payment to be at least equal to the required annual debt service on the
clubhouse (approximately $415,000 per year through 2025). In today's golf economy, it is very
unlikely the City will be able to find a private partner willing to pay that amount as many recent
leases observed by NGF in the 2011 golf economy have been much closer to the $50,000 to
$100,000 per year range, excluding carts and equipment. As both the carts and equipment are
owned by the City, some accommodation may be made but still unlikely to reach the level of
$400,000 per year in lease payment to the City.
Advantages to Leasing
• Burden of Risk. Leasing the facility to a private entity shifts the burden of
operational risk to the lessee. This includes the risk associated with rapidly rising
labor and other expenses, as well as potential continued downturns in rounds played
and revenues. Barring a breach of the contract, the City could have a guaranteed net
revenue stream. The only expenses remaining with the City will be those associated
14
with administering the contract, oversight, and compliance.
• Simplicity. The City would be relieved of the day -to -day responsibility in maintaining
and operating these facilities. (As with all management options, the City should still
have a person who has golf course expertise monitoring the operation and enforcing
contract compliance — i.e., Director of Golf Operations or Golf Course Manager).
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. — City of Auburn Golf Operations — DRAFT Report — 48
• Capital Improvements. Depending on the relative attractiveness of the business
opportunity to the private entity, the lease terms could require (or at least incentivize)
the lessee to make, or at least contribute significantly to, needed capital
improvements (i.e., improving drainage, maintenance facility and on- course
services).
• Maintenance Equipment. The lessee would be responsible for providing
maintenance equipment and golf carts.
Disadvantages to Leasing
• Control. This lease option offers municipalities the least amount of control over the
golf course operation, especially with regard to resident use of the facility and pricing.
• Profit Motive. This is closely tied to the control issue. If not carefully executed, a
lease arrangement may conflict with the objective of providing an affordable
recreation activity for residents, as private interests (including maximizing return) can
often be in opposition to public interests (such as providing a community service).
• Labor Issues. The lease could lead to public sector employees losing their positions
at the golf course, or at least face reductions in pay and /or benefits.
• Revenue Constraint. As would be expected when one party shares a
disproportionately low share of the risk, the City would receive less of the upside
revenue potential than it would with a management contract.
• Long Term. Leases are typically for a long term, especially if capital improvements
are included in the lease terms. This makes it difficult to get out of the lease, should
the municipality become displeased with the lessee's operation of the facility.
• Down Market. The lessee may be forced to cut maintenance expenses and /or raise
fees if revenues do not meet expectations. Unexpected golf market downturns often
lead to the lessee seeking to renegotiate terms.
Discussion and Policy Implications
While leasing of public sector golf facilities was popular in previous decades, its popularity
waned in the 1990s as golf revenues were increasing and public agencies began to see what
they thought were large sums in golf revenue going to an outside vendor and not being
reinvested in the facility or going as profit to the municipality. However, since the turn of the 21st
century, leases are coming back into fashion for municipal golf facilities, particularly in the 2009-
2011 period of time, with public sector budget challenges. Leasing out the golf operations shifts
the burden of operating risk to the private vendor, eliminates large fiscal losses, and, in some
cases, provides a guaranteed revenue stream to public agencies. In most cases, the vendor will
also contribute to capital improvements.
Although the appeal of turning everything over to an outside agency may have a lot of merit,
especially in terms of transferring operational risk, we should note that the basic issues that tend
to drive municipalities into this option do not exist in Auburn golf operations. While there may be
some inflation in its expenses and diminishment of the golf enterprise working capital fund,
Auburn Golf is presently operating efficiently and working to increase revenue and reduce its
expense structure in 2011, despite challenges from uncontrollable factors. Overall, it does not
seem that the conditions in Auburn lend themselves to this sort of solution.
Further, the City of Auburn will also have to consider other issues related to leasing that should
be reviewed by City legal staff. NGF has noted the issues we find that commonly affect Cities
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. — City of Auburn Golf Operations — DRAFT Report — 49
considering leasing public sector -owned golf courses (some may also apply to management
contracts):
• Unionized Staff. The NGF review of Auburn Golf shows a unionized maintenance
15
staff that may have to be retained even in a lease agreement. If this is the case, the
lease becomes less attractive to the private sector.
• Bond Covenants. The clubhouse was funded through the issuance of a revenue
bond that remains in place through 2025. The restrictive covenants in bond issues of
this type typically prevent the "conveyance" of property in a lease agreement.
• Park Property. Further, the Auburn Golf Course may be considered a "park
property" that may also have restrictions on "conveyance" that may apply under a
lease option. The key issue in this possible constraint is the definition of
"conveyance," and whether a lease or some type of concession agreement would be
considered a "conveyance."
Option 5: Hybrid Management Contract
A Hybrid contract blends many of the advantages of a lease with those of a management
contract. Similar to a lease, the operations of the facility would be turned over to a privately
owned company who would be responsible for all the operating expenses. Thus the
management company assumes MOST of the risk. However, it is not a lease. It varies in a
number of ways, including.
• Term: A management contract is for a shorter period, typically three to five years.
• Variable Payment: In most cases the payment to the management entity has a low
fixed base, heavily weighted toward incentives on performance.
• Capital Improvements: Typically, the City would still be responsible for all major
capital improvements, although some management companies may be willing to
include some of the capital improvement recommendations contained in this report in
exchange for more favorable terms.
• Flexibility: A management contract can include all or only parts of the operation.
Advantages I Disadvantages
The advantages and disadvantages of a Hybrid contract generally mirror the management
agreement and leasing advantages and disadvantages, combining the best of both options for
the benefit of the municipality.
Discussion
The NGF Consulting review of the various operational considerations for the Auburn Golf
Course shows that two of the four options presented are probably not the best fit for the City of
Auburn and can be eliminated from further evaluation:
• Outright Lease. The NGF review of the lease option shows that leasing may not be
fully allowable under various legal and City charter provisions. The most important of
these are bond covenants, conveyance of park property and union issues. Further
review of these issues will be required if the City is to consider a lease option, as
there clearly are "gray" areas in these considerations.
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. — City of Auburn Golf Operations — DRAFT Report — 50
• Traditional Concession. This option will likely produce too many "working parts"
that require attention and shift the City burden from managing golf courses to
managing contracts. The City will likely still be responsible for covering losses and
making capital improvements (retain risk). Thus the multiple concession option is not
likely to bring the City into a more favorable economic position than it is at present.
In light of this, NGF sees the continued self- operation (as -is), or some form of management
agreement, as the two most appropriate options for the City going forward. However, NGF must
also note that if the City opts to pursue a management agreement for the Auburn Golf Course,
the key issues that must be addressed prior to making the evaluation include the issue of
whether to include the food and beverage operation into the agreement, given that it is under
contract through 2014.
NGF Recommendation
NGF recommends that the City of Auburn continue with its present operational structure,
with a business - oriented Golf Facility Manager (as at present), continue with upgrades to
its marketing (especially electronic), make some investment in the facility to improve
16
revenue, and make other modifications to operations, particularly food and beverage
operations, over the next two years (through 2013) to better promote the facility as an
ideal venue for tournaments, events and outings. As the new clubhouse was developed to
become a community resource, in addition to an amenity to the golf course, some form of
sharing of the total debt expense between City departments is also recommended and common
in the golf industry. Further, NGF Consulting recommends the City of Auburn explore a
management contract option only if action on these items still fails to improve net revenue by
the end of FY2013.
Public Policy Implication
If the above items can be adjusted to ease the economic burden on the City Golf System, the
continued self operation option becomes much more appropriate, and the privatization option
much less appealing as the Auburn Golf Course would be in much improved fiscal condition. If
the City is to seek a management company type of arrangement, NGF recommends that the
agreement be entered into only if:
• Hybrid Agreement. Includes a variable portion that helps spread the risk to the
operator.
• Include Some Capital Investment. Requires the private vendor to contribute capital
to the properties, which would be in their interest given the recommended
investments are designed to increase revenue.
• Commit to Public Service. The selected vendor will have to commit to a program of
service to the community by offering junior programs, high school access,
senior /junior discounts, frequent tournaments, honor league commitments, and other
activities presently employed by the Auburn Golf Course under self- operation.
• Oversight: The contract should contain an oversight mechanism that allows the City
to inspect the operation on a regular basis (such as twice a year) and have set
standards that the contractor should adhere to. If the contractor is not performing to
standards, then there would be financial consequences. (We further suggest that
these inspections be carried out by a qualified third party).
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. — City of Auburn Golf Operations — DRAFT Report — 51
17
18
Pro Forma
Aovi8DrS
ATTACHMENT E
ORS
\/| /��
VI: Golf Course Operating Options
The following section presents a description and information regarding various forms of golf course operation
and management available to the City of Lynnwood. Presently, Lynnwood Municipal Golf Course is self-
operated whereby the City is responsible for golf course maintenance, golf operations and overall manage-
ment, with the golf course food and beverage function provided under a concessionaire agreement with a
third party concessionaire.
There are four basic golf course operating options that are available to the City of Lynnwood:
■ Current Self-Operation
■ Facility Lease
■ Full Management Agreement
■ Hybrid Model
Responsibility for the basic maintenance, operation and management functions for each of these operating
models is summarized as follows:
`orrilbility for Follow'
Self- City/ City
Operation Concession |
Facility Private/ Private
Lease Concession
Management Private Private Private Private
Agreement
Hybrid City/Private Private/ Concession City/Private
Concession
In addition to the basic options outlined above, there are numerous other permutations which would create
alternative hybrid models. These alternative hybrid models, discussed later in this aection, combine some
form of self-operation, concession agreements, and/or management/contract private party agreements. All
of the operating options require City oversight responsibilities including contract monitoring, budget preparation
and review, management oversight, and the like, The degree of City participation varies by operating model.
Self-Operation Model
Currently, theOhyofLynnwoodmain\ainoandoperateathogolfooursein'houoeuaingeoombinationofhul|-
time/permanent and part time/seasonal City employees. The food and beverage function is the responsibility
Pro Forrna Advisors, LLC
Pro Forma
Adv/�ons`LC
��/��l�
\ ��/�.��/ /„.)
of a third party concessionaire. Under this model, the City receives all of the golf course revenue (including
rent payments from the food and beverage concession), and is responsible for all operating expenses and
capital costs, In addition, the City provides overhead support functions such as finance, human resources,
legal, and other general and administrative services.
Overtheyears'thenahaobeenadeurtrendawayfromCityae}f-oparation.oathenaremainnelahvelyfawmu-
nicipalities which continue to oelf-operatn. Most municipalities have elected to lease their facilities, retained a
professional management company, or entered into some combination of the lease management models
(that is, some form of hybrid operation). This trend has been driven by several factors, First, the cost of pub-
||u employees is higher than their priva e sector counterparts, primarily because of more comprehensive and
costly benefit packages. Second, municipalities have increasingly attempted to eliminate the financial risk of
self operation. Lastly, there has been a recognition on the part of municipalities that professional manage-
ment ganeraUyoanoperatemonaeffioienUy,adaptmonequick|ytodynamiomurketuond|tions.andgnzw
revenue.
The principal advantage of the self-operation mode is that the City retains full control ove all policies and
decisions regarding golf maintenance and operations. As well, the City is the sole beneficiary of any upside
performance of the golf course. The model also allows the retention of a loyal and tenured staff.
There are a number of disadvantages of the self-operation model. Labor costs tend to be higher than the
private sector due primarily to higher benefit packages. There is a high level of financial risk as the municipal-
ity bears all of the operating expenses and capital investment costs. The self-operation model typically con-
strains management from implementing quick changes in response to changing market conditions.
Golf Facility Lease
Under this option, the golf course is leased to a private golf course operator who provides course
maintenance, golf operations, and overall facility management services. The food and beverage operation
may be included under the golf course facility lease or provided under a separate lease to a dedicated food
and beverage operator. The operator's lease payments typically are based on a minimum rental payment
versus a percentage of golf, merchandise, |enaone, and food and beverage departmental gross revenue.
Under a typical facility lease, the lessee receives 100 percent of the revenue and is obligated to fund required
front-end capital improvements (if any), operating expenses, and a reserve for ongoing capital improvements.
As such, the financial risk is largely borne by the lessee. The term of the lease is negotiable, although the
length generally is related to operator capital improvement levels and rental payment terms,
There are many examples of the facility lease model, although most of these leases were negotiated 15-30
years ago, although it is much more common in California than in the Pacific Northwest. A survey of public
gnlfoounsoyintheStataofVVanhingtnnrevealoon|ynixofforty'thnaecoureaaare|eaaed.and{hemajohh/of
these are in the eastern part of the state. There has been limited activity in recent years, and golf facility
Pro Forma Advisors, LLC
20
Pro Forma
leases have not been particularly well received in the past four-five years due to the softness of the golf mar-
ket,
In general, under facility leases, the golf facilities are leased to a managemen company with a minimum lease
payment versus percentage rents. The contrac specifies performance standards, required capital improve-
ments and a range of contractual terms. The various terms of the leases are interrelated and the lease pay-
ments must be considered in the context of all the terms of the lease.
' Lease Term. The term of the facility leases shown generally ranges from 15-30 years. When front-end
lessee capital improvements are required, which generally is the case, the term of the lease must be
long enough to amortize these capital expenditures. The length of the term normally is a function of
the level of capital improvements. Occasionally a short-term agreement (less than five years) is
negotiated, but these are generally related to the continuation of an agreement with an operator where
minimum capital improvements are required or where an option is exercised to extend the lease term,
^ Minimum Rent, The minimum rent typically is established at about 75 to 80 percent of the expected
percentage rent' amount, The minimum often is adjusted annually to reflect about 80 percent of the
average of percentage rents paid during the prior three to four years operation, but never less than the
preceding minimum rent level,
` Percentage Rents. Percentage rents vary by golf department, although often a composite rate is
applied to greens fees, cart revenue, and driving range revenue. Merchandise, food and beverage,
and other minor departments generally have lower individual percentage rents primarily due to the
relatively small operating profit margins on these goods and services. The percentage rents are a
function of the length of term, required capital improvements, utility sharing agreements, and the
replacement reserve requirements, The rent percentage may increase over the term of the lease, The
higher the capital expenditure requirement, replacement reserve, and costs associated with utilities
and other course operations, the lower the percentage rent structure, Also, the market strength and
potential profitability of the course strongly influence percentage rents,
^ Fees and Operating Policies. Under most municipal facility leases, the lessor (City) retains substantial
control over setting fees and establishing operating policies, Ae well, apecifioguidelines such ao
maintenance standards are in-place or negotiated as an integral part of the lease terms. While
changes in fees and policies normally require City approval, in practice, the lessee has greater
influence in modifying fees and terms which financially benefit the lessee, Moreover, regardless of the
rigor of the|eaaaag^aemant.aoumberof^grayonaus.euohua|eve|ofoouroeuonditioning.genaoa||y
remain which often are exploited by the lessee,
~ Capital Improvements. Most facility leases call for capital improvements to be funded by the lessee. A
list of improvements is specified and a time frame for their implementation is established. The capital
improvements requirement varies widely, from less than $500,000 to over $2 million.
° Capital Improvement Replacement Reserve. Generally, some provision for establishing a reserve for
ongoing future capital improvements is stipulated. The replacement reserve is normally a percentage
Pro Forma
AdviSorS -::„..C,
of greens fee revenue, with the percentage depending on anticipated future capital requirements, the
ago of the course, and the front-end capital expenditure requirement. Usually, the replacement reserve
is in addition to percentage rents, but sometimes the reserve funds are credited against rent
payments.
Utilities. Typically, the lessee is responsible for utility costs. However, in situations where utility costs
are high, there may be some cost sharing of utilities, or some protection provided the lessee in terms
of ceilings or caps on utility rate increases,
For facility lease agreements, the marke potentials, specific course maintenance requirements, areas of
lessor/lessee responsibility, other contract terms, and overall economics must all be considered in establish-
ing an equitable lease structure. Thus, while the experience of other courses can serve as a general guide-
|ino.opaoifinconaideradonohou|dbegivonto1heun|quecharaoterish000faCity'sgo|foouroe.000haathe
location and marke strength. Further, the overall objectives of the City will influence the structure of contract
terms.
The marke for golf leases with municipalities has been substantially affected by the soft golf market condi-
tions experienced over recent years. The number of qualified investor/operator groups which have an inter-
estinauohagoeementaheodeo|inedahorp|8andthenantotmotunahaugenera||ybnenmmdifioddmwnwauJ.
In many instances, municipalities desiring leases are faced with the option of having to select groups with
limited experience in exchange for the lessee's willingness to invest private capital and commit to reasonable
rent payments.
It also should be noted that with the softening of golf markets, there have been a number of initiatives on the
part of lessees to renegotiate lease terms, particularly relating to courses which negotiated new leases in the
1995-2000 period. In the cases where rent concessions have been granted by the lessor, rent terms have
been modified by reducing base and percentage rent levels, often with nign|fivantincreases in potential par-
ticipation bythe|esaorinnevenuaabovethaoumant threshold.
The primary advantages of the facility lease option include a guaranteed minimum ren payment to the City
potential benefits of professional golf management, limited required participation by the lessor (City), mini-
mum financia|rixktntheCity, and private capital improvement funding availability. The primary disadvan-
tages of the facility lease option include waiving some control ove operating policies and procedures, com-
mi1montto|ongertermagnaamentu.and|imitedpartioipa1ioninupn|deDnenoia|performanca. Moreover, de-
pendingonthootrongthofthago|fmarket.a|euaamaynotbae0000mioa||yviab|etoaprivateaeotoropera'
toc
Management Agreement
This optio relates to a fee-for-service agreement with a Director of Golf, General Manager or an outside
management company. Golf and food and beverage functions may be combined or separated, but the
structure is the same. All functions would be under the authority of the contract golf director, General Man-
Pro Forma Advisors LLC Page 37 PFAID: 10-471
22
Pro Forma
Amv|Gnre^��
ager or management firm. Under a typical management agreement, the facility owner (City) receives all reve-
nues andis responsible for funding all capita improvements, operating expenses, and reserves for ongoing
capital reinvestment. In addition, the owner (City) pays the operator a fee for management of the facility. In
effect, the professional operator serves as the City's agent in managing, operating, and maintaining the golf
facility. Management compensation typically consists of a base fee, plus performance incentives. Increas-
ingly, public agencies are moving to a management contrac approach to operations and maintenance.
As previously indicated, under this structure, the City receives all revenue and is obligated to fund all
maintenance, operating and administrative expenses, including a management fee. The management fee is
in addition to all on-site salaries and expenses. The basic terms and conditions of the agreements are dis-
cussed be)mw.
Term
Generally, managemen terms are five year in length, long enough to allow a firm to amortize its initial efforts
to establish policies, pmcedures, and syokems, and to ensure sufficien job security for key employees.
Longer terms offer little advantage to the owner. The renewal of an agreement typically is for a period of
three to five years. The terms may be influenced by conditions dictated by the financing instrument used
such as tax-exempt bond IRS regulations (Internal Revenue Service Code Section 141), For example, the
IRS has a number of stipulations imposed to ensure a management contract does not result in private busi-
ness activity/u000fabond'finanoedfaci|ity Among other things, the IRS restricts contracts which give the
service provider an ownership or leasehold interest or provide compensation for services rendered based in
whole, or in part, on a share of net profits from operations of the facility. Specifically, the IRS will allow
agreement terms up to 15 years, but the structure of compensation is specific to the term. With 15-year
agreements, at least 95 percent of the total compensation must be fixed/guaranteed, At 10 years, at least
80 percent; and at 5 years, at least 50 percent must be fixed/guaranteed. As well, in accordance with IRS
regulations, incentive compensation cannot be based, in whole or in part, on a share of net profits, and thus
must be based on gross revenue or expense thresholds.
The IRS also requires the management agreement to have an agreement cancellation option for the owner,
typically at the end of three years. In cases where a cancellation provision is required by the financing
authority, management companies have not objected.
Compensation Structure
For moderate volume courses ($2.0-$2.5 million in annual golf/greens, carts, range) revenue, the base fee
generally ranges from $100,000 to $140,000 per year. Compensation typically consists of a base, or guar-
anteed fee, plus an incentive fee. For low volume courses ($1 million in golf revenue), the base fee generally
ranges from $80,000 to $100,000 per year for 18-hole courses. Incentive fees are structured such that ex-
pec1edperfonnancewmu|dneau|tinadditiona}oompenmationof$2O.O0Oto$5O.00O. Total compensation,
assuming budgets are met or slightly exceeded, for moderate volume 18-hole public courses, generally
Pro Forma Advisors, LLC Page 38 PFAID: 10-471
Pro Forma
AdvoOrs.0
ranges from $130,000 to $160,000 per year, and $100,000 to $120.000 for low volume courses. While
there are many ways of structuring incentive agreements, it is generally more effective to key them off of net
operating income, or gross revenue above established threshold levels, with incentive payments equaling
anywhere from 25 to 100 percent of the base fee.
The compensation noted above relates to agreements where all management staff, including day-to-day ac-
counting, are onsite, and there are no reimbursements for corporate support functions, marketing, or other
normal offsite management services, including routine travel. The cost of some extraordinary services (e.g.,
legal, specialty agronomical consulting, etc.) may be borne by the golf course owner.
Incentive compensation normally is triggered by performance which exceeds predetermined levels of net
operating income (defined as "earnings before intarent, taxea, deprecia1ion, and amortiza0on." or EBITDA) or
gross revenue. Since expenses are reasonably predictable, incentive payments based on gross revenue ex-
ceeding specified threshold levels often are workable.
It should be noted that golf revenue (greens, oarto, and range) has little associated variable cost, whereas
merchandise and food and beverage have very high variable costs. Given this, each revenue category
should be treated independently, such that incentive clauses should more greatly reward extraordinary golf
revenue compared with merchandise, food and beverage, lessons, and other miscellaneous sources.
Overall, total compensation for moderate and high volume golf courses should represent about 4-5 percent
of tota gross revenue. The 4-5 percen allowance is an industry standard which most professional golf man-
agementfinnouM|izowhenu||ooatinghomeoffioaaerv|caaforoouraaotheyowmandoparate. However, for
low volume golf courses, the management fee will represent a much higher percentage of gross revenue,
often 6-10%.
It is generally desirable for at leas one-quarter to one-third of total compensation to be incentive-based.
Again, the type of financing may influence the structure of the compensation and limit the portion which is
incentive-based.
Base Fee Adjustments
In many agreements, the base foe is inflation-adjusted. This is a negotiable point, and typically relates to the
structure of incentive compensation, which often serves as an inflation hedge.
Management Services
Offsite management services covered under the management fee include, although are not necessarily lim-
ited
^ Personnel/Human Resources
oTruning
' Payroll and Benefit Administration
" Procurement
Pro Forma Advisors, LLC Fage39 PFAID: 10-471
24
Pro Forma
8dmGoro
-'�l�`�[� �
'/��.
^ Management Reporting and Accounting Systems
' Internal Audits
Budgeting Support
^ Marketing Support
^ Agronomical Support
Typically, all of these services are included under the management fee. If not, an accordingly lower manage-
ment fee would be expected.
While the management company provides these services, they do so, in effect, as the agent for the City, The
City determines the fee structure, establishes policies, and has the right to approve compensation, employ-
ment preodoau.endotharaimi|aritoms. Clearly, the management firms provide input and recommendations,
but ultimately the City retains near-full control over all operating decisions.
Other Provisions
Daily accounting and management system reports are an integral part of the golf course operation. This
dsilyfuncdoncanbepnovidedon'oitebyQohoourseadodnistmtiveutaff.ora11hehomeoffioeoftheman-
agement company, When provided by on-site staff, the expense is borne by the course like any other oper-
ating expenao. VVhonprovideduff'ai\eby1hemanagnmentoompany, there often is a separate charge to the
City, in addition to the basic management fee.
There may be other services provided by the management company which are reimbursed by the City sepa-
rately fromthemanagementfee. Examp|enindudeirave|expenueabyhome'oMicemanagementotaM.out'
oideagmnomiva|ova|oationa.ondthe|ika. All of these elements of the management agreement are negotia-
b|e.undc|eady,theovera||uompensotionoonsiateoftheoumofthebaoefee.inoentivafee.andreimburse-
ments.
The primary advantages of the management agreement structure include the benefits related to professional
golf course management, lower wage and benefit structure related to private sector employment, shorter
term contractual commitments, full control over the overall golfer experience and operations, and full partici-
pation inupoidofinanc|a|perfonnanue. The major disadvantages of this form of operation include greater
participation required on the part of the contractor (City), financial risk, and inability to attract private capital.
Hybrid Model
There are numerous alternative hybrids which consist of some combination of concession agreements and
service contracts, and often such hybrids involve City-provided golf course maintenance. One alternative
hybrid would retain golf operations and food and beverage concessionaires, with golf course maintenance
responsibility retainedbytheCity,asoumart|y|nprovidod.Animi|araltemativehybhdvvou|dretaingo|fop'
arationuandfoodondbeveragaoonceaoionairea.withgo|fcounsnmointenanuarempona|bi|i\ynhMtedtoa
private landscape maintenance entity on a contract basis, The City woUld still be responsible for overall golf
course management. Another alternative model would involve retaining a golf operations professional (indi-
Page
Pro Forma Advisors, LLC
Pro Forma
AdmQDr3�LO
vidual or firm) on a fee-for-service basis, who would also be responsible for overall golf facility management
as well as the golf operations functions (reservations, utarting, pro ohop, range, carts). Under this al\ernative,
golf course maintenance could continue to be pr vided by the City, or contracted to a private landscape
maintenance provider. This option would provide the City with the professional operational oversight of a
private operator. These services would include marketing and sales and revenue management. The City
would receive all of the golf course revenues (greens, carts, range, merchandise) and bear most or all of the
operating expenses, paying a fee to the contractor for their service. Generally, the agreement with the golf
operations contractor has performance incentives structured in the compensation. Most of the benefits and
constraints discussed under the full management agreement would transfer to this option, with a lower base
fee.
There are several firms which provide contrac golf course maintenance on a fee-for-service basis. The con-
tractors employ private sector employees, paying private sector prevailing wages and benefits, which gener-
ally arawe||bu|owtheoonespondingpub|iooeoborwaQe/ben*fit scale. Maintenance is provided by a private
landscape provider, such as Valley Crest or International Golf Management (IGM), on a fixed fee basis subject
to standards and practices established by the public agency. The responsibilities of the concessionaire and
the structure of the golf operations concession agreement vary considerably.
Concessionaires normally pay rent to the City based on a percentage of gross revenue (percentage varies by
revenue category), SomeUmeu.therentcotegorieoonaadjueteddovvnwardtoreflec1thaconcasmiunairere-
sponsibility for reservation, greens fees collections, and starting, but in other cases a separate fee is paid to
the concessionaire by the City for these services. In these cases, the City receives rent from the conces-
sionaire, and also pays the concessionaire a fee for services.
Summary of Operating Ootons Strengths and Weaknesses
The strengths and weaknesses of the four basic options are outlined in Table VI-1. Each option offers advan-
tages and disadvantages relative to economic perfnnnanoe, the cost of payroll and employee benefits, city
oortm|, maintenance and influence on po|ig+making, more responsiveness of the operator, and efficiencies
relating to one operating entity, required city involvement, and other factors.
The current self-operatiion model, while having some benefits in terms of quality control, support from other
City departmenta, and upside financial partioipation, has many deficiencies. There are higher costs associ-
ated with public sector employment, financial hsk, and absence of professional golf management "best prac-
tices." The most significant disadvantage, at least in the current structure, is the City's inability to operate in
a business-oriented, entrepreneurial manner which allows management to adapt and respond to dynamic
market conditions. As well, the absence of an on-site manager with the authority to manage and coordinate
the various functions provided by multiple providers is pmb|emckic, potentially resulting in lower revenues,
less efficient operations and a diminished golfer experience.
Pro Forrna Advisors, LLC
26
pagew PFAID: 10-471
Pro Forma
,A,..dviSOrs�LC
' ��u/ ` ��
��
) /��[
[}�//
The strengths and weaknesses of a hybrid mode would depend on the specific model. Contracting the
maintenance function may offer cost savings, bu must be considered in the context of the City's policies
with respect to outsourcing jobs, Retaining a fee-for-service golf operations management entity/individual
offerau|mi|aredvantageaanddiaadvantogea000ciatedwiththe^managemen!mode|''—phncipa||yoffering
greater City control and participation in upside revenues, while increasing operating and financial risk to the
City.
Theturnkeyfaci|ity|eaaeoftenyia|doareaaoneb|afinancia|*a\urntotheCityandrequinaotho|eaotCityin'
vo|vemon1, but maintenance and golf operations service levels may be below those desired by the City, As
well, the City typically relinquishes at least some control over golf practices and policies, much of which may
be due to contract gray" areas. A major advantage of the turnkey operation is that capital funds may be
attracted from the private sector for course improvemento, with the amount directly related to the length of
the lease term.
A fee-for-service management agreement offers many advantages such as maintaining greater authority
managing the facility. Since the City would receive all revenues and expenses under this option, the financial
return to the City may exceed that of a turnkey facility lease, but carries with it additional financial exposure.
At present, service contracts are more prevalent in the private sector (management of daily fee golf courses).
However, there is an emerging trend toward this option primarily as a result of cities seeking to maintain
greater control without giving up the benefits of private sector management and operation.
Pro Forma Advisors, LLC
Pro Forma
AUv/�or8u�
r ,�_����
( >[�T|�l
Table 1/1-1: Strengths and Weaknesses of Golf Course Operating Options
Self-Operation
Facility Lease
Management Agreement
STRENGTHS
O Provides high level of City
control over rates, policies,
practices, and overall golf
experience
o Availability of City overhead
support functions
" Strong participation in up
o|definanoia|pedonnanca
o Provides opportunity to
retain specialist in food and
beverage
~ Preserves option to convert
to alternative operating
option
• Potentially provides some
financial return to City
• May produce guaranteed
minimum rent payment to
City
• Minimizes financial risk
• Minimizes political influence
with less direct involvement
of City with setting fees,
policies, and practices
• Offers potential benefits in
golf management expertise
• Potentially provides highes •
financial return to City.
• Provides high level of City
control
• Greater potential quality •
assurance
• Opportunity to provide
shorter term contracts
• PotenUa||ymoreoompadb|o°
with multiple operator op-
ticmo
• Provides opportunity to •
Provides high level of City
control over rates, policies,
practices, and overall golf
experience
Availability of City overhead
support functions
Strong participation in up-
side financial performance
Potential benefits from
lower private sector golf
operations payroll/benefits
Provides opportunity to
and specialized retain specialists in profes- retain specialists in golf
maintenance support serv- sional golf management operations and food and
ices ° Captures benefits of private beverage
• May provide private capital sector wage and benefit • Preserves option to convert
investment in facilities structure to alternative operating
option
"Management agreement for golf operations and over ll administration, with City-provided maintenance.
WEAKNESSES
o Constrains ability of man- •
ogament to adap and re-
spond to dynamic market •
conditions
o Entai|ah\ghleve|o/fnuncia|°
risk
~ Involves higher public sec- •
tor wage and benefit struc-
ture for maintenance/golf •
operations
. Reduces opportunity to
attract private capital due
to reduced lessee control
• Potential conflicts of multi-
ple concessionaires
°
Relatively high City monitor-
in ,enu|mmentn
Minimum operational and •
quality control
May involve long-term con-
tractual commitment
Minimizes financial upside,
particular in curren market •
Current weak market for
facility leases
Potential conflicts over
capital reinvestment re-
sponsibilities of contracting
parties
Requires more City in- •
volvement than facility lease
option
Minimizes private capital
investment in facilities,
Entails greatest leve of City °
financial risk
°
°
Entails high level of financial
risk
May involv higher public
sector maintenance wage
and benefit structure
Reduces opportunity to
attract private capital due
to reduced lessee control
Potential conflicts of multi-
ple concessionaires
Relatively high City monitor-
ing requirements
Pro Forma Advisors, LLC
28
Page 43
PFAID: 10-471
City of Tukwila
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Haggerton
Finance & Safety Committee
FROM: Chris Flores, Acting Fire Chief
DATE: August 12, 2013
SUBJECT: King County Zone 3 Master Interlocal Agreement
ISSUE
The Tukwila Fire Department seeks to enter into a Master Interlocal Agreement with the King
County Fire Zone 3 partnering agencies.
BACKGROUND
Interlocal agreements associated with the fire service, and within King County and Zone 3 are
not uncommon. The drafting of such agreements inevitably results in the expenditure of much
time, and energy. Legal fees and staff costs are also commonly expended. The King County
Zone 3 Master Interlocal Agreement has been designed to incorporate language that will be
common to all future agreements of this nature, thereby reducing the time, energy, and expense
associated with the production of said agreements. The agreement was entered into by all
major Zone 3 partnering agencies, with the exception of Renton and Tukwila, last year.
DISCUSSION
Rachel Turpin has reviewed the agreement. She has indicated in her feedback that some of the
language is somewhat unconventional, but that it is a low risk to proceed, and that she does not
see any major issues with the City signing the agreement. Additionally, Rachel has
recommended a course of action for utilizing this agreement in the future.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no foreseeable financial impact associated with entering into this agreement.
RECOMMENDATION
The Council is being asked to consider and approve this item at the August 26, 2013 Committee
of the Whole meeting and subsequent September 3, 2013 Regular Meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
KING COUNTY ZONE 3 MASTER INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
29
30
KING COUNTY ZONE 36/11/2012
MASTER INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
1. PARTIES.
The original parties to this King County Zone 3 Master Interlocal
Agreement are as follows:
King County Fire Protection Districts 2 (Burien), 11 (North
Highline), 13 (Vashon Fire), 20 (Skyway /Bryn Mawr / /Lakeridge), 39
(South King Fire & Rescue, 43 (Maple Valley Fire), 44 (Mountain
View Fire), together with the cities of, SeaTac Fire Department,
Renton Fire & Emergency Services, Tukwila Fire Department, the
Kent Regional Fire Authority and the Valley Regional Fire
Authority, the Port of Seattle Fire Department and King County
Medic One.
The intent of the original parties is to create one master
interlocal agreement for eventual execution by various municipal
corporations, including but not limited to fire protection
districts and regional fire protection service authorities,
cities, counties, other special purpose districts, and other
agencies such as federal and state agencies, in order to create
one applicable master interlocal agreement with common provisions
between all agreeing parties. Additional parties can bring
themselves under the provisions of this Agreement by either
executing this Master Interlocal Agreement or a counterpart
thereof. Some of the interlocal agreements, which will be
exhibits hereto, will include some but not all of the parties to
the Master Interlocal Agreement.
2. RECITALS.
A. The original parties to this Master Interlocal Agreement have
found and concluded that there are many interlocal agreements
currently in existence in King County between fire protection
districts, between such districts and cities, between cities
and the County, and various other combinations, which
contain overlapping redundant terms and conditions. It is
further found that many of these repetitive and overlapping
terms and conditions could be avoided by having one master
interlocal agreement containing all of the standard
provisions agreed upon perpetually by the parties.
B. The original parties to this Agreement further find that
there is a continuing trend toward cooperation between fire
protection districts in King County and a beginning trend of
cooperation between cities and fire protection districts. In
an ever increasing frequency, these municipal corporations
are engaging in consolidated functions, complete
consolidations of administration or operations, and in fact
mergers. This Master Interlocal Agreement is intended to
June 5, 2012 17:17:41 1
31
further these trends toward cooperation and consolidation of
functions.
C. The original parties to this Master Interlocal Agreement
perceive a need for a master agreement to set forth the
common, standard, and repetitive provisions rather than have
these common terms and conditions included in most, if not
all, of the interlocal agreements.
D. The interlocal agreements which shall be appended hereto as
exhibits could be independent, "stand- alone" contracts
between the parties, but the parties would prefer to keep
such interlocal agreements simple and short, containing only
the substantive provisions relevant to the circumstances at
hand, while incorporating by reference the standard terms and
provisions of this Agreement by making each interlocal
agreement an exhibit to this Master Interlocal Agreement.
3. AUTHORITY.
Authority for this Agreement is contained for all applicable state
agencies, political subdivisions, special purpose districts and .
municipal corporations in the State of Washington by RCW 39.34,
the Interlocal Cooperation Act. With respect to regional fire
protection service authorities, additional authority is contained
in RCW 52.26.090. Additional authority is contained in RCW
52.12.021 and RCW 52.12.031, with respect to the fire protection
districts. With respect to water districts, additional authority
is contained within Title 57 RCW. With respect to cities,
additional authority for such contracts is contained within RCW
35, and Title 35A for optional municipal code cities. Authority
for such agreements by the County is contained within Title 36
RCW.
4. PURPOSE AND INTENT.
The purpose of the original parties to this Master Interlocal
Agreement and any parties added later shall be to save costs and
expenses, as well as time, by avoiding redundancy and repetitive
terms and provisions in various interlocal agreements when the
common terms and provisions of this Master Interlocal Agreement
are already in effect. The intent of the parties is to create a
master interlocal agreement that can include the parties' general
agreement as to many standard terms and provisions without
limiting the parties' flexibility to execute an interlocal
agreement containing substantive provisions when the circumstances
arise. Whenever a new subject for cooperation, consolidation, or
mutual and joint action requires an interlocal agreement, the
parties may execute one without undue expense or needless waste or
time.
June 5, 2012 17:17:41 2
32
5. RECORDING.
This Agreement shall be recorded and filed pursuant to the
provisions of RCW 39.34.
6. TERM OF AGREEMENT.
The term or duration of this Agreement shall be perpetual, subject
to the below- stated termination provisions. This Agreement by its
own force does not require the expenditure of any specific
municipal corporation's funds.
7. CONFLICT BETWEEN AGREEMENTS.
If there is any conflict between the terms and provisions hereof
and the specific terms of an interlocal agreement, it is
understood and agreed that the specific conflicting provisions of
the interlocal agreement shall control. This conflict rule is
applicable not only to interlocal agreements specifically appended
hereto as exhibits at any time, but also any other interlocal
agreements hereafter entered into between any parties to this
Agreement.
8. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT.
This Master Interlocal Agreement may be terminated upon mutual
agreement of all of the parties then signatory thereto by
execution of a written instrument of termination.
9. WITHDRAWAL FROM AGREEMENT.
Any of the original parties, or any of the additional parties
added to this Master Interlocal Agreement at any time may withdraw
from the Master Interlocal Agreement by submitting written notice
to any of the parties to the Master Interlocal Agreement with
which the withdrawing party has entered into any interlocal
agreement that references or incorporates this Master Interlocal
Agreement, whether it be an exhibit to this Master Interlocal
Agreement or not. A withdrawal shall be effective upon the date
stated in the notice, so long as the notice is properly given at
least ninety (90) days before the effective date.
10. MODIFICATION OR AMENDMENT OF AGREEMENT.
This Master Interlocal Agreement may be modified or amended, but
such amendment shall require the mutual written assent of all
parties then signatory to the Master Interlocal Agreement. The
index of exhibits, below referenced, shall include a list of all
parties to all applicable interlocal agreements.
11. LEAD AGENCY CONCEPT.
In many, if not all of the interlocal agreements appended to this
June 5, 2012 17:17:41 3
33
Master Interlocal Agreement, the concept of a lead agency will be
used. When the term "lead agency" is used in this Master
Interlocal Agreement or any interlocal agreement executed
hereafter between the parties, the concept shall mean and include
that the lead agency shall be primarily responsible for the
administration and implementation of the referenced agreement.
The agency taking the lead on any particular agreement does not
thereby incur any greater liability for performance of the
agreement, which shall remain with the parties as set forth in the
interlocal agreement. The lead agency will be responsible for
contract administration in the manner specified in the interlocal
agreement. Lead agency duties may include but not be limited to
billing the other parties for appropriate reimbursement of costs
incurred under the agreement, acting as the employer when called
for under any applicable agreement (unless otherwise provided in
the interlocal agreement), and also acting as liaison or
contracting party with any third parties affected by the
interlocal agreement.
12. REIMBURSABLE COSTS.
Those interlocal agreements which provide for reimbursable costs
to the lead agency or any other party shall, unless specified
otherwise in the interlocal, use the current version of the
Washington State Fire Chiefs Association wage and benefit schedule
to establish the rates for all costs for reimbursement.
13. ENTIRE AGREEMENT.
This Master Interlocal Agreement and Exhibit A (regarding
reimbursable costs) embrace and include the entire understanding
of the parties. This Agreement supersedes and cancels any prior
negotiations or communications between the parties with respect to
the subject matter of the Master Interlocal Agreement, but the
execution of the Master Interlocal Agreement does not supersede
any interlocal agreements executed between these parties prior to
this Agreement's effective date. Further, it is understood and
agreed that the Master Interlocal Agreement is intended for use in
conjunction with future exhibits, which shall be interlocal
agreements between some or all of the parties hereto. Such
interlocal agreements are to be appended as exhibits to this
Agreement and are intended to be incorporated herein by reference
as a part of the Master Interlocal Agreement.
14. GOVERNING LAW.
This Agreement is entered into and shall be governed by the law of
the State of Washington. In the event of a dispute that has
completed arbitration or been held ineligible for arbitration, the
venue shall lie in King County, Washington.
15. ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES.
It is the intent of all parties to the Master Interlocal Agreement
that disputes, if any, between any of the parties hereto shall be
June 5, 2012 17:17:41 4
34
resolved as informally and amicably as possible by settlement
without the assistance of any outside professionals in dispute
resolution. However, if such conciliation fails, the parties
agree that mediation may be used. If the parties are unable to
resolve the dispute through mediation, then an arbitrator shall be
selected through the auspices of the American Arbitration
Association, or any such entity providing arbitrators as the
parties may agree upon. The arbitration shall proceed, however,
with a single arbitrator and with the parties sharing the costs
proportionately, depending upon how many of the parties are
involved in the dispute. Only if arbitration is unsuccessful or
declared by a court to be inapplicable to the dispute shall the
parties proceed to Superior Court.
16. CONSTRUCTION /INTERPRETATION.
This Agreement is being entered into and shall be construed and
interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of
Washington.
17. EXHIBITS /INDEX OF EXHIBITS.
With the exception of Exhibit A regarding a cost schedule, the
other exhibits to this Master Interlocal Agreement are intended to
be separate and independent interlocal agreements that are
rendered complete by their inclusion as exhibits to this
Agreement. Since this Master Interlocal Agreement is in a certain
sense open -ended and may be subject to numerous exhibits, it is
understood and agreed that a master index of the exhibits or
interlocal agreements shall be maintained. That index of exhibits
or interlocal agreements to which this Master Interlocal Agreement
makes reference shall be maintained at the offices of counsel, now
declared to be:
Brian Snure
The above counsel shall be the custodian of the index and shall
make available to any party to this Agreement at any time not only
the index of exhibits, but any individual interlocal agreement
which any party to this Agreement desires to obtain.
June 5, 2012 17:17:41 5
35
18. INDEPENDENT COUNSEL REVIEW.
While it is recognized that many of the parties to this Agreement
have historically used as their general counsel either Brian Snure
or Joseph F. Quinn, it is understood and agreed by all parties
that each party has the right to have independent counsel review
this Master Interlocal Agreement, or any interlocal agreement
executed hereunder as an exhibit, to ensure objective and
disinterested review hereof.
19. HOLD HARMi.ESS /INDEMNIFICATION.
Each of the parties which are signatories hereto, by executing
this Master Interlocal Agreement or by executing any of the
interlocal agreements which are exhibits hereto, after review of
this Master Interlocal Agreement, are deemed to hold harmless and
indemnify any and all other parties to any respective interlocal
agreement between the parties for any negligence, errors or
omissions of the indemnifying party. The indemnification and hold
harmless is mutual with respect to any of the negligence, errors
and omissions of any of the other parties, with respect to their
own negligence, errors and omissions. Each party, therefore,
remains solely liable for their own sole negligence, errors or
omissions. Such indemnification extends not only to the actual
party, but all employees, agents, volunteers and parties acting on
their behalf. The respective parties to the interlocal agreement
are not deemed to be agents of each other for purposes of these
agreements. IT IS FURTHER SPECIFICALLY AND EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD
THAT THE INDEMNIFICATION PROVIDED HEREIN CONSTITUTES EACH PARTY'S
WAIVER OF IMMUNITY UNDER INDUSTRIAL INSURANCE, TITLE 51 RCW,
SOLELY TO CARRY OUT THE PURPOSES OF THIS INDEMNIFICATION CLAUSE.
THE PARTIES FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY HAVE MUTUALLY
NEGOTIATED THIS WAIVER.
20. WAIVER OF BREACH.
The failure of any party to this Agreement to insist upon strict
performance of any of the covenants and agreements contained in
this Agreement or any of the interlocal agreements which are
exhibits, or to exercise any option or right conferred by this
Agreement or those agreements, in any one or more instance shall
not be construed to be a waiver or relinquishment of any such
option or right or of any other covenants or agreements which
shall all be and remain in full force and effect.
21. ATTORNEY'S FEES.
If any party brings any legal action in court to enforce any
provisions of this Agreement or any documents executed in
connection therewith, the successful prevailing party shall be
entitled to recover reasonable attorney's fees and other costs
incurred in that action, in addition to any other relief to which
that party may be entitled.
22. NOTICES.
June 5, 2012 17:17:41 6
36
Any notice required or desired to be served, given or delivered
hereunder or under any of the interlocal agreements shall be in
writing and shall be deemed to have been validly served, given or
delivered upon deposit in the United States mail by registered or
certified mail with proper postage prepaid and addressed to the
party to be notified. Each party to this Master Interlocal
Agreement shall include the applicable address below the signature
block hereof and below the signature block of any interlocal
agreement entered into as exhibits to this Agreement.
23. COUNTERPARTS.
This Agreement may be executed simultaneously in two or more
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all
of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.
As additional parties are added to this Master Interlocal
Agreement, a counterpart will be used to include them into the
Master Interlocal Agreement.
24. ASSIGNMENTS.
No party may assign or delegate any right or duty under this
Agreement without unanimous written consent of all parties.
25. SEVERABILITY.
The invalidity, illegality or unenforceability of any provisions
hereof or of any individual interlocal agreement incorporated
herein as an exhibit shall not in any way affect, impair,
invalidate or render unenforceable this Agreement or any
provisions thereof, of any of the interlocal agreements which are
exhibits hereto or any provisions thereof.
26. CAPTIONS.
The captions and headings of the paragraphs of this Agreement and
of the individual interlocal agreements which are exhibits hereto
are for convenience and reference only and are not to be used to
interpret or define provisions.
27. VARIATIONS IN PRONOUNS.
All pronouns include the masculine, feminine, neuter, singular or
plural as the identification of persons, places, firms,
corporations or entities as the context may require.
June 5, 2012 17:17:41 7
37
28. BENEFITS
This Agreement shall not be construed to provide any benefits to
any third parties. Specifically, and without limiting the
foregoing, this Agreement shall not create or be construed as
creating an exception to the Public Duty Doctrine.
29. SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS.
If any party to this Agreement or any of the interlocal agreements
which are exhibits hereto ceases to exist by reason of merger,
dissolution, or any other such corporate change of form, and if
there is a successor corporation or entity surviving the merger,
dissolution, or otherwise to which the duties of any contracting
party are assignable, then the terms and provisions of this Master
Interlocal Agreement and any applicable interlocal agreements
which are exhibits hereto are deemed to apply to that
successor /assignee municipal corporation, so long as the
applicable laws of the State of Washington allow such municipal
corporation to assume those duties and responsibilities.
30. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Agreement is dated the day of , 2012, the
date on which the last of the signatures below has been affixed to
the Agreement. This Master Interlocal Agreement shall not
operate, however, and be effective until the effective date of the
first interlocal agreement appended hereto.
SIGNATURE PAGES TO FOLLOW
June 5, 2012 17:17:41 8
38
King County Fire Protection
District 2
Chair
Commissioner
Commissioner
Attest:
Secretary
Approved as to Form:
June 5, 2012 17:17:41
9
39
King County Fire Protection District
11
Chair
Commissioner
Commissioner
Attest:
Secretary
Approved as to Form:
June 5, 2012 17:17:41 10
40
King County Fire Protection
District 13
Chair
Commissioner
Commissioner
Attest:
Secretary
Approved as to Form:
June 5, 2012 17:17:41
11
41
King County Fire Protection
District 20
Chair
Commissioner
Commissioner
Attest:
Secretary
Approved as to Form:
June 5, 2012 17:17:41
42
King County Fire Protection
District 39
Chair
Vice Chair
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Attest:
Secretary
Approved as to Form:
June 5, 2012 17:17:41
13
43
King County Fire Protection
District #43
Chair
Vice Chair
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Attest:
Secretary
Approved as to Form:
June 5, 2012 17:17:41
44
King County Fire Protection
District 44
Chair
Vice Chair
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Attest:
Secretary
Approved as to Form:
June 5, 2012 17:17:41
15
45
Kent Fire Department Regional Fire
Authority
Board Chair
Board Vice Chair
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Attest:
Secretary
Approved as to Form:
June 5, 2012
46
17:17:41 16
Valley Regional Fire Authority
Board Chair
Board Vice Chair
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member
Attest:
Clerk of the Board
Approved as to Form:
June 5, 2012 17:17:41 17
47
City of Renton
By: City Manager
Attest:
City Clerk
June 5, 2012 17:17:41
48
City of SeaTac
By: City Manager
Attest:
City Clerk
June 5, 2012 17:17:41
19
49
City of Tukwila
By: City Manager
Attest:
City Clerk
June 5, 2012 17:17:41
50
Port of Seattle /SeaTac
International Airport
By: Fire Chief
Attest:
City Clerk
June 5, 2012 17:17:41 21
51
King County Medic One
By: EMS Division Director
Attest:
June 5, 2012 17 :17:41
52
TO:
City of Tukwila
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
Mayor Haggerton
Finance & Safety Committee
FROM: Chris Flores, Acting Fire Chief
DATE: August 12, 2013
SUBJECT: 2013 First Half Report
ISSUE
To provide the Tukwila City Council Finance and Safety Committee with periodic updates
regarding department performance, accomplishments, challenges, and activities.
BACKGROUND
Starting in 2013 it was our intent to provide a quarterly report to the committee. We were
unable to produce a first quarter report in 2013, and wish to capture first and second quarter
information in a 2013 first half report. It is our departmental intention to produce a quarterly
report hereafter.
DISCUSSION
The department administration wishes to provide, on a more frequent basis, information to the
committee and to council, that will both inform them, and to provide them with additional
decision making tools.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no immediate financial impact associated with the provision of this report.
RECOMMENDATION
Information only
ATTACHMENTS
Mid -year Report
53
54
NEW
Tukwila Fire Departillint
1st Half Report
55
56
Tukwila Fire Department 2013 1st Half Report
Mission Statement
Our Mission is to deliver professional services to the greater Tukwila community and
provide a safe working environment for our personnel.
Safety * Commitment * Excellence
Organization Chart
Tukwila Fire Department
Organizational Chart
Assistant to the
Chief
Administrative Suupport.
lfechniiciian
FIRE CHIEF
Battalion Chief
,(Fire Marshall Fire Freventtlony
Assistant Fire Chief
(OperatansfTraining)
Emergency Manager
Battalion Chief
Pub Ed/ CERT Training (.75)
Captain
(Traiiniing Officer)
Administrative Support
Technician
Captalin
(Training Officer)
Captain (2)
(II nspector /Investigator)
Fire Project
Coordinator
Battalion Chief
(A- Shift)
Battalion Chief
(E - Shift)
Battalion Chief
(C. - Shiitt)
Captain Sta 51
Firefighter (3)
Captain Sta 52
Firefighter (2)
Captain Sta 53
Firefighter (3)
Captain Sta 54
1
Firefiighte
Captain Sta - 51
Firefighter (3)
Captain Sta 52
Firefiighter (2
Captain Sta 53
Firefighter (3)
Captain Sta 54
Firefighter (5)
Captain Sta 51
Firefighter (3)
Captain Sta 52
Firefiighter (2
Captain Sta 53
Fiiirefighders
Captain Sta 54
Firefiight
5)
57
Report from Administration
Acting Fire Chief Chris Flores
The first half of 2012 was marked by many significant changes, accomplishments, and
challenges at the Tukwila Fire Department. The department staff has been instrumental
in implementing change, pursuing accomplishments, and meeting challenges head on.
These achievements have been touched by the hands and minds of our skilled and
dedicated individuals and teams. I have great confidence in the ability of our staff
members to improvise, adapt, and overcome when faced with hurdles and obstacles.
Our department human resources are our most valued assets.
Changes: In the category of change, our department has entered into a strategic
planning process through the guidance of BERK and Associates. Stakeholders,
including Tukwila City Council Members, will be contacted for interviews regarding the
relationships with and performance of Tukwila Fire Department. The overall goal is to
increase the performance of the department, while also improving the ownership,
responsibility, and enthusiasm of our members.
Also in the category of change, our members have embraced our participation in the
South King County Training Consortium. Feedback on our participation has been
extremely positive. Our members are receiving a much higher quality of training, and
are meeting all required laws and standards as a result. The structuring of an Interlocal
Agreement for participation in the Consortium is in the works for 2014, and will appear
before committee in the third quarter.
Our department entered into the Joint Apprenticeship Training Committee (JATC)
program, with Washington Labor and Industries. The department and city will realize the
benefit of a more structured three year program that each and every new firefighter will
enter into and complete as a condition of employment. This program is a vast
improvement over our previous three year program, and carries significant
reimbursements and discounts for the required training. A committee of department
members has engineered and structured the program. Four new employees have
entered into this program this year.
The department has initiated long range planning for the replacement of capital
equipment and we are working with Tukwila Finance Department on issues of structure
and funding. One looming example of the need for such a replacement plan would be
SCBA's (Self Contained Breathing Apparatus). Our current equipment is fifteen years
old and will last about five more years, having just completed a mandatory rebuild of
each and every system. The cost of replacing these critical systems in 2018 could
exceed $400,000.00.
2
58
Accomplishments: Late in 2012 the department convened a joint apparatus
specification committee. Members of the department combined forces with Tukwila
Public Works, Fleet. They continued work throughout the first half of 2013, and
developed specifications for two fire engines /pumpers. The direction that they were
given at the beginning of the process was to design equipment that would offer
longevity, usability, safety, serviceability, and within budget. The committee was
successful in all facets of this endeavor, and due to the cooperative effort on the part of
the Finance Department, Tukwila Public Works, and Tukwila Fire, an order has been
placed for two Pierce pumpers to be built upon their Velocity chassis. They should be
ready for delivery in approximately eight months.
During the last contract negotiation with Tukwila Firefighters IAFF Local 2088, and at
the suggestion of council, the budget line item for contractual college level education
was increased. Many members of the union body are taking advantage of this
opportunity and are completing courses toward their degrees. I sincerely believe that a
more educated workforce will contribute to achieving goal four of the 2012 Strategic
Plan, that of providing A High- Performing & Effective Organization.
Annual Hose and Ladder Testing, a process that historically has taken most of the
summer, and sometimes more time, to complete, was completed in three days this year.
The decision was made to outsource this project to a private company with the
equipment and resources to perform this magic in such a short amount of time. The cost
of this outsourcing was less than $10,000. It is safe to say that previous staffing and
collateral costs in completing this project could far exceed $10K in a given year. The
department did suffer some lost time injuries during these previous testing procedures.
The know impacts of such injuries include overtime for backfill of the injured member,
and medical expenses.
Our addressing project draws to a close near the end of the first half of 2013. It
consumed six months of time for one staff member who was reassigned to day shift for
the duration of the project. The work was that was performed was tedious and required
a great deal of concentration and attention to detail. This project should positively
impact several departments in the areas of finance and billing, permit issuance,
inspections, and emergency response /public safety.
Challenges: In March of 2013 our department saw the departure of two senior
members whose work and experience totaled approximately 60 years. As our workforce
ages and prepares themselves for their golden years it is a significant challenge to
prepare our newer generations of firefighters and officers for succession. In order to
meet this challenge we have implemented a mentorship program for our new
employees. In addition to that mentorship program we have also sought to train and
prepare teams or multiple individuals to perform tasks and services, which in some
3
59
cases have been performed solely by a senior member of the department. As we
identify such unique positions we partner junior members with senior members and
enroll them in specialized training associated with the task or project.
With one major exception our 2013 department budget appears to be in good shape.
Our suppression overtime line item was the casualty of enduring multiple absences and
vacancies during the first half of 2013. At times there were seven vacancies due to long
term disability, four vacancies due to retirement, and one vacancy due to assignment to
special project. During the entire period there was one suppression vacancy due to a
battalion chief being assigned on day shift, to the position of Acting Assistant Chief. The
Fire Suppression Overtime Line Item was funded at $408,858.00 for 2013, and at the
halfway mark it is virtually depleted. We are working closely with the Finance Director
and City Administrator regarding the development of strategies to deal with this
budgetary challenge. Pipeline positions may be one potential solution to the
replacement of retirees. Preliminary figures indicate that hiring two replacement
firefighters prior to the departure of two retirees in August of 2012 would have resulted
in a cost savings to the city. Approximately 180 shift days of overtime /backfill were
generated during the approximately 270 day period that elapsed between the departure
of the retirees and availability for their replacements to report to shift. 180 shifts of
overtime equal approximately $180,000.00. Salary and benefits for two probationary
firefighters for the same one year period including three months of training and nine
months of service totals approximately $160,000.00.
4
60
Response Statistics
RupVExp
Pub Asst
Other
Haz Mat
Good Int
Fire
False
EMS
2013 1st Hall Total Calls
Based on Ca
Somme: Tukuda Fie MFRS Cob
0
500
1000
1500
1684
2000
Call Type by Percentage
1111111111111EMS iuuuu False 11111111F ire la Good Int 11111111111111azMat 1111111U Other m Pub Asst 11111111Rupt/ Ex p
2% 1% Civ%
13%,
11111111111111111111111111
Saone: Tub Are NFIRS Dab
5
71%
61
0:05:46 0:0
Average Response Times
0:06:2
0:06:00 X1:66 :144 0:06:17
Sow: Tula b IF €ue NFIIFS Data
11%6
IV o
ob
eso
a
201
144
3
1 iifr�J111111111111111111111 %G'"
M
utua
Aid
Responses
243
31
No Ak Given cvd
Aid Recehred GcouuIp
62
S : Fre NFIIRS Cut
Aid Given Group
6
lIncompOlete IDIocii nits
Report from Operations
Oper r ins Chief
Acting Assistant Chief Mike Soss
Highlights /Accomplishments:
• Continued participation in South King County Fire Training Consortium.
• All Officers /Acting Officers certified in Blue Card Incident Command.
• JATC program developed and implemented.
• Specification work on two new Fire Engines and a Command Car.
• Installed new storage shelving at Station 51.
• Hazard Assessment completed for all TFD operations (per W.A.C.).
• Identified personal protective equipment needs, including the need for
Ballistic Vests. Proposal made to City Administrator.
• Experimentation with cross - staffing /relocation of Ladder 54.
• Addressing desire to lessen the amount of calls handled by the Ladder Truck.
• Administration conducting regular informational meetings with the shifts and
Labor /Management meetings with Local 2088.
• Ongoing rebuilds of air pack breathing apparatus.
• Battalion Chief promotional test administered.
• Three candidates certified.
• Four new firefighters hired and put through Academy and initial training.
• Mentor program for new firefighters initiated.
• Retirement of two long -time employees (Dave Green and Steve Wheeler).
• Participation in High Performance Organization training.
• All department hose and ladders tested.
• Contracted provider utilized for first time, with associated productivity and
quality.
• Department Strategic Plan creation underway.
Challenges:
• Uncertainty regarding long -term department management staffing.
• Funding for ballistic vests, identified as needed above.
• Funding for increase in department Training Consortium contribution for 2014.
7
63
Temporary Battalion Chief Jack Waller
The first half of 2013 saw several Temporary position changes on A- Shift. BC Mike
Soss has been the Acting Assistant Chief for the first half of 2013. Capt. Mike McCoy
was the Temporary BC, in Chief Soss' place, from January to the end of May. Captain
Jack Waller has been the Temporary BC from mid -July to the present. Firefighter Bill
Rodal has been in a Temporary Captain position for the first six months of the year
backfilling at McCoy and Waller's stations. Probationary Firefighter Greg Planellas
started his career with the Tukwila Fire Department on January 1, 2013 and came to A-
shift on May 8, 2013 following completion of the Basic Recruit Academy with the
Training Consortium.
A -shift has taken all the changes in stride and has worked well together to support and
assist all the Temporary officers and our newest member.
Emergency Responses: A -shift responded to 402 calls for service in the first quarter
and 377 calls for service in the second quarter. Aid responses dominated our calls for
service. There have been three responses for Boat 51 on A -Shift during the first half of
2013. A -Shift responded to several multiple alarm fires in neighboring jurisdictions, but
did not have any in Tukwila. A -Shift responded to 10 confirmed Commercial fires, 6 out
of jurisdiction, and 5 confirmed residential fires, all out of jurisdiction, in the first half of
2013.
Training: Training with the Training Consortium has been outstanding and well
received by the crews on A- Shift. Participation in the Consortium has been a morale
booster as well. Probationary Firefighter Planellas is the first for A -Shift to go through
the Joint Apprenticeship Training Consortium. The JATC program requires 6000 total
hours of training in a three year period. He will be taking his Module 1 Test and Practical
Exam on August 19.
The first six months of 2013, A -shift crews attended Flammable liquids training, Live
Fire training, and the implementation of Blue Card Fireground Command Training for all
of the Captains. The HazMat team members participated in an intensive week of
training during the first quarter which met all of the annual training objectives.
8
64
I B-S h iiiif
Battalion Chief Marty Roberts
The first half was challenging due to our staffing level being at fifteen rather than a full
staff of eighteen. Our staffing was affected by injury and special projects, both of these
were overcome by the dedication and professionalism of all of the members of B Shift.
The first half was also successful based on our performance when responding to calls,
our excellent training, support from our administration and our desire to provide
excellent customer service.
Emergency Responses: B Shift responded to 378 calls in the first quarter and 382
calls in the second quarter.
B Shift did not have any multiple alarm fires in Tukwila, we did respond to a number of
second and third alarm fires in neighboring jurisdictions. Of the fires we did respond to
in Tukwila, we performed very well and kept fire loss to a minimum with aggressive
strategies and tactics.
Aid calls continue to dominate our call volume. The dedication to training and improving
the knowledge of our EMT's continues at a high level. Our performance in the field has
resulted in a number of commendations from King County EMS and our Training
Officers.
Training: With the growth of the Training Consortium and use of the Training Tracker
system to assign training and track training records, the confidence and performance
level of our department has greatly improved. B Shift averaged over 95% completion of
all drills in the first quarter and over 97% in the second quarter.
Highlights in training include:
• Live Fire Training focusing on Multi- Company Operations at the Fire Academy.
• Flammable Liquid Firefighting at the Fire Academy.
• The expansion of the Blue Card Training Program to include members on the
Acting Captains list.
General: On April 16, FF Lucero officially became Capt. Lucero. He will serve six
months on shift and then move to the Fire Prevention Office.
FF Schell received a temporary promotion to Captain for a special project in the Fire
Prevention Office.
9
65
f
Battalion Chief Lavern Peterson
Staffing: Because of the retirement of David Green and two duty related injuries the C
staffing level was at 15 during the first quarter, and then increased to 17 by the end of
the second quarter as we welcomed FF Fink to the shift after he finished the academy.
Emergency Response: As in the past the majority of calls were for emergency aid.
However the first two quarters saw a rise in the number of CPR calls we responded to.
The majority of the CPR calls were a result of heroin overdoses. Even with mutual aid,
there were numerous times that all of our apparatus were out of service on calls to the
community.
C Shift responded to several single alarm fires in Tukwila. Because of our level of
training with sound tactics and aggressive but safe firefighting our fire losses were kept
at a minimum. At different times during the first two quarters all of our apparatus
responded to a number of multiple alarm fires in Renton, Kent, North Highline, Skyway
and Des Moines.
Training: With our participation in the Training Consortium and use of the Training
Tracker system our level of training has exceed previous years. C Shift averaged over
95% completions of all drills in the first quarter and second quarter
Projects:
• BC Peterson completed the Station upgrade projects:
• New flooring at Station 52, 53 and 54
• Energy efficient windows installed upstairs at Station 51
Highlights in training include:
• Blue Card Training for all of the Captains and A /Captains of our shift
• Flammable Liquid Firefighting.
• Swift Water training for our Rescue Team members
• Search and Rescue residential
• Auto Extrication
• Zone 3 SCBA Drill
• Advanced Pump Academy at North Bend
• Zone 3 BC Training
• Structural Collapse
10
66
SI
pecillI III
Oper CI ins: Rescue & H z1V1 t
Rescue
Captain Chuck Mael
In the first half of 2013 we welcomed 2 new team members. With their addition to the
special operations team, we now have 12 team members. These two members have
attended several technical certification classes this year such as rope rescue, water
rescue and Rescue Systems 1.
The rescue team continues to participate in Zone 3 technical training drills. There have
been some challenges this year with team member attendance at these drills. Members
are to attend these drills on their off days on overtime. We are currently looking at ways
to send members to these drills while they are working their normal shift days. This
would allow members to attend the drills while they are at work, and also save on
overtime. The challenge is to have proper City coverage for their response area while
gone to the drills.
The Green /Duwamish River continues to challenge our rescue technicians skills and
response capabilities. In July alone our City had 3 water rescue incidents involving
vehicles into the river. Two of the incidents involved our rescue swimmers accessing
and assisting vehicle occupants out of the water. One incident required a thorough
search of the vehicle underwater by dive teams from other departments to be sure no
one was trapped in the submerged vehicle.
Our rescue boats have added a significant benefit to quick response times and
capabilities for our water rescue efforts. These boats allow day and night searches
along with a stable platform to work off of while maneuvering in a river environment.
With 20 Swift Water technicians now trained within our department along with the
rescue boats, Tukwila is more prepared than ever for water incidents.
New Class -3 rope rescue harnesses have been purchased this year for our suppression
crews. These harnesses will be on each front -line apparatus. With ongoing training
provided by our rescue team members, fire personnel will have the new harnesses and
equipment needed for operation level rope rescue capabilities.
11
67
A record number of training hours for technical rescue has been documented in the first
half of this year thanks in part to the new Training Tracker record system and joint
training with Zone 3 members.
H a zM at
No Report.
EIS
Captain Mike McCoy
• We have added a new Taxi Voucher program in the city. The program is paid for by
King County EMS. If a patient meets certain requirements and criteria we can
provide them with a taxi voucher (at no charge to them) to go to a medical facility.
We can even provide them a voucher to return home if needed.
• Currently the EMS Supply budget is on track to meet the needs of the department
and call volume.
• Capt. Jeff Johnson has written an issue and options paper to replace the old and out
dated Automatic External Defibrillators that we are currently using.
• We are in the process of rotating medical supplies from the MCI trailers into the
normal ems supply chain.
• We have had all medical oxygen tanks hydro tested that need to be done this year.
Thanks to FF Smith for his work.
• We are investigating the oxygen cascade system that we currently use. It may be no
longer legal to refill our oxygen tanks with the current method.
• We updated the City's Exposure Control Plan for the cities Appendix H
• We updated all Exposure plans (BBP and Airborne) for the Fire Department and
instituted a new reporting process.
"'ice iiii in iiii in
Captain Ben Hayman & Captain Jeff Johnson
Summary: Below is a list of the many training areas that the Training Consortium
organized in the 1st half of 2013. The total training hours for Tukwila in the first half of
2013 was 6,885 hours. These hours include assigned training, as well as extra training
initiated by the company officer.
Highlights: Using our evaluation sheets which are turned in after each training session,
we are able to determine a "satisfaction rating" for that session. All of our evaluations
have shown no less than a 92% satisfaction rating and some are as high as 96 %! We
are very pleased with this result and plan to continue delivering the highest quality
12
68
training that we can to the firefighters of the South King County Fire Training
Consortium. Our goal is to deliver meaningful training that the firefighters enjoy
participating in, while at the same time keeping the departments in compliance with the
mandated WAC requirements.
Noteworthy Training Hours for the 1st Half Of 2013
• Incident Command Training
• EMS Training
• Hazmat Tech Training
• Hose and Ladder Training
• Truck Company Training
• Flammable Liquids Training
• Live Fire Training
• Rescue Training
• SCBA Training
• Engineer Training
• Health and Safety Training
763 Hours
1052 Hours
316 Hours
237 Hours
340 Hours
120 Hours
152 Hours
637 Hours
215 Hours
263 Hours
312 Hours
Challenges: Delivering the required training needed for the many rescue certifications
that our departments Rescue Team members hold, while not making it cost prohibitive
for the department. Implementing the department's new JATC (Joint Apprenticeship and
Training Committee) program was a first time challenge.
Ex IIII re rs
Captain Pat McCoy
The Fire Explorer program has been out in full force this year. Currently we have about
25 young adults in the 4 posts that are combined and called the Zone 3 Fire Explorers
(Tukwila, Sea -Tac, Renton and Maple Valley). We are currently recruiting for the next
school year and open enrollment will be in the month of September. The Explorers have
been busy assisting in many different events this year. I will not be able to fit all the
events in this document but will give you an overview of what we have accomplished
and the events we have participated in. We continue to have our weekly meetings and
trainings at the 4 host departments every Wednesday night from 1830 -2130.
We have assisted the South King County Fire Training Consortium with the following
training events.
• Live fire training at the WA State Fire Academy for 6 days
• Flammable Liquids Training at WA State Fire Academy for 6 days
• Zone 3 Training day's for 6 days
13
69
Assisted the City of Renton (both PD & Fire)
• MCI drills at Station 14 for 4 days
• CBT drills at Station 14 for 5 days
• Career Day at Hazen HS for 1 day
• Relay for Life for 2 days
Assisted the City of Sea -Tac
• International Festival for 4 days
• 4th of July Parade for 1 day
• BSA Jamboree for 1 day
• Kids day at the YMCA for 1 day
Assisted the City of Tukwila
• Museum of Flight Fire Day for 1 day
• CERT Training Final for 1 day
• 4th of July at Fort Dent for 1 day
• Assisted DEM and FMO on several events
• Touch a Truck for 1 day
Assisted the City of Burien
• Kids Day at the Fire Station
• The Burien 4th of July Parade
• Several First Aid Events
Assisted the South King & Fire Rescue Department (City of Federal Way)
• Fire Safety Day at the Commons for 2 Days
• Kids Day at the Fire Station for 1 day
• Several First Aid events for Karate Tournaments
Assisted the WA State Fire Investigators
• With Burn Cells for 2 evenings
Assisted the City of Seattle
• Seattle Fire Festival for 2 days
• Sea -Fair fuel truck safety in the Hydro Pits for 4 days
We also assisted several private organizations with the events including:
• Sea -Tac and Tukwila Rotary
70
14
• NW Paddle Festival for 2 days for a small donation to the program
• Saddle Club for 8 days and they also gave a small donation to the program
• Several Cancer & Burn Foundation Events
For Emergency Response:
Rehab 1 & 2 have responded to approximately 84 incidents in the first 6 months this
year and the Explorers have responded to 9 incidents
111 r n r it Gu it
Captain Ken Beckman
The Honor Guard has kept its membership steady at 8 members including Captains
Beckman, Morales, Waller, Rees, FFs A. Johnson, Schell, Browning, and Czuleger.
There have been soft recruitment attempts with no responses to date. Optimism is high
that some of the newer staff will join when they are able. The team is led by Captain
Beckman. Captain Morales also serves at the State Honor Guard as their lead. FF
Browning is widely sought for her singing skills and participates at a variety of events
singing the National Anthem.
Last year we had some retirements and this spring included two also. FF Dave Green
had his retirement ceremony on April 7th. Captain Steve Wheeler had his retirement
ceremony on May 4th. The team spent approximately 24 staff hours training for these
ceremonies. Our ceremony bell that we use received a new base for it to sit on. This
new base stand looks very nice and works very well for our purposes. There were about
10 staff hours and a couple hundred dollars well spent.
May 13th, Captains Rees and Beckman participated with the Police Color Guard in the
National Police Officers Memorial Day Ceremony at City Hall. It was a joy and honor to
work with the PD Honor Guard.
Friday May 31st two of our Honor Guard members, Capt. Morales and FF Browning
participated in a funeral for Tacoma FD FF Albert Nejmeh.
Bellevue Fire Department Honor Guard sets the standard in our area as they have had
extensive training with many of their members in Washington D.C. with the U.S.
Marines World Famous Body Bearers, the elite team of Honor Guard for the Military.
We have sent Capt. Morales back to D.C. to get this training and it is invaluable. We
have an open invite to train with Bellevue on their regular training day each month and
some members take advantage of that.
On behalf of the other members of our team, we thank you for all your support in our
efforts to show honor and respect in all the occasions we participate in. All time spent by
15
71
our members is done on shift or on our own time. We do not accept pay for any off duty
time spent in Honor Guard activities.
Emergency Management & Public Education
IMFirmnmemr ency NI n eiment
Battalion Chief Marty Grisham
CEMP: The Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) has had a MAJOR
overhaul, with new annexes, resource lists and forms added. The complete package is
with the I.T. Department for final formatting and grammar check. Once complete, we
will present it to the Mayor and City Council.
CodeRed: We identified who in the city has authority to "launch" a critical message
through CodeRed, and created new accounts for all of them. We also worked with
Water District 125 to obtain their customer list so that they can be added to the
database in the case that we needed to launch a water emergency message to them.
Chamber of Commerce: During the first quarter, Marty and Raejean had the
opportunity to meet with the Chamber of Commerce to share information regarding
services Emergency Management can offer the business community. The group had
an excellent discussion regarding CERT, applications of Map Your Neighborhood for
businesses, and Incident Command training available. This meeting has opened the
door for ongoing communications between our office and the Chamber, and therefore
our business partners. We are now able to share with them important warnings and
alerts that might affect the business community, as well as other information such as
upcoming events and training opportunities.
NIMS: During the first half of 2013, Emergency Management assumed the role of
managing NIMS Compliance for the City, including tasking Raejean Kreel with tracking
NIMS Training of all city employees. Raejean took this task seriously and the following
report shows the fruits of her labor. Adding to the many employees that have already
completed NIMS training, 25 individuals completed ICS 100, 66 completed ICS 200, 8
attended ICS 300, 4 attended ICS 400, 22 completed IS 700, and 63 have completed IS
800!!! City employees have made significant headway in working towards NIMS
compliance and they, as well as Raejean, should be greatly commended!
Other: EM staff attended the regional UASI Vulnerable Populations Conference, of
which Raejean was part of the planning committee and Marty was part of a panel
discussion about our services in Tukwila. Raejean also participated in a Youth
Preparedness Workshop as a panelist, providing input regarding Teen CERT, and
16
72
attended the "Partners in Emergency Preparedness Conference" and the "Latino
Cultural Awareness Event ".
GIRT /Puu III IEf uc tiiiir n
Raejean Kreel
CERT: During the first half, CERT "Class 3" was held. We graduated 11 new
members, giving us nearly 50 graduates to date. It should be noted for future reference
that during this period we began planning for the purchasing of CERT supplies. As
funding becomes more limited (an announced reduction in grant funds directly impacts
this program), supplies will become harder to obtain. Therefore, it has been our focus
to plan how we will ensure we have the supplies needed through the 2014 year.
Community Connectors Liaison Program: Emergency Management participated in
the Community Outreach Kick Off meeting early in the year. Seeing the value of this
program to our efforts to reach out to our diverse communities, Raejean is now a
standing member of the Community Connectors Liaison Program's Implementation
Team. The group is moving forward towards piloting this program during the second
half of the year, as well as providing Equity and Diversity Training to City employees.
Events: There were several events that took place during the first half of 2013. We
participated in the "Global 2 Local Health Fair" in April, "Kids' Safety Day @ the
Museum of Flight" and the "Teen Summer Kick -off Fair" in June. Also, for the first time,
our CERT members participated in the "South King County CERT Shake Up" event,
held in June, where members had the opportunity to exercise and expand on the skills
they learned when they went through the CERT program. Tukwila CERT had nearly as
many participants in attendance as our neighboring jurisdictions. Considering they all
have hundreds of graduates, our team represented Tukwila well!
Fire Prevention Activities
I1nslpecitiiii ns
Inspections completed are as follows:
• 18 —month Annual Fire Inspections: 361
• 18 -month Re— inspections: 455
• Night Life Safety Inspections: 52
• Fire Marshal's Construction Inspections: 976
17
73
Plan Review hours and fees collected are as follows:
• Plan Review hours: 521
• Code Question hours: 192
• Plan Review Fees Collected: $26,804.80
• Special Permit Fees Collected: $12,400.00
Invest iiii iiiir ns
The division investigated twelve fires in the first six months. One was a recreational
travel trailer fire that originated in a faulty refrigerator unit within the trailer. The
remaining breakdown is two vehicle fires, three kitchen fires, two residential fires, three
commercial fires, two Hazardous Material's leak or spill investigations and one structural
failure investigation. Two of the three kitchen fires resulted in smoke inhalation injuries
to the occupants when they attempted to extinguish the fire. One of the fires has been
determined Arson, but no suspect information could be obtained and it is closed inactive
at this time. The current fire loss through June 30, 2013, is $212,395.
Perm it Act iiiiviiiity
Major permitted projects worked on within the Fire Marshal's Office from January
through June of this year have been the address data base review and correction,
Tukwila Village, Raisbeck Aviation High School, Boeing 9 — 101 composite freezer
addition, Baker Commodities retro fire sprinkler upgrade, Sabey Data Center expansion,
Providence pharmaceutical distribution facility, Home2Suites Hotel and the Telex
computer center remodel.
18
74
TO:
City of Tukwila
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
Mayor Haggerton
Finance and Safety Committee
FROM: Peggy McCarthy, Finance Director
DATE: August 14, 2013
SUBJECT: Financial Planning Model, Attachment A- Format
ISSUE
Review Attachment A of the Financial Planning Model for line item groupings and other
formatting issues; include a key to give visibility to the account groupings of certain revenue line
items pursuant to Council input at the July 17, 2013 Finance and Safety Committee meeting.
BACKGROUND
Attachment A is used as a planning and forecasting tool. The formatting and design objective of
the Attachment is to present governmental financial data in a logical and easily understandable
manner that assists analysis and highlights items that are of particular interest to the Council
and other readers.
A discussion of the presentation and format occurred at the July 17, 2013 Finance and Safety
Committee meeting and a request was made to include a key on the face of the Attachment to
give visibility to the account groupings of certain revenue line items.
DISCUSSION
The revised format more closely aligns the revenue line items and account groupings with those
used in the City's internal quarterly financial reports and those prescribed by the Washington
State Budgeting Accounting and Reporting System (BARS). A supporting schedule named
"Attachment A — Revenue Detail" provides additional information on the components of each
revenue line item.
RECOMMENDATION
For information only.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A, 2013 -2018, Reformatted August 2013
Attachment A - Revenue Detail, 2013 -2018
75
76
REFORMATTED AUGUST 2013
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
30
31
32
33
CITY OF TUKWILA
ATTACHMENT A
REVENUES & EXPENDITURES GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
2013 - 2018 Analysis in 000's
REVENUES (See A -1)
BUDGET
PROJECTIONS
Totals
2013 -2018
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
General Revenues
Sales and Use Taxes
$ 15,299
$ 15,680
$ 15,915
$ 16,393
$ 16,884
$ 17,391
$ 97,562
Property Taxes
13,814
14,322
14,680
15,047
15,423
15,808
89,094
Utility Taxes
4,288
4,357
4,488
4,623
4,761
4,904
27,422
Interfund Utility Tax
1,486
1,586
1,665
1,748
1,835
1,927
10,247
Gambling and other taxes
2,709
2,819
2,861
2,903
2,947
2,991
17,230
RGRL
1,750
1,768
1,812
1,857
1,903
1,951
11,041
Licenses & permits
1,597
1,626
1,673
1,721
1,772
1,826
10,215
SCL Agreement, franchise fees
2,476
2,520
2,596
2,674
2,754
2,837
15,858
Intergovernmental
2,605
2,262
2,283
2,305
2,327
2,349
14,130
Charges for Services
2,954
3,036
3,127
3,221
3,317
3,417
19,072
Indirect cost allocation
2,036
2,085
2,148
2,212
2,279
2,347
13,106
One -time revenue
8,500
4,355
3,500
2,000
18,355
Sub -total
59,515
56,416
56,747
56,703
56,203
57,748
343,332
Dedicated Revenues (Capital)
881
837
823
845
870
897
5,153
TOTAL REVENUES
60,396
57,252
57,570
57,548
57,073
58,645
348,484
EXPENDITURES
Operating & Maintenance
(see Attachment B)
48,142
48,924
50,722
51,990
53,290
54,622
307,690
Debt Service
5,964
3,026
2,859
2,632
2,634
2,628
19,744
Reserve Fund
1,500
2,200
3
119
146
150
4,118
Operating transfers
475
675
323
329
316
283
2,401
Adm /Engineering
414
429
440
451
463
474
2,672
Subtotal Available
3,900
1,998
3,223
2,027
224
488
11,860
Capital Projects (Attachment C)
Residential Street
551
255
2,380
500
500
500
4,686
Arterial Street
4,561
2,178
2,901
1,981
2,067
2,166
15,854
Land & Park Acquisition
147
97
147
38
40
41
510
Governmental
Facilities
580
-
-
-
-
580
General Government
478
200
200
200
200
200
1,478
Fire Improvements
(50)
(50)
(50)
(50)
(50)
(50)
(300)
Sub total Capital
6,267
2,680
5,578
2,669
2,757
2,857
22,808
Change in fund balance
(2,367)
(682)
(2,355)
(642)
(2,533)
(2,369)
(10,948)
Beginning fund balance
11,289
8,922
8,240
5,885
5,242
2,710
11,289
Ending Fund Balance
$ 8,922
$ 8,240
$ 5,885
$ 5,242
$ 2,710
$ 341
$ 341
Reserve fund balance
$ 3,000
$ 5,203
$ 5,206
$ 5,325
$ 5,470
$ 5,620
$ 5,620
Sales and Use Taxes - includes retail sales and use tax, natural gas use tax and criminal justice sales tax
Gambling and other taxes - includes gambling tax, admission tax and leasehold excise tax
Licenses & permits - icludes business licenses, residential rental licenses, building and other permits
Intergovernmental - includes streamlined sales tax mitigation, grants, state shared revenues and entitlements
Dedicated Revenues (Capital) - includes REET, Greenbelt property tax levy, parking tax, motor vehicle tax,
investment income earned in the capital funds
2013 - 2018 Financial Planning Model VIII
08/Tif2013
78
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
ATTACHMENT A - REVENUE DETAIL, 2013 -2018 Analysis in 000's
REVENUES (See A -1)
BUDGET
PROJECTIONS
Totals
2013 -2018
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
General Revenues
Sales and Use Taxes
$ 15,299
$ 15,680
$ 15,915
$ 16,393
$ 16,884
$ 17,391
$ 97,562
Retail sales and use tax
14,629
15,010
15236
15,693
16,163
16,648
93,379
Natural gas use tax
290
290
294
303
312
321
1,808
Criminal justice
380
380
386
397
409
421
2,374
Other
-
-
Property Taxes
13,814
14,322
14,680
15,047
15,423
15,808
89,094
Utility Taxes
4,288
4,357
4,488
4,623
4,761
4,904
27,422
Electric
1,620
1,669
1,719
1,770
1.,821
1,878
10,480
Gas
689
7111
731
753
775
799
4,456
Sold waste
149
349
:159
370
381
395
2,202
Cable
230
330
237
244
251
259
1,451
Telephone
1,400
1,400
1,442
1,483
1,530
1,576
8,833
Other
-
Interfund Utility Tax
1,486
1,586
1,665
1,748
1,835
1,927
10,247
Water
523
553
581
610
641
673
3,580
Sewer
578
609
639
671
705
740
3,942
Surface water
385
423
445
467
490
515
2,724
Gambling and other taxes
2,709
2,819
2,861
2,903
2,947
2,991
17,230
Gambling
2,038
2,148
2,170
2,191
2,213
2,236
12,997
Admissions
612
612
630
649
669
689
3,861
Leasehold
59
59
61
63
64
66
377
Other
0
0
0
(1
0
0
0
RGRL
1,750
1,768
1,812
1,857
1,903
1,951
11,041
Licenses & permits
1,597
1,626
1,673
1,721
1,772
1,826
10,215
Licenses
457
465
477
489
504
519
2,911
Business Licenses
422
410
441
452
465
479
2,690
Residential rental license
35
35
So
37
38
39
221
Permits
1,140
1,161
1,196
1,232
1,269
1,307
7,304
Eire permits
80
80
82
85
87
90
505
Building permit
615
627
646
666
685
706
3,945
Electrical permit
297
3(13
312
321
331
341
1,905
Mechanicalpermits
114
111.6
120
123
127
131
731.
Plumbing and other permits
34
35
36
37
38
39
218
SCL Agreement, franchise fees
2,476
2,520
2,596
2,674
2,754
2,837
15,858
Seattle City Light agreement
2,206
2,250
2,318
2,388
2,459
2,533
14,154
Franchise fees,
270
270
278
286
295
304
1,703
Intergovernmental
2,605
2,262
2,283
2,305
2,327
2,349
14,130
Streamlined sales tax mitigation
1,166
1,200
1,200
1,200
1,200
1,200
7,166
Grants, State Shared Revenue
1,439
1,062
1,083
1,105
1,127
1,149
6,965
KC Basic Life. Safety Emergency
380
380
388
195
403
411
2,358
Fed grant - Transit Oriented Develc
143
-
-
-
-
143
DOJ -COPS grant
20.2
32
32
33
34
34
368
State Liquor fees
218
181
183
189
'192
196
1,161
State Criminal justice
93
149
152
1.55
158
161
869
Law enforcement services
45
45
46
47
48
49
279
Commute trip reduction
66
45
46
47
48
49
320
Homeland Security EMPG
82
5-4
55
56
57
58
363
Other
188
176
180
183
187
191
1,105
Charges for Services
2,954
3,036
3,127
3,221
3,317
3,417
19,072
Security
580
605
623
642
661
681.
3,790
Transportation
167
169
174
179
185
190
1,064
Plan check fees
619
629
647
667
687
707
3,955
Culture, Rec fees
520
520
�.. ?J
:2
757
365
545
Rents & concessions
405
405
417
430
443
456
2,557
Other
604
799
730
752
774
798
4,426
Indirect cost allocation
2,036
2,085
2,148
2,212
2,279
2,347
13,106
One -time revenue
8,500
4,355
3,500
2,000
18,355
Other
-
-
11,041
Sub -total
59,515
56,416
56,747
56,703
56,203
57,748
343,332
Dedicated Revenues (Capital)
881
837
823
845
870
897
5,153
REET
260
260
268
276
284
293
1,641
Prop Tax Greenbelt levy
34
-
-
-
34
Parking tax
151
151
156
160
'165
170
953
Motor Vehicle tax
:374
:377
388
400
412
424
2,373
Investment income
21
9
9
9
9
10
67
Other
41
40
2
-
-
83
TOTAL REVENUES
60,396
57,252
57,570
57,548
57,073
58,645
348,484
2013 - 2018 Financial Planning Model
VIII
08/14/2013