The URL can be used to link to this page

Council PKT 03-19-2002 Special/Regular City of Federal Way City Council Meeting AGENDA CO UN CILMEMBERS Jeanne Burbidge, Mayor Eric Faison Linda Kochmar Mary Gates Dean McColgan Michael Hellickson Mike Park CITY MANAGER David H. Moseley Office of the City Clerk March 19,2002 I. II. III. I. II. III. IV. AGENDA FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL Council Chambers - City Hall March 19, 2002 (www.cifederal-wav.wa.u,) ***** SPECIAL SESSION - 5:30 p.m. CALL MEETING TO ORDER BRANDING PROCESS Branding Survey Results & Direction ADJOURNMENT ***** REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 p.m. CALL MEETING TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PRESENTATIONS a. b. Proclamation/Sister City Tonghae Incorporation Anniversary Proclamation/Camp Fire Boys & Girls "Absolutely Incredible Kid Day" Parks/Recreation Commission/Introduction & Certificate (unexpired term) City Manager/Introduction of New Employees City ManagerÆmerging Issues c. d. e. CITIZEN COMMENT PLEASE COMPLETE THE PINK SLIP & PRESENT TO TIlE CITY CLERK PRIOR TO SPEAKING. Citizens may address City Council at this time. When recognized by the Mayor, please come forward to the podium and state your name for the record. PLEASE LIMIT YOUR REMARKS TO TIlREE (JJ MINUTES. The Mayor may interrupt citizen comments that continue too long, relate negatively to other individuals, or are otherwise inapprop,iate. over please. . . v. VI. VII. VIII. Ix. CONSENT AGENDA Items listed below have been previously reviewed by a Council Committee of three members and brought before full Council for approval; all items are enacted by one motion. Individual items may be removed by a Councilmember for separate discussion and subsequent motion. a. b. Minutes/March 5 2002 Regular Meeting Council Bill #295/City Adoption of the Final 2001 King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan/Enactment Ordinance Human Services Commission Appointment (unexpired term) Solid Waste & Recycling Division 2002-2003 Grant Approvals/ Resolution Digital Aerial Photography So 288th St @ SR99 Signal/Intersection Improyements/30% Design Status Support ofWRlA #9 Efforts Letter of Support to National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for Grant Application/Friends of the Hylebos c. d. e. f. g. h. CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS Municipal Facility Adyisory Committee/Scope of Work INTRODUCTION ORDINANCES a. Council Bill #296/2002 Carry-Forward Budget Adjustment AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO BUDGETS AND FINANCE, REVISING THE 2001- 02 BIENNIAL BUDGET (AMENDS ORDINANCE 00-377, 01-387, 01-406 AND 01- 408). b. Council Bill #297/Changes to Thresholds Requiring Right-of-Way Improvements (25% Trigger) Code Amendment AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, AMENDING CHAPTER 22 (ZONING) OF THE FEDERAL WAY MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADDRESS FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS (AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 02-414). CITY COUNCIL REPORTS CITY MANAGER REPORT X. EXECUTIVE SESSION a. b. c. Property Acquisition/Pursuant to RCW 42.30.110(1 )(b) Potential Litig:ationIPursuant to RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) Collective BargainingfPursuant to RCW 42.30.l40(4)(a) XI. ADJOURNMENT .. THE COUNCIL MAY ADD AND TAKE ACTION ON OTHER ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA" THE COMPLETE AGENDA PACKET IS AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT CITY HALL AND ALSO ON TIlE CITY'S WEBSITE UNDER "NEW-FEDERAL WAY DOCUMENT LIBRARY" MEETING DATE: March 19, 2002 ITEM# X'&.) ------------- CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES CATEGORY: 12:1 CONSENT D RESOLUTION D CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS BUDGET IMPACT: D ORDINANCE D PUBLIC HEARING D OTHER Amount Budgeted: Expenditure Amt.: Contingency Req'd: $ $ $ ------ ATTACHMENTS: Draft minutes of the regular City Council meeting held on March 5, 2002- - --------------------.--- ----.-.-.---------.---------.----- SUMMARYIBACKGROUND: Official City Council meeting minutes for permanent records pursuant to RCW requirements- - - -------- ---.---------.-----.------.-----.--..--.----...----.--..----... -.-. .---------.-.-------..-------.--.---.- --. -......-..-.........-----.-.- ruy COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: nJa ._-----_._-----_.__._-_._._-------_._~-_._-_._---_._------------....----.-------.----------- PROPOSED MOTION: I moye approyal of the minutes of the City Council regular meeting held on March 5,2002- -~;~~-~:~:~;~-:~~~~-~:~:--_..__...._~---------------------------------- / (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: 0 APPROVED D DENIED D TABLEDIDEFERRED/NO ACTION D MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) COUNCIL BILL # 1 ST reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # REVISED - 05/10/2001 FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL Council Chambers - City Hall Regular Meeting March 5, 2002 - 7:00 p.m. Minutes ***** ~~ ()~ I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER Mayor Burbidge called the meeting of the Federal Way City Council to order at the hour of7:02 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeanne Burbidge, Deputy Mayor Dean McColgan, Councilmembers Eric Faison, Mary Gates, Michael Hellickson, Linda Kochmar, and Mike Park. Staff present: City Manager David Moseley, City Attorney Bob Sterbank, City Clerk Chris Green and Deputy City Clerk Stephanie Courtney. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council member Park led the flag salute. III. PRESENTATIONS a. City ManagerlIntroduction of New Employees City Manager David Moseley announced and welcomed two new employees: Faith Ferreria who has been hired as the new Support Services Coordinator in the Management Services Department, and Dwight Shiotani, who has been hired to fill the Financial Analyst position also in Management Services. b. City ManallerÆmerging Issues City Manager announced there were no emerging issues tonight. IV. CITIZEN COMMENT Barbara Reid. Betty Huff. and Susie Horan. spoke individually to thank the City Council for their continued support of the Federal Way Symphony. Federal Way City Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 5, 2002 - Page 2 Maya Kumar, spoke on behalf of the Diyersity Commission. She updated Council on the current and upcoming projects of the Commission. Dave McKenzie Myla Montgomery Larry Brooks. Judy Carlson.. and Faith Noble, spoke to the City Council to address their continued concerns with the Oxford House locating in their Twin Lakes neighborhood. H. David Kaplan and Russell Wolf, spoke in fayor of the proposed City Hall Adyisory Committee. v. CONSENT AGENDA a. b. MinuteslFebruary 19. 2002 Regular Meeting -Approved Correction Minutes/December 18. 200 I Regular Meeting -Approved Vouchers -Approved Final Year-End 2001 Financial Report -Approved Council Bill #294/SR 99 Phase II Condemnations /Enactment Ordinance -Approved Ordinance #02-415 Parks & Recreation Commission Appointment (unexpired term) - Approved c. d. e. f COUNCILMEMBER PARK MOVED APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED; COUNCILMEMBER GATES SECOND. The motion passed as follows: Burbidge Gates Kochmar Park yes yes yes yes Faison Hellickson McColgan yes yes yes VI. CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS City Hall Advisory Committee/Composition & Selection Process DEPUTY MAYOR MCCOLGAN MOVED APPROVAL OF OPTION #1: A NINE- MEMBER COMMITTEE CONSISTING OF FIVE CITIZENS WHO ARE RECRUITED USING THE TYPICAL PROCESS FOR BOARDS/COMMISSIONS AND INTERVIEWED AND APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL; PLUS FOUR "EXPERTS" IN DEVELOPMENT, PLANNING, REAL ESTATE, AND/OR FINANCE WHO ARE RECRUITED BY STAFF, INTERVIEWED AND APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. THE COUNCIL WOULD DESIGNATE Federal Way City Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 5, 2002 - Page 3 ONE MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE AS CHAIR; COUNCILMEMBER FAISON SECOND. COUNCILMEMBER PARK PROPOSED A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO INCREASE THE COMMITTEE TO ELEVEN, WITH SELECTION OF THE MEMBERSHIP BY THE CITY MANAGER AND DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS. DEPUTY MAYOR MCCOLGAN ACCEPTED THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO INCREASE THE SIZE OF THE COMMITTEE TO ELEVEN, BUT REJECTED A SELECTION PROCESS BY THE CITY MANAGER AND DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS; COUNCILMEMBER FAISON CONCURED. DEPUTY MAYOR MCCOLGAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION; COUNCILMEMBER GATES SECOND. COUNCILMEMBER HELLICKSON MOVED TO AMEND THE CALL FOR THE QUESTION IN ORDER TO EXTEND DISCUSSION; COUNCILMEMBER KOCHMAR SECOND. City Attorney Bob Sterbank recommended a short recess to allow staff to research parliamentary procedures, in order to determine the appropriateness of Councilmember Hellickson's motion. Mayor Burbidge called for a brief recess at 8:25 p.m.; at 8:40 p.m., Mayor Burbidge reconyened the regular meeting. City Attorney Sterbank adyised Councilmembers that, pursuant to Robert's Rules of Order, a "call for the question" is not debatable or amendable, requires a two-thirds yote, and must be yoted on immediately. Deputy Mayor McColgan's earlier call for the question passed 5-2 as follows: Burbidge Gates Kochmar Park yes yes yes no Faison Hellickson McColgan yes no yes The main motion, as amended, passed 5-2 as follows: Burbidge Gates Kochmar Park yes yes yes no Faison Hellickson McColgan yes no yes Federal Way City Council Reguwr Meeting Minut£s March 5, 2002 - Page 4 VII. INTRODUCTION ORDINANCE Council Bill #295/City Adoption of the Final 2001 King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASIDNGTON, RELATING TO SOLID WAS1E MANAGEMENT, ADOPTING KING COUNTY'S WAS1E MANAGEMENT PLAN (AMENDS ORDINANCES 90-73 AND 93-197). COUNCILMEMBER KOCHMAR MOVED COUNCIL BILL #295/CITY ADOPTION OF THE FINAL 2001 KING COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN TO SECOND READING/ENACTMENT AT THE MARCH 19TH COUNCIL MEETING; COUNCILMEMBER HELLICKSON SECOND. The motion passed as follows: Burbidge Gates Kochmar Park yes yes yes yes Faison Hellickson McColgan yes yes yes VIII. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Council member Gates updated the City Council on her recent attendance at yarious regional meetings, including National League of Cities Intergoyemmental Relations Committee, and Regional Transit Committee. She noted a written Sound Transit update would be distributed to Council mailboxes shortly. Councilmember Kochmar announced that she would be meeting, along with Mayor Burbidge, with representatives in Washington D.C. She announced she would be attending various other regional meetings, and reminded citizens the Kiwanis are sponsoring an eyeglass and hearing aid recycling program which benefits third world countries. Councilmember Park noted he was interviewed for a Diversity Commission video that would be airing on FWTV Channel 21. He also attended at the Potential Annexation AIea (P AA) Open House recently held at Lake Dolloff Elementary School; and wished Mayor Burbidge and Councilmember Kochmar a safe trip to Washington D.C. Councilmember Hellickson announced the next meeting ofthe FinanceÆconomic Deyelopment would be held March 26th at 5:30 p.m. He noted he had a wonderful time at the Volunteer Recognition Dinner. Federal Way City Council Regular Meeting MinuJes March 5, 2002 - Page 5 Councilmember Faison also reported on his attendance at the Potential Annexation AIea (P AA) Open House; the Open House was well staffed by city staff, county employees, and consultants who were ayailable to answer citizen questions. He announced the next meeting of the Land Use/Transportation Committee would be held March 18th at 5:30 p.m. Deputy Mayor McColgan also wished Mayor Burbidge and Councilmember Kochmar a safe trip to Washington D. C. He complimented the Parks staff on the field maintenance at Saghalie and Sacajawea parks for upcoming baseball season. He announced the next meeting of the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee would be March 8th at 8:00 a.m. Mayor Burbidge updated the Council on her attendance at various regional meetings, and reminded everyone of the Sister City Baseball Auction that will be held Saturday, March 9th, the proceeds will benefit local athletes traveling to our Sister City of Hac hi no he for a baseball tournament. She also updated citizens of upcoming events happening in the Arts and in the community. Ix. CITY MANAGER REPORT City Manager David Moseley updated Council on the recent Open House for the Potential Annexation AIea (P AA), which was held at the Lake Dolloff Elementary School. He noted positive interaction with the residents, and extended his thanks to Community Development Planner Rox Burhans for all his work. Mr. Moseley thanked eyeryone who attended last week's Volunteer Recognition Dinner. The dinner was a huge success and he also thanked Jennifer Teeler, Volunteer Coordinator and city staff who worked on this project. He reported on the two new programs that are currently running on the Federal Way GQyernment Channel2!. The Diversity Commission has produced a video entitled "Profiles in Federal Way" which is now airing; and "Storytelling" which is airing in conjunction with the Community Literacy Celebration. City Manager Dayid Moseley announced the new Spring Parks and Recreations Brochure is out and registration has begun. Maintenance staff has also begun making sure the ball fields are in good condition for the spring sports season. Mr. Moseley extended "kudos" to Management Services Director Iwen Wang and her staff for their ongoing fiscal responsibility. He noted that further detailed information could be found in the Final 2001 Year-End Financial Report, which the Council passed on tonight's Consent Agenda Federal W'9' City Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 5, 2002 - Page 6 He finally reminded Council of the need for an executive session for the purpose of discussing Property AcquisitionlPursuant to RCW 42.30.11 0(1)(b); for approximately thirty minutes with action expected. Mr. Moseley noted Potential Litigation would not be discussed this eyening. X. EXECUTIVE SESSION At 9: 10 p.m. Mayor Burbidge announced the Council would be recessing to executive session for the purposes of discussing Property AcquisitionlPursuant to RCW 42.30.11 0(1)(b); for approximately thirty minutes with action expected. After a brief extension, Council returned to Chambers at 9:50 p.m. a. b. Property AcauisitionlPursuant to RCW 42.30.11 O(J)(b) Potential LitigationlPursuant to RCW 42.30. I lO(J)(i) -CANCELED XI. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Federal Way City Council, Mayor Burbidge adjourned the regular meeting at 9:50 p.m. Stephanie D. Courtney Deputy City Clerk MEETING DATE: 3/1'116~ ITEM# L~ CITY OF FEDERALW A Y City Council AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: City Adoption of the Final 2001 King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan ~;;~~~LB"SINESS ~~~~=G ~~:;~~~~{~¡¡._- ~-------------- --------- -- ----- -- ------------------~--------- ---------------------- ATTACHMENTS: Memorandum and Attaclunent from the Finance, Economic Development and Regional Affairs Committee's February 26, 2002 meeting- Ordinance adopting the County Solid Waste Management Plan- SUMMARYIBACKGROUND:-King Couníy's updated Comprehensive Solid Waste Manàgem~~Ú)ï;;n (Plan)~iïlg~id;i¡;;; County's solid waste transfer and disposal system, and provide direction for regional waste reduction and recycling programs- The County initially completed a Final Draft of the Plan in 2000, and during 2001 the Regional Policy Committee (RPC) conducted a thorough review process to clarify the Plan's policy elements, which lead to revisions contained in the Final Plan. he County Council approved the Plan in October 2001, after which the Regional Policy Committee, acting as the Solid Waste InterIocal Forum, passed a resolution recommending that Cities adopt the Plan. The City is a party to the Solid Waste InterIocal Forum, and therefore has the ability to either adopt or reject the Plan. The City has adopted the two prior County solid waste plans (1989 and 1992 versions). The attached Plan Summary gives a detailed overview of the Plan's fonnat and recommendations. Also attached is an ordinance, passage of which would adopt the Plan and the Plan's appendices (including concurrent adoption of the Plan's Environmental Impact Statement)- City Council approval of this ordinance will complete the City's Plan adoption process. Once the Plan is adopted, staff will continue to monitor progress related to the Plan's implementation, and staff will also participate in workgroups that will be convened to further develop the Plan's programs. -------------------~------------ - --______n______- ----------------------------------------------- CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: At their February 26,2002 meeting the Finance, Economic Development and Regional Affairs Conunittee (FEDRAC) fOIwarded the adoption ordinance to the March 5, 2002 City Collncil Agenda with a recommendation of adoption of the 2001 King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. PROPOSED MOTION: "] move the ptOposed ordinance to second reading and apptOval at the next regular meeting on March 19,2002_" CITY MANAGER APPROV AL: =V}if\ (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: 0 APPROVED 0 DENIED' 0 TABLEDIDEFERRED/NO ACTION ~ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) COUNCIL BILL Ii 1sT reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # d'fS-- 3/S'/ð-:J... REYISED-O5/IOI2001 k:lcou"cillagdbil1s\2002\sw camp pi," ,doptio" o,d.doc DATE: February 26, 2002 TO: Finance, Economic Development and Regional Affairs Committee FROM: Rob Van Orsow, Solid Waste and Recycling Coordinato<::::>l..u~~ David H. ~nager Adoption ofFin~2~01 King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan VIA: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND In December 2001, King County issued a complete update of the King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan ("Plan"). This Plan guides the regional solid waste system in transfer and disposal of solid waste, while proyiding direction for a broad range of regional waste reduction and recycling efforts. DISCUSSION During much of2001, the Regional Policy Committee (RPC) completed a thorough review process clarifYing the Plan's policy elements. This review included input from the City of Federal Way's representative to the RPc. The results of this policy review are reflected throughout the Final 200 I Plan. The Plan's legislative adoption phase began when the County Council enacted Ordinance 14236 approving the plan in October 200 I. . In October 2001, the Regional Policy Committee, acting as the Solid Waste Interlocal Forum, passed a resolution recommending that Cities adopt the Plan. As a party to the Solid Waste Interlocal Forum agreement, the City of Federal Way has agreed to cooperate in King County's development of solid waste plans. The City also has the responsibility to either adopt or reject the Plan. A !20-day period (ending March 31, 2002) has. been set for the City adoption process. During this time, the Department of Ecology will conduct its own analysis of the Plan, and then make its own approval decision following the actions of the Cities. The City previously adopted two prior County solid waste plans, the 1989 King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan and the 1992 King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. Key elements of the 2001 Plan include: SpecifYing use of the Cedar Hills Landfill as the regional solid waste disposal facility until it reaches its pennitted capacity (in approximately 2012). When this landfill closes, waste would be exported , (most likely by rail) to a landfill located outside King County. Upgrading equipment and facilities at transfer stations to meet regional demands for capacity, and to prepare the system for conversion to waste export. Expanding cost-effective strategies for waste reduction and recycling - thereby reducing the amount of waste that requires disposal. Establishing clear policies and recommendations for keeping system costs (and resulting rates) low and stable over the twenty year planning horizon. þ-\ Solid Waste Management Comp Plan Adoption Page 2 of2 The Plan's recommendations were developed with input from local governments, industry representatives, and area residents. The County held two "open house" meetings in South King County (one in Federal Way, and one in Auburn) to seek input from local residents during Plan development. The City of Federal Way also provided fonnal comments on the Draft Plan in October 2000 as part of this process. The attached Plan Summary (excerpted tTom Chapter I of the Plan) provides a detailed overview of the data and recommendations that constitute the Plan. Also attached is a draft ordinance that adopts the Plan and the Plan's appendices (inclusive of the Plan's Environmental Impact Statement, which will be adopted concuITently). City Council approval of this ordinance will complete the City's Plan adoption process. Once the Plan is adopted, staff will continue to monitor progress related to the Plan's implementation to ensure that the City's needs continue to be addressed. A review copy of the Plan and its two yolumes of Technical Appendices may be found on the shared lateral file located in the City Council office. RECOMMENDA nON Staff recommends that the Finance, Economic Development and Regional Affairs Committee (FEDRAC) folWard the attached draft ordinance to the Marc~2002 City Council Agenda with a recommendation of adoption of the 200 I King County comprehensir Solid Waste Management Plan. ~J' r;]1-Oð v- RV:dl Attachments: Plan Summary Draft Ordinance ':\[,d,\1oo"",&,oo.." p"" 1O "Jopldo, \,')-1/ DRAFT 2/27/02- ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANèE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT, ADOPTING KING COUNTY'S WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN. (AMENDS ORDINANCES 90-73 AND 93-197). WHEREAS, RCW 70.95.080 requires that each city develop its own comprehensive solid waste management plan, enter into an agreement to prepare a joint city/county plan or authorize the County to prepare the plan for the City's solid waste management; and WHEREAS, in 1990 the City of Federal Way and King County entered into a Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement whereby the parties agreed that they shall cooperate in the County's development of a Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan; and WHEREAS, in 1990 King County prepared and proposed a 1989 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan and submitted it to the City for approyal and adoption; and WHEREAS, the City, by its Ordinance 90-73, had approyed and adopted the 1989 King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan with addenda; and WHEREAS, in 1993 King County prepared and proposed a 1992 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan and submitted it to the City for approval and adoption; and WHEREAS, the City, by its Ordinance 93-197, approved and adopted the 1992 King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan with addenda; and WHEREAS, in 200 I, King County prepared and proposed a 200 I Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan ("Plan") and submitted it to the City for approval and adoption; and, ORD.# ,PAGEl WHEREAS, pursuant to WAC 197-11-630, the City has published its intention to adopt by reference thePlan's corresponding King County Enyironmentallmpact Statement (ElS) on satisfaction of its enyironmental reyiew for the Plan; and WHEREAS, Section 10 of Chapter 431 of the Laws of the State of Washington, 1989 Regular Session, amending RCW 70.95.160, authorizes the City to determine that King County shall not exercise any powers regarding the type of service for any aspect of solid waste handling in the City of Federal Way; and WHEREAS, the City Council having considered the Final 2001 Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Adoption of King County EIS. The City Council of the City of Federal Way hereby adopts by reference the Enyironmentallmpact Statement prepared by King County for the Plan, pursuant to WAC 197-11-630, as full satisfaction of the City's required enyironmental review. Section 2. Adoption of Plan. The City Council of the City of Federal Way hereby adopts the Final 2001 Comprehensiye Solid Waste Management Plan with addenda, incorporated herein by this reference. Section 3. City Retains Service Leyel Authority- Pursuant to RCW 70.95.160, the City of Federal Way hereby determines that King County shall not exercise any powers regarding the leyels and types of service for any aspect of solid waste ~andling in the City of Federal Way. King County regulations and ordinances regarding leyels and types of service for ORD.# , PAGE 2 any aspect of solid waste handling shall not apply within the corporate limits of the City as may now or hereafter be determined by the City. Section 4. City Retains Rate Setting Authority. The City shall continue to determine solid waste and recycling collection rates. Section 5. Seyerability. The proyisions of this ordinance are declared separate and seyerable. The inyalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion of this ordinance or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall not affect the validity of the remainder of the ordinance, or the yalidity of its application to other persons or circumstances. Section 6. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 7. Effectiye Date. This ordinance shall be effective five (5) days after passage and publication as proyided by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Federal Way this - day of ,2002. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MAYOR, JEANNE BURBIDGE ATTEST: CITY CLERK, N. CHRISTINE GREEN ORD. #_--, PAGE 3 APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY, ROBERT C. STERBANK FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. klfedc\2002Isw&r comp plan to adopt ordinance.doc ORD.#__,PAGE4 Chapter 1 . Plan Summary Plan Summary The Final 2001 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan presents King County's strategy for managing the solid waste system's garbage and recycling ser- vices over the next 20 years. It will guide us through a time of many significant changes- including closure of the last actiye landfill in King County. The area that this Plan covers includes all of King County's incorporated and unin- corporated areas, except for the City of Seattle, which has its own solid waste system, and Milton, which is part of Pierce County's system. In mapping out a plan for the solid waste system, several fundamental objectives emerged: . Keep pace with the region's population and economic growth . Continue to provide the vital services that residents have come to expect . Monitor industry changes and advances to keep the system as efficient and effective as possible . Continue to be a steward of the environment and a leader in resource conservation . Control system costs and continue to keep disposal rates stable and low These fundamental objectives underlie the planning for each facet of the regional solid waste system - from promotion of waste reduction and recycling to transfer sta- tion improvements to planning for long-term disposal. The common theme mnning through the Plan is to build upon the system's existing infrastmcture and past successes to shape our future. FINAL King Co.nty Comp"h.,,;v. Solid Waste Management Plan' 2001 1-1 Chapter 1 . Plan Summary This final 200 I Plan is the culmination of a system-wide planning effort. The rec- ommendations presented throughout its pages were deyeloped with input from local government leaders, private industry representatives, and King County citizens. The County will continue to work closely with these planning participants as the recom- mendations in this Plan are implemented and the region's future unfolds. Guide to the Plan The purpose of a Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan is to provide the overarching goals and policies that will guide solid waste and recycling programs and services in the system. While it presents a framework for the future, it is not intended to be a work plan for specific policies, rates, programs, or capital improvements. Imple- mentation of specific recommendations will be accom- plished through the County and cities' annual work plan processes. This 200 I Plan is organized to guide the reader through the planning process from demographic forecasting to the assessment of garbage disposal fees. Chapter 2 sets the stage for the reader by providing a brief look at the history of solid waste management in the county, the process for developing the Plan, and the governing policies for the solid waste management system. Chapter 3 looks at pro- jected population and employment growth and how that growth and other factors are used to develop waste generation, recycling, and disposal forecasts. Chapters 4 through 10 discuss the various facets of the solid waste system, including: . Chapter 4 - Waste Reduction, Recycling, and Market Deyelopment . Chapter 5 - Collection of Recyclables and Mixed Municipal Solid Waste (MMSW or Garbage) . Chapter 6 - The Regional Transfer System . Chapter 7 - Disposal of MMSW . Chapter 8 - Construction, Demolition, and Landclearing Debris (CDL), and Special Wastes . Chapter 9 - Enforcement . Chapter 10- Solid Waste System Financing and Rates "- The Plan presents recommendations lor all facets of the regional solid waste system These chapters present the background, governing policies and current issues asso- ciated with each element of the system, followed by recommendations for the 20-year planning period. The recommendations might propose specific actions, suggest a con- tinuation of current practice, or identify the need for further dialogue or additional studies. For ease of locating recommendations within each chapter, they ~ are noted with the symbol to the right. A brief summary of the key recom- ~ mendations from each chapter is presented below. 1-2 fINAL K;ng Co."'Y Compmhens;ve SoUd Woste Management Plan' 2001 Chapter 1 . Plan Summary Chapter 4 - Waste Reduction, Recycling, and Market Development With the increases in population and employment projected for King County in the upcoming years, it is critical to continue our focus On waste reduction and recycling as the highest priorities for managing solid waste. The recommendations in Chapter 4 build on existing waste reduction and recycling programs by expanding educational and technical assistance in our communities, businesses, and schools, and developing strong partnerships with cities and public agencies to coordinate our mutual efforts in this area. The Plan describes measurable goals and targets for our waste reduction and recy- cling efforts. It also reaffinns the policy that waste reduction and recycling programs must be cost effective as well as aggressive. One element of the Plan's recommendation is to expand recycling and reuse oppor- tunities at the County's transfer stations and pursue other venues for collection, such as special community events. In addition, more commodities are being looked at for their recycling potential in the marketplace, such as certain plastics, textiles, construction debris, food wastes, and others. Regional markets and technologies are routinely stud- ied to assess the market potential for an array of recycled and reused products. The County will continue to work with the cities, regional agencies and organizations, and area residents, businesses, and manufacturers to pursue sustainable markets to support our waste reduction and recycling goals. Some of the newer programs slated for more attention include increased recycling and reuse of organic materials, such as yard wastes and agricultural wastes; product stewardship among consumers, businesses, and manufacturers; and promotion of "green " or sustainable building principles throughout our communities. Chapter 5 - Collection of Recyclables and Mixed Municipal Solid Waste Nearly all of the residents in King County subscribe to curbside collection services for garbage and recyclables. One recommendation in Chapter 5 is to research the costs and benefits of combining curbside recyclables (except for glass) into a single bin for collection and adding new materials for pick-up, such as polycoated papers, juice boxes and similar containers, textiles, and more plastics. These changes were recently made by the City of Seattle's solid waste system. Other recom~endations in the chapter focus on providing collection opportunities that reduce the need for customers to bring wastes to the transfer stations in their own vehicles, thereby reducing traffic and congestion at the stations. One reason customers typically give for bringing material to the transfer stations is that they have bulky or extra items that could not be put out at the curb, such as debris from a household clean- ing or remodeling project. To develop alternative ways for residents to dispose of bulky and extra items, the County will work with the cities to coordinate more special collection events and with the private collection companies to examine the feasibility of establishing efficient and economical pick-up services. FINAL K;ng County Comp,.hen,;.e Sol;d Wa"e Management Plan' 2001 1-3 Chapter 1 . Plan Summary The County will also be studying the possibility of establishing a stationary collec- tion site for household hazardous waste at a transfer station. This service would aug- ment collection provided by the County's Wastemobile, which travels throughout the county to collect these types of wastes. Chapter 6 - The Regional Transfer System The current transfer system is a mix of public and private facilities, and the Plan recommends that this balance remain the same in the future. The private solid waste handling companies presented several alternatives to increase their role in providing transfer services. After a thorough analysis of the alternatives, no benefit to the ratepayers of King County was identified from further privatization of part or all of the public transfer system. The County's 1992 Plan called for a major construction program to build a number of new and replacement transfer stations. The 2001 Plan makes the best use of existing facilities and optimizes capital outlay by concentrating investment at "expandable" sta- tions and making repairs and safety and operational improvements at the remaining stations, 'where there is limited space for expansion. This Plan does recognize that some of the transfer stations are operating very close to capacity, and some new facili- ties may be necessary, primarily in the northeast part of the county. When the Cedar Hills Regional Landfill closes in about 2012, the County will make the transition to waste export. To prepare the regional transfer system for export, waste compactors will be installed at County transfer stations. Studies of similar utilities that have made the transition to waste export show that consolidating garbage into com- pacted loads makes transport considerably more economical. Other upgrades will be made at the transfer stations to improve traffic flow and queuing and to complete necessary maintenance and repairs at some of the older stations. The County will also be pur- suing ways to manage traffic patterns and traffic flow at the transfer stations to better serve the customers. ... The County opened Refuse Aree 5 of the Cedar Hills Regional Landfill in 1999 Chapter 7 - Disposal of MMSW The County's aggressive waste reduction and recycling efforts in the past have led to a substantial reduction in the amount of garbage that reaches the landfill. In fact, one outcome of these efforts has been to extend the life of the Cedar Hills Regional Landfill by about 8 years. Eyen so, the landfill is expected to reach its permitted capacity and close in 2012. The Plan recommends that the County fol- low the path of other local jurisdictions and begin to export wastes to a landfill outside of King County once Cedar Hills closes. Adoption of this Plan is only the first step in preparing for waste export. There will be extensive public and city involvement in the planning process before export begins. Together, we will develop a new system for disposing of the region's waste by 2012. 1-4 FINAL K;"g Co."ty Comp,.he",;.e Sol;d W,"e M'"'geme"' PI'"' 2001 Chapter 1 . Plan Summary One alternative examined in some detail in the draft and final Plans was whether to begin exporting waste before Cedar Hills is ful1, in order to extend the life of the land- fill. This idea did not prove to be a cost-effective alternative. There are compelling operational and economic reasons to continue sending all of King County's wasle to the landfill until it reaches its permitted capacity and then closing the facility. However, the County will remain open to considering proposals for initiating waste export prior to the 2012 closure of Cedar Hills should circumstances warrant. A transition plan will also be needed as the closure date approaches. Chapter 8 - Construction, Demolition, and Landclearing Debris (CDL) Private-sector solid waste management companies currently handle the system's CDL waste and recycling under contract with King County. King County facilities accept only limited quantities ofCDL. Contracts with the private companies expire in 2004. Before this date, targeted studies will be conducted to determine how to best handle CDL in the future. The primary goal of any selected plan will be to increase the amount of CDL that is recycled from both commercial work sites and disposal sites. Chapter 9 - Enforcement The key recommendation in Chapter 9 is to continue to coordinate system-wide efforts to control litter and illegal dumping. The County and other jurisdictions at the state and local level have established a cooperative effort to tackle the problem. Rec- ommendations in the Plan include continuing with existing programs and task forces, increasing targeted education programs, establishing an illegal dumping hotline, and possibly pursuing legislative remedies to strengthen enforcement. Chapter 10 - Solid Waste System Financing and Rates All of the program and service recommendations for the regional transfer and disposal system are designed to strike a balance between system improvements and cost. There are two primary recommendations in this chapter of the Plan. First, the County plans to provide more tech- nical assistance to the cities. Grants provide critical fund- ing to city programs for waste reduction and recycling, and the County will assist cities in locating and taking advan- tage of grant opportunities. The County will also serve as a clearinghouse of information about programs, contracts, and ideas that can be shared among the cities. Also recommended is the fonnation of a Solid Waste Policy Work Group. The work group is intended to share responsibility for analyzing and developing solid waste policies and rate structures. Proposals developed by the group will go to the King County Executive for consideration in future rate design. ... Curbside recycling is available to nearly all ofthe County's residents FINAL King County Comp"henslve Sol;d Waste Management Plan' 2001 1-5 Chapter 1 . Plan Summary Recommendations fonnulated in the Plan were developed through extensive re- search and analyses. Each chapter cites various supporting documents, studies, and technical papers that are provided in the 2000 Comprehensive Solid Waste Manage- ment Plan Technical Appendices. These appendices are bound in two volumes under separate cover. A glossary of important terms and abbreviations is presented following the Plan chapters. The final attachment to this Plan is the Responsiveness Summaries, which present the County's response to public comments received on the draft Plan issued in April 2000. The summaries provide a guide on how the Plan incorporates comments from the individuals and groups that participated in developing the Plan. The Regional Planning Effort Issuance of this Plan follows a comprehensive planning effort involving all of the key players in the solid waste system. This effort began in the spring of 1999 as the County's Solid Waste Division. asked for suggestions and ideas about the future direc- tion of solid waste programs and services. The Division met individually with- . Elected officials and solid waste coordinators from the 37 cities that are part of the regional system . Representatives from the private solid waste management companies . The unincorporated area councils . The Solid Waste Advisory Committee . The Regional Policy Committee . The Utilities and Technology Committee To be sure that private citizens were heard, the County hosted six public meetings across the county. These meetings were attended by some 250 people who contributed their ideas and expectations about services in the region as well as in their own com- munities. From the diyerse ideas gathered during this process, the Division prepared the draft Plan, which was issued in April 2000. The draft Plan laid out various alternatives and proposed recommendations for regional services and programs. The public comment period for the draft Plan extended from May through Septem- ber 2000. During this period, Division staff again met with all of the key players to introduce the major components of the Plan and the process for providing comments. Meetings were held with the cities both individually and jointly to discuss the Plan contents and process for revision and adoption. Five more public meetings were held around the County. The final Plan was developed after careful consideration of all the comments received in response to the draft Plan. Those comments are included with the Respon- siveness Summaries bound in this document. The two Responsiveness Summaries show how and where the Executive's 2000 Plan addressed the public and city comments and how they were addressed in this final 2001 Plan adopted by the King County Council. 1-6 FINAL King County Comp,.hens;ve Solid Waste Management PIa"' 2001 Chapter 1 . Plan Summary Process for Adopting and Amending a Final Plan The final Plan must be adopted by the cities and the King County Council and ap- proved by the Washington Department of Ecology before implementation- The process for development and adoption of the Plan is described in Figure 1-1. Figure 1-1. Process for Development. Review. and Adoption of the Plan Draft Plan Development May-Oct. 1999 Meetings with the public. cities. solid waste industry. and other groups Oct. 1999-April20oo Preparation and issuance of the draft Plan Dee. 1990-Aug- 2000 Preparation and issuance of the draft Environmental Impact Statement (Els) Draft Plan Review and Response to Comments April-Sept. 2000 Public review and comment period for draft Plan and for the draft Eis (Aug--sept.) Work with Plan participants Briefings for the King County Council's Utilities & Technology Committee and Regional Policy Committee on the draft Plan Draft Plan and Draft Eis Revision Oct. 2000-Feb- 2001 Additional analysis and revision of draft Plan and Eis based on review of public comments Consideration of Anal Plan and EIS by King County Council March 2001 King County Executive releases final 2000 Plan and Eis March-Oct. 2001 Utilities & Technology and Regional Policy Committee Review of Plan recommendations Adoption of Anal Plan Oct. 15. 2001 Adoption of the Fino! 2001 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan by the King County Council Oct. 25, 2001 The Regional Policy Committee, acting as Solid Waste Interiocal Forum, recommends that the cities approve the Plan Dee. " 20Ot-March 3', 2002 The no-day period for city adoption begins Aprill,2002 Ecology's 45-day approval period for adopted Plan begins FINAL K;ng County Comp,.hens;ve Sol;d W"te Managemenl Plan' 2001 1-7 Chapter 1 . Plan Summary The ILAs require that adopted solid waste management plans be reviewed, and any necessary revisions proposed, at least once every three years, or more frequently if warranted. Elements to be updated will be assessed to accommodate new needs and opportunities and to make corrections necessary to achieve adopted goals and imple- ment adopted policies. An amendment process was developed and agreed upon by the cities and the County in 1990. If issues requiring a plan amendment are identified and resolved between the County and the affected city or cities, the parties develop the plan amendment, take formal action to adopt it, and then implement it. If an issue arises and agreement cannot be reached between the affected jurisdic- tions, a formal request is made by the County or affected city(ies) to the Regional Policy Committee (replacing the former Solid Waste Interlocal Forum) to consider a plan amendment. If the Regional Policy Committee detennines that a plan amendment is necessary, the committee detennines which cities are affected by the issue, and re- views and approves the proposed plan amendment. Once approved, the County and all other affected cities would act to adopt the amendment. Ecology would ¡hen approve the amendment, and it would be distributed to all cities that are covered by the Plan. 1-8 FINAL K;ng County Comp,ehens;ve SoUd W..te Management Plan' 2001 MEETING DATE: March 19, 2002 ITEM# :rz:- k,) ---- CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION APPOINTMENf (unexpired tenn) --------- CATEGORY: BUDGET IMPACT: i:81 CONSENT D RESOLUTION D CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS D ORDINANCE D PUBLIC HEARING D OTHER Amount Budgeted: Expenditure Amt.: Contingency Req'd: $ $ $ -----------------------~-------------------------------------------------------------------- ATTACHMENTS: None ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: As a result of the resignation of Human Services Commissioner David Baker on February 26, 2002, it is necessary to name a replacement for his unexpired tenn through January 31, 2004- Current alternate Esther (Jungsoon) Heo has been inyolyed in recent grant funding discussions, and will serve the commission well as a yoting member. -------------------- ------------------------------------------------------- - -- --------------- ---- CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: N/A -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~--------------- PROPOSED MOTION: I moye the appointment of Esther (Jungsoon) Heo as a voting member of the Human Services Commission, to fill the unexpired tenn of Commissioner David Baker through January 31, 2004. (The City Clerk will arrange for introduction and presentation of the appointment certificate for the new appointee at the April 2 regular meeting) --------------------------- - -------------------------------------- ---------------- CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ~ (BELOW TO BE COMPLElED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: D APPROVED D DENIED D TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION 'J MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) COUNCIL BILL # 1 ST reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # REVISEO - 05/1 012001 MEETING DATE: March 19,2002 ITEM# :::rz=- Ç:Æ) ------~--------- - - -~-------- CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA BILL SUBJECT:_- Solid ~~~t=-¡tJ]_d~,,~~i_~g Division 2002/2003 Grant Approyals (~ CATEGORY: I BUDGET IMPACT: ¡g¡ CONSENT 0 ORDINANCE Amount Budgeted: ¡g¡ RESOLUTION 0 PUBLIC HEARING Expenditure Amt.: 0 CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS 0 OTHER Contingency Req'd: $ $ $ ---------------- ATTACHMENTS: Memo to the Finance, Economic Deyelopment and Regional Affairs Committee dated February 26, 2002_~~~. ----------------------------- ----~------- SUMMARYIBACKGROUND: Grant funds totaling $188,736 is ayailable in 2002/2003 to support waste reduction and recycling projects for area residents and businesses- As in prior years, Public Works staff filed applications and scopes of work in order to reserve the ayailable grant funds for 2002/2003. The 2002/2003 grants are consistent with grants accepted in prior years, with two notable differences. First, the match 'uirement of the Coordinated Preyention Grant has been reduced fi-om 40% to 25%. This wil1 allow added flexibility in .dgeting for projects with more than one grant source. Secondly, Suburban Cities may now carry forward funding fi-om the annual Local Hazardous Waste Management Program (LHWMP) Grant fi-om year to year. For 2002, $16,800 wi]] be carried forward to support two ongoing projects; 'At-Home' Hazardous Waste Collection Pilot and Integrated Pest Management Education. The LHWMP grant administrator will process the carry forward as part of the 2002 grant contract amendment process. The Committee is requested to review the 2002/2003 grants and forward a related resolution to the City Council for approyaI. A draft resolution is attached that would formally approye the grant projects, accept the funds, and proyide authority to enter into agreements with grant agencies and yendors. ---------~----------------------------------~-----~------------~----- CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: At its February 26, 2002 meeting, the Finance, Economic Deyelopment and Regional Affairs Committee made the following recommendations: Approye the 2002/2003 Solid Waste and Recycling Division grant applications and programs. Forward a resolution to this effect for consideration by the City Council to the March 19, 2002 consent agenda, with a recommendation for adoption. ---------~-------------------------- ------------------------------------------- -- PROPOSED MOTION: "I moye approyal of the 2002/2003 Solid Waste and Recycling Division grant application and programs and that the attached resolution to this effect be considered and recommended for adoption." --------------------------------------------------------r=-------------------------------------------------------------- --- ---- -... ------------------------- CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: W~ '1vtev(.f" - f..v 'D""'~ rvv-J-L'¡ (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: 0 APPROVED 0 DENIED 0 TABLED/DEFERREDINO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) COUNCIL BILL # 1ST reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # k:\councillagdbills\2O02\swr 20û2 2003 grant approvals.doc REVISED - 05110/2001 DATE: February 26, 2002 TO: Finance, Economic Development and Regional Affairs Committee Rob Van Orsow, Solid Waste and Recycling Coordinator <3'Z-~~~ David H. ~anager Solid Waste andl¡(e;YClin~ Division 2002/2003 Grant Approvals FROM: VIA: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND Grant funds totaling $188,736 are available in 2002/2003 to support waste reduction and recycling projects for area residents and businesses. As in prior years, Public Works staff filed applications and scopes of work in order to reserve the available grant funds for 2002/2003. TIlls memorandum and its attachments summarize these grant projects. Attachment I to this memorandum contains brief descriptions of each grant, including project descriptions. Attachment 2 reports on related grant-funded programs that served the Federal Way community in 2001. DISCUSSION The 2002/2003 grants are consistent with grants accepted in prior years, with two notable differences. First, the match requirement of the Coordinated Prevention Grant has been reduced !Tom 40% to 25%. This will allow added flexibility in budgeting for projects with more than one grant source. Secondly, Suburban Cities may now carry forward funding !Tom the annual Local Hazardous Waste Management Program (LHW1r!P) Grant !Tom year to year. For 2002, $16,800 will be carried forward to support two ongoing projects: 'At-Home' Hazardous Waste Collection Pilot and Integrated Pest Management Education. The LHWMP grant administrator will process the carryforward as part of the 2002 grant contract amendment process. The Committee is requested to review the 2002/2003 grants and forward a related resolution to the City Council for approval. A draft resolution is attached that would fonnally approve the grant projects, accept the funds, and provide authority to enter into agreements with grant agencies and vendors. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Committee act to approve the 2002/2003 Solid Waste and Recycling Division grant applications and programs, and forward a resolution to this effect for consideration by the City Council to the March 19, 2002 consent agenda, with a recommendation for adoption. RV:dJ Attachments: 2002/2003 Solid Waste And Recycling Grant Applications And Projects Draft Resolution Accepting 2002/2003 Solid Waste And Recycling Grants 200 J Solid Waste And Recycling Grant Progress Report k:\f,d,\2002"w&. ",,""'-2002.do' (,-1 DRAFT 3/13/ ð L- RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, AUfHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF MONIES AND DIRECTING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENTS TO ACCEPT FUNDS FROM VARIOUS STATE AND COUNTY SOURCES FOR ESTABLISHING PROJECTS WITHIN THE SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING FUND. WHEREAS, cities are charged with providing and maintaining public projects necessary to maintain and improve the public health, safety and welfare; and WHEREAS, the financial resources of cities to provide these necessary service and improyements are limited; and WHEREAS, yarious state and county sourceS haye special funds ayailable to supplement city projects, which are awarded on a population allocation and project specific basis; and WHEREAS, the City staff has aggressively pursued obtaining these funds in order to maximize the local public benefits of these funds; and WHEREAS, the grants identified herein will net the City of Federal Way a total of One- Hundred Eighty-Eight Thousand Seyen Hundred Thirty-Six and No/lOO Dollars ($188,736.00); and WHEREAS, the City commits to accountability by measuring and quantifYing the results of the funded programs; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section I. Agreements Authorized. For all projects identified in Column I of Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, the City Manager or his or designated representative is authorized and directed to develop scopes of work and execute such agreements with the agencies identified in Column 2 of Exhibit A as are necessary to accept the grant monies identified in Column 3 of Exhibit A- Res.#~,Page I C-l Section 2. Receipt of Funds Authorized. The City Manager or his or her designee is hereby authorized to receive the grant monies identified in Colunm 3 of Exhibit A attached hereto. Section 3. Creation of Solid Waste Project Grant Funds Authorized. At the time of execution of each agreement and acceptance of the grant funds specific to that agreement, separate projects shall be established within the Solid Waste and Recycling Fund, into which monies specific to that grant project shall be deposited. Section 4. Manager Shall Administer Funds- The City Manager or his or her designated representatiye shall have responsibility for the administration of the grant monies receiyed, and award of grant projects to qualified vendors and contractors- Section 5. Identification of Source Funds- The approximate amounts and anticipated sources of reyenue for the grant fund projects are identified in Exhibit A attached hereto. Section 6. Seyerabilitv. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase ofthis resolution should be held to be inyalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such inyalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution. Section 7. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to theeffectiye date of the resolution is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 8. Effectiye Date. This resolution shall be effectiye immediately upon passage by the Federal Way City Council. RESOLVED BY TIlE CTIY COUNCIL OF THE CTIY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, this - day of ,2002. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MAYOR, JEANNE BURBIDGE Res. #_, Page 2 c.16 ATTEST: CITY CLERK, N. CHRISTINE GREEN, CMC APPROVED AS TO FORM: BOB C. STERBANK, CITY ATTORNEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY TIlE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. ko\council\agdbills\2002\swr 2002 grant resolution.doc Res.#~,Page3 e:-C\ Exhibit A CITY OF FEDERAL WAY SOLID WASTE & RECYCLING DMSION - 2002-2003 GRANT PROJECTS AND FUNDING AMOUNTS Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5 0 ...L 0 GRANT/PROJECT SOURCE GRANT MATCH TERM AMOUNT REQUIRED 2002/2003 Coordinated Prevention Grant Department of Ecology $96,602 $32,201 1/1102 to 12/31/03 Litter and Recycling Collection in Public Places, Pilot At-Home Collection of Household Hazardous Waste and Waste Latex Paint Disposal, Waste Reduction and Recycling (WR/R) Options Promotion, and Expansion of Otganics Waste Collection ftom commercial soUlCes 2002/2003 Waste Reduction and Recycling Program Grant King County Solid Waste $68,204* $0 1/1102 to 12/31/03 (I) Littet and Recycling Collection in Public Places; (2) Support of tile Division regional "Grasscycling" outreach program; (3) Support of Waste Reduction and Recycling Options promotion, which includes production of the annual "Recycling Options" flyer; (4) Participation in a regional Home Compost Bin Distribution event; (5) Expansion of Organics Waste Collection from commercial sources; (6) The Business Recycling Program; (7) Special Recycling Collection Events. 2002 Local Hazardous Waste Manágement Program Grant King County Local $23,930* $0 1/1102 to 12/31/02 Household Hazardous Waste Collection ServicesIPaint Disposal; and Hazardous Waste Special Recycling Events; City of Federal Way participation on the Management Program LHWMP Household Hazardous Waste Education Subcommittee Total $188,736 . These grant amounts include the required màtching funds fot the 2002 Coordinated Prevention Grant funding. k""",,""UOO1"m,-..b.O1.'~ Attachment 1 200212003 SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING GRANT APPLICATIONS AND PROJECTS 1. 2002-2003 Department Of Ecolo!!V Coordinated Prevention Grant (CPG) The 2002-2003 grant focuses on four projects: Litter and Recycling Collection in Public Places, Pilot At- Home Collection of Household Hazardous Waste and Waste Latex Paint Disposal, Waste Reduction and Recycling (WRJR) Options Promotion, and Expansion of Organics Waste Collection from commercial sources- This grant totals $96,602 over two years, and provides 75% funding, with a 25% match requirement. The King County WRIR grant and the Local Hazardous Waste Management Program (LHWMP) grant will provide the matching funds. 2. 2002-2003 Kin!! County Waste Reduction and Recvclin!! (WR!R) Pro!!ram Grant The 2002-2003 King County Waste Reduction and Recycling (WRIR) grant encompasses three separate components, which were fonnally covered by separate contracts: Waste Reduction and Recycling projects, Business Recycling outreach, and Special Recycling Events. King County has approved the 2002 funding for this grant, while the 2003 funding will be part of the County's 2003 budget process. This arrangement should allow for annual amendment of a single contract rather than deyelopment of several new contracts annually. Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant funds total $68,204 to support seven separate projects: (I) Litter and Recycling Collection in Public Places. (2) Support of the regional "Grasscycling" outreach program (now called Northwest Natural Yard Days- Three Federal Way lawn and garden retailers are set to participate in this year's program, focusing on the discounted sale of electric mulching mowers and promotion of "natural lawn care" and other ecologically- sound garden maintenance methods- (3) Support of Waste Reduction and Recycling Options promotion, which includes production of the annual "Recycling Options" flyer. (4) Participation in a regional Home Compost Bin Distribution eyent, to be targeted to South King County residents. (5) Expansion of Organics Waste Collection crom commercial sources. (6) The Business Recycling Program component will focus on waste reduction and recycling outreach to businesses through "on-request" assistance and targeted programs, such as ongoing expansion of recycling services at SeaTac Mall. (7) The Special Recycling Collection Event component will entail operating two special recycling collection events in Federal Way during 2002, one in Spring and one in Fall. These events provide residents with a convenient method to recycle a wide variety of materials that are not nonnally collected at curbside. 3. 2002 Local Hazardous Waste Mana!!ement Pro!!ram (LHWMP) Grant The Seattle-King County Department of Public Health 2002 Local Hazardous Waste Management Program (LHWMP) grant allocates $17,930.00 with no match requir~ment. This grant will primarily supplement funding for operating two Special Recycling Events, as w';¡~ as provide match for the Pilot At-HClme Collection of Household Hazardous Waste and Waste Latex Paint Disposal project. The LHWMP allots an additional $6,000 to cover costs (staff time, parking, training, etc_) of City of Federal Way staff participation as Suburban City representative to the LHWMP Household Hazardous Waste Education Subcommittee during 2002. (-2 Attachment 2 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY - PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Solid Waste and Recycling Division 2001 Grant Progress Report I. Special Recycling Events Funded by King County Solid Waste Division Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant, and King County Local Hazardous Waste Management Program Grant. Two Special Recycling Collection Events were held in 200 I. The Spring event held on April 21 attracted 406 participants, and the Fall eyent on September 15 attracted 537 participants. Both eyents were held at the South Federal Way Park and Ride. The type and weight of materials collected andrecyc1ed is shown in the following table. Used computer monitors and CPU's were collected at both events, substantially increasing the total weight of the Household Goods category- At the Fall eyent, acceptable scrap wood was expanded to include painted wood, which substantially increased recoyery of wood waste. In addition, fluorescent tubes and BBQ-size propane tanks were also collected at both events for the first time. TYPE OF MATERIALS SPRING 2001 FALL 2001 Quantity Weight (lbs.) Quantity Weight (lbs.) CFC Appliances (refiigerators, 77 15,804 84 17,241 freezers, air conditioner units) AutomobileIMarine Batteries 76 2,728 78 2,800 Used Motor Oil/Mixed Petroleum 385 gallons 2,695 705 gallons 4,935 Products Antifreeze 110 gallons 880 55 gallons 440 Tires 306 4,284 284 4,003 Used Oil Filters I drum 440 I drum 440 Textiles and Reusable Household y, Trailer 3,732 Y, Trailer 3,732 Goods Computers/monitors 73 units 2,502 24 units 912 Propane Tanks 68 1,360 72 1,440 Fluorescent Tubes 210 210 225 225 Painted Scrap Wood - - - 29.33 tons 58,660 Scrap WoodlYard Debris 26.74 tons 53,480 7.87 tons 15,740 TOTAL Weight (lbs.) 88,115 110,568 TOTAL Weight (tons) 44.1 55.3 TOTAL Participants 406 537 l:-3 II. Business Recycling Project Funded by King County Solid Waste Division - Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant. This project consisted of three main components: a cooperatiye phone book advertisement, "On-call" outreach to businesses, and database/reporting. In keeping with prior years, the phone book advertisement appeared in the yellow pages under the "Recycling" category to promote the regional Business Recycling Assistance program. As a result of this adyertisement, twenty businesses contacted the City requesting assistance with recycling issues. The advertisement also generated numerous calls from residents seeking recycling options. Other related activities included participation in a Chamber tradeshow, and support for expansion of the SeaTac Mall recycling program (providing signage, recycling containers and support equipment). The Mall's recycling program now includes a dedicated compactor for cardboard collection, tow carts for cardboard collection and transportation to the compactor, plastic film recoyery, and scrap wood recovery. This is a marked improyement from the informal recycling effort that preyiously existed at the Mall. Ongoing efforts will be made to further expand this program during 2002. All assistance, outreach and follow-up activities were compiled into the County's tracking system. ID. Household Hazardous Waste Education Funded by King County Local Hazardous Waste Management Program (LHWMP) Grant. Staff worked with LHWMP and other suburban cities to produce a series of three educational postcards. The postcards were sent to Federal Way residents to emphasize "Integrated Pest Management" or ¡PM, including methods of yard care that protect surface waters, reduce the use of hazardous materials, and protect kids, domestic animals, and wildlife. A survey of County residents taken before and after the campaign showed an increase in awareness about fayorable natural lawn care practices. In addition to a residential ¡PM focus, City operations worked to improve the City's internal practices. A number of altematiyes are being considered for implementation, including soils testing, altematiye landscaping techniques, use of slow-release organic fertilizers, and expanded use of soil aeration equipment. These options will in turn contribute to the City's response to the listing of salmon as an endangered species- The altematiyes will be implemented during 2002. IV. Backyard Compost Bin Distribution to Federal Way Residents Funded by King County Solid Waste Division Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant, and the Department of Ecology Coordinated Prevention Grant This project entailed seyeral components. The contractor was selected via a request for proposals process. The contractor hired operated a one-day compost bin sale, held on October 13, 200 I, which distributed compost bins to Federal Way residents. Compost bins that were leftover from the sale are also available to area residents by direct mail. A promotional flyer (enclosed) was prepared, printed, and mailed to area single- family residents to create awareness about this event. In addition, a press release was prepared which highlighted details of the eyent. A total of 682 compost bins and educational booklets were procured through this project. (;4 V. Waste Reduction and Recycling Options Brochure! WRIR Promotion Funded by Department of Ecology Coordinated Prevention Grant This brochure infonns Federal Way residents of the 2001-2002 winter yard waste service schedule, while increasing awareness of other ayailable waste reduction, recycling, disposal and household hazardous waste options- Staff completed revisions to the Options for Recycling and Disposal brochure for the latest version. More than 19,000 brochures were distributed. One additional flyer was developed and printed, providing Spanish-language recycling infonnation targeted to the new multi-family recycling program. An expanded options brochure for multi-family recycling is being developed in early 2002- VI. Yard Waste Reduction (a.k.a. "Grasscycling"} Promotion Campaign and Mower Sales Funded by King County Solid Waste Division Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant, Department of Ecology Coordinated Prevention Grant, and Local Hazardous Waste Management Grant The regional Grasscycling campaign culminated in April 200 I and resulted in the subsidized sale of electric mulching lawnmowers and 'reel' push mowers, and the recycling of old gas mowers throughout three Puget Sound counties. The eyents were well receiyed and again attracted a great deal of media attention. A total of 3,178 push and electric mowers were sold, while area residents recycled oyer 2,000 old gas-powered mowers. A South King Countyeyentwas added for the first time in 2001. The focus of the 2002 program will be more 'retailer based' - and so far, three Federal Way lawn and garden retailers are planning to participate. vll. Household Hazardous Waste Education Subcommittee - Suburban Cities Represeutation Funded by Local Hazardous Waste Management Grant City of Federal Way staff participates as the Suburban City Association representatiye on the LHWMP's staff- leyel Household Hazardous Waste Education Subcommittee. Staff participated in monthly meetings throughout 2001 to help focus LHWMP education programs on issues that concern suburban cities. Funding from the LHWMP grant is allocated to defray costs (staff time, parking, and training) associated with staff participation on this subcommittee- VllI. Pilot At-Home Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) Collection Project The City was awarded Supplemental CPG funds for this project in early 2001, but project implementation was delayed due to workload related to the SWfR Procurement Process and City Code Update. The City released and advertised an RFP in September 200 I, based on a similar prwurement effort already underway in Clark County. A company that specializes in at-home HHW collection nàrned "Curbside, Inc_" was awarded the contract. The company has perfonned over 70,000 at-home collections nationwide. The City then designed, mailed and printed a postcard announcing the availability of the program. The postcard was mailed to a list of 3,700 residents aged 60 and oyer (who along with those who are disabled, make up the initial targeted group for this service). Despite the contractor's name, this program is not simply "curbside collection" ofHHW. First, the participant calls a toll free number, and the contractor detennines their eligibility, sets a collection day, and sends a kit (a lockable collection bin along with detailed instructions). On the collection day, the resident places the locked collection bin on their doorstep. Specific HHW materials (motor oil, antifreeze, latex paint, and auto batteries only) may be placed outside the collection bin ifvolumes warrant. For those residents needing help identifYing HHW in their home or garage, the contractor will provide special assistance on-site. The contractor then packs the collected materials for transport to a pennitted facility (operated by Envirotech of Lynwood) for further processing. (:5 Although program operations were set to begin December 200 I, the start date is now uncertain, since there is an issue regarding acquisition of a County Health Department pennit for operation of the collection service- Staff is working with the Contractor to ensure that the necessary permits are obtained in a timely manner. Funding from the 2002 CPG and LHWMP grant cycle is targeted to support implementation of this program in 2002. Due to the lack of pennit, there haye been no billable operations by the Contractor to date; all costs to date reflect only the City's Contractor acquisition costs and promotion efforts. k:lfedc\2002\sw&r grants-2002.doc (-6 MEETING DATE: 3/1 9/02 ITEM# ~~) CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: Digital Aerial Photography CATEGORY: BUDGET IMPACT: IZI CONSENT 0 RESOLUTION 0 CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS 0 ORDINANCE 0 PUBLIC HEARING 0 OTHER Amount Budgeted: Expenditure Amt.: Contingency Req'd: $18000.00 $18000.00 $ A TT ACHMENTS: Memorandum ITom Finance, Economic Development and Regional Affairs Committee ---.-.- SUMMARYIBACKGROUND: Proposal to acquire 1999 digital aerial photography for Federal Way and the Potential Annexation Area (P AA) through a cost sharing joint yenture with the City of Des Moines, City of Normandy Park, Highline Water District and Lakehaven Utility District using sayings ITom the 2001 budget. --- ITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Approyal PROPOSED MOTION: "I moye approval for the acquisition of the 1999 digital aerial photography" ~ CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: 0 APPROVED 0 DENIED 0 TABLEDIDEFERREDINO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) COUNCIL BILL # 1ST reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # REVISED - 05/10/2001 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM From: Subject: February 22, 2002 Finance, Economic Development and Regional Affairs Committee Curt Ryser, GIS SupervisorlIS Administrator Digital Aerial Photography Date: To: Summary This is a request for Council approyal for the acquisition of a set of update digital aerial photography through cost sharing with the City of Des Moines, City of Normandy Park, Highline Water District and Lakehayen Utility District. This joint yenture would proyide the city with 1999 aerial photographs with the option of acquiring 2002 photography at significantly reduced costs. The funding for the project will come from 2001 budget sayings of$II,500 from the GIS and $6,500 from the surface water management fund. Background On several occasions, staff examined the possibility of acquiring updated aerial photography of the greater Federal Way area to replace/update the existing photographs taken in 1991 and 1993. Staff has also explored options to obtain the data from other sources such as the Washington State Dept. of Transportation or Sound Transit, but haye been unable to find existing aerial photography that match the leyel of detail or the extent of the coyerage area. This aerial photography would provide the following needed information: 0 Screen-digitize and update planimetric data in the City's Potential Annexation Area (PAA) 0 Addition of building footprints, roadways and impervious surfaces in the areas annexed to the city since 1993. 0 Verification and update of commercial and multi-family projects that have deyeloped since 1993 0 Update of single-family footprints that haye been built since 1993 0 Update of street improyements recently constructed 0 Produce prints of the more current photography for staff use in meetings and presentations 0 Possibility of updating and acquiring a Digital Eleyation Model (DEM) for the Federal Way area to allow slope/yiew analysis and 3D mapping In addition, the aerial photography would allow staff the ability to print the photographs for reference, combine the imager with other digitally mapped data contained in the city's Geographic Information System (GIS) and CAD systems. Proposal The total cost to acquire the 1999 aerial photography for the project area is $45,959 plus taxes. The participating agencies will share the cost based on each entities area of interest with the project area. Based on this method, the city's portion of the cost will be $15,626 plus tax and data compression costs for a grand total of$18,000. The recommended funding sources for the project is~from II/ioo b\ 1r;./~ GIS and $6;000 from SWM based on 200] budget sayings. The $36,000 to upgrade to 2002 aerial photography will be subject to additional funding from each of the participating agencies. Participant Acres % of Gross Acres 1999 Photography 2002 Photography Des Moines 6,900 10% $ 4,596 $ 3,600 Federal Way 22,701 34% $15,626 $12,240 Highline Water District 11,669 17% $ 7,813 $ 6,]20 Lakehaven Util. District 25,156 37% $]7,005 $13,320 Nonnandy Park 1,540 2% $ 919 $ 720 TOTALS: 67,966 100% $45,959 $36,000 Project Participant Costs Recommendation Staff recommends council approve the proposed acquisition of the 1999 digital aerial photography. FEDRAC Committee Action: K:\FINANCE"'DocuMENT2 Ca--¿ MEETING DATE: March 19, 2002 ITEM# ::v-- ~) --------------------- ------~---------------~------ CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: S 288'" Street at SR-99 SignaI/Intersection Improvements/30% Design Status ------------------------ --------------------- CATEGORY: BUDGET IMPACT: ~ CONSENT 0 RESOLUTION 0 CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS 0 ORDINANCE 0 PUBLIC HEARING 0 OTHER Amount Budgeted: Expenditure Amt.: Contingency Req'd: $ $ $ --------~--- ----- ATTACHMENTS: Memo to Land Useffransportation Committee dated March 4,2002- --------------- -------------- SUMMARYIBACKGROUND: This project on 288'" Street adds a second left-hand turn lane westbound and a left-hand turn lane eastbound; adds left-turn lanes at 18'" Avenue S; interconnect signals on S 288th Street at SR-99 with Military Road at S 304th Street, S 288'" Street, and Star Lake Road- The purpose of the project is to improve traffic flow and reduce accidents by eliminating conflicts- The project is approximately 30% designed- The total project estimated cost is $2,068,385. The total available funding is $2,068,955. The project was presented to the Land Useffransportation committee on March 4, 2002. -TY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: At its March 4, 2002 meeting, the Land Useffrausportation mmittee made the following reconunendations: Authorize staff to proceed with design of the South 288th Street at SR-99 Signal and Intersection Improvements Project. Return to the LUTC Committee at the 85% design completion stage for further reports and authorization. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move approval of authorizing staff to proceed with design of the South 288'" Street at SR-99 Signal and Intersection Improvements Project; and to return to the LUTC Committee at the 85% design completion stage for further reports and authorization. " --------------------------r-"'T--------------------- CITYMANAGERAPPROVAL:U-lAJ~ -f.o, D"'I11¡/ ~{-<l~ (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: 0 APPROVED 0 DENIED 0 TABLEDIDEFERREDINO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) COUNCIL BILL # 1 ST reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # klomn",m'gdb;U,12002" "8th" ",,99 30%_doc REVISED - 05/10/2001 DATE: March 4, 2002 SUBJECT: Eric Faison, Chair ~/ Land Use I Transportation Committee Marwan Salloum, Street Systems Manager David H. Mo+anager South 288th St. at SR99 Signal and Intersection Improvements- 30% design Status Report TO: FROM: VIA: BACKGROUND: This project on 288'h Street adds a second left-hand turn lane westbound and a left-hand turn lane eastbound; adds left-turn lanes at l8'h A yenue S; interconnect signals on S 288th Street at SR-99 with Military Road at S 304th Street, S 288'h Street, and Star Lake Road. The purpose of the project is to improve traffic flow and reduce accidents by eliminating conflicts. The following provides a brief synopsis of the progress on this project to date. Currently, the project design is approximately 30% complete, which includes the following completed tasks: The Topographical Surveys Right of Way plan NEPA and Biological Assessment submittals Project Design to 30% Ongoing Tasks Include: Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) Phase I NEPA and Biological Assessment Determination and Project Permitting Right of Way Requirements (Property Appraisals, Negotiation, and Acquisition) Project Design to 85% OVERHEAD UTILITIES CONVERSION All overhead utilities along S 288'h street between 16'h Ayenue S and 19'h Ave S will be converted into an underground system except for the Puget Sound Energy (PSE) electrical transmission system (115,000 yolts or larger). PROJECT ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES: Planning and Design Right of Way Acquisition Year 2003 Construction (estimate) 30% Construction Contingency Construction Management Underground Conversion (estimate) TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $140,000 525,685 868,000 260,700 124,000 150,000 $2,068,385 AVAILABLE FUNDING: Total Grant Funding $1,569,520 TlA $1,201,270, HES $300,000, WSDOT $68,250 Transfer in Street C1P Fund Mitigation Interest Earning 468,000 9,622 21,813 $2,068,955 TOTAL AVAILABLE BUDGET RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends placing the following item on the March 5, 2002 Council consent agenda: Authorize staff to proceed with design of the South 288th Street at SR-99 Signal and Intersection Improyements Project and return to the LUTC Committee at the 85% design completion stage for further reports and authorization. MS:dl cc: Project File Day File k:\lulc\2002\s288th street al sr99, 30%.doc MEETING DATE: March 19, 2002 ITEM# ~ ---- .------.--------.-.--.-------.---- CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: Support ofWRIA 9 ILA Efforts ------..----.---- CATEGORY: ~ CONSENT 0 RESOLUTION 0 CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS BUDGET IMPACT: 0 ORDINANCE 0 PUBLIC HEARING 0 OTHER Amount Budgeted: Expenditure Amt.: Contingency Req'd: $ $ $ -------.---.- ATTACHMENTS: Memo to the Land Use/Transportation Committee dated March 4, 2002. ----.------.--.--- SUMMARYIBACKGROUND: The City of Federal Way has been an active participant in long range plannillg efforts for Watershed Resource Inyentory Area (WRIA) No.9 (GreenlDuwamish and Central Puget Sound drainages) through two Inter Local Agreements (ILA). Currently, the City is participating under a Planning Agreement signed early in 2001 and amended in August of 200 I. In 1999 and 2000 the City participated in an ILA known as the Ecosystem Restoration Study (ERS)- The ERS agreement provided support for a Corps of Engineers project to idé'ntify current conditions in the watershed and potential restoration projects for future Corps funding. That ILA resulted in the creation of an extensive list of projects to be built in cooperation with participating jurisdictions within the watershed. Further, it created an 1)ortunity for these jurisdictions to pursue significant federal funding, up to $113,000,000. Congressional appropriation this funding is being negotiated at this time. Towards the end of the Ecosystem Restoration Study project, the City of Federal Way entered into the WRIA 9 ILA in order to participate in regional efforts for salmon habitat recoyery. This ILA has a goyeming body of elected officials from all jurisdictions within the watershed; Council member Faison is the City of Federal Way's representatiye. The ILA provides language within sections 2.2 and 2.3 whereby the Forum and members can pursue and provide funding for projects within the watershed termed to be of benefit to the eventual recovery of the listed species and oyerall habitat improyements for the same. Copies of the ILA Planning Agreement signed early last year; the first amendment; The WRIA 9 Forum Resolution No. 2001-2; Forum minutes for July 18th and November 14,2001; the current draft of the WRIA 9 Planning and Adyanced Planning (PED) cost shares; and a one page graplric description of the WRIA 9 Ecosystem Restoration description of the work in the GreenlDuwamish watershed and nearshore environment were attached reviewed at March 4, 2002 Land Use/Transportation Committee meeting. These were provided in hope of a better understanding of the foundation upon which Federal Way can provide financial support for the next phase (PED) of the ERS study. Examination of the attached cost share document reyeals that Federal Way's contribution towards the PED phase of work amounts to $18,000 spread oyer the next four years. This is broken down into incremental distributions based on planned leyels of effort for the engineering and design portions of the work. No funding is anticipated for construction of projects outside of the City's limits. Participation in these planning efforts is anticipated to hasten the eyentual remoyal of Chinook Salmon ITom the Endangered Species Listing. --.-----.--.-.-.-.-.-.---..-- - - -.--.-..- -------_._-----_._-----_._--------------_._._~_._---_.-------------------- CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: At its March 4, 2002 meeting, the Land Use/Transportation Committee made the following recommendations: Authorize the Surface Water Utility to expend funding in support of the Adyanced Planning phase (PED) ofthe Corps of Engineers study for habitat restoration efforts within the Green/Duwamish Watershed (WRIA no. 9). This funding will be taken ITom the unallocated fund balance within the Utility funding in accordance with the attached cost-sharing exhibit. If future funding allocations differ through shifting of projects by the Forum, this authorization will allow the Utility to cover such costs from unallocated funding provided the total expenditure of funds does not exceed the total of $18,000 shown on the attached. Expenditure of additional funding above this amount, $18,000, will require Council authorization. --...-......--......... . .------- .....---...-.-.-.-....--........... PROPOSED MOTION: "I moye authorization ofthe Surface Water Utility to expend funding in support of the Advanced Planning phase (FED) of the Corps of Engineers study for habitat restoration efforts within the GreenlDuwamish Watershed (WRIA No.9). The authorization will allow the Utility to coyer such costs from unallocated funding provided the total expenditure offunds does not exceed $18,000." ,... , ....----.---.-..... 'i-J--ervJlvt I'd- c.v j)"~1 d 'VI-"'! ("7 CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: 0 APPROVED 0 DENIED 0 TABLEDillEFERRED/NO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) COUNCIL BILL # 1ST reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # k'<ounoil'agdbm,I2002'aupport of wo. 9 iI. ,fTo",.do< REVISED - 05/1 0/200 1 ~~ ~~ERAL DATE: March 4, 2002 TO: SUBJECT: Eric Faison, Chair Land Use / Transportation Committee Paul A. Bucich, P.E., Surface Water Mana~ David H. MO~anager Support ofWRIA 9 ILA Efforts FROM: VIA: BACKGROUND The City of Federal Way has been an active participant in long range planning efforts for Watershed Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) No.9 (Green/Duwamish and Central PugetSound drainages) through two Inter Local Agreements (ILA). Currently, the City is participating under a Planning Agreement signed early in 200 I and amended in August of 200 I. In 1999 and 2000 the City participated in an ILA known as the Ecosystem Restoration Study (ERS). The ERS agreement provided support for a Corps of Engineers project to identify current conditions in the watershed and potential restoration projects for future Corps funding. That ILA resulted in the creation of an extensiye list of projects to be built in cooperation with participating jurisdictions within the watershed. Further, it created an opportunity for these jurisdictions to pursue significant federal funding, up to $113,000,000. Congressional appropriation of this funding is being negotiated at this time. Towards the end of the Ecosystem Restoration Study project, the City of Federal Way entered into the WRIA 9 ILA in order to participate in regional efforts for salmon habitat recovery. This !LA has a goyeming body of elected officials from all jurisdictions within the watershed; Council member Faison is the City of Federal Way's representatiye. The ILA provides language within sections 2.2 and 2.3 whereby the Forum and members can pursue and proyide funding for projects within the watershed termed to be of benefit to the eventual recoyery of the listed species and oyerall habitat improyements for the same. Attached please find copies of the lLA Planning Agreement signed early last year; the first amendment; The WRIA 9 Forum Resolution No. 2001-2; Forum minutes for July 18th and November 14, 2001; the current draft of the WRIA 9 Planning and Adyanced Planning (PED) cost shares; and a one page graphic description of the WRIA 9 Ecosystem Restoration description of the work in the Green/Duwamish watershed and nearshore environment. These are provided so that you may better understand the foundation upon which Federal Way can provide financial support for the next phase (PED) of the ERS study. Examination of the attached cost share document reveals that Federal Way's contribution towards the PED phase of work amounts to $18,000 spread over the next four years. This is broken down into incremental distributions based on planned levels of effort for the engineering and design portions ofthe work. No funding is anticipated for construction of projects outside of the City's limits. Participation in these planning efforts is anticipated to hasten the eyentual removal of Chinook Salmon from the Endangered Species Listing. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends placing the following item on the March 19th, 2002 Council consent agenda for approyal: Authorize the Surface Water Utility to expend funding in support of the Advanced Planning phase (PED) of the Corps of Engineers study for habitat restoration efforts within the Green/Duwamish Watershed (WRlA no. 9). This funding will be taken from the unallocated fund balance within the Utility funding in accordance with the attached cost-sharing exhibit. If future funding allocations differ through shifting of projects by the Forum, this authorization will allow the Utility to coyer such costs ITom unallocated funding proyided the total expenditure of funds does not exceed the total of $18,000 shown on the attached. Expenditure of additional funding aboye this amount, $18,000, will require Council authorization. PB:dl cc: Project File Day File k:\lutc\2002\ARIA 9 PED cost sharing.doc INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT For the Watershed Basins within Water Resource Inventory Area 9 PREAMBLE . THIS AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into pursuant to Chapter 39.34 RCW by and among the eligible county and city govemments signing this agreement that are located in King County, lying wholly or partially within the management area of Watershed Resource Inventory Area ("WRIA") 9, which indudes all or portions of the Green-Duwamish and Central Puget Sound forums, all political subdivisions of the State of Washington (collectiyely, for those signing this agreement, 'parties"). The parties share interests in and responsibnity for addressing long-term watershed planning and conservation for the watershed basins in WRIA 9 and wish to provide for planning, funding and implementation of various activities and projects therein. 1. MUTUAL COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this Agreement, the following terms shall haye the meaning provided for below: 1.1 ELIGIBLE JURISDICTIONS: The goyernments eligible for participation in this Agreement as parties are the County of King and the Cities and Towns of Algona, Aubum, Black Diamond, Burien, Covington, Des Moines, Enumctaw, Federal Way, Kent, Maple Valley, Normandy Part<, Renton, SeaTac, Seattle', and Tukwila. WRIA 9 FORUM: The WRIA 9 Fon:m created herein is the governing body responsible for implemer,ting this Agreement and is comprised of designated representatiYes of eligible jurisdictions who have authorized the execution of and become parties to this Agreement. WRIA 9 STEERING COMMITTEE: The WRIA 9 Steering Committee referred to herein is the cooperative representational body comprised of a balance of stakeholder representatiyes and any other persons who are deemed by the parties to this Agreement to be appropriate to the creation of WRIA-based Watershed Plans. WRIA-BASED WATERSHED PLANS: WRIA-based Watershed Plans as refeCTed to herein are those documents to be developed for WRIA 9 induding its sub-basins which recommend actions related to watershed protection, restoration and salmon 1_2 1_3 1.4 1.5 recovery. WRIA SUB-FORUMS: WRIA Sub-Forums as refeCTed to herein are those cooperative representational bodies currently meeting and working on issues, preparing plans and implementing projects within watersheds. These groups are comprised of elected offiCials from the general purpose governments located within the watershed. WRIA9 ItA 9-29 VERSION- 10/14/00 - 3:01 PM SERVICE PROVIDER: Service Provider, as used herein, means that agency, government, consultant or other entity which supplies staffing or other resources to and for the WRIA 9 Forum, in exchange for payment. The Service Provider may be a party to this Agreement. FISCAL AGENT: The Fiscal Agent refers to that agency or goyernment who. peliorms all accounting services for the WRIA 9 Forum, as it may require, in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 39.34 RCW- STAKEHOLDERS: Stakeholders refers to those public and priyate entities within the WRIA who reflect the diverse interests integral for planning for Íhe recoyery of the listed species under the Endangered Species Act, which may include but is not limited to enyironmental and business interests. PURPOSES. The purposes of this Agreement include the following: 2.1 To provide a mechanism and governance structure for the joint funding, development, review and approval of WRIA-Based Watershed Plans. Such plans shall include reconnaissance, assessment and analysis of conditions and recommendations for the WRIA Forum- It is understood that the maximum financial or resource obligation of any participating eligible jurisdiction under this Agreement shall be limited to its share of the cost of deyeloping the WRiA-Based Watershed Plans. To provide a mechanism for securing technical assistance and any ayailable funding 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2. 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2 , - MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE: Management Committee as referred to herein - consists of five (5) elected officials-or their designees which elected officials are chosen by the WRIA 9 Forum, according to the voting procedures in Section 5, charged with certain oversight and administrative duties on the WRlA 9 Forum's behalf. from state agencies or other sources- To provide a mechanism for the implementation of other habitat, water quality and flood projects with regional, state, federal and non-profit funds as may be contributed to the WRiA 9 Forum. To provide a framework for cooperation and coordination among the parties on issues relating to the WRIA or sub-WRIA planning or to meet the requirement ot a commitment by any party to participate in WRIA-based or watershed basin planning in response to any state or federal law which may require such participation as a condition of any funding, permitting or other program of state or federal agencies, at the discretion of such party to this Agreement. To develop and articulate WRIA-based positions on salmon habitat, conservation and funding to state and federal legislators. WRIA9 IlA 9-;>< VERSION- 10/14/00 - 3:01 PM 2_6 To provide for thè ongoing participation of citizens and other stakeholders ili such efforts "rod to ensure continued public outreach efforts' to educate and gamer support for current and future ESA efforts. . . 3. It is not the purpose or intent of this Agreement to create, supplant, preempt or supersede the authority or role of any individual jurisdiction or water quality policy bodies such as the Regional Water Quality Committee. EFFECTIVE DATE AND TERM. This Agreement shall become effective upon its execution by at least fiye (5) of the eligible jurisdictions within WRIA 9 representing at least seventy per cent (70%) of the affected population, as authorized by each jurisdiction's legislative body. Once effective, this Agreement shall remain in effect for an initial teon of five (5) years; proviöed, howeyer, that this Agreement may be extended for such additional teons as the parties may agree to in writing. ORGANIZATION AND NATURE OF WRIA 9 FORUM- The parties to this Agreement hereby establish a goyeming body for WRIA 9 and the Green-Duwamish watershed basin and associated Puget Sound drainages (hereinafter the "WRIA 9 Forum" the precise boundaries of which are established in Chapter 173-500 WAC, or as deteonined by the WRIA Forum) to serve as the foonal goyemance structure for canying out the purposes of this Agreement. Each party to this agreement shall appoint one (1) elected official to serve as its representative on the WRIA 9 Forum. The WRIA 9 Forum is a voluntary association of \Pe county and city goyemments located wholly or partially within the management area of WRIA 9 and the Green-Duwamish watershed basin and associated Puget Sound drainages who . choose to be parties to thisAgreement. 4_1 Upon the effective execution of this agreement and the appointment of representatiyes to the WRIA 9 Forum, the WRIA 9 Forum shall meet 'and choose from among its members, according to the provisions of Section 5, five (5) elected officials or their designees, to serve as a Management Committee to oversee and direct the funds and personnel contributed under this Agreement, in accordanœ with the adopted annual budget and such other directions as may be provided by the WRiA 9 Forum. Representatives of the Fiscal Agent and SetVice Provider may serve as non-yoting ex officio members thereof. The Management Committee shall act as an executive subcommittee of the WRiA 9 Forum, responsible for oversight 4. and evaluation of any SetVice Providers or consultants, administtation of the budget, and for providing recommendations on administrative matters to the WRIA 9 Forum for action, consistent with other subsections of this section.. 4.1.1 it is contemplated that services to the WRIA 9 Forum and WRIA 9 Steering Committee for the year 2001 shall be provided by SctVice Provider, King County Department of Natural Resources. The Management Committee 3 WRIA9 (LA 9.29 VERS[ON- 10/[4/00 - 3:01 PM 4.2 'I 4.1.2 shall prepare a Memarandum af Understanding to. be executed with the SetVice Provider, to. be approved by the WRIA 9 Forum, which shall set out the expectatians far services so. provided. Services shauld include, withaut limitatian, identificatian af and jab descriptians far dedicated staff in increments no. smaller than.S FTE, descriptian af any supervisary role retained by the SetVice Pravider aver any staff perfarming services under this Agreement, and a methad af regular consultatian between the SetVice Provider and the Management Committee cancerning the perfarmance af services hereunder. Upan the effective executian af this Agreement, and the selectian af the Management Cammittee, the Management Cammittee shall reyiew existing work products and plans and make recommendatians to. the entire WRIA 9 Forum far actian, including initiat decisians related to. wark program, staffing and service agreements, and budget and financial aperatians, for the year 20"01- All duties of the Management Committee shall be established by the WRIA 9 Forum- The WRIA 9 Forum shall haye the autharity to. establish and adapt the fallawing: 4.2.1 The WRIA 9 Steering Cammittee shall develap and propase far consideratian, amendment and ad aptian by the WRIA 9 Forum, a scope af wark far development af WRIA-based Watershed Plans, including planning priarities far each year af this Agreement, and perfarmance review af wark under this Agreement. The scope af wark may provide far certain tasks ar processes to. be the respansibility af the WRIA Sub-Forums. The scope af wark shall specifically identify the level af staff suppart to. be provided to. the WRIA Sub-Forums in furtherance af thPjr agreed upon tasks ar processes. 4.2.2- The WRIA.9 Forum shall by September 1 af each year, establish and approve an annual budget, establishing the level af funding and tatal resaurce abligatians af the parties which are to. be allocated an a propartianal basis based an the average af the papulatian, assessed valuatian and area attributable to. each party to. the Agreement, in accordance with the farmula set forth in Exhibit A. which farmula shall be updated annually by the WRIA 9 4.2.3 Forum, as mare current data becomes ayailable. The WRIA 9 Forum shall review and evaluate annually the duties to. be assigned to. the Management Committee hereunder and the perfarmance af the fiscal agent and SetVice Providet{s) to. this Agreement, and shall provide for whatever actians are necessary it deems appropriate to. ensure that quality services are efficiently, effectively and respansibly delivered in the WRlA9 ILA 9-29 VERSION- 10/14/00 - 3:01 PM The WRIA 9 Forum may contract with similar watershed forum goveming bodies or any other entities for any lawful purpose related hereto. The parties may choose to create a separate legal or administrative entity under applicable state law, inclUding without limitation a nonprofit corporation or general partnership, to accept private gifts, grants or financial co'1tributions, or for any other lawful purposes. The WRIA 9 Forum shall adopt other rules and procedures that are consistent with its purposes as stated herein and are necessary for its operation. VOTlNG- The WRIA 9 Forum shall make decisions, approye scope of work, budget. priorities and any other actions necessary to carry out the purpGses of this Agreement as ,follows: 5.1 Decisions shall be made using a consen~us model as mucP as possible. Each party agrees to use its best efforts and ex~se good faith in conse:1SUS decision-making- Consensus may be reached by un~imous agreement of the parties, or by a majority recommendation with a minority report. Any party who does not accept ,a majority decision may request weighted voting as set forth below- tn the event consensus cannot be achieyed, as determined by rules and procedures adopted by the WRIA 9 F-orum, the WRIA 9 Forum shall take action on a dual- majority basis, as follows: 5.2.1 Each party, through its appointed representative, may cast its weighted vote in connection with a proposed WP.lA 9 Forum action. 5.2.2 The weighted vote of each party in relation to the weighted votes of each of the other parties shall be determined by the percentage of the annual contribution by each party set in accordance with Subsection 4.2.2 in the year in which the vote is taken. For any action subject to weighted voting to be deemed approved, an affirmative vote must be cast by both a majority of the parties to this Agreement and by a majority of the weighted votes of the parties to this Agreement. No action shall be valid and binding on the parties to this 4.3 4.4 5. 5.2 5 4.2.4 performance of the purposes of this Agreement. In evaluating the performance of any Servke Provider, at least every two'years. the WRIA 9 Forum shall retain an outside consultant to perform a professional, assessment of the work and services so pròvided. The WRIA 9 Forum shall oversee and administer the expenditure of budgeted funds and shall allocate the utilization of resources contributed by each party or obtained from other sources in accordance with an annual prioritized list of planning activities within the WRIA during each year of this Agreement. 5.2.3 Agreemenl until it shall receive majority votes of both the total number of WRIA 9 ILA 9.29 VERStON- 1O/14{00 - 3:01 PM 6. parties to the Agreement and of the members representing a majority of the annual budget contribution for the year in which the vote is taken. A vote of abstention shall be recorded as a "no" vote. CREATION, APPROVAL AND RATIFICATION OF WRIA-BASED WATERSHED PLANS. WRIA-based Watershed Plans shall be developed, drafted and recommended by the WRIA 9 Steering Committee, approved by the WRIA 9 Forum and subject to ralification by the legislative bodies of the parties to this Agreement, consistent with the following: 6.1 The WRIA 9 Forum shall appoint a WRIA 9 Steering Committee, comprised of a balance of stakeholder representatives and any other persons who are deemed by the parties to this Agreement to be appropriate to the creation of WRIA-based Watershed Plans. It is intended that representatives of local general purpose governments will continue to participate on the WRtA 9 Steering Committee. The WRIA 9 Steering Committee shall be responsible for the deyelopment and recommendation of WRIA-based Watershed Plans consistent with the purposes of this Agreement and shall act as an advisocy body to the WRIA 9 Forum. Changes in the membership or composition of the WRIA 9 Steering Committee shall be made pursuant to the yoting procedures in Section 5. The WRIA 9 Forum shall establish procedures for naming and replacing representatives on the WRIA 9 Steering Committee- 6_2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6 The WRI(1. 9 Forum shall act to approve or remand any finallong-tenn WRIA-based Watershed Plan prepared and recommended by the WRIA 9 Steering Committee within ninety (90) days of receipt of the final plan, according to the voting procedures described in Section 5. In the event that any plan is not so approved, it shall be returned to the WRIA 9 Steering Committee for further consideration and amendment and theredter returned to the WRIA 9 Forum for decision. After approval of the plan by the WRIA 9 Forum, the plan shall be referred to the parties to this Agreement for ratification prior to the plan's submission to any federal or state agency for further action- Ratification means an affirmative action, evidenced by a resolution or ordinance of the jurisdiction's legislative body, by at least five jurisdictions within WRIA 9 representing at least seventy per cent (70%) of the total population of WRIA 9. Upon ratification, the WRIA 9 Forum shall transmit the WRIA- based Watershed Plan to any state or federal agency as may be required for further action. In the event that either any state or federal agency to which such plans are submitted shall remand any such plan for further consideration, the plan shall be remanded to WRIA9 ItA 9-29 VERSION- 10/14/00 - J:OI PM 6.6 7. the WRIA 9 Forum for consideratioll, which may include fur:\her refenatto the WRIA 9 Steering Committee for recommendatiòn on amendments thereto- The parties agree that no. WRiA-based Watershed Plan developed and funded pursuant to this Agreement shall be forwarded separately by any of them 10 any state or federal agency unless it has been approved and ratified .as provided herein. 7.1 OBLIGATIONS OF PARTIES: BUDGET: FISCAL AGENT: RULES. 7.2 7_3 8. 7 Each party shall be responsible for meeting its financial obligations hereunder as established in the annual budget adopted by the WRIA 9 Forum under this 7.4 Agreement, including all such obligations related to WRlA 9 Forum and WRlA 9 Steering Committee funding, technical support, and participation in related plánning projects and activities as set forth herein. 1\ is anticipated that separate actions by the legislative bodies of the parties will be necessary from time to time in order to carry out these obligations. The maximum funding responsibilities imposed upon the parties during the first year of this Agreement shall not exceed the amounts set forth in t:xhibit A, which shall be updated annually as described in Section 4.2.2. No later than September 1 of each year of this Agreement, the WRfA 9 Forum shall adopt a budget, including its overhead and administrative costs, for the following calendar year. The budget shall propose the level of funding and other (e.g. staffing) responsibilities of the individual parties for the following calendar year and shall propose the leyels of funding and resources to be allocated to specific prioritized planning activities within the WRIA. The parties shall thereafter take whatever separate legislatiye or other actions that may be necessary to timely address such indiYidual responsibilities under the proposed budget, and shall haye done so no later than December 1st of each such year. Funds collected from the parties or other sources on behalf of the WRIA 9 Forum shall be maintained in a special fund by King County as fiscal agent and as ex officio treasurer on behalf of the WRlA 9 Forum pursuant to rules and procedures established and agreed to by the WRIA 9 Forum- Such rules and procedures shall set out billing practices and collection procedures and any other procedures as may be necessary to provide for its efficient administration and operation. Any party to this Agreement may inspect and review all records maintained in connection with such fund at any reasonable time. LATECOMERS. A county or city government in King County lying wholly or partially within the management area of WRIA 9 and the Green-Ouwamish watershed basin and adjacent Puget Sound drainages which has not become a party to this Agreement within twelve (12) months of Ihe effective date of this Agreement may become a party only wilh the written WRIA9 (LA 9.29 VERSION. 10{14{00 - 3:01 PM g. 10. consent of all the parties. The provisions of Section 5 otherwise goyeming decisions cr' r-c, WRlA 9 Forum shall not apply to Section 8. The parties and the county or city seekinç 1: become a party shall jointly determine the terms and conditions under which the coun~. O'::C- may become a party. These terms and conditions shall include payment by such courr, :,' city to the parties of the amount determined jointly by the parties and the county or city 1: represent such county or city's fair and proportionate share of all costs associated with activities undertaken by the WRIA 9 Forum and the parties on its behalf as of the date r~ county or city becomes a party. Any county or city that becomes a party pursuant to th:3 section shall thereby assume the general rights and responsibilities of all other parties ,= :-':õ Agreement. TERMINATION This Agreement may be terminated by any party, as to that party only. u:.:r sixty (60) days' written notice to the other parties. The terminating party shall remain fut'., responsible for meeting all of its funding and other obligations through the end of the cae-,::ç¡- year in which such notice is given, together with any other costs that may have been incJ"""".~= on behalf of such terminating party up to the effective date of such termination. This Agreement may be terminated at any time by the written agreement of all parties. tt is expected that the makeup of the parties to this Agreement may change from time to tirr.E. Regardless of any such changes, the parties choosing not to exercise the right of termin,,-;.:. shall each remain obligated to meet its respective share of the obligations of the WRIA Ð Forum as reflected in the annual budget. HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNIFICATION. To the extent permitted by state law,an;:! fJ the limited purpöses set forth in this agreement, each party shall protect, defend, hold harmless and indemnify the other parties, their officers, elected officials, agents and employees, while acting within the scope of their employment as such, from and again",- a-:-: and all claims (including demands, suits, penalties, liabilities, damages, costs, expenses. O' losses of any kind or nature whatsoever) arising out of or in any way resulting from sue-. party's own negligent acts or omissions related to such party's participation and obligatio:-:s under this agreement. Each party agrees that its obligations under this subsection exte-o: := any claim, demand and/or cause of action brought by or on behalf of any of its employees ':0 agents. For this purpose, each party, by mutual negotiation, hereby waives, with respe::c <: the other parties only, any immunity that would otherwise be available against such cI""",s under the industrial insurance act provisions of Title 51 RCW. The provisions of this subsection Ghall survive and continue to be applicable to parties exercising the right of termination pursuant to Section g. 11. NO ASSUMPTION OF LIABILITY. In no event do the parties to this Agreement intend -,: assume any responsibility, risk or liability of any other party to this Agreement or otherw':3~ with regard to any party's duties, responsibilities or liabilities under the Endangered Sp~~>-?~ 8 WRIA 9 lLA9.Z9I1ERSI0N.1O/14/00-3:01 =- 12. Act, or any other act. statute or regulation of any local municipality or govemment, the State of Washington or the United States. VOLUNTARY AGREEMENT. This is a yoluntary agreement and.it is acknowledged and agreed that, in entering into this Agreement, no party is committing to adopt or implement any actions or recommendations that may be contained in a WRIA-based Watershed Plan 13. developed pursuant to this Agreement. NO PRECLUSION OF ACTIVITIES OR PROJECTS. Nothing herein shall prectude anyone or more of the parties to this Agreement from choosing or agreeing to fund or implement any work, activities or projects associated with any of the purposes hereunder by separate agreement or action, provided that any such decision or agreement shall not impose any funding, participation or other obligation of any kind on any party to this Agreement which is not a party to such decision or agreement. 14. NO THIRD PARTY RIGHTS. Nothing contained in this Agreement is intended to, nor shall it be construed to, create any rights in any third party, including without limitation.the WRlA 9 Steering Committee, NMFS, USFWS, any agency or department of the United States, or the State of Washington, or to form the basis for any liability on the part of the WRIA 9 Forum or any of the parties, or their officers, elected officials, agents and employees, to any third party. AMENDMENTS- This Agreement may be amended, altered or clarified only by the unanimous consent of the parties to this Agreement, represented by affirmative action by their legislative bodies- COUNTERPARTS- This Agreement may be executed in counterparts. APPROVAL BY PARTIES' GOVERNING BODIES. This Agreement has been approyed for 15. 16- 17. execution by appropriate action of each party's goyerning body. .INWITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto haye executed this Agreement on the dates indicated below: A;1proved as to form: By: Title: Date: 9 (k/!ß ~ j/ H~¡I/~~ . /~/ ~¡J() KING COUNTY ",ç¿; ~ "~ Title: 7:d,p~ [r/).~ú 5/2) Þ I Date: WRIA 9 ILA 9.29 VERSION. 10/14/00,3:01 PM ExhIbIt A RegIonal Watershed FundIng WRJA Based Cost-share: WRJA 9 Only Yote: Does not include watershed assessment technical work TOTAL: $433,000 Average of Asses'sed Value IAVI Pop I AV I WRIA 09 PoDulation (POD) Area Area WRIA09 <Ine ('.0 Portion Kine Co Portion 1 Algona 0.1% $367 0.1% $415 0.1% $390 0.1% $391 1 Algona 2 Aubum 4.4% $19,074 6.0% $25,829 4.0% $17,243 4.8% $20,715 2 Aubum 3 Black Diamond 0.7% $3,Q63 0.7% $3,167 1.9% $8,333 1.1% $4,854 3 Black Diamond 4 Burlen 5.5% $23,839 4.8% $20,912 2.3% $10,110 4.2% $18,287 4 Bu~en' 5 Covln9ton 2.4% $10,418 1.9% $8,275 1.8% $7,589 2.0% $6,761 5 Covington 6 Des Moines 5.0% $21,749 3.6% $15,440 2.0% $8,835 3.5% $15,341 6 Des Moines 7 Enumclaw 1.2% $5,362 0.8% $3,478 0.8% $3,264 0.9% $4,035 7 Enumclaw 8 Federal Way 3.0% $13,152 2.7% $11,574 1.4% $6,273 2.4% $10,333 8 Federal Way 9 Kent 13.3% $57,487 15.4% $66,691 8.9% $38,452 12.5% $54,210 9 Kent 10 King County 22.5% $97,551 20.0% $86,726 59.0% $255,652 33.9% $146,643 10 King County 11 Maple Valley 1.8% $7,671 1.7% $7,513 1.4% $5,910 1.6% $7,031 11 MapleValley 12 Normandy Pari< 1.3% $5,633 1.6% $6,972 0.8% $3,467 1.2% $5,357 12 Normandy Pari< 13 Renton 3.4% $14,663 4.0% $17,331 2.0% $8,662 3.1% $13.552 13 Renton 14 Sea.Tac 4.4% $18,874 6.5% $28,051 3.2% $13,993 4,7% $20.306 14 Sea-Tac 15 Seattle 28.2% $122,243 23.6% $102,259 7.5% $32,527 19.8% $8M76 15 Seattle 16 Tukwila 2.7% $11,856 6.6% $28,366 2.8% $12,301 4.0% $17,507 16 Tukwlla Sub-Total $433,000 King Co. Sub- Tota! 100.0% $433,000 TOTAL ~OTE: King County land area excludes the Upper Green River basin. FIRST AMENDMENT TO THEINTERLOCAL AGREEMENT For the Watershed Basins within Water Resource Inventory Area 9 This First Amendment to the Interlocal Agreef11ent for the Watershed Basins within Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 9, which was entered into by the County of King and the Cities and Towns of Algona, Aubum, Burien, Covington, Des Moines, Enumclaw, Federal Way, Kent, Maple Valley, Nònnandy Park, Renton, SeaTac, Seattle, and Tukwila ("Agreement'), amends the tenns of the Agreement to provide for changes as desired by the parties to the Agreement, that include: 1) to allow for the addition of the City of Tacoma, which has a major interest in WRIA 9, as a party to the Agreement; 2) to change the number of members of the WRIA 9 Forum Management Committee from five to seven members; 3) to allow for each party to name, as an altemate to its named elected official, a senior staff member or other elected official as its representative to the WRIA 9 Forum; 4) to provide for an additional financial contribution to be made by King County to account for the addition of Vashon/Maury Islands to the WRIA 9 Forum activities and planning efforts. This RrstAmendment is effective upon execution by all of the parties to the Agreement and may be executed in counterparts- The Agreement is hereby amended by substituting the text provided below for eaclí of the identified sections (underlining of text indicates a textual change, and is not to be considered as part of the amended text): 1. The Preamble to the Agreement is amended to read as follows: This agreement ("Agreement") is entered into pursuant to Chapter 39_34 RCW by and among the eligible county and city govemments signing this agreement that are located in King County Q!: Pierce County and lie wholly or partially within or have a major interest in the management area of Watershed Resource Inventory Area (.WRW) 9, which includes all or portions of the Green- Duwamish and Central Puget Sound forums, all political subdivisions of the State of Washington (collectively, for those signing this agreemen~ 'parties.). The parties share interests in and responsibility for addressing Iong-tenn watershed planning and COIlselVation for the watershed basins in WRIA 9 and wish to provide for plàlming, funding and implementation of various activities and projects therein. 2. Section 1.1 is amended to read as follows: ELIGIBLE COUNTY AND CITY GOVERNMENTS: The govemments eligible for participation in this Agreement as parties are the County of King, and the Cities of Algona, Aubum, Black Diamond, Burien, Covington, Des Moines, Enumclaw, Federal Way, Kent, Maple Valley, Nonnandy Park, Renton, SeaTac. Seattle, Tacoma and Tukwila. ' 3. Section 1.6 is amended to read as follows: MANAGEMENT COMMITIEE: Management Committee as refelTed to herein consists of seven ill elected officials or their designees which elected officials are chosen by the WRIA 9 Forum, according to the voting procedures in Section 5, charged with certain oversight and administrative duties on the WRIA 9 Forum's behalf. 7111014:17 PM 4, Section 4 is amended to read as follows: . ORGANIZATION AND NATURE OF WRlA 9 FORUM, The parties to this Agreemenfhereby establish a goveming body for WRIA 9 and the Green-Duwamish watershed basin and associated Puget Sound drainages (hereinafter the 'WRIA 9 Forum: the precise boundaries of which are established in Chapter 173-500 WAC, or as determined by the WRIA Forum) to serve as the formal govemance structure for canying out the purposes of this Agreement. Each party to the agreement shall appoint one (1) elected official to serve as its representative on the WRIA 9 Forum. The parties shall also appoint an alternate representative who may be a different elected official or senior staff person. The WRIA 9 Forum is a voluntary association of the county and city govemments located wholly or partially within the management area of or havinq a major interest in WRIA 9 and the Green-Duwamish watershed basin and associated Puget Sound drainages who choose to be parties to this Agreement. 5. Section 4,1 is amended to read as follows: Upon the effective execution of this agreement and the appointment of representatives to the WRIA 9 Forum, the WRIA 9 Forum shall meet and choose from among its members, according to the provisions of Section 5, seven m elected officials or their designees, to serve as a Management Committee to oversee and direct the funds and personnel contributed under this Agreement, in accordance with the adopted annual budget and such other directions as may be provided by the WRIA 9 Forum, Representatives of the Fiscal Agent and Service Provider may serve as non-voting ex officio members thereof. The Management Committee shall act as an executive subcommittee of the WRIA 9 Forum, responsible for oyersight and evaluation of any Service Providers or consultants, administration of the budget, and for providing recommendations on administrative matters to the WRIA !I Forum for action, consistent with other subsections of this section. 6, Section 4.2.2 is amended to read as follows: The WRIA 9 Forum shall by September 1 of each year establish and approye an annual budget establishing the level of funding and total resource obligations of the parties which are to be allocated on a proportional basis based on the average of the population, assessed valuation and area attributable to each party to the Agreement, in accordance with the formula set forth in Exhibit A-1, which formula shall be updated annually by the WRIA 9 Forum as more current data becomes available, Tacoma's cost share will be determined on an annual basis by the parties and will be documented on the annual updates to Exhibit A-1- The weiqht accorded Tacoma's vote for weiqhted votinq pursuant to Aqreement section 5 shall correspOnd to Tacoma's cost share for each year relative to the cost shares contributed by the other parties, 7, Section 6.4 is amended to read as follows: After approval of the plan by the WRIA 9 Forum, the plan shall be referred to the parties to this Agreement for ratification prior to the plan's submission to any fedéral or state agency for further action. Ratification means an affirmative action, evidenced by a resolution or ordinance of the jurisdiction's legislative body, by at least five jurisdictions representing at least seventy percent (70%) of the total population within the qeoqraphic area of WRIA 9 as defined in Chapter 173-500 WAC, Upon ratification, the WRIA 9 Forum shall transmit the WRIA-based Watershed Plan !o any state or federal agency as may be required for further action. 7/Z/OI 4:17 PM 8. Section 7_2 is amended to read as follows: The maximum funding responsibilities imposed upon the parties during the first year of this Agreement shall not exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit A-1, which shall be updated annually as desclibed in Section 4.2.2. . 9. Section 8 is amended to read as follows: A county or city government in King County lying wholly or partially within the management area of or with a major interest in WRIA 9 and the Green-Ouwamish watershed basin and adjacent Puget Sound drainage which has not become a party to this Agreement within twelve (12) months of the effective date of this Agreement may become a party only with the written consent of all the parties. The provisions of Section 5 otherwise governing decisions of the WRIA 9 Forum shall not apply to Section 8. The parties and the county or city seeking to become a party shall jointly determine the terms and conditions under which the county or city may become a party. These terms and conditions shall include payment by such county or city to the parties of the amount determined jointly by the parties and the county or city to represent such county or city's fair and proportionate share of all costs associated with activities undertaken by the WRIA 9 Forum and the parties on its behalf as of the date the county or city becomes a party. Any county or city that becomes a party pursuant to this section shall thereby assume the general rights and responsibilities of all other parties to this Agreement. 10. ExhibitA-1;attached to this First Amendment, is hereby substituted for Exhibit A to the Agreement, and is incorporated therein and made a part thereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this First Amendment is executed by the entities so signing on the dates indicated below: ApprjVed as to form~) II BY:~'\c.,<... S. ~ Title: Q......~'t' ~ TOWN OF ALGONA BY:~ Title: mA l/o'€ Date:ÛJ.Ja, vAt ;, .2..00 \ . Date: ~ <:;/ 1.I!?P / ApproYed as to form: CITY OF AUBURN By: By: Title: Title: Date: Date: 7/ll01 4:17 PM 8. Section 7.2 is'amended to read as follows: The maximum funding responsibilities imposed upon the parties during the first year of this. Agreement shall not exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit A-1 , which shall be updated annually. as described in Section 4.2.2. 9. Section 8 is amended to read as follows: . A county or city government in King County lying wholly or partially within the management area of or with a major interest in WRIA 9 and the Green-Duwamish watershed basin and adjacent Puget Sound drainage which has not become a party to this Agreement within twelve (12) months of the effective date of this Agreement may become a party only with the written consent of all the parties. The provisions of Section 5 otherwise governing decisions of the WRIA 9 Forum shall not apply to Section 8. The parties and the county or city seeking to become a party shall jointly determine the terms and conditions under which the county or city may become a party. These terms and' conditions shall include payment by such county or city to the parties of the amount deteonined jointly by the parties and the county or city to represent such county or city's fair and proportionate share of all costs associated with actiyities undertaken by the WRIA 9 Forum and the parties on its behalf as of the date the county or city becomes a party. Any county or city that becomes a party pursuant to this section shall tliereby assume the general rights and responsibilities of all other parties to this Agreement. 10. Exhibit A-1, attached to this First Amendment, is hereby substituted for Exhibit A to the Agreement, and is incorporated therein and made a part thereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this First Amendment is executed by the entities so signing on the dates indicated below: Approved as to foon: TOWN OF ALGONA By: By: Title: Title: Date: Date: ~~ Title: ~ ~ ~ Date~(>{O( CITY O~ AUBU~N - '" ,n BY:~ Title: Mayor Date: August 6, 2001 7t7JOI 4:17 PM Approved as 10 Conn: CITY OF BlACK DIAMOND' By: By: Title: Tille: Dale: Date: Approved as 10 lonn: '.J) By: -,/ ~..--/":/t ---.--..... CITY °ÃRIEN By: / ~ f ¿~ Title: (,fry m~ Date: 'ð~/(J-OI Title: ,lIT"': /\ï(:"o \~l'-Y Date: Cf//1-h1\ Approved as 10 Conn: CITY OF COVINGTON By: By: Title: Title: Dale: Dale: Approved as 10 Conn: CITY OF DES MOINES By: By: Title: Title: Dale: Dale: Approved as 10 Conn: CITY OF ENUMCIAW By: By: Title: Title: Dale: Dale: 7/])014:17 PM Approved as to loon: CITY OF BLACK DIAMOND By: By: Title: Title: Date: Date: Approved as to form: CITY OF BURIEN By: By: Title: Title: Date: Date: ~'ï ::zz:z VA Title: t~ .;t¿t ~ ¡J ~ Date:~'$ £f¡/O I :~ Title: ~ Ü¡ Date: 7 hi (0/ I Approved as to loon: CITY OF DES MOINES By: By: Title: Title: Date: Date: Approved as to loon: CITY OF ENUMCLAW By: By: --- Title: Title: Date: Date: 7/]}O14:17 PM Approved as to 101m: . By: Title: Date: Approved as to form: By: Title: Date: Approved as to form: By: Tille: Date: Approved as 10 form: By: Title: Dale: Approved as to form: By: Title: Date: 7mOl 4:17 PM CITY OF BLACK DIAMOND By: Title: Date: CITY OF BURIEN By: Title: Date: CITY OF COVINGTON By: Title: Date: CITY OF DES MOINES By: ~~ ~~"--- Title: C<"'::~ ~~" <--so. <;> or - \ Dale: \.<...:)- ~-=\ CITY OF ENUM'::;LAW By: Title: Date: 4 Approved as to Conn: By: Title: Dale: Approved as to Conn: By: Title: Dale: Approved as to Conn: By: Title: Date: Approved as to Conn: By: Title: Date: :j)JJ~ Title: ~..~ :),/11)01 Date: 7/11014:17 PM CITY OF BLACK DIAMOND By: Title: Date: CITY OF BURIEN By: Title: Date: CITY OF COVINGTON By: Title: Date: CITY OF DES MOINES By: Title: Date: CI~~ By. ~ TItI,.~ Date: , I: { 4 Approved as tQ tonn: BY:{-~~I-.J.hv Db. rJ( Title: ¿1-<1 þn,-,..,.., ì f?18i rn , Date: Approved as to tonn: By: Title: Date: Approved as to tonn: By: Title: Date: ApproYed as to tonn: By: Title: Date: Approved as to tonn: By: Title: Date: 7fliOl 4:17 PM Date: CllY OF KENT By: Tille: Date: KING COUNlY By: Tille: Date: - CllY OF MAPLE VALLEY By: Title: Date: CllY OF NORMANDY PARK By: Tille: Date: s ApproYed as t<;> loan: By: CI1Y OFFEDERA,L WAY. By: Title: Title: Date: Date: Approved as to loan: By:~ ~ ~~ -roM. e.tlú~ Title: pG\1T'( Cli'/ krr"f. Date: qfvrlo I By: Title: Date: 9-¿;J.¥-ð/ / Approved as to loan: KING COUN1Y By: By: Title: Title: Date: Date: Approved as to loan: CI1Y OF MAPLE VALLEY By: By:- Title: Title: Date: Date: ApproYed as to loan: By: CI1Y OF NORMANDY PARK By: Title: Title: Date: Date: 7121014:17 PM _Approved as to fO!TTl: By: Title: Date: Approved as to form: By: Title: Date: - Approved as to form: Br, ~A b¿ß- Title:t!j)¡74 ~ - ~ Date: Þ /;;¡ð. !ó/ I I Approved as to loon: By: Tille: Date: ApproYed as to foon: By: Title: Date: 7f2101 4:17 PM CI1YOFFEDEffiAlWAY - By: Title:- Date: CI1Y OF KENT Br, TrtJe: Date: KING COUNTY BY:~~ Title: Date: /(1)A.;-/o/ CI1Y OF MAPLE- VALLEY Br, TrtJe: Date: CI1Y OF NORMN.NDY PARK Br, Title: Date: 6 Approved as t<;> form: By: Title: Date: Approved as to form: By: Title: Date: Approved ?s to form: By: Title: Date: Approved as to form: By: Title: Date: Approved as to form: By: Title: Date: 7/2JOt 4:17 PM CITY OF FEDERAL WAY By: Title: Date: ;;-.' CITY OF KENT By: Title: Date:- KING COUNTY By: Title: Uate: . B' Date: ~ CITY OF NORMANDY PARK 5 By: Title: Date: Approved as 19 form: .<..,., . By: Tille: Date: Approved as to form: By: TItle: Date: . Approved as to form: By: TItle: Date: Approved as 10 form: By: TItle: Date: Approved as to form: By: Title: Date: 7nJOl 4:17 PM CITY OF FEDERAL WAY By: "-'. '-"""'. .- <,,' "'. .'. Title: Date: CITY OF KENT By: Title: Date: KING COUNTY By: Title: Date: CITY OF MAPLE VALLEY By: Tille: Date: affO~ Ü ~. ~ Title:~ V\ÆtJMf} Q {J-\ Date: ~ ~.p~ l }(A;Ld) I 5 ~edaSloform: - - -- -- :~.~~ Title: City Attorney Dale: August 17, 2001 Approved as 10 form: By: Tille: Dale: Approved as 10 form: By: Tille: Dàte: Approved as to form: By: Title: Date: Approved as to form: By: Tille: Dale: 7r1JOI 4:17 PM ENTON - - ;;1' ~ By: - Title: Mayor Dale: August 20.2001 CITY OF SEATAC By: Title: Dale: CITY OF SEA TILE By: Title: Date: CITY OF TACOMA By: Tille: Dale: CITY OF TUKWILA By: Title: Date: 6 Approved <Js to loon: . By: Title: Date: Approved as to loon: BC &:;, ~ r/~. J1J ') TItle: L(-r~ A-r""'-"'í'.fJ6-., Date: 7/"7/ú{ / / Approved as to loon: By: TItle: Date: Approved as to loon: By: TItle: Date: Approved as to loon: By: TItle: Date: 711JO[ 4;[7 PM CITY OF R{:NTON . By: TItle: Date: CITYOFSEATAC By: Title: Date: h'~ Æ"u , Î C/7 ¡Jz~ t¿ )7- /0/ / / I CITY OF SEATTLE By: Title: Date: CITY OF TACOMA By: TItle: Date: CITY OF TUKWIUè By: Title: Date: 6 Approved as 10 form: By: Title: Date: Approved as to form: By: Title: Dale: Approved as 10 form: By: TItle: Dale: Approved as 10 form: By: Tille: Dale: Approved as 10 form: By: Tille: Date: 717JOI 4:17 PM CITY OF RENTON. By: Title: Dale: CITY OF SEATAC By: Title: Dale: CITY OF SEA TILE . .s~~ BY:pu DiGVl6-- ~",Ie Title: 4!LÅ7~ £I/~_k SII Dale:~ 1;).&«/1 CITY OF TACOMA By: Tille: Date: CITY OF TUKWILA By: Title: . Date: 6 Approved as to form: By: Tille: Date: Approved as to form: By: Title: Date: Approved as to form: By: Title: Date: Approved as to form: By: Title: Date: Approved as to form: BY:~ Title:' f J fl¡ /h7-zJa~ Date: f1h 7/VOI 4:17 PM CITY OF RENTON . By: Tille: Date: CITY OF SEATAC By: Title: Date: CITY OF SEATTLE By: TItle: Date: CITY OF TACOMA By: Title: Date: CITY OF TUKWILA BY~ S~~-.) MM.ÆW- Title: N\Hr'1°Q oate:~ 6 ExhIbIt A.1. (Jsqe one RegIonal Watershed Funding 2001 WRIA 9 Cost Shares (see Exhibit A.1, page two for weighted voting percentages) Note: Does not include wetershed assessment tachnlcal work Average of Pop I AV I WRIA 09 Population (Pop) Assessed Value (AY) Area Area WRIA 09 1 Algona 0.1% $367 0.1% $415 0.1% $390 0.1% $391 1 Algona 2 Aubum 4.4% $19,074 6,0% $25,829 4.0% $17,243 4.8% $20,715 2 Aubuin I 3 Black Diamond 0.7% $3,063 0.7% $3,167 1,9% $8,333 1.1% $4,854 3 Black Diamond 4 Burien 5.5% $23,839 4,8% $20,912 2.3% $10,110 4.2% $18,287 4 Burien 5 Covington 2.4% $10,418 1.9% $8,275 1.8% $7,589 2.0% $8,761 5 Covington 6 Des Moines 5.0% $21,749 3.6% $15,440 2.0% $8,835 3.5% $15,341 6 Des Moines 7 Enumclaw 1.2% $5,362 0.8% $3,478 0.8% $3,264 0.9% $4,035 7 Enumclaw 8 Federal Way 3.0% $13,152 2.7% $11,574 1.4% $6,273 2.4% $10,333 8 Federal Way 9 Kent 13.3% $57,487 15.4% $66,691 8.9% $38,452 12.5% $54,210 9 Kent 10 King County 22.5% $97,551 20.0% $88,726 59.0% $255,652 33.9% $146.643 10 King County I 11 Maple Valley 1.8% $7,671 1.7% $7,513 1.4% $5,910 1.6% $7,031 11 Maple Valley 12 Normandy Park 1.3% $5,633 1.6% $6,972 0.8% $3.467 1.2% $5.357 12 Normandy Pari< 13 Renton 3.4% $14,663 4.0% $17,331 2.0% $8.662 3,1% $13,552 13 Renton 14 Sea-Tac 4.4% $18,874 6.5% $28,051 3.2% $13,993 4.7% $20,306 14 Sea-Tac 15 Seanle 28.2% $122,243 23.6% $102,259 7.5% $32.527 19.8% $85,676 15 Seanle 16 Tukwila 2.7% $11.856 6.6% $28,366 2.8% $12,301 4.0% $17,507 16 Tukwlla $433,000 Sub-Total '------ 100.0% $433,000 SUBTOTAL NOTE: King County land area excludes the Upper Green River basin. Additional year 2001 contributions (forWRIA 9 Contingency Fund). - King County (Increased King County cost share with the addition ofVashon/Maury Islands $12,551 -Tacoma ~ . ~ (contingency fund) $470,051 TOTAL Exhibit, 'paoe two Regional Watershed Funding WRIA 9 Weighted Voting with Contingency Fund 2001 Weighted Proportional Change .. Voting with Weighted In Vote WRIA 09 Vashon I Tacoma' Voting for 2001" Weicht WRIA 09 1 Algona 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 1 Algona 2 Auburn 4.8% 4.4% -0.4% 2 Auburn 3 Black Diamond 1.1% 1.0% -0.1% 3 Black Diamond 4 Burlen 4.2% 3.9% -0.3% 4 Burlen 5 Covington 2.0% 1.9% -0.2% 5 Covington 6 Des Moines 3.5% 3.3% -0.3% 6 Des Moines 7 Enumclaw 0.9% 0.9% -0.1% 7 Enumclaw 8 Federal Way 2.4% 2.2% -0.2% 8 Federal Way 9 Kent 12.5% 11.5% -1.0% 9 Kent 10 King County 33.9% 31.2% -2.7% 10 King County lOa King County VashonlMaury Islands 2.9% 2.7% -0.2% lOa KIng County Vashon/Maury Islands 11 Maple Valley 1.6% 1.5% -0.1% 11 Maple Valley 12 Normandy Park 1.2% 1.1% -0.1% 12 Normandy Park 13 Renton 3.1% 2.9% -0.3% 13 Renton 14 Sea-Tac 4.7% 4.3% -0.4% 14 Sea-Tac 15 Seattle 19.8% 18.2% -1.6% 15 Seattle 16 Tacoma 5.8% 5.3% -0.5% 16 Tacoma 17 Tukwlla 4.0% 3.7% -0.3% 17 Tukwlla 108.7% 100.0% -8.7% TOTAL 'Average of population, assessed value and area column (cost-share percentages) from Exhibit A-1 page one, with additional proportional cost share percentages for Tacoma and King County Vashon/Maury Islands "Cost share percentages scaled to 100%. Name Charles Booth Howard Botts Joe Brennan Rebecca Clark Tim Clark Richard Conlin Eric Faison Stephen Lamphear Steve Mullet George Rossman Jesse Tanner Paul Bucich Jay Coyington Dennis Dowdy Noel Gilbrough Nancy Hansen-Ahem Laure Iddings Ryan Larson Judith Noble Lorin Reindt Loren Reinhold Megan Smith Ron Straka John Wiltse Bill Wolinski Laura Blackmore Linda Hanson Doug Osterman WRIA 9 FORUM SUMMARY 3:30-5:30 pm July 18,2001 Tukwila Community Center A'ITENDEES Affiliation City of Auburn City of Black Diamond CityofSeaTac City of Covington City of Kent City of Seattle City of Federal Way City of Burien City ofTukwila City ofEnumclaw City of Renton City of Fèderal Way City of Renton City of Auburn US Anny Corps of Engineers King County DNR City of Maple Valley City of Tukwila City of Seattle King County DNR City of Des Moines ILA Service Provider City of Renton City ofNonnandy Park City of Kent WRlA 9 Nearshore Sub-Forum CoiJrdinator WRIA 9 Projects Coordinator WRIA 9 Coordinator July /8,2001 WRIA 9 Forum Meeting Draft Summary Pag" 1 Welcome and Introductions Mayor Mullet called the meeting to order, welcomed everyone, and asked people to introduce themselves. Public Comment There was no public comment. Election of Forum Vice-Chair Mayor Mullet stated that the Management Committee recommended that Rebecca Clark, Council member of the City of Covington, be elected Forum Vice-Chair. Action Item: The motion to elect Rebecca Clark Forum Vice-Chair was approved by consensus. Meetinl! Summary Action Item: The motion to approve the May 16 meeting summary as written was approyed by . consensus. WRIA 9 [LA Amendment Update Doug Osterman provided an update on the status of the ILA Amendment. The Management Committee had asked member jurisdictions to approve the Amendment by August L The City of Seattle has already approved it The Cities of Aubum, Kent, Renton, and Tukwila are scheduled to approve it by August I, the City of Nonnandy Park on August 6, and the City ofBurien on August 12. Rebecca Clark added that Coyington had approyed the amendments the previous evening. Doug urged Forum representatives to contact him with any questions or concerns, and asked members to indicate when they would consider the Amendment for approval. Stephen Lamphear stated that the Amendments had met with some resistance in Burien- Paul Bucich noted that the letters that accompany the Amendment reflect the change in King County's weighted vote due to the inclusion ofVashon and Maury Islands, but the amendment language does not. Doug said that this issue is made explicit in the table in Exhibit lA, which would be a legal part of the amended ILA. Laure Iddings asked why Vashon is changing WRlAs. Doug responded that it is because King County has a strong interest in ensuring that salmonid habitat on Vashon is protected, and Green River chinook likely use nearshore habitat on Vashon. Because Kitsap County does not have chinook salmon, it is unlikely that WRlA 15 would take the same measures to protect salmonid habitat on Vashon that WRlA 9 would. Paul Bucich asked whether there were any remaining issues that may prevent Vashon ti-om joining WRIA 9. Doug said that the two counties need to work out an ILA, and then bring it before WDFW, which manages the Lead Entity grants. However, King County is committed to contributing the cost-share for Vashon no matter what. July /8,200/ WRfA 9 Forum Meeting Draft Summary Page 2 Laure Iddings asked Whether a seat would be. added to- the Steering Committee for Vashon. Doug said perhaps, if an interl'St or citi~n group 'would like one and the Forum approved it The King County representati"ve on the Steering.Committee already represents Vashori's municipal interests. Paul Bucich noted that the letters accompanying the amendments state that Tacoma's cost-share' percentage would be renegotiated every year, but the 2002 budget is based upon $24,500. Rebecca Clark said that the Management Committee plans to work with Tacoma on the cost- share by December, but hadn't decided if any funding over $24,500 would go into the contingency fund or decrease the other jurisdictions' cost-shares. Jesse Tanner stated that Tacoma should not be given any more voting power per dollar than any other city. 2002 Bud¡:et Mayor Mullet opened the discussion by describing the proposed 2002 WRIA 9 budget. He stated that the Management Committee recommended that the cost-shares remain the same for the cities, and to put the extra funding from the additions ofVashon and Tacoma in the contingency fund- Also, there is $85,000 in KCD funds that need to be reallocated- At the Management Committee meeting, there were concerns about a lack of coordination of the planning with the technical assessment work. Megan Smith, representing the ILA Service Provider, said that the original 200 I budget didn't differentiate between staffing and operating costs. She noted that King County made a presentation to the WRIA 9 Management Committee clarifying the 2001 operating costs, and that this infomlation also was sent to Forum members by email. The materials describing the 2002 budget proposal present it in the context of the Lead Entity grant and KCD. The $433,328 budget for staff is the worst case scenario, and includes a cost-of-living increase, merit increases, and a one-time classification adjustment Ifnot all of that money is needed, the third quarter bills in 2002 will be lower- The $27,500 in operating costs includes motor pool charges, printing, graprncs, supplies, and training costs- The $46,000 in contingency fund is cany-oyer from 2001 and unallocated funds from 2002- Megan next described the Lead Entity grant It includes $35,000 for staffing for the SRFB grant process and limited technical review; $32,500 for developing a database of projects in the WRIA, and $2,500 in operating costs. Megan said that the relationship between the Lead Entity grant and the ILA Early Action Coordinator is that the Lead Entity grant pays for staff to do the administratiye work on the SRFB process, while the ILA pays for an Early Action Coordinator to perfonn coordination and oversight tasks. The $85,000 in KCD funds needs to be reallocated because it was originally for the project coordinator staff position that is now coyered by the !LA. Laure Iddings asked if salaries had been overestimated in 2001- Megan responded that each of the salaries had been calculated at the top of the salary range for the position, but that not ail of the ILA employees actually are paid at that level. Also, the salaries listed for 2001 include operating costs. Richard Conlin stated that he appreciated Doug Ostennan's éommitrnent to looking at ways to provide technical support. Doug presented an option for providing this support for the immediate future: From August I to November I, use a portion of Laura Blackmore's time for technical support. Laura is a logical choice because she already is involved in working with the WRIA 9 Technical Committee and has a scientific background- July /8. 2001 WRIA 9 Forum Meeting Draft Summary Page 3 .However, Laura is the Nearshore Coordinator- During this time she would not bee able to spend quite as much: time on nearshore issues. Also, het work on the N=~- Term Action Agenda would be curtailed. . Linda Hanson would pick up the work on the Near-Term Action Agenda and reri=ce her suppol1 of the Salmon Recovery Funding Board process. Richard Conlin noted that there are not as many meetings in August, so that should free up soome time. Doug said yes, and that Laura would still be the key staff person working with the nearshore cities on the Near-Term Action Agenda and other issues- For next year, Doug said that he would work with staff to identify technical support tasks for 2002. The Forum could consider using some KCD funds to pay for that. Joe Brennan stated that he thought it was wise to allow Doug to make adjustments to staff assignments as needed, staying within the budget. Mayor Booth said that he didn't want to do anything to damage the nearshore process, and asked whether it was necessary to reallocate =e $85,000 in KCD dollars that day. Doug said that it wasn't necessary, and that he planned to wwork with staff on KCD options in July and August and come back to the Forum with specifics in September. . Judith Noble asked whether Mayor Mullet was asking for approval on the amount of the buåg!;ret, or also the work program. Mayor Mullet responded that it was the former. Megan Smith adãced that although the focus now is on total budget rather than on the details of the work program.. King County as the Service Proyider still needs some certainty in terms of which staff will be-, assigned to provide cost-shared services. King County is trying to be responsive to requests Ùnr a "firewall" between King County staff and ILA staff. Therefore, it needs to be able to tell statE: whether they will be part of the "ILA Team" or not. Mayor Mullet noted that he's assumingttmat there is flexibility to shift assignments among the staff shown in the budget, but that he doesm:'t anticipate moying the staff in or out of the ILA Team- Mayor Mullet noted that the Management Committee feit that the cost-shares could be handl=d by the cities this year, and that any extra money should go into the contingency fund rather than. decrease jurisdictions' cost-shares. The Forum would make any decisions on how to spend tm:", contingency fund. Mayor Tanner stated that he would cause a ruckus next year if the Service Provider asks the Forum to pay for I 0% raises for the ILA staff again. Mayor Mullet responded that if the Couomy can't proyide staff at the rates that the Forum expects, the Forum will find someone else to be c the Service Provider. Action Item: A motion to approye the 2002 budget was approved by consensus. Ecosystem Restoration Project Mayor Mullet opened this discussion by noting that the ILA has melded the nearshore and freshwater jurisdictions into one WRIA. Now the WRIA needs to determine how to fund projects- He asked for a philosophical discussion of this topic, and said that the Manageme"r Committee felt that all jurisdictions should contribute to project funding regardless of where. me projects are. The Forum could choose to use KCD funding to ease the burden this might p[aG~" on smaller cities- Mayor Mullet promoted a philosophy of "all for one and one for all: saying c.TIat the pUtpOSe of the WRIA process is to protect salmon ids. July /8.2001 WRIA 9 Forum Meeting Draft Summary :'"O"2.ge4 Linda Hanson described the Ecosystem Restoration Project, which ~gan four years ago as the Ecosystem Restoration Study. The ERS specifie4limiting factors for the Green River and identified projects to address them.. The federal goyemffient authorized $75 mill.ion for approximately 45 restoration projects throughout the watershed to be done oyer the next 10 years. The next phase of the overall program is called the Ecosystem Restoration Project, or ERP- The first step in the ERP is the Pre-Construction Engineering and Design phase, or PED, in which the projects chosen for construction will be designed and permitted- Some construction may begin as soon as 2002 The ccst of the PED Phase is $3 million dollars with a local cost-share of25%, or $750,000 over four years. Linda presented three proposals to the Forum: King County should act as the umbrella local sponsor for the PED phase. The County has acted in this capacity during previous phases of the project, but has not yet agreed to do this for the PED phase. . The Forum should use some of its KCD funding to reduce the local share- All cities of the Forum should participate in cost-sharing the local match. Most of the projects are in the Green-Duwamish, but several are system-wide, including some studies. As the Nearshore GI moves forward, the Green-Duwamish cities could participate in the cost- share for that. Linda asked th~ cities to give their staff a pat on the back for moving this yery complex project forward. She also noted two changes in the materials since the last time jurisdictions saw them: the LowerlUpper Springbrook project expanded to include Garrison Creek, and the cost of the studies decreased slightly. Jay Coyington reiterated that the Management Committee felt that this should be a WRIA-wide project, and that they are looking forward to funding nearshore projects when they are proposed- Mayor Mullet and Richard Conlin stated that Seattle was committed to participating but would need to do some shuffling in their internal budget to do so- The Forum discussed the costs of the construction phase- Much of the local match should come from real estate, but Laure Iddings noted that individual jurisdictions' CIPs might be compromised if they contribute to the ERP over so many years. Jesse Tanner recommended using SRFB funds where possible for the local match- Linda Hanson said that the SRFB already had provided funds to purchase Site I, Kanasket, Big Spring Creek, Metzler Park, and other WRIA 9 projects- Jay Coyington asked if the Corps imposed a timeline on construction. Noel said that they were planning on three phases over ten years, and that we are embarking on Phase L Ron Straka asked if the federal government had approyed money for construction yet. Noel said that they hadn't. Howard Botts asked if the WRIA were fairly sure that the work would make a demonstrable impact. Doug said thatthe various technical documents, including the Environmental Impact Statement and Biological Assessment, had indicated that it would. Linda noted that new agreements with the Corps would be necessary before any construction begins. Noel said that there are a tremendous number of back-out clauses built into the program. Ron Straka stated that the PED phase, which is what is before us now, will give us a better idea of the program costs before anyone agrees to fund construction. July /8,2001 WRJA 9 Forum Meeting Draft Summary Page 5 John Wiltse asked ifpalticipating in the ERP would provide coverage under thle 4(d) rule. Mayor Mullet responded that if a city is doing good things, then it could use that as ¡moofof its good,,~Il. It gives the city the moral and legal high ground, but nothing can stop ànyone: :.from suing a çity- Doug noted that the 4(d) rule might include WRIA planning as a pl~nk. Bill '.wolinski said thaI representatives from NMFS and USFWS have participated in the ERP to date, Stephen Lamphear said that the materials explaining the proposal were too Wl,wieldy for him to take to his Council, and that he wasn't sure that his Council would support the: proposal. They would see it as a charge for the ILA, plus a new charge. Burien is facing a $500,000 shortfall in their budget next year, so it is unlikely they could find the funds for the ERP, Stephen said he could not see a nearshore component 10 the ERP at aIL His concern is that it ""' a river program, and it needs to be more than that. Linda Hanson promised to provide a more concise package of materials for jUITisdictions. Mayor Mullet said that he thought that all of the jurisdictions should stick together, amd that the riyer cities are willing to use funding to help the nearshore develop programs such = the ERP- In the meantime, he hoped that the nearshore cities would help the river cities conStITUct their projects. Paul Bucich said that the benefits of the ERP are that it would move us close:-cIO the eventual de- listing of the salmon, and that Federal Way expects help from the river cities '.when nearshore projects come forward- Federal Way is looking at the long-tenD benefits. Joe Brennan noted that SeaTac has no salmon, no riyer, and no marine shorelime, so there is no physical benefit to the city from most of WRIA planning. But ESA affects alL of us, and it behooves all of us to act. However, we do need to be able to sell the benefits: "'0 the region. Stephen Lamphear said that he agreed, and that he wasn't advocating not woriKing together. However, Burien's council may haye another view. Rebecca Clark said that the streams and riyer need the nearshore, and vice v=. Selling the ERP will be a tough creek to row in Coyington, but she believes that someday th= will be projects in Covington and she wants to help the region- Mayor Booth reminded the group that during the development of the ILA, th=e was some discussion of capping the contributions of smaller cities that could not afforå ,It. Mayor Mulk. suggested using KCD dollars toward city shares- Jesse Tanner said that the ILA specifies a ratio and provides an out for cities 'triat can't pay. He said that the Forum couldn't modify payments without an amendment. Doug: Osterman said that the Forum could allocate KCD dollars to pick up the tab for small cities- Jay :::ovington obsery,,¿ that if the Forum used KCD dollars to reduce the local match in future years, oily contributions would be much smaller. Mayor Iddings asked why the Forum was going through this process if the mwney was not yet certain for construction. Noel said that the region needs to show Congress sumport for the project in order for them to allocate construction funding. July /8, 200/ WRJA 9 Forum Meeting Draft Summary p,,~ : Mayor Mullet noted that the Forum would l<:>ok for ways to help cities with their cost-shares and would improve the package of materials for preseiJ.tations to councils- WillA 9 Kin~.Conservation District Fundinl! In the few minutes remaining, John Wiltse suggested acting on the KCD briefing materials prepared by the ILA staff- Action Item: A motion to approye the Management Conunittee's recommendation for splitting the KCD funding among types of projects was approved by consensus as working guidance. The types of projects, percentages, and approximate funding amounts were as follows: Catcl'orv Percentage Annroximatc Fundinv Amount General Grant Match 40% $240,000 Ecosystem Restoration Project Match 17% $102000 High Priority Research 30-35% $180,000 to $210,000 Education and Stewardshin 8-12% $48,000 to $72,000 Forum staff will develop specific proposals for the Forum's consideration in September. Next Meetinl! The next meeting of the WRIA 9 Forum is tentati.-ely scheduled for September 19. The location of the meeting is to te determined- The meeting was adjourned at 5:39 PM. July 18,2001 WRIA 9 Forum Meeting Draft Summary Page 7 WRIA 9 FORUM DRAFT SUMMARY 3:30-5:30 pm November 14, 2001 Tukwila Community Center ATIENDEES Name Charles Booth Rebecca Clark DelU1is Dowdy Tim Clark Laure Iddings Stephen Lamphear Steve Mullet Judith Noble JoalU1a Richey Chris Searcy Ron Straka Maureen Welch Affiliation City of Auburn City of Covington City of Auburn City of Kent City of Maple Valley City of Burien City ofTukwila City of Seattle ILA Service Provider City of Enumclaw City of Renton King County Noel Gilbrough Fred Goetz Tim Smith Laura Blaclanore Linda Hanson Doug Osterman US Anny Co!]>s of Engineers US Anny Co!]>s of Engineers Washington Department ofFish & Wildlife WRIA 9 Nearshore Sub-Forum Coordinator WRIA 9 Projects Coordinator . WRIA 9 Watershed Coordinator Welcome and Introductions Mayor Mullet called the meeting to order, welcomed everyone, and asked people to introduce themselves. Public Comment The WRIA 9 Forum presented Mayor Chuck Booth with á cake and gifts to thank him for his untiring service to the watershed and to wish him well upon his retirement. Mayor Mullet read letters fi-om Mayors Booth and Ta!U1er of Auburn and Renton, respectively, indicating that De!U1is Dowdy is the alternate representative for the City of Auburn, and Ron Straka is the alternate representative for Renton, for this meeting only. November 14,200/ WRIA 9 Forum Meeting Draft Summary Page I Meetinj! Summary Action Item: The motion to approve the September 19 meeting summary as written was approved by consensus. WillA 9 ILA Amendment Update Doug Ostennan announced that the amendment to the [LA is now official. As a result, the City of Tacoma is indicating that it will work to become a member of the WRlA 9 Forum in early 2002, and King County will make an additional financial contribution for WRlA planning for VashonlMaury Island inclusion in WRlA 9. Doug noted that the Watershed Coordination Services Staff will work with the City of Black Diamond to facilitate adoption of the amended ILA, and to obtain funding for their percentage of the cost-sharing agreement. WRIA 9 Forum Resolution - At its September 200 I meeting, the Forum approved a resolution, with changes, that established the Forum's support for participating in the advanced planning phase, or pre-<:onstruction engineering and design, of the Ecosystem Restoration Project,.including cost-sharing of the local funding match. The Forum referred the resolution baek to the Management Committee for additional review to ensure that concerns expressed about the annual role of King Conservation Distriet and other funding contributions were addressed adequately. The Management Committee recommends additional changes to the resolution that clarify the following: Cost shares are to be detennined in a manner eonsistent with the cost-share fonnula of the WRlA 9 Interloeal Agreement, minus any King Conservation Distriet or other funds the Forum designates from grant funding. (Revised Section III) The Forum will detennine the funding collection procedure annually, including consideratioo of using regional King Conservation District funds, city or county funds, or other contributed funds. (New Section IV) Laure Iddings asked whether the resolution amended the ILA- Mayor Mullet said no- She asked whether it committed ILA partners to project construction. Doug said it did not. He said the resolution is a mechanism for using the ILA to support the ERP advanced planning phase, \mown as Pre-Construction Engineering and Design- Doug further explained that the resolution provides for individual city council app¡oval, and Forum support ofERP funding. The resolution does not commit anyone to construction of the projects- Stephen Lamphear asked if an attorney had reviewed the resolution. Linda Hanson said that the King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office had reviewed it. Action Item: The motion to approve the WRlA 9 Forum Resolution as recommended by the Management Committee was approved by consensus. Tacoma Cost-Share Doug noted that the Tacoma cost-share for the [LA needs to be negotiated annually because the ILA cost-share fonnula does not work for Tacoma. The 2002 WRlA 9 ILA budget assumes that Tacoma's cost-share will be $24,500, which gives Tacoma a weighted vote of about five percent. Tacoma is comfortable with this amount, and the Management Committee recommends that the Forum approve a $24,500 cost-share for 2002. November 14. 2001 WRIA 9 Forum Meeting DrajiSummary Page 2 Chris Searcy asked whether Tacoma's cost share decreases other jurisdictions' cost-:'5nares. Doug said that it does not effect other cost shares because the T Jlcoma cost share is not faccrored into the fonnulà for determining each cost share. The budget that IS cost-shared, as detenninced by the ILA cost-share formula, is $445,551. Tacoma's contribut)Qn is on top of that for a :JOIaI 2002 lLA planning budget of$470,051. Action Item: A motion to approve the $24,500 cost-share j'or Tacoma was approved.. loy consensus. WRIA 9 Kin!! Conservation District Fundin!! Doug Osterman highlighted provisions of the proposed 2002 KCD Budget and WorKi: Program as recommended by the Management Committee- The Manæ.gement Committee recommnends that the Forum approve the 2002 KCD Budget and Work Program, and the following tw.:-o policies: Establish a minimum local match of 10% for the gram! match category. Create a wlifonn and streamlined process for evaluatiing and screening projects .:ill each category- In the grant match, education and stewardsfuip, and small cities techn:n:ical assistance categories, that process could take the form of letters <of request to the Forum Cnaair and Watershed Coordinator. The Forum Chair and Watershed Coordinator would usse their discretion to screen these requests, and bring promisimg projects to the full Formnn for the final decision- Following the presentation, Dennis Dowdy asked where mon-profits could find marccl1 money. Mayor Mullet responded that finding match funding was 1fb.e responsibility of the pro!Jject sponsor, and that having a match requirement would encourage weill thought-out projects. Stephen Lamphear said that he would like to receive infot:1l1ation on all funding reqnnests, not only the ones that are recommended for funding. He agreed tlmtt the Chair and Coordinamor should still screen and recommend the projects, but he felt they shoufid bring all the projects to CIhe Forum, not just the recommended ones. Mayor Mullet stated that screening criteria need to be deweloped- Rebecca Clark s~ested having the Management Committee draft criteria to be rarified by the Forum- She ~eed that all projects should come to the Forum along with the Chair ænd Coordinator's recomm=ndation- Maureen Welch supported that idea as well, and suggested keeping the criteria simpnie, perhaps as few as 3 or 4 "screening" criteria. Laure Iddings noted that small requests make up 50 percent of the KCD budget, an= suggested changing the percentages allocated to types of funding re-..:¡uests (such as research) ¡Q) reflect the watershed's priorities, especially the Ecosystem Restorati.on Project. Judith Noble stated that it might be preferable nòt to foc"" on the percentages. The' relatiÝely small percentage of KCD funding allocated to the Ecosystem Restoration Project le,-yerages a tremendous amount of federal funding. Since the Forum was able to provide all oi ~:1:Ì1.e local match using only 26 percent of the available funds, it doe-.5 not make sense to alloca.œ~ more to the project. The Forum should revisit the percentage next year, because a different pe7"..centage may be necessary to provide 100 percent of the local match. Laure said that in that case- we should drop the percentages and concentrate on content. November /4,100/ WRIA 9 Forum Mee1ing Draft Sum"",,'}, Page 3 . . Stephen Lamphçar said that he would rather see pòliey statements. If the. Forum's intent is to fund the local match for the Ecosystem Restoration Project fully, then that should.be state<L The . Forum should create language reflecting the other categories as well. Such policy statements could be ~hanged in future years if they no longér serve the Forum welL Laure Iddings stated that if the Ecosystem Restoration Project is the Forum's priority, then the Forum should commit to funding the local match at 100 percent. Maple Valley will not have the funding to provide local match in the future. Maureen Welch said that the Forum should look at KCD funding together with \LA funding so that the Forum can see the total picture. The County would like to see a discussion ofthe use of KCD funds for local match dollars that jurisdictions previously committed to providing. Judith Noble suggested developing draft KCD policies as part of the 2003 budgeting process- Mayor Mullet agreed to this suggestion. Stephen Lamphear said that policies would help guide grant decisions and budget priorities. Action ¡tern; A motion to approve the 2002 KCD Budget, Work Program, and policies as recommended by the Management Committee was approyed by consensus- Pue:et Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project Presentation Tim Smith of the Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife and Fred Goetz of the U-S- Anny Corps of Engineers gaye the Forum a presentation about the Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project (PSNERP)- The Forum allocated $50,000 in KCD funds (as part of the 2002 KCD Budget) to support this project, which will develop lists of habitat restoration projects for the nearshore. For copies of this presentation please contact Tim Smith at smithtrs(@.dfw.wa.>,:oY. At the conclusion of the presentation, Ron Straka asked how the WRIA would provide input to the project. Tim said that WDFW would enter into an Inter-Agency agreement with the Forum so that the Forum would know exactly how the KCD funds would be spent.WDFW, as local sponsor, will strive to have frequent communication with stakeholders such as WRIA 9, and the Forum would have the opportunity to send a liaison to the projects' Steering Conunittee. Noel Gilbrough noted that the budget for PSNERP (aoout $12 million over six years) is ten times that of the Ecosystem Restoration Project, and is a very big effort- Fred Goetz commented that local jurisdictions are doing so much in the nearshore that could be counted as in-kind match that the federal share may end up increasing. Linda Hanson said that the focus of the Ecosystem Restoration Project was fish and wildlife, and asked what the focus of the PSNERP would be. Fred answered that PSNERP had to focus so that the project would not fail, and that the focus would be on salmon and forage fish. However, these speci'OS have many linkages to the rest of the ecosystem. The project will address only the nearshore, and only habitat issues. Judith Noble asked if the PSNERP Steering Committee and Teclmical Committee meetings were open to the public. Tim Smith said they were, and invited Forum members to email him to get put on the appropriate emaillists. Tim and Fred thanked the Forum for their support of this project, and offered to report back to tl1e Forum at any time. November 14,200/ WRIA 9 Forum Meelillg Draft Summary Page 4 Next Meetin!! The next meeting of the WR1A 9 Forum is ientatively scheduled for January 23, 2002. The location of the meeting is to be determined, but willlike\y be at the Tukwila Community Center. The meeting was adjourned at 5: 15 PM. November 14, 2001 WRIA 9 Forum Meeting Draft Summary Page 5 WRIA 9 FORUM RESOLUTION NO, 2001-2 A RESOLUTION memoriaHzing the W"er R"olli"ce Inventory ^"" (WRlA) 9 Forum's puridpalion in aQd cost slwUtg fn< Iocd sponsodip for adv>cced planning "stipul"ed by the D"igQ AgreemeQt for the GreenlDuwamish Ecosystem Re"oratioQ Project, to be executed by the U.S. Anny Co<ps of Enginee.. >cd King County ("D"ign Ag"ement"). WHEREAS the cili" ofWRlA 9 and King County havc organized the""dv" into a "p""n"tivc o'ganiution called the WRlA 9 Fonun; and WHEREAS the cili" ofWRlA 9 and King County have eQtered into an Interl",,1 Agreemcnt, executed OQ Jammy 9, 2001, for Wlte..hed-based planning actiOQ" a key component of the local and regio",,1 End>cgered Species Act (ESA) response and compliance s"'tegy; and WHEREAS the IQteriocal AgreemeQt executed January 9, 2001, has beeQ ameQded" of October 25, 2001; and WHEREAS the IQteriocal AgreemeQtprovides a mecham,mfQr the implementatioQofhabi"t, water quality, and flood projects with regio""I, state, federal and nonprofit funds " they become available; and WHEREAS advanced planning" descnõed in !he Design AgreemeQt provides for pre-<onstructiOQ engineering, design and ,tudies '" be completed by 2005 far a told cost "timAted at $3 million with a . local cost ,hare of 25% Qf!he total amount; and WHEREAS it is und"'tood that future eonstruetiQQ of projects" detennined through advaQeed planning will begin" early" 2002, depending upoQ the availability of fedml funds; and WlŒRE.AS repr"eatatives or the cities ofWRlA 9 and King County have agreed through the WRlA 9 Forum '" endo..e and to fmancially ,upport the advanced planning work provided for in the Design AgreemeQ~ aQd WHEREAS representatives of cities participating in the WRIA 9 Forum and King (:Qunty willlm1smit 10 their respective councils for approval finaQcial support of the advan<ed planning work provided for in the Design AgreemeQt according'" cost ,hare fonnuIa" designated through the Interlocal AgreemeQt; NOW, TI!EREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED; I. That the WRL\ 9 Forum approves I¡ld ,upports the activities provided for in the Design AgreemeQt for advanced planning work for the GrcenlDuwamish Ecosystem RestoratioQ ProjCGt, to be executed by the U.s,lumy Cotps of Engine", and King County, ,,_ting one of the objCGtives for which !he WRIA 9 Interlocal Agreemenr, executed aQ January 9, 2001, was entered into. u. That the WRIA 9 Forum supports and approves the designation of King County tQ act" the fiscal agent for and local sponsor under the Design AgrCGmeQt. lli. That the WRIA 9 Forum recommends that each council consider the approval Qfthe collection of funds from the jurisdictions represented in the WRIA 9 Forum for the PIn]>O"s of meeting !he frnancial obligations of the local cost share for advanced planning under !he Design AgreemeQt, and dIstnõutioQ offunds '" King County, in aeeordance with the cost shares provided for in the Interlocal Agreement, less KCD or other such funds the Forum desig""tes fram grant funding. The WRIA 9 Forum will annually determine the funding collCGtioQ b=d OQ the attachment AI of the !LA planning cost share fotmula, and will consider using regio",,1 King ConservatioQ District funds, individual city or county funds, ar other COQtnõuted funds. ^"y financial abligations associated with advanced planning will be included in the WRIA 9 Forum budget, and will be administered follawing SectiOQ 1 of the loterl",,1 AgreemeQt for the W"",bed Basins within W"er Rcsolli"ce Inventory Area 9. !Y. v. That Steven M. Mulle,- WRIA 9 Forum Chairman, is hereby duly authorized to act OQ behalf of the WRIA 9 Farum indicating its 'upport of the actions descnõcd above. This resolution bas beeQ approved by those WRIA 9 Forum membe.. present OQ the 14" day November, 2001. ç'~ M ""^'~ SteveQM.Mullet, WRIA 9 Forum ChaimuQ Atte'" WRIA 9 Planning (+3%) and Advanced Planning (PED): Cost Sha=ng 2002-2005 for WRIA 9 Managoment Committee Rev/ow & DIscussion Only, Do Not Dlstrtbute. WRIA 9 Plannln Average at PoplAVI WRlA09 Area 2002 2003 2004 =05 Total 1 Algona 0.1% 5387 5398 $410 $423 2 AubtJm 4.8% 520,500 521,196 521,634 522,469 I 3 Blad< Diamond 1.0% $4,410 $4,543 $4,679 $4,619 1 4 Burfen 4.0% $17,660 $16,396 $16,946 519,516 S 5 C<Mng1on 1.9% 56.347 56.597 56,655 59,121 , 6 Dos MOÜ1es 3.0% 513,245 513,543 514,052 514,474 , 7 Enumdaw 0.9% $4,034 $4,155 54,260 $4,408 , . """"" Way 2.3% $10,106 510,409 510,721 511,043 S 9 Kent 11.9% $53.237 554,634 $56,479 556,173 5; 10 (jog County (1) 37,7% $166,055 $173,097 5176,269 5163,636 5; 11 Maple Valley 1.6% 56.945 57,153 $7,358 57,569 1 12 Nonnandy P"", 1.1% $4,664 55,030 $5,161 55,337 $ 13 Renton 3.0% $13,165 513,560 $13,987 514,386 $ 14 SeaTec 4.4% 519,589 520,177 520,762 $21,405 $ 15 Sea"e 16.6% 563,553 586,059 5ee.541 591,300 ., 16 Tukwia 3.6% $17,154 517,666 518,198 51B,744 $ 100.0% $445,551 $445 551 5445,551 $445 551 51,1 (1) (jog County lAdode, V..hon and Maur; ~lands end exdud.. !he Up"", G,een Rive.- ea,in Tacoma - - - lli.m 1 AnooaJ Total $470,051 $478.051 $470,051 $470,051 -W WRIA 9 ILA Advanced PlannlnQ IPED! fede",1 Dol~ '-""ve",ged: 53,( Lc=alMatch: 5; (A) - A '$204,000 C A '5240,000 A'leeooo At-=76,000 , - A '57S( Av...... at PaptAVI Pa< WRIA 09 hea 2002 2003 2004 ::mo5 loca 1 AIgooa . 0.1% 5204 5260 5188 576 2 AubtJm 4,6% 59,612 513,468 59,043 53,752 1 3 Black Diamond 1,1% $2,244 $3,060 $2,068 $858 4 Burian 4.2% $8,586 $11,760 $7,696 $3,276 $ 5""""""",, 2.0% 54,080 55,600 53,760 51.560 $ 6 Dos MOÜ1es 3.5% 57,140 59,600 56,500 52,730 $ 7 Enumdaw 0.9% 51,636 52,520 51,692 5702 6 fede<alWay .2.4% $4,696 $8,720 $4,512 51.872 $ 9 Kent 12.5% $25,551 $35,0711 523,547 59,770 $ 10 (jog County 34.0% $89,291 $95,105 $63,656 $26,493 $2 11 Ma<eVaIey 1.6% $3,264 $4,460 53,006 $1,246 $ 12 Nonnandy P"", 1.2% $2,448 $3,360 52,256 5936 13 Renton 3.1% $6,324 $8,680 $5,626 $2,418 1 14 SeaTac 4_7% $9,608 513,188 $8,655 $3,674 , 15 Sea"e 19.8% $40,474 $55,552 $37,299 $15,475 51 16 Tukwla 4.0% $8.160 $11,200 $7,520 $3,120 , 100.0% $204000 $UO 000 $168000 $76000 5' WRIA 9 ILA Combined Planning and Advanced PlannIng PED) WRlA09 2002 2003 2004 2005 """'Ad Total 1 AIgooa $591 5676 $598 5501 $2,386 2 AubtJm $30,393 $34,666 $30.876 $26,240 5122,175 .3 Bled< Diamond $6,654 $7,623 56,747 $5,677 $26,701 4 ....... $26,4" 530,156 $26,644 522,792 $106,220 5""""""",, $12,427 $14,197 $12,615 $10,581 $49.920 6 Dos""""" 520,365 523,443 $20,632 517.204 $81,664 7 Eoomdaw 55,870 $6,675 $5,972 '$5,110 523,626 8 fede<alWay 515,002 $17,129 $15= $12,915 $60,260 9 Kent $78,788 $89,904 $60,026 567,943 5316.660 10 KIng CountY 5237,346 5268,201 $242,146 5210,132 5957,824 11 MapleValley 510.209 $11,633 $10,376 $8,637 $41,055 12 Nom13ndy Pa<t< $7,332 $8,390 $7,437 $6,273 529,432 13 Renton $19,469 $=40 $19,795 $16.604 576,329 14 SeaTac 529,197 $33,365 529,637 525,079 5117,276 15 Sea... $124,026 $141,611 $125,940 $106,776 5496,354 16 Tukwla 525,314 $28,668 $25,718 521,664 5101,754 5649451 m87eO 566O 593 5564 827 .".613,652 DRAFT WRIA 9 CombIned Cost SIw""%b 1/1712002 ",....,......... ""c..... ............. ~ Nearshore General Investigation Study Area (Puget Sound-wide) . Proposed Ecosystem Restoration Project Site * Phase I Construction Site ..,-. Salmon Recovery Planning Area _/ Major Road --- River =" Open Water Incorporated Area WRIA 9 Ecosystem Restoration Project Locations tJ.n...:.a.~... .. ~. programatlc or basinwide projects not shown on map . In-Stream Woody Debris Placement . Gtavel Replacement . Malnstem Maintenance . Volunteer Revegetation .~. 8 ,~,~~ ~~..U~TY <"",d V'M'COmm"'k""" u", W""'L>""".~_OM,", 010SWR1A""""""""'" MO.WO~MO.SK .""..200' --c.c ""'>""'-:-"""~.' -""õ."""""";:~";'" . . RIA 9 Ecosystèm~Restoråtion Water Resource Inventory Area (WRtA19 is an extremetyproductive piKe for fish and wildl.e habitat.Tens of thousands of salmon and trout convene in Elliott Bay and migrate up the rilÆr every year to spawn and rear, using miles of habitat on the mainstem, tributaries and the saltwater shoreline at different times during their various lifestages.ln 1995, the US Congress authori,.d a study to ensure that the Green/Duwamish ecosystem would be protected and restored.!n 1999, Cangress authorized similar work for the WRtA 9 Nearshore Are'.ln January 2001, local governments adopted a Watershed Planning Interlocai Agreement that joins the interests of the Green/Duwamish and Central Puget Sound Watersheds. Under this' governance structure, the Ecosystem Rest"",tion effort includes two elements: (t) The Pre-Construction Engineering and Design phase for the construction of riverine projects Is being Initiated: and (2) a Green/Duwarnish Ecasystem Restoration Projec~ for which a General Investigation Study fOf nearshore projects Is currently moving into a feasIbility phase. How We Got Here... Green/Duwamish Ecosystem Restoration Project A. Reconnaissance Study-199S to 1997 Cost: $450.000 (100% Federa)) Outcome: Recommended FeasIbility Study of over SO sites basin wide " Cooperative agreements between the U.5.Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) and tocal jurisdictions " DolÆlopmentoflocal ILAto COVef cost of Feasibility Study B.Feasibility Study-1997 to 2000 Cost: $1.500.000(50% fed<ral and 50% local) Outcome: Feasibility Study and conceptual designs for future constrUction of 45 recommended sites over 10 years " Cost $113 mlilion:65%federal share,35% local share,($35 million real estate, $5 million cash) " Authorized by the Water Resource Devetopment Act of 2000 " Approved Programmatic EI5 and Biological Assessment Nearshore General Investigation Study Reconnaissance Study - 2000 Cost: $100.000 (1 00% Iedera)) Outcome: Recommended feasIbility Study of Puget 5aund Current Activities A.Nearshore Feasibility Study, Phase (-2001 to 2003 Cost: 1.5 million (50% Iederal share, 25% Salmon Recove<y funding Board ((5RfB)) share, 25% state and local share, Washington Dopanment of Ash and WIldlife will act as local sponsor) Outcomes: " Umlting factors analysis " Eariyactlon project proposals B. Green/Duwamish Design Agreement-2002 to 200S Cost: $3 million (75%Iederal share,25% local share) Outcome: " Completion ofdeslgn and engineering for 20 sites ready to build ($1,800,000) "Studies necessary for construction of 20 sites ($1,200,000) Future. .. A. Green/Duwamish Phase 1 Construction-2002 to 200S Cost: $39,ooo.ooo( 65% federal share, 35% local share,$12,OOO,000 real estate, $2.000,000 cash) 2002: $1.000,000 requested for new constrUction start on 3 sites 2002 to 200S: $38,000.000 in construction on 17 sites B.Green/Duwamish Phase 2 and 3 -200S to 2012 Remainder of 25 sites constructed C. Nearshore Design and Construction Cost and Schedule: To be determined in Nearshore Feasibility Study. Available for Other Projects in WRIA 9 Section 1135 or206 programs and the PugetSound Restoration Initiative through u.s. Army Corps of Engineers """";;:;""'" œ ~ !~:~~ Corps " . On.. ..." of Engineers. MEETING DATE: March 19,2002 ITEM# :Tï'"- (Iv) -------------------- - ----------------------- ------------------------------- CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: Letter of Support to National Marine Fisheries Service for Grant Application / Friends of the Hylebos CATEGORY: BUDGET IMPACT: ~ CONSENT 0 RESOLUTION 0 CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS 0 ORDINANCE 0 PUBLIC HEARING 0 OTHER Amount Bndgeted: Expenditure Amt.: Contingency Req'd: $ $ $ ------------------------------- ------------- ATTACHMENTS: Memo to Land Useffransportation Committee dated March 18, 2002 and letter to Christopher C. Doley, Director, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Restoration Center dated March 19, 2002. --------------------------------------------- ----------- SUMMARYIBACKGROUND: A letter has been written in support of the Friends of the Hylebos Wetlands' grant application for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Community-Based Restoration Program (CRP) Grant. This grant will help fund King County acquisition of property along the west fork ofHylebos Creek and a major City of Federal Way restoration project in the same vicinity. The City project is now being initiated with design in 02 and construction slated for 2003. Current estimates are that the project will cost $ 1.2 million. The City Council has committed $750,000 through Surface Water Management fees for this project and staff is in the process of obtaining grant funding and other reyenues to COYer the additional expense. The NOAA grant opportunity will provide an additional means of meeting the project goal - restoration of 2500 lineal feet of quality salmonid habitat. As such, the City of Federal Way supports the Friends' grant application and through the grant, intend on working with the Friends' during the design and construction of the City's West Hylebos Creek restoration project slated for 2002/2003. As a part of the restoration project, the City will be directing its consultant to assist in developing changes to the City's comprehensiye plan to guide long-term management of this reach of the West Hylebos, including surface water management and parks issues, and the feasibility of interpretiye trails and an off-site interpretiye center. ----------------------- CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Land Useffransportation Committee will consider this at its March 18, 2002 meeting- If they approye, it is recommended the Mayor and City Manager sign the attached support letter. ---------------------------------------------------- -------------------------- PROPOSED MOTION: "I moye that the Mayor and City Manager of Federal Way sign the attached support letter to Christopher D. Doley_" ~~~::~:~~~~~;~~v AL:--V~:-,~-¡j-~:--/rr- i)'f<J¡;¡;:¡;--------------- (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: 0 APPROVED 0 DENIED 0 TABLEDIDEFERRED/NO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) COUNCIL BILL # 1 ST reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # REYISED - 05/10/2001 CITY HALL 33530 1 5t Way South PO Box 9718 (253) 661-4000 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 March 19,2002 ~ DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE O. R" ¡::.1' \ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ~{' , Christopher D. Ooley, Director ;;;¿;; NOAA Restoration Center National Marine Fisheries Service .J ((1 ( () æ/ 1315 East West Highway (F/HC3) :~::s~:~::~::::::"' ~ Cl ~ , Dear Mr. Ooley: ~ () ê This letter is being written in support of the Friends of the Hylebos Wetlands' (Friends) grant application for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Community-Based Restoration Program (CRP) Grant. Since incorporation eleyen years ago, restoration and conservation of Hylebos Creek has been a priority for the City of Federal Way. To this end the City has established protective zoning measures to preserve key reaches of Hylebos Creek, constructed four regional retention/detention ponds to reduce flooding and high flows in Hylebos Creek, and implemented several stream stabilization and restoration projects. In 1994, the Federal Way City Council authorized the Surface Water Management department to implement a major restoration project for the west fork of Hylebos Creek. This project is now being initiated with design in 2002 and construction slated for 2003. CUfTent estimates are that the project will cost $1.2 million. The City Council has committed $750,000 through Surface Water Management fees for this project and staff is in the process of obtaining grant funding and other reVenues to coyer the additional expense. The NOAA grant opportunity will provide an additional means of meeting the project goal - restoration of 2500 lineal feet of quality salmonid habitat. As such, the City of Federal Way supports the Friends' grant application and through the grant, intends on working with the Friends' during the design and construction of the City's West Hylebos Creek restoration project slated for 2002/2003. This grant affords both the City and the Friends organization the opportunity to jointly work towards restoration and preservation of cntical salmonid habitat within the city hmits. In conjunction with the extensive detentIOn and retention ÜlCilities the City has constructed over the past ten years, we expect this restoration project to provide signIficant benefits to salmonid resources. As a part of the restoratIOn project, the City will be directing Its consultant to assist In developing changes to the City's comprehensive plan to guide long-tenn management of this reach of the West Hylebos, including surtàce water management and parks issues, and thc feasibihty of interpretive trails and an oft: site InterpretIve center. Christopher D. Doley, Director NOAA Restoration Center CliP Projecl Applications Page 2 Hylebos Creek is an important community and natural resource and we are pleased to support the Friends of the Hylebos Wetlands' grant application to the Community Restoration Program. For several years, the City has partnered with the Friends of the Hylebos Wetlands on Hylebos Creek restoration projects and we are anticipating another successful partnership. Sincerely, Jeanne Burbidge Mayor David Moseley City Manager JB/DM:dl cc: Cary Roe, Public Works Director Paul Bucich, Surface Water Manager Jennifer Schroder, Parks and Recreation Director City Council(7) Project File Day file """"1'""""'10"""","',10,, h,ld"" "'PI"'" """ d"c DRAFT .31¡~ It) 2-- CITY HALL 33530 1 5t Way South PO Box 9718 (253) 661-4000 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 March 19, 2002 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Christopher D. Ooley, Director NOAA Restoration Center National Marine Fisheries Service 1315 East West Highway (F/HC3) Silyer Spring, MD 20910-3282 A TTN: CRP Project Applications. Dear Mr. Ooley: This letter is being written in support ofthe Friends of the Hylebos Wetlands' (Friends) grant application for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Community-Based Restoration Program (CRP) Grant. Since incorporation eleyen years ago, restoration and conservation of Hylebos Creek has been a priority for the City of Federal Way. To this end the City has estabJished protectiye zoning measures to preserve key reaches of Hylebos Creek, constructed four regional retention/detention ponds to reduce flooding and high flows in Hylebos Creek, and implemented seyeral stream stabilization and restoration projects. In 1994, the Federal Way City Council authorized the Surface Water Management department to implement a major restoration project for the west fork of Hylebos Creek. This project is now being initiated with design in 2002 and construction slated for 2003. Current estimates are that the project will cost $1.2 million. The City Council has committed $750,000 through Surface Water Management fees for this project and staff is in the process of obtaining grant funding and other reyenues to coyer the additional expense. The NOAA grant opportunity will proyide an additional means of meeting the project goal - restoration of 2500 Jineal feet of quaJity salmonid habitat. As such, the City of Federal Way supports the Friends' grant appJication and through the grant, intend on working with the Friends' during the design and construction of the City's West Hylebos Creek restoration project slated for 2002/2003. This grant affords both the City and the FOHW organization the opportunity to jointly work towards restoration and preservation of critical salmonid habitat within the city limits. In conjunction with the extensive detention and retention faciJities the City has constructed over the past ten years, we expect this restoration project to provide significant benefits to salmonid resources. As a part of the restoration project, the City will be directing its consultant to assist in developing changes to the City's comprehensive plan to guide long-tenD management of this reach of the West Hylebos, induding surface water management and parks issues, and the feasibility of interpretive trails and an off- site interpretive center. Christopher D. Doley, Director NOAA Restoration Center CRP Project Applications Page 2 Hylebos Creek is an important community and natural resource and we are pleased to support the Friends of the Hylebos Wetlands' grant application to the Community Restoration Program. For several years, the City has partnered with the Friends of the Hylebos Wetlands on Hylebos Creek restoration projects and we are anticipating another successful partnership. Sincerely, Jeanne Burbidge Mayor David Moseley City Manager JBIDM;dl cc; Cary Roe, Public Works Director Jennifer Schroder, Parks and Recreation Director City Council(7) Project File Day file ',\'wm\pmj,",\hy"bŒlfohw hy"bo> "'pport ",'" do, MEETING DATE: March 19,2002 ITEM# vr ------------------------- CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: Municipal Facility Advisory Committee / Scope of Work 0 CONSENT 0 RESOLUTION :g CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS 0 ORDINANCE 0 PUBLIC HEARING 0 OTHER ~UDGET IMPACT: Amount Budgeted: Expenditure Amt.: Contingency Req'd: CATEGORY: $ $ $ ------------------------------ ATTACHMENTS: I) Draft Municipal Facility Adyisory Committee scope of work; 2) Municipal Facility Work Program as adopted by the City Council on February 19. --------------------- SUMMARYIBACKGROUND: At its Match 5 meeting, the City Council approyed creation ora Municipal Facility Advisory Committee. The committee will consist of II members - seyen citizens and four "experts" - appointed by the Council. Councilmembers also directed that staff prepate a scope of work for the committee, a draft of which is attached for your reyiew and approyal. Upon approyal, staff will begin the actiye recruitment process for committee members. '~rviews ate tentatiyely scheduled for April 16. The committee's mission would be as follows: "Using a thorough public process, analyze potential sites and explore funding issues in order to proyide the City Council with yaluable infonnation and recommendations on both siting and funding a new municipal facility- At the conclusion of this process, the City Council could amend the committee's mission by adding a second phase to address building specifications and/or design." The committee's "first phase" tasks would be divided into six ateas: start-up, data collection, analysis, preliminary report, citizen comment, and final report. The committee would meet from April-October 2002. Staff is also working on an RFP for a property consultant that will assist the city and committee with site identification, cost analysis, pro/con analysis, site preparation issues, and initial enyiommental analysis- This item was approved by Council as part of the Municipal Facility Work Program adopted on February 19, Staff contact: Derek Matheson, x-4671. CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: None. PROPOSED MOTION: "I moye approval ofthe attached Municipal Facility Advisory Committee scope of work." ~ --------- CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: 0 APPROVED 0 DENIED 0 TABLEDillEFERREDINO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) COUNCIL BILL # 1ST reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # REVISED - 05/10t2001 Municipal Facility Advisory Committee Scope of Work - 6th Draft (3/11/02,9:30 a.m.) Compositioni An eleven-member committee consisting of seven citizens who are recruited using the typical process for boards/commissions and interviewed and appointed by the City Council; plus four "experts" in development, planning, real estate, and/or finance who are recruited by staff then interviewed and appointed by the City Council. The Council will designate one member of the committee as chair. Council members are seeking a diyersity of opinions. Property owners or deyelopers with an interest in parcels likely to be considered by the committee are not eligible for membership. Staff Support The city manager will designate a lead staff person to support the committee. The committee will also work closely with the municipal facility staffteam. Missionii Using a thorough public process, analyze potential sites and explore funding issues in order to provide the City Council with yaluable information and recommendations on both siting and funding a new municipal facility. At the conclusion of this process, the City Council could amend the committee's mission by adding a second phase to address building specifications and/or design. Parameters Provide regular updates at City Council meetings. Provide opportunities for public comment! interaction at all meetings. Conduct all meetings and activities in compliance with the state Open Public Meetings Act, City Council Rules, city Code of Ethics, and all other applicable laws/ordinances/po Ii ci es. Dutiesiii 1. Start-up a. Elect a vice chair. (April-May) b. Set a meeting schedule. (April-May) Data Collection a. Review all City Council decisions and work products from 1997 to date on the municipal facility project. (April-May) Review the Comprehensive Plan and other city policies related to public facilities. (April-May) Invite City Council members to proyide their individual perspectives on the municipal facility project. (May) Review space needs analysis, site selection criteria, and any sites being reviewed by staff and the city's property consultant. (May) e. Review funding requirements. (May-June) Analysis a. Analyze site options, preliminary costs, and pros/cons.of sites. (May-September). 2. b. c. d. 3. 4. b. Analyze funding options (May-September) Preliminary Report a. Provide a preliminary report with recommendations on locations (i.e., core, frame, suburban, current site, etc.), sites within those locations, and financing issues. All reports should analyze the costs and pro~cons of each alternative and provide the committee's top three-plus recommended alternatiyes in rank order. (July) Citizen Comment a. Proyide input to a survey that will ask the public about the municipal facility project (June) Hold public forums to explain the municipal facility issue, present preliminary findings/ recommendations, and solicit public feedback for inclusion in the committee's final report. (July-September) Final Report a. Provide a final report to the City Council. (September) b. Disband unless City Council extends mission (i.e., building specifications/design). (October) 5. b. 6. Outcome City Council prepared to make a decision on site and funding for a new municipal facility. I Adopted by the City Council, Mar. 5, 2002 'Adopted by City Council as part of City Hall Work Program, Feb. 12,2002 (attacbed) '" Some duties have been previously adopted by the City Council as part of the City Hall Work Program. Where appropriate, they have been modified to reflect Council's discussion on Mar. 5, 2002. 2 Work Program for New City Hall Prepared for the City Council - 2112/02 Wotk Ptogram Gnal: Using a thomugh public involvement pmcess, analyze potential sites and explore funding issues in order to provide the City Council with valuable information and recommendations on both siting and funding a new city hall. StatTTeam: Detek Matheson (lead), Patrick Dnherty, Donna Hanson, Anne Kirkpatrick, Jenny Schmder, and ¡wen Wang !ask 1. Startup . City Council discusses city hall issue at January retreat . StatTfinalizes work program for adoption by City Council . StatT submits draft work pmgram to City Council . City Council adopts work pmgram 2. Community involvement process . City solicits/appoints a City Hall Advisory Committee . Committee convenes and teviews work-to-date . Committee discusses and holds public forums on both site issues and financing issues . Committee provides preliminary tecommendations on preferred site area (i.e., core, frame, suburban, current site, etc.) and financing issues to City Council . . City Council selects preferred site area . Committee provides final report to City Council on site issues and financing issues 3. Analyze the location and costs/benefits of alternative sites . Staff hires outside agent to identify and cost out two to three sites each in the City Center Core, City Center Frame, suburban areas; plus considers current City Hall . Outside agent assists committee and staff with site issues . Committee and public discuss site options as part of community involvement pmcess 4. 2003-2004 budget development and adoption . Committee and public discuss funding options as part of community involvement pmcess . City Council incorporates preferred funding option into budget 1 EM AMI 1 A S Q N Q MEETING DATE: March 19,2002 ITEM# JlZ¿- ~) ............................................................................................................................................................. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT: 2002 Carry-Forward Budget Adjustment ............................................................................................................................................................... CATEGORY: 2002 BUDGET IMPACT: $25,746,421 _CONSENT _X_ORDINANCE _BUSINESS _HEARING _FYI _RESOLUTION _STAFF REPORT _PROCLAMATION _STUDY SESSION _OTHER ............................................................................................................................................................... ATTACHMENTS: Budget Adjustment Summary, Memo and Ordinance. ............................................................................................................................................................... SUMMARYIBACKGROUND: This is an ordinance to adjust the 2002 budget to: (I) reflect the actual ending fund balance at 12/31101; (2) carry-forward grants, transfers, and otherreyenues which were awarded and budgeted but not receiyed in 2001; and (3) carry-forward projects, services, and other expenditures that were approyed or committed in 2001 but not yet completed or paid at the end of 200 1. Unless otherwise identified, these adjustments are housekeeping in nature. .............................................................................................................""""""""""""""""""""""""" CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Approye the 2002 CalT)'-Forward Budget Adjustment. ............................................................................................................................................................... CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION: Motion to move the 2002 Carry-Forward Budget Adjustment to second reading and enactment at the April 9th regular meeting. ............................................................................................................................................................... APPROVED FOR INCLUSION IN COUNCIL PACKET: (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: _APPROVED _DENIED _TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION COUNCIL BILL # 0< t (p 1st READING ENACTMENT READ ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # ............................................................................................................................................................... "1& CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM Date: To: Via: From: Subject: February 20, 2002 Finance, Economic Deyelopment & Regional Affairs Committee David Moseley, City Manager Iwen Wang, Management Services Director J1AJ Carry Forward Budget Adjustment Ordinance Back!!round The carry forward budget adjustment makes three types of modifications to current year's budget: I. Adjust the beginning fund balance ayailable based on the actual year-end balance of the previous year; 2. Appropriate for projects that were budgeted in the prior year, but not completed and will continue during the current year; 3. Make other changes or correction as needed. General and Street Fund Operations: The General and Street Funds operations for 200] resulted in an additional $4.6 million in fund balance than anticipated during the mid-biennial budget adjustment. Of this amount, $2.86 million is needed in 2002 to coyer the potential loss ofI695 backfill from the state, to continue projects in progress, and to fully fund the 2002 contingency account (we only budget for 20% ofthe amount for the second year in a biennium). This leayes a $1.76 million undesilmated balance that is ayailab]e for capital or one-time expenses in 2003/04 budget cycle- The $4_6 million is made up of$l.5 million in higher revenues than budgeted and $3.1 million in unspent expenditures. The primary source of additional reyenues is sales tax ($462,806), 1-695 backfill not budgeted in 2001 ($470,] 79), and gambling tax ($222,867), Planning/PW Plan Review fees ($3]8,028), and Polic.e Security and Traffic School reyenues ($209,580). On the $3.1 million unspent expenditures, $2.6 million will be needed in 2002 for projects in progress ($1.9 million), fully fund the 2002 contingency account ($639,]20), and $137,500 in one-time items as listed below for Council funding consideration. . Allocate $11.5k for the city to participate in a cost sharing purchase of an updated digital aerial photography (also $6.5k will be funded from SWM for a total of$18k); Provide funding for outside legal counsel for anticipated telecomm lease negotiations for 2002 $35k Proyide $25k for unscheduled major maintenance project at KLCC; Provide $66k for Public Safety grant match. . . . Designated or Project Specific Funds: The balance of the adjustments are for designated programs or capital project funds, such as arterial street oyerlay program, lodging tax funded tourism program, 2% for the arts project, CIP funds, KFTheater/Dumas Bay Centre capita] projects. The carry forward adjustment will incorporate the following reallocations: . Allocate $40k from BP A Trail Phase III to fund a consultant to perfonn an analysis of West Hylebos stream protection needs; Allocate $]40k from parks CIP fund balance for property acquisition as previously approyed by Council. . Action Requested Moye the carry forward budget adjustment in the amount of $25,746,42] to the full Council for approyal. ~tt~ APPROVAL BY COMMIT Ufinlb;enn;a)lordinanc\2002 carryforward memo doc '3\ ~fÿ( - ~ ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON,RELATINGTOBUDGETS AND FINANCE, REVISING THE 2001-02 BIENNIAL BUDGET (AMENDS ORDINANCE 00-377, 01-387, 01-406 AND 01-408). WHEREAS, certain revisions to the 2001-02 Biennial Budget are necessary; and WHEREAS, these revisions are a result of funds to be carried forward ITom 2001; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Ordinance 01-408, Section I, is hereby amended to adopt the revised budget for the years 2001-02 biennium in the amounts and for the following purposes: Section 1. 2001-02 Biennial Budget. That the budgetforthe 2001-02 biennium is hereby adopted in the amounts and for the purposes as shown on the attached Exhibit A ("2002 Reyised Budget"). Section 2- Severability. The proyisions ofthis ordinance are declared separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion of this ordinance or the inyalidity of the application thereofto any person or circumstance, shall not affect the validity of the remainder of the ordinance, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. ORD.# ,PAGEl "3Q Section 3. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effectiye date of this ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force five (5) days from the time of its final passage, as provided by law- PASSED by the City Council of the City of Federal Way this day of ,2002. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MAYOR, JEANNE BURBIDGE ATTEST: CITY CLERK, N. CHRISTINE GREEN APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY, BOB STERBANK FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. K,\\fm\b;=;.I\",dm~,\2002 """f'~Md ",dm~re.d" ORD.# , PAGE 2 "-;5 (0 : Re"'ed,C", "..,..sir" 3,700,'07 $ Special Revenue Fund" s¡¡e¡,¡- Arterial St",et UtlHtyT., 2% foe the Art, Gcant, - CDBG ~, Suareole Reseeve "eport St",tegle Re,eeve "',000 41,859 8,220,885 268,863 40,781 2,878 41:414 Cebt Service Fund 5,258,013 c\ Capital P,oject Funds: .9!Y£acHitles Packs SWM Tcaffic St",e" 10,059 ~ 1,268,036 458,047 t,111,943 Ente'.'i,. Fund: ~e Wale' Maoaoemeot . Dumas ~ Cente, 338,505 20,140 Intemal Service Fund" .-- 8'!k Managem~ '~f2..nnarlon S"tems 3,631,827 1,513,180 192667 , 830 895 ',055,299 .02 2002 REVfSEO BUCGET EXHIBIT A '" "RòVe¡r"es:&:Oiii",,:SQU""" ,',',',' " ROVIsBrJ, ", :Ch..~e:tn:: ':" ::' Re""'u.' " ,R"enu. ':Fund_""." ',Ad/.._,' 27,389, tOO $ 3,594,307 1,584,254 6,476,07' 266,208 120,000 669,343 9,000 132,500 4,862,179 750,000 155,000 ',"99,009 1,373,000 3,269,656 755,650 708,550 1,579,842 221,095 ',310,081 450,863 ':$'" ~~,)i~,~~~~$, ,:5~;771À( ""n\blennlallcedlnaneI2002 canyfocwacd adj,xls oedlnanee 02 0212212002 t2:35 PM 4,519,52J $ 157,926 673,365 51,964 ,~:~;: '00,709 ~ 1,461 434 237,867 7,853,872 713,242 5,409,731 ('59,147 7,089,525 16',725 358,45' 315,511 121,300 1:214 ~ ,:30424 .~Ùil;q~: 337~735)ß$ 35,:m',999 II $ 98,003 30,307 ~r:--=== - - 11,368,059 8,823,831 292,261 II 1 151 409 7,765,676 298,900 1,772 t2S II 11,346,593 258ÆJL ~';~~::~ 237,540 = 27,300 " #;~¡j¡jiqi 28,583,259 $ 3,612,307 1,626,113 4,485,844 ""3,808 12Opoo 669,343 132,500 6ÆMÆ2. 750,000 157500 2,10',264 1,373,000 3,250,014 715,422 708650 1,305,202 246,158 816,990 ::::8,89,410, ::$5¡j,~i;.W ¿,350~613lrs 256,019 673,365 35,411 123,835 91,187 28,114 4,139 '32,500 7,85M61 857498 5,330,314 185,689 6,031,452 637,001 288,928 84,329 27,300 :~iM~Ú$. 30,943,872 II $ 3,869,226 2,299,478 4,485,844 300,219 123,838 211,187 28,114 673,482 6,604,792 8,603,861 1 014998 7,440,578 186,560 8,304,452 3,250,914 1,352,423 70e,550 1,- 90',319 696,7'0 "~113;~;9q~' FundS""'..." ': R....,.,.dF,', :'fJ"~ed' 4,32I,f27 100,000 ',150,051 188,433 59,303 50,848 4,763,267 10,970 135411 325,098 112,331 3,042,141 500,982 40,230 3,948,335 1,957,74' 166,390 2,25' 523 867,175 ~1;~;3~ . ....... .... ... Be¡jiniiioíi#uii<jBalåitcé . REVENUES Properly Tax Sales Tax Criminal Justice Sales Gambling Tax Leasehold/Mis Taxes License & Fees Franchise Fees Building Petmits/Plan Check - CO MVETII695 Backfill Criminal Justice HlC Criminal Justice UP Liquor Excise Tax Liquor Profits Grants Vehide License Fee Fuel Tax Plan ReviewlZoing Fees Plan Check FeeS/Petmits - PW Other Mise Slteet Feestcharges Financing Proceeds-PW Fines & Forfeitures/Court Revenues Interest Income Police & Securitynnclduing PS grants Mise Rev Recreation Prog Admin Fee Operating Trsft .:.Tòtàl:ÈIi!"en!ièS.: EXPENDITURES City Council City Manager Muni-Court Community Oevelopment Legal Management Services Jail Public Safety Park & Recreation Public Works Capital Transfer Contingenc .fQif¡;~:iiMlif!ji~ .¡¡x~;;;$ofR';~';,;;;esíÉXp~se . EiidinÍ1FiJn.diiåli";jc~.. . . Street Endtn FIB Geneia,ll{ndlngFJB . City of Federal Way General & Street Fund 2001 Operating Results and Carry Forward Summary .AQiustl!d~ . ...Bod:.! :.. Fà"ò,ablit U;m,voiabJe) Dunl< ... ... ere""t.. ..NoIe.:. ......... .... .$~;6zóA44$6:62¡¡;44 . . ... . .. ........... ~4;~16;549 ¡=rom2ci(J1ó~r~iioO$ $ 7,200,394 $ 7,215,272 $ 14,878 0.21% 9,905,347 10,368,153 462,806 4.67% 1,589,767 1,653,470 63,703 4.01% 2,000,000 2,222,867 222,867 11.14% 4,765 2,675 (2,090) -43.85% 174,809 94,891 (79,919) -45.72% 561,294 591,965 30,671 5.46% 796,353 597,881 (198,472) -24,92% 470,179 470,179 na (468,852) 2002 Bkfill Bgt ($ for 2003) na 64,955 76,903 11,948 18,39% 240,226 282,016 41,790 17,40% 455,780 442,941 (12,839) -2.82% 294,156 272,142 (22,014) -7,48% 81,268 KC/Signal Syn, 680,038 690,231 10,193 1.50% 1,170,933 1,190,299 19,386 1.65% 398,230 578,096 179,886 45,17% 259,583 397,745 138,162 53.22% 17,725 PW Expidited Plan Review 5,548 13,686 8,138 146.68% na 1,022,784 1,032,731 9,947 0,97% 407,064 346,319 (60,745) -14.92% 423,516 633,096 209,580 49,49% 126,978 PS Seiaures/Grants 53,834 138,146 64,312 156.61% 616,040 551,016 (65,024) -10.56% 476,306 476,302 (4) 0.00% 483,542 483,542 0,00% . $::29;2M;2M: :30;8:12,563;. ..$:.:1;537' 99':: :..!5',250/0 :$::::::(24:1;881 GFISFReveriU,,'¡ ,. 224,893 $ 207,604 $ 17,289 7.69% 707,908 654,896 53,012 7,49% 61,864 InternfTemp help/Branding 1,056,440 1,043,290 13,150 1.24% 65,128 Sal/Ben Error correction 3,710,221 3,068,826 841,394 17.29% 651,912 HS/PAAlPASEAP/CodeIPetmit sys 1,273,928 1,167,796 106,132 8.33% 35,000 Outide legal counsel-Telecom 1,756,088 1,862,975 93,113 5.30% 114,938 EOEN/KronoslOl Sys 1,388,938 1,333,515 55,423 3.99% 13,628,144 13,024,013 604,131 4.43% 735,986 Seizure/grant programs 3,247,600 3,089,826 157,774 4.86% 56,665 Arts com/add truck(s) 3,676,246 3,176,155 500,091 13.60% 256,919 ContracUProjecUtruck repl 639,999 518,553 121,446 18.98% 716,294 716,294 100.00% 639,120 Fully fund 2002 contingency $::32;O~;¡;~ $2&,9'<iT,4SIJ $ . 3;079;1!50::. .. :9'.61'4 .$::.:2,61t.53Zc. .. . . ...... . ::$. .$. .(1!;741;435. :$:.1;815;f1:t: :.4,.6t1>,649. . '168AO'l', :$::{2;860;413. $ 3,879;d99 $8;495;5$1 $. . 4;61t.54g. 119:01% ji¡7S6',i3i;i '$ 118,000 $ 275,926 $ 157,926 $ 3;761,1Jj)9 $8;219,6'31 $4,458',623. :$: 1;1:56;t36:. 11-- 02/22/2002 124 PM 02"'ryfwd"mma'YOf,oo".,.,I, 01 R., & E,p Va"a"" CITY OF FEDERAL WAY 2002 CARRYFORWARD ADJUSTMENT General Fund: cnv Manaoa, CM Contingency - to fully fund 2002'5 """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""",................... Extend Management Intem 6 months...... ........................................ Branding ....... .. ................... ....................... Temporary Help.... """"""""""""""'" ................................................. Munlcloal Court Internal Service Charge-Building Configurations for Clerk working on Impound Ordinance................................... Internal Service Charge-RE TrSfr OP Fund-DP Equipment............................................................................ Adopted Budget Correction.Judge & Commissioner Salaries & Benefits Correction............................................ Manaoamant Sarvicas Internal Service Charge-Residual Equity Transfer for Kronos Timekeeping System........................................... Internal Service Charge-Residual Equity Transfer for Eden Finandal System................... ................................ Wellness Program.......... """""""""""" ................................................ Education Assistance ............................................................................................................................ M&O for Atea Photo Project.................................................................................................................... Internal Service Charge-Residual Equity Transfer for Oocument Management System........................................ Law Oeoartment: Outside Legal Counsel-Negotiations for Teiecommunication Leases............................................................... Communnv Oavelooment One-Time/Planned Action SEPA-Project Not Complete................................................................................ One-Time/PAA Study-Project Not Complete............................................................................................... One-Time/Camp Plan Update-Project Not Started....................................................................................... Contract Service for Code Amendments-In Progress................................................................................... Part-Time Intern-Funded wtSCA Buildable Lands $ in 2001........................................................................... Internal Service Charge-Pennit Tracking System......................................................................................... Human Services Contract-2000 Balance................................................................................................... Human Services Contract-2001 Balance................................................................................................... Human Services-Employee Oonations...................................................................................................... Human Service-Defendant Donations....................................................................................................... Neighborhood Matching Grant-2001 Balance............................................................................................. Neighborhood Development-Training........................................................................................................ Neighborhood Oevelopment-Improve 2002 Volunteer Recognition DInnet........................................................ One-Time/City Hall Study.... ............................................................................................. Parks & Recreation Internal Service Charge-Residual Equity Transfer for Econnect Recreation Registratioo...................................... Arts Commmission Operations Balance................................................................................................... Internal Service Charge-Building Fund M&O for Klahanee Lake Center Unscheduled Repairs & Maintenance ....... Pubtic Saletv Explorer Program.................. ......................................................................................... TrafficSchool............. ............................................................................... State Seizures........ ..... .............................................. Federal Seizures............. .................................."""""""""""""".................................... Memorabilia Account.... ............................................................................................................. Weyerhauser Grant-Speed Board.... """"""""""""""" .............................................................. 2000 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant................................................................................................. 2001 Local Law Enforcement BlockGrant................................................................................................. Pending Grant Match - 2002 Bulletproof Vest Program..... ......................................................... Pending Grant Match -2002 LLEBG ........ """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""'" Pending Grant Match - 2002 COPS More...................................................................................... Street Fund: Commute Trip Reduction.................................. ................................................ Neighborhood Traffic Safety-Install Speed Bumps..... """""""""""""""""""" King County Contract-Pavement Markings.. ................................. .............................................. Pedestrian Safety-Install Audible Pedestrian Signals.............................. ............................... Pavement Markings City-Wide.. .................... ........................... WSDOTTriangleStudy......... ...................... .......................... ................... Traffic Impact Fee Study-Altemative Traffic Mitigation Approach....................... . .. Intemal Service Fund Charge-Auxiliary Generator for Steel Lake Maintenance Building............ Parking Structure Study: Analysis of Housing/Additional Parking....... Internal Service Charge-Digitai Aerial Photography.... Temporary Help-Funded with Expedited Review Fees.. 'SulitötalGenerat & StreetFiind . 0212212002 1 :01 PM 2002 carryforward adj.xls sum 02 ~ $639,120 15,000 38,000 6,864 2,300 3,500 59,326 21,000 25,000 5,732 13.706 11,500 36,000 35,000 170,000 204,460 10,500 53,000 11,656 114,000 1,290 26,082 5,341 25,492 18,024 300 2,000 9,767 5,000 26,665 25,000 2,596 60,710 365,801 92,006 466 2,500 49,468 96,133 10,000 10,000 46,300 31,268 20,000 7,000 12,786 15,025 22,714 50,000 34.781 6,500 32,620 6,500 17,725 $2,817;532 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY 2002 CARRYFORWARD ADJUSTMENT Arterial Street Fund: Asphalt Overlay Program-2001 Balance................................................ ..................................... Sotld Waste 8. Recycling Fund: Sound Resource Management Contract-2001 Contract Balance.......................... ..................."" Increase Grant Expenditures based on Actual 2002 Allocation............. .............................................. HoteVMotet Tax Fund: Tourism Program-2001 Balance.............................................................................................................. 673,365 6,104 30,307 91,187 Strategic Reserve Fund: Eliminate Budget for Transfer of Interest to Risk Management Fund-Combined Reserves wlRisk Managemen!........ (132,500) .:.;¡tJI¡\"I'ISØ~~I~I~"~,,O""i/Ij~:"""""""""""" :':.'.".'.'..'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'...".'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'....,...........,.....:-:-.:-..............,... :::$1;I;8A~' City Facititles CtP Fund: Public Safety Facility-2001 Balance.......................................................................................................... Oowntown Revitalization-Capital-2001 Balance........................................................................................... Downtown Operations-Consulting Contracts-Legal Fund............................................................................... Oowntown Operations-Sign Incentive Program........................................................................................... Downtown Operations-Kiosk................................................................................................................... Parles CIP Fund: Sportsfield Improvements-8acajawea Cip & Annual Program-Project Balance.................................................. Neighborhood Parks-Project Balance........................................................................................................ Celebration Park-Project Balance............................................................................................................. Klahanee Lake Improvements-Project Balance........................................................................................... New Project-West Hytebos-Source is BpA Trail Phase III General Fund Balance............................................... BpA Trail Phase III-Grant Balance............................................................................................................ Skateboard Park-Project Balance............................................................................................................. Alderbrook Play Park-Project Balance....................................................................................................... Hytebos Project-Project Balance.............................................................................................................. Major MaintenancelParks Facilities-Project Balance..................................................................................... Parks Acquisition-New Project................................................................................................................. Surface Water Management CIP Fund: SeaTac Mall Detention-Project Balance..................................................................................................... Startake RoadtSouth 272nd Convenyance Improvements-Project Balance....................................................... South 356ths Regional Storm Water Facility-Project Balance...... ................................................................. West Hytebos Channel Stabilization-Project Balance.............................................................................. SR99 Storm Orainage Improvements-Project Balance.................................................................................. West Branch Lakota Creek Restoration-Project Balance............................................................................... Lakota Creek Channel Restoration-Project Balance.................... ........................................................... 5 Year Monitoring Program-Project Balance............................................................................................... Traffic CIP Fund: Dash Point Road & 8th Ave SW Traffic Signal-Project Balance...... ............................................................ Transportation CIP Fund: South 356th St to SR99 to 1st Ave-2001 Balance.............. ...................................................................... ROW 23rd Ave South, South 317th to South 326th-2001 Bal..................................................................... South 312th - SR99 to 23rd Ave South...................................................................................................... South 320th St & Highway 99 Intersection Improve-2001 Bal......................................................................... Pacific Highway Phase 1- South 312th to South 324th-2001 Bal.. ..................................................... SR99 & South 33Oth St - 2001 Balance...... ..................................................................... Pacific Highway Phase 11- South 324th to So 34Oth - 2001 Bal....................................................................... Pacific Highway Phase 11- South 324th to So 340th - Balanced Transferred from South 348th to SR99.................. South 312th St@ 8th Ave So Traffic Signal-2001 Bal................ .............................................. So 336th St and Weyerhauser-2001 Balance.... ..................... South 32Oth St@lstAveSouth-2001 Balance South 288th St@SR99lntersection-2001 Balance..................... . 1st Ave So-So 356th to 361st Shoulder-OI deficit bal covered by 2002.. South 3121h @ 14th Ave Traffic Signal-2001 Balance.. South 348th St@ 1st Ave South-add Turn Lanes........ ... 21st Ave SW/SW 357th SI: SW 356th St-22nd Ave-2001 Bal.. South 348th SI:9th Ave So to SR99-2001 Balance..... 20th Ave So: So 316th to So 32Oth St-2001 Balance...... So 3408th SI@ SRI61-2001 Balance.. 9th South & 336th-2001 Balance.. ......................................... ........................ ....................... ............................. ...................... 6,549,874 1,068,842 79,898 105,247 50,000 91,597 63,328 126,466 26,554 40,000 292,261 18,993 4,233 51,984 1,295 140,787 1,910,267 723,310 346,230 747.868 271,667 883,944 326,045 129,983 186,569 155,444 2,046,334 55,780 767,590 1.473,796 13,828 1,210,591 27.208 22,691 248,115 45,222 478,530 (4,884) 957 29,126 44,417 203.379 61.437 51,390 500 .S\J~Ø"'¡:Capit;>ll'r"¡~~IFohd$ . .$i!1;168;684" 02/22/2002 1:01 PM 2002 carryforward adj.x!s sum 02 jq CITY OF FEDERAL WAY 2002 CARRYFORWARD ADJUSTMENT Surlace Water Management: ESAGapAnalysis............ ... ... """""""""""'" .................. ....... .... ... Internal Service Charge-Residual Equity Transfer for Auxiliary Generator-Steel Lake Maintenance Building............. Watershed Interlocal Agreement """""""""""""""""""""""" ............................................ Brochure .Printing...................................................... ................................................... Steel Lake Covered Wash Facility............. .................... ........................................ Dumas Bay Centre Fund: Knutzen Family Theatre Capital-2001 Balance.................. ............................................................ OBC Operations-Ending Balance to Capital Maintenance........................ ..................................................... KFT Operations-Ending Balance to Capital Maintenance.... """""""""""""'" OBC-AJea Grant Project Balance & Grant Funding...................... ..... """"""""""""""""""""'" DBC-Carpet, Irrigation, Roof Repair.................................................. ........................................................ Information Systems Fund: Mid-Biennium Correction- 4 Radios for 4 Lateral Officers............. ......................................................... Eden Financial System Upgrade-MSIFinance............................................................................................. Kronos TImkeeping System-MSIFinance................................................................................................... Document Management System-MSIFinance............................. """""""""""""""""'" Pennit Tracking System-CDlBuilding.................................... ............................................................ Recreation Registration-Econnect-PklRec................................................................................................. New Program-GIS Area Photo Project (pending 2126 FEORAC)..................................................................... GIS Server Replacement-Use of Reserves................................................................................................ City Hall Server Replacement-Use of Reserves........................................................................................... Munl-Court DP Equipment..................................................................................................................... I-Net for City Hall................................................. .................................................... LAN Equipment Replacement-Use of Reserves.................................... """""""""""""""""""""""""'" Reet & Equipment Fund: PW-5 Yard Dump Truck-Use of Reserves & Sale at ..Existing........................................................................ Pk/Mt-Bobcar Skid Steer Loader Annual Trade Out-Use of Rsvs...... ............................................. PWtST & SWM-Auxlliary Generator for Steel Lake Maint Bldg........................................................................ Buildings & Furnishings Fund: Muni-Court-Clerk Office Reconfiguration for Clerk working on Impound Ordinance................... ......................... Unscheduled Repairs to Klahanee Lake CommunitylSenior Center..... ........................................................... 46,151 6,500 3,444 2,660 39,328 17,825 29.873 30,084 520,947 38.272 9,928 25,000 21.000 38,000 114.000 5.000 18,000 35,000 13,500 3.500 2,000 4,000 67,171 4.158 13.000 2,300 25,000 '::S\ìb.tò¡irp",j¡i:loi¡if¡i:F<iridS::: :::S:1;135M~:: Speciat Studies/Contracts Fund: Government Channel Cable Broadcasting-2001 Balance.............................................................................. 2% for the Arts Fund: Parks Art Balance................................. """""..................................,..... CDBG Fund: Domestic Violence Grant Reimbursement-Transfer to Law...... ............................................................ :::$"6;091': ::: S.ubtOtaI: Nò,OArii1i¡¡iI:PtògraiRs::: 123,838 28.114 4.139 . ....,....' .... ........ :'G~~iJ1:9T:i~('ÂiÙij¡i¡6~. '.",', ...... '.. $~~,7~iìj~i 02/2212002 1 :01 PM 2002 carryforward adj,xls sum 02 '1<;; MEETING DATE: March 19,2002 ITEM# :Jllr ~ --------------..---.----------..-----.-...-..- -. ---~--- .----- ..... ._...._------_....._.._~------_...__..... -...--.------ .- CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: Ordinance Correcting Ordinance No. 02-414 (Changes to Thresholds Requiring Right-of-Way Improvements (25% Trigger) Code Amendments)) ~A~N - Ò ~t~RIN~-~;~' :- - D CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS D OTHER ~G I LntingenCy Req'd: $ _._----_._..__..__._.._-_.--~._---_._.._..._...._.__. ---_._~----_.__._---_...._- ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance. ---.-------...---.....-.......-.......---.-------..--.--_.__._---_._._.__._._-~~--- - -----..-.....--------- SUMMARYIBACKGROUND: Corrections to original Ordinance No. 02-414 as approyed by Council on February 19, 2002, are necessary to correct clerical errors. The highlighted corrections do not affect the amendments adopted in Ordinance No. 02-414. .-.-------.---.---....-.---..-..... ....--.-----------..--------------- ... ----...--.-.---.-.-.- _ITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: N/A ---.-----.-.-...-.--...-.----- ... .._._-_.....__._----~-----_..__.__._.__.._._._.._-_._. - .--. - - -- --------.--.----- PROPOSED MOTION: "I moye the rules be suspended, second reading be waiyed, and the proposed ordinance be approyed." ~;;;:~:~~~:;~~~:~:~------------_. (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) ...-----.----- COUNCIL ACTION: 0 APPROVED 0 DENIED 0 TABLEDillEFERREDfNO ACTION 0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) COUNCIL BILL # 1 ST reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # ~<j7 REVIS EO - 05/10/2001 K:\agnditemt25% trigger chap 22 3.11.02 ORDINANCE NO. DRAFT :3> /Í J.j () L-- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, AMENDING CHAPTER 22 (ZONING) OF THE FEDERAL WAY MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADDRESS FRONT AGE IMPROVEMENTS (AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 02-414) WHEREAS, the City of Federal Way adopted Ordinance No. 96-270 in July 1996, which significantly revised the Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 22 (Zoning); and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 02-414 on February 19,2002, amending FWCC Chapter 22 relating to ftontage improvements; and WHEREAS, typographical errors were made in Ordinance No. 02-414, and the City Council wishes to correct the mistakes by adopting a corrected version of Ordinance No. 02-414; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the cOde amendment is consistent with intent and purpose of FWCC Chapter 22 (Zoning) to provide for and promote the health, safety, and welfare of the general public; Now, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Amendment. FWCC, Chapter 22, Section 1473 is amended as set forth in the attached Exhibit A. Section 2. Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are declared separate and severable. The inyalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion of this ordinance, or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall not affect the validity of the remainder of the ordinance, or the validity of ils application to any other persons or circumstances. Section 3. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this ordinance is hereby ratified and affinTIed. Oed No.__, Page 1 Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective five (5) days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Federal Way at a regular meeting of the City Council on the - day of ,2002. ApPROVED: Mayor, Jeanne Burbidge AlTEST: City Clerk, N. Cluistine Green, CMC ApPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney, Bob C. Sterbank FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE No: K:\ordinance\25%.Chap 22 amendO3.11.02 Ord No.__, Page 2 ATTACHMENT A DRAFT: PROPOSED CODE REVISIONS Article XVI. IMPROVEMENTS Sections: Division I. Generally 22-1471 Special regulations in designated areas. 22-1472 Official right-of-way map adopted. 22-1473 When public improyements must be installed. 22-1474 Required public improvements. 22-1475 Additional improvements. 22-1476 Traffic control devices and signing. 22-1477 Modifications, deferments and waiyers. 22-1478 Bonds. 22-1479 - 22-1495 Reserved. DIVISION 1. GENERALLY 22-1471 Special regulations in designated areas. If the city council has approved a public improvements master plan or special design guiàelines for a particular area that includes a right-of-way, the master plan or other guidelines will be filed . with the city clerk and will govern the improyements to be provided by developments that abut that right-of-way. (Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(110.10), 2-27-90; Ord. No. 98-330, § 3, 12-15-98) 22-1472 Official right-of-way map adopted. The public works director shall produce and keep current an official right-of-way classification map that classifies each of the improyed and proposed rights-of-way, other than alleys, based on the classification standards contained within FWCC 22-1524 and 22-1525 and the objectives the comprehensiye plan. This right-of-way classification map, as adopted and amended from time to time, shall haye the full force as if its proyisions were fully set forth within this chapter. (Ord. No, 90-43. § 2(110.15), 2-27-90; Ord. No, 98-330, § 3,12-15-98) 22-1473 When public improvements must be installed. In/he le,-,n 'F,J:lI~I)c.~m:mc:>I.;" ",' ¡..,C,/ :.1 this -,cclio:> shut! ,-cjòr L {Ill co,:sln:ctifmc FefffmfRH.+HHHl/'-+tètmiF-HF^IN.'j-Hlli+wffl.'!;-ftlf'i!ilic.; ':/,)11,<; (,~cfi'¡/ "hllllil1g jJ1+Mie-èiIFed'fí'fIl-II<f,1';t' eFt>fflf't'Ff~I~-:¡c.¡ (a) The applicant shall provide the improvements required by this article if the applicant engages in any activity which requires a development permit except for the following: City or cedera! Way Draft Code ReviSIon, (I) The applicant need not comply with the provisions of this article if the proposed fa) :n1t'-i\jt~'¡eaflt-5hall pro,,'ide the impro-\'e+f\ents require;-by-\~icle if the applicant improvements in any 12-month period do not exceed 25 percent of the assessed or appraised value (based on an MAl appraisal provided by the applicant) of all structures and land combined on the subject property, whicheyer is greater, except that if the subject property is equal to or greater than 100,000 square feet in size, the land yalue shall not be included in the assessed or appraised value used to determine the 25 percent. (2) The applicant need not comply with the provisions of this article if, within the immediately preceding four years, public improvements were installed as part of any subdivision or discretionary land use approyal under this or any prior zoning code. (3) The applicant need not comply with the proyisions of this article if the proposal is to locate a personal wireless services facility (PWSF) on the subject property. (4) The applicant need not comply with the provisions of this article if the proposal is for façade improyements only. In addition, the cost of improvements required by Article XIX, Community Design Guide!ines, shall not be included in the total cost of improyements measured over a l2-month period pursuant to Section 22-1473(a)(1). (5) Tenant improyements, unless the proposed improvements add additional floor area- (6) If the required improvement is part of a larger project that has been scheduled for construction in the city's adopted six-year transportation improvement program, the public works director may permit the applicant to fulfill the applicant's obligation under this section by paying to the city the pro rata share of the costs of the required improyements attributable to the deyelopment of the subject property, as determined by the public works director. For purposes of determining the applicant's pro rata share, funds receiyed by the City from any federal, state, or local grant for the project shall be excluded from the total cost of the planned six-year transportation improyement. (b) Right-of-way adjacent to and within subdivision and short subdivisions must be dedicated and improved consistent with the requirements of this article, unless different requirements are imposed by the city as part of the subdivision or short subdivision approval. (Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(110.20),2-27-90; Ord. No. 98-330, § 3, 12-15-98; Ord. No. 00-363, § 15, 1-4-00) 22-1474 Required public improvements. (a) Generally. The development standards portion of FWCC 22-1523 through 22-1528 establish the improvements that must be installed, based on the classification of the yarious rígh¡s-ot~ way within the city. The applicant shall, consistent with the provisions of this article, install all improvements established in FWCC 22-1523 through 22-1528 along the frontage of each right-of-way, other than alleys. that abuts and traverses the subject property, commensurate with the imp3cts of the development. At a minimum, improvements shall be required on the City of Fede,a¡ Way D,an Code Revisions 2 abutting side of the right-of-way and a IO-foot lane on the side of the right-of-way opposite the frontage. (b) Additional dimensions and improvements. The applicant may increase the dimensions of any required improyement or install additional improyements within the right-of-way with the written consent of the public works director. (c) Authority to require dedication. If a right-of-way abutting the subject property has inadequate width based on the requirements in FWCC 22-1523 through 22-1528, the applicant shall dedicate a portion of the subject property parallel to the right-of-way and equal in width to the difference between the present right-of-way width and the width required by FWCC 22- 1523 through 22-1528 for that right-of-way. The public works director may waive additional dedication or may permit dedication of a lessor amount of the subject property for additional right-of-way width if: (I) It is likely to anticipate that, within the near future, the priyate property across the right-of-way will be required to dedicate property for public right-of-way; or (2) The reduction in the required right-of-way width will nonetheless provide adequate room for all improvements, inuastructure and functions within the right-of-way- For the purpose of determining the rough proportionality of right-of-way dedication to the development's impacts, the city may require up to 300 square feet of right-of-way dedication per ayerage daily trip generated by the development. All dedications under this subsection shall be by conveyance through a statutory warranty deed- (d) Partial right-of-way improvements. Where a right-of-way abutting the subject property does not, eY~n after dedicatior.s required under subsection (c) of this section, contain adequate width to install all of the improyements required within that right-of-way under this article, the applicant shall install improvements within the right-of-way which will provide a safe and efficient right-of-way and which will facilitate completion of all right-of-way improvements required in this article at a later date. The specific extent and nature of improvements, where full right-of-way width is not ayailable, will be determined by the public works director on a case-by-case basis. (e) Easements. The public works director may require the applicant to grant such easements over, under and across the subject property as are reasonably necessary or appropriate under the circumstances, including but not limited to easements for the following: (I) Pedestrian access and sidewalks. (2) Street lighting. (3) Traffic control devices. (Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(110.25),2-27-90; Ord. No. 98-330. § 3, 12-15-98) City or "oder,,¡ w,¡y Dr"n Code ¡(cvlSi""s 22-1475 Additional improvements- The city may require the applicant to paye or install additional improvements within rights-of- way, either abutting or not abutting the subject property. This may include traffic signals, channelizations, turn lanes, and other improyements necessary or appropriate to improve traffic circulation and safety, the need for which is directly attributable to development of the subject property. Where appropriate, the public works director may pennit the applicant to fulfill the applicant's obligation under this section by paying to the city the pro rata share of the costs of the required improvements attributable to deyelopment of the subject property, as determined by the public works director. The city may also require the applicant to provide traffic studies and other data describing the traffic impacts of the proposed deyelopment, the need for improvements under this section, and the reasonable pro rata share of the costs of these improyements to be borne by the applicant. (Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(110.30),2-27-90; Ord. No. 98-330, § 3, 12-15-98) 22-1476 Traffic control devices and signing. All traffic control deyices and pavement markings shall confonn to the Manual on Unifonn Traffic Control Devices (M.UTCD.) as adopted, from time to time, by the State Department Of Transportation. (Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(110.55), 2-27-90; Ord. No- 98-330, § 3, 12-15-98) 22-1477 Modifications, deferments and waiyers. The public works director may modify, defer or waiye the requirements of this article only after consideration of a written request for the following reasons: (I) The improvement as required would not be harmonious with existing street improyements, would not function properly or safely or would not be advantageous to the neighborhood or city as a whole. (2) Unusual topographic or physical conditions preclude the construction of the improvements as required. (3) Proper vertical or horizontal alignments cannot be detennined because the existing streets do not have correct alignments. (4) The required improvement is part of-a larger project that has been scheduled for construction in the city's adopted six-year transportation improvement program. (Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(110.60), 2-27-90; Ord. No. 98-330, § 3,12-15-98) 22-1478 Bonds. The city may require or permit a bond under FWCC 22-146 et seq. to insure compliance with any of the requirements ot"this article. (Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(110.65). 2-27-90; Ord. No. 98-330, § 22-1479-22-1495 Reserved K:\ordinance\25'Yo attachment'\.chapt 22 amend.3.11.02doc City of Feder,,¡ W", Dr"n Code ReviSIons 4