HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/19/2011 08 Street Maintenance Options Report from the Council Transit and Transportation Committee BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No.
For Meeting of July 19, 2011
ITEM TITLE: Report Regarding Street Maintenance Options from the Council Transit and
Transportation Committee
SUBMITTED BY: Chris Waarvick, Director of Public Works
Joe Rosenlund, Streets & Traffic Operations Manager
CONTACT PERSON/TELEPHONE: Joe Rosenlund, Streets & Traffic Operations Manager
(575 -6005)
SUMMARY EXPLANATION:
The nearly 1,000 lane miles of city arterials and neighborhood streets are at a critical tipping
point regarding significant preservation, restoration and repairs. The decision made will
determine if the transportation system will be bolstered and preserved for community needs
(public safety, economic vitality and quality of life) or if the system will begin an increasingly
steeper decline unable to adequately support the community and its needs.
The last successfully voted street bond was in the late 1980's (Nob Hill Blvd, 16 Ave to 44
Ave). Two street bonds in the mid 1990's garnered well over 50% but failed to meet the 60%
threshold required of property tax measures. The City made a concerted investment into basic
maintenance (chip sealing, crack filling, shoulder repair) with the passage of REET 2 in 2003
and hard surfaced nearly all of its remaining dirt streets. The City did not have the resources,
® however, to invest in a substantial way into the necessary grind and overlay and limited
reconstruction of failed roadways.
Now, with REET revenue significantly diminished and what remains dedicated toward street
debt service, and no other readily available revenue to invest, the Council Transit and
Transportation Committee brings this staff report to the full Council for review, deliberation and
direction. This report provides a description of what maintenance and rehabilitation work is
proposed with packages of $20, $25, and $30 million. Staff anticipates that practically no more
than $6 million could be accomplished in any given year due to constraints in project
management and traffic disruption city -wide.
(Continued on next page.)
Resolution _ Ordinance _ Contract _ Other X (Specify) Report
Contract Mail to (name and address):
Funding Source Various Potential Sources
APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL: ,`.. 1 W-7 City Manager
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff respectfully recommends City Council deliberation of the
Street Maintenance matter and direction to staff regarding further assignment of tasks.
BOARD /COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Transit and Transportation Committee has
reviewed the report and forwards the matter to the full City Council for deliberation and further
action.
o COUNCIL ACTION:
Street Maintenance Options Report .
July 19, 2011
Page 2
•
Financial options include a traditional publicly voted (60 %) property tax increase to support a
bond, imposition of a 6% increase in the public utility "in lieu" tax (Council voted), imposition of a
car license tab fee (TBD— Council voted up to $20), levy LID lift (TBD — publically voted $0.20K),
publically voted 0.2% sales tax and /or reductions in current General Government programs or
expenditures sufficient to support the level of investment Council determines adequate and
appropriate.
The work described in the following report does not include bridge or culvert repair, new - .
sidewalks, arterial capacity increases by adding additional travel lanes, nor new arterial
roadways.
Additional information is available regarding Transportation Benefit Districts (TBD). In addition
to the $20 car tab revenue option (Council Decision up to $20), TBD's allow a number of
different funding mechanisms. These include up to $100 car tab fees (publically voted), 1 -year
property tax excess levy authority (capital purposes, publically voted), and up to a 0.2% sales
tax (publically voted). A 0.2% sales tax dedicated to eligible Street programs may generate
nearly $3.0 Million. Finally, the last line of the chart below is in recognition of diminished street
maintenance operating resources and how it may fit into sustaining the broader program.
Discussion Summary Chart
Funding Source(s)
Traditional 2 s 2
TBD Car Tab TBD
Voted Property Council Voted TBD 2 Voted Priorities o
($20 max Voted
Program Size Tax for Bond In Lieu Tax Levy Lid Lift o Government
(20 yr, level 6 %1 w /Council $0.20 /K 0.2 /o Sales Allocations
levy) vote) , • Tax
$1.7 M /yr debt $2.1 M $1.0 M $1.1 M $2.8 M Council
$20 Million service Budget
$0.23K4 (sufficient) (insufficient) (insufficient) (sufficient)
Decision
•
$2.1 M /yr debt $2.1 M $1.0 M $1.1 M $2 M Council
$25 Million service Budget
$0.28/K4 (sufficient) (insufficient) (insufficient) (sufficient)
Decision
$2.5 M /yr debt $2.1 M $1.0 M $1.1 M $2.8 M Council
$30 Million service Budget
$0.34/K4 (insufficient) (insufficient) (insufficient) (sufficient)
Decision
Annual Street Possibly Possibly Possibly Council
Maintenance Infusion N/A Sufficient Sufficient Not Possible Sufficient Budget
($500,000) Decision
1 In Lieu Tax - -1% increase is approximately $356,000
2 TBD— Transportation Benefit District RCW 36.73
•
3 Car Tab - 50,000 registered eligible vehicles @ $20 /yr. 0
Assessment per $1,000 value
f • .
Pavement Management Concepts
Preventive Maintenance Approach
Excellent —
40% Drop
Good — in Quality
Fair _V
75% of Life < $1.00 for Renovation Here
Poor _ 40% Drop
in Quality Will cost 58.00
1 to S10.00 Here
Very Poor _ V
12% of Life
Failed
I( I I I I I I f I 1 I I l I I I I l I f I l I I 1 1
0 10 Years 20
() * S 94TH AVE
co CO o S 92ND AVE N 92ND AVE
00 --1 2
0 0 m O S 90TH AVE z
O < r- S 88TH AVE N 88TH AVE _
n S 86TH AVE m O m o m
r
v III
11
fr o 4TH S 85T S 83RD AVE N 8 AVE 0 m
° .. Cl -I 77
m S 8011:1$}! N 8 0TH AVE Z
m
co
n 1 v ‘. 0
' I m m ' 1 D 11 — X
76T AVE 0
S 74TH AVE I D Z c 73 S ? , � i E
-I S 72ND AVE O
0 I �� -, S 69TH AVE H AVE
1
S 66TH A W ^1� m lh , N 68TH AVE
�� AVE
- ----._ --'-) < S 64TH AVE-
----- tr ' / / / / / /��
CD w -i .I z N61 T E "
3 D z Fat
. 0 D A el 4 1 N 5r k' O d d
n y m --
S52NDAVE i� �l m ft e ;` II I ''..."'ll. O�
= I -I ,_� �N :� . � c�C `
'~: --I S 47TH AVE = -- - - -- B 4A HA = E f8 c y c K II S 4 ' - -'. -L��, j AVE '
ni
S41STAVE II S . "'� :� E E �V 4 - ? 4_2N A E —' ..6
CL ,.,istik„r--1 „ILA /7
S 38TH AVE _= r E V: ^3 j T � � � O
34T H AVgI C
L
S T / 0
fi l)
2 l �tl ` 1 - 1 • 1� Avg C� - „ 1 '
O ^ Y J N r I 7� . � L .ff' r n - 1
1.73' •
0
0 , 1 S 26 AVE 1� I 2 W. c 7 �.xuA� E !I F ,- •
` 11 I, r , 1 . ____.. m
O Z 11�112NDAVE ` �� - .'Ij , — j 1 c_ 0
D r.,� E q ua+
d
co
=
-, S 18TH E' • ' ALLEY - r ' f 70
II - J u _ . ! U W Tal
0 S T A S 17T H "II . - 7 16TH AVE
S16 .AVE 1 1 , 5 iR � •
5 1srnAV , - -r --` ' _ 1 4T ■ 4 IK ..,40-,.. I 1 0 §
0 E
S 10TH AVE S 11 H AVE i K O ; • - AI I FY;� 3• . 1 9 <1 . --101: >1° H A N
0) S 8TH AVE I 8T • VE Z : 2 — . . . t �� c ,N 4N. 4 VEI
=
' - - ..�4� Ib '_ALL ' •' ir i
J.r L, '1) I O `*
CORN:: I..> < i ' ��� 1
O S 5TH AVE r li m ,� = =_'� '�� 7 yS —... .l .-: `z
D. D I I � i t II u f? 3R Q ' 7�p , m
_ I ' (I 1 •
mLANDONAVE j ll . � m ALLY � i � ��'r V �. .",ql IF)
Q D ALLEY u •LEY 1 � ^`� , 14 0 "✓ rte;
-. 1 yS � et,, �s. *
< 0 _ _ m o 4� 1 ,d m p' �,
D � � ' til › . . s ill 6 S z ..s . z 11 E{� yS J.3 �� � D
;; m
m ! 1 S 2
Ui r 1 1 S}IlEti D
III
p p S 14TH ST m z ; , , � A
1 4TH _\a ��
0
5T
D 11 ,, : c
O 2ND ST m 18T T ■s` S 18TH ST 0
< MAIN ST S 20TH
cD 1 82 RAMP EB o O
- s 182 HWY E RUDKIN RD BUTTERFIELD RD
E 9M dW .62 l
KEYES RD N KEYES RD
III Transit & Transportation Planning Committee
July 12, 2011
Councilmember Rick Ensey, Chair
Mayor Micah Cawley
Councilmember Maureen Adkison, (Altn.)
From: Chris Waarvick, Director of Public Works
Joe Rosenlund, Streets and Traffic Operations Manager
Subject: Street Maintenance Bond Proposal
The Transit & Transportation Planning Committee along with staff has discussed the condition
of Yakima City streets and potential funding sources to pay for maintenance for over a year. At
the last committee meeting the members directed staff to develop project lists of $20 million, $25
million and $30 million to be funded through a street maintenance bond. Staff was also to show
the probable cost to city property owners to repay the bonds.
The three project lists break the work into five areas: Traffic Systems, Intersection
• Improvements, Maintenance Equipment, Street Maintenance and Arterials /Collectors Rehab.
Traffic Systems are needed improvements to the traffic control system focused on upgrades to
existing equipment, communications systems and lighting.
Intersection Improvements are relatively small construction projects intended to correct
operational or design deficiencies. Although some capacity improvements may be realized,
safety is the primary driver for these projects.
Maintenance Equipment is for the purchase of paving equipment and vehicle tracking
equipment. In order to accomplish the desired amount of work on residential streets, the Streets
Department needs better paving equipment. Without the equipment, all paving work in the
residential areas will need to be contracted at a higher cost thereby reducing the amount of
work that can be accomplished with the bond funds. This equipment has a 15 to 20 year life
expectancy enabling city crews to pave and rehabilitate streets better and more efficiently for
many years after the bond funds have been expended.
The vehicle tracking equipment allows real time monitoring of vehicle locations and operation.
It enables the Streets Department to track and log material usage, plow operation and routes,
sweeping routes, lane striping and other maintenance functions in order improve our efficiency
and reduce operating costs.
III
Street Maintenance includes repair of residential streets, funding to get caught up on chip seals •
that were not done in the past few years and engineering and inspection costs. Additional
engineering and inspection is needed because of the quantity of work being proposed and there
are some repairs additional expertise may be required such as concrete roadways.
Arterials /Collectors Rehab is the funding required for arterial and collector roadways. A list of
the roadways to be repaired is attached. The work is broken down into three groups:
Reconstruction, Grind & Overlay, and Overlay. The Pavement Condition Index (PCI) was used
to determine the level of maintenance required. Reconstruction is 0 to 35 PCI, Grind & Overlay
is 35 to 50 PCI, and Overlay is 50 to 65 PCI.
Scenarios
The $25 million and the $30 million scenarios use about $22 million directly on street repairs.
The difference between the two is that funding for Traffic Systems is reduced by about $1
million and funding for Intersection Improvements is reduced by $3.9 million.
In order to get the funding level down to $20 million, the following changes were made.
Funding for all Intersection Improvements is eliminated and Traffic Systems is reduced to
$700,000. Additionally, chip seal catch -up is cut from $1.5 million to $750,000. Three streets that
were slated for reconstruction in Arterials /Collectors were shifted to grind & overlay. •
Bonds
The Finance Department has estimated the cost of the bonds for each of three bond scenarios.
The estimates are based on 15 and 20 -year life using either a level tax rate or a level debt service.
The following table depicts the estimate payments for the various bond scenarios. The current
voted bond debt of the City is very low. The last voted bond was the Fire bond and it is
scheduled to retire in 2013. The challenge remains - -there is no current reliable source of
revenues to pay new bond debt.
Ongoing Maintenance Program Funding
The vast majority of the work described within the context of the Street Maintenance Bond is to
be conducted by private contractors through competitive bidding processes after design and bid
specifications are prepared through the City. The City instituted the Second Quarter Real Estate
Tax (REET 2) some years back, after significant public discourse, to fund basic maintenance
tasks such as crack filling, shoulder repair, chip sealing, materials for pothole patching, and
contributions to basic maintenance equipment replacement funding. This revenue source has
seen significant reductions due to the slowness of the housing market nationwide. REET 2
contributions to the basic maintenance of streets has dropped from $450,000 to $200,000
(includes an informal "hold" on $50,000 of the $250,000 budget) in the 2011 budget. This is on •
top of a total of nearly $1.8 million in decreased property tax revenues reallocated from Streets
2
towards Public Safety over the last 3 years following the POG model. The most visible sign of
III
the reduced funding level is the chip seal program where we have gone from chip sealing over
30 miles of residential and arterial streets annually to less than 1 mile of arterial roadway
planned for this year.
Two options to provide a renewed infusion of resources to fund basic maintenance with the
Street budget include the State authorized car license tab fee program (up to $20 by simple
Council vote) and increasing the City's Water, Wastewater and Refuse In Lieu tax (also by
simple Council vote). The Countywide referendum on the Car Tab fee was defeated a few years
ago. The In Lieu Tax rate on City utilities stands at 14% currently.
To raise $500,000 through the Car Tab fee, otherwise more technically correct in calling it an
option within a Transportation Benefit Area, the car tab fee could be assessed at $10 only. The
Department of Motor Vehicles advises the City that there are approximately 57,000 registered
vehicles within the City eligible for this assessment. Some 7,000 vehicles have been discounted
for conservative calculation purposes. The recent City of Spokane Fact Sheet has been attached
providing a concise explanation of this option.
To raise approximately $500,000 from an increase in the in Lieu Tax on City utilities, the in Lieu
tax would raise Refuse from 9% to 10.5% and Water & Sewer from 14% to 15.5 %.
1111
Either of these revenue sources would be dedicated to basic annual budgeted street
maintenance tasks within the Street Budget.
Alternatively, $500,000 could be reduced elsewhere within the General Government Priorities of
Government (POG) model and applied to general street maintenance. This redirection of
existing resources after a number of years of budget curtailment would have a significant
impact on affected services and could effectively eliminate certain programs that are currently
in the budget. The current voted bond debt of the City is very low. However, there are already
costs increases anticipated within the 2011 Year End budget estimate and projected 2012 budget
for items such as fuel, jail costs, medical and the unseen impact of labor settlements and
arbitration awards.
III
3
Street Maintenance Bond
Estimated Cost to Property Owner
$30 Million Bond
Level Tax Rate Level Debt Service
Assessed Value Rate /$100K Annual Cost Rate /$100K Annual Cost Rate /$100K Annual Cost
15 -Year 20 -Year 15 -Year 20 -Year 15 -Year Hi 15 -Year Lo 15 -Year Hi 15 -Year Lo 20 -Year Hi 20 -Year Lo 20 -Year Hi 20 -Year Lo
$100,000 0.42 0.34 $42.00 $34.00 0.50 0.33 $50.00 $33.00 0.43 0.25 $43.00 $25.00
$150,000 0.42 0.34 $63.00 $51.00 0.50 0.33 $75.00 $49.50 0.43 0.25 $64.50 $37.50
$25 Million Bond
Level Tax Rate Level Debt Service
Assessed Value Rate /$100K Annual Cost Rate /$100K Annual Cost Rate /$100K Annual Cost
15 -Year 20 -Year 15 -Year 20 -Year 15 -Year Hi 15 -Year Lo 15 -Year Hi 15 -Year Lo 20 -Year Hi 20 -Year Lo 20 -Year Hi 20 -Year Lo
$100,000 0.34 0.28 $34.00 $28.00 0.42 0.28 $42.00 $28.00 0.36 0.21 $36.00 $21.00
$150,000 0.34 0.28 $51.00 $42.00 0.42 0.28 $63.00 $42.00 0.36 0.21 $54.00 $31.50
$20 Million Bond
Level Tax Rate Level Debt Service
Assessed Value Rate /$100K Annual Cost Rate /$100K Annual Cost Rate /$100K Annual Cost
15 -Year 20 -Year 15 -Year 20 -Year 15 -Year Hi 15 -Year Lo 15 -Year Hi 15 -Year Lo 20 -Year Hi 20 -Year Lo 20 -Year Hi 20 -Year Lo
$100,000 0.28 0.23 $28.00 $23.00 0.33 0.22 $33.00 $22.00 0.29 0.16 $29.00 $16.00
$150,000 0.28 0.23 $42.00 $34.50 0.33 0.22 $49.50 $33.00 0.29 0.16 $43.50 $24.00
2011 ost 110510.xIs •011
• III III
Projects List $30 Million Bond
Traffic Systems
1 2 3 4 5 6 Total
Controler Upgrades $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $480,000
Upgrade Signal Network $75,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $700,000
Signal Head - LED
Conversions $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $150,000
Streetlight LED
Conversions $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $1,200,000
$380,000 $430,000 $430,000 $430,000 $430,000 $430,000 $2,530,000
Intersection
Improvements
Engineering /Design $225,000 $225,000
Right -of -Way $350,000 $350,000 $700,000
5th Ave/Tieton Roundabout $500,000 $500,000
16th/Tieton - Turn Bays,
Lane Width & Curb Radii $1,250,000 $1,250,000
1 st/Nob Hill - Curb Radii,
Upgrade Signal $750,000 $750,000
40th Ave/Tieton, Lincoln,
Englewood -Curb Radii,
Signal Upgrades $1,250,000 $1,250,000
$225,000 $850,000 $1,600,000 $750,000 $1,250,000 $0 $4,675,000
2011 Bond Scenarios 110510.xls 1 of 6 6/16/2011
Projects List $30 Million Bond
Maintenance Equipment
Asphalt Paver $120,000 $120,000
12 -Ton Roller $130,000 $130,000
Vehicle Locator System $50,000 $50,000
$300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,000
Non - Roadwork
Improvements $905,000 $1,280,000 $2,030,000 $1,180,000 $1,680,000 $430,000 $7,505,000
Street Maintenace
Engineering $150,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $400,000
Inspection $75,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $825,000
Chip Seal Catch -up $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,500,000
Local Streets - Asphalt $250,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $2,250,000
Local Streets - Concrete $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $450,000
$1,050,000 $1,175,000 $1,175,000 $675,000 $675,000 $675,000 $5,425,000
Arterials /Collectors $16,710,000
Street Rehab Total $22,135,000
Total $29,640,000
2011cenarios 110510.x1s 2 ill .011
• • •
Projects List $25 Million Bond
Traffic Systems
1 2 3 4 5 6 Total
Controler Upgrades $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $240,000
Upgrade Signal Network $50,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $550,000
Signal Head - LED
Conversions $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $150,000
Streetlight LED
Conversions $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $600,000
$215,000 $265,000 $265,000 $265,000 $265,000 $265,000 $1,540,000
Intersection
Improvements
Engineering /Design $100,000 $100,000
Right -of -Way $100,000 $100,000
5th Ave/Tieton Roundabout $500,000 $500,000
$100,000 $100,000 $500,000 $0 $0 $0 $700,000
2011 Bond Scenarios 110510.xls 3 of 6 6/16/2011
Projects List $25 Million Bond
Maintenance Equipment
Asphalt Paver $120,000 $120,000
12 -Ton Roller $130,000 $130,000
Vehicle Locator System $50,000 $50,000
$300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,000
Non - Roadwork
Improvements $615,000 $365,000 $765,000 $265,000 $265,000 $265,000 $2,540,000
Street Maintenace
Engineering $150,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $400,000
Inspection $75,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $825,000
Chip Seal Catch -up $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,500,000
Local Streets - Asphalt $250,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $2,250,000
Local Streets - Concrete $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $450,000
$1,050,000 $1,175,000 $1,175,000 $675,000 $675,000 $675,000 $5,425,000
Arterials /Collectors $16,710,000
Street Rehab Total $22,135,000
Total $24,675,000
2011
0 S cenarios 110510.xls 4 4) *11
• •
•
Projects List $20 Million Bond
Traffic Systems
1 2 3 4 5 6 Total
Controler Upgrades $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $240,000
Upgrade Signal Network $0
Signal Head - LED
Conversions $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $150,000
Streetlight LED
Conversions $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $300,000
$115,000 $115,000 $115,000 $115,000 $115,000 $115,000 $690,000
Intersection
Improvements
Engineering /Design $0
Right -of -Way $0
5th Ave/Tieton Roundabout $0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
2011 Bond Scenarios 110510.xls 5 of 6 6/16/2011
Projects List $20 Million Bond
Maintenance Equipment
Asphalt Paver $120,000 $120,000
12 -Ton Roller $130,000 $130,000
Vehicle Locator System $50,000 $50,000
$300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,000
Non - Roadwork
Improvements $415,000 $115,000 $115,000 $115,000 $115,000 $115,000 $990,000
Street Maintenace
Engineering $150,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $400,000
Inspection $75,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $825,000
Chip Seal Catch -up $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $750,000
Local Streets - Asphalt $250,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $2,250,000
Local Streets - Concrete $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $450,000
$800,000 $925,000 $925,000 $675,000 $675,000 $675,000 $4,675,000
Arterials /Collectors $14,329,000
Street Rehab Total $19,004,000
1 Total $19,994,000
2011
OS cenarios 110510.xls 6 • •11
•
•
2010 Street Network Condition
40%
35.8%
30%
a)
21.2%
20%
c 14.7%o
10% 9.2% 9.1% 9.0%
1.0%
0% f L_
O Failed Very Poor O Poor O Fair • Good O Very Good • Excellent
• Arterial /Collector Maintenance Projects
$25 and $30 Million Bond Scenarios
Additional
Street From To Treatment PCI Cost/SY Area (SY) Cost Work Items Total Cost
5th Ave Division Yakima Reconstruct 11 $25.00 19,333 $483,333 $72,500 $556,000
3rd Street Arlington Beach Reconstruct 16 $25.00 10,556 $263,889 $39,583 $304,000
Lincoln Ave 56th Ave 66th Ave Reconstruct 17 $25.00 7,667 $191,667 $28,750 $221,000
25th Ave 650 N 900 Reconstruct 21 $25.00 3,556 $88,889 $13,333 $103,000
Yakima Ave 12th Ave 16th Ave Reconstruct 23 $25.00 9,111 $227,778 $34,167 $262,000
Summitview Ave 7th Ave 14th Ave Reconstruct 24 $25.00 10,778 $269,444 $40,417 $310,000
3rd Ave Yakima Walnut Reconstruct 26 $25.00 7,556 $188,889 $28,333 $218,000
G St 1st St 8th St Reconstruct 26 $25.00 10,000 $250,000 $37,500 $288,000
I Street 1st St 6th Ave Reconstruct 26 $25.00 7,667 $191,667 $28,750 $221,000
6th Street Pacific Yakima Reconstruct 28 $25.00 24,444 $611,111 $91,667 $703,000
Walnut Street 1st St 3rd St Reconstruct 28 $25.00 4,111 $102,778 $15,417 $119,000
24th Ave Washington Nob Hill Reconstruct 30 $25.00 27,778 $694,444 $104,167 $799,000
Walnut Street 5th Ave 7th Ave Reconstruct 30 $25.00 4,111 $102,778 $15,417 $119,000
Lincoln Ave 24th Ave 40th Ave Reconstruct 33 $25.00 24,000 $600,000 $90,000 $690,000
16th Ave Englewood Madison Reconstruct 34 $25.00 21,222 $530,556 $79,583 $611,000
40th Ave Nob Hill Summitview Reconstruct 34 $25.00 29,222 $730,556 $109,583 $841,000
48th Ave Englewood Fechter Reconstruct 34 $25.00 10,333 $258,333 $38,750 $298,000
53rd Ave Englewood Scenic Reconstruct 34 $25.00 5,444 $136,111 $20,417 $157,000
6th Street Yakima H St Reconstruct 35 $25.00 22,222 $555,556 $83,333 $639,000
1st Street City Limits Nob Hill Reconstruct 36 $25.00 51,333 $1,283,333 $192,500 $1,476,000
Fair Ave Nob Hill Pacific Reconstruct 37 $25.00 17,222 $430,556 $64,583 $496,000
$9,431,000
0 Englewood Ave 66th Ave 74th Ave Grind & Overlay 36 $9.75 6,556 $63,917 $9,588 $74,000
5th Ave Yakima Lincoln Grind & Overlay 37 $9.75 9,000 $87,750 $13,163 $101,000
64th Ave Ahtanum Nob Hill Grind & Overlay 37 $9.75 40,556 $395,417 $59,313 $455,000
48th Ave Englewood Fechter Grind & Overlay 38 $9.75 4,667 $45,500 $6,825 $53,000
Summitview Ave 40th Ave 48th Ave Grind & Overlay 40 $9.75 16,444 $160,333 $24,050 $185,000
6th Street Nob Hill Pacific Grind & Overlay 41 $9.75 11,333 $110,500 $16,575 $128,000
32nd Ave Tieton Summitview Grind & Overlay 43 $9.75 6,444 $62,833 $9,425 $73,000
66th Ave Englewood Scenic Grind & Overlay 43 $9.75 3,111 $30,333 $4,550 $35,000
Fechter Road 40th Ave 4708 Grind & Overlay 43 $9.75 10,556 $102,917 $15,438 $119,000
Nob Hill Blvd 100 W 300 W Grind & Overlay 44 $9.75 20,444 $199,333 $29,900 $230,000
Viola Ave 18th St Rudkin Grind & Overlay 46 $9.75 3,556 $34,667 $5,200 $40,000
Walnut 6th St 8th St Grind & Overlay 46 $9.75 2,667 $26,000 $3,900 $30,000
Scenic Drive 4624 5800 Grind & Overlay 47 $9.75 12,000 $117,000 $17,550 $135,000
Mead Ave 300 1000 Grind & Overlay 48 $9.75 12,778 $124,583 $18,688 $144,000
Pierce Ave Summitview Lincoln Grind & Overlay 48 $9.75 4,444 $43,333 $6,500 $50,000
Nob Hill Blvd 44th Ave 52nd Ave Grind & Overlay 49 $9.75 14,667 $143,000 $21,450 $165,000
Walnut Street 3rd Ave 5th Ave Grind & Overlay 49 $9.75 4,111 $40,083 $6,013 $47,000
1st Street I Street City Limit Grind & Overlay 50 $9.75 23,333 $227,500 $34,125 $262,000
40th Ave Englewood Fruitvale Grind & Overlay 50 $9.75 28,889 $281,667 $42,250 $324,000
Division Street 3rd Ave 6th Ave Grind & Overlay 50 $9.75 5,333 $52,000 $7,800 $60,000
Castlevale Rd 2400 3200 Grind & Overlay 51 $9.75 7,889 $76,917 $11,538 $89,000
$2,799,000
1111
2011 Bond Scenarios 110510.xls 1 of 4 6/16/2011
ArteriallCollector Maintenance Projects •
72nd Ave Coolridge Washington Overlay 52 $6.25 2,889 $18,056 $2,708 $21,000
Englewood Ave 16th Ave 40th Ave Overlay 61 $6.25 26,444 $165,278 $24,792 $191,000
Scenic Drive 58th Ave 66th Ave Overlay 56 $6.25 7,667 $47,917 $7,188 $56,000
Chestnut Ave 8th St Fair Overlay 57 $6.25 6,000 $37,500 $5,625 $44,000
Viola Ave 1st St Fair Overlay 61 $6.25 10,556 $65,972 $9,896 $76,000
Lincoln Ave 46th Ave 56th Ave Overlay 61 $6.25 10,667 $66,667 $10,000 $77,000
48th Ave Randall Park Nob Hill Overlay 63 $6.25 4,889 $30,556 $4,583 $36,000
Mead Ave 1st St 10th St Overlay 52 $6.25 4,889 $30,556 $4,583 $36,000
Occidental Ave 64th Ave 85th Ave Overlay 55 $6.25 17,667 $110,417 $16,563 $127,000
Ahtanum Rd 16th Ave 26th Ave Overlay 56 $6.25 26,667 $166,667 $25,000 $192,000
32nd Ave Summitview Englewood Overlay 57 $6.25 5,222 $32,639 $4,896 $38,000
3rd Ave Npb Hill Tieton Overlay 57 $6.25 14,889 $93,056 $13,958 $108,000
Walnut Street 3rd St 6th St Overlay 57 $6.25 7,222 $45,139 $6,771 $52,000
32nd Ave Nob Hill Tieton Overlay 60 $6.25 6,667 $41,667 $6,250 $48,000
80th Ave Wide Hollow Tieton Overlay 60 $6.25 9,222 $57,639 $8,646 $67,000
Castlevale 32nd Ave 36th Ave Overlay 60 $6.25 4,000 $25,000 $3,750 $29,000
I Street 1st St 4th St Overlay 61 $6.25 5,778 $36,111 $5,417 $42,000
Tieton Drive 16th Ave 32nd Ave Overlay 61 $6.25 25,889 $161,806 $24,271 $187,000
Mead Ave 100 W 300 W Overlay 62 $6.25 21,667 $135,417 $20,313 $156,000
Tieton Drive 56th Ave 64th Ave Overlay 63 $6.25 13,333 $83,333 $12,500 $96,000
Fruitvale Blvd 21st Ave 40th Ave Overlay 64 $6.25 59,111 $369,444 $55,417 $425,000
1st Street Nob Hill Yakima Overlay 51 $6.25 42,000 $262,500 $39,375 $302,000
Summitview Ave 48th Ave 56th Ave Overlay 51 $6.25 16,778 $104,861 $15,729 $121,000
Lincoln Ave 1st St 4th St Overlay 57 $6.25 7,000 $43,750 $6,563 $51,000
Lincoln Ave 7th Ave 16th Ave Overlay 59 $6.25 12,778 $79,861 $11,979 $92,000
16th Ave Nob Hill Yakima Overlay 59 $6.25 29,000 $181,250 $27,188 $209,000
Nob Hill Blvd 1st St 18th St Overlay 59 $6.25 27,778 $173,611 $26,042 $200,000
1st Street Yakima I St Overlay 61 $6.25 42,000 $262,500 $39,375 $302,000
16th Ave Yakima Englewood Overlay 62 $6.25 20,222 $126,389 $18,958 $146,000
Nob Hill Blvd 52nd Ave 64th Ave Overlay 62 $6.25 24,222 $151,389 $22,708 $175,000
MLK Jr Blvd 1st St 10th St Overlay 63 $6.25 20,444 $127,778 $19,167 $147,000
Summitview Ave 14th Ave 23rd Ave Overlay 63 $6.25 18,778 $117,361 $17,604 $135,000
0
40th Ave Nob Hill Washington Overlay 64 $6.25 22,222 $138,889 $20,833 $160,000
Nob Hill Blvd 32nd Ave 44th Ave Overlay 64 $6.25 25,778 $161,111 $24,167 $186,000
Yakima Ave 1st St 8th St Overlay 66 $6.25 20,778 $129,861 $19,479 $150,000
$4,480,000
Street Rehab Total 816,710,000
•
2011 Bond Scenarios 110510.xls 2 of 4 6/16/2011
• Arterial /Collector Maintenance Projects
Arterial /Collector Maintenance Projects
$20 Million Bond Scenario
Additional
Street From To Treatment PCI Cost/SY Area (SY) Cost Work Items Total Cost
5th Ave Division Yakima Reconstruct 11 $25.00 19,333 $483,333 $72,500 $556,000
3rd Street Arlington Beach Reconstruct 16 $25.00 10,556 $263,889 $39,583 $304,000
Lincoln Ave 56th Ave 66th Ave Reconstruct 17 $25.00 7,667 $191,667 $28,750 $221,000
25th Ave 650 N 900 Reconstruct 21 $25.00 3,556 $88,889 $13,333 $103,000
Yakima Ave 12th Ave 16th Ave Reconstruct 23 $25.00 9,111 $227,778 $34,167 $262,000
Summitview Ave 7th Ave 14th Ave Reconstruct 24 $25.00 10,778 $269,444 $40,417 $310,000
3rd Ave Yakima Walnut Reconstruct 26 $25.00 7,556 $188,889 $28,333 $218,000
G St 1st St 8th St Reconstruct 26 $25.00 10,000 $250,000 $37,500 $288,000
I Street 1st St 6th Ave Reconstruct 26 $25.00 7,667 $191,667 $28,750 $221,000
6th Street Pacific Yakima Reconstruct 28 $25.00 24,444 $611,111 $91,667 $703,000
Walnut Street 1st St 3rd St Reconstruct 28 $25.00 4,111 $102,778 $15,417 $119,000
24th Ave Washington Nob Hill Reconstruct 30 $25.00 27,778 $694,444 $104,167 $799,000
Walnut Street 5th Ave 7th Ave Reconstruct 30 $25.00 4,111 $102,778 $15,417 $119,000
Lincoln Ave 24th Ave 40th Ave Reconstruct 33 $25.00 24,000 $600,000 $90,000 $690,000
16th Ave Englewood Madison Reconstruct 34 $25.00 21,222 $530,556 $79,583 $611,000
$5,524,000
40th Ave Nob Hill Summitview Grind & Overlay 34 $9.75 29,222 $284,917 $42,738 $328,000
48th Ave Englewood Fechter Grind & Overlay 34 $9.75 10,333 $100,750 $15,113 $116,000
53rd Ave Englewood Scenic Grind & Overlay 34 $9.75 5,444 $53,083 $7,963 $62,000
0 6th Street Yakima H St Grind & Overlay 35 $9.75 22,222 $216,667 $32,500 $250,000
1st Street City Limits Nob Hill Grind & Overlay 36 $9.75 51,333 $500,500 $75,075 $576,000
Fair Ave Nob Hill Pacific Grind & Overlay 37 $9.75 17,222 $167,917 $25,188 $194,000
Englewood Ave 66th Ave 74th Ave Grind & Overlay 36 $9.75 6,556 $63,917 $9,588 $74,000
5th Ave Yakima Lincoln Grind & Overlay 37 $9.75 9,000 $87,750 $13,163 $101,000
64th Ave Ahtanum Nob Hill Grind & Overlay 37 $9.75 40,556 $395,417 $59,313 $455,000
48th Ave Englewood Fechter Grind & Overlay 38 $9.75 4,667 $45,500 $6,825 $53,000
Summitview Ave 40th Ave 48th Ave Grind & Overlay 40 $9.75 16,444 $160,333 $24,050 $185,000
6th Street Nob Hill Pacific Grind & Overlay 41 $9.75 11,333 $110,500 $16,575 $128,000
32nd Ave Tieton Summitview Grind & Overlay 43 $9.75 6,444 $62,833 $9,425 $73,000
66th Ave Englewood Scenic Grind & Overlay 43 $9.75 3,111 $30,333 $4,550 $35,000
Fechter Road 40th Ave 4708 Grind & Overlay 43 $9.75 10,556 $102,917 $15,438 $119,000
Nob Hill Blvd 100 W 300 W Grind & Overlay 44 $9.75 20,444 $199,333 $29,900 $230,000
Viola Ave 18th St Rudkin Grind & Overlay 46 $9.75 3,556 $34,667 $5,200 $40,000
Walnut 6th St 8th St Grind & Overlay 46 $9.75 2,667 $26,000 $3,900 $30,000
Scenic Drive 4624 5800 Grind & Overlay 47 $9.75 12,000 $117,000 $17,550 $135,000
Mead Ave 300 1000 Grind & Overlay 48 $9.75 12,778 $124,583 $18,688 $144,000
Pierce Ave Summitview Lincoln Grind & Overlay 48 $9.75 4,444 $43,333 $6,500 $50,000
Nob Hill Blvd 44th Ave 52nd Ave Grind & Overlay 49 $9.75 14,667 $143,000 $21,450 $165,000
Walnut Street 3rd Ave 5th Ave Grind & Overlay 49 $9.75 4,111 $40,083 $6,013 $47,000
1st Street I Street City Limit Grind & Overlay 50 $9.75 23,333 $227,500 $34,125 $262,000
40th Ave Englewood Fruitvale Grind & Overlay 50 $9.75 28,889 $281,667 $42,250 $324,000
Division Street 3rd Ave 6th Ave Grind & Overlay 50 $9.75 5,333 $52,000 $7,800 $60,000
Castlevale Rd 2400 3200 Grind & Overlay 51 $9.75 7,889 $76,917 $11,538 $89,000
$4,325,000
•
2011 Bond Scenarios 110510.xls 3 of 4 6/16/2011
Arterial /Collector Maintenance Projects
0
72nd Ave Coolridge Washington Overlay 52 $6.25 2,889 $18,056 $2,708 $21,000
Englewood Ave 16th Ave 40th Ave Overlay 61 $6.25 26,444 $165,278 $24,792 $191,000
Scenic Drive 58th Ave 66th Ave Overlay 56 $6.25 7,667 $47,917 $7,188 $56,000
Chestnut Ave 8th St Fair Overlay 57 $6.25 6,000 $37,500 $5,625 $44,000
Viola Ave 1st St Fair Overlay 61 $6.25 10,556 $65,972 $9,896 $76,000
Lincoln Ave 46th Ave 56th Ave Overlay 61 $6.25 10,667 $66,667 $10,000 $77,000
48th Ave Randall Park Nob Hill Overlay 63 $6.25 4,889 $30,556 $4,583 $36,000
Mead Ave 1st St 10th St Overlay 52 $6.25 4,889 $30,556 $4,583 $36,000
Occidental Ave 64th Ave 85th Ave Overlay 55 $6.25 17,667 $110,417 $16,563 $127,000
Ahtanum Rd 16th Ave 26th Ave Overlay 56 $6.25 26,667 $166,667 $25,000 $192,000
32nd Ave Summitview Englewood Overlay 57 $6.25 5,222 $32,639 $4,896 $38,000
3rd Ave Npb Hill Tieton Overlay 57 $6.25 14,889 $93,056 $13,958 $108,000
Walnut Street 3rd St 6th St Overlay 57 $6.25 7,222 $45,139 $6,771 $52,000
32nd Ave Nob Hill Tieton Overlay 60 $6.25 6,667 $41,667 $6,250 $48,000
80th Ave Wide Hollow Tieton Overlay 60 $6.25 9,222 $57,639 $8,646 $67,000
Castlevale 32nd Ave 36th Ave Overlay 60 $6.25 4,000 $25,000 $3,750 $29,000
I Street 1st St 4th St Overlay 61 $6.25 5,778 $36,111 $5,417 $42,000
Tieton Drive 16th Ave 32nd Ave Overlay 61 $6.25 25,889 $161,806 $24,271 $187,000
Mead Ave 100 W 300 W Overlay 62 $6.25 21,667 $135,417 $20,313 $156,000
Tieton Drive 56th Ave 64th Ave Overlay 63 $6.25 13,333 $83,333 $12,500 $96,000
Fruitvale Blvd 21st Ave 40th Ave Overlay 64 $6.25 59,111 $369,444 $55,417 $425,000
1st Street Nob Hill Yakima Overlay 51 $6.25 42,000 $262,500 $39,375 $302,000
Summitview Ave 48th Ave 56th Ave Overlay 51 $6.25 16,778 $104,861 $15,729 $121,000
Lincoln Ave 1st St 4th St Overlay 57 $6.25 7,000 $43,750 $6,563 $51,000
Lincoln Ave 7th Ave 16th Ave Overlay 59 $6.25 12,778 $79,861 $11,979 $92,000
16th Ave Nob Hill Yakima Overlay 59 $6.25 29,000 $181,250 $27,188 $209,000
Nob Hill Blvd 1st St 18th St Overlay 59 $6.25 27,778 $173,611 $26,042 $200,000
1st Street Yakima I St Overlay 61 $6.25 42,000 $262,500 $39,375 $302,000
16th Ave Yakima Englewood Overlay 62 $6.25 20,222 $126,389 $18,958 $146,000
Nob Hill Blvd 52nd Ave 64th Ave Overlay 62 $6.25 24,222 $151,389 $22,708 $175,000 •
MLK Jr Blvd 1st St 10th St Overlay 63 $6.25 20,444 $127,778 $19,167 $147,000
Summitview Ave 14th Ave 23rd Ave Overlay 63 $6.25 18,778 $117,361 $17,604 $135,000
40th Ave Nob Hill Washington Overlay 64 $6.25 22,222 $138,889 $20,833 $160,000
Nob Hill Blvd 32nd Ave 44th Ave Overlay 64 $6.25 25,778 $161,111 $24,167 $186,000
Yakima Ave 1st St 8th St Overlay 66 $6.25 20,778 $129,861 $19,479 $150,000
$4,480,000
Street Rehab Total $14,329,000
ID
2011 Bond Scenarios 110510.xls 4 of 4 6/16/2011
• •
•
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Scenario 6
Par Amount $30 Million $25 Million $20 Million $30 Million $25 Million $20 Million
Length (yrs) 20 20 20 15 15 15
Structure Level Debt Level Debt Level Debt Level Debt Level Debt Level Debt
Total Debt Service $ 47,026,863 $ 39,185,293 $ 31,337,805 $ 40,977,934 $ 34,150,738 $ 27,317,859
Avg. Annual Debt Service $ 2,351,343 $ 1,959,265 $ 1,566,890 $ 2,731,862 $ 2,276,716 $ 1,821,191
Net Interest Cost 5.09% 5.09% 5.09% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58%
Levy Rate(s) /$1,000 $0.43 - $0.25 $0.36 - $0.21 $0.29 - $0.16 $0.50 - $0.33 $0.42 - $0.28 $0.33 - $0.22
Scenario 7 Scenario 8 Scenario 9 Scenario 10 Scenario 11 Scenario 12
Par Amount $30 Million $25 Million $20 Million $30 Million $25 Million
$20 Million
Length (yrs) 20 20 20 15 15 15
Structure Level Levy Level Levy Level Levy Level Levy Level Levy Level Levy
Total Debt Service $ 49,921,433 $ 41,601,418 $ 33,275,091 $ 42,236,390 $ 35,099,780 $ 28,160,671
Avg. Annual Debt Service $ 2,496,072 $ 2,080,071 $ 1,663,755 $ 2,815,759 $ 2,339,985 $ 1,877,378
Net Interest Cost 5.22% 5.22% 5.22% 4.66% 4.66% 4.66%
Levy Rate(s) /$1,000 $0.34 $0.28 $0.23 $0.42 $0.34 $0.28
1
City of Yakima
Projected Bond Tax Rates
_ Calculation Factors
Rating: A+
Interest Rates: 2012 Issue: Current Plus 1.00 Percent
Assessed Value Increases at:
R &P
2012 1.00%
2013 -2014 2.00%
2015 -2060 3.00%
Issue Structure: Level Debt Service
Issue 1 Total
Bonds issued: 6/1/2012
Issue Size: $30,000,000 $30,000,000
(In 1,000's)
Bond Debt Service Projected Tax Rates
Levy Assessed Prior 2012 Total Prior 2012
Year Value Debt Issue Bonds Debt Issue
2011 $5,521,928 $0 $0 $0 $0.00 $0.00
2012 5,577,147 0 2,070 2,070 0.00 0.43 (1)
2013 5,688,690 0 2,368 2,368 0.00 0.42
2014 5,802,464 0 2,364 2,364 0.00 0.41
2015 5,976,538 0 2,366 2,366 0.00 0.40
2016 6,155,834 0 2,364 2,364 0.00 0.38
2017 6,340,509 0 2,364 2,364 0.00 0.37
2018 6,530,725 0 2,364 2,364 0.00 0.36
2019 6,726,646 0 2,364 2,364 0.00 0.35
2020 6,928,446 0 2,369 2,369 0.00 0.34
2021 7,136,299 0 2,368 2,368 0.00 0.33
2022 7,350,388 0 2,367 2,367 0.00 0.32
2023 7,570,900 0 2,367 2,367 0.00 0.31
2024 7,798,027 0 2,366 2,366 0.00 0.30
2025 8,031,968 0 2,369 2,369 0.00 0.29
2026 8,272,927 0 2,365 2,365 0.00 0.29
2027 8,521,114 0 2,366 2,366 0.00 0.28
2028 8,776,748 0 2,365 2,365 0.00 0.27
2029 9,040,050 0 2,367 2,367 0.00 0.26
2030 9,311,252 0 2,366 2,366 0.00 0.25
2031 9,590,589 0 2,368 2,368 0.00 0.25
Total Debt Service: $47,027 (1) Builds DS Fund reserves.
Total interest: $17,027
Net Interest Cost: 5.09%
Yakima 01
Prepared 5 /9/2011 SN
II 4110
• •
•
City of Yakima
Projected Bond Tax Rates
Calculation Factors
Rating: A+
Interest Rates: 2012 lssue: Current Plus 1.00 Percent
Assessed Value Increases at:
R &P
2012 1.00%
2013 -2014 2.00%
2015 -2060 3.00%
Issue Structure: Level Debt Service
Issue 1 Total
Bonds Issued: 6/1/2012
Issue Size: $25,000,000 $25,000,000
(in 1,000's)
Bond Debt Service Projected Tax Rates
Levy Assessed Prior 2012 Total Prior 2012
Year Value Debt Issue Bonds Debt Issue
2011 $5,521,928 $0 $0 $0 $0.00 $0.00
2012 5,577,147 0 1,738 1,738 0.00 0.36 (1)
2013 5,688,690 0 1,968 1,968 0.00 0.35
2014 5,802,464 0 1,969 1,969 0.00 0.34
2015 5,976,538 0 1,971 1,971 0.00 0.33
2016 6,155,834 0 1,969 1,969 0.00 0.32
2017 6,340,509 0 1,970 1,970 0.00 0.31
2018 6,530,725 0 1,971 1,971 0.00 0.30
2019 6,726,646 0 1,969 1,969 0.00 0.29
2020 6,928,446 0 1,972 1,972 0.00 0.28
2021 7,136,299 0 1,971 1,971 0.00 0.28
2022 7,350,388 0 1,970 1,970 0.00 0.27
2023 7,570,900 0 1,971 1,971 0.00 0.26
2024 7,798,027 0 1,972 1,972 0.00 0.25
2025 8,031,968 0 1,972 1,972 0.00 0.25
2026 8,272,927 0 1,973 1,973 0.00 0.24
2027 8,521,114 0 1,973 1,973 0.00 0.23
2028 8,776,748 0 1,973 1,973 0.00 0.22
2029 9,040,050 0 1,972 1,972 0.00 0.22
2030 9,311,252 0 1,970 1,970 0.00 0.21
2031 9,590,589 0 1,971 1,971 0.00 0.21
Total Debt Service: $39,185 (1) Builds DS Fund reserves.
Total Interest: $14,185
Net Interest Cost: 5.09%
Yakima_02 ^ VV
Prepared 5/9/2011 `J
City of Yakima
Projected Bond Tax Rates
Calculation Factors
Rating: A+
Interest Rates: 2012 Issue: Current Plus 1.00 Percent
Assessed Value Increases at:
R &P
2012 1.00%
2013-2014 2.00%
2015 -2060 3.00%
Issue Structure: Level Debt Service
Issue 1 Total
Bonds Issued: 6/1/2012
Issue Size: $20,000,000 $20,000,000
(in 1,000's)
Bond Debt Service Projected Tax Rates
Levy Assessed Prior 2012 Total Prior 2012
Year Value Debt Issue Bonds Debt Issue
2011 $5,521,928 50 $0 $0 $0.00 50.00
2012 5,577,147 0 1,397 1,397 0.00 0.29 (1)
2013 5,688,690 0 1,574 1,574 0.00 0.28
2014 5,802,464 0 1,578 1,578 0.00 0.27
2015 5,976,538 0 1,575 1,575 0.00 0.26
2016 6,155,834 0 1,574 1,574 0.00 0.26
2017 6,340,509 0 1,575 1,575 0.00 0.25
2018 6,530,725 0 1,578 1,578 0.00 0.24
2019 6,726,646 0 1,578 1,578 0.00 0.23
2020 6,928,446 0 1,575 1,575 0.00 0.23
2021 7,136,299 0 1,578 1,578 0.00 0.22
2022 7,350,388 0 1,577 1,577 0.00 0.21
2023 7,570,900 0 1,574 1,574 0.00 0.21
2024 7,798,027 0 1,577 1,577 0.00 0.20
2025 8,031,968 0 1,575 1,575 0.00 0.20
2026 8,272,927 0 1,575 1,575 0.00 0.19
2027 8,521,114 0 1,575 1,575 0.00 0.18
2028 8,776,748 0 1,576 1,576 0.00 0.18
2029 9,040,050 0 1,578 1,578 0.00 0.17
2030 9,311,252 0 1,574 1,574 0.00 0.17
2031 9,590,589 0 1,575 1,575 0.00 0.16
Total Debt Service: $31,338 (1) Builds DS Fund reserves.
Total Interest: $11,338
Net Interest Cost: 5.09%
Levy Rate Summary (5 -9-
I Prepared 5/9/2011 S N
ID 0
4111 •
i
City of Yakima
Projected Bond Tax Rates
Calculation Factors
Rating: A+
Interest Rates: 2012 Issue: Current Plus 1.00 Percent
Assessed Value Increases at:
R &P
2012 1.00%
2013 -2014 2.00%
2015 -2060 3.00%
Issue Structure: Level Debt Service
Issue 1 Total
Bonds Issued: 6/1/2012
Issue Size: $30,000,000 $30,000,000
(in 1,000's)
Bond Debt Service Projected Tax Rates
Levy Assessed Prior 2012 Total Prior 2012
Year Value Debt Issue Bonds Debt Issue
2011 $5,521,928 $0 $0 $0 $0.00 $0.00
2012 5,577,147 0 2,434 2,434 0.00 0.50 (1)
2013 5,688,690 0 2,751 2,751 0.00 0.48
2014 5,802,464 0 2,755 2,755 0.00 0.47
2015 5,976,538 0 2,753 2,753 0.00 0.46
2016 6,155,834 0 2,754 2,754 0.00 0.45
2017 6,340,509 0 2,751 2,751 0.00 0.43
2018 6,530,725 0 2,754 2,754 0.00 0.42
2019 6,726,646 0 2,751 2,751 0.00 0.41
2020 6,928,446 0 2,755 2,755 0.00 0.40
2021 7,136,299 0 2,755 2,755 0.00 0.39
2022 7,350,388 0 2,753 2,753 0.00 0.37
2023 7,570,900 0 2,753 2,753 0.00 0.36
2024 7,798,027 0 2,756 2,756 0.00 0.35
2025 8,031,968 0 2,753 2,753 0.00 0.34
2026 8,272,927 0 2,751 2,751 0.00 0.33
2027 8,521,114 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2028 8,776,748 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2029 9,040,050 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2030 9,311,252 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2031 9,590,589 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
Total Debt Service: $40,978 (1) Builds DS Fund reserves.
Total Interest: $10,978
Net Interest Cost: 4.58%
Levy Rate Summary (5 -9-
Prepared 5/9/2011 S N W
City of Yakima
Projected Bond Tax Rates
Calculation Factors
Rating: A+
Interest Rates: 2012 Issue: Current Plus 1.00 Percent
Assessed Value increases at:
R &P
2012 1.00%
2013 -2014 2.00%
2015 -2060 3.00%
Issue Structure: Level Debt Service
Issue 1 Total
Bonds Issued: 6/1/2012
Issue Size: $25,000,000 $25,000,000
(in 1,000's)
Bond Debt Service Projected Tax Rates
Levy Assessed Prior 2012 Total Prior 2012
Year Value Debt Issue Bonds Debt Issue
2011 $5,521,928 50 $0 50 50.00 $0.00
2012 5,577,147 0 2,025 2,025 0.00 0.42 (1)
2013 5,688,690 0 2,294 2,294 0.00 0.40
2014 5,802,464 0 2,294 2,294 0.00 0.40
2015 5,976,538 0 2,294 2,294 0.00 0.38
2016 6,155,834 0 2,294 2,294 0.00 0.37
2017 6,340,509 0 2,294 2,294 0.00 0.36
2018 6,530,725 0 2,293 2,293 0.00 0.35
2019 6,726,646 0 2,296 2,296 0.00 0.34
2020 6,928,446 0 2,292 2,292 0.00 0.33
2021 7,136,299 0 2,297 2,297 0.00 0.32
2022 7,350,388 0 2,295 2,295 0.00 0.31
2023 7,570,900 0 2,297 2,297 0.00 0.30
2024 7,798,027 0 2,297 2,297 0.00 0.29
2025 8,031,968 0 2,294 2,294 0.00 0.29
2026 8,272,927 0 2,293 2,293 0.00 0.28
2027 8,521,114 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2028 8,776,748 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2029 9,040,050 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2030 9,311,252 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2031 9,590,589 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
Total Debt Service: $34,151 (1) Builds DS Fund reserves.
Total Interest: $9,151
Net Interest Cost: 4.58%
Levy Rate Summary (5 -9- A I
Prepared 5/9/2011 S C I v
I I I 1111
• •
•
City of Yakima
Projected Bond Tax Rates
Calculation Factors
Rating: A+
Interest Rates: 2012 lssue: Current Plus 1.00 Percent
Assessed Value Increases at:
R &P
2012 1.00%
2013 -2014 2.00%
2015 -2060 3.00%
Issue Structure: Level Debt Service
Issue 1 Total
Bonds Issued: 6/1/2012
Issue Size: $20,000,000 $20,000,000
(in 1,000's)
Bond Debt Service Projected Tax Rates
Levy Assessed Prior 2012 Total Prior 2012
Year Value Debt Issue Bonds Debt Issue
2011 $5,521,928 $0 $0 $0 $0.00 $0.00
2012 5,577,147 0 1,621 1,621 0.00 0.33 (1)
2013 5,688,690 0 1,837 1,837 0.00 0.32
2014 5,802,464 0 1,833 1,833 0.00 0.32
2015 5,976,538 0 1,835 1,835 0.00 0.31
2016 6,155,834 0 1,838 1,838 0.00 0.30
2017 6,340,509 0 1,837 1,837 0.00 0.29
2018 6,530,725 0 1,836 1,836 0.00 0.28
2019 6,726,646 0 1,836 1,836 0.00 0.27
2020 6,928,446 0 1,835 1,835 0.00 0.26
2021 7,136,299 0 1,833 1,833 0.00 0.26
2022 7,350,388 0 1,837 1,837 0.00 0.25
2023 7,570,900 0 1,835 1,835 0.00 0.24
2024 7,798,027 0 1,834 1,834 0.00 0.24
2025 8,031,968 0 1,835 1,835 0.00 0.23
2026 8,272,927 0 1,836 1,836 0.00 0.22
2027 8,521,114 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2028 8,776,748 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2029 9,040,050 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2030 9,311,252 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2031 9,590,589 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
Total Debt Service: $27,318 (1) Builds DS Fund reserves.
Total Interest: $7,318
Net Interest Cost: 4.58%
Levy Rate Summary ( 5 - 9 -
P r e p a r e d 5/9/2011 S N W
City of Yakima
Projected Bond Tax Rates
Calculation Factors
Rating: A+
Interest Rates: 2012 Issue: Current Plus 1.00 Percent
Assessed Value Increases at:
R &P
2012 1.00%
2013 -2014 2.00%
2015 -2060 3.00%
Issue Structure: Level Levy Rate
Issue 1 T to
Bonds Issued: 6/1/2012
Issue Size: $30,000,000 $30,000,000
(in 1,000'5)
Bond Debt Service Projected Tax Rates
Levy Assessed Prior 2012 Total Prior 2012
_ Year Value Debt Issue Bonds Debt Issue
2011 $5,521,928 $0 $0 $0 $0.00 $0.00
2012 5,577,147 0 1,640 1,640 0.00 0.34 (1)
2013 5,688,690 0 1,941 1,941 0.00 0.34
2014 5,802,464 0 1,979 1,979 0.00 0.34
2015 5,976,538 0 2,039 2,039 0.00 0.34
2016 6,155,834 0 2,100 2,100 0.00 0.34
2017 6,340,509 0 2,162 2,162 0.00 0.34
2018 6,530,725 0 2,229 2,229 0.00 0.34
2019 6,726,646 0 2,295 2,295 0.00 0.34
2020 6,928,446 0 2,365 2,365 0.00 0.34
2021 7,136,299 0 2,432 2,432 0.00 0.34
2022 7,350,388 0 2,507 2,507 0.00 0.34
2023 7,570,900 0 2,584 2,584 0.00 0.34
2024 7,798,027 0 2,657 2,657 0.00 0.34
2025 8,031,968 0 2,740 2,740 0.00 0.34
2026 8,272,927 0 2,822 2,822 0.00 0.34
2027 8,521,114 0 2,908 2,908 0.00 0.34
2028 8,776,748 0 2,993 2,993 0.00 0.34
2029 9,040,050 0 3,084 3,084 0.00 0.34
2030 9,311,252 0 3,175 3,175 0.00 0.34
2031 9,590,589 0 3,271 3,271 0.00 0.34
Total Debt Service: $49,921 (1) Builds DS Fund reserves.
Total Interest: $19,921
Net Interest Cost: 5.22%
Levy Rate Summary (5 -9-
Prepared 5/9/2011 SNI
II 41111
• 0 •
City of Yakima
Projected Bond Tax Rates
Calculation Factors
Rating: A+
Interest Rates: 2012 Issue: Current Plus 1.00 Percent
Assessed Value lncreases at:
R &P
2012 1.00%
2013 -2014 2.00%
2015 -2060 3.00%
Issue Structure: Level Levy Rate
Issue . Total
Bonds lssued: 6/1/2012
Issue Size: $25,000,000 $25,000,000
(in 1,000's)
Bond Debt Service Projected Tax Rates
Levy Assessed Prior 2012 Total Prior 2012
Year Value Debt Issue Bonds Debt Issue
2011 $5,521,928 $0 $0 $0 $0.00 $0.00
2012 5,577,147 0 1,371 1,371 0.00 0.28 (1)
2013 5,688,690 0 1,616 1,616 0.00 0.28
2014 5,802,464 0 1,651 1,651 0.00 0.28
2015 5,976,538 0 1,698 1,698 0.00 0.28
2016 6,155,834 0 1,747 1,747 0.00 0.28
2017 6,340,509 0 1,804 1,804 0.00 0.28
2018 6,530,725 0 1,855 1,855 0.00 0.28
2019 6,726,646 0 1,912 1,912 0.00 0.28
2020 6,928,446 0 1,968 1,968 0.00 0.28
2021 7,136,299 0 2,028 2,028 0.00 0.28
2022 7,350,388 0 2,087 2,087 0.00 0.28
2023 7,570,900 0 2,155 2,155 0.00 0.28
2024 7,798,027 0 2,215 2,215 0.00 0.28
2025 8,031,968 0 2,282 2,282 0.00 0.28
2026 8,272,927 0 2,354 2,354 0.00 0.28
2027 8,521,114 0 2,423 2,423 0.00 0.28
2028 8,776,748 0 2,496 2,496 0.00 0.28
2029 9,040,050 0 2,569 2,569 0.00 0.28
2030 9,311,252 0 2,645 2,645 0.00 0.28
2031 9,590,589 0 2,727 2,727 0.00 0.28
Total Debt Service: $41,601 (1) Builds DS Fund reserves.
Total Interest: $16,601
Net Interest Cost: 5.22%
Levy Rate Summary (5 -9-
Prepared 5/9/2011 S N W
City of Yakima
Projected Bond Tax Rates
Calculation Factors
Rating: A+
Interest Rates: 2012 Issue: Current Plus 1.00 Percent
Assessed Value lncreases at:
R &P
2012 1.00%
2013 -2014 2.00%
2015 -2060 3.00%
Issue Structure: Level Levy Rate
Issue 1 Total
Bonds Issued: 6/1/2012
Issue Size: $20,000,000 $20,000,000
(in 1,000's)
Bond Debt Service Projected Tax Rates
Levy Assessed Prior 2012 Total Prior 2012
Year _ Value Debt Issue Bonds Debt Issue
2011 $5,521,928 $0 $0 $0 $0.00 $0.00
2012 5,577,147 0 1,101 1,101 0.00 0.23 (1)
2013 5,688,690 0 1,295 1,295 0.00 0.23
2014 5,802,464 0 1,317 1,317 0.00 0.23
2015 5,976,538 0 1,357 1,357 0.00 0.23
2016 6,155,834 0 1,400 1,400 0.00 0.23
2017 6,340,509 0 1,440 1,440 0.00 0.23
2018 6,530,725 0 1,486 1,486 0.00 0.23
2019 6,726,646 0 1,528 1,528 0.00 0.23
2020 6,928,446 0 1,576 1,576 0.00 0.23
2021 7,136,299 0 1,624 1,624 0.00 0.23
2022 7,350,388 0 1,672 1,672 0.00 0.23
2023 7,570,900 0 1,720 1,720 0.00 0.23
2024 7,798,027 0 1,773 1,773 0.00 0.23
2025 8,031,968 0 1,823 1,823 0.00 0.23
2026 8,272,927 0 1,881 1,881 0.00 0.23
2027 8,521,114 0 1,937 1,937 0.00 0.23
2028 8,776,748 0 1,995 1,995 0.00 0.23
2029 9,040,050 0 2,054 2,054 0.00 0.23
2030 9,311,252 0 2,119 2,119 0.00 0.23
2031 9,590,589 0 2,177 2,177 0.00 0.23
Total Debt Service: $33,275 (1) Builds DS Fund reserves.
Total Interest: $13,275
Net Interest Cost: 5.22%
Levy Rate Summary (5 -9-
Prepared 5/9/2011 S N
il ID
• • •
City of Yakima
Projected Bond Tax Rates
Calculation Factors
Rating: A+
Interest Rates: 2012 Issue: Current Plus 1.00 Percent
Assessed Value Increases at:
R &P
2012 1.00%
2013 -2014 2.00%
2015 -2060 3.00%
Issue Structure: Level Levy Rate
Issue 1 Total
Bonds lssued: 6/1/2012
Issue Size: 530,000,000 530,000,000
(in 1,000's)
Bond Debt Service Projected Tax Rates
Levy Assessed Prior 2012 Total Prior 2012
Year Value Debt Issue Bonds Debt Issue
2011 55,521,928 50 50 50 50.00 $0.00
2012 5,577,147 0 2,020 2,020 0.00 0.42 (1)
2013 5,688,690 0 2,377 2,377 0.00 0.42
2014 5,802,464 0 2,421 2,421 0.00 0.42
2015 5,976,538 0 2,494 2,494 0.00 0.42
2016 6,155,834 0 2,570 2,570 0.00 0.42
2017 6,340,509 0 2,650 2,650 0.00 0.42
2018 6,530,725 0 2,726 2,726 0.00 0.42
2019 6,726,646 0 2,807 2,807 0.00 0.42
2020 6,928,446 0 2,893 2,893 0.00 0.42
2021 7,136,299 0 2,977 2,977 0.00 0.42
2022 7,350,388 0 3,070 3,070 0.00 0.42
2023 7,570,900 0 3,161 3,161 0.00 0.42
2024 7,798,027 0 3,259 3,259 0.00 0.42
2025 8,031,968 0 3,355 3,355 0.00 0.42
2026 8,272,927 0 3,456 3,456 0.00 0.42
2027 8,521,114 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2028 8,776,748 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2029 9,040,050 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2030 9,311,252 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2031 9,590,589 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
Total Debt Service: $42,236 (1) Builds DS Fund reserves.
Total Interest: $12,236
Net Interest Cost: 4.66%
Yakima 10 SNW
Prepared 5 /9 /2011
City of Yakima
Projected Bond Tax Rates
Calculation Factors
Rating: A+
Interest Rates: 2012 Issue: Current Plus 1.00 Percent
Assessed Value Increases at:
R &P
2012 1.00%
2013 -2014 2.00%
2015 -2060 3.00%
Issue Structure: Level Levy Rate
Issue 1 Total
Bonds Issued: 6/1/2012
Issue Size: 525,000,000 525,000,000
(in 1,000's)
Bond Debt Service Projected Tax Rates
Levy Assessed Prior 2012 Total Prior 2012
Year Value Debt Issue Bonds Debt Issue
2011 55,521,928 50 50 50 50.00 50.00
2012 5,577,147 0 1,914 1,914 0.00 0.34 (1)
2013 5,688,690 0 1,960 1,960 0.00 0.34
2014 5,802,464 0 1,998 1,998 0.00 0.34
2015 5,976,538 0 2,057 2,057 0.00 0.34
2016 6,155,834 0 2,120 2,120 0.00 0.34
2017 6,340,509 0 2,183 2,183 0.00 0.34
2018 6,530,725 0 2,253 2,253 0.00 0.35
2019 6,726,646 0 2,316 2,316 0.00 0.34
2020 6,928,446 0 2,390 2,390 0.00 0.34
2021 7,136,299 0 2,459 2,459 0.00 0.34
2022 7,350,388 0 2,534 2,534 0.00 0.34
2023 7,570,900 0 2,608 2,608 0.00 0.34
2024 7,798,027 0 2,688 2,688 0.00 0.34
2025 8,031,968 0 2,768 2,768 0.00 0.34
2026 8,272,927 0 2,851 2,851 0.00 0.34
2027 8,521,114 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2028 8,776,748 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2029 9,040,050 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2030 9,311,252 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2031 9,590,589 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
Total Debt Service: 535,100 (1) Builds DS Fund reserves.
Total Interest: $10,100
Net Interest Cost: 4.66%
Levy Rate Summary (5 -9-
Prepared 5/9/2011 S N W
41110 1111/ •
I
• •
•
City of Yakima
Projected Bond Tax Rates
Calculation Factors
Rating: A+
Interest Rates: 2012 Issue: Current Plus 1.00 Percent
Assessed Value Increases at:
R &P
2012 1.00%
2013 -2014 2.00%
2015 -2060 3.00%
Issue Structure: Level Levy Rate
Issue 1 Total
Bonds lssued: 6/1/2012
Issue Size: $20,000,000 520,000,000
(in 1,000's)
Bond Debt Service Projected Tax Rates
Levy Assessed Prior 2012 Total Prior 2012
Year Value Debt Issue Bonds Debt Issue
2011 55,521,928 $0 $0 $0 50.00 50.00
2012 5,577,147 0 1,338 1,338 0.00 0.28 (1)
2013 5,688,690 0 1,583 1,583 0.00 0.28
2014 5,802,464 0 1,616 1,616 0.00 0.28
2015 5,976,538 0 1,665 1,665 0.00 0.28
2016 6,155,834 0 1,714 1,714 0.00 0.28
1 2017 6,340,509 0 1,764 1,764 0.00 0.28
2018 6,530,725 0 1,817 1,817 0.00 0.28
2019 6,726,646 0 1,875 1,875 0.00 0.28
2020 6,928,446 0 1,931 1,931 0.00 0.28
2021 7,136,299 0 1,989 1,989 0.00 0.28
2022 7,350,388 0 2,049 2,049 0.00 0.28
2023 7,570,900 0 2,111 2,111 0.00 0.28
2024 7,798,027 0 2,169 2,169 0.00 0.28
2025 8,031,968 0 2,237 2,237 0.00 0.28
2026 8,272,927 0 2,304 2,304 0.00 0.28
2027 8,521,114 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2028 8,776,748 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2029 9,040,050 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2030 9,311,252 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
2031 9,590,589 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
Total Debt Service: $28,161 (1) Builds DS Fund reserves.
Total lnterest: $8,161
Net Interest Cost: 4.66%
Levy Rate Summary (5 -9-
Prepared 5/9/2011 !!! S N W
July 2 0 1 0
Transportation Benefit ASSOCIATION
OF WASHINGTON
Ci i iES
District Legislation in Effect
Through the cooperative efforts of the Association of Washington Cities (AWC) and the Washington State Associations of
Counties (WSAC), significant legislation went into effect in 2007, which resulted in the most important local transportation
tool for cities and counties in sixteen years — Transportation Benefit Districts (TBDs). Newly enacted 2010 legislation
enhanced the TBD's authority.
TBDs are independent taxing districts that can impose an array of taxes or fees either through a vote of the people or through
district board action.TBDs are flexible -- they allow cities and counties to work independently or cooperatively on addressing
both local and regional transportation challenges.
Frequently Asked Questions additional jurisdictions through interlocal agreements,
Background then the governing body must have at least five members,
In 1987, the Legislature created TBDs as an option for local including at least one elected official from each of the
governments to fund transportation improvements. In 2005, participating jurisdictions, or may be the governing b
the Legislature amended the TBD statute to expand its uses a metropolitan planning organization if the TBD boun s
are identical to the boundaries of the metropolitan planning
and revenue authority. In 2007, the Legislature amended
the TBD statute to authorize the imposition of vehicle fees organization serving the district
and transportation impact fees without a public vote. In What are the boundaries of aTBD?
2010, the Legislature amended the TBD statute again to The boundaries of a TBD may be less than the boundaries
clarify project eligibility, the use of impact fees, and sales tax of those jurisdictions participating in the For example,
expenditures, and make TBD governance more flexible. a county or city may choose to have the TBD boundaries
What is a Transportation Benefit District (TBD)? identical with the county or city, or it may choose just to
ATBD is a quasi - municipal corporation and independent include a portion of the county or city. However, if aTBD
taxing district created for the sole purpose of acquiring, chooses to exercise the tax authority that does not require
constructing, improving, providing, and funding transportation a public vote (e.g. vehicle and impact fees), the boundaries of
improvements within the district. the TBD must be countywide, citywide, or unincorporated
countywide.
Who may create aTBD?
The legislative authority of a county or city may create aTBD Why create aTBD if the county or city legislative
by ordinance following the procedures set forth in Chapter authority is the governing board?
36.73 RCW.The county or city proposing to create a TBD ATBD is an independent legal creature. Although aTBD
may include other counties, cities, port districts, or transit has many of the powers of a county and city (impose taxes,
districts through interlocal agreements. eminent domain powers, can contract and accept gifts,
etc.), - it is a separate taxing district.Additionally, by bein a
Who governs theTBD? separate legal and taxing entity,TBDs have more flexi
The members of the legislative authority (county or city) For example, more than one type of jurisdiction can b
proposing to establish a TBD serves as the governing body of aTBD and the boundaries can be less than countywide or
of the TBD.The legislative authority is acting ex officio and citywide.
independently as the TBD governing body. If a TBD includes
0
Can aTBD be created without imposing fees or proposing What transportation improvements can be funded
voter approved revenue options? by aTBD?
Yes.A county or city takes legislative action through the The definition of transportation improvements is broad.This
ordinance process to create aTBD.The ordinance must can include maintenance and improvements to city streets,
include a finding that the creation of a TBD is in the public's county roads, state highways, investments in high capacity
interest, describe the boundaries of the TBD, and specify the transportation, public transportation, transportation demand
activities or functions to be implemented or funded by the management and other transportation projects identified in
district.The county or city ordinance creating the TBD may a regional transportation planning organization plan or state
also specify and authorize what fees or revenues that the plan.
TBD may pursue.TheTBD, acting in its own official capacity, In developing criteria for a transportation improvement, it
has the authority to identify proposed fees or revenue can include one or more of the following: reduced risk of
options. transportation facility failure and improved safety; improved
travel time; improved air quality; increases in daily and peak
Are TBD revenues required to be spent as they are
period trip capacity; improved modal connectivity; P P P ty� P ty; improved
freight mobility; cost- effectiveness of the investment; optimal
No.The governing body which creates a TBD must develop performance of the system through time; and other criteria,
a plan that specifies the transportation improvements to as adopted by the governing body.
be provided or funded by the TBD.As part of this plan, the
i TBD's governing board can indicate if the funds will be used Note: In 2010, cities within King County are specifically
mmediately, or if they will be collected for a specified period, authorized to provide or contract for supplemental
prior to spending the accumulated funds.Typically, funds that public transportation improvements to meet the mobility
are collected for a specified period before being expended needs of the city, and may contract for such improvements
are used to fully fund large projects, when bonding, or serve with private and nonprofit entities and may also form public -
as a match for state or federal funds that may only become private partnerships.
available in a specified time frame.
If a jurisdiction uses the SEPA process to collect
Does aTBD have to meet certain tests? impact fees, would this preclude aTBD from using
There are three threshold tests for transportation impact fees?
improvements in a TBD: I) the type of transportation No. However, the law requires the jurisdiction to provide
improvement contained within the boundaries of the TBD, a credit to commercial or industrial developments that are
2) whether the improvements are identified in any existing subject to SEPA, or transportation impact fees authorized
state, regional, county, city or eligible TDB jurisdiction's (port under GMA.This is commonly called a "no double- dipping"
or transit) transportation plan and that the improvements provision.
are 3) necessitated by existing or reasonably foreseeable
congestion levels. The definition of "congestion" does not
have a set standard in law; each TBD has the discretion to
tailor and make its own determination of congestion levels
when implementing its TBD ordinance.
continued
Ill
1111
What revenue options do TBD's have? after enactment of the 2007 Iegislation.Today, a county that
TBD's have several revenue options subject to voter creates a countywide TBD (incorporated and unincorporated
approval: areas) and proposes to impose up to a $20 non -voted
Property taxes — a 1 -year excess levy or an excess levy vehicle fee should first attempt to impose a countywide
• for capital purposes; fee to be shared with cities by interlocal agreement. Sixty
percent (60 %) of the cities representing seventy-five (75 %)
• Up to 0.2% sales and use tax; of the incorporated population must approve the interlocal
• Up to $100 annual vehicle fee per vehicle registered in agreement for it to be effective.The Legislative expectation is
the district; and that if an interlocal agreement cannot be reached between a
• Vehicle tolls. county and city or cities, the county is authorized to create a
Please Note:There are exemptions or unique requirements TBD and impose the fee only in the unincorporated area of
when using the vehicle fee or vehicle tolls. the county.
TBD's have two revenue options that do not Credits must be provided for previously imposed TBD
vehicle fees. Credits are not required for voter approved
require voter approval, but are subject to
vehicle fees.
additional conditions:
I. Annual vehicle fee up to $20.This fee is collected at Commercial and Industrial Transportation
the time of vehicle renewal and cannot be used to fund Impact Fees:
passenger -only ferry service improvements. A TBD that is either countywide or citywide must pro • a
2. Transportation impact fees on commercial and industrial credit for a commercial or industrial transportation i
buildings. Residential buildings are excluded. In addition, a fee if the respective county or city has already impose
county or city must provide a credit for a commercial or transportation impact fee.This is commonly called a "no
industrial transportation impact if the respective county double- dipping" provision.
or city has already imposed a transportation impact fee. If we create a countywide TBD for the up to $20
Please Note: Foregoing a vote is an option only. A county vehicle fee, how is the revenue distributed to
or city still has the option of placing either the annual fee of cities?
up to $20 or the impact fees to the vote of the people as an The revenue must be shared according to the interlocal
advisory vote or an actual requirement of imposition. agreement.The law does not prescribe what the interlocal
agreement contains. Consequently, the revenue can be shared
What are the additional conditions required to by population, number of vehicles within each jurisdiction,
impose revenue options not subject to voter project list, a combination of these, or whatever the county
approval? and cities can reach agreement on.
To impose either fee, the TBD's boundaries must
be countywide or citywide, or if applicable, in the What happens if a city imposes the up to $20
unincorporated county. vehicle fee and then the county imposes a
countywide fee without voter approval?
Vehicle Fees: The law requiresTBDs to provide a credit for vehicle fees
When the Legislature revised the TBD authority in 2007 to previously imposed by aTBD.
enable councilmanic vehicle fees, it was intended to ensure
a county-wide or regional approach for first consideration
of this new option.That is why counties had the exclusive •
authority of the $20 vehicle fee for the first six months
continued
•
For example, if a city was the first to create a TBD and What other requirements should I be aware of?
impose a $20 vehicle fee and subsequently its county Revenue rates, once imposed, may not be increased, unless
creates a countywide TBD imposing a $20 vehicle fee, the authorized by voter approval.
county TBD must provide a $20 credit against its fee for
If project costs exceed original costs by more than 20
vehicles registered within the city.As a result, no fee would
percent, a public hearing must be held to solicit public
be collected by the county TBD from vehicles registered
comment regarding how the cost change should be resolved.
within the city.Additionally, the city would not be part of the This is typically called a material change policy.
interlocal agreement with the county or be included in the
number /percentages needed for the interlocal agreement to The TBD must issue an annual report to include the status
be effective. of project costs, revenues, expenditures, and construction
schedules.
However, if in the same example, the city TBD imposed only
$10 of the $20 vehicle fee and the county TBD imposed The TBD must be dissolved upon completion of the
a countywide $20 vehicle fee, only a $10 credit would be project(s) and the payment of debt service.
provided for vehicles registered within the city.The county
TBD would collect $10 from vehicles registered in the city. Who has imposed aTBD?
The cities of Lake Forest Park, Edmonds, Des Moines,
Consequently, the county TBD would need to include the
Olympia, Prosser, and Shoreline imposed the $20 vehicle
city in the interlocal agreement discussions and the city is
fee. Ridgefield and Sequim passed the 2/10% sales tax.
included in the number /percentages needed for the interlocal
•reement to be effective.
Point Roberts and Liberty Lake formed TBD's prior to the
legislative changes in 2005.
If a county or city is considering the $20 vehicle
fee, how does a county or city estimate revenues?
Currently, no TBD has been in effect for an entire year and
therefore revenue estimates and histories are incomplete. Checklist
WhatTBDs around the state have learned to date: vehicles For a checklist that highlights many of the important
per household calculations vary significantly around the considerations when creating a Transportation Benefit
state. Statistical data shows that there tends to be about District (TBD), please see www.awcnet.org/tbd.
one vehicle per person in rural areas and 0.8 vehicles per
person in urban areas. Another factor to strongly consider Eligibility requirements vary. For additional questions on
is seasonality; vehicles sales are not evenly distributed Transportation Districts, please contact AWC staff
throughout the year and this will affect monthly receipts. Ashley Probart at ashleyp @awcnet.org I
Finally, a city or county must understand and recognize that Sheri Sawyer at sheris @awcnet.org.
other factors such as people failing to register their vehicles,
and data accuracy can affect actual revenues when compared
to forecasted revenues.
III
1 Transportation Benefit Districts 7/12/11 8:55 AM
M.R
. c Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington
Working Together for Excellence in Local Government
Updated 02/11
Transportation Benefit Districts
Contents
• About Transportation Benefit Districts
• Transportation Benefit District Legislation
• Transportation Benefit Districts, Including Proposals
About Transportation Benefit Districts
Transportation benefit districts (TBDs) are quasi - municipal corporations with independent taxing
authority, including the authority to impose property taxes and impact fees for transportation purposes.
RCW 36.73.020 governs formation by counties, and RCW 35.21.225 governs formation by cities. For an
overview, see:
• Transportation Benefit Districts (TBDs) (in) in the Transportation Resource Manual, Joint
Transportation Committee, updated 2009
• Transportation Benefit Legislation in Effect (E), AWC Fact Sheet, 07/10/2010
Prior to 2007, only three TBDs had been formed - Fords Prairie (Centralia and Lewis County) in 1991110
Point Roberts (Whatcom County) in 1992, and Liberty Lake in Spokane County in 2002. Fords Prairie
was dissolved after two attempts to obtain voter approval of the funding package. Funding was
approved by the majority of the voters, but the requirement of a three - fifths majority was not met.
[See history in Transportation Benefit Districts Analysis and Report (1), Washington State Department
of Transportation, 1998, and Centralia TBD Ordinances (in).]
Transportation Benefit District Legislation
• Laws of 2007, ch. 329 (ESHB 1858) (I1)
• Final Bill Report (CI)
• Local Transportation Benefit District Fees, Department of Licensing
Transportation Benefit Districts, Including Proposals
• Bellingham Transportation Benefit District - Funded by $.002 Sales Tax
• Bellingham Ordinance No. 2010 -07 -240 (M), passed 07/2010 - Establishing a TBD; specifying that
the boundaries of the district will coincide with city boundaries; and specifying the transportation
improvements to be funded by the district
• Bellingham TBD No. 1 Resolution #2010 -1 (1) - Concerning a sales and use tax to fund
transportation improvements - Proposition No. 1 (November 2010 ballot)
• Bremerton Transportation Benefit District
• Ordinance No. 5076 (M), passed 02/04/2009
• Proposal to impose an annual $30.00 vehicle fee to finance transportation improvements for a •
period of three years was voted down in November 2009 general election.
• Burien Transportation Benefit District - Funded by Vehicle Registration Fee
http: / /www.mrsc.org/ Subjects /governance /spd /tbd.aspx Page 1 of 3
Transportation Benefit Districts 7/12/11 8:55 AM
• Burien Ordinance No. 516 (1), passed 07/20/2009 - Creates district and provides for election to
411 ass a $30 vehicle registration fee
ehicle registration fee of $30 voted down at November 2009 election.
ehicle registration fee of $10
• Covington - Proposed
• Presentation on Transportation Benefit District on), Council Meeting Packet, 01/12/2010 - Includes
Power Point Presentation -
• Covington City Council Decides Against Transportation Benefit District, by Kris Hill, Covington
Reporter News, 01/27/2010
• Des Moines Transportation Benefit District - Funded by vehicle registration fee
• Des Moines Ordinance No. 1147 (C1), passed 11/20/2008
• Rules of Procedure
• Des Moines TBD Board Resolution No. 0001.TBD (), passed 12/2008
• Edmonds Transportation Benefit District - Funded by vehicle registration fee
• Documents
• Edmonds Ordinance No. 3707 (1), passed 11/18/2008
• Edmonds Resolution No. 1181 (M) - Sets public hearing date for TBD
• Staff Report (M), 11/13/2008
• TBD Presentation (J), 11/18/2008
• Edmonds TBD Ordinance No. 2 (M), passed 08/2010 - Proposal to raise vehicle registration fee by
$40; measure was defeated at the November 2010 general election.
• King County Transportation Benefit District
• King County Ordinance No. 16742 (3), passed 01/04/2010 - Created a TBD in unincorporated King
County
• Documents relating to formation of King County TBD
• e Forest Park Transportation Benefit District - Funded by vehicle registration fee
ea Forest Park Ordinance No. 983 (in), passed 10/23/2008 - Excerpt from Lake Forest Park
Council Packet, 10/09/2008, re: Transportation Benefit District
• Leavenworth Transportation Benefit District - Funded by $.002 sales tax
• Leavenworth Ordinance No. 1372 (M), passed 07/2010 - Creates a TBD
• Index of Leavenworth TBD documents
• Liberty Lake Transportation Benefit District
• Liberty Lake Ordinance No. 82 (l), passed 2002
• Lynnwood Transportation Benefit District - Funded by vehicle registration fee I
• Lynnwood Ordinance No. 2837 (M), passed 05/2010 - Establishes a TBD
• Olympia Transportation Benefit District - Funded by vehicle registration fee
• Olympia Ordinance No. 6611 (L:i), passed 12/16/2008
• Transportation Benefit District Charter ()
• Olympia Ordinance No. 1, passed 03/2009
• Point Roberts (Whatcom County) - Funded by $0.01 gas tax available to border towns
• Whatcom County Resolution No. 91 -036 (n) - Sets hearing on proposed Point Roberts TBD
• Whatcom County Ordinance No. 91 -043 (in) - Creates Point Roberts TBD
• Whatcom County Resolution No. 91 -059 () - Proposition to voters to impose gas tax on the retail
sale of fuel within the Point Roberts TBD
• Whatcom County Resolution No. 92 -002 (1) - Adopts gas tax on the retail sale of fuel within the
Point Roberts TBD
• Whatcom County Resolution No. 92 -013 (n) - Establishes bylaws for governing body of the Point
Roberts TBD
• Prosser Transportation Benefit District - Funded by vehicle registration fee
• Prosser Municipal Code Ch. 3.90, passed 01/20/2009 - TBD
efield Transportation Benefit District - Funded by $.002 sales tax
rdinance No. 998 (M), passed 06/26/2008 and Press Release, 11/05/2008 - Passage of TBD at
general election
http: / /www.mrsc.org/ Subjects /governance /spd /tbd.aspx Page 2 of 3
Transportation Benefit Districts 7/12/11 8:55 AM
• Seattle Transportation Benefit District - Funded by vehicle registration fee
• Seattle Ordinance No. 123397, passed 09/2010 - Creates a TBD
• Seattle TBD Resolution No. 1 - Authorizing a $20 vehicle license fee pursuant to RCW 36.73.0
• Sequim Transportation Benefit District - Funded by $.002 sales tax
• Sequim Ordinance No. 2008 -008 (M), passed 07/2008 - Creates a TBD
• Sequim Ordinance No 2008 -012 (1) - Amends Ordinance No. 2008 -008
• Proposition 1, the sales and use tax levy for the TBD did not pass, 11/05/2008 (49.08%
Yes /50.92% No)
• Sequim TBD Resolution No. 2009 -10 (1), passed 07/2009 - Sales and use tax levy proposition
• Shoreline Transportation Benefit District - Funded by vehicle registration fee
• Ordinance No. 550 (M), passed 06/22/2009
• Snohomish Transportation Benefit District - Includes documents
• Snohomish Municipal Code Ch. 12.52 - Transportation Benefit District (Ordinance No. 2197, passed
09/2010)
• Snoqualmie Transportation Benefit District - Funded by vehicle registration fee
• Snoqualmie News Release, 06/15/2010
• Snoqualmie Ordinance No. 1061 (M), passed 06/14/2010
• Snoqualmie Agenda (E]) for meeting of August 9, 2010 and TBD Draft Agenda Bills: AB 10 -001 In) -
Resolution No. 001, approving Charter; AB 10 -002 (1) - Resolution No. 002, approving bylaws; AB
10 -003 ('L1) setting a hearing date on $20 license fee; AB 10 -004 (L]) setting a hearing date on
TBD projects; AB 10 -005 (n) - Resolution No. 003, adopting the $20 license fee; AB -10 -006 (n) -
Resolution No. 04, approving interlocal agreement between TBD and the Washington State
Department of Licensing; AB 10 -007 (in) - Resolution No. 005, approving certain transportation
improvement projects; AB 10 -008 (in) - Resolution No. 006, approving� interlocal agreement
between TBD and city, for city to provide staff support; AB 10 -009 (L]) - Resolution 007, approving
a material change policy; and AB 10 -010 (), approving appendix No. 88 -10 of interlocal
agreement creating the Washington Cities Insurance Authority wherein TBD agrees to be bound
that agreement.
• Spokane County Regional Transp�ortation Benefit District (Proposed)
• Draft Interlocal Agreement (L]), Washington State Department of Transportation
• University Place Ordinance No. 562, passed 12/07/2009 - Establishes a TBD
• Yakima County conducted an advisory vote November 2007; based on the vote, the county did not
form the TBD
Return to Transportation Taxes
Related Resources
MRSC Index - Formation of special districts. creation of special districts
MRSC Index - Special Purpose Districts - General
MRSC Index - Transportation benefit district (Ch. 36.73 RCW, Ch. 327 Laws 1987)
110
http: / /www.mrsc.org/ Subjects /governance /spd /tbd.aspx Page 3 of 3
Sequim,WA - TBD - Overview 7/12/118:52 AM
City Hall (360) 683 -4139, Public Works (360) 683 -4908, Police (360) 683 -7227
III .� of SEg TBD iti
cd• Search Website Contact Us Home
,./(--- W•A•S•ft•I- N- G•T -O•
Overview
What Is a Transportation Benefit District?
• Overview - TBD Home
A Transportation Benefit District (TBD) is a quasi - municipal corporation and . 2011 TBD Fiscal Year Budget
independent taxing district created for the sole purpose of acquiring, • FAQ
constructing, improving, providing, and funding transportation improvements
within the district. The boundaries of the TBD are identical with the City • Agendas
limits. • Minutes
Background ■Ordinances
• Resolutions
Statutory authority for Transportation Benefit Districts has existed for 20 ■ Inter - Local Agreements
years. However, until 2007 to establish a TBD required a vote of the people.
In 2007, the Association of Washington Cites (AWC) worked with the
Legislature to provide some relief to cities and counties for traffic
congestion. AWC was successful in amending the law to allow some
flexibility. A City (or County) may (but Sequim has chosen not to) implement
up to a $20 per vehicle fee with City Council (or County Commissioner)
approval under Chapter 36.73 RCW. Sequim Chose to submit to the voters
a proposed 2 /10ths of 1% sales tax increase to fund the TBD. This sales
tax increase passed in November 2009 with a 58% affirmative vote of the
citizens. The members of the legislative authority proposing to establish the
district, in this case the Sequim City Council, make up the TBD Board.
Members of the TBD Board are acting ex- officio and independently from
City Council.
Sequim City Council Establishes a TBD
On behalf of the Sequim Transportation Benefit District, the Washington
State Department of Revenue will be remitting collected TBD sales tax
revenue after April 2010, when the tax is implemented. Revenues are
expected beginning in June, 2010.
As referenced above, Washington State legislature permits local
governments to establish a TBD and accompanying funding sources to
provide for the preservation, maintenance, and construction of local public
ways.
In July of 2008 and in an August 2008 amendment, after conducting public
hearings, the Sequim City Council approved Ordinances 2008 -008 and
2008 -012 that formed the Sequim Transportation Benefit District and
adopted a new chapter to the Sequim Municipal Code, entitled
"Transportation Benefit District ". The ordinance specifies that the
boundaries for the TBD be coextensive with the City limits. Funds used to
operate the District must make transportation improvements that are
consistent with existing regional, state, and local transportation plans and
http: / /www.ci.sequim.wa.us /TBD /index.cfm Page 1 of 2
5equim ,WA - TBD - Overview 7/12/118:52 AM
necessitated by existing and reasonably foreseeable congestion levels as
provided in Chapter 36.73 RCW.
411,1
he council further determined that it is in the public interest to provide for
transportation improvements that specifically focus on reducing the risk of
transportation facility failure and improving safety, decreasing travel time,
increasing daily and peak period trip capacity, improving modal connectivity,
and preserving and maintaining optimal performance of transportation
infrastructure. The governing board of the TBD shall be the Sequim City
Council serving in an ex- officio and independent capacity as per RCW
36.73.020. This was done through an tnterlocal Agreement between the
City and the TBD.
In March 2010, the Sequim TBD Board approved the Charter and Bylaws
of the Sequim Transportation Benefit District outlining the conditions by
which the TBD is organized and defining its rights and privileges.
With the establishment of a TBD, the TBD and the City can begin to replace
the transportation funding that has been lost over the years, and be better
able to preserve, maintain or expand the City's transportation infrastructure
into the future.
Contact the TBD
c/o City of Sequim
152 W. Cedar Street
Sequim, WA 98382
I I City Council 1 City Manager Clerk Finance 1 Planning Police Public Works
City of Sequim . City Hall .152 West Cedar St. • Sequim, WA 98382 . (360) 683 -4139 • Fax: 360 - 681 -3448
Sitemap 1 Contact Us
I
III
http: / /www.ci.sequim.wa.us /TBD /index.cfm Page 2 of 2
WA State Licensing: Local transportation benefit district fees 7/12/11 8:48 AM
Local transportation benefit district fees
A law passed in 2007 allows city or county governments to create local transportation •
benefit districts and impose a local vehicle registration fee to fund local transportation
projects.
Transportation benefit districts and fees
If you live in any of the following locations, you must pay an additional local
transportation benefit district fee when you renew your vehicle tabs:
District Fee Effective date Location Contact phone
(Tabs expiring on or after...) code
Burien No. 1 $10 February 1, 2011 17 -34 206 - 241 -4647
Des Moines $20 September 1, 2009 17 -09 206 - 870 -7586
Edmonds $20 September 1, 2009 31 -04 425- 771 -0260
Lake Forest Park $20 September 1, 2009 17 -17 206- 368 -5440
Lynnwood $20 July 1, 2011 31 -10 425 - 670 -5020
Olympia $20 October 1, 2009 34 -03 360 -570 -3727
Prosser $20 November 1, 2009 03 -03 509 - 786 -2332
Seattle $20 May 1, 2011 17 -26 206 - 233 -5005
Shoreline $20 February 1, 2010 17 -37 206 - 801 -2302
Snoqualmie $20 March 1, 2011 17 -28 425 - 888 -1555, Ext.
1135
City of Spokane $20 September 1, 2011 32 -10 509 - 625 -6255
111111
Vehicles subject to fees
• Passenger vehicles
• Trucks that weigh 6,000 pounds or less
• Motorcycles
• Commercial passenger vehicles and trucks that weigh 6,000 pounds or less
• Combination trucks that weigh 6,000 pounds or less
• Tow trucks
• House moving dollies
• Trucks used exclusively for hauling logs that weigh 6,000 pounds or less
• Taxicabs
• For -hire or stage vehicles with 6 seats or less
• For -hire or stage vehicles with 7 or more seats that weigh 6,000 pounds or less
• Private use trailers over 2,000 pounds
• Motorcycle trailers
• Travel trailers
• Fixed load vehicles that weigh 6,000 pounds or less
• Mobile homes licensed as vehicles
Exempt vehicles
• All farm vehicles
• Campers
• Off -road vehicles
• Snowmobiles
• Mopeds
• Personal use trailers with a single axle and less than 2,000 pounds scale weight
• Commercial trailers •
• Combination trailers
• Trailers used exclusively for hauling logs
http:// www. dol. wa. gov/ vehicleregistration /localfees.html Page 1 of 2
WA State Licensing: Local transportation benefit district fees 7/12/11 8:48 AM
• Horseless carriage, collector, or restored -plate vehicles
• Converter gear
• • Government vehicles
• Private school vehicles
• Vehicles properly registered to disabled American veterans
How a transportation benefit district works
Once a local transportation benefit district is set up, the district's board of directors
may vote to charge a local vehicle licensing fee due when a vehicle owner buys new
tabs.
• The transportation benefit district board has the authority to impose a fee of up to
$20 per vehicle without voter approval.
• A transportation benefit district may impose a vehicle renewal fee of up to $100 per
vehicle or seek other sources of funding if approved by voters.
Related laws
• RCW: 36.73: Transportation benefit districts
• RCW 82.80.140: Vehicle fee — Transportation benefit district — Exemptions
CONTACT US ABOUT US DO MORE ONLINE DRIVER GUIDE STAY CONNECTED
Office locations What we do Renew your tabs English
Contact us Rulemaking activity Replace your license or ID card
News center Report the sale of vehicle
•P ' Reports and data Check the status of a driver license
Jobs Get a form
...more ...more
•
http: / /www.dol.wa.gov/ vehicleregistration /localfees.html Page 2 of 2
Transportation Benefit District 7/12/11 8:50 AM
Home 1 News Room 1 SiteMap I Help
J
Site Search
Go
» »
Printer- friendly
Transportation Benefit District
- -- > Transportation Benefit
District
12 Ave Sidewalk • Kirkland Considers Reliable Transportation
114 Ave NE & NE 85 St Improvement Revenue Source
Intersection ..
•
116 Ave NE Non-Motorized
„ ` • Preserving Roadway System
Billy Creek Infrastructure " ■■
Improvements \i • Maintaining City Infrastructure
Central Way 6th St S • Reducing Costly Repairs
Improvements
Central Way Pedestrian Background
Enhancements City's Street Division
Elementary School Walk Route
Enhancements annexation Seattle council takes
Emergency Sewer Program Step to raise parkin
E
car -tab taxes0
Getting Around Regionally 2010 Kirkland citizen opinion survey
Kirkland Transit Center Public Input Process
Timeline, How will the
NE 68 St & 108 Ave NE City use your input,
Improvements
when will a decision be
NE 85 St Improvements made (PDF coming
NE 100 St Sidewalk
soon)
NE 120 St Extension June 15, 2010 Staff
Park Lane Enhancements
Report:
Transportation
Pavement Marking Program Benefit District
Public Feedback June 15, 2010 Staff
Presentation and
Public Works Capital - See details Council
Improvement Projects Map deliberation (video)
Street Preservation Program - Jump to 10.b
February 17, 2009
Staff Report: 2008
State of the Streets
February 17, 2009
Staff Presentation and
Council deliberation
(video) Jump to 11.b
0� I
Dr 1A/ /ZG 7Z \•
http: / /www.kirklandwa.gov/ depart/Public_Works /Capital_ Improvements/ Transportation _Benefit_District.htm Page 1 of 3
Transportation Benefit District 7/12/11 8:50 AM
r■-l..vv i /.
Existing Program Transportation Benefit
preservation techniques Districts
Association of
Street Preservation Program Washington Cities
Capital Improvement Program (AWC)
O'
Street Preservation Purchasing Power Municipal Research
and Services Center of
Washington CMRSC)
O+
Kirkland's Pavement Condition Scores Drop
Pavement Management System
Ray Steiger
Interim Public Works
Director
425 - 587 -3833
Caring for your
infrastructure to keep
Kirkland healthy, safe
2008 State of the Streets and vibrant.
•
rating process
Need for Sustainable Road Maintenance Funding
•
http: / /www.kirklandwa.gov/ depart /Public_ Works /Capital_ Improvements/ Transportation _Benefit_District.htm Page 2 of 3
Transportation Benefit District 7/12/11 8:50 AM
State Recognizes Need to Fund Local
• Transportation Projects
authority to create a
local Transportation Benefit District
• RCW 36.734
Home I Community I Business 1 Visitors 1 Departments 1 City Services 1 City Government I Contact Us I Council I Employment I Events
Calendar I KirklandPermits.net I KirklandParks_ net I Parks & Community Services 1 ExoloreKirkland.com KirklandFirst.orq
123 Fifth Avenue Kirkland, Washington 98033 * 425 - 587 -3000 * TTY/TTD 425 - 587 -3111
Email: webmaster(dkirkl,. * Please read our Disclaimer, Privacy Notice and Linking Policy
• Copyright 2006 - 2011 City of Kirkland
http: / /www.kirklandwa.gov/ depart/Public_Works /Capital_ Improvements/ Transportation _Benefit_District.htm Page 3 of 3
• Options for City of Yakima Street Preservation
• Options within existing revenues:
o Priority of Government
• Determine dollar amount to be allocated to street preservation and
do the percentage breakdown from all categories to realize that
dollar amount.
o Parks
• Determine dollar amount to be allocated to street preservation and
draw it entirely out of Parks budget.
o Concessions from labor
• Deferred Compensation
• Negotiate with all labor groups who are receiving deferred
compensation as a part of their benefit package the end of
that benefit and redirect those dollars to street preservation.
• Across the board concession by labor of 4% (7.5 %)
• The two percentages represent that which would come from
entire city labor force verses to that which would come
from labor groups that are part of general fund.
o Current Management Strategy
•
• REET 2 dollars are currently servicing debt with no dollars to
direct towards street preservation. This year there will be no chip
sealing which is an important maintenance strategy. And there has
not been a LID in the city of Yakima in the last four years, which
is part of the current strategy to improve streets.
• Options with new revenue source:
o Street Bond
• $20 Million
• $25 Million
• $30 Million
o $20 Vehicle License Fee
o In Lieu Tax on Public Utilities
o Combination of $20 Vehicle License Fee and In Lieu Tax on Public
Utilities
• The only option that provides needed revenues.
•
Sources of Revenue Available to the City of Yakima- Transportation Purposes
[This chart presents some options provided by existing state law.
Nu recommendation pre or con or prioritization is intended to be suggested by inclusion of or sequence of items in this chart.]
REVENUE PURPOSES AUTHORIZED POTENTIAL YIELD
OPTION
AUTHORITY LIMITATIONS HOW ESTABLISHED
[2010 estimate]
,
Non -voted debt WA Coast.,
Gen
< 1.5% Total Art 8 Sec General Government Capital 553,0170,000
Assessed Value (AV) RCW 3936.020 Revenue must be identified /obligated Bond Ordinance Passed by City Council [unused debt capacity)
within City Ch. 39.46 RCW to pay debt so►icRCW
y
Voted Debt- General WA Consl., General Government Capital S52000,000
Purposes— Total City Art 8 Sec 6
Debt <2.5: Total 60; hlajarity Election [unused debt capacily— in
Assessed Value RCW 39.36.020 Debt Service supported by excess General Obligation Bonds addition to non-voted
within City Ch. 39.46 RC IV property tax levy capacity listed above)
General Government -2 options, both Simple Majority Election 50.10 /thousand raises
Property Tax —Levy
RCW 84.55.050 can bemulti -year 5538,000 annually
Lid Lift (up to 6 yrs) In Sept. (primary) or Nov. (general)
RCW RC 8452.043 Cannot exceed Statutory maximum levy election 510 /}z on S100,000 AV
rate (currently 53.10 /thousand)
Property Tax — Excess General Government J $0.10 /thousand raises
Levy (one year)
RO>.V 8932.052 60% Majority Election 5538,000 annually
Can exceed Statutory Maximum rate for
the year of the excess levy S10 /yr on $100,000 AV
Local Business.uid S3,000,000 annually
Occupation Tax Ordinance passed by City Council [51,500,000 per well .1 %J
Tax < 0.2% of gross RCW 35.21.710 General Government
receipts Subject to Referendum (needs 5200,000 in new
admin cost for collection)
.___
Tax < 6.0% on Private
Utilities, i.e. RCW 35.21.870 Ordinance by City Council to Remove 5580,000 annually (affects
Electricit , Teie hone 5.911(190- 060 YA1C General Government primarily larger mfg.
y P S4,000 /customer /mo.lid businesses)
Natural Gas
3 : 1 9 iv
III 1.oF 4
.,
R AUTHORITY HOW AUTHORIZ • HOW ESTABLISHED POTENTIAL OD
OPTION LIMITATIONS 12010 estimate]
Tax > 6.0% on Private
Utilities , i.e. RCW 35.21.870 Simple Majority Election $1,300,000 annually
Electricity, Telephone 5.50.030- 060 YMC Government to exceed 6% per each 1 1.
Natural Gas
Tax > 6.0X on Cable Cable Rate is not restricted. d, but must not be Ordinance passed by City Council
TV (rate currently at Communications 5130,1100 annually
6 ) Policy Act of 1984 "unduly discriminatory against cable (but would recommend only if voters r each 1
5_50.065 YZV1C operators and subscribers. approve other utility taxes >6%)
In Lieu Tax on Public General Government
Utilities, Le.Refuse, Ch. 7.64 YMC 5325.000 annually
Water, Wastewater (No ca in RCt Current rates -14S Water and Ordinances Passed by City Council o
p Wastewater, 9% Refuse per each 1
(Parks now receives 3.5%)
Admissions Tax 5420,000 annually
RCW 3521.280 General Government Ordinance Passed by City Council (estimate based on similar
Max 5% cities)
Additional Sale Tax- RCW 82.14.045 "Public Purposes
Transportation" Purpos
Transit Simple Majority Election
51,465,000 annually per
up to 09% 3.89.010 YMC each additional (1.1 X
(addl 0.6%)
(excludes street maintenance)
County Motor
Vehicle and Special Transportation Purposes Approval of county legislative body
Fuel Tax RCW 82.80.010 and a simple majority of the registered Uncertain
10% of state rate voters
(2.84 /ga1.)
Transportation Ordinance Pam by City Council (up
Benefit District -- RCW 36.73 & Transportation Purpexses to 520 per vehicle) 51,007,000 annually
Vehicle License Fee 82.80.140 including streets (520 /Vehicle)
qua ied vehicle) Simple Majority Election- 520 -5100
Cie new rim entm clue !yIe/2010 319 PM
Page2of4
REVENUE AUTHORITY PURPOSES AUTHORIZED HOW ESTABLISHED POTENTIAL YIELD
OPTION LIMITATIONS [2010 estimate]
Transportation Simple Majority Election S2•930,0U0 annually
RCW 36.73 & Transportation Purposes
Benefit District – 82.14.0455 including streets Levied for 10 years- renewable for (51,465,000 per each
Sales Tax (up to another 10 years additional 0.1 :)
0.2 %) – - -- — _ –
Transportation Purposes Ordinance passed by City Council
Commercial Parking RCW 82.80.030 Uncertain
Tax (RCW has no cap on tax rate, and allows
various ways to assess tax) Subject to Referendum
Street Utility-(up to
52 per employee or RCW 82.80.050 Street Capital and Maintenance. Ordinance passed by City Council Uncertain if available
residential unit)
Local improvements including streets
and alleys
Local Improvement special by effected Landowners, Can only be determined in
Districts (Lips) Ch. 35.43 "...levy and collect spal asscssmenls p� Pry
on property specially benefited thereby Enacted by City Council relation to s tfic is
to pay the whole or any part of the
expense" RCW 35.43.010
Reimbursement Street projects which the owners elect to Ordinance Passed by City Council that
Contracts For Street. install as a result of ordinances that requires certain projects as a Cdn only be determined in
CIL Road, And Highway require the projects as o pnerc'quisite to prerequisite to further property relation to specific projects
Projects further property development development
5.52 YMC Fees increased in 1988 for Sundome Debt Currently sliding scale
Business Licensee Fee
Service. (about 30% currently obligated Ordinance Passed by City Council based an employee count –
inrneasee RCW 35.22.280 (32) fort his purpose) 10% ■ 552,000
(no cap in RCN
__.
(lene a chart 414/20103:19PS!
III
of 4
RE E AUTHORITY PURPOSES AUTHORI HOW ESTABLISHED POTENTELD
O N LIMITATIONS [2010 e s e]
IMPACT FEES: Note: Cities are authorized to require impact fees to pay for improvements necessitated by new development-Yakima does not impose.
Fire, Parks, Schools, Street Capital
Projects
Impact Fees 82.02.050 .090 .. ,cities ...that plan under RCW Imposed upon development as a Can only be determined in
36.70A.040 are authorized to impose condition of development approval relation to specific projects
impact fees on development activity as
part of the financing for public facilities"
Mitigate off -site transportation impacts
that are a direct result of proposed Generally: requires a plan adopted
development under ch. 39.92
Transportation Ch. 39.92 Provide a portion of the funding for Can only be determined in
Impact Fee reasonable and necessary off -site Specifically: monetary charge imposed relation to specific projects
transportation improvements to solve the on new development for the
cumulative impacts of planned growth authorized purposes
and development in the plan area
Cje new revenue chart 8/17/2010 11:06 AM
Page 4 of 4
• •
•
Street Network Condition
40%
35.8%
30% - -
co
L
21.2%
p 20% - - - - - - -- -
re
o 14.7%
0
10% 9.2% 9.1% 9.0%
1 1.0%
0% 4-----J —J II
❑ Failed • Very Poor ❑ Poor ❑ Fair i Good ❑ Very Good • Excellent
PCI By Classification
100 -
90
80 75.55
_ 70 _ 67 05 - _ 68.77 --
U -411111111.1111F-91r
O.
60 58.45
- a 50
a>
. 0 ) 40
30
20
10
p
❑ Principal Arterial IN Minor Arterial ❑ Collector ❑ Local
•
• •
• •
• it
rI - TT �fSLy + . f
w 1* ; • r r - wit a ✓ * 1 '
- w
j s Yep
1 4 ' ''.. ' 1 '-- Ir'''" ;;;41:1"%ai4S, ' 1 * t : i ''''' ' 44- •id. 41t4:-.4141. " ' ,
If
t "It • AL:. It, st• 44 r ,. 4 c., • . ir.
.... ,,, ,.,, , Jr , C
k i l l.. 4 lir
;kg -.
. .. ( 0
ik 4 , ,, 0
1.
a e � , ... - -
0
0 •'\ * /
, ♦%
•
• '.....NalISIN i
4
r i 1
r m
r ... / ...... \,. :, ,
mi . ".!° =.fx ; '�
. , tv .., : ' 3- 0 IN . ■ V In '
1 ,,, a 6 111 111 .' t•
•
: !!!! •••••••.1114 00
�r
• •;f� b y �'
■
tit 1 il ., $ „. , 1 ..41 1.
WWTPProjects 8 i
Name
Q IW - Industrial Waste Anaereblc Process = $6,000,000 :tfi
DRYER - Biosolids Class A Dryer = $2,300,000
STRUVITE - Struvite Reactor = $700,000
GRS - Grease Receiving Station = $400,000
BOILERS - 2 New Boilers = $2,000,000 "'�•'
DIST - Up Date Electrical Power Distribution = $1,700,000
PWR p ,
EXECUTIVE SESSION
JUNE 21, 2011
1. 6/16/11 Memorandum from City Manager re: Labor Negotiations Update
11111
fi)
MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Yakima City Council
FROM: Dick Zais, City Manager .
SUBJECT: Labor Negotiations Update
DATE: June 16, 2011
This memorandum is submitted as a recommendation by the Council Budget Committee.
The City will soon have (15) separate Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs), with four (4)
different Unions, representing a majority of the City's 750 employees. Administering and
negotiating these agreements requires considerable time, expertise and attention to detail.
The four (4) units (Firefighters, Battalion Chiefs, Dispatchers and Dispatch Supervisor and 911 -
Calltakers) represented by the International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) and the
Correction Sergeants represented by Teamsters Local #760 all agreed to a 3% cut in the City's
® contribution to their deferred compensation and a zero percent Cost Of Living Adjustment
(COLA) for 2011. The 3% contribution is to be restored to all five (5) units 1/1/2012.
Negotiations with the numerous labor units are in varying stages. The purpose of this
memorandum is to provide you with information to assist you as the city moves forward with
negotiations for the various units.
Status of Collective Bargaining Units — A summary of the status of the fifteen (15) bargaining
agreements for 2011 and 2012.
2011 Salary Summary Report — This document shows the value of 1% of salary and economic
benefits for each of the bargaining units.
Deferred Compensation Report — This document was previously provided in January 2011 and
summaries annual employer paid deferred compensation for 2008 — 2011.
Medical and Dental Costs — A summary of the 2011 medical and dental costs and premiums for
the major employee groups.
Overtime and Special pay Expenditures — This document is a list of the overtime and special
pay expenditures for each division for 2008 — 2011.
We look forward to discussing this information in greater detail at your June 21, Executive
• Session and your direction related to specific bargaining guidelines for all 2012 agreements.
FOR COUNCIL INFO ONLY
_C CCC ✓ES
DATE 417-41i/
Status of Collective Bargaining Units — 14 & 1 pending •
AFSCME Municipal — Expires Dec 31, 2011 — not currently bargaining
AFSCME Transit — Expires Dec 31, 2012 — currently open for wages & medical premiums
overdue for 2011 and will be open for 2012
All 4 IAFF units below are operating on contracts expired December 31, 2010
* *The addendum signed January 7, 2011 reducing deferred compensation contributions by 3%
for all 4 of these groups will become null and void effective 11:59 December 31, 2011 and the
3% restored for 2012.
We are currently in active negotiations with all 4 groups for 2011 contracts
International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) — LEOFF employees — Dec 2010
Battalion Chief's — LEOFF employees — Dec 2010
911 Calltakers — PERS employees — Dec 2010
Public Safety Dispatchers — PERS employees — Dec 2010
Yakima Police Patrolmans Association (YPPA) — Expires Dec 31, 2011 — not currently bargaining
Yakima Police Management Unit (Capt & Lt's) — Expires Dec 31, 2012 — not bargaining this yea.
Teamsters Units
Fire Deputy Chief's — LEOFF employees — Dec 31, 2011 — request for bargaining just
received
Public Works Supervisors — Dec 31, 2012 — not bargaining this year — Wages
determined by Municipal Code
Public Works Division Managers Dec 31, 2012 — not bargaining this year — Wages
determined by Municipal Code
Corrections Sergeants — Dec 31, 2012 — not bargaining this year — Wages
determined by Municipal Code
* *Note - deferred compensation contributions of 3% restored for 2012.
New Teamsters Units: (contracts have not been bargained)
Non— Commissioned Police Department Supervisors — 3 members - Wages will be determined by
Municipal Code
Teamsters Administration — PERC Hearing re: representation scheduled for 06/09/11 — potential 1
members — Wages will be determined by Municipal Code
•
CITY OF YAKIMA - SUMMARY
III YEAR 2011 - ARY . .
.
•
�,1'. : -,i: _ _ ..yl„,.. f..'„51:P,y':4:' •,^-h•^E i!m.,:. ,,,,,: „N^,::'2av ,,:•, ,ym.,.n
„ Iva.:
i
M:
n.m,
urrv•:
I I
.; �.
tlB
1 . J ,- .. •, . .. Y -.
fit ...,•..::;:
. - ., i ... ...: ::.. ,::::... • is -. .. i,, ._ - .••! �
' 'rr
, a n da t edBene fifs_:: ; .... „ . _
ANNUALIZED MEDICAL DENTAL LIFE
•
GROUP POSITIONS BASE SALARY DEF.COMP LONGEVITY INS IND.INS &
INS INS FICA RETIREMENT UNEMP. TOTAL
BASE % INCREASE 1/01/11 0.00% 3%
AFSCME 287 - POSITIONS 12,726,534.67 380,860.28 357,937.48 2,277,473.94 289,396.48 43,452.75 1,012,207.78 718,790.26 511,463.13 18,318,116.77
BASE % INCREASE 1/01/11 0.00% 3% 1% = 183,181.17
TRANSIT 52 - POSITIONS 1,892,237.61 56699.75 60,335.90 405,918.48 52,740.48 11,843.52 151,916.37 106,692.98 135,453.21 2,873,838.30
BASE % INCREASE 1/01/11 0.00% 4.50 /° ° 1 % = 28,738.38
POLICE 130 - POSITIONS 1 437,218.14 434,101.70 1,534,52t84 131,851.20 31,574.40 143,810.30 566,797.60 247,657.99 13,555,728.07 '
1%
BASE % INCREASE 1/01/11 0.00% 1 % = 135,557.28
FIRE -LEOFF 75 - POSITIONS 5,452,250.10 54,633.50 223,076.97 803,477.40 76,068.00 4,554.00 : 73,863.16 295,865.96 ' 157,757.02 7,141,546.11
BASE % INCREASE 1/01/11 0.00% ' 0% 1 % = 71,415.46
FIRE - DISPAT 17 - POSITIONS 871,668.36 0.00 38,445.78 155,431.32 17,242.08 1,032.24 69,166.34 48,326.78 • 9,609.25 1,210,922.15 ,
BASE % INCREASE 1101/11 0.00% 0%
:1% = 12,109.22
•
FIRE -PERS 17 - POSITIONS 798,859.31 0.00 • 32,98111 149,903.16 17,242.08 1,032.24 63,162.21 44,171.00 16,561.50 1,123,914.61
BASE % INCREASE 1/01/11 0.00% 3% 1 % = 11,239.15
MANAGEMENT 41 - POSITIONS 3,356,985.22 100,677.61 161,570.42 317,325.18 46,789.68 8,742.41 !: 251,480.94 197,487.82 29,983.62 4,471,042.90
BASE % INCREASE 1/01/11 0.00% 3%
1 % = 44,710.43
SUPERVISOR 40 - POSITIONS 2,878,895.73 85,321.06 155,162.69 320,496.37 48,846.76 7,389.63 235,251.94 159,954.69 -. 49,615.95 3,940,934.82
BASE % INCREASE 1/01/11 0.00% 3%
1 % = 39,409.35
CONFIDENTIAL 30 - POSITIONS 1,702,351.52 50,868.49 59,695.59 218,100.51 31,012.02 4,432.73 137,919.53 96,266.02 17,715.94 2,318,362.35
1% = 23,183.62
BASE % INCREASE 1/01111 0.00% 3%
YAK DIV. MAN 5 - POSITIONS 436,313.28 13;124.40 11,708.52 45,579.00 5,582.40 1,137.12 35,277.76 24,486.96 3,561.46 576,770.90
BASE % INCREASE 1101111 0,00% 3%
• 0.001% = 5,767.71 •
YAK DIV SUP 11 - POSITIONS 705,654.12 21,182.04 36,245.95 90,058.56 12,262.80 1,959.72 57,976.12 40,519.93 19,132.06. 984,991.30
BASE % INCREASE 1/01/11.0.00% 0%
•
1 %= • 9,849.91
CORR SERGT 3 - POSITIONS 194,093.64 0.00 ' 8,963.04 - 20,918.88 2,708.88 504.00 15,886.04 16,395.60 1,878.96 261,349.04
1% = 2,613.49
6/13/2011 • Page 1
CITY OF YAKIMA - SUMMARY
Y EAR 2011 - SALARY
v:
�'4 1
7 =rr:•
Yf»
't. " F .t' A 3 ° h ft iK:.. �.ti,a . :V "V �`- I c�;f .
.gbFl �.r .Y ..
,'.v ,.d.:+n3:.,cfi.r.J . :•r�ie�':ii:1,i,Ta :.�A �� c�
�,i J r7, i,47, ?Alit _ L5 t,, i , .; + ' ..,., 1 � �i .... :� '.
,...,...._ .. .. ,.,. ,, Bar ame i nefits ., : bSM. f?sr ^: iiF Cr} .;> �,..1 : @i I _. . 5
:r•: g,.... ...,,, .,,. .,.. z.,, ++ :;..:,,, ±; c „, •, r a .... 1 • ANNUALIZED Mand Be nefits ..
MEDICAL DENTAL LIFE IND.INS &
GROUP POSITIONS BASE SALARY DEF.COMP LONGEVITY INS INS INS
FICA RETIREMENT . UNEMP. TOTAL
BASE % INCREASE 1/01/11 2.50%
BASE % INCREASE 7/01/11 2.00% 3.50%
PL CAPT & LT 7 - POSITIONS 715,038.36 25,042.60 64,513.14 67,054.68 7,099.68 1,872.42 4,872.67 42,160.62 14,248.80 941,902.97 :
1% = 9,419.03
BASE % INCREASE 1/01/11 0.00% 3%
DEP FIRE CHF 2 - POSITIONS 209,826.24 6,281.52 18,369.12 21,940.80 2,028.48 546.72 1,638.72 6,248.64 2;347.52 269,227.76
•
11/4 = 2,692.28
BASE % INCREASE 1/01/11 0.00% 0%
FIRE BATT CHF 3 - POSITIONS 294,044.40 0.00 26,382.96 28,737.72 3,042.72 741.60 1,478.34 16,790.52 6,729.54 377,947.80
720 - BUDGETED POSITIONS 1% = 3,779.48
TOTAL SUMMARY 42,262,947.46 1,231,909.39 1,689,492.37 6,456,937.84 743,913.74 120,815.50 -,: 2,255,908.22 2,380,955.38 1,223,715.95 58,366,595.85
1% = l 583,665.96
410 410
ID
,
6/13/2011
Page 2
•
•
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: January 20, 2011
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Cindy Epperson, Deputy Director - Acct /Bud
RE: Deferred Compensation
At the January 18, 2011 City Council meeting, Councilmember Dave Edler requested
information on what the City pays out annually for Deferred Compensation for its
employees.
The following is a chart of deferred compensation included in the budget from 2008
through 2011:
• # Permanent
Year Positions Def. Comp. Notes
2008 749 $1,078,582 AFSCME started a DC program with 1% at
1/1/08; 1% at 1/1/09; and 1% at 7/1/09
2009 751 1,411,138 YPPA increased from 4% to 4.5% on 7/1/08
2010 737 1,491,440
2011 714 1,248,617 IAFF reduced by 3% for 2011 only
•
City of Yakima
Medical and Dental Insurance Cost Summary - -Major Employee Groups
Effective 1/1/11
1/1/11 Total 1/1/11 City
Employee 1/1/11 Employee Percent of
Share of Share of Total
Family Premium 'Total Em to ee Employee`s Share
Costs for Employee Employee & of Total Employee
Enlplo� ee Group & Family Family
I\Iedical and Dental Premium Costs Family
Premium Costs Premium Costs
•
.i FSCAIE (Emp- ∎e Dep.) $1,190.13 /m° $ 882.79 /n,o
$307.34/mo 25.82' ,,
A FSGItE Transit (Emp. & Dep -) $1,190.13 /mo
$ 552.79/m° $307.34/mo
25.52`, %u
•
I.1FF (Firefighters)
•
a) LEOFF I (Emp. & Dep.) $1,421.99/mo '
a ) LEOFF f1 (Enip. Dep.) $1,_51.99 /mo $140.00 /mo
$1,190.13/mo $1,050.13/mo 9.76%
$140.00 /m° 11.76`S0
IAFF (Battalion Chiefs)
a) LEOFF I (E 8` mp. Dep.)
a ) LEOFF 11 (Emp. & Dep.) $1,421.99/mo $1,114.65/mo
$1,190.13 / mo $307.34/ m° 21 -61f,
$ 88_ 79/m° - $307.34/mo 75.82%
I <9FF (non fire suppression)
•
a) Fire PEPS (Emp. Dep.)
h) Communications (Em g De $1,190.13 /mo $ 1,036.13/mo
p p.) $1,190.13/mo $ 1
12.94%
$154.00/mo 12.94
,036.13/m° $154.00/mo
2'PPA (Police Officer /Sgt)
a) LEOFF I (Emp. & Dep.)
a ) LEOFF It (Emp. Dep.) $ - $1,329.15/mo
$1,190.13/mo $ 92.4/mo 6.53%
$1,09729/m° $ 92.84/mo
S0' %0
City Management '
a) �[gmt., Supv., Cont. (Emp Dep.) $1 566.72/mo
$1,137.54/m° $429.18/mo 2— „ '
Teamsters =760 (Police Captains Lieutenants) / Ja
a) LEOFF I (Emp. & De
b) LEOFF II (Emp. & Dep.) $1,421.99/nlo $1,114.65/mo
$1,190.13/mo $ $52 $307.34/ mo 2.62,0
.79/ 1110 $307.34/mo ?5 ,;
-52,x,
Teamsters #760 (Deputy Fire Chiefs)
a) LEOFF I (Emp. & Dep.) $1,421.99/mo
$1,_05.09 /m° $216.90/
V) LEOFF II (Emp. & Dep.) no 15.25%
$1,190.13/mo $ 973.23/mo
•
0
4110 x /17%11
Teamsters .: ublic Works Divisio111\Ianajers) • •
Employee a ependent
$1,566.72/mo $1,137.54/mo
Teamsters , -760 (Public "Works Supervisors)
Employee and Dependent $1,566.72/ $1,137.54/ • $429.18/ 1110 27.19 o
•
•
•
Note: (1) PERC has recognized a new a
recognized group, Police non mnunissioned supervisors; contract to be negotiated. Affected personnel are currently in the management group.
(2) PERC has recently received a petition to form a new 14 member group which potentially includes the Human Resources Specialists, Human Resource Assistant an
some finance personnel. , and
•
•
•
Med Charts (Annual)
3/17/11
•
•
•
City of Yakima
2008 to 2011 Special Pay #130
2008 2009 2010 2011 YTD •
•
Fund/Department Actual Actual Actual Budget 05/31/2011
012 City Manager - - - - 42
015 Financial Services - - 63 135 -
017 Legal 720 1,440 810 810 338
018 Municipal Court 1,115 2,081 1,440 1,440 600
021 Environmental Planning 360 828 958 958 606
• 022 Code Administration 900 1,008 198 187 58
031 Police 253,196 336,805 • 336,063 362,940 170,859
032 Fire 56,041 63,685 63,631 62,792 40,158
041 Engineering 180 144 122 122 40
051 City Hall Maintenance 508 437 86 406 28
052 Information Systems 18,739 18,779 13,725 19,000 4,692
054 Utility Services 720 720 357 765 564
General Fund Total 332,479 425,927 417,454 449,555 217,983
123 Economic Development 18 108 86 86 30
124 Community Development 792 1,692 2,149 1,440 1,093
125 Community Relations - - - - 24
131 Parks & Recreation 2,306 2,543 2,502 2,947 1,965 0
141 Street & Traffic Operations 52,395 46,876 41,354 38,149 22,943
150 Emergency Services 7,203 5,568 5,569 5,621 6,503
151 Public Safety Comm 1,350 2,790 2,820 2,790 1,523
152 Police Grant - - 1,600 4,433 6,882
441 Stormwater Operating - 533 1,903 2,000 1,411
462 Transit 1,440. 2,880 2,460 2,160 1,247
473 Wastewater Operating 19,449 6,653 5,108 7,396 1,827
474 Water Operating 13,090 14,345 15,134 15,202 7,590
475 Irrigation Operating 6,129 6,621 6,673 6,972 2,119
515 Risk Management - - 630 630 263
551 Equipment Rental 1,106 400 362 - • 506
560 Public Works Admin 360 180 - - -
** *City Total * ** 438,116 517,115 505,802 539,381 273,909
•
•
•
•
erp 6/14/2011 4:03 PM
•
City of Yakima •
ID 2008 to 2011 Overtime #120
2008 2009 2010 • 2011 YTD
Fund/Department Actual Actual Actual Budget 05/31/2011
012 City Manager - - - 1,000
014 Records - 5,296 1,485 ' 721 2,550 -
015 Financial Services 6,577 7,200 7,848 7,500 3,822
016 Human Resources 363 59 - 2,000 -
017 Legal 10,900 2,505 - 4,000 -
018 Municipal Court 56,864 52,772 24,870 27,500 4,647
021 Environmental Planning - 324 500 ' -
022 Code Administration 15,660 16,541 9,800 6,000 -
031 Police 885,763 1,176,999 1,090,832. 897,000 425,781
032 Fire 312,628 411,389 364,325 413,000 97,480
041 Engineering 10,669 2,875 453 1,000 -
051 City Hall Maintenance 2,198 1,631 2,384 2,500 210
052 Information Systems 15,685 9,349 13,243 10,250 8,292
054 Utility Services 68 396 9,183 1,000 2,555
General Fund Total 1,322,671 1,683,201 1,523,983 1,375,800 542,787
0. 124 Community Development 27 - 4 1,100 -
•
125 Community Relations 600 474 252 1,000
131 Parks & Recreation 12,086 11,017 16,367 13,100 3,776
141 Street & Traffic Operations 67,236 67,050 87,268 62,150 11,708 _
144 Cemetery 3,116 2,737 2,539 3,500 2,147
150 Emergency Services 36,153 48,585 44,471 47,000 11,404
151 Public Safety Comm 148,146 121,507 141,152 89,000 49,197 .
152 Police Grant - - 93,148 183,200 45,475
441 Stormwater Operating 1,453 520 864 1,500 256
462 Transit 71,482 53,387 91,990 75,500 47,737
471 Refuse 29,434 34,992 37,367 36,700 6,375
473 Wastewater Operating 68,212 60,204 69,142 80,100 28,504
474 Water Operating 76,678 75,838 58,485 70,000 31,780
475 Irrigation Operating 21,020 16,969 15,573 20,000 4,981
•
512 Unemployment Compensation 29 25 - 100 -
513 Employees Health Benefit 163 42 - 1,000 -
514 Workers' Compensation 1,072 42 - 500 -
515 Risk Management 1,097 453 - 2,000 -
551 Equipment Rental 12,567 8,000 9,922 8,500 4,061
560 Public Works Admin 14,494 19,643 10,369 13,500 9,406
** *City Total* ** 1,887,736 2,204,684 2,202,896 2,085,250 799,593
0
s .
E 544."4 .,w.. 9, f,.� ` P
5 fP
g l e
L
NI
1
�...a `
0 ,,„..... �^ 1191 ,
r N
9 \ / .
@ . 8mm14w14.r1 q ®n, .. a.wn ...no n, 9
s, i @ F
3 , „.„„, � @ n , F , rare, 1 9 y m , oaw 5 r \rMV�
! 9 1.n I i r e 4.
„149, 1.49 g 1 ., 1w.. 191.. g 1,
.
1,..44» 1xw. re ,n 9 g s
., ,s "' ^" s, u "u+° 19 SUS.
u�...r 3 3
� v °'. in.. or,w.vn nr.u�
15.44 { ` °
� °� 1 .
. . E 54 e w . s .ur: Y 9x949. 49„49., 33 P, y, i.
,,,, _*_ ° �„p \4434.3 6 6 -: °' _' '
c ,..n w,' F36
9w « £F a y 55 urn p j ' 1w.. � $ > > s E '?
VII t g 4 C .. TM s } .n,. ` g u nr14 9 0, 1 .e•�'� .x rr,...rr",.�. g
•oa` " "°' ° x1 e� go .49.49, �°� i.......-...... ' .9
J¢p " \ ° "• :MI"- • 141..x11, ,m, iL 31. r"s1. ° , 'a It \
S 919 NT$ wn 4.175 •
: � : { {{ . 9 4 w! � °` a 9 " „ 91 . ,., "ax { 049494
1j " 3 � • wt' • • " " . Y ,1414. an 011. 011. . 4
,,v, CM.
'�' • 141 4. .1w..
,. 655.445 oe�x„ • q a "n .w �,, .174 _ F .49.x..1 $ yy g a,,. s yM"R S
el
�^ a "4 "� s 49...1x4 3an•uiw we, anw„ •x31\
i y 14w. ° ° „16 F .a., 14
, .49 w,a
an 9193 ..1x49, 'fir
x. �.., p ,141 . Y 93
..3
MMM ..49",
3 , re r .t A i n F n .' >* q e ' . 449.1 :, ° " " , . °n. e s
915.1 .1490 V ! i ^ ' "� M ` S .r.. i F
� � a1r 4 _ 3 .w n . ' n n \ ` MY.. � 4 a1w14r.
3n , 5554, SPIV
/ 1 G 4 i ,9,91 r. 3 ne4, w
333
b 3•.r, 9 "ye .
k >n149. r},. . i arxl. 9 I
.xrwn. ' .e I a
.,
SFr.. r °
, � c € °1 1„ 1 .. x149 b " \ •
Jam r 1 °n \ .6 seg. ° c , 49
g b 199 1 x - n. .,.. . S 'nrx \491..3 4 1/4515/45
494C 5..144 �, 14.a.. " 1 w � , • �., ,
Y • 3
e145 X 3,4939.3
00 i
cl ��IA! i `" 7 40 „ 549x„ 44049x,55. in mists le 45, CD t
'41.P are 345519 .. "1, 4 ; 1�."'" 1 .rx�n ••''' 6141 r _'�" ° x 55 " mx�. .�,,,,
CO
M . 34xax 3,x14 �, a1x5s45 ' J J . ;\ : , : :: J 34. 5531 g-
�1x,sx 340. »�. x14 ".551. � �.. °. .:a: ° . c �
to ID
1 1.91
33. n l E .n 49x., 3° `
3491 ,. �. i r ; : .x 5915 i 491551 "a b '3 3 V; 8 = T
CD CO
6 491
• 5
5 _ ` g • w,, 341. in... @
W 6 N
mnm° 1 ? r W vuxu mxu x 119,3 5/3.141 1 g: ..,
�°��, Kx b " � „ 4.x1. 8 �, "..,�. �w, .
�� Q 3155"4 � e •9.x,1, ".yd so f
+ � 141,,.. f p 1 " . n 0091 @ � 6 >,. 049..4 ` � a .. °rm, o 1 5 N 1+..: � 459.3. a V
° a 8 ».',x, "x m,� ��. y
Amman . • _
CO • 0
p r b'� b mx,w. 1550491
14..x.." 945359 3.•x0551 . k ,
15553194 \
a ' � = x rem....
,5554 L. OS as
/ �� i f a re
141.,1 44 " >m .x ,1x1., 4\551, 6.14 e
�•"' .,4° 11 3,x.9 �, M =
,. ti 340 ,.x g ue
eS' m. i 14, 1 0 391 1 14 1 "xi n c
3
i
°
�
� .,1,m °w �.,,� ' �, �� � 3413 3x5 ,
°1"1, ., . 341x„
�� "� "401 >_ . . o .x3455,,. 3 x�. b 491x., ■ �� °
34x. s r� 1 n� i "
�.. «. �. t ..:; .n u 3.551,
, 53 5 1114 S
g t
-I i °
3 911 3, "1..i..gen 3155.,, 49911 b
» mu\
}
G 34x.1s �vx g -e•
a 4 I ., $ 3,x1„ "� m.1. N
�, 31.5504 y.,.x g q. ,nH"" y gig. K
i °1x,95 35.x.. ' $
M 147 55.,,494. 88 b .+.,1, +5 '� ,.w... O
v 141x.,.. x�" g 5 5 .9.x4914 4544,.. 141 i 14949551. Z e+1°" y "` F M
V E ,. ., # x., 8 9 ° i r gq
91 31 44 s„ W. "'� . x494991..,... g � ; � � 3. 91 199. Y 3 `.."149
' jf I I
,n "3 n @ R 31
.,91 v> ~n @ �
3 6.549, i 3.x4. w K • >. . � $ 49 4^ mn. a tt 3 C
/ .6 1"149,3..x.31, 3 n.+ ° w q p r�..r . r
@ 'x b 6
x555.." s mm g i 3,. g g 3. w. • } 3/9.41.3 145554.9 k Vs... 14. 49..
$ 1 / , .,49x.,51 9114. 3 ."•° • b n x a
§ 0 343.5 91 'n ° d t 1 ,404 II
.55.x\4 3 _ gy m 1 4 S @ 3nx491n 4994",°0° N r aarnn.w $54549 } 34 .u1 :� 3.1x491\ .111.433. x e l I xer km. if 349111
x,
@
g g. "" sb @ a a z i s a
liii x 3.91 .. 1„ 1 ' § x..9.f A
149,.,14 I'.'''''. 344x3, 3,49x1..
! 141.1., 3..551.1
Geex.n; I ...Goys m 1,
3115, xi3,.w,,, .~.,1, 3.49,49.. S55 isms
5511
0 „44�, ,1 x14 ..n 34 Two s
w1�. w
0 +
155 035.
•
e Street Maintenance Budget Scenarios
March 17, 2011
10 -Year Work Backlog
Date 1/3/2012 1/3/2013 1/3/2014 ' 1/3/2015 1/3/2016 1/3/2017 1/3/2018 1/3/2019 1/3/2020 1/3/2021 10 -Year Total
Preventive Funded $3,058,264.77 $4,113,250.67 $4,989,931.99 $4,851,640.45 $4,755,377.42 $2,236,500.20 $1,470,947.83 $654,214.18 $443,480.39 $328,388.25 $26,901,996.15
Global Funded $75,336.03 $8,408.03 $24,846.99 $17,907.24 $5,054.50 $0.00 $597,395.95 $277,441.54 $72,576.56 $213,532.11 $1,292,498.95
Major Under Critical Funded $48,592,929.25 $66,960,917.75 $66,058,589.86 $66,141,440.31 $35,441,020.95 $33,041,087.06 $12,306,868.26 $9,633,699.16 $2,977,858.49 $1,551,513.17 $342,705,924.26
Major Above Critical Funded $19,337,372.09 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $19,337,372.09
Total $71,063,902.15 $71,082,576.45 $71,073,368.84 $71,010,988.00 $40,201,452.87 $35,277,587.25 $14,375,212.03 $10,565,354.88 $3,493,915.44 $2,093,433.54 $390,237,791.45
70 PCI in 10 Years
Date 1/3/2012 1/3/2013 1/3/2014 1/3/2015 1/3/2016 1/3/2017 1/3/2018 1/3/2019 1/3/2020 1/3/2021 10 -Year Total
Preventive Funded $3,246,599.99 $4,112,255.11 $4,986,777.86 $4,834,986.74 $4,721,118.89 $2,182,096.51 $1,393,610.55 $550,902.65 $312,651.82 $160,064.16 $26,501,064.28
Global Funded $75,336.03 $8,408.03 $24,846.99 $17,907.24 $5,054.50 $0.00 $264,543.65 $113,356.63 $98,655.92 $105,985.45 $714,094.44
Major Under Critical Funded $0.00 $15,986,022.55 $16,659,952.91 $16,819,747.53 $16,942,347.47 $19,489,729.13 $20,003,390.88 $21,007,879.33 $21,260,433.83 $21,409,937.92 $169,579,441.55
Major Above Critical Funded $18,353,357.64 $1,566,015.30 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $19,919,372.94
Total $21,675,293.66 $21,672,701.00 $21,671,577.76 $21,672,641.51 $21,668,520.86 $21,671,825.64 $21,661,545.08 $21,672,138.62 $21,671,741.56 $21,675,987.53 $216,713,973.22
• Maintain Existing PCI
Date 1/3/2012 1/3/2013 1/3/2014 1/3/2015 1/3/2016 . 1/3/2017 1/3/2018 1/3/2019 1/3/2020 1/3/2021 10 -Year Total
Preventive Funded $4,547,523.82 $4,464,814.50 $4,985,580.67 $4,831,782.90 $4,714,908.20 $2,171,590.47 $1,377,966.73 $530,845.01 $283,710.27 $123,568.66 $28,032,291.23
Global Funded $75,336.03 $8,408.03 $24,846.99 $17,907.24 $5,054.50 $0.00 $123,841.61 $152,432.23 $87,180.63 $37,065.34 $532,072.60
Major Under Critical Funded $0.00 $0.00 $8,271,682.50 $11,401,751.14 $11,533,006.12 $14,083,048.86 $14,753,798.12 $15,565,375.55 $15,885,719.94 $16,087,102.22 $107,581,484.45
Major Above Critical Funded $11,634,236.33 $11,783,032.23 $2,976,319.75 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $26,393,588.31
Total $16,257,096.18 $16,256,254.77 $16,258,429.91 $16,251,441.28 $16,252,968.82 $16,254,639.32 $16,255,606.46 $16,248,652.79 $16,256,610.84 $16,247,736.22 $162,539,436.59
Existing Budget
Date 1/3/2012 1/3/2013 1/3/2014 1/3/2015 1/3/2016 1/3/2017 1/3/2018 1/3/2019 1/3/2020 1/3/2021 10 -Year Total
Preventive Funded $400,959.55 $675,882.14 $709,737.22 $745,205.72 $782,598.68 $821,695.63 $862,639.77 $291,322.97 $250,210.02 $66,315.46 $5,606,567.16
Global Funded $0.00 $59.33 $0.00 $87.43 $0.00 $0.00 $138.52 $40,970.01 $4,089.61 $1,176.50 $46,521.40
Major Under Critical Funded $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $15,243.11 $39,354.55 $0.00 $12,747.89 $62,753.56 $221,223.67 $231,435.53 $582,758.31
Major Above Critical Funded $146,263.06 $156,159.47 $163,068.14 $154,089.51 $141,978.00 $178,762.71 $180,154.43 $142,380.45 $0.00 $0.00 $1,262,855.77
Total $547,222.61 $832,100.94 $872,805.37 $914,625.77 $963,931.23 $1,000,458.34 $1,055,680.62 $537,426.99 $475,523.31 $298,927.49 $7,498,702.67
III