PRHSPSC PKT 03-08-2011 City of Federal Way
City Council
Parks, Recreation, Human Services & Public Safety Committee
March 8,2011 City Hall
5:30 p.m. Hylebos Conference Room
MEETING AGENDA
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PUBLIC COMMENT (3 minutes)
3. COMMISSION COMMENTS
4. COMMITTEE BUSINESS
Action Council
Topic Title /Description Presenter Page or Info Date
A. Approval of Minutes: February, 8, 2011 3 Action N/A
B. Dumas Bay Centre Marketing and Communications Plan Ettinger 5 Information N/A
Update
C. Community Development Block Grant Direct Entitlement Hynden 7 Action Consent
3/15/11
C. Naming of the Brooklake Overlook/Spur in Honor of Thais Bock Ikerd 33 Action Consent
3/15/11
D. Amend Federal Way Revised Code Title 9 Regarding Animal Wilson 39 Action First Reading
Services 3/15/11
5. PENDING ITEMS
• Festivals
• Concept of Housing in South King County
6. NEXT MEETING: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 5:30pm — Hylebos Conference Room
7. ADJOURNMENT
Committee Members City Staff
Jeanne Burbidge, Chair Cary M. Roe, P.E., Director of Parks, Public Works and Emergency Management
Roger Freeman Marylaenicke, Administrative Assistant 11
Mike Park
I
City of Federal Way
City Council
PARKS, RECREATION, HUMAN SERV ICES & PUBLIC SAFETY COUNCIL COMMITTEE
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
5:30 p.m.
SUMMARY
Committee Members in Attendance: Committee Chair Jeanne Burbidge, Councilmember Michael Park, and
Councilmember Roger Freeman
Council Members in Attendance: Councilmember Linda Kochmar
Staff Members in Attendance: Cary Roe, Director of Parks, Public Works & Emergency Management, Amy Jo
Pearsall, City Attorney, Brian Wilson, Chief of Police, Bryant Enge Administrative Services Director, Steve Ikerd
Parks & Facilities Manager, and Mary Jaenicke, Administrative Assistant II.
Guest: None
Chair Burbidge called the meeting to order at 5:34p.m.
Public Comment: None
Commission Comments: None
Councilmember Park moved to add the Community Enhancement as item E. to the agenda. Chair Burbidge
seconded motion passed.
APPROVAL OF SUMMARY
Councilmember Park moved to approve the January meeting summary. Councilmember Burbidge
seconded. Motion passed.
BUSINESS ITEMS
Parks Commission Work Plan
Parks & Facilities Manager Steve Ikerd reported that the Parks Commission met in January to work on the Parks
Commission Work Plan. Amongst the highlights of the Work Plan is a study on connecting trails from West
Hylebos Park, through Panther Lake and up to the BPA trail, conduct a Panther Lake study for future development,
and evaluate and identify potential sites for a disc golf course. Chair Burbidge inquired about the CIP Budget and
Lakota Park. Mr. Ikerd answered that the funding for that project was eliminated in the 2009 budget cuts_ Director
Roe added that there is not sufficient funding to implement the Master Plan at Lakota. The field at Sacajawea is a
very high use field. The field is over 10 years old and is in need of repair. The drainage around the field also needs
to be repaired. Councilmember Park moved to forward the 2011 Parks Commission Work Plan to the full
council February 15, 2011 consent agenda for approval. Chair Burbidge seconded. Motion passed.
Councilmember Freeman arrived
Amend Federal Way Revised Code Regarding Pawnbrokers and Secondhand Dealers
Police Chief Wilson stated that this proposed amendment addresses precious metals and secondhand dealers. The
Police Department is seeing an increase in burglaries in jewelry. The burglaries have gone up 15% and the jewelry
stolen in those burglaries is up 13 %. The proposed regulations will address secondhand dealers, create a temporary
license for secondhand dealers, and create an enforcement mechanism whereby they will be required to document
transactions and display the registrations. If they fail to do this it will be a gross misdemeanor. There is a lack of
regulations on secondhand dealers. The Pawnbrokers are in support of the statewide legislation. The amendment to
the city's existing ordinance will require the secondhand dealers to obtain identification of the person conducting
the transaction, enter the information into a data base that is regulated by the Police Department and retain the
information for 45 days before selling or disposing of any article. There will be an education process to all of the
dealers and vendors. Councilmember Park moved to forward approval of the ordinance to the March 1, 2011
Council meeting for adoption. Councilmember Freeman seconded. City Attorney Pearsall stated that this
item needs to go Full Council on February 15, 2011 for First Reading. A friendly amendment was made, and
3
PARKS, RECREATION, HUMAN SERVICES & PUBLIC SAFETY COUNCIL COMMITTEE
Tuesday February 8, 2011Summary
Page 2
it was moved to forward the proposed ordinance to First Reading on February 15, 2011 City Council
meeting. Councilmember Freeman seconded. Motion passed.
State of Washington, 62 Legislature House Bill #1445 and Senate Bill #5345
Police Chief Wilson reported that this Legislation mirrors what is currently being offered for firefighters on a
statewide basis. This bill would cover law enforcement officers. If a law enforcement officer who is cov ered under
the RCW dies as a direct and proximate result of a heart attack or stroke that law enforcement officer shall be
presumed to have died as the direct and proximate result of personal injury sustained in the course of employment.
There are conditions and requirements that are listed in the statute in both the !louse Bill and the Senate Bill that
specify the specifics. The Association of Washington Cities (AWC) and the Association of Insurance Agencies
have come out against these Bills based on the fiscal note in terms of adding benefits in this economic environment.
Councilmember Park asked if AWC was against this only because of the fiscal note. Chief Wilson answered that he
believes that it is part of the issue, and that AWC is also concemed about the Federal Regulations. There is concern
that L &1 is going to have difficulty interpreting the federal regulations. What type of medical evidence is going to
be necessary in proving that the stress associated with the incident is the cause of death. Councilmember Park
stated that he is concerned that AWC opposes this Bill. Chair Burbidge stated that she is comfortable with the way
that the Bill is written. Councilmember Freeman moved to forward the request to support Presumptions of
Occupational Disease for Law Enforcement Officers and firefighters as defined under House Bill #1445 and
Senate Bill #5354 to the February 15, 2011 city council consent agenda for approval. Councilmember Park
seconded (with some concern). Motion passed.
Community Enhancement Grant
Administrative Services Director Enge reported that in the 2011 budget that was adopted by Council, money was set
aside to impact community services. To be as efficient as possible, the Human Services Commission will evaluate
the proposals and make a recommendation on how to allocate the grants. Information regarding the grant will be
posted in the newspaper, groups that have applied for the grants previously will be notified, and the Human Services
Commissioners will also notify groups that may be interested in participating. Councilmember Park stated that in
previous years $30,000 dollars was set aside. Mr. Enge stated that because of the challenging economic times, it
has been reduced to $15,000. In trying to help as many groups as possible, the grant amounts have been reduced
from a maximum amount of $5,000 to a maximum amount of $1,000. Councilmember Park stated that the
application form must be very simple. Mr. Enge answered that it has been simplified. Councilmember Park asked
Chief Wilson regarding the funding amount. Chief Wilson answered that the dollar amount was split on a half -year
basis; $15,000 for the first six months and $15,000 for the second six months. The $30,000 is in the General Fund.
After discussion, the Committee would like the following 3 items to be addressed: 1) Reconsider the timeline 2)
Increase maximum amount to $1500 3) Add language regarding non - profit groups.
Pending Items
Councilmember Kochmar stated that she has names of some people that would like to volunteer at future
community events /festivals in Federal Way. She would like this information to get passed on to the Mayor and
appropriate staff, and have staff contact them. Councilmember Kochmar also inquired about the outside area at the
Community Center. Chair Burbidge stated it was discussed at the last Parks Commission meeting. Consultants were
there to present preliminary information and ideas_ It has turned out to be an expensive project.
NEXT MEETING
March 8, 2011 5:30 p.m. in the Hylebos Conference Room
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 6:39p.m.
4
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: N/A — Information Only ITEM #:
• CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
•
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: DUMAS BAY CENTRE MARKETING AND COMMUNICATIONS PLAN UPDATE
POLICY QUESTION: N/A
COMMITTEE: Parks, Recreation, Human Services and Public Safety MEETING DATE: March 8, 201 1
CATEGORY:
❑ Consent ❑ Ordinance n Public Hearing
n City Council Business U Resolution ® Other
STAFF REPORT BY: Rob Ettinger/Rita Cipalla DEPT: PRCS
Attachments: Memorandum.
Handouts will be provided at the meeting.
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: N/A � ��
MAYOR APPROVAL: z 0 DIRECTOR APPROVAL: 6 ,417
Committee Council Committee Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
Committee Chair Committee Member Committee Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: N/A
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL #
❑ DENIED 1 reading
❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading
•
❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) ORDINANCE #
RESOLUTION #
5
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
Marketing the Dumas Bay Centre
DATE: March 8, 2011
TO: Parks, Recreation, Human Services & Public Safety Committee
VIA: Cary M. Roe, Director of Parks, Public Works & Emergency Management
FROM: Rob Ettinger, Dumas Bay Centre Conference Coordinator
SUBJECT: Communications and Marketing Materials for Dumas Bay Centre
Background: To increase rental income and to improve the visibility of the Centre in key markets, the City
budgeted $70,000 in its 2010 adjusted budget for marketing and communications work. We are nearing
completion of the project and are presenting the marketing and communications materials prior to approving the
printing of all materials.
The deliverables for this contract are:
• Communications plan — 100% complete
• New logo, color palette — 100% complete
• Visual library (photography, video) — 75% complete. One remaining photo shoot scheduled for Spring,
2011.
• Website, electronic communications — 100% complete. Website went live on February 23, 2011
• Advertising and mailers — 60% complete — annual contracts with Sound Publishing (Federal Way,
Auburn and Kent) banner ads, Bravo publications, Myweddings.com, Washington Executive Magazine,
Tacoma convention and visitors bureau
• Print materials 54% complete
• Tabletop display — 0%
Performance measures we hope to obtain:
1. Secure 1 -2 anchor clients (potential revenue increase $10 -20K)
2. Increase day rental revenue by 10% (potential revenue increase by up to 8k)
3. Increase overnight stays by 10% (potential revenue increase by up to l8k)
4. Increase social events by adding 10 -20 life events focusing on weddings, anniversaries and memorial
services.
Dumas Bay Centre performed well in 2010. Revenues exceed while expenditures are below 2009 levels_ 2010
revenues of $501K increased by $3K or less than 1% (not significant but nevertheless increasing) while
expenditures of $543K are down by $46K or almost 8% compared to 2009. Staff changed what they could
control and that was expenditures. The net "loss" in 2010 was $42K compared to the previous years of
approximately $90K. See table below for comparison and keep in mind 2008 was the beginning of the
recession.
Dumas Bay Revenue Expenditure Subsidy
2006 496,903 526,536 29,633
2007 518,051 561,881 43,830
2008 494,270 585,803 91,533
2009 497,814 588,509 90,695
2010 500,844 543,146 42,302
6
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 15, 2011 ITEM #:
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT DIRECT ENTITLEMENT
POLICY QUESTION: Should the City Of Federal Way provide notice to King County and Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) before April 30, 2011 that the city will receive its Community Development Block Grant
entitlement funds directly from HUD beginning in year 2012. Notice to the parties will confirm that the city has
determined it is not in their best interest to continue under the Joint Agreement Interlocal with King County but
rather receive its fund directly.
COMMITTEE: PRHS &PS MEETING DATE: March 8, 2011
CATEGORY:
• Consent 1 ' Ordinance ❑ Public Hearing
❑ City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other
STAFF REPORT BY: DEPT:
Attachments:
• Memorandum to PRHS &PS Council Committee dated March 1, 2011
• Memorandum to Human Services Commission dated February 16, 2011
• Federal Way CDBG Entitlement Feasibility Study — dated November 2010
Options Considered:
1. The City of Federal Way provides notice to King County and HUD before April 30, 201 lof its intent
on receiving its entitlement directly. This means that the city will allocate the necessary funds
needed, as recommended by the feasibility study, to ensure that the completion of the transfer from
the interlocal agreement with King County to becoming a direct recipient from HUD is built upon a
firm foundation. In addition that the capital priorities for at least the next three years will be housing
rehabilitation and micro - enterprising activities as recommended by the Human Services
Commission. Knowing that this transition process has to be supported and embraced by city and all
of its Departments, it is encouraged that other departments within the city are schooled on the
processes and engaged in the transition. Finally, the feasibility study provides descriptive
recommendations on how to support the Human Services Divisional staff by ensuring that the
program is properly staffed and the city also agrees with its recommendations.
2. The City Of Federal Way will notify King County that its intent is to sign the Joint Interlocal
Agreement as a Joint Agreement city whereby, allowing King County to receive the City Of Federal
Way's entitlement. This action would by action put the city into a sub - recipient relationship with
HUD and has to remain as such for not less than 3 years.
3. Other:
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends option 1
7
MAYOR'S APPROVAL: / if • DIRECTOR APPROVAL:
or 'nee Council Committee Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I move to forward option 1, as written and recommended by staff via the
Human Services Commission that the city in 2012 will be a direct recipient of its entitlement funds rather than
participating with King County in a Joint Interlocal Agreement to the March 15. 2011 consent agenda for
approval.
Committee Chair Committee Member Committee Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move approval of
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL #
❑ DENIED 1ST reading
❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading
❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) ORDINANCE #
REVISED— 08/12/2010 RESOLUTION #
8
CITY OF
Federal Way
MEMORANDUM
TO: Parks, Recreation, Human Services and Public Safety Council Committee
.1
FROM: Lynnette S. Hynden, Human Services Manager \-- `.
DATE: March 1, 2011
RE: CDBG Direct Entitlement Consideration
Background:
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) dollars have been woven in the fabric of the Federal Way community
for well over 16 plus years. Both capital projects and public services have benefited our residents. At one point in
the city received its allotment directly from Housing and Urban Development (HUD) when it was a very young city
and wasn't properly staffed. From approximately 1995 every three years the city assesses and had made the
determination to continue in the Joint City Interlocal Agreement with King County where that puts the city as a sub -
recipient of its own funds or to ramp up and support the necessary processes to become a direct recipient.
The Joint Inter - Local Agreement (JIA) outlines for those cities who chose to be a sub - recipient of their direct entitled
funds being administered by King County. There are administrative costs and program impacts as well as
procedures that are agreed upon between King County and joint agreement cities. The county's role is as the
technical advisor to the JIA cities because under the agreement, HUD recognizes the county as its client and the JIA
cities are sub - recipients.
Joint Agreement Cities contribute agreed upon portions of its allotment for such costs associated with the
administrating the grants. There is very little if no flexibility in negotiation on the inter -local agreement. Everything
from capital implementation (environmental reviews and Davis Bacon monitoring), minor housing repair to the
administrative and planning dollars are all jointly and clearly negotiated in the agreement. Also discussed are
limitations to number of service programs and capital projects the joint agreement cities can contract with within the
program year. King County prepares all required documents that are directed by HUD. While the City Of Federal
Way has the ability to select public service programs and capital projects, it is the County, through the JIA, that has
the final determination on the projects selected.
Purpose:
At the end of this year, December 2011, the City Of Federal Way's Joint Agreement with King County expires. The
city is now once again faced with either renegotiating the JIA for another three years or the city could opt to
undertake the process of receiving its entitlement directly from HUD. Infrastructure within the Human Services
Division will need to be set up as statutorily required by law and monitored by HUD. This infrastructure creates the
foundation for greater responsibility and a direct relationship to HUD. The city's administrative dollars over the past
years has supported the county's infrastructure to provide such support that now would need to be switched.
The consultant hired to examine the pending question explored and assessed the "Pros and Cons of the City Of
Federal Way assuming their Entitlement status beginning in 2012 ". The consultant provided his final report in
November 2010 (report is attached).
In addition to the consultants work, staff also participated in lengthy discussions between King County staff and the
two other joint agreement cities as well as the two potentially new joint agreement cities. Discussions on such
9
topics as whether or not there could be changes to the Joint Inter -local Agreement, what type of activities a direct
entitlement city can do that would limit the risks of greater liability for project management, Housing Repair
programs and potential South King County City collaboration. The discussions and outcomes from the meetings are
incorporated into the overall staff recommendation.
CDBG Program
Since 1974 Congress has allocated funding to support the Community Development Block Grant program which is
both public services and capital projects that benefit the community of need. The Direct Entitlement average for the
city has been in the mid $700,000_range. There are a few ways to increase this base line entitlement by generating
program income, recapturing funds and supplementing CDBG with local funds. Another option to increase the
allocation is the potential of annexing another 20,000 persons that would increase our entitlement by approximately
$150,000.
CDBG Administrative Costs
The consultant compared five most comparable cities to the City Of Federal Way and found that most cities
recorded under the 20% administrative service cap on the program. However, across the board cities reported that
it is very difficult to truly capture the total FTE used on any one activity. Dedicated CDBG staff hours are recorded
and reported, but depending on the project activity other city departments provide in -kind supportive services. Other
services such as environmental reviews, David Bacon monitoring and in -house projects are just a few that come to
mind but have to be supported as needed per activity. The more complex activities selected require more staff and
technical expertise that if not provided by employed city staff will have to be done on an outside contractor basis.
It is suggested that the city allocate 1.75 -2.25 FTEs to just CDBG to assure adequate staffing is available within the
Human Services Division to support the added administrative responsibilities, regardless of what program activities
are selected. If complex capital activities become a city priority another increase in FTEs would be necessary to
support additional labor intensive oversight. Eventually, after a couple of years of ramping up the program and that
time commitment levels off the city could maintain a limited number of the FTEs at the 1.75 - 2.25 suggested level.
This is assuming that the staffing expertise remains stable and sustainable. It is staff expertise that makes this
program successful or potentially a liability for the city. Also, this assumes that only slight modifications are made to
desired program activities over the years.
Start -up Costs
Developing a Five -year Consolidated Plan as well as the Assessment of the Impediments to Fair Housing
and the Anti- Displacement and Relocation Plan are all required to be created and maintained. Currently King
County absorbs these costs and burdens for the city. Public comment and participate is the backbone structure of
CDBG programming.
The Consolidated Plan ranges from $25,000. to $40,000 and must be complete before the city would be approved
to receive its allotment. This can be reimbursed; however, the city must front the costs. The other reports range
from $5,000 to $10,000 dollars for the initial start-up.
The IDIS system for reporting programming and expenses to HUD is required. While this is a web -based system,
there will be minimal costs associated with having the appropriate set -up, but there will be soft human capital costs
such as technical support from the IT Department will be essential and necessary.
While staff have gone through hours of updating our monitoring process, tracking systems and document storage
systems. The infrastructure required by HUD as a direct entitlement still lays ahead of us and more work and staff
resources are needed to ensure the city's operations meets HUD guidelines.
Summary:
The consultant's report in addition to staff time spent over the past 6 months examining the question of what benefit,
if any, will becoming a Direct Entitlement from HUD be a better option for the City Of Federal Way can be answered.
The most important and pervasively absent benefit for the city is community relationships that the City Of Federal
Way has not maintained because of the barriers between our community and King County. The inter -local
agreement arrangements, with or without intention, inhibits thffity staff from developing on -going relationships
needed to achieve the necessary spend down ratios required by HUD. The city needs to embrace its community by
forming lasting strategic planning partnership for its residents. To date, while the city has spent dollars in our
community to enhance capital projects, it is the county that is seen as the lead and decision maker. At times those
decisions have been detrimental to actually realizing community projects but at other times we have been
successful. The inconsistency in services provided by the county to meet its agreements is impacting the city's
ability to fully engage the community partners and realize completed projects.
Determining whether the city would be interested in changing its program mix is a policy decision that neither staff
nor the consultant answered in making its recommendations. However, the Human Services Commission offers its
recommendation that capital projects be limited to housing rehabilitation and micro - enterprising activities. Certainly
if the city minimized the number of public service agencies they contract with and then limit the capital project
activity, managing the entitlement would be done with less risk.
The overall organizational change involved in transitioning the current work processes to support the Human
Services Division taking on this grand operation needs to be accepted throughout the entire city's organizational
structure. The effect the change necessary to make such a shift of this magnitude requires internal support and
recognition of the potential impacts if not fully embraced. With organizational support that allows ownership for
controlling the change and then having the city adapt to the change will prove to be a successful shift for this
program and the city. Come short of an organizational buy in, the risks again to the overall functionality of the
CDBG program could be high for the City Of Federal Way if not supported on every level of the organization.
Staff Recommendation:
I am honored to have had the opportunity to examine in depth the pending question of what is the appropriate
decision to make this year as it relates to continue the status quo of engaging in the Joint Interlocal Agreement
between the city and King County, or pursue the cities entitlement in a completely different direction. The decision is
difficult because of multiple factors. More than 9 months with six of them being consumed with research and
queries of partners both internally and externally has transpired. Finally, an unbiased consultant weighed in as well.
Engaging the Human Services Commission and their combined wealth of knowledge and vested interest were also
done throughout the process and leading to their recommendation on February 28, 2011. The HS Commission
after carefully weighing the options unanimously recommends to the City Council that the City Of Federal Way
provide notice and sets out a course to receive its entitlement funds directly from HUD starting in 2012.
Options for the council committee to consider:
1. The City of Federal Way provides notice to King County and HUD before April 30, 201 lof its intent
on receiving its entitlement directly. This means that the city will allocate the necessary funds needed,
as recommended by the feasibility study, to ensure that the completion of the transfer from the
interlocal agreement with King County to becoming a direct recipient from HUD is built upon a firm
foundation. In addition that the capital priorities for at least the next three years will be housing
rehabilitation and micro - enterprising activities as recommended by the Human Services Commission.
Knowing that this transition process has to be supported and embraced by city and all of its
Departments, it is encouraged that other departments within the city are schooled on the processes and
engaged in the transition. Finally, the feasibility study provides descriptive recommendations on how
to support the Human Services Divisional staff by ensuring that the program is properly staffed and the
city also agrees with its recommendations.
2. The City Of Federal Way will notify King County that its intent is to sign the Joint Interlocal
Agreement as a Joint Agreement city whereby, allowing King County to receive the City Of Federal
Way's entitlement. This action would by action put the city into a sub- recipient relationship with
HUD and has to remain as such for not less than 3 years.
Staff recommends option 1.
Thank you and if you have any questions that I can answer, please let me know.
11
CITY OF
Federal Way
MEMORANDUM
TO: Human Services Commission
FROM: Lynnette S. Hynden, Human Services Manager -
DATE: February 16, 2011
RE: CDBG Direct Entitlement Consideration
Background:
The City of Federal Way has been eligible for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) dollars for well over 16
years. History will recall that at one point the city did receive its allotment directly from Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) when it was a very young city and wasn't properly staffed to manage the laborious funding
requirements and processes necessary to be a direct recipient.
There are few cities in King County with populations above 50,000 that qualify to receive funds directly from HUD;
Federal Way being one of them. With a population count over 88,000, the City of Federal Way receives the largest
entitlement sum of the cities that remain under a Joint Interlocal Agreement (JIA) partnered with King County. King
County also receives funds directly from HUD for all the smaller cities that have a population under 50,000 as well
as the unincorporated areas of the county. The smaller cities and unincorporated King County in addition to the JIA
cities are known as the "Consortium" that is governed by the "Joint Recommendation Committee." Over the years
the City of Federal Way has participated in the King County CDBG Consortium as a Joint Agreement City.
Currently, Renton and Shoreline combined with Federal Way make up the three cities that are identified as "Joint
Agreement" cities. There are two seats identified for the Joint Agreement cities to rotate among them and
participate as members. If more agreements are reached between cities and the county, at this time only two seats
are still available to all JIA cities and must be rotated. Joint Agreement cities are those cities that qualify to receive
their allotment directly from HUD but for several reasons have chosen not to. Every three years the JIA between the
county and the eligible cities is revisited and executed for continued collaboration. Pursuant to HUD's guidance,
cities can opt out of the JIA every three years.
The Joint Inter -Local Agreement (MA) outlines the administrative costs and program impacts as well as procedures
that are agreed upon between IGng County and joint agreement cities. The county's role is as the technical advisor
to the JIA cities because under the agreement, HUD recognizes the county as its client and the JIA cities are sub -
recipients. Joint Agreement Cities contribute agreed upon portions of their allotment for such costs associated with
administrating the grants. Everything from capital implementation (environmental reviews and Davis Bacon
monitoring), minor housing repair, to the administrative and planning dollars are all jointly and clearly negotiated in
the agreement. Also discussed are limitations to number of service programs and capital projects the joint
agreement cities can contract with within the program year. King County prepares all required documents that are
directed by HUD. While the City of Federal Way has the ability to select public service programs and capital
projects, it is the County, through the JIA, that has the final determination on the projects selected.
The City of Federal Way's "seat" at the King County Housing Consortium, "JRC" membership allows for
collaboration and contribution to larger regional projects. Being a member of the consortium allows the city to work
cooperatively with others among the region on housing and capital projects which would otherwise not have enough
funding to be completed.
12
Purpose:
At the end of this year, December 2011, the City of Federal Way's Joint Agreement with King County expires_ The
city is now faced with either renegotiating the JIA for another three years, or the city could opt to undertake the
process of receiving its entitlement directly from HUD. If the decision is to receive the city's entitlement directly, the
city has to notify both the county and HUD by April 2011. Infrastructure within the Human Services Division will
need to be set up and plans drawn up as statutorily required by law and monitored by HUD_ This infrastructure
would be creating the foundation for greater responsibility and being directly responsive to HUD. The city's
administrative dollars over the past years have supported the county's infrastructure to provide such support that
now would need to be switched.
In preparation for making a determination regarding the feasibility of the city receiving our entitlement directly, the
Human Services Division hired a consultant. The consultant explored and assessed the "Pros and Cons of the City
of Federal Way assuming the direct entitlement status beginning in 2012 ". The consultant provided his final report
in November 2010 (report is attached). Also in preparation for making this decision, staff has participated in lengthy
discussions between King County staff and the two other joint agreement cities as well as the two potentially new
joint agreement cities. Discussions on such topics as whether or not there could be changes to the Joint Interlocal
Agreement, what type of activities a direct entitlement city can do that would limit the risks of greater liability for
project management, Housing Repair programs and potential South King County City collaboration. These
discussions and outcomes from the meetings are incorporated into the overall considerations staff will weigh when
making a recommendation.
CDBG Program
Since 1974 Congress has allocated funding to support the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program
which is both public services and capital projects that benefit the community of need. The funding level between
1974 and 2006 remained constant, and then there was a slight decline in 2008. The Direct Entitlement average
from the last 4 years is in the mid $700,000 range. There are a few ways to increase this baseline entitlement by
generating program income, recapturing funds and supplementing CDBG with local funds. Another option that is
lingering that could increase the allotment is per the Growth Management Area there are another 20,000 persons
that could at sometime join the city via annexation. The annexation would increase our entitlement by
approximately $150,000.
There are ongoing costs are associated with managing CDBG_ Administering the grant requires more staff time
than what the city is currently devoting to the CDBG program management. Developing an Annual Action Plan and
annually reporting the program's progress is essential. Both of these reporting processes require public
participation. Record keeping and program management in addition to contract management will rest entirely upon
the city's purview. Fiscal management is also necessary and depending on what contracts are written and fund
source disbursements, there could be extra burdens on other city departments and divisions. Finally, technical
experience assistance and training for sub - recipients is another duty in addition to monitoring agency compliance.
Staff will have to assume reporting into the IDIS HUD electronic system for all of the city's sub - recipients.
CDBG Administrative Costs
The consultant compared the five most comparable cities to the City of Federal Way and found that most cities
recorded under the 20% administrative service cap on the program. For example, he has shown most operate
within average of 1.47 FTEs. What is not used for administrative management can be put into project activities.
However, across the board cities reported that it is very difficult to truly capture the total FTE used on any one
activity. Dedicated CDBG staff hours are recorded and reported, but depending on the project activity other city
departments provide in -kind supportive services. Other services are environmental reviews, Davis Bacon
monitoring and in -house projects to name a few. The more complex activities selected naturally require more staff
and technical expertise that if not provided by employed city staff will have to be done on an outside contractor
basis.
Currently under the JIA, the City of Federal Way is compelled to support the salary of its CDBG Coordinator with
General Fund dollars. The city has dedicated 1.0 FTE to the CDBG grant coordination and the 10% of its
administrative allocation ceiling does not cover the salary/benefits of its coordinator. It also does not have monetary
allowances to reimburse the city for operating costs such as mailing, legal postings and such required by law.
13
It is suggested that the city allocate 1.75 -2.25 FTEs to assure adequate staffing is available within the Division to
support the added administrative responsibilities, regardless of what program activities are selected. If complex
capital activities become a city priority, another increase in FTEs would be necessary to support additional labor
intensive oversight. It appears regardless of whether or not the city becomes a direct entitlement, supplementing
staff salary and operating costs with General Funds is necessary. Eventually, after a couple of years of ramping up
the program and the time commitment levels off, the city could maintain a limited number of the FTEs at the 1.75-
2.25 suggested level. This is assuming that the staffing expertise remains stable and sustainable. It is staff
expertise that makes this program successful or potentially a liability for the city. Also, this assumes that only slight
modifications are made to program activities over the years.
Start -up Costs
Developing a Five -year Consolidated Plan as well as the Assessment of the Impediments to Fair Housing and the
Anti - Displacement and Relocation Plan are all required to be created and maintained. Currently King County
absorbs these costs and burdens for the city. In general, expert consultants are hired to complete these required
documents because of the labor intensive activities needed to complete these reports. Public comment and
participation is the backbone structure of CDBG programming. While some of these reports can be delayed and
implemented in a rolling fashion, they still have to be completed and will absorb funds from the limited 20% cap
maximum limit for administrative costs allowed. The Consolidated Plan ranges from $25,000 to $40,000 and must
be complete before the city would be approved to receive its allotment. This can be reimbursed; however, the city
must front the costs. The other reports range from $5,000 to $10,000 dollars for the initial start-up that then can be
updated by staff.
The IDIS system for reporting programming and expenses to HUD is required. While this is a web -based system,
there will be minimal costs associated with having the appropriate set -up. On -going technical support from the IT
Department will be essential and necessary. In addition, the new federal Transparency Act requirements and
associated reports appear to consume significant staff resources.
While staff have gone through hours of updating our monitoring process, tracking systems and document storage
systems, our current internal controls are sufficient for compliance with our JIA. The infrastructure required by HUD
and in anticipation of preparing to become a direct entitlement city, more work and staff resources are needed to
ensure the city's operations meet HUD guidelines.
Summary:
The consultant's report, in addition to staff time spent over the past 6 months, examines the question of what
benefit, if any, becoming a Direct Entitlement from HUD will have, and would it be a better option for the City of
Federal Way. To answer this question there appears to be benefits on both sides of the question. Project activities
PP uest on. Pro'
q 1
the city has accomplished in the past would have a greater impact p P g pact and drain and still require Regional Support;
however, determining the greatest needs of the local community could be better served being a direct entitlement.
In general, there is no compelling reason not to engage in the continued Joint Interlocal Agreement; conversely,
there are no compelling reasons not to discontinue the agreement relationship as well. The JIA provides much
more protection and a safety net when administering the program activities. The bureaucracy with the additional
layer having King County administratively support the city can be cumbersome and certainly communication at times
has been strained which resulted in less than outstanding outcomes; however, over the years there have been
many program activities that have benefited the city due to the current arrangement.
Specifically, questions 1 - 3 on page 15 of the consultant's report outlined next steps to consider before making the
decision. Question 1 was explored and at this time all mentioned cities are not interested in further negotiations
outside of the JIA. Question 2 the other South King County entitlement cities are not interested in developing a
Localized consortium to reduce costs or operate a larger housing repair consortium. No other cities are considering
to opt out of the JIA and in fact at least one of the two newer cities are committed to opt in, as suggested in
Question 3 this topic be explored.
Determining whether the city would be interested in changing its program mix is a policy decision that neither staff
nor the consultant could answer. Certainly if the city minimized the number of public service agencies they contract
with and then limit the capital project activity to microenterprise and perhaps home repair, both of which are
14
identified as community needs for Federal Way, managing the entitlement would be done with Tess risk and
significantly less impact to the Finance Department.
The organizational change that would be involved in transitioning the current work process into a Division that will
receive the entitlement directly needs to be accepted throughout the entire organization. Effecting change is merely
not enough to make a shift of this magnitude for the size of this organization. With organizational support that
allows ownership for controlling the change and then having the city adapt to the change will prove to be a
successful shift in this program. Come short of an organizational buy -in, the risks again to the overall functionality of
the CDBG program could be high for the City of Federal Way if not supported on every level of the organization.
Staff Recommendation:
As staff it is my duty to assess and weigh the overall outcomes of implementing policy change successfully. This is
a very difficult situation for the Human Services Divisional staff and was not made in a vacuum. Detailed
assessments were completed and queries made on all levels of the organization both internally and externally. As
an unbiased participant, a consultant was also asked to make a recommendation based on his work and
assessment. All that being said, there is no one obvious answer on which direction to pursue.
The pros for `Direct Entitlement" are that the city has its own autonomy from King County but also separate from the
Regional King County combined cities. To be frank, it appears as if the struggles for the city to fully participate in
the current JRC and JIA structure is the disjointed and fragmented communication between the city and King
County personnel Staff is trying to determine if the overall outcome change of being a direct entitlement city based
on personnel shortcomings and past experiences is a benefit to the City of Federal Way. The collaborative nature
or lack thereof is strained due to personnel performances and not merely the structure that the city has been
operating under for the past several years. Another jurisdiction outside of King County that is similar in size reported
to staff that their collaborative relationships and open communication have benefited their region to have joint
agreements. While it is true that leveraging and combining CDBG entitlement dollars within the Region would
provide greater opportunity to expunge the balances on the yearly dollars in meaningful ways to benefit the
community it is intended to serve.
Option A: The Human Services Commission recommends that the City of Federal Way continue in its long- standing
Joint Interlocal Agreement with King County. However, it also recommends that the city actively pursue open
communication and convey to King County the necessity to be collaborative by enhancing the working relationships.
Option B: The Human Services Commission recommends that the City of Federal Way provides notice before April
15, 2011 to King County as well as Housing and Urban Development (HUD) of its intent on receiving its entitlement
directly. Which means the city will have to fund the necessary documents required by HUD before the city receives
its entitlement. The 20% Administrative Costs allotment of the entitlement funds will remain with the Human
Services Division to ensure appropriate implementation to safeguard potential liability associated with risk of not
managing the allotment appropriately.
Option C: Other:
Cc: Mayor Skip Priest
Bryant Enge, Administrative Services Director
•
15
Federal Way CDBG Entitlement Feasibility Study
Potential for City of Federal Way to Assume CDBG Entitlement Responsibilities
November 2010
Purpose:
The purpose of this study is to assess and present the Pros and Cons of the City of Federal Way assuming
CDBG Entitlement status beginning in 2012; and to study the potential for improving (or deteriorating)
CDBG Program outcomes.
Background:
As an urban city with a population over 50,000, the City of Federal Way receives a HUD CDBG allocation
based on its population, extent of poverty and condition of its housing stock. The grant allocation for
housing and community development activities in the City activities in 2010 is $779,391. For the 2012
program year, the City has the choice of renewing its existing Joint Interlocal Agreement (JIA) with King
County to receive and administer the program on behalf of the City or it can choose to receive the funds
directly from HUD. At least 4 other King County Consortium members are considering the same
question (Renton, Shoreline, Kirkland and Redmond). The purpose of this analysis is to provide
information on which the Gty can make an informed decision regarding which option would best serve
the City's interests.
Financial Considerations
Annual Funding Stability /Instability
CMG Entitlement Funds
' The City should expect to receive in the area of $750,000 in CDBG funds for the foreseeable future
(notwithstanding any potential drastic changes resulting from the continued economic recession). Since
the legislation forming the CDBG Program was passed in 1974, there has been a federal allocation of
funds for communities every year. For the past 36 years, Congress has seen the Program as a fixture in
providing basic needs of both large and small cities. The Program has significant and powerful support
1
16
from the Mayor's Conference and national county government associations. In the early years following
the turn of the century, formula -based Entitlement funding levels for Federal Way were consistently
over $800,000 per year. Beginning in 2006, Entitlement funding levels for the City dropped into the
$700,000 level and only in the 2010 fiscal year has it approached earlier levels at $779,391. The
proposed FY 2011 Federal budget for the formula -based CDBG Program remains at the same level as the
Congress appropriated funds for FY2010. This means the City can expect approximately $780,000 for
the 2011 program year and a similar amount for the 2012 year. Following are the annual Entitlement
allocations for the City of Federal Way over the past five years, showing a steady funding base,
averaging $738,207 over the period:
Annual Entitlement Allocations for the City of Federal Way 2006 -2010
FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010
$733,274 $740,582 $714,719 $723,071 $779,391
Other Resources
Program Income - An additional source of program funds is possible from income generated from loans
or deferred loans made with CDBG funds which are repaid. Estimated 2010 program income was
$37,000. Both City and County staff indicate it is likely to drop somewhat in 2011. It is probable (as a
result of recent negotiations between other consortium cities and the County) that future program
income generated from past activities in Federal Way would revert to the City. This is an area that is
subject to negotiation with the County. The current HUD regulations allow the funds to be formally
shifted to a newly qualified Entitlement but they also do not require them to do so and the current
Interlocal agreement does not include any post- agreement termination provisions. While program
income is a relatively small part of the current program, it still represents 5% of total resources.
Regardless of the status of current loans made to Federal Way homeowners, if the City is concerned
about increasing funds available for administration, it can over time, augment its budget by
implementing activities which generate program income such as housing rehabilitation or economic
development loans.
Recaptured Funds — In discussions with King County CDBG staff, it appears that any project activities
that would be open at the time the City would elect for direct Entitlement status would continue to be
administered by the County until the project is completed. However, if funds that have been
programmed to activities eventually do not ultimately proceed, the County would likely re- convey them
to the City. Should this event occur, it is a subject to negotiation between the two entities.
Local Funds to Supplement COBG Funds - City staff not paid with CDBG resources — In discussions with
other COBG Entitlements, it is apparent that many cities are supporting program activities through staff
hours that are not charged to the program. It should be noted that in those same discussions, it was
2
17
apparent that CDBG- assigned staff do not spend 100% of their time strictly on CDBG activities and, in
fact, CDBG staff were considered an overall asset to the City as a result of their contributions to other
City activities and representations.
Potential Entitlement Allocation Increases — There is a potential for increased allocations of CDBG
formula funds. It is estimated that potential annexations of areas in the Growth Management Area
containing approximately 20,000 persons could occur at some point. This could mean as much as
$150,000 additional annual allocations. However, it appears from conversations with City staff that
annexations are very unlikely in the next 3 years, so it would have no or little impact during the up-
coming JIA period.
On -going Costs
There are several major, on -going responsibilities of administering the program, each requiring staff
time and /or expense that the City would have full responsibility for in a direct Entitlement status (for
many of these, the City currently has full or partial responsibility under "pass- through" provisions of the
current County Consortium Contract):
Developing the Annual Action Plan — The Annual Action Plan requires citizen participation, at least 2
hearings, review and selection of projects, preparation of a written plan, publishing notices in
newspaper (at least 3 legal notices annually).
Program Management — Overall management of the program assures compliance with the HUD
requirements and public trust.
Program Documentation /Record- keeping Systems — Within these requirements, the eligibility of
program beneficiaries and eligibility of activities are among the most important.
Annual Program Progress Reporting — An annual report (CAPERS) to HUD and the public is required
annually. The City currently provides some of the information for the County report while the County
provides the rest.
Contracting and Contract Management — Contracts with Sub - recipients and private contractors will
need to be developed and managed. County models or other Entitlement City models could be used.
Fiscal Management —
• LOCs system management
• Payment of funds to sub - recipients and contractors
• Audits and the costs of a periodic audit
Sub - recipient Reporting — IDIS is one of the most difficult requirements to manage. Training of staff
would be required to meet these data keeping requirements.
3
18
Sub- recipient Training and Technical Assistance — To assure compliance with the requirements so that
the City itself remains in compliance with HUD requirements, training and technical assistance of sub -
recipients is necessary periodically.
Sub - recipient Monitoring — If the City has sub- contracts, periodic monitoring of the sub - recipient's
performance and compliance is required.
Federal Davis -Bacon Wage Rate Monitoring — If public works construction contracts are entered into,
the City is responsible for monitoring federal and state wage rates.
Environmental Reviews and Clearances— Depending on the project activity, this may be fairly simple or
it may be complex.
Loan Servicing for Housing and Economic Development Loans, if applicable - If there is program income
from loan or recapture activities, these funds must be accounted for and used for eligible activities.
Preparation for, and Responses to, HUD Monitoring — HUD periodically monitors (site audits)
Entitlements for compliance, progress and performance. These visits often involve both preparation
and significant attention during the monitoring visit. An early visit within a year should be expected and
if relatively clean, several years may pass before a subsequent monitoring visit is made.
Staff Training — New staff will need training. While HUD provides periodic training, it is often only
available at regional or national training sites which will require travel expenses. if asked, the local HUD
office will try to accommodate a request for 1 -1 training.
Estimated Cost of Administering Activities Based on the 2011 Proposed
Activities
In order to determine the approximate cost of potential planning and administration as a direct grantee
with the full program responsibilities of a CDBG Entitlement, we reviewed two sources. First, to
determine the probable budget for 2011, we used the July 19 staff report to the Human Services
Commission outlining potential project activities for the 2011 Program Year. We then used a survey to
obtain comparative data from 6 other CDBG Entitlement communities in the state of Washington with
similar entitlement allocations. We later decided to limit the use of information from the City of
Bellingham because they receive a much higher level of program income ($237,000 annually).
If we assume the 2011 HUD CDBG allocation remains essentially the same as 2010 ($779,000) and there
is no program income available, approximately $156,000 would be available for planning and
administration of the program (this is a conservative estimate as it now appears that a small amount of
program income would become available to the City).
As can be seen by the attached "Comparable CDBG Entitlements in the State of Washington (CDBG
Funds only) ", the average amount of resources available to the five most similar Entitlements is
4
19
$741,000, approximating Federal Way resources of $779, while the average number of programs
managed (8.4) by the others is 23% less than the probable number of Federal Way projects (11).
Program Mix
In general, the larger the number of project activities administered, the larger the administrative budget
(including financial staff). But even more important than the number of activities, is the type of projects
managed. For instance, staffing of a housing rehabilitation program can be paid from the housing
rehabilitation program budget, whereas administration and support for a public works construction
projects must come from the administration budget. Construction projects involving public works
require a significant amount of monitoring and documentation, including administration of the Davis -
Bacon Wage Rate and environmental review and clearance requirements.
The five most comparable cities used approximately $113,000 of their resources and consumed 1.47
CDBG- funded FTEs for basic administration costs of the program. The average amount of funds spent by
these other Entitlements on administration was 14 %, indicating that some Entitlements are using some
of the funds for planning activities within the 20% cap on planning and administration funds and some
(most notably Bellevue and Kennewick) have chosen to use a significant portion of funds — available
within the planning and administration cap - for project activities. And in those two cities, other non -
CDBG funds are used to pay for a portion of the planning and administration costs. It should be noted
that it was very difficult for Entitlement staff to estimate with accuracy the FTEs committed to the
program from non -CDBG sources - so the extent of other funds used to support the program may be
underestimated.
Estimated Administrative Costs
If the City were to choose to administer the CDBG directly in 2012, they would need to budget for
additional FTEs. Looking at the comparative data, the kind of projects proposed for Federal Way in 2011
and taking into account the somewhat higher number of activities projected compared to other CDBG
Entitlements, the City may want to budget for 1.75 -2.25 FTEs to assure that adequate staffing is
available.
Assuming an average staff cost of $40.00 /hour including benefits, 2 FTEs would be approximately
$10,000 more than the $156,000 that would is likely to be available from CDBG Program resources. This
is approximately double the $81,607 budget in the 2010 administrative budget (which is for a more
limited scope of program responsibilities). Other costs for travel, mileage, training, public notices, etc.
may add $5,000 - $10,000 /year. If program income could be generated or a slightly Tess expensive mix of
program activities were programmed, on -going program expenses would be almost cost - neutral for the
City. And, once systems have been established after a year or two of administering the full
requirements, a slightly lower level of FTE consumption may be sufficient to operate the program. In
addition to these on -going costs, there are infrequent, periodic costs outlined in the next section that
will likely require City resources.
5
20
City Finance Office staff indicated that adding any responsibilities to the Office beyond their existing
responsibilities for CDBG, would cause a "tipping point" to be reached, resulting in the need for an
additional position within the Office. Also of concern to the Office should the City seek Entitlement
status at this time were several unknowns. Among those are the program activities mix (including the
impact on FTEs) and the need to carefully plan for how the Office would gain the level of expertise and
experience necessary for direct grant administration.
Start-up Costs /Pre- Agreement costs
Should the City determine it is in their best interests to become a direct grantee, there are both
obligations to be met and resources to defray the start-up costs of meeting those obligations.
Obligations
There are two major documents that must be prepared during the start-up stage or shortly following the
start-up of a new Entitlement.
1. Development of a Five Year Consolidated Plan. Every 5 years, Entitlement cities must prepare a
Housing and Community Development Five Year Consolidated Plan. The plan must be
developed prior to the first year of an Entitlement program. The plan has value beyond being a
pre- requisite for CDBG funding as it can serve as a guide to action in housing, community
development and human services. The vast majority of Entitlement communities enter
contracts with consultants to conduct a planning process to develop a Consolidated Plan largely
because of the concentrated time commitment necessary to prepare the Plan, their staff's lack
of experience in preparing the Plan and the typical consultant's familiarity with the
requirements and facilitating the planning process. In almost all cases of communities gaining
Entitlement status for the first time, consultants are contracted to complete the plan. Once the
pattern of a plan has been developed and a base of information is available, it is easier for the
community to prepare future plans. (It is recognized that a "Federal Way 2006 -2010
Consolidated Plan" was developed 4 years ago. While some of the needs /market analysis data
could be used, most of the information would need to be updated and the strategies would
need to be redeveloped. In addition, there have been some changes to the requirements since
then- most notably the performance measurement requirements.) A factor in determining
whether to do this in -house is that some of the changes in HUD's suggested format have made
the plan somewhat easier to prepare. However, it remains a time- consuming task. The cost for
consultant services to prepare a 2012 -16 Consolidated Plan and an Annual Action Plan is
estimated in the $25,000- $40,000 range. City staff could potentially prepare the Annual Action
Plan reducing the overall cost.
2. Assessment of the Impediments to Fair Housing (Al). Most the Entitlement communities do
not prepare the initial Al in- house. Roughly one -half prepare the updates every 4 -5 years with
6
21
staff. There are some technical areas in preparing the Al but HUD generally does not make a
close quality check of the contents. In fact it is not required to be submitted to HUD for
approval; and Entitlements are only required to "prepare" an Al, including a description of
actions to be taken to implement recommendations to overcome identified impediments. The
Al does not have to be completed in the first or second year - although it is more efficient and
cost effective to prepare it during or shortly after the Consolidated Plan is prepared as some of
the data and interviews are complementary. If it is contracted to a consultant, the costs range
from $4,000 - $9,000.
3. Other costs: Also to be developed is an Anti- Displacement and Relocation Plan — this is a
simple document that HUD has developed a Guide form to fill out so the costs are minimal. In
addition, a Citizen Participation Plan specific to the Con Plan must be developed if the City does
not already have one. This not a major task; and this Plan can be created in 3 -4 hours.
Probably the most time - consuming effort in start-up will be setting up the filing /record- keeping
system and the HUD financial reporting and IDIS reporting system. There may be some initial
phase -in costs to cover the need for specialized attention for such things as IDIS set up, fiscal
record - keeping, program development, etc. that could add to the first or second year costs.
These might be obtained through administrative contracts or extra part-time FTEs. These
activities may either be covered within the personnel making up the 2.0 FTEs (depending on
their particular skills and expertise) or may add up to $10,000 in start-up costs.
Resources
The City can use their Entitlement funds beginning two years before their first program year as a direct
grantee if they request authority to incur pre- agreement costs of the Seattle HUD Office. Such costs are
limited to 25% of the Entitlement (or approximately $195,000). Most of the these pre- agreement costs
are related to planning and staffing to begin setting up files (which will be a lesser task in the Federal
Way case as they have been keeping records on beneficiaries and financial records). It should be
remembered that planning and administrative costs are capped at 20% of the annual Entitlement, so
these pre - agreement costs will count against that cap for up to two years' of Entitlement allocations.
Financial Summary
The national CDBG Program is a very stable program; and the City could expect a stable amount of both
program and administrative funds for the CDBG Program for many years. If the City elects to administer
a direct Entitlement program in 2012, it is suggested 1.75 -2.25 FTEs be budgeted. This assumes a
program mix that is similar to the draft 2011 activities listed in the July staff report. The $156,000
available for CDBG planning and administration expenses is almost sufficient to provide for on -going
staffing at this level. It is estimated that the shortfall to cover other administrative support costs would
be $5,000- $10,000. In addition, start up expenses may add $5,000- $10,000 in the first year depending
on several factors. If the City undertakes activities which generate future program income, the annual,
7
22
on -going gap could be reduced significantly over time. The Program mix or types of program could
make a major impact by reducing or increasing FTE consumption to come within the available funds.
If the Consolidated Plan and the Assessment of Impediments to Fair Housing (Al) are prepared through
contracts for services, there will be costs every five years that are likely to be in excess of available
funds. These two planning activities will need to take place in the first two years. If the City chooses to
seek consultant assistance to prepare them, approximately $45,000 should be budgeted in the first two
years. The combination of conducting these planning activities, meeting the suggested staffing levels
and paying for other administrative expenses will not fit within the first year budget. There are two
steps the City can take to mitigate this: First, the Al can be deferred to a future year (but would need to
be in place within three years at the latest). Second, HUD regulations allow the City to request
authorization to incur costs prior to the grant award up to 25% of the grant in order to pay for the cost
of preparing for the grant; and after award of the initial grant these funds can be paid out of CDBG
grants over the next two years.
Finally, two issues should be addressed early in the decision process: 1) program mix is a critical factor in
determining staffing needs, including fiscal, and should be determined early in any decision to assume
Entitlement status; and 2) a strategy for obtaining the expertise needed to successfully administer the
program.
8
23
Other Major Considerations
There are a number of non - financial considerations and issues that need to be considered. Below is an
issue by issue discussion.
Flexibility /Control Over Project Activity Choice
Membership in the Consortium results in a number of program /project restrictions emanating from the
necessity to have common programs and procedures for efficiency in the King County Consortium. The
County has layered requirements on top of HUD eligibility requirements restricting project type and
number per year (such as limitations to 2 stand -along capital projects and 4 stand -alone public services
projects).
On the other hand, if the City were to administer the program, there would financial limitations on the
number and types of programs /projects they could effectively administer because of administrative cost
inefficiencies and the necessity of becoming experts on a broader range of program requirements than
currently. The County currently provides a management service taking advantage of a larger workload
among Consortium members to which they can spread costs.
Another factor is the ability and speed of the City to modify or change its programs/projects -
ear.
Y fY t; in mid
-year.
The County discourages multiple amendments because of process and costs, whereas the Ci ty could
make that choice whether to pursue a formal amendment complete with hearings and public notices.
The City's ability to respond quickly to a needed change is stronger under a direct Entitlement status
than it is currently. Additionally, the County prohibits amendments from July through October whereas
if the City were the direct recipient, amendments could be submitted to HUD almost year- round. This
has resulted in a more limited ability to undertake activities that may be a higher local priority or
respond quickly to a local need.
There are three crucial questions related to the issue of flexibility to choose program activities:
1) Are the activities currently being funded under the County Consortium reflective of the City's
priorities? City Community Development staff could not recall any cases in recent years where
the City was prevented from following one of its priorities due to a County policy or procedure.
However, City Community Development staff indicated that, although they have had few
proposals for infrastructure projects, these were the project type they might pursue more if
they were a direct grantee. In addition, they expressed that the combination of the slow
process of working through the County on changes /amendments, along with the Consortium's
program mix restrictions, theoretically limits what they could do. If Federal Way were a direct
grantee and wanted to respond to a local priority, these issues would not be present.
9
24
2) A related question is: If the City were a direct grantee, would it have the capacity to carry out
the full range of activities? In other words, would there be practical issues that would prevent
the City from carrying out activities even if they had that opportunity as a direct grantee? It was
recognized that as a direct grantee the City may still not be able to carry out all types and
numbers of activities because of administrative or technical capacity issues. For example, would
the City have the capacity to administer the Davis Bacon Labor Standards on two capital projects
in a given year?
3) Are there activities not currently being funded that would be carried out if the City were a direct
grantee? In recent years, the City has undertaken few economic development activities and
only a few public works projects have been proposed. There appears to be needs in community
for these types of projects but they have not been generated to date.
If the restrictions placed on the Consortium members are resulting in the City's inability to meet its own
priorities or desired activities, and the City would likely carry out different activities if it had direct
Entitlement status, there would be a strong case for becoming a direct grantee.
Administrative Layering
In order to provide services to Consortium members, some administrative layering of requirements and
processes is inevitable. Most of the requirements affecting the program are pass- through requirements
of the Federal Program. On the other hand, the County must add a layer of County -level requirements
and procedures necessary whenever it contracts with other parties. These do not appear to be major
deterrents to effective program management but do add somewhat to the administrative burden and
timing of actions.
However, one area of concern is over the contracting process, especially related to Program Year start
ups. HUD is chronically late in contracting with Entitlements for funds because the annual Congressional
appropriations process often drifts into early spring. As a consequence, even though the King County
CDBG Program Year begins on January 1 each year, the contract (and eventually access for funds
through the LOCCS /King County fiscal system) does not take place until early spring. Jurisdictions
wishing to continue on -going projects or start new projects on a timely basis, must up -front local funds
which are later reimbursed by HUD. While it is unlikely (because the City's fiscal year is also January—
December) the City would want to change the program year to a later date to avoid this hardship if they
were a direct recipient, the City would have the flexibility to so. Irrespective of these potential changes,
the process of obtaining funds as a direct recipient would be expedited by a matter of weeks if the
annual contracting process with HUD was directly between the City and HUD.
10
25
Federal Program Responsibilities
Under CDBG Program rules, the direct recipient of funds is required to comply with all program laws,
rules and regulations. The Joint Interlocal Agreement (JIA) recognizes these as a County responsibility
but also passes to the City compliance with ".... All relevant requirements of federal laws and regulations
that apply to King County as the applicant......" (under Section VII. H of the Agreement).
The JIA requires that the City assign a staff member as liaison to the Consortium to provide information
and attend meetings with the County and Consortium members. There is a City cost in time and energy
in attending these meetings and providing this information. On the other hand, most of the
information would need to be managed by the City if it were a direct Entitlement. For instance, the
CAPERs (Annual Performance Report) contains information that the City supplies (and the County
provides for programs such as the Home Repair Program it administers for the City and other members).
The County also is responsible for preparing the CAPERs document for submission to HUD.
There are several major program responsibilities that the County provides (or partially provides under
the JIA):
1. Preparation of Annual Plan and Consolidated Plans & amendments
2. Setting up projects in the HUD information management system (IDIS)
3. Administration of and reporting on the Housing Stabilization and Housing Repair Programs
4. Request and disbursement of Federal funds (LOCCS)
5. Liaison with and responses to HUD
There are several major areas that are joint responsibilities (in each of these there is actual or potential
County /City duplication of effort):
1. Environmental Review and Clearance responsibilities (City may need to provide information
on the project)
2. Davis Bacon Labor Standards (City will need to attend pre- construction meetings facilitated
by County staff)
3. Monitoring Program Activities
In these and other responsibilities, there are necessarily some areas of inefficiency built into the system
by the division of responsibilities of the City and the Consortium:
• Joint participation in Davis Bacon Labor Standards meetings
• Reports to the County on project activities
• The County monitors the City for compliance and record - keeping
• There are required quarterly meetings (although, in part, these are used by the County to
update City staff and provide them technical assistance)
11
26
There is great value for direct CDBG recipients having technical and program expertise — something the
County already possesses. It is unlikely that the City, in a direct recipient role, could fully replace the
level of expertise (irrespective of City intent and staff capabilities) currently provided by the County staff
because the specialization that is inherent in the County Consortium role allows them to maintain a
higher level of expertise. If the City were to become a direct grantee, it would be monitored by HUD
staff and subject to Audit. This might result in some findings and the need to resolve them.
However, it is clearly possible for cities the size of Federal Way to provide enough staffing and expertise
to adequately administer the CDBG Program. There are currently 30 communities in the State of
Washington with 2010 CDBG allocations and almost half (14) receive smaller allocations than Federal
Way. Apart from Shoreline and Renton, who are in the King County Consortium, all receive their CDBG
grants as direct recipients from HUD. While probably all have had some findings or concerns reported
by HUD at some point in time (that the jurisdiction responded to and corrected), it has been rare that
HUD or HUD Auditors have raised serious management /compliance issues related to those
communities.
Impact on Enhancing Partnerships & Relationships
Regional Relationships
There is value to the existing relationship the City enjoys with King County as a Consortium member.
This offers networking opportunities and joint project solutions. To a minor extent this would be
diminished under a direct HUD grantee relationship. At this point in time there seems to be a high level
of interest on the part of several cities to meet, coordinate and cooperate on a range of subjects.
Regardless of the Federal Way decision on Entitlement status, the City can take advantage of these
opportunities. The City can still be part of the HOME Consortium, ESG Consortium and is part of the
County Homeless Continuum.
Sub - Regional Relationships
On the other hand, there has been a growing South King County regional presence. This could be
enhanced through cooperative efforts involving the CDBG Programs of Federal Way, Kent, Renton, and
Auburn through the implementation of common programs in housing or capital facilities. Shared and
coordinated planning efforts are currently possible. It does not appear that that direct Entitlement
status would necessarily hurt existing partnerships with the possible exception of the Federal Way -King
County government relationship.
There are few, strong non - profit agencies operating in Federal Way — a concern voiced by City staff
whether the CDBG program is operated under the Consortium or as a direct recipient. There are several
non - profit housing developers operating in the area that could serve Federal Way, including Common
Ground, Fusion, LIHI, the Archdiocese Housing Authority and Mercy Housing.
12
27
King County Relationships
The County sees the CDBG Consortium as a viable means of cooperative efforts in housing and
community development in the area. They see the Quarterly meetings as an avenue for networking,
information exchange and technical assistance with Consortium members that benefit the individual
cities as well as regional efforts. Continuing participation in the HOME Consortium and ESG allocations
keep these doors open. If Federal Way were to leave the Consortium, the County has indicated they
would need to reduce FTEs and potentially reduce service /increase fees charged to other city members.
The Entitlement decision should not impact on the City's participation in the King County HOME
Consortium, but the City will have to make that separate decision to continue. The City also has
potential access to the Emergency Shelter Grant through the County and the HIV /AIDS HOPWA through
the Puget Sound Consortium. The CDBG decision should not directly impact any aspect of these
programs.
Other Local Government Relationships
The CDBG decision should not impact the cities relationship with other cities in the county.
Washington State Government Relationships
There would be no apparent impact on State relationships.
HUD Relationships
HUD has no formal position on whether a community takes on direct Entitlement status. HUD expects
communities to make their own choices and supports those decisions. In the past 3 years, jurisdictions
with newly qualifying Entitlement status have become direct recipients in several small cities in the
State, including Mt Vernon, Longview, Anacortes and most recently East Wenatchee, the last two with
annual allocations of less than $125,000. If several Consortium jurisdictions became direct Entitlements,
there would be some limitations on HUD time staff allocated to the new communities as increasing their
staffing (if justified) is typically a drawn out process.
13
28
Summary
There are some sound reasons for Federal Way to remain in the CDBG Consortium as well as reasons
why they might consider leaving the Consortium and opportunities that may open if they made that
choice. Three primary areas of consideration in the decision stand out: financial feasibility and cost;
ease of administration; and program control /flexibility of choice.
Financially, there is a safety factor in remaining in the Consortium. For the most part, the costs are
known and the sources are non -city (there is some potential for increases in administrative fees the
County may charge however). If the City were to opt for direct grantee status, there would be initial
start-up costs (largely planning) that are unlikely to be able to be covered within the 20% administrative
and planning cap. There may also be a modest amount ($5,000- $10,000) of annual supplement needed
to cover all administrative costs. This assumes the type and number of programs which would be
administered remains about the same currently. A change in program mix would likely result in either
reduced or increased costs as this is a major determinant.
Administratively, there is no compelling need to opt out of the Consortium for reasons of inability to
work with County staff or within the Consortium — according to City CDBG staff the working
relationships between the two entities is generally adequate. The City can obtain the capacity to
effectively administer the program. On the other hand, they would probably struggle somewhat with
technical capacity, particularly during the first 2 years - just as other new direct grantees have struggled.
Additional staff would need to be hired or assigned. A positive outcome of the direct grantee option
would be that local administration of the program would expedite decision- making, contracting and
fund disbursement.
Programmatically, the City would potentially have more control over what the CDBG funds are used for
than they currently have under the Consortium. This is due to program /project choice restrictions
imposed by the County Consortium. However, an over - riding central issue is, if the City were to simply
continue to operate the same mix of programs as a direct grantee, the value of this increased program
flexibility and control would be essentially nil. Since there appear to be few major compelling reasons
for change /not changing in Federal Way's case, this may help define the decision. If programmatic
choice would remain the same under both systems, there would be few incentives for change.
14
29
Next Steps
If a decision is made to consider pursuing direct Entitlement status, the following steps should be
considered before making a formal decision and advising HUD and the County:
1. Before making a final decision, suggest working closely with Kirkland, Shoreline, Renton and
Redmond to determine if there are common interests that could affect the negotiations in
closing out the Consortium relationships and in particular determining if there is an interest in
negotiating any set of administrative services that could to be provided by the County in areas
such as Acquisition /Relocation requirements, Davis - Bacon /Labor Standards in shared funding
capital projects (or inclusion in the County capital projects consortium subject to HUD rules on
use of funds outside of the jurisdiction).
2. Before making a final decision, explore with other South King County Entitlements and other
smaller Consortium cities the potential areas of program implementation where cooperation
among potential partners could result in administrative savings or efficiencies of scale such as
entering into administrative agreements to operate a housing rehabilitation program and Davis -
Bacon requirements.
3. Before making a final decision, attempt to determine if other cities are likely to opt out of the
Consortium and then discuss with the County if there are likely to monetary implications
regarding spreading the administrative costs between fewer members in the Consortium.
4. Use the attached Decision - Filter Tools to further assess the value of potential direct Entitlement
status and, in particular, determine the value to the City of changing the current program mix.
15
30
V)
r/
N
N 1 -4 O N N C.- vr 4( * * g
W C CO 11-4 .-1 V Z Z
1..- O O 3
<L Z U u1 .;
C C
C a
. r N 0 0 0 N 10 t1 * i- 3
W L Ni V el 0 d .v
az O E L
A
N . O Ill O in N O N P. * * co C
lyl 1-1 m 00 t-4 e-1 l0 <t L U
0 t- o CV . + .-4 r1 Q.
LL
VI U 0 L
- 0 as -6
C . 61 O N N N 00 0 N m m* N* t0 41 to E 4; O d N .-1 N 01 N m .-1 10 t1 10 11 In >
u E t10 0 .-f ..+ . <
-1 e-1 ,4 .-1 I 1-1 L
O O v► nl 411 V1 V1 4.11 in V1 Aft VI. V1 Vt I V
m Q m N
0 C f0
TO
C 0 n . 01 171 00 01 a 01 N A ZLI
L
44
to a
y 1 1
..0 4J C . 00 0 to L o Lii W W W W 3 JO
■
MI I M O 0 0 ' N .-6 O .-1 a..4 0 CO a. U 00 10
m > to
a) n. 0.1 - 0 4)
vs RI O m m U1 .-1 m M Cr to f ri .13
+a L 3 >
til el tis
a
a) U RI
4.1 L
+ z + +�+
Z 4
, j 0 (1,1 .-1 N m N N N h m H 3
ul O
1 .2 Y
CU tol
E m
++ C
CLI -a 0 .-1 U1 .-9 N m N N h h 3
++ 0 0
u. >
C - 0. '.
W N a m
t0 .. WI
m i 1p c 01 01 N t� 0 p 00 CA r4 to CO 01 0
C) 0 0 00 '' 100 00 1 t0 00 P 0 00 0
0 00 N
u t - 0 V1 o V1 v* 4/1. VI. Vs V1 V1 1$1. 1J) Lit -0
"a v
C r
1 _ I E 41
in
A ea al E in r's y 0 tag 0 N 0,1 0 0 0 0 1/1 .-1 N 0 O i C
CC p C V1 -40. V1 V1 N V1 v} C
EL
L W
ra N 44 6
C- 0 ca d C 8 .- N. 171 01 N 40 et N 01 01 01 0 .+
I-1 -4
00 . 01 to to C•1 N h n L 0
Q 4 ... 41 tr O n 171 t0 co 40 t0 h N n 1\ 1.. 3
0 N 0 E 1 Iy .-1 111. v1 V1 V1 V1 4/1. 4/1 v1 V1 V1 u 0
N
- - f0
rC. >. > ?
m � v / lig >. > Wil
a m O tl M a C Y a 4 OD Y LL N. o r u.
31
32
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 15, 2011 ITEM #:
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: NAMING OF THE BROOKLAKE. OVERLOOK/SPUR IN HONOR OF THAIS BOCK
POLICY QUESTION: Should the Brooklake overlook/spur on the Nest Hvlebos boardwalk be named in
honor of Thais Bock and authorization given for a memorial plaque consistent with the City donation
and memorial policy?
Coil LtTTEE: PRHSPS MEETING DATE: Mar 8, 2011
CATEGORY:
® Consent I 1 Ordinance 1 1 Public Hearing
n City Council Business n Resolution I 1 Other
STAFF REPORT BY: Stephen lkerd, Parks & Facilities Manager DEPT: PRCS
Attachments: Letter of request and copy of Resolution 91 -57 naming policy.
Options Considered:
#1- Approval of the Brooklake overlook/spur to be named in honor of Thais Bock and authorization
given for a memorial plaque.
#2- Do not approve the naming of the Brooklake overlook in honor of Thais Bock and give staff direction.
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: Approval of option #l; to name the Brooklake overlook/spur in honor of
Thais Bock and authorization given for a memorial plaque.
MAYOR APPROVAL: DIRECTOR
�� APPROVAL:
LLL r
Con 'tee Council - Comunittee Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: /move to forward the naming of the Brooklake overlook/spur in honor of
Thais Bock and authorization given for a memorial plaque to the full Council March 15, 2011 consent
agenda for approval.
Committee Chair Committee Member Committee Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: " I move approval of the naming of the Brooklake overlook/spur to be
named in honor of Thais Bock and authorization given for a memorial plaque.''
•
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL #
❑ DENIED I reading
❑ TABLED /DEFERRED /NO ACTION Enactment reading
❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) ORDINANCE t?
REVISED - 08/12;2010 RESOLUTION 14
33
Mayor Skip Priest February 25, 2011
City Of Federal Way
33325 8 Ave S.,
Federal Way, WA 98003
Mayor Priest,
The intent of our letter is a request to honor one of our city's pioneer conservationists, Thais Bock,
who passed away Feb. 25, 2010. We propose naming the Brooklake Spur of the West Hylebos
Wetlands Boardwalk in her honor.
On our first visit to the Hylebos, Thais introduced us to the Nlarckx family, who themselves had
realized the treasure of the wetland they owned. Her knowledge of birdlife in the area was well
studied, and amazing in scope and depth. For decades, she taught classes on birding, acid let: countless
birding field trips throughout the county and state. She helped to build a network of birders throughout
the region. Thais had a special fondness for the West Hylebos Wetlands and worked to increase
understanding and awareness of the West Hylebos Wetlands and the Hylebos Creek watershed. She
was instrumental in developing bird surveys of the park that allowed the local community and decision
makers to properly value the park as a key birding habitat. Working through Friends of the Hylebos,
she developed brochures and other public education materials that spread awareness of the park's
unique birding habitat.
Mrs. Bock was one of the founding members of the Tahoma Audubon Society and founder of the
Rainier Audubon Society. Through her continued involvement in each, she was instrumental in
developing knowledge and awareness of native bird populations in the South Puget Sound area. In
addition to the cultural impact of Mrs. Bock's efforts to develop birding in the West Hylebos Wetlands
and surrounding areas, Mrs. Bock played an important role in the preservation of the West Hylebos
Wetlands. She was a close friend of the West Hylebos Wetlands' founders, Ilene and Francis Marckx,
and worked closely with local conservationists to secure preservation of the park. In addition, Mrs.
Bock also led the successful efforts to preserve the Dumas Bay Preserve and the Peasley Canyon heron
rookery.
In recognition of her lifetime of conservation work in the Federal Way area, the Friends of the Hylebos
honored her with its Lifetime Stewardship Award in 2009.
As advocates for protection of West Hylebos Wetlands, it has been exciting to see this park become a
jewel in the Federal Way park system. The boardwalk improvements, interpretive signs and
connecting trails brought the vision of many residents to reality. Dedicating the Brooklake Spur to
Mrs. Bock would be an ideal part of the West Hylebos Wetlands to bear tribute in her dedication to the
park. This section of the boardwalk, including the overlook at Brooklake, is one of the prime areas of
the park for outstanding bird and wildlife observation.
Respectfully yours,
Adele and Mark Freeland
5150 SW 326` P1
Federal Way, WA 98023
34
COPY
RESOLUTION NO. 91
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO PARKS
AND PUBLIC FACILITIES, CREATING A POLICY AND
PROCEDURE FOR NAMING /RENAMING CITY PARKS AND
WHEREAS, the City Council may have occasions to name or
rename City parks and other City facilities; and
' it is appropriate to establish criteria and
procedures for the official naming /renaming of City parks and other
facilities; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL CF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
A. The naming /renaming of City Parks and other City
facilities shall only be in accordance with the procedures and
criteria set forth below. Once adopted, name changes should only
occur on an exceptional basis.
B. The following criteria shall be considered:
1. Neighborhood or geographical identification;
2. Natural or geological features;
3. Historical or cultural significance;
4. The individual or entity who has donated
substantial monies or land or has been
otherwise instrumental in the acquisition of
the property.
5. The articulated preference of residents of the
neighborhood surrounding the public facility.
35
6. Facilities shall not be named for living
persons; however, exceptions may be considered
when a significant contribution of land or
money is made and the donor stipulates naming
the facility as a i;G::ditic h Ji the :.._;:dt_c
when an unusually outstanding public service
Would so justify.
C. The Following procedures s al_ be follc:.ed
for
naming /renaming of City parks and other City facilities:
1. The City shall solicit suggestions for names
from organizations and individuals. All
suggestions, whether solicited or
independently offered, shall be acknowledged
and recorded by the City.
2. The City Council, following review and
recommendations and public meetings by the
city Council and /or its designee, shall
determine the name for City parks and other
City facilities.
3. There shall be a lapse of at least twelve (12)
months between the date of the death of the
person(s) or of the event commemorated and the
issuance of the final Committee recommendation
of the proposed park name.
-2-
36
RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Federal Way,
this 2nd day of April 1991.
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MAYOR, DEBRA ERTEL
ATTEST:
/)
5I1 Y CLERK,_JNAUREEN M. SWANEY,» CMC
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
-�
CITY ATTORNEY, SANDRA
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: March 29, 1991
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: April 2, 1991
RESOLUTION NO. 91 -57
911254
• -3-
37
38
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 15, 2011 ITEM #:
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: AMEND FEDERAL WAY REVISED CODE TITLE 9 REGARDING ANIMAL SERVICES
POLICY QUESTION: Should the City Council approve and adopt the proposed amendments to Chapters 9.05,
9.18 and 9.25 of the Federal Way Revised Code regarding animal services?
COMMITTEE: PRHS &PS MEETING DATE: 03/08/2011
CATEGORY:
❑ Consent ® Ordinance
❑ Public Hearing
❑ City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other
STAFF REPORT BY: Chief Brian Wilson DEPT: Police
Attachments: Staff Report and proposed ordinance amending Chapters 9.05, 9.18 and 9.25 of the Federal Way
Revised Code ( FWRC ") regarding animal services.
Options Considered: 1. Approve the proposed ordinance amending Chapters 9.05, 9.18 and 9.25 of the FWRC
regarding animal services.
2. Modify the proposed ordinance amending Chapters 9.05, 9.18 and 9.25 of the FWRC
regarding animal services.
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: Option 1
MAYOR APPROVAL: 4</' 7 DIRECTOR APPROVAL: l4 ✓a, oi/) / 4A1� A44✓,
Committee Counc,I Committee Counci
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: 1 move to forward the proposed ordinance to First Reading on March 15,
2011City Council meeting.
Committee Chair Committee Member Committee Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION(S):
1 READING OF ORDINANCE (MARCH 15): I move to forward approval of the ordinance to the April 5, 2011
Council Meeting for adoption.
2 READING OF ORDINANCE (APRIL 5): ` I move approval of the proposed ordinance amending Chapters
9.05, 9.12 and 9.25 of the FWRC regarding Animal Services."
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL #
❑ DENIED 1sT reading
❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading
❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) ORDINANCE #
REVISED 08/12/2010 RESOLUTION #
39
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE STAFF REPORT
DATE: March 8, 2011
TO: Parks, Recreation, Human Services and Public Safety Council Committee
VIA: Skip Priest, Mayor
FROM: Brian J. Wilson, Chief of Poles —
SUBJECT: Amend Federal Way Revised ' ode Regarding Animal Services
The proposed amendment would update Chapters 9.05, 9.18 and 9.25 of the Federal Way
Revised Code. The purpose of these updates are as follows:
Chapter 9.05 FWRC
9.05.010: Add a definition of bite.
Reason: We currently do not have a definition and it would benefit us to clarify that a bite is a
pierced. When the skin is not punctured, we can still pursue enforcement through the aggressive
dog section of the code.
9.05.010: Change defintion of hobby cattery to 6 or more cats.
Reason: This would allow a residence to have up to 5 cats. This encourages people to license
their cats. Right now they may not, because they do not want animal services to know that they
are over the limit. In addition, this encourages people to adopt more cats. We shelter many more
cats than dogs.
Chapter 9.18 FWRC
9.18.020: Expand definition of animal cruelty to include leaving animals in vehicles during hot
weather and authorize officers to enter vehicles with force, if necessary.
Reason: We respond to several of these calls during hot weather. Right now our only option is to
cite the owner with RCW 16.52.080, which is not as specific and is a misdemeanor. This gives us
more enforcement options, and it will be easier for us to educate the public with a specific section.
9.18.100: Add "poop /scoop" law.
Reason: We currently do not have any law to allow us to enforce cleaning up after a pet. Neighbor
complaints regarding other pets are common.
9.18.100: add parks to list of places where aggressive dogs constitute a nuisance
Reason: Currently, aggressive dogs on sidewalks, streets, alleys or other public ways are considered
public nuisances, but not those in parks — this would fix that over sight.
1
40
9.18.110: Clarify when and how the animal services authority may abate nuisances.
Reason: Currently, our code refers to Chapter 1.15 for nuisance abatement, which is geared
towards code enforcement. We are requesting this be changed "abatement procedures
established by director," so our nuisance abatement process can be tailored for animal services.
In addition, we need to change language from "shall" to "may" after three convictions, because,
as the law reads now. if we write an owner three off leash tickets, we then have to abate that dog.
It is essential for the animal services authority to discretion in these types of matters.
Chapter 9.25 FWRC
9.25.030: Clarify' how a dangerous dog would be confiscated.
Reason: Need to clarify the term - "dispose of to state humane destruction of the animal.
It is the recommendation of the staff that the City Council approve the proposed ordinance amending
Chapters 9.05, 9.12, and 9.25 of the FWRC regarding updating our animal services code.
2
41
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating to
animal services; amending FWRC 9.05.010, 9.18.020, 9.18.100, 9.18.110,
9.25.030. (Amending Ordinance Nos. 10 -661, 09 -592, 08 -574, 07 -573, 06-
530, 06 -527, 92 -153, and 90 -30.)
WHEREAS, Federal Way Revised Code ("FWRC ") Title 9, "Animals," sets forth the
administration, regulations, enforcement, and licensing requirements of animal services in the City of
Federal Way; and
WHEREAS, updates to Chapter 9.05 FWRC are needed to include a definition of and
to increase the number of adult cats a person may have at his or her residence; and
WHEREAS, updates to Chapter 9.18 FWRC are needed to address leaving animals in parked
cars, aggressive dogs at public parks, cleaning up after animals, and how and when nuisances are
abated by the animal services authority; and
WHEREAS, an update to Chapter 9.25 FWRC is needed to clarify how dangerous dogs are
disposed of and
WHEREAS, the City Council of Federal Way finds it is in the best interest of the citizens to
update Title 9 to adopt changes to these chapters;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY,
WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. FWRC 9.05.010 is hereby amended to read as follows:
9.05.010 Definitions.
The definitions in this section apply throughout this title unless the context clearly requires
otherwise.
Abatement° means the termination of any violation by reasonable and lawful means
determined by the director in order that the owner or a person presumed to be the owner shall
comply with this title.
Ordinance No. 11- Page 1 of 7
Rev 1/10
42
Adult cat" means a cat of either sex, altered or unaltered, that has reached the age of 21
weeks.
"Adult dog" means a dog of either sex, altered or unaltered, that has reached the age of 21
weeks.
"Altered" means neutered or spayed.
"Animal" means any living creature except human beings, insects and worms.
"Animal services authority" means the animal services unit of the Federal Way police
department acting alone or in concert with King County animal care and control and /or any city -
contracted shelter for enforcement of the animal services laws of the city, county and state for
the shelter and welfare of animals.
"Animal services officer" means any individual employed, contracted or appointed by the
director for the purpose of aiding in the enforcement of this title or any other law or ordinance
relating to the Iicensure of animals, control of animals or seizure or impoundment of animals,
and includes any state or local law enforcement officer, sheriff or other employee whose duties
in whole or in part include assignments which involve the seizure and impoundment of any
animal. For the purposes of this title, this definition shall apply where a person charged with
enforcement of this title is referred to as "officer" or "official."
"Animal rescuer" means any individual who routinely obtains unwanted dogs or cats, ensures
that they are spayed or neutered, and locates within 90 days an adoptive home for them. An
extension of the 90 days may be granted by the animal services authority up to a maximum of
six months if a dog or cat is pregnant, nursing, or injured and that condition is verified by a
veterinarian.
"Bite" means to pierce the skin with the teeth, fangs, or mouthparts.
"Cattery" means a place where four or more adult cats are kept, whether by owners of the cats
or by persons providing facilities and care, whether or not for compensation, but not including a
small animal hospital, clinic or pet shop.
"Dangerous dog" means any dog that according to the records of the animal services
authority:
(1) Has inflicted severe injury on a human being without provocation on public or private
property;
(2) Has killed a domestic animal without provocation while off the owner's property;
(3) Has been previously found to be potentially dangerous, the owner having received notice
of such, and the dog again aggressively bites, attacks, or endangers the safety of humans or
domestic animals;
(4) Has a known propensity, tendency or disposition to attack without provocation to cause
injury or otherwise endanger humans and /or domestic animals based upon notice to the owner;
(5) Bites or attacks without provocation after prior notice to the owner; or
(6) Is defined as a "dangerous dog" under RCW 16.08.070.
"Director" means the Federal Way chief of police or designee.
"Domesticated animal" means those domesticated beasts including any dog, cat, rabbit,
horse, mule, ass, bovine animal, Iamb, goat, sheep, hog or other animal made to be domestic.
"Euthanasia" means the humane destruction of an animal, accomplished by a method that
involves instantaneous unconsciousness and immediate death, or by a method that causes
painless loss of consciousness and death during such Toss of consciousness.
"Grooming parlor" or "grooming service" means any place or establishment, public or private,
where animals are bathed, clipped or combed for the purpose of enhancing their aesthetic value
and /or health and for which a fee is charged.
Ordinance No. I1- Page 2 of 7
Rev 1 /10
43
"Harboring, keeping or maintaining a dog or cat" means performing any of the acts of
providing care, shelter, protection, refuge, food or nourishment in such manner as to control the
animal's actions, or that the animal is treated as living at one's house by the homeowner.
"Hobby cattery" means a noncommercial cattery at or adjoining a private residence where fear
six or more adult cats are bred or kept for exhibition for organized shows or for the enjoyment of
the species.
"Hobby kennel" means a noncommercial kennel at or adjoining a private residence where four
or more adult dogs are bred or kept for hunting, training and exhibition for organized shows,
field, working and /or obedience trials, or for enjoyment of the species.
"Juvenile" means any dog or cat, altered or unaltered, that is under the age of six weeks.
"Kennel" means a place where four or more adult dogs are kept, whether by owners of the
dogs or by persons providing facilities and care whether or not for compensation, but not
including a small animal hospital, clinic or pet shop.
"Known propensity" means an inclination for behavior that the owner is or should be aware of.
"Leash " means a cord, rope, thong or chain not more than 20 feet in length by which an
animal is controlled by the person accompanying it.
"Livestock" means cattle, hogs, sheep, goats, horses, llamas and other large grazing animals.
"Neutered" or "spayed" means a procedure performed by a licensed veterinarian meant to
prevent conception by an animal.
"Owner" means any person having an interest or right of possession to an animal or any
person having control, custody or possession of an animal, and includes but is not limited to the
keeper or custodian of an animal. Any person residing at a location where an animal has been
consistently residing shall be presumed to be the owner.
"Pack of dogs" means a group of two or more dogs running upon either public or private
property not that of their owner in a state in which either their control or ownership is in doubt or
cannot readily be ascertained, and when such dogs are not restrained or controlled.
"Pet daycare" means any commercial facility where four or more dogs or other pet animals are
left by their owners for periods of supervised social interaction in play groups with other animals
of the same species for the majority of the time the pets are at the facility during the hours the
facility is open to the public.
"Pet shop" means any person, establishment, store or department of any store that acquires
live animals, including birds, reptiles, fowl and fish, and sells, or offers to sell, or rents such live
animals to the public or to retail outlets.
"Police dog" means a dog used by a law enforcement agency and specially trained for law
enforcement work.
"Potentially dangerous dog" means a dog the owner reasonably knows has aggressively
bitten, attacked or endangered humans and /or domestic animals and includes but is not limited
to any dog that meets the definition of "potentially dangerous dog" as defined by RCW
16.08.070.
"Proper enclosure" means a securely confined indoor area of the owner's premises, or a
securely enclosed and locked pen, kennel, or other exterior structure no less than six feet by 12
feet on the owner's premises, suitable to prevent the entry of young children or human
extremities and designed to prevent a potentially dangerous or vicious animal from escaping.
Such pen, kennel, or other structure shall have secure sides and a secure top, and provide
protection from the elements for the dog. If such pen, kennel, or structure has no bottom
secured to the sides, the sides shall be embedded not less than two feet into the ground. Doors,
windows, or other openings enclosed solely by wire or mesh screening shall not be considered a
proper enclosure as defined in this section_
Ordinance No. 11- Page 3 of 7
Rev 1/10
44
"Provocation" includes taunting, teasing, willfully causing undue pain and /or unlawful entry
upon or into the owner's property.
"Running at large" means to be off the premises of the owner and neither secured by a leash
nor under control of the owner or other competent person.
"Service animal" means any animal trained or being trained for the purposes of assisting or
accommodating a person's sensory, mental, or physical disability and used for that purpose.
"Severe injury" means any physical injury that results in broken bones or lacerations requiring
multiple sutures or cosmetic surgery.
"Shelter" means a facility which is used to house or contain stray, homeless, abandoned or
unwanted animals and which is owned, operated or maintained by a public body, an established
humane society, animal welfare society, society for the prevention of cruelty to animals, or other
nonprofit organization devoted to the welfare, protection and humane treatment of animals.
"Special hobby kennel license" means a license issued to pet owners, under certain
conditions, who do not meet the requirements for a hobby kennel license, to allow them to retain
only those specific dogs and cats then in their possession until such time as the death or
transfer of such animals reduces the number they possess to the legal limit set forth in this title.
"Under control" means the animal is under voice- competent and /or signal control so as to
thereby be restrained from approaching any bystander or other animal and from causing or
being the cause of physical property damage when off a leash or off the premises of the owner.
"Vicious" means the act of or the propensity to do any act endangering the safety of any
person, animal, or property, including but not limited to biting a human being, attacking human
beings, or attacking domesticated animals without provocation.
Section 2. FWRC 9.18.020 is hereby amended to read as follows:
9.18.020 Cruelty violations.
It is unlawful for a person to:
(1) Abandon a domestic animal by dropping off or leaving such animal on the street, or in any
other public place, or on the private property of another;
(2) Willfully run down with a vehicle an animal. A person who kills or injures an animal while
driving a vehicle shall stop at the scene of the accident and shall render such assistance as is
reasonable, shall make a reasonable effort to locate and identify himself to the owner or keeper
of the animal, and shall report the accident immediately to the police department;
(3) Sell or offer for sale or to give away living baby rabbits, chicks, ducklings, or other fowl that
are under two months of age or that have been dyed or colored, or otherwise treated so as to
have an artificial color, but this subsection shall not be construed so as to prohibit the sale or
display of natural baby rabbits, chicks, ducklings, or other fowl in proper brooder facilities by
hatcheries or stores engaged in selling them for commercial purposes.
(4) No person shall leave or confine an animal in any unattended motor vehicle under
conditions that endanger the health or well -being of an animal due to heat, cold, lack of
adequate ventilation, or lack of food or water, or other circumstances that could reasonably be
expected to cause suffering, disability, or death to the animal.
(a) A law enforcement officer or animal services officer is authorized to take all steps that
are reasonably necessary for the removal of an animal form a motor vehicle, including,
but not limited to, breaking into the motor vehicle, after a reasonable effort to locate the
owner or other person responsible.
Ordinance No. 11- Page 4 of 7
Rev 1/10
45
Section 3. FWRC 9.18.100 is hereby amended to read as follows:
9.18.100 Public nuisances.
(1) The owner of any animal shall not allow such animal to be or become a public nuisance,
do any act deemed a public nuisance, or otherwise violate this chapter.
(2) The following are declared to be public nuisances:
(a) Any dog running at large within the city is a public nuisance. This section does not
apply when the dog is on the property of another person with the permission of the owner of the
property; on public property designated to allow dog competitions sanctioned by national
organizations; at animal shows, exhibitions or organized dog - training classes where at least 24
hours' advance notice has been given to the animal services authority; or in an officially
designated off -leash area of a city park during the designated times.
(b) An animal that enters any place where food is stored, prepared, served or sold to the
public, or any other public building or hall, is a public nuisance. This section shall not apply to
veterinary offices or hospitals, or to animal shows, exhibitions or organized dog - training classes
where at least 24 hours' advance notice has been given to the animal services authority.
(c) A female dog, while in heat, accessible to other male animals, except for controlled
and planned breeding, is a public nuisance.
(d) An animal which chases, runs after, or jumps at vehicles using the public streets and
alleys is a public nuisance.
(e) An animal which snaps, growls, snarls, jumps upon or
otherwise threatens persons lawfully using the public parks, sidewalks, streets, alleys or other
public ways is a public nuisance.
(f) Any animal which has exhibited vicious propensities and which constitutes a danger
to the safety of persons or property off the premises of its owner or lawfully on such premises is
a public nuisance. A vicious animal or animal with vicious propensities which runs at large at any
time, or such an animal off the owner's premises not securely leashed or confined and in the
control of a person of suitable age and discretion to control or restrain such an animal, is a
public nuisance.
(g) An animal which howls, yelps, whines, barks or makes other oral noises, in such a
manner as to disturb any person or neighborhood to an unreasonable degree, is a public
nuisance.
(h) Any domesticated animal which enters upon another person's property without the
permission of that person.
(1) Animals staked, tethered or kept on public property without prior written consent of
the animal services authority.
(j) Animals on any public property and not under the control of the owner or other
competent person.
(k) Animals kept, harbored or maintained and known to have a contagious disease
unless under the treatment of a licensed veterinarian.
(1) Animals running in packs.
(m) Any animal which enters a public playground or school ground without permission
from the school.
(n) Pet owners must remove all fecal material deposited by their pets on property they
do not own, including neighbors' yards, city parks, school property, public rights of way, etc.
Each person in control of the pet must have materials to remove and dispose of in a sanitary
manner feces left by their pet when they are off their own property.
(3) This section does not apply to service animals.
Ordinance No. 11- Page 5 of 7
Rev 1/10
46
Section 4. FWRC 9.18.110 is hereby amended to read as follows:
9.18.110 Animal declared a public nuisance — Abatement.
An animal that has been the subject of three convictions of a violation of this chapter in a
period of 365 days or an animal that bites or attacks a person or persons without provocation
twice within a five -year period is a public nuisance and may be required to be removed from
shallot -be -kept within the city. If deemed necessary, the animal services authority shall follow
the procedures set out in Chapter 1.15 FWRC in order to abate such animal. After the
completion of such abatement procedures, an animal subject to removal from the city as
provided in this section that is found within the city shall be impounded and treated as an
unredeemed animal with no right of redemption by its owner or keeper.
Section 5. FWRC 9.23.030 is hereby amended to read as follows:
9.25.030 Confiscation.
A dog shall be confiscated by the animal services authority if the dog has been deemed a
dangerous dog and the owner has received notice under this chapter and has either failed to
appeal or has been denied relief following appeal. A dog may be impounded if the animal
services authority has deemed it a dangerous dog prior to final determination. Any dangerous
dog impounded or confiscated under this section prior to final determination will be held at the
owner's expense pending appeal of the classification or violation. Upon final determination the
humane destruction of the dog will occur _ _ _ _ _ _ _ "e _ -'e _ _ _ - •_ _ _
redeem such dog. However, upon showing of good cause and in the sound discretion of the
animal services authority, the dog may be released to the owner for removal from within the city
limits.
Section 6. Severability. Should any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or
phrase of this chapter, or its application to any person or situation, be declared unconstitutional or
invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this
chapter or its application to any other person or situation. The City Council of the City of Federal
Way hereby declares that it would have adopted this chapter and each section, subsection,
sentence, clauses, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more
sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
Ordinance No. 11- Page 6 of 7
Rev 1 /10
47
Section 7. Corrections. The City Clerk and the codifiers of this ordinance are authorized
to make necessary corrections to this ordinance including, but not limited to, the correction of
scrivener /clerical errors, references, ordinance numbering, section/subsection numbers and any
references thereto.
Section 8. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective
date of this ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed.
Section 9. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days
from and after its passage and publication, as provided by law.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Federal Way this day of April 2011.
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MAYOR, SKIP PRIEST
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK, CAROL MCNEILLY, CMC
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY, PATRICIA A. RICHARDSON
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.:
Ordinance No. 11- Page 7 of 7
Rev 1/10
48