Loading...
01/12/2019 05 Review Requests from Council During the 2019 Budget Process BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEM ENT Item No. 5. For Meeting of: January 12, 2019 ITEM TITLE: Review requests from Council during the 2019 budget process SUBMITTED BY: Cliff Moore, City Manager SUMMARY EXPLANATION: 5. a. Information on a Levy Lid Lift 5. b. City debt 5. c. Additional budget reduction possibilities 5. d. Process to bring Charter repeal possibility forward 5. e. Possibility of creating a Regional Fire Authority 5. f. Transportation Benefit District: current status, project list, next steps ITEM BUDGETED: STRATEGIC PRIORITY: APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL: /11 City Manager STAFF RECOMMENDATION: BOARD/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: ATTACHMENTS: Description Upload Date Type D 1 le lid lift 1/a/201 r e o D le lid lift V*/ 01 r e o D I . r e o D b debt sum a V*/ 01 r e o D bud et r uctions 1/*/ 01 r e o 2 D Sd charter process 17/X12018 Cover Memo D Sc RFA 1713112018 Cover Memo D Sf TBD 15ii201F Ce‘cr Memo 3 �w' eft }}tom !f{'kX1i. kI MEMORANDUM y TO: The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Cliff Moore, City Manager FROM: Steve Groom, Finance Department DATE: January 8, 2019 RE: Potential Levy Lid Lift The purpose of this item is to annually update council on the city's property tax revenue factors. As discussed during the 2019 budget process, this year there exists a sufficiently large difference in the tax rate that a levy lid lift discussion is in order. As the attached two charts show, the 1% valuations of existing property increased disproportionally to the 1% cap resulting in a range of up to 32 cents that City Council may want to consider for a proposed ballot measure. Tax Revenue - Value = Tax Rate/000 Total Levy (from Assessor) max $3.10 2018 $ 18,686,841 = $6,241, 111,833 x 1,000 = $ 2.99 2019 Add : 1% 186,868 544,028,661 New construction 295, 182 98,586,215 Annexation 13,035 4,681,000 $ 19, 181,926 = $ 6,888,407,709 x 1,000 = $ 2.78 $ 0.32 Property Tax Capacity $68, 884 for every 1-cent change in Property Tax rate Value x Tax Rate = Tax Revenue Difference $ 6,888,407,709 $ 2.78 $ 19, 181,909 6,888,407,709 0.05 2.83 19,526,329 344,420 6,888,407,709 0. 10 2.88 19,870,750 688,841 6,888,407,709 0. 15 2.93 20, 215, 170 1,033, 261 6,888,407,709 0.20 2.98 20,559,591 1,377,682 6,888,407,709 0.25 3.03 20,904,011 1,722, 102 6,888,407,709 0.30 3.08 21, 248,431 2,066,522 6,888,407,709 0.31 3.09 21,317,315 2, 135,406 6,888,407,709 0.32 3. 10 21,354,064 2, 172, 155 6 �w' eft }}tom If kI MEMORANDUM TO: The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Cliff Moore, City Manager FROM: Steve Groom, Finance Department DATE: January 8, 2019 RE: Progress on Budget Reduction Measures The city-wide debt executive summary, initially developed as a large chart, has been reformatted for letter size paper to fit into the 2019 budget book and is attached. The correction noted from the Nov. 13th City Council meeting has been incorporated. The debt summary serves in the following ways: 1. Provides a single overview of the city's debt across all funds and funding sources 2. Shows each restricted fund's debt repayment 3. Provides long-term planning to coincide with the long-term planning of capital asset projects and the long-term forecast of the city's health in general 4. Clearly identifies when debt issues will be fully repaid, decision opportunities to consider debt re-issuance Three debt issues will be fully repaid in 2019: 1. The 2004 Convention Center expansion debt, paid from Lodging Tax restricted revenues will be repaid in 2019, resulting in debt repayment capacity in 2020 2. The 2013 Police Vehicle and Fire Air Pack debt, paid from General Fund will be repaid in 2019, resulting in debt repayment capacity in 2020 3. The 2008 infrastructure project debt paid out of REET 1 & 2 will be repaid in 2019, resulting in debt repayment capacity in 2020 This tool is primarily intended to be useful for strategic planning, budgeting and when specific debt issues are brought for consideration. 7 DEBT SUMMARY Long-term debt planning is integral to planning for fiscal sustainability. The City's debt is supported by eleven different funding streams which are segmented on the following pages. This information include a complete city-wide summary of debt issues and includes current balances and future payments. Remaining debt payments for the next 10 years are shown in the spreadsheets and associated graphs, and show when issues become fully paid within this time frame. Future points when payments decrease are the points at which decisions to re-issue debt or redeploy budgetary resources can be planned for. The attached summary has been created by staff to accomplish three things: • Provide a single overview of the city's debt across all funds and funding sources • Clearly identify when debt will be extinguished and when decision opportunities will arise to contemplate how the city will best be served by further debt or not • To provide long-term planning to coincide with the long-term planning of capital asset projects and the long-term forecast of the city's health in general The most immediate debt maturities are: 1. The 2004 Convention Center expansion debt,paid from Lodging Tax restricted revenues will be repaid in 2019,resulting in debt repayment capacity in 2020. 2. The 2013 Police Vehicle and Fire Air Pack debt,paid from General Fund,will be repaid in 2019,resulting in debt repayment capacity in 2020. 3. The 2008 infrastructure project debt paid out of REET 1 &2 will be repaid in 2019,resulting in debt repayment capacity in 2020. The two points in time this tool is most useful are during the annual strategic planning and budgeting process and when debt is issued,and at the points when specific debt issues are brought for review and approval. TOTAL DEBT SERVICE 2019-2028 11,000,000 10,000,000 9,000,000 8,000,000 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 ph! 3,000,000 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2019 City of Yakima Budget-1 8 Balance DAC Description LTD Type Funding Source Mat Date Category 12/31/18 General Fund (Property Tax/Sales Tax) 001 8717500 2013(74)Police Vehicles Gov't GF-Prop Tax/Sales Tax 06/01/19 Lease/Pchs $ 789,037 001 8707500 2013(70)Fire Air Packs Gov't GF-Prop Tax/Sales Tax 06/01/19 Lease/Pchs 86,898 001 8297500 2011 Two Fire Apparatus Gov't GF-Prop Tax/Sales Tax 12/01/20 Lease/Pchs 139,917 281 8177100 2008 Fire Ladder Apparatus Gov't GF-Prop Tax/Sales Tax 12/01/21 GO Debt 221,600 001 8697500 2013 Fire Apparatus Gov't GF-Prop Tax/Sales Tax 12/01/23 GO Debt 196,078 281 8687100 2014 Street Impr Project 2014 Gov't GF-Prop Tax/Sales Tax 06/01/23 Lease/Pchs 9,893,525 281 8887100 2018 Street Resurfacing Project(Ref) Gov't GF-Prop Tax/Sales Tax 06/01/24 GO Debt 3,996,637 15,323,692 Parks Property Tax Charter 281 8878300 2018 Yakima Sports Complex(Ref) Gov't Parks-Prop Tax Chtr$ 06/01/35 GO Debt 6,452,558 281 8267100 2018 Aquatic Center YMCA Gov't Parks-Prop Tax Chtr$ 12/01/42 GO Debt 15,004,128 21,456,686 Gas Tax 142 8098320 2015 SIED Loan-21st Ave/Airport Gov't Gas Tax 06/01/23 290,449 142 8778320 2016 SIED Loan-SOZO Gov't Gas Tax 06/01/27 955,773 142 8148320 2018 SIED-River Rd Impr/Aquatics Gov't Gas Tax 06/01/29 628,000 1,874,222 Restricted Energy Savings(Lighting) 141 8798300 2017 Energy Project(lighting) Gov't Prop Tax/Energy Svgs 06/01/27 Lease/Pchs 2,386,101 GENERAL FUND(PROPERTY TAX/SALES TAX) 3,500,000 — 3,000,000 — 2,500,000 — 2,000,000 — 1,500,000 1,000,000 — 500,000 0 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 PARKS PROPERTY TAX CHARTER 920,000 — 900,000 — 880,000 — 860,000 — 840,000 — 820,000 — 800,000 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2-2019 City of Yakima Budget 9 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029-2040 $ 789,037 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 86,898 69,959 69,959 73,200 75,600 72,800 39,216 39,216 39,216 39,216 39,216 1,646,650 1,648,750 1,650,750 1,648,375 1,648,750 1,650,250 399,664 399,664 399,664 399,664 399,664 399,664 399,664 399,664 399,664 399,664 3,104,624 2,233,189 2,162,430 2,087,255 2,087,630 2,049,914 399,664 399,664 399,664 399,664 - 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 2,452,558 420,000 420,000 420,000 420,000 420,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 10,404,128 820,000 820,000 820,000 820,000 820,000 900,000 900,000 900,000 900,000 900,000 12,856,686 58,090 58,090 58,090 58,090 58,090 106,197 106,197 106,197 106,197 106,197 106,197 106,197 106,197 106,197 - 62,797 62,800 62,800 62,800 62,800 62,800 62,800 62,800 62,800 62,803 164,287 227,084 227,087 227,087 227,087 168,997 168,997 168,997 168,997 62,800 62,803 264,977 264,742 264,496 264,237 263,965 263,680 265,897 267,080 267,028 GAS TAX 300,000 - 250,000 - 200,000 �1.;(0oe 100,000 o 50,000 0 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 RESTRICTED ENERGY SAVINGS(LIGHTING) 300,000 - 250,000 - 200,000 - 1550,000 - 100,000 50,000 0 I I I I I I I I I I 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2019 City of Yakima Budget-3 10 Balance DAC Description LTD Type Funding Source Mat Date Category 12/31/18 911 Call Dispatch 154 8758200 2014 City Pt of 911 Call Disp Ctr Gov't Prop Tax/Disp Fees 05/01/34 $ 1,912,450 Convention Center Expansion 287 8277100 2004 Convention Center Exp II Gov't Lodging Tax 11/01/19 GO Debt 349,070 Public Funds District(Sales Tax) 272 8157100 2007 Convention Ctr Addition III Gov't PFD(Sales Tax) 05/01/26 GO Debt 3,646,170 272 8167100 2009 Capitol Theatre Exp(BABs) Gov't PFD(Sales Tax) 12/01/32 GO Debt 7,624,330 11,270,500 REET 1&REET 2 281 8237100 2008 Infrastructure Project Gov't REET 1&2(50%ea) 12/01/19 GO Debt 239,200 281 8207100 2007 Fire Station(West Valley,92nd) Gov't REET 1 05/01/22 GO Debt 292,123 281 8238320 2008 Infrastructure Project Gov't REET 2 12/01/19 GO Debt 530,428 281 8187100 2003 Sundome Expansion Gov't GF-Prop Tax/Sales Tax 12/01/23 GO Debt 741,475 343 8677800 2009 Railroad Grade Separation Gov't REET 2 07/01/28 1,696,405 342 8317850 2010 Railroad Grade Separation Gov't REET 1 06/01/34 1,224,494 4,724,125 911 CALL DISPATCH 150,000 — 130,000 — 110,000 90,000 70,000 — 50,000 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 LODGING TAX 400,000 300,000 — 200,000 — 100,000 — 0 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 4-2019 City of Yakima Budget 11 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029-2040 $ 119,150 $ 117,663 $ 119,863 $ 121,863 $ 118,663 $ 120,463 $ 117,063 $ 119,513 $ 121,813 $ 118,963 $ 717,438 349,070 459,795 455,995 456,695 456,700 455,908 449,508 457,336 454,234 571,130 571,570 566,170 565,210 558,410 556,050 552,850 545,410 541,980 532,230 2,063,320 1,030,925 1,027,565 1,022,865 1,021,910 1,014,318 1,005,558 1,010,186 999,644 541,980 532,230 2,063,320 239,200 74,535 71,935 74,235 71,418 132,365 132,665 132,765 132,633 150,000 147,796 145,746 147,934 150,000 173,355 172,530 171,704 170,879 170,053 169,228 168,402 167,577 166,751 165,926 - 84,448 84,448 84,448 84,448 84,448 84,448 84,448 84,448 84,448 84,448 380,015 853,903 609,374 608,898 607,312 404,501 253,676 252,850 252,025 251,199 250,374 380,015 PUBLIC FUNDS DISTRICT(SALES TAX) 1,100,000 - L000,000 900,000 - 800 000 - 700,000 000 - 600 000 500,000 - 400,000 ..... 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 REET 1&REET 2 1,000,000 900,000 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 200,000 T. T� I ""ill"""200,000 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2019 City of Yakima Budget-5 12 Balance DAC Description LTD Type Funding Source Mat Date Category 12/31/18 Irrigation Revenue 491 8558320 2004 Irrigation System Rev Bonds Business Irrigation Revenue 09/01/34 Rev Bonds $ 5,120,409 Water Operating Revenue 474 8468300 2003 Naches WTP Improvements Business Water Operating 07/01/23 683,729 474 8488320 2009 New Water Well Business Water Operating 07/01/28 1,244,804 474 8668320 2013 Automated Reading System Business Water Operating 07/01/32 3,753,289 474 8658320 2013 Design WTP Lagoons Business Water Operating 10/01/34 3,170,350 474 8478320 2005 Naches River WTP Filter Rehab Business Water Operating 10/01/25 336,099 9,188,271 Wastewater Revenue 473 8427800 2001 Fruitvale Neighborhood Sewer Business Wastewater Revenue 07/01/21 235,204 493 8587200 2012 Wastewater Rev Bonds,Ref 03B Business Wastewater Revenue 11/01/23 Rev Bonds 5,823,400 473 8447800 2005 River Road Sewer Business Wastewater Revenue 07/01/25 887,115 473 8458300 2007 Ultraviolet Disinfection Business Wastewater Revenue 07/01/27 1,119,812 473 8628300 2012 Wastewater Treatment Plan Business Wastewater Revenue 06/01/32 3,559,244 473 8638300 2012 Industrial Sewer Main Ext Business Wastewater Revenue 06/01/37 1,622,727 473 8648300 2011 Energy Efficiency Project Business Wastewater Revenue 03/31/33 504,973 473 8768300 2012 Industrial Waste Anaerobic Business Wastewater Revenue 07/01/34 630,540 488 8548320 2008 Wastewater Revenue Bonds Business Wastewater Revenue 11/01/27 Rev Bonds 3,720,588 18,103,603 $ 91,709,129 IRRIGATION REVENUE 400,000 350,000 300,000 250,000 200,000 PPOPPOPPO 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 WATER OPERATING REVENUE 850,000 — 800,000 — 750,000 — 700,000 — 650,000 — 600,000 — 550,000 — 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 6-2019 City of Yakima Budget 13 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029-2040 $ 320,154 $ 318,760 $ 322,160 $ 319,510 $ 321,635 $ 318,310 $ 319,760 $ 320,160 $ 320,080 $ 319,520 $ 1,920,360 138,093 137,420 136,746 136,072 135,399 127,206 126,601 125,995 125,389 124,783 124,178 123,572 122,966 122,360 121,755 - 272,368 271,711 271,053 270,395 269,737 269,079 268,421 267,763 267,105 266,447 1,059,211 217,918 215,282 212,645 210,009 207,373 204,737 202,101 199,465 196,829 194,193 1,109,798 48,720 48,485 48,249 48,014 47,779 47,543 47,308 804,305 799,499 794,688 789,879 785,071 645,537 641,402 590,194 586,294 582,395 2,169,009 78,789 78,401 78,013 1,162,400 1,169,200 1,164,200 1,162,800 1,164,800 128,594 127,973 127,352 126,731 126,109 125,488 124,867 126,851 126,244 125,638 125,031 124,424 123,817 123,210 122,603 121,996 277,824 277,152 276,479 275,806 275,133 274,461 273,788 273,115 272,443 271,770 811,274 89,067 88,660 88,254 87,847 87,440 87,033 86,627 86,220 85,813 85,407 750,359 34,826 34,826 34,826 34,826 34,826 34,826 34,826 34,826 34,826 34,826 156,716 39,409 39,409 39,409 39,409 39,409 39,409 39,409 39,409 39,409 39,409 236,452 415,063 412,738 414,988 411,600 413,600 415,000 415,800 411,000 410,800 2,352,823 2,354,603 2,349,159 2,264,050 2,265,741 1,100,034 1,098,527 967,173 965,287 431,412 1,954,801 $10,184,218 $8,772,475 $8,691,642 $8,523,099 $8,308,610 $6,826,167 $5,174,344 $4,984,448 $4,522,341 $3,597,355 $22,124,432 WASTEWATER REVENUE 3,000,000 - 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 I I I I I I I I I I 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2019 City of Yakima Budget-7 14 raw' }}tom !f{'kX1i. kI MEMORANDUM TO: The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Cliff Moore, City Manager FROM: Steve Groom, Finance Department DATE: January 8, 2019 RE: Progress on Budget Reduction Measures Now that the 2019 budget year has commenced, the Finance Department has begun the process of supporting management of the budget. Our first effort has been to reach out to all departments to identify vacancies that currently exist that will result in one-time savings until each vacancy is filled. Staff seeks clarification from council on a need to identify $160,000 in budget reductions that was expressed during the budget process. With the decision to eliminate the public education captain in the fire department, resulting in budget savings of $160,000, are further reductions in that amount still sought? Staff will continue to manage expenses across all funds, seeking opportunities for revenue and for expense savings, and will continue to report the City's fund balance positions, particularly progress on the General Fund's fund balance target, to Council on a quarterly basis. 15 A 1 IMENT aUSouthIllid Yaldrna,W-, ii 1.11 • • Fav(5C9 .1€0 E 0 ANI October 30, 2018 TO: Cliff Moore, City Manager Ana Cortez, Assistant City Manager FROM: Helen A. Harvey, Senior Assistant City Attorney SUBJ: City Charter- Amendments to the Charter A. Background. You have requested a brief memorandum on the process for amendments to the City Charter. This involves the issue of possible consideration by the voters of potential amendments repealing two sections of the Yakima City Charter: Section 8 and Section 9 of Article VI, Section 8 and Section 9 of Article VI of the City Charter are below. "ARTICLE VI Additional Powers and Limitations on Officers" "SECTION 8. There shall be a dedicated street overlay and reconstruction fund,reserved for the enhancement in quality and value of City street infrastructure, of no less than Two Million Dollars annually in the City's General Fund budget. This dedicated fund base amount of Two Million Dollars shall be adjusted annually in accord with the annual change in the June U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers(CPI-U)West Region. The City Council shall make no other use of this fund than as is provided in this Section." 16 Memo re Amendments to the Charter October 30, 2018 Page 2 "SECTION 9. There shall be a dedicated public parks and recreation capital fund, reserved for the construction and rehabilitation of City public parks and recreation facilities, of no less than Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars annually in the City's General Fund budget. This dedicated fund base amount of Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars shall be adjusted annually in accord with the annual change in the June U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U)West Region. The City Council shall make no other use of this fund than as is provided in this Section." Section 8 of Article VI on the dedicated street overlay and reconstruction fund was passed by the voters at the election on August 6,2013, As reflected in the"Authentication of Charter Amendment" section in the Charter history book (attached), the amendment passed by 72.3% of the votes: "For the proposed amendment to the Charter, 7,781 votes; Against the proposed amendments to the charter, 2,967 votes; Majority for the proposed amendment to the charter, 4,814 votes." Section 9 of Article VI on the dedicated public parks and recreation capital fund was passed by the voters at the election on November 4, 2014. As reflected in the "Authentication of Charter Amendment" section,the amendment passed by 68.6% of the votes: "For the proposed amendment to the Charter, 11,784 votes; Against the proposed amendments to the charter, 5,372 votes; Majority for the proposed amendment to the charter, 6,412 votes." B. Steps for Amendment of the City Charter. Article XIII of the Yakima City Charter discusses amendments to the Charter, and states: 17 Memo re Amendments to the Charter October 30, 2018 Page 3 "Article XIII Amendments SECTION 1. This charter may be amended in the manner provided by the laws of the State of Washington. Special elections for amending this charter may be called by the City Council or shall be called upon petition of qualified voters of the City of a number not less than fifteen percent of the total number of votes cast at the last preceding general state election, and otherwise as set forth in State law." The attached respective"Authentication of Charter Amendment" sections from the Yakima City Charter history book describe the basic process for amending the City Charter when the election is called by the City Council. Section 8 of Article VI of the Yakima City Charter regarding the dedicated street overlay and reconstruction fund: 1. Resolution No. 2013-029 (attached) was adopted by the City Council on February 9, 2013, and called for an election to be held in conjunction with the regular municipal election on August 6, 2013. 2. Proposed amendments to the City Charter were published in the Yakima Herald-Republic at least once each week for four weeks preceding the date of submitting the proposed charter amendments to the electors. 3. Voters voted in the regular municipal election held August 6, 2013. Section 9 of Article VI of the Yakima City Charter regarding the dedicated public parks and recreation capital and rehabilitation fund: 1. Resolution No.2014-066(attached)was adopted by the City Council on May 6, 2014, and called for an election to be held in conjunction with the regular municipal election on November 4, 2014. 2. Proposed amendments to the City Charter were published in the Yakima Herald-Republic at least once each week for four weeks preceding the date of submitting the proposed charter amendments to the electors. 18 Memo re Amendments to the Charter October 30, 2018 Page 4 3. Voters voted in the regular municipal election held November 4, 2014. C. Election Costs. In October 2018, City Clerk Sonya Claar Tee corresponded with Kathy Fisher, Elections Manager of the Yakima County Elections Division, to attempt to receive a rough estimate of election costs depending on whether a ballot proposition was scheduled on the election date on February 12,2019 or April 23, 2019, on the primary on August 6, 2019, or on the general election on November 5, 2019. Attached is their email correspondence. Elections Manager Kathy Fisher indicates that ballot propositions at elections in February or April cost the most for a city. For example, when Kathy Fisher used February 2016 as a comparable, the "city's cost using the 2016 February actuals would have been S64,000." A ballot proposition on the primary or the general election costs less, although the amount varies depending on how many items are on the ballot. An estimate of "roughly $5,000" additional for a ballot proposition was given for the primary or general election; however, the actual cost will depend on how many positions/items are on the ballot at that time. cc: Jeff Cutter, City Attorney Attachments: 1. 2019 Election Calendar from Yakima County Elections Division 2. Resolution No.R-2013-029 regarding a dedicated street overlay and reconstruction fund (passed on August 6, 2013) (includes the "Authentication of Charter Amendment" section in the Yakima City Charter history book) 3. Resolution No. R-2014-066 regarding a dedicated public parks and recreation capital construction and rehabilitation fund (passed on November 4, 2014) (includes the "Authentication of Charter Amendment" section in the Yakima City Charter history book) 4. Emails between Yakima County Elections Manager Kathy Fisher and City Clerk Sonya Claar Tee in October 2018 regarding election costs 19 211 • Election Calen.i r from Y.kima County Elections ! ivision 10/17Y20 8 2U18/20M8 election calendar YakirnaCvunty,WA oo = .~ ~ � 2018 ,^9 election calendar ' � � . Resolutions CertKKkatUon ^' Tb call for m specialelection !n February nrApril, Election results are certified 1U days after oSpecial resolutions are due 6O days prior to the election Election i0 February mr April, 14 days after a date' ' Primary, and 21 days after m General Election. � |f the Special E|ection /etobe held in conjunction Candidate Filing 2019 with Primary, resolutions are due no later than the * Friday immediately before the first day ofthe ~���'---=~�------- — ^~ ^ regular candidate filing period. Candidate filing period for 2018 |e May 1347' � ^ ' - RCVV2SA.24.O5O Resolutions calling for a Special Election in v � conjunction with the General Election are due no ' later than the day of the Primary. FlCVV2Q&.O4.321 ' � ^ ^ ^ A ballot measure cover sheet must besubmitted ^ with each resolution or ordinance submitted hn Yakima County Elections. if a jurisdiction wishes to withdraw o nano|U(/on' e _ signed statement must ha submitted tothe � elections division. The deadline bnm/ithdraw,e ^ | � resolution |a the same ao filing a resolution that ^ co||a for an election. ' Election Date Aug Nov Feb12 Aupr23 Aug Nov ~ 2018 2018 2019 2019 2019 2019 � ^� Resolution Due Mav11 Aug Doo14 Fmb22 W1my1O Aug � ^ 29Dov Registration and Update Deadline July Oct Jan14 K8ar25 ^ * ^ 8 Day New Registration Deadline Juk/3O Oct20 Feb Aor15 ^ ^ Overseas/Military Ballots Mailed Junm22 Seot21 Jan 11 yWar22 June21 8*ot2O � Ballots Available ^ July 20 C)ct10 .. Jan25 Apr 5 JU/y1O <Jct18 !� Election Certified Auo21 NoV27 Fab2Z May Aug 20 Nov 28- Select1_4nmaQg|��� � ' 21 *beginning June 2019: citizens who are not currently registered In Washington may register: by mail or online-Applications must be received by the County auditor no later than 8 days before the election. in person-Applicants must appear in-person in the County Auditor's Office no later than 8pm on the day of the election. Individuals already registered to vote in Washington may update their registration no later than 8pm on the day of the election. SSB 6021;2018 The 8 day in person voter registration deadline is only for individuals who are not currently registered in Washington State.The applicant must appear in-person in the Auditor's Office. RCW 29A.08.140 Select Language I http://www.yardmacoUnty•us/1873/2018-2019-election-calendar r 22 IMP OP esol tion o. * -2113 - 12 ' re • ar in • a • • street overlay 4) reco st ction • ( • asseson A • ust • , 2113) (inclus es t e " A e tic tion of C er A e ent" sectio in e a City ty oo ~ RESOLUTION NO. R-2013-029 A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Yakima, Washington, providing for the submission to the voters of the City of Yakima a Proposition on whether Article l/| of the Charter of the City of YaWrOo should be amended to add new Section 0 establishing a dedicated street 0«er/ay and reconstruction fUUd, to be funded in the amount of no + . |mae than Two Million Dollars annually, adjusted annually per consumer price index, and limiting expenditures from such fund to the dedicated purposes of street overlay and reconstruction; and requesting the Yakima County Auditor to submit the Proposition to the Men; on the regular municipal primary election to be held August 6. 2O13. � WHEREAS, Chapter 3522 of the F�avio�d Code of Washington /Fl(�VV\ | ' ' ` ' ' authorizes first class cities of the State of Washington to amend and revise their charters ` upon @ppFUVa} by a majority of the qualified voters of the city voting in a gono[o| or . special election called for that purpose; and ^ - WHEREAS, an amendment of the charter may be initiated by the City Council ° through the approval of resolution requesting that a proposition be submitted to the ^ qualified voters in the City to decide whether the City should adopt an amendment to Article V| of the Charter of the City of Yakima to add new Section 8 establishing a '^ dedicated street overlay and reconstruction fund to be funded annually from the General Fund budget in an amount no less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000), which amount shall be adjusted annually in accordance with the oOmuo| change in the June U.S. Department ofLabor, Bureau,of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) West Region, and further providing that the City Council shall make no other use of this Fund than ao provided iD such Section 8; and * WHEREAS, the City Council desires to hold an election in the City of Yakima on the neQU|@[ municipal primary election date of /\UgVot 8, 2013. for the purpose of GUbQn|tt/Og to the qualified voters of the City the proposition of whether the City Of � Yakima should approve the amendment tothe Charter oodescribed abova, all as set forth in the proposed amendment toArticle \/| of the Charter to add new Sect/on 8 attached hereto ae Exhibit ')4|'' and WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that the best interests and general welfare of the City of Yakima would be served by submitting to the qualified voters /n the City the proposition of whether the City of Tmkinoe should approve the amendment to the Charter @e set forth herein, therefore, ^ `^ BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKKMA: , 1. The proposition to be oUb0D/ttad at the August O' 2013 regular municipal ` phVla[V election shall be in the form of a ballot title as follows: � l ^ " ^ 2 4 ,.. PROPOSITION NO 1 ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO CHARTER OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA PROPOSITION NO. 1 concerns an amendment of the City of Yakima Charter. This measure amends Charter Article VI adding new Section 8 creating a dedicated street overlay and reconstruction fund, funded annually in the amount of no less than Two Million Dollars from the general fund budget, adjusted annually in accordance with consumer price iridex, and providing that expenditures from such fund be limited to such street overlay and reconstruction. Should this proposition be approved'? YES L.......J NO L...1 2. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the Yakima County Auditor. 3. The Yakima County Auditor is requested to call and conduct an election to be held in the City of Yakima on the regular municipal primary election day of August 6, 2013, for the purpose of submitting to the qualified voters of the City of Yakima the proposition set forth in Section 1 above. 4. Severability If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 19th day of February, 2013 Micah Cawley, ayor „...........v...,..‘‘,,, ,,e• EST: . . / r *....."" ...• f) %,,,, . .......a.4,.. ..., ' 0 e, % , * City Clerk fti . „ ..„. -4 il N174s>f 1.41,,,,,,,,%4 * ,, I k Y 4 APPROVED AS TO FORM: VO4 '04000,.......... e Z Jeff , City Attorney 2 25 EXHIBIT "A" BALLOT PROPOSITION AMENDING CITY CHARTER ARTICLE VI, SECTION 8 (To Be Added As A New Section) There shall be a dedicated street overlay and reconstruction fund, reserved for the enhancement in quality and value of City street infrastructure, of no less than Two Million Dollars annually in the City's General Fund budget. This dedicated fund base amount of Two Million Dollars shall be adjusted annually in accord with the annual change in the June U S Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) West Region The City Council shall make no other use of this fund than as is provided in this Section. 26 *te' tir .%).• r,„ BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIIVIA,WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT Item No. For Meeting of: February 19,2013 ITEM TITLE: Resolution of the City Council of the City of Yakima providing for the submission to the eligible voters of the City of Yakima on the regular municipal primary election to be held August 6, 2013, a Proposition to amend Article VI of the Charter of the City of Yakima to add new Section 8 establishing a dedicated street overlay and reconstruction fund in the City's General Fund budget SUBMITTED BY: Jeff Cutter, City Attorney CONTACT Jeff Cutter, City Attorney/575-6030 PERSON/TELEPHONE: SUMMARY EXPLANATION: The Revised Code of Washington authorizes first class cities of the State of Washington to amend and revise their charters upon approval by a majority of the qualified voters of the city voting in a general or special election called for that purpose. The City Council desires to hold an election in the City of Yakima on the regular municipal primary election date of August 6, 2013, for the purpose of submitting to the qualified voters of the City the proposition to amend Article VI of the City Charter to add new Section 8 establishing a dedicated street overlay and reconstruction fund to be funded annually from the General Fund budget in en amount no less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000), with the provison that this amount shall be adjusted annually in accordance with annual change in the Consumer Price Index, and further providing that the City Council shall make no other use of this Fund than as provided in such Section 8. Other Resolution X Ordinance (specify) Contract: Mail to: Contract Term: Amount: Expiration Date: Insurance Required? No Funding Source: Phone: APPROVED FOR 27 SUBMITTAL: 4 City Manager STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution. BOARD/COMM1SSION RECOMMENDATION: ATTACHMENTS: Click to download El edqpIDedicated S reel o -2-2013 El CHARTER AMENDMENT- aciott Proposition-Dedicated Street Fund-Exia A-2-2013 tn-0 rr I . 28 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 129 North Second Street 014" Yakima, Washington 98901 .1 jai P Phone(509)575-6037*Fax(509)576-6614 t;• February 26, 2013 HAND DELIVERED Ms Corky Mattingly Yakima County Auditor 128 North Second Street Yakima, WA 98901 Dear Ms Mattingly 'On February 19, 2013, the Yakima City Council adopted Resolution No R-2013-029 that requests you to submit a proposition to the voters of the City of Yakima on the municipal primary election to be held August 6, 2013 The ballot title states PROPOSITION NO 1 ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO CHARTER OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA PROPOSITION NO I concerns an amendment of the City of Yakima Charter This measure amends Charter Article VI adding new Section 8 creating a dedicated street overlay and reconstruction fund, funded annually in the amount of no less than Two Million Dollars from the general fund budget, adjusted annually in accordance with consumer price index, and providing that expenditures from such fund be kneed to such street overlay and reconstruction Should this proposition be approved? YES NO f Attached is an original resolution signer! by Mayor Micah Cawley Please contact me if you have questions SIy, /Zee Sonya Clear Tee City Clerk C City Attorney Attachment REC MED FEB 2 8 2013 Yakima °a:Art-0,41 Yakima Courity Election Division 194 29 AMENDMENT NO. 12 "That Article VI, Section 8, to be added as a new section, of the Charter of the City of Yakima be amended to read as follows: ARTICLE VI SECTION 8. There shall be a dedicated street overlay and reconstruction fund, ' reserved for the enhancement in quality and value of City street infrastructure, of no less than Two Million Dollars annually in the City's General Fund budget This dedicated fund base amount of Two Million Dollars shall be adjusted annually in accord with the annual change in the June U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) West Region, The City Council shall make no other use of this fund than as is provided in this Section." As adopted by vote of the people August 6, 2013. Effective date August 20, 2013. AUTHENTICATION OF CHARTER AMENDMENT I, Micah Cawley, Mayor of the City of Yakima, State of Washington, do hereby certify that in accordance with the Constitution and statutes of the State of Washington, the City Council of the City of Yakima duly adopted Resolution No. R-2013-029 at a regular meeting of the Yakima City Council held on February 19, 2013, by which resolution the Yakima City Council proposed to the electors of the City of Yakima, Washington that Article VI of the Charter of the City of Yakima be amended and by which resolution the Yakima City Council called for the election to be held in conjunction with the regular municipal election to be held August 6, 2013, for the submittal to the electors of the City Of Yakima, Washington, for their approval or rejection, of the said proposed amendment , to the Yakima City Charter. That such regular municipal election was duly called by resolution of the Yakima County • Auditor, and thereafter the said proposed amendments to the Yakima City Charter were published in the Yakima Herald-Republic, the daily newspaper of largest general circulation published in the requirements of applicable laws, which notice was published at least once each week for four weeks next preceding the date of submitting said proposed charter amendments to the electors for their approval; and that all further notices of said regular municipal election were duly and timely published in accordance with requirements of applicable laws. 4-141. • That thereafter on August 6, 2013, at such election dulyrcalledd ,and held, the said proposed amendments were submitted to the qualified ele'Petors,of the City of Yakima and the returns canvassed resulted as follows: • For the proposed amendment to the Charter, 7,781 votes; Against the proposed amendments to the charter, 2,967 votes; Majority for the proposed amendment to the charter, 4,814 votes; • 79 30 4 /.,, a • Whereupon the said proposed amendments of the Yakima City Charter were declared approved and adopted by a majority of the qualified electors voting thereon at the said election. I further certify that the foregoing is a full, true and complete copy of the said charter amendment so voted upon and adopted as aforesaid. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and affix the corporate seal of said city at my office this 20th day of August, 2013. MAYOR of the City of Yilaki a, Washington ATTEST: CITY CLER of the City of Yakima, Washington 0 # 4,4X* I 31 esolution -2C 14- 1 . • re_aro in: a e • is 1 to � �u � ic e 4rks . n + recreation c. * ital construction . n� reh4 e ilit tion fun • ( . asse . on Novem ter 4, 2114) (inclu. es the " A uthentication of Charter Ame ent" section in the Y kima City Charter history 9 ook) 32 RESOLUTION NO. R-2014-066 A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Yakima, Washington, providing for the submission to the voters of the City of Yakima a Proposition on whether Article VI of the Charter of the City of Yakima should amended to add new Section 9 establishing a dedicated public parks and recreation capital construction and rehabilitation fund, to be funded in the amount of no less than Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars annually, adjusted annually per consumer price index, and limiting expenditures from such fund to the dedicated purposes of public parks and recreation capital construction and rehabilitatioh; and requesting the Yakima County Auditor to submit the Proposition to the voters on the regular municipal general election to be held November 4, 2014. WHEREAS, Chapter 35.22 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) authorizes first class cities of the State of Washington to amend and revise their charters upon approval by a majority of the qualified voters of the city voting in a general or special election called for that purpose; and WHEREAS, an amendment of the charter may be initiated by the City Council through the approval of a resolution requesting that a proposition be submitted to the qualified voters in the City to decide whether the City should adopt an amendment to Article VI of the Charter of the City of Yakima to add new Section 9 establishing a dedicated public parks and recreation capital construction and rehabilitation fund to be funded annually from the General Fund budget in an amount no less than Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($750,000), which amount shall be adjusted annually in accordance with the annual change in the June U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index for Al! Urban Consumers (CPI-U) West Region, and further providing that the City Counc:il shall make no other use of this Fund than as provided in such Section 9; and • WHEREAS, the City Council desires to hold an election in the City of Yakima on the regular municipal general election date of November 4, 2014, for the purpose of submitting to the qualified voters of the City the proposition of whether the City of Yakima should approve the amendment to the Charter as described above, all as set forth in the proposed amendment to Article VI of the Charter to add new Section 9, attached hereto as Exhibit "A;" and WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that the best interests and general welfare of the City of Yakima would be served by submitting to the qualified voters in the City 1 33 the proposition of whether the City of Yakima should approve the amendment to the Charter as • set forth herein,therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA: 1. The proposition to be submitted at the November 4, 2014 regular municipal general election shall be in the form of a ballot title as follows: PROPOSITION NO. 1 • ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO CHARTER OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA • PROPOSITION NO. 1 concerns an amendment of the City of Yakima Charter. This measure amends City Charter Article VI adding new Section 9 creating a dedicated public parks and recreation capital construction and rehabilitation fund, funded annually in the amount of no less than Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars from the general fund budget, adjusted annually in accordance with consumer price index, and providing that expenditures from such fund be limited to public parks and recreation capital construction and rehabilitation. Should this proposition be approved? 2. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the Yakima County Auditor 3. The Yakima County Auditor is requested to call and conduct an election to be held in the City of Yakima on the regular municipal general election day of November 4, 2014, for the purpose of submitting to the qualified voters of the City of Yakima the proposition set forth in Section 1 above. 4. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution. 2 34 ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 6th day of 2014. Micah awls , Mayor EST: I ( 1 1 City Clerk Ott itk APPROVED AS TO FORM: (1,14 Jett City Attorney 3 35 EXHIBIT"A" BALLOT PROPOSITION AMENDING CITY CHARTER ARTICLE VI, SECTION 9. (To Be Added As A New Section) There shall be a dedicated public parks and recreation capital fund, reserved for the construction and rehabilitation of City public parks and recreation facilities, of no less than Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars annually in the City's General Fund budget This dedicated fund base amount of Seven Hundred Fi`" Thousand Dollars shall be adjusted annually in accord with the annual change in the June U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPIU) West Region. The City Council shall make no other use of this fund than as is provided in this Section. 4 36 4sx.s 9f.... BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKI A,WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT Item Noll ` For Meeting of: 5/6/2014 ITEM TITLE: Resolution providing for the submission to the eligible voters of the City of Yakima on the regular municipal primary election to be held August 5,•2014, a Proposition to amend Article VI of the Charter of the City of Yakima to add new Section 9 establishing a dedicated parks and recreation • capital construction and rehabilitation fund in the City's General Fund budget. SUBMITTED BY: Jeff Cutter,City Attorney 1575-6030 SUMMARY EXPLANATION: The Revised Code of Washington authorizes first class cities of the State of Washington to amend and revise their charters upon approval by a majority of the qualified voters of the city voting in a general or special election called for that purpose. The attached resolution and Exhibit A thereto, if approved by the City Council, would submit the attached Proposition No. 1 to the qualified voters of the City on the regular municipal primary election date of August 5, 2014, for their Vote on the preposition to amend Article VI of the City Charter to add new Section 9 establishing a dedicated parks and recreation capital construction and rehabilitation fund,to be funded annually from the General Fund budget in an amount no less than Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($750,000), with the provision that this amount shall be adjusted annually in accordance with annual change in the Consumer Price Index, and further providing that the City Council shall make no other use of this Fund than as provided in Section 9. The deadline for submitting the resolution to the County Auditor for the August 6, 2014 primary general election is May 9, 2014. The resolution could also be amended for submission to the Auditor by no later than August 5, 2014 to be included on the November 4, 2014 general election ballot. Resolution:X Ordinance: Other(Specify): Contract: Contract Term: Start Date: End Date: 37 Item Budgeted: NA Amount: Funding Source/Fiscal Impact: Strategic Priority: Economic Development Insurance Required?No Mail to: Phone: APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL City Manager : -401P RECOMMENDATION: Take action on the resolution. ATTACHMENTS: Description Upload Date Type Charter Areendinent-Ballot Proposition-Dedicated ET 4/16/2014 Resolution Park and Red Fund Exhibit A-Charter Amendment-Ballot Proposition- 4/16/2014 Exhibit Dedicated park 8,Rea Fqnd 82 38 AMENDMENT NO, 14 . "That Artie VI of the Charter of the City of Yakima be amended with the addition of Section 9, to read as follows: ARTICLE VI SECTION 9. There shall be a dedicated public parks and recreation,capital fund, reserved for the construction and rehabilitation of City public parks and recreation facilities, of no less than Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars annually in- the City's General Fund budget. This dedicated fund base amount of S even Hundred Fifty Thousand Millers shall be adjusted annually In accord with the annual change in the June U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index fel-All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) West Region, The City Council shall make no other use of this fund than as is provided in this'Section!' As adopted by vote of the people November 4, 2014. Effective date November 4, 2014. AUTHENTICATION OF CHARTER AMENDMENT Micah Cawley, Mayor of the City of Yakima, State cif Washington, do hereby certify that in accordance with the Constitution and statutes of th,e State Of Washington, the City Council of the City of Yakima duly adopted Res QI ution No. R-2014-066 at a regular meeting of the Yakima City Council held on May 6, 2614, by which resolution the Yakima City Council proposed to the electors of the City of Yakima, Washington that Article VI of the Charter of the City of Yakima be amended and by which resolution the Yakima City Council called for the election to be held in conjunction with the regular municipal election to be held November 4, 2014, for the submittal to the electors of the City Of Yakima, Washington, for their approval or rejection, of the said proposed amendment to the Yakima-City Charter.. That such regular municipal election was duly called by resolution of the Yakima County Auditor, and thereafter the said proposed amendments to the Yakima City Charter were published in the Yakima Herald-Republic, the daily newspaper of largest general circulation published in the requirements of applicable laws, which notice was published at least once each week for four weeks next preceding the date of submitting said proposed charter amendments to the electors for their approval; and that all further notices.Of said regular municipal election were duly and timely published in accordance with requirements of applicable laws. That thereafter on November 4, 2014, at such election duly called and held, the said proposed amendments were submitted to the qualified electors of the City of Yakima and the returns canvassed resulted as follows: For the proposed amendment to the Charter, 11,784 votes; Against the proposed amendments to the charter, 5,372 votes; 83 39 Majority for the proposed amendment to the charter, 6,412 votes; ereoperi the said,proposed amendments of the Yakima City Charter Were declared, approved and adopted by a majority of the qualified electors voting thereon at the said election; I further certify that the foregoing it a full, true and complete copy of the said charter amendment so voted upon and adopted as aforesaid. IN TESTIMONY WIJEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and affix the corporate seal of said city at my office this 25t day of November, 2014. (20-g MAYOR-of the City of akirna, Washington ATTEST: OTT),CL R of t st City of Yakima,Washington /0: tfie * tt/t - :E1A *Xli * 4 ZIA I i.ult :0*w", 40 Emails between Yakima County Rlections Manager K,thy Fisher n r City Clerk Sonya Claar Tee in • ctober 2018 regarding election costs v ^ ~ 41Harvey � Helen ' ~ From: [bmrToo Sonya � Sent: Thuraay, October 18\ 20183:47PM � To: ` � Moore, Cliff, Cortez, Ana Cutter,Jeff, Harvey, Helen Groom, Steve � Cc: Price, [ally s FVV election cost question � See estimates b8lOVV From: Kathy Fisher[ma i Ito:kathy.fisher@co.yakima.wa.us] - Hi Sonya — | replied ho your questions below. Thanks! From: C|aarTee,Sonya<SonVa.CIaarTee(@vakimawa.gov> Hi Kathy— I'm trying to do some rough estimates and hoping you can let me know how close I might be. � U. If we have @Special Election iD February QF April, I estimate the cost at approx. $50.000. The only districts scheduled for February so far are Selah and Highland school districts...this means that the City would pick up a large chunk of the cost of that election because it would be the largest jurisdiction. [>f course, | won't know for sure until December 14 when the naso due date hits. | used Febnuary2U18 as a comparable for this oaUmobe—thio election had 62.300 voters which is on|y5'UOU more than the City, 8o|ah. and Highland. The nity'o cost using the 201G February actuo|s would have been $64,000. O. If we have S8Ve[8l positions on the Primary and we add @ ballot measure, VVOUld that be pDUgh/V $5'000? 1 used the 2017 Primary for this estimate...the City had 3 positions on the ballot for a total cost of ^ $30.880. Adding two more(one for the extra council position and one for the issue would bring that total cost up to$34.000. Of course, not knowing what jurisdictions will have a primary or not plays o big pad in this one, (nice job on your estimoh*|) O. If we have @ Fx[imGFy with OD positions on the ballot, and we add a ballot measure, what VVOUld you estimate the cost at? Again, | used the 2U17 Primary for this estimate....with just 1 ^poniUon. on that ballot would have cost the City $25,900. O.' If we add a ballot DleaGUme to the General, since we will have 4 COUOCil 0DeD0be[O UD for re- election, VVOUld that be approx. $5,000 additional? I used the 2017 General for this estimate...with 5 items on that ballot, the city paid $24,900. Sn that would ba roughly the same amount. 1 42 As a quick FYI, there are some big legislative changes for elections that go into effect 2019 June—same day (no deadline) registration and updates. This has the potential to increase costs....no registration deadline means more voters, which means more ballots, envelopes, time spent conducting the election, etc. ° Thank you for your assistance! " From: Kathy Fisher[mmai|tmdkat rma.m/ .ms Sent: Friday, October 1Z,2O1O11:16AK4 To:C|aar Tee, Sonya ki Subject: Re: election cost question Hi Sooyu^' Everything ia the same ~ From:C|aar Tee, Sonya <SomVa.CIaa kirmawa^gov> . Sent: Friday, October 12,2O1810:S1:S8AM To: Kathy Fisher Subject: election cost question ^ - Hi KmthV— I received the info below in 2014 re election costs. Is this still CO[PSCf or are there GOV changes/updates? Th@OkVoUH ~ To start, election costs are calculated as per The Budget,Accounting, and Reporting System(BARS) manual as published by the Washington State Auditor(SAO). Yakima County job costs all expenses, including salary and benefits in order to more accurately allocate a jurisdictions' proportionate share. Election costs can vary greatly if a jurisdiction places a measure on a general election ballot vs, a special election ballot. If a jurisdiction conducts a special election in February or April and they are the only jurisdiction conducting an election during that time,they absorb all the costs associated with that election rather than having the costs proportionally distributed amongst other jurisdictions that may also have a special election on that date. Since local jurisdictions and special districts always have a General Election in an odd numbered year to elect council members,school board members and commissioners, if they added a special issue to that particular ballot it wouldn't substantially increase their costs for that particular election since most, if not all,jurisdictions in the county are sharing in the cost of that general election. For example, in 2013,the City of Yakima had 6 contests/issues on the ballot,for a cost of$27,839.84. If they had an additional issue (7),their cost would have been approximately$30,000. Compare that to the February 2009 special election when the City was the only jurisdiction on the ballot and their cost was$47,000+. In addition, during an odd numbered year General Election, not only are the special districts and cities proportionately sharing in election costs,the State pays their proportionate share for state issues on the ballot.Since they are the largest jurisdiction on the ballot(encompassing the whole mounty),they pay a much greater share of the costs. The same scenario would more than likely hold true for a special issue for most even numbered year general election ballots. The only difference is that the State does not pay for federal and state offices on the ballot(which is state law),so those costs 2 43 �� foUto the cnunty |n |onNn8at November 2O12�general election mos� � , thaC�yp|auedanbsueonthotbaUotdhe/rcuxm would have been similar if not a bit less than the 7 issue 2013 general election scenario I described above. What I described above are only costs directly associated with that particular election.At the end of the year, miscellaneous costs are proportionately distributed to all jurisdictions who conducted any type of election during that year based ono percentage factor established bx the SAO. Sonya C|oor Tee,CIVIC | City Clerk domain.NOTICE OF PUBLIC DISCLOSURE.,This e-mail account is public Any correspondence from or to this e-mail account may be a public record. | '4ccov&ng(Kthis e-mail,8t0ole mrin part,nmy be subject to disclosure pursuant eCN/42.n6,/egaodlm000/*nyclq^mor confidentiality nrpnMleg' | asserted bvanexmmo/party. - � ~ ~ ' , - 3 ` 44 � �?ckn This document is a culmination of investments of personal time and commitments made by group of volunteers in our community. The community as a whole owes much gratitude to . these individuals for their selfless dedication that resulted in this feasibility study and recommendation. Members of the Feasibility Study Group met for 3 years gathering, organizing,and analyzing volumes of data and information used in this project. Special thanks must be given to Fred Bruning of[enter[a| Properties and owner of the Valley K8o||, City of Yakima, Fire District 11, and Fire District 1O for their monetary contributions that funded the financial study portion of this project. Fire District 11 acted us the financier of the study and provided a place for the volunteer group to meet. Special thanks to the Kent Regional Fire Authority for providing many hours of expert advice and for traveling to Yakima to deliver presentations and answer questions for our group. This project certainly would have suffered if not for the help of the members of the Kent Fire Authority. Our gratitude is owed to Chief Jim Schneider, Chief Greg Markley, Captain Larry ( Robe/ and the staff of Kent RFA. The Washington Survey and Rating Bureau was more than generous with material and expert presentations delivered by Robert Ferrell to the Study Group at our facilities. Employees ofboth Fire Departments and Advance Life Systems ambulance service provided manpower and equipment for learning demonstrations on manpower assignment and usage. � Thanks to all Council members and Mayors and Fire Commissioners for supporting this study.� Finally, thanks to the volunteers that actually performed this study and produced this document. yNauneenAdkiaon Jennifer Norton Micah Cawley Dan Olson Kathy Coffey RyanOm|in Gary Collins Ty|erQuanth||e Carl Cyr Thomas Sevigny Chris Jensen A||ieStewart Ray Kempf Michael Trujillo Nancie Lehrman Roger Wentz Joe Mann , TimVVhitmhurxt ~ Dave Matson RockyVVi||ette Connie Mendoza David Willson DD Eric Miller MP-0 Woody Woodcock Yakima/Union Gap/0strict1O/Districtl1 Kegiona| FimAuthnrityFeasibi|ityRepo� ~ � 45 Executive Summa- OBJECTIVE Fire Protection Jurisdictions all around the Country are facing a decreased amount of revenue � compared toon increased cost of doing business. Besides the poor economy and flat tax base, � other municipal departments such as Public Works and Law Enforcement are requiring a higher percentage of the revenue pie to operate. This trend is causing a continuous degradation in service provision for Fire Departments including those in the Yakima Valley. |nZUO4legislation in Washington State was passed allowing Regional Fire Authorities toform between two or more jurisdictions including Cities and County Fire Districts. A Regional Fire Authority (RFA) collects a property tax and in some cases a benefit fee which is voted by the public. An RFA isa junior taxing district which exclusively funds the operations of the Fire Department. You will recognize this practice as the same process that Fire Districts around the state use for operation. This Report is the result of o feasibility study involving the City of Union Gap, The City of Yakima,Yakima County Fire District 11 (Broadway),and Fire District 10(Fruitva|e). The intent nf o Regional Fire Authority in this area is to maintain a level of service determined by the public as an acceptable level and operate under direction of an elected panel represented by the voters. A larger Fire Department formed by consolidating all four jurisdictions would have efficiencies and on increased depth of service by design. The intent of this RFA is not to reduce the cost of operation which can only be done by a reduction in service. This could easily be done by eliminating members and services currently provided. This kind of erosion iscurrently taking place and is the driving force behind formation of RFA's in the state. The intent of this RFA would be to provide a consistent funding source that maintains the current level of service enjoyed by the citizens within the proposed RFA area. STUDY GROWp. Under direction of the Councils of Union Gap and Yakima and Commissioners of Fire District 11 and 10' a feasibility study was performed. This study was performed by a diverse 20 person group that met for two years bringing this recommendation forward. The group was comprised of Business owners, Residents, Elected Public Officials, Employees, and Fire Officials. The study was facilitated by the Fire Chief from Yakima and Union Gap. A consulting firm was employed to perform the financial feasibility portion of this study. JURISDICTION BACKGROUND The City of Yakima Fire Department is staffed fully with on duty full time career firefighters. The Fire Department is funded from the General Fund by combination mf revenue sources. The Fire Department also receives slightly more than one million dn||am per year from the voter approved county wide EMS levy. The City of Union Gap Fire Department is staffed by full time career firefighters during the day and a combination of career and volunteer firefighters in the evening. The Union Gap Fire ° Yakima/Union Gap/District lO/Districtl1 1 Regional Fire Authority Feasibility Report ^ 40 Department is funded much like Yakima from mixed sources of revenue through the General - Fund and slightly less than one hundred thousand dollars from the county wide EMS levy. | Yakima County Fire District 11 (Broadway) is funded by a Five Service property tax and some revenue from the countywide EMS levy. District 11 has a fire station on Washington Avenue but no firefighting force or standard fire equipment. District 11 contracts with Union Gap for � fire protection. � Yo6ino County Fire Dbtrict2D (Fruitva|m) is funded by Five Service property tax and some revenue from the county wide EMS levy. District 1O has no firefighting force or equipment and contracts for service with the City of Yakima for fire protection. FINAN��L��U0Y8UK4PNERY A� the onset of phase 3 of this project, the study group voted to employ a consulting firm to perform the financial feasibility portion of this project. This decision was made on the premise that the financial portion of the study needed to be performed by a professional firm for the sake of accuracy, completeness and unbiased fact finding. The entire report from the consulting firm of Emergency Service Consulting international'(E3C|) can be found in its entirety in the financial portion nf this document. The scope of the report from ESC| was to determine if the four jurisdictions could join under the regulations of the Revised [ode of Washington and provide a same type service using the revenue sources available to Regional Fire Authorities in Washington State. The consulting firm was not employed to design or give advice on the amount of revenue to collect or how this particular RFA budget should be modeled and therefore, the actual financial study document provided by � � ES[|only recommends whether onRFA would be possible or not in this area. It must also be noted that this project officially started in January of 2011. The financial data provided toESC|was current at the time of acquisition in early 2O12. Budgets and departments change continuously so the data listed will have to be updated if the elected officials opt to continue the process to the Planning Committee stage. With so many variables in this report' it was unrealistic to update and change the figures tu make this document current ot the time you read this. All figures used in the study are from the snapshot in time when ESC| gathered all the information needed to make the compilations. OPTIONS As outlined in the findings of the Consultant report o Regional Fire Authority is feasible with the four participating jurisdictions if an ad valorem tax of$1 plus a benefit charge is used for a revenue source. The total cost of the proposed RFA and the required benefit fee are outlined in detail in the financial section of this report. Yakima/Union Gap/District 1O/Distriol1 1 Regional Fire Authority Feasibility Report ~ �. � 47 With the finalization of the feasibility study, the group voted unanimously to recommend that " the elected officials of all four jurisdictions proceed with further study of this funding option for ( the fire service. This conclusion was made in port by the following positive aspects of forming a Regional Fire Authority in our area: w The combined resources of four jurisdictions offer a greater depth of service to everyone within the proposed boundary. There vvmu|d be o greater number of firefighters and apparatus available to all citizens then currently exist. w The public would have direct control over costs of a Regional Fire Authority and directly determine the level of service they prefer. * A dedicated funding source would allow a sustained level ofservice. � A Regional Fire Authority would be governed by citizens elected as directors or commissioners with the sole concern of making decisions for the Fire Department. As noted in the Financial Summary, there are areas of the proposal that can be adjusted and cost shifting possibilities. � Yakima/Union Gap/District IO/District 11 1 Regional Fire Authority Feasibility Report E..fi. � � 48 1:),,e,gior; Fire Authorfiy Implemenfation GLIide Fire Authority eyelop ent rocess 23 49 Recaiona/ Fire Aufficrity impernentation Guide ire -uthority evelo, ent Iocess The first step in the process to determine it the regional fire authority (RFA) is right for you is to ask the following questions: • Are we considering an RFA for the benefit of our citizens' • Are we considering an RFA to gain efficiencies for the benefit of our citizens? • Are we considering an RFA to improve the overall level of service, standards of cover, and enhance services for the benefit of our citizens% If the answer to these simple questions is yes, then an RFA might be a strong consideration for your department. However, if you are considering an RFA simply to try to save money, or due to a funding issue; or, if you are considering an RFA to eliminate issues between fire departments (such as issues between cities and fire districts), then the RFA probably is not the answer for you.l'he REA should only be used if it can be determined that combining fire departments, or subsets of fire departments, can truly benefit the citizens that are being served. If it is not about the citizens, then don't do it. If it is...proceed forwardffl For those not familiar with the term RFA, or the concept, a regional fire protection authority (RFA) is a municipal corporation in Washington and a separate taxing district Its boundaries are coextensive with those of the two or more fire protection jurisdictions (e.g. a fire district or districts and/or a city) that want to cooperate and form such an authority. The entity is created by a vote of the people. An RFA operates pursuant to a Plan, which is formulated by a Planning Committee and approved by the voters in the service area, The statute (Tide 52) outlines broadly how the plan is formulated, what agencies to coordinate with and consult, and includes public input requirements, There is a detailed statutory provision dealing with the authorization of the RFA to establish a system of ambulance service, requiring procedures to ensure that the system does not compete with existing private 24 50 Re-giGn Fit 41.uriorily Impiemenfatict7 Guide ambulance services, unless first there is a finding of inadequacy of service. -Fhere have been similar "inadequacy" and "non-compete"provisions in city and county laws for many years. However, those provisions do not exist for fire districts, as they can lawfully establish ambulance services that compete with private ambulance services without running afoul of any law (or proving inadequacy), including the antitrust laws. In the Plan, the RFA's recommended sources of revenue should also be set forth, to include tax levies and benefit charges, it an . However, if the plan calls fur imposition of any benefit charges or levying of any taxes that would need Win voter approval, then the ballot measure to approve the Plan and create the RFA needs 60°./0 voter approval. Otherwise, the measure needs only majority approval by the voters. Therefore, if the decision is made by two (2) or more adjacent/contiguous fire department organizations that wish to explore the potential of combining then services for the benefit of their citizens, then the first step is to establish a Planning Committee. The Planning Committee, as stated previously, is responsible to develop the "Plan" for the RE'1, which is the single most important component of the RFA as it establishes how the RFA will operate; how thc RFA will be funded; and how the RFA will be governed and managed. Here are some hey points related to the "Planning Committee": 111 Each governing body of the tire protection jurisdictions looking into the RFA shall appoint three (3) elected officials to the RFA Planning Committee. This can be a mix of Fire District Commissioners, City Council Members and Tribal Leaders depending upon the RFA being considered. 25 51 Regions! Fire Authoriry impiernentz lion Gufde 'fhe RFA Planning Committee may elect officers and adopt rules and procedures at its first meeting. These should then be agreed upon in writing. The Planning Committee may dissolve itself at any time by a majority vore of the total membership of the Planning Committee. This would occur if the research into the RFA shows that the RFA is not the method of choice for the participating agencies. Any participating fire protection jurisdiction may withdraw upon thirty (30) calendar days written notice to the other jurisdictions. l'he RFA Plan, developed by the Planning Committee (or by subcommittees as assigned by the Planning Committee) provides for the design, financing and development of fire protection and emergency services in the proposed RFA. The Plan: Shall create opportunities for public input in the development of the plan. This can be handled through public hearings, public meetings, and other such venues. Shall consider transport issues related to use of private ambulance companies, or potential transport by the RFA itself. May include land use planning and input from surrounding cities and districts. 4 Shall deliver the final approved Plan to all of the governing bodies to initiate an election. The Plan, agreed upon by the Planning Committee, still requires the approval of the governing bodies of each entity in order to place the RFA on the ballot (i.e. individual City Councils and Fire District Commissioner Boards still have to approve the RFA Plan for it to move forward). If the RFA Plan is placed on the ballot, set not approved through an election by citizens in the affected areas, the RFA Planning Committee may modify the Plan for resubmission to the voters. 26 52 RepicnE41 Fire Authority ftulementauon Guide If the Rb Plan tails three (3) times the RFA Planning Committee is dissolved (in other words, three (3) strikes and you're out!!!). Funding for the RFA may include any tax or benefit charge that is available to a fire district: Fire levy (collection up to $1.50 per$1000 of assessed valuation,including the authority to run multi-year lid lifts). EMS levy Excess levy Benefit Charge Bonds for Capital Purchases All funding mechanisms require a super majority (60% or greater), except the $1.50/1000 of AV fire levy (ad valorem property taxes). The funding mechanism for the RFA is built directly into the REA Plan. 'Thus,when the RFA is eventually placed before the voters at an agreed upon election,if the RFA Plan includes a funding mechanism that requires a simple majority (ad valorem taxes at up to $1.50 per $1000 of A/V) then the approval of the RFA Plan by the voters requires a simple majority (50[Vo plus 1 voter). If the RFA Plan includes a funding mechanism that requires a super majority (60% or greater, such as via the Benefit Charge) then the approval of the R1-7A Plan by the voters requires a super maJoI1tl The governing bodies of the fire protection jurisdictions may certify the Plan to the ballot once they receive the RFA Plan from the Planning Committee. The governing bodies of the fire protection jurisdictions draft a single ballot measure that both approves the formation of the authority (RFA), and approves the plan itself._Authorities may negotiate interlocal agreements necessary to implement the plan, The electorate is the citizens voting within the boundaries of the proposed regional fire protection service authority. In other words, all citizens in the proposed RFA who are registered to 27 53 Regional Fire Authority implementation Guide vote have the authority to vote on the RFA. It is the TOTAL of all who vote that determine the outcome of the RI-A (in other words, the RFA does not need to pass in each individual jurisdiction it is the combined vote from all participating jurisdictions which determines passage or failure), 'The RFA is liable for its proportionate share of the costs of the election if it passes, If it fails, each original governing entity must share the costs of the election based upon the formulas utilized for elections based on the number of registered Voters in each area. If the RFA passes at the ballot, the RFA is formed on the next January 1st or July 1st after voter approval. The county where the RFA has formed shall publish a notice declaring the RFA formed within 15 days of the certification of the election. Any challenge on the procedure or the formation of the RFA must take place within 30 days of the certification of the election to the County Prosecuting Attorney and Attorney General. A key point to keep in mind is that due to the operations within each County around the State,if an RFA election takes place after August 1' of a given year, then the RFA will not be able to collect ad valorem taxes or issue benefit service charges in the upcoming year (i.e. if the ballot measure passes in mid-August or November of 2007, the RFA can not begin to collect funds as a municipal organization until of 2009.,.not 2008). This is due to the fact that for County Finance and the Assessor's Office, August l'' is the cut off date for any entity to be formally in place for the collection of property taxation or benefit service charges in the following year.This key component must be kept in mind during the Planning Committee process as it might require that the RFA operate in its first year under contractual agreements with the old governance bodies (i.e. contracts with the Cities or Fire Districts) to collect funds and distribute these funds back to the RFA for its operations. Then, the following year, the RFA can operate as outlined under Title 52 for revenue. The statute provides that RFA Plans shall be reviewed, and updated as necessary, by the governing body, every ten years. 28 54 Fire Authority Implementation Gluide Most of the typical list of powers usually provided to fire districts or cities are included for the RFA within Title 52, plus a sort of"catchall" provision saying the board may exercise powers and perform duties the board determines necessary to can), out the purposes, functions and projects of the authority in accordance with Title 52, if one of the fire protection jurisdictions is a fire district, or other statutes identified in the plan, if none are fire districts. Property rights and eminent domain powers would be "transferred" from the former fire districts and/or cities to the RFA. This makes it rather plain that a participating city or fire district is "out of business" completely, at least with respect to fire and EMS, when an RFA is created. funds, assets, and personnel of the participating jurisdictions must be transferred over to the RFA. Detailed statutory changes make it clear that employees get transferred,with at least equal compensation to what they enjoyed at the time of transfer, no change in benefits, promotional opportunities, or probationary periods. If any of the participating jurisdictions had a civil service system, as city firefighters do (and a few fire districts, such as Lakewood) then the law requires that to be negotiated per RC\X' 41.56, Existing collective bargaining agreements must be honored until they expire, or have been modified or renegotiated by the RFA and the new Union(s). The RFA can incur indebtedness and issue municipal bonds, up to three-fourths of one percent of the taxable property within the boundaries and not to exceed twenty years. Also, general obligation bonds are allowed to be issued, but not to exceed 1 1/2 percent of the value of taxable property. Frequently .,,lkskeli Questions 29 55 R 42/Gnat Tire Authority Imp/erne/1 te fic fl Guide Frequently Asked Suestions What is an RFA? An RFA is an abbreviation for Regional Fire Authority,which is the common term for what the state law refers to as a Regional Fire Protection Services Authority.The RFA law is a legal process to allow the voters of that area to consider fire service consolidation and regionalization of services to produce service efficiencies, The RFA encourages Fire Districts and Municipal Fire Departments to consider consolidation by treating both entities equally. Where can I learn more about the law that allows the RFA? Recent changes to state law now allow the process of forming an RFA, RC\X' 52.26 see Rl'A RCWs for the actual law. Why combine services? The purpose of the Regional Fire Authority is to provide the citizens with the best level of fire protection and emergency medical services with through combined resources. The cost of maintaining and improving fire protection and emergency medical services has increased substantially. Combining services may provide the most cost-effective service for our citizens through economies of scale, macro-service delivery strategies, removing duplication and erasing borders. How big can an RFA be? Basically, as big as you want it to be. As an example, the new Kitsap RFA with Bremerton Fire Department, Central Kitsap Fire and Rescue and South Kitsap Fire and Rescue would serve approximately 200,000 citizens, 300 square miles, $16 billion in assessed value, operating budget of$40 million, 200 career Firefighters/EMT and Paramedics and 100 active volunteers and support service personnel. 'fhe vision dictates that this new RFA must demonstrate value for the citizens now and into the future. Other current RFA's include Valley Regional Fire Authority (VRFA), which combined the cities of Auburn, Algona and Pacific, and Riverside RFA which combined Lewis County Fire Protection District #12 and the city of Centralia. Both of these RI,.\.s are working very well within their plan and vision. What is the Vision Statement for the Kitsap RFA? The vision of the RFA is: Provide tth? bOst emergeng fie and EMS.rervicefOr ozo rili,zens?pith die available rsonrces. The Strategy is: To develop a consolidation work,plan and determine if provides net efficiencies in fir and EMS iTrPiCe lielween Bremerton Fire Department, Central Kitsap Fire and ReSCRO, and South Kitsap Fire and Resine. How is die RFA set up? The law allows the establishment of a RFA Planning Committee to explore the process of regionalization. The Planning Committee then creates the RFA Steering Committee to provide the information necessary for the Planning Committee to make sound decisions to the creation of the RFA. The ultimate authority for the creation of the RFA rests with the voters when the RFA Planning Committee forwards its recommendations and a ballot measure is placed before the voters, Who are the members of the committees? The members of the RFA Planning Committee for any planning process include three (3) members from each participating agency. Thus, if you were looking to combine two (2) cities and two (2) fire 30 56 Region Fire ALithority implemeniatlon GuidE5 districts, the Planning Committee would be comprised of twelve (12) members (6- City Council members representing the 2 cities,and 6- Commissioners representing the 2 fire districts). When and where are the meetings held? The RFA Planning Committee establishes meetings on a regular basis at an established time and location (which can rotate as deemed proper by the Planning Committee). The purpose of these meetings is to gather information for the development of the Plan. These should he open public meetings to allow for public input, as well as their education on the RFA concept. How the work is accomplished and is there a time line? The process of developing the RFA work plan will be for the Steering Committee to develop strategic statements for all of the project task items and once approved by the Planning Committee, then organize the work and produce a recommendation in a timely manner for consideration by the Planning Committee. How will the RFA be funded? The funding options for the Regional Fire Authority are the same as those available for the Fire Districts. l'hose options include property tax funded fire levies, EMS levies, bonds, excess levies. Benefit service charges are considered a fee for service and arc permitted in lieu of the last fifty cents of property tax funded fire levy revenue. Finally, non-tax revenue, such as transport fees, contracts and other assessments are available as possible funding sources. Any funding mechanism must be approved by the voters by the same majority that the fire district measures required. When the RFA is approved by the voters, what happens to existing career and volunteer personnel? All personnel (career and volunteer) from all involved agencies would be transferred to the new department and retain their status through new agreements. Some member's assignments may change to support emergency service delivery improvements. The key to a successful transition is to involve Labor early in the process, and ensure that wages, hours and working conditions are negotiated as per RCW 41.56. Is it mandatory for the Labor Unions to combine when an RFA is formed which covers two or more organized labor groups? No it is not. However, it is strongly suggested that Labor be involved from the beginning when contemplating and developing an RFA. Their input and support will be extremely important in the successful implementation of an RFA. Additionally,it is strongly suggested to work together with Labor under the auspices of RC\\' 41.56 related to collective bargaining to ensure that all members are handled fairly with regards to wages, hours and working conditions. While different labor groups maY work under different collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) for a short period of time during the inception of an RFA, it is strongly suggested that a new CBA be fairly negotiated and implemented by both parties as soon as is practical. Does the law allow additional fire districts or municipalities to join the RFA after it has been formed? Can two or more RFA's join together or merge? No. Under current law, there is nothing which allows for any additional entities (fire districts or municipalities) to formally join an RFA, except under a contract for service or contractual consolidation. RFAs are not currently allowed per legal statute to merge or annex areas, or have cities annex into them once the RFA has been formed. 31 57 Regional Fire Authority impfementa(ion Guide When a City annexes into a Fire District, the City's property tax levy capacity increases from $3.375 per$1000 of assessed valuation to $3.60 per$1000 of assessed valuation, less the amount the Fire District collects (either$1.50 or$1.00) and any funds collected by a Library District (up to $0.50). Does the same thing happen when a City becomes part of an RFA? No. The statute does not allow for the same benefit to a City annexing into a Fire District (the increase in property tax levy availability) as when a City becomes part of an REA. What is the impact of LEOFF I liabilities on parties considering formation of a Regional Fire Authority(RFA)? The obligation for LEOFF 1 liabilities (especially for retired members) would succeed to the surviving entity just as if that new entity had incurred the obligation in the First place (much like a "successor employer" succeeding to the obligations of its predecessor under collective bargaining agreements). This is true whether the combination were a fire district merger or formation of an RLA.The surviving entity (an RFA in this circumstance) would be responsible for all LEOFF 1 liability previously incurred by the former fire agencies (i.e. former fire districts or municipalities now involved with the RFA). Can the governing body members of a regional fire authority(RFA)formed under chapter 52.26 RCW be compensated for their services under the existing laws, much like fire district commissioners are compensated under RCW 52.14.010? The answer is yes. While not expressly stated within RCW 52.26, the opinion of Legal Counsel is that Governing Bodies may indeed be compensated for their attendance at meetings much like that of Fire District Commissioners. This provision should be addressed within the RFA Plan. Under the authority of the Plan, and applicable statutes, the governing body should adopt its governing rules and policies. One of those rules or policies could include a rule or policy establishing the compensation policy of the RFA for board services. It makes most sense for the compensation policy to be in accord with the language of RCW 52.14.010, which currently provides compensation of$90 per day or portion thereof, whenever a board holds a meeting or a member otherwise provides authorized services. 32 58 Memorandum January 12, 2019 To: Honorable Mayor, Members of City Council, City Manager From: Scott Schafer, Director of Public Works Bronson Faul, Senior Assistant City Attorney Brett Sheffield, PE, Chief Engineer Subject: Transportation Benefit District Update With the City Council approved formation of a Transportation Benefit District (TBD) funded by a twenty (20) dollar car tab fee, the City began collecting TBD revenue as of July 2018. From July 1, 2018 to December 31, 2018, the City collected a total of$633,862. This amount is approximately $83,000 more than the initial estimate for 2018 TBD revenue. Although inflation was factored into the projected costs of TBD projects, the fact that the revenue is coming in slightly higher than anticipated will help address cost containment issues over the life of the TBD. The TBD is to fund transportation improvements that have been identified in the approved project list. The current project list was generated and prioritized by City Council and is estimated to take 20 years to complete. The total cost of the projects exceeds just over $24 million. The obligated revenue is to restore streets and sidewalks by leveraging any available grant funding or debt funding to increase the overall impact of the project list. Specifically, the revenue is to fund three categories of projects: 1. Debt service coverage on large projects in which we would bond (for example, the N. 1' St. Revitalization project) 2. Pay as you go/grant match on smaller projects (for example, River Road Improvements, 40'h to 34'h Ave —Aquatic Center) 3. Sidewalk construction/repair This approach provides the City approximately $300,000 in relief for the General Fund on an annual basis (meaning that we would utilize TBD revenue instead of General Fund revenue for some projects or local match for State and Federal grants). Per the RCW: "A district shall issue an annual report, indicating the status of transportation improvement costs, transportation improvement expenditures, revenues, and construction schedules, to the public and to newspapers of record in the district. "Subject to the provisions of RCW 36.73.160, functions or transportation improvements proposed to be provided or funded by the district may not be expanded beyond those specified in the notice of hearing, unless additional notices are made, further hearings on the expansion are held, and further determinations are made that it is in the public interest to so expand the functions or transportation improvements proposed to be provided or funded." 59 The table below outlines the current projects on the TBD list, with their estimated costs and scheduled dates to begin construction. TBD Estimated Cost and Timeline Scheduled Estimated Begin Construction Construction Project District(s) Cost Dates Naches Avenue Sidewalk:Walnut to Pacific 2 $ 330,000 2018 River Road Improvements,40th to 34th (Aquatic Center) 5 $ 750,000 2019 Mead Avenue Sidewalk: 27th Ave.to 28th Ave. 3 $ 17,000 2019 N. 1st Street Revitalization, Phase 2 (20 year bond) 1, 4,5 $ 10,802,260 2020 4th Street Sidewalk:Walnut to Pacific 2 $ 315,000 2020 Browne Avenue Sidewalk:7th Ave.to 16th Ave. 5 $ 336,000 2020 Pacific Avenue Sidewalk:Fair Avenue to Jail Property 2 $ 300,000 2020 88th Avenue Sidewalk:Tieton Drive to Summitview Avenue 6 $ 650,000 2022 1st Street and Washington Avenue I/S Improvements 3 $ 2,000,000 2023 Fair Avenue Sidewalk:Pacific Avenue to Nob Hill Boulevard 2 $ 370,000 2023 Nob Hill Boulevard Sidewalk: 12th Street to 14th Street 2 $ 130,000 2023 6th Avenue Roadway Improvements 1,5 $ 5,591,760 2024 Powerhouse Road and Englewood Avenue I/s Improvements 5 $ 728,000 2024 Mead Avenue Pedestrian Signal at 10th Avenue 3 $ 300,000 2024 N. 16th Avenue Sidewalk: Fruitva le Boulevard to River Road 5 $ 250,000 2024 Nob Hill Boulevard and Fair Avenue I/S Improvements 2 $ 256,000 2025 3rd Avenue Sidewalk: Nob Hill to Walnut 4 $ 480,000 2026 44th Avenue Sidewalk:Viola to Randall Park 7 $ 275,000 2027 Chestnut Avenue Sidewalk:56th Ave.to 70th Ave. 6 $ 448,200 2028 Total: $ 24,329,220 In late 2018, utilizing TBD revenue, the City's Street Division began working on the Naches Avenue Sidewalk project to replace broken and root-lifted sections of sidewalk along Naches Avenue between Walnut Street and Pacific Avenue. Approximately $34,000 was spent in 2018 for tree removal associated with this project. Sidewalks will be installed/repaired in 2019. 1/8/2019 2