Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2024.02.20 Council Meeting Packet
AGENDA City Council Regular Meeting 7:00 PM - Tuesday, February 20, 2024 Pasco City Hall, Council Chambers & GoToWebinar Page 1. MEETING INSTRUCTIONS for REMOTE ACCESS - Individuals, who would like to provide public comment remotely, may continue to do so by filling out the online form via the City’s website (www.pasco-wa.gov/publiccomment) to obtain access information to comment. Requests to comment in meetings must be received by 4:00 p.m. on the day of this meeting. To listen to the meeting via phone, call (914) 614-3221 and use access code 347-125-017. City Council meetings are broadcast live on PSC-TV Channel 191 on Charter/Spectrum Cable in Pasco and Richland and streamed at www.pasco-wa.gov/psctvlive and on the City’s Facebook page at www.facebook.com/cityofPasco. 2. CALL TO ORDER 3. ROLL CALL (a) Pledge of Allegiance 4. CONSENT AGENDA - All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by roll call vote as one motion (in the form listed below). There will be no separate discussion of these items. If further discussion is desired by Councilmembers, the item may be removed from the Consent Agenda to the Regular Agenda and considered separately. 6 - 13 (a) Approval of Meeting Minutes for February 5th and February 12th To approve the minutes of the Pasco City Council Regular Meeting and Regular Workshop held on February 5, 2024 and February 12, 2024 respectively. 14 - 15 (b) Bills and Communications - Approving Claims in the Total Amount of $11,263,823.62 Page 1 of 461 To approve claims in the total amount of $11,236,823.62 ($10,035,973.51 in Check Nos.261560 - 262070; $6,107.65 in Check Nos.54652 -54656, 1,194,742.46 in Electronic Transfer Nos. 30203344 - 30204012). 16 - 31 (c) Resolution No. 4419 - Project Acceptance for West Pasco Water Treatment Plant, Phase 1 Project To approve Resolution No. 4419, accepting work performed by Apollo, Inc. under contract for the West Pasco Water Treatment Plant Phase 1 Project. 32 - 58 (d) Resolution No. 4420 - Interlocal Agreement for Participation in the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments To approve Resolution No. 4420, authorizing an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement with the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments. 59 - 62 (e) *Confirming Civil Service Commission/Personnel Board Reappointment of Ericka Garcia To confirm the City Manager's reappointment of Ericka Garcia to Position No. 3 on the Civil Service Commission/Personnel Board for a six-year term, from February 17, 2024, through February 17, 2030. (RC) MOTION: I move to approve the Consent Agenda as read. 5. PROCLAMATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS - The public may address Council on any items unless it relates to a scheduled Public Hearing. This item is provided to allow the opportunity to bring items to the attention of the City Council or to express an opinion on an issue. Its purpose is not to provide a venue for debate or for the posing of questions with the expectation of an immediate response. Some questions require consideration by Council over time and after a deliberative process with input from a number of different sources; some questions are best directed to staff members who have access to specific information. Citizen comments will normally be limited to three minutes each by the Mayor. Those with lengthy messages are invited to summarize their comments and/or submit written information for consideration by the Council outside of formal meetings. Lastly, when called upon, please state your name and city or county residency into the microphone before providing your comments. 7. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND/OR OFFICERS (a) Verbal Reports from Councilmembers 63 - 64 (b) Japanese Beetle Eradication Program Presentation Page 2 of 461 Presentation by Camilo Acosta, Japanese Beetle Eradication Coordinator, Washington State Department of Agriculture 65 - 280 (c) 2023 Community Survey Highlights Presentation 8. HEARINGS AND COUNCIL ACTION ON ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS RELATING THERETO 9. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS NOT RELATING TO HEARINGS 281 - 317 (a) *Q Ordinance No. 4705 - Kelly Rezone from RS-12 to R-1 (Z 2023- 009) MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4705, amending the zoning classification of certain real property located on the Westside of Road 76, between Ter Ray Court and Queen Bee Court, Pasco, Franklin County, Washington, from RS-12 (residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low- Density Residential), and further, authorize publication by summary only. 318 - 359 (b) *Q Ordinance No. 4706 - Jankelson Rezone from RS-12 to R-4 (Z 2023-011) MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4706, amending the zoning classification of certain real property located at Lots 1 and 2 of Short Plat 81-82, Pasco, Franklin County, Washington, from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-4 (High-Density Residential) and further, authorize publication by summary only. 360 - 397 (c) *Q Ordinance No. 4707 - Welch Rezone from RS-12 to R-1 (Z 2023-013) MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. 4707, amending the zoning classification of certain real property located on the Southside of W. Henry Street, between Road 44 and Road 42, Pasco, Franklin County, Washington, from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential), and further, authorize publication by summary only. 398 - 413 (d) Resolution No. 4421 - Change Orders Nos. 28-36 for the Lewis Street Overpass Project MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. 4421, authorizing the City Manager to execute Change Orders Nos. 28-36 to the construction contract with Cascade Bridge, LLC. for the Lewis Street Overpass Project. 414 - 433 (e) Resolution No. 4422 - Interlocal Agreement - Cable Bridge LED Lighting System Page 3 of 461 MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. 4422, authorizing the City Manager to sign and execute an Interlocal Cooperative Agreement between the City of Pasco, Washington, a Washington Municipal Corporation, City of Kennewick, Washington, a Washington Municipal Corporation, the Port of Pasco, a Municipal Corporation, and the Port of Kennewick, a Municipal Corporation, for the purpose of facilitating the modernization and enhancement of the lighting system on the Pasco-Kennewick Intercity Cable Bridge. 434 - 459 (f) Resolution No. 4423 - Interagency Agreement with the Washington Traffic Safety Commission for the Law Enforcement Liaison Program MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. 4423, authorizing the City Manager to execute the interagency agreement between the Washington Traffic Safety Commission and the City of Pasco for the Law Enforcement Liaison program. 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 11. NEW BUSINESS 12. MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION 13. EXECUTIVE SESSION (a) Discussion with Legal Counsel About Current or Potential Litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) (10 minutes) 14. ADJOURNMENT 15. ADDITIONAL NOTES (a) (RC) Roll Call Vote Required * Item not previously discussed Q Quasi-Judicial Matter MF# “Master File #....” 460 - 461 (b) Adopted Council Goals (Reference Only) This meeting is broadcast live on PSC-TV Channel 191 on Charter/Spectrum Cable in Pasco and Richland and streamed at www.pasco-wa.gov/psctvlive. Audio equipment available for the hearing impaired; contact the Clerk for assistance. Page 4 of 461 Servicio de intérprete puede estar disponible con aviso. Por favor avisa la Secretaria Municipal dos días antes para garantizar la disponibilidad. (Spanish language interpreter service may be provided upon request. Please provide two business day's notice to the City Clerk to ensure availability.) Page 5 of 461 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 14, 2024 TO: Adam Lincoln, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/20/24 FROM: Debra Barham, City Clerk City Manager SUBJECT: Approval of Meeting Minutes for February 5th and February 12th I. REFERENCE(S): 02.05.2024 and 02.12.2024 Draft Council Minutes II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: To approve the minutes of the Pasco City Council Regular Meeting and Regular 2024 12, February and 2024 on February held Workshop 5, respectively. III. FISCAL IMPACT: None IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: V. DISCUSSION: Page 6 of 461 MINUTES City Council Regular Meeting 7:00 PM - Monday, February 5, 2024 Pasco City Hall, Council Chambers & GoToWebinar CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM by Pete Serrano, Mayor. ROLL CALL Councilmembers present: Pete Serrano, David Milne, Blanche Barajas, Melissa Blasdel, Charles Grimm, Peter Harpster, and Leo Perales Councilmembers absent: None Staff present: Adam Lincoln, City Manager; Richa Sigdel, Deputy City Manager; Angela Pashon, Assistant City Manager; Darcy Buckley, Finance Director; Kevin Crowley, Fire Chief; Eric Ferguson, City Attorney; Jacob Gonzalez, Community & Economic Development Director; Jesse Rice, Parks & Recreation Director; Ken Roske, Police Chief; Maria Serra, Interim Public Works Director; and Debby Barham, City Clerk The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Meeting Minutes for January 16th and January 22nd To approve the minutes of the Pasco City Council Regular Meeting held on January 16, 2024, and Special Meeting and Regular Workshop held on January 22, 2024. Bills and Communications - Approving Claims in the Total Amount of $8,525,026.97 To approve claims in the total amount of $8,525,026.97 ($6,075,804.07 in Check Nos. 261268 - 261559; $59,157.19 in Electronic Transfer Nos. 844422 - 844437, 844489 - 844648, 844660 - 844677; $20,336.14 in Check Nos. 54637 - 54651; $2,369,578.85 in Electronic Transfer Nos. 30202046 - 30203343; $150.72 in Page 1 of 4Page 7 of 461 Check No. 957). Resolution No. 4417 - Bid Award for Sylvester Street Safety Improvements Project To approve Resolution No. 4417, awarding the construction contract for Bid No. 21227 - Sylvester Street Safety Improvements Project to Granite Construction Company of Yakima, WA in the amount of $3,215,920.00, and further, authorize the City Manager to execute the contract documents. Resolution No. 4418 - Architects West, Inc. Professional Services Agreement for Services Martin Luther King Community Center Remodel and expansion Project To approve Resolution No. 4418, authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with Architects West, Inc. for the Martin Luther King Community Center Remodel and Expansion. MOTION: Mayor Pro Tem Milne moved, seconded by Councilmember Harpster to approve the Consent Agenda as read. RESULT: Motion carried unanimously 7-0 AYES: Mayor Serrano, Mayor Pro Tem Milne, Councilmember Barajas, Councilmember Blasdel, Councilmember Grimm, Councilmember Harpster, and Councilmember Perales PROCLAMATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Proclaiming February 2024 as "Black History Month" Mayor Serrano read and then presented the proclamation proclaiming February 2024 as, "Black History Month" in Pasco, Washington to Pasco community member Irving Brown Sr. Mr. Brown Sr. expressed thanks to Mayor Serrano and Council for the proclamation and stated that this proclamation was a call to action for standing together in Pasco. RECESS Mayor Serrano called a five-minute recess at 7:10 PM for photo opportunities related to the Black History Proclamation. PUBLIC COMMENTS Abbey Cameron, Three Rivers Community Foundation (3RCF) CEO and Richland resident, explained 3RCF mission and purpose, and stated that it it has distributed between $600K to $1M per year to local not-for-profit organizations. Ms. Cameron Page 2 of 4Page 8 of 461 suggested that 3RCF partner with the City to distribute ARPA, State and Federal funding to Pasco non-profit organizations. David Hannum, Pasco resident, commented on liberty and freedom in the United States and expressed concern of the impending loss of liberty and freedom due to specific government and private entities. John Lehman, Meadow Company Representative from Oregon State, proposed an economic opportunity for Pasco by use of billboard signage and suggested that amendments to the Pasco Municipal Code related sign requirements would be simple to enact. He provided packets for the Council to City Clerk Barham to distribute before the meeting. Colin Hastings, Pasco Chamber of Commerce Executive Director and Pasco resident, also expressed support on the use of billboard signage within Pasco. Matt Murphy, Tri-City Chamber of Commerce Government & Regional Affairs Director and Pasco resident, introduced himself. He recently joined the Tri-City Chamber of Commerce and looks forward to working with the Pasco Councilmembers. Stephen Bauman, Franklin County resident and B4 Development and Consulting, LLC owner, distributed a document to Council related to a Broetje development and on behalf of his client expressed concern on the approved, permitted, Cul-de-sac design due to safety concerns for eight of the lots as currently configured. Katelyn Ashford, Kennewick resident, stated that they are representing the Party of Socialism and Liberation and asked Council for a resolution regarding the Israeli and Palestinian conflict for seize fire and lasting peace between the two groups. Stephen Bauman, also asked for a response related to his public comment given at the January 16, 2024 Council Meeting. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES AND/OR OFFICERS Verbal Reports from Councilmembers Mr. Grimm reported on the Pasco Chamber of Commerce Meeting and a Pasco Police Department event, held at Tierra Vida Event Center, that he recently attended. He also stated that he and Mr. Perales held a Water Rights Subcommittee meeting recently and that more information from that meeting will follow. Lastly, he announced that it was his five-year anniversary volunteering at Tri-City Union Gospel Mission. Ms. Blasdel reported on the Visit Tri-Cities Board meeting she recently attended. Mr. Perales reported on the HAPO Center Advisory Board meeting he recently attended. Page 3 of 4Page 9 of 461 Mayor Serrano commented on the Boys and Girls Club's Youth of the Year Competition that he and Ms. Barajas recently attended. Financial and American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Updates Ms. Buckley reported on the financial standing of the City including updates related to the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding. Council and Ms. Buckley briefly discussed status of the City's finances, as well as the unallocated ARPA funds. Mayor Serrano expressed support to obligating the ARPA funds to either the MLK Center project and Boys & Girls Club improvements as both have significate merit in helping Pasco youth. MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSION Mr. Gonzalez shared that the City was recently awarded a $2M grant from the Washington State Department of Commerce for affordable housing. Mr. Perales commented on the signage in Pasco and suggested that staff look into the adding billboards within the City. He held up the document that Mr. Bauman distributed at the January 16th Council Meeting. Lastly, he commented on the Downtown Pasco Development Authority's (DPDA) Washington State Audit. Mayor Pro Tem Milne also commented on the billboard opportunity and the DPDA audit. Mr. Grimm also commented on the billboard opportunity and would also like to hear from the public on the topic. Mr. Harpster and Mayor Serrano concurred that these and other topics may be discussed at workshops and during the upcoming Council retreat to determine Council's priorities. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:23 PM. PASSED and APPROVED on ____________________. APPROVED: ATTEST: Pete Serrano, Mayor Debra Barham, City Clerk Page 4 of 4Page 10 of 461 MINUTES City Council Workshop Meeting 7:00 PM - Monday, February 12, 2024 Pasco City Hall, Council Chambers & GoToWebinar CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM by Pete Serrano, Mayor. ROLL CALL Councilmembers present: Pete Serrano, David Milne, Blanche Barajas, Melissa Blasdel, Charles Grimm, Peter Harpster, and Leo Perales Councilmembers absent: None Staff present: Adam Lincoln, City Manager; Richa Sigdel, Deputy City Manager; Angela Pashon, Assistant City Manager; Darcy Buckley, Finance Director; Eric Ferguson, City Attorney; Jacob Gonzalez, Community & Economic Development Director; Jesse Rice, Parks & Recreation Director; Ken Roske, Police Chief; Maria Serra, Interim Public Works Director; and Debby Barham, City Clerk The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance. VERBAL REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS Mr. Grimm reported on the Ben Franklin Transit Board meeting he recently attended. He also commented on a recent Business Watch with Pasco Police, Pasco Chamber of Commerce's Economic Development Committee meeting and Chiawana High School's Career Development Day. Mayor Pro Tem Milne reported on a COPA Board meeting and Pasco Chamber of Commerce lunch meeting he recently attended. Ms. Barajas commented on the COPA Board meeting where she was appointed to the Board as its Vice Chair. Mayor Serrano announced that there will be a rally cheering on the Chiawana High School Wrestling Team as they vie for a 5th State Wrestling Championship the coming week. Page 1 of 3Page 11 of 461 ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION Downtown Pasco Development Authority Update Ms. Sigdel reported on the status of the Downtown Pasco Development Authority (DPDA). She explained required state audits that the City of Pasco has to complete noting that the accountability audit is the most critical. She then explained the biennial audit that the state performs on the the DPDA. She discussed the results of the most recent audit of the DPDA and provided a list of pending issues associated with DPDA. Ms. Sigdel stated that staff is recommending the dissolution of the DPDA. Council, Mr. Lincoln, Ms. Sigdel and Mr. Ferguson continued to discuss the DPDA, which included: Risks associated with the dissolution of the agency. Dissolution process. Explanation of the City's role in overseeing the operation of the DPDA. Discussion of who is responsible to pay the DPDA debts. Hold the DPDA accountable for the debts. Inquired about what other cities that have like a PDA and Non-profit organization. Discussion of the Main Street program and the possibility of encouraging it be reestablished and/or downtown associations. Clarification of public and private grant funding. Clarification of audit findings verses a fraud report and the state audit included only findings and no fraud report. Clarification that the City has only resumed the City's assets which includes the Farmer's Market and the Pasco Specialty Kitchen. Council will need to make a decision soon on whether to fund DPDA to get it solvent or to dissolve it. Mr. Grimm suggested that Council move forward on pursuing criminal prosecution to recover the public funds and restore the public's trust. Mr. Harpster asked that Council has an opportunity hear from the public before taking any action on this request to dissolve DPDA and to not place this on the Consent Agenda. Mr. Lincoln confirmed that when this topic comes back to Council for action, it will not be placed on the Consent Agenda. Resolution - Interlocal Agreement - Cable Bridge LED Lighting System Ms. Sigdel provided a brief report on the proposed interlocal agreement related updating the lighting on the Cable Bridge. Council, Mr. Lincoln and Ms. Sigdel discussed the pros and cons of the proposed Page 2 of 3Page 12 of 461 interlocal agreement and Council was split on support for and opposition to approving the agreement. At the end of the discussion, staff was directed to bring this item back to Council for formal approval or denial of the interlocal agreement. Resolution - Project Acceptance for West Pasco Water Treatment Plant, Phase 1 Project Ms. Serra introduced Senior Engineer Puna Clarke who provided a brief report on the proposed acceptance of the completed West Pasco Water Treatment Plant (WPWTP) Phase 1 Project. MISCELLANEOUS COUNCIL DISCUSSION Ms. Serra announced that the Lewis Street Overpass project (LSO) has another nine change orders that will be brought forward to Council for approval at the next Council meeting. Ms. Serra also noted that Lewis Street, between Oregon Ave to 2nd Avenue, will be closed for eight weeks commencing on February 26th related to the completion of the Lewis Street Overpass. RECESS Mayor Serrano called a four-minute recess at 8:16 PM. EXECUTIVE SESSION Council adjourned into Executive Session at 8:20 PM for 20 minutes returning at 8:40 PM to discuss with legal counsel about current or potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) with the City Manager, Deputy City Manager, Community & Economic Development Director and City Attorney. Mayor Serrano called the meeting back to order at 8:40 PM. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:40 PM. PASSED and APPROVED on ___________________. APPROVED: ATTEST: Pete Serrano, Mayor Debra Barham, City Clerk Page 3 of 3Page 13 of 461 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 15, 2024 TO: Adam Lincoln, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/20/24 FROM: Darcy Buckley, Finance Director Finance SUBJECT: Bills and Communications - Approving Claims in the Total Amount of $11,263,823.62 I. REFERENCE(S): Accounts Payable 02.14.2024 II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: To approve claims in the total amount of $11,236,823.62 ($10,035,973.51 in Check -54656, Nos.54652 Check in - 262070; Nos.261560 $6,107.65 1,194,742.46 in Electronic Transfer Nos. 30203344 - 30204012). III. FISCAL IMPACT: IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: V. DISCUSSION: Page 14 of 461 REPORTING PERIOD: February 20, 2024 Claims Bank Payroll Bank Gen'l Bank Electronic Bank Combined Check Numbers 261560 - 262070 54652 - 54656 Total Check Amount $10,035,973.51 $6,107.65 Total Checks 10,042,081.16$ Electronic Transfer Numbers - 30203344 - 30204012 Total EFT Amount $0.00 $1,194,742.46 $0.00 $0.00 Total EFTs 1,194,742.46$ Grand Total 11,236,823.62$ Councilmember 100 1,504,243.45 110 48,058.58 140 5,906.20 145 7,299.42 150 137,877.34 160 1,164.04 165 5,624.00 168 59,442.44 170 1,269.50 180 3,039.90 185 50.34 188 41,471.66 189 250.07 190 2,464.08 194 19,317.60 195 4.19 196 HOTEL/MOTEL EXCISE TAX 10,000.00 367 1,883,029.94 410 6,064,495.83 510 122,759.22 511 15,886.04 690 1,303,169.78 GRAND TOTAL ALL FUNDS:11,236,823.62$ February 1 to February 14, 2024 C I T Y O F P A S C O Council Meeting of: Accounts Payable Approved The City Council City of Pasco, Franklin County, Washington We, the undersigned, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury the materials have been furnished, the services rendered or the labor performed as described herein and the claim is a just, due and unpaid obligation against the city and we are authorized to authenticate and certify to such claim. Adam Lincoln, City Manager Griselda Garcia, Finance Manager We, the undersigned City Councilmembers of the City Council of the City of Pasco, Franklin County, Washington, do hereby certify on this 20th day of February, 2024 that the merchandise or services hereinafter specified have been received and are approved for payment: C.D. BLOCK GRANT MARTIN LUTHER KING COMMUNITY CENTER AMBULANCE SERVICE Councilmember SUMMARY OF CLAIMS BY FUND: GENERAL FUND STREET CEMETERY ATHLETIC PROGRAMS ANIMAL CONTROL SENIOR CENTER OPERATING MULTI-MODAL FACILITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STADIUM/CONVENTION CENTER GENERAL CAP PROJECT CONSTRUCTION UTILITY, WATER/SEWER RIVERSHORE TRAIL & MARINA MAIN SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LODGING LITTER ABATEMENT REVOLVING ABATEMENT PAYROLL CLEARING EQUIPMENT RENTAL - OPERATING GOVERNMENTAL EQUIPMENT RENTAL - OPERATING BUSINESS Page 15 of 461 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 13, 2024 TO: Adam R. Lincoln, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/20/24 FROM: Maria Serra, Interim Director Public Works SUBJECT: Resolution No. 4419 - Project Acceptance for West Pasco Water Treatment Plant, Phase 1 Project I. REFERENCE(S): Resolution PowerPoint Presentation II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Motion: I move to approve Resolution No. 4419, accepting work performed by Apollo, Inc. under contract for the West Pasco Water Treatment Plant Phase 1 Project. III. FISCAL IMPACT: Bid Award $8,411,830.20 Change Orders $709,950.70 Final Construction Cost $9,121,780.90 Funding for the project is provided as follows: Adopted 2021-2022 Project budget: $9,835,000.00. Adopted 2023-2024 Project Budget: $1,184,677.00 This project was partially funded by: $5,353,000.00 at 1% Department of Health State Revolving Fund. Original interest rate of 1.75% was reduced to 1% due to timely completion; ARPA Funds in the amount of $4,835,000; and Water Utility Fund IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: Design, permitting, and final cost estimates for this project were completed in late 2021. Phase 1 project consists of the first set of improvements to expand Page 16 of 461 the production capacity of the West Pasco Water Treatment Plant (WPWTP) from 6 million gallons per day (MGD) to 12 MGD, through the installation of membrane treatment units and ancillary equipment, installation of a new process residuals system involving a clarifier and new residuals pump station building, SCADA system upgrades, and other plant improvements. The improvements at this facility provide cost-effective resiliency for the City’s water system as the main water treatment facility (Butterfield WTP) is aging and will be undergoing planned extensive improvements in the coming years. Increasing treatment capacity at the WPWTP provides for additional supply to meet our current and future potable water demands, as well as provide much- needed supply redundancy for existing water customers. With the planned improvements to the Butterfield WTP on the horizon, completing the Phase I improvements will provide resiliency in the water system. On February 22, 2022, Council awarded the WPWTP Improvements Phase 1 contract to Apollo, Inc. of Pasco, WA in the amount of $8,411,830.20. The Engineer’s Estimate was $8,382,834.00. This was less than the Bid Award by $28,2996.20 (0.34%). Since Construction began, the project required 18 Change Orders for a total of $709,950.70. The Change Orders addressed design changes, asphalt timing with safety and updates, equipment security various 2, Phase existing changes, a new raw water vault, and sales tax increases from 8.6% to 8.7% and to 8.9%. Formal acceptance of public works projects is required by State law and starts the 45-day period within which an outside vendor, supplier or laborer would have an opportunity to file a claim against this project pursuant to RCW 60.28.011 (2). Upon completion of the 45-day lien filing period, retainage being held by the City may be released upon receipt of the following: An affidavit of no liens A release from the Department of Revenue that all taxes have been paid A release from any claims from the Department of Labor and Industries, pursuant to RCW 60.28.051 V. DISCUSSION: This item was presented to Council at the February 12, 2024, Workshop as a discussion item. City Staff recommends approval of the Resolution for the acceptance of the West Pasco Water Treatment Plant, Phase 1 Project, as constructed by Apollo, Inc. Page 17 of 461 Page 18 of 461 Resolution - WPWTP Ph1 Project Acceptance- 1 RESOLUTION NO. ________ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED BY APOLLO, INC., UNDER CONTRACT FOR THE WEST PASCO WATER TREATMENT PLANT PHASE 1 PROJECT. WHEREAS, the work performed by Apollo, Inc., under contract for Project No. 16008 West Pasco Water Treatment Plant Phase 1 has been examined by City of Pasco (City) staff and been found to be in apparent compliance with the applicable project specifications and drawings; and WHEREAS, it is the City staff’s recommendation that the City of Pasco formally accept the contractor's work and the project as complete. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON: That the City Council concurs with City staff’s recommendation and thereby accepts the work performed by Apollo, Inc., under contract for Project No. 16008 West Pasco Water Treatment Plant Phase 1 as being completed in apparent compliance with the project specifications and drawings. Be It Further Resolved, that the City Clerk is hereby directed to notify the Washington State Department of Revenue of this acceptance, and Be It Further Resolved, that the final payment of retainage being withheld, pursuant to RCW 60.28.011, regulations and administrative process, shall be released upon apparent compliance with and satisfaction of applicable project specifications and verification thereof by Interim Public Works Director and Finance Director. Be It Further Resolved, that this Resolution will take effect immediately. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, on this ___ day of _______, 2024. _____________________________ Pete Serrano Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ ___________________________ Debra Barham, CMC Kerr Ferguson Law, PLLC City Clerk City Attorneys Page 19 of 461 Pasco City Council Regular Meeting February 20, 2024 Pa g e 2 0 o f 4 6 1 West Pasco Water Treatment Plant, Phase 1 Project #16-008 Pa g e 2 1 o f 4 6 1 West Pasco Water Treatment Plant, Phase 1 Project #16-008 Pa g e 2 2 o f 4 6 1 West Pasco Water Treatment Plant, Phase 1 Before Pa g e 2 3 o f 4 6 1 West Pasco Water Treatment Plant, Phase 1 Before Pa g e 2 4 o f 4 6 1 West Pasco Water Treatment Plant, Phase 1 In Progress Pa g e 2 5 o f 4 6 1 West Pasco Water Treatment Plant, Phase 1 In Progress Pa g e 2 6 o f 4 6 1 West Pasco Water Treatment Plant, Phase 1 After Pa g e 2 7 o f 4 6 1 West Pasco Water Treatment Plant, Phase 1 After Pa g e 2 8 o f 4 6 1 West Pasco Water Treatment Plant, Phase 1 Project Costs Final Construction Cost: $9,121,780.90 Bid Award: $8,411,830.20 Engineer’s Estimate: $8,382,834.00 AmountDescriptionChange Order No.AmountDescriptionChange Order No. $91,574.14Remove& Install new Hypochlorite Tank10$9,411.59Access Roadway Work1 $405,827.56Raw Water Vault replacement11$3,614.23Pump St. CMU Changes2 $56,748.36Misc. updates for Plant safety and redundancy12-$14,192.47Clarifier Change, Door Hardware3 $50,912.27Misc. Safety Upgrades and Asphalt Removal13$40,558.09Electrical Modifications, Piping Changes, Concrete Testing 4 $10,372.27Addition of Backflow valves and RPBA14$68,374.20Replace Valves and Electrical5 $13,272.94Addition of Supernatant Recycle Supply Pump15$4,171.72Vault Ladder Additions6 $13,429.55Misc. Upgrades for Plant Safety16$1,177.66Davit Crane for Pumps7 $17,294.07Misc. Upgrades for Plant Safety17$16,764.32Membrane recirculation for current filters 8 -$9,806.29Reconciliation to match certified Pay apps18$32,568.03Modify air scour pipe & HVAC9 Pa g e 2 9 o f 4 6 1 West Pasco Water Treatment Plant, Phase 1 Project Costs PROJECT FUNDING 20-year, 1.0% Interest$5,350,000.00Drinking Water SRF loan Grant$4,835,000.00ARPA $401,740.00Water rates (Fund 411) $701,954.00Secure Revenue Bond $11,288,694.00TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $1,309,722.83Design and permitting $9,121,780.90 Construction contract $839,084.05Construction administration $11,270,587.78TOTAL PROJECT COSTPa g e 3 0 o f 4 6 1 Questions?Pa g e 3 1 o f 4 6 1 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 14, 2024 TO: Adam Lincoln, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/20/24 FROM: Richa Sigdel, Deputy City Manager City Manager SUBJECT: Resolution No. 4420 - Interlocal Agreement for Participation in the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments I. REFERENCE(S): Resolution Interlocal Cooperation Agreement with BFCOG PowerPoint Presentation from 1.22.24 Council Workshop for reference II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. 4420, authorizing an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement with the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments. III. FISCAL IMPACT: Budgeted annual membership contribution = $44,951 IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: The Benton-Franklin Council of Governments (BFCOG) was established as a voluntary association of local government in the two-county region in 1966. The BFCOG is structured under state law as a regional planning commission, a council of governments, and a Regional Transportation Planning Organization (RTPO). Planning Metropolitan the designated federally the also is BFCOG The Organization (MPO)/Transportation Management Area (TMA) for the Tri-City Metropolitan Area and the Economic Development District (EDD) for Benton and Franklin Counties. At the January 22 ,2024, Council Workshop, BFCOG Executive Director Michelle Holt provided a brief presentation on the programs BFCOG administers and services provided the region. Ms. Holt also requested the Page 32 of 461 ratification of the amended Interlocal Agreement between the City of Pasco and BFCOG. V. DISCUSSION: Staff recommends approval of the Resolution authorizing execution and ratification of the Interlocal Agreement between the City of Pasco and BFCOG. Page 33 of 461 Resolution – ILA Lighting System on Cable Bridge - 1 RESOLUTION NO. ____ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT WITH THE BENTON-FRANKLIN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS. WHEREAS, Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 39.34, INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT, authorizes political subdivisions to jointly exercise their powers, privileges, or authorities with other political subdivisions of this State through the execution of an interlocal cooperative or interagency agreement; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to RCW Chapter 36, Laws of 1959, as amended RCW 36.70.060 and Chapter 84, Laws of 1965, Extraordinary Session, RCW 36.64.080, City of Pasco, Washington, is by Interlocal Agreement, a member of the regional agency known as the Benton- Franklin Council of Governments (BFCOG); and WHEREAS, the Board of the BFCOG determined that amendments made to the Interlocal Cooperative Agreement and Bylaws documents amended September 18, 2020, required review and revision to rectify inconsistencies prudent to ensure organizational effectiveness; and WHEREAS, on May 19, 2023, the BFCOG Board adopted the amended documents Interlocal Cooperation Agreement of the Benton-Franklin Council of Government, and Bylaws of the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments, as a total and complete replacement for all previous Interlocal Agreements and Bylaws of BFCOG, by the process outlined in the previously adopted Bylaws; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, has after due consideration, determined that it is in the best interest of the City of Pasco to enter into the updated Interlocal Cooperative Agreement, thereby maintaining tis membership in the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON: That the City Council of the City of Pasco hereby authorizes the execution and ratification of the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments Interlocal Cooperation Agreement and Bylaws; a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A. Be It Further Resolved, that the City Manager of the City of Pasco, Washington, is hereby authorized, empowered, and directed to sign and execute the Interlocal Cooperative Agreement. Be It Further Resolved, that this Resolution shall take effect immediately. Page 34 of 461 Resolution – ILA Lighting System on Cable Bridge - 2 PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, on this ___ day of __________________, 2024. _____________________________ Pete Serrano Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ ___________________________ Debra Barham, CMC Kerr Ferguson Law, PLLC City Clerk City Attorneys Page 35 of 461 1 | P a g e BFCOG Interlocal Agreement - Amended 5.19.2023 INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT OF THE BENTON-FRANKLIN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS Amended May 19, 2023 (As a total and complete replacement for all previous Interlocal Agreements) Pursuant to Revised Code of Washington (RCW) Chapter 36, Laws of 1959, as amended (RCW 36.70.060) and Chapter 84, Laws of 1965, Extraordinary Session, (RCW 36.64.080), and be it resolved that the local governments of: • Ben Franklin Transit, • Benton County, • City of Benton City, • City of Connell, • City of Kennewick, • City of Pasco, • City of Prosser, • City of Richland, • City of West Richland, • Franklin County, • Port of Benton, • Port of Kennewick, and • Port of Pasco Each hereafter referred to as a “Member” or collectively, as “Members,” do hereby organize and reaffirm the establishment of a regional agency, hereinafter referred to as the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments or “COG”; and further establish, as an integral component thereof, an Economic Development District organization, hereinafter referred to as the “EDD” by this Interlocal Agreement or “Agreement.” This Agreement terminates and supersedes in all respects the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments Interlocal Agreement dated September 18, 2020; the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments Articles of Association amended November 21, 2014; the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments Articles of Association amended May 22, 1998, and original Benton-Franklin Governmental Conference Articles of Association dated November 7, 1966, and any or all such agreements. RECITAL WHEREAS, each of the Members hereto is a public agency pursuant to the terms of RCW 39.34 Interlocal Cooperation Act, and it is the intent and purpose of the Members to exercise their powers and authority in accordance with its provisions; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 39.34, two or more public agencies may jointly cooperate to perform functions that each may individually perform. Therefore, Members enter into this lnterlocal Cooperation Agreement to provide for the joint and/or cooperative exercise of their powers, privileges, and authorities for the purpose of comprehensive transportation planning; and WHEREAS, the Members acknowledge the need to engage in cooperative planning and decision- Page 36 of 461 2 | P a g e BFCOG Interlocal Agreement - Amended 5.19.2023 making on transportation and economic development issues and the benefits to be derived therefrom as demonstrated by the attached signature pages; and WHEREAS, Federal transportation legislation, Title 23 United States Code 134 and Title 49 United States Code 5303, requires the establishment, by agreement between the Governor of the State of Washington and units of general-purpose local government, of a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), which, in cooperation with the State of Washington, is to develop transportation plans and programs for urbanized areas of Washington State; and WHEREAS, 23 CFR §450 sets forth the national policy that the MPO designated for each urbanized area is to carry out a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive multimodal transportation planning process, including the development of a Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) and a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP); and WHEREAS, the Washington State Growth Management Act, RCW 36.70A, requires local governments to adopt transportation plans that are consistent with comprehensive land use plans; and WHEREAS, RCW 47.80 authorizes the formation of a Regional Transportation Planning Organization (RTPO) by the voluntary association of local governments within a county, provided each RTPO shall have as members all counties within the RTPO's boundaries and at least sixty percent of the cities and towns collectively, representing a minimum of seventy-five percent of the population of all incorporated municipalities; and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 47.80.023(7), the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments is designated as the lead planning agency and governing body for the MPO and the RTPO; and WHEREAS, RCW 47.80.40 provides each RTPO formed by local governments is required to create a Transportation Policy Board to provide policy advice to the RTPO and shall allow representatives of major employers within the region, the department of transportation districts, port districts, and member cities, towns, and counties within the region to participate in policy making; and WHEREAS, the Members acknowledge the need to provide regional economic development planning and have established the Benton-Franklin Economic Development District for these purposes, which will provide these services through the US Department of Commerce Economic Development Administration’s Partnership Planning Program and Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) process; and WHEREAS, the Members acknowledge the need to promote economic development activities for the region in alignment with the Public Works Economic Development Act of 1965 and to provide services as promulgated by the US Department of Commerce Economic Development Administration, US Department of Agriculture, and other funding sources available to the region; and WHEREAS, each of the Members has previously adopted one or more resolutions authorizing the execution of this Agreement and that such resolutions are in all ways valid and binding; and WHEREAS, the Members agree to be governed by Bylaws of the COG approved by a two-thirds (2/3) majority vote of all members in good standing; NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the above recitals that are incorporated into this lnterlocal Cooperation Agreement as included below, and in consideration of the terms and conditions set forth below, it is hereby agreed as follows: Page 37 of 461 3 | P a g e BFCOG Interlocal Agreement - Amended 5.19.2023 ARTICLE I PURPOSE The purposes which form the basis of this Agreement are as follows: 1. COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS: To study regional and governmental problems of mutual interest and concern as agreed to by the Board and consistent with RCW 36.64.80; 2. REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY: To initiate regional planning programs and accept/receive state and federal grants and funding as agreed to by the Board and consistent with RCW 36.70.060; 3. METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (MPO): To implement and perform the functions of an MPO for the Tri-Cities Urbanized Area as such area’s boundaries are defined now or in the future (23 USC 134 and USC 49; CFR 23 and 40) 4. REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ORGANIZATION (RTPO): To implement and perform the functions of an RTPO for Tri-Cities Urbanized Area as such area’s boundaries are defined now or in the future (RCW 47.80); 5. Economic Development District (EDD): To implement and perform the functions of an EDD for the Benton and Franklin Counties area as promulgated by the Economic Development Administration of the US Department of Commerce. (40 USC Subtitle V) 6. PUBLIC WORKS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACT (PWEDA) To implement the PWEDA of 1965, PL 89 136 42 USC 3121 et. seq., and all related/subsequent Federal and Washington State legislation related to the purpose of the said Act; 7. To strengthen the regional economy through planning, program development, and economic diversification activities, and 8. Implement and administer other functions and agencies of regional concern as determined by its Board of Directors. ARTICLE II BOUNDARIES The boundaries of the regional planning district shall be the boundaries of Benton County, Franklin County, Washington, and the Tri-Cities Urbanized Area as such area’s boundaries are defined now or in the future, and any local, county, or state jurisdiction located within. All references to the “region” in this agreement shall mean Benton and Franklin Counties, and the Tri-Cities Urbanized Area unless changed by the Board as authorized by the COG Bylaws. The COG may be expanded to include contiguous geographic and statistically relevant areas and agencies economically and socially related to the region to provide mutual benefit. ARTICLE III FUNCTIONS AND AUTHORITIES 1. TRANSPORTATION. In meeting its responsibilities for regional transportation planning, the COG will: a. Produce a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) as prescribed by federal and state law and regulations and based on local comprehensive planning. The RTP will establish Page 38 of 461 4 | P a g e BFCOG Interlocal Agreement - Amended 5.19.2023 planning direction for regionally significant transportation projects, as defined in state law, and shall be consistent with the regional growth management strategy, including but not limited to: i. Certify that transportation elements of local comprehensive plans are consistent with the regional transportation plan. ii. Certify that all transportation projects within the region that have a significant impact on regional facilities or services are consistent with the RTP. b. Carry out MPO functions as prescribed for federally funded projects in the region. These functions include preparing an RTP, an annual or biennial Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP), and a four-year capital plan (with an annual element). 2. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. To further the purposes of regional economic development, pursuant to RCW 39.34, the COG will: a. Cooperatively develop and maintain a regional economic development strategy that complies with the Federal requirements for a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (USC 42, Chapter 38 Public Works and Economic Development, Subchapter IV) and is also consistent with the requirements of the state of Washington for comprehensive planning under the Growth Management Act (RCW 47.80). b. Contract for, administer, and manage state and federal economic development programs as authorized in the COG Bylaws. 3. REGIONAL DATABASE DEVELOPMENT. The COG shall provide for the establishment and maintenance of a regional database to: a. Support the development of the Metropolitan Transportation Plan and other regional planning efforts of mutual concern to the Members. b. Forecast and monitor the region's economic, demographic, and travel conditions. c. Develop the database jointly with relevant state agencies for use in the region by local governments and the State of Washington. d. Respond to data prepared by the State Office of Financial Management. 4. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE. The COG shall provide technical assistance to local, state, and federal governments through regional data collection and forecasting services consistent with the agency’s purpose, functions, and budget upon request. In addition, the COG may provide, upon request, general transportation or economic development planning assistance consistent with the COG’s purpose and functions to Members. 5. DISCUSSION FORUM. The COG may provide a forum for discussion among local and state officials and other interested parties on common regional issues. 6. RESEARCH AND PLANNING. The COG may act as a research and fact-finding agency for the Members. To that end, it may make such surveys, analyses, research, and reports requested as authorized in the bylaws of the Agency. The COG, upon such authority or requests, may also: a. Make inquiries, investigations, and surveys concerning the resources of Benton and Franklin Counties. b. Assemble and analyze the data thus obtained, the systematic utilization and Page 39 of 461 5 | P a g e BFCOG Interlocal Agreement - Amended 5.19.2023 development thereof. c. Cooperate with other commissions and public and private agencies of the Region, Washington State, and the United States in planning endeavors. d. Develop programs of Intergovernmental cooperation for the benefit of Members. 7. OTHER FUNCTIONS. The COG shall, insofar as possible: a. Coordinate general planning among and for the Members b. Provide a written report to the members each year c. Prepare, approve, and administer its own annual budget, which includes setting the amount of cost allocations, member assessments, and dues, hiring an Executive Director (who shall hire and supervise employees), hiring consultants, engaging professional accounting, legal and other services as needed, sue and be sued; and other such additional modified, or removed functions and authorities as authorized in the COG Bylaws. ARTICLE IV BYLAWS The authority to make, amend, or repeal bylaws is vested in the COG so long as such bylaws are consistent with the provisions of these articles and applicable laws. Bylaws for the COG are separately adopted and included in Exhibit A of this Agreement. ARTICLE V MEMBERSHIP General Units of Government (excluding small cities with a population of less than 2,500 population) or Special Units of Government (such as school districts, public utility districts, and port districts) located within the COG's planning area of Benton and Franklin Counties of the State of Washington and the Tri-Cities Urbanized Area as such area’s boundaries are defined now or in the future is eligible for voting membership in the COG through execution of this Agreement and the payment of such cost allocations as determined by the Board via dues or assessment. COG Membership shall be open to any general or special units of government located within the boundaries. The COG Board shall be comprised of delegates representing voting members as outlined in the Bylaws. ARTICLE VI ALLOCATION OF COSTS Voting members in the COG shall contribute to the expense of the Agency in amounts as established annually by the COG and agreed to by participating jurisdictions pursuant to the budgetary laws outlined in the Revised Code of Washington (RCW). Members shall be assessed according to a per capita ratio or other equitable assessment established by the Board as authorized in the Bylaws. Services and facilities may be provided by participating agencies at a mutually agreed value in lieu of assessment, as authorized in the Bylaws. Page 40 of 461 6 | P a g e BFCOG Interlocal Agreement - Amended 5.19.2023 ARTICLE VII DURATION AND DISSOLUTION The COG shall have perpetual existence until dissolved by: (1) a vote of 2/3 of the voting Members’ provided that all members shall receive one month’s written notice of the proposed dissolution and all members provided an opportunity for comment on the motion: or (2) withdrawal of such members so that the MPO/RTPO ratification thresholds are no longer met as required by 47.80 RCW and Ch. 468-86 WAC and/or Title 23 USC and Title 49 USC as currently adopted or as amended and 23 CFR Parts 450 and 500 and 40 CFR Part 613. Upon termination of this Agreement, any money or assets in possession of the COG after payment of all liabilities, costs, expenses, and charges validly incurred under this Agreement shall be returned to all contributing governments in proportion to their assessment determined at the time of termination. The debts, liabilities, and obligations of the COG shall not constitute a debt, liability, or obligation of any member agency. ARTICLE VIII WITHDRAWALS Any Member shall have the right to withdraw from this Agreement by giving written notice to the Board six months prior to the Board’s annual meeting establishing the annual assessment. The Members agree that withdrawal will not absolve them of responsibility for meeting financial or other obligations of annual contracts or agreements which exist between the State of Washington or the federal government and the COG at the time of the withdrawal. The formation of the MPO is based on the population of the metropolitan planning area. Withdrawal by any Member could put the existence of the MPO at risk, resulting in the loss of federal funding for transportation projects. Withdrawal of member jurisdictions could impact the organization with respect to its designation and funding as an RTPO under Washington State law. ARTICLE IX GENERAL PROVISIONS A. ADOPTION AND EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this Agreement shall be upon ratification by the Counties and at least sixty percent (60%) of the cities and towns within the council area that represent seventy-five percent (75%) of the cities and towns population (“Ratification”). This Agreement shall be binding upon the Members who have executed this Agreement, their successors, and assigns, provided that upon Ratification, all prior agreements and bylaws between the parties shall be deemed terminated and replaced herewith. Thereafter, no city, town, tribe, or special district shall be a voting member of the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments, the Benton-Franklin Metropolitan Planning Organization/Regional Transportation Planning Organization Transportation Policy Board, or the Benton-Franklin Economic Development District until the Board has approved the entity’s membership and the entity’s governing body has approved this Agreement and paid assessed dues. B. AMENDMENTS. This Agreement may be amended by Board action pursuant to the COG Bylaws. C. FILING AND STATE APPROVAL. Pursuant to RCW 39.34.040, this Agreement shall be on the COG website or other electronically retrievable public source. To the extent any Page 41 of 461 7 | P a g e BFCOG Interlocal Agreement - Amended 5.19.2023 state officer or agency has control over the operations which may be the subject of this Agreement, then this Agreement shall be submitted to such state officer or agency for approval pursuant to RCW 39.34.050 prior to its entry into force. D. INVALID PROVISIONS. If any portion of this Agreement, or its application to any local government, person, or circumstances, is held or determined to be invalid, such holding or determination shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other term or provision, and the application of this Agreement to other local government entities, persons or circumstances shall not be affected. E. COUNTERPARTS. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts by the parties. Receipt of executed resolutions having the same effect as if all parties had signed the same agreement. EXHIBITS Exhibit A – Benton-Franklin Council of Governments Bylaws, Amended 5.19.2023 ADOPTION This Interlocal Agreement is adopted as a total revision to and replacement of all previously existing Interlocal Agreements between the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments and its Regular Member Jurisdictions by the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments Board of Directors at their Meeting on the 19th day of May 2023 by BFCOG Resolution 04-23. Page 42 of 461 8 | P a g e BFCOG Interlocal Agreement - Amended 5.19.2023 PARTICIPANTS Participants in this agreement shall be whichever of the parties ratify this agreement. If any party fails to ratify this agreement, such action shall not affect this agreement as it pertains to the remaining parties. WHEREAS, the [MEMBER JURISDICTION NAME] authorized the execution of this Agreement by Resolution No. _______________________________________, Adopted on ______________________________________ [Date]. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands. By: _____________________________ Attest: __________________________ Title: ____________________________ Title: ___________________________ Date: ____________________________ Date: ___________________________ Page 43 of 461 Michelle Holt, BFCOG Executive Director Presentation to Pasco City Council January 22, 2024 Pa g e 4 4 o f 4 6 1 Benton-Franklin Council of Governments Benton-Franklin Council of Governments (BFCOG) was established by voluntary association of the local units of government in 1966 with the vision of providing a forum for improved communication, multi-jurisdictional decision making, regional planning, and lead agency capacity for provision of multi- jurisdictional programs. The services currently provided to the member jurisdictions are outlined by Interlocal Agreement and can evolve with the needs of the region. BFCOG currently fulfills the following designations on behalf of the Benton-Franklin region: •Conference/Council of Governments (RCW 36.64.80) •Regional Planning Commission (RCW 36.70.60) •Metropolitan Planning Organization/Transportation Management Area (Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration) •Regional Transportation Planning Organization (RCW 47.80.20) (WSDOT) •Economic Development District (US Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration) Pa g e 4 5 o f 4 6 1 Pa g e 4 6 o f 4 6 1 Summary of Support Provided to: City of Pasco Transportation Planning & Funding: •$3,942,128 in Transportation Project funding for 2019 - 2023 •24-25 Transportation Improvement Plan Projects A Street/6th Ped Crossing, Court St/Rd 68 Intersection, 1-182 Broadmore Blvd Interchange Improvements & Bike/Ped Overpass, Sandifer Pkwy/Rd 90 & Argent Rd/Rd 88 Ped Crossings, Sylvester St. Overpass Ped/Bike Access. •Coordination Assistance for the WA State Transportation Commission Meeting held in Pasco in October 2023. Economic Development: •EPA Brownfields Coalition Assessments Grant – $59,000 for Downtown Brownfields Inventory and Reuse Analysis/Plan for Thunderbird Motel Property •4 Technical Assistance Meetings with Congressional Staff •Notice of Funding Communications made available for EDA Tech Hubs, Commerce Energy Grant, and EDA Funding opportunities. •Franklin County Broadband Action Team - $51,000 to create the Franklin County BEAD and Digital Equity Plan Documents and Rapid Design Study to enable access for BEAD funding applications in 2024 Fiscal Impact to: City of Pasco 2023 Dues Assessment: $44,951 (Federal Matching Only – 17.02% of Assessment Budget) •5 Year ROI: $28.61 return for every $1 Invested What have you done for me lately? Pa g e 4 7 o f 4 6 1 BFCOG receives operating revenues through 5 funding sources. •Renewing Program Funding (Grants/Federal & State Allocations) •Single Opportunity Grants (Direct/Lead Agency) •Contracted Services •Local Funds ( Annual Member Assessments) Renewing Program Funding – 2024 Federal Transportation Funding – 13.5% Local Match Required Federal Highway Administration Planning Program (FHAPL) -$582,587* Federal Transit Administration 5303 Program (FTA5303) - $319,319 Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) - $310,000* STBG allocates roughly $6M per biennium to local transportation projects in the region through a competitive call for projects. WSDOT RTPO Funding (No Local Match Required) - $123,729 (*Annual amounts can vary due to funder allocation changes and carry-over funds) Economic Development Administration Funding – 100% Local Match Required Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Planning Grant (CEDS) Renewable 3-Year $225K grant ($75K per year) to produce and update the CEDS, which EDA uses to determine potential economic impact related to EDA grant-making within the region. Since 2009 $12.5M in EDA grants have been awarded in our region to the benefit of the cities of West Richland, Pasco & Connell, and all three of the Ports for infrastructure projects. BFCOG Funding Pa g e 4 8 o f 4 6 1 Call for Projects Funding Allocation makes available roughly $6M Per Biennium to local jurisdictions for local multi-modal projects through a competitive process in cooperation with WSDOT. This funding is only available to jurisdictions through the local MPO. Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) is a long-range, multi- modal planning document that identifies the region’s mobility needs for 20+ years. It provides a policy framework for the investment of anticipated federal, state, and local funds based on the anticipated needs and regional goals and objectives. Transportation projects that are not part of the MTP are not eligible for state and federal transportation funding. Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Assistance is provided to local jurisdictions to ensure projects are entered into the WSDOT project software. Projects not entered are not eligible for state or federal/state pass-through funds. Regional Transportation Priorities is an annually compiled list of collaborative transportation projects for the Tri-Cities region highlighting the highest priority projects as adopted by the BFCOG. This listing is useful to local, state, and federal agencies in accomplishing planning tasks and provides information to support the pursuit of projects and funding, including grant applications. Comprehensive Plan Growth Management Act Certification: Review of the transportation element of local jurisdiction comp plans to ensure consistency with GMA requirements, then issue required GMA certification. Travel Demand Modeling Data and Land Use Scenarios for developments and comprehensive planning is provided to local jurisdictions and regularly updated on behalf of the region. This service would have to be procured by each individual jurisdiction if not provided by BFCOG. Additional services available upon request by local jurisdictions include Land Use Planning, Land Suitability Analysis, Mapping Services, and Equity Data Support. Regional Planning Pa g e 4 9 o f 4 6 1 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) is produced by BFCOG on behalf of the region. The CEDS, which showcases projects and regional economic areas of emphasis, is a requirement of the Economic Development Administration (EDA) to support investments of EDA grant funding in the region.Since 2009 more than $12.5M has been invested by the EDA for projects in this region. Economic Recovery Coordination – includes activities focused on economic recovery from COVID-19 and building economic resiliency to help communities avoid or withstand economic shocks in the future. Funding Technical Assistance includes helping to facilitate the flow of state and federal funding into the region through grants and ongoing programs to support local governments. We do this by providing education to our members, supporting funding applications, providing letters of support, and networking with program administrators like EDA – which has over $3.5B available nationally for community-building programs. BFCOG is the Notice of Record resource for Sen. Murray and Cantwell’s offices for dissemination of federal Notice of Funding Opportunities (NOFO) to regional jurisdictions. Lead Agency Capability is available for BFCOG to by the applicant and administrator for state or federal programs that allow collaboration and impact to more than one jurisdiction in the region. One such program is the EPA Brownfields Program, where BFCOG was awarded a $600K competitive grant for Brownfields Assessments across the region. Regional Brownfields Program is a new initiative to identify and prioritize brownfield sites to facilitate potential redevelopment or reuse through environmental assessment, remediation, and site- specific planning. An environmental consulting firm has been contracted to support these activities and identification of other funding support for related activities. Local Government Resources Pa g e 5 0 o f 4 6 1 BFCOG Interlocal Cooperation Agreement In May 2023, the BFCOG Board of Directors unanimously approved new Bylaws and amended the 2020 Interlocal Agreement. The Interlocal Agreement must be ratified and signed by each member jurisdiction. We are seeking ratification by the City of Pasco. The Interlocal Cooperation Agreement did not substantively change. •Since BFCOG is phasing out its loan fund programs, the WHEREAS that referenced specifically the revolving loan fund program was amended to reference the Public Works Economic Development Act of 1965, which provides the agency authority for not only loan funds but other types of economic development activities. This is not a new authority but a clarification of existing authority. •The updated version removed procedural information that was duplicated in the Bylaws. •The wording and layout are updated to align with the new Bylaws, which provides more detail about BFCOG’s respective designated roles. For example, the previous interlocal referred to BFCOG as “the Council.” The new documents and bylaws both refer to it as “the COG.” •It is formatted to allow for a signature sheet to be signed independently by Members as counterparts to the agreement. Pa g e 5 1 o f 4 6 1 What is a Council of Governments? Council of Governments –We exist to study regional and governmental problems of mutual interest and concern, to formulate recommendations for review and action by member jurisdictions legislative bodies. (RCW 36.54.080) Councils of Governments are unique, reflecting the needs of their respective regional needs. Pa g e 5 2 o f 4 6 1 What is a Regional Planning Agency? Regional Planning Agency–allows for the creation of the regional planning commission, its administration, initiate regional planning programs, governance, and acceptance of grants -in-aid and receiving of state or federal funds for planning in the interest of furthering the planning program. (RCW 36.70.060) It is as a Regional Planning Agency that BFCOG is eligible for its additional designations as MPO/TMA/RTPO/EDD. Pa g e 5 3 o f 4 6 1 What is an MPO? A Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) is the policy board of an organization created and designated to carry out the metropolitan transportation planning process. MPOs are required to represent localities in all urbanized areas (UZAs) with populations over 50,000, as determined by the U.S. Census. MPOs are designated by agreement between the governor and local governments that together represent at least 75 percent of the affected population (including the largest incorporated city, based on population) An urbanized area with a population over 200,000, as defined by the Bureau of the Census and designated by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), is called a Transportation Management Area (TMA). In recognition of the greater complexity of transportation issues in large urban areas, an MPO in a TMA has a stronger voice in setting priorities for implementing projects listed in the transportation improvement program and are responsible for additional planning products. Pa g e 5 4 o f 4 6 1 What is an RTPO? A Regional Transportation Planning Organization (RTPO) is created by local governments to coordinate transportation planning among jurisdictions and develop a regional transportation plan. In Washington State, the regional transportation planning program creates a formal mechanism for local governments and the state to coordinate transportation planning for regional transportation facilities. This program is designed to ensure a minimum level of consistency across the state while providing flexibility for regions to meet specific mobility needs. RTPO’s are funded cooperatively by the Washington State Department of Transportation and matching funds from local governments. Pa g e 5 5 o f 4 6 1 What is an Economic Development District? Economic Development Districts (EDDs) are multi-jurisdictional entities, commonly composed of multiple counties and in certain cases even cross-state borders. They help lead the locally-based, regionally driven economic development planning process that leverages the involvement of the public, private and non-profit sectors to establish a strategic blueprint (i.e., an economic development roadmap) for regional collaboration. The strategic blueprint, known as a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS), is a strategy-driven plan for regional economic development. A CEDS is the result of a “regionally-owned” planning process designed to guide the economic prosperity and resiliency of an area or region. It provides a coordinating mechanism for individuals, organizations, local governments, and private industry to engage in a meaningful conversation and debate about the economic direction of their region. https://eda.gov/edd/ Pa g e 5 6 o f 4 6 1 BFCOG Roles in Economic Development •Regional Planning Activities •Data & Modeling •Funding Access Technical Assistance •Lead Agency for Multi-Jurisdictional Grants & Programs Pa g e 5 7 o f 4 6 1 Local Economic Development Eco-System Designation: WA Dept. of Commerce – Associate Development Organization (ADO) Primary Customer: Business Activities: •Business Recruitment, Retention & Expansion •New Business Development •Advocacy for Industry (e.g., Nuclear/Clean Energy) Designation: •US Dept of Commerce Economic Development Administration (EDA) - Economic Development District (EDD) •Federal Highway Administration/ Federal Transit Administration - Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Primary Customer: Local Governments Activities: •Planning Activities (e.g., Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS), 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan, •Regional Data •Conduit to State/Federal Funds, Grants-in- Aid – Programs/Infrastructure •Lead Agency Capability for Multi- Jurisdictional Programs (e.g., Brownfields) Designation: Local Government Primary Customer: Constituents Activities: •Municipal Infrastructure, •Policy, Zoning, Comprehensive Planning •Business Recruitment, Retention & Expansion •New Business Development Economic Vitality Pa g e 5 8 o f 4 6 1 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 14, 2024 TO: Adam Lincoln, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/20/24 FROM: Debra Barham, City Clerk City Manager SUBJECT: *Confirming Civil Service Commission/Personnel Board Reappointment of Ericka Garcia I. REFERENCE(S): PMC 2.40 Candidate Application Packet - Council Only II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: MOTION: I move to confirm the City Manager's reappointment of Ericka Garcia to Position No. 3 on the Civil Service Commission/Personnel Board for a six- year term, from February 17, 2024, through February 17, 2030. III. FISCAL IMPACT: N/A IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: State Law (RCW 41.08 Civil Service for City Fire Fighters and 41.12 Civil Service Service Civil a maintain to for the requires Police) City City Commission for its Police and Fire Departments. PMC 2.40 establishes a Civil Service Commission for Fire and Police employees, a Personnel Board for all employees of the City. Per statute, the appointment of its members are to six- year terms. The purpose of the Civil Service Commission/Personnel Board is to: ensure the provisions of the law are carried out; ensure the continuance of the civil service system; promote efficiency in the dispatch of public business; ensure that the selection and promotion of employees is based on merit; and ensure all employees in the classified civil service receive fair and Page 59 of 461 impartial treatment at all times. Additionally, the Commission is tasked with certifying that no person in the classified civil service, or seeking admission thereto, shall be appointed, promoted, reduced, or removed, or in any way favored or discriminated against in their employment or opportunity for employment because of their race, color, age, religious or political opinions or affiliations, union affiliation or national origin. The Civil Service Commission is composed of three (3) citizens to assure fairness and impartiality in the hiring and promotion of uniformed police and fire employees. The Commission also decides appeals of discipline administered to uniformed police and fire employees, when such employees elect to use the Civil Service Commission hearing process (rare occasions) rather than the grievance arbitration process afforded in their respective bargaining contracts. In addition, the City Council has previously designated the Civil Service Commissioners to fill the role of the Personnel Board to consider certain appeals of workplace issues relating to non-uniformed employees who are not otherwise covered by a Collective Bargaining Agreement. Appointments to the Civil Service Commission are made by the City Manager with the consent of the City Council, per PMC Section 2.40.020. V. DISCUSSION: The key attributes of a Commission member are attention to detail, an interest in the civil service process and the ability to make fair and impartial decisions based on the facts surrounding an issue. Ms. Garcia has extensive civil service knowledge and experience through her years serving as a commissioner on the Pasco's Civil Service Commission since March of 2018. City Manager requests Council to confirm Ericka Garcia to the Civil Service Commission. Page 60 of 461 2.40.010 2.40.020 2.40.030 2.40.040 2.40.050 2.40.060 Chapter 2.40 CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION AND PERSONNEL BOARD Sections: Created – Purpose. Membership. Civil service rules. Powers and duties of Personnel Board. Fire Chief excepted. Police Chief excepted. 2.40.010 Created – Purpose. There is created pursuant to Chapters 41.08 and 41.12 RCW a Civil Service Commission for the Fire Department and Police Department, and a Personnel Board for all employees of the City. [Ord. 3266 § 5, 1997; Code 1970 § 2.33.010.] 2.40.020 Membership. Residents of the City of Pasco being citizens of the United States will be eligible for appointment. The City Manager will make all appointments to the Commission with consent of the City Council, following rules established in Chapters 41.08 and 41.12 RCW. Members of the Civil Service Commission will also serve as members of the Personnel Board. [Ord. 3266 § 5, 1997; Code 1970 § 2.33.020.] 2.40.030 Civil service rules. The Commission shall adopt rules as provided for in Chapters 41.08 and 41.12 RCW, respectively. Commission rules may be amended and updated from time to time. [Ord. 3266 § 5, 1997; Code 1970 § 2.33.030.] 2.40.040 Powers and duties of Personnel Board. It shall be the duty of the Personnel Board to: (1) Hear grievances in accordance with rules of procedures and practices to be adopted by the Board, but informality of proceedings or in the manner of taking testimony shall not affect any action of the Board. Your Selections | Pasco Municipal Code Page 1 of 2 The Pasco Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 4643, passed March 6, 2023. Page 61 of 461 The Pasco Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 4643, passed March 6, 2023. Disclaimer: The City Clerk’s office has the official version of the Pasco Municipal Code. Users should contact the City Clerk’s office for ordinances passed subsequent to the ordinance cited above. City Website: www.pasco-wa.gov City Telephone: (509) 544-3080 Code Publishing Company, A General Code Company (2) Advise the appointing authority on matters brought before the Board by the appointing authority. (3) Keep such records as may be necessary for the proper execution of the powers and duties of the Board. [Ord. 3266 § 5, 1997; Code 1970 § 2.33.040.] 2.40.050 Fire Chief excepted. Any person appointed as Fire Chief after January 25, 1994, shall be excepted from inclusion within the purview of the Civil Service System created by this chapter. [Ord. 3545 § 33, 2002; Code 1970 § 2.33.050.] 2.40.060 Police Chief excepted. Any person appointed as Police Chief after January 25, 1994, shall be excepted from inclusion within the purview of the Civil Service System created by this chapter. [Ord. 3545 § 33, 2002; Code 1970 § 2.33.060.] Your Selections | Pasco Municipal Code Page 2 of 2 The Pasco Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 4643, passed March 6, 2023. Page 62 of 461 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 13, 2024 TO: Adam Lincoln, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/20/24 FROM: Angela Pashon, Assistant City Manager City Manager SUBJECT: Japanese Beetle Eradication Program Presentation I. REFERENCE(S): II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Presentation by Camilo Acosta, Japanese Beetle Eradication Coordinator, Washington State Department of Agriculture III. FISCAL IMPACT: N/A IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: In 2023, a Franklin County Horticultural Pest and Disease Board trapper found the beetle and state officials responded to the catch, verified the beetle, and set up a delimiting trapping grid around the find. The trap produced a single beetle. Washington State Department of Agriculture teams began immediately setting up additional traps and checking nearby nurseries for additional detections, which resulted in additional beetles being trapped. have could it area, the in Japanese becomes beetle the If established significant impacts on gardens and yards, parks and farms, as well as farmers’ ability to move agricultural products out of the area. V. DISCUSSION: Mr. Acosta will provide a brief presentation on what the Japanese Beetle is and why it is a threat in Pasco, history of the eradication program, and details on proposed treatments and local quarantine. Page 63 of 461 Page 64 of 461 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 12, 2024 TO: Adam Lincoln, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/20/24 FROM: Angela Pashon, Assistant City Manager City Manager SUBJECT: 2023 Community Survey Highlights Presentation I. REFERENCE(S): The NCS Report Open Participation Survey Results PowerPoint Presentation II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Informational III. FISCAL IMPACT: None IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: The City of Pasco, in partnership with the National Research Center (NRC) in Colorado, has conducted the "National Community Survey" biennially since 2005. The latest survey, conducted in 2023, collected opinions from residents on Pasco's governance and various community aspects. Results are statistically valid and allow comparison with over 500 other communities using the same methodology, providing valuable trend data. To ensure accuracy, households receiving the survey were identified using zip codes from Go-Dog Direct via Polco, with addresses verified against municipal boundaries. The survey included both single-family and multi-family units, sampled at a ratio of 5:3. Pasco added an "open participation" section to the survey to gather additional insights, which are reported separately from the main portion to maintain validity. Page 65 of 461 The statistically valid benchmark report and open participation results are attached. Both data sets are available online, available here. Please note: To view results by district, navigate to “Comparisons” tab and select “Area” on the dropdown menu on the right-hand side. To view open participation results, navigate to “Open Participation” tab. V. DISCUSSION: Results show steady trends, with limited deviations. To be considered points percentage eight than a difference significant, statistically greater between the 2021 and 2023 surveys is needed. Many statistically significant changes return Pasco to historical levels prior to covid restrictions (2021 survey). Statistically Valid Report Highlights Survey sent to 3,000 randomly selected households. 310 surveys were completed providing an overall response rate of 10% and the 6% level of confident was within the margin of error to be statistically valid. 50% of respondents consider themselves of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin. The survey was provided in English and Spanish (online), 14 responses were received in Spanish. employees Pasco service customer by of satisfaction The overall increased 11% from 2021, this was a 9% increase from the historical trend in 2019. The quality in our storm water management program increased 13% from 2021, this was a 10% increase from historical trend in 2019. Opportunities for parks and recreation remained at, or increased to, historical trends. Quality of police services and crime prevention increased to historical trends. Quality of fire services and ambulance or emergency medical services increased to historical trends. Custom Questions The City of Pasco selected two custom questions to ask during this survey cycle. Page 66 of 461 Communication Sources for Pasco Information With communications, engagement, and marketing efforts ramping up, collecting information on where resident receive their information will assist in the strategy of these efforts. Overall, respondents use the following as major sources: traditional media (50%); City website (47%); Facebook (44%); and radio (38%). Importance of Local Community Addressing Homelessness Respondents were asked how important, if at all, the following are for our local community to implement to help address homelessness. The purpose of this question was to better understand our community’s priorities for addressing the issue and to provide data to continue/enhance discussions. Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Providing emergency shelter 32% 40% 22% 6% Creating affordable, permanent housing 42% 33% 21% 4% Enforcing “no camping” ordinances 42% 34% 18% 5% Providing access to health care, behavioral health, and substance abuse treatment 50% 32% 16% 2% Helping fund organizations that provide services to people experiencing homelessness in our community 39% 37% 20% 4% Page 67 of 461 Statistically Valid vs. Open Participation Results As mentioned, there are two components of the survey, staff recommends a greater focus on the statistically valid results. Although helpful, the open participation results can be swayed by a small percentage of our community and even those outside of it (16 respondents reported not being a Pasco resident). Below is a snapshot to compare responses. Statistically Valid Open Participation Quality of Life Pasco as a place to live 77% 56% Overall quality of life 69% 50% Overall image 42% 32% City Services & Systems Public information services 53% 52% Customer service 68% 57% Value of services for taxes paid 42% 40% Overall direction Pasco is taking 47% 51% Acting in best interest of community 42% 35% Overall quality of services provided by Pasco 60% 59% Transportation system quality 51% 36% Code enforcement 31% 45% Animal control 44% 34% Utility billing 72% 66% Police services 73% 57% Crime prevention 58% 53% Fire services 89% 75% Ambulance/emergency medical services 78% 59% Economy Pasco as a place to work 69% 53% Page 68 of 461 Quality of economic development 55% 42% Variety of businesses and services 50% 30% Vibrancy of DT 25% 25% Pasco as a place to visit 34% 26% No action is needed, staff provides this information to support the City Council's upcoming goal setting. Page 69 of 461 Pasco, WA The National Community Survey Report of Results 2023 Visit us online! www.polco.us National Research Center at Polco is a charter member of the AAPOR Transparency Initiative, providing clear disclosure of our sound and ethical survey research practices. Report by: Page 70 of 461 Table of Contents About The NCS ........................................................................................... 1 Methods ...................................................................................................... 3 Key Findings................................................................................................ 6 Facets of Livability ..................................................................................... 7 Quality of Life ........................................................................................... 10 Governance ............................................................................................... 11 Economy ................................................................................................... 13 Mobility ..................................................................................................... 15 Community Design ................................................................................... 17 Utilities .................................................................................................... 19 Safety ........................................................................................................ 20 Natural Environment ................................................................................. 22 Parks and Recreation ............................................................................... 23 Health and Wellness ................................................................................. 24 Education, Arts, and Culture ..................................................................... 25 Inclusivity and Engagement ..................................................................... 26 Participation ............................................................................................. 28 Custom questions ..................................................................................... 29 National benchmarks ................................................................................ 32 Full trends ................................................................................................. 43 Complete frequencies ............................................................................... 55 Open participation survey – methods ..................................................... 84 Open participation survey – results ......................................................... 86 Page 71 of 461 About The NCS™ The National Community Survey™ (The NCS™) report is about the “livability” of Pasco. A livable community is a place that is not simply habitable, but that is desirable. It is not only where people do live, but where they want to live. The survey was developed by the experts from National Research Center at Polco. Great communities are partnerships of the government, private sector, community-based organizations and residents, all geographically connected. The NCS captures residents’ opinions considering ten central facets of a community: • Economy • Mobility • Community Design • Utilities • Safety • Natural Environment • Parks and Recreation • Health and Wellness • Education, Arts, and Culture • Inclusivity and Engagement How the results are reported For the most part, the percentages presented in the following tabs represent the “percent positive.” Most commonly, the percent positive is the combination of the top two most positive response options (i.e., excellent/good, very safe/somewhat safe, etc.). On many of the questions in the survey respondents may answer “don’t know.” The proportion of respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in the tab “Complete data.” However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in most of the tabs. In other words, the tables and graphs display the responses from respondents who had an opinion about a specific item. Comparisons to benchmarks NRC’s database of comparative resident opinion is comprised of resident perspectives gathered in surveys from over 500 communities whose residents evaluated the same kinds of topics on The National Community Survey. The comparison evaluations are from the most recent survey completed in each community in the last five years. NRC adds the latest results quickly upon survey completion, keeping the benchmark data fresh and relevant. The communities in the database represent a wide geographic and population range. In each tab, Pasco's results are noted as being “higher” than the benchmark, “lower” than the benchmark, or “similar” to the benchmark, meaning that the average rating given by Pasco residents is statistically similar to or different (greater or lesser) than the benchmark. Being rated as “higher” or “lower” than the benchmark means that Pasco's average rating for a particular item was more than 10 points different than the benchmark. If a rating was “much higher” or “much lower,” then Pasco's average rating was more than 20 points different when compared to the benchmark. The survey was administered after the COVID-19 pandemic, a time of challenge for many local governments. While we provide comparisons to national benchmarks, it is important to note that much of the benchmark data was collected prior to or during the pandemic. This may impact how your City's 2023 ratings compare to other communities’ ratings from the past five years. Trends over time Trend data for Pasco represent important comparison data and should be examined for improvements or declines.¹ Deviations from stable trends over time represent opportunities for understanding how local policies, programs, or public information may have affected residents' opinions. Changes between survey years have been noted with an arrow and the percent difference. If the difference is greater than eight percentage points between the 2021 and 2023 surveys, the change is statistically significant. 1. In 2020, The NCS survey was updated to include new and refreshed items. Consequently, some of the trends may be impacted due to wording modifications that could have potentially altered the meaning of the item for the respondent. The report provides the opinions of a representative sample of 310 residents of the City of Pasco collected from November 9, 2023 to December 31, 2023. The margin of error around any reported percentage is 6% for all respondents and the response rate for the 2023 survey was 10%. Survey results were weighted so that the demographic profile of respondents was representative of the demographic profile of adults in Pasco. 1Page 72 of 461 About The NCS™The National Community Survey™ (The NCS™) report is aboutthe “livability” of Pasco. A livable community is a place that is notsimply habitable, but that is desirable. It is not only where peopledo live, but where they want to live. The survey was developed bythe experts from National Research Center at Polco.Great communities are partnerships of the government, privatesector, community-based organizations and residents, allgeographically connected. The NCS captures residents’ opinionsconsidering ten central facets of a community: • Economy • Mobility • Community Design • Utilities • Safety • Natural Environment • Parks and Recreation • Health and Wellness • Education, Arts, and Culture • Inclusivity and Engagement How the results are reported For the most part, the percentages presented in the following tabs represent the “percent positive.” Most commonly, the percent positive is the combination of the top two most positive response options (i.e., excellent/good, very safe/somewhat safe, etc.). On many of the questions in the survey respondents may answer “don’t know.” The proportion of respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in the tab “Complete data.” However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in most of the tabs. In other words, the tables and graphs display the responses from respondents who had an opinion about a specific item. Comparisons to benchmarks NRC’s database of comparative resident opinion is comprised of resident perspectives gathered in surveys from over 500 communities whose residents evaluated the same kinds of topics on The National Community Survey. The comparison evaluations are from the most recent survey completed in each community in the last five years. NRC adds the latest results quickly upon survey completion, keeping the benchmark data fresh and relevant. The communities in the database represent a wide geographic and population range. In each tab, Pasco's results are noted as being “higher” than the benchmark, “lower” than the benchmark, or “similar” to the benchmark, meaning that the average rating given by Pasco residents is statistically similar to or different (greater or lesser) than the benchmark. Being rated as “higher” or “lower” than the benchmark means that Pasco's average rating for a particular item was more than 10 points different than the benchmark. If a rating was “much higher” or “much lower,” then Pasco's average rating was more than 20 points different when compared to the benchmark. The survey was administered after the COVID-19 pandemic, a time of challenge for many local governments. While we provide comparisons to national benchmarks, it is important to note that much of the benchmark data was collected prior to or during the pandemic. This may impact how your City's 2023 ratings compare to other communities’ ratings from the past five years. Trends over time Trend data for Pasco represent important comparison data and should be examined for improvements or declines.¹ Deviations from stable trends over time represent opportunities for understanding how local policies, programs, or public information may have affected residents' opinions. Changes between survey years have been noted with an arrow and the percent difference. If the difference is greater than eight percentage points between the 2021 and 2023 surveys, the change is statistically significant. 1. In 2020, The NCS survey was updated to include new and refreshed items. Consequently, some of the trends may be impacted due to wording modifications that could have potentially altered the meaning of the item for the respondent. The report provides the opinions of a representative sample of 310 residents of the City of Pasco collected fromNovember 9, 2023 to December 31, 2023. The margin of error around any reported percentage is 6% for allrespondents and the response rate for the 2023 survey was 10%. Survey results were weighted so that thedemographic profile of respondents was representative of the demographic profile of adults in Pasco. 2Page 73 of 461 Conducting the survey The 3,000 randomly selected households received mailings beginning on November 9, 2023 and data collection for the survey remained open for eight weeks. The first mailing was a postcard inviting the household to participate in the survey. The next mailing contained a cover letter with instructions, the survey questionnaire, and a postage-paid return envelope. The final mailing was a reiminder postcard inviting the household one final time to participate in the survey. All mailings included a web link to give residents the opportunity to respond to the survey online, as well as QR codes to further encourage participation. All follow-up mailings asked those who had not completed the survey to do so, and those who had already done so to refrain from completing the survey again. About 1% of the 3,000 mailed invitations or surveys were returned because the household address was vacant or the postal service was unable to deliver the survey as addressed. Of the remaining 2,970 households that received the invitations to participate, 310 completed the survey, providing an overall response rate of 10%. The response rate was calculated using AAPOR’s response rate #2 for mailed surveys of unnamed persons.² It is customary to describe the precision of estimates made from surveys by a “level of confidence” and accompanying “confidence interval” (or margin of error). A traditional level of confidence, and the one used here, is 95%. The 95% confidence interval can be any size and quantifies the sampling error or imprecision of the survey results because some residents’ opinions are relied on to estimate all residents’ opinions. The margin of error for the City of Pasco survey is no greater than plus or minus six percentage points around any given percent reported for all respondents (310 completed surveys). In addition to the randomly selected “probability sample” of households, a link to an online open-participation survey was publicized by the City of Pasco. The open-participation survey was identical to the random sample survey, with two small updates; it asked a question to confirm the respondent was a resident of Pasco and also a question about where they heard about the survey. The open-participation survey was open to all city residents and became available on December 7, 2023 The survey remained open for three weeks. The data presented in the following tabs exclude the open participation survey data, but a tab at the end provides the complete frequency of responses to questions by the open-participation respondents. The survey datasets were analyzed using all or some of a combination of the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), R, Python and Tableau. For the most part, the percentages presented in the reports represent the “percent positive.” The percent positive is the combination of the top two most positive response options (i.e., excellent/good, very safe/somewhat safe, essential/very important, etc.), or, in the case of resident behaviors/participation, the percent positive represents the proportion of respondents indicating “yes” or participating in an activity at least once a month. On many of the questions in the survey respondents may answer “don’t know.” The proportion of respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in the tab “Complete data”. However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in the reports. In other words, the tables and graphs display the responses from respondents who had an opinion about a specific item. Contact The City of Pasco funded this research. Please contact Angela Pashon of the City of Pasco at pashona@pasco-wa.gov if you have any questions about the survey. Study Limitations All public opinion research is subject to unmeasured error. While the methodologies employed for this survey were designed to minimize this error as much as possible, these other sources of potential error should be acknowledged. Non-response error arises when those who were selected to participate in the survey did not do so, and may have different opinions or experiences than those who did respond. Coverage error refers to the possibility that some respondents that should have been included in the surveyed population were not (e.g., for a general resident survey, USPS mailing lists may exclude certain types of housing units, such as multi-family buildings where mail is delivered to a common area rather than to a specific unit (though this is rare), or where mail is received at a PO box instead of the at household's physical location. Finally, recall bias occurs when respondents may not perfectly remember their experiences in the past year (such as participation in social or civic events), and social desirability bias may cause respondents to answer in ways they think cast their responses in a more favorable light. Survey Validity See the Polco Knowledge Base article on survey validity at https://info.polco.us/knowledge/statistical-vali 2. See AAPOR's Standard Definitions for more information at https://aapor.org/standards-and-ethics/standard-definitions/ 3. Pasek, J. (2014). ANES Weighting Algorithm. Retrieved from https://surveyinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Full-anesrake-paper.pdf 4. Targets come from the 2020 Census and 2022 American Community Survey Unweighted Weighted Target ⁴ Age 18-34 35-54 55+ Area District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 District 6 Hispanic origin No, not of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin Yes, I consider myself to be of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin Housing tenure Own Rent Housing type Attached Detached Race & Hispanic origin Not white alone White alone, not Hispanic or Latino Sex Man Woman Sex/age Man 18-34 Man 35-54 Man 55+ Woman 18-34 Woman 35-54 Woman 55+ Analyzing the data Responses from mailed surveys were entered into an electronic dataset using a “key and verify” method, where all responses are entered twice and compared to each other. Any discrepancies were resolved in comparison to the original survey form. Range checks as well as other forms of quality control were also performed. Responses from surveys completed on Polco were downloaded and merged with the mailed survey responses. The demographics of the survey respondents were compared to those found in the 2020 Census and 2022 American Community Survey estimates for adults in the City of Pasco. The primary objective of weighting survey data is to make the survey respondents reflective of the larger population of the community. The characteristics used for weighting were age, sex, race, Hispanic origin, housing type, housing tenure, and area. No adjustments were made for design effects. Weights were calculated using an iterative, multiplicative raking model known as the ANES Weighting Algorithm.³ The results of the weighting scheme for the probability sample are presented in the following table. NRC aligns demographic labels with those used by the U.S. Census for reporting purposes, when possible. Some categories (e.g., age, race/Hispanic origin, housing type, and length of residency) are combined into smaller subgroups. Methods Selecting survey recipients All households within the City of Pasco were eligible to participate in the survey. A list of all households within the zip codes serving Pasco was purchased from Polco's mailing vendor, Go-Dog Direct, based on updated listings from the United States Postal Service. Since some of the zip codes that serve the City of Pasco households may also serve addresses that lie outside of the community, the exact geographic location of each housing unit was compared to community boundaries using the most current municipal boundary file. Addresses located outside of the City of Pasco boundaries were removed from the list of potential households to survey. From that list, addresses were randomly selected as survey recipients, with multi-family housing units (defined as those with a unit number) sampled at a rate of 5:3 compared to single family housing units. An individual within each household was randomly selected using the "birthday method". The birthday method selects a person within the household by asking the “person who most recently had a birthday” to complete the questionnaire. The underlying assumption in this method is that day of birth has no relationship to the way people respond to surveys. This instruction was contained in the introduction of the survey. 3Page 74 of 461 Conducting the surveyThe 3,000 randomly selected households received mailings beginning on November 9, 2023 and data collection for the survey remained open for eight weeks. The first mailing was a postcard inviting the household to participate in the survey. The next mailing contained a cover letter with instructions, the survey questionnaire, and a postage-paid return envelope. The final mailing was a reiminder postcard inviting the household one final time to participate in the survey. All mailings included a web link to give residents the opportunity to respond to the survey online, as well as QR codes to further encourage participation. All follow-up mailings asked those who had not completed the survey to do so, and those who had already done so to refrain from completing the survey again.About 1% of the 3,000 mailed invitations or surveys were returned because the household address was vacant or the postal service was unable to deliver the survey as addressed. Of the remaining 2,970 households that received the invitations to participate, 310 completed the survey, providing an overall response rate of 10%. The response rate was calculated using AAPOR’s response rate #2 for mailed surveys of unnamed persons.²It is customary to describe the precision of estimates made from surveys by a “level of confidence” and accompanying “confidence interval” (or margin of error). A traditional level of confidence, and the one used here, is 95%. The 95% confidence interval can be any size and quantifies the sampling error or imprecision of the survey results because some residents’ opinions are relied on to estimate all residents’ opinions. The margin of error for the City of Pasco survey is no greater than plus or minus six percentage points around any given percent reported for all respondents (310 completed surveys).In addition to the randomly selected “probability sample” of households, a link to an online open-participation survey was publicized by the City of Pasco. The open-participation survey was identical to the random sample survey, with two small updates; it asked a question to confirm the respondent was a resident of Pasco and also a question about where they heard about the survey. The open-participation survey was open to all city residents and became available on December 7, 2023 The survey remained open for three weeks. The data presented in the following tabs exclude the open participation survey data, but a tab at the end provides the complete frequency of responses to questions by the open-participation respondents. The survey datasets were analyzed using all or some of a combination of the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), R, Python and Tableau. For the most part, the percentages presented in the reports represent the “percent positive.” The percent positive is the combination of the top two most positive response options (i.e., excellent/good, very safe/somewhat safe, essential/very important, etc.), or, in the case of resident behaviors/participation, the percent positive represents the proportion of respondents indicating “yes” or participating in an activity at least once a month. On many of the questions in the survey respondents may answer “don’t know.” The proportion of respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in the tab “Complete data”. However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in the reports. In other words, the tables and graphs display the responses from respondents who had an opinion about a specific item. Contact The City of Pasco funded this research. Please contact Angela Pashon of the City of Pasco at pashona@pasco-wa.gov if you have any questions about the survey. Study Limitations All public opinion research is subject to unmeasured error. While the methodologies employed for this survey were designed to minimize this error as much as possible, these other sources of potential error should be acknowledged. Non-response error arises when those who were selected to participate in the survey did not do so, and may have different opinions or experiences than those who did respond. Coverage error refers to the possibility that some respondents that should have been included in the surveyed population were not (e.g., for a general resident survey, USPS mailing lists may exclude certain types of housing units, such as multi-family buildings where mail is delivered to a common area rather than to a specific unit (though this is rare), or where mail is received at a PO box instead of the at household's physical location. Finally, recall bias occurs when respondents may not perfectly remember their experiences in the past year (such as participation in social or civic events), and social desirability bias may cause respondents to answer in ways they think cast their responses in a more favorable light. Survey Validity See the Polco Knowledge Base article on survey validity at https://info.polco.us/knowledge/statistical-vali 2. See AAPOR's Standard Definitions for more information at https://aapor.org/standards-and-ethics/standard-definitions/ 3. Pasek, J. (2014). ANES Weighting Algorithm. Retrieved from https://surveyinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Full-anesrake-paper.pdf 4. Targets come from the 2020 Census and 2022 American Community Survey Unweighted Weighted Target ⁴ Age 18-34 35-54 55+ Area District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 District 6 Hispanic origin No, not of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin Yes, I consider myself to be of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin Housing tenure Own Rent Housing type Attached Detached Race & Hispanic origin Not white alone White alone, not Hispanic or Latino Sex Man Woman Sex/age Man 18-34 Man 35-54 Man 55+ Woman 18-34 Woman 35-54 Woman 55+ 26% 36% 38% 26% 36% 38% 61% 25% 13% 12% 21% 21% 21% 13% 12% 12% 21% 21% 21% 13% 12% 8% 28% 23% 24% 10% 8% 50% 50% 50% 50% 22% 78% 31% 69% 31% 69% 9% 91% 74% 26% 74% 26% 87% 13% Analyzing the data Responses from mailed surveys were entered into an electronic dataset using a “key and verify” method, where all responses are entered twice and compared to each other. Any discrepancies were resolved in comparison to the original survey form. Range checks as well as other forms of quality control were also performed. Responses from surveys completed on Polco were downloaded and merged with the mailed survey responses. The demographics of the survey respondents were compared to those found in the 2020 Census and 2022 American Community Survey estimates for adults in the City of Pasco. The primary objective of weighting survey data is to make the survey respondents reflective of the larger population of the community. The characteristics used for weighting were age, sex, race, Hispanic origin, housing type, housing tenure, and area. No adjustments were made for design effects. Weights were calculated using an iterative, multiplicative raking model known as the ANES Weighting Algorithm.³ The results of the weighting scheme for the probability sample are presented in the following table. NRC aligns demographic labels with those used by the U.S. Census for reporting purposes, when possible. Some categories (e.g., age, race/Hispanic origin, housing type, and length of residency) are combined into smaller subgroups. MethodsSelecting survey recipients All households within the City of Pasco were eligible to participate in the survey. A list of all households within the zip codes serving Pasco was purchased from Polco's mailing vendor, Go-Dog Direct, based on updated listings from the United States Postal Service. Since some of the zip codes that serve the City of Pasco households may also serve addresses that lie outside of the community, the exact geographic location of each housing unit was compared to community boundaries using the most current municipal boundary file. Addresses located outside of the City of Pasco boundaries were removed from the list of potential households to survey. From that list,addresses were randomly selected as survey recipients, with multi-family housing units (defined as those with a unit number) sampled at a rate of 5:3 compared to single family housing units.An individual within each household was randomly selected using the "birthday method". The birthday method selects a person within the household by asking the “person who most recently had a birthday” to complete the questionnaire. The underlying assumption in this method is that day of birth has no relationship to the way people respond to surveys. This instruction was contained in the introduction of the survey. 4Page 75 of 461 Conducting the surveyThe 3,000 randomly selected households received mailings beginning on November 9, 2023 and data collection for the survey remained open for eight weeks. The first mailing was a postcard inviting the household to participate in the survey. The next mailing contained a cover letter with instructions, the survey questionnaire, and a postage-paid return envelope. The final mailing was a reiminder postcard inviting the household one final time to participate in the survey. All mailings included a web link to give residents the opportunity to respond to the survey online, as well as QR codes to further encourage participation. All follow-up mailings asked those who had not completed the survey to do so, and those who had already done so to refrain from completing the survey again.About 1% of the 3,000 mailed invitations or surveys were returned because the household address was vacant or the postal service was unable to deliver the survey as addressed. Of the remaining 2,970 households that received the invitations to participate, 310 completed the survey, providing an overall response rate of 10%. The response rate was calculated using AAPOR’s response rate #2 for mailed surveys of unnamed persons.²It is customary to describe the precision of estimates made from surveys by a “level of confidence” and accompanying “confidence interval” (or margin of error). A traditional level of confidence, and the one used here, is 95%. The 95% confidence interval can be any size and quantifies the sampling error or imprecision of the survey results because some residents’ opinions are relied on to estimate all residents’ opinions. The margin of error for the City of Pasco survey is no greater than plus or minus six percentage points around any given percent reported for all respondents (310 completed surveys).In addition to the randomly selected “probability sample” of households, a link to an online open-participation survey was publicized by the City of Pasco. The open-participation survey was identical to the random sample survey, with two small updates; it asked a question to confirm the respondent was a resident of Pasco and also a question about where they heard about the survey. The open-participation survey was open to all city residents and became available on December 7, 2023 The survey remained open for three weeks. The data presented in the following tabs exclude the open participation survey data, but a tab at the end provides the complete frequency of responses to questions by the open-participation respondents. The survey datasets were analyzed using all or some of a combination of the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), R, Python and Tableau. For the most part, the percentages presented in the reports represent the “percent positive.” The percent positive is the combination of the top two most positive response options (i.e., excellent/good, very safe/somewhat safe, essential/very important, etc.), or, in the case of resident behaviors/participation, the percent positive represents the proportion of respondents indicating “yes” or participating in an activity at least once a month. On many of the questions in the survey respondents may answer “don’t know.” The proportion of respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in the tab “Complete data”. However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in the reports. In other words, the tables and graphs display the responses from respondents who had an opinion about a specific item. Contact The City of Pasco funded this research. Please contact Angela Pashon of the City of Pasco at pashona@pasco-wa.gov if you have any questions about the survey. Study Limitations All public opinion research is subject to unmeasured error. While the methodologies employed for this survey were designed to minimize this error as much as possible, these other sources of potential error should be acknowledged. Non-response error arises when those who were selected to participate in the survey did not do so, and may have different opinions or experiences than those who did respond. Coverage error refers to the possibility that some respondents that should have been included in the surveyed population were not (e.g., for a general resident survey, USPS mailing lists may exclude certain types of housing units, such as multi-family buildings where mail is delivered to a common area rather than to a specific unit (though this is rare), or where mail is received at a PO box instead of the at household's physical location. Finally, recall bias occurs when respondents may not perfectly remember their experiences in the past year (such as participation in social or civic events), and social desirability bias may cause respondents to answer in ways they think cast their responses in a more favorable light. Survey Validity See the Polco Knowledge Base article on survey validity at https://info.polco.us/knowledge/statistical-vali 2. See AAPOR's Standard Definitions for more information at https://aapor.org/standards-and-ethics/standard-definitions/ 3. Pasek, J. (2014). ANES Weighting Algorithm. Retrieved from https://surveyinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Full-anesrake-paper.pdf 4. Targets come from the 2020 Census and 2022 American Community Survey Unweighted Weighted Target ⁴Age 18-3435-5455+Area District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 District 6Hispanicorigin No, not of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin Yes, I consider myself to be of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish originHousingtenureOwnRentHousing type Attached Detached Race & Hispanic origin Not white alone White alone, not Hispanic or Latino Sex Man Woman Sex/age Man 18-34 Man 35-54 Man 55+ Woman 18-34 Woman 35-54 Woman 55+ 74% 26% 74% 26% 87% 13% 42% 58% 42% 58% 69% 31% 49% 51% 49% 51% 49% 51% 13% 17% 19% 13% 18% 20% 13% 17% 19% 13% 18% 20% 27% 15% 7% 34% 10% 6% Analyzing the dataResponses from mailed surveys were entered into an electronic dataset using a “key and verify” method, where all responses are entered twice and compared to each other. Any discrepancies were resolved in comparison to the original survey form. Range checks as well as other forms of quality control were also performed. Responses from surveys completed on Polco were downloaded and merged with the mailed survey responses.The demographics of the survey respondents were compared to those found in the 2020 Census and 2022 American Community Survey estimates for adults in the City of Pasco. The primary objective of weighting survey data is to make the survey respondents reflective of the larger population of the community. The characteristics used for weighting were age, sex, race, Hispanic origin, housing type, housing tenure, and area. No adjustmentswere made for design effects. Weights were calculated using an iterative, multiplicative raking model known as the ANES Weighting Algorithm.³ The results of the weighting scheme for the probability sample are presented in thefollowing table.NRC aligns demographic labels with those used by the U.S. Census for reporting purposes, when possible. Some categories (e.g., age, race/Hispanic origin, housing type, and length of residency) are combined into smaller subgroups.MethodsSelecting survey recipients All households within the City of Pasco were eligible to participate in the survey. A list of all households within the zip codes serving Pasco was purchased from Polco's mailing vendor, Go-Dog Direct, based on updated listings from the United States Postal Service. Since some of the zip codes that serve the City of Pasco households may also serve addresses that lie outside of the community, the exact geographic location of each housing unit was compared to community boundaries using the most current municipal boundary file. Addresses located outside of the City of Pasco boundaries were removed from the list of potential households to survey. From that list,addresses were randomly selected as survey recipients, with multi-family housing units (defined as those with a unit number) sampled at a rate of 5:3 compared to single family housing units.An individual within each household was randomly selected using the "birthday method". The birthday method selects a person within the household by asking the “person who most recently had a birthday” to complete the questionnaire. The underlying assumption in this method is that day of birth has no relationship to the way people respond to surveys. This instruction was contained in the introduction of the survey. 5Page 76 of 461 Key Findings Many safety ratings experienced increases in 2023, but safety still remains a challenge for the City. When asked about their feelings of safety in their neighborhood during the day, about 9 in 10 survey respondents indicated that they felt very or somewhat safe; this score saw a statistically significant increase from the 2021 survey and matched national benchmarks. A similar proportion reportedly felt safe from fire, flood, or other natural disasters, also in line with benchmark comparisons. Participants’ feelings of safety overall in Pasco (60%), from property crime (58%), and from violent crime (70%) all remained relatively steady but fell below national averages. About 6 in 10 reviewers also reported feeling very or somewhat safe in Pasco’s downtown/commercial area during the day, which increased by 8% from 2021 but ranked lower than benchmark communities. Safety-related services generally showed improvement over prior survey results and garnered ratings similar to national averages, with a couple of exceptions. Fire services were given excellent or good marks by approximately 89% of residents, up from 77% in 2021. About three-quarters of respondents favorably reviewed ambulance or emergency medical services as well as police/sheriff services, each trending upward by roughly 10%. Two-thirds of residents offered positive evaluations for fire prevention and education, showing a statistically significant increase in rating from the previous survey. Marks for crime prevention (58%) increased by 12% since 2021, on par with national averages. Falling below the national benchmarks, however, were scores for emergency preparedness (47%) and animal control (44%), which both remained in line with Pasco’s previous survey iteration. Most aspects of community design receive positive reviews while indicating some areas for additional focus. About half of Pasco residents gave excellent or good ratings to the overall design or layout of the city’s residential and commercial areas, similar to the national average. Three-quarters of respondents indicated they were pleased with their neighborhood as a place to live, which was also on par with the benchmark. Half of Pasco residents offered assessments in line with benchmarks for the overall quality of new development and for the preservation of the historical or cultural character of the community. A similar percentage provided positive scores for the overall appearance of Pasco, falling below benchmarks. Well-planned commercial growth, well-planned residential growth, well-designed neighborhoods, and the variety of housing options in Pasco all garnered average reviews by about 4 in 10 survey participants. The two services related to this facet of community livability—land use, planning, and zoning and code enforcement—were both rated positively by about one-third of residents; the latter score fell lower than that of comparison communities. Residents also provided below-average evaluations to Pasco’s public places where people want to spend time (25%). Although the availability of affordable quality housing (18% excellent or good) matched comparison communities, this rating declined by almost 10% from Pasco’s 2021 results, suggesting an opportunity for renewed focus. The economy is a top priority for Pasco residents. About 93% of residents rated the overall economic health of Pasco as an essential or very important focus area for the next two years, making it a top priority for the community. Approximately 7 in 10 residents rated Pasco an excellent or good place to work. Roughly 6 in 10 survey participants offered positive reviews for the overall quality of business and service establishments in the city, while half were pleased with Pasco’s economic development, employment opportunities, and the variety of business and service establishments. Half of residents also positively rated Pasco’s overall economic health. Each of these were on par with national benchmarks. Although it remained in line with comparison communities, the cost of living in Pasco garnered favorable reviews from just one-third. Shopping opportunities in Pasco and Pasco as a place to visit both earned below-average ratings from 34% of evaluators. Only 25% offered positive marks for the vibrancy of the downtown/commercial area in Pasco, also lower than the benchmarks. While most evaluations pertaining to the local economy held steady since the previous survey iteration, this facet of livability remains of high importance to the larger community. 6Page 77 of 461 Facets of livability Every jurisdiction must balance limited resources while meeting resident needs and striving to optimize community livability. To this end, it is helpful to know what aspects of the community are most important to residents and which they perceive as being of higher or lower quality. It is especially helpful to know when a facet of livability is considered of high importance but rated as lower quality, as this should be a top priority to address. Quality-Importance Matrix To help guide City staff and officials with decisions on future resource allocation, resident ratings of the importance of facets were compared to their ratings of the quality of these facets. To identify the services perceived by residents to have relatively lower quality at the same time as relatively higher importance, all facets were ranked from highest perceived quality to lowest perceived quality and from highest perceived importance to lowest perceived importance. Some facets were in the top half of both lists (higher quality and higher importance); some were in the top half of one list but the bottom half of the other (higher quality and lower importance or lower quality and higher importance); and some facets were in the bottom half of both lists. 52% or more of respondents were considered of “higher quality” and those with ratings lower than 52% were considered to be of “lower quality.” Services were classified as “more important” if they were rated as essential or very important by 76% or more of respondents. Services were rated as “less important” if they received a rating of less than 76%. This classification uses the median ratings for quality and importance to divide the services in half. The quadrants in the figure below show which community facets were given higher or lower importance ratings (right-left) and which had higher or lower quality ratings (up-down). Facets of livability falling closer to a diagonal line from the lower left to the upper right are those where performance ratings are more commensurate with resident priorities. Facets scoring closest to the lower right hand corner of the matrix (higher in importance and lower in quality) are those that may warrant further investigation to see if changes to their delivery are necessary to improve their performance. This is the key part of this chart on which to focus. Facets falling in the top left hand corner of the chart (lower in importance but higher in quality) are areas where performance may outscore resident priorities, and may be a consideration for lower resource allocation. Overall economic health Overall quality of the transportation system Overall design or layout of residential and commercial areas Overall quality of the utility infrastructure Overall feeling of safety Overall quality of natural environment Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities Overall health and wellness opportunities Residents' connection and engagement with their community Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. (% excellent or good) 70%80%90% Importance 40% 50% 60% 70% Qu a l i t y Safety Parks and recreation Natural environment Mobility Inclusivity and engagement Health and wellness Education, arts, and culture Economy Community design Utilities Median Median Quality and Importance by the Numbers The charts below show the proportion of residents who rated the community facets positively for quality and the priority (importance) placed on each. Also displayed is whether local ratings were lower, similar, or higher than communities across the country (the national benchmark). Overall economic health Overall quality of the transportation system Overall design or layout of residential and commercial areas Overall quality of the utility infrastructure Overall feeling of safety Overall quality of natural environment Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities Overall health and wellness opportunities Residents' connection and engagement with their community Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. (% essential or very important) 5. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. vs. benchmark⁵ 7Page 78 of 461 Facets of livabilityEvery jurisdiction must balance limited resources while meeting resident needs and striving to optimize communitylivability. To this end, it is helpful to know what aspects of the community are most important to residents and whichthey perceive as being of higher or lower quality. It is especially helpful to know when a facet of livability isconsidered of high importance but rated as lower quality, as this should be a top priority to address.Quality-Importance MatrixTo help guide City staff and officials with decisions on future resource allocation, resident ratings of the importanceof facets were compared to their ratings of the quality of these facets. To identify the services perceived byresidents to have relatively lower quality at the same time as relatively higher importance, all facets were rankedfrom highest perceived quality to lowest perceived quality and from highest perceived importance to lowestperceived importance. Some facets were in the top half of both lists (higher quality and higher importance); somewere in the top half of one list but the bottom half of the other (higher quality and lower importance or lower qualityand higher importance); and some facets were in the bottom half of both lists.52% or more of respondents were considered of “higher quality” and those with ratings lower than 52% wereconsidered to be of “lower quality.” Services were classified as “more important” if they were rated as essential orvery important by 76% or more of respondents. Services were rated as “less important” if they received a rating ofless than 76%. This classification uses the median ratings for quality and importance to divide the services in half.The quadrants in the figure below show which community facets were given higher or lower importance ratings(right-left) and which had higher or lower quality ratings (up-down). Facets of livability falling closer to a diagonalline from the lower left to the upper right are those where performance ratings are more commensurate withresident priorities. Facets scoring closest to the lower right hand corner of the matrix (higher in importance andlower in quality) are those that may warrant further investigation to see if changes to their delivery are necessary toimprove their performance. This is the key part of this chart on which to focus. Facets falling in the top left handcorner of the chart (lower in importance but higher in quality) are areas where performance may outscore residentpriorities, and may be a consideration for lower resource allocation. 2017 2019 2021 2023 Overall economic health Overall quality of the transportation system Overall design or layout of residential and commercial areas Overall quality of the utility infrastructure Overall feeling of safety Overall quality of natural environment Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities Overall health and wellness opportunities Residents' connection and engagement with their community 57%45% 63%53% Similar57%45% 63%53% Similar 51% 57%51% Similar51% 57%51% Similar 43% 51% 41% 47% Similar43% 51% 41% 47% Similar 74% 64% 69% Similar 74% 64% 69% Similar 57%64%53% 60% Lower57%64%53% 60% Lower 52%61%62% 58% Lower52%61%62% 58% Lower 43% 59%48% Much lower43% 59%48% Much lower 48% 47%46% 53% Lower 48% 47%46% 53% Lower 34%33%39% Lower34%33%39% Lower Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. (% excellent or good) Quality and Importance by the Numbers The charts below show the proportion of residents who rated the community facets positively for quality and the priority (importance) placed on each. Also displayed is whether local ratings were lower, similar, or higher than communities across the country (the national benchmark). Overall economic health Overall quality of the transportation system Overall design or layout of residential and commercial areas Overall quality of the utility infrastructure Overall feeling of safety Overall quality of natural environment Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities Overall health and wellness opportunities Residents' connection and engagement with their community Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. (% essential or very important) 5. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. vs. benchmark⁵ 8Page 79 of 461 Facets of livabilityEvery jurisdiction must balance limited resources while meeting resident needs and striving to optimize communitylivability. To this end, it is helpful to know what aspects of the community are most important to residents and whichthey perceive as being of higher or lower quality. It is especially helpful to know when a facet of livability isconsidered of high importance but rated as lower quality, as this should be a top priority to address.Quality-Importance MatrixTo help guide City staff and officials with decisions on future resource allocation, resident ratings of the importanceof facets were compared to their ratings of the quality of these facets. To identify the services perceived byresidents to have relatively lower quality at the same time as relatively higher importance, all facets were rankedfrom highest perceived quality to lowest perceived quality and from highest perceived importance to lowestperceived importance. Some facets were in the top half of both lists (higher quality and higher importance); somewere in the top half of one list but the bottom half of the other (higher quality and lower importance or lower qualityand higher importance); and some facets were in the bottom half of both lists.52% or more of respondents were considered of “higher quality” and those with ratings lower than 52% wereconsidered to be of “lower quality.” Services were classified as “more important” if they were rated as essential orvery important by 76% or more of respondents. Services were rated as “less important” if they received a rating ofless than 76%. This classification uses the median ratings for quality and importance to divide the services in half.The quadrants in the figure below show which community facets were given higher or lower importance ratings(right-left) and which had higher or lower quality ratings (up-down). Facets of livability falling closer to a diagonalline from the lower left to the upper right are those where performance ratings are more commensurate withresident priorities. Facets scoring closest to the lower right hand corner of the matrix (higher in importance andlower in quality) are those that may warrant further investigation to see if changes to their delivery are necessary toimprove their performance. This is the key part of this chart on which to focus. Facets falling in the top left handcorner of the chart (lower in importance but higher in quality) are areas where performance may outscore residentpriorities, and may be a consideration for lower resource allocation.Overall economic healthOverall quality of the transportation systemOverall design or layout of residential andcommercial areasOverall quality of the utility infrastructureOverall feeling of safetyOverall quality of natural environmentOverall quality of parks and recreation opportunitiesOverall health and wellness opportunitiesResidents' connection and engagement with theircommunityPlease rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole.(% excellent or good)Quality and Importance by the NumbersThe charts below show the proportion of residents who rated the community facets positively for quality and thepriority (importance) placed on each. Also displayed is whether local ratings were lower, similar, or higher thancommunities across the country (the national benchmark). 2017 2019 2021 2023 Overall economic health Overall quality of the transportation system Overall design or layout of residential and commercial areas Overall quality of the utility infrastructure Overall feeling of safety Overall quality of natural environment Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities Overall health and wellness opportunities Residents' connection and engagement with their community 91%92%89%93% Similar91%92%89%93% Similar 75%78% 76% Similar75%78% 76% Similar 87%74%90%84% Similar87%74%90%84% Similar 87%92%81% Similar87%92%81% Similar 92%87%94%92% Similar92%87%94%92% Similar 74%88%70% 76% Similar74%88%70% 76% Similar 81% 91%75% Similar81% 91%75% Similar 77%77%86%75% Similar77%77%86%75% Similar 72%76%77% 65% Similar72%76%77% 65% Similar Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. (% essential or very important) 5. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. vs. benchmark⁵ 9Page 80 of 461 Excellent 10% Good 59% Poor 2% Fair 29% The overall quality of life in Pasco, 2023 Quality of Life Measuring community livability starts with assessing the quality of life of those who live there, and ensuring that the community is attractive, accessible, and welcoming to all. 2017 2019 2021 2023 Pasco as a place to live The overall quality of life 77%85%72% 76% Similar77%85%72% 76% Similar 69% 61% 69%69% Similar 69% 61% 69%69% Similar Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. (% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Recommend living in Pasco to someone who asks Remain in Pasco for the next five years 78%84%76%78% Similar78%84%76%78% Similar 81%83%79%79% Similar81%83%79%79% Similar Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following. (% very or somewhat likely) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Overall image or reputation 37%35%34% 42% Lower37%35%34% 42% Lower Please rate each of the following in the Pasco community. (% excellent or good) 6. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. vs. benchmark⁶ 10Page 81 of 461 Excellent 5% Good 33% Fair 43% Poor 18% Overall confidence in Pasco government, 2023 Governance Strong local governments produce results that meet the needs of residents while making the best use of available resources, and are responsive to the present and future needs of the community as a whole. 7. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. 2017 2019 2021 2023 The value of services for the taxes paid to Pasco The overall direction that Pasco is taking The job Pasco government does at welcoming resident involvement Overall confidence in Pasco government Generally acting in the best interest of the community Being honest Being open and transparent to the public Informing residents about issues facing the community Treating all residents fairly Treating residents with respect 37% 50% 33% 42% Similar37% 50% 33% 42% Similar 56% 56%46% 47% Similar56% 56%46% 47% Similar 44%37% 49%46% Similar44%37% 49%46% Similar 43% 44%44%39% Similar43% 44%44%39% Similar 48% 43%51%42% Similar 48% 43%51%42% Similar 51%52%Similar51%52%Similar Please rate the following categories of Pasco government performance. (% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Public information services Overall customer service by Pasco employees 53%50% 55%53% Similar53%50% 55%53% Similar 61%59%57% 68% Similar61%59%57% 68% Similar Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. (% excellent or good) The City of Pasco The Federal Government Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? (% excellent or good) vs. benchmark⁷ 11Page 82 of 461 Overall confidence in Pasco government,2023GovernanceStrong local governments produce results thatmeet the needs of residents while making the bestuse of available resources, and are responsive tothe present and future needs of the community asa whole. 7. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. The value of services for the taxes paid to PascoThe overall direction that Pasco is takingThe job Pasco government does at welcomingresident involvementOverall confidence in Pasco governmentGenerally acting in the best interest of the community Being honest Being open and transparent to the public Informing residents about issues facing the community Treating all residents fairly Treating residents with respect 48%51%52%38% Similar48%51%52%38% Similar 42%46%36% Similar 42%46%36% Similar 40% 43%39% Similar40% 43%39% Similar 46% 50% 45% 48% Similar46% 50% 45% 48% Similar 60% 48% 61% Similar 60% 48% 61% Similar Please rate the following categories of Pasco government performance.(% excellent or good)Public information servicesOverall customer service by Pasco employeesPlease rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco.(% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 The City of Pasco The Federal Government 61%62%63%60% Similar61%62%63%60% Similar 39% 36%36% 40% Similar 39% 36%36% 40% Similar Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? (% excellent or good) vs. benchmark⁷ 12Page 83 of 461 Excellent 7% Good 46% Fair 37% Poor 10% Overall economic health of Pasco, 2023 Economy Local governments work together with private and nonprofit businesses, and with the community at large, to foster sustainable growth, create jobs, and promote a thriving local economy. 2017 2019 2021 2023 Pasco as a place to work Pasco as a place to visit 67%56% 72%69% Similar67%56% 72%69% Similar 35%39% 33% 34% Much lower 35%39% 33% 34% Much lower Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. (% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Overall quality of business and service establishments Variety of business and service establishments Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area Employment opportunities Shopping opportunities Cost of living 56%59% 42% 62% Similar56%59% 42% 62% Similar Please rate each of the following in the Pasco community. (% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Economic development 52%40%55%55% Similar52%40%55%55% Similar Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. (% excellent or good) What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be: What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be: (% very or somewhat positive) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Overall economic health 57%45% 63%53% Similar57%45% 63%53% Similar Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. (% excellent or good) 8. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. vs. benchmark⁸ 13Page 84 of 461 Overall economic health of Pasco, 2023EconomyLocal governments work together with private andnonprofit businesses, and with the community at large, tofoster sustainable growth, create jobs, and promote athriving local economy.Pasco as a place to workPasco as a place to visitPlease rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco.(% excellent or good)Overall quality of business and service establishments Variety of business and service establishments Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area Employment opportunities Shopping opportunities Cost of living 45% 54%50% Similar45% 54%50% Similar 23% 29% 19% 25% Lower23% 29% 19% 25% Lower 47%56%45% 52% Similar47%56%45% 52% Similar 37% 35% 40%34% Lower 37% 35% 40%34% Lower 39%45%48% 34% Similar 39%45%48% 34% Similar Please rate each of the following in the Pasco community.(% excellent or good)Economic developmentPlease rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco.(% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be: 26% 25% 38% 20% Similar26% 25% 38% 20% Similar What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be: (% very or somewhat positive) Overall economic healthPlease rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole.(% excellent or good) 8. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. vs. benchmark⁸ 14Page 85 of 461 Excellent 13% Good 38% Fair 31% Poor 18% Overall quality of the transportation system in Pasco, 2023 Mobility The ease with which residents can move about their communities, whether for commuting, leisure, or recreation, plays a major role in the quality of life for all who live, work, and play in the community. 9. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. 2017 2019 2021 2023 Traffic flow on major streets Ease of public parking Ease of travel by car Ease of travel by public transportation Ease of travel by bicycle Ease of walking 41% 49% 29% 35% Lower41% 49% 29% 35% Lower 57%49%66% 62% Similar57%49%66% 62% Similar 66%74%64% 68% Similar66%74%64% 68% Similar 57%62%62% 55% Higher57%62%62% 55% Higher 44%33% 52%45% Similar44%33% 52%45% Similar 49% 56% 45% 49% Lower49% 56% 45% 49% Lower Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. (% excellent or good) Used public transportation instead of driving Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone Walked or biked instead of driving Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. (% yes) Traffic enforcement Traffic signal timing Street repair Street cleaning Street lighting Snow removal Sidewalk maintenance Bus or transit services Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. (% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Overall quality of the transportation system 51% 57%51% Similar51% 57%51% Similar Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. (% excellent or good) vs. benchmark⁹ 15Page 86 of 461 Overall quality of the transportation system inPasco, 2023MobilityThe ease with which residents can move abouttheir communities, whether for commuting,leisure, or recreation, plays a major role in thequality of life for all who live, work, and play inthe community. 9. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. Traffic flow on major streetsEase of public parkingEase of travel by carEase of travel by public transportationEase of travel by bicycleEase of walkingPlease also rate each of the following in the Pasco community.(% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Used public transportation instead of driving Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone Walked or biked instead of driving 20% 33% 14%23% Similar20% 33% 14%23% Similar 56%56%55%55% Higher56%56%55%55% Higher 54%49% 58%47% Lower54%49% 58%47% Lower Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. (% yes) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Traffic enforcement Traffic signal timing Street repair Street cleaning Street lighting Snow removal Sidewalk maintenance Bus or transit services 55%56%51% 52% Similar55%56%51% 52% Similar 52% 51%51% 57% Similar 52% 51%51% 57% Similar 48% 49% 51%41% Similar 48% 49% 51%41% Similar 56%57%53% 59% Similar56%57%53% 59% Similar 50% 53% 47% 56% Similar50% 53% 47% 56% Similar 42% 36%36% 44% Lower 42% 36%36% 44% Lower 44% 53% 42% 49% Similar44% 53% 42% 49% Similar 69%56%70%64% Higher69%56%70%64% Higher Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. (% excellent or good) Overall quality of the transportation systemPlease rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole.(% excellent or good)vs. benchmark⁹ 16Page 87 of 461 Excellent 6% Good 42%Fair 36% Poor 17% Overall design or layout of Pasco's residential and commercial areas, 2023 Community Design A well-designed community enhances the quality of life for its residents by encouraging smart land use and zoning, ensuring that affordable housing is accessible to all, and providing access to parks and other green spaces. 10. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. 2017 2019 2021 2023 Well-planned residential growth Well-planned commercial growth Well-designed neighborhoods Preservation of the historical or cultural character of the community Public places where people want to spend time Variety of housing options Availability of affordable quality housing Overall quality of new development Overall appearance 36% 45%40% Similar36% 45%40% Similar 43%42% 43% Similar43%42% 43% Similar 44%53%40% Similar 44%53%40% Similar Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. (% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Your neighborhood as a place to live 73%70%77%75% Similar73%70%77%75% Similar Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. (% excellent or good) Land use, planning and zoning Code enforcement Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. (% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Overall design or layout of residential and commercial areas 43%51% 41% 47% Similar43%51% 41% 47% Similar Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. (% excellent or good) vs. benchmark¹⁰ 17Page 88 of 461 Overall design or layout of Pasco's residential andcommercial areas, 2023Community DesignA well-designed community enhances thequality of life for its residents byencouraging smart land use and zoning,ensuring that affordable housing isaccessible to all, and providing access toparks and other green spaces. 10. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. Well-planned residential growthWell-planned commercial growth Well-designed neighborhoods Preservation of the historical or cultural character of the community Public places where people want to spend time Variety of housing options Availability of affordable quality housing Overall quality of new development Overall appearance 50% 42% 49% Similar50% 42% 49% Similar 30% 30% 46% 25% Much lower30% 30% 46% 25% Much lower 44%50%37% 37% Similar44%50%37% 37% Similar 27%36%41% 18% Similar 27%36%41% 18% Similar 52% 62% 50% 50% Similar52% 62% 50% 50% Similar 48%52%45% 45% Lower48%52%45% 45% Lower Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community.(% excellent or good)Your neighborhood as a place to livePlease rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco.(% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Land use, planning and zoning Code enforcement 38%43%35% 36% Similar38%43%35% 36% Similar 35%37%37%31% Lower35%37%37%31% Lower Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. (% excellent or good) Overall design or layout of residential andcommercial areasPlease rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole.(% excellent or good)vs. benchmark¹⁰ 18Page 89 of 461 Excellent 21% Good 48% Fair 26% Poor 5% Overall quality of the utility infrastructure in Pasco, 2023 Utilities Services such as water, gas, electricity, and internet access play a vital role in ensuring the physical and economic health and well-being of the communities they serve. 11. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. 2017 2019 2021 2023 Affordable high-speed internet access Garbage collection Drinking water Sewer services Storm water management Power (electric and/or gas) utility Utility billing 45% 34% 47% Similar45% 34% 47% Similar 82%80%86%84% Similar82%80%86%84% Similar 71%82%66% 76% Similar71%82%66% 76% Similar 81%76%75% 84% Similar81%76%75% 84% Similar 73%71%68% 81% Similar73%71%68% 81% Similar 77%83% Similar 77%83% Similar 64% 62% 54% 72% Similar64% 62% 54% 72% Similar Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. (% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Overall quality of the utility infrastructure 74%64%69% Similar 74%64%69% Similar Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. (% excellent or good) vs. benchmark¹¹ 19Page 90 of 461 Excellent 11% Good 50% Fair 28% Poor 12% Overall feeling of safety in Pasco, 2023 Safety Public safety is often the most important task facing local governments. All residents should feel safe and secure in their neighborhoods and in the greater community, and providing robust safety-related services is essential to residents' quality of life. 2017 2019 2021 2023 Overall feeling of safety 57%64% 53% 60% Lower57%64% 53% 60% Lower Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. (% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 In your neighborhood during the day In Pasco's downtown/commercial area during the day From property crime From violent crime From fire, flood, or other natural disaster 87%82%90%90% Similar87%82%90%90% Similar 61%48% 66%56% Much lower61%48% 66%56% Much lower 54% 65%58% Lower54% 65%58% Lower 63%62% 70% Lower63%62% 70% Lower 88% 82% 89% Similar 88% 82% 89% Similar Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel: (% very or somewhat safe) Police/Sheriff services Crime prevention Animal control Ambulance or emergency medical services Fire services Fire prevention and education Emergency preparedness Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. (% excellent or good) 12. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. vs. benchmark¹² 20Page 91 of 461 Overall feeling of safety in Pasco, 2023SafetyPublic safety is often the most important taskfacing local governments. All residents shouldfeel safe and secure in their neighborhoodsand in the greater community, and providingrobust safety-related services is essential toresidents' quality of life.Overall feeling of safetyPlease rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole.(% excellent or good)In your neighborhood during the dayIn Pasco's downtown/commercial area during the dayFrom property crimeFrom violent crimeFrom fire, flood, or other natural disasterPlease rate how safe or unsafe you feel:(% very or somewhat safe) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Police/Sheriff services Crime prevention Animal control Ambulance or emergency medical services Fire services Fire prevention and education Emergency preparedness 73%61%78% 73% Similar73%61%78% 73% Similar 46% 61%62%58% Similar46% 61%62%58% Similar 47% 53% 41% 44% Lower47% 53% 41% 44% Lower 82% 92% 69% 78% Similar82% 92% 69% 78% Similar 85%77%90%89% Similar85%77%90%89% Similar 58%68% 69%66% Similar58%68% 69%66% Similar 44%47% 43% 47% Lower 44%47% 43% 47% Lower Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. (% excellent or good) 12. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. vs. benchmark¹² 21Page 92 of 461 Excellent 10% Good 47% Fair 32% Poor 11% Overall quality of natural environment in Pasco, 2023 Natural Environment The natural environment plays a vital role in the health and well-being of residents. The natural spaces in which residents live and experience their communities has a direct and profound effect on quality of life. 2017 2019 2021 2023 Cleanliness Water resources Air quality 52%47%47% 56% Lower52%47%47% 56% Lower 52% 62%53% Similar52% 62%53% Similar 65%71%63%67% Similar65%71%63%67% Similar Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. (% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Preservation of natural areas Pasco open space Recycling Yard waste pick-up 49%42%51% 46% Lower49%42%51% 46% Lower 54%43%41% 46% Lower54%43%41% 46% Lower 24%46%18%24%46%18% 55%53% 67%50% Lower55%53% 67%50% Lower Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. (% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Overall quality of natural environment 52%61%62%58% Lower52%61%62%58% Lower Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. (% excellent or good) 13. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. vs. benchmark¹³ 22Page 93 of 461 Excellent 15% Good 32%Fair 34% Poor 18% Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities, 2023 Parks and Recreation "There are no communities that pride themselves on their quality of life, promote themselves as a desirable location for businesses to relocate, or maintain that they are environmental stewards of their natural resources, without such communities having a robust, active system of parks and recreation programs for public use and enjoyment." - National Recreation and Park Association 2017 2019 2021 2023 Availability of paths and walking trails Fitness opportunities Recreational opportunities 57%48%60%59% Similar57%48%60%59% Similar 53%46%59%53% Lower53%46%59%53% Lower 50%43%42% 45% Lower50%43%42% 45% Lower Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. (% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 City parks Recreation programs or classes Recreation centers or facilities 57% 68% 53% 53% Lower57% 68% 53% 53% Lower 44%34% 53%49% Lower44%34% 53%49% Lower 37%50% 32% 37%50% 32% Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. (% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities 43% 59%48% Much lower43% 59%48% Much lower Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. (% excellent or good) 14. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. vs. benchmark¹⁴ 23Page 94 of 461 Excellent 10% Good 42% Fair 34% Poor 13% Overall health and wellness opportunities in Pasco, 2023 Health and Wellness The characteristics of and amenities available in the communities in which people live has a direct impact on the health and wellness of residents, and thus, on their quality of life overall. 2017 2019 2021 2023 Availability of affordable quality food Availability of affordable quality health care Availability of preventive health services Availability of affordable quality mental health care 59%55%66%53% Similar59%55%66%53% Similar 52% 47%60%42% Lower52% 47%60%42% Lower 53%46%57%45% Similar53%46%57%45% Similar 29% 49% 27% 27% Lower29% 49% 27% 27% Lower Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. (% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Health services 51%54%55%47% Similar51%54%55%47% Similar Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. (% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Please rate your overall health.63%43%68%56% Similar63%43%68%56% Similar Please rate your overall health. (% excellent or very good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Overall health and wellness opportunities 48%47%46% 53% Lower48%47%46% 53% Lower Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. (% excellent or good) 15. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. vs. benchmark¹⁵ 24Page 95 of 461 Excellent 10% Good 36%Fair 35% Poor 19% Overall opportunities for education, culture and the arts, 2023 Education, Arts, and Culture Participation in the arts, in educational opportunities, and in cultural activities is linked to increased civic engagement, greater social tolerance, and enhanced enjoyment of the local community. 2017 2019 2021 2023 Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities Community support for the arts Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool K-12 education Adult educational opportunities Opportunities to attend special events and festivals 33%33% 21% 36% Lower 33%33% 21% 36% Lower 30%29% 31% Lower30%29% 31% Lower 48%31%30% 32% Similar48%31%30% 32% Similar 54%45%55%51% Similar54%45%55%51% Similar 51%39% 57%51% Similar51%39% 57%51% Similar 39%38%47%45% Similar39%38%47%45% Similar Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. (% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Public library services 75%77%71%73% Similar75%77%71%73% Similar Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. (% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Overall opportunities for education, culture, and the arts 47%55%45% 45% Lower47%55%45% 45% Lower Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. (% excellent or good) 10. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. vs. benchmark¹⁶ 25Page 96 of 461 Excellent 4% Good 35% Fair 40% Poor 21% Residents' connection and engagement with their community, 2023 Inclusivity and Engagement Inclusivity refers to a cultural and environmental feeling of belonging; residents who feel invited to participate within their communities feel more included, involved, and engaged than those who do not. 2017 2019 2021 2023 Pasco as a place to raise children Pasco as a place to retire Sense of community 71%60%73%72% Similar71%60%73%72% Similar 54% 54% 66%48% Similar54% 54% 66%48% Similar 43% 34% 45%45% Lower 43% 34% 45%45% Lower Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. (% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Residents' connection and engagement with their community 34%33%39% Lower34%33%39% Lower Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. (% excellent or good) Making all residents feel welcome Attracting people from diverse backgrounds Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds Taking care of vulnerable residents Please rate the job you feel the Pasco community does at each of the following. (% excellent or good) Sense of civic/community pride Neighborliness of residents Opportunities to participate in social events and activities Opportunities to volunteer Opportunities to participate in community matters Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. (% excellent or good) 17. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. vs. benchmark¹⁷ 26Page 97 of 461 Residents' connection and engagement withtheir community, 2023Inclusivity and EngagementInclusivity refers to a cultural and environmentalfeeling of belonging; residents who feel invited toparticipate within their communities feel moreincluded, involved, and engaged than those who donot.Pasco as a place to raise childrenPasco as a place to retireSense of communityPlease rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco.(% excellent or good)Residents' connection and engagement withtheir communityPlease rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole.(% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Making all residents feel welcome Attracting people from diverse backgrounds Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds Taking care of vulnerable residents 58% 63%59% Similar58% 63%59% Similar 54%53% 57% Similar54%53% 57% Similar 67% 49% 69% Similar 67% 49% 69% Similar 44% 42% 46% Similar44% 42% 46% Similar Please rate the job you feel the Pasco community does at each of the following. (% excellent or good) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Sense of civic/community pride Neighborliness of residents Opportunities to participate in social events and activities Opportunities to volunteer Opportunities to participate in community matters Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 36%31% 45% Similar36%31% 45% Similar 49%50% 39% 53% Similar 49%50% 39% 53% Similar 42% 30% 44%43% Lower 42% 30% 44%43% Lower 55% 37% 60%52% Lower55% 37% 60%52% Lower 45% 36%34% 49% Similar 45% 36%34% 49% Similar 49% 66% 43% 53% Similar49% 66% 43% 53% Similar Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. (% excellent or good) 17. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. vs. benchmark¹⁷ 27Page 98 of 461 Residents' Participation Levels 2017 2019 2021 2023 Attended a local public meeting Watched a local public meeting Campaigned or advocated for a local issue, cause, or candidate 20%14% 22% 14% Similar20%14% 22% 14% Similar 34%26% 36%27% Similar34%26% 36%27% Similar 15% 16%18% 9% Similar15% 16%18% 9% Similar Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. (% yes) 2017 2019 2021 2023 Access the internet from your home Access the internet from your cell phone Visit social media sites Use or check email Share your opinions online Shop online 88%89%88% Similar 88%89%88% Similar 96%90%96% Similar96%90%96% Similar 82%81%82% Similar82%81%82% Similar 93%92%95% Similar93%92%95% Similar 33%35%26% Similar 33%35%26% Similar 50%50% 50% Similar50%50% 50% Similar In general, how many times do you: (% a few times a week or more) 18. Comparison to the national benchmark is shown. If no comparison is available, this is left blank. vs. benchmark¹⁸ 28Page 99 of 461 Please indicate how important, if at all, each of the following are for your local community to implement to help address homelessness. Providing emergency shelter Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Creating affordable, permanent housing Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Enforcing "no camping" ordinances Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Providing access to health care, behavioral health, and substance abuse treatment Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Helping fund organizations that provide services to people experiencing homelessness in our community Essential Very important Somewhat important Notatallimportant Howmuchofa source,ifatall,do youconsidereach ofthefollowingto beforobtaining informationabout Pasco? Traditionalmedia outlets(newspapers suchastheTri-City Heraldorlocalnetwrok TV) Majorsource Minorsource Notasource NotifyMe®email subscription Majorsource Minorsource Notasource Citywebsite (www.pasco-wa.gov) Majorsource Minorsource Notasource Facebook Majorsource Minorsource Notasource Instagram Majorsource Minorsource Notasource YouTube Majorsource Minorsource Notasource X(formerlyTwitter)Majorsource Minorsource Notasource Nextdoor Majorsource Minorsource Notasource WhatsApp Majorsource Minorsource Notasource Radio Majorsource Minorsource Notasource 6% 22% 40% 32% 4% 21% 33% 42% 5% 18% 34% 42% 2% 16% 32% 50% 4% 20% 37% 39% Custom questions Below are the complete set of responses to each custom question on the survey. By default, “don’t know” responses are excluded. 29Page 100 of 461 Pleaseindicatehowimportant,ifatall,eachofthefollowingareforyourlocalcommunitytoimplementtohelpaddresshomelessness.Providingemergencyshelter EssentialVeryimportantSomewhatimportantNotatallimportantCreatingaffordable,permanenthousing EssentialVeryimportantSomewhatimportantNotatallimportantEnforcing"nocamping"ordinances EssentialVeryimportantSomewhatimportantNotatallimportantProvidingaccesstohealthcare,behavioralhealth,andsubstanceabusetreatment EssentialVeryimportantSomewhatimportantNotatallimportantHelpingfundorganizationsthatprovideservicestopeopleexperiencinghomelessnessinour community EssentialVeryimportant Somewhat important Not at all important How much of a source, if at all, do you consider each of the following to be for obtaining information about Pasco? Traditional media outlets (newspapers such as the Tri-City Herald or local netwrok TV) Major source Minor source Not a source Notify Me® email subscription Major source Minor source Not a source City website (www.pasco-wa.gov) Major source Minor source Not a source Facebook Major source Minor source Not a source Instagram Major source Minor source Not a source YouTube Major source Minor source Not a source X (formerly Twitter)Major source Minor source Not a source Nextdoor Major source Minorsource Notasource WhatsApp Majorsource Minorsource Notasource Radio Majorsource Minorsource Notasource 4% 37%39% 16% 34% 50% 47% 35% 18% 16% 37% 47% 25% 30% 44% 49% 28% 23% 47% 33% 20% 66% 16% 18% 59% 34% 7% CustomquestionsBelowarethecompletesetofresponsestoeachcustomquestiononthesurvey.Bydefault,“don’tknow”responsesareexcluded.Include"don'tknow"No 30Page 101 of 461 Please indicatehow important, if at all, each of the following are for your localcommunity toimplement to helpaddresshomelessness.Providing emergencyshelter EssentialVery importantSomewhat importantNot at all importantCreating affordable,permanent housing EssentialVery importantSomewhat importantNot at all importantEnforcing "no camping"ordinances EssentialVery importantSomewhat importantNot at all importantProviding access to health care, behavioral health, and substance abuse treatment EssentialVery importantSomewhat importantNot at all importantHelping fund organizations that provide services to people experiencinghomelessness in ourcommunity EssentialVery importantSomewhat importantNot at all importantHow much of asource, if at all, do you consider eachof the following to be for obtaining information aboutPasco?Traditional media outlets (newspapers such as the Tri-City Herald or local netwrok TV)Major sourceMinor sourceNot a sourceNotify Me® emailsubscription Major sourceMinor sourceNot a sourceCity website(www.pasco-wa.gov)Major sourceMinor sourceNot a sourceFacebookMajor sourceMinor sourceNot a sourceInstagramMajor sourceMinor sourceNot a sourceYouTubeMajor sourceMinor sourceNot a sourceX (formerly Twitter)Major sourceMinor sourceNot a source Nextdoor Major source Minor source Not a source WhatsApp Major source Minor source Not a source Radio Major source Minor source Not a source 59% 34% 74% 12% 14% 25% 37% 38% Custom questionsBelow are the complete set of responses to each custom question on the survey. By default, “don’t know”responses are excluded.Include "don't know"No 31Page 102 of 461 % p o s i t i v e Ra n k Nu m b e r o f co m m u n i t i e s Pe r c e n t i l e Quality of Life Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. Pasco as a place to live Similar The overall quality of life Similar Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following. Recommend living in Pasco to someone who asks Similar Remain in Pasco for the next five years Similar Please rate each of the following in the Pasco community.Overall image or reputation Lower Governance Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Public information services Similar Overall customer service by Pasco employees Similar Please rate the following categories of Pasco government performance. The value of services for the taxes paid to Pasco Similar The overall direction that Pasco is taking Similar The job Pasco government does at welcoming resident involvement Similar Overall confidence in Pasco government Similar Generally acting in the best interest of the community Similar 1837629676% 1839230869% 2932422778% 2232224879% 1337031142% 2232425153% 2237227868% 2337727942% 3435222747% 3334423046% 2631623439% National Benchmark Tables This table contains the comparisons of Pasco's results to those from other communities. The first column shows the comparison of Pasco's rating to the benchmark. Pasco's results are noted as being “higher”, “lower” or “similar” to the benchmark, meaning that the average rating given by Pasco residents is statistically similar to or different than the benchmark. The second column is Pasco's “percent positive.” Most commonly, the percent positive is the combination of the top two most positive response options (i.e., excellent/good). The third column is the rank assigned to Pasco's rating among communities where a similar question was asked. The fourth column is the number of communities that asked a similar question. The fifth column shows the percentile for Pasco's result -- that is what percent of surveyed communities had a lower rating than Pasco. 32Page 103 of 461 Governance Please rate the following categories of Pasco government performance. Overall confidence in Pasco government Similar Generally acting in the best interest of the community Similar Being honest Similar Being open and transparent to the public Similar Informing residents about issues facing the community Similar Treating all residents fairly Similar Treating residents with respect Similar Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? The City of Pasco Similar The Federal Government Similar Economy Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. Pasco as a place to work Similar Pasco as a place to visit Much lower Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall economic health Similar Please rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Overall quality of business and service establishments Similar Variety of business and service establishments Similar Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area Lower Employment opportunities Similar Shopping opportunities Lower 2532024042% 1631126038% 2226520736% 1526922939% 2531723848% 3526217161% 2137128460% 4230417440% 5537015969% 832929834% 3032322553% 3132322062% 3426017150% 1330226225% 723369252% 33Page 104 of 461 Economy Please rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Employment opportunities Similar Shopping opportunities Lower Cost of living Similar Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco.Economic development Similar Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall economic health Similar What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be: Similar Mobility Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall quality of the transportation system Similar Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Traffic flow on major streets Lower Ease of public parking Similar Ease of travel by car Similar Ease of travel by public transportation Higher Ease of travel by bicycle Similar Ease of walking Lower Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. Used public transportation instead of driving Similar Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone Higher Walked or biked instead of driving Lower Traffic enforcement Similar 2532624234% 3931318934% 5431814555% 4729715593% 5030615420% 5126813051% 1434428735% 5130214762% 4133419468% 853064555% 3033422945% 1633827949% 682889323% 863054255% 2430723447% 34Page 105 of 461 Mobility Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months.Walked or biked instead of driving Lower Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Traffic enforcement Similar Traffic signal timing Similar Street repair Similar Street cleaning Similar Street lighting Similar Snow removal Lower Sidewalk maintenance Similar Bus or transit services Higher Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall quality of the transportation system Similar Community Design Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco.Your neighborhood as a place to live Similar Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall design or layout of residential and commercial areas Similar Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Well-planned residential growth Similar Well-planned commercial growth Similar Well-designed neighborhoods Similar Preservation of the historical or cultural character of the community Similar Public places where people want to spend time Much lower 2236527752% 5031615857% 4435719641% 2632723759% 3135523356% 1527923044% 3332721849% 852954364% 5525811576% 1433027975% 1731426047% 4226215240% 5026112943% 2226220140% 1625821649% 35Page 106 of 461 Community Design Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Preservation of the historical or cultural character of the community Similar Public places where people want to spend time Much lower Variety of housing options Similar Availability of affordable quality housing Similar Overall quality of new development Similar Overall appearance Lower Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Land use, planning and zoning Similar Code enforcement Lower Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall design or layout of residential and commercial areas Similar Utilities Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall quality of the utility infrastructure Similar Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Affordable high-speed internet access Similar Garbage collection Similar Drinking water Similar Sewer services Similar Storm water management Similar Power (electric and/or gas) utility Similar Utility billing Similar 230830125% 2832122737% 3034323718% 4333218650% 1634628145% 4332718336% 1735728631% 832975084% 632599669% 3225617447% 753378184% 5732513676% 743228184% 723379281% 812805383% 36Page 107 of 461 Utilities Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Power (electric and/or gas) utility Similar Utility billing Similar Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall quality of the utility infrastructure Similar Safety Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall feeling of safety Lower Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel:In your neighborhood during the day Similar In Pasco's downtown/commercial area during the day Much lower From property crime Lower From violent crime Lower From fire, flood, or other natural disaster Similar Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Police/Sheriff services Similar Crime prevention Similar Animal control Lower Ambulance or emergency medical services Similar Fire services Similar Fire prevention and education Similar Emergency preparedness Lower Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall feeling of safety Similar 713018672% 1125823081% 1736229260% 1734127990% 332931756% 1427023158% 1527022870% 802605289% 3238925673% 2836625358% 433831644% 2333424978% 2735324989% 1432227266% 932328847% 37Page 108 of 461 Safety Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco.Emergency preparedness Lower Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall feeling of safety Similar Natural environment Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall quality of natural environment Lower Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Cleanliness Lower Water resources Similar Air quality Similar Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Preservation of natural areas Lower Pasco open space Lower Recycling Much lower Yard waste pick-up Lower Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall quality of natural environment Similar Parks and Recreation Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities Much lower Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Availability of paths and walking trails Similar Fitness opportunities Lower Recreational opportunities Lower Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. City parks Lower Recreation programs or classes Lower 5529713392% 932329358% 1733727856% 3324116253% 1931025167% 1230826946% 1630625646% 334132325% 1730324850% 1229725976% 326525648% 3133822959% 1331026853% 1032829445% 433432053% 38Page 109 of 461 Parks and Recreation Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. City parks Lower Recreation programs or classes Lower Recreation centers or facilities Much lower Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities Similar Health and wellness Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall health and wellness opportunities Lower Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Availability of affordable quality food Similar Availability of affordable quality health care Lower Availability of preventive health services Similar Availability of affordable quality mental health care Lower Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco.Health services Similar Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall health and wellness opportunities Similar Please rate your overall health.Similar Education, Arts and Culture Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall opportunities for education, culture, and the arts Lower Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities Lower Community support for the arts Lower Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool Similar K-12 education Similar 1033129449% 531830237% 2325920075% 1631626553% 3130821253% 1731526142% 2230223445% 1330626627% 1829824347% 5929712175% 2130323856% 1831926045% 1532427436% 1025823231% 3631620232% 39Page 110 of 461 Education, Arts and Culture Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool Similar K-12 education Similar Adult educational opportunities Similar Opportunities to attend special events and festivals Similar Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco.Public library services Similar Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall opportunities for education, culture, and the arts Similar Inclusivity and Engagement Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. Pasco as a place to raise children Similar Pasco as a place to retire Similar Sense of community Lower Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Residents' connection and engagement with their community Lower Please rate the job you feel the Pasco community does at each of the following. Making all residents feel welcome Similar Attracting people from diverse backgrounds Similar Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds Similar Taking care of vulnerable residents Similar Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Sense of civic/community pride Similar Neighborliness of residents Similar Opportunities to participate in social events and activities Lower 3131922051% 4230917951% 1731425745% 1233328973% 5829712477% 2638027172% 1937529348% 1434128945% 1326222739% 2526419959% 5526111857% 5826211069% 4025815546% 2225820145% 1630925753% 40Page 111 of 461 Inclusivity and Engagement Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Neighborliness of residents Similar Opportunities to participate in social events and activities Lower Opportunities to volunteer Lower Opportunities to participate in community matters Similar Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds Similar Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Residents' connection and engagement with their community Similar Participation Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. Contacted the City of Pasco for help or information Similar Contacted Pasco elected officials to express your opinion Similar Attended a local public meeting Similar Watched a local public meeting Similar Volunteered your time to some group/activity Similar Campaigned or advocated for a local issue, cause, or candidate Similar Voted in your most recent local election Lower In general, how many times do you:Access the internet from your home Similar Access the internet from your cell phone Similar Visit social media sites Similar Use or check email Similar 831929143% 731429152% 1231427549% 3533221353% 2129723365% 5833613948% 2930721713% 2131024314% 6329910927% 5031315532% 43032899% 1025823264% 1125722988% 842594196% 802595282% 41Page 112 of 461 Participation In general, how many times do you: Visit social media sites Similar Use or check email Similar Share your opinions online Similar Shop online Similar 2026020795% 4025815426% 2825718450% 42Page 113 of 461 2005 2007 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2022 2023 Quality of Life Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. Pasco as a place to live The overall quality of life Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following. Recommend living in Pasco to someone who asks Remain in Pasco for the next five years Please rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Overall image or reputation Governance Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Public information services Overall customer service by Pasco employees Please rate the following categories of Pasco government performance. The value of services for the taxes paid to Pasco The overall direction that Pasco is taking The job Pasco government does at welcoming resident involvement Overall confidence in Pasco government Generally acting in the best interest of the community 69% 76% 69% 72% 61% 85% 69% 77% 59% 66% 69% 69% 64% 73% 52% 59% 64% 75% 79% 78% 79% 76% 81% 78% 83% 84% 80% 76% 85% 77% 83% 79% 42%37%35%34%23%28%32%35%46% 68% 53% 57% 50% 59% 55% 61% 53% 57% 63% 55% 51% 71% 57% 60% 58% 58% 55% 39% 46% 47% 42% 44% 37% 56% 33% 43% 49% 56% 50% 44% 44% 46% 37% 34% 38% 42% 45% 39% 34% 51% 34% 40% 45% 49% 48% 54% 51% 56% 61% 52% Full Trends This table contains the trends over time for the City of Pasco. The combined "percent positive" responses for each survey year are presented (e.g., excellent/good or yes). If an item was not included during an administration of the survey, no percentage will be shown in the table. If the difference between the 2022 and 2023 surveys is greater than eight percentage points, the change is statistically significant. It is important to note that in 2020, The NCS survey was updated to include new and refreshed items. Consequently, some of the trends may be impacted due to wording modifications that could have potentially altered the meaning of the item for the respondent. 43Page 114 of 461 Governance Please rate the following categories of Pasco government performance. Overall confidence in Pasco government Generally acting in the best interest of the community Being honest Being open and transparent to the public Informing residents about issues facing the community Treating all residents fairly Treating residents with respect Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? The City of Pasco The Federal Government Economy Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. Pasco as a place to work Pasco as a place to visit Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall economic health Please rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Overall quality of business and service establishments Variety of business and service establishments Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area 61% 48% 39% 36% 38% 42% 48% 46% 43% 42% 48% 48% 60% 45% 40% 46% 51% 51% 50% 52% 43% 42% 39% 43% 46% 40% 40% 40% 60% 36% 61% 39% 62% 36% 63% 44% 60% 36% 64% 42% 61% 41% 58% 50% 69% 34% 69% 35% 67% 33% 56% 39% 72% 34% 47% 43% 56%63%57%65% 53%57%63%45%40%44% 25% 50% 62% 19% 45% 56% 29% 54% 59% 23% 42% 14% 43% 18% 38%54% 44Page 115 of 461 Economy Please rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Variety of business and service establishments Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area Employment opportunities Shopping opportunities Cost of living Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Economic development Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall economic health What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be: Mobility Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall quality of the transportation system Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Traffic flow on major streets Ease of public parking Ease of travel by car Ease of travel by public transportation Ease of travel by bicycle Ease of walking 34% 34% 52% 25% 39% 37% 56% 19% 45% 35% 47% 29% 48% 40% 45% 23% 49% 35% 37% 14% 48% 31% 28% 18% 35% 40% 38% 33% 35% 39% 55%52%55%40%41%43%46%53%49% 93%89%92%91%89%83% 20%25%38%26%30%25%25%23%32% 51%51%57% 45% 55% 68% 62% 35% 33% 57% 64% 49% 29% 44% 62% 74% 66% 41% 52% 62% 66% 57% 49% 57% 59% 72% 66% 47% 35% 55% 67% 63% 47% 53% 72% 55% 55% 64% 53% 63% 73% 65% 45Page 116 of 461 Mobility Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Ease of travel by bicycle Ease of walking Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. Used public transportation instead of driving Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone Walked or biked instead of driving Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Traffic enforcement Traffic signal timing Street repair Street cleaning Street lighting Snow removal Sidewalk maintenance Bus or transit services Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall quality of the transportation system Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. Your neighborhood as a place to live 49%45%49%56%57%47%55%57%67% 47% 55% 23% 54% 56% 14% 49% 55% 33% 58% 56% 20% 41% 45% 28% 52% 47% 26% 64% 49% 44% 56% 59% 41% 57% 52% 56% 44% 36% 50% 53% 48% 51% 51% 70% 53% 42% 53% 57% 51% 51% 55% 69% 42% 36% 47% 56% 49% 52% 56% 64% 48% 51% 50% 59% 46% 48% 50% 69% 49% 45% 46% 49% 39% 41% 61% 73% 50% 47% 51% 60% 53% 57% 57% 77% 51% 46% 54% 59% 57% 44% 59% 53% 45% 57% 62% 54% 57% 63% 76%78%75% 46Page 117 of 461 Mobility Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall quality of the transportation system Community Design Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. Your neighborhood as a place to live Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall design or layout of residential and commercial areas Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Well-planned residential growth Well-planned commercial growth Well-designed neighborhoods Preservation of the historical or cultural character of the community Public places where people want to spend time Variety of housing options Availability of affordable quality housing Overall quality of new development Overall appearance Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Land use, planning and zoning Code enforcement Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall design or layout of residential and commercial areas 75%70%77%73%74%77%71%63%68% 47%43%51%41%42%45% 45% 50% 18% 37% 25% 49% 40% 43% 40% 48% 50% 27% 37% 30% 42% 44% 42% 36% 52% 62% 36% 44% 30% 50% 53% 43% 45% 45% 52% 41% 50% 46% 44% 44% 48% 52% 41% 33% 54% 54% 57% 31% 37% 66% 52% 57% 33% 65% 52% 48% 73% 55% 31% 36% 35% 35% 37% 43% 37% 38% 31% 33% 33% 36% 27% 46% 39% 46% 38% 53% 47Page 118 of 461 Community Design Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco.Code enforcement Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall design or layout of residential and commercial areas Utilities Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall quality of the utility infrastructure Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Affordable high-speed internet access Garbage collection Drinking water Sewer services Storm water management Power (electric and/or gas) utility Utility billing Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall quality of the utility infrastructure Safety Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall feeling of safety Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel: In your neighborhood during the day In Pasco's downtown/commercial area during the day From property crime 84%90%87%74%74%56% 69%64%74% 72% 83% 81% 84% 76% 84% 47% 64% 77% 68% 75% 66% 80% 34% 54% 71% 81% 82% 86% 45% 62% 73% 76% 71% 82% 66% 69% 77% 64% 84% 56% 60% 65% 63% 76% 68% 76% 65% 84% 63% 71% 54% 84% 66% 69% 56% 85% 81%87%92% 60%57%64%53%53%48% 56% 90% 48% 82% 66% 90% 61% 87% 59% 85% 60% 92% 61% 91% 64% 80% 69% 85% 48Page 119 of 461 Safety Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel: In Pasco's downtown/commercial area during the day From property crime From violent crime From fire, flood, or other natural disaster Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Police/Sheriff services Crime prevention Animal control Ambulance or emergency medical services Fire services Fire prevention and education Emergency preparedness Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall feeling of safety Natural environment Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall quality of natural environment Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Cleanliness Water resources 89% 70% 58% 82% 63% 54% 88% 62% 65% 54% 44% 41% 32% 53% 40% 47% 66% 89% 78% 44% 58% 73% 47% 58% 77% 69% 41% 46% 61% 43% 69% 85% 82% 53% 61% 73% 44% 68% 90% 92% 47% 62% 78% 40% 65% 87% 85% 36% 45% 63% 32% 62% 78% 73% 46% 50% 67% 47% 70% 88% 84% 37% 56% 74% 87% 73% 45% 43% 63% 89% 87% 53% 56% 70% 92%92%94%87%91%94% 58%52%61%62%58%57%55% 56%52%47%47%52%32%38% 49Page 120 of 461 Natural environment Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Cleanliness Water resources Air quality Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Preservation of natural areas Pasco open space Recycling Yard waste pick-up Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall quality of natural environment Parks and Recreation Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Availability of paths and walking trails Fitness opportunities Recreational opportunities Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. City parks Recreation programs or classes Recreation centers or facilities 67% 53% 63% 52% 71% 62% 65%64%56%56%59%64% 50% 25% 46% 46% 53% 18% 41% 42% 55% 24% 54% 49% 67% 46% 43% 51% 66% 32% 47% 46% 65% 34% 37% 42% 66% 43% 51% 56% 52% 61% 65% 76%74%88%70%75%68% 48%43%59% 45% 53% 59% 42% 46% 48% 43% 53% 57% 50% 59% 60% 42% 49% 61% 42% 53% 47% 45% 59% 48%47% 49% 53% 34% 53% 44% 57% 53% 68% 50% 66% 45% 56% 53% 65% 59% 68% 69% 70% 50Page 121 of 461 Parks and Recreation Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Recreation programs or classes Recreation centers or facilities Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities Health and wellness Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall health and wellness opportunities Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Availability of affordable quality food Availability of affordable quality health care Availability of preventive health services Availability of affordable quality mental health care Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Health services Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall health and wellness opportunities Please rate your overall health. Education, Arts, and Culture Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall opportunities for education, culture, and the arts Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities Community support for the arts Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool 37%37%32%50%56%38%53%53%59% 75%81%91% 53%47%46%48%40%49% 27% 45% 42% 53% 27% 46% 47% 55% 29% 53% 52% 66% 49% 57% 60% 59% 38% 53% 47% 30% 43% 51% 49% 43%45% 59% 42% 58% 47%54%51%55%48%57%58% 75%77%86%77%73%74% 56%63%68%43%47%55% 45%45%47%55%40%52% 31% 36% 29% 21% 30% 33%33%36%27%45%51%49% 51Page 122 of 461 Education, Arts, and Culture Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Community support for the arts Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool K-12 education Adult educational opportunities Opportunities to attend special events and festivals Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Public library services Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall opportunities for education, culture, and the arts Inclusivity and Engagement Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. Pasco as a place to raise children Pasco as a place to retire Sense of community Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Residents' connection and engagement with their community Please rate the job you feel the Pasco community does at each of the following. Making all residents feel welcome Attracting people from diverse backgrounds Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds Taking care of vulnerable residents 45% 51% 51% 32% 38% 39% 45% 31% 47% 51% 54% 30% 39% 57% 55% 48% 39% 59% 53% 46% 37% 54% 54% 38% 53% 47% 50% 40% 62% 41% 73%71%75%77%79%69%61%74%68% 77%73%86%78%81%81% 45% 48% 72% 45% 54% 71% 43% 54% 73% 34% 66% 60% 38% 45% 61% 33% 59% 63% 48% 59% 63% 46% 45% 49% 56% 54% 66% 39%34%33% 69% 57% 59% 49% 53% 58% 67% 54% 63% 52Page 123 of 461 Inclusivity and Engagement Please rate the job you feel the Pasco community does at each of the following. Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds Taking care of vulnerable residents Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Sense of civic/community pride Neighborliness of residents Opportunities to participate in social events and activities Opportunities to volunteer Opportunities to participate in community matters Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Residents' connection and engagement with their community Participation Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. Contacted the City of Pasco for help or information Contacted Pasco elected officials to express your opinion Attended a local public meeting Watched a local public meeting Volunteered your time to some group/activity Campaigned or advocated for a local issue, cause, or candidate 46%42%44% 53% 49% 52% 43% 53% 45% 43% 36% 37% 30% 39% 36% 49% 34% 55% 42% 49% 31% 66% 45% 60% 44% 50% 48% 47% 53% 41% 41% 45% 37% 45% 29% 40% 57% 51% 58% 50% 56%54% 65%72%76%77%82%70% 32% 27% 14% 13% 48% 27% 34% 14% 14% 51% 31% 26% 22% 9% 44% 22% 36% 20% 14% 43% 37% 29% 21% 15% 44% 35% 30% 14% 15% 45% 38% 47% 22% 46% 43% 41% 19% 71% 41% 45% 31% 61% 53Page 124 of 461 Participation Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. Volunteered your time to some group/activity Campaigned or advocated for a local issue, cause, or candidate Voted in your most recent local election In general, how many times do you: Access the internet from your home Access the internet from your cell phone Visit social media sites Use or check email Share your opinions online Shop online 64% 9% 66% 16% 68% 15%18%27%20% 57%51%58% 50% 26% 95% 82% 96% 88% 50% 33% 93% 82% 96% 89% 50% 35% 92% 81% 90% 88% 54Page 125 of 461 Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. Pasco as a place to live Excellent Good Fair Poor Your neighborhood as a place to live Excellent Good Fair Poor Pasco as a place to raise children Excellent Good Fair Poor Pasco as a place to work Excellent Good Fair Poor Pasco as a place to visit Excellent Good Fair Poor Pasco as a place to retire Excellent Good Fair 4% N=11 20% N=61 59% N=178 18% N=54 6% N=19 18% N=56 52% N=160 23% N=70 5% N=14 23% N=66 55% N=161 17% N=50 7% N=20 24% N=64 50% N=135 18% N=49 24% N=69 42% N=124 28% N=81 6% N=19 38% N=102 33% N=87 15% N=40 Complete Set of Frequencies This dashboard contains a complete set of responses to each question on the survey. By default, "don't know" responses are excluded, but may be added to the table using the response filter to the right. In some tables, the percentages may not sum to 100%; this is either because the question permitted the respondent to "choose all that apply", or for a question that asked the respondent to select one answer, it is due to the customary practice of rounding values to the nearest whole number. 55Page 126 of 461 Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. Pasco as a place to retire Good Fair Poor The overall quality of life Excellent Good Fair Poor Sense of community Excellent Good Fair Poor Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall economic health Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall quality of the transportation system Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall design or layout of residential and commercial areas Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall quality of the utility infrastructure Excellent Good Fair 14% N=37 38% N=102 2% N=6 29% N=85 59% N=171 10% N=30 15% N=44 40% N=114 33% N=96 12% N=33 10% N=28 37% N=106 46% N=130 7% N=20 18% N=55 31% N=94 38% N=116 13% N=39 17% N=53 36% N=110 42% N=128 6% N=17 26% N=79 48% N=145 21% N=65 56Page 127 of 461 Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall quality of the utility infrastructure Good Fair Poor Overall feeling of safety Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall quality of natural environment Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall health and wellness opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall opportunities for education, culture, and the arts Excellent Good Fair Poor Residents' connection and engagement with their community Excellent Good Fair 5% N=15 26% N=79 12% N=36 28% N=85 50% N=152 11% N=33 11% N=32 32% N=97 47% N=142 10% N=32 18% N=53 34% N=104 32% N=98 15% N=46 13% N=40 34% N=100 42% N=125 10% N=31 19% N=55 35% N=101 36% N=103 10% N=28 40% N=114 35% N=99 4% N=12 57Page 128 of 461 Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Residents' connection and engagement with their community Good Fair Poor Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following. Recommend living in Pasco to someone who asks Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Remain in Pasco for the next five years Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel: In your neighborhood during the day Very safe Somewhat safe Neither safe nor unsafe Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe In Pasco's downtown/commercial area during the day Very safe Somewhat safe Neither safe nor unsafe Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe From property crime Very safe Somewhat safe Neither safe nor unsafe Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe 21% N=61 40% N=114 8% N=25 14% N=42 48% N=145 30% N=91 9% N=27 12% N=36 24% N=73 55% N=164 1% N=4 2% N=7 7% N=21 37% N=115 52% N=162 10% N=30 17% N=52 18% N=53 34% N=102 22% N=66 9% N=26 16% N=50 17% N=53 43% N=131 15% N=47 58Page 129 of 461 Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel: From property crime Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe From violent crime Very safe Somewhat safe Neither safe nor unsafe Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe From fire, flood, or other natural disaster Very safe Somewhat safe Neither safe nor unsafe Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe Please rate the job you feel the Pasco community does at each of the following. Making all residents feel welcome Excellent Good Fair Poor Attracting people from diverse backgrounds Excellent Good Fair Poor Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds Excellent Good Fair Poor Taking care of vulnerable residents Excellent Good 9% N=26 5% N=15 14% N=43 12% N=37 43% N=131 27% N=82 1% N=3 3% N=8 7% N=22 33% N=101 56% N=171 12% N=35 29% N=83 40% N=114 19% N=55 14% N=40 29% N=81 34% N=94 23% N=65 12% N=32 19% N=53 47% N=131 22% N=62 32% N=80 15% N=36 59Page 130 of 461 Please rate the job you feel the Pasco community does at each of the following. Taking care of vulnerable residents Excellent Good Fair Poor Please rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Overall quality of business and service establishments Excellent Good Fair Poor Variety of business and service establishments Excellent Good Fair Poor Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area Excellent Good Fair Poor Employment opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Shopping opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Cost of living Excellent Good 12% N=30 41% N=103 32% N=80 11% N=33 27% N=84 46% N=140 16% N=50 15% N=48 35% N=107 36% N=110 14% N=43 29% N=85 45% N=134 20% N=58 6% N=18 8% N=20 40% N=107 38% N=101 14% N=39 27% N=84 39% N=119 24% N=72 10% N=32 30% N=91 5% N=14 60Page 131 of 461 Please rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Cost of living Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall image or reputation Excellent Good Fair Poor Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Traffic flow on major streets Excellent Good Fair Poor Ease of public parking Excellent Good Fair Poor Ease of travel by car Excellent Good Fair Poor Ease of travel by public transportation Excellent Good Fair Poor Ease of travel by bicycle Excellent Good 23% N=70 43% N=132 30% N=91 16% N=48 42% N=128 34% N=104 8% N=23 37% N=115 28% N=87 28% N=87 6% N=19 14% N=43 24% N=74 43% N=131 18% N=55 9% N=28 23% N=71 46% N=142 22% N=66 18% N=34 27% N=52 40% N=76 15% N=28 34% N=74 11% N=23 61Page 132 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Ease of travel by bicycle Excellent Good Fair Poor Ease of walking Excellent Good Fair Poor Well-planned residential growth Excellent Good Fair Poor Well-planned commercial growth Excellent Good Fair Poor Well-designed neighborhoods Excellent Good Fair Poor Preservation of the historical or cultural character of the community Excellent Good Fair Poor Public places where people want to spend time Excellent Good 29% N=64 27% N=58 34% N=74 25% N=67 27% N=75 37% N=101 12% N=32 23% N=62 37% N=102 32% N=87 9% N=24 26% N=69 31% N=82 32% N=84 11% N=30 17% N=48 43% N=124 30% N=87 10% N=28 18% N=42 33% N=79 38% N=90 11% N=26 21% N=61 4% N=13 62Page 133 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Public places where people want to spend time Excellent Good Fair Poor Variety of housing options Excellent Good Fair Poor Availability of affordable quality housing Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall quality of new development Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall appearance Excellent Good Fair Poor Cleanliness Excellent Good Fair Poor Water resources Excellent Good 32% N=94 42% N=123 21% N=61 27% N=75 35% N=98 30% N=83 8% N=23 44% N=121 38% N=106 14% N=39 4% N=12 16% N=44 34% N=95 41% N=114 9% N=27 8% N=25 47% N=144 37% N=112 8% N=26 13% N=40 31% N=95 48% N=145 8% N=24 37% N=107 17% N=48 63Page 134 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Water resources Excellent Good Fair Poor Air quality Excellent Good Fair Poor Availability of paths and walking trails Excellent Good Fair Poor Fitness opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Recreational opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Availability of affordable quality food Excellent Good Fair Poor Availability of affordable quality health care Excellent Good 17% N=49 29% N=84 37% N=107 7% N=20 26% N=80 50% N=152 17% N=53 10% N=28 31% N=90 41% N=120 18% N=52 18% N=51 29% N=84 37% N=108 16% N=45 23% N=67 32% N=94 33% N=96 12% N=36 9% N=28 37% N=114 44% N=135 9% N=28 36% N=104 7% N=21 64Page 135 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Availability of affordable quality health care Excellent Good Fair Poor Availability of preventive health services Excellent Good Fair Poor Availability of affordable quality mental health care Excellent Good Fair Poor Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities Excellent Good Fair Poor Community support for the arts Excellent Good Fair Poor Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool Excellent Good Fair Poor K-12 education Excellent Good 23% N=66 35% N=101 36% N=104 18% N=46 37% N=96 37% N=98 8% N=22 48% N=97 25% N=50 22% N=43 6% N=12 29% N=76 35% N=90 26% N=68 10% N=26 29% N=67 41% N=94 22% N=50 9% N=21 23% N=45 43% N=83 23% N=45 10% N=20 32% N=80 19% N=47 65Page 136 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. K-12 education Excellent Good Fair Poor Adult educational opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Sense of civic/community pride Excellent Good Fair Poor Neighborliness of residents Excellent Good Fair Poor Opportunities to participate in social events and activities Excellent Good Fair Poor Opportunities to attend special events and festivals Excellent Good Fair Poor Opportunities to volunteer Excellent Good 11% N=26 38% N=95 32% N=80 18% N=45 30% N=75 35% N=85 17% N=41 15% N=42 40% N=111 33% N=90 12% N=34 17% N=49 30% N=86 42% N=122 11% N=33 17% N=49 40% N=111 36% N=102 7% N=18 10% N=26 45% N=125 31% N=85 14% N=40 43% N=97 9% N=21 66Page 137 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Opportunities to volunteer Excellent Good Fair Poor Opportunities to participate in community matters Excellent Good Fair Poor Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds Excellent Good Fair Poor Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. Contacted the City of Pasco for help or information No Yes Contacted Pasco elected officials to express your opinion No Yes Attended a local public meeting No Yes Watched a local public meeting No Yes Volunteered your time to some group/activity No Yes Campaigned or advocated for a local issue, cause, or candidate No Yes Voted in your most recent local election No Yes 16% N=36 31% N=70 43% N=97 14% N=30 38% N=83 43% N=95 6% N=12 11% N=29 35% N=90 41% N=106 13% N=34 48% N=148 52% N=160 13% N=39 87% N=265 14% N=42 86% N=264 27% N=82 73% N=225 32% N=98 68% N=209 9% N=26 91% N=281 64% N=193 36% N=109 67Page 138 of 461 Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. Voted in your most recent local election No Yes Used public transportation instead of driving No Yes Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone No Yes Walked or biked instead of driving No Yes Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Public information services Excellent Good Fair Poor Economic development Excellent Good Fair Poor Traffic enforcement Excellent Good Fair Poor Traffic signal timing Excellent Good Fair Poor Street repair Excellent Good 64% N=193 23% N=70 77% N=238 55% N=169 45% N=139 47% N=143 53% N=164 10% N=25 37% N=93 40% N=101 13% N=33 14% N=36 30% N=78 42% N=107 14% N=36 21% N=60 27% N=74 42% N=115 10% N=29 14% N=42 29% N=85 50% N=150 7% N=20 33% N=99 9% N=27 68Page 139 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Street repair Excellent Good Fair Poor Street cleaning Excellent Good Fair Poor Street lighting Excellent Good Fair Poor Snow removal Excellent Good Fair Poor Sidewalk maintenance Excellent Good Fair Poor Bus or transit services Excellent Good Fair Poor Land use, planning and zoning Excellent Good 21% N=62 38% N=113 33% N=99 17% N=52 24% N=70 49% N=147 10% N=29 16% N=49 28% N=84 43% N=131 13% N=39 17% N=49 38% N=110 37% N=107 7% N=20 18% N=51 33% N=95 41% N=119 8% N=24 14% N=28 22% N=43 40% N=79 24% N=47 30% N=63 7% N=15 69Page 140 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Land use, planning and zoning Excellent Good Fair Poor Code enforcement Excellent Good Fair Poor Affordable high-speed internet access Excellent Good Fair Poor Garbage collection Excellent Good Fair Poor Drinking water Excellent Good Fair Poor Sewer services Excellent Good Fair Poor Storm water management Excellent Good 17% N=36 47% N=99 30% N=63 34% N=83 35% N=84 27% N=65 4% N=11 23% N=67 30% N=86 35% N=102 12% N=36 3% N=9 13% N=39 38% N=116 46% N=139 9% N=25 16% N=47 43% N=126 33% N=96 0% N=1 16% N=43 48% N=129 36% N=99 53% N=137 28% N=73 70Page 141 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Storm water management Excellent Good Fair Poor Power (electric and/or gas) utility Excellent Good Fair Poor Utility billing Excellent Good Fair Poor Police/Sheriff services Excellent Good Fair Poor Crime prevention Excellent Good Fair Poor Animal control Excellent Good Fair Poor Ambulance or emergency medical services Excellent Good 6% N=16 13% N=34 53% N=137 2% N=7 15% N=45 46% N=139 37% N=111 3% N=10 25% N=76 47% N=140 25% N=75 10% N=26 18% N=47 40% N=108 32% N=87 14% N=36 28% N=70 43% N=109 15% N=38 24% N=52 32% N=71 35% N=78 9% N=20 43% N=89 35% N=73 71Page 142 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Ambulance or emergency medical services Excellent Good Fair Poor Fire services Excellent Good Fair Poor Fire prevention and education Excellent Good Fair Poor Emergency preparedness Excellent Good Fair Poor Preservation of natural areas Excellent Good Fair Poor Pasco open space Excellent Good Fair Poor Recycling Excellent Good 6% N=13 15% N=31 43% N=89 2% N=4 9% N=20 53% N=118 36% N=80 9% N=20 25% N=54 46% N=101 20% N=44 24% N=41 28% N=48 33% N=56 15% N=25 21% N=51 33% N=83 34% N=86 12% N=29 17% N=40 37% N=87 34% N=79 12% N=29 20% N=57 5% N=15 72Page 143 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Recycling Excellent Good Fair Poor Yard waste pick-up Excellent Good Fair Poor City parks Excellent Good Fair Poor Recreation programs or classes Excellent Good Fair Poor Recreation centers or facilities Excellent Good Fair Poor Health services Excellent Good Fair Poor Public library services Excellent Good 51% N=143 23% N=65 20% N=57 20% N=49 29% N=70 32% N=77 19% N=46 17% N=47 30% N=85 40% N=113 13% N=37 24% N=50 27% N=54 37% N=75 12% N=25 32% N=71 32% N=70 24% N=53 12% N=28 12% N=30 42% N=108 38% N=98 9% N=24 41% N=113 32% N=88 73Page 144 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Public library services Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall customer service by Pasco employees Excellent Good Fair Poor Please rate the following categories of Pasco government performance. The value of services for the taxes paid to Pasco Excellent Good Fair Poor The overall direction that Pasco is taking Excellent Good Fair Poor The job Pasco government does at welcoming resident involvement Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall confidence in Pasco government Excellent Good Fair Poor Generally acting in the best interest of the community Excellent Good 9% N=24 18% N=50 41% N=113 8% N=21 24% N=60 45% N=114 23% N=59 20% N=52 39% N=102 36% N=93 6% N=15 14% N=37 39% N=102 38% N=98 9% N=23 18% N=41 35% N=78 39% N=86 8% N=17 18% N=48 43% N=115 33% N=89 5% N=14 34% N=88 8% N=21 74Page 145 of 461 Please rate the following categories of Pasco government performance. Generally acting in the best interest of the community Excellent Good Fair Poor Being honest Excellent Good Fair Poor Being open and transparent to the public Excellent Good Fair Poor Informing residents about issues facing the community Excellent Good Fair Poor Treating all residents fairly Excellent Good Fair Poor Treating residents with respect Excellent Good Fair Poor each of the following? The City of Pasco Excellent Good 17% N=45 40% N=103 34% N=88 19% N=42 43% N=93 30% N=65 8% N=18 20% N=47 44% N=104 28% N=66 8% N=20 33% N=83 28% N=69 31% N=76 8% N=20 22% N=51 30% N=70 38% N=89 10% N=23 15% N=38 23% N=57 45% N=111 17% N=42 50% N=146 10% N=29 75Page 146 of 461 Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? The City of Pasco Excellent Good Fair Poor The Federal Government Excellent Good Fair Poor Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall economic health Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Overall quality of the transportation system Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Overall design or layout of residential and commercial areas Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Overall quality of the utility infrastructure Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Overall feeling of safety Essential Very important 8% N=24 32% N=92 50% N=146 30% N=81 30% N=82 35% N=94 5% N=14 1% N=3 6% N=19 50% N=146 43% N=128 2% N=7 22% N=66 47% N=143 29% N=89 2% N=6 14% N=43 43% N=130 41% N=127 3% N=9 16% N=49 36% N=111 44% N=136 37% N=112 56% N=170 76Page 147 of 461 Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall feeling of safety Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Overall quality of natural environment Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Overall health and wellness opportunities Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Overall opportunities for education, culture, and the arts Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Residents' connection and engagement with their community Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important your local community to implement to help address homelessness. Providing emergency shelter Essential Very important 0% N=1 7% N=22 37% N=112 2% N=6 22% N=68 44% N=135 32% N=97 2% N=5 23% N=71 46% N=138 29% N=88 2% N=6 23% N=71 40% N=123 35% N=106 4% N=11 20% N=62 45% N=138 31% N=96 6% N=18 29% N=87 43% N=129 23% N=68 40% N=121 32% N=97 77Page 148 of 461 Please indicate how important, if at all, each of the following are for your local community to implement to help address homelessness. Providing emergency shelter Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Creating affordable, permanent housing Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Enforcing "no camping" ordinances Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Providing access to health care, behavioral health, and substance abuse treatment Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Helping fund organizations that provide services to people experiencing homelessness in our community Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important How much of a source, if at all, do you consider each of the following to be for obtaining information about Pasco? Traditional media outlets (newspapers such as the Tri-City Herald or local netwrok TV) Major source Minor source Not a source Notify Me® email subscription Major source Minor source Not a source 6% N=18 22% N=65 40% N=121 4% N=11 21% N=62 33% N=100 42% N=128 5% N=16 18% N=54 34% N=103 42% N=128 2% N=7 16% N=47 32% N=97 50% N=152 4% N=11 20% N=61 37% N=113 39% N=118 16% N=48 34% N=105 50% N=151 47% N=104 35% N=77 18% N=40 78Page 149 of 461 How much of a source, if at all, do you consider each of the following to be for obtaining information about Pasco? Notify Me® email subscription Minor source Not a source City website (www.pasco-wa.gov)Major source Minor source Not a source Facebook Major source Minor source Not a source Instagram Major source Minor source Not a source YouTube Major source Minor source Not a source X (formerly Twitter)Major source Minor source Not a source Nextdoor Major source Minor source Not a source WhatsApp Major source Minor source Not a source Radio Major source Minor source Not a source 47% N=104 16% N=46 37% N=106 47% N=136 25% N=75 30% N=90 44% N=132 49% N=142 28% N=82 23% N=65 47% N=138 33% N=95 20% N=59 66% N=190 16% N=47 18% N=52 59% N=164 34% N=96 7% N=19 74% N=216 12% N=35 14% N=42 25% N=75 37% N=109 38% N=114 79Page 150 of 461 How much of a source, if at all, do you consider each of the following to Radio Minor source Not a source In general, how many times do you:Access the internet from your home Several times a day Once a day A few times a week Every few weeks Less often or never Access the internet from your cell phone Several times a day Once a day A few times a week Every few weeks Less often or never Visit social media sites Several times a day Once a day A few times a week Every few weeks Less often or never Use or check email Several times a day Once a day A few times a week Every few weeks Less often or never Share your opinions online Several times a day Once a day A few times a week Every few weeks 25% N=75 8% N=24 4% N=10 6% N=18 11% N=33 72% N=214 3% N=10 0% N=1 5% N=15 10% N=29 82% N=245 16% N=47 2% N=5 13% N=39 15% N=46 54% N=162 5% N=14 1% N=2 7% N=20 22% N=64 67% N=199 12% N=34 13% N=37 3% N=8 11% N=31 80Page 151 of 461 In general, how many times do you: Share your opinions online A few times a week Every few weeks Less often or never Shop online Several times a day Once a day A few times a week Every few weeks Less often or never Please rate your overall health.Excellent Very good Good Fair Poor What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be: Very positive Somewhat positive Neutral Somewhat negative Very negative How many years have you lived in Pasco? Less than 2 years 2-5 years 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Which best describes the building you live in? Single-family detached home Townhouse or duplex (may share walls but no units above or below you) Condominium or apartment (have units above or below you) 62% N=177 12% N=34 22% N=64 28% N=84 34% N=100 5% N=15 11% N=34 1% N=2 10% N=30 33% N=101 34% N=102 23% N=70 8% N=25 28% N=84 44% N=132 14% N=41 6% N=18 38% N=117 19% N=59 14% N=42 20% N=61 8% N=26 14% N=41 8% N=23 73% N=221 81Page 152 of 461 Which best describes the building you live in? Townhouse or duplex (may share walls but no units above or below you) Condominium or apartment (have units above or below you) Mobile home Other Do you rent or own your home?Rent Own About how much is your monthly housing cost for the place you live (including rent, mortgage payment, property tax, property insurance and homeowners' association (HOA) fees)? Less than $300 $300 to $599 $600 to $999 $1,000 to $1,499 $1,500 to $2,499 $2,500 to $3,999 $4,000 to $6,999 $7,000 to $9,999 Do any children 17 or under live in your household? No Yes Are you or any other members of your household aged 65 or older? No Yes How much do you anticipate your household's total income before taxes will be for the current year? (Please include in your total income money from all sources for all persons living in your household.) Less than $25,000 $25,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $74,999 $75,000 to $99,999 $100,000 to $149,999 $150,000 to $199,999 $200,000 to $299,999 $300,000 or more 2% N=7 4% N=12 14% N=41 69% N=210 31% N=94 1% N=2 1% N=4 11% N=33 40% N=121 24% N=72 13% N=40 5% N=16 4% N=12 47% N=145 53% N=160 23% N=71 77% N=234 1% N=3 7% N=19 14% N=39 23% N=65 9% N=25 18% N=51 20% N=58 9% N=27 82Page 153 of 461 How much do you anticipate your household's total income before taxes will be for the current year?$200,000 to $299,999 $300,000 or more No, not of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin Yes, I consider myself to be of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin Are you of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin? What is your race? (Mark one or more races to indicate what race you consider yourself to be.) American Indian or Alaska Native Asian Black or African American Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander White A race not listed In which category is your age?18-24 years 25-34 years 35-44 years 45-54 years 55-64 years 65-74 years 75 years or older What is your gender?Woman Man Identify in another way If you identify in another way, how would you describe your gender?Identify in another way 1% N=3 50% N=150 50% N=152 31% N=89 66% N=188 1% N=4 2% N=5 3% N=8 7% N=21 7% N=23 9% N=27 9% N=29 19% N=58 17% N=52 32% N=97 6% N=18 0% N=1 51% N=153 49% N=148 100% N=1 83Page 154 of 461 Methods (Open Participation) As part of its participation in The National Community Survey™ (The NCS™), the City of Pasco conducted a survey of 200 residents. Survey invitations were mailed to randomly selected households and data were collected from November 9, 2023 to December 31, 2023. The results from this main survey effort represent the most robust estimate of your residents’ opinions. After the above data collection period was underway, a link to an online open participation survey was publicized by the City of Pasco. The open participation survey was identical to the probability sample survey with two small updates; it included a question at the beginning asking where the respondent lives and also a question about where they heard about the survey. The open participation survey was open to all Pasco residents and became available on December 7, 2023. The survey remained open for three weeks and there were 139 responses. The open participation survey data were not collected through a random sample and it is unknown who in the community was aware of the survey; therefore, a level of confidence in the representativeness of the sample cannot be estimated. However, to reduce bias where possible, these data were statistically weighted to match the demographic characteristics of the 2020 Census and 2022 American Community Survey estimates for adults in the City of Pasco. The characteristics used for weighting were age, sex, race, Hispanic origin, housing type, housing tenure, and area. No adjustments were made for design effects. Weights were calculated using an iterative, multiplicative raking model known as the ANES Weighting Algorithm.¹⁸ The results of the weighting scheme for the open participation survey are presented in the following table. Unweighted Weighted Target¹⁹ Age 18-34 35-54 55+ Area District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 District 6 Hispanic No, not of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin Yes, I consider myself to be of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin Housing type Attached Detached Race/ethnicity Notwhitealone Whitealone,notHispanicorLatino Sex Man Woman Sex/age Man18-34 Man35-54 Man55+ Woman18-34 Woman35-54 Woman55+ Tenure Own Rent 26% 36% 38% 28% 38% 34% 45% 46% 9% 12% 21% 21% 21% 13% 12% 11% 22% 21% 21% 12% 13% 6% 29% 19% 24% 14% 7% 50% 50% 50% 50% 16% 84% 74% 26% 74% 26% 91% 9% 18.Pasek,J.(2014).ANESWeightingAlgorithm.Retrievedfrom https://surveyinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Full-anesrake-paper.pdf 19.Targetscomefromthe2020Censusand2022AmericanCommunitySurvey. 84Page 155 of 461 Methods (Open Participation)As part of its participation in The National Community Survey™ (The NCS™), the City of Pasco conducted a survey of 200 residents. Survey invitations were mailed to randomly selected households and data were collected from November 9, 2023 to December 31, 2023. The results from this main survey effort represent the most robust estimate of your residents’ opinions.After the above data collection period was underway, a link to an online open participation survey was publicized by the City of Pasco. The open participation survey was identical to the probability sample survey with two small updates; it included a question at the beginning asking where the respondent lives and also a question about where they heard about the survey. The open participation survey was open to all Pasco residents and became available on December 7, 2023. The survey remained open for three weeks and there were 139 responses.The open participation survey data were not collected through a random sample and it is unknown who in the community was aware of the survey; therefore, a level of confidence in the representativeness of the sample cannot be estimated. However, to reduce bias where possible, these data were statistically weighted to match the demographic characteristics of the 2020 Census and 2022 American Community Survey estimates for adults in the City of Pasco. The characteristics used for weighting were age, sex, race, Hispanic origin, housing type, housing tenure, and area. No adjustments were made for design effects. Weights were calculated using an iterative,multiplicative raking model known as the ANES Weighting Algorithm.¹⁸ The results of the weighting scheme for the open participation survey are presented in the following table.Unweighted Weighted Target¹⁹Age 18-3435-5455+Area District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 District 6Hispanic No, not of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish originYes, I consider myself to be of Hispanic,Latino/a/x, or Spanish originHousing type Attached Detached Race/ethnicity Not white alone White alone, not Hispanic or Latino Sex Man Woman Sex/age Man 18-34 Man 35-54 Man 55+ Woman 18-34 Woman 35-54 Woman 55+ Tenure Own Rent 74% 26% 74% 26% 91% 9% 42% 58% 41% 59% 77% 23% 49% 51% 46% 54% 50% 50% 13% 17% 19% 13% 18% 20% 14% 18% 14% 13% 20% 21% 23% 25% 3% 20% 23% 6% 31% 69% 31% 69% 13% 87% 18. Pasek, J. (2014). ANES Weighting Algorithm. Retrieved from https://surveyinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Full-anesrake-paper.pdf 19. Targets come from the 2020 Census and 2022 American Community Survey. 85Page 156 of 461 In which district of Pasco do you live? (Refer to map above.) District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 District 6 None of these/I don't live in Pasco Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. Pasco as a place to live Excellent Good Fair Poor Excellent 9% N=13 10% N=14 20% N=28 19% N=27 19% N=26 11% N=15 12% N=17 8% N=11 36% N=52 41% N=58 15% N=22 Open Participation Survey Results This dashboard contains a complete set of responses to each question on the open participation survey. By default, "don't know" responses are excluded, but may be added to the table using the response filter to the right. In some tables, the percentages may not sum to 100%; this is either because the question permitted the respondent to "choose all that apply", or for a question that asked the respondent to select one answer, it is due to the customary practice of rounding values to the nearest whole number. 86Page 157 of 461 Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. Pasco as a place to live Poor Your neighborhood as a place to live Excellent Good Fair Poor Pasco as a place to raise children Excellent Good Fair Poor Pasco as a place to work Excellent Good Fair Poor Pasco as a place to visit Excellent Good Fair 11% N=14 21% N=27 36% N=48 32% N=42 16% N=21 33% N=43 35% N=46 17% N=22 11% N=13 25% N=30 43% N=50 21% N=24 22% N=32 4% N=6 87Page 158 of 461 Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. Pasco as a place to visit Good Fair Poor Pasco as a place to retire Excellent Good Fair Poor The overall quality of life Excellent Good Fair Poor Sense of community Excellent Good Fair Poor Excellent 27% N=39 46% N=67 32% N=39 25% N=29 34% N=41 9% N=11 16% N=23 33% N=46 40% N=56 10% N=14 21% N=28 36% N=48 35% N=47 7% N=10 88Page 159 of 461 Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco.Sense of community Poor Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall economic health Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall quality of the transportation system Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall design or layout of residential and commercial areas Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall quality of the utility infrastructure Excellent Good Fair 19% N=27 27% N=38 45% N=64 10% N=14 20% N=27 42% N=56 34% N=45 4% N=6 33% N=48 34% N=50 30% N=43 3% N=5 44% N=60 21% N=29 89Page 160 of 461 Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall quality of the utility infrastructure Good Fair Poor Overall feeling of safety Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall quality of natural environment Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Excellent 9% N=12 25% N=34 22% N=32 20% N=29 47% N=69 11% N=16 27% N=38 27% N=39 40% N=57 5% N=8 28% N=40 39% N=57 25% N=35 9% N=12 90Page 161 of 461 Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities Poor Overall health and wellness opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall opportunities for education, culture, and the arts Excellent Good Fair Poor Residents' connection and engagement with their community Excellent Good Fair Poor Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following. Recommend living in Pasco to someone who asks Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely 25% N=34 39% N=55 32% N=44 4% N=6 33% N=45 27% N=38 33% N=46 8% N=11 26% N=35 38% N=52 30% N=41 6% N=9 49% N=71 22% N=31 91Page 162 of 461 Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following. Recommend living in Pasco to someone who asks Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Remain in Pasco for the next five years Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel: In your neighborhood during the day Very safe Somewhat safe Neither safe nor unsafe Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe In Pasco's downtown/commercial area during the day Very safe Somewhat safe Neither safe nor unsafe Somewhat unsafe 14% N=21 15% N=21 12% N=16 11% N=15 29% N=38 48% N=63 1% N=2 12% N=17 9% N=13 16% N=22 61% N=87 10% N=14 34% N=48 18% N=25 92Page 163 of 461 Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel: In Pasco's downtown/commercial area during the day Neither safe nor unsafe Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe From property crime Very safe Somewhat safe Neither safe nor unsafe Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe From violent crime Very safe Somewhat safe Neither safe nor unsafe Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe From fire, flood, or other natural disaster Very safe Somewhat safe Neither safe nor unsafe 16% N=22 22% N=31 15% N=21 15% N=21 22% N=31 35% N=50 12% N=17 7% N=10 24% N=33 14% N=19 33% N=45 23% N=32 27% N=38 57% N=80 93Page 164 of 461 Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel: From fire, flood, or other natural disaster Somewhat safe Neither safe nor unsafe Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe Please rate the job you feel the Pasco community does at each of the following. Making all residents feel welcome Excellent Good Fair Poor Attracting people from diverse backgrounds Excellent Good Fair Poor Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds Excellent Good Fair Poor 1% N=1 7% N=9 9% N=13 21% N=30 24% N=36 37% N=54 18% N=26 15% N=18 26% N=32 40% N=48 19% N=24 28% N=38 44% N=60 9% N=13 94Page 165 of 461 Please rate the job you feel the Pasco community does at each of the following. Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds Fair Poor Taking care of vulnerable residents Excellent Good Fair Poor Please rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Overall quality of business and service establishments Excellent Good Fair Poor Variety of business and service establishments Excellent Good Fair Poor Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area Excellent Good 18% N=25 47% N=59 26% N=32 20% N=25 7% N=9 24% N=35 30% N=44 38% N=56 8% N=11 36% N=51 34% N=48 19% N=27 11% N=16 4% N=5 95Page 166 of 461 Please rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area Excellent Good Fair Poor Employment opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Shopping opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Cost of living Excellent Good Fair Poor 50% N=73 25% N=37 21% N=31 21% N=25 25% N=30 40% N=48 14% N=17 44% N=64 34% N=50 22% N=32 0% N=1 46% N=63 27% N=37 4% N=6 96Page 167 of 461 Please rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Cost of living Fair Poor Overall image or reputation Excellent Good Fair Poor Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Traffic flow on major streets Excellent Good Fair Poor Ease of public parking Excellent Good Fair Poor Ease of travel by car Excellent Good 23% N=31 35% N=50 31% N=44 26% N=36 8% N=11 46% N=67 24% N=35 22% N=32 9% N=13 20% N=29 21% N=31 38% N=56 20% N=29 26% N=37 97Page 168 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Ease of travel by car Excellent Good Fair Poor Ease of travel by public transportation Excellent Good Fair Poor Ease of travel by bicycle Excellent Good Fair Poor Ease of walking Excellent Good Fair Poor 7% N=10 34% N=48 32% N=45 28% N=27 34% N=33 31% N=29 6% N=6 47% N=43 23% N=21 29% N=27 1% N=1 23% N=26 29% N=33 9% N=10 98Page 169 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Ease of walking Fair Poor Well-planned residential growth Excellent Good Fair Poor Well-planned commercial growth Good Fair Poor Well-designed neighborhoods Excellent Good Fair Poor Preservation of the historical or cultural character of the community Excellent Good Fair 39% N=45 41% N=54 26% N=34 33% N=43 1% N=1 46% N=64 27% N=39 27% N=38 29% N=40 37% N=52 34% N=48 1% N=1 43% N=50 1% N=1 99Page 170 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Preservation of the historical or cultural character of the community Good Fair Poor Public places where people want to spend time Excellent Good Fair Poor Variety of housing options Excellent Good Fair Poor Availability of affordable quality housing Excellent Good Fair Poor Excellent 23% N=27 33% N=38 40% N=56 44% N=63 12% N=17 4% N=6 33% N=42 35% N=45 31% N=39 2% N=2 56% N=73 30% N=38 14% N=18 1% N=1 100Page 171 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Availability of affordable quality housing Poor Overall quality of new development Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall appearance Excellent Good Fair Poor Cleanliness Excellent Good Fair Poor Water resources Excellent Good Fair 22% N=28 32% N=41 41% N=53 6% N=7 22% N=31 47% N=67 20% N=29 11% N=15 21% N=31 32% N=47 39% N=58 8% N=11 41% N=57 6% N=9 101Page 172 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Water resources Good Fair Poor Air quality Excellent Good Fair Poor Availability of paths and walking trails Excellent Good Fair Poor Fitness opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Excellent 27% N=37 25% N=34 7% N=10 27% N=38 48% N=68 19% N=27 25% N=35 35% N=48 26% N=37 14% N=20 36% N=49 27% N=37 35% N=47 1% N=1 102Page 173 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Fitness opportunities Poor Recreational opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Availability of affordable quality food Excellent Good Fair Poor Availability of affordable quality health care Excellent Good Fair Poor Availability of preventive health services Excellent Good Fair 32% N=45 29% N=41 33% N=46 7% N=9 15% N=22 42% N=61 32% N=46 11% N=16 30% N=39 38% N=50 24% N=32 8% N=10 27% N=36 8% N=10 103Page 174 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Availability of preventive health services Good Fair Poor Availability of affordable quality mental health care Excellent Good Fair Poor Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities Excellent Good Fair Poor Community support for the arts Excellent Good Fair Poor Excellent 37% N=49 28% N=37 54% N=52 39% N=38 6% N=6 1% N=1 34% N=45 48% N=62 12% N=16 6% N=8 27% N=31 55% N=63 9% N=10 9% N=10 104Page 175 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Community support for the arts Poor Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool Excellent Good Fair Poor K-12 education Excellent Good Fair Poor Adult educational opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Sense of civic/community pride Excellent Good Fair 56% N=42 28% N=22 15% N=11 1% N=1 19% N=21 30% N=31 35% N=37 16% N=17 25% N=27 36% N=38 30% N=31 8% N=9 43% N=54 5% N=6 105Page 176 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Sense of civic/community pride Good Fair Poor Neighborliness of residents Excellent Good Fair Poor Opportunities to participate in social events and activities Excellent Good Fair Poor Opportunities to attend special events and festivals Excellent Good Fair Poor Excellent 11% N=14 41% N=50 20% N=27 47% N=62 24% N=31 10% N=13 28% N=37 25% N=33 42% N=56 4% N=5 24% N=32 26% N=36 45% N=61 5% N=6 106Page 177 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Opportunities to attend special events and festivals Poor Opportunities to volunteer Excellent Good Fair Poor Opportunities to participate in community matters Excellent Good Fair Poor Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds Excellent Good Fair Poor Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. Contacted the City of Pasco for help or information No Yes No 20% N=23 35% N=40 40% N=46 5% N=6 27% N=31 33% N=39 36% N=42 5% N=6 22% N=29 36% N=47 35% N=46 7% N=9 52% N=77 48% N=69 107Page 178 of 461 Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. Contacted the City of Pasco for help or information Yes Contacted Pasco elected officials to express your opinion No Yes Attended a local public meeting No Yes Watched a local public meeting No Yes Volunteered your time to some group/activity No Yes Campaigned or advocated for a local issue, cause, or candidate No Yes Voted in your most recent local election No Yes Used public transportation instead of driving No Yes No 26% N=38 74% N=109 34% N=51 66% N=96 60% N=88 40% N=59 46% N=68 54% N=79 28% N=41 72% N=106 75% N=111 25% N=36 22% N=32 78% N=115 108Page 179 of 461 Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. Used public transportation instead of driving Yes Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone No Yes Walked or biked instead of driving No Yes Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Public information services Excellent Good Fair Poor Economic development Excellent Good Fair Poor Traffic enforcement Excellent Good Fair 47% N=68 53% N=79 48% N=70 52% N=77 21% N=29 21% N=28 53% N=71 5% N=6 21% N=29 34% N=46 33% N=44 12% N=16 33% N=43 7% N=10 109Page 180 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Traffic enforcement Good Fair Poor Traffic signal timing Excellent Good Fair Poor Street repair Excellent Good Fair Poor Street cleaning Excellent Good Fair Poor Excellent 31% N=41 29% N=37 27% N=39 31% N=44 35% N=50 7% N=10 20% N=29 29% N=41 47% N=67 4% N=5 16% N=22 33% N=46 38% N=53 13% N=18 110Page 181 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Street cleaning Poor Street lighting Excellent Good Fair Poor Snow removal Excellent Good Fair Poor Sidewalk maintenance Excellent Good Fair Poor Bus or transit services Excellent Good Fair 18% N=27 30% N=43 43% N=63 8% N=12 21% N=28 38% N=51 38% N=50 4% N=5 17% N=21 43% N=56 29% N=37 12% N=15 43% N=43 1% N=1 111Page 182 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Bus or transit services Good Fair Poor Land use, planning and zoning Excellent Good Fair Poor Code enforcement Excellent Good Fair Poor Affordable high-speed internet access Excellent Good Fair Poor Excellent 14% N=14 42% N=42 41% N=50 33% N=41 21% N=26 5% N=6 19% N=23 30% N=37 46% N=56 4% N=5 34% N=43 13% N=17 46% N=58 7% N=9 112Page 183 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Affordable high-speed internet access Poor Garbage collection Excellent Good Fair Poor Drinking water Excellent Good Fair Poor Sewer services Excellent Good Fair Poor Storm water management Excellent Good Fair 4% N=6 10% N=14 46% N=62 39% N=52 14% N=19 16% N=22 42% N=56 27% N=36 2% N=2 19% N=24 50% N=63 28% N=36 46% N=58 19% N=23 113Page 184 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Storm water management Good Fair Poor Power (electric and/or gas) utility Excellent Good Fair Poor Utility billing Excellent Good Fair Poor Police/Sheriff services Excellent Good Fair Poor Excellent 15% N=19 20% N=25 7% N=10 10% N=14 62% N=85 21% N=28 18% N=24 8% N=11 49% N=64 25% N=32 5% N=7 27% N=33 33% N=39 34% N=41 114Page 185 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Police/Sheriff services Poor Crime prevention Excellent Good Fair Poor Animal control Excellent Good Fair Poor Ambulance or emergency medical services Excellent Good Fair Poor Fire services Excellent Good Fair 21% N=26 20% N=25 47% N=59 12% N=15 30% N=36 28% N=33 34% N=40 8% N=9 5% N=6 23% N=27 39% N=46 33% N=39 39% N=50 42% N=54 115Page 186 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Fire services Good Fair Poor Fire prevention and education Excellent Good Fair Poor Emergency preparedness Excellent Good Fair Poor Preservation of natural areas Excellent Good Fair Poor Excellent 0% N= 20% N=25 18% N=22 17% N=21 29% N=35 36% N=43 22% N=22 34% N=33 37% N=37 7% N=7 24% N=27 34% N=39 41% N=46 1% N=1 116Page 187 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Preservation of natural areas Poor Pasco open space Excellent Good Fair Poor Recycling Excellent Good Fair Poor Yard waste pick-up Excellent Good Fair Poor City parks Excellent Good Fair 27% N=31 39% N=45 29% N=33 5% N=5 75% N=91 12% N=15 7% N=8 6% N=8 35% N=38 21% N=23 36% N=39 8% N=9 35% N=51 12% N=18 117Page 188 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. City parks Good Fair Poor Recreation programs or classes Excellent Good Fair Poor Recreation centers or facilities Excellent Good Fair Poor Health services Excellent Good Fair Poor Excellent 15% N=22 37% N=53 28% N=31 35% N=39 28% N=31 10% N=11 35% N=37 40% N=42 25% N=27 0% N= 28% N=33 34% N=40 33% N=39 5% N=6 118Page 189 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Health services Poor Public library services Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall customer service by Pasco employees Excellent Good Fair Poor Please rate the following categories of Pasco government performance. The value of services for the taxes paid to Pasco Excellent Good Fair Poor The overall direction that Pasco is taking Excellent Good Fair 7% N=8 14% N=15 37% N=41 42% N=47 16% N=23 26% N=37 34% N=49 24% N=35 30% N=40 27% N=36 34% N=45 10% N=13 36% N=51 16% N=23 119Page 190 of 461 Please rate the following categories of Pasco government performance. The overall direction that Pasco is taking Good Fair Poor The job Pasco government does at welcoming resident involvement Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall confidence in Pasco government Excellent Good Fair Poor Generally acting in the best interest of the community Excellent Good Fair Poor Excellent 26% N=37 22% N=32 28% N=35 35% N=43 27% N=33 9% N=12 28% N=39 22% N=31 38% N=54 11% N=16 27% N=37 37% N=51 25% N=35 11% N=16 120Page 191 of 461 Please rate the following categories of Pasco government performance. Generally acting in the best interest of the community Poor Being honest Excellent Good Fair Poor Being open and transparent to the public Excellent Good Fair Poor Informing residents about issues facing the community Excellent Good Fair Poor Treating all residents fairly Excellent Good Fair 23% N=32 37% N=52 27% N=38 12% N=17 31% N=42 30% N=41 31% N=42 9% N=12 28% N=39 34% N=46 29% N=39 9% N=12 22% N=28 19% N=24 121Page 192 of 461 Please rate the following categories of Pasco government performance. Treating all residents fairly Good Fair Poor Treating residents with respect Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? The City of Pasco Excellent Good Fair Poor The Federal Government Excellent Good Fair Poor Essential 21% N=27 37% N=47 21% N=29 32% N=42 29% N=38 18% N=25 13% N=18 27% N=38 44% N=62 16% N=22 24% N=32 48% N=63 23% N=31 5% N=6 122Page 193 of 461 Overall, how wouldyou rate the quality ofthe services provided by each of the following?The Federal Government Poor Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall economic health Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Overall quality of the transportation system Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Overall design or layout of residential and commercial areas Essential Very important Somewhat important Overall quality of the utility infrastructure Essential Very important Somewhat important Essential 3% N=4 14% N=20 38% N=56 45% N=66 4% N=5 25% N=36 29% N=43 42% N=61 7% N=10 49% N=71 44% N=65 11% N=17 45% N=66 43% N=64 123Page 194 of 461 Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall quality of the utility infrastructure Somewhat important Overall feeling of safety Essential Very important Somewhat important Overall quality of natural environment Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Overall health and wellness opportunities Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important 11% N=17 35% N=51 54% N=78 2% N=3 17% N=25 52% N=76 29% N=42 2% N=3 11% N=16 46% N=66 41% N=60 20% N=29 45% N=64 34% N=48 124Page 195 of 461 Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall health and wellness opportunities Somewhat important Not at all important Overall opportunities for education, culture, and the arts Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Residents' connection and engagement with their community Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Please indicate how important, if at all, each of the following are for your local community to implement to help address homelessness. Providing emergency shelter Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Creating affordable, permanent housing Essential Very important 0% N= 8% N=11 23% N=33 35% N=51 34% N=50 5% N=7 26% N=38 40% N=58 29% N=43 10% N=13 16% N=21 41% N=55 34% N=45 47% N=66 125Page 196 of 461 Please indicate how important, if at all, each of the following are for your local community to implement to help address homelessness. Creating affordable, permanent housing Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Enforcing "no camping" ordinances Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Providing access to health care, behavioral health, and substance abuse treatment Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Helping fund organizations that provide services to people experiencing homelessness in our community Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important 11% N=15 11% N=16 31% N=44 14% N=21 19% N=28 25% N=36 42% N=62 4% N=5 22% N=32 16% N=23 58% N=81 15% N=21 31% N=43 47% N=66 126Page 197 of 461 Please indicate howimportant, if at all, each of the following are for your local community to implement to help address homelessness. Helping fund organizations that provide services to people experiencing homelessness in our community Somewhat important Not at all important How much of a source, if at all, do you consider each of the following to be for obtaining information about Pasco? Traditional media outlets (newspapers such as the Tri-City Herald or local netwrok TV) Major source Minor source Not a source Notify Me® email subscription Major source Minor source Not a source City website (www.pasco-wa.gov)Major source Minor source Not a source Facebook Major source Minor source Not a source Instagram Major source Minor source 7% N=10 15% N=22 44% N=64 40% N=58 49% N=71 40% N=58 12% N=17 10% N=15 53% N=76 36% N=52 27% N=39 19% N=27 54% N=79 21% N=31 127Page 198 of 461 How much of a source, if at all, do you consider each of the following to be for obtaining information about Pasco? Instagram Major source Minor source Not a source YouTube Major source Minor source Not a source X (formerly Twitter)Major source Minor source Not a source Nextdoor Major source Minor source Not a source WhatsApp Major source Minor source Not a source Major source 52% N=76 27% N=39 51% N=74 37% N=54 12% N=18 76% N=108 18% N=25 6% N=8 62% N=89 30% N=43 8% N=12 75% N=106 22% N=31 4% N=5 128Page 199 of 461 How much of a source, if at all, do you consider each of the following to be for obtaining information about Pasco? WhatsApp Not a source Radio Major source Minor source Not a source In general, how many times do you: Access the internet from your home Several times a day Once a day A few times a week Every few weeks Less often or never Access the internet from your cell phone Several times a day Once a day A few times a week Every few weeks Less often or never Visit social media sites Several times a day Once a day 29% N=42 31% N=45 40% N=59 4% N=6 4% N=6 8% N=12 6% N=9 77% N=112 1% N=1 3% N=4 0% N= 15% N=21 82% N=120 65% N=94 129Page 200 of 461 In general, how many times do you: Visit social media sites Several times a day Once a day A few times a week Every few weeks Less often or never Use or check email Several times a day Once a day A few times a week Every few weeks Less often or never Share your opinions online Several times a day Once a day A few times a week Every few weeks Less often or never Several times a day 15% N=21 1% N=1 4% N=7 16% N=23 0% N= 1% N=1 3% N=4 33% N=47 63% N=89 45% N=64 21% N=31 18% N=26 8% N=11 8% N=11 130Page 201 of 461 In general, how many times do you: Share your opinions online Less often or never Shop online Several times a day Once a day A few times a week Every few weeks Less often or never Please rate your overall health.Excellent Very good Good Fair What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be: Very positive Somewhat positive Neutral Somewhat negative Very negative Less than 2 years 16% N=22 23% N=32 44% N=61 8% N=11 8% N=11 7% N=9 26% N=36 46% N=64 21% N=29 7% N=11 32% N=47 26% N=37 28% N=40 7% N=11 131Page 202 of 461 What impact, if any, do you think theeconomy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be:Very negative How many years have you lived in Pasco? Less than 2 years 2-5 years 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Which best describes the building you live in? Single-family detached home Townhouse or duplex (may share walls but no units above or below you) Condominium or apartment (have units above or below you) Mobile home Other Do you rent or own your home?Rent Own About how much is your monthly housing cost for the place you live (including rent, mortgage payment, property tax, property insurance and homeowners' association (HOA) fees)? Less than $300 $300 to $599 $600 to $999 40% N=55 16% N=22 14% N=19 17% N=23 13% N=18 5% N=7 4% N=5 7% N=10 14% N=20 71% N=103 69% N=98 31% N=44 3% N=5 1% N=1 132Page 203 of 461 About how much is your monthly housing cost for the place you live (including rent, mortgage payment, property tax, property insurance and homeowners' association (HOA) fees)? $300 to $599 $600 to $999 $1,000 to $1,499 $1,500 to $2,499 $2,500 to $3,999 $4,000 to $6,999 $7,000 to $9,999 Do any children 17 or under live in your household? No Yes Are you or any other members of your household aged 65 or older? No Yes How much do you anticipate your household's total income before taxes will be for the current year? (Please include in your total income money from all sources for all persons living in your household.) Less than $25,000 $25,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $74,999 $75,000 to $99,999 $100,000 to $149,999 0% N= 2% N=3 17% N=25 47% N=68 12% N=18 17% N=25 46% N=67 54% N=77 30% N=43 70% N=100 19% N=27 17% N=24 17% N=24 2% N=3 133Page 204 of 461 How much do you anticipate your household's total income before taxes will be for the current year? (Please include in your total income money from all sources for all persons living in your household.) $75,000 to $99,999 $100,000 to $149,999 $150,000 to $199,999 $200,000 to $299,999 $300,000 or more Are you of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin? No, not of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin Yes, I consider myself to be of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin What is your race? (Mark one or more races to indicate what race you consider yourself to be.) American Indian or Alaska Native Asian Black or African American White A race not listed In which category is your age?18-24 years 25-34 years 35-44 years 45-54 years 1% N=1 9% N=12 12% N=17 22% N=31 50% N=70 50% N=70 30% N=39 69% N=89 1% N=1 4% N=5 6% N=8 20% N=29 32% N=45 3% N=5 134Page 205 of 461 In which category is your age? 35-44 years 45-54 years 55-64 years 65-74 years 75 years or older What is your gender?Woman Man How did you hear about this survey? (Select all that apply.) The City's website The City's social media (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc.) Received an email from the City In a City newsletter or utility bill In my Facebook feed Saw it on a video of a public meeting or at a meeting I attended Saw it on the City's cable channel Saw it in a newspaper article or ad (hard copy or online) Saw a flyer or poster about it 5% N=7 11% N=15 11% N=16 18% N=26 54% N=79 46% N=68 5% N=7 4% N=6 2% N=3 22% N=32 3% N=5 21% N=31 25% N=37 13% N=18 135Page 206 of 461 How did you hear about this survey? (Select all that apply.) Saw it in a newspaper article or ad (hard copy or online) Saw a flyer or poster about it Heard about it from a family member, friend or neighbor Heard about it from a business or social organization in my community Polco social media post Other 10% N=15 1% N=1 1% N=1 9% N=14 7% N=10 136Page 207 of 461 Th e N a t i o n a l C o m m u n i t y S u r v e y ™ • © 2 0 0 1 -20 2 3 Na t i o n a l R e s e a r c h C e n t e r , I n c . The City of Pasco 2023 Community Survey Page 1 of 5 Please complete this survey if you are the adult (age 18 or older) in the household who most recently had a birthday (the year of birth does not matter). Your responses are confidential and no identifying information will be shared. 1. Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know Pasco as a place to live ........................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Your neighborhood as a place to live .............................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Pasco as a place to raise children ...................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Pasco as a place to work ....................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Pasco as a place to visit ......................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Pasco as a place to retire ...................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 The overall quality of life in Pasco .................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Sense of community ................................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 2. Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know Overall economic health of Pasco ..................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Overall quality of the transportation system (auto, bicycle, foot, bus) in Pasco .................................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Overall design or layout of Pasco’s residential and commercial areas (e.g., homes, buildings, streets, parks, etc.) ................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Overall quality of the utility infrastructure in Pasco (water, sewer, storm water, electric/gas, broadband) ........................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Overall feeling of safety in Pasco ....................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Overall quality of natural environment in Pasco ....................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities ............................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Overall health and wellness opportunities in Pasco ................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Overall opportunities for education, culture, and the arts..................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Residents’ connection and engagement with their community .......................... 1 2 3 4 5 3. Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following. Very Somewhat Somewhat Very Don’t likely likely unlikely unlikely know Recommend living in Pasco to someone who asks .............................1 2 3 4 5 Remain in Pasco for the next five years ...................................................1 2 3 4 5 4. Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel: Very Somewhat Neither safe Somewhat Very Don’t safe safe nor unsafe unsafe unsafe know In your neighborhood during the day ...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 In Pasco’s downtown/commercial area during the day ............................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 From property crime ....................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 From violent crime ........................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 From fire, flood, or other natural disaster ............................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 5. Please rate the job you feel the Pasco community does at each of the following. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know Making all residents feel welcome ................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Attracting people from diverse backgrounds .............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds ...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.) ........... 1 2 3 4 5 6. Please rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know Overall quality of business and service establishments in Pasco ....................... 1 2 3 4 5 Variety of business and service establishments in Pasco ....................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area ..................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Employment opportunities ................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Shopping opportunities ........................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Cost of living in Pasco ............................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Overall image or reputation of Pasco .............................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 137Page 208 of 461 Th e N a t i o n a l C o m m u n i t y S u r v e y ™ • © 2 0 0 1 -20 2 3 Na t i o n a l R e s e a r c h C e n t e r , I n c . Page 2 of 5 7. Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know Traffic flow on major streets ............................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of public parking ............................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of travel by car in Pasco .............................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of travel by public transportation in Pasco ........................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of travel by bicycle in Pasco ...................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of walking in Pasco ....................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Well-planned residential growth ...................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Well-planned commercial growth .................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Well-designed neighborhoods ........................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Preservation of the historical or cultural character of the community ............ 1 2 3 4 5 Public places where people want to spend time ........................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Variety of housing options ................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of affordable quality housing ..................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Overall quality of new development in Pasco ............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Overall appearance of Pasco ............................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Cleanliness of Pasco ................................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Water resources (beaches, lakes, ponds, riverways, etc.) ..................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Air quality .................................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of paths and walking trails .......................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Fitness opportunities (including exercise classes and paths or trails, etc.) ... 1 2 3 4 5 Recreational opportunities .................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of affordable quality food ............................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of affordable quality health care ............................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of preventive health services ..................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of affordable quality mental health care ............................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities .......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Community support for the arts ........................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool ............................................ 1 2 3 4 5 K-12 education .......................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Adult educational opportunities ....................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Sense of civic/community pride ........................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Neighborliness of residents in Pasco ............................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to participate in social events and activities .................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to attend special events and festivals ............................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to volunteer .................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to participate in community matters ................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds ..................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 8. Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. No Yes Contacted the City of Pasco (in-person, phone, email, or web) for help or information ................................... 1 2 Contacted Pasco elected officials (in-person, phone, email, or web) to express your opinion ....................... 1 2 Attended a local public meeting (of local elected officials like City Council or County Commissioners, advisory boards, town halls, HOA, neighborhood watch, etc.) ............................................ 1 2 Watched (online or on television) a local public meeting ............................................................................................... 1 2 Volunteered your time to some group/activity in Pasco ................................................................................................. 1 2 Campaigned or advocated for a local issue, cause, or candidate .................................................................................. 1 2 Voted in your most recent local election ................................................................................................................................ 1 2 Used bus, rail, subway, or other public transportation instead of driving ............................................................... 1 2 Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone .............................................................................. 1 2 Walked or biked instead of driving ........................................................................................................................................... 1 2 138Page 209 of 461 Th e N a t i o n a l C o m m u n i t y S u r v e y ™ • © 2 0 0 1 -20 2 3 Na t i o n a l R e s e a r c h C e n t e r , I n c . The City of Pasco 2023 Community Survey Page 3 of 5 9. Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know Public information services ............................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Economic development ..................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Traffic enforcement ............................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Traffic signal timing ............................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Street repair ........................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Street cleaning ....................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Street lighting ........................................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Snow removal ........................................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Sidewalk maintenance ....................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Bus or transit services ....................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Land use, planning, and zoning ...................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) ...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Affordable high-speed internet access ....................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Garbage collection ............................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Drinking water ...................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Sewer services ....................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Storm water management (storm drainage, dams, levees, etc.) .................... 1 2 3 4 5 Power (electric and/or gas) utility ............................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Utility billing .......................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Police/Sheriff services ....................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Crime prevention ................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Animal control ....................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Ambulance or emergency medical services ............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Fire services ........................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Fire prevention and education ....................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Emergency preparedness (services that prepare the community for natural disasters or other emergency situations) ..................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands, and greenbelts) ..... 1 2 3 4 5 Pasco open space ................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Recycling .................................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Yard waste pick-up .............................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 City parks ................................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Recreation programs or classes .................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Recreation centers or facilities ...................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Health services ...................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Public library services ....................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Overall customer service by Pasco employees (police, receptionists, planners, etc.) ..................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 10. Please rate the following categories of Pasco government performance. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know The value of services for the taxes paid to Pasco ................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 The overall direction that Pasco is taking ................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 The job Pasco government does at welcoming resident involvement ............... 1 2 3 4 5 Overall confidence in Pasco government .................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Generally acting in the best interest of the community ...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Being honest ........................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Being open and transparent to the public ................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Informing residents about issues facing the community ................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Treating all residents fairly ............................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Treating residents with respect .................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 11. Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know The City of Pasco .................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 The Federal Government .................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 139Page 210 of 461 Th e N a t i o n a l C o m m u n i t y S u r v e y ™ • © 2 0 0 1 -20 2 3 Na t i o n a l R e s e a r c h C e n t e r , I n c . Page 4 of 5 12. Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Very Somewhat Not at all Essential important important important Overall economic health of Pasco ........................................................................................1 2 3 4 Overall quality of the transportation system (auto, bicycle, foot, bus) in Pasco .......................................................................................................................................1 2 3 4 Overall design or layout of Pasco’s residential and commercial areas (e.g., homes, buildings, streets, parks, etc.) .....................................................1 2 3 4 Overall quality of the utility infrastructure in Pasco (water, sewer, storm water, electric/gas, broadband) ..........................................1 2 3 4 Overall feeling of safety in Pasco ..........................................................................................1 2 3 4 Overall quality of natural environment in Pasco ..........................................................1 2 3 4 Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities ...............................................1 2 3 4 Overall health and wellness opportunities in Pasco ....................................................1 2 3 4 Overall opportunities for education, culture, and the arts........................................1 2 3 4 Residents’ connection and engagement with their community .............................1 2 3 4 13. Please indicate how important, if at all, each of the following are for your local community to implement to help address homelessness. Very Somewhat Not at all Don’t Essential important important important know Providing emergency shelter ................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Creating affordable, permanent housing .......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Enforcing “no camping” ordinances ................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Providing access to health care, behavioral health, and substance abuse treatment ....................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Helping fund organizations that provide services to people experiencing homelessness in our community ......................... 1 2 3 4 5 14. How much of a source, if at all, do you consider each of the following to be for obtaining information about Pasco? Major Minor Not a source source source Traditional media outlets (newspapers such as the Tri-City Herald or local network TV) ........................... 1 2 3 Notify Me® email subscription ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 City website (www.pasco-wa.gov) ................................................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 Facebook ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 Instagram ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 YouTube .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 X (formerly Twitter) ................................................................................................................................................................................ 1 2 3 Nextdoor ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 WhatsApp ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 Radio ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 140Page 211 of 461 Th e N a t i o n a l C o m m u n i t y S u r v e y ™ • © 2 0 0 1 -20 2 3 Na t i o n a l R e s e a r c h C e n t e r , I n c . The City of Pasco 2023 Community Survey Page 5 of 5 Our last questions are about you and your household. Again, all of your responses to this survey are confidential and no identifying information will be shared. D1. In general, how many times do you: Several Once A few times Every Less often Don’t times a day a day a week few weeks or never know Access the internet from your home using a computer, laptop, or tablet computer ......................1 2 3 4 5 6 Access the internet from your cell phone .......................1 2 3 4 5 6 Visit social media sites such as Facebook, Twitter, Nextdoor, etc. .......................................................1 2 3 4 5 6 Use or check email ....................................................................1 2 3 4 5 6 Share your opinions online ...................................................1 2 3 4 5 6 Shop online ..................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 6 D2. Please rate your overall health. Excellent Very good Good Fair Poor D3. What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be: Very positive Somewhat positive Neutral Somewhat negative Very negative D4. How many years have you lived in Pasco? Less than 2 years 2-5 years 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years D5. Which best describes the building you live in? Single-family detached home Townhouse or duplex (may share walls but no units above or below you) Condominium or apartment (have units above or below you) Mobile home Other D6. Do you rent or own your home? Rent Own D7. About how much is your monthly housing cost for the place you live (including rent, mortgage payment, property tax, property insurance, and homeowners’ association (HOA) fees)? Less than $300 $2,500 to $3,999 $300 to $599 $4,000 to $6,999 $600 to $999 $7,000 to $9,999 $1,000 to $1,499 $10,000 or more $1,500 to $2,499 D8. Do any children 17 or under live in your household? No Yes D9. Are you or any other members of your household aged 65 or older? No Yes D10. How much do you anticipate your household’s total income before taxes will be for the current year? (Please include in your total income money from all sources for all persons living in your household.) Less than $25,000 $100,000 to $149,999 $25,000 to $49,999 $150,000 to $199,999 $50,000 to $74,999 $200,000 to $299,999 $75,000 to $99,999 $300,000 or more D11. Are you of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin? No Yes D12. What is your race? (Mark one or more races to indicate what race you consider yourself to be.) ❑ American Indian or Alaskan Native ❑ Asian ❑ Black or African American ❑ Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander ❑ White ❑ A race not listed D13. In which category is your age? 18-24 years 55-64 years 25-34 years 65-74 years 35-44 years 75 years or older 45-54 years D14. What is your gender? Woman Man Identify in another way → go to D14a D14a. If you identify in another way, how would you describe your gender? Agender/I don’t identify with any gender Genderqueer/gender fluid Non-binary Transgender man Transgender woman Two-spirit Identify in another way Thank you! Please return the completed survey in the postage-paid envelope to: National Research Center, Inc., PO Box 549, Belle Mead, NJ 08502 141Page 212 of 461 November 2023 Dear City of Pasco Resident: Please help us shape the future of Pasco! You have been selected at random to participate in the 2023 Pasco Community Survey. If you’ve already completed the survey online, thank you. Please do not respond twice. Please take a few minutes to fill out the enclosed survey. Your participation in this survey is very important—especially since your household is one of only a small number of households being surveyed. Your feedback will help Pasco make decisions that affect our city. A few things to remember: • Your responses are confidential and no identifying information will be shared. • In order to hear from a diverse group of residents, the adult 18 years or older in your household who most recently had a birthday should complete this survey. • You may return the survey by mail in the enclosed postage-paid envelope, or you can complete the survey online at: https://polco.us/xxplaceholder Please do not share your survey link. This survey is for randomly selected households only. The City will conduct a separate survey that is open to all residents just a few weeks from now. If you have any questions about the survey, please call 509-543-5794. Thank you for your time and participation! Sincerely, Estimado Residente de la Ciudad de Pasco: ¡Por favor ayúdenos a moldear el futuro de Pasco! Usted ha sido seleccionado al azar para participar en la Encuesta de la Comunidad de Pasco del 2023. Si ya completó la encuesta en línea, gracias. Por favor no responda dos veces. Por favor tome unos minutos para completar la encuesta adjunta; si usted preferiría completar la encuesta en español, por favor siga las instrucciones abajo para acceder a la encuesta en español por medio de la red. Su participación en esta encuesta es muy importante—especialmente porque su hogar es uno de solamente un número pequeño de hogares que se están encuestando. Sus observaciones le ayudarán a Pasco tomar decisiones que afectarán a nuestra ciudad. Algunas cosas para recordar: • Sus respuestas son confidenciales y no se compartirá ninguna información de identificación. • Para poder escuchar a un grupo diverso de residentes, el adulto de 18 años o más en su hogar que haya celebrado su cumpleaños más recientemente debe completar esta encuesta. • Puede devolver la encuesta en ingles por correo en el sobre pre-pagado adjunto, o puede completar la encuesta en línea en español en: https://polco.us/xxplaceholder Por favor no comparta el enlace de su encuesta. Esta encuesta es solamente para hogares seleccionados al azar. La Ciudad conducirá una encuesta separada que está abierta a todos los residentes dentro de unas semanas. Si tiene alguna pregunta sobre la encuesta, por favor llame al 509-543-5794. ¡Gracias por su tiempo y participación! Atentamente, Blanche Barajas Mayor/Alcalde 142Page 213 of 461 In which district of Pasco do you live? (Refer to map above.) District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 District 6 None of these/I don't live in Pasco Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. Pasco as a place to live Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know 9% N=13 10% N=14 20% N=28 19% N=27 19% N=26 11% N=15 12% N=17 8% N=11 36% N=52 40% N=58 15% N=22 Open Participation Survey Results This dashboard contains a complete set of responses to each question on the open participation survey. By default, "don't know" responses are excluded, but may be added to the table using the response filter to the right. In some tables, the percentages may not sum to 100%; this is either because the question permitted the respondent to "choose all that apply", or for a question that asked the respondent to select one answer, it is due to the customary practice of rounding values to the nearest whole number. Page 214 of 461 Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. Pasco as a place to live Poor Don't know Your neighborhood as a place to live Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Pasco as a place to raise children Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Pasco as a place to work Excellent Good Fair Poor 1% N=1 7% N=10 10% N=14 19% N=27 34% N=48 30% N=42 9% N=13 14% N=21 30% N=43 32% N=46 15% N=22 21% N=30 36% N=50 17% N=24 Page 215 of 461 Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. Pasco as a place to work Fair Poor Don't know Pasco as a place to visit Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Pasco as a place to retire Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know The overall quality of life Excellent Good Fair 17% N=24 9% N=13 1% N=1 27% N=39 46% N=67 22% N=32 4% N=6 16% N=23 27% N=39 21% N=29 29% N=41 8% N=11 40% N=56 10% N=14 Page 216 of 461 Please rate each of the following aspects of quality of life in Pasco. The overall quality of life Good Fair Poor Don't know Sense of community Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall economic health Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Overall quality of the transportation system Excellent Good 1% N=1 16% N=23 33% N=46 3% N=4 20% N=28 35% N=48 34% N=47 7% N=10 2% N=3 18% N=27 26% N=38 44% N=64 10% N=14 4% N=6 Page 217 of 461 Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall quality of the transportation system Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Overall design or layout of residential and commercial areas Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall quality of the utility infrastructure Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Overall feeling of safety Excellent Good 5% N=8 19% N=27 40% N=56 32% N=45 33% N=48 34% N=50 30% N=43 3% N=5 5% N=8 8% N=12 24% N=34 42% N=60 20% N=29 11% N=16 Page 218 of 461 Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall feeling of safety Excellent Good Fair Poor Overall quality of natural environment Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Overall health and wellness opportunities Excellent Good 22% N=32 20% N=29 47% N=69 0% N= 27% N=38 27% N=39 40% N=57 5% N=8 2% N=2 27% N=40 39% N=57 24% N=35 8% N=12 4% N=6 Page 219 of 461 Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Overall health and wellness opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Overall opportunities for education, culture, and the arts Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Residents' connection and engagement with their community Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Very likely 2% N=3 24% N=34 39% N=55 31% N=44 5% N=8 31% N=45 26% N=38 31% N=46 7% N=11 5% N=7 24% N=35 36% N=52 29% N=41 6% N=9 Page 220 of 461 Please rate each of thefollowingcharacteristics as they relate to Pasco as a whole. Residents' connection and engagement with their community Don't know Please indicate how likely or unlikely you are to do each of the following. Recommend living in Pasco to someone who asks Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Don't know Remain in Pasco for the next five years Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Don't know Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel: In your neighborhood during the day Very safe Somewhat safe Neither safe nor unsafe Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe 1% N=2 14% N=21 14% N=21 49% N=71 21% N=31 6% N=8 11% N=16 11% N=15 27% N=38 45% N=63 12% N=17 9% N=13 15% N=22 59% N=87 Page 221 of 461 Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel: In your neighborhood during the day Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe Don't know In Pasco's downtown/commercial area during the day Very safe Somewhat safe Neither safe nor unsafe Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe Don't know From property crime Very safe Somewhat safe Neither safe nor unsafe Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe Don't know Very safe 4% N=5 1% N=2 5% N=7 15% N=22 21% N=31 9% N=14 33% N=48 17% N=25 3% N=4 15% N=21 15% N=21 21% N=31 34% N=50 12% N=17 Page 222 of 461 Please rate how safe or unsafe you feel: From property crime Don't know From violent crime Very safe Somewhat safe Neither safe nor unsafe Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe Don't know From fire, flood, or other natural disaster Very safe Somewhat safe Neither safe nor unsafe Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe Don't know Please rate the job you feel the Pasco community does at each of the following. Making all residents feel welcome Excellent Good Fair 3% N=4 7% N=10 23% N=33 13% N=19 32% N=45 22% N=32 1% N=1 1% N=1 7% N=9 9% N=13 27% N=38 56% N=80 37% N=54 17% N=26 Page 223 of 461 Please rate the job you feel the Pasco community does at each of the following. Making all residents feel welcome Good Fair Poor Don't know Attracting people from diverse backgrounds Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Valuing/respecting residents from diverse backgrounds Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Taking care of vulnerable residents Excellent Good 1% N=2 21% N=30 24% N=36 14% N=19 13% N=18 23% N=32 34% N=48 17% N=24 7% N=10 17% N=25 26% N=38 41% N=60 9% N=13 6% N=9 Page 224 of 461 Please rate the job you feel the Pasco community does at each of the following. Taking care of vulnerable residents Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Please rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Overall quality of business and service establishments Excellent Good Fair Poor Variety of business and service establishments Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area Excellent Good 14% N=20 41% N=59 22% N=32 18% N=25 24% N=35 30% N=44 38% N=56 8% N=11 1% N=1 36% N=51 34% N=48 19% N=27 11% N=16 4% N=5 Page 225 of 461 Please rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Employment opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Shopping opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Cost of living Excellent Good 0% N= 50% N=73 25% N=37 21% N=31 16% N=23 18% N=25 21% N=30 33% N=48 12% N=17 44% N=64 34% N=50 22% N=32 0% N=1 4% N=6 Page 226 of 461 Please rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Cost of living Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Overall image or reputation Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Traffic flow on major streets Excellent Good Fair Poor Ease of public parking Excellent Good 4% N=5 22% N=31 44% N=63 26% N=37 4% N=6 34% N=50 30% N=44 25% N=36 7% N=11 46% N=67 24% N=35 22% N=32 9% N=13 20% N=29 Page 227 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Ease of public parking Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Ease of travel by car Excellent Good Fair Poor Ease of travel by public transportation Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Ease of travel by bicycle Excellent Good 0% N= 20% N=29 21% N=31 38% N=56 7% N=10 34% N=48 32% N=45 26% N=37 35% N=51 18% N=27 22% N=33 20% N=29 4% N=6 1% N=1 Page 228 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Ease of travel by bicycle Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Ease of walking Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Well-planned residential growth Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Good 36% N=51 30% N=43 15% N=21 19% N=27 21% N=31 31% N=45 18% N=26 23% N=33 7% N=10 5% N=6 39% N=54 25% N=34 31% N=43 1% N=1 Page 229 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Well-planned residential growth Don't know Well-planned commercial growth Good Fair Poor Don't know Well-designed neighborhoods Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Preservation of the historical or cultural character of the community Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Excellent 3% N=5 44% N=64 27% N=39 26% N=38 1% N=1 28% N=40 36% N=52 34% N=48 1% N=1 21% N=31 18% N=27 26% N=38 34% N=50 0% N=1 Page 230 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Preservation of the historical or cultural character of the community Don't know Public places where people want to spend time Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Variety of housing options Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Availability of affordable quality housing Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know 0% N= 40% N=56 44% N=63 12% N=17 4% N=6 9% N=12 30% N=42 32% N=45 28% N=39 2% N=2 51% N=73 27% N=38 12% N=18 1% N=1 Page 231 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Availability of affordable quality housing Poor Don't know Overall quality of new development Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Overall appearance Excellent Good Fair Poor Cleanliness Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know 9% N=13 11% N=17 19% N=28 28% N=41 36% N=53 5% N=7 22% N=31 47% N=67 20% N=29 11% N=15 21% N=31 32% N=47 39% N=58 8% N=11 Page 232 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Cleanliness Poor Don't know Water resources Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Air quality Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Availability of paths and walking trails Excellent Good Fair Poor 0% N= 4% N=5 26% N=37 24% N=34 40% N=57 6% N=9 1% N=1 7% N=10 27% N=38 47% N=68 19% N=27 33% N=48 25% N=37 13% N=20 Page 233 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Availability of paths and walking trails Fair Poor Don't know Fitness opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Recreational opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Availability of affordable quality food Excellent Good Fair 5% N=8 24% N=35 5% N=7 35% N=49 26% N=37 34% N=47 1% N=1 2% N=2 31% N=45 29% N=41 32% N=46 6% N=9 32% N=46 11% N=16 Page 234 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Availability of affordable quality food Good Fair Poor Don't know Availability of affordable quality health care Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Availability of preventive health services Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Availability of affordable quality mental health care Excellent Good 0% N= 15% N=22 42% N=61 8% N=12 27% N=39 35% N=50 22% N=32 7% N=10 10% N=14 33% N=49 25% N=37 24% N=36 7% N=10 1% N=1 Page 235 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Availability of affordable quality mental health care Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Community support for the arts Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Excellent 32% N=46 37% N=52 27% N=38 4% N=6 8% N=11 32% N=45 44% N=62 11% N=16 5% N=8 20% N=28 22% N=31 44% N=63 7% N=10 7% N=10 Page 236 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Community support for the arts Don't know Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know K-12 education Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Adult educational opportunities Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know 47% N=68 29% N=42 15% N=22 8% N=11 0% N=1 22% N=31 15% N=21 23% N=31 27% N=37 13% N=17 18% N=27 26% N=38 21% N=31 6% N=9 Page 237 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Adult educational opportunities Poor Don't know Sense of civic/community pride Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Neighborliness of residents Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Opportunities to participate in social events and activities Excellent Good Fair Poor 29% N=42 10% N=14 10% N=14 36% N=50 39% N=54 4% N=6 8% N=12 19% N=27 43% N=62 22% N=31 9% N=13 23% N=33 38% N=56 4% N=5 Page 238 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Opportunities to participate in social events and activities Fair Poor Don't know Opportunities to attend special events and festivals Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Opportunities to volunteer Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Opportunities to participate in community matters Excellent Good Fair 11% N=15 25% N=37 4% N=5 23% N=32 25% N=36 44% N=61 4% N=6 21% N=32 16% N=23 27% N=40 31% N=46 4% N=6 30% N=42 4% N=6 Page 239 of 461 Please also rate each of the following in the Pasco community. Opportunities to participate in community matters Good Fair Poor Don't know Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. Contacted the City of Pasco for help or information No Yes Contacted Pasco elected officials to express your opinion No Yes Attended a local public meeting No Yes No 17% N=24 22% N=31 27% N=39 10% N=15 20% N=29 32% N=47 32% N=46 6% N=9 52% N=77 48% N=69 26% N=38 74% N=109 34% N=51 66% N=96 Page 240 of 461 Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. Attended a local public meeting Yes Watched a local public meeting No Yes Volunteered your time to some group/activity No Yes Campaigned or advocated for a local issue, cause, or candidate No Yes Voted in your most recent local election No Yes Used public transportation instead of driving No Yes Carpooled with other adults or children instead of driving alone No Yes Walked or biked instead of driving No Yes Excellent 60% N=88 40% N=59 46% N=68 54% N=79 28% N=41 72% N=106 75% N=111 25% N=36 22% N=32 78% N=115 47% N=68 53% N=79 48% N=70 52% N=77 Page 241 of 461 Please indicatewhether or not youhave done each of the following in the last 12 months.Walked or biked instead of driving Yes Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Public information services Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Economic development Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Traffic enforcement Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know 9% N=13 19% N=29 19% N=28 48% N=71 4% N=6 6% N=8 20% N=29 32% N=46 31% N=44 11% N=16 29% N=41 26% N=37 30% N=43 7% N=10 Page 242 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Traffic enforcement Poor Don't know Traffic signal timing Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Street repair Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Street cleaning Excellent Good Fair Poor 8% N=12 0% N= 27% N=39 31% N=44 35% N=50 7% N=10 3% N=5 20% N=29 28% N=41 45% N=67 4% N=5 31% N=46 36% N=53 13% N=18 Page 243 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Street cleaning Fair Poor Don't know Street lighting Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Snow removal Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Sidewalk maintenance Excellent Good Fair 5% N=7 15% N=22 1% N=2 18% N=27 29% N=43 43% N=63 8% N=12 9% N=13 19% N=28 35% N=51 34% N=50 4% N=5 26% N=37 10% N=15 Page 244 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Sidewalk maintenance Good Fair Poor Don't know Bus or transit services Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Land use, planning and zoning Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Code enforcement Excellent Good 11% N=16 15% N=21 38% N=56 31% N=44 10% N=14 29% N=42 30% N=43 1% N=1 16% N=23 34% N=50 28% N=41 18% N=26 4% N=6 4% N=5 Page 245 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Code enforcement Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Affordable high-speed internet access Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Garbage collection Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Excellent 12% N=16 17% N=23 27% N=37 41% N=56 13% N=18 30% N=43 12% N=17 40% N=58 6% N=9 7% N=10 4% N=6 10% N=14 43% N=62 36% N=52 Page 246 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Garbage collection Don't know Drinking water Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Sewer services Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Storm water management Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know 4% N=6 14% N=19 16% N=22 40% N=56 26% N=36 11% N=15 2% N=2 17% N=24 45% N=63 25% N=36 13% N=19 17% N=25 39% N=58 16% N=23 Page 247 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Storm water management Poor Don't know Power (electric and/or gas) utility Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Utility billing Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Police/Sheriff services Excellent Good Fair Poor 15% N=22 4% N=6 7% N=10 10% N=14 59% N=85 20% N=28 11% N=16 16% N=24 7% N=11 44% N=64 22% N=32 23% N=33 28% N=39 29% N=41 Page 248 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Police/Sheriff services Fair Poor Don't know Crime prevention Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Animal control Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Ambulance or emergency medical services Excellent Good Fair 16% N=23 5% N=7 11% N=16 18% N=26 18% N=25 42% N=59 11% N=15 17% N=24 25% N=36 23% N=33 28% N=40 6% N=9 32% N=46 27% N=39 Page 249 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Ambulance or emergency medical services Good Fair Poor Don't know Fire services Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Fire prevention and education Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Emergency preparedness Excellent Good 19% N=27 4% N=6 19% N=27 6% N=9 0% N= 18% N=25 36% N=50 39% N=54 17% N=25 15% N=22 14% N=21 24% N=35 30% N=43 5% N=7 Page 250 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Emergency preparedness Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Preservation of natural areas Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Pasco open space Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Excellent 27% N=37 16% N=22 24% N=33 27% N=37 22% N=31 19% N=27 27% N=39 32% N=46 1% N=1 20% N=28 22% N=31 31% N=45 23% N=33 4% N=5 Page 251 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Pasco open space Don't know Recycling Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Yard waste pick-up Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know City parks Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know 16% N=23 63% N=91 10% N=15 6% N=8 5% N=8 22% N=31 27% N=38 16% N=23 28% N=39 7% N=9 15% N=22 36% N=53 34% N=51 12% N=18 Page 252 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. City parks Poor Don't know Recreation programs or classes Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Recreation centers or facilities Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Health services Excellent Good Fair Poor 2% N=3 22% N=32 21% N=31 27% N=39 22% N=31 8% N=11 25% N=36 26% N=37 30% N=42 19% N=27 0% N= 28% N=40 27% N=39 4% N=6 Page 253 of 461 Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Pasco. Health services Fair Poor Don't know Public library services Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Overall customer service by Pasco employees Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Please rate the following categories of Pasco government performance. The value of services for the taxes paid to Pasco Excellent Good Fair 17% N=24 23% N=33 23% N=34 5% N=8 11% N=15 28% N=41 32% N=47 2% N=3 16% N=23 25% N=37 33% N=49 24% N=35 31% N=45 9% N=13 Page 254 of 461 Please rate the following categories of Pasco government performance. The value of services for the taxes paid to Pasco Good Fair Poor Don't know The overall direction that Pasco is taking Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know The job Pasco government does at welcoming resident involvement Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Overall confidence in Pasco government Excellent Good 8% N=11 27% N=40 25% N=36 3% N=4 25% N=37 22% N=32 35% N=51 16% N=23 14% N=20 25% N=35 30% N=43 23% N=33 8% N=12 11% N=16 Page 255 of 461 Please rate the following categories of Pasco government performance. Overall confidence in Pasco government Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Generally acting in the best interest of the community Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Being honest Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Excellent 3% N=4 27% N=39 22% N=31 37% N=54 3% N=4 26% N=37 36% N=51 24% N=35 11% N=16 6% N=9 22% N=32 35% N=52 26% N=38 12% N=17 Page 256 of 461 Please rate the following categories of Pasco government performance. Being honest Don't know Being open and transparent to the public Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Informing residents about issues facing the community Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Treating all residents fairly Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know 5% N=7 29% N=42 28% N=41 29% N=42 8% N=12 7% N=11 26% N=39 31% N=46 27% N=39 8% N=12 20% N=27 34% N=47 20% N=28 17% N=24 Page 257 of 461 Please rate the following categories of Pasco government performance. Treating all residents fairly Poor Don't know Treating residents with respect Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? The City of Pasco Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know The Federal Government Excellent Good Fair Poor 9% N=13 8% N=12 20% N=29 29% N=42 26% N=38 17% N=25 1% N=2 13% N=18 27% N=38 44% N=62 15% N=22 44% N=63 22% N=31 4% N=6 Page 258 of 461 Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? The Federal Government Fair Poor Don't know Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall economic health Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Overall quality of the transportation system Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Overall design or layout of residential and commercial areas Essential Very important Somewhat important Overall quality of the utility infrastructure Essential Very important 8% N=11 22% N=32 3% N=4 14% N=20 38% N=56 45% N=66 4% N=5 25% N=36 29% N=43 42% N=61 7% N=10 49% N=71 44% N=65 43% N=64 Page 259 of 461 Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall quality of the utility infrastructure Essential Very important Somewhat important Overall feeling of safety Essential Very important Somewhat important Overall quality of natural environment Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Overall quality of parks and recreation opportunities Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Overall health and wellness opportunities Essential Very important 11% N=17 45% N=66 11% N=17 35% N=51 54% N=78 2% N=3 17% N=25 52% N=76 29% N=42 2% N=3 11% N=16 46% N=66 41% N=60 34% N=48 Page 260 of 461 Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Pasco community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Overall health and wellness opportunities Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Overall opportunities for education, culture, and the arts Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Residents' connection and engagement with their community Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Please indicate how important, if at all, each of the following are for your local community to implement to help address homelessness. Providing emergency shelter Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important 0% N= 20% N=29 45% N=64 8% N=11 23% N=33 35% N=51 34% N=50 5% N=7 26% N=38 40% N=58 29% N=43 16% N=21 41% N=55 34% N=45 Page 261 of 461 Please indicate how important, if at all, each of the following are for your local community to implement to help address homelessness. Providing emergency shelter Somewhat important Not at all important Creating affordable, permanent housing Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Enforcing "no camping" ordinances Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Providing access to health care, behavioral health, and substance abuse treatment Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important Helping fund organizations that provide services to people experiencing homelessness in our community Essential Very important 10% N=13 11% N=15 11% N=16 31% N=44 47% N=66 14% N=21 19% N=28 25% N=36 42% N=62 4% N=5 22% N=32 16% N=23 58% N=81 47% N=66 Page 262 of 461 Please indicate how important, if at all, each of the following are for your local community to implement to help address homelessness. Helping fund organizations that provide services to people experiencing homelessness in our community Essential Very important Somewhat important Not at all important How much of a source, if at all, do you consider each of the following to be for obtaining information about Pasco? Traditional media outlets (newspapers such as the Tri-City Herald or local netwrok TV) Major source Minor source Not a source Notify Me® email subscription Major source Minor source Not a source City website (www.pasco-wa.gov)Major source Minor source Not a source Facebook Major source Minor source Not a source 7% N=10 15% N=21 31% N=43 15% N=22 44% N=64 40% N=58 49% N=71 40% N=58 12% N=17 10% N=15 53% N=76 36% N=52 19% N=27 54% N=79 Page 263 of 461 How much of a source, if at all, do you consider each of the following to be for obtaining information about Pasco? Facebook Minor source Not a source Instagram Major source Minor source Not a source YouTube Major source Minor source Not a source X (formerly Twitter)Major source Minor source Not a source Nextdoor Major source Minor source Not a source WhatsApp Major source Minor source 27% N=39 52% N=76 27% N=39 21% N=31 51% N=74 37% N=54 12% N=18 76% N=108 18% N=25 6% N=8 62% N=89 30% N=43 8% N=12 4% N=5 Page 264 of 461 How much of a source, if at all, do you consider each of the following to be for obtaining information about Pasco? WhatsApp Major source Minor source Not a source Radio Major source Minor source Not a source In general, how many times do you: Access the internet from your home Several times a day Once a day A few times a week Every few weeks Less often or never Access the internet from your cell phone Several times a day Once a day A few times a week Every few weeks Less often or never 75% N=106 22% N=31 29% N=42 31% N=45 40% N=59 4% N=6 4% N=6 8% N=12 6% N=9 77% N=112 3% N=4 0% N= 15% N=21 82% N=120 Page 265 of 461 In general, how many times do you: Access the internet from your cell phone Every few weeks Less often or never Visit social media sites Several times a day Once a day A few times a week Every few weeks Less often or never Use or check email Several times a day Once a day A few times a week Every few weeks Less often or never Share your opinions online Several times a day Once a day A few times a week Every few weeks 1% N=1 15% N=21 1% N=1 4% N=7 16% N=23 65% N=94 0% N= 1% N=1 3% N=4 33% N=47 63% N=89 18% N=26 8% N=11 8% N=11 Page 266 of 461 In general, how many times do you: Share your opinions online A few times a week Every few weeks Less often or never Don't know Shop online Several times a day Once a day A few times a week Every few weeks Less often or never Don't know Please rate your overall health.Excellent Very good Good Fair What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be: Very positive Somewhat positive 1% N=2 44% N=64 21% N=31 0% N= 16% N=22 23% N=32 44% N=61 8% N=11 8% N=11 7% N=9 26% N=36 46% N=64 21% N=29 7% N=11 Page 267 of 461 What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be: Very positive Somewhat positive Neutral Somewhat negative Very negative How many years have you lived in Pasco? Less than 2 years 2-5 years 6-10 years 11-20 years More than 20 years Which best describes the building you live in? Single-family detached home Townhouse or duplex (may share walls but no units above or below you) Condominium or apartment (have units above or below you) Mobile home Other Rent 7% N=11 32% N=47 26% N=37 28% N=40 40% N=55 16% N=22 14% N=19 17% N=23 13% N=18 5% N=7 4% N=5 7% N=10 14% N=20 71% N=103 Page 268 of 461 Which best describes the building you live in?Other Do you rent or own your home?Rent Own About how much is your monthly housing cost for the place you live (including rent, mortgage payment, property tax, property insurance and homeowners' association (HOA) fees)? Less than $300 $300 to $599 $600 to $999 $1,000 to $1,499 $1,500 to $2,499 $2,500 to $3,999 $4,000 to $6,999 $7,000 to $9,999 Do any children 17 or under live in your household? No Yes Are you or any other members of your household aged 65 or older? No Yes Less than $25,000 69% N=98 31% N=44 0% N= 2% N=3 17% N=25 47% N=68 12% N=18 17% N=25 3% N=5 1% N=1 46% N=67 54% N=77 30% N=43 70% N=100 Page 269 of 461 Are you or any other members of your household aged 65 or older?Yes How much do you anticipate your household's total income before taxes will be for the current year? (Please include in your total income money from all sources for all persons living in your household.) Less than $25,000 $25,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $74,999 $75,000 to $99,999 $100,000 to $149,999 $150,000 to $199,999 $200,000 to $299,999 $300,000 or more Are you of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin? No, not of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin Yes, I consider myself to be of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin What is your race? (Mark one or more races to indicate what race you consider yourself to be.) American Indian or Alaska Native Asian Black or African American White A race not listed 1% N=1 9% N=12 12% N=17 22% N=31 19% N=27 17% N=24 17% N=24 2% N=3 50% N=70 50% N=70 69% N=89 1% N=1 4% N=5 6% N=8 Page 270 of 461 What is your race? (Mark one or more races to indicate what race you consider yourself to be.) White A race not listed In which category is your age?18-24 years 25-34 years 35-44 years 45-54 years 55-64 years 65-74 years 75 years or older What is your gender?Woman Man How did you hear about this survey? (Select all that apply.) The City's website The City's social media (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc.) Received an email from the City In a City newsletter or utility bill In my Facebook feed 30% N=39 5% N=7 11% N=15 11% N=16 18% N=26 20% N=29 32% N=45 3% N=5 54% N=79 46% N=68 3% N=5 21% N=31 25% N=37 13% N=18 Page 271 of 461 How did you hear about this survey? (Select all that apply.) In a City newsletter or utility bill In my Facebook feed Saw it on a video of a public meeting or at a meeting I attended Saw it on the City's cable channel Saw it in a newspaper article or ad (hard copy or online) Saw a flyer or poster about it Heard about it from a family member, friend or neighbor Heard about it from a business or social organization in my community Polco social media post Other 10% N=15 1% N=1 1% N=1 9% N=14 7% N=10 5% N=7 4% N=6 2% N=3 22% N=32 Page 272 of 461 Pasco City Council Meeting February 20, 2024 Pa g e 2 7 3 o f 4 6 1 National Community Survey •Gathers feedback and opinions from residents about various aspects of our community •Survey is beneficial for several reasons •Inform decision making – data can be used to make informed decisions, understand residents' priorities •Benchmarking and comparison – performance against 500+ communities •Trend analysis – tracks perceptions & satisfaction levels, enable proactive measures to concerns or maintain positive trends •Community engagement – opportunity for residents to voice their opinions & concerns as part of the decision-making process •Evidence-based Planning – used for grant/funding applications Pa g e 2 7 4 o f 4 6 1 National Community Survey •Measures ten community facets 1.Economy 2.Mobility 3.Community Design 4.Utilities 5.Safety 6.Natural Environment 7.Parks & Recreation 8.Health & Wellness 9.Education, Arts & Culture 10.Inclusivity & Engagement Pa g e 2 7 5 o f 4 6 1 2023 Survey •3,000 surveys sent out •310 survey completed, 10% response w/6% margin of error •50% of respondents consider themselves of Hispanic, Latino/a/x, or Spanish origin •Results showed steady trends, returning to historical levels •Police & crime prevention •Fire services & ambulance/emergency medical services •Increase •Satisfaction in City customer service (+11%) Pa g e 2 7 6 o f 4 6 1 2023 Survey •Custom questions •Communication sources for Pasco information •Main sources: traditional media (Tri-City Herald, news), City website, Facebook & Radio •Importance of local community addressing homelessness, responses that the following areas are essential or very important •72% - Providing emergency shelter •75% - Creating affordable, permanent housing •76% - Enforcing “no camping” ordinances Pa g e 2 7 7 o f 4 6 1 2023 Survey •Open participation option •Provides additional opportunity to provide input •Responses helpful, results can be swayed by small % •144 respondents •16 from outside of PascoPa g e 2 7 8 o f 4 6 1 Questions? Pa g e 2 7 9 o f 4 6 1 Pasco City Council Meeting February 20, 2024 Pa g e 2 8 0 o f 4 6 1 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 13, 2024 TO: Adam Lincoln, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/20/24 FROM: Jacob Gonzalez, Director Community & Economic Development SUBJECT: *Q Ordinance No. 4705 - Kelly Rezone from RS-12 to R-1 (Z 2023-009) I. REFERENCE(S): Ordinance Exhibit A - Hearing Examiner Recommendation Exhibit B - Map Report to Hearing Examiner Dated: December 10, 2023 PowerPoint Presentation II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: MOTION: zoning the amending 4705, No. move adopt to I Ordinance classification of certain real property located on the Westside of Road 76, between Ter Ray Court and Queen Bee Court, Pasco, Franklin County, Washington, to (Low-Density Suburban) R-1 RS-12 from (residential Residential), and further, authorize publication by summary only. III. FISCAL IMPACT: None IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: On December 10, 2023, the Hearing Examiner held a public hearing to consider & 118461013 Nos. Parcels at rezone to request a property 118431055 located along the west side of Road 76, Pasco, Franklin County, Washington, (Low-Density from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 Residential). Following the conduct of the public hearing, the Hearing Examiner recommended approval of the applicant's request for a rezone. Page 281 of 461 No appeals of this recommendation have been received. V. DISCUSSION: The applicant, Jeff Kelly has submitted a request to rezone the property located at Parcels Nos. 118461013 & 118431055 from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential) to facilitate residential development on the site. The property currently hosts a single family dwelling unit, constructed around 2007. Review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in the Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) Section 25.210.030. The criteria can be summarized as: 1. The date the existing zone became effective: The site was assigned RS-12 zoning in 2009 via Ordinance No. 3924. 2. The changed conditions, which are alleged to warrant other or additional zoning: On January 24, 2022, Council approved Ordinance No. 4575, amending the Zoning Code, including the PMC Chapter 25.45 relating to the R-1 zoning district. The approved ordinance changed the purpose of the R-1 zone found in the PMC Section 25.45.010 as follows: "The R-1 low density residential district is established to provide a low to medium density residential environment compliant with the Comprehensive Plan land use density table in the PMC Section 25.215.015. Certain public facilities and institutions may also be permitted, provided their nature and location are not detrimental to the intended low to medium density residential environment". 3. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: The Low Density Residential designation allows for RS-20, RS-12, RS-1, R-1, R-1-A, and R-1-A2 zoning; development with a higher density of dwelling units per acre will help reduce urban sprawl and increase home ownership. The rezone application and proposal are consistent with the Council approved amendments to the Pasco Comprehensive Plan, which has been determined to be in the best interest of advancing public health, safety and general welfare of the community. 4. The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property and the Comprehensive Plan: Page 282 of 461 A change in zoning would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use of Low Density Residential. 5. The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted: The applicant has stated that development costs are high and without the rezone the cost per lot may prohibit development. 6. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property: The City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Low Density Residential which allows for both the RS-12 and R-1 zoning and requires a density of 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre for both zoning designations. 7. Such other information the Hearing Examiner requires: The rezone application is consistent with and meets the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and City Council Goals. Full descriptions and details can be found in the attached "Exhibit A". Recommendation--Hearing Examiner: As noted in the attached "Exhibit A," the Hearing Examiner has found that the proposed rezone meets the criteria found in the PMC Section 25.210.060, and recommended, based on the Recommended Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, that the City Council approve the rezone from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential), without a concomitant agreement. Staff concurs with the Hearing Examiner's recommendation, that Parcels Nos. 118461013 & 118431055, in Pasco WA., be rezoned from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential). Page 283 of 461 Ordinance – Kelly Rezone Z 2023-009 - 1 FILED FOR RECORD AT REQUEST OF: City of Pasco, Washington WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City of Pasco, Washington Attn: City Clerk 525 North 3rd Avenue Pasco, WA 99301 ____________________________________________________________________________ ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1802 ROAD 76, PASCO, FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON, FROM RS-12 (RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN) TO R-1 (LOW- DENSITY RESIDENTIAL). WHEREAS, the Petitioner, Jeff Kelly, seeks to rezone Parcel Nos. 118461013 and 118431055, located at 1802 Road 76, Pasco, Washington; and WHEREAS, a complete and adequate petition for change of zoning classification meeting the requirements of Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) Section 25.210.030 was received by the City of Pasco (City) and, after notice was issued under PMC Section 25.210.040, an open record hearing was conducted by the Pasco Hearing Examiner upon such petition on December 13, 2023; and WHEREAS, based upon substantial evidence and demonstration of the Petitioner that: (a) the proposal is in accord with the goals and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan; (b) the effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity is not materially detrimental; (c) there is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole; (d) any impacts of the rezone application and anticipated development will be mitigated by the regulations and requirements of the Pasco Municipal Code and the City of Pasco Design and Constructions Standards; (e) a concomitant agreement is not required under these circumstances; and (f) the proposal is consistent with and satisfies all criteria in PMC Section 25.210.060; the Hearing Examiner has recommended to approve the rezone, which findings and recommendation are hereby adopted by the City Council, and the Hearing Examiner Report is hereby incorporated by reference as Exhibit A. Page 284 of 461 Ordinance – Kelly Rezone Z 2023-009 - 2 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the Zoning Ordinance for the City of Pasco, Washington, and the Zoning Map, accompanying and being part of said Ordinance shall be and hereby is changed from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low Density Residential) for the real property as shown in the Exhibit B attached hereto and described as follows: Parcel 118461013: N2NE4SE4SW4, LESS E 30' FOR 21-9-29 FOR RD 76 (270292) Parcel 118431055: PTN 21-9-29 DAF; S 130' OF W 110' OF SE4NE4SW4, EXC CO RDS Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this ordinance should be held to the invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality thereof shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, subsection, sentence, clause phrase or word of this ordinance. Section 3. Corrections. Upon approval by the city attorney, the city clerk or the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including scrivener’s errors or clerical mistakes; reference to other local, state, or federal laws, rules, or regulations; or numbering or referencing of ordinances or their sections and subsections. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take full force and effect five (5) days after approval, passage and publication as required by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, on this ___ day of __________________, 2024. _____________________________ Pete Serrano Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ ___________________________ Debra Barham, CMC Kerr Ferguson Law, PLLC City Clerk City Attorneys Published: _____________________________ Page 285 of 461 EXHIBIT A Page 286 of 461 Page 287 of 461 Page 288 of 461 Page 289 of 461 Page 290 of 461 0 230 450 680 900110 Feet "Exhibit B" R‐1 Item: Kelly RS-12 to R-1 Rezone Applicant(s): Jeff Kelly File #: Z 2023-009 m Pa g e 2 9 1 o f 4 6 1 REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Remote WEDNESDAY, 08 November 2023 6:00 PM 1 MASTER FILE #: Z 2023-009 APPLICANT: Jeff Kelly 1802 Road 76 Pasco, WA 99301 REQUEST: REZONE: 1802 Road 76 and Parcel #118-431-055 Rezone from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential) BACKGROUND 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: Parcel 1: N2NE4SE4SW4, LESS E 30' FOR 21-9-29 FOR RD 76 (270292); 1802 Road 76 (Parcel 118- 461-013) Parcel 2: PTN 21-9-29 DAF; S 130' OF W 110' OF SE4NE4SW4, EXC CO RDS; (Parcel 118-431-055) General Location: 1802 Road 76; eastern side of Road 76 approximately 1000 feet from the intersection of W Court Street and Road 76. Property Size: Parcel 1 (Parcel 118-461-013): 4.82 Acres Parcel 2 (Parcel 118-431-055): 0.33 Acres Total: 5.15 Acres 2. ACCESS: 1802 Road 76 (Parcel 118-461-013) has access via Road 76, Parcel 118-431-055 is does not have direct access to public right-of-way and must be accessed via neighboring properties. 3. UTILITIES: Municipal water is available in Road 76, municipal sewer is located approximately 800 feet to the south in Road 76. A lift station may be required to extend sewer to the property. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned RS-12 (Residential Suburban) and is developed with a single family dwelling unit and various accessory structures. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: RS-20 COUNTY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING EAST: RS-12 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING SOUTH: RS-12 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING WEST: RS-12 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING 5. Comprehensive Plan: The City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan designates this site as “Low Density Residential.” The Low-Density Residential designation is described as a variety of residential housing at a density of 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre, and may be assigned RS-20, RS-12, RS-1, R- 1, R-1-A, and R-1-A2 designations. Per PMC 25.215.015 maximum gross density of any proposed Page 292 of 461 2 development within any zoning district, expressed as dwelling units per acre, shall be no less than the corresponding minimum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, and no greater than the corresponding maximum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, except as provided in Chapter 25.161 PMC. Housing Goal H-1 requires the City to encourage housing for all economic segments of the city’s population consistent with the local and regional market; Housing Policy H-1-A further details that the City should allow for a full range of housing including single family homes, townhouses, condominiums, apartments, and manufactured housing, accessory dwelling units, zero lot line, planned unit developments etc. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the State Environmental Policy Act (“SEPA”) checklist, Comprehensive Plan, applicable regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for this project was issued on 4 December 2023, under WAC 197-11-158. ANALYSIS Request Applicant Jeff Kelly wishes to rezone Parcels 118-461-013 and 118-431-055, located on the eastern side of Road 76 approximately 1000 feet from the intersection of W Court Street and Road 76 in Pasco, WA 99301 from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential). The sites comprise approximately 5.15 acres (approximately 224,334 square feet). The underlying Land Use Code is “Low Density Residential,” which specifies 3 to 6 dwelling units (DU) per acre. Staff would like to note that the proposed rezone does not include a project action. It is anticipated that should the rezone be approved a subsequent subdivision project may be submitted for review. This review would include requirements for the impacts it has on the level of service for parks, transportation, etc. Any subsequent subdivision proposals would additionally be required to adhere to Pasco Municipal Code, including provisions such as connectivity and residential design standards. History The site was annexed into the City via Ordinance 3920 and subsequently assigned the RS-12 (Residential Suburban) zoning designation via Ordinance 3924. The site is developed with a single family dwelling unit that was constructed on or around 2007. Per the Franklin County Assessor’s records various shops, sheds, and Quonsets have been constructed on site, staff was unable to find information relating the dates of construction for the accessory buildings. Rezone Criteria The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC. 25.210.030. The criteria are listed below as follows: 1. The date the existing zone became effective: The site was assigned RS-12 zoning in 2009 via Ordinance 3924. 2. The changed conditions, which are alleged to warrant other or additional zoning: In 2009 the site was annexed into the City and given the Low-Density Residential designation, and has remained so since. Page 293 of 461 3 On January 24, 2022 Council approved Ordinance 4575, amending the Zoning code, including Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) 25.45 relating to the R-1 zoning district. The approved ordinance changed the purpose of the R-1 zone found in PMC 25.45.010, as follows: “The R-1 low density residential district is established to provide a low to medium density residential environment compliant with the Comprehensive Plan land use density table in PMC 25.215.015. Certain public facilities and institutions may also be permitted, provided their nature and location are not detrimental to the intended low to medium density residential environment,”. As well, PMC 25.45.020 added zero-lot line dwellings, multiple dwellings, duplexes, triplexes, and courtyard apartments to the mix of allowed uses in the R-1 zoning district. The density requirement in PMC 25.45.050 was also amended to eliminate the one-unit-per-lot development restriction. 3. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: The Low Density Residential designation allows for RS-20, RS-12, RS-1, R-1, R-1-A, and R-1-A2 zoning; development with a higher density of dwelling units per acre will help reduce urban sprawl and increase home ownership. Per PMC 25.215.015 maximum gross density of any proposed development within any zoning district, expressed as dwelling units per acre, shall be no less than the corresponding minimum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, and no greater than the corresponding maximum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, except as provided in Chapter 25.161 PMC The rezone application and proposal are consistent with the Council-approved amendments to the Pasco Comprehensive Plan, which has been determined to be in the best interest of advancing public health, safety and general welfare of the community. 4. The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property and the Comprehensive Plan: A change in zoning would be consistent with the comprehensive plan Land Use Map Low Density Residential designation for the site. Per Applicant, the new houses and associated improvements to the adjacent streets will be similar to the surrounding development and will have a positive impact to the value or character of the adjacent property. 5. The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted: Per Applicant, development costs are high and without the rezone the cost per lot may prohibit development. 6. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property: The City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan designates this site as “Low Density Residential.” The Low Density Residential designation provides a variety of residential housing at a density of 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre, and may be assigned RS-20, RS-12, RS-1, R-1, R-1-A, and R-1-A2 zoning. Per PMC 25.215.015 maximum gross density of any proposed development within any zoning district, expressed as dwelling units per acre, shall be no less than the corresponding minimum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, and no greater than the corresponding maximum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, except as provided in Chapter 25.161 PMC. 7. Such other information as the Hearing Examiner requires: The rezone application is consistent with and meets the intent of the Comprehensive Plan, and City Council Goals. Page 294 of 461 4 STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report. The Hearing Examiner may add additional findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. Public notice of this hearing was sent to property owners within 300 feet of the property and posted in the Tri-City Herald on November 20th, 2023. 2. Applicant wishes to rezone 1802 Road 76 (Parcel 118461013) and Parcel 118431055 from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential). 3. The sites comprise approximately 5.15 acres (approximately 224,334 square feet). 4. The underlying Land Use code specifies 3 to 6 dwelling units (DU) per acre. 5. The site was assigned RS-12 zoning in 2009 via Ordinance 3924. 6. The City’s 2018-2038 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the site as “Low Density Residential”. 7. The “Low Density Residential” designation may be developed with a variety of residential housing including single family dwellings, zero lot line dwellings, multiple dwellings, duplexes, triplexes, and courtyard apartments. 8. 1802 Road 76 (Parcel 118461013) is developed with a single family dwelling and multiple accessory structures. TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a rezone, the Hearing Examiner must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusions based upon the criteria listed in PMC 25.210.060. The criteria are as follows: 1. The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the lot “Low Density Residential.” A change in zoning would be consistent with the comprehensive plan Land Use Map designation for the site. According to the table in Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) 25.215.015, the Low Density Residential classification is intended to provide a “variety of residential housing at a density of 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre,” and allows for RS-20, RS-12, RS-1, R-1, R-1-A and R-1-A2 zoning designations. A rezone could help to implement Policy H-1-A of the following policy from the Comprehensive Plan: “Allow for a full range of housing including single family homes, townhouses, condominiums, apartments, and manufactured housing, accessory dwelling units, zero lot line, planned unit developments etc.” 2. The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. This application for rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element and meets the intent of the Goals and Policies for the property. 3. There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. The proposed zoning designation is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and the Goals and Policies as adopted by the Pasco City Council. The proposal includes infill development and promotes the goals of the Low Density Residential Land Use Map Designation. 4. Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. The rezone application and anticipated project are subject to the regulations and requirements of the Pasco Municipal Code and the City of Pasco Design and Construction Standards. As such, no conditions Page 295 of 461 5 should be imposed; any future development will be evaluated for significant adverse impacts at the time of a development application, which will also be subject to review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). 5. A Concomitant Agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. No Concomitant Agreement is considered necessary for this application. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions herein, that 1802 Road 76 (Parcel 118461013) and Parcel 118431055 in Pasco WA., be rezoned from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential). Page 296 of 461 C O L U M B I A R I V E R C O L U M B I A R I V E R 0 850 1,700 2,600 3,400430 Feet Overview Map SITE Item: Kelly RS-12 to R-1 Rezone Applicant(s): Jeff Kelly File #: Z 2023-009 ± Pa g e 2 9 7 o f 4 6 1 0 230 450 680 900110 Feet Vicinity Map SITE Item: Kelly RS-12 to R-1 Rezone Applicant(s): Jeff Kelly File #: Z 2023-009 ± Pa g e 2 9 8 o f 4 6 1 SFDUs SFDUs SFDUs SFDUs SFDUs SFDUs SFDUs SFDUsSFDUs SFDUs SFDUs SFDUs SFDUs SFDUs SFDUs SFDUs SFDUs SFDUs Residential Other Residential Other Residential Other Residential Other Residential Other Residential Other Residential Other Residential Other 72 - Recreational - Public assembly 72 - Recreational - Public assembly Undeveloped Undeveloped Undeveloped Undeveloped Undeveloped Undeveloped Undeveloped 0 230 450 680 900110 Feet Land Use Map SITE Item: Kelly RS-12 to R-1 Rezone Applicant(s): Jeff Kelly File #: Z 2023-009 ± Pa g e 2 9 9 o f 4 6 1 R-S-20 R-S-12 0 230 450 680 900110 Feet Zoning Map SITE Item: Kelly RS-12 to R-1 Rezone Applicant(s): Jeff Kelly File #: Z 2023-009 ± Pa g e 3 0 0 o f 4 6 1 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Low Density Residential 0 230 450 680 900110 Feet Comp Plan Map SITE Item: Kelly RS-12 to R-1 Rezone Applicant(s): Jeff Kelly File #: Z 2023-009 ± Pa g e 3 0 1 o f 4 6 1 0 230 450 680 900110 Feet "Exhibit B" R-1 Item: Kelly RS-12 to R-1 Rezone Applicant(s): Jeff Kelly File #: Z 2023-009 ± Pa g e 3 0 2 o f 4 6 1 Looking North Pa g e 3 0 3 o f 4 6 1 Looking Northeast Pa g e 3 0 4 o f 4 6 1 Looking East Pa g e 3 0 5 o f 4 6 1 Looking Southeast Pa g e 3 0 6 o f 4 6 1 Looking South Pa g e 3 0 7 o f 4 6 1 Looking Southwest Pa g e 3 0 8 o f 4 6 1 Looking West Pa g e 3 0 9 o f 4 6 1 Looking Northwest Pa g e 3 1 0 o f 4 6 1 Affidavit of Mailing In regards to MF# 22023-009 I, Carmen Patrick, hereby confirm that notification was sent by mail November 20, 2023 to the owners of the parcels within 300 feet of the proposed site . The attached Notification List and Notice of Public Hearing are to be used as a reference as to what was sent and to whom received the notification . Given under my hand and official signature this 20th day, November of 2023. Page 311 of 461 ' PifSco Community Development Department PO Box 293, 525 N 3rd Ave , Pasco, WA 99301 P: 509 .545.3441 / F: 509 .545.3499 CITY OF PASCO PUBLIC NOTICE Si necesita ayuda para entender este aviso o necesita mas informaci6n, par favor llame al Departamento de Desarrollo Comunitario y Econ6mico de la Ciudad de Pasco a 509-545-3441. A public hearing with the Hearing Examiner will be held on December 13, 2023 at 6:00 pm Place: Council Chambers in Pasco City Hall at 525 N 3rd Avenue in Pasco, Washington . Proposal: Jeff Kelly ha s submitted a Rezone application (Z 2023-009} from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential) for two parcels sized 4.82 acres and 0.33 acres . The parcels are located 1802 Road 76 (Franklin County Assessor Parcel Nos: 118461013 & 118431055) in Pasco, WA 99301 . The proposal is subject to regulations contained in the Pasco Municipal Code . Future site-specific development applications will be subject to SEPA environmental review and code requirements . Impact fees will apply . Public Comment Period: Written comments must be submitted to the Community Development Department by 5:00 p.m. on December 13, 2023, to be included in the Hearing Examiner packet . If you have questions on the proposal, contact the Planning Division at (509) 545-3441 or via e-mail to: hatto ria@pa sco -wa .gov . If you wish to participate in the hearing virtually, please register at least 2 hours prior to the meeting at the following registration link: www.pasco-wa.gov/publiccomment After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar. Estimated Date of the Decision: It is estimated that the Hearing Examiner will make a recommendation on the rezone within ten {10) days of the public hearing. Prepared 20 November 2023 by: Andrew Hattori, Planner II , PO Box 293 Pasco , WA 99301 (509) 545-3441 The City of Pas co welcomes full participation in public meetings by all citizens . No qualified individual with a disability shall be exc luded or denied the benefit of participating in such meeting s. If you wish to use au xiliary aids or require assistance to comment at thi s public meeting , pleas e contact the Commun ity Developmen t Departmen t at (509 ) 545-3441 or TDD (509 ) 585-4425 at least ten days prior to the date of the meeting to make arrangements for special needs . Page 1 of 2 Page 312 of 461 Item: Kelly RS-12 to R-1 Rezo11e "Exhibit B" Applicant(s): Jeff Kelly File#: Z 2023-009 Ft!t!l :~ .. ~ ;,_ . . . . --. > <N .. : l) ,~ A . . - ·. 1 ... : ·,. -.-• •· :N '+- 0 N (IJ . 0.0 Ill 0.. - Pa g e 3 1 3 o f 4 6 1 NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP JEFF & JENNIFER KELLY 1802 ROAD 76 PASCO WA 99301 KARL WALTERSKIRCHEN 2004 N ROAD 76 PASCO WA 99301 SKYLER & KELSIE KENOYER 1920 ROAD 76 PASCO WA 99301 RAMON VERA (ETUX) 2003 ROAD 80 PASCO WA 99301 DANIEL & SANDRA AND ERSO N 1919 N ROAD 80 PASCO WA 99301 DUSTIN R & BRITN I R BLUNDON 1921 N ROAD 80 PASCO WA 99301 JEFF & JENNIFER KELLY 1006 CHRISTOPHER LN PASCO WA 99301 GREG T & JILL MALLEN 1706 N ROAD 76 PASCO WA 99301 BRADLEY & RACHAEL MICHEL 3814 W GRAND RONDE AVE KENNEWICK WA 99336 JOHN R & CHAREL LE A BOREY 7806 W AGATE CT PASCO WA 99301 JTN CONSTRUCTION LLC PO BOX 2586 PASCO WA 99301 SUE E & JOHN E RICHARDSON PO BOX 151 RICHLAND WA 99352 ABEL L & MELISSA D GONZALEZ 7805 AGATE CT PASCO WA 99301 WILLIAM L & NANCY W DAWKINS (T 1917 ROAD 76 PASCO WA 99301 DANIEL & ASHLEY MALLERY 1921 ROAD 76 PASCO WA 99301 SARAH RENEE BLASDEL 1909 RD 76 PASCO WA 99301 JERRALEE A COOLEY PO BOX 1038 RICHLAND WA 99352 ROGER E LENK (ETUX) 1817 N ROAD 76 PASCO WA 99301 JOSIAH JOH NSON (ET AL) 1491 CLARK RD PASCO WA 99301 BRADLEY R & CHERYL A MCCORT 5426 ROAD 69 STE D MPB 104 PASCO WA 99301 JEFFERY R & SHELBY J SONDERMAN 7504 TER RAY CT PASCO WA 99301 RANDALL D & LEANN M NUNAMAKER 7518 TER RAY CT PASCO WA 99301 CITY OF PASCO 525 N 3RD AVE PASCO WA 99301 Pa g e 3 1 4 o f 4 6 1 Z2023-009 (RS-12 to R-1) Requirements for Zoning Petition (PMC 25.210.030) •The date the existing zone became effective; •The changed conditions which are alleged to warrant other or additional zoning; •Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare; •The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property and the Comprehensive Plan; •The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted; •The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property; and •Such other information as the Hearing Examiner requires. Pa g e 3 1 5 o f 4 6 1 Z2023-009 (RS-12 to R-1) Process (PMC 25.210.060) Rezone Petition and Application PMC 25.210.020(1) Public Notice PMC 25.210.040 Public Hearing w/Hearing Examiner PMC 25.210.060 Hearing Examiner Findings + Recommendation PMC 25.210.060(2) City Council Regular Business Meeting PMC 25210.060( 2) Pa g e 3 1 6 o f 4 6 1 Z2023-009 (RS-12 to R-1) Public Hearing: • December 13, 2023 Hearing Examiner Determination: • Recommendation of Approval Site Information: • Parcel No: 118‐461‐013 & 118‐461‐013 • Address: 1802 Road 76 • Size: 5.15 Acres • Land Use: Low Density Residential • Zoning: RS‐12 (Residential Suburban) • Proposed: R‐1 (Low‐Density Residential Rezone Criteria: • PMC 25.210.030 Pa g e 3 1 7 o f 4 6 1 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 13, 2024 TO: Adam Lincoln, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/20/24 FROM: Jacob Gonzalez, Director Community & Economic Development SUBJECT: *Q Ordinance No. 4706 - Jankelson Rezone from RS-12 to R-4 (Z 2023- 011) I. REFERENCE(S): Ordinance Exhibit A - Hearing Examiner Recommendation Exhibit B - Map Report to Hearing Examiner Dated: December 10, 2023 PowerPoint Presentation II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: MOTION: zoning the 4706, No. amending adopt to move I Ordinance classification of certain real property located at Lots 1 and 2 of Short Plat 81- 82, Pasco, Franklin County, Washington, from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to by publication authorize further, Residential) (High-Density R-4 and summary only. III. FISCAL IMPACT: None IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: On December 10, 2023, the Hearing Examiner held a public hearing to consider a request to rezone property at 3216 & 3320 Road 68 (Parcels Nos. 117642105 & 117642098 respectively) located along the west side of Road 68, Pasco, Franklin County, Washington, from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R- 4 (High-Density Residential). Following the conduct of the public hearing, the Hearing Examiner recommended approval of the applicant's request for a rezone. Page 318 of 461 No appeals of this recommendation have been received. V. DISCUSSION: The applicant, Kimberly Jankelson has submitted a request to rezone the property located at 3216 & 3320 Road 68 from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-4 (High-Density Residential) to facilitate residential development on the site. The properties currently host a single family dwelling unit on each parcel. Review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) Section 25.210.030. The criteria can be summarized as: 1. The date the existing zone became effective: The site was assigned RS-12 zoning in 1997 via Ordinance No. 3215. 2. The changed conditions, which are alleged to warrant other or additional zoning: In 1997 the site was annexed into the City and given the Low-Density Residential designation, the designation was subsequently amended to Mixed Residential & Commercial in 2023 via Ordinance No. 4650. On January 24, 2022, Council approved Ordinance No. 4575, amending the Zoning code, including the PMC Chapter 25.70 relating to the R-4 zoning district. The approved ordinance changed the purpose of the R-4 zone found in PMC Section 25.45.010 as follows: "The R-4 district is established to provide a high-density residential environment compliant with the Comprehensive Plan Land Density Table in the PMC Section 25.215.015". 3. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: The Low Density Residential designation allows for R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4; C-1 and O zoning; development with a higher density of dwelling units per acre will help reduce urban sprawl and increase home ownership. The rezone application and proposal are consistent with the Council approved amendments to the Pasco Comprehensive Plan, which has been determined to be in the best interest of advancing public health, safety and general welfare of the community. 4. The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property and the Comprehensive Plan: Page 319 of 461 A change in zoning would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use of Mixed Residential & Commercial. 5. The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted: The applicant has stated that either the property will remain undeveloped or sold as single family only building parcels. 6. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property: The City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Low Density Residential which allows for a diverse range of housing, nonresidential uses, commercial uses, neighborhood retail and office uses, parks and recreation areas, and civic uses at a density of 5 to 29 dwelling units per acre. 7. Such other information the Hearing Examiner requires: The rezone application is consistent with and meets the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and City Council Goals. Full descriptions and details can be found in the attached "Exhibit A". Recommendation--Hearing Examiner: As noted in the attached "Exhibit A," the Hearing Examiner has found that the proposed rezone meets the criteria found in the PMC Section 25.210.060, and recommended, based on the Recommended Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, that the City Council approve the rezone from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) concomitant a without (High-Density R-4 to Residential), agreement. Staff concurs with the Hearing Examiner's recommendation, that 3216 & 3320 Road 68 (Parcels Nos. 117642105 & 117642098 respectively), in Pasco WA., be (High-Density rezoned from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-4 Residential). Page 320 of 461 Ordinance- Jankelson Rezone Z 2023-011 - 1 FILED FOR RECORD AT REQUEST OF: City of Pasco, Washington WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City of Pasco, Washington Attn: City Clerk 525 North 3rd Avenue Pasco, WA 99301 ____________________________________________________________________________ ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3216 ROAD 68 AND 3320 ROAD 68, PASCO, FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON, FROM RS-12 (RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN) TO R-4 (HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL). WHEREAS, the Petitioner, Kimberly M. Jankelson, seeks to rezone Parcel Nos. 117642105 and 117642098, located at 3216 Road 68 and 3320 Road 68, Pasco, Washington; and WHEREAS, a complete and adequate petition for change of zoning classification meeting the requirements of Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) Section 25.210.030 was received by the City of Pasco (City) and, after notice was issued under PMC Section 25.210.040, an open record hearing was conducted by the Pasco Hearing Examiner upon such petition on December 13, 2023; and WHEREAS, based upon substantial evidence and demonstration of the Petitioner that: (a) the proposal is in accord with the goals and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan; (b) the effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity is not materially detrimental; (c) there is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole; (d) any impacts of the rezone application and anticipated development will be mitigated by the regulations and requirements of the Pasco Municipal Code and the City of Pasco Design and Constructions Standards; (e) a concomitant agreement is not required under these circumstances; and (f) the proposal is consistent with and satisfies all criteria in PMC Section 25.210.060; the Hearing Examiner has recommended to approve the rezone, which findings and recommendation are hereby adopted by the City Council, and the Hearing Examiner Report is hereby incorporated by reference as Exhibit A. Page 321 of 461 Ordinance- Jankelson Rezone Z 2023-011 - 2 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the Zoning Ordinance for the City of Pasco, Washington, and the Zoning Map, accompanying and being part of said Ordinance shall be and hereby is changed from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-4 (High-Density Residential for the real property as shown in the Exhibit B attached hereto and described as follows: Parcel 117642105: SHORT PLAT 81-21 LOT 2 Parcel 117642098: SHORT PLAT 81-21 LOT 1 Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this ordinance should be held to the invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality thereof shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, subsection, sentence, clause phrase or word of this ordinance. Section 3. Corrections. Upon approval by the city attorney, the city clerk or the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including scrivener’s errors or clerical mistakes; reference to other local, state, or federal laws, rules, or regulations; or numbering or referencing of ordinances or their sections and subsections. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take full force and effect five (5) days after approval, passage and publication as required by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, on this ___ day of _____, 2024. _____________________________ Pete Serrano Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ ___________________________ Debra Barham, CMC Kerr Ferguson Law, PLLC City Clerk City Attorneys Published: _____________________________ Page 322 of 461 EXHIBIT A Page 323 of 461 Page 324 of 461 Page 325 of 461 Page 326 of 461 Page 327 of 461 Pa g e 3 2 8 o f 4 6 1 REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Remote WEDNESDAY, 08 November 2023 6:00 PM 1 TER FILE #: Z 2023-011 APPLICANT: Kimberly M Jankelson; Road 68 Venture PO Box 98210 Lakewood, WA 98496-0210 REQUEST: REZONE: 3216 Road 68 and 3320 Road 68 Rezone from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-4 (High-Density Residential) BACKGROUND 1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal: 3216 Road 68: SHORT PLAT 81-21 LOT 2 3320 Road 68: SHORT PLAT 81-21 LOT 1 General Location: Western side of Road 68, south of the FCID Canal and approximately 400 feet from the intersection of Road 68 and W Argent Road. Property Size: 3216 Road 68 (Parcel 117-642-105): 1.13 Acres 3320 Road 68 (Parcel 117-642-098): 1.05 Acres Total: 2.18 Acres 2. ACCESS: Both properties have access from Road 68 along their eastern property lines. 3. UTILITIES: Municipal water and sewer are available in Road 68. 4. LAND USE AND ZONING: Both properties are zoned RS-12 (Residential Suburban) and are developed with Single Family Dwellings and Detached Garages. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: RS-20/FCID CANAL LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/FCID CANAL EAST: RS-12 HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/UNDEVELOPED SOUTH: C-1 RETAIL COMMERCIAL/FIRE STATION WEST: RS-12 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 5. Comprehensive Plan: The City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan designates this site as “Mixed Residential & Commercial.” The Mixed Residential & Commercial designation accommodates a diverse range of housing, nonresidential uses, commercial uses, neighborhood retail and office uses, parks and recreation areas, and civic uses at a density of 5 to 29 dwelling units per acre, and may be assigned R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, C-1 and O zoning. Per PMC 25.215.015 maximum gross density of any proposed development within any zoning district, expressed as dwelling units per acre, shall be no less than the corresponding minimum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan Page 329 of 461 2 land use density table, and no greater than the corresponding maximum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, except as provided in Chapter 25.161 PMC. Housing Goal H-1 requires the City to encourage housing for all economic segments of the city’s population consistent with the local and regional market; Housing Policy H-1-A further details that the City should allow for a full range of housing including single family homes, townhouses, condominiums, apartments, and manufactured housing, accessory dwelling units, zero lot line, planned unit developments etc. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the State Environmental Policy Act (“SEPA”) checklist, Comprehensive Plan, applicable regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for this project was issued on 4 December 2023, under WAC 197-11-158. ANALYSIS Request Applicant Kimberly Jankelson wishes to rezone Lots 1 & 2 of Short Plat 82-21 (Parcel #’s 117-642-098 & Parcel 117-642-105) in Pasco, WA 99301 from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-4 (High-Density Residential). The sites comprise approximately 2.18 acres (approximately 95,000 square feet). The underlying Land Use Code is “Mixed Residential & Commercial,” which specifies 5 to 29 dwelling units (DU) per acre. Staff would like to note that the proposed rezone does not include a project action. It is anticipated that should the rezone be approved a subsequent development project may be submitted for review. This review would include requirements for the impacts it has on the level of service for parks, transportation, etc. Any subsequent subdivision proposals would additionally be required to adhere to Pasco Municipal Code, including provisions such as connectivity and residential design standards. History The site was annexed into the City via Ordinance 3214 in 1997 and subsequently assigned the RS-12 (Residential Suburban) zoning designation via Ordinance 3215. The site’s land use designation was amended from Low Density Residential to Mixed Residential & Commercial in 2023 via Ordinance 4650. 3216 Road 68 is developed with a single family dwelling unit that was constructed in 1979. 3320 Road 68 is developed also developed with a single family dwelling unit that was constructed in 1950. Both sites also contain detached garages, staff was unable to find documentation detailing the dates of construction for either garage. Rezone Criteria The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC. 25.210.030. The criteria are listed below as follows: 1. The date the existing zone became effective: The site was assigned RS-12 zoning in 1997 via Ordinance 3215. 2. The changed conditions, which are alleged to warrant other or additional zoning: In 1997 the site was annexed into the City and given the Low-Density Residential designation, the designation was subsequently amended to Mixed Residential & Commercial in 2023 via Ordinance 4650. On January 24, 2022 Council approved Ordinance 4575, amending the Zoning code, including Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) 25.70 relating to the R-4 zoning district. The approved ordinance changed the Page 330 of 461 3 purpose of the R-1 zone found in PMC 25.70.010, as follows: “The R-4 district is established to provide a high-density residential environment compliant with the Comprehensive Plan Land Density Table in 25.215.015,”. As well, PMC 25.70.020 added zero-lot line dwellings, multiple dwellings, duplexes, triplexes, and courtyard apartments to the mix of allowed uses in the R-4 zoning district. The density requirement in PMC 25.70.050 was also amended to eliminate the one-unit-per-lot development restriction. 3. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: The Mixed Residential & Commercial designation allows for R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4; C-1 and O zoning; development with High-Density Residential will add and increase density which will help reduce urban sprawl and increase home ownership. Per PMC 25.215.015 maximum gross density of any proposed development within any zoning district, expressed as dwelling units per acre, shall be no less than the corresponding minimum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, and no greater than the corresponding maximum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, except as provided in Chapter 25.161 PMC The rezone application and proposal are consistent with the Council-approved amendments to the Pasco Comprehensive Plan, which has been determined to be in the best interest of advancing public health, safety and general welfare of the community. 4. The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property and the Comprehensive Plan: A change in zoning would be consistent with the comprehensive plan Land Use Map Mixed Residential & Commercial designation for the site. The site has been subject to at least two Code Enforcement cases related to maintenance, development of the site would improve the value and character of the adjacent properties. 5. The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted: Per Applicant, either the property will remain undeveloped or sold as singly family only building parcels. 6. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property: The City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan designates this site as “Mixed Residential & Commercial.” The Mixed Residential and Commercial designation accommodates a diverse range of housing, nonresidential uses, commercial uses, neighborhood retail and office uses, parks and recreation areas, and civic uses at a density of 5 to 29 dwelling units per acre, and may be assigned R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4; C-1 and O zoning. Per PMC 25.215.015 maximum gross density of any proposed development within any zoning district, expressed as dwelling units per acre, shall be no less than the corresponding minimum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, and no greater than the corresponding maximum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, except as provided in Chapter 25.161 PMC. 7. Such other information as the Hearing Examiner requires: The rezone application is consistent with and meets the intent of the Comprehensive Plan, and City Council Goals. Page 331 of 461 4 STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report. The Hearing Examiner may add additional findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. Public notice of this hearing was sent to property owners within 300 feet of the property and posted in the Tri-City Herald on November 20th, 2023. 2. Applicant wishes to rezone 3216 Road 68 (Parcel 117642105) and 3320 Road 68 (Parcel 117642098) from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-4 (High-Density Residential). 3. The sites comprise approximately 2.18 acres (approximately 95,000 square feet). 4. The underlying Land Use Code specifies 5 to 29 dwelling units (DU) per acre. 5. The site was assigned RS-12 zoning in 1997 via Ordinance 3215. 6. The sites land use designation was amended from “Low Density Residential” to “Mixed Residential & Commercial” in 2023 via Ordinance 4650. 7. The City’s 2018-2038 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the site as “Mixed Residential & Commercial”. 8. The “High-Density Residential” designation may be developed with a combination of single-family dwellings, two-family dwellings, zero-lot line dwellings, multiple dwellings, duplexes, triplexes, and courtyard apartments. 9. Both 3216 Road 68 and 3320 Road 68 are developed with single family dwellings and detached garages. TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a rezone, the Hearing Examiner must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusions based upon the criteria listed in PMC 25.210.060. The criteria are as follows: 1. The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the lot “Mixed Residential & Commercial.” A change in zoning would be consistent with the comprehensive plan Land Use Map designation for the site. According to the table in Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) 25.215.015, the Mixed Residential & Commercial classification is intended to accommodate “a diverse range of housing, nonresidential uses, commercial uses, neighborhood retail and office uses, parks and recreation areas, and civic uses at a density of 5 to 29 dwelling units per acre,” and allows for R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4; C-1 and O zoning designations. A rezone could help to implement Policy H-1-A of the following policy from the Comprehensive Plan: “Allow for a full range of housing including single family homes, townhouses, condominiums, apartments, and manufactured housing, accessory dwelling units, zero lot line, planned unit developments etc.” 2. The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. This application for rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element and meets the intent of the Goals and Policies for the property. 3. There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. The proposed zoning designation is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and the Goals and Policies as adopted by the Pasco City Council. The proposal includes infill development and promotes the goals of the Low Density Residential Land Use Map Designation. 4. Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the Page 332 of 461 5 proposal. The rezone application and anticipated project are subject to the regulations and requirements of the Pasco Municipal Code and the City of Pasco Design and Construction Standards. As such, no conditions should be imposed; any future development will be evaluated for significant adverse impacts at the time of a development application, which will also be subject to review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). 5. A Concomitant Agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. No Concomitant Agreement is considered necessary for this application. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions herein, that Lots 1 & 2 of Short Plat 81- 21 in Pasco WA, be rezoned from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-4 (High-Density Residential). Page 333 of 461 0 540 1,100 1,600 2,200270 Feet Overview Map SITE Item: Jankelson RS-12 to R-4 Rezone Applicant(s): Kimberly Jankelson File #: Z 2023-011 ± Pa g e 3 3 4 o f 4 6 1 0 540 1,100 1,600 2,200270 Feet Vicinity Map SITE Item: Jankelson RS-12 to R-4 Rezone Applicant(s): Kimberly Jankelson File #: Z 2023-011 ± Pa g e 3 3 5 o f 4 6 1 Pa g e 3 3 6 o f 4 6 1 Pa g e 3 3 7 o f 4 6 1 Pa g e 3 3 8 o f 4 6 1 Pa g e 3 3 9 o f 4 6 1 Looking North Pa g e 3 4 0 o f 4 6 1 Looking Northeast Pa g e 3 4 1 o f 4 6 1 Looking East Pa g e 3 4 2 o f 4 6 1 Looking Southeast Pa g e 3 4 3 o f 4 6 1 Looking South Pa g e 3 4 4 o f 4 6 1 Looking Southwest Pa g e 3 4 5 o f 4 6 1 Looking West Pa g e 3 4 6 o f 4 6 1 Looking Northwest Pa g e 3 4 7 o f 4 6 1 Affidavit of Mailing In regards to MF# Z2023-011 I, Carmen Patrick, hereby confirm that notification was sent by mail November 20, 2023 to the owners of the parcels within 300 feet of the proposed site. The attached Notification List and Notice of Public Hearing are to be used as a reference as to what was sent and to whom received the notification. Given under my hand and official signature this 20th day, November of 2023 . ~cD Representative's Signature Page 348 of 461 • PifSco Community Development Department PO Box 293, 525 N 3rd Ave, Pasco, WA 99301 P: 509.545 .3441 / F: 509.545.3499 CITY OF PASCO PUBLIC NOTICE Si necesita ayuda para entender este aviso o necesita mas informaci6n, par favor Ila me al Departamento de Desarrollo Comunitario y Econ6mico de la Ciudad de Pasco a 509 -545-3441. A public hearing with the Hearing Examiner will be held on December 13, 2023 at 6:00 pm Place: Council Chambers in Pasco City Hall at 525 N 3rd Avenue in Pasco, Washington. Proposal: Kimberly Jankelson has submitted a Rezone application (Z 2023-011) from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-4 (High-Density Residential) for two parcels sized 1.13 acres and 1.05 acres . The parcels are addressed 3216 Road 68 and 3320 Road 68 (Franklin County Assessor Parcel Nos : 117642105 & 117642098 respectively) in Pasco , WA 99301. The proposal is subject to regulations contained in the Pasco Municipal Code . Future site-specific development applications will be subject to SEPA environmental review and code requirements . Impact fees will apply . Public Comment Period: Written comments must be submitted to the Community Development Department by 5:00 p.m. on December 13, 2023, to be included in the Hearing Examiner packet . If you have questions on the proposal, contact the Planning Division at (509) 545-3441 or via e-mail to: hattoria@pasco-wa.gov . If you wish to participate in the hearing virtually, please register at least 2 hours prior to the meeting at the following registration link: www.pasco -wa .gov/publiccomment After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar. Estimated Date of the Decision: It is estimated that the Hearing Examiner will make a recommendation on the rezone within ten (10) days of the public hearing. Prepared 20 November 2023 by: Andrew Hattori, Planner 11, PO Box 293 Pasco , WA 99301 (509) 545-3441 The City of Pas co welcomes full participation in publ ic meetings by all citizens . No qual ified individual with a disability shall be excluded or denied the benefit of partic ipating in such meetings . If you wish to use au xil iary aids or require assistance to comment at thi s public meetin g, plea se contact the Commun ity Development Department at (509 ) 545-3441 or TDD (509 ) 585-4425 at least ten days prior to the date of the meeting to ma ke arrangements for special needs . Page 1 of 2 Page 349 of 461 Item: Jankelson RS-12 to R-4 Rezone "Exhibit B" Applicant(s): Kimberly Jankelson File #: Z 2023-011 ~·.:::.~•·z·,t'I L .-lm:..;.";I . ~.~-_ ....... '"'fl Feet N A N .,._ 0 N QJ tlO ro a.. Pa g e 3 5 0 o f 4 6 1 NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP CITY OF PASCO PO BOX 293 PASCO WA 99301 RMM GROUP LLC 1231 COUNTRY RIDGE DR RICHLAND WA 99352 ANDREW & KAREN WEIS 6920 VALLEY VIEW PL PASCO WA 99301 BERNARDINO & EUDOCIA CONTRERAS PO BOX 595 PASCO WA 99301 ANA RAHIMLOU PO BOX 173 RICHLAND WA 99352 TED & AMY WONG 1655 SAGEWOOD ST RICHLAND WA 99352 ROAD 68 JOINT VENTURE PO BOX 881240 STEILACOOM WA 98388 AGAPITO RAMOS 3218 ROAD 68 PASCO WA 99301 BRIAN ALLEN & DANYELL ANN WAGE 3007 ROAD 70 PL PASCO WA 99301 KIMBERLY A GARTNER 8312 ARROYO JUSTIN AVE LAS VEGAS NV 89128 JONATHAN DUARTE 84205 E SAGEBRUSH RD KENNEWICK WA 99338 BENNY W & GLENDA L WYRICK 3111 ROAD 70 PL PASCO WA 99301 NAOMI DIAN ROGERS 3203 ROAD 70 PL PASCO WA 99301 NANCY F PETERSON 3115 ROAD 70 PL PASCO WA 99301 Pa g e 3 5 1 o f 4 6 1 Page 352 of 461 Page 353 of 461 Page 354 of 461 Page 355 of 461 i',irpat R:c,a-,,-.-e Comm=v.tl CD'lfedt,, 111!€<! Tribe!i -Cot.ill!! llNRA.eMn-e tigft Ol!!it!!i!',· R.si:li!l'ltiJJI JtdLJSli.ri�I L.c,w Density Resll!Entlal HedlU'Tl DEnsit';' Re!idenlla t>..JI� 5' ] Q Page 356 of 461 Z2023-011 (RS-12 to R-4) Requirements for Zoning Petition (PMC 25.210.030) •The date the existing zone became effective; •The changed conditions which are alleged to warrant other or additional zoning; •Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare; •The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property and the Comprehensive Plan; •The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted; •The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property; and •Such other information as the Hearing Examiner requires. Pa g e 3 5 7 o f 4 6 1 Z2023-011 (RS-12 to R-4) Process (PMC 25.210.060) Rezone Petition and Application PMC 25.210.020(1) Public Notice PMC 25.210.040 Public Hearing w/Hearing Examiner PMC 25.210.060 Hearing Examiner Findings + Recommendation PMC 25.210.060(2) City Council Regular Business Meeting PMC 25210.060( 2) Pa g e 3 5 8 o f 4 6 1 Z2023-011 (RS-12 to R-4) Public Hearing: • December 13, 2023 Hearing Examiner Determination: • Recommendation of Approval Site Information: • Parcel No: 117‐642‐105 & 117‐642‐098 • Address: 3216 & 3320 Road 68 • Size: 2.18 Acres • Land Use: Mixed Residential & Commercial • Zoning: RS‐12 (Residential Suburban) • Proposed: R‐4 High Density Residential Rezone Criteria: • PMC 25.210.030 Pa g e 3 5 9 o f 4 6 1 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 13, 2024 TO: Adam Lincoln, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/20/24 FROM: Jacob Gonzalez, Director Community & Economic Development SUBJECT: *Q Ordinance No. 4707 - Welch Rezone from RS-12 to R-1 (Z 2023- 013) I. REFERENCE(S): Ordinance Exhibit A - Hearing Examiner Recommendation Exhibit B - Map Report to Hearing Examiner Dated: January 10, 2024 PowerPoint Presentation II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: MOTION: zoning the amending 4707, No. adopt to move I Ordinance classification of certain real property located on the Southside of W. Henry Street, between Road 44 and Road 42, Pasco, Franklin County, Washington, from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential), and further, authorize publication by summary only. III. FISCAL IMPACT: None IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: On January 10, 2024, the Hearing Examiner held a public hearing to consider a request to rezone property at Parcel No. 119512299 located along the south side of W Henry Street between Road 44 and Road 42, Pasco, Franklin County, Washington, from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential). Following the conduct of the public hearing, the Hearing Examiner recommended approval of the applicant's request for a rezone. Page 360 of 461 No appeals of this recommendation have been received. V. DISCUSSION: The applicant, Gary Questad, who represents the owner of the property, Michael Welch, submitted a request to rezone the property located at Parcel No. 119512299 from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential) to facilitate residential development on the site. The property currently is undeveloped and contains a post and wire fence on and around the site. Review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in the Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) Section 25.210.030. The criteria can be summarized as: 1. The date the existing zone became effective: The site was assigned RS-12 zoning in 1996 via Ordinance No. 3145. 2. The changed conditions, which are alleged to warrant other or additional zoning: On January 24, 2022, Council approved Ordinance No. 4575, amending the Zoning code, including the PMC Chapter 25.45 relating to the R-1 zoning district. The approved ordinance changed the purpose of the R-1 zone found in the PMC Section 25.45.010 as follows: "The R-1 low density residential district is established to provide a low to medium density residential environment compliant with the Comprehensive Plan land use density table in the PMC Section 25.215.015. Certain public facilities and institutions may also be permitted, provided their nature and location are not detrimental to the intended low to medium density residential environment". 3. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: The Low Density Residential designation allows for RS-20, RS-12, RS-1, R-1, R-1-A, and R-1-A2 zoning; development with a higher density of dwelling units per acre will help reduce urban sprawl and increase home ownership. The rezone application and proposal are consistent with the Council approved amendments to the Pasco Comprehensive Plan, which has been determined to be in the best interest of advancing public health, safety and general welfare of the community. 4. The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property and the Comprehensive Plan: Page 361 of 461 A change in zoning would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use of Low Density Residential. 5. The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted: The applicant has stated that if the rezone is not granted, development of the property will not be financially feasible at this time. 6. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property: The City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Low Density Residential which allows for both the RS-12 and R-1 zoning and requires a density of 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre for both zoning designations. 7. Such other information the Hearing Examiner requires: The rezone application is consistent with and meets the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and City Council Goals. Full descriptions and details can be found in the attached "Exhibit A". Recommendation--Hearing Examiner: As noted in the attached "Exhibit A," the Hearing Examiner has found that the proposed rezone meets the criteria found in the PMC Section 25.210.060, and recommended, based on the Recommended Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, that the City Council approve the rezone from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential), without a concomitant agreement. Staff concurs with the Hearing Examiner's recommendation, that Parcel No. 119512299, in Pasco WA., be rezoned from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential). Page 362 of 461 Ordinance – Rezone Z 2023-013 - 1 FILED FOR RECORD AT REQUEST OF: City of Pasco, Washington WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City of Pasco, Washington Attn: City Clerk 525 North 3rd Avenue Pasco, WA 99301 ____________________________________________________________________________ ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF W HENRY STREET BETWEEN ROAD 44 AND ROAD 42, PASCO, FRANKLIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON, FROM RS-12 (RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN) TO R-1 (LOW- DENSITY RESIDENTIAL). WHEREAS, the Petitioner, Gary Questad on behalf of Michael Welch, seeks to rezone Parcel No. 119512299, in Pasco, Washington; and WHEREAS, a complete and adequate petition for change of zoning classification meeting the requirements of Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) Section 25.210.030 was received by the City of Pasco (City) and, after notice was issued under PMC Section 25.210.040, an open record hearing was conducted by the Pasco Hearing Examiner upon such petition on January 10, 2024; and WHEREAS, based upon substantial evidence and demonstration of the Petitioner that: (a) the proposal is in accord with the goals and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan; (b) the effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity is not materially detrimental; (c) there is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole; (d) any impacts of the rezone application and anticipated development will be mitigated by the regulations and requirements of the Pasco Municipal Code and the City of Pasco Design and Constructions Standards; (e) a concomitant agreement is not required under these circumstances; and (f) the proposal is consistent with and satisfies all criteria in PMC Section 25.210.060; the Hearing Examiner has recommended to approve the rezone, which findings and recommendation are hereby adopted by the City Council, and the Hearing Examiner Report is hereby incorporated by reference as Exhibit A. Page 363 of 461 Ordinance – Rezone Z 2023-013 - 2 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the Zoning Ordinance for the City of Pasco, Washington, and the Zoning Map, accompanying and being part of said Ordinance shall be and hereby is changed from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low Density Residential) for the real property as shown in the Exhibit B attached hereto and described as follows: SM 2023-012 BLA PER RS-1968785 PARCEL 119512297 .44 AC, PARCEL 119512331 2.56 AC, AFTER BLA PARCEL 119512298 .77 AC, PARCEL 119512299 2.22 AC FOR 2023 TAX YEAR Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this ordinance should be held to the invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality thereof shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, subsection, sentence, clause phrase or word of this ordinance. Section 3. Corrections. Upon approval by the city attorney, the city clerk or the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including scrivener’s errors or clerical mistakes; reference to other local, state, or federal laws, rules, or regulations; or numbering or referencing of ordinances or their sections and subsections. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take full force and effect five (5) days after approval, passage and publication as required by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, on this ___ day of ________________, 2024. _____________________________ Pete Serrano Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ ___________________________ Debra Barham, CMC Kerr Ferguson Law, PLLC City Clerk City Attorneys Published: _____________________________ Page 364 of 461 CITY OF PASCO HEARING EXAMINER IN THE MATTER OF ) ) ) ) ) ) RECOMMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT,RECOMMENDED CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND RECOMMENDED DECISION Z 2023-013 Questad THIS MATTER having come on for hearing in front of the City of Pasco Hearing Examiner on January 10, 2024, the Hearing Examiner having taken evidence hereby submits the following Recommended Findings of Fact, Recommended Conclusions of Law, and Recommended Decision as follows: I.RECOMMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT 1.PROPERTY/APPLICATION DESCRIPTION: 2. 3. 4. 5. 1.1 Legal: ADWSTED PARCEL A SM 2023-012 BLA PER RS-1968785 PARCEL 119512297 .44 AC,PARCEL 119512331 2.56 AC,AFTERBLA PARCEL 119512298 .77 AC, PARCEL 119512299 2.22 AC FOR 2023 TAX YEAR 1.2 General Location: Located on the south side of W Herny Street between Road 44 and Road 42 in Pasco, WA. 1.3 Property Size: Approximately 2.22 Acres. 1.4 Request: Rezone Parcel #119-512-299 from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential). 1.5 Owner/Applicant: Gary Questad, 6114 Kent Lane, Pasco, WA 99301. ACCESS: The parcel has access on W Henry Street. UTILITIES: Municipal water is available in W Herny Street, municipal sewer is located approximately 150 feet to the west in Road 44 and approximately 125 feet to the east in Road 42. LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned RS-12 (Residential Suburban) and is developed with a single family dwelling unit and various accessory structures. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: North: RS-12 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/TRI CITY ADVENTIST East: RS-12 South: RS-12 West: RS-12 SCHOOL TRACK LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING Low Density Residential/CITY OF PASCO HERITAGE PARK COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan designates this site as "Low Density Residential." The Low-Density Residential designation is described as a variety of residential housing at a density of 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre, and may be assigned RS-20, RS-12, RS-1, R-1, R-1-A, and R-l-A2 designations. Per PMC 25.215.015 Z 2023 013 Questad Rezone Page 1 of 5 EXHIBIT A Page 365 of 461 maximum gross density of any proposed development within any zoning district, expressed as dwelling units per acre, shall be no less than the corresponding minimum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, and no greater than the corresponding maximum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, except as provided in Chapter 25 .161 PMC. Housing Goal H-1 requires the City to encourage housing for all economic segments of the city's population consistent with the local and regional market; Housing Policy H-1-A further details that the City should allow for a full range of housing including single family homes, townhouses, condominiums, apartments, and manufactured housing, accessory dwelling units, zero lot line, planned unit developments etc. 6.ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the State Environmental Policy Act ("SEPA") checklist, Comprehensive Plan, applicable regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for this project was issued on December 4, 2023, under WAC 197-11-158. 7.REQUEST: Applicant Gary Questad wishes to rezone Parcel 119-512-299, located on the south side ofW Henry Street between Road 42 and Road 44 in Pasco, WA 99301 from RS- 12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential). The sites comprise approximately 2.22 acres. The underlying Land Use Code is "Low Density Residential," which specifies 3 to 6 dwelling units (DU) per acre. The Hearing Examiner notes that the proposed rezone does not include a project action. It is anticipated that should the rezone be approved a subsequent subdivision project may be submitted for review. This review would include requirements for the impacts it has on the level of service for parks, transportation, etc. Any subsequent subdivision proposals would additionally be required to adhere to Pasco Municipal Code, including provisions such as connectivity and residential design standards. 8.HISTORY: The site was annexed into the City via Ordinance 3144 and subsequently assigned the RS-12 (Residential Suburban) zoning designation via Ordinance 3145. The site is undeveloped with a post and wire fence located around and inside the property. 9.REZONE CRITERIA: The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC 25.210.030. The criteria are listed below as follows: 9.1 The date the existing zone became effective: 9.1.1 The site was assigned RS-12 zoning in 1996 via Ordinance 3145. 9.2 The changed conditions, which are alleged to warrant other or additional zoning: 9.2.1 In 1996 the site was annexed into the City and given the Low-Density Residential designation, and has remained so since. 9.2.2 On January 24, 2022, Council approved Ordinance 4575, amending the Zoning code, including Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) 25.45 relating to the R-1 zoning district. The approved ordinance changed the purpose of the R-1 zone found in PMC 25.45.010, as follows: "The R-1 low density residential district is established to provide a low to medium density residential environment compliant with the Comprehensive Plan land use density table in PMC 25.215.015. Certain public facilities and institutions may also be permitted, provided their nature and location are not detrimental to the intended low to medium density residential environment,". As well, PMC 25.45.020 added zero-lot line dwellings, multiple dwellings, duplexes, Z 2023 013 Questad Rezone Page 2 of 5 Page 366 of 461 triplexes, and courtyard apartments to the mix of allowed uses in the R-1 zoning district. The density requirement in PMC 25.45.050 was also amended to eliminate the one-unit-per-lot development restriction. 9.3 Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: 9.3.1 The Low Density Residential designation allows forRS-20, RS-12, RS-1, R- 1, R-1-A, and R-l -A2 zoning development with a higher density of dwelling units per acre will help reduce urban sprawl and increase home ownership. 9.3.2 Per PMC 25.215.015 maximum gross density of any proposed development within any zoning district, expressed as dwelling units per acre, shall be no less than the corresponding minimum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, and no greater than the corresponding maximum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, except as provided in Chapter 25.161 PMC 9.3.3 The rezone application and proposal are consistent with the Council approved amendments to the Pasco Comprehensive Plan, which has been determined to be in the best interest of advancing public health, safety and general welfare of the community. 9 .4 The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property and the Comprehensive Plan: 9 .4.1 A change in zoning would be consistent with the comprehensive plan Land Use Map Low Density Residential designation for the site. Per Applicant, the proposed land usage matches that of the adjacent properties and have a positive impact of neighboring properties. 9.5 The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted: 9.5.1 Per Applicant, if the rezone is not granted, development of the property will not be financially feasible at this time. 9 .6 The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property: 9.6.1 The City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan designates this site as "Low Density Residential." The Low Density Residential designation provides a variety of residential housing at a density of 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre, and may be assigned RS-20, RS-12, RS-1, R-1, R-1-A, and R-l -A2 zoning. 9.6.2 Per PMC 25.215.015 maximum gross density of any proposed development within any zoning district, expressed as dwelling units per acre, shall be no less than the corresponding minimum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, and no greater than the corresponding maximum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, except as provided in Chapter 25.161 PMC. 9.7 Such other information as the Hearing Examiner requires. 9.7.1 The rezone application is consistent with and meets the intent of the Comprehensive Plan, and City Council Goals. 10.Public notice of this hearing was sent to property owners within 300 feet of the property and posted in the Tri-City Herald on December 24, 2023. Z 2023 013 Questad Rezone Page 3 of 5 Page 367 of 461 11.An open record public hearing after due legal notice was held January 10, 2024, with the Planning Department staff and public appearing in person and the Hearing Examiner appearing via videoconference. 12.Appearing at the hearing was Paul Knutzen. Mr. Knutzen stated that he was an agent of the Applicant/property owner and that he agreed with the staff report. 13.Testifying from the public were the following individuals: 13 .1 Richard Ding. Mr. Ding owns property east of the proposed rezone. He wanted to question the property owner's agent as to their future plans for the property. The Hearing Examiner noted that the property owner and Applicant's agent had already testified that any future development would comply with the applicable codes. The Hearing Examiner indicated that there was no project action associated with this rezone and that the Applicant/property owner was not bound by any particular development plans. The Hearing Examiner did not allow Mr. Ding to directly question the Applicant/property owner's agent. 13.2 Wayne Stordahl. Mr. Stordahl testified that he opposed the new density that the rezone would allow. He also had concerns about his septic and well system being damaged by the vibrations and compacting of the subject property during its development. He stated that neighbors' properties are all at least one-half acre. 14.The staff report, application materials, agency comments and the entire file of record were admitted into the record. 15.Any Conclusion of Law that is more correctly a Finding of Fact is hereby incorporated as such by this reference. II.RECOMMENDED CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Before recommending approval of this rezone, the Hearing Examiner has developed findings of fact from which to draw those conclusions based upon the criteria listed in PMC 25.210.060. The criteria are as follows: 1.The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 1.1 The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the lot "Low Density Residential." A change in zoning would be consistent with the comprehensive plan Land Use Map designation for the site. According to the table in Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) 25.215.015, the Low Density Residential classification is intended to provide a "variety of residential housing at a density of 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre," and allows for RS-20, RS-12, RS-1, R-1, R-1-A and R-l-A2 zoning designations. 1.2 A rezone could help to implement Policy H-1-A of the following policy from the Comprehensive Plan: "Allow for a full range of housing including single family homes, townhouses, condominiums, apartments, and manufactured housing, accessory dwelling units, zero lot line, planned unit developments etc." 2.The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. 2.1 This application for rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element and meets the intent of the Goals and Policies for the property. 3.There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. Z 2023 013 Questad Rezone Page 4 of 5 Page 368 of 461 3 .1 The proposed zoning designation is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and the Goals and Policies as adopted by the Pasco City Council. The proposal includes infill development and promotes the goals of the Low Density Residential Land Use Map Designation. 4.Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. 4.1 The rezone application and anticipated project are subject to the regulations and requirements of the Pasco Municipal Code and the City of Pasco Design and Construction Standards. As such, no conditions should be imposed; any future development will be evaluated for significant adverse impacts at the time of a development application, which will also be subject to review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). 5.A Concomitant Agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. 5.1 No Concomitant Agreement is considered necessary for this application. 6.Any Finding of Fact that is more correctly a Conclusion of Law is hereby incorporated as such by this reference. III.RECOMMENDED DECISION Based on the above Recommended Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Hearing Examiner RECOMMENDS APPROVAL that Parcel 119512299 be rezoned from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential). Dated this 16th day of January, 2024. CITY OF PASCO HEARING EXAMINER /ik{i!rr? Z 2023 013 Questad Rezone Page 5 of 5 Page 369 of 461 Pa g e 3 7 0 o f 4 6 1 REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING City Hall – 525 North Third Avenue – Council Chambers WEDNESDAY, 10 January 2024 6:00 PM 1 MASTER FILE #: Z 2023-013 APPLICANT:Gary Questad 6114 Kent Lane Pasco, WA 99301 REQUEST: REZONE: Parcel #119-512-299 Rezone from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential) BACKGROUND 1.PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal:ADJUSTED PARCEL A SM 2023-012 BLA PER RS-1968785 PARCEL 119512297 .44 AC, PARCEL 119512331 2.56 AC, AFTER BLA PARCEL 119512298 .77 AC, PARCEL 119512299 2.22 AC FOR 2023 TAX YEAR General Location: Located on the south side of W Henry Street between Road 44 and Road 42 in Pasco, WA. Property Size: Approximately 2.22 Acres 2.ACCESS:The parcel has access on W Henry Street. 3.UTILITIES:Municipal water is available in W Henry Street, municipal sewer is located approximately 150 feet to the west in Road 44 and approximately 125 feet to the east in Road 42 4.LAND USE AND ZONING: The site is zoned RS-12 (Residential Suburban) and is developed with a single family dwelling unit and various accessory structures. Surrounding properties are zoned and developed as follows: NORTH: RS-12 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/TRI CITY ADVENTIST SCHOOL TRACK EAST: RS-12 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING SOUTH: RS-12 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING WEST: RS-12 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/CITY OF PASCO HERITAGE PARK 5.Comprehensive Plan:The City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan designates this site as “Low Density Residential.” The Low-Density Residential designation is described as a variety of residential housing at a density of 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre, and may be assigned RS-20, RS-12, RS-1, R- 1, R-1-A, and R-1-A2 designations. Per PMC 25.215.015 maximum gross density of any proposed development within any zoning district, expressed as dwelling units per acre, shall be no less than the corresponding minimum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, and no greater than the corresponding maximum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, except as provided in Chapter 25.161 PMC. Housing Goal H-1 requires the City to encourage housing for all economic segments of the city’s population consistent with the local and regional market; Housing Policy H-1-A further details that the City should allow for a full range of housing including single family homes, townhouses, Page 371 of 461 2 condominiums, apartments, and manufactured housing, accessory dwelling units, zero lot line, planned unit developments etc. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the State Environmental Policy Act (“SEPA”) checklist, Comprehensive Plan, applicable regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for this project was issued on 4 December 2023, under WAC 197-11-158. ANALYSIS Request Applicant Gary Questad wishes to rezone Parcel 119-512-299, located on the south side of W Henry Street between Road 42 and Road 44 in Pasco, WA 99301 from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential). The sites comprise approximately 2.22 acres. The underlying Land Use Code is “Low Density Residential,” which specifies 3 to 6 dwelling units (DU) per acre. Staff would like to note that the proposed rezone does not include a project action. It is anticipated that should the rezone be approved a subsequent subdivision project may be submitted for review. This review would include requirements for the impacts it has on the level of service for parks, transportation, etc. Any subsequent subdivision proposals would additionally be required to adhere to Pasco Municipal Code, including provisions such as connectivity and residential design standards. History The site was annexed into the City via Ordinance 3144 and subsequently assigned the RS-12 (Residential Suburban) zoning designation via Ordinance 3145. The site is undeveloped with a post and wire fence located around and inside the property. Rezone Criteria The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC. 25.210.030. The criteria are listed below as follows: 1. The date the existing zone became effective: The site was assigned RS-12 zoning in 1996 via Ordinance 3145. 2. The changed conditions, which are alleged to warrant other or additional zoning: In 1996 the site was annexed into the City and given the Low-Density Residential designation, and has remained so since. On January 24, 2022 Council approved Ordinance 4575, amending the Zoning code, including Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) 25.45 relating to the R-1 zoning district. The approved ordinance changed the purpose of the R-1 zone found in PMC 25.45.010, as follows: “The R-1 low density residential district is established to provide a low to medium density residential environment compliant with the Comprehensive Plan land use density table in PMC 25.215.015. Certain public facilities and institutions may also be permitted, provided their nature and location are not detrimental to the intended low to medium density residential environment,”. As well, PMC 25.45.020 added zero-lot line dwellings, multiple dwellings, duplexes, triplexes, and courtyard apartments to the mix of allowed uses in the R-1 zoning district. The density requirement in PMC 25.45.050 was also amended to eliminate the one-unit-per-lot development restriction. 3. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare: Page 372 of 461 3 The Low Density Residential designation allows for RS-20, RS-12, RS-1, R-1, R-1-A, and R-1-A2 zoning; development with a higher density of dwelling units per acre will help reduce urban sprawl and increase home ownership. Per PMC 25.215.015 maximum gross density of any proposed development within any zoning district, expressed as dwelling units per acre, shall be no less than the corresponding minimum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, and no greater than the corresponding maximum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, except as provided in Chapter 25.161 PMC The rezone application and proposal are consistent with the Council-approved amendments to the Pasco Comprehensive Plan, which has been determined to be in the best interest of advancing public health, safety and general welfare of the community. 4. The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property and the Comprehensive Plan: A change in zoning would be consistent with the comprehensive plan Land Use Map Low Density Residential designation for the site. Per Applicant, the proposed land usage matches that of the adjacent properties and have a positive impact of neighboring properties. 5. The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted: Per Applicant, if the rezone is not granted, development of the property will not be financially feasible at this time. 6. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property: The City of Pasco Comprehensive Plan designates this site as “Low Density Residential.” The Low Density Residential designation provides a variety of residential housing at a density of 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre, and may be assigned RS-20, RS-12, RS-1, R-1, R-1-A, and R-1-A2 zoning. Per PMC 25.215.015 maximum gross density of any proposed development within any zoning district, expressed as dwelling units per acre, shall be no less than the corresponding minimum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, and no greater than the corresponding maximum density expressed in the Comprehensive Plan land use density table, except as provided in Chapter 25.161 PMC. 7. Such other information as the Hearing Examiner requires: The rezone application is consistent with and meets the intent of the Comprehensive Plan, and City Council Goals. STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Findings of fact must be entered from the record. The following are initial findings drawn from the background and analysis section of the staff report. The Hearing Examiner may add additional findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1. Public notice of this hearing was sent to property owners within 300 feet of the property and posted in the Tri-City Herald on December 24, 2024. 2. Applicant wishes to rezone Parcel 119512299 from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low- Density Residential). 3. The sites comprise approximately 2.22 acres. 4. The underlying Land Use code specifies 3 to 6 dwelling units (DU) per acre. 5. The site was assigned RS-12 zoning in 1996 via Ordinance 3145. Page 373 of 461 4 6. The City’s 2018-2038 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the site as “Low Density Residential”. 7. The “Low Density Residential” designation may be developed with a variety of residential housing including single family dwellings, zero lot line dwellings, multiple dwellings, duplexes, triplexes, and courtyard apartments. 8. Parcel 119512299 is undeveloped and contains a post and wire fence surrounding and inside the property. TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS BASED ON INITIAL STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a rezone, the Hearing Examiner must develop findings of fact from which to draw its conclusions based upon the criteria listed in PMC 25.210.060. The criteria are as follows: 1. The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the lot “Low Density Residential.” A change in zoning would be consistent with the comprehensive plan Land Use Map designation for the site. According to the table in Pasco Municipal Code (PMC) 25.215.015, the Low Density Residential classification is intended to provide a “variety of residential housing at a density of 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre,” and allows for RS-20, RS-12, RS-1, R-1, R-1-A and R-1-A2 zoning designations. A rezone could help to implement Policy H-1-A of the following policy from the Comprehensive Plan: “Allow for a full range of housing including single family homes, townhouses, condominiums, apartments, and manufactured housing, accessory dwelling units, zero lot line, planned unit developments etc.” 2. The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. This application for rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element and meets the intent of the Goals and Policies for the property. 3. There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. The proposed zoning designation is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and the Goals and Policies as adopted by the Pasco City Council. The proposal includes infill development and promotes the goals of the Low Density Residential Land Use Map Designation. 4. Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. The rezone application and anticipated project are subject to the regulations and requirements of the Pasco Municipal Code and the City of Pasco Design and Construction Standards. As such, no conditions should be imposed; any future development will be evaluated for significant adverse impacts at the time of a development application, which will also be subject to review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). 5. A Concomitant Agreement should be entered into between the City and the petitioner, and if so, the terms and conditions of such an agreement. No Concomitant Agreement is considered necessary for this application. Page 374 of 461 5 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions herein, that Parcel 119512299 be rezoned from RS-12 (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (Low-Density Residential). Page 375 of 461 Pa g e 3 7 6 o f 4 6 1 Pa g e 3 7 7 o f 4 6 1 Pa g e 3 7 8 o f 4 6 1 Pa g e 3 7 9 o f 4 6 1 Pa g e 3 8 0 o f 4 6 1 Pa g e 3 8 1 o f 4 6 1 \2 0 2 3 \ 2 3 2 0 5 - R o a d 4 4 & H e n r y S u b d i v i s i o n \ D W G \ 2 3 2 0 5 P P 0 1 . d w g - N o v 0 6 , 2 0 2 3 - 0 2 : 2 6 p m - r m c RD 4 4 & H E N R Y S T S U B D I V I S I O N 5401 RIDGELINE DR. SUITE 160 1-509-222-0959 PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T PP01PRELIMINARY PLATA1 0' 1" 10' 20' 40' 60' = 20' NORTH 2 BUSINESS DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG CALL 811 PRELIMINARY PLAT CONTACT INFO BASIS OF BEARINGS BASIS OF ELEVATION VICINITY MAP NORTH LAND USE SUMMARY LEGAL DESCRIPTION HENRY ST NE W R O A D SITE Pa g e 3 8 2 o f 4 6 1 The picture can't be displayed. Looking North Pa g e 3 8 3 o f 4 6 1 The picture can't be displayed. Looking Northeast Pa g e 3 8 4 o f 4 6 1 The picture can't be displayed. Looking East Pa g e 3 8 5 o f 4 6 1 The picture can't be displayed. Looking Southeast Pa g e 3 8 6 o f 4 6 1 The picture can't be displayed. Looking South Pa g e 3 8 7 o f 4 6 1 The picture can't be displayed. Looking Southwest Pa g e 3 8 8 o f 4 6 1 The picture can't be displayed. Looking West Pa g e 3 8 9 o f 4 6 1 The picture can't be displayed. Looking Northwest Pa g e 3 9 0 o f 4 6 1 Page 391 of 461 Page 392 of 461 Page 393 of 461 Page 394 of 461 Z2023-013 (RS-12 to R-1) Requirements for Zoning Petition (PMC 25.210.030) •The date the existing zone became effective; •The changed conditions which are alleged to warrant other or additional zoning; •Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare; •The effect it will have on the value and character of the adjacent property and the Comprehensive Plan; •The effect on the property owner or owners if the request is not granted; •The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property; and •Such other information as the Hearing Examiner requires. Pa g e 3 9 5 o f 4 6 1 Z2023-013 (RS-12 to R-1) Process (PMC 25.210.060) Rezone Petition and Application PMC 25.210.020(1) Public Notice PMC 25.210.040 Public Hearing w/Hearing Examiner PMC 25.210.060 Hearing Examiner Findings + Recommendation PMC 25.210.060(2) City Council Regular Business Meeting PMC 25210.060( 2) Pa g e 3 9 6 o f 4 6 1 Z2023-013 (RS-12 to R-1) Public Hearing: • January 10, 2024 Hearing Examiner Determination: • Recommendation of Approval Site Information: • Parcel No: 119‐512‐299 • Size: 2.22 Acres • Land Use: Low Density Residential • Zoning: RS‐12 (Residential Suburban) • Proposed: R‐1 (Low‐Density Residential) Rezone Criteria: • PMC 25.210.030 Pa g e 3 9 7 o f 4 6 1 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 15, 2024 TO: Adam Lincoln, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/20/24 FROM: Maria Serra, Interim Director Public Works SUBJECT: Resolution No. 4421 - Change Orders Nos. 28-36 for the Lewis Street Overpass Project I. REFERENCE(S): Resolution Change Order Summary II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: MOTION: City the authorizing 4421, No. move approve to I Resolution Manager to execute Change Orders Nos. 28-36 to the construction contract with Cascade Bridge, LLC. for the Lewis Street Overpass Project. III. FISCAL IMPACT: Original Agreement $22,344,999.88 Previously Approved Change Order Nos. 1-27 $3,710,041.02 Change Order No. 28 $19,792.64 Change Order No. 29 $6,895.00 Change Order No. 30 $3,117.81 Change Order No. 31 $4,717.35 Change Order No. 32 $10,487.14 Change Order No. 33 $1,587.00 Change Order No. 34 $3,680.00 Change Order No. 35 $14,657.98 Change Order No. 36 $27,133.28 Change Order Total Nos. 28-36 (proposed) $92,068.20 New Agreement Total $26,147,109.10 An ordinance with a budget amendment will be presented to Council to reconcile additional revenues received and increased expense budget. Page 398 of 461 IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: Street Lewis the replaces existing Overpass Street Lewis The project undercrossing, constructed under the BNSF Railyard in 1937, with a new bridge over the railyard. On March 1, 2021, Council awarded the Lewis Street Overpass construction contract in of amount the WA Cascade of LLC Bridge, to Vancouver, $22,344,999.88. Since construction began, the project has required twenty-seven (27) change orders for a total of $3,759,867.11. Please see the Change Order Summary attached for details on Change Orders Nos. 28 - 36 being presented tonight. Previously presented item related to Lewis street Overpass project can be reviewed in the following link: https://docs.pasco- wa.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=1170065&dbid=0&repo=CityofPasco V. DISCUSSION: Change Order No. 28 is needed to have the necessary foundational support for the pedestrian guardrail and provide the necessary safety features for the project. Change Order No. 29 is necessary to accommodate the utilities serving the businesses and residents of Pasco. Material are provided by the various utilities as a partnering effort on the project. Change Order No. 30 is necessary to install the required storm drainage facilities. Multiple alternatives were evaluated, and the most cost-effective option was used. Change Order No. 31 is necessary to maintain the planned design and aesthetic of the new roadway corridor between the BNSF Bridge and the 2nd Ave Bridge. Change Order No. 32 is necessary to maintain power through FPUD’s system at a different location than CO 29. Material are provided by FPUD as a partnering effort on the project. Page 399 of 461 Change Order No. 33 is necessary to relocate storm drainage facilities as required for the construction of the project. Change Order No. 34 was necessary to protect the top lift of asphalt from construction traffic for a significant duration. It will result in a longer lifespan of the new pavement and was determined to be a cost-effective solution. Change Order No. 35 is necessary to provide the long-term corrosion resistance needed in the BNSF railroad screening. Change Order No. 36 is necessary to supplement Change Order 27, which provided additional traffic control for phase 1b of the project. City Staff recommends approval of the proposed Change Order Nos. 28-36 with Cascade Bridge, LLC. in the amount of $92,068.20. Page 400 of 461 Resolution – CO 28-36 for Lewis St Overpass - 1 RESOLUTION NO. _________ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE CHANGE ORDER NOS. 28-36 TO THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WITH CASCADE BRIDGE, LLC. FOR THE LEWIS STREET OVERPASS PROJECT. WHEREAS, the City of Pasco, Washington (City) and Cascade Bridge, LLC. entered into a Construction contract on March 1, 2021, for construction of the Lewis Street Overpass Project; and WHEREAS, this project involves the construction of a new 562-foot, 4-span, pre-stressed concrete overpass, over the BNSF Railway yard and a new 63-foot, voided slab, overpass over First Avenue. Along with roadway improvements, backfilling, partial structure removal, retaining wall construction, earthwork, paving with HMA, landscaping, storm drainage, illumination, water mains, sanitary sewer, and other associated work; and WHEREAS, the City and Cascade Bridge, LLC executed Change Orders Nos. 1 through 27 to provide for additional work not included in the original contract; and WHEREAS, proposed Change Orders Nos. 28 through 36 involve additional work related to: thickened edge treatment, Phase 1B traffic control, a revised joint utility trench, revisions to an irrigation trench, revised Franklin Public Utility District (FPUD) trench, additional survey costs, added paper joints, and additional sealant for a total of $74,934.92; and WHEREAS, the $74,934.92 amount of Change Order No. 28-36, added to the cumulative sum previously approved change orders, exceeds the City Manager’s authority, and thus requires Council approval; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, has after due consideration, determined that it is in the best interest of the City of Pasco to enter into Change Order Nos. 28-36 with Cascade Bridge, LLC. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON: That the City Council of the City of Pasco approves the terms and conditions of the Change Order Nos. 28-36 between the City of Pasco and Cascade Bridge, LLC. as attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A. Be it Further Resolved, that the City Manager of the City of Pasco, Washington, is hereby authorized, empowered, and directed to execute said Change Order Nos. 28-36 on behalf of the City of Pasco. Be It Further Resolved, that this Resolution will take effect immediately. Page 401 of 461 Resolution – CO 28-36 for Lewis St Overpass - 2 PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, on this ___ day of __________, 2024. _____________________________ Pete Serrano Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ ___________________________ Debra Barham, CMC Kerr Ferguson Law, PLLC City Clerk City Attorneys Page 402 of 461 Change Order Nos. 28 – 36 Summary •Change Order 028 – Thickened Edge Treatment ($19,792.64): This change order compensates the contractor to fabricate and install an additional pedestrian guardrail and construct a sidewalk with a thickened edge. Project plans originally identified a portion of the pedestrian guardrail as chain link fencing; however, this segment needs to be a pedestrian guardrail. In order to have the necessary structural foundation for the handrail, a thickened edge is required on the back edge of the sidewalk. •Change Order 029 – Revised Joint Utility Trench ($6,895.00): The costs included in CO 029 are to relocate several utility vaults and revise the utility trench to accommodate new conduits for Lumen, Charter, and FPUD required to connect to their existing system. Conduits and electrical vault materials were provided by the utilities. This also includes transportation costs for the contractor to pick up the electrical vaults which are being supplied by FPUD and deliver them to the site. •Change Order 030 – Infiltration Trench ($3,117.81): The costs included in CO 030 are to relocate storm drainage facilities. In 2022, the project team discovered there had been basements constructed below the sidewalk at the intersection of 2nd Ave and Lewis Street. Because of this issue, portions of the storm drainage facilities have been revised and relocated to avoid excavation immediately adjacent to the building's basement walls. •Change Order 031 – Revised Irrigation Plan ($4,717.35): The costs included in CO 031 are to revise the irrigation plan to reroute and upsize service to the landscaping between the bridges. •Change Order 032 – Revised FPUD Trench ($10,487.14): During construction, it was determined the existing FPUD trench would need to be extended to connect to FPUD’s system at a different location than originally planned. FPUD provided materials related to this change order which were installed by the project contractor. •Change Order 033 – Extra Survey Cost ($1,587.00): This change order compensates the contractor to bring a licensed surveyor back to the project site to re-survey several project features that were incorrectly identified on the plans. •Change Order 034 – Paper Joints (West) ($3,680.00): The costs included in CO 034 compensate the contractor to construct paper (temporary) joints on the west side of the project. These joints were added to allow the contractor to place a final top lift near the end of construction and avoid nearly one year of construction traffic. •Change Order 035 – Additional Selant ($14,657.98): The costs included in CO 035 compensate the contractor for adding additional sealant to the railroad screening. At locations of stitch welds, the fabricator notified the City that an additional coating was needed to ensure no long-term corrosion of the railroad screening at these weld locations. This clear coating was applied to the weld areas of 48 panels of railroad screening and is compatible with the remainder of the coating system. •Change Order 036 – Phase 1B ($27,133.28): The costs included in the CO 036 compensate the contractor for additional costs associated with the closure of Lewis Street while moving traffic from the existing underpass to the overpass. These costs supplement Change Order 027, which provided additional traffic control costs for phase 1A. EXHIBIT A Page 403 of 461 February 20, 2024 Lewis Street Overpass Council Meeting Pa g e 4 0 4 o f 4 6 1 Lewis Street Overpass Overview PROGRESS! PROJECT ELEMENTS: •625’ Bridge •Over 1 mile of girders! •Over 900,000 lbs. rebar •70’ Bridge over 1st Ave •55,000 SF of Walls •40,000 CY Wall Backfill •35,520 CY of Borrow •4,000 TONS HMA •6,500 SY Sidewalk Pa g e 4 0 5 o f 4 6 1 PROGRESS! Lewis Street Overpass BSNF Bridge from Pedestrian Path Barrier on West Side of Structure Pa g e 4 0 6 o f 4 6 1 Current Schedule: •Ground Breaking Ceremony = June 4, 2021 •Contractor Began Work = August 30, 2021 •400 working day contract •Bridge Open for Vehicles = March 2024 (anticipated) •Will require closure of Lewis Street before traffic moved onto bridge •Substantial Completion Date = July 2024 •Project is behind original schedule •Underpass Demolition – Anticipated Q1 2025 Lewis Street Overpass Pa g e 4 0 7 o f 4 6 1 Change Order 28 – Thickened Edge Treatment •Fabricate and install additional pedestrian guard rail •Location of additional guard rail required thickened slab at back of sidewalk •Total proposed change order amount = $19,792.64 Change Order 29 – Revised Joint Utility Trench •Revised trench locations to accommodate multiple utilities placed within trench (Charter, Lumen, FPUD, etc.) •Added transportation of FPUD supplied utility vaults to the project site •Total proposed change order amount = $6,895.00 Change Order 30 – Infiltration Trench •Location had to be revised due to basements constructed under sidewalk within public ROW •Adds pipe and additional excavation to the overall project. •Total proposed change order amount = $3,117.81 Lewis Street Overpass Change Orders 28-36 Pa g e 4 0 8 o f 4 6 1 Change Order 31 – Revised Irrigation Plan •Relocates and upsized service lines to planters between BSNF bridge and 2nd Ave bridge •Provides conduit for irrigation routing up SEW walls •Total proposed change order amount = $4,717.35 Change Order 32 – Revised FPUD Trench •Extends planned FPUD Trench to beyond originally planned limits •Added material provided by FPUD for installation by project Contractor •Total proposed change order amount = $10,487.14 Change Order 33 – Extra Survey Cost •Station and offset for several catch basins was incorrectly depicted on the plans •Total proposed change order amount = $1,587.00 Lewis Street Overpass Change Orders 28-36 Pa g e 4 0 9 o f 4 6 1 Change Order 34 – Paper Joints (West) •Constructs and maintains temporary joints (paper joints) on the west side of the project •Allows for the final lift of asphalt to be placed immediately before opening the road and avoiding construction damage •Total proposed change order amount = $3,680.00 Change Order 35 – Additional Sealant •A urethane-based sealer needed to ensure long term corrosion resistance at welds •Welds on 48 panels treated •Total proposed change order amount = $14,657.98 Change Order 36 – Phase 1B Traffic Control •Additional traffic control signage and devices to accommodate traffic control phasing •Final configuration will have traffic on the new roadway alignment (bridges) •Total proposed change order amount = $27,133.28 Lewis Street Overpass Change Orders 28-36 Pa g e 4 1 0 o f 4 6 1 BUDGET DISCUSSION Construction Budget ◦ Original Contract Total $22,344,999.88 ◦ Approved Change Orders (1-27) $ 3,710,041.02 ◦ Proposed Change Orders (28-36) $ 92,068.20 ◦ Projected Contract Total $26,147,109.10 Lewis Street Overpass Pa g e 4 1 1 o f 4 6 1 Major Remaining Efforts ◦Open Bridges to Traffic ◦ Pedestrian improvements remain along corridor ◦ Existing Lewis Street Improvements ◦ Roadway and sidewalk activities remain ◦ Historical Coordination ◦ Removal of the BNSF Underpass ◦ Anticipated $2.5M effort ◦ Unanticipated at bid time ◦ Not part of current contract Lewis Street Overpass Pa g e 4 1 2 o f 4 6 1 Questions? Lewis Street Overpass Pa g e 4 1 3 o f 4 6 1 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 14, 2024 TO: Adam Lincoln, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/20/24 FROM: Richa Sigdel, Deputy City Manager City Manager SUBJECT: Resolution No. 4422 - Interlocal Agreement - Cable Bridge LED Lighting System I. REFERENCE(S): Resolution Interlocal Cooperative Agreement (ILA) PowerPoint Presented at 2.12.2024 Council Workshop II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: MOTION: City authorizing 4422, No. the approve to move I Resolution Manager to sign and execute an Interlocal Cooperative Agreement between the City of Pasco, Washington, a Washington Municipal Corporation, City of Kennewick, Washington, a Washington Municipal Corporation, the Port of Pasco, a Municipal Corporation, and the Port of Kennewick, a Municipal Corporation, for the purpose of facilitating the modernization and enhancement of the lighting system on the Pasco-Kennewick Intercity Cable Bridge. III. FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed Agreement suggests a $25,000 contribution from each party involved (City of Pasco, City of Kennewick, Port of Pasco, and Port of Kennewick). These funds will be utilized to secure resources necessary for obtaining a comprehensive and accurate cost estimate, serving as the foundation for broader fundraising efforts. IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: a is Bridge, Hendler Ed the Bridge, known officially Cable The key as infrastructural element in the Tri-Cities region, linking the Cities of Pasco and Kennewick. Constructed over a period from 1974 to 1978, the Ed Hendler Bridge was Page 414 of 461 developed as a strategic response to the challenges of increasing traffic and the demands of urban expansion in our region. Its design is noteworthy for its pioneering use of suspended cables stretched between two main towers. This architectural choice not only marked the bridge as an immediately recognizable feature in our landscape but also represented a significant advancement in bridge engineering at the time. Upon its completion, the Cable Bridge quickly became a symbol of modernization and growth for the Tri-Cities area. It has played a vital role in facilitating smoother and more efficient transportation across the Columbia River, thereby positively impacting the economic and social development of our communities. The Cable Bridge, connecting Pasco and Kennewick, has not only been a critical infrastructural element but also a symbol of the Tri-Cities region's growth and development. Notably, during the "Year of the River" in 1998, the bridge gained additional symbolic significance, reflecting the region's connection to and reverence for the Columbia River. To further enhance this iconic structure, a new initiative is underway to illuminate the Cable Bridge using modern LED lighting. This enhancement is intended to transform the bridge into a more striking visual landmark, thereby complementing its longstanding symbolic role in the region. This new lighting system is envisioned to provide dynamic, programmable lighting effects, which can be managed remotely through computer programming. a up setting at aimed agreement collaborative a involves project The framework for funding. The funds collected will be allocated towards hiring consultants who will conduct a thorough review of the bridge. Their role will include developing a planning-level cost estimate for replacing the current lighting system with a cutting-edge LED system. Once cost estimates are prepared, a joint community effort to raise funds will be undertaken to bring this idea to fruition. This various among effort joint parties, a represents initiative significant underlining the commitment to not only maintain but also enhance the aesthetic and cultural value of the Cable Bridge. Ultimately, this project aims to benefit the of beacon a as role the reinforcing region, Tri-Cities entire bridge's community pride and regional identity. V. DISCUSSION: City Council and staff discussed the proposed interlocal agreement for design work of new lighting for the Cable Bridge at the February 12, 2024 Council Workshop. Page 415 of 461 Staff is seeking Council's approval of the Resolution authorizing the interlocal agreement. Page 416 of 461 Resolution – ILA Lighting System on Cable Bridge - 1 RESOLUTION NO. ____ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN AND EXECUTE AN INTERLOCAL COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGON, A WASHINGTON MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, CITY OF KENNEWICK, WASHINGTON, A WASHINGTON MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, THE PORT OF PASCO, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, AND THE PORT OF KENNEWICK, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, FOR THE PURPOSE OF FACILITATING THE MODERNIZATION AND ENHANCEMENT OF THE LIGHTING SYSTEM ON THE PASCO- KENNEWICK INTERCITY CABLE BRIDGE. WHEREAS, RCW 39.34, INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT, authorizes political subdivisions to jointly exercise their powers, privileges, or authorities with other political subdivisions of this State through the execution of an interlocal cooperative or interagency agreement; and WHEREAS, the Pasco-Kennewick Intercity Cable Bridge (Bridge), due to its distinctive design, has long served as a symbol of this region, particularly during the "Year of the River" in 1998; and WHEREAS, the Bridge's illumination is seen as a unique opportunity to enhance the aesthetic beauty of the river setting and the installation of modern LED lighting will transform the Bridge into a visual attraction, creating a striking image that complements the symbolic role it holds for the Tri-Cities region; and WHEREAS, this project represents a collaborative effort among the parties to revitalize the Bridge's lighting system for the mutual benefit of the Tri-Cities region; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, has after due consideration, determined that it is in the best interest of the City of Pasco to enter into the Interlocal Cooperative Agreement with the previously identified parties to provide initial funding to secure the resources required for obtaining a comprehensive and accurate cost estimate, which will serve as the foundation for initiating and facilitating the broader fundraising efforts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON: That the City Council of the City of Pasco approves the terms and conditions of the Interlocal Cooperative Agreement between the City of Pasco, the City of Kennewick, the Port of Pasco, and the Port of Kennewick; a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A. Page 417 of 461 Resolution – ILA Lighting System on Cable Bridge - 2 Be It Further Resolved, that the City Manager of the City of Pasco, Washington, is hereby authorized, empowered, and directed to sign and execute the Interlocal Cooperative Agreement; and to make minor substantive changes as necessary to execute the Agreement. Be It Further Resolved, that this Resolution shall take effect immediately. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, on this ___ day of __________________, 2024. _____________________________ Pete Serrano Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ ___________________________ Debra Barham, CMC Kerr Ferguson Law, PLLC City Clerk City Attorneys Page 418 of 461 INTERLOCAL COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR CABLE BRIDGE ILLUMINATION UPDATE BY THIS LOCAL COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT entered into this ______ day of ________________, 20___, between the City of Pasco, Washington, a Washington Municipal Corporation (“Pasco”), the City of Kennewick, Washington, a Washington Municipal Corporation (“Kennewick”), the Port of Pasco , a Municipal Corporation (“Port of Pasco”), and Port of Kennewick, a Municipal Corporation (“Port of Kennewick”) and collectively referred to as ”Parties”, do hereby enter into the following Agreement. Pursuant to Chapter 39.34 RCW, and in consideration of the mutual benefits and covenants described herein, the Parties agree as set forth below. Section I – Project Description I.I Purpose The purpose of this Agreement is to facilitate the modernization and enhancement of the lighting system for the Pasco - Kennewick Intercity Cable Bridge ("Bridge") to promote tourism and economic development (“Project”). The existing lighting system of the Bridge shall be replaced with state-of-the-art LED lighting fixtures. These fixtures will allow for dynamic and programmable lighting effects, controlled remotely from an offsite computer program. I.II Background 1. The Bridge, due to its distinctive design, has long served as a symbol of this region, particularly during the "Year of the River" in 1998. 2. The Bridge's illumination is seen as a unique opportunity to enhance the aesthetic beauty of the river setting. The installation of modern LED lighting will transform the Bridge into a visual attraction, creating a striking image that complements the symbolic role it holds for the Tri-Cities region. 3. This project represents a collaborative effort among the parties to revitalize the Bridge's lighting system for the mutual benefit of the Tri-Cities region. 4. The Parties are acting pursuant to their authorities to promote tourism and economic development within their respective boundaries. I.III Project Scope The scope of this Agreement shall encompass the following: 1. Design and Specifications: The design and specifications for the Project shall be provided by ENGINEERING FIRM, hereinafter referred to as the "Design Consultant", and shall be responsible for the following scope of work: Page 419 of 461 ○ Review of Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) As- Builts: The Design Consultant shall conduct a comprehensive review of the WSDOT as-built documents to assess the current state of the lighting system on the Pasco - Kennewick Intercity Cable Stay Bridge. ○ Preliminary Equipment List and Work Items: Based on the findings from the as-built review, the Design Consultant shall formulate a preliminary equipment list, detailing the necessary components and a list of work items required to facilitate the installation of the new LED lighting system Project. ○ Cost Estimate: The Design Consultant shall provide a detailed cost estimate for the entire Project. This estimate shall encompass all expenses associated with the procurement and installation of the Project, as well as any additional costs related to the Project's execution. ○ Promotional Visual Representation: The Design Consultant shall create a promotional visual representation illustrating the potential aesthetic transformation of the Bridge with the implementation of the new LED lighting system. This visual representation shall serve as a promotional tool to garner support for the project and demonstrate its potential impact on the region's landscape. The design and specifications developed by the Design Consultant, encompassing the above elements, will be shared with all Parties to this Agreement for their timely review and approval. I.IV Fundraising Efforts The scope of fundraising efforts shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following objectives: ꞏ Community Involvement: Encourage the active participation of local businesses, citizens, and community organizations in supporting the project through financial contributions, sponsorships, and volunteer efforts. ꞏ Fundraising Campaign: Plan, coordinate, and execute a comprehensive fundraising campaign that engages the community, conveys the significance of the project, and provides clear avenues for financial support. ꞏ Funds Allocation: Allocate the funds raised from the community towards the overall project cost, with the goal of funding the entire project through a combination of public and private contributions. ꞏ Transparency: Maintain transparency in all fundraising activities, accounting for all funds collected and expended, and providing regular updates to the community and the involved parties. The Parties understand the value of the Bridge as an iconic symbol of the community and its potential to unite local residents, businesses, and stakeholders and to promote tourism and economic development in their respective jurisdictions. To leverage this iconic status, the Parties commit to dedicating reasonable efforts and resources towards achieving the Project's financial goals through fundraising efforts. Page 420 of 461 The Parties shall collaborate with local organizations, civic groups, and institutions to facilitate community engagement and fundraising activities. They shall work collectively to identify and reach out to potential donors and supporters within the community. This commitment to fundraising efforts and community engagement aligns with the vision of using local support to contribute to the funding of the entire Project cost. The Parties will actively seek to leverage the iconic significance of the Bridge to foster local pride and garner financial support from the community. I.V Funding The Parties acknowledge the importance of securing funding for this Project, and they are committed to its success. In furtherance of this commitment, each Party agrees to provide an initial funding contribution. The details of each Party's contribution shall be as follows: ● Pasco: $25,000 ● Kennewick: $25,000 ● Port of Pasco: $25,000 ● Port of Kennewick: $25,000 The purpose of this initial funding is to secure the resources required for obtaining a comprehensive and accurate cost estimate, which will serve as the foundation for initiating and facilitating the broader fundraising efforts. It is intended to not only support the development of an accurate Project budget but also to establish the fundraising campaign within the local community. The Parties shall closely coordinate their efforts to maximize the effectiveness of these fundraising activities. Port of Pasco and Port of Kennewick will have no further funding obligations under this Agreement. In the event Project costs are higher than projected, the cities of Pasco and Kennewick will assume excess Project costs not to exceed 10% over the initial funding of $100,000. Project costs in excess of the 10% contingency require written approval by the Cities in the form of an addendum to this Interlocal Agreement. The Port’s payment will be made within thirty days of receipt of invoice from City of Pasco. If the Project is abandoned, then this Agreement shall be of no further force or effect. SECTION II: PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION II.I Administrative /Lead Agency For the purpose of RCW 39.34, Pasco shall serve as the administrative/ lead agency responsible for overseeing the implementation of this Project and for securing all necessary permits and certifications required for its successful completion. II.II Procurement and Project Execution Page 421 of 461 1. Pasco shall be responsible for procuring all services and materials required to execute this Project in strict accordance with the design and specifications outlined in Section I and in accordance with RCW requirements governing Professional Services and Public Works. 2. Pasco shall collect Project funds contributed by the Parties for this first phase of the Project and disburse such funds as described in this Agreement. 3. Once the design, equipment list, cost estimates, promotional visual representation and fundraising is complete, the Project shall be carried out using modern LED lighting technology as detailed in the design and specifications provided by ENGINEERING FIRM and approved by the Parties. II.III Project Timeline The target date for the completion of the Project under this Agreement shall be TARGET DATE However, under no circumstances shall the Project extend beyond the deadline of DEADLINE DATE without the mutual consent of the Parties. SECTION III: TERM OF AGREEMENT The term of this Agreement shall commence on the date of its execution by all Parties i. The termination date for the installation of the illumination system shall be SPECIFY DATE, or upon the satisfactory completion and acceptance of the Project work outlined within this Agreement, unless otherwise modified, terminated, or extended by mutual agreement of the Parties. Any Party may terminate their participation in this Agreement by giving thirty (30) days written notice to all Parties at the addresses set forth below. A Parties’ termination shall not relieve it of its funding obligation set forth in Section I.V Funding herein above. SECTION IV: OWNERSHIP OF IMPROVEMENTS All enhancements resulting from this Project shall constitute permanent fixtures on the Bridge, which is property owned by the State of Washington Department of Transportation. SECTION V: MODIFICATIONS AND AMENDMENTS This Agreement may only be modified, altered, or amended through written agreement executed by the then-current Parties to this Agreement except as set forth in Section III. SECTION VI: MAINTENANCE Upon the Project's completion and acceptance by the Parties, the ongoing operational and maintenance expenses shall initially be covered by eligible funding, as may be made available by the State of Washington. Any remaining costs shall be divided equally between Pasco and Kennewick. SECTION VII: INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT PROVISIONS Page 422 of 461 No special budget or continuous funds are expected or required for the construction, maintenance, and operation of this Project. There is no intention to establish a separate legal entity for the cooperative Project, nor to require the holding or disposition of real or personal property. The Pasco Public Works Director shall be designated as the Administrator of the Project. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the Parties hereto and their successors and assigns. No other person shall have any right or cause of action based upon any provisions of this Agreement. This Agreement has been reviewed and revised by legal counsels for each Party, and no presumption or rule construing ambiguity against the drafter of the document shall apply to the interpretation or enforcement of this Agreement. No employees or agents of any Party shall be deemed, or represent themselves to be, employees of any of the other Party. A copy of this Agreement shall be recorded with the Auditor of each County within which any Party is located or shall be posted to each Parties’ web site as provided by law, Except as provided herein, each Party shall finance its own conduct of responsibilities under this Agreement. No ownership of property will transfer as a result of this Agreement. SECTION VII: SEVERABILITY If any term or condition of this Agreement, or its application to any person or circumstance, is found to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of the other terms, conditions, or applications of this Agreement that can be given effect without the invalid provision. Consequently, the terms and conditions of this Agreement are considered severable. SECTION IX: INDEMNIFICATION Each Party shall undertake the defense, indemnification, and hold harmless of the others from any claims, damages, causes of action, or judgments arising due to the negligent or intentional actions of their agents, employees, or officers. Each Party specifically assumes liability for actions brought by its own employees against the other Party and for that purpose each Party specifically waives, as respects the other parties only, any immunity under the Worker’s Compensation Act, RCW Title 51. The Parties recognize that this waiver was the subject of mutual negotiation. In the event any Party incurs attorney’s fees, costs or other legal expenses to enforce the provisions of this Agreement against the other Party, all such fees, costs and expenses shall be recoverable by the prevailing Party. Page 423 of 461 No liability shall attach to any of the Parties by reason of entering into this Agreement except as expressly provided herein. The provisions of this Section IX shall survive any termination or expiration of this Agreement. SECTION X: ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement comprises the entirety of the terms and conditions agreed upon by the Parties. All documents referred to by incorporation are attached as exhibits. No other understandings, whether oral or otherwise, relating to the subject matter of this Agreement, shall be deemed to exist or bind any of the Parties. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington, and its validity and performance shall be governed by these laws. In the event of any legal action arising from this Agreement, the venue shall be the Superior Court in the County of Franklin, State of Washington. SECTION XI: NOTICE ADDRESSES All notices given pursuant to this Agreement shall be deemed delivered to the respective Party on the date that it is personally delivered to the address(es) set forth below, or on the date that it is successfully sent by email transmission to the email addresses set forth below: ENTITY: Attention: Email: Address XII. RECORDS AND AUDIT. During the term of this Agreement, and for a period not less than six (6) years from the date of termination, records and accounts pertaining to the work of this Agreement and accounting therefore shall be kept by each Party and shall be available for inspection and audit by representatives of either Party and any other entity with legal entitlement to review said records. If any litigation, claim, or audit is commenced, the records and accounts along with supporting documentation shall be retained until all litigation, claims, or audit finding has been resolved, even though such litigation, claim, or audit continues past the six-year (6) retention period. This provision is in addition to and is not intended to supplant, alter or amend records retention requirements established by applicable state and federal laws. [SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE] Page 424 of 461 CITY OF KENNEWICK: PORT OF KENNEWICK: ___________, City Manager Tim Arzen, CEO Date:______________ Date:______________ Approved as to form: _______________ ___________________ City Attorney Port Legal Counsel CITY OF PASCO: PORT OF PASCO ___________, City Manager _____________CEO Date:______________ Date:______________ Approved as to form: City Attorney Port Legal Counsel Page 425 of 461 Cable Bridge Illumination Inter Local Agreement Pa g e 4 2 6 o f 4 6 1 Current State The current white spotlights were installed over 20 years ago. The old technology limits the lighting capabilities. To change the color of the lights, a plastic-colored plate must be installed over each light making it labor intensive and expensive. Pa g e 4 2 7 o f 4 6 1 Desired State Turn this landmark bridge into an artistic feature of the community. Update antiquated lighting with energy efficient LED technology. Highlight Osprey Point, Clover Island & other nearby Port of Pasco and Port of Kennewick projects. Raise awareness of the Columbia River system. Pa g e 4 2 8 o f 4 6 1 Project Cost Design Cost – Not to exceed $125K Construction Estimated at over $2 million Community led fundraising effort Pa g e 4 2 9 o f 4 6 1 Pros Cons Reduce energy consumption Expensive >$2 million Lower labor cost to change/manage bridge lights DOT approval needed Increase placemaking Many partners involved Artistic landmark Additional workload for all parties involved during project design and construction Support of various causes/festivals/holidays Pa g e 4 3 0 o f 4 6 1 Partners and Investment 1.City of Pasco - $25,000 2.City of Kennewick - $25,000 3.Port of Pasco - $25,000 4.Port of Kennewick - $25,000 Pa g e 4 3 1 o f 4 6 1 Policy Decision Approval of $25,000 in funding for design efforts. Pa g e 4 3 2 o f 4 6 1 Questions?Pa g e 4 3 3 o f 4 6 1 AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council February 13, 2024 TO: Adam Lincoln, City Manager City Council Regular Meeting: 2/20/24 FROM: Ken Roske, Police Chief Police Department SUBJECT: Resolution No. 4423 - Interagency Agreement with the Washington Traffic Safety Commission for the Law Enforcement Liaison Program I. REFERENCE(S): Proposed Resolution Interagency Agreement with the Washington Traffic Safety Commission (WTSC) for the Law Enforcement Liaison Program II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: MOTION:City the authorizing 4423, No. approve to move I Resolution Manager to execute the interagency agreement between the Washington Traffic Safety Commission and the City of Pasco for the Law Enforcement Liaison program. III. FISCAL IMPACT: None IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: This agreement, between the Washington Traffic Safety Commission (WTSC) and the Pasco Police Department, aims to secure funding from the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) for the implementation of the "2024-Sub-grants-5194- Region 14 Law Enforcement Liaison" traffic safety grant project. The agreement delineates the performance period, commencing upon mutual execution or October 15, 2023, and extending until September 30, 2024. The Pasco Police Department will be entrusted with executing various project provisions, including facilitating law enforcement engagement in traffic safety enforcement activities, enhancing professional development for officers, and offering guidance on law enforcement matters to the regional Target Zero Page 434 of 461 Manager and traffic safety coalition. The agreement stipulates a maximum budget of $3,000.00 for the entire performance period. Future funding beyond the initial year is contingent upon availability and demonstration of satisfactory progress. This agreement signifies a collaborative effort between WTSC and the Pasco Police Department to enhance traffic safety initiatives within the community. By adhering to the outlined provisions, both parties aim to maximize the efficacy and impact of the grant project while ensuring compliance with funding regulations and objectives. V. DISCUSSION: In order to continue receiving financial support from the Washington State Traffic Safety Commission to participate in Law Enforcement Liaison (LEL) activities staff is recommending Council approval of the proposed interagency agreement to support these collaborative efforts. Page 435 of 461 Resolution - WTSC ILA - 1 RESOLUTION NO. ____ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN AND EXECUTE AN INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE WASHINGTON TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION AND THE PASCO POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR THE LAW ENFORCEMENT LIAISON PROGRAM. WHEREAS, RCW 39.34, INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT, authorizes political subdivisions to jointly exercise their powers, privileges, or authorities with other political subdivisions of this State through the execution of an interlocal cooperative or interagency agreement; and WHEREAS, the City of Pasco, Washington (City) and the Washington Traffic Safety Commission (WTSC) desire to enter into this Interagency Agreement to support collaborative efforts to conduct Law Enforcement Liaison (LEL) activities; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to contribute a commissioned officer to work with WTSC and local law enforcement agencies to develop and implement statewide initiatives focusing on traffic safety education and culture change at the local level; and WHEREAS, the City shall do the things necessary for, and incidental to the performance of duties set forth in this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, has after due consideration, determined that it is in the best interest of the City to enter into the interagency agreement to conduct straight time or overtime law enforcement liaison activities with the WTSC. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON: That the City Council of the City of Pasco approves the terms and conditions of the Interagency Agreement between the Washington Traffic Safety Commission and the Pasco Police Department, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A. Be It Further Resolved, that the City Manager of the City of Pasco, Washington, is hereby authorized, empowered, and directed to sign and execute said Agreement on behalf of the City of Pasco; and to make minor substantive changes as necessary to execute the Agreement. Be It Further Resolved, that this Resolution shall take effect immediately. Page 436 of 461 Resolution - WTSC ILA - 2 PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, on this ___ day of ___________________, 2024. _____________________________ Pete Serrano Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ ___________________________ Debra Barham, CMC Kerr Ferguson Law, PLLC City Clerk City Attorneys Page 437 of 461 Interagency Agreement-2024-Sub-grants-5194-Region 14 Law Enforcement Liaison INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE Washington Traffic Safety Commission AND Pasco Police Department THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the Washington Traffic Safety Commission, hereinafter referred to as “WTSC,” and Pasco Police Department, hereinafter referred to as “SUB-RECIPIENT.” NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the authority provided to WTSC in RCW 43.59 and RCW 39.34, terms, conditions, covenants, and performance contained herein, or attached and incorporated and made a part hereof, the parties mutually agree as follows: 1. PURPOSE OF THE AGREEMENT: The purpose of this Agreement is to provide funding, provided by the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and allowed under the Assistance Listing/Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) #20.600, for traffic safety grant project 2024-Sub-grants-5194-Region 14 Law Enforcement Liaison. 2. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE The period of performance of this Agreement shall commence upon the date of execution by both parties or October 15, 2023, whichever is later, and remain in effect until September 30, 2024, unless terminated sooner, as provided herein. 3. STATEMENT OF WORK The SUB-RECIPIENT shall carry out the provisions of the traffic safety project described here as the Statement of Work (SOW). If the SUB-RECIPIENT is unable to fulfill the SOW in any manner on this project, the SUB-RECIPIENT must contact the WTSC program manager immediately and discuss a page 1 of 22 Page 438 of 461 potential amendment. All Federal and State regulations will apply. 3.1 SCOPE OF WORK 3.1.1 Problem ID and/or Opportunity The Law Enforcement Liaison (LEL) program provides an opportunity for the WTSC to work with local law enforcement agencies to develop and implement statewide initiatives focusing on traffic safety education and culture change at the local level. The frequency of contact with local law enforcement is important to help facilitate their cooperation in achieving the Washington State Traffic Safety Commission’s (WTSC) mission of building partnerships to save lives and prevent injuries on our roadways for the health, safety, and benefit of our communities. The LEL program provides the conduit to make those connections while helping the WTSC and local coordinators implement agency strategies. 3.1.2 Project Purpose and Strategies The purpose of this project is to increase law enforcement participation in traffic safety enforcement and to serve as a resource for the regional Target Zero Manager. This is accomplished by empowering the local LEL by providing them training, funding, technical assistance, and access to a larger community of LELs. WTSC sees the following as some key qualities of an effective LEL - - Demonstrated knowledge, understanding, and application of WA traffic safety laws. - Strong interpersonal skills and good oral communications skills. - Knowledge of general police methods, practices, and procedures. - Solid connections with law enforcement agencies within the region. 3.2 PROJECT GOALS 1) Support participation in regional traffic safety activities, with a goal of 75% of law enforcement agencies in the region participating in HVE events in the fiscal year. 2) Provide leadership in the development of professional development for traffic safety minded officers, with the long term goal of increasing the number of law enforcement agency leaders/admin who believe that traffic safety is a priority. 3) Provide guidance/feedback on law enforcement topics to the regional Target Zero Manager and traffic safety coalition (if applicable). 3.2.1 The objectives, measures and timelines listed in Appendix A will be reviewed at least annually by the designated contacts of the SUB-RECIPIENT and WTSC, and may be updated pursuant to clause 6 of this AGREEMENT. For the purposes of this section only, the parties’ DESIGNATED CONTACTS, as page 2 of 22 Page 439 of 461 listed in clause 42, are authorized to execute these amendments to Appendix A. 3.3. COMPENSATION 3.3.1 The cost of accomplishing the work described in the SOW will not exceed $3,000.00, for the entire period of performance, as allocated to each year of this agreement in Section 3.4 PROJECT COSTS. Unspent contract funds from each year do NOT carry over into subsequent years and each year’s budget is independent of the others. 3.3.2 Payment for satisfactory performance of the work shall not exceed this amount unless the parties mutually agree to a higher amount in a written Amendment to this Agreement executed by both parties. 3.3.3 After the first year, continuation is subject to funding availability, agreement on future objectives and measures, and satisfactory progress toward completion of agreed upon goals (as determined by WTSC), as set forth in the SOW. 3.3.4 If the SUB-RECIPIENT intends to charge indirect costs, an Indirect Cost Rate must be established in accordance with WTSC policies, and an approved cost allocation plan may be required to be submitted to the WTSC before any performance is conducted under this Agreement. Indirect cost rates are subject to change based on updated Indirect Rate Letters from a cognizant federal agency or approved cost allocation plans. If the indirect rate increases, the budget will be modified by deducting the amount of the indirect rate increase from other budget categories so that the total budget does not increase. The total budget may not increase without an amendment to this agreement executed by both parties. 3.3.5 WTSC will only reimburse the SUB-RECIPIENT for travel related expenses for travel defined in the scope of work and budget or for which approval was expressly granted. The SUB-RECIPIENT must submit a travel authorization form (A-40) to request approval for any travel not defined in the SOW and for all travel outside of the continental United States. 3.3.6 WTSC will reimburse travel related expenses consistent with the written travel policies of the SUB- RECIPIENT. If no written policy exists, state travel rates and policies (SAAM Chapter 10) apply. If WTSC makes travel arrangements on behalf of the SUB-RECIPIENT, state travel policies must also be followed. Washington State Administrative & Accounting Manual (SAAM) Chapter 10 can be obtained at this website: https://www.ofm.wa.gov/sites/default/files/public/legacy/policy/10.htm. If for any reason, this information is not available at this website, contact the WTSC office at 360-725-9860 to obtain a copy. If following state travel policies, the SUB-RECIPIENT must provide appropriate documentation (receipts) to support reimbursement requests, including the A-40 Travel Authorization form if required. 3.3.7. Any equipment that will be purchased under this agreement with a purchase price over $5,000 must be pre-approved by NHTSA prior to purchase. Pre-approval must also be gained if funding from this page 3 of 22 Page 440 of 461 agreement is used to purchase a portion of an item with a purchase price of $5,000 or higher. Approval for these purchases will be facilitated by WTSC. WTSC will notify the SUB-RECIPIENT when approval has been gained or denied. Failure to receive pre-approval will preclude reimbursement. SUB- RECIPIENT will provide WTSC with purchase price, quote, manufacturer, description of its use in the project, and documentation showing that it is made in America. Any equipment purchased with NHTSA funds, must be used exclusively for traffic safety purposes or the cost must be pro-rated. 3.3.8. All equipment must be inventoried by the SUB-RECIPIENT. The SUB-RECIPIENT agrees to maintain the equipment, continue to use it for project purposes, and report on its status to WTSC each year when requested. 3.3.9. Equipment is defined as any asset with a useful life greater than one year AND a unit cost of $5,000 or greater, and small and attractive assets. Small and attractive assets are the following if they a unit cost of $300 or more: Laptops and Notebook Computers Tablets and Smart phones Small and attractive assets also include the following if they have a unit cost of $1000 or more: Optical Devices, Binoculars, Telescopes, Infrared Viewers, and Rangefinders Cameras and Photographic Projection Equipment Desktop Computers (PCs) Television Sets, DVD Players, Blu-ray Players and Video Cameras (home type) 3.4 PROJECT COSTS The costs for the work under the SOW to be provided by the SUB-RECIPIENT are as follows: Year 1: $3,000.00 APPLICABLE STATE AND FEDERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS: 4. ACTIVITY REPORTS The SUB-RECIPIENT will submit progress reports on the activity of this project in the form provided by page 4 of 22 Page 441 of 461 the WTSC using the WTSC Enterprise Management System (WEMS) Progress Reporting process or other alternate means pre-approved by WTSC. The SUB-RECIPIENT will include copies of publications, training reports, advertising, social media posts, meeting agendas, and any statistical data generated in project execution in the reports. The final report will be submitted to WTSC within 30 days of termination of this Agreement. WTSC reserves the right to delay the processing of invoices until activity reports are received and approved. 5. ADVANCE PAYMENTS PROHIBITED No payments in advance of or in anticipation of goods or services to be provided under this Agreement shall be made by the WTSC. 6. AGREEMENT ALTERATIONS AND AMENDMENTS This Agreement may be amended by mutual agreement of the parties in the form of a written Amendment to this Agreement. Such amendments shall only be binding if they are in writing and signed by personnel authorized to bind each of the parties. 7. ALL WRITINGS CONTAINED HEREIN This Agreement contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the parties. No other understandings, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement shall be deemed to exist or to bind any of the parties hereto. 8. ASSIGNMENT The SUB-RECIPIENT may not assign the work to be provided under this Agreement, in whole or in part, without the express prior written consent of the WTSC, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. The SUB-RECIPIENT shall provide the WTSC a copy of all third-party contracts and agreements entered into for purposes of fulfilling the SOW. Such third-party contracts and agreements must follow applicable federal, state, and local law, including but not limited to procurement law, rules, and procedures. If any of the funds provided under this Agreement include funds from NHTSA, such third-party contracts and agreements must include the federal provisions set forth in this Agreement in sections 32 through 41. 9. ATTORNEYS’ FEES In the event of litigation or other action brought to enforce the Agreement terms, each party agrees to bear its own attorney fees and costs. 10. BILLING PROCEDURE The SUB-RECIPIENT shall submit monthly invoices for reimbursement to WTSC with supporting documentation as WTSC shall require. All invoices for reimbursement shall be submitted through the WEMS invoicing process, or via alternate method if approved by WTSC. Payment to the SUB- RECIPIENT for approved and completed work will be made by warrant or account transfer by WTSC page 5 of 22 Page 442 of 461 within 30 days of receipt of such properly documented invoices acceptable to WTSC. Upon expiration of the Agreement, any claim for payment not already made shall be submitted within 45 days after the expiration date of this Agreement. All invoices for goods received or services performed on or prior to June 30, must be received by WTSC no later than August 10 of the same calendar year. All invoices for goods received or services performed between July 1 and September 30, must be received by WTSC no later than November 10 of the same calendar year. WTSC reserves the right to delay the processing of invoices until activity reports required by Section 4 of this agreement, are received and approved. 11. CONFIDENTIALITY / SAFEGUARDING OF INFORMATION The SUB-RECIPIENT shall not use or disclose any information concerning the WTSC, or information which may be classified as confidential, for any purpose not directly connected with the administration of this Agreement, except with prior written consent of the WTSC, or as may be required by law. 12. COST PRINCIPLES Costs incurred under this Agreement shall adhere to provisions of 2 CFR Part 200 Subpart E. 13. COVENANT AGAINST CONTINGENT FEES The SUB-RECIPIENT warrants that it has not paid, and agrees not to pay, any bonus, commission, brokerage, or contingent fee to solicit or secure this Agreement or to obtain approval of any application for federal financial assistance for this Agreement. The WTSC shall have the right, in the event of breach of this section by the SUB-RECIPIENT, to annul this Agreement without liability. 14. DISPUTES 14.1. Disputes arising in the performance of this Agreement, which are not resolved by agreement of the parties, shall be decided in writing by the WTSC Deputy Director or designee. This decision shall be final and conclusive, unless within 10 days from the date of the SUB-RECIPIENT’s receipt of WTSC’s written decision, the SUB-RECIPIENT furnishes a written appeal to the WTSC Director. The SUB-RECIPIENT’s appeal shall be decided in writing by the Director or designee within 30 days of receipt of the appeal by the Director. The decision shall be binding upon the SUB-RECIPIENT and the SUB-RECIPIENT shall abide by the decision. 14.2. Performance During Dispute. Unless otherwise directed by WTSC, the SUB-RECIPIENT shall continue performance under this Agreement while matters in dispute are being resolved. 14.3 In the event that either Party deems it necessary to institute legal action or proceedings to enforce any right or obligation under this Agreement, the Parties hereto agree that any such action or proceedings shall be brought in the superior court situated in Thurston County, Washington. 15. GOVERNANCE page 6 of 22 Page 443 of 461 15.1. This Agreement is entered into pursuant to and under the authority granted by the laws of the state of Washington and any applicable federal laws. The provisions of this Agreement shall be construed to conform to those laws. 15.2. In the event of an inconsistency in the terms of this Agreement, or between its terms and any applicable statute or rule, the inconsistency shall be resolved by giving precedence in the following order: 15.2.1. Applicable federal and state statutes and rules 15.2.2. Terms and Conditions of this Agreement 15.2.3. Any Amendment executed under this Agreement 15.2.4. Any SOW executed under this Agreement 15.2.5. Any other provisions of the Agreement, including materials incorporated by reference 16. INCOME Any income earned by the SUB-RECIPIENT from the conduct of the SOW (e.g., sale of publications, registration fees, or service charges) must be accounted for, reported to WTSC, and that income must be applied to project purposes or used to reduce project costs. 17. INDEMNIFICATION 17.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the SUB-RECIPIENT shall indemnify and hold harmless the WTSC, its officers, employees, and agents, and process and defend at its own expense any and all claims, demands, suits at law or equity, actions, penalties, losses, damages, or costs of whatsoever kind (“claims”) brought against WTSC arising out of or in connection with this Agreement and/or the SUB- RECIPIENT’s performance or failure to perform any aspect of the Agreement. This indemnity provision applies to all claims against WTSC, its officers, employees, and agents arising out of, in connection with, or incident to the acts or omissions of the SUB-RECIPIENT, its officers, employees, agents, contractors, and subcontractors. Provided, however, that nothing herein shall require the SUB-RECIPIENT to indemnify and hold harmless or defend the WTSC, its agents, employees, or officers to the extent that claims are caused by the negligent acts or omissions of the WTSC, its officers, employees or agents; and provided further that if such claims result from the concurrent negligence of (a) the SUB-RECIPIENT, its officers, employees, agents, contractors, or subcontractors, and (b) the WTSC, its officers, employees, or agents, or involves those actions covered by RCW 4.24.115, the indemnity provisions provided herein shall be valid and enforceable only to the extent of the negligence of the SUB-RECIPIENT, its officers, employees, agents, contractors, or subcontractors. 17.2. The SUB-RECIPIENT agrees that its obligations under this Section extend to any claim, demand and/or cause of action brought by, or on behalf of, any of its employees or agents in the performance of this agreement. For this purpose, the SUB-RECIPIENT, by mutual negotiation, hereby waives with respect to WTSC only, any immunity that would otherwise be available to it against such claims under the page 7 of 22 Page 444 of 461 Industrial Insurance provisions chapter 51.12 RCW. 17.3. The indemnification and hold harmless provision shall survive termination of this Agreement. 18. INDEPENDENT CAPACITY The employees or agents of each party who are engaged in the performance of this Agreement shall continue to be employees or agents of that party and shall not be considered for any purpose to be employees or agents of the other party. 19. INSURANCE COVERAGE 19.1. The SUB-RECIPIENT shall comply with the provisions of Title 51 RCW, Industrial Insurance, if required by law. 19.2. If the SUB-RECIPIENT is not required to maintain insurance in accordance with Title 51 RCW, prior to the start of any performance of work under this Agreement, the SUB-RECIPIENT shall provide WTSC with proof of insurance coverage (e.g., vehicle liability insurance, private property liability insurance, or commercial property liability insurance), as determined appropriate by WTSC, which protects the SUB- RECIPIENT and WTSC from risks associated with executing the SOW associated with this Agreement. 20. LICENSING, ACCREDITATION, AND REGISTRATION The SUB-RECIPIENT shall comply with all applicable local, state, and federal licensing, accreditation, and registration requirements and standards necessary for the performance of this Agreement. The SUB- RECIPIENT shall complete registration with the Washington State Department of Revenue, if required, and be responsible for payment of all taxes due on payments made under this Agreement. 21. RECORDS MAINTENANCE 21.1. During the term of this Agreement and for six years thereafter, the SUB-RECIPIENT shall maintain books, records, documents, and other evidence that sufficiently and properly reflect all direct and indirect costs expended in the performance of the services described herein. These records shall be subject to inspection, review, or audit by authorized personnel of the WTSC, the Office of the State Auditor, and federal officials so authorized by law. All books, records, documents, and other material relevant to this Agreement will be retained for six years after expiration. The Office of the State Auditor, federal auditors, the WTSC, and any duly authorized representatives shall have full access and the right to examine any of these materials during this period. 21.2. Records and other documents, in any medium, furnished by one party to this Agreement to the other party, will remain the property of the furnishing party, unless otherwise agreed. The receiving party will not disclose or make available this material to any third parties without first giving notice to the furnishing party and giving them a reasonable opportunity to respond. Each party will utilize reasonable page 8 of 22 Page 445 of 461 security procedures and protections to assure that records and documents provided by the other party are not erroneously disclosed to third parties. 22. RIGHT OF INSPECTION The SUB-RECIPIENT shall provide right of access to its facilities to the WTSC or any of its officers, or to any other authorized agent or official of the state of Washington or the federal government, at all reasonable times, in order to monitor and evaluate performance, compliance, and/or quality assurance under this Agreement. The SUB-RECIPIENT shall make available information necessary for WTSC to comply with the right to access, amend, and receive an accounting of disclosures of their Personal Information according to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) or any regulations enacted or revised pursuant to the HIPAA provisions and applicable provisions of Washington State law. The SUB-RECIPIENT shall upon request make available to the WTSC and the United States Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services all internal policies and procedures, books, and records relating to the safeguarding, use, and disclosure of Personal Information obtained or used as a result of this Agreement. 23. RIGHTS IN DATA 23.1. WTSC and SUB-RECIPIENT agree that all data and work products (collectively called “Work Product”) pursuant to this Agreement shall be considered works made for hire under the U.S. Copyright Act, 17 USC §101 et seq., and shall be owned by the state of Washington. Work Product includes, but is not limited to, reports, documents, pamphlets, advertisement, books, magazines, surveys, studies, computer programs, films, tapes, sound reproductions, designs, plans, diagrams, drawings, software, and/or databases to the extent provided by law. Ownership includes the right to copyright, register the copyright, distribute, prepare derivative works, publicly perform, publicly display, and the ability to otherwise use and transfer these rights. 23.2. If for any reason the Work Product would not be considered a work made for hire under applicable law, the SUB-RECIPIENT assigns and transfers to WTSC the entire right, title, and interest in and to all rights in the Work Product and any registrations and copyright applications relating thereto and any renewals and extensions thereof. 23.3. The SUB-RECIPIENT may publish, at its own expense, the results of project activities without prior review by the WTSC, provided that any publications (written, visual, or sound) contain acknowledgment of the support provided by NHTSA and the WTSC. Any discovery or invention derived from work performed under this project shall be referred to the WTSC, who will determine through NHTSA whether patent protections will be sought, how any rights will be administered, and other actions required to protect the public interest. 24. SAVINGS page 9 of 22 Page 446 of 461 In the event funding from state, federal, or other sources is withdrawn, reduced, or limited in any way after the effective date of this Agreement and prior to completion of the SOW under this Agreement, the WTSC may terminate the Agreement under the "TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE" clause, without the 30 day notice requirement. The Agreement is subject to renegotiation at the WTSC’s discretion under any new funding limitations or conditions. 25. SEVERABILITY If any provision of this Agreement or any provision of any document incorporated by reference shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Agreement which can be given effect without the invalid provision, if such remainder conforms to the requirements of applicable law and the fundamental purpose of this Agreement, and to this end the provisions of this Agreement are declared to be severable. 26. SITE SECURITY While on WTSC premises, the SUB-RECIPIENT, its agents, employees, or sub-contractors shall conform in all respects with all WTSC physical, fire, or other security policies and applicable regulations. 27. TAXES All payments of payroll taxes, unemployment contributions, any other taxes, insurance, or other such expenses for the SUB-RECIPIENT or its staff shall be the sole responsibility of the SUB-RECIPIENT. 28. TERMINATION FOR CAUSE If the SUB-RECIPIENT does not fulfill in a timely and proper manner its obligations under this Agreement or violates any of these terms and conditions, the WTSC will give the SUB-RECIPIENT written notice of such failure or violation, and may terminate this Agreement immediately. At the WTSC’s discretion, the SUB-RECIPIENT may be given 15 days to correct the violation or failure. In the event that the SUB- RECIPIENT is given the opportunity to correct the violation and the violation is not corrected within the 15-day period, this Agreement may be terminated at the end of that period by written notice of the WTSC. 29. TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, either party may terminate this Agreement, without cause or reason, with 30 days written notice to the other party. If this Agreement is so terminated, the WTSC shall be liable only for payment required under the terms of this Agreement for services rendered or goods delivered prior to the effective date of termination. 30. TREATMENT OF ASSETS 30.1. Title to all property furnished by the WTSC shall remain property of the WTSC. Title to all property furnished by the SUB-RECIPIENT for the cost of which the SUB-RECIPIENT is entitled to be reimbursed as a direct item of cost under this Agreement shall pass to and vest in the WTSC upon delivery of such page 10 of 22 Page 447 of 461 property by the SUB-RECIPIENT. Title to other property, the cost of which is reimbursable to the SUB- RECIPIENT under this Agreement, shall pass to and vest in the WTSC upon (i) issuance for use of such property in the performance of this Agreement, or (ii) commencement of use of such property in the performance of this Agreement, or (iii) reimbursement of the cost thereof by the WTSC in whole or in part, whichever first occurs. 30.2. Any property of the WTSC furnished to the SUB-RECIPIENT shall, unless otherwise provided herein or approved by the WTSC, be used only for the performance of this Agreement. 30.3. The SUB-RECIPIENT shall be responsible for any loss or damage to property of the WTSC which results from the negligence of the SUB-RECIPIENT or which results from the failure on the part of the SUB-RECIPIENT to maintain and administer that property in accordance with sound management practices. 30.4. If any WTSC property is lost, destroyed, or damaged, the SUB-RECIPIENT shall immediately notify the WTSC and shall take all reasonable steps to protect the property from further damage. 30.5. The SUB-RECIPIENT shall surrender to the WTSC all property of the WTSC upon completion, termination, or cancellation of this Agreement. 30.6. All reference to the SUB-RECIPIENT under this clause shall also include SUB-RECIPIENT's employees, agents, or sub-contractors. 31. WAIVER A failure by either party to exercise its rights under this Agreement shall not preclude that party from subsequent exercise of such rights and shall not constitute a waiver of any other rights under this Agreement. APPLICABLE CERTIFICATIONS AND ASSURANCES FOR HIGHWAY SAFETY GRANTS (23 CFR PART 1300 APPENDIX A): 32. BUY AMERICA ACT The SUB-RECIPIENT will comply with the Buy America requirement (23 U.S.C. 313) when purchasing items using federal funds. Buy America requires the SUB-RECIPIENT to purchase only steel, iron, and manufactured products produced in the United States, unless the Secretary of Transportation determines that such domestically produced items would be inconsistent with the public interest, that such materials are not reasonably available and of a satisfactory quality, or that inclusion of domestic materials will increase the cost of the overall project contract by more than 25 percent. In order to use federal funds to purchase foreign produced items, the WTSC must submit a waiver request that provides an adequate page 11 of 22 Page 448 of 461 basis and justification, and which is approved by the Secretary of Transportation. 33. DEBARMENT AND SUSPENSION Instructions for Lower Tier Certification 33.1. By signing this Agreement, the SUB-RECIPIENT (hereinafter in this section referred to as the “lower tier participant”) is providing the certification set out below and agrees to comply with the requirements of 2 CFR part 180 and 23 CFR part 1200. 33.2. The certification in this section is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was entered into. If it is later determined that the lower tier participant knowingly rendered an erroneous certification, in addition to other remedies available to the federal government, the department or agency with which this transaction originated may pursue available remedies, including suspension and/or debarment. 33.3. The lower tier participant shall provide immediate written notice to the WTSC if at any time the lower tier participant learns that its certification was erroneous when submitted or has become erroneous by reason of changed circumstances. 33.4. The terms covered transaction, civil judgement, debarment, suspension, ineligible, participant, person, principal, and voluntarily excluded, as used in this clause, are defined in 2 CFR parts 180 and 1200. 33.5. The lower tier participant agrees by signing this Agreement that it shall not knowingly enter into any lower tier covered transaction with a person who is proposed for debarment under 48 CFR part 9, subpart 9.4, debarred, suspended, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this covered transaction, unless authorized by WTSC. 33.6. The lower tier participant further agrees by signing this Agreement that it will include the clause titled “Instructions for Lower Tier Certification” including the “Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion - Lower Tier Covered Transaction,” without modification, in all lower tier covered transactions and in all solicitations for lower tier covered transactions, and will require lower tier participants to comply with 2 CFR part 180 and 23 CFR part 1200. 33.7. A participant in a covered transaction may rely upon a certification of a prospective participant in a lower tier covered transaction that it is not proposed for debarment under 48 CFR part 9, subpart 9.4, debarred, suspended, ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from the covered transaction, unless it knows that the certification is erroneous. A participant is responsible for ensuring that its principals are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise ineligible to participate in covered transactions. To verify the eligibility page 12 of 22 Page 449 of 461 of its principals, as well as the eligibility of any prospective lower tier participants, each participant may, but is not required to, check the System for Award Management Exclusions website (https://www.sam.gov/). 33.8. Nothing contained in the foregoing shall be construed to require establishment of a system of records in order to render in good faith the certification required by this clause. The knowledge and information of a participant is not required to exceed that which is normally possessed by a prudent person in the ordinary course of business dealings. 33.9. Except for transactions authorized under paragraph 33.5. of these instructions, if a participant in a covered transaction knowingly enters into a lower tier covered transaction with a person who is proposed for debarment under 48 CFR part 9, subpart 9.4, suspended, debarred, ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this transaction, in addition to other remedies available to the Federal government, the department or agency with which this transaction originated may pursue available remedies, including suspension or debarment. Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion - Lower Tier Covered Transactions 33.10. The lower tier participant certifies, by signing this Agreement, that neither it nor its principals are presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this transaction by any federal department or agency. 33.11. Where the lower tier participant is unable to certify to any of the statements in this certification, such participant shall attach an explanation to this Agreement. 34. THE DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE ACT OF 1988 (41 U.S.C. 8103) 34.1. The SUB-RECIPIENT shall: 34.1.1. Publish a statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the SUB-RECIPIENT'S workplace, and shall specify the actions that will be taken against employees for violation of such prohibition. 34.1.2. Establish a drug-free awareness program to inform employees about the dangers of drug abuse in the workplace; the SUB-RECIPIENT’s policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace; any available drug counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs; and the penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug violations occurring in the workplace. 34.1.3. Make it a requirement that each employee engaged in the performance of the grant be given a page 13 of 22 Page 450 of 461 copy of the statement required by paragraph 34.1.1. of this section. 34.1.4. Notify the employee in the statement required by paragraph 34.1.1. of this section that, as a condition of employment under the grant, the employee will abide by the terms of the statement, notify the employer of any criminal drug statute conviction for a violation occurring in the workplace no later than five days after such conviction, and notify the WTSC within 10 days after receiving notice from an employee or otherwise receiving actual notice of such conviction. 34.1.5. Take one of the following actions within 30 days of receiving notice under paragraph 34.1.4. of this section, with respect to any employee who is so convicted: take appropriate personnel action against such an employee, up to and including termination, and/or require such employee to participate satisfactorily in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation program approved for such purposes by a federal, state, or local health, law enforcement, or other appropriate agency. 34.1.6. Make a good faith effort to continue to maintain a drug-free workplace through implementation of all of the paragraphs above. 35. FEDERAL FUNDING ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY ACT (FFATA) In accordance with FFATA, the SUB-RECIPIENT shall, upon request, provide WTSC the names and total compensation of the five most highly compensated officers of the entity, if the entity in the preceding fiscal year received 80 percent or more of its annual gross revenues in federal awards, received $25,000,000 or more in annual gross revenues from federal awards, and if the public does not have access to information about the compensation of the senior executives of the entity through periodic reports filed under section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or section 6104 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. 36. FEDERAL LOBBYING 36.1. The undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that: 36.1.1. No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any federal contract, the making of any federal grant, the making of any federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. 36.1.2. If any funds other than federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this federal page 14 of 22 Page 451 of 461 contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying, in accordance with its instructions. 36.1.3. The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all sub-awards at all tiers (including sub-contracts, sub-grants, and contracts under grant, loans, and cooperative agreements), and that all sub-recipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. 36.2. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by Section 1352, Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. 37. NONDISCRIMINATION (Title VI, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.) 37.1. During the performance of this Agreement, the SUB-RECIPIENT agrees: 37.1.1. To comply with all federal statutes and implementing regulations relating to nondiscrimination (“Federal Nondiscrimination Authorities”). These include but are not limited to: 37.1.1.1. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq., 78 stat. 252 37.1.1.2. 49 CFR part 21 37.1.1.3. 28 CFR section 50.3 37.1.1.4. The Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 37.1.1.5. Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973, (23 U.S.C. 324 et seq.) 37.1.1.6. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, (29 U.S.C. 794 et seq.) 37.1.1.7. The Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended, (42 U.S.C. 6101 et seq.) 37.1.1.8. The Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 37.1.1.9. Titles II and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. 12131-12189) 37.1.1.10. Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations 37.1.1.11. Executive Order 13166, Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency 37.1.1.12. Executive Order 13985, Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities through the Federal Government 37.1.1.13. Executive Order 13988, Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation 37.1.2. Not to participate directly or indirectly in the discrimination prohibited by any federal non- discrimination law or regulation, as set forth in Appendix B of 49 CFR Part 21 and herein. page 15 of 22 Page 452 of 461 37.1.3. To keep and permit access to its books, records, accounts, other sources of information, and its facilities as required by the WTSC, USDOT, or NHTSA in a timely, complete, and accurate way. Additionally, the SUB-RECIPIENT must comply with all other reporting, data collection, and evaluation requirements, as prescribed by law or detailed in program guidance. 37.1.4. That, in the event a contractor/funding recipient fails to comply with any nondiscrimination provisions in this contract/funding Agreement, the WTSC will have the right to impose such contract/agreement sanctions as it or NHTSA determine are appropriate, including but not limited to withholding payments to the contractor/funding recipient under the contract/agreement until the contractor/funding recipient complies, and/or cancelling, terminating, or suspending a contract or funding agreement, in whole or in part. 37.1.5. In accordance with the Acts, the Regulations, and other pertinent directives, circulars, policy, memoranda, and/or guidance, the SUB-RECIPIENT hereby gives assurance that it will promptly take any measures necessary to ensure that: “No person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity, for which the Recipient receives Federal financial assistance from DOT, including NHTSA”. 37.1.6 To insert this clause, including all paragraphs, in every sub-contract and sub-agreement and in every solicitation for a sub-contract or sub-agreement that receives federal funds under this program. 38. POLITICAL ACTIVITY (HATCH ACT) The SUB-RECIPIENT will comply with provisions of the Hatch Act (5 U.S.C. 1501-1508), which limit the political activities of employees whose principal employment activities are funded in whole or in part with federal funds. 39. PROHIBITION ON USING GRANT FUNDS TO CHECK FOR HELMET USAGE The SUB-RECIPIENT will not use 23 U.S.C. Chapter 4 grant funds for programs to check helmet usage or to create checkpoints that specifically target motorcyclists. This Agreement does not include any aspects or elements of helmet usage or checkpoints, and so fully complies with this requirement. 40. STATE LOBBYING None of the funds under this Agreement will be used for any activity specifically designed to urge or influence a state or local legislator to favor or oppose the adoption of any specific legislative proposal pending before any state or local legislative body. Such activities include both direct and indirect (e.g., “grassroots”) lobbying activities, with one exception. This does not preclude a state official whose salary is supported with NHTSA funds from engaging in direct communications with state or local legislative officials, in accordance with customary state practice, even if such communications urge legislative page 16 of 22 Page 453 of 461 officials to favor or oppose the adoption of a specific pending legislative proposal. 41. CERTIFICATION ON CONFLICT OF INTEREST 41.1. No employee, officer or agent of the SUB-RECIPIENT who is authorized in an official capacity to negotiate, make, accept or approve, or to take part in negotiating, making, accepting or approving any subaward, including contracts or subcontracts, in connection with this grant shall have, directly or indirectly, any financial or personal interest in any such subaward. Such a financial or personal interest would arise when the employee, officer, or agent, any member of his or her immediate family, his or her partner, or an organization which employs or is about to employ any of the parties indicated herein, has a financial or personal interest in or a tangible personal benefit from an entity considered for a subaward. 41.2. Based on this policy: 41.2.1. The SUB-RECIPIENT shall maintain a written code or standards of conduct that provide for disciplinary actions to be applied for violations of such standards by officers, employees, or agents. The code or standards shall provide that the SUB-RECIPIENT’s officers, employees, or agents may neither solicit nor accept gratuities, favors, or anything of monetary value from present or potential sub- awardees, including contractors or parties to subcontracts and establish penalties, sanctions or other disciplinary actions for violations, as permitted by State or local law or regulation. 41.2.2. The SUB-RECIPIENT shall maintain responsibility to enforce the requirements of the written code or standards of conduct. 41.3. No SUB-RECIPIENT, including its officers, employees or agents, shall perform or continue to perform under a grant or cooperative agreement, whose objectivity may be impaired because of any related past, present, or currently planned interest, financial or otherwise, in organizations regulated by NHTSA or in organizations whose interests may be substantially affected by NHTSA activities. 41.3.1. The SUB-RECIPIENT shall disclose any conflict of interest identified as soon as reasonably possible, making an immediate and full disclosure in writing to WTSC. The disclosure shall include a description of the action which the recipient has taken or proposes to take to avoid or mitigate such conflict. 42. DESIGNATED CONTACTS The following named individuals will serve as designated contacts for each of the parties for all communications, notices, and reimbursements regarding this Agreement: The Contact for the SUB-RECIPIENT is:The Contact for WTSC is: Lauren Whitworth Jerry Noviello page 17 of 22 Page 454 of 461 whitworthl@pasco-wa.gov 509-545-3437 jnoviello@wtsc.wa.gov 360-725-9897 ext. 43. AUTHORITY TO SIGN The undersigned acknowledge that they are authorized to execute this Agreement and bind their respective agencies or entities to the obligations set forth herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement. Pasco Police Department _____________________________________ Signature _____________________________________ Printed Name _____________________________________ Title _____________________________________ Date WASHINGTON TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION _____________________________________ Signature _____________________________________ Printed Name page 18 of 22 Page 455 of 461 _____________________________________ Title _____________________________________ Date page 19 of 22 Page 456 of 461 APPENDIX A Project Costs Year 1 BUDGET CATEGORY DESCRIPTION DIRECT AMOUNT Indirect Cost Rate Indirect Amount Total Budget Employee salaries and benefits $3,000.00 0% $0.00 $3,000.00 Travel $0.00 0% $0.00 $0.00 Contract Services $0.00 0% $0.00 $0.00 Goods and Services $0.00 0% $0.00 $0.00 Equipment $0.00 0% $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL $3,000.00 $0.00 $3,000.00 Important Notes: 1. Indirect cost rates are subject to change based on updated Indirect Rate Letters from a cognizant federal agency or approved cost allocation plans. If the indirect rate increases, the budget will be modified by deducting the amount of the indirect rate increase from other budget categories so that the total budget does not increase. 2. The total annual budget may not increase without a written amendment to this agreement executed by both parties. 3. Adjustments between budget categories within the same year can be made upon mutual agreement of the contact for WTSC and the contact for the SUB-RECIPIENT. Objectives and Measures page 20 of 22 Page 457 of 461 Goal 1 - Support participation in regional traffic safety activities, with a goal of 75% of law enforcement agencies in the region participating in HVE events in the fiscal year. Objective Objective Details Completion Date Actively participate in your region/county traffic safety task force. Encourage participation in HVE activities from all agencies in the region. Troubleshoot options if an agency is experiencing staffing or political issues that impact their participation in local HVE programming. 09/30/2024 Facilitate the development of performance expectations for HVE participation for your region. Along with the TZM, monitor HVE performance and follow up with officers if their performance doesn't meet the task force's expectations. The WTSC relies on LELs to ensure that HVE funds are being used in an appropriate and effective manner. Work with your task force to determine appropriate performance expectations and processes for following up when needed. 09/30/2024 Build support for traffic safety by meeting/presenting to department leadership about traffic safety. These can be a great opportunity to gather feedback about their priorities for the region and discuss current/future planned activities. 09/30/2024 Measure Reporting Frequency Type Target Percent of law enforcement agencies in your region that participate in HVE activities.Annual Outcome 75 Goal 2 - Provide leadership in the development of professional development for traffic safety minded officers, with the long term goal of increasing the number of law enforcement agency leaders/admin who believe that traffic safety is a priority. page 21 of 22 Page 458 of 461 Objective Objective Details Completion Date Seek out opportunities for professional development for yourself and others in your region that will grow traffic safety leaders in your region. Some examples of this include the Traffic Safety Champions event, CJTC supervisor training courses, etc. 09/30/2024 Goal 3 - Provide guidance/feedback on law enforcement topics to the regional Target Zero Manager and traffic safety coalition (if applicable). Objective Objective Details Completion Date Support the TZM in building relationships with law enforcement departments in your region.09/30/2024 page 22 of 22 Page 459 of 461 QUALITY OF LIFE Promote a high-quality of life through quality programs, services and appropriate investment and re- investment in community infrastructure including, but not limited to: • Completion of Transportation System Master Plan and design standard updates to promote greater neighborhood cohesion in new and re-developed neighborhoods through design elements, e.g.; connectivity, walkability, aesthetics, sustainability, and community gathering spaces. • Completion of the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan and development of an implementation strategy to enhance such services equitably across the community. • Completion of the Housing Action and Implementation Plan with a focus on a variety of housing to address the needs of the growing population. FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY Enhance the long-term viability, value, and service levels of services and programs, including, but not limited to: • Adopting policies and strategic investment standards to assure consistency of long-range planning to include update of impact fees, area fees to specific infrastructure, and SEPA mitigation measures related to new development, e.g.; schools, traffic, parks, and fire. COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION NETWORK Promote a highly functional multi-modal transportation system including, but not limited to: • Application of the adopted Transportation System Master Plan including development of policies, regulations, programs, and projects that provide for greater connectivity, strategic investment, mobility, multi -modal systems, accessibility, efficiency, and safety. COMMUNITY SAFETY Promote proactive approaches for the strategic investment of infrastructure, staffing, and equipment including, but not limited to: • Adoption and develop implementation strategies for Comprehensive Fire Master Plan aimed at maintaining the current Washington State Rating Bureau Class 3 community rating. • Collaboration with regional partners to influence strategies to reduce incidences of homeless by leveraging existing resources such as the newly implemented 0.1% mental health sales tax, use of resource navigator programs, and other efforts. • Development of an implementation strategy for the Comprehensive Police Master Plan to support future service levels of the department to assure sustainability, public safety, officer safety, crime control, and compliance with legislative mandates. ECONOMIC VITALITY Promote and encourage economic vitality including, but not limited to: • Implementation of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan through related actions including zoning code changes, phased sign code update, and development regulations and standards. • Completion of Area Master Plans and environmental analysis complementing the Comprehensive Land Use Plan such as Downtown and Broadmoor Master Plans. • Development of an Economic Development Plan, including revitalization efforts. COMMUNITY IDENTITY Identify opportunities to enhance community identity, cohesion, and image including, but not limited to: • Development of a Community Engagement Plan to evaluate strategies, technologies, and other opportunities to further inclusivity, community engagement, and inter-agency and constituent coordination efforts. • Support of the Arts and Culture Commission in promoting unity and the celebration of diversity through art and culture programs, recognition of significant events or occurrences, and participation/sponsorship of events within the community. Page 460 of 461 CALIDAD DE VIDA Promover una calidad de vida alta a través de programas de calidad, servicios, inversiones y reinversiones apropiadas en la infraestructura de la comunidad incluyendo, pero no limitado a: • Terminar el Plan de Transportación para promover más cohesión entre nuestras vecindades actuales y re-desarrolladas a través de elementos de diseño, p.ej. conectividad, transitabilidad, sostenibilidad estética, y espacios para reuniones comunitarias. • Terminar el Plan de los Parques, la Recreación, y los Espacios Vacíos y el desarrollo de una estrategia de implementación para mejorar tales servicios justamente a lo largo de la comunidad. • Terminar el Plan de Acción e Implementación de Viviendas con un enfoque en una variedad de viviendas para tratar las necesidades del aumento en la población. SOSTENIBIILIDAD FINANCIERA Mejorar la viabilidad a largo plazo, el valor, y los niveles de los servicios y los programas, incluyendo, pero no limitado a: • Adoptar las políticas y los estándares de inversión estratégica para asegurar consistencia en la planificación a largo plazo para incluir la actualización de las tarifas de impacto, las tarifas en áreas de infraestructura específica, y las medidas de mitigación SEPA relacionadas con el nuevo desarrollo, p.ej. escuelas, tráfico, parques, e incendios. RED DE TRANSPORTACION COMUNITARIA Promover un sistema de transportación multimodal en alta operación incluyendo, pero no limitado a: • Aplicar el Plan de Transportación que fue adoptado, incluyendo el desarrollo de las políticas, las reglas, los programas, y los proyectos que proporcionan más conectividad, inversión estratégica, movilidad, sistemas multimodales, accesibilidad, eficiencia, y seguridad. SEGURIDAD COMUNITARIA Promover métodos proactivos para la inversión estratégica en la infraestructura, el personal, y el equipo incluyendo, pero no limitado a: • Adoptar y desarrollar estrategias de implementación para el Plan Comprehensivo para Incendios. Con el propósito de mantener la clasificación comunitaria actual en la tercera Clase del Departamento de Clasificación del Estado de Washington. • Colaborar con socios regionales para influenciar estrategias que reduzcan los incidentes de personas sin hogar al hacer uso de los recursos actuales como el impuesto de ventas de 0.1% implementado recientemente para la salud mental, el uso de programas para navegar los recursos, y otros esfuerzos. • Desarrollar una estrategia de implementación para el Plan Comprehensivo de la Policía para apoyar los niveles futuros de servicio del departamento para asegurar la sostenibilidad, la seguridad pública, la seguridad de los policías, el control de crímenes, y el cumplimiento con los mandatos legislativos. VITALIDAD ECONOMICA Promover y fomentar vitalidad económica incluyendo, pero no limitado a: • Implementar el Plan Comprehensivo del Uso de Terreno a través de acciones relacionadas, incluyendo cambios de los códigos de zonificación, actualización en las etapas de los códigos de las señales, y el desarrollo de las reglas y los estándares. • Terminar los Planes de las Áreas y un análisis ambiental el cual complementa al plan integral de uso de la tierra como a los Planes del Centro y de Broadmoor. • Desarrollar un Plan de Desarrollo Económico, el cual incluya esfuerzos de revitalización. IDENTIDAD COMUNITARIA Identificar oportunidades para mejorar la identidad comunitaria, la cohesión, y la imagen incluyendo, pero no limitado a: • Desarrollar un Plan de Participación de la Comunidad para evaluar las estrategias, las tecnologías, y otras oportunidades para promover la inclusividad, la participación de la comunidad, y los esfuerzos interdepartamentales y de coordinación de los constituyentes. • Apoyar a la Comisión de las Artes y Cultura al promover la unidad y la celebración de la diversidad a través de programas de arte y cultura, reconocer eventos o acontecimientos significantes, y participar/patrocinar eventos dentro de la comunidad. Page 461 of 461