Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
12-02-2024 Special Meeting Agenda
City Council Special Meeting December 2, 2024 - 5:30 PM City Hall Council Chambers AGENDA CALL TO ORDER LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT We would like to acknowledge the Federally Recognized Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, the ancestral keepers of the land we are gathered on today. We thank them for their immense contributions to our state and local history, culture, economy, and identity as Washingtonians. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION A. The Auburn City Council Special Meeting scheduled for Monday, December 2, 2024, at 5:30 p.m. will be held in person and virtually. Virtual Participation Link: To listen to the meeting by phone or Zoom, please call the number below or click the link: Telephone: 253 205 0468 Toll Free: 888 475 4499 Zoom: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/84346952388 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL APPOINTMENTS A. Airport Advisory Board City Council to approve the reappointments of Justin Heater, Jay Miner, and Wayne Osborne to the Airport Advisory Board for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027 (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve the reappointments of Justin Heater, Jay Miner, and Wayne Osborne to the Airport Advisory Board for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027.) Page 1 of 433 B. Human Services Committee City Council to approve the reappointments of Susan Miller, Suzanne Pak, and Erica Thomas to the Human Services Committee for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027 (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve the reappointments of Susan Miller, Suzanne Pak, and Erica Thomas to the Human Services Committee for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027.) C. Parks & Recreation Board City Council to approve the reappointments of Matt Jennings and Wayne Osborne to the Parks & Recreation Board for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027 (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve the reappointments of Matt Jennings and Wayne Osborne to the Parks & Recreation Board for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027.) D. Planning Commission City Council to approve the reappointment of Julie Berry to the Planning Commission for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027 (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve the reappointment of Julie Berry to the Planning Commission for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027.) E. Salary Commission City Council to approve the reappointment of Grantley Martelly to the Salary Commission for a four-year term expiring December 31, 2028 (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve the reappointment of Grantley Martelly to the Salary Commission for a four-year term expiring December 31, 2028.) F. Transportation Advisory Board City Council to approve the new appointment of Keila Cassia Yagumyum and the reappointments of Emmanuel Dolo and Michael Harbin Jr., to the Transportation Advisory Board for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027 (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve the new appointment of Keila Cassia Yagumyum and the reappointments of Emmanuel Dolo and Michael Harbin Jr., to the Transportation Advisory Board for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027.) G. Urban Tree Board City Council to approve the reappointment of James Tourangeau to the Urban Tree Board for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027 (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve the reappointment of James Tourangeau to the Urban Tree Board for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027.) Page 2 of 433 AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION This is the place on the agenda where the public is invited to speak to the City Council on any issue. A. The public can participate in-person or submit written comments in advance. Participants can submit written comments via mail, fax, or email. All written comments must be received prior to 5:00 p.m. on the day of the scheduled meeting and must be 350 words or less. Please mail written comments to: City of Auburn Attn: Shawn Campbell, City Clerk 25 W Main St Auburn, WA 98001 Please fax written comments to: Attn: Shawn Campbell, City Clerk Fax number: 253-804-3116 Email written comments to: publiccomment@auburnwa.gov If an individual requires accommodation to allow for remote oral comment because of a difficulty attending a meeting of the governing body, the City requests notice of the need for accommodation by 5:00 p.m. on the day of the scheduled meeting. Participants can request accommodation to be able to provide a remote oral comment by contacting the City Clerk’s Office in person, by phone (253) 931-3039, or by email (publiccomment@auburnwa.gov). CONSENT AGENDA All matters listed on the Consent Agenda are considered by the City Council to be routine and will be enacted by one motion in the form listed. A. Minutes from the November 18, 2024, City Council Meeting B. Claims Vouchers (Thomas) Claims voucher list dated November 26, 2024, which includes voucher numbers 478201 through voucher 478305, in the amount of $2,124,000.65, three electronic fund transfers in the amount of $325.71, and six wire transfers in the amount of $804,183.64 C. Payroll Voucher (Thomas) Payroll check numbers 539625 through 539626 in the amount of $611,495.87, electronic deposit transmissions in the amount of $2,698,061.25, for a grand total of $3,309,557.12 for the period covering November 14, 2024, to November 27, 2024 (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve the Consent Agenda.) Page 3 of 433 ORDINANCES A. Ordinance No. 6954 (Krum) An Ordinance relating to Planning; adopting 2024 Annual Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments pursuant to the provisions of RCW Chapter 36.70A (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve Ordinance No. 6954.) B. Ordinance No. 6955 (Krum) An Ordinance amending Sections 19.02.115, 19.02.120, 19.02.130 and 19.02.140 of Auburn City Code relating to School Impact Fees (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve Ordinance No. 6955.) C. Ordinance No. 6961 (Thomas) An Ordinance amending the City's 2023-2024 Biennial Operating and Capital Budgets (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve Ordinance No. 6961.) RESOLUTIONS A. Resolution No. 5800 (Hinman) A Resolution adopting the 2025 State Legislative Agenda (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 5800.) DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Jurassic Parliament Training ADJOURNMENT Agendas and minutes are available to the public at the City Clerk's Office and on the City website (http://www.auburnwa.gov). Page 4 of 433 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Minutes from the November 18, 2024, City Council Meeting December 2, 2024 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: City Council 11-18-2024 Minutes Administrative Recommendation: Background for Motion: Background Summary: Councilmember: Staff: Page 5 of 433 City Council Regular Meeting November 18, 2024 - 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Backus called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers of Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main Street. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Mayor Backus acknowledged the Federally Recognized Muckleshoot Indian Tribe as the ancestral keepers of the land we are gathered on today. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION The meeting was held both in person and virtually. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Backus led those in attendance in the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Councilmembers present: Acting Deputy Mayor Yolanda Trout-Manuel, Kate Baldwin, Hanan Amer, Cheryl Rakes, and Tracy Taylor. Deputy Mayor Larry Brown, and Councilmember Clinton Taylor were excused. Mayor Nancy Backus and the following staff members present included: Senior City Staff Attorney Taryn Jones, Inspectional Services Commander Shaun Feero, Director of Public Works Ingrid Gaub, Director of Parks, Arts, and Recreation Daryl Faber, Director of Community Development Jason Krum, Director of Human Services Kent Hay, Director of Human Resources and Risk Management Candis Martinson, and Deputy City Clerk Hannah Scholl. ANNOUNCEMENTS, MAYOR'S PROCLAMATIONS, AND PRESENTATIONS There were no announcements, Mayor’s proclamations, or presentations. Page 6 of 433 APPOINTMENTS A. Human Services Committee City Council to approve the appointments of Amber Lott and Heather Wise to the Human Services Committee for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027 Councilmember T. Taylor moved and Acting Deputy Mayor Trout-Manuel seconded to approve the appointments of Amber Lott and Heather Wise to the Human Services Committee for a three-year term expiring on December 31, 2027. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5-0 AGENDA MODIFICATIONS There were no modifications to the agenda. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Public Hearing No. 2 for Ordinance No. 6948 (Thomas) City Council to conduct a second Public Hearing to consider Ordinance No. 6948 adopting the 2025-2026 Biennial Operating Budget for the City of Auburn, Washington Mayor Backus opened the Public Hearing at 7:03 p.m. No one came forward to speak. Mayor Backus closed the Public Hearing at 7:04 p.m. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION No one came forward to speak. CORRESPONDENCE There was no correspondence for Council to review. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes of the November 4, 2024, Study Session Meeting B. Claims Vouchers (Thomas) Claims voucher list dated November 13, 2024, which includes voucher number 478069 in the amount of $24,700.00 C. Claims Vouchers (Thomas) Claims voucher list dated November 13, 2024, which includes voucher Page 7 of 433 numbers 478018 through voucher 478068 and voucher numbers 478070 through voucher 478200 in the amount of $4,671,193.73, ten electronic fund transfers in the amount of $1,322.27 and six wire transfers in the amount of $646,430.10 D. Payroll Voucher (Thomas) Payroll check numbers 539622 through 539624 in the amount of $82,935.36, electronic deposit transmissions in the amount of $2,830,035.48, for a grand total of $2,912,970.84 for the period covering October 31, 2024 to November 13, 2024 Councilmember Amer moved and Councilmember T. Taylor seconded to approve the consent agenda. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5-0 UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business. ORDINANCES A. Ordinance No. 6947 (Thomas) An Ordinance establishing the Levy for regular property taxes by the City of Auburn for collection in 2025 for general City operational purposes in the amount of $25,607,602 Councilmember Baldwin moved and Councilmember Amer seconded to approve Ordinance No. 6947. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5-0 B. Ordinance No. 6948 (Thomas) An Ordinance adopting the 2025-2026 Biennial Operating Budget for the City of Auburn, Washington Councilmember Baldwin moved and Councilmember Rakes seconded to approve Ordinance No. 6948. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5-0 Page 8 of 433 C.Ordinance No. 6956 (Thomas) An Ordinance adopting the 2025-2030 Capital Facilities Plan for the City of Auburn, Washington Councilmember Baldwin moved and Councilmember Amer seconded to approve Ordinance No. 6956. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5-0 MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS A.From the Council Acting Deputy Mayor Trout-Manuel reported she attended the City of Auburn's Veterans Day Parade, National League of Cities (NLC) Conference, and announced she received the 2024 Elected Women of Excellence Award from the National Foundation for Women Legislators (NFWL). Councilmember Amer reported she attended the Auburn Food Bank Harvest Breakfast, City of Auburn's Veterans Day Parade, NLC Conference, and the Water Resource Inventory Area 9 (WRIA 9) meeting. Councilmember Baldwin reported she attended the Auburn Food Bank Harvest Breakfast, City of Auburn's Veterans Day Parade events, and the NLC Conference. B.From the Mayor Mayor Backus reported she attended the Veterans Luncheon at the Senior Center, the first session of the Leadership Institute of Puget Sound, and City of Auburn's Veterans Day Parade events. She also attended the Welcome Ceremony at the Muckleshoot Casino Resort for the first female Prime Minister of Samoa, Fiamé Naomi Mata'afa. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 7:22 p.m. APPROVED this 2nd day of December 2024. ____________________________ ____________________________ NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR Hannah Scholl, Deputy City Clerk Page 9 of 433 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Claims Vouchers (Thomas) Claims voucher list dated November 26, 2024, which includes voucher numbers 478201 through voucher 478305, in the amount of $2,124,000.65, three electronic fund transfers in the amount of $325.71, and six wire transfers in the amount of $804,183.64 December 2, 2024 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Finance None Administrative Recommendation: City Council to approve Claim Vouchers. Background for Motion: Background Summary: Claims voucher list dated November 26, 2024, which includes voucher numbers 478201 through voucher 478305, in the amount of $2,124,000.65, three electronic fund transfers in the amount of $325.71, and six wire transfers in the amount of $804,183.64. Councilmember: Kate Baldwin Staff: Jamie Thomas Page 10 of 433 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Payroll Voucher (Thomas) Payroll check numbers 539625 through 539626 in the amount of $611,495.87, electronic deposit transmissions in the amount of $2,698,061.25, for a grand total of $3,309,557.12 for the period covering November 14, 2024, to November 27, 2024 (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve the Consent Agenda.) December 2, 2024 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Finance None Administrative Recommendation: City Council to approve Payroll Vouchers. Background for Motion: Background Summary: Payroll check numbers 539625 through 539626 in the amount of $611,495.87, electronic deposit transmissions in the amount of $2,698,061.25, for a grand total of $3,309,557.12 for the period covering November 14, 2024, to November 27, 2024. Councilmember: Kate Baldwin Staff: Jamie Thomas Page 11 of 433 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Ordinance No. 6954 (Krum) An Ordinance relating to Planning; adopting 2024 Annual Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments pursuant to the provisions of RCW Chapter 36.70A (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve Ordinance No. 6954.) December 2, 2024 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Community Development Ordinance No. 6954, EXHIBIT A - Staff Report, EXHIBIT B - CFP Update for Auburn School District, EXHIBIT C - CFP Update for Dieringer School District, EXHIBIT D - CFP Update for Federal Way Public Schools, EXHIBIT E - CFP Update for Kent School District Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrative Recommendation: City Council to approve Ordinance No. 6954. Background for Motion: This Ordinance adopts the Auburn, Kent, Federal Way, and Dieringer School Districts Capital Facilities Plans. Background Summary: The City of Auburn adopted amendments to its Comprehensive Plan in 1995 in response to the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements, as amended. Since then, the Auburn Comprehensive Plan has been amended annually. At the end of 2015, the City adopted a substantially updated Comprehensive Plan in compliance with State-required periodic updates. Annual Comprehensive Plan amendments can be initiated by the City of Auburn (City- initiated) and by private parties (private-initiated). This year the City is initiating four policy/text amendments: *P/T No. 1 Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan (2024-2030) *P/T No. 2 Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan *P/T No. 3 Federal Way Public Schools Capital Facilities Plan *P/T No. 4 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan Page 12 of 433 This staff report and recommendation addresses the City-initiated policy/text amendments and specifically: *P/T No. 1 Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan *P/T No. 2 Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan *P/T No. 3 Federal Way Public Schools Capital Facilities Plan *P/T No. 4 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan In terms of process, the Comprehensive Plan amendments are initially reviewed during a Public Hearing process before the City of Auburn Planning Commission, who then provides a recommendation to the City Council for final action. City Council consideration and action on the amendments generally occurs but is not required prior to the end of the year. City Comprehensive Plan Amendments CPA24-0001: *P/T No. 1 – Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Auburn School District *P/T No. 2 – Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Dieringer School District *P/T No. 3 – Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Federal Way Public Schools *P/T No. 4 – Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Kent School District The attached staff report (EXHIBIT A) addresses the full set of 2024 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments. EXHIBITS B -E contain staff reports for City-initiated amendments and materials provided to the Planning Commission. Councilmember: Tracy Taylor Staff: Jason Krum Page 13 of 433 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6954 December 2, 2024 Page 1 ORDINANCE NO. 6954 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO PLANNING; ADOPTING 2024 ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF RCW CHAPTER 36.70A WHEREAS, since 1986 the City of Auburn has maintained a Comprehensive Plan, periodically updated and reaffirmed by the City Council, that includes a map establishing the location of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations throughout the City; and WHEREAS, on December 14, 2015, the Auburn City Council adopted an updated Comprehensive Plan by Ordinance No. 6584; and WHEREAS, the City of Auburn received and processed five Capital Facilities Plan Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan (Auburn School District, Dieringer School District, Federal Way Public Schools, Kent School District, and City of Auburn); and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan text/policy amendments were processed by the Community Development Department as proposed Year 2024 Annual Amendments to the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, on May 23, 2024, the Auburn School District issued a Determination of Non-Significance for the 2024–2030 for the Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan; on June 2, 2023, the Dieringer School District issued a Determination of Non- Significance for the Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2023-2029; on June 13, 2024, Federal Way Public Schools issued a Determination of Non-Significance for the 2025 Federal Way Public Schools Capital Facilities Plan; and on May 13, 2024, the Kent School District issued a Determination of Non-Significance for the 2023-2024 through 2029-2023 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan; and Page 14 of 433 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6954 December 2, 2024 Page 2 WHEREAS, the environmental impacts of the proposed Year 2024 Comprehensive Plan Amendments were considered in accordance with procedures of the State Environmental Policy Act File No. SEP24-0017 (city-initiated amendments), were determined to have no environmental significance; and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act, RCW 36.70A, requires the City to maintain a current Capital Facilities Plan which the City updates on a bi-annual schedule with the most recent update occurring in 2024; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendments were transmitted to the Washington State Department of Commerce, Growth Management Services Division, and other State agencies on October 3, 2024 for the 60-day review period in accordance with RCW 36.70A.106; and WHEREAS, after proper notice published in the City’s official newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the Hearings, the Auburn Planning Commission on October 23, 2024, conducted Public Hearings on the proposed amendments heard and considered the public testimony, viewed the evidence and exhibits presented to it, and made recommendations to the City Council on the proposed Year 2024 Annual Comprehensive Plan map and text amendments and for certain amendments, on the associated rezones; and WHEREAS, on November 25, 2024, the Auburn City Council reviewed the Planning Commission’s recommendations; and WHEREAS, on November 18, the Auburn City Council adopted the City’s Capital Facilities Plan under Ordinance No. 6956. Page 15 of 433 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6954 December 2, 2024 Page 3 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The 2024 annual Comprehensive Plan City-Initiated Text Amendments (CPA24-0001), as set forth in Exhibits B, C, D, and E are approved. The full text of the four school district’s Capital Facilities Plans copies of which shall be on file with the Office of the City Clerk are adopted and referenced in the City Capital Facilities Element. The Findings and Conclusions outlined in the October 8, 2024, staff report to City Council, as set forth in Exhibit A, are adopted. Section 2. The adopted Comprehensive Plan as amended is designated as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority under the Washington State Environmental Policy Act by the City's responsible environmental official in accordance with RCW 43.21C.060. Section 3. The Mayor is hereby authorized to implement such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directions of this legislation to include incorporating into one document the adopted Comprehensive Plan map and text amendments, attached as Exhibits B, C, D, and E when preparing and publishing the amended Comprehensive Plan. Section 4. The provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section or portion of this Ordinance, or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this ordinance, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. Page 16 of 433 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6954 December 2, 2024 Page 4 Section 5. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force five days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. INTRODUCED: _______________ PASSED: ____________________ APPROVED: _________________ ____________________________ NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR ATTEST: ____________________________ Shawn Campbell, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ Jason Whalen, City Attorney Published: _________________________________________________________ Page 17 of 433 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Subject/Title: CPA24-0001, CPA24-0002, SEP24-0014, 2024 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Specifically, City Initiated Plan Policy/Text Amendments Date: October 8, 2024 Department: Community Development Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrative Recommendation: Planning Commission to conduct public hearing and recommend to City Council approval of the 2024 City-Initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendments (Policy/Text Amendments). Background Summary: The City of Auburn adopted amendments to its Comprehensive Plan in 1995 in response to the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements, as amended. Since then, the Auburn Comprehensive Plan has been amended annually. At the end of 2015, the City adopted a substantially updated Comprehensive Plan in compliance with state-required periodic updates. Annual Comprehensive plan amendments can be initiated by the City of Auburn (city-initiated) and by private parties (private-initiated). This year the city is initiating: • Five policy/text amendments o P/T #1 Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan (2024-2030) o P/T #2 Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan o P/T #3 Federal Way Public Schools Capital Facilities Plan o P/T #4 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan o P/T #5 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan This staff report and recommendation addresses the city-initiated amendments and specifically: • Policy/Text (P/T) Amendments P/T # 1 through # 5 o P/T #1 Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan o P/T #2 Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan o P/T #3 Federal Way Public Schools Capital Facilities Plan o P/T #4 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan o P/T #5 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan In terms of process, the Comprehensive plan amendments are initially reviewed during a public hearing process before the City of Auburn Planning Commission, who then provides a recommendation to the City Council for final action. City Council consideration and action on the amendments generally occurs but is not required prior to the end of the year. Page 18 of 433 Staff Member: Gabriel Clark, Planner II Date: October 8, 2024 Page 2 of 7 A. Findings 1. RCW 36.70A.130 (Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA)) provides for amendments to locally adopted GMA comprehensive plans. Except in limited circumstances as provided for in State law and City Code, comprehensive plan amendments shall be considered by the city legislative body no more frequently than once per year. 2. As a result of the periodic comprehensive plan update, the city temporarily paused the acceptance of privately initiated comprehensive plan map and text amendments for processing in the annual cycle of 2024. The City has not accepted applications for consideration in the 2024 annual amendment cycle but will resume accepting applications for the 2025 annual cycle. 3. The City of Auburn received annual updates to the four (4) school district Capital Facilities Plans whose districts occur within the City of Auburn, and one (1) City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan. These Capital Facilities Plans are proposed to be incorporated by reference in the current Capital Facilities Element, of the current Auburn Comprehensive Plan and are processed as Policy/Text (P/T) amendments. 4. The environmental review decision under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for the school district capital facilities plans were prepared separately by each school district acting as their own lead agency, as allowed by State law (State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)). 5. The environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for the remaining city-initiated policy/text amendments, resulted in a Determination of Non- Significance (DNS) issued for the City-initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendments on September 23, 2024 (City File No. SEP24-0014). The comment period will end at 5:00 p.m. October 7, 2024, and the appeal period will end at 5:00 p.m. October 23, 2024. A copy of the DNS and environmental checklist application is provided as exhibit 25. 6. Auburn City Code (ACC) Chapter 14.22 outlines the process for submittal of privately- initiated amendments and the general processing of comprehensive plan amendments as follows: “Section 14.22.100 A. The planning commission shall hold at least one public hearing on all proposed amendments to the comprehensive plan. Notice of such public hearing shall be given pursuant to Chapter 1.27 ACC and, at a minimum, include the following: 1. For site-specific plan map amendments: a. Notice shall be published once in the official newspaper of the city not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of public hearing; b. Notice shall be mailed by first class mail to all property owners of record within a radius of 300 feet of the proposed map amendment request, not less than 10 calendar days prior to the public hearing; 2. For area-wide plan map amendments: a. Notice shall be published once in the official newspaper of the city not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of public hearing; Page 19 of 433 Staff Member: Gabriel Clark, Planner II Date: October 8, 2024 Page 3 of 7 b. Notice shall be mailed by first class mail to all property owners of record within the area subject to the proposed amendment; c. Notice shall be posted in at least two conspicuous locations in the area subject to the proposed amendment not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of the public hearing. B. Notwithstanding the above, the director may expand the minimum noticing provisions noted above as deemed necessary. C. Planning Commission Recommendation. The planning commission shall conduct a public hearing on all potential comprehensive plan amendments and shall make and forward a recommendation on each to the city council. The planning commission shall adopt written findings and make a recommendation consistent with those findings to the city council. D. The city council, if it elects to amend the comprehensive plan, shall adopt written findings and adopt said amendments by ordinance. E. State Review. All comprehensive plan amendments considered by the planning commission shall be forwarded for state agency review consistent with RCW 36.70A.106. F. Any appeal of an amendment to the comprehensive plan shall be made in accordance with Chapter 36.70A RCW. (Ord. 6172 § 1, 2008.)” 7. As provided in the City code, the Comprehensive Plan amendments are initially reviewed during a public hearing process before the City of Auburn Planning Commission, who then provides a recommendation to the City Council for final action which generally occurs, but is not required to, prior to the end of the year. 8. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, the proposed comprehensive plan amendments outlined in this agenda bill were sent to the Washington State Department of Commerce and other state agencies for the required state review. The Washington State Department of Commerce acknowledged receipt on October 3, 2024, by Submittal ID No. 2024-S-7564, and 2024-S-7565. No comments have been received from the Washington State Department of Commerce or other state agencies as of the writing of this report. A copy of the transmittal and acknowledgement is provided as No. 2024-S-7564 see exhibit 22 and ID No. 2024-S-7565 see exhibit 27. 9. The following report identifies Comprehensive Plan Policy/Text (P/T) and Map (CPM) amendments scheduled for the Planning Commission’s October 23, 2024 public hearing with a staff recommendation. Comprehensive Plan Policy/Text Amendments (File No. CPA24-0001, City initiated) P/T No. 1 Incorporate the Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan 2024 through 2030 into the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Discussion The Auburn School District has provided the City with its annually updated Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) covering from 2024-2030. The CFP was prepared by the District Page 20 of 433 Staff Member: Gabriel Clark, Planner II Date: October 8, 2024 Page 4 of 7 staff and adopted by the Auburn School District School Board of Directors on June 10, 2024 and has been subject to separate SEPA review and a Determination of Non- Significance (DNS) prepared by the District. Information contained in the School District CFP serves as the basis for the City’s collection of school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The Planning Commission action is to incorporate the Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan into the City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference. The CFP includes the following: • Six–year enrollment projections • Auburn school district level of service standards • An inventory of existing facilities • The district’s overall capacity of the 6-year period • District capital construction Plan • Impact fee calculations A review of the Auburn School District’s updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the District is requesting a decrease in the fee obligations. The net fee obligation for single-family dwellings is proposed to be $4,584.00, a decrease of $1,373.02 and the requested fee for multiple-family dwellings is $8,966, a decrease of $947.64. The actual impact fees are established by ordinance through subsequent City Council action. Recommendation Planning Commission to recommend approval of the Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan 2024 through 2030 to the City Council. P/T No. 2 Incorporate the Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2023-2029 into the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Discussion The Dieringer School District has provided the City with its Capital Facilities Plan 2023 - 2029. Dieringer has opted to retain the CFP adopted by the Dieringer School District Board of Directors on June 20, 2023. The CFP has been subject to separate SEPA review and a DNS prepared by the District. Information contained in the School District CFP serves as the basis for the City’s collection of school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The Planning Commission action is to incorporate the School District Capital Facilities Plan into the City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference. The CFP includes the following: • Overview • An inventory of existing facilities • Six–year enrollment projections • Standard of service • Capacity projects • Finance plan • Impact fee calculations Page 21 of 433 Staff Member: Gabriel Clark, Planner II Date: October 8, 2024 Page 5 of 7 A review of the Dieringer School District’s 2023 Capital Facilities Plan indicates the District has requested no changes to the fees compared to those currently adopted. As mentioned above, the impact fees will remain unchanged from 2023 to 2024. The net fee obligation for single-family dwellings is $8,054 and the fee for multiple family dwellings is $3,400. The actual impact fees are established by ordinance through subsequent City Council action. Recommendation Planning Commission to recommend approval of the Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2023-2029 to the City Council. P/T No. 3 Incorporate the Federal Way School District 2025 Capital Facilities Plan into the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Discussion The Federal Way School District has provided the City with its annually updated Capital Facilities Plan 2025. The CFP was adopted by the Federal Way School District School Board July 23, 2024. The CFP has been subject to separate SEPA review and a DNS prepared by the District. Information contained in the School District CFP serves as the basis for the City’s collection of school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The Planning Commission action is to incorporate the School District Capital Facilities Plan into the City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference. The CFP includes the following: • Introduction • Inventory of educational facilities & non-instructional facilities • Needs forecast, existing & new facilities • Six–year finance plan • Maps of district boundaries • Building capacities & portable locations • Student forecast • Capacity summaries • Student forecasts • Impact fee calculations A review of the Federal Way School District’s updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the District is not requesting to retain the $0.00 impact fee for single-single family development and decrease the multiple family dwellings impact fee to $0.00, a decrease of $6,998. Federal Way Public Schools requested to not adopt school impact fees for 2025. The actual impact fees are established by ordinance through subsequent City Council action. Recommendation Planning Commission to recommend approval of the Federal Way School District’s 2024 Capital Facilities Plan to the City Council. Page 22 of 433 Staff Member: Gabriel Clark, Planner II Date: October 8, 2024 Page 6 of 7 P/T No. 4 Incorporate the Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan 2022-2023 to 2028-2029 into the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Discussion The Kent School District has provided its annually updated 2023-2024 to 2029-2030 Capital Facilities Plan. The CFP was adopted by the Kent School District School Board in June 2024 and has been subject to separate SEPA review and a DNS prepared by the District. Information contained in the School District CFP serves as the basis for the City’s collection of school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The Planning Commission action is to incorporate the School District Capital Facilities Plan into the City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference. The CFP includes the following: • Executive Summary • Six-year enrollment projection & history • District standard of service • Inventory, capacity & maps of existing schools • Six-year planning & construction plan • Portable classrooms • Projected classroom capacity • Finance Plan, cost basis and impact fee schedules • Summary of changes to previous plan A review of the Kent School District’s updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the District is not requesting a change in the fee obligations. The net fee obligation for single-family dwellings is proposed to be maintained at $0.00, and the fee for multi- family dwellings is proposed to be maintained at $0.00. The District notes in the Capital Facilities Plan impact fees are not proposed in 2024 based on revised student generation rates, and capacity and enrollment projections. Recommendation Planning Commission to recommend approval of the Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan 2022-2023 to 2028-2029 to the City Council. Comprehensive Plan Policy/Text Amendments (File No. CPA24-0002, City initiated) P/T No. 5 Incorporate the City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan 2025 – 2030 into the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Discussion A Capital Facilities Plan is one of the comprehensive plan elements required by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) (RCW 36.70A). The GMA requires that a capital facilities plan include an inventory of existing capital facilities (showing Page 23 of 433 Staff Member: Gabriel Clark, Planner II Date: October 8, 2024 Page 7 of 7 locations and capacities), a forecast of future needs for such capital facilities, proposed locations and capacities of new or expanded capital facilities, and a minimum of a six- year plan to finance capital facilities with identified sources of funding. The proposed City of Auburn 6-year Capital Facilities Plan 2025-2030 satisfies the GMA requirements for a capital facilities element as part of the Comprehensive Plan. Each comprehensive plan prepared under the GMA must include a capital facilities plan element. More specifically, RCW 36.70A.070(3) of the GMA requires the following: “A capital facilities plan element consisting of: (a) An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities, showing the locations and capacities of the capital facilities; (b) a forecast of the future needs of such capital facilities; (c) the proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities; (d) at least a six-year plan that will finance such capital facilities within projected funding capacities and clearly identifies sources of public money for such purposes; and (e) a requirement to reassess the land use element if probable funding falls short of meeting existing needs and to ensure that the land use element, capital facilities plan element, and financing plan within the capital facilities plan element are coordinated and consistent. Park and recreation facilities shall be included in the capital facilities plan element.” A capital facility is defined as a structure, street or utility system improvement, or other long-lasting major asset, including land. Capital facilities are provided for public purposes. Capital facilities include, but are not limited to, the following: streets, roads, highways, sidewalks, street and road lighting systems, traffic signals, domestic water systems, storm and sanitary sewer systems, parks and recreation facilities, and police and fire protection facilities. These capital facilities include necessary ancillary and support facilities. The City of Auburn 6-year Capital Facilities Plan 2025-2030 is proposed to be incorporated by reference in the Comprehensive Plan, Capital Facilities Element. A review of the City of Auburn’s updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the costs of facilities will total $273,664,914 between 2025 and 2030. This plan indicates a $16,216,616 decrease in expenditures from $289,881,530 in the 2023 Capital Facilities Plan. The city has revised the list of current and pending projects throughout the document for this iteration. Recommendation Planning Commission to recommend approval of the City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan 2025 - 2030 to the City Council. Page 24 of 433 Auburn School District No. 408 Capital Facilities Plan 2024 through 2030 Chinook Elementary School – 2023 Adopted by the Auburn School District Board of Directors on June 10, 2024. Page 25 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 1 915 Fourth Street SE Auburn, Washington 98002 (253) 931-4900 Board of Directors Tracy Arnold Valerie Gonzales Arlista Holman Sheilia McLaughlin Laura Theimer Dr. Alan Spicciati, Superintendent TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1 – Executive Summary Page 2 SECTION 2 – Facility Inventory Page 3 SECTION 3 – Enrollment Projections Page 7 SECTION 4 – Student Generation Rates Page 9 SECTION 5 – Standard of Service Page 11 SECTION 6 – Capital Construction Plan Page 16 SECTION 7 – Impact Fees Page 17 SECTION 8 – Conclusions Page 21 Page 26 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 2 SECTION 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Auburn School District (District) has prepared this six-year Capital Facilities Plan (Plan) in compliance with the requirements of Washington’s Growth Management Act and the ordinances adopted by the counties and cities served by the District. The District reviews and amends the Plan annually. All changes are made pursuant to the Growth Management Act and the local ordinances. The Plan was prepared using data available in the spring of 2024 unless otherwise noted. The Plan is consistent with prior long-term capital facilities plans adopted by the District. This Plan is not intended to be the sole plan for all the District’s needs. The District may prepare interim and periodic long-range Capital Facilities Plans consistent with this six- year Capital Facilities Plan. The Plan will be submitted to jurisdictions located within the District’s service area along with a request to include the plan as an element in the jurisdictions’ Comprehensive Plans. King County, and the Cities of Algona, Auburn, Black Diamond, Kent, and Pacific must adopt this Plan to enable the District to collect impact fees within their jurisdiction. In the past, the Cities of Algona and Pacific have not adopted a school impact fee ordinance or the District’s Capital Facilities Plans. King County Code 21A allows school districts to assess impact fees on every dwelling unit in the District for which a fee schedule has been established. This Plan provides the data and calculations required by King County and the Cities to establish the District’s school impact fees for 2024. The District’s 2024 impact fee for Single-Family Residences is $4,584. The 2024 impact fee for Multi-Family Residences is $8,966. The Plan establishes the District’s Standard of Service to determine the District’s current and future capacity. While the State Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square footage guidelines for school capacity, those guidelines do not account for the local program needs of the District. The Growth Management Act and the school impact fee ordinance authorize the District to define its standard of service based on the District’s specific needs. The District’s Standard of Service is based upon the District’s current student -teacher ratio and service model for special programs. The Standard of Service and District’s school inventory have been used to calculate the capacity of schools in the District. The District’s permanent capacity for the 2024-25 school year is 14,595 students. The number of students enrolled in the District as of October 1, 2023, is 17,239 students. Page 27 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 3 The following table summarizes changes that are incorporated in the District’s 2024 -2030 Capital Facilities Plan: Table 1: 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Changes ITEM 2023 CFP 2024 CFP COMMENTS Classroom Capacity - Elem. Schools 20.33 20.29 Adjusted for Pre-Kindergarten classes Debt Service Tax Rate 1.84000 1.93178 Per King County District Average Assessed Value - SFR $573,704 $530,816 Per King County District Average Assessed Value - MFR $270,892 $232,969 Per King County District SF Capacity - Permanent 14,230 14,595 Updated calculation District SF Capacity - Permanent + Portables 17,074 17,541 Updated calculation District Impact Fee - SFR $5,615.82 $4,584.00 Updated calculation District Impact Fee - MFR $9,223.54 $8,966.00 Updated calculation Facility Cost - Middle School $143,000,000 $143,300,000 Construction cost escalation Facility Cost - Portable Classroom $250,000 $388,165 Based on current portable classroom cost Facility SF % - Permanent - Elementary 96.16% 97.73% Adjusted for portable classroom relocations Facility SF % - Permanent - Middle School 92.45% 91.28% Adjusted for portable classroom relocations Facility SF % - Permanent - High School 95.96% 94.87% Adjusted for portable classroom relocations Facility SF % - Portables - Elementary 3.84% 2.27% Adjusted for portable classroom relocations Facility SF % - Portables - Middle School 7.55% 8.72% Adjusted for portable classroom relocations Facility SF % - Portables - High School 4.04% 5.13% Adjusted for portable classroom relocations Genl. Obligation Bonds Interest Rate 3.58% 3.48% Per Bond Buyer Index OSPI Construction Cost Allowance $246.83 $375.00 Per OSPI OSPI Match % - District 35.42% 33.14% Per OSPI OSPI Match % - State 64.58% 66.86% Per OSPI Student Generation Rate - Elementary - SFR 0.303 0.269 Updated housing inventory Student Generation Rate - Middle School - SFR 0.133 0.107 Updated housing inventory Student Generation Rate - High School - SFR 0.151 0.117 Updated housing inventory Student Generation Rate - Elementary - MFR 0.440 0.482 Updated housing inventory Student Generation Rate - Middle School - MFR 0.150 0.131 Updated housing inventory Student Generation Rate - High School - MFR 0.172 0.146 Updated housing inventory SECTION 2 – FACILITY INVENTORY Auburn School District encompasses 62 square miles in King and Pierce Counties and serves the cities of Auburn, Algona, Pacific, as well as a portion of Unincorporated King County. The District owns 661 acres of property, operates 30 facilities, and utiliz es 112 portable classrooms. The 30 facilities include 16 elementary schools, four middle schools, four high schools, and six support facilities. 108 portable classrooms are located at schools and four are located at the District’s Administration Building and used for conferences, training, and office space. Page 28 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 4 The following map shows the District’s boundaries, school locations, major roads, and the Urban Growth Boundary. Figure 1 – School District Map Page 29 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 5 The following table identifies the District’s school facilities and facility data. Table 2: School Facility Inventory FACILTY ADDRESS YEAR BUILT MAJOR MOD. SITE SIZE (ACRES) GROSS SF OSPI SF ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS Alpac 310 Milwaukee Blvd N, Pacific 1972 1987 10.68 48,042 46,592 Arthur Jacobsen 29205 132nd Ave SE, Auburn 2007 NA 10.02 56,620 56,283 Bowman Creek 5701 Kersey Way SE, Auburn 2020 NA 21.85 75,862 74,413 Chinook 3502 Auburn Way S, Auburn 2022 NA 13.07 75,896 74,496 Dick Scobee 1031 14th St NE, Auburn 2020 NA 8.90 76,371 74,961 Evergreen Heights 5602 S 316th St, Auburn 1970 2014 / 2017 10.10 44,231 41,923 Gildo Rey 1005 37th St SE, Auburn 1969 1988 / 2012 10.05 49,123 47,697 Hazelwood 11815 SE 304th St, Auburn 1990 NA 13.08 54,906 53,482 Ilalko 301 Oravetz Place SE, Auburn 1992 NA 14.22 54,734 53,310 Lake View 16401 SE 318th St, Auburn 1980 NA 16.48 54,054 52,252 Lakeland Hills 1020 Evergreen Way SE, Auburn 2006 NA 12.00 54,876 53,454 Lea Hill 30908 124th Ave SE, Auburn 2022 NA 20.24 75,896 74,384 Pioneer 2301 M St SE, Auburn 2021 NA 11.13 76,758 75,358 Terminal Park 1101 D St SE, Auburn 2023 NA 6.09 77,443 75,793 Washington 20 E St NE, Auburn 1972 1988 5.33 46,378 46,377 Willow Crest 13002 SE 304th St, Auburn 2021 NA 10.43 75,849 74,405 TOTAL 193.67 997,039 975,180 MIDDLE SCHOOLS Cascade 1015 24th St NE, Auburn 1967 1998 16.94 89,320 89,320 Mt Baker 620 37th St SE, Auburn 1994 NA 28.98 90,365 90,365 Olympic 839 21st St SE, Auburn 2019 NA 17.40 107,625 107,625 Rainier 30620 116th Ave SE, Auburn 1991 NA 25.54 91,321 91,321 TOTAL 88.86 378,631 378,631 HIGH SCHOOLS Auburn High – Main Building 711 E Main St, Auburn 2015 NA 20.50 277,229 276,229 Auburn High – TAP Building 501 3rd St NE, Auburn 2009 NA 0.24 2,662 2,662 Auburn Mountainview 28900 124th Ave SE, Auburn 2005 NA 39.42 187,542 187,539 Auburn Riverside 501 Oravetz Rd, Auburn 1995 NA 35.32 180,248 180,248 West Auburn 401 W Main St, Auburn 1990 NA 5.26 30,295 30,295 TOTAL 100.74 677,976 676,973 GRAND TOTAL 383.27 2,053,646 2,030,784 The following table identifies the District’s support facilities and facility data. Page 30 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 6 Table 3: Support Facility Inventory FACILTY ADDRESS YEAR BUILT MAJOR MOD. SITE SIZE (ACRES) GROSS SF OSPI SF SUPPORT FACILITIES Administration Building 915 4th St NE, Auburn 1968 1987 / 2017 3.50 24,046 NA Administration Annex 502 4th St NE, Auburn 1935 1989 0.34 6,557 NA Auburn Memorial Stadium 405 4th St NE, Auburn 1978 1980 / 1997 6.60 17,055 NA Auburn Pool 516 4th St NE, Auburn 1971 2011 0.74 14,390 NA Support Services 1302 4th St SW, Auburn 1996 NA 5.50 41,184 NA Transportation Center 615 15th St SW, Auburn 1997 NA 5.90 19,500 NA TOTALS 22.58 122,732 The following table identifies the District’s portable classrooms that are located at schools. Table 4: School Portable Classroom Inventory FACILITY SINGLE PORTABLE CLASSROOMS DOUBLE PORTABLE CLASSROOMS TOTAL PORTABLE CLASSROOMS ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS Alpac 8 0 8 Arthur Jacobsen 0 0 0 Bowman Creek 0 0 0 Chinook 0 0 0 Dick Scobee 0 0 0 Evergreen Heights 4 0 4 Gildo Rey 2 0 2 Hazelwood 2 0 2 Ilalko 2 0 2 Lake View 0 0 0 Lakeland Hills 3 1 5 Lea Hill 0 0 0 Pioneer 0 0 0 Terminal Park 0 0 0 Washington 8 0 8 Willow Crest 0 0 0 MIDDLE SCHOOLS Cascade 8 0 8 Mt. Baker 6 3 12 Olympic 8 0 8 Rainier 9 1 11 HIGH SCHOOLS Auburn High - Main Building 8 0 8 Auburn High - TAP Building 0 0 0 Auburn Mountainview 10 1 12 Auburn Riverside 6 6 18 West Auburn 0 0 0 TOTALS 84 12 108 Page 31 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 7 The following table identifies the District’s inventory of undeveloped property. Table 5: Undeveloped Property Inventory SITE NO. LOCATION YEAR ACQUIRED SITE SIZE (ACRES) BUILDING DEPT. JURISDICTION URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY 23A SE 318th St., Auburn 1948 62.44 King County Outside 25A SE Lake Holm Road / 190th Ave. SE, Auburn 1990 23.86 King County Outside 25B SE Lake Holm Road / 188th Ave. SE, Auburn 2008 5.00 King County Outside 33 SE Lake Holm Road /129th Way SE, Auburn 2005 40.00 King County Outside 34/39 I St. NE/40th St. NE, Auburn 2002 / 2022 72.28 City of Auburn Within 35 Sumner Tapps Hwy. E./ 62nd St. SE, Auburn 2009 53.00 City of Auburn Within TOTAL 256.58 SECTION 3 – ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS The District’s consultant, Davis Demographics, analyzed demographic data relevant to the District’s facility planning efforts. The report created by Davis Demographics identifies trends occurring in the community, how these trends may affect future student populations, and assists in illustrating facility adjustments that may be necessary to accommodate student population. Davis Demographics’ ten-year forecast methodology combines historic student population counts, past and present demographic characteristics, and planned residential development to forecast future student populations. Additionally, Davis Demographics uses factors calculating incoming kindergarten classes based upon birth rates, additional students from new housing, the effects of student mobility, and a detailed review of planned residential development within the District. Historical Enrollment The following table shows the District’s October 1 historical enrollment over the past 20 - years. The data reveals an average overall growth of 1.46% during the past 10 years. This includes a 4% decrease in October 2020 enrollment due to the COVID pandemic. Page 32 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 8 Table 6: Historical Enrollment Projected Enrollment Based upon the district-wide analysis conducted by Davis Demographics: ● The student population in the District is expected to increase slightly by 0.9% during the next five years and decrease slightly by 0.5% during the following five years. ● The birth rates in the District have fluctuated over the past ten years, but the overall trend is positive. ● An influx in students transitioning into 1st grade and 9th grade is expected. The District anticipates the largest decline in students transitioning into 11th and 12th grades. This is primarily due to students participating in the Running Start program. ● The enrollment projection includes 11 residential development projects with a total of 1,024 units during the next ten years. ● The K-5 resident student population is expected to increase to nearly 7,600 in 2026 and then decline slowly due to diminished housing development and larger kindergarten cohorts moving into middle school. Overall, the K-5 grade group is expected to decrease by 0.8% in the 5-year forecast and 1.4% in the ten-year horizon. ● The 6-8 Grade resident population within the District is expected to increase by 3.3% in the five-year forecast and 0.8% in the ten-year horizon. Page 33 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 9 ● High school student population is expected to experience a slight increase of 1.6% in the five-year forecast while remaining flat with a small decrease of 0.1% towards the tail end of the ten-year horizon. The following table identifies student enrollment projections for the next six years. Table 7: Student Enrollment Projections GRADE 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 IN-DISTRICT STUDENTS Pre-K 130 130 130 130 130 130 K 1,129 1,165 1,213 1,188 1,180 1,180 1 1,213 1,190 1,230 1,267 1,240 1,230 2 1,268 1,227 1,208 1,235 1,270 1,242 3 1,296 1,302 1,266 1,232 1,258 1,292 4 1,245 1,322 1,336 1,282 1,247 1,272 5 1,321 1,262 1,342 1,343 1,289 1,252 6 1,272 1,288 1,237 1,299 1,299 1,245 7 1,266 1,291 1,308 1,243 1,306 1,306 8 1,216 1,274 1,304 1,305 1,240 1,301 9 1,287 1,253 1,316 1,340 1,339 1,271 10 1,368 1,318 1,290 1,344 1,367 1,364 11 1,301 1,290 1,243 1,208 1,260 1,279 12 1,169 1,275 1,270 1,215 1,179 1,231 Subtotal 16,479 16,587 16,695 16,629 16,605 16,596 OUT-OF-DISTRICT STUDENTS K-5 260 260 262 263 261 259 6-8 95 98 100 98 98 100 9-12 516 517 516 514 518 518 Subtotal 871 875 878 874 877 877 TOTAL STUDENTS PreK-5 7,861 7,858 7,988 7,939 7,876 7,857 6-8 3,848 3,951 3,950 3,945 3,943 3,953 9-12 5,641 5,653 5,636 5,620 5,663 5,663 TOTAL 17,350 17,462 17,574 17,503 17,482 17,473 SECTION 4 – STUDENT GENERATION RATES King County Code 21A establishes a formula to determine school impact fees. Developers of residential properties must pay a school district the impact fee to help compensate the District for the impact of new housing units on school facilities. This King C ounty code was substantially adopted by the Cities of Auburn, Black Diamond, and Kent. This formula requires the District to establish a “Student Generation Rate”. This rate is the average number of students generated by a residential housing unit and is used to Page 34 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 10 estimate the number of students that will be added to the District by each new housing unit. Two sets of data are used to calculate Student Generation Rates - current student enrollment and from recently constructed housing units in the District. This information associates each student with a housing unit. Two general housing categories are analy zed - single-family and multi-family. The District also uses the Student Generation Rates to estimate anticipated student enrollment in the future. Development data is collected to determine the number of new residential units that may be built in the future. The Student Generation Rates applied to estimate the number of new students that the planned residential developments may yield. Planned residential development data was obtained through discussions with city agencies, counties, and major developers within the District boundaries. Student population by residence includes all approved and tentative tract maps in addition to any planned or proposed development that may occur within the project timeframe. The planned residential development information is a snapshot of the District currently. The information may change and is updated annually. The following table provides information about recent single -family residential developments in the District and associated Student Generation Rates. Table 8: Single-Family Residential Development Summary SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS OCCUPANCY DATE OCCUPIED UNITS TO BE OCCUPIED 2024 STUDENTS STUDENT GENERATION RATE UNITS K-5 6-8 9-12 Total K-5 6-8 9-12 Total Bridges 2021 380 380 0 96 32 45 173 0.253 0.084 0.118 0.455 Forest Glen 2021 30 30 0 23 13 6 42 0.767 0.433 0.200 1.400 Greenvale 2023 17 17 0 0 1 0 1 0.000 0.059 0.000 0.059 Greenview Estates 2023 17 17 0 3 2 3 8 0.176 0.118 0.176 0.471 Hastings 2020 10 10 0 5 1 1 7 0.500 0.100 0.100 0.700 Lozier Ranch 18 7 11 1 0 0 1 0.143 0.000 0.000 0.143 Palisades - Homes 16 15 1 5 2 3 10 0.333 0.133 0.200 0.667 River Rock 14 7 7 0 0 0 0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Seremounte 2019 30 30 0 7 5 4 16 0.233 0.167 0.133 0.533 Vasiliy 2021 8 8 0 2 0 0 2 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.250 Willow Place 2021 11 11 0 1 1 0 2 0.091 0.091 0.000 0.182 TOTALS 551 532 19 143 57 62 262 0.269 0.107 0.117 0.492 The following table provides information about recent multi-family residential developments in the District and associated Student Generation Rates. Page 35 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 11 Table 9: Multi-Family Residential Development Summary MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS OCCUPANCY DATE OCCUPIED UNITS TO BE OCCUPIED 2024 STUDENTS STUDENT GENERATION RATE UNITS K-5 6-8 9-12 Total K-5 6-8 9-12 Total Copper Gate Apts. 2021 500 500 0 341 93 103 537 0.682 0.186 0.206 1.074 The Verge Auburn 2022 226 226 0 9 2 3 14 0.040 0.009 0.013 0.062 TOTALS 726 726 0 350 95 106 551 0.482 0.131 0.146 0.759 SECTION 5 – STANDARD OF SERVICE The School Impact Fee Ordinances adopted by King County and the Cities of Auburn, Black Diamond, and Kent require the District to establish a “Standard of Service” to be eligible to impose school impact fees. The Standard of Service must identify the schoo l program year, class size by grade span, the types of facilities needed to serve its student population, and other Rates identified by the District including the requirements of students with special needs. CURRENT ENROLLMENT The District operates 16 elementary schools with pre-school to grade 5, four middle schools with grades 6 to 8, three comprehensive and one alternate education high school with grades 9 to 12. Student enrollments at these schools as of March 2024 are: ● Elementary Schools: 8,569 students ● Middle Schools: 3,656 students ● High Schools: 5,247 students ● Total Enrollment: 17,472 students CLASS SIZE Standard class sizes in the District are subject to state regulations, collective bargaining agreements, and student needs. Class sizes also vary based upon grade level and classroom type. The District’s blended class size standards are as follows: ● Elementary Schools: 20.29 students per classroom ● Middle Schools: 28.02 students per classroom ● High Schools: 28.74 students per classroom ● Self-Contained Special Education: 12.00 students per classroom Page 36 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 12 PERMANENT CLASSROOMS Permanent classrooms are located in permanent structures owned and operated by the District. The number of permanent classrooms in the District’s 24 schools are: ● Elementary Schools: 507 classrooms ● Middle Schools: 151 classrooms ● High Schools: 221 classrooms ● Total: 879 classrooms PORTABLE CLASSROOMS Portable classrooms in the District are modular structures that can be relocated. The District uses portable classrooms when permanent facilities do not have adequate space to accommodate its students and staff. Portable classrooms are also used at the sch ool district’s Administration Building for training, conference, and office space. The number of portable classrooms in use and their locations are: ● Elementary Schools: 31 portables ● Middle Schools: 39 portables ● High Schools: 38 portables ● Support Facilities: 4 portables ● Total: 112 portables TYPES OF CLASSROOMS The types of classrooms in the District vary based upon grade level, instructional program, and student needs. Classroom types in the District are: ● General Classrooms: Spaces used for general instruction and do not have specialized features or equipment. These classrooms are present in elementary, middle, and high schools. ● Special Education Self-Contained Classrooms: Spaces used for self-contained instruction for students with disabilities. These classrooms are present in elementary, middle, and high schools. ● Specialty Classrooms: Instructional spaces that have unique features or equipment. These classrooms are present in middle and high schools and consist of teaching stations for art, automotive technology, band, business education, career center, choral, construction manufacturing, computer science, culinary arts, drafting, drama, fitness and conditioning, horticulture, kitchen science, marketing, metals, orchestra, Page 37 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 13 physical education, robotics, science, sports medicine, theater arts, and visual communications. ● Pull-Out Classrooms: Spaces where students receive specialized instruction for a portion of the school day and are comprised of elementary gymnasiums and music, and elementary, middle, and high school multi-lingual, resource, and Title/LAP classrooms. Pull-out classrooms do not contribute to a school’s capacity because students visit these classrooms during the school day while excused from their general classrooms. The standard number of students in a classroom varies based upon grade level and classroom type. Standard class sizes in the District are: ● Elementary General Classroom Pre-Kindergarten: 20 students per classroom. ● Elementary General Classrooms Kindergarten through Grade 3: 17 students per classroom. ● Elementary General Classrooms Grades 4 and 5: 27 students per classroom. ● Middle School General and Specialty Classrooms Grade 6: 27 students per classroom. ● Middle School General and Specialty Classrooms Grades 7 and 8: 28.53 students per classroom. ● High School General and Specialty Classrooms Grades 9 through 12: 28.74 students per classroom. ● Special Education Self-Contained Classrooms Pre-Kindergarten – Grade 12: 12 students per classroom. ● Pull-Out Classrooms Pre-Kindergarten through Grade 12: Class size varies depending on the grade level and type of instruction being provided. CLASSROOM UTILIZATION As noted above, the District has established standard student class sizes based upon grade level and classroom use. While the District works diligently to assign students to achieve full classroom capacity, it is not possible to always do so. Consequently, the District applies classroom utilization rates to address inefficiencies in assigning classes. The utilization rates are: ● Elementary Schools: 100% utilization based on the ability to fully assign classes at classroom size standards. ● Middle and High Schools: 76.67% utilization based upon 92% utilization due to elective class sizes x 83% utilization due to classrooms used for planning periods. Page 38 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 14 SCHOOL CAPACITY School capacity is determined by the number of teaching stations present at each school, type of teaching station, class size, teaching station capacity, and classroom utilization rate. The following table identifies the capacity of each school in the District in permanent classrooms. Table 10 – School Capacities SCHOOL NAME GEN. CLRMS. PRE-K CLRMS. SPEC. ED. SELF- CONTAINED CLRMS. PULL- OUT CLRMS. SPECIALTY CLRMS. TOTL CLRMS. GEN. & SPECIALTY CLRM. CAPACITY SPEC. ED. SELF- CONTAINED CLRM. CAPACITY CLRM. UTILIZATION RATE SCHOOL CAPACITY PERMANENT SCHOOL CAPACITY PERMANENT + PORTABLES ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS Alpac 19 2 0 5 0 26 20.29 12.00 100.00% 426 576 Arthur Jacobsen 20 1 2 5 0 28 20.29 12.00 100.00% 450 450 Bowman Creek 32 1 1 5 0 39 20.29 12.00 100.00% 682 682 Chinook 26 4 2 7 0 39 20.29 12.00 100.00% 633 633 Dick Scobee 25 4 2 8 0 39 20.29 12.00 100.00% 612 612 Evergreen Heights 16 1 1 4 0 22 20.29 12.00 100.00% 357 457 Gildo Rey 17 3 1 4 0 25 20.29 12.00 100.00% 418 443 Hazelwood 22 1 1 4 0 28 20.29 12.00 100.00% 479 529 Ilalko 20 1 2 5 0 28 20.29 12.00 100.00% 450 450 Lake View 19 1 1 4 0 25 20.29 12.00 100.00% 418 418 Lakeland Hills 21 1 1 5 0 28 20.29 12.00 100.00% 458 533 Lea Hill 27 3 3 6 0 39 20.29 12.00 100.00% 645 645 Pioneer 26 4 2 7 0 39 20.29 12.00 100.00% 633 633 Terminal Park 27 4 2 6 0 39 20.29 12.00 100.00% 653 653 Washington 12 3 2 7 0 24 20.29 12.00 100.00% 328 578 Willow Crest 29 3 1 6 0 39 20.29 12.00 100.00% 661 661 TOTALS 358 37 24 88 0 507 8,303 8,953 MIDDLE SCHOOLS Cascade 14 0 1 8 17 40 28.02 12.00 76.67% 675 899 Mt Baker 12 0 2 7 15 36 28.02 12.00 76.67% 598 990 Olympic 12 0 2 9 17 40 28.02 12.00 76.67% 641 865 Rainier 9 0 3 8 15 35 28.02 12.00 76.67% 543 851 TOTALS 47 0 8 32 64 151 2,458 3,606 HIGH SCHOOLS Auburn High 23 0 3 15 40 81 28.74 12.00 76.67% 1,416 1,696 Auburn High - TAP 0 0 3 0 0 3 28.74 12.00 76.67% 28 28 Auburn Mountainview 17 0 4 11 30 62 28.74 12.00 76.67% 1,072 1,408 Auburn Riverside 21 0 2 10 29 62 28.74 12.00 76.67% 1,120 1,624 West Auburn 8 0 0 4 1 13 28.74 12.00 76.67% 198 226 TOTALS 69 0 12 40 100 221 3,834 4,982 GRAND TOTALS 474 37 44 160 164 879 14,595 17,541 Page 39 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 15 SECTION 6 - CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN Since 1975, the District has regularly performed an in -depth review of its existing facilities and long-term facility needs. The process includes the formation of community -wide citizens’ committees to review facility needs and make recommendations for improvements, modernizations, and new facilities. In 2015, a citizens’ committee recommended the District build two new elementary schools, replace one middle and five elementary schools, and acquire property for three elementary schools. In November 2016, the voters approved by 62.38% a $456,056,000 bond proposition to build and replace these schools. Capital Project reserve funds were used to acquire the elementary school property. The last project in this building program is under construction and will be completed in July 2024. In 2023, the District completed a 10-year Facilities Master Plan. This plan identified the following facility needs: ● Complete improvements at 22 facilities to address aging equipment, air conditioning, energy conservation, major maintenance, and safety and security improvements within six years. ● Replace Alpac Elementary School within six years. ● Replace Cascade Middle School with six years. ● Build a new middle school within six years. ● Replace Evergreen Heights and Gildo Rey Elementary Schools within seven to 13 years. ● Replace the Administration Building and Administration Annex within seven to 13 years. ● Build a new high school in nine years if current enrollment projections remain accurate. ● Acquire new portable classrooms and relocate existing portable classrooms where needed to accommodate localized enrollment growth at individual schools. A citizens’ committee was convened in the fall of 2023 and recommended completion of the facility improvements, facility replacements, and new school construction identified in the 2023 Facilities Master Plan. The District Board of Directors is considering a November 2024 bond proposition to address facility needs recommended to be completed within six years. The District is eligible for state funding assistance for school replacement projects. The District is not eligible for state funding assistance for a new middle school project. The new middle school, as part of the District's permanent and portable classroom solution, will provide new capacity to serve growth and is the basis for the District's impact Page 40 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 16 fees. The District also plans to purchase or relocate portable classrooms to accommodate growth at the middle and high school levels. These District’s six-year facility needs are summarized in the following table. Table 11 : Six-Year Capital Construction Plan PROJECT ADDED CAPACITY FUND SOURCE ESTIMATED COMPLETION ESTIMATED COST (2024) SIX-YEAR FINANCE PLAN 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Total New Middle School 800 Future Bond Aug. 2027 $143,300,000 $1,433,000 $3,037,960 $64,404,752 $95,576,652 $1,706,726 $0 $166,159,090 Alpac Elem. Replacement 224 Future Bond Aug. 2028 $89,872,100 $0 $952,644 $1,797,443 $42,815,644 $63,538,415 $1,134,615 $110,238,761 Cascade MS Replacement 125 Future Bond Aug. 2028 $142,587,755 $0 $1,511,430 $3,204,232 $67,929,719 $100,807,703 $1,800,138 $175,253,222 Improvements at 22 Facilities 0 Future Bond Aug. 2029 $55,476,260 $0 $5,880,484 $15,583,281 $19,821,934 $17,509,375 $7,003,750 $65,798,824 Portable Classrooms 0 Cap. Proj. Fund Aug. 2024 $1,750,000 $1,750,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,750,000 Property Acquisitions 0 Cap. Proj. Fund NA $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTALS $432,986,115 $3,183,000 $11,382,518 $84,989,708 $226,143,948 $183,562,219 $9,938,502 $519,199,896 SECTION 7 - IMPACT FEES King County Code 21A allows school districts to assess impact fees on every dwelling unit in the District for which a fee schedule has been established. The fee schedule is based on the school impact fee formula set out in King County Ordinance 11621 Atta chment A. Page 41 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 17 The following table identifies the data used by the District in calculating impact fees for 2024. Table 12: Impact Fee Data SINGLE FAMILY MULTI FAMILY IMPACT FEE ELEMENTS SOURCE Elementary Middle School High School Elementary Middle School High School Classroom Capacities District Standards 20.29 28.02 28.74 20.29 28.02 28.74 Debt Service Tax Rate King County 1.93178 1.93178 1.93178 1.93178 1.93178 1.93178 District Average Assessed Value King County $530,816 $530,816 $530,816 $232,969 $232,969 $232,969 District SF Capacity- Permanent District Data 997,039 378,631 677,976 997,039 378,631 677,976 District SF Capacity - Portables District Data 23,200 36,160 36,640 23,200 36,160 36,640 District SF Capacity - Permanent + Portables District Data 1,020,239 414,791 714,616 1,020,239 414,791 714,616 District Impact Fees CFP Calculation $4,584.00 $4,584.00 $4,584.00 $8,966.00 $8,966.00 $8,966.00 Facility Cost - Middle School District Data $0 $143,300,000 $0 $0 $143,300,000 $0 Facility Cost - Portable Classroom District Data $388,165 $388,165 $388,165 $388,165 $388,165 $388,165 Facility SF % - Permanent Facilities District Data 97.73% 91.28% 94.87% 97.73% 91.28% 94.87% Facility SF % - Portable Facilities District Data 2.27% 8.72% 5.13% 2.27% 8.72% 5.13% Genl. Obligation Bonds Interest Rate Bond Buyer Index 3.48% 3.48% 3.48% 3.48% 3.48% 3.48% OSPI Construction Cost Allowance OSPI $375.00 $375.00 $375.00 $375.00 $375.00 $375.00 OSPI Match % - District OSPI 66.86% 66.86% 66.86% 66.86% 66.86% 66.86% OSPI Match % - State OSPI 33.14% 33.14% 33.14% 33.14% 33.14% 33.14% OSPI Square Footage Per Student OSPI 90 108 130 90 108 130 School Capacities District Standards 650 800 1,500 650 800 1,500 Site Acreage District Standards 12 24 36 12 24 36 Site Cost per Acre District Standards $2,023 $2,023 $2,023 $2,023 $2,023 $2,023 Student Generation Rates CFP Calculation 0.269 0.107 0.117 0.482 0.131 0.146 Page 42 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 18 The following table shows the District’s impact fee calculation for single-family residences. Table 13: Impact Fee Calculation – Single-Family Residences SCHOOL SITE ACQUISTION COST Grade Level Site Acreage Cost per Acre School Capacity Site Cost per Student Student Gen. Rate Cost per SFR Elementary 12 $0 650 $0 0.269 $0 Middle 24 $0 800 $0 0.107 $0 High 36 $0 1,500 $0 0.117 $0 TOTAL $0 SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION COST Grade Level Facility Cost Student Capacity Percent Permanent SF Facility Cost per Student Student Gen. Rate Cost per SFR Elementary $0 650 0.9773 $0 0.269 $0 Middle $143,300,000 800 0.9128 $163,505 0.107 $17,495 High $0 1,500 0.9487 $0 0.117 $0 TOTAL $17,495 PORTABLE CLASSROOM COST Grade Level Facility Cost Student Capacity Percent Portable SF Facility Cost per Student Student Gen. Rate Cost per SFR Elementary $0 20.29 0.0227 $0 0.269 $0.00 Middle $388,165 28.02 0.0872 $1,208 0.107 $129.26 High $388,165 28.74 0.0513 $693 0.117 $81.06 TOTAL $210.32 STATE MATCH CREDIT Grade Level Construction Cost Allowance OSPI SF Per Student State Match % State Match per Student Student Gen. Rate Cost per SFR Elementary $375.00 90 0.6686 $0 0.269 $0 Middle $375.00 108 0.6686 $0 0.107 $0 High $375.00 130 0.6686 $0 0.117 $0 TOTAL $0 TAX CREDIT Category Residential Assessed Value Debt Service Tax Rate G.O. Bond Interest Rate Years Amortized Tax Credit Single Family $530,816 1.93178 0.0348 10 $8,537 IMPACT FEE SUMMARY - SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE Site Cost per Acre Permanent Facility Cost Portable Clrm. Cost State Match Credit Tax Credit 50% Local Share Impact Fee SFR $0 $17,495 $210 $0 ($8,537) 0.500 $4,584 Page 43 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 19 The following table shows the District’s impact fee calculation for multi-family residences. Table 14: Impact Fee Calculation – Multi-Family Residences SCHOOL SITE ACQUISTION COST Grade Level Site Acreage Cost per Acre School Capacity Site Cost per Student Student Gen. Rate Cost per SFR Elementary 12 $2,023 650 $0 0.482 $0 Middle 24 $2,023 800 $0 0.131 $0 High 36 $2,023 1,500 $0 0.146 $0 TOTAL $0 SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION COST Grade Level Facility Cost Student Capacity Percent Permanent SF Facility Cost per Student Student Gen. Rate Cost per SFR Elementary $0 650 0.9773 $0 0.482 $0 Middle $143,300,000 800 0.9128 $163,505 0.131 $21,419 High $0 1,500 0.9487 $0 0.146 $0 TOTAL $21,419 PORTABLE CLASSROOM COST Grade Level Facility Cost Student Capacity Percent Portable SF Facility Cost per Student Student Gen. Rate Cost per SFR Elementary $0 20.29 0.0227 $0 0.482 $0.00 Middle $388,165 28.02 0.0872 $1,208 0.131 $158.25 High $388,165 28.74 0.0513 $693 0.146 $101.16 TOTAL $259.41 STATE MATCH CREDIT Grade Level Construction Cost Alllowance OSPI SF Per Student State Match % State Match per Student Student Gen. Rate Cost per SFR Elementary $375.00 90 0.6686 $0 0.482 $0 Middle $375.00 108 0.6686 $0 0.131 $0 High $375.00 130 0.6686 $0 0.146 $0 TOTAL $0 TAX CREDIT Category Residential Assessed Value Debt Service Tax Rate G.O. Bond Interest Rate Years Amortized Tax Credit Single Family $232,969 1.93178 0.0348 10 $3,747 IMPACT FEE SUMMARY - SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE Site Cost per Acre Permanent Facility Cost Portable Clrm. Cost State Match Credit Tax Credit 50% Local Share Impact Fee MFR $0 $21,419 $259 $0 ($3,747) 0.500 $8,966 SECTION 8 – CONCLUSIONS Housing units continue to be built in the District and the student population continues to grow. The student population is projected to increase during the next five years but at a slower rate than in the past 10 years. Page 44 of 433 2024 Capital Facilities Plan Auburn School District No. 408 20 The District built two new elementary schools and replaced five elementary schools with larger facilities during the past four years. This increased elementary school capacity so that it fully accommodates current elementary students. However, the District continues to lack permanent classroom space to accommodate middle and high school students, including students from new growth. Consequently, 55 portable classrooms are being used to accommodate middle and high school students and are part of the District ’s capacity solution. Because of a shortage of classrooms at middle and high schools, the District is considering placing a bond proposition on the ballot in November 2024 to build an additional middle school. The District is also monitoring annual enrollment levels and bonding capacity to determine when an additional high school should be built. While new housing units continue to be built in the District, the rate is slowing. Consequently, the District’s Student Generation Rates have decreased during the past year. This is the primary factor reducing the District’s school impact fees for 2024. Th is is reflected in a reduction for single-family residences from $5,615.82 to $4,584.00 and a reduction for multi-family residences from $9,223.54 to $8,966.00. Auburn School District’s 2024-2030 Capital Facilities Plan, including its 2024 impact fee rates, will be submitted to King County and the Cities of Algona, Auburn, Black Diamond, Kent, and Pacific with a request the jurisdictions adopt the plan and include the plan as an element in their Comprehensive Plans. Page 45 of 433 Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2023-2029 DRAFT Board Approval scheduled on June 20, 2023 Page 46 of 433 DIERINGER SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 343 1320-178th A venue East Lake Tapps, Washington 98391 (253)862-2537 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Megan Bearor Mike Skagen Greg Johnson Chelsea Steiner Michael Farmer, Superintendent Page 47 of 433 DieringerEducating every child forConfidence today andContribution tomorrowPage 48 of 433 Dieringer School District No. 343 d An Overview Established in 1890, Dieringer School District consolidated with Lake Tapps School District in 1936. The District's three schools, Lake Tapps Elementary School, Dieringer Heights Elementary School and North Tapps Middle School, provide K through 8th grade education, and serve as hubs for community activities as well. Dieringer School District #343 is located in unincorporated Pierce County, bounded on the east by the White River, on the west by the Stuck River, on the north by the city of Auburn, and on the south by the cities of Bonney Lake and Sumner. The District surrounds the northern two-thirds of Lake Tapps and covers approximately 5.5 square miles. The current student enrollment is approximately 1,418 students in grades kindergarten through eight. Students in grades first through third are housed at Lake Tapps Elementary, constructed in 2005 as a replacement project. Construction was complete on an addition in the September 2017. Dieringer Heights Elementary opened in the fall of 2000 and is home to students in kindergarten, fourth and fifth grade. Dieringer Heights Elementary also houses two inclusion preschool classrooms. Originally constructed in 1992 and added on to in 1998 and 2009, North Tapps Middle School houses students in grades sixth-eighth. The district supports an additional 560 high school students who may select to attend any public high school. The majority chose to attend Auburn Riverside, Sumner and Bonney Lake High Schools. The district has a long standing history of providing high quality education for all our students. Our goal is for our students to gain the skills that will allow them to become successful, confident, contributing members of society. Dieringer is composed of students who come to school well prepared and eager to learn. Parents are concerned with student success and provide outstanding support for their children and the Dieringer School District. The PTA and many volunteers contribute countless hours and resources to our schools and students. The community supports the schools through the passage of funding issues to support bus acquisition, student access to current technology and the construction of school facilities. Impact fees, including interest, are held in reserve until used to meet District identified needs for site acquisition, additional facilities and improvements an/or technology capital expenditures. Page 49 of 433 DIERINGER SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 343 Capital Facilities Plan Update, 2023 Current Facilities Inventory of Public Schools NAME CAPACITY LOCATION Lake Tapps Elementary 357 1320-178th Ave E., Lake Tapps Dieringer Heights Elementary 508 21727 -34 th St. E., Lake Tapps North Tapps Middle School 536 20029-12th St., E., Lake Tapps High School 0 TOTAL 1,401 Page 50 of 433 r.1ZH luz:ff11'q?=rW?ll?an?'Wilzaz1-lZRI)11.J:"l.,l:ll $1!l?11lr-?01%(r'if!1aa!Ifflii il?i ll101lIiIi l=k991iil zelili li t'-j.'6/'? ' .'il."J4,Ill-Al'fml mci:Ia0W##'7'?ntoB@Page 51 of 433 Dieringer School District Proposed Housing Potential Enrollment Increase June 2020 Proposed Housing Units: *Single Family-224 x .381 generation factor = 85.3 students K-8 Enrollment Impact: 85 .3 students K-8 Estimated 17.1 students a year over the period 2021-2026 Potential enrollment increase = 5.6% (based on 1,523 enrollment 4/20) Increase per grade level = 9.5 students (based on 9 grade bands) Approximately students per school: 28.4 **District enrollment based on 4/19 and potential growth =1,608.3 / 1654.3 District program capacity = 1,401 students *Generation factor based on an average of2019 Sumner .429 and Auburn .333 **Numbers are without and with preschool students, respectively Page 52 of 433 Enrollment ProjectionsThe Dieringer School District is located in an area that continues to experience gromh.This growth can be noted by reviewing the following indicators: enrollment trend data,proposed housing development, and the mitigation impact fees received for newconstruction.The District continues to experience steady growth in student enrollment. This hasslightly exceeded the Pierce County and Puget Sound Educational Service District(PSESD) enrollment growth over the same period. A review of proposed constructionwithin the borders of the Dieringer School District indicates that the growth trend can beexpected to continue over the next four years and beyond. The growth this year has beenhigher than anticipated. There are 224 single family residents slated for constructionwithin the next five years. These projects, together with individual lots and general in-migration, are anticipated to generate an additional 85.3 students in kindergarten througheighth grade.To partially address this growth, the District passed a 2006 bond issue to construct anadditional five classrooms at Dieringer Heights Elementary. Those classrooms werecompleted and occupied in 2009. The bond issue also provided for the addition of anauxiliary gym, health and fitness classroom, and four science rooms at North TappsMiddle School. Those projects were completed in 2009 and the new instructional spacesare in use. At Lake Tapps Elementary School the constmction of 3 new classrooms wascompleted in September 2017.Page 53 of 433 HOUSING DEVELOPMENT/POTENTIAL ENROLLMENT INCREASE#1 Fairweather Cove Estates (18)28 lots total8 lots sold (Lived in) (1 on 2 lots combined)18 active lot listings2 active construction2011 permit for PSE replacing 3 power poles1600-2000 block of 16th st. @ the 17500-17800 block of Sumner-Tapps Hwy.#2 Rainier Plateau (10)10 lots totalPermit approvedBehind DHESNo active buildingEnd of 34'h St.#3 Tapps Meadows (6)lOLots4 completedAcross from Snag Island#4 Country Creek Estates (1)9 out 10 lots builtRemaining lot filed for Plat Alteration 2007Off 15th near Edwards Road#5 Forest Canyon Estates (124)l year extension approved (Applied 3/2018)Owner Kenneth Atkinson124 lots; Behind Al Lago/off Forest Canyon Rd.#6 The Ridge at Lake Tapps (45)No active permits45 Single Family Lots -32XX Sumner Tapps Hwy. E./next to al Lago#7 Maryanski Plat (4)Short Plat (4 or less. Usually 6-month completion time)- 4 Single Family Lots; 40"l St. E and 230"l Ave E- No active buildingToward Wildview Ridge#8 Franklin Northlake (16)-Active site; pre-build-16 Single Family Lots-off Lake Tapps PkwySingle Family Units to be built: 224Page 54 of 433 Standard of ServiceThe Dieringer School District houses children in elementary schools serving studentspreschool through fifth grade and a middle school that houses grades six through eighth.High school students, grades nine through twelve, attend adjacent high schools, primarilyin the Auburn and Sumner School Districts.Dieringer School District follows a traditional school calendar beginning in earlySeptember and completing in mid June. The daily school schedules begin between 7:49and 8:45 a.m. and end between 2:17 and 3:15 p.m.The Dieringer School District standard of service is based on class size and programdecisions adopted by the Dieringer School District Board of Directors. Based on thelegislative funding regarding class size, the targeted number of students per classroomkindergarten through third grade 17, fourth through fifth and sixth grade 27 and seventhrough eighth grade 28. These class sizes have an impact on facilities and the permanentcapacity of each school reflects these class sizes.In the District, rooms designated and assigned for special use are not counted as capacityclassrooms. At the elementary level students are provided music instruction and physicaleducation in non-capacity classrooms. Special education and intervention programs areprovided as pullout programs and do not provide capacity. At the middle school level,instruction is organized around a six period day; classrooms are calculated as providing5/6 capacity to accommodate teacher planning time in the instuctional space.Page 55 of 433 DIERINGER SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 343 Capital Facilities Plan Update, 2023 Dieringer School District Service Standards Public School Facilities (Square Feet Per Student) Elementary School 139 Middle School 148 Junior High NA High School NA Dieringer School District Individual Capacity Projects (2022-2027) Elementary School #3 Middle School Classroom Addition 400 112 Page 56 of 433 Name Lake Tapps Elementary Dieringer Heights Elem. Elementary #3 North Tapps MS TOTALS DIERINGER SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 343 Current Capacity 357 508 536 1401 PERMANENT CAPACITY PROJECTS MASTER SCHEDULE June,2022 6 -Year Total Capacity Capacity 2022 2023 357 508 400 400 536 433 1834 2024 400 2025 2026 2027 112 112 Page 57 of 433 DIERINGER SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 343 Capital Facilities Plan Update, June 2023 CFP Projects and Financing Plan Sources and Uses of Funds Sources of Funds Existing Revenue: Reserve New Revenue: (x $1,000) Bonds, Levies, Fees, State Matching Funds, Dedications, Mitigation Payments TOTAL SOURCES Uses of Funds Elementary #3 Non-Capacity Projects: School Site, Tech nology Upgrades, And Board Approved Projects TOTAL USES BALANCE $7,481,000 $37,057,761 $44,538,761 (8,237,365) ($44,538,761) NTMS Classroom Addition 0 ($32,978,807) ($3,322,589) Page 58 of 433 Permanent Capacity Projects School Site Elem. No. 3 Total Capacity Projects Non-Capacity Projects School Site Elem. No. 3 Technology Improvements Total Non-Capacity Projects TOT AL PROJECTS Estimated Cost 29,945,896 29,945,896 6,355,500 8,237,365 14,592,865 44,538,761 DIERINGER SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 343 FINANCE PLAN 2023-2029 June 2023 Unsecured Source of Funds Estimated Amt Levy, Bond 29,632,896 29,632,896 5,604,079 3,528,892 8,040,827 38,765,867 Estimated Unrestricted 4,000 4,000 0 10,000 10,000 14,000 Secured Source of Funds Impact Levy, Bond & Unrestr Fees Amount Amount 9,000 0 0 9,000 0 0 0 0 751,421 0 4,708,473 0 0 4,708,473 751,421 9,000 4,708,473 751,421 Impact Fees 300,000 300,000 0 0 0 300,000 Page 59 of 433 Time Period 2020 Actual 2021-2026 Growth Elementary Schools $57,639 DIERINGER SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 343 Capital Facilities Plan Update, 2023 Capital Facilities Requirements to 2029 Student Population 1523.0 85.3 Student Capacity 1401 433 Net Reserve Or (Deficiency) (122) 347.7 Dieringer School District Cost Per Student Middle Schools $64,467 (2020 Dollars) Junior High Schools NA High Schools NA Page 60 of 433 School Impact Fee Calculation 6/22 DISTRICT Dieringer School District School Site Acquisition Cost: (AcresxCost per Acre /Facility Capacity)x Student Generation Factor Student Student Facility Cost/ Facility Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ Acreage Acre Capacity SFR MFR SFR MFR Elementary #3 12 $529,625 400 0.322 0.172 $5,116 $2,733 Middle 0.13 0.07 TOTAL $5,116 $2,733 School Construction Cost: ( Facility Cost/Facility Capacity)xStudent Generation Factor)x(permanent/Total Sq Ft) Facility Cost Facility Capacity Student Student Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ SFR MFR SFR MFR Elementary #3 $2,6623,307 400 0.322 0.172 $21,432 $11,448 0.13 0.07 NTMS Classroom Addition $3,322,589 112 0.322 0.172 0.13 0.07 $3,857 $2,077 TOTAL $25,288 $13,525 Temporary Facility Cost: ( Facility Cost/Facility Capacity)xStudent Generation Factor)x(Temporary/Total Square Feet) Student Student Cost/Cost/ %Temp/ Facility Facility Factor Factor SFR MFR Total Sq.F Cost Size SFR MFR Elementary 0 0.322 0.172 Middle 0 0.13 0.07 TOTAL $0 $0 State Matching Credit: Boeckh Index X SPI Square Footage X District Match % X Student Factor Student Student Boeckh SPI District Factor Factor Cost/cost/ Index Footage Match % SFR MFR SFR MFR Elementary Middle TOTAL $0 $0 Tax Payment Credit:SFR MFR Average Assessed Value 2021 $937,043 $619,841 Capital Bond Interest Rate (est 5/20 0.40%0.40% Net Present Value of Average Dwelling $9,164,187 $6,061,983 10 10 Property Tax Levy Rate 2023 $1.56 $1.56 Present Value of Revenue Stream $14,296 $9,457 Fee Sumary:Single Multiple Family Family Site Acquistion Costs $5,116.18 $2,732.87 Permanent Facility $25,288 $13,525 Temporary Facility Cost $0.00 $0.00 State Match Credit $0.00 $0.00 Tax Payment Credit ($14,296.13 ($9,457) FEE $16,108 $6,801 FEE WITH DISCOUNT OF 50%$8,054 FEE WITH DISCOUNT OF 50%$3400 Page 61 of 433 Capital Facilities Plan 2025 Olympic View K-8 School Mirror Lake Elementary Wildwood Elementary Star Lake Elementary/ Evergreen Middle School Thomas Jefferson High School Memorial Field Renovation Illahee Middle School Lake Grove Elementary Page 62 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN July 23, 2024 BOARD OF EDUCATION Dr. Jennifer Jones, President Luckisha Phillips, Vice President and Legislative Representative Trudy Davis, Board Director Quentin Morris, WIAA Representative Joan Marie Murphy, Board Director SUPERINTENDENT Dr. Dani Pfeiffer Prepared by: Rob Bryant, Chief Finance & Operations Officer Michael Swartz, Executive Director of Capital Projects Jennifer Thomas, Student & Demographic Forecaster Page 63 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 2-3 SECTION 1 THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Introduction 4 Inventory of Educational Facilities 5 Inventory of Non-Instructional Facilities 6 Needs Forecast - Existing Facilities 7 Needs Forecast - New Facilities 8 Six Year Finance Plan 9-10 SECTION 2 MAPS Introduction 11 Map – City and County Jurisdictions 12 SECTION 3 SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION Introduction 13 Building Capacities 14-16 Portable Locations 16-17 Student Forecast 18-20 SECTION 4 KING COUNTY, CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, AND CITY OF KENT IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS Introduction 21 Capacity Summaries 22-26 Impact Fee Calculation 27-28 Student Generation Rates 29 Changes Summary from 2024 to 2025 30 Page 64 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2 INTRODUCTION In response to the requirements of the State of Washington Growth Management Act (SHB) 2929 (1990) and ESHB 1025 (1991)), and under the School Impact Fee Ordinances of King County Code 21A, City of Federal Way Ordinance No. 95-249 effective December 21, 1995 as amended, City of Kent Ordinance No.4278 effective June 2018, revised December 2021, and the City of Auburn Ordinance No. 5078 effective 1998, Federal Way Public Schools has updated its Capital Facilities Plan as of May 2024. This plan will be submitted for consideration to each of the jurisdictions located with the Federal Way Public Schools’ service area: King County, the City of Kent, City of Federal Way, and the City of Auburn and is incorporated in the Comprehensive Plans of each jurisdiction by reference. This plan is requested to be included in the Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive Plans of each jurisdiction. To date, the City of Des Moines has not adopted a school impact fee ordinance. The City of Des Moines collects school impact fees as part of the SEPA process. Discussions with the City of Milton to adopt an ordinance for school impact fees for parcels located within the Federal Way School District’s service area is in process. The Growth Management Act requires the County to designate Urban Growth areas within which urban growth can be encouraged. The Growth Management Planning Council adopted and recommended to the King County Council for Urban Growth Area Line Maps with designations for urban centers. A designation was made within the Federal Way planning area, which encompasses Federal Way Public Schools boundaries. King County will encourage and actively support the development of Urban Centers to meet the region’s need for housing, jobs, services, culture, and recreation. This Plan’s estimated population growth is prepared with this underlying assumption. This Capital Facilities Plan will be used as documentation for any jurisdiction which requires its use to meet the needs of the Growth Management Act. This plan is not intended to be the sole planning tool for all of the District needs. The District may prepare interim plans consistent with Board policies or management need. Currently Federal Way Public Schools is nearing the end of Phase 2 Bond projects supporting school expansion and replacement as authorized by the voters in 2017. Prior to the passage of the Phase 2 Bond the District formed a 100-member Facilities Planning Committee consisting of parents, community members and staff. This Committee was tasked with developing a recommendation to the Superintendent regarding Phase 2 of the District’s plan for school construction, remodeling, and/or modernization for voter consideration in November 2017. The voters passed this $450M bond authorization with a 62% YES vote reflecting a commitment to invest in the modernization of our infrastructure. As of today, the District has completed Thomas Jefferson High School, Evergreen Middle School, Lake Grove Elementary, Mirror Lake Elementary, Star Lake Elementary, Wildwood Elementary, Olympic View K-8 and Memorial Field. Illahee Middle School is currently about 50% complete and will be ready to move in once school is out in June 2025. Page 65 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 3 INTRODUCTION, continued The rebuilding of the schools has and will continue to create additional capacity for students at the elementary and high school levels. The District continues to monitor factors that may have an impact on enrollment and capacity at our schools, including new single-family and multi-family residential developments and any impacts due to the COVID-19. In accordance with the McCleary decision, the State has provided funding to reduce K-3 class size to 17 and 4-12 class size to 25. Beginning in 2019-20 the legislature expected compliance with this funding adding pressure to the need for elementary capacity. In response to this need the district has acquired a commercial building to renovate into classrooms to provide permanent additional capacity. The COVID-19 pandemic negatively affected brick and mortar enrollment in recent years, as well as increased enrollment in the Internet Academy. However, the district’s 2022-23 enrollment was higher than projected. We have seen similar growth in the 2023-2024 school year, although we have not yet reached our Pre-Covid enrollment numbers. We are anticipating continued enrollment growth, especially considering the City of Federal Way’s plans to increase housing in the downtown core in conjunction with Sound Transit’s Link Light Rail development. The District has increased capacity at the elementary level over the past several years and shows no unhoused scholars based on the six-year enrollment projections (even with projected growth at that level). The 2025 Capital Facilities Plan shows fairly flat enrollment; however, we will adjust our projections yearly based on new housing developments currently being proposed to open in 2027 and beyond. Page 66 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 4 SECTION 1 - THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN The State Growth Management Act requires that several pieces of information be gathered to determine the facilities available and needed to meet the needs of a growing community. This section provides information about current facilities, existing facility needs, and expected future facility requirements for Federal Way Public Schools. A Financial Plan that shows expected funding for any new construction, portables and modernization listed follows this. Page 67 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 5 INVENTORY OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS (K-5) Adelaide 1635 SW 304 th St Federal Way 98023 Brigadoon 3601 SW 336 th St Federal Way 98023 Camelot 4041 S 298 th St Auburn 98001 Enterprise 35101 5th Ave SW Federal Way 98023 Green Gables 32607 47 th Ave SW Federal Way 98023 Lake Dolloff 4200 S 308 th St Auburn 98001 Lake Grove 303 SW 308 th St Federal Way 98023 Lakeland 35827 32nd Ave S Auburn 98001 Mark Twain 2450 S Star Lake Rd Federal Way 98003 Meredith Hill 5830 S 300th St Auburn 98001 Mirror Lake 625 S 314 th St Federal Way 98003 Nautilus (K-8) 1000 S 289th St Federal Way 98003 Olympic View (K-8) 2626 SW 327th St Federal Way 98023 Panther Lake 34424 1 st Ave S Federal Way 98003 Rainier View 3015 S 368 th St Federal Way 98003 Sherwood Forest 34600 12 th Ave SW Federal Way 98023 Silver Lake 1310 SW 325th Pl Federal Way 98023 Star Lake 26812 40th Ave S, Bldg.B Kent 98032 Sunnycrest 24629 42 nd Ave S Kent 98032 Twin Lakes 4400 SW 320 th St Federal Way 98023 Valhalla 27847 42 nd Ave S Auburn 98001 Wildwood 2405 S 300th St Federal Way 98003 Woodmont (K-8) 26454 16 th Ave S Des Moines 98198 MIDDLE SCHOOLS (6-8) Federal Way Public Academy (6-10) 34620 9 th Ave S Federal Way 98003 Illahee 36001 1st Ave S Federal Way 98003 Kilo 4400 S 308th St Auburn 98001 Lakota 1415 SW 314th St Federal Way 98023 Sacajawea 1101 S Dash Point Rd Federal Way 98003 Sequoyah 3450 S 360 th ST Auburn 98001 Evergreen 26812 40th Ave S, Bldg.A Kent 98032 TAF @ Saghalie (6-12) 33914 19th Ave SW Federal Way 98023 HIGH SCHOOLS (9-12) Decatur 2800 SW 320th St Federal Way 98023 Federal Way 30611 16 th Ave S Federal Way 98003 Thomas Jefferson 4248 S 288 th St Auburn 98001 Todd Beamer 35999 16 th Ave S Federal Way 98003 Career Academy at Truman 31455 28th Ave S Federal Way 98003 ADDITIONAL SCHOOLS Internet Academy (K-12) 31455 28 th Ave S Federal Way 98003 Employment Transition Program (12+) 33250 21 st Ave SW Federal Way 98023 Federal Way Open Doors 31455 28 th Ave S Federal Way 98003 ES24 (Former DeVry Property) (K-8) 3600 S 344th Way, Federal Way 98001 Page 68 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 6 CURRENT INVENTORY NON-INSTRUCTIONAL FACILITIES Developed Property Central Kitchen 1214 S 332nd St Federal Way 98003 Federal Way Memorial Field 1300 S 308 th St Federal Way 98003 Educational Services Center 33330 8 th Ave S Federal Way 98003 Support Services Center 1211 S 332 nd St Federal Way 98003 Leased Property Early Learning Center at Uptown Square 1066 S 320th St Federal Way 98003 Undeveloped Property Site # Location 75 SW 360th Street & 3rd Avenue SW – 9.2 Acres 65 S 351st Street & 52nd Avenue S – 8.8 Acres 60 E of 10th Avenue SW - SW 334th & SW 335th Streets - 10.04 Acres 73 N of SW 320th and east of 45th PL SW – 23.45 Acres 71 S 344th Street & 46th Avenue S - 17.47 Acres 82 1st Way S and S 342nd St – Minimal acreage 96 S 308th St and 14th Ave S – .36 Acres Notes: Not all undeveloped properties are large enough to meet school construction requirements. Properties may be traded or sold depending on what locations are needed to house students in the District. Page 69 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 7 NEEDS FORECAST - EXISTING FACILITIES PHASE EXISTING FACILITY FUTURE NEEDS ANTICIPATED SOURCE OF FUNDS As needed Purchase and Relocate Portables Interim Capacity Anticipated source of funds is Impact Fees. II Thomas Jefferson High School Replaced Existing Building, Increased Capacity Voter Approved Capital bond II Illahee Middle School Replace Existing Building Voter Approved Capital bond II Evergreen Middle School Replaced Existing Building Voter Approved Capital bond II Lake Grove Elementary Replaced Existing Building, Increased Capacity Voter Approved Capital bond II Mirror Lake Elementary Replaced Existing Building, Increased Capacity Voter Approved Capital bond II Olympic View K-8 School Replaced Existing Building, Increased Capacity Voter Approved Capital bond II Star Lake Elementary Replaced Existing Building, Increased Capacity Voter Approved Capital bond II Wildwood Elementary Replaced Existing Building, Increase Capacity Voter Approved Capital bond II Memorial Stadium Replaced Existing Facility Voter Approved Capital bond II ES24 (DeVry Property) Temp Swing School Increase Capacity SCAP and K-3 Class size reduction funding III Mark Twain Elementary Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity TBD III Decatur High School Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity TBD III Kilo Middle School Replace Existing Building TBD III Sacajawea Middle School Replace Existing Building TBD III Adelaide Elementary Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity TBD III Brigadoon Elementary Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity TBD III Camelot Elementary Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity TBD III Lake Dolloff Elementary Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity TBD III Nautilus K-8 School Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity TBD III Twin Lakes Elementary Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity TBD III Woodmont K-8 School Replace Existing Building, Increase Capacity TBD Page 70 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 8 NEEDS FORECAST - ADDITIONAL FACILITIES NEW FACILITY LOCATION ANTICIPATED SOURCE OF FUNDS FWPS has leased a portion of the Truman Campus property to Region X and Puget Sound Education Service District. Region X and PSESD built a Head Start building on this property which has served Federal Way 3- and 4-year-olds for the last twenty years. In the recent re- competition, the federal funding for a Head Start program at this location was lost. Subsequently the District has been using this facility for a state-funded Early Childhood Education (ECEAP) program and is currently in negotiations to secure title to the building. The building will only be available for preschool activities. Page 71 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 9 SIX YEAR FINANCE PLAN Secured Funding Sources Impact Fees (1) $173,000 Land Sale Funds (2) $2,964,000 Bond or Levy Funds (3) $10,726,000 K3-Class Size Reduction (4) $6,585,000 School Construction Assistance Program (SCAP) (5) $77,764,000 TOTAL $98,212,000 Projected Revenue Sources School Construction Assistance Program (SCAP) (6) $18,998,000 K-3 Class Size Reduction (7) $0 Bond Funds (8) $0 Land Fund Sales (9) $0 Impact Fees (10) $0 TOTAL $18,998,000 Actual and Planned Expenditures Total Secured Funding and Projected Revenue $117,210,000 Estimated and Budget 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Total Total Cost Prior Years 2024-2025 2025-2026 2026-2027 2027-2028 2028-2029 2029-2030 2030-2031 2024-2031 MODERNIZATION AND EXPANSION Lake Grove Elementary (11)$39,780,000 $0 $39,780,000 Mirror Lake Elementary (11)$42,200,000 $0 $42,200,000 Star Lake Elementary (11)$39,623,000 $0 $39,623,000 Wildwood Elementary (11)$41,190,000 $0 $41,190,000 Olympic View K-8 School (11)$46,350,000 $0 $46,350,000 Thomas Jefferson High School (11)$117,728,000 $7,000,000 $7,000,000 $124,728,000 Evergreen Middle School (11)$65,688,000 $0 $65,688,000 Illahee Middle School (11)$22,746,000 $66,127,000 $66,127,000 $88,873,000 Memorial Stadium (11)$28,804,000 $3,000,000 $3,000,000 $31,804,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 SITE ACQUISITION Former DeVry/ES 24 (12)$28,891,000 $1,423,000 $1,422,000 $1,424,000 $1,422,000 $1,423,000 $7,114,000 $36,005,000 TEMPORARY FACILITIES Portables (13)$3,500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $3,500,000 $7,000,000 TOTAL $476,500,000 $78,050,000 $1,922,000 $1,924,000 $1,922,000 $1,923,000 $500,000 $500,000 $86,741,000 $563,241,000 NOTES:` 1. These fees are currently being held in a King County, City of Federal Way, City of Auburn, and City of Kent impact fee account, and will be available for use by the District for system improvements. This is year end balance on 12/31/23. 2. This is year end balance on 12/31/23. 3. This is the 12/31/23 balance of bond funds and capital levy funds. This figure includes interest earnings. 4. This represents the K3-CSR revnue received but not spent as of 12/31/2023. 5. This represents the balance of SCAP funding but no spent as of 12/31/2023. 6. This is anticipated SCAP for the future projects authorized by the voters in 2017. 7. This is the remaining K-3 Class size reduction grant revenue. 8. In November 2017, the District passed a $450M bond measure. All bonds authorized have been issued. 9. There are no projected sale of surplus properties. 10. In this current plan, there are no projected impact fees. 11. Project budgets are updated as of December 2023. The budget for Illahee Middle School is still being updated. 12. A former private university campus located in Federal Way was purchased in 2019 to provide up to 43 additional permanent elementary classrooms. Prior to creating new permanent capcity this location will be used as a temporary housing. These costs are excluded from impact fee calculations. 13. These fees represent the cost of purchasing and installing new portables. The portable expenditure in future years may replace existing portables that are not functional. These may not increase capacity and are not included in the capacity summary. NEW SCHOOLS Page 72 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 10 SECTION 2 - MAPS As of September 2024, Federal Way Public Schools has twenty elementary schools (grades K- 5), three schools with a K-8 grade configuration, six middle school schools (grades 6-8), four high schools (grades 9-12) and four small secondary schools. The Federal Way Public Academy serves students in grades 6-10. The programs at Open Doors and Career Academy at Truman High School serve students in grades 9-12. In addition to these programs, TAF@Saghalie serves students in grades 6-12 who reside within the service area and the Employment and Transition Program (ETP) at the Norman Center serves 18–21-year-old scholars. The Growth Management Act requires that a jurisdiction evaluate if the public facility infrastructure is in place to handle new housing developments. In the case of most public facilities, new developments have major impacts on the facilities immediately adjacent to that development. School districts are different. If the district does not have permanent facilities available, interim measures must be taken until new facilities can be built or until boundaries can be adjusted to match the population changes to the surrounding facilities. It is important to realize that a single housing development does not require the construction of a complete school facility. School districts are required to project growth throughout the district and build or adjust boundaries based on growth throughout the district, not just around a single development. Adjusting boundaries requires careful consideration by the district and is not taken lightly. It is recognized that there is a potential impact on students who are required to change schools. Boundary adjustments impact the whole district, not just one school. The final map included represents the city and county boundaries which overlap with the district’s service areas. City of Algona City of Auburn City of Des Moines City of Federal Way City of Kent City of Milton Unincorporated King County Page 73 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 11 MAP – CITY AND COUNTY JURISDICTIONS FWPS boundaries is 100% Urban Growth Area Page 74 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 12 SECTION 3 - SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION Building Capacities - The Education Program Portable Locations Student Forecast – 2025 through 2031 Page 75 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 13 BUILDING CAPACITIES This Capital Facilities Plan establishes the District’s “standard of service” in order to ascertain the District’s current and future capacity. The Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square footage guidelines for capacity, but these guidelines do not take into consideration the education program needs. In general, the District’s current target class size provides that the average class size for a standard classroom for grades K through 3 should be 17 students to comply with current legislation. In grades 4-5 the target is 25 students. For grades 6 to 12 the target class size is 26 students. Classrooms for students with Individualized Education Program (Special Education) needs are calculated at 12 seats per classroom. Historically, the District has used the OSPI square footage calculation as a baseline for capacity calculation and made adjustments for specific program needs. The District will continue to use this calculation for determining capacity at our middle and high schools. However, for elementary school capacity will be calculated based on the number of classroom spaces and the number of students assigned to each classroom. Class Size Guidelines FWPS Historical “Standard of Service” HB2661/SHB2776 Enacted Law Square Footage Guideline Kindergarten 18.9 17 25-28 Grades 1-2 18.9 17 25-28 Grade 3 18.9 17 28 Grades 4-5 25 25 28 Grades 6-12 26 26 28 For the purposes of determining student capacity at individual schools, the following list clarifies adjustments to classroom spaces and the OSPI calculation. Special Education Resource Rooms: Each middle school requires the use of a standard classroom(s) for special education students requiring instruction to address specific disabilities. English as a Second Language Programs: Each middle school and high school require the use of a standard classroom for students learning English as a second language. Middle School Computer Labs: Each middle school has computer labs, except Evergreen Middle School. Wireless access has been installed at all secondary schools. If additional classroom space is needed, these computer labs may be converted to mobile carts. Page 76 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 14 BUILDING CAPACITIES, continued High School Career Development and Learning Center (Resource) Room: Each high school provides special education resource room and career development classrooms for students requiring instruction to address specific disabilities. Preschool/ECEAP: Our district currently offers preschool programs for both special needs & typically developing students at 9 elementary schools. We also have the ECEAP program at 10 sites (6 elementary schools, 3 high schools, and 1 commercial site). These programs decrease capacity at those schools. Alternative Learning Experience: Federal Way offers students the opportunity to participate in an Alternative Learning Experience through our Internet Academy. These students have never been included in the capacity calculation of unhoused students. 1418 Youth Reengagement: Federal Way offers students the opportunity to participate in 1418 Youth Reengagement Open Doors program. These students are housed at the Truman campus but are not currently included in the capacity calculation of unhoused students. Page 77 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 15 BUILDING CAPACITIES, continued ELEMENTARY BUILDING MIDDLE SCHOOL BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACITY PROGRAM CAPACITY School Name Headcount 1Preschool School Name Headcount Adelaide 392 30 Illahee 855 Brigadoon 408 30 Kilo 779 Camelot 378 30 Lakota 786 Enterprise 524 15 Sacajawea 694 Green Gables 439 Sequoyah 585 Lake Dolloff 535 Evergreen 795 3 Lake Grove 588 TAF @ Saghalie 598 Lakeland 455 Federal Way Public Academy 183 Mark Twain 515 TOTAL 5,275 Meredith Hill 606 30 3 Mirror Lake 514 30 *Middle School Average 727 Nautilus (K-8)512 Olympic View (K-8)429 HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING Panther Lake 501 PROGRAM CAPACITY Rainier View 607 30 Sherwood Forest 451 6 School Name Headcount Silver Lake 476 Decatur 1243 Star Lake 544 30 Federal Way 1684 Sunnycrest 636 Thomas Jefferson 1600 Twin Lakes 413 30 Todd Beamer 1085 Valhalla 598 TAF @ Saghalie 155 3 Wildwood 597 30 Career Academy at Truman 159 Woodmont (K-8)474 Federal Way Public Academy 116 TOTAL 11,592 291 Employment Transition Program 48 TOTAL 6,090 Elementary Average 504 2 High School Average 1,403 Notes: 1 Preschool enrollment reduces capacity for K-5 students. 15 preschool students in one classroom. 2 Federal Way Public Academy, Career Academy at Truman High School, and Employment Transition Program 3 Lake Grove and Wildwood opened January 2021; Mirror Lake opened September 2021 and TAF @ Saghalie for the high school school grade span (9-12) are non-boundary schools. These schools are not used in the calculated averages. Page 78 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 16 PORTABLE LOCATIONS The Washington State Constitution requires the State to provide each student a basic education. It is not an efficient use of District resources to build a school with a capacity for 500 students due to lack of space for 25 students when enrollment fluctuates throughout the year and from year to year. Portables are used as interim measures to house students when increasing population impacts a school attendance area. Portables may also be required to house students when new or changing programs require additional capacity. They also provide housing for students until permanent facilities can be financed and constructed. When permanent facilities become available, the portable(s) is either used for other purposes such as storage or childcare programs or moved to another school for an interim classroom. Some portables may not be fit to move due to age or physical condition. In these cases, the District may choose to buy new portables and surplus these unfit portables. With the school expansion projects funded through the 2017 Bond, new capacity has been created within the new schools and portables have been eliminated from these campuses. The following page provides a list of the location of the portable facilities used for educational facilities by Federal Way Public Schools. Page 79 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 17 PORTABLE LOCATIONS, continued PORTABLES LOCATED PORTABLES LOCATED AT ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS AT HIGH SCHOOLS NON NON INSTRUCTIONAL INSTRUCTIONAL* INSTRUCTIONAL INSTRUCTIONAL Adelaide 1 2 Decatur 8 1 Brigadoon 1 Federal Way Camelot 1 Thomas Jefferson Enterprise 3 Todd Beamer 8 Green Gables 1 TOTAL 16 1 Lake Dolloff 5 1 Lake Grove Lakeland Mark Twain 3 Meredith Hill 3 PORTABLES LOCATED Mirror Lake AT SUPPORT FACILITIES Nautilus 3 Olympic View MOT Panther Lake 4 TDC 9 Rainier View 5 Former TAFA Sherwood Forest 2 2 TOTAL 9 Silver Lake 1 3 Star Lake Sunnycrest 6 DISTRICT PORTABLES IN USE FOR ECEAP Twin Lakes 1 2 AND/OR HEADSTART Valhalla 4 Sherwood Forest 2 Wildwood Evergreen Woodmont 3 Total 2 TOTAL 47 10 PORTABLES LOCATED AT MIDDLE SCHOOLS NON INSTRUCTIONAL INSTRUCTIONAL Illahee Kilo 1 6 Lakota Sacajawea 5 Sequoyah 2 Evergreen TAF@ Saghalie 4 TOTAL 10 8 Page 80 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 18 STUDENT FORECAST Student enrollment projections are a basic component of budget development and facility need. Enrollment projections influence many of the financial estimates that go into budget preparation. The majority of staffing requirements are derived directly from the forecasted number of students. Allocations for instructional supplies and materials are also made based on projected enrollment. Other expenditures and certain revenue projections are directly related to enrollment projections. Enrollment projections are completed annually in the Business Services Department. Projections must be detailed at various levels, district total, school-building totals, grade level and program level to include vocational and special education students. The basis of projections has been cohort survival analysis. Cohort survival is the analysis of a group that has a common statistical value (grade level) as it progresses through time. In a stable population the cohort would be 1.00 for all grades. This analysis uses historical information to develop averages and project the averages forward. This method does not trace individual students; it is concerned with aggregate numbers in each grade level. The district has used this method with varying years of history and weighted factors to study several projections. Because transfers in and out of the school system are common, student migration is factored into the analysis as it increases or decreases survival rates. Entry grades (kindergarten) are a unique problem in cohort analysis. The district collects information on birth rates within the district’s census tracts and treats these statistics as a cohort for kindergarten enrollment in the appropriate years. The Federal Way School District is using various statistical methods for projecting student enrollments. The resultant forecasted enrollments are evaluated below. In February 2024, the District contracted a demographer to develop projections for the Federal Way School District. The model used to forecast next year’s enrollment uses cohort survival rates to measure grade to grade growth, assumes market share losses to private schools (consistent with county-wide average), assumes growth from new housing or losses due to net losses from migration. This forecast was provided as a range of three projections. The long-range forecast provided with this report used a model with cohort survival rates and growth rates based on projected changes in the 5-19 age group for King County. Page 81 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 19 STUDENT FORECAST, CON’T Page 82 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 20 STUDENT FORECAST, continued Most of the methods used for long range enrollment reporting assume that enrollment is a constant percent of something else (e.g. population) or that enrollment will mirror some projected trend for the school-age population over time. The report included 5 different calculations to provide a range of possible projections for the District to the year 2029. This model produces a projection that is between 19,500 and 21,000 when applied to the low, medium, and high range modes. This provides a reasonable range for long-range planning and is consistent with estimates from various models. Long-range projections that establish the need for facilities are a modification of the cohort survival method. The cohort method of analysis becomes less reliable the farther out the projections are made. The Federal Way School District long-range projections are studied annually. The study includes information from the jurisdictional demographers as they project future housing and population in the region. The long-range projections used by Federal Way Public Schools reflect a similar age trend in student populations as the projections published by the Office of Financial Management for the State of Washington. Near term projections assume some growth from new housing, which is offset by current local economic conditions. The District tracks new development from five permitting jurisdictions. Long range planning assumes a student yield from proposed new housing consistent with historical growth patterns. Growth Management requires jurisdictions to plan for a minimum of twenty years. The Federal Way School District is a partner in this planning with the various jurisdictions comprising the school district geography. These projections create a vision of the school district community in the future. The COVID-19 pandemic negatively affected brick and mortar enrollment in recent years, as well as increased enrollment in the Internet Academy. The district’s 2022-23 enrollment was higher than projected. As we move farther away from the effects of COVID-19, we hope to see continued enrollment growth, especially considering the City of Federal Way’s plans to increase housing in the down-town core in conjunction with Sound Transit’s Link Light Rail development. Page 83 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 21 SECTION 4 – KING COUNTY, CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, AND CITY OF KENT IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS Capacity Summaries Site & Construction Costs Allocations Student Generation Rates Impact Fee Calculations Reference to Impact Fee Calculations Page 84 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 22 CAPACITY SUMMARIES All Grades, Elementary, Middle School, and High Schools The Capacity Summaries combine Building Capacity information, Portable Capacity information and the Student Forecast information. The result demonstrates the requirements for new or remodeled facilities and why there is a need for the District to use temporary facilities or interim measures. The District has recently adjusted its capacity calculation method for Elementary schools to better show capacity needed to comply with the K-3 Class Size Reduction. This adjustment is also shown in the portable capacity calculation. In order to allow for flexibility in portable usage the District will use an average class size calculation of 21 for each Elementary portable and an average class size of 25 for each Middle and High School portable. The information is organized with a page summarizing the entire District, and then evaluating capacity vs. number of students at elementary, middle school, and high school levels individually. The notes at the bottom of each spreadsheet provide information about what facilities are in place each year. Page 85 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 23 CAPACITY SUMMARIES, Continued Capacity Summary – All Grades Actual Budget Calendar Year 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 CAPACITY School Year 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 2030-31 BUILDING PROGRAM HEADCOUNT CAPACITY 22,957 22,957 22,957 23,569 23,569 23,569 23,569 23,569 Add Capacity 0 0 612 0 0 0 0 0 Adjusted Program Headcount Capacity 22,957 22,957 23,569 23,569 23,569 23,569 23,569 23,569 ENROLLMENT Basic Headcount Enrollment 20,568 20,696 20,690 20,711 20,731 20,752 20,773 20,805 Internet Academy Headcount Enrollment1 (255) (255) (255) (255) (255) (255) (255) (255) Basic FTE Enrollment without Internet Academy 20,313 20,441 20,435 20,456 20,476 20,497 20,518 20,550 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM FTE CAPACITY 2,644 2,516 3,134 3,113 3,093 3,072 3,051 3,019 RELOCATABLE CAPACITY Current Portable Capacity 1,685 1,685 1,687 1,739 1,791 1,843 1,895 1,947 Add/Subtract Portable Capacity 0 2 52 52 52 52 52 0 Adjusted Portable Capacity 1,685 1,687 1,739 1,791 1,843 1,895 1,947 1,947 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 4,329 4,203 4,873 4,904 4,936 4,967 4,998 4,966 NOTES: 1 - - Projected - - Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities. This represents historic enrollment. Page 86 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 24 CAPACITY SUMMARIES, Continued Capacity Summary – Elementary Schools Actual Budget Calendar Year 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 CAPACITY School Year 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 2030-31 BUILDING PROGRAM HEAD COUNT CAPACITY 11,592 11,592 11,592 12,204 12,204 12,204 12,204 12,204 Add/Subtract capacity total 0 0 612 0 0 0 0 0 Add capacity at1: Star Lake De Vry 612 Olympic View K-8 0 Adjusted Program Headcount Capacity 11,592 11,592 12,204 12,204 12,204 12,204 12,204 12,204 ENROLLMENT Basic Headcount Enrollment 9,317 9,461 9,415 9,424 9,434 9,443 9,453 9,472 Internet Academy Headcount2 (20) (20) (20) (20) (20) (20) (20) (20) Basic Headcount Enrollment without Internet Academy 9,297 9,441 9,395 9,404 9,414 9,423 9,433 9,452 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM CAPACITY 2,295 2,151 2,809 2,800 2,790 2,781 2,771 2,752 RELOCATABLE CAPACITY3 Current Portable Capacity 931 931 931 931 931 931 931 931 Add/Subtract portable capacity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Add portable capacity at: Subtract portable capacity at: Lake Grove Mirror Lake Star Lake Wildwood Olympic View K-8 (42) Adjusted Portable Capacity 931 931 931 931 931 931 931 931 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 3,226 3,082 3,740 3,731 3,721 3,712 3,702 3,683 NOTES: 1 2 3 - - Projected - - Capacity increases are projected based on a design to accommodate 525 students. Increased capacity is currently stated as the difference between current calculated capacity and the projected design. In order to reduce elementary class size, Devry capacity is calculated at 17 scholars per classroom. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities. This represents historic enrollment. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only based on class size capacity of 21. The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs. Page 87 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 25 CAPACITY SUMMARIES, Continued Capacity Summary – Middle Schools Actual Budget Calendar Year 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 CAPACITY School Year 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 2030-31 BUILDING PROGRAM HEADCOUNT CAPACITY 5,275 5,275 5,275 5,275 5,275 5,275 5,275 5,275 Add/Subtract capacity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Add capacity at: Evergreen 1 Illahee Adjusted Program Headcount Capacity 5,275 5,275 5,275 5,275 5,275 5,275 5,275 5,275 ENROLLMENT Basic Headcount Enrollment 4,719 4,714 4,749 4,754 4,759 4,763 4,768 4,768 Internet Academy 2 (55) (55) (55) (55) (55) (55) (55) (55) Basic Enrollment without Internet Academy 4,664 4,659 4,694 4,699 4,704 4,708 4,713 4,713 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM CAPACITY 611 616 581 576 571 567 562 562 RELOCATABLE CAPACITY3 Current Portable Capacity 338 338 288 288 288 288 288 288 Add/Subtract portable capacity 0 (50)0 0 0 0 0 0 Evergreen Middle School Sacajawea Middle School Illahee Middle School (50) Adjusted Portable Capacity 338 288 288 288 288 288 288 288 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 949 904 869 864 859 855 850 850 NOTES: 1 2 3 - - Projected - - Evergreen and Illahee Middle Schools currently have capacity for 800 & 850 students respectively, so no new capacity is anticipated with the rebuild of these older buildings. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities. This represents historic enrollment. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only based on class size capacity of 25. The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs. Page 88 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 26 CAPACITY SUMMARIES, Continued Capacity Summary – High Schools Actual Budget Calendar Year 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 CAPACITY School Year 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 2030-31 BUILDING PROGRAM HEADCOUNT CAPACITY 6,090 6,090 6,090 6,090 6,090 6,090 6,090 6,090 Add/Subtract capacity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Thomas Jefferson High School Adjusted Program Headcount Capacity 6,090 6,090 6,090 6,090 6,090 6,090 6,090 6,090 ENROLLMENT Basic Headcount Enrollment 6,532 6,521 6,526 6,533 6,539 6,546 6,552 6,565 Internet Academy 1 (180) (180) (180) (180) (180) (180) (180) (180) Basic Ed without Internet Academy 6,352 6,341 6,346 6,353 6,359 6,366 6,372 6,385 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM CAPACITY (262) (251) (256) (263) (269) (276) (282) (295) RELOCATABLE CAPACITY2 Current Portable Capacity 416 416 520 624 728 832 936 1,040 Add/Subtract portable capacity 0 52 52 52 52 52 52 0 As Needed on High School Campuses 52 52 52 52 52 52 Adjusted Portable Capacity 416 520 624 728 832 936 1,040 1,040 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE CAPACITY3 154 269 368 465 563 660 758 745 NOTES: 1 2 3 - - Projected - - Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities. This represents historic enrollment. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only based on class size capacity of 25. The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs. Capacity for unhoused students will be accommodated with traveling teachers and no planning time in some classrooms. Page 89 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 27 IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS Single and Multi-Family Residences Each jurisdiction that imposes school impact fees requires that developers pay these fees to help cover a share of the impact of new housing developments on school facilities. To determine an equitable fee throughout unincorporated King County, a formula was established. This formula can be found in King County Code 21A and was substantially adopted by the City of Auburn, Federal Way, and Kent. The formula requires the District to establish a "Student Generation Factor" which estimates how many students will be added to a school district by each new single or multi-family unit and to gather some standard construction costs, which are unique to that district. Impact Fee Calculation When applicable, the CFP includes variables for the calculation of the Impact Fee for single family and multi-family units based on King County Code 21A and the Growth Management Act. Plan Year 2024 Plan Year 2025 Single Family Units $0 $0 Multi-Family Units $6,998 $0 Impact Fee Calculation - King County Code 21A Page 90 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 28 IMPACT FEE CALCULATION, CON’T SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION COST Consistent with the capacity calculations described earlier, the District uses the OSPI square footage calculation for determining capacity at our secondary schools. Based on this methodology, the following construction costs for Thomas Jefferson High School are allocated as the proportionate share: Square Footage Capacity at approx. 131 sq. ft. Current: 179,119 1378 Planned: 210,000 1615 Increased Capacity 237 Increase as % 17.24% GMP $92,903,922 Proportionate Share $16,017,095 The District will use the above formulas created as a base for future Capital Facilities Plans during the life of the current bond authorization. The capacity of these schools may vary from year to year as programs are added or changed and construction cost may increase over time. FACILITIES CAPACITY Permanent Facility Capacity: Changes to the Building Program Capacities calculation are found on page 15. Capacity Summaries: The changes in the Capacity Summary reflect the changes in the capacities and student forecast. New schools and increased capacity at current buildings are shown as increases to capacity. Capacity Summaries are found on pages 22-26. Student Generation Factor Analysis: Federal Way Public Schools student generation factor was determined separately for single-family units and multi-family units. The factors used in the 2025 Capital Facilities Plan were derived using actual generation factors from single- family units and multi-family units that were constructed in the District in the last five (5) years and can be found on the next page. Temporary Facility Cost: The list of portables reflects the movement of portables between facilities or new portables purchased. Portable Locations can be found on pages 16 and 17. Page 91 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 29 STUDENT GENERATION RATES New Construction 2019-2023 Single family - Year Built Homes KG 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th ES Total 6th 7th 8th MS Total 9th 10th 11th 12th HS Total Total 2019 30 8 5 4 4 3 2 26 5 2 2 9 4 3 6 6 19 54 2020 37 9 7 7 5 9 3 40 6 5 3 14 4 1 4 3 12 66 2021 23 9 4 2 2 3 3 23 3 2 3 8 1 3 1 2 7 38 2022 12 1 1 3 2 1 8 5 1 2 8 3 1 1 1 6 22 2023 12 4 2 1 2 2 2 13 2 4 1 7 2 2 4 24 Total 114 31 19 17 13 19 11 110 21 14 11 46 12 8 14 14 48 204 Multi family Units KG 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th ES Total 6th 7th 8th MS Total 9th 10th 11th 12th HS Total Total 21-Watermark (650) 221 35 32 29 28 26 23 173 26 25 27 78 26 24 21 23 94 345 24-Trouve (450) 233 2 2 1 1 0 3 Total 454 37 32 29 28 26 23 175 26 25 28 79 26 24 21 23 94 348 Single family Homes ES MS HS ES SGR MS SGR HS SGR Total SGR 2019 30 26 9 19 0.8667 0.3000 0.6333 1.8000 2020 37 40 14 12 1.0811 0.3784 0.3243 1.7838 2021 23 23 8 7 1.0000 0.3478 0.3043 1.6522 2022 12 8 8 6 0.6667 0.6667 0.5000 1.8333 2023 12 13 7 4 1.0833 0.5833 0.3333 2.0000 Total 114 110 46 48 0.9649 0.4035 0.4211 1.7895 Multi family Units ES MS HS ES SGR MS SGR HS SGR Total SGR 21-Watermark (650) 221 173 78 94 0.7828 0.3529 0.4253 1.5611 24-Trouve (450) 233 2 1 0 0.0086 0.5000 0.0000 0.0129 Total 454 175 79 94 0.3855 0.1740 0.2070 0.7665 Page 92 of 433 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2025 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 30 IMPACT FEE CALCULATION CHANGES FROM 2024 to 2025 Item From/To Comment Percent of Permanent Facilities 97.65% to 97.68%Report #3 OSPI Percent Temporary Facilities 2.41% to 2.32%Updated portable inventory Average Cost of Portable $128,646 to $231,523 Cost of last portable purchased. Classrooms Construction Cost Allocation $246.83 to $271.61 Change effective July 2024 State Match 63.86% to 63.86%Change effective February 2024 Average Assessed Value Per King County Assessor's Office SFR- $581,023 to $536,791 Single-family residences (taxable) MFR- $198,069 to $203,026 Apartments/Condos (taxable) Capital Bond Interest Rate 3.58% to 3.48%Market Rate Property Tax Levy Rate $1.45 to $1.53 King County Treasury Division Student Generation Factors Updated Housing Inventory Single-Family Elementary 0.1705 to 0.9649 Middle School 0.0682 to 0.1740 High School 0.0958 to 0.4211 Multi-Family Elementary 0.7104 to 0.3855 Middle School 0.3665 to 0.1740 High School 0.3665 to 0.2070 Impact Fee1 SFR- $0 to $0 Single-Family Residential based on the updated calculation MFR - $6,998 to $0 Multi-Family Residential based on the updated calculation 1Each jurisdiction (King County, Cities of Federal Way, Auburn, Kent) through local ordinances may adopt lesser fees. Note: Student generation factors for our single family units are based on new developments constructed within the District over the last five (5) years prior to the date of the fee calculation. Student generation factors for are multi- family units are based on new developments constructed within the District over the last five (5) years prior to the date of the fee calculation. Page 93 of 433 Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan 2023-2024 through 2029-2030 June 2024 Kent School District No. 415 12033 SE 256th Street Kent, Washington 98030-6643 (253) 373-7526 BOARD of DIRECTORS Ms. Meghin Margel, President Mr. Awale Farah, Vice President Mr. Tim Clark, Legislative Representative Mr. Donald Cook, Director Mr. Andy Song, Director ADMINISTRATION Israel Vela Superintendent of Schools Dr. Wade Barringer, Deputy Superintendent Dave Bussard, Executive Director Operations Sara Dumlao, Assistant Director of Business Services Page 94 of 433 Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table of Contents I - Executive Summary................................................................................................. 1 II - Six - Year Enrollment Projection ............................................................................. 4 III - Current Kent School District “Standard of Service" ................................................. 7 Current Standards of Service for Elementary Students................................................... 7 Current District Standards of Service for Secondary Students ........................................ 8 IV - Inventory and Capacity of Existing Schools ............................................................ 9 V - Six-Year Planning and Construction Plan .............................................................. 14 VI - Portable Classrooms ........................................................................................... 21 VII - Projected Six-Year Classroom Capacity ............................................................... 25 VIII - Finance Plan ..................................................................................................... 30 IX - Summary of Changes to June 2024 Capital Facilities Plan..................................... 34 X - Appendices..........................................................................................................35 Page 95 of 433 I - Executive Summary This Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan has been prepared by the Kent School District as the organization's capital facilities planning document, in compliance with the requirements of Washington's Growth Management Act, King County Code K.C.C. 21A.43 and Cities of Kent, Covington, Renton, Auburn, Black Diamond, Maple Valley, and SeaTac. This annual Plan update was prepared using data available in the spring of 2024 for the 2023-2024 school year. This annual update of the Plan reflects no new major capital projects. This Plan is consistent with prior long-term capital facilities plans adopted by the Kent School District. This Plan is not intended to be the sole planning document for all the District's needs. The District may prepare interim and periodic Long-Range Capital Facilities Plans consistent with BoardPolicies,considering a longeror shorterperiod, other factors and trends in the use of facilities, and other needs of the District as may be required. Prior Capital Facilities Plans of the Kent School District have been adopted by Metropolitan King County Council and Cities of Kent, Covington, Auburn, and Renton and included in the Capital Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive Plans of each jurisdiction. This Plan has also been submitted to the cities of Black Diamond, Maple Valley, and SeaTac for their information and inclusion in their Comprehensive Plans. In order for impact fees to be collected in the unincorporated areas of Kent School District, the Metropolitan King County Council must adopt this Plan and a fee- implementing ordinance for the District. For impact fees to be collected in the incorporated portions of the District, the cities of Kent, Covington, Renton and Auburn must also adopt this Plan and their own school impact fee ordinances. This Capital Facilities Plan establishes a standard of service in order to ascertain current and future capacity. While the State Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square footageguidelinesforcapacity,thoseguidelinesdonotaccountforlocalprogram needs in the District. The Growth Management Act, King County and City codes and ordinances authorize the District to make adjustments to the standard of service based on specific needs for students of theDistrict. This Plan includes the standard of service as established by Kent School District. Functional capacity is based on an average capacity and updated to reflect changes to special programs served in each building. Portables in the interim capacity calculation use the same standard of service as the permanent facilities. 1 Page 96 of 433 The capacity of each school in the District is calculated based on the District’s standard of service and the existing inventory of permanent facilities. The District's program capacity of permanent facilities reflects program changes and the state’s mandated reduction of class size to meet the standard of service for Kent School District. Portables provide additional interim capacity. Kent School District is the fifth largest (FTE basis) district in the state. Enrollment is electronically reported monthly to the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (“OSPI”)onForm P-223. AlthoughfundingapportionmentisbasedonAnnualAverageFull Time Equivalent (AAFTE), enrollment on October 1 is a widely recognized “snapshot in time” that is used to report the District’s enrollment for the year as reported to OSPI (See Table 1). The District's standard of service, enrollment history and projections, and use of interim facilities are reviewed in detail in various sections of this Plan. The District plans to continue to satisfy concurrency requirements through the interim use of portables. This Plan currently represents projects in process funded primarily by the Kent School District’s 2016 Bond, as well as the 2018 Capital Levy. Additional information about these projects can be found on the District’s capital projects homepage (link). Additionally, project updates sent to our community of stakeholders can be accessed on the KSD website (link). Based on revised student generation rates, our capacity and enrollment projections, the District will stay current with non-collection of student impact fee rate for the coming year. For a short overview, see Section IX (Summary of Changes to the June 2024 Capital Facilities Plan). 2 Page 97 of 433 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 OCTOBER REPORT 1251H (HEADCOUNT) ENROLLMENT HISTORY LB = Live Births LB in 2011 LB in 2012 LB in 2013 LB in 2014 LB in 2015 LB in 2016 LB in 2017 LB in 2018 October HC Enrollment 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 King County Live Births 1 24,630 25,032 24,910 25,348 25,487 26,011 25,274 24,337 Incr/(Decr) 116 402 (122)438 139 524 (737) (937) Kindergarten / Birth % 1 8.17% 8.14% 7.98% 7.93% 6.68% 7.06% 7.41% 7.24% Kindergarten 2,013 2,037 1,989 2,010 1,703 1,836 1,874 1,761 Grade 1 2,067 2,056 2,061 2,036 1,882 1,768 1,945 1,931 Grade 2 2,163 2,077 2,008 2,091 1,980 1,818 1,840 1,966 Grade 3 2,195 2,143 2,043 1,995 2,001 1,938 1,887 1,878 Grade 4 2,195 2,218 2,118 2,038 1,912 1,924 1,953 1,924 Grade 5 2,103 2,189 2,170 2,120 1,937 1,872 1,953 1,973 Grade 6 Midd 1,952 2,119 2,184 2,164 2,024 1,893 1,962 1,948 Grade 7 " "2,021 1,922 2,044 2,166 2,010 1,925 1,906 1,949 Grade 8 " " 2,021 2,043 1,882 2,073 2,086 1,937 1,956 1,922 Grade 9 High 2,105 2,006 2,003 1,888 2,001 2,042 2,010 1,958 Grade 10 " " 2,099 2,080 1,946 2,034 1,811 1,959 2,048 2,001 Grade 11 " " 1,865 1,823 1,732 1,663 1,743 1,584 1,679 1,729 Grade 12 " " 1,730 1,810 1,653 1,634 1,453 1,655 1,467 1,502 Total Enrollment 2 26,529 26,523 25,833 25,912 24,543 24,151 24,480 24,442 Yearly Headcount Incr/(Decr)17 (6) (690)79 (1,369) (392)329 (38) Cumulative Incr/(Decr)(302) (308) (998) (919) (2,288) (2,680) (1,959) (2,718) 1 This number indicates actual births in King County 5 years prior to enrollment year as updated by Washington State Department of Health, Center for Health Statistics. Kent School District percentage based on actual Kindergarten enrollment 5 years later. 2 Enrollment reported to OSPI on Form P-223 generates basic education funding and excludes Early Childhood Special Education ("ECSE" & "B2" or Birth to 2 Preschool Inclusive Education) and excludes College-only Running Start students. For 2024 CFP - Headcount Enrollment History Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 1 May 2024 3 Page 98 of 433 II - Six - Year Enrollment Projection For capital facilitiesplanning, enrollment growth projections are based on cohort survival and student yield from documented residential construction projected over the next six years (See Table 2). For this Plan, the District relied substantially on the results from Dr. Les Kendrick’s study of long-range enrollment forecasts for the Kent School District in the winter of 2022. King County live births and the District's relational percentage average were used to determine the number of kindergartners entering the system (See Table 2). 7.24% of 24,337 King County live births in 2018 is projected for 1,761 students expected in Kindergarten for October 1, 2023. Thisis a decreaseof937livebirthsin KingCountyover the previous year. Early Childhood Education students (also identified as “ECE”), “Early Childhood Special Education (“ECSE”) students areforecast and reported to OSPIseparatelyon Form P-223H for Special Education Enrollment. Capacity is reserved to serve students in the ECE programs at elementaryschools. In addition to live birth data, enrollment projections for October 1, 2024 going forward rely upon the results of the enrollment study by Dr. Kendrick, utilizing the “low growth” methodology. Within practical limits, the District has kept abreast of proposed developments. The District will continue to track new development activity to determine impact to schools. Information on new residential developments and the completion of these proposed developments in all jurisdictions will be considered in the District's future analysis of growth projections. The Kent School District serves eight permitting jurisdictions: unincorporated King County, the cities of Kent, Covington, Renton, and Auburn and smaller portions of the cities of SeaTac, Black Diamond, and Maple Valley. 4 Page 99 of 433 STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR "Student Factor" isdefined by King County code as "the number derived by a school district to describe how many students of each grade span are expected to be generated by a dwelling unit" based on district records of average actual student generated rates for developments completed within the last ten years. Following these guidelines, the student generation rate for Kent School District is as follows: Single Family Elementary .229 Middle .087 High .113 Total .429 Multi-Family Elementary .109 Middle .037 High .054 Total .200 Thestudentgenerationfactorisbased on 2,062 new SFD (Single Family Detached) units built between 2017 and 2022. The student generation factor is based on 1,709 new MF (Multi- Family) units built during the same period. The multi-family units consisted of 1,379 apartment units and 330 townhome units. The District sees an average of 43 students for every 100 single family units that are built and an average of 20 students for every 100 multi-family units that are built. The rate for apartment units is higher than for townhome units. The District sees an average of 23 students for every 100 apartment units and only 6 students for every 100 townhome units. The student generation rate also varies among apartment developments, based on the number of bedrooms in the unit. Units with three plus bedrooms have much higher student generation rates than units that have two or fewer bedrooms. Noting these differences can help the District when planning for future growth from housing. In preparing the 2023-2024 to 2029-2030 Capital Facilities Plan the District contracted with Educational Data Solutions, LLC led by Dr. Les Kendrick, a noted expert in demographic studies for school districts, to analyze and prepare the student generation factor. Within the District’s borders there are several income-based and multi-family housing projects coming on-line in 2023/2024. Once developed with occupancy occurring the District does recognize that the student generation for multi-family housing may impact future Capital Facilities Planupdates.At the start of the 2023-24 school year, 2 apartment complexes; Alexan Gateway and Station by Vintage have been excluded from the available multi-family units because the units have not been completed and/or have not been released to be rented. 5 Page 100 of 433 K ENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No . 415 SIX - YEAR ENROL L MENT PROJ ECTION Full Day Kindergarten at all Elem LB in 2018 LB in 2019 LB in 2020 LB in 2021 LB in 2022 LB in 2023 Est. LB in 2024 ACTUAL ENROLLMENT October 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 King County Live Births 24,337 24,090 23,686 23,390 23,012 23,973 24,428 Incr/(Decr)(937) (247) (404) (296) (378)961 455 Kindergarten / Birth % 7.24% 7.53% 7.60% 7.61% 7.94% 7.75% 7.60% FD Kindergarten 1,761 1,814 1,801 1,781 1,827 1,857 1,857 Grade 1 1,931 1,893 1,902 1,888 1,849 1,897 1,918 Grade 2 1,966 1,961 1,946 1,955 1,931 1,891 1,930 Grade 3 1,878 2,004 2,017 2,002 2,011 1,986 1,936 Grade 4 1,924 1,861 2,013 2,026 2,010 2,019 1,985 Grade 5 1,973 1,887 1,893 2,047 2,060 2,044 2,043 Grade 6 Middle 1,948 2,009 1,950 1,955 2,114 2,128 2,101 Grade 7 " "1,949 1,973 2,005 1,946 1,952 2,111 2,114 Grade 8 " "1,922 1,937 1,991 2,024 1,965 1,970 2,120 Grade 9 High 1,958 1,939 1,993 2,049 2,083 2,022 2,018 Grade 10 " "2,001 1,990 1,958 2,012 2,069 2,103 2,031 Grade 11 " "1,729 1,754 1,755 1,726 1,774 1,824 1,845 Grade 12 " "1,502 1,695 1,678 1,680 1,652 1,698 1,737 Total Enrollment Projection 24,442 24,717 24,902 25,091 25,297 25,550 25,635 Yearly Incr/(Decr)(38)275 185 189 206 253 85 Yearly Incr/(Decr) % -0.16% 1.13% 0.75% 0.76% 0.82% 1.00% 0.33% Total Enrollment Projection*24,442 24,717 24,902 25,091 25,297 25,550 25,635 Projection Source: Les Kendrick Demographic Study Dec '22 ("Preferred Forecast") *Does not include iGrad, RS 2023 - 2029 Enrollment Projections PROJECTED ENROLLMENT Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 2 May 2024 6 Page 101 of 433 III - Current Kent School District “Standard of Service" In order to determine the capacity of facilities in a school district, King County Code 21A.06.1225 references a "standard of service" that each school district mustestablishinorder to ascertain its overall capacity. The standard of service identifies the program year, the class size, the number of classrooms, students and programs of special need, and other factors determined by the district which would best serve the studentpopulation. This Plan includes the standard of service as established by Kent School District. The District has identified schools with significant special needs programs as “impact” schools andthe standard of service targets a lower-class size at those facilities. Portables included in the capacity calculation use the same standard of service as the permanentfacilities. The standard of service defined herein will continue to evolve in the future. Kent School District is continuing a long-term strategic planning process combined with review of changes to capacity and standard of service. This processwill affectvariousaspectsofthe District'sstandardofserviceandfuture changeswillbereflectedinfuturecapitalfacilities plans. Current Standards of Service for Elementary Students Class size ratio for grades K - 3 is planned for an average of 23 students per class, not to exceed 26. Class size ratio for grades 4 - 5 is planned for an average of 27 students per class, not to exceed 29. Some special programs require specialized classroom space and the program capacity of some of the buildings housing these programs is reduced. Some students, for example, leave their regular classroom for a short period of time to receive instruction in special programs and space must be allocated to serve these programs. Students may also be provided with music instruction and physical education in a separate classroom or facility. Some identified students will also be provided educational opportunities in classrooms for special programs such as those designated as follows: Career and Technical Education (CTE) – State Program Closing Educational Achievement Gaps (Title I – Part A) - Federal Program Highly Capable Students (HiCap) - State Program 7 Page 102 of 433 Learning Assistance Program (LAP) – State Program Multilingual Education (MLE) - State Program Inclusive Education Service for Elementary and Secondary students with disabilities may be provided in a separate or self-contained classroom sometimes with a capacity of 10-15 students, depending on the program. Current District Standards of Service for Secondary Students The standards of service outlined below reflect only those programs and educational opportunities provided to secondary students which directly affect the capacity of the school buildings per the negotiated collective bargaining agreement with KEA. The average class size ratio for grades 6–8 is 30 students per class and 143 students per day, with a maximum daily class load/enrollment of 150 based on five class periods per day. The average class size ratio for grades 9-12 is 32 students per class and 153 students per day, with a maximum daily class load/enrollment of 160 based on five class periods per day. Like Inclusive Education Programs listed above, many other secondary programs require specialized classroom space which can reduce the functional capacity of the permanent school buildings, such as technology labs, performing arts activities, a variety of career and technical education programs, and other specialized programs. Space or Classroom Utilization As a result of scheduling conflicts for student programs, the need for specialized rooms for certain programs, and the need for teachers to have a workspace during their planning periods, it is not possible to achieve 100% utilization of regular teaching stations at secondary schools. Based on the analysis of actual utilization of classrooms, the Kent School District has determined that the standard utilization rate is 66% for secondary schools. Functional capacity at elementary schools reflects 56% utilization at the elementary level. 8 Page 103 of 433 IV - Inventory and Capacity of Existing Schools Currently, the District has permanent functional capacity to house 35,494students and interim (portable) capacity to house 4,238. This capacity is based on the District's Standard of Service as set forth in Section III. Included in this Plan is an inventory of the District's schools by type, address and current capacity (See Table 3). The ratio between permanent capacity and portable capacity is 89% - 11%. The functional capacity is periodically updated for changes in the programs, additional classrooms, and new schools. Functional capacity has been updated in this Plan to reflect program changes implemented in the fall of 2023. Calculation of Elementary, Middle School and High School capacities are set forth in Appendices A, B, and C. Maps of existing schools are included. For clarification, the following is a brief description of some of the non-traditional programs for students in Kent School District: iGrad - Kent School District has developed the Individualized Graduation and Degree Program or “iGrad”. iGrad is an Open Door (Drop-out Reengagement) School that offers a second plus chance to students aged 16-21 who have dropped out of high school or are at risk of not earning a high school diploma by age 21. iGrad is not included in this Capital Facilities Plan, because it is served as a leased space at the Kent Hill Plaza Shopping Center. Over the past three years, enrollment in the iGrad program has averaged over 434 students. Kent Virtual Academy - The Kent Virtual Academy is open to grades 6-12 and is currently serving 108 students. The virtual school offers a flexible learning experience designed to engage students when and where they work best. Each school day includes a combination of live (synchronous) virtual instruction and on-demand (asynchronous) learning opportunities outside of a traditional bell schedule. Students can attend live virtual lessons with their teachers and classmates, participate in live virtual class or small group discussions, check-in or meet with teachers, watch recorded video lessons, work independently on projects and lessons, participate in learning experiences outside the school setting for credit or to meet competencies. Virtual school students may also attend their boundary school for select classes and services. 9 Page 104 of 433 Year Opened Carriage Crest Elementary 1990 CC 18235 - 140th Avenue SE, Renton 98058 626 Cedar Valley Elementary 1971 CV 26500 Timberlane Way SE, Covington 98042 568 Covington Elementary 2018 CO 25811 156th Avenue SE, Covington 98042 744 Crestwood Elementary 1980 CW 25225 - 180th Avenue SE, Covington 98042 629 1953 EH 9825 S 240th Street, Kent 98031 779 1999 EP 11800 SE 216th Street, Kent 98031 653 1969 FW 16600 - 148th Avenue SE, Renton 98058 528 East Hill Elementary Emerald Park Fairwood Elementary George T. Daniel Elementary 1992 DE 11310 SE 248th Street, Kent 98030 640 Glenridge Elementary 1996 GR 19405 - 120th Avenue SE, Renton 98058 591 Grass Lake Elementary 1971 GL 28700 - 191st Place SE, Kent 98042 595 Horizon Elementary 1990 HE 27641 - 144th Avenue SE, Kent 98042 634 Jenkins Creek Elementary 1987 JC 26915 - 186th Avenue SE, Covington 98042 641 Kent Elementary 1999 KE 24700 - 64th Avenue South, Kent 98032 760 Lake Youngs Elementary 1965 LY 19660 - 142nd Avenue SE, Kent 98042 725 Martin Sortun Elementary 1987 MS 12711 SE 248th Street, Kent 98030 768 Meadow Ridge Elementary 1994 MR 27710 - 108th Avenue SE, Kent 98030 706 Meridian Elementary 1939 ME 25621 - 140th Avenue SE, Kent 98042 793 Millennium Elementary 2000 ML 11919 SE 270th Street, Kent 98030 688 Neely-O'Brien Elementary 1990 NO 6300 South 236th Street, Kent 98032 864 Panther Lake Elementary 2009 PL 12022 SE 216th Street, Kent, 98031 744 1963 PO 11010 SE 232nd Street, Kent 98031 701 1967 PT 27825 - 118th Avenue SE, Kent 98030 732 1987 RW 18030 - 162nd Place SE, Renton 98058 661 2021 RR 22420 Military Rd. S., SeaTac, WA 98198 886 Park Orchard Elementary Pine Tree Elementary Ridgewood Elementary River Ridge Sawyer Woods Elementary 1994 SW 31135 - 228th Ave SE, Black Diamond 98010 549 1960 SH 837 1971 SC 591 1969 SB 730 1992 SR 719 20,082 19 C 1,1 0 19 C 1,1 0 1981 MA 1,020 1970 MK 1,224 1958 MM 1,110 2005 MC 1,200 Scenic Hill Elementary Soos Creek Elementary Springbrook Elementary Sunrise Elementary Elementary TOTAL 1996 NW 1,140 7,9 1951 KM 2,595 1997 KL 2,714 1968 KR 2,932 1981 KW 2,917 11,158 2021 LA 542 C Middle Middl Mattson Middle Meeker Middle Meridian Middle reek Middle Northwood Middle Middle TOTAL Kent-Meridian High Kentlake High Kentridge High Kentwood High High TOTAL Kent Lab tory Ac d my DISTRICT TOTAL 39,7 2023-2024 Functional SCHOOL ABR ADDRESS 26025 Woodland Way South, Kent 98030 12651 SE 218th Place, Kent 98031 20035 - 100th Avenue SE, Kent 98031 22300 - 132nd Avenue SE, Kent 98042 1 Street, 980 Street, 980 16400 SE 251st Street, Covington 98042 12600 SE 192nd Street, Renton 98058 23480 - 120th Avenue SE, Kent 98031 620 North Central Avenue, Kent 98032 17007 SE 184th Street, Renton 98058 10020 SE 256th Street, Kent 98030 21401 SE 300th Street, Kent 98042 12430 SE 208th Street, Kent 98031 25800 - 164th Avenue SE, Covington 98042 105 SE 208th St., Kent, WA 98031 10 Page 105 of 433 11 Page 106 of 433 12 Page 107 of 433 13 Page 108 of 433 V - Six-Year Planning and Construction Plan In November 2016, the voters of the Kent School District approved a bond measure for $252 million. This bonding authority provided for the replacement of Covington Elementary school,whichopened inAugustof2018, the new River Ridge Elementary school, and our new Kent Laboratory Academy, whichboth opened in August 2021. As a critical component of capital facilities planning, county and city planners and decision- makers are encouraged to consider safe walking conditions for all students when reviewing applications and design plans for new roads and developments. This should include sidewalks for pedestrian safety to and from schools and bus stops, as well as bus pull-outs and turn- arounds. Included inthisPlan is an inventory of potential projects and sites identified by the District which are potentially acceptable site alternatives in the future (See Table 4 & Sitemap). Voter approved bond issues have included funding for the purchase of sites for future schools and district use; the sites acquired to date are included in this Plan. Some funding is secured for the purchase of additional sites but may also be funded with impact fees as needed. Not all undeveloped properties meet current school construction requirements, and some property may be traded or sold to meet future facility needs. The Board will continue an annual review of standards of service and those decisions will be reflected in each update of the Capital Facilities Plan. Our District went out for a Bond Measure in April of 2023 and did not receive enough votes for approval. We reevaluated the District needs and looked at next steps to align with the Strategic Plan which continues to make it a priority to revitalize, rejuvenate and rebuild our aging schools as well as begin a process to remove interim classroom portables and find room or create permanent structures to reduce and eventually eliminate the more than 166 portable classrooms in our District. We will continue to determine capacity versus enrollment as well as programs to ensure this goal to reduce and or eliminate all portables in our District is obtained in the next several years. As a part of the planning process, the District has been tracking a few major development projects which have affected enrollment and will continue to increase students' forecasts. On Meeker Street in Kent, we have seen several major apartment complexes, ETHOS and Midtown 64 Apartments. These continue to have an impact on enrollment as they fill up their newly built facilities. The Alexian Gateway Project is located on the corner of Military Road and Veterans Drive in Kent and has begun occupying its 283 units in 2023-2024. In Covington, we are tracking a multi-family house development which has been approved and construction has begun. The 1700-unit Lakepointe Urban Community will fall within our 14 Page 109 of 433 enrollment boundary and proposed completion of Phase 4 is shown to be 2027. Construction in the Kent School District boundaries have been steadily rising over the last four years and planned communities are now being recognized through the planning teams in multiple city and county jurisdictions we serve. 15 Page 110 of 433 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 Site Acquisitions and Projects Planned to Provide Additional Capacity Projected Projected % for SCHOOL / FACILITY / SITE LOCATION Type Status Completion Program new Date Capacity Growth Approximate Approximate # on Map ELEMENTARY MIDDLE & HIGH TEMPORARY FACILITIES Additional Capacity # on Map 2 OTHER SITES ACQUIRED Land Use Designation Type 12 256th - Covington (Halleson) 25435 SE 256th, Covington 98042 Rural Sold 12a 156th - Covington (Wikstrom) 25847 156th Ave. SE, Covington 98042 Rural To be sold 16 White House - Kent (Top) 11027 SE Kent-Kangley Kent, WA 98030 Commercial Purchased 16a Green Building - Kent (iGrad) 11109 SE Kent-Kangley Kent, WA 98030 Commercial Purchased Notes: None King County King County Land Use Jurisdiction King County King County Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 4 May 2022 16 Page 111 of 433 17 16 16a Page 112 of 433 18 Page 113 of 433 19 Page 114 of 433 20 Page 115 of 433 VI - Portable Classrooms The Plan references use of portables as interim capacity for facilities. Currently,theDistrictutilizesportablestohousestudentsmore thanfunctionalcapacity and for program purposes at some school locations (Please see Appendices A, B, C). Based on enrollment projections, implementation of full day kindergarten programs, lower state mandated class sizes, functional capacity, and no need for additional interim capacity, the District anticipates no need to purchase or lease additional portables during the next six- year periodto ensure capacity requirement (Noted in section V. Six Yr. Planning Construction). During the time period covered by this Plan, the District does not anticipate that all of the District’s portables will be replaced by permanent facilities. During the useful life of some of the portables, the school-age population may decline in some communities and increase in others, and these portables provide the flexibility to accommodate the immediate needs of the community. Portables may be used as interim facilities: 1. To prevent overbuilding or overcrowding of permanent schoolfacilities. 2. To cover the gap between the times of demand for increased capacity and completion of permanent school facilities to meet that demand. 3. To meet unique program requirements. Portables currently in the District’s inventory are continually evaluated and maintained. The District's goal is to reduce the number of portables so we may provide an equitable learning environment for all. The Plan projects that the District will use portables to accommodate interim housing needs for the next six years and beyond. The use of portables, their impactson permanent facilities, life cycle and operational costs, and the interrelationship between portables, emerging technologies, and educational restructuring will continue to beexamined. 21 Page 116 of 433 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT FACTORS FOR ESTIMATED IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS Student Generation Factors - Single Family 0.229 0.109 0.087 0.037 0.113 Student Generation Factors - Multi-Family Elementary (Grades K-5) Middle (Grades 6- 8) High (Grades 9-12) 0.054 0.429 Total 0.200 0 0 0 OSPI - Square Footage per Student, see side char Elementary Middle 1 High Special Education 12 25 $161,678 Elementary (Grades K- 5 Middle (Grades 6- 8) High (Grades 9-12) Total Projected Increased Student Capacity Elementary Middle High (Academy) Required Site Acreage per Facility Elementary (required) Middl (required) High (required) 40 $0 $0 $68,000,000 Average Site Cost / Acre Elementary Middle High Temporary Facility Capacity & Cost $155,000,000 Elementary @ 24 $315,000 $220,000,000 Middle @ 29 $315,000 High @ 31 $315,000 State Funding Assistance Credit 123,702 District Funding Assistance Percentage 52.88% 10,256 21,296 155,254 Construction Cost Allocation CCA - Cost/Sq, Ft. $375.00 1,567,594 760,483 District Average Assessed Value 1,077,315 Single Family Residence $594,679 3,405,392 District Average Assessed Value 1,691,296 Multi-Family Residence $310,811 770,739 New Facility Construction Cost Elementary Middle High Temporary Facility Square Footage Elementary Middle High Total 4.4% Permanent Facility Square Footage Elementary Middle High/Other Total 95.6% Total Facilities Square Footage Elementary Middle High/Other 1,098,611 Total 3,560,646 Bond Levy Tax Rate/$1,000 $1.11 Current Rate / 1,000 Tax Rate 0.0011 Developer Provided Sites / Facilities Value 0 General Obligation Bond Interest Rate Dwelling Units 0 Current Bond Interest Rate 3.48% CPI Inflation Factor 5.80% Budget Preparations | OSPI (www.k12.wa.us) Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan (APPENDIX A)May 2024 22 Page 117 of 433 Site Acquisition Cost per Single Family Residence Formula: ((Acres x Cost per Acre) / Facility Capacity) x Student Generation Factor Required Site Acreage Average Site Cost/Acre Facility Capacity Student Factor 12 $161,678 0 0.229 25 $0 0 0.087 A 1 (Elementary) A 2 (Middle A 3 (High) 40 $0 0 0.113 Total 77 $161,678 0 0.429 A $0.00 Permanent Facility Construction Cost per Single Family Residence Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Permanent/Total Square Footage Ratio) Construction Cost Facility Capacity Student Factor Footage Ratio $68,000,000 0 0.229 0.903 $155,000,000 0 0.087 0.984 B 1 (Elementary) B 2 (Middle) B 3 (High) $220,000,000 0 0.113 0.998 Total $443,000,000 0 0.429 B $0.00 Temporary Facility Cost per Single Family Residence (Portables) Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Temporary / Total Square Footage Ratio) Facility Cost Facility Capacity Student Factor Footage Ratio $315,000 24 0.229 0.097 $291.55 $315,000 29 0.087 0.016 $15.12 C 1 (Elementary) C 2 (Middle) C 3 High) $315,000 31 0.113 0.020 $22.96 Total $945,000 84 0.429 C $329.63 State Funding Assistance Credit per Single Family Residence (formerly "State Match") Formula: Area Cost Allowance x SPI Square Feet per student x Funding Assistance % x Student Factor Construction Cost Allocation SPI Sq. Ft. / Student Assistance % Student Factor $375.00 115 0.5288 0.229 $5,222.23 $375.00 148 0.5288 0.087 $2,553.31 D 1 (Elementary) D 2 (Middle) D 3 (High) $375.00 173 0.5288 0.113 $3,876.57 D $11,652.11 Tax Credit per Single Family Residence Average SF Residential Assessed Value (AAV)$594,679 Net Present Value (per EQ) (NPV)8.32 Current Debt Service Rate / 1,000 ( r ) 0.11% TC $5,473.99 (Below used to calculate NPV) Current Bond Interest Rate 3.48% Years Amortized (10 Years)- Used in NPV Calculation 10 Developer Provided Facility Credit Facility / Site Value Dwelling Units 0 0 FC 0 Fee Recap ** A = Site Acquisition per SF Residence $0.00 B = Permanent Facility Cost per Residence $0.00 C = Temporary Facility Cost per Residence $329.63 Subtotal $329.63 D = State Match Credit per Residence $11,652.11 TC = Tax Credit per Residence $5,473.99 Subtotal $17,126.10 Total Unfunded Need ($16,796.47) 50% Developer Fee Obligation ($8,398) FC = Facility Credit (if applicable) $0 District Adjustment $8,398 Net Fee Obligation per Residence - Single Family ($0.00) Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan (APPENDIX B)May 2024 23 Page 118 of 433 Site Acquisition Cost per Multi-Family Residence Unit Formula: ((Acres x Cost per Acre) / Facility Capacity) x Student Generation Factor Required Site Acreage Average Site Cost/Acre Facility Capacity Student Factor 12 $161,678 0 0.109 25 $0 0 0.037 A 1 (Elementary) A 2 (Middle) A 3 High) 40 $0 0 0.054 Total 77 $161,678 0 0.200 A $0.00 Permanent Facility Construction Cost per Multi-Family Residence Unit Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Permanent / Total Square Footage Ratio) Construction Cost Facility Capacity Student Factor Footage Ratio $68,000,000 0 0.109 0.903 $155,000,000 0 0.037 0.984 B 1 (Elementary) B 2 (Middle) B 3 (High) $220,000,000 0 0.054 0.998 Total $443,000,000 0 0.200 B $0.00 Temporary Facility Cost per Multi-Family Residence Unit Formula: ((Facility Cost / Facility Capacity) x Student Factor) x (Temporary / Total Square Footage Ratio) Facility Cost Facility Capacity Student Factor Footage Ratio $315,000 24 0.109 0.097 $138.77 $315,000 29 0.037 0.016 $6.43 C 1 (Elementary) C 2 (Middle) C 3 (High) $315,000 31 0.054 0.020 $10.97 Total $945,000 84 0.200 C $156.18 State Funding Assistance Credit per Multi-Family Residence (formerly "State Match") Formula: Area Cost Allowance x SPI Square Feet per student x Funding Assistance % x Student Factor Area Cost Allowance SPI Sq. Ft. / Student Equalization % Student Factor $375.00 115 0.5288 0.109 $2,485.69 $375.00 148 0.5288 0.037 $1,085.89 $375.00 173 0.5288 0.054 $1,852.52 D $5,424.10 D 1 (Elementary) D 2 (Middle) D 3 (High) Tax Credit per Multi Family Residence Average MF Residential Assessed Value (AAV)$310,811 Net Present Value (per EQ) (NPV)8.32 Current Debt Service Rate / 1,000 ( r ) 0.11% TC $2,861.00 (Below used to calculate NPV) Current Bond Interest Rate 3.48% Years Amortized (10 Years)- Used in NPV Calculation 10 Developer Provided Facility Credit Facility / Site Value Dwelling Units 0 0 FC 0 Fee Recap ** A = Site Acquisition per Multi-Family Unit $0.00 B = Permanent Facility Cost per MF Unit $0.00 C = Temporary Facility Cost per MF Unit $156.18 Subtotal $156.18 D = State Match Credit per MF Unit $5,424.10 TC = Tax Credit per MF Unit $2,861.00 Subtotal $8,285.10 Total Unfunded Need ($8,128.92) 50% Developer Fee Obligation ($4,064) FC = Facility Credit (if applicable) 0 District Adjustment $4,064 Net Fee Obligation per Residential Unit - Multi-family ($0.00) Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan (APPENDIX C)May 2024 24 Page 119 of 433 VII - Projected Six-Year Classroom Capacity As stated in Section IV, the functional capacity study is periodically updated for changes in special programs and reflects class size requirements, class size fluctuations etc. As shown in the Inventory and Capacity chart in Table 3, the functional capacity is also reflected in the capacity and enrollment comparison charts (See Tables 5 & 5 a-b-c). Enrollment is electronically reported to OSPI on Form P-223 on a monthly basis and funding apportionment is based on Annual Average FTE (AAFTE). The first school day of October is widely recognized as the enrollment “snapshot in time” to report enrollment for the year. Kent School District continues to be the fifth largest district (both FTE and headcount basis) in the State of Washington. The P-223 Headcount for October 2023 was 24,442 with kindergarten students counted at 1.0 and excluding ECSE and college-only Running Start students. In October 2023, there were 1087 studentsin 11th and 12th grade participating in the Running Start program at different colleges and receiving credits toward both high school and college graduation. Of these students, 560 attended classes only at the college (“college-only”) and are excluded from FTE and headcount for capacity and enrollment comparisons. Kent School District has one of the highest Running Start program participation rates in the state. Based on the enrollment forecasts, permanent facility inventory and capacity, current standard ofservice, portable capacity, and futureadditional classroom space, the District plans to continue to satisfy required capacity through the interim use of portables (See Table 5 and Tables 5 a-b-c). While the District currently shows available capacity to address projected need on a purely statistical basis, there are variety of extenuating factors that need to be considered. The Kent School District currently makes significant use of portables, which we do not consider as part of our permanent standard of service. We have included portable space in our interim capacity figures, and we do not count that as a permanent space solution. Kent is unusual in that it incorporates neighborhoods intersecting with at least 6 municipalities, including Kent, Auburn, Black Diamond, Maple Valley, Renton, and SeaTac. The district covers 73 square miles and includes over 40 schools. Within this large geographic area, we expect to have pockets of localized capacity need that are not necessarily reflected in the aggregate figures. As one example, the Lakepointe Urban Village development in Covington may require new classroom capacity even as space may exist in schools on the far other end of the District’s boundaries. 25 Page 120 of 433 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY TOTAL DISTRICT SCHOOL YEAR 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 Actual Permanent Functional Capacity 1 35,494 35,494 35,494 35,494 35,494 35,494 35,494 Changes to Permanent Capacity 1 Capacity Increase (F) Additional Permanent Classrooms 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Permanent Program Capacity Subtotal 35,494 35,494 35,494 35,494 35,494 35,494 35,494 Interim Portable Capacity Elementary Portable Capacity Required 3,255 3,201 3,201 3,201 3,201 3,201 3,201 Middle School Portable Capacity Required 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 High School Portable Capacity Required 608 608 608 608 608 608 608 Interim Portable Capacity Total 4,238 4,184 4,184 4,184 4,184 4,184 4,184 TOTAL CAPACITY 1 39,732 39,678 39,678 39,678 39,678 39,678 39,678 Total Enrollment/Projection 2 24,385 24,225 24,197 24,201 24,265 24,378 24,348 DISTRICT AVAILABLE CAPACITY 15,347 15,453 15,481 15,477 15,413 15,300 15,330 1 Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes. 2 Projection Source: Les Kendrick Demographic Study, 2022 ("Low Growth Model") P R O J E C T E D Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 May 2024 26 Page 121 of 433 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY SCHOOL YEAR 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 Actual Elementary Permanent Capacity 1 16,827 16,696 16,696 16,696 16,696 16,696 16,696 Additional Permanent Classrooms 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Permanent Program Capacity Subtotal 16,827 16,696 16,696 16,696 16,696 16,696 16,696 Interim Portable Capacity 3,255 3,201 3,201 3,201 3,201 3,201 3,201 TOTAL CAPACITY 1 20,082 19,897 19,897 19,897 19,897 19,897 19,897 ENROLLMENT / PROJECTION 2 11,433 11,420 11,572 11,699 11,688 11,694 11,669 SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 8,649 8,477 8,325 8,198 8,209 8,203 8,228 1 Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes. 2 Projection Source: Les Kendrick Demographic Study, 2022 ("Low Growth Model") ELEMENTARY: Grades K - 5 Elementary Grade K-5 P R O J E C T E D Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 A May 2024 27 Page 122 of 433 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY SCHOOL YEAR 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 Actual Middle School Permanent Capacity 1 7,575 7,216 7,216 7,216 7,216 7,216 7,216 Changes to Middle School Capacity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Permanent Program Capacity Subtotal 7,575 7,216 7,216 7,216 7,216 7,216 7,216 Portable Interim Capacity 1 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 TOTAL CAPACITY 1 7,950 7,591 7,591 7,591 7,591 7,591 7,591 ENROLLMENT / PROJECTION 2 5,819 5,919 5,946 5,925 6,032 6,209 6,335 SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 2,131 1,672 1,645 1,666 1,559 1,382 1,256 1 Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes. MIDDLE SCHOOL: Grades 6 - 8 2 Projection Source: Les Kendrick Demographic Study, 2022 ("Low Growth Model") P R O J E C T E D Middle School Grade 6-8 Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 B May 2024 28 Page 123 of 433 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT and CAPACITY SCHOOL YEAR 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 Actual High Permanent Capacity 1 10,550 10,097 10,097 10,097 10,097 10,097 10,097 Changes to High School Capacity 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Permanent Program Capacity Subtotal 10,550 10,097 10,097 10,097 10,097 10,097 10,097 Portables Interim Capacity 1 608 608 608 608 608 608 608 TOTAL CAPACITY 1 11,158 10,705 10,705 10,705 10,705 10,705 10,705 ENROLLMENT / PROJECTION 2 7,195 7,378 7,384 7,467 7,578 7,647 7,631 SURPLUS (DEFICIT) CAPACITY 3,963 3,327 3,321 3,238 3,127 3,058 3,074 1 Capacity is based on standard of service for programs provided and is updated periodically to reflect program changes. 2 Projection Source: Les Kendrick Demographic Study, 2022 ("Low Growth Model") HIGH SCHOOLS: Grades 9 - 12 P R O J E C T E D Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 5 C May 2024 29 Page 124 of 433 VIII - Finance Plan The finance plan shown on Table 6 demonstrates how the Kent School District plans to finance improvements for the years 2023-2024 through 2029-2030. The financing components include secured and unsecured funding and impact fees. The plan is based on future bond issues, state school construction assistance, collection of impact fees under the State Growth Management Act and voluntary mitigation fees paid pursuant to State Environmental Policy Act. In November 2016, the District held a special election to approve the authorization of $252,000,000 in bonding authority. The projects described below are part of this authorization. The first series of bonds ($80 million) were issued in February 2017, which funded the Covington Elementary Replacement School, as well as other infrastructure projects. Impact fees were used at both River Ridge Elementary School and Kent Laboratory Academy projects due to escalation in construction pricing across the Pacific Northwest. According to RCW 82.02.090, the definition of an impact fee is ". . . a payment of money imposed upon development as a condition of development approval to pay for public facilities needed to serve new growth and development, and that is reasonably related to the new development that creates additional demand and need for public facilities, that is a proportionate share of the cost of the public facilities, and that is used for facilities that reasonably benefit the new development. `Impact fee' does not include a reasonable permit or application fee." Mitigation or impact fees can be calculated on the basis of "unhoused student need" or "the maintenance of a district's level of service" as related to new residential development. A mitigation/impact fee may be imposed based upon a determination of insufficient existing permanent and/or interim portable school space or to pay for permanent and/or newly acquired interim portable school space previously constructed as a result of growth in the district. A district's School Board must first approve the application of the mitigation or impact fees and, in turn, approval must then be granted by the other general government jurisdictions having responsibility within the district, counties, cities and towns (Kent, Covington, Renton, Auburn, Black Diamond, Maple Valley, SeaTac, and Unincorporated King County). Though the current enrollment projections increase for both elementary and secondary schools are relatively flat, the ongoing need to provide permanent instructional facilities to house students is a driving need as the shifts in our family populations continue, due to ongoing development. Previously collected impact fees may be used to support and address the challenges related to the number of interim instructional facilities currently in use, the replacement of some of these aged facilities, the maintenance of the district's level of services, and the potential expansions to existing facilities in future years. The Kent School District 2023-2024 CFP update includes continued execution of the 2016 Capital Bond Projects, the 2018 Levy Projects, and the data collection and review of our Facility Assessment Reports. The District Facilities and Capital Planning Teams had come together and joined the Capital 30 Page 125 of 433 Bond Planning Task Force (CBPTF) which included District personnel, design professionals, teaching staff, student voices, as well as community members who collaborated and discussed the District needs. The initial plan revealed priorities including school replacement due to age, and the need for added permanent facilities to (1) reduce and eliminate our need for portables and (2) accommodate future growth as housing in the Kent region continues to expand. We started with a list of 2 billion in needs and through itemizing and prioritizing, we brought the list of essential projects to 495 million. This list was brought before the District Board of Directors for comments, discussion, and approval. A Capital Bond Measure followed and went out to vote in April 2023 and did not pass with voter approval. After the failure to pass the 2023 Bond, we re-evaluated needs and for next steps. Surveys went out to the community to see what people would like to prioritize from the list of needed projects. A new list of projects was presented through the 2023 Levy in November. This levy did not pass. This list was again taken and revised to prioritize projects that are critical to operations and life safety within our buildings. In April we set forth our 2024 Levy to a vote, which also did not receive the needed support to pass. Future updates to this Capital Facilities Plan will include details of any adopted planning. With the opening of Canyon Ridge Middle School, our sixth grade moving from elementary to middle school, and our boundary change, we have advanced opportunities to even out capacity at each site to accommodate our programs, district-wide site capacity, and student-based needs. For the Six-Year Finance Plan, costs of future schools are based on estimates from Kent School District Capital Planning Team. Please see pages 13-14 for a summary of the cost basis. Cost Basis Summary For impact fee calculations, construction estimated costs are based on the last elementary school built in Kent, adjusted for inflation, and projected cost future elementary school, as well as average pricing of nearby school districts recently built new middle and new high school projects. Project Projected Cost New Elementary School $68,000,000 New Middle School $155,000,000 New High School $220,000,000 Site Acquisition Cost The site acquisition cost is based on an average cost of sites purchased or built on within the last ten years. Please see Table 7 for a list of site acquisition costs and averages. District Adjustment The impact fee calculations on Appendix B & C result in a zero-dollar impact fee total for this year but may be adjusted if needed per RCW 36.70A.130(2)(b) provision. 31 Page 126 of 433 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 SIX-YEAR FINANCE PLAN Secured Unsecured Impact SCHOOL FACILITIES *2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 TOTAL Local & State State 2 or Local 3 Fees 5 Estimated Estimated PERMANENT FACILITIES No School Projects at this time. $0 TEMPORARY FACILITIES Additional portables 3 - 4 $0 OTHER N / A Totals $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * F = Funded U = Unfunded NOTES: 2 The District anticipates receiving some State Funding Construction Assistance for some projects. 3 Facility needs are pending review. Some of these projects may be funded with impact fees. 4 Cost of portables based on current cost and adjusted for inflation for future years. 5 Fees in this column are based on amount of fees collected to date and estimated fees on future units. Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 6 May 202 32 Page 127 of 433 KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 415 Site Acquisitions & Costs Average of Sites Purchased, Sold or Built on within last 10 Years Type & # on Map School / Site Year Open / Purchased Sold Location Acreage Cost/Price Avg cost-price/acre Total Average Cost / Acre Elementary No Acquisitions for Elemenary Schools 0.00 $0 Elementary Site Subtotal 0.00 $0 $0 Elem site average Middle School No Acquisitions for Middle Schools 0.00 $0 Middle School Site Subtotal 0.00 $0 $0 Middle Schl Site Avg. High No Acquisitions for High 0.00 $0 $0 Senior High Site Subtotal 0.00 $0 $0 Sr Hi Site Average Note: All rural sites were purchased prior to adoption of Urban Growth Area. Numbers correspond to locations on Site Bank & Acquisitions Map on Page 1 / Urban Site - Covington area North (So of Mattson MS) 1984 2 / Rural Site - Ham Lake east (Pollard) 1992 4 / Urban Site - Shady Lake (Sowers-Blaine-Drahota-Paroline) 1995 0.00 $0 5 / Rural Site - SE of Lake Morton area (West property) 1993 0 0 0 9 / Rural Site - McMillan Assemblage (South of MC) 98 - 04 10 / Urban Site - Yeh-Williams (W of 132 Ave SE at SE 288) 1999 12a / Urban Site - 156th Ave. SE Covington (Wikstrom) 2004 12b / Urban Site - SE 256th St. Covington (West of CO) 2004 16 Site - 11027 SE Kent-Kangley Kent, WA 98030 2023 16a Site - 11109 SE Kent-Kangley Kent, WA 98030 2023 Total Acreage & Cost Total Average Cost / Acre #DIV/0! Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan Table 7 May 2024 33 Page 128 of 433 IX - Summary of Changes to June 2024 Capital Facilities Plan The Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") is updated annually based on previous Plans in effect since 1993. The primary changes from the June 2023 Plan are summarized here. Capacity changes continue to reflect fluctuations in class size ratio and program changes. Changesin portablesor transitional capacity reflect use,leaseorpurchase, sale, surplus and/or movement betweenfacilities. The District moved to a K-5 Elementary and 6-8 Middle School model beginning at the 2023- 2024 school year. Capacity has been added at the middle school level by reopening the original Sequoia Junior High (now Canyon Ridge Middle School). The Districtworked with Educational Data Solutions, LLC to update student generation factors. The updated rates are included in the body of the Plan. The District expects to receive some State Funding Assistance (formerly called “state matching funds”) for projects in this Plan and tax credit factors are updated annually. Unfunded site and facility need will be reviewed in the future. The impact fees for 2024 calendar year will result in no collection of impact fees for both Single-Family and Multi-Family due to the capacity study completed in spring 2024. 34 Page 129 of 433 ITEM Grade /Type FROM TO Increase/ Decrease Comments Student Generation Factor Elem 0.248 0.229 -0.019 Single Family (SF) MS 0.085 0.087 0.002 SH 0.107 0.113 0.006 Total 0.440 0.429 -0.011 Student Generation Factor Elem 0.130 0.109 -0.021 Multi-Family (MF) MS 0.049 0.037 -0.012 SH 0.056 0.054 -0.002 Total 0.235 0.200 -0.035 State Funding Assistance Ratios (“State Match”)51.86% 52.88% 1.02%Per OSPI Website Area Cost Allowance $246.83 $375.00 128.170 Per OSPI Website Link Average Assessed Valuation (AV) SF $653,485 $594,679 (58,806)King County AV - Average of Condominiums & Apts. MF $290,599 $310,811 20,212 King County Debt Service Capital Levy Rate / $1000 $1.02 $1.11 $0.09 Per King Co. Assessor Report General Obligation Bond Interest Rate 3.58% 3.48%-0.10%Bond Buyers 20 year GO Index Impact Fee - Single Family SF $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 No Change Impact Fee - Multi-Family MF $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 No Change X - Appendices Changes to Impact Fee Calculation Factors Include: Kent School District Six-Year Capital Facilities Plan May 202435 Page 130 of 433 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Ordinance No. 6955 (Krum) An Ordinance amending Sections 19.02.115, 19.02.120, 19.02.130 and 19.02.140 of Auburn City Code relating to School Impact Fees (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve Ordinance No. 6955.) December 2, 2024 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Community Development Ordinance No. 6955 Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrative Recommendation: City Council to approve Ordinance No. 6955. Background for Motion: Ordinance No. 6955 would amend Chapter 19.02 of Auburn City Code to reflect the 2024 School Impact Fees adopted by the Auburn, Kent, Federal Way, and Dieringer School Districts. Background Summary: Title 19 (Impact Fees) of the Auburn City Code (ACC) contains standards and regulations pertaining to the collection of impact fees in the City of Auburn. Impact fees are authorized by State law. Specifically, Chapter 19.02 (School Impact Fees) addresses the establishment, calculation, collection and amendment of School Impact Fees within the municipal boundaries of the City of Auburn. The City originally established School Impact Fees in 1998 by Ordinance No. 5078. Portions of four school districts occur within the City limits. Pursuant to Code Section 19.02.060 (Annual Council Review) of the Auburn City Code, on at least an annual basis, the Auburn City Council shall review the information submitted by the Districts pursuant to ACC 19.02.050. The review shall be in conjunction with any update of the Capital Facilities Plan Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The City Council may also at this time determine if an adjustment to the amount of the impact fees is necessary. The City of Auburn Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment process for 2024 included requests for City approval of the Capital Facilities Plans of the four districts as follows: *2024-2030 Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan; Page 131 of 433 *2023-2024 to 2028-2029 Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan; *2025 Federal Way Public Schools Capital Facilities Plan; and *2023-2024 through 2029-2030 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan These requests were submitted in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.02.050 (Submission of District Capital Facilities Plan and Data) of the Auburn City Code. The School Districts’ Capital Facilities Plans are contained in the packet for the 2024 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments, distributed to the City Council prior to the November 25, 2024, Study Session. Other key points of the City’s regulations include: *RCW 82.02.050 - .110 and WAC 365-196-850 authorize cities (towns & counties) planning under the Growth Management Act (GMA) to impose impact fees. *The impact fee shall be based on a Capital Facilities Plan adopted by the school district and incorporated by reference by the City as part of the Capital Facilities Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan, adopted pursuant to Chapter 36.70A RCW, for the purpose of establishing the fee program. *Separate fees shall be calculated for single-family and multifamily types of dwelling units, and separate student generation rates must be determined by the district for each type of dwelling unit. *The fee shall be calculated on a district-wide basis using the appropriate factors and data supplied by the district. The fee calculations shall also be made on a district-wide basis to assure maximum utilization of all available school facilities in the district which meet district standards. *As a condition of the City's authorization and adoption of a School Impact Fee Ordinance, the City and the applicable district shall enter into an Interlocal Agreement governing the operation of the School Impact Fee Program and describing the relationship and liabilities of the parties. The agreement must provide that the district shall hold the City harmless for all damages. *On an annual basis (by July 1st or on a date agreed to by district and the City and stipulated in the Interlocal Agreement), any district for which the City is collecting impact fees shall submit the Capital Facilities Plan and supporting information to the City. *Applicants for single-family and multifamily residential building permits shall pay the total amount of the impact fees assessed before the building permit is issued, using the impact fee schedules in effect, unless the fee has been deferred pursuant to City Ordinance No. 6341. *The impact fee calculation shall be based upon the formula set forth in ACC 19.02.110, “Impact fee formula”. The formula is the City's determination of the appropriate proportionate share of the costs of public school capital facilities needed to serve new growth and development to be funded by school impact fees based on the factors defined in ACC 19.02.020. Based on this formula, the “Fee Obligation” is the “Total Unfunded Need” x 50% = Fee Calculation. The Capital Facilities Plans that were approved by each of the school boards contain proposed school impact fees for each of the districts. The requests for adjustment of the School Impact Fees are required to be submitted concurrent with the submittal of the Capital Facilities Plans. Under City regulations a separate letter request is only required to be submitted to the City when the fee adjustment is requesting an increase. Auburn School District: Page 132 of 433 The Auburn School District indicated by letter submitted with their Capital Facilities Plan, that they are requesting an increase in School Impact Fees for the year 2025. The year 2025 fees for single-family dwellings is proposed to be $4,584.00, a decrease of $1,373.02, and the requested fee for multiple- family dwellings is $8,966.64, a decrease of $947.64. Dieringer School District: The Dieringer School District requests to retain the 2024 Impact Fee Rates, as indicated by the letter submitted with their Capital Facilities Plan. The year 2024 fees for single-family dwellings is proposed to be $8,054.00, for single family units and the fee for multiple family dwellings is proposed to be $3,400.00 for multifamily unit. Historically, the City has established fee rates for the Dieringer School district that is the same as the fee implemented in Pierce County’s fee since it is more appropriate and consistent with the public’s interest in reasonably mitigating school impacts within the affected portion of the City. The single- family and multiple family dwelling school district fee calculation exceeds the maximum fee obligation proposed by a draft Pierce County Ordinance by No. 2023-64, which was discussed during the October 17, 2023, regular Council Hearing; anticipated to be effective February 1, 2023. The proposed Ordinance identifies a maximum impact fee obligation for single family dwelling units of $4,545.00, and for multi-family dwelling units of $2,410.00. The Dieringer School District is the only school district common to both the jurisdictions of the City of Auburn and Pierce County. Federal Way Public Schools: The Federal Way Public Schools indicated by letter submitted with their Capital Facilities Plan that they are requesting to retain the $0 impact fee for single-single family development and decrease the multiple-family dwellings impact fee to $0.00, a decrease of $6,998. Federal Way Public Schools requested to not adopt School Impact Fees for 2025. Kent School District The Kent School District indicated by letter submitted with their Capital Facilities Plan they are not requesting a School Impact Fee for 2025 and did not request school impact fees for 2024. The District notes in the Capital Facilities Plan Impact Fees are not proposed in 2025 based on revised student generation rates, and capacity and enrollment projections. The establishment of the actual fee amount occurs through separate Council action amending Chapter 19.02 of the Auburn City Code. Section 19.02.060, (Annual Council Review) specifies the following: “On at least an annual basis, the city council shall review the information submitted by the district pursuant to ACC 19.02.050. The review shall be in conjunction with any update of the capital facilities plan element of the city's comprehensive plan. The city council may also at this time determine if an adjustment to the amount of the impact fees is necessary; provided, that any school impact fee adjustment that would increase the school impact fee shall require the submittal of a written request for the adjustment by the applicable school district concurrent with the submittal of the annual capital facilities plan pursuant to ACC 19.02.050. In making its decision to adjust impact fees, the city council will take into consideration the quality and completeness of the information provided in the applicable school district capital facilities plan and may decide to enact a fee less than the amount supported by the capital facilities plan.” This Section provides the Auburn City Council is not obligated to accept the fees proposed by the School Districts within their submitted Capital Facilities Plans and may establish fees that the Council determines are more appropriate and consistent with the public’s interest in reasonably mitigating school impacts within the affected portion of the City. Page 133 of 433 Councilmember: Tracy Taylor Staff: Jason Krum Page 134 of 433 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6955 December 2, 2024 Page 1 of 6 ORDINANCE NO. 6955 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON AMENDING SECTIONS 19.02.115, 19.02.120, 19.02.130 AND 19.02.140 OF THE AUBURN CITY CODE RELATING TO SCHOOL IMPACT FEES WHEREAS, the City of Auburn has adopted a School Impact Fee Ordinance and collects School Impact Fees on behalf of certain School Districts located in part within the City of Auburn; and WHEREAS, the Auburn School District, Federal Way Public Schools, and the Kent School District, each being located in part within the City of Auburn, have provided the City of Auburn with updated Capital Facilities Plans to be considered during the City’s 2024 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment process that addresses among other things, the appropriate School Impact Fee for single family residential dwellings and multi- family residential dwellings for each district; and WHEREAS, the Dieringer School District will resubmit the 2023-2024 Capital Facilities Plan for 2023-2024 to 2028-2029; calculated impact fees will remain unchanged; and WHEREAS, after proper notice published in the City’s official newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the date of Hearing, the Auburn Planning Commission on October 23, 2024, conducted Public Hearings on the proposed Auburn School District 2024-2030 Capital Facilities Plan; the proposed Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2023- 2029; the proposed Federal Way Public Schools 2025 Capital Facilities Plan; and the proposed Kent School District 2023-2024 through 2029-2030 Capital Facilities Plan; and Page 135 of 433 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6955 December 2, 2024 Page 2 of 6 WHEREAS, following the conclusion of the Public Hearing on October 23, 2024, and subsequent deliberations, the Auburn Planning Commission, following individual positive motions, made recommendations to the Auburn City Council on the approval of the School Impact Fees for single family residential dwellings and multi-family residential dwellings for each district; and WHEREAS, the Auburn City Council reviewed the recommendations of the Auburn Planning Commission for the School Districts’ Capital Facilities Plans at both a regularly scheduled Study Session, on November 25, 2024, and a regularly scheduled meeting, on December 2, 2024; and WHEREAS, on December 2, 2024, the Auburn City Council approved the proposed Auburn School District 2024-2030 Capital Facilities Plan; the proposed Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan 2023-2029; the proposed Federal Way Public Schools 2025 Capital Facilities Plan; and the proposed Kent School District 2023- 2024 through 2029-2030 Capital Facilities Plan; and WHEREAS, the Auburn City Code Chapter 19.02 provides for adjustments to School Impact Fees based on a review of the Capital Facilities Plans for each of the districts; and WHEREAS, on November 25, 2024, the Auburn City Council at a regularly scheduled Study Session reviewed amendments to Auburn City Code Chapter 19.02 (School Impact Fees) pertaining to School Impact Fees for single family residential dwelling units and multi-family residential dwelling units to be applied in the City of Auburn for the Auburn School District; Dieringer School District; Federal Way Public Schools; and Page 136 of 433 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6955 December 2, 2024 Page 3 of 6 the Kent School District; respectively, based on the aforementioned Capital Facilities Plans for each of these districts; and WHEREAS, Section 19.02.060 (Annual Council Review) of the Auburn City Code specifies that in making its decision to adjust impact fees the Auburn City Council will take into consideration the quality and completeness of the information provided in the applicable school district Capital Facilities Plan and may decide to enact a fee less than the amount supported by the Capital Facilities Plan. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Amendment to the City Code. Section 19.02.120 of the Auburn City Code is amended to read as follows. 19.02.120 Impact fee calculation and schedule for the Auburn School District. The impact fee calculation and schedule is based upon a review of the impact fee calculation for single-family residences and for multifamily residences set forth in the most recent version of the Auburn School District’s Capital Facilities Plan adopted by the Auburn City Council as an element of the Auburn comprehensive plan. The calculation is the determination of the appropriate proportionate share of the costs of public school capital facilities needed to serve new growth and development to be funded by school impact fees based on the factors defined in ACC 19.02.020. Effective January 1, 20242025, or the effective date of this ordinance whichever is later, the school impact fee shall be as follows: Per Single-Family Dwelling Unit $5,957.02$4,584.00 Per Multifamily Dwelling Unit $9,913.64$8,966.00 (Ord. 6627 § 1, 2016; Ord. 6581 § 2, 2016; Ord. 6542 § 2, 2014; Ord. 6488 Page 137 of 433 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6955 December 2, 2024 Page 4 of 6 § 2, 2013; Ord. 6445 § 2, 2012; Ord. 6393 § 2, 2011; Ord. 6341 § 2, 2011; Ord. 6340 § 2, 2010; Ord. 6279 § 2, 2009; Ord. 6214 § 2, 2008; Ord. 6134 § 2, 2007; Ord. 6060 § 2, 2006; Ord. 5950 § 1, 2005; Ord. 5793 § 1, 2003; Ord. 5232 § 1, 1999.) Section 2. Amendment to the City Code. Section 19.02.115 of the Auburn City Code is amended to read as follows. 19.02.115 Impact fee calculation and schedule for the Dieringer School District. The impact fee calculation and schedule below is based upon a review of the impact fee calculation for single-family residences and for multifamily residences set forth in the most recent version of the Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan adopted by the Auburn City Council as an element of the Auburn comprehensive plan. The calculation is the determination of the appropriate proportionate share of the costs of public school capital facilities needed to serve new growth and development to be funded by school impact fees based on the factors defined in ACC 19.02.020. Effective January 1, 20242025, or the effective date of this ordinance whichever is later, the school impact fee shall be as follows: Per Single-Family Dwelling Unit $4,545.00 Per Multifamily Dwelling Unit $2,410.00 (Ord. 6627 § 1, 2016; Ord. 6581 § 1, 2016; Ord. 6542 § 1, 2014; Ord. 6488 § 1, 2013; Ord. 6445 § 1, 2012; Ord. 6393 § 1, 2011; Ord. 6341 § 2, 2011; Ord. 6340 § 1, 2010; Ord. 6279 § 1, 2009; Ord. 6214 § 1, 2008; Ord. 6134 § 1, 2007; Ord. 6060 § 1, 2006; Ord. 5950 § 2, 2005.) Section 3. Amendment to the City Code. Section 19.02.140 of the Auburn City Code is amended to read as follows. 19.02.140 Impact fee calculation and schedule for the Federal Way Public Schools The impact fee calculation and schedule is based upon a review of the impact fee and calculation for single-family residences and for multifamily Page 138 of 433 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6955 December 2, 2024 Page 5 of 6 residences set forth in the most recent version of the Federal Way Public Schools’s Capital Facilities Plan adopted by the Auburn City Council as an element of the Auburn comprehensive plan. The calculation is the determination of the appropriate proportionate share of the costs of public school capital facilities needed to serve new growth and development to be funded by school impact fees based on the factors defined in ACC 19.02.020. Effective January 1, 20242025, or the effective date of this ordinance whichever is later, the school impact fee shall be as follows: Per Single-Family Dwelling Unit $0.00 Per Multifamily Dwelling Unit $ 6,998.00$0.00 (Ord. 6627 § 1, 2016; Ord. 6581 § 4, 2016; Ord. 6542 § 4, 2014; Ord. 6488 § 4, 2013; Ord. 6445 § 4, 2012; Ord. 6393 § 4, 2011; Ord. 6341 § 2, 2011; Ord. 6340 § 4, 2010; Ord. 6279 § 4, 2009; Ord. 6214 § 4, 2008; Ord. 6134 § 4, 2007; Ord. 6060 § 4, 2006; Ord. 6042 § 1, 2006.) Section 4. Amendment to the City Code. Section 19.02.130 of the Auburn City Code is amended as follows. 19.02.130 Impact fee calculation and schedule for the Kent School District. The impact fee calculation and schedule is based upon a review of the impact fee and calculation for single-family residences and for multifamily residences set forth in the most recent version of the Kent School District’s Capital Facilities Plan adopted by the Auburn City Council as an element of the Auburn comprehensive plan. The calculation is the determination of the appropriate proportionate share of the costs of public school capital facilities needed to serve new growth and development to be funded by school impact fees based on the factors defined in ACC 19.02.020. Effective January 1, 20242025, or the effective date of this ordinance whichever is later, the school impact fee shall be as follows: Per Single-Family Dwelling Unit $0.00 Per Multifamily Dwelling Unit $0.00 Page 139 of 433 -------------------------- Ordinance No. 6955 December 2, 2024 Page 6 of 6 (Ord. 6627 § 1, 2016; Ord. 6581 § 3, 2016; Ord. 6542 § 3, 2014; Ord. 6488 § 3, 2013; Ord. 6445 § 3, 2012; Ord. 6393 § 3, 2011; Ord. 6341 § 2, 2011; Ord. 6340 § 3, 2010; Ord. 6279 § 3, 2009; Ord. 6214 § 3, 2008; Ord. 6134 § 3, 2007; Ord. 6060 § 3, 2006; Ord. 5950 § 1, 2005; Ord. 5233 § 1, 1999.) Section 5. Constitutionality and Invalidity. If any section, subsection sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance, is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any Court of competent jurisdiction such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 6. Implementation. The Mayor is authorized to implement such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directions of this legislation. Section 7. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force five days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. INTRODUCED: _______________ PASSED: ____________________ APPROVED: _________________ ____________________________ NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR ATTEST: ____________________________ Shawn Campbell, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ Jason Whalen, City Attorney Published: _________________________________________________________ Page 140 of 433 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Ordinance No. 6961 (Thomas) An Ordinance amending the City's 2023-2024 Biennial Operating and Capital Budgets (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve Ordinance No. 6961.) December 2, 2024 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Finance Ordinance No. 6961, 2024 BA6 Ord No 6961 Schedule A, 2024 BA6 Ord No 6961 Schedule B Current Budget: $588,247,181.00 Proposed Revision: $11,563,152.00 Revised Budget: $599,810,333.00 Administrative Recommendation: City Council to approve Ordinance No. 6961. Background for Motion: Ordinance No. 6961 is the sixth and final amendment to the City of Auburn's 2023-2024 Biennial Budget, and authorizes Operational and Capital Budget adjustments, recognition of grant and loan revenues and expenditures, and limited requests for new budget authority. Background Summary: Ordinance No. 6961 (Budget Amendment No. 6) represents the sixth and final Budget Amendment for the 2023-2024 Biennium. The sixth Budget Amendment of the Biennium consists of operational adjustments, capital project and equipment purchase adjustments, grant and loan revenues and expenditures, reallocation of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) project funding and limited requests for new budget authority. For details, see attached transmittal memorandum and supporting materials. Councilmember: Kate Baldwin Staff: Jamie Thomas Page 141 of 433 ------------------------- Ordinance No. 6961 November 19, 2024 Page 1 of 2 ORDINANCE NO. 6961 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE CITY’S 2023-2024 BIENNIAL OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGETS WHEREAS, at its November 21, 2022, regular meeting, the Auburn City Council Enacted Ordinances No. 6879 and 6888, which adopted the City’s 2023- 2024 Biennial budget (Budget); and WHEREAS, the City Council has amended the Budget five times since adoption (by enacting Ordinance No. 6900 on April 14, 2023, Ordinance No. 6911 on July 17, 2023, Ordinance No. 6918 on November 20, 2023, Ordinance No. 6937 on April 15, 2024, and Ordinance No. 6945 on August 19, 2024); and WHEREAS, the City deems it necessary to amend the Budget a sixth time to appropriate additional funds into the various Budget funds outlined in the schedules attached to this Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Council has approved this Ordinance by one more than its majority in accordance with RCW 35A.34.200. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Amendment of the 2023-2024 Biennial Budget. Pursuant to RCW 35A.34, the City hereby amends its 2023-2024 Biennial Budget to reflect the revenues and expenditures shown on Schedules “A” and “B” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Page 142 of 433 ------------------------- Ordinance No. 6961 November 19, 2024 Page 2 of 2 Section 2. Implementation. The Mayor is authorized to utilize the revenue and expenditure amounts shown on Schedules “A” and “B” attached to this Ordinance. A copy of these Schedules are on file with the City Clerk and available for public inspection. The Mayor is further authorized to implement those administrative procedures necessary to carry out the directives of this legislation. Section 3. Severability. The provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion of this Ordinance, or the invalidity of the application of it to any person or circumstance, will not affect the validity of the remainder of this Ordinance, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. Section 4. Effective date. This Ordinance will take effect and be in force five days from and after its passage, approval, and publication as provided by law. INTRODUCED: _______________ PASSED: ____________________ APPROVED: _________________ ____________________________ NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR ATTEST: ____________________________ Shawn Campbell, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ Jason Whalen, City Attorney Published: ________________________________________________________ Page 143 of 433 Schedule A Summary of 2024 Budget Adjustments by Fund Budget Amendment #6 (Ordinance #6961) Beg. Fund Balance Revenues Expenditures Ending Fund Balance General Fund (#001) 2024 Adopted Budget 9,475,710 101,921,889 101,372,924 10,024,675 Previous Budget Amendments 36,243,836 6,182,986 12,247,520 30,179,302 2024 Amended Budget 45,719,546 108,104,875 113,620,444 40,203,977 BA#6 (Ordinance #6961, Proposed):- 1,013,296 1,794,829 (781,533) Administration True-up EMPG Grant gr2304 - 6,114 6,114 - Human Resources Updates to Court Prof Svcs - - 245,000 (245,000) 2024-25 OPD SPAR Grant gr2407 - 388,000 388,000 - Finance Department 2024 ARPA Project Reallocation - - - - Community Development Climate Commitment Planning Program - 125,000 125,000 - Police Department Evidence Room Roof Repair - - 67,000 (67,000) K9 Sale Revenue - 37,160 37,160 - pd2202/pd2302 grant funding/CF - 8,662 8,662 - pd2301 2023 wellness grant CF - 26,666 26,666 - pd2303 BVP 2023 grant CF - 6,102 6,102 - pd2306/2404RSO Grnt Funding/CF - 10,299 10,299 - pd2407 BVP Grant Accpetance - 13,368 13,368 - Public Works Department Traffic Signal Rpr-Ins Recover - 34,140 34,140 - Page 144 of 433 Schedule A Summary of 2024 Budget Adjustments by Fund Budget Amendment #6 (Ordinance #6961) Beg. Fund Balance Revenues Expenditures Ending Fund Balance Parks Department Remove Double Budgeted Project Amount - - (50,000) 50,000 Senior Center Exterior Siding Repair - - 316,000 (316,000) Tourism Board Grant spevnt - 16,000 16,000 - 4Culture Local Arts Award 2024 - 13,000 13,000 - 4Culture Preservatn Award 2024 - 3,682 3,682 - Increase Operating Supplies Budget - 10,000 10,000 - Cascade Bike Club Grant-WSDOT - 212,033 212,033 - Increase Inventory Budget - 60,000 60,000 - KCD 2024 Farmers Market Grant - 20,000 20,000 - Museum Director - - 28,000 (28,000) Lea Hill Insurance Claim - 23,070 23,070 - Streets Department Streets De-Icer Truck Replacement - - 175,533 (175,533) Revised 2024 Budget - Fund 001 45,719,546 109,118,171 115,415,273 39,422,444 Arterial Street Fund (#102) 2024 Adopted Budget 690,081 11,307,150 11,968,800 28,431 Previous Budget Amendments 1,589,050 14,489,580 15,888,250 190,380 2024 Amended Budget 2,279,131 25,796,730 27,857,050 218,811 BA#6 (Ordinance #6961, Proposed):- (2,235,986) (2,235,986) - Garden Ave Project, Add FIL - 20,000 20,000 - A St NW Ph. 2–Remove 2024 TIF - (150,000) (150,000) - AWS/6th St SE–Remove 2024 TIF - (435,000) (435,000) - 304/132 RAB–Remove 2024 TIF - (50,000) (50,000) - Stewart Rd Sumner Contribution - 150,000 150,000 - A St SE Study–Remove 2024 TIF - (34,782) (34,782) - AWS Widening – Remove 2024 TIF - (1,736,204) (1,736,204) - Revised 2024 Budget - Fund 102 2,279,131 23,560,744 25,621,064 218,811 Page 145 of 433 Schedule A Summary of 2024 Budget Adjustments by Fund Budget Amendment #6 (Ordinance #6961) Beg. Fund Balance Revenues Expenditures Ending Fund Balance Housing and Comm Develop Fund (#119) 2024 Adopted Budget 42,842 650,000 650,000 42,842 Previous Budget Amendments 62 - - 62 2024 Amended Budget 42,904 650,000 650,000 42,904 BA#6 (Ordinance #6961, Proposed):- 216,057 216,057 - CDBG Grant Carryforward - 216,057 216,057 - Revised 2024 Budget - Fund 119 42,904 866,057 866,057 42,904 Cumulative Reserve Fund (#122) 2024 Adopted Budget 29,402,101 80,000 12,959,994 16,522,107 Previous Budget Amendments 1,487,714 6,102,000 (65,130) 7,654,844 2024 Amended Budget 30,889,815 6,182,000 12,894,864 24,176,951 BA#6 (Ordinance #6961, Proposed):- - 4,459,604 (4,459,604) 2023 CF – POL.0039 Transfer Budget - - 659,604 (659,604) cp2227 ACRC Funding inc Grant - - 3,800,000 (3,800,000) Revised 2024 Budget - Fund 122 30,889,815 6,182,000 17,354,468 19,717,347 Page 146 of 433 Schedule A Summary of 2024 Budget Adjustments by Fund Budget Amendment #6 (Ordinance #6961) Beg. Fund Balance Revenues Expenditures Ending Fund Balance Mitigation Fees Fund (#124) 2024 Adopted Budget 5,533,385 1,600,100 7,003,800 129,685 Previous Budget Amendments 10,838,081 - 6,483,975 4,354,106 2024 Amended Budget 16,371,466 1,600,100 13,487,775 4,483,791 BA#6 (Ordinance #6961, Proposed):- - (2,555,986) 2,555,986 cp2325 Drvng Rge Rtn Park Impact - - (300,000) 300,000 A St NW Ph. 2–Remove 2024 TIF - - (150,000) 150,000 AWS/6th St SE–Remove 2024 TIF - - (435,000) 435,000 304/132 RAB–Remove 2024 TIF - - (50,000) 50,000 Stewart Rd Sumner Contribution - - 150,000 (150,000) A St SE Study–Remove 2024 TIF - - (34,782) 34,782 AWS Widening – Remove 2024 TIF - - (1,736,204) 1,736,204 Revised 2024 Budget - Fund 124 16,371,466 1,600,100 10,931,789 7,039,777 Parks Construction Fund (#321) 2024 Adopted Budget 1,013,804 568,800 768,500 814,104 Previous Budget Amendments 575,491 1,517,292 2,567,471 (474,688) 2024 Amended Budget 1,589,295 2,086,092 3,335,971 339,416 BA#6 (Ordinance #6961, Proposed):- 1,217,260 1,217,260 - cp2423 Thtr Plaza/Comic purch - 1,217,260 1,217,260 - Revised 2024 Budget - Fund 321 1,589,295 3,303,352 4,553,231 339,416 Page 147 of 433 Schedule A Summary of 2024 Budget Adjustments by Fund Budget Amendment #6 (Ordinance #6961) Beg. Fund Balance Revenues Expenditures Ending Fund Balance Capital Improvements Fund (#328) 2024 Adopted Budget 13,591,156 4,099,300 7,249,500 10,440,956 Previous Budget Amendments 2,078,134 12,853,776 16,682,380 (1,750,470) 2024 Amended Budget 15,669,290 16,953,076 23,931,880 8,690,486 BA#6 (Ordinance #6961, Proposed):- 5,710,125 8,740,125 (3,030,000) cp2414 Theater Construction - - 2,000,000 (2,000,000) 2024 ARPA Project Reallocation - 222,850 222,850 - cp2325 Drvng Rge Rtn Park Impact - (300,000) (300,000) - cp2227 ACRC Funding inc Grant - 5,770,000 6,800,000 (1,030,000) 2024 Street Lighting Rebate - 17,275 17,275 - Revised 2024 Budget - Fund 328 15,669,290 22,663,201 32,672,005 5,660,486 Water Fund (#430) 2024 Adopted Budget 6,238,052 18,963,410 21,242,749 3,958,713 Previous Budget Amendments 11,364,035 - 10,840,419 523,616 2024 Amended Budget 17,602,087 18,963,410 32,083,168 4,482,329 BA#6 (Ordinance #6961, Proposed):- 3,637,666 12,439 3,625,227 cp1603 Loan Proceeds CF - 3,637,666 - 3,637,666 Streets De-Icer Truck Replacement - - 12,439 (12,439) Revised 2024 Budget - Fund 430 17,602,087 22,601,076 32,095,607 8,107,556 Sewer Fund (#431) 2024 Adopted Budget 8,526,494 9,661,700 10,676,197 7,511,997 Previous Budget Amendments 7,480,243 - 425,064 7,055,179 2024 Amended Budget 16,006,737 9,661,700 11,101,261 14,567,176 BA#6 (Ordinance #6961, Proposed):- - 12,439 (12,439) Streets De-Icer Truck Replacement - - 12,439 (12,439) Revised 2024 Budget - Fund 431 16,006,737 9,661,700 11,113,700 14,554,737 Page 148 of 433 Schedule A Summary of 2024 Budget Adjustments by Fund Budget Amendment #6 (Ordinance #6961) Beg. Fund Balance Revenues Expenditures Ending Fund Balance Storm Drainage Fund (#432) 2024 Adopted Budget 13,315,693 11,160,700 17,964,446 6,511,947 Previous Budget Amendments 3,024,091 130,000 1,455,974 1,698,117 2024 Amended Budget 16,339,784 11,290,700 19,420,420 8,210,064 BA#6 (Ordinance #6961, Proposed):- - 67,639 (67,639) Vegetation Truck Replacement - - 55,200 (55,200) Streets De-Icer Truck Replacement - - 12,439 (12,439) Revised 2024 Budget - Fund 432 16,339,784 11,290,700 19,488,059 8,142,425 Airport Fund (#435) 2024 Adopted Budget 267,581 1,938,000 2,107,005 98,576 Previous Budget Amendments 1,651,182 781,756 1,324,989 1,107,949 2024 Amended Budget 1,918,763 2,719,756 3,431,994 1,206,525 BA#6 (Ordinance #6961, Proposed):- - - - Tow-behind FOD Blower - - - - Revised 2024 Budget - Fund 435 1,918,763 2,719,756 3,431,994 1,206,525 Airport Capital Fund (#465) 2024 Adopted Budget 73,580 1,145,755 1,101,210 118,125 Previous Budget Amendments 164,158 5,555,611 5,724,222 (4,453) 2024 Amended Budget 237,738 6,701,366 6,825,432 113,672 BA#6 (Ordinance #6961, Proposed):- 238,255 238,255 - cp2335 AWOS Beacon & Emerg Gen - 238,255 238,255 - Revised 2024 Budget - Fund 465 237,738 6,939,621 7,063,687 113,672 Page 149 of 433 Schedule A Summary of 2024 Budget Adjustments by Fund Budget Amendment #6 (Ordinance #6961) Beg. Fund Balance Revenues Expenditures Ending Fund Balance Workers' Comp Fund (#503) 2024 Adopted Budget 3,496,920 1,144,900 751,000 3,890,820 Previous Budget Amendments (108,951) - 309,300 (418,251) 2024 Amended Budget 3,387,969 1,144,900 1,060,300 3,472,569 BA#6 (Ordinance #6961, Proposed):- 410,000 500,000 (90,000) Worker’s Compensation Settlement - 410,000 500,000 (90,000) Revised 2024 Budget - Fund 503 3,387,969 1,554,900 1,560,300 3,382,569 Facilities Fund (#505) 2024 Adopted Budget 368,394 4,451,000 4,468,294 351,100 Previous Budget Amendments (160,590) 313,105 385,130 (232,615) 2024 Amended Budget 207,804 4,764,105 4,853,424 118,485 BA#6 (Ordinance #6961, Proposed):- 548,000 548,000 - Community Center Gym Floor Patch - 165,000 165,000 - Evidence Room Roof Repair - 67,000 67,000 - Senior Center Exterior Siding Repair - 316,000 316,000 - Revised 2024 Budget - Fund 505 207,804 5,312,105 5,401,424 118,485 Equipment Rental Capital Fund (#560) 2024 Adopted Budget 4,882,593 3,023,152 2,648,380 5,257,365 Previous Budget Amendments 456,182 2,462,261 6,675,223 (3,756,780) 2024 Amended Budget 5,338,775 5,485,413 9,323,603 1,500,585 BA#6 (Ordinance #6961, Proposed):- 864,160 284,400 579,760 2023 CF – POL.0039 Transfer Budget - 579,760 - 579,760 Tow-behind FOD Blower - 16,350 16,350 - Vegetation Truck Replacement - 55,200 55,200 - Streets De-Icer Truck Replacement - 212,850 212,850 - Revised 2024 Budget - Fund 560 5,338,775 6,349,573 9,608,003 2,080,345 Page 150 of 433 Schedule A Summary of 2024 Budget Adjustments by Fund Budget Amendment #6 (Ordinance #6961) Beg. Fund Balance Revenues Expenditures Ending Fund Balance IT Capital Fund (#568) 2024 Adopted Budget 326,754 603,944 514,544 416,154 Previous Budget Amendments 278,686 824,456 1,064,916 38,226 2024 Amended Budget 605,440 1,428,400 1,579,460 454,380 BA#6 (Ordinance #6961, Proposed):- 79,844 - 79,844 2023 CF – POL.0039 Transfer Budget - 79,844 - 79,844 Revised 2024 Budget - Fund 568 605,440 1,508,244 1,579,460 534,224 SKHHP Fund (#654) 2024 Adopted Budget 1,599,818 331,000 377,600 1,553,218 Previous Budget Amendments 6,091,282 4,120,300 1,126,573 9,085,009 2024 Amended Budget 7,691,100 4,451,300 1,504,173 10,638,227 BA#6 (Ordinance #6961, Proposed):- (135,525) - (135,525) SKHHP Affordable Housing Tax Revenue Adjustment - (135,525) - (135,525) Revised 2024 Budget - Fund 654 7,691,100 4,315,775 1,504,173 10,502,702 Grand Total - All Funds 2024 Adopted Budget 128,255,683 269,799,652 304,836,791 93,218,544 Previous Budget Amendments 112,485,534 77,706,312 132,678,989 57,512,857 2024 Amended Budget 240,741,217 347,505,964 437,515,780 150,731,401 Total BA#6 (Ordinance #6961, Proposed):- 11,563,152 13,299,075 (1,735,923) Revised 2024 Budget 240,741,217 359,069,116 450,814,855 148,995,478 599,810,333 599,810,333 Page 151 of 433 Schedule B 2024 Ending Fund Balance/Working Capital by Fund Fund 2024 Amended Beginning Balance 2024 Amended Ending Balance BA#6 (ORD #6961) Revenues BA#6 (ORD #6961) Expenditures BA#6 (ORD #6961) Net Change in Fund Balance Revised Ending Balance General Fund (#001)45,719,546 40,203,977 1,013,296 1,794,829 (781,533) 39,422,444 Arterial Street Fund (#102)2,279,131 218,811 (2,235,986) (2,235,986) - 218,811 Local Street Fund (#103)6,372,457 4,180,848 - - - 4,180,848 Hotel/Motel Tax Fund (#104)506,580 473,380 - - - 473,380 Arterial Street Preservation Fund (#105)5,773,021 2,860,624 - - - 2,860,624 American Rescue Plan Act Fund (#106)- - - - - - Drug Forfeiture Fund (#117)959,366 702,449 - - - 702,449 Housing and Comm Develop Fund (#119)42,904 42,904 216,057 216,057 - 42,904 Recreation Trails Fund (#120)109,020 49,910 - - - 49,910 BIA Fund (#121)- - - - - - Cumulative Reserve Fund (#122)30,889,815 24,176,951 - 4,459,604 (4,459,604) 19,717,347 Mitigation Fees Fund (#124)16,371,466 4,483,791 - (2,555,986) 2,555,986 7,039,777 2020 LTGO A&B Refunding Bonds Fund (#232)483,916 484,016 - - - 484,016 SCORE Debt Service Fund (#238)- - - - - - LID Guarantee Fund (#249)- - - - - - Golf/Cemetery 2016 Refunding Fund (#276)- - - - - - Parks Construction Fund (#321)1,589,295 339,416 1,217,260 1,217,260 - 339,416 Capital Improvements Fund (#328)15,669,290 8,690,486 5,710,125 8,740,125 (3,030,000) 5,660,486 Local Revitalization Fund (#330)485,926 25,885 - - - 25,885 Water Fund (#430)17,602,087 4,482,329 3,637,666 12,439 3,625,227 8,107,556 Sewer Fund (#431)16,006,737 14,567,176 - 12,439 (12,439) 14,554,737 Storm Drainage Fund (#432)16,339,784 8,210,064 - 67,639 (67,639) 8,142,425 Sewer Metro Sub Fund (#433)4,882,326 4,909,826 - - - 4,909,826 Solid Waste Fund (#434)1,196,491 535,733 - - - 535,733 Airport Fund (#435)1,918,763 1,206,525 - - - 1,206,525 Cemetery Fund (#436)1,719,510 973,772 - - - 973,772 Water Capital Fund (#460)5,583,234 300,795 - - - 300,795 Sewer Capital Fund (#461)10,812,955 1,634,688 - - - 1,634,688 Storm Drainage Capital Fund (#462)8,239,288 459,356 - - - 459,356 Airport Capital Fund (#465)237,738 113,672 238,255 238,255 - 113,672 Cemetery Capital Fund (#466)46,805 23,482 - - - 23,482 Insurance Fund (#501)1,429,696 1,124,196 - - - 1,124,196 Workers' Comp Fund (#503)3,387,969 3,472,569 410,000 500,000 (90,000) 3,382,569 Facilities Fund (#505)207,804 118,485 548,000 548,000 - 118,485 Innovation & Technology Fund (#518)2,706,614 1,959,036 - - - 1,959,036 Equipment Rental Fund (#550)3,275,831 2,919,046 - - - 2,919,046 Equipment Rental Capital Fund (#560)5,338,775 1,500,585 864,160 284,400 579,760 2,080,345 IT Capital Fund (#568)605,440 454,380 79,844 - 79,844 534,224 Fire Pension Fund (#611)1,870,328 1,739,672 - - - 1,739,672 SKHHP Fund (#654)7,691,100 10,638,227 (135,525) - (135,525) 10,502,702 Cemetery Endowment Fund (#701)2,390,209 2,454,339 - - - 2,454,339 Page 152 of 433 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Resolution No. 5800 (Hinman) A Resolution adopting the 2025 State Legislative Agenda (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 5800.) December 2, 2024 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Administration Resolution No. 5800, Exhibit A - 2025 City of Auburn Legislative Priorities $0 Administrative Recommendation: City Council to adopt Resolution No. 5800. Background for Motion: A Resolution for the Auburn City Council to adopt the 2025 Legislative Priorities for the City of Auburn to inform the City's advocacy work during the 2025 Legislative Session. Background Summary: The City of Auburn staff, City Council, and community, in conjunction with other municipalities, organizations and agencies work together each year in between Legislative Sessions to develop a list of priority topics for our communities. The 70th Legislative Session is a long session (105 days) and will convene on January 13, 2025, and is expected to end on April 27, 2025. Councilmember: Kate Baldwin Staff: Dana Hinman Page 153 of 433 -------------------------------- Resolution No. 5800 November 26, 2024 Page 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 5800 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE 2025 STATE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA WHEREAS, the actions of the Washington State Legislature in respect to local government issues, services, and funding have a profound effect on the City’s ability to provide local services to its residents; and WHEREAS, the Auburn City Council believes that it is appropriate to communicate its position regarding issues affecting the City and local government that may come before the State Legislature during the 2025 Legislative Session. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, RESOLVES as follows: Section 1. The City Council adopts its 2025 Legislative Agenda as set forth in Exhibit A. Section 2. The Mayor shall cause a copy of this Resolution be delivered to the City’s State Legislative District Representatives and to other regional government entities. Page 154 of 433 -------------------------------- Resolution No. 5800 November 26, 2024 Page 2 of 2 Section 3. This Resolution will take effect and be in full force on passage and signatures. Dated and Signed this _____ day of ________________, 2024. CITY OF AUBURN ____________________________ NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR ATTEST: ______________________________ Shawn Campbell, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ Jason Whalen, City Attorney Page 155 of 433 Contact Dana Hinman, Director of Administration Office: 253-931-4009 | Cell: 253-266-2787 dhinman@auburnwa.gov 2025 State Legislative Priorities The City of Auburn, like most communities, faces a number of issues that impact our community . What is becoming very clear, we cannot treat each issue as separate. Instead, the City is committed to continue efforts that look at solving our challenges in a comprehensive manner. Our belief is that the following problems can only be solved with an interconnected strategy for success. PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE: The City of Auburn supports the continued reforms to policing and community caretaking in our State and wishes to continue working in concert with legislators, police officers, our communities and others to continue this effort. REQUEST: Work with cities to make technical fixes those bills in which language is vague, conflicting or confusing. ISSUE: Police agencies are currently in a staffing crisis. As we seek to fill vacated positions, we will need tools to ensure our departments are fully staffed and able to effectively respond to local public safety needs. REQUEST: Additional funding for officer wellness and DEI staffing within police agencies. REQUEST: Additional funding sources for officer recruitment and retention. Possibly through a councilmanic public safety sales tax, impact fees or direct funding from the state. ISSUE: Impacts to towing companies from the Seattle v. Long decision force cities to expend more sums for towing services. REQUEST: Additional dedicated funding to cities for towing services, or an increase in funding to the State reimbursement account under RCW 46.53.010 ISSUE: Ongoing public safety issues related to illegal drug use. REQUEST: Restore drug free school zones and expand to community parks REQUEST: Additional funding to implement new law (Blake fix) REQUEST: Ongoing funding for therapeutic courts, recovery programs in jails and after treatment supports REGULATORY & LAND USE ISSUE: Affordable housing needs are deeper than 60% AMI – more like 50% or 40%. Washington State Housing Finance Commission programs are providing great support for projects that hit the 60% AMI mark. REQUEST: Create incentives to hit the deeper marks since that is where the greatest need exists. REQUEST: Future legislation related to affordable housing, missing middle housing or other land use laws must provide safe harbor for those cities that are creating or in the process of creating their Housing Action Plan (HAP) in line with previous legislative actions that included grant funding provided by the State Legislature. ISSUE: Rehabilitate existing affordable housing. There are very few programs that help maintain older homes and multifamily complexes which results in one of two outcomes (1) older properties are maintained appropriately, but the investment is reflected in increasing rental costs, or (2) older properties are not maintained which helps keep rental costs down but at the sake of declining health and safety for tenants. REQUEST: Create dedicated funds to put towards the rehabilitation of single or multifamily units because it is far less expensive and environmentally sustainable to preserve existing housing stock instead of building new units and will ensure housing stock is readily available in the market. ISSUE: The large number of regulatory processes are a hindrance to bringing affordable housing projects to fruition including SEPA, GMA, NPDES. State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) is an outdated and overly burdensome process that adds time and money. Growth Management Act (GMA) and affordable housing objectives are at direct odds because the GMA limits supply which increases costs. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) adds significant cost to development which is passed on to future owners or tenants. REQUEST: Allow procedural relief for any mandates that the State Legislature imparts upon cities. Work with cities to make it easier for us to update our local laws if or when it is in response to a State mandate rather than having to go through all of the obligations related to the planning commission, SEPA, public notice, etc. ISSUE: The 2023 and 2024 legislative sessions introduced a high volume of planning and zoning changes centered around affordable housing. The City of Auburn supports efforts to address the current housing crisis in Washington, and in King County specifically, and want to part of the solution. REQUEST: Allow cities time to respond to the recent changes in planning and zoning laws from 2023 and 2024 and also to ensure the changes are accomplishing the desired results. REQUEST: Remedy conflicting or vague language in the multitude of planning and zoning bills passed in recent years. For example, the definition of a transit stop varies widely between bills. PUBLIC WORKS, TRANSPORTATION, INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUE: It is critical to protect all of the State funds that support local transportation projects. The cities cannot do this on their own given the amount of growth and commerce in the region. This includes maintained or increased funding for Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) and Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) along with state grant programs managed by the WSDOT for local agency projects. EXHIBIT A Page 156 of 433 REQUEST: In order to address this crisis, we need to fund all aspects of affordable housing, including: • Homeownership for moderate income households and below • Preservation of naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH) • Land acquisition to secure permanent affordability • Permanent supportive housing (PSH) • Infrastructure around affordable housing developments • Workforce housing PARKS AND OPEN SPACES ISSUE: Help cities protect and maintain parks and open spaces REQUEST: Maintain funding for the Washington Recreation & Conservation Office and Land/Water Conservation Fund so residents have increased access to existing and new public spaces REQUEST: Support Washington State Historical Society’s (WSHS) capital budget request and the Heritage Capital Projects in the 2025-2027 funding biennium which includes the transformation of Auburn’s Historic Post office building into an Arts & Culture Center REQUEST: Support Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) request for municipal parks deferred maintenance grant funding program in the 2025-27 Operating Budget BUDGET & FINANCE ISSUE: The arbitrary 1% property tax cap is regressive and hinders growth in Washington state. The City of Auburn supports a commonsense reform to this cap. REQUEST: Revise the cap by tying it to inflation and population growth with a limit of 3% ISSUE: The leasehold excise tax can be interpreted in many ways according to the Department of Revenue and causes confusion within local jurisdictions. REQUEST: Provide greater clarification on what is considered a benefit and who the beneficiary is to ensure equitable application of the law REQUEST: Fund a $2.5M Implementation Plan for the SR167 Master Plan that was completed in 2023. The Master Plan was an important first step in meeting the needs of the underserved communities along the SR167 corridor and the legislature needs to support the next step of creating the implementation plan so that the projects envisioned collaboratively in the Master Plan have the potential to be completed and provide the benefit to the region that was identified in the plan and is needed in the region. REQUEST: Increase the councilmanic ability to levy sales taxes for infrastructure. REQUEST: Make changes to appropriate RCWs to allow Municipalities to charge properties for street lighting. Current RCW 54.16.120 allows Utility Districts to charge properties for providing street lighting, but the law does not allow Municipalities to do this. Current revenues for general fund use cannot meet the needs and charging for street lighting would be an appropriate way to address a specific service being provided to residents and businesses within a jurisdiction. REQUEST: Retain or increase the Public Works Trust Fund amount. The legislature continues to raid this fund to fix structural budget issues and it must stop. The PWTF it is key to providing funding for local agency projects. REQUEST: Retain and increase the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. This fund is key for local water purveyors to cost effectively fund needed infrastructure projects. REQUEST: Support allocating 1% of the existing aviation fuel tax to WSDOT’s Aviation account to fund airport projects. Current levels of funding cannot meet the growing need to maintain and improve this important infrastructure that provides a significant benefit to commerce and the State’s economy. REQUEST: Support the industry and federal efforts to develop a replacement fuel to 100 Low-Lead for aviation uses that works for all aircraft without adding additional time constraints for Washington State only that will only negatively impact these industries and users within Washington. SOCIAL SERVICES ISSUE: Cities throughout the state do not have the local resources available to adequately address homelessness, substance abuse disorders and untreated mental illness. REQUEST: Support greater funding for behavioral health programs and incentivize workers to pursue careers in behavioral health REQUEST: Support and fund programs that will alleviate the need for police response to quality-of-life issues such as mental distress or illness, substance abuse and persons experiencing homelessness REQUEST: Make any necessary changes to State laws that prohibit cities from hiring Mental Health Professionals or Designated Crisis Responders REQUEST: Provide clarification on the qualified use of Trueblood dollars to ensure the continuum of care in local communities REQUEST: Support the construction and operation of tiny home villages that provide permanent supportive housing using a community living concept. ISSUE: South King County is facing a growing affordable housing crisis. As a member of the South King Housing and Homelessness Partners (SKHHP), we pool funds with other cities to support the production and preservation of affordable housing in South King County, but we need more help. Mayor Nancy Backus Deputy Mayor Larry Brown Councilmembers Yolanda Trout-Manuel Kate Baldwin Cheryl Rakes Tracy Taylor Clinton Taylor Hanan Amer 25 West Main Street Auburn, WA 98001 253-931-3000 auburnwa.gov 2025 State Legislative Priorities Page 157 of 433 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Jurassic Parliament Training December 2, 2024 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: City Council Jurassic Parliament Training Presentation Administrative Recommendation: Background for Motion: Background Summary: Councilmember: Staff: Page 158 of 433 Great City Council Meetings Ann G. Macfarlane, Professional Registered Parliamentarian Jurassic Parliament City of Auburn, Washington Monday, December 2, 2024 Page 159 of 433 Our topics I. Introduction II. Meeting discussion, Point of Order, Appeal III. How to do this? IV. Motions and Amendments V. Who’s in charge? VI. Citizen committees and public comment VII. The right kind of control VIII. Conclusion 2 Page 160 of 433 I. Introduction 3 Page 161 of 433 Why are we here? To energize you to run effective meetings to serve your community 4 Page 162 of 433 After taking this training you will be able to: 1. Apply the principle that the authority of the group is more important than any single individual, even the chair. 2. Follow best practices for discussion. 3. Respond to disorder and difficult people. 4. Make Motions and Amendments. 5. Run effective public comment sessions. 6. Make better decisions for your community. 5 Page 163 of 433 Disclaimer The material contained in this presentation is based upon the principles and practices of parliamentary procedure. I am not an attorney and nothing in this presentation constitutes legal advice. 6 Page 164 of 433 Page 165 of 433 Page 166 of 433 We are better than chimps •Most adult human beings are peaceful and compliant. •When group expectations are clear, they will follow them. •Many of our local governments and nonprofit boards do just fine. 9 Page 167 of 433 Page 168 of 433 Page 169 of 433 Solution: adopt and enforce common guidelines 12 Page 170 of 433 Enforcement •We don’t like the idea that guidelines must be enforced. •However, all human organizations, even benign institutions like hospitals, schools and retirement communities, ultimately depend on power enforcement for their success. 13 Page 171 of 433 You need two things… •The ability of the chair (which can be learned!) •The agreement of a majority of the members to democratic principles and processes 14 Page 172 of 433 •This training invites you to make a personal and whole-hearted commitment to the principles we are going to discuss. •PERSONAL? WHOLE-HEARTED? •Emotion is more important than procedure. 15 Page 173 of 433 II. Meeting discussion, Point of Order, and Appeal 16 Page 174 of 433 Workshop method •We are in the League of Northwest Dino Cities. •This is not entirely realistic – it is a fantasy – but there is some overlap with real life! •We use broad strokes to convey the big picture. •You are going to be the members of the Dinopolis City Council. 17 Page 175 of 433 Page 176 of 433 City of Dinopolis Regular Council Meeting Motto: We do our best for all our residents, whether we like them or not! 19 Page 177 of 433 Page 178 of 433 Call meeting to order •Sit in the chair reserved for the person running the meeting. •Rap the gavel lightly one time and announce, “This meeting of the Dinopolis City Council is called to order.” •Ask the clerk to take the roll. •Announce that a quorum is present (or not). 21 Page 179 of 433 Quorum •The “quorum” is the minimum number of voting members who must be present for business to be done. •For local governments, usually it is a majority (more than half) of the fixed positions in the body. •“Quorum” is different from “votes cast.” •If you lose your quorum, you can’t do business. 22 Page 180 of 433 Serial meeting •Local government bodies must not create a “walking quorum” or a “serial meeting.” •Generally speaking, when members of the body talk or email with each other outside of meetings, such that a quorum is discussing the body’s business, the Open Public Meetings Act has been violated. 23 Page 181 of 433 Agenda •Prepared by leadership, but within control of council (subject to notice requirements, of course). •Robert’s Rules says that if you follow the standard “Order of Business,” you don’t need to vote to adopt an agenda. •However, many bodies do vote. Takes a majority vote to adopt, and a 2/3 vote to change later in the meeting. 24 Page 182 of 433 Regular agenda/consent agenda Question: What’s the difference between the regular agenda and the consent agenda? •The regular agenda lays out the items to be taken up at a particular meeting. •It follows your “Order of Business.” •The agenda may include, as a single item, “Adoption of the consent agenda.” 25 Page 183 of 433 Consent agenda/consent calendar •A “consent agenda” lists items that are expected not to be controversial. •If any member requests that an item be removed from the consent agenda, it is done on request. •The item is then placed at its proper place in the regular agenda. •Some cities add a line item right after the consent agenda. 26 Page 184 of 433 Consent agenda •The consent agenda CANNOT BE DISCUSSED OR DEBATED. •It is adopted with a single vote. •The minutes must list all the items that were approved. 27 Page 185 of 433 EXERCISE Script Reading 28 Page 186 of 433 Watch for •Rules for discussion •Inappropriate remarks •Point of Order and Appeal •Chair out of line 29 Page 187 of 433 •In real life, members must be recognized by the chair before speaking. •In this script, the numbers take the place of recognition. 30 Page 188 of 433 Weed control at city hall Chair - Ann Banker Gardener Dancer Photographer Football fan 31 Page 189 of 433 Principle of Equality All members have equal rights, privileges and obligations. 32 Page 190 of 433 Key Point Discussion in council and committee meetings is NOT A CONVERSATION. It is DEBATE and has its own rules. 33 Page 191 of 433 Fundamental guideline •No one may speak a second time until everyone who wishes to do so has spoken once. 34 Page 192 of 433 Fundamental guideline •No one may speak a second time until everyone who wishes to do so has spoken once. 35 Page 193 of 433 Why don’t we follow this? •Councils tend to discuss their affairs in conversational mode. •In conversations, dominant people tend to dominate. •Agreeable people tend to let them. •Must have a structure to make sure that everyone has an equal chance to speak. •This is both fair and efficient. 36 Page 194 of 433 Equity and inclusion •This rule is also the best way to ensure that each person has an equal voice. •The system is formal but inclusive. •It will make for robust discussion and advance your equity goals. 37 Page 195 of 433 •Note that this guideline pertains to discussion on the substantive issues. •The chair will speak more than others on procedural matters, because they have the role of facilitating the discussion during the meeting. 38 Page 196 of 433 Page 197 of 433 Point of Order flying dinosaur Page 198 of 433 •When ANOTHER MEMBER breaks one of the rules, a member may make a POINT OF ORDER. •Chair rules on the point. Point of Order flying dinosaur 41 Page 199 of 433 •A motion claiming that a procedural mistake has been made. •According to Robert, can be made only by a member. •We recommend that key staff be authorized also. •Public may not raise a Point of Order. Point of Order 42 Page 200 of 433 43 Page 201 of 433 1. Member: Point of Order! 2. Chair: State your point. 3. Member: That remark breaks our rules of decorum. 4. Chair: The point is well taken. Members may not use this term. Process Point of Order 44 Page 202 of 433 •You can make this at any time, except during voting. •Do not have to be recognized. •May interrupt a speaker if necessary. •Must be timely – made at the time of the offense. Point of Order 45 Page 203 of 433 •It is the chair’s responsibility to say, “The point is well taken,” or “The point is not well taken.” •Be alert as to whether the member who says “Point of Order” is actually using the motion correctly. •The ruling goes into the minutes, as a precedent for the future. Use the passive voice! “A Point of Order was made that the word malarkey is insulting…” The chair must issue a ruling 46 Page 204 of 433 •Use the “third person” to keep things neutral and lessen conflict. •Note that the chair states the general rule. •The chair is speaking on behalf of the rules of procedure. •DO NOT SAY “You are out of order” or “You made a mistake.” Language tip 47 Page 205 of 433 •Make a Point of Order if a rule has been broken. •DO NOT make a Point of Order to bring something to the chair’s attention, or because you think someone has made a factual mistake, or because you disagree with what they said. •Speak about that when it is your turn to discuss. When should members make a Point of Order? 48 Page 206 of 433 •If a member has trouble explaining what the Point of Order is about, the chair can ask: What rule has been broken? If someone is confused… 49 Page 207 of 433 When in doubt, ask the group! •Chair can always ask the group to decide if a Point of Order is correct (“well-taken”) or not. 50 Page 208 of 433 •Member A: That statement is just a bunch of baloney! •Member B: Point of Order! •Chair: State your point. •Member B: The word “baloney” is insulting! •Chair: The chair is in doubt and will ask the group to decide. 51 Page 209 of 433 •Chair: All those who believe that the word “baloney” is insulting, say “aye.” •Members in favor: Aye! •Chair: All those who believe it is not insulting, say “no!” •Members opposed: No! •Chair: The ayes have it, the word baloney is insulting and may not be used, OR The noes have it, the word baloney is not insulting and may be used. 52 Page 210 of 433 •The chair has the duty of maintaining order and decorum, so doesn’t need to say “Point of Order.” •Just needs to take appropriate action. Chair doesn’t have to say “Point of Order” 53 Page 211 of 433 Chair subject to same rules •If the chair breaks one of the rules, a member may raise a Point of Order. •The chair rules on own behavior, which seems odd, but is the way the system works. 54 Page 212 of 433 No further discussion •Once the chair has ruled on a Point of Order, the only allowable form of discussion is to appeal the ruling. 55 Page 213 of 433 Page 214 of 433 Appeal The most important motion in all of Robert’s Rules – and the least known! 57 Page 215 of 433 •The CHAIR enforces order and decorum. •The GROUP is the final authority. •Any TWO MEMBERS can appeal a ruling of the chair (one member appeals and one seconds the appeal). •EXCEPTION: If the ruling is a matter on which there cannot be two reasonable interpretations, the ruling cannot be appealed. Chair’s rulings can be appealed 58 Page 216 of 433 Appealing a ruling of the chair •Member A: Chair, Point of Order. •Chair: State your point. •Member A: My esteemed colleague has used the term “cream-faced loon” in referring to the Secretary. According to Robert’s Rules, insults are not allowed in debate. •Chair: The point is well taken. Members will refrain from using improper language. 59 Page 217 of 433 •Member B: Chair, I appeal the Point of Order on the grounds that “cream-faced loon” is a literary reference and not an insult. •Member C: Second! •Chair: Very well, since the ruling of the chair has been appealed, the group will decide. Note that appeals pertaining to proper use of language and decorum may not be debated. 60 Page 218 of 433 •Chair: All those who believe that “cream-faced loon” is an insult, say “aye.” •Members who agree: Aye! •Chair: All those who believe that this phrase is not an insult, say “no.” •Members who believe it is not an insult: No! 61 Page 219 of 433 •Chair: The ayes have it, the ruling of the chair is sustained, and members may not use this term, OR The noes have it, the ruling of the chair is not sustained, and members may use this term. •Clerk, please record this outcome in the minutes. Note that the vote was on whether the ruling of the chair should be SUSTAINED. 62 Page 220 of 433 Don’t get into arguments! •If you are a member, you may not argue with the chair. •If you are the chair, don’t argue with a difficult member. •Simply state your ruling, and then say Does the member wish to appeal this ruling? 63 Page 221 of 433 •Point of Order is made by one member, but an Appeal needs a second. •Point of Order and Appeal are processed immediately. No other business can take place until they are dealt with. •Points of Order and Appeals do not count against a member’s turn to speak in debate. Further points 64 Page 222 of 433 •Point of Order cannot be debated. •Appeals pertaining to language, decorum, and the order of business cannot be debated. •When an appeal can be debated, the process is different from anything else in Robert’s Rules. Debatable? 65 Page 223 of 433 Don’t get into arguments! •If you are a member, you may not argue with the chair. •If you are the chair, don’t argue with a difficult member. •Simply state your ruling, and then say Does the member wish to appeal this ruling? 66 Page 224 of 433 Page 225 of 433 III. How to do this? •Seek recognition before speaking. •No one may speak a second time until everyone who wishes to do so has spoken once. •No interrupting (in general) •No sidebar conversations. •Set time limits. •Courtesy and respect are required. 68 Page 226 of 433 Seeking recognition •Members must seek recognition from the presider before speaking. 69 Page 227 of 433 Seeking recognition •Raise your hand and wait to speak until the presider (chair) calls your name, nods at you, or gives some other sign that you have permission to speak (you “have the floor”) •Online, you can use the “raise hand” function or raise your physical hand. •For Zoom on the telephone, press *9 (star nine). 70 Page 228 of 433 Most useful phrase Members will kindly seek recognition before speaking. Just a moment Josh, Elaine has the floor. 71 Page 229 of 433 Duty to remain silent •When you have not been recognized, you have a duty to remain silent. •The exception is a Point of Order when essential. 72 Page 230 of 433 Page 231 of 433 Fundamental guideline •No one may speak a second time until everyone who wishes to do so has spoken once. 74 Page 232 of 433 NO CROSS TALK BETWEEN COUNCILMEMBERS! 75 Page 233 of 433 HOW to do this? •Chair can keep track of who has spoken and who wishes to speak, using a chart. •Chair can empower vice-chair to do this – good training for them. 76 Page 234 of 433 Page 235 of 433 A great method – the “round robin” •The chair goes around the table, asking each person in turn for their opinion. People may pass and speak at the end. •Important to have a pencil in hand, to jot down points or questions for when your turn arrives. •Chair must wait their turn also! •This rule applies to questions and answers also, and to discussions with staff. •Don’t let any two people “hijack” the meeting. 78 Page 236 of 433 Interrupting •When a member has the floor, they have the right to speak until they have completed their comments. •Members may not interrupt each other. •Chair may interrupt members when necessary to bring them to order. •Members may interrupt to make a Point of Order when essential. 79 Page 237 of 433 No sidebars or texting •No “sidebar conversations” •No whispering! Disable the chat. •No texting to each other or people outside during meetings. •No posting on social media during meetings. 80 Page 238 of 433 Frustrating •Structuring discussion in these ways can be frustrating. •Councilmembers sometimes say, “I wish we could just hash it out and have a free-form discussion.” •The Open Meetings Act, and the press of time, mean that usually, this won’t serve your council well. •However… 81 Page 239 of 433 An occasional exception… •Sometimes there is benefit in the conversational style or “informal discussion.” •It can be useful at study sessions (Committee of the Whole), or in committee meetings. •Chair must still ensure that no one dominates. •Do not make the conversational style your ordinary or “default” style of discussion. 82 Page 240 of 433 Set time limits •Jurassic Parliament recommends that councils set estimated times for agenda items. •We recommend time limits on individual councilmember speeches – 3 or 5 minutes. •Time limits cannot be debated. •They can be suspended or changed by a two- thirds vote without debate. 83 Page 241 of 433 84 Page 242 of 433 Fundamental guideline Courtesy and respect towards everyone are required. 85 Page 243 of 433 These remarks are inappropriate 1. Personal remarks about other members (except for conflict of interest) 2. Discourteous remarks – insulting language, attacks 3. Inflammatory language 4. Criticizing past actions of the group (unless subject is under discussion, or member is about to propose to amend or rescind the action at the end of their speech) 5. Remarks that are not germane (relevant) to the discussion 86 Page 244 of 433 Page 245 of 433 Page 246 of 433 Personal remarks The measure, not the member, is the subject of debate…The moment the chair hears such words as “fraud,” “liar,” or “lie” used about a member in debate, he must act immediately and decisively to correct the matter and prevent its repetition. Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised, 12th edition, Section 43:21 89 Page 247 of 433 Page 248 of 433 Note that this is proprietary information. Do not duplicate. Page 249 of 433 Who decides? •If any question arises whether a remark is appropriate or not, or a comment is germane, the chair rules, subject to appeal. •The chair may also turn immediately to the group to ask the members to decide. •Ultimately it is the GROUP’S CALL. 92 Page 250 of 433 Important note •Note that these are council rules for discussion among yourselves. They DO NOT APPLY to the public when they are giving public comment. 93 Page 251 of 433 PARTNER DISCUSSION Please pair up with a partner and share two items that you have found valuable from this presentation so far. 94 Page 252 of 433 Page 253 of 433 Stand at ease 10 minutes Please choose your roles for the motions practice. 96 Page 254 of 433 IV. Motions and Amendments 97 Page 255 of 433 Main Motion Tyrannosaurus rex •A main motion is the usual and customary way to start the action of discussion and decision-making. •For small boards (up to about 12 people), it is OK to have discussion before a motion is moved. Jurassic Parliament recommends moving the motion before discussing it whenever possible. 98 Page 256 of 433 Main Motion Tyrannosaurus rex Page 257 of 433 Main Motion We recommend this sequence: •Staff presents proposal in writing and answers any questions. Each councilmember may ask one or two questions, then the next member has a turn. •Motion is moved and seconded. •Members discuss motion and may amend it. •Members vote on motion. 100 Page 258 of 433 Characteristics of Main Motion •It should be in writing if at all possible. •It should be clear and unambiguous. Don’t say, “I move what he just said,” or “so moved.” •It should be phrased in the grammatical positive. •It must comply with the bylaws and the procedural law of the land. •You can have only one main motion at a time. 101 Page 259 of 433 Fundamental guideline One thing at a time. 102 Page 260 of 433 How do you introduce a Main Motion? Three little words: I move that… 103 Page 261 of 433 Member must be clear •The member has the responsibility of formulating the motion. •Don’t mix up your ideas about the subject with the motion itself. Save those for debate. 104 Page 262 of 433 I’ve been noticing that the number of wild cats is increasing in our city, and they’re getting stomped on by bigger dinosaurs. It’s important that the city do something to protect them, so I think allowing catios would be great, this fits in with our mandate to serve all species and it will make the little kitties safer. 105 Page 263 of 433 State the exact motion clearly I move that residents be authorized to build catios in their private yards. 106 Page 264 of 433 You can request a moment to write it down •May I have a few minutes to write this motion down? •Chair may also request that motion be written. 107 Page 265 of 433 Second Second the motion! 108 Page 266 of 433 Second the motion •You “second a motion” to show that you would like to talk about it. •No need to be recognized. Just call out “second.” •It is OK to second a motion you disagree with, if you want to explain why it’s a bad idea. 109 Page 267 of 433 If no second… •If there is no second, the chair says: There being no second, the motion will not be considered. •Then moves immediately to next item of business. 110 Page 268 of 433 You can’t speak against your own motion •Under Robert’s Rules, the maker of the motion cannot speak against it. •If the discussion has changed their mind, they should request permission to withdraw the motion. •The maker CAN vote against their own motion. 111 Page 269 of 433 112 Page 270 of 433 EXERCISE Eight steps cards Please fill in the blanks in the worksheet. 113 Page 271 of 433 Eight steps to process a motion 1. Member makes motion. 2. Another member seconds motion. 3. Chair states motion. 4. Members debate and/or amend motion. 5. Chair restates motion and calls for vote. 6. Members vote on motion. 7. Chair states results of vote, whether motion passes or fails, and what happens next as a result of the vote. 8. Chair states next item of business. 114 Page 272 of 433 Main Motion Tyrannosaurus rex Residents will be authorized to build catios in their private yards. 115 Page 273 of 433 Main Motion Tyrannosaurus rex Page 274 of 433 Step #3 is very important! •Presider MUST repeat the motion, or have the clerk repeat it. •After step #3, the motion belongs to the group as a whole, not to the person who made it. •WHY? So that everyone knows what we are actually discussing. 117 Page 275 of 433 Step #5 is also very important! •Chair must repeat the motion before the vote is taken. •Have you ever been at a meeting when once the vote is taken, someone says, “What did we just approve?” and no one knows exactly what it was? •WHY? So that everyone knows what we are actually voting on. 118 Page 276 of 433 Point of Information Friendly member: Chair, Point of Information. I’m confused! What exactly IS a “catio”? Chair: A catio is a patio for cats. Here’s an example. 119 Page 277 of 433 120 Page 278 of 433 Point of Information Note that “Point of Information” is a QUESTION. It is also called “Request for Information.” It cannot be used to GIVE information. 121 Page 279 of 433 Discussion General Contractor: I feel that catios will allow our dear feline friends to experience the outdoors without getting hurt or endangering other wildlife. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this motion. 122 Page 280 of 433 Discussion Photographer: I’m in favor! My cousin has built a catio, and her little pet Fuzzy is completely at home in it, as you can see from this picture. 123 Page 281 of 433 124 Page 282 of 433 Discussion Architect: I think this is a terrible idea! Catios are intrusive and will ruin the look of our city. Here’s an example I saw when I visited Dinodome last week. We don’t want this kind of ugly building in beautiful Dinopolis. 125 Page 283 of 433 126 Page 284 of 433 Moving to vote •When it seems that discussion is finished, chair asks, “Is there any further discussion?” or “Are you ready to vote?” and then, if no one speaks up, takes the vote. 127 Page 285 of 433 Voting •Chair repeats the motion. •Chair says, “All those in favor say ‘aye,’ all those opposed say ‘no.’” •Chair announces results of vote, whether motion passes or fails, and what will happen next as a result of the vote. •Chair announces next item of business. 128 Page 286 of 433 Voting The “ayes” have it, the motion passes, and residents will be authorized to build catios in their private yards, OR The “noes” have it, the motion fails, and we will not implement this proposal. •Note that on a voice vote, the chair must call for the negative vote, even if it seems obvious that the motion is unanimous. 129 Page 287 of 433 No debate during voting •Nothing can interrupt the voting process. •Members are not allowed to explain their vote during the vote, or afterwards. •Even a Point of Order must wait until the result of the vote is announced. 130 Page 288 of 433 Changing your vote •A member may change their vote up until the time the chair announces the result. •After that time, it takes unanimous consent of the body (everyone agreeing) for the member to change their vote. •Once the chair has moved on to the next item of business, it is too late to change a vote. 131 Page 289 of 433 Abstain •Under Robert’s Rules, to abstain is to do nothing. •Abstentions are not counted. •The chair does not call for abstentions. •However, if you are a public body, likely you will count abstentions. 132 Page 290 of 433 Conflict of interest •If you have a conflict of interest, you should “recuse” yourself from the vote. •Recusal is a special form of abstention. •Talk with your attorney before the meeting! Don’t spring it during the meeting itself. •It may be that recusal is not enough. 133 Page 291 of 433 See MRSC post Resolving Financial Conflicts of Interest: Is Abstaining from Voting Enough? www.mrsc.org 134 Page 292 of 433 MRSC •MRSC, formally known as the Municipal Research and Services Center, is a private nonprofit organization in Washington State that provides guidance to local government bodies. 135 Page 293 of 433 Unanimous consent •Form of voting—a type of “fast track.” •Very efficient for minor procedural matters. •Presider suggests something, and if you agree, REMAIN SILENT. Silence means consent. •If you don’t want to proceed in this way, say “OBJECTION.” •Presider then abandons the fast track to use the regular method. 136 Page 294 of 433 Examples •A member has proposed an amendment to correct an error in the Main Motion. The presider sees that this is a necessary correction, so says, “Is there any objection to accepting this correction?” •The meeting has become fraught, and the presider recognizes that a recess would help cool tempers down, so says, “Is there any objection to taking a 10- minute recess?” 137 Page 295 of 433 Amendment Dimetrodon Page 296 of 433 •You amend a motion to improve it. •The Amendment applies to the main motion. •The Amendment must be germane (relevant). •Anyone may move to amend, even the person who made the motion. Amendment Dimetrodon 139 Page 297 of 433 Amendment Engineer: I move that we amend the motion by adding the words, “Provided that the plan for each catio is approved by the Design Review Board.” 140 Page 298 of 433 If adopted, will read: Residents will be authorized to build catios in their private yards, provided that the plan for each catio is approved by the Design Review Board. 141 Page 299 of 433 Four ways to amend 1. Add or insert words. 2. Strike out words. 3. Strike out words and insert words in their place. 4. Substitute (not recommended!). 142 Page 300 of 433 Process Amendment •The Amendment is processed using the same eight steps that we just saw for a main motion. 143 Page 301 of 433 The challenge is… •We vote on amendments BEFORE we vote on the main motion, in order to make the main motion as good as possible—to PERFECT the motion. 144 Page 302 of 433 Amendment blocks Main Motion Page 303 of 433 Fate of the Amendment •People sometimes get confused, and don’t realize that after voting on the amendment, the process continues. •Once the fate of the amendment has been decided, debate continues on the main motion. 146 Page 304 of 433 More amendments are possible… •Once you’ve dealt with one amendment, you may have others… •provided that they apply to a different aspect of the main motion. •It takes special actions (reconsideration) to go back and change something we’ve already amended. 147 Page 305 of 433 The process continues •After all amendments have been processed, the body still must vote on the AMENDED MAIN MOTION. 148 Page 306 of 433 “Friendly amendment” •People often process “friendly amendment” the wrong way. •DO NOT turn to maker and seconder to ask if they accept the amendment – this give them improper power. •Handle this the same as any other amendment. •Ask, “Is there a second?” etc. •Once a motion has been stated by the chair, the maker and seconder have same rights as any other member. 149 Page 307 of 433 Secondary amendment •When an amendment has been proposed, it is called a “primary amendment.” •It is also possible to amend the amendment, which is called a “secondary amendment.” •This is processed just like the main motion, EXCEPT that no further amendments are possible—no “tertiary” amendments. 150 Page 308 of 433 Primary Amendment Dimetrodon Page 309 of 433 Secondary Amendment Small Dimetrodon Page 310 of 433 Amend the Amendment Architect: I move that we amend the amendment by striking the words “Design Review Board” and inserting the words “a licensed architect.” 153 Page 311 of 433 If adopted, amendment will read: provided that the plan for each catio is approved by the Design Review Board a licensed architect. 154 Page 312 of 433 Secondary amendment Secondary amendment blocks primary amendment Page 313 of 433 Sequence •Discuss and vote on the secondary amendment. •Discuss and vote on the primary amendment. •Discuss and vote on the Main Motion. 156 Page 314 of 433 How many amendments? •“Primary amendments” are amendments to the main motion itself. You may have as many as you have time for, one after another. •There are also “secondary amendments.” •You may have as many of these as you have time for. •At any given moment, there may be only ONE primary amendment and ONE secondary amendment pending. 157 Page 315 of 433 No amendments in minutes •According to Robert’s Rules of Order, details of each amendment and how it was voted on ARE NOT INCLUDED in the minutes. •“After discussion and amendment, the following motion was adopted…” 158 Page 316 of 433 Call the Question Triceratops Page 317 of 433 •People often process this motion wrong. •You cannot simply cut off debate by saying “question.” •You must be recognized to make this motion. •It requires a second. •It cannot be debated or amended. •It takes a two-thirds vote to pass. Call the Question Triceratops 160 Page 318 of 433 EXERCISE Motions practice 161 Page 319 of 433 EXERCISE Using the surplus Dinopolis has a $10 million surplus this year. What will the city do with it? 162 Page 320 of 433 Performing Arts Center Moved and seconded: That the city build a performing arts center at a cost not to exceed $10 million. 163 Page 321 of 433 Review and note eight steps 1.Member makes motion. 2.Another member seconds motion. 3.Chair states motion. 164 Page 322 of 433 4. Members debate and/or amend motion. 165 Page 323 of 433 5. Chair restates motion and calls for vote. 6. Members vote on motion. 7. Chair states results of vote, whether motion passes or fails, and what happens next as a result of the vote. 166 Page 324 of 433 8. Chair states next item of business. 167 Page 325 of 433 V. Who’s in charge? 168 Page 326 of 433 Can the mayor discuss? •In Washington State, the mayor is not technically a member of the council. •The RCW says that “the mayor and council shall meet,” which implies discussion. In our view, the mayor can and should take part in discussion. •We recommend that the mayor exercise restraint, and speak last in each round. 169 Page 327 of 433 170 Page 328 of 433 Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised, 12th edition Abbreviated RONR “Rules of Order Newly Revised” We recommend spiral-bound edition from National Association of Parliamentarians Also available from Amazon on Kindle (good for searching) 171 Page 329 of 433 . 172 Page 330 of 433 . 173 Page 331 of 433 174 Page 332 of 433 Accountability Hierarchy BOSS 175 Page 333 of 433 Accountability Hierarchy BOSS 176 Page 334 of 433 Voluntary Association LEADER 177 Page 335 of 433 Key Point Each member has an equal right to speak and to try to persuade others to accept their view. 178 Page 336 of 433 Key Point During meetings, the chair controls the process so the group can make the decisions. 179 Page 337 of 433 Fundamental guideline During meetings, the chair is the servant of the group, and the group is the final authority. 180 Page 338 of 433 Fundamental guideline During meetings, the chair is the servant of the group, and the group is the final authority. 181 Page 339 of 433 You have both types of structure •The council forms a voluntary association. •The mayor and staff form an accountability hierarchy. 182 Page 340 of 433 What is each person’s individual authority? 183 Page 341 of 433 . 184 Page 342 of 433 ZERO Nothing Nada Zip 0 185 Page 343 of 433 All members of a governing board share in a joint and collective authority which exists and can be exercised only when the group is in session. The Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure 186 Page 344 of 433 What is your individual power? 187 Page 345 of 433 LEGISLATION is the prerogative of the council. Mayor supports council, but does not decide. Page 346 of 433 ADMINISTRATION is the prerogative of the mayor. Council may not interfere. Page 347 of 433 Councilmembers may not do the work of the city •Elected officials care deeply about their city. •Sometimes they have special knowledge and expertise. •They may make suggestions to the mayor, but they may not do the work of the city themselves. •Why? They must not cross the line between legislation and administration. •This is a legal requirement! 190 Page 348 of 433 Your duty as a councilmember •Debate and determine overall strategy, policy, and legislation for your city. •Leave the details of operations to the mayor and staff. 191 Page 349 of 433 Vigorous discussion •Discussion on council motions can and should be vigorous! •Express your views freely and don’t hold back. •Once the vote has been taken, however, things change. 192 Page 350 of 433 It’s OK to disagree •The fact that people have different opinions is a strength. It’s a good thing! •BUT we tend to identify with our own position. •When we are defeated, we sometimes take it personally. •This is a mistake. 193 Page 351 of 433 At the end of the day, the body must unite behind its decision. •It is a basic democratic principle that the decision of the majority, voting at a properly called meeting, is the decision of the body as a whole. •The minority must make it their decision as well. 194 Page 352 of 433 Page 353 of 433 Democracy is the worst system of government in all the world, with the exception of those others that have been tried from time to time. Winston Churchill 196 Page 354 of 433 Bottom line •In a democracy, HOW we decide things is more important than WHAT we decide. •Courtesy and respect, no surprises, no unilateral action, no end-runs…these are essential for the system to work. 197 Page 355 of 433 Fiduciary duties •Duty of care •Duty of loyalty •Duty of obedience 198 Page 356 of 433 Duty of care •A councilmember has the duty of exercising the diligence a reasonable person would use in carrying out his or her duties. 199 Page 357 of 433 Duty of loyalty •A councilmember has the duty of furthering the interests of the city and the council, as established by majority rule, and may not take action to undermine or harm its moral stance or business interests. 200 Page 358 of 433 Duty of loyalty •A councilmember may not use their position on the council to prioritize their personal business interests over the interests of the general public. 201 Page 359 of 433 Duty of obedience •A councilmember has the duty of obeying the agreed-upon rules and guidelines established by the council. •A councilmember may propose changes, but is bound by the rules until they are changed. 202 Page 360 of 433 Duty of obedience •When serving on a city council, councilmembers have a duty to uphold the decision of that body, even if they disagree with it. 203 Page 361 of 433 Disagreement •Members may express their disagreement in public, but may not attempt to UNDERMINE the decision. •They are free to try to persuade their colleagues, during the meeting, to change the decision (within limits). 204 Page 362 of 433 We all want to be right •It’s human nature to be unhappy when you oppose the decision. •Our current culture places a strong premium on individuality. •I invite you to commit yourself to a bigger principle than your own views. 205 Page 363 of 433 WHY? The essential principle of majority rule. 206 Page 364 of 433 Page 365 of 433 What is the alternative? The ballot box is sacred because the alternative is blood. Elias Canetti, author and Nobel Prize winner 208 Page 366 of 433 VI. Advisory committees and public comment 209 Page 367 of 433 Another disclaimer Robert’s Rules of Order contains very little guidance on advisory committees and public comment. In general, this information comes from Jurassic Parliament’s experience over 20 years of working with local governments. 210 Page 368 of 433 Confusion about the job The work of the Planning Commission is to carry out the instructions of the Council. City of Bellevue Planning Commissioner 211 Page 369 of 433 What is a planning commission or city advisory committee? •A planning commission or city advisory committee is a body that has been established in order to do a job ASSIGNED BY SOMEONE ELSE. •This can be a challenge! 212 Page 370 of 433 Public hearing vs public comment •A PUBLIC HEARING is an administrative procedure governed by state law and your council rules. •It is a meeting of the public. •You must include testimony, or a summary, in the minutes. •The PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD is an agenda item governed by your own rules. 213 Page 371 of 433 WHY public comment? •A council meeting is NOT A MEETING OF THE PUBLIC. •It is a MEETING OF THE COUNCIL that is held in public. •The purpose of the “public comment” period is to allow the councilmembers to become informed about the views of the public. •It should be carefully structured. 214 Page 372 of 433 Be consistent •Best to announce rules at beginning of each session, and provide written handout. •For the sake of fairness, rules for public comment MUST be enforced consistently. •Public must address remarks to chair, not to individual councilmembers or the audience. 215 Page 373 of 433 Follow time limits •Ask staff to time speakers so chair is not distracted. •Some bodies have a visible timer so speakers know when their limit is approaching. •Speakers may not donate their time to someone else. 216 Page 374 of 433 Do not dialogue •This is not a dialogue. •Do not get into back-and-forth with the public. If chair starts dialoguing with the public, the situation can quickly become confusing. •If you respond to some speakers but not to others, it can be interpreted as showing bias. 217 Page 375 of 433 Differing expectations •The public may have different expectations. •They may come to the meeting looking for answers to specific questions. •They may want to argue. •They may want their remarks “on the record.” •They may want to raise a “Point of Order,” which they cannot do. •Education is critical! 218 Page 376 of 433 Audience relations •Only the chair may speak to the audience as a whole. •Individual councilmembers may not speak to the public or recognize people in the audience. •Discourage demonstrations—clapping, booing, whistling, stamping of feet, etc. These can chill free speech, both for councilmembers and public. 219 Page 377 of 433 Time, place and manner •The courts have found that local governments may limit the time, place and manner of public comment. •All such restrictions must be viewpoint-neutral. •We recommend setting a time period for public comment (for example, 30 minutes). •We recommend setting a 3-minute limit for individual speakers. 220 Page 378 of 433 If a speaker runs over… •If a speaker runs over the limit, interrupt and request that they conclude their remarks, or simply inform them, “Your time is up.” 221 Page 379 of 433 Comment vs. disruption •Attendees do not have the right to DISRUPT the meeting. •However, the courts have found that mere words do not usually constitute disruption. •In general, residents can say whatever they like during public comment, including offensive remarks, remarks about individuals, and so on. •You can have rules prohibiting campaigning. 222 Page 380 of 433 First Amendment liability? Any person who causes actual disruption by failing to comply with the allotted time established for the individual speaker’s public comment, making personal attacks, using hate speech, making slanderous remarks or other disruptive conduct while addressing the Council shall be barred from further participation by the Presiding Officer, unless permission to continue is granted by a majority vote of Councilmembers present. Rules of Procedure of the City Council of the City of Auburn, Washington, 10.2 223 Page 381 of 433 How to act on dais? •Chair and members convey interest and concern by their body language. •They should listen to each person speaking as if there were no one else in the room (this is hard!). •Keep a warm and pleasant expression, or a neutral face if speaker is not complimentary. •Don’t whisper, pass notes, or use your cell phone. 224 Page 382 of 433 How to respond? •Best approach is to thank each speaker, unless extremely negative, and move on. •Chair may provide brief factual information, if appropriate, which must not degenerate into lecturing or criticism. •When highly offensive comments are made, chair may make a brief statement reaffirming the council’s commitment to principle. 225 Page 383 of 433 City of Kirkland WA Before continuing, I want to offer a comment on behalf of our Council. We heard statements tonight that were hurtful, and offensive to our community. The City Council does not condone those comments and they are actually disruptive to our meeting. We are committed to making Kirkland a safe, inclusive, and welcoming place for all. At the same time, “Items From The Audience” provides an opportunity for community members to express their views to Council, regardless of content. 226 Page 384 of 433 Attacks on staff •Councilmembers should not criticize staff in public and must be courteous to them, because it is an unequal power relationship. •If public attacks staff, do not get defensive. •Do not get in a hostile exchange. •Be prepared if appropriate to refer the matter to the mayor. 227 Page 385 of 433 Conclude with thanks •At the end of the public comment period, the chair should thank the public for attending. •Explain again that while this is not a time for dialogue, all comments and questions are taken seriously by the body. •Sincerity and warmth on the part of the chair will make a big difference to the experience the public has at your meeting. 228 Page 386 of 433 No public comment in minutes •Jurassic Parliament recommends that details of public comment should NOT be included in the minutes. •See our blog entry, “Don’t include detailed public comment in meeting minutes.” 229 Page 387 of 433 MRSC recommends Since meeting minutes are subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act, if your agency chooses to include public comment in the minutes, we recommend a summary of the comment period that avoids providing personally identifiable information on individual commenters. Blog entry “Less is More” August 23, 2023 230 Page 388 of 433 Other channels •It is essential for you to be in touch with your public, to be responsive, and to appear responsive. •Given the limitations of the public comment period, we recommend maintaining other channels for dialogue with the public. •Community forums, personal discussions, “coffee with the council” (always less than a quorum), a form on your website, surveys, etc. 231 Page 389 of 433 Best practices for public comment 1. Set time limits for public comment and for individual speeches. 2. Have the public address the chair, and have the chair respond. 3. Don’t engage in dialogue with the public, but have arrangements to answer their questions afterwards. 4. Speakers may not donate their time. 5. On the dais, make the effort to be, and to appear to be, listening intently to all speakers. 232 Page 390 of 433 Page 391 of 433 VII. The right kind of control 234 Page 392 of 433 Three things you must have: 1. Knowledge of how this system works 2. A majority on your council in favor of civility and this system. 3. The personal moxie, chutzpah, energy and drive to put it all into practice. 235 Page 393 of 433 Chair must control who speaks when •The chair serves as a BENEVOLENT DICTATOR, enforcing the rules the group has chosen. •Individual members must SEEK RECOGNITION before speaking. 236 Page 394 of 433 Chair controls who speaks when •If someone speaks up without being recognized, STOP THEM. •If someone speaks out of turn, INTERRUPT THEM. •If someone makes insulting remarks, CUT THEM OFF. 237 Page 395 of 433 Duty to obey the chair •Members have a duty to obey the chair’s directions. •If they disagree, they can’t argue back. •What can they do? •They can make a Point of Order or an Appeal. 238 Page 396 of 433 HOW to control? 239 Page 397 of 433 “Generous authority” 240 Page 398 of 433 Page 399 of 433 Abandon “Northwest Nice” •We are recommending a style that is the opposite of our common way of speaking here in the Pacific Northwest. •Psychologically we are encouraged to defer to others, to suggest rather than to direct, to phrase things as gently as possible. •This doesn’t work well for local government meetings! 242 Page 400 of 433 Give directions, not suggestions •Kindly place these flags to the side, so the dais is clear, vs •Would you be willing to move these flags to the side? 243 Page 401 of 433 244 Page 402 of 433 Guide your members by stating the obvious •You as chair know more about the process than anybody else. •You must repeat yourself, and state the obvious, to help bring everyone along. 245 Page 403 of 433 Keep things moving! Be brisk! Speak crisply! •Well, I guess the agenda is adopted… •I’ll kind of get a thumbs up from the board next week… 246 Page 404 of 433 Don’t say “you” –These remarks are out of order vs You are out of order. –Members are reminded that remarks must be relevant to the subject at hand vs John, I think you’re off topic. 247 Page 405 of 433 Don’t say “I” or “my” –This is my meeting! –The chair will entertain a motion vs I will entertain a motion. –The chair will ask the committee to look into this vs I’ll ask my committee to look into this. 248 Page 406 of 433 Don’t be intimidated by anger •Evolutionary psychologists tell us that anger evolved “in the service of bargaining, to resolve conflicts of interest in favor of the angry individual.” Leonard Mlodinow, Emotion: How Feelings Shape Our Thinking 249 Page 407 of 433 Language tip •End your sentences on a falling tone. 250 Page 408 of 433 Language tip •No sarcasm, no eye-rolling, no shoulder shrugging. •Respect is essential, even when provoked. •Your colleagues and the public will detect contempt instantly, and it will worsen the atmosphere. 251 Page 409 of 433 Emotion is more important than procedure 252 Page 410 of 433 Language tip •Phrase things in the positive. - We’re committed to being transparent vs. We’re not trying to hide anything here. . 253 Page 411 of 433 Language tip •Give up on the word “but.” Always say “and.” –You make a very good point, and I would also like to mention… vs You make a very good point, but I feel it’s also important to mention… 254 Page 412 of 433 Language tip •Don’t say “please” This sounds like pleading. •Instead, use the word “kindly,” or no adverb when you need to escalate your direction. –Members will kindly refrain from using improper language. –According to Council policy, cell phone use is not allowed on the dais. If members must use their cell phone, kindly leave the room. 255 Page 413 of 433 Strength and warmth John Neffinger and Matthew Kohut Compelling People: The Hidden Qualities that Make Us Influential 256 Page 414 of 433 Page 415 of 433 A balancing act •Radiate confidence. •Speak clearly and definitely. •At the same time, keep emotionally connected to the people present, insofar as possible. •Your style should be firm, but not harsh. 258 Page 416 of 433 259 Page 417 of 433 HOW to control? The chair should never get excited . Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised, 12th edition, Section 47:19 260 Page 418 of 433 261 Page 419 of 433 VIII. Conclusion 262 Page 420 of 433 WHY do we need rules? Win/lose is the only game most of us understand. We have a constant unspoken need for domination and actually find no enjoyment in win/win situations. Richard Rohr 263 Page 421 of 433 Vision phase one •Each member expresses their personal views on topics before the council with vigor, energy, commitment, and respect. 264 Page 422 of 433 Vision phase two •Once the vote is taken, personal opinions and political views are LESS IMPORTANT than the majority vote of the council. •Members accept the decision and move on without rancor or bitterness. 265 Page 423 of 433 Keep in touch! •You are invited to subscribe to our monthly enewsletter. •Subscribe to the blog on our website for insight, tips and inspiration, including our advice column, “Dear Dinosaur.” www.jurassicparliament.com ann@jurassicparliament.com 206-542-8422 266 Page 424 of 433 Page 425 of 433 After taking this training you will be able to: 1. Apply the principle that the authority of the group is more important than any single individual, even the chair. 2. Follow best practices for discussion. 3. Respond to disorder and difficult people. 4. Make Motions and Amendments. 5. Run effective public comment sessions. 6. Make better decisions for your community. 268 Page 426 of 433 Page 427 of 433 Page 428 of 433 271 Page 429 of 433 Kindness is within our power. Liking is not. Samuel Johnson, British author 272 Page 430 of 433 Serving on a local government board is like being in a marriage arranged by the citizens. Tami Tanoue, Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing Agency 273 Page 431 of 433 Why are we here? To energize you to run effective meetings to serve your community 274 Page 432 of 433 Disclaimer: Nothing in this presentation constitutes business or legal advice. © Jurassic Parliament 2024. All rights reserved. PO Box 77553, Seattle, WA 98177 Tel: 206-542-8422 Email: ann@jurassicparliament.com Web: www.jurassicparliament.com 275 Page 433 of 433