Council PKT 01-25-2003 Special - Retreat
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL RETREAT - --- DUMAS SAY CENTRE
SATURDAY, JANUARY 25,2003 8:30 a.m. - 3:00 p.m.
AGENDA
Retreat Objectives:
. Share information and perspectives on key planning issues and capital projects
. Obtain Council agreement and direction to staff on major issues, approaches and timelines
for the Municipal Facility and Community Center projects
. Discuss and obtain agreement on proposed new City Council rules
8:30
8:40
8:45
9:00
9:45
10:30
11:30
12:30
1:15
2:15
Welcome, Retreat Objectives and Introductions
Jeanne Burbidge
Overview of the Agenda
Bonnie Berk
Setting the Context: Sharing Perspectives on Key Highlights
of 2002 and Challenges for 2003
Council
Discussion of Comprehensive Plan Overview and Purpose
. Brief history, evolution and vision of the current Comprehensive
Plan
. How the Plan works in decision making
. Investment in the Downtown Core and Frame
Kathy McClung/
Cary Roe/All
Municipal Facility Discussion
. Review of Municipal Facility Advisory Committee Report
. Identification of key issues
. Potential approaches and timeline
. Discussion and agreement on next steps
Derek Matheson/All
Break
Community Center/Senior Center/Pool Project Jenny Schroder/All
. Proposed process and timeline for moving forward
. Discussion and agreement on process, timeline and next steps
Lunch
Revised City Council Rules of Procedure
. Council member attendance at meetings
. Public hearings
. Council representation
. Public records
. Council Committee
. Voting on Council Vacancies
Pat Richardson/All
Planned Annexation Area Discussion
. Status of current study
. Council discussion
Kathy McClung/Ail
3:00 Summary of the Day and Adjourn
Conckgs�ons and Recommendations
On A Municipal Facility
For The City of Federal Way
ina� Report
Prepared By:
City of Federal Way
Municipal Facility Advisory Committee
December 17, 2002
CITY OF
Committee Members
Ben Conwell Jack Dovey (Chair) Dini Duclos
Bill Feldt Marta Justus Foldi Bill Foulkes
H. David Kaplan Stacy Keen Bob Kellogg
C.T�Purdom (Vice-Chair) Russ Wolf
Table of Contents
MFAC Conclusions and Recommendations Page
Current Need for Facilities 1
Facilities Planning for Future Needs 1
Specific Site Evaluations 2
Cost vs. Location: The Economic Development Issue- 3
Design of City Hall Offices 5
RFP Process Strongly Recommended 5
Appendices Page
1: Municipal Facilities Siting and Feasibility Analysis 7
2: Summary of Alternative Structures of Development/
Ownership of Federal Way's Municipal Center- 25
3: Estimated Development Cost vs. Net Present Value 30
4: Maps of Potential Municipal Facility Locations 31
5: Public Forum Feedback 37
6: Emails and Other Feedback Received From Citizens 39
Municipal Facilities Advisory Committee (MFAC)
Conclusions and Recommendations
Dec. 11, 2`002
Current Need for Facilities — MFAC is in agreement as to the
f, need for improved facilities for our Police Department and our-Municipal Court,
and for remodeled or expanded city hall offices.
Our current Police Department facilities are clearly inadequate and insufficient.
This is the most.urgent and critical need.
Our current Municipal Court facilities are too small, and the layout of the facility
is both inefficient and does not provide for all needs.
Our current City Hall offices are generally too small, are overcrowded, and
therefore are inefficient. A good example is our Permit Center: it is too small,
poorly configured, and definitely not"user-friendly', especially in comparison with
the facilities of other cities.
/ The City's combined departments occupy around 57,54LO square feet, and due to
V currently crowded conditions, city staff has represented-t-hatthe current need is
for an additional 12,500 square feet, for a total current,need o 70,00 square
feet. MFAC has no reason to disagree with this information.
FacH ties Planning for Future Needs — MFAC strongly
recommends that the City-,council and city staff make decisions that include
considerations for future space needs. Therefore, MFAC recommends that the
City focus on meeting its current space needs of roughly 70,000 square feet, and
plan for projected space needs for the next 20-year time horizon.
Various members of MFAC toured the city facilities of four other area cities,
Renton, Kent, Redmond, and Kirkland. The latter three cities had one major
problem in common: they have run out of room for city staff in their city
halls. As a result, they have to lease office space off-site, and city departments
seem to be regularly shuffling from one office location to another. We have all
had to move our home or our office, so it is easy to understand that this constant
shuffling is very costly and inefficient. While moving, city employees must focus
on an activity that has no direct benefit to its citizens, and takes them away from
performing services for its citizens.
- 1 -
For example, the city of Kirkland finished a major, $ 7.3 million expansion of their
city Hall in 1995, only seven years ago, and they are already out of space. This
situation would seem to indicate either a planning failure or some major financial
or political constraints.
MFAC is made up of private citizens and businesspeople, and we are not by any
means advocating the unnecessary and excessive growth of city staff or public
spending. However, it is unrealistic to assume that our city staff, and the city's
space needs, will not grow in the future. In today's world, the process of
governing is becoming more complicated, not less complicated, and the services
the public expects from its government increases each year. In addition, the very
real prospect of a major annexation in the future will also increase the demands
on our city workers.
We should learn from the problems being experienced by these other cities, and
be realistic about our future needs. Being chronically short of office space seems
to guarantee government inefficiency, and MFAC believes it is a problem that our
city can and should avoid. Therefore, as the Council takes action to solve our
current space needs, MFAC believes that the City should plan for the additional
30,000 to 40,000 square feet of space that we will almost surely need in the next
20 years.
One option for the city would be to acquire this additional space during its current
planning process. The City could plan for an efficient and reasonable use of the
space for its current needs, and lease currently unneeded space (which creates
a revenue stream.) However, MFAC received expert testimony which indicated
there are certain difficulties in leasing space in a municipal'building to
commercial tenants. Therefore, we believe that city staff should be extremely
conservative and cautious when making assumptions regarding lease revenue
from excess capacity.
Whether or not the city obtains the additional space now, it is very important
that the City at least have an intelligent plan to anticipate its future space
needs and to provide for these needs in a deliberate, efficient, and cost-
effective manner.
Specific Site Evaluations — As originally requested by the City
Council, MFAC went through the process of evaluating specific sites in the
downtown core, frame, and non-downtown locations. The real estate consultant
assigned to assist us, Mike Hassenger of the Seneca Group, identified a total of
22 sites that were potentially available. The committee identified a number of
qualitative criteria, established weightings for these criteria, and then rated these
sites based on these criteria. MFAC then narrowed this list to 9 sites. Mr.
Hassenger then sketched out a possible building design for each of the 9
remaining sites, and prepared an estimate of the development budget and a net
present value cost for each of these sites.
- 2 -
MFAC understands and appreciates the difficulty faced by Mr. Hassenger in
coming up with an estimated development budget for these sites. Because of
the limitations and uncertainties he faced during this process, the development
costs and net present values estimated by Mr. Hassenger can only be used as a
rough guide, but are considered adequate for comparative purposes.
The qualitative score and the relative net present value cost of each of these nine
sites were then plotted on a "value graph,"which is included in this report packet.
The locations plotted in the lower right quadrant of this value graph are by
definition the most desirable sites. The four most hi hl rated sites are listed
below in order of estimated developmen costs EDC). Site size and location are
also Iiste
A) Current tion -4 els totaling 8.4 acres at 1 st Ave. S and 336th,
18.0 million EDC
B) Reliance land- 5.7 acres at 336th and 6th Ave. S.,Jut OlAhnff 06�bdo
22.9 million EDC,
C) Safew - e er- 16.3 acres of land at 1"an¢ 320th.
$25.7 million EDC, W� G '
D) East Campus-20 acres at 32"d Ave. S. and 320th St. (east of 1-5)
$ 2.6.2 million EDC.
JCost vs. Location: The Economic Development
Issue — It was apparent from the beginning of MFAC's work that many on the
City Council favored a downtown core location for city hall facilities. While it was
generally expected that,a downtown core location would be more costly, those
who favor a core location believed that building a city hall downtown would serve
as a catalyst to generate economic development in our downtown core.
Specifically, it was hoped that a downtown core location would lead to the
realization of the City's vision for downtown, which includes mid-rise office
buildings and residential buildings in a compact, pedestrian friendly setting.
Some believe the extra cost of building City Hall in the downtown core would be
justified by the economic growth it generated.
Given this situation, MFAC was particularly interested in this issue. We asked
the question "Will the location of city hall in the downtown core have a significant
impact on economic development?"to officials of other cities, to developers, and
to real estate professionals. We asked city staff to research this question.
f, Almost unanimously, the real estate professi�Is,, devers and offic�sfrom
othercitieswere uite emphatic in their opining city hall in the
vwntawn core will not have a 'f' �t im ac conomic
p
devedid not receive any clear evidence that a
lo men ndee ,
own own core location would in any way help produce the desired development
in the core.
- 3 -
It should be noted that the cost estimates, and net present value estimates, for
the two downtown core sites were significantly higher than all the other sites we
studied. In our opinion, paying any premium for a location in the downtown
core, in the vague hope that doing so will somehow become la catalyst for
economic development, is simply not justified, given the city's other needs.
MFAC also was very concerned about the amount of expenditure of the public's
tax dollars for new municipal facilities. We reviewed information about the city's
sources of funds for capital improvements, and reviewed future plans for other
types of public facilities that would greatly enhance our community. We are
aware that the cost of these desired facilities (which includes the operation of an
endangered swimming pool, a performing arts center, a multipurpose sports
complex/field house, and a senior center) greatly exceeds the city's ability to pay
for them at the present time.
MFAC held two public forums to solicit public comment. There were 16 citizens
at the first forum, and 10 at the second forum. MFAC also received testimony at
its regular meetings, and received approximately 17 emails and letter comments..
The overwhelming majority of the comments we received (over 80%), were
against moving city hall to another location, and/or indicated serious concern
over excessive government spending on city hall offices during the current
economic downturn. There was general acceptance of the public safety building
(police/courts). However, many questioned the need for city hall offices.
Given this situation, MFAC strongly recommends that the.City Council
preserve the city's resources by focusing on the least costly alternatives as
it improves our police, municipal court, and city hall facilities. We need to
provide efficient, quality facilities for our city workers. However, we need
to do so while spending as little of the public's money as possible. This
will preserve resources and allow the City to accomplish one or more.of the
additional projects desired by this community.
MFAC believes that the "least costly alternative" means leaving city hall at its
current location, and acquiring adjacent parcels to build a police department and
municipal court. It means giving serious consideration to phasing the
improvements, and not improving all facilities at once. It means resolving to
spend much less than the allotment of$ 24.5 million for city hall facilities included
in the recently passed city budget for 2003-2004. MFAC believes it would be
irresponsible for the city to spend this large a sum on municipal facilities, given
the current economic environment and the city's needs.
Another alternative the city should consider is issuing a "request for proposal"
(RFP) to the development and real estate community(discussed below). MFAC
believes this process has enormous potential to give the public more for its
money and limit expenditures as the city improves its facilities-
- 4 -
Design of City Hall OfficeS — MFAC discussed the relative
merits of campus-style city facilities (meaning a complex of several buildings)
versus having all city facilities in one building. All other factors being equal
(including cost, public access, etc), based on information we have reviewed, the
Committee prefers a campus-style design.
The "value graph", mentioned earlier in this report, was the result of the
combined efforts of MFAC,the Federal Way city staff, and the Seneca Group.
This value graph attempts to combine qualitative criteria with cost criteria. The
four most highly rated properties_which resulted from this "value graph" analysis
are all large land parcels, and MFAC presumed a campus-style design when
rating these sites. Their high ratings indicate that the campus-style design is
regarded as the most cost-effective design. -
During our tours, MFAC was very impressed with the efficiency and functionality
of Renton's city hall, which is located in one multiple-story building. However,
one of the main drawbacks of Renton's city hall relates to a lack of public spaces
surrounding the building. Redmond's city hall campus was very attractive and
served as a gathering place for its citizens.
By definition, c m sign would cover a large land area. MFAC
s
believes thissigr+ w Jd-be-M6r attractive, people-friendly, and would allow
more flexibility in design and function. For example, a larger campus-style
design would allow easier expansion of facilities. Also,a campus-style design
would be more conducive to locating other public facilities nearby (such as a
senior center). This, in turn, would give City Hall the potential of becoming a
gathering place for our citizens, and would enhance our sense of community.
RFP Process Strongly Recommended — In hearing
testimony from real estate professionals and developers, MFAC has come to
appreciate the advantages of issuing an RFP, or"request for proposal", to the
development community. This RFP would include, but not be limited to, the most
highly rated sites on the "value graph", and should be open to any suitably zoned
/ site in the city, including sites in the downtown core. The committee is not
opposed to a location in the downtown core as long as the costs make sense and
traffic issues are resolved.
The RFP would outline the type of facilities desired by the city, would list specific
requirements and criteria, would describe the process that would be used to
evaluate the proposals received, and would ask the private sector for proposals.
This would be a transparent process, with public knowledge of the city's criteria
and evaluation process.
MFAC believe this rocess as enormous enfl and the resulting short
delay in the process would be justified. The primary benefit of this process is that
— 5 —
it would take advantage of the creativity and imagination of the private sector.
Given the current"buyers market" for commercial pffice buildings, we might all be
pleasantly surprised by the proposals we receive_SMFACbelieves that the RFP
recess has the potential of Identifying previously unknown sites for
municipal facilities that could provide for the city's needs at a cost
substantially lower than the estimated development costs for staying in the
city's current location.
Because of this, at this stage of the process�MFAC strongly suggests that the'-,
ity Council immediately prepare and submit such an RFP. We strongly
urge the City Council to not limit its deliberations to the sites that have
beer `identified up to this point.
MFAC has gained much knowledge about the RFP process and how it could
benefit the City as it moves forward to improve its facilities. We recommend that
the City Council utilize this knowledge by including members of MFAC on its RFP
team.
- 6 -
Appendix
city of Federal Way
Municipal Facility
Ad�eisory committee
Municipal Facilities
siting and Feasibility
Analysis
December2002
Prepared .
MunicipalAdvisory Committee
And
The Seneca Real Estate Group,
Table of Contents
SENECA GROUP MATERIALS Page
Introduction................................................................................................. ....... ........................11
InitialList of Sites ........................................................ ........................... ........13
Initial List of Sites Chart............................................... ..................... ......... ....................15
_1w_
Listof Semi-Finalists................................................................................................:.................16
SemkFinalistChart...........................................................................................:...............17
QualitativeAnalysis....................................................................................................................18
QualitativeMatrix ..............................................................................................................19
QuantitativeAnalysis...................-............................................................................................20
Summary of Selected Assumptions..................................................................................21
Summary of Financial Analysis ........ ------..................................................... ........ .....22
ValueGraph................................................................................................................................23
ValueGraph (Chart) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------24
- 9 -
INTRODUCTION
Background
In Fall 2001, prior to the current scope of work giving rise to this report, the City of
Federal Way ("City") engaged the Seneca Real Estate Group ("Seneca") to conduct a
preliminary Siting and Feasibility Analysis for a proposed new civic center. The focus of
that work was to examine the potential differences in cost and qualitative benefit
associated with several hypothetical locations both inside the Core and Frame and
elsewhere. This work culminated in the City Hall Siting and Feasibility Analysis dated
December 18, 2001. In the interest of brevity, this report may refer to that prior work for
background information and concepts discussed there.
Following that analysis, the Federal Way City Council-desired to have additional public
input into the site selection process. As a result, they created the Municipal Facility
Advisory Committee ("MFAC) to identify and evaluate potential sites. The City of
Federal Way then engaged Seneca to provide some basic decision-making tools-with
which to work and to assist the MFAC with their analysis.
Space Needs
The foundation for the analysis is the amount of space that the City will need over time.
Discussions with City staff indicated that an initial size of 70,000 square feet, the
amount used in the December 2001 analysis, was still appropriate. As for the future,
the City now estimates its needs at approximately 100,000 square feet,which is down
from the 109,000 square feet used in the December 2001 analysis. The primary
difference is that the 2001 area increased the size of certain public areas (e.g. council
chambers) as the population grew. The current estimate holds those public areas
constant in size.
MFAC Objectives
The overall analytical process involves two sets of objectives, one for MFAC and one for
Seneca. The City Council asked the MFAC to do the following:
1. Identify numerous potential sites in three areas:
Core;
• Frame; and
• Elsewhere in the city.
2. Evaluate the relative merits of the initial list of sites and reduce the list to 2-3
sites in each of the three areas for further evaluation with assistance from
Seneca.
3. Conduct a preliminary financial and qualitative analysis for each of 6-9 sites to
provide a relative comparison of the sites
4. Based on comparative information, identify the top three "finalists" to
recommend to the City Council.
5. Examine possible financing options and provide input to the City Council on
potentially desirable alternatives.
Seneca Engagement Objectives
Seneca's objectives include the following:
1. Brief the MFAC on the December 2001 analysis.
2. Identify a broad list of potential sites in the three areas of the City for the initial
site identification process.
3. Provide basic information about the various sites to enable the MFAC to
reduce the list to 6-9 Semi-Finalists.
4. Provide a qualitative decision-making tool to allow the MFAC to evaluate the
subjective aspects of the Semi-Finalists. -
5. Conduct a preliminary financial analysis on the Semi-Finalists.
6. Prepare a value graph that combines_the qualitative and quantitative elements
of the various sites.
Note that the Seneca's role is to p rovide support and technical assistance to the MFAC
throughout the analytical process. As a result, the conclusions and recommendations-in
this report are from the MFAC.
5ET�LCA
GkV - 12 -
INITIAL LIST OF SITES
Overview
In keeping with its engagement objectives, Seneca briefed the MFAC about the
December 2001 analysis at the regularly scheduled MFAC meeting on May 29, 2002.
Similarly, Seneca reviewed the December 2001 financial analysis in detail with several
MFAC members at a special meeting on June 11, 2002.
The next step was to begin to identify a broad list of potential sites for the MFAC to
evaluate. As for where to look, the committee deliberated a variety of search criteria at
its Jurig�12, 2002 meeting, which are discussed below.
MFAC Search Criteria
Search Boundaries
Outside the Core and Frame, the MFAC indicated that the initial boundaries should be
S. 3121h Street on the north, S. 348th Street on the south, 1 st Avenue S. on the west and
East Campus on the east.
Size
Another search criterion involves the siae of parcels that the MFAC wanted to consider.
Seneca's prior analysis indicates that the amount of land needed to satisfy the City's
basic needs was around five acres. The MFAC indicated an interest in evaluating larger
parcels that could also accommodate other potential civic uses. Also, the MFAC
requested that the analysis indicate whether each particular parcel could accommodate
a multiple building campus or a single building.
Location
In conjunction with its Search Boundaries discussion, the MFAC also discussed several:
aspects of location. They indicated a desire for the new facility to have good visibility
from the street and that public transportation provide adequate service. If possible,
given the preliminary nature of the analysis, the MFAC also wanted to know if a%
particular site needed additional infrastructure. Also, given the traffic on S. 320th Street,
the MFAC expressed concern about a site with its primary access on S. 320th Street.
Visibility on S. 320th was more important that access to and from that street.
Existing Building vs. New Construction
In lieu of expressing a specific preference for either an existing building or new
construction, the MFAC requested that the initial list contain both product types for them
to evaluate.
Acquisition Strategies
Committee members wanted to avoid the condemnation process.
SENE A
C, Ir - 13 -
Assembly of Initial List
Seneca then assembled an initial list of properties from several sources, including:
• Properties listed for sale by the various commercial brokerages active in the
market;
• Discussions with City staff;
® Review of King County Tax Assessor data;
• Discussions with real estate professionals active in the market;
Properties evaluated in conjunction with the December 2001 analysis; and
• Properties suggested by MFAC members.
In additian to identifying the specific properties, Seneca also assembled some basic
information about the parcels, such as parcel size, current building areas, availability
and pricing. With regard to availability, we assumed that the property was readily
available if it was listed for sale. If not listed, we discussed the site with the respective
landowners to ascertain its availability. For pricing, we included the listing price, asking
price or other pricing information that the landowner was willing to share. Seneca made
no attempt to negotiate the prices.
Initial List of Sites
Seneca presented the initial list of sites to the MFAC at its regularly scheduled meeting
on July 24, 2002. The list contained 19 sites consisting of 25 properties. Some of the
sites required assembling several properties to create sufficient land area for the
contemplated municipal facilities.
During the next several MFAC meetings, the committee deliberated the various sites.
The MFAC also added three sites to the list for further consideration. The schedule on
the next page contains all 22 sites that the MFAC evaluated (the initial 19 plus the three
additions) as part of the initial list of sites.
Note that the left-hand column of the schedule, entitled "ID", contains an identifying
number for each parcel. The ID numbers in the Core are not sequential because one of
the properties initially placed on the list in an early draft ultimately was not available.
- 14-
o C> o0 C> It
C! ID CD
CD 10 a, -W 'r m m
10
d a i s5: vI ss vj
Ge
al I I � 1j i it C � I
61) CD 0 C> C> C> O
E_ w o C�lc� C� C� C� C�
I C; CD \0 C> C> C>
u
C,
C�
cq,C, r--:-10 C, C>I C, C> CD C, 0 C> ID, O'__.
ClC> aC,
Ci
cG
\C�
10
of 1; w m!
M O '7 -'T C� r-: t
C� t r-I CD m C� CA In n C�
C� m C, C, m CD
rq
04
CD
Oa, 'o r- C:,, 'o CD C,_
0 r-:,rZI
C>1 C>
C4
e! tr-.2 -2
a co m m 0 m m 'a m
o 0..4 •
�4 C) j r r C
;> E_ r r a r r
0 0 < 01 To 0 0 0 100 0,
P64 iuf
�4
0
f
P. u
,
LI
Ed U U C vv Gv v' r
F m 0 01
0 C2 =
po 21 v
1 4�WTo7
C 0, -0
-M-6 0
0
t 110
F2
bD
r r
0 C)
L.. Z.> H u u C7 u im O U,W, w
Ln
GO
In
> < >
C� CI > > >
c,
'o
8 T
oi C) 48 's .8
G. Clra4 C� C) ;>
Ci >
Cq C:, ui �6
N c.4 r C> 10 C4,
en
Co..
>
0
Do E0,
z
ZIX,
z
r f'!E>;, a
U Na 0 u 2
Or-,
En 0 tLc 0
c 0
0
cf) u u
ri�
U, u U' In,cn In C13
0 "10
U
L
LIST OF SEMI-FINALISTS
Overview
With the initial list of sites as the starting point, the MFAC then began the deliberation
process to reduce the list to the target of 2-3 sites in each of the Core, Frame and
elsewhere. The committee conducted these deliberations over the course of the next
several meetings and culminated in late August 2002 with a list of nine properties that
would be the subject of more detailed analysis. During the deliberations, the MFAC
discussed the possibility of expanding the scope of the analysis to more than nine sites
but ultimately decided to leave the scope unchanged.
List of Semi-Finalists
The schedule on the next page contains the nine semi-finalist sites that the MFAC
wanted to evaluate in greater detail.
SEN LF %
GIS()Yp)
- 16-
7 �C �O' OI7O III 0 0 0 0'v1
Le. �f ii cV Q •Oy 070 O O vi ci
V1 na' 1 E 69'. 69-169 69 69 N-69
�,I o o
N' O
161 O+O
i I
,A OO ' O O co,
Fw p GI lo' c) o O �69 OOO
o
i E
0 0l of
r
69
w ,i a �
ter• { y'w m� "v,` v� m;
O O Cl N O O�o
%c
Hr `- N{O Irl
W Z 00 01O M
C,3 i M fcl V V
a,h O, rn T
oo n
IN r
o N M o0 rM` O fV vl 06 O
N O h r' I oo M cl 7 N
>4 a N N
co
1
m cc m
Uia a qIl
_Q+ cru
c° U
1
�
D 3 m
oM
p:N N N O
w: N M M M N: M a ; M5
M
ao
oto' O Io 7 >
yy lD O CD O M1: G .�., V O:Z)'.o0
O
.r N O c
en cn � S
w: p o Cdp
121
z
o •si "
N j oQ rn GQ4 V] o VJ o�UIW o V > En
E
QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS
Overview
Real estate decisions such as those faced by Federal Way have important subjective
elements that are not readily quantifiable. To assess these elements, the MFAC used a
decision-making tool called a qualitative matrix.
Qualitative Matrix
Seneca created an initial draft of the Qualitative Matrix and presented it to the MFAC at
its June 20, 2002 meeting. The committee focused on the various criteria to include in
the matrj4 and the associated weighting. To further discuss the matrix and establish the
initial criteria and weighting, the MFAC held a special meeting on July 17, 2002.
Seneca then used the results of this special meeting to prepare the template for the
qualitative matrix. Each MFAC member assessed the weight for each of the criteria.
Seneca then computed the overall weighting by averaging the individual weights of the
various committee members.
With the template established, the MFAC temporarily set the matrix aside while it
focused on selecting the semi=finalists. Once they identified the nine properties, the
committee then scored the various sites, completing this portion of the scope in early
October 2002. As with the weighting process, Seneca averaged the individual
committee responses to obtain the scores on the final matrix.
The next page contains the final qualitative matrix.
GP\,OLIP
- 18 -
f •� M D` � oo f ..�=N �.OI ISO '� M��O�Vt Ul oo ' oo e
. Y ?� c N ^ N N --�N[- {' ' •N M M -- � N �
f I I
w D O
U' M�N M N,N M V:M M --' M'M M N; V= '. '•
— oloolo v � rn'� r N o n of n o
b € d .--.I.-• O oo V 7 V7'.-- O b 'vi W e r 00 M R
N N M I
lC0 W N 7 M �O 4\ N O R 'Q
N
P4 < 0EL
^_
_ aUi 9 rn j r vt V D\ [/1 O a/1 b O r- O� fT
M N M 1
V. M
_l
o0"O 'O I- ^'
M:ViN M
. n v r` r-: c9 v rn ^ o rn ool�o an �oY 'o
'y o M M No0 r -- n W 00 O b N V1
3 M N N M N M M V V r
W � —
10410111
,�,��T P'
z � ;•O � <J '7 M:7 NNM �M[C' M N V=. `.
O, waU l^
I
i
'o b tT O oo O� V rl N'
�.
oo Oi� O�1 Ol N 1� O r
Mr+N
-n O' '00 o0'N,N Vl lw c> .- iC!{I -1,-: 'q
W
M
N N C N N N N M M
a
--
��!! N > W O 'R � � O '•A R U M 1 7 O N o0 00 �lq�
Qi,
N N M,, N N �--��. �N Mi-
'4R
M
�
'ONib oo M •d
[ � O 7 CJ a M V M M M Nl ;fV rel*9 II
N} .
�f Lti ' N Q O
j fh i X0.6
CC 'P'
y y vi w 'O V rn oo rn 7 ut O� O o a
u
m rd ^ C O oo N; M N O P' O O V t` b 'T
' F" C'7 ✓' N 1 7 N N V V'V M M M M M M NI
7 O N
1p T At
Vl Vl N V) N M R
I a
Q r
o
. v
oo ', v v v
rn o
;l0
rn O i Irr'1'O O' O O•tn T,r;M 0�,: 7 trR'ao.O
6 r v'
o 8:
H I`
J1
M
AN FL g
C N O
O �' L.D Z W rj r
o+; y "¢,¢ `� d G-I Z y @I a' , Vb v y,
o A SWI o: o o a Ho ;O ° n'�`wo C Iz E Q N:
QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS
Overview
The quantitative analysis evaluates the financial aspects of each scenario. Seneca
used financial models similar to those used for the December 2001 analysis for each of
the Semi-Finalists. As before, Seneca has tried to use conservative assumptions,
meaning that we believe these costs to be on the,higher side of the realistic spectrum.
Similarly, we have tried to reduce income expectations to temper the effect on the
analysis.
We also wish to emphasize that the focus of this analysis is on the relative order of
magnitude cost. It is not an attempt to reflect actual costs since we have not conducted
any negotiations with landowners and we do not have drawings from which to solicit
bids.
Summary of Selected Assumptions
Any financial analysis of a sophisticated civic center project includes a wide variety of
assumptions that are needed to perform the calculations. Following this textual
description is a page entitled "Summary of Selected Assumptions" that lists a wide
variety of these inputs. The upper left part of the page includes assumptions used to
estimate the development budgets for all of the scenarios. The upper right corner
contains assumptions common to all scenarios as they relate to the ongoing cash flows
associated with operating the facility once it is up and running. The bottom part of the
page contains other assumptions that are unique to each of the various alternatives.
Summary of Initial Financial Analysis
Following the Summary of Assumptions is a page entitled Summary of Initial Financial
Analysis. The page is divided into two primary sections. The top section, entitled
"Development Budgets" identifies the estimated up-front costs associated with the
particular sites. The lower section, entitled "NPV's as of 1/1/03", shows the net present
value of the costs of owning and operating the facilities over a 20-year time horizon.
In the Development Budget section, the line entitled "Cash and Other Assets"follows
the "Total Development Budget line and reflects the funding sources that the City has
on hand to offset the initial capital cost of the project. These sources include $7.5
million in cash and $2.6 million in net proceeds from the sale of the existing City Hall
Building. Note that in the "Current Location" scenario, the "Cash and Other Assets"
amount does not include the current City Hall because the City would continue to use
that building.
The computations in the section entitled "NPV's as of 1/1/03" reflect the various cash
expenditures anticipated for each site.
SEiV 1
EC
GKQJaP
-20-
h i i 0 o n o o }5 }y o 0 0 C> 0
3 R O O N O O O O O O CY1 O
p" b r l0 O O N O O O
O
w w w w w o e
r v I o � v� o N N o00 C> o
o �¢ o0 0 000 oLnO
01 Cl r- Cl o r
v) o, vMi v`"i by by vi 0, }
c E
i L I O j O O O }q f� �N, j4 O O O N Z,
Cl �y vi'O O O O O CO
V E ^ V Vl O Oi O O ; N 69 69 69 -o*
69 N O, N
a o vi v In oo
W,
z y . o o o a I y H = y b y o 0
No O o >' •a 0 a o 0o C> }N o00 0 0
o �nN a R U C. � o o I o00 0 � rn
0 0 0 O 6�i9 b16i9 6\69 O O N
c, W o iso ss h h
VJ
rA
3 oo h o o in
o y o 0 0 o O
ai O o AI vi v 0Gt10
Z a W O 00o i \6 Gs o O
rn o
`�' sv N
bs
z � x
W F `i' z .G Wa w
V r7 Z � d 5 °3 •r- , cx g'3 a, o m \D c ) 6 000 R [o �
5 O U P4 ¢ w °' I O My o 000 ' o v d ,c o = o
U E rwn O P. I o av 6e h o v) U9 69
U Q 0 _ •M F, F. o A 0 c Gti
A OFA
W U U
3l v p q a �yO O O y $ JE J� O Cl O
a O O ,
0 0 O O O O O [p O
1�1 V ppb �4 [S cV C O O I ri �O �O = O N
� O 6iT 6H VOl yOj 69 69 UY cl
dW
f� rA
W W
A O a y
y
H y y h y y o
o y o00 0 0
rW m , O m vi 0ID
vi vi vi 0 LO o
I�1 Ln p" (� O N m Vl b t 6�9 6�9 64 ^ rn O
p � o X69 M � z
p
b b b o 9 5 o 0 0 0 0
m m m m o 00 v o 0 0 0 0 U o
vvv � a E ri o 0o v \c d o =
PpP t o
m
I �
t4 t4 3
sss
ww w
000
y o 0 0 y N y y
y
0
o00 Cl 00 � � Cl o mo � � y h vOi � vOi OCnO s
000 00o riv n d t o vo o kn M rn vi o 6 o S
rl�O O Vi(A 69 F O 69 M b 69 69 69
O 69 69 $
F �
W
r W
z a y
z p
Q 0
a a N z 2 H sem ;,
C7 0 °ovz
c Z04 O ¢ct�
Vim] ; > c°e W U Q U N 3 [�,� ; � Q W L a N . U
w a Z En w p o m > 9 w
'" O c o q z Q o c 3 c4 a
UOU y mUQ Oz W aGi 2 O
W z q° Ai fii bo Iba> a� U U z W „a W 0.. :9 E z d ti a W I""'
a
" -Q L"V V ¢ `- " ° as h L"mL°m
WW . 0 z0 ' o o o
w j 7 0CLU Pao o a. r
qD -7 � U ¢
c U a FaU p F .W Q v2 a U O w U s
e
s"
a
v I
L1 ' O O r M Ol W O I n O I h p Vl h 00 N I 00 0 0 = v0
b , O O DD-.-. Ol 01 10 I O I V'1 1 O N Yr1 I O O
LC R , 1. v'1 00 Ol b e W , Vp O V'x 1 r W b V I n r
r 1D v .. o o to cv On
1
u O O b Vl 0 0 0= ,-1 II O I II oo M O+ M r N 0
a 'O O O M .--. V O O t Cl II O i rn
•_ C O O o0 0o V N 7 "o O I O .r vl M 3 M R
as r .. oo M e o 0o I .-. n , C,o0 0o r o0 00
1
.--,t N I O i N p .--. 1p N'_ b i b
rq
EO) fA
f 0 >
o f o O N n 0 7 10 1 r-: II o , n Ii i M n li m
r oo v D o m o o ' r o �i vi m o o Wi
FL. A N N O 10 � In V I O 7 I ' M Co", b Do O O I vOUi G
y U V Vl M M O
0 00 I .w I Vl , b II 1 O n o0 O ul V1 II O
V C V
10 V O ' Ol b
to E 69 I Vi II II ' v 69 fH 11
�[
1
O .-. ut O O O; CT II O^` II M Ol M M Cl! O yl.II y
O.I V O M Oi O v-1 N I O , cV I 1 ,l �--� b Ol m T O I r II
A m E i O O 00 W M h N 00 I O 1 00 I 1 O In M N M II 4�J
W 10 .. n M 00 M H O 1 17 00 00 n cl O
z � 1 � _ _ a_ _ I OI �I �� N i all
69 N I p '.
z � � V II 69 se � �II SCO
A C i O O O 'n O O O to li O .n li ; 7 � c1 M 0, " O .r I 'd O
N 0 0 7 ui O , V O ' V O [V 1D Oi O Ci O O Z 0�
y m 7 I O O N oo O r h M I O M p O M ul M h b O
r .-. M M Ol .-. M CT .-. 00 II! r v o0 r N N yy
'
� 61' o
jl b
Z ,�.0
bO 10 II V7 M O, to I N O b l O O
O O M C7, Vi O ' 00 i O i 06 I b16 Ol i h Oi O , Q
U V 3 O O 00 CO M N [ 1D I O I 10 1 N .-, h M h 1D I >+
U Iv. N N I O .--, r M 00 -. M i N .--� � i 0o 0o r M99
iIw0
I1 ifl j 69 6^'9 II C
U a c ii II Ii o
Q, Z ig 10 I oo O m vl O O O .r I O fl t 00 M ON M i h N O I Ol I '� O' N
a o t I-i o0 o N oo to r 10 o I o o I M — 'o M i c r-
1%
l
W pC ca to M Y•i rn N v_ N .-. . r m o0 0o r t w n
N 7 .-. .. .. � 00" I O` 00 1 ; b b v I N I NII b y
w ;
Z 6 R 3
I Ii
o
W W G m O O oo v) ' n a 01 �-� I
Q a +� ['� N O O 1- C, vi O y M II C i M I 1 0o cV 10 a ' O; Oi O i 00 II GO. UO
C 1V R w O O 2 o0 01 N Olv-Y
tw O a .� O .-. .-. M O M b II wl
klV .--. O O i O 1 , V N
V E � �
Z 69
V- N II N I On N 'r69 69 W9,
cba
a C
I
a s t II vi II II
ob
I ^ I N n N r o o
Ii -O bYPNtv
o of 1D o c 1D to i o6 , c4 cri I r- o c r`II
N 10
o rno a o Cl CL o0 0 0
O = It 1 0
61) > 0
GO 12 m
U ypi vo vl000 ; o II o= of i mMON ogcl oIl 0 0 2
Y0 i V O oo r. V vt O i M II O i Yui I p M c i 16 ci: M Oi O i M II U
hM
• V O I •� aU+
F = M69 r -,t cl N II O Ol it , I\r N M M II O
= E II I Iii , 69 v j 69 i fiA p .d LL
1 Q•m �
z W ' c
C7 P C7
1
Cw7 z w 0oxa H "' o c
A o Q x r F F w 1 U y
EnZ
En
z z y 5
m 8
pZUcn w l o W �7w o
FD O O ¢ rz a w zCO3 > w Az5 M �.M n
NO z d w E-' z >' Q x Q 1 ,..I [L) o o > ra tR p� m
¢ oo � w0z w o z wU Ua � w >
AL, � a 0 x 48 -< > u- .'o .a a w c is z-
oaS > Q F
A p W ¢H -- �
A a awgaa0a�i � x ; � v�C ] d y c 7
�j0ww000 a, , wwzM wu. [ a
w waa. waiP -1-1aa... 0 O U ¢ p�. Q0E--' vii (n0 � a
93.1A F n a z
VALUE GRAPH
Overview
Once we complete the quantitative and qualitative analyses, the final step in Seneca's
scope is to combine these components onto a single page to allow the decision-makers
to see the relative positions of the various scenarios on both their numeric and
subjective aspects. We call this page a Value Graph. The Value Graph for the MFAC
is on the following page.
The Axes
The vertical axis contains the NPV of 20-year costs for each of the nine sites. Because
of the preliminary nature of the analysis, we have included vertical bars intended to
represent a reasonable range in which the NPV could fall and reduce any sense of false
precision. The horizontal axis depicts the qualitative score based on the matrix derived
by the MFAC.
Interpreting the Chart
We divided the chart into four quadrants to assist the user in assessing the relative
positions of the various scenarios. The lower right-hand quadrant contains the
alternatives with the optimal combination of lower cost and higher qualitative value. The
upper left-hand quadrant presents the worst option for the City, alternatives with higher
cost and lower qualitative value.
The remaining two quadrants, the lower left and upper right, indicate areas that have
the ability to be of greater value to the City.but with a correspondingly higher cost. In
these areas, the general rule is "You get what you pay for." We.also wish to point out
that this area of proportionality is not as finely delineated as the quadrant lines might
indicate. Rather, there is a band of proportionality, spanning from lower left to upper
right. Throughout this band, the decision-makers must decide how much they are
willing to spend for the corresponding increase in qualitative benefit.
.Yi;` ?111P
- 23 -
00
tw-
21
I E' a
E+ v
tx
s *'`
kn
„ m
cd
•� i �,a I, � ': C 1 1 A J '� � ti ';
3 ° CO
P.
bb
f ,yY P 1r. 0 1
�a U
0 >
1 aaN� `�.. .e�.s $fir � -+''•"'+�*�� �. , x",.;�?�". , ;{�,� ' �:
kn
&L � I w
m x
O O O O O O O OCl
N
O O O O O O O O H
0
�O t N O 00 �o �t N
N N N N -, -- -. —4 N
69 69 E0*9Is�T GS (7669 6R 64 v ca
JLSO✓^^AJN Sl I IgH O N
O
N �y N
C, Cd
a
U N
_ y
v E" U
0 U
12 . e
a
Appendix II
SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVE STRUCTURES OF
DEVELOPMENT / OWNERSHIP OF FEDERAL WAY'S
MUNICIPAL CENTER
There are almost as many different ways to structure the lease, development, purchase
and long-term ownership of the City's new municipal facilities as there are potential sites
on which to locate the facilities. A summary of the salient terms and .associated
advantages and disadvantages of each follows below. Note that the Request for
Proposal methodology described elsewhere herein can be applied successfully to any
of the structures highlighted below.
At a basic level, long-term occupancy of the new facilities by the various City functions
is most easily segregated into to leasing and ownership. The most fundamental
differences between the two are clear:
• Long term leasing avoids having to make a huge initial capital outlay leaving
investment capital available for other City needs
• Ownership requires a large capital investment up front, but provides the opportunity
to build equity in the facilities over the holding period.
A more thorough analysis of each general course, however, results in conclusions that
are considerably more complicated.
• Leasing does provide the City predictability for most, but not all of its occupancy
costs during the term of the lease
Long Term Lease
The City of Federal Way could enter into a long term lease agreement (perhaps twenty
years plus extension options)with a private developer for either the development of a
brand new build-to-suit facility designed to the City's specific needs or an existing
building modified for the City's needs. The parties would negotiate timing and size of
period rental increases, additional operating expenses that would be due in addition to
net rent and other terms. Rental increases may be fixed in advance or could be
variable and subject to certain adjustments such as the increase in CPI etc.
Such a structure would eliminate the requirement for the City to invest considerable
capital at the outset for a purchase. Precise occupancy costs over the life of the lease
would not necessarily be known with certainty, as operating costs may be variable
depending on the terms of the lease agreement. While extension options could give the
City the power to stay longer if it chooses, the City may be faced with the need to move
-25 -
out and rent/ purchase new facilities. It will have to face the then-applicable market
conditions for better or worse.
Conclusion: Capital preservation at the outset, but exposure on rent and operating
costs exists.
Long Term Lease With Option to Purchase
The committee studied the Kent experience, which proved to-be very successful for the
City. The City of Kent entered into an agreement with a private developer for a long-
term le'ate of a to-be-developed building that met the City's requirements. The
agreement provided the City the option to purchase the property at specified points
during the lease term. The City of Kent elected to exercise that option and was able to
purchase the property for a "market' price as determined by appraisal.
As a result, the City secured facilities that met its criteria, was able to enjoy occupancy
for the agreed-upon rental rate and to defer the initial capital investment for the
acquisition from the start of the development process when bond rates were not as
attractive until a later time when there was a significantly more attractive debt market. A
win-win for the City.
The City of Federal Way could enter into a long term lease agreement (perhaps twenty
years) with a private developer for either the development of a brand new build-to-suit
facility designed to the City's specific needs or an existing building modified for the
City's needs (as described above) with an option to purchase the building similar to the
Kent arrangement. The parties could negotiate purchase option "windows," perhaps
every five years during the term. The purchase could be structured to be at market as
determined by appraisal, at a price agreed-upon at the outset of the lease or based on
some other means.
This would enable the City to monitor the debt market and to elect or not elect to
exercise its option at each opportunity. The flexibility to the City is considerable.
Ownership of property, however, is not without risks, administrative responsibility etc.
Conclusion: Subject to negotiation of the precise terms, this strategy provides the City
the advantages of leasing until conditions are such that the City could purchase the
facility at its election and avoiding having to make the capital investment to purchase
until it chooses; thereafter enjoying the benefits of ownership.
-26-
Turnkey Purchase at Completion
If the City has the investment capital to fund the equity requirement on hand and/or is
confident that it can secure sufficient capital to fund the entire purchase price, a turnkey
purchase of a facility at completion is another viable strategy.
The City could enter into an agreement with a private developer for either the
development of a brand new build-to-suit facility designed to the City's specific needs or
an existing building modified for the City's needs providing that the City would purchase
the facility at a fixed, agreed-upon price at completion of construction. The private
developer's profit would be built into the City's purchase price and all responsibility for
cost overruns and delays would be borne by the developer. As with the lease-based
options described above, the City would be deeply involved in the design with the
developer and its4eam to insure the completed facility satisfies the City's needs.
The City would be insulated from construction risk, schedule risk and cost risk under a
properly structured agreement. It would, however, require that the City provide agreed-
upon security/down payment to the developer to compensate the developer for the risk
of constructing the facility. Cost or schedule changes caused by changes that the City
elects to do during construction, however, would be adjusted for and not at the
developer's risk. At completion the balance of the purchase price would be paid and the
City would have fee ownership in the completed development.
Conclusion: If capital is available and the city is committed to ownership from the
outset, a turnkey purchase gives the City a good deal of security.
Turnkey Fee Development on City-Owned Land
If the City owned a site on which it wanted new (or remodeled) facilities developed, it
could secure an agreement with a private developer to deliver the completed project to
an agreed-upon set of criteria and design specifications for a fixed price. This approach
is very similar to the turnkey purchase method described above except that the City
would already own the land and the transaction would cover only improvements on the
City's site.
The City would be deeply involved in the design with the developer and its team to
insure the completed facility satisfies the City's needs. As with the turnkey purchase
approach above, the developer could bear the responsibility for schedule delays, cost
over-runs and construction risk and the developer's profit could be built into the fixed
price. The fee could also be structured on an incentive basis whereby both the
developer and the City participate in the success of the project. Likewise, any owner-
initiated changes that affect schedule or cost would be adjusted for in the purchase
price.
Conclusion: If timing and market opportunities result in the City owning land for the new
facilities prior to the start of development, teaming with a private developer to develop
-27-
the City's desired improvements on a turnkey fee basis gives the City the advantages of
one-stop turnkey services but on its own land.
City Self-Develops
The City could elect to tie up property and proceed with the development of the new
facilities purely on its own using City staff resources and capital. The committee
believes, however, that the City cannot operate the same way that the private
development community can (e.g. prevailing wage rates) and'as a result, the City would
not be able capture the entrepreneurial equity of the private sector.
While not a criticism of City staff and its technical abilities, there are specialized skills
required to plan, develop and construct office and administrative facilities that are
considerably different than the skills found in most municipal organizations. The City
has a core business to run: the welfare and protection of the residents of Federal Way.
The start to finish development of the new City facilities poses a tremendous distraction
to the main mission of the City staff.
Especially if a competitive RFP process is followed, the committee surmises-that market
forces will drive private developer fees and implied profits down considerably: So far so
that it would be less than the true, incremental costs of the City developing the facilities
itself.
CDnCILIsion: The development of the new facilities by the City itself should make for an
over-all more expensive and less efficient process vis a vis applying the forces of the
private development market.
-28-
DISCUSSION OF DESIGN/BUILD PROCESS
The Washington State legislature authorizes cities like Federal Way to utilize alternative
public works contracting procedures including GC/CM and Design/Build. These
alternatives are available to cities with a population greater than seventy thousand and
for projects valued over$10.0 million. To use the process, the project must first go
through a public review process to allow the public to understand and approve the
reasons for not using the traditional "design-bid-build" public works process.
Once the City determines that the alternative process will serve the public interest, the
next step is to conduct the design/build process itself. The steps include:
Developing the RFP, which must include certain elements, including the
scoring system, the maximum allowable construction cost and the honorarium
payable to losing finalists;
• Narrowing the proposals to 3-5 finalists;
• Obtaining "Best and Final" proposals from the finalists; and
• Selecting the winner
• Completing a design/build contract between the winner and the City.
Note that the maximum allowable construction cost requirement can be structured a
couple of ways. One way is to require that the cost not exceed the maximum and be
less if possible. A second way is to require that the cost be equal to the maximum and
that the design incorporate as many features as is possible to fit within that maximum
cost.
Here's a simplified com Darison of certain aspects of the two processes.
DESIGN/BUILD LEASE-TO-OWN
Site Selection City ownership RFP for site only or
or RFP for Site and Team or
RFP for City-owned site Negotiation with landowner
Land Ownership City Private Developer
During Development
Team Selection RFP for design/build team Negotiation with
landowner/developer
or
RFP for developer _
Governing Document Design/Build Agreement Assignment of land PSA (if
RFP for site only); and
Lease; and
Development Agreement or
PSA with nonprofit
Construction Interest Tax-Exempt Private (Taxable)
Risk of Cost Overruns Governed by Design/Build Governed by Lease and PSA
Agreement
-29-
Appendix III
Estimated Development Cost vs. Net Present Value
Estimated Development Cost MC)
Tlje estimated total cost to fully develop and construct the facility.
o Example: What you would pay when buying a house (including such fees
as closing costs, etc. in addition to the "list" pride)
Net Present Value (NPV)
• The current value (today's dollars) of future cash requirements for the facility
o This includes debt (mortgage) service payments and the cost of
maintenance and operating the facility.
• This number is used by businesses when they make financial decisions.
- 30 -
Appendix IV
Maps of Potential Municipal Facility Locations
Overall Site Map
"Safeway-Fred Meyer" Site-
• Located at 1" Way S. and S. 320th St.
East Campus Site
• Located at 32"d Ave. S. and S. 320th St.
Current City Hall
Located at S. 336th St.'�and 1St Way S.
Reliance Land
• Located at S. 336th St. and 6th Ave. S.
- 31 -
` ff
/
- {z L , 2
g _ d
�.` lz
CIL lz
C15 cli 70
■� a. (� 1 pCO
tI7 W 3
N
- r E.5
ArM 7c Nl1J --—-----
z:-— •'' Z '•.. 1
41
v gLJ� f N 5
3p� i N i
S AV 4182
m - -
W Y_ _
-
I m --
$3�b� � 1
SAV _ ---
PJCZ
- ori
co
F— --
(A - -
cn
S AMH 31310 Vd
S AM-14 3 131 Vd
g C/)
S ld 4W
Cl)F- - a a
-c,
[/? o U}
CN
S AV 436-�,
g.
a f; -
� m
cn
S 3AV _.._...
Is
C O m
ra
CO oC a� a
C ' o?m 3 Q
�'v
os
CKS
ci nim
zo
�■/ cu E
J d CO LO N fns 85 3: dZ
LL { U
N O F 3 0
� f 1
-- -- -- t--------- - ---------
EMO :
� • Iffr
■
` r •�ti' � v - r I Ii -
1
Y
1 Y • I
v
...sir_ i
i , 1 wCc
■ `
r d
41
tT
-Om>
on
LA
_ Y ■ �3 , I
l ■ '
- /�\ ■ Y f r i 1
I r
-- - -; -------
Y Q
I I lU
11i ti r� � ■ I a�00 L7lU
�1 r L_� ■
�Ilkf
1' 1 11 1I • y' � � I 3�'�'[l'� ��1�
� 11 /' �' U � � %:! III' �:� eh+t•'�� -���
n -----------
p
W
CC
tel. 1 1 L ■ \ -
,� w
■
LIM----MX
k L
z
■
, I
i ti- -----------------
-----------
']AV
----- •
C
Y]
m
O 7 N<->
-- as
� N V O
_ a) a� 0 C c11 V cV Z_a`v c a w.m (6 N o••••-
g.
J d Cn to N [n 2 cn 2i az ct�r v ocsca Y ��
1 1 I
1
1 --
..
cc
f !
—__—_ ______---- --------------------------------L------
;g"
----------------...............L_...-.;gf9te ..{ 4—
�10. I
+
_ 1
1
■ !
- - p
' 1
■----------------------------- -
1
1
• ■ 1
■ -- r +
. .....................r-..-.......�....�.------- f
■ • l
■ 1
■ + i
- +�---------------- ----i-----------------------------------
----------- • .S
e ---.--�
•
•
� • r
• 1
__" 11�g� R 1
• 1
•r..r...w-.r-..wr-w..--.-•--------
Z3
.-ws---1------------------------------- -------------------------o -ti ------------------
qj 3■■*-■■
ca
i
11
[7 > c� •
Lt--r-- e
1 � ■ I
-----------------------------
1 • I
1 ■ I
1 � ■
+ • k
• s
-- -------------
1 -•
■
----------------------------------
r
r I
■
1 �
1
. ! I
I � 1
� 1
I
-- - - -- _
- ------ - --------
I � .
.m�U
C LoY3
_ U
_ C) U m ami N �E
to Yo a� Q a —E ; S mEa
V C -V C .�-• C o m c o m m i M o.-m
C IV
co Z=�`a_= y C� � oC3� fn v.
L UJ ccF _ In d _ c6 _ 4J m `.E� 5 L m p m
r +�
7
' � r -
• a y c �} fs.1�75^rr r•_- ,
,M1
�^�"y ' � E i t L� rcPs�Y�•�
' - -
Cj-
1 } 11
cc
ui
c
a :
w�+ e f - y ■ - i '
11
It
■a�' • I� � m tea} V t d��'f"��,a����,� � f�� • 1 1
��►� � �,. '- ` "`dei r�`•dt"s.�,� E.i{�,j^,t'.,�., , i
1 4�
}
lk
1 1 P
•' A 1 a s r.: s i y,It-
c,
■
F u £ ti
_� --rte`� i�` — �' ��-' * 1 ti ����-���'�s to 'y �' .•4 I's
r ...
i
C �
c m
cls
V al "O ¢ a •' m- l - i Z' AC
of a� ami v Z_=�' G M
w
W
V
1 1 ,
---- - -------
•. -- L
• �
------------------ �H 'AVE n .
� f �
f ■ _ __
f • `• r J
� ■ x +i
+ • r`r
e ■ ■ 1
; ♦ r ■ t
x,♦ E
� p ■ 1
♦ Y • f
�♦ 6 ■ 1
��`, ■ 1
r �
■
,
4 { • e
t 1 s • •
• t_ t
I _ y •
i�� rr • i kk �i
• • i
testi , • •
`• f.l i •
s
1 •
Vall,
CANT iS, i. ; T 111 }I, i • *�'
4f f
ryF .l .f Jl rr- L 1a }, • See
1 -
32� moo- �-.�_� - �+_���-..�-� •
■,
Appendix V
MUNICIPAL FACILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE
PUBLIC FORUM FEEDBACK
Public Forum #1 _ November 13 — City Hall
David Larson. MFAC needs to make its feelings known to the City Council.
Elizabeth Allison. 31026 20th Ave. S. The city should take care of its needs in
the most cost effective way. Praised the Police Department. Supports the
current site and does not support downtown.
Pat Allison. 4034 SW 328th St. Does not see the need for a new city hall. Read
her letter to the editor re Linda Kochmar's op-ed.
■ Lynda Jenkins. 29726 3rd Ave. S. She is a member of the Historical Society of
Federal Way. The city needs to be frugal and make-do.
Bobbie Bronson. Supports MFAC's work.
• Cheryl Nevers. 30190 3`d Pl. SW. Does not see the need for a new city hall.
The city should focus on human services.
• Dan Casey. Gateway Center president. Dollar figures in the MFAC report are
too high. RFP process will bring in a lower price due to competition.
• Judy Carlson. 31423 42nd PI. SUV. Does not want a downtown city hall. The city
should improve the police facility, then court, then city hall. The city should build
the facility in stages.
• Joanne Bernovich. 30120 12th Ave. SW. The City Council's vision will have to
wait. Commended Linda Kochmar.
- 37 -
Public Forurn #2 — N'ovember-20— Regional Library
• Didn't get name. 21St Ave. SW. Questioned whether the municipal facility costs
are fully loaded. Committee responded in the affirmative.
• Barbara Reid. Stressed the importance of the public transportation network
when choosing a site. Said that people need to see the typically unseen portions
of city offices to understand the city's space needs. Does not support a site on
S. 320th St. or Pacific Hwy. S.
• P_qte Stobart. S. 292nd St. Feels the city needs to do a better job of cutting costs.
Asked for clarification about overcrowding calculations. Thinks 100,000 square
feet is palatial.
• Nancy Combs. 21St Ave. SW. Does not support higher taxes when the economy
is bad. Supports more police service.
• Mark Clirehugh. 812 S. 273`d Ct., Des Moines. Complimented the City Council
for the MFAC process. Complimented MFAC on its independence. Supports
RFP process. Said it is cheaper to buy a building than to build a building.
• Dan Casey. Gateway Center president. Government lags behind the private
sector in calculating square feet per employee. Technological advances will
reduce need for space. MFAC should recheck its growth assumptions. An RFP
process will yield lower costs than in the MFAC study. MFAC needs to help the
City Council quantify the value of subjective variables, i.e.,-how much location on
a main road, new construction, etc., are worth in dollars. Wonders whether it is
really necessary to put city hall and police/court in same building. Thinks RFP
process should allow optional separate buildings.
• Larry Monuteaux. Resides in Colonial Forest. MFAC did a good job of holding
costs down but does not think City Council will listen to MFAC.
• Joann Piquette. Commended MFAC's process and hard work. Suggested that
city hall and police/court do not need to be co-located. Feels a downtown site is
not necessary.
® ,David Larson. Submitted comments in writing to Jack Dovey. Does not believe
the utility tax increase is for the community/senior/swim center— believes it is
really for the municipal facility. Asked MFAC to keep pushing its views after it
presents its final report to the City Council.
- 38 -
Appendix Vi
E-mails and Other Feedback Deceived From Citizens
Note:For privacy reasons,the addresses(both physical and email)and phone numbers of those who
provided feedback to the committee have been taken out of the messages. .
-39 -
From: "S. Ashurst"
To: Patrick Briggs
Date: 5/19/02 7:59PM
Subject: Online Council Comment From
This is not a question. It is input and comment.
We voted for a public safety facility and funded it. We did NOT give you permission to
build a city hall. If you can save the money without cutting services,then build it when
you have the cash. We are living with the results of fiscal irresponsibility perpetrated
upon us by past King County denizens Locke, and now Sims.
I certainly do NOT want a new City Hall,if parks within the immediate area are being
closed.
If you have extra money and the parks and pools-are closed-I expect you to use that
money to keep amenities for which we have already paid, open for the citizens to use
who are trying to still LIVE here.
Remember us? No,I don't actually think that you do. Otherwise no one would be
putting a park and ride at the old Silo site. If you were thinking at all about those of us
who are trying to LIVE here, you would have fought that with all of your might,and kept
it with the existing park and ride, and the garage the mall offered to help government
build.
No new city hall until you have either saved the money, or asked US if we want to fund
it. Don't you dare dip into a cookie jar with no funds in it, and expect us to bail you out.
The mood people are in,you just might find yourself with a City Hall begun,which
cannot be completed.
There are PRIORITIES unfunded. A new City Hall isn't one of them.
-40-
From: "Stehpen Ashurst"
To: Patrick Briggs
Date: 5/19/02 8:24PM
Subject: Online Council Comment From
Concerning the construction of a "NEW CITY HALL" I don't understand how any
reasonable city official could in the current economic environment envision spending the,
limited resources available,unless we the tax paying public are being lied to, on a
boondogle like constructing a building. State and county governments are threatening the
closure of public facilities designed to provide summer activities for our youth and keep
them occupied and out of the hands of the unsavory street culture that is trying to take
oveYbur city and your answer is "Sure,take the kids,we want a fancy new building to
boost our IMAGE." Do you have the money to build this new city hall,and keep the
other facilities open. If not, I believe that it is a bigger boost to our image as a caring
community that we do all we can to serve our citizens before we consider serving
ourselves.
-41 -
From: Derek Matheson
To: Paul Cataldo
Date: 6/14/02 8:32AM
Subject: Re: opinion about city hall
Dear Andrew,
Mayor Burbidge received your e-mail and asked me to send you a quick note. She
appreciates you taking the time to share your thoughts on our municipal facility project.
There are several reasons why the City Council is Iooking at a new municipal facility.
First,our Police Department and Municipal Court-both new departments-are housed in
temporary space that is expensive to rent and was never designed for police and court _
work. Secondly, our current buildings are too small. A study last year found that the city
needs about 13,000 more square feet right now in order to operate efficiently. Thirdly,
our city is growing and will see thousands of new residents over the next twenty years.
We will need to have enough space to serve that growing population.
The City Council's Municipal Facility Advisory Committee is currently studying where
to put a new municipal facility and how to pay for it. We will forward your letter to the
committee so the members know your opinion. You are also welcome to attend any
committee meeting and speak with the members. The group meets on the second
Wednesday of every month at 4:00 p.m. and the fourth Wednesday of every month at
6:00 p.m. The next meeting is June 26 at 6:00 p.m.
Thanks again for taking such a strong interest in your city government.
Derek Matheson
Assistant City Manager
City of Federal Way
253-661-4016
>>>Paul Cataldo 06/12 4:35 PM>>>
I'm Andrew Cataldo of Boy Scout troop 342, and I want to give my opinion about
moving city hall. First off why do we need to move it? The city hall we have now is not
runn down, old, and needs to be replaced. Second,where would the city put it. I don't
think downtown is a good place to put it because it's messed up enough already.More
construction in that part of town is not a good idea.It will only make people more upset.
Putting a new city hall out in an isolated part of town is not a good idea either. I think,if
Federal Way is desperate enough, to just update the building we have. It would be
cheaper depending on what needs to be replaced. Please e-mail me back as soon as
possible, and tell me your opinion on the issue.
Sincerly,Andrew Cataldo
CC: David Moseley; Jeanne Burbidge
-42 -
From: Derek Matheson
To: Vernon &Lynda
Date: 8/15/02 4:54PM
Subject: Re:New City Hall
Hi,Lynda-Thanks for your comments. The MFAC meets the second Wednesday of
every month at 4:00 p.m. and the fourth Wednesday at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall.
The group has had a very busy summer. Members have reviewed past reports and toured
other city halls as part of their research. Most recently,the MFAC started going through
a list of 22 potential city hall sites identified by the city's real estate consultant. The
committee narrowed that list to nine sites on which our consultant is doing a thorough
financial analysis. In addition,the MFAC will discuss financing tools and revenue
sources on August 28. A preliminary report with recommendations on sites and finances
will come out later this year-a bit later than expected.
Chair Jack Dovey and I will be meeting with the editors of both the Mirror and News
next week to discuss their coverage of the MFAC. We hope that both papers will
increase their coverage. However,please note that the city manager has given frequent
updates at City Council meetings and has highlighted the MFAC's work in two columns
in the Mirror. The MFAC was also the headline article in the summer city newsletter.
I know you mentioned that you don't use the internet frequently,but it is a great source of
information. Simply go to www.cityoffederalway.com and click on "Municipal Facility
Advisory Committee" at the bottom of the page. This will take you to a wide variety of
information on the group's work. Thanks for your interest and perhaps we'll see you at a
future meeting. Derek Matheson
>>> "Vernon&Lynda" >08/13 9:06 AM>>
Although I don't look at your website that often or know how to look at everything I
haven't seen any notice as to what the Municipal Facility Advisory Committee is doing,
when the meetings are being held, etc.
I have even e-mailed the FW Mirror paper thinking that this would be a public service
but nothing.
I was not chosen to be on the committee (and that's fine)but from the form that you
put out it gave a time line as to what was going to take place.
Number 5 Citizen Comment with public forums. I realize I was on vacation May and
part of June but I haven't seen any information on such .
Here it is almost Sept. what is going on?
Sincerely,
Lynda Jenkins
CC: MFAC ROSTER
-43 -
From: L.Anthony Tebeau
Sent: Thursday, September 12,2002 2:11 PM
To:jdovey
Subject: City Hall Building
Jack:
The short of it is the last thing the city needs to get involved in is.the building and paying
for a new city hall. They have the opportunity to get the building they want for 1/2 the
price by buying the property adjacent to the current city hall.
As an aside,how is the city planning to pay the costs related to the sign issue? I have
been told that that cost could be as high as$25,000,000.
Tony Tebeau
-44-
From: Derek Matheson
To: Mark Gouras
Date: 9/30/02 11:OOAM
Subject: Re: Online Council Continent From
Mr. Gouras -Thanks for your comment. In addition to the City Council,we will also
provide a copy to the eleven members of the city's Municipal Facility Advisory
Committee. If you wish to attend their next meeting, it is on Oct. 9 at 4:00 p.m. at City
Hall. Derek Matheson,Assistant City Manager.
>>> "Mark Gouras" 09/28 8:21 PM>>>
How'do I submit my comment against a new, expanded City Hall?Does the following
constitute a formal comment? If so,I submit the following: _
Building a new,expensive City Hall is a fundamentally unsound thing to do when we
have the worst economy in the country. Isn't the office vacancy rate in Federal Way
already outrageous?Who do you think that you are going to attract?
I want a low key(no self-aggrandizing buildings), low cost, functional government.I
absolutely DO NOT want Federal Way to become Seattle. If I wanted a spend thrift
government, I would move back there.
I honestly believe that a new,expensive City Hall would be a monument to the City
government and nothing else. Please,please,please do not do this.If you need more
space,rent some more. It's not there is a shortage.
CC: David Moseley; Dean McColgan; Eric Faison; Jeanne Burbidge;
Linda Kochmar; Mary Gates; Michael Hellickson; Michael Park
-45 -
From: 'ROBERT LEGGE"
To: jason.suzaka
Date: 10/6/02 11:11 PM
Subject: City Hall site
Dear Mr. Suzaka,
I was unable to access the "testify now" option on your website. Please deliver my
comments to the Municipal Facility Advisory Committee.
My wife and I have lived in Federal Way since 1978 and we would like to see a
pedestrian friendly city hall located at South 320th and 1 st Avenue South. That location
would be close to the downtown core,but would contribute much less traffic congestion.
It would be a cheaper alternative to the downtown core and would allow for a town
square which is a feature of many city halls that are vital and attractive.
Rob and Earline Legge
838-5114
-46-
From: "Mary Anne Reinhart"
To: derekm,jasons, aaronu
Date: 10/28/02 1:l OPM
Subject: Municipal Facility Advisory Committee -Online Comment Form
Name: Mary Anne Reinhart
Message:
Dear Municipal Facility Advisory Committee Members:
I read with interest a recent article in the Federal Way Mirror about your efforts to make
recommendations on where a new City Hall and Police Facility should be located. I can
well appreciate all of the study and efforts that have gone into this project and want to
thank you for your untiring work.
As a taxpaying resident of Federal Way for the past seventeen years,I have several
thoughts about the site. I believe that any location near the central core of the business
district would not be the best choice. 1) It would increase the traffic congestion problems
we already have. 2) It would probably be more expensive than soem other area. 3)It
would take existing taxable property off of the tax roles and thus reduce revenue to the
city. In light of the economic problems that are affecting not only the city,but county
and state,we do not need to add to the situation.
My choice of location would be the existing one. People generally know where the
offices are located. It is conveniently located for most people. Parking is not particularly
good but could very likely be improved. A second option would be to renovate another
building or buildings in the area. There are a number of office buildings already in the
same area of West Campus that are presently empty. I would suggest that one of them
might be more than adequate to meet the projected needs.
Thank you for allowing some input into the discussion and I look forward to seeing the
project move forward in the most favorable way for all the citizens of Federal Way.
Respectfully yours,
Mrs.Mary A.Reinhart
-47-
From: Derek Matheson
To: Bob Hester
Date: 11/12/02 9:27AM
Subject: Re: Municipal Facilities Input
Mr.Hester-Good morning and thank you for your comments. We will share them with
the members of our Municipal Facility Advisory Committee. The group will be making
recommendations on this subject to the City Council. I would also encourage you to
attend one of two public forums hosted by the MFAC to find out what residents are
thinking. The dates/times are included in the attached press release. Perhaps I will see
you, re. Derek Matheson,Assistant City Manager.
>>> "Bob Hester" 11/09 11:51 AM>>>
To: Mr. Derek Matheson
City of Federal Way
From: Robert Joe Hester
I read Council member Linda Kochmar's article in last Saturdays Federal Way Mirror.
After having our retirement funds beat down during the last two years,I read with interest
her preferred option "that costs significantly less..." regarding meeting the needs for our
city's municipal offices.
I believe we need to continue developing appropriate facilities for our growing city but
keep the cost within the means of our taxpayer citizens. It would be nice but is not
necessary to build municipal facilities within the core of our developing downtown area.
The cost to do so is much too high. I prefer Linda Kochmar's preferred option of
remaining in the existing city hall and building a new police facility on adjacent land with
a connecting breezeway. I also believe it is time for the City Council and administration
to become more frugal with the funds they are managing.The cost of the recent image
study was exorbitant in today's economy and I believe most of Federal Ways taxpayers
would not like to see such a subjective project pursued again in the future.
Thank you for your time.
Bob Hester
CC: Jason Suzaka
-48 -
From: Derek Matheson
To: STEPHEN MANDLE
Date: 11/12/02 9:33AM
Subject: Re: City Hall Project
Mr. &Mrs. Mandle- Good morning and thank you for your comments. We will share
them per your request. As you know, the Municipal Facility Advisory Committee will be
making recommendations on this subject to the City Council. I would encourage you to
attend one of two public forums hosted by the MFAC to find out what residents are
thinking. The dates/times are included in the attached press release. Perhaps I will see
you there. Derek Matheson,Assistant City Manager.
-z.
>>> "STEPHEN MANDLE"0 11/09 5:06 PM>>>
We wish to express our concerns over the proposal to build a new city hall. Our strong
preference is to have City Hall remain in the existing building and to build the new police
facility adjacent to that building. Linda Kochmar expressed our views on this subject
perfectly in her Federal Way News article. It's crazy to spend the amount of money
proposed to relocated city hall when the current location is far better than any of the
proposed sites. The economics alone in these tough times should be enough to stop any
move, even if the current location was less than ideal!
Please pass on our feelings in this matter to the Municipal Facilities Advisory Board and
the City Council Thank you.
Stephen and Inga Mandle
CC: Jason Suzaka
-49 -
From: "Robin Baker"
To: derekm,jasons, aaronu
Date: 11/13/02 1:54PM
Subject: Municipal Facility Advisory Committee-Online Comment Form
Name:Robin Baker
Message:
My comments are based on being the City-Wide Receptionist for the City of
Federal Way. I here many comments regarding the unneccesary need for a new facility.
Although I agree this might not be the best time with regards to our economy,it is the
best time if this great city is going to continue to expand. We have absolutely no more
space on the 1 st floor for the new employee's we will indoubtedly need with anymore
expansion,which is bound to happen. More developments,housing and commercial will
lead to more inspections,land-use review,and ultimately more files/plans. As it is we
have a filing system that is overflowing onto the isles. Cost is definately an issue for the
public,but as an employee who hears all the disgruntled mutterings of that same public it
would seem they want the best,quickest service for nothing.
-50-
From: "Garry& Carol Bryan"
To: Patrick Briggs
Date: 11/19/02 2:52PM
Subject: Online Council Comment From
We are against building a new city hall in the core of downtown for 30 million,when
expansion of the present city hall could be built on adjacent property.Also,business
revenue would be cut off,if built downtown.
-51 -
From: Derek Matheson
To: Kim Scattarella
Date: 11/26/02 8:56AM
Subject: Re: Suggestion
Hi,Kim-We've actually taken a look at this building. It's about the right size and has a
decent location. The Municipal Facility Advisory Committee chose not to include it
among its four recommend sites because it became available so late in the process.
The asking price,when compared to the MFAC's other sites,is surprisingly a bit high,
especially when we factor in the likely cost of renovations.
In addition to recommending four sites,the MFAC is also recommending the City
Council run an RFP process and invite any developer to submit a proposal for a turnkey
building. If the Council goes this direction,Capital One's real estate agent tells me the
company will submit a proposal.
Thanks for the helpful suggestion. Derek
>>>Kim Scattarella 11/25 3:41 PM>>>
For a new City Hall(if this option has been explored-never mind)
What about the new Capitol One Building-isn't it mostly vacant now?
If the size is large enough and that might be a big if,that would be a already built location
that could potentially save the City millions of dollars! The down side might be the
location,but it probably isn't much worse than here.
Then approach Quadrant-if this site deems favorable and negotiate an asking price. If
they aren't interested,they could always use the approach that was used by the City of
Renton to obtain a new City Hall -condemn as the mayor chose to do,then get a reduced
price on the already existing building.
Kim Scattarella,PE
Senior Engineering Plans Reviewer
City of Federal Way
CC: Jason Suzaka; Natalie Rees; Patrick Briggs
- 52 -
From: "John Caulfield"
To: derekm,jasons, aaronu
Date: 12/2/02 12:58AM
Subject: Municipal Facility Advisory Committee-Online Comment,Form
Name: John Caulfield
Message:
As outlined in the City's Comp Plan-civic center development/redevelopment should at
least be considered and encouraged to be located downtown- specifically in the City
Center core. If the community is to redevelop this area to meet our needs (versus
traveling to Tulwila, Seattle,.Bellevue, etc.), which has consistently lost business and
market share over the last. 10+years, civic center(i.e., city halls,police stations,
libraries, performing art theaters, etc.)will play an integral part in spurring
redevelopment. As we all know and as the empirical evidence supports, a vibrant and
economically sustainable downtown only survives if there is a balance of retail, office,
housing, AND civic activites located cohesively in one,general area.: If we do not wish to
implement our Comp Plan- fine-let's repeal it-but if we are to implement our Comp
Plan- serious consideration needs to be given to locate a City hall downtown. Because-
if not now with this project-when - and how can we expect other civic related
developers to consider downtown. We are a crossroads-a watershed moment if youwill
-are we going to walk the walk or simply continue to ignore our downtown area. As a
collegue of mine said to me many years ago-the sooner we get started the sooner we
are there-this project provides an exceelent opportunity to spur the redevelopment of
downtown/SeaTac Mall. I suggest this group talk with large national type developers and
simialr architects and engineers who are in the "know"about what is really occurring in
the retail and housing markets-including the importance of locating civic cenetrs in
downtowns -much has chnaged in the last 12 -18 months. If we lose this opportunity-
this community will cotninue to see its downtown area at best provide a minimal ROI and
at worst become a large blighted area as we all know the SeaTac Mall is very cabable of
doing.
-53 -
August 27, 2002
Jack Dovey
Chair, Municipal Facilities Committee
Federal Way City Hall
3353.0 1" Way South
Federal Way, Washington 98003
Reference: Economic Impact of the Municipal Facilities Committee Charge
Dear Jack;
The Municipal Facilities Committee has done some long,and.hard
theoretical application of the causes.and effects of the concept of the civic center project
(a combined City Hall, Police, Courts and other."projection based"office space.needs):
You;have looked at some theoretical planning(Seneca Report), monuments in Seattle,
some other-city's-starts and stops (Seatac), and some other'city's realized market
opportunities (Seattle, Renton, Kent).
You have:made the.assumption that-a.Municipal Facil_Wwo:uld be an economic
stimulator to-the area surrounding it,only to find.the-assumption unsupportable (the
unanswered former Mayor's challenge, and the"anchor tenant"concepts). The City
Center has other hard work ahead of it to realize its potential. A municipal facility will
not be a cure all.
You know that the need for dollars will never end(police, capital facilities, capital
facility maintenance, human services, parks, school levies, fire department propositions,
and limitations on our ability to provide those dollars (Inititives 601, 747, and others with
increasing frequency.)
We believe that growth should pay for growth, but cannot figure out how to
implement the array of user fees necessary to accomplish this (excise motor vehicle taxes,
gas taxes, utility taxes, and user fees). They simply will not cover the costs unless You
make them. If we cannot cover the costs, we may need to adjust our goals.
The market opportunity we-have before us in the municipal facility arena is to take
advantage of the real estate opportunities as presented in the market today and leverage
them based on the opportunities allowed us in the overbuilt office market, regionally.
Build the "custom" facilities with experienced municipal developers that can turnkey a
project on their own land and sell to us-at a guaranteed budget price. Quadrant is still
building, at a fixed price, for the Washington Education Association, and to a regional
transportation agency(Sound Transit in Snoqualamie Ridge) with limited funding.
rte_
The market opportunity we have before us is a County system that has huge deficits
and is selling off the assets it can no longer afford and relegating services under the
"Growth Management" mandate.
The market opportunity we have before us is buildings we can buy and improve to our
specifications for less than the cost to build new and have more than adequateoffice
space. In 1991 we were in"market opportunity"times and did the same with the .facility
we now own.
The question before us is at what cost to the stakeholders do we want to build
monuments?. Do we have the obligation to fund only municipal facilities and have
human services, parks, roads, police, fire and emergency services, and others, pay for
themselves from user fees?
We can have over 100;000 square feet of"state of the art" and adequate office
facilities, with improvement monies built in; for less than U-5,20.0,000.; or we can"Build
new In Core" for$30,831,200. The Seneca Group; moderate Growth-2025 report said
we would need 108,622 sf. on page 6 of the report, and the Total Development Budget
from the chart after page 12 was $30;83:1,200. We need to take advantage of the market
opportunities presenting themselves in-today's market, or adjust our goals or.stratifies.
.Please remember some of these things in your deliberations: Thanks for doing the
"hard job", andcontinuing to serve your community.
Sincerely Yours,
Mark Freitas
-55-
29726 3`d Ave_ S_
Federal Way, Wash_ 98003
Sept.3,2002
Dear Mr. Dovey,Chair,Municipal Facilities Committee,
I appreciated attending your recent meeting and the discussion of financing of the new city hall.As I
mentioned there, I don't feel I have the expertise in the many facets of what is being discussed in regards to the
structure but hopefully you will listen to me as well as any others who can assist you in your decisions..
I have attended many public meetings over the years as a learning process for myself_ I wish more citizens
would do the same_ So few do.I respect those who do although they may not agree with me.
I have been involved with the Historical Society of Federal Way for some time volunteering with clipping
and filing the past few years: It's ironic that awhile back I came across the enclosed newspaper accounts. I took
copies to the FW Mirror thinking that they may want to use them in their coveragd of the new city hall.
Then you wonat believe this but I decided to do the same for your committee after attending your recent
meeting(Aug.28"'). 1 know you were discussing several sites in the downtown area and then here in the FW Mirror
this weekend they featured three such sites. I appreciate their coverage and hope that they will continue tri do so as
well as the Federal Way News_
Well as you can see Mr.Andrew Cratsenberg had"plans" in 1976. I thought de ja-vu(not the local strip
joint).Here you are talking about somewhat in the same area he had visions. Although I have lived here since 1962
I don't remember seeing such plans. Some of the names listed are still in the area. You may want to contact them
to see what they were discussing. Maybe if it would have been built back then we wouldn't be hassling the issue
today.
My many recollections of the 1970's were of the struggle citizens, students and teachers were having with
the Federal Way School District since I was raising five children at the time, some of which may of attended with
you.
I also found the other clipping on the city starting up and finding money to do this. Since you were talking
about money I thought it was also of interest.
Now to my feelings of where to put a city hall. I for one would encourage you to search out an area outside
of the downtown core. I feel there is already enough traffic congestion and the price of property more costly there.
I would hope that,you would consider staying in the current building, acquiring buildings nearby to expand the
police and courts. Most importantly keep the cost down with a modest functional building rather than a monument
to those who.built it.
Thanks for your service as a city councilman and the time you are spending on this project. Would love to
have you join the Historical Society of Federal Way.
Sincerely,
Lynda L.Jenkins
-56-
w- _
cs9�� .�d"i AC4`; +I 5i
57
ty g
S" _ YI Or - .67 °� Vl "t}
J CL
•."11 :.LCy h4 Y,Ty -e,✓2 •�^, r�' - .'�+.�tl
r41
__ F �tl�• J �N
�7 S
r _
•.�"C .lam—.,A -- k� �f g V ' � �
�'S3:wv'T*k�5.".�:a����?:�riJ3zo1 �T.,., ..,c::Ss�%•:f'i?;� .x::sy'C..''r�.C'l k?!`•-i`k7.,C_•'�G:•� a..��-.�' 4:. ;a-^2; � r ,C•;�'� n- yF�ia
. .�,4i17;,ff �: �!E'-I�4�k-'�:R�k�f"k�:!EEIi-"�F�• � ic�lltit :d.�:��•z�k� •�i� t�,r.._�:.
h
- 57-
' Nine Persons
a
to site choice
Formation of a nine-j)erson task Councilman Paul Barden was and at that time the county could
force empowered to look into present at the mea.. ir - -;d in- consider the offer,"added Barden:
Possible sites in Federal Way for a dicated that while the Cratensberg Members of the task.force-were
new complex announced ed T srrse and administrative site seemed attractive, there were chosen from both the Community
p y other considerations_ Council and the Federal. Wa
night a four-hour rrit'eting of the "A,ll that is needed at this point is Chambei-Of Commerce. It includes
Community Council, about -two acres, enough for a
News of the task force came courthouse, and an option to Kirsten Straight, John Krausser,
shortly after an ad hoc committee purchase additional acreage if a. Bill Seifert, Joe Martinson;
report by Kirsten Straight atrdJohn decision were made later to expand Barbara Casade, Dean Gullikson,
Krausser recommending
ecommandn acre sitthat e the courthouse into a.n Bob Wood, Ted Sampsoil•and
- County p administrative complex that would
package offered by businessman include a police sub-station and Shirley Charnell. Wood, Sampson
Andrew Cratsenberg_ other facilities,"explained Barden. and Charnell will be non-voting
King County' 7th District "It would have to be in writing members_
I V[Cceinter
a 911t
.
.,receivet wi
avor _
By ROBERT SMITH acres he would build for tease a Street and'24t1i Avenue South would
The court house, police precinct build- be gn 84-u4it apartment for senior
proposeded for Federal ing, multi-service center, civic -citizens,similaadministrative Way'center by center and administrative -offices constructed ir to one Cratsenberg
ri Puyallup.
developer Andrew Cratsenberg is .Cor King County-
"very well designed for compatible The offer is sweetened with the Roads would lead directly to the
use,'" a(,rording to the coordinator administrative ceitter but
for a citizens committee studying possibility aC a donated park site alignment of roads around the Cent-
y g just east Cthe administrative cent- err would discourage their use as
new sites for Federal Way District er where Cratsenbcrg plans to con- thoroughfares, Cratsenberg
Court' struct a .two acre lake to hold
Of three sites selected by the ground water and runoff. reported.
citizen 's committee, the Mrs. Straight agrees with Work is scheduled to begin within
Cratsenberg site, just north of Cratsenberg that such a lakeside' a month to sink 28th and 29 wool=
SeaTac Mall is being viewed with l?ark`"has turned a negative rob- c h a South. Although this would
particular favor because there is a lem (water runoff) into an asset." c h a n n e 1 traffic near t h c
developer who has outlined specific Cratscnb r s offer inti(.i ),rtes admenis[ra[ive park,the traffic will
plans for that site, reports Kirsten growth of`administt ative needs be redirected Onto South 320th,
Straight_ w4rh open space into which Cratsenberg reported.
Mrs_Straight—a member of the buildings could expand and enough A 1 though Cratsenberg has
Long Range Planning Committee room in the proposed court buildin cooperated closely with the
for the Federal Way Community for three judges, g citizen's group studying civic sites,
Council wasspeakingas a rnemb- His administrative center would he has maintained a low profile and
er of an ad hoc committee that is be on an elevation I7 fete hi her has avoided actively promoting his
studying civic center sites for than his g offer_ He was not present Thursday
Federal Way_ proposed 13-acre Center night_
Plaza,a shopping center fronting on The- citizens comrotitree
Cratsenberg's offer of a 10-acre South320thStreet and bordering the recommended the Cratsenberg
site gc;es before King County southern edge of the administrativeoffer along with two other sites.
Executive John Spellman Monday, cotter_
with copies of his laps
-They are a 10-acre silt. Itrrsting
county council members being to still `the�ilmr pawl is a hospital 3 Utl diate north — and �Stdr etwesbtof lb runs on South
4 and
Cratsenberg's offer is to donate 3 si f e being considered by nine a five-acre site nc-ar the district`s
acres for a city hall site that would doctors. CraTsenbcrg reported Educational
be needed when Federal Way in- Friday. lice vices Center that
corporates. On an additional seven Nearby, fronting on South 312[h and t73 IeAvenue.,.;.On()nIt1road linking 28th
5f�—
Tuesday, September 24, 2002
To the Facilities Oversight Committee_
In that I will be out of town until October 11, I decided to communicate in writing. I
have been watching(from a distance)the progress of your committee and am encouraged
by the deliberative and thoughtful approach you are taking.
The recommendation you make to the Council will likely be what is finally decided
simply because you are researching, studying and listening: The Council has stated the
need for more public input and therefore created your committee as the vehicle to achieve
same.
I served on the City Council from 1992-1999. During that time I evolved from one who
despised and distrusted everything"government'to one who realizes the critical:role
government plays in shaping and developing a sense of community. .I evolved from one
who championed the all-volunteer efforts of a group.attempting to develop parts of the
BPA Trail (known as City Pride Park) to a strong proponent of a tax.Ancrease to develop
Celebration Park as a first-class community asset.
I take enormous pride in having been a patt.of the shaping of Federal Way as we worked
to emerge as a viable city. I came to appreciate the dedication and:.professionalism of
city employees. I am proud of the conservative accounting practices the first Council put
in place and the fiscal soundness of our city.
I was part.of the decision-making that ultimately placed the Transit Center at the location
of the old:Silo,store. That decision is now being challenged by a.devcloper with property
impacted by reduced ingress, egress. But the evolution of our current sea.,of.asphalt into
a planned downtown core will require some sacrifice by all partie"evelopem,business
owners and taxpayers. The placement of the transit center with structured parking will be
the catalyst for further development around that facility. It will add a north-south street
between 2e and 23d running from 320`h to 317th. Civic enterprises such as a field house
or a performing arts-center or a community center could eventually locate in proximity to
the structured parking and use it to mitigate parking requirements,thereby reducing the
cost of developing those community assets. I find it anupusing.that the challenge is based
on environmental impacts of increased noise and pollution. I wonder if Seattle assets
such as Columbia Center, Seattle Center or Experience Music Project would have ever
been built if"environmental impacts"challenges had prevailed. Densifying the
downtown core and making it more pedestrian-friendly will by definition constrain SOV
convenience. As we emerge as a city, detractors and those resistant to change will argue
against the efforts.
The decision before you now is the siting of a municipal complex. I include,for your
review,the original position paper I wrote when I recommended the utility tax increase in
1996. Though the suggestion at that time addressed the need for a public safety building,
— 59—
we have the resources today to prepare our government complex for service to our
community for the next fifty years. I also include an article from the NewsTribune dated
September 24 announcing the opening of the new City hall in Gig Harbor. Here are some
interesting statistics: $10 million facility(including$2 million for the land),tripling of
space to accommodate projected growth, community with population of 6,500 and annual
general fund budget of$5 million.
Deputy Mayor McColgan made an interesting observation at a recent Chamber of
Commerce forum. He suggested the current Chamber space is hard to find—they need
more visibility. The same argument holds for City Hall. Locating the'municipal complex
in the downtown core/frame recognizes Federal Way's potential annexation area and the
centralizi119 of municipal services for the future.
One need look no further than our neighboring cities to recognize that private investment
goes hand in hand with public investment in'a downtown,area. Where is Seattle's:City
Hall? Where is Tacoma's City Hall? Where is Bellevue's City Hall? Arguing that
public ownership of land in the downtown core reduces_tax revenue,ignores the
tremendous increase in property value around such a public investment. Consider the
renaissance of downtown Tacoma. Does anyone seriously believe that renaissance would
have materialized without the development of UW Tacoma c:mnpus,Museum of
Washington State History and millions of public dollars invested in infrastructure?
Would anyone challenge,the statement that Tacoma-is becoming a more"livable"city
due to the renovation? '
As you deliberate, strong arguments will be madeto complete this project as cheaply as
possible. People will point to current economic difficulties,to excessive taxation,to
strains=on social programs: Your challenge is-to make a recommendation based,not on
economics of the next six months,but in fact on a vision for the next twenty to:fifty,
years. Your conunittee is charged with the visioning process even more-than siting,and
funding issues. And that visioning requires"seeing"Federal Way in the year 2022 and
beyond, with the Eastside annexations completed,a population of 130,000 to 150,000 and
the economic slump of 2001-2002 a distant memory.
I ask all-ofyouto recognize the enormous weight ofyourposition on the future of
Federal Way as a livable city_ As I shared at the opening ceremony for,Celebration-Pa k:
A leader is one who sees more than others see,who sees farther than others see,and who
sees before others see. My sincere hope.is that you act individually and collectively to
lead our community forward.
Respectfully,
Ron Gintz
_(Oa–
November 1, 1996 from Ron Gintz to the City Council
The following is what I hope to` be the starting point for a
plan to lead our community into the year 2000 with facilities
and services that further enhance our quality of life.
The 1 . 37% utility tax instituted this year generates roughly
$1, 000,000 per year. We bonded that revenue- stream for ten
years providing $7 .5 million in capital. The difference be-
tween the $10.0 million collection over ten years and the
$7 .5 million in capital is attributable to cost of debt and
maintenance and operation provisions. Our tax collections
appear to be running ahead of projections, but I will ignore
that fact so as to err on the side of +conservative accounting
as I make the following proposal:
In adIffitio.n to taking the property tax levy to $1 . 60 from- the
current $1.56, I propose we raise the utility tax to 5.0%.
Based on the assumptions attributable to the� 1.37% level, the
additional 3.63% will generate roughly $2 .6 million per year.
I propose a two-way approach to allocating the funds:
1) $800, 000-$500, 000 to our current overlay .program, bring-
ing the current annual funding to $1.2 million.
•$150, 000 to restore Human Services funding
$ 40, 000 to restore Arts funding
$110, 0.00 to restore Parks Maintenance funding
. r
2 ) $2,000, 000-=Use this income stream to; bond $15,0.00,000 to
be repaid over the next ten years.
$7,500;000--build Celebration .Park per the
latest master plan.
$1,500,000-=fund the Perform fig Arts Facility
and parking enhancements at
Visitation.
$3,000, 000--fund Police Facility and complete
the municipal complex at First Way _
So and 336th St.
$3,0001000--fund Business District improve;=
ments including signage support,
boulevard enhancements and green
space areas.
I know these are rough and largely undefined numbers. But
what we accomplish in this plan is to address virtually ev-
ery constituent in our city. We enhance the passive and ac-
tive park system, the municipal complex, the cultural fa-
cilities and the downtown core. 'The debt service and M & 0
are covered more than adequately. At the end of ten years
the utility tax revenues can be utilized for another Forward
Thrust-type program or the tax can be rolled back.
of obvious concern to me is the inadequacy of the Overlay
Program even with the $500,000 infusion. On the other hand,
the addition of $500,000 per year beginning in 1997 would put
us ahead of the $200, 000 per year timetable assumed in re-
ti,por ts, Xecently.. .provided by .Staff. That early infusion would. -
`change th"eteriocation table a little. Ism -stall in favor
of adding to that number, but additional commitments may need
_61-
to come in the form of onetime money allocated each year from
carry-over funds. With the other areas addressed by the
utility tax increase, the Overlay Program could be placed at
the top of the list for additional funding with carry-over
moneys.
This plan preserves the integrity of the $600, 000 City Man-
ager's Contingency Fund, the $800,000 1997 reserve and the
$400,000 1998 reserve. Those moneys are available to handle
unforeseen events and onetime needs such as ACC funding, con-
tract funding for planners etc etc.
Please -review the information above and give :me the courtesy
of your personal feedback prior to going- public with any
facet of this proposal . This is simply a position paper for
discussion purposes . The prospect of a tax 'increase, is emo-
tionally charged at any time. But I believe we have held the
line trr the point that all excesses in our municipal budget
have been wrung out-. What is left is funding that is neces-
sary for the efficient functioning of our government. Some
people will always question the wisdom of funding specific
programs for which they personally have no interest or need,
but that is the balancing act we must perform.
T believe we should make the statement now, during budget de-
liberations. I do not wish to wait until our Council Retreat
when we are out of town, returning with the message that
"while we were away, we decided to raise, your taxes. " Let's
debate this plan over the next month and take the vote now.
I believe we will be thankful in .January that our task is
then to implement the spending plan rather. than vote the tax
increase. We can anticipate a furor and..some rancor, but
that criticism will come even -with the proPerty tax increase
from $1.56 to $1. 60. We have heard- several people declare
that LOS. cuts are not in their best interest.
Even after raising the utility tax to 5$ we will boast no
amusement tax, no B & O tax, and one of the lowest property
tax assessments in the region. I have heard that because
other taxing districts have higher tax levels we must keep
our portion low. I reject that argument. We cannot be held
responsible for the policies of other taxing districts . Tax-
payers must look critically at their tax load and take issue
with the entities that are overtaxing, in their opinion. We,
as elected officials of the City of Federal Way, must take
responsibility for the fiscal soundness. of our own policies.
To denigrate our level of service due to overreaching by '
other entities is irresponsible and reckless. I believe the
time has come for strong leadership and vision on our part.
We have. spent the last four years wringing out the real and
perceived excesses of our municipal government. We can now
place new revenues at our Staff's disposal, confident that
the maximum benefit of those dollars will be realized by
citizens of Federal Way.
I will close for now with the following thought I heard re-
cently: A manager does- things right--a leader does the right
thin gII
October 25, 2002
D � Q � ,� -�
Federal Way City Council 5
City Hall rf
33530 lst Way South ALT 2 9 � f
Federal Way, WA 98003
CiA�clerks Our
'O of Ftileraf�}y
Attention: Linda Kochmar and all members of council:
We very much agree with Linda Kochmar that Federal Way does
not need a- new city hall. Building a Police Facility/Municipal
Court adjoining the present City Hall is a better option_
We especially like the idea of a new Senior/Community
Center. The present Klahanee facility is poorly .designed, poorly
located, has inadequate parking and a dangerous street crossing_
We seldom go there. Instead, we drive 12 miles. to Kent for their
Tuesday night dances in a beautiful- building and we sign up for
their classes and activities. We sometimes feel a little guilty
using their facility- when we live in Federal Way.
We have lived in our Twin Lakes home for 22 years and had
hoped to upgrade to a smaller but newer home this year_ However,
with reduced value of our investments and less income this is no
longer an option. So we are happily making improvements to the
hotge we have. We think the City should do the same.
Sincerely,
ay Ind Pat Allison
t {
All/
�IO��
Community Center Review and Approval Process
Draft Work Program and Timeline
Goal: Gather public input and develop a plan for a community center, senior center and pool that will meet three
objectives: 1)a facility that will provide a place for a diverse multi-generational recreation and cultural activities,i.e.,
fitness,classes and gatherings, 2) a pool facility that will meet the need for learn-to-swim programs,competitive
swimming programs, swim for fitness and recreation swim activities and 3)a facility that will serve our community's
senior health,recreation and social needs.
Staff Team: Donna Hanson(co-lead),Jennifer Schroder(co-lead),Mary Faber,B. Sanders,Ken Miller,Karen
Kirkpatrick,Michael Olson,and Greg Fewins
TIMELINE 2003-2006
ACTIVITIES 2003 12004 2005 2006
Startup 11T QTR 2F1OQTR 3RD QTR 4""QTR
1. Council review and direction on community X
center work plan and timeline
2. Council review/approval of final work plan and X
timeline
3. Advertise/select/contract A&E Consultant X
4. Project web site/newsletters/traveling display X X X X X X X
Planning Phase
5. Convene advisory group representing a variety of X
community interests
6. Conduct online survey of programming interests X
7. Advisory group reviews city's recreation X
rograms and fee policies
8. Convene focus groups on specialized X
2rograrruning areas
9. Tour Community Centers X
10. Conduct a public community center design X
charrette
11. Identify potential sites and selection criteria g
Design Phase
12. Prepare and review business plan and facility X
concepts forpotential sites
13. Open House on concept plans and sites X
14. Evaluate potential sites X X
15. Council selects preferred concepts and site X X
16. Council authorizes property acquisition
X X X
17. Prepare schematic design and preliminary cost X X
est. for 2-3 preferred concepts
18. Open house on community center schematic X
design alternatives
19. Prepare a report on findings from advisory group X
input, outreach and research
20. Presentation of findings,recommendations, and X
budget impacts to council
21. Council selects preferred design alternative X
Construction Phase
22. Council authorize staff to proceed with a final X
design and business plan
23. Prepare construction documents X
24. Permitting X
25. Bid project X
26. Construction X X
27. Grand Opening X
Council Retreat:January 25,2003
2nd DRAFT 2nd DRAFT 2nd DRAFT 2nd DRAFT
CI'T'Y OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
RULES OF PROCEDURE
ADOPTED
JANUARY 21, 1992
Amended
Marcb 17,1992
May 19,1992
July 21,1992
December 15,1992
April 20,1993
January 18,1994
June 7,1994
September 21,1994
December 6,1994
November 16,1999
February 19,2002 f
1--ebrllar� . 2003
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
INDEX
SECTION NO. TITLE PAGE NO.
1 Authority 4
2 Council Meetings 4
3 Agenda Preparation 8
4 Council Discussion 9
5 Citizen Comment 9
6 Motions 10
7 Ordinances 12
8 Mayor and Deputy-Mayor 13
9 Council Relations with City Staff 13
10 Council Meeting Staffing 14
11 Council Member Attendance at Meetings 15
12 Public Hearings 15
13 Media Representation at Council Meetings 16
14 Council Representation 16
15 Confidentiality 16
16 Council Travel & Expenses 17
2
SECTION NO. TITLE VAG E NO.
17 Public Records 24
18 City Manager Evaluation Process 24
19 Mayor/Deputy Mayor Selection Process 25
20 City Advisory Committees 26
21 Council Committees 29
22 Filling City Council Vacancies 30
23 Miscellaneous 33
24 Suspension and Amendment of Rules 33
3
SECTION 1. AUT I I OIC UIN
1.1 The Federal Way City Council hereby establishes the following Rules of
Procedure ("Rules") for the conduct of Council meetings, proceedings and
business. These Rules shall be in effect upon adoption by the Council and until
such time as they are amended or new Rules adopted in the manner provided by
these Rules.
SECTION 2. COUNCIL MEETINGS
2.1 TYPES OF MEETINGS
(1) lte,ti 9a r Meetin-gs. Council's regular meetings will be held the first and
third Tuesdays of each month in Council Chambers, City Hall.
Regular Council meetings will begin at the hour of 7:00 p.m., and will
adjourn no later than 10:00 p.m. To continue past this time of
adjournment, a majority of the Council must concur.
If any Tuesday on which a meeting is scheduled falls on a legal holiday,
the meeting shall be held at 7:00 p.m. on the first business day following
the holiday, or on another day designated by a majority vote of the
Council.
(2) Special Meetin Us. A Special meeting is any Council meeting other than a
Regular Council meeting. Notice shall be given at least 24 hours in
advance specifying the time and place of the meeting and the business to
be transacted. A Special Council meeting may be scheduled by the
Mayor, City Manager or at the request of a majority of the Council
Members.
(3) Study Sessions. Council's Study Sessions will be held,when needed, as
follows:
Study sessions may be called by the Mayor, City Manager or by two(2)
or more Council Members.
Study Sessions will be informal meetings for the purpose of reviewing
forthcoming programs,receiving progress reports on current programs
or projects,or receiving other similar information. The Mayor and City
4
Manager will determine on-going dedicated schedules for regular Study
Sessions.
No final decisions can be made at a Study Session. Decisions on those
issues will be scheduled for a Regular or Special Council meeting.
(4) l nicrgeiiev ;Nleetin„; . An Emergency meeting is a Special Council
meeting called without the 24-hour notice. An Emergency meeting deals
with an emergency involving injury or damage to persons or property or
the likelihood of such injury or damage,when time requirements of a 24-
hour notice would make notice impractical and increase the likelihood of
such injury or damage. Emergency meetings may be called by the City
Manager or the Mayor with the consent of a majority of Council
Members. The minutes will indicate the reason for the emergency.
(5) ExecutO,e'SessiosiINleetings. An Executive Session is a Council meeting
that is closed except to the Council, City Manager and authorized staff
members and/or consultants authorized by the City Manager. The
public is restricted from attendance. Executive sessions may be held
during Regular or Special Council meetings and will be announced by
the Mayor or the Chair of the Special Council Committee,respectively.
Executive session subjects are limited pursuant to Chapter 42 RCW,
including considering real property acquisition and sale, public bid
contract performance,complaints against public officers and employees,
public employment applications and public employee evaluation,elective
office appointments and attorney-client discussions.
Before convening an Executive session, the Mayor or Chair shall
announce the purpose of the meeting and the anticipated time when the
session will be concluded. Should the session require more time,a public
announcement shall be made that the meeting is being extended.
2.2 ORDER OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
(1) Call 111eetin4 To Order
The Mayor calls the meeting to order. The Mayor will announce the
attendance of Council Members and indicate any Council Member who
is not in attendance and whether or not the Council Member has an
excused absence. The Mayor may,with the concurrence of the Council
Members, take agenda items out of order. Agenda items may be added
pursuant to Section 3.3 of these Rules.
5
(2) Pledge of Allegiance
Council Members and, at times, invited guests lead the flag salute.
(3) Proclamations and Presentations
A Proclamation is defined as an official announcement made by either
the City Council or the Mayor.
City Council Proclamations are defined as those non-controversial
events which have a major citywide impact. City Council Proclamations
shall be publicly read at a City Council meeting and presented to a
representative of the event during the Council meeting.
Mayor's Proclamations are defined as those non-controversial events
which are requested by and for a special interest group within the City.
Mayor's Proclamations are signed by the Mayor and forwarded to a
representative of the event.
The Mayor and City Manager shall determine if the Proclamation
request is for a City Council Proclamation or a Mayor's Proclamation.
Controversy is defined as a dispute,especially a lengthy and public one,
between sides holding opposing views.
City Manager - Introduction of New City Employees and Emerging
Issues
(4) Citizen C.ornment
Members of the audience may comment on items relating to any matter.
Citizen comment sign-ups will be available at each regular council
meeting for the use of those citizens wishing to address the Council.
Comments are limited to three (3) minutes, except that for a person
whose property is the subject of a condemnation ordinance then pending
before the City Council, or a person speaking on behalf of a group,
comments are limited to five (5) minutes. No speaker may convey or
donate his or her time for speaking to another speaker.
The Mayor may allow citizens to comment on individual agenda items at
times during any regularly scheduled City Council meeting other than
the regularly scheduled Citizen Comment period. These agenda items
include, but are not limited to, ordinances, resolutions and Council
Business issues. (See also Section 5,"Citizen Comment"of these Rules.)
6
(5) Consent Agenda
Consent Agenda items have either been fully considered by a City
Council Committee or are considered to be routine and non-
controversial and may be approved by one motion. Items on the Consent
Agenda include but are not limited to, minutes, resolutions and
ordinances discussed at a previous City Council or Committee meetings,
bid awards and previously authorized agreements. Any Council
Member may remove any item from the Consent Agenda for separate
discussion and action.
(6) PuNic Hiariri;gs
See Section 12 of these Rules for discussion of public hearing procedure.
(7) Council13-usiness
Council Business items are usually those items other than resolutions
and ordinances requiring Council action.
(8) Introduction and First Readinp, of Ordinances
Discussion and debate by the City Council may be held at this time.
Council Members may request amendments to the ordinance at this time
or at any time prior to adoption, direct staff to further review the
ordinance, or approve placing the ordinance on the Consent Agenda at
an upcoming Regular Council meeting for enactment as an enforceable
City law.
(9) Council Reports
The Council Members may report on significant activities since the last
meeting.
(10) Citi' Nlanaper Repor°F
The City Manager and staff update the Council Members on current
issues or items of Council interest.
7
(11) .'lcljuaAr-�aaaaeaat
With no further business to come before the Council, the Mayor
adjourns the meeting.
2.3 MEETING MINUTES
The City Clerk will keep an account of all proceedings of the Council in
accordance with the statutory requirements, and proceedings will be entered
into a minute book constituting the official record of the Council. City Council
meeting minutes will not be revised without a majority affirmative vote of the
Council at a regularly scheduled Council meeting.
2.4 COUNCIL MEMBER SEATING
A City Council Member's seat at the dais will be determined as follows:
(1) The Mayor shall sit in Chair #4, the center seat at the dais, and the
Deputy Mayor shall sit to the Mayor's right, in Chair#3;
(2) The remaining Council Members will be seated north to south by
position #1 through #7, as consecutively as possible.
SECTION 3. AGENDA PRLPARATION
3.1 The City Clerk will prepare an agenda for each Council meeting specifying the
time and place of the meeting, and setting forth a brief general description of
each item to be considered by the Council. The agenda is subject to approval by
the Mayor and the City Manager.
3.2 An item may be placed on a Council meeting agenda by any of the following
methods:
(1) A majority vote of the Council;
(2) Council consensus;
(3) By any two (2) Council Members;
(4) By the City Manager;
(5) By a Council Committee; or
(6) By the Mayor.
A draft agenda will be provided to all City Council Members who shall have
approximately 48 hours to review prior to publication.
8
3.3 An item may be placed on a regular Council meeting agenda after the agenda is
closed and the notice published if the Council Member or City Manager
explains the necessity and receives a majority vote of the Council at a public
meeting.
3.4 The City Clerk will endeavor to schedule sufficient time between public
hearings and other scheduled items, so the public is not kept unduly waiting,
and so the Council will have sufficient time to hear testimony and to deliberate
matters among themselves.
3.5 Legally required and advertised public hearings will have a higher priority over
other time-scheduled agenda items which have been scheduled for convenience
rather than for statutory or other legal reasons.
3.6 Agendas will be finalized by Wednesday, noon - approximately one (1) week
prior to the Council meeting. Agenda materials will be available, at City Hall,
for the Council, City staff, media and public on the Friday before the meeting.
3.7 All agenda items packet reports will be in the format provided by the City
Clerk's Office.
3.8 The Council may use the agenda item cover sheet "Recommendation
Statement" language for making a motion.
SECTION 4. COUNCIL DISCUSSION
4.1 All Council discussion shall be governed by ROBERTS RULES OF ORDER,
NEWLY REVISED.
SECTION 5. CITIZEN COAII pAAT ,
5.1 Persons addressing the Council, who are not specifically scheduled on the
agenda, will be requested to step up to the podium, give their name for the
record,and limit their remarks to three(3)minutes. No speaker may convey or
donate his or her time for speaking to another speaker. All remarks will be
addressed to the Council as a whole, and not to individual City staff members.
Any person making personal, impertinent, or slanderous remarks, or who
becomes boisterous, threatening, or personally abusive while addressing the
Council, may be requested to leave the meeting.
9
5.2 The Mayor has the authority to preserve order at all meetings of the Council,to
cause the removal of any person from any meeting for disorderly conduct and to
enforce these Rules. The Mayor may command assistance of any peace officer
of the City to enforce all lawful orders of the Mayor to restore order at any
meeting.
5.3 Citizens with complaints,concerns or questions,will be encouraged to refer the
matter to the City Manager, or ask that the matter be placed on a future City
Council meeting, or Council Committee agenda with the appropriate
background information. Any citizen who voices a concern or complaint at a
City Council meeting which involves a potential violation of the City's Code of
Ethics sball be advised by the Council, or City Management staff, of the
existence of the City's Board of Ethics, and of the procedures for requesting
Ethics Board opinions and/or investigations from the Ethics Board.
SECTION 6. INIOTIONS
6.1 If a motion does not receive a second,it dies. Motions that do not need a second
include: Nominations,withdrawal of motion, agenda order, request for a roll
call vote, and point of order.
6.2 A motion that receives a tie vote is deemed to have failed.
6.3 When making motions,be clear and concise and not include arguments for the
motion within the motion.
6.4 After a motion and second, the Mayor will indicate the names of the Council
Members making the motion and second.
6.5 After a motion has been made and seconded, the Council may discuss their
opinions on the issue prior to the vote. No further citizen comments may be
heard when there is a motion and a second on the floor, unless allowed by the
Mayor.
After a motion has been made and seconded,the Council may ask questions of
staff and/or discuss their opinions on the issue prior to the vote. No further
citizen comments may be heard when there is a motion and a second on the
floor, unless allowed by the Mayor.
6.6 When the Council concurs or agrees to an item that does not require a formal
motion, the Mayor will summarize the agreement at the conclusion of the
discussion.
10
6.7 A motion may be withdrawn by the maker of the motion, at any time,without
the consent of the Council.
6.8 A motion to table is undebatable and shall preclude all amendments or debates
of the issue under consideration. If the motion to table prevails,the matter may
be "taken from the table" only by adding it to the agenda of a future Regular or
Special meeting at which time discussion will continue; and if an item is tabled,
it cannot be reconsidered at the same meeting.
6.9 A motion to postpone to a certain time is debatable as to the reason for the
postponement but not to the subject matter of the motion; is amendable; and
may be reconsidered at the same meeting. The question being postponed must
be considered at a later time at the same meeting,or to a time certain at a future
Regular or Special City Council meeting.
6.10 A motion to postpone indefinitely is debatable as to the reason for the
postponement as well as to the subject matter of the motion; is not amendable,
and may be reconsidered at the same meeting only if it received an affirmative
vote.
6.11 A motion to call for the question shall close debate on the main motion and is
undebatable. This motion must receive a second and fails without a two-thirds'
(2/3) vote; debate is reopened if the motion fails.
6.12 A motion to amend is defined as amending a motion that is on the floor and has
been seconded,by inserting or adding,striking out,striking out and inserting,
or substituting.
Motions that cannot be amended include: Motion to adjourn,agenda order,lay
on the table, roll call vote, point of order, reconsideration and take from the
table. A motion to amend an amendment is not in order.
6.13 Amendments are voted on first, then the main motion as amended (if the
amendment received an affirmative vote).
6.14 The motion maker, Mayor or City Clerk should repeat the motion prior to
voting.
6.15 At the conclusion of any vote, the Mayor will announce the results of the vote.
6.16 When a question has been decided, any Council Member who voted in the
majority may move for a reconsideration,but no motion for reconsideration of a
vote shall be made after the meeting has adjourned.
11
6.17 The City Attorney shall decide all questions of interpretations of these Rules
and other questions of a parliamentary nature which may arise at a Council
meeting. (See also Section 4 of these Rules.) All cases not provided for in these
Rules shall be governed by Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised. In the
event of a conflict,these Rules shall prevail.
6.18 Roll call votes will be taken during all televised Council meetings on non-
unanimous votes, or if requested by a Council Member, or as required by law.
The purpose of roll call votes is to assist the City Clerk in recording the vote and
to communicate to the viewing public during televised City Council meetings the
outcome of the vote. The official meeting minutes will always reflect roll call
votes on each action item.
6.19 The Presiding Officer's decision on a point of order may be appealed. If
seconded, the appeal may be voted on by the Council. An appeal may not be
amended, is not debatable when it relates to indecorum, transgressions of the
rules of speaking, the priority of business, or if the appeal is made while the
previous question remains pending. In the event of a tie vote,the decision of the
Presiding Officer stands. An appeal is not in order when another appeal is
pending.
SECTION 7. (ORDINANCES
7.1 All ordinances shall be prepared or reviewed by the City Attorney. No
ordinance shall be prepared for presentation to the Council,unless requested by
a majority of the Council, or requested by the City Manager or City Attorney.
7.2 Ordinances will be introduced and enacted by a Council Bill Number. After
enactment, the City Clerk shall assign a permanent ordinance number.
7.3 The City Clerk or designee shall read the title of the ordinance prior to voting
unless the ordinance is on the Consent Agenda.
7.4 Upon enactment of the ordinance, the City Clerk shall obtain the signature of
the City Attorney. After the City Attorney's signature, the City Clerk shall
obtain the signature of the Mayor. After the Mayor's signature,the City Clerk
shall sign the ordinance.
7.5 Ordinances, or ordinance summaries, shall be published in the official
newspaper, as a legal publication, immediately following enactment.
7.6 Ordinances become effective thirty(30)days after the passage of the ordinance
unless otherwise specified.
12
SECTION 8. MAYOR ANIS DE PUNY MAYOR
8.1 The Presiding Officer at all meetings of the Council shall be the Mayor, and in
the absence of the Mayor, the Deputy Mayor will act in that capacity. If both
the Mayor and Deputy Mayor are absent, the Council Members present shall
elect one of its members to serve as Presiding Officer until the return of the
Mayor or Deputy Mayor.
8.2 The Presiding Officer shall:
(1) Preserve order and decorum in the Council chambers;
(2) Observe and enforce these Rules;
(3) Decide all questions on order,in accordance with these Rules,subject to
appeal by any Council Member;
(4) Recognize Council Members in the order in which they request the floor.
The Presiding Officer, as a Council Member, shall have only those
rights,and shall be governed in all matters and issues by the same rules
and restrictions as other Council Members; and
(5) From time to time, appoint Council Members to serve on City Council
and ad hoc committees.
SECIION 9. COUNCIL RLLATIONS WITH CITY
STAFF
9.1 There will be mutual respect from both City staff and Council Members of their
respective roles and responsibilities when, and if, expressing criticism in a
public meeting.
9.2 City staff will acknowledge the Council as policy makers, and the Council
Members will acknowledge City staff as administering the Council's policies.
9.3 All written informational material requested by individual Council Members
shall be submitted by City staff, after approval of the City Manager, to all
13
Council Members with a notation indicating which Council Member requested
the information.
9.4 Council Members shall not attempt to coerce or influence City staff in the
selection of personnel, the awarding of contracts, the selection of consultants,
the processing of development applications or the granting of City licenses or
permits.
9.5 The Council shall not attempt to change or interfere with the operating rules
and practices of any City department.
9.6 Mail that is addressed to the Mayor and Council Members shall be copied and
circulated to all City Council Members by the City Clerk,as soon as practicable
after it arrives.
9.7 The City Clerk shall not open mail addressed to individual Council Members if
it is marked personal and/or confidential.
9.8 No Council Member shall direct the City Manager to initiate any action or
prepare any report that is significant in nature, or initiate any significant
project or study without the consent of a majority of the Council. New
initiatives having policy implementation shall be directed to a Council
Committee for consideration.
9.9 Individual requests for information can be made directly to the Department
Director unless otherwise determined by the City Manager. If the request
would create a change in work assignments or City staffing levels,the request
must be made through the City Manager.
9.10 To provide staff the necessary preparation time,Council Members will provide
staff advance notice of any questions or concerns they may have regarding an
agenda item prior to a public meeting, if possible.
SECTION 10. COUNCIL MEETING STAF'F'ING
10.1 The City Manager shall attend all regular meetings of the Council unless
excused. The City Manager may make recommendations to the Council and
shall have the right to take part in the discussions of the Council,but shall have
no vote.When the City Manager has an excused absence,the designated Acting
City Manager shall attend the meeting.
10.2 The City Attorney shall attend all meetings of the Council unless excused, and
shall, upon request, give an opinion, either written or oral, on legal questions.
14
The City Attorney shall act as the Council's parliamentarian. The Deputy or
Assistant City Attorney shall attend meetings when the City Attorney has been
excused.
10.3 The City Clerk,or designee,shall attend Regular meetings of the Council,keep
the official journal (minutes), and perform such other duties as may be needed
for the orderly conduct of the meeting.
SECTION 11. COUNCIL MEMBER ATTENDANCE AT
MEETINGS
11.1 i Li EXCUSED ABSENCES. Excused absences are defined as
follows:
(1) Death of immediate family member. "Immediate family members"are
detined as: simiase, c}aiN. parentssiblings. grajiftarents,father and
or- daarolkter and son-in-law. (No�4je-4 ufS�
(2) Illness. lllraess ot ,a Coiiocil iiiezol)cr ckr- of an immediate family, as
defined above requiring the nienil)er to personally attend and care for
tlrc inmiekii,ate fanaaly member-
74
ember_h, °e a oiiconsecutir e absences. Three 0n+:mr -,knseeutive absences ver
calendar year provided_ hat prior notice is liven to as referenced in
Section 11.3.
1 1.2 V.kC ANCY OFOFFICE. _A Council position sli all liecrkrne vacant upon three
i-1) erarisecutive unex+ensed absences or more than three (3) nrknconwelitive
absences as defined in Section 11.1(3). (RCW 35A.12.Ob(0)
11.3 Council Members will inform the Mayor,a Ceune-il '�lertAxe,F the City Manager
or City Clerk if they are unable to attend any Council meeting, or if they
knowingly will be late to any meeting. The minutes will show the Council
Member as having an excused absence.
m
SECA ION 12. PUBLIC HEARINGS
12.1 TYPES There are two types of public hearings: legislative and quasi-judicial.
The Mayor will state the public hearing procedures before each public hearing.
Citizens may comment on public hearing items.
12.2 LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARINGS_ The purpose of a legislative public
hearing is to obtain public input on legislative decisions on matters of policy,
including without limitation, review by the City Council of its comprehensive
land use plan or the biennial budget.
15
12.3 QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARINGS. The purpose of a quasi-judicial
public hearing is to decide issues including the right of specific parties and
include,without limitation,certain land use matters such as site specific rezones,
preliminary plats, and variances. The City Council's decision on a quasi-
judicial matter must be based upon and supported by the "record" in the
matter. The "record" consists of all testimony or comment presented at the
bearing and all documents and exhibits that have been submitted. In quasi-
judicial bearings, Council Members shall comply with all applicable laws
including without limitation the appearance of fairness doctrine(Chapter 42.36
RCV).
APPI NCE OF F. ' RNESS. Council members should recognize that the
Appearance of Fairness Doctrine does not require establishment of a conflict of
interest,but whether there is an appearance of conflict of interest to the average
Pei-son. This may involve the Council member or a Council member's business
;issr3ci ate. r�r ir3amediate family. It could involve e-x ar-te mitside.. the bearing
communications,ownership of property in the vicinity, business dealings with
the proponents and/or opponents before or after the hearing,business dealings
of the Council member's employer with the proponents and/or opponents,
announced prediist)()0tjon-;, Fwd the like. Prior to atiy ttuasi-iudicial hearing,
each Council member should ,iti e consi€Iera tion to whether a potential violation
of the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine exits. If so,no matter how remote,the
Council member should disclose the facts to the Citv Manner who will seek the
opinion of the City Attorney, which will be communicated to the Council
inenib ur ali
nd ( e Akin or. -- ------
SECTION 13. MEDIA REPRESENTATION AT
COUNC 1.1, MEETINGS
13.1 All public meetings of the City Council, Council Committees, and Council
advisory committees shall be open to the media, freely subject to recording by
radio, television and photographic services at any time, provided that such
arrangements do not interfere with the orderly conduct of the meeting. Seating
space shall be provided for the media at each public meeting.
SECTION 14. COUNCIL REPRESENTATION
14.1 f41—If a Council Member appears on behalf of the City before another
governmental agency,a community organization,or through the media.,for the pie[-pose of
commenting on an issue,the Council N lember needshall to-state the majority position of the
16
Council, if known, on such issue. Personal opinions and comments which differ from the
Council majority may be expressed if the Council Member clarifies that these statements
do not represent the Council's position.
14.2 Council Members need to have other Council Member's concurrence before
representing (1) another Council Member's view or position, or (2) the majority of
Council's vieNv or position with the media, anntlhtr go errninental acgency gar cotnm mtiif,.
org,mization.
14.3 Letters,written statements,newspaper guest opinions by a Council member,and so on,
which state a Council opinion or policy shall be submitted to the full council for review,
comment and final api)ror ai prior to their release.
14.4 As a matter of courtesv, letters to the editor, intervie►vs or other communication by a
Council member of a controversial nature, which do not express the maiority opinion of
the Council, should be presented to the full Council in-the--" ;' prior to
publication so that the council members may be made aware of the impending publication.
SECTION 15. CONFIDENTIALI'T'Y
15.1 Council Members should keep confidential all written materials and verbal
information, including, but not limited t() 1.1!t:: 101)ic(s) your!/tar Ole sltbst,A]CO
provided to them during Executive Sessions,to ensure that the City's position is
not compromised. Confidentiality also includes information provided to
Council Members outside of Executive Sessions when the information is
considered to be exempt from disclosure under exemptions set forth in the
Revised Code of Washington (RCNN1 42.23.0 0(3)�f
15.2 If the Council,in Executive session,has provided direction or consensus to City
staff on proposed terms and conditions for any type of issue,all contact with the
other party should be done by the designated City staff representative handling
the issue. Council Members should obtain the permission of the City Manager
prior to discussing the information with anyone other than other Council
Members,the City Attorney or City staff designated by the City Manager. Any
Council Member having any contact or discussion needs to make full disclosure
to the City Manager and/or the City Council in a timely manner.
SECTION 16. COUNCIL TRAVEL AND EXPENSES
16.1 PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION
17
The objectives of this policy are to provide elected officials who incur authorized
travel, subsistence, registration and related expenses while on city business,
reasonable and timely mechanisms for the reimbursement and/or the
advancement of such necessary expenditures.
It is also recognized that City payment for business related food and beverage
for non-travel purposes will be incurred by the City Council wherein
reimbursement will be provided. This policy statement also serves to provide
guidelines by which to determine whether or not expenditures by the City
Council may be reimbursable to the Council Member, and by which to
determine refreshments and related costs served or made available at meetings
involving volunteers and other quasi-employees are legitimate City
expenditures.
Claimants have the responsibility for becoming knowledgeable about authorized
expenditures and the documentation requirements. Care must be taken to avoid
unnecessary or excessive expenditures, and those not directly and reasonably
related to the conduct of City business.
16.2 DOCUMENTATION
Except for per diem allowances, no claim for reimbursement shall be paid
unless it is accompanied by a bona fide vendor's receipt. Such receipts should
show the date, a description of the purchase,vendor identification and amount
paid.
16.3 CLAIMS
Claims for reimbursement shall contain the following:
(1) The name of the person who consumed the goods or used the service for
which reimbursement is requested, whether it be for meals, lodging,
transportation or any other purpose.
(2) A description of the event,occasion or circumstances related to the claim
and the public policy or public purpose served.
16.4 MEALS
18
Meal costs must be incurred directly by the claimant; direct billing to the City
by a restaurant is prohibited except by way of an authorized City credit card.
Payment for table service at a restaurant, commonly referred to as a tip,not to
exceed fifteen percent(15%)of the restaurant price of the meal,is reimbursable
as a reasonable and necessary cost for such service.
16.5 PER DIEM SCHEDULE OF I�EIMBURSABLE MEAL COSTS
The reasonable cost of necessary meals while conducting City business is
authorized for reimbursement.
All City officials claiming reimbursement for meals consumed while on City
business shall be entitled to reimbursement not to exceed the Renzheimer
Meal/Lodging Index.
Notwithstanding the foregoing index, actual meal costs may be claimed when
they are part of a regularly scheduled business event such as training seminar,
professional meeting, or other business meeting.
If the costs of meals for persons other than the claimant are included, those
persons must be entitled to meal reimbursement in their own right and they
shall be listed by name and title in claim documentation.
16.6 EXPENDITURES NOT INCLUDABLE AS ACTUAL MEAL COSTS
Unauthorized expenditures include, but are not limited to:
(1) Liquor.
(2) Expenses of a spouse or other persons not authorized to receive
reimbursement under this policy.
16.7 TRAVEL
Reimbursement for reasonable costs of business travel is authorized. General
guidelines are as follows.
16.8 CITY VEHICLE
Out-of-the-area costs of vehicle operation are authorized,such as gas,oil,tires
and necessary repairs.
16.9 PERSONAL VEHICLE
19
Expenses shall be reimbursed for travel within a 300 mile radius of the City at
such rate per mile as shall be established from time to time by the City Manager
in his/her discretion,but not to exceed the then current maximum rate allowed
by the United States Internal Revenue Service for reimbursement of such
expenses for purposes of business travel expense deductions. Trips beyond this
limit will be reimbursed at the lower of a)the established rate per mile,or b)the
lowest available (other than non-refundable) airfare obtainable by the City's
Purchasing Manager plus mileage reimbursement at the then current City rate,
based upon the estimated distance between the airport and the destination.
Incidental travel costs such as parking,ferry or bridge tolls are reimbursable as
they would be if a City vehicle was provided.
16.10 RENTAL VEHICLE
The cost of vehicle rental is considered an exception to this policy and must be
approved in writing per Section 4A (Meal Reimbursement for Non-City
Officials). Vehicle rental authorization must be separately set out in any request
for approval of such expenses. Approval of vehicle rental as an item on a travel
advance request will not be considered sufficient authorization without a
separate statement presenting the reason such an expenditure is required.
16.11 AIR TRAVEL
Arrangement for air travel on City related business shall be arranged by the
Purchasing staff of the Finance Department or as otherwise designated by the
City Manager as outlined below:
(1) Whenever feasible, the need for air travel arrangements should be
provided by way of the normal requisition process at least 5 weeks in
advance of the departure date.
(2) The authorized procurer will arrange for air travel based on the lowest
available(other than non-refundable) airfare for a regularly scheduled
flight which reasonably accommodates the time of travel requested,and
the destination as specified by the requisitioning department.
(3) The authorized procurer will purchase the tickets at the time the rate is
quoted and the Council Member will be advised of the arrangements for
acquiring the tickets.
(4) If personal travel is combined with business related travel,the traveling
Council Member shall be responsible for paying the increase in airfare
necessary to accommodate the personal part of the flight. The City shall
only pay the lowest available(other than non-refundable)airfare for the
20
round trip between the Seattle/Tacoma airport and the business related
destination. Such payment for a personal travel shall accompany the
City's payment to the vendor for the tickets.
(5) If changes in travel plans occur that are the result of City business
requirements,(i.e.delays in departure,cancellations,extended stays,or
revised itinerary) any associated costs shall be paid by the City.
However, all increase in cost of travel due to changes for personal
convenience will be borne by the Council Member.
(6) Officials who obtain airline tickets on their own will be reimbursed
based on the lower of: a) Actual out-of-pocket cost paid for the airline
tickets or alternate means of transportation (substantiated by a receipt);
or b) the lowest (other than non-refundable) airfare available for their
time of travel, unless an exception is granted in writing by the City
Council. In this case,the official must pay the cost of the travel and seek
reimbursement along with all other travel expenses. Direct billing of
airfare to the City is allowed only if ordered by the Purchasing Staff,as
may be authorized by the City Manager.
16.12 FIRST CLASS AIR TRAVEL
First class air travel is not authorized.
16.13 OTHER TRAVEL EXPENSES
Miscellaneous travel costs such as bus,taxi,bridge or other tolls,parking,ferry,
porter,bellman and the like(not including any maid service)are authorized by
a listing of same as provided by the reimbursement form. Payment of a
reasonable amount for porter service,bellman service and the like is considered
to be a necessary payment for such service and, therefore, reimbursable.
16.14 VENDOR'S RECEIPT
A vendor's receipt will be required only when the single item cost of this type
expense exceeds $10.00.
Local parking,ferry and bridge tolls may be reimbursed through the Petty Cash
system, subject to the Petty Cash Guidelines.
16.15 OUT-OF-STATE OR OVERNIGHT TRAVEL
21
To be eligible for any City reimbursement for out of state and/or overnight
travel expense, the one way travel distance must be greater than 50 miles from
City or home.
16.16 ACCOMMODATIONS
Reasonable hotel/motel accommodations for officials are acceptable and will be
reimbursed at a maximum of the single room rate. A vendor's receipt for this
category is required for all claims. Direct billing of hotel/motel charges is not
allowed unless by way of an authorized City credit card.
16.17 INCIDENTAL EXPENSES
Includes all reasonable and necessary incidental expenses and includes, but is
not limited to, the following.
16.18 ALLOWABLE INCIDENTAL EXPENSES
Laundry expenses if away from home four (4) or more calendar days.
Baggage checking.
Business telephone and postage expenses. Personal telephone calls home, if
away from home for more than a 24 hour duration, are considered a business
telephone expense.
16.19 NON-:1.1,L4)%VAl11_,E 1NCIDE NTAl. i XPFNSES
Personal entertainment.
Theft, loss or damage to personal property.
Expenses of a spouse, family or other persons not authorized to receive
reimbursement under this policy
Barber or beauty parlor services.
Airline and other trip insurance.
Personal postage, reading material, telephone calls.
Personal toiletry articles.
16.20 NON-TRAVEL FOOD AND BEVERAGE REIMBURSEMENT POLICY
22
Reimbursable expenses are subiect to the following:
(1) Meals consumed by the City official during meetings and other functions
which conduct official City business or serve to benefit the City of
Federal Way are reimbursable to the official.
(2) Generally, the City will not incur costs for refreshments, and other
related items, for meetings or functions held in the normal course of
business or that are attended solely by City officials. However, such
meetings or functions wherein a municipal function,public purpose,or
City program is served or furthered, and wherein the City Council has
expressly approved the meeting as such, the City may incur such costs
directly or as a reimbursement to employees who have incurred such
costs on behalf of the City.
(3) Refreshments purchased solely for personal entertainment are not a
legitimate City expense.
16.21 CEREMONIES AN l) CELEBRATIONS
(1) Reasonable expenses, including food and beverage, associated with
commemorating a dedication or an unveiling that is recognized as
serving a public purpose are legitimate City expenditures.
(2) Private celebrations rather than public celebrations are not generally
considered as serving a public purpose. Refreshment,food and beverage
related costs would therefore not be recognized as legitimate City
expense.
(3) Support of a local "event" or celebration may not take the form of a
gratuitous contribution of public funds to a private person,committee or
organization. Expenditure of public funds on a publicly sponsored event
requires the existence of a recognizable public purpose that relates to the
City's existence,proper authorization from the legislative authority for
such public sponsorship, and a reasonable relationship between the
amount of the City's expenditure and the "public" nature of the event.
16.22 MEAL R1.1 NI131_ PUSE1�IENT FOR NON-C'[T-Y OFFICIALS
Council Member claims for the reimbursement of meal costs for non-city
employees and non-city officials shall be documented by a memo authorized by
the Mayor or, in the Mayor's absence, the Deputy Mayor. The memo must
identify:
23
(1) The names of the individual or individuals being hosted;
(2) Their official title or capacity as it related to City business;
(3) The explanation of why this expenditure was an appropriate use of City
funds.
CLAIMS AND APPROVAL PROCEDURE
16.23 All claims shall be submitted for reimbursement using the form provided by the
City Finance Department. Travel and subsistence expenses except for incidental
and minor costs will not be paid from any Petty Cash Fund, unless as in
compliance with petty cash policy adopted by the City.
16.24 Special approvals required by this policy shall be obtained by Council
Members, from the Mayor, or in his/her absence, by the Deputy Mayor. Such
approvals shall be by separate memo which identifies the policy exception being
authorized and explains the reasons therefor.
16.25 Claims may include the reimbursable costs of other City officials who would be
entitled in their own right to claim business expenses.
16.26 Claims of Council Members must be approved by the Mayor or in his/her
absence the Deputy Mayor.
16.27 Exceptions to the expense rules for unusual circumstances may be approved at a
regular City Council meeting by a majority vote of the Council Members
present at the meeting.
16.28 In preparation of the City's annual operating budget, Council Member travel
and training expenses shall be anticipated and included in budget
appropriations. Attendance at annual conferences of municipal officials,such
as the National League of Cities or Association of Washington Cities, shall be
addressed at the time of budget adoption to reflect the number of Council
Members who will attend to represent the City.
Meetings,conventions or training programs that require expenditure of funds
to be reimbursed or paid on behalf of Council Members, and that are not
anticipated at the time of budget adoption,must be submitted to the Council for
approval. The request must be presented to the Council in a timely manner
prior to the event to permit an opportunity for the Council to review and
approve or deny the request based on its merit, to allow all Council Members
opportunity to discuss the appropriate Council attendance. The request shall
include: (a) Name of organization sponsoring meeting, (b)Why attendance is
24
requested; benefits to the City, (c) Council Member(s) to attend, (d) Location,
(e) Attendance dates, and (f) Estimated cost to the City.
16.29 A report, oral and/or written as appropriate, shall be made to the Council at a
meeting no later than two (2) weeks following said conference, seminar or
training,in order that the full Council may benefit from the training experience
received by the Council Member who attended. A record of such reports shall
be maintained by the City Clerk.
The Mayor shall make an annual State of the City report during a regularly
scheduled City Council meeting; a written report shall be made available to the
public at the time of the meeting.
The City Manager shall provide an Executive Summary following each City
Council retreat; a written report shall be made available to the public the first
working day following the retreat.
SECHI ON 17. PUBLIC RECORDS
17.1 Public records created or received by the Mayor or any Council Member should
be transferred to the City Clerk's office for retention by the City in accordance
with the Public Records Act, Chapter 42.17 RCW. Public records that are
duplicates of those received by,or in the possession of the City,are not required
to be retained. Questions about whether or not a document is a public record or
if it is required to be retained should be referred to the City Attorney.
17.2 Weservedfor--E4eefsaaic l e �e t�r�fi4 -11ai#Il=l€karmic mail
communications that do not relate to the functional res]onr .ihifity of the
recipient or setteler• is .i ptililic rri'flrial, :uch as„meeting notices. r€mitt€leis,
telephone messages-and bit' t'in,)l n r;r r ,, do not constitute a pliblic rc a«e tl_ All
other messages that relate to the functional responsibility of the recipient or
sender as a public official constitute a public record.
E-mail communications that are intended to be shared among four or more
Council members whether concurrently or serially,must be considered in light
of the Open :Public Meetings Act. If the intended purpose of the e-mail is to
have a discussion that should be held at an open_tnecting, the electronic
discussion should not occur. Further, the use of e-mail communication to form
a collective decision of the Council violates the Open Public Meetings Act.
25
SECTION 18. C I TY MANAGER EVALUATION
PROCESS
18.1 The Mayor,Council Members and City Manager will determine the evaluation
criteria and format for the process.
18.2 After the criteria have been developed,the Council Members need to concur on
when the completed evaluation forms are due and who will collect these
documents.
18.3 Council Members need to discuss and decide if the Mayor and one (1) or more
Council Members should meet prior to the actual evaluation; this meeting
would allow time to summarize the comments; also,this sub-committee(of less
than a quorum) could determine recommendations for the City Manager's
employment contract amendments, including, but not limited to, salary,
performance payment, cost-of-living increase; the sub-committee can make a
recommendation to the entire Council at the time of the evaluation.
18.4 Copies of the City Manager's current employment contract shall be made
available to the entire Council.
18.5 At the evaluation session, the summary comments may be given, as well as
individual comments by Council Members; the City Manager may wish to
respond which is usually at the conclusion of the Council comments; the City
Manager's contract should be discussed and any recommendations may be
concurred to by the Council.
18.6 The evaluation is held in Executive session. Attendance is limited to the Mayor,
Council Members, City Manager and City Attorney.
18.7 The final step of the City Manager evaluation process is to have the City
Attorney prepare amendments, if any, to the City Manager's employment
contract. This contract needs to be approved as a Consent Agenda item at a
Council meeting.
18.8 The Mayor shall prepare a press release no later than the next working day
following the Executive Session regarding the results of the evaluation.
SECTION 19. MAYOR/DEPUTY MAYOR SELECTION
PROCESS
26
19.1 The Mayor and the Deputy Mayor shall be nominated and elected from the
ranks of the sitting Council Members.
19.2 The Mayor and Deputy Mayor shall be elected for two(2)year terms at the first
Regular City Council meeting in January of the applicable year,by a majority
vote of the City Council in accordance with RCW 35A.13.030 and .035.
19.3 The City Clerk or designee shall conduct the election for Mayor. The Mayor
shall then conduct the election for the Deputy Mayor. (See Appendix "A" to
these Rules.)
SECr1ION 20. CITY ADVISORY COMMITTEES
20.1 Federal Way's commissions, committees and task forces provide an invaluable
service to the City. Their advice on a wide variety of subjects aids the Mayor
and Council Members in the decision-making process. Effective citizen
participation is an invaluable tool for local government.
20.2 These advisory bodies originate from different sources. Some are established by
ordinance while others are established by motion of the City Council. It is at the
discretion of the Council as to whether or not any advisory body should be
established by ordinance.
20.3 Federal Way advisory bodies bring together citizen viewpoints which might not
otherwise be heard. Persons of wide-ranging interests who want to participate
in public service but not compete for public office can be involved in
governmental commissions,committees and task forces. These bodies also serve
as a training ground or stepping stone for qualified persons who are interested
in seeking public office.
20.4 As Federal Way advisory bodies have been formed since incorporation, the
adoption of uniform rules of procedure is necessary to assure maximum
productivity. The following policies govern the City's advisory groups;some of
these advisory groups may have more specific guidelines set forth by ordinance,
resolution, the Federal Way City Code, or at times by state law.
20.5 Every advisory body, when it is formed, will have a specific statement of
purpose and function, which will be re-examined periodically by the City
Council to determine its effectiveness. This statement of purpose is made
available to all citizen members when they are appointed.
20.6 The size of each advisory group is determined by the City Council and the size is
related to its duties and responsibilities. Another determination to be made
prior to formation,is the cost impact for City staffing a proposed advisory body.
27
20.7 The Council may dissolve any advisory body that, in their opinion, has
completed its working function or for any other reason.
20.8 Members and alternate members of all advisory bodies are appointed by
majority vote of the Council Members during a regularly scheduled meeting.
20.9 The Council Committee of the Whole shall be convened to review, interview
and recommend Citizen Advisory Committee appointments to the City Council.
Any Council Member who shall attend the public interview session shall be
eligible to vote on the recommendation to be made to the full Council. A
quorum of three (3) Council Members shall be required to forward any
recommendation to the full Council. The full City Council shall vote on the
appointments to the Citizen Advisory Committee at a regularly scheduled
Council meeting.
20.10 The City Council may approve reappointment of citizens wishing second terms
subject to any limits established by ordinance or other laws.
20.11 Council Members will raise any concerns about any recommendation prior to
the City Council meeting that is scheduled for the approval of the appointment.
20.12 Vacancies are advertised so that any interested citizen may submit an
application. Applicants must be citizens of the City of Federal Way if required
by the Federal Way City Code or if required by the City Council. Council
Members are encouraged to solicit applications from qualified citizens.
Applications shall be available from the Office of the City Clerk.
20.13 Lengths of terms vary from one advisory body to another, but in all cases
overlapping terms are intended. On special work task forces, where a specific
project is the purpose, there need not be terms of office.
20.14 Newly appointed members will receive a briefing by the commission,committee
or task force chairperson and/or City staff,regarding duties and responsibilities
of the members of the advisory body. This will include a review of the City of
Federal Way Ethics Code. Each newly-appointed member will receive an
information packet which will include a Certificate of Appointment signed by
the City Council, a commission, committee or task force membership list,
responsible City staff member, statement of purpose for the advisory body
which may include an ordinance, resolution,bylaws, or annual work program
and a copy of the City of Federal Way Ethics Code.
20.15 All advisory bodies will be responsible for adopting their operating policies
consistent with the establishing resolution or ordinance.
28
20.16 All meetings of advisory bodies are open to the public in accordance with the
public meeting laws of the State of Washington which requires a minimum 24-
hour advance notice;no advisory committee will schedule a meeting earlier than
7:00 a.m.
20.17 The number of meetings related to business needs of the advisory group may be
set by the individual body,unless set forth in a resolution or ordinance. Notice
of all meetings,including date,time,place and principal subjects to be discussed
will be published in accordance with the public meetings laws of the State of
Washington and the policies of the City of Federal Way.
20.18 The advisory body chairperson will be responsible for coordinating the meeting
agendas with the appropriate City support staff.
20.19 Minutes will be kept of all meetings in accordance with the public meeting laws
of the State of Washington. The appropriate City support
staff will be responsible for preparation of the minutes of each advisory
committee meeting.
20.20 Excessive absenteeism, excluding illness or required travel, is cause for the
removal of an advisory body member. Three (3) consecutive absences will be
considered resignation from the body unless prior to the third absence, the
member has requested, and been granted, an excused absence. The advisory
body granting the excused absence will determine the validity of the request.
20.21 Members may resign at any time their personal circumstances change to
prevent effective service.
Members may be removed, from any advisory committee, prior to the
expiration of their term of office, by a majority vote of the City Council.
20.22 A quorum for conducting business is a simple majority of the membership of the
advisory body.
20.23 All members of advisory bodies should be aware of the need to avoid any
instance of conflict of interest. No individual should use an official position to
gain a personal advantage.
20.24 Lobbying efforts by any advisory bodies on legislative, or political, matters
should first be checked for consistency with existing City policy by contacting
the City Manager's office. In the event a position is taken that differs from that
of the City's policy, an advisory body acting as an official body of the City of
Federal Way,cannot represent that position before another body,i.e.,the State
29
Legislature or the King County Council. An individual member is free to voice
a position, oral or written,on any issue as long as it is made clear that he or she
is not speaking as a representative of the City of Federal Way, or as a member
of his or her commission, committee or task force.
20.25 Members of advisory bodies.are encouraged to attend City Council meetings to
keep abreast of Council actions.
20.26 The City Council transmits referrals for information or action through the City
Manager to the advisory groups. These advisory groups transmit findings,
reports, etc., to the City Council through the City Manager.
20.27 While the City staffs role is one of assisting the commission,committee or task
force, the City staff members are not employees of that body. The City staff
members are directly responsible to his or her Department Director and the
City Manager.
20.28 Annually, each advisory committee shall develop a work program for the City
Council's consideration and approval. The City Council may amend the
committee's work program.
ECTION 21. COUNC11, COAlAUTTEES
21.1 Council committees are policy review and discussion arms of the Council.
Committees may study issues and develop recommendations for consideration
by the Council. Committees may not take binding action on behalf of the City
unless a quorum of the City Council is present,the Council Committee has been
advertised as a Special Meeting of the Whole City Council and, by majority
vote, the City Council has directed that such action occur at the Council
Committee.
Council Committee structure shall be as determined by the City Council in
January of each year. The 1999 committees are as follows:
FINANCE/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT/REGIONAL AFFAIRS
COMMITTEE
LAND USE/TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
PARKS/RECREATION/HUMAN SERVICES & PUBLIC SAFETY
COMMITTEE
30
Committees shall establish regular meeting schedules as determined by the
Chair of the Committee.ii7�ftt&dlfOM tl
21.3 Each committee will have staff support assigned by the City Manager. Staff will
work with the committee chairs to set agendas, provide support materials and
prepare reports.
21.4 Summaries of each meeting will be prepared by staff and distributed to the
Mayor and Council Members. These summaries will be in lieu of verbal reports
at Council meetings.
21.5 The City Manager or Mayor may send issues directly to committees for their
review in lieu of being referred to committee by the entire Council.
21.6 Committee appointments (chairs and members) shall be made by the Mayor.
The Mayor will take into account the interests and requests of individual
Council Members in making committee assign ts.
21.7 'Membership of each committee will consist of three (3) Council Members.
Council Members are expecte r] to attend-.M eir resl2ective committee meetings .i
mirt **'IRseye F)1 E4`l1 :3�£11C� 1T Vl?�1
21.8 The Mayor shall be (4f eioll memb e*sa "ex officio" member of each
committee. The Deputy Mayor may serve as "ex officio" or be appointed to a
committee.
21.9 The Mayor will make committee ascipments each January, rYith me bers
serving one (1)year terms. ')react., c,ilW� Gl � j6'`tc--�v C�1;i� L� r Ae
SECTION 22. FILLING CITY COUNCIL VACANCIES
22.1 PURPOSE
The purpose of this section is to provide guidance to the City Council when a
Federal Way Council Member position becomes vacant before the expiration of
the official's elected term of office. Pursuant to state law, a vacancy shall be
filled only until the next regular municipal election, to serve the remainder of
the unexpired term.
22.2 REFERENCES
31
RCW 42.30.110(h)-Executive Session Allowed to Consider Qualifications of a
Candidate for Appointment to Elective Office.
RCW 42.30.060 - Prohibition on Secret Ballots.
RCW 42.12 -Vacant Position.
RCW 35A.13.020-Vacancies-Filling of Vacancies in Council/Manager Form of
Government.
22.3 APPOINTMENT PROCESS
(1) A Council position shall be officially declared vacant upon the
occurrence of any of the causes of vacancy set forth in RCW 42.12.010,
including resignation,recall,forfeiture,written intent to resign,or death
of a Council Member. The Council Member who is vacating his or her
position cannot participate in the appointment process.
(2) The City Council shall direct staff to begin the Council Member
appointment process and establish an interview and appointment
schedule, so that the position is filled at the earliest opportunity.
(3) The City Clerk's Office shall prepare and submit a display
advertisement to the City's official newspaper,with courtesy copies to all
other local media outlets,which announces the vacancy consistent with
the requirements necessary to hold public office: that the applicant(a)
be a registered voter of the City of Federal Way, and (b) have a one(1)
year residency in the City of Federal Way. This display advertisement
shall be published once each week for two (2) consecutive weeks. This
display advertisement shall contain other information,including but not
limited to,time to be served in the vacant position,election information,
salary information, Council Member powers and duties, the deadline
date and time for submitting applications, interview and appointment
schedules, and such other information that the City Council deems
appropriate.
(4) The City Clerk's Office shall prepare an application form which
requests appropriate information for City Council consideration of the
applicants.Applications will be available at City of Federal Way offices,
King County libraries located in Federal Way, the Federal Way
Chamber of Commerce office, the Federal Way School District
administration office and such other locations that the City Council
deems appropriate. Copies of the display advertisement will be provided
32
to current members of City of Federal Way commissions, committees,
task forces and other City-sponsored citizen groups.
(5) Applications received by the deadline date and time will be copied and
circulated, by the City Clerk's Office, to the Mayor and City Council.
Packets may also contain additional information received such as
endorsements, letters of reference and other pertinent materials.
(6) The City Clerk's Office shall publish the required public notice(s)for the
meeting scheduled for interviewing applicants for consideration to the
vacant position. This meeting may be a regularly scheduled City Council
meeting, or a special City Council meeting.
(7) The City Clerk's Office shall notify applicants of the location, date and
time of City Council interviews.
(8) Prior to the date and time of the interview meeting, the Mayor shall
accept one interview question from each Council Member.
22.4 INTERVIEW MEETING
Each interview of an applicant/candidate shall be no more than 30 minutes in
length as follows:
(1) The applicant shall present his or her credentials to the City Council.(10
minutes)
(2) The City Council shall ask the predetermined set of questions which
must be responded to by the applicant. Each applicant will be asked and
will answer the same set of questions, and will have 2 minutes to answer
each question. (14 minutes)
(3) An informal question and answer period in which Council Members
may ask and receive answers to miscellaneous questions. (10 minutes)
(4) The applicants' order of appearance will be determined by a random lot
drawing performed by the City Clerk.
(5) The Council may reduce the 30-minute interview time if the number of
applicants exceed six (6) candidates, or alternatively, the Council may
elect not to interview all of the applicants if the number exceeds six (6)
candidates. The decision as to which applicants to interview will be
based on the information contained in the application forms.
22.5 VOTING
33
Upon completion of the interviews, Council Members may convene into
Executive Session to discuss the qualifications of the applicants. However, all
interviews,deliberationsnominations and votes taken by the Councilshall be in
open public session.
(1) The Mayor shall ask for nominations from the Council Members for the
urntr.Sr. of creati.nggrerip of cwididates to consider. No second is
needed.
(2) Noinhiations a,re closed by a rnotiori, second and majority rote of the
Council.
(3) Coif icil lN_I_eiiiber%, rt3.ry delihei-Me_such matters as criteria for selection
and the nominated group of camdid;ates.
(4) 'I'lie :\favor shall poll ['oarncil Members to ascertain that Council
Me»tiaers are prepared to vote._
(5) The City Clerk shall
proceed with a roll-call vote.
(,L6) Elections will continue until a nominee receives a majority of four (4)
votes.
47 At anytime during the election process, the City Council may postpone
elections until a date certain or regular meeting if a majority vote has not
been received.
�8 Nothing in this policy shall prevent the City Council from reconvening
into Executive Session to further discuss the applicant/candidate
qualifications.
(L9) The Mayor shall declare the nominee receiving the majority vote as the
new Council Member and shall be sworn into office by the City Clerk at
the earliest opportunity or no later than the next regularly scheduled
City Council meeting.
1.0- If the City Council does not give a majority vote within 90 days of the
declared vacancy, the Revised Code of Washington delegates
appointment powers to King County.
SECTION 23. MISCELLANEOUS
23.1 When Council Members register to attend an official conference requiring
voting delegates,such as the annual National League of Cities or Association of
34
Washington Cities, the Council shall designate the voting delegate(s) and
alternate voting delegate(s) during a public meeting, by a majority vote; when
possible, said selection of voting
delegate(s) shall be done on a rotating basis for the purpose of allowing all
Council Members the opportunity to be an official voting delegate.
SECTION 24. SUSPENSION ANIS AMEND_NIEN'_r O_h'
RULES
24.1 Any provision of these rules not governed by state law or ordinance, may be
temporarily suspended by a two-thirds (2/3) majority vote of the Council.
24.2 These rules may be amended, or new rules adopted, by a majority vote of the
Council.
KADOCUMENI CCRULES.2002
01/09/02
35
APPENDIX "A"
MAYOR/DEPUTY MAYOR ELECTION PROCESS
(1) Any Council Member may nominate a candidate; no second is needed.
(2) Nominations are closed by a motion,second and 2/3 vote of Council.
(3) If only one (1) nomination is made, it is appropriate to make a motion and obtain a
second to instruct the City Clerk to cast a unanimous ballot for that nomination.
Approval is by majority vote of Council Members present.
(4) If more than one(1)nomination is made,an open election is conducted by roll call vote.
(5) To be elected, the nominee needs a majority vote of the Council.
(6) Elections will continue until a Mayor and Deputy Mayor are elected by a majority vote
of the Council.
(7) The City Clerk shall declare the nominee receiving the majority vote as the new Mayor.
The new Mayor shall declare the nominee receiving the majority vote as,the new
Deputy Mayor. The Clerk shall swear the individuals into office.
36