Loading...
03/21/2012 - Special - MinutesCity of Port Orchard Council Meeting Minutes Special Meeting of March 21, 2012 3:00p.m. Call to Order Mayor Matthes called the meeting to order at 3:00p.m. Mayor Pro-Tem Jerry Childs and Councilmembers Cindy Lucarelli, Jim Colebank, and Carolyn Powers were present. Interim City Clerk Brandy Rinearson was also present. 1. Lobbyist Update: Gordon Thomas Honeywell Governmental Affairs (GTHGA) Briahna Taylor, City's Lobbyist with Gordon Thomas Honeywell Governmental Affairs, stated the City has directed GTH GA top legislative priorities be capital and transportation funding requests. As such, most of the Olympia advocacy centered on positioning the City requests for funding, which is expected to carry over into future years (particularly in the transportation arena). Bay Street Pedestrian Path While not originally included on the City's legislative agenda, GTHGA learned of an opportunity for capital funding and began working on a funding request for Bay Street Pedestrian Pathway. This is an example of how daily presence in Olympia can often lead to funding opportunities for the City. After learning about the opportunity for capital funding, they worked with the delegation to submit a couple different capital budget requests -the Bay Street Pedestrian Pathway best fit the criteria that legislators had developed. When the original Capital Budgets were released, the Senate included funding for the project, but the House did not. GTHGA worked to have the project included in the compromise version of the budget. As part of this effort, the Mayor made calls to the delegation reinforcing the request -the Mayor's active involvement helped out advocacy efforts and his time and attention to advancing the funding request was appreciated. Unfortunately, the passage of a final capital budget is dependent on operating budget negotiations. The capital budget is continually being renegotiated, and they continue to work with the delegation to ensure that the Bay Street Pedestrian Pathway remains in the budget. At this time, the current proposed compromise Capital Budget contains $soo,ooo for Bay Street Pedestrian Pathway. It is unknown when we the finalized version of the budget will be presented. Tremont Street Through many changing factors, there were no funding opportunities for transportation projects this year. Throughout the legislative interim, the Governor convened the Connecting Washington workgroup to assess the State's transportation needs and recommend transportation funding options. The plan was to develop a large transportation revenue package and fund projects throughout the state. Given this plan, GTHGA began working on a funding request to improve Tremont Street. They met with members of the delegation and informed them about the project and closely followed the development of the transportation revenue proposal. Connecting Washington presented a report to the Governor recommending a $20 billion transportation revenue package largely funded by a gas tax increase. Instead of accepting the recommendation, the Governor refocused around a smaller transportation fee package that did not require voter approval. This did not provide the same level of funding March 21, 2012, Special Council Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 5 opportunities. Any appropriations made under this smaller proposal would be for engineering and design, and would be for lesser amounts (mostly under $1 million). The Tremont Street funding request did not meet these criteria's. The project cannot be phased, meaning that the City would need to receive a significant portion of the total cost of the project ($14 million) in order for the funding to helpful. This level of funding was not available in a smaller transportation package. GTHGA anticipates that a large transportation revenue package will still be brought forward in 2013 or 2014 -without it, transportation infrastructure throughout the state will begin to deteriorate. GTHGA efforts this year have laid the groundwork for a request in future legislative sessions. In moving forward, GTHGA recommends that this funding request remain on the City's legislative agenda, and that they combine these funding requests with requests to the Transportation Improvement Board, PSRC, and other grant agencies to secure funding from multiple sources. Operating Budget Impacts In November, the Governor proposed cutting local government revenues. The City of Port Orchard received the following appropriations from the state: • Municipal Criminal Justice Funding: $18,964 • Liquor Profit Funding: $77,920 • Liquor Taxes: $50,871 Had the Governor's proposal been enacted, the City would have experienced a reduction of $147,755 in its general fund. GTHGA lobbied against these cuts. The House and Senate took different approaches on whether these should be cut. The original House proposal cut these revenues, and then provided local jurisdictions (cities and counties) with councilmanic authority to increase taxes. This approach was later abandoned. The Senate proposed making a so% cut to liquor excise taxes, and excess liquor profits (NOTE: Liquor excess profits are NOT the $77,920 that the City has previously received; they are the additional profit expected to be generated by I-1183; if the state left the account alone, the City would actually receive more money than previous years). GTHGA has been lobbying against cuts to local revenues, and advocating that any cuts that are made be temporary in nature. These negotiations are ongoing throughout Special Session. Below is the status liquor taxes and excess profits in the two most current versions of the budget: Senate Bipartisan Budget, House Democrat Budget, passed released :l/15 House3/8 Liquor Prqfits & Excise Taxes Moves excess liquor profits to the Moves excess liquor profits to the general fund (these are the additional general fund (these are the additional profits projected to be generated by I-profits projected to be generated by I- 1183). This would be permanent. 1183). This would be temporary. Reduces Liquor Excise taxes $28.8 Reduces Liquor Excise Taxes by $29.1 March 21, 2012, Special Council Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 5 million (roughly so%), effective in the 2013 biennium. This would be temporary. Public Facility District Legislation million (applies to full fiscal year, meaning the cut would start in 2012 - specific time dependent on when budget is enacted). This would be tern ora . As part of an ongoing long-term effort to eventually have the Kitsap County Public Facility District fund a new project in Port Orchard, GTH GA has been advocating for additional Public Facility District funding. House Bill 2539, sponsored by Rep. Timm Ormsby (D- Spokane), extends the credit against the state sales tax that public facility districts (PFD) currently receive. The bill allows existing PFDs, including the Kitsap County Public Facility District, to receive additional money and do more projects. It would also allow PFDs to refinance their bonds to lower their payments. Earlier this year, the Wenatchee Public Facility District defaulted, making many legislators hesitant to support this legislation. This reticence prevented the bill from moving forward during the regular session. GTH GA continues to advocate for the concept during the Special Session. Most recently, there is a last-ditch effort to have the bill included as part of a Jobs Agenda. Public Records Legislation GTH-GA began working on Public Records Act reform during the interim. During the December special session, a meeting of all the stakeholders was held. As a result of that meeting, city, county, and port interests developed a proposal. Senate Bill 6351, sponsored by Sen. Margarita Prentice (D-Renton), would have extended injunction authority that currently applies to public records requests from inmates to overly burdensome public records requests. It would have also helped smaller jurisdictions by allowing them to limit the number of hours spent on public records as long as certain documents are posted to the jurisdiction's website. Unfortunately, the bill got a leadership hold put on it and died in the Senate Rules Committee. There is an ongoing effort to continue to have this issue addressed during the interim. GTHGA recommends that the City continue to have this included as part of the legislative agenda. Progress will only be made with persistence. Newspaper Notifications The effort to amend newspaper notification requirements was part of a larger effort to offer local governments cost savings measures; see below under additional legislative issues. Additional Legislative Issues: New Local Government Funding Options House Bil12801, sponsored by Rep. Sam Hunt (D-Olympia) contained language that cut a number of state-shared revenues, some cost savings provisions from House Bill2641, and also contained new local government funding options, including: • Authorizes cities and counties to impose a sales tax up to 0.5 percent on food and beverages sold by restaurants, taverns, and bars. • Eliminates the voter-approval requirement for the 0.1 percent county sales tax for building and operating juvenile detention facilities. March 21, 2012, Special Council Meeting Minutes Page4 ofs • Eliminates the voter-approval requirement for the 0.3 percent local public safety sales and use tax. • Authorizes counties to impose up to a 6 percent utility tax. • Allows local fees related to the administration of the State Environmental Policy Act to cover staffing, administration, and facilities associated with application processing. • Authorizes cities to accept credit cards, debit cards, and other types of electronic payments. If any of these tools would be particularly helpful to the City of Port Orchard, GTHGA recommends maldng them a legislative priority for next year. Cost Savings Measures In anticipation of cuts to local government revenues, the city and county associations worked to compile a list of statutory changes that would saves local governments money. The result of those efforts was House Bill 2641, sponsored by Rep. Larry Springer (D- Kirkland), and Senate Bil16372, sponsored by Senator Dan Swecker (R-Rochester). In its original form, the bill included the following provisions: • Audits -Local governments are audited once every 3 years unless: (a) To address suspected fraud or irregular conduct; (b) At the request of the local government governing body; (c) As required by federal laws or regulations; OR (d) that had a finding involving a significant violation of state law or weakness in internal controls in the preceding year. • Binding Interest Arbitration Changes -When an arbitrator is called upon, he or she may not rely on or give undue consideration to past arbitration decisions when making a determination, but shall consider the following criteria: (a) The constitutional and statutory authority of the employer; (b) The budget priorities, as determined by the governing body; (c) Financial and budgetary constraints; (d) Internal equity within the organization among employee pay and benefits; • Use of Volunteers -Collective Bargaining Use of them by cities and counties is excluded in bargaining, this bill would allow it. • Low Income Housing Impact Fee Waiver (HB 1398 which passed the House last session 80-10-8 excused) Removes requirement that cities/counties imposing such fees have to replace the revenue iflow-income units are exempted. • Stormwater and Low Impact Development -Provides legislative direction on what should be in the next Municipal Phase II Permit -incentives vs. requirements. • Seatbelts Admissible in Civil Actions -Whether or not seatbelts are worn in an accident becomes admissible in court. • Workgroup to explore Public Health Efficiency Recommendations • Published Ordinances - A summary published in the paper of record and notation of website for more information. Hard copy available upon request. Neither the House or Senate bill advanced out of committee. There were too many controversial portions of the bill to garner support for the bill. If any of these cost savings would be particularly helpful to the City of Port Orchard, GTHGA recommends making them a legislative priority for next year. Medical Cannabis March 21, 2012, Special Council Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 5 Senate Bill 6265, sponsored by Sen. Kohl-Welles (D-Seattle), attempted to clarify the state law on medical marijuana. This bill would have allowed the City of Port Orchard to choose to not have medical marijuana dispensaries within city boundaries, but would have required the City to have collective gardens. It also would have given the City explicit authority to zone and regulate both dispensaries and collective gardens. Mter a series of amendments were proposed on the bill, the Senate chose to never bring Senate Bill 6265 up for a vote and the bill died. Given this outcome, jurisdictions will continue to function with the legally murky statutes that were enacted after the last legislative session. The City did not take an official position on this legislation. It is likely to come forward in future years. SEPA Reform This issue continues to be worked on during special session. Last legislative session, there was an effort to modernize the SEPA process . While that effort failed, it led to an interim working group on SEPA. GTH-GA participated in the interim working group, which held a number of subcommittee meetings. Resulting from this work group was House Bill 2253, prime sponsored by Rep. Joe Fitzgibbon (D-Burien). The bill went through a number of iterations. Toward the end of the legislative session, the bill was amended into Senate Bill 6406, which is an omnibus natural resources reform bill. This bill also did not pass during regular session, but is being discussed during special session. Transportation Revenue Options: Senate Bill 6582 Senate Bill 6582, sponsored by Senator Mary Margaret Haugen (D-Camano Island) provides local governments with transportation options. During regular session, the bill passed both the House and Senate and a conference committee report was negotiated. The transition from regular session to special session moves the bill b ack to the Senate Rules Committee. The Governor included this bill as one of the bills that can be brought up this legislative session. The conference report version of the bill is now being negotiated. Th e following is what the bill currently includes and what is being discussed: A $20 to $40 councilmatic vehicle fee increase for city-only transportation benefit districts (counties were left out). It appears that this was an error, and it will be changed to include both cities and counties. Included a 1% MVET for counties over 400,000 in population. This revenue can only be used on public transportation purposes (i.e. trans it). Discussion s around which counties are given this authority -there is interest in narrowing this to King, Snohomish, and Pierce . Next Work Study Session-Tuesday, April17, 2012 e meeting was adjourned. hes, Mayor