Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council Workshop - Agenda - 04/03/2001 KEN T WASHINGTON COUNCIL WORKSHOP CITY COUNCIL Leona Orr Council President April 3, 2001 220 Fourth Ave. S. Kent,WA 98032-5895 Phone: 253-856-57 2 Fax:253-856-6712 The Council Workshop will be held in Chambers East in Kent City Hall at 5:00 PM on Tuesday, April 3, 2001. Council Members: President Leona Orr, Sandy Amodt, Tom Brotherton, Tim Clark, Connie Epperly, Judy Woods, Rico Yingling Speaker Time 1. Legislative Report Dena Laurent 10 min. 3. Kent Station Developer Selection Process Jacki Skaught 45 min. Geoff Graham 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. HUNTER INTERESTS I N C O R P O R A T E D KENT STATION RFQ Process A. RFQ Distribution and Response February 12, 2001—200 RFQ brochures sent to developers and architects. Eight responses received on March 19'. The respondents were: 1. Lincoln Property, Bethel Park, PA 2. Trammell Crow Residential, Kirkland, WA 3. Quadrant, Bellevue, WA 4. Kimball Fritzemeier, Seattle, WA 5. Center Oak Properties, L.L.C., Torrance, CA 6. Opus Northwest, L.L.C., Bellevue, WA 7. Langly Properties, Inc., Issaquah, WA 8. LCOR Public/Private Inc., San Francisco, CA B. RFQ Review Each of the conductors reviewed each response to the RFQ based on an initial analysis of the response. A conductor's workshop was held to discuss each response relative the RFQ requirements as well as overall project goals and objectives. Subsequent to this review process, the conductors recommend that four potential master developers be asked to submit a formal proposal to enter into a public/private partnership to develop Kent Station. The recommended finalists are: • Opus North West, L.L.C.— A member of the Opus Group of Companies, which is a nationwide network of companies, Opus Northwest presently has 1.4 million square feet under construction valued at approximately $220 million. Projects in the northwest include Opus Center at Union Station, Sammamish Parkplace in Issaquah and Opus Eastpointe Corporate Center in Issaquah. National development projects which are similar to the Kent Station project includes the 2,000 acre mixed use development in Maple Grove MN which combines retail, office, residential and civic components. • LCOR and Lehman Brothers Holdings— LCOR is a national development company that specializes in public/private development projects. LCOR has $4.35 billion in development or under construction and is currently involved in a number of transit-oriented development projects including the White Flint URBAN ECONOMICS FINANCE • REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT 121 MAIN STREET• ANNAPOLIS,MARYLAND 21401 •(410)269-0033•FAX(410)280-9163 HUNTER INTERESTS I N C O R P O R A T E D L Metro station in Kensington, Maryland, Hoboken Station Square at Hoboken Terminal in New Jersey, and the $3 billion JFK International Air Terminal expansion which is the largest public/private airport project in U.S. history. LCOR believes that an achievable and sustainable plan for Kent Station would be one that brings people to the downtown area to live and play because of the convenience that is offered by an urban village lifestyle. High-density residential development coupled with market supportable retail would be the first stepping stone towards a more vibrant downtown Kent. In January 1999 LCOR and Lehman Brothers created a joint venture to own investment real estate. This partnership sets the stage for Lehman's assistance in defining and implementing the necessary capital structure for the Kent station development. • Langly Properties Inc. — This is an independent developer of commercial real estate founded in 1984 and located in Issaquah, WA. Projects that Langly and or its principals have undertaken which are similar to the Kent Station concept include the Overlake Park and Ride Transit oriented development, Redmond Town Center, Kirkland Park Place and Pickering Place. In addition Langly sited the possibility of including Tarragon Development Company as part of the project team. Tarragon is an award winning developer of over 10 million square feet of commercial, industrial, mixed use and multifamily real estate with an emphasis in King and Pierce Counties. Tarragon is currently working on Lakeland Town Center a $26 million shopping center that will serve as the primary commercial center for the Lakeland master planned community and the neighboring Lake Tapps region. • Center Oak Properties and Oaktree Capital — Center Oak Properties has eight properties under development in Oregon, Washington, and Utah, including mixed use transit-oriented development in Gresham, Oregon. Gresham Station is a 400,000 square feet project, which includes retail, office, and residential components. Oaktree Capital is one of the largest private investment funds in the U.S. with total assets of over $20 billion. Oaktree Capital provides Center Oak Properties with the resources necessary to engage in significant development projects such as Kent Station. In addition to these four master developers, Green River Community College has expressed a strong interest in developing a Kent higher education center that would provide curriculum and programs from a consortium of colleges and universities from the Pacific Northwest and throughout the United States. It is anticipated that the higher education center will be one of the primary anchors of Kent Station and act as a catalyst for the overall project Hudson Jones Cinema is an operator of high quality cinemas and has expressed a strong interest in operating a 12-16 screen cinema as part of the Kent Station development. Hudson Jones has conducted initial market analysis which indicated 2 HUNTER INTERESTS t N C O R P O R A T E D that substantial market support exists for a cinema development in Kent. The development of such an entertainment anchor will greatly enhance Kent Station's ability to attract other entertainment-oriented retailers such as a bookstore, music store, and high quality restaurants. C. Goals and Objectives for Kent Station The vision goals and objectives for Kent Station, as established by the extensive planning and community outreach effort undertaken over the past three years, are as follows: • Create a high quality, mixed use, transit-oriented development • Create a community focal point and gathering place • Create an urban village in south King County • Create an active 18-hour a day village • To expand the tax abase and diversify the economy to lessen dependence on property taxes D. Project Timeline and Partnership Formulation Process • April 3, 2001: Presentation to City Council • April 2-8: Develop RFP (Request for Proposals), letters to all respondents • April 10: RFP to conductors • April 10- May Reference checks, project site visits • April 24: RFP sent to four finalists • April/May: Additional meetings with Green River Community College and the cinema company • June 12: RFP responses due • June 13: Conductors meeting • June 12-15: Review proposals • June 21: Notify respondents of interviews; develop questions and issues to address during interviews • July 10/11: Conduct interviews • July 17: Recommendation to Council for preferred master developer(1a.) and developer(lb.) • July 18-31: Additional reference, finances and background checks. • August: Begin negotiations and development of MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) • September: Develop draft of development agreement for presentation to council 3 HUNTER INTERESTS I N C O R P O R A T E D E. Implications of Initial Reponses Relative to Kent Station Goals and Objectives As expected, the residential component of the project has the most appeal to the development community. In order to realize the type of atmosphere envisioned for Kent Station, it is critical to ensure that the residential component provide a variety of unique housing products. These should include environmentally friendly, loft-style apartments, brownstone-type townhouses which embrace and contribute to street life, and upscale urban housing which will appeal to young professionals who work in Kent Station's office component and the Regional Justice Center. Based on initial responses and perceptions of the downtown Kent marketplace, the retail and entertainment component will be the most difficult to realize. However, the inclusion of the higher education center and cinema will strengthen the appeal of Kent Station as a location to open retail and food/beverage establishments. It is also critical that the office and residential components be used as leverage to induce development of high quality retail and entertainment space or the "soul/sizzle" of Kent Station. L. Another critical issue which must be addressed is the balance of convenience retail that serves the transit center (dry cleaners, banks, food-to-go, drugstore) with destination retail (boutiques, upscale restaurants, music stores). This will help Kent Station penetrate a broader geographic area and enable downtown Kent to evolve into a leisure destination for south King County. The development of the educational component creates numerous opportunities to leverage other desired developments including meeting space, which can be utilized by the community, and a unique bookstore, which serves both the students and the general public. Based on the potential development components and their expected impact, it will be important that the planning of Kent Station is not limited to the site's borders. How the site integrates with the Central Avenue corridor and the municipal parking lot should be included in the project planning process. Potential second- phase development components, such as a high quality hotel which would support office space and the educational center developed during the first phase of the development, should also be included in the planning process. 4 Calendar please: Wednesday, April 4 7 p.m., Mercer Island City Hall CAFETERIA The next 10-12 days in Olympia are going to be critical for"regional transportation" funding and governance. A number of senators, especially Senate Republicans, are adamant that they will not go home with a regional bill to accompany any state revenue package for transportation. What happens now may shape transportation investment for years to come. Business and county interests are showing a heavy presence in Olympia, promoting their preferred bills, and legislators are listening. Now is the time to talk/act. Fed Way/Kent Everett lobbyist Doug Levy indicates that NOW is the time for cities to visit legislators, to show a strong presence, and to express concerns about proposals now on the table and constructive ideas about what is acceptable to cities. The bills on the table contemplate a range of projects and governance models. The alternative language suggested by Everett/Kent/Fed Way in the last email message from SCA, while largely acceptable to you, contained provisions that Sen. Mary Margaret Haugen indicated were not acceptable when she met with Sen. Patterson, Kent Mayor Jim White and Doug Levy last week. That alternative language is now unlikely to be submitted in the Senate, though it may be appropriate to approach House members. Doug plans on working with King County legislators to set up some meetings on Friday,April 6 (tentatively) in Olympia. The reason for the quick action is that the legislature will begin floor work next week, and meetings will be increasingly hard to schedule. We will need to identify suburban city reps for these meetings, including outreach to some cities in Pierce and Snohomish Counties who may share your concerns and who may wish to join you in Olympia. TO PREPARE: On Wed, 4/4/0, 7.00 pm , we'll convene a discussion/meeting, at Mercer Island City Hall in the lunch room for two purposes: u Make sure we can identify a simple common message concerning the current legislative proposals and, (2) make arrangements for who/how will visit Olympia to deliver that message on Friday, April 6 Some Snohomish/Pierce county cities have been contacted, since their voices will be important in any Puget Sound area `city' message. The meeting on Wednesday is scheduled late in the day, so that Doug Levy can get back from Olympia with the latest information. We will have information on all bills in play, pros and cons, legislators' positions, possible common messages. If you can attend the Wednesday meeting to help shape the message, please do. If you are available to travel to Olympia on Friday, April 6, please reply to the SCA office ASAP (Sue, Nancy, Chuck, we know that you're interested — but are you available on this short notice?) TRANSPORTATION ISSUES rank as the#1 problem on every regional or local poll. SCA's Board made i RANSPORTATION our focus issue for this year. Remember: Hitting "reply all" allows you to converse, discuss, agree or disagree with information or suggestions in these emails, and your colleagues will hear you ... immediately! Return email to sca@halcyon.com <mailto:sca@halcyon.com> if you need directions to Mercer Island City Hall. Deb Suburban Cities Association ph: 206-236-7676 fax: 206-236-3588 2 REPORT -- WEEK 12 OF 2001 SESSION Doug Levy—4/1/01 Week 12 was the last of the Committee cutoff weeks in Olympia. Bills passed by one chamber(House or `.. Senate)had to clear the policy committee of the opposite chamber by 5 p.m.Friday,March 30,or be declared`dead' for the session. For bills with fiscal implications that are in the Senate Ways&Means, House Appropriation,House Finance, or Senate or House Transportation Committees,the cutoff will be Monday,April 2. Bills deemed necessary to implement the budget,or closely linked to the budget,can survive past that cutoff as well(an example: several of the Blue Ribbon Commission on Transportation bills). The next major cutoff before the scheduled April 22"Sine Die"is Friday,April 13,when bills from one House must have cleared the full floor of the other. This was a very positive week in that we saw the unfurling of Senate Operating and Capital budgets that featured full Post-695 backfill funding(SEE THE SEPARATE MEMO ON THE BUDGETS),a high enough funding level in the Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program(WWRP)to fund all four of Kent's listed projects,and the passage of a revised"design-build"bill out of the House State Government Committee. The area with the biggest challenges and pitfalls is in the transportation regional governance arena,but even there, some hopeful signs emerged at week's end. Kent specific 2001 Legislative Agenda Items: • DWI Ignition Interlock and Driving While Drugged/Blood record bills(HB 1419,HB 1243): These two bills passed out of the Senate Judiciary Committee this week and proceeded to Senate Rules. Barring some unforeseen holdup in Rules,prospects look excellent for moving the bills out of Rules,onto the Senate floor for passage,and to the Governor's desk for signature. I will be e- mailing some Senators to help ensure a"pull"to the floor by the Rules Committee. • HB 1001—Public Works Trust Fund supplemental funding: This bill remains in the Senate Ways&Means Committee—we're urging it be passed quickly and hopefully signed into law by the end of the session. HB 1001 provides$93.5 million in supplemental funds from the Public Works Trust Fund—including$10 million for the City toward our Pipeline 5 obligations. • 695 Backfill: As noted in a memorandum e-mailed to City Hall on Thursday, the 2001-03 Operating Budget unveiled Wednesday by the Senate contained the identical$731,995 level of backfill for Kent first proposed by the Governor,before a series of major budget setbacks struck the state. The backfill was accomplished partly via a one-time use of$250 million of the$1+ billion surplus in the LEOFF 1 pension system. I testified at the Senate Ways&Means Committee's Wednesday hearing,thanking Chairwoman Lisa Brown and the Committee for their efforts. We are hardly at home plate on this issue,however. Some in the labor community are not happy with the transfer of LEOFF 1 pension reserves to the general fund(even though separate legislation is structured to ensure the sanctity of the pension system as well as continued contributions to the LEOFF 1 medical system),and several Republicans and Democrats in the House see the$250 million grab as either a)putting off for two years the tough budget decisions and cuts that need to occur now;or b)inflating the I-601 spending limit to a level that takes Republicans in particular out of their comfort zone. Also, while the backfill picture has improved for this session,legislators are publicly declaring that this may be the final biennium for the backfill funds to cities/counties. Meanwhile,I had some conversations Friday,attempting to learn when the House puts out its budget(s)and whether it will be a unified Democrat-Republican budget or two separate ones. Folks are pretty tight-lipped at this point—the best we can do is say something should appear in a week or so. • Urban cities' supplemental transit services study/pilot project in transportation budget: Rep. Geoff Simpson,D-Covington,has reinforced with Transportation Committee leaders that this will be a budget proviso for their transportation package. The latest language was sent to City Hall(via Dena)over the weekend. • Design-build legislation—ESSB 5060: The good news is that the House State Government Committee passed the design-build legislation out of Committee this week. The potential problem,or problems,center on which stakeholders are now out of the bill. The statute would still be expanded to allow Kent and other cities 70,000 and over to use these alternative forms of public works contracting on$12 million+projects. However,some counties and port districts that were h part of the expansion under an earlier version of the bill are now no longer eligible. Whether ports and counties fight to get some of their members back in the bill,and how that affects the outcome, is the$64 question,of course. ESSB 5060 is in House Rules. • ESHB 1953/SSB 5703—Inspecting alterations to mobile and manufactured housing: For the City's purposes,this bill has improved markedly. What was once legislation to shift to local government the responsibility for inspecting all alterations to mobile and manufactured housing, was changed to a study,and now contains provisions to improve L&I's performance in addressing proposed alterations. Unfortunately,copies of the amended bill were not being given out Thursday and I was not in Olympia on Friday,when the measure passed to Rules. I also talked to Mark Triplett, lobbyist for the Washington Association of Building Officials(WABO),about receiving a copy of the amended bill—but haven't received anything from Mark yet. I will be checking Monday on copies of the passed-out bill. However,the bottom line is that this work is not any longer being shifted down to the local level. • Transportation—Environmental Permit Streamlining Bill(ESSB 5765): This is one of the Blue Ribbon Commission bills that is exempt from cutoff and is a work in progress. The bill is currently"parked"in the Senate Rules Committee while various stakeholders work through changes with Sens.Margarita Prentice,D-Renton,and Dan Swecker,R-Rochester,the two members charged with shepherding the bill toward passage. I sat in a 2 '/z-hour meeting Monday at which a number of revisions were discussed—and a newer draft was e-mailed to City Hall late this week. Again,the developments are good news for the City: What originally had been a bill stipulating that cities join a consolidated environmental permitting process,and potentially allowed the Department of Transportation to take over administration of local permits on"projects of statewide significance,"has been reduced to legislation calling for three pilot projects to aim towards consolidated and streamlined permitting. It also contains provisions seeking delegated authority for the state to administer permits(Clean Water,ESA)currently under federal processes. Dena,via input from Tim Clark,has directed we support the bill in its current form • Transportation—Regional Governance: The major flurry of events this week was less on a funding package—which the Senate and House continue to work behind the scenes—than on the -� complicated issue of regional transportation governance. Senator Julia Patterson,D-SeaTac,had been willing to prime our alternative legislation that was more flexible in terms of how regions are initiated,governed,what their boundaries are,etc. However,on Monday,with mein tow, Senator Patterson went to see Transportation Chair Senator Haugen regarding the draft bill. Senator Haugen saw our bill's provisions for shared governance among city and county officials as tantamount to a federated board. She let myself, Sen.Patterson and Mayor White know when we visited her on Tuesday that a federated board concept for regional governance was unacceptable and dead on arrival. She also let us know her vision is that a region would do one or two mega- projects—say,a 405 corridor—and the state package would be relied on to carry the financing for other projects. Then,on Wednesday,Senator Patterson held a meeting with myself and Doug Hurley of the Washington Transportation Alliance,which was pressing the case for a smaller governance board(9 members or so)and a prescribed 4-county region in terms of boundaries. The fact that Sen.Haugen would not accept the federated board portion of our alternative bill,and the fact that many discussions were ensuing on what regional governance should look like,led Sen.Patterson to pull back on introducing the bill(Sen.Haugen would have held a hearing on it but would not have moved it). The potential silver lining I referenced in the introduction of my report occurred on Friday,after I had subsequent discussion with Doug Hurley and after both former Seattle City Councilman Jim Street and myself expressed strong concerns at a Friday WTA meeting with any governance model that leaves most suburban cities out in the cold. There will now be a Monday`drafting'meeting of a WTA Regional Governance Subcommittee on Monday at 3 p.m I was invited to attend and to get"principals"there from Federal Way,Kent,and Everett —which I am doing. We're recommending either the Mayor or Brent McFall be there for Kent. Ironically,the WTA/County Executives'proposal that we were having some heartburn with is at least being rethought,and perhaps we have a chance to affect some positive changes in it. We'll report back further after Monday's meeting. • Pipeline Safety Legislation: The House Agriculture and Ecology Committee passed SSB 5182 out of committee on Thursday night,making some changes to the legislation and the new state inspection and monitoring program that arises from the bill. There were accountability provisions that call for a review of the program after two years,and have the Joint Legislative Audit Review Committee(JLARC)performing such a review rather than the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission. �,, • Changing pension board meetings from monthly to quarterly: In a prior weekly report I noted that SB 6061,our bill to make this technical change(what we jokingly called the `Why Have Meetings when you don't need to Act of 2001'), did not emerge out of Senate Rules and was technically `dead.' I spent some time looking for live bills with sufficiently broad enough and related enough titles to tack this bill onto. I was not able to find any. I recommend the City develop some process—whether a memo, or something—to notify people if a monthly meeting is not necessary. Or, if the City likes, we can try the bill again next year. 272"d Street Corridor—I-5 interchange to Pacific Highway—funding opportunity? On Thursday I attended a meeting of Federal Way,Kent, and King County METRO interests with Sound Transit. An earlier Interstate 5 in-line transit station planned for the area near I-5/272"d has been dropped by Sound Transit,and the agency is considering alternative projects to which to devote some or all of the estimated $18 million it was previously going to spend on the in-line station. Federal Way and Kent are united in believing that fixes to the I-5/272° interchange and to 272"d between I-5 and Pacific Highway,including significant HOV work, would be the best use of those dollars. Cary Roe,joined by Kent public works staff, did an excellent job laying out the rationale for the projects—and the transit and HOV benefits associated with them--during Thursday's meeting. Sound Transit is proceeding methodically, wanting to study a series of four alternatives before making any decisions. Federal Way and Kent staff talked afterward about asking Councilmember Mary Gates and Mayor White—both members of the Sound Transit Board—to help us expedite the process and up the ante for steering the dollars toward I-5/272°d and 272"d/Pacific Highway. Tax/Fiscal Legislation—HB 2031,ESSB 5264: We received more positive news this week when HB 2031,after being moved out of the Senate Economic Development/Telecommunications Committee,was referred to Senate Ways&Means. Ways&Means will hold a hearing on this bill Monday—but it will be late in the day and HB 2031 will be bumping up against the cutoff deadline for fiscal bills. Our concern with HB 2031,which exempts pay-phone services from utility taxation,is both with the fiscal impact today and the future potential for other phone service providers to seek the exemption in years to come if this effort is successful. Also on a fiscal-impact front,we had significant concerns with ESSB 5264,which contained language noting that public employers needed to ensure that part-time employees were not being treated discriminately or in a manner that resulted in unfair labor practices. A number of city officials interpreted this language as forcing them to provide full-time benefits to season, day labor, and part-time employees as a result. ESSB 5264 did not make it out of the House Commerce/Labor Committee and is thus `dead' for the 2001 session. Water Resources Legislation—ESHB 1832: It's never been easy to pass substantial water resources legislation in the 7+years I've lobbied and tracked the issue in Olympia—and this session is not setting any new precedents. The Governor's water package—which contains no `growing communities'protection for municipal water suppliers—is,pardon the pun,encountering rough waters. The bill adds funding for watershed planning efforts, enacts a modest water conservation tax credit, makes revisions to the way Water Conservancy Boards are constituted and operate, and contains authorization to create `two lines' for water rights permit processing in order to expedite hundreds of water rights changes and transfers that are in the pipeline. The Conservancy Board provision is very controversial with Seattle and Tacoma,which have no desire to see a Conservancy Board established in King or Pierce counties. A revision to the bill explicitly notes that municipal suppliers do not have to use Conservancy Boards to rule on transfers,even in a county that has established one. The Association of Washington Cities(AWC),in an effort to make the bill more acceptable for all of its cities, is promoting an amendment that would require the largest city and largest utility in a county to approve before a Conservancy Board could be created. The water legislation has sparked sharp divisions in the House Appropriations Committee—and HB 1832 did not move over the weekend. It may emerge from Committee, albeit with a lot of no votes,on Monday. Meanwhile,individual Senate bills containing provisions within the larger Governor's package, were NOT passed this week by the House Agriculture and Ecology Committee. This may increase tensions between House and Senate chairs that already existed on water. I'll try to keep all posted. Economic Development: At this point, it does not look encouraging for movement of economic development legislation or budget provisions in the 2001 session. SHB 1518, the Governor' s economic development/community investment legislation, supposedly was exempted form the cutoff deadlines. But there is no budget provision for the legislation, and no movement on it as a stand-alone bill. SHB 1418, legislation that depends on a property-tax method of tax increment financing, may make it out of the Senate but will have to come back to the House, where we are told it is either dead on arrival or on life support. The Spokane Chamber of Commerce is the major proponent of SHB 1418, which may have significant constitutional and practical limitations. ESRB 1458, 120-day permit processing: This bill moved out of the Senate State & Local Government Committee and changed considerably in the process. It now simply says that jurisdictions "should" (not "shall") process land-use and building permits within 120 days, and requires larger jurisdictions such as Kent to do two annual reports on how well they stack up to a 120-day turnaround. Health Insurance Retiree Access to Local Jurisdiction Health Plans—SSB 5777: As reported earlier, this bill mandates that public-agency retirees be afforded access to local government health plans. However,the bill is written in a fashion that requires these retirees to pay the full cost of participation and allows local governments to require the access be through a separate plan, so as not to add costs to the active employees'health plan. 5777 is in House Appropriations. Shorelines/Critical Area Funding: Another positive part of the Senate's 2001-03 operating budget bill was the inclusion of$6 million in shoreline update grants to local governments in King,Pierce, Snohomish, Clark,and Kitsap counties,as well as$3 million for assistance in critical area ordinance updates. ` Fines legislation—SSB 5309: This legislation to provide additional fine-collection authority on traffic tickets and other infractions will be heard in House Appropriations on Monday. It continues to move. SSB 5104—Increased Taxing Authority for the Conservation Futures program: Clark County interests,through SSB 5104 sponsored by Sen.Don Carlson,R-Vancouver,had worked this bill hard. We had intervened,noting for the House Natural Resources Committee that we did not have objections with legislation authorizing up to 6'/4 additional cents in the conservation futures program and asking voters to approve it. We did have concerns, we noted,with the lack of any process to ensure a fair distribution of conservation futures monies throughout a county and, specifically,back to the urban cities whose taxpayers finance much of the program(it's my understanding this has been a particularly acute concern among King County suburban cities that went years without seeing conservation futures monies for theirprojects). For this reason and others—such as one legislator's desire to require a 60 percent supermajority approval of any new conservation futures taxes—SSB 5104 did not emerge from committee. The bill is dead for the 2001 session. SSB 5755,Consolidating FMSIB,TIB,Etc.—This legislation was passed out of the Senate this week. Among other things, SSB 5755 consolidates some of the functions of the Transportation Improvement Board and Freight Mobility Board. The legislation was prime-sponsored by Sen.Haugen. We are told that neither of the House Co-Chairs,Ruth Fisher,D-Tacoma and Maryann Mitchell, R-Federal Way,plans to hear or move the bill. SHB 1750—receiving value for street vacations: The Senate Transportation Committee is expected to move this bill Monday in committee. SHB 1750 is being promoted by the AWC as one of the items in its resolutions approved during the 2000 AWC Convention. The bill allows cities to receive up to 100%of appraised value of vacated streets. TO address concerns by some legislators that the funds not simply go into balancing budgets,the AWC was working on amendments that may, for example,restrict the use of any funds to infrastructure purposes. Energy Legislation: As reported in the news media,sharp philosophical differences among Republicans and Democrats will result in the Legislature enacting very little in the way of new energy legislation or energy policy—despite a bipartisan resolve to take bold steps in the wake of the energy crisis. "Ds"and "Rs"cancelled each other out on proposals for a more diversified approach to development of energy sources(a Democratic proposal)vs. a more tax-friendly approach to the development of new energy generating facilities(pushed by the Republicans). Executive Session Legislation—SHB 1384: As we had noted in earlier reports,the original bill to rein in the holding of executive sessions on litigation matters, and to require minutes to be taken during those executive sessions which later could be subject to discovery requests, changed substantially in the political process. A compromise bill acceptable to all parties, including us, came out of Senate State&Local Government this week. The requirement that minutes be kept is gone from the bill, and there are a reasonable array of rationales that can be used to hold an executive session on pending litigation. The latest bill notes that the State Attorney General's Office(rather than the State Auditor's Office)may provide technical assistance to local jurisdictions as to what properly constitutes an executive session on pending litigation.for an executive session. ESSB 5058—Bargaining Strategy Records and Disclosure of Law Enforcement Investigative Records: ESSB 5058,which contained two positive provisions for cities, died in Committee this week. The legislation would have exempted records used in bargaining strategy sessions from public disclosure. Under an amendment added on the Senate floor, it also would have protected from disclosure any pre- prosecution referral records of a law enforcement investigation. The AWC promoted ESSB 5058 and likely will try to rework the legislation again in 2002. Hearings week of April 2-6 - few and far between: Beyond hearings already noted for some of the bills referenced above, there are few ``— hearings of import this coming week. As stated earlier, Monday, April 2, is the big cutoff date for bills that are before the fiscal committees.