HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council Workshop - Special Minutes - 02/03/2023 Approved
City Council Workshop
• Workshop Special Meeting
KENT Minutes
WAS M IN G 7 0 N
February 3, 2023
Date: February 3, 2023
Time: 8:00 P.M.
Place: Green River College at the Kent
Station
I. CALL TO ORDER
Council President Boyce called the meeting to order.
Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
Bill Boyce Council President Present
Brenda Fincher Councilmember Present
Satwinder Kaur Councilmember Present
Marli Larimer Councilmember Absent
Zandria Michaud Councilmember Present
Toni Troutner Councilmember Present
Les Thomas Councilmember Present
Dana Ralph Mayor Present
2. Other Attendees
Andrew Ballard, Facilitator, from Marketing Solutions
Pat Fitzpatrick, Chief Administrative Officer
Patti Belle, Communications Manager
Chad Bieren, Public Works Director
James Endicott, Information Technology
Kurt Hanson, Economic and Community Development Director
Kim Komoto. City Clerk
Rafael Padilla, Police Chief
Paula Painter, Finance Director
Julie Parascondola, Parks Director
Uriel Varela, Race and Equity Manager
Natalie Winecka, Interim Human Resources Director
Tammy White, City Attorney
Margaret Yetter, Court Administrator
3. Preliminaries
Mayor Ralph, Council President Boyce and Chief Administrative Officer Pat
Fitzpatrick provided opening remarks.
Andrew Hutchins facilitated the planning session and provided an overview of
the agenda items and reviewed the ground rules.
City Council Workshop Workshop Special February 3, 2023
Meeting Kent, Washington
Minutes
4. Group Activity
Councilmembers and the members of the Executive Leadership Team
participated in the group activity.
S. Roundtable - Council and ELT Members
All participants shared their three successes from 2022 and one challenge for
the City in 2023.
Dominant themes related to public safety and the uncertainty of potential
legislative changes. The budget was a concern where the City's expenses
outpace revenue. Finally, homelessness and how to tackle the issues faced
by all jurisdictions was discussed.
6. Facilities Assessment and Planning
Parks Director, Julie Parascondola provided the Re-Investing in City Facilities
presentation, including:
An overview of facilities operations:
The City maintains 27 City buildings, 344,664 square feet of indoor space.
Current Investment in City Facilities
• City Facilities and Services Provided
• Internal Service Funding and Square Foot Charges
• Lifecycle vs. Capital Investment
• Current Capital Facilities Investments
2021 Facilities Condition Assessment and Strategic Plan
• Observed Deficiencies and Predicted Renewals
• What happens if we do nothing
• Funding Scenarios (all draft for discussion)
• Highest need facilities
Primary Discussion Topic: City Hall and KPD
• History of the Spaces / Occupancy
• Specific Observed Deficiencies and Predicted Renewals
• Financial Need to Upgrade
Options for Consideration - Keeping in mind that decisions made today will
impact the future 50 years
• Parascondola reviewed the various options for discussion
• Kurt Hanson, Economic and Community Development Director provided
information on the concept of funding through the National Development
Council. 63-20 Financing.
....... ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ... ....
Page 2 of 5
City Council Workshop Workshop Special February 3, 2023
Meeting Kent, Washington
Minutes
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................._...............................................................................................................................................................................................................
• Paula Painter, Finance Director provided an overview of the financial
considerations and capital capacity.
Council discussed moving forward with the pre-development and all agreed
they were in favor of the next steps.
7. DEI Presentation
Uriel Varela, Race and Equity Manager, and Maria Tizoc, Race and Equity
Coordinator, presented the Language Access and Equity Plan Preview.
Information was provided regarding legal standards and obligations relating
to:
• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act
• Executive Order 1316
• The evaluation of vital Documents
• Pass-through funds
• And what Meaningful Access requires
The Language Plan is considered a reasonable step towards compliance and
the City has a Language Access Plan in draft form. The four factor analysis
was reviewed and information was provided regarding the Safe Harbor
Provision that requires the translation of vital documents if 5% or 1,000 of
population is LEP.
Varela reviewed statistics for Limited English Proficiency groups and indicated
Kent has an LEP population of 20%.
Recommended actions and decision points included:
• Identify vital documents
• Programs directly funded by federal dollars
• Services & benefits that have heightened impact on residents
• Establish Internal controls
■ How are we collecting data
■ Where is the data warehoused?
■ Who oversees process?
• Approve Title VI Plan
■ Includes Language Access Plan
• Create a vital doc list for each dept and adopt translation toolkit.
Executive Leadership Team Vetting of Title VI plan
• Create or adopt process of collecting language data using vital documents
identified by departments
• Monitor data
• Identify and translate vital documents
• Update vital document translation toolkit
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Page 3 of 5
City Council Workshop Workshop Special February 3, 2023
Meeting Kent, Washington
Minutes
• Title VI as part of mandatory training
• Provide notice of translation & interpretation resources
• Website - Professional translation of vital pages
• Create SharePoint landing page for all Title VI related resources, including:
• Document translation
• Event Interpretation
S. Public Safety
Chief Rafael Padilla walked the Council through the Public Safety
presentation, including:
Staffing
• Where we were. Chief Padilla reviewed officers per thousand residents and
reviewed growth since 2018
• Where we are now - reviewed officers per thousand residents
• Where we need to go - Chief Padilla talked about overcoming historical
staffing shortages, elevating diversity and building a culture of DEI.
For 2023, Chief Padilla talked about the four primary department-wide goals:
1. Integration and development of new personnel and newly-assigned personnel
2. Elevate effectiveness in serving and protecting the community
3. Develop a wellness plan for employees
4. Develop a Strategic Plan for 2023-2029 personnel and newly-assigned
personnel
Chief Padilla talked about the Police Department's data collection efforts and
advised Kent is ahead of the state mandates.
Chief Padilla responded to the council's questions regarding staffing levels and
the work relating to the culture of the Police Department.
9. Review of City Mission/Vision/Values
Council and staff reviewed the City's Mission, Vision, Values and Goals.
Pat Fitzpatrick introduced the City's new Government Performance
Coordinator, Alyssa Elliot and advised she will be working on this project in
addition to leading LEAN efforts throughout the City.
10. Housing Goals and Homelessness
Council talked about what they would like to see happen in the City in the
future. Fitzpatrick asked councilmembers to provide topics they would like
staff to focus on researching, while keeping in mind the possible changes
that could come from the current legislative session.
Councilmembers expressed an interest in having more affordable housing
options, addressing homelessness including finding more beds, advocating
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Page 4 of 5
City Council Workshop Workshop Special February 3, 2023
Meeting Kent, Washington
Minutes
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................._...............................................................................................................................................................................................................
for funding from the county and state, renter protections and evaluating
infrastructure impacts of density growth.
11. Next Steps/Evaluation/Closing Remarks
Councilmembers supported exploring the feasibility of adding/funding for
additional officers.
Councilmembers and staff evaluated today's retreat and provided feedback.
Mayor Ralph, Council President Boyce and Pat Fitzpatrick provided closing
remarks.
Meeting ended at 3:30 p.m.
Kanbe4-levy A. Ko vwto-
City Clerk
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Page 5 of 5
i
Municipi
KENT C,OUPt
6iiiNW-
Re - Investingin City Facilities
City Council Retreat February 3, 2023
ism
KENT
WAS H I NG70 N
Agenda
City Council Retreat February 3, 2023
Welcome
a
General Facilities Overview
Municipi
KENT court Current Investment in City Facilities
r - City Facilities and Services Provided
i Internal Service Funding and Square Foot Charges
• Lifecycle vs. Capital Investment
.. Current Capital Facilities Investments
2021 Facilities Condition Assessment and Strategic Plan
• Observed Deficiencies and Predicted Renewals
=�= What happens if we do nothing
• Funding Scenarios (all draft for discussion)
• Highest need facilities
Primary Discussion Topic: City Hall and KPD
• History of the Spaces/Occupancy
• Specific Observed Deficiencies and Predicted Renewals
• Financial Need to Upgrade
r Options for Consideration
- ., - Options for Discussion
63-20 Financing Option through NDC
�� Financial Considerations and Capital Capacity
=__---- Questions/Next Steps
i
Municipi
KENT C,OUPt
u
69-
Overview of
KEN T
--- ! - Yt
s=-==�r � WA S H I NGTG N
City Facilities - Overview
• Maintain 27 City Buildings, 344,664 Square Feet of Indoor Space
• Recreational Facilities Police and Fire Facilities
o Kent Commons Community Center o Kent Police Department HQs
a o Kent Senior Activity Center o East Hill Police Substation
Municipi
✓ENT court o Kent Memorial Park Building o Panther Lake Substation
o Riverbend Golf Complex o Woodmont Substation
o Station 75
W[W • Historic Facilities o Station 74
o Neely-Soames Historic Home
o Bereiter House (GKHS) Courts and Corrections Facilities
o Carriage House (GKHS) o Kent Municipal Court
o Kent Corrections Facility
• Shops/Other Facilities o Kent Corrections —Annex
- o Russell Road Shops
o Russell Road Shed Row
o East Hill Operations Center
o GRNRA Greenhouse/Shops
City Offices City facilities range from
_r o City Hall
-� o Centennial Center 139 ( Neely-Soames) years old
__ =- �,,,
o City Hall Campus Garage
to 32 years old (Centennial Center)
o City Campus —Annex
m o City Hall Campus Generator Building
City Facilities — Services Provided
• Maintenance functions managed by Facilities include:
■ Custodial Services Maint Carpets Tiles (interior)
Utility and Consumption Management Hard surface/Sidewalks
Mu nit ip` HVAC Systems Management Parking Lots
■ Roofing systems Signage
f� g Y
I Mechanical Snow/de-icing removal
■
■ Re-striping
■ Electrical
_ Facility Signage (inter/ext.)
■ Plumbing ■
Perimeter Trash Removal
Doors/Hardware ■
Routine and Deep Cleaning
■ Building Envelope
■ Room Setup/Tear Down -
- Lighting Fixtures
Program Support (if needed)
■ Furniture ,
■ Ergonomic Assessments �
Keys and Security Alarms Small Tenant Improvements
■ Boilers t•. '
■ Small Life Cycle Replacements d ,�
■ Generators4'
r Windows
Painting/Finishing
HERB
sue- -1
City Facilities — Internal Service Fund
• Facilities Maintenance and Operations, located within Kent Parks, is an Internal Service Fund
(direct bill other departments for maintenance of facility space).
• The preliminary, 2023 rate is $18.46 sq ft. Approximately $1.85 goes towards lifecycle (10% of the
Municipi sq ft rate) and the remaining $16.61 sq ft goes to pay for custodial, maintenance, HVAC, security,
Court, key/access control, utilities, and general administration for facilities. Note:when final budget is adjusted with COLAs,
the square foot charge will change.
I
$449,850, HVAC, $574,851 ,
7.83% Lifecycle, 10%
$1,320,630, $1,372,189,
Custodial,22.97% Admin, 23.87%
In 2023, preliminary adopted budget
for city-wide facilities is 5 748 510.
Each year Facilities is balance to zero. 'AO
$871,160,
=__'z�,�-.===`_`__ Maint/Repair, $1,159,830,
="; _ 15.15% Utilities,20.18%
--®CRY of Item
City Facilities — Lifecycle vs . Capital
• Lifecycle replacement focuses on scheduled replacement of identified assets, components etc,
such as roofs, HVAC, plumbing, parking lot re-pavements/striping, floor replacements, etc)
Example: On a home, major maintenance would be replacing the roof or the hot water
Municip; heater, a garage, re-painting the exterior, adding a fence, etc
` r,T Court
' Lifecycle allocations in the square foot are 10% of the total square footage charge
.. In 2023, an additional $574,851 in lifecycle funding will go towards major maintenance
W11
• Unfortunately, there is more lifecycle need than there are resources available; major
_ y maintenance is pushed out well beyond useful lives
City facilities do not have a sustainable capital source. 2019 is the first year the City allocated
capital funding towards City facilities, separate from major maintenance
Example: On a home, capital would typically be larger financial scale, be a full remodel
of your home, adding onto your home, enhancing all design to be current trends and
functionality, improvements could add value to your home etc
Current Ca ital FundingCit Facilities
Beginning 2019 forward, each budget has had some level of capital dollars for City facilities. As a
reminder, this is what has been allocated (capital) by City Council to date:
2019-2024
Name Non-Lifec cle Status
Municipi Kent Police Corrections Plumbing 600,000 Complete
KENT Court Kent Senior Center- Roof Repairs 525,000 In Progress
Cit wide Access Control update and installation 330,000 Not started
Securify Camera Upgrade 26,000 Complete
Tenant Requested Renovation 199,500 Not started
Kent Police Building 1,550,000 Complete
City Hall Patio 200,000 Complete
Police Corrections &Court Security Fence 220,000 Complete
Kent Commons Building 1,500,000 In Progress
Kent Senior Center Buildin 500,000 In Progress
Kent Commons HVAC/G m Divider 715,000 In Progress
Kent Police Corrections Portable Backup Generator 350,000 In Pro ress
Citywide Training Room Remodel 200,000 Not started
Kent Police Corrections Jail Safety Improvement 50,000 In Progress
IT Annex Remodel 300,000 In Progress
City Hall Entrance Improvements 705,000 Not started
City Hall Chamber Move and Upgrade ARPA 280,000 Not started
'-,,- Centennial Customer Service Counter Improvement ARPA 1,045,000 Not started
Kent Police Corrections Annex Fence 143,840 New
Facility Reinvestment Fund 10,000,000 New
Kent East Hill Operation Center fKEHOQ 24,469,900 New
Kent Police Department Facility Upgrade 350,000 New
Kent Police Firing Range Renovation 350,000 New
Kent Police HQ Cooling Tower 223,750 New
Kent Senior Center Solar Panel Match 120,000 New
Siemens HVAC Controls 230,000 In Pro ress
Totall 45,182,990
min. Note: Facilities only has 1.0 FTE project manager(s) to work on capital projects. In the 2021-2022
CRY of., budget, Facilities was authorized a 3-year TLT Project Manager to assist with capital projects for a
total of 2.0 FTEs
OEM
i
Municipi
KENT C,OUPt
Facilities Strategic Plan
and CoAssessment..........
KENT
WAS H I NG70 N
Cit y Facilities — Goals
Financial Goals:
• Part 1: Create a one-time funding scenario and action plan to address the highest deficiency
or priority facilities at risk of failure or long-term viability to operate
Municip; Part 2: Create a citywide facilities, long-term sustainable capital funding source to be
ANT Court
-- utilized by the Facilities Division, in the creation and delivery of its capital improvement plan
WIM. General Goals:
• Understand the condition of city facilities and components, lifecycle
• Identify opportunities to improve energy efficiency, security, or user experience
• Establish prioritization of short-term and long-term projects
• Develop a high-level maintenance frequency plan
• Creation of service level standards (HVAC, Custodial and Repair) based on financial and
staffing capacity
• Work towards sustainable staffing to handle increased project management and
_r. maintenance and repair demands
M.
cKya
==
--- --
CityFacilities — Short and LongTerm Planning
• The Facilities Division used a plan created in 1998, which assessed the condition of city facilities at
that time, to form a 20-year plan to address needed repairs and replacements. This helped
Facilities staff prioritize lifecycle investments, etc.
� Municip; • In late 2020, the City contracted with MENG Analysis and FCS Group, for a Facilities Condition
court Assessment and Master Plan. The ultimate objective of this process was to identify how the City
can maximize operational efficiency and sustainability via fiscally-responsible strategies
There are two parts to this plan:
W11 • Facilities Condition Assessment. Work is complete.
o The facility condition assessment documented the current condition of the City's facility assets, quantified the
amount of maintenance backlog, created lists of prioritized short-term action items, and forecast long-term needs
- for facility maintenance and upgrades. This assessment also identified opportunities for the City to improve user
experience, energy efficiency, and building longevity through facility updates
• Operations and Maintenance Analysis. Work is pending.
o The City's current operations and maintenance practices were analyzed and compared to level-of-service standards
for the three maintenance groups: HVAC, general maintenance, and custodial. Recommended monthly, quarterly,
and annual maintenance activities were codified and used to calculate recommended staffing levels for these
r groups. An Excel-based what-if analysis tool was developed to compare staffing needs at various maintenance
levels of service
The full, completed plan is anticipated to be final after policy direction on next steps and
- -==--= sustainable funding or capital funding identification
City Facilities — Condition Assessment
• Consultant conducted an in-depth survey of all 27 facilities and listed all Observed Deficiencies
(OD) and Predicted Renewals (PR) along with costs and timelines for the next 20 years
• Each building is assessed at a subsystem level, with some more critical to the building's continued successful operation
than others (e.g.foundation versus carpeting). Each subsystem is assigned an importance factor(spanning highest to
Municipi lowest). Renewals for higher-risk subsystems are prioritized over lower-risk subsystems
Court
WI • Observed Deficiencies—An issue witnessed by or disclosed to a surveyor that exceeds a direct cost of$5,000 and should
i be addressed within five years of the survey date
.. Predicted Renewal-A forecast estimating when building systems will exceed their typical lifespan and funding will be
required for renewals or replacements
User Experience,
— 228,019 Life Safety, $791,782
$3,149,568
160,036 Other,
$8,048,609 all
Other City Hall=
Code Issue, Facilities= $8.2M
$3,729,901
%.276 $15.7M
7,604
_ � Energy
Excellent Good Fair Poor Efficiency,
1$7,655,092
r Square Footage by Condition. The condition
WIWLE— assessment is complete; shows the distribution of the Citywide Deficiencies by Action Type. All Facilities vs. City Hall. 2023 —2026
City's facility square footage by condition score. More 2023 — 2026 observed deficient costs
Y observed deficiency costs across all facilities
than half of the City's facilities are rated as "excellent" b action type.Y Yp total nearly$24 million. Of this, City Hall is
or "good" condition, with only 13% of facilities in a
catim., "poor" condition. accounts for 35/, or $8.2M of the total, and
represents more than half the square footage
in the "poor" condition category.
Cit Facilities — Condition Assessment cont
Y
• The City's current annual allocation of $550,000 per year for lifecycle funding for facility maintenance
is insufficient for tackling the large maintenance backlog and upcoming facility needs. The graphic
below is a representation of the shortfall created by the current funding strategy
a
Municipi
KENT COUP t
- Cumulative Funded o Cumulative Unfunded
o Accumulated Reserves Cumulative Resources Generated
$100.0
W11
$80-0 The dark orange line shows the cumulative
$60 resources available each year under the current
$200 L LLL funding scheme and the empty white bars show
$ Q Q the amount of unfulfilled accumulated needs
2023 2024 2025 2626 2i727 2[728 2029 2f13f]2t131 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2637 2[]38 2fk39 2f14❑2041
Frgure 7-Sfafus Qua Funding Resuffs
Alternatively,Figure a illustrates the performance of5cenorio3 which is the break-even point for funding Second chart demonstrates an example funding
--- the projected facility needs,still without accumulating reserve funds.
a strategy that keeps lifecycle the same but adds a
�Cumulative Funded o Cumulative Unfunded
Accumulated Reserves Cumulative Resources Gen erded sustainable capital allocation of $2.5 million
annually and a $10,000 one-time investment to
get ahead of the observed deficiencies. This is
$tea just a sample scenario for discussion, not final
$-
�����►� --_� 2023 20e4 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 20131 2032 20133 2034 20135 2[136 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041
„yy ►a-�L-;�����_r� Frgure 8-Break-Evert Funding Scenorio Resuifs
o CRY a Wem
_— ----_—
CityFacilitiesSample Fundin Scenarios
MEDIUM HIGH
Icenarioic Revised Scenarios Funding Needs
00 00 00"Owl, 'OW ScenarioX ScenarioX BREAKEVEN STATUS QUO
00 i
00 i
00
Municipi
ANT Court
Importance Factor 1 0 0 0 0 0
i (structure and life safety) $17.5M 100/0 100/0 100/0 100/0 79/o
Importance Factor 2
(building exteriors and I $16.81VI 100% 100% 100% 100% 0%
MEP)
t Importance Factor 3
(elevators, interior fixtures, $31.1M 11% 56% 100% 100% 0%
access control)
- Importance Factor 4
(communications and $15.1 M 0% 0% 0% 100% 0%
specialty equipment)
Importance Factor 5
r (interior finishes and I $4.51VI 0% 0% 0% 100% 0%
landscaping)
=- Total I $85.0M 44% 61% 77% 100%* 16%
- -
i
Municipi
KENT C,OUPt
Highest
=� CityHall and KPD HQs
KEN T
WA S H I NGTG N
City Facilities — OD PR Needs by Facility
O D+PR Tota I vs Square Footage
$18,000,000.00 — 80,000
i S16,OOO,OOO.0D
70,000
.0001% Municipi
` r,T Court
S14,OOO,OOO.Oa
60,000
� S12,00,000.00
wo 50,000
�. S1a,0OO,000.00
40,000
S8,O06,006.04
- 30,000
S6,OOO,OOO.04
1
20,000
S4,O06,006.06
S2,OOO,OOO.06 10,000
c
r �
='=e
Rl
Kem Grand Total --w—sgft
CityFacilities Need No CityHall No KDP
Revised Scenarios Funding Needs ScenariolB Scenario213 Scenario313 "500K I$1.82M "500K 1$0
LOW MEDIUM HIG� BREAKEVEN STATUS QUO
Municipi
court Importance Factor 1 (structure !
and life safety) $11.0M 100% 1000/0 100% 10000 100%
Importance Factor 2(building o o o
o
exteriors and MEP) $12.7M 100% 100Io 10010 100� 22Io
Importance Factor 3
t
(elevators, interior fixtures, $25.9M 27% 81% 100% 1000/ 0%
_ access control)
- Importance Factor
NEW
(communications and $13.5M 0% 0% 65% 100% 0%
specialty equipment)
Importance Factor 5(interior M 0/o
finishes and landscaping) 3 0% 0% 1000/0 0%
Total C $67.3M 46% 66% 87°/ 100%* 21%
-=_ *Break-even scenario. No accumulated reserve balance at end of 2041.
"Y'c Importance factors based on 2021 condition assessment. TO the extent needs are not addressed, If we handle City Hall/KPD separately,
—_—® iiem
_=__ cost of needs will increase, and urgency of needs may increase. this reduces the 20-year forecast down
------------
by $17.7 million.
_ ���
Kani Clay Hall UI
f_ �• -
Pq
jm
+ -
. �L.. f ■ Annex
Centennial Cente -! „n m m
.� � t
6
Kent City Hall a t 1
16
K{-nt Fn iorinFnti
i ampus Parking GaraJOE—
ge y • �
• e5i l
Kent Police Department R
_ t
r ,, a • #
At
I - � - ALM' --
_ L •- i-h � s �5
Ill
Kas�t I TL '
CityHall Building — Use and History
• Originally constructed in 1971 - 52 years old
• 33,000 square feet (still has the old jail and shooting range)
a -
• Programmatically obsolete and wood framed brick structure; not in code compliance
Municipi •
KENT court 81 Employees work in the City Hall building within the following Departments/Divisions:
o City Clerk's Office
i
o Mayor's Office
o City Communications and Multimedia
W11 o Information Technology
o Human Services
o Parks Admin and Parks Programming
o Legal/Law F '
o Council Chambers / OfficeP
• City Council Chambers, the most visible and _
highest used public space is in City Hall f: y
` Has had multiple capital improvements, but
.. p p p ,,� - -
r still has not kept up with demands and y - - -
___==_=== ==- � aesthetics
CityHall Building — ODs PRs
• The City Hall Building has an estimated $8.2 million in short term deficiencies with another $5.4
miiiion in 121 coiciea renewals, totaling $13.6 million in need over 20 years. Likely more due to
recent inflation.
a
Municipi
KENT C,OUPt
I D20 Plumbing$258K,1
D40 Fire Protection$466K
W11
C301nterior Finishes
D50 Electrical$558K D50 Electrical
B20 Exterior Closure $6a6K
D30 HVAC $63iK
E E10 Equipment b536K
N
T
CIO interior Construction $3s3K
D 10 Vertical Transportation $32a
B30 Roofing $313K
D30 HVAC$2,562K�
D20 Plumbing $258K
D40 Fire Protection,$34K
B10 Superstructure$4,327K
$O.OM sc $0AM $0.6M $0.w $1.0N $12'.'
Predicted Renewals
WIRM_r_
Observed Deficiencies Predicted Renewals
�
;=
Kent Police HQs Building — Use and History
• Originally constructed in 1971 - 49 years old
• Kent Police occupied the building in 1986, which was converted as a library and at the time was
.4",
supposed to be a temporary space
Municip; 0 18,000 square feet and has always been too small to fit KPD needs
KENT C,OUPt
- 0 KPD Operations broken up, on City Hall Campus, between it's Headquarters Building and the Yd
Floor of Centennial, where Detectives are located, which causes communication and continuity
W11 issues within their operations
• Do not have adequate space for major emergency operations for incidents such as major
earthquakes, tanker spills, etc.
=�= KPD has run out of space to adequately provide workspace for some of their sworn personnel who
work at a desk
KPD has utilized evidence storage at City Hall, which has not fulfilled their needs
• Each year KPD takes in more evidence than they have the ability to destroy, growing evidence inventory annually
• New laws are now required longer retention and storage evidence, including some evidence that KPD must retain
forever
r The last two KPD accreditation cycles, KPD evidence storage issues have been highlighted by the assessors as something
-- - KPD needs to address or be at potential risk of losing certification
• KPD evidence storage is being discussed at KEHOC but it will not be enough
Kent Police HQs — ODs/PRs
• The Kent Police HQs Building has an estimated $1.4 million in short term deficiencies with another
$2.5 million in predicted rui IIfVVdIJ, totaling $4.0 million in need over 20 years. Likely more due to
recent inflation.
a
Municipi
KENT C,OUPt
DSO Electrical$91 K
I
D50 Electrical
C30 Interior Finishes
B20 Exterior Closure $368K
B30 Roofing$439K
El Equipment EzszK
E
_ N
n
D20 Plumbing_3iseK
E D30 HVAC$953K C101nterior Construction_3isK
D30 HVAC 0-K
D40 Fire Protection I-K
$O.OM $0.2M $0.4M $0.6M $08M $1.0m
r' Predicted Renewals
Observed Deficiencies Predicted Renewals
Cp
Other Considerations
• Important to remember decision made now, will impact the future 50 years
• Both City Hall and KPD Headquarters were built in the 70s to serve a city with 16,600 population and
around 138 FTEs
Municip; Kent has added 1151000 more residents since the 70s. The City now has 745 employees. KPD was
KENT C,OUYt
added in 1986 and Centennial Center was added in 1996 to help fill that need, however, buildings
have always been retrofitted vs. built to what the City really needed; space needs have continued to
be an issue over the decades
WIW- • Even if we create a funding strategy for City Hall/KPD, there is still a $68 million, predicted
facilities backlog that needs to be addressed through some type of sustainable funding source
in the future
11
b iW'
..
MENN.IIIIIIIIIIIIII Municipi
KE 7 Court
A
Summary of Opt
I
1�u
,�Cily of I(em
KEN T
W A S H I N G T O N
Options 1
Status Quo, do nothing beyond minor lifecycle repairs, react when necessary
Pros:
a -
• Would save City capital funds in the short term, less immediate impact on long range forecast
Municipi
KENT court No major renovations, means no staff or City service disruptions
W11
Cons:
• City may need to react to identify emergency funding to repair if something fails
Potential emergency displacement of City staff and services
- Does not address any backlog; future financial need will continue to grow
• Maintenance and operations costs will increase due to increased repair demands
• Will not be able to provide any enhanced working environment for staff or visitors
,.., „CRy m
Options 2
Keep both buildings, but invest a designated $ of capital to begin making critical repairs
Pros:
.. • Would save City capital funds in the short term, less impact on long range forecast
Municipi
ANT Court
_ • Depending on amount allocated, we could address pressing issues like fire, life/safety and elevator
improvement
Cons:
Would need to identify an established capital dollar amount and then develop a plan
• Renovations could snowball in old buildings and trigger additional repairs and costs
• Would not have any aesthetic or operational efficiencies, would look the same
Option 3
Demolish both buildings, merge into one, more efficient building that meets City needs
Pros:
• Would enhance the brand image of the City
Municipi
• Could advance environmental/sustainable goals
KENT C,OUPt
• Would allow staff teams to operate more efficiently
• Can consolidate some staff into underutilized Centennial Center
• Can consolidate front line services to serve visitors better
• Ability to plan for growth and space needs in the long term future
• Smaller square footage and new building would reduce operational cost
=�= • Savings on external storage, paid by KPD, could be eliminated with new facility space
• Potential savings on insurance and risk prevention with new facilities
a Less building/operation impacts, staff would shift temporarily one time
• If we utilize NDC option, would span the payback over 30-35 years, instead of all at once
Cons:
Public understanding of rational for decision
Demand on the long term forecast due to payback of loan/debt
_�=--- • Staff would be temporarily moving, causing disruption/displacement
gCKy. • Impact to available capital in the long-term forecast
Impact to staff workload (depending upon approach)
Option 3 continued
• Both City Hall and KPD's identified ODs/PR will cost an estimated $17,700,000 (in 2022 dollars)
• City Hall Square Footage = 33,000 Kent Police HQs Square Footage = 18,000 1 Total = 51,000
.. - A lot of underutilized space, due to design, in both facilities and with utilizing Centennial Center
Municip; (which is 71,000 sqft) more efficiently, we do not need 51,000 square feet, can reduce down
` r,T Court
i
Example costs of a new, joint facility:
W1 Equal Space Keduced Space Reduced Space
: - 51,000 Sq Ft 401000 Sq Ft 30,000 Sq Ft
X $600 Sq Ft X $600 Sq Ft X $600 Sq Ft
r° Est $30,600,000 Est $24,000,000 Est $18,000,000
"Estimated costs are for building only, additional costs will need to be considered for furniture/fixtures.
"Costs of debt issuances are also not included.
,.., ON�a item
i
Municipi
KENT C,OUPt Financial
Options
and C
..........
KEN T
WA S H I NGTG N
Concept of Funding Through NDC
MIM
w
Y i
+
-- E- v •l �. 555- -
The National - r
Development Council r �.
Bothell ■ L •
1
• Founded in 1969
• $2.6 Billion P3 Developed
• Regional Public Examples r•
�wra�-•.. ..1.r
Ed.Lou man
e ■rn ��
00
pis
I+
_ —
What is 63 -20
Financing
Tax-Exempt• • •
Leverages• Efficiency/Flexibilityof
SectorPrivate • r Construction of •
Sector
' I k#
go
oil
~ I _ ... ~
MEJ
WA Biomedical Research Facility for UW
- - Phase 1 ase 2 Phase 3
What are the Benefits of • Public Debt Structures are Less Costly
this Option ? 0 Private Development is More Efficient
N DC Typical Process
F
• Selection of the Not-For-Profit
• Selection of the Development
Team J
1 •
• Pre-Development
h
• Contracts 4
• Bond Sale, Construction,
Occupancy & Management - - -
Riverside County Law Building
Financial Forecast Capital Capacity
Operating vs Capital Budgets
Funding Source: Capital Resources Fund
.. - Main Revenue Sources:
�% Municip�
`�KENT
c°urt Property Tax
Real Estate Excise Tax (REET)
• Streamlined Sales Tax (through June 2026)
W11
• Fund Balance
• Ongoing Commitments:
• Debt Service (through 2037)
• ShoWare Lifecycle
• IT Hardware/Software Lifecycle
_r. Parks Capital
Streets Capital
_ems-
__ m Remaining Capital Program Funding
Financial Forecast Capital Capacity
Anticipated Future Project Needs
• Other Parks, Streets and IT Projects
.. Municipi Grant Match
NT Court
- • Continued Investment In Meet Me On Meeker
Facilities Options
1. Status Quo
A. Continue Already Planned Projects
2. Keep and Invest in Both Buildings
A. Establish Ongoing Capital Budget
3. Create One Joint Building
A. Estimated Annual Cost over 30 years
i. $18M - $30.6M Project: $1.1M - $1.9M
a. Construction only (based on estimate presented earlier)
ii. $45.5M Project: $2.75M
B. Utilize a Portion of Available Capital Program Funding
cftyq m C. Return Certain Unspent City Campus Project Funding
N. =_======- D. Utilize a Portion of Fund Balance through 2032
i
Municipi
!TNT Court
Ik
Cou
..............
..................
...........T A-
KEN T
WAS H I NG70 N
i
Municipi
KENT C,OUPt
ISM Contact .
Julie Parascondola, Parks Director, 253.856.5007
Brian Levenhagen, Deputy Parks Director, 253.856.5116
Will Moore, Facilities Superintendent, 253.445.3761
. - .,
i
anguage
Access
quity P HOLAIN r
Preview
By: Maria Tizoc & Uriel Varela
Table of Contents
� e
L
k
- Legal standards&obligations t
-Communitylanguagesglan "
- What does this mean forKent �,
PMBi
-Recommended actions&decision points
.. �< ,,•
-EquityStrategic Plan Preview �'�
Legal Standard & Obligations
• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act
■ Prohibits discrimination based on country of origin
(language by proxy)
' Executive Order 133.66
TALOFA .
Mandates language access for Federally funded programs
t Reasonable steps to provide meaningful access
➢ Translating vital documents & provide outreach
+ �- Vital Documents
■ Contain information critical for obtaining services
Assessment of impact (Factor3)
3 I
Legal Standard & Obligations cont.
■ Pass-through Funds (Federal)
■ City retains a non-dischargeable duty to monitor
recipients for compliance (grants, contracts).
Contract Language has been drafted and added to
TALOFA ! grants and contracts
= Meaningful Access
I If department receives federal funds in support of its
operations, requirement applies to all department's
operations.
Maria has worked with Public Works and has completed
WSDOT mandatory yearly reports on Title VI (2019-
\ 2022)
■ Maria has also completed the first draft of the City's
Title VI plan, currently under legal review.
4 I
Community Languages Plan (LEP)
Language plan is considered a reasonable step
towards compliance
We have a LanguageAccess Plan in draft form
AO !
Identification Identification
� of funding& &assessment
/�' �' ��� procurement of LEP
issues communities Collaboration
Staff training with LEP
on policies& communities&
procedures other
- �� stakeholders
� -� Identification Description of
'� =��, � of persons who timeframe,
i`' \ � will implement objectives,&
-:=" � �� the plan benchmarks
Language
Notice of ACCess Monitoring&
language updating of
assistance Plan policies,plans,
services &procedures
Community
Languages Plan cont.
Four FactorAnalysis
� � ; ,3 � Factor 1: Number or Proportion of
� LEP Persons
�— ,_�' �` Factor 2: Frequency of Contact with
LEP Persons
AO
Factor 3: The Nature and Importance
' of the Program or Service
: �-%�,- � � Factor 4: The.Resaurces Available
._. \ Balanced against the Costs
Data sources
Safe Harbor Provision `Trigger"
■
A statute or regulation that provides protection from
legal liability or other penalty when certain conditions - F
z
are met.
■ Minimum language service/action keeping us in `
compliance with Title VISafe '
Harbor Provision console. log("Hello!");
If t,
% or 1,000 i must be translated
population is LEP, vital documents
Language City of Kent LEP % of Total City of Kent
Population (Speak English Population of —131,000
less than "very well"
Spanish 6,879 5.3%
Pun'abi 1,923 1.5%
Ukrainian 1,874 1.4%
Vietnamese 1855 1.4%
Chinese 1,399 1.1%
Tagalog 1,153 0.8% 7 I
What does that mean for Kent?
■ 7.6% of state population is in a Limited English
Proficiency group (LEP)
z
■ 8% is the national average
■ City of Kent has an LEP population of 20%
console. log("Hel lo!");
American Community Survey
S1601 LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME
2020:ACS 5-Year Estimates Subject Tables
Speak English Percent speak
Cities less than English less than
very well very well
Tukwila city, Washington 5,496 28.90%
SeaTac city, Washington 6,407 23.80%
Kent city, Washington 23,918 19.80%
Renton city, Washington 16,745 17.50%
Federal Way city, Washington 15,142 16.80%
Auburn city, Washington 9,634 1 12.90%
Seattle city, Washington 54,021 1 7.60%
8 I
Language City of Kent LEP % of Total City of Kent
What does that mean for Kent? cons Population (Speak English Population of —131,000
less than every well")
Spanish 6,879 5.3%
Punjabi 1,923 1.5%
■ Program receives federal funds = Translation (vital Ukrainian 1,874 1.4%
document) Vietnamese 1855 1.4%
Chinese 1,399 1.1%
Tagalog 1,153 10.8%
■ All residents eligible for program/resource = Translation
(vital documents)
■ Program serves under 5o = Written notice
b, ,. ,
■ If number of eligible participants for program is both less
than 5% (LEP eligible residents) and fewer than s,000
persons (LEP eligible) = No proactive translation required.
Yes
■ Calculation...
Does the amount of any Does the percent of LEP
LEP persons fora persons for a language
language exceed 1,000'N° exceed 5%of total �y��
people? population?
II
No
9 I
Recommendations & Decision Points
Do cus arn&rsview
■ Identify vital documents No thematerials?
Y
■ Programs directly funded by federal dollars Yea
f
■ Services & benefits that have heightened impact on residents
Is this a fern the No
■ Ex.Waiver of rights, shut-off notices, benefit applications, cus4orner toms m?
infraction notices, public hearing notices, health warnings, crime
alerts. Fez Yes Is this a notice for
free Languase
Spectrum of impact assisstancesemces7
Is this a daimor Ho
appicatian? Yes
Na
ks this a notice to reduce.
�, deny,or 4erminate
mar
4
■ Establish Internal controls ce �th6aformfor "°
Isthisa consent or
waiver of ruts? Yes
■ How are we collecting data No
Is tlhis a notice of rifts
■ Where is the data warehoused? „,s orrespansibilities?
■ Who oversees process? I tme senumem "°
timeensitiveF Yes
■ Approve Title VI Plan
Is this a notice an
something that i mpacts
■ Includes Language Access Plan No `usb3nnem?
No
■ Create a vital doc list for each dept and adopt translation L d'{
toolkit.
All documents,vita and non-vital,must he translated 10 I
upon request.
Next Steps
ELT Vetting of Title VI plan
Create or adopt process of collecting language data
using vital documents identified by departments
Monitor data
Identify and translate vital documents
Update vital document translation toolkit
Title VI as part of mandatory training
• Neogov course
Provide notice of translation & interpretation resources
Website — Professional translation of vital pages
Create Sharepoint landing page for all Title VI related
resources, including
• Document translation
• Event Interpretation
• Other translation/interpretation resource
�� I
Equity & Inclusion Plan Preview
❑ 5 Areas of Focus
Communications In-Language Res. Equitable Rep. Training Community Eng.
❑ 47 Actionable Steps
❑ 5-year plan
12 I
Actionable Step by Complexity of implementation
A� High Level � Medium Level . J
o City Procurement Process o Emergency Partners Program o Speaker Series
o Welcoming America o Co-designing Strategic plans o Cultural Conversations program
o Language access & Title VI training
o Staff training - - o Facilities welcoming environment
o Streamlined Kent Zol
o Certified Interpreter list o Representation in city marketing
o Translations of vital documents
o Removing Bias from the materials
o Standardize resident data collection
application process o BIPOC Business List o Purchasing interpretation
nterpretation
o Community Engagement Best o Increase Multilingual staff equipment
Practices o Language data collection o Comms team attending BIPOC
o Retaining diverse staff led/focused meetings
o Non-profit candidate referral o Mayor — Community meetings
Thank You!
- = r
}
k.
t�z f
GRACIAS !
14 I
PUBLIC SAFETY
�. City Council Retreat
February 3, Zo23
STAFFING
Where We Were
Officers Per Thousand Part 1 Crimes per Officer: 2018
Residents 42 31 4.4.79
45.00 .24 39.19
• Seattle = 1 .9/thousand ( 1405) 40.00
35.00 30.49
• Everett = 1 .87/thousand (206) 30.00 26.06 26.09
25.00
• Tacoma = 1 . 68 (356) 20.00
15.00
Auburn = 1 . 5 ( 119) 10.00
5.00
Federal Way = 1 . 38 ( 137) 0.00
Bellevue = 1 . 32 ( 18 7) lee
Renton = 1 . 24 ( 129)
Kent = 1 . 24 ( 165)
GROWTH SINCE 20i8
Sworn Officers
2018 = 157 authorized
2019 = 160 authorized
2020 = 165 authorized (then reduced to
160 because of Covid budget impacts )
2021 = 160 authorized
2022 = 166 authorized ( Co- responder plus 5
unfrozen )
2023 = 166 authorized
\ 2024 = 166 authorized
WHERE WE ARE
City Population Sworn Ofc per 1k Unofficial data notes
Tukwila 21615 77 3.56
Everett 110812 201 1.81 now 209
Lynwood 40592 70 1.72
Seattle 733919 1200 1.64
Tacoma 219205 336 1.53
Spokane 229071 346 1.51
Federal Way 101131 137 1.35 adding 13 officers
Des Moines 32689 44 1.35 *policel
Auburn 85699 115 1.34
Bellingham 92289 120 1.30
Olympia 55919 70 1.25 *policel
Bellevue 149440 186 1.24
Vancouver 192169 236 1.23
Renton 105179 129 1.23
Kent 137900 166 1.20
Kirkland 92107 108 1.17
Redmond 76354 78 1.02
WHERE WE NEED TO GO ?
HIRING
' Overcoming the historical staffing shortage
Elevating our diversity
Building a culture of DE1
Overcoming Historical Staffing Shortage
Examined entire process and made significant changes
Support from Mayor and City Council
Dedicated significant resources
Innovated
• Put in the work
Elevating our Diversity
New faces
New places
New focus
New Outcomes
Building a Culture of DEI
Community Immersion Law Enforcement Program (CELIP)
Aligned DEI Officer position to the recruiting, hiring and
onboarding process
Launched New Initiatives
Developed KPD Specific Training
DIRECTION FOR 2023
Four Primary Department-Wide Goals
Integration and Development of New Personnel and Newly Assigned
Personnel
Elevate our effectiveness in serving and protecting the community
3 Develop a wellness plan for employees
Develop a Strategic Plan for 2024-2029 Personnel and Newly Assigned
Personnel
QUESTIONS ?