HomeMy WebLinkAbout1066RESOLUTION NO. /(){_~f)
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, adopting the Capital
Improvement Program: 1986-1990.
WHEREAS, the City has previously adopted functional plans
in the areas of transportation, fire, parks and recreation, and
City Hall office facilities; and
WHEREAS, the implementation of these plans is important
to the quality of life in Kent; and
WHEREAS, funding for the implementation of the projects
contained in those plans is limited; and
WHEREAS, it is important to coordinate and prioritize the
funding of projects in those plans; and
WHEREAS, a comprehensive Capital Improvement Program is
the best vehicle for accomplishing such a coordinated planning
process; and
WHEREAS, the City Staff has developed a draft Capital
Improvement Program for the years 1986 through 1990; and
WHEREAS, a great deal of public input has been sought and
obtained through surveys and public meetings regarding priorities
and funding sources; and
WHEREAS, the final draft of the Capital Improvement
Program contains three alternative scenarios, each depicting a
different combination of projects and funding sources; NOW
'rHEREFORE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The 1986 -1990 Capital Improvement Program
Scenario 2 of the proposed Funding alternatives attached hereto
and incorporated herein by reference is hereby adopted.
Section 2. A final Capital Improvement Program shall be
printed in accordance with the adopted Scenario 2.
Section 3. The City Attorney is directed to prepare an
ordinance enacting the real estate excise tax with an effective
date of January l' 198-6. yl, /986 r-v~~.,:t:: ~~s _..
Section 4. The City Administrator is directed to
incorporate the elements of The Capital Improvement Program into
the proposed 1986 Annual Budget.
Section 5. A process shall be developed to address the
recommendation that a public safety bond issue should be submitted
to the voters sometime during 1986.
Passed at a regular meeting of ~City Council of the
City of Kent Washington this /5 day of . 1-<.j:: 1985.
( l
Concurred in by the Mayor of the City of Kent, this /£
day of ~"(j , 1985. --
ATTEST:
~~ MARIE JE ~1 CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
P\2~ ~~ORNEY
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
Resolution No. I ZJ b fo , passed by the City Council of the City of
Kent, washington, the /5 day of~~ , 1985.
02780-120
- 2 -
CITY OF KENT
1986 -1990
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
FUNDING SCENARIOS
CITY OF KENT
1986-90
CAPITAL IMPROVEr-tENT PROGRAM
FUNDING SCENARIOS
OVer a year ago the City of Kent began developing its first .Capital Improvement
Program (CIP). The five-year CIP was needed to bring together the City's
non-utility long range plans into one comprehensive City-wide plan. This plan would
then act as a master plan for the City, identifying which City projects would be
funded and what year funding would occur. The need to develop such a plan arose
when it became apparent that the City could not afford to simultaneously implement
all of its non-utility long range plans. These plans, such as the Transportation
Plan, the Fire Master Plan and the Parks and Recreation Plan, were being adopted
independent of the needs of other departments and more importantly, regardless of
available revenues. Hence, a coordinating plan was needed to balance the needs of
the departments and to balance planned expenditures with available revenues.
THE CIP PROCESS
The process of developing a CIP began when each City department was asked to.
complete a standardized capital bnprovement
capital project needed through the year 1990.
request form for each non-utility
It was important that the projects
requested were intergrally related to the City's overall mission and that they were
needed to fulfill goals established in departmental long range plans. Once the
request forms were completed, they were forwarded to the Finance Department for
review and analysis. The Finance Department then prepared the Prelbninary Capital
1
Improvement Program.
The Prelilninary CIP, issued in February of 1985, confirmed the expectation that
planned expenditures exceeded projected revenues. In particular, the Prelilninary
CIP showed the City had over $100 million in identified capital improvement needs.
Seventy-six million of that need was identified for funding in the five year period
from 1986-90. Netting out dedicated revenue, such as state and federal grants,
private donations and LID's, the Prelilninary CIP showed that the City needed $38
million to fund its non-utility projects from 1986 to 1990. Traditionally the City
sets aside certain revenues for capital ilnprovements. These revenues were projected
to total about $16 million over the next five years however $9 million is needed to
pay the existing City debt service. Thus,· with $7 million available to fund
projects the City has an unfunded deficit of $31 million.
Given the tremendous ilnpact that the CIP has on Kent's future and the City's history
of involving citizens in local government decisions, an extensive public review
process was conducted to solicit input on how to balance the CIP's $31 million
deficit. A questionnaire was sent out with the March utility bills informing the
citizenry of three neighborhood meetings, one each on the Valley Floor and the East
and west Hills. In addition the City Council held two workshop meetings, four City
Council cammittee meetings, and the City staff had several meetings with a special
task force of the Kent Chamber of Commerece. OVer 600 questionnaires were completed
and returned with utility payments.
The results of this input have been analyzed and are used as the bases for
developing three CIP scenarios. The scenarios were balanced based on the input
received from the public, the City Council and the Kent Chamber of Comrnerece. The
only difference between the scenarios is the ilnpact of new taxes. Each scenario
2
' .
uses progressively more revenue sources,
objectionable taxes, with the first being
most. All scenarios extensively use the
based on the addition of the least
the least expensive and the third the
financing option of project deferral.
Although each scenario balances revenue and expenditures over a five year period, an
annual review process will update revenue estbnates and may change project
priorities, therefore the 1986 proposal is the most important part of each scenario.
The three scenarios and their revenue assumptions are listed below:
First Scenario:
-Voted G.O. for Public Safety in 1986 (20 yr, 10%)
-Councilmanic G.O. for Library and City Hall Office Space in 1988 (20 yr, 10%)
Second Scenario:
-Voted G.O. for Public Safety in 1986
-Counci~anic G.O. for Library and City Hall Office Space in 1988
-Real Estate Excise Tax ($300,000 in 1986 growing at a real rate of 5% thereafter)
Third Scenario:
-Voted G.O. for Public Safety in 1986
-Councilmanic G.o. for Library and City Hall Office Space in 1988
-Real Estate Excise Tax
-Add'l 1.5-2% Utility Tax (calculated to be $900,000 in 1986 and to grow at 5%
thereafter)
-5% Admissions Tax (calculated to be $100,000 a year with no substantial growth)
3
RESULTS OF PUBLIC INPUT
Three scenarios were developed based on the results of: the questionnaire mailed to
all utility customers, the public comments received on the questionnaire and through
public meetings, the Chamber of Commerce review process, and the criteria
established by the Council at a special CIP workshop.
QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS
The questionnaire results are presented below in order of most supported to least
supported. The range was "5" for strongly support and "1" for strongly oppose. The
far right coulumn identifies how willing the respondents are to support a tax for
the type of project described.
Ranking
1 Emergency equipment for public safety
2 Facilities for automobile and truck traffic
3 Communication and training facilities for public
4 Recycling City garbage
5 Greenbelts and open space
6 Drainage facilities
7 Bike routes/pedestrian paths
8 Public safety facilities
4
Score
3.781
3.653
safety 3.593
3.434
3.272
3.256
3.211
3.057
%Who
Support
a tax
69.9%
47.4%
61.2%
51.8%
37.1%
49.0%
44.8%
40.8%
9 Expanded library facilities 2.889 39.0%
10 Community playfields & cultural facilities 2.880 35.7%
11 Neighborhood and industrial area parks 2.855 33.4%
12 Technological equipment 2.852 31.5%
13 City Hall office space 2.398 23.2%
OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS
The following is a summary of questionnaire responses and input obtained from public
meetings as well as from the Chamber of Commerce.
1) The public expressed support for public safety projects.
2) Many people feel that the people and businesses moving into Kent should pay for
the growth related problems they cause--i.e. ·traffic problems, parks and
recreation needs, etc ••
3) Voted G.O.'s are an acceptable fonn of taxation.
4) There is support for a real estate excise tax.
5) Preference should be given to projects which generate revenue.
6) State and federal funding should be used wherever possible.
7) Projects should be those included in approved City plans.
8) City employees should be more productive in providing City services.
5
COUNCIL CRITERIA
During a special workshop on the CIP, the City Council came up with the following
criteria.
1) Priority to projects with outside funding sources.
2) Increase allocation of existing funding to capital needs.
3) Services not now provided get prioirity over existing services.
4) Preserve future projects thru current acquisition of right-of-way, both for land
and buildings.
5) Build into CIP funding funds for unanticipated opportunities.
6) Develop existing property prior to acquiring new property.
7) Before funding a capital project insure availability for operation and
maintenance funding.
8) Insure conformance with City plans and vice versa, where possible.
9) Where possible, multi-purpose projects should be supported.
10) A project should have demonstrated public support.
OTHER CIP BALANCING CONSIDERATIONS
In addition to the public comment and Council criteria there are a number of other
factors which impact the CIP. City studies, state regulations and staff input
affected the outcome of the three CIP scenarios. These considerations are:
6
1) Fire Department computer generated location package--This package will be used
to determine the optimum location for the City's fire stations. Pending the
outcome of this study and the on-going negotiations on a lease/purchase
agreement for an industrial area Fire Station, the City will have a better grasp
of what precisely will be needed. It may turn out that the Fire Headquarters
station will lend itself to expansion and remodel instead of replacement and/or
that the training facility will be built jointly with the cities of Renton and
Tukwila.
be funded
In any event, it is recommended that new fire stations and equipment
from a voted bond issue. It is further recommended that prior to
making a decision on what to include in the issue, a citizen committee be formed
to help determine what projects will be included and when the issue should be
introduced.
2) City Automation Plan--The on-going Automation Plan will determine computer needs
on a City~wide basis. All computer related projects are included in the General
Goverrnnent section under the project heading "Computer Systems." Pending the
outcome of the Automation Plan, the City will have a better idea of its computer
need priorities and how much it will cost to meet those needs.
3) Road District Analysis--The City is examining the possibity of forming a Road
District to finance the major road projects. Road Districts are separate taxing
entities formed when voters in a proposed district approve its formation by a
60% margin. The District would be administered by the County's Public Wbrks
Department which would construct and maintain roads within the District. The
establishment of a Road District would greatly expedite the East-West arterial
projects.
4) Right-of-Way Acquisiton Fund Analysis--It is proposed that a fund be created to
7
provide a reserve for acquiring right-of-ways before development occurs thereby
preserving a future road project.
5) Street Funding--State law mandates that fuel tax revenues be used to fund street
and arterial street projects.
6) Library Needs Analysis--The Library Board will be working on an analysis of
library needs and space requirements. The study should be completed in late
1985.
7) Library District Analysis--The City is looking into the possibility of annexing
to the King County's Library District. Annexing to the County Library District
would elilninate the City's current involvement in providing library services.
This would make available $450,000 a year which is currently being spent by the
City for Library operation and maintenance costs. This would allow the City to
either lease its half of the library to King County or purchase the County's
half to provide for City Hall expansion.
8) Voted G.O. Criteria--Because of the costs and the tilne involved in a campaign
to issue voted general obligation debt, certain criteria should be met before
placing a voted G.o. issue on a ballot. These crieria are:
a) There should be demonstrated public support for a project, including support
in the form of an interested group of citizens that would be willing to raise
funds and work on a campaign committee.
b) The project should be highly visible providing a clear-cut, broadly
8
distributed public benefit.
CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM PUBLIC INPUT AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
Based on the public input results and the other considerations mentioned above the
following conclusions were drawn and incorporated into the CIP scenarios:
1) There seems to be a consensus that those who contribute to a problem should help
pay to alleviate that problem. Toward this end the City will continue its
policy of promoting LID's to provide City ~rovements to specially benefited
developments. All three scenarios use $7.5 million in probable LID money to
fund various projects.
2) The City Council and the public has emphasized the importance of utilizing
non-City sources of funding. This is yet further evidence that the City should
aggresively pursue LID's. In addition it indicates that the City should be
thorough and persistent in seeking funding from the State and Federal
Governments and private parties. Including LID's, the City staff has identified
nearly $29 million of possible outside funding.
3) Public safety is of major concern to the citizens of Kent and projects
addressing public safety needs should receive attention. Moreover the Council
has stated that preference should be given to projects with demonstrated public
support. In all three CIP scenarios, the majority of public safety projects are
identified for funding in 1986.
9
4) A voted G.O is the least objectionable taxing option and public safety projects
are the most favored. Moreover the questionnaire shows that people are willing
to accept higher taxes to pay for public safety projects. Given this
information and the criteria, public safety projects are the most likely
candidates for a voted G.O. bond issue. In all three scenarios a voted G.O. is
used to fund public safety projects in 1986. The voted G.O. issue is currently
identified for $11,149,000. However, this amount is subject to revision pending
the outcome of the Fire station location analysis, a joint training facility
study with Renton and review by a citizens committee.
5) Many people feel that Kent's problems are being caused by people and businesses
moving into Kent and that those people and businesses should help pay for the
problems they cause. In 1981 the City initiated an environmental excise tax
based on square feet of construcction or number of bedrooms per home. The
authority for this tax was taken away from the City by the 1982 State
Legislature. The Legislature substituted the Real Estate Excise Tax.
A Real Estate Excise Tax is the best of existing available sources to tax those
people and businesses most responsible for Kent's growth related problems. The
tax, at one-quarter of one percent,
seller/resident and buyer/newcomer.
taxes the transfer of real property between
Both King County and most of the cities
surrounding Kent already impose this tax. Since a larger dollar volume of the
property sales are in the non-residential sector, those firms which develop
property in Kent and encourage people and businesses to move to Kent will be
contributing to any revenues brought to the City through a Real Estate Excise
Tax. A Real Estate Excise Tax is proposed in the Second and Third CIP Scenario.
10
6) Streets and open spaces received high levels of public support. The Council
expressed a desire to preserve future projects through land and right-of-way
acquisitions. All three CIP scenarios emphasize land acquistion as opposed to
development.
7) Street projects were given high priority however the questionnaire revealed
there was less support for additional taxes to fund them. Since the State
mandates that its fuel tax revenues be used expressly for street and arterial
street projects the City was able to fund most of its street projects without
using local funding sources. Thus street projects were given high priority but
are being funded with existing revenue sources and LID's.
8) The public and City Council favor projects which are identified in adopted City
Plans and those projects which are multi-purpose. The New Library and City Hall
Office Space are related. The City Hall Master Plan, completed in 1983,
projects that additional office space will be needed by 1996. In addition, a
preliminary Library needs analysis shows the present Library cannot adequately
serve Library patrons and that a bigger library is needed to serve a growing
community.
Since the architectural design of the Library building prohibits upward
expansion and since the City will need additional office space, particularly to
house a coordinated permit processing center, the City Hall Master Plan suggests
that the Library be relocated to a larger facility thereby allowing City Hall to
expand into the vacated Library. A coordi~ated permit center should greatly
enhance City productivity in meeting community development needs. All three CIP
scenarios provide for the New Library/City Hall project through a councilmanic
11
general obligation issue in 1988. However, pending the outcome of the Library
Needs Analysis and the Library District Analysis this project may be revised or
funded from an alternate source such as annexation to the Library District.
9) The City-wide 11 Computer Systems 11 project was partially funded to address the
public's desire to increase the productivity of their government. 11 Computer
Systems 11 is a multi-purpose project which affects all City operations from
police investigations to gathering and storing demographic information.
Currently the City is using antiquated labor intensive methods for performing
duties which can be more efficiently performed by computers. Each scenario
identifies $125,000 in funding for each of the five years of the program. This
amounts to $625,000 for the whole program leaving $1,090,000 to be funded in
1991 or beyond. It is possible that a public safety bond issue could include
computer systems.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The staff is recommending the Second Scenario. This scenario best represents the
views of the public and the Council and it also addresses staff concerns regarding
on going City studies, State regulations and adopted City Plans. Although the
Second Scenario is largely balanced by defering projects until a later date, the
staff feels that the City can fund Kent's most critically needed and desired capital
improvements with the funding levels presented in the Second Scenario.
12
The most prominent features of the Second Scenario are a voted G.O. bond issue for
public safety and a Real Estate Excise Tax. Though the amount of the bond issue is
currently identified at $11,743,000, it will most likely decrease following
completion of the Fire Station Location Package, the Training Facility Study and
other input analyzed by the citizens committee. Assuming a $11,743,000 issue at 10%
for 20 years, the annual debt service would be $1,379,328 or $.63 per $1,000 of
asessed valuation. This would amount to approximately $50 per year on an $80,000
home. A real estate excise
real property. Based on
tax is a one quarter of one percent tax on the sale of
historical trends the City would generate approximately
$300,000 annually if this tax were implemented. These in combination with existing
sources of capital linprovement revenue and debt financing options for councilmanic
debt will begin the funding process for Kent's capital needs.
13
CITY OF KENT
SUMMARY RECOMMENDED CIP
FIRST SCENARIO:
-VOTED G.O FOR PUBLIC SAFETY IN 1986
-COUNCILMANIC G.O. FOR LIBRARY AND CITY HALL OFFICE SPACE IN 1988
'IDTAL 1991 &
1986-90 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 BEYOND
------------
PROJECTED CIP REVENUE 16,266 2,959 3,130 3,256 3,390 3,531 N/A
COMMITTED DEBT SERVICE 8,980 1,727 1,825 1,927 1,806 1,695 N/A
PROPOSED DEBT SERVICE 574 287 287
NET AVAILABLE CIP REVENUES 6,712 1,232 1,305 1,329 1,297 1,549 N/A
PROPOSED NEW REVENUES
vai'ED G.O. FOR PUBLIC SAFETY 11,743 11,743
COUNCILMANIC G.O. FOR LIBRARY 2,450 2,450
'IOTAL AVAILABLE CIP REVENUE 20,905 12,975 1,305 3, 779 1,297 1,549 N/A
'IOTAL PROJECTS 20,872 12,967 1,292 3,738 1,300 1,575 33,432
BAlANCE 33 8 13 41 (3) ( 26)
FIRST SCENARIO
VOTED G.O. FOR PUBLIC SAFETY IN 1986
COUNCILMANIC G.O. FOR LIBRARY AND CITY HALL IN 1988
PROJECTS TOTAL YEAR PROJECT FUNDED
Gross Dedi-Net
Project cated Project 1991 &
Cost Revenue Cost 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 BEYOND
------- -----------------------
PUBLIC SAFETY
Police
1. Police Radio* 250 250 250
2. Valley Can Imp. 61 61 61
3. Training Facility* 1,175 1,175 1,175
4. W. H. Sat. Sta.* 170 170 170
A. Police Headquarters 1,700 1,700 1,700
Fire
1. Aid Cars* 146 146 146
2. Suburban Pumpers* 310 310 310
3. E.H. Fire Station* 1,640 1,640 1,640
4. WVH Sta.Trn. Ctr.* 3,215 3,215 3,215
5. w. H. Fire Station* 1,614 1,614 1,614
6. Fire HQ Station* 3,025 3,025 3,025
7. Fire Cammun. Sys.* 558 558 158 400
8. Valley Can Imp. 17 17 17
9. Mobile Camp. Ter.* 40 40 40
TOTAL 13,921 13,921 11,743 78 .0 0 0 2,100
PUBLIC OORKS
1. Green River Bridge 2,907 2,622 285 285
2. SR 515 8, 776 8,451 325 325
3. Ped & Bike Path Imp 1,117 457 660 125 125 125 285
4. Adv Right-of-Way Acq 37 346 (383)
5. S.E.l92nd NR toEVH 7,913 3,000 4,913 4,913
6. City Shop Remodel 225 75 150 150
7. 180th and WVH Int. 600 450 150 150
8. 180th and EVH Int. 229 65 164 164
9. 212th & WV Int.Imp 250 250 250
10. EVH 192nd-180th 2,901 1,575 1,326 600 726
11. 76 Ave 212th-222nd 1,257 561 696 25 671
12. 240th & 104th Int. 80 80 80
13. 240th & 116 Int Imp 138 138 138
14. 84th & 167 Int Imp 50 50 50
15. 240th @ 102nd 425 425
16. WVH Imp Meeker-180 3,619 3,619
A. 196/200 EV Hwy N.R. 10,580 2,000 8,580 8,580
B. S.196 & WV Int. Imp 142 142 142
FIRST SCENARIO
VOTED G.O. FOR PUBLIC SAFETY IN 1986
COUNCilMANIC G.O. FOR LIBRARY AND CITY HALL IN 1988
PROJECTS 'IDI'AL YEAR PROJECT FUNDED
Gross Dedi-Net
Project cated Project 1991 &
Cost Revenue Cost 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 BEYOND
------------------------------
c. K-D M Road & SR 99 116 116 116
D. S 224th and E.V.Int 104 104 104
E. New Arterial-224th 6,942 3,471 3,471 3,471
'IDI'AL 48.,371 26,771 21,600 647 660 713 750 851 17,979
PARKS
1. Riverfront Acq 850 850 350 150 350
2. Van Doren's Dev. 129 129 129
3. Kent Cam. Parking 250 250 250
4. Golf Course Dev. 1,000 1,000 389 611
5. Mill Creek Can. Tr 450 450 100 150 200
6. Lake Fenwick Park 300 300 25 275
7. Ball Field Lights 65 65 65
8. East Hill Park 1,050 100 950 400 550
9. S. Scenic Hill Park 50 50 50
10. Riverfront Dike 115 115 37 78
11. Uplands Parking 160 160 60
12. Upper Mill Cr. Park 569 569 569
13. Riverfront Parking 65 65 65
14. Green River Rest. 150 150 150
15. Glenn Nelson Park 500 500 500
16. Commons Playfield 300 300 300
17. Perfonning Arts Ctr 3,400 3,400 3,400
18. Russell Rd. Park 1,760 1,760 1,760
19. Campus Cam. Park 50 50 50
20. s. Willis Park 60 60 60
21. Good News Bay Park 420 420
22. Riverfront Park 1,000 1,000 1,000
23. Orillia Dist. Park 250 125 125 125
24. G. R. Frontage Tr. 100 100 100
A. Sunnycrest Neigh. 260 260 260
B. Clark Lake Cam. Park 1,100 150 950 950
c. Mill Creek WOods G. 120 120 120
D. w. Ponds & Wetlands 600 500 100 100
E. Panther Lake Park 85 85 85
F. Sprinigbrook Park 175 75 100 100
G. T-Bridge Green Belt 80 80 80
H. s. Merid. Cam.Park 525 200 325 325
I. Interburban N. Park 50 50 50
FIRST SCENARIO
VOTED G.O. FOR PUBLIC SAFEI'Y IN 1986
COUNCILMANIC G.O. FOR LIBRARY AND CITY HALL IN 1988
PROJECTS 'IOTAL YEAR PROJECT FUNDED
Gross Dedi-Net
Project cated Project 1991 &
Cost Revenue Cost 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 BEYOND
------------------------------
J. Interburban c. Park 50 50 50
K. Interburban O'Brien 50 50 50
'IOTAL 16,138 1,570 14,568 452 279 450 425 599 12,263
GENERAL GOVERNMENT
l. Library** 2,150 2,150 150 2,000
2. City Hall Expansion** 450 450 450
3. Telecommun. System 425 425
4. Computer Systems***
Geocoding 300 300
Police Computer 140 140
Fire Computer 150 150
Other 1,125 1,125
--------
1,715 1,715 125 125 125 125 125 1,090
'IOTAL 4,740 425 4,315 125 275 2,575 125 125 1,090
GRAND 'IOTALS 83,170 54,404 1,292 1,300 33,432
28,766 12,967 3,738 1,575
* Included in 1986 Voted G.o.
** Included in 1988 Councilmanic G.O.
*** Funding allocation to individual projects based on results of Automation Plan
CITY OF KENT
SUMMARY RECOMMENDED CIP
SECOND SCENARIO:
-VOTED G.O FOR PUBLIC SAFETY IN 1986
-COUNCILMANIC G.O. FOR LIBRARY AND CITY HALL OFFICE SPACE IN 1988
-REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX
'IOTAL 1991 &
1986-90 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 BEYOND -------------
PROJECTED CIP REVENUE 16,266 2,959 3,130 3,256 3,390 3,531 N/A
COMMITTED DEBT SERVICE 8,980 1,727 1,825 1,927 1,806 1,695 N/A
PROPOSED DEBT SERVICE 574 287 287
NET AVAilABLE CIP REVENUES 6,712 1,232 1,305 1,329 1,297 1,549 N/A
PROPOSED NEW REVENUES
VOTED G.O. FOR PUBLIC SAFETY 11,743 11,743
COUNCILMANIC G.O. FOR LIBRARY 21450 2,450
REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 1,658 300 315 331 347 365
TOTAL AVAilABLE CIP REVENUE 22,562 13;275 1,620 4,109 1,644 1,914 N/A
TOTAL PROJECTS 22,511 13,267 1,594 4,074 1,648 1,928 32,268
BALANCE 51 8 26 35 (4) (14)
*Assumes bnplementation in 1986, additional funds would accrue if bnplemented in 1985.
SECOND SCENARIO
VOTED G.O. FOR PUBLIC SAFETY IN 1986
COUNCILMANIC G.O. FOR LIBRARY AND CITY HALL IN 1988
REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX
PROJECTS TOTAL
Gross Dedi-Net
Project cated Project
Cost Revenue Cost 1986 --------------------
PUBLIC SAFETY
Police
1. Police Radio* 250 250 250
2. Valley Com Imp. 61 61
3. Training Facility* 1,175 1,175 1,175
4. W. H. Sat. Sta.* 170 170 170
A. Police Headquarters 1,700 1,700
Fire
1. Aid Cars* 146 146 146
2. Suburban Pumpers* 310 310 310
3. E.H. Fire Station* 1,640 1,640 1,640
4. WVH Sta.Trn. Ctr.* 3,215 3,215 3,215
5. w. H. Fire Station* 1,614 1,614 1,614
6. Fire HQ Station* 3,025 3,025 3,025
7. Fire Commun. Sys.* 558 558 158
8. Valley Com Imp. 17 17
9. Mobile Camp. Ter.* 40 40 40
TOTAL 13,921 13,921 11,743
PUBLIC WJRKS
1. Green River Bridge 2,907 2,622 285 285
2. SR 515 8, 776 8,451 325 325
3. Ped & Bike Path Imp 1,117 457 660
4. Adv Right-of-Way Acq 187
5. S.E.l92nd NR toEVH 7,913 3,000 4,913
6. City Shop Remodel 225 75 150
7. 180th and WVH Int. 600 450 150
8. 180th and EVH Int. 229 65 164
9. 212th & WV Int.Imp 250 250
10. EVH 192nd-180th 2,901 1,575 1,326
11. 76 Ave 212th-222nd 1,257 561 696
12. 240th & 104th Int. 80 80
13. 240th & 116 Int Imp 138 138
14. 84th & 167 Int Imp 50 50
15. 240th @ 102nd 425 425
16. WVH Imp Meeker-180 3,619 3,619
A. 196/200 EV Hwy N.R. 10,580 2,000 8,580
YEAR PROJECT FUNDED
1991 &
1987 1988 1989 1990 BEYOND
----------
61
1,700
400
17
78 0 0 0 2,100
125 125 125 285
498 173 (858)
4,913
150
150
164
250
600 726
198 171 327
80
138
50
8,580
SECOND SCENARIO
VOTED G.O. FOR PUBLIC SAFETY IN 1986
COUNCILMANIC G.O. FOR LIBRARY AND CITY HALL IN 1988
REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX
PROJECTS TOTAL
Gross Dedi-Net
Project cated Project
Cost Revenue Cost 1986 -------------------
B. S.l96 & WV Int. Imp 142 142
c. K-D M Road & SR 99 116 116
D. S 224th and E.V.Int 104 104
E. New Arterial-224th 6,942 3,471 3,471
TOTAL 48,371 26,771 21,600 797
PARKS
l. Riverfront Acq 850 850 500
2. Van Doren's Dev. 129 129
3. Kent Cam. Parking 250 250
4. Golf Course Dev. 1,000 1,000
5. Mill Creek Can. Tr 450 450
6. Lake Fenwick Park 300 300
7. Ball Field Lights 65 65 65
8. East Hill Park 1,050 100 950
9. s. Scenic Hill Park 50 50
10. Riverfront Dike 115 115 37
11. Uplands Parking 160 160
12. Upper Mill Cr. Park 569 569
13. Riverfront Parking 65 65
14. Green River Rest. 150 150
15. Glenn Nelson Park 500 500
16. Commons Playfield 300 300
17. Performing Arts Ctr 3,400 3,400
18. Russell Rd. Park 1,760 1,760
19. Campus Cam. Park 50 50
20. s. Willis Park 60 60
21. Good News Bay Park 420 420
22. Riverfront Park 1,000 1,000
23. Ori1lia Dist. Park 250 125 125
24. G. R. Frontage Tr. 100 100
A. Sunnycrest Neigh. 260 260
B. Clark Lake Cam. Park 1,100 150 950
c. Mill Creek Woods G. 120 120
D. w. Ponds & Wetlands 600 500 100
E. Panther Lake Park 85 85
F. Sprinigbrook Park 175 75 100
G. T-Bridge Green Belt 80 80
YEAR PROJECT FUNDED
1991 &
1987 1988 1989 1990 BEYOND
----------
142
116
104
3,471
812 886 923 1,022 17,160
350
129
250
571 429
50 50 150 200
300
150 600 200
50
63 15
60
569
65
150
500
300
3,400
1,760
50
60
1,000
125
100
260
950
120
100
85
100
80
SECOND SCENARIO
V0rED G.O. FOR PUBLIC SAFETY IN 1986
COUNCILMANIC G.O. FOR LIBRARY AND CITY HALL IN 1988
REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX
PROJECTS TOTAL
Gross Dedi-Net
Project cated Project
Cost Revenue Cost 1986 --------------------
H. S. Merid. Com.Park S2S 200 32S
I. Interburban N. Park so so
J. Interburban c. Park so so
K. Interburban O'Brien so so
TOTAL 16,138 l,S70 14,S68 602
GENERAL GOVERNMENT
1. Library** 2,1SO 2,1SO
2. City Hall Expansion** 4SO 4SO
3. Telecommun. System 42S 42S
4. Computer Systems***
Geocoding 300 300
Police Computer 140 140
Fire Canputer lSO lSO
Other 1,12S 1,12S --------
1,71S 1,71S 12S
TOTAL 4,740 42S 4,31S 12S
GRAND TOTAlS 83,170 S4,404
28,766 13,267
* Included in 1986 Voted G.O.
** Included in 1988 Councilmanic G.o.
YEAR PROJECT FUNDED
1991 &
1987 1988 1989 1990 BEYOND ----------
32S
so
so
so
429 613 600 781 11,443
lSO 2,000
4SO
'12S 12S 12S 12S 1,090
27S 2,S7S 12S 12S 1,090
l,S94 1,648 31,793
4,074 1,928
*** Funding allocation to individual projects based on results of Automation Plan
CITY OF KENT
SUMMARY RECOMMENDED CIP
THIRD SCENARIO:
-VOTED G.O FOR PUBLIC SAFETY IN 1986
-COUNCILMANIC G.O. FOR LIBRARY AND CITY HALL OFFICE SPACE IN 1988
-REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX
-ADD'L 1.5-2% UTILITY TAX
-5% ADMISSIONS TAX
'IDTAL 1991 &
1986-90 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 BEYOND
------------
PROJECTED CIP REVENUE 16,266 2,959 3,130 3,256 3,390 3,531 N/A
COMMITTED DEBT SERVICE 8,980 1,727 1,825 1,927 1,806 1,695 N/A
PROPOSED DEBT SERVICE 574 287 287
NET AVAILABLE CIP REVENUES 6, 712 1,232 1,305 1,329 1,297 1,549 N/A
PROPOSED NEW REVENUES
VDrED G.O. FOR PUBLIC SAFETY 11,743 11,743
COUNCILMANIC G.O. FOR:
LIBRARY 2,450 2,450
PERFORMING ARTS CENTER 3,400 3,400
REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX 1,658 300 315 331 347 365
ADD' L 1. 5%-2% UTILITY TAX 4,973 900 945 992 1,042 1,094
5% ADMISSIONS TAX 500 100 100 100 100 100
'IOTAL AVAILABLE CIP REVENUE 31,435 14,275 2,665 5,202 2,786 6,508 N/A
'IOI'AL PROJECTS 31,404 14,265 2,649 5,194 2,763 6,533 23,000~
BAIANCE 31 10 16 8 23 {25)
*Assumes llnplementation in 1986, additional funds would accrue if llnplemented in 1985.
THIRD SCENARIO
VOTED G.O. FOR PUBLIC SAFETY IN 1986
COUNCILMANIC G.O. FOR LIBRARY AND CITY HALL IN 1988
REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX
ADD'L 1.5-2% UTILITY TAX
5% ADMISSIONS TAX
PROJECTS 'IOTAL
Gross Dedi-Net
Project cated Project
Cost Revenue Cost 1986
--------------------
PUBLIC SAFETY
Police
1. Police Radio* 250 250 250
2. Valley Com Imp. 61 61
3. Training Facility* 1,175 1,175 1,175
4. W. H. Sat. Sta.* 170 170 170
A. Police Headquarters 1,700 1,700
Fire
1. Aid Cars* 146 146 146
2. Suburban Pumpers* 310 310 310
3. E.H. Fire Station* 1,640 1,640 1,640
4. WVH Sta.Trn. Ctr.* 3,215 3,215 3,215
5. W. H. Fire Station* 1,614 1,614 1,614
6. Fire HQ Station* 3,025 3,025 3,025
7. Fire Cammun. Sys.* 558 558 158
8. Valley Com Imp. 17 17
9. Mobile Camp. Ter.* 40 40 40
'IOTAL 13,921 13~921 11,743
PUBLIC ~RKS
1. Green River Bridge 2,907 2,622 285 285
2. SR 515 8,776 8,451 325 325
3. Ped & Bike Path Imp 1,117 457 660
4. Adv Right-of-Way Acq 0 675
5. S.E.l92nd NR toEVH 7,913 3,000 4,913
6. City Shop Remodel 225 75 150
7. 180th and WVH Int. 600 450 150
8. 180th and EVH Int. 229 65 164
9. 212th & WV Int.Irnp 250 250
10. EVH 192nd-180th 2,901 1,575 1,326.
11. 76 Ave 212th-222nd 1,257 561 696
12. 240th & 104th Int. 80 80
13. 240th & 116 Int Imp 138 138
14. 84th & 167 Int Imp 50 50
15. 240th @ 102nd 425 425
YEAR PROJECT FUNDED
1991 &
1987 1988 1989 1990 BEYOND ----------
61
1,700
400
17
78 0 0 0 2,100
155 125 125 125 130
870 331 (1,876)
4,913
150
150
164
250
600 726
400 296
80
138
50
THIRD SCENARIO
VOTED G.O. FOR PUBLIC SAFETY IN 1986
COUNCILMANIC G.O. FOR LIBRARY AND CITY HALL IN 1988
REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX
ADD'L 1.5-2% UTILITY TAX
5% ADMISSIONS TAX
PROJECTS 'IOTAL
Gross Dedi-Net
Project cated Project
Cost Revenue Cost 1986
--------------------
16. WVH Imp Meeker-180 3,619 3,619
A. 196/200 EV Hwy N.R. 10,580 2,000 8,580
B. S.l96 & WV Int. Imp 142 142
c. K-D M Road & SR 99 116 116
D. s 224th and E.V.Int 104 104
E. New Arterial-224th 6,942 3,471 3,471
'IOTAL 48,371 26,771 21,600 1,285
PARKS
l. Riverfront Acq 850 850 500
2. Van Doren's Dev. 129 129
3. Kent Cam. Parking 250 250
4. Golf Course Dev. 1 ,.000 1,000
5. Mill Creek Can. Tr 450 450 100
6. Lake Fenwick Park 300 300
7. Ball Field Lights 65 65 65
8. East Hill Park 1,050 100 950 332
9. s. Scenic Hill Park 50 50
10. Riverfront Dike 115 115 115
11. Uplands Parking 160 160
12. Upper Mill Cr. Park 569 569
13. Riverfront Parking 65 65
14. Green River Rest. 150 150
15. Glenn Nelson Park 500 500
16. Commons Playfield 300 300
17. Performing Arts Ctr 3,400 3,400
18. Russell Rd. Park 1,760 1,760
19. Campus Cam. Park 50 50
20. S. Willis Park 60 60
21. Good News Bay Park 420 420
22. Riverfront Park 1,000 1,000
23. Orillia Dist. Park 250 125 125
24. G. R. Frontage Tr. 100 100
A. Sunnycrest Neigh. 260 260
B. Clark Lake Com. Park 1,100 150 950
c. Mill Creek Wbods G. 120 120
YEAR PROJECT FUNDED
1991 &
1987 1988 1989 1990 BEYOND
----------
467 763 7,350
142
116
104
296 3,175
1,339 1,444 1,488 1,614 14,430
100 250
129
250
200 800
125 225
300
278 340
50
160
350 219
65
150
500
300
3,400
1,760
50
60
1,000
125
100
260
950
120
THIRD SCENARIO
VOTED G.O. FOR PUBLIC SAFETY IN 1986
COUNCILMANIC G.O. FOR LIBRARY AND CITY HALL IN 1988
REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX
ADD'L 1.5-2% UTILITY TAX
5% ADMISSIONS TAX
PROJECTS TOTAL
Gross Dedi-Net
Project cated Project
Cost Revenue Cost 1986
--------------------
D. w. Ponds & Wetlands 600 500 100
E. Panther Lake Park 85 85
F. Sprinigbrook Park 175 75 100
G. T-Bridge Green Belt 80 80
H. S. Merid. Cam.Park 525 200 325
I. Interburban N. Park 50 50
J. Interburban c. Park 50 50
K. Interburban O'Brien 50 50
TOTAL 16,138 1,570 14,568 1,112
GENERAL GOVERNMENT
1. Library** 2,150 2,150
2. City Hall Expansion** 450 450.
3. Telecommun. System 425 425
4. Computer Systems***
Geocoding 300 300
Police Computer 140 140
Fire Computer 150 150
Other 1,125 1,125 --------
1,715 1,715 125
TOTAL 4,740 425 4,315 125
GRAND TOTALS 83,170 54,404
28,766 14,265
* Included ·in 1986 Voted G.O.
** Included in 1988 Councilmanic G.O.
YEAR PROJECT FUNDED
1991 &
1987 1988 1989 1990 BEYOND ----------
100
85
100
80
325
50
50
50
957 1,175 1,150 4,794 5,380
150 2,000
450
125 125 125 125 1,090
275 2,575 125 125 1,090
2,649 2,763 23,000
5,194 6,533
*** Funding allocation to individual projects based on results of Automation Plan
APPENDIX A
CITY OF KENT
PROJECTED CIP REVENUES
PROJECTED CIP REVENUES TOTAL
1986-90 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 -------
Sales Tax-Capital Improvement(!) 9,318 1,653 1,752 1,857 1,969 2,087
Fuel Tax -Street(2) 1,690 312 324 337 351 365
Fuel Tax -Arterial Street 1,127 208 216 225 234 243
Federal Marshal Payments(3) 1,235 247 248 247 247 246
Federal Revenue Sharing(4) 100 100
Interest -Capital Improvement(5) 375 75 75 75 75 75
Loan Repayment-Capital Imp.(6) 170 34 34 34 34 34
Contributions -General Fund(?) 1,790 358 358 358 358 358
Contributions -Golf Course(8) 470 94 94 94 94 94
Contributions -Water Fund(9) 141 28 28 28 28 29
1986 Beginning Fund Balances(lO)
Street Funds 44 44
Capital Improvement Fund (245) (245)
Revenue Sharing Fund 51 51
TOTAL PROJECTED CIP REVENUES 16,266 2,959 3,130 3,256 3,390 3,531
(1) Sales Tax will increase at a real rate of 6% per year based on historical growth.
(2) Fuel Taxes will increase at a real rate of 4% per year based on historical growth
(3) Federal Marshal Payments are exact per contract with the Federal Marshal.
(4) Federal Revenue Sharing is assumed to be discontinued by Congress in 1987. It is
assumed based on historical usage that the City will use about $100,000 of its
Revenue Sharing monies to fund capital ilnprovements in 1986).
(5) Valley Cam will pay the Capital Improvement Fund $34,000 a year to repay a loan m
to Valley Cam in 1984.
(6) Interest on the Capital Improvement Fund is expected to generate $75,000 a year.
(7) The General Fund is assumed to continue to contribute about $350,000 a year for G
Course and LID debt.
(8) The Golf Course will generate $94,000 to help pay its debt service.
(9) The Water Fund is contributing $28,000 a year for debt. service.
(10) The City is going into 1986 with beginning fund balances of $44,000, $(245,000),
$51,000 for the Street Funds, Capital Imporovement Fund and Revenue Sharing Fund,
respectively.
APPENDIX B
COMMITTED COUNCILMANIC DEBT SERVICE
TOTAL
1986-90 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990
-------
MATURITY -------
1966 Street Bonds 1986 26 26
1973 General Purpose Bonds 1990
General Government -30.5% 186 37 37 37 37 38
Street -46.6% 287 57 57 57 57 59
Water -22.9% 141 28 28 28 28 29
Senior Center (Old) 1991 25 5 5 5 5 5
Crow Road/SE 260th LID 300 1997 273 61 58 55 51 48
S 252nd/Kent Kangely LID 301 1997 199 45 42 40 37 35
Smith Street LID 304 1997 156 12 11 114 10 9
1978 General Purpose Bonds 1998
Parks -26.7% 177 36 36 35 35 35
Street -73.3% 386 98 95 96 97
Des Moines LID 1987 2 1 1
1981 Golf Course G.O. Bonds 2001 1,189 241 239 237 235 237
1984 General Purpose Bonds 2004
Jail -25.2% 1,235 247 248 247 247 246
Senior Center -53.1% 2,606 522 523 521 521 519
Golf Course -21.7% 1,062 213 213 212 212 212
w. Meeker St LID 297 1997 294 66 62 59 55 52
W. Valley Drainage LID 306 1998 258 70 66 63 59
l04th @ 270th Water LID 1997 10 2 2 2 2 2
N. Central Imp LID 318 1998 48 12 12 12 12
CBD Improvement LID 313 1997 132 30 28 26 25 23
Upper Mill Creek Purchase Agr. 1990 195 33 54 54 54
James Street Improvement LID 32 1997 93 25 24 23 21
TOTAL COMMITTED DEBT SERVICE 8,980 1,727 1,825 1,927 1,806 1,695