HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-24-2017 CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION AGENDACity Council Study Session and
Special Focus Area
April 24, 2017 - 5:30 PM
Auburn City Hall
AGENDA
Watch the meeting LIVE!
Watch the meeting video
Meeting videos are not available until 72
hours after the meeting has concluded.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. Roll Call
II. ANNOUNCEMENTS, REPORTS, AND PRESENTATIONS
A. Junior City Council Report on National League of Cities
B. Auburn Station Access Improvement Project
III. AGENDA ITEMS FOR COUNCIL DISCUSSION
A.Ordinance No. 6643
B.Ordinance No. 6652
C.Resolution No. 5291
D.Safer Cities/Inclusive Cities Ad Hoc Presentation
IV. MUNICIPAL SERVICES DISCUSSION ITEMS
A.Traffic School Update
B.Commendation Inquiry Allegation (CIA) Report and Use of Force Report
C.Solid Waste Update
D.104th Ave SE Property Update
E.Business Shopping Cart Discussion
V. OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS
VI. NEW BUSINESS
VII. MATRIX
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Page 1 of 123
Agendas and minutes are available to the public at the City Clerk's Office, on the City
website (http://www.auburnwa.gov), and via e-mail. Complete agenda packets are
available for review at the City Clerk's Office.
Page 2 of 123
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
Ordinance No. 6643
Date:
April 17, 2017
Department:
CD & PW
Attachments:
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
Budget Impact:
$0
Administrative Recommendation:
Discussion of Draft Ordinance No. 6643 for MCImetro Access Transmission Services
Corp. d/b/a Verizon Access Transmission Services Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Background Summary:
MCImetro Access Transmission Services Corp. d/b/a Verizon Access Transmission
Services (MCI/Verizon) has applied for a Franchise Agreement to be able to construct
within the City’s rights of way a fiber optic telecommunications network. These
facilities would be part of a larger network of infrastructure that MCI/Verizon is building
throughout Washington. MCI/Verizon desires to provide telecommunications,
telephone service, internet access and private line services to potential customers
including mobile fronthaul and backhaul services and leasing of facilities to affiliates
and third parties.
The initial proposed build-out includes overhead installations on existing utility poles
wherever possible with underground installation being utilized if necessary. The
applicant is requesting the entire City as the proposed franchise area so that future
expansion of their facilities may be accommodated without having to amend the
agreement for each installation. Exact locations, plans, engineering and construction
schedules would be reviewed, approved and managed through the City’s permitting
processes that are a requirement of the Franchise Agreement.
A Public Hearing to consider this application and hear public comment is scheduled
before the City Council on May 1, 2017 in accordance with Auburn City Code Chapter
20.06.030.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Staff:Snyder
Page 3 of 123
Meeting Date:April 24, 2017 Item Number:
Page 4 of 123
------------------------------
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 1 of 20
ORDINANCE NO. 6 6 4 3
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, GRANTING TO
MCIMETRO ACCESS TRANSMISSION SERVICES
CORP., D/B/A VERIZON ACCESS TRANSMISSION
SERVICES, A DELAWARE CORPORATION, A
FRANCHISE FOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS
SERVICES
WHEREAS, MCImetro Access Transmission Services Corp. d/b/a Verizon
Access Transmission Services (“Grantee”) has applied to the City of Auburn
(“City”) for a non-exclusive Franchise for the right of entry, use, and occupation of
certain public right(s)-of-way within the City, expressly to install, construct, erect,
operate, maintain, repair, relocate and remove its facilities in, on, over, under,
along and/or across those right(s)-of-way; and
WHEREAS, following proper notice, the City Council held a public hearing
on Grantee’s request for a Franchise, at which time representatives of Grantee
and interested citizens were heard in a full public proceeding affording opportunity
for comment by any and all persons desiring to be heard; and
WHEREAS, from information presented at such public hearing, and from
facts and circumstances developed or discovered through independent study and
investigation, the City Council now deems it appropriate and in the best interest of
the City and its inhabitants that the franchise be granted to Grantee,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN as follows:
Section 1. Grant of Right to Use Franchise Area
A. Subject to the terms and conditions stated herein, the City grants to
the Grantee general permission to enter, use, and occupy the right(s)-of-way
and/or other public property specified in Exhibit “A”, attached hereto and
incorporated by reference within the City of Auburn (the “Franchise Area”).
B. The Grantee is authorized to install, remove, construct, erect,
operate, maintain, relocate and repair the types of facilities specified in Exhibit “B”,
attached hereto and incorporated by reference, and all necessary appurtenances
Page 5 of 123
------------------------------
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 2 of 20
thereto, (“Grantee Facilities”) for provision of those services set forth in Exhibit “C”
(“Grantee Services”) in, along, under and across the Franchise Area.
C. This Franchise does not authorize the use of the Franchise Area for
any facilities or services other than Grantee Facilities and Grantee Services, and
it extends no rights or privilege relative to any facilities or services of any type,
including Grantee Facilities and Grantee Services, on public or private property
elsewhere within the City.
D. This Franchise is non-exclusive and does not prohibit the City from
entering into other agreements, including Franchises, impacting the Franchise
Area, unless the City determines that entering into such agreements interferes with
Grantee’s right set forth herein.
E. Except as explicitly set forth herein, this Franchise does not waive
any rights that the City has or may hereafter acquire with respect to the Franchise
Area or any other City roads, rights-of-way, property, or any portions thereof. This
Franchise shall be subject to the power of eminent domain, and in any proceeding
under eminent domain, the Grantee acknowledges its use of the Franchise Area
shall have no value.
F. The City reserves the right to change, regrade, relocate, abandon, or
vacate any right-of-way within the Franchise Area. If, at any time during the term
of this Franchise, the City vacates any portion of the Franchise Area containing
Grantee Facilities, the City shall reserve an easement for public utilities within that
vacated portion, pursuant to RCW 35.79.030, within which the Grantee may
continue to operate any existing Grantee Facilities under the terms of this
Franchise for the remaining period set forth under Section 3.
G. The Grantee agrees that its use of Franchise Area shall at all times
be subordinated to and subject to the City and the public’s need for municipal
infrastructure, travel, and access to the Franchise Area, except as may be
otherwise required by law.
Section 2. Notice
A. Written notices to the parties shall be sent by certified mail to the
following addresses, unless a different address shall be designated in writing and
delivered to the other party.
Page 6 of 123
------------------------------
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 3 of 20
City: Engineering Aide,
Community Development and
Public Works Department - Transportation
City of Auburn
25 West Main Street
Auburn, WA 98001-4998
Telephone: (253) 931-3010; Fax: (253) 931-3048
with a copy to: City Clerk
City of Auburn
25 West Main Street
Auburn, WA 98001-4998
Grantee: MCImetro Access Transmission Services Corp. d/b/a Verizon
Access Transmission Services
Attn: Franchise Manager
600 Hidden Ridge
Mailcode: HQE02G295
Irving, TX 75038NAME
with copies (except for invoices) to:
Verizon Business Network Services
1320 North Courthouse Road, Suite 900
Arlington, VA USA 22201
Attn: Vice President and Deputy General Counsel, Network
Operations
B. Any changes to the above-stated Grantee information shall be sent
to the City’s Engineering Aide, Community Development and Public Works
Department – Transportation Division, with copies to the City Clerk, referencing
the title of this agreement.
C. The above-stated Grantee voice and fax telephone numbers shall be
staffed at least during normal business hours, Pacific time zone. The City may
contact Grantee at the following number for emergency or other needs outside of
normal business hours of the Grantees: Network Operations Center 1-800-624-
9675.
Page 7 of 123
------------------------------
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 4 of 20
Section 3. Term of Agreement
A. This Franchise shall run for a period of five (5) years, from the date
of execution specified in Section 5.
B. Renewal Option of Term: The Grantee may renew this Franchise for
an additional five (5) year period upon submission and approval of the application
specified under ACC 20.06.130, as it now exists or is amended, within the
timeframe set forth therein (currently 240 to 180 days prior to expiration of the then-
current term). Any materials submitted by the Grantee for a previous application
may be considered by the City in reviewing a current application, and the Grantee
shall only submit those materials deemed necessary by the City to address
changes in the Grantee Facilities or Grantee Services, or to reflect specific
reporting periods mandated by the ACC.
C. Failure to Renew Franchise – Automatic Extension. If the Parties fail
to formally renew this Franchise prior to the expiration of its term or any extension
thereof, the Franchise automatically continues month to month until renewed or
either party gives written notice at least one hundred and eighty (180) days in
advance of intent not to renew the Franchise.
Section 4. Definitions
For the purpose of this agreement:
“ACC” means the Auburn City Code.
"Emergency" means a condition of imminent danger to the health, safety and
welfare of persons or property located within the City including, without limitation,
damage to persons or property from natural consequences, such as storms,
earthquakes, riots, acts of terrorism or wars.
“Maintenance or Maintain” shall mean examining, testing, inspecting, repairing,
maintaining and replacing the existing Grantee Facilities or any part thereof as
required and necessary for safe operation.
“Relocation” means permanent movement of Grantee facilities required by the
City, and not temporary or incidental movement of such facilities, or other revisions
Page 8 of 123
------------------------------
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 5 of 20
Grantee would accomplish and charge to third parties without regard to municipal
request.
“Rights-of-Way” means the surface and the space above and below streets,
roadways, highways, avenues, courts, lanes, alleys, sidewalks, easements, rights-
of-ways and similar public properties and areas.
Section 5. Acceptance of Franchise
A. This Franchise, and any rights granted hereunder, shall not become
effective for any purpose unless and until Grantee files with the City Clerk (1) the
Statement of Acceptance, attached hereto as Exhibit “D,” and incorporated by
reference, (2) all verifications of insurance coverage specified under Section 15,
and (3) the financial guarantees specified in Section 16 and (4) payment of any
outstanding application fees per the City fee Schedule. These four items shall
collectively be the “Franchise Acceptance”. The date that such Franchise
Acceptance is filed with the City Clerk shall be the effective date of this Franchise.
B. Should the Grantee fail to file the Franchise Acceptance with the City
Clerk within thirty (30) days after the effective date of the ordinance approving the
Franchise, the City’s grant of the Franchise will be null and void.
Section 6. Construction and Maintenance
A. The Grantee shall apply for, obtain, and comply with the terms of all
permits required under ACC Chapter 12.24 for any work done within the City.
Grantee shall comply with all applicable City, State, and Federal codes, rules,
regulations, and orders in undertaking such work, which shall be done in a
thorough and proficient manner.
B. Grantee agrees to coordinate its activities with the City and all other
utilities located within the public right-of-way within which Grantee is under taking
its activity.
C. The City expressly reserves the right to prescribe how and where
Grantee Facilities shall be installed within the public right-of-way and may from
time to time, pursuant to the applicable sections of this Franchise, require the
removal, relocation and/or replacement thereof in the public interest and safety at
the expense of the Grantee.
Page 9 of 123
------------------------------
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 6 of 20
D. Before commencing any work within the public right-of-way, the
Grantee shall comply with the One Number Locator provisions of RCW Chapter
19.122 to identify existing utility infrastructure.
E. Tree Trimming. Upon prior written approval of the City and in
accordance with City ordinances, Grantee shall have the authority to reasonably
trim trees upon and overhanging streets, public rights-of-way, and places in the
Franchise Area so as to prevent the branches of such trees from coming in physical
contact with the Grantee Facilities. Grantee shall be responsible for debris
removal from such activities. If such debris is not removed within twenty-four (24)
hours of completion of the trimming, the City may, at its sole discretion, remove
such debris and charge Grantee for the cost thereof. This section does not, in any
instance, grant automatic authority to clear vegetation for purposes of providing a
clear path for radio signals. Any such general vegetation clearing will require a
land clearing permit.
Section 7. Repair and Emergency Work
In the event of an emergency, the Grantee may commence such repair and
emergency response work as required under the circumstances, provided that the
Grantee shall notify the City telephonically during normal business hours (at 253-
931-3010 and during non-business hours at 253-876-1985) as promptly as
possible, before such repair or emergency work commences, and in writing as
soon thereafter as possible. Such notification shall include the Grantee’s
emergency contact phone number for the corresponding response activity. The
City may commence emergency response work, at any time, without prior written
notice to the Grantee, but shall notify the Grantee in writing as promptly as possible
under the circumstances.
Section 8. Damages to City and Third-Party Property
Grantee agrees that if any of its actions under this Franchise impairs or
damages any City property, survey monument, or property owned by a third-party,
Grantee will restore, at its own cost and expense, said property to a safe condition.
Such repair work shall be performed and completed to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
Page 10 of 123
------------------------------
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 7 of 20
Section 9. Location Preference
A. Any structure, equipment, appurtenance or tangible property of a
utility, other than the Grantee’s, which was installed, constructed, completed or in
place prior in time to Grantee’s application for a permit to construct or repair
Grantee Facilities under this Franchise shall have preference as to positioning and
location with respect to the Grantee Facilities. However, to the extent that the
Grantee Facilities are completed and installed prior to another utility’s submittal of
a permit for new or additional structures, equipment, appurtenances or tangible
property, then the Grantee Facilities shall have priority. These rules governing
preference shall continue in the event of the necessity of relocating or changing
the grade of any City road or right-of-way. A relocating utility shall not necessitate
the relocation of another utility that otherwise would not require relocation. This
Section shall not apply to any City facilities or utilities that may in the future require
the relocation of Grantee Facilities. Such relocations shall be governed by Section
11.
B. Grantee shall maintain a minimum underground horizontal
separation of five (5) feet from City water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer facilities
and ten (10) feet from above-ground City water facilities; provided, that for
development of new areas, the City, in consultation with Grantee and other utility
purveyors or authorized users of the Public Way, will develop guidelines and
procedures for determining specific utility locations.
Section 10. Grantee Information
A. Grantee agrees to supply, at no cost to the City, any information
reasonably requested by the City to coordinate municipal functions with Grantee’s
activities and fulfill any municipal obligations under state law. Said information
shall include, at a minimum, as-built drawings of Grantee Facilities, installation
inventory, and maps and plans showing the location of existing or planned facilities
within the City. Said information may be requested either in hard copy or electronic
format, compatible with the City’s data base system, as now or hereinafter existing,
including the City’s geographic information Service (GIS) data base. Grantee shall
keep the City informed of its long-range plans for coordination with the City’s long-
range plans.
B. The parties understand that Washington law limits the ability of the
City to shield from public disclosure any information given to the City. Accordingly,
the City agrees to notify the Grantee of requests for public records related to the
Page 11 of 123
------------------------------
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 8 of 20
Grantee, and to give the Grantee a reasonable amount of time to obtain an
injunction to prohibit the City’s release of records.
Grantee shall indemnify and hold harmless the City for any loss or liability
for fines, penalties, and costs (including attorneys’ fees) imposed on the City
because of non-disclosures requested by Grantee under Washington’s open
public records act, provided the City has notified Grantee of the pending request.
Section 11. Relocation of Grantee Facilities
A. Except as otherwise so required by law, Grantee agrees to relocate,
remove, or reroute its facilities as ordered by the City Engineer at no expense or
liability to the City, except as may be required by RCW Chapter 35.99. Pursuant
to the provisions of Section 14, Grantee agrees to protect and save harmless the
City from any customer or third-party claims for service interruption or other losses
in connection with any such change, relocation, abandonment, or vacation of the
Public Way.
B. If a readjustment or relocation of the Grantee Facilities is
necessitated by a request from a party other than the City, that party shall pay the
Grantee the actual costs thereof.
Section 12. Abandonment and or Removal of Grantee Facilities
A. Within one hundred and eighty days (180) of Grantee’s permanent
cessation of use of the Grantee Facilities, or any portion thereof, the Grantee shall,
at the City’s discretion, either abandon in place or remove the affected facilities.
B. The parties expressly agree that this Section shall survive the
expiration, revocation or termination of this Franchise.
Section 13. Undergrounding
A. The parties agree that this Franchise does not limit the City’s
authority under federal law, state law, or local ordinance, to require the
undergrounding of utilities.
B. Whenever the City requires the undergrounding of aerial utilities in
the Franchise Area, the Grantee shall underground the Grantee Facilities in the
manner specified by the City Engineer at no expense or liability to the City, except
Page 12 of 123
------------------------------
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 9 of 20
as may be required by RCW Chapter 35.99.Where other utilities are present and
involved in the undergrounding project, Grantee shall only be required to pay its
fair share of common costs borne by all utilities, in addition to the costs specifically
attributable to the undergrounding of Grantee Facilities. Common costs shall
include necessary costs for common trenching and utility vaults. Fair share shall
be determined in comparison to the total number and size of all other utility facilities
being undergrounded.
Section 14. Indemnification and Hold Harmless
A. The Grantee shall defend, indemnify, and hold the City and its
officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers harmless from any and all
costs, claims, injuries, damages, losses, suits, or liabilities of any nature including
attorneys’ fees arising out of or in connection with the Grantee’s performance
under this Franchise, except to the extent such costs, claims, injuries, damages,
losses, suits, or liabilities are caused by the sole or contributory negligence of the
City. Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that this Agreement is
subject to RCW 4.24.115, then, in the event of liability for damages arising out of
bodily injury to persons or damages to property caused by or resulting from the
concurrent negligence of the Contractor and the City, its officers, officials,
employees, and volunteers, the Contractor's liability hereunder shall be only to the
extent of the Contractor's negligence.
B. The Grantee shall hold the City harmless from any liability arising out
of or in connection with any damage or loss to the Grantee Facilities caused by
maintenance and/or construction work performed by, or on behalf of, the City within
the Franchise Area or any other City road, right-of-way, or other property, except
to the extent any such damage or loss is directly caused by the negligence of the
City, or its agent performing such work.
C. The Grantee acknowledges that neither the City nor any other public
agency with responsibility for firefighting, emergency rescue, public safety or
similar duties within the City has the capability to provide trench, close trench or
confined space rescue. The Grantee, and its agents, assigns, successors, or
contractors, shall make such arrangements as Grantee deems fit for the provision
of such services. The Grantee shall hold the City harmless from any liability arising
out of or in connection with any damage or loss to the Grantee for the City’s failure
or inability to provide such services, and, pursuant to the terms of Section 14(A),
the Grantee shall indemnify the City against any and all third-party costs, claims,
Page 13 of 123
------------------------------
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 10 of 20
injuries, damages, losses, suits, or liabilities based on the City’s failure or inability
to provide such services.
D. Acceptance by the City of any work performed by the Grantee shall
not be grounds for avoidance of this section.
E. It is further specifically and expressly understood that the
indemnification provided herein constitutes the Grantee’s waiver of immunity under
Industrial Insurance, Title 51 RCW, solely for the purposes of this indemnification.
This waiver has been mutually negotiated by the parties. The provisions of this
section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement.
Section 15. Insurance
A. The Grantee shall procure and maintain for the duration of this
Franchise, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property
which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder
by the Grantee, its agents, representatives, or employees in the amounts and
types set forth below:
1. Automobile Liability insurance covering all owned, non-
owned, hired, and leased vehicles with a minimum combined single limit for bodily
injury and property damage of $1,000,000.00 per accident. Coverage shall be
written on Insurance Services Office (ISO) form CA 00 01 or a substitute form
providing equivalent liability coverage. If necessary, the policy shall be endorsed
to provide contractual liability coverage.
2. Commercial General Liability insurance with limits no less
than $1,000,000.00 each occurrence, $2,000,000.00 general aggregate and a
$2,000,000.00 products-completed operations aggregate limit. Coverage shall be
written on ISO occurrence form CG 00 01 or a substitute form providing equivalent
coverage and shall cover liability arising from premises-operations, independent
contractors, products-completed operations, stop gap liability, and personal injury
and advertising injury and liability assumed under an insured contract. The
Commercial General Liability insurance shall be endorsed to provide the
Aggregate Per Project Endorsement ISO form CG 25 03 11 85 or an equivalent
form. There shall be no endorsement or modification of the Commercial General
Liability insurance for liability arising from explosion, collapse, or underground
property damage. The City shall be named as an additional insured under the
Grantee’s Commercial General Liability insurance policy with respect to the work
Page 14 of 123
------------------------------
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 11 of 20
performed under this Franchise using ISO Additional Insured Endorsement CG 20
10 10 01 and Additional Insured-Completed Operations endorsement CG 20 37
10 01 or substitute endorsements providing equivalent coverage.
3. Professional Liability insurance with limits no less than
$1,000,000.00 per claim for all professionals employed or retained Grantee to
perform services under this Franchise.
4. Workers’ Compensation coverage as required by the
Industrial Insurance laws of the State of Washington.
B. The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the
following provisions for Automobile Liability, Professional Liability, and Commercial
General Liability insurance:
1. The Grantee’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance
as respects the City. Any insurance, self-insurance, or insurance pool coverage
maintained by the City shall be in excess of the Grantee’s insurance and shall not
contribute with it.
2. The Grantee’s insurance shall be endorsed to state that
coverage shall not be cancelled by the insurers except after thirty (30) days’ prior
written notice has been given to Grantee. Upon receipt of such notice, Grantee
shall immediately notify by certified mail, return receipt requested, the City.
C. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with
a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A-:VII.
D. Verification of Coverage. Grantee shall furnish the City with
documentation of insurer’s A.M. Best rating and with original certificates and a
copy of amendatory endorsements, including but not necessarily limited to the
additional insured endorsement, evidencing the insurance requirements of
Grantee before commencement of the work.
E. Grantee shall have the right to self-insure any or all of the above-
required insurance. Any such self-insurance is subject to approval by the City.
F. Grantee’s maintenance of insurance as required by this Franchise
shall not be construed to limit the liability of Grantee to the coverage provided by
Page 15 of 123
------------------------------
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 12 of 20
such insurance, or otherwise limit the City’s recourse to any remedy to which the
City is otherwise entitled at law or in equity.
Section 16. Performance Security
The Grantee shall provide the City with a financial guarantee in the amount of Fifty
Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00) running for, or renewable for, the term of this
Franchise, in a form and substance acceptable to the City. In the event Grantee
shall fail to substantially comply with any one or more of the provisions of this
Franchise, then there shall be recovered jointly and severally from the principal
and any surety of such financial guarantee any damages suffered by City as a
result thereof, including but not limited to staff time, material and equipment costs,
compensation or indemnification of third parties, and the cost of removal or
abandonment of facilities hereinabove described. Grantee specifically agrees that
its failure to comply with the terms of Section 19 shall constitute damage to the
City in the monetary amount set forth therein. Such a financial guarantee shall not
be construed to limit the Grantee’s liability to the guarantee amount, or otherwise
limit the City’s recourse to any remedy to which the City is otherwise entitled at law
or in equity.
Section 17. Successors and Assignees
A. All the provisions, conditions, regulations and requirements herein
contained shall be binding upon the successors, assigns of, and independent
contractors of the Grantee, and all rights and privileges, as well as all obligations
and liabilities of the Grantee shall inure to its successors, assignees and
contractors equally as if they were specifically mentioned herein wherever the
Grantee is mentioned.
B. This Franchise shall not be leased, assigned or otherwise alienated
without the express prior consent of the City by ordinance, which consent shall not
be unreasonably withheld, conditioned, or delayed.
C. Grantee and any proposed assignee or transferee shall provide and
certify the following to the City not less than sixty (60) days prior to the proposed
date of transfer: (a) Complete information setting forth the nature, term and
conditions of the proposed assignment or transfer; (b) All information required by
the City of an applicant for a Franchise with respect to the proposed assignee or
transferee; and, (c) An application fee which shall be set by the City, plus any other
Page 16 of 123
------------------------------
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 13 of 20
costs actually and reasonably incurred by the City in processing, and investigating
the proposed assignment or transfer.
D. Prior to the City’s consideration of a request by Grantee to consent
to a Franchise assignment or transfer, the proposed Assignee or Transferee shall
file with the City a written promise to unconditionally accept all terms of the
Franchise, effective upon such transfer or assignment of the Franchise. The City
is under no obligation to undertake any investigation of the transferor’s state of
compliance and failure of the City to insist on full compliance prior to transfer does
not waive any right to insist on full compliance thereafter.
Section 18. Dispute Resolution
A. In the event of a dispute between the City and the Grantee arising by
reason of this Agreement, the dispute shall first be referred to the operational
officers or representatives designated by Grantor and Grantee to have oversight
over the administration of this Agreement. The officers or representatives shall
meet within thirty (30) calendar days of either party's request for a meeting,
whichever request is first, and the parties shall make a good faith effort to achieve
a resolution of the dispute.
B. If the parties fail to achieve a resolution of the dispute in this manner,
either party may then pursue any available judicial remedies. This Franchise shall
be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of
Washington. In the event any suit, arbitration, or other proceeding is instituted to
enforce any term of this Agreement, the parties specifically understand and agree
that venue shall be exclusively in King County, Washington. The prevailing party
in any such action shall be entitled to its attorneys’ fees and costs of suit, which
shall be fixed by the judge hearing the case, and such fees shall be included in the
judgment.
Section 19. Enforcement and Remedies
A. If the Grantee shall willfully violate, or fail to comply with any of the
provisions of this Franchise through willful or unreasonable negligence, or should
it fail to heed or comply with any notice given to Grantee under the provisions of
this agreement, the City may, at its discretion, provide Grantee with written notice
to cure the breach within thirty (30) days of notification. If the City determines the
breach cannot be cured within thirty days, the City may specify a longer cure
period, and condition the extension of time on Grantee’s submittal of a plan to cure
Page 17 of 123
------------------------------
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 14 of 20
the breach within the specified period, commencement of work within the original
thirty day cure period, and diligent prosecution of the work to completion. If the
breach is not cured within the specified time, or the Grantee does not comply with
the specified conditions, the City may, at its discretion, either (1) revoke the
Franchise with no further notification, or (2) claim damages of Two Hundred Fifty
Dollars ($250.00) per day against the financial guarantee set forth in Section 16
for every day after the expiration of the cure period that the breach is not cured.
B. Should the City determine that Grantee is acting beyond the scope
of permission granted herein for Grantee Facilities and Grantee Services, the City
reserves the right to cancel this Franchise and require the Grantee to apply for,
obtain, and comply with all applicable City permits, franchises, or other City
permissions for such actions, and if the Grantee’s actions are not allowed under
applicable federal and state or City laws, to compel Grantee to cease such actions.
Section 20. Compliance with Laws and Regulations
A. This Franchise is subject to, and the Grantee shall comply with all
applicable federal and state or City laws, regulations and policies (including all
applicable elements of the City's comprehensive plan), in conformance with federal
laws and regulations, affecting performance under this Franchise. Furthermore,
notwithstanding any other terms of this agreement appearing to the contrary, the
Grantee shall be subject to the police power of the City to adopt and enforce
general ordinances necessary to protect the safety and welfare of the general
public in relation to the rights granted in the Franchise Area.
B. The City reserves the right at any time to amend this Franchise to
conform to any hereafter enacted, amended, or adopted federal or state statute or
regulation relating to the public health, safety, and welfare, or relating to roadway
regulation, or a City Ordinance enacted pursuant to such federal or state statute
or regulation upon providing Grantee with thirty (30) days written notice of its action
setting forth the full text of the amendment and identifying the statute, regulation,
or ordinance requiring the amendment. Said amendment shall become
automatically effective upon expiration of the notice period unless, before
expiration of that period, the Grantee makes a written call for negotiations over the
terms of the amendment. If the parties do not reach agreement as to the terms of
the amendment within thirty (30) days of the call for negotiations, the City may
enact the proposed amendment, by incorporating the Grantee’s concerns to the
maximum extent the City deems possible.
Page 18 of 123
------------------------------
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 15 of 20
C. The City may terminate this Franchise upon thirty (30) days written
notice to the Grantee, if the Grantee fails to comply with such amendment or
modification.
Section 21. License, Tax and Other Charges
This Franchise shall not exempt the Grantee from any future license, tax, or
charge which the City may hereinafter adopt pursuant to authority granted to it
under state or federal law for revenue or as reimbursement for use and occupancy
of the Franchise Area.
Section 22. Consequential Damages Limitation
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, in no event shall
either party be liable for any special, incidental, indirect, punitive, reliance,
consequential or similar damages.
Section 23. Severability
If any portion of this Franchise is deemed invalid, the remainder portions
shall remain in effect.
Section 24. Titles & Interpretation
The section titles used herein are for reference only and should not be
used for the purpose of interpreting this Franchise. Interpretation or construction
of this Agreement shall not be affected by any determination as to who is the
drafter of this Agreement, this Agreement having been drafted by mutual
agreement of the parties.
Section 25. Implementation.
The Mayor is hereby authorized to implement such administrative
procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directions of this legislation.
Section 26. 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.
Page 19 of 123
------------------------------
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 16 of 20
INTRODUCED: ___________________
PASSED: ________________________
APPROVED: _____________________
________________________________
NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________
Danielle E. Daskam, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________
Daniel B. Heid, City Attorney
Published: _________________
Page 20 of 123
18
18
516
164
167
167
WEST VALLEY HWY SWS 277TH ST 132ND AVE SEJ O VITA BLVD E
SE 274TH ST
SE 272ND ST
MI
LI
TARY RD
S
ELLINGSON RD SW
EAST VALLEY HWY SESE KENT-K
A
N
G
L
E
Y
R
D68TH AVE S124TH AVE SE116TH AVE SE142ND AVE E24TH ST E
S 272ND ST CENTRAL AVE S108TH AVE SEWEST VALLEY HWY NW8TH ST EPEASLEY CANYON RD SA ST SEWEST VALLEY HWY SW124TH AVE SE24TH ST E
S 2 7 7T H S T
SE 272ND ST
9TH ST E51ST AVE S12TH ST E182ND AVE EAUBURN-BLACK DIAM OND RDS E
S 288TH ST
214TH AVE EFORES T CANYON RD E
2
1
0
TH
AV
E
E
SUMNER-TAPPS HWY E321ST ST S
16TH ST E
A
UB
URN-
E
NU
MC
L
A
W R
D S
S 2
72ND
W
AY
MI
LI
TARY RD SS 272ND ST
AUBURN WAY NMILITARY RD SMILITARY RD SA ST SEC ST SWB ST NWI ST NEAU
B
U
R
N
W
A
Y
SM ST SEAUBURN WAY N124TH AVE SER ST SE132ND AVE SES 277TH ST
WEST VALLEY HWY NC ST NWW MAIN ST 112TH AVE SEE MAIN ST
41ST ST SE
29TH ST SE
SE 312TH ST
51ST AVE SKE
RSEY WAY SE
8TH ST NE
37TH ST NW
ORAVETZ RD SEM ST NED ST NW4TH ST SE
LA
K
E
L
A
ND
HI
LLS WAY SE15TH ST NW
A ST NEL A KE TAPPS PK
W
Y S
EWEST VALLEY HWY SLEA HILL R D S E
S 316TH ST
37TH ST NE
D ST NEPE ASLEY C A NYON RD S
RIVERWALK DR SEEAST VALLEY HWY SEH
A
R
V
E
Y
R
D
N
E
15TH ST NE
15TH ST SW
BOUNDARY BLVD SW
AUBURN-BLACK DIAMOND RD SE
SE 281ST ST
TERRACE DR NW
ELLINGSON RD SW
SUMNER-TAPPS HWY E SE 30 4 T H ST
17TH ST SE
6TH ST SE
10TH ST NE
3RD ST NE 124TH AVE SEA ST SER ST SEMUCKLESHOOT
CASINO
SUPERMALL
LAKE
TAPPS
KENT
KING
COUNTY
PIERCE
COUNTY
PACIFIC
SUMNEREDGEWOOD
ALGONA
FEDERAL
WAY
Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy.
Map ID: 3899
Exhibit A
0 1,100 2,200 3,300 4,400 5,500
FEETCity Hall
MCI Fiber (PWA 08-03)
MCI Fiber (PWA 96-07)
City of Auburn
Parks
Water Features
Printed On: 1/31/2012Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 17 of 20 DRAFTPage 21 of 123
------------------------------
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 18 of 20
Exhibit B
Grantee Facilities
Grantee Facilities include, collectively or individually, any and all communications
transmission and distribution systems, including but not limited to, wires, lines,
conduits, ducts, cables, braces, guys, anchors, vaults, switches, fixtures, and any
and all other equipment, appliances, attachments, appurtenances and other
items necessary, convenient, or in any way appertaining to any and all of the
foregoing, whether the same be located across, above, along, below, in, over,
through, or underground.
Grantee Facilities shall not include any wireless telecommunications facilities
such as antennas, DAS, Small Cell facilities or other wireless transmission
devices that are mounted on poles or other structures in the right-of-way.
Page 22 of 123
------------------------------
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 19 of 20
Exhibit C
Grantee Services
The offering of communications and communications services, including, but not
limited to a telephone service (as set forth in RCW § 82.16.010),integrated data
services, internet access service, private line service, mobile fronthaul and
backhaul services, and leasing of facilities (e.g., dark fiber) to affiliates and third
parties. Grantee shall not offer a Cable Service or an Open Video System.
Page 23 of 123
------------------------------
Draft Ordinance No. 6643
March 7, 2017
Franchise Agreement No. 17-09
Page 20 of 20
EXHIBIT “D”
STATEMENT OF ACCEPTANCE
MCIMETRO ACCESS TRANSMISSION SERVICES CORP. D/B/A VERIZON
ACCESS TRANSMISSION SERVICES, for itself, its successors and assigns,
hereby accepts and agrees to be bound by all lawful terms, conditions and
provisions of the Franchise attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference.
[Grantee]
By: Date:
Name:
Title:
STATE OF _______________)
)ss.
COUNTY OF _____________ )
On this ____ day of _______________, 20xx, before me the undersigned, a Notary
Public in and for the State of __________, duly commissioned and sworn,
personally appeared, __________________ of _________, the company that
executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said
instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said company, for the uses
and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he/she is authorized to
execute said instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal
on the date hereinabove set forth.
Signature
NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of
___________, residing at
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:
Page 24 of 123
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
Ordinance No. 6652
Date:
April 19, 2017
Department:
Administration
Attachments:
Ord 6552
Budget Impact:
$0
Administrative Recommendation:
Background Summary:
A number of communities in King County, including, for instance, Bellevue, Kirkland,
Renton and Kent have ordinances that prohibit rental housing discrimination based
upon source of funds. The purpose of these regulations is to assist low income
housing by a prohibiting or restricting practices that do not accommodate or allow
rental relationships were the based upon source of funds section 8 voucher programs.
There are a variety different facets to the various ordinances of the city's, but, for
instance, looking at Kent’s ordinance, it provides a restriction on practices that
preclude source of income discrimination in rental housing with limited exceptions.
Draft ordinance number 6652, similar to Kent’s ordinance, would apply to all rental
housing, except (one) where the rental housing unit is in a residential building shared
by (occupied by) the owner, or where the owner of the rental housing owns fewer than
four housing units within the city. As with Kent's ordinance, the proposed ordinance
number 6652 would not prohibit rental choices that are based on other factors other
than source of income. However, if a person/landlord does improperly denied housing
rental based upon source of income, that is prohibited as an unfair housing practice
under this ordinance. The ordinance provides for penalties consistent with chapter
1.25 of the city code. Appeals of the penalties or determinations of unfair housing
violations would be to the director of administration (first tier) and then to the hearing
examiner (second tier). Currently the fee for appeals generally are a little over
$1,000.00 per appeal (to the Hearing Examiner). We do not have a fee specially, at
this point, for the first tier. It may be appropriate to consider what that fee should be
and whether the second tier appeal fee should be different then the current $1,030.00.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Staff:Heid/Hinman
Page 25 of 123
Meeting Date:April 24, 2017 Item Number:
Page 26 of 123
Ordinance No. 6652
April 20, 2017
Page 1 of 5
ORDINANCE NO. 6 6 5 2
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, CREATING A NEW
CHAPTER 5.40 OF THE AUBURN CITY CODE, RELATED
THE REGULATION OF FAIR HOUSING PRACTICES
WHEREAS, the City of Auburn recognizes that discrimination in housing
adversely and seriously affects the health, safety, and welfare of the community.
WHEREAS, there are several government programs that assist very low income
families, the elderly, veterans, and people with disabilities with financial subsidies that
allow them to afford decent, safe, and sanitary housing in the private market.
WHEREAS, a significant number of people have difficulty securing adequate
rental housing without financial assistance, and it is essential to assure that housing is
available to those people.
WHEREAS, housing rental rates are rapidly rising in the Puget Sound region,
and the number of affordable units is decreasing as rents increase, which, in turn,
disfavors low-income tenants and those receiving government assistance.
WHEREAS, when families lose their homes because of income source based
discrimination, they often lack funds to move, risk being unable to find replacement
housing close to their workplace, risk becoming homeless, and risk disruption to their
children's education and social development by being forced to move away from their
friends and schools.
WHEREAS, citywide and countywide planning policies seek to promote fairness
in housing for residents of all abilities, ages, races, and incomes.
WHEREAS, participation by landlords in these housing assistance programs
provides a reliable, steady source of rental income.
Page 27 of 123
Ordinance No. 6652
April 20, 2017
Page 2 of 5
WHEREAS, some state financial assistance programs are only available to
landlords in cities that have passed ordinances that prohibit denying tenancy based
solely on the applicant's source of income.
WHEREAS, the Auburn City Council has determined that prohibiting landlords
from denying tenants the opportunity to rent housing solely because the tenant
proposes to use government financial assistance will promote the health, safety, and
welfare of the community.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN,
WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. New Chapter to City Code. A new Chapter 5.40 to the
Auburn City Code, entitled “Unfair Housing Practices,” is created to read as follows:
CHAPTER 5.40
UNFAIR HOUSING PRACTICES
Sections:
5.40.010 Source of Income Discrimination Prohibited.
5.40.020 Definitions.
5.40.030 Applicability.
5.40.040 Exceptions.
5.40.050 Penalties.
5.40.060 Appeals.
5.40.010 Source of Income Discrimination Prohibited.
A. Property owners, property managers, landlords, and their agents, who rent
or lease multiple dwelling units may not refuse to rent or lease a dwelling unit to any
tenant or prospective tenant or otherwise discriminate or retaliate against that person
solely on the basis that the person proposes to pay a portion of the rent from a “source
of income” as defined in this chapter.
B. This chapter does not prohibit any person from making a choice among
prospective tenants based on factors other than the source of income.
5.40.020 Definitions.
A. “Source of income” includes income derived from social security,
supplemental security income, other retirement programs, and any federal, state, local,
or nonprofit-administered benefit or subsidy programs, including housing assistance,
public assistance, and general assistance programs. “Source of income” does not
include income derived in an illegal manner;
Page 28 of 123
Ordinance No. 6652
April 20, 2017
Page 3 of 5
B. “Multiple dwelling units” means four (4) or more dwelling units located
within the corporate limits of Auburn, owned, operated or managed by the same
property owners, landlords, and their agents, whether the units are in the same
building(s) or are separate dwelling unit structures, offered or available for rent or lease
as a part of a rental housing business.
C. “Rental housing business,” as used in this chapter, means any person,
company, association or entity that rents or leases, or makes available for rent or lease,
one or more rental units for rent or lease as residential units.
D. Other terms used in this chapter shall be defined as set forth in the
Residential Landlord Tenant Act, chapter 59.18 RCW.
5.40.030 Applicability. Nothing in this chapter will apply if the dwelling unit does not
qualify for participation in the tenant's “source of income” program. However, any
property owner or manager that refuses to rent a dwelling unit to a person based upon
the proposed use of funds from a “source of income” must notify that person in writing of
the reasons why the dwelling unit is ineligible for participation in the particular “source of
income” program. Refusal to allow a health and safety inspection of the property by a
public housing authority shall not be considered a legitimate basis for refusing to rent
due to program ineligibility.
5.40.040 Exceptions.
This Chapter shall not apply to:
A. Renting, leasing, or subleasing of a portion of a single-family dwelling,
where the owner or person entitled to possession maintains a permanent residence,
home or abode in the same dwelling, or an accessory dwelling unit; and
B. Rental of residential dwelling units where less than four (4) such units are
owned, operated or managed by the same property owners, landlords, or their agents.
5.40.050 Penalties.
A. Civil violation.
1. The violation of any provision of this chapter is a civil violation as provided
for in chapter 1.25 of the city code, for which a monetary penalty may be assessed and
abatement may be required.
2. Any penalty due and unpaid and delinquent under this chapter will
constitute a debt of the city. The city may, pursuant to chapter 19.16 RCW, use a
collection agency to collect unpaid license fees, or it may seek collection by court
proceedings, which remedies shall be in addition to all other remedies.
5.40.060 Appeals.
A. Any person ordered to pay a civil penalty pursuant to ACC 5.40.050 may
appeal the penalty by filing with the city clerk a written appeal. Appeals shall be in
writing and contain the following information:
1. Appellant's name, address, phone number, and email address;
2. Appellant's statement describing his or her standing to appeal;
3. Identification of the summary of decision which is the subject of the
appeal;
Page 29 of 123
Ordinance No. 6652
April 20, 2017
Page 4 of 5
4. Appellant's statement of grounds for appeal and the facts upon which the
appeal is based;
5. The relief sought, including the specific nature and extent; and
6. A statement affirming that the appellant has read the appeal and believes
the contents to be true, followed by the appellant's signature.
B. To be valid, the appeal must be received and date stamped by the city
clerk's office no later than fourteen (14) calendar days after the penalty was issued. The
city clerk will forward all timely appeals to the director of administration or designee.
C. The director, or designee, will review the appeal and either affirm or repeal
the order imposing the civil penalty based upon written findings of fact and conclusions
of law. The director, or designee, may reduce the amount of the civil penalty upon a
finding that the violation did not occur in bad faith and any known victims of the violation
have been fully compensated for damages suffered as a result of the violation. The
Director, or designee, may request additional information necessary to make the
decision and/or choose to hold an informal hearing to solicit evidence.
D. If the penalty is not repealed, the person who has been ordered to pay the
civil penalty may appeal the director's decision to the hearing examiner pursuant to the
process set forth in section 1.25.065 of the city code. Appeals must be accompanied by
an appeal fee as set in the Auburn Fee Schedule, or as set the city council. The city
shall have the burden of proof to establish the violation by a preponderance of the
evidence.
Section 3. Implementation. That the Mayor is hereby authorized to
implement such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the
directives of this legislation.
Section 4. Severability. That 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.
Section 5. Effective date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect
five (5) days after publication.
INTRODUCED: ________________________
PASSED: _____________________________
APPROVED: __________________________
Page 30 of 123
Ordinance No. 6652
April 20, 2017
Page 5 of 5
CITY OF AUBURN
_____________________________________
NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_________________________
Danielle E. Daskam, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
Daniel B. Heid, City Attorney
Published: _________________
Page 31 of 123
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
Resolution No. 5291
Date:
April 19, 2017
Department:
Administration
Attachments:
Res 5291
Executive Summary
restroom
CDBG Funding form
Budget Impact:
$0
Administrative Recommendation:
City Council conduct the public hearing. For more information on this item, please see
Resolution No. 5291.
Background Summary:
The CDBG Annual Action Plan provides a concise summary of the actions, activities
and specific federal and non-federal resource that will be used each year to address
the priority needs and specific goals identified by the Consolidated Plan. Action Plan
Amendments carry out new activities using funds covered under the consolidated
plan. The process of a substantial amendment process is required by the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the City’s Consolidated
Plan to reallocate funds received.
The City of Auburn will reallocate $280,000 in CDBG funds for projects that are
consistent with federal regulations and the objectives and policies of the Auburn
Consolidated Housing and Community Development Plan. The funding will be used to
make ADA updates to Les Gove Park restrooms and to complete housing repair
projects for low-income homeowners in Auburn.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember: Staff:Hinman
Meeting Date:April 24, 2017 Item Number:
Page 32 of 123
Page 33 of 123
RESOLUTION NO. 5 2 91.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, APPROVING
AMENDMENT TO THE 2016 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN
UPDATE OF THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Auburn was designated as an entitlement community
by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for its
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program; and
WHEREAS, the primary objective of the Consolidated Plan and CDBG
Program is the development of viable urban communities by providing decent
housing and a suitable living environment and expanding economic opportunities,
principally for persons of low- and moderate-income; and
WHEREAS, to allocate additional funds received, a substantial amendment
must be made to the 2016 Plan, whereby the City of Auburn must amend the 2016
Annual Action Plan for its Consolidated Plan that serves as a federally required
planning document to guide the City of Auburn's human service and community
development efforts; and
WHEREAS, the planning process to develop the Consolidated Plan involved
citizen participation and guidance from non-profit and governmental agencies
serving low income residents in the community; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Auburn heard and considered
public comment about its proposed use of Community Development Block Grant
funds and amendment to the 2016 Annual Action Plan; and
Resolution No. 5291
April 10, 2017
Page 1 of 2
Page 34 of 123
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN,
WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE:
Section 1. The 2016 Annual Action Plan heretofore adopted by the City of
Auburn City Council is amended to update to the City's Consolidated Plan, making
approximately $250,000.00 of CDBG funds available for projects that are consistent
with federal regulations and with the objectives and policies of the Auburn
Consolidated Housing and Community Development Plan, primarily to complete
housing repair projects for low-income homeowners in Auburn and to conduct a Fair
Housing analysis.
Section 2. The Mayor is hereby authorized to implement such administrative
procedures as may be necessary to carry out directions of the legislation.
Section 3. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect upon passage and
signatures hereon.
DATED and SIGNED this day of 2017.
Nancy Backus
Mayor
ATTEST:
Danielle Daskam, City Clerk
APPROVED A S TO FORM:
1 41
Atizi
Mel B. eid, City A ttorne, _.
Resolution No. 5291
April 10, 2017
Page 2 of 2
Page 35 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 1
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Executive Summary
AP-05 Executive Summary - 91.200(c), 91.220(b) 1. Introduction
Each year the City of Auburn executes specific actions to implement the goals and strategies of the Consolidated Plan for Years 2015-2019. Actions that will be undertaken in 2016 are outlined in this Annual Action Plan.
The City of Auburn received $519,029 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds in 2016. The funds were allocated for the City's Housing Repair program ($249,950), Public Service Activites ($77,550), Ecomonic Development ($40,000), support of youth outreach ($51,644). and general program management ($100,000).
The City also had a total of $300,XXX in unspent funds accumulated from prior years. The accumulation is due to projects that were unable to be completed.
The 2016 Action Plan Amendment proposes to reallocate $261,552 of the accumulated funds to the update the City's Les Gove Park bathroom to make them ADA accessible and $20,000 to the City's Housing Repair program.
The City of Auburn is committed to focusing more on achieving solutions to recurring social problems and achieve a greater collaboration among service providers.
2. Summarize the objectives and outcomes identified in the Plan
This could be a restatement of items or a table listed elsewhere in the plan or a reference to another location. It may also contain any essential items from the housing and homeless needs assessment, the housing market analysis or the strategic plan.
With the overall goal of reducing the number of people living in poverty within the City of Auburn, the following objectives for the 2016 Action Plan Amendment will be employed:
1. Rehabilitate housing occupied by low to moderate income persons. 2. Improve public facilities for a purpose that beneifts all residents and at least 51% of those residents are low to moderate income.
Outcomes are as follows:
Page 36 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 2
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
1. Increasing the affordability, accessibility and access to supportive services of affordable housing for low income Auburn residents. 2. Increase number Auburn residents using Les Gove Park services and activities.
To accomplish these outcomes and objectives, the City invests in programs that meet the community basic needs, increase self sufficiency, provide opportunites to develop a safe community.
3. Evaluation of past performance
This is an evaluation of past performance that helped lead the grantee to choose its goals or projects.
During the past year Auburn has accomplished significant achievement on its programs and impacted the lives of thousands of residents. In 2016 alone, projects funded by the City completed the following:
Over 50 low income Auburn residents were able to avoid homelessness by providing maintnence to their deteriorating homes through the City's housing repair program. Over 200 low income Auburn residents avoided utilizing costly emergency healthcare services by receiving free medical and/or dental care. 12 low income small business owners received technical assistance to start or expand their small business in Auburn.
In the end of 2016 the Green River Small Business Assistance Center (economic development) notified the City that they were unable to meet their original deliverables detailed in their contract. Due to the unmet deliverables the City only awarded the amount for the services they were able to complete. The amount detailed in their original contract was $40,000 for 27 small business owners. The City awarded $20,000 for the 12 business owners they successfully provided services to.
4. Summary of Citizen Participation Process and consultation process
Summary from citizen participation section of plan.
Notices of the Action Plan Amendment are sent out in the newspaper and public comment is made available at a City Council meeting. Review of the Amendment can be done per request of the City of Auburn's Human Services Manager.
Two public forums will be made available for the Annual Action Plan amendment. One prior to its approval and another after its approval Both public forums will be conducted at a City of Auburn Council Meeting that will be publicized in the City's vehicles of communication.
5. Summary of public comments
Page 37 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 3
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
This could be a brief narrative summary or reference an attached document from the Citizen Participation section of the Con Plan.
6. Summary of comments or views not accepted and the reasons for not accepting them
7. Summary
Auburn residents along with stakeholders, community partners, service providers and others were consulted during the development of the Action Plan. They provided valuable input that supported to the development of the outcomes and objectives listed in the plan.
The City of Auburn will continue to use all of its funds to support residents of low/moderate income while maintaining a focus on underserved and special populations.
Page 38 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 4
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies - 91.200(b) 1. Agency/entity responsible for preparing/administering the Consolidated Plan
The following are the agencies/entities responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source.
Agency Role Name Department/Agency Lead Agency AUBURN CDBG Administrator ESG Administrator Table 1 – Responsible Agencies Narrative
Consolidated Plan Public Contact Information
Erica Azcueta, Human Services Manager
25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA 98001
eazcueta@auburnwa.gov 253-876-1965
Page 39 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 5
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
AP-10 Consultation - 91.100, 91.200(b), 91.215(l) 1. Introduction
The City of Auburn consulted with local and regional public and private agencies during the development of the Action Plan Amendment. Agencies that participated in consultations included: the King County Department of Community and Human Services, and nonprofit agencies delivering services in Auburn and the subregion.
In addition to conducting consultations during the development of the plan, the City of Auburn collaborates and works closely with numerous coalitions, committees and government entities throughout the duration of the plan in efforts to enhance strategies and systems to meet established goals and objectives on the plan.
Provide a concise summary of the jurisdiction’s activities to enhance coordination between public and assisted housing providers and private and governmental health, mental health and service agencies (91.215(l)).
The City of Auburn works closely with partnering King County jurisdictions, public housing authorities and health providers to develop systems in order to improve the quality of service and access for low-income residents as well as the community as a whole within the city and throughout the region. Additionally, the City participates in monthly meetings with King County Community and Human Services, Public Health King County, Valley Cities, the Multi-Service Center and King County Housing Authority to review program progress and delivery of services funded through regional efforts. This group has worked collaboratively to fund a full-time Homeless and Housing Planner to address needs and issues in the South King County region.
Describe coordination with the Continuum of Care and efforts to address the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans, and unaccompanied youth) and persons at risk of homelessness.
The City works closely with the King County CoC to ensure residents needs are being met and nonprofits delivering services have access to funds awarded through the CoC. The City also works closely with nonprofits in reciept of CoC funds including Auburn Youth Resources, King County YWCA and Valley Cities.
Describe consultation with the Continuum(s) of Care that serves the jurisdiction’s area in determining how to allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards for and evaluate outcomes of projects and activities assisted by ESG funds, and develop funding, policies and procedures for the operation and administration of HMIS
Page 40 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 6
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
All projects receiving CoCfunding are required by HUD to apply for support through a local Continuum of Care. For King County, the Continuum of Care encompasses programs and activities within the borders of King County. Each continuum sets funding priorities and need for its community. The King County CoC priorities are set by All Home King County. Auburn staff contribute to the CoC by working collaboratively with All Home on efforts for King County to ensure coordination efforts between the two entities.
2. Agencies, groups, organizations and others who participated in the process and consultations
Page 41 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 7
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Table 2 – Agencies, groups, organizations who participated 1 Agency/Group/Organization KING COUNTY Agency/Group/Organization Type Other government - County What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Public Housing Needs Homeless Needs - Chronically homeless Homeless Needs - Families with children Homelessness Needs - Veterans Homelessness Needs - Unaccompanied youth Homelessness Strategy Non-Homeless Special Needs Briefly describe how the Agency/Group/Organization was consulted. What are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
The City and King County meet regularly to discuss all CDBG related issues that impact our region. To improve coordination there have been more strategic systems put in place to increase communication and collaborative efforts.
Identify any Agency Types not consulted and provide rationale for not consulting
The City of Auburn consulted with all types of organizations that primarily serve the populations focused on in the Action Plan Amendment and implemented programs that addressed the greatest need in the community.
The only types of organizations not consulted with were corrections facilities and homeless shelters. The rationale for not consulting with these facilities is that the City does not host either type of organization in the region.
Page 42 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 8
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Other local/regional/state/federal planning efforts considered when preparing the Plan
Name of Plan Lead Organization How do the goals of your Strategic Plan overlap with the goals of each plan? Continuum of Care King County The goals of Auburn's Strategic Plan overlap with the goals of the CoC to address the needs of homeless residents in the community and reduce the risk of homelessness. Table 3 - Other local / regional / federal planning efforts
Narrative
Page 43 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 9
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
AP-12 Participation - 91.401, 91.105, 91.200(c) 1. Summary of citizen participation process/Efforts made to broaden citizen participation Summarize citizen participation process and how it impacted goal-setting
Citizen participation plays a crucial role in the success of the City's Annual Action Plan. The goals are to hear the community's feedback and recommendations on how CDBG funds should be invested and how services can coordinate to achieve the greatest impact.
Citizens will be given two opportunities to participate in the process throughout the year. The first time will be prior to the submittal of the Amendment and the second will be after the Amendment is approved.
Citizen Participation Outreach
Sort Order Mode of Outreach Target of Outreach Summary of response/attendance Summary of comments received Summary of comments not accepted and reasons
URL (If applicable)
1 Newspaper Ad Non-targeted/broad community No comments were received.
2 Public Meeting Non-targeted/broad community
Table 4 – Citizen Participation Outreach
Page 44 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 10
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Expected Resources
AP-15 Expected Resources – 91.420(b), 91.220(c) (1, 2) Introduction
The City of Auburn anticipates funding for the duration of the Consolidated Plan from
CDBG City of Auburn General Fund allocation for Community Services
Anticipated Resources
Program Source of Funds Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Amount Available Remainder of ConPlan $
Narrative Description Annual Allocation: $
Program Income: $ Prior Year Resources: $
Total: $
CDBG public - federal Acquisition Admin and Planning Economic Development Housing Public Improvements Public Services 529,029 0 277,808 806,837 1,587,427
General Fund public - local Public Services 500,000 0 0 500,000 2,000,000 Table 5 - Expected Resources – Priority Table Explain how federal funds will leverage those additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how
Page 45 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 11
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
matching requirements will be satisfied
The City of Auburn relies on CDBG funds to support community and economic development projects and activities in efforts to support low to moderate income populations become self sufficient and sustain affordable housing. However, CDBG funds are not the only source of funds the City uses to support community projects and activities. The City's general funds are used to support community projects in addition to CDBG funds.
CDBG funds do not require matching funds.
If appropriate, describe publically owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan
N/A
Discussion
The City of Auburn will use CDBG funds to support all eligible projects and activities that align with CDBG guidelines and regulations.
Page 46 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 12
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Annual Goals and Objectives AP-20 Annual Goals and Objectives - 91.420, 91.220(c)(3)&(e)
Goals Summary Information
Sort Order Goal Name Start Year End Year Category Geographic Area Needs Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator
1 Ensure a Suitable Living Environment 2015 2019 Non-Housing Community Development
Homeless Prevention and Intervention Affordable Housing Development and Preservation
CDBG: $66,664 Public service activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 15 Persons Assisted Public service activities for Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 55 Households Assisted 2 End Homelessness 2015 2019 Homeless Homeless Prevention and Intervention CDBG: $62,500 Homelessness Prevention: 30 Persons Assisted 3 Ensure Decent, Affordable Housing 2015 2019 Affordable Housing Public Housing Affordable Housing Development and Preservation Neighborhood Revitalization
CDBG: $289,950 Public service activities other than Low/Moderate Income Housing Benefit: 30 Persons Assisted Homeowner Housing Rehabilitated: 55 Household Housing Unit 4 Planning and Administration 2015 2015 Planning and Administration CDBG: $100,000
Table 6 - Goals Summary
Goal Descriptions
Page 47 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 13
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
1 Goal Name Ensure a Suitable Living Environment Goal Description 2 Goal Name End Homelessness Goal Description 3 Goal Name Ensure Decent, Affordable Housing Goal Description 4 Goal Name Planning and Administration Goal Description Table 7 – Goal Descriptions
Page 48 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 14
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
AP-35 Projects - 91.420, 91.220(d) Introduction
Auburn's Annual Action Plan provides descriptions of proposals of how funds will be prioritized to achieve goals identified in the Consolidated Plan. Projects funded by the City will address the priority needs of providing assistance to prevent homelessness, ensure affordable housing and a suitable living environment. Projects and programs are selected through a competitive application process to ensure optimal quality services is provided to the community in use of the funds.
# Project Name 1 HOUSING REPAIR 2 GRC SMALL BUSINESS ASSISTANCE CENTER 3 Les Gove Park Restroom Upgrade Table 8 – Project Information Describe the reasons for allocation priorities and any obstacles to addressing underserved needs
The allocations proposed are based on the assessment of Auburn's needs, the resources available in the region, the availability of other funds also focusing on needs, and the purpose of Consolidated Plan funds.
Should CDBG revenues exceed the proposed amount, the additional resources shall be allocated in accordance to the following guidelines:
Fill gaps in human services primarily healthcare, homeless prevention and intervention and affordable housing accessibility. Increase funding for physical development activities including housing, community facilities and economic development.
If increases are not significant enough to enhance projects or activitities funds may be placed in contingency for programming later in the year or the following program year.
Should CDBG revenues come in lower than anticipated; the City will continue with its planned policy and to the extent allowed reduce funding allocations in physical development projects and administrative activities. Public service project funds will not be decreased.
Should CDBG revenues come in less than originally proposed, the City will continue managing the programs with decreased resources to the extent possible and reduce funding allocations in administrative activities and not public services.
If exceeded revenues are not significant enough to enhance or fund a project, funds may be placed in
Page 49 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 15
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
contingency for programming later in the year or in the next program year.
Page 50 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 16
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
AP-38 Project Summary Project Summary Information
1 Project Name HOUSING REPAIR Target Area Goals Supported Ensure a Suitable Living Environment Needs Addressed Affordable Housing Development and Preservation Neighborhood Revitalization Funding : Description Maintain the affordability of decent housing for very low-income Auburn residents by providing repairs necessary to maintain suitable housing for low income Auburn homeowners. Target Date 12/29/2017 Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities
A minimum of 4 Auburn residents will benefit from the housing repair program.
Location Description Auburn city limits. Planned Activities Minor home repairs and maintenance include but are not limited to: roof repair, ramp installation, furnace repair and replacement, plumbing, floor repair and weatherization. 2 Project Name GRC SMALL BUSINESS ASSISTANCE CENTER Target Area Goals Supported Ensure a Suitable Living Environment Needs Addressed Economic Opportunity
Page 51 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 17
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Funding CDBG: $20,000 Description Create economic opportunities by providing the availability and access to counseling and training for approximately 12 Auburn residents who are either trying to sustain or create a small business and collectively generate jobs. Target Date 12/29/2017 Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities
12 Auburn residents will benefit from the proposed activity of Small Business Assistance.
Location Description 1221 D Street NE Auburn, WA 98002 Planned Activities Provide counseling and technical assistance to low income Auburn residents who are small business owners looking to improve or expand their business as well as residents looking to start a small business in Auburn. 3 Project Name Les Gove Park Restroom Upgrade Target Area Goals Supported Ensure a Suitable Living Environment Needs Addressed Neighborhood Revitalization Funding : Description The City of Auburn Les Gove Park restroom has experienced significant deterioration over the years causing residents visiting the park to not feel safe using the restroom facilities. The Les Gove Park provides imperative programs and services to many of Auburn's low to moderate income residents. Ensuring all park facilities such as the restroom are safe and ADA compliant allow park staff to continue serving our residents and connect them with invaluable programs. Target Date 12/29/2017
Page 52 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 18
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Estimate the number and type of families that will benefit from the proposed activities
The Les Gove Park hosts 80,000-90,000 visitors each year. All visitors of the Park and its facilities will benefit from the proposed activities with a specific benefit to those living with physical disabilities.
Location Description 910 9th St. SE Auburn, WA 98002 Planned Activities Contain and stabilize project area using appropriate erosion control measures. Demolish and dispose of existing restroom building, and excavate project area to accommodate proposed building footprint. Upgrade existing water supply lines to accommodate the increase in restroom fixtures if necessary. Construct the new building using appropriate building materials based on today's construction materials. Install toilets, urinals and sinks based on design develoed by project architect. Install landscape improvements to stabilize soils and to match existing landscaping in the vicinity of the project area.
Page 53 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 19
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
AP-50 Geographic Distribution - 91.420, 91.220(f) Description of the geographic areas of the entitlement (including areas of low-income and minority concentration) where assistance will be directed
The City of Auburn intends on distributing funds throughout the jurisdiction.
Geographic Distribution
Target Area Percentage of Funds Table 9 - Geographic Distribution Rationale for the priorities for allocating investments geographically
n/a
Discussion
Due to the fact that areas of low-income and minority concentrations are dispersed throughout all of Auburn, the City intends on investing throughout the entire jurisdiction to ensure that all populations throughout the region have access to beneficial programs and housing opportunitites.
Page 54 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 20
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Page 55 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 21
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
AP-85 Other Actions - 91.420, 91.220(k) Introduction
The City of Auburn will continue to work with service providers throughout the region in coordination to develop systems and strategies to promote their efforts in providing optimal, easily accessible services. The City will work to reduce the number of families in poverty, sustain relationships with employment training agencies, and work to preserve the affordable housing stock in our community.
Actions planned to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs
By establishing a strong foundation of networks between local service providers, stakeholders and government agencies through committees and coalitions, the City will work in partnership to address obstacles and ameliorate barriers to meeting underserved needs. The collaborated organizations will develop detailed strategic plans that will delegate tasks, build systems and ongoing assessment of service delivery.
Actions planned to foster and maintain affordable housing
The City will continue to maintain the affordability of decent housing for low income Auburn residents by reallocating $20,000 of CDBG funds to the City's Housing Repair Program. The program provides emergency repairs necessary to maintain safe housing for up to 55 Auburn homeowners, many of whom are senior citizens and/or are experiencing barriers safely accessing their homes due to physical disabilities or impairment.
In addition to Auburn's Housing Repair program, the City will maintain affordable housing by continuing to engage and partner with coalitions, committees and other government agencies to integrate and enhance efforts on the issue.
Actions planned to reduce lead-based paint hazards
The City of Auburn will continue to implement U.S. Department of Housing Urban Development (HUD) regulations to protect residents from lead-based paint hazards in housing that is financially assisted by the federal government. The requirements apply only to housing built prior to 1980, the year lead-based paint was banned nationwide for consumers.
Actions planned to reduce the number of poverty-level families
The City of Auburn's actions planned to reduce the number of poverty- level families include but are not limited to:
Allocating $20,000 to the housing repair program
Page 56 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 22
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Participate and partner with coalitions, committees and agencies that provide antipoverty services to develop and enhance strategies and efforts to reduce poverty level families
Actions planned to develop institutional structure
The City's planned actions to address the gaps and weaknesses identified in the strategic plan include:
Maintaining partnerships with and participating in the South King County Homeless Coalition, the Committee to End Homelessness of King County and other regional human service providers, coalitions and committees who address homeless issues. The City will also continue to work collaboratively with partnering organizations and groups to integrate and enhance services to provide optimal services to individuals and families currently experiencing or at risk of homelessness. Continue to use the recommendations provided by the City's Homeless Task Force to address gaps in services to our homeless population and identify where resources can be leveraged to strengthen the safety net of supportive services available to our residents.
Actions planned to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies
The City of Auburn has heavily contributed and intends to continue cultivating relationships between public and private housing and social service agencies. In addition the City will continue to participate in collaborations with the South King County Homeless Forum, the South King County Council of Human Services, King County Housing Development Consortium and the Seattle-King County Joint Planners Meeting.
Discussion
The expressed goal of the City's Consolidated Plan is to reduce the number of people living in poverty within Auburn. The City intends to give funding priority to programs that in addition to complying with federal regulations and address a priority a outlined in the Consolidated Plan are consistent with all of the goals and objectives identified.
Page 57 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 23
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Program Specific Requirements AP-90 Program Specific Requirements - 91.420, 91.220(l)(1,2,4)
Introduction
The City of Auburn will use all CDBG funds to support projects and activities benefiting low and moderate income residents. The full allowable amount of funds will be used for Public Services and Planning and Administration with the remaining balance intended for housing rehab services and economic development.
Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) Reference 24 CFR 91.220(l)(1) Projects planned with all CDBG funds expected to be available during the year are identified in the Projects Table. The following identifies program income that is available for use that is included in projects to be carried out. 1. The total amount of program income that will have been received before the start of the next program year and that has not yet been reprogrammed 0 2. The amount of proceeds from section 108 loan guarantees that will be used during the year to address the priority needs and specific objectives identified in the grantee's strategic plan. 0 3. The amount of surplus funds from urban renewal settlements 0 4. The amount of any grant funds returned to the line of credit for which the planned use has not been included in a prior statement or plan 0 5. The amount of income from float-funded activities 0 Total Program Income: 0 Other CDBG Requirements 1. The amount of urgent need activities 0 2. The estimated percentage of CDBG funds that will be used for activities that benefit persons of low and moderate income.Overall Benefit - A consecutive period of one, two or three years may be used to determine that a minimum overall benefit of 70% of CDBG funds is used to benefit persons of low and moderate income. Specify the years covered that include this Annual Action Plan. 100.00%
Page 58 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 24
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Discussion
The City of Auburn will continue to use all of its funds to support residents of low/moderate income while maintaining a focus on underserved and special populations.
Page 59 of 123
Annual Action Plan 2016 25
OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015)
Page 60 of 123
Restroom at Les Gove Park
The current restroom at Les Gove Park is non-ADA compliant and has passed its usable life. The
demands of the park have greatly increased. Below are list of features that necessitate a properly sized
ADA accessible facility.
Splash Park
Discovery Playground that attracts families and camps from all over the region
3 large summer festivals each attracting up to 10,000 participants.
Summer Concerts
Shelter rentals
General Park Use
In addition the following park projects are under construction
Herr Property- to feature Car Shows and other community activities
Central Plaza- Food Trucks, Youth Field Trips, Entertainers, etc. will gather in this area
Lighted Crescent walk and “Les Gove Loop” walking path is being developed and expanded for a
safe walkable route in Auburns Central Park
The Park Campus currently receives approximately 100,000 visitors per year. A minimum of 6 restroom
stalls are needed to accommodate the visitation, 2 of which need to be ADA and have baby changing
stations. The summer months are particularly busy with young families as well as participants with
special needs.
Per Councilmember Peloza’s request related to the cost of demolition of existing restroom and using
port-a-potty restrooms
Cost of demolition of existing restroom and associated earthwork- $25,000 (one time)
Cost of port-a-potties operation based on 6 port-a-potties (2 ADA accessible) for summer months with
pumping every 2 days and 3 port-a-potties (1 ADA) for other months with weekly pumping
$20,000 annually
Cost of current restroom maintenance
$2,500 annually
Page 61 of 123
1Keeping Your CDBG Funds Moving: Guidelines for Managing Your Overall Community Development Block Grant Program in a Timely Manner
(U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development)
2www.hudexchange.info/programs/cdbg-entitlement/cdbg-entitlement-program-eligibility-requirements/
City of Auburn CDBG Reallocation Action Plan Amendment 2017
The City of Auburn has been flagged by H.U.D. for untimeliness spending of Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) funds for the 2015 and 2016 program years due to underspending of funds
between 2010 and 2014. H.U.D.’s CDBG timeliness guidelines state that an entitlement can have no
more than 1.5% of their annual allocation in their line of credit by the end of the program year1. (24 CFR
570.902(a)). This calculation is made 60 days prior to the end of the current program year.
In April 2016, an Action Plan Amendment was approved by the Auburn City Council to reallocate to the
following projects:
Rehabilitation for Transitional Home (Complete) - $65,000
Funds were allocated to rehabilitate a house we did not know we owned that was purchased with CDBG
money about eight years ago and was required to be utilized according to the plans that had been
documented to HUD or we would need to repay the funds in the amount of $110,000. The home was
rehabbed and the City of Auburn has partnered with Mary’s Place to manage the property, place and
work with families that are surviving domestic violence. After much work to meet federal guidelines and
execute the contract, a family will be occupying the home very soon.
Downtown Façade Improvements (Complete) - $50,000
The City’s facade improvement grants facilitate exterior building (facade) improvements for businesses
within the designated Business Improvement Area (BIA). The City Council approved $200,000 to be
awarded between 2015 and 2016. CDBG funds were added in the amount $50,000 for this program to
allow for a larger grant amounts to be applied for.
Auburn Youth Resources – Arcadia House (Project Delayed, funds unspent) - $280,000
This money was to support pre-construction costs related to the Arcadia project. Unfortunately due to
delays in the project, Auburn Youth Resources could not begin the project resulting in Auburn’s CDBG
funds to be unspent.
Unspent funds must be reallocated through the formal Action Plan Amendment process1 including an
amended action plan written using H.U.D.’s IDIS system, a 30 day comment period, a public hearing, an
environmental review if it is a capital project and Council approval. Entitlements that are untimely in
their allocation spending are at risk of the reduction of future CDBG funds.
H.U.D. recommends that grantees use the following guidelines to ensure timely spending of funds1:
Identify additional activities in the Consolidated Plan that will be available when a project is not
ready to proceed on schedule.
Conduct environmental reviews and request release of funds for projects before the
Consolidated Plan has been approved.
Work on a 3- to 5- year window, shuffling projects among program years depending on
readiness
Page 62 of 123
1Keeping Your CDBG Funds Moving: Guidelines for Managing Your Overall Community Development Block Grant Program in a Timely Manner
(U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development)
2www.hudexchange.info/programs/cdbg-entitlement/cdbg-entitlement-program-eligibility-requirements/
Through guidance from the city’s H.U.D. representative to spend the funds as soon as possible, the Les
Gove Park improvement project was selected. The Les Gove Park improvement project is in line with
H.U.D.’s national objectives, a H.U.D. eligible activity and will easily spend down the funds. Spending
the funds will reduce the risk of a reduction in future CDBG awards to the City of Auburn.
Other projects that were considered and presented to H.U.D. were:
Funding of a capital project for a local non-profit (No funded programs in place; none listed in
current action plan)
Micro-housing project for a local non-profit (program not in place; not in current action plan)
Advance lease payments to a site for a potential shelter operation (ineligible activity)
Sidewalk enhancements in an eligible neighborhood (not shovel ready, not in action plan)
Funding a hygiene center (ineligible activity)
It should be noted that H.U.D. grant funds are reimbursable monies to grantees. This can present a
challenge for some organizations to accept this type of assistance due to the need for upfront funding to
be reimbursed as well and the sometime onerous reporting and other regulations that must be met to
qualify for the funds.
Eligible Activities2
CDBG funds may be used for activities which include, but are not limited to:
Acquisition of real property
Relocation and demolition
Rehabilitation of residential and non-residential structures
Construction of public facilities and improvements, such as water and sewer facilities, streets,
neighborhood centers, and the conversion of school buildings for eligible purposes
Public services, within certain limits
Activities relating to energy conservation and renewable energy resources
Provision of assistance to profit-motivated businesses to carry out economic development and
job creation/retention activities
Each activity must meet one of the following national objectives for the program: benefit low- and
moderate-income persons, prevention or elimination of slums or blight, or address community
development needs having a particular urgency because existing conditions pose a serious and
immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community for which other funding is not available.
Generally, the following types of activities are ineligible:
Acquisition, construction, or reconstruction of buildings for the general conduct of government
Political activities
Certain income payments
Construction of new housing (with some exceptions)
Page 63 of 123
1Keeping Your CDBG Funds Moving: Guidelines for Managing Your Overall Community Development Block Grant Program in a Timely Manner
(U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development)
2www.hudexchange.info/programs/cdbg-entitlement/cdbg-entitlement-program-eligibility-requirements/
Note: Staff reached out to our local H.U.D. representative to be present at the 4/24/17 meeting and
received this response:
From: Williams, Quincy H [mailto:Quincy.H.Williams@hud.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 8:39 AM
To: Erica Azcueta <eazcueta@auburnwa.gov>
Subject: RE: CAPER
Hello Erica,
I have reviewed your message regarding Monday’s council meeting. Not sure if we can meet your
request but will present to management. Did you stress to council that if the city doesn’t get funds
expended ASAP that allocation will be in jeopardy of being reduced?
Quincy Williams
CPD Representative
Housing and Urban Development
909 First Avenue, Suite 300
Seattle, WA 98104
206-220-5370
Page 64 of 123
Restroom at Les Gove Park
The current restroom at Les Gove Park is non-ADA compliant and has passed its usable life. The
demands of the park have greatly increased. Below are list of features that necessitate a properly sized
ADA accessible facility.
Splash Park
Discovery Playground that attracts families and camps from all over the region
3 large summer festivals each attracting up to 10,000 participants.
Summer Concerts
Shelter rentals
General Park Use
In addition the following park projects are under construction
Herr Property- to feature Car Shows and other community activities
Central Plaza- Food Trucks, Youth Field Trips, Entertainers, etc. will gather in this area
Lighted Crescent walk and “Les Gove Loop” walking path is being developed and expanded for a
safe walkable route in Auburns Central Park
The Park Campus currently receives approximately 100,000 visitors per year. A minimum of 6 restroom
stalls are needed to accommodate the visitation, 2 of which need to be ADA and have baby changing
stations. The summer months are particularly busy with young families as well as participants with
special needs.
Per Councilmember Peloza’s request related to the cost of demolition of existing restroom and using
port-a-potty restrooms
Cost of demolition of existing restroom and associated earthwork- $25,000 (one time)
Cost of port-a-potties operation based on 6 port-a-potties (2 ADA accessible) for summer months with
pumping every 2 days and 3 port-a-potties (1 ADA) for other months with weekly pumping
$20,000 annually
Cost of current restroom maintenance
$2,500 annually
Page 65 of 123
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
Safer Cities/Inclusive Cities Ad Hoc Presentation
Date:
April 19, 2017
Department:
Administration
Attachments:
Ord 6651
Res 5284
Budget Impact:
$0
Administrative Recommendation:
Background Summary:
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember: Staff:
Meeting Date:April 24, 2017 Item Number:
Page 66 of 123
------------------------------
Ordinance No. 6651
April 12, 2017
Page 1 of 4
ORDINANCE NO. 6 6 5 1
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, ADDING A NEW
SECTION 1.02.030 OF THE AUBURN CITY CODE
RELATING TO THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF
CITY OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING
THE AFFIRMATION OF THE VALUE OF ALL
AUBURN RESIDENTS
WHEREAS, the City of Auburn (the “City”) wishes to foster trust and
cooperation between City personnel, law enforcement officials, and the public;
and
WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Section 35A.11.030 of the Revised
Code of Washington (RCW) to define the functions, powers, and duties of its
officers and employees and to adopt and enforce ordinances appropriate to the
good government of the city; and
WHEREAS, the functions, powers, and duties of City officers and
employees does not include responsibility for enforcement of federal immigration
law; and
WHEREAS, the good government of the City includes recognizing that all
people are vital to our shared prosperity and that all people must be respected
and valued; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City and of the residents of the
City to be a diverse and inclusive city.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN as follows:
Page 67 of 123
------------------------------
Ordinance No. 6651
April 12, 2017
Page 2 of 4
Section 1. Recitals Adopted. That the City Council hereby adopts the
recitals contained in this Ordinance as Findings of Facts and Conclusions, as
appropriate given the context of each recital and incorporates said recitals herein
by this reference.
Section 2. New Section of City Code. A new Section 1.02.030 of
the City of Auburn City Code is amended to read as follows:
1.02.030 Restriction on immigration inquiries.
Consistent with the city’s intention of being a diverse and inclusive city,
except as provided in this section or when otherwise required by a law, a city
office, department, employee, agency or agent shall not condition the provision of
city services on the citizenship or immigration status of any individual.
A. Nothing in the Auburn city code shall be construed to restrict or
prohibit any city officer or employee from participating in cross-designation or
task force activities with federal law enforcement authorities.
B. City personnel shall not request specific documents relating to a
person’s civil immigration status for the sole purpose of determining whether the
individual has violated federal civil immigration laws. The documents include but
are not limited to; passports, alien registration cards; or work permits.
C. City personnel may use documents relating to a person’s civil
immigration status if the documents are offered by the person upon a general,
nonspecific request.
D. City personnel shall not initiate any inquiry or enforcement action
based solely on a person’s:
1. Civil immigration status;
2. Race;
3. Inability to speak English; or
4. Inability to understand city personnel or its officers.
E. Except when otherwise required by law, where the city accepts
presentation of a state-issued driver’s license or identification card as adequate
evidence of identity, presentation of a photo identity document issued by the
person’s nation of origin, such as a driver’s license, passport or consulate-issued
document, shall be accepted and shall not subject the person to a higher level of
scrutiny or different treatment than if the person had provided a Washington state
driver’s license or identification card. However, a request for translation of such a
document to English shall not be deemed a violation of any provision of City
code. This provision does not apply to documentation required to complete a
federal I-9 employment eligibility verification form.
F. This section does not create or form the basis for liability on the
part of the city, its officers, employees, or agents.
Page 68 of 123
------------------------------
Ordinance No. 6651
April 12, 2017
Page 3 of 4
G. Unless otherwise permitted by city code, or required by state or
federal law, or international treaty, all applications, questionnaires and interview
forms used in relation to the provision of city benefits, opportunities or services
shall be promptly reviewed by each agency, and any question requiring
disclosure of information related to citizenship or immigration status shall be, in
the agency’s best judgment, either deleted in its entirety or revised such that the
disclosure is no longer required.
Section 3. Implementation. The Mayor is hereby authorized to
implement such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the
directions of this legislation.
Section 4. 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 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.
Section 5. 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: ____________________
CITY OF AUBURN
______________________________
NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
Page 69 of 123
------------------------------
Ordinance No. 6651
April 12, 2017
Page 4 of 4
_________________________
Danielle E. Daskam, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
Daniel B. Heid, City Attorney
Published: ________________
Page 70 of 123
----------------------------------
Resolution No. 5284
April 5, 2017
Page 1 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. 5 2 8 4
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AUBURN, WASHINGTON, AFFIRMING OF THE VALUE OF ALL
AUBURN RESIDENTS
WHEREAS, the City of Auburn is committed to inclusiveness and diversity as
fundamental aspects of our community; and
WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Section 35A.11.030 of the Revised Code of
Washington (RCW) to define the functions, powers, and duties of its officers and
employees and to adopt and enforce ordinances appropriate to the good government of
the City; and
WHEREAS, the good government of the City includes recognizing that all people
are vital to our shared prosperity and that all people must be respected and valued; and
WHEREAS, local elected officials can and should lead the way forward in making
inclusiveness and diversity priorities; and
WHEREAS, the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the
equal protection of the laws to all persons, not just citizens and residents, stating that
“[n]o state shall . . . deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process
of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
[U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1]; and
WHEREAS, the courts of this state as well as the United States have repeatedly
stated that “the equal protection clause applies to resident aliens as well as citizens.”
Herriott v. City of Seattle, 81 Wn.2d 48, 500 P.2d 101 (1972), citing Takahashi v. Fish &
Game Comm'n, 334 U.S. 410, 420, 68 S.Ct. 1138, 92 L.Ed. 1478 (1948); and the City
Page 71 of 123
----------------------------------
Resolution No. 5284
April 5, 2017
Page 2 of 3
Council finds that is in in the best interest of the City to be an inclusive and diverse
community for all people.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, KING
COUNTY, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES as follows:
Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Auburn reaffirms its commitment
to making inclusiveness and diversity fundamental aspects of our community, pledges
active efforts to seek to achieve that goal, and urges all residents of the City of Auburn
to join together to support this effort.
Section 2. That the Mayor is authorized to implement such administrative
procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directives of this legislation.
Section 3. That this Resolution shall take effect and be in full force upon
passage and signatures hereon.
Dated and Signed this _____ day of _________________, 2017.
CITY OF AUBURN
_____________________________________
NANCY BACKUS
MAYOR
ATTEST:
_________________________
Danielle E. Daskam, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
Daniel B. Heid, City Attorney
Page 72 of 123
----------------------------------
Resolution No. 5284
April 5, 2017
Page 3 of 3
Page 73 of 123
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
Traffic School Update
Date:
April 18, 2017
Department:
Police
Attachments:
Traffic School update
Budget Impact:
$0
Administrative Recommendation:
Background Summary:
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember: Staff:Lee
Meeting Date:April 24, 2017 Item Number:
Page 74 of 123
r
itripm
tip'}
ki,-;:c.-f..:,:.s- A u,iso
a --4, ,,. 44'‘
i
4
Elli " 11"
riff
ir ,..:.
il:
A..,
41: ik.
1r
4_ ,' 1U R
c s 41,
0 .01 ,41
CITY OF AUBURN
TRAFFIC S
a
iiiiimiihh,
r Presentation by
41IIIII:
Auburn Police Department
x n Sy
Traffic Unit
Page 75 of 123
saiaeies aopnalsui ui pied si uoilin} Jo %ZT •
1anoo }oialsia ay} olpied si uovq. Jo %SZ •
auoqdapui apuis imps aye ui palioaua aney sluapn}s .ELT •
saseanui Aweindod aye se sassep leuonippe Jo uoqedpi}ue
aye iprN tpuoua pea papnpuop am sassep onnl. 01. aup .
uasaad ol. g-rpZ aagopp leuop.eaado uaaq seq loops .
1ooLIDs Dulaal uangnd
Page 76 of 123
GOALS
Discuss traffic safety issues within the City of Auburn .
Common causes of collisions
Contributing factors to fatalities and injuries
Rules of the road
Page 77 of 123
COLLISIONS
VEHICLE COLLISIONS ARE THE
OF DEATH FOR AGES 5-24*
According to CDC report 2014
Page 78 of 123
COLLISIONS
City of Auburn
2015
Total Fatalities : 2
Total Collisions : 1,392
Injury Collisions :
October and July had highest amount
Page 79 of 123
COLLISIONS
City of Auburn
2016
Total Fatalities : 3
Total Collisions : 1,535
Injury Collisions :
Page 80 of 123
1)ISTRACTED DRIVING
We bust you
because we care.
2015
10% of ALL fatal crashes
mow wow
3,477 deaths nationwide
15% of ALL injury crashes
391,000 injuries estimated
tvk 4 p.
M
4. r:,,,
Fpmp.e dorma_cilwmda't.Y],.
Page 81 of 123
RULES OF THE ROAD
Speed Lane Use
Contributor to collisions Center turn lane
School zones/Other special zones C-curbing
Per se Method of turning
Right of Way Safe Following Distance
Left turns (New signals) 3 second rule
Roundabouts
Blocking intersections Auburn's Inattentive Driving Law
Pedestrian crossing
Buses/School Buses
Page 82 of 123
Jaycee's Video
A.
rt ..
f
Al r
Page 83 of 123
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
Commendation Inquiry Allegation (CIA) Report and Use of
Force Report
Date:
April 18, 2017
Department:
Police
Attachments:
2016 Use of Force Summary
CIA Analysis
Power Point
Budget Impact:
$0
Administrative Recommendation:
Background Summary:
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember: Staff:Lee
Meeting Date:April 24, 2017 Item Number:
Page 84 of 123
1
POLICE DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
DATE: April 24, 2017
TO: Mayor and Auburn City Council Members
FROM: Auburn Police Department
SUBJECT: 2016 Annual Use of Force Summary
The purpose of this annual report is to document and summarize all Use’s of Force that were
completed by Auburn Officers during the 2016 calendar year. This report compares statistics from
2010 through 2016, which adds context and helps us identify trends that we can address in future
training. The report will compare Use of Force incidents vs. Use of Force Allegations; types of
injuries sustained by both suspect and officer; and force used when presented with different
scenarios (i.e. officer about to be assaulted, property about to be damaged, etc.).
In 2016, Auburn Police Officers responded to 94,348 CAD incidents (92,872 in 2015) and
completed 17,823 case reports (17,875 in 2015). Officers made 4,716 arrests (4,985 in 2015)
with 2,551 of those arrestees being booked into SCORE (2,884 in 2015), and issued 8,298
infractions/citations (8,292 in 2015).
There were 135 Use of Force Incidents in 2016 compared to 136 in 2015. Of the 135 incidents
where force was used, 116 suspects were involved. Of the 116 suspects, 46 reported injuries. All
injuries were photographed and noted to be minor scrapes, bruises, small lacerations, K-9 bites,
and minor punctures or redness from Taser applications.
Auburn Police Officers were compelled to use force once in every 699 CAD incidents, once in
every 132 case reports, once in every 35 physical arrests and once in every 29 physical bookings.
See below table for ratio comparison from 2015.
Only .14% of contacts resulted in a use of force.
2015 2015 Ratio
(136)
2016 2016 Ratio
(135)
Force Frequency
Change
CAD 92,872 1/683 94,348 1/699 -2%
Cases 17,875 1/131 17,823 1/132 .45%
Arrests 4,985 1/37 4,716 1/35 -4.7%
Bookings 2,884 1/21 2,551 1/29 -10.9%
Page 85 of 123
In 2016, we received three allegation
incidents were investigated and determined to be unfounded.
USE OF FORCE
There were 135 Use of Force Incidents documented
Officers continue to use de-escalation techniques and verbal skills to gain compliance.
The Auburn Police Department reports uses of force using
chart is a snapshot comparison of total excess
amount of force incidents.
Force Report Comparison 2010
Year Use of
force
Incidents
2010 107
2011 113
2012 94
2013 98
2014 96
2015 136
2016 135
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
6.0%
7.0%
8.0%
9.0%
2010 2011
8.4%
3%
% Total force Resulting in Complaints
2
allegations of inappropriate and/or excessive applications of force.
incidents were investigated and determined to be unfounded.
USE OF FORCE COMPARISON
Incidents documented in 2016, which is a
escalation techniques and verbal skills to gain compliance.
reports uses of force using a Use of Force
is a snapshot comparison of total excessive force allegations for each year compared to the
orce Report Comparison 2010-2016
Use of
force
Incidents
Excessive
Force
Allegations
Sustained
Allegations
107 9 1
113 3 0
94 2 0
98 3 1
96 0 0
136 0 0
135 3 0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
3%
2%
3%
0% 0%
% Total force Resulting in Complaints
2010-2016
and/or excessive applications of force. All
decrease from 2015.
escalation techniques and verbal skills to gain compliance.
orce form. The following
ive force allegations for each year compared to the
Sustained
Allegations
2016
2%
Page 86 of 123
The use of force types listed below are
on the type of resistance the subject
force our officers use which is also t
Restraint which is not considered a “choke hold” and is widely used across the country.
Pursuit Immobilization Technique
quickly as possible in order to reduce potential injury and take the suspect into custody. An
Intentional Vehicle Strike is authorized by policy in certain situations which entails the officer
striking a suspect vehicle with his/her patrol car at slow speed in order to pin the vehicle so that it
cannot continue to flee.
8 10
1
7
0
14
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
3
Types of Force Used
The use of force types listed below are techniques that the officers are trained to use depending
on the type of resistance the subjects are exhibiting. Take Down is by far the most used type of
force our officers use which is also the least forceful type of force. LVNR is
which is not considered a “choke hold” and is widely used across the country.
Pursuit Immobilization Technique which is used during pursuits in an attempt to end the pursuit as
quickly as possible in order to reduce potential injury and take the suspect into custody. An
is authorized by policy in certain situations which entails the officer
suspect vehicle with his/her patrol car at slow speed in order to pin the vehicle so that it
Force Types Used in 2016
3 4 3 3 6
21
2
23
1
10
5
techniques that the officers are trained to use depending
. Take Down is by far the most used type of
is Lateral Vascular Neck
which is not considered a “choke hold” and is widely used across the country. PIT is
during pursuits in an attempt to end the pursuit as
quickly as possible in order to reduce potential injury and take the suspect into custody. An
is authorized by policy in certain situations which entails the officer
suspect vehicle with his/her patrol car at slow speed in order to pin the vehicle so that it
5 7
34
9
35
Page 87 of 123
4
Effective vs. Not Effective
Not every type of force is always effective and at times multiple types of force are used on one
person during the same incident.
Force Used Resulting in Injuries
In 2016, injuries were reported to the suspect in 34% of all uses of force incidents. Officers
received minor injuries in 11% of the incidents, which is a 2% decrease over 2015. Officer injuries
included bite marks, bruising, minor punctures, scrapes and scratches.
Total
Force
Incidents
Suspects
Injured
Officers
Injured
% of total of
suspects
injured
2010 107 47 13 44%
2011 113 51 10 45%
2012 94 38 9 40%
2013 98 39 8 40%
2014 96 35 6 36%
2015 136 48 17 35%
2016 135 46 15 34%
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Effective
Not Effective
Page 88 of 123
0
10
20
30
40
50
2010 2011
Suspect Injury By Type 2010
Taser Probe
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
06000700080009001000110012002016 Incidents By Time of Day
5
Time of Day
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Suspect Injury By Type 2010-2016
Taser Probe Pain Complaint K-9 Cut/Bruise/Scrape/Bone
1300140015001600170018001900200021002200230024002016 Incidents By Time of Day
2016
240001000200030004000500Page 89 of 123
6
The above charts depicts the Auburn Police Department use of force incidents by time of day. As
in all previous years documented, the majority of the occasions that officers are compelled to use
force occur between the hours of 6:00 PM and 2:00 AM.
Reason for Use of Force
Officer
Assaulted/Threat
to be Assaulted
Fighting
Stance
Other
About to be
Assaulted
Subject
With
Weapon
Muscular
Tension/Pulled
Away
Subject
Trying
to Flee
Refusing
Commands Other
2010 14 22 3 0 99 41 94 42
2011 25 0 3 1 Unk 77 88 17
2012 15 13 5 0 52 23 53 7
2013 15 19 3 1 96 29 77 22
2014 10 7 1 0 103 30 67 20
2015 27 16 7 0 151 52 97 27
2016 34 13 12 6 126 50 91 23
The above chart shows the reasons that an officer(s) used force on a subject. Most of the time
there are multiple reasons for use of force on one subject. In 2016, there were 355 documented
reasons why an officer(s) used force.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Force Incidents by Time of Day
2010-2016
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
Page 90 of 123
7
Summary
It is clear from the report that Auburn Officers contact many subjects throughout the year and
make many arrests. The most compelling stats in this report are that the calls for service, arrests,
and bookings are high numbers and by percentage the use of force does not occur often. This is
due to the training the officers receive and the quality of personnel we have working for the
Auburn Police Department. We as a department work hard to train our officers in de-escalation
techniques and the officers do a great job influencing behavior.
Page 91 of 123
POLICE DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
DATE: April 24, 2017
TO: Mayor and Auburn City Council Members
FROM: Auburn Police Department
SUBJECT: 2016 Annual Commendations, Inquiries and Allegations of
Misconduct Analysis (CIA)
This annual analysis of the CIA investigations provides the administration of the
agency and the public we serve a review of agency personnel conduct from an
analytical perspective and possibly through the eyes of our community. Our Vision
Statement calls for us to be a premier agency that is trusted, supported, and
respected. Our Mission Statement requires that our department will “provide
professional Law Enforcement services to our community.” To meet these demands,
we must be a disciplined and a well-regulated organization. One method by which to
determine our success is to evaluate our CIA process. This report illustrates how well
the Auburn Police Department is perceived to be following our Vision and Mission
statements, as well as our Manual of Standards.
Summary of 2016
In 2016, Auburn Police Officers responded to 94,348 (92,872 in 2015) CAD incidents
and completed 17,823 (17,875 in 2015) case reports. Officers made 4,716 (4,985 in
2015) arrests, with 2,551 (2,940 in 2014) of those arrestees being booked into the
SCORE Jail. Officers also issued 8,298 (8,292 in 2015) infractions/citations. All of this
activity accounts for only a portion of the personal contacts with our community
members that are made by our police officers throughout the year.
As outlined in the Auburn Police Department Manual of Standards (MOS), the CIA
system provides a standardized means of reporting, investigating, and documenting
Commendations, Inquiries, Internal Investigations and Collision Reviews.
Page 92 of 123
2
Commendations
A Commendation is used to recognize actions or performance by members of the
police department who act or perform in a manner that is outstanding or beyond what
is normally expected. The Commendation process recognizes employees for
Professionalism, Exemplary Job, Exemplary Actions, Life Saving and Heroism. Total
Commendations have increased 60% from 2011.
The Medal of Valor will be awarded to department personnel for acts that meet all of
the following conditions.
1. When the act conspicuously displays extreme courage, beyond the normal
demands for police service.
2. When failure to take such action would not justify official censure.
3. When substantial risk to their physical safety actually existed and the
individual was unquestionably conscious of this imminent threat.
4. When the objective was logically believed to be of sufficient importance to
justify the risk taken.
The Medal of Distinction will be awarded to department personnel for acts which
meet all of the following criteria.
1. When personnel manifest courage in the performance of duty under
circumstances less than those required for the Medal of Valor.
2. When a risk to the individual’s physical safety actually existed, or when there
was reason to believe that such a risk was present.
3. When the act indicated that the individual was conscious of the imminent
danger to their personal safety, or when a reasonable and prudent person
would normally assume such a danger was present.
4. When the objective was reasonably believed to be of sufficient importance to
justify the risk taken.
5. When the individual accomplished the objective, or was prevented from
doing so by circumstances beyond his/her control.
The Lifesaving Medal shall be awarded to department personnel for acts that meet
all of the following criteria.
1. When the acts were personally performed by the officer.
2. When affirmed by competent medical authority, an individual saved a human
life or prolonged life beyond the day of extraordinary circumstances.
Page 93 of 123
3
The Merit Medal shall be awarded to department personnel for acts that meet all of
the following criteria.
1. When individuals who distinguish themselves by excellence in events which
involve tactical action.
2. When the event involves some risk to the individual.
Year
Total
Commendations
Involved
Employees
Letter of
Commendation
Medal of
Distinction
Life
Saving
Medal of
Valor
Medal of
Merit
2010 114 209 2 0 0
2011 47 67 3 1 0
2012 32 48 0 0 0
2013 41 58 0 0 0
2014 52 126 3 0 0
2015 75 146 0 0 2
2016 97 172 10 5 5
1
5
The majority of our commendations come from citizens who took the time to recognize
one or more officers due to their exemplary and professional work. These
commendations range from officers doing school speeches, helping someone change
a tire or going above and beyond to investigate someone’s case.
Year External Source Internal Source
2010 86 28
2011 34 13
2012 24 8
2013 29 12
2014 42 10
2015 68 7
2016 63 20
Page 94 of 123
4
Employee Investigations
There are two ways a complaint can be categorized and investigated: Supervisory
Inquiry and Internal Investigation.
A Supervisory Inquiry involves a complaint made regarding the quality of service
delivery. These complaints vary in degree from complaints regarding an employee’s
demeanor, tardiness, complaints related to customer service, or the nature of a
department practice. The employee’s immediate supervisor typically handles this type
of complaint, but a commander might also take charge of it.
An Internal Investigation involves a complaint of a possible violation of department
standards, written directives, City policies or applicable Civil Service Rules. These
allegations include, but are not limited to, complaints of bias based policing, excessive
force, alleged corruption, insubordination, breach of civil rights, false arrest, and other
types of allegations of serious misconduct. In the event that an allegation of criminal
misconduct is reported and appears to have merit, a simultaneous criminal
investigation will be initiated.
Internal Investigations
Year
CAD
Incidents
Internal
Investigations
Inv. With
Misconduct
Total
Employees
Emp. With
Misconduct
Violations
Reported
Violations with
Misconduct
2010 73,329 21 5 27 5 36 6
2011 62,488 22 18 32 23 32 23
2012 65,750 13 11 24 19 26 22
2013 71,512 11 8 15 8 19 12
2014 89,350 5 3 5 3 12 9
2015 92,872 6 4 8 6 18 14
2016 94,348 8 5 9 3 12 9
Total allegations generated by internal and external sources
External Sources Internal Sources Total Combined
Total Allegations 3 9 12
Sustained Misconduct 0 9 9
The above table shows that 100% of the allegations received from internal sources
resulted in a finding of misconduct. Two of the allegations from external sources were
recorded on video and shown to be unfounded.
Page 95 of 123
5
Supervisory Inquiries
Inquiries were down this year and the amount of employees with unacceptable
performance was also down. These low numbers compared to the amount of contacts
with the public indicate the low number of complaints which would indicate how
professional our officers are on a daily basis.
Allegations
The following table depicts the total combined allegations for all the Supervisory
Inquiries and Internal Investigations for 2016. It should be noted that Supervisory
Inquiries can result in findings of Acceptable Performance or Unacceptable
Performance, and Internal Investigations can result in findings of Misconduct or No
Misconduct, among others. For the purposes of this combined report, all findings will
be labeled as Misconduct or No Misconduct.
Allegation Total No Misconduct Misconduct
Violation of General Policy 4 0 4
Discourtesy/Conduct Unbecoming 4 2 2
Neglect of Duty 1 1 0
Code of Conduct 2 0 2
CORE Values/Professionalism 1 0 1
Bias Policing 2 2 0
Collision – fail to report 0 0 0
Fail to meet expectations 2 0 2
Insubordination 1 0 1
Unlawful Search and Seizure 0 0 0
Excessive Force 3 3 0
Year
Supervisory
Inquiries
Inquiries with
Unacceptable
Performance
Violations
Initially
Reported
Involved
Employees
Employees with
Unacceptable
Performance
2010 27 6 34 32 6
2011 25 9 32 32 9
2012 21 9 32 20 9
2013 11 7 14 13 7
2014 25 5 45 34 4
2015 17 9 23 23 9
2016 12 7 12 10 6
Page 96 of 123
6
Late/no show for work 2 0 2
Totals 22 8 14
Criminal Investigations
There were no criminal investigations in 2016
Collisions
In 2016, there were 21 collisions involving APD employees. 13 of the 21 collisions
were determined to be preventable on the part of the officer. The average years of
service of the officers involved in collisions is 7 and the average age of the officer was
35. 14 of the collisions that occurred were officers who have 4 years or less of service
with Auburn PD. The preventable collisions were attributed to officers with an average
of 7 years of service.
In reviewing the 13 collisions, which were determined by a Collision Review Board to
be preventable, “driver inattention” was apparent in most cases, by either watching for
suspects or looking at vehicle equipment inside the car. If the drivers had been more
attentive, they would not have collided with another vehicle, curb, tree, etc. All 2016
collisions (preventable and non-preventable) are categorized as follows:
· 9 - Driver Inattention
· 1 - Driving beyond ability
· 4 - Improper Backing
· 2 - Poor Tactics
· 5- Other driver at fault
This chart depicts the corrective action dispensed to the employees in preventable
collisions. Some officers also received additional training where it was appropriate.
Page 97 of 123
The following chart depicts action taken
Investigation, Supervisory Inquiry, or Preventable Collision.
22
18
16
14 13
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
2010 2011 2012
7
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Coaching Written reprimand
7
Actions Taken
action taken for misconduct, whether from an Internal
Investigation, Supervisory Inquiry, or Preventable Collision.
16
22
32
26
21
13
15
22
16
13
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
2010-2016 Collisions
Collisions
Preventable
4
2
0
Written reprimand Suspension Dismissal
Corrective Action
for misconduct, whether from an Internal
Collisions
Preventable
Page 98 of 123
Outside Agency Investigations
To ensure that our investigations are unbiased, there are times when an outside
agency may be asked to investigate serious allegations of misconduct made against
agency staff, especially those that may be of a criminal nature. In the years 2007
there were no investigations assigned to an outside agency. Between 2011 and 2012
three criminal investigations were investigated by outside agencies. In 2013, outside
agencies investigated three officers under two incidents. Those agencies presented
the information to the respective prosecutors without influence from the Auburn Police
Department or the City of Auburn. The King County Prosecutor’s Office filed Assault
charges on one incident and the employee resigned in lieu of termination. In the
second incident of alleged excess
crime was committed.
In the years 2014-2016, there were no outside investigations.
Auburn Police Department to err on the side of caution
objectively investigate serious allegations of misconduct. In our view, this provides
Auburn citizens with confidence and
activities, and decisions made by the Auburn Police Depa
There were no grievances in 2016
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Counseling Verbal Reprimand
10
Combined Discipline
8
Outside Agency Investigations
investigations are unbiased, there are times when an outside
agency may be asked to investigate serious allegations of misconduct made against
agency staff, especially those that may be of a criminal nature. In the years 2007
assigned to an outside agency. Between 2011 and 2012
three criminal investigations were investigated by outside agencies. In 2013, outside
agencies investigated three officers under two incidents. Those agencies presented
tive prosecutors without influence from the Auburn Police
Department or the City of Auburn. The King County Prosecutor’s Office filed Assault
charges on one incident and the employee resigned in lieu of termination. In the
second incident of alleged excessive use of force, the prosecutors determined that no
there were no outside investigations. It is the practice of the
Auburn Police Department to err on the side of caution and allow outside agencies to
objectively investigate serious allegations of misconduct. In our view, this provides
Auburn citizens with confidence and allows for unbiased transparency
activities, and decisions made by the Auburn Police Department.
Grievances
There were no grievances in 2016.
Conclusion
Verbal ReprimandWritten Reprimand Suspension Dismissal
0
9
4
0
Combined Discipline (Internals/Inquiries/Collisions)
investigations are unbiased, there are times when an outside
agency may be asked to investigate serious allegations of misconduct made against
agency staff, especially those that may be of a criminal nature. In the years 2007-2010
assigned to an outside agency. Between 2011 and 2012
three criminal investigations were investigated by outside agencies. In 2013, outside
agencies investigated three officers under two incidents. Those agencies presented
tive prosecutors without influence from the Auburn Police
Department or the City of Auburn. The King County Prosecutor’s Office filed Assault
charges on one incident and the employee resigned in lieu of termination. In the
determined that no
It is the practice of the
and allow outside agencies to
objectively investigate serious allegations of misconduct. In our view, this provides
into actions,
Dismissal
(Internals/Inquiries/Collisions)
Page 99 of 123
9
A review of the frequency of incidents for 2016 regarding alleged misconduct by
employees of the Auburn Police Department does not appear to raise any specific
concerns. The data revealed in this analysis shows a decline in most areas even
though the call load continues to increase. In addition to that, the number of
allegations and found misconduct when compared to the actual number of contacts
Auburn Police Officers encounter each year is extremely low. The data revealed for
2016 illustrates that the Auburn Police Department continues to be successful in
striving to perform by the standards of our CORE values and provide professional
police services to the City of Auburn.
Page 100 of 123
CIA AND USE OF FORCE ANALYSIS
2016 INSPECTIONAL
SERVICES REPORTS
Page 101 of 123
CIA SUMMARY
Increase from 2015
•CAD incidents –94,348 +1.6%
•Case reports –17,823 -0.3%
•Arrests –4,716 -5.4%
•Booked into Score –2,551 -1.2%
•Infractions/Citations –8,298 +0.1%
Page 102 of 123
COMMENDATIONS
Year
Total
Commendations
Involved
Employees
Letter of
Commendation
Medal of
Distinction Life Saving
Medal of
Merit Medal of Valor
2010 114 209 2 0 0 0 0
2011 47 67 3 1 0 0 0
2012 32 48 0 0 0 0 0
2013 41 58 0 0 0 0 0
2014 52 126 3 0 0 0 0
2015 75 146 0 0 2 0 0
2016 97 172 10 5 5 1 1
Page 103 of 123
INTERNAL INVESTIGATION
•Possible violation of policy, force, bias policing, false arrest. More
serious allegation.
Year
CAD
Incidents
Internal
Investigations
Inv. With
Misconduct
Total
Employees
Emp. With
Misconduct
Violations
Reported
Violations with
Misconduct
2010 73,329 21 5 27 5 36 6
2011 62,488 22 18 32 23 32 23
2012 65,750 13 11 24 19 26 22
2013 71,512 11 8 15 8 19 12
2014 89,350 5 3 5 3 12 9
2015 92,872 6 4 8 6 18 14
2016 94,348 8 5 9 3 12 9Page 104 of 123
SUPERVISORY INQUIRY
•Complaint of service delivery, demeanor, customer service, etc.
Year
Supervisory
Inquiries
Inquiries with
Unacceptable
Performance
Violations Initially
Reported Involved Employees
Employees with Unacceptable
Performance
2010 27 6 34 32 6
2011 25 9 32 32 9
2012 21 9 32 20 9
2013 11 7 14 13 7
2014 25 5 45 34 4
2015 17 9 23 23 9
2016 12 7 12 10 6
Page 105 of 123
ALLEGATIONS
•Inquiries and Internal investigations combined
Allegation Total No Misconduct Misconduct
Violation of General Policy 4 0 4
Discourtesy 4 2 2
Neglect of Duty 1 1 0
Code of Conduct 2 0 2
CORE Values/Professionalism 1 0 1
Bias Policing 2 2 0
Fail to Meet Expectations 2 0 2
Insubordination 1 0 1
Excessive Force 3 3 0
Late/No Show for Work 2 0 2
Totals 22 8 14
Page 106 of 123
COMBINED DISCIPLINE
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Counseling Verbal Reprimand Written Reprimand Suspension Dismissal
10
0
9
4
0
Combined Discipline (Internals/Inquiries/Collisions)
Page 107 of 123
COLLISIONS
22
18
16
22
32
26
21
14 13 13
15
22
16
13
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
2010-2016 Collisions
Collisions Preventable
Page 108 of 123
CORRECTIVE ACTION FOR COLLISIONS
7
4
2
00
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Coaching Written reprimand Suspension Dismissal
Corrective Action
Page 109 of 123
USE OF FORCE COMPARISON
Force Incidents
Year Use of force
Incidents
Excessive Force
Allegations
Sustained Allegations
2010 107 9 1
2011 113 3 0
2012 94 2 0
2013 98 3 1
2014 96 0 0
2015 136 0 0
2016 135 3 0
Page 110 of 123
FORCE TYPES
8
10
1
7
0
14
3 4 3 3
6
21
2
23
1
10
5
7
34
9
35
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Page 111 of 123
EFFECTIVE VS NOT EFFECTIVE
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Effective
Not Effective
Page 112 of 123
FORCE USED RESULTING IN INJURY
Total Force
Incidents Suspect Injuries Officer Injuries
% of total of suspect
injuries
2010 107 47 13 44%
2011 113 51 10 45%
2012 94 38 9 40%
2013 98 39 8 40%
2014 96 35 6 36%
2015 136 38 17 35%
2016 135 46 15 34%
Page 113 of 123
TIME OF DAY
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Force Incidents by Time of Day
2010-2016
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
Page 114 of 123
REASON FOR USE OF FORCE
Officer About
to be Assaulted
Fighting
Stance
Other About to
be Assaulted
Subject
With
Weapon
Muscular
Tension/Pulled
Away
Subject
Trying to
Flee
Refusing
Commands Other
2010 14 22 3 0 99 41 94 42
2011 25 0 3 1 ?77 88 17
2012 15 13 5 0 52 23 53 7
2013 15 19 3 1 96 29 77 22
2014 10 7 1 0 103 30 67 20
2015 27 16 7 0 151 52 97 27
2016 34 13 12 6 126 50 91 23
Page 115 of 123
QUESTIONS
?
Page 116 of 123
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
Solid Waste Update
Date:
April 18, 2017
Department:
Finance
Attachments:
Memo
Budget Impact:
$0
Administrative Recommendation:
For discussion only.
Background Summary:
Update on solid waste services.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember: Staff:Coleman
Meeting Date:April 24, 2017 Item Number:
Page 117 of 123
Page 1 of 2
Interoffice Memorandum
To: City Council
From: Joan Nelson, Solid Waste Supervisor
CC: Nancy Backus, Mayor, Shelley Coleman, Finance Director,
Brenda Goodson-Moore, Customer Service Manager
Date: April 24, 2017
Re: Status of Solid Waste Provider Bids & Recommendations Going Forward
Background
The City of Auburn’s current solid waste contract expires December 31, 2017. However,
the contract provides for two extensions of the existing contract for a period of up to two
years each.
In 2016, the City solicited a Request for Bids (RFB) which were due September 14, 2016.
There are four solid waste service providers in the area: Waste Management, Republic
Services, Recology-CleanScapes, and Waste Connections. The City received only one
bid, from its current provider, Waste Management. Republic Services and Recology-
CleanScapes stated that they declined to bid because it was based on price only. They
believe they have innovative services and programs to offer and consider. Both expressed
interest in competing for the Auburn contract if it was a Request for Proposal (RFP).
At this point in time, the City has three options:
•Reject the Waste Management bid, exercise the first of two contract extensions
through September 2019, and initiate an RFP process.
•Accept the bid received from Waste Management on September 14, 2016.
•Re-negotiate a contract with Waste Management and extend the first of two
contract extensions to allow negotiation time.
Page 118 of 123
Page 2 of 2
Waste Management Bid
The bid submitted by Waste Management included fees higher than the City’s current
contract, but the proposed contract included enhancements such as new trucks, new
containers, and unlimited commercial recycling. Waste Management will begin contacting
City Council once the agenda for the contract discussion is published. They stated that if
the City doesn’t negotiate or sign a new contract now, the rates will only increase over
time. Waste Management also mentioned that the reason others haulers didn’t bid was
because no one can beat Waste Management’s prices.
Recommendation
The City would like a competitive process, so it is recommended to extend the contract
with Waste Management for an additional 21 months, to September 30, 2019. The
franchise agreement with Republic Services in the annexation areas will also need to be
extended. Republic Services agreed to continue service to the area under the current
state (UTC) approved rates. Waste Management has indicated that they have no interest
in taking over the annexation area for a short period of time. The City would then initiate
an RFP process in 2017 for a contract that would be effective October 1, 2019. The
effective date for the next contract was chosen to avoid starting a new contract in summer
or winter.
Using the first of two extension options provides the City time to observe some of the other
solid waste contract activities occurring in the City of Renton (Republic Services took over
from Waste Management effective February 1, 2017) and the City of Kirkland (Proposals
were due March 20, 2017).
The RFP process rates haulers on a combination of services and price; allowing the
haulers to highlight the service qualities that set them apart from their competitors.
Timeline
•Spring 2017 - Observe other RFP processes and contract implementations
•2017 – Begin RFP contract procurement process
•Summer 2018 – City executes contract
•October 1, 2019 – Start of new collection services
Page 119 of 123
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
104th Ave SE Property Update
Date:
April 19, 2017
Department:
Parks/Art and Recreation
Attachments:
104th Ave Presentation
Budget Impact:
$0
Administrative Recommendation:
Staff to update Council on Green River Park property
Background Summary:
The 14 acre subject property is comprised of two separate parcels, and is bordered by
104th Ave. SE to the east. The Green River (Type S) forms the northern boundary of
the property, and there is one on-site Category III Wetland. The site is undeveloped
with forested area in the western portion of the property, and areas dominated by
invasive species in the eastern portion of the site. Pedestrian access to the site is
currently gained from the east via 104th Ave. SE or from the south via 102nd Ave SE.
The two parcels were transferred to the City through two separate acquisitions. The
western parcel was transferred from KC through an Intergovernmental Land Transfer
Agreement, while the eastern portion was transferred to the City from The Washington
State Parks & Recreation Commission.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Staff:Faber
Meeting Date:April 24, 2017 Item Number:
Page 120 of 123
104th Ave SE History and Challenges
•The plan is to avoid impacts to on-site
regulated areas to the maximum extent
possible.
•Onsite regulated areas include Critical areas,
Floodplains, and Shorelines.
•Ample opportunities for invasive species
removal and interplant with native species.
Two separate parcels:
•One was transferred from Washington State
Parks to the City.
•The other was transferred from King County
to the City through an Intergovernmental
Land Transfer Agreement.
•The entire property is deed restricted and is
required to be protected as parkland in
perpetuity.
Page 121 of 123
Floodplain Map
Page 122 of 123
104th Avenue SE Park Master Plan
•Working with Robert W. Droll, Landscape Architect to develop Park Master Plan
•City Survey crew has completed an onsite survey to determine extent of on-site regulated areas
•Project will be ready to submit for 2018 funding cycle through RCO Grant Programs –
Land and Water Conservation Fund and Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program
Page 123 of 123