Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012.12.10 Council Workshop PacketAGENDA PASCO CITY COUNCIL Workshop Meeting 7:00 p.m. December 10, 2012 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL: (a) Pledge of Allegiance. 3. VERBAL REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS: 4, ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: (a) Engineering Division Presentation. (NO WRITTEN MATERIAL ON AGENDA) Presented by Mike Pawlak, City Engineer. (b) Process Water Refuse Facility Upgrade Presentation. (NO WRITTEN MATERIAL ON AGENDA) Presented by Steve Vernier, Cascade Earth Sciences. (c) Regionalization of Emergency Communications: 1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield, City Manager dated December 4, 2012. 2. Resolution No. 3369. 3. Proposed Interlocal Agreement. (d) Ambulance Service Contract with Fire District No. 3: 1. Agenda Report from Gary Crutchfield, City Manager dated December 5, 2012. (e) Annexation: Commercial/Kahlotus (MF #ANX12 -003): 1. Agenda Report from Dave McDonald, City Planner dated December 3, 2012. 2. Vicinity Map. 1 Proposed Annexation Ordinance. 4. Proposed Zoning Ordinance. 5. Planning Commission Report and Minutes dated 11/15/12. (f) Annexation: Water Intake Property (MF #ANX12 -006): 1. Agenda Report from Dave McDonald, City Planner dated December 3, 2012. 2. Vicinity Map. 3. Proposed Annexation Ordinance. 4. Proposed Zoning Ordinance. 5. Planning Commission Report and Minutes dated 10/18/12. (g) 2012 Budget Supplement: 1. Agenda Report from Dunyele Mason, Financial Services Manager dated December 6, 2012. 2. Proposed Ordinance Amending the 2012 Operating Budget. 3. Proposed Ordinance Amending the 2012 Capital Improvements Projects Budget. 4. Proposed Resolution Authorizing Interfund Loans. 5. Memo from Financial Services Manager to City Manager. 6. Exhibit 1 - 2012 Budget Supplement Worksheet. (h) Sidewalk Repair and Maintenance: 1. Agenda Report from Stan Strebel, Deputy City Manager dated December 3, 2012. 2. Proposed Ordinance. (i) Code Change on Definition of Family or Household Members: 1. Agenda Report from Stan Strebel, Deputy City Manager dated November 30, 2012. 2. RCW 26.50.010(2). 3. Proposed Ordinance. (j) Public Record Requests: 1. Agenda Report from Stan Strebel, Deputy City Manager dated December 3, 2012. 2. Washington Administrative Code 44 -14- 07003. 3. 2012 Copy Study. 4. Proposed Resolution. Workshop Meeting 2 December 10, 2012 5. OTHER ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: (a) (b) (c) 6. EXECUTIVE SESSION: (a) (b) (c) 7. ADJOURNMENT 1. 12:00 p.m., Monday, December 10, Pasco Red Lion — Pasco Chamber of Commerce Membership Luncheon. (2013 Mid - Columbia Ag Hall of Fame Inductee Announcement) 2. 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, December 12, Hal Homes Center, Ellensburg — Columbia River Policy Advisory Group Meeting. (MAYOR MATT WATKINS) 3. 5:30 p.m., Wednesday, December 12, Clover Island Inn, Kennewick — Benton, Franklin & Walla Walla Counties Good Roads & Transportation Association Meeting. ( COUNCILMEMBER BOB HOFFMANN, Rep.; REBECCA FRANCIK, Alt.) 4. 7:00 a.m., Thursday, December 13, Smith's, Walla Walla — BFCG Tri-Mats Policy Advisory Committee Meeting. ( COUNCILMEMBER BOB HOFFMANN, Rep.; REBECCA FRANCIK, Alt.) 5. 7:00 p.m., Thursday, December 13, Transit Facility — Ben - Franklin Transit Board Meeting. (MAYOR MATT WATKINS, Rep.; COUNCILMEMBER MIKE GARRISON, Alt.) 6. 11:30 a.m., Friday, December 14, El Chapala Restaurant, Kennewick — Benton - Franklin Council of Governments Board Meeting. ( COUNCILMEMBER AL YENNEY, Rep.; REBECCA FRANCIK, Alt.) TO: City Council FROM: Gary AGENDA REPORT Manager SUBJECT: Regionalization bf Emergency Communications I. REFERENCE(S): 1. Resolution No. 3369 2. Proposed Interlocal Agreement December 4, 2012 Workshop Mtg.: 12/10/12 Regular Mtg.: 12/17/12 II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 12/10: Discussion III. FISCAL IMPACT: None IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A) Benton and Franklin Counties operate separate 911 call centers and associated dispatch operations within their respective counties. Benton's operation is governed collectively by a board composed of representatives from cities and fire districts in addition to a county representative. Franklin County continues to operate as a division of the County Sheriff's department with no shared decision - making by using entities. Benton's operation uses a VHF system for the fire service while law enforcement uses an 800 mhz system. Franklin's system relies totally on VHF for the entire county. Over the past several years, with rapidly expanding use of citizen's cell phones, the emergency communication system has witnessed a growing number of communication failures (for example, a 911 call from parts of Pasco automatically go to the Benton 911 center instead of Franklin County, causing serious delays in emergency response; some parts of Pasco do not receive VHF communications, but do receive 800mhz signals). B) Franklin County Emergency Management obtained a grant two years ago to study the potential for regionalization of the two communication systems. The study (by E -Gov) resulted in findings in fall 2011 that regionalizing the system would result in: improved emergency response to citizen emergency calls; improved safety of law enforcement responders; and reduced overall public cost by eliminating some of the duplication inherent in the current operations. The Pasco City Council, like many other agencies throughout Benton and Franklin Counties, endorsed the concept of realizing the benefits of regionalization (see Resolution No. 3369), but stopped short of creating a plan for action. V. DISCUSSION: A) Earlier in 2012, Franklin County obtained a tentative commitment from the state E911 agency to provide funds for the two counties to develop an action plan for regionalization of the two separate systems (the state encourages fewer regional 911 centers rather than one or more in each county). The $100,000 grant offers the funding necessary to gather a collective effort by those most affected by the objective (the two counties and three major cities represent 90% of the bi -county population use and cost of operation). Over the past six months, a "steering committee" (composed of one commissioner from each county and the city manager of each of the three cities) has developed an interlocal agreement by 4(c) which the five agencies can collectively oversee the effort to develop the long- term plan (an implementation plan to establish a single 911 call center) by the end of 2013 and, hopefully, create a viable option for Pasco law enforcement to use 800 mhz (Pasco fire would remain on VHF). B) The proposed interlocal agreement will initiate some movement behind the E -Gov recommendations, leading to improved emergency services for citizens while improving a critical communications tool for law enforcement. C) The other four agencies will review the draft agreement during December. Any final changes to the draft agreement can be identified by January and final approval of the agreement can occur at that time. RESOLUTION NO.33�aj A RESOLUTION ENDORSING A REGIONAL EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM AND URGING THE GOVERNING BODIES OF PUBLIC SAFETY AGENCIES WITHIN FRANKLIN COUNTY TO IMPLEMENT SUCH A SYSTEM IN CALENDAR YEAR 2012. WHEREAS, e -Gov, a qualified consultant, has studied the existing, separate emergency communication systems used in each of Benton and Franklin Counties and has concluded that combining the two systems under a single regional governance structure could improve emergency response capabilities in both counties and reduce the combined cost of the existing system; and WHEREAS, the emergency communications system provided currently by Franklin County cannot provide the scope and quality of emergency communication capability needed to serve the growing urban population center in Pasco, representing more than 80% of the entire population of Franklin County; and WHEREAS, both the Pasco Fire Chief and the Pasco Police Chief have each reviewed the e- Gov study and concluded that emergency services to citizenry as well as emergency responder safety will be improved by combining the communication systems under a single regional governance and central emergency call center; and WHEREAS, evaluation of the present cost of emergency communication services compared to a combined regional system indicates that the cost of such services for Pasco and Franklin County would likely decrease; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Pasco hereby endorses the concept of a single regional emergency communications system as envisioned in the e -Gov study. Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Pasco hereby urges the governing bodies of public safety agencies within Franklin County to take all steps necessary and appropriate to make available such a regional system, including 800 MHz communications for Pasco law enforcement, before the close of calendar year 2012. Section 3: That the Pasco City Manager is hereby directed to take all steps necessary and appropriate to prepare for participation in a regional system, including 800 MHz for law enforcement operations, by the close of calendar year 2012. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco at its regular meeting this 17th day of January, 2012. 0005P �00 Matt Watkins, Mayor ATTiUST: I 1 i Debra L. CClar9,tity Clerk 7 APPR VED S TO FORM: Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT (MATRICS) This agreement is entered into by and between Benton County and Franklin County, each being political subdivisions of the State of Washington, and the cities of Kennewick, Pasco and Richland, each being municipal corporations of the State of Washington, all hereinafter referred to as "Jurisdictions," for the purpose of collectively regionalizing the emergency communications system within Benton and Franklin Counties, on this ^ day of 2012. WHEREAS, the Emergency Communication Systems in Benton and Franklin Counties were recently studied by a consultant (E -Gov) and the E -Gov report recommends regionalization of the two existing systems under a single form of governance and operation, citing improved emergency response to citizens, improved safety and effectiveness for emergency responders, and reduced overall public costs for taxpayers; and WHEREAS, Benton and Franklin Counties, on behalf of all citizens of the two counties, desire to realize the benefits of regionalization and have obtained a $100,000 grant from the state of Washington to employ professional and experienced assistance to define and carryout an appropriate implementation plan to regionalize the emergency communication system within the two counties; and WHEREAS, Benton County, Franklin County, and the cities of Kennewick, Pasco and Richland collectively represent 90% of the emergency communication system use, and its financial support, and will require direct involvement in the design and implementation of the plan to ensure the most effective transition for citizens and responders alike; and WHEREAS, the Interlocal Cooperation Act, RCW Chapter 39.34, authorizes municipal corporations to make the most efficient use of their powers by enabling them to cooperate with each other on the basis of mutual benefit through the execution of interlocal cooperation agreements; NOW THEREFORE Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this joint effort is to collectively use qualified contract personnel to assist in the design and implementation of an action plan resulting in creation of a regionalized emergency communication (E -911) system throughout Benton and Franklin Counties, consisting of a single governance and operational structure, as generally outlined but not strictly constrained by the recommendations in the E -Gov study at the soonest time practicable. Section 2. Steering Committee. To provide direction in the design of the action plan as well as its implementation, there shall be a Steering Committee consisting of one representative from each of the jurisdictions participating in this agreement. Such representation shall be fulfilled by the Chief Administrative Officer or that person's designated representative. Jurisdictional cooperation and good faith are essential to creating an effective, broadly supported regional emergency communication system. Therefore, reasonable effort will be made to ensure the concerns of individual jurisdictions are fully addressed. Accordingly, the Steering Committee will endeavor to make its decisions by consensus; provided, however, where consensus is not achievable, the decision shall be made by supermajority (four) of the full membership of the Steering Committee. Section 3. Advisory Committee. There shall exist an Advisory Committee of the following composition: the Police Chief from each participating city; the Fire Chief from each participating city; the Sheriff from each participating county; and one additional representative nominated by the fire districts within and appointed by each participating county. The Advisory Committee shall advise the Steering Committee on all matters referred to the Advisory Committee, including the action plan design, technical considerations and resources required to implement the plan. Section 4. State Grant. The cost of contract personnel to design and facilitate implementation of the regionalization plan shall be allocated to the $100,000 grant from Washington State (copy attached). All expenditures shall require prior authorization by the Steering Committee. Section 5. Administrative Support. Administration of the state grant and all contracts necessary to fulfill the purpose of this agreement and approved by the Steering Committee will be administered by Franklin County. As resources allow, the City of Richland will provide administrative support to the Steering and Advisory committees, so as to ensure timely meetings, appropriate meeting space, and associated clerical and record services. Section 6. Objectives /Criteria. A. The Steering Committee shall endeavor to accomplish regionalization of the current E -911 systems by December 31, 2013. In particular, the following milestones are hereby prescribed: a. Interlocal agreement for regional communication system, by April 2013. b. Bi- County PSAP (Public Safety Answering Point) operational, by December 2013. c. Complete migration to a regional system by December 31, 2014. B. In designing the interlocal agreement for regionalization of the emergency communication system and the implementation plan, the committees shall utilize existing work products and give full consideration to the following criteria: a. Operational effectiveness b. Cost effectiveness c. Sustainability and reliability of communication systems Section 7. Indemnification. Each Party shall defend, indemnify and hold the other Parties, their officers, officials, employees and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits, including attorney fees, resulting from or arising out of negligent acts or omissions relating to or in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Section 8. Actions Contesting Agreement. Each party shall appear and defend any action or legal proceeding brought to determine or contest: (i) the validity of this Agreement and/or (ii) the legal authority of any party to undertake the activities contemplated by this Agreement. If all parties to this Agreement are not named as parties to the action, the party named shall give the other parties prompt notice of the action and provide the others an opportunity to intervene. Each party shall bear any costs and expenses taxed by the court against it; any costs and expenses assessed by a court against all member jurisdictions jointly shall be shared equally. Section 9. Notice. Any notice or other communication given hereunder shall be deemed sufficient, if in writing and delivered personally to the addressee, or sent by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, addressed as follows, or to such other address as may be designated by the addressee by written notice to the other party: To Pasco: City Manager City of Pasco 525 North 3rd Avenue Pasco, WA 99301 To Benton County: Chairman, Board of Commissioners Benton County P.O. Box 190 Prosser, WA 99352 To Franklin County: Chairman, Board of Commissioners Franklin County 1016 N. 4`h Avenue Pasco, WA 99301 To Richland: City Manager City of Richland P.O. Box 190 Richland, WA 99352 To Kennewick: City Manager City of Kennewick PO Box 6108 Kennewick, WA 99336 Section 10. Severability. Whenever possible, each provision of this Agreement shall be interpreted in such a manner as to be effective and valid under applicable law. Any provision of this Agreement which shall prove to be invalid, void or illegal shall in no way affect, impair, or invalidate any other provisions hereof, and such other provisions shall remain in full force and effect. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Agreement shall be subject to re- negotiation as provided in this Agreement. Section 11. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties and supersedes any prior understandings and agreements between them regarding the subject matter hereof. There are no other representations, agreements, or understandings, oral or written, between the parties hereto relating to the subject matter of this Agreement. No amendment of, or supplement to, this Agreement shall be valid or effective unless made in writing and executed by the parties hereto. Section 12. Dispute Resolution: Should any dispute arise concerning the interpretation, enforcement, breach or default of this Agreement, the parties shall first meet in good faith and attempt to resolve or mediate the dispute. In the event it remains unresolved by mediation, the dispute shall be resolved by final and binding arbitration pursuant to RCW 7.04A, the Mandatory Rules of Arbitration, but with no right of appeal. The arbitration shall be conducted by a single arbitrator selected by mutual agreement of the parties or, failing such agreement, the arbitrator shall be selected by the then presiding judge of the Franklin County Superior Court. Venue for such arbitration shall be placed in Franklin County, Washington, and the prevailing party shall be awarded its attorney fees and costs as additional judgment against the other, Section 13. Captions. The section and paragraph captions used in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not control or affect the meaning or construction of any of the provisions of this Agreement. Section 14. Duration and Termination. The terms of this Agreement shall be for a period of two (2) years. The Agreement shall take effect on December 1, 2012 or as soon thereafter as all of the following events have occurred: A. Approval of the Agreement by the official action of the governing bodies of each of the parties hereto. B. Execution of the Agreement by the duly authorized representative of each of the parties hereto. C. Filing a copy of this Agreement with the Franklin County Auditor. Any party may elect to terminate this Agreement by written notice of such termination to all other parties delivered by regular mail to the contact person identified herein; provided, termination shall be effective no sooner than 30 days following receipt of written notice and shall not relieve the terminating party of any financial obligations incurred prior to the date of termination. COUNTY OF BENTON County Commissioner County Commissioner County Commissioner COUNTY OF FRANKLIN County Commissioner County Commissioner County Commissioner ATTEST: County Clerk to the Board Approved As To Form: Prosecuting Attorney, Deputy ATTEST: County Clerk to the Board Approved As To Form: Prosecuting Attorney, Deputy CITY OF KENNEWICK Mayor CITY OF PASCO Mayor CITY OF RICHLAND Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Approved As To Form: City Attorney ATTEST: City Clerk Approved As To Form: City Attorney ATTEST: City Clerk Approved As To Form: City Attorney AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council FROM: Gary Crutchfie y anager SUBJECT: Ambulance Se r ice Contract with Fire District No. 3 I. REFERENCE(S): December 5, 2012 Workshop Mtg.: 12/10/12 Regular Mtg.: 12/17/12 II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 10/10: Discussion 10/17: MOTION: I move to extend the ambulance service contract with Fire District 3 through January 2013. III. FISCAL IMPACT: IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A) The city has extended ambulance service to Fire District No. 3 since the late 1990s under a contract fee which recently amounted to about $30,000 annually. In addition to the contract fee, the city bills the "transport fee" to any user of the service. B) The City Council, in April of this year, increased the "availability charge" to $6.25 /month (effective January 2013) for all households and businesses within the city, in order to generate sufficient funds to reduce the general fund subsidy to the ambulance fund by approximately 50% (back down to $400,000 annually). In doing so, Council noted that District No. 3 should be required to pay a contract fee equivalent to the availability charge for all households within the District. That fee would amount to approximately $180,000 for 2013. C) City staff recommended and City Council agreed in June to provide ambulance service for 50% of the fee otherwise required to be comparable to the city charge ($90,000 for 2013). The Council action was taken in recognition of the District's desire for time to pursue its financial options, including the possibility of an EMS levy. V. DISCUSSION: A) As Council may know, the District submitted an EMS levy to its voters on the November 2012 ballot; the result was 60% voted no. B) District representatives and city staff have recently discussed options to continue the service in 2013, but the District feels it needs more time to determine its options. Staff recommends Council extend the current ambulance service contract (and contract rate) through January 2013, thus providing one additional month for District representatives and city staff to complete their effort. 4(d) AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council (- December 3, 2012 TO: Gary Crutchfi i Manager Workshop Mtg.: 12/10/12 Rick White, Regular Mtg.: 12/17/12 Community & dconomic Development Director( FROM: David McDonald, City Planner SUBJECT: ANNEXATION: Commercial /Kahlotus (MF# ANX12 -003) I. REFERENCE(S): A. Vicinity Map B. Proposed Annexation Ordinance C. Proposed Zoning Ordinance D. Planning Commission Report and Minutes dated: 11/15/12 II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 12/10: 12/17: COUNDUCT HEARING: MOTION A: I move to adopt Ordinance No. an Ordinance annexing certain real property to the City of Pasco and, further authorize publication by summary only. MOTION B: I move to adopt Ordinance No. , an Ordinance establishing I -1 zoning for the Commercial/Kahlotus Annexation area as recommend by the Planning Commission and, further authorize publication by summary only. III. FISCAL IMPACT: The addition of $11,440,405 to the total assessed value of the city. IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A. On September 4, 2012, the City Council passed Resolution No. 3424 establishing an annexation boundary for the proposed Commercial /Kahlotus Annexation area. Following the passage of the resolution a 60% annexation petition was submitted to the City. B. The petition has been reviewed by the County Assessor and has been determined to be sufficient to constitute a legally acceptable petition under the 60% petition method of annexation. C. The next step in the annexation process requires the City Council to hold a public hearing on the proposed annexation. V. DISCUSSION: A. The proposed annexation Ordinance (Motion "A "), if adopted, will cause the area in question to be annexed to the City subject to the following conditions: 1. The Pasco Comprehensive Plan will continue to be applicable to the area. 2. The annexation area will not assume any existing bonded indebtedness. 3. The annexation area will be assigned to Voting District #1. B. The Planning Commission conducted a zoning determination hearing for the proposed annexation area on November 15, 2012 and recommended the area be zoned I -1 (Light Industrial). Motion `B" will establish I -1 zoning for the annexation area. 4(e) WHEN RECORDED PLEASE RETURN TO: City of Pasco Attn: City Planner 525 North 3" Pasco, WA 99301 ORDINANCE NO, AN ORDINANCE relating to annexation and annexing certain real property to the City of Pasco. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pasco has declared, its intent to annex the following described territory to the City of Pasco pursuant to RCW Chapter 35A.14; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing on the proposed annexation has been published and posted as required by law; and, WHEREAS, a public hearing on the proposed annexation was held on December 17, 2012; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the following described area, situated in Franklin County, Washington to- wit: Beginning at the intersection of the north right -of -way line of SR -12 and the east line of Section 34, Township 9 North, Range 30 East, W.M. said point being the True Point of Beginning; Thence northerly, along the said east line, to the northeast corner of said Section 34; Thence northerly, along the east line of Section 27, Township 9 North, Range 30 East, W.M. to the northeast corner of said Section 27; Thence westerly, along the north line of said Section 27, to the west right -of- way line of Commercial Avenue; Thence northerly, along a line parallel with the east line of the southwest quarter of Section 22, Township 9 North, Range 30 East, W. M. to the north right -of -way line of Pasco- Kahlotus Road; Thence northeasterly, along said north right -of -way line to the east line of southwest quarter of said Section 22; Thence northerly, along said east line, to the intersection of said east line with the southerly line of the parcel of land shown on Record of Survey tiled for record in the office of the Franklin County Auditor under Fee Number 448594; Thence northwesterly along the southerly and westerly line of said parcel of land, to the north line of the southwest quarter of said Section 22; Thence westerly, along the north line of said southwest quarter to the east right -of -way line of Dietrich Road; Thence southerly along said east right -of- way line to the southwest corner of the parcel of land shown on Record of Survey filed for record in the office of the Franklin County Auditor under Fee Number 1598719, said corner being 302.36 feet southerly of the centerline of Commercial Avenue; Thence southerly to the north line of said Section 27 and continuing southerly to the intersection with the northerly right -of -way line of SR- 12; Thence southeasterly along said right -of -way to the True Point of Beginning; as depicted in the map attached hereto and labeled Exhibit "1" and the same is hereby annexed to the City of Pasco and is hereby declared to be within the corporate limits of the City of Pasco. Section 2. That the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Pasco be and the same is hereby adopted for the above described tract of land. Section 3. That said tract of land shall not assume any portion of the existing bonded indebtedness of the City of Pasco. Section 4. That said tract of land shall be in Voting District # 1. Section 5. That a certified copy of this ordinance be and the same shall be filed with the Franklin County Commissioners. Section 6. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect on December 31, 2012. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 17th day of December 2012. Matt Watkins, Mayor ATTEST: Debra Clark, City Clerk -2- APPROVED AS TO FORM Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney Item: Commercial /Kahlotus Annexation Exhibit Applicant: (Multiple Owners) N #1 File #: ANX 2012 -003 Annexation Ju LJLJ I_'LII �QYXJ III IMI LL Area L1= - ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the City of Pasco, Washington, assigning zoning to certain real property within the City of Pasco. WHEREAS, on November 15, 2012, the Planning Commission of the City of Pasco conducted a public hearing to develop a recommendation for the assignment of zoning to certain property; in the event the property was incorporated within the City; and WHEREAS, on December 17, 2012, Ordinance No. effectively annexed certain real property to the City of Pasco; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the following described area, situated in Franklin County, Washington to -wit: Beginning at the intersection of the north right -of -way line of SR -12 and the east line of Section 34, Township 9 North, Range 30 East, W.M. said point being the True Point of Beginning; Thence northerly, along the said east line, to the northeast corner of said Section 34; Thence northerly, along the east line of Section 27, Township 9 North, Range 30 East, W.M. to the northeast corner of said Section 27; Thence westerly, along the north line of said Section 27, to the west right -of -way line of Commercial Avenue; Thence northerly, along a line parallel with the east line of the southwest quarter of Section 22, Township 9 North, Range 30 East, W. M. to the north right - of -way line of Pasco- Kahlotus Road; Thence northeasterly, along said north right -of -way line to the east line of southwest quarter of said Section 22; Thence northerly, along said east line, to the intersection of said east line with the southerly line of the parcel of land shown on Record of Survey filed for record in the office of the Franklin County Auditor under Fee Number 448594; Thence northwesterly along the southerly and westerly line of said parcel of land, to the north line of the southwest quarter of said Section 22; Thence westerly, along the north line of said southwest quarter to the east right -of -way line of Dietrich Road; Thence southerly along said east right -of -way line to the southwest corner of the parcel of land shown on Record of Survey filed for record in the office of the Franklin County Auditor under Fee Number 1598719, said corner being 302.36 feet southerly of the centerline of Commercial Avenue; Thence southerly to the north line of said Section 27 and continuing southerly to the intersection with the northerly right -of -way line of SR -12; Thence southeasterly along said right-of-way to the True Point of Beginning; as depicted in the map attached hereto and labeled Exhibit No. "1" be and the same is hereby assigned 1- 1(Light Industrial) zoning. Section 2. That any and ail zoning maps be and the same are hereby amended to conform to the aforesaid assigtment of zoning. Section 3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect on December 31, 2012. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 17 "' day of December, 2012, Matt Watkins, Mayor ATTEST: Debra Clark, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney Item: Commercial /Kahlotus Exhibit Applicant: (Multiple Owner #1 File #: ANX 2012 -003 Annexation Area ]LfT11 LTJ ED, r' ILIA � 1 T ul 11- -' - REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSIONER MASTER FILE NO: (MF# ZD2012 -003) APPLICANT: City of Pasco ACTION DATE: 11/15/2012 PO Box 293 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: Develop zoning recommendation for the Commercial/ Kahlotus Annexation Area. 1) AREA ID: Area Size # of Dwellings Population generally located east of SR -12 Commercial/ Kahlotus 546 acres 2 6 2) UTILITIES: A water main extends southerly in Commercial Avenue approximately 1,000 feet south of Kahlotus Highway. There is also a water line at the south end of Commercial Avenue extending westerly under SR 12. In 2010 the City completed a sewer line boring under SR 12 to bring sewer to the proposed annexation area. The city has undertaken considerable utility planning for the area and has ear marked several million dollars of infrastructure improvements for the area within the Capital Improvement Plan, 3) LAND USE AND ZONING: The proposed annexation area is currently zoned I -2 Medium Industrial (454 acres) and I -3 Heavy Industrial (92 acres) under the County zoning regulations. The County does not have an I -1 Light Industrial District, 4) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the proposed annexation area for industrial land uses. 5) ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197 -11 -158. ANALYSIS On October 4, 2012 the City Council approved Resolution 3424 accepting a Notice of Intent to commence annexation proceedings for a 546 acre area generally located east of SR -12 north and south of the Kahlotus Highway. Following acceptance of the Notice of Intent and prior to Council action on an annexation petition, the Planning Commission is to hold a zoning determination hearing. The purpose of said hearing is for the Planning 1 Commission to recommend appropriate zoning districts for the proposed annexation area in the event it may become part of the City. In determining the most appropriate zoning for the annexation area, the Planning Commission needs to consider the existing land uses, nearby development, zoning, policies of the Comprehensive Plan and the Land Use Designations of the Land Use Map. The Planning Commission also needs to be guided by the criteria in PMC 25.88.060 (as discussed below) in developing a zoning recommendation. The annexation area contains a mix of land uses ranging from farm fields to food processing plants. Three hundred and seventy -one acres (371) are currently devoted to farming while 120 acres are developed for industrial uses. The remaining acreage contains the Lewis Street Interchange and other streets, a storm water pond and two houses. The Comprehensive Plan designates the entire annexation area for industrial uses. The purpose of the annexation is to assist with the expansion of industrial businesses within the area. To support that effort the City completed a major boring under SR -12 in 2010 at a cost of $600,000. The boring contains four pipes to provide both water and sewer to the annexation area. Future planning includes extension of 12 and 16 inch water lines into the annexation area and extension of sewer lines. Land has already been provided within the annexation area for a sewer lift station to serve current and future industrial needs. The new sewer lift station along with the other planned utility improvements will provide service to about 2,000 acres of land on the east side of SR -12. These planned utility improvements will provide an efficient and cost - effective way for the food processors in the area to provide for their waste water and production water needs. These improvements will also enable expansion of the food processing plants within the annexation area and development of other related facilities. To maintain consistency with current zoning, land uses, utility planning and the Comprehensive Plan industrial zoning should be applied to the proposed annexation area. The use of the I -1 Light Industrial zone for the area will continue to permit existing industrial development and allow for future expansion of industrial enterprises. The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC 25.88.030. The criteria are listed below as follows: K 1. The changed conditions in the vicinity which warrant other or additional zoning: • The property is located within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. • The property in question is being annexed to the City of Pasco. • Upon annexation the property will need to be zoned. • Considerable utility planning has taken place to support existing and future industrial development within the proposed annexation area. 2. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare. The property is being annexed to the City and will need to be zoned. The justification for the rezone is the fact that if a zoning designation is not determined the property could become annexed without zoning. For the advancement of the general welfare of the community the property needs to be zoned. 3. The effect rezoning will have on the nature and value of adjoining property and the Comprehensive Plan. Rezoning the property to I -1 will maintain the status quo for the neighborhood. The nature and value of adjoining properties will not be impacted by retaining industrial zoning in the area. 4. The effect on the property owners or owner of the request is not granted. Without the annexation area being assigned a specific zoning district, the area will essentially be un -zoned upon annexation. The area needs to be zoned to provide certainty and benefit to the property owners and the adjoining property owners. 5. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for industrial development. 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 Planning Commission may add findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1) The site is within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. 2) The Urban Growth Boundary was established by Franklin County in 1994. 3) The property is being proposed for annexation by the end of 2012. 3 4) The annexation area is identified in the Comprehensive Plan for industrial uses. 5) Properties to the west, in the City, are zoned C -3 and I -1 with a small area zoned RT. 6) The annexation area contains trucking firms, an oil distribution facility, two food processing plants, warehouses, the BPA substation, two houses and a number of farm fields. 7) The current Franklin County zoning for the site is I -2 and I -3. 8) The County does not have I -1 zoning. 9) I -3 zoning within the City is reserved for the Big Pasco Port area only. 10) 1 -1 zoning permits the location of trucking firms, food processing plants, warehousing, power stations and similar uses. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a rezone the Planning Commission must develop its conclusions from the findings of fact based upon the criteria listed in PMC 25.88.060 and determine whether or not: (1) The proposal is in accord with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Zoning the properties to reflect the land use designations in the Comprehensive Plan will cause the proposal to be in accord with the Plan. (2) The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. Retaining the industrial zoning on the property will have no material impact on surrounding properties. (3) There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. It is in the best interest of the community and neighborhood to have the annexation area zoned to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and with the current uses, Without zoning, the value and character of the neighborhood would not be protected or maintained. (4) Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. I -1 zoning would mitigate the impacts of the property not being zoned and therefore no conditions are needed. 13 (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. A concomitant agreement is not needed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move the Planning Commission adopt the Findings of Fact as contained in the November 15, 2012 staff report. MOTION: I move, based on the findings of fact as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council zone the Commercial Kahlotus Annexation Area I -1 Light Industrial upon annexation. 5 � L O •� � Q ; ct ,Its) C L �J�N qv 40 y� MIMI �s O °Otl N01tl131U•. _ - .... .�...... ... ..V ` [i" 41W11NYZ 4S ? , ct ¢ 1r Tr� P 5 o N Wv '<</,�Vb3tl0 1� IIU +u11 O ` T 030 3nb tlb43'J O ulvm yy 3AV OOOH LL •C� M o Z Q )nH. T 3Y 0 N C f5U - AV Btl WY AS' _ t c mAS �! O 13 ~ 3nv m3 O e . O � ..J N a 3nvs 3n X m w 10 2 # cot / F S _tl N3M0 U Q m C y. O LO 3nY N'J330 P zH3M PE OPVE o 3AV S31 D ow' alp^ .s G y � N PHp J$ z 0 ct 0 U O `r' n� ON U N N �N O N I� Q N a a o V Y61 Y� -aa eoia ia- M V I� i IN e 3M1Y MN 3'J. r 3 VOanH , \tl 3HOWtlOAS t 3 V Wl3 r 3Ab SMnaa AV O } N3 o H0339 N ?q `r Tom N7INILjtl -P� P ..v PM• � ¢ Q2 O I S — P03Y � \ %b3NONtl £ 7 NXN TOM g 3 ST o 3ntl sn�no W Q 8 3/�Y N033B p w ¢ M anb S31HYN 0 PNE 3I�VNIIMryy] � PJf 1 x • �F l �w N w L Y (6 C` C U M O 0 N N E o J N T Z 6i� Ile N w L Y (6 C` C U M O 0 N N E o J N T Z 6i� Planning Commission Minutes 11/15/12 E. Zoning Determination Zoning determination of an unincorporated property located at Kahlotus Hwy /Commercial Ave (MF# ZD 2012 -0031 Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. Dave McDonald, City Planner, explained the proposal to annex approximately 546 acres of land located east of SR 12 on the north and south side of the Kahlotus Highway. Property owners are currently are currently working on a petition for the annexation. Part of the annexation process requires the Planning Commission to develop a recommendation for the City Council for zoning in the event the properties in question become annexed to the City. Staff is anticipating annexation by the end of 2012 or January 2013. Mr. McDonald explained the Planning Commission needed to consider the comprehensive plan designations, the policies of the plan, current land use, current County zoning when developing a recommendation for zoning. The current zoning of the proposed properties is split between two different County Zoning Districts; the I -3 (Heavy Industrial) and I -2 (Medium Industrial) Districts. Most of the properties within this area are developed for industrial uses, more in line with I -1 zoning rather than I -2 or I -3. The County does not have an I -1 Zoning District. In the City's zoning regulations the I -3 Zoning District is set aside specifically for the Port of Pasco which is the only area that can be zoned I -3. The difference between I -1 and I -2 is that the I- 2 District allows salvage yards and junk yards without any restrictions other than the development standards in the zoning code. The I -2 District also permits some enhanced food processing relating to the rendering of meats, fats and oils. The current uses in the proposed area are mainly I -1 District type of uses. There are two food processors, a large substation owned by Bonneville Power, there are a number of trucking firms, a small fertilizer /bio- chemical company that provides services to the agriculture industry, three potato shed warehouses and a couple of homes. Staff recommended I -1 zoning for the area, which would allow current uses to continue and existing uses would be able to expand. Chairman Cruz agreed with staff that the area should be zoned as I -1 (Light Industrial). The fellow commissioners agreed. The public hearing was opened but with no questions or comments it closed. Mr. McDonald also added that he and Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, met with property owners to go over any zoning questions with them and as far as staff was are aware there were no objections to the Industrial Zoning being proposed. Staff does not see the proposed zoning disrupting any of the current uses. Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, to adopt the findings of fact as contained in the November 15, 2012 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Greenaway moved, seconded by Commissioner Kempf, based on the findings of fact as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council zone the Commercial /Kahlotus Annexation Area, I -1 (Light Industrial) upon annexation. The motion passed unanimously. AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Counei 1 TO: Gary Crutchfield., M ger Rick White, Community & Economic elopment Director FROM: David McDonald, City Planner SUBJECT: ANNEXATION Water Intake Property (MF# ANX12 -006) 1. REFERENCE(S): A. Vicinity Map B. Proposed Annexation Ordinance C. Proposed Zoning Ordinance D. Planning Commission Report and Minutes dated: 10/18/12. December 3, 2012 Workshop: 12/10/12 Regular Mtg.: 12/17/12 II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 12/10: DISCUSSION: 12/17: COUNDUCT HEARING: MOTION A: I move to adopt Ordinance No. an Ordinance annexing certain real property to the City of Pasco and, further authorize publication by summary only. MOTION B: I move to adopt Ordinance No. an Ordinance establishing R -T zoning for the Water Intake Annexation area as recommend by the Planning Commission and, further authorize publication by summary only. III. FISCAL IMPACT: None IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A. In August of this year the City purchased a small parcel of land directly west of the 1 -182 Bridge in the 11400 block of West Court Street. The property was purchased to accommodate piping and other equipment for a new water intake facility to be located in the Columbia River. B. On October I, 2012, the City Council passed Resolution No. 3430 establishing an annexation boundary for the proposed Water Intake property. Following the passage of the resolution a 60% annexation petition was submitted to the City. C. The petition has been reviewed by the County Assessor and has been determined to be sufficient to constitute a legally acceptable petition under the 60% petition method of annexation. D. The next step in the annexation process requires the City Council to hold a public hearing on the proposed annexation. V. DISCUSSION: A. The proposed annexation Ordinance (Motion "A "), if adopted, will cause the area in question to be annexed to the City subject to the following conditions: I . The Pasco Comprehensive Plan will continue to be applicable to the area. 2. The annexation area will not assume any existing bonded indebtedness. 3. The annexation area will be assigned to Voting District #5. B. The Planning Commission conducted a zoning determination hearing for the proposed annexation area on October 18, 2012 and recommended the area be zoned R -T (Residential Transition). Motion "B" will establish R -T zoning for the area. 4(f) WHEN RECORDED PLEASE RETURN TO: City of Pasco Attn: City Planner 525 North 3`d Pasco, WA 99301 ORDINANCE NO, AN ORDINANCE relating to annexation and annexing certain real property to the City of Pasco. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pasco has declared, its intent to annex the following described territory to the City of Pasco pursuant to RCW Chapter 35A.14; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing on the proposed annexation has been published and posted as required by law; and, WHEREAS, a public hearing on the proposed annexation was held on December 17, 2012; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the following described area, situated in Franklin County, Washington to- wit: Beginning at the southwesterly corner of Lot 11, Harris Subdivision said corner being the True Point of Beginning; Thence southwesterly along the southwesterly projection of the westerly line of said Lot 11, to the intersection with the existing City Limit line; Thence northeasterly along said City Limit line to the intersection with the northerly right -of -way line of West Court Street; Thence northwesterly along said northerly right -of -way line to the intersection with the northeasterly projection of the westerly line of said Lot 11; Thence southwesterly along said projected line to the southerly right -of -way line of West Court Street; Thence continuing southwesterly along the westerly line of said Lot 11, to the True Point of Beginning; as depicted in the map attached hereto and labeled Exhibit "1" and the same is hereby annexed to the City of Pasco and is hereby declared to be within the corporate limits of the City of Pasco. Section 2. That the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Pasco be and the same is hereby adopted for the above described tract of land. Section 3. That said tract of land shall not assume any portion of the existing bonded indebtedness of the City of Pasco. Section 4. That said tract of land shall be in Voting District # 5. Section 5. That a certified copy of this ordinance be and the same shall be filed with the Franklin County Commissioners, Section 6. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect on December 31, 2012. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 17th day of December 2012. Matt Watkins, Mayor ATTEST: Debra Clark, City Clerk -2- APPROVED AS TO FORM Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney ORDINANCE NO, AN ORDINANCE of the City of Pasco, Washington, assigning zoning to certain real property within the City of Pasco. WHEREAS, on October 18, 2012, the Planning Commission of the City of Pasco conducted a public hearing to develop a recommendation for the assignment of zoning to certain property; in the event the property was incorporated within the City; and WHEREAS, on December 17, 2012, Ordinance No. , effectively annexed certain real property to the City of Pasco; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the following described area, situated in Franklin County, Washington to -wit: Beginning at the southwesterly corner of Lot 11, Harris Subdivision said corner being the True Point of Beginning; Thence southwesterly along the southwesterly projection of the westerly line of said Lot I1, to the intersection with the existing City Limit line; Thence northeasterly along said City Limit line to the intersection with the northerly right -of -way line of West Court Street; Thence northwesterly along said northerly right -of -way line to the intersection with the northeasterly projection of the westerly line of said Lot 11; Thence southwesterly along said projected line to the southerly right -of -way line of West Court Street; Thence continuing southwesterly along the westerly line of said Lot 11, to the True Point of Beginning; as depicted in the map attached hereto and labeled Exhibit No. "1" be and the same is hereby assigned R -T (Residential Transition) zoning. Section 2. That any and all zoning maps be and the same are hereby amended to conform to the aforesaid assignment of zoning. Section 3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect on December 31, 2012. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco this 17`h day of December, 2012. Matt Watkins, Mayor ATTEST: Debra Clark, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney y I� • y � Y� l 1 CD OTC � m• N O COD CD lot REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSIONER MASTER FILE NO: (MF# ZD2012 -002) APPLICANT: City of Pasco ACTION DATE: 10/ 18/2012 PO Box 293 Pasco, WA 99301 BACKGROUND REQUEST: Develop zoning recommendation for the Water Intake property Annexation Area on West Court Street. 1) AREA ID: Area Size # of Dwellings Population Water Intake Property 21,004 sq. ft. 0 0 2) UTILITIES: The Court Street sewer interceptor terminates at the current city limits on Court Street. The city water main that provides service to Shoreline Estates is located on Court Street. 3) LAND USE AND ZONING: The proposed annexation area is currently zoned R -T under the County zoning regulations and was used for growing vegetables. The lot is 12,427 square feet and adjoining right -of -way and shoreline area add another 8,577 square feet to the annexation area. Properties to the west and north are zoned RT in the County. Properties down river along West Court Street are in the City and zoned R -S -20. 4) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates the proposed annexation area for low density residential development. 5) ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Pasco is the lead agency for this project. Based on the SEPA checklist, the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, City development regulations, and other information, a threshold determination resulting in a Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) has been issued for this project under WAC 197 -11 -158. ANALYSIS In August of this year the City purchased a small parcel of land (12,427 sq. ft.) directly west of the I -182 Bridge. The property was purchased to accommodate piping and other equipment for a new water intake facility to be located in the Columbia River. The property was originally part of the Harris Family Farm established in the 1940's and has been used primarily for the production of vegetables. In determining the most appropriate zoning for the annexation area the Planning Commission needs to consider the existing land uses, nearby development, zoning, policies of the Comprehensive Plan and the land use designations of the land use map. The Planning Commission also needs to be guided by the criteria in PMC 25.88.060 (as discussed below) in developing a zoning recommendation. The general area around the proposed annexation site can be characterized primarily as a suburban agricultural area with pockets of low- density residential single - family development. The bulk of the Harris Farm is located on the north side of Court Street. There are three single - family homes on the parcels directly upriver from the water intake parcel. Downstream from the site, south of the I -182 Bridge, are a number of single - family homes on lots ranging in size from 15,000 - 18,000 square feet. The new city water treatment plant is located on the north side of Court Street to the south of the I -182 freeway. The Harris Farm and associated property is zoned RT in the County. The properties in the City south of the I -182 Bridge are zoned R -S -20 and the water treatment plant is zoned R -S -12. To maintain consistency with nearby development patterns and the Comprehensive Plan, the most appropriate zoning would be a suburban zoning district (RT, R -S -20 or R -S- 12). The water intake facility will not be impacted by the establishment of a zoning district on the property because the proposed facility will require a special permit regardless of what zoning is chosen. Because most of the Harris properties north of the I -182 Bridge are currently zoned RT, it may be appropriate to continue with the RT zoning on the intake property upon annexation. The RT zoning could then remain on the property until the Harris Farm is annexed. The initial review criteria for considering a rezone application are explained in PMC 25.88.030. The criteria are listed below as follows: 1. The changed conditions in the vicinity which warrant other or additional zoning: • The property is located within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. • The property in question is being annexed to the City of Pasco. • Conditions have changed little in the neighborhood in the last few years. The major change is the annexation of the parcel in question. Upon annexation the property will need to be zoned. 2. Facts to justify the change on the basis of advancing the public health, safety and general welfare. The property is being annexed to the City and will need to be zoned. The justification for the rezone is the fact that if a zoning designation is not determined the property could become annexed without a zone. For the advancement of the general welfare of the community the property needs to be zoned. 3. The effect rezoning will have on the nature and value of adjoining property and the Comprehensive Plan. Rezoning the property to RT will maintain the status quo for the neighborhood. The nature and value of adjoining properties will not be impacted by retaining the RT zoning. 4. The effect on the property owners or owner of the request is not granted. Without the annexation area being assigned a specific zoning district, the area will essentially be un -zoned upon annexation. The area needs to be zoned for the benefit of the owner (City of Pasco) and adjoining property owners. 5. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the property. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for low- density residential development. Utility Goal, UT -1, of the Plan suggests the City should ensure adequate utility service is provided within the UGA to accommodate anticipated growth. 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 Planning Commission may add findings to this listing as the result of factual testimony and evidence submitted during the open record hearing. 1) The site is within the Pasco Urban Growth Boundary. 2) The Urban Growth Boundary was established by Franklin County in 1994. 3) The property is being proposed for annexation by the end of 2012. 4) The annexation area is identified in the Comprehensive Plan for low- density residential uses. 5) Properties to the north and west are zoned RT. 6) According to the Franklin County Assessor's records (October 2012), the property values for lots in Rivershore Estates adjacent to RT zoning on the Harris Farm have increased over the past four years. 7) The current Franklin County zoning for the site and adjoining properties north of the I -182 Bridge is RT. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON STAFF FINDINGS OF FACT Before recommending approval or denial of a rezone the Planning Commission must develop its conclusions from the findings of fact based upon the criteria listed in PMC 25.88.060 and determine whether or not: (1) The proposal is in accord with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan encourages the development of utility services to accommodate anticipated growth within the UGA (UT -1). The property being annexed will be used specifically for enhancing the City's utility system for current and future growth. (2) The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. Retaining the RT zoning on the property will have no material impact on surrounding properties. (3) There is merit and value in the proposal for the community as a whole. It is in the best interest of the community and neighborhood to have the annexation area zoned to match surrounding properties. Without zoning, the value and character of the neighborhood would not be protected or maintained. (4) Conditions should be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impacts from the proposal. RT zoning would mitigate the impacts of the property not being zoned and therefore no conditions are needed. (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. A concomitant agreement is not needed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION MOTION: I move the Planning Commission adopt the Findings of Fact as contained in the October 18, 2012 staff report. MOTION: I move, based on the findings of fact as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council zone the Water Intake Annexation Area to R -T. . d I �xr:. :��,, �;,. 4 0 o a N ct N �N •rME4 LL D um ,D G0 cn um \ LM L a \J� FM �O % Ali �o ct N� r \ to ct o � � c b ct o V Q Ali ormlo N Planning Commission Minutes 10/18/12 D. Zoning Determination Zoning Determination of unincorporated property located at I -182 Water Intake Facility (MF# ZD2012 -0021 Chairman Cruz read the master file number and asked for comments from staff. David McDonald, City Planner, discussed the zoning determination of unincorporated property located at the I -182 Water Intake Facility. The City Council recently passed a resolution that accepted a notice of intent to annex a small piece of property just northerly of the Pasco /Richland Bridge along Court Street. This is a small property that the City recently purchased that is needed for water intake facilities for the City's water work system. That property will most likely be annexed by the end of the year. Zoning designation needs to be applied to that property prior to annexation. The property is all located north of I -182. In the county it is currently zoned RT (Residential Transition). Staff is recommending that it remain zoned as RT at the present time to match the County. In the future it will mostly likely be rezoned. There will also need to be a shoreline permit application and perhaps a special permit for the facilities that will be located on this lot, whether it is zoned RS -20 or RT. Steven Schlegel, 9304 W. Richardson Road, asked for clarification on the possible zoning change and what the plans are by the City for that property. Mr. McDonald answered that the City is planning to expand the ability of withdrawing water from the river for the City water system. The City already has an intake pump and facility under the bridge and it needs to be enhanced and enlarged. A number of pipes will need to be run from the river up to Court Street and then down to the water plant. To be able to control what happens to that property the City needs to annex it. Once it is annexed and the proper permits are obtained, the Public Works Department will then contract to have the equipment installed. Mr. Schlegel asked for clarification on the location of the water intake and the location of the lot. Mr. McDonald answered that the water intake itself will be in the river but the piping to carry the water from the water intake facility will be underground through the proposed site. Mr. Schlegel asked if the Planning Commission knew the property was included in the incorporation petition that the County has received and have certified that there are an adequate amount of signatures for a vote and that it cannot be annexed without a vote. Rick White, Community & Economic Development Director, stated that is incorrect. The annexation petition was filed October 3, 2012. The state law regarding incorporation and annexation gives an adjacent city 90 days from the filing of the petition to initiate annexation efforts for any property contained within the incorporation petition. Essentially, Pasco has 90 days from October 3, 2012 to initiate annexation. The reason the Planning Commission is considering zoning designation is because that needs to be determined prior to annexation. With no further questions or comments the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Levin moved, seconded by Commissioner Khan, to adopt the findings of fact as contained in the October 18, 2012 staff report. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Levin moved, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, based on findings of fact as adopted, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council zone the Water Intake Annexation Area to R -T. The motion passed unanimously. AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Counc4e, TO: Gary Crutc t anager FROM: Dunyele M, nancial Services Manager SUBJECT: 2012 BUDGET SUPPLEMENT I. REFERENCE(S): December 6, 2012 Workshop Meeting: 12/10/12 Regular Meeting: 12/17/12 A) Proposed ordinance amending the 2012 Operating Budget B) Proposed ordinance amending the 2012 Capital Improvements Projects Budget C) Proposed resolution authorizing Interfund Loans D) Memo from Financial Services Manager to City Manager E) Exhibit 1— 2012 Budget Supplement Worksheet II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL /STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: December 10: Discussion December 17: Public Hearing MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. amending the 2012 Operating Budget by providing a Revenue Supplement of $10,023,459 and an Expenditure Supplement thereto in the amount of $16,096,166 and to authorize publication by summary only. MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. amending the 2012 Capital Improvements Budget by providing an Expenditure Supplement thereto in the amount of $4,379,768 and to authorize the publication by summary only. MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. authorizing temporary inter - fund loans from the General Fund to the Economic Development Fund, the LID Debt Service Fund, the Community Development Grant Fund, Ambulance Fund and the General Construction Fund for a total amount of $2,1905000. III. FISCAL IMPACT: See attached Exhibit 1— 2012 Budget Supplement Summary IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: The items recommended to be included in the Supplemental Budget are for expenditures that were unanticipated or indeterminable at the time of the 2012 Budget preparation. Resources for the expenditures are: 1. Unanticipated revenue 2. Contributions from active funds 3. Ending fund balances V. DISCUSSION: Please see attached memo from the Financial Services Manager to the City Manager. 4(g) ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2012 ANNUAL OPERTING BUDGET OF THE CITY OF PASCO BY PROVIDING SUPPLEMENT THERETO; BY APPROPRIATING REVENUE RECEIVED IN EXCESS OF ESTIMATED REVENUES FOR THE CURRENT YEAR AND BY PROVIDING TRANSFERS AND ADJUSTMENT AUTHORITY. WHEREAS, staff has identified the need to make certain revisions to the 2012 Annual Operating budget originally adopted through Ordinance No. 4208 on December 19, 2011, and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing has been held subsequent to due notice, and the City Council has, after consideration, deemed the proposed Supplement to the Annual Operating Budget necessary and appropriate; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: §l. Pursuant to RCW 35A.33.120, the 2012 Operating Budget be and the same is hereby amended to provide for the following adjustments to revenue and expenditures, and by providing authority for any necessary transfer of money within or between funds indicated. FUND REVENUES EXPENSES GENERAL FUND 2,4071004 3,3771001 ARTERIAL STREET FUND 150,000 246,049 1 -182 Cooridor Traffic Impact 105,087 40,907 STREET OVERLAY - 34,252 CD GRANT FUND 4410172 591,172 AMBULANCE FUND 860,100 521,000 CEMETERY FUND 23,000 23,000 BOULEVARD MAINTENANCE FUND 44,000 44,000 GOLF COURSE FUND 248,000 359,285 SENIOR CENTER FUND 50,000 47,000 SCHOOL IMPACT FEE FUND 920,000 920,000 RIVERSHORE TRAIL & MARINA 20,000 25,000 REVOLVING ABATEMENT FUND - 30,000 TRAC DEVELOP & OPERATING FUND - 10,000 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND - 153,913 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - 11918,241 STADIUM /CONVENTION CENTER FUND 22,000 971789 LID DEBT FUND 515,944 515,944 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION FUND 21470,411 11176,321 WATER /SEWER UTILITY FUND 11507,741 41718,462 FUND GOVT EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND MEDICAL /DENTAL FUND TOTAL CITY WIDE OPERATING BUDGET REVENUES EXPENSES 239,000 627,330 619,500 101023,459 161096,166 The above items are shown as revenues and appropriations to specific budgets and items within budgets in the attachment marked "Exhibit 1 — 2012 budget Supplement" the Expenditure/Revenue detail, which is incorporated herein as though fully set forth. §2. That the additions in appropriations and expenditures are hereby declared to exist in the above funds for the said uses and purposes as shown above and in the Exhibit and the proper City officials are hereby authorized and directed to issue warrants and transfer funds in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance. §3. This Ordinance shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Pasco, on this 17th day of December, 2012. City of Pasco: Matt Watkins, Mayor Attest: Debra Clark, City Clerk Approved As To Form: Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO SUPPLEMENTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS BUDGET FOR THE YEAR 2012, WHEREAS, staff has identified the need to make certain revisions to the 2012 Capital Improvement budget originally adopted through Ordinance No. 4209 on December 19, 2011, and WHEREAS during the year 2012 additional capital improvement expenditures became necessary that were unanticipated and a need exists requiring a Supplement to provide for such expenditure authority, and WHEREAS a Public Hearing has been held subsequent to due notice, and the City Council has after consideration, deemed the proposed Supplement to the Capital Improvements Projects Budget necessary and appropriated; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: §L The following capital improvement projects hereby authorized, budgets amended and projects closed as detailed below: Project Description NEW 2012 PROJECTS Muni Courthouse Prep Street Oregon Ave (SR397) - Phase 1 Oregon Ave (SR397) - Phase 2 LID#149 Kurtzman - STREETS Interconnect Road 68 Signals 4th Ave Block Wall Broadmoor Transmission Waterline Commercial & Kahlotus Swr Ext - South Road 44 Sewer Odor Control LID#149 Kurtzman - STORM LID# Riverview Estate Stormwater PWRF Plant Expansion, Phase 1 PWRF Plant Expansion, Phase 2 Linda Loviisa Well Rehabilitation Current Change In New Total Author i Author i Authori 753,234 753,234 105,300 105,300 2301400 30,400 - 1945560 945560 - 586,237 586,237 - 20,000 20,000 - 1,500 1,500 - 76,300 76,300 - 65,675 655675 - 61000 6,000 - 45,000 45,000 1000 10,000 572,781 5725781 1239000 123,000 122,339 122,339 Total New 2012 Projects 2,9121326 2,912,326 Project Descri tD ion Current Change In New Total Author i Author i Authori 4th Ave South Street Improve 15200,000 153,913 1,353,913 Powerline Road 655000 40,907 105,907 2011 Filtrat Plant Improv (Storage Bldg) 1009000 5,300 105,300 Water Line Replace - Road 56 (Court & Sylvester) 204,000 121,600 325,600 2010 WWTP Improvement (f /k/a 3rd Clarifier) 196505000 2205515 1,870,515 Continuing Projects with 2012 Increases 3,219,000 542,235 317619235 PROJECTS CLOSING IN 2012 Fire Ladder Truck - 750,000 750,000 Linda Loviisa (Capital) Park 344,510 - 344,510 Chiawana Park Restroom Upgrades 251,000 1,108 2525108 Gesa Stadium - Parking Lot Overlays 139,000 97,789 236,789 Chiawana Park - Parking Lot Overlay 735000 70,415 143,415 City Hall Roof Replacement 2979000 - 297,000 CBC Main Entr & Argent Traffic Signal 346,500 (46,500) 3009000 LID4148 Kurtzman Park Ph. II St. Imp. - STREET 732,707 732,707 2011 Alley Hard Surfacing (Chip Sealing) 80,000 805000 2011 Wtr Line Extension ( Upsize) Rd 72 38,400 - 385400 2011 Water Distrib Line Ext. (Kurtzman) 347500 55,479 89,979 Broadmoor Pump Station Improvements 545,000 9,401 554,401 Annual Water Line Distrib Extensions 150,000 (1209000) 3000 2012 Meter Replace & Cross Connect 1505000 - 150,000 2010 WWTP Exp (HVAC System) 59,738 2,673 62,411 2010 WWTP Exp (Proc Monitor Control) 68,703 68,703 2010 WWTP Exp (Pole Bldg & Wash Pad) 509848 50,848 2010 WWTP Exp (Scum Pump) 12,078 129078 2012 Annual Sewer Line Extensions 2005000 (41500) 195,500 2011 PWRF Irrigation Upgrade - 1462689 146,689 PWRF Last Arm 1705000 (22,799) 147,201 LID#148 Kurtzman Park Ph. II St. Imp. -STORM 49,230 17,926 67,156 2012 SW Additions - 108 Beech Ave 97000 - 92000 2012 SW Additions - Rd 76 & Burden 18,000 (45015) 13,985 2012 SW Additions -Cedar & Kalispell 20,275 (9,945) 10,330 2012 SW Additions - Rd 37 & Ruby 95000 45228 13,228 2012 SW Additions - Twin City Foods 135000 3,049 16,049 2012 SW Additions - Meadow Ct & Meadow View Dr 105000 860 10,860 2012.SW Additions - Argent Rd & Rd 36 4,000 - 4,000 2012 SW Additions - Capital Ave Infil Retrofit 16,725 6,547 23,272 Well House - Desert Sunset 150,000 48,672 198,672 Annual Irrigation Line Extensions 100,000 (81,870) 181130 Total Projects Closing in 2012 4,142,214 925,207 530675421 Total Increases $ 4.669.397 Total Decreases $ (289.629) §2. This Ordinance shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Pasco, on this 17th day of December, 2012. City of Pasco: Matt Watkins, Mayor Attest: Debra Clark, City Clerk Approved As To Form: Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INTERFUND LOANS FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO OTHER FUNDS. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pasco has, pursuant to RCW 35.33.121, found that it is in the best interest of the City to lend funds from the General Fund to the Economic Development Fund, the LID Debt Service Fund, the Community Development Grant Fund, Ambulance Fund and the General Construction fund and to provide for the repayment thereof, and NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Authorization for loans. The Financial Services Manager of the City of Pasco is hereby authorized and directed to make the following loans from the City of Pasco funds as follows: (A) From the General fund to the Economic Development fund to provide adequate resources for working capital which was impacted by the transfer obligation for the farm assets in the amount of $700,000; (B) From the General fund to the LID Debt Service fund in the amount of $550,000 to provide temporary financing for the LID148 and LID 149 construction projects. (C) From the General fund to the Community Development Grant fund in the amount of $290,000 to ensure positive fund balance as of 12/31/12. (D) From the General fund to the General Construction fund in the amount of $150,000 to provide positive fund balance as of 12/31/12. (E) From the General fund to the Ambulance fund in the amount of $500,000 to provide positive fund balance as of 12/31/12. 2. Terms and Memorialization. The effective dates of the loans shall be as listed below. This resolution shall constitute memorialization of these loans and their terms. (A) Disbursement is authorized effective 4/1/12 in lump sum and shall bear two and one -half percent (2.5 %) interest and is due 4/1/2015 when permanent financing is secured after the end of construction with fixed annual payments starting 4/1/2013. (B) Disbursement is authorized monthly as construction costs are incurred; the interest rate is set at zero percent (0 %) and the loan is due upon receipt of debt proceeds pursuant to the issuance of permanent financing for the LID 148 and 149 construction projects. (C) Disbursement is authorized as of 12/31/12 and repayment is due as of 1/1/2013. The interest rate is zero percent (0 %). (D) Disbursement is authorized as of 12/31/12; the interest rate set at 0% with a due date of 1/1/2013. (E) Disbursement is authorized as of 12/31/12; the interest rate set at 0% with a due date of 1/1/2013. (F) PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, this 17th day of December 2012. SIGNED in authentication of its passage this 17th day of December, 2012. Matt Watkins, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Debra Clark, City Clerk Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney 2012 Operating & Capital Budget Supplement Memorandum Date: December 5, 2012 To: Gary Crutchfield, City Manager Rick Terway, Administrative & Community Services Director From: Dunyele Mason, Financial Services Manager Subject: 2012 OPERATING AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECTS BUDGET SUPPLEMENT As is traditionally the case, a budget supplement is required to increase the legal spending authority for those items unanticipated or indeterminable at the time the 2012 Annual Operating and Capital Improvements Projects Budgets were adopted. 2012 OPERATING BUDGET SUPPLEMENT Resources for the 2012 Operating Budget Supplement will be unanticipated revenue, contributions from active funds, and beginning fund balance. The budget supplement ordinance will only list those funds that will actually increase revenue and/or expenditure amounts. GENERAL FUND The following departments require additional authority to cover unanticipated expenditures. Please refer to the attached Exhibit to see the line items affected. The Exhibit is broken into three sections. Section 1 shows the changes relating to operating costs; Section 2 shows the changes in the interfund loans and transfers and Section 3 shows the changes in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) project budgets. The changes by department in the General Fund are anticipated to offset each other and therefore no budget supplement is requested to cover Departmental expenditures; there is a supplemental request of $2,852,001 to cover NonDepartmental expenditures as explained below. $2,407,004 of these additional expenditures are covered by 2012 revenues in excess of original budget and by $444,997 use of ending fund balance. Net Department changes that exceed $35,000 in total are itemized as follows: 1. Police Department $(264,440) 2. Fire Department 210,750 3. Engineering (168,450) All Other Depts. Combined 4( 6.860) Total Net Effect 269 000 4. NonDepartmental 3 377 001 2012 Operating & Capital Budget Supplement Memorandum 1. The overall Police Department decrease of $264,440 is related to the $362,257 decrease in care and custody of prisoners (offset by $63,093 in medical /dental premiums and $34,724 in various other increases). The city is billed each year based on the county budget projections for the care and custody of prisoners. The 2011 actual spending was less than budgeted by the county and therefore the city received a one -time credit at the beginning of 2012 to lower its 2012 costs. 2. The Fire Department increase of $210,750 is related to: a. $134,000 of overtime expenditures in excess of original budget. There were over 4,000 hours of Firefighter disabilities this year compared to 750 hours in the prior year. b. $19,350 for 3 VHF base radios to improve coverage. c. $11,900 for replacement and repairs to bay doors. d. $21,000 to pay hazardous material team members from other agencies. This is later reimbursed to the general fund by the company that made the hazardous spill. e. $24,500 various other small changes. 3. The Engineering Department spending is below original budget due to continued vacancies. Since these positions are generally charged back and paid by other funds, the savings are offset by reduced revenues to the general fund. 4. The NonDepartmental increase of $3,377,001 is primarily related to: a. $1,101,057 transfers to support various new capital and construction projects; including $753,234 for the Municipal Courthouse project. b. $2,005,944 in overnight loans, temporary LID construction financing; including the $700,000 interfund loan to the Economic Development fund to facilitate the move of the Farm System to that fund from the Water /Sewer Utility fund; and $500,000 contingency overnight loan for the ambulance fund if Medicare payments are delayed. (See related information in ambulance fund). c. One time subsidy to the golf course of $200,000, $50,000 to the Senior Center (HVAC) and $20,000 to the Rivershore Marina fund (lease termination settlement). OTHER OPERATING FUNDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUND The Community Development Block Grant Fund requires a $290,000 interfund loan in order for the fund to have positive cash balance at year end. The loan will be repaid in January 1, 2013. $441,172 is needed to provide expenditure budget authority for 2012 activities. $301,500 is to provide construction project subsidies (which will be eventually recaptured through grant revenues). Those two amounts are offset by a reduction in expected spending for HOME housing construction costs by year end of $150,328. E 2012 Operating & Capital Budget Supplement Memorandum u t II N16 A tUzI FC A total expenditure budget increase of $521,000 is needed for the ambulance fund. Injuries have pushed overtime spending and related benefits $211,000 over original budget. Additional funding to re- chassis an ambulance is $68,000 and a year -end bookkeeping entry to adjust the reported uncollectible receivable balance to 48% will increase the annual bad debt expense by an additional $80,000. Additional $120,000 bad debt expense is related to an increase in accounts sent to collection. State B &O tax on ambulance services is expected to exceed original budget by $27,000. Original budgets for salary and wages for both admin and operational personnel were under budgeted in the original budget by $63,000. The $521,000 additional expenditures are expected to be offset by $360,000 additional revenues from the 2012 utility charge rate increase and the remainder through the use of fund balance. A $500,000 contingency overnight loan is established in case Medicare funding is delayed in the month of December. City is currently in the process of mandatory reapplication review with Medicare. Medicare can withhold payment until review is finished. It is expected to be complete in December but the loan is in case there are any delays. The Groundsman position at the cemetery was budgeted at .5 FTE but the actual work performed in 2012 was closer to .9 FTE resulting in a supplemental budget of $23,000. Since the Groundsman position is a permanent full time position, the actual spending in the general fund facility budget was impacted by $(23,000) due to his working at the cemetery instead. BOULEVARD MAINTENANCE FUND This fund is used to pay costs associated with the city's maintenance of the boulevards. This year the city took on the project of replacing selected portions of estate fences. The cost included in the supplemental budget for fence materials is $44,000. This amount will be billed back to adjacent property owners. GOLF COURSE FUND The golf course requires an additional $359,285 in expenditure authority. $185,000 of this is to repay the temporary loan created to cover the prior year operating deficit and the remaining $174,285 is to cover the operating deficit created during the current year. Since the golf course does not appear to be able to generate sufficient cash to cover repayment of the prior year loan, the general fund is making a one -time transfer not to exceed $200,000 to the golf course to establish a minimal working capital balance at the end of the year. SENIOR CENTER FUND The replacement of the HVAC system at this facility requires a supplemental budget adjustment of $47,000 in this fund to complete the floor refinishing project started in 2011 and to replace the HVAC system when it failed during 2012. The $50,000 transfer in from the general fund was used to help offset these costs as sufficient fund balance was not available. 3 2012 Operating & Capital Budget Supplement Memorandum SCHOOL IMPACT FEE FUND This is a new fund that was created in 2012 when the new school impact fee was approved. This fund works as a conduit as the amounts collected from the impact fee less a small administrative charge are passed through to the school district. Since the impact fee is related to construction, then large variations in activity can occur from year to year. There was no original budget authority and so the entire 2012 revenue and expenditure budget of $920,000 is hereby adopted. RIVERSHORE TRAIL & MARINA In 2012 the marina lease was terminated triggering a $25,000 settlement agreement. This was offset by a transfer from the general fund. REVOLVING ABATEMENT FUND There was no original budget for bad debt expense included and based on prior year and current year experience, $30,000 is estimated to be the total annual bad debt expense (for uncollected liens) and will reduce fund balance. TRAC FUND Settlement of prior year expenses resulted in an additional $6,900 supplemental budget adjustment; the remaining $3,100 is from the 2012 actual billings in excess of original 2012 budget projections. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND The Economic Development fund was expanded this year to include the transfer of the Farm System assets, debts and activities from the Water /Sewer utility. This fund also paid for the net Farm System assets according to the Water /Sewer bond debt covenants. Since this was done after the 2012 budget was created, all related activities which total $1,918,241, is included in the 2012 Supplemental Budget. STADIUM CONVENTION CENTER FUND The cost of the parking lot overlay exceeded original budget estimates resulting in a $97,789 supplemental budget adjustment. This expense is covered $22,000 by higher than expected hotel motel tax revenue and the rest by fund balance. DEBT SERVICE FUND These funds exist to collect payments from LID participants and to repay the financing of LID construction. Additionally this fund is used as a conduit to distribute the interfund loan proceeds that provide temporary construction financing for LID construction projects. Thus proceeds and disbursements for interfund loans for LID construction totaling $515,944 offset each other. CI 2012 Operating & Capital Budget Supplement Memorandum GENERAL CONSTRUCTION FUNDS This fund collects funds from a variety of sources and constructs non - utility projects. Once projects start other funding sources (e.g. grants) may come available. When projects are finished under budget then additional funds are available to return from the construction fund. The 2012 Supplemental Budget of $1,176,321 predominately relates to two projects created in 2012: 1) the Municipal Courthouse project where $753,254 of 2012 spending is expected and the City Hall Boiler project completed in 2012 for $118,316. The remaining difference generally represents change in timing of expenditures between years. These expenditures are reflected and offset by various funding (revenue) transfers to reflect updated construction schedules and return of city funding replaced by federal grant funding. WATER/SEWER UTILITY FUND The Farm System was included as part of the Water /Sewer Utility in the past. At the beginning of 2012 council authorized the transfer of the Farm System to the Economic Development Fund. Supplemental adjustments are required to reflect the transfer of assets and the proceeds received in return per the bond debt covenants. EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT (GOV'T) FUND A detailed review of vehicle and equipment replacement was undertaken in 2012. Some vehicle purchases scheduled for the current year were postponed to future years. Conversely some vehicles that were scheduled for replacement in future years were deemed necessary to purchase in the current year. Not all vehicles had sufficient funds set aside in the equipment reserves to fully fund the new purchases. The total expenditure supplement is $627,330. This increase results primarily from the $750,000 purchase of the fire ladder truck originally scheduled for 2013 but the city was able to purchase off of a City of Walla Walla bid in 2012 and since the agreement allowed the vendor to show the vehicle prior to delivery, substantial savings were obtained. Additional transfers in to cover additional spending totaled $239,000 and the remaining amount was paid for from cash previously set aside for purchases. MEDICAL/DENTAL INSURANCE FUND The city is self - insured for employee medical, dental and vision. The claims to date have been higher than expected and already exceed the current year's budget. Due to the nature of the claims it is difficult to predict and so current year spending and the highest month's claim in the current year was used to determine the supplemental request. As 2012 claims continue to be processed through January and to ensure adequate budget the total supplement is $619,500 which will all come from fund balance. Interfund premiums are set to increase 10% January 1, 2013. 2012 Operating & Capital Budget Supplement Memorandum 2012 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET SUPPLEMENT Some projects will be complete by the end of 2012 and will be closed and removed from the Capital Improvement Budget. Also, during the course of the year some capital improvements projects exceed their original appropriation and some are new and thus not included in the 2012 Capital Improvements Projects Budget. Therefore, a supplement to the 2012 Capital Improvements Projects Budget is required. The total amount of increased authority is $4,379,760. New projects total $2,912,326, continuing projects with 2012 increases total $542,235 and the net effect of closing projects total $925,207. The total overall change in the Capital Improvement Budget is $4,089,991. W Account Description GENERAL FUND NONDEPARTMENTAL Transfer Senior Center Transfer Golf Course Fund Transfer Rivershore Marina Fund Transfer Equip Replacement Fund Transfer Equip Replacement Fund Transfer Chiawana Stadium Overlay Transfer Chiawana Park Restrooms Transfer Muni Courthouse Transfer Prep Street Interfund Loan- LID #148 Interfund Loan- LID #149 Interfund Loan- Overnight CDBG Interfund Loan- Overnight Ambulance Interfund Loan- Farm Property Taxes Sales Taxes Telephone B &O Taxes Electric B &O Taxes Irrigation B &O Taxes Stormwater B &O Taxes PWRF B &O Taxes Building Permits EXHIBIT 1 - 2012 Budget Supplement Worksheet REVENUES EXPEND FUND BAL 50,000 200,000 20,000 75,000 96,000 70,415 1,108 753,234 105,300 379,707 136,237 290,000 500,000 700,000 Explanation One time emergency repairs and fund balance subsidy One time working capital subsidy One time working capital subsidy Crass Truck cost more than projected Ladder Truck purchase to 2012 from 2013 Project cost more than original estimate. Project cost more than original estimate. New project funding. Per developer agreement. Provide temporary financing for LID construction Provide temporary financing for LID construction Provide year end working captial Contingency overnight loan if Medicare payments delayed Provide working captial for farm asset transfer 400,000 ** 220,000 ** 643,000 170,000 ## TOTAL GENERAL FUND 121,004 ** ** Revenue budgets are conservatively estimated as 75,000 ** they are variable by nature. Based on current year 805000 ** activity revenue estimates are hereby revised. 145,000 ** 450,000 350,000 ** 1,500 Liquor Board Profits 203,000 One time sale of liquor stores by state. Interfund Loan Repayments 643,000 TOTAL 1 -182 Cooridor Over night loan repayments. TOTAL GENERAL FUND 294079004 3,3779001 (969,997) Repay 2012 overnight loan ARTERIAL STREET FUND Repay 2012 overnight loan Contractor payments (150,328) Transfer In Rd 68 Imp Phase II 150,000 450,000 STP funding obtained; Return of prior year funding. Transfer Out Interconnect Rd 68 Signals 1,500 20,000 New Project Transfer Out Lewis Str Grants are based on reimbursing expenditures. 226,049 Transfer prior year project funding balance. TOTAL ARTERIAL STREET FUND 150,000 2469049 (969049) 1 -182 Cooridor Traffic Impact Transfer In Rd 68 Imp Phase II 58,587 STP funding obtained; Return of prior year funding. Transfer In CBC & Argent 46,500 Return funds for closed project. Transfer Out Powerline Road 40,907 Additional funding for current year work. TOTAL 1 -182 Cooridor 105,087 40,907 1 649180 STREET OVERLAY Transfer Out 2011 STP overlay 34,252 Spending sooner than expected. TOTAL 1 -182 Cooridor - 34,252 (349252) CD GRANT FUND Repay 2012 overnight loan 290,000 Repay 2012 overnight loan Contractor payments (150,328) Project postponed to future year. Transfer Out LID #149 Kurtzman 450,000 LID formed in 2012 Transfer Out 4th Ave Block Wall 1,500 Provide funding for estimated cost increase. HUD grant 151,172 Grants are based on reimbursing expenditures. Overnight loan proceeds 290,000 Provide cash for positive year end fund balance. TOTALCDBGFUND 441,172 5919172 (1509000) 12/6/20123:22 PM \ \solo2 \Flnance\A FINANCE MANAGER \BUDGET- Working Files \SUPPLEMENT5\2012 SUPP \20125UPPL BUDGET.Asz Account Description AMBULANCEFUND Salaries and wages Bad debt expense Salaries and wages Overtime Liability insurance premium State B &O taxes Interfund medical /dental Transfer out EXHIBIT 1 - 2012 Budget Supplement Worksheet REVENUES EXPEND FUND BAL 16,000 200,000 47,000 160,000 8,000 27,000 11,000 68,000 Explanation Admin salaries not fully budgeted. Accounts sent to collection; most not collectible Operation salaries not fully budgeted. Cover shifts for injured workers. 2012 updated allocation formula New tax calcualtion per tax audit. Additional costs for two re- chassis. Ambulance utility charge 360,100 Effect of new rates implemented 2012. Interfund loan proceeds 500,000 Contigency loan if Medicare payments delayed TOTAL AMBULANCE FUND 860,100 5219000 339,100 Salaries & wages Headstone sales 23,000 TOTAL CEMETERY FUND 23,000 23,000 - 23,000 Budgeted at .5 FTE; worked at .9 FTE BOULEVARD MAINTENANCE FUND Repair and maintenance 44,000 Estate fence material. costs O &M assessment 44,000 Assessment to homeowners TOTAL CEMETERY FUND 447000 44,000 - GOLF COURSE FUND Misc professional expenses 174,285 Cost to operating contractor higher than budgeted Interfund loan repay to Gen'I Fund 185,000 Repay temporary loan from prior year. Pro shop merchandise sales 485000 Transfer In from General fund 2009000 To provide one -time working capital. TOTAL GOLF COURSE FUND 2489000 359,285 (111485) SENIOR CENTER FUND Repair & maintenance 47,000 HVAC system emergency replacement; finish floor sanding Transfer In from General fund 50,000 TOTAL GOLF COURSE FUND 50,000 47,000 3,000 SCHOOLIMPACTFEEFUND School impact fee pass through 9205000 New impact fee adopted in 2012. School impact fees 920,000 Fee passes through to Pasco School District. TOTAL SCHOOL IMPACT FUND 9209000 920,000 RIVERSHORE TRAIL & MARINA Repair & Maintenance - Other 25,000 Lease termination settlement. Transfer In from General fund 20,000 Funding for lease termination settlement. TOTAL RIVERSHORE MARINA FUND 20,000 255000 (59000) REVOLVING ABATEMENT FUND Bad debt expense 30,000 Liens not paid. Based on current year activity. TOTAL RIVERSHORE MARINA FUND - 30,000 (309000) 12/6/20123:22 PM \\so102 \Finance\A FINANCE MANAGER \BUDGET-Working Fi1es \S1JPPLEMENT5\2012 SUPP \2012 5UPPL BUDGET.xlsx EXHIBIT 1 2012 Budget Supplement Worksheet Account Description REVENUES EXPEND FUND BAL Explanation TRAC DEVELOP & OPERATING FUND County Services 10,000 Includes $6,900 settle -up of prior year costs TOTAL TRAC FUND 109000 (109000) CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 753,234 Transfer In Chiawana Stadium Overlay 70,415 Transfer In Chiawana Park Restrooms Transfer Out 4th Ave S Street Transfer In Lewis Str 1535913 Increase in project costs TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVE FUND 20,000 153,913 (1539913) 34,252 1,500 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 450,000 153,913 Repah/Maimenance Supplies 12,000 * *Farm operation costs originally budgted in the Utility Miscellaeneous Professional Services 262000 Electricity 120,000 Repair Services 405000 State Leasehold Taxes 62,500 Land 1505000 Purchase of BOR quarter section Transfer Out Utility Infrastructure 12307,741 Payment for Farm System transfer. Transfer Out Utility Economic Dev debt 200,000 Contribution to P WRF debt per agreement. TOTAL ECONOMIC DEVELOP FUND 11918,241 (19918,241) STADIUM /CONVENTION CENTER FUND Transfer Out GESA Stadium 97,789 Parking Lot overlay cost more than expected. Hotel /motel tax 22,000 TOTAL SCHOOL IMPACT FUND 22,000 97,789 (75,789) LID DEBT FUND Transfer Out LID 148 379,707 These are bookkeeping, conduit entries required Interfund Loan proceeds 379,707 to provide interim finanacing for LID construction Transfer Out LID 149 1365237 projects. Transfers & loans require council approval. Interfund Loan proceeds 136,237 TOTAL LID DEBT FUND 515,944 5159944 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION FUND Transfer In Muni Courthouse 753,234 Transfer In Chiawana Stadium Overlay 70,415 Transfer In Chiawana Park Restrooms 1,108 Transfer In Lewis Str 226,049 105,300 20,000 40,907 34,252 1,500 zm 450,000 153,913 97,789 379,707 Transfer In St Ignatius Street Transfer In Interconnect Rd 68 Signals Transfer In Powerline Road Transfer In 2011 STP Overlay Transfer In 4th Ave Block Wall Transfer In LID # 149 Kurtan Transfer In 4th Ave S Street Transfer In GESA Stadium Transfer In LID 148 Transfer In LID 149 136,237 Transfer Out to Arterial St Road 68 150,000 Transfer Out to Traffic Impact St Road 68 58,587 Transfer Out to Traffic Impact CBC Signal 465500 Municipal Courthouse 7539234 Interfund Loan Repayment LID 148 168,000 TOTAL GENIL COSTRUCTION FUND 214709411 111769321 172949090 New project Final funding to close project. Final funding to close project. Transfer prior year project funding balance. New Developer project New project Additonal work planned for current year. Additional funding for current year work. Change in estimate for current year Move grant funding to construction fund Bids higher than budgeted. Final funding to close project. New project New project Return of prior year funding; STP funding awarded. Return of prior year funding; STP funding awarded. Return funds for closed project. New project Rebook temporary financing via debt service fund 12/6/2012 3:22 PM \ \solo2 \Finance \A FINANCE MANAGER \BUDGET- Working Files \SUPPLEMENTS\2012 5UPP \2012 5UPPL BUDGI T.xlsx EXHIBIT 1 - 2012 Budget Supplement Worksheet Account Description REVENUES EXPEND FUND BAL Explanation WATER/SEWER UTILITY FUND Transfer of Farm Assets 4,718,462 Disposal of Farm System Transfer In of proceeds for assets 1,307,741 Payment received for Farm System per bond requirements Transfer In of proceeds for debt 200,000 Payment towards 2012 debt service per agreement. TOTALWATER/SEWER UTILITY FUND 115079741 49718,462 (392109721) GOVT EOUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND Vehicle purchases 627,330 Purchase of ladder truck in 2012 rather than 2013 Transfers In from Ambulance Fund 68,000 Two re- chassis were more than projected. Transfer In from General fund 75,000 No equipment replacement cash available for Grass Truck Transfer In from General fund 96,000 Move funding from 2013 to 2012 for ladder truck TOTAL GOVT EQUIP REPL FUND 239,000 627,330 (388,330) MEDICAL/DENTAL FUND Medical claims 477,500 Claims higher than past years. Dental claims 142,000 Dental was separated from medical in 2012. TOTAL MED/DENTAL FUND - 6199500 (619,500) 12/6/20123:22 PM \\solo2 \Finance\A FINANCE MANAGER \BUDGET- Working Files \SUPPLEMENTS \2012 SUPP \20125UPPL BUDGEF.Au FOR: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: I. II. III. Lull V AGENDA REPORT City Council Gary Crutchfie 1 Manager _�C� Stan Strebel, Deputy City Managerl Sidewalk Repair and Maintenance REFERENCE(S): Proposed Ordinance December 3, 2012 Workshop Mtg.: 12/10/12 Regular Mtg.: 12/17/12 ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 12/10: Discussion 12/17: MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. amending Title 12 of the Pasco Municipal Code regarding Sidewalk Repair and Maintenance and, further, to authorize publication by summary only. FISCAL IMPACT: HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A) Two sections in the Pasco Municipal Code require that maintenance and repair of sidewalks is the responsibility of the abutting property owner and, except in cases where there is damage to sidewalks due to City activities (i.e., city work, vehicles or trees), state law seems to support the position in the PMC. B) Current case law in the state, however, establishes that while a city may require an abutting property owner to be responsible for most sidewalk repair and maintenance, it cannot easily shift liability for injuries that may occur as a result of uneven sidewalks in need of repair. C) Additionally, because 1) there are a number of potential causes for sidewalk failure; and 2) there are sometimes multiple remedies for addressing sidewalk safety problems, it becomes more complicated to work with adjacent property owners, many of whom have no idea of the City's code provision on maintenance, let alone repairs. The more time that it takes to address known problems, the more potential exposure the City has for injury claims. D) As discussed with Council on October 16, staff feels that it is prudent for Council to change the City's policies with regard to sidewalk repair. While it seems reasonable to continue to assign responsibility for the cleaning of sidewalks to adjacent property owners (i.e., snow, litter, debris), it will be most cost effective for the City to assume responsibility for sidewalk repair and to develop an on -going program to inventory and repair sidewalk problems (by whatever method is most cost effective) as needed. Possible exceptions would be repair of sidewalks that is necessitated by the actions of the adjacent property owner or others, for examples: damaged caused by tree roots planted by the owner or damage due to failure to protect from heavy equipment. In cases where it can be clearly shown to be the fault of others, the law allows the City to assign responsibility for sidewalk repairs to owners. By budgeting an amount each year, the City may be able to focus repair work in geographic areas (to minimize the costs of mobilization); by type of repair (to take advantage of equipment or contractor specialty); and, proactively to minimize potential claims. The City's assumption of repair responsibilities will minimize conflicts with property owners, many of whom do not expect to be responsible for repairing sidewalk failures. DISCUSSION: A) The attached, proposed ordinance will make the necessary amendments to the Municipal Code. Adoption is recommended. 4(h) ORDINANCE NO, AN ORDINANCE Amending Title 12 of the Pasco Municipal Code, Regarding Sidewalk Repair and Maintenance. 2012. WHEREAS, the Pasco City Council has determined that certain amendments to Pasco Municipal Code regarding sidewalk repair and maintenance are necessary; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That Section 12.04.140 of PMC is hereby amended to read as follows: 12.04.140 MAINTENANCE OF SIDEWALKS. Whenever any street, lane, square, place or alley in the City shall have been improved by the construction of a sidewalk along either side thereof, the duty, burden, and expense of the maintenance and; cleaning (including the cleaning of snow and ice litter and other debris), repair —and renewal of such sidewalk; inelading !he ereetion and maintenanse ef suitable baffiers r .rvvu, avu ^b'^ of sueh sidewalk where the elevated more than wo fee above the -1—m g = prepv� shall devolve ve upon the owner of the private property directly abutting on the sidewalk. Whenever the City has persuasive evidence that the actions of the property owner or its agents have resulted in damage to an abutting sidewalk it may order the repair or replacement of such sidewalk, and the repair or replacement impreve,znt shall be made by the owner in the manner provided by the ordinances of the City, and the laws of the state. It shall be unlawful for any person after receiving notice from the City to fail to maintain, clean, repair, or replace renew such sidewalk pursuant to the obligations created above. A violation of this Section shall be a Civil Code infraction carrying a maximum penalty of $250. Section 2. That Section 12.08.100 "Maintenance of Sidewalks" is hereby repealed in its entirety. Section 3. This Ordinance shall take full force and effect on , 2012, after its approval, passage and publication as required by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, and approved as provided by law this 17th day of December, 2012. Matt Watkins, Mayor ATTEST: Debbie Clark, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council November 30, 2012 TO: Gary Crutchfi Manager Workshop Mtg.: 12/10/12 Regular Mtg.: 12/17/12 FROM: Stan Strebel, De uty City Manager SUBJECT: Code Change on Definition of Family or Household Members I. REFERENCE(S): 1. RCW 26.50.010(2) 2 Proposed Ordinance II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 12/10: Discussion 12/17: MOTION: I move to adopt Ordinance No. , amending the definition of family or household members in Chapter 9.06 of the Pasco Municipal Code to be consistent with state law and, further, to authorize publication by summary only. III. FISCAL IMPACT: N/A IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A) The City Attorney recently noticed that the City's definition of "family or household member" in PMC Section 9.06.040 "Domestic Violence," has not been updated subsequent to recent changes in state law [RCW 26.50.010(2)]. B) Staff recommends updating the Code to be consistent with the statute. V. DISCUSSION: A) Passage of the attached ordinance is recommended to effect the change. 4(i) RCW 26.50.010 Definitions. As used in this chapter, the following terms shall have the meanings given them: (1) "Domestic violence" means: (a) Physical harm, bodily injury, assault, or the infliction of fear of imminent physical harm, bodily injury or assault, between family or household members; (b) sexual assault of one family or household member by another; or (c) stalking as defined in RCW 9AA6.110 of one family or household member by another family or household member. (2) "Family or household members" means spouses, domestic partners, former spouses, former domestic partners, persons who have a child in common regardless of whether they have been married or have lived together at any time, adult persons related by blood or marriage, adult persons who are presently residing together or who have resided together in the past, persons sixteen years of age or older who are presently residing together or who have resided together in the past and who have or have had a dating relationship, persons sixteen years of age or older with whom a person sixteen years of age or older has or has had a dating relationship, and persons who have a biological or legal parent -child relationship, including stepparents and stepchildren and grandparents and grandchildren. (3) "Dating relationship" means a social relationship of a romantic nature. Factors that the court may consider in making this determination include: (a) The length of time the relationship has existed; (b) the nature of the relationship; and (c) the frequency of interaction between the parties. (4) "Court" includes the superior, district, and municipal courts of the state of Washington. (5) "Judicial day" does not include Saturdays, Sundays, or legal holidays. (6) "Electronic monitoring" means a program in which a person's presence at a particular location is monitored from a remote location by use of electronic equipment. (7) "Essential personal effects" means those items necessary for a person's immediate health, welfare, and livelihood. "Essential personal effects" includes but is not limited to clothing, cribs, bedding, documents, medications, and personal hygiene items. ORDINANCE NO, An Ordinance of the City of Pasco, Washington amending the Definitions of "Family or Household Member" in Chapter 9.06 of the Pasco Municipal Code. WHEREAS, the City recognizes the need for the definition of "Family or Household Members" as found in PMC Section 9.06.040 to be consistent with applicable state statute; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That Section 9.06.040(2) Definitions (A) "Family or Household Member" is hereby amended to read as follows: "Family or Household Members" means fafffier spouses, adult persons related by blood or ,..1,.. a �a� r� presently J idi b together- h have resided together in !he past, afid per-sons NAia have a ehild in eeffimon regardless of whethe they teen been ., ea or have lived togeihe_ at anHiffle-- spouses, domestic partners, former spouses, former domestic partners, persons who have a child in common regardless of whether they have been married or have lived together at any time adult persons related by blood or marriage, adult persons who are presently residing together or who have resided together in the past, persons sixteen years of age or older who are presently residing together or who have resided together in the past and who have or have had a dating relationship persons sixteen years stepparents and stepchildren and grandparents and grandchildren. Section 2. 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, this 17th day of December, 2012. Matt Watkins, Mayor ATTEST: Debra L. Clark, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Leland B. Kerr, City Attorney AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council TO: Gary V FROM: Stan Strebel, D uty City Manager SUBJECT: Public Record Requests I. REFERENCE(S): 1. Washington Administrative Code 44 -14 -07003 2. 2012 Copy Study 3. Proposed Resolution December 3, 2012 Workshop Mtg.: 12/10/12 Regular Mtg.: 12/17/12 II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 12/10: Discussion 12/17: MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. amending Resolution No. 3267 regarding Public Records Requests. III. FISCAL IMPACT: None. IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A) Pursuant to action of the State Legislature in 2005 revising public disclosure statutes and subsequent rulings of the Washington State Supreme Court, the Council has adopted Resolution No. 3267 regarding Public Records Requests. B) The Public Records Act (PRA -RCW 42.56) allows an entity to apply a reasonable charge of no more than $0.15 cents per page for photocopies. The charge can consist of the cost for equipment, supplies and photocopy time but cannot include the cost to search for records and prepare the same for public inspection (i.e. redaction). The photocopy charge is included in Resolution No. 3267. C) The PRA does not have a default rate for scanning documents; however the Washington Administrative Code (WAC 44 -14- 07003) provides that "an agency can establish a scanning fee for records it scans" (if the agency has a paper -only copy of a record and the requestor requests an Adobe Acrobat PDF copy). D) To determine the City's actual scanning costs, the City Clerk's office conducted a "copy study" in July 2012. Using methodology similar to that utilized by other cities and comparing to the cost associated with photocopying, the computed per scan cost is 0.1129 per page. Additionally, commercial copy services were found to charge approximately 25 cents per page, with, in some cases, a minimum handling charge or a charge for processing time. For simplicity and in an effort to maintain transparency while providing documents responsive to PRA requests, staff suggests the scan charge be set at $0.10 per page. E) Staff recommends approval of the Resolution amending Resolution No, 3267. 4(j) WAC 44 -14 -07003 Charges for electronic records. Providing copies of electronic records usually costs the agency and requestor less than making paper copies. Agencies are strongly encouraged to provide copies of electronic records in an electronic format. See RCW 43.105.250 (encouraging state and local agencies to make "public records widely available electronically to the public. "). As with charges for paper copies, "actual cost' is the primary factor for charging for electronic records. In many cases, the "actual cost' of providing an existing electronic record is de minimis. For example, a requestor requests an agency to e-mail an existing Excel© spreadsheet. The agency should not charge for the de minimis cost of electronically copying and e- mailing the existing spreadsheet. The agency cannot attempt to charge a per -page amount for a paper copy when it has an electronic copy that can be easily provided at nearly no cost. However, if the agency has a paper -only copy of a record and the requestor requests an Adobe Acrobat PDF© copy, the agency incurs an actual cost in scanning the record (if the agency has a scanner at its offices). Therefore, an agency can establish a scanning fee for records it scans. Agencies are encouraged to compare their scanning and other copying charges to the rates of outside vendors. See WAC 44 -14- 07001. [Statutory Authority: 2005 c 483 § 4, amending RCW 42.56.570. 07 -13 -058, § 44 -14- 07003, filed 6/15/07, effective 7/16/07. Statutory Authority: 2005 c 483 § 41 RCW 42.17.348. 06 -04 -079, § 44 -14- 07003, filed 1/31/06, effective 3/3/06.] CITY OF PASCO SCAN CHARGE PER PAGE B/W - STUDY Title Hourly rate Benefit (avg 28 %) Total City Clerk 30.63 5.98 36.61 Department Asst I City Clerk Office 10.72 3.01 13.73 Admin Asst II -A &CS 22.76 4.81 27.57 Exec Admin Asst 28.23 5.62 33.85 Court Clerk 21.45 4.61 26.06 Police Clerk 18.1 4.11 22.21 Admin Asst II - C &ED 19.04 4.25 23.29 Admin Asst I - PW /Eng 20.21 4.43 24.64 Accts Payable - Finance 21.82 4.67 26.49 Total 192.96 41.49 234.45 Paper Copy Cost Total 234.45 Average 26.05 Per Hour 0.43 Per Minute 0.00716 Per Second 0.0078 per sheet Copier Cost 288.88 Monthly IS Copier 311.68 Monthly 3rd Floor Copier 115.12 Monthly City Clerk Copier 238.56 Average /monthly 0.0055 Average /minute Suggester Copy Cost Total Suggested Scan Charge Total 0.0078 Paper 0.0055 Copier 0.1074 (15 Second of Labor) 0.1207 0.0055 Copier 0.1074 (15 Second of Labor) 0.1129 Suggested Scan Charge 0.10 per page CITY OF PASCO SCAN CHARGE PER PAGE COLOR - STUDY Title Hourly rate Benefit (avg 28 %) Total City Clerk 30.63 5.98 36.61 Department Asst I City Clerk Office 10.72 3.01 13.73 Admin Asst II -A &CS 22.76 4.81 27.57 Exec Ad min Asst 28.23 5.62 33.85 Court Clerk 21.45 4.61 26.06 Police Clerk 18.1 4.11 22.21 Admin Asst II - C &ED 19.04 4.25 23.29 Admin Asst I - PW /Eng 20.21 4.43 24.64 Accts Payable - Finance 21.82 4.67 26.49 Total 192.96 41.49 234.45 Paper Copy Cost Total 234.45 Average 26.05 Per Hour 0.43 Per Minute 0.00716 Per Second 0.0078 per sheet Copier Cost 288.88 Monthly IS Copier 311.68 Monthly 3rd Floor Copier 138.45 Monthly Police Dept Records Copier 246.34 Average /monthly 0.0057 Average /minute Suggester Copy Cost Total Suggested Scan Charge Total 0.0078 Paper 0.0057 Copier 0.1074 (15 Second of Labor) 0.1209 0.0057 Copier 0.1074 (15 Second of Labor) 0.1131 Suggested Scan Charge 0.10 per page RESOLUTION NO, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 3267 REGARDING PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS WHEREAS, the City of Pasco previously adopted the Washington State Attorney General's advisory rules as Resolution No. 3267; and WHEREAS, the State Attorney General has provided guidance on the allowability of charges for the production of electronic records or producing records electronically in the Washington Administrative Code, including WAC 44 -14- 07003; and WHEREAS, the City finds that it is necessary to update its disclosure procedures to facilitate the efficient use of staff time and more effectively accommodate the accessibility of its public records as well as expedite any disputes in regards to their disclosure, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That Resolution No. 3267 is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 1. AGENCY DESCRIPTION - CONTACT INFORMATION - PUBLIC RECORDS OFFICER. A) The City of Pasco is a Washington Municipal Corporation providing municipal services. The City's central office is located at the Pasco City Hall, located at 525 North 3rd, Pasco, WA, B) Any person wishing to request access to public records or seeking assistance in making a request should contact the City's Public Records Officer. The City Clerk has been designated by the City Manager as the City's Public Records Officer pursuant to RCW 42.56.580. While the public records officer may offer help and guidance relating to any public records request, requests for police records and municipal court records should be directed to the designated records officer within those departments at the contact information listed below. 1) Requests for records other than Police and Municipal Court records. Requests to inspect or copy any records maintained by the City, other than Police and Municipal Court records, should be made to the Public Records Officer at: Office of the City Clerk City of Pasco 525 North 3rd Pasco WA 99301 (509) 545 -3402 - telephone (509) 543 -5727 — facsimile Email address: CityClerkInfo QPasco -wa. ov 2) Request for Police records. Requests to inspect or copy records maintained by the City's Police Department should be made to the Police Records Officer at: Records Office City of Pasco Police Department 525 North 3`a Pasco WA 99301 (509) 545 -3421 - telephone (509) 545 -3423 - facsimile 3) Request for Municipal Court records. Requests to inspect or copy records maintained by the Pasco Municipal Court, should be made to the Court Administrator at: Court Administration City of Pasco 1016 North 4`h Pasco WA 99301 (509) 545 -3491 - telephone (509) 543 -2912- facsimile 4) Internet access to records. Many records are also available on the City's web site at www.pasco- wa.gov. Requesters are encouraged to view the documents available on the website prior to submitting a public records request. C) The public records officer will oversee compliance with the act but another City staff member may process a request. Therefore, these rules will refer to the public records officer "or designee." The public records officer or designee and the City will provide the "fullest assistance" to requesters; ensure that public records are protected from damage or disorganization; and prevent fulfilling public records requests from causing excessive interference with essential functions of the City. Section 2. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC RECORDS. A) Hours for inspection of records. Public records are available for inspection and copying during normal business hours of the City, Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., excluding legal holidays. Records must be inspected at the office of the City Clerk at City Hall. The City's Police Department hours are Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m, excluding legal holidays. The Municipal Court hours are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding legal holidays. B) Records Index. The City finds that maintaining an index is unduly burdensome and would interfere with City operations. The requirement would unduly burden or interfere with City operations in the following ways: Public Records Request Resolution Page 2 1) Given the number of different departments /divisions in the City, the maintenance of a single index is impractical; and 2) Due to activity levels in the City, the type and number of records is constantly changing. C) Organization of records. The City will maintain its records in a reasonably organized manner. The City will take reasonable actions to protect records from damage and disorganization. A requestor shall not take City records from City offices, or that location designated for the inspection of public records, without the permission of the public records officer or designee. A variety of records are available on the City's web site at www.pasco- wa.gov. Requestors are encouraged to view the documents available on the web site prior to submitting a records request. D) Making a request for public records. 1) Any person wishing to inspect or copy public records of the City should make the request in writing on the City's request form, or by letter, fax, or e-mail addressed to the public records officer and including the following information: a) Name of requestor; b) Address of requestor; C) Other contact information, including telephone number and /or e- mail address; d) Identification of the public records adequate for the public records officer or designee to locate the records; and C) The date, and if presented at City Hall, the time of day of the request. 2) If the requestor wishes to have copies of the records made instead of simply inspecting them, he or she should so indicate and make arrangements to pay for copies of the records or a deposit. Standard photocopies will be provided at 15 cents (15¢) per page. 3) A form is available for use by requestor at the office of the public records officer and online at www.pasco- wa.gov. 4) The public records officer or designee may accept requests for public records that contain the above information by telephone, facsimile, email, or in person. If the public records officer or designee accepts such a request, he or she will confirm receipt of the information and the substance of the request in writing. Public Records Request Resolution Page 3 5) In the event the records requested in any department are readily available, of a routine nature, and do not involve the interest of any other person, the public records officer or the department head may authorize the immediate inspection and /or copying of such record without the necessity of filing the request as provided in subsection (1) above. Section 3. PROCESSING OF PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST - GENERAL. A) Providing "fullest assistance." The City is charged by statute with adopting rules which provide how it will "provide full access to public records," "protect records from damage or disorganization," "prevent excessive interference with other essential functions of the City," provide "fullest assistance" to requestors, and provide the "most timely possible action" on public records requests. The public records officer or designee will process requests in the order allowing the most requests to be processed in the most efficient manner. B) Acknowledging of a deposit for the copies, if any, is made or terms receipt of request. Within five (5) business days of receipt of the request, the public records officer will do one or more of the following: 1) Make the records available for inspection or copying; 2) If copies are requested and payment of a deposit for the copies, if any, is made or terms of payment are agreed upon, send the copies to the requestor; 3) Provide a reasonable estimate of when records will be available; 4) If the request is unclear or does not sufficiently identify the requested records, request clarification from the requestor. Such clarification may be requested and provided by telephone. The public records officer or designee may revise the estimate of when records will be available; or 5) Deny the request. C) Consequences of failure to respond. If the City does not respond in writing within five (5) business days of receipt of the request for disclosure, the requestor should consider contacting the public records officer to determine the reason for the failure to respond. D) Protecting rights of others. In the event that the requested records contain information that may affect rights of others and may be exempt from disclosure, the public records officer may, prior to providing the records, give notice to such others whose rights may be affected by the disclosure. Such notice should be given so as to make it possible for those other persons to contact the requestor and ask him or her to revise the request, or, if necessary, seek an order from a court to prevent or limit the disclosure. The notice to the affected persons will include a copy of the request. Public Records Request Resolution Page 4 E) Records exempt from disclosure. Some records are exempt from disclosure, in whole or in part. If the City believes that a record is exempt from disclosure and should be withheld, the public records officer will state the specific exemption and provide a brief explanation of why the record or a portion of the record is being withheld. If only a portion of a record is exempt from disclosure, but the remainder is not exempt, the public records officer will redact the exempt portions, provide the nonexempt portions, and indicate to the requestor why portions of the record are being redacted. F) Privilege Log. If the City determines that a record is exempt and should be withheld, the City will maintain a privilege log of those withheld records. The privilege log will identify: 1) Type of record withheld. 2) Date of record. 3) Number of pages. 4) Author or recipient. 5) The exemption invoked. A copy of the privilege log will be produced to the records requestor. G) Inspection of records. 1) Consistent with other demands, the City shall promptly provide a location to inspect public records. No member of the public may remove a document from the viewing area or disassemble or alter any documents. The requestor shall indicate which documents, if any, he or she wishes the City to copy. 2) The requester must claim or review the assembled records within thirty (30) days of the City's notification to him or her that the records are available for inspection or copying. The City will notify the requestor in writing of this requirement and inform the requestor that he or she should contact the City to make arrangements to claim or review the records. If the requestor or a representative of the requestor fails to claim or review the records within the thirty -day period or make other arrangements, the City may close the request and refile the assembled records. Other public records requests can be processed ahead of a subsequent request by the same person for the same or almost identical records, which can be processed as a new request. H) Providing copies of records. After inspection is complete, the public records officer or designee shall make any requested copies or arrange for copying. Public Records Request Resolution Page 5 I) Providing records in installments. When the request is for a large number of records, the public records officer or designee will provide access for inspection and copying in installments, if he or she reasonably determines that it would be practical to provide the records in that way. If, within thirty (30) days, the requestor fails to inspect the entire set of records or one or more of the installments, the public records officer or designee may stop searching for the remaining records and close the request. J) Completion of inspection. When the inspection of the requested records is complete and all requested copies are provided, the public records officer or designee will indicate that the City has completed a diligent search for the requested records and made any located nonexempt records available for inspection. K) Closing withdrawn or abandoned request. When the requestor either withdraws the request or fails to fulfill his or her obligations to inspect the records or pay the deposit or final payment for the requested copies, the public records officer will close the request and indicate to the requestor that the City has closed the request. L) Later discovered documents. If, after the City has informed the requestor that it has provided all available records, the City becomes aware of additional responsive documents existing at the time of the request, it will promptly inform the requestor of the additional documents and provide them on an expedited basis. Section 4. EXEMPTIONS. A) The Public Records Act provides that a number of types of documents are exempt from public inspection and copying. In addition, documents are exempt from disclosure if any "other statute" exempts or prohibits disclosure. Requestors should be aware of other exemptions, outside the Public Records Act, that restrict the availability of some documents held by the City for inspection and copying. A list of such laws is available at the office of the City Clerk and may be available at the City's website. B) The City is prohibited by statute from disclosing lists of individuals for commercial purposes. Section 5. COSTS OF PROVIDING,COPIES OF PUBLIC RECORDS. A) Costs for copies. There is no fee for inspecting public records. A requestor may obtain co vies for the following costs: standard blaek and • hit copies for- 15 eefAs 1. Standard black and white photocopies - 15 cents (150) epage, 2. Standard color photocopies - 15 cents (150) per page; 3. Scanned copies (if records are not already in electronic format) - 10 cents (100) per page; Public Records Request Resolution Page 6 Before beginning to make the copies, the public records officer or designee may require a deposit of up to ten percent of the estimated cost of copying all the records selected by the requestor. The public records officer or designee may also require the payment of the remainder of the copying cost before providing all the records, or the payment of the cost of copying an installment before providing that installment. The City will not charge sales tax when it makes copies of public records. B) Costs for electronic records. The costs of electronic copies of records shall be One Dollar ($1.00) for information on a floppy disk and One Dollar ($1.00) for information on a CD- ROM. C) Costs for specialized mailing. services. In the event the City is required due to the size of the request or there is a need for specialized copying equipment (i.e., photographs, blueprints, taped or video recordings) to use the services of an outside source designated by the City, the requestor shall be required to pay the actual costs of such service, including delivery and return of public records for the purpose of copying. D) Costs of mailing. The City may also charge actual costs of mailing (including the costs of the shipping container) and the actual costs of long distance facsimile transmission. E) Payment. Payment may be made by cash, check or money order to the City. Section 6. REVIEW OF DENIALS OF PUBLIC RECORDS. A) Petition for internal administrative review of denial of access. Any person who objects to the initial denial or partial denial of a records request may petition in writing (including e-mail) to the public records officer for a review of that decision. The petition shall include a copy of, or reasonably identify, the written statement by the public records officer or designee denying the request. B) Consideration of petition for review. The public records officer shall promptly provide the petition and any other relevant information to the City Attorney. The City Attorney will immediately consider the petition and either affirm or reverse the denial within two business days following the City's receipt of the petition, or within such other time as City and the requestor shall mutually agree. The comments incorporated in Chapter WAC 44 -14 may be relied upon as authority for determinations made by the City in applying or interpreting this Resolution. C) Alternative Dispute Resolution. In the event of a dispute regarding the inspection or copying of public records, the parties shall first meet in a good -faith attempt to resolve the dispute by agreement of the parties or by mediation. In the event the dispute remains, the dispute shall be resolved by arbitration pursuant to RCW 7.04A, the Mandatory Rules of Arbitration, and venue being placed in Franklin County, Washington. The mediators and arbitrators will be selected from an approved list maintained by the City and available upon request. The party wishing to seek mediation or arbitration shall provide fifteen (15) days written notice to the City. Public Records Request Resolution Page 7 D) Judicial review. Any person may obtain court review of denials of public records requests pursuant to RCW 42.56.550 at the conclusion of two business days after the initial denial regardless of any internal administrative appeal. Section 7. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to institute such administrative policies and practices as necessary and appropriate to fully affect this policy. SECTION 2. The provisions of this resolution shall be effective on January 1, 2013 and shall be applicable to any pending requests which have not been completed as of the effective date. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Pasco, Washington, at its regular meeting on the 17th day of December, 2012. Matt Watkins Mayor Attest Debra L. Clark City CIerk Approved as to Form: Leland B. Kerr City Attorney Public Records Request Resolution Page 8