HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council Workshop - Agenda - 03/07/2000 CITY OF �L1UY��
r�
Jim White, Mayor
rNVICTA
COUNCIL WORKSHOP
AGENDA
The Council Workshop will meet in Chambers East in Kent City Hall at 5:00 PM on Tuesday,
March 7, 2000.
Council Members: President Leona Orr, Sandy Amodt, Tom Brotherton, Tim Clark,
Connie Epperly, Judy Woods, Rico Yingling
Sneaker Time
`-- 1. Image Project Jacki Skaught, Dena Laurent 20 minutes
2. Downtown Projects Update Linda Phillips, Lori Flemm, 30 minutes
Chris Miller
3. Intergovernmental Update Dena Laurent 10 minutes
The Council Workshop meets each month on the first Tuesday at 5:OOPM and the third Tuesday at 5:30 PM
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.
220 4th AVE.SO., /KENT,WASHINGTON 98032-5895/TELEPHONE (253)856-5200
Image Project
March 1, 1999
To: Kent City Council Members
From: Dena Laurent, Government Affairs Manager
Jacki Skaught, Economic Development Manager
We are pleased to submit to you the City of Kent Branding report. A committee of city
staff and community people developed this report. It is the culmination of a series of
meetings, interviews and testing of concepts. You will find in this report an overview of
the process used, the brand development and recommendations.
Members of the committee and us will be at your workshop Tuesday March 7ch to present
this report answer your questions and get your feedback.
Ads o PR
CITY OF KENT
BRANDING
Final Report, December 29, 1999
535 E. OOCK ST., SUITE 205
TACOMA, WA 98402-4810
253 521.9128
EAX 253.fi21.0548
I. BACKGROUND
Kent has experienced tremendous growth, both economically and
geographically, over the past several years making it the second largest city
in South King County. With its growth, Kent has undergone a transformation
from a small community with strong rural ties to one of industrial parks, new
civic facilities and plans for a commuter rail station with a direct link to Seattle
and Tacoma. Although Kent now has many big city amenities, it still
maintains its family appeal through a commitment to greenery, parks, family
recreation and livable neighborhoods.
As Kent continues to grow and prosper, it becomes increasingly important for
the city to first identify, and then actively manage, its identity. JayRay Ads &
PR facilitated the branding process that led to an identity, or"position," that
blends together Kent's heritage with its vision for the future and helps guide
Kent as it becomes the largest city in South King County. This new position,
as detailed on the following pages, will serve to guide the city through the
update and/or creation of new marketing and promotional material.
A. The Process to Date
How an organization arrives at a positioning platform is sometimes as
important as the position itself. Larger and more complex organizations
require a more complex process. The owner of a small retail operation can
make every marketing decision and implement it. A municipality is much
more complex, with many individuals making marketing planning and
implementation decisions, frequently with little coordination.
1. The "Image Group"
JayRay acted as a facilitator whose objective it was to guide the "Image
Group" participants through a process to a result that everyone can stand
behind. Those involved with the city have the best knowledge upon which to
draw—they know Kent. JayRay, in turn, brings to the process expertise in
marketing and positioning development as well as experience in working
within a governmental structure. Image Group members are:
Community Representatives: Kent City Staff Representatives:
Carol Vass, Kent Arts Commission Jacki Skaught, Economic
Patricia Loveall, Kidder Mathews Development Manager
Segner Dena Laurent Sorenson,
Andy Wangstad, Owner, Sir Government Affairs Manager
Speedy Printing Gary Gill, City Engineer
Kathy Madison, General Manager, Dea Drake, Multimedia Manager
Hawthorn Suites Heath Fugate, Multimedia
Cindy Reishus , Vice President of Lori Flemm, Parks
Consumer Affairs, Continental Planning/Development
Mills Superintendent
Denis Law, Publisher, Puget Linda Phillips, Planning
Sound Publishing Co./ Kent Department
Reporter
2. Target Audience and Stakeholder Interviews
JayRay interviewed 23 Kent opinion leaders and business people from the
Puget Sound area to determine current and past perceptions of Kent. Future
vision for the city and recent progress were also investigated. See appendix
A for interview outline and summary
3. Image Group Ideation Sessions
During three sessions, the Image Group generated and evaluated various
branding and implementation strategy alternatives. The group addressed
target audiences, the points where the target audiences contact Kent, images
and themes. See appendix B for brainstorming results.
4. Evaluation of Current Marketing Materials
JayRay evaluated current Kent printed and marketing materials and
messages to determine if they fit the Image Group's recommendations.
3
II. FINDINGS: "BRANDING" THE CITY OF KENT
The Image Group applied the principles successful businesses use to bring
focus and purpose to their images. The City of Kent is similar to a successful
business. Like a business corporation, Kent exists to provide a worthwhile
return to the investor (taxpayer). That return on taxpayer investment comes in
the form of quality services, quality of life, pride, and in the case of local
businesses, a nurturing business environment.
Kent is an "early adopter" (another marketing term) of branding. It joins
Renton, Lynnwood, and Tacoma in their efforts to create a desirable and true
perception for their municipalities. Rather than leaving it up to the media,
word-of-mouth, and "competing" cities to define their images, they are
actively creating their own identity.
To communicate Kent's brand image to current, future and potential Kent
clients, we can borrow some of the "branding" and "positioning" tools used by
successful corporations. Those tools are:
• Position, promise, and personality (the "three Ps" of branding)
• Graphic identity
• Target audiences
• Key messages
• Marketing communications
A. Kent's Position—"Connecting for Success"
- A brand position is how you want your target audience to define your city in
relation to competitors. It is how we complete the statement, "Kent is
" A brand position is a place you occupy in the mind of the
target. Some examples:
• Washington "Evergreen State" = environmental
• Renton "Ahead of the Curve" = progressive
• Nike "Just Do It" = performance
• Disney "The Happiest Place on Earth" = family entertainment
• Sea-Tac Airport "The Journey Begins Here" = exciting travel
"Connecting for Success" is the theme line that the Image Group developed
and that describes Kent's brand position. It is based on the idea that Kent is:
connected
...to the world through international trade and transportation
...to the region through regional planning and cooperation
...within the community through networking and group problem-
solving
and helps people be successful
...in raising their families
...in taking care of their business needs
...by being proactive and planning for the community's success
4
A good position for Kent meets several criteria:
Cohesive—The positioning will be the basis of all Kent's communications
marketing material, promotions, publicity and signage.
Long-term—Once established, which could take years, the position will
be synonymous with and exclusive to Kent for years to come.
True---It will reflect the current and future reality of the city.
Meaningful The position will have a benefit and be meaningful to the
audience.
B. Kent's Promise—"Kent will help you succeed"
A brand "promise" completes the statement, "Kent will " The
Image Group cited many examples of the community working together to help
people succeed, such as providing many healthy recreational and sports
opportunities, providing the infrastructure to support businesses and
residential growth, and working to make Downtown Kent a place where
people want to live, work, and be entertained.
C. Kent's Personality— "Kent is embracing, vital and energized"
A brand "personality" is how we want the target audience to think of Kent as if
Kent were a person. It completes the statement, "Kent, as a person, is
" Kent's personality shows through tonality in marketing and
communications materials, public relations messages, special events,
signage, employee contacts with target audiences, and Kent's relationships
with other organizations.
D. Preliminary Imagery
The Image Group developed several preliminary images that they felt
symbolized the new direction of Kent's brand position. These will be explored
further and expanded upon in creating the graphic look that will be part of
marketing and the points of"brand contact" discussed later.
• All over the map • Riverboats, airplanes, street
• Distribution center of patterns, rail station, road
international trade turtles
• Wheels • Handshakes, reaching out
• Circles • Arrows
• Hands around the community • Colors
• The Green River, river patterns > Green (light green,
• Bridges, bridging shapes glowing, or multi-hued)
• Fireworks > Multi-color, blurred, time-
0 Electrical/electronic plugs, lapse
fiber-optics ➢ Red (basic red)
• KENecTion,KENB.Ted ➢ Yellow
• Energy ➢ No gray or earth tones
• Slanted (italic, moving) > palette of standard and
Puzzle pieces accent colors
• Motion
• Umbrella
5
E. Target Audiences
The Image Group identified the following target audiences:
1. Corporations, retailers, 5. Elected officials: local,
restaurants regional, state and federal
2. Potential homeowners 6. News media
3. Prospective developers and 7. Kent's neighbors
businesses 8. Visitors, tourists, RJC jurors,
4. Kent residents, businesses and and people passing through
their employees the community
9. International community
F. Key Messages
The concept of "key messages" comes from the practice of public relations. It
is based on the principle of frequency. A key message should be the "take-
away," the single idea we want people to remember. The key messages
formulated from the Image Group work are:
1. The people who live and work in Kent have increasingly higher income
and education levels.
2. Kent's diverse and vibrant economy offers great potential for business
development and expansion.
3. Kent welcomes new residents and businesses.
4. Kent's downtown has great potential for business investment and
residents.
�...- 5. Kent's city government offers efficient and effective service delivery.
6. Kent is a desirable place to live and do business
G. "Points of contact" with the Kent "brand"
A brand is much more than a logo. It's how you want people to define you.
People come to their definition through many contacts with a brand. In order
for a brand and positioning to work for Kent, the city and community should
take into account the brand elements (position, promise, personality and key
messages) at every point of brand contact, including, and not limited to:
• Personal contacts with city • Logo
representatives, phone calls • Printed materials, letterheads,
• City vehicles envelopes, bills, documents,
• Uniforms forms
• Kent imprinted promotional • View of the valley from the
items, pens, caps, t-shirts, etc. hills, roads, & railroad
• Antique shops, SIR, RJC • Signs
• City hall, facilities, venues • Realtors (commercial &
(parks, golf course) residential)
• School districts, Chamber of • Festivals, events
Commerce • News media
• Internet, cable access • Advertising
television • Word-of-mouth
6
IV. COMMUNICATIONS AUDIT
The City of Kent produces many communications pieces. Most are
informational or promote local events. The target audiences are citizens and
local businesses. Few of the materials are designed to market Kent to outside
targeted audiences. Because there has not been a prior plan to create a
consistent positioning or graphic standards program for Kent, no two
communications vehicles match. Paper and ink colors, even the preferred
blue color, vary significantly.
A. Logo Consistency
The Kent logo varies and is highly modified by city departments.
• There are two variations of the basic logo:
> The horse shield/Invicta logo alone
> The horse shield/Invicta logo with "City of Kent" above it, and
"Mayor Jim White, " or Jim White, Mayor" below it.
• The Police Department uses a modified version of the horse symbol and
"Invicta" motto, surrounded by the "Service/Pride/Integrity" motto and
another concentric set of banners containing "City of Kent" and "Police."
• The Fire Department uses three logos:
> The horse shield/Invicta logo, surrounded by a ring with the words
Fire/Life/Safety/Est. 1889
> A Fire Dist 37 symbol
> A Kent Firefighters IAFF logo
• Kent Parks & Recreation Department has its own mountain/river logo,
and has developed logos for Canterbury Faire.
• The Kent Arts Commission has its own logo.
• The Public Works Department sometimes uses a variation of the horse
shield/Invicta logo with the recycling arrow symbol and the words
"recycle" in a banner.
B. Message Consistency
Although the look of the printed materials varies, the cumulative effect is that
Kent takes the effort to communicate with its stakeholders in a friendly,
approachable, non-bureaucratic manner.
7
III. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS
The Image Group has determined that Kent's position is "connecting for
success", with a promise to "help you succeed" and having a personality of
"embracing, vital and energized." Based upon this information, we feel that
the following recommendations would serve to integrate the findings of the
Image Group into the Kent brand position.
A. Update/Revise Logo
The current logo has served Kent for several decades. It is distinct, noble,
and evocative of the Old World. Municipalities, counties and other
governmental units change their look to fit new realities. With transformation
of Kent into a player in global trade, and with its rapid growth and geographic
expansion, it is time to design a logo and graphic identity that looks to the
future and captures the new spirit and vitality of the Kent brand as defined by
the Image Group. Kent's current logo does not accurately fit the new image of
Kent.
We recommend that Kent look to revise/update its logo to better reflect:
■ connectedness
■ helping people, organizations, and businesses succeed
■ energy
■ vitality
_ embracing new ideas, people, organizations, and businesses
The logo should include a basic color or colors that will not look dated in ten
years. It should have the flexibility to include contemporary colors in
applications with limited life spans, such as web pages
B. Update/Revise Business and Marketing Material
Kent's current business material (letterhead, envelopes, business cards)
relies heavily on the Invicta logo for graphic identity, and thus does not
incorporate the energy and vitality of the new brand image the Image Group
proposes. So in conjunction with the update/revise of the logo, we also
recommend all Kent business material be revised to reflect the new position,
promise and personality. This should be done simultaneously with the
development of the new logo.
If Kent is to effectively convey its new brand; it must unify all forms of
communication. It is very important that each of Kent's marketing pieces,
although still promoting different things, be consistent in brand image look,
feel and tonality. Currently, Kent's marketing and promotional
communications are vastly different and vary in color, look and feel from
piece to piece. We recommend that Kent formulate guiding standards or
templates that reflect the new brand identity and that can be used to easily
add consistency to all marketing pieces.
8
C. Develop Implementation Strategy
The success of Kent's new positioning does not rely on marketing material
alone. It also requires an equally strategic implementation process. As we
mentioned, all points of contact with the Kent brand must convey the new
position, promise and personality, from signage to interaction with city staff
and community organizations (such as the Downtown Partnership). The
implementation of Kent's new brand needs to be comprehensive and proceed
in a way that promotes excitement and enthusiasm for the full adoption of the
new position. We recommend that Kent develop an action plan detailing how
and when the new positioning will be implemented into each point of contact.
9
IV. NEXT STEPS
Based upon the evaluation of where Kent's brand currently stands, versus
where the Kent brand has the potential to be, we have formulated the
following steps. These steps are designed to bring Kent's new position,
promise and personality to life.
A. Logo and Business Identity Update
Create a team that includes city staff and a graphic design consultant firm to
develop a logo that more accurately reflects position, promise and personality
designated by the Image Group.
It will be important for the logo to be tested, by an unbiased facilitator, among
Kent's target audiences to ensure that the correct position, promise and
personality are being conveyed.
B. Communications Audit
The City of Kent will need to review all of its marketing and communications
pieces to determine the usefulness, purpose and areas of improvement of
each piece. It may also be necessary to create completely new pieces. Once
determined, the selected design team creating the logo and business
materials will also need to revise and/or develop the necessary marketing
materials that reflect Kent's new brand position
C. Implementation Action Plan
The City of Kent, in cooperation with the Image Group and the design team,
should construct an action plan for the implementation of the new brand
position. Change is often times hard to accomplish, and resistance easily
impedes the progress and success of any kind of change, no matter how
small. That is why thought should be given to how and when all aspects of
the brand's points of contact will reflect the new position, promise and
personality. Equally important is gaining the excitement and support, of the
city staff and community as a whole. Public relations may play a key role in
successful implementation.
Furthermore, in order to maintain the integrity of the brand position
throughout all communication venues, it would be useful for the city and
design team to formulate graphic standards or guidelines for use in various
mediums. Such standards may include:
1. Colors
A color palette should be developed. These colors, or the spirit of this palette,
should be used for anything that conveys the Kent brand and will consist of:
• OBasic"color or colors that will not be dated within ten years. "Basic" does
not mean primary and secondary colors only. The basic colors can be
10
"classic," or timeless. This basic color or colors will be used on vehicles,
signage, and other applications that may have a life of ten or more years.
• Supplemental colors that can be contemporary, and change over time.
These will be used for printed materials, web graphics, displays, and
other applications where appearing progressive, "vital," and "energized" is
important.
2. Environmental Graphics
The primary roles of signage are direction, identification, and information. But
signs should also reflect the position and personality of Kent. The branding
elements should be considered as part of all Kent environmental graphics
projects. Latitude should be given to the designers to interpret the branding
elements in a way that supports the primary mission of the signage.
3. Personal Contact with Kent
Kent's brand promise, "helping you succeed," is, and should continue to be, a
guiding principal for Kent's employees. It is also delivered by other
organizations that support the community, such as the Chamber of
Commerce, the schools, social services and arts organizations. And these
organizations tend to work together to help people succeed, supporting the
"connection" element of the brand.
Kent's employees should also continue to reflect Kent's personality. They
should "embrace" new people, new businesses, new ideas, and new
geographic areas. And they should continue to reflect the "energy" and
"vitality" that is Kent's personality.
4. Media Relations
The Kent departments that are in contact with the news media should include
the key messages in their communications. And the messages should be
written in a way that reinforces Kent's position of being "connected for
success." Managers should find opportunities to let the news media know
about how Kent is helping people to succeed, and demonstrates vitality,
energy, and how it embraces new people, ideas and companies.
5. City Vehicles
City vehicles are another prime opportunity to further communicate the city's
brand. These vehicles are ideal because they are a highly visible part of the
City's government. From law enforcement to utility works, from fire
department to municipal cars, these vehicles represent the government's
interaction with the community. That is why it is ideal to have these vehicles
marked with either a City logo or signature that conveys the position, promise
and personality of the city they serve.
11
In conclusion, JayRay Ads & PR has thoroughly enjoyed working with the
City of Kent and the Image Group throughout this process. We have learned
- a great deal about the city and continue to be inspired by its potential and
vision. The Image Group has done a fantastic job of formulating a position,
promise and personality for the City of Kent that meet the criteria of a strong
and lasting brand image that can lead Kent into the 21st century. We are
excited to see Kent's new brand position come to life to more accurately
reflect the energy and vitality that is Kent.
12
V. Appendices
1. Appendix A
Interview Outline
City Of Kent
Interview Outline
CITY OF KENT STAKEHOLDER
Name: Phone:
Company/Org:
Date: Time:
Hello, my name is and I'm with the marketing firm
JayRay. We are working with Jacki Skaught and Dena Laurent Sorensen of
the City of Kent to help further develop a marketing position for the city.
Would you mind if I asked you a few questions? I estimate it would take about
20 minutes of your time. Or, could I schedule a time that would be more
convenient?
Date: Time
Do you live and work in Kent? For how long?
What is your involvement with the city or community?
What are three things that most impress you about Kent?
Is there anything that surprises you about the city, or that you think would
surprise others?
In your own words how would you describe an "ideal" Kent in which to live
and work?
On a scale of 1 — 10 how "business friendly" would you consider Kent?
What is your definition of"business friendly"?
Can you list the top three elements that make Kent attractive to business
prospects looking to relocate or start new?
What kind of businesses would benefit the most from locating in Kent?
What type of businesses would you like to see locate in Kent?
13
I'm going to list a few local communities. Please tell me your first three
impressions that come to mind:
Tukwila
1. 2. 3.
Federal Way
1. 2, 3.
Kent
1. 2. 3.
Renton
1. 2. 3.
Any other communities you'd like to share your impressions of?
On a scale of 1 — 10 how unique is Kent from these other communities?
1 being very unique --- 10 not unique
How is Kent unique or how are all these communities the same?
If you had to define Kent's character in terms of a car, what kind of car would
Kent be? Why?
What about if Kent were an animal?What would it be?
That wraps up all of the questions that I have. Is there anything else you
would like to add?
Thank you for your help. We really appreciate you lending your time and input
to our marketing efforts. If you are interested, I will gladly send you
information upon completion of this project so you can see how your input
affected our work.
No Yes
Address:
14
2. Appendix B
Interview Results
What are the things that most impress you about Kent?
• Small town atmosphere (home town)
• Great school district (dynamic)
• Leading city in S. King County with social service, public policy and
business
• Incredible chamber of commerce— involved, available
• Good place to live
• Wonderful parks and recreation (quality of things to do)
• Downtown making effort to maintain small town feel
• Pride of citizens
• Vitality of business community
• Civic and social center in DT
• Willingness of officials to preserve park land
• Naturalness remains me of farmland heritage
• Access to local government
• Close to major metro areas, but maintains small town feel
• Central location close to all forms of transportation
• How progressive it is
• Controlled growth and destiny
• Progressive nature of business community (International trade)
• Committed to community involvement
• Affordable housing
• Diversity — not boring
Is there anything that surprises you about the city, or that you think
would surprise others?
• 4ch largest school district in state
• amount of growth
• transience of population
• Good downtown shopping area (unique stores)
• Global activity of Chamber
• Not— Po-dunk ville
• Lively DT (but not a place for single people)
• Traffic (hard to get anywhere)
• Life S. of 1-90
• Stigma of blue collar isn't all true
• Vitality
• It's not all back roads and people have teeth missing
• Huge employment base
• People have no idea of Kent's DT
• No strip mall development— historical center
• Nicely situated in valley — hills/ mountains/ river
• Don't realize how progressive it is
• Revitalization (6-8 years)
• RJC brought a lot of economic growth
15
• Don't realize that there are residential opportunities on the valley floor
• Strong affordable housing
• Friendly city
• Population recently doubled w/ annexation
• Family oriented (parks/cultural)
• Commitment to parks
• People think of big hair and pick ups
• Variety of people
In your own words how would you describe an "ideal" Kent in which to
live and work?
• Fix the high rate of turnover in community
• More investment in schools
• Fix traffic
• More retail so you don't have to go to other communities to shop
• Ease permit process
• More focus on uniqueness of Kent
• Streamline transportation (new streets/ less lights)
• DT stores are "Twinkie" nothing of real value (too many antiques etc)
• Small town feeling in the middle of urban area
• People care about community
• No strip malls
• More sense of place
• Strong identity
• Vibrant DT
_ Activity centers (perhaps beyond DT)
• Good public transportation
• Needs for different lifestyles
• Strong economy
• Business friendly
• Retail based to serve community
• Feels like home
• Easy to get around
• Parks recreation
• Train service to DT (Seattle?)
• Alive/friendly/ safe/ prosperous/ inviting/ convenient
• growing
On a scale of 1 — 10 how "business friendly" would you consider Kent?
• Very —friendly to current services
• RJC good for business
• 7 —Good chamber
• Quite friendly
• 9— orientation towards business— allowed through land use patterns
• Government is very friendly
• Effort to make permit process less complicated
• 6 — Permit and taxation are pretty good
• Gov. doesn't take advantage of their captive businesses
16
• 8 —very interested in getting business/ progressive about fixing problems
• 6 or 7 — permit process could be better
• Need more retail —too much emphasis on warehouse
• 4 or 5 — horror w/ permits and inspections/don't know what they want and
it's difficult
• City needs to work on customer service —treat like human beings
• Personal opinion gets in the way w/ permit processing
• Permit process is an irritation relative to other communities
• City makes good fiscal decisions, well managed
• High level of business w/o increasing tax rates
• Lack of land
• 7 — room for improvement, but pretty good overall
What is your definition of"business friendly"?
• Merchants and business welcome new industry and business
• City government— laws that are pro business
• Eager to help business succeed
• Climate is pro business
• Retailer friendly
• Good customer service
• Sound infrastructure—water/ streets/ etc.
• Mix of business and residential
• Sensitive to tax impacts
• Mindful of need for strong bus. Community
• Government open to business/ approachable
• Creating and maintaining climate of ease of doing business
• Reasonable costs B & O tax
• Healthy economy
• Provision of housing
• Pro-activity
• Works hard to work w/ existing businesses and attract new ones
• Affordable utilities
• Business community working together
Can you list the top three elements that make Kent attractive to
business prospects looking to relocate or start new?
• Thriving/growing community
• Terrific schools
• Accessibility to cultural events and recreation
• City's vision — growth not dying — moving forward
• Improvements — RJC, performing arts, transit
• Taxing
• Affordable housing
• Low cost to build/ availability of space
• Location — accessibility to transportation
• City structure—friendly
• Location — close to ports, trains, airport, highways
• Good infrastructure
17
• Availability of inexpensive land
• Close proximity to Seattle
• Strength of community
• Good draw of employees
• Businesses can't afford Bellevue/Seattle
• Population base w/ good disposable income
• Large captured audience
• Healthy DT
What kind of businesses would benefit the most from locating in Kent?
• Those that want to grow
• International business
• Heavy concentration on warehousing
• High tech that can't find the space they need
• Boeing is vacating their building — more opportunity there
• Smaller businesses
• Greater mix of office uses
• Warehouse and distribution
• Light manufacturing
• More high tech than people think—high tech manufacturing
(sophisticated)
• Small retail services. Corp. offices
• Transportation related
• High tear of professionalism
• Big industrial
• Shops in downtown
• Specialized/ niche
What type of businesses would you like to see locate in Kent?
• Innovative—w/ people who are interested in the community
• Major hotel for conference room use (can't have major function because
there is not accommodations)
• Good restaurants
• More retail/ clothes
• Greater mix of office use
• Mom and pop stores like bakeries, etc.
• More head quarters
• Small business like attorneys/insurance
• Things people need — household stuff (grocery, clothes, entertainment)
• Cultural related companies, high profile
• Service support businesses
• Entertainment
• Weak link is retail — need more
• Too much industry
• Microsoft
• Good mix of everything you want
• Bars and hotels
• Department stores
18
• Town center—goods that public require
• Real office center in DT
— • Product development
• Retail would be nice but hard to do w/ S. Center and Sea/Tac so close
• Services that make area attractive to employees (daycare, amenities,
etc.)
• Larger employee based companies like Boeing or software
• Up scale stuff
• Entertainment that will keep people here past 6 p.m.
I'm going to list a few local communities. Please tell me your first three
impressions that come to mind:
Tukwila
• South Center
• Low income
• No center
• All the same
• Traffic
• Retail
• Strip malls
• Little housing
• Small city
• Unimpressive
• Confusing as to where it is
• Not friendly
_ • Industrial
• No community
• Inexpensive housing
• Wide streets
• Huge immigrant population
• Small town
• Hotel corridor
Federal Way
• Highway 99
• More traffic than Kent
• Not family friendly
• No city/ or DT
• Urban bedroom community
• Diverse
• No character
• No definition
• Strip malls
• No strong community
• Big mall
• Multi-family housing
• Retail
• Struggling identity
19
•. Emerging
• Good places
• Sprawling
• Congested
• Sea/Tac
• Nice housing
• Nice office building
• Apartments
• No community
• Not lots of businesses but lots of people
• Weyerhaeuser
• New development
Kent
• Valley
• Good schools
• Green space
• Golf/recreation
• Business
• Growing
• Dynamic
• Vibrant
• Working class
• Light industrial
• Small town feeling
• Mix of business and retail
• Open space
• Big arterial
• Developing DT
• Warehousing
• Distribution
• Single-family housing
• Multi-faceted
• Centrally located
• In transition
• Wonderful
• Cozy DT
• Parks
• Large
• Sprawling
• Historical DT
• Mayberry-esque
• Healthy DT
• Aerospace/industry
• Blue collar
• Family friendly
• Concrete tilt up
• Stable
20
• Thriving
• Livable
Renton
• Industry
• Boeing
• S-Curves
• Not a developed DT
• Old DT
• Established
• Ugly
• Evolving
• Confusing streets
• Trains going through
• Multi-family housing
• Trying to change image
• Good residential
• Not inviting
• Progressive
• User friendly
• Strong commitment to business
• Confused DT—get lost there
• Manufacturing
• Traffic
• Dirty
• End of road
• Ahead of the curve
• Old boys network— Boeing
Any other communities you'd like to share your impressions of?
• Auburn shares many same characteristic as Kent— not as developed yet
• Edmonds reminds me of Kent
• Tacoma —same mix of industry and residential
• Issaquah has the businesses Kent wants to attract
• Kent is similar to Federal Way
• Kirkland —fun DT, cohesive, small
How is Kent unique or how are all these communities the same?
• DT makes Kent unique
• School district is superior
• Broad spectrum of business in Kent
• Strong performing arts in Kent
• Kent is pro business
• No other community is as committed to parks
If you had to define Kent's character in terms of a car, what kind of car
would Kent be? Why?
• Ford Truck— no explanation
21
• Semi or airplane — moving things
• 1990 Lumina —All American, not too stylish, acceptable, dependable
• Old time interurban car—part of the past, but futuristic at the time
• Jeep — practical but with an interesting character
• New VW— has backbone, redeveloping, reliable, becoming modern again
• SUV— industrial transitioning to residential/ changing image
• VW— becoming pretty again, not so ugly, proud, cute, quaint
• Pickup truck— aspiring to be leisure car
• Old Chevy or Minivan—family, middle of the road
• 4-door sedan —not crazy, good and solid, made for families
• Buick—working class (want to be Jetta or Passat— cool but not snobby)
• Oldsmobile — not your father's car, changing, redefining
That wraps up all of the questions that I have. Is there anything else you
would like to add?
• Kent is battling a lot of misconceptions
• Kent is a hidden jewel
• Any way to get more information about housing developments availability
to prospective residents and businesses?
• Change or update the logo
• Kent has really nice entryways into the city—Mt. Rainier, river, gateways
• Need a theme that conveys how cool and entrepreneurial Kent is
• Kent has a small chamber w/ big ideas
22
3. Appendix C
Image Group Meeting Notes
10/20 Image Group Meeting #1 Project Kick off/ Information
Gathering
• Image group role — all represent different yet essential aspect of the
community. Need to solicit your honest opinion and insight. Come to
some sort of consensus as to a marketing position for Kent. Lastly, we will
work to translate that consensus into all of Kent's marketing points of
contact (marketing materials, signage, government documents, etc.)
• Meeting goal— Focus group. So many different representations of the
community and government. Everyone needs to speak up. Don't have to
agree — let me hear it when you don't. Getting information out in the open.
• Image Group Introductions
• Name
• Company
• How long you've lived in the area/owned a business in the area
• If you could live anywhere in the world, where would you live and why?
You can be as general or specific as you want. No restrictions. If you live
in your ideal place then tell me why It's ideal.
How we perceive things
• People make judgements all the time about everything they encounter.
From the food you eat, to the car you drive to even the places that
surround you. These judgements are based on several things. Some of
which are very tangible "weather, terrain, location" Some are more
subjective and based on your perception "livability, sense of community,
economic opportunity "
• It's this gray area that marketers and advertisers love. Because every
point of contact you have with a product or service is information you will
use to help better define your perception of that product or service. So as
you know companies spend millions on marketing all to sway your
perception and ultimately get you to buy/use their goods. For example:
• What comes to mind when you think of NIKE
• What about Microsoft
• Now what about the Northwest? (no marketing)
• How about Southern California
• More specific— Seattle
• Bellevue?
• Lynwood?
• More and more newly incorporated cities are beginning to actively
manage and/or develop their image for not only their current residence
and businesses, but economic prospects too.
• Show Lynwood article/Renton/Enumclaw
Outside View of Kent
• So what we need to do is get a realistic view of Kent
• Not from your eyes, but the eyes of those living outside of Kent
23
• View from 167 —warehouses
• RJC/ busy/farm community
• Apartments- not a home town
• Cheap/train tracks
• Affordable upper-middle class homes, nice
• City of Kent is different than the housing resembles
• Where is it???
• Nothing special to identify it
• Kent commons/sports
• Boeing
• Green River/ access to Sea/Tac
• Not the place to come to do things
• Skilled/semi-skilled labor
• 6) Target Audience
• Now I also want to get a sense of who those outsiders may be and what
are some of their points of contact:
• Residence of other cities — Drive by on 1-5 or 167, driven through Kent,
Friends, family live here, business here
• Businesses outside Kent— Do business in Kent
• Other city governments/organizations —?
• Media — ?
• Perceptual Map of Outsider's view of Kent
Cosmopolitan
Seattle
Bellevue
Traditional Tacoma Progressive
Ideal view of Kent
Outside view of Kent
Auburn
Country
• Inside view of Kent
• Key words that describe the insider's view of Kent.
• Midpoint between Seattle, Tacoma
• Close to Sea/Tac
• Convenience of location
• Work force
• Family/ community oriented
• Home like
• Figuring out where it's going — proactive
• Out of traditional thinking
24
• Arts—Jazz, sculptures
• Parks, friendly, nice downtown
Kent's Vision/Ideal Kent
• Improved congestion
• Clean water and air
• Infrastructure quality
• Friendly and fun
• Accessible
• comfortable living
• Safe
• prosperous
• Proactive
• progressive
Next Steps
• We will bring our findings back to the table when we reconvene on the 9`h
At that time we will begin making sense of the information and use it to
begin constructing a positioning. It will be based on lining up the
meaningful outside perceptions w/those tangible things Kent can really
deliver on. We will also need to make sure that what we are saying to the
outside audience is true and meaningful to the inside audience. And
lastly, that what we say of Kent must have some longevity and be able to
grow with the city.
11/9/99 Image Group Meeting #2 Position/Promise/Personality
Target Audiences:
• Corporations
• Employers
• Potential homeowners
• Retail
• Developers
• Existing residents and businesses
• Media
• Commuters/ passers through
• Neighbors
• Jurors
• Tourists/visitors
• Employees
Points of contact with the Kent brand:
• Local newspapers
• Kent letters and signs
• Golf course
• View of valley from hills
• Police and fire
• Commons/Earthworks
25
• RJC
• All media
• Vehicles
• Uniforms
• Logo
• Signage
• Farmers markets
• Chamber of Commerce
• SIR
• City Hall
• School Dists.
• Realtors
• Roads
• Antique shops
• Festivals
• Web
• Printed materials
• Personnel
Personality of Kent:
• Stable, anchor, foundation, mature, comfortable, safe, caring, traditional,
unpretentious
• Healthy, vital, re-inventing , regenerating, growing
• Progressive, regional, proactive, leadership, strategic, rethinking, unique
• Professional, smart, dependable
• Embracing, working together, accessible, approachable
Promise (Kent will always...)
• Kent will help you succeed
• Offer a sense of community, have a home town feeling, pull together,
invest in the community
• Listen —give a well thought out answer
• Make it happen
• Be friendly
• Provide a safe environment
• Care
• Communicate in a timely and honest manner
• Be a smart investment/ good value
Positions (vs. competition)
• Global/Trade/Connections/Hub
• Welcoming/make it happen
• Center of S. King Co.
• Intelligent
• Central
26
• Global Valley
• World Class
• Accessible
• Helping
• On the move
• Active
• Wheel/hands across the community
• Location
Global
• 50% of all Kent companies sell internationally
• Transportation —close proximity to Seattle and Tacoma ports/ SeaTac
airport
• International business makes up 8 — 10 percent of all sales in Kent
• Kent firms have international sales of 625 million annually
• Implies diversity
• People working together
• Global approach to problem solving
Connections
• Kent is among the top 5 distribution centers in the country (unverified)
• Close proximity to ports (Seattle/Tacoma/SeaTac)
• Government connected to community
• Unity/links
• Dynamic
• Accessible
• Helping people move
11/30/99 Image Group Meeting #3 Finalize Position/Promise/Personality
Final Position:
• Global and Connected
• Theme line options:
• Vital connections for success
• Connecting for success
Final Promise
• Kent will help you succeed
Final Personality
• Embracing, vital and energized
Initial Imagery:
• Reaching out Letters moving
• Fireworks Motion
• Energy Puzzle pieces
• Wheel Umbrella
• Arrows Bridges
• Fiber-optics
• Handshake
27
3/i/UV
Downtown Projects Update
3/7i00
Intergovernmental Update
City of Kent
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 29, 2000
TO: Kent City Councilmembers
FROM: Dena Laurent
Government Affairs Manager
SUBJECT: Target Issues on Regional Governance and Leadership
At you 1999 Council Retreat, you identified Regional Governance and Leadership as a
moderate priority target issue. As part of that discussion, we prepared an issue paper
outlining potential work items around addressing this issue. The purpose of this memo is
to outline actions we've taken on those items and how we're working to address regional
issues. We have also attached two packets of information(Attachments C and D)
prepared by Suburban Cities Association staff that do an excellent job of summarizing the
regional bodies and issues. We hope this information will provide a backdrop for further
discussion at your March 7 Council Workshop. During that discussion, we are interested
in soliciting your feedback and further direction regarding this approach.
Target Issue Report Action Items--Grouped
1. Intergovernmental Bodies
✓ Conduct an inventory of local, regional, county, state and national bodies with
opportunities for local government representatives to give input on issues affecting
Kent. Inventory City staff and elected official participation in these bodies.
Local bodies: City Boards and Commissions, School District and Chamber committees,
citizen committees and local service clubs.
The Mayor, all Councilmembers and many staff serve as liaisons and
members of many of these groups.
Regional and County bodies: These are best inventoried along with current membership
in an SCA chart (Attachment A). Mayor White and Councilmembers
Epperly, Clark and Brotherton serve on regional/county bodies. Several
staff also serve on regional/county bodies including Chief Ed Crawford,
Gary Gill (Public Works) and Lt. Curt Lutz (Corrections). Many staff also
attend and/or are members of numerous regional, county and sub-county
groups around their staff function (i.e., police chiefs, planning, human
services) and/or specific regional issues (i.e. the Endangered Species Act,
regional watersheds).
t
State and National bodies: Bodies at this level include the Association of Washington
Cities and the National League of Cities. The City is a member of each of
these bodies and City elected officials periodically attend meetings.
Councilmembers can run for election to the AWC Board of Directors
which meets several times a year. They can also request appointment to
Boards and Committees of the National League of Cities. Staff are also
members of national organizations related to their profession(i.e.
International Association of Chiefs of Police, International City/County
Management Association).
2. Issues before Intergovernmental Bodies
✓ Identify current and future issues to be considered by these bodies which may affect
Kent.
✓ Prepare an intergovernmental briefing document on these bodies, issues and
participants.
✓ Present the briefing document to the City Council. Receive Council input on issues
and bodies of interest. Determine Council desire for future participation, information
and briefings. Determine desired communication feedback from participants back to
Council and staff and implement.
Local Bodies: The issues before these groups vary. Issues before City Boards and
Commissions often come to the City Council as policy items. The issues
before citizen groups, committees and clubs also vary and are sometimes
reported in the local media.
Issues before these bodies include: school district bonds and levies, the performing arts
center, workforce, trade, athletics, the arts, traffic safety, freight mobility,
diversity, responsible government and community service.
Regional/County Bodies: Issues before these bodies are well charted in an SCA graph
(Attachment B) and are described in the SCA reports.
State/National Bodies: We bring state issues to you through the annual legislative agenda
and session updates. National issues are offered to you through national
League of Cities publications and conferences. Some issues, such as
pipeline safety are supported through correspondence from the Mayor's
Office.
3. Staff Role
✓ Provide staff support for Council serving on regional, state and national bodies.
✓ Consider formation of staff level intergovernmental affairs cabinet with monthly
meetings. Cabinet would assist in development of regional affairs report at Council
workshops.
✓ Continue on current schedule for development and adoption of state legislative
agenda. Consider adoption of federal legislative agenda.
Staffing for elected officials serving on regional, state and national bodies varies
by body and issue. We always try to provide staff support on Council request.
After much discussion, we have chosen to organize staff collaboration on regional
affairs on an issue by issue basis. For example, we have an interdepartmental "fish team"
that meets monthly to discuss ESA issues. We had an interdepartmental team that met
weekly during the siting of Kent Sound Transit Station. Intergovernmental staff have
been meeting with traffic staff to evaluate the impact of various Metro service cut
proposals. Many issues are also discussed at the weekly Leadership Team meetings. We
find that while this more "decentralized, ad hoc" approach is more efficient, bringing
together the precise players needed for the time needed rather than requiring a meeting to
share or request information.
We advise continuing on the current schedule for adoption of the State Legislative
Agenda. We have requested some advice regarding the timing, scope and effectiveness of
adopting a federal legislative agenda.
4. Council Opportunities for Election/Appointment to Bodies
✓ Ensure Council workshop briefings include notification of upcoming opportunities for
election, appointment or participation in bodies of interest.
Much of this information is provided to Council via mail from the individual bodies. In
general, SCA elections are in May/June and their appointments to regional/county
committees is in December/January:AWC Board elections are in June with nominations
accepted before that for the Board positions which are open. Nominations for NLC
appointments made by AWC occur in the fall. We will ensure information we receive on
these opportunities is provided to Council.
5. Council Involvement Required
✓ Receive intergovernmental briefing document and presentation
✓ Determine bodies and issues of interest, desired level and methods of communication
✓ Consider any policy issues raised by intergovernmental bodies
✓ For Councilmembers choosing/selected to serve on intergovernmental bodies:
become knowledgeable on the issues, commit to regular meeting attendance,
collaborate with support staff, communicate back to staff and Council on body's
actions.
The question here is whether this course of activity achieves the level of regional
governance and leadership you had in mind when making this as a moderate priority
target issue. We are committed to providing information on intergovernmental issues,
especially those with policy implications. We do this by memo and in your committee
meetings. We look forward to your feedback on this question.
Attachment A
CA Italic = new appointment Suburban Cities ASSOCiption
2000 Appointments List
As approved by the Board of Directors, 01/19/00
<ING COUNTY EXEC APPOINTMENTS RWQC continued
Sound Transit Sants Contreras Kirkland
Member City Patrick Hawkins Clyde Hill
Mary Gates Federal Way Alternates
Jim White Kent Cheryl Lee Shoreline
Jack Crawford Kenmore
Regional Law, Safety, and Justice Committee PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL
Member City Puget Sound Regional Council Executive Board
Jeanne Burbidge Federal Way Member City
Charles A. Booth Auburn Mary Gates Federal Way
Russell Joe Issaquah Nancy McCormick Redmond
Alternates Ron Hansen Shoreline
Judy Clibborn Mercer Island Sue Singer Auburn
Deborah Chase Kenmore Alternates
Dave Asher Kirkland Laure Iddings Maple Valley
Phil Rourke Clyde Hill
METROPOLITAN KING COUNTY
REGIONAL COMMITTEES Frank Hansen SeaTac
Regional Policy Committee PSRC Operations Committee
Member City Member City
Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Renton Sue Singer Auburn
Rosemarie Ives Redmond Alternate
Jeanne Garber Newcastle Ron Hansen Shoreline
'an Kiest Lake Forest Park
—.,a Frisinger Issaquah PSRC Transportation Policy Board
Pat Sullivan Covington Member City
Alternates Linda Montgomery Shoreline
Elodie Morse Kenmore Jim White Kent
Tom Brotherton Kent Alternate
Linda Kochmar Federal Way Pam Carter Tukwila
Sandy Guinn Bothell Dick Taylor Kenmore
Regional Transit Committee PSRC Growth Management Policy Board
Member City Member City
Mary Gates Federal Way Rosemarie Ives Redmond
Claudia Scrivanich Newcastle Tim Clark Kent
Jim White Kent Alternate
Linda Montgomery Shoreline Pete Lewis Auburn
Glenn Wilson Algona Kathy Huckaby Sammamish
Guy Spencer Normandy Park
Alternates PSRC Regional Staff Committee
Dan Becker Medina
Chuck Booth Auburn Member City
Bob Deis Shoreline
Rebecca Clark Covington
Roberta Lewandowski Redmond
Eric Shields Kirkland
Regional Water Quality Committee Alternates
Member City Gary Gill Kent
J—se Tanner I Renton Cary Roe Federal Way
L Taylor enmore Michael Booth SeaTac
kw—QC continued:
Update attachment 01/28/00
h�
Local Hazardous Waste Management Plan
Growth Management Planning Council Member City
Perm Member ci y Kathy Ka 9ker-`A,1hae'er :enter,
12102 Trish Borden j Auburn
12/01 Terry Brazil Des Moines Seattle King County Economic Development
12/01 Judy Clibborn Mercer Island Council
12/00 Howard Botts Black Diamond Member City
12/00 Shirley Thompson SeaTac Shirley Thompson SeaTac
12/02 Joan Simpson North Bend Terry Brazil Des Moines
Alternate George Rossman Enumclaw
George Rossman Enumclaw Michael Park Federal Way
Scott Jepson Shoreline Larry Springer Kirkland
Richard Cole Redmond Kevin Grossman Shoreline
Jeanne Burbidge Federal Way
Staff Deb Eddy SCA King County Consortium
Rob Odle Burien Joint Recommendations Committee for CD
Tim Stewart Shoreline Pos Member City
Eric Shields Kirkland I Ava Frisinger Issaquah
Alternate Geoff Simpson Covington
King County Board of Health 2 Howard Botts Black Diamond
Member City Alternate I Bob Patterson Carnation
David Hutchinson Lake Forest Park 3 Georgette Valle Burien
Dan Sherman Des Moines Alternate R. Lewandowski Redmond
Alternates 4 Pam Linder Tukwila
Ava Frisinger Issaquah Alternate j Rich Gustafson j Shoreline
Steven Colwell Kenmore
King County Jail Advisory Committee OTHER COMMITTEES & BOARDS
Member City
Emergency Medical Services Funding Task
Force
Sonny Putter Newcastle
Jeff Merrill Bothell Term Member City
Alternate End of Task, two positions open to cities under
Jim Haggerton Tukwila 50,000 but not assigned
Bob Ransom Shoreline Non SCA appointments, cities over 50,000
Cmber Ron Smith Bellevue
AFIS Advisory Committee Mayor Jim White Kent
Bob Deis j Shoreline
Member I City ( Jim Hamilton Fedl Wati
Deborah Chase Kenmore
Tim Schlitzer Renton Workforce Development Council
Dave Asher Kirkland Member I City
Merlin McReynolds Normandy Park Chief Ron Wood Federal Way Jim White Kent
Lt Curt Lutz Kent Ad Hoc Committee for ESA ILA
Chief Gary Anderson Renton
Member City _
King County Disability Board LEOFF 1 Ava Frisinger Issaquah
Judy Clibborn Mercer Island
Member City Chuck Booth Auburn
Howard Botts Black Diamond STAFF
Deb Eddy SCA
Emergency Management Advisory Committee Cary Roe Federal Way
Member City Jay Covington Renton
Howard Botts Black Diamond
Larry Gilbert Burien
Staff
Chief Ed Crawford Kent
L Y 71, Cs:'ser KirSc;a;: '
Chief Bob Johnson Auburn
Update attachment 01/28/00
28
Attachment B
----- a) T-INI
------, Czm ; iE' ° U C U i O `
^ �^ 1 Q I I L ° � ET ° i 0 Q
d I C O C 'Y Co
U) '
a)i0_ U)
0-0
---- A
I (V ,
x , C4
,W O ,
I � , E
c _ , o E
Q .� ---- `cn— E v
c �- o ' m ,
a) ° c
m
rw C4 C3) �--
'r
CU
O L C
C
OL a C N
y rn
LO
O � �
TE
1 ° > I
�Y O` '
GV Z y o CL o
•� 2 L--------'
Qo
V c4 E " o • ' � N I
� E � N 'moo
Cn
C Cu
U 2' 1° o cc '
[•.� O T N I
C^ E•y p)
) CII
►•� C! E `
c I cn
ot
CD
0 cc
I
O E ' U N
�I ,U ' I to Cc
�/ �•C cn � 'U � Q ' O
CD C13
U I '— cc
x
�7 C LL � �Z L CCu
i Y O fn O FBI �L E
CO---- -----� �� O LL
a�
office`'ofJ the Mayor
SCA Suburban Cities Association
9611 SE 36th Ave - Mercer Island, WA 98040
phone: 206-236-7676 fax: 206-236-3588
I, scq(q-4hq1cyon.com
"At
1001% "of
REGIONAL ISSUES ORIENTATION
31 JANUARY 2000
Prepared by Deb Eddy
SCA Executive Director
01/30/00
REGIONAL ISSUES ORIENTATION
31 January 2000
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 3
2. ROLE OF SUBURBAN CITIES ASSOCIATION 3
3. CITIES' ROLES IN REGIONAL AFFAIRS 5
Role of Regional Committees
4. WATER ISSUES: QUALITY,
WASTEWATER AND SUPPLY 7
Regional Water Quality Committee
Endangered Species Act
Water supply
5. LAND USE 11
Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC) —
Housing — production, affordability
"Buildable Lands"
Housing Initiative Grant
1000 Friends Sprawl Report
Joint Recommendations Committee for CDBG
Land use —transportation linkages and
the status of GMA implementation
6. TRANSPORTATION 17
Regional Transit Committee
Puget Sound Regional Council
Governors Blue Ribbon Commission
on Transportation
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing Paper Page 1
7. PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY 20
Regional Policy Committee
Regional Law, Safety and Justice Committee
Jail Advisory Committee
8. SUMMARY AND WRAP UP 21
APPENDIX
Suburban Cities Association 23
Bylaws
2000 Appointments List
2000 Appointments Distribution Map
Appointments Policies
Chart of Comparative Jobs, AV and Population
Regional Issues Matrix 35
Metro King County Regional Committees 37
Flowchart for decision making
Selected sections from King County Charter
Tri-County Steering Committee ESA Early Action Plan 41
Possible relationships WRIA/forums/cities (diagram) 53
Map: Watershed forum and WRIA boundaries 54
Perkins Coie ESA Workshop, registration information 55
Copy: Interlocal contract for GMPC 59
Executive summary of housing reports: GMPC 61
Reprint: A Typology of Regional Growth Management Systems 65
Executive summaries on transportation by BRCT 79
SCA Slide presentation: PSRC Executive Board 89
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing Paper Page 2
1. INTRODUCTION
This orientation into regional issues for suburban elected officials has to be
superficial. An exhaustive or in-depth treatment would leave everyone
bewildered and with information overload.
In the description of each issue area, basic structures of regional forums are first
explained. Other information tries to set the stage or describe the current state of
affairs. For some categories, there are identified "TENSIONS'. These are
differing points of view or interests among governments and other stakeholders
which may affect how issues are addressed — or not addressed.
Sometimes, words need defined. In the regional arena, for instance, there is a
specific meaning to the word caucus. Used here, it means different
representational groups:
Seattle
King County
SCA or "suburban cities"
This reflects a historical grouping of what were peer groups about eight or ten
years ago, when each grouping delivered local services to roughly equal
population groups. As population continues to grow in the suburban areas, and
as annexations and incorporations move more people out of King County, the
suburban cities tend to be under-represented at some regional forums.
2. SUBURBAN CITIES ASSOCIATION
Begun as a dinner club in the 1960s, the association of cities outside of Seattle
evolved over time into a formal non-profit association. Membership is limited to
cities under 150,000. Staff was added in 1993, after rising populations in the
suburbs, the merger of Metro and King County governments, and the creation of
the new Puget Sound Regional Council increased the need for a formal
mechanism for cooperative action among these cities.
In the late 1980s, there had been discussion about whether these joint activities
should be done via interlocal contract or a non-profit corporation. The interlocal
contract would require a fiscal agent to be chosen from among the cities and for
staff to be employed by that city. Costs would then be billed to the other cities
benefitting from the program. This gave rise to the possibility of a "first among
equals" being created in the fiscal agent. A non-profit association offered a
better mechanism for joint action by the cities on a more equal basis. SCA is a
502(c)(4) non-profit, governed by a Board of Directors selected from the member
cities and by adopted Bylaws.
SCA provides a number of coordinative or cooperative opportunities for the cities,
but its most visible role is in the provision of a fair and orderly method of
making appointments to jointly held seats. That is, SCA provides the
mechanism by which the cities participate in those forums where a limited
number of seats must be shared by all cities of a certain class (usually described
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing Paper Page 3
as "all other cities and towns in King County ex�epi for Oeatric ur wuf as to tna.
effect). This type of joint participation requires that appointees from the cities
and towns act in a representational manner on behalf of all the members of
the described class.
For purposes of these jointly held seats, SCA's actions are likely to be presumed
valid as long as SCA has the participation and concurrence of cities representing
over 50% of the population (and, perhaps, 50% of the cities) of"all other cities
and towns in King County except for Seattle". Bellevue's withdrawal from the
association last year has required an analysis of suburban representation at a
number of forums. In effect, Bellevue's primary assertion is: "You guys share.
We prefer not to."
SCA has no interest in any seats at any forums. This is often misunderstood.
As a nonprofit corporation, SCA has no status and no formal relationship with
other governments. Rather, the member cities, individually, have the status and
relationship with other governments. SCA provides only a formal structure for
joint activities taken by the cities. Information on SCA, including bylaws and
appointments policies, begins at page 7-5 .
SCA COMMUNICATES AND INTERACTS WITH
AWC SCA
Acts on behalf of King County SEATTLE
cities and towns under 150,000,
COUNTY BELLEVUE?
EXEC
ALL ELECTED OFkIALS
REGIONAL STAFF
METRO MEDIA
KING MGRS AND DEPT DIRECTORS
COUNTY
COUNCIL
STAFF FROM AGENCIES,
GOVERNMENTS AND
DISTRICTS
TENSIONS.
SCA's Board of Directors is currently re-considering the form and function of the
organization, to assure that scarce time and resources are well spent. All
member cities will be challenged to give input into the ongoing re-design.
Change may bring criticism, particularly as the cities'efforts become more
effective.
There will continue to be tension at some forums until Bellevue's representational
issues are resolved. Since Bellevue continues to decline membership in SCA, it
is likely that there will be some effort on their part to encourage a re-design of
some forums, especially PSRC, so as to gain a designated seat.
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing Paper Page 4
3. CITIES ROLE IN REGIONAL AFFAIRS
There are three general levels of government that come into play in discussing
regional issues and the cities' participation in joint decision making. These are:
• State(Governor)(Legislature)
• County(Executive)(Council)
• Cities(Mayors)(Councils)
Other government entities, such as water/sewer districts, fire districts and transit
-agencies w+ll also come into play-in our consideration of regional issues, with a
nod to the Federal government's role in local issues.
Last year, SCA staff developed the Regional Issues Matrix (attached here in
the Appendix at page 1,5' ) as an illustration of the many groups competing for
time and attention of elected officials and city staff. These are grouped into
loosely connected subject areas:
• Water Supply/Use/Quality
• Land Use and Growth Management
• Transit and Transportation
• Public Health and Safety
Within these areas, SCA exercises its appointment authority to regional forums
or committees only where seats are held jointly. Some groups, like the
subregional transportation groups, have individual seats for each city. Some
seats are created and the cities' representation is in the hands of another entity,
such as the County Executive or Governor. Regional forums and their
memberships are created by:
• County Council ordinance
• Interlocal contract among jurisdictions
• State statute
Informal agreements for ad hoc actions
In each of these cases, the way in which participants are chosen may be
different, with widely different representational schemes. In a currently
contentious case, the county executive of each county names representatives to
the board of Sound Transit according to a statutory formula in which no suburban
city seats are formally assigned. The county legislative body must confirm the
executive's choices. A seat held by a city representative might go to a county
councilman in the next appointment cycle.
SCA tries to provide for some oversight of issues at those forums where the
cities hold joint seats. However, the increasing number of forums and issues
have made this impossible in recent years. So, SCA's Executive Committee and
staff consult on a weekly basis, prioritizing issues based on consideration of such
questions as:
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing Paper Page 5
vvhat are the aeauiineS! Are uit--oc c+...uai
date? Or are they simply process steps or artificially imposed deadlines?
How many cities does this issue impact? And, of the issues that affect most
of us, which issues have the most potential for negative impact?
Can we actually do something about this issue? Is our participation likely to
affect the outcome?
Do we have the resources to do things that would impact this issue? If not,
can we leverage individual city staff or find other ways to affect the outcome?
Given SCA's two-person office, our ability to cover issues is limited. The EMS
task force (phase 11) provides an example. The County Council created this task
force by ordinance, with two seats for cities under 50,000. In the Executive
Committee's view, to appoint elected officials to and staff this committee would
be an inappropriate use of limited resources: The involvement of Federal Way,
Kent and Shoreline by statute, our previous involvement in "phase I" and the very
steep learning curve on this topic affect our ability to cover the issue adequately.
And, in the final analysis, our impact on the product is limited.
TENSION: City elected officials are often frustrated at the different levels of
participation possible for part time elected officials. Full time officials, like in
Seattle, King County and some strong mayors in our member cities, have more
time and opportunity to devote to regional forums.
Historically, city managers have not been accorded the ability to participate or the
status reserved for elected officials at regional forums. This may put some cities at
a disadvantage in being able to sustain a regional 'presence". Often, enabling
ordinances or statutes require that representatives be elected officials.
Partisanship of county and state governments often contributes to our difficulty in
addressing regional issues. City officials have no party affiliation in their elected
offices, and often find it difficult and frustrating to deal with the clearly partisan
politics of the county council.
ROLE OF THE REGIONAL COMMITTEES
Three regional forums considered here are created by the King County Charter.
These committees were designed to take the place of the old Metro Council,where
over 40 elected officials governed provision of wastewater (sewer) and transit
services in King County. The Metro Council was found to violate the one man-one
vote rule of representative government, as the participating officials did not
represent equal numbers of similarly situated constituents. After some debate and
one failed-measure, the electorate approved a ballot measure calling for the
merger of Metro into King County.
The regional committees were designed not to run afoul of the one man-one vote
federal court decision finding. As a result, these committees have been called
ineffectual and "toothless", since final authority remains in the King County
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing Paper Page 6
supermajority vote of the Cou,1i*., W 44YCi1U'.1
RWQC and RTC are generally considered to be functional committees with
benefits to all citizens due to city representation. RPC is considered dysfunctional,
for a variety of reasons, although recent leadership has brought it out of the
constant uproar stage.
In the Appendix at page '�2, we've provided a flow chart of how these three
committees work and the charter language explaining how a supermajority of the
county council is needed to overturn a decision of a regional committee. While this
sounds good, it must be noted that the county council has strong control over what
issues are referred to these committees.
Metropolitan King
County Council
REGIONAL POLICY REGIONAL WATER
COMMITTEE QUALITY COMMITTEE
MKCC 6 seats/votes MKCC 6 seats/votes
Seattle 3 seats/votes REGIONAL TRANSIT Seattle 2 seats/votes
Other cities and COMMITTEE Other cities and towns 4
towns 6 seats, Y MKCC 6 seats/votes seats, %vote each
vote each Seattle 3 seats/votes Sewer districts 2 seats/votes
Other cities and towns 6
seats, '/2 vote each
More information on the creation of the merger government can be found, aloAg
with a great deal of other useful information at King County's web page at
www.metrokc.gov.
4. WATER ISSUES — Quality, wastewater and supply
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY COMMITTEE
The Regional Water Quality Committee is a merger committee, created when
Metro and King County merged in 1992. This committee's subject matter is limited
to wastewater services and water quality issues ancillary to sewers. Membership
is different than the other two committees, as this committee includes seats for
sewer districts, which still serve a large area of the county, including both urban
and rural areas. Besides the six county council seats (6 votes), there are two
Seattle seats (2 votes), 2 sewer district seats (2 votes) and four suburban cities
and town seats (1/2 vote each, for a total of 2 votes).
King County's wastewater services do not extend over the entirety of King County.
The sewage of many southwestern cities flows south into Tacoma's system.
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing P-per P.".e 7
in Snohomisn c.,,,_.l. CA,.0 , �,, ;.__�..,J
are not coterminous. This means that it's unlikely that a Federal Way or
Normandy Park councilmember would serve on this committee.
- RWQC develops and approves financial policies governing the sewer rates, also.
In the past, efforts of Seattle and suburban elected officials are credited with
saving ratepayers real money. A continuing issue has been the amount of money
collected from sewer ratepayers which can be spent on non-sewer "water quality"
projects.
A study known as the "Culver Report" concluded that only a small percentage
(about 2%?) of sewer revenues should be spent on such activities. While water
quality activities are quite popular, sewer services are "utility" services. As such,
there must be a direct relationship between the service and the rate paid for it.
With ESA providing a rationale for increased water quality spending, some
participants in RWQC are concemed that the County may try to exceed the Culver
Report's limitation on ancillary activities that may be paid for with sewer revenues.
A related group to RWQC is called MWPAAC. This, too, dates from the time of the
Metro council and is made up of professional staff from the "component agencies".
Literally, it means "Metropolitan Water Pollution Abatement Advisory Committee".
Component agencies are the sewer districts and cities which use King County's
wastewater treatment system. MWPAAC's input is highly valued by the RWQC.
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
Before even beginning to explain the regional structure of this issue, it is
necessary to acknowledge three things:
• The initial creation of the Tri-County Steering Committee and WRIAs may not
have been the best way to go about planning to plan. Establishing clear
relationship of WRIAs to forums to cities to sewer districts has proven rugged,
not least because the county's competing roles, as local services provider and
as regional service provider, are unclear.
• At the present time, various discussions and negotiations are going on in
parallel. In other words, planning and decision making are not (and probably
cannot) happen sequentially. Parallel negotiations and discussions have had
the effect of further confusing an already confusing subject.
• No one—and everyone — is in charge.
The Tri-County Steering Committee is the voluntary organization, created by the
three county executives for Pierce, Snohomish and King County, which is
overseeing our region's response to the listing of the chinook salmon as
"threatened". This is, by the way, not as bad as a listing of"endangered".
The Tri-County Steering Committee includes seats for what are considered the
major stakeholders in response to the ESA listing, including environmental groups,
business interests and the tribes. Executive Sims named Bellevue's (now Mayor)
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing Paper Page 8
^_ •. 1a-. •...tr 4.- .._..,.mac^.-.„,; tee.'„..-.•..._,.,, .., _..- .....-I f.�. f.... 'de
we cany r cuon rian iiicu wan ;vueiai u-ili feglull J
toward proving our commitment to preserving the salmon stock, the City of
Bellevue is charged with an urban issues study to identify solutions for urban areas
in assuring a successful recovery plan. (See EAP, in the Appendix at page 4l).
The Tri-County group decided to use the state-defined WRIA (Water Resource
Inventory Area) boundaries as planning units. WRIAs are defined in a statute that
is not otherwise applicable here, but the creation of these units was considered
ideal for purposes of ESA and in creating recovery plans. Many "stakeholders"
have seats at this very inclusive table, but there are a limited number of seats for
cities.
The city seats are not under any duty to represent other cities, although to date,
the participation of city nominees on these committees has tended to be broad
based and not overly parochial. The Executive has assigned alternates to each
city seat, thus broadening the city participation.
At the same time, the cities have been engaging in planning for their watersheds at
the watershed forums. Each city has a seat at the watershed forums, which were
created on completion of the Regional Need Analysis for Surface Water
Management (RNA) in about 1996. RNA concluded that the most logical way to
deal with surface water problems was through interjurisdictional groups based on
the watershed basin.
Although this conclusion appears to be a "no-brainer" now, it was just slightly
revolutionary at the time. Everyone knows that watershed basins do not align with
many political boundaries. The County agreed to fund the watershed coordinators
and other staff for these forums for three years. That funding will end in December
2000 (this year). There is hope that, in working out the terms of response to ESA,
the provision of staffing for these forums will occur through an interlocal agreement
to be signed by the affected jurisdictions.
In the Appendix, at page 53, appears a possible relational matrix developed at
the ILA table, described below.
The parallel tracks that prevent any hard and fast conclusions about our regional
response to ESA are:
• NMFS and negotiators from Snohomish, Pierce and King County are engaging
in ongoing discussions. A DRAFT Rule 4(d) has been issued and is out for
comment, even while negotiators continue to discuss the terms with NMFS. A
FINAL DRAFT is expected in March or April.
• Since an earlier Oregon plan was struck down in court due to its lack of
certainty, cities have known that some instrument binding the local jurisdictions
into some level of effort would be necessary. A small drafting group made up
of Seattle, suburban and county electeds and staff has been trying to come up
with a potential ILA (interlocal contract) to accommodate this need.
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
The WRIAs are moving forward with planning for recovery. The broad
participation at the WRIAs means that varied needs must be accommodated,
and discussions there can sometimes seem very slow and redundant.
• The forums continue to meet and are waiting for the potential ILA to show up
for discussion. At the same time, thes forums continue to plan for activities to
benefit their individual watersheds. There are two watersheds, more or less, in
each WRIA, by the way.
Every city is trying to figure out what to do, and to do no damage in the
meantime. Some cities are reviewing critical areas ordinances and other local
issues. There is a tension between moving ahead and waiting for one of the
other parallel tracks to come to conclusion. There remains a question as to the
cities' ability to fulfill Rule 4(d) requirements. What is the city's risk?
The county has contracted a case study of six jurisdictions by CH2Mhill on the
Draft Rule 4(d). The purpose of these case studies is to find out how much it
might cost these cities to respond to the draft rule, as written. Additionally, the
case studies are asking these six cities whether delineated tasks are best done
locally, i.e., by the city itself, or jointly, i.e., pooled or in cooperation with other
cities.
Individual cities' abilities to track these actions are mixed. Many elected officials
complain of meeting overload or difficulty in figuring out just which meeting is the
most important for them to attend.
Each jurisdiction's exposure and liability under the Endangered Species Act is its
own. As Councilmember Pageler of Seattle has said: "The lawsuits will be filed
against each local jurisdiction. Not against King County in its regional role, not
against the Tri-County Steering Committee, not against the WRIAs. It's very
important that we take responsibility for our own actions and not believe that the
County can take care of this for us."
Thus, while this topic is generally agreed to be critical to our cities' future, it is
difficult to get any sort of firm handle on what it will mean, exactly.
Perkins Coie is having a workshop on ESA specifically tailored for city elected
officials in late February. A flyer is attached in the Appendix, pp.55. This
workshop is limited to 100 participants, and will include a discussion of risk in the
absence of Rule 4(d) protection. Should this workshop prove particularly useful in
providing an overview of ESA response, it may be repeated.
TENSIONS: All of the above is one big tension. Many cities are concerned that
King County will use the opportunity of ESA response to further support for a
countywide charge or state authorization of a new revenue source for water
quality planning and projects. While cities support the goals of environmental
protection and restoration of the species, King County's high overhead (and
partisanship) disinclines many cities to approve new revenue to the county
without very clear limits and boundaries.
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing Paper Page 10
The law of water rights is complicated; it has also been called "totally archaic". _
But, for a variety of reasons, the state legislature has been unable to effect any
major reform. An excellent survey of water rights law, along with myriad other
topics, can be found at www.msrc.orq.
In King County, the City of Seattle is the owner of a large portion of water rights.
It sells its water to "purveyors", who then re-sell the water to houses and
businesses. Some older King County cities have their own water supplies in whole
or part, such as Auburn, Renton and Kent.
Some years ago, through a complicated set of steps, the suburban cities and
sewer districts put together a concept by which Seattle would transfer all water that
it did not need to a separate entity. This entity would be responsible for not only
the distribution of that water but also for the development of new water sources.
This concept evolved into the Cascade Water Association.
The affirmation of Cascade Water Association depended upon ratification of (self-
imposed) 75% of the eligible agencies by November 15, 1999. At that time, with
just over 50% of the eligible agencies having agreed to participate, Mayor Paul
Schell essentially pulled the plug on CWA. The buzz in November was that water
supply issues in King County were now back at square one.
Representatives from the Cascade Water Association are continuing to meet with
Seattle representatives in an effort to find some common ground.
TENSION: For the past several years, there has been a fear King County will
attempt to convince the legislature that growth management requires a strong
regional water supply agency, such as itself Should CWA and Seattle fail to come
to an agreement, this concem will arise again. State law would have to be
changed in order for King County to a purveyor of water.
5. LAND USE ISSUES
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLANNING COUNCIL (GMPC)
Created by interlocal contract between the County and 30 cities in 1992, GMPC
was to provide the forum by which the jurisdictions would agree to how to
manage growth under the Growth Management Act. It was expected to have a
life of 3 ar four years, after which its functions would go to the (at that time, newly
created) Regional Policy Committee.
By 1996, the RPC had not become a functional alternative. And, unlike the
regional committees, the King County Executive has a seat at GMPC.
Additionally, the executive has historically provided staff for the group. Finally,
the legislature keeps amending the GMA and jurisdictions have to respond to
those amendments. The continued existence of GMPC is now assumed.
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing Paper Page 11
The GMPC's representational scheme, seen in the contract (Appendix, page
" J ;s ;rughlty pi - +e� 1 +-- the population divic-;on i- the a.J �Q��S. �L'rv�f
the years, population has shifted, and now the suburban cities and towns are
under-represented. Even with the spontaneous addition of an additional seat for
Bellevue by Executive Sims last year, the cities do not have parity at this table.
King County's disproportionately large number of seats continues to be defended
on the basis of their regional authority under the Growth Management Act.
CAUCUS POPULATION GMPC SEATS GMPC VOTES RATIO/votes
Unincorp KC 358,748 6 6 1:59791
or
Unincorp KC 1,677,000 6 6 1:279,500
Seattle 540,500 3 3 1:180,167
Other cities 671,552 6- 3 1:223,851
SCA
Bellevue 106,200 1 ?
At first, Executive Sims' seating of Bellevue was resisted. However, by analyzing
the process by which countywide planning policies are adopted, SCA's board last
year decided to set aside the contract and to treat GMPC as a discussion group.
Under the adopted countywide planning policies, any new policies must be
ratified by the local jurisdictions. GMPC only recommends policies; the
County Council must affirmatively vote a policy out for ratification. Then 30% of
the cities with at least 70% of the population must approve (or take no action on)
the CPP.
For purposes of ratification, King County-acts in its local government role, and so
is attributed the population for whom it delivers local services.
CREATION OF A COUNTYWIDE PLANNING POLICY
GMPC: King Co 6 Ratification by 30%of the local
seats/votes; Seattle 3 jurisdictions representing 70%of
seats/votes, SCA 6 MKCC the population:
seats, '/2 vote each. Total jurisdictions 40
Total 000ulation 1.677.000
Bellevue—seat and
vote are outside
contract
Some cities were not incorporated at the time of the interlocal contract and do not
have signed agreements with the county. The legal opinion has been that those
cities are equitably covered by the terms of the contract, so that their populations
are transferred into the "incorporated" side of the equation and their status for
participation at GMPC and for ratification is identical to the signatory cities.
The Countywide Planning Policies describe ways in which we will implement the
Growth Management Act, preparing to accept urban growth within the Urban
Growth Line, while preserving the rural areas. As originally written and rated in
1994, the CPPs cover everything from soup to nuts, including human services,
transportation and critical areas policies. Therefore, GMPC's work program
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing Paper Page 12
inern here. i ney aie avallaulc v(i ale Weil ai
In the CPPs, you will find policies concerning "Regional Finance and _
Governance". This refers to the duty to provide govemment services in a logical,
effective and efficient way. The proliferation of governments and services over
time, added to our convoluted tax system, has produced a hodge podge of
services and service providers.
The CPPs state that local services should be provided by cities, except in the
rural areas, where the county remains the local service provider. Regional
services should be turned over to the county. Simply.put, this is.a policy which
requires that we decide what is local and what is regional, and then match the
responsibility for providing a service with the revenue to support it.
In the CPPs, also, we find the policy by which all jurisdictions agree that all urban
development inside the UGA should be annexed into an existing city or
incorporated. This is so that all local services will be provided by cities.
Historically, the cities have insisted that we deal with real revenue and expense
numbers and that we acknowledge the current "urban subsidy". This is the state
of affairs where general taxes paid to the county by property owners in cities (or,
in past debate, perhaps a portion of the sales tax) are being diverted to subsidize
local service delivery in those urban areas which remain unincorporated. The
county, of course, does not wish to discuss this. However, this subsidy has been
cited for creating an atmosphere in which annexation or incorporation is not
particularly attractive to an urban unincorporated area. Because, argue the
cities, revenues from our citizens are already being used to support police, parks
and recreation and other services in these areas.
In truth, this "urban subsidy" will disappear when two things occur: (1) all PAAs
(planned annexation areas) are absorbed into existing cities and, (2) the cities
and county agree on an acceptable level by which general tax dollars will support
services in the rural area. One of the side effects of preserving the rural area is
that it is unable to raise revenues to support minimum levels of service.
But even when the "urban subsidy" is gone, cities must remain vigilant in
resisting "billing" for services that were once assumed to be paid for out of
general tax revenue.
TENSIONS.-
The county's dual role as regional service provider and local government have
made it difficult to work out some issues. Also, the partisan alignment of county
councilmembers makes dealing with some growth issues difficult.
Seattle elected officials (especially the mayor) and some county councilmembers
believe that Seattle tax dollars support services in the suburban areas. Cities
believe that this allegation is based on a faulty financial analysis, but the
assertion has been difficult to dispel. Councilmember Pageler repeated it in her
acceptance of the Council presidency just two weeks ago.
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing Paper Page 13
The history of development in King County is illuminating. Some cities don't want
to admit cnerrypicking the highly desira"le commercial areas ($ale$ tax!) in the
1970s and early 1980s. Now, having gleaned the benefits of these annexations
for many years, some cities resist annexing the remaining less lucrative
- residential areas.
King County's permitting practices and development regulations have left many
newly incorporated cities with little infrastructure and myriad problems.
Accumulated road tax revenues from preincorporation years (retained by the
county) appears to be a particular sore spot.
HOUSING — PRODUCTION, AFFORDABILITY
Let's get one thing clear. Cities do not build houses. Cities are required to
provide zoning and development regulations which provide an environment in
which sufficient housing can be built by the market.
The CPPs concerning housing were reviewed by GMPC in 1999, assessing
county-wide performance in meeting our housing goals. Overall, we found that
King County met its targets for housing production. However, that housing is not
evenly distributed throughout the county. While north and east King County had
hot housing markets, development in south King County was slower.
Realtors and builders have attempted to characterize these differentials in
housing production as a result of a city's deliberate actions —or inactions.
Unfortunately, close examination of zoning and development regulations does
not bear out this causative relationship.
At the same time that many south end cities are chastised for failing to attain
their targets for production of new housing, these same cities provide most of the
remaining existing affordable housing in the-county. Additionally, data compiled
by Dupree+Scott for King County shows that south King County's cities provide
almost all the ownership opportunities for lower middle income people.
Staff reports prepared for GMPC's housing panel discussion late last fall are
attached in the Appendix at page faL.
There will be a Housing Retreat for GMPC on late March, covering all of the
findings of the CPP Housing review last year and more fully exploring, "Where to
from here?" GMPC meetings are public, and elected officials with a particular
interest in housing issues may wish to attend this retreat as observers.
"BUILDABLE LANDS"
Related to the housing issue is the requirement that cities comply with a 1997
amendment to the Growth Management Act, popularly referred to as "Buildable
Lands". In its simplest terms, this amendment requires us to compile
development data so that we can ascertain achieved density, i.e., are we
getting what we're zoning for? One of the Benchmarks accepted by GMPC
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing Paper Page 14
::p;iiaillJl�.
SCA's Board, at the planning directors' behest, has apportioned some of the
cities' grant funds (appropriated by the legislature in a paltry attempt at meeting
the "no unfunded mandate" requirement of state law) in two directions. A
contract planner with specialized experience in land use data collection is
assisting the cities in development of their base data and with creating consistent
data collection systems for the future. The report back to the legislature is due in
2002, to cover the period from 1996 through 2001. Secondly, a distribution of
some grant funds is sent to each city upon submission of its "base data" under
the act, described as development information for the years 1996 through 1998.
For a complete set of Benchmarks measurements and other growth data, see the
GMPC's website at www.metrokc.gov/exec/orpp.
HOUSING INITIATIVE GRANT
This year, for the first time, GMPC applied for a grant in its own right from the
State's Department of Community Trade and Economic Development (CTED),
the oversight agency for GMA compliance. Seattle is providing lead agency
services, but several suburban staff are part of the staff group implementing the
grant. The proposal is now popularly called the "Housing Initiative". CTED
awarded the grant of about $130,000 for efforts to bridge the disconnect between
the need for affordable housing (not just very low-income, but affordable across
all income levels) and the continued community resistance to it.
This grant proposal was based on the premise that, while most elected officials --
agree with the policy goals for increased housing opportunities, our communities
often object to any (real or perceived) increase in density in their neighborhoods.
This results in city councils being put on the defensive in realizing new and
creative ways of developing housing. A commitment to the goals of smart growth
can be sorely tested when a council is faced with a group of outraged citizens.
This resistance has real political repercussions in cities. Support for increased
density, smaller lot sizes or creative cluster housing is often equated with
destruction of the community's quality of life. Affordable housing projects receive
resistance, too, for the perceived "drop in property values" that is the mantra of
some community protesters.
The Housing Initiative is a project designed to develop strategies to meet this
community resistance, to turn it around and to re-direct it into support for efforts
to increase housing opportunities.
TENSIONS exist among and between
• Cities who want to preserve their communities overall health and quality of life
while meeting GMA goals;
• Concerned citizens (or NIMBYS) who don't want anything else built and who
are emphatic about preservation of the status quo,
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing Paper Page 15
providing ,. _dssG,y runds for ir,,
etc.) to support the projected den::_ ,
• Realtors, who want more units to sell, more `product",*
• Builders, who was not only more units, but to preserve the profit margins on
those units and thus oppose maximum lot sizes or limitations on house sizes.
• Who's side are you on, anyway?
JOINT RECOMMENDATIONS COMMITTEE FOR COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS — (JRC-CDBG)
As part of the housing mix, there are a variety of public and private efforts to
create new affordable housing. The Federal Government distributes CDBG
funds, some of which are passed through to the cities and some of which are
distributed to housing projects through a joint interlocal agreement that cities
execute with the County. This interlocal contract has extremely poorly written
representational language, but this committee otherwise works quite well and
cooperatively in identifying where these CDBG funds should go.
LAND USE —TRANSPORTATION LINKAGE AND
THE STATUS OF GMA IMPLEMENTATION
There is a disconnect between land use and transportation. It is an accepted
maxim that land use and transportation planning must be coordinated. However,
authority to plan, fund, permit and execute in two subject areas is fractured
among hundreds of different governmental units. The largest criticism of growth
management implementation has been the inability of the state legislature to
provide revenues to build the necessary infrastructure to support the density.
There are two articles cited in the section on TRANSPORTATION that deal with
this issue: the article concerning potential roles for regional planning agencies
and some executive summaries prepared for the Governor's Blue Ribbon
Commission on Transportation.
For general data concerning growth in King County, including data concerning
individual cities, get a copy of King County's Annual Growth Report and the most
recent Benchmarks Report, which attempts to measure GMA implementation,
both available online at www.metrokc.gov.
Some issues which relate to this land use—transportation disconnect are:
• Continued low variable cost of auto use
• Lack of connections in the secondary road network (local grids)
• Separation and distances between housing, jobs, services
• Parking supply requirements continue to be high
• Development trends toward big box retail and large residential lots
• Competition among jurisdictions to attract "high end" development for
higher revenue realization
TENSIONS. While concepts of"SmartGrowth"are supposed to support growth
management goals, if not carefully done, these can result in penalizing cities for
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing Paper Page 16
f'ifi(PC fr)ok oyfrPrro
cities which had iaet their housing `'targets". There's that troublesome concept of
targets, again. While his intentions were probably good, this idea totally ignored
the market forces at work in the distribution of housing growth and could have
resulted in a redistribution of transit routes without regard to ridership or support
for underlying land use decisions.
1000 Friends of Washington — the sprawl report
Although this summary of how we're doing in implementing the vision of growth
management contains some interesting information, some conclusions have
been criticized as slightly misleading. The questionnaire used some arbitrary
indicators (i.e., the size of the smallest lot in town in likely not indicative of overall
density measures for that city) and failed to factor in different development
environments. For instance, both Federal Way and Shoreline were almost
entirely built out while still under the jurisdiction of King County. So their poor
showing in the category described as "pedestrian friendly downtown" so soon
after incorporation is not constructive. You can access this report on the web at
www.1000friends.org.
6. TRANSPORTATION
When we solicit interest for service on regional boards, it seems like everyone
wants to be involved in transportation. Why is this? Likely because it is one of
the motivators for people to get involved in politics; it is named as the number
one issue in the region in various polls of voters.
We live in a mobile society, and we know that preserving that mobility for
ourselves and for business in critical to that ephemeral thing called "quality of life"
— which includes concepts like continued economic opportunity through assuring
freight mobility. And we know that mass transit must be part of the overall
picture, to preserve air quality and to provide efficient ways of moving people
around the region. The scope and role of transit is constantly under scrutiny and
re-assessment. One of Tim Eyman's new initiatives ("Son of 1-695") would
require 90% of state revenues directed to transportation to be spent on roads.
REGIONAL TRANSIT COMMITTEE
One of the merger committees, RTC has policy authority over transit planning
and service delivery for King County's transit services. In recent years, a
significant effort has resulted in the "Six Year Plan", by which priority was given
to development of transit services in the suburban areas, in support of the
housing densities being developed there.
Post 1-695, much of this service is in danger of being cut. With significantly
diminished revenue, the question becomes: What to cut? Seattle has an interest
in preserving routes based on productivity or fare box revenues, which makes a
certain economic sense. Fare box revenues account for about half of Metro's
budget. However, suburban representatives are concerned that this unfairly
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing Paper Page 17
forces economies on routes recently developed and still be nurtured, or the
housing recently crea eu v ,,,cn relies on trarssl,
The importance of these policy decisions has required re-direction of some staff
efforts. While the merger committees are ostensibly staffed by the county, on the
participants' behalf, these staff are county employees with some conflict of
interest in addressing issues where the caucuses' interests may not be the same.
For several years, Federal Way has provided staffing for RTC, in part due to the
high profile of Councilmember Mary Gates in regional transportation affairs.
Recently, intergovernmental staff members from Shoreline and Kent have been
brought into the loop to assist in resolution of the transit cuts issues.
PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL
Puget Sound Regional Council is a creature of interlocal contract by the counties
and cities in a four county region (Snohomish, Pierce, King and Kitsap). PSRC
has many jurisdictional members, including most cities and towns. In King
County, only Des Moines and Normandy Park are (currently) not members of
PSRC, based on their objection to the third runway.
In order to qualify for most federal and state funding for transportation, a region
must have an RTPO (regional transportation planning organization) or MPO
(metropolitan planning organization), which has to meet certain criteria under
federal and/or state law. PSRC's budget is supplied in part by the dues of the
member jurisdictions, but most of its budget is in federal and state grants.
In 1995 the regional metropolitan transportation plan (MTP) identified a $15
billion gap between infrastructure needed and revenues available. The MTP is
-- currently being updated, based on the '95 plan, with adoption slated for March
20001.
This four-county transit-planning agency maintains a great web site with maps,
descriptions and data concerning growth in the Puget Sound region. See their
entire catalogue at www.psrc.org.
PSRC is comprised of, and the suburban cities and towns appoint
representatives to, an Executive Board and two policy boards, the Growth
Management Policy Board and the Transportation Policy Board. The number of
seats and weighted voting scheme for the Executive Board are fixed in the
interlocal contract and somewhat enlarged upon in the bylaws.
In action last year, a solution was devised to Bellevue's insistence upon
separate seats at the policy boards. By describing a new class of stakeholder,
(cities described as "urban hubs" in the adopted MTP) as eligible for participation
on these policy boards, Bellevue, Everett, Tacoma and Bremerton all received
dedicated seats. These policy boards also include representatives from
community and environmental interest groups, labor and business.
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing Paper Page 18
authority to change tnc C-ACVuuvc Cwvcifu ilfaKc4"- ,.-;5 v+`i+y 14i J�ii�3 wi ei
membership, through a change in the interlocal contract and/or bylaws.
Attached in the Appendix, at page 5—t, are the slides used in explaining PSRC
representational issues to the membership at the January 2000 meeting.
Bellevue continues to insist on separate representation at the Executive Board,
on two apparent bases: (1) By not agreeing with the method by which the
majority of cities have chosen to make these appointments, Bellevue is
aggrieved and "prevented" from participation. (2) There is an apparent argument
that PSRC should recognize the importance of Bellevue's contribution to the
region's transportation and economic climate and should interpret the existing
interlocal contract and bylaws so as to support their assignment to an identified
seat at the Executive Board.
ORGANIZATION CHART FOR PSRC
GENERAL ASSEMBLY
Includes all member
jurisdictions, weighted voting
1
PSRC EXECUTIVE.
.................
--...............:
Operations
Committee
Growth
Transportation Management
Policy Board Policy Board
R. 1
PSRC Staff Group
and technical
arlvicnry rnmmittaa-
PSRC has been described as under the radar", i.e., the general citizenry and
many elected officials are not aware of it or its role in regional planning. The role
of such regional planning agencies in fast-growing metropolitan areas is
discussed in an article attached in the Appendix, at page �.
GOVERNOR'S BLUE RIBBON COMMISSION ON TRANSPORTATION (BRCT)
These guys have a website: www.brct-wa.aov/brct
Frustrated by an inability to get significant attention on transportation issues at
the legislature, Governor Gary Locke in May of 1998 put together this
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing Paper Page 19
commission, a mixture of business, labor and government interests. The group
needs and with developing recommendations, including funding, to address
regional needs. The commission is charged with reporting back to the legislature
and governor in Dec 2000.
Cities are represented on this commission through two AWC appointments.
Councilmember Richard McIver of Seattle represents western Washington; AWC
has recently named to represent eastern Washington interests.
The initial Findings published by the BRCT late last year have confirmed some
oft-cited problems, including the increased cost of public projects caused by
extensive state bidding regulations. The findings document, an interesting read,
can be found on BRCT's website. In the Appendix, at pp.1:4 we've included
some well-written executive summaries prepared for a presentation to GMPC by
the Blue Ribbon Commission in September. These include a current overview of
the state of affairs governing
• GOVERNANCE STRUCTURES,
• LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION LINKAGES
• PERMIT REFORM
• FUNDING
7. PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY
REGIONAL POLICY COMMITTEE
The Regional Policy Committee, the last merger committee, was supposed to
provide an arena for intergovernmental cooperation among the county and cities
on all topics other than water quality and transit issues (the historical Metro
issues). For a variety of reasons, this potential has not been realized.
Two years after its creation, a citizens advisory panel overseeing the merger of
Metro into King County declared that the RPC was dysfunctional. While issues
such as solid waste contract, emergency planning, specialized police services
and human services would provide the expected work program here, the County
Council has been loathe to approve a significant work program. By the continued
existence of GMPC, it is unlikely that RPC will take on any role in land use
issues.
In recent years, however, the caucus leads, including SCA's Councilmember
Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, have worked to bring this committee to a point of non-
combat. Issues brought before the committee at the request of the King County
Council, such as the emergency management system for the county, have
engaged the caucuses in productive discussion. There is some hope that, with
better communication between the cities and county, this committee may be
revitalized into realizing at least some of its potential.
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing Paper Page 20
REGIONAL LAW SAFETY AND JUSTICE COMMITTEE
(I have recently realized that I know next to nothing about this group. I know that
appointments are made by the County Executive, and that a variety of criminal
justice and public safety issues are discussed there. Participants hail from the
courts, police, juvenile detention services, cities and probably some others. I will
ask President Judy Clibborn to discuss it on Monday night! ... DHE)
JAIL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
This committee is a creation of the interlocal contract signed by each city
establishing the terms for cities' use the King County Jail for detention of
misdemeanants and the formula that the county can use in establishing the rates
for that incarceration. The committee reviews the jail's budget each year, on
which booking and daily rates are computed, but has no veto power over that
budget. The committee's primary function is the resolution of billing disputes
between King County and the contracting cities.
All felonies are prosecuted through the King County Prosecutor's Office and
responsibility for incarceration for crimes at that level are King County's.
Several cities do not use the King County Jail. Kent, Renton and Issaquah, for
instance, have their own municipal jails.
TENSIONS_ Jail casts have been rising for years, as numbers of defendants and
length of each jail stay has increased. While many cities have stepped up their
use of electronic home detention, community supervision and other new forms of
meting out punishment, the total dollars devoted to criminal justice costs
continues to spiral up. Unfunded mandates in this arena, exemplified by last
year's changes in the DUI statute, have left cities holding the bag.
If present projections are correct, King County will need anotherjail within ten
years. Plans have been in the works for several years to build anew facility
somewhere on the Eastside. In recent years, Executive Sims has encouraged
eastside cities to fund and operate their own jail for misdemeanants. Some
eastside elected officials believe that this is the very epitome of a regional service
and that King County must build this essential public facility.
SUMMARY AND WRAP UP
All errors or misstatements of either fact or opinion in this paper are wholly the
responsibility of the author. In attempting a useful overview, liberties had to be
taken.
Your comments on the utility of this orientation, either now or in the future, are
sincerely appreciated.
SCA Regional Issues Orientation
Briefing Paper Page 21
Attachment D
SCA Suburban Cities Association
9611 SE Wh Ave - Mercer Island, WA 98040
phone: 206-236-7676 fax: 206-236-3588
�) scgAhalcvon.com
APPENDIX
REGIONAL ISSUES ORIENTATION
31 J AN U ARY 2000
DocumenQ 01/30/00 1
Suburban Cities Association
zopmr 206 236 76io rt-tX 206 236 3588
BY-LAWS of SCA
Adopted by the membership on June 10, 1998
The SUBURBAN CITIES ASSOCIATION OF KING office of the Association shall be the address of the
COUNTY, as constituted by its Articles of Incorporation and Association staff office.
By-laws, exists for the benefit of all member cities and
towns. Accordingly, the Association will endeavor to achieve ARTICLE II PURPOSE
its organizational goals, as outlined in Section II of its By-
laws, by undertaking the following actions. The Association SECTION 1. Purpose. The purpose of the SUBURBAN
will: CITIES ASSOCIATION OF KING COUNTY shall be:to
discuss common problems and concerns among member
• work to achieve its goals through consensus building cities and towns and related jurisdictions; to obtain greater
understanding and coordination of efforts among cities and
• emphasize the sharing of research and information towns;to increase the knowledge of municipal, county, and
between member cities and towns to improve the state governmental services and programs among cities
quality of decision-making for its elected officials and towns;to assist the Association of Washington Cities in
its programs and activities; and, with the concurrence of the
• encourage broader participation in the development majority of the member cities and towns, act as
of Association issues, solutions, and spokesperson for the Suburban Cities Association in
implementations regional affairs and policy discussions with King County
and/or other affected regional agencies.
• ensure that the Association's Board of Directors is
representative of the different sized cities and towns SECTION 2. Non-Profit, The Suburban Cities Association
'- which comprise Association membership is a non-profit corporation in accordance with Chapter 24.03
RCW(Washington Non-Profit Corporation Act).
• provide that the Association's Board of Directors is
comprised of both mayors and councilmembers ARTICLE III - MEMBERSHIP
• provide that the Board of Directors composition SECTION 1. Members. Membership in the Suburban
reflects a geographical balance of its member cities Cities Association shall be open to all cities and towns in
and towns and, to the extent possible, limit the King County having a population of less than 150,000.
representation from a single city or town to one Members shall be those qualified cities and towns which
Director. have paid annual dues and assessments. Membership shall
be in the name of the city or town.
All member cities and towns will receive notification of
Association meetings; however, only cities and towns which SECTION 2. Other Participants. Officials from other
have paid their Association dues and assessments will be governments or agencies shall not be qualified for
allowed to vote. Only officials from member cities and towns membership and shall not have a vote.
which have paid their Association dues and assessments will
be appointed to serve as Suburban Cities Association ARTICLE IV DUES AND ASSESSMENTS
representatives to quasi-govemmental committees.
The dues and assessments of the Suburban Cities
ARTICLE I NAME Association shall be assessed annually as determined by the
Board of Directors with approval of the entire membership.
The name of the organization shall be the SUBURBAN The dues and assessments will be based on the official
r -S ASSOCIATION OF KING COUNTY. The registered population figure for each city and town as provided by the
State Office of Financial Management(OFM). For purposes
Bylaw%condemed Page 1
23
of the dues, operating assessments, and any other special cities or towns of the Association shall be eligible to hold
assessment the population figures will be updated annually. office, and there shall be no more than one officer from any
ARTICLE V MEETINGS one city or town.
SECTION 2. Nominations for Officers Not less than one +
SECTION 1. Regular Meetings. The SUBURBAN CITIES month prior to the May meeting,the President shall appoint
ASSOCIATION OF KING COUNTY shall meet monthly, a Nominating Committee consisting of one(1) Past
unless otherwise determined by the Board, but in no event President and a representative from each of the four(4)
less than ten (10)times per year at a location within King caucuses. The Nominating Committee shall present and
County as designated by the President of the Association. place in nomination at the May meeting, a slate of
candidates for office for the ensuing year. Should the
SECTION 2. Special Meetings. Special meetings of the Nominating Committee be unable to reach a consensus,
Association may be held on the call of the President, officer nominations will be brought back to the full Board.
or by request from three (3) member cities or towns. Additional nominations may be made from the floor at the
Written notice of a special meeting shall be provided to May meeting.
member cities and towns at least three (3) days prior to
any such meeting. However, in an extraordinary or SECTION 3. Vacancies. Vacancies in the position of
emergency situation, the President shall have the option to officers of the Association shall be filled by a vote of the
notify cities and towns of a special meeting by Board of Directors and approved by a vote of the members
telephone and/or facsimile transmission. of the Association at its following meeting. The replacement
candidate(s)for office shall be chosen from a slate of
SECTION 3. Rules of Order. Robert's Rules of Order candidates presented to the Board by the Nominating
shall apply at any meeting of the Association where Committee. The Committee shall be chosen in the same
parliamentary rules or procedures are involved. method as is set forth in Article VII, Section 2 above. In
addition to the criteria set forth in Article VII, Section 4, the
ARTICLE VI VOTING/QUORUM Committee shall also consider the candidate's prior service
as an officer.
SECTION 1. Voting. Only elected officials from member
cities or towns whose dues and assessments have been SECTION 4. Nominating Criteria. Consideration of the
paid in full may vote on issues. Any elected official candidate for office by the Nominating Committee shall
representing a qualified member city or town may request a include:
roll call weighted vote. In this instance, each qualified city
or town will have a weighted vote based upon its population, A. Ran for re-election in his or her city or town at least one
one vote per 1,000 population. Qualified member cities or time;
towns with less than 1,000 population will each have one B. Only one individual from a city or town may serve as an
vote.All votes from a member city or town must be cast on officer;
the same side of the issue. C. Gender balance;
D. Distribution of representation from small, medium I,
SECTION 2. Quorum. To constitute a quorum for the medium Il, and large cities and towns;
transaction of business at a special or regular meeting of E. Balance of representation from geographical locations;
the Association, it shall be necessary to have a vote cast by F. Prior Association leadership experience and
elected representatives from at least forty(40) percent of the participation in Association meetings and activities;
Association's member cities and towns. G. Availability to fulfill obligations of office;
H. Balance between the Mayors and Council
ARTICLE VII OFFICERS AND TERMS representatives.
SECTION 1. Officers and Elections. The officers of the SECTION 5. Duties of Officers. The respective duties of
Suburban Cities Association shall consist of the President, the officers of the Association shall be:
Vice President, Secretary/Treasurer, and Past President.
The terms of office shall be for one(1)year. The officers A. President-The President, along with the Board of
shall be elected at the May meeting of the Association and Directors, will ensure the implementation of policies adopted
will commence service of their terms of office effective the by the Suburban Cities Association;will preside at regular
first day of June. Only elected officials of qualified member and special meetings of the Association,the Board of
Bylaw%condensed
24
Directors, and Executive Committee; will determine the E. Three representative from the medium I cities or
location for each meeting:will create special committees as towns selected by a vote of the caucus from the mp.diii- I
necessary;will appoint representatives to standing, quu., cities and towns for a one year term;
governmental, intergovernmental, and special committees, F. Three representatives from large cities selected by a
with approval of the Board of Directors;will approve and sign vote of the caucus, or by agreement of the caucus one
_. esolutions passed by the Association; and will take such selected by each large city council, so long as there are only
actions on behalf of the Association as may be directed by a three large cities,for a one year term.
vote of membership at regular or special meetings.
The officers, including the Past President of Suburban Cities
In the event of a tie,the President may cast the deciding Association of King County,will not be counted in the
vote. Upon completion of his or her term of office, the caucuses they represent. No city or town shall have more
President will automatically serve a second year on the than one representative on the Board of Directors serving as
Board of Directors as Past President. either an officer or member.
B. Vice President-The Vice President will act in the A small city or town shall be a city or town with a population
absence of the President, performing the duties of that under 10,000 citizens. A medium II city shall be a city or
office, and will serve as the Chair of the Legislative town with a population of 10,000 to under 35,000 citizens. A
Committee. medium I city shall be a city or town with a population of
35,000 to under 60,000 citizens. A large city shall be a city
C. Secretary/Treasurer-The Secretary/Treasurer will or town with a population of 60,000 to under 150,000
ensure that the minutes of regular and special meetings are citizens. Population figures for each city or town will be
kept, and that notice of meetings are transmitted in a timely derived annually from State Office of Financial Management
manner to member cities and towns, and that reservations (OFM) census data for the previous year.
for such meetings are received; will oversee arrangements
with the host city for such meetings; will oversee annual SECTION 2. Caucus Appointments. Each caucus shall
billings for dues,operating assessments, and any other select, by a vote, their own representatives to the Board of
special assessments to the members of the Association; will Directors. Such selections shall be made at the May
be responsible for the deposit of monies into a checking meeting and become effective the first day of June. Each
;ount established for the Suburban Cities Association; will Board membership shall be for a one year term. Vacancies
`oversee disbursement for Association expenditures; and will which occur during a Board member's term of office shall be
make an annual report as to the status of the treasury of the filled by a vote of the caucus from which the Board member
Association at the May meeting. The financial duties of the was originally selected.
Secretary/Treasurer shall be subject to audit annually by the
Executive Committee whose audit shall be attached to the SECTION 3. Compensation. Members of the Board of
Secretary/Treasurer's annual report to the Association. Directors of the Association shall serve without
compensation.
SECTION 6. Compensation. Officers of the Association
shall serve without compensation. ARTICLE IX MEETINGS OF THE BOARD OF
— DIRECTORS
ARTICLE VIII BOARD OF DIRECTORS
SECTION 1. Responsibilities and Conduct of Business.
SECTION 1. Membership. The Board of Directors shall The Board of Directors, along with the President, will ensure
be comprised of the following sixteen representatives: the implementation of policies adopted by the Suburban
Cities Association. The Board of Directors will confirm all
A. President, a non voting member; appointments recommended by the President. To the extent
B. Three officers: Vice President, Secretary/Treasurer, and possible, all matters of business to be considered by the
immediate Past President; Association shall first be brought to the Board of Directors for
C. Three representatives from the small cities or towns discussion and recommendation to the Association. Board
selected by a vote of the caucus from the small cities and of Directors meetings will be held on a monthly or as needed
towns for a one year term; basis.
D. Three representatives from the medium II cities or
t s selected by a vote of the caucus from the medium II SECTION 2. Voting. Each member of the Board of
cims and towns for a one year term; Directors shall have one vote. The President shall vote only
Bylaw%condensed Page 3
25
before the Association for confirmation shall be by a majority taken. In the instance of a dispute, a member city or town,
vote of the Board. or an elected official from a member city or town, may call for _
a weighted vote as outlined in Article VI, Section I of the By-
SECTION 3. Quorum. In order for the Board of Directions laws.
to take action on an issue, it shall be necessary to have a
quorum of the Board of Directors. A quorum of the Board of ARTICLE XI DISSOLUTION
Directors shall be a majority of the total Board membership.
The SUBURBAN CITIES ASSOCIATION OF KING COUNTY
ARTICLE X EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE may dissolve and conclude its affairs in the following
manner:
SECTION 1. The Executive Committee shall consist of the
President, Vice President, Secretary-Treasurer, and At a regular or special meeting, the Board of Directors shall
immediate Past President or, if unavailable, a designee adopt a resolution in accordance with Chapter 24.03 RCW
selected by the Board. (Washington Non-profit Corporation Act) recommending that
the Association be dissolved and directing that the question
SECTION 2. The Executive Committee shall meet at least of dissolution be put to a vote of the entire voting
one time each month to approve the Board of Directors and membership. Advance written notice of such a meeting shall
general membership meeting agendas and review the be provided for all member cities and town. A resolution to
activities of the Executive Director. This meeting will dissolve the Association shall be adopted upon receiving at
normally be scheduled to allow at least two weeks notice of least two-thirds approval of the voting member cities and
agenda items to member cities. The Executive Committee towns.
will be empowered to amend agendas in the event of an
emergency. The Executive Committee will be empowered, If dissolution occurs, the assets of the Association shall be
in the event of an emergency, to take action without the distributed to member cities and towns in a distribution
approval of the Board of Directors or the full membership. formula identical to that in which Association dues and
An emergency action is defined as an instance where, assessments are assessed.
because of time constraints,the Board of Directors cannot
be convened. The Board of Directors and the Association Passed and approved this 10th day of June1998.
shall be notified as soon as possible of the emergency
action. SUBURBAN CITIES ASSOCIATION OF KING COUNTY
ARTICLE XI CAUCUS MEETINGS /s/
President, Charles Booth
Caucus meetings shall be scheduled quarterly, in
conjunction with general membership meetings, to facilitate /s/
communications between caucus members and to provide Secretary/Treasurer, Terry Brazil
direction to the caucus representatives. The meetings will
be chaired by one of the elected caucus representatives to
the Board who will establish and publish an agenda in
advance, consistent with general membership guidelines for
timing and distribution. Each meeting will allow time for
introduction of items from caucus members.
ARTICLE XII APPROVAL AND AMENDMENT OF BY-
LAWS
The By-laws of the SUBURBAN CITIES ASSOCIATION OF
KING COUNTY may be amended upon a majority vote of the
member cities and towns whose annual dues and --
assessments have been paid to the Association. Any
proposed amendment shall be mailed to the member cities
Bylaw%condensed Page 4
26
As approved by the Board of Directors, 01/19/00
KING COUNTY EXEC APPOINTMENTS RWQC continued
Sound Transit Sants Contreras Kirkland
Member City Patrick Hawkins Clyde Hill
Mary Gates Federal Way Alternates
Jim White Kent Cheryl Lee Shoreline
Jack Crawford Kenmore
Regional Law, Safety, and Justice Committee PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL
Member City Puget Sound Regional Council Executive Board
Jeanne Burbidge Federal Way Member City
Charles A. Booth Auburn Mary Gates Federal Way
Russell Joe Issaquah Nancy McCormick Redmond
Alternates Ron Hansen Shoreline
Judy Clibborn Mercer Island Sue Singer Auburn
Deborah Chase Kenmore Alternates
Dave Asher Kirkland Laure/ddings Maple Valley
Phil Rourke Clyde Hill
METROPOLITAN KING COUNTY Frank Hansen SeaTac
REGIONAL COMMITTEES
Regional Policy Committee PSRC Operations Committee
Member city Member City
Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Renton Sue Singer Auburn
Rosemarie Ives Redmond Alternate
anne Garber Newcastle Ron Hansen Shoreline
-Alan Kiest Lake Forest Park
Ava Frisinger Issaquah PSRC Transportation Policy Board
Pat Sullivan Covington Member City
Alternates Linda Montgomery Shoreline
Elodie Morse Kenmore Jim White Kent
Tom Brotherton Kent Alternate
Linda Kochmar Federal Way Pam Carter Tukwila
Sandy Guinn Bothell Dick Taylor Kenmore
Regional Transit Committee PSRC Growth Management Policy Board
Member city Member City
Mary Gates Federal Way Rosemarie Ives Redmond
Claudia Scrivanich Newcastle Tim Clark Kent
Jim White Kent Alternate
Linda Montgomery Shoreline Pete Lewis Auburn
Glenn Wilson Algona Kathy Huckaby Sammamish
Guy Spencer Normandy Park
Alternates PSRC Regional Staff Committee
Dan Becker Medina Member City
Chuck Booth Auburn Bob Deis Shoreline
Rebecca Clark Covington Roberta Lewandowski Redmond
Eric Shields Kirkland
Regional Water Quality Committee Alternates
Member city Gary Gill Kent
_se Tanner Renton I Cary Roe Federal Way
~Dick Taylor Kenmore Michael Booth SeaTac
RWQC continued:
Update attachment 01/28/00
OTHER KING CO COMMITTEES Local Hazardous Waste Management Plan
Growth Management Planning Council Member city
Term Member City ( Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Renton
12/02 Trish Borden Auburn
12/01 Terry Brazil Des Moines Seattle King County Economic Development
12/01 Judy Clibborn Mercer Island Council
12/00 Howard Botts Black Diamond Member City
12/00 Shirley Thompson SeaTac Shirley Thompson SeaTac
12/02 Joan Simpson North Bend Terry Brazil Des Moines
Alternate George Rossman Enumclaw
George Rossman Enumclaw Michael Park Federal Way
Scott Jepson Shoreline Larry Springer Kirkland
Richard Cole Redmond Kevin Grossman Shoreline
Jeanne Burbidge Federal Way
Staff Deb Eddy SCA King County Consortium
Rob Odle Burien Joint Recommendations Committee for CDBG
Tim Stewart Shoreline Pos Member City
Eric Shields Kirkland 1 Ava Frisinger Issaquah
Alternate Geoff Simpson Covington
King County Board of Health 2 Howard Botts Black Diamond
Member City Alternate Bob Patterson Carnation
David Hutchinson Lake Forest Park 3 Georgette Valle Burien
Dan Sherman Des Moines Alternate R. Lewandowski Redmond
Alternates 4 Pam Linder Tukwila
Ava Frisinger Issaquah Alternate I Rich Gustafson Shoreline
Steven Colwell Kenmore
King County Jail Advisory Committee OTHER COMMITTEES & BOARDS
Member City Emergency Medical Services Funding Task
Sonny Putter Newcastle Force
Jeff Merrill Bothell Term Member City
Alternate End of Task, two positions open to cities under
Jim Haggerton Tukwila 50,000 but not assigned
Bob Ransom Shoreline Non SCA appointments, cities over 50,000
Cmber Ron Smith Bellevue
AFIS Advisory Committee Mayor Jim White Kent
Bob Deis Shoreline
Member City
Deborah Chase Kenmore Jim Hamilton Fedl Way
Tim Schlitzer Renton Workforce Development Council
Dave Asher Kirkland Member City
Merlin McReynolds Normandy Park Jim White Kent
Chief Ron Wood Federal Way
Lt Curt Lutz Kent Ad Hoc Committee for ESA ILA
Chief Gary Anderson Renton Member City
King County Disability Board LEOFF 1 Ava Frisinger IssaquahJudy Clibborn Mercer Island
Member City Chuck Booth Auburn
Howard Botts I Black Diamond STAFF
Emergency Management Advisory Committee Deb Eddy SCACary Roe Federal Way
Member City Howard Botts Black Diamond Jay Covington Renton
Larry Gilbert Burien
Staff
Chief Ed Crawford Kent
Lynn Oliver Kirkland
'thief Bob Johnson Auburn
Update attachment 01/28/00
ZS
Notimm
fcar;
SaLEVW
EIRUY
y;
p
,veomt
ObQ - ,�.. -.SST .+•0. ��� � (n,i �:^ P I ` � r-.
Pok
IL
v
t(ll ` /���,,A `f• ��i � � ,/ vn orwru emare
King County
Current City Boundaries
August 1999
Incorporated Areas
sm=:wry co► Deoa"w of Devdopneri and Erna(—nW services(DLFS)
® King County ,
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Miles pt AW,
rl�
2,1
Suburban Cities Association
APPOINTMENTS POLICIES -
1. EXERCISE OF SCA APPOINTMENT I comprised of elected officials from all caucuses to
AUTHORITY recommend appointments to regional forums.
2.2 SCA's president shall provide for notice to the
1.1 Suburban Cities Association (hereafter, SCA) membership of:
exercises appointment authority on behalf of its • all regional appointments currently being
member cities for those regional forums in which reviewed,
the suburban municipalities of King County, other 0 the process and timeline for approval of
than Seattle, share representation and where, by appointments,
charter, bylaw or interlocal contract, the . any requirements or criteria for consideration
appointment authority is exercised by the affected . appointments which are available due to
jurisdictions. retirement or resignation
1.2 SCA's appointment authority for shared 2.3 The Appointments Committee shall review all
representation is valid for so long as SCA's pertinent information and determine a draft list of
membership comprises over 50% of the suburban appointments for the coming year with regard to the
municipalities containing over 50% of the suburban following criteria, both within each forum and for the
population. appointments list as a whole:
geographic distribution— north, east, south
1.3 SCA may be asked to recommend appointments to • size distribution —small, medium I, medium II,
regional forums where appointment authority
resides in others (state or county executives or large
legislative bodies). SCA is not responsible for the • governance distribution—strong mayor,
appointment subsequently made, staffing council-manager
scheduling or information distribution. • ability to serve, interest in serving, past
participation _
1.4 While SCA attempts to meet the representational 0 knowledge of the subject matter
requirements of regional bodies, it is the policy of
SCA's board of directors to promote consolidation 2.4 Appointments may be continued from year to year,
of regional issues in such a way as to provide for upon recommendation of the Appointments
effective decision-making through efficient use of Committee and approval of the President and
staff and elected officials' time. This policy may be Board of Directors, based on:
evidenced through the creation of a core caucus 0 past participation and continued interest in
group of suburban elected officials on any issue, serving,
representing existing participation in existing 0 successful representation of membership
forums. interests in past efforts,
• information from the "caucus lead", if any,
1.5 SCA shall retain discretion in accepting or . comparative need for organizational continuity
exercising appointment authority for new forums, in any appointment.
based on the perceived value of the forum
proposed, availability of elected officials or staff with 2.5. Appointments are valid for one year. Although
prerequisite knowledge, and the availability of continuity of representation is a criteria of
alternate forums for exercise of the same function. appointment, no elected official should assume that
The Board, upon recommendation of the Executive an appointment will be continued beyond the
Committee, shall be the final arbiter of acceptance current year, except where the document creating
of responsibility for new forums. the appointment authority dictates otherwise. The
2. IDENTIFICATION OF APPOINTEES appointments committee, president and Board will
maintain authority over term of service in all events,
2.1 SCA's president shall, in the fall of each year, based on the overall interests of the member cities.
appoint a committee ("Appointments Committee") 2.6 When the population of a single city equals the
proportional representation for one seat at any
"Caucus", in this document, means those members of a forum or forum, then the Appointments Committee will gi,
ccmmit?-~who represent suburban cities and have been considerable weight to that city's ability to proviG.
appointed by SCA,with a duty to represent the interests of all the i suitable appointr-nen io :hat forum, and that city
member cities.
Page 1
Approved:December 15, 1999 Board of Directors Meeting
A:Appointments/Appointment Policies 2000
2.7 s presioe,,. ..
Committee prior to forwarding the final 3.7 A representative designated as "caucus iead" L
appointments list to the Board for final action, if any SCA's president shall be individually responsible for
_ recommendation of that Committee is changed by reporting forum issues and activities to the Board,
the president, by exercise of his/her bylaw authority. and for working with and being available to any
assigned staff in support of that forum.
2.9 SCA's president is empowered, consistent with
Article VII, Sec. 5 of the Bylaws to"appoint 3.8 The caucus members should be responsible for
representatives to standing, quasi-governmental, identification of cross-forum issues and the caucus
intergovernmental and special committees, with lead should be responsible for communicating
approval of the Board of Directors. In forwarding cross-forum or conflicting issues to the Board.
the list of recommended appointments to the Board
for approval, the President shall designate who will 4. ANNUAL PREPARATION FOR
serve as "caucus lead" for each forum, as APPOINTMENTS PROCESS
appropriate.
4.1 SCA's president shall provide for establishment of a
2.10 Alternates will be appointed for forums, according to timeline, in consultation with the Board, to be
the same criteria as full members. conveyed to the membership, which will include:
• evaluation of ongoing forums and activities,
provision of training and orientation
3. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF opportunities,
APPOINTEES . naming of new appointments
3.1 Appointees to regional forums should endeavor to • notification of the membership and affectedforums.
attend meetings of the forum and of the SCA
caucus therefore. At the beginning of each 4.2 Beginning with Year 2000, SCA's president will
appointment year, caucus leads, in coordination provide for a joint seminar to provide training and
with the executive director, shall establish steps to orientation for regional appointees, alternates and
be taken in confirming attendance, notifying of any affected staff in January. This training will be
absences or other procedural matters concerning scheduled to provide an orientation vehicle for
the forum. newly elected officials. In October 2000, SCA's
3.2 Appointees should be knowledgeable of the subject president will provide an additional training session
matter of the forum, reviewing materials and for issue review and orientation to those elected
participating in discussion on behalf of the interests officials who wish to apply for an appointment or
of the affected jurisdictions. Appointees shall recommendation to a regional forum.
observe any protocols or procedures of the forum in 4.3 SCA's president shall provide for the compilation of
which they participate. a current list of all elected officials from member
3.3 Alternates should participate in all caucus meetings cities, a current appointments list, and information
and in materials distribution on a par with full on each forum for which appointments will be
members, including the discussion of any caucus made.
consensus position. 4.4 SCA's president, in consultation with caucus leads
3.4 Alternates should expect to succeed to full for the various forums, will provide for an annual
participation in any forum on the resignation or review of existing forums, which may include
illness of the principal appointee, for the duration of external or internal assessments of the forum's
the current term, at the discretion of the Board. utility to the member cities, effectiveness of the
forum in meeting the needs of regional decision
3.5 Appointees and alternates should report activities of making, and potential future value to the member
their forum to SCA's membership, through cities. In consultation with the Board, SCA's
attendance and participation in SCA membership president will provide for dissemination or
and board meetings, written reports or electronic communication of the annual review to member
communication, as is appropriate to the forum and cities and regional governments.
at the direction of the Board.
3.6 Appointees shall, in all matters for which they are a
delegate of SCA, represent the common interests of
all member cities. Appointees shall notify the Board
_. ...� cvej,ii inat it1C Oi L6C
Page 2
Approved:December 15, 1999 Board of Directors Meeting
A:Appointments/Appointment Policies 2000
3A
i T
N
7 I I >> d
f N m
m
d
a 0 U
c U c Y
C ? Y �
eo y
eaCD IL o
> m
d
TT
Q U
Q cn m CO
a g g g
77-
7E
a
o U)
a m
m
a 0 O
L) z o
w z
2 Q
o 8 8 > z
8 8 8 8 0 S c°� o
q � g
f� OOOctON 'If U) � tt') co OCOU) r t- C7 �' `7 � N O � OOM O � O
r C7 V Q O co Uo O M M � to R � Uo � to C7 C7 CV (O O r M N CO to (O O W) (O O d
co Vr tovr (Ot- t- rCO (Oto C7 (hU) Mr (OU) MNtD co t` Oh fir - r O
NUn �O NU') c7N Oc7 M NCO t- r -7 C) W) N � ( CA C H d
-� C`) LO Z W
> >
UY �y OF'
y a`) a d U
U) o d Ur Q
c °3 z CL
X M
D O
N ? U
O Nr O W 0C) MNrO (OCDO O OOOUnCY) CI) I.C) t` j
O O O r CO O (0 t- O - 0 r 0 CO N Co N C)CO r- V O M CO U) 't C) Co O (O h to (p �t Le
(O O O U.) (O CO S O N O)O U6 P t, CV t- h M O) In tC�N N O CO N N r' tf) O N M Co N O
r t-- O C C) O N CA N co If to U) O O CT 0 r m t- C7 IT IT CO Co O C O O N O V' to r' C) O CO U')
r tC) N N 0 to O C N Un N N r N r N CA r- O 'V' to CD M r to to t- r R r 0 C) N In N
Q Cj cl t7 NN (n N
N y ar m
cr
U tb
C Of
a-
C Q� FCK
O O M to O O Ln M O O U) O O N O M O O O O O O Un U. to to O O 0 0 0 0 U) O O O O
r CA N N O t- M M (O M '7 r r- M co CO W "T "T v t- M O M r- � N O tl- M t'- CO qr to CO
rCo CV 00 Uo t- t- co rvt-- A) IT - 0 CO O to O) to Co (O C) vW W ITUna N M W NCA O �p
a N Co M t7 [n N C7 t` v O CO O h C`9 M (V N CO CO to M P- CO C7 N r- � O
O M r N r (V r C- r r ►� r r N �f V N N Cf)
r
a o �
U a
Y U .2 Y d) u
c Cl.
O T
E (n w co m a c v E y L •°) a� .o u co a e
0s m u, �,
cQ ° _ ° o m Ra m c o > H cm o c co U E t—° S cc
U C) U o W m O E N a1 0 � — to
XY d c m c � E a`� �' c o c� Et Ew. H � Y €
U � •�' E ' > a > > o c JEJ,cc . ,c , � '(� � c E (o 0 0(D 6 7 (t7 - O N 7 C y 7 C7 4) - C) (� O CU = N O O l9 tl) d M tU M ,C c 7 (0mcncoM 00OUJu. = YXac � F � �.7izzza- Q!(rMMtncnwl
r N C� U7 CD IC
D C.
r N C'7 to CO CO O O r N M LA (O � W O O r N M to O � oo 'Ct
r r r r r rrrrr N N N N N CV (V N N N M M M M M M M M M
- - 33
c
c
C > _
O
N = V S O — M O y M O C Y
t� 2 _ Stm
c oU cca � U = U a � U = a It �VaU
00
QCA — LYe— CO L (� pN — Ors! d Opp (,
ON .Q Doti . Or � � � � �
II Qa i r' Q La
>°, M � 0 C\1c`oo ° mau) 'T CO E °,°M° � a� Lmoa)
� Uccoo E c0, u � E Ovto .OUC 1 j,�,N �
�•1 N a O N U
U U U
0 �
V
M
r
� o
y L C — cu
cC
> (II M Q] fQ Q) M U
A 0 = ^ L% m = E a) S U S Cl) E = E
E .— L � U C — U ULO
+.
� ov = ao � CN 0 � o_ opo(DpE p ) V* rn
, U
o O (0 a) E — O OpNCn �� co
cfl � UU �co � J
UV) 00 -.
>, 11? 2 '� �� �) M CD 1 — - env 2 '0 co
O mU �h cUChLn � UUrno =C.DUco `n c� Lo
0O N N 04 N N C o N
NV 0 N U N
V a
L
*Q O 'N .c
_ m _ L —
L
U c = E O CO :c
O Y = E C O 2
>+- ° .>', C w C6 — C A O
` U U 'nF0- gU � U cV (DU yQ aUU
7 VOA — i L tf) N — � Y (c co a) U) =3
N L L o m Q� N M CA � LL L Q
` d O co Cn a O U') C'V �'s ,� p E O. L. 4 p
OMN N ° tip �—�c� N O � U +_ cj O a'
(� L
E �c� co � COco � as � UN � � a LUrn2
CjUON •= VON N � tM _m
N O N N J
O
o U E
_ m
34
O z
U Q
z
N o
------. 0)-2 Fcu �oE,
,------, CU ai 0.0cc E i
Co 0.0
�o ' s m o c i E e
C O �� O E
A r•-i ' °D U ' -- O U p U c 0 " ' o p
A z Q 0) CL; o U o ,m o ; �U ai
is U) -----+
to cc C , r--- z z
U O
' O C ' m ' ' '— ' '.0
'W 0 , o U ;� ' ; a) p i
iw� ;
c EE a) ,-0 m • ,
10 i pO E
C i ' y E ;
.. ,U ' c 't ,
aci --- a� E '(0 ' o O ,
Q E " v ,
c o
V O U c � �� 0 o ; O ,
C U '0
'w ca 0� -----
c
CU
O L
_ 0
c�
O �E
E c V U .------
Q o � � �
tY OL 7 ,
CV d O i
o
•� w = �--------'
E
M co U
Q 0 ,
V .cc E� _ n
CJ� E ` m " '
cc 0 m c ' c4
c U E -E >+ is c ;
0 U O 10 cC
CD cu a
E ' cc
c N ,
z 10 E ' �cc 0 ar � � cc
' — w
N �y O
Q �U---a- 0
,n U IIII
cu
'� i+% O i iQ •C 7 i �U) i V c W z
Cc u' iZ L O ' i C ' Y 0 Cl) O
W m
35
Ordinance Introduced by:
(1)county counclmember,
(2)institutional initiative,or
(3)initiative petition
z YES
Deadline agreed upon for RC YES Ordinance referred to a Regional _ NO } RC votes to request that
recommendation between Council Committee(RC)by Metropolitan King Council refer ordinance
and Committee County Council(Council)
YES NO
NO YES
Council acts on RC
Council approves YES referral request No consideration by RC
YES 120day d efault
ln NO
deadline set y
Council disapproves
RC makes timely Council action
recommendation to Council YES
(after public hearing)
NO
Extension of time Move to adopt ordinance Move to amend ordinance Move to adopt ordinance
YES granted consistent with (in manner not previously inconsistent with
RC recommendation reviewed by RC) RC recommendation
(but no new amendments)
NO
If 7 votes Refer Back If 8 votes
Council free to approve OkInance p to RC Ordinance Passes
proposed ordinance
Move to adopt ordinance Move to amend ordinance
as originally proposed (in manner not previously
reviewed by RC)
If 8 votes BOA
Ordinance Passes Refer Back
to RC
ATTACHMENT
!FLOW CHART OF MERGER COMMITTEE
!POLICY ISSUES AND SELECTED SECTIONS
!FROM KING COUNTY CHARTER
T41
Section 270. Regional Committees.
• 270.10. Regional Committees.
Three regional committees shall be established by ordinance to develop,
recommend and review regional policies and plans for consideration by the
metropolitan county council: one for transit, one for water quality and one
for other regional policies and plans. (Ord. 10530, 8/24/92)
270.20. Composition of regional committees.
Each regional committee shall consist of twelve voting members. Six
members shall be metropolitan county councilmembers appointed by the chair of
the council, and shall include councilmembers from districts with
unincorporated residents. The remaining six members of each committee except
the water quality committee shall be local elected city officials appointed
from and in proportion to the relative populations of: (i) the city with the
largest population in the county and (ii) the other cities and towns in the
county. Committee members from the city with the largest population in the
county shall be appointed by the legislative authority of that city.
Committee members from the other cities and towns in the county shall be
appointed in a manner agreed to by and among those cities and towns
representing a majority of the populations of such cities and towns, provided,
however, that such cities and towns may appoint two representatives for each
allocated committee membership, each with fractional (1/2) voting rights.
The special purpose districts providing sewer service in the county shall
appoint two members to serve on the water quality committee in a manner agreed
to by districts representing a majority of the population within the county
served by such districts. The remaining four local government members of the
water quality committee shall be appointed in the manner set forth above for
other regional committees. Allocation of membership of each committee's
members who are city and town representatives shall be adjusted January 1 of
each even-numbered year beginning in 1996 based upon current census
information or, if more recent, official state office of financial management
population statistics.
In the event any areas are annexed pursuant to powers granted to
metropolitan municipal corporations under state law, the populations of any
cities and towns in such annexed areas shall be considered as if they were
within the county for purposes in this section with regard to regional
committee participation on policies and plans which would be effective in such
annexed areas. (Ord. 10530, 8/24/92) .
270.30 Powers and Duties.
Each regional committee shall develop, review and recommend ordinances and
motions adopting, repealing, or amending county-wide policies and plans
relating to the subject matter area for which a regional committee has been
established. The regional policies committee may, by majority vote, request
that the county council assign to the committee proposed policies and plans
concerning other regional issues including but not limited to public health,
human services, regional services financial policies, criminal justice and
jails, and regional facilities siting.
The metropolitan county council shall assign each such proposed ordinance
or motion to a regional committee for review. When a proposed policy or plan
is referred to a regional committee for review, a time limit for such review
shall be 120 days or such other time as is jointly established by the
metropolitan county council and the committee, which shall be confirmed in the
form of a motion by the metropolitan county council. If the committee fails
to act upon the proposed policy or plan within the established time limit, the
metropolitan county council may adopt the proposed policy or plan upon eight
affirmative votes. The committee may request, by motion to the county
council, additional time for review.
A proposed policy or plan recommended by a regional committee may be
adopted, without amendment, by the metropolitan county council by seven
affirmative votes. If the metropolitan county council votes prior to final
passage thereof to amend a proposed policy or plan that has been reviewed or
recommended by a regional committee, the proposed policy or plan, as amended,
shall be referred back to the appropriate committee for further review and
recommendation. The committee may concur in, dissent from, or recommend
additional amendments to the policy or plan. After the regional committee has
had the opportunity to review all metropolitan county council amendments,
final action to adopt any proposed policy or plan which differs from the
committee recommendation shall require eight affirmative votes of the
metropolitan county council.
The council shall not call a special election to authorize the performance
of an additional metropolitan municipal function under state law unless such
additional function is recommended by a regional policy committee,
notwithstanding the provisions of Section 230.50.10 of this charter. Such
recommendation shall require an affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the
membership of each of: (1) metropolitan councilmembers of the committee; (2)
members from the city with the largest population in the county; and (3) other
city or town members of the committee. Nothing in this section prohibits the
metropolitan county council from calling a special election on the
authorization of the performance of one or more additional metropolitan
functions after receiving a valid resolution adopted by city councils as
permitted by RCW 35.58.100 (1) (a) and RCW 35.58.100 (1) (b) , or a duly certified
petition as permitted by RCW 35.58.100 (2) . (Ord. 10530, 8/24/92) .
270.40 Invalidity-Development of Proposed Amendment.
If any provision of section 270 of this charter is declared invalid, the
metropolitan county council shall initiate a process with representatives of
cities and towns within the county to develop a proposed charter amendment
providing for effective city, town, and unincorporated area participation in
regional decisions. (Ord. 10530, 8/24/92) .
ARTICLE 3
THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH
Section 310. Composition and Powers.
The executive branch shall be composed of the county executive, the county
administrative officer, the county assessor, the officers and employees of
administrative offices and executive departments established by this charter
or created by the county council and the members of the boards and commissions
except the board of appeals and the personnel board. The executive branch
shall have all executive powers of the county under this charter.
BOA g�
CAACFEP-
3°�
40
Response
Organizational Framework
_ 9
7/14/98
Tri-County Assembly
Executive Committee
Staff Group
Work Groups as Needed
Key issues:
v> -Funding -Habitat -Science
V •LegaVAssurances -Production/Harvest -Water Supply
z -Work Program -Economic Impacts -Public Involvement
and Education
WATERS HEDSJWRIAS
White/ Green/Nisqually Puyallup Duwamish Cedar Snohomish Stillaguamish
WRIA WRIA WRIA WRIA WRIA WRIA
2M714 ESA Trxaxmf0 j4)d WG A
4/f
a�
cc c,
U ° F; c `� o .fl U cz o •o
= a�
yr a. >°,o ° En o 0
F L cd 6. ++ U
Z = a
ci
V = 9 •a L. •C i ¢ a, 00C w
CZ
C3, CWxcCC� E-� x0aa ..aWr/� Wrn o
.N
0
� W
F a�
WOZ U ° U >, h c U •v Ls. = cz
.a F � o :-
W O on ° c,., Q.U c '' on W cn W is
4 =
L �sa •�
— o
.4
o •o
c ID ° ¢ 3 --
O O
Z --
a E 0
OU c c 5
cz h C4 = V] U
aJ c
U R CQ
O
42—
TRI-COUNTY ESA RESPONSE WORK PLAN
(As approved December 11, 1998, by the Tri-County Executive Committee)
INTRODUCTION
Tri-County is a voluntary coalition of jurisdictions and private interests that have come
together with the common interests of recovering salmon and responding to ESA
listings. On October 16, 1998, the Tri-County Executive Committee adopted the Tri-
County ESA Response Strategy (Strategy) and directed staff to prepare a work plan
based upon the Strategy. This document translates the Strategy into definable tasks
and a tri-county work plan.
The Tri-County ESA Response Work Plan identifies a "Lead" for each task and major
sub-task in the work plan. In general, the "Lead" is an entity, usually a legal entity,
which takes responsibility for coordinating the work of accomplishing the task. The
specific responsibilities of a "Lead" will vary according to the nature of the task. A Task
Lead is the coordinator and convenor of the task, notetaker and reporter for the task,
and developer of issues for completion of the task. A Task Lead may be a funder or co-
funder for the task, contractor for consultant or other services and manager of funds.to
complete the task. However, a Task Lead is not an isolated decision maker regarding
the task.
Fund sources for each task are identified where those funds are known. Many of the
fund sources are unknown at this time, but will be investigated as part of the task. It
x should be recognized that participants in the Tri-County effort are providing in-kind
resources to these and many other tasks associated with the recovery of salmon, which
are not necessarily reflected in this work plan. .
A schedule, cost estimate and critical path flow chart for the work plan will be developed
in the next month for consideration by the Staff Group and Executive Committee to
assure timely response with the anticipated listings. The cost estimate and schedule for
this work plan will be for calendar year 1999.
PURPOSE
The Tri-County Response Strategy identifies Water Resource Inventory Areas (WRIA)
as the primary building blocks for the development of recovery plans for salmon. The
Strategy also recognizes general purpose governments maintain authority for decisions
that would create legal accountability. The tasks outlined in this work plan reflect the
elements of the Strategy where there are common Central Puget Sound and cross
WRIA interests. The work plan is intended to be subject to periodic updating and
change as more information becomes available.
TASK 1.0 - REGIONAL COORDINATION
Tri-County will provide coordination with federal, state, tribal, WRIA and local salmon
_ recovery and ESA response efforts. This coordination will include sharing ESA
43
information, undertaking joint efforts to recover Puget Sound salmon, responding to ESA
listings, addressing legislative issues, and seeking state and federal funds.
Task 1.1 —Tri-County Coordination: Facilitate communication, discussion, and
coordination among Central Puget Sound participants, NMFS, state agencies, and the
legislature by hosting Assembly and Executive Committee meetings, conducting Tri-
county Staff Group meetings and by completing this work plan.
Task 1.1 - Lead: King,.Pierce and Snohomish Counties
Task 1.1 - Deliverable and Schedule: Management of logistics for Tri-County
Assembly, Executive Committee, and Staff Group meetings including meeting room
scheduling, preparation of notices, agendas, meeting materials, mailings, and
meeting minutes.
Task 1.1 - Fund Source: $200,000 King, Pierce & Snohomish Counties
Task 1.2 — Federal Coordination: Facilitate communication between members of the
Tri-County Executive Committee and federal and state agencies to identify options to
align and integrate the Central Puget Sound ESA conservation plans with other major
federal environmental protection requirements (e.g., CWA, CERCLA). Develop a
proposed process with state and federal agencies to obtain assurances and coverage
for local activities with a nexus to federal activities as discussed in Task 4.0.
Task 1.2 - Lead: King County and Seattle
Task 1.2 - Deliverables and Schedule: Proposal and understanding with the _
federal and state agencies regarding the integration of the federal environmental
protection requirements in the WRIA recovery plans.
Task 1.2 — Fund Source: Covered in Task 1.1 funding
Task 1.3 - Tribal Coordination. Facilitate communication and active tribal participation
in Tri-County efforts to ensure incorporation of and coordination with tribal salmon
recovery programs, tribal hatchery and harvest practices, to improve coordination on
critical salmon recovery policies and regulations, and to increase utilization of technical
and biological assistance from the tribes.
Task 1.3 — Lead: Muckleshoot Tribe, Nisqually Tribe; Puyallup Tribe, Stillaguamish
Tribe, and the Tulalip Tribes.
Task 1.3 - Deliverables and Schedule: Tribal participation in Tri-County
processes, including WRIA activities. Periodic updates on tribal activities regarding
salmon recovery, hatchery and harvest, and other issues of concern at the Staff
Group and, as appropriate, the Executive Committee Meetings.
Task 1.3 — Fund Source: $300,000 allocated from Tri-County Federal funds
($200,000 in additional Tri-County funds proposed)
Task 1.4 — State Coordination. Facilitate active state participation in Tri-County efforts
to ensure incorporation of and coordination with state-administered environmental and
salmon recovery programs, to improve coordination on critical salmon recovery colic;eS
44 2
• - e
and regulations, and to increase utilization of technical and biological assistance from
state agencies.
Task 1.4.1 - Regional/State Plan Integration. Facilitate the integration of regional
planning efforts in the Central Puget Sound and WRIA Conservation planning into on-
going salmon recovery planning efforts by the state for the ESU.
Task 1 4 2 - Regional/State Plan Implementation. Facilitate coordination with the
state to implement regional and WRIA plans to recover salmon, and coordinate
implementation that crosses WRIA boundaries.
Task 1.4.3 -Tri-County Input to State. Provide input on related State regulatory--
actions that affect local functions such as GMA, SMA, forest practices, hydraulic
code, SEPA and state clean water act revision processes. Assist in permit
streamlining and state rule negotiations, where appropriate.
Task 1.4.4 - State Recovery Strategy Input. Participate in development of the
state salmon recovery strategy, BMP's, or HCP's by coordinating with members of
the salmon team and designated staff from individual state agencies, inviting regular
state representation in the Tri-County staff group, Executive Committee, and
Assembly meetings. Comment on and review State salmon recovery documents and
strategies in their formative stages.
Task 1.4.1 through 1.4.4 - Lead: Representatives of the state salmon team,
WDF&W, WDOE, PSWQA, CTED, and others as appropriate.
Task 1.4.1 through 1.4.4 - Deliverable and Schedule: Monthly updates to the
Tri-County Staff Group and the Tri-County Executive Committee including
identification of early actions for the Tri-County and coordination of issues,
discussions, facilitation, schedules and processes.
Task 1.4.1 through 1.4.4 - Fund Source: (n-kind by state and local
governments.
Task 1.4.5 - Coordinate with State Legislature. Coordinate communications to the
state legislature regarding the Tri-County recovery efforts among govemment
relations and/or lobbying staff of participating entities. The focal point for coordination
regarding Tri-County activities is intended to be the Tri-County Coordinator. Inform
the Tri-County Staff Group, Executive Committee and Assembly about legislative
developments, as appropriate.
Task 1.4.5 - Lead: Pierce County and Tacoma
Task 1.4.5 - Deliverable and Schedule: Updates during the legislative session
to the Tri-County Staff Group regarding legislative issues that may affect the Tri-
County efforts.
Task 1.4.5 - Fund Source: In-kind by local govemments
Task 1.5- Hatchery/ Harvest Practices: Ensure all entities have the opportunity to
have the information to c- _ -ffec+s of Tribal/ State/ Federal harvest
45
3
r
and hatchery goals and policies on each WRIA plan. The objective is present specific
hatchery and harvest plans for each WRIA regarding impacts on the watershed and
cross watershed plans.
Task 1.5.1 — Coordinate a presentation from hatchery management entities that
contains historic data on production, and addresses questions such as: what are
the return projections, what are the future plans for releases; and what is the
intention of those releases; and how may those plans assist or conflict with the
WRIA goals.
Task 1.5.2 - Coordinate a presentation from harvest managers to present
historic catch data, current plans, methodologies and future expectations on
salmonid species originating from Central Puget Sound ESU WRIAs.
Task 1.5.3 — Coordinate a workshop on the interrelationship of habitat, hatchery
and harvest goals.
Task 1.5.4 — Coordinate a presentation on the effects of ESA principles on
hatchery and harvest activities, and how those activities relate to WRIA plans
and expectations.
Task 1.5.5 — Coordinate a presentation on the hatchery and harvest goals as
developed by the state, tribes and NMFS for use in the WRIA planning effort.
Task 1.5 - Lead: Co-managers of the hatchery and harvest elements (State and
tribes).
Task 1.5 - Deliverable: Develop opportunities for WRIA and Tri-County participants
to receive information about hatchery and harvest factors that will affect each WRIA
plan and the ESU.
Task 1.5 - Fund Source: Federal funds
Task 1.6 —WRIA Coordination. Provide a forum for cross-WRIA communication,
coordination, and information sharing on issues such as setup, initiation, model
agreements, functions, factors for decline, habitat priorities, relevant harvest and
hatchery strategies of the co-managers, and plan implementation. Coordinate among
WRIA groups and jurisdictions to identify key tasks and deliverables needed to support
the development of WRIA plans and implementation measures. Identify cross-WRIA
needs and opportunities to coordinate research, policies, and implementation actions.
Coordinate the integration of WRIA plans with existing federal, state, tribal, and private
ESA approved plans.
Task 1.6 — Lead: Snohomish County
Task 1.6 — Deliverables and schedule: Provide for regular meetings of the
Habitat/WRIA Coordination Work Group; provide an integrated key product schedule
for Tri-County WRIA efforts; suggest issues for cross WRIA discussion and common
problem solving; develop recommendations for the Staff Group, Executive
Committee, and WRIA Forums regarding issues and problem solving areas.
Task 1.6 - Fund Source: To be determined.
46
4
Task 1.7 — Funding. Develop common strategies in partnership with public and private
partners to administer, generate and distribute funding.for planning and implementation
including cost sharing agreements, and operating agreements as needed.
Task 1.7.1 — Funding Strategies: Develop common funding strategies for WRIA
salmon recovery for and between WRIA's. Facilitate partnerships between
appropriate jurisdictions to accomplish common salmon recovery goals identified
in WRIA recovery plans as needed.
Task 1.7.2 — Cost Sharing. Develop strategies to accommodate and share the
costs of Tri-County activities among participating entities.
Task 1.7.3 — Operating Agreement. As needed, consider operating
agreements to receive federal, state and local funds, fund the science panel, and
conduct other work items assigned to the Tri-County elements of the response.
Task 1.7.4 —Allocation Strategies. Develop strategies or targets for allocating
and distributing funds within and across WRIA's, including goals and
accomplishments that are intended by the funding allocation strategy.
Task 1.7.5 - Habitat Bank. Assist in the design and development of an entity to
serve as a "bank" to facilitate the process of applying funds or other valuable
consideration to habitat restoration and protection priorities, at both the WRIA
and regional levels.
Task 1.7 - Lead: King County
Task 1.7 - Deliverable and Schedule: To be determined.
Task 1.7 - Fund Source: In-kind by local governments.
Task 1.8 —.Urban Issues Study. Assess measures that could be taken and solutions
that could be implemented within urban and urbanizing areas to ensure a successful
recovery program. Develop mechanisms for flexible interjurisdictional implementation.
Task 1.8 - Lead: Bellevue/Urban Issues Oversight Committee
Task 1.8 — Deliverables and schedule: Computerized database of scientific
literature evaluating Chinook and coho recovery efforts; scientifically valid
assessment tools for use in a salmon recovery efforts, assessment of current
activities, regulations; and enforcement practices; list of options available for salmon
recovery; and a list of potential pilot projects for various levels of urban development.
Completion by November 1999.
Task 1.8 - Fund Source: $300,000 currently allocated from Tri-County funds
Task 1.9 — Science Panel. The Tri-County Executive Committee and Staff Group will
consider participation in development of a science panel. A science panel could provide
technical assistance to the Tri-County process, such as:
Review of existing state of knowledge of limiting factors analysis and other
concepts and approaches to watershed planning for salmon recovery.
Examine and make recommendations for prioritizing actions across WRIA's.
4�-
• Provide other assistance as requested by the Tri-County Executive
Committee.
Task 1.9 - Lead: King County
Task 1.9 - Deliverable and Schedule: To Be Determined
Task 1.9 - Fund Source: To Be Determined.
Task 1.10 — Economic Impacts. Coordinate the development of an analysis of the
economic implications of the proposed ESA response plan elements. Coordinate with
the National Marine Fisheries Service as they prepare their economic impact analyses
required to implement federally adopted elements of the Tri-County ESA Response
Work Plan.
Task 1.10 — Lead: Everett
Task 1.10 — Deliverable and Schedule: approximately 3 months after the proposed
4(d) Rule is made available for public comment.
Task 1.10 — Fund Source: To Be Determined.
Task 1.11 — Legal Analyses. Convene legal experts to provide general legal analysis,
in connection with the Tri-County effort, to serve as a clearinghouse for legal information
and a forum for discussion of legal issues as identified by the Staff Group of the
Executive Committee. Specific tasks may include analysis of ESA "tools," previously
negotiated agreements and other documents, and general analysis of the legal issues
surrounding the ESA response.
Task 1.11 — Lead: Pierce County
Task 1.11 — Deliverable and Schedule: as needed assistance
Task 1.11 — Fund Source: In-kind by local governments.
Task 1.12 —Water Supply. Coordinate with the Central Puget Sound Water Supplier
Forum to incorporate water demand and supply information into WRIA and Tri-County
efforts. The Central Puget Sound Water Supplier Forum intends to develop a Water
Supply Outlook that includes development of water demand and supply information in
the Tri-County area. This effort will include: coordination with the Tri-County ESA
response, communication with the Tri-county Staff Group, Executive Committee and
WRIA processes.
Task 1.12 - Lead: Tacoma Public Utilities
Task 1.12 - Deliverable and Schedule: Draft Outlook by April 1999
Task 1.12 - Fund Source: In-kind by local governments.
TASK 2.0 - PUBLIC OUTREACH AND INVOLVEMENT
This task is intended to raise public awareness, provide information to the public and
stakeholders, and involve the public and stakeholders in recovery planning and
implementation. The public must understand the Endangered Species Act and the
reasons for the salmon crisis and support the implications of a recovery plan for it to
48 6
succeed. The recovery planning process must be representative of the public as a
whole and the public must have ongoing, meaningful opportunities to provide input. In
addition, citizens and stakeholders must be engaged in the recovery effort and
understand and embrace their roles for the recovery plan to be fully implementable.
Task 2.1 - Public Outreach and Involvement Strategy. Facilitate development of a
public outreach and involvement strategy and framework to be used while the Tri-
County develops the salmon response plan.
Task 2.2 — Implementation Strategy. Facilitate development of a public outreach and
involvement strategy and framework for use during implementation of the response
plan.
Task 2.3 — Tools. Develop public education tools for development of recovery plans
and identify long-term tools and strategies that will assist the region in the recovery
efforts.
Task 2.0 - Lead: King County and Seattle
Task 2.0 - Deliverable and Schedule: To be determined.
Task 2.0 - Fund Source: To be determined.
TASK 3.0 - INVENTORY OF ACTIVITIES POTENTIALLY
AFFECTING SALMON
Each Tri-County participant can choose to undertake an inventory of their activities,
program, and regulations that potentially affect salmon. Those conducting the inventory
may include counties, cities, tribal governments, state agencies, ports, special districts,
private sector, and environmental interests. When completed, these inventories can be
used to:
• Establish a baseline understanding of current regulatory and non-regulatory
activities that affect and protect salmon, particularly regulations and programs
impacting or protecting streams, riparian habitat and water quality.
• Assist the WRIA planning processes by developing a consistent set of data
about existing measures affecting and protecting salmon across the Tri-County
region, and may become part of a conservation plan.
• Identify existing regulations, policies, programs and activities that might be
included in a 4(d) rules as exempt from the "no take" provisions of a listing.
Task 3.1 - Inventory Template. Develop a common process or template for
inventorying regulations and activities that potentially affect or protect salmon,
particularly regulations and programs impacting or protecting streams, riparian habitat,
and water quality. The inventory template will be sent to affected state, local, and tribal
governments and other interest groups to complete an internal inventory-of regulations,
programs, and activities.
49
Task 3.2 - Inventory Completion. Individual jurisdictions and agencies voluntarily
complete inventories of their regulations, plans, policies and activities that affect or
protect salmon.
Task 3.3 - Inventory Compilation. Compile completed inventories for use in WRIA-
based planning efforts.
Task 3.0 - Lead: Pierce County and the Tri-County Inventory and Evaluation Work
Group
Task 3.0 - Deliverable and Schedule:
• Inventory Template and mailing list - Accomplished
• Complete inventory template — each jurisdiction or entity — In process
• Compiled inventories --Accomplished.
Task 3.0 - Fund Source: In-kind by local governments.
TASK 4.0 - BASIC ACTION PACKAGE -- INITIAL PROTECTION
PROPOSAL
Tri-County entities will consider and employ a combination of ESA "tools" to ensure an
effective, efficient, and timely response to the listing of Chinook salmon and other
species and which will achieve ESA coverage for identified activities. Tools shall include
the development of a flexible 4(d) strategy with NMFS, participation in the Section 7
consultation process and other available tools. Possible elements of the Initial
Protection Proposal includes:
• Process for negotiation that honors commitments made in the Tri-County
strategy.
• Identification of activities for which the Tri-County is seeking coverage.
• Coordination and agreement with the state regarding the approach.
• Identification of roles for development of 4(d) planks and mechanisms for
communication and input.
The Staff group will further define the proposal for initial protection for discussion and
approval by the Tri-County Executive Committee.
Task 4.0 - Lead: Snohomish, King and Pierce Counties
Task 4.0 - Deliverable and Schedule: To be determined.
Task 4.0 - Fund Source: To be determined.
TASK 5.0 - MONITORING AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT
The Tri-County Staff Group will coordinate an approach to monitoring and adaptive
management that serves the following goals:
• Recovery plans that contain adecuate Provisions for monitoring
50 8
•
• Recovery measures that are linked to the limiting factors analysis by WRIA,
such that monitoring will provide useful information to refine the analysis and
guide future actions.
• Recovery plans that are structured to allow for adaptive management
responses. .
Task 5.1 — Define Monitoring and Adaptive Management. The Staff Group will solicit
and coordinate input from the WRIA's, state, federal, and tribal entities and other Tri-
County Work Groups to develop Tri-County recommendations on monitoring and
adaptive management. This task will include working with NMFS to define what
adaptive management means.
Task 5.2 — Monitoring Framework. A workshop will be organized to develop
recommendations that can serve as a model for WRIA based efforts. This workshop will
focus on developing a framework for monitoring: the effectiveness of the recovery
program; implementation of the recovery measures and programs; and appropriate use
and consideration of adaptive management strategies.
Task 5.0 - Lead: Seattle and King County
Task 5.0 - Deliverable and Schedule:
• White paper outlining an approach to monitoring and adaptive management
and a process for developing recommendations --March 1999.
• Recommendations on WRIA-based monitoring and adaptive management --
July 1999.
Task 5.0 - Fund Source: To be determined.
9 ��
0
0
� o
Na
a
0
U
� a �
oCdta
>
po
� R
b
o -
� o \
Q
:b
.r .N ca
4•r 4 � c � �' .�
U �
r.r
O �
a
p u
> A
O U /
5
C
a
� o
O u
cla u
� O A
4) a �G��t$ � 1?Fih7l�t�b1F� °°
u C
ti
C C
O
_ U SCA
53
o3-Lower Skagit-Samish F ---
I
-,..
it- ............ -_.__...
S'til/n2ttamisd River- `uta�t/e Rfve� .--
WhitSL•h y
OS-Stillaguamish
River
—
' x S N 0 H 0 M I S H COUNTY
t t
Island
y
E� r _
Quilcene-Shaw
`, 45-Wenatchee
.� ;mot
t :h � t ate` �4 � �4� "O..$h0'homis�}` •r x`;�'t'P „"'` �y��� -�`
YP
SDpyYa1101eor01R`� zzs;
�'�.� *w :
15-Kitsa
-s
��. 1 Sar�pam�sh�
7.
�a �
-Green River ke NIa shF
orum
forum
`
J%� ,Py "�`rYY� � � •� _ ��.4yrkl�" �'4aj�1,
Duwamish-Gress
12- "sth nra�re�'i — 39 Upper Yakima
Chambers- —
CloverA.
•s � � r
10-Puyallup-White c `�
11-Nisqually -
s ; PIERCE COUNTY
26-Cowlrtz
Watershed Forum and WRIA Boundaries N
King, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties _
0 5 10 Mi
— — County Boundary
11•name Produced by the Vds lCammrariration&GIS Unit,Public(Nitreadt Seaian
WRIA Basin Boundary and Name Fie Na 98066A-RWw nWPoAnuoai Fit
WRIA(Water Resource Inventory Area):
A watershed-based land unit for river and stream inventory and management developed by the KING COUNTY
r ^ State of WacMgt ron in 1973.WRIA basin boundaries may not match the more up-to-date Forum ® �Department of Natural Resources
•)�} basin bo.eroar" 'Room,
...: ....... .. _ _ _ _ ...
�.. .
.....•..
».. ..
,_:__
:......
r :..:
.
. .. .. -• _
.:..,. :. . : ....: S1i1�SS;:CD311t...
. __
'T't'+�COUii v$�1
.
.: .
- _ , _ - -
_ :. .
COPE::.LP ,- :.''::�':::.::. -
...... : . .. .... .. .. .. .. .. 1.
PERiCXS: .......:..... ...
-lcsho
..... _::.._.....ti.
. ..: .........:.... :.
:......::':�; ,. ::
- -
t ::dit:r a_ltal p:_ ;;:: ':: ::::;: '
....invite you o. f.dad: v or.
:_ -
. .. .......... - - -
:...-.. � ..:.:, .: :..
::•. . :...:..
-._... ,.: ... :.......:.. .. -
. . ... ..
:.
...: -for- Eleet�ed :O.fficia _.._ ---
:.....7.,.'.:_.:.::...::::: . ..- :.: A Wo..-. si�o. _
:. ....
::::::
:_
- -
-
.::..
::
:..:......
:.:...::.. . . .......:.
.:..:...... .
:... ....:-.. .. .... .:.. t:Y:o. .
:ilea :::
:::---,_ :to novv, bouti::the:
:::.
:: ::::.
....... . .. ....:_:.
.... .. _... .:: .
....__..
..._ ....
: .
5 :2 0
0
::.. . :. . . .
....
:. .
. :......:... . :. ....._...:
: .: ..
:�:Fri�day; F:ebru�ary::�
:.r- ,.
.:....:•::_: .- . .... _'-:.:: ' =:-
..:,:... :...... -
�arriott�:
- -
.__
...
. ::. . ..........-:..:......::.:. .....:: . ..: .._.::::'_..,._7.......:..,. ..:...:. .
- -
W ksho :'Wi'tl:Cover: : :;::::::::: �:;;:::: .;::::-:
What:the -
:. :. ..
or p
U". ...:
c
9..-.*'-.-"*....'..-'.,.'..."�.....,...... ..... .... :: ..:. :...:.::_: e:..., ...:...... .- 0-.cars:o.:..--i 1. ugtoii;_esp.-da .w__ :�.ts d......d�to the elec ed:: _ _.:.::: :. :-This;Half y aP.. . -
::........:.....it'..:....:.:... un couticil:menibers and�co uss?oners;::an ;ci . and.�outtty:: `::::::
::: �:..:c?.t3::council.members,:co ty.:.. ' -... . :. . .. .
:-: : :: .:_..: .: .....:... . _..: :.. .. -
:w ,.are':and:wil�:be-:. .,. ::w diff-icult p .licy;..ecisions a out.:.:ecoverurg.: .: -- .::::: :::;:: `:::: ':';
:.::attorneys ho:.... ..::"..::::::..;....:.: . _
.
.:_:_•;:.:_. "runs: This:worksho ::is:•intended:to provide.the.elected_official:or.:::::.; ; ::..::.:::::;:::::':: ,:::::1::;;::.:
.. . . ...::•:Washington_salmon.. P.
:.... _
::.::::..::- ..':.._. ....:::
:: .-:dam..;of the-differenM..t =.tfic:legal=abl�gatioris... ace... ::_:;::..:: : ... ;.....
. :.._ :. .:..
:.::.:....P
olicymakervrth;a=ciear:un erstan 8:..
::. :::....:..... .._ .......: :.::_.
. .
:..
: l cal: ovem rents;under:the:Endangered:Spec_ies;Act. n,.-: -e:pohcy:_c _olces': _ t:.are::.::-;::1.:_:;':.:_:::;:_: :__^
::::: may:.p . :_.� : - - _ = --
.... _...:. .
............
-::.._ - .le ..&Ii ations.- huuted:to:.loa,..::..
vailable:.over.and.above:those -
a . ...8 ce
... ..:....... :..:............_.._ .
• .. -.,: . .'- airs :have:been-a 11ed::for:wit3r.trtie Washin
ts.:..CLE:credrts- 4.5.ho PP:
ci an - -
a G. ..
:._:,::...:. :...
P �`gton:�State:'. ar ` :•:::':::;�::; ��:::�::�:=::'-
iaton:" _ - _ _
oc:As s -
-- _ _ cal - - - - -
Fa -ty: -
:-:.,........ . . ....:: --
:.::
:..
,.. .::,.-:.. _:.. -
M::_:.:.:.:- ::.:: . . .. .... . .._ : liaired:b- ::P:ezlans:Coie:la... er:::Chuck:-..ad yell ::'I'lie`fa ult vsiill:: : :.'';r,;:::`._ `:.
- v ;.... ... . . 'l'he:workshop will be c.
.: :.:....::...:.... ......
-:..:..:.: :.
.:...
Cole, , e�s'T, en-Scliuler and'I'o ri.*:*,.*I.: : ::::`':::::`::::::
_-.:..: :::also Include.Bill DdUr of�CH2M:Hi11:;and P.erlans..
:...
-.::- :.:..:.. -
._.:._. .... . ...:.:: -
•::...:.::::.....:
::.::::::: :::.... . ouun PerkyC: .i—,liucic::lVladuell:spent vyer<ten. ars wi .:: a Kiug::::;: :: :: .;:;
:.Mcponald::::B.efore� g_
. .... _:....: .:.:.....:..
.::..:.:.:: .. ;...: .:;:.. -
.. . ... .
: :. .....
-__:- --moo.
un Prosecutor's Office.as:a.Semor•;DeputyProsecuting_ rney.an
ty .. . . . ._ __ ..:
__..... . . . ..... . .. . ..;........._..
:.: :A
... : _. . :..:..
0
:.:.._..: -. . . :.:-: fimcr n 1999 after::..-:..-...'a..;...
ei du g
:.,'... _ v onmental:Law:Sect�on.,:TomMc-Donald:"omedtfie
:. Use.an& u ... .. _.. :•..:..:_:-.:. ..:.. :.•...: .:,.- .:......:.
.
.. ...
..sP
: . :,,. t
,tl::.. .
t Attorne.y-General-and:Water ection:Chief_ or:: :e:: colo Division: ;:::::;:.::::;:::_`:__
::... .:
en.:years:as;an SS1Stan y
: :. ..:,.
. ...::;
....::....
__ .. .. :Water'resources Pro ectManager::with C�-I2Ni:1 i1 s Bellevue:;office :,-",.:::- :.'..:.. :<,-:
.:$xI1:D 1s.-a:Senior:. . . J . _ -
eny: . . - -
..-.. :.. - -
-.... ::::. .:: . . ....: ..: .:. ..:. . to ment':s ecialist:.and:_strategic.:planning=:consultart;:-;:::. ::.:: _::: ._::. :=
:.
:. -.Galen:_Schuler,..a_former..econonuc..deve
-_..-:
_...: . _
.. -
:..:•... .:. _..._. ... :.:::.:........ .: .
.... :.,.:..
.::..:... .......
: ....
...........
::..:.:,...... . . .. work in on: S issues= :::`�::;::::< :. :
,.....:... *11 vate rachce.for.five.years... , g.,_.
.has.been pm..... ..P . .: -
-. ..... .... . .. .
A.... .:.: ...:::..•
:.. .:..,. .. :.
O
b0 rite: - -
:.W rks
P: -
..-. .._
- - :'_e__ - --
e
- �320:T Soih.
:tt
..::.........:::.:.::.:.. :.__...:
- = tt"Hotel at:SeaTac
e worksho will be held:aftlie::lvlario'
-- -
P..
_ . ... .. -
81.88 ;::;: ';::;.::`;;:-:;_::;::;::: ..
_: ►.�.. -
-
._-.-,..,U-,..,.,l,....'::-`.. :,..._-,../...:'..�.-,._....:.-'-'.:--.*..-.*�,:.......*:.-
--.*-,�.....:_,-......-.:-.*..,*"...:,i.-,.:.-....'':::..,......,,..-:..-'.::..,.,'.:�..'-.�,.-":..,...---:....,..:-...-..,�..:....-......'....*.',_....,-,..-:�...:-.."..,..._:.......,.-.'...',-...:./
...*::,.'U-.,-- U-*.-.*.,".._.-.........,-:...-"..--"...:,-
_. ....,_
..
.......,.....'..--.,..-,.-....--..*:..."-,I.7:....:"....:-..-....--:...
-_,.,.-*,"-..
....--.'-..,,i.-.i.-...*"..-'..---.........:...-.,...-,._.........'.....-,.....':,..�.._:";.."I�.'...-...-..-.::,N�:.,l:.....;-.'.-......-'-..
.-.-_:.-,..
.._....-.-*.-_
'-__,..
_
.:,.-..7-...�..-,...:..,.:-..*-.-.-*,.,...*._...I-..,..
- --:--
-......":- ...-
....._.:",$.;'
*;...
'-,...`..
..-
-----,.--
'1..:.-f
......7:..
*
..�
-.....:.-!.-......�..-..-"
..-
"
,_.-..:..:,.,-.'....-
:."...., -..-,...:.-:....:.._:.".....*.:..-,,...........:_..- -
.
,tA.Y VIuaj�f .6jkl LLA.vAV._ I
-Pgr .ctpatejplease to tad.lh6-registrar;byW_edAesd Y,` e, , sd-t c*Spccl
d . -- '.',.` `-'--'.-- -:- ..* * *."....-..-...
.. " b na6-l..-*' * -'_--'.---*''. ,,.*-. .. *:I..-.-7-- .."-'. . ,.-..--.., --.-,- � " :.:..,....: ......,..... ..'.'..._..-.-.-1.- .-.
.:.
"-.�I...
1,...-,*....-'-.,.,...:�-�....:...
:,..-.-....,....,.-_...-
..-:..
"...-...-
.?....7-
....-....-,
.
.4T=g = ' ;
=,
..,.,.,.,-.
"......'-
."".
--
-:..
,,*...-..--.;'........-.--....,
.,:.
..�:
r.,..�..
.,.'..�.
.'.
-..
.,.:-......��-...."-.:..,*
..:_..
..-.,.".
.:...
"::.....
*.*
..`"-.i....
.-..-"
....-.,......--..-.
'...-...
*.-
�.--
-,,
...,:.i.-.._
'`�
... .".. .f..-...'...:,.... . .-. -�..... .? eb .,
.,: ' ,':. .....- -
:_. -.:: . _...... . .: ...
..-..-:.:. . :,._ .: : ** , *
...... ..... .:. .
..:.--:.....:. . ..: .-' . :.:: -- - -:::..... :.' 1:...' �
� Continental6 eis 6�ow . . .. .fe- '. . ".- ., .._..,...-"_,._.:..—..: -.'.. :..,.- � .-
...:,.-..--
.:
....-i-.�...,.,
,-
.**...
..-_
...:.
.*-....-..,,-...:..;''--....-.-'.*'_-..-.,:..
.:
.."...:::
...-
.-:....':.'
.,
.....--
,
-,.
...-...*'.._-
...
;'..
:
-,'
.:.,..
.
... -:afi �-_R. ::*' :..:. I _ 7 .l.... ..:.;
.: .-..-: .. `` ,.. --.-:.,- .:.-,.... Chu6k .W6 A--..:.: ..:':.*:.%-I.... ..l -BOo-aj . ,Wh . h W d Y ou."Cu - - -
`:-..."'"''"-� 3 ... -_ Sa�. on7
-. .' , 'B�I. Ti6
'- - - _
.- , . ;.
..:-..:-.-.,..:.-:.:.: :. .M:: e mli-Proo . -
....,. ._: ..
-%.... � ....-:''::., ,, :.-': :.-
_.." ,Iibk.w i
.:: ,. . .:....: ,:,;.-.,.:
.."......... -" . ' -..- . .". ,-. --. ...., ._',::: T6&-�.M�06iild.--,_,:-:....- :. - ,..�..:-...:-"..--
.
'..,�..:
..-i
..
..-.:-.*.':.:.,
-..-1.
-.
,:...--'..:..,.
..:.:,-,.�....
.....:'_:-....:.:
'..;.....
.:�
-....-,..*.
.*
:....:,-
-,"-
:*...
-*..-
_
:
-`.
�._..'...-'...-..i,..,.�:...
-�.
1
-
:
,-
.-,
:..
:-..
;-...-
,
:-..
:.-
...-
-
...',
:.�.
*-.
:.l
:
.-
:
..:
.:-
-
�.
:
-:-.
:
-
-- :...&l .��.... , ,"*�ie-t A-A,nway,' `._.-._:� ...,,-.,.: .-...:.-;i-:-;....
..;. " ..
..: .:,-.::�...:: � :.... ,, ,.:.'�.
.. . -.. "..
'.- .. . .... : .... :........ . -§. :*!--.§: .. .
. :1. . .. :..:I-
...--...-w-"---..... '�:' .,:.,:, -:..,,.0�666 - ... 6 "
...ESAT ....G. , . .
Ybur.L xgO.Obj�gattons,Uu&. fth e
:What. e
--. .. . ...:
i..- ... : : ..:. i "-,.:- :::: -- ::.-f::,:;.. ::.I
' ..*,-. ..*Pf6b-ibit6
.'; ,"., ... .`-:"
..... ....-. .l _ ____ . . :�-jiabiliYish , - . _-" : :�,"* .. ,., ,* ._:. : � . ,,:
. --....,'_..... -."e::.:.,.'....-'... , :7-CO.nuiiatibl�. :.,: ,- i.,_. . " ,::,_,� , '- % .. .--.;.;:,:..,*-* ...:.:...: ..,.. . ,. _-:..
-.:..*:
-
,.
-
_
.-
1.
:.
.:.
*
_.�.:.._-.-,I-._.�...�..-:..::-_"."-,.-..-,..,:,',..��j.::-:t.........'."�,..wz:-2-f-.,.-:.W,..�.,.-:..j:..".....�-...:.-....':..�%�.....':.".-..*::....-�.-:.*`....:.*':-....:-::..:..i-.'*-:�-..'..-_,.�.:.:.-.--::.',......::.;.-.-.-,:,,..:..,,.:,,.,-_.-..._,...:-I.,:.-:...::.:..:...!..;....*-...,..:.-.:.,'.�.-..:....':.::....-...,_.....--..l,.'0...:-...*.�'',..:...--6.:..:,..-..-..,'...-.,4..........-..-..-,..-.-..,-.,.-,:.,.-:-.,":..,..:.-.".-*:.:--.,-.:-*....,,:.,-:.,-,-.',:.:,4"-:..,.-:..,..,-..-...,....:........_..-..,.......-...'....._....."-......._..,.*�I..........*-.........._:.........!..'�,....:._.._..._..,.-._.._.�.,..__..,�l....'!...1'.._....*................_,'...�1....'..,..-I.,...-.:1_......--.......I.-.......:.-.....:......_......,._.........-..I.-..-.......-......�.I..........7...".....;-....'.........................-.._..........'........._....'....-..,.-....-................-......,.--.--.,............-.....-.....I....-....,'..................-.__,.-.-....-.....,-.......--....._-........-�-.......-.....-...,......_.....-...-_-.......-.......-......-....'.........-.............'..........-......"_.........-.....,....._.*-....,-.................-......_....'............,.....'..-......,.........-.-..................-.,..-,.............-.............-._'...........,....,.......'.'...._..-........-.............Il.......-........_...............-.-.....-..-..-.................-...-...............................__.._..,................_.................'..-._'._......._..,,......:........-..-_...-.._...............-..-..-.......-.......--.........._.........-...*..-,'-.,...;".._.,....._....,....,..'._�.-,.,...._....-......._'.._-'..-............_.........._.......,...--....._.:-........_.-.......-..._._........,.-.._..........-...:......-....,_...,........-..,..:....:--�'....,...".._........._................_.:........_._....'I:........_:-......._............._-..,..........._.._.._......-..,....:....-..:-.....__....-............�...I..-.�.:-...,.._.'....,...,...._...l......-._.........�,....l:......w....-.,..........:....._...-........':.......—.........:.._._......'..............�.........'.....:...............!..--...,..................:..........-.:..._-.............I............_.�..............-.,'..-.".:-.........:-_....,....:-.,
.......:...........,...........-........."".,,.....................:-.........-............':...............,.-......'.......':.........-.,....'.......�.:-............-..".......:....�...:....-......�...I.......�.............._._....._........_....',,....._.--....-................,.'.......................'........_.I.._.......,'._.....,_.....................-..,....."............_....,........-.......'............-..........,...._..........-...,.....,.__..I,-..._..'_..-...._..........-.........-_.._..............._-..._......',._.............."_.......,...:.................-........'......'...-..,......._....;.-,.........,-.....-...--................-11..,...._.'..........."....-.......�.......:..'.,_.,...'......,....-..-...:......',....,..-....*.,...........-......-..',....--:._.......-..........I":...-.................."'.-.,.:-�..I,...-.........:.,........'..'...._.....'........._.........................__.......-......-�..._...........'.........
...............-......1._.,.........-:,........_-.�..�.....l-.........,'.......,...,......_"l....,.._.
�.-,......*....,..-_...*.''......-.....,...l:_;.'.�..."".._..�"......,-.�..--..'..-'._......:.....`-......-.........-.............:....-........:....-.,_..�............_.-..,_..-:..-_._...........
..,...
....-.
_ ._.;... ..
.. .... .:..... :,... ....:.fi6�.
__ 6� . _� . . .
�6 -*** - -"4. -: B9- 5
_ -::-- : �,.:�:��.. '"'',.,:.:....,- ...
*:,:_ ii... . ,*' . . � t _...:, ' ' .:: Wit& i �-,_:.'__*._.. _-:-._ .'TO.M- .wOiwa
:..-.-..... .....WhkAb ut Y.t W.06i , .,
-:::. :,':.-..::....".:.:"..,: .h.-:---.
,,: .
-.,. ........... . , --- -. .-- . .........: .,:__. •
...::.I...:;:.
1-,.... . �..:....... .-�,, -'.- .,:: �...-.- :Ch-i kk- * id kii. ��6. .S. .�. T- :`
l -' '-I _45��_ .� hafAr YomPb1p:. a. 6��_ . .:..;.:
-- . "--.:, *... - -
.."' .:. .; . ..Z... .1...
-,.': .. - .. i Wha :. ±e the i�k &:yoR
.:,-.•.:.-..:: -
_...... :. ,
...,.....: N. .:�.
:`:'* i
-- . .:.`_r,*.......:-::..-.:: ''' ) !b sue`?: ..'. -*.:'. :.-. :. . --.,.., 1..:..:. . .-- - . :..I_. ,'-!': :,,.:-.
--..,.....-i.�' . '..-_ . . ... .. ..WA d ' � � are..a:p
.-:..-..�'!'* w ---:, *:. : :. .. .
:: -.-:: * . - ._ ..., ....
-:.:. ...-- . .... _. - -... '. .. ,
"
-__-_'---___. -_-,_. ..::-.... ....:.-.. _.�:q.H6*. Ch- ef mHLIY dO*-You:W nt. a l..-,._:_::i`- .: :. .....• *
,- .. ...- .:: :-
:, .-
- .:.:**,, 6 Can . WaffbiW-6.:"_ .., -:,:-*-- ..* :'. ....;.,-_:.:.,:.:. - ", -.,' . :l-:.::.. .,,- ...,.
-.. --�.--. :"......- . .. ..:. !... :. ,:- . -. . _......I. ..66 "'
7 :. ...:-�-D .y6i*iaib*lTmovat :0v.:.w ail ds -
" '. . .-". ..,- _ -
-�-.. .. - .- -. .." ,..:. ..:.... : - ... . .. : , * end. 7.. ... nd
-- _`.- , .: :: :- ,.* -.
-...-....:... :- . " - :Sho I ,you:reTon n&ep- : �:. - ....- ..... _!-.:`- __ -- d ces,: '`- - ...,-,,:--, ..o f.-
.: ,* .....- : . i'.
,:*. .COOperat n:w1&.. _ r
e=d.l ..:. b- _O -...--. ...- :...........%..: : :_
.* . ..-liW at .ou�. ptPni-f 'i
.- . -
-:- � . i-. . .* ,,_ -
_.....__l......:. :.--...--., - ..- . '. . .. : _ ... . '- ' :-: .': : ,:ll�*l ._ :. .:. :.. .." .:, , . ,-- :- . .W -
_ ."
,. _.:'l .....I.. - '..... .," :":.. are.
:-., :�: -.:,... . ..:_' -- ey f .. ... _ -
... . .. . ...
:.: :.: .: . . �. _ bd_Ay61 ike'".,- _* _,_:._ ,`"." - ::.," -.- _ . :�'--'- .... :::: - _ . -
- - �.-...'
,- :.�.Incidental_TAkd.9._
-.. ..
...:..::. .: ..: :.,: .. ._ :-4 6 x mp a6s�-','Ii.afbut I" .1 -....'.
. . .. -. -: "....:..:: ;, -- W' . -(.0): .
-::--!-_:--:,_.:. ..: ..- -�..*.
,:"...." :...: .-.-... . /:. i. i6. T'I . " * .*-� ..:.�"-_ ... ,,: ,'....... .*..,..:,..:.... :-.. ::- ::..:',. -....: ...... "
-:- .:.: .- .,,
-.-.......... Hi �. i..C6��i
. - :
� -..�, ,,,
' , " . ..:
D - 0 ..O46:: _i ,-ers. ; -3 11:D .:Chick1 id
Whifb. . . st1)i :a&..� w
.: -; .�..:-. ,...-�:. : :..:. � ., . .:..... .'.. .:,. :.... :: ., .::.-::....., "... .S-ailok i .:T -i M.W&iil&` -"-,o... .... ;1..
. '. .. ..... ............ : * ,.*:.-
--,*`-.- :-, ." '.- L
-; . ---:: - .--�: �:-... . -: 0Tki_ppED. s,.-. �,.' " ,." -,. .., -.- .*...-'".-""..*:':''. -:. . -' �*:. .- .-�. ,_,, . ;- :..--.,,. , ..
:_. :
.... - .-.
.:.: ---. -.. _.. :.'-.. .... ...- ....I-
70 36 1_SL
, ,
I
.
-
*-*,i-" ,,
,
�- 7 :* *-** -
" ``
" **
,"' """ , - * *
, "' ,"""', **
,--""""', **"' , '*""*"*
, ""**"**'*"' ' *' -
,-.-.--*..--*,..-,.-..-.-.*-.,�l-*--,.*,..,,.-.*,..,.--.-**.-**...-...*.,--.*.-,.-,..-,----.*;�l-*'.-
--.......--.-...--....-......-..- ........-..-.--...,..-. -,.--....,-.--.-...--........--.-..-
I.-�...-.-......-.;......-.......-......-.--.-,,.,-..--.,.-..--.---.--...---.....-.�...--.--..-
.. - - - - ... ,-.. .-.- .......
. ' .. -
. . I
I
I
�
. I
�
. -
�
I
I
�
�
I I 1. I I
. I I I . I
..," . .. � I--.-,"�� .A.....;-.,.-.::.. , ,*"'�-:'-.-,-.:....-....,.-:....... -:z.::..,..,:....:--....*..:-,:.-...- .,
-; :.:.�;-,.:;,.::,....:...:...:..-:.,.:...,.-.*::... ....'.......-; .�-. I .:.:: -_: ....:.... -I'. .,%. . . .:: - .... ... . . �
-I ..--..... l-.---.-.-.:-:,.-: -:.:� --:. . ...:.. - .... ,;:-:::.�: ,-,.. . .
- -�......: - :,:,.: .. .:�-,;-,.:----.-.,..-.-'.-,:--.,-,:":�----,...!... .......*....,... - -�:,.-,:"-...:....",*...",.*..*,..-.;:,.".... .. : .--. ... . �., -
- ... I --...;......:,.... .............',-*.:..:.-'.,...:........I.......'........'I".....-:-...I..-.. .:I .... ..,. - .:... ...-......-,...'--'-. "...,.:..,:..*......-.- - -
--*::,.,.,..-..,:-.:-.'..*..-'....': , * , , .. .. .. ....... -..
,-,, ..... .::.-,..:.-,.......-..:--:--.-::.,.,--.:-.---.-;7'.'.-.-'-:'"-'.-::':-''.'::.'.-"-..--- ...---.- . .. .-..-., ' . ...,-*...., :"-'.. -..--..'-'--'.-..'..,.--...., *
" , "' " '* "- *'' .....�. .......-..."-.'-..I.........'.... .-, --:'
* :.: - . - . ... - . - .. , , .:-:-...&....... - -,...... ... - ... ..............:.�'7.:..1.
:.. .......... .....
.*":. .: .-.* - ,.* - - �-i--.-y.',-.-..'.-2."5-';-'.,,- . . .,�--.'..--'--'. -.. ..- . :.:::-'--7..:,.....:-......
- ':*.�....."...*.' , *;,...::-.-.' , -; . -.. .
.----..: .::.,:.......'...;,.....:..,..;..:,....�--:::�::*'�--.--."..: li.i. ..--...*..,..' : ,* , , -.'. .,.... .,... .
.." . -.-, . . ,,:: .;.. --* - . 7 .,".*, , ...: - ..� , **' -�l-*'.."-.-...-"-.,.-'.'.�.-'.."��..,.,;,...,.,..,,......*-., . . . -...:
.... ....... ,., -.'.: . ..�.--:-:-.:-.:.-, .:'-- : ..'*.2..-'000'--�l�-���"'::;':" ,*,..,-,-..*--.-,.".,,:.-...-.-..,-.-.'-.--..-....,-.,
.. , . .- ,
.. . - , . ., .
-.. - ' ' .- -:...--.-,.-�....-*..-.�.-F�..-:.-.... �" .-.9...'.-, -.,* - .....- .-.... ,.:... . . .
.... , . . 5 .:. . . . . .....-. .
* - - .. :.'.''":7'.;,".."-...;-.:":- . ,... -. " :
. � ..:. .- . '-".' .:.,.. . .
. ....... * ,, .:,.!:......", . I_.- . . ,.,.**.:.,.., , :.
.. .. .:---,:.*::,...,.,..":.,--..:--.;.",*:... . .::�-:*:-,.--.-,.-. .. :----:�--*.;,.-..",---,-','.-.-.... .I.. , - . . ,-":,"--.-, ,
..:,:,...:.,......-.. ': ,- ...:-.. . - . -. .:'.,'.*,.-!.".".
.. ..,. .- -�'--;.-.,....,..: .. -...... ::"..,:*"* .. .-,.'.-...* . -,*.-",-r-: . -_.:_.- -...-.
- . . '. . '...
. .�. . . . .... . . ... .. . .
., .. '. . . - -::. . . ......:......... . . . . ...:. . -.:-::...,
- -A I....,...,.,.......,:..:.:..:.. ."..:....*...., , , , ,, ...-'....-... ., " *:* - . . ... , ,, , , - ... ... . :,:*-,.-,:-:-,'--:-:::..7. ....:. ---.
, --.. -� . ...-..:....I.,::;.-" -.*."*-"....- -,,.-.......".....'- . . .. .. .... - -.. . .
, , ** ":-:. a..--�--�-�*", .',-':.--..-.':*.:..-.,-',.-,:.:-*::-:.*.-.-::, I .... 1 -
... . .- � ,...,.. . : -.-...'-.:...."..::.,.:..,..'.' -;-...:.,...*,:..
.. - I- .1 I , .- ,��--:-:-*--.'-�--..., . .. . -
. ., ..,.-:* . ... -- .. - .. .: ''' ..-..... ...:.- . ..- -
...... ��........::.,:.' .'...,,.-..�-.-. -. -.-- .. - - - - -..:: - -. ..' . --.---...: ::-,:-:.�-.,:-f;�.,.:.,.::
.
. . , .. ..
. . . . :,; - - . -
, ` - . : .:o :. -. - .. ': . :..:..,...-........:.:...-
....... . ....... .... .'... .::.......,---:�,---'----*.-'.--*"...."..,...-.., --�.'*�;::::---,.:- '.. .,... .
...
. . . . . . - --.. .. ... - -:*.,. .. .. . .. . . '.....
.......� ..... . "-.. ......'.... ..... ....... ., .. ..... ..: - . :. .. : . .. ,.*.":: :::..",*.-...,..,.,..."*.*-. . .
- .... .-. . .:.:....,-....,. .....-.�--� %W .. .. . . * ,*."-".... ...... . ..
. - - . :.. .,-.. ...... ......'...--*..I ,.'- ",.....
.... ... .� ..:"..,..... - .,,.'-----.--.--,
" - :.. ,.:.--,.,-'..."::�.*,:**:*: .". :",.-*,......*I.--.-... .....-....,-. :: ::.'::". "' . . . ,-�: .
.I...:I..:..-.'.-.-.:......'.-...::..: .:. . * 7 -"9w .. . .
. ..
..�....
....�� . . . . ..
, .. .. .
... .
'. .,- ... .. ... R'
- - ,
.'*:, ..,:.:*.-.,-.-..*.-*....-- . . -"-'* . . .,. ..
. . - ..::.:...,...., ..... ... * "* **""' "' -- , .
.. ---l-l-I - ..
;---.,.....:.",....,....... - .-.- I..". � .-.- *':. :," . %-...�.:- ;:*".�::,.:...:.".::::.*.:
.... . ': -:...: ":-..,.---..-.-..-:,.-'-:-.--.*';:--,-..------ .. --.---. "" : 1 : .. ': -,�-.,.., -- - :::-� -_-...:,.., -... .L
....:........ ... ... -::'.. ..'-�. -.......--, -- - - .- - - - - . : .: ..".'-'. ... ...:,. .
-,:. .- "..::..::I*--'-"-",-;..,....- --.--;" -.:�- .,..:,. .....-....--.f.--...-.-.-,..- . ...... .
- .:.,.. ... .,. . * ........'..".. ...:-, . ..:.-.:'
...:,-.�
, - - . .
- -::.*, ..;..... .. ..-y..----. .-;�;
.: -----.---.','l.�-.:.,-`:,.,, - , " . ,::*."-:--'�* *:' � .
::-..*,.::.*:..�-:.:.-..::..;.... ""' "- -, ...�.".---.-..-.- '..'. . .. . ...... .. . ''t"', I..'
.- . - , - , - - --- . .. ",-.... ....,: . '. ..
.
...-.,..::-,--.."......:..... .....- ., ..... - .".:.:.::..,.-.:::..,-..,...:.-'..,.. .: -.....-..---........,...�'..,:..,..!.**-'.*7�.*.'i::'.:'-":d"""".:"'�'-:'.--::*-:.-: .
.....:.. .�..- --- -..:.....---,-.- -- .., ---- - ... ... ... .: . ... -...
-, . -,�.:. .�.-.--...-....:-.�....-..-..-.,...-,�-......--.'.'.--.'.,-.--.-,...� ,----.-------.-.-.,.:.--:�...: - . '.-..*.*:.....-. - - - "' '"
. ..:. ..:-�,:.-'--.:-:*.- . .. ... .. , � . ::- .. .:...:.' , . .-".-'"' - '-' " -ftei i eit
,
. . ..-.. ,, - -�..' -
'. . - .�:........o.....:.. . .
, .-.......-.:. .-.-.. . . .:, . -.... - A
.-..::........-..:.-:.-"..-'.. , ,;..,�.'*..'�-�.-.-,.:,.,�.-...--:.-........,.........*.......,...,......::�..-.,.'-.-.r.:.--."..:: ::.*...'.�..::.,.:.:.,:.!:.:.�'-�:. - -
..�.....:. * ... .-- . - -... ... . ..:-.. . .
. --.�'-'.' . .. . - - . .... _ , :::.....:-.---. ...............::;
. '. .. .. . .... . ...........- . . .... : .
-�..,:..,.,.:",..::.:,:.,::...-,.-,.., :--.-,..l-::.-,:-.,--d'.'. -. ... .. .:...7-::..,....,-",..: .... . ,
: ..... -, --� :�-: l-'. .. ::..:. ..:. :,-' ':*,*. ...-. ...: .,.'' -.:".:":*.*,;:,:. ..:.:.".: . .
. . ... -- .:.'..:*:' � ... ..
... .. .. :,...,:,.,:..-:."..*.' .. ..-.,-.,.:.:.,.. . :. ..�:... . ... ..:�,'*..'. .... -.1.1- ... ...
. .. . .. .., '-. .. '. - ,
. I --- - ... .
." - , . . .1. .:..:.: 1.
--..::.- -W -, "' * ... ex..,-,." ,- ,"--'. ,,7. :, '. ,
- .. . ::-:��.y.,*p - .*-"' , -:r:... ...,.:,.,.:*....-. I....::..":*.::
.. .; ' : , '" ...-::...:...., - .- .....-I., . :...: .. ....-. ..:"I".,.'.-...*-
. , " .. .- . .... e..-..'..*,---,-*,.,-` "'.. ,-,.,., . ..-:..::
, . . - - :.. , : . �,.:-.;:�.....,.. . ..
-.... .....-...�'----..-.-.,-- .: ,.-".,.-.::,:.::... ...*.-,,.*..--..:. .. ... :. . ... - .. .
. . . .. .. -,- -�:---,-.--.- - ......-, -.-.
. *`" Or - - - - - .-- .. �.. -:�-: . - . -
. .... .".O -I .- : -�..-.'.:
- . :.;..,.,..,...,::.'-:�.::-.,..�.�::....,.','.:'.'.-�,�:-.*.:,.-:::----�.'�l",.,:---:.-,-,:...,-.�::.:.:;:,:�..: .--,�-----,�- -'...., -*-..-,--*..*-.'."'..,..*".".;..":.-
...,
-,", ..:,. Elected .. c ib-I..... ... ,:. .* :.:;,:: ., - .. .....
:,: "I" .ESXW-or ho : 1* . . ...-,f:�----�.�---"!:: ..
. - ..... ......... : .:.L. -- - .- - .. --........, :.::-,-.-. --..,---..-.�...-.-. .,.,........ 1.:.,...
- : . - -........ .-..... .�'.....-.._:... . .. ,:.,:...-.... .......... - ' " ''- .. , - , . ....,
.. .. - .- -........:............... :. . , - :... - I... .,-..,:,....:..-. .... �'.L*,-:..-....
:;:': . . - .. .. .... .::..:: . .. V..l-l.-..-.--.'..:.,: ..: ,.,:".":":,.,* -:-.-'-,'.-,:.:..*.'.'.-*.*.�....-..",:::. . :,:.**:', � ....*.:.:.
:,::-::::�.'::.: -... ''" '....... .... . *' . . _ :.,�:7.. ......... , .......
. . . . ,. . .::. .:-� -.-:: - , . ..-. . . - -.- ",:"
. . :. - n ..y - -e .. .. .. --., :...::.-...�"".:-'* "...--..-, -.. ...- ..... . - , , .::.. .':: :,:.--, -::,..-*-
.-... - idi""'T""bi )" . .
:;-,-,:::.:.-.-,::�.'�:.* - , . .. . ...�._. � I , , . - - 6
:... -'. -,... :. '15. .,... . : . . . . .. ...--:...,6-..-.... ..... 61
. . . , -- -*;'.I.'- --....:..-....-..*.,:-:,:..;:,.::..,:.,:.. -� -*-.' --:--: ,-6:.... -.-.'.--. -6�.�6-.:.-
- .1y - - . 6 . m,'....-:.6 ..,.: .:.:6...:..... . .. .. -::-.7,�.]--�: .
. .�
. 0 �M� 6 - -- . ..
:":: ,.,I,.. '6 . ,..,.F - ..; . . ......... .. . :., ,��--;7. -. ....'.. .. .:.*... ,::'.::;.,". _,. -'. ..-�'. -6 . - .
, ,
::":: ,.,I.,.. .:... '.:: --.... . .. .... ... ..6,:".,...:--.�: .�:::,.--..:.,--6:. ,.'-- .:. . .. - " :.:: . .
- " . :. , :" . - .. - .:-. . "*:--.* ';.-...".'..:**.,.,.-.......,. :.,. , .:-,..:.f.*666."
-I - -::. .. ,:.-:*.-..,'..:*:.. ...:...6.,...6...":.-.. -..... ---* -',- ---..-� .--.,.::...:-.-.,-,..,..--.. ". .�', ......-.�.:...............".*-*, ,." - * , .:- ..:.,.,
. .. ...:...- - - . .. ........-, . -
- - ----- . . . 6. . :-"..-'---,-�:--6-6... .-..:...'7. . f;-,--:-:�-,-, - *.. '. -.- .
- .*t.":,. .,:6. . : . ... ...-.,. ,.�..6. . -. ".... ,..-..-...----- .. -
- - .:..- . . ..... - .6 --::. -..-.:�--7�.:--.-:-�::::-'-'.-:':.'.6.-'.'-'�"--'7. . .: --11-...-..-.�-*,::., .....
-..'..,. . :.;�.. . - . .. .- .. 6",:,�,.,..:: - ..-:..'-.-- . '-:.6 -:.'-*': .. :-, . .t.:::..:...-I - ".�:---....-.
:.. , , , .,-.. ....-..�-.-.. ..... . . . . ., .. -... . . .: . .. ..
. :6 - . .:..-:. . . : .� -'... ...'.'..... : ..
... ... ... ..:..... . .. - . . . .. , ... -6":%...
- � .: . , . -.-- :.-- :--,.,,::.
, ,
... � ,. - - . .. .......I.
- , ,
os, - ..", .,.....:, 6...-...:.,...::.-..:.6 . .- ".."*".. .. . �.. , ,6-,..,..., .,
:-"� ... ..: �d:;(A-.,c h .pa, 'Idub.: - 01C.-.... ::.- .:.. -. �, ....... '.. ,:-:.,.:: .:6..-*.:6�:-.
.. . - .-,..- .. :-, .:..:-
. -encl. ,'e-d k ,-*,, .. ::;�.,-.- . .****** .:. .."...",
.- . ,- .-... .e... .-. -.- :: . :
.. ,:.,..:.'7..!.'.*r-:.6,::.:,.,.::...... 6,6"6,.,..6.....-.. .. .., **,
. .. - . . . .
. . ...,.- -,.- .-:.;---..:...-.....-....,:..,. . ..-
. . . . . . Y.A-bk6---&.-'-*-P6&:'::-�'- ..-....: ,",-**-, . ,;., ..*. : ..
I*-,.-
. ..:.::. . : -
.. . . .-.....:...,. .n.... -.'.�,-,.:�,.: . ..: ... ,�:.!::�... .-- -- .. .. . .... , - .. 6 . � 16'"
I otal: :.., :: . . - . . . , , , , - ..--- . - -- . ... .::�......
.., .. . . .... .- - --,.-.-- ....- ...... .....-.,-6 .... 6 . - -. - .6. :--... ... .: :,.:...: .. .... ...:,.:: ,
.66: - ....-.6:6..:. - - ' ' -6 - I ..,.,- :,..6... . , ... :: '.
�: .: .::..6 .., . . ..:- . 6 .. .: --� - 6 - -6. : '.., .-::,-
1 .....6:.,-,.. .4 . .- iA"j---:tf,.-N,f," .. - . . -.:...,.:�, - - - ,. 6.�.-- -
. . .- . - , ---:..--,..6.6..:::.*6.'.-,.".::--.-�:....--.,6,..,..":6"....,.--.--.-...-..6
-... : hi ,.-7: --6t��� . -... ... ..,:,.--......-. .. .- 6.-.
'. ,:...,6 6fd.t r&Y(Perld'ns 6, . -
. :6 6.1 . M`,:-: . . : . -.:
-b . - - .." .::-- . . . .. ...: .:...... .. , . . .
6 . , . . .- . .-. , . . : **:: , , - .":::. -:::,:-�::.�-. . - -
. . . , .. . , .-,-:-:::::,-�.--:.-.-,..... .. 6....:..-'.'..'..�:.::6..�'..-'.*":,.* .-.:",-.:..--.-..----:�.....--;".....,... - ..... . "'
- 6 . , ..�::::6,:,.,.6..:....,.6*--::,:,..,*.,.- - .�. . .6. . ..,..-. . , ... , .:..6 , *.,..:-:---.---".-::!76;"
. ..! .. .,- -.:.,.�:,6-- ._. ..,..,, , ... . .�, ,-':;..-.:'.."6�6:..'-..- - . ..:. * , . ..-- .
- �*.�.::.6"....*"�:��:.,I*,..6.� ..,6 ....:,,...--.:.6,.,..-..;, :: ... ..6.,.: -..:�..�.. 6- , * ** '.......:......-..:... ...... ..,--, - -:--:.-:--'�-.*.-6.-.:,.6.........� �
--, , .- . . . �* ". ..6..-......,...:..6.. --...,....:..,7.- ".:.".,..*.........�-,:-,7.,.,: -",::-. - ....-..---.:::....-..:. . 6 "-
,....... . , . . : .. -:... .-..::.6.r.-,..-��-*.*.6 .'.'. ...., * :....*....".6. ..-.. 6..,....:*.:,.,...-..*...,:-......�'..:.:...: .."...� .:: ---.. ,, .. ...
: .. ,...�, --6. -..6..:...,.,*` .:6 ...-.---.-,.::,:�6....... ...".,.:I....,*:...-.-.......'.. - ...- -* 6"* , ,-, :-. ,I - '. , "ll""',:�..'.......'".�6�-.... 6 6' ' ..* -:' ' "", .:.:...,:.,.,:::-:.....-,...-:-......�: -�:- , :..-.-.-.m-:-6:.-...j'.---.16--.--.l
. � ... . - , 6. - ,:.,-",.-:.,,., - - .6.'' -, .:.:... ..:. . . ::.::........ -:7 . " .1 " * ---�**--,--"-"
-,- . . .�66.,.,...- -.6 ... --- - - .: -... -.-- ... 6. - , - .,-.-..,
... ,.--I,,--,.6,11. .:,.....:.....-..�................-.. ::-,7.,.::,:i*.::,...",..,;",-,.I . 6. .,..:�., -,.:: . .- ... ....... .. -- -�:'..-...-,.:-::- . .*.'.'..'.-'.-*.-...'-,..-.,�-'.I
. , * ...6...-.. - , :*:: :....-.-..- ..:.-'...:- ....- - .:.-'."-:.-6.-6.,--... - -.6,..:::..
,::,:-,*:��.. 1 '.-:,.. . ...-.:.!...,.:....-..: ,!-....--....,6.*..,-.".-.'.-.'6..'....*..-'.**-...,.....-_-.---.,..6.-..,.,.-.".-....'.,.,.". .'"."..-.,:.".6.11'..-..,'--..-.*.-.-'-'..'-.16'�..:.,.".-6.1--�...-..., ..,:.,: -- . "' ' ,, 6::..:.:6-:.. . ...
I .. .:. . . . -..:-,.`;.i:--,'. .... . . . .. ., , - - , -.- - - .--
. .. 6--- :... - -,.:-.. . . 6 - . ,-''*,",, ,.6.-.-.:. . ......:",....... .. - . . .......'..
..I.., :6.- .., 6.6.....::. 6 ... ... .-.,.., .- 6 ....".. ......: .-.-..-..--..6.-6...---... .. , -, - - -':*�.--,-::,.--,--...'l...- �.. -. ...-.-�"--":.*6-.',".-*7.'�':-'-'.'.,6.,---...., - of ,.1 6.-.1:-.... .. ...
. . :.6 I'--' - .7,',7:-'--:.':;: . .--,.--,::,-�-., 6 6,.,- �
....--".. :,:, - :--::.,..,.: .!:�:::.,.,.,.:*:.��.,--.;�-.'-'i�.:-:.*,61,�- . .....:-.-f.6",-."." 6
' 1 .;"-:::'.-.:...-:.*.,..-:6,.,-� .. . -:-".6-%*:;'.... ...:. .... - . .11
, 6: :6,*:.. -.--m.6 .....":.* ...- ..-...- . ..: . 1.6
- .6..- `*"'. - - - . : 6.....: '-'-.'.-'.'�-'. .....,...6-.6.. .-- '' - - '' . ... ,:. ': . .--- --------.-:�
: ��:., . .- .......6- -,.------. . -......6..';-.--.':---... ....6 . .... ....6 6'.....*.:".-.-...,- - ...,..6.6......-.6.......
I - ,:Rppre��enl:i.i*:�--:-..:.��-..�;:-- ...:. ..: - -.... ..... !77777=7-=;-;��... , .---.'.. .:
- - � ;��.�...'. .. -".....6......,:.......
wl. . . ......... . - � .....:." ..:. .:.,:.,.,66*,6,...-,..".:.,..:�.'.. 6
-*6,:.;-":7--.,-,**::.,.,�::�6::....�-�", - ,," , , .. ..:..:.-.. - *,: -, --,*"-,
� ��.... . . . ...:.,..*.":: . ...7��.-.....,.-.......... -......-.: 6 - ... .. ..- .. .... .. .. . - .,-,-,-,-,.*, -
" . . ... .. 6 ., - 6, - '-:' -:-'.�-.:,':-,.... . .6-- . --, - .. .:.".,:"-:,-,..:.,-.,: 6- .-.--..-.
..1. '.. ..... ..:.......,. , . . .. .6 .::...::: :.-, .. .1 - --�-.--.�;-:-,-,--,.:* -11 .--,6.---.-,..-.:......�
I . I.,..... .,*�,::.% ..-,-.---.:.-,.-..-...--.. ..'.*,..:-:r,.,...6 6*-..:... ..... ...:....-...-..:".... ::;6:.*.6. ...7-.. , - -,, , . -- .--. -", ,...:.."..*...:. ...- -.-.
w .6. �:-........... , . ... ..: ..:.,.:,..,:*-*... , �....'�'�:;..,..6.6-.,6:*.-.6..,�.�,.*-,.,.., -
':..., . . . . . .. .: ,.: . -..,. ...,..:"... . - . ,-, - - "' ,.- - . .-,--.-:--�*-,-.:,.-,-- 1 �.,.,-*:*"-.6:.,.,.6".
'' - -., . -..- - . . * ...... - '..-,:*,-..-.:�.... .
, , -'.-'..,-,::7.*. -6 "' -..-.�,-,-.,.,6:.-�-.'--.:.-.-.7�--.;:....6 . ,..o '. -!--.- ..-.".--w.: -,
,6:.:, . -,:: ...:6, *� -*�,"'"-6 , , - .- .. - ..6....':--,6..,..- -
.-- ... ..... . . ."'"'.. : . .:.. .: -..:-..*,..."--,..-.,,...-.:..,. ,�.. I.- .1 I-
p. -..-6.......:.- -, . * .......-.....6.,.... , '' ", ---'--'*-'*--'----- ....-.��..'*..-'...'*..-.."..'.,...*..-....--.",......*-.,:�� -..::--.::."�-,::-.,.-:.6 - -
�:� .:.:.:.6: .:::." i�6:.,-6 ,�.:.,-.,-.-.f,.---,..... ... .. ,.....-.-..,.,. -.-.--..-..,.-;.6....:-.........,- .... . ..-. . --�.�-.i-
.... ..... ..-... '44 a of*40M 0 ... .,. . .. . . - 6 �:m.....,-.�--:,. .... .,���---'--','.--..,.,.-.,-".6 .'--,..
. .6- . .. . .. - .-... .--.. 6 *l. . !�� .. . * ,
-.6. --... e/.T .... ... . ... ...7*7-7::"640;o. - -..-".L.%-*.o.-o:.. - , - - "': . . , " -- ., -, ......6--.0-6-
:.,-*.,-:-.,:--,.:-,--60. . - ,:�--,:o ..-.
O.. . .;..": ..::..: O'.- 6,6
-..W... 6... - ,- , -;- .-I. - -.*.-" ,:..*..,..:.:.,.:.:,.��.:.*..',, :...:-..6...*6.1::* .0,6:-�-...
.. w. . . ... . -. .. . .. -, 0,I '-*'ol: I . -O.. .. . -7- -------i,. 6 , 0- *'-;*,' :.:"..,.:,-,.."::...--
I I 0. ..I.-Niiii ,.-...6- '..- - . :.",...:.......-..-.I .....:.-,.,*..-�.:�-_.-..-..�.::: - -::,--," , ",, ,...".....:*-.-O....-�:0,!,.,-..,.W...:.:�-
..0..6:. ....... . - ......:'��,:.*_-.:o�0...:,. ..: .1 --- I- 0 0 .-,6:......,7,:-.�..:-.--.-.--,,, 0 . ., `'*
. ,. . . . .,-:....... 6 .... ......: ,",* ,, , , - - .:;'. .. - 0 - - -.*- -:" -.------ .- --- ..... --
.:.:... . . . -, . ..----- .- - .-.... -...- --.. I--,':...61...:,:.6:.,::�--:,-,..* ::.,��:*,.6:.::....*.:....6'.,..-...�:;:.,6 0 , .06. f--.*.l'-o.l-l-.-----"-.-'-.-6 -- - - 00..--�.- - - .,.O:,. .,;..
::60'.-:-.�.:..-6 --.----..--��-----6---,----.------.'.6'....., -...-.. .6*-6- ,� .**. -.":-0 6 -- -
. .,:,.:,", -,-....-.-....:...- -.,....-.. - .. 0 :7. . . .0 ... --.-.. -- .. -..,
--.,0�-6..O.. 6.:.:.,...:-.- :-" - - ....- . . . 6 - .........., 'o 6, .66'.. ..,-.�.--- . '... -..: ,16, - -I... *...,.6..:,.,..:.-:,..: ,60 ,
6.:::6.::*-,,-.-,..'*.:.:-*..:!.:* *.. I... I. .. ... -
.- I 0, I . . ...
. -.0 .. ...6 - *- fo I - - - , - --,'*,, ,- -,-.: . I 6...."-.6'...... . 6.. ....6... . 6 . -�...-. ._-.,,,....-. ---.,. . *i..*...* .. ..,6
-, - 6 - ..:*. , ,,"**"- , -: -.,..,-.0-0.."'..-..-.-ol -. -.0-..::.:::.-0.. . - , 1........�..,.,. . . . :6.., �. �....... - :.; ...�.7 ...:..O.,..0 - ..-.. -
�.�-0.6.,.-,..--.�.-.,.;.-,,�� �":---'6-j.T,",-t., :0": . a. �. .. . ..:.-::.-:.-.O...,f".0-..-...".:..,..,..:".-*-%`*.-,::".--*:O.,...,*:.::..
6 .. j4 .1 �.-.:O..O*..'-...'�-O'.0.,..."...,.,.6..6*..6-.....-,.."�'..'.-,.*..-,--...-.-:6--�-6..-6.*.6.-....*...6..,.�6..-.6.-.*.-,.-.--:�--....... ..,.-.-..',':`.----....�..--.-6---. . . .. - - .--,- -, .- - :-7=-... . . ... .6..
0 Tne . I e, - - - - .6 .. .:
" -.7,!T-7-�: , ..�.::�:..:...::.:�.,.,.;::.. ::.��.��.�6....�.'�.,O,�:�:.::.o..*..,.",..*.-,..'...",..,....... .:. .::_*.-":-:-..-*'�:..:,-.,-. ..,.- . ,�.-....:.
* , . .. - . ... . . . 6...6.,.. ;0,...6.7o..
- O. ... �. ... .,
. .-.��.:!.%.:06:...'......6 ,�..-...:o.,6....:. : ..--:-- ,....:6 .. -- -,-'--.'---:-7--�7'.`7�i.-.:l-.0'.-'." .. -.-.-" '***6" -, - 6 , , - ......6.6 ....
- : , - -, , *...O,..,:*..,6,.:. ... - ,...-...-..-:..,...-::..-:6..-,:....,...0.. . ,:,-..::--"-*, . ....-6-1.'.
- ,", ",,,0,, 6'" . . .. ...:
..6 :: 6-0-:: .':.*.6...6 - � - --i�.-::-.'_':'..;-6: -'....:*.,.I:. -
�".:',.�....,...---6:.,-6.:-" .........-,6-6:.:.6: �,., , , , *** O.,- -:.O.-,,.:'.--�-:.':'.*-:�:-:�. 6,.- . . �
0 ,6 -" * , "" 6.'*"' 6 6 - :..----..--f..:,.:.:.:..,.-.:.-6,.:.-6
1 - "' *' , - .. .�.*.o:.:,:,:-o,.-::;. .:*.,�,�. 6... .. - .,
, " * , "' , .. ..6 6.0,�6::.-., - , :-- ..-.-----..o. -.,�.......... . ,::.:'.o. ,, : , , , .:.. ... . 0. ,....,o�.o.... ....... ...'. ,'...6....
6:-.:--.6:.---�.�.:,.--.:------.--.'0:-� 1:.1-.-.:-.' -:.. .1.6.6 i- .......-...---- .::�. .0:..,-'....., .-.... -.. --.6.1 . ."-*. .,.. - ., .. . 6:.-,6. .. ,
. . ... . .. -::" . 1*1-,.W--ow.,.-�:,.....-.......... "- -.:,..*.,.:--.,-:o%:;-L.:�: - ...* ......-.-
- . almle,- 4 e 6,:.-....-.. - ....6.... -, ...4'.0,'. - . . ---�--..... - .-*:�!�...0.--.6;.,..,.,...:�::�;�0,.....6,...,6---.. . ... 0.6 . ,��� ...6 s.-.--...:�-.
0 ,, * '' 0 6-- -.. "' *: , ::.."..::......::.!.. .. . ..I--.6 - . 6 .. . 6�
6- - ..-- ...... .. -.
-... '"::"'"' - '-"'::-":-- - . ::7:'-6- :,:.......I.......... . . .- 6 ...
6 0 -.. .0. . .-6%-16,6,:-- .. . - .., . .. ;
. . ......6-N ,/T*il :,6 . O.' .. 0. . ... .. - .. ..... 6.: 6..,:O.o�0�-�-:-- --.-.-','..:':. .-.
. "
.6--.:�:�::--_--�:.... , . ....M�. . * . -I M�.. -.. ... 6..:0 ..! . .. . ,
-':,.-,'- , �-- ..6. .......... - ,6 6,-,-�-:�':-....., -, -*._: .....,66:6-, ..... " .. ....0...-.-.0. 0. ..
, ,":.,.:.,:O..-6,.60.1.. .. -.. . .:6- � . ..::...:::..:.- .:"-.-'----.,.*.,..*:.*:..,.-. -, .-;.,. ..:..:.6--* .- -::. .:. . . . ..:.. - :�::O::-.
�..:.-...,..,.O:...'...." - - 0. :. - - *-��" . . :",.'.-.:*:, . .,, .6.,.,.*:,.6, *. .
. 1...........1:.,-.6:.60: :. . ..:.:.. 6:. -.,.:. :-�.-,-`:..::...,*.. :� - --., '.: ....:..-::,,::,--.6-,:� -. -.-0:...:., . -.. .6 ..:.6.,.
-- ,- . . . --,;: - .. - .:. z:-:.::.', ,, , :-., -..-.�'-o.,-..: -.-,.*.::.:'-:.. . ...�.:. .: �'.--.-,..---.,.--o-. ..,.�.... -
.. ..:...--.,.::�.:..:-...:.6,.:L :...... - - - .. . . . .. .. . I. .
. -.- - -..,**.-.-*.'.-, �--*--,..,-*-*-.-...,., *:...0,- .*:,- , :-.-. ::,.::'.'6�"."'.'.... .0 .. I.. . , . ....... -, ..-
-, " �. I-.0 I : :-::-,:-..o....... .:.. ..-:..- . -6 6 .. .:...I
-.'-",.O":...--..� ...-:. ,.,..,..�......-.....�...6...-.6..- .- ....-0... I.".-..-... '..4::.:. : * . . . .: 0. . . .
. , ... .. . ..... . . :-* .. �, : ..-,::I'.,:...-.....- ,-. ......,. .-.-. . . -... I:I I .
"-, - ,,�.'.., :'' .. % * .-. ..:....6-.- ..0.,.:: * :.:'.-, , - :.. :.. -.6�::.0.��.,.,.:..6.."0....�-,�*...-- . --����-
0- -.6 -,-,*- ... . ,�:,: -'. ... ,--:':6.... .-,.,.O::,..:: * . ,- .......* ,-*
- - - . ":.:*..',:,�, - ....
-�.-:::6,...0:. -. id*A� .!:.04.:-:.,.::.:...6...::....,-.,..-. ....,0,-*,-.,-"06"':..:*' : ,-,.:,.-.:".*.,*,- -. . , .. ., - . ..
.. . . , ::. ..-,,.,.- . I.-I � I ...-... . ... . -.::: .....,6: :..-,::,.O.,-.,-,,�.-.-.0..6..,
. -......:....-- --'.'. .....1.'... ,:...0...6...�-- .-.:�.:, .*,. .,:.:. . .... , - -
0 .:.-.--�V.'-. -..�- . - .: , *1- , 00"*7 ..- .-
:.:- .......-. .-.......6.0.
.. ,, "- :::",.:.:-,:-06.0..,:-.,�:,�.-.--0.6--,: . - - ": '
- . . . ...6....,...O... ..:":.::.::.7.6
. .. . . . ......4..-,".'-,....I .......O......--. . .,
.. . . .:.::. ,.. ,. . ......, .. . . .. . , **,"4-'- " -, , .: ..,
-1:.6.61-*.-06,6,::.-.,..;..........-.0 0 .:.. . ---'---.:..,.::,:....:. . ..-*-..-'.'*--. .. . . .- . .....6-.. .. ...,
--.;. .. . est* :.:.... ..: -
.'..'-. ,*`� . ,:.... . -.. ....6. . -- - . 6 ... .. . .
-- -.f:.-,..:.: . ..::,... ... . . . . ... ..--...-....... :. ... . ,:�".-:
.:.::.--:*:' .,. 6 . .. -. . ::..:..,.;-..:... *, 0 ...... . ... --,- .-.. - - -.6, --:.6��:-,.,.:.o-.... ...-.-...:.......*..., . ..I . -�: .':.:'.:.'::1.7-.'.:.:.-..*.::-:_
. . .
.. -- ,.......... ....6., - .."..-....:..:...
., : -6::.-..,...-..- :. -,-o- �:: ,,**6 , " , e... -.:,.::....... . , ....
--!.�. '. ..: . ..0 .. -,*:.. -... -�-"--.:: _,.-'.". -0,-.*-,f:.....--....-.f.....,.-.,..*.6 , - -.- --. .-. .
- �. ... .-..; ....-,: -'-o*.-.::.... -`'o..". . -, .:. i,:.-.,6`-,�:�--��...."*.,%-.*:...-,
-'6.�. .....,....,- .6.**..6�.. .....-. 6 , . .:6:.: .-----�- -.... 6..-........-............--... -- - - .. -,- .. .
r'.";......:...-,-::*..*:.,:...:.,..:.-,...,.7 . I .. . - " .:. ...., ..,-.....o...:.:.*f:.,�..,.:..-.-...,.;:..�--.-....l..
.4 ,-.-....-0--...*,...0�-',:.�-....--."- . .. -
. . j:7 . ---,..-:,:,".. ... - .-"o-" "': :-.. -:0.-. -.0. . -..:.: ... -- -: - ' ::
..:L6:.:.,. .. .:. ..6. -,.*, -.'.' .::... ......., ..:.-, ...�;:'.*.,--:7.0. : ... .
-,;.....I ..,. -. ..: �z, .: , . .I .. . ,-..7f7r77777777 -7-*,*,�.-...--;6-- -'.:-.6
, .6 . .. . . .... . ,
6.:,.. 0-::'�::�6-,:.-',".,.-t;-:o......�.... 0.,.0.---... '6�-. -, "' , . .
1*1..0 - ,.8faip .6. ,77�..".,*:. '....:,".-*�'f'.'.-:::�---':':'* ,-�L
. ... .: 6. .... -...- ---': ---:----.::...-...4.....'.... .. .......-. ... 6 . - 6 ,- -
I.. -6 6.. 6....:. " ,, .. .:o".. . :
. .. . . . .:. 6.!'. ..:... .
- * "..-,.-::..:...:..-.�... 0 0 .- .. 0. *..: .:...,....
,:... -,6-.:.�67.1-..66. , 6:..:O..,... .:::...-'-66.:,.'-"- "�::....:,� ....�.::.,..:.. .. 0 - 6--.- .. .. . .. 0 .::6.:,.*.�o:: .:
,.... ,6-.- .. . .: , "', -,-- '..'.."...1-�--:-,.
1.6. ..:7 ... IW. .... .. .:-'. 6 ..;....--.:- ..-.. - -, , , ,0-' . -..-,..-.":. 6.*.-,-:� .. - ,�::-.--,..... -..":..6....-..-6.....: - .1
. .::. ..I .....0.6 - - .1- - -�:- -- . :.::. 6-...--.......- ---.--.
6 . 0 ..;.*....- . , - --- - ----..:.-::..... .-..- I---�6..............- .-..;� ..---.7..
.:.........;..60.:-....,". .,: 77777�-----m---- - --'.-'---
. . .:-o.-,--.,-.,.:-*.�:... , 6'**:.-.6.--.:.:::..,.:....::.,.: ".. ; -��--6..�O::�:.6:*. ..�:.--..
.:,.�..,:�,�6 :..6 6 ... -- , .. .., . , -.....o....... . . -
-,:....:.. 0.6 .- . .. . --�*::- ..- : :�':�'" .-�:--:-- -�.:-.--,--'.-.,.::.. :. '... -.... I 10 - ..
. ..:...O.-6-.--,----:.,;.6.: ..- .-:, .0 0',:. ..:,6..:.:6..,:.,: :..O,.61 *6;,%:�*:::%, '61...,..,.:6.. -..-......- ... . .. ..,*,*-**
I ...6..... ..6.-. -,.0.�7...--0-:W...:.. -......, .. -00:::.,*-, -".,. �,�:--:,:.,. ,.-.--��-.*- . , ....-.- - 0."..6 6" .�: -.1. " *6 '..--,:R�g
'-'.,..-..6..,6*,'-'.,..�-,.6--,-,-T-61'eDnone:*,.,.,-,.-,..-...:.:::,-.:.,:..�.:.-..*:..:.�-:---o-o-.-.,...'.,... :... -.....-'-. ....-.. ..o......,., . ... ..- o'...... ..6.-.,7:6a.6... ... .6 ...,...:.,."�:.. ... ... .._::.......,:......6.....6: .::::*.:-.'-:-,6*..**,:.,.-.6*"O..,..,...'-'.�..-*..6-00..'....,......
o..;0M..-- - .,:. 6.....:..�..:.... ...,.:..O....,. . - �`-.��:.-_ ':6- .-.'6... -- .,O�'.'..6...O:..:.-..,61,.::,..--
.6::...-.-.,... . .. .-�--. .: .0"6..:::.:.:..,.:,.:.6..;.. --'....,::::. .,...0'6.....:...o.- '-..:. ..-...-,-"�.-.-'.-.-- .*.,:,.,.**,:.: - -.-.�.�-
6 , , . - .- . . , -,::*.*:-6.-O,.::*:.:.-..,.:-. .,....:...-...6.6-.::-�::.*r,:,.......*,..�...:.�-.66 ...., -:6 .. - .. 6 -..,..-- -.�6...-6.-6'-.*...,.,:.-:..O".:o*.*6.:'6:::�-�.......-.6. .,....
- .. 6. ... ,:.:,:.: O...6 " .. .. , .., - - .6 -
6-.- .. .. . ...�,�i*:.-:*.,:.:::"*.,....- - -..:.- . .-.,..--"-.,. .'.-�,.,.�.-*6.-:.*:,.06.,-".,..�:,.o
- ..... ..... : " . .. --.::�:
* , ,, .., . . .- - - - . . - �'.-�,_-.'-�--7.'.:..-.-6�. .:.--.0 ..�..-'*..,:-:O"..*":."....�'.-'.*..::...o .. 0. :
.- .l:-.-,.::,�o..--'.�-:....*...... - , , , **"" ,...�.:.*-...-.,..:..,:.;,.-.:6,.,-.O,:,.-.::""",,�"6,-,�::i �-'..'-*.6.,:-.o-.I:o-':�.-._,�"...:,-.,O*,.f..:6�.6- ........6......'o., :.. .
.. .., I .., .... ..
.: .�,.-- *,4..,... ...:..:6 . - .-:*:.,.6..*''..... .. ..:..:-.::.66.0.-:6..-Lo,..�....;:. . - , - 6
. - - ..:,....:O*.*.. :.,-...:......,.. . .,-,. 6-:� -.-.:�-:.-';',.� . - , .: .:.,.-,::;:,-.:..:Y-,.*:.
-.-. . . . 6 , . ..-, '.
. .. �f.::r:: ..6. .,.:.,:.-'.-,:'�..6.........- , ... - -: - -,:..:..;,......,;,:.O,..: , , , , . ;:::.
- . "..'-.::*:,16... .,:-.:O:,..,.,4,.:--.'.',�.0.,.,.,;�..-....'.:.,- .-.:.00,.;........:,:..,.
��M...*'..-'....,-..O....*..-..6-.*-.,.-...��'*"�....,...-..-,.,..4.*......-6. .. oo....". .'..,.'-..'.---.,6-0,."-..*.6116,-....,,.....'--'O..*......,.-.,."......-.-'-:.O--.-,..,6..O.,.-,.6;-,-...O..-,-,.-.-....-..,.-.....n.".O....0-:.,.::�.'.*�. ..I.-;. - , 6 ,* " .. :..
., .: .:::,-6.:'.. ---:;.', 6: . .
,,, .... --,:-oo006.-,.-'. :..:-.:-,--.,-::�:'-':�::-�...-....... .
. . - - : .:*:.::..:;,:.:.-6.---::*.:...:.:.�:. .-....... ....... '.�_:--.. ... . 0-,- , , " . . . 0 0 . -
- ,, , - . ....6:.O:,.: ... .;...- -I....":*.,..,..:.:.��."...-."... 0 .
....::. :: ..6....0,:..':-*:.*...".-,..:..... �-:-�......... ...-- ............... .... :..
.:. ...:., .-.::.:,0.::,". *-, *60-..,-..;..-.'.� 0* , , " , ,". .6 . . -* .6. - - .- .. -, - .., ,
, ,:,*6:. - - 6- - .-. , - . ...,..:.-:.:�6.w,:.-...6....,.:*.�o.- -.0--o... . '.., ::. .--.--.,--.6.�-_., -., ,
6 - . . ..:6."--.*:7'.'�.,O-.-.:.,.:,..:.,....:;;.W...:.... . :. '. .-. - ..: 6: .. . -
, 6 - �-'-'-'-"--6-,6--.*--"--.,... -6--'-" .,---- .. ..-..o...-...o.....-.o.,-..-...,..�-...,�:.w--......-.---,.....,.,;.,..-:-:.-.'.:.:..,..,..-.*-:'-�.:-.-.:,.6..,...,..,.::
��:-"-6.6,-,.-.'..*.:.---.-'-'--..-,..."..,6.--6.00-".-�-.-.�,*.6:-,*:,6.-..:.*......:"..6" -.6. .:........ .:�--. .."�.---,.o....6.:.,-.�,..-..-,.."..:. .- . . ..:. -....., . . . - -::- .0. .
...,.:., ..:.... .. .,....66...O......-. -.�-:-L:..00:,..:,..,.,..... .'. -
--:.6 6, 1",:.:...* '. -.*:�...:O.,.:*:,*.:-�.:-'-*-'--.-- .l... . ..-:;:..:.. ..6.o',�--:..,.,.,:.**.
.., .-.".. .�,::.--o...:,...6.. '.*..,:::...:,.:,.,6.,-,.!.:6..-.:::... .-. , . -,"*,* "" - . . .. 6-:---..�.-...... .:.:..,:.,." .. .
... .-.". .. . � ...- -- .� ;.-..
... - -- -- - I-...:".,:-.::-�.�:6.%o:.:-o�,:....00 - . .....W-......., .....
...,. : ..,---,.o:-*..-. ..'....i:.6.'-.":::-,..--...,-,-..'....;::-:.,.,..,6.-.-.-.,.::"::-6."O.-O :::7.-6.-:-:-:f:--...'-*--'.,.-�.�-.--...O-,..... .....O.----- - ,- " .0-::.I-.,.-0.::W..-:.-:-.-o-:*.
.;.,6",..,.,.... ..�:6�,0-,.,.�:'��-�-,:�.-:�6-..:..-..-.:.....:..:....::"".:....:---...... . .......: ... -.....,., .
': , .6 0, .:. - ..:..0. -6 - - --- "1 .....6 . - . ,;1� ,
6, 6 6" , -* .6. .0 ... �w w . ....I... .�.
.
..:.-.:�.-:.:::;.:.. ..:,-.-..-:6.",6,-....'�.6.. . .. .04.W.-,:.o..-I :�:...... ."- , ;.-:--.0. . ... .- . . .� ... -...o.o.. ....
. -,, ,:*`�," ... . .. .. .�o,;.,0:..o...... -:.......
. .,6.,6"--:'0:...; ..6 6...6 .. .. . -----:--..-:*.-�.-:o��:--'.'.-'�-,.-..-,o:,.-.: . , , :, -. ... ..__,::,.*..O...o..: -:.*- .-.-'.'..",:.-.:,.-",:,.-O-;.*--"
.-.�-.....:...."..,:.--..o.....'...- *-,�.---:`.---.,:,.6 6,--*:.:,...,o 6.":'-'-.--0.:..6-.16-, ; .: .-.. .� w-w . . ..
. - .;...:.....1...:...l. 0.- - . ..::-....:,W:.,.,Or..::,:,:..:.O-;:,*.-,0.6,�."",.,:.-.**.!..,...:�".:'- ; -.--.,6 ., . ': ... .. 61" ":-.... .'. - - -.. ,--,*--,
- .6. 6.: ....:.......6:-o'-..o,..-,.,f. .�-,..:.,. *.'.-':-:.:..... . . - . ... . .-... �--- :0:..:'..0 0... .. .6. ..� .:,.�,- -
, , 6 -- .. .. . - - - =:4.4 :;;;:.o.. ::. ...* :.. 1 .l.-.,6-�:.,.:.:,0:-. . --,-..-� .'.
-�-.- ..: . -.6.'.'..:�O:-,:.6......-O.... ., . 0 ..%- -:O*.::.::. --V.6. . .. -..!.,-�:.,.�.�7016:.:.--01*: --
0 --:..... ..,-.:..::. 6 - ..: =:=::: . ..�..*..'00-7.'. - ..., ... ....".'*. , * - .".
-0,0: ...::.:�6::�:.:�6;:.,�.': . - . .� .. : .
.: .: .":, ...::. . ..0. -.-- ":.- O.:,:.,.,.:,.*..".�.....6:.,.�.,6,.O:,!.:.,:::.6..:.,:O:::,.�.�-f::.....-!..:......-.-..'I*.,:,.-'-�"�:�.: 6. , , . - - -
.%:. 6 .. . . . . ...- !�: - W. - -
.-..�. 0 ..�.:...:6 :* ..6.0 . ..: .. , .: . ..-.O..- .�.-.-.-...,...,:..,.",--.,�.'-. --.
��
, ':::::...-.:.....6 ..., .0-.-.1 . .. - .. 6 . '��-ro.j... . : .. ..., .....0�1.4 ::(&hec '::or -.- - .-.-..
.
�.
.
. ,:.:.: :-....--*::..,....,O,.-.-.. . .*0-. . '�- �., 6 .6 .. � .1 .
�
�
W:..--:,o."::6z:,:�.,..�.* .,. 6:... - .-. . -.... ,:!.A..-.--,:.::.. . --.a ..- :: 6 . � k ii)- -.,.-..
- ::�, * oi cf..;..o-- -._o *-�6:.. -: ..�.. -. .6 . . S..i... ..:. ,..,.:",... .....:�::":066.-,:.
' e-: � -.-.- ., ... . . ... .`� . ..-:......0.--.-*6'.�.:.-:.--.:,..,:.:
.-.,--,-�.6 :::.6 p i.-6'..:.::�:::.:-1... .0 V* 'k . ---& 06 a. .6........� - .. -..:.:,:'::.::;.:..-...-...---;::,-, -- , - 6
. .,:::��o i�"-' .',' ' -'---" - U6-.O.-P.w ::,.,..
...: . . ;.I:EI.C.bic ----.--I. - - - - ..
---- . ... --6.. *.,::o ",-�.0-,-*..:6-,:�----. ". -".:-,.6;-:.-:.,-,.,-�1.6....-�-..-...., .. .:::.::::.......... ,,.!..O:-...,:"-:::..O...*...-.,:,...,::�o'*..:..,'j. - 0� --;*:-.. -..,
.. .-.- .. . - . .,.:. .,-"" ... . -- -.:": .:-'�'--
..6";.'*.;..:...-.........-:.Y.. -,..,...** -.- .. . .1.. ,;.-,----,-�,-.:-,-....;.. ,.*1:6...::..'..::...:.. . ...'.. - 4 . ....-..
- ,-, .6... . .6. .1.0'...- .. . ... -.60: . e 7 O... ..:.... .. . .. ...,:..,.:
. - :-,. � , .... O..0 . . .:....." . . .
.' - .:; ..: -., -.:.:..! .. 6 0::".,.." ,....*O.., -*.:.:.:-',*.0..,...-...-.-.,: . . :6..* 1 . . . .-.: :... ... .0.. .
- - . - - . .. 0, . -.�,::::": -: ..:. .:.-'--:-*-*'."..-.*: ,*,� -* .,::.
.. 0:6:.6... ....,..-O-.-.., ,.".*.-. .*.-.0.4. ."",...-., , ..... : . . .:.
.: - , -14.�.., --::::.�� I.......�'-..;., 0 ... .. .0 -*.".,:O:,. '. .
- -.....-" - ..:.: .;..,_,� * - -- .:..-.. ..,... , -.. --.. ..:..�....�.'.,�..--�.......--:�,..:..................:,
.6 ,'.*.'.0,:,.,...:..:............ ....60 . . . ".. -'-;--.-� - -- - ----*- , . . .. . ,
-'-:..-,::�-.,::-:o,:::,7.-.-,*:O..,.-:..::,.: . ....o.....:,..*...:..,.-. .o.....-. ;. - �:.,.O.,,�.�.,.::�:.�6..�::.::.;..:;:. ..-:::;... 7.::.6*6 6 .6 -.--.I:- .:.... ..--...---,.-..-,.... ...
::.:-::.:.-":.--:-..--O-:-,:.:.: , * *'-" . .0 . .......... ....':. ' ..,:; .�--.::-,--.", .,-.:-'....- .......... :.:�-..
, - 6, 6.....- - .. 6,.I :...,..,." ....�...........-�O-,.-... ..-:::.7.::6:...O:
-'. . . . . . . �..,.......--.. ..,.*..:0..,*.6'. . '*"-'` 0 -oj�k6iii--- ...06.'� -::-..,:-",O,.,:*..*.-,::.,.-:.!-',...,O..-..-.*-.7".�6,-�;.
-. .- . . -.6, * ....:;::.,.".:::.'I*.-- -.":.:-..,.6.-.",:::.*.:: ail� ..-,-.�o'----:---../.-..6�*0...,.,,;...-..*,7..,...-.:-.
---.,-�'.---'.':.:.-:-:-:-.00..:.'.-'7�-;."-:.- ':'"-'--:": -"' ,: -.',:,:.:.-.-:,-:-:.-.,0,:.-... , ..,.6-" - 6 .-,
:0-*.:,::��::�-:.�:,'.: 7:0::- -.--.: .*-.---,-.'.. ..,:.�.o
1.W:� . ; .:,.-::...��---':-.,*::-�',, ..... ---"%,.!..:.".....,.O.-...**�.-.-.--:.*6.",-:14.:. .. .., ,:,.:� 0 ,
-' ..--:'.l...0 . 6 a.. :6...O.:.-0. -.... -...-.,... .."::6.: ,,-,*":.::. .;. .. :. ....-�
. . .. ....- ---n--..-...-,:-.6....,:- .:-�,.,.0. - * . .0 -�... .I I 1:
- .. - .. ... ..
0, . - .: �7���..-.-.. .-..-.- 0 . �:*::,., , . . ....'. I. " ,"-, *."
-.. : 6.. ._.:1.- . .. . .: . .- .. . .,. .,.,-�-.'-�:.*6,..'...-:..:, -.. - ......-..-. -...-
- -Niihiber- . : ., -- . .:.. : ..O",..o' .
..:":,.,.-:-,*�..:. oird: .:���.. . .-. '- .. I-'. -..'..'..-.I-.-
.-".-:-,..O..::. . .. -.. -:.::,..... 6-:- , ......:.--- .::..7..- -W W* 6 -�..�,..., - .0, '. , '.*;...-;.,.,.'.- ,-::.:.-... 0 , -:..*...:-,.,:;- , 0 - ... . ..
. : :�:.,,:.;-:..,:::!::-..6: -.**:0 ..:.. .*:�,--�'--, ::-,.-:.-"...,'.:- . . . .. .,. -,:., ...::,.,:..-..-
'.-..,...,...., .-. - . . . 6 . .... .. ..:.:;,;*-- ,.:."--.--:- ...,-::. ::--.,..-:.:......,:. , -:-...
. . 6 0.:..,---.6-0---,.-,:,:-'....-'...o:::-.:,.-..,..-� . ;.�:::.:�:-.'o.% ..,0 ..:..-....:I.- - ;.,"I'. .0. . -.
.6......6... ... .: .. .....;66 . % - . .�. , , ;..0- ...
. 6 " ,-*I.--------*, ..-.... .. :.. :---0"..0...,:......6-.--,,-:I-,. 6,.,.-,00,..
,.-- ...."":.:,,*:,... -....- ,, ,:,..: .-7.�"...'.., - .. .,....:.:.,."..,.,,..:,�i-:'.-.:'--:--':��*-�-'-':' ...,- 6 *,,,-,,: .. �,7..-..*,'-,.....�-.,...-�6.-.--;.,:�.-,.�--..,.
. . ..:-. : 6 -...-.-.. -- ...:. ... :-.:-: -4 .6 .: .:1....... 0
" , -6!:�7.:::::.,:.'-.-"-.*:.'. . .6-,::-..,-....:..-..:..:.,.�-.'.---'..-.::.-.-,:.o............ .6,-�-.. -..........-.,:.-.......,....:"...- ., ......1:..:..Lo%,...O.-.*.-'..-- - 7 0 - .:*- -* --.0.,,.---.,.,�-0...,:.,...--....,��......:�-.6--.'
. . , , -
-0.. . - ..:;. '..:::.:::,... . 6 ... ......0�.,..:0: - 0.;:*...:.-*.�;.00.0.:::::I ..�.0...=. 0- .6..-..-7 0:.. . !*'.-
--�-: .:.., 0. ...:. .. . . , -, .. . 0-;�:i-,--,.,.,-, ..- ... ,
I - .6.'.. --...I..... .-:--,:::-:.:-'.--....--,:.::...-: . - . ,. .. . - :..-::,::;.:0*:.,*-.** -:., ... 6 .6".6"'.:*...-.'
- ., . ..::. .,*--.:�- ,��.. - .., -...�
. ......
- . ,,
. --.'-.. --... . 0. :.....-", * . - 6'"
- - :, -'-.-.,'."' -P . - ,,,,,--, - -...0 : .*-:�,,.,., .:-
- 0"in -.� ::,00..I:.::-.:-:�:60..:,O*:..-, ...:.:.-,:i*.o , -...--.-.:...,
.. , '. .. , .O.........-.....0- S* ...-. .....
.. . .. .
:6-:6......-:�.. ..'. .O...... .....
--6-'�-:-..:::"..,6.-.�*.,::.'.:.O,*..P.t 0 t..nilljt:.Ijjl..:i�jj&:':�:;..- :::, *..----��-'--..:.1--o...........-,. .. .... . .. � ... 6:...-.,:� - -
.. . I. . .-. ...6. .. 0 6 .........:::.. O..:..'.........:.....-.,-O..6-----------0.,.-.....O.....:,O.,.-.,..,-."-:,., I .. *' :
6- * - . - * . . .I...."..,.... . -�. ... ..0....I.0.-�. . - ..... -- , --..00- :'.':-':--.7.'�!',;'�:-
... .. ........ 6 ........� . .--.-I...:....I"...'.:,.":.-.:.:7..:.o.-- - .� 0., .- . . - .-.:-"O.-...**..**'..6'.--.�'.:.'.�1,
: ,..*.;,-.....-1.-..6.-....6...�..-...:---.'-1 6*.,.,*�.-....,..0.-:...., ,- ,* --:-'.:,*:.,-::::*.... -- .*:::....- .6..-:--...--.. -.o...6.............. .. *0"** ,--
-..-6:-.-:�..�--:..-.-":4...o" .....,. . .. * ,.. ..'. 0-**: -.'-�.. - -,-:-*.-',:.. .:.; .. . . -:. .'.. ... . --...-.:... 0--
.:,:-.-':..-f-.:--,. , 6."::, ....'-','I".":*. ..... .
,......:.w.6. , 6:"- ...-. .:--:..- - -: . .. , :.o.�...........0 .. - �:.., .... . �....- ..... .-.. .. ... ,, .;:"
--: .. .*.6,:..-: .- ..... ,-.- -, - ..::.'.:::-....6..-06 o.'o..:::.*...---I...:..:--_-....'. 0 . , . :.. . ..... ..
', * , ..::-,..-..-...,---,:.......-,-.,.6.,.6..:,......6,.*':-.:0:.. .. ..:..,*-*.,.--......"O,-. .:... .:. . . . -- ..I.--.. -0..-.
6 - .. . ;:,:.....:.::... - ::.,'.-.7.':-.'6,:.0-'*-60.-.6-..�....-.:.-: . 0 . " .-, .... .:..-:..6..:.... .0 .,- I- ----
. --:-.::6'......:..�....,:.6:.,0...:'.- . - . , 0 -:-:.;*-'..--: -6.. .., 0,.-::,.6*-.6,...6,-,:.....:.. .,::..:_,..:::::.::-::,.-..-. ., 0..6.:.-:-:--..'o..0*0. -. 6. ..- I -.--0 I-
, . .. .,:. . 0..-..-..-..'-.I::.-....6...,...,,-,.*o-,0.-.......,:...- ,-:..... -.... : .:.:.:.,:O.::10--:'".-6 ..O... .. -..- ...�.--�.--,-.-
.z...w,......6,6..... " -. . ......: .
. '���,..-.."..-,:-!-.--...-.........:......6....".-- - : -..0.0-.'.: -.0-I..,:1,.0-. -.6 0 ..-:-...:......0.::.:........ .6.��-.. -;*-'."-.-6-.---6.-"-:---'--'�.-'l'.:,-.'7::-- .._o.....-,:-":--'::.-'...:�..::o..:�... .. . - --- -
..'-"6".-..:.. -':. .. .. .. . . ......,. ..... .:.....:.
. .. . .. . ... ...6-:.:,*.-:0,:�-6:,.-::.,*:..'.'...:.:-.,.:.,::.:.O,6.. ..... *:***,-,,,,*
---..6- ..: . .:".."*.,.O.*: , . . .;,'I"; -,.::6.:..*.::: ** -,.: .6 .-1:-,..".::*-6 6 .0. . -.---.;-.�-.:.:.:'.-;-'�:..!:.,,-:,.6*".
.-6, :.Io - ....ih&:,.-.G,i6idiot.:�".-,..*-:�,':-�6�:::..... .: . - -,*,:. :*::...-..:..,.*.7.-".--:.... .. . 6....'.. ,
. .. .. . . . ..:. 0-,-.-:.-66-.:,..."....:.. - ...., . -I-I...,. - .... ... ......... . .
.. . , - - .. - - -- 6.......6. .6.:. .. ,:.:,..::.".::..:... ..:.::.., ....,,6- .,:6.::,.....:-,0"",::.,-:-., .. ...:. . . .. -.-..I...,;..-..., -
6::.�. . . - ,. . . ::. . . 6
. - ':- *,":.::.O- '-'" "-'.-':',:' ...I : ::::: : , , ..:. . . .,.::... ,
..0.. Id'asema-*.: s-- o o ,-,*,-. - .. ... .. ,..:. .,
.:.... 0.........p fl�� .f I ... . .. - .:. .- �,
.. . - . ........:.:..:. .. _:b.......--.. . 6.�:-:,.o,.o::::-:.:..-:..,:::::'... 6 , ..:::,7.:: ":: . . .. ...-.....:.-:
- ,6 , - . 6 . . -:: ..::' .
6.... ... .0, ... . - .:.. ..--.:.:-.:::�--.'..-- .---.,-.6-0.,O-.-'..'..'.:...o--.: .. . . .. .. 0
�6-::,.-*:--.*-:,.-.--.:�. . . ....:6..:.. .;..---�'.---.-.:o.....,6....:........,:7,4, , :6. .� - .. . .o.. : *
. . ..-:.-:.. -, i " ,* ,P:I 0:.:.....0...,.....6�'..-.0.'-.:.::..:., .,- - ""-:......-'*Oo:,::.;-,-'o-.6.,..:...:.: ---. -- --,-
--6-' ' *' - '-' -' -:.-h- -,-......,.4-..-- 6 - k.-mi -",- - . .,:...,-:,..:,-..:..::.:..:.-"--.:.::-,6..,-..-.,6.... '.....-, .I:66.. .... . -
--* , -�, .. - L . -.
- �:�:-:-::�-:---.�': ik"46:7 .......-..- .G i L6. ..;,..-...... ...-o--.::"..:.j.,.,.,.,*..-'.-:::.... ' " 0 '", - -.'o�*.**::-----::'-: .....I...
--6 - c e .....:-..-o...o'-".---,.-o..:.-........:.-...., .... . . . 0 .. . - -q..----".*!-:�:�-".,-:,.---0`::66.�-.'�- .,.6 :., 0 ...
-:--,: - .. �, v ..;.0. . - ._�.-.
-0.. . . . . . . - '-
. itb,your 0 ..,:... . .. . - ' .:.06.:..:6.." .. 0 ...
0 ..I.:.:...".,...1.6.:.,... -'S'�-':-ioffl --:Wk,.-981.'--6:I--;---3G9 .:.:.....,-:'.:. ,... .0
- .6:... 6.... ...., . . .::.:I . ... .
. 6,1,.l 6, ea .'!B,..-:.--...:-, .-o�, :"...-':..":,
w , 0-f::q ,.iLf.d6* -*48*00�o .. -. -- ..-... �. , . ..
,--::..!:::,-:�:..,.-��:'.�-.-�o"','"6''.:7;'6'.'.::-.-.-:�..*,06,.".:,.66-*--,O,!,..,.`6.,..,6 6--,:::..,':"*,,.-..6..:.-'...- 6 -h .A;�6aj,&7�,.S'djt6. - , .
, . " - , -. .6*.".,:,..'.. -�.
.. -, ,_ .- .... . .* " - ": - , , , *',-,"6-0.-,..-,.6..*.,;:,.,-"...:.,'.'....".,. , .6-.......-.,;..:-
. . -. .. -,: p 0 �'-.'..-'�,, - ", -.�-.:,,, **", ,, .6*.".�,:,,.'..
,�:_-.:...:.,6 1,,::::..:.-...-1.6': 6" 0-':, .*--:0..':-,-'..::"-.-. -.--:..:, , - . .. ...:--,..:. .6...o.....7,.0:6..::6-:..--.---7%.;-..,....6.O.,-6...,.-,,�.- --..., 6 0- 6 1- - - - 0 . .- .
.- - - .6..:'..:--.*:,6 "::o -*-:6 --..,o. .-..... . '.'..,0�:,-,-.-... -,*...0.- " "00.*-".,:
. . -. . - ,::;,,, , -,,..:'-:'."..6.-::-" �...
* -,--, - 6.
. ,
- . ....'.. ... 0 ,:..*",.--..'. ,- ,0( , . . .. .. , 0."0':.- . . .�:: ..,-*"o*.. , .-..:-
.::.:-6P "*:5.9-3- ,L-842, - 6 . .,6 ... -
.. .,6".o I . .. - 0-...-....-...�..*."..O,--....-"*.,.�.-..*..*.-"*I-.'.....".-*...* - .:
, ,.:",, , : .. .- -R).I.:...--.:..-.,.......- .:.,.:, . . .0. - . :
--6 * , "", 0,, - .. .:.�-0, ,--..-. '...�...:.*.,..O,:.":..*.,.,. . _� . " -6 - "'--6..-.-- -6- 0.-.-
....'.,. . . -.� ..'. . 6:. D*' -.10' 1;'-' - -6
-,, ,*6,,, .0 , -6 � ,6.:....: ---&,-'(8*Q0)475-- ..' -'�:*'6 -- 0.......0....---6�.......-O...
--..,.,.-.- - 0 ,-..... 6---.-- --,.. .6 6 -- - ---
- - - 0 .0 . ... -......0 ... ..
. .,6 - -:- - .:
,:..,:
,:.,:
,:.,:
,:.,:
,:.,:
,:.,: :..
-:.'6',.:-..,:::
-, .: - .,
.":-..,::, .
":-..,::. . ..
- ,
- .. .�...... -;:. . .:.. 6,--�-. .0...-.:.:..:.:'*::....,.�..O*.O'.�',�...,O.-....:......*.-�,4.."....,.:: :---..,:: .-.. .,.6,6."6*6.1*�
�-0.-..O.,..6.6--6---�--6....:*6,..-.,.-6.0.6-....,-*..0-.-,.,-.., , :...:6.'.0,0,:�.,:�.-:.-':':.:.*".,O,. : ,.. ." '... - . . 0. '.0.'?,�. 106......:.... ...,-�.-:..-f':.,6-:-o 6..-- ."� ,
-..-...- r... --.. ;...:.6.-...-.,..O.:.....,:,.. ,hqrie`��:`(2 , , . .'-.,]..*--.�,.':. -- I - -
0 . . .
�-::--*:6,::.**7.-�.-..,.::.10.:,.-..*::.,:-...::6"..:.O"-o---,:. . . --.;,.. .. . .. :'0. ... , ....:.. -':6
" , , '-*,*",*",-"" " . -:-.�,:7:6-- 0:�. - 0 ..6- - ..
...--'-" .:,.O.,. "' . 0,.,.'�.*-,-,:.o:�..*---.-.,..;.. .0.. """',*'o-"*06;.-.�..-6- . . -....0
-�::-,*-::�-:-.::.-.-.7:. -:: . . .,. - -83' - - '..'*."6-"�.::7:.�:�,--.�,-..::.�-',*:....::� .. ..;�.
� .- *.*,.:: :-..6::.:.6:.... 4...::.... :...0:o" :�':.'.*.-;--.-..-�.::�.. -.�;.::,..:;:...:'...;.:-,:.6 6� .6. .
.
.
. .. .
-:..,�: . . --:..::
.6. . - :..:
" .6. . .-:..:
....
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. - 500 .-6. . :6
.,. �.
. . . .:*.: -: - :.:...: ,..:'..'..--'-:-*::�-i-.-':.----.-:.-.,-....,....:.6.. .... *'"" :-,-�':.�O-,:,.: :::...0,....'..-.-::..
- , . . ,:..-. .--,1p.'��,--,.-::::--'(4 ci,, , .6 . .
- -.,..,:7:� ...-..*".--..-,::..,.-*.."::,.::..-.6.-...06.0,..,-:... . .6).5. -;-8 * , ;... .--"--'*'-*'"*"' ,-,.. .-,.,:::.
---,........., ... - . ., . 0 * - . 6.6 6 .. ,
7--...--6........r....--. .:-' - .:6:......:,..:.*.,:,.*"...'e..."---.:.-..-,...:. . .- ..... . . .*.,:.�o - - -....4'. .
.. . . . ....... . 0.:..::
-.'-,/....-.6....�...0'....,0 ,*',�-.:.,.4..,...,.. ...:o .i�:::06:.-.-:*..'::-..-.:..:.,:.:.-�.-::,7::.,*..:-:::'.:.:.:,.I�:..�;-.'�, ,, , . . .*:-,-"..-..6.�-,.-.-,..--.�.-�--.-.,.."60,...-. ...6,6,0,...-.-.,-..,.6-., :�.,.
... ". .. --.-,:0*6.-6,:6��::,.-o.-:--.:-4,-,..':.'.-:.. . . . . :. .;. . ,,'.;,6.::,.- ....:.--..... -0:.;':....*, .0 .0... . - ...�.
6 - -;-:.-.. -'...�'fo.-!,..--..:.--�..-:-:6:---0 -,--...'....- 6 ..--------':..'..".-..:-6.,-..'..,.:4.:..-..�'.:-.
i�- -:., -.I..-- -:..-. . ... ..01.:4,.,.--..-::*. ....: 6 . . 6 ... . ...
�,.:., .."..:. ,. -1 - - .. . ., ":"-v.,-:;,-:. -, -:.,-6:.....O-,..----- .:.:-.�-.-.-.....6.:. 0 . Z, ..1:.*.
. -:0,-'. .�........... . .., -
- . . .. ....; .'...........--.,..4. �:.:.:.-- ...,. *0 , :-, . . . -,:6-6 '.:::.�'-, --:--..::.:..,O.:,..-::-6---'.--'.:.'.....:0.
. .:"...0....,..,..*.::;.�*'.'.*.- ...., ..:.:.-,-.::6.:�-..--:-':-.16--��,..':,.,.-'.:��.-:--,.,.:*..--.,...-,: .:,_; -..�::.::o.....:... . .'.. .,
. , -... .-::.,...-:--:�:...,...,.::..-:.:.�...-,;::O::. ,':-,"00.6'...'* , . .
�-x... . ......'*I.'...-.-.--""-:-, - '...::.. ,:-,:':-."* , 7. -..... - . . .- 0. . 0.;.."*"": "
-�r-":..-.'.'o.-7,.,.*..--*. ':.*::.. . ,0"::.*. - .:- .
.. *0:- --Z:...,:-"�,:-*.,;6,:6,. . -.
- .,.f '* ' -O',-'::.-.----:' " ..,4...-, . .. ... ,Z...'o.....',:. '. ...:....:...�.. . ,.4:...-..6.-:.*-.'-.':,*,.-.�:-.-.!---,".-'.,.'-'..-.
�..::.....,...: -: . ..,....- ..,7.7..." . . -.�--*,"-:.,:,. .0 . ...-:..."6.:.*:V...: 0 ;-.0.,.;. ..
� .... . . .. . . es, 'y�.. .e r-.Vay-.Y.::,
-��-:--,.-,--,.:-.o ,66,..--*. ':.6.:." .'I.o .-'...........6.......230.-..2 . C . ..., -'.
..!:: .... , �.- :'..:*...:.......,.......**.,..:*-� - "",O,66.6"�n..2.0..I�fb.(iiil...:.......-.--'-.*-:...,::.6,::.�',.:,*�!:.6.:..,:-.-::.,..: :.:",:-.
Re- - tr, - "- "
:..-0,6.,:6... .:.---::'-..:.::.:..*.�:..-::.*..*..-,:...-..: , I 6 :'-� e.--'-'-W.idi div -t ,, .. ..4,.. . ... :::-..,.--.5.-.:o-...,:,... ,
, . . . D - I . . .:.*-.*.",":..:-.,-.-;..L'.r,*."�:.-::'--
7o.:-*o.,..'...-'..-6.....-..- .. sa .ation:; ea ..:..:-.*.70,:...6:.-..:,:,..,O".**' . . ,.
- . . -.-::.:-.-,.,.*,...:,.,-----.., .-.-,-,.
.. -- - -.7.'.*.--.- - * :....O,:.-.-.,.::.-...,.-,-*..,:O.;.,.....:-....,- , . - ... .:.--.: -:-'-:-.o-,.---!-.,
. **",--,W.-*.*,-6,-. ..-..*.,..*,-.6,'-"-.*.*-,. .,.*:,.-::. "'-",-, , - " 0-"�'
6 , I I,-,--..1-.0---'..,'.,--'.- -'.- I.:
- ,::.:-- . ....6. .. * --*-.-... -.-.....--:�- .... .-*..,.,.,. .- .... . . . . _.. ...--.--.--...-- - � . , --;.-;*-.",�*.O:�-.i.:..'---O--:0-6
1-�..�-, -,.-. ..� . -,-.61-- . . -0.:" ---,-,.., .- - .- . . --.....--. .-...-....-.. -,---0;:--,j"*o*- ""
.1 . " **-*.".'-:-"O..4..*-,.-*-"�-*,--.--"-. - � - w - .- . -- ..,.:-..,.. -*
. .,.,.o . --'�.*.'. - fi . ....,- .......,-7.....o..., .0�-,4.....,.,.,-.. . 0.6.,....... ..6...- -
. .. 0,:
. .
- .
.
. ry,-2
M7777
I..I-
.:.
.
-.
..:..-..
.*,-.�,
.. I..
0 ..
;
-.0
111111-.�-.-..-*.-. ..... :......60::.....::..�l.*O,....�::O::,:,�-'.-',.�-'.-",-:-.:. 0
.:. "I..:. -- -.-�-.. , .*..
�--'-------.'-l:-,--- . . . .. . :-,-,.:.:-,.,-..:*..::.:;,:*..*'..�-:::6,.-O.-.*.', , --- 6:.60 . :.:.:'........... * I `_0
�z--...:..--.... .. 0 . .. -4 .. .-.. .. - I----- -�.--::r-;�-*.--- .,
.. .-'--'-I' :. *,':-:-;-.,.:".-.*-::.-6.0,....:.-.-,7�,0..---.-:.::�..O-"...-...-...O:.0.6--6::..-..:,.:...:6:....:..6 -7--:1�.f.... :O'.1 . . . .,...,.::..,...,z .* "..%*
. -,*1 -:".-�-:-.- . , -- ,-�,::*:--;o',-'.'7.::.:*.'-..-.-..-:..6 6�-...'"',.-,.-,*6 6. -.-, ,.,':,., . ..--* .'*..' ."06::;
- - . - .. ..: . -- 0 .-,6.... ----------�oo----- - ...- .... :-,....�..-."'....-... ... - 0.--
............6 . . . -: ., ..:::::. ... . .. :.. ...-0,- -.- -. .- - -- .�.-6--- .,.-,- .. .. 6 ... - ,.7-..-,.-.....-...
--.-, ., .... ...- :�. . ...�� .,,6 , '.... ... ..w . ..- _-.:--..,:� . 0.-6 6-0-�-�,-..',,.6.0��-� .* .::..o...:. :. .0..... ,. , .'..-O�"...:.:.�:�.-':-,-.,.*,.-'.',;.�.0-...O.",:.-.--.
� .::..:.,.:.10;,...�-,'-.l-'....".......",:...0.. ........6-0..,0.... - 0 0--.0-0.....-6 .... .-:",-,-.�o:.--,00......'::.6. .-... .,.� ,.:. . - ..,. . -
-- *' * .. . ....-....- .:. . .. , - -, ,- . ,. . .:. ... .;
- -..... .6 ....-. .:.. ., :-...-':-.;.-:-;-,.*-,-..::.*............:.o-*:,--:-.-...'..":,..
.... . : . :,:�:-.
---* - - i.....-..0 .0... ,. . -�--"'�-,.:,-�-.`�..:--'..:�:,-,-,. 4
- - .......-:...,.,........,. . -0.. *:..*-'.-. *-..,0,. -:':.:....,.:.... .x,-6, ..6,:.'.
-.. .....-.-. , .�. ....
--- - .:"-,:-..,.�.:�.-*..:-,::.,.*.,��.:.,.�:-::..:-,--...-��-;:..-,:---,:.:.,::-o*
--I - '4.61::6..o..".......'�...,.,..:...O.......-..o f..;,:1
-- I- - .:::*.-:..-0-...*.::.'-....-,'., ...... 0. 0.-*
. 0-.- ...
�---- I- :. ...I ......,"----,�.o*-::o....,:. ...---o'...
-- - ,.",.*.4,-",-......'.....:.",,..*,.. .,... " ,.".;�'.
--.- - - .... .%..-.:..-,:-. .. I
-�...-..-0 , -:--.-e.:..o-.. . ..::"'; "
- - .--.., I
,
--.. .
�
-
�
- -v �.. ati VXIJh'11j
MANAGEMENT PLANNING COUNCIL OF KING COUNTY
This Agreement is entered into Amon Kin County, Srz7/92
_ g g ty, a political rubdivicion of the State of Washington,
hereinafter referred to as the *County,; the City of Seattle, municipal corporation of the State of W
hereinafter rr-ferred to Ls 'Seattle', and ruburban cities and towns of King County, all mttaici ��hington,
the State of Washington, hereinaf cr roferrod to as 'Suburban Cities.' P� rpontioas of
WHEREAS RESHB 1025 adopted in 1991 requires that, through it process agr=d to by the County, Seattle,
and Suburban Cities, the legislative authority of the County adopt a county-wide planning policy by July 1,
1992, and
WHEREAS the County, Seattle, and Suburban Cities have developed a collaborative process to produce the
county-wide planning policy, and
WHEREAS this agreement is authorized by the Interlocal Agreement Act, RCW 39.34,
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties mutually agree as follows:
I. LcLfinitioms.
a. Suburban Cities: Cities and towns in King County other than the City of Seattle.
b. County-wide planning rolicv (CPP): Tne'wrincu policy rtnt�.mcnt or statements used solely for
establishing a county-wide framework from which County, Seattle, and Suburban City comprehensive
Plans art developed and adopted, thus promoting comprehensive plans which arc consistent as req uired
by RCW 36.70A.100.
2. Establishment of the Growth Management Planning Council and staff. In order to establish the Growth
Managcm=t Planning Council and provide staff, the parties shall designate the. following elected official
members and staff. To Lhc extent possible, the parties' designees shall have a broad geographic
representation.
a. Membership for the Growth Management Planning Council (GMPCI.
1) Sc-attic shall designate three members to exercise three votes;
2) Suburban Cities shall designate rix members to exercise three votes;
3) King County shall designate six members, one of whom will be the King County Executive, to exercise
six votes.
b. Staff to the GMPC.
1) Each party shall designate staff to form an interjurisdicdonsl team to provide staff to the GMPC. The
County shall have designated staff of the King County Council and designated staff of the King County
Executive. The staff designatcd by the Executive shall serve as lead for the interjurisdic6onal Lcsm
through initial ratification.
2) The GMPC shall select a coordinator specifically to handle its administrative and procedural matters.
3. County-wide plaanine T>Olicy develo meet adoption process and ti
develop and recommend to the Kingation recess. The GMPC shall
Cot�unry Council a proposed CPP. Following a public hearing, the King
County Council shall adopt an ordinance approving a CPP. King County Lhen shall circulate the CPP for
ratification. The CPP shall be deemed adopted for purposes of the RCW 36.70A.210 when it has b=n
ratified by ordinance or rtsolution of a) at least thirty perr_ent (30%) of the number of city and county
governments in King County and b) such governments rtprnsent at least seventy percent (70%) of the
Population of King County. Adoption of the CPP by King County shall constitute ratification on behalf of
the population of unincorporated King County. Each city shall by ordinance or resolution either ratify the
We City Qy .::a _d..».r.., ....:.:.j..�....i...... ..is 'V..'..
4. Function and autboriry of GMPC.
Z. The GMPC shall recommend to the King County Council the county-wide planning policy in a form
and with content to comply with applicable Statz law. The recommended planning policy from the
GW,PC shall address issues and concerns obtained from review and comment during its public review
process. At a minimum, the CPP shall address the following: policies to implen cat RCW 36.70A.110;
policies for promotion of contiguous and orderly development and provision of urban services to such
development-, policies for siting public capital facilities of a county-wide or state-wide nature; policies
for county-wide transpor-.ation facilities and strategies; policies that consider the need for affordable
housing, such as housing for all economic segments of the population and parimcter for its distribution;
policies for joint county and city planning within urban growth arcz_s; policies for county-wide
oconoutic development and employment; and an analysis of the fiscal impact.
b. The GMPC shall devise and the parties shall comply with a locally based conflict resolution process
which will be directed at conflicts which may arise from the wort; of the GlviPC.
C. The GMPC shall devise and the parties shall comply with a process to amend the CPP that is adopted.
Amendments to the CPP shall be adopted and ratified in the same manner as provided in Section 3
above.
5. Funding for staff of the GMPC. T-ne parties recognize that under a separate agreement which allocates the
State Growth MZnagcment Act grant dollars among King County, Seattle, and Suburban Cities funds are set
zside for the development of the CPP.
6. Duration. This agreement shall become effective January 1, 1992 and shall remain in force and effect until "1
completion of the designzted duties of the GMPC, provided that it party may withdraw from this agreement
wit* sixty (60) days notice to the Count)' which notice may not be given prior to October 1, 1992.
Withdraw of any.party will not affect the status of the CPP.
7. Amendments. This agrecmaat may be amended by mutual written agreement of the parties.
S. Entire agreement. The parties agree that this agreement is the complete expression of the terms hereto and
any oral representations or understandings not incorporated herein are excluded. The parties recognize that
time is of the essence in the performance of the provisions of this agrc meat.
9. Stare relationship. A copy of this agreement shall be filed with the Washington State Department of
Community Development.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF?, this agreement has beaa.executed by: 1
Name of T .: -'t n Cit _ Bellevue King County Executive
Approved to or=. Apj io fom:
s
�� �� t
City Attorney Prosecuting Attorney
C90
l�f rTr
x�;.:ctrvIIVt SUM'lVARY
HOUSING POLICY ISSUE PAPERS
Summary of Policy Process
This paper summarizes the results of staffs' review of the CPP housing policies, as
presented in the housing issue papers discussed at the September 22 GMPC meeting. The
paper concludes with a discussion of policy implications, built upon the key findings of
the policy review. The overall housing policy update is outlined in the following four
steps:
(1) Policy Review. Report on the 5-year review of the housing policies
This was accomplished with the housing issue papers;
(2) Policy Implications. Identify key policy implications, based on the results of the
policy review, that can then be used to focus on potential policy options
Identifying policy implications to assist the GMPC in providing direction on potential
policy options is the purpose of this Executive Summary;
(3) Policy Options. based.on this direction, develop specific policy options for GMPC
consideration, and finally;
(4) Amend Housing Policies. Draft and reach consensus on amendments to the housing
policies.
Housing Growth
Overall Growth. The Countywide Planning Policies anticipate that total 20-year
household growth in King County will range between 171,816 and 222,558 households.
■ Countywide, from 1995 to 1998, jurisdictions issued permits to construct 41,847
units of housing.
■ In the last four years,jurisdictions, Countywide, have achieved 21% of the 20-
year growth target.
■ If development continues at this pace, the CPP growth target will be met.
Variations in Growth Rates. There is no requirement in the CPPs that growth occur at the
same rate in all areas during the 20-year planning period. The expectation established in
the policies is that, at the end of the 20-year period, each jurisdiction will have planned to
accommodate the level of household growth identified in the CPPs and in local
comprehensive plans. However, the review of building permits, 1995-1998, reveals that
cities and areas of the County are experiencing household growth at varying rates. Permit
data also reveals a variable rate of housing production in the 13 urban centers.
■ Growth is occurring at variable rates across the County (Eastside cities have
achieved 29% of their 20-year target, while southern cities and Seattle have
achieved 14% and 15%, respectively).
Rural Growth. The CPPs anticipates that rural King County will experience 7,000 units
of household growth over the 20-year period. From 1995-1998, permits have been issued
Cod
Rural Growth. The CPPs anticipates that rural King County will experience 7,000 units
vfho��seh.ld growth over+he 20-yea_.r peniod. -on: ?995-?99$, permits have been issued
for 3,676 housing units in rural King County. This equals 53% of the overall 20-year _
target for the rural areas.'
■ Permit data indicates that household growth in rural areas, if growth continues
at current rates, will far exceed the 20-year target for these areas.
Housing Affordability
Moderate-Income Housing. Policy AH-2 directs jurisdictions to develop plans and
regulations so that 17% of new growth is affordable to households earning moderate
incomes (50-79% of median income). Affordability data for rental housing, developed by
Dupre & Scott, indicates that, Countywide, a high percentage (>50%) of new units
produced by the private sector are currently affordable to households earning 50-79% of
median income.
■ Countywide, the moderate-income affordability target of AH-2 is being met in
private rental housing production. The data on new unit affordability is not
sufficient to draw similar conclusions for specific cities and areas of the County.
Low-Income Housing. Policy AH-2 also directs jurisdictions to develop plans and
regulations so that 20/24% of new growth is affordable to households earning low-
incomes (below 50% of median income). Countywide, the Dupre + Scott data on
privately produced rental affordability for new units indicates that the affordability of
new rental units is far below the 20/24%target. More specifically: in the best year(1998)
for the production of private low-income rental housing, only 7% of the units were
affordable below 50% of median income ; and, none of the new rental units surveyed,
1995-1998, were affordable below 30% of median income.
■ Since the adoption of the CPPs, the private sector has not been able to produce
low-income housing in quantities approaching the 20124% requirement of Policy
of AH-2.
Public agencies and local government have played a much stronger role than the private
sector in the production of low-income housing. Since the adoption of the CPPs, local
governments in King County have become significantly more sophisticated in their
support of and approach to low-income housing development. In addition, most
jurisdictions have met their financial "shared commitments" to low-income housing,
established subsequent to the adoption of the CPPs. The ARCH Trust Fund has
supported the development and preservation of 1,060 units/beds of affordable, mostly
low-income housing. King County, from 1994-1999, has funded the development and
preservation of 2,365 units of mostly low-income housing in unincorporated areas and
cities throughout the County. In 1995, Seattle voters renewed their housing levy which
will support over 1,300 units of affordable housing over a 7-year period.
■ This significant local support for low-income housing has helped 7 cities
(Bellevue, Des Moines, Enumclaw, Kent, Seatac, Seattle and Woodinville)
achieve their Targets for low-income housing (see attached table).
�2 2
Policv d, .wications
1. Should we explore establishing "interim" growth targets in the CPPs for
monitoring?
Currently, growth targets for all jurisdictions are aimed at a 20-year horizon. Should the
policies also include shorter-term goals (5 or 10-year), as a means of making checks and
corrections on the rate of growth, either Countywide or for all jurisdictions?
2. Should the CPPs seek to influence the distribution of growth? If so, what are
appropriate measures for influencing the distribution?
In the first five-years of the CPPs, rates of growth have varied across the County. Is this
a concern? If the GMPC wishes to create an expectation that growth occur evenly
throughout the County, how can this be achieved?
3. Rural: What are appropriate measures for curbing the level of growth in rural
areas? And, how can we be sure that growth diverted from rural areas, will
occur in urban areas?
More than half of the housing growth anticipated, by 2012, for rural areas has already
occurred. What actions are appropriate for ensuring that rural growth does not exceed the
level anticipated in the CPPs?
Affordabilitv
1. What strategies are appropriate and realistic for increasing state and regional
funding for Low-Income housing?
The GMPC's September 22 discussion on low-income housing funding strategies
identified legislative strategies and private sector partnerships as two options for
increasing resources dedicated to low-income housing. Should other options be
considered as part of the update to housing policies?
2. Should specific strategies be considered to encourage housing production
affordable to populations in greatest need (e.g., households with incomes below
30% of median)? If so, what measures are appropriate?
3. What approach should be taken for distributing "credit" toward the low-income
housing target when there is support from multiple local jurisdictions?
Distributing credit for a low-income unit could involve two criteria: location and funding.
Many of the low-income units created in the last five years have been funded by
neighboring cities or the County. The principle that neighboring cities and the County
(when funding projects in incorporated areas), should receive credit toward their low-
income housing targets is illustrated by the facts that: (1) of the 2,365 units funded by
King County, 2,004 have been located in incorporated areas; and (2) of the 1,060 units
funded by ARCH, 660 of those units have been funded by multiple Eastside cities. What
should be the distribution of credit for a low-income unit when multiple regional
jurisdictions participate? In addition to location, should.the distribution consider the
amount contributed by a jurisdiction, the affordability of the unit, the population of the
contributing jurisdictions, or other factors?
4. What regulatory strategies for encouraging low-income housing should be
pursued?
3 63
Low-Income Housing Units Created (by Jurisdiction)
(1994-1999)
(Average Annual Target/Average Annual Units Funded)
Jurisdiction Average Annual Low-Income Average Annual Funded
Housin� Target' Low-Income Housing UnitS2
EAST
Bellevue 103 111
Bothell 20 14
Issaquah 35 15
Kirkland 70 6
Mercer Island 19 12
North Bend 5 4
Redmond 119 43
Woodinville 22 23
SOUTH
Auburn 81 26
Burien 43 7
Des Moines 16 50
Enumclaw 12 21
Federal Way 180 20
Kent 67 204
Maple Valley Na 14
Renton 97 56
SeaTac 36 68
Tukwila 54 24
NORTH
Kenmore Na 24
Shoreline Na 7
Seattle 550 7963
Unincorporated 449 102
King County All 2,348 1,488
SOURCE: Countywide Planning Policies; King County Housing and Community Services; City
of Seattle, Office of Housing.
' The Average Annual Low-Income Housing target equals 20%or 24%of a jurisdictions annual growth
target.
2 Cities in boldface have exceeded their low-income housing target.
'Units funded 1994-1997.
I
ATypologyRegional
of Growth
Management Systems
Benjamin G. Hitchings
cross the United States,regional land use to clarify the present alternatives and spark future
patterns are shaping the local quality of innovations.
life.The challenge many regions face is A Continuum of Approaches
to help local governments work together
to address growth issues effectively while respecting Regional cooperation can take many different
political traditions that favor local control.Regional forms,including joint services delivery by local gov-
growth management frameworks in the U. S. exist emments,cooperative research and development by
along a continuum,with differing levels of author- private firms,and infrastructure development initia-
ity vested at the regional level.This article describes tives sponsored by nonprofits (Nunn and
a typology for classifying these systems as ad hoc, Rosentraub 1997).However,both managing growth
advisory,supervisory,or authoritative.Brief case histo- and shaping land use patterns on a regional level
ries from selected regions across the country illustrate must involve government since the rules that govern
the continuum. the land development process are drafted and imple-
The most significant advances in recent years are mented through government
the continued evolution of the Metropolitan Service A number of states and/or local governments
District in Portland, Oregon and the emergence of cede varying degrees of land use planning and deci-
moderate alternatives in San Diego and Seattle
that combine regional oversight with local respon-
sibility for implementing a regional growth strat-
egy. Figure 1. A Typology of
As local governments seek to mitigate the down- Regional Growth Systems in
sides of the low-density post-World War H suburban the United States
growth, those jurisdictions that establish land use
controls in isolation risk simply deflecting new de- Classification Examples
velopment to outlying jurisdictions (Downs 1994)
that often have fewer resources to manage it. In so Ad Hoc Research Mangle North Carolina
doing, they risk accelerating the degradation of im- Many other regions
portant regional systems such as watersheds, Advisory Denver, Colorado
airsheds,and transportation networks.In the search Atlanta, Georgia
for new mechanisms to shape regional development Supervisory San Diego,California
patterns and advance common regional interests, Seattle,Washington
metropolitan areas can learn much from existing Authoritative Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota
efforts. By classifying the range of regional growth Portland, Oregon
aa�^.a zement systems in the U. S., this article seeks
Volume 3, Numbers 1/2 (FalI 1998) The Regionalist 1
G5
a
t
Svstems 9 Beniamin G. Hitchings
i
{
}
Figure 2a. Key Features of Selected Regional Growth Systems:
Deciding Factors in Classification
Has Current Administers Regional Can Require °
Region Regional implementation Changes in Local s
Plan Strategy Plans or Other Codes
r
Ad Hoc
Research Triangle, N.C.
Many other regions
Advisory
Denver, Colo. x
Atlanta, Ga. x
Supervisory
San Diego, Calif. x x
Seattle,Wash. X
Authoritative
Twin Cities, Minn. X x
Portland, Ore X x
sion-making authority to the regional level to help metropolitan areas have drafted regional plans,but
local communities pursue their common interest in have little or no means for implementing them.As 1"I
the physical development of their region.The result- a result,they must rely on voluntary action by local
ing systems for managing development at a regional governments to realize the regional vision.
scale exist along a continuum, with differing Next in the continuum are regional bodies with
amounts of powerregional vested in the re ' l body. supervisory powers that administer a regional growth
Y
At one end ofthe continuum are communities that strategy developed with the local jurisdictions. Re-
take an ad hoc approach to addressing regional growth sponsibility for implementing the strategy lies with 1
issues. In this arrangement, local governments may local communities,while the regional body oversees
work together to confront specific land use issues such compliance and tracks the progress made toward
as protecting water supply watersheds or siting a re- realizing the goals of the regional plan.This explicit
gional airport,but they have no updated written plan implementation responsibility distinguishes the su-
in place for coordinating the future physical develop- pervisory framework from the advisory one .
went of the region as a whole These places may have a The other end of the continuum is marked by
voluntary council of governments that provides a forum regions that have statutory authority to develop a .
for discussing issues of regional concern but has insuf- regional growth strategy and oversee its implemen- i
ficientresourcesorauthoritytodraftacurrentregional tation. In such authoritative systems, the regional ,<
plan or require regional coordination(Figure 1). body can require changes in the plans and develop- IS
The next group of regions is categorized as hav- ment codes of local communities to ensure that these ing an advisory system of growth management.These documents are consistent with the regional strategy.
2 The Regis-. li s* Volume 3, Numbers 112 (Fall 1998)
A I ypu'w5Y U7 Ne8,u11at Grovflui
Figure 2b. Key Features of Selected Regional Growth
Management Systems: Supporting Factors' in Classification
Plan Revie y Authority Regional Selection Financial
Region Local Dev. of Revenue of Governing Investment in
Plans Reg. Impact Snaring Board Reg. Planning
Ad Hoc
Research Triangle, N.C. Locally delegated Low
Many other regions
Advisory
Denver, Colo. Locally delegated Low
Atlanta, Ga. x x Locally delegated Medium-low
Supervisory
San Diego, Calif Locally delegated Medium
Seattle,Wash. % Locally delegated Medium
Authoritative
Twin Cities, Minn. x x x Appointed Medium-high
Portland, Ore. x Directly elected High
1. The fifth supporting factor of regional infrastructure control applies limitedly to Tivin Cities,Minn. and Portland, Ore.
A System of Classification council on the assertion that how this relationship
Previous typologies have tried to classify ap- is structured fundamentally influences the chances for
proaches to regionalism in one of three ways: success in addressing regional development issues.
■ across issues(Seltzer 1995,Robinson and Hodge This typology classifies regions into four catego-
1998); ries based on three factors (Figure 2a):
■ across sectors (Downs 1994); or 1. Whether the region has a current regional plan;
■ across both issues and sectors (Walker 1987, 2. Whether the regional council has been given the
Nunn and Rosentraub 1997). responsibility to oversee local government com-
Works by Ndubisi and Dyer(1992) and Downs pliance with the regional plan to help ensure its
(1994)both examine the regional role in managing implementation; and
development.The former looks at regional councils 3. What authority the regional council has to man-
in the context of state land-use programs,while the age land use across the region by requiring
latter pans across sectors in search of the most prom- changes in local land use plans and development
ising regional approach. codes to ensure consistency with the regional
The typology presented in this article takes a plan.
different approach, specifically examining the rela- These latter tools,more than any others,provide
onship between local governments and the regional a mechanism for promoting regional coordination.
Volume 3, Numbers 112 (Fall 1998) The Regionalist 3
G�-
•Y
A Typology of Regional Growth Management Systems ■ Benjamin G. Hitchings
y
Local governments can pursue a de facto local 'V' 1 whether the regional council serves as the Met- -�
growth management framework in the absence of an I ropolitan Planning Organization responsible for
adopted local plan since they have land-use control helping local governments prioritize the alloca-
t
and taxing and spending authority and therefore can tion of federal funds for transportation projects
guide growth using their development codes, fiscal in the region. '
policies, and capital improvements programs.This _
. The extent of the regional body's plan-re-
is not generally possible for regional councils,which r view authority.Does the body have the author-
typically lack land use authority and often are lim- `� ity to review local comprehensive plans for con-
ited in their control over regional infrastructure de- sistency with a regional plan?Does it review pro-
dsions.As a result a regional growth management posed developments of regional impact? Such
system is generally effective to the extent that it co- �'� ' authorities systematize the process of ensuring
ordinates and enforces the myriad local plans and local coordination with a regional plan.
development codes and guides collective local ded- 3. The extent of regional revenue sharing. Do
sons such as how to spend regional transportation local communities in the region pool sales tax
funds. revenues and/or property tax base to reduce
competition for new tax base and promote I
Four Broad Categories greater regional cooperation?Such a mechanism
Therefore, this typology classifies a regional can make a regional plan widely acceptable even
growth management system as ad hoc if the region if it calls for an uneven distribution of new de-
does not have a current regional development plan. velopment and resource protection areas _K
If it has a plan but no regional oversight authority, (Orfield 1997).
it is classified as advisory.If it has a plan and admin- 4. The manner in which members of the re-
isters a regional implementation strategy developed gional body's governing board are selected.
jointly with the local governments, it is categorized Are they locally-elected public officials sent as
as supervisory.If it has a plan and the ability to require delegates by each community? Representatives
and enforce modifications in local plans and codes directly elected by the voters in the region? Or
to ensure consistency with the regional plan, it is members appointed by the governor? If a pub-
classified as authoritative. lic decision maker is elected or appointed re-
The typology becomes more precise through use gionally,that person may be more likely to take
of five additional factors to determine where a region posuuons at are in the best interest of the re-
falls within each of the four broad categories (Fig- gion as a whole, as opposed to a local delegate
ure 2b).These measures have been selected for their whose primary responsibili is to his or her
usefulness in implementing a regional development ffr:e�g=io�n'sannual
Orfield 1997).
plan, fostering regional cooperation, and building 5. per capita financial in-
the political will to advance common regional inter- vestment in regional land use planning.More
ests.They include: resources per capita should enable a regional
1. The regional body's relative control over the body to work more closely with local jurisdic-
development of regional infrastructure sys- lions to develop and implement an effective % k
terns. Such influence can be used to guide strategy for managing regional development In
growth on a regional level and promote local addition, the relative certainty of the funding is
compliance with regional plans. Examples in- important, with more stable sources such as a
clude direct management of infrastructure sys- regional tax base and mandatory annual contri- r
�y r
�k J tems such as wastewater collection and treat- butions from local governments improving the
ment, as well as planning and permitting for ability of regional councils to provide long-term .:
these systems. Another source of influence is coordination of regional development activities. '
Volume 3, Numbers 1,2 (FaIl 1998) ?
�:a
A Typology of Regional Growth Management Systems ■ Benjamin G. Hitchings
This part of the urban growth boundary in Washington County lies on Tualatin-Valley Highway near 219th
Avenue.
This level of financial investment has been infrastructure and no authority to review local plans.
ranked as low, medium, or high for the purposes Regional transportation planning is carried out by
of this study based on research conducted by two separate federally-designated Metropolitan Plan-
the Greater Triangle Regional Council (1998). ning Organizations(neither of which is TJCOG),the
Depending on the situation,the presence of one state Department of Transportation, and a regional
or several of these factors can justify classifying the transit authority.
growth management framework in a region as 'en- No revenues are shared on a regional level, al-
hanced' within its category. What follows are the though a portion of sales tax revenues are pooled on
results of this analysis for seven regions,including a a statewide basis and distributed based on popula-
':)rief description of each system and a discussion of tion.In comparison with the other regions examined
how it fits into the typology.Together,these examples in this study, the Research Triangle's investment in
encompass the range of regional growth manage- regional planning is low, with TJCOG spending an
ment systems presently in use in the U. S. average of 30 cents Der capita on reaionall land e
planning in fiscal vear 1996-97 (GTRC 1998).
Case Studies In 1969,TJCOG's predecessor,the Research Tri-
Regions with an Ad Hoc Approach angle Regional Planning Commission, produced a
Perhaps the most common approach to manag- regional development guide that included maps and
ing growth on a regional scale in the U. S. is the ad a discussion of the development issues facing the
hoc arrangement. A typical example is the Research region (Research Triangle Regional Planning Com-
Triangle Region of North Carolina. mission 1969).This document has never been up-
Research Triangle,North Carolina:One of 18. dated and is not current.As a result, efforts to coor-
regional councils in North Carolina, the Triangle J dinate land use activities throughout the region have
Council of Governments (TJCOG) serves as the re- taken place strictly on an ad hoc basis, as defined in
gional forum for a six-county area that includes 30 the classification scheme.Communities have worked
municipalities. It conducts planning and research, together to site a regional airport,develop watershed
and provides programs and services to communities protection measures,and establish a buffer along the
throughout the region.Participation by local govern- Interstate 40 corridor, the region's 'Main Street.'
ments is voluntary, and members pay annual dues Now, a coalition of leaders from the business
based on population (TJCOG 1997). community,government,academic institutions,and
The organization is governed by a board com- civic organizations called the Greater Triangle Re-
posed of one local elected official from each mem- gional Council (GTRC) has sponsored an examina-
T jurisdiction.It has no direct control over regional tion of possible future development patterns in an
Volume 3, Numbers 112 (Fall 1998) A ie xegionausr o
A Typology of Regional Growth Management Systems ■ Benjamin G. Hitchings `
effort to build cooperation on regional growth issues. (DRCOG 1997). A key goal seeks to contain the
It remains to be seen what form, if any, such coop- region's growth to a 700-square-mile area.This pro-
eration might take,and whether it will be enough to vision helps phase growth outward instead of allow- l
address the issues the Research Triangle Region faces ing it to leapfrog to distant rural areas (DRCOG
as it grows by a projected 600,000 new residents over 1997). DRCOG worked closely with local govern-
the next generation. ments and recently drafted an interim growth map
covering 731 square miles (DRCOG 1998).This is
Regions with an Advisory Framework out of a 5,075 square mile region.
Some regions have established an advisory sys- Other Metro Vision 2020 implementation ef-
tem of regional growth management that includes forts include: encouraging local communities to
the development of a regional plan but lacks a bind- develop comprehensive plans that are consistent
ing mechanism for implementing it. with the regional plan; identifying regional centers
Denver,Colorado:With 436,000 new jobs and for mixed-use development; and integrating the i
770,000 new residents expected by the year 2020, Metro Vision 2020 Plan with the regional transpor-
Denver is projected to grow at a pace similar to the tation,water quality, and air quality plans (DRCOG
Research Triangle Region(Denver Regional Council 1997).
of Governments 1997).Working through the Den- In addition, DRCOG has created a new point
ver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG), system for prioritizing transportation projects for
communities in the metropolitan area are now de- federal funding. Linder the proposed arrangement,
veloping a regional framework for managing this five percent of the total points would go to projects
growth that support urban centers and the voluntary urban
DRCOG serves an eight-county region with just growth boundaries. The new formula is scheduled
over 2 million residents. It is the state-designated to be implemented in two years (Broderick 1998). t
regional planning commission charged with the task Local governments are responsible for carrying '
of r 'ng a pan or the physical development of out the Metro Vision 2020 Plan,since the document t
the region and serves as the federally-designated establishes that all implementation strategies be
le for voluntary(DRCOG 1997).It is not clear how far they
Metropolitan Planning Organization responsib
regional transportation planning.Participating juris- will progress toward realizing their common vision,
dictions pay annual dues based on population and however, in the absence of any mutually binding F
tax base. Decisions are made by a board consisting agreement (see Wallis, p. 21 of this issue).
o elegates from each of the member governments Atlanta, Georgia: Local governments are re-
(Knight 1997). sponsible for implementing the Atlanta area regional t
DRCOG has no authority to review local plans plan. However, as a result of several state laws, the N
and does not oversee any mechanism for sharing Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) is authorized
revenues on a regional level.Its spending on regional to conduct a number of functions that help promote '4
land use planning amounted to 32 cents per capita regional coordination. E
in fiscal year 1996, giving it a low ranking on finan- The ARC provides regional planning and inter- j
dal investment compared with the other metropoli- governmental coordination to a 10-county region
tan areas in this study (GTRC 1998). containing three million people Strctly an advisory
The Metro Vision 2020 Plan approved by the agency, the ARC plans for job training, transports-
DRCOG Board of Directors in the spring of 1997 sets tion,and aginneed in the region,as well as for land
policy objectives for six core elements related to use,environmental Protection,an econorruc evel-
growth and quality of life in the region, providing opment. The organization is governed by a board I
the basis for more detailed plans for regional devel- composed of 23 10 public officials and 15 private
opment, regional transportation, and clean water citizens. Local government membership in the ARC
6 T}:e Regionalist Volume 3, Numbers 112 (Fall 1998)
x�
�a
.s mandatory,and each jurisdiction pays annual dues with the regional plan, and the Atlanta regional
of 8 tS pe a ita (Georgia 1989). growth management framework still falls into the
The ARC has no direct control over regional in- advisory category. Because of these added planning
frastructure,and no system of regional revenue shar- responsibilities and its significant financial commit-
ing has been established.Its per capita spending on ment to regional planning, the Atlanta approach
regional land use planning amounted to 63 cents in represents an enhanced advisory system.
fiscal year 1997, giving it a medium-low ranking
Regions with a Supervisory Framework
(GTRC 1998).
One major function the ARC undertakes is draft- Two regions in the U.S. are helping to define a
ing a regional plan(West 1995).Phase I of this plan, new middle ground in the regional growth manage-
VISION 2020, generated a shared vision for the re- ment continuum. Local governments in both San
gion and set regional benchmarks. Phase II of the Diego, California, and Seattle, Washington, have
process, titled 'Detailing the Vision,' involves pro- worked in their regions to develop regional growth
during a development plan, a transportation plan, strategies.In addition,they have given their regional
and a water supply plan for the region. Phase II in- planning bodies some authority to administer their
cludes analyzing different future regional develop- strategies and encourage local communities to
ment options. implement them,creating a supervisory system of re-
The need to complywith federal air quality stan- gional growth management. Each region, however,
dards may spur implementation of the regional plan. is taking a slightly different approach to this task.
The region has been downgraded to severe non-at- San Diego,California:To help prote j qual-
tainment for ground-level ozone pollution and must ity of life as the region grows,the 18 dues within the
develop a regional transportation plan by 2005 that County of San Diego all voluntarily participate in ffie
rill bring it into compliance.As part of this process, San Diego Association o Gn mm n s (S DAG).
—the federal government has frozen federal funding Formed in 1980,this association conducts regional
for many new road projects (Goldberg 1998). planning for transportation, growth management,
The ARC performs other planning functions. environmental management, and criminal justice.
Under the provisions of the Georgia Planning Act of Member governments pay annual dues and receive
1989, it reviews Developments of Regional Impact votes on the governing board based on a weighted
(DRIB)based on a range of factors,makes non-bind- formula.
ing rulings on whether the DRI projects are in the SANDAG does not have direct control over any
best interest of the state, and reviews local compre- regional infrastructure systems and, to date, no sys-
hensive plans for compliance with state planning tem of regional revenue sharing has been estab-
standards established under the Act(ARC 1987).In lished.Its financial investment in regional planning
addition, the ARC exercises planning and project is ranked as medium, based on spending of 93 cents
review authority for proposed developments along per capita on regional land use planning in fi
the Chattahoochee River,which provides more than 1997. However, thanks to voters, it possesses an
65 percent of the region's drinking water, to ensure unusual tool for coordinating land use planning in
compliance with development restrictions in the the region.
corridor (ARC 1987). Concerned about the increasing impacts of
Together,the regional plan,the DRI process,the growth on the region, citizens passed their own bal-
consistency review, and the project review responsi- lot initiative in 1988 requiring the formulation of a
bilities along the Chattahoochee River give the ARC plan to manage development on a regional level.All
significant ability to coordinate planning efforts 18 municipalities and San niPo� rrn,n wer re-
throughout the region.These measures are no sub- quired to vartidnate in La clan n+ent pro-
tute for the authority to require local consistency cess and comply with the resulting growth manage-
Volume 3, Numbers 112 (Fall 1998) The Regionalist 7
1
A Typology of Regional Growth Management Systems ■ Benjamin G. Hitchings
ment framework, known as the Regional Growth plans and codes to the shared regional goals on a
Management Strategy (Detwiler 1992). This docu- regular basis,
the self-certification process has im-
ment includes measurable standards and objectives proved regional coordination. However, so far, the F
for nine quality of life factors including air quality, mechanisms created to promote implementation of
open space protection,housing,and economic pros- the strategy have had a minimal impact on the land
perity(SANDAG 1993).SANDAG is responsible for use plans and policies of the local jurisdictions.
overseeing compliance with the Regional Growth In addition,no monitoring system has been es-
Strategy tablished to measure the region's progress toward
Under the procedure developed jointly by the achieving the quality-of-life improvements called for
local governments in the region,every two years each in the strategy (Baldwin 1997). The region has
jurisdiction must conduct a self-certification review moved slowly toward greater consistency in its poli-
process using a SANDAG checklist to determine des and does not yet know what the impact of this F
whether its general plan is consistent with the Re- movement has been.
gional Growth Strategy. The major inducement to Seattle, Washington: Seattle has crafted a re- e
comply with the Regional Growth Strategy provi- gional growth management framework largely
lions is peer pressure.One jurisdiction can challenge through consensus-building with local governments. r
the compliance claims of another, triggering an ex- But unlike San Diego, Seattle has the ability to im-
amination by the Review Board and possible media- pose financial sanctions if local jurisdictions do not
Lion through SANDAG's conflict resolution process. develop plans that are consistent with the renal iY
At present,SANDAG has no authority to review transportation plan. The organization that adman- z
and verify the self-certification findings submitted or isters this system is the Puget Sound Regional Coun- k
3
offer incentives for compliance. Instead, it simply cil (PSRC).
performs an administrative function,issuing a com- The PSRC has no service provision responsibili- 4
pilation of the local government findings (Baldwin ties and instead functions strictly as a planning body. '1
1997). Researchers Judith Gruber and Michael In addition, it has no direct control over regional
t,
Neuman note that the resulting system of regional infrastructure systems and administers no form of
growth management'sets standards that each com- regional revenue sharing.However,it does have sig- r
munity has to meet,but decisions about how to meet nificant regional plan development and local plan
them remain local.'(Gruber and Neuman 1993,96) review authority.It derives much of its authority from
Do local governments follow through on their an Interlocal Agreement signed by its member gov-
commitment?So far,local communities have under- emments.This document created the organization R
gone three cycles of self-certification and a number and outlined its major functions, including main-
are still working to achieve consistency with the Re- raining an updated regional growth strategy, devel-
gional Growth Strategy(SANDAG 1996).To date,no oping a regional database, and providing technical
jurisdiction has challenged the self-certification find- assistance to local governments (PSRC 1991).
ings of another.The local review process has received In addition,the PSRC ensures local compliance f
little public attention, with minimal debate at the with the state Growth Management Act and serves
r;
as the federally-designated agency in charge of re-
public meeting that each community must hold
before it can certify that its general plan and ordi- gional transportation planning.Membership in the
nances are consistent with the Regional Growth Strat- PSRC presently includes four counties and 64 mu-
egy. Since its inception, though, the strategy has nidp �. well as three port authorities an two f
helped focus the attention of public officials on re- state agencies. The organization is governed by its
�T-
Executive Board and its General Assembly.Represen- '=
gional growth issues. '
To date, the overall success is mixed. By requir- tatives from member governments, seated in num-
ing local jurisdictions systematically to compare their hers approximately proportional to member jurisdic-
:r
8 The Regionalist Volume 3, Numbers 112 (Fall 1998)
ii
a
r.•
1
'niamin r-. PitchingF
I
lions'populations,constitute the General Assembly is the growth management framework established by
A per capita spending rate of 97 cents on regional the state. Passed in 1990, the Growth Management
land use planning in fiscal year 1997 gives it a me_- Act requires communities in larger and faster-grow-
dium ranking (GTRC 1998). ing counties to develop comprehensive plans that are
In an effort to shape growth in the region over consistent with thirteen state planning goals.
the next generation, the PSRC's predecessor and lo- Spurred by the state growth management law
cal governments developed a strategy in 1990 for and dP in the Seattle region havere to promote their common a
growth management, economic development, and cal governments
transportation in the four-county area.This VISION system thatverges on authoritative,with the regional
2020 documentwas updated in 1995 with extensive council empowered by the state to withhold federal
public input and calls for locating new development transportation funds.Yet, through careful negotia-
in urban growth areas that can be more efficiently lion, the PSRC has succeeded in promoting consis-
fumished with public services(PSRC 1995).PSRC staff tency in a nonconfrontational manner.This could
are now developing a performance monitoring pro- provide a new model for regions that are hesitant to
gram to gauge progress toward implementing the plan. develop a system that is truly authoritative.
Another major function of the PSRC is to review Regions with an Authoritative Framework
local comprehensive plans throughout the region.
The agency does so in three ways, including provid- Two regional bodies in the United States have
ing consultation on local comprehensive plans, statutory authority to require changes in local plans
upon request, to strengthen coordination with re- if these documents contradict regional goals.
gional plans; systematically examining countywide Minneapolis-St.Paul,Minnesota.First created
and multicounty planning policies to ensure com- to address the problem of failing septic tanks, the
pliance with state law; and systematically reviewing Metropolitan Council-has developed into one of the
local comprehensive plans and countywide planning most influential regional councils in the country.
policies to ensure consistency with the Regional Directed by a 17-member board chosen by the gov-
Transportation Plan and compliance with the State error, the Met Council serves 7 counties and 186
Growth Management Act (PSRC 1996). cities and townships with a combined population of
eo
An appeals process is available if local govern- m lion people. Its Primary function is to draft
ments disagree with the results of this latter consis- plans for the different regional infrastructure systems,
tency review. In some states, such a review is con- including transportation facilities,sewers,parks,and
ducted for the entire comprehensive plan. In this airports.In addition, it operates the regional waste-
case, however, it only applies to the transportation water treatment system and the regional transit sys-
component of the plan (PSRC 1996). Under state tem. In fiscal year 1997, it spent 2.08 dollars per
law, if the PSRC deems that local plans are not con- capita on regional land use panning, giving it a
sistent with the regional transportation plan, it can medium-high ranking(GTRC 1998).
withhold federal transportation funds. However, it Thanks to a law passed in 1971, the Met Coun-
prefers to work cooperatively with local governments, cil also administers a system of regional tax-base
giving them a chance to review PSRCs findings and sharing that pools 40 percent of the commercial and
revise their plans and codes before any money is with- industrial tax-base growth above the 1971 base from
held.Planners feel the program has been very success- each jurisdiction and reallocates it to local jurisdic-
fiil from a policy perspective,with local policies largely lions through a formula based on population and
consistent with regional policies(Piro 199 8). Now the assessed value.A 19 9 5 analysis of the program by the
challenge is to implement these measures. Met Council found that the program had narrowed
One factor that has strengthened the PSRC's the disparity between the communities with the
ability to coordinate planning throughout the region highest and lowest commercial and industrial tax
The Regionalist 9
Nurrvhv77 1/2 (Fall 1998)
73
C
A Typology of Regional Growth Management Systems ■ Benjamin G. Hitchings `
base per capita from 17 to 1 down to 4 to 1 (Metro- in the urban core,protection of rural areas and agri-
politan Council 1995). cultural lands, and an adequate supply of affordable i
A 1976 state law requires all communities in the housing. To accomplish these goals, the strategy =�
Twin Cities area to draft comprehensive plans and seeks to guide growth to a municipal urban service
submit them to the Met Council for review. The Met area and rural growth centers, while establishing a
Council then makes sure they are consistent with its permanent rural area with an average density of 1
metropolitan system plans and other adopted plans, unit per 10 acres and a permanent agricultural area E
as well as with the plans of other jurisdictions (Met- with a minimum lot size of 1 unit per 40 acres (Met-
ropolitan Council, Jan./Feb. 1997). It can require a ropolitan Council 1996). �
local government to "modify any comprehensive The Met Council is implementing the growth s
plan or part thereof which may have a substantial strategy by means of its regional transportation and
impact on or contain a substantial departure from water resources management plans, which direct K
metropolitan systems plans.' (Minnesota Statutes public investments in sewer and transportation fa-
1997)This provision gives the Met Council authori- duties.Local communities help this effortwhen they '
tative power. It constitutes a more comprehensive revise their local comprehensive plans (Met Coun-
mandate than Seattle's authorization to review local cil,Jan./Feb. 1997).This effort is enhanced by a 1995 t
plans for consistency with the regional transporta- amendment to the Metropolitan Land Planning Act,
tion plan and one that is completely absent from the which obligates local governments to include an
San Diego system of self-certification. implementation plan in their local comprehensive `
However, as Minnesota state legislator Myron plans and requires them to adopt local land use regu-
Orfield notes, 'Under a system of self-imposed re- lations, fiscal measures, or capital improvements
straint, the council will require a plan amendment programs that are consistent with the plan (Minne-
onlywhen the local comprehensive plan imposes a sofa Statutes 1997).Other initiatives also supportthe
burden on a metropolitan system that'threatens its strategy.The Livable Communities Act passed by the
capacity'—a fairly cataclysmic event.' (Orfield 1997, state legislature in 1996 provides funds for afford-
177) As a result, the regional growth management able housing,the development of mixed-use,pedes-
framework in theTwin Cities could be termed nomi- trian-friendly communities, and the cleanup and
nally authoritative. redevelopment of contaminated lands (Metropoli- 5
While the Met Council is cautious about using tan Council 1998).
its legislated authority to require revisions in local A shift from its present policy regarding the use
plans,it is not shy about using its control over sewer of its statutory authority to require changes in local
permits and transportation investments to pressure plans might well require a change in the manner in 4.
tt
local jurisdictions to comply with the regional plan. which the council is selected.The present system of
As a result of these measures, 93 percent of the de- gubernatorial appointment makes the council be- 4R
velopment in the region between 1980 and 1990 holden to the governor,and according to critics such
took place in areas where it was planned to go,sav- as Myron Orfield, prevents it from developing the
ing an estimated $1 billion in infrastructure costs in political will to fully use its legislated power(Orfield
the process (Met Council, Jan./Feb. 1997). 1997). Until it does, the Twin Cities system of re-
More growth is anticipated in the future,with the gional growth management will remain classified as
_r
region projected to add an additional 650,000 nominally authoritative. .
people by the year 2020. To discuss this challenge, Portland, Oregon: In contrast with the Twin Y
the Met Council sponsored public debates on the Cities,the regional growth management framework
-1
region's future during the mid-1990s.The resulting in the Portland region is functionally authoritative.
regional growth strategy, Metro 2040, calls for the Here, the Metropolitan Service District (METRO) ,
efficient provision of regional services,reinvestment combines regional planning, regional service provi-
1L The Regionalist Volume 3, plumbers 1/2 (Fall 1998) �a
l bE.
1
L
1: .61nnal Gi..wul ,�.�...b
Sion, and land use management authority to main- land use issues that is unique in the United States.
tain the environmental quality of life in the region. One key to the Portland system is that, like Se-
METRO is the only directly-elected regional body in attle, it operates within a state growth management
the country, composed of an executive officer and a framework Passed in 1973,the Oregon Land Use Act
seven-member council. It is augmented by an advi- requires every city and county in the state to draft a
sory board of local officials called the METRO Policy comprehensive plan for its community.Each plan is
Advisory Committee (MPAC). then reviewed by the state for consistency with 19
METRO's primary function is regional land use state planning goals. Furthermore, communities
and transportation planning.In addition,it manages must ensure that their development codes are con-
regional parks and green spaces,solid waste disposal, sistent with their plans (Oregon 1990).
and a number of civic facilities including the METRO These measures, combined with substantial in-
Zoo and the Oregon Convention Center.It also over- vestments in public transit,have succeeded in mini-
sees the region's urban growth area sized to accom- mizing leapfrog development and providing greater
modate new development in the region over the next certainty about where and when development can
20 years and protect rural land uses outside the line. occur.A regional approach to regional problems and-
The urban growth area represents 363 square miles an authoritative growth management framework are
out of the region's 3,069. In fiscal year 1996-97, it the basis for this success.
spent three dollars per capita on regional land use Conclusion
planning, giving it a high ranking (GTRC 1998).
In 1992, voters passed a home rule charter for As regions across the U.S. grapple with growth
METRO giving it new financing powers and requir- and explore ways to manage it, a fundamental mea-
ing a Regional Framework Plan, completed in De- sure of success will be whether their growth manage-
cember 1997,to accommodate growth in the region ment systems succeed in shaping regional develop-
over the next 50 years.To implement the new plan, ment patterns.The categories presented in this article
METRO has the power to draft specific standards provide differing prospects for achieving this objec-
which must be followed by the three counties and tive.The ad hoc approach affords the possibility of
24 cities in the region.Examples include minimum cooperating on certain mutually agreeable regional
development densities, floodplain protection mea- problems, but provides no framework for address-
sures, affordable housing objectives, and transpor- ing regional development issues in a comprehensive,
tction performance standards. In addition, each coordinated, and ongoing manner.
community is responsible for accommodating a The advisory framework can generate a common
portion of the regional population and job growth vision for the future physical development of a re-
over the next 20 years (Metropolitan Council 1996). gion,but does not provide the means to pursue this
Local governments must amend their compre- vision in a systematic and sustained way.
hensive plans and development codes to comply The evidence provided by the regions studied in
with these standards, and then submit them to this article suggests that only when regions develop
METRO for verification.Those that fail to do so are a supervisory or an authoritative framework and main-
subject to a conflict resolution process,followed by tain it over a significant period of time can they truly
possible legal action and a reduction in regional begin to shape development patterns on a regional
transportation funding, among other measures scale, not just in particular corridors or sectors as
(METRO 1996). In contrast to San Diego's dispute might be possible with majorregional infrastructure
resolution process,METRO makes the final decision investments.
in disputed cases on whether to require a local gov- Portland is one region which has achieved some
emment to change its comprehensive plan(METRO success at this endeavor. Here, a regional growth
1995). This gives METRO a level of authority over management system has been in place long enough
The Regionalist 11
Volume 3, Numbers 112 (Fall 1998)
A Typology of Regional Growth Management Systems ■ Benjamin G. Hitchings
s . .
F
i -
and with the requisite authority to curtail leapfrog and the county in the region to 'participate in the 4
development and spur redevelopment in downtown formulation of, and...comply with, the adopted re-
Portland.Considerable efforts are now underway to gional growth management plan.'(SANDAG 1993)
promote more compact development within the In addition, it says that the 'Regional Board r
urban growth area. [SANDAG] shall have the authority to require that
Minneapolis-St.Paul has had more limited suc- the county and the cities adopt the necessary legis-
cess molding growth. The region has managed to lation to implement the regional growth manage-
expand urban services in an orderly manner, hold ment plan.' (SANDAG 1993) Theoretically, then,
down the cost of public sewer service, and maintain SANDAG should have the authority to oversee the
a relatively vital urban core (Davis 1998). Yet low- implementation of the regional growth management
density development continues to spread at a rapid plan, but to date, it lacks this power.
pace outside of the urban services area and the den- The experiences of Seattle and San Diego high-
sity of new residential development inside the light the fact that the supervisory framework is still f
boundary is about two-thirds that of new projects in evolving. While it holds considerable promise, it is F
E
the Portland region, leading to escalating automo- as yet unproven in its ability to shape regional de- F,
bile travel and traffic congestion (Metropolitan velopment patterns.A key to realizing this potential ;
Council, Sept./Oct. 1997). While the Metropolitan is the establishment of a binding mechanism to en-
Council appears to have the legislative authority to sure the long-term group discipline necessary to
take stronger measures, an ongoing challenge has implement a regional plan.
been finding the political basis to do so. This feature is absent in both Atlanta and Den- _
Perhaps the most promising approach for re- ver.While Atlanta has a number of legislatively-au-
gions reluctant or unable to establish an authcrita- thorized planning functions vested at the regional
tine system is to develop a supervisory framework level,unabated sprawl in the region indicates that the
Seattle has made substantial progress toward build- system to date has not been sufficiently potent to
ing such a system of regional coordination.Thanks counteract many of the downsides of growth. In 2
to diplomatic enforcement of state law and a com- Denver,local jurisdictions have recently agreed to an
mitment on the part of local governments,the Puget interim urban growth boundary in an effort to mini-
Sound Regional Council has been successful in co- mize leapfrog development and help implement the
ordinating regional transportation planning and Metro Vision 2020 plan (see Wallis, p. 21 of this is-
associated land use planning on a policy level.Time sue).
will tell if this system is able to influence regional Key questions remain,however,such as whether i
development patterns. local jurisdictions will stay committed to the bound-
Although it was initiated earlier than Seattle's, ary over the long term,whether the standards asso-
the system in San Diego has been slower to develop. ciated with the boundary are sufficient to prevent
While substantial investments in transit and a region- sprawling development outside of it, and how the
wide effort to protect endangered species habitat are region develops inside these borders.
helping to implement the regional growth strategy, Regions that want to move to a supervisory or
the region is still working to coordinate local and authoritative system might take note of how regional
regional growth policies. San Diego's experience councils in the past have been empowered to coor-
suggests that once a mutually agreed-upon regional dinate regional development activities. Generally,
plan has been developed, a binding agreement this authority has come from either:
among local jurisdictions is needed for the system ■ the state, through state legislation;
to be successful. ■ local governments,through an interlocal agree-
The language of the voter initiative that spawned ment; and/or
the regional planning framework calls for the cities ■ voters, through an initiative or referendum. _
12 The Regionalist Volume 3, Numbers 1/2 (Fait 1998)
`�6
A Typology of Regional Growth management Syscenis id benlaina, +•�: ,
Building support for at least one of these actions, directly through the local initiative process,if one has
then,is a critical task to developing a supervisory or been authorized in the state. Here in particular, a
authoritative system.Certain common elements are well-developed sense of regional citizenship and an
essential to gamering this support in each case,such understanding of the regional nature of growth is-
as widespread public sentiment that unmanaged sues are crucial.While regional civic organizations
growth is compromising the local"quality of life. have an important role to play in each approach,they
However, additional factors are also important are especially important in this latter case to mobi-
At the state level, advocates of state planning line widespread support among voters. With a bet-
legislation might take heed of recent trends in such ter understanding of the institutional framework
initiatives and move toward more incentive-based needed to develop effective regional growth manage-
programs to build the necessary support. ment systems, metropolitan areas can more readily
A hybrid of the Maryland Smart Growth ap- improve their ability to grow on their own terms. ■
proach has potential.To receive state funding under
the Maryland law for new transportation facilities Benjamin G. Hitchings works as a senior planner for
and certain housing projects,water and wastewater the Triangle J CounaI of Government and lives in the
facilities,and economic development projects,juris- Piedmont of North Carolina.He holds a master's degree
dictions must designate growth areas that meet cer- in regional planning from the University of North Caro-
tain standards.Existing municipalities and enterprise lina at Chapel Hill.
zones are automatically eligible.Local governments The author would like to thank Philip Berke, David
can identify additional growth areas provided they Godschalk,John Hodges-Copple, and Edward Kaiser for
are developed to specified infrastructure and density reviewing drafts of this paper.
standards (Maryland Senate Bill 389).
States that wish to establish a similar system REFERENCES
might first require the local governments in a met-
l
ropolitan region to develop a common regional plan Atlanta Regional Commission. 1997.Strategy'97:Atlanta
Regional Commission 1997 Work Program and Budget.
and implementation strategy. Short of this, states Atlanta Regional Commission.1995.A Community's Vision
might provide regions access to a special infrastruc- Takes Flight—VISION 2020: Key Initiatives for the Fu-
ture fund if they can demonstrate a certain level of Lure.
regional cooperation on land use issues. The Re- Atlanta Regional Commission. 1987. Review of Area
Plans—Administrative Report.
gional Competitiveness Act passed in Virginia in Atlanta Regional Commission. 1987. Metropolitan River
1996 provides an example of this kind of legislation protection Act Review—Administrative Manual.
(Richman and Oliver, Spring 1997). Baldwin, Susan, senior land use planner, San Diego As-
In the absence of state legislation,local govem- sociation of Governments. September 5, 1997. Per-
sonal communication with Benjamin Hitchings.
menu may find it difficult to support a regional Broderick Bill, planner II, Denver Regional Council of
m
growth framework without some regional syste of Governments. December 11, 1997 and February 27,
revenue sharing to help balance the benefits and 1998. Personal communication with Benjamin
burdens of the growth strategy developed.The tax- Hitchings.
base sharing program in the Minneapolis-St. Paul Davis,Bob,senior planner,Metropolitan Council.July 31,
1997 and March 2, 1998. Personal communication
region remains the most instructive model in the with Benjamin Hitchings.
United States and has been credited with defusing Denver Regional Council of Governments. 1998.'Special
excessive local competition for new commercial and Feature: Interim Urban Growth Boundary.'Regional
industrial development sufficiently for individual com- Report.
munities to consider regional land use initiatives. Denver Regional Council of Governments. 1997. Metro
Vision 2020 Plan.
If the politics can't be worked out at the local Detwiler, Peter M. 1992. 'Is Cooperation Enough?A Re-
government level, citizens may try to spur action view of San Diego's Latest Growth Management Pro-
Volume 3, Numbers 112 (Fall 1998) The Regionalist 13
A Typology of Regional Growth Management Systems ■ Benjamin G. Hitchings
i�
A
t
gram.' Chapter 4 in State and Regional Init.atives for Nunn, Samuel and Mark S. Rosentraub. Spring 1997.
Managing Development,Douglas R. Porter, ed.Wash- 'Dimensions of Interjurisdictional Cooperation.'
ington,D.C.:The Urban Land Institute. Journal of the American Planning Association,Vol. 63,
Downs, Anthony. 1994. New Visions for Metropolitan No.2:205-219.
America.Washington,D.C.and Cambridge,MA The Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commis- :E
Brookings Institution and the Lincoln Institute of sion. 1990. Oregon's Statewide Planning Goals.
Land Policy. Orfield,Myron. 1997.Merropolitics:A Regional Agenda for
Georgia Official Code. 1989.Annotated Section 50-8-80. Community and Stability.Washington,D.C.and Cam-
Atlanta Regional Commission. bridge, MA:The Brookings Institution and the Lin-
Goldberg,David.July 1998.'Heads Up,Atlanta.It's Clean coin Institute of Land Policy.
Air Tine.'Planning,Vol. 64, No, 7: 20-23. Piro,Rocky,senior planner,Puget Sound Regional Coun- :t
Greater Triangle Regional Council. 199S. Spending Com- cil.September 8,1998.Personal communication with g
parison on Regional Land Use Planning. Benjamin Hitchings.
Gruber, Judith E. and Michael Neuman. 1993. 'San Di- Puget Sound Regional Council. 1996.Puget Sound Regional
ego Regional Growth Management Strategy.' Case 3 Council Adopted Policy and Plan Review Process. r
in Coordinating Growth: Environmental Management Puget Sound Regional Council.1995.VISION2020:1995
Through Consensus Building,Judith Innes, ed. Update.
Knight, Audrey, principal regional planner, Denver Re- Puget Sound Regional Council. March 13, 1991.Resolu-
gional Council of Governments.November 24,1997. tion A-91-01:Framework Plan, InterIocal Agreement. e
Personal communication with Benjamin Hitchings. Research Triangle Regional Planning Commission. 1969.
Maryland.1997.Senate Bill 389: 'Smart Growth'and Neigh- 1969 Research Triangle Region Development Guide. Y
boyhood Conservation. Rhea, Beverly, review coordinator, Review Process Divi- �.
Metropolitan Council (Twin Cities). 1998. 1997 Annual sion,Atlanta Regional Commission.June 30, 1997.
Reps_ Personal communication with Benjamin Hitchings.
Metropolitan Council(Twin Cities). 1997.Local Planning Richman,Roger and James B.Oliver,Jr.Spring 1997.'The
Handbook. Urban Parmership and the Development of Vagina's I
Metropolitan Council(Twin Cities).Jan./Feb.1997.Coun- New Regional Competitiveness Act.'The Regionalist,
cil Directions. Vol.2,No. 1:3-19.
Metropolitan Council (Twin Cities). Sept./Oct. 1997 Robinson,Ira M.and Gerald Hodge.May 1998.Canadian "`-
Council Directions. Regional Planning at 50: Growing Pains. Plan Canada:
Metropolitan Council(Twin Cities). 1996.Regional BIue- 10-14.
print, San Diego Association of Governments. July 18, 1996. :F
Metropolitan Council (Twin Cities). 1995.Regional Up- Regional Growth Management Strategy Self-Certification �
date: Tax-Base Sharing in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Status Report for 1994-95.
Area. San Diego Association of Governments. 1993. Regional
Metropolitan Service District [METRO (Portland)]. De- Growth Management Strategy. r
cember 1997.Regional Framework Plan. Seltzer, Ethan. Feb. 1995. 'Responsibilities to Our Re-
Metropolitan Service District[METRO(Portland)].1996. gions.' IGA/APA Intergovernmental Affairs Division
Urban Growth Management Functional Plan. Newsletter,No.43: 1, 10-13.
Metropolitan Service District[METRO(Portland)]. 1995. Triangle J Council of Governments.1997.Growingwith the
Regional Urban Growth Goals and Objectives. Region: 1996-1997 Annual Report
Minnesota Statutes. 1997.Section 473.175:Review of Com- Triangle J Council of Governments. 1996. Budget. Fiscal E(•i
prehensive Plans. Year 1996197.
Minnesota Statutes. 1997.Section 473.864:Plans and Pro- Walker,David B. 1987. 'Snow White and the 17 Dwarfs:
grams;Adoption;Amendment. From Metro Cooperation to Governance.' National
Ndubisi, Forster and Mary Dyer. Fall 1992. 'The Role of Civic Review,Vol.76.
Regional Entities in Formulating and Implementing West, Harry. Fall 1995. 'VISION 2020: Key to Regional-
Statewide Growth Policies.' State and Local Govern- ism in the Atlanta Region.'The Regionalist,Vol.1,No.
ment Review,Vol.24,No.3: 117-127. 3: 33-41. s
14 The Regionalist Volume 3, Numbers 112 (Fall 1998)
A
vq
Governance Structures
PROBLEM STATEMENT
There are at least 468 entities responsible for some form of transportation planning or
implementation in Washington state. These include government bodies, as well as regulatory
and planning agencies, transit authorities, port districts, and tribes. The authority of the
Washington State Department of Transportation(WSDOT) over Washington's transportation
network is neither very strong nor very extensive. Of the over 80,000 miles of roadway in
Washington state, WSDOT controls 8.8%, or about 7,000 miles. That is less than the national
average of 23% for states.'
The last major overhaul of the state's transportation system was done in 1977, when many of
the transportation functions of the state were consolidated into the newly-formed Department
of Transportation, governed by a Transportation Commission. WSDOT sets service
objectives for state-owned modes of transportation and for facilities that are of`statewide
significance.' However, these do not include city- and county-owned streets, roads, and
. bridges.
`. Funding and policy decisions for city and county roads, and for transit, ports, and other
transportation authorities are not made by WSDOT, but rather by the specific municipalities
or agencies.
Funding Sources
State transportation revenue is strictly limited to how it is raised, where it can be spent, and
how much it can be increased. We get a significant share of our state transportation revenues
in Washington from a 23-cent per gallon tax on gasoline. The state's constitution requires
that gas tax revenues be used only for highway purposes. The State Legislature,which
appropriates transportation funding throughout the state, oversees the allocation of two-thirds
of all gas tax revenues. The other one-third goes directly to cities and counties. State funding
for city streets, county roads, and public transit occurs mainly through direct allocation,
without any decision by the legislature or WSDOT. However, state funding for local streets
and roads accounts for half or less of all revenues. Most (68%) of the funding for city streets
and half(50%) of the funding for county roads is raised locally, through local property taxes
or general fund revenues.
Governance Structures:Draft Paper
Z Draft Issue Paper:Local Sources in Funding City and County Transportation Needs
Draft Prepared for Administration Committee by ECONorthwest 1
9/23199
Governance Structures, DRAFT
9/23/99
By and large, the multiple governments have succeeded in creating a remarkable
transportation system for the state. Their efforts seem to work best when authority for
planning, deciding, funding, and implementing projects rests within a given body, such as
WSDOT's responsibility for state roads, and the various transit agencies' responsibility for
their transit systems. When responsibility is more diffuse, and planning requires coordination
with a number of jurisdictions, the results are more mixed. In certain areas of the state, the
complexity of the structure and the number of players warrant examining structures that
might improve and simplify the process in those areas.
CASE STUDIES
Legislatures in other states and regions have struggled over problems with traffic congestion,
pollution, sprawl, and lack of coordination among governments. Described below are five
jurisdictions in which changes to transportation governance have been proposed or
implemented:
■ Michigan — the governor has proposed to provide additional funding for road projects,
reform transportation agencies, and expand the state's authority of the road system;
■ San Diego—the regional planning agency has project selection and funding powers
■ Atlanta region — an expansive regional authority has recently been created, with
transportation and land use oversight;
■ Vancouver, B. C.— a newly-created regional authority, TransLink, has assumed
responsibility for managing roads and transit, and is also responsible for planning, service
levels, and funding;
■ New Zealand —moving toward a system of public road companies, paid for by user
fees.
EVALUATION
Proposed approaches to the issue of governance will be evaluated against the following
criteria:
■ Aligns authority and responsibility to plan, fund, and implement transportation services
■ Balances the desire for local accountability with need for a system-based perspective
■ Creates transportation systems able to innovate and change
■ Inspires public support and increases public confidence in governance of the system
■ Enables comparison among all modes of transportation, meaning that the most beneficial
projects will get funded, constructed, and maintained
■ Has the potential to be implemented
DRAFT Prepared for Administration Committee by CCONorthwest 2
c 9/23/99
G'D
Land use and 'Transportation
PROBLEM STATEMENT
Over the past century, growth of automobile use, highways, and auto-related land
development have enabled people to increase the distance between home and job and to
travel across long distances quickly. For better or worse, low-density suburban development
has become the dominant land use pattern in metropolitan areas today. This pattern of
dispersed centers of activity has contributed to an environment where only one type of
transportation—the personal automobile—is viable.
This type of transportation system can place an undue burden on roadways and contribute to
traffic congestion. Past efforts to address congestion focused primarily upon adding new
capacity—more and wider roads. Today, some planners and policy makers believe that
mobility solutions may lie in a closer examination of the link between land use and
transportation and in using policies to strengthen that link.
CURRENT AND PAST EFFORTS
Several recent efforts have made steps to improve the connection between transportation and
land use:
Washington Growth Management Act (1990)
The Washington State Legislature passed the Growth Management Act (GMA) to address
some of the negative aspects of population growth in the state— urban sprawl, loss of open
space, traffic congestion, pollution, diminishing wildlife habitat. GMA requires
comprehensive planning at the county level, and it recognizes the link between transportation
and land use. The `concurrency' element of GMA requires that local jurisdictions have
adequate transportation facilities or strategies in place prior to approving major new
development.
Regional Transportation Planning Organizations (RTPOs)
Authorized under the 1990 Growth Management Act, RTPOs provide a formal mechanism
for cities, counties, and the state to coordinate transportation planning at the regional level.
RTPOs develop multimodal regional transportation plans and project lists for funding. The
process is intended to establish a regional approach to transportation planning, capital
investments, and service improvements.
Federal Transportation Legislation (1991, 1998)
The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) represented a significant shift
in federal transportation funding. Instead of emphasizing interstate highway construction,
ISTEA shifted the focus to include system preservation and maintenance, as well as
efficiencies to improve the movement of people and goods. Other modes, including transit,
bicycles, and pedestrian infrastructure, received increased attention and funding. The 1998
reauthorization, the Transportation Efficiency Act for the 21" Century (TEA-21) established
DRAFT prepared for Investment Committee by ECONorthwest 9/23/99 /
g�
DRAFT, Land Use and Transportation
Page 2
a new program that allows jurisdictions to limit sprawl through interrelated transportation,
land use, and environmental protection programs.
PROPOSED SOLUTIONS
Strengthen Powers of Regional Agencies
Creation of regional authorities can enable coordination of programs across several levels of
government and among competing jurisdictions. Washington's RTPOs are an example of
regional government on a small scale. In areas such as Portland, Oregon; and Vancouver,
B.C., regional authorities have control over transportation infrastructure and funding, as well
as provisions to enforce land use plans. Integrating land use and transportation plans at all
levels of government could help improve use of the existing transportation system and
prevent future land use and transportation conflicts.
Promote `Smart Growth'
An emerging trend in planning and urban design focuses on changing the conventional
wisdom of what new development should look like. This `new' type of development
hearkens back to a pattern more common in urban and suburban areas prior.to World War H
and features a grid pattern of streets, smaller building lots, mixed-use development,
sidewalks, pedestrian-scale lighting, and other amenities. Destinations such as the comer
store, coffee shops, and restaurants are within walking distance of residences and work
places, establishing the presence of people on the streets and enhancing the perception of
safety and vitality. In `smart growth' communities, the number of car trips per household can
be significantly less than that of traditional suburban households.
Policy changes to promote smart growth may include:
• zoning revisions to allow mixed-use development
• zoning for increases in density
• modifications to building setback requirements
• transfer of development rights to increase density in some areas while protecting open
space elsewhere
• modification of parking requirements
• expedited permitting to encourage projects that meet specified criteria.
Challenges to `smart growth' include NIMBY ("not in my backyard") opposition; a lack of
recent experience on the part of developers and lenders with this kind of development; and a
more limited number of households who want to live in higher density communities.
DRAFT prepared for Investment Committee by ECONorthwest 9/23/99
g2
Item IV-C
Permit Reform
PROBLEM STATEMENT
Legislation promoting environmental preservation, citizen involvement, and growth
management has resulted in improvements in the quality of life, but has also left a legacy of
complex regulations and permits.
At the federal level, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Air Act, the Clean
Water Act, and the Endangered Species Act have had the most impact on major capital
projects. The State Environmental Policy Act and the Growth Management Act deal with
issues at the state level, and also allow local jurisdictions to adopt ordinances to protect
critical areas.
When planning for projects, the type and timing of review at the local level can conflict with
federal requirements for environmental review, making the process seem cumbersome,
duplicative, and overly time-consuming. Critics of the existing system argue that there is an
emphasis on procedure over substance; that environmental impact statements are used to
justify a choice that has already been made; and that environmental review imposes increased
costs and project delays. Also damaging is the perception of permitting and regulation as `red
tape,' a sign of government waste and inefficiency.
PROPOSED POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS
All proposed potential solutions stem from existing efforts to improve the planning and
permitting process.
■ Better integration of NEPA/SEPA and planning process: This could insure proper
evaluation and could reduce the cost of state permits, as well as speed projects along,
through a consolidation of environmental, land use, and growth management review, and
issuance of programmatic permits rather than piecemeal permits as projects are
developed.
■ Comprehensive and holistic planning: WSDOT is working to coordinate its
environmental mitigation programs with other federal, state, and non-governmental
agencies as a means of forming a more comprehensive approach to mitigation. Also,
WSDOT is doing watershed-based planning so that it may do permitting and
environmental review from a holistic policy basis rather than on a project-by-project
basis.
DRAFT Prepared for Administration Committee by ECONorthwest 9/23/99 S3
DRAFT, Permit Reform
■ Increased staff in resource agencies: Through interagency agreements with other
state or federal agencies, WSDOT may be able to increase its environmental review staff
and speed review.
■ Early stakeholder involvement: A pilot project for SR 104 involves the creation of a
steering committee for project decision making. Giving equal standing to all stakeholders
(not just funding agencies) ensures early involvement and `buy-in' of stakeholders.
■ Statutory and regulatory changes: Minor statutory changes, such as standardization of
public notification requirements, could result in a faster and fairer permitting process.
EVALUATION
The four criteria established for the evaluation of proposed solutions are whether the
approach:
■ helps make decisions that stick
• reduces permitting costs
■ reduces the time for the permitting process
■ reduces environmental impacts through better decision making.
It should be noted that these proposed solutions are incremental in nature, as they build upon
existing reform efforts and do not call for wholesale change in the environmental review and
permitting process.
DRAFT Prepared for a aminisu ation Committee oy CCONorthwest 9/23/99
Q'
Overview of Transportation Funding
PROBLEM STATEMENT
In the 1996-97 time-frame, the state of Washington received $3.67 billion in transportation
funding. This funding comes from three primary sources: state government ($1.95 billion),
local governments ($1.25 billion), and the federal government ($0.47 billion). These
revenues are often raised and distributed in strict categories, often by transportation mode or
geographic region.
The current revenue framework is characterized by:
■ a large number of funding categories, or `buckets;'
■ a high degree of fund dedication with restrictions on uses;
■ distribution of funds by jurisdiction, mode, and program; and
■ different economic characteristics of the different fund sources.
Such characteristics can create a tendency to localized and compartmentalized transportation
planning and project development. Often a lack of agreement on priorities among adjacent
jurisdictions results in a lack of effective coordination despite other collaborative efforts.
Recent legislative and programmatic changes at the state and federal levels have created
opportunities and incentives for a new look at transportation funding. These include:
■ Broader funding categories: The 1990 federal Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act (ISTEA) created significant new flexibility through broad funding
categories for roadway enhancement and maintenance, as well as funding non-traditional
projects.
■ Regional planning: Regional transportation planning organizations have brought
numerous governments and modes to a single planning and fund allocation table.
■ Increased public participation: a recent increase in the level of public involvement in
projects has brought community groups, environmental groups, and alternative
transportation coalitions into the decision-making process.
These trends may be signs of more flexible funding in the future, as well as funding that is
more responsive to emerging conditions.
PROPOSED POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS
Proposed potential solutions attempt to make the funding framework simpler, more flexible,
more equitable, and well coordinated across jurisdictions and modes. These approaches could
be used separately or in combination with another:
■ A user-based framework: General purpose transportation taxes would be replaced with
user fees, strengthening the connection between the use of the transportation system and
DRAFT Prepared for Revenue Committee by Prospect Delta 9/23/99
DRAFT,Transportation Funding in Washington
Page 2
its funding. All levels of government would have access to the same set of user fee-based
funding resources.
• A function-based framework (`state ISTEA'): Modeled after the federal program, this
would reduce the number of funding `buckets' at the state level and focus on broader
functional funding categories.
■ A cluster-based framework: Clusters of facilities that form a single inter-related set of
transportation functions could be defined together for purposes of planning and funding.
For example, a major regional arterial, together with its HOV lanes, feeder roads, bridges,
overpasses, bike trails, sidewalks, transit centers and park and ride lots could be defined
as a regional transportation `cluster.' This approach is similar to corridor-based
proposals, but goes a step further.
■ New regional planning/funding bodies: Another funding framework could be
developed based on giving increased funding authority to existing regional planning
bodies (RTPOs and MPOs) or creating new regional bodies similar to the Regional
Transit Authority but for other purposes. For example, a regional entity could be created
that would have a stable funding stream that was flexible enough to fund a mix of
roadways, transit, technology and trip reduction improvements.
■ New system-wide investment principles: A new funding framework could be
developed that used broad system-wide criteria and allocated funds linked to the criteria.
For example, criteria could include:
a) funding maintenance and preservation first;
b) funding efficient use of existing facilities (through signalization or other
technologies) prior to adding new capacity;
c) common definitions of"needs" across all levels of government and eventually across
modes;
d) funding based on analysis of optimal investment effectiveness (based on cost-benefit
analyses or modal trade-off models).
These criteria are intended to be illustrative only and are not a proposal. Any fi-amework of
system-wide investment principles would need to be based on an agreement by major
stakeholders and would be applied primarily to regional arterials, not to local streets and
roads.
DRAFT Prepared for Revenue Committee by Prospect Delta 9/23/99
`Needs' Exceeu r uuattig
PROBLEM ST
ATEMENT
In Washington, the public sector spends close to $4 billion annually providing roads,
ferries, and transit services. Despite this level of spending, all levels of government have
identified transportation needs far in excess of their existing and projected levels of
funding. According to the Washington State Department of Transportation's most recent
state transportation plan, Washington has over$50 billion in unfunded transportation
needs over the next twenty years. To fund these needs would require a two-thirds
increase in public transportation spending. The current update of the state transportation
plan will likely show even higher levels of needed investments in streets, roads,
highways, transit, ferries, and freight mobility.
While many people want government to improve the maintenance of the road system and
make road and transit investments to relieve congestion, there is less support for the
increases in taxes and fees necessary to fund a two thirds increase in transportation
spending. In addition, some are skeptical as to whether all of the identified `needs'
represent cost-effective investments. Jurisdictions do not share common definitions of
needs and service objectives. Since few `needs' have been subject to rigorous analysis of
their cost-effectiveness, it is difficult to know whether substantial increases in public
spending would generate benefits in excess of their costs.
PROPOSED SOLUTIONS
There are several broad strategies for closing the gap between needs and funding:
• • Increase funding: More revenue is one way to narrow the gap between needs and
funding. See separate papers existing and new sources of revenue.
• Constrain plans to available resources: The federal government now requires
states and metropolitan planning organizations to develop plans within their existing
and probable future funding. While requiring jurisdictions to "live within their
current budget" is one approach to reducing the need, many people are unhappy with
the congestion and poor quality,of the transportation system that will result from
maintaining current funding levels and investment practices.
• Improve the process for identifying and funding the most cost-effective
investments: Applying better and more consistent analytic practices such as benefit-
cost analysis to all transportation investments at all levels of government could help
separate needs from wants.
• Strengthen the link between user fees and the actual costs of providing
transportation services: Greater reliance on direct user fees for roads (tolls) and
transit use (fares) could help close the gap between needs and funding. Setting user
fees to cover the actual cost of providing transportation service on a specific facility
helps reduce demand, generates revenue, and provides guidance on the best
investments for the future.
• Consolidate planning and funding processes: The current system of governance
and funding is fragmented which makes it difficult to identify, fund, and implement
the most cost-effective transportation solutions. See the paper on governance for
more discussion of this issue.
EVALUATION
DRAFT prepared for Investment Committee by ECONorthwest 9/23/999
UI
DRAFT, Needs Exceed Funding
Dann 2
rroposed ai r,,, ,� �j closing the gap between needs and funding will be evaluated on
the following criteria:
• Cost effectiveness
• Ability to produce a measurable change
• Acceptability to the public
• Administrative feasibility
g�
-40
-41P4W Appointments Policy
AW
Issues concerning PSRC
appointments: Bellevue request
Ab
.40 7anuary 2000 SCA General Membership Meeting sca
AW Presentation by Deb fd�y,Exec Director
. PUGET SOUND REGIONAL
COUNCIL
�4 County transit planning agency
oMTO and RTO for federal, state funds
o21 member iurisdiction seats, 5 statutory
members
a..
oExecutive Board conducts business,
approvals for all members, between General
Assemblies S�
AW
1
•S
PSRC Member Jurisdictions
�. PSRC
Kitsap County Snohomish County
county = 1 seat County = 2 seats
�e. 4 cities = 1 seat Everett = 1 seat
-aA►
19 other cities = 1 seat
Pierce County King County
*� County = 2 seats County = 3 seats
Tacoma = 1 seat Seattle = 4 seats
.► 21 cities = 1 seat 36 cities = 4 seats
sca
I
-sr
King County Seats/Votes at PS RC
'based on 1998 OFM population
-AW SEATS VOTES
-ao
King County 3 262.63
Largest city (Seattle) 4 115.98
Other cities and towns 4 146.65
oKing County and its cities have 11 of21
city/county seats - over 50%
oKing County and its cities have 525.26
scn
0of 1000 weighted votes - over 50% I�
AW
2
qo
PSRC Bylaws, Art V, Sec 3, (b)
4
40
y .
O"For the remaining member
,, _•� cities and towns in each
county, the method of
appointment is at the
discretion of the members
immediately concerned."
-OW
King County cities' Practices:
oKing County has 38 cities, other than 5eattle,
with over 260 elected ofcials.
.M
oThese cities and towns provide for over 75
regular annual appointments, not including staff
*These cities and towns use non-profit 5CA to
provide for a fit and orderly method of ma ki ng
and supporting these appointments.
z
J
41
r
SCA Appointments Policies
*Must pay dues.
Bylaws, Preamble: 'Only oficials From member cities which have
paid their dues and assessments will be appointed to serve as
A, Suburban Cities Association representatives to quasi-
�+ governmental committees.'
Aw
~� O Must represent interests of all.
Sec. 1, Purpose: '... and with the concurrence of-,he majority of
�► the member cities and towns,act as spokc�person Forthe
Aft Suburban Cities Association in regional aitairs and policy
'• discussions with King County and/or other a(tected regional SC1
agencies.'
II
SCA Member Cities' options
o5hares costs and duty to represent all.
ao oAd here to Bylaws °No Bellevue seat under status quo.
oCa rve out seat for B'vue °Creates disparrty among peer cities.
Bellevue'guaranteed a seat
od cities`requests defeats'scheme
lowoChan e Bylaws d
9 y Defeats agm't for cost sharing and duty to represent all
*� Keeps.:appointmentsundernominal SCA umbrella
*8ellevue'may or may not get a seat.
oPecline to a oint
-Honors differences in membership
Cities need to convene separately;may need proxies
Bellevue may or may get a seat
*Na costsharingor duty to:represent'all,cities
4
�Z
COMMUTER RAIL STATION AREA STUDY
BACKGROUND AND PROJECT UPDATE
Background: The purpose of the Commuter Rail Station Area Study is to identify potential new mixed-use
development sites within walking distance of the station and develop recommendations for public and private
transportation-related improvements to mitigate the effects of development and connect new development to existing
commercial, civic,residential and recreational activity areas.. Updating the 1998 downtown market analysis with the
latest available information will help to identify uses for potential development sites and for redevelopment and infill
in existing mixed-use areas. The study will be used to inform those who may invest in downtown Kent in the future,
and to guide City decision makers regarding public-funded improvements and potential public/private partnerships
The project will also create a general concept master plan for the Borden Industrial Site in accordance with the
Downtown Strategic Action Plan . It will provide recommendations for specific street and sidewalk improvements
related to the commuter station and future land uses. Although the community discussed many of the issues related to
traffic circulation and connections in the downtown core during the extensive Downtown Strategic Action Plan
process,we now have new information about the commuter station, and other existing and future developments such
as the Kent Market building and the Performing Arts Center. This new information justifies another,more detailed,
look at the streets and sidewalks near the station. Recommendations will focus on improving circulation in the study
area and strengthening pedestrian connections between potential development sites and existing activity areas-the
King County Regional Justice Center,the Kent Market, and existing retail and office centers. Street and sidewalk
recommendations will be coordinated with the ongoing Gateways Project.
The study will also provide a list of potential funding sources and partnership opportunities.
The City will make the final study available to public decision-makers,property owners,private investors,businesses,
and service providers.
Project Update: Property Counselor's preliminary market analysis summary provides demographic information that
1�1.1 demonstrates that"Overall demographic conditions indicate strength of underlying market area."
Several redevelopment sites were identified by using the City GIS system. The system was programmed to highlight
vacant sites and sites where the ratio of assessed value of improvements to assessed value of land is less than 0.5. For
existing single-family uses in commercial zones, a ratio of 1.0 was used. Vacant parcels were highlighted based on a
criterion of improvement value less than $1000. All values provided were as recorded in King County Assessor's
Records. We realize assessor's records often do not reflect current market values,but they do provide an objective
base for comparison and preliminary analysis.
LMN staff obtained Public Works Department information regarding current and currently proposed traffic circulation
on streets adjacent to the Borden site and coordinated with the designers of the proposed Sound Transit parking garage
and Performing Arts Center to draft a general site plan for the Borden site. It features a north extension of 2nd Street
that curves to 4"'Avenue to direct vehicles entering and leaving the site to use Smith Street and 4"'Avenue only. The
interior streets and parking lots serve the types of land uses identified by the market analysis, including office,
residential,and retail. The concept includes a public plaza,with connections to the station,new commercial,
Performing Arts Center and existing downtown activities via 2nd Avenue. The Borden site also provides space for a
cinema. Mixed office,retail and or residential uses are recommended for other redevelopment sites. The market
analysis verifies that the long term City objective of 2,500 to 3,000 housing units in the downtown core over 20 years
is ambitious but achievable. The hotel conference center,recommended by the 1998 market analysis, and identified as
"still a realistic opportunity" is shown on the current municipal parking lot site. Other redevelopment sites were
identified east of the future station and just outside the 1500 foot perimeter
south and west of the station.
The land use concepts and traffic impact assessments will be used by Mirai Associates and Atelier Landscape
architects to recommend street and sidewalk facilities, including circulation improvements, lighting,bollards,
turnouts and curbing, crosswalks and traffic calming devices, and other specific improvements that could be
incorporated into the City's long-range capital improvement plan.
The study is scheduled to be completed by June,2000.