Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council Workshop - Agenda - 04/16/2002 KENT WASHINGTON COUNCIL WORKSHOP P Aril 16 2002 Cift The Council Workshop will be held in Chambers East in Kent City Hall at 5:00 PM Phone: 253-856-5712 on Tuesday, April 16, 2002. Fax:253-856-6712 Council Members: President Tim Clark, Connie Epperly,Leona Orr, Julie Peterson, Bruce White,Judy Woods, Rico Yingling Sneaker Time 1. End of Session Mini-Briefing Dena Laurent 20 min. Doug Levy The Council Workshop meets each month on the first and third Tuesdays at 5:OOPM in Chambers East unless otherwise noted. For agenda information please call Jackie Bicknell at (253) 856-5712. ANY PERSON REQUIRING A DISABILITY ACCOMMODATION SHOULD CONTACT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AT (253) 856-5725 IN ADVANCE. FOR TDD RELAY SERVICE, CALL THE WASHINGTON TELECOMMUNICATIONS RELAY SERVICE AT 1-800-833-6388. N%we FINAL OVERVIEW OF THE 2002 SESSION OF THE WASHINGTON STATE LEGISLATURE—FROM A CITY OF KENT PERSPECTIVE Doug Levy—3/24/02 Introduction The 2002 session is likely to be remembered as one of the most difficult ones ever for the Washington State Legislature. State lawmakers came to Olympia staring at an Operating Budget shortfall of more than$1 billion due to the effects of"9-11," a recessionary economy, and new voter-passed initiatives. A federal court judge had ordered them to do something about siting additional,non-Pierce County"secure facilities"for violent sexual predators. And the daunting task of addressing transportation and congestion problems—especially in the Puget Sound—had been made even more challenging by their failures to enact any kind of statewide or `regional' plans during the 2001 session. Against this backdrop, legislators made some decisions that, in large part, will be judged as successful or not depending on the will of the voters and whether the state's economy begins to rebound from the doldrums it is in now. For the City of Kent, the 2002 session can be judged as a fairly successful one in a number of ways. We will receive $900,000 for the Kent Station project through a Capital Budget"economic stimulus"package and new capital bonding authority that pays for it(ESB 6396; SSB 6818). We worked hard to ensure funding of key transportation projects that can move forward—if voters say "yes"to a statewide transportation package in the November general election. We also defeated a King County proposal for new countywide utility tax authority that we did not believe was either a) a good idea; or b) something the citizens of South King County wanted to see. At the same time,the City also had a few setbacks and disappointments—and faces some unknowns. The Legislature's severe budget crunch led it to repeal post-695 "backfill"payments for 2003 for most cities, including ours—so we will not receive a$366,000 payment(and wisely did not budget in anticipation of getting it). The Legislature passed a"regional" transportation plan that provides little input and no formal seat at the table for cities—with House leaders accepting such a plan in order to negotiate a state package. 2002 saw no legislative solution for municipal water utilities who had been told this session would be"our year"for addressing water rights and"growing communities"issues. And there are question marks: Will voters say yes to higher taxes and fees to pay for transportation improvements? What will the Central Puget Sound do on transportation"regionalism"—and when? This final report and overview of 2002 cannot answer those questions, of course. What it can do is attempt to provide the City's elected officials, decision-makers,Department Heads and senior staff a rundown of what occurred in 2002 in comparison to what was in our 2002 Legislative Agenda. Each category begins with a statement of what our legislative agenda contained, followed by a listing of major and minor legislative actions and bills in that category. At the end of the report are additional notes on issue areas in which we were involved even though they may not have been set forth in the main body of our 2002 Legislative Agenda. 1.. Economic Development: "The City of Kent will continue to push for additional funding and economic development financing tools..." -� Until the final week of the 2002 Session, it appeared we were going to be receiving a few minor economic development tools from Olympia and little else. But then a coalition emerged to make the "economic stimulus"package in the Capital Budget a distinct possibility. Working with other local governments, school districts and higher education institutions, promoters of Columbia River dredging funds, etc., we helped round up the 10+House Republican votes necessary for a 60-vote majority on the bonding bill, SSB 6818,that was necessary to finance the Capital Budget's existing and new projects. The payoff for Kent came in a line-item for Kent Station -$900,000. We had worked with Rep. Geoff Simpson in particular on this project and others on a list of economic stimulus projects that could be under construction before the end of the state biennium. In turn, Rep. Simpson did a good job impressing upon Rep. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, Chair of the House Capital Budget Committee, the merits of the Kent Station project. On other fronts,the Legislature enacted several modest tools regarding economic development: • SHB 2357,"Community Renewal'bill: This legislation rewrites some of the old `Urban Renewal' sections of state statute, giving cities and counties additional powers and authorities to obtain, reclaim, and redevelop blighted areas. The City should take a close review of this legislation and determine whether it may b� e helpful with respect to either downtown Kent or the Midway Landfill area. • SHB 2437,"mini-TIF": We dubbed this bill miniature Tax-Increment-Financing. It -� explicitly allows cities to establish their own TIF areas and within those TIF boundaries, bond against their own local sales tax collection. We, of course, have sought a Tax- Increment-Financing that would allow us to capture the future increment of the state's 6.5-cent portion of the sales tax, so this Tacoma-promoted bill on the .85-cent city share does not amount to much of an economic development tool. But, it does provide a foothold in state statute and allows us to come back in future years and request a more expansive TIF. As a side note, Rep. Aaron Reardon did introduce the more expansive TIF legislation via HB 2925,but that bill never received a hearing due to its fiscal-note impact on the state budget. We did, however, work with Rep. Reardon to promote the "TIF"concept—and gained some stature and visibility in Olympia on this issue. • SHB 2466, Revision to 10-year property tax exemption for multi- family housing: This bill has a helpful provision for those cities, like ours, using the 10-year exemption. It notes that "At the conclusion of the ten-year exemption period, the new or rehabilitated housing cost shall be considered as new construction. " Given the new voter-approved limitations on property tax growth, this measure should be helpful to us in downtown Kent. One additional note on economic development involves a pre-2002 session initiative the City worked on—and that we successfully included in the Governor's Competitiveness Council report. It was the concept of expanding the Master Business License program. This program allows businesses to get a state business license at the same time it is receiving a local license, and vice- versa. Kent is engaged in discussions with the State Department of Licensing and plans to become part of this program. Finance/Local Revenues/Unfunded Mandates Prevention: "The City will actively work with other local governments to urge the Legislature to refrain from imposing new mandates unless the corresponding funding is provided to implement them. Further, Kent will work to ensure that any changes in tax policy or budget policy enacted by the Legislature do not come at the expense of local revenues." One of the elements in this category that we identified in our 2002 Legislative Agenda involved utilizing surpluses in the LEOFF 1 Pension Fund. However,just before our 2002 Agenda had gone to press, we noted the state's economic downturn, major losses in the stock market, and the September 11 events may have the effect of eating up most of what had once been a$1.2 billion surplus. This indeed happened, so the LEOFF 1 issue was never on the table in 2002. In terms of refraining from imposing new unfunded mandates, the Legislature is generally to be commended on this front. Lawmakers tended to be mindful of the"don't make it worse for local governments" issue—though in the personnel and fire safety areas, a couple of bills that were enacted could have fiscal implications down the line. The Legislature did not enact any legislation to reduce gambling tax authority, though that is a moot issue for Kent. Additionally, the House Finance Committee rejected HB 2713, which sought to prescribe new requirements for local hotel/motel taxes and provide advisory committees—rather than local elected officials— with ultimate spending power over those taxes. Additionally, it's worth noting that the Legislature took a rather dim view of legislation to provide new local taxing options. HB 2700/SB 6649,legislation on "local-option"transportation taxing authorities for cities and counties, did not pass. Nor did HB 2659/SB 6593,new countywide utility tax authority sought primarily by King County. King County also was a driving force behind HB 2950, a bill with new state liquor and beer taxes, new countywide utility tax authority, and new sales-and utility-tax options for counties and cities outside of King County. That bill was not successful, and nor was HB 3029, a bill introduced late in the session to expand Keno games and provide new criminal justice revenues for cities and counties. Finally, a note that the House Finance Committee ultimately `killed"2SSB 5104,providing new conservation futures taxing authority for counties. And, the Legislature also elected not to enact any of a series of new local-taxing authority bills sought by a parks M&O task force that it had formed the year before—even with all of these requiring voter approval. On the issue of avoiding costly tax exemptions, we were of course helped by the fact that the state had its own revenue problems and was not in much of a mood to consider the kinds of tax exemption and tax relief bills it had welcomed in years past. HB 1575,an effort to exclude physical fitness services from state and local sales tax, did not pass. Another bill, SHB 2031 on taxation of pay phone services, was amended so that its fiscal impact was negligible. On a positive note,the Legislature also passed SHB 6835,meant to provide$29.5 million in new state revenues primarily by closing use tax loopholes on deliveries of outside goods into Washington State. As I understand it, Dena is requesting a review of this legislation to determine whether it has any positive fiscal implications for Kent on local sales tax. Finally, some discussion is in order of various efforts the City undertook, or in which we participated regarding cost-and mandates-relief: • E2SSB 2847,Stormwater: This bill was promoted by our city and the City of Everett and we lobbied it extensively, getting it through the House and through Senate ..1 Committee before it died in the Senate Ways/Means Committee 1 1/z weeks before session ended. 2847 injected cost-relief,flexibility, and watershed-based approaches into stormwater management—so that a Department of Ecology Stormwater Manual which is inflexible in terms of road redevelopment projects, and potentially very costly—was not seen as the end-all, be-all. Even though we did not pass 2847,DOE clearly received the message from cities,WSDOT, Association of Washington Business, Contractors, and legislators that it should deal with stormwater requirements more openly and flexibly. • E2SHB 2866,Stormwater: The Legislature did pass this bill, which essentially notes that the State Department of Fish and Wildlife should not be in the business of imposing new Stormwater requirements through its Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) authority. This could provide some measure of cost relief on future road projects with which the City is involved. • SSB 5841, GMA/Critical Area Plans Timelines & Frequency: We worked hard with the AWC and Association of Counties on enactment of this bill, which contained many of the same features as an original HB 2676 we had a part in crafting. This legislation provides local governments in Puget Sound with an additional 21/a years to do required updates of GMA Comprehensive Plans and Critical Area Ordinances—instead of being due this September, they are due in December 2004. Additionally, instead of having to do updates once every five years,the updates are due once every seven years (HB 2676 had an every-10-years provision we pushed hard for). This is a cost-savings of several hundred thousand dollars for Kent, according to earlier cost estimates from Planning. • HB 2782,Pension Contribution Rates: We did not lobby this bill per se,but the Legislature is to be commended for enacting it. Given the fiscal difficulties being faced by local governments, HB 2782 temporarily lowers PERS and LEOFF contribution rates beginning in April 2002 and through June 30, 2003. Dena Laurent has learned this measure is likely to provide a cost-savings to Kent of just over$500,000. • SHB 2846,"Fund it or forget it" bill: The Legislature also passed this measure, which said that if the Legislature was not going to fund required"buildable lands"inventories it required the state's largest counties and cities to do,then it should repeal the requirement. There is some belief that development interests and Realtors will urge the Governor to veto this bill. This bill is not a big money-saver for Kent—but it does state an important theme in statute and serves as an important precedent in the law. reen River Community College—Placeholder for Capital Fundin We never acted upon this item during the 2002 session,based on pre-session meetings with Green River CC at which they expressed a preference to seek federal funding for any international facility they might construct at Kent Station. Land Use—Timeline Extensions for legal requirements to update comprehensive plans and critical area ordinances: Kent will work closely with the Association of Washington Cities.. and other organizations in urging this change with the 2002 Legislature. As noted above, the Legislature enacted SSB 5841 in this issue area. Kent was a very heavily involved individual city in the lobbying effort. Parks and Recreation—Capital Funding for Clark Lake Because the Clark Lake project does not involve awarding of a construction contract during the 2001-03 biennium and is not jobs-intensive, it was not eligible for the Legislature's"Economic Stimulus"package. However, at the request of Rep. Simpson, the City will be looking at how it can use state monies toward Kent Station to free up additional city general fund dollars that can be put toward the Clark Lake project. Public Safety—Regional Law Enforcement Services Study: Kent will work to ensure that in any legislative response...no ill-conceived `one size fits all'solution is imposed. The City placed this item on the 2002 Agenda in case any jurisdictions sought to further regionalize law-enforcement services through a 2002 legislative bill or initiative. None was introduced or pushed during the 2002 session. Public Works—Funding for Public Works Trust Fund: Kent will join many others in asking the Legislature to approve a Public Works Trust Fund(PWTF) loan program that includes an additional$10 million low-interest loan to assist the City with its participation in the "Pipeline S" regional water supply project.." The Legislature did indeed approve the PWTF loan list via HB 2537. I testified on the City's behalf in support of the PWTF legislation in both the House and Senate. Transit—Placeholder—Possible 2002 Recommendations from Urban Transit Services Study The aforementioned study will resume again in April 2002. No interim recommendations came before the 2002 Legislature, so we did not have an active 2002 session item to address. Transportation Funding—Overall Needs: In particular, the City will work to advance new funding for critical state highway projects,for freight mobility,for the Transportation Improvement Board(TIB) and, certainly,for local road needs. On the closing day of the 2002 session, the Legislature passed both ESHB 2969 and a striking amendment to SSB 6347—the first being legislation containing new transportation revenue sources and the second being the actual investment package. Voters will decide in November on a$7.7 billion revenue package funded primarily through a two-step, 9-cent increase in the gas tax; a 1% sales tax surcharge on automobile purchases; a two-step, 30% increase in gross weight fees for trucks; and bonding. Business interests and the Governor made a furious last-ditch attempt—unsuccessful, as it turns out—to have the Legislature enact the package rather than send it to voters. We played a key role in ensuring that the transportation package contained funding for local needs and new funding for freight mobility needs. We consistently lobbied our delegation for new Transportation Improvement Board(TIB) funding and new direct-distribution money for cities—and drafted advocacy letters on these issues that our legislators sent to their Committee Chairs. We also were among those lobbying for new Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB)funding that had been included in the House's revenue package but not the Senate's. In the end, the Legislature appropriated$110 million over 10 years for the TIB to administer city and county corridor congestion relief grants. The Legislature also provided cities and counties with the equivalent of /a-cent in distributions of any new gas tax money approved by voters— what amounts to about$2.50/capita. These are not huge appropriations, but they would not have occurred without lobbying and prodding by local governments such as ours. Transportation—Funding for Transportation Projects: Major projects the City will advance for inclusion on any list include SR-509; 1671405 Interchange; Local Freight Corridors; Pacific Highway Improvements; 1-51272"d Street; SR 167 Corridor; I-5 HOV Extension. The final package of transportation investments agreed to by the Legislature through the striker to SSB 6347 is a very positive one for Kent—voters willing. It contains funding for all of the above-named projects except for Pacific Highway, where Kent's segments do appear to be funded. It contains$500 million for SR-509, not the$578 million in state funding for which we had hoped but higher than the $400 million(House) and$464 million(Senate) funding levels that might have resulted had not we intervened so consistently with our legislators. The 167/405 interchange is a prime piece of the $1.773 billion appropriation for the 405 Corridor. In terms of local freight, the $116 million for the Freight Mobility Board includes an$8.5 million state commitment to our 228 h Corridor($700,000 of that in the short-term). We also obtained$5 million for 1-5/272°a after it had been left off initial House and Senate lists. And, there is $8 million for a 167 Corridor Action Plan and policy legislation, SSB 6665,directing WSDOT to move forward with the plan. Finally, the package contains a little over$69 million as the state's share toward extending 1-5 HOV lanes to/from Pierce County. Again, we need to remember an important caveat: All of this rests on the voters' willingness to say yes in November. Transportation—Regional Authority,Financing, Governance: 2002 Legislative Agenda called for seat at the table for cities, equity,flexibility in project selection This will go down as a 2002 session disappointment—particularly after we worked so hard on a House bill on "regionalism"that did an excellent job in meeting objectives sought by cities and counties. In its closing days of the 2002 session, the Legislature enacted 2SSB 6140,a regional bill crafted primarily by east King County legislators in the Senate—and designed to provide maximum exposure and funding to "highways of statewide significance" such as 405. The House had enacted ESHB 2359,which provided cities a seat at the table in project selection, provided flexibility in what types of projects a region could select,provided direct local distributions to cities and counties for M&O/local arterial needs; and had an equity provision. We went to great length to work on 2359 and ensure it included provisions advantageous to local government—and then many of us urged the House to be strong negotiators against a Senate bill that was too 405- based in its layout and its intent. As noted in the introduction, the Legislature ultimately chose to enact a regional bill with most of the language from the Senate `regional' plan. It provides for County Council members to select a batch of regional projects. City input is to be"considered"only. No equity provisions and very little project-selection flexibility is within the bill. The bill had contained a"null and void" provision stating that a state transportation package had to be enacted before a regional plan could be considered. Due to the voter-approval requirement in the state package—and the possibility voters could say no—the Governor vetoed the null-and-void clause when he signed 6140 into law on Thursday, March 21. Water Rights—Growing Communities Legislation: Kent will actively work on expected 2002 legislation involving water rights, instream flows, water conservation, and water infrastructure. The Legislature had high hopes on this issue in the months preceding the Legislature and in the initial weeks of the 2002 Session. A"Joint Executive-Legislative Organization" of eight legislators and three members of the Locke Administration had formed to develop a water bill for 2002. Municipal water utilities, which received few benefits from a 2001 water bill, were told "this is your year." The Legislature wanted to come up with a strategy for addressing growing communities, instream flows, and the needs of agriculture. In the end, the Legislature accomplished almost nothing on water. Severely hamstrung by a requirement that the "JELO"group come to consensus on a bill, and with differing interest groups having vastly different perspectives on the water issue, legislators set an impossible goal of trying to satisfy everyone to some extent. In the end, they satisfied virtually no one. In the final week of session,the Legislature adopted HB 2993,which contains industrial water reuse provisions, sets out goals and strategies for water use, sets up an account for use of federal farm-bill money, and gives direction to DOE on water-law compliance matters. The bill's own sponsor,Rep. Kelli Linville,D-Bellingham, urged her colleagues and the Governor NOT to make any big deal of this bill, as she realized it contained very little of substance. That being said,there were some tangential benefits that we can point toward. For one thing, utilities strengthened their relationship with Rep. Linville and the Governor's water negotiator, Jim Waldo. For another, in her various drafts on the water bill, Rep. Linville was very attentive to two of our issues on water— 1)recognizing and respecting Habitat Conservation Plan(HCP) set flows; and 2)ensuring any water conservation provisions are performance based and give credit for good work already done. Lastly, there was nothing adverse to the City in the 2002 .-. water bill—honoring the `do no harm' theme. However, it is obvious we will need to renew efforts as we head toward 2003. "SUPPORT LIST"AND "TRACK/MONITOR"ITEMS FROM 2002 AGENDA The City also had a number of issues identified as support items and track/monitor items in its 2002 Agenda. Here are a number of those, with the 2002 Legislature item of note: • Support"Appropriate waivers and exemptions under state welfare program reauthorization (TANF)". The Legislature passed and delivered to the Governor ESSB 1144,providing several `good cause"reasons for certain individuals to be exempted from welfare program time limits. Kent supported the legislation and signed in in support of it. • Support"a legislative initiative to create additional funding for low-income and affordable housing through enactment of an increased recording fee..": The Legislature enacted SHB 2060,which establishes a$10 document recording fee for housing transactions to be collected by county auditors. 5% of the funding may be retained by counties to cover administrative costs. Of the remainder,40% is remitted back to the state for the housing trust fund, and 60% is to be used by counties and their cities for very low-income housing—through inter-local agreements. Kent should stay attuned to funds being collected and work to ensure they are being spent equitably throughout King County. • Strongly support"agency requests by the Transportation Improvement Board(TIB)": As noted, the Transportation Package, voters willing, includes $110 million in new funding for the TIB to administer City and County Corridor Congestion Relief programs over the next 10 years. • Support"legislative proposals that allow a voter-approved increase of 1/10 of 1 cent in sales tax for 9-1-1 operations...for notjust county-run 9-1-1 operations but city-run 9- 1-1 operations as well": The Legislature enacted 2SHB 1477,authorizing the 1/10 of one cent sales tax for 9-1-1. It included an amendment, drafted at our request,ensuring that a city or cities over 50,000 that have 9-1-1 centers can share in the distributions of any additional 9-1-1 funds through an inter-local agreement. Also of note,the Legislature enacted HB 2595,putting the enhanced 9-1-1 tax for wireless phones at the same 70-cent level that already had existed for wireline phones. Kent supported both 1477 and 2595. • Support"legislation that requires local agencies to provide public-agency retirees access to local health care plans,provide the plans can be structured...to require the retiree to pay additional costs that accrue as a result": The Legislature passed ESSB 5777, which met the cost-coverage criteria we outlined and is structured in a manner that is designed to prevent new unfunded mandates. Kent supported 5777 based on those provisions and assurances. • Strongly support"efforts by Fire Chiefs to amend state statute regarding fire apparatus weight restrictions": The Legislature enacted SHB 2673,enabling fire departments to utilize overweight fire apparatus under certain conditions. Kent supported the legislation. • Strongly oppose"efforts to further weaken drug seizure laws': The Legislature refrained from passing HB 2377,SB 6514,SB 6517—all of which contained provisions to weaken drug seizure laws and shift proceeds from drug seizures to state drug treatment programs. Kent opposed all of those measures. • Work to ensure that"recommendations from a Legislatively-established Task Force on local parks M&O funding do not recommend solutions that increase M&O funding at the expense of needed capital funding": The Senate did have SB 6334 introduced, allowing local Real Estate Excise Taxes (REET)to be put toward M&O as a local option. The bill did not get a hearing or advance beyond Committee. • Closely Track"Legislation authorizing local governments to utilize photo-radar and photo-red technology": HB 1118 did progress a ways through the legislative process, but did not pass. • Closely Track"requirements for local police to address `racial profiling': The Legislature did enact ESB 5852 requires local police to utilize training, and have policies in place,to prevent racial profiling. Kent is ahead of the game in having such training and policies in place. • Closely Track "a 2002 effort to make technical corrections to a 2001 law on fair market value for street vacations. Kent will support such fixes": The Legislature enacted, and the Governor already has signed, SB 6798. This technical fix bill ensures that property previously acquired by a municipality is eligible for full fair market value in any vacation proceeding. OTHER KEY LEGISLATIVE ISSUES IN WHICH WE WERE INVOLVED—OR WHICH IMPACT THE CITY OF KENT As with any session, a number of issues and measures will arise that impact the City and that, as a result,require our attention and involvement. Or, there may be bills or initiatives passed that the City needs to be aware of,review and analyze, etc. Here is a rundown of many of these. Backfill: The final 2002 Supplemental Operating Budget agreed to by the Legislature—SSB 6387—did not contain 2003 backfill payments for most cities. This was a$366,000 `hit' on the City of Kent,but Kent wisely did not anticipate the July 2002 payment in any of its budgeting. �-- The Legislature did maintain the backfill for public health and provide backfill assistance to the most severely-impacted cities and counties in the state. These are good signs and lend hope that when the state's economic recovery occurs, there will at least be a backfill program that could be expanded. Human/Social Services: Also noteworthy regarding SSB 6387 was its very light touch on human and social services cuts. For Kent, which is heavily impacted by what happens with state spending in such areas, this was a very fortunate development. Funding for the medically indigent, adult dental and adult vision assistance, continuum of care programs, and the like were only cut minimally or not at all. Obviously, the water issue, and seeing what positive legislation can be developed for 2003, that Public Safety/Police/Fire/Courts The Legislature, partly due to"9-11,"had a busy session in the public safety arena. For example, while the Legislature examined and rejected a number of terrorism bills, the Legislature did enact SSB 6439. This legislation was amended and significantly narrowed,but does permit state and local agencies to withhold public release of certain records that could be security-sensitive or could be used to prevent, mitigate, or respond to terrorist attacks. I would recommend the Legal Department carefully review this public law (it is on the Governor's Desk for signature) and determine how best to craft future ordinance plans, drawings, etc., that could become a matter of future public record. Elsewhere in the areas of public safety, fire, and courts, the Legislature: • Enacted ESSB 6594 on sex predator siting. We will want to have further review and discussion of this law, which calls on local governments to either initiate by Sept. 1 essential public facility siting process and development regulations for"Secure Community Transition Facilities (SCTFs)"—or risk state pre-emption. As alluded to in my introduction, the Legislature moved this bill under the cloud of a court order. We need to do a thorough review and analysis of the pros and cons of moving forward vs. pre-emption—and further see what King County intends to do. • Enacted SSB 6490 on vehicle theft: This bill increases penalties for more serious cases of vehicle theft and joy-riding. Kent strongly supported this bill and Police and legal should become familiar with it. • Enacted new law on seat-belt enforcement: HB 1460 makes a driver's failure to wear a seat belt a"primary"offense, rather than simply a"secondary"offense. In other words, whereas police had to have cited someone for another infraction before considering any secondary seat-belt infraction, the failure to wear a seat belt can now be the sole reason for a stop and a citation. This bill narrowly passed both the House and Senate, on primarily partisan lines (Ds supported, most Rs opposed). Kent strongly supported this measure and Police and legal should become familiar with its provisions. • Protecting personal privacy information on police officers and their families: Unfortunately, in the closing days of session, SSB 6660 did not pass the Legislature. It would have afforded some new privacy protections in the law for police officers and their families. • Protection of jail records, SHB 2421: We worked with Senator Jeri Costa on a successful amendment to HB 2421 on .� jail records. The amendment protects from public disclosure those jail records "containing specific and unique vulnerability assessments or specific and unique emergency and escape response plans at a city, county, or state adult or juvenile correctional facility, the public disclosure of which would have a substantial likelihood of threatening the security of a city, county, or state adult or juvenile correctional facility or any individual 's safety. " With this amendment, we can protect the confidentiality of any city jail-expansion plans that have been submitted to us via the permitting process. • Courts - Traffic fines bill - SB 6343 defeated: While many Municipal Courts allow for time-payment plans to help the low-income and destitute pay their traffic fines, SB 6343 prescribed specific provisions to that effect that would have been overly onerous and costly to our Court and others . Fortunately, this bill did not pass . Pension Issues, Personnel Issues,LEOFF Issues, Sick Leave, Workers Comp, Etc. The Legislature took action on a number of bills this year that will affect us: • E2SHB 2663,"Presumptive Disease" bill for firefighters: Kent took no formal position on this bill. It adds things such as smoke exposure and inhalation, certain cancers and skin diseases, etc., to the list of what are presumed to be "occupationally- related"diseases for which a firefighter is entitled to workers compensation benefits. The AWC reported that amendments to the bill lowered-but did not eliminate-its fiscal impact on cities. • SSB 6426,Sick Leave: This bill expands the allowable uses of sick leave, to go beyond employees and to now cover a sick parent or parent-in-law, child, or grandparent. Amendments added to the bill-clarifying that the sick leave must be specified as allowable under collective bargaining or policy guidelines-should somewhat lessen its potential fiscal impact. With sick leave for police and fire personnel in particular, cities often can incur time-and-a-half replacement costs. • ESSB 5264, prohibitions against misclassifying employees: This bill, enacted by the Legislature, had in its earlier versions contained language prohibiting employers from misclassifying any employee in a deliberate attempt to exclude them from benefits to which they are entitled. Some cities expressed concern with the breadth of the language, which could have resulted in us being forced to provide full benefits to even temporary and seasonal workers. Amended language ensures that we can utilize collective bargaining agreements and policies to ensure who is and is not eligible, and to exclude temporary and seasonal workers from the eligibility list. • Pension Governance bills: A series of bills-HB 2917,HB 2930,HB 2931,and,late in session,HB 3010-sought to eliminate the state's Joint Committee on Pension Policy (JCPP) made up of legislators and create new pension governance bodies. In many of the bills-though not in 3010-these bodies would have been heavily tilted toward employee representatives. None of these bills passed the Legislature. • SSB 5969-Limiting employer liability for providing information on current or former employees: As was the case in prior sessions, this bill advanced a ways through the legislative process but did not pass. We have supported these bills. Other issues—Public Works/Public Works Contracting, Rights-of-way, Building Codes, SHB L 2466--A few other bills—in the headlined subject areas—that impact us or in which we were involved: • SSB 6528,"Lowest Responsible Bidder"bill: Most city and county governments, as well as contractors, expressed significant concerns with this bill. In the name of trying to correct a wrong that had occurred with a Highline School District contact, it sought to prescribe new provisions on what local agencies had to do in terms of identifying the "lowest responsible bidder"for public works projects. Local government testifiers talked to legislators about the bill being duplicative, contradictory, and in some ways costly for local governments, contractors,ports, and others. SSB 6528 did not pass but it likely will re-emerge in 2003. It may well be another `interim' project for us. • SSB 6597,"Design-build" and "GC-CM"forms of public works contracting: While this bill applies primarily to school districts, a separate provision of it is significant for us. Specifically, the provision lowers the threshold—from$12 million to$10 million—on the size of project that is allowed to utilize either design-build or GC-CM. This is a positive change in the law for us, on the heels of 2001 law that made us eligible to use these alternative forms of public works contracting. • HB 2527,"Day Labor"Limits: This bill provides us increased authority to do certain small public works projects—such as street lighting and street signalization -- in-house. Whereas prior statute required anything above$35,000 to go out for bid, 2527 ups the limit to$50,000, and to$65,000 in 2010. • Utility relocation costs—Legislature does not enact changes: Through bills such as SB 5452 and HB 2660—and through a late amendment to the regional transportation bill —companies such as Qwest attempted in 2002 to redefine the law in terms of public agency responsibility for utility relocation costs. In 5452 and 2660,the bills specifically ,.. aimed at Sound Transit and its responsibilities for utility relocation costs of its light-rail project. We opposed these bills because they could have set a very troubling precedent of putting the cost onus on the public agency. Neither of these bills passed, and the amendment to the regional bill failed on a voice vote. • HB 1555 Dies on final day: Lastly, Robert Hutchinson and other building officials had hoped the state's badly outdated building codes could be updated, but HB 1555,a bill to do so,failed to receive final House concurrence after surviving a number of fits and starts. OVERVIEW FOR CITY OF KENT INITIATIVES/REFERENDA FILED WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE Doug Levy,4/16/02 This memorandum provides the Mayor, City Council and decision-makers at the City of Kent with an overview of initiatives and referenda filed to date with the Secretary of State's Office in Olympia. Kent officials wishing to go online to track the progress of these measures can do so via www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/initiatives Please note that there are four types of initiatives and referenda: • An initiative to the people must be filed at 10 months prior to the General Election, must have valid signatures equaling at least 8% of the votes cast in the previous gubernatorial election, and must have signatures turned into the Secretary of State's Office not less than four months prior to the next General Election. For 2002, Initiatives to the People will need 197,734 valid signatures from registered voters, turned in by July 5, 2002. • An initiative to the Legislature must be filed at least 10 months prior to the next general session of the Legislature, and has the same 8% valid signatures requirement as an initiative to the people. Signatures must be turned into the Secretary of State not less than 10 days prior to the start of the next regular session. If an Initiative to the Legislature meets the signature requirements and deadlines, the Legislature has the option to a) enact it; b) reject it and have it go to the next general-election ballot; or c) provide voters with an amended version of the initiative to consider side-by-side with the filed initiative. • Referendum Measures can be filed on bills passed by the Legislature. These must obtain valid registered-voter signatures equaling at least 4% of the votes cast in the previous gubernatorial election—for 2002 purposes this is 98,867. Petition signatures must be turned into the Secretary of State's office within 90 days after the regular session adjournment date to qualify for that year's general election. • Referendum Bills are those passed by the Legislature with an election date specified in the bill and referring it to voters. This year's state transportation package— set for a November 5 general-election vote -- is an example. Capsule Summary of Current Initiatives to the People • I-776—Transportation/Transit Taxes: This is the Initiative filed by Tim Eyman, Monte Benham, et al, that requires motor vehicle license tab fees to be $30 for cars, SUVs, motorcycles, motor homes, and light trucks. It also would repeal laws allowing for imposition of Sound Transit taxes and the $15 local-option vehicle license fee imposed in King County and three other counties. • I-777 —Employer/Employee Labor Agreements: This measure would prohibit any employer from requiring employees to belong to or not belong to a labor organization, or requiring employees to pay union dues, or requiring employees to �,.. pay representation costs in lieu of dues. 0 I-779 —Bonus compensation to teachers: Based on questionnaires mailed to parents or guardians of students each school year, this measure would provide �— bonus compensation to public school teachers. Teachers would be rated on a scale set forth in the initiative measure. For teachers that qualify, the state treasurer would be directed to transfer funds to the school districts for payment of the bonus compensation. • I-780—Testing requirements for candidates for public office: Candidates for most public offices would have to complete the 10`h-grade Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) before being allowed to file. • I-781 —Penalties for officials who seek to weaken initiative measures: This measure would set penalties for any member of the legislature, county commissioner, governor, mayor or other officer who introduces a bill to overturn an initiative approved by voters —or who seeks to weaken the effectiveness of such an initiative. The Attorney General's Office has listed an addendum to I-781 reserving the option of objecting to its constitutionality. • I-782—Allocating Tax Share According to Wealth: Measure states that a tiny percentage of individuals and corporations possess 95% of the money in the state and this group would pay 95% of all the taxes levied by the legislature or by county and city governments. The Attorney General's Office has listed an addendum to I-782 reserving the option of objecting to its constitutionality. • I-783 —Limiting campaign contributions: Only individuals entitled to vote in an election could make campaign contributions. Additionally, corporate campaign contributions would be prohibited, as would use of non-voter funds for political advertising. • I-784—Drug Forfeitures: Would require conviction of all owners before property from a drug seizure could be forfeited. Earlier notice and preliminary hearing authority is granted as well, and seizing law enforcement agencies could not use forfeited property. Proceeds from the sale of forfeited drugs would go to the common school fund. • I-785 —Geographic Limitations on distribution of transportation funds: Revenues from voter-approved motor vehicle fuel taxes, vehicle licensing fees and voter- approved local transportation funds could only be spent on roads, bridges and mass transit in the county in which they were collected. Exceptions would require a vote of the people, vote of the county council, or 2/3 majority of the State Legislature. A Seattle resident named Brandon Scott Durham filed this initiative. • I-786—Rights/privileges afforded to Tribes: Any right, activity of privilege afforded to tribes of Washington State would be shared equally and in common with the citizens of Washington State. • I-787 —Sales tax on motor vehicle and special fuels: The sales tax would be applied to retail sales of gasoline and special fuels. • Filed but no initiative number assigned(to be assigned a number, an initiative must have been reviewed by the State Code Reviser and the sponsor must have approved final language for the measure): Two initiatives related to taxes filed by a David A. Whitman of Seattle, and one related to school funding filed by a Thomas G. Erikson of Vancouver. Capsule Summary of Current Initiatives to the Legislature �- • I-262-Health Care Financing: Would create a health care finance commission, appointed by the Governor, which would propose a unified health services financing system for all Washington residents. Within 30 months of formation, the commission would submit its proposal to the 2005 Legislature. Capsule Summary of Current Referendum Measures • R-50 and R-53 -Unemployment Insurance: The Building Industry Association of Washington (BIAW),joined by the National Federation of Independent Businesses (NFIB), has filed this challenge to EHB 2901 on unemployment insurance reform. The BIAW is critical of the legislation's provisions, particularly as they relate to The Boeing Co. R-50 and R-53 are differing methods of how to restructure the UI reform. • R-52-on Civil Service Reform: This Referendum measure, also spearheaded by BIAW, challenges SHB 1268 on personnel reform and collective-bargaining authority for state employees. R-52 sets forth its own version of how collective bargaining could be conducted. Capsule Summary of Current Referendum Bills • R-51, Transportation: R-51 is the measure through which voters will decide on ESHB 2969, the state transportation financing package adopted by the Legislature -containing a 2-step 9-cent increase in gas tax; a 1% sales tax surcharge on new and used autos; and a 2-step 30% increase in gross weight fees on trucks. From crime to credit cards, initiatives run gamut So far, only Eyman's 1-776 has the paid signature gatherers needed to qualify a measure for the ballot. By David Ammons Associated Press OLYMPIA -- Initiative backers are hawking several dozen ballot measures, dealing with everything from crime and credit card interest to road taxes and a requirement that all political candidates take the loth grade achievement test. One citizen would even like to change the state's name from Washington to "Cascadia." Thus far, all but one of the initiative efforts are mom-and-pop operations. The exception: Tim Eyman's Permanent Offense committee has begun paying solicitors to hit the streets with clipboards. Sponsors find it very difficult to qualify unless they have well-heeled backers and can use paid signature-gathering. Of the 66 initiatives filed in 2000 and 2001, for instance,just nine qualified for a place on the ballot and most used paid solicitors. Seven of those measures passed. The initiative process, which allows average citizens and groups to try their hand at writing state laws, has been criticized in recent years for hemming in the Legislature by cutting revenue while mandating billions in new spending. Eyman's confession in February that he had secretly converted some campaign contributions into a salary fund for himself spurred the Legislature to consider restrictions. The only change adopted this year was a requirement for the state budget office to do a fiscal analysis that would be included the Voters' Pamphlet write-up on each initiative. One new initiative, however, warns legislators to keep their hands off the process. Initiative 781 says any lawmaker who attempts to overturn or weaken an initiative would be expelled from office, put in the state penitentiary for five years and barred from politics for life. However, that's probably more of a "message to Olympia" than a legal threat. The state Constitution, which cannot be amended by initiative, says lawmakers can amend or repeal an initiative within two years of its passage with two-thirds votes in both houses, and by a simple majority after that. This year, for instance, the Senate voted to repeal anti-trapping Initiative 713; the count was a few votes short in the House. This year's initiatives also include: Transportation taxes: Eyman's I-776 would roll back car tab fees to $30 a year for vehicles, motorcycles and motor homes. This would eliminate some of the taxes that pay `— for mass transit in central Puget Sound. I-785 would require that all transportation taxes and tolls be spent on transportation projects and mass transit in the county where they are collected. I-787 extends the sales tax to gasoline, with revenue earmarked for public transportation. Education: I-780 would require candidates for state and local office to take the loth grade Washington Assessment of Student Learning. Test scores would be made public, including a notation in the Voters' Pamphlet. I-779 would award merit pay to teachers, based on parents' ratings. I-789 would allow school principals to develop and manage a schoolhouse budget, subject to school board approval and state audit. Tax policy: I-782 says 95 percent of all state and local taxes should be paid by the individuals and corporations that possess 95 percent of the state's wealth. A couple making less than about$100,000 a year would pay no tax. The attorney general says this measure is flawed, because it has no enacting clause. 1-791 would impose state spending limits stronger than the ones voters approved in 1993 with Initiative 601. Tax increases would require a legislative supermajority or a vote of the people. Campaign finance: I-783 says the only legal campaign contributions would be ones from individuals who are able to vote for the candidate or ballot measure. This would rule out money from unions, business, political action committees and parties, as well as individuals from outside the state or district. Crime: I-784 would allow property forfeiture only after a person is convicted of a drug crime. I-792 would stiffen the penalties for vehicular assault while intoxicated or high on drugs. Credit cards: 1-788 would impose a 12 percent annual interest limit on credit card balances. More: 1-786 says all tribal rights would be "shared equally and in common with the citizens of Washington state." I-777 bars employers from either demanding or forbidding workers to belong to a union or to pay union representation costs. 1-790 establishes a new board to oversee the Law Enforcement and Fire Fighters' Plan 2 pension. Numbers haven't been assigned yet, but other initiatives have been filed, including ones to abolish the death penalty, tie legislative salaries to homecare workers' pay and to rename the state Cascadia. Copyright©2002 Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published,broadcast, rewritten,or redistributed. Draft Interim Plan Ideas For Discussion with Dena Laurent Doug Levy—411102 1. Transportation—State One of the most important things on the City's plate, legislative, must in my mind be the statewide transportation package coming up for a November vote. I strongly recommend the City take a leadership role in the community—through a City Council action, with the Chamber, with service clubs and citizen groups, and perhaps through mailing of factual information—to educate the public on the merits of this package. There is an enormous amount at stake for the City of Kent—509, the 405/167 interchange, 228th and the freight program, extending of I-5 HOV lanes, TIB $$, local distribution $$, transit $$, and the like. I recommend scheduling of an internal meeting, soon, so that the City can begin to evaluate this issue and determine next steps. 2. Transportation—Regional The Legislature's authorizing of 2ESSB 6140 on "regional" transportation authorities, financing, and governance, puts an issue in front of the City that it should not ignore. We are aware of King, Snohomish, and Pierce counties and the City of Seattle meeting on an informal basis to begin evaluating the feasibility of this measure. We also are aware of certain parties —the Governor included -- pushing for the regional measure to be put �-- before voters in November. The City of Kent has a real interest, I believe, in 1) Pushing this vote out beyond November; and 2) working to evaluate this legislation, perhaps most logically with other cities, or other bodies. The King County SCA and the PSRC are two that jump to mind most naturally. Again, if we can schedule an internal meetingto o start discussing this, I think we are better off. Such a topic could be part of one meeting, combined with the statewide issue. 3. Violent Sex Predator Siting—ESSB 6594 The City is apparently meeting today, April 1, on this matter—which is excellent. The sex predator siting law passed by the Legislature requires jurisdictions by Sept. I to initiate amendments to their regulations on essential public facility siting, and initiate development regulations, or risk being pre-empted by DSHS in the siting process. It's critical Kent move quickly on this issue to determine pros/cons of initiating siting efforts. I would also highly recommend the City consult other jurisdictions in King County—that may be an important factor in your decision-making. I am also happy to be involved in working on this effort however the City sees fit. 4. Sales-tax-based Tax Increment Financing (TIF) As I have discussed with you, I believe there are a number of timing and strategy issues associated with how aggressively we work this issue. One is to see what kind of interim attention Rep. Velma Veloria, Chair of House Economic Development, may be willing to devote. Another is to check with Stan Finkelstein of AWC to see what staff attention he would be willing to devote to this. A possible way to attack this might be to work with other jurisdictions on drafting of legislation that would authorize a couple of pilot projects in the State of Washington—in hopes we could be one of them. Another idea might be to work on legislation authorizing this concept beginning in, say, 2006, after the state's economy has had a chance to rebound. Suggest we do a couple of things to start with: 1) Sit down with Mike Martin on this issue; 2)Have Mike, our Langley development team, and whomever else review SHB 2357 (Community Renewal bill) and SHB 2437 (the local "mini-TIF"bill) passed into law—to see how usable or not these might be. Both have TIF provisions in them—2437 is city share of sales tax only. 5. Meetings with all Department Heads/Key Staff As we have done in the past, I would like to schedule meetings with the Department Heads and key senior staff in Legal, Planning, Public Works, Parks/Human Services, Finance, Fire, Police, Employee Services, Computer Services, and Muni Court (which we have not done before but, I would suggest be added). It would also be good if you and I can meet with Mike Martin to see what types of issues, or projects, or things Mike may have in mind. For most of these Departments, meetingin n September is perfectly appropriate. However, I would like to schedule a meeting much sooner, probably by mid-April, with Don Wickstrom, Tim LaPorte, and Gary Gill, in order to discuss a number of pending transportation issues, including: • TIB call for projects; • Status of I-5/272nd with Sound Transit Board • Freight Mobility projects both at FAST and FMSIB levels —check in • Next steps on stormwater after legislation progressed a ways yet failed • Fallout from state/regional transportation discussions • TEA-21 Reauthorization, "Demo" project ideas and top candidates 6. Drive-Around Trip with City Staff As I did with Brent McFall shortly after I began contracting with the City, I would like to do an updated drive tour of key projects and facilities in the City. For example, I would like to have a better sense of where the East Hill facilities are situated, see the 228tn Corridor once again, look at some of our Public Works/Environmental facilities again, see where Rock Creek is situated, see where our Pipeline 5 infrastructure is being placed, etc. I will work with you, Dena, on when this could take place and with whom I could go, if this is OK. 7. Federal Issues and Federal Funding Efforts Recognizing that we will be having you, Dena, as our point person with Dale Learn of Senator Murray's office, I see three major areas where I can be of assistance to the City: a) Regular check-ins with offices of Cong. Dunn and Cong. Smith to check in on our FY 2003 request. This would be Pierce Scranton and Shana Chandler, respectively; b) Set up meeting with Cong. Dunn and Cong. Smith (individually) in August, go over City of Kent TEA-21 Reauthorization "Demo"project ideas c) Ongoing tracking of federal issues, programs, funding matters, and drafting of letters, e-mail to advocate bills and funding matters. For example, I will be drafting a letter for the City shortly on problems with proposed funding cuts in federal highway funding, local law enforcement block grants, "COPS" program d) "Primacy" for CDBG funding—need to check our status and make sure all is proceeding in satisfactory fashion 8. LTC Study of Local Transit Services We need to return to the mode of bird-dogging this one and push Mark McLoughlin to re- initiate it. I will call Mark and will be informing him that, since Ashley Probart is leaviniz AWC staff and no replacement is imminent vet, we would like to take a lead role in involvement. 9. Master Business License Program Would recommend we keep abreast of how close Tom Vetsch, May, et al, are to having the kinks worked out in order for us to initiate this. When we are at the point of initiating the program, given the fact that we successfully worked to have the Master Business License Program expansion captured as a Competitiveness Council recommendation, we can get some PR mileage out of a joint announcement with State/Governor's Office. Recommend we might even look into having Governor attend some kind of kickoff for the program. 10. Water Rights/Water Resources Issues In light of the Legislature's failure to do anything meaningful in terms of water law and "growing communities" fixes for utilities, we will want to be involved in interim discussions on this issue. In particular for Kent, we also should make some determination on what we do with the groundwater points of withdrawal issue. I will be attending an April 10 meeting of the WA Water Policy Alliance and an April 15 meeting of the WA Water Utility Council and we can evaluate then where we are and where we may wish to go 11. Stormwater Management Issue Although we didn't get 2ESHB 2847 passed into law, we formed a close alliance with WSDOT and Jerry Alb of the DOT Environmental Affairs Office. As an interim project, I would like to schedule a meeting for me, our Public Works guys, and Jerry and his folks. For one thing, I would like to see what use, if any, we can make of the ongoing �- Transportation Permit Efficiency and Accountability Committee work that does involve how to more flexibly address environmental permitting issues on highway projects. 12. King County Relations I would suggest that, given the heartburn King County had over the failure of its utility tax proposal and its belief that King County suburban cities were the roadblock, we will need to monitor this issue very closely. I will be having coffee with Chuck Williams of KC on Wednesday morning and plan to feel him out on this issue a bit. 13, International Building Codes Bill—HB 1555 Over the interim, Building Officials within the Washington Association of Building Officials (WABO) will be evaluating what happened with 1555 and how to resurrect it for next session. A first meetingis's April 11 in Lacey=given our strong support of this (and Federal Way's), I am planning to go. 13. Other interim matters—and checks we need to make over the interim • AWC —I will keep in touch with what interim issues, studies, etc., AWC is tracking and working on; • Petition-method annexations—legal and le islative: I will plan on tracking. There is a legal motion being filed for reconsideration of the recent State Supreme Court decision. • SHB 2060: This bill provides new funding for low-income housing. About 60% of it will come through King County. We need to have someone on point to bird-dog this and ensure Kent/South County is being fairly treated in any distribution of funding/projects • SSB 6597: A reminder that this bill lowers the design-build/GC-CM threshold for us to $10 million. We ought to, again, see if any projects lend themselves.... • SHB 2527, "Day Labor" bill: This measure gives us ability to do a few more small public works projects in-house. I'll want to discuss with Public Works if there are any they can think of off the top that could go in- house rather than have to be contracted out. • SSB 6439: This bill allows the City to protect against public disclosure any records that are considered terrorism-related or vulnerable. Legal should be analyzing what could fit into such a category. • SHB 2421: This bill has new language in statute to protect confidentiality of jail construction/expansion public records. We should be familiar with its contents and utilize them to our advantage. • 2SHB 2663 ("Occupational Disease" Bill) and SSB 6426 (Expanded Sick Leave): I believe we should talk with Sue Viseth and May Miller regarding tracking of our costs in these areas to see what if any increased costs we may experience. ~" • HB 1460: Our Police and Legal need to be familiar with this "primary enforcement" seat belt bill and utilize it accordingly. Reminder: The first two weeks of August, I am planning to take a family vacation. Want to ensure this is OK and on your radar screen.