Council PKT 04-01-2008 Special/Study
FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL
Council Chambers - City Hall
Aprill,2008
Study Session/Special Meeting Agenda
5:30 PM
(www.cityojJederalway.com)
******
1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER
2. RETREAT ITEMS FOLLOW-UP DISCUSSION
. Green City Plan
. Allocation of Utility Tax for Operations
. Jail Facility Options
3. DISCUSSION
4, ADJOURN
City of Federal Way
MEMORANDUM
Date:
April I, 2008
To:
City Council Members
From:
Ken Miller, Deputy Public Works Director
Scott Pingel, ICMA Fellow
Subject:
Green City Plan
As part of the 2008 Mid-biennium Budget Adjustment, the City Council budgeted $80,000 to
develop a Green City Strategic Plan. After receiving this direction, staff proceeded to research and
develop an RFP in order to hire a consultant to develop the Green City Strategic Plan. After
presenting the draft RFP to the Council at the Council's Annual Retreat, Council directed staff to
research alternative approaches to developing the Green City Strategic Plan other than issuing an
RFP to hire a consultant.
Background
As staff researched other ways cities are developing green city plans, most cities had taken two initial
steps that the City of Federal Way has not taken. First, an internal city "Green Team" was created,
which included key staff that playa role in developing and implementing the plan. The Green Team
will identify what the City is currently doing and provide insight and direction to the green city
process. Second, some cities have formed a community group or "green ribbon" panel that includes
key stakeholders in the community. This group may include representatives from businesses,
citizens, City staff, City Council and other public and private entities. Though different in each city,
this group has identified community values, a community vision, and recommendations to Council.
Staff s research in pursuing additional options for the Green City Plan included the Cool Cities/Sierra
Club information presented to the Council last September. While helpful and informational, the
material presented was very general to environmental sustainability and was not specific to the City
of Federal Way. The principles they presented will be incorporated in the City's efforts.
Strategic Plan Alternatives
Staff researched three alternatives the City can use to pursue a Green City Plan. Several jurisdictions
have used just one, but several others used a mixed approach to reduce costs and maximize
outcomes.
Alternative 1: Hire a consultant.
The first alternative is to take the general approach of issuing an RFP and hiring a consultant to help
in developing the Green City Plan. Without significant staff resources to focus on sustainability,
hiring a consultant with specific expertise has been the general practice of the cities and counties we
have contacted. A consultant brings resources, experience, depth and knowledge that is difficult to
find with one staff person or at the university level. However, starting from where we are now,
$80,000 will likely not get us the total package with community involvement and public education as
well as the internal operations, which Council was interested in pursuing.
Alternative 2: Hire a sustainabilitv staff person to develop and implement the plan.
Staff has also been in contact with several cities around the country that have hired a staff person to
develop and implement a sustainability strategy or green city plan. Regardless of how the plan is
developed, hiring a staff person may be necessary in the long-term to implement the plan. A staff
person is always on-site and would have direct access to the green team, city records and other city
employees. A staff person would also help focus green initiatives and efforts on a daily basis. The
downside to hiring a staff person to develop the plan is that a staff person is just that, one person. A
staff person will most likely not have the depth of knowledge or resources a consultant will have and
several tasks may have to be contracted out anyways.
Alternative 3: Hire a University/College to develop the plan.
Staff has been in contact with regional universities including: University of Washington, Seattle
University, University of Puget Sound, Central Washington University, Western Washington
University, DeVry University, and Highline Community College. The University of Washington is
the only university that has expressed the capability and an interest in a partnership with the City.
More specifically we have been in contact with their Green Futures Research and Design Lab, which
may be able to perform pieces of the work. Hiring the University of Washington may create new
avenues of research, projects and partnerships at the university level. However, again, there are only
pieces of the project they will be able to accomplish. The soonest they could start would be fall, and
the resources they are able to provide are subject to the school year, class schedule and availability of
graduate students and faculty.
Staff Recommendations
1. We create an internal City Green Team to identify the green programs and policies the City
currently employs. The Green Team will also provide leadership and direction and develop a
VISIOn.
2. The Green Team will review areas such as: Energy, Transportation, Fleet, Environment and
Urban Forestry, Surface Water, Green Buildings, Purchasing Procedures, and Solid
WastelRecycling.
3. Organize a Green Ribbon Panel. Using the Shoreline Sustainability Strategy document,
Pierce County's sustainability work and information from other local governments, identify
the most important options and develop recommendations for the 09-10 budget.
4. Calculate the City's and the community's carbon footprint by contracting with the University
of Washington or a consultant, so we have baseline data.
5. If there are sufficient funds available, staff recommends hiring a City staff member to help
coordinate the work of the Green Team, the Green Ribbon Panel, and community outreach.
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
From:
Via:
Subject:
April 1, 2008
Federal Way City Council
Iwen Wang, Assistant City Manager/CFO
Neal Beets, City Manager
Use of Utility Tax for Maintenance and Operation
BACKGROUND:
At the January Council Retreat, the City Council agreed that the transfer of utility taxes for operations
purposes is a significant fiscal policy that staff should bring back to Council for confirmation.
HISTORY OF UTILITY TAX IN FEDERAL WAY:
Capital Improvements and Associated Maintenance and Operation
The City initially instituted Utility Taxes to implement a variety of capital improvement projects. These
included 10 community-wide transportation projects, City Center streetscape improvements, the annual
street overlay program, Celebration Park, the building of the Knutzen Family Theatre, funding of the
Police facility in the new City Hall, and the construction of the Community Center.
Concurrent with providing capital funding for these capital improvement projects, the City Council also
allocated utility taxes to fund the maintenance and operation (M&O) for these improvements. In addition,
the street overlay program is an on-going program and is funded annually on a pay-as-you-go basis.
Currently, around $1.5 million or13% of utility tax revenue is used to support these activities.
2005/2006 Budget Allocation
During the 2005/2006 biennium budget process, the City was faced with a projected operating deficit of
12%. Staff identified program cuts to bridge the projected budget gap. The City Council approved
cutting $1.5 million from the budget, funding $640k with I-time sources, and restoring all proposed
police budget cuts with 0.5% of utility tax ($700k), and allocating 0.75% ($94k) utility tax to restore
community events (Red White & Blue) and as a source for arts commission support. Both of these utility
tax allocations are on-going funding commitments.
2007/2008 Budget Allocation:
Staff informed the Council that if the utility tax were made available for operations, the City would be
able to continue its staffing at the 2006 level until 2012, including those programs funded on a one-time
basis in 2006. Council gave staff direction to:
I. Use available capital utility taxes to fund existing operations, to include restoring one-time
funded programs to an on-going basis;
2. Backfill the redirected utility tax with Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) or other capital funds to
maintain the street overlay program at the current level; and
3. Ask voters in November 2006 for additional utility taxes at 1.75% for enhanced police and
community safety services.
Based on these directions, the resulting 2007-2008 City Budget included a transfer of utility taxes to the
General Fund in the amounts of $1.2 million and $1.8 million respectively, for 2007 and 2008; and the
placement of Proposition I, the Police and Community Safety Improvement proposal, on the Fall election
ballot in 2006.
Proposition 1 Vote:
On November 7, 2006, voters approved Proposition I with a positive vote of 62%, designating 1.75% of
utility taxes for police and community safety improvements. This new revenue source will continue to be
designated for police and community safety purposes. Therefore, it is not part of the base-line budget
balancing amounts mentioned in the above numbers.
Current Outlook:
At the Council Retreat in January this year, staff provided an updated General Fund outlook, and updated
projections for the utility tax and its allocation, REET revenue, and other capital sources for the next six
years. While both General Fund revenues and expenditures have risen higher than anticipated in 2006, a
projected gap is still expected to occur between 2012 and 2014, depending on the general economy of the
City.
Also highlighted at the Council Retreat was the fact that, by 2014, a majority of utility tax revenues will
be used for operations purposes except for approximately $3 million, or 17% of the revenue, which will
continue to be designated for the Community Center debt service and for transportation and the street
overlay capital programs.
As discussed with Council in prior budget processes, the General Fund budget gap is created by a
structural imbalance between the City's revenue sources and operating costs. Using utility taxes for
operations will help mitigate this structural imbalance and provide increased diversity to our property and
sales tax reliant General Fund. The growth rate of the utility tax is also more predicable and at a pace that
will help to improve overall revenue growth. For this reason, it is more common in the state of
Washington for cities to use utility tax revenue for general governmental operations than for capital
purposes. (See attached chart showing municipal use of utility taxes for operations.)
Council Policv Ouestions:
I. Confirm the use of utility tax for operations, with the condition that the City continue to maintain the
level of the street overlay program using utility taxes and/or other capital sources.
Direct staff to develop a 2009/20 I 0 City Budget assuming a base budget utility tax transfer in
addition to specific project-based and voter-approved transfers. The base transfers are currently
projected to be $25 and $3.7 million, or 6% and 8% of the respective budget funding source for 2009
and 2010.
2. Direct staff to prepare a preliminary budget without utility tax transfer in support of baseline services.
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE STAFF REPORT
DATE: March 31, 2008
TO: Parks, Recreation, Human Services and Public Safety Council Committee
VIA: Neal J. Beets, City Manager
FROM: Stan McCall, Police Commander
SUBJECT: Misdemeanor Incarceration Options For Federal Way
BACKGROUND
Federal Way houses misdemeanor prisoners at four jails: Fife, Enumclaw, King County and Yakima County. Fife
and Enumclaw Jails are short term holding for facilities and are used primarily for immediate bookings. Since
Yakima County Jail does not accept medical, mental, and inmates with behavioral (management) problems, long-
term inmates with these conditions are housed in King County. Our current (approximate) jail population
distribution:
· 10-15 prisoners in the Fife Jail.
· 10-20 prisoners in King County Jail.
· 25-35 prisoners in Yakima County Jail.
Historically, our average daily population (ADP) - 2002-2007:
The King County Jail contract expires December 31 st, 2012. King County Jail officials have indicated that all
municipal prisoners will be removed at the end of the contract and the contract will not be renewed. All cities in
King County are facing the elimination of these misdemeanor jail bed spaces within four (4) years. And the City
of Federal Way will be faced with no place to put our inmates with 3M (Medical, Mental, and Management)
problems.
The current Yakima County Jail contract expires December 31 st, 2010. Yakima County officials have
indicated a willingness to renegotiate their contract with JAG Cities collectively or cities individually. They
have also indicated that they will likely raise the daily rate from $71.47 per day to $105.00 per day.)
OPTIONS EXPLORED
Over the past year, staffhas been working on long-term options to house the city's inmates. The following three
options are evaluated to address the impending misdemeanor jail bed space needs for Federal Way.
1) Continue Contractin2 for Jail Services.
This option assumes the City will continue with contract arrangements with various jail service
providers based on their bed availability and service charges.
Pros:
· No new jail construction costs;
· Potentially more cost effective than building our jail either individually or partnering in a sub-
1
regional jail;
· Transfer management and liability of operating a jail to service providers.
Cons:
· Uncertain of bed availability.
The biggest potential risk is there will be no assurance that we can find beds for our mental,
management and medical needs prisoners, and places to book female prisoners.
Fife Jail is a 30-day facility, has a total of 60 beds, and does not house females or the 3M prisoners.
Enumclaw jail has 20 male and 4 female beds, and currently is our only female option other than King
County. Yakima County Jail may continue to be an option for longer-term offenders, but they are also
rejecting prisoners with behavioral problems. Due to distance, Yakima Jail is not a solution for daily
booking needs.
City staff coordination cost. Another cost factor needs to be considered in managing multiple jail
contracts is that currently 3 FTEs, 2 Court Transport officers and I Jail Coordinator, are dedicated to
accommodate prisoner moves and to manage prisoners at contract jails. The estimated cost is around
$270k per year.
· Ability to influence jail costs and operations.
Contracting for jail services allows for no financial or operational control.
2) Build our own misdemeanor iail facility and mana2e our own inmates.
Staffhas not fully explored this option at this time. The very rough estimate indicates construction cost is
roughly $100,000 to $120,000 per bed, not including land; or a total of$15 to $18 million for a 150-bed
facility. The very preliminary annual operating cost is estimated between $4 to $6 million. The City will
be the sole decision maker on personnel hiring, training, supervision and management, and may still need
to maintain long-term jail contracts with other facilities.
Pros:
· Predictable bed space;
· Full operational and fmancial control;
· City makes all policy and operational decisions;
· Expedited booking - officers back on the road faster;
· Court hearings easier to accommodate.
Cons:
· High capital requirement.
· Time and expertise in building and running a jail facility;
· Given the City's number of inmates, it is likely to be the most costly to operate on a per-bed basis;
· No economy of scale benefits or cost sharing;
· May not provide same medical and mental programs and services as a larger, sub-regional facility
could;
· Location of the facility -may be difficult to site.
3) Partner in a sub-re2ional iail facility.
The concept of South County Correction Entities (SCORE) largely came from the successful Valley
Communication Center. Currently the proposed Facility is sized at 808 beds with six potential partners:
Auburn, Des Moines, F ederal Way, Kent, Renton, and Tukwila. There are a number of different financial
obligation sharing models being considered at thIs time, and the fmal recommendation has yet to be
determined. One of these proposed options is that all partners will equally share construction and
2
operating costs, and each commit to a number of beds. Any usage over the committed beds will pay
additional costs, and any entity has unused beds will be able to generate revenues from other members as
well as other contacts. If all current partners remain in the SCORE, each will be committing for financial
the construction and operation of around 135 beds. The table below shows ADP numbers for potential
member jurisdictions:
Federal Way
Auburn
Des Moines
Tukwila
Renton
Kent
2005 ADP
54
109
17
27
116
151
2006 ADP
52
110
18
28
111
126
2007 ADP
59
121
15
27
123
124
Pros:
· More local control than contracting;
· Predictable bed space;
· Some control of costs;
· Economy of scale;
· 24 hour medical care;
· No need to move prisoners from one facility to another;
· Potential revenue generating options by renting unused bed space to other contracting agencies;
· Transfer day-to-day jail operation responsibilities.
Cons:
· Capital commitment: Depends on whether Kent participate or not, construction cost would be $15 to
$18 million per city or more. This amount will be convert into $1 to $1.2 million debt service annually,
over a 30 year period.
· High operating cost risk: The operating costs are estimated to be $19 to $22 million annually, again
will be born equally by all members if no revenues generated. Combined debt service and operating
costs, without offsetting revenues, would likely to double or triple the City's current jail costs.
· Shared decision making may requires more coordination. (For example, the potential SCORE Cities
have not yet agreed on the allocation of capital and operating costs for a SCORE facility and the
discussion is time-consuming and sometimes difficult.)
COUNCIL DIRECTION:
Unless Council has concems with any of the above 3 options, staff will continue to explore all three options.
SCORE would like to move forward with their site selection and design process as soon as possible. They have
requested cities to indicate their interest to participate in the proposed Facility by April 14, 2008. Without a more
complete picture of SCORE financial information available, staff suspects more time will be needed for all the
cities to finalize their discussions and decision making process. Staffwill bring additional information to Council
when available, and possibly to the April 7 PRHSPS Council Committee meeting.
3