HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010.09.27 Council Workshop Packet AGENDA
PASCO CITY COUNCIL
Workshop Meeting 7:00 p.m. September 27,2010
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL:
(a) Pledge of Allegiance.
3. VERBAL REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS:
4. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:
(a) Planning Commission Interviews:
1. Agenda.Report from Gary Cn:tchfield, City Manager dated September 21, 2010.
2, Applications(4) (Council Packets Only).
(b) Initiatives 1100 and 1105:
1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield, City Manager dated September 24, 2010.
2. AWC Fact Sheet Regarding Initiatives 1100 and 1105.
3. Grapb/7able, Liquor Tax/Profit Receipts,Pasco, 2004-2010.
4. Memorandum from Chief Austin to City Manager.
5. Entail message from Stefan Sharkansky to City Manager.
(c) Recycling Services;
I. Agenda Report from Stan Strebel,Deputy City Manager dated September 22,2010.
2. .Tune 2009"Pulse"-Tnformation on Recycling.
3. October 2009 Agreement Regarduig Promotion of'Recycling.
4. City's Website Spotlight on Recycling, November 2009.
5. The National Citizen Survey Policy Question, December 2009.
6. August 2010 Letter from Darrick Dietrich, BDT.
(d) V1'CIA Risk Management Presentation. (NO WRITTEN MATERIAL ON AGENDA)
Presented by Stan Strebel,Deputy City Manager.
(e) 2010 Pool Operations Summary:
1 . Agenda Report from Rick Terway, Administrative & Community Services Director dated
September 22, 2010.
2. 2010 Pool Operations Comparison Chart.
(f) 2011 HOME Fund Allocations and Annual Work Plan (NIF#CDBG10-028):
1. Agenda Report from Angie Pitman,Block Grant Administrator dated September 21, 2010.
2. Resolution Allocating 2011 HOME Funds.
(g) Benton-Franklin Head Start Lease,MLK Center:
I. Agenda Report from Rick Terway, Administrative & Community Services Director dated
September 21, 2010.
2. Proposed Lease Agreement,
5. OTHER ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:
(a)
(b)
(c)
6. EXECUTIVE SESSION:
(a)
(c)
7. ADJOURNMENT
REMINDERS:
1. 4:00 p.m., Monday, September 27, Port of Benton - Hanford Area Economic Investment Fund
Committee Meeting. (COUNCILMEMBER AL YENNEY,Rep.; SAUL MARTINEZ, Alt.)
2. 1;00 p.m., Thursday, September 30, Richland Library - Parliamentary Procedures Workshop.
(COUNCILMEMBERS TOM LARSEN and AL YENNEY)
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council September 21,2010
FROM: Gary Crutchfie ,t .'Manager Workshop Mtg.: 9/27/10
SUB.IFCT: Planning Commission Interviews
I. REFERENCE(S):
1 . Applications (4) (Council packets only)
H. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
9/27: Council to conduct brief interviews with Lisa Gemig, Alecia Greenaway, Virginia
Kent and Dave Morasch,
III. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) The Planning Commission is composed of nine members, terms are for six years.
The Commission meets on the third Thursday of each month at 7:00 p.m.
B) The Planning Commission conducts workshop meetings and public hearings on
land-use policy and development proposals and issues recommendations for the
City Council.
C) At the present time there are three vacancies on the Commission:
1. Position No. 1 (vacant)
2. Position No. 4 (vacant)
3. Position No. 9 (vacant)
D) The Council Screening committee recommends only two of the three positions be
filled, allowing more opportunity for appointments early next year.
E) After Council committee review of all applications, the following have been
selected to interview:
1. Lisa Gemig.......................................... .................4207 Segovia Drive
1 Alecia Greenaway.......................................................416 N. Road 34
3, Virginia Kent ...................•...................................... 4214 Desert Place
4. Dave Morasch.......................................................,....4606 Baja Drive
IV. DISCUSSION:
A) After conduct of interviews at the September 27 Workshop meeting, it is
proposed that appropriate appointments be made by the Mayor, subject to
confirmation by the Council, at the October 4 Business meeting,
4(a)
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council I September 24, 2010
i
FROM: Gary Crutchfiel Manager Workshop Mtg.: 9/27/10
SUBJECT: Initiatives 1100 and 1105
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. AWC Fact Sheet Regarding Initiatives 1100 and 1105
2. Graph/Table, Liquor Tax/Profit Receipts, Pasco, 2004-2010
3. Memorandum from Chief Austin to City Manager
4. Email message from Stefan Sharkansky to City Manager
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
9/27:
A.) Collect public comment
B) Discuss issue
C) Indicate whether or not a Resolution should be prepared for action at the
October 4, 2010 meeting
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) The state of Washington has long operated a monopolized liquor sales and
distribution system. Cities receive a portion of the state's liquor excise tax and
liquor profits (see reference #1). As Pasco's population has grown over the past
decade, so has Pasco's share of the state's tax and profit distributions (see
reference 42). According to current state estimates, Pasco should receive
approximately$735,000 in liquor tax/profit distributions this year.
B) Because the 2010 distribution estimate reflects a "temporary" increase in liquor
rates imposed by the legislature through June 2011, proponents of the initiatives
argue the loss estimates should be based on the prior year distributions.
Proponents also note that the "profit" distribution includes excess license fees
(above the cost of enforcement) and proceeds of a beer tax; if both remain after
the initiatives (as suggested by the proponent) then the "profit" distribution should
be reduced by a factor of 19% (assuming accuracy in the proponent's analysis).
Applying the adjustment to Pasco's 2009 actual "profit" distribution would result
in a figure of approximately $300.000. Thus, the potential loss of liquor "profit"
distributions to Pasco would range between at least $300,000/year to as much as
$460,000/year.
C) Initiatives 1100 and 1105 both propose to take the state out of the liquor
sales/distribution business, thus allowing privatization of all liquor sales and
distribution throughout the state. Financial impact of the initiatives:
• Initiative 1100: maintains liquor tax but eliminates profit distribution.
Potential Ioss for Pasco between-$300,000 and-$460,000/year.
• Initiative 1105: includes direction to the Liquor Control Board to recommend
a new liquor tax structure that would avoid any loss to state and local
governments; however, there is no obligation on the legislature to adopt such
a structure (and another initiative on the ballot, if passed, would make it more
difficult for the legislature to do so).
Potential loss for Pasco between 4300,000 and -$735,000/year.
4(b)
V. DISCUSSION:
A) Based on 2009 actual and expected 2010 receipts for state liquor tax and profit
distributions, passage of either initiative 1100 or 1105 would result in a loss of at
least $300,000 per year and possibly $735,000/year. A loss of general fund
revenue in that magnitude would require greater use of general fund reserves to
balance the budget (at the very least) or cause staff and associated service
reductions to offset the loss. Simply put, a loss of the magnitude expected from
the liquor initiatives (whether $300,000 or 5735,000) cannot simply be absorbed
without affecting service to the community; exactly what service reductions
would occur would be decided by Council with the 2012 budget.
B) In addition to the direct financial loss, the city's police department expects an
increase in service calls due to increased violations of liquor laws and greater
availability of liquor, particularly involving minors. The police department also
anticipates more alcohol-related vehicle accidents and DUls, resulting from the
expected lower level of compliance with liquor laws.
C) Council should collect public testimony offered (for and against), discuss the
initiatives and their impact to the city, and determine whether or not Council
wishes to take a fonnal position (not required). if so, a Resolution can be
prepared for action on October 4.
S e p t e m b e r 2 0 1 0
Initiatives 1100 Ft 1105 : ' A
ASSOCIATION
The Privatization of Liquor c a "�"E S
If approved by voters,Initiatives 1 100& 1 105 each impact a What do the two initiatives do to profits and
significant revenue scream for cities,counties,and the state, taxes?
While both initiatives close state liquor stores and privatize Both initiatives eliminate liquor profits.I-I 100 maintains the
the sale and distribution of liquor,the measures have liquor tax: 1-1105 eliminates the liquor tax effective April I,
different effective dates and different impacts to state and 2012,
local government revenue.
Do the initiatives require a new method of liquor
How do the initiatives impact local and state taxation?
revenue? No.I-1 105 has intent language that the privatization of
State and local governments get two types of revenue from liquor sales and distribution"not result in revenue losses to
the sale of liquor:liquor profits and liquor taxes. state or local governments"and directs the Liquor Control
• liquor board profits are revenues from permits,licenses, Board to recommend to the Legislature"a rate of taxation
and liquor store sales-The state first pays for the activities that,along with other spirits-related revenue sources,would
of the Liquor Control Board (administration,sales people, project to generate at least the same annual revenue for
leases,etc.),and the remaining profits are divided 50% the state and local jurisdictions as under the current state
to the state,40% to cities,and 10% to counties (border control system..,"The Legislature is under no obligation
areas receive an additional distribution). to enact the Liquor Control Board's proposal,and if 1-1053
(Eyman's initiative) passes,it makes it far more challenging
• Liquor excise taxes come from a state tax to consumers to enact new or replacement tax rates on liquor sales.That
and restaurant licensees-The tax rates include a basic rate
initiative requires a 213 vote by the Legislature to raise taxes.
plus surcha.-ges,Revenues from the basic rates of 15% for
consumers and 10% for restaurants are shared 65%to With the removal of the state liquor taxes,liquor sales
the state,28% to cities,and 7% to counties. and distribution would become subject to two local taxes:
According to estimates in MRSC's Budget Suggestions For the local sales tax and the local B&O tax,if located in the
2011,the following are city distributions: 38 towns and cities that impose such a tax.Any safes tax
revenues would be distributed based on the point of sale
Distributions 2008 2009 2010 2011 and not the current per capita system for liquor
to cities revised estimate* revenue.
Liquor $27,090,572 $27,091,000 $34,072,000 $31,200,000
Will the state save money by closing liquor
profits
Per capita $6.73 $6.67 $6.21 $7.34 stores?
No.The state pays for the administration and
profits
operation of state liquor stores from the revenue of
Liquor tax $19,301,609 $19,900,000 $20,551,000 $21,161,000
selling liquor.In addition,liquor generates additional
Per capita Y $4.80 $4.90 $4.95 $4.98 money for the state.For 2011 —2015,the Office
liquor
of Financial Management estimates that the state
*Subject to change if either of the initiatives pass. general fund will lose between $115 and $123
This means that a city of 35,000 received $460,000 in taxes million under I-I 100 and between $513 and $547 million
and profits in 2010,while a city of 5,000 received $66,000. under 1-1105,
continued
AWC has not taken a position for or against this ballot initiative.AWC's role is to provide its
members educational materials that can be shared with elected officials-,staff and the community.
Association of Washington Cities • 1076 Franklin St SE • Olympia,WA 98501 • www.awcnet.org
Are there other impacts on local governments directs the Liquor Control Board to develop criteria for
from these initiatives? issuing retail liquor licenses.
The Liquor Control Board indicates that if either liquor
initiative passes,they likely will have sufficient funding from Why are there two liquor initiatives?
While both initiatives allow private retailers to sell liquor,
other sources to continue their current enforcement
operations.However,they do not anticipate sufficient one primary difference is who is allowed to distribute liquor.
additional enforcement funding to mitigate a substantial Currently,the state distributes liquor to the liquor stores.
increase in the number of liquor retailers.As a result of I-I 100 would allow retailers to negotiate and buy liquor
the increased work load and limited resources,local law directly from the manufacturers.I-I 105 would require
enforcement could feel the impact from the expansion of retailers to buy liquor from a third-party distributor;the
liquor sales. distributors would sell to all retailers at the same price.
Additionally,the Municipal Research and Services Center According to the Washington State Public Disclosure
receives almost all of its funding from a contract with the Commission,Initiative 1100's campaign is primarily funded
state.The contract is funded through cities' (76.7%) and
by Costco,and Initiative 1 105 is funded by Odom Southern
counties' (15,9%) share of liquor revenue,The city share is Holdings and Young's Market Company,two beverage
paid out of city liquor profits,which would be eliminated by distribution companies,
both initiatives,and the county share is paid out of county Large retailers likely would benefit by negotiating discounts
liquor taxes,which would be eliminated by 1-1105. directly with the makers of liquor.Smaller retailers (and
distributors),on the other hand,likely would benefit from a
When would private stores open?When would distribution system that sells to small and large retailers at
liquor profits and taxes end? the same price.
The initiatives have different effective dates:
1100 I !05 What happens if both initiatives pass?
In 1993,when two rival tax-limit measures,!-601 and 1-602,
Date private liquor distribution 1/112011 10/11201 1 were on the ballot,the Attorney General issued a formal
begins _ _ opinion observing it would be possible for the Legislature
Private liquor stores open 611/201 1 1 1/1/201 1 to resolve any conflict by amending either or both measures
State liquor stores close-- 6/15/2011 1 1/15/201 1 with a two-thirds vote.Failing that,the courts would be
according to OFM fiscal note tasked with resolving the differences,possibly by giving
State liquor distribution & liquor 6/15/201 I 1 111 5/20 1 1 deference to the initiative that got the most votes or that
profits end—according to OFM had the later effective date.
fiscal note _
What i
State liquor stores must close Tl2/31!201 I 4/1/2012 sAWC's role?
State liquor distribution must 12/31/2011 4/1/2012 AWC will continue to provide our members with
end & liquor profits end educational materials.Please check our website for additional
information at v vww,awcnet,org/initiatives.This website
State liquor taxes end NIA 4/1/2012
— — includes:
How many stores will be able to sell liquor if one • Summaries of I-I 100 and 1-1 105,
or both of the initiatives pass? • Tables of liquor taxes and profits received by each city
Currently,Washington has 315 state and contract liquor from 2006—2008.
stores,and it is unknown how many private retailers will • News articles about the initiatives,
choose to sell liquor if one or both initiatives pass.Earlier . Resources from the Public Disclosure Commission &
this year,the Washington State Auditor estimated 3,357 Attorney General's Office about elected and appointed
private stores would sell liquor under a privatized system. officials ballot measure campaign activities and use of
!-I 100 would allow any current retailer with a beer and/ public funds.
or wine grocery store license or specialty store license to
sell liquor;approximately 5,200 stores currently have one For more information
of these licenses and would be eligible to sell liquor. 1-1 105 Candice Bock,Legislative& Policy Advocate
candiceb @awcnet,org, (360) 753-4137.
AWC has not taken a poshfan for or against this ballot initiative.AWCs role is to provide fts
members educational materials that can be shored with elected of c;ofs,staff and the community.
Liquor Tax/Profit Receipts, Pasco, 2004-2010
800,000 ---
700,000
600,000
N
CU
' 500,000
C
it 400,000
'.a
300,000
.Q
200,000
100,000
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Est
• Liq u or Excise Tax 151,130 171,858 196,702 223,171 246,008 260,149 275,000
•Liquor Board Profit 272,396 291,428 286,709 348,280 339,355 359,867 460,000
•Tatai 425,530 465,291 485,417 573,458 587,371 1622,025 735,000
ti
� - Memorandum
Ojj?ce of the Chref
To: Clary Crutchfield,City Manager
From: Denis Austin, Chief of Police
Date: September 24, 2010
Re: I-1100-Possible Impact
While I have taken no position on this initiative I do think it's important to note what
impact it may have on our service demands. Below is a short list of some of the issues we
may be required to deal with if this initiative passes. I am sure that there may be other
secondary impacts that are yet to be seen. However, you can see that the below listed
items could very well tax our already limited resources.
This Initiative would privatize the sale of liquor in the State of Washington and would
increase the number of outlets ten-fold. This would make liquor available in outlets such
as; grocery stores, neighborhood convenience stores, gas stations and thousands of other
outlets across the state,
It is not beyond reason to assume that if this initiative passes that local law enforcement
will see an increase in service call demands involving alcohol related incidents such as:
• Increased compliance checks to insure "no-sale"to minor's philosophy is
maintained.
• Increase in theft of alcohol by minors due to increased availability of liquor
throughout the community.
• Increase in consumption by minors.
• Increase in DUI arrests.
• Increase in alcohol related accidents and alcohol related medical assists.
Please let me know if you need further information or research on this issue.
---------- Forwarded message----------
From: Stefan Sharkansky<theshark rAnd—Wwork.com>
Date: Fri, Sep 17,2010 at 9:51 AM
Subject: 1-1100 and Pasco
To: zunkert"eai.Uasco wa.gov
Mr. Crutchfield,
Thank you for calling yesterday.
The punch line is that the portion of the liquor"profits" distributions attributable solely to state store sales in a typical
year is 81%.
Here are the gory details of how I get to that. The LCB financial statements do not make this easy to follow, so bear
with me, I'm attaching two documents, both from state FY 2009--the Operating Statement and the Distribution
Statement.
Near the middle of the Operating Statement is"Net Profit Merchandise Function", about$60.1 million. That's the
surplus from store sales which goes into the Liquor Revolving Fund, to be distributed with other surplus funds per
RCW 66.08.190, The cities aggregate share is nearly 40%, so$24 million.
What the liquor board calls "profits" includes more than surplus store revenues. It includes a portion of the beer tax
and surplus license fees. The total "profits" (also called "Excess Funds")for FY 2009 are illustrated on p,5 of the
Distribution Statement,
In the bottom(able of that page there is the FY 09 total distribution to cities of$27,332,723,and in additional FY
total distribution of$2,229,000 to Fund 06C, The latter is the cities'share of funding for MRSC.Also per RCW
66.08.190 those are the first dollars taken out of the cities'share of the LRF distributions.So the cities' total portion
of the LRF surplus for FY2009 is the $27.3 million+ $2.2 million=$29.5 million.
$24 million of that comes from product sales, the remainder comes from beer taxes(the top section on p.5 of the
Distribution Statement)and from surplus license fees.(it takes a few more steps through these statements to figure
out the license fees are included here, and I'll go through that if you're interested in the details),
Thus you can see that the proportion of store sales in what the liquor board calls "profits" was 24/29,5=81% in FY
2009.The "profits" from FY 2010 have a different composition, due to the temporary markup increase which started
in August 2009 and expires at the end of FY 2011
(see (1trp:/rwww,liq,ova,gQV/releasesipr09U5t?6-markufr asr)
If the chart of"Liquor Tax Profit Receipts" on the last page of your recent Council packet is based on calendar years
as opposed to fiscal years,then your estimate of FY 2009 surplus store receipts will be a bit off. Best to sum the 4
quarterly disbursement ending with the June 2009. then multiply that number by 81%to see what you're really
getting from store sales. If your total "profits"for FY 2009 is closer to the $339,000 you report for 2008,then the
Pasc.o's share of FY 2009's store sales would be closer to$280,000.The remaining portion of"profits", from beer
tax and license fees will remain untouched whether or not either of 1100 or 1 105 passes,
hope this helps. Let me know if you have any other questions.
regards,
Stefan Sharkansky
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council September 22, 2010
Gary Crutchf y Manager Workshop M1g,: 9'27/10
FROM: Stan Strebel, Deputy City Manager
SUBJECT: Recycling Services
I. REFERENCE(S):
1. .tune 2009 "Pulse" - information on recycling
2. October 2009 agreement regarding promotion of recycling
3. City's website spotlight on recycling November 2009
4. The National Citizen Survey Policy Questions December 2009
5. August 2010 letter from Darrick Dietrich, SDI
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
9/27: Discussion
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) During the City Council's biennial goal setting retreat, it was noted that the citizen's
survey conducted in November 2009 revealed a majority of respondents expressed
desire for a curbside recycling service. As a result of Council's retreat discussion,
staff was directed to further evaluate the concept and share more background
information with Council this year. In addition, a citizen inquiry in August
reiterated desire for such a service.
B) At the Council meeting of August 2, 2010 a citizen addressed the Council regarding
her desire to see curbside recycling implemented. After addressing the issue briefly,
iVlayor Watkins requested that staff provide a briefing to Council, in the near future,
on the issue.
C) The city has been involved in a number of activities regarding recycling promotion
and outreach during the last ,year. Sec referenced attachments 1-4.
D) In preparation for this meeting, staff asked Darrick Dietrich of BD1 to provide
updated information on the economics associated with recycling as well as
discussion of some of the alternatives that may be considered (see reference
attachment 5). Mr, Dietrich will attend the meeting to make a brief presentation and
answer questions.
4(c)
3ulle '200c)
icrr
i Turse A bi-monilily publication (Api - Dec.)
PASCO
Utility Gets Two A's
In preparation for a new issue of long-term debt These opinions reflect well on the long-term effort
to pay for the new water plant on the west end of by your City Council and star to keep rates as low
town,the city applied to Standard& Poor's(S&P) possible while assuring,first and foremost,that
for a current bond credit rating. The credit raring
the rates are sufficient to cover all debt obligations
is important when bond buyers determine the rate and operational costs with sufficient"reserves" j
of interest they require to justify their investment to absorb unexpected circumstances without {
An our system(risk versus return). Given the dire increasing rates, This has been the guidance and
lfinancial circumstances witnessed nationally over focus of the utility's management for the past
"the past year,credit ratings have taken an an even- l� Years, leading to appropriate growth,system
greater influence in the investment marketplace. improvements and modest rates(Pasco's water
The result of the city's recent effort: ",%A-" rate is the lowest of the three cities).
representing a substantial upgrade! (equivalent
to going from a"C+" to an"A-"). Perhaps more
important to ratepayers is the effect the higher
rating had on the bonds issued to pay for the new 0 {
water plant; the lower interest rates translated to 1
reduced interest cost of nearly$200,000 over the
life of the bonds(a net present value of more than
$120,000)!
Two notable factors contributed to the dramatic In short,third-party investment advisors(S&P)
improvement in the utility's bond rating: customer have graded Pasco as high as any utility in the
growth and strong financial management. The region, on their"_-expectation that the(utility)
tremendous growth in the number of utility system will continue to generate net revenues t
customers over the past decade has helped create a Sufficient to maintain good debt service coverage
larger financial base to absorb major projects(like and a strong liquidity position, in line with Pasco's
a second water plant). policy." A very good report card - from a very
Sound financial management was the compelling tough grader!
factor,as indicated by the following quote from
the S&P rating report. (You can read the report in its entirety at www.
"The financial performance of'Pasco's pasco-wa.gov/generalinfo/citycotinci[reports(click
waterworks utility system has been strong" on S&P Credit Rating.)
Proud to be vour home!
i
Agreement
For Recycling Services
The Pasco School District, City of Pasco and Basin Disposal Inc. (hereinafter "the parties" or"each
party") enter into this agreement to encourage recycling of waste by the District and within the City.
By signature of this agreement each party agrees to participate in the recycling effort,and to encourage
staff to be involved and take part in the project. This agreement is non-binding, and no party shall be
subject suit or legal action of any kind for its failure to perform according to the terms of the agreement,
Basin Disposal Inc. agrees to set recycling bins throughout the City of Pasco and the Pasco School
District. In the City of Pasco, these recycling bins will be placed at designated areas approved by the
City's designee.In the District, these recycling bins will be placed at designated areas approved by the
District's designee.
The District agrees to encourage students, staff, and patrons to recycle applicable materials and to
properly utilize the recycling bins. The City agrees to encourage residents and city staff to recycle
applicable materials and to properly utilize the recycling bins.
Each party agrees to indemnify and hold the others harmless from any loss, cost, or expense claimed by
third parties for property damage and bodily injury, including death, pain, and suffering,mental or
emotional disdain caused solely by negligence or willful misconduct of the other parry,the party's
employees or agents in connection with the obligations of the party under the terms of this agreement.
This agreement will be effective for one (1) year from the date of first signature unless otherwise
extended,terminated or amended by the parties. This agreement will be automatically renewed for
successive one (1) year terms if no contrary action is taken by any party, not to exceed a period of five
(5) years. The agreement may be amended at any time by the written notification and agreement of all
parties. Any party may terminate its individual participation in this agreement with fifteen(15)days
advance written notice to all other parties.
Pasco School District City of Pas o
By: BY:
Signed igned
Print Name: .� - M . Print Name: C1,,L7 CIfl- �..,
Dated: (0• a. 7- 0 4 Dated: ��} z - z���•
Basin ispos I c.
By:
Signed
Print Name: JUP,uu
Dated: Oa�
November 2009 Website Spotlight
Neighborhood Recycling Centers - New Locations!
Several residents have inquired about more recycling opportunities in Pasco and curb side
recycling. Curb-side recycling is still cost prohibitive, potentially adding several dollars to the
monthly bill for each household. In an effort to be responsive to citizen's requests, the city has
collaborated with Basin Disposal Incorporated and the Pasco School District to provide
additional neighborhood recycling centers. Community education and collaboration provides for
an opportunity to recycle: glass, mixed paper, newspaper, cardboard, tin and aluminum cans.
("Locations are subject to change as needed)
CURRENT LOCATIONS (Click to view Location Map)
1) Mediterranean Villas; Broadmoor Blvd. & Vincenzo Drive
2) Maya Angelou Elementary; 6001 Road 84
3) McLoughlin Middle School; 2803 Road 88
4) Columbia Valley Grange; Road 54 & Court Street
5) Soccer Fields; Road 48 & Court Street
6) Riverview Plaza; 3315 W. Court Street
7) Community Unitarian Universalist Church; 2819 W. Sylvester Street
8) Pasco High School; 1102 N. 10th Avenue
9) Grigg's Department Store; 10th Avenue & Columbia
10) Pasco Senior Center; 5th Ave. & Brown Street
11) Ranch House Restaurant; 1410 E. Lewis Street
12) Ochoa Middle School; 1801 E. Sheppard Street
PROPOSED LOCATIONS
13) Stevens Middle School, 1120 N. 22nd Avenue
14) Emerson Elementary; 1616 W. Octave
15) Virgie Robinson Elementary; 125 S. Wehe Avenue
City of Pasco 12009
POLICY QUESTIONS i
"Don't know" responses have been removed from the following questions.
Policy Question 1
To what extent do you .uppoit or oppose establishing curbside recycling service, if it Percent of
requires an increase to your garbage pickup service cost of $4 to $5 dollars per month? respondents
Strongly support 35%
Somewhat support_ - ------ 28%
Somewhat oppose - - -- --- ----- ---- -- --------- -- - 18�°
Strongly oppose --- - - -- - ...------ - -- 19% -
Total ._- - - - ------------ -- -- 100%
PA S C O C I TY HALL (549)547-2476
i i=I V E n 800-542-6447
BASIN DISPOSAL, INC. N. Com47-8617 fax'
P. 0. Box 3850 Pasco, WA 99302-3850 2 T l] 221 N. Commercial Ave.
Pasco, WA 99301
CITY MANA3ER'S
August 30, 2010 OFFICE
Mr. Stan Strebel
City of Pasco
525 North 3'd Avenue
Pasco,WA 99301
Dear Mr. Strebel:
With the,recent-public interest in curbside recycling, I would like to offer you some details on
the characteristics and feasibility of offering such a service to the residents of Pasco.
A curbside recycling program typically consists of a collection system to target the following
commodities;
➢ Aluminum and Tin containers
A Newspaper and various office papers and bulk mailings
➢ Cardboard and other fiber packaging
Plastics of.vadous grades and sizes
A curbside recycling program can effectively target the typical household commodities that
are recyclable, and can offer a simple way for residents to help divert materials from the
landfill. Implementing such a program is very feasible and may fulfill the expectations of our
community. With that said, often times a full discussion of the positive and negative attributes
of such a program are not fully discussed in the public forum. Offering that discussion is the
intent of this letter.
Quality versus Affordability
As with everything in�life, there is a tradeoff between the quality of a program, and the
associated price, if the goal of.our community is to divert and recycle as much of the listed
commodities as possible, then a multi-bin, manual sorting program is the preferred option.
This, of course. would come with a higher cost of service.
Manual Sort, multi-bin Recycling Program
A multi-bin recycling program would require that each participating resident sort and
segregate each commodity into its respective bin prior to placement at the curb for collection.
The multiple bins will take up more space inside of the residence, and requires some initial
education and a continued commitment from each participant to' properly segregate the
recyclable commodities each week. Additionally, these bins do not hold as much material, so
weekly collection at the household is typically part of such a program.
Other considerations are that these-bins do not have lids, so wind-blown litter can result on
collection days. Additionally, the driver of the recycling vehicle is responsible to further sort
• Page 2 August 30, 20",0
the material at the curbside, and place each commodity within the.proper compartment in the
vehicle. This'takes time, and adds to the expense of such a program.
Finally, once the material - reaches- 6 ' local ' recycling' facility, :further sorting and
decontamination is necessary before each commodity can be prepared for shipment to the
end user of these commodities. All of the above mentioned steps'are labor intensive,`and
takes some level of.commitment from each participant�in the process. - However, the end
result.is that the'vast majority-of what is'placed 'at the curb for recycling actually ends up
being recycled and put back into productive use,'which is'typicaliy the assumed goal of any
such recycling.program. .
To summarize the points of a manual-sort, multi-bin recycling program;
• Participants need to be educated on how to recycle; and maintain some level'of
commitment to following the guidelines of such-a program
• Multiple bins will occupy more space within the household and.may present littering
problems during windy collection days
Higher expense due to manual sort'at curbside and further sorting and cleaning at the,
.rocessing facility
• Higher :expense due to weekly ,collection and relatively .inefficient .,payloads on .
collection vehicle
+. Less contamination and therefore.higher 4e of diversion grid recycling is achieved;
overall quality of material collected is much higher in these.typ&s of programs
Commingled:Recycling Program
Over. the recent past, there has been a dramatic shift in recycling programs.towards
commingled recycling programs. These types of programs-look'essentially'dentical to the
garbage:collection.program that,Pasco resident's i7ave enjoyed over the years: A 96 gallon
cart similar to.the standard garbage cart is,offered to_residents. -Typically a different colored .
lid is utilized so that the residents.can differentiate between the;-recycling and garbage carts-.,
Further, the collection truck used on.a-commingled re'ycliiig..p_rogram is identical'to:what is .
used to collect garbage. ,
The program,consists of residents'placing:any and all listed recyclable-commodities into a
single cart (the:"commingled" part of the program) and pfacing the cart out for collection every
other week. . This'is possible due'to the large.size of the•cart in comparison to typical
generation rates of. a household. At the point of collection;.-the driver-does.hot need-to .
provide any.further..sorting of,the commodities,-but can simply ernptythe contents into the
vehicle. Finally, upon delivery of the commingled material to a local'.processing facility, the.
contents.of the collection vehicle are simply bated and shipped off.to a,regional.processing
facility for final segregation of material into their respective ca#egaries, and final shipment to
,the purchasing end users.
Where such a program provides many conveniences to the household; the downside is'that-
contamination levels are higher than with the manual:.sort, multi=bin system.: Since the
• Page 3 August 30,2010
.contents-of the cart cannot be easily seen, participants tent to introduce more contaminants
into the commingled..stream: Additionally; #he',very process of commingling multiple
commodities together•presents tontamiriationAssu6s that•,,r6sult in.•lawer,actual recycling
rates.- This is due to the fact that each-component of,the recycle stream must ultimately be
segregated out prior. to, end:use. Some,.components�'Will 'cross contaminate .other
components-(Iiquid, oils,-etc.),,some comrnodities'will-.break.down intosmaifersizesthat'bo'•
not allow themselves to be rrrechanicall -i6gregated.(glass or some Small plastic'con tainers),
and 'some commodities will simply bind.: w€th 'other •'commodities, and•make, segregation.
impossible(plastic films for example).
Additionally, it must be noted 'that�any commingled recycling program:will,yield lower resale
values "for' the commodities,•collected., ,''This' is'•a� natural result, of the:- above; noted, .
contamination issues;: s:•we€€ as the extensive.#echm.'by.,and labor:required-to segregate
each.and every, comporen# back into its:rispective.category:- So the!!ease.,of use":and
convenience of a.commingled recycling 'prog6ma havethe' .0ect.of.�lowering•tNe value and." :
ultimate percentage of carrlmodities actually making t#to the end user
' Cha'racter'istics of any..Recyclirig Program
With the two.types,of recycling 'programt defined; I.will 66W focus-on;character€stics-inherent ;
in any residential recycling �prograrrt: I.believe it.is important.t'o'understan' 'tfiese'issues"as
part of any. decision'to introduce such:a.program.into out 60' irrtunity.
ssumin' that the public would refr :,-e im licit nd�low&,c t of:a comm n led;
J�g_ g e'p o p e the s. R Y'a cost o i � . • . . .
recycling program, this,would add'.$4.00-to'X5.00 per montli:.to�each.'Nousehala's;'garbage . .
expense.•:TFie:adoption of a ritativai.sort,'t co substantially`Mre.
This rice•ran ,e is•de rident.oii,"tle"assum;.tion'that$ut�scri tion in#he'rec .clip pr` ain
P 9 Pe p p Y g *� •
wodld:be mandatory for ' occupied,residents'w€thin Pasco:
Pr€sing Vary, Another factor to consider,is that the.cost structure of a,recycling.program;
is•more-variable than a comparable garbage-collection program: The'oost,:structure.'of.a
garbage collection.prograirr consists of a stable grid predictab e,revenue base:(same n`umlaer
bf participan'ts month to irronth WKbo dspose.of .roughly'the .same.ahic, rst'of garbage) and .
stable 'disposal-fees on the expense side:. These and ei'pense characteristics'..aie,
-not present in a.recycling:program:.As maiket.irondi&`s change each m6nth,:tile value.6f-.,
each commoditYr recycled•may change, 1Nhat is 'recyctbla•one.year"may:'not-bean as:much '
demand by:."the :marketplace`•€n•the su6sequerit year." ' another component' oath cost
stnacture. to 'consider, is 'the additional- transportation: necessary. to. %rnsrket• the recyclable,
conirrrc&ies.:. U€tima e'ly, -the material collected would.iree&to,'::go-td Seattle; .Portlarid,:ror
other distant markets`to be recycled., 'Dru'OAg'•'times'of,changing fuel cos#s,•this transportation"
expense will ultimately*affect the fina€price,paid py`the household.
All of this leads to variability in the value received"for.the commodities;collected in.4he
collection program: The value:received.from the sale of•ahe,commodities,acts'•as an'off-
setting credit to-.the expenses of'operating.the.recycling pro'g'ram. "Any.-prolonged'change in'
the value of this'credit will lead,to a-change'in the- price:paid,by the,household. In. many: .
instances,•pricing is adjusted annually to accommoda#e for this fluctuation. While we all enjoy. -
steady, stable,'pricing 'for garbage service,-that stability cannot be assumed for:a'recycling .
Program. :.
Page 4 August 30,2Q'i4
Mandato!y_$.ubscri Lion vs. Voluntary ubscrio#ion►tion: .Co'nsideiation.6ilust also'be given to the
question of mandatory subscription versus voluhWy subscription.' If subscription is voluntary;• , ,
the'above noted cost would increase...This is due to the fact'that a lower revenue,base would'
be achieved,•yet essentially the same capital expenditure'requirernents tivou{d be necessary-.: ,
to implement a recycling program::'Further;.as cosfs increase year .'to:•year,'it earl safely,be
assumed that4 voluntary subscriber base would decrease: As this•'reveniae pase:deereases,
the resulting cost per household would'inorease.- This`cost'mechan' isrri•oduid,lead to•further .
{oss of'remaining households,.voluntanly:subscribing to the-,recycling Seivice; and°.ultimately
dimifthing the original goal of'increasing recycling andxriaterial.diversion from landfills..'
Psrtici ion Rate. Another factor when..consider. .; recycliing,program is,the resukting
participation rates amongst eligible households. 'A program'�saypically'defined'as.successful
if a l5articipation rate of 35% is achieved. 'This fact must•be considered when deciding,if it is, .
the correct policy to.make`subscription ti andaiory.forall 1louseho€ds-within`Pasco:
Unlimited barb g Qollectlon versus lbcentlylz3_rrg,R cycling:, Pasco:residents•have enjoyed ;
a-.9kbage callection.system,that'•is .relatively unique That unique-�featu'rei Js.-.the'!unlirnited
' collection••of essentially all• household.generated,trash: Over•3'Q6%o„of,residents 6bke an
additiCnal•ca'rt',fortheir garbage;.and'when'd6uMH6 house,61ds'that,pla6e addtional,bags;::
-boxes or other trash out for collection,.that•ndmt er;goes to well-over.50% of households who=
require trash coliectiori servicesieyond tfie'96-gll6n.cart.
The'question.m6si be- asked if this widely:valued:provis€onV obr-.current:coltectlon service
would°serve as a disincantive .to recycling: Does it make•sensi3 ,tq repairs atl par#icipants lo'
subscribe.`ta a conii�ingied recycling'..prograri; with='.the'gdai,of,`.increas'ing'.recyciirig
diversion°from'landf€lls, while'`.at -the sari�e'time,:allowing,for::tt e:'unfimited'collection of'solid w
waste?,,.Ii cost tb:ihe.hou hold W'k' e onl 'motivatin factor w w uld`a Oe son ace'
Y'' . 9 tay:. 4 Pe p!
recyc{ables in'a,riecyciing;cart for.an addit€oral cost`'wkien:they"could is H.
thetn iii,tne.
afbaga'cai'for no addltional,cost? r: is'the labile"WIliri to �a for.,:ai3ditior al.services'
9 p . g . p Y
solely for the.desire to increase recyc!!ng'.,arid divert:'mtire;m'afarial.frorn the lendll'?".ls.the .
Pasco community.willing -to,.abandon'1the-,unlimited-Colleeti6 'of•'sbk€ :waste in,favor'of .a
S
.'recycling program and the'resulting•'addiiiorial-'costs? .If'the;`decision"is to ripstrict.o�abandon:
unlimited garb age'co{l'ectior"vAll code.enforcement issues increase:as'each household will'
+; not have;immedlate access t'o"dispodIng of occasional additional solid weste'�
Alternat€ves?
With all of the details outlined, above regarding the characteiisties.,of,a curbside:recycling
program, I want to-point out that-the additiori.of just su ch' prograrri°may.indeed fit•wi#hii :tlie
goals'•and.desites:of..the •Pasco community. .',l just,believe:that- these:topics.sli'ould •b ''
.,discussed and understood p160o"i " "derision ofJmplerraenting a program'in'Pasco: !t is
al so,prudeht to'ask whether.iherejare•.othar programs. that:might,,.156,rr;ore feasilafe.to'our
community. • If this quest+on, is asked,.'then the`consideration.of a "Green`,UVastei—program `
would certainly-.be' an option: '
: . .
If the goal of a community is to recycle.and divert'as much waste is possible from the landfill;
then 'targeting•"green-waste".is:probably, abetter option.than-:curbside. recycling, This is .
derived.from the'fact-thaCorganic waste such 's,,grass'clippings;.br.uish, and other natuia€`
types of vegetation,(in addition to household food waste)-tepiesent a Iarger-percentage of '
residential trash, than does the commodit'les'recycled in a typical curbside recycling;progr'am. '
Additionally, since "green waste" is essentially a homogenous waste•stream,, the expense of
segregating'out componenis;(as Is..necessary:in.a cu''rbside program)'is none:existent. A. ;
• Page 5 August 30, 2010
further benefrt of a "green waste" program is that it is not dependant on outside market forces.
This reduces the pricing-variability inherent in a curbside recycling program. Finally, "'green
waste" - can .be composted and utilized locally,'.thereby eliminating . the' expensive
transportation .cost 'component necessary to'.'tmari<et the curbside •recycling materials.
Composting locally would also provide for additional jobs_!n our community.
Since the:.provisions of a "green waste" recycling..program our. outside of the :current -
discussion,-I will not provide further detail in this letter..''However,'I did want to introduce this,
idea because I believe-it is•important'to`consider-alternative programs that''may_fit into the
solid waste collecti6n needs of our community as part of any.decision regarding'the feasibility
of a curbside,recycling program. As. we know, dollars .and:resources..are always scarce.
Before any cbmrnunity is asked to fund a new program, all options, including the null option
must be fully explored;
I hope this letter is received.w,efl, andin the.spit it is intended. My,'h`ope is that it will.create
further-,auestion arid-discussion about how recyctir�g frts'into-the goals of.-our commuty: As
always; ! stand:eager,to address any questions you'may have:' Please`don't`hesitate'to.. `
contact rrie at 547-2476.
Sincerely,
Darrick Dietrich ,
President
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Councils September 22, 2010
TO: Gary Crutchfielc, y anager Workshop Mtg.: 9/27/10
FROM: Rick Tervvay, Director,
Administrative & Commur y . ervices
SUBJECT: 2010 Pool Operations Summary
I. REFERENCE(S):
A) 2010 Pool Operations Comparison Chart
11. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL 1 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
9127: Discussion
I1I. FISCAL IMPACT:
None
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
We tracked costs for the operation of the three pools separately for the 2010 season. The
attached chart shoves expenditures, gate revenue and net cost of operation for each pool.
We also included the cost per user to more clearly identify the subsidy for each pool.
Some quick facts comparing 2009 to 2010:
• Attendance increased by 48%
• Operational costs increased by 13%
• Revenues increased by 407%
V. DISCUSSION:
The Memorial Pool renovation has had a major impact on the recreational experience
offered in Pasco and the Tri-Cities. With the addition of the zero-depth pool, spray toys
and two new water slides, there has been an overwhelming effect on the experience at
Memorial Pool. The expanded lawn and deck area, with umbrellas for needed shade,
provide the opportunity for families to use the facility as a total family outing. Those who
do not enioy the water can become a part of the outing by being close to family and
friends.
The Tri-Cities swim team event was a huge success with the new "deck level" water
which improves competition and enhances the salability of additional swim meets at
Memorial Pool, The Channel Cats will be hosting an additional meet next year and we
look forward to this trend continuing for years to come.
Renovation of the pool had man), challenges. The demolition revealed concerns that were
not obvious until uncovered (much like rebuilding an engine, you do not know what you
will find until the covers are off). We tried to alleviate any long term maintenance issues
by tweaking the design of the building and mechanical systems. This incurred some
additional costs upfront, but will save much more over the life of the facility.
Some ideas for next year at Memorial pool include a small shelter for lawn area,
expanding pool hours and adding a concession area. These items are in the exploratory
stage at this time with the Park Advisory Board.
4(e)
2010 Pool Operations Comparison
2010 2010 2010 2009 Actual
Kurtzman/Richardson Memorial Total All Pools
Kurtzman Richardson
Total Expenses $36,812 $35,925 $124420 197,157 $183,033
Revenue (gate) $2,293 $3,862 $825528 $88,683 $201120
Cost of Operations $34,519 $325063 $41,892 $1081474 $162,913
2010 Attendance 2,294 3,860 25,078 31,232 21,100
Cost Per User $15.05 $8.31 $1.67 $3.47 $7.72
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council j Date: September 21, 2010
TO: Gary CrutchfielL- ,�/ager Workshop: 09/27/10
Rick VyUte, Direvtor f,V_f Regular: 10/04/10
Community&Economic Development
FROM: Angela R. Pitman, Block Grant Administrator
Community&Economic Development Department
SUBJECT: 2011 HOME Fund Allocations and Annual Work Plan (MF# CDBGI0-028)
Z. REFERENCE(S):
1. Resolution allocating 2011 HOME funds.
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
09/27/10: DISCUSSION
10/04110: MOTION; I move to approve Resolution No. allocating the
estimated 2011 HOME funds.
III. FISCAL IMPACT
Estimated$476,000 in Federal HOME funds
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A. Pasco entered into a HOME Consortium Agreement with Richland and Kennewick in
1996 making the City eligible for Federal HOME funds. In May, 2010, this
Agreement was renewed through 2013.
B. Currently Pasco's HOME Fund balance for Program Year 2008 through Program
Year 2010 for all projects is $714,816. These funds are allocated as follows:
Current Activities Budget Units
AcquiSition & Rehab/Infill Projects $ 171,700.00 2
Owner-occupied Rehabilitation $ 221,115.72 6
Rental Rehabilitation $ 297,000.00 7
First Time Homebuyer Assistance S 25,000.00 5
$ 714,815.72
C. HOME funds are based on need and income eligibility and may be used anywhere
within the city limits, however, neighborhoods designated as priority by City Council
receive first consideration. Funding is first targeted in the Longfellow and Museum
neighborhoods, then within low-moderate income census tracts (201, 202, 203 and
204). If HOME funds cannot be applied to those areas, then they are used as needed
anywhere within the city limits for the benefit of eligible low-moderate income
families.
V_ DISCUSSION:
A. Foreclosed and abandoned properties present particular challenges to neighborhoods.
Foreclosed properties are often in severe disrepair and remain un-purchased after an
extended period of time. These properties usually do not meet HUD minimum
standards and blight the neighborhood. In March, 2010, the City modified the
Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) to allow the acquisition and rehabilitation
of abandoned or foreclosed properties.
B. The City is able to use HOME fiends in a similar manner as NSP funds for acquisition
and rehabilitation of foreclosed properties. Once the purchased homes are
4(f)
rehabilitated, the City sells the properties to eligible buyers. "Program Income" (the
proceeds of the sale) can then be used for future down payment assistance or
rehabilitation activities.
C. It is estimated that approximately $216,000 from the 2011 Entitlement and $260,000
from Program Income from the sale of two acquisition and rehabilitation projects and
other activities will be available for affordable housing projects. Staff proposes
estimated funds totaling $476,000 be allocated as follows:
Proposed Activities Budget Units
Acquisition & Rehab/Infill Projects $ 275,000.00 2-3
Owner-occupied Rehabilitation $ 115,000.00 3
First Time Hoinebuyer Assistance S 64,000.00 12
Administration from PI $ 26,000.00
$ 476,000.00
D. The Owner-Occupied Rehabilitation and First Time Homebuyer Assistance activities
are a continuation of the existing HOME program. Staff is optimistic that adding
Acquisition and Rehabilitation of foreclosed properties as an activity will provide a
rapid and significant contribution to neighborhoods.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION ALLOCATING ESTIMATED 2011 FEDERAL HOME FUNDS.
WHEREAS, the City of Pasco entered into an Agreement with Kennewick and Richland
in 2007 continuing participation in a Consortium originally formed in 1996 under the Home
Investments Partnership (HOME) Program; and
WHEREAS, the Consortium allows the three cities to be eligible for federal HOME
funds; and
WHEREAS, the City has established a Community Housing Improvement Program
(CHIP); and
WHEREAS, it is estimated in 2011, the City of Pasco will receive $216,000 federal
HOME Entitlement Funds plus $260,000 in Program Income for a total estimated available of
$476,000 NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO:
Section L 2011 HOME funds received by the City of Pasco shall be allocated to the
Community Housing Improvement Program (CHIP) operate city-wide. Priority will be given to
neighborhood improvement areas and low-moderate income census tracts as needed for the
following activities below:
Estimated
Activity Units Amount
HOME Administration $ 26,000.00
First Time Homebuyer's Program 12 $ 60,000.00
Acquisition & Rehabilitation Program 2-3 $ 275,000.00
Owner-occupied Rehabilitation 3 $ 115,000.00
TOTAL ALLOCATED 15 $ 476,000.00
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this day of , 2010.
CITY OF PASCO:
Matt Watkins
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Debra L. Clark Leland B. Kerr
CMC City Clerk City Attorney
AGENDA REPORT
FOR: City Council r September 21, 2010
TO: Cary Crutchfie 'vlanager Workshop Mtg.: 9/27/10
Regular Mtg.: 1014110
FROM: Rick Terway, Tiirector
Administrative and Community . .rvlces
SUBJECT: Benton-Franklin Head Start Lease, MLK Center
I. REFERENCE(S):
A. Proposed Lease Agreement
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
9/27: Discussion
1014: MOTION: I move to approve the lease with Benton-Franklin I-lead Start for
tenancy at the Martin Luther King Center and, further, to authorize
the City Manager to sign the lease agreement.
III. FISCAL IMPACT:
Revenue Increase
IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF:
A) For almost twenty years, Benton-Franklin Head Start has leased space at the
Martin Luther King Center. The current lease agreement expires September 30,
2010. The last lease, entered into in 2000, was a five year lease with the option to
extend an additional five years, which was exercised.
V. DISCUSSION:
A) The proposed lease has been updated by the City Attorney and reflects all current
requirements. This lease is for a five year period with the option to extend an
additional five years. In addition, the rent has increased 2% per annum from the
last five years of the old lease to set the beginning rate for the new lease and the
2% per annum increase is carried forward each year in the terms of the new lease,
Head Start has reviewed the lease and is in agreement with the terms.
B) Staff recommends Council authorize the City Manager to enter into the agreement
on behalf of the City.
4(g)
MARTIN LUTHER KING COMMUNITY CENTER
MUNICIPAL LEASE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT made on , 2010, between the City a Pasco,
a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, located in the County of Franklin,
hereinafter referred to as "Lessor", and Benton-Franklin Head Start, a nonprofit corporation of
the State of Washington, hereinafter referred to as "Lessee", both sometimes referred to as
"Parties."
IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual covenants herein set out, the Parties agree as
follows:
1. Description of Premises. Lessor hereby leases to Lessee approximately 4,800
square feet of space, as shown on the attached Exhibit "A", at the Martin Luther King
Community Center, more specifically described as follows:
The Martin Luther King Community Center located at 205 South Wehe
Street, Pasco, Washington, which is situated in the portion of the NW 1/4 of
the SW 1/4, Section 28,T.20N, R30E.W.M.
2. Term. This lease shall commence on October 1, 2010, for a term of sixty (60)
months expiring on September 30, 2015. Lessee shall have the option to renew the lease for
periods of the same duration upon giving written notice to the Lessor of its intent to exercise the
option at least ninety (90) days before expiration of the lease term and upon agreement between
Lessor and Lessee of the appropriate monthly rent during the renewal term of the lease.
Either party may terminate this lease prior to the expiration of any lease term by giving
the other party one (1) year advance notice of their intent to terminate the lease.
3. Rent. Lessee shall pay Lessor for the use of the premises the amount of
$2,120.00 per month for the year 2010; $2,162.40 per month for the year 2011; $2,205.65 per
month for the year 2012; $2,249.76 per month for the year 2013; $2,294.76 per month for the
year 2014; and $2,340.66 per month for the year 2015, payable on the first day of each month
and sent to'
City of Pasco
PO Box 293
Pasco WA 99301
There will be a late collection charge of $50.00 for any delinquent rental payment not
delivered to the Lessor on or before the 50' day of each month during the term of this Agreement,
and shall bear interest at the rate of 1 '/2 percent per month until paid in full.
Leasehold excise tax is levied pursuant to Chapter 82.29A RCW. The Lessee shall
faithfully pay this tax when due unless Lessee provides the Lessor with proof of exemption from
\\so1o2\acs\agreements\m1k headstart9.20.10.docx
the Washington State Department of Revenue. If the leasehold excise tax levy changes during
the term of this Agreement, the tax payable hereunder shall, likewise, be correspondingly
changed.
In the event that the monthly operating costs to the Lessor increase by ten percent (10%)
or more during the terra of this lease, the additional operating costs shall be passed onto the
Lessee by an increase in the monthly rental equal to the increase in operating cost. Operating
costs include maintenance services, utilities and other direct out-of-the pocket expenses of the
Lessor for maintenance and operation of the Martin Luther King Community Center facility.
4. Q-giet En'o 'ru,,ent. Lessor covenants and agrees that the Lessee shall lawfully,
peacefully, and uietly hold, occupy and enjoy the leased premises during the term of the lease
without objection or molestation.
5. Use of the Lease Premises. Lesser, agrees that the leased premises shall be used
by the Lessee exclusively as a preschool for early childhood education and related activities.
Such use shall conform with applicable City ordinances and State and Federal laws. No other
usage of the building shall be allowed unless prior written consent is obtained from the City
Manager, which shall be granted or not granted at the absolute discretion of the City, it being
understood that it is the purpose of the City to maintain the neighborhood and preserve the
building.
When available, the Lessee may use the playground and gym located on the premises,
such uses to be supervised by Lessee and wholly the responsibility of Lessee. Lessee's use of
the playground and gym shall be coordinated with the Lessor's designee as necessary to allow
Lessee's use of the playground and gym by Lessee when such facilities are not required for
Lessor's purposes, including the recreational programs and activities sponsored by the YMCA at
the Martin Luther King Community Center.
In such event, Lessee shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color,
religion, age, sex, national origin, or physical handicap, and further understands and agrees to
comply with the City's Nondiscrimination in Community Athletics Policy and with the Fair Play
in Community Sports Act.
Lessee agrees to maintain a safe environment for all participants in such playground or
gym facilities. In the event the Lessee suspects a youth participant has sustained an injury,
including but not limited to concussion or other head injury, the youth participant shall be
removed from participation immediately and the participant's parents or guardians shall be
contacted immediately, In the event of an emergency relating to the health and safety of a
participant, Lessee shall tali 911 and report the emergency immediately.
Lessee shall not exceed the posted room occupancy signs posted for fire safety, nor shall
any flammable materials or open flames be permitted within the premises.
6. Acceptance by ,Lessee. Lessee has inspected and knows the condition of the
premises and accepts the same in their present condition (sul iect to ordinary wear, tear and
\\so1o2\acs\agreements\mlk headstart9.20,10.docx
deterioration in the event the term commences after the date hereof and to the rights of present or
former occupants, if any, to remove movable property), including the interior surfaces of exterior
walls.
7. Lessor's Right of Entry. Lessor or Lessor's agent may enter the premises at
reasonable hours to examine the same, to do anything Lessor may be required to do hereunder or
which Lessor may deem necessary for the good of the premises.
S. aintenance and Improvements by Lessee. Lessee shall take good care of the
premises and the equipment and fixtures therein. At the expiration of the term, Lessee shall
surrender the premises broom clean, in as good condition as the reasonable use thereof will
permit. All damage or injury to the leased premises not caused by fire and other casualty, as set
forth in Section 14 hereof. and all damage to glass shall be promptly repaired by the Lessee.
All improvements to the leased premises made by the Lessee shall be first approved by
Lessor. All building repairs, alterations, additions, improvements, installation, equipment and
fixtures, by whomsoever installed or erected (except such business trade fixtures belonging to
Lessee as can be removed without damage to or leaving incomplete the premises or building)
shall belong to Lessor and remain on and be surrendered with the premises as part thereof, at the
expiration of this Lease or any extension thereof..
9. Utilities and Custodial Services. Lessor shall furnish and pay for all electricity,
gas, water, fuel, or any services or utilities used in or assessed against the premises, unless
otherwise herein expressly provided. Lessor shall also be responsible for removal of garbage
from the leased premises.
Lessee shall be responsible for charges billed to Lessor for "false alarms"on the premises
security system when such charges are incurred as a result of Lessee's failure to properly disarm
system during use of the premises by Lessee.
Lessee will provide, at its own expense,custodial services for the premises leased herein.
10. Signs and Advertisements. Lessee shall not put upon nor permit to be put upon
any part of the premises, any signs, billboards, or advertisements whatever, without the prior
written approval of the City Manager.
11. Indemnity/Hold Harmless. Lessee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless
the Lessor, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims,
suits, actions, or liabilities for injury or death of any person, or for loss or damage to property,
which arises out of Lessee's use of premises, or from the conduct of Lessee's business, or from
any activity, work or thing done, permitted, or suffered by Lessee in or about the premises,
except only such injury or damage as shall have been occasioned by the sole negligence of the
Lessor.
\\so1o2\acs\agreements\mlk headstart9.20.10.docx
12. Insurance. The Lessee shall procure and maintain for the duration of the
Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may
arise from or in connection with the Lessee's operation and use of the leased premises.
A. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Lessee shall obtain insurance of the types
described below:
(1) Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written on
Insurance Services Office (ISO) occurrence form CG 00 01 and shall cover
premises and contractual liability. Lessor shall be named as an insured on
Lessee's Commercial General Liability insurance polity using ISO Additional
Insured-Managers or Lessors of Premises Form CG 20 11 or a substitute
endorsement providing equivalent coverage.
(2) Property insurance shall be written on an all risk basis.
B. Minimum Amounts of Insurance. Lessee shall maintain the following
insurance limits:
(1) Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written with
limits no less than $1,000,000 each occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate.
(2) Property insurance shall be written covering the full value of
Lessee's property and improvements with no coinsurance provisions.
C. Other Insurance Provisions, The insurance policies are to contain, or be
endorsed to contain, the following provisions for Commercial General Liability
insurance:
(1) The Lessee's insurance coverage shall be primarily insurance as
respects the Lessor. Any insurance, self-insurance, or insurance pool coverage
maintained by the Lessor shall be excess of the Lessee's insurance and shall not
contribute with it.
(2) The Lessee's insurance shall be endorsed to state that coverage
shall not be cancelled by either party, except after thirty (30) days prior written
notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the Lessor.
D. Acceptabilit�� of urers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a
current A.M. Best rating of not less than ANIL
E. Verification of Coverage. Lessee shall furnish the Lessor with original
certificates and a copy of the mandatory endorsements, including but not necessarily
limited to the additional insured endorsement, evidencing the insurance requirements of
the Lessee,
\\so1o2\acs\agreements\m1k headstart9.20.10.docx
F. Waiver of Subrogation. Lessee and Lessor hereby release and discharge
each other from all claims, losses, and liabilities arising from or caused by any hazard
covered by property insurance on or in connection with the premises or said building.
This release shall apply only to the extent that such claim, loss or liability is covered by
insurance.
G. Lessor's PxopeM Insurance, Lessor shall purchase and maintain during
the term of the lease ail-risk property insurance covering the buildings for their full
replacement value without any coinsurance provisions.
Lessee shall comply with all insurance regulations so that the lowest fire, lightening,
explosion, extended coverage, and liability insurance rates may be obtained. nothing shall be
done or kept in or on the premises by Lessee which will cause an increase in the premium for
any such insurance of the premises or on any building of which the premises are a part or on any
contents located therein, over the rate usually obtained for the property use of the premises
permitted by this lease or which will cause cancellation of any such insurance.
In the event the Lessee's use of the premises is responsible for an increase in the
insurance rates on the building of which the premises are a part, then in such event, Lessee
agrees to pay any resulting increase in premiums on such building.
13. Damage to PropeM on Premises. Lessee agrees that all property of every kind
and description kept, stored, or placed in or on the premises shall be at Lessee's sole risk and
hazard and that Lessor shall not be responsible for any loss or damage to any of such property
resulting from fire, explosion, water, steam, gas, electricity, or the elements, whether or not
originating in the premises, caused by or from leaks or defects in or breakdown of plumbing,
piping, wiring, hearing, or any other facility, equipment, or fixtures or any other cause or act
except resulting from the gross negligence of Lessor or anyone for whom Lessor may be
responsible.
14. Damatze by Casualty, In case the leased premises shall be destroyed or shall be
so damaged by fire or other casualty, as to become untenantable, then in such event, at the option
of the Lessor, this lease shall terminate from the date of such damage or destruction and the
Lessee shall immediately surrender such premises and all interest therein to Lessor, and Lessee
shall pay rent only to the time of such surrender. Lessor shall exercise such option to terminate
this lease by notice in writing delivered to Lessee within ten (10) days after such damage or
destruction, In case Lessor shall not elect to terminate this lease, in such event, this lease shall
continue in full force and effect and the Lessor shall repair the leased premises with all
reasonable promptitude, placing the same in as good a condition as they were at the time of the
damage or abate in proportion to the extent and duration of untenantability. In either event
Lessee shall remove all rubbish, debris, merchandise, furniture, equipment, and other personal
property, within ten (10) days after the request of the Lessor. If the leased premises shall be only
slightly injured by fire or the elements, so as not to render the same untenantable and unfit by
occupancy, then the Lessor shall repair the same within a reasonable time, and in that case the
rent shall not abate. No compensation or claim shall be made by or allowed to the Lessee by
\\so1o2\acs\agreementslm1k head start9.20.Z0.docx
reason of any inconvenience or annoyance arising from the necessity of repairing any portion of
the building or the leased premises,however, the necessity may occur.
15. Public Requirements. Lessee shall comply with all laws, orders, ordinances, and
other public requirements now or hereafter affecting the premises or the use thereof, and save
Lessor harmless from expense, or damage resulting from failure to do so. The leased premises
are not exempted from compliance with zoning or any other municipal codes or ordinances nor
from any other requirements of law due to title being in the name of the City.
16. Assignment or Sublease. Lessee shall not assign, transfer, or encumber this
lease and shall not sublease the premises or any part thereof or allow any other person to be in
possession thereof without the prior written consent of the Lessor.
17. Surrender at End of Term. At the expiration of the term of this lease, the
Lessor or his agent shall have the right to enter and take possession of the leased premises, and
the Lessee agrees to deliver the same without process of law, The Lessee shall be liable to
Lessor for any loss or damage, including attorney's fees and court costs incurred, as a result of
Lessee's failure to comply with this obligation.
18. Holding Over. Any holding over by Lessee after the expiration of the term of
this lease or any extension thereof shall be construed to be a tenancy from month to month at a
monthly rental equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the rent payable during the last month
immediately prior to the expiration of the term and shall be subject to the terms and conditions of
this agreement. Nothing herein set out shall he construed to authorize any such holding over.
19. Default. If default is made in the payment of any installment of rent on the due
date thereof: or if Lessee shall default in the performance of any other agreement (other than
payment of rent) continuously for ten (10) days after written notice thereof, or if the premises be
vacated or abandoned, then in any such event this lease shall terminate, at the option of Lessor,
and Lessor may re-enter the premises and take possession thereof, with or without legal process
being hereby expressly waived, and upon such entry, as aforesaid, this lease shall terminate and
the Lessor may exclude Lessee from the premises, changing the lock on the door or doors if
deemed necessary, without being liable to Lessee for any damages or for prosecution therefor.
Lessor's rights in such event may be enforced by action in unlawful detainer or other proper
legal action, and the Lessee expressly agrees, notwithstanding termination of this lease and re-
entry by the Lessor that the Lessee shall remain liable for a sum equal to the entire rental payable
to the end of the term of this lease and shall pay any loss or deficiency sustained by the Lessor on
account of the premises being let for the remainder of the original term for a less sum than
before. Lessor, as agent for Lessee without notice may re,-let the leased premises or any part
thereof for the remainder of the terra or for any longer or shorter period as opportunity may offer,
and at such rental as may be obtained and Lessee agrees to pay the difference between a sum
equal to the amount of rent payable during the remainder of the term and the net rent actually
received by the Lessor during the terrn after deducting all expenses of every kind for repairs,
recovering possession, and re-letting the same, which difference shall accrue and be payable
monthly. All property of the .Lessee which is now or may hereafter be at any time during the
term of this lease in or upon such premises, whether exempt from execution or not, shall be
\\so1o2\acs\agreements\m1k head start9.20.JA.docx
bound by and subject to a lien for the payment of the rent herein reserved, and for any damages
arising from any breach by the Lessee of any of the covenants or agreements of this lease to be
performed by Lessee. In the event of default by Lessee in the payment of rent or otherwise,
Lessor may foreclosure such lien and take possession of such property or any part thereof and
sell or cause the same to be sold, at such place as Lessor may elect, at public or private sale, with
or without notice, to the highest bidder for cash, and apply the proceeds of such sale to pay the
costs of taking possession of and selling such property, and then toward the debt and/or damages
as aforesaid. Any excess of the proceeds of the sale over such costs, debt, and/or damages shall
be paid to Lessee. Any such sale shall bar any right ol'redemption by Lessee.
20. Waiver. The rights and remedies of the Lessor under this lease, as well as those
provided or accorded by law, shall be cumulative, and none shall be exclusive of any other rights
or remedies hereunder or allowed by law. A waiver by Lessor of any breach or breaches, default
or defaults, of Lessee hereunder shall not be deemed or construed to be a continuing waiver of
such breach of default nor as a waiver of or permission, expressed or implied, for any subsequent
breach or default, and it is agreed that the acceptance by Lessor of any installment of rent
subsequent to the date of same should have been paid hereunder, shall in no manner alter or
affect the covenant and obligation of Lessee to pay subsequent installments of rent promptly
upon the due date thereof. No receipt of money by Lessor after the termination in any way of
Us lease shall re-instate, continue, or extend the term above demised.
21. Bankruptcy. Neither this lease or any interest therein nor any estate hereby
created shall pass to any trustee or receiver in bankruptcy or to any other receiver or assignee for
the benefit of creditors by operation of law during the term of this lease or any renewal thereof.
22. Encumbrances. Any assignment, transfer or conveyance by Lessee of any
property rights arising out of this lease shall not encumber, alienate, diminish, cloud, or impair in
any way the title ownership and interest of the City in and to such property.
23. Notices. Any notice hereunder shall be sufficient if sent by registered or certified
mail, addressed to Lessee and Lessor at the following:
Lessee
Benton-Franklin Head Start
1549 Georgia Ave SE Suite B
Richland WA 99352
Lessor
City of Pasco
PO Box 293
Pasco, WA 99301
Receipt of any notice shall be deemed effective three (3) days after deposit of written notice in
the U. S. mails, with proper postage and properly addressed.
\\sol02\acs\agreernent5\Mlk headstart9.20.10.docx
24. Covenants to Run with the Premises. The covenants herein contained shall run
with the premises hereby let and bind the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and
successors of the Lessor and Lessee respectively. Consent of Lessor to assignment, and
acceptance of rent from assignee of the Lessee shall not release the Lessee from his obligation to
pay rent and comply with other conditions of this lease.
25. General Provisions. For the purpose of this Agreement, time is of the essence.
In the event of a dispute regarding the enforcement, breach, default or interpretation of this
Agreement,the parties shall first meet in a good faith effort to resolve such dispute. In the event
the dispute cannot be resolved by agreement of the parties, said dispute shall be resolved by
arbitration pursuant to RCW 7.04A, as amended, and the Mandatory Arbitration Rules (MAR);
venue shall be placed in Franklin County, Washington, the laws of the State of Washington shall
apply; and the prevailing party shall be entitled to its reasonable attorney fees and costs.
In the event any provision of this Agreement is deemed to be unenforceable, the other
provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
26. Entirg AUxgement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the
Parties, and no modification of this Agreement shall be binding upon the parties unless evidences
by an agreement in writing signed by the Lessor and the Lessee after the date hereof.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement on the date and
year.first written above.
CITY OF PASCO BENTON-FRANKLIN' HEAD STAR
By: By.
Gary Crutchfield, City Manager James Skucy, Executive Director
APPROVED AS TO FORM
By:
Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney
\\solo2\acs\agreements\mlk headstart9.20.10.docx
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
ss,
County of Franklin )
On this day personally appeared before me GARY CRUTCHFIELD, City Manager for
the City of Pasco, to be known to be the individual described in and who executed the within and
foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he signed the same as his free and voluntary act
and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned.
GIVEN under my hand and official seal this day of. - , 2010.
NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington
Residing at:
My Commission Expires:
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
ss.
County of )
On this day personally appeared before me JAMES SKUCY, Executive Director of
Benton-Franklin Head Start, to be known to be the individual described in and who executed the
within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he signed the same as his free and
voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned.
GIVEN under my hand and official seal this day of , 2010.
NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington
Residing at:
My Commission Expires:
\\so1o2\acs\agreements\m1k headstart9,20.10.docx