Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council Workshop - Agenda - 04/17/2001 KENT W A 5 HI NGTON COUNCIL WORKSHOP CITY COUNCIL Leona Orr Council President April 17, 2001 220 Fourth Ave. S. Kent,WA 98032-5895 Phone: 253-856-5712 Fax:253-856-6712 The Council Workshop will be held in Chambers East in Kent City Hall at 5:00 PM on Tuesday, April 17, 2001. Council Members: President Leona Orr, Sandy Amodt, Tom Brotherton, Tim Clark, Connie Epperly, Judy Woods, Rico Yingling Speaker Time 1. Legislative Briefing Dena Laurent 10 min. 3. Probation Services Liability Issues Dena Laurent 45 min. Tom Brubaker Judge Robert McSevcney 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. i 14 OF 2001 SESS101� WEEK islatute is dam PORT " of the 2001 Le$ Session consider the «S ecial ,y,ade, (]� e 4/14/0, et been 1" decide"• oo�s Le°y- brought the realization thae is al session ssion has y e nowhere near hscal �-' Week 14 of the Legislature broug a or philosophic announcement an a sp And m While no f°m'al am' final transportation revenue issues are need to be given- Wednesday• near a g estate and regional d Re ublican,etc., operating budget until next Tuesdemocrat an p t1Ve* unfinished business: tnbolic than substan House will not put out its op House and Senate,D " final day)on April 22 will be more sy and substantive disagreements among worked out. The scheduled"Sine Die Brace yourselves for a state legislative session in May, Legislature completing its calendar of bills by Elsewhere,some significant progress was made,with the Leg deadline(next week's floor action is restricted to lie°What its called theber or other e ch Fridays cutoff d opposite side did to g "bills,Clark Lake,the decides whether to concur with what the revenue/fiscal "Concurrence Calendar"). We have good news to report on the DWII'DWD supplemental funding for the Public Works Trust Fund,"design-build,"pipeline safety, issues-even regional transportation governance,where two of the more encouraging bills appeared. 7M= ems within Kent's 2001 Legislative Agenda:B 1419: Both of these bills are officially through the legislative process and headed tor for signature into law! As reported,HB 1243 ensures that a driver's refusal to take ad on a"driving while drugged" stop can be admitted into evidence in a prosecution'sthe court. HB 1419 stipulates that a judge's order for a DUI offender to install an ignition interlock device will be posted on the computerized driving record maintained by the state Department of Licensing(rather than having it go on the physical driver's license and having the offender simply fail to get that done). Congratulations are in order for Prosecutor Michele Walker, who worked on both bills and testified on behalf of them on multiple occasions. Rep.Chris Hurst, D-3 0,whose district includes a piece of Kent,prime-sponsored the two bills. Sen. Steve .�. Johnson, R-47`h(Kent),was quite helpful on the two Senate versions of the bills. I've filled out a form with the Governor's office so that we can be notified when the bill-signing ceremonies for 1243 and 1419 occur-and so that Michele can have the honor of being pictured with the Governor at the bill signing. • HB 1001-Public Works Trust Fund supplemental funds: Part of our 2001 Legislative Agenda involved a strong push for$93.5 million in supplemental funding from the PWTF. This supplemental money in the PWTF was embodied in HB 1001. This week,HB 1001 came out of the Senate Rules Committee and easily passed the Senate. It will now go to the Governor for his signature. HB 1001 includes$10 million in supplemental loan funding toward the City's Pipeline 5 obligations. The loan funding is at an incredibly low interest rate-%percent. • Clark Lake: We continue to make a push to see if the 2001-03 capital budget can earmark a special appropriation for Clark Lake,to help us with part or all of the$3.5 million funding gap we have for the project. Mike Ryherd,who represents the Washington Wildlife and Recreation Coalition and is very close to Democratic House Co-Speaker Frank Chopp, is helping us. Mike and Parks Director John Hodgson have been in contact on details and strategy. Again,a thanks to Rep. Geoff Simpson, D-47`h, for asking Co-Speaker Chopp to consider this as part of a `take home'request by Simpson. • Urban cities'supplemental transit services study/pilot project in transportation budget: Good news! When the House Transportation Committee did committee amendments to the House current-law transportation budget, amendment#8,successfully spoken to and inserted by Rep. Simpson, contained our budget proviso to conduct a study of ways to supplement current levels of transit service in urban-center cities. The proviso also calls for development of a pilot project to test ways of instituting the higher level of transit service in these urban areas. Thanks to Dena Laurent, Jim Storment,Cathy Mooney and others for their work in estimating costs and logistics of the pilot project,which would involve transit circulator service between our major employment hubs and the new Sound Transit commuter rail station. This budget proviso language was �..► previously provided to City Hall; let me know if additional copies of the language are needed. • 695 Backfill: It will be interesting to see what comes out of the House budget on backfill when it is released next Tuesday or Wednesday. As previously reported,cities provided Rep. Helen Sommers, D-Seattle and co-chair of House Appropriations,a formula for cutting cities' backfill funding by$16-17 million over the 2001-03 biennium while still ensuring all 279 cities receive some level of funding. Additionally,the county and city associations are working on amendments to the operating budget—if it does indeed contain reductions from the `full' funding for backfill— that would restore the funding level to that advocated by the Governor and Senate. Stan Finkelstein of AWC reported to us Thursday that as many as a dozen legislators signed on to the amendments. Obviously,over the next couple of days,this is a"wait and see" item. • Design-build legislation—ESSB 5060: A roller-coaster week on this bill ended with the roller- coast in the right position: on the upside. Earlier in the week Sen.Julia Patterson,D-SeaTac, chair of the Senate State and Local Government Committee and Senate prime sponsor of ESSB 5060,told me she was reconsidering concurring with the House's version of the bill. The Senator really wanted an `inflator' in the design-build statute that would call for a$16 million threshold by the year 2010 to be met by any project utilizing this alternative public works contracting procedures. The next day,we discussed among city and county lobbyists ways in which we could persuade Senator Patterson to return to her earlier decision to simply concur with the bill. Our concern was that, if the Senate added amendments to ESSB 5060 and sent it back over to the House,too much havoc could be wreaked and too many substantive and political problems could arise. I talked further with Sen. Patterson;also vital was that Rep. Sandra Romero,co-chair of the House State Government Committee that moved this legislation in the House,pleaded with Sen. Patterson to simply leave the bill as is and concur. We again seem headed that direction. ESSB 5060 is important to us for two reasons: 1)it extends the current design-build/GC-CM program in statute,meaning we can uitilize this contracting procedure for the arena/special events facility;2) it broadens current statute so that on specialized public works projects over$12 million, cities of 70,000 and over can now access the design-build and GC/CM procedures. • Transportation—Regional Governance: This week we saw the House join the regional governance debate in earnest—with three bills introduced. Two of them—Rep.Fred Jarrett's bill specifying an 11-member project-selection committee,and the House Republican `proposal' with a PSRC-led project selection,do far more to involve city officials in project selection than any of the earlier bills we've seen. On the down side,a governance model we worked on within the Washington Transportation Alliance group—featuring a 13-member project selection group with three King County suburban city seats as part of it—was dismissed by the Senate Transportation Chair, Senator Haugen. The House Democrats' proposal,HB 2239,came out Monday and was the subject of a press conference by the Ds. Wednesday came the bill drafted by Rep. Jarrett,R-41' (Mercer Island),and,Thursday,the"proposal" from the House Republicans. Add these to the two bills pending in the Senate—SSB 6140 and SSB 6172—and we can safely say there is a glut of proposals on"regionalism." At this point,we also can say A)a resolution to the regional transportation issue is a long, long way off,and B)There are some hard feelings emerging among some of the members. Sens. Julia Patterson and Ken Jacobsen are upset that they are being left out of the negotiating process; similarly,Rep.Jarrett is not one of the negotiators on the House side, even though he put forth one of the more thoughtful legislative vehicles...Meanwhile,the House and Senate Democrats and Republicans designated two members from each caucus to lead negotiation and discussion on this issue. They are: Reps. Ruth Fisher and Mike Cooper(D-2 V)— House Ds;Rep. Maryann Mitchell and Mike Armstrong(12t'—Chelan County)—House Rs; Sens. Georgia Gardner and Margarita Prentice—Senate Ds; Sens. Dan McDonald and Dan Swecker— Senate Rs. Also, internally,we helped spearhead discussions among a number of King(and Snohomish)County cities and development of six general principles we want to see incorporated into any regional transportation governance measure. Thanks to Mayor White for his attendance and contributions at these discussions. An updated comparison chart of regional transportation governance bills, an updated outline of the legislative"lay of the land"on this issue,and a copy of the draft six principles are being provided separately to City Hall. • Transportation—State Budgets—As previously reported,the Senate is still at work on what we understand will be a 10-year,$10 billion new revenue package of state transportation investments. Sen. Haugen,the Senate Chair,has told folks that of the$10 billion,up to$7 billion will be headed for the Puget Sound. She deserves plaudits for developing an ambitious package—but whether it can be achieved is another matter. It would,for example,require a staged increase of some 12 cents in the gas tax,at a time analysts are projecting that gas prices at the pump could rise `-- to as much as$3/gallon this summer. Another very intriguing development on the state transportation budget front involves a behind-the-scenes effort by the big players in the business community to push for legislative enactment of the new-revenue package without sending it to a vote of the people in November. That initiative is a long way from being successful—for one thing,House Co-Speakers Clyde Ballard and Frank Chopp,House Co-Majority Leader Dave Mastin, and even the Governor,may not be convinced it's wise to enact the package without giving the voters the final say. But if it is successful, it makes development and `sizing' of a regional transportation package much cleaner and much less complex....Meanwhile,as previously reported,the House has its current-law transportation budget out. It was due to be passed out of House Transportation Wednesday but was held up;now it is scheduled for executive action this coming Wednesday. The House current-law budget is just about as dismal as the Senate's current- law budget—with very, very small amounts of funding for SR 509, Pacific Highway, etc. The bright spot is that it contains$52 million for extending the HOV lanes on I-5 to the Pierce County line....As with regional governance, it's patently obvious that the state budget package on transportation is nowhere near being done. The reasons are many. The House is not moving on this issue until the Senate moves its new-law package along. The issue of how much money is devoted to transit and non-highway needs,both at the state and regional levels, is a lightning-rod issue. As referenced above,there's the question of whether to enact something in Olympia or refer it to the voters. There's the issue of whether the Legislature should repeal the transit Motor Vehicle Excise Tax,which supposedly went out the window with 1-695 but which,according to a lower-court judge, is legally still on the books(some believe it would raise the ire of the voters to leave it in place; others say it would be foolhardy to repeal it when more funding options for transit are needed, not fewer)....We could go on, but then we'd never get to the end of this report! • Transportation—WTA and development of regional lists—While all the movin' and shakin' continues in Olympia,we're attending weekly meetings of the Washington Transportation Alliance,which is discussing governance and also attempting to fashion 4-county transportation investment lists of$6 billion,$10 billion,even$20 billion. We're participating in list development because in the event a"regionalism"package comes out of Olympia and the WTA pushes for a ballot measure in November,the work on the current lists will serve as a foundation. Thanks to involvement of folks such as Tim LaPorte,we're holding our own in terms of project inclusion. The$681 million for SR 509,money for I-5 HOV,the 228`'Street freight project,are all incorporated within the regional lists. • Transportation—Blue Ribbon Bills: Finally—just in case you're getting sick of transportation and wondering how complicated and unsettled this issue can get—there's this problem: Key legislators most certainly don't agree on how to deal with the Blue Ribbon Commission on Transportation request bills. House GOP Co-Speaker Clyde Ballard,at a press conference last Wednesday, identified contracting out and flexibility on prevailing wage requirements as two `efficiency and accountability' areas where the Republicans want to see compromise by the Democrats. Democrats,meanwhile,would like to see Co-Speaker Ballard come off his adamant opposition to the idea of having the Transportation Secretary report directly to the Governor rather than to a citizen commission. Folks, it is,admittedly,a big mess in transportation... • Governor's Water Bill—HB 1832; and Intertie Legislation,HB 1874: This week,by an 83-14 vote,the House passed the Governor's water bill,HB 1832. It now goes to the Senate and will be heard by the Senate Environment,Energy,and Water Committee Monday at 4 p.m. As earlier reported and discussed,the bill does not address the core municipal water rights that are"front burner"for us and other utilities. However, it does provide for additional watershed planning funding,provides a modest water conservation tax credit,and contains language to ensure that laws on water service areas or`place of us' are not made any more restrictive. Seattle and Tacoma continue to have reservations about provisions in the bill related to the authority of"Water Conservancy Boards,"and may continue to mildly oppose those parts of the bill. We're seeing this bill as a first step, and Jim Waldo's entry into the negotiation of water issues as a positive sign....On a related issue,we earlier reported the Kitsap PUD and others were working with Rep. Kelli Linville, D-Bellingham,on a separate bill, HB 1874,to strengthen authority for water supply �' interties. However,when Tom Mortimer and others reviewed the draft amending language this week,they had several concerns with HB 1874. It now looks as if 1874 will not move forward— which is just as well given the language that appeared. �- • Fix in taxation of out-of-state linen/uniform supply services—HB 1385: Congratulations to Rep. Aaron Reardon, D-38, on HB 1385. HB 1385 passed out of the Senate Tuesday and is now on its way to the Governor to be signed into law. The City supported HB 1385 and had listed this issue as a"support"item in its 2001 agenda. Rep. Reardon's bill assists Kent linen/uniform supply businesses by closing a loophole in the law that allowed out-of-state linen and uniform supply services to compete unfairly with in state businesses. Before 1385,sales tax on linen and uniform supply service transactions depended on the location of the activity. Thus, in-state businesses had been subject to the sales tax while an out-of-state, Portland,Ore. supplier delivering into Washington had been exempt from sales tax. HB 1385 ensures that the retail sales of linen and uniform supply services—and thus the tax of those sales—will be based on the place of delivery to the customer. With HB 1385,our own businesses can now compete on even terms with the Portland company. Ironically, the Portland, Ore., business has inquired about relocating to Kent! Unsure of where that proposal currently stands—Mayor White had mentioned to me that the frrm's water-supply needs might present a problem to us... • Pipeline Safety legislation—ESSB 5182a: Every indication we have is that the Senate will concur with the House-approved version of this measure next week,paving the way for it to become law. ESSB 5182 is landmark legislation in that it allows Washington to establish a state- based pipeline safety inspection and monitoring program. Fees on interstate and intrastate pipeline operators will finance the program. While we're not the only state in the nation that has received approval to start a state pipeline program, I'm told we will be one of the model states in terms of the program and the emphasis on inspections and safety compliance. The City supported ESSB 5182 through all of its twists and turns and advocated the bill via legislative contacts, letters by Mayor White, etc. Fiscal issues—presumptive disease bill dies; `fines' bill means some additional funding for police, criminal justice,etc.; LEOFF 1 medical bill in limbo: A last bill with significant negative fiscal implications"died"this week. Firefighters appear to have pulled the plug on their efforts to pass SSB 5411. The legislation would have added heart problems that were experienced within 72 hours of exposure to smoke, fumes, or toxic substances; cancer;and infectious diseases as presumed occupational diseases for firefighters. Had this legislation been enacted, it would have cost local government employers an estimated $9 million over the next biennium....Meanwhile,there was important House passage of one bill to augment local revenues,while a second bill,to ease our LEOFF 1 medical cost burdens, is in a holding pattern. The bill to augment local revenues is ESSB 5309,which won House approval. It is now expected to head to the Senate and receive concurrence. ESSB 5309 specifies that penalties for traffic infractions will increase by $10 and penalties for traffic misdemeanors will increase by$50. Some of the additional money goes to state public safety accounts,drug courts,etc. For cities and counties,the additional funds from the increased penalties on these infractions and misdemeanors equates to about$9 million. That's not enough to cover all the dramatic increase in law enforcement and criminal justice costs that we are incurring—but it is on the `plus' side of the ledger and is therefore appreciated. Kathy Gerke of the Association of Washington Cities did the lion's share of the work on the bill for cities and deserves our gratitude...The LOEFF I bill to which I referred as being in `a holding pattern' is SB 6166. This is the legislation that establishes an investment pool to help offset city-county LEOFF 1 long-term and extraordinary medical care costs. It also would place a percentage of surplus LEOFF 1 pension fund revenues into the long- term/extraordinary medical care pool. At one time,that pension fund surplus was thought to be$1 million+;stock market woes over the last 14 months have caused the amount to shrink to$500 million— leading some to question whether it makes sense to create the long-term/extraordinary medical care fund. Additionally,while some"active" employee groups of police and firefighters are supportive of SB 6166,a number of retirees' groups are opposing the measure, believing that any surplus in the LEOFF 1 pension fund is really"their"money and not the state's to utilize. After an emotional hearing in the House Appropriations Committee Monday,the co-chairs announced the bill will be on hold a few days until they consider next steps. Drug Seizure Legislation—ESHB 1995: This week the Senate approved the version of ESHB 1995 that �.- passed out of the House last week. This version of ESHB 1995 focuses primarily on establishment of a legislative task force to study the whole issue. Further, it states that in any drug seizure proceeding the burden of proof is upon the law enforcement agency to establish its case,"by a preponderance of the �-- evidence,"that property was subject to seizure. Further, a provision of EHSB 1995 states that a claimant against the law-enforcement agency is entitled to attorneys' fees when the legal claimant"substantially prevails." Several city attorneys reviewed these provisions and while they certainly are not thrilled with them,they believe we can live with them. One of the factors considered by groups such as the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs(WASPC)and the Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys(WAPA)is that, in all likelihood,a failure to deal with these issues in the legislative arena would have led to a citizen petition on drug forfeiture that could have been difficult to defeat. Another factor is that the burden of proof and attorneys' fee provisions apparently are similar in wording to what exists in federal law. Shorelines/Critical Areas Funding and Timelines: A fairly thorough update of this issue is in the AWC's weekly bulletin, so I won't go into endless detail. Suffice to say that AWC is part of the frequent negotiations on these issues,making a push for adequate"money and time"to be provided to cities such as Kent. Questions of how much money,how much time,who must do shoreline updates, and whether the shoreline rule promulgated by Ecology is legal and fair,permeate the discussions. Dave Williams of AWC did provide me with a copy of a proposed striking amendment to ESSB 5378,the one shoreline bill that is alive and usable as a vehicle for resolving these issues. The bill is 28 pages,so I hesitate to fax it to City Hall(and it's not available online yet). I do have a 4-page series of comments by Dave Williams if the City would like to see it—essentially he praises the striker's staggering of compliance timelines and its recognition of funding needs,while raising concerns about provisions for consolidated planning timeline in `buildable lands' counties,and concerns over potential preferential treatment to counties(25 of which would be exempted from update requirements)vs. cities(many of which have never issued shoreline permits and yet still would be required to do updates). Please let me know if a copy of the Dave Williams comments, including Section-by-Section observations is desired I also can fax a copy of the whole bill if folks wish. "Cowles Fix"—embodied in HB 1717: This legislation contains amending language to remedy what is known as the"Cowles case"in Spokane. That case reversed 30 years of legal precedent and would appear to allow the news media access to law enforcement criminal investigative files even before a charging or prosecution referral decision has been made! To remedy the Cowles case,cities and the Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys(WAPA)had worked with Senator Jeri Costa on SB 5117. That bill didn't pass, but provisions of it were inserted into SB 5058. 5058 didn't pass,either, but a lobbyist for the WAPA was able to insert the Cowles fix provisions in HB 1717. HB 1717 has passed the Senate and the House is expected to decide Monday whether to `concur' with the Senate-passed amendments. This will be a close vote because the Washington Newspaper Publishers are vigorously opposing the 1717 amendments. Hearings week of April 16-22: We expect hearings Wednesday when the House budgets come out. Additionally, there is the expected House Transportation Committee executive action on its current—law budget. There also is the aforementioned Senate water hearing Monday afternoon.