Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
City Council Meeting - Council Workshop - Agenda - 05/15/2001
KENT W A S H I NGTON COUNCIL WORKSHOP " COUNCIL Leona Orr May 15, 2001 Council President 220 Fourth Ave.S. Kent,WA 98032-5895 The Council Workshop will be held in Chambers East in Kent City Hall at 5:00 PM Phone: 253-856-5712 on Tuesday, May 15, 2001. Fax:253-856-6712 Council Members: President Leona Orr, Sandy Amodt, Tom Brotherton, Tim Clark, Connie Epperly, Judy Woods, Rico Yingling REVISED AGENDA Speaker Time 1. Legislative Update Dena Laurent 05 min. 2. Performance Measures and Strategic Planning Dena Laurent 25 min. May Miller Jana King Larry Blanchard 3. Final Environmental Impact Statement Don Wickstrom 20 min. for the 228th Street Corridor Project 4. Emergency Medical Service Norm Angelo 15 min. The Council Workshop meets each month on the first and third Tuesdays at 5:OOPM in Chambers East unless otherwise noted. For agenda information please call Jackie Bicknell at (253) 856-5712. ANY PERSON REQUIRING A DISABILITY ACCOMMODATION SHOULD CONTACT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AT (253) 856-5725 IN ADVANCE. FOR TDD RELAY SERVICE, CALL THE WASHINGTON TELECOMMUNICATIONS RELAY SERVICE AT 1-800-833-6388. REPORT -- WEEK 18 OF 2001 SESSION Doug Levy—5/14/01 The Legislature completed its third week of the Special Session—and the only `end' in sight is the `end' of a first Special Session that will spill over into the beginning of a second Special Session. Those negotiating the budgets—particularly transportation packages—tell us a 2nd Special is inevitable at this point. That would take us through the end of June and,at that point,the State biennial fiscal year will have ended and new budgets must have been adopted. At this point,the major hangup in the transportation budgets is the desire for a revenue package vs., in the case of the House Republicans in particular,the desire for passage of"reform and efficiency"bills and a change in the way the WSDOT does business before a revenue package is put in play. With the Operating Budget,the$64 question is whether any portion of LEOFF 1 pension fund surpluses will be tapped—the Senate uses$250 million,the House zero. Until that question is agreed upon, it is difficult if not impossible to negotiate other parts of the budget. Meanwhile,we are told the Capital Budget is very close and is simply waiting for the others to move along. From a Kent perspective,we continue to work the transportation issue,and also had some reason to hope that our effort to obtain up to$3.5 million in specially earmarked capital budget money for Clark Lake might be getting some resuscitation work last week(however, at this writing, we are still following up and have no details to offer). Additionally,the Governor signed his water bill(HB 1832) into law,sent a letter to legislative leaders requesting additional water action next session, and vetoed a provision of a House bill (ESHB 2172)that a number of utilities had requested be vetoed. Finally, a dozen Senators, including Sen. Julia Patterson(D-33`d),will be sending a letter to the Chair and Ranking Member of Senate Ways& Means urging them to hold the line on full backfill funding as laid out in the Senate Operating Budget. Kent-specific 2001 Legislative Agenda Items: • Operating Budget--695 Backfill: The 695 backfill letter that's referenced in my introductory ` comments is BEING E41MIL ATTACHED to this weekly report. It calls on Sens. Lisa Brown(D- �✓ Spokane)and Dino Rossi(R-Issaquah),the chair and ranking member of Senate Ways and Means, respectively,to hold the line on the Senate's full backfill funding rather than succumb to the House Operating Budget version that reduces city and county backfill by$25 million. Yours truly had a major hand in conceiving and drafting the letter. However,Kent is not playing an out-front role on backfill. In dollar terms for us, it's a nearly$200,000 difference between the$732,000 in the Senate budget and the approximately$540,000 in the House budget. We expect the letter to be walked around the Senate floor today at noon for signatures. It was specifically structured to have an equal number of Republican and Democratic signers—and that's why you may not see all the conceivable `Rs' and`Ds' who might have otherwise signed. Signers will be Democratic Sens. Tracey Eide, Patterson, Karen Fraser, Georgia Gardner, Mary Margaret Haugen, and Rosemary McAuliffe; and Republican signers will be Sens. Bob McCaslin, Alex Deccio, Don Carlson, Shirley Winsley, Larry Sheahan, and Dan Swecker. • Transportation: As the introductory section notes,we have a long way to go on transportation. House Republicans are insistent that there be movement on environmental permit reform, contracting out,and prevailing wage issues in particular, before a revenue package can be discussed. The Senate and the Governor have packages and we are aware that the House Democrats do as well(though details are somewhat sketchy, other than a gas tax in the 8-10 cent range). House Republicans were planning a press conference today at the 41h Avenue Bridge in Olympia,where earthquake-damage repairs have been expedited,to prove that where there is a will,the state can move quickly on projects....On the"regionalism" front,we've also learned that our push for"equity" in any package is at least being reviewed, as Rep. Maryann Mitchell informed us that House Transportation Committee staffer Gene Baxstrom has been asked to draft some concepts. I will be following up with Gene...Also on the regional bill,we are being told that the"project selection"portion of the House bill will be akin to either the House Republican or Rep. Fred Jarrett versions,both of which had city involvement. We were also told by Rep. Mitchell that House-Senate negotiations have been postponed in favor of the House settling on one bill(which it hasn't yet)and the Senate settling on one bill(which it also has not yet). Another important detail we received from Rep. Mitchell is that the Governor's package on transportation is being given no serious consideration at this point. It is a"marker to shoot at,"she explained,but what we consider the problematic pieces of the Governor's package—smaller state investment vs. big regional;no local distribution; 7 cent gas tax discouraging other discussion on the appropriate size of the package—are not`in play.' • Urban cities' supplemental transit services study/pilot project in current-law transportation budget: No new news to report. This is in the House current-law budget bill, SHB 1267. We are working to have it included on the Senate side as well. • ESSB 5703—Inspecting alterations to mobile and manufactured housing: No new news to report. The Governor has until midnight Tuesday to act on this bill. Look for a bill signature, but with explanatory verbiage from the Governor indicating no intention whatsoever to pass any unfunded-mandate inspection responsibilities onto local government. • ESHB 2172—Backflow control device bill: As previously reported,a significant number of water utilities had requested a veto of Section 4 of this bill,which would have undercut public health and safety by doing away with annual inspections and testing of Backflow devices. Other cities' Public Works staff have reported that these devices can fail about 8%of the time. Last Friday Governor Locke signed ESHB but VETOED Sec.4 of the bill. A copy of the Governor's veto message is e-mail attached with this weekly report. • Design-build legislation—ESSB 5060: No word yet on date/time for a bill-signing ceremony. The Governor has until midnight Tuesday to act on this legislation. We have called several times to get more specifics and have none to report—though I have been promised I will be one of the first calls. Other Items: • Shorelines: I reported last week that Rep. Mark Doumit(D-Cathlamet)was shopping around a proposal that, essentially, involves"money and time"for urban area shoreline, critical,and GMA plan updates in exchange for"alternative compliance"options for the most rural counties and cities in the state. The City is not going to take any out-front position on this proposal or the shorelines issue in general. Rep. Hans Dunshee(D-Snohomish),a key Democrat negotiating the shorelines issue and one who is considerably`greener' on this issue than Rep. Doumit,told me the two have not had any significant conversation yet and that the Doumit proposal may not be in play much longer. Other emerging proposals including one from Rep. Kelli Linville,D-Bellingham, that provides money and time for cities and counties and, also,puts into statute some regulatory language to recognize that in more urban areas, developed and `ecologically altered' shorelines are a reality to be dealt with. Yet another proposal,this one from Rep. Gary Chandler,R-Moses Lake, would create a five-year `pilot' period where the six"buildable lands"counties(King, Snohomish, Pierce,Thurston,Clark, Spokane)and the cities within them would go forward with shoreline updates and money,time, and rule elements would be adjusted depending on their`on-the-ground' experiences. At this point,with nearly a new idea a day surfacing on shorelines, it's simply a matter of staying tuned in. • Water: It was actually a fairly active week on the water resources front,to wit: 1)The Governor signed into law ESHB 1832, a water bill that, as we've previously reported,has only limited benefit for us and other water utilities. Specifically, 1832 makes additional watershed planning money available,provides a very modest water conservation tax credit for utilities, and sets up a "2-line"permitting process to better expedite water rights changes and transfers. It does not contain explicit help for growing communities/GMA obligations, and at last Thursday's bill signing,the Governor actually thanked cities, PUDs,and water districts for our patience on this issue;2)Directly related to No. 1,the Governor sent a letter to legislative leadership asking for interim attention and 2002 action by the Legislature to"meet the water needs of our growing population, as well as the water needs of fish and agriculture." I faxed the letter to City Hall. • Other legislative action: The Senate last week took action on an explicit repeal of the transit portion of the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax(MVET)—via SB 6036. A Thurston County Superior Court Judge recently ruled that I-695 did NOT invalidate the transit portion of the MVET. Also, the Senate took action to prohibit the imposition of day-use fees at state parks. Neither of these issues has reached final resolution. AWC Resolution # X : Address potential utility tax losses from open-market energy purchases Background Recently the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission(WUTC)approved new rate schedules that allow a select group of Puget Sound Energy(PSE)customers to purchase electric power on the open market rather than from PSE. The companies are housed in several King County cities. With the open-market purchase of power authorized under the new schedules,this select group of customers would pay PSE a wheeling charge but would be purchasing their power from generators located outside of city boundaries. The wheeling charge will continue to be subject to the public utility tax. However, a legal opinion just provided to the City of Bellevue by the Perkins Coie firm notes that cities will not be able to tax the value of the electrical power, absent explicit action by the State Legislature. Issue Without legislative policy changes, cities in King County could experience moderate to significant utility tax revenue losses from these new PSE rate schedules. These revenue losses present a major problem for cities,particularly at a time when jurisdictions are struggling with the impacts of Initiative 695,receiving less direct assistance from the state and federal governments, and bracing for the possibility of additional property tax limitations brought on by Initiative. Additionally,the new schedules for PSE could trigger similar actions in other parts of the state, thus presenting immediate revenue-loss implications for King County cities and potential, possibly soon-to-come implications for other cities across Washington. AWC Position We urge the State Legislature to take direct actions to ensure that any open-market power purchases by large companies are taxed in a way that ensures revenue neutrality for cities and the State of Washington. One method of ensuring such revenue neutrality is through a taxing mechanism that imposes tax on the consumption of electricity for those instances where the production or sale of electricity is not subject to state and local public utility tax. There is precedent for such action by the Legislature. A few years ago, large industrial users began purchasing natural gas directly from out-of-state suppliers,thus avoiding payment of state and local public utility tax. The Legislature responded by enacting a brokered natural gas tax on the use of natural gas purchased under such circumstances, and providing cities the option of imposing such a tax at the local level. This Resolution submitted by: • City of Kent—Contact: Dena Laurent, Assistant Chief Administrative Officer— 253-856-5708 \ ./ a � _ g 5 j ( � © ? M / \ \ E 2 # _ � d � \ t t » _* E � � a \ � k / 2 ® \ < t \ _ E - \ / .0 \ CJ / \tk \ \ � \ \ \ \ \ Cj Lin \ � ® ° \ � E \ 3 / � a e 2 / 2 3 2 / / / \ \ / \ — \ \ \ 2 \ \ \ \ 2 3 2 \ Q c \ \ \ / % \ % \ / / — k k ( ( � k \ � \ � \ ) \ \ ƒ - / \ l Cl) \ \ \ _( ) � /ss > # � 3 3 2 3 = \ \ \ \ o / � �k § _ § _ \ 2 / Qj ( : f 2 \ \ 2 2 { \ / \ k ( f J E / $ § \ k _ / § e E e ) \ ° Q ® / ct lab= 7 Q # 9 \ IM6 2 3 / / /° \9 9 9 o - o o - c o - - � / c c CD 0 0 00 o c o z CD o CIA \ / / % \ 5 / \ o / \ \ \ c m \ / .§ .§ 2 ] ./ ƒ \ � ( ( \ ® 2 � / a � Q $ 2 \ \ q \ > •� Q t cc \ \ / 2 ;_ 14 14 / cz \ \ \ ` \ 5 e ¥ ° � # \ % 2Cd 'y / / \ \ m 9 © 9 9 9 9 — \ rd \ 2 2 / \ 2 \ 2 3 2 2 \ / / 5 \ 0 / % \ / \ \ \ / m a 0 u u et z u cc ea Q u C G U � C CC w U CS L X 7 U O O U u �_ w L � v� U vi U w+ ct O U •� C F' w � W � > > O � cpG O U ^ L W � V � •� Q O �^ C M _ � N N O Cl) O O O O O O O O O O O U � O O O "" 4•. O O O O O O O O ca ON N O N ON ON N ON ON Q 'V' Qj Cj L L o � o � w � bo � c c.. c. 0 U U C O :J C C O U ^O C � � U � U O O � L r•a U :Q L ' � � h cl� 14 pc c `o v� F" cLc a 1.0 u 0 3 U O.. C CC U U ^p = o U CC U. U. p � � 0. E � a o o. � � � F• � � � 6- y N N N N y N N N N N N O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N U w O O —+ O Uct O 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O � O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O cV N N N N N O N N N N N N N N N O vi u u L L^ rr C +J � :.y L U 7 r.+ c3 C U Q ° O ^ ^ r w U CJ U ^ O W cz C � O O � C p ° cz x N wcd ci .— U � c0¢ q p n ca u Z Qo cz U O O 0 0 CD O O O O O L O O O O O O O O O O ON Q � ) ° \ � \ \ � / . 8 2 � # c \ \ / E » J \� 4t \ /JCJD ] t a a = C a § § / 3 � a / � � § � ) = 7 \ ( \ k ƒ j 7 / tz \ § s ® \ _ 2 ¥ \ \ 2 ® e § \ 7 7 / \ / \ - � UD / / \ 2 2 / / / \ \ o 0 o c o c o _ § o = = o 0 0 .. © 9 ® 9 9 9 9 m m m 9 9 9 - 2 - 2 3 - ® E ct c n e m m n m m o n m n m m m o » cd a L L' a = a = C — nr r O U L a O U O C � U L � � O = 3 _ w v � o � CL. � � � a L ^ L _ cd cd cz ci .. = N X ci � C Qj O CD ''in 0 bOL cS ^ 3 cjL. ce a ^ i•• W o U � � �, _ > L C u O F O p E U N � � ci ^ ^ N N N N y ^ N t%') ^' r=+ N N N N N N N v .N N N N •-- V O O O O 0 0 O O O O O N Q 00 2 @ ./ ./ 3 2 $ \ 5 / .e .e k k \ \ G ® & .2 .§ 2 _ £ § « 7 ' { \ § \ $ \ � �\ \ Cc § & R \ c c o 0 0 0 .. y z o o c 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 o c o o % o \ \ / CD CD > > o L L L c � c Gz L LT. LL b-0 \bA bL =4 w G G 'u c 'c � O c�C •C CJ 'LS •U r_ L C-- c f v. U C C3 fC cd U G a L y C L G .. � � ^�•X L cj O L L U L C v 'C7 'U U C) a� � Lzr pp C. rp •� GG w Q O Q C Q C Cd c u ❑ cOe E c > i a cz U •� � O � U .� � � O C C C O '� c� � O � O bD c4 � cLe � � i c�'a G y ca u i X � '� � c c: ❑ � F U = o o E' v� a E- L ca _ c F• c � c vi �o r 0 0 VD O O Z/j O O O O O O C/j O C O C cz O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O NN N O NN O NN NN N N O NN N NCa -� 0 0 L L b-0 � C G_ 7 a C. u, v� O O w U u u L U C L v�i >a vi u w V � u L CC u � .� � ,;; �•> CL X u �' .�. 5n i L $ U L O a ❑ v� o 04 M, " 3 C6. > ro cj a Lz] .. c W C > u ri u a � c � a N N U N U N N N N N N `,� O O •� O O O O O O O O O O O N N U N N V N N N 1V N N N N N r.+ 0 N 0 0 o c c o 0 0 0 0 0 N O N N O N N N N N N N N N Ca 0 L ..O U O w U O U GA h � U U V .� •� X v U U GD ". .O � U .. R7 p •��-' J5 N � U O O O O C O C O N N O O O ON Q N 0 4 • '� = ! cis a PEW Vk ct ct . cn { ct cz $nl ct 3 � o 0 o a. O N O cao �j► 4+ O v O y R tCi Cl in, o 4 0 o CO x O � a•., x o 0 o a oO U Cuv, � o 0 0 0 �" w cc " Vxto L p y O -4 S V] ff} Gl9 cc 0 Q � OA Q vi p Q b4 O E �••� y U �, U . U C3 U cz cn CIA .. Ncd cC Fzi > U +- cti Li C U , ., Ub � � CArA ^ � O W W u W p4 W w r ' �srx�y --------- • la O Q� T r p"'•� t O CA `Z i f 40 +, ct r....�R ct ct ct 46 � a t � .6 00 • •o ct •o W > �J F F' W •ram } c a Li. N z N 0 = N w F 2 r W O X 0 _ W= 3 U A' J W Q ` Oy z .... x > u� W � W a � W N 0 0 U _ um N z N C r (r, - z 0 x �tnW �V Ct 4-4 O 00 W A■�I a U! ct O 00 cr L. i, W *.., ► L a W Vi CY 2 _ ti za 3E Z Z F y w W Q �, • • J Q !mil!/Y z Z Z� Z CSf Fes, a LA, A Z UfCD ,Q 10 ._...•S-31W q*LS - ...-._,. v � ��1 V t V y L ti Iw,: < p Lj ►- _ b a t Lj o ;c C r- M- Y J i,r ���y; _ - - \ I.. 64 1 cLarl 64 Lai Lai POW C*4 4-0 -41io OPO LAJ N■�■■I , kA \ h t� , -;? AV - fI f a v _k U C ,.� ^�/[ t ct W 7=4 to r" cl crs..., �,., � •• 4� cRL 4-4 W J � ct IL u tY +a. [V�\j V o � •� o • e� Cj czcon ' o WC714-4 4-4 o � o n • i • f f � r � a ; .; , ., _ .;��, ., �� � •_ �. z �-, •- --- ,� ,_�; ,«., — �: ,.F_ ,... ;�. k � �` `�, � 3 !s. :3 '",�,� } �+� ,. � � �� i= � - .y � +T�1 _ i, � � _ (1 �: ;, . �� � a ,, H _;. 4r i ._ � r.�! * .� 1 i, � � � ��, ��� � � _ � ;_, o a� �, � � �o _ � �, Q4 _. � . � ,..� �' ! * y+'� ��`€�� Ins ��Y t.. � .. .\�_�Ir1' *��'j � �"1 �� �� � � � . ,rr�' j � � � �.. � �' � , , . . .: 7 W y� aD Y' r 2 1 y j r t Z zl ZOOz:x V W Z�� W 00 +zq F U Q a �pz Lam? W oo+is i�j: -�z� 0. o1,20 z EOO+6c o 0 Iice_ uu f'tp�n"+ 6f rL ��,0 aa�r '+4' " � ? ' //.' �.�1 e �l V�/ Tw p•£—ri aCf h is 3 �1' i +Ct Ln AV 6Z rt- Ql SJc � � � �'1 I�1 •ZZ PC: ?oo+lz 00+61 00-91 Nam x V p P y •� J < < y 7 III 00+11 d9 I i L'i00+5 4 D n t1 f i t King County Executive RON SIMS April 18, 2001 APR 2 3 2M The Honorable Jim White Mayor, City of Kent KENT FIRE DEPARTMENT 220 Fourth Avenue South Kent, WA 98032-5895 Dear Mavor White: Thank you for your letter of March 26, 2001, expressing an interest in exploring the feasibility of providing paramedic services in conjunction with other South King County cities and fire protection districts. Your letter was also distributed to representatives of the EMS 2002 Task Force by Councilmember Epperly, at the final meeting of the Task Force on March 27, 2001. I serve as Chair of that Task Force. There was considerable discussion at the Task Force about your proposal. Representatives from the City of Federal Way proposed specific language for inclusion in the 2002 EMS Strategic Plan Update. Their proposed language, although somewhat different than your letter, is substantially the same in intent. The proposed language was also discussed and unanimously approved by all members of the EMS 2002 Task Force for inclusion in the 2002 EMS Strategic Plan Update. That language reads as follows: Advanced Life Support (ALS) paramedic services in South King Countv Two cities (Cities of Kent and Federal Way) in South King County have expressed interest in creating a new public entity to provide ALS services in that area of the County. "EMS 2002 Task Force members agreed: • The two cities may initiate a dialogue with other cities and fire districts in South King County as to the creation of such an entity. However, members stressed that any new entity must be a component of the efficient and integrated countywide EMS system. • King County will participate with any dialogue that may occur, especially as it relates to any transition from a county-provided service to a sub- regionally provided service." KING COUNTY COURTHOUSE 516 THIRD AVENUE. ROOM 400 SEATTLE, WA 98104-3271 (206) 296-4040 296-0194 FAX 296-0200 TDD E-mail: ron.sims@metrokc.gov -� King County is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer and complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act The Honorable Jim White April 18, 2001 Page 2 It was clearly the sense of the members that such discussions would not occur until 2002, following the successful passage of the proposed EMS Levy in November 2001. Many members felt that, if feasible and effective, any transition in service should not occur until after 2007. I will soon be transmitting the recommendations of the EMS 2002 Task Force, including the new language, to the King County Council for their review and approval. Once approved by the Council, the 2002 EMS Strategic Plan update will serve as policy direction for EMS, as our other EMS planning documents have done. I am very proud of the world-class paramedic service that King County has provided to the cities and fire districts of South King County since 1979. King County paramedics are second to none. King County Medic One operates 6.5 paramedic units, responds to over 14,000 paramedic calls per year in South King County, and operates efficiently and cost effectively. Our service is already very closely integrated with the fire departments in that area, including Kent, where two paramedic units are quartered in city fire stations. It will be very interesting to study the benefits that a consortium of fire departments will bring to improve this already fine service. This region has spent the past three years in two EMS Task Force efforts to review operational and funding issues associated with this important program and planning for the future. The recommendations of the EMS 2002 Task Force embody that work and are unprecedented in the history of EMS in King County. Thank you again for taking the time to write. It is my sincere hope that the City of Kent will join me in endorsing the operational and financial plan of this important service. Sincerely, on ims King County Executive RS:th c: 2002 EMS Task Force Members 4