HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-08-2021 CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION AGENDACity Council Study Session Muni
Serv ices S FA
March 8, 2021 - 5:30 P M
Virtual
A GE NDA
Watch the meeting L I V E !
Watch the meeting video
Meeting videos are not available until 72
hours after the meeting has concluded.
I .C A L L TO O R D E R
I I .Virtual Participation L ink
A .Virtual Participation L ink
The A uburn City Council Meeting scheduled for Monday, March 8, 2021 at 5:30 p.m.
will be held virtually and telephonically. To attend the meeting virtually please click the
link or enter the meeting I D into the Z oom app or call into the meeting at the phone
number listed below.
P er Governor I nslee's Emergency P roclamation 20-05 and 20-28 et. seq.
and S tay Safe-S tay Healthy, the City of Auburn is prohibited from holding in-person
meetings at this time.
City of Auburn Resolution No. 5581, designates City of Auburn meeting locations for
all Regular, Special and S tudy S ession Meetings of the City Council and of the
Committees, B oards and Commissions of the City as Virtual L ocations until
Washington’s Governor authorizes local governments to conduct in-person meetings.
The link to the Virtual Meeting or phone number to listen to the Council Meeting is:
J oin from a P C, Mac, iPad, iP hone or A ndroid device:
P lease click this UR L to join. https://zoom.us/j/91973449315
Or join by phone:
253 215 8782
877 853 5257 (Toll F ree)
Webinar I D: 919 7344 9315
B .Roll Call
I I I .A G E ND A I T E MS F O R C O UNC I L D I S C US S I O N
A .4th Quarter 2020 F inancial Report (T homas)(30 Minutes)
Page 1 of 109
B .K ing County Population P rojections (Tate)(15 Minutes)
I ntroductory briefing by King County planning staff, Rebeccah Maskin, K ing County’s
efforts, and A uburn’s role in those efforts, to fulfill planning requirements associated
with the state’s Growth Management A ct
I V.MUNI C I PA L S E RV I C E S D I S C US S I O N I T E MS
A .2020 I nspectional Services Reports (O'Neil)(30 Minutes)
V.O T HE R D I S C US S I O N I T E MS
V I .NE W B US I NE S S
V I I .A D J O UR NME NT
Agendas and minutes are available to the public at the City Clerk's Office, on the City website
(http://www.auburnwa.gov), and via e-mail. Complete agenda packets are available for review
at the City Clerk's Office.
Page 2 of 109
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
4th Quarter 2020 Financial Report (Thomas)(30 Minutes)
Date:
March 1, 2021
Department:
Finance
Attachments:
Q4 2020 Report
Budget Impact:
Administrativ e Recommendation:
For discussion only.
Background Summary:
The financial report summarizes the general state of Citywide financial affairs and highlights
significant items or trends that the City Council should be aware of. The attachment provides
the year-to-date through December 31, 2020 status report based on financial data available
as of January 28, 2021. Sales tax information represents business activity that occurred
November 2019 - October 2020.
Rev iewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Staff:Thomas
Meeting Date:March 8, 2021 Item Number:
Page 3 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020
General Fund Summary
$1.1
$3.6
$4.8 $3.5 $2.9
$5.3
$1.1
$4.6
$30.8
$4.4
$12.7
$3.9
$6.8
$1.0
$3.4
$4.3 $3.1 $2.4
$4.3
$1.0
$4.6
$28.5
$3.6
$10.8
$3.5 $2.8
Council& MayorAdministrativeServicesHumanResourcesFinanceCity AttorneyCommunityDevelopmentCommunity &Human ServicesJail - SCOREPolicePublicWorksParks, Arts& RecreationStreetsNon-Departmental$0
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
$30
$35
$40
Millions2020
Budget
2020
Actuals
(Favorable)
2020
Actuals
(Unfavorable)
General Fund Expenditures by Department(Through December 2020)
$22.0
$17.7
$13.5
$9.3
$0.7 $1.5
$6.1 $5.8
$50.5
$24.9
$9.4
$0.5
$22.4 $21.4
$14.2
$10.2
$1.0 $1.6
$6.8
$42.6
$20.8
$9.4
$0.4
$3.4
PropertyTaxesSalesTaxesOtherTaxesIntergovernmental(Grants, etc.)DevelopmentService FeesCulture &RecreationOther Fees& ChargesOtherRevenuesPersonnelSupplies& ServicesOtherExpendituresTransfersOutRevenues Expenditures
$0
$10
$20
$30
$40
$50
$60
Millions2020
Budget
2020
Actuals
(Favorable)
2020
Actuals
(Unfavorable)
General Fund Revenues and Expenditures
(Through December 2020)$76.5 $85.4$81.1 $73.1
Total
Revenues
Total
Expenditures
$0
$20
$40
$60
$80
$100
Millions1 Page 4 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 2
General Fund 2019
Summary of Sources and Uses Annual YE YE YE
Budget Budget Actual Actual Amount
Operating Revenues
Property Tax 7 22,000,000$ 22,000,000$ 22,445,340$ 21,907,038$ 445,340$ 2.0 %
Retail Sales Tax 8-9 15,576,200 15,576,200 18,855,889 18,766,215 3,279,689 21.1 %
Affordable Housing Sales Tax Credit 150,000 150,000 149,445 98 (555)(0.4)%
Sales Tax - Pierce County Parks 110,800 110,800 111,038 110,860 238 0.2 %
Sales Tax - Annexation Credit - - - 373,279 0 N/A
Criminal Justice Sales Tax 1,910,000 1,910,000 2,265,134 2,415,647 355,134 18.6 %
Brokered Natural Gas Tax 131,000 131,000 151,369 225,847 20,369 15.5 %
City Utilities Tax 9-10 4,521,700 4,521,700 4,540,292 4,103,107 18,592 0.4 %
Admissions Tax 10-11 252,800 252,800 209,091 444,678 (43,709)(17.3)%
Electric Tax 9-10 4,024,400 4,024,400 4,206,456 3,535,407 182,056 4.5 %
Natural Gas Tax 9-10 1,201,900 1,201,900 1,254,700 927,187 52,800 4.4 %
Cable Franchise Fee 904,000 904,000 902,977 923,506 (1,023)(0.1)%
Cable Utility Tax 1,135,100 1,135,100 1,149,682 974,747 14,582 1.3 %
Cable Franchise Fee - Capital 65,000 65,000 61,346 64,263 (3,654)(5.6)%
Telephone Tax 9-10 981,900 981,900 1,122,804 935,324 140,904 14.4 %
Solid Waste Tax (external)9-10 154,600 154,600 231,046 148,706 76,446 49.4 %
Leasehold Excise Tax 51,000 51,000 224,090 211,916 173,090 339.4 %
Gambling Excise Tax 11 82,100 82,100 109,986 374,082 27,886 34.0 %
Taxes sub-total 53,252,500$ 53,252,500$ 57,990,683$ 56,441,907$ 4,738,183$ 8.9 %
Business License Fees 12 328,000$ 328,000$ 353,802$ 336,359$ 25,802$ 7.9 %
Building Permits 13 720,000 720,000 835,588 1,232,743 115,588 16.1 %
Other Licenses & Permits 551,300 551,300 897,189 1,074,402 345,889 62.7 %
Intergovernmental (Grants, etc.)14-15 9,274,170 9,274,170 10,223,904 6,038,639 949,734 10.2 %
Charges for Services:15-17
General Government Services 15 2,823,620 2,823,620 2,971,348 2,636,527 147,728 5.2 %
Public Safety 15-16 964,000 964,000 1,109,581 1,213,112 145,581 15.1 %
Development Services Fees 15-16 650,000 650,000 955,824 1,098,969 305,824 47.0 %
Culture and Recreation 15, 17 1,512,380 1,512,380 1,638,185 2,600,103 125,805 8.3 %
Fines and Penalties 17-18 668,500 668,500 635,209 914,240 (33,291) (5.0)%
Fees/Charges/Fines sub-total 17,491,970$ 17,491,970$ 19,620,631$ 17,145,093$ 2,128,661$ 12.2 %
Interest and Investment Earnings 19 700,700$ 700,700$ 506,385$ 406,802$ (194,315)$ (27.7)%
Rents and Leases 19 517,600 517,600 432,432 938,457 (85,168)(16.5)%
Contributions and Donations 19 46,200 46,200 30,945 41,321 (15,255)(33.0)%
Other Miscellaneous 19 230,800 230,800 200,414 386,132 (30,386)(13.2)%
Transfers In 4,081,527 4,081,527 2,081,527 120,456 (2,000,000)(49.0)%
Insurance Recoveries - Capital & Operating 179,250 179,250 189,322 127,895 10,072 5.6 %
Other Revenues sub-total 5,756,077$ 5,756,077$ 3,441,025$ 2,021,063$ (2,315,052)$ (40.2)%
Total Operating Revenues 76,500,547$ 76,500,547$ 81,052,339$ 75,608,062$ 4,551,792$ 6.0 %
Operating Expenditures
Council & Mayor 1,057,296$ 1,057,296$ 950,412.30$ 1,009,480$ 106,884$ 10.1 %
Administration 3,578,081 3,578,081 3,408,641 2,429,605 169,440 4.7 %
Human Resources 1,767,704 1,767,704 1,598,724 1,530,153 168,980 9.6 %
Municipal Court & Probation 3,074,111 3,074,111 2,675,734 3,003,011 398,377 13.0 %
Finance 3,518,178 3,518,178 3,086,689 3,339,183 431,489 12.3 %
City Attorney 2,894,572 2,894,572 2,360,532 2,566,977 534,040 18.4 %
Community Development 5,349,088 5,349,088 4,294,915 4,072,172 1,054,173 19.7 %
Community & Human Services (Comm Devel)1,055,484 1,055,484 992,927 1,030,651 62,557 5.9 %
Jail - SCORE 4,601,000 4,601,000 4,565,099 4,962,413 35,901 0.8 %
Police 30,763,024 30,763,024 28,456,544 28,234,921 2,306,480 7.5 %
Public Works 4,426,341 4,426,341 3,628,787 3,729,378 797,554 18.0 %
Parks, Arts & Recreation 12,673,216 12,673,216 10,770,987 12,576,009 1,902,229 15.0 %
Streets 3,858,677 3,858,677 3,546,286 3,638,316 312,391 8.1 %
Non-Departmental 6,811,133 6,811,133 2,750,054 1,919,610 4,061,079 59.6 %
Total Operating Expenditures 85,427,905$ 85,427,905$ 73,086,331$ 74,041,879$ 12,341,574$ 14.4 %
Page
Ref
2020 2020 YE Budget vs. Actual
Favorable (Unfavorable)
Percentage
2 Page 5 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 3
Executive Summary
This report provides an overview of the City’s overall financial position for the fiscal period ending
December 31, 2020, reflecting financial data available as of January 28, 2021.
General Fund:
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many General Fund revenues declined due to the Governor’s
“Stay Home, Stay Healthy” order that effectively closed all non-essential businesses in March
2020. While King County had since progressed to Phase 2, reopening in mid-2020, by November
the Governor had enacted additional restrictions based on the increased rate of COVID-19
infections. Therefore, revenues through the end of 2020 were still being unfavorably impacted
compared to what would be considered normal activity. The revenue categories that were
primarily impacted by the pandemic included admission tax, gambling tax, culture and recreation,
and rents and leases. In light of the economic impacts of COVID-19, the City adjusted some
General Fund revenue budgets downward to reflect new expectations for 2020. At the same time,
the City also implemented expenditure reductions with the goal of closing the expected revenue
gap. These expenditure reductions are reflected in this financial report in both the budget and
actuals. In 2020, General Fund revenues totaled $81.1 million and were $4.6 million, or 6.0%
favorable to the revised budget expectations.
The City estimates that the annual revenue loss to the General Fund in 2020 due to COVID-19
was between $6.0 million and $9.0 million. To help close the revenue gap, the City implemented
the following policy changes in mid-2020; together, these changes accounted for incremental
revenue to the General Fund in the amount of $2.7 million.
Policy Changes due to COVID-19:
• Diverted interest earnings for most funds to the General Fund for 2020 (retroactive to
April).The incremental revenue to the General Fund as a result of this policy change was
an additional $263,000 in revenue.
• No longer allocated a portion of Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax (MVFT) monies to the Arterial
Street Fund for 2020 and, therefore, that portion of revenues from the state remained in
the General Fund. The funding source in 2020 for the Arterial Street Fund was replaced
with real estate excise tax (REET) monies. This policy change was made retroactive to
January, and the incremental revenue in 2020 to the General Fund as a result of this
policy change was approximately $464,000.
• Retained all utility tax revenues entirely in the General Fund for 2020 and replaced this
funding source for the Arterial Street Preservation Fund with REET funds. This policy
change, which was also made retroactive to January, resulted in incremental revenue to
the General Fund of $2.0 million.
Notable variances to budget include:
• Retail Sales Tax: The sales tax report through December 2020 (which is provided as
an attachment to this report) reflects amounts remitted to the City of Auburn based on
sales from November 2019 through October 2020. Revenue losses compared to the
year prior were seen in several categories, most notably in the manufacturing,
automotive, and services sectors. While sales tax revenues were down in some areas,
there were some categories that exceeded expectations; most notable among these
was the construction category, which increased by $876,000 in 2020 compared to
2019. While it was expected that retail sales tax dollars would be considerably lower
than 2019 due to COVID-19, 2020 actuals were $90,000, or 0.5% higher than the year
prior. [pages 8-9]
3 Page 6 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 4
• Building permit revenues in 2020 totaled $836,000 and were $116,000, or 16.1%, above
budget, although this revenue source ended the year nearly $400,000 less than
revenues that were collected in 2019. While the “Stay Home, Stay Healthy” order did
impact building permit revenues, there were three significant commercial projects in the
City that contributed to higher than anticipated revenues this year: the replacement of
Pioneer Elementary School and construction of Auburn Elementary School #16 and the
Bridge Point Warehouse. 475 building permits were issued in 2020, which was 13.6%
less than the number of permits issued in 2019. [page 13]
• Culture and recreation revenues collected in 2020 totaled $1.6 million and were
$962,000 less than what was collected in 2019. These reduced revenues were a direct
result of the COVID-19 pandemic whereby the City of Auburn essentially closed the
majority of all Parks, Arts and Recreation activities and services in March. While some
activities resumed later in the year, these were generally at a reduced capacity; other
activities continued to be on hold, delayed, or canceled to comply with the Governor’s
guidance for Washington’s Safe Start phased reopening plan. [pages 15, 17]
• The 2020 budget anticipated the need to transfer $4.0 million from the Cumulative
Reserve Fund but, due to significant underspends in 2020, only $2.0 million of the $4.0
million transfer was needed.
2020 ending fund balances will not be finalized until approximately June 2021 pending year-end
adjustments and certification by the State Auditor’s Office. Once the final ending 2020 fund
balances are available, budgeted beginning 2021 fund balances will be reconciled and adjusted
accordingly.
2020 General Fund expenditures totaled $73.1 million compared to a revised budget of $85.4
million; this represents a $12.3 million, or 14.4%, favorable variance to budget. All departments
operated within their allocated budget in 2020. Salary and benefit costs were underspent by $8.0
million. In addition, in the services and charges category was underspent by $3.7 million,
predominately in professional services and miscellaneous expenditures. Due to the significant
impact the COVID-19 pandemic had on the General Fund, the City implemented several
mitigation strategies to close the gap for the projected revenue shortfall. These strategies
included employee furloughs, hiring freezes on sixteen positions, voluntary early retirements,
temporary benefit cuts, temporary lay-offs of temporary and seasonal employees, participation in
the Shared Work Program for employees whose workload had slowed down, and specific
departmental expenditure reductions in the areas of travel, training, and some service contracts.
These expenditure cuts are reflected in the expenditures reported here.
4 Page 7 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 5
Street Funds:
The City’s three street funds are special revenue funds wherein the revenue sources and
expenditures are legally restricted. These funds are used for street capital construction projects,
as well as local and arterial street repair and preservation projects. Historically, the majority of
expenditures in all three street funds occur during the second half of the year when weather
conditions are optimal for pavement construction. Variances in budget and actuals between years
are generally due to the schedule and level of activity on projects in the fund, and the timing of
grant reimbursements and other funding.
In 2020, Arterial Street Fund revenues totaled $2.6 million as compared to collections of $1.9
million in 2019, while expenditures totaled $3.1 million as compared to expenditures of $2.0
million in 2019. [pages 22–23]
Local Street Fund revenues of $1.9 million are in line with budget expectations and only $61,000
below collections in 2019. Expenditures in 2020 were $1.1 million as compared with $2.2 million
in 2019. [pages 24–25]
Lastly, Arterial Street Preservation Fund revenues totaled $3.1 million in 2020, approximately
$511,000 higher than 2019. Expenditures totaled $2.3 million versus $3.9 million last year.
[pages 26–27]
YE Budget
$ 76.5M
YE Budget
$ 85.4M
YE Actuals
$ 81.1M
YE Actuals
$ 73.1M
$0 $20 $40 $60 $80 $100
Revenues
Expenditures
$ Millions
General Fund
Revenues vs. Expenditures Through December 2020
5 Page 8 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 6
Enterprise Funds:
The City’s enterprise funds account for operations with revenues primarily provided from user
fees, charges or contracts for services.
All City utilities transitioned from bimonthly to monthly usage billing starting in January 2019.
Additionally, a new utility fee schedule also went into effect in January 2019.
The Water Fund ended 2020 with operating income of $5.5 million year-to-date, compared to
$6.2 million last year. [page 29]
The Sewer Fund finished 2020 with operating income of $1.9 million versus $2.7 million in 2019.
This variance is largely due to a one-time refund from the Department of Revenue last year, as
well as lower commercial consumption volumes. [page 30]
In 2020 the Stormwater Fund had operating income of $3.3 million compared to $2.0 million in
2019, largely due to the rate increase implemented in January. [page 30]
The Solid Waste Fund finished 2020 with year-to-date operating loss of $114,000 compared to
operating income of $200,000 last year. [pages 30-31]
The Airport Fund experienced operating income of $604,000 in 2020, compared to $476,000 in
2019. This variance is largely attributable to the purchase and sale of aviation fuel, an activity that
was not previously directly managed by the City, as well as increased revenue from property
leases and rents. [page 32]
The Cemetery Fund had operating income of $229,000 in 2020, compared to $107,000 in 2019.
This increase in largely attributable to increased revenues from lot sales. [page 32]
Internal Service Funds:
Internal service funds provide services to other City departments and include functions such as
Insurance, Worker’s Compensation, Facilities, Innovation & Technology, and Equipment Rental.
No significant variances were reported in these funds in 2020. [page 33]
6 Page 9 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 7
General Fund
Revenues
The combined total of property, sales/use, utility, gambling, and admissions taxes provides over
70% of all resources supporting general governmental activities. The following section provides
additional information on these sources.
Property Tax collections in 2020 totaled $22.4 million and compare to a budget of $22.0 million.
As depicted in the graphic below, the majority of property taxes are collected during the months of
April and October, coinciding with the due dates for the County property tax billings. The COVID-
19 pandemic had minimal, if any, impact to property tax revenues.
$0.0
$2.0
$4.0
$6.0
$8.0
$10.0
$12.0
$14.0
$16.0
$18.0
$20.0
$22.0
$24.0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsProperty Taxes
2020 Budget
2020 Actual
2019 Actual
$17.2 $17.9
$20.8 $21.4 $21.9 $22.4
$0.0
$5.0
$10.0
$15.0
$20.0
$25.0
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020MillionsProperty Tax Revenue
Actuals
7 Page 10 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 8
Retail Sales Tax collections in 2020 reflect taxes remitted to the City of Auburn based on sales
from November 2019 through October 2020, including several months where non-essential
business were closed as part of the “Stay Home, Stay Healthy” order and some businesses
occupancy was restricted to 25% or 50%. As a result, sales tax revenues in many categories
were lower than sales taxes collected during the same period in 2019. Conversely, sales tax
revenues collected in the construction category increased in 2020 by $876,000 compared to 2019
due primarily to the construction of two elementary schools, Legacy Plaza, the Bridge Point
Warehouse, and several single-family homes. In a 2020 budget amendment, the budget for retail
sales tax revenues was reduced by $3.3 million to reflect revised expectations but actual impacts
were less than anticipated. Overall, 2020 retail sales taxes collected totaled $18.9 million and
were $90,000 higher than collections in 2019, exceeding budget expectations by $3.3 million.
Note: The increase in sales tax revenue from 2018 to 2019 was primarily due to a policy change
whereby sales tax on construction revenue stays in the General Fund starting in 2019. Of the
year-over-year increase in sales tax revenue depicted in the graphic above from 2018 to 2019,
$2.2 million of the $2.9 million increase was due to this policy change.
$0.0
$2.0
$4.0
$6.0
$8.0
$10.0
$12.0
$14.0
$16.0
$18.0
$20.0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsRetail Sales & Use Tax
2020 Budget
2020 Actual
2019 Actual
$14.5 $14.6 $14.9 $15.9
$18.8 $18.9
$0.0
$2.0
$4.0
$6.0
$8.0
$10.0
$12.0
$14.0
$16.0
$18.0
$20.0
$22.0
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020MillionsRetail Sales & Use Tax
Actuals
8 Page 11 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 9
The following table breaks out the City’s retail sales taxes by major business sector.
Citywide retail sales tax revenue collected in 2020 were $42,000, or 0.2%, more than revenues
collected in 2019. While most business sectors generated less revenue, the construction
category collected significantly more revenue in 2020 than the year prior.
Utility Taxes consist of interfund taxes on City utilities (Water, Sewer, Storm and Solid Waste)
and taxes on external utilities (Electric, Natural Gas, Telephone and Solid Waste). Due to the
fiscal impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, the City of Auburn implemented a temporary policy
change regarding how these utility tax revenues were recorded. Historically, these revenues have
been split between the General Fund and the Arterial Street Preservation Fund. Effective in 2020
only and retroactive to January, the City retained 100% of the utility tax revenues in the General
Fund. This policy change resulted in an additional $2.0 million in revenues in the General Fund in
2020 to fund ongoing operations.
2019 2020
Component Group Actual Actual Amount
Construction 2,192,555$ 3,068,164$ 875,610$ 39.9 %
Manufacturing 820,898 389,637 (431,261)$ (52.5)%
Transportation & Warehousing 88,710 197,189 108,479$ 122.3 %
Wholesale Trade 1,496,015 1,346,271 (149,743)$ (10.0)%
Automotive 4,069,263 3,826,981 (242,282)$ (6.0)%
Retail Trade 5,436,454 5,499,535 63,081$ 1.2 %
Services 4,445,147 4,220,223 (224,924)$ (5.1)%
Miscellaneous 264,505 307,887 43,382$ 16.4 %
YE Total 18,813,547$ 18,855,888$ 42,341$ 0.2 %
Comparison of Retail Sales Tax Collections by Group
Through December
Change from 2019
Percentage
$0.0
$2.0
$4.0
$6.0
$8.0
$10.0
$12.0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsUtility Tax
2020 Budget
2020 Actual
2019 Actual
9 Page 12 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 10
The table below demonstrates the various utility tax revenues and show actuals
compared to budget.
An Admission Tax of 5.0% is placed on charges for general admission, season tickets, cover
charges, etc. Admission tax revenues collected in 2020 totaled $209,000 and compare to
$445,000 collected last year. While there are only a handful of businesses that qualify to remit
these taxes to the City, 75% of the tax revenue in this category is typically generated from Auburn
Regal Theater located at the Outlet Collection mall. Due to the Governor’s orders relating to
COVID-19, all of these revenues ceased from April through December and will be limited for
some period in 2021. Beyond the initial shutdown in March, the Governor allowed golf courses to
reopen within certain limitations and the Auburn Golf Course reopened in early May. Revenues in
this category collected beginning in May were almost exclusively from admissions tax collected
from the golf course.
$9.7 $10.0 $10.2 $9.9 $9.6
$11.4
$0.0
$2.0
$4.0
$6.0
$8.0
$10.0
$12.0
$14.0
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020MillionsUtility Tax Revenues
Actuals
2019 2020 2020
Utility Tax Type YE Actual YE Budget YE Actual Amount Amount
City Interfund Utility Taxes 4,103,107$ 4,521,700$ 4,540,292$ $ 437,185 10.7 % $ 18,592 0.4 %
Electric 3,535,407 4,024,400 4,206,456 671,049 19.0 %182,056 4.5 %
Natural Gas 927,187 1,201,900 1,254,700 327,513 35.3 %52,800 4.4 %
Telephone 935,324 981,900 1,122,804 187,480 20.0 %140,904 14.4 %
Solid Waste (external)148,706 154,600 231,046 82,340 55.4 %76,446 49.4 %
YE Total 9,649,730$ 10,884,500$ 11,355,297$ $ 1,705,567 17.7 % $ 470,797 4.3 %
Through December 2020
Utility Tax by Type
2020 vs. 2019 Actual 2020 vs. Budget
Percentage Percentage
10 Page 13 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 11
Gambling Tax applies to all card games, punch board games, pull tabs, bingo games, raffles and
amusement games played within City limits. Due to the Governor’s orders relating to COVID-19,
these entertainment style activities were mostly on hold during the year. Therefore, revenues
generated from gambling taxes in 2020 were significantly lower than normal. As depicted in the
graphic below, revenues collected in 2020 totaled $110,000, which was $264,000 less than
collections in 2019.
x
$0.0
$100.0
$200.0
$300.0
$400.0
$500.0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecThousandsAdmission Tax
2020 Budget
2020 Actual
2019 Actual
$0.0
$100.0
$200.0
$300.0
$400.0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecThousandsGambling Tax
2020 Budget
2020 Actual
2019 Actual
11 Page 14 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 12
The City charges an annual fee of $100 for a Business License for each business that is located
within the City. The City typically sends out the renewals for the following year around December
of each year. Therefore, the majority of these revenues are collected in December for the
following year or January in the current year. Business license revenues collected in 2020 totaled
$354,000 and were $26,000, or 7.9%, favorable to budget.
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
$400
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecThousandsBusiness Licenses
2020 Budget
2020 Actual
2019 Actual
$282 $225
$163
$353 $336 $354
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
$400
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020ThousandsBusiness License Revenues
Actuals
12 Page 15 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 13
Building Permit revenues collected in 2020 totaled $836,000 and ended the year $116,000, or
16.1%, favorable to budget, which had been reduced by $350,000 to adjust for expected fiscal
impacts related to COVID-19. While these revenues were affected by COVID-19 due to the fact
that construction was temporarily halted, there were several large projects that contributed to the
higher revenues collected. Some of these projects include the replacement of Pioneer
Elementary School, Auburn Elementary School #16, and the Bridge Point Warehouse.
$0.0
$0.2
$0.4
$0.6
$0.8
$1.0
$1.2
$1.4
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsBuilding Permits
2020 Budget
2020 Actual
2019 Actual
$1.2
$2.0
$1.2
$0.9
$1.2
$0.8
$0.0
$0.5
$1.0
$1.5
$2.0
$2.5
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020MillionsBuilding Permits
Actuals
13 Page 16 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 14
Intergovernmental revenues include grants (direct and indirect federal, state and local),
revenue from the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT) compact as well as state shared revenues.
Collections in 2020 totaled $10.2 million and were $950,000 above budget expectations.
The majority of the favorable variance to budget was seen in the contributions from Muckleshoot
Casino for services related to police calls for service, court related prosecutions, and street
maintenance.
Total intergovernmental revenues collected in 2020 was $4.2 million higher than collections in
2019. The primary contributor of the increase in year-over-year revenues was seen in the
Federal grant revenues. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the City of Auburn received $3.8
million in CARES Act (Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act) funding which was
used to meet expenditures for public safety dedicated to mitigating or responding to the COVID-
19 public health emergency.
Due to COVID-19 and the “Stay Home, Stay Healthy” order, many people drastically reduced
their driving patterns and therefore fuel consumption was low compared to historical usage. To
mitigate the revenue loss, the City of Auburn implemented a policy change for 2020 (retroactive
to January) where motor vehicle fuel tax revenues (MVFT) that had historically benefitted the
Arterial Street Fund were retained in the General Fund. The policy change resulted in an
additional $464,000 in MVFT monies in the General Fund.
Streamlined Sales Tax (SST) revenue is a state shared revenue that was granted in 2008 as a
way for cities to offset the negative fiscal impact of the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax
Agreement, also known as ‘destination sourcing’. The City of Auburn expected to receive these
monies through Q2-2021. In the state’s effort to close its revenue gap due to COVID-19, the state
announced in April it was discontinuing any SST distributions after Q2-2020. This loss of revenue
represented a loss of $460,000 to the City of Auburn in 2020. The City of Auburn received the
final remittance from the state in June 2020, which totaled $250,000.
2019 2020 2020
Revenue YE Actual YE Budget YE Actual Amount Amount
Federal Grants 315,319$ 4,184,910$ 4,098,926$ $ 3,783,607 1199.9 % $ (85,984)(2.1)%
State Grants 216,442 230,000 155,813 (60,629) (28.0)%(74,187) (32.3)%
Interlocal Grants 130,972 498,800 468,349 337,377 0.0 %(30,451) (6.1)%
Muckleshoot Casino Services 1,228,007 845,200 1,721,249 493,243 40.2 %876,049 103.6 %
State Shared Revenues:
Streamlined Sales Tax 1,279,860 490,000 494,830 (785,031) (61.3)%4,830 1.0 %
Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax 1,162,578 1,417,400 1,498,329 335,750 28.9 %80,929 5.7 %
Criminal Justice - High Crime 224,094 200,000 228,428 4,334 1.9 %28,428 14.2 %
Criminal Justice - Population 24,165 22,800 25,601 1,436 5.9 %2,801 12.3 %
Criminal Justice - Special Prog.86,942 84,000 91,623 4,682 5.4 %7,623 9.1 %
Marijuana Excise Tax 180,727 135,000 172,010 (8,717) (4.8)%37,010 27.4 %
State DUI 11,233 11,600 11,878 645 5.7 %278 2.4 %
Fire Insurance Tax 80,386 78,900 85,819 5,433 6.8 %6,919 8.8 %
Liquor Excise 440,761 410,060 515,087 74,326 16.9 %105,027 25.6 %
Liquor Profit 657,153 665,500 655,964 (1,189) (0.2)%(9,536) (1.4)%
Total State Shared:4,147,900 3,515,260 3,779,568 (368,332)(8.9)%264,308 7.5 %
YE Total 6,038,639$ 9,274,170$ 10,223,904$ 4,185,265$ 69.3 %949,734$ 10.2 %
Through December 2020
Intergovernmental Revenues (Grants, Entitlements & Services)
2020 vs. 2019 Actual 2020 vs. Budget
% Change % Change
14 Page 17 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 15
Charges for Services consist of general governmental service charges, public safety charges,
development service fees, and culture and recreation fees. Total charges for services collected
in 2020 totaled $6.7 million and were $874,000, or 11.6%, less than revenues collected in 2019.
The General Government revenue category primarily includes the interfund assessment for the
salary and benefit costs for support departments (Finance, Human Resources and the Legal
Department). Salary and benefit costs for these support departments are charged to the
respective General Fund home department and the offsetting revenues for that support personnel
is recouped from other funds into the General Fund.
$5.3 $5.7 $6.1 $6.3 $6.0
$10.2
$0
$2
$4
$6
$8
$10
$12
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020MillionsIntergovernmental Revenues
(Grants, Entitlements & Services)
Actuals
2019 2020 2020
Revenue YE Actual YE Budget YE Actual Amount Amount
General Government 2,636,527$ 2,823,620$ 2,971,348$ $ 334,822 12.7 % $ 147,728 5.2 %
Public Safety 1,213,112 964,000 1,109,581 (103,531) (8.5)%145,581 15.1 %
Development Services 1,098,969 650,000 955,824 (143,145) (13.0)%305,824 47.0 %
Culture & Recreation 2,600,103 1,512,380 1,638,185 (961,917) (37.0)%125,805 8.3 %
YE Total 7,548,710$ 5,950,000$ 6,674,939$ (873,772)$ (11.6)% $ 724,939 12.2 %
Through December 2020
Charges for Services by Type
2020 vs. 2019 Actual 2020 vs. Budget
Percentage Percentage
15 Page 18 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 16
Public safety revenues mostly consist of revenues for law enforcement services. Law
enforcement services include revenues received for extra duty security services, whereby police
officers are contracted for and reimbursement is made by the hiring agency. This category also
includes reimbursements from the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT) for a full-time dedicated police
officer and associated expenditures as well as monies collected from the Auburn School District
and the Criminal Justice Training Commission (CJTC) for services rendered. Law enforcement
service revenues collected in 2020 totaled $1.1 million and were $179,000, or 19.8%, favorable to
budget expectations. Revenues collected in 2020 were lower than collections in 2019 as some
businesses who utilize these services did not require security services due to business closures.
Development services fee collections consist primarily of plan check fees, facility extension
charges, and zoning and subdivision fees. In 2020, development service fees totaled $956,000,
and were $306,000 favorable to budget expectations. The favorable variance to budget was
seen primarily in facility extension charges, which generated $468,000 in revenue in 2020. Part of
this favorable variance was due to a sizable change in the fee schedule for this service. Plan
check revenues collected in 2020 totaled $375,000 and were approximately $245,000 less than
amounts collected in 2019. Plan check revenues included numerous commercial and residential
projects including Auburn Elementary School #16, the replacement of Pioneer Elementary
School, Legacy Plaza, projects at Boeing, and the Copper Gate Apartments as well as single
family residential projects such as the Forest Glen and Pulte Homes developments.
$0.0
$0.2
$0.4
$0.6
$0.8
$1.0
$1.2
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsDevelopment Service Fees
2020 Budget
2020 Actual
2019 Actual
16 Page 19 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 17
The majority of culture and recreation revenues are derived from greens fees and pro shop sales
at the Auburn Golf Course, recreational classes, ticket sales at the Auburn Avenue Theater,
senior programs and special events. Due to COVID-19, all of these activities were suspended in
March. Effective May 2020, the Auburn Golf Course reopened with restrictions but there were
numerous other culture and recreation activities that continued to be suspended or were
significantly modified through the end of 2020. Therefore, culture and recreation revenues
collected in 2020 totaled $1.6 million as compared to $2.6 million collected last year, which
represents a 37.0% reduction in revenues.
Fines & Penalties include civil penalties (such as code compliance fines), parking and traffic
infraction penalties, criminal fines (including criminal traffic, criminal non-traffic and other criminal
offenses) as well as non-court fines such as false alarm fines. Total revenues collected in 2020
totaled $635,000 compared to a budget of $669,000 and were 5.0% below budget expectations.
$0.0
$0.2
$0.4
$0.6
$0.8
$1.0
$1.2
$1.4
$1.6
$1.8
$2.0
$2.2
$2.4
$2.6
$2.8
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsCulture & Recreation
2020 Budget
2020 Actual
2019 Actual
2019 2020 2020
Month YE Actual YE Budget YE Actual Amount Amount
Civil Penalties 93,531$ 15,000$ 22,436$ $ (71,095)(76.0)% $ 7,436 49.6 %
Civil Infraction Penalties 426,138 349,900 270,885 (155,252) (36.4)%(79,015) (22.6)%
Redflex Photo Enforcement 3,296 0 1,411 (1,885) (57.2)%1,411 N/A %
Parking Infractions 126,452 69,800 69,073 (57,379) (45.4)%(727) (1.0)%
Criminal Traffic Misdemeanor 36,927 57,400 26,197 (10,730) (29.1)%(31,203) (54.4)%
Criminal Non-Traffic Fines 58,052 43,600 23,752 (34,300) (59.1)%(19,848) (45.5)%
Criminal Costs 17,944 46,900 19,547 1,602 8.9 %(27,353) (58.3)%
Non-Court Fines & Penalties 151,900 85,900 201,907 50,007 32.9 %116,007 135.0 %
YE Total 914,240$ 668,500$ 635,209$ $ (279,031)(30.5)% $ (33,291)(5.0)%
Through December 2020
Fines & Penalties by Type
2020 vs. 2019 Actual 2020 vs. Budget
Percentage Percentage
17 Page 20 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 18
$0.0
$0.1
$0.2
$0.3
$0.4
$0.5
$0.6
$0.7
$0.8
$0.9
$1.0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsFines & Penalties
2020 Budget
2020 Actual
2019 Actual
$0.9 $0.9 $0.9 $0.9 $0.9
$0.6
$0.0
$0.2
$0.4
$0.6
$0.8
$1.0
$1.2
$1.4
$1.6
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020MillionsFines & Penalties
Actuals
18 Page 21 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 19
Miscellaneous Revenues consist of investment earnings, income from facility rentals, revenue
collected on golf cart rentals at the Auburn Golf Course, contributions and donations, and other
income including the quarterly purchasing card (P-card) rebate monies.
Revenues collected in 2020 in this category totaled $1.2 million and were under budget
expectations by $325,000, or 21.7%. The majority of the unfavorable variance to budget was in
the interest and investments category. As noted earlier, the City implemented a temporary policy
change in 2020 where the majority of interest earnings for most funds were diverted to the
General Fund (retroactive to April 2020). The incremental revenue to the General Fund as a
result of this policy change was an additional $263,000 in revenue. While the budget was
increased to reflect this policy change, there was an unfavorable variance to budget primarily due
to the drastic decline in the State Investment Pool Interest rate, which started out at the beginning
of 2020 at 1.7%, but which declined each month and was as low as 0.16% in December.
The rents and leases revenue category is primarily rental revenue generated from campsites and
park shelters, rentals of the athletic fields, and rentals of meeting and event rooms as well as golf
cart rentals, parking spot rentals, and lease rental revenue from the restaurant located at the Golf
Course. Due to COVID-19, facility rental revenue abruptly halted in March as all of the facilities
closed. While some rental activity since resumed, there continued to be significant restrictions on
rentals for the year. Rent and lease revenue collected in 2020 was $506,000, or 53.9%, less than
was collected in 2019.
2019 2020 2020
Month YE Actual YE Budget YE Actual Amount Amount
Interest & Investments 406,802$ 700,700$ 506,385$ 99,584$ 24.5 %(194,315)$ (27.7)%
Rents & Leases 938,457 517,600 432,432 (506,025)(53.9)%(85,168) (16.5)%
Contributions & Donations 41,321 46,200 30,945 (10,376)(25.1)%(15,255) (33.0)%
Other Miscellaneous Revenue 386,132 230,800 200,414 (185,718)(48.1)%(30,386) (13.2)%
YE Total 1,772,712$ 1,495,300$ 1,170,176$ (602,535)$ (34.0)%(325,124)$ (21.7)%
Miscellaneous Revenues by Type
Through December 2020
2020 vs. 2019 2020 vs. Budget
Percentage Percentage
$1.0
$1.2
$1.5
$1.8 $1.8
$1.2
$0.0
$0.5
$1.0
$1.5
$2.0
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020MillionsMiscellaneous Revenues
Actuals
19 Page 22 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 20
Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) revenue is receipted into the Capital Improvement Projects
Fund and is used for governmental capital projects. REET revenue represents taxes on the sale
of both commercial properties and single-family residences. REET revenues collected in 2020
totaled $4.2 million, exceeding budget expectations by $1.7 million. Sales activity in 2020
included the sale of several warehouses, several office complexes, as well as numerous retail
businesses, multi-family complexes, single family homes, and several parcels of vacant land.
2019 2020 2020
Month Actual Budget Actual Amount Amount
Jan 387,084$ 208,500$ 214,936$ (172,147)$ (44.5)%6,436$ 3.1 %
Feb 208,857 208,500 455,986 247,129 118.3 %247,486 118.7 %
Mar 232,233 208,500 214,029 (18,204) (7.8)%5,529 2.7 %
Apr 318,475 208,500 273,949 (44,526) (14.0)%65,449 31.4 %
May 375,246 208,500 245,815 (129,431) (34.5)%37,315 17.9 %
Jun 481,934 208,500 288,495 (193,440) (40.1)%79,995 38.4 %
Jul 352,378 208,500 392,753 40,375 11.5 %184,253 88.4 %
Aug 452,068 208,500 368,252 (83,815) (18.5)%159,752 76.6 %
Sep 400,173 208,500 346,819 (53,354) (13.3)%138,319 66.3 %
Oct 414,124 208,500 444,623 30,500 7.4 %236,123 113.2 %
Nov 1,046,103 208,500 439,428 (606,675) (58.0)%230,928 110.8 %
Dec 553,301 208,900 554,308 1,007 0.2 %345,408 165.3 %
YE Total 5,221,975$ 2,502,400$ 4,239,394$ (982,581)$ (18.8)%1,736,994$ 69.4 %
Real Estate Excise Tax Revenues
December 2020
2020 vs. 2019 2020 vs. Budget
Percentage Percentage
$0.0
$0.5
$1.0
$1.5
$2.0
$2.5
$3.0
$3.5
$4.0
$4.5
$5.0
$5.5
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsReal Estate Excise Tax
2020 Budget
2020 Actual
2019 Actual
20 Page 23 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 21
$4.6 $4.3
$3.6 $3.8
$5.2
$4.2
$0.0
$1.0
$2.0
$3.0
$4.0
$5.0
$6.0
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020MillionsReal Estate Excise Tax Revenues
Actuals
21 Page 24 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 22
Street Funds
This section provides a financial overview of the City’s three street funds for the period ending
December 31, 2020. The City’s three street funds include the Arterial Street Fund (Fund 102),
the Local Street Fund (Fund 103), and the Arterial Street Preservation Fund (Fund 105).
Fund 102 – Arterial Street Fund
The Arterial Street Fund is a special revenue fund that is funded by transportation grants, traffic
impact fees, a portion of the City’s gas tax receipts, Public Works Trust Fund loans, developer
contributions, and other sources. As of December 31, 2020 there were 25 separate street
projects budgeted in this fund.
In 2020, revenues collected totaled $2.6 million as compared to collections of $1.9 million in
2019. Total expenditures in 2020 were $3.1 million as compared to $2.0 million expended in
2019. Variances in revenues and expenditures are largely due to the timing of capital
expenditures and any subsequent reimbursement via grants and/or operating transfers.
Expenditure timing is generally determined by the current phase of each individual capital project;
expenditures tend to increase as projects move from design phase into construction.
Fund 102 - Arterial Street 2019
Summary of Sources and Uses 2020 2020 YE 2020 YE 2019 YE
Report Period: December 2020 Budget Budget Actual Actual Amount
Revenues
Federal Grants 5,535,770$ 5,535,770$ 292,049$ 589,081$ (5,243,721)$ (94.7)%
State And Local Grants 730,000 730,000 30,020 - (699,980) (95.9)%
Motor Vehicle Fuel and Multimodal Taxes 197,000 197,000 111,399 641,601 (85,601) (43.5)%
Developer Contributions - - - - -
Miscellaneous Revenue - - 194,065 - 194,065
Other Governmental Agencies - 280,000 - - (280,000) (100.0)%
Operating Transfer In 3,370,194 3,370,194 1,953,492 609,065 (1,416,702) (42.0)%
Investment Income 11,600 11,600 7,660 42,766 (3,940) (34.0)%
Total Revenues 9,844,564$ 10,124,564$ 2,588,685$ 1,882,513$ (7,535,879)$ (74.4)%
Expenditures
Salary and Benefits 397,000$ 397,000$ 531,846$ 314,620$ (134,846)$ (34.0)%
Capital Outlay 10,096,046 10,096,046 2,083,399 991,035 8,012,647 79.4 %
Subtotal - Capital Project Expenditures 10,493,046 10,493,046 2,615,245 1,305,655 7,877,801 75.1 %
Services and Charges 400,000 400,000 173,854 286,713 226,146 56.5 %
Interfund Payments for Services 80,100 80,100 80,100 78,100 - 0.0 %
Debt Service Principal and Interest 207,600 207,600 207,428 208,122 172 0.1 %
Operating Transfer Out - - - 143,196 -
Total Expenditures 11,180,746$ 11,180,746$ 3,076,626$ 2,021,785$ 8,104,120$ 72.5 %
Net Change in Fund Balance (1,336,182)$ (1,056,182)$ (487,941)$ (139,273)$ 568,241$ 53.8 %
Beg. Fund Balance, January 2020 1,970,223$
Net Change in Fund Balance, December 2020 (487,941)
Ending Fund Balance, December 2020 1,482,282$
2020 Budgeted Ending Fund Balance 634,041$
2020 2020 YE Budget vs. Actual
Favorable (Unfavorable)
Percentage
22 Page 25 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 23
The table below presents the status of the projects with the most significant budget impact on the
fund. Many capital projects are budgeted over multiple years; what is displayed below is the 2020
portion of each project’s budget and year-to-date expenditures.
Note: The Lea Hill Safe Routes to Schools project was originally programmed assuming
grant funding that has not yet been received in the competitive process.
$0.0
$2.0
$4.0
$6.0
$8.0
$10.0
$12.0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsFund 102 -Capital Project Expenditures
2020 YE Budget
2020 YE Actual
2019 YE Actual
2020 YE Actual:
$2.6M
2020 Budget:
$10.5M
2019 YE Actual:
$1.3M
Name 2020 Budget YTD Actual Remaining
F Street SE Non-Motorized Improvements $2.9M $1.3M $1.6M
AWS Improvements - Hemlock St SE to Poplar St SE $2.2M $0.1M $2.1M
Lea Hill Safe Routes to Schools $1.4M $0.0M $1.4M
All Other Projects (22 Others Budgeted)$3.9M $1.1M $2.8M
Total $10.5M $2.6M $7.9M
*Components may not sum to total due to rounding.
Fund 102 - Arterial Street
Capital Projects Status *
23 Page 26 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 24
Fund 103 – Local Street Fund
The Local Street Fund is a special revenue fund used for local street preservation. Effective
January 1, 2019 through 2020 this fund is funded at a specific annual amount by real estate
excise tax (REET 2) whereas, previously, the funding source was sales tax on construction.
Expenditures in 2020 were $1.9 million and compare to expenditures of $2.0 million in 2019.
Highlighted in the table below and shown in the following graph are the fund’s total expenditures
related to capital projects.
Fund 103 - Local Street Fund 2019
Summary of Sources and Uses 2020 2020 YE 2020 YE 2019 YE
Report Period: December 2020 Budget Budget Actual Actual Amount
Revenues
Sales Tax on Construction -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Operating Transfer In 1,900,000 1,900,000 1,900,000$ 1,900,000 - 0.0 %
Interest Earnings - - 10,301$ 71,732 10,301
Total Revenues 1,900,000$ 1,900,000$ 1,910,301$ 1,971,732$ 10,301$ 0.5 %
Expenditures
Capital Salary and Benefits 162,391 162,391 120,657 99,810 41,734 25.7 %
Capital Services and Charges
Capital Outlay 2,950,143 2,950,143 1,016,935 2,046,645 1,933,208 65.5 %
Subtotal - Capital Project Expenditures 3,112,534 3,112,534 1,137,592 2,146,456 1,974,942 63.5 %
Admin Salary and Benefits - - 19,745 18,438 (19,745)$
Admin Services and Charges 700 700 361 22,787 339 48.5 %
Interfund Payments for Services 15,600 15,600 15,600 15,200 - 0.0 %
Operating Transfer Out - - - - -
Total Expenditures 3,128,834$ 3,128,834$ 1,173,297$ 2,202,880$ 1,955,537$ 62.5 %
Net Change in Fund Balance (1,228,834)$ (1,228,834)$ 737,004$ (231,148)$ 1,965,838$ 160.0 %
Beg. Fund Balance, January 2020 2,550,612$
Net Change in Fund Balance, December 2020 737,004
Ending Fund Balance, December 2020 3,287,616$
2020 Budgeted Ending Fund Balance 1,321,778$
2020 2020 YE Budget vs. Actual
Favorable (Unfavorable)
Percentage
24 Page 27 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 25
The table below presents the status of the projects with the most significant budget impact on the
fund. Many capital projects are budgeted over multiple years; what is displayed below is the 2020
portion of each project’s budget and year-to-date expenditures.
$0.0
$0.5
$1.0
$1.5
$2.0
$2.5
$3.0
$3.5
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMillionsFund 103 -Capital Project Expenditures
2020 YE Budget
2020 YE Actual
2019 YE Actual
2020 Budget :
$3.1M
2019 YE Actual:
$2.1M
2020 YE Actual:
$1.1M
Name 2020 Budget YTD Actual Remaining
2021 Local Street Preservation $1.7M $0.1M $1.5M
2020 Local Street Reconstruction $0.8M $0.7M $0.0M
2019 Local Street Reconstruction $0.7M $0.3M $0.4M
All Other Projects (2 Others Budgeted)$0.0M $0.0M $0.0M
Total $3.1M $1.1M $2.0M
*Components may not sum to total due to rounding.
Fund 103 - Local Street
Capital Projects Status*
25 Page 28 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 26
Fund 105 – Arterial Street Preservation Fund
The Arterial Street Preservation Fund is a special revenue fund that is primarily funded by a 1.0%
utility tax that was adopted by Council in 2008; these utility tax revenues are restricted for arterial
street repair and preservation projects. In 2020, due to COVID-19 impacts, the funding source
will be transfers-in of REET 2 revenues and the 1.0% utility tax will be retained in the General
Fund.
Major projects budgeted within the Arterial Street Preservation Fund in 2020 include Auburn Way
North Preservation (Phase 2), Auburn Way North Preservation (Phase 3) and 2020 Arterial Street
Preservation. In 2020 revenues totaled $3.1 million, which is approximately $511,000 lower than
in 2019. This is primarily due to the change in funding source, and also the timing associated with
construction projects and their subsequent cost reimbursements from grants and transfers-in.
Expenditures in 2020 were $2.3 million as compared to $3.9 million through in 2019. Historically,
the majority of this fund’s expenditures occur in the second half of each year due to the weather
sensitivity of pavement construction (this work needs to be done primarily in the summer and
early fall). Highlighted in the table below and shown in the following graph are the fund’s total
expenditures related to capital projects.
Fund 105 - Arterial Street Preservation 2019
Summary of Sources and Uses 2020 2020 YE 2020 YE 2019 YE
Report Period: December 2020 Budget Budget Actual Actual Amount
Revenues
City Utility Tax 66,900$ 66,900$ -$ 683,851$ (66,900)$ (100.0)%
Electric Utility Tax 69,900 69,900 - 707,081 (69,900) (100.0)%
Natural Gas Utility Tax 19,800 19,800 - 185,437 (19,800) (100.0)%
Cable TV Tax 18,800 18,800 - 194,949 (18,800) (100.0)%
Telephone Utility Tax 16,100 16,100 - 187,065 (16,100) (100.0)%
Garbage Utility Tax (External Haulers)2,200 2,200 - 24,784 (2,200) (100.0)%
Grants 3,880,589 3,880,589 741,557 833,586 (3,139,032) (80.9)%
Permits - - 168,887 - 168,887
Developer Mitigation Fees - - - 79,343 -
Operating Transfer In 2,618,020 2,618,020 2,142,224 632,659 (475,796) (18.2)%
Interest Earnings 13,000 13,000 7,297 41,765 (5,703) (43.9)%
Total Revenues 6,705,309$ 6,705,309$ 3,059,965$ 3,570,522$ (3,645,344)$ (54.4)%
Expenditures
Salary and Benefits 306,000$ 306,000$ 546,715$ 557,262$ (240,715)$ (78.7)%
Capital Outlay 6,903,224 6,903,224 1,734,348 3,336,071 5,168,876 74.9 %
Subtotal - Capital Project Expenditures 7,209,224 7,209,224 2,281,063 3,893,333 4,928,161 68.4 %
Services and Charges - - 985 76,809 (985)
Operating Transfer Out - - - - -
Total Expenditures 7,209,224$ 7,209,224$ 2,282,047$ 3,970,142$ 4,927,177$ 68.3 %
Net Change in Fund Balance (503,915)$ (503,915)$ 777,918$ (399,620)$ 1,281,833$ 254.4 %
Beg. Fund Balance, January 2020 2,041,919$
Net Change in Fund Balance, December 2020 777,918
Ending Fund Balance, December 2020 2,819,837$
2020 Budgeted Ending Fund Balance 1,538,004$
2020 2020 YE Budget vs. Actual
Favorable (Unfavorable)
Percentage
26 Page 29 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 27
The table below presents the status of the projects with the most significant budget impact on the
fund. Many capital projects are budgeted over multiple years; what is displayed below is the 2020
portion of each project’s budget and year-to-date expenditures.
$0.0
$1.0
$2.0
$3.0
$4.0
$5.0
$6.0
$7.0
$8.0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct NovMillionsFund 105 -Capital Project Expenditures
2020 YE Budget
2020 YE Actual
2019 YE Actual
2020 Budget:
$7.2M
2019 YE Actual:
$3.9M
2020 YE Actual:
$2.3M
Name 2020 Budget YTD Actual Remaining
AWN Preservation Phase 3 $1.8M $0.9M $1.0M
AWN Preservation Phase 2 $1.5M $0.3M $1.2M
2020 Arterial Street Preservation $0.9M $0.3M $0.6M
All Other Projects (13 Others Budgeted)$3.0M $0.8M $2.2M
Total $7.2M $2.3M $4.9M
*Components may not sum to total due to rounding.
Capital Projects Status*
Fund 105 - Arterial Street Preservation
27 Page 30 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 28
Fund 124 – Mitigation Fees
The Mitigation Fees Fund is a special revenue fund funded from revenues from fees for new
development that are assessed at the time applications are received for development activity.
These revenues are used to address costs associated with City growth.
The fund houses two types of revenues: mitigation fees and impact fees. Mitigation fees are
variable charges collected as a result of State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) reviews and the
City’s determination that a project must pay additional fees to compensate for a unique effect that
it has on the community. Impact fees are set charges collected automatically for a variety of
projects. These fees are adopted annually by the City Council based on projects anticipated in
the Capital Facilities Plan over the next six years.
The City received $2.0 million in revenues in in 2020, which exceeded total revenue budgeted for
the year. With the exception of interest and investment income, each revenue category exceeded
its annual budgeted amount. Expenditures were significantly below budget due to the timing of
capital projects funded by mitigation and/or impact fee revenues.
Fund 124 - Mitigation Fees
Summary of Sources and Uses
Report Period Through:Ending Ending
December 2020 Fund Balance Fund Balance
Transportation Impact Fees 800,000$ 2,952,194$ 5,541,320$ 1,325,856$ 1,530,492$ 7,488,878$
Traffic Migitation Fees - - 123,687 13,622 - 137,309
Fire Impact Fees 100,000 75,000 473,889 129,526 - 578,415
Fire Mitigation Fees - - 81 - - 81
Parks Impact Fees 200,000 2,121,728 3,382,966 301,000 344,017 5,261,677
Parks Mitigation Fees - 300,000 49,371 129,591 300,000 178,962
School Impact Admin Fees 2,000 - 86,251 4,625 - 88,876
Wetland Mitigation Fees - 5,000 67,581 - - 72,581
Interest and Investment Income 204,700 - 204,700 57,118 - 57,118
Fees in Lieu of Improvements - - 27,020 - - 27,020
Operating Transfers-In - - - - - -
Total 1,306,700$ 5,453,922$ 9,956,866$ 1,961,338$ 2,174,509$ 13,890,917$
Beginning Fund Balance, January 2020 14,104,088$
Net Change in Fund Balance, December 2020 (213,171)
Ending Fund Balance, December 2020 13,890,917$
2020 Budgeted Ending Fund Balance 9,956,866$
YE ActualsBUDGET
Revenues ExpendituresRevenuesExpenditures
28 Page 31 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 29
Enterprise Funds
Detailed income and expense statements for Enterprise and Internal Service funds can be found
in an attachment at the end of this report. The attachment provides operating and – as applicable
– capital fund reports for these funds showing budget, actuals, and variances. Operating funds
house all the operating costs along with debt service and financing obligations. Capital funds
show costs associated with capital acquisition and construction. Both the operating and capital
funds have a working capital balance. This approach isolates those funds available for capital
and cash flow needs for daily operations, and project managers will know exactly how much
working capital is available for current and planned projects.
In 2020 the Water Utility had operating income of $5.5 million as compared to $6.2 million in
2019. Total Water Fund operating revenues were $617,000 lower than 2019; the majority of this
variance was due to weaker performance in water sales. Increases in residential sales revenue
were more than offset by decreases in most other categories, particularly commercial,
manufacturing, and schools. Also contributing to the reduced operating income was a significant
decrease in interest earnings from 2019 to 2020. Operating expenditures in 2020 were materially
the same as in 2019.
Water sales by volume in 2020 totaled 2.9 million hundred cubic feet (ccf) as compared to 3.1
million ccf in 2019, a decrease of 5.2%. Consumption was lower each month in 2020 compared to
2019 with the exception of the March, September and October billings for the prior months’
consumption. Total consumption decreased across all non-residential categories, resulting in the
lowest consumption in a five-year period. This is in line with a trend of decreased year-over-year
consumption on a per account basis due largely to conservation efforts and appliance efficiency
improvements, which are anticipated in the Utilities Comprehensive Plan. COVID-19 mitigation
efforts contributed significantly to the decrease in commercial and manufacturing consumption, as
many businesses were required to close or operate at reduced capacity.
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
800,000
900,000
1,000,000
$0
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
$1,600
$1,800
$2,000
CCFThousandsWater Revenues vs Water Sold
2020 vs 2019
2019 Water Sales ($)
2020 Water Sales ($)
2019 Water Sold (ccf)
2020 Water Sold (ccf)
29 Page 32 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 30
In 2020, the Sewer Utility finished with operating income of $1.9 million as compared to $2.7
million in 2019. Last year, the fund received a one-time $203,000 refund from the Department of
Revenue for an overpayment of excise tax; this significantly increased revenues in 2019.
Consumption by volume in 2020 was down 10.8% from 2019 due to reductions in commercial
consumption, which was exacerbated by COVID-19 mitigation efforts. This resulted in a decrease
of $259,000 in sewer service revenue.
Operating expenditures in the Sewer Utility were 1.8% higher than 2019, due mainly to increases
in interfund allocations, debt service payments and service charges.
In 2020, the Stormwater Utility had operating income of $3.3 million compared with $3.0 million
in 2019. Operating revenues were up $107,000 compared to 2019 mainly due to charges for City
storm service. As most Stormwater Utility charges are based on a flat rate, COVID-19 did not
have a significant effect on service revenue.
Operating expenditures in the Stormwater Utility were down $191,000 from 2019, contributing to
the higher operating income noted above. This variance was mainly due to lower expenses for
services.
In 2020 the Solid Waste Utility Fund had $15.5 million in operating revenues, compared to $15.6
million in operating expenditures. The City of Auburn’s Solid Waste services are outsourced to
Waste Management and to Republic Services, who manages the contract for the annexed areas.
In 2020, Waste Management serviced 15,586 customers (79% of customers) and Republic
Services serviced 4,180 customers (21% of customers).
The current mix of solid waste customer account types is:
• 89.6% Residential
• 7.9% Commercial
• 2.4% Multifamily
The “diversion rate” is a measure of how much generated waste is not sent to the landfill; i.e.,
waste that is either recycled or collected yard waste. In 2020, the total diversion rate was 30.2%,
which represents a total of 24,600 tons of waste that was diverted from landfills.
30 Page 33 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 31
2020 Tons Collected and Diversion Rates
Of the total tonnage collected in 2020, 37% was from residential customers, 16% from multifamily
customers, and 47% from commercial customers, as shown in the following graph:
31 Page 34 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 32
In January 2019, the Auburn Municipal Airport transitioned from contracted management
services through a third-party management company, Airport Management Group (AMG), to
management of the Airport by City staff.
In 2020, the Airport Fund had operating income of $604,000 as compared with operating income
of $476,000 in 2019. Operating revenues in the Airport Fund were $71,000 more than the same
period last year, largely due to increased revenue for property leases and tie down and hangar
rents.
Operating expenditures in the Airport Fund were $57,000 less than last year. Much of this
variance consisted of payroll expenditures, which decreased due to a vacant position at the
Airport. Other notable decreases include expenditures on operating supplies and small tools and
equipment.
In 2020, the Cemetery Fund experienced operating income of $229,000 as compared with an
operating income of $107,000 in 2019. Total sales revenue was up $175,000, or 12.8% from
2019, due mainly to significant increases in lot sales revenue. Other significant contributing
factors were increased revenues for openings and closings, as well as sales of liners. Operating
expenditures were up $53,000 or 4.2% from last year due largely to increased expenditures for
inventory purchases and interfund charges.
32 Page 35 of 109
Quarterly Financial Report Through December 2020 33
Internal Service Funds
Operating expenditures within the Insurance Fund represent the premium cost pool that will be
allocated monthly to other City funds over the course of the year. As a result, the expenditure
balance gradually diminishes each month throughout the year.
No significant variances are reported in the Workers’ Compensation, Facilities, Innovation &
Technology, or Equipment Rental Funds.
Contact Information
This report is prepared by the Finance Department. Additional financial information can also be
viewed at our website: http://www.auburnwa.gov/. For any questions about this report please
contact Jamie Thomas at jdthomas@auburnwa.gov.
33 Page 36 of 109
Investment Purchase Book Maturity Yield to
Type Date Value Date Maturity
State Investment Pool Various 125,692,297$ Various 0.16%
KeyBank Money Market Various 20,465,622 Various 0.01%
Pacific Premier Bank Interest Acct Various 10,539,569 Various 0.17%
FFCB 8/27/2018 2,025,600 2/23/2021 2.70%
RFCSP 2/19/2019 5,146,514 1/15/2021 2.52%
FHLB 1/17/2020 5,044,370 12/9/2022 1.56%
FHLMC 11/20/2020 5,001,765 11/6/2023 2.38%
Total Cash & Investments 173,915,737$ 0.344%
Investment Mix % of Total
State Investment Pool 72.3%Current 6-month treasury rate 0.09%
Key Bank Money Market 11.8%Current State Pool rate 0.16%
Pacific Premier Bank Interest Acct 6.1%KeyBank Money Market 0.01%
FHLB 2.9%Pacific Premier Interest Acct 0.17%
FFCB 1.2%Blended Auburn rate 0.34%
RFCSP 3.0%
FHLMC 2.9%
100.0%
City of Auburn
Investment Portfolio Summary
December 31, 2020
Summary
34 Page 37 of 109
SALES TAX SUMMARY
DECEMBER 2020 SALES TAX DISTRIBUTIONS (FOR OCTOBER 2020 RETAIL ACTIVITY)
2019 Annual Total 2019 YTD 2020 YTD YTD 2019 Annual Total 2019 YTD 2020 YTD YTD
NAICS CONSTRUCTION (Nov '18-Oct '19)(Nov '18-Oct '19)(Nov '19 - Oct '20)% Diff NAICS AUTOMOTIVE (Nov '18-Oct '19)(Nov '18-Oct '19)(Nov '19 - Oct '20)% Diff
236 Construction of Buildings 1,219,472 1,219,472 2,000,382 64.0%441 Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealer 3,809,399 3,809,399 3,594,307 -5.6%
237 Heavy and Civil Construction 132,101 132,101 184,377 39.6%447 Gasoline Stations 259,864 259,864 232,674 -10.5%
238 Specialty Trade Contractors 840,982 840,982 883,406 5.0%TOTAL AUTOMOTIVE 4,069,263$ 4,069,263$ 3,826,981$ -6.0%
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION 2,192,555$ 2,192,555$ 3,068,164$ 39.9%Overall Change from Previous Year (242,282)$
Overall Change from Previous Year 875,610$
2019 Annual Total 2019 YTD 2020 YTD YTD
2019 Annual Total 2019 YTD 2020 YTD YTD NAICS RETAIL TRADE (Nov '18-Oct '19)(Nov '18-Oct '19)(Nov '19 - Oct '20)% Diff
NAICS MANUFACTURING (Nov '18-Oct '19)(Nov '18-Oct '19)(Nov '19 - Oct '20)% Diff 442 Furniture and Home Furnishings 221,841 221,841 209,308 -5.6%
311 Food Manufacturing 9,140 9,140 10,332 13.0%443 Electronics and Appliances 277,403 277,403 300,343 8.3%
312 Beverage and Tobacco Products 12,690 12,690 11,872 -6.4%444 Building Material and Garden 651,706 651,706 751,040 15.2%
313 Textile Mills 326 326 1,178 260.8%445 Food and Beverage Stores 406,230 406,230 450,577 10.9%
314 Textile Product Mills 2,965 2,965 2,390 -19.4%446 Health and Personal Care Store 426,130 426,130 348,418 -18.2%
315 Apparel Manufacturing 767 767 1,301 69.6%448 Clothing and Accessories 1,236,033 1,236,033 872,671 -29.4%
316 Leather and Allied Products 307 307 488 58.9%451 Sporting Goods, Hobby, Books 254,383 254,383 239,744 -5.8%
321 Wood Product Manufacturing 13,028 13,028 14,670 12.6%452 General Merchandise Stores 818,123 818,123 878,021 7.3%
322 Paper Manufacturing 10,180 10,180 4,028 -60.4%453 Miscellaneous Store Retailers 917,046 917,046 1,178,104 28.5%
323 Printing and Related Support 46,449 46,449 37,260 -19.8%454 Nonstore Retailers 227,559 227,559 271,309 19.2%
324 Petroleum and Coal Products 8,499 8,499 1,404 -83.5%TOTAL RETAIL TRADE 5,436,454$ 5,436,454$ 5,499,535$ 1.2%
325 Chemical Manufacturing 11,220 11,220 10,595 -5.6%Overall Change from Previous Year 63,081$
326 Plastics and Rubber Products 7,666 7,666 7,322 -4.5%
327 Nonmetallic Mineral Products 19,762 19,762 16,154 -18.3%
331 Primary Metal Manufacturing 48,894 48,894 62,321 27.5%2019 Annual Total 2019 YTD 2020 YTD YTD
332 Fabricated Metal Product Manuf 29,751 29,751 34,205 15.0%NAICS SERVICES (Nov '18-Oct '19)(Nov '18-Oct '19)(Nov '19 - Oct '20)% Diff
333 Machinery Manufacturing 21,356 21,356 22,168 3.8%51*Information 667,861 667,861 a 684,732 2.5%
334 Computer and Electronic Product 8,921 8,921 8,232 -7.7%52*Finance and Insurance 138,176 138,176 177,847 28.7%
335 Electric Equipment, Appliances 1,213 1,213 8,276 582.0%53*Real Estate, Rental, Leasing 434,301 434,301 368,873 -15.1%
336 Transportation Equipment Man 510,518 510,518 92,399 -81.9%541 Professional, Scientific, Tech 344,043 344,043 c 394,150 14.6%
337 Furniture and Related Products 17,907 17,907 10,109 -43.5%551 Company Management 1,147 1,147 66 -94.3%
339 Miscellaneous Manufacturing 39,336 39,336 32,935 -16.3%56*Admin. Supp., Remed Svcs 522,491 522,491 651,469 24.7%
TOTAL MANUFACTURING 820,898$ 820,898$ 389,637$ -52.5%611 Educational Services 45,995 45,995 40,410 -12.1%
Overall Change from Previous Year (431,261)$ 62*Health Care Social Assistance 93,305 93,305 110,693 18.6%
71*Arts and Entertainment 119,538 119,538 50,412 -57.8%
72*Accommodation and Food Svcs 1,469,344 1,469,344 1,204,980 -18.0%
2019 Annual Total 2019 YTD 2020 YTD YTD 81*Other Services 606,743 606,743 534,972 -11.8%
NAICS TRANSPORTATION AND WAREHOUSING (Nov '18-Oct '19)(Nov '18-Oct '19)(Nov '19 - Oct '20)% Diff 92*Public Administration 2,204 2,204 1,620 -26.5%
481 Air Transportation 0 0 0 N/A TOTAL SERVICES 4,445,147$ 4,445,147$ 4,220,223$ -5.1%
482 Rail Transportation 22,935 22,935 14,421 -37.1%Overall Change from Previous Year (224,924)$
483 Water Transportation 0 0 0 N/A
484 Truck Transportation 17,265 17,265 22,499 30.3%
485 Transit and Ground Passengers 27 27 9 -67.3%2019 Annual Total 2019 YTD 2020 YTD YTD
488 Transportation Support 37,253 37,253 79,945 114.6%NAICS MISCELLANEOUS (Nov '18-Oct '19)(Nov '18-Oct '19)(Nov '19 - Oct '20)% Diff
491 Postal Service 727 727 676 -7.1%000 Unknown 0 0 0 N/A
492 Couriers and Messengers 285 285 69,993 24424.5%111-115 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing 4,807 4,807 5,367 11.7%
493 Warehousing and Storage 10,217 10,217 9,647 -5.6%211-221 Mining & Utilities 29,481 29,481 28,831 -2.2%
TOTAL TRANSPORTATION 88,710$ 88,710$ 197,189$ 122.3%999 Unclassifiable Establishments 230,217 230,217 273,689 18.9%
Overall Change from Previous Year 108,479$ TOTAL SERVICES 264,505$ 264,505$ 307,887$ 16.4%
Overall Change from Previous Year 43,382$
2019 Annual Total 2019 YTD 2020 YTD YTD
NAICS WHOLESALE TRADE (Nov '18-Oct '19)(Nov '18-Oct '19)(Nov '19 - Oct '20)% Diff GRAND TOTAL 18,813,547$ 18,813,547$ 18,855,888$
423 Wholesale Trade, Durable Goods 1,169,244 1,169,244 b 1,027,727 -12.1%Overall Change from Previous Year 42,341$ 0.2%
424 Wholesale Trade, Nondurable 316,221 316,221 303,860 -3.9%
425 Wholesale Electronic Markets 10,550 10,550 14,684 39.2%Total December 2020 Sales Tax Distributions 1,652,954$
TOTAL WHOLESALE 1,496,015$ 1,496,015$ 1,346,271$ -10.0%55,877$ g ()
(149,743)$ Percent Increase from December 2019
Comparisons:
December 2019 18,813,547 17,216,470 1,597,077$
Includes Adjustments in excess of +/- $10,000.December 2018 18,198,285 16,691,656 1,506,629$
a. WA State Department of Revenue audit adjustment to sales tax returns for February 2019 Reporting (adjustment: $14,165).
b. WA State Department of Revenue audit adjustment to sales tax returns for August 2019 Reporting (adjustment: $10,411).
c. WA State Department of Revenue adjustment to sales tax returns for July 2020 Reporting (adjustment: $18,706).
12/29/20
3.5%
35Page 38 of 109
Budget
YE
Actual Variance Budget
YE
Actual Variance Budget
YE
Actual Variance Budget
YE
Actual Variance
OPERATING FUND:460 460 461 461 462 462
OPERATING REVENUES
Charges For Service 14,778,400 14,832,494 54,094 8,554,200 8,562,111 7,911 17,259,700 16,833,185 (426,515) 10,328,200 10,278,852 (49,348)
Grants - - - - 50,000 50,000
Interest Earnings - 49,530 49,530 - 28,473 28,473 - 2,959 2,959 - 29,248 29,248
Rents, Leases, Concessions, & Other 187,000 148,433 (38,567) 69,000 36,167 (32,833) - - - 56,000 47,373 (8,627)
TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES 14,965,400 15,030,457 65,057 8,623,200 8,626,751 3,551 17,259,700 16,836,143 (423,557) 10,384,200 10,405,473 21,273
OPERATING EXPENSES
Salaries & Wages 2,522,053 2,390,321 131,732 1,511,111 1,441,451 69,660 - - - 2,574,037 2,352,640 221,397
Benefits 1,446,108 1,184,417 261,691 846,106 703,718 142,389 - - - 1,437,619 1,186,046 251,573
Supplies 364,244 296,678 67,566 164,550 84,872 79,678 - - - 75,050 64,811 10,239
Other Service Charges 4,435,767 2,961,274 1,474,493 3,534,100 2,851,349 682,751 18,397,800 17,352,594 1,045,206 2,070,740 1,399,520 671,220
Intergovernmental Services (Less Transfers Out)- - - - - -
Waste Management Payments
Sewer Metro Services - - -
Debt Service Interest 1,064,200 863,864 200,336 293,900 197,873 96,027 - - - 346,700 287,434 59,266
Interfund Operating Rentals & Supplies 1,844,067 1,853,014 (8,947) 1,443,267 1,451,856 (8,589) - - - 1,838,700 1,846,931 (8,231)
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 11,676,439 9,549,568 2,126,871 7,793,034 6,731,119 1,061,915 18,397,800 17,352,594 1,045,206 8,342,846 7,137,382 1,205,464
OPERATING REVENUES LESS EXPENSES
BEFORE DEPRECIATION 3,288,961 5,480,889 2,191,928 830,166 1,895,632 1,065,466 (1,138,100) (516,451) 621,649 2,041,354 3,268,091 1,226,737
NON-OPERATING REVENUES
Operating Transfers-in - - -
Intergovernmental Loan 3,095,821 116,582 2,979,239
Other Non-Operating Revenues -
Revenue Bond Proceeds 15,719,900 15,729,824 (9,924)
NON-OPERATING EXPENSES
Transfer to Capital Subfund 17,385,692 6,484,733 10,900,959 - - - - - -
Other Operating Transfers-out 390,308 57,311 332,997 315,681 13,399 302,282 391,081 87,399 303,682
Debt Service Principal 1,638,200 2,227,831 (589,631) 596,700 862,567 (265,867) 470,100 693,765 (223,665)
Net Change in Restricted Net Assets - 1,881,592 1,881,592 - 17,811 17,811 - 4,646 4,646
Interfund Loan Repayment
Other Non-Operating Expenses
BEGINNING WORKING CAPITAL - January 1, 2020 11,913,106 11,913,106 - 7,216,765 7,216,765 - 3,445,836 3,445,836 - 7,198,290 7,198,290 -
ENDING WORKING CAPITAL - December 31, 2020 14,603,588 22,588,935 7,985,347 7,134,550 8,218,620 1,084,070 2,307,736 2,929,385 621,649 8,378,463 9,680,571 1,302,108
NET CHANGE IN WORKING CAPITAL (see Note)2,690,482 10,675,829 7,985,347 (82,215) 1,001,855 1,084,070 (1,138,100) (516,451) 621,649 1,180,173 2,482,281 1,302,108
CAPITAL FUND:
CAPITAL REVENUES
Interest Revenue 4,300 279 (4,021) 34,700 107,572 72,872 34,700 50,643 15,943
Grants - - - 174,120 4,575 (169,545)
Contributions - - - - - - - - -
Other Non-Operating Revenue - 40,750 40,750 - 388,408 388,408 - 16,493 16,493
Increase In Contributions - System Development 960,200 669,802 (290,398) 670,500 216,134 (454,366) 501,800 575,136 73,336
Interfund Revenues - - - - - - - - -
Increase In Contributions - FAA - - - - - - - - -
Proceeds of Debt Activity - - - - - - - - -
Transfers In from Operating Sub-Fund 17,385,692 6,484,733 (10,900,959) - - - - - -
Transfer In from Other Funds - - - - - - - -
TOTAL CAPITAL REVENUES 18,350,192 7,195,563 (11,154,629) 705,200 712,114 6,914 710,620 646,847 (63,773)
CAPITAL EXPENSES
Other Non-Operating Expense - 395,386 (395,386) - - - - - -
Increase In Fixed Assets - Salaries 353,600 290,293 63,307 78,600 86,647 (8,047) 130,000 105,938 24,062
Increase In Fixed Assets - Benefits 141,400 136,780 4,620 31,400 44,456 (13,056) 52,000 48,725 3,275
Increase In Fixed Assets - Services 400 8 392 2,000 382 1,618 2,000 570 1,430
Increase In Fixed Assets - Site Improvements 122,000 53,746 68,254 - - - - -
Increase In Fixed Assets - Equipment - - - - - - 9,500 9,497 3
Increase In Fixed Assets - Construction 16,545,553 6,070,218 10,475,335 3,903,942 830,680 3,073,262 2,263,293 421,353 1,841,940
Operating Transfers Out 50,000 50,000 - 50,000 50,000 - 50,000 50,000 -
TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENSES 17,212,953 6,996,430 10,216,523 4,065,942 1,012,166 3,053,776 2,506,793 636,083 1,870,710
BEGINNING WORKING CAPITAL - January 1, 2020 81,079 81,079 - 13,300,157 13,300,157 - 11,809,735 11,809,735 -
1,218,318 280,212 (938,106) 9,939,415 13,000,105 3,060,690 10,013,562 11,820,499 1,806,937
NET CHANGE IN WORKING CAPITAL (see Note)1,137,239 199,133 (938,106) (3,360,742) (300,052) 3,060,690 (1,796,173) 10,764 1,806,937
Total Change in Working Capital 3,827,721 10,874,962 7,047,241 (3,442,957) 701,802 4,144,759 (1,138,100) (516,451) 621,649 (616,000) 2,493,045 3,109,045
(*) Depreciation 3,829,600 3,774,956 2,450,100 2,337,347 - - 2,315,100 2,120,788
OPERATING & CAPITAL FUNDS
WATER
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
SEWER SEWER METRO STORMThrough December 2020
(*) Debt service interest as shown represents actual cash outlay. Debt service principal represents actual expenditures; payments will be made as scheduled in December 2020. Working Capital = Current Assets
minus Current Liabilities
ENDING WORKING CAPITAL - December 31, 2020
See note
36Page 39 of 109
OPERATING FUND:
OPERATING REVENUES
Charges For Service
Grants
Interest Earnings
Rents, Leases, Concessions, & Other
TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES
OPERATING EXPENSES
Salaries & Wages
Benefits
Supplies
Other Service Charges
Intergovernmental Services (Less Transfers Out)
Waste Management Payments
Sewer Metro Services
Debt Service Interest
Interfund Operating Rentals & Supplies
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES
OPERATING REVENUES LESS EXPENSES
BEFORE DEPRECIATION
NON-OPERATING REVENUES
Operating Transfers-in
Intergovernmental Loan
Other Non-Operating Revenues
Revenue Bond Proceeds
NON-OPERATING EXPENSES
Transfer to Capital Subfund
Other Operating Transfers-out
Debt Service Principal
Net Change in Restricted Net Assets
Interfund Loan Repayment
Other Non-Operating Expenses
BEGINNING WORKING CAPITAL - January 1, 2020
ENDING WORKING CAPITAL - December 31, 2020
NET CHANGE IN WORKING CAPITAL (see Note)
CAPITAL FUND:
CAPITAL REVENUES
Interest Revenue
Grants
Contributions
Other Non-Operating Revenue
Increase In Contributions - System Development
Interfund Revenues
Increase In Contributions - FAA
Proceeds of Debt Activity
Transfers In from Operating Sub-Fund
Transfer In from Other Funds
TOTAL CAPITAL REVENUES
CAPITAL EXPENSES
Other Non-Operating Expense
Increase In Fixed Assets - Salaries
Increase In Fixed Assets - Benefits
Increase In Fixed Assets - Services
Increase In Fixed Assets - Site Improvements
Increase In Fixed Assets - Equipment
Increase In Fixed Assets - Construction
Operating Transfers Out
TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENSES
BEGINNING WORKING CAPITAL - January 1, 2020
NET CHANGE IN WORKING CAPITAL (see Note)
Total Change in Working Capital
(*) Depreciation
OPERATING & CAPITAL FUNDS
Through December 2020
Working Capital = Current Assets
minus Current Liabilities
ENDING WORKING CAPITAL - December 31, 2020
See note
Budget
YE
Actual Variance Budget
YE
Actual Variance Budget
YE
Actual Variance Budget
YE
Actual Variance
464 464 465 465 466 466 -
16,068,500 15,443,215 (625,285) 1,378,000 1,428,976 50,976 1,086,000 1,542,097 456,097 - - -
88,600 73,900 (14,700) 70,000 69,000 (1,000) - -
42,400 19,417 (22,983) 7,800 5,471 (2,329) 1,000 3,287 2,287 10,000 2,757 (7,243)
- - - 6,100 14,593 8,493 - 100 100
16,199,500 15,536,532 (662,968) 1,461,900 1,518,039 56,139 1,087,000 1,545,483 458,483 10,000 2,757 (7,243)
- - - 232,843 214,016 18,827 473,497 447,200 26,297 - - -
- - - 167,008 106,253 60,755 291,646 251,180 40,466 175,000 58,727 116,273
53,400 25,238 28,162 307,000 337,904 (30,904) 221,700 272,676 (50,976) - - -
2,499,675 2,872,693 (373,018) 213,800 209,350 4,450 157,400 149,198 8,202 5,600 135,004 (129,404)
- - - - - - - - - - - -
13,485,300 12,104,160 1,381,140
- - - 100 34 66 - - - - - -
642,300 648,338 (6,038) 46,100 46,100 (0) 196,000 196,349 (349) - - -
16,680,675 15,650,429 1,030,246 966,851 913,657 53,194 1,340,243 1,316,603 23,640 180,600 193,731 (13,131)
(481,175) (113,896) 367,279 495,049 604,382 109,333 (253,243) 228,880 482,123 (170,600) (190,974) (20,374)
100,000 - (100,000) - - -
- 2,199 2,199
355,400 220,386 100,000 42,500
22,877 11,662 11,215 - - - - - -
- - - - - -
- (91,804) (91,804) - (1,851) (1,851)
12,200 11,627 573
5,936,695 5,936,695 - 634,377 634,377 - 822,045 822,045 - 1,921,953 1,921,953 -
5,432,643 5,811,137 378,494 761,826 1,098,551 336,725 568,802 1,012,475 443,673 1,751,353 1,730,979 (20,374)
(504,052) (125,558) 378,494 127,449 464,174 336,725 (253,243) 190,430 443,673 (170,600) (190,974) (20,374)
200 1,696 1,496 - 989 989
165,000 52,000 (113,000) - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
3,812,598 2,784,718 (1,027,880) - - -
- - - - - -
355,400 220,386 (135,014) 100,000 42,500 (57,500)
- - - 55,400 55,400 -
4,333,198 3,058,801 (1,274,397) 155,400 98,889 (56,511)
- - - - - -
4,300 76 4,224 - 4,139 (4,139)
1,700 24 1,676 - 2,151 (2,151)
100 - 100 100 16 84
- - - -
- - - -
4,650,290 3,393,878 1,256,412 405,400 343,383 62,017
25,000 - 25,000 - - -
4,681,390 3,393,979 1,287,411 405,500 349,688 55,812
429,841 429,841 - 258,983 258,983 -
81,649 94,663 13,014 8,883 8,184 (699)
(348,192) (335,178) 13,014 (250,100) (250,799) (699)
(504,052) (125,558) (220,743) 128,996 349,739 (503,343) (60,368) 442,975 (170,600) (190,974) (20,374)
21,100 9,410 519,700 427,175 45,000 23,891 - -
(*) Debt service interest as shown represents actual cash outlay. Debt service principal represents actual expenditures;
payments will be made as scheduled in December 2020.
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
SOLID WASTE AIRPORT CEMETERY
INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
INSURANCE
See note below
37Page 40 of 109
OPERATING FUND:
OPERATING REVENUES
Charges For Service
Grants
Interest Earnings
Rents, Leases, Concessions, & Other
TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES
OPERATING EXPENSES
Salaries & Wages
Benefits
Supplies
Other Service Charges
Intergovernmental Services (Less Transfers Out)
Waste Management Payments
Sewer Metro Services
Debt Service Interest
Interfund Operating Rentals & Supplies
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES
OPERATING REVENUES LESS EXPENSES
BEFORE DEPRECIATION
NON-OPERATING REVENUES
Operating Transfers-in
Intergovernmental Loan
Other Non-Operating Revenues
Revenue Bond Proceeds
NON-OPERATING EXPENSES
Transfer to Capital Subfund
Other Operating Transfers-out
Debt Service Principal
Net Change in Restricted Net Assets
Interfund Loan Repayment
Other Non-Operating Expenses
BEGINNING WORKING CAPITAL - January 1, 2020
ENDING WORKING CAPITAL - December 31, 2020
NET CHANGE IN WORKING CAPITAL (see Note)
CAPITAL FUND:
CAPITAL REVENUES
Interest Revenue
Grants
Contributions
Other Non-Operating Revenue
Increase In Contributions - System Development
Interfund Revenues
Increase In Contributions - FAA
Proceeds of Debt Activity
Transfers In from Operating Sub-Fund
Transfer In from Other Funds
TOTAL CAPITAL REVENUES
CAPITAL EXPENSES
Other Non-Operating Expense
Increase In Fixed Assets - Salaries
Increase In Fixed Assets - Benefits
Increase In Fixed Assets - Services
Increase In Fixed Assets - Site Improvements
Increase In Fixed Assets - Equipment
Increase In Fixed Assets - Construction
Operating Transfers Out
TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENSES
BEGINNING WORKING CAPITAL - January 1, 2020
NET CHANGE IN WORKING CAPITAL (see Note)
Total Change in Working Capital
(*) Depreciation
OPERATING & CAPITAL FUNDS
Through December 2020
Working Capital = Current Assets
minus Current Liabilities
ENDING WORKING CAPITAL - December 31, 2020
See note
Budget
YE
Actual Variance Budget
YE
Actual Variance Budget
YE
Actual Variance Budget
YE
Actual Variance
- - 568 568 560 560
1,150,500 1,013,606 (136,894) 3,490,600 3,546,479 55,879 6,587,500 6,636,091 48,591 2,085,395 2,009,306 (76,089)
- - - - - -
26,600 10,918 (15,682) 10,100 5,943 (4,157) - 10,704 10,704 - 10,572 10,572
50,000 8,623 (41,377) - 11,982 11,982 - 2,696 2,696 - 120,225 120,225
1,227,100 1,033,147 (193,953) 3,500,700 3,564,403 63,703 6,587,500 6,649,492 61,992 2,085,395 2,140,103 54,708
- - - 786,793 771,049 15,744 2,009,816 2,017,950 (8,134) 563,879 656,449 (92,570)
250,000 91,396 158,604 444,389 391,208 53,181 1,112,945 905,880 207,065 327,656 307,865 19,791
- - - 140,220 74,987 65,233 460,150 213,860 246,290 941,200 856,705 84,495
455,315 242,881 212,434 1,884,560 1,300,013 584,547 2,830,900 2,451,511 379,389 511,100 432,316 78,784
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - 1,500 257 1,243
128,100 128,100 - 161,400 161,400 0 185,900 185,900 0 304,000 305,313 (1,313)
833,415 462,376 371,039 3,417,362 2,698,657 718,705 6,599,711 5,775,100 824,611 2,649,335 2,558,903 90,432
393,685 570,771 177,086 83,338 865,746 782,408 (12,211) 874,392 886,603 (563,940) (418,800) 145,140
250,000 41,832 (208,168) 269,953 91,941 (178,012) 7,000 - (7,000)
500,000 - 500,000
698,700 679,176 19,524 - - - - - -
- - -
- - - - - - - (56,664) (56,664)
- 49,840 (49,840)
1,877,627 1,877,627 - 1,315,496 1,315,496 - 2,522,898 2,522,898 - 2,956,770 2,956,770 -
2,271,312 2,448,398 177,086 950,134 1,543,898 593,764 2,280,640 3,489,231 1,208,591 2,399,830 2,594,634 194,804
393,685 570,771 177,086 (365,362) 228,402 593,764 (242,258) 966,333 1,208,591 (556,940) (362,136) 194,804
- 5,027 5,027 - 17,724 17,724
133,700 133,728 28
- - - - - -
- 7,405 7,405 - 12,782 12,782
- -- - - -
- -- 1,585,105 1,661,194 76,089
- -- - - -
- -- - - -
500,000 - (500,000) - - -
25,000 23,222 (1,778) 868,600 - (868,600)
525,000 35,654 (489,346) 2,587,405 1,825,428 (761,977)
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
300 61 239 500 309 191
- -
1,186,527 742,323 444,204 2,941,150 1,629,845 1,311,305
- - - 1,140,000 - 1,140,000
- - - - - -
1,186,827 742,383 444,444 4,081,650 1,630,153 2,451,497
1,445,614 1,445,614 - 4,419,304 4,419,304 -
783,787 738,885 (44,902) 2,925,059 4,614,578 1,689,519
(661,827) (706,729) (44,902) (1,494,245) 195,274 1,689,519
393,685 570,771 177,086 (365,362) 228,402 593,764 (904,085) 259,604 1,163,689 (2,051,185) (166,862) 1,884,323
- - - - 530,000 379,334 1,300,000 1,372,284
INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
WORKER'S COMPENSATION FACILITIES INNOVATION & TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT RENTAL
38Page 41 of 109
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
King County Population Projections (Tate)(15 Minutes)
Date:
March 2, 2021
Department:
Community Development
Attachments:
Attachment A – PowerPoint presentation for the
March 8, 2021 City Council Study Ses s ion
Meeting by Rebeccah Mas kin, of King County on
the development of the Core Cities Growth Targets.
Budget Impact:
Current Budget: $0
Proposed Revision: $0
Revised Budget: $0
Administrativ e Recommendation:
For discussion only.
Background Summary:
As a part of the 2021 Countywide Planning Policies update, King County is leading the process
to set new growth targets for jurisdictions to use in the 2024 periodic update of comprehensive
plans. Creating growth targets is a collaborative effort in King County, facilitated by King County
staff with the participation of planning staff from each jurisdiction. The process uses the Puget
Sound Regional Council’s VISION 2050 Regional Growth Strategy as a platform for distributing
growth to King County and Regional Geographies within King County, and a deliberative process
to refine a set of preliminary housing and job growth targets for each jurisdiction. Ultimately,
growth targets will be finalized by the Growth Management Planning Council who will make a
recommendation to the King County Council for adoption into the adopted 2021 Countywide
Planning Policies.
Interpreting Growth T argets:
Growth Targets are policy statements about the amount of housing and job growth each
jurisdiction is planning for. Under the Growth Management Act, all jurisdictions share a role in
accommodating future growth, though the amount will differ by the role each jurisdiction plays in
the county and region. Targets express growth over a range of time (2019-2044 for the targets
in progress), and are generally set independently from the last targeting exercise, i.e., the 2019-
2044 targets will replace the 2006-2035.
Targets form the basis for the land use assumptions in comprehensive plans. Drawing from
PSRC’s guidance on growth targets in VISION 2050, the land use assumptions used in
comprehensive plans must be substantially consistent with adopted growth targets. As such,
growth targets are the numbers jurisdictions should be aiming for in their plans, and all King
County jurisdictions are encouraged to fully participate in setting growth targets, to ensure they
reflect anticipated future growth.
How the Urban Growth Capacity Report (Buildable Lands) Relates to Growth T argets:
Page 42 of 109
The Urban Growth Capacity Report and growth target setting are separate but intersecting
components of growth management in King County. The Urban Growth Capacity Report is a
mid-cycle performance check on growth and planning goals of adopted comprehensive plans,
including adopted growth targets. For the 2021 Urban Growth Capacity Report, this will mean
reporting on adopted 2006-35 growth targets and 2015 comprehensive plans.
The growth target setting process will support the 2024 periodic update of comprehensive
plans, with targets covering roughly 2019-2044. The calculated capacity from the Urban Growth
Capacity Report is a key reference for the growth target setting process, as jurisdictions want to
understand and compare their relative amounts of capacity, but jurisdictions may consider a
number of additional factors in setting their growth target.
Because capacity calculated in the Urban Growth Capacity Report is constrained by the
assumptions of currently adopted plans and recently developed housing and workplaces, it may
not reflect the entirety of the planned future for a jurisdiction. For example, a newly permitted
major development, planned visioning around a neighborhood center, or a necessary zoning
change around a future infrastructure investment may not be accounted for in the capacity
calculation from the Urban Growth Capacity Report. King County’s growth target setting process
makes space for a variety of additional related factors to be considered alongside of the initial
and final capacity as calculated through the Urban Growth Capacity process. Comprehensive
plans should have land capacity analyses to support their growth assumptions. These may be
based on the Urban Growth Capacity Report and incorporate new analysis for places where
future development is likely to differ.
Creating Preliminary T arget Ranges:
Step 1: Create Countywide and Regional Geography Allocations
Drawing from the VISION 2050 Regional Growth Strategy PSRC’s Regional Macroeconomic
Forecast, King County’s share of regional growth (50% population, 59% employment) is applied
to the forecasted regional growth for 2019-2044, to create the countywide growth allocation.
Then the Regional Geography shares of growth are applied to the countywide growth allocation,
to create the 2019-2044 Regional Geography allocations. Population is converted to housing
units by Regional Geography, using assumptions tailored to each regional geography. The
Regional Geography total housing and job allocations are located at the bottom of the Inputs tab
in the refined preliminary target range spreadsheets.
Step 2: Select Data Factors
Data factors are relevant data variables used to break out the Regional Geography allocations to
preliminary growth targets for each jurisdiction. Data factors were identified from past growth
targets setting exercises, and input from planners and staff on the Growth Management Planning
Council’s Interjurisdictional Team, and the Urban Growth Capacity Technical Committee. The
data factors selected include: current 2006-2035 targets, recent jobs and housing growth (2012-
2018, and 2006-2019 respectively), current jobs and housing estimates (2019 and 2020,
respectively), jurisdiction land area, and initial capacity estimates of housing units and non-
residential square feet, from draft Urban Growth Capacity Report data. Though they have not
progressed through the Regional Geography level target setting deliberations, two additional
Page 43 of 109
series of weighed data factors were created for some jurisdictions. Metro cities, Core cities, and
High Capacity Transit Communities have an additional set of data factors weighted by the
number of high capacity transit stops within a jurisdiction. Metro cities and Core cities also have
an additional set of data factors weighted by the number of designated regional centers in each
city.
High capacity transit stops were determined by the Puget Sound Regional Council as an input to
VISION 2050, and include existing and planned light rail, commuter rail, ferry, bus rapid transit,
and high-frequency, all-day service bus stops.
Step 3: Collect Data Factors
Once defined, data factors are collected from state, regional, and local sources. These sources
are listed below.
Housing Units 2020: OFM April 1st estimates for 2020
Jobs 2019: PSRC/ESD Total employment, less construction/resource sector jobs
HU T arget: 2006-35 extended targets
Jobs T arget: 2006-35 extended targets
Land Area: Area of jurisdiction in acres
HU 2006-19: OFM Small Area Estimates
Jobs 2012-18: PSRC/ESD Total Employment, less construction/resource sector
HU Capacity: initial residential capacity from Urban Growth Capacity Phase 3 reporting,
expressed in housing units
Job Capacity: initial non-residential capacity from Urban Growth Capacity Phase 3
reporting. Non-residential capacity was converted to jobs via two assumptions: in
industrial zones by multiplying area by an assumption of 750 sq ft/job; in other non-
residential zones by multiplying area by an assumption of 350 sq ft/job
Step 4: Convert Raw Data Factors into Shares (%) to Apply to Regional Geography
Allocations
After the data factors are collected, they are converted to a percentage share that can be
applied to the Regional Geography allocations to create preliminary targets for each jurisdiction.
Data factors are grouped by Regional Geography and summed for a total at the Regional
Geography level. Then, each jurisdiction’s data factor value is divided by the Regional
Geography total to create a percentage representing the share each jurisdiction within a
Regional Geography. This process is repeated for each data factor.
Step 5: Apply Data Factor Shares to Regional Geography Allocations to Create Preliminary
Targets
To create a preliminary target for each jurisdiction, the data factor shares from the previous step
are multiplied by the Regional Geography growth allocation. This apportions the Regional
Geography allocation to jurisdictions, proportionate to a jurisdiction’s data factor value. This step
is repeated for each data factor. Taking the different data factor derived values together creates
Page 44 of 109
a range for each jurisdiction. The preliminary housing growth target range for Auburn was
between 9,266 and 12,725, while the preliminary jobs growth target range for the city is between
13,826 to 22,619.
Interpreting the Preliminary T arget Ranges:
Each scenario shows how growth targets could look if they were allocated to cities by a single
data factor. Each factor has pros and cons that make it relevant or credible (or not) as a
foundation for a growth target. The table below lists the benefits and drawbacks of using a
specific range value.
2020
Housing
Units or
2019 Jobs
Pro · Most populous/job-rich cities in Regional Geography receive
the most growth
Expresses cities’ current roles
Con · Doesn't account for recent growth trends or future role- maybe
not a good fit for jurisdictions anticipating significant change
from annexation, new infrastructure investments, or other
significant changes
Land Area
Pro · Similar to existing housing units or jobs, largest cities receive
the most growth
· May be helpful for cities with larger amounts of vacant land or
greenfield development
Con · Not very useful indicator of density or capacity
· Limited connection to accommodating future growth
· Does not consider sensitive environmental areas, lack of
sewer infrastructure
2035
Housing
or Job
T arget
(existing
targets)
Pro · Yields a proportionately similar target to 2015-era growth
targets, with an updated forecast and Regional Growth Strategy
· Helpful indicator if growth in a jurisdiction has been on target
Con · May not account for recent changes in growth
· Less helpful for cities that have changed Regional Geography
designation in VISION 2050
Housing
or Job
Growth
(2006 -
2018)
Pro · Cities that have grown more in the past ~12 years receive
larger targets
· Helpful if recent trends are indicative of future growth
Con · Does not account for the existing base or size of city
· Less helpful if factors inducing growth are not expected to
continue
Capacity
Pro · Cities with greater relative capacity receive a larger target
· Targeted growth is based on a city's capacity to absorb growth
Con · Less helpful for cities planning to add capacity to
accommodate a future target, or if other anticipated changes are
not yet reflected in current capacity
Preliminary T arget Range Analysis and Baselines:
Core Cities
The Core cities have coalesced around a strategy for reviewing the preliminary ranges and
developing baselines for housing and jobs. The group elected to remove the land area data
Page 45 of 109
factor from consideration for housing and jobs targets, and to review an additional factor:
allocating jobs by the 2020 distribution of housing units. There was discussion about removing
the outlying high and low values for each city and the 2020 housing data factor from the ranges,
but no consensus on either item. To consider the recent job growth factor while accommodating
cities that have experienced job losses over the 2006-18 period, the group elected to also
examine a more recent period of growth, e.g., 2012-18, where job gains are more likely.
To establish a baseline, the staff working group agreed to start from an average of the remaining
unweighted data factors. The average will be presented alongside of the initial capacity from the
Urban Growth Capacity Report and the existing adopted growth targets for comparison. King
County will provide this information to cities, along with additional documentation and a
dashboard link at least a week prior to the next Core Cities meeting, to allow cities to digest and
form a position on their draft growth target.
After determining the data ranges to include in calculating a baseline preliminary target at the
December meeting, the Core cities each shared an initial position and reaction to the baseline
job and housing targets. In February, core cities staff coordinated, and Auburn has been
allocated 12,000 housing units for future growth. This figure is supported by the models run by
King County, the Housing Action Plan Existing Conditions Report identifying an underproduction
of housing in Auburn by 2,361 (meaning 2,361 more households or families moved into Auburn
than houses that were built during the same timeframe). Jobs growth targets are under current
discussion.
Rev iewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Staff:Tate
Meeting Date:March 8, 2021 Item Number:
Page 46 of 109
KING COUNTY
COUNTYWIDE PLANNING
POLICIES & GROWTH TARGETS
PRESENTATION FOR AUBURN CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 8, 2021
Page 47 of 109
2
TONIGHT’S
AGENDA
GMA + GMPC Overview
Countywide Planning Policies Update
Growth Targets
Schedule
Page 48 of 109
IMPLEMENTING
THE GROWTH
MANAGEMENT
ACT
3
Page 49 of 109
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLANNING COUNCIL (GMPC)
Established in 1992 via Interlocal Agreement
Convened by the King County Executive
Members representing: King County, City of Seattle, Sound Cities Associations
Ex-Officio members representing: Special Purpose Districts, School Districts, Port of Seattle
Oversee the Countywide Planning Policies including: the UGA, Growth Targets, policies for
topics of a countywide nature that cross jurisdictional lines
Make recommendations to the King County Council
Ratification: after approval and ratification by the King County Council, approval of
amendments within 90 days by county & cities representing at least 70% of the population
and 30% of those jurisdictions
4
Page 50 of 109
Countywide Planning Policies establish:
Guidance for the comprehensive plans
Urban growth area boundary
Criteria for revising growth boundary
Growth targets for each jurisdiction
Criteria for defining urban centers and
manufacturing/industrial centers
Policies for issues of a countywide nature
5
Page 51 of 109
WHY UPDATE
COUNTYWIDE
PLANNING
POLICIES NOW?
VISION 2050 update + Regional Centers
Framework
New growth targets for 2024
Comprehensive Plans
Policy guidance for 2024 Comprehensive
Plans
Other policy and legislative changes since
2012
Policy recommendations from GMPC’s
Affordable Housing Committee
6
Page 52 of 109
2021 COUNTYWIDE PLANNING POLICIES
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Establish a focused scope for review based on the 2012 baseline
Center social equity & health
Integrate regional policy & legislative changes
VISION 2050
GMA amendments –e.g. for buildable lands
ST3 and other regional transit investments
King County 4:1 Program changes
Policy recommendations from the GMPC’s Affordable Housing Committee
Provide clear, actionable direction for comprehensive plans
Implement RGS with 2044 growth targets that form the land use basis for periodic comprehensive plan
updates
7
Page 53 of 109
CHAPTER
CONCEPTS
8
Environment: Access to healthy
environment
Development Patterns: Access to
high opportunity areas for all; revise
centers criteria
Housing: Create affordable housing
in areas with reliable and easy access
to job centers
Page 54 of 109
CHAPTER
CONCEPTS
9
Economy: Prioritize diversity of living-wage
jobs
Transportation: Emphasize creating an
equitable transportation system that is
safe for all users
Public Facilities + Services: Broaden
resilience and recovery policy to include an
awareness of communications with these
communities
Page 55 of 109
10
2044 GROWTH
TARGETS
Growth Targets Development
Process
Countywide and Regional Geography
allocations
Next Steps
Page 56 of 109
WHAT ARE GROWTH TARGETS?
Growth targets are:
A policy statement about the amount of housing and jobs
each jurisdiction will plan for in 2024 comprehensive plans
Part of the Countywide Planning Policies
For the urban area only
For at least a 20-year period
Created collaboratively by all cities and King County 11
#
Page 57 of 109
GROWTH TARGET PROCESS
12
Regional
Forecast
County
Growth
Projections
Regional
Geography
Allocations
City/PAA
Growth
Target
Ranges
City/PAA
Growth
Targets
Comp Plans
VISION 2050 Regional Growth Strategy County/Local Factors
OFM Pop HU
Process Steps
Data Sources
Page 58 of 109
GROWTH TARGETS
KEY ASSUMPTIONS + PROCESS
Data Source: PSRC Regional Forecast
Assumptions: Central Puget Sound counties have agreed to use
this forecast for growth target setting
13
Regional Population and Job Growth 2019-2044:
Regional
Forecast
Population
Growth Job Growth
Region 1,321,700 884,450
Page 59 of 109
GROWTH TARGETS
KEY ASSUMPTIONS + PROCESS
Data Source: County growth share from VISION 2050 Regional
Growth Strategy
Assumptions: Apply growth share to regional forecasted growth
2019-2044
14
Countywide Population and Job Growth 2019-2044:
County
Growth
Projections
Population
Growth Share
Job Growth
Share
King County 50%59%
Kitsap County 5%5%
Pierce County 21%17%
Snohomish County 25%19%Page 60 of 109
GROWTH TARGETS
KEY ASSUMPTIONS + PROCESS
Data Sources:
Regional Geography growth shares from VISION 2050
Regional Growth Strategy
Demographic data from OFM, Census Bureau
Assumptions:
Apply RG growth share to countywide growth 2019-2044
Convert population to housing units with household
assumptions for each Regional Geography
15
Regional Geography Housing Unit and Job Growth 2019-2044:
Regional
Geography
Allocations
Page 61 of 109
GROWTH TARGETS
KEY ASSUMPTIONS + PROCESS
More on Assumptions:
Urban Unincorporated King County’s largest
potential annexation areas are in High
Capacity Transit Communities
Cities in the rural area include affiliated PAA
Targets are not created for the rural area
Household size, vacancy rate, and group
quarters assumptions are unique to Regional
Geographies, and reflect long-term and recent
trends
16
Regional Geography Housing Unit and Job Growth 2019-2044:
Regional Geography
Population
Growth
Share
Job Growth
Share
Metro Cities 44%46%
Core Cities 40%45%
High Capacity Transit
Communities
11%6%
Cities and Towns 5%3%
Urban Unincorporated <1%<1%
Rural 1%<1%
Regional
Geography
Allocations
Regional
Geography
Allocations
Page 62 of 109
COUNTYWIDE AND REGIONAL GEOGRAPHY ALLOCATIONS
17
2019-2044
Growth Metro Core HCT Cities and Towns Urban
Unincorporated
Population 288,400 261,900 69,650 33,300 3,000
Housing Units 134,500 112,850 29,950 14,000 1,300
Jobs 223,500 222,800 28,750 12,950 700
*Regional Growth Strategy Rural area growth: 4,200 Housing Units, 2,150 Jobs
King County 2019-2044
Population 660,850
Housing Units 296,800
Jobs 490,850
Page 63 of 109
COUNTYWIDE AND REGIONAL GEOGRAPHY ALLOCATIONS
18
Page 64 of 109
GROWTH TARGETS
KEY ASSUMPTIONS + PROCESS
Data Sources:
Growth data from OFM, Census Bureau, PSRC
Capacity from the Urban Growth Capacity Report
Assumptions:
Allocate housing units and jobs proportionately to cities
within regional geographies, based on data factors 19
City and Potential Annexation Area Ranges of Housing Unit and
Job Growth 2019-2044
City/PAA
Growth
Target
Ranges
Page 65 of 109
GROWTH TARGETS
KEY ASSUMPTIONS + PROCESS
Data Sources:
Preliminary target ranges (previous step)
Countywide discussion and deliberation
Assumptions:
Convene cities by Regional Geography
Review methods and city ranges
Collaboratively determine local growth targets
20
City/PAA
Growth
Targets
City and PAA Housing Unit and Job Growth 2019-2044:
Page 66 of 109
GROWTH TARGETS NEXT STEPS
21
•Continue convening Regional Geography meetings to
deliberate targets (through mid-March 2021)
•Prepare draft targets for March 2021 GMPC meetings
Page 67 of 109
COUNTYWIDE PLANNING POLICIES MILESTONES AND ADOPTION
22
CPP Public
Review Draft
GMPC
Approval
King County
Council
Adoption
City
Ratification
March
2021
June
2021
3Q
2021
4Q
2021
Page 68 of 109
FOR MORE INFORMATION
GMPC WEBSITE
THE KING COUNTY INTERJURISDICTIONAL TEAM
FACILITATOR: KAREN WOLF, FAICP: KAREN.WOLF@KINGCOUNTY.GOV
GROWTH TARGETS LEAD: REBECCAH MASKIN: RMASKIN@KINGCOUNTY.GOV
23
Page 69 of 109
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
2020 Inspectional Services Reports (O'Neil)(30 Minutes)
Date:
March 3, 2021
Department:
Police
Attachments:
2020 Inspectional Services Reports
2020 Annual CIA Review
2020 Annual us e of Force Review
Budget Impact:
Current Budget: $0
Proposed Revision: $0
Revised Budget: $0
Administrativ e Recommendation:
For discussion only.
Background Summary:
Commander Steve Stocker will present an analysis on the 2020 Inspectional Service
Reports: Commendations, Inquiries, and Allegations (CIA) and Use of Force.
Rev iewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Staff:O'Neil
Meeting Date:March 8, 2021 Item Number:
Page 70 of 109
CIA AND USE OF FORCE ANALYSIS2020 INSPECTIONAL SERVICES REPORTSPage 71 of 109
CIA SUMMARYIncrease/decrease from 2019•CAD incidents – 73,998 -14%•Case reports – 15,299 -9%•Arrests – 3,629 -21.2%•Booked into Score – 1,652 -42.9%•Infractions/Citations – 8,110 +11.7%Page 72 of 109
COMMENDATIONSYear Total CommendationsLetter of CommendationMedal of Distinction Life Saving Medal of Valor Medal of Merit201799 5 0 15 0 0201871 1 0 7 1 0201993 7 0 11 0 42020167 16 3 10 0 0Page 73 of 109
INTERNAL INVESTIGATION•Possible violation of policy, force, bias policing, false arrest. More serious allegation.Year CAD Incidents Internal Investigations Inv. With Misconduct Total Employees Emp. With Misconduct201797,843 14 (.01%) 6 20 6201896,884 7 (.007%) 6 9 7201986,062 18 (.02%) 11 17 13202073,998 9 (.01%) 6 9 6Page 74 of 109
SUPERVISORY INQUIRY•Complaint of service delivery, demeanor, customer service, etc.Year CAD IncidentsSupervisory InquiriesInquiries with Unacceptable Performance Involved EmployeesEmployees with Unacceptable Performance201797,843 14 (.01%) 8 16 8201896,884 20 (.02%) 10 20 12201986,062 11 (.01%) 7 12 6202073,998 21 (.03%) 12 21 11Page 75 of 109
ALLEGATIONS•Inquiries and Internal investigations combinedAllegation TotalNo Misconduct/Acceptable PerformanceMisconduct/Unacceptable performanceNo Conclusion/PendingViolation of General Policy21 1 0De-Escalation Policy20 2 0Discourtesy/Conduct Unbecoming53 2 0Neglect of Duty10 1 0Code of Conduct11 7 4 0Fail to Notify Supervisor10 1 0False Arrest22 0 0Harassment11 0 0K9 Policy Violation10 1 0Excessive Force75 2 0Biased Policing/Discrimination22 0 0Dereliction of duty10 1 0No Show/Late for Work20 2 0Take Home Car Policy10 1 0Slow/No Response20 2 0Totals41 21 20 0Page 76 of 109
COLLISIONS412019182914 14100510152025303540452017 2018 2019 20202017-2020 CollisionsCollisionsPreventablePage 77 of 109
CORRECTIVE ACTION FOR COLLISIONS02468101214Coaching Written Reprimand Suspension Dismissal13100131008200CollisionsCorrective Action 2018Corrective Action 2019Corrective Action 2020Page 78 of 109
COMBINED DISCIPLINE0246810121416Coaching Written Reprimand Suspension Demotion No Conclusion140301153112125100Combined Discipline (Internals and inquiries)201820192020Page 79 of 109
USE OF FORCE COMPARISONForce ReportsYear Use of force reportsExcessive Force AllegationsSustained Allegations2017217 7 02018252 2 02019214 3 02020231 7 2Page 80 of 109
FORCE TYPES11303631583616341393251115110434020406080100120Page 81 of 109
EFFECTIVE VS. NOT EFFECTIVE020406080100120EffectiveNot EffectivePage 82 of 109
FORCE USED RESULTING IN INJURYTotal Force Reports Suspects Injured Officers Injured % of total of suspects injured2017217 79 23 36%2018252 87 35 35%2019214 84 31 39%2020231 88 35 38%Page 83 of 109
SUSPECT INJURY BY TYPE02022792321277975411069402991230020406080100120140Taser Probe Pain Complaint K-9 Cut/Bruise/Scrape Broken bone/ToothSuspect Injury By Type 2017-20202017201820192020Page 84 of 109
TIME OF DAY020406080100120Force Incidents by Time of Day2015-2020202020192018201720162015Page 85 of 109
REASON FOR USE OF FORCEOfficer AssaultedOfficer About to be AssaultedOther About to be AssaultedSubject With WeaponAttempting to EscapeRefusing Commands Other20168201653434201718 17 6 5 80 71 17201813 28 8 2 112 76 11201916 26 4 2 77 76 13202023 21 4 3 92 78 10Page 86 of 109
CITIZEN RESISTANCE DURING A FORCE ENCOUNTEROfficer Assaulted/Threat to be AssaultedFighting StanceOther About to be AssaultedMuscular Tension/Pulled AwaySubject Trying to FleeRefusing Commands Other201634 13 12 126 50 91 23201752 16 14 219 82 162 37201847 32 14 247 117 170 31201948 27 10 268 66 183 21202049 31 10 274 75 173 40Page 87 of 109
OFFICER ASSESSMENT OF CITIZEN01020304050607080Agitated Alcohol or Drugs Angry Calm Enraged Mental Disorder Out of Control73652930952974621714117236357252418928Officer Assessment201820192020Page 88 of 109
USE OF FORCE DEMOGRAPHICS020406080100Asian/PacificIslanderBlack White Hispanic NativeAmericanOther/Unk.176188239141346772614928388225811Race - Use of Force201820192020174361414013145050100150200Male FemaleGender - Use of Force201820192020Page 89 of 109
QUESTIONS?Page 90 of 109
Page 91 of 109
2
This annual analysis of the CIA (Commendations, Inquiries, and Allegations)
investigations provides the administration of the agency and the public we serve a
review of agency personnel conduct from an analytical perspective and possibly through
the eyes of our community. As outlined in the Auburn Police Department Manual of
Standards, the CIA system provides a standardized means of reporting, investigating,
and documenting Commendations, Inquiries, Internal Investigations and Collision
Reviews.
Our Vision Statement calls for us to be a premier agency that is trusted, supported,
and respected. Our Mission Statement requires that our department will “provide
professional Law Enforcement services to our community.” To meet these demands,
we must be a disciplined and a well-regulated organization. One method by which to
determine our success is to evaluate our CIA process. This report illustrates how well
the Auburn Police Department is perceived to be following our Vision and Mission
statements, as well as our Manual of Standards.
Summary of 2020
In 2020, Auburn Police Officers responded to 73,998 CAD incidents (86,062 in 2019)
and completed 15,299 case reports (16,827 in 2019). Officers made 3,629 arrests
(4,606 in 2019) with 1,652 of those arrestees being booked into SCORE (2,893 in 2019),
and issued 8,110 infractions/citations (7,262 in 2019). All of this activity accounts for
only a portion of the personal contacts with our community members that are made by
our police officers throughout the year.
Commendations
A Commendation is used to recognize actions or performance by members of the
police department who act or perform in a manner that is outstanding or beyond what
is normally expected. The Commendation process recognizes employees for
Professionalism, Exemplary Job, Exemplary Actions, Life Saving and Heroism.
The majority of our commendations come from citizens who took the time to recognize
one or more officers due to their exemplary and professional work. These
commendations range from officers conducting school speeches, helping someone
change a tire or going above and beyond to investigate someone’s case.
The Medal of Valor will be awarded to department personnel for acts that meet all of
the following conditions.
1. When the act conspicuously displays extreme courage, beyond the normal
demands for police service.
2. When failure to take such action would not justify official censure.
3. When substantial risk to their physical safety actually existed and the individual
was unquestionably conscious of this imminent threat.
Page 92 of 109
3
4. When the objective was logically believed to be of sufficient importance to
justify the risk taken.
The Medal of Distinction will be awarded to department personnel for acts which meet
all of the following criteria.
1. When personnel manifest courage in the performance of duty under
circumstances less than those required for the Medal of Valor.
2. When a risk to the individual’s physical safety actually existed, or when there
was reason to believe that such a risk was present.
3. When the act indicated that the individual was conscious of the imminent
danger to their personal safety, or when a reasonable and prudent person would
normally assume such a danger was present.
4. When the objective was reasonably believed to be of sufficient importance to
justify the risk taken.
5. When the individual accomplished the objective, or was prevented from doing
so by circumstances beyond his/her control.
The Lifesaving Medal shall be awarded to department personnel for acts that meet all
of the following criteria.
1. When the acts were personally performed by the officer.
2. When affirmed by competent medical authority, an individual saved a human
life or prolonged life beyond the day of extraordinary circumstances.
The Merit Medal shall be awarded to department personnel for acts that meet all of the
following criteria.
1. When individuals who distinguish themselves by excellence in events which
involve tactical action.
2. When the event involves some risk to the individual.
Year
Total
Commendations
Letter of
Commendation
Medal of
Distinction
Life
Saving
Medal of
Valor
Medal of
Merit
2017 99 5 0 15 0 0
2018 71 1 0 7 1 0
2019 93 7 0 11 0 4
2020 167 16 3 10 0 0
Page 93 of 109
4
Employee Investigations
There are two ways a complaint can be categorized and investigated: Supervisory
Inquiry and Internal Investigation.
A Supervisory Inquiry involves a complaint made regarding the quality of service
delivery. These complaints vary in degree from complaints regarding an employee’s
demeanor, tardiness, complaints related to customer service, or the nature of a
department practice. This may also be a complaint of a minor policy violation. The
employee’s immediate supervisor typically handles this type of complaint, but a
commander might also take charge of it.
An Internal Investigation involves a complaint of a possible violation of department
standards, written directives, City policies or applicable Civil Service Rules. These
allegations include, but are not limited to, complaints of bias based policing, excessive
force, alleged corruption, insubordination, breach of civil rights, false arrest, and other
types of allegations of serious misconduct. In the event that an allegation of criminal
misconduct is reported and appears to have merit, a simultaneous criminal
investigation will be initiated.
Internal Investigations
Year
CAD
Incidents
Internal
Investigations
Inv. With
Misconduct
Total
Employees
Emp. With
Misconduct
2017 97,843 14 (.01%) 6 20 6
2018 96,884 7 (.007%) 6 9 7
2019 86,062 18 (.02%) 11 17 13
2020 73,998 9 (.01%) 6 9 6
Internal Investigations generated by internal and external sources
External Sources Internal Sources Total Combined
Total Investigations 4 5 9
Sustained Misconduct 2 4 6
In examining the above tables, Internal Investigations generated internally usually
resulted in a finding of actual misconduct. The above table shows that most of the
Investigations received from internal sources resulted in a finding of misconduct. During
these types of investigations, statements, photographs, videos, police reports, and any
other potential documentation are examined. The investigation is then forwarded to a
supervisory review board to determine findings.
Page 94 of 109
5
Supervisory Inquiries
These numbers continue to be very low compared to the amount of contacts with the
public. This would appear to indicate that our officers conduct themselves most of the
time in a professional manner due to the fact that inquiries are complaints regarding an
officer’s demeanor, tardiness, and customer service.
Allegations
The following table depicts the total combined allegations by category for all Inquiries
and Internal Investigations for 2020. It should be noted that Supervisory Inquiries can
result in findings of Acceptable Performance or Unacceptable Performance, and
Internal Investigations can result in findings of Misconduct or No Misconduct, among
others.
Allegation Total
No Misconduct/
Acceptable
Performance
Misconduct/
Unacceptable
performance
No Conclusion/
Pending
Violation of General Policy 2 1 1 0
De-Escalation Policy 2 0 2 0
Discourtesy/Conduct
Unbecoming 5 3 2 0
Neglect of Duty 1 0 1 0
Code of Conduct 11 7 4 0
Fail to Notify Supervisor 1 0 1 0
False Arrest 2 2 0 0
Harassment 1 1 0 0
K9 Policy Violation 1 0 1 0
Excessive Force 7 5 2 0
Biased Policing/Discrimination 2 2 0 0
Dereliction of duty 1 0 1 0
No Show/Late for Work 2 0 2 0
Take Home Car Policy 1 0 1 0
Slow/No Response 2 0 2 0
Totals 41 21 20 0
Year
CAD
Incidents
Supervisory
Inquiries
Inquiries with
Unacceptable
Performance
Involved
Employees
Employees with
Unacceptable
Performance
2017 97,843 14 (.01%) 8 16 8
2018 96,884 20 (.02%) 10 20 12
2019 86,062 11 (.01%) 7 12 6
2020 73,998 21 (.03%) 12 21 11
Page 95 of 109
6
Collisions
In 2020, there were 18 collisions involving APD employees. Ten of the 18 collisions
were determined to be preventable on the part of the officer. The median years of
service of the officers involved in collisions is 6.3 and the median age of the officer was
35. Twelve of the collisions that occurred were officers who have 5 years or less of
service with Auburn PD. The preventable collisions were attributed to officers with a
median of 6 years of service. In examining the number of collisions, it is important to
note that the department determines a collision to be any time an employee in control
of a department vehicle has any contact with another vehicle, object, or person.
Damage caused by a specific maneuver (PIT, intentional strike, etc.) is not considered
a collision under our department policy. The majority of these collisions did not meet
the state definition of a reportable collision.
In reviewing the 10 collisions which were determined by a Collision Review Board to be
preventable, “driver inattention” was apparent in most cases, by either watching for
suspects or looking at vehicle equipment inside the car. If the drivers had been more
attentive, they would not have collided with another vehicle, curb, tree, etc. All 2020
collisions (preventable and non-preventable) are categorized as follows:
7 - Driver Inattention
2 - Improper Backing
0 - Fail to Clear Intersection
8 - Other driver at fault
1 - Poor tactics
41
20 19 18
29
14 14
10
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
2017 2018 2019 2020
2017-2020 Collisions
Collisions
Preventable
Page 96 of 109
7
The below chart depicts the corrective action dispensed to the employees in preventable
collisions. Some officers also received additional training where it was appropriate.
Actions Taken Internal Investigations
The following chart depicts action taken for misconduct, whether from an Internal
Investigation or Supervisory Inquiry, for each employee involved.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Coaching Written Reprimand Suspension Dismissal
13
1 00
13
1 00
8
2
00
Collisions
Corrective Action 2018 Corrective Action 2019 Corrective Action 2020
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Coaching Written Reprimand Suspension Demotion No Conclusion
14
0
3
0
1
15
3
11
2
12
5
1
00
Combined Discipline (Internals and inquiries)
2018 2019 2020
Page 97 of 109
8
Outside Agency Investigations
To ensure that our investigations are unbiased, there are times when an outside agency
may be asked to investigate serious allegations of misconduct made against agency
staff, especially those that may be of a criminal nature. This provides Auburn citizens
with confidence and allows for unbiased transparency into actions, activities, and
decisions made by the Auburn Police Department. In 2020 there were no allegations
of criminal misconduct.
Grievances
Two of the Internal Investigations where misconduct was found are currently in the
grievance process.
Conclusion
A review of the frequency of incidents for 2020 regarding alleged misconduct by
employees of the Auburn Police Department does not appear to raise any specific
concerns. The number of allegations and found misconduct when compared to the
actual number of contacts Auburn Police Officers encounter each year is extremely low.
This illustrates and confirms that we take all complaints seriously and train our
employees regularly, and when necessary use corrective action depending on the
severity of the allegation.
And, as noted earlier, inquiries and investigations that come from internal sources make
up the majority of sustained misconduct which illustrates that we take it very seriously
to police ourselves and make sure our employees are following our mission and vision
statement.
As seen in this document the majority of corrective action taken was coaching and
counseling which illustrates that the majority of allegations were minor in nature and did
not warrant more severe corrective action. The data revealed for 2020 illustrates that
the Auburn Police Department continues to be successful in striving to perform by the
standards of our CORE values and provide professional police services to the City of
Auburn.
Page 98 of 109
1
Page 99 of 109
2
The purpose of this annual report is to document and summarize all Uses of Force that were
completed by Auburn Officers during the 2020 calendar year. This report compares statistics from
previous years through 2020, which adds context and helps us identify trends that we can address
in future training. The report will compare Use of Force incidents vs. Use of Force Allegations;
types of injuries sustained by both suspect and officer; and force used when presented with different
scenarios (i.e. officer about to be assaulted, suspect fled, etc.).
In 2020, Auburn Police Officers responded to 73,998 CAD incidents (86,062 in 2019) and completed
15,299 case reports (16,827 in 2019). Officers made 3,629 arrests (4,606 in 2019) with 1,652 of
those arrestees being booked into SCORE (2,893 in 2019), and issued 8,110 infractions/citations
(7,262 in 2019).
There were 179 incidents where officers were required to use force. Of the 179 incidents there
were 231 Use of Force reports completed by officers in 2020 compared to 214 in 2019. Force
reports exceed incidents because at times multiple officers used force on one suspect. Of the 179
incidents, there were 88 reported injuries by the suspect. All injuries were photographed and noted
and most were minor scrapes, bruises, small lacerations, K-9 contacts, and complaints of pain with
no visible injury.
It is important to understand that there are times when it takes two or more officers using force on
one suspect in order to gain compliance and get the suspect in custody. When that occurs each
officer is required to complete a force report which then generates multiple force reports for one
incident. Table #1 below depicts the ratios in comparison to the force incidents.
Only .24% of subjects contacted resulted in force being used.
Table 1 2019 2019 Ratio
(183)
2020 2020 Ratio
(179)
CAD 86,062 1/470 (.21%) 73,998 1/413 (.24%)
Cases 16,827 1/92 (1%) 15,299 1/85 (1.2%)
Arrests 4,606 1/25 (4%) 3,629 1/20 (5%)
Bookings 2,893 1/16 (6.3%) 1652 1/9 (11%)
The above table effectively shows that our officers use de-escalation techniques well. As
you can see only 179 subjects out of 73,998 who were contacted, compelled the officer to
use force.
Table #2 below shows the ratio comparison from 2019 regarding force reports completed.
Only .31% of contacts resulted in a use of force report being completed.
Table 2 2019 2019 Ratio
(214)
2020 2020 Ratio
(231)
CAD 86,062 1/402 (.25%) 73,998 1/320 (.31%)
Cases 16,827 1/79 (1.3%) 15,299 1/66 (1.5%
Arrests 4,606 1/22 (4.5%) 3,629 1/16 (6.3%)
Bookings 2,893 1/14 (7%) 1,652 1/7 (14%)
Page 100 of 109
3
USE OF FORCE COMPARISON
The Auburn Police Department reports uses of force using an electronic reporting system. If there
is any allegation of excessive force, by policy an internal investigation may be ordered by the Chief
of Police. The following chart is a snapshot comparison of total excessive force allegations for each
year compared to the number of force reports.
Force Report Comparison 2017-2020
In 2020, we received Seven allegations of inappropriate and/or excessive applications of force. All
incidents were investigated and 5 were determined to have no misconduct and were within policy.
Table #3 shows there were 7 incidents that resulted in allegations of excessive force. Table #4 then
reflects these same numbers in a percentage of allegations which is 3% in 2020.
Table 3
Year
Use of
force
reports
Excessive
Force
Allegations
Sustained
Allegations
2017 217 7 0
2018 252 2 0
2019 214 3 0
2020 231 7 2
Table 4
0%
1%
1%
2%
2%
3%
3%
2017 2018 2019 2020
3%
1%
1.4%
3%
% Total force Resulting in Complaints
2017‐2020
Page 101 of 109
4
Types of Force Used
The use of force types listed below are techniques that the officers are trained to use depending on
the type of resistance the subjects are exhibiting. Take Down is the most used type of force our
officers use which is also the least invasive type of force. VNR is Vascular Neck Restraint which is
not considered a “choke hold” and was widely used across the country. VNR is used often in some
sporting events such as many martial arts types events. VNR has been a very successful and useful
tool for our officers in the past reducing the need for officers to escalate the force incident. In the
middle of 2020 the VNR policy was paused and currently can only be used under lethal force
considerations. PIT is Pursuit Immobilization Technique which is used during pursuits in an attempt
to end the pursuit as quickly as possible in order to reduce potential injury and take the suspect into
custody. An Intentional Vehicle Strike is authorized by policy in certain situations which entails
the officer striking a suspect vehicle with his/her patrol car at slow speed in order to pin the vehicle
so that it cannot continue to flee. There were a total of 368 force types documented in 2020.
Force Types Used in 2020
Table #5 below shows each force type that can be used by an officer, and shows the number of
times that particular type of force was used in 2020.
Table 5
11
30
3 6 3
15
8
3 6
1
6
34
1
39
3
25
11
15
110
4
34
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Page 102 of 109
5
Effective vs. Not Effective
Not every type of force is always effective, and at times multiple types of force are used on one
person during the same incident. Table #6 shows the effectiveness of the types of force and also
shows when a force type is ineffective. As you can see officers use verbal skills first quite often,
and when that is ineffective the officer is then compelled to use a different type of force.
Table 6
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Effective
Not Effective
Page 103 of 109
6
Force Used Resulting in Injuries
In 2020, injuries were reported by the suspect in 38% of all uses of force. Officers received minor
injuries in 15% of the incidents. Injuries to suspects can include abrasions, contact from K9’s, or
general complaints of pain. All complaints of injuries are required to be documented and
photographed. Officer injuries included bruising, minor punctures, scrapes and scratches. Table
#7 and #8 compare these numbers to previous years. There was one fatal injury due to an officer
involved shooting. This statistic is not included in the below tables.
Table 7
Total
Force
Reports
Suspects
Injured
Officers
Injured
% of total of
suspects injured
2017 217 79 23 36%
2018 252 87 35 35%
2019 214 84 31 39%
2020 231 88 35 38%
Table 8
0
20 22
79
23
21
27
79
75
41
10
69
40
29
9
123
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Taser Probe Pain Complaint K‐9 Cut/Bruise/Scrape Broken bone/Tooth
Suspect Injury By Type 2017‐2020
2017
2018
2019
2020
Page 104 of 109
7
Time of Day
The below tables depict the Auburn Police Departments use of force incidents by time of day. As in
previous years documented, the majority of the occasions that officers are compelled to use force
occur between the hours of 8:00 PM and 2:00 AM. Table #9 focuses on the year 2020 only and
Table #10 compares the times to previous years.
Table 9
Table 10
0
5
10
15
20
25
0600070008000900100011001200130014001500160017001800190020002100220023002400010002000300040005002020 Incidents By Time of Day
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Force Incidents by Time of Day
2015-2020
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
Page 105 of 109
8
Reason for Use of Force
Table #11 below shows the reasons that an officer(s) were compelled to begin to use force
resulting in the 231 force reports.
Table 11
Officer Assaulted
Officer
About to
be
Assaulted
Other About
to be
Assaulted
Subject
With
Weapon
Attempting
to Escape
Refusing
Commands Other
2016 8 20 1 6 53 43 4
2017 18 17 6 5 80 71 17
2018 13 28 8 2 112 76 11
2019 16 26 4 2 77 76 13
2020 23 21 4 3 92 78 10
Citizen Resistance During Force Encounter
Table #12 below shows the different resistance citizens were giving to an officer during a use of
force encounter. Most of the time there are multiple types of resistance provided by a subject
during a force encounter. In 2020, there were 652 documented forms of resistance during force
encounters.
Table 12
Officer
Assaulted/Threat
to be Assaulted
Fighting
Stance
Other About
to be
Assaulted
Muscular
Tension/Pulled
Away
Subject
Trying
to Flee
Refusing
Commands Other
2016 34 13 12 126 50 91 23
2017 52 16 14 219 82 162 37
2018 47 32 14 247 117 170 31
2019 48 27 10 268 66 183 21
2020 49 31 10 274 75 173 40
Page 106 of 109
9
Officer Assessment of Citizen Prior to Force Being Used
The below table is what the officer was observing or perceiving of the citizen prior to being
compelled to use force.
Table 13
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Agitated Alcohol or
Drugs
Angry Calm Enraged Mental Disorder Out of Control
73
65
29 30
9
5
29
74
62
17 14 11
7
23
63
57
25 24
18
9
28
Officer Assessment
2018 2019 2020
Page 107 of 109
10
Use of Force Demographics
Table 14 depicts the race of the citizen the officer(s) were compelled to use force on. These
numbers are in relation to 73,998 contacts our officers had in 2020 which resulted in only 179
incidents of force.
Table 14
Table 15 depicts the gender of the citizen the officer(s) were compelled to use force on.
Table 15
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Asian/Pacific
Islander
Black White Hispanic Native
American
Other/Unk.
17
61
88
23
9 1413
46
77
26
14 9
28
38
82
25
8 11
Race ‐Use of Force
2018
2019
2020
174
36
141
40
131
45
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Male Female
Gender ‐Use of Force
2018
2019
2020
Page 108 of 109
11
Summary
It is clear from the report that Auburn Officers contact many subjects throughout the year and make
many arrests. Calls for service were down by over 10,000. Subsequently, force incidents continue
to be low compared to the amount of contacts our officers make each year. As noted previously,
VNR was paused as a type of force our officers can use except in a deadly force encounter. This
may be one reason why officer “Take Downs” increased by 33% this year. In 2019 there were 74
take downs and in 2020 there were 110.
The most compelling statistics in this report are that the calls for service, arrests, and bookings are
high numbers and by percentage the use of force does not occur often. In 2020, only .24% of CAD
incidents required force to be used on a subject. Officers continue to receive annual defensive
tactics/use of force training, as well as training on de-escalation techniques. This training
encompasses classroom, hands-on, and scenario based training. Each Officer has completed the
40 hour Crisis Intervention Training as well as completing yearly refresher training as required.
In 2020 there was one instance where an officer discharged his firearm during a force encounter.
This incident occurred in December which resulted in the suspect being fatally injured.
At the start of 2021 we created a Use of Force Committee which is comprised of Commanders and
Sergeants who are highly trained in police use of force encounters. We also are now part of the
Department of Justice FBI Use of Force database. Uses of force that result in serious bodily injury
(as defined by the Department of Justice) or death will be reported in the FBI database. Any use of
force that results in great bodily harm (as defined by the Revised Code of Washington), death, or
appears to be out of policy, will be reviewed by the Use of Force Committee who will then provide
a report to the chief. The goal of the Force Committee is to provide a more detailed analysis than
is already done and to analyze force trends in order to enhance training, reduce injuries and ensure
our citizens remain protected.
Page 109 of 109