HomeMy WebLinkAbout090418 EDC packetMembers;
Councilmember Cousens
Councilmember Guti6rrez
Councilmember White
1. Minute Approval
iili�
mum
Second Floor Conference Room
Yakima City Hall
Staff: Others:
Ana Cortez -Steiner,
Assistant City Manager
John Carney, Information Systems Manager
Scott Schafer, Public Works Director
Joan Davenport, Community Development
Director
L9=0 1W
a. Review draft minutes from July 5, 2018 meeting
b. Review draft notes from the July 26, 2018 meeting (no quorul
2. Discussions
a. Main street business development
b. Downtown Central Plaza
c. Committee member reports
i. Ellensburg Economic Development Conference
d. Partner reports — Jonathan Smith, Choose Yakima Valley
e. Staff reports
i. Proposed change to the business license ordinance per State statutes
3. Future agenda items
WVL0WMWiXWjqX;fM9X"
Yakima City Hall
Thursday, July 26, 2018
Committee Members: Staff: Community members:
Council Member White Assistant City Manager Ana Cortez -Steiner John Cooper
Information Systems Manager John Carney Jonathan Smith
Associate Planner Eric Crowell Luz Gutierrez
Planning Manager Joseph Calhoun Kaitlin Bain
Chief Engineer Brett Sheffield Andrew Holt
Economic Dev. Manager Sean Hawkins Joe Mann
Records Administrator Jodi Stephens
es only- Quorum
Council Member White called the meeting to order at 137 p.m.
Absent: Council Members Cousens and Dulce Gutierrez
1. Reviewed the draft minutes from July 5, 2018 meeting:
There was no quorum at the meeting to approve the minutes.
2. Discussions:
a. Strategic Plan Update
Calhoun presented''a PowerPoint presentation emphasizing the Economic
Development Element is one of the primary elements of the Comprehensive Plan
and is mandated by the Growth Management Act (GA). The plan guides
physical development through 2040 and was adopted by Council on June 6,
2017.
Crowell reviewed the conditions and trends of the demographics, challenges amV
opportunities, and goals and policies of the plan.
Further discussion took place about options to attract businesses to Yakima and
White asked about a Public Authority District. Hawkins explained the Public
Authority District is a tool used to support economic development, enhance
Yakinna'sconnpetitk/eness and iscreated b«Council. |t does not have taxing
authority and is similar to a Port District.
Calhoun briefed White on the free pre -application review process that connects
the applicants with various City departments and what permits they will need
moving forward.
b. Conduit and fiber assets
i. Carney reported onthe findings from his research conducted on
Anaoortes. Anacortesisrunning conduit sleeves inside ofexisting
vacated pipes, which cost about $5O ,--�andtheyarethesizeofSe|ah.
They are using the conduit to bridge - 'communications between
government buildings. Carney reported City staff are currently
conducting an inventory of the City's underground conduit and working
with GIS to create a mapping application to show a visual inventory of the
conduit and targeting 2019 to show the Committee the results. The City
currently utilizes fiber optics here at the City of Yakima to join our
government buildings. Carney also indicated the best part of this process
is IT and Public Works are working more closely together on projects and
are moving toward a dig once approach.
_ Creative District update ,
White did ,not discuss this item.
d. Sidewalk and crosswalk pain—White did not discuss this item,
i, Policy
ii. Costs
iii. Recommendation
e. Discussion on vacant building
'.
Calhoun indicated the City ofYakima doesn't track this information;
-
however, there
- isalink accessing Yakima County information via the
City's website.
White would like to know what the City of Spokane has done with vacant
ANorth First Street Corridor PowerPoint presentation was added 10the agenda, which
Sheffield presented,
This project will begin in spring of 2019.
0 Phase 1 is from 'N' Street to SR12
• Phase 2 is from '|' Street to 'N' Street
The North First Street Ad Hoc Committee was created and met several times in 2011. The City
received S|EOPlanning Grant of$25,OOO,and onOctober l8, 2DI1the Council accepted the
North First Street Corridor Revitalization Project P|annin8Grantfina|neportandbrnchure.The
Yakima Bikes and Walk group were aproponent mfadding the sidewalks inthe plan.
After discussion, Cortez confirmed with White he would like to see changes to sidewalks,
landscaping, and the middle ofthe road.
3. Future CED agenda items '
• White would like "other business" as a standing item on this agenda
• Pavement coating
• Discussion on vacant buildings
• Would like North First Street as a standing item until we decide otherwise
White brought upthe incorrect cost quoted atthe last Council meeting and his concern
if several Council members want to attend the Economic Development Conference in
Ellensburg. Cortez indicated the deadline is July 31, 2018 and she is not aware of any
other requests to attend. White made a request tocattend.
4. Audience participation
Luz Gutierrez would like to know if any of the money for the North First Street project
can be used anywhere else in the City. She also thanked Community and Economic
Development Manager Sean Hawkins for all his hard work, his work with LCDR, and
having such a great interest in economic development in our area.
'
- -
Community member and business owner Joe Mann spoke highly of the YakBack feature
onour website and thanked the staff who responded yoquickly and professionally toa
report of a pothole. Mr.Mann also suggested when selling property orland toconsider
the long-term
interest to the City, and not only accept the highest bidder.
Adjourned at 2:40 .
The next meeting is scheduled for August 23, 2018 at 1:30 p.m. in the Second Floor
Conference Room.
Jason White, Chair
F101 1,161 i I I ^
committee"t-
City Hall
111MVINUE
Members: Staff: Others:
Councilmember White Ana Cortez, Assistant City Manager Maria Rodriguez
Councilmember Cousens Scott Schafer, Public Works Director Jonathan Smith
Councilmember Guti6rrez John Carney, Information Systems Manager Luz Guti6rrez
Brett Sheffield, Chief Engineer
Tom Sellsted, Senior Analyst
Cally Price, Assistant to the City Manager
Executive Minutes
White called the meeting to order.
1. Review draft minutes from May 24, 2018 meeting:
The May 24, 2018 meeting minutes were reviewed. Guti6rrez motioned to accept the
minutes as presented and Cousens seconded the motion. The minutes were approved
unanimously.
2. Discussions:
a. Strategic Plan Update
Cortez reviewed the strategic plan with the Committee members. Committee
members agreed that changing the format, to be consistent with Partnership,
would be appropriate. Committee members will meet and discuss strategic
priorities and report back at the next meeting.
b. Conduit and fiber assets
White reported that at the AWC conference there was a session on fiber and
he suggested that staff follow up with Port Angeles and Anacortes to see how
they implemented fiber using existing water pipes.
c. Creative District designation update
White reported that he is interested in spearheading this project and asked
that staff add this discussion to a future Council agenda.
White distributed a copy of a "Green Way" project for Yakima. Staff will see if
there are any codes regulating or prohibiting painting on the street and what
the paint would cost.
Guti6rrez suggested that if this moves forward, that the project be started on
North Ilst Street as part of the TBD project. Committee members would like to
see a timeline how this could be accomplished.
d. Economic Development Council conference
Cousens shared information she received about an Economic Development
Conference being held in Ellensburg and she would like at least one
committee member to attend. This item will be brought up at a future Council
meeting for discussion.
e. 1 st Street Development
Brett Sheffield spoke about the North Ilst project, specifically, funding,
schedule and phases. Phase 1 (N. Street to SR 12) will begin in the spring
and is funded. Phases 2 and 3 could begin in 2020.
Guti6rrez would like to see jaywalking addressed in the plans for N. 1 st Street.
Since some items still need to be addressed, Guti6rrez suggested that a
Council study session be scheduled. Committee members will bring this up
at a future Council meeting. Presentation should include budget, vision, and
traffic model (similar to what was produced for the mill site). Guti6rrez would
like to see the structure/framework of what the next 18 months would look like
and be able to monitor progress/benchmarks.
3. Future agenda items
Strategic Plan update
Conduit and fiber assets
Creative District update
Sidewalk and crosswalk paint
Discussion on vacant buildings
4. Other business
Cousens distributed information on how to fill downtown gaps she received at the
AWC Conference. Committee members would like to have a list of vacant buildings
in downtown Yakima and along North Ilst Street.
5. Audience Participation
Luz Guti6rrez inquired about the status of the Economic Development Plan that was
created a few years ago.
Jon Smith reported that CERB recently announced they will offer funding to assist
rural counties and cities with broadband provided it ties to job creation.
The next meeting is scheduled for July 26 at 1:30 in the 2nd Floor Conference Room,
Jason White, Chair
TO: Members of the Economic Development Committee
Chairman Jason White
Councilwoman Holly Cousens
Councilwoman Dulce Gutierrez
FROM* Sara Watkins, Senior Assistant City Attorney
Glenn Denman, Supervising Code Inspector
DATE:: August 27, 2018
SUBJ; Proposed Amendments to YMC 5.52
Members of the Economic Development Committee:
The Washington State Legislature passed a statute that requires cities to amend
their business license code section effective before January 1, 2019, in two
ways. Staff is bringing you the options, as well as staff's recommendation with
regards to the proposed language. This memorandum outlines the options
(where there are options) and the reasoning behind choosing that option. Staff
held a meeting with legal, the supervising code inspector, and members of staff
who deal with business licensing within the City prior to making this
recommendation.
1. Required Change 1: The definition of "engaging in business."
The statute, RCW 35.90.080(2)(a) states:
A city that imposes a general business license requirement must adopt
the mandatory provisions of the model ordinance by January 1, 2019.
The following provisions are mandatory:
A definition of "engaging in business within the city" for purposes of
delineating the circumstances under which a general business license is
required.
The model ordinance language was created by a development committee,
working through the Association of Washington Cities, as specifically required by
the statute. RCW 35.90.080(1)(a). The statute also required that before the
model ordinance was finalized that there be "substantial input from business
stakeholders and other members of the public." The full model ordinance, for
which City staff is not seeking adopting in full, can be found online. State statute
only mandates that two provisions be adopted by all cities which conduct
business licensing.
The first provision mandated to be adopted is the definition of "engaging in
business." The AWC model definition is proposed to be adopted as required by
the statute. Please see the redlined version of Yakima Municipal Code 5.52.010.
As you can see, the definition is much more specific and provides examples of
businesses that must be licensed, as well as some exemptions that must be
taken into account. Please note that there is no recommendation from staff to
eliminate the City's additional exemptions from licensing found in YMC 5.52.050.
Staff recommends sending this mandated definition change to the full City
Council for review.
2. Required Change #2: Minimum threshold for license fees
RCW 35.90.080(2)(b) & (3) requires that all cities that impose business license
requirements also adopt:
A uniform minimum licensing threshold under which a person would be
relieved of the requirement to obtain a city's general business license. A
city retains the authority to create a higher threshold for the requirement to
obtain a general business license but must not deviate lower than the
level required by the model ordinance.
A city may require a person that is under the uniform minimum licensing
threshold as provided ... to obtain a city registration with no fee due to the
city.
AWC provided two threshold options, of which cities are required to adopt one—
with the acknowledgement that the City could change the minimum threshold
amount to make it higher. The two options are as follows:
a. Option 1: Threshold exemption
To the extent set forth in this section, the following persons and businesses shall
be exempt from the registration, license and/or license fee requirements as
outlined in this chapter:
(1) Any person or business whose annual value of products, gross
proceeds of sales, or gross income of the business in the city is equal
to or less than $2,000 (or higher threshold as determined by city) and
who does not maintain a place of business within the city shall be
exempt from the general business license requirements in this chapter.
The exemption does not apply to regulatory license requirements or
activities that require a specialized permit.
NA
b. Option 2: Threshold with Fee -free License/Registration-only
For purposes of the license by this chapter, any person or business whose
annual value of products, gross proceeds of sales, or gross income of the
business in the city is equal to or less than $2,000 (or higher threshold as
determined by city) and who does not maintain a place of business within the
city, shall submit a business license registration to the Director or designee. The
threshold does not apply to regulatory license requirements or activities that
require a specialized permit.
City staff is recommending that the City use option 2, extend it to all businesses
(not limit it to out of town businesses) and increase the minimum threshold to
$7,000.
a. Why staff recommends using option 2
Option 2 is recommended, which requires all businesses to register with the City,
and exempts some businesses from paying the license fee. This option is the
preferred option because by issuing a business license to every business there
is a record with the City of where businesses are located, the types of
businesses being opened, and other data and information about businesses in
Yakima. This is also consistent with the City's current practice to require
businesses which are exempt to register, but not pay the business license fee.
Further, by issuing a license, if a business were to violate any ordinance
provisions, the license could be suspended or revoked. If the City provided for
the exemption without requiring a cost-free license, it creates a situation where it
is hard for the City to know where businesses are locating, ensure zoning
regulations are followed, or hold businesses accountable for violations of code
provisions.
b. Why staff recommends extending the definition to include in -
City sole proprietorships, not just out-of-town businesses
Although the mandatory language is for businesses that do not maintain a place
of business within the city limits, staff recommends that the definition be
extended to both in -city sole proprietors and out-of-town businesses for
consistency. Currently in -City sole proprietorships are exempt from licensing if
they work less than 600 hours that year. To keep exemptions consistent, staff
felt that the sole proprietorship exemption should also be based on gross sales
or product, not on hours worked per year.
c. Why staff recommends increasing the minimum threshold to
$7,000.
Staff thought that an exemption with a minimum threshold would not be
consistent with current exemptions, and was so low that it would not exempt very
many businesses.
Currently, one of the City's exemptions is for sole proprietors who have no
employees and operate less than 600 hours. YMC 5.52.050(1). Staff took that
concept—that persons operating a business for less than 600 hours a year are
exempt from business license fees, and calculated the amount that these
businesses would receive if they were paid minimum wage for 600 hours. That
amount equaled a little less than $7,000. As such, staff thought that rounding
up, and exempting sole proprietorship businesses from paying for a business
license if their gross income is less than $7000 was similar to the City's current
provision.
To create consistency, clarity and transparency, City staff recommends
eliminating the exemption based on hours worked for sole proprietorships, and
enacting the exemption based on gross sales or products across the board to
both in -city sole proprietorships and out-of-town businesses.
The $7,000 amount is more easily verified if there is a complaint, and it provides
a clear delineation that can be tracked and estimated at the time of licensing by
business owners. Staff believed it was a clearer standard to explain and a
clearer standard to understand. Further, the minimum threshold in a dollar
amount is mandated for out-of-town businesses, so it would be inconsistent to
have a dollar amount threshold for out-of-town businesses, and a maximum
hours worked for an in -city sole proprietor business. As such, staff recommends
extending the mandated process of using gross sales to the in -city sole
proprietorships as well.
3. Deadline
The state -mandated changes must be enacted and be in force before January 1,
2019. If the changes are not adopted by the City by that time, then the City
cannot enforce its business licensing ordinances. As such, staff is bringing this
to you early to ensure that all of your questions are answered and this matter can
be in front of the full Council for a decision in advance of the deadline.
4. Future business license changes
To provide more context for this change, staff wants to provide some information
about future business license changes within the City. The state, pursuant to
RCW 19.02, is requiring all jurisdictions that have business license regulations
that require license fees to ultimately utilize the state Business Licensing System
(BLS) by 2022. This will provide easy access to business owners to go online
and apply for both their state and local business licenses at the same time.
Business owners (except for those requiring City -required regulatory licenses
such as, for example, Mobile Food Vendors or Peddlers) will be able to obtain all
the necessary licenses online without having to come to City Hall, and can make
payment directly online. This should streamline the majority of business licenses
in the City for business owners.
11
City staff will need to amend the City's business license ordinance more than the
mandated changes that are required right now. Staff will be working on these
amendments to move towards using the state system during 2019, and the
expected first year that businesses could use this streamlined system will be
2020. We look forward to coming back to this committee to discuss those
changes in 2019.
5. Enclosures
With this memo are the following documents.
a. Redlined version of 5.52.020 which changes the definition of
"engaging in business" as mandated by state law.
b. Redlined version of 5.52.040 which adds a section that
specifies the minimum threshold for out -of -city businesses as
mandated by state law (staff's recommendation to choose
Option 2.
c. Redlined version of 5.52.050 which removes the exemption
based on hours worked and changing it to an exemption based
on minimum monetary thresholds for consistency with YMC
5.52.040.
d. AWC short sheet "Final city business license model threshold."
In construing the provisions of this chapter, save when otherwise declared or clearly apparent from the context,
the following definitions shall be applied:
(a) "Year' means calendar year.
¢V "Person" means any individual, firm, copartnership, company, corporation, association, receiver,
assignee, trustee in bankruptcy, trust, estate, joint venture, club, joint-stock company, business trust, society, or
any group ofindividuals acting aeaunit,
(c) "Business" includes all activities, occupations, trades, pursuits or professions located and/or engaged in
within the cjt�i Qf Yakima with the ob'ect ofgain benefit or advantave to the taxlkayer or to another erson or
class, directly or indirectly. Each business location shall be deemed a separate business,
(d) "Engaging in business"
MggCmeans commencing, conducting, or continuing in any business,
iii! olicitin�, Sales,.
�i a&sem
Lep Lr r ov pdsn, ab ant n rr cts nrwi @tea rgal car � n t 9g_ r naI ar�r.. d
Araetudtra� �rra�r�rat wr+ark �iad..�r� e���ts'�@�'r�ractp
v3 r car ai sEstartc tar efrytc , mcludj . uai`st ccantr alrsactaagt MW tLons'
+ arr�ra@ rt dm filar srvac s rrra r rrY aryrt td t r@@1i_LgjgLbLe pgMortg ar f@ C d Rhe t(srr w car
its behlt,_
Iiinrg crnstrg"m vgdaae rrt Llg q� c a _cgn$taaarjtr�agf rQ tart ft Ctl
r p—W ria _ qty.
—Lmtai d in pe tr art r spurrkvara Praticlatse Ilr tatkdr 3raadl:ar reem:
viii Ccllectinq current tar delinent agcourtts;
gr
e# vated rnaterghi....
.m�,�.._,m�t..rsudpdtt,4�5?srn[�r�trsranrt.tst��ra��.rurc� �rcr�?trar�a��t�r�cl.,raar:tlm�r�a=fix,
6tra a rater sta r r rarteaft I sir r .ea a , fni rl m8 t,d a e arc&adt ur +per .. r W_§ s e_r : cw r s
ar�vact rstl r�t�tr�t�ds iatdttd 3tt th�ara„�@I��srr� fat rrF ns�.�s r �E rri rte,
ktLqrqeys.pkLctiqmsikg ursrr rs8l o? on A r, ..r t ,asrarugl jathtgt It@a rs ,@aq-%Cq 11 rµEa 4s aasd.rat a spray
atr��h@pt�sF 3;��6,ts�cS��@�tsBEc�.p$,�� php�,p?��_�rtyrtt �d?+t�re �t3�rst t��r.r�e4�r"@rva������arttat�r�?;
�d �r� r �s�hr��.u��t�raraarda?
@dt: lr elfin vti 0 casts rs,rte„p t rataa6 tr trsrngr en awwhen Lira s 3e5 rat rd
rat�rt�rl �t trite rrw�fi!�.<,
mn o'si Ty r ss tatmrracrr�it l rsra r oa*enR Jago–ontleri@; clirad Qm—byre-kerb �r
cattatacaauusSt�ratrp.taf �rat�ctarlC?.ta>aa€@r.cas�rt.palu*@geysers:
„� xrvttratrasr a'rsa �r,�sc#�trt errcrt8erwrses�sslanals�rafvar��.tatcarrrrtatrt,.p3�dra�s,:
t s t�a- t t ktoa er taaan ut bead r dip rr� Id Eq rtl o rLe �,�-t�& ser
r�arrtt�ss tat vv@a�� �f� er�� tt3kvpr�+ pt a�t� ��r�� a@t,pts€rr,
xtns aa_vkt t�rart*..tntci„mtspd tasgd pr nlarrrt ngd bttrt�� ear
(� �f �r�rsrara mar uds rrrtratt�Y.r»���rtt r�n�g�ttia�.c�ta�c��ri�t�n �ca����p�t°+� t7�,��!ic�� ta:+��kt�t
tart pan telae aensorsTs #t�€aPF 1[ stsailrtia4w istarta the tEy�t iter h f [v waft r� D -OA
Mgand obtain a dnasrraesstscamse,
_r(j!.Oaeti, w ith Arm ie .tat a rtd seuwtr�s ascAnsta
(ILRw n avddh t earn a rst r r tt. fry rur. r. ttp 9ft., t M ??r i?
PrfOM mr0g00t9 t rPrA r_ ps�sdrrOrrti 9-
t[nit ttent9rnct raa tdn` luta aCrr ra�tra .. red i apmignm4ie9 grafcpra. srr
other meefincis whetein the Oetson does not or�svu e tradntrno irr+ eonno kon r uth t stanac �e er4 add
t . he iec p r r can c s. t? ? 1 hrs a vp t�u�_���� Ctp_� tapk�;rr� �r ode rd_raf (r ter � a IW -aL O RO
raggiarro-i aid�ush rna �2rfr tit �raflsrat�taml4rss..asettmrratrtaj.:
on
—ANI. }wt a brra a ra. 1 G r v a w 6 r priyAk —qcL4aLpmL,r � r ti g rgm - -s p— ds �_rrt tie
applicable.
Lvi Cand,ucting..adv r4 ssn 4hrcau ,h the;mmai
vii Soliciting sales by hone from a locations outside the Ci
a l c�drar n€ aat .” to i r
js� � �ael€en fa4at1 otrtsrt7�: She E rn�r9v �tIv�ran co�a� sr��ti�+�t�.i'; b . nro� rte i ataar r�°a€'
fs rnrnQt M% rerl o_re isRear fa d o6tann a i€sss cs €me nse,ravr�tad tP 4 Rt_ r s:Rrr ntC AW t_taa? r s, ar trv_atIs
in �C _� M u€fMsr eutaedta pQt tnp9tai ra nispc t�an,&f atps.Raate9d t€�t tdln r
d�s�sdn�s n��siud� aa�€rv_iCyafi3dn�rt� Lr� �4�ta€felt®rn�na trstartatrsss�of a .ty�snf,..�tn� jtcds�+.v4rw,�rm �Afe Iry
and the constItutnons of the United States and the Stale, of Washin torn. Nems is resu- tcs continue ter, ton:.._as...
the lax a or raftfriosa a n n u hrr in aI rn rEarrn ocsnkdct ear �t�nt{tr„rat
(e) "Employee" means any person employed at any business location within the city and/or any person
(f) "Taxpayer" includes any person who engages in business or who is required to have a business license
hereunder, or who is liable for any license fee or tax hereunder, or who performs any act, for which a license
fee or tax is imposed by this chapter, (Ord, 2837 § 1, 1985: Ord. B-2014 § 2, 1947)
5.52.040 Business located outside citv.
alIbLreshold exec n� fiq[j
_
�itoth�eDirect�
�tesi nee. The threshold does�no a i o re alto lidense ruiremnts or dctivitids that re airs
AP994!40-permit.
LZLAs to businesses located outside the city of Yakima and furnishing or performing services within the city
that meet the reAirementsof sectionabove, the license fee or tax herein shall be measured by the number
of employees of such business who perform any part of their duties within the city. (Ord. B-2014 § 4, 1957).
5.52.050
In addition tq the exeqjpt�g������he provisions oJthis chapter shall not apply
to:
(a) Any person in respect to engaging in any of the following enumerated business activities: franchised
electric power, telephone, gas and passenger transportation companies;
(b) Fraternal benefit societies as defined by Section 48.36.010 of the Revised Code of Washington; fraternal
mutual property insurers as defined by Section 48.36.410 of the Revised Code of Washington; and nonprofit
corporations organized under or existing by virtue of Chapter 24.03 of the Revised Code of Washington if such
nonprofit corporations provide in their bylaws for the assessment of each member of a fixed sum to be held by
the corporation to be paid as death benefits on the death of a member for the purpose of assisting widows,
orphans orother persons dependent onedeceased member;
(c) Any religious society, assndeUonorcorporaUon.throu0hUheoperadonofonyhoapdaiclinin.remortor
other institution devoted exclusively to the care or healing of human beings; provided, that no exemption is
granted where the income therefrom inures to the benefit of any physician, surgeon, stockholder or individual
by virtue of ownership or control of such hospital, clinic, resort or other institution;
(d) Auctioneers licensed under Chapter 514;
(e) licensed under Chapter 5.02;
UD Any instrumentality of the United States, state of Washington, or political subdivision thereof;
(g) Any farmer, gardener, or other person who sells, delivers or peddles any fruits, vegetables, berries, butter,
eggs, fish, milk, poultry, meats, or any farm product or edibles raised, caught, produced or manufactured by
such person within the state ofWashington;
(h) Any person, who is the holder of a valid permit under Section 8.52.070 of the city of Yakima Municipal
Code, engaged in the business of curb number painting and who devotes no more than six hundred hours per
year bosaid business;
(0 Newsboys engaged in the sale or delivery of newspapers and magazines or periodicals to the reading
I
�egs ifig
whose
mmam city business license m,ko=e. threshold
Contact: Victoria Lincoln, Andrew Pd1e|Keu.Sheila Gall
Business license and city B&O tax
simplification
In the 2017 session, EHB 2005 (RCW 35-90)
passed requiring three actions bvcities with
business licenses and local B&C]taxes. The law:
1. Requires cities with business licenses tm
establish awmrhQnouptocreate a model
business license with elicensing threshold by
July 2U18for adoption bvall business license
cities byJanuary 1.2O19;
2. Requires all cities with business license 10
administer their business license through the
state's Business Licensing System (BL8)bv
2Q22orF||eLoog|by2O2O;and
3. Establishes otask force onlocal Bfk(]tax
service apportionment under RCVV85.1O2.13U
to report tmthe Legislature byOctober 2D10.
Cities were required 0o develop amodel ordinance
for business licensing bvJuly 1.2O18.The
ordinance includes amandatory definition oY
"engaging inbusiness" and aminimum threshold
(or.occasional sale) exemption toestablish when
out-of-1ownortransient businesses are required to
belicensed. All business license cities must adopt it
bythe end Cf the year ).
What is in the model?
The model threshold has two pieces: a model
thre Id and a definition of "engaging in business."
1. The model business license threshold language
would:
w Apply minimum threshold of $2,000 per
year inthe city for businesses that donot
have alocation iOthe city;
w Require elicense for businesses with a
location in the city without regard tmthe
threshold;
• /\||ow cities the option to require registration
with no fee for businesses under the
threshold; and
* Only apply togeneral business licenses, not
regulatory licenses orlocal taxes.
2. The definition of"engaging iDbusiness"
includes examples ofwhat constitutes business
activities in cities that would subject business
tolicense requirements, aawell as those
activities that would not. The model language |a
adapted from the definition that the 45cities
with local B&C)taxes have already adopted for
the definition of "engaging in busiOese" in the
B8Otax model ordinance.
What are the deadlines for all cities with
business licenses to adopt the model?
Cities with a business license must adopt the model
bvJanuary 1,2O19.However, cities that currently
partner with the state's Business Licensing Sen/ice
(BL8) for business licensing administration have o
deadline of October 17. 2018. because they must
provide BLS 75-deynotice ofany changes tntheir
business licenses (including this mandatory
change).
Where can I learn more about implementing
the threshold?
AWC is hosting a webinar to tell you everything you
need to know to comply with the mandatory model
threshold.
Pre are to streamline vour business license
August 8 at 10 am I Webinar
AWC also held a presentation on this topic at its
Annual Conference in June and will present at the
WFOA Annual Conference on September 19 and
EWFOA on October 12.
What happens if we don't enact the
threshold by the deadline?
RCW 35.90.090 provides that a city cannot enforce
its business license after January 1, 2019, until it
has adopted the mandatory threshold.
RCW 35.90.090: "A city that has not complied with
the requirements of this section by January 1,
2019, may not enforce its general business
licensing requirements on any person until the date
that the mandatory provisions of the model
ordinance take effect within the city."
What if my city wants a higher threshold?
Cities can choose to enact a higher threshold. The
$2,000 threshold level per city per year for out -of -
city businesses is the minimum level that every city
must enact.
How was the business license threshold
developed?
Section 8 of EHB 2005 required cities to work
through the Association of Washington Cities
(AWC) to develop a model business license
threshold by July 1, 2018 with a focus on
determining a threshold for when a license should
be required for out -of -city businesses. The bill also
required input from the business community.
AWC convened a task force of city business license
officials to begin drafting a model license threshold
in August 2017. The group met monthly in person
or via conference call to research city business
license systems and existing options for
establishing a model threshold and to review
feedback on the proposed model from cities and
the business community. AWC sent a survey to
cities last fall on preferences for approaching the
model threshold and sent a draft for review to cities
in March 2018. In April -June 2018, AWC sent drafts
of the model to the business community for
comment, and the task force met in person with
business community representatives.
In response to business community concerns about
the level of the threshold, the committee proposed
doubling its initial proposed level to $2,000 per year
in the city for businesses without a location in the
city. The committee agreed to review the threshold
level in four years when the model B&O tax model
ordinance will also be due for review and more
information on impacts of the license threshold is
known. In late June, the committee finalized the
model language.
Business license model threshold
implementation timeline
July 2017 — EHB 2005 takes effect
August 2017 — First meeting of city workgroup
July 1, 2018 — Deadline for city work group to
develop model ordinance with minimum threshold
to get a license
August 8, 2018 — AWC webinar on implementing
model threshold
October 17, 2018 — Deadline for current BLS
partner cities to adopt model minimum threshold
and notify DOR of changes to business license for
threshold adoption
(Cities on BLS plan but not yet onboarded would
have later deadline of January 1, 2019)
January 1, 2019 — Deadline for all other cities to
adopt model minimum threshold
How many cities does this impact?
More than 230 cities issue local business licenses.
Where can I find more information on the
Business Licensing Service or FIIeLocal?
Business licensing service: cit artnci dor.wa. ov
FileLocal: filelocai.ord
What about the provision of EHB 2005 and
the scope of work for the B&O service
apportionment task force?
The two -factor formula for B&O tax service
apportionment was required by RCW 35.102.130,
effective in 2008. The two factors, payroll and
service income, have complicated multi -part tests
to determine how much of business service
revenues should be apportioned to a city.
EHB 2005 created a seven -member task force to
make recommendations to simplify two -factor
service apportionment by October 2018 with the
following members:
• One Department of Revenue, non-voting chair
• Three cities with local B&O taxes
• Three business representatives
The task force has been meeting monthly since
August 2017, and the deadline by which it must
submit a report to the Legislature is October 31,
2018. The city representatives are:
•, Chris Bothwell, Lake Forest Park
Joseph Cunha, Seattle
• Danielle Larson, Tacoma
How did this legislation come about?
During the 2016 legislative session, lawmakers
passed HB 2958, establishing a task force to
evaluate options to continue local business tax and
licensing simplification. On December 30, 2016, the
task force released its final report on local tax and
licensing simplification with four main
recommendations. The task force did not
recommend that all cities with a business license
be required to participate in the state's Business
Licensing Service, nor did it recommend any
centralized collection of city B&O tax at the state
level. However, some of the items recommended
represented a significant compromise on the part of
cities.
Where can I find more information on the
2016 task force?
The report included four recommendations related
to licensing, establishing a business license
threshold, recommending a task force on service
income apportionment, and providing for data
sharing between DOR and FileLocal. Read the full
report.