Loading...
12/04/2000 - Special - Minutes-Special Session• • Port Orchard, Washington December 4, 2000 Council of the City of Port Orchard, Washington, called to Special Session by Mayor Leslie J. Weatherill at 7:30 P.M. Councilmembers present: Clauson, Wyatt, Geiger. Powers. Van Zee, and Stansbery. Staff Present: City Treasurer Tompkins, City Engineer Curies, Police Chief Townsend, Court Administrator Hunt, and City Clerk Parks. Mayor Weatherill informed those present the purpose of this Special Session is to hold a Public Hearing to discuss and receive input on the City of Port Orchard's proposed 2001 Budget. Mayor Weatherill requested Councilman Geiger, Chair of Finance Committee, review proposed 2001 budget allocations. Councilman Geiger reviewed proposed year 2001 budget allocations as discussed at the November 27, 2000 Budget Study Session. Mayor Weatherill called for public input on proposed budget allocations, as no response was received, Mayor Weatherill closed the public input portion of the Public Hearing and referred proposed 2001 budget to Council for discussion. Councilman Van Zee questioned how proposed budget allocations for the Municipal Court, attorney legal fees and city hall facilities expense compare with year 2000 budget allocation and expenditures. City Treasurer Tompkins confirmed there are not significant budget increases within the Municipal Court [Judge!. The attorney legal fee 2001 allocation has increased due to separate contracts for city attorney services and city prosecutor services. The City Engineer will provide a summarized itemization of expenses for the city hall facility. Councilman Stansbery questioned status of Health Promotion Committee and potential restructure. The Health Promotion Committee is discussing potential changes, however no specific information was available Councilman Clauson stated the City has received a $6500 settlement from the LP siding litigation (Fire Station 31 building). These funds are contained in the proposed 2001 budget and reminded staff and council members that Fire District 7 will be looking at repair/replacement alternative for the fire station siding during 2001. By Council consensus the City Treasurer was directed to draft the Year 2001 budget ordinance based upon the expenditure changes presented for discussion (exhibit A) including two recommendations presented at the November 27, 2000 Budget. The draft ordinance will be presented to Council at the regular meeting December 11, 2000 for consideration. ~ Spoci" '"";' H~riog """' m '" e~~.-----::? Patricia Parks, City Clerk Leslie J. Weatherill, Mayor • EXPENDITURE CHANGES: Current Expense: Building Repair Funds COLA from 3.3% to 3.5% Financial Software Package Additional Jail Costs Home Monitoring Costs Cen-Com Adjustment Police Records Clerk to Full Time Salary Police Records Clerk to Full Time Benefits Replace Police Portable Radios New Police Officer (One or Two w/Grant) Salary New Police Officer (One or Two w/Grant) Benefits New Police Officer Uniforms New Police Officer Fuel Police Car Fund Transfer Active Club Tables & Chairs New Banners for Bay Street Givens Restroom Central Playfield Corner Replace Truck #7 Replace Big Toy at Active Club Truck Mounted Water Tank Riding Mower Replacement Funds Nuisance Abatement Downtown Flowers & Ground Cover Salary Survey Phase in Implementation of Salary Survey Assistant Engineer Salary Assistant Engineer Benefits New Public Works Employee Salary (Parks 34%) New Public Works Employee Benefits (Parks 34%) Engineer Vehicle Street: Replace PW Portable Radios New Parking G0-4 Downtown Sidewalk Replacement Plan Remove Street 3/4 ton Pickup Truck New Parking Enforcement Salary (1/2 time) New Parking Enforcement Benefits (1/2 time) New Parking Enforcement Uniform New Parking Enforcement Fuel Fund 001 001/101 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001/101 001 001 001 001 001 101 101 101 101 101 101 101 101 • December 4, 2000 Page 2 of 3 EXHIBIT A Proposed Revision 7,000.00 5,400.00 80,000.00 8,000.00 (8,500.00) (8,698.00) 10,548.00 7,384.00 9,000.00 42,251.00 14,788.00 4,000.00 1,000.00 20,000.00 2,500.00 1,000.00 47,300.00 9,000.00 20,000.00 8,000.00 2,000.00 8,000.00 10,000.00 3,000.00 15,000.00 56,700.00 39,853.00 13,949.00 11,453.00 4,008.00 25,000.00 1,300.00 20,000.00 50,000.00 (20,000.00) 12,300.00 1,960.00 200.00 300.00 • New Parking Enforcement Tickets REVENUE CHANGES: Balance Not Budgeted Cash Carryover Increase Sales Tax Increase Housing & Monitoring of Prisoners Givens Restroom Grant Sale of Fixed Asset (G0-4 to W/S) Contract with County -Parking Enforcement EXPENDITURE CHANGES: Water -Sewer Remove Well #7 Rehabilitation New Public Works Employee Salary (66%) New Public Works Employee Benefits (66%) G0-4 Purchase from Street Additional $$ Improvements to Marina Pump Station Restrooms Phase in Implementation of Salary Survey REVENUE CHANGES: Cash Carryover Increase PROJECTS TO BE CARRIED OVER TO 2001 lntergraph Police Software Mobile Data Terminals State Distribution for 1-695 Loss Street Sweeper Tremont Signal Synchronization • 101 401 401 401 401 401 401 001 001 001 101 102 Additional recommendations presented at November 27, 2000 Budget Study Session: December 4, 2000 Page 3 of 3 740.00 5,060.00 318,176.00 150,000.00 (3,000.00) 40,000.00 10,000.00 15,500.00 (30,000.00) 22,200.00 7,800.00 2,000.00 3,000.00 13,150.00 18,150.00 40,000.00 20,000.00 40,663.00 125,700.00 12,000.00 (1) Increase proposed allocation of $1,000 for "New Banners for Bay Streef' to $2,000. Councilman Clauson stated he did not believe the proposed amount of $1,000 would be sufficient to replace the number of banners located on Bay Street; and (2) Add $3,500 to start a Council Presentation System Acquisition/Replacement Account. This would provide for future purchase of a Pan & Zoom Lens or other equipment to maintain or enhance the presentation system. • • Port Orchard, Washington December 4, 2000 Council of the City of Port Orchard, Washington, called to order for a Study Session by Mayor Leslie Weatherill at 7:45PM at City Hall, 216 Prospect Street. Council members present: Clauson, Wyatt, Geiger, Powers, VanZee, and Stansbery. Staff present: City Treasurer Tompkins, City Engineer Curies, and City Clerk Parks. Mayor Weatherill announced the purpose of this Study Session is to provide an opportunity for the City-County Revenue Sharing Ad Hoc Committee to review and discuss the draft Revenue Sharing Proposal (Exhibit A) Councilman Van Zee reported on Revenue Sharing Ad Hoc Committee lengthy meeting process and introduced Mary McClure (KRCC) and Michael Hodgins of Berk & Associates the consulting firm that worked with KRCC and the Ad Hoc Committee to develop Revenue Sharing Proposal. Ms. McClure reported two activities; Part 1 -Annexations and Part 2 -New construction, intensification, or relocation of existing businesses within the Urban Grow1h Areas would implement revenue sharing. Councilmembers discussed under the proposed revenue sharing plan for annexations payment would ftow from the city to the County over a three year period with 75% year 1, 50% year 2, and 25% year 3. For new construction, intensification or relocation of existing businesses within the urban grow1h areas payment would ftow from the county to the city on the same three year 75/50/25% soft landing approach used in the case annexations. For every other major land use decision (in the county), the amount of the payment will be based on 50% of the estimated sales tax revenues for three years after occupancy. Council discussion resulted in two recommended changes; (1) Part 1 Annexations amend item 1 to read. "The City confirms its willingness ami iAteAtieA to eventually annex all land within its Urban Grow1h Area Boundary, recognizing that annexation requires approval of property owners or voters with the annexing area; and (2) clarify section relative to 'The Cities agree to share revenue from all annexations as follows: 1. Revenue sharing payment will be based on actual county collections within the annexation area during the year preceding the annexation, from the following sources ... " Michael Hodgins reviewed handouts titled "Estimated Impact of Annexation Agreement on Cities and County" illustrating the financial impact on affected cities and the county. Mr. Hodgins highlighted the point that all annexations will have unique individual issues regarding special services or infrastructure within it boundaries such as county parks (who will maintain and own), transition of roads, etc. Mayor Weatherill called for a 10 minute recess reconvening study session at 8:42 PM. Council members addressed Part 2 relative to "New construction, intensification, or relocation of existing businesses within the Urban Grow1h Areas". Part 2 sets threshold for implementation of Part 2 (payment by the County to a City) as any new development that houses any single retail tenant greater than 40,000 square feet. Councilmembers questioned the 40,000 square feet questioning typical square footage of new commercial construction within the South Kitsap area. Ms. McClure will verify square footage of the new Stapes, Office Depot, Walgreen's, and Rite Aid which are located in the Bethel/Lund intersection area, Council consensus was to recommend square footage threshold based on average area of these retail stores. It was also clarified that under item "2" of Part 2 the "estimated sales tax revenues" would not be based on actual sales tax receipts, but will be based upon industry standards (adjusted for Kitsap Standards as established by a committee of Finance Staff from affected jurisdictions). • • December 4, 2000 Page 2 of 2 Ms. McClure reported she would present the Port Orchard. City Council's recommended changes at KRCC meeting scheduled for December 6. Council confirmed they are prepared to proceed with consideration of the Revenue Sharing lnterlocal Agreement. Meeting adjourned at approximately 9:18 p.m. ~~ Leslie J. Weatherill, Mayor Patricia Parks, City Clerk REVENUE SHARIG PROPOSAL Part 1 ANNEXATIONS • December 4, 2000 Study Session Exhibit "A" The intent of the annexation revenue sharing agreement is to provide a framework for logical and orderly annexations that are consistent with GMA and to mitigate the fiscal impact to the County of future annexations. The agreement would apply to all Kitsap Cities and Kitsap County and would begin upon adoption of the interlocal agreement implementing revenue sharing. The agreements shall provide for the following: r.::\1'A \(~ 1. The City confirms its willingnes~As iAte~tiorjto eventually annex all land within its Urban Growth Area boundary, recognizing that annexation requires approval of property owners or voters within the annexing area. 2. The City shall encourage annexation of all lands equally, and will support logical and coordinated annexations consistent with the intent of GMA. 3. The County and Cities will address coordinated development in the UGA's, as part of the 2001 KRCC Work Program, including infrastructure standards and funding. Prior to constructing major infrastructure improvements in an unincorporated UGA, the County and City will negotiate an interlocal agreement specifying the level of reimbursement to the County for a portion of its investment, should the area be annexed within a specified period of time. 4. KRCC shall report annually on all activity relating to this agreement, including annexation actions and revenue sharing 5. KRCC and member jurisdictions shall review this revenue sharing agreement within 3 years after adoption and then every 5 years thereafter. 6. As part of this agreement, the County will not oppose annexations nor invite the Boundary Review Board to invoke jurisdiction. The Cities agree to share revenue from all annexations as follows: ~~ 1. Revenue sharing payments will be based on a~ons within the annexation area during the year preceding the annexation, from the following sources: • Sales tax (city portion of local sales tax) • Road levy • Admissions tax 2. The amount of the payment will be based on a three year "soft landing" approach whereby the Year 1 payment will be 75% of lost revenue (as defined above), the Year 2 payment will be 50% of lost revenue and the Year 3 payment will be 25% of lost revenue. Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council 12/4/00 1 :32 PM Page 1 REVENUE SHARI,G PROPOSAL • Part 2 NEW CONSTRUCTION, INTENSIFICATION, OR RELOCATION OF EXISTING BUSINESSES WITHIN THE URBAN GROWTH AREAS The intent of the major land use revenue sharing agreement is to recognize the fact that retail development near jurisdictional boundaries does have an impact on neighboring jurisdictions. In particular, there are impacts to existing businesses and on the demand for public services and facilities. This agreement is designed to mitigate these impacts by sharing sales tax revenues from the new development or relocation of existing businesses with the affected neighboring jurisdiction. This agreement applies to major land use decisions within unincorporated UGA's. This section applies to Kitsap County and would begin upon adoption of the revenue sharing agreement for developments in the unincorporated UGA's. For the purposes of this agreement, a major land use decision is defined as any new development that houses any single retail tenant greater than 40,000 square feet. New or relocated automobile, truck, recreational vehicle, and boat dealerships are automatically included regardless of the size of the building permitted. Revenue sharing will begin in the first full year after occupancy of the development or relocation. Revenue sharing will only apply with respect to sales tax revenues generated from the new or relocated 40,000+ square foot retail tenant(s). Recognizing the confidentiality limitations of using actual sales tax collections from the new or relocated development, the revenue sharing payment will be based on estimated sales tax revenues using Kitsap-based industry standards for taxable retail sales-per-square-foot for a range of retail business types. The revenue sharing payment will vary according to whether the new development will house a relocating major business. The payment will be calculated according to the following formulas and will be made from Kitsap County to the affected neighboring City: 1. For a relocation of a major retail business within Kitsap County, the amount of the payment will be based on the same 75%-50%-25%, three-year "soft landing" approach used in the case of annexations. 2. For every other major land use decision, the amount of the payment will be based on 50% of the estimated sales tax revenues for three years after occupancy. 3. KRCC, in collaboration with the County and Cities, shall track the actual sales tax revenue generated by any mini malls that are built in the incorporated or unincorporated Urban Growth Areas as input to the review of this revenue sharing agreement within 3 years of its adoption. Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council 12/4/00 1 :32 PM Page2