Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/23/03 AGENDA FILE 239 4th Street · Bremerton, WA 98337 · Phone (360) 478-5280 · Fax {360) 478-5251 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA JULY 23, 2003 1. PRE-COUNCIL STUDY SESSION: 5:00 - 5:30 P.M in Council Conference Room A. General Council Business 2. CALL TO ORDER: 5:30 P.M. in Council Chambers A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Invocation 3. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes of Meeting -June 25, 2003 (#AB03-129 4. CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS 5. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS 6. MAYOR'S REPORT 7. PUBLIC RECOGNITION - Comments limited to 3-minutes 8. NEW BUSINESS A. Budget Adjustment No. 2003-1; and Professional Services Agreement with ECONOMIC & ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. for Comprehensive Water, Sewer, and Stormwater Rate Study (#AB03-130) B. 2004 Draft CDBG/HOME Policy Plan and Application (#AB03-131) 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS - ORDINANCES & RESOLUTION,':; A. Resolution No. 2895 placing on the September 16, 2003 Ballot a continuation of the EMERGENCY MEDICAL CARE AND SERVICE TAX LEVY for a 6-year period (#AB03-132) J '~" B. Resolution No. 2897, declaring the Public Utility property surplus, and approving the sale of the property to the KITSAP SQUARE DANCE ASSOCIATION (#AB03-133) C. Resolution No. 2898, authorizing an Inteffund Loan to the CONFERENCE CENTER FUND (Fund 410) from the EQUIPMENT RENTAL & REVOLVING FUND (Fund 510) (#AB03-134) 10. EXECUTIVE SESSION A. An Executive Session will be held to discuss "POTENTIAL LITIGATION" per R.C.W. Chapter 42.30.110(1 )(i) (#AB03-135) 11. ADJOURNMENT OF CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING E-rnail: c tycounc I@ci.bremerton wa.us · Web: www.ci.bremerton.wa.us FILE KITSAP COMMUNITY A Community Action Agency creating opportunities for people in need. July 23, 2003 Bremerton City Council Dear Council Members, We are writing to express our concerns and recommendations regarding proposed uses of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding. We did not testify on this issue at the first public hearing because the first draft plan appeared reasonable to us. The changes proposed later in Attachment C, however, would significantly affect the amount of CDBG funding available to community organizations serving people in need. The block grant regulations require that 70% of the funds be used to directly benefit low and moderate income residents. As we read it, Attachment C proposes that: 15% of the funds be used for administration and planning, 11% for public services, 11% for community capital projects and 63% for city municipal projects. Does this meet the intent of the funding? Also, it doesn't appear that the Housing Rehab or Worldchangers programs will be continued this year. Traditionally, the City has not provided most human services directly but instead has relied on its non-profit community partners to provide such services as helping domestic violence survivors, providing housing for homeless families, or providing childcare, weatherization help, youth activities or food assistance. One primary way the City has supported its human services partners is with CDBG funding for public services, capital projects and housing improvement. The City CDBG funding to non-profit partners typically leverages substantially more resources from private and public sources, often meeting specific match requirements for external funds. Most of our human services agencies are currently experiencing funding cuts from state, federal and private sources, making CDBG funding even more important. This local CDBG commitment has been very important to human service agencies and very much appreciated in past years. We do not oppose setting aside some funding for municipal projects, but we encourage you to make additional dollars (at least another $100,000 more than the $90,000 recommended in Attachment C) available for competitive proposals from outside city government. Quality human services and housing are very important to the quality of life in Bremerton. CDBG funding has and should continue to be used for these purposes. Sincerely, Larry Eyer Executive Director cc: Mayor CaryBozeman Sherrill Huff-Menees 802 7th Street Bremert0n. WA 98337-1512 , 360-478-2301 Fax :360-415-2706 www.kcr, org Catholic Communitg 2&5 l th Str , Suite July ~., 2oo3 City of Bremerton City Council · 39 Fourth Street Bremerton, WA 98337 Dear Council Members: I was pleased to have the opportunity to attend your committee Meetin8 on Tuesday, July [5~ where several important topics were discussed, One of those topics, the proposed CDBG distribution, was of particular interest to my colleagues and me in the non-p~,fii community. $ince yOUr Committee Meeting does not allow for public comment, you were only able to hear one side of the equation. I would like to share with you my perception of the impact the proposed distribution scheme will have on non-profits: · Non-profits must ofeen demonstrate local (city) support for projects they wish to pursue to improve conditions for poor and vulnerable citizens in the community. City block srant funding for viable c~pital projects is a way to show strol~g local support. · Non-profits experience the same ns~d for matching funds for projects, similar to the need for matching funds for some city projects (example: Skateboard Park). s The magnitude of the disparity in the proposed distribution of CDBG funding will allow fewer non-profits to he funded, and those tha~ may be funded may he awarded such a small amount of funding that their projects may be ineffectual of unable to move forward. a Decreased allocations to non-city projects may place ~reater burdens on our Kl~sap County United Way at a time when many United Ways in the Puget 3ound Region are unable to meet their fundraising g~als due to ~he economy. Social ~ervice agencies have been meetin$ human needs in our community in partnership with Bremerton's Block grant Pro, ram for many years. I hav~ found the City's prolp~un to be one of the most effectively managed program8 of those I have worked with, As you lmow, $5oo,ooo was set aside la~ year for the Maritime Park project; this set-aside funding wes available as a result of an excess in block ~rant proem income; it is a somewhat unusual occurrence to have t_hi~ much pro,ram income compared to other years. Since the City does not maintain a human services department that provides competitive fundln8 for identified human servi? capi~, ne~., it becom.m exceedingly impo~ant ~or non-prot~t organizations to have the opportunity to apply for block 8rant funding for the purpoze of addr~sing emerging and urgent needs. Catholic Community Services recommends that the City Council amend the propoc, ed distribution of funds by increasing the apportionment of CDBG funding for non-city capital projects to $19o,ooo, thereby redueing the administration's capital project allocation to $400,000. Feel free to contact me at home at (360) 895-t321 or at my office (253) 5oa-2744 if you have questions relarding this reeonunendation. Sincerely, Beverly F, incaid, Gran~ Manager Catholic Community Services, Souttlwest Re~ion DATE SUBMITTED: July 17, 2003 BILL # ~.' AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON ~~ CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Minutes of Meeting - Committee Meeting Date: N/A June 25, 2003 COUNCIL MEETING Date: July 23, 2003 Department: City Council Presenter: Carol Mends Phone: (360) 473-5280 SUMMARY: Attached are the minutes for the Council Meeting held June 25, 2003. ATTACHMENTS: Minutes for June 25, 2003 FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): 0 APPROVALS: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: FINANCE DIRECTOR: MAYOR: FISCAL/BUDGET: CONSENT AGENDA [] OPERATIONS: COUNCIL PRESIDENT: -~,-t..e_ ~(c..~ RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to pass the Consent Agenda as presented. COUNCIL ACTION: [] Approve [] Deny [] Table [] Continue [] No Action / TAPE #1898 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES June 25, 2003 The weekly meeting of the City Council of the City of Bremerton was called to order in the City Council Chambers, 239 4th Street, Bremerton, Washington, Wednesday, June 25, 2003, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President Carol Arends presiding. Council members present were Mike Short, Will Maupin, Mike Shepherd, Ed Rollman, Daren Nygren, Cecil McConnell, and Wayne Olsen. Council member Eric Younger was absent. Also present were City Attorney Roger Lubovich; Deputy City Clerk Paula Johnston; and Legislative Assistant Lori Smith. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council Member Cecil McConnell~ followed by the invocation provided by Pastor Dean Reeder with Westpark Christian Church. President Arends made the following announcements: 1. A Pre-Council session was held in the Council Conference Room to discuss updates to the meeting agenda; and 2. A Monthly Study Session will be held next Wednesday, July 2nd. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes of Meeting - May 28, 2003 (#AB03-113) B. Washington Traffic Safety Commission grant application and agreement for the Bremerton-Kitsap County Traffic Safety Task Force Project Contract (#AB03-114) #0025 MISIClU (McConnell/Olsen) Move to approve Consent Agenda as presented. CLAIMS & CHECK REGISTERS Vouchers audited and certified by the auditing officer as required by RCW 42.24.080, and those expense reimbursement claims certified as required by RCW 42.24.090 have been recorded on a listing that had been made available to the Council. #0050 MISIClU (McConnell/Olsen) On June 25, 2003, the Council approved payment for Check Numbers 281599 - 282244; EFT's 7709 - 7720 in the total amount of $2,168,598.94; and Regular Payroll for the pay-period ending June 15, 2003 in the amount of $909,962.64. COUNCIL MEMBERS Wayne Olsen discussed the activities he participated in during the 2003 Annual Association of Washington Cities Conference in Spokane last week; congratulated Betty Peterson for being elected President for the Bremerton Central Lions Club; and thanked Joe Mentor for donating the flag that now flies from the crane located at the conference center construction site. Cecil McConnell briefly reported on the District 1 & 2 Town Meeting held recently to provide citizens an opportunity to hear a presentation on the proposed "1% FOR THE ARTS INITIATIVE". Daren Nwren invited citizens to the next District 3 neighborhood meeting Saturday, June 28 from 10:00 to 11:00 A.M. at the Manette Senior Center to discuss the "1% FOR THE ARTS INITIATIVE". Ed Rollman discussed the Special Meeting held Monday, June 16 with members of the City Council, Bremerton Housing Authority, and Bremerton School Board to hear a presentation on the proposed development of Anderson Cove. He also remembered former Mayor Gene Nelson, who past away over the weekend; provided a brief follow-up report on several citizen concerns; and recognized George Tiller for remaining in business through the good and bad times in Bremerton over the past thirty years. TAPE# 1898 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes June 25, 2003 Page 2 of 4 Mike Shepherd also reported his participation in several activities at the 2003 Annual AWC conference in Spokane; and noted that it has been determined that the AWC Annual Conference in 2004 will be held at Ocean Shores. Will Ma!upin followed up on the information previously presented regarding the meeting with several jurisdictions on Monday, June 16 to discuss Anderson Cove; and reported on his attendance at the 2003 Annual Conference held in Spokane last week. He also remembered Gene Nelson, and stated he will really be missed. Mike Short also attended the 2003 Annual AWC Conference in Spokane, and reported on his attendance at several budget workshops. Carol Arends noted that Council member Eric Younger is still in Washington D.C. due to business; and discussed how she spent her time on the many activities taking place in town while several Council members were attending the conference in Spokane. MAYOR'S REPORT - Mayor Bozeman ... · Again noted that the DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY will no longer provide police services at the Jackson Park Housing Development, which will increase the demand on BPD; · Will soon present a proposal for an Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Levy; · Provided an update on several projects currently taking place; · Discussed the end of Passenger-Only ferry service in October of this year; · Briefed the Council on Federal money received for several City projects including the remodel of the Navy Museum and construction of a Maritime Park; · Noted that developers visited property adjacent to the golf course with potential plans for a time-share; and · Established that final decisions will soon need to be made regarding space planning for the Government Center. PUBLIC RECOGNITION Allen Shute thanked the Council and Mayor for the efforts to revitalize the City, which influenced a friend to keep his computer services business in Bremerton. Helen Miller read a statement into the record expressing her concerns that the Municipal Services Coordinator is signing documents on behalf of the Mayor; and asked that the Legal Department respond to a complaint filed against the Community Development Department. SA- AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATED GOLF ASSOCIATION (U.S.G.A.) ANn THE CITY OF BREMERTON FOR THE 81sT ANNUAL U.S. PUBLIC LINKS CHAMPIONSHIP IN 2006 (AB03-115): Jim Spencer, Parks & Recreation Director, announced that the City of Bremerton's Olympic Course at the Gold Mountain Golf Complex has been selected by the UNITED STATES GOLF ASSOCIATION (U.S.G.A.) to host the 81st Annual U.S. Public Links Championship in 2006. This prestigious event is one of 13 national events conducted by the U.S.G.A. In order to formally accept the U.S.G.A.'s invitation to host this event, it is necessary to enter into the attached agreement. There were no comments from the public. #1230 M/S/C/U (McConnell/Nygren) Move to approve and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the Agreement by and between the UNITED STATES GOLF ASSOCIATION (U.S.G.A) and the City of Bremerton with substantially the same terms and conditions as contained in the proposed agreement. TAPE#1898 City Council Reg, Mtg, Minutes June 25,2003 Page 3 of 4 9A - PUBLIC HEARING AND RESOLUTION NO. 2894 REGARDING RECOVERY OF FEE~; FOR SECURING A FIRE-DAMAGED BUILDING AT 233`1 WHEATON WAY (#AB03-tt6): Janet Lunceford, Code Enforcement Officer, explained that on April 23, 2003, Public Works secured the fire-damaged building at 2331 Wheaton Way after the owner of record, Lee Goddard failed to do so. The cost of the work, including the administrative fee, totaled $1,555.75. Council must now decide if the fees are just and reasonable, and how the fees should be collected. There were no comments from the public. #1385 M/S/C/U (Shepherd/Short) Move to pass Resolution No. 2894 ordering that the fees in the amount of $1,555.75 incurred for securing the building at 2331 Wheaton Way be collected as reasonable abatement costs and become a lien against the property. 9B - PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDINANCE NO. 4858 (SECOND READING) REGARDINR ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO BREMERTON MUNICIPAL CODE 2'1.02 FIGURE t52 (B) FOOTNOTE RELATING TO BUILDING HEIGHT WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN ZONE (#AB03- t10): The first reading of the ordinance was heard on June 11, 2003. Chris Hugo, Director of Community Development; and Gary Tuskber~, from the Kitsap County Consolidated Housing Authority, were available to answer questions. There were no comments from the public. #t565 MISIC/U (Olsen/Maupin) Move to pass Ordinance No. 4858 on second reading. 9C - PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDINANCE (FIRST READING) RELATING TO REGULATORY LICENSES AND FEES (#AB03-117): Michael Wilson., Finance Director, pointed out that current provisions of certain chapters of Title 5 of the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) relating to regulatory licenses and regulations of certain business are either duplicative of State Law, outdated, and/or pre-empted by State Law. Additionally, the provisions of Chapter 5.80 relating to "AMUSEMENT DEVICES" would be more appropriately codified as a chapter within Title 3, and the provisions of Chapter 5.10 relating to "PAWNBROKERS AND SECOND-HAND DEALERS" would be more appropriately codified as a chapter in Title 9. The proposed ordinance updates Title 5 relating to regulatory licenses, and modifies Rate Table A of Chapter 3.01 of the BMC to eliminate certain regulatory fees consistent with the proposed changes to Title 5. There were no comments from the public. #1900 M/SICIU (ShorFMcConnell) Move to approve the proposed ordinance on first reading. 9D - PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDINANCE (FIRST READING) ADDING A NEW SECTION TO CHAPTER 21.02 OF THE BREMERTON MUNICIPAL CODE~ PROVIDING STANDARDR FOR THE SITING OF WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES (#AB02-1`18): Paul Rogerson, Planning Manager, reiterated that at the request of City Council, a citizen process led to the development of a draft ordinance which would add a new section 21.02.335 to the Bremerton Municipal Code. The new section would add standards for the siting of wireless telecommunications facilities in the City of Bremerton. Affected facilities include antenna arrays, equipment enclosures, support towers, and site improvements associated with so-called "cell phone" services. The proposed ordinance also includes sections discussing removal of abandoned facilities, permit processes, application submittals, etc. The proposed ordinance addresses a moratorium that expires on July 23, 2003. The proposed ordinance was heard TAPE# 1898 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes June 25, 2003 Page 4 of 4 before the Planning Commission on June 17, 2003. The efforts of the citizens who served on the Committee to study this issue were acknowledged. There were no comments from the public. After extensive discussion among the Council, the first reading of the ordinance was approved unanimously by all Council members present... #2855 MlSlClU (Rollman/Short) Move to approve the ordinance on first reading. Council member Wayne Olsen left the meeting at approximately 6:52 P.M. and was not available for the following vote... 9E - PVBLIC HEARING AND ORDINANCE (FIRST READING) AMENDING CHAPTER 21.07 OF THE BREMERTON MUNICIPAL CODE~ RELATING TO THE REGULATION OF OFF- PREMISES SIGNS (#AB03-119): Paul Rol:lerson, Planning Manager, mentioned that at the request of the City Council, the Department of Community Development has conducted a citizen process leading to the development of recommended changes to the sign chapter of the zoning code. The proposed ordinance recommends that off-premises signs, vehicle mounted signs, and most billboards be added to the existing list of prohibited sign types. It also suggests new siting standards for "sandwich board" signs and additional mechanisms for amortizing non- conforming signs. This proposed ordinance addresses a moratorium that expires on July 23, 2003. This proposed ordinance was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on May 20, 2003. Chris Hugo, Director of Community Development, provided additional clarification on sandwich board and on-vehicle signs. There were no comments from the public. After extensive discussion among the Council, the first reading of the ordinance was approved unanimously by all Council members present... #3355 M/S/C/U (McConnell/Short) Move to approve the proposed ordinance on first reading. With no further business, the regular meeting of the City Council was adjourned at 7:05 P.M. Prepared and Submitted by: LORI SMITH Legislative Assistant Attest: PAULA JOHNSTON, Deputy City Clerk CAROL ARENDS, City Council President City of Bremerton CAIP JIIslcge DATE SUBMITTED: July 9, 2003 BILL # ,).',' '" ,/ AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON ~ A CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Budget Adjustment and Committee Meeting Date: July 15, 2003 Professional Services Agreement - COUNCIL MEETING Date: July 23, 2003 Comprehensive Water, Sewer, and Department: PW&U Stormwater Rate Study Presenter: Gene Sampley Phone: 5315 SUMMARY: The City's Water, Sewer and Stormwater Utility rates have not been comprehensively analyzed since 1994 and are in need of review. EES, Inc. has been selected to perform this review and the attached Professional Services Agreement (PSA) has been negotiated. This review will include the Water Utility's use of timber resources and the methodology and rates for the U.S. Navy facilities. A budget adjustment for the amount of this work is required. It is recommended that the attached Budget Adjustment and PSA be approved for EES to perform the required study in an amount not-to-exceed $104,400. ATTACHMENTS: Budget Adjustment No. ~)O3 ' [ PSA with EES FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): A budget amendment for $104,000 is attached. Funds are available from ending cash proportionately from each utility. APPROVALS: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: F ANCE OIRECTOR: MAYOR: ~ ~ ~ - OPERATIONS: coUNcn. PRESIDENT: RECOMMENDED MOTION: (1) I move to approve Budget Adjustment No. (2) I move to approve the attached Professional Services Agreement with Economic and Engineering Services, Inc. in an amount not-to-exceed $104,400 and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the same. COUNCIL ACTION: [] Approve [] Deny [] Table [] Continue [] No Action Memo 'lo: Gene Sampley, Public Works and Utilities Director From~ Tom Gould; Angie Sanchez, EES ~ July 17, 2003 Rate Study and SDC Study Budget Project #3-03-254 The City of Bremerton has requested that the original budget for the water, sewer and stormwater rote study and system development charge analysis be revised to separate the efforts associated with completing the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard (Navy) analysis. The following fee summary is our estimate of the requested budget separation. Water- Sewer - Water Navy Sewer Navy Storm Total Labor: Task 1: Initial Project Meeting $500 $250 $500 $250 $500 $2,000 Task 2: Data Collection 800 200 650 100 500 2,250 Task 3: Revenue Req't Analysis 7,500 0 7,000 0 6,500 21,000 Task 4: Cost of Service Analysis 5,000 3,000 4,000 3,500 3,500 19,000 Task 5: Rate Design Analysis 3,000 2,000 2,500 1,500 4,000 13,000 Task 6: SDCs 9,500 0 9,000 0 7,500 26,000 Task 7: WriCx*,n Reports 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,250 3,000 8,000 Task 8: Public Presentations 3,000 0 3,000 0 3,000 9,000 Task 9: Rate Models 500 0 500 0 500 1,500 Grand Total Labor $31,050 $6,700 $28,400 $6,600 $29,000 $101,750 Mileage/Ferries 1,150 Misc. (phone, copies, fax) 1,500 Total Expenses $2,650 Grand Totnl Water, Sewer & Stormwater Rate Study/SDC Analysis $104.4fl0 MElvlORANDUM FOR Gene Sampley, Public Works and Utilities Director July 17, 2003 Page 2 In developing our estimates of the Navy's portion of the analysis, it should be noted that the City has asked for a separate analysis of the Navy's costs and a separate written report to present to the Navy. This is similar to the services that EES provided to the City when new wholesale contracts were negotiated with the Navy. Under this approach, the City's water and sewer rate analyses (studies) are extended to create specific exhibits for the Navy's written report. In stanmary, we have identified $6,700 of labor costs related to the Navy's water an2tlysis, along with $6,600 of labor costs related to the Navy's sewer analysis. This is a total of $13,300 of labor related costs associated with the Navy analysis. In addition to this, we estimate that $500 in expenses would be incurred to produce the separate written report and any other miscellaneous costs. Therefore, EES estimates the cost associated with preparing the Navy analysis and separate report is $13,800. It should be noted that the SDC for either utility, along with the stormwater budget has not been assigned to the Navy for either utility. I hope this budget separation meets the City's needs. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Memo Mike Wilson, City of Bremerton Tom Gould; Angie Sanchez, EES July 17, 2003 Follow up Budget Question Project #3-03-254 The City has requested that EES provide additional budget data in regard to the efficiencies achieved by completing multiple rote studies at the same lime compared to having each study completed independently or on a stand alone basis. The combined budget for the water, sewer and stormwater rote study and GFC analysis is provided in Table 1. Water Sewer Stormwater Total Labor: Task 1: Initial Project Meeting $750 $750 $500 $2,000 Task 2: Data Collection 1,000 750 500 2,250 Task 3: Revenue Requirement Analysis 7,500 7,000 6,500 21,000 Task 4: Cost of Service Analysis 8,000 7,500 3,500 19,000 Task 5: Rate Design Analysis 5,000 4,000 4,000 13,000 Task 6: System Development Charges 9,500 9,000 7,500 26,000 Task 7: Workpapers/Written Reports 2,500 2,500 3,000 8,000 Task 8: Public Presentations 3,000 3,000 3,000 9,000 Task 9: Computerization - Rate Models 500 500 500 1,500 Grand Total Labor $37,750 $35,000 $29,000 $101,750 Mileage/Ferries 1,150 Misc. (phone, copies, fax) 1,500 Total Expenses $2,650 Grand Total Water, Sewer and Stormwater Rate Study/SDC Analysis $104.400 M~4OR~DUM FO~t Mike Wilson, City of Bremerton Jul),- 17, 20O3 Page 2 The most significant efficiencies that can be achieved through a combined project effort include having one initial project meetings instead oftin~, data collection is reduced by combined reports and a single set of data, a combined written report instead of three separate reports for each study and combined presentations, instead of flame separate sets of presentations for each utility. Our estimate of the "stand-alone" pricing is summarized below. Labor Expenses Total Water Utility Rate Study $32,000 $2,000 $34,000 Water SDC Study 10,000 1,500 11,500 Sewer Utility Rate Study 30,000 2,000 32,000 Sewer SDC Study 10,000 1,500 11,500 Stonnwater Utility Rate Study 22,500 2,000 24,500 Stormwater SDC Study 9,000 1,500 10,500 Navy Shipyard Analysis 15,000 500 16,000 Total $128,500 $11,000 $139,500 In developing our original fee estimate the City requested a separate report for the U.S. Navy. Therefore, in developing the Table 2 estimates, we have separated the costs out for producing a separate report tbr the Navy. The summary shows that seven independent studies would cost approximately $140,000, compm'ed to our current fee estimate of $104,400. As previously stated, the majority of savings is a result of working with one set of historical data, having combined meeting/presentations, and minimizing the number of reports fi.om seven separate reports to the three proposed in the current study. I hope the above discussion has assisted the City understand the efficiencies obtained by combining studies. If you have any additional questions, please give me a call. CITY OF BREMERTON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST Requesting Department: Public Works & Utilities Adjustment Number: 2003-1 Approval Authority Required: [-]Finance Director r-~Ma¥or ~- Fiscal & Bud~let ~--~Council SOURCE OF FUNDS: USE OF FUNDS: Description Amount Description Amount Water Fund - 401 Water Fund - 401 Decrease Ending Fund Balance 44,700 Increase Professional Services 44,700 Wastewater Fund - 451 Wastewater Fund - 451 Decrease Ending Fund Balance 29,800 Increase Professional Services 29,800 Stormwater Fund - 481 Stormwater Fund - 481 Decrease Ending Fund Balance 29,900 Increase Professional Services 29,900 NARRATIVE: This adjustment will provide funding for the EES Utility Rate Study and System Development charges analysis. Department Head Si~lnature Director Si~lnature Date Finance Director Comments: Finan'~e Director Date Mayor Comments: ~"~//Recommended ~ Not Recommended~ ~ Approved ~ Denied ~J~/~i~''-~ --~'~7~/''' 7-~0'-~) ~ Mayor's Si~re-- Date Fiscal & Budget Commi~ee Comments: Recommended ~ Not Recommended Approved [~1 Denied ~[, Fiscal & Budget Committee Signature Date PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT Comprehensive Water, Sewer, and Stormwater Rate Study The City of Bremerton ("City") and Economic and Engineering Services, Inc. ("Consultant"), referred to collectively as the "Parties," enter into the following Agreement for professional services: I. Scope: The Consultant agrees to perform the services more specifically described in the Scope of Work, dated ,2003, including any attachments thereto, attached hereto as Exhibit A, which is incorporated by reference herein. The Scope of Work may be modified only pursuant to Section VII.H. of this Agreement. If the Scope of Work provides for unspecified additional services such services shall only be performed upon the express written request of the City. Consultant further represents that the services furnished under this Agreement will be performed in accordance with generally accepted professional practices in effect at the time such services are performed. II. Term: The City and the Consultant agree that work wilt begin on the tasks described in Exhibit A immediately upon execution of this Agreement. The parties agree that the work described in Exhibit A is to be completed as provided for in the work schedule attached hereto as Exhibit B; provided however, the Agreement shall terminate December 31, 2004. Additional time shall be granted by the City for excusable delays or extra work as provided for in section IX (A) of this agreement. III. Compensation: In consideration of the services provided pursuant to this Agreement, the City shall pay Consultant in an amount not to exceed One Hundred Four Thousand, Four Hundred Dollars ($104,400.00) Consultant's charges and bills shall conform to the fee schedule attached hereto as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by this reference. The Consultant shall submit regular billing statements detailing work performed and amount charged on each task or portion thereof. The descriptions shall conform to and fall within the categories set out in the Scope of Work and/or Fee Schedule. Upon receipt of a conforming billing statement, the City shall promptly process payment. PROVIDED, HOWEVER, the City reserves the right to prioritize scoped work and accelerate and/or delay work tasks under the time frame set forth in Section II herein. The Consultant's labor rates and billing fees shall be as delineated in Exhibit C. Consultant shall not perform work beyond the Scope of Work, nor shall be compensated for such work, unless the Scope of Work or amount of compensation is modified pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall only be compensated for additional services if requested pursuant to Section I and, if not otherwise provided, such compensation shall be in accordance with Exhibit C. If a billing statement does not conform to this Agreement, the City may withhold payment until the statement is brought into compliance. Such withholding does not relieve Consultant of its obligations under this Agreement. Bremerton/EES, Inc. Comprehensive Water, Sewer, Stormwater Rate Study Page 1 of 6 IV. Relationship of Parties: Consultant represents that it is skilled in the matters addressed in the Scope of Work and is performing independent functions and responsibilities within its field of expertise. Consultant and its personnel are independent Consultants and not employees of the City. Consultant and its personnel have no authority to bind the City or to control the City's employees and other Consultants. None of the benefits provided by the City to its employees, including, but not limited to, compensation, insurance, and unemployment insurance are available from the City to the employees, agents, representatives, or sub-Consultants of the Consultant. Consultant will be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of Consultant's agents, employees, representatives and sub-Consultants during the performance of this Agreement. The City may, during the term of this Agreement, engage other independent Consultants to perform the same or similar work. As an independent Consultant, Consultant is responsible for its own management. The City's administration and enforcement of this Agreement shall not be deemed an exercise of managerial control over Consultant or its personnel. As an independent Consultant, Consultant is responsible for payment of all taxes and licensing fees necessary to perform its obligations under this Agreement. These taxes and fees include but are not limited to State industrial insurance, Business & Occupation, State professional licensing, and City business licensing. If any taxes or fees due the City have been declared delinquent, the City may withhold the delinquent amount, plus any additional charges arising from the delinquency, from any payments due Consultant. V. Indemnification: Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits, including all legal costs and attorney fees, arising out of or in connection with the performance of this Agreement, except for that portion of the injuries and damages caused by the City's sole negligence. The City's review or acceptance of any of the work when completed shall not be grounds to avoid any of these covenants of indemnification. 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 Consultant and the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers, the Consultant's liability hereunder shall be only to the extent of the Consultant's negligence. IT iS FURTHER SPECIFICALLY AND EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD THAT THE iNDEMNIFICATION PROVIDED HEREIN CONSTITUTES THE CONSULTANT'S WAIVER OF IMMUNITY UNDER INDUSTRIAL INSURANCE, TITLE 51 RCW, SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS INDEMNIFICATION. THE PARTIES FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY HAVE MUTUALLY NEGOTIATED THIS WAIVER. The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. Bremerton/EES, Inc. Comprehensive Water, Sewer, Stormwater Rate Study Page 2 of 6 I 3 VI. Insurance: The Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement, 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 Consultant, its agents, representatives, employees, sub-consultants or sub-Consultants. Before beginning work on the project described in this Agreement, the Consultant shall provide a Certificate of Insurance evidencing: 1. Professional Liability insurance with limits no less than $1,000,000 limit per occurrence/claim. Any payment of deductible or self insured retention shall be the sole responsibility of the Consultant. All required policies shall be provided on a "claims-made" basis. The Consultant's insurance shall be primary insurance as respects the City and the City shall be given thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, of any cancellation, suspension or material change in coverage. The City also reserves its unqualified right to require at any time and for any reason, proof of coverage in the form of a duplicate of the insurance policy with all endorsements as evidence of coverage. VII. General Conditions: A. Reports and Information: When requested by the City, Consultant shall furnish periodic reports and documents on matters covered by this Agreement. The reports and documents shall be furnished in the time and form requested. Consultant shall maintain accounting records in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) to substantiate all billed amounts. B. Ownership and Use of Records and Documents: Original documents, drawings, designs and reports, including those in electronic format, developed under this Agreement are the property of the City. All written information submitted by the City to the Consultant in connection with the services performed by the Consultant under this Agreement will be safeguarded by the Consultant to at least the same extent as the Consultant safeguards like information relating to its own business. If such information is publicly available or is already in Consultant's possession or known to it, or is rightfully obtained by the Consultant from third parties, Consultant shall bear no responsibility for its disclosure, inadvertent or otherwise. All data, documents and files created by Consultant under this Agreement may be stored at Consultant's office in Bellevue, Washington. Consultant shall make such data, documents, and files available to the City upon its request at all reasonable times for the propose of editing, modifying and updating as necessary until such time as the City is capable of storing such Bremerton/EES, Inc. Comprehensive Water, Sewer, Stormwater Rate Study Page 3 of 6 information in the City's offices. Duplicate copies of this information shall be provided to the City upon its request, and at reasonable cost. All documents, including all reports, drawings, specifications, computer software or other items prepared or fumished by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement, are instruments of service with respect to the project and are the property of the City. Any reuse by the City for other than the specific purpose intended will be at City's sole risk. C. Consultant to Maintain Records to Support Independent Consultant Status: On the effective date of this Agreement (or shortly thereafter), Consultant shall: 1. File a schedule of expenses with the Internal Revenue Service for the type of business Consultant conducts; 2. Establish an account with the Washington State Department of Revenue and other necessary state agencies for the payment of all state taxes normally paid by employers, register to receive a unified business identifier number from the State of Washington; and 3. Maintain a separate set of books and records that reflect all items of income and expenses of Consultant's business, all as described in the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) Section 51.08.195, as required to show that the services performed by Consultant under this Agreement shall not give rise to an employer- employee relationship between the parties which is subject to RCW Title 51, Industrial Insurance. D. Work Performed at Consultant's Risk: Consultant shall take all precautions necessary and shall be responsible for the safety of its employees, agents, and sub consultants in the performance of the work hereunder and shall utilize all protection necessary for that purpose. All work shall be done at Consultant's own risk, and Consultant shall be responsible for any loss of or damage to materials, tools, or other articles used or held for use in connection with the work. E. Place of Work: The Consultant shall perform the work authorized under this Agreement at its offices in Bellevue, Washington. Meetings with the City staff as described in Exhibit A, Scope of Work, shall take place at the City's offices, or at locations mutually agreed upon by the parties. F. Entire Agreement: This Agreement and its Exhibits constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties, and the Parties acknowledge that there are no other agreements, written or oral, that have not been set forth in the text of this Agreement. G. Severability: Should any part of this Agreement be found void, the balance of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. .H. Modification: This Agreement may only be modified by written instrument signed by both Parties. Bremerton/EES, Inc. Comprehensive Water, Sewer, Stormwater Rate Study Page 4 of 6 I~ I. Written Notices: All communications regarding this Agreement shall be sent to the parties at the addresses listed below by registered or 1st class mail, or by personal service, and shall be deemed sufficiently given if sent to the addressee at the address stated in this Agreement or such other address as may be hereafter specified in writing. City Address Consultant Address J. Waiver: Failure to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of that provision. Waiver of any right or power arising out of this Agreement shall not be deemed waiver of any other right or power. K. Non-Waiver of Breach: The failure of the City to insist upon strict performance of any of the covenants and agreements contained herein, or to exercise any option herein conferred in one or more instances shall not be construed to be a waiver or relinquishment of said covenants, agreements or options, and the same shall be and remain in full fome and effect. L. Compliance with Laws: Consultant shall comply with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws in performing its obligations under this Agreement. M. Choice of Law and Venue: This Agreement shall be interpreted according to the laws of the State of Washington. Any judicial action to resolve disputes arising out of this Agreement shall be brought in Kitsap County Superior Court. N. Attorneys' Fees: In the event of litigation to enforce any of the terms or provisions herein, each party shall pay all its own costs and attomey's fees. O. Assignment: Any assignment of this agreement by the Contractor without the written consent of the City shall be void. VIII. Nondiscrimination: Consultant shall not discriminate in employment or services to the public on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, marital status, or disability, except for employment actions based on bona fide occupational qualification. IX. Termination: This Agreement may be terminated, at will, by either Party upon sixty (60) days notice to the other Party. This Agreement may be immediately terminated for cause by a Party if the other Party substantially fails to perform through no fault of the terminating Party, and the non-performing Party does not commence correction of the failure of performance within thirty (30) days of the terminating Party's sending notice to the non-performing Party. Notice by Consultant shall include a report showing the status of all items listed in the Scope of Work current through the termination date. Bremerton/EES, Inc. Comprehensive Water, Sewer, Stormwater Rate Study Page 5 of 6 If the City receives reimbursement by any federal, state, or other source for work described in Section I herein, and that funding is withdrawn, reduced or limited in any way, or the project is cancelled or substantially reduced after the execution date of this Agreement and prior to the completion of the work, the City may summarily terminate this Agreement. Termination shall be effective ten calendar days after Consultant's receipt of the written notice by certified mail. A. Excusable Delays: The right of Consultant to proceed shall not be terminated nor shall Consultant be charged with liquidated damages for any delays in the completion of the work due to: 1) any acts of the federal government in controlling, restricting, or requisitioning materials, equipment, tools, or labor by reason of war, national defense, or other national emergency; 2) any acts of the City, its consultants, or other public agencies causing such delay; and 3) causes not reasonably foreseeable by the parties at the time of the execution of the Agreement that are beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of the Consultant, including, but not restricted to, acts of God, fires, floods, strikes, or weather of unusual severity. PROVIDED, HOWEVER, that the Consultant must promptly notify the City within ten (10) calendar days in writing of the cause of the delay. If, on the basis of the facts and the terms of this Agreement, the delay is properly excusable, the City shall, in writing, extend the time for completing the work for a period of time commensurate with the period of excusable delay. B. Rights Upon Termination: In the event of termination, the City shall pay for all services performed by the Consultant to the effective date of termination, as described on a final invoice submitted to the City. After termination, the City may take possession of all records and data within the Consultant's possession pertaining to this project which may be used by the City without restriction. Any such use not related to the project which Consultant was contracted to perform shall be without liability or legal exposure to the Consultant. CITY OF BREMERTON ECONOMIC AND ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. By: Cary Bozeman By:. its: Mayor its: Date: Date: Approved as to form: Attest: Bremerton City Attomey City Clerk Bremerton/EES, Inc. Comprehensive Water, Sewer, Stormwater Rate Study Page 6 of 6 1'7 Introduction The City of Bremerton (City) has requested technical assistance in conducting a comprehensive water, sewer and stormwater utility rate study. The ultimate goal of this study is to assure the adequate funding of each utility's O&M and capital needs, while developing rates that are fair and equitable. In order to accomplish that goal a comprehensive rate study must be conducted for each utility. At the end of that process, rates will be recommended that meet the financial objectives of the City and which are cost-based and equitable. In addition to conducting a comprehensive rate study for each utility, the City also would like to review and update the current system development charges (SDC's) for the water and sewer utilities and establish SDC's for the stormwater utility. The purpose of SDC's is to equitably assign the costs of infrastructure related to growth to those new customers connecting to the system and creating the need for expanded infrastructure. By maintaining cost-based SDC's, existing customers may be sheltered from the costs related to growth. Provided within this section of the proposal is a detailed discussion of our proposed scope of services to conduct a comprehensive rate study and system development charge study for the City's water, sewer, and stormwater utilities. Overview of a Comprehensive Rate Study A comprehensive rate study is generally comprised of three interrelated analyses: (1) the development of revenue requirements to determine adequate funding levels, (2) a cost of service study designed to understand the cost differences associated with serving various types of customers, and (3) a rate design analysis that establishes a cost-basis for setting fixed and variable rates. Provided below in Table A-1 is a brief overview of the rate study process. I Compares the sources offunds (revenues) to the Revenue Requirement Anal~is expenses of each utility to determine the overall ~_ ,.~.~.~ adjustment to rates, ~ Allocates the total revenue requirements to the Cost of Service Analysis ~ various customer classes of service in a "fair ..... ~"~"~'"' and equitable" manner. i Design rates to yield the revenue requirements Rate Design Analysis and meet the goals and objectives of the City. Exhibit A~etailed Scope of Services A-1 City of Bremerton While Table A-1 provides an overview of the typical components of a comprehensive water, sewer and/or stormwater rate study, an important aspect of this study is incorporating and "tailoring" those analytical elements into an overall scope of services that will provide the work products being requested by the City. Provided below is detailed discussion of how this basic analytical framework will be tailored to meet the City's needs. Detailed Description of Proposed Scope of Services EES has developed a detailed scope of services that has attempted to meet the specific goals and objectives of the City. More importantly, the scope of services outlined below, provides the City with a better understanding of our depth of knowledge and skills in conducting comprehensive rate studies. In developing the proposed scope of services, two items should be noted. First, it is assumed that each of the utility rate analyses will be conducted simultaneously. The second item to note is that the scope of services to conduct the water, sewer and stormwater are assumed to be identical, except where noted. Task l--Initial Kick-Off Meeting (Project Meeting) Task Objective: Bring the Consultant, utility/City management and staff together, at the start of the project, to assure that both parties have a mutual understanding of the goals, objectives, issues and concerns related to the study. The initial kick-off (project) meeting is important to the overall success of this engagement since it forms the foundation for the rate study process. The initial project meeting is used as a starting point in developing a strong working relationship between EES and the City. At the same time, this meeting allows both parties to discuss the overall goals and objectives for this study, while at the same time discussing any issues and concerns that either party may have. It is proposed that the initial project meeting be approximately 2-hours in length. Expected City Staff Support for Task 1: · Have City key management/project team members attend a half-day planning meeting. Work Product Deliverables as a Result of Task I--Initial Kick-off Meeting: · Identification of objectives, issues and concerns by both parties. · Face-to-face meeting to get the study off to a positive start. Task 2--Data Collection Task Objective: Review and assess the City's existing water, sewer and stormwater data, and provide a written data request detailing the data required to complete the study. The initial written data request details the data and information required to conduct the study. EES will provide a written data request to the City prior to the initial kick-off meeting so that it can be discussed at the meeting and any problem areas quickly resolved. The data and information requested for this study should be, for the most part, readily available information (e.g. financial, statistical, customer, etc.). The key issue for data collection purposes may be the /,//'~ Exhibit A--Detailed Scope of Services A-2 City of Bremerton level of detail that is readily available and needed for the study. It is important to keep in mind that a cost of service study requires data and information that is more detailed than the data typically reported for annual financial statement purposes. For those areas where the data is not readily available, or will require significant labor and expense on the City's part to provide, EES and the City will determine the "sensitivity" or "importance" of the data required and if altemative data sources are available. As with any study, it is imperative that the City provide a timely response for the data requested. Expected City Staff Support for Task 2: m Gather the data requested from the written data request provided by EES. (Note: typically requires 20 - 40 hours of total stafftime to provide.) Work Product Deliverables as a Result of Task 2--Data Collection: m An initial written data request to the City. · Identification of any data constraints. Task 3--Revenue Requirement Analysis Task Objective: Using a generally-accepted rate setting methodology, develop for each utility, the revenue requirernents for a projected five-year period to ensure adequate funds for operating and capital needs. The development of the revenue requirement analyses for each utility is the first major analytical portion of the comprehensive rate study process. This portion of the study entails reviewing, for each utility, the various sources of funds (revenues) and comparing them to the applications of funds (expenses) for the utility. This task considers the prudent and proper funding for O&M and capital expenditures for each utility, and determines the need for any rote adjustments over the time period selected. A more detailed discussion of the various steps involved in developing the City's revenue requirements for each utility is provided below. STEP 1 - SELECTION OF A TEST PERIOD - The first step in the development of the revenue requirements is the selection of a "test period". A "test period" refers to a time frame of reference for the accumulation of revenues, expenses and consumption data. In this case, a five- year projected time period is proposed (e.g. 2004 - 2008). By reviewing costs over this extended time frame, the City can determine if any major rate impacts are on the horizon and potentially take steps today to help minimize future impacts (e.g. rate adjustment transition, accumulation of capital reserves, etc.). STEP 2 - METHOD OF ACCUMULATING COSTS - Once the "test period" has been determined, the next decision is to determine the basis or method of accumulating costs. There are two choices for accumulating costs for revenue requirement/financial planning purposes; the "cash" or "utility/accrual" basis. Table A-2 provides a simple comparison between these two "generally accepted" methodologies. Exhibit A--Detailed Scope of Services A-3 City of Bremerton Utility/Accrual Basis Cash Basis + O&M Expense + O&M Expense + Taxes or Transfer Payments + Taxes or Transfer Payments - Annual Depreciation Expense + Capital Projects Financed with Rate Revenues (_> Deprec. Exp.) ~ Return on Rate Base (Investment) + Debt Service (P+I) Revenue Requirement - Revenue Requirement Two items should be noted from the above table. First, the terms "cash" and "accrual" used in the table are not the same terms used in the accounting sense. These terms, as used for rate setting purposes, relate to the cost components to be included within the revenue requirements. The second important point that should be made concerning the above table is that in practice, the "cash" basis approach is most commonly used by public (municipal) utilities for determining and setting their revenue requirements since this closely follows their budgeting process. This is the methodology EES would recommend to establish revenue requirements for the City. This is also the method that the City utilized in its last comprehensive rate study conducted by EES. STEP 3 - ACCUMULATION OF REVENUES AND EXPENSES- Once the test period and method of accumulating costs has been determined, EES in conjunction with City management and staff, will develop the test period revenue requirements for each utility. Revenue requirements are composed of two major types of costs; operational and capital expenses. The operational costs are generally projected from historical or budgeted costs, using assumed escalation factors, and adjusted for any known changes in operations (e.g. additional personnel, growth/expansion, etc.) While the projection of the operational costs is fairly straightforward, the capital cost projections are generally the focus of the analysis, and require more thought and planning. Within this study, the starting point for projecting capital costs (expenditures) will be the City's capital facility plan or capital budgeting documents. In the financial planning process, consideration must be given to maximizing the capital improvements (expenditures) for the system, while minimizing rates to its customers. This is accomplished in a variety of ways. However, the most important aspect of this discussion is that there are multiple methods of financing capital expenditures, and it is through this process that rates can be minimized. Table A-3 provides an overview of the general approach that is used to develop a capital expense plan for the revenue requirement analysis. Exhibit A--Detailed Scope of Services A-4 City of Breme~on Total Capital Projects - ,/ Replacemem and Refurbishment Capital Projects '/ Legally Mandated Capital Projects · / System Growth and Expansion Capital Projects Outside Funding Sources - ,/ Capital Reserves / Grants · / Low-Interest Loans (State and/or Federal) ff System Development Charges (SDCs)/(Contributed Capital) · / Short-Term Borrowing ~/ Borrowed Funds/Long Term Debt (e.g. Revenue Bond) Capital Projects Financed with Rate Revenues (_> Deprec. Exp.) The basic framework shown above is developed on a year-by-year basis for each of the projected five (5) years of the water, sewer and stormwater revenue requirement analysis. In summa~ form, the general approach is to list the annual capital projects for each utility, and then determine the various outside funding soumes for each of the projects. These outside funding sources may be low-interest loans, grants, customer capital contributions, system development charges, etc. The balance of projects not funded by the available sources of funds must be financed from a combination of long-term debt and rates. It is the balancing of the use of long- term debt to the impact upon rates, which is critical to the analysis. In balancing the use of debt to equity (rate) financing of capital projects, a number of financial planning aspects are taken into account. First, the utility's debt service coverage ratio is an important financial measure or indication of the utility's ability to repay debt. The strength of the debt service coverage ratio is a direct function of the amount of capital projects that are financed from rate revenues. At a minimum, we assume that a utility should fund an amount equal to or greater than the utility's annual depreciation expense for renewal and replacement of capital projects. By following this simple financial rule, the utility is not only assured of a strong debt service coverage ratio, but at the same time, it assures that existing plant in service will be maintained at acceptable service levels. By properly funding for this component of the capital projects, it should provide the utility with greater flexibility in its ability to borrow for capital projects. In summary, given a better understanding of the overall magnitude of the needed capital projects, a final financing plan can be developed which meets the City's goals and objectives for each utility, while attempting to minimize rates and costs over time. Expected Ci~v Staff Support for Task 3: · Provide "as needed" assistance, via email and telephone, to explain the City's data and information as it relates to developing the revenue requirements. Exhibit A--Detailed Scope of Services A-5 City of Bremerton ,~ · Provide "as needed" data refinements or additional data needs as determined during the process of developing the revenue requirements. · Attend a one-half day project meeting to review the draft revenue requirement analysis. Work Product Deliverables as a Result of Task 3 - Development of the Revenue Requirement Analysis. From the work accomplished above, the deliverables for this task will be as follows: · A projected revenue requirement analysis for a projected 5-year period that considers the necessary operating and capital needs of each utility. · A capital financing plan within the revenue requirement analysis, utilizing the City's comprehensive plans or capital budget, which attempts to maximize capital expenditures, while minimizing the impacts to customers over time. · If needed, a transition plan to "phase in" any needed rote adjustments. · Recommendations regarding key financial indicators (debt service coverage, capital replacement, reserve levels, etc.). Task a--Cost of Service Analysis Task Objective: Develop an average embedded cost of service study to equitably allocate the revenue requirements of each utility to the customers served by the City. Determine the fixed and variable costs associated with serving each customer class of service. Given the results of the revenue requirements, the revenue requirements of each utility will be allocated to the various customer classes of service using an average embedded cost of service methodology. In simplified terms, a cost of service study attempts to equitably allocate the revenue requirements of each utility between the various customer classes of service (e.g. residential, commercial, U.S. Navy, etc.). A brief discussion of the major steps associated with a cost of service analysis is provided below. STEP 1 - SELECTION OF TEST PERIOD - The first step of a cost of service is to select a time period for the allocation of costs. This is similar to the revenue requirement time period selection process noted above. A cost of service analysis typically reviews a 1 to 2 year period, or the period over which water, sewer and stormwater rates will ultimately be set. In the City's case, allocating the year 2003 revenue requirements for each utility for cost of service purposes would appear to be appropriate. STEP 2 -- ~ELECTION OF THE METHOD TO ACCUMULATE COSTS - Much like the discussion of revenue requirements, the City must determine whether to use a "cash" or "accrual" basis approach for the cost of service study. The City currently has a contract with the U.S. Navy that specifies the use of the accrual basis approach. Therefore, EES will convert the City's "cash" basis revenue requirements to an accrual approach. In developing the rates for the U.S. Navy, they will be charged a "fair" rate of retum on the investment made by the City. The balance of the revenue requirements are paid by the City's retail customers. STEP3 - FUNCTIONALIZATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF EXPENSES- The next step in the cost of service analysis is to functionalize the data. Functionalization refers to the arrangement of cost data into its basic cost categories (e.g. for the water utility, source of supply/production, treatment, transmission, distribution, etc.). This task is simplified greatly through the City's use Exhibit A--Detailed Scope of Services A-6 City of Bremerton of a uniform system of accounts. Given functionalized costs, the costs are then classified to their various cost components. For the water utility, classification involves determining whether each specific cost or account item was incurred to meet a consumer's capacity, commodity, fire protection or customer related need. In contrast, for the sewer utility, classification involves determining ~vhether each specific cost or account item ~vas incurred to meet a consumer's volume, strength or customer related need. For the stormwater utility, the two main cost drivers are volume flows and customer related costs. While the basic cost components noted above for each utility are the cornerstone to the analysis, they are by no means the only cost components to be utilized for each of the studies. A thorough review of the various types of costs that the City incurs for each utility will be undertaken and specific cost classifiers developed. Classification will be based upon generally accepted cost of service techniques. STEP ,it - DETERMINATION OF CLASSES OF SERVICE- Development of the cost of service for each utility begins with determining the classes of service that will be used for purposes of establishing cost allocations and rates. The process of establishing classes of service is to group customers into homogeneous groups. That is, customers with similar usage and/or facility requirements. One of the major reasons for conducting this study is to assure that the rates being charged all customers, including the U.S. Navy, are fair and equitable. As a starting point, the City's current rate schedules will be used to establish customer classes of service. The U.S. Navy will be treated as a separate class of service to allow for the establishment of equitable and cost-based rates. The final classes of service to be used for this study will be reviewed by the City. STEP $-ALLOCATION OFEXPENSES - The next analytical process involved in each of the cost of service analyses is the allocation of the classified rate base and expenses to each of the customer classes of service. Once the classes of service have been determined, the process of developing allocation factors is undertaken. In developing the allocation factors, EES will develop factors that are "fair and equitable" to all customers, and which rely upon City specific data where available. STEP ..,e _ SUMMARY OF THE COST OF SERVICE - Given the development of all the allocation factors, the previous task allocated the rate base and expenses to each class of service. From this process, a summary page of the cost of service study for each utility is provided. The summary page for the cost of service study compares the difference between the current level of rate revenues received from each class of service, and the allocated cost of service for each class. The cost of service will also provide average unit costs, or cost-based water, sewer and stormwater rates, which are important to the development of final rate designs. Average unit costs provide the City with an understanding of the cost/rate relationship between fixed and variable costs. In particular, the U.S. Navy is concerned that the annual method of adjusting its rates has increased the fixed component of the rate, beyond its actual cost. This analysis will determine the appropriate cost-based relationship between the fixed and variable costs that the U.S. Navy is charged. In summary, the development of average unit costs will provide "cost of service" based water, sewer and stormwater rates for all classes of service for the City. Exhibit A--Detailed Scope of Sera,Ices A-7 City of Bremerton Expected City Staff Support for this Task: I Attend a half-day project meeting to review the findings and results of the cost of service analyses for each utility. I Provide any "as needed" data refinements or additional data needs as determined during the process of developing the cost of service analysis. Work Product Deliverables as a Result of Task 4 - Cost of Service Analysis: · Review of the current customer classes of service for each utility and determine any revisions for cost allocation purposes. · A "fair and equitable" allocation of the revenue requirements to the various classes of service for the City's utility systems. · A summary of the average unit costs (cost based rates) for the various customer classes of service for each utility. Task 5--Rate Design Analysis Task Objective: Utilize the cost information developed as a part of the previous tasks and develop rate design options for possible adoption by the City Council. A starting point for the rate design process is understanding the rate design goals and objectives the City is striving for in this study. These objectives may include ease of administration, simplicity, revenue stability, efficient use, etc. Understanding the City's rate design objectives will assist EES in the development of the rate design alternatives for each utility. In designing the rate options for the City, the cost of service information and average unit cost information for each utility will be utilized as a starting point. As a part of this task, the City's present rate designs for each utility will be reviewed to ensure that they conform to contemporary rate-setting goals and objectives. EES will review the rate objectives of the City and provide rate alternatives for each utility that will meet those objectives. For each rate design developed, a bill comparison and graph will be provided that shows a comparison between the present bill and the proposed bill at various levels of usage. Bill comparisons are useful in assessing the potential impacts to a wide variety of customers. A comparison of neighboring water, sewer and stormwater utilities will also be provided for the proposed rate designs. Expected City Staff Support for this Task: · Discuss with EES the City's rate design goals and objectives. · Review rate design altematives for appropriateness. Work Product Deliverables as a Result of Task 5- Rate Design Analysis: · Review of the City's current rates and development of various rate design alternatives. · Bill comparisons and graphs for the rate design alternatives developed. Exhibit A--Detailed Scope of Services A-8 City of Brernerton Task 6--Review and Update System Development Charges TaM{ Objective: Review the City's system development charges and update them as appropriate to consider the City's current facility plans for each utility. EES as part of this task will review and update the City's system development charges. The system development charges will be calculated based on the cost and value of unused system capacity in the City's systems as well as associated capital improvements necessary to serve new development. System development charges (SDC's) are one-time charges paid by new development to finance the construction of growth related facilities and reimburse existing customers for the past investments in available capacity. In developing the methodology to be used to analyze the City's SDC's for each utility, EES will meet with City staff to review the current methodology used to establish the City's SDC's. At the same meeting, a discussion can be held regarding any modifications that may be needed to each methodology to assure that the proper costs are captured and recovered in this process. Various options for valuation of the existing systems will be reviewed. These will include original cost, depreciated original cost, depreciated replacement value, as well as original cost adjusted for the associated carrying cost of the excess capacity investment. EES will also review options associated with allocation of capital improvements to serve growth. Generally two options are available: the incremental method and the proportional method. The incremental method assigns the cost of project replacements to existing development based on the additional cost incurred in over-sizing of the facilities. The proportional method would assign the cost to existing and new development based on the proportional amount of capacity. An example of the incremental method is to look at the cost of upsizing a 6-inch line to a 12-inch line. It is anticipated that the methodology and key issues will be resolved very early on in the study process to assure that the appropriate data is developed and incorporated into the SDC methodology. As a part of the study process, EES will review any associated credits required to be given to new development to assure that they do not "pay twice"; that is, once through rates and once through the SDC charge. This will include review of any general obligation issues which are paid by property taxes and hence are paid for whether or not the user has been pay/ng through water rates or not. Additionally, any associated debt, which may be paid for through revenue bond issuances, will also be reviewed for applicable credits. Given the nature and complexity of these charges, EES will prepare a separate report discussing the establishment of the SDC's for each of the utilities. Given the legal implications of establishing SDC's, it is better filed as a report separate from the rate study report. Five (5) copies of the draft SDC reports will be submitted to the City for review and comment. Fifteen (15) copies of the final SDC reports will be provided to the City. Expected City Staff Support for this Task: I Discuss with EES the City's ~'growth" related projects. I Review the proposed methodology and resulting SDC's for appropriateness. Work Product Deliverables as a Result of Task 6---System Development Charge Methodology: s System development charges, for each utility, that are cost-based, equitable and legally defensible. f/~ee~ Exhibit A--Detailed Scope of Services A-9 City of Bremerton m Separate reports outlining the findings, methodology and system development charges. Five (5) copies of the draft SDC report will be provided and fifteen (15) copies of each final report will be provided to the City. I A camera ready copy of the report. Task 7--Work Papers and Report Documentation Task Objective: Provide a well-written report to summarize the findings, conclusions and recommendations of the rate study. In addition, provide a copy of all workpapers associated with the project to aid in future updating of the study by City stqffJ Upon completion of the rate analysis, EES will develop a draft written report of the rate study. The written report is intended to be comprehensive in nature and document all of the activities undertaken as a part of the project, along with our findings, conclusions and recommendations. Within all of our reports, EES provides technical appendices of all the technical analyses undertaken. EES will provide five (5) copies of the draft final report to the City for its review and comment. Any comments, suggestions or corrections from the City concerning the draft final report will be incorporated into the final report. Fifteen (15) copies of the final report will be provided to the City. A stand-alone document will be developed for the U.S Navy due to the special circumstances surrounding these accounts. Additionally, complete documentation of all workpapers used in the preparation of the utility rate study will be provided to the City. This should facilitate subsequent updating by City staff with limited input from outside consultants. Expected City Staff Support for this Task: · Review and comment on the draft written report. Work Product Deliverables as a Result of Task 7- Work papers and Report Documentation: a Five (5) draft and fifteen (15) final copies of the written report. · Five (5) draft and fifteen (15) final copies of the stand-alone report developed for the Navy. a A camera ready copy of each report. I A copy of all workpapers used in the preparation of the study. Task 8--Meetings/Workshops/Public Presentations Task Objective: Provide effective public presentations of the findings, results and recommendations of the study. The overall quality and value of a rate study is often measured by the quality of the public presentation process. In addition, the ability of the consultant to present this technical material in a manner that is easily understandable to the City Council and public is paramount. EES excels in this aspect of the study. EES would suggest up to four meetings with the City Council and the public. The first meeting would be a workshop to discuss the results of the water, sewer and stormwater revenue requirements and cost of service. From that meeting, EES would gain policy direction from the City Council as it relates to moving forward with final rate designs. The second meeting with the City Council would review the various alternative rate designs for possible adoption. The City ff~ee~ Exhibit A--Detailed Scope of Services A-10 City of Bremerton Council could narrow its options for a final public hearing. The third meeting would review the development of the proposed system development charges. Finally, the fourth meeting would be a formal City Council meeting to have a public hearing on the proposed rates and SDC's. Throughout this project, EES will schedule, as appropriate, project meetings with the City staffto keep them abreast of the progress of the study and to assure that the assumptions and methodology used within the study are consistent with the City's thinking. Throughout this engagement, EES will provide as much educational service to the City's staff members as possible. This "transfer of knowledge" should allow for subsequent analysis and updates of these studies with little or no outside technical assistance. Expected City Staff Support for this Task: · Review and comment on any proposed handouts for public meetings. Work Product Deliverables as a Result of Task 8 - Meetings/Workshops/Public Presentations: · Up to four (4) workshops/public presentations with the City Council during the rate study process to gain policy direction and present the results to the public. Task 9--Computer Models Task Objective: Provide a copy of all models developed as a part of this study. The financial/rate models developed for the City will be provided at the end of the study. The models will be developed using the spreadsheet program of the City's choice (e.g. Excel, Lotus, etc.). Expected City Staff Support for this Task: · Select the City's preferred spreadsheet program. Work Product Deliverables as a Result of Task 9- Computer Models: · A copy of the computer spreadsheet models used to develop the City's study. This concludes the discussion of the proposed scope of services for the City. This scope of services has been developed based upon our limited understanding of the City's goals and objectives for this study. EES is willing to modify its approach to meet the City's specific needs. At the conclusion of this process, should the City desire the assistance of EES to meet or negotiate with the U.S. Navy on the proposed rates, these services will be provided on a time and materials basis. EES has not included any time or expenses within this scope of services for those efforts, should they be needed. Summary This section of the proposal has provided a detailed discussion of our approach and methodology in meeting the City's rate study needs. We have attempted to provide as much detail to our approach as reasonably possible. As needed, our proposed approach can be revised to meet the specific needs of the City. We are confident of our ability to provide a quality work product to the City, and to work effectively and in the best interests of its customers. /~[~ee~ Exhibit A--Detailed 8cope of Services A-t 1 City of Bremerton Introduction This section of the proposal will provide a detailed discussion of our proposed hourly billing rates and the estimated labor hours for the project. These proposed items are based upon our understanding of the City's needs and may be negotiated and adjusted to meet the specific needs of the City. EES Hourly Billing Rates Economic and Engineering Services, Inc. (EES) utilizes the following hourly billing rates. These rates were effective as of January 1, 2003. Hourly Range Within a Grade Title Grade Minimum to Maximum Principal/V.P. $140.00/hr $165.00/hr Associate Analyst 7 $118.00/hr $144.00/hr Financial Manager 6 105.00/hr 129.00/hr Sr. Financial Analyst 5 92.00/hr 112.00/hr Project Analyst 4 77.00/hr 94.00/hr Financial Analyst 2/3 54.00/hr 78.00/hr Associate Engineer 7 $118.00/hr $144.00/hr Engineering Manager 6 105.00/hr 129.00/hr Sr. Engineer 5 92.00/hr 112.00/hr Project Engineer 4 77.00/hr 94.00/hr Engineer 2/3 54.00/hr 78.00/hr Sr. Word Processor $38.00/hr $51.00/hr Word Processor 30.00/hr 49.00/hr Estimated Fees EES has developed fee estimates for the City's project based upon the current hourly billing rates, the estimated labor needed to conduct the water, sewer, and stormwater rate study and SDC analysis. Exhibit B--Proposed Billing Rates and Eatimated Feea B-t City of Brernerton Water Sewer Stormwater Total Labor: Task 1: Initial Project Meeting $750 $750 $500 $2,000 Task 2: Data Collection 1,000 750 500 2,250 Task 3: Revenue Requirement Analysis 7,500 7,000 6,500 21,000 Task 4: Cost of Service Analysis 8,000 7,500 3,500 19,000 Task 5: Rate Design Analysis 5,000 4,000 4,000 13,000 Task 6: System Development Charges 9,500 9,000 7,500 26,000 Task 7: Workpapers/Written Reports 2,500 2,500 3,000 8,000 Task 8: Public Presentations 3,000 3,000 3,000 9,000 Task 9: Computerization - Rate Models 500 500 500 1,500 Grand Total Labor $37,750 $35,000 $29,000 $101,750 Expenses: Mileage/Ferries l, 150 Misc. (phone, copies, fax) 1,500 Total Expenses $2,650 Grand Total Water, Sewer and Stormwater Rate Study/SDC Analysis $104.400 The above fee estimate is based upon the scope of services previously presented. Economic and Engineering Services, Inc. is willing to negotiate a final fee based upon a scope of services. Should the City request any additional services under this contract, the services will be provided at the hourly billing rates stated above. All portions of this proposal can be expanded or reduced as mutually agreed upon in writing by the City and EES. The above quoted fees will remain in effect until September 1, 2003. As noted within our scope of services, the above fee estimates for the water and sewer rate study and SDC analysis does not include any time or effort associated with U.S. Navy negotiations. EES has included time and budget to meet with the Navy to discuss the findings, conclusions and recommendations of the study. However, any extensive discussions or negotiations with the U.S. Navy, or any other customer, will be considered outside of the scope of services contained herein. In negotiating a final fee for this study, EES is willing to enter into a "not-to-exceed" contract with the City for the proposed services. Summary This section of the proposal provided a detailed discussion regarding the project hourly billing rates and estimated fees for the City's water, sewer and stormwater rate and SDC studies. We are willing to adjust our scope and schedule to attempt to work within the City's time or budget constraints. Exhibit B-Proposed Billing Ratex and Estimated Feex B-2 City of Bremerton Introduction A rate study of this complexity generally requires 16 to 24 weeks to complete, depending upon a number of factors. These factors include the amount of time required by the City to collect the necessary data, the ability to schedule meetings with City staff in a timely manner and, most importantly, receive policy direction from the City's management and/or City Council for the study. Provided below in Figure C-1 is an estimated time schedule for the project. 2004 Task Description Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar I Initial Project Meeting 2 Data Collection 3 Rev. Requirement Analysis I 4 Cost of Service Analysis 5 Rate Design Analysis 6 System Development Charges I 7 Writlen Reports 8 Public Presentations 9 Computer Models · Meetings/Public Presentations ~,~ Rate Implementation Summary ECS has provided a time schedule that allows sufficient time to work through the many issues surrounding a rate and SDC study. ECS makes every effort to meet our client's needs, while at the same time providing a high quality work product. Exhibit C--Proposed Time Schedule C-3 City of Bremerton DATE SUBMITTED: 6/30/03 BILL # d .~ -' ]-ti AGENDA BILL 8 B CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: 2004 DRAFT CDBG/HOME Committee Meeting Date: 7/8/03 POLICY PLAN AND APPLICATION COUNCIL MEETING Date: ~ i~'/~z 1//~? 177 Department: DCD Presenter: Marylyn Wait}el Phone: 473-$375 SUMMARY: Attached is the Draft 2004 Plan. A study session with the Council was held on 6/4/03. Recommendations ~om that meeting are listed on Page A. An advertised public meeting was held on 6/24/03 and the recommendations ~om that meeting are listed on Page B. ATTACHMENTS: Council Study Session Recommendations, Public Meeting Recommendations and the Draft Plan. FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): APPROVALS: ~/~_ / ~... DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR: ' CITY ATTORNEY: FINANCE DIRECTOR: FISCAL/BUDGET: , CONSENT AGENDA [] OPERATIONS: COUNCIL PRESIDENT: RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the Draft 2004 CDBG/HOME Policy Plan and Application as amended. COUNCIL ACTION: [] Avvrove [] Deny [] Table [] Continue [] NoAction ATTACHMENT "A" 2004 CDBG/HOME POLICY PLAN AND APPLICATION PACKET CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION 6/4/03 RECOMMENDED CHANGES FROM THE 2003 PACKET (THESE CHANGES ARE INCORPORATED INTO DRAFT PLAN) 1. Michelle Eichhom has joined our staff. Michelle is our Project Coordinator and is responsible for the Planning and Capital Projects. 2. In our "Allocation Schedule" we have added a date (8/22/03) for formal training of our Advisory Committee members. 3. The City has changed and increased the Advisory Committee. The City now has a 5 member committee with term limits for Public Service projects made up of: a. I member fi.om the Manette Area b. 2 members fi.om the West Bremerton area c. 2 members from the East Bremerton area 4. For Capital and Planning projects, the City has a 5 member committee: a. 1 member is the DCD Director b. 1 Councilmember (appointed by the Council President) c. 1 Planning Commissioner (appointed by Comm. President) d. 1 member fi.om the West Breme~on area e. 1 member from the East Bremcrton area 5. Par~ II, Page 4, the middle of the page explains the Advisory Committee options for allocating funds. 6. Part II, Page 4, the bottom 4tl~ of the page explains the City's policy on "off-cycle" funding. 7. Part III, the Application, under the Capital Project has a new form, C-7, Preliminary Environmental Review Checklist. ATTACHMENT "B" 2004 CDBG/HOME POLICY PLAN AND APPLICATION PACKET ADVERTISED PUBLIC MEETING 6/24/03 RECOMMENDED CHANGES FROM THE 2003 PACKET (THESE CHANGES ARE NOT INCORPORATED INTO DRAFT PLAN) 1. Technical Assistance Training should be mandatory. 2. Thc technical review checklist should be mailed to each applicant after the review has been completed. 3. A process review period should be added: 10/9/03-11/8/03. 4. The CDBG/HOME Citizen Participation Plan should be part oftbe policy plan/application packet. 5. There should be no City staff on the review committees. 6. The people serving on the Review Committee should be informed in writing that: "Our reviewers are given special needs accommodations and awareness that enables them to have full participation." 7. Par~ II, Page 4 regarding "off-cycle funding", should state where the additional funds are coming from, i.e. revolving loan payments, closed-out projects, etc. 8. Copy of 24 CFR 570-209 (Part II Page 10) should be included in the packet. 9. Form B-8, Salary Summary is unclear if it is for the Agency or Project. 10. The process for the interview format should be provided prior to the interview. 11. Fiscal review of all applications should be completed by a qualified financial person. ATTACHMENT "C" 2004 CDBG/HOME POLICY PLAN AND APPLICATION PACKET CITY DEPARTMENT HEAD MEETING 7/14/03 RECOMMENDED CHANGES FROM THE 2003 PACKET (THESE CHANGES ARE NOT INCORPORATED INTO DRAFT PLAN) 1. Proposed distribution o f funds: Public/Human Services $ 90,000.00 Planning and Administration $120,000.00 Capital: City Administration Projects: $500,000.00 Non-City Projects: $ 90,000.00 TOTAL $800,000.00 2. Capital Projects Process: City Administration Capital Projects will be as follows: Applications will be submitted by 8/22/03 to DCD DCD will review for eligibility Mayor will make funding recommendations City Council Public Hearing for final approval Non-City Capital Projects process will be as follows: Application will be submitted by 8/22/03 to DCD DCD will review for eligibility Application will be reviewed and interviewed by a five (5) member committee: DCD Director Councilmember Planning Commissioner West Bremerton Resident East Bremerton Resident Committee will make funding recommendations City Council Public Hearing for final approval CITY OF BREMERTON 2004 CDBG/HOME POLICY PLAN AND APPLICATION 2004 CDBGfltOME POLICY PLAN AND APPLICATION PACKET CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION 6/4/03 RECOMMENDED CHANGES FROM THE 2003 PACKET (THESE CHANGES ARE INCORPORATED INTO DRAFT PLAN) 1. Michelle Eichhom has joined our staff. Micbelle is our Project Coordinator and is responsible for the Planning and Capital Projects. 2. In our "Allocation Schedule" we have added a date (8/22/03) for formal training of our Advisory Committee members. 3. The City has changed and increased the Advisory Committee. The City now has a 5 member committee with term limits for Public Ser~i.'ce projects made up of: b. 2 members from the West Bremerton area c. 2 members from the East Brcmerton area 4. For Capital and Planning projects, the City has a 5 member committee: a. 1 member is the DCD Director b. 1 Councilmember (appointed by the Council President) c. I Planning Commissioner (appointed by Comm. President) d. 1 member from the West Bremerton area e. 1 member from the East Brernerton area 5. Part II, Page 4, the middle of the page explains the Advisory Committee options for allocating funds. 6. Part II, Page 4, the bottom 4th of the page explains the City's policy on "off-cycle" 7. Part III, the Application, under the Capital Project has a new form, C-7, Preliminary Environmental Review Checklist. CITY OF BREMERTON STAFF CONTACTS CDBG/HOME ADMINISTRATION & PUBLIC SERVICE PROJECTS MARYLYN WAIBEL, CDBG PROGRAM ADMINISTRATOR TELEPHONE: (360) 473-5375 FAX: (360) 473-5318 E-MAIL: mwaibel~ci.bremerton.wa.us MAILING ADDRESS: City of Bremerton Department of Community Development 286 4th Street Bremerton, WA 98337 PLANNING & CAPITAL PROJECTS MICHELLE EICHHORN, CDBG PROGRAM COORDINATOR TELEPHONE: (360) 473-5211 FAX: (360) 473-5318 E-MAIL meichhorn~ci.bremerton.wa.us MAILING ADDRESS: City of Bremerton Department of Community Developmem 286 4~ Street Bremerton, WA 98337 CITY OF BREMERTON 2004 CDBG ALLOCATION SCHEDULE Wednesday, 6/4/03 Present Proposed 2004 Policy Plan at City Council Study Session, City Council Office, 5:30PM Wednesday, 6/11/03 Advertise Availability of 2004 Draft Policy Plan (Ad to be placed in The Sun) Tuesday, 6/24/03 Public Meeting on 2004 Draft Policy Plan DCD Conference Room, 286 4~h Street, 3:00 PM Tuesday, 7/8/03 City Council Committee Meeting on Draft Plan Tuesday, 7/15/03 City Council Committee Meeting on Draft Plan Wednesday, 7/23/03 Bremerton City Council Public Hearing on 2004 Policy Plan, 239 4t~ Street, 5:30 PM Friday, 7/25/03 Final 2004 Policy Plan and Application Packet Available - 286 4t~ Street, DCD Monday, 7/28/03 Technical Assistance Meeting DCD Conference Room, 286 4th Street, 3:00 PM Tuesday, 8/5/03 City Council Committee on Appointment of Advisory Committee Members Wednesday, 8/13/03 City Council Meeting on Approval of Advisory Committee Members Friday, 8/22/03 Applications Due in City of Bremerton DCD, 286 4th Street (Postmark is not acceptable) Friday, 8/22/03- StaffTechnical Review Wednesday, 9/10/03 Friday, 8/22/03 Advisory Committee Member Training DCD Conference Room, 286 4th Street, 3:00 PM Friday, 8/29/03- CDBG Advisory Committee Review and Interview Friday, 9/19/03 Public Service Applications City Advisory Committee Review and Interview Capital Projects Wednesday, 9/24/03 Committee Recommendations to DCD Staff Tuesday, 9/30/03 Public Meeting to Comment on Funding Recommendations DCD Conference Room, 286 4t~ Street, 3:00 PM Wednesday, 10/8/03 City Council Hearing on Funding Recommendations 239 4th Street, 5:30PM Friday, 11/14/03 Annual Action Plan to HUD Thursday, 1/1/04 CDBG Program Year Begins CDBG CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE PUBLIC SERVICE APPLICATIONS 1 Member from the Manette Area Term will be 1/1/03-12/31/05 2 Members from the West Bremerton Area 1 Term will be 1/1/04-12/31/06 1 Term will be 1/1/04-12/31/07 2 Members from the East Bremerton Area 1 Term will be 1/1/04-12/31/06 1 Term will be 1/1/04-12/31/07 From then on 3 year staggered 3 year terms CITY STAFF ADVISORY COMMITTEE CAPITAL AND PLANNING APPLICATIONS Director of Community Developmem 1 Councilmember (to be appointed by Council President) 1 Planning Commissioner (to be appointed by Commission President) 1 Member from the West Bremerton Area 1 Member from the East Bremerton Area 2004 PROPOSED DISTRIBUTION OF CDBG FUNDS Estimated HUD 2004 Emitlement $600,000.00 Estimated 2003 Program Income $200,000.00 Estimated 2004 Allocation $800,000.00 Public and Human Services $ 90,000.00 Planning and Administration $120,000.00 Capital Projects $590,000.00 Estimated 2004 Allocation $800,000.00 Part I 2004 CDBGIHOME ALLOCATION-GENERAL INFORMATION What is the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program · The program is authorized by Title I of the Community Development Act of 1974. · Federal funds are provided to local governments to assist in the development of decent housing, a suitable living environment, and expanded economic opportunities primarily for persons of low and mo&rate income. · CDBG funds must be used for activities determined by the federal government to be eligible, however the local government determines which eligible use is appropriate in the community. · The City of Bremerton is an "entitlement city" and receives an annual CDBG allocation fi.om the federal government. · The City accepts applications fi.om various organizations to implement CDBG activities. · Each application, at a minimum must meet the four threshold requirements. It must: be implemented by an eligible applicant/recipient; be eligible under the CDBG program requirements; and, meet one of the three national objectives. How much money is available? In 2003 the City of Bremerton received $611,000. The amount for 2004 is dependent on the federal HUD budget and will not be known until it is appropriated. We are estimating the amount to be available in 2004 to be $600,000. Who is an eligible applicant/recipient? Eligible applicant/recipients include: · City departments · Other local public agencies · Public and private nonprofit organizations (501 C 3) · Section 301(d) small business investment companies · Local development corporations · Private profit organizations may implement certain economic development and microenterpfise activities. Additionally applicants must: · Demonstrate an active governing body or beard of directors with skills and experience to provide leadership and direction to the agency; · Demonstrate the legal, financial, and programmatic ability to administer the proposed project; and, · Meet the City's requirements for contracting agencies such as insurance requirements, audit and financial requirements. 2004 CDBG/HOME ALLOCATION--GENERAL INFORMATION PART 1 PAGE 1 What are eligible activities? Eligible activities are defined in the CDBG program regulations at 24 CFR 570.201- 570.207. More information concerning eligible activities, and special circumstances relating to the activities, can be found in Part V pages 6 through 10 of this package. A list of some of the activities follows: · Acquisition of real property by purchase, lease or donation · Acquisition, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation or installation of public facilities and improvements · Code enforcement in deteriorated or deteriorating areas · Clearance, demolition and removal and rehabilitation of buildings and improvements · Removal of material and architectural barriers · Public services (including labor, supplies and materials) including but not limited to those concerned with employment, crime prevention, child care, health, drug abuse, education, energy conservation, welfare or recreation needs · Planning activities · Assistance to Community Based Development Organizations (CBDO) to carry out projects · Assistance to carry out economic development projects · Housing services such as housing counseling and energy auditing · Assistance to facilitate and expand homeownership opportunities for low and very low income people · Lead based paint haTa.rd evaluation and reduction The following activities generally are not eligible for CDBG funding: · New residential housing construction, except in special circumstances · Regular government operations · Buildings such as city halls, police stations, or other buildings primarily for the general conduct of government (except for the removal of architectural barriers) · Income payments such as payments to individuals or families for food, clothing, or rent, except in certain circumstances · Political activities What are the three National Objectives? An eligible CDBG activity must either: · Principally benefit low and very low income households; · Reduce or prevent slum and blight; or, · Meet an urgent need The National Objectives are included in the CDBG regulations at 24 CFR 570.208 and described in detail in Part V pages I through 6 of this package. 2004 CDBG/HOME ALLOCATION--GENERAL INFORMATION PART I PAGE 2 Are there rules or regulations that I should consider when thinking about submitting an application? All projects are subject to environmental review, civil rights compliance, and procurement requirements. Some of the other things that may affect the amount you request, and your project, are labor standards, relocation, local hire, American Disability Act, and audit requirements. How do I apply? Complete an application and submit (POSTMARK IS NOT ACCEPTABLE) it by 5:00 PM on August 22, 2003 to the: City of Bremerton Department of Community Development, Attn: CDBG 286 4th Street Bremer~on, WA 98337 Eligible applicants will be required to take part in an interview with the Citizen Advisory Committee between August 29 and September 19, 2003. How do I get help with the application? s Call Marylyn Waibel at 473-5375. s Attend the pre-application workshop scheduled July 28, 2003 at 3:00 at the Community Development Office, 286 4t~ Street, Bremerton. How will applications be reviewed and projects selected? s City staffwill review the application to assure it is complete, the applicant and project meet the three threshold requirements, and the project is consistent with the Consolidated Plan. Projects not meeting the threshold requirements will be disqualified ~om consideration for funding. Such projects will not be rated. s A Citizens Advisory Committee, appointed by the Mayor, will review the Public Service applications, interview applicants, rate and rank the projects utilizing the process outlined in Part II, and present their recommendation to the Bremerton City Council. A City StaffAdvisory Committee, appointed by the Mayor, will review the Capital/Planning applications, interview the applicants, rate and rank the projects and present their recommendation to the Bremerton City Council. · A public hearing will be held and the Bremerton City Council will make the final decision concerning activities to be included in the 2004 Action Plan~ · The 2004 Action Plan will be sent to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development by November 15, 2003 for approval. 2004 CDBG/HOME ALLOCATION--GENERAL INFORMATION PART I PAGE 3 When will funds be available? Funding is dependent on the federal HUD budget being ratified. In "normal" years this is by March. We will not be able to sign contracts with subrecipients until we receive a contract from HUD. Remember the $600,000 is an estimation, we will not know the actual amount until at~er HUD's budget is approved. HOME PROGRAM What Is the HOME Program? · The HOME Program was created by the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 (NAHA). The Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 and the Multifarnfly Property Disposition Act of 1994 made important changes to the Progran~ · The intent of the HOME Program is to: * expand the supply of decent, safe, sanitary, and affordable housing; * to strengthen the abilities of state and local governments to provide housing; * to expand the capacity of nonprofit community based housing development organizations; and, * to leverage private sector participation in financing affordable housing. How much money is available? Approximately $430,000 in HOME funds will be available through the City in 2004. 15% or approximately $64,500 will be available to Community Development Housing Organizations (CFLDOs) and 5% or approximately $21,500 will be available to Kitsap County for administration and 5% or approximately $21,500 will be available to the City for admires' trafion. What are the City's Priorities for Use of HOME funds? · HOME funds will primarily be used for projects that promote homeownership. · Projects that promote rehabilitation and renovation of existing buildings will be preferred over projects that promote construction on vacant sites. What is the Process for allocation of HOME funds? · Applications will be accepted year round · Application will be submitted to DCD · Application will be reviewed by DCD stall'for technical requirements · Staffwill contact Council person in District where proposed project is located. · Neighborhood meeting will be held if appropriate (Council person will determine the scope of meeting) · Applicant will present the proposed project to an interview panel. · Recommendations of the panel will be presented at City Council Committees · Recommendations of the panel will be presented to City Council · City Council will approve or deny funding 2004 CDBG/HOME ALLOCATION--GENERAL INFORMATION PART I PAGE 4 Where do I get an application or more information? Call Marylyn Waibel at 473-5375 if you are interested in applying for funds under the HOME Program. 2004 CDBG/HOME ALLOCATION--GENERAL INFORMATION PART I PAGE $ /& PART II 2004 CITY OF BREMERTON CDBG ALLOCATION POLICY How will CDBG funds be distributed between various eligible activities? Funds available for various eligible CDBG activities are determined by Federal regulations and local priorities. · Federal regulations limit the amount of funds which can be allocated to public service projects to 15% of the annual CDBG entitlement, plus 15% of the program income received during the City's immediately preceding program year. The City receives program income/~om the revolving housing loan program. These funds do not impact the annual CDBG allocation. The amount available for public services will be 15% of the federal allocation. · The amount of funds that can be allocated to planning and administration projects, including the overall administration of the City ofBremerton's CDBG Program, is limited to 20% of the annual grant. ® Federal regulations require that a minimum of 70% of the annual grant funds go to projects that directly benefit low and moderate income persons. · Funds allocated under the CDBG program must meet one of the priorities identified in the Kitsap County Consortium Consolidated Plan for 2001 through 2006. The City of Bremerton and Kitsap County joined together as a consortium in order to assure receiving HOME funds. The Consolidated Plan identifies 5 general priorities related to housing, homeless, and non-housing community needs to be addressed with Federal funds. Please note, that activities that are included in the plan may not he prioritized in the City's Policy Plan. The Consolidated Plan priorities are listed below (the order listed does not establish any categorical priority): 1. _Homelessness To ensure that decent, accessible, affordable, and suitable housing is available in the County and ' ' · Citrus and to support servmes that meet the needs of individuals and families who are · will: homeless or at risk ofhomelessness, the Kitsap County community 2004 C~TY ov BR[MERTON--CDBG A~ ~ · Pr°vide a variety o f decent and safe emergency transitional and affordable permanent housing; · Provide adequate support through coordinated systems of.' resources, outreach, assessment, case management, provider collaboration, homelessness prevention, and rental assistance; ·Develop, coordinate, and maintain suflficient support services to sustain low- income and special needs populations' independent living. 2. .Special Needs Populations* To ensure that suitable, effective assistance is available for vulnerable persons in special needs populations who are in need of housing, support or care services, the Kitsap County community will: Maintain, improve and increase effective services and suitable housing; · Ensure effective service delivery and housing availability through supportive ordinances and regulations; · Support efforts to develop an entry system for special population clients that ensures links with appropriate diagnosis, placement, support and treatment; · Increase and maintain the availability of effective, timely life skills training and work preparation to promote self sufficiency. *Special Needs Populations include the following categories: elderly, frail elderly, persons with disabilities (mental, physical, developmental), persons living with HIV/AIDS, persons fleeing domestic violence, persons with alcohol or other drug addiction and people affected by more than identification, one To ensure access to affordable, decent, safe and appropriate transitional and permanent housing for all individuals and families, the Kitsap County community will: · Increase the stock of affordable rental units throughout the County (except in Bremerton where an increase will be considered only when dilapidated structures are demolished or rehabilitated) through preservation, rehabilitation and construction · Increase the number of new homeowners among low/moderate income individuals and. families through fair housing efforts, education, housing counseling, financial assistance and affordable construction; · Improve and retain existing housing stock through preservation, rehabilitation, weatherization, accessibility and planning efforts; · Support education and training that builds community awareness of lead-based paint hazards and incorporate new studies and regulations into any planning for mitigation; ·Improve the safety and livability of neighborhoods through revitalization and/or demolition of inappropriate or dilapidated structures; 2004 CITY OF BREMERTON--CDBG ALLOCATION POLICY PART 1I PAGE /¢ 4. Community Development To ensure the safe livability ofneighberhoods, the preservation of important facilities, public access to facilities and services, and planning activities, that primarily benefit low-income persons, Kitsap County will: · Support a continuum of social and health services for low/moderate income persons in Kitsap County; · Provide suitable access to all public buildings in the cities and County; · Support planning and projects that preserve or increase housing for Iow income and moderate income populations; · Support local efforts toward solving public facility needs, especially those identified in capital facilities plans; · Meet urgent Community Development needs, which pose a serious and immediate risk to public health or safety. 5. Economic Development To ensure a thriving community, with livable wage jobs and long-term economic and social viability, Kitsap County community will: · Support creation and retention oflivable wage jobs, and essential job prepuration; · Assist low-income individ~al~ who wish to establish, expand or stabilize a small business by providing loans and supportive technical assistance and training; · Revisit existing economic development plans and modify them as necessary to develop and maintain infi'astructures that encourage living wage jobs; · Support the continuum of social services for low/moderate working persons in Kitsap County that promote self-sufficiency. What is the proposed distribution of 2004 CDBG funds? Remember, the Public/Human Services $ 90,000 amount the City 15% maximum will receive in 2004 is an Planning & Administration estimate. We will 20% maximum not know the (Admin. $100,000) $120,000 actual amount until Congress Capital Projects $590,000 approves the federal HUD TOTAL $800,000 budget. 2004 CITY OF BREMERTON--CDBG ALLOCATION POLICY PART ii PAGE 3 How will Projects be selected for funding? · City staffwill review applications to assure they are complete and meet threshold requirements. Projects that do not meet threshold requirements will not be considered for funding. · Applications that are complete and meet threshold requirements will be provided to members of the Citizen and City Advisory Committees for review. ® Each applicant will have the opportunity to orally present their project and answer questions concerning the application during a brief interview with the Advisory Committees. · Based on the application and the interview, each member of the Committee will rate the application according to criteria described in this section. Activities in each category (public service, capital, and planning,) will be rated in comparison with other activities in the same category. · The scores of the Committee members will be averaged to determine the total overall activity score. · Once projects have been rated and ranked, funds will be awarded to projects as follows: Projects will be ranked in numerical order according to their rating. The Advisory Committee may recommend a redistribution of the funds among the categories based on the number and quality of applications received or funds will be awarded according to the (eligible and reasonable) amount requested by the applicant until the amount available in the category is allocated The minimum award for public service activities is $7,500, the maximum is $25,000. · The recommendation to be forwarded to the City Council will consist of the projects in each category that receive the highest ranking score based on the funding distribution described above or redistributed as described above. · Applicants will be notified of the status of their applications. · A public hearing will be held and the Bremerton City Council will make the final decision concerning activities to be included in the 2004 Action Plan. The City of Bremerton's policy on "off-cycle" funding will be as follows: The City does not want to encourage or endorse any "off-cycle" funding, but want to have a process in case a unique opportunity of economic impact or a health, safety, or welfare issue may arise. ,/ City staffwill review the application to ensure it is complete and meets threshold and eligibility requirements, as well as confirm there are funds available. Pro and Con documentation will be required on the merits of funding now or waiting until the next annual cycle. ~ The activity must have the approval of the Administration. ff The application will be reviewed by the Advisory Committee. ,/ Final approval will come fi.om a Public Hearing at City Council. 2004 CITY OF BIIEMERTON--CDBG ALLOCATION POLICY PART 11 PAGE 4 What are the five threshold requirements? · The application was received by the due date (Postmarks are not accepted) · The application is substantially complete (applicants will have the opportunity to repair ,,minor clerical errors). · The applicant is eligible as of the application due date. · The project or activity addresses a national objective. · The project or activity is eligible under the CDBG progran'L Whet are the Criteria each of the applications will be rated on? The City anticipates receiving more eligible proposals that address priorities identified in the Consolidated Plan than can be funded. The following criteria will be utilized to select activities to be funded. The actual rating form that will be used to evaluate applications is included in part IV. You are strongly encouraged to review it and make sure you respond to the criteria when completing the questions required in the application. It is unlikely that any application will address all of the criteria. 2004 CITY OF BREM£RTON--CDBG ALLOCATION POLICY PART II PAGE PUBLIC/HUMAN SERVICE CRITERIA Public service activities include, but are not limited to: child care; health care;job training; recreation programs; education programs; public safety services; fair housing activities; services for senior citizens; services for homeless persons; and drug abuse counseling and treatment. The minimum grant award will be $7,500 and the maximum award will be $25,000. The criteria to be used to evaluate public service activities is based on issues identified by service organi?ations, the Continuum of Care Coalition, Navigating Change meetings and the Family Policy Principals developed by the State of Washington. Projects that address the following criteria will receive priority: [~ Activities that address priorities identified in community planning efforts (0-30 pts). [~ Projects that are effective in addressing the identified need Appropriateness and impact (0-10pts) Project Design (0-1 Opts) Cost (0-1 Opts) ~] Projects that are collaboration between 2 or more agencies to best serve a client group (0-10 pts). ['~ Projects that address a basic need (food, shelter, or clothing) (0-10 pts). [~ Projects that have the greatest' impact on the lives of clients in relation to the cost of services will receive a priority (0-10 pts) [~ Projects that address a defined problem through prevention and thus reduce crises and the need for furore services (0-10 pts). [] Projects that include a fair and realistic system for measuring both short-range and long range progress (0-10 pts) ~'] Projects that directly address child care issues, prepare people to get a job, and or employ people who are currently on TANF will receive priority. (0-1 Opts) ['~ Projects that address a problem that results in a health or safety hazard for low and very low income persons (0-10 pts). [~ Quality points--Citizen Advisory Members have the option of providing up to +10 or -10 points for projects that are either exceptional or projects they feel will have a negative impact on the community. (-10-+10 pts). 2004 C~T~ or BREMERTON--CDBG ALLOCATION POLICY PART !! PAGE 6 PLANNING CRITERIA. CDBG funds may be used for studies, analyses, data gathering, preparation of plans; and identification of actions that will implement plans. Examples include comprehensive plans, individual project plans, neighborhood plans and capital improvement plans. Projects that address the following criteria will receive priority: ~'] Plans that result in the developmem of specific community priorities (0-30 pts). ~'] Plans that upon implementation will benefit low and moderate income persons (0-20 pts). [~ Projects that are a collaboration between 2 or more agencies (0-10 pts). ['~ Projects that promote neighborhood and local improvements (0.10 pts). [~ Quality points--Citizen Advisory Members have the option of providing up to +10 or -10 points for projects that are either exceptional or projects they feel will have a negative impact on the community. (-10-+10 pts). 2004 C~TY OV BREMERTON--CDBG ALLOCATION POLICY PART 1I PAGE 7 CAPITAL PROJECTS CRITERIA Capital proposals include a variety of projects such as community centers, senior eemers, health and day care centers, water and sewer facility improvements, parking, street improvements, parks and playgrounds. Projects that address the following criteria will receive priority: [~ Activities that address priorities ident~ed in community planning efforts (0-30 pts). [~ Projects that are effective in addressing the identified need Appropriateness and impact (0-10pts) Project Design (0-1 Opts) Cost (0-10pts) [~ Projects that address slum and blighting conditions in areas meeting the definition of a slum and blight area under state or local law (0-10 pts). ~] Projects that include post assistance maintenance and operation requirements (0-10 pts). ~] Projects that have the greatest' impact on the lives of clients in relation to the cost of the activity will receive a priority (0-10 pts) [~ Projects that address a problem that results in a health or safety hazard for low and very low income persons (0-10 pts). [~] Projects that leverage private funds or other public funds (0-10 pts) [~ Quality points--Citizen Advisory Members have the option of providing up to +10 or -10 points for projects that are either exceptional or projects they feel will have a negative impact on the community. (-10-+10 pts). 2004 CITY OW BREMERTON--CDBG ALLOCATION POLICY PART II PAGE 8 What are the other policies and regulations you briefly mentioned? · Consistency with applicable City, County, and/or State Codes and Policies To be considered for funding, projects must be consistent with adopted codes and other applicable policies, plans and standards.. · Approval of the Implementing Agency: Proposals submitted by applicants other than the Agency, City or County Department that will implement them must be reviewed and approved by the appropriate implementing Agency, City, or County Department prior to submittal. · Legally Binding Public Interest in CDBG Assisted Property_: HUD requires that facilities acquired, constructed or improved with CDBG funds be "publicly owned" and that the CDBG public interest be protected. The public (CDBG) interest will be secured, when appropriate, through a lien on the property recorded as a deed of trust, and a promissory note explaining the sale and change of use provisions that accompany CDBG assisted real property. The specific terms and conditions of the public interest security agreements will vary depending on the type of project assisted. · Restrictions on the Change-of-Use of CDBG Assisted Property: All CDBG recipients must agree to restrict the use of the property to the intended purpose for which the funds were awarded for a minimum of 5 years after close out of the project. This is to ensure compliance with HUD requirements restricting the change in use of property acquired, constructed or improved with CDBG assistance, and to ensure continued public benefit. · Restriction on Assessments: CDBG funds may not be used for public improvement projects where a portion of the projects is to be financed by assessments to area property owners, unless the project is structured such that CDBG funds are used to pay the assessments of all low and very low income property owners. The analysis of incomes of affected persons must be done ahead of time and submitted as part of the application for CDBG funds. 2004 CITY oF BREMERTON--CDBG ALLOCATION POLICY PART 1I PAGE 9 · Guidelines for Evaluation and Selecting Economic Development Projects:: The City, of Bremerton will utilize the guidelines provided at 24 CFR 570.209 relative to project costs and financial requirements and standards for evaluating public benefit. All CDBG proposals must comply with federal, state, local laws, and executive orders which prohibit discrimination on the grounds of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age, marital status, or the presence of any disability. Discrimination is prohibited in the provision of a service or facility funded with CDBG funds, and in all other aspects of administering a CDBG proposal including contracting, procurement, and employment. · Minimizing the Loss of Low and Very Low Income Dwelling Units: Any CDBG proposal that would directly result in any occupied or vacant occupiable low and very low income dwelling units being (1) demolished, or (2) converted to a use other than as low and very low income housing must include a realistic plan to provide replacement housing within three years of the commencement of the demolition or rehabilitation relating to conversion. * Min/mizin~ Disolacement and Providing Relocation Assistance: It is the policy of the City of Bremerton CDBG Program to discourage CDBG proposals that would cause displacement of people or businesses. Any proposal for CDBG funds that is likely to cause displacement must include relocation assistance payments in the budget. Relocation assistance must be provided consistent with the federal Uniform Relocation Act. · Federal Waee Rates (Davis-Bacon): Pursuant to the Davis-Bacon Act, federal wage rates apply to almost all construction projects over $2,000. Applications that involve construction must consider Davis-Bacon wage rates in the budget. There are few exceptions to the Davis-Bacon Act such as public agency use of force account crews and the rehabilitation of single family homes and small multi-family buildings. 2004 CITY OF BREMERTON--CDBG ALLOCATION POLICY PART 1I PAGE 10 · Federal Audit Requirements: Private non-profit agencies expending $300,000 or more in federal funds annually (whether CDBG alone or CDBG in conjunction with other federal funds) must have an annual audit conducted by an independent auditor in accordance with OMB A-133 Audit Standards for Private Non-Profit Organizations. Agencies are responsible to meet this audit requirement. · Lead-Bnsed Paint Abatement: Any proposed homeownership, rental housing, rehabilitation or acquisition project that involves a (1) pr¢-1978 structure, and (2) would likely house a child age 6 or less must be informed of the possible hazards of lead based paint and a plan must be developed for addressing the presence of lead based paint under 24 CFR 35.105. Costs for abatement must be included in the rehabilitation budget. · Supplanting: Federal regulations prohibit using CDBG funds to supplant (replace or substitute for) local funds for public services or ongoing responsibilities of general local government. The intent of this federal regulation is to prevent local government fi.om using the avallab'dity of federal CDBG dollars ns an excuse to reduce local funding commitments. * Architectural Barriers Act (ABA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): The ABA requires certain buildings or other facilities that receive Federal funds to be designed, constructed or altered in accordance with standards that insure accessibility to, and use by physically handicapped people. The ADA provides comprehensive civil rights to individuals with disabilities in the areas of employment, public accommodations, State and local government services, and telecommunications. It further requires that facilities for first occupancy are readily accessible and that architectural and structural barriers are removed when possible in existing facilities. Famil Polic Princi als In the early 1990s the State of Washington conducted a number of focus groups throughout the State. Approximately 400 people, who were receiving human services at the time, were asked to describe the characteristics of services that would be most effective for them. The Family Policy Principles reflect their collective response, and form the basis for the Washington State Human Service Policy. The principals, which have been incorporated in the rating of applications, are listed below: 2004 CITY OF BR~:MERTON--CDBG ALLOCATION POLICY PART II PAGE 11 57 Family-oriented services and supports that: Respond to the changing nature of families; · Respond to what individuals and famih'es say they need, and · Meet those needs in a way that maintains their dignity and respects their choices. Culturally relevant services and supports that: · Explicitly recognize the culture and beliefs of each family and use these as resources on behalf of the family; · Provide equal access to culturally unique communities in planning and programs, and day-to-day work, and actively address instances where clearly disproportionate needs exist; and · Enhance every culture's ability to achieve self-sufficiency and contribute in a productive way to the larger community. Coordinate services that: · Develop strategies and skills for collaborative planning, problem solving, and service delivery; · Encourage coordination and innovation by providing both formal and informal ways for people to communicate and collaborate in planning and programs; · Allow clients, vendors, community people, and other agencies to creatively provide the most effective, responsive, and flexible services; and · Commit to an open exchange of skills and information; and expect people throughout the system to treat each other with respect, dignity, and understanding. Locally planned services and supports that: · Operate on the belief that each community has special characteristics, needs and strengths; · Include a cross-section of local community partners from the public and private sectors, in the planning and delivery of services and supports; and · Support these partners in addressing the needs of their communities through both short range and long range planning and in establishing priorities within state and federal standards. 2004 C~TY Or BREMERTON--CDBG ALLOCATION POLICY PART II PAGE 12 Community based prevention that: * Encourages and supports state residents to create positive conditions in their communities to promote the well being of £amilies and reduce crises and the need for future services. Outcome-based services and supports that: · Include a £aJr and realistic system for measuring both short-range and long-range progress and determining whether efforts make a difference; · Use outcomes and indicators that reflect the goals that communities establish for themselves and their children; · Works towards these goals and outcomes at all staff levels and in every agency; and · Provide a mechanism for informing the development of program policies. Customer service that: Provides a climate that empowers staff to deliver quality programs and services; · Is provided by courteous, sensitive, and competent professionals; and · Uphold the dignity and respect of individuals and fame'es by providing appropriate staffrecognition, information, training, skills and support. Creativity that: · Increases the flexibility of funding and programs to promote innovation in planning, development, and provision of quality services; and · Simplifies and reduces or eliminates rules that are barriers to coordination and quality services. 2004 CITY OF BREMERTON--CDBG ALLOCATION POLICY PART I1 PAGE 13 PART III 2004 CDBG APPLICATION INTROOUCTiON: The application has been designed to gather necessary information about your organization and project to determine compliance with federal CDBG requiremems and consistency with local policies for use of funds. Applications should be clear and concise. APPUCATION DUE DATE: Applications must be received (postmark NOT acceptable) by 5:00 August 22, 2003 at: City of Bremerton Department ofCommunityDevelopment, Attn: CDBG 286 4t~ St Bremerton WA 98337 APPLIGATION SUBMISSION Three separate application packages are provided ia this section. The application you use will be determined based on the type of project you are proposing. Each application will consist of 3 componems: 2004 CDBG Funding Application Form · Response to Rating Factors · Attachments · For all applications, please provide I original and 5 copies of the entire application. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE A technical assistance meeting will be held Monday, July 28, 2004 at 286 4th Street in the Community Development Office, Bremerton. Contact: Marylyn Waibel at 473-5375. 2003 CDBG APPLICATION GENERAL INTORMATION-PART III PAGE i 6,0 PLANNING APPLICATION -17 2004 CDBG Application PLANNING APPLICATIONS 2004 CDBG Funding Application Form Response to Rating Factors Attachments Attachment A (Organizational Capacity): **A-1 A Board Profile, attach the names and addresses of Board Members Ao2 An organizational chart showing all staff, board members and volunteer positions A-3 Organizational Data (i.e. 501 (c)(3), public charter...) A-4 Non-Discrimination Policies A-5 Mission Statement Attachment B (Organizational Financial Management): **B-1 Agency CDBG/HOME History Form B-2 Summary of most recent Financial Audit or Financial Statement prepared by an Accounting Firm. B~3 A statement of experience including operating statements and lender references and record of performance, qualifications, and capacity to carry out the project described in this application B-4 Annual Report B-5 IRS 990 (for non-profits) B-6 Secretary of State CHO-1 Form (for non-profits) B-7 Secretary of State Non-Profit Corporate Annual Report (for non-profits) **B-8 Salary Summary (form provided within packet) Attachment C & F (Project Feasibility) **C-3(a) Sources of Financing **C-3(b) Use of Financing F-2 Commitment letters from other funding sources for this project **Form is in application packet 2004 CDBG FUNDING APPLICATION FORM Check the appropriate box to Identify the type of funds for which you are applying: __Public Service __Capital Improvement __ Planning Amount of CDBG Funds Requested $. Project Title (If this project has been previously funded, please use the same title) Project Description: Funds will be used to: (25 words or less with specific numbers/goals): Project Location (physical address). Geographic Service Area Census Tract(s) Number of Unduplicated People Directly Benefiting from this Project Applicant Name Mailing Address Agency Director Name Telephone # Staff Contact Name and Title Telephone and Fax # Federal Tax I.D, # Type of Organization: Public Agency. Private Nonprofit Other (Specify) Are you a Certified Housing Development Organization (CHDO) or Certified Community Based Development Organization (CBDO)? 0 Yes 0 No If not, are you planning on becoming a Certified CHDO or CBDO? [~ Yes r~ No Authorized Signature Date 2004 Planning Applications Response to Rating Factors: Your project will be rated on thc factors listed in Part IV of the application. Review thc factors carefully and identify below how your project relates to the criteria. It is unlikely that any application will address all of the criteria. Indicate by N/A if the criteria is not applicable to your application. Limit your response to a maximum of 4 pages. Briefly describe your project: (3 to 4 sentences) 1. Describe the anticipated results of the planning activity. Explain if the plan result in the development of specific community priorities. 2. Describe who will benefit from implementation of the planning effort and how they will benefit. I of 2~ 3. Describe if you are collaborating or coordinating with other agencies to develop the plan. Attach documentation if available. 4. Does the plan promote neighborhood and local improvements? Explain. 2of2 {05" Agency CDBG/HOME History Form Attachment B-1 ^gency Name Project Name Provide a history of your agency's management of CDBG and/or HOME Projects since 1999. Year Project Dollar Funds CDBG or HOME City or County Amount Expended Funds by 12/31/03 CDBG [] COUNTY [] HOME [; CITY [] CDBG [] COUNTY [] HOME [] CITY [] CDBG [] COUNTY [] HOME [] CITY ~ CDBG [] COUNTY [] HOME [] CITY [] CDBG [] COUNTY [] HOME [] CITY [] CDBG [] COUNTY [] HOME [] CiTY [] CDBG [] COUNTY E: HOME [] CITY [; What is the agency's insurance program for general liability/officers and board/volunteers, etc.? Does the agency have any threatened or pending litigation? L~ No [] Yes (if yes, attach explanation) Does the agency have any audit or IRS problems? [] No [] Yes (if yes, attach explanation) Authorized Signature Date Salary Summary ATTACHMENT B-8 Agency Name: Project Name Description 2004 Projected Budget Number of professional FTEs Number of cledcal FTEs Number of all other FTEs Salary Information Salary of Director Salaries of Professional Staff Salaries of Cledcal Staff Other Salaries Description Description Description Description Totals Total Payroll Cost (including payroll taxes) Total Cost of Benefits Total Cost of Retirement Total Salary and Fringe Costs Sources of Financing - All Project Funding Sources Attachment C-3(a) Source (Name) Committed Conditional Tentative Federal: $ $ $ State: $ $ $ Local: $ $ $ Applicant: $ $ $ Private: $ $ $ In-kind: $ $ $ Subtotals: $ $ $ TOTAL ALL FUNDING SOURCES $ Use of Financing - All Funding Sources Attachment C-3:b) Project Cost Amount CDBG/HOME Funds Other Source of Funds PERSONNEL Managers Staff SUBTOTAL SUPPLIES/EQUIPMENT Office Supplies Equipment SUBTOTAL *ADMINISTRATION Adve~sing Audit Insurance/Bonds Postage/Printing Rent/Utilities Communication Training/Travel Transportation SUBTOTAL ACQUISITION COSTS Acquisition SUBTOTAL DEVELOPMENTAL SOFT COSTS Appraisal Design and A & E P rocessing/Settiem ent and Financing Marketing Operating Reserve SUBTOTAL DEVELOPMENTAL HARD COSTS Clearance/Demolition Construction Rehabilitation Im~)rovements SUBTOTAL OTHER COSTS Relocation 0 peratJng/Maintenance expenses SUBTOTAL TOTAL PROJECT COST * ffyouragencyhas an administrative overheadratepre-pproved, ~lease a~tach documentation. o Checklist for Planning Applications [] Application is complete and signed by authorized official [] All narrative questions have been answered and are included [] Board and Staff Profile with the names, addresses and associations of Board Members attached (A-l) [] Organizational chart showing all staff, board members and volunteer positions {A- 2) [] Organizational Data (501(c)(3), public charter, etc.) (A-3) [] Non-Discrimination Policies (A-4) [] Mission Statement (A-5) [] Agency CDBG/HOME History Form (B-l) [] Summary of most recent financial audit (B-2) [] A statement of experience (B-3) [] Annual Report (B-4) [] IRS 990 (for non-profits) (B-5) [] Secretary of State CHO-1 Form (for non-profits) (B-6) [] Secretary of State Non-Profit Corporate Annual Report (for non-profits) (B-7) [] Salary Summary (B-8) [] Soumes of Financing (C-3(a)) [] Uses of Financing (C-3(b)) [] Commitment letters (F-2) [] The original plus five copies of the application are included PUBLIC SERVICE APPLICATION 2004 CDBG Application PUBLIC SERVICE APPLICATIONS 2004 CDBG Funding Application Form Response to Rating Factors Attachments Attachment A (Organizational Capacity): **A-1 A Board Profile, attach the names and addresses of Board Members A-2 An organizational chart showing all staff, board members and volunteer positions A-3 Organizational Data (i.e. 501 (c)(3), public charter...) A-4 Non-Discrimination Policies A-5 Mission Statement Attachment B (Organizational Financial Management): **B-1 Agency CDBG/HOME History Form B-2 Summary of most recent Financial Audit or Financial Statement prepared by an Accounting Firm. B-3 A statement of experience including operating statements and lender references and record of performance, qualifications, and capacity to carry out the project described in this application B-4 Annual Report B-5 IRS 990 (for non-profits) B-6 Secretary of State CHO-1 Form (for non-profits) B-7 Secretary of State Non-Profit Corporate Annual Report (for non-profits) **B-8 Salary Summary Attachment C (Project Feasibility): **C-1 Total Budget, Form 1 **C-2 2004 Agency Budget, Form 2 **C~3(a) Sources of Financing **C-3(b) Uses of Financing ** C-4 National Objective and Eligibility Determination **C-5 Outcome Evaluation C-6 Job Description (if requesting funding for personnel) **Form provided within packet 2004 CDBG FUNDING APPLICATION FORM Check the appropriate box to Identify the type of funds for which you are applying: __Public Service __Capital Improvement __ Planning Amount of CDBG Funds Requested $. Project Title (If this project has been previously funded, please use the same title) Project Description: Funds will be used to: (25 words or less with specific numbers/goals): Project Location (physical address) Geographic Service Area Census Tract(s) Number of Unduplicated People Directly Benefiting from this Project Applicant Name Mailing Address Agency Director Name Telephone # Staff Contact Name and Title Telephone and Fax # Federal Tax I.D. # Type of Organization: Public Agency Private Nonprofit Other (Specify) Are you a Certified Housing Development Organization (CHDO) or Ce~ified Community Based Development Organization (CBDO)? ~ Yes [-] No if no~, are you piann.ng on becoming a Certified CHDO or CBDO? u Yes u~ No 2004 Public Service Applications Response to Rating Factors: Your project will be rated on the factors listed in Part IV of the application. Review the factors carefully and identify below how your project relates to the criteria. It is unlikely that any application will address all of the criteria. Indicate by N/A if the criteria is not applicable to your application. Limit your response to a maximum of 4 pages. Briefly describe your project: (3 to 4 sentences) 1. Is the project you are proposing identified/prioritized in a community or agency plan? If so, explain how, identify the plan, and provide sufficient information to address rating criteria number 1. 2. Question 2 has three sections a. Describe how you determined that the project is the most appropriate method to address the need. Describe the impact the project will have on the problem or condition the project is addressing. b. Provide a schedule for completion of the project including specific milestones to be accomplished. Describe any potential obstacles in completing the project. c. Describe how you determined costs. What is the status of any other funds needed to complete the project. Clarify the information in the budget forms if necessary. 3. Describe if you are collaborating or coordinating with other agencies to provide the service. Attach documentation if available. 4, Describe how the project addresses a basic need (food, shelter, or clothing). 5. Describe the impact the project will have on the lives of the people using the services/facility in relation to the cost of the service/facility. 6. Describe how the project will directly address the defined problem through prevention and thus reduce crises and the need for future services. 7. Describe how you will determine the success of the project. Results of the project that are defined in short and long term outcomes will receive a priority. Attachment C-6 can be used to belp document this criteria. 8. Describe how the project directly addresses child care issues, preparing people to get a job and/or employs people who are currently on TANF. 9. Describe how the project addresses a problem that creates health and safety baTards for low and very low income persons Agency CDBGIHOME History Form Attachment B-1 ^gency Name ProJect Name Provide a history of your agency's management of CDBG and/or HOME Projects since 1999. Year Project Dollar Funds CDBG or HOME City or County Amount Expended Funds by 12/31/03 CDBG [] COUNTY [] HOME [] CITY [] CDBG ~ COUNTY [; HOME [] CITY [] CDBG [] COUNTY [] HOME [] CITY [] CDBG [] COUNTY [] HOME [] CITY [] CDBG [] COUNTY [] HOME [] CITY [] CDBG [] COUNTY [] HOME [] CITY [] CDBG [] COUNTY [] HOME [] CITY [] What is the agency's insurance program for general liability/officers and board/volunteers, etc.? Does the agency have any threatened or pending litigation? [] No [] Yes (if yes, attach explanation) Does the agency have any audit or IRS problems? [] No [] Yes (if yes, attach explanation) Authorized Signature Date W Salary Summary ATTACHMENT B-8 Agency Name: Project Name Description 2004 Projected Budget Number of professional FTEs Number of clerical FTEs Number of all other FTEs Salary Information Salary of Director Salaries of Professional Staff Salaries of Clerical Staff Other Salaries Description Description Description Description Totals Total Payroll Cost (including payroll taxes) Total Cost of Benefits Total Cost of Retirement Total Salary and Fringe Costs Attachment C-1 Total Budget Form 1 .~,ency Name: [] acc~af basis [] cash ~ lb~inninE Fund Balance ............................................... In-Kind .......................................................................... 4~ Le~sci~ & Bequest. .................................................... 4~00 ContributmJ ~y .-~so~iat,~d OrganizatJor~q. ................... ~090 ~vernment Rev~tme - Other (Specify) ........................ 8400 Occupancy (Building & Grounds) ................................ Other (Describe). ........................................................... TOTAL EXPENSES-(C) PLUS (E) ......................................... (F~ DEFICIT OR ~XCESS - (A) MINUS (1;3 ................................ [ I { { Sources of Financing - All Project Funding Sources Attachment C-3(a) Source (Name) Committed Conditional Tentative Federal: $ $ $ State: $ $ $ Local: $ $ $ Applicant: $ $ $ Private: $ $ In-kind: $ $ $ Subtotals: $ $ $ TOTAL ALL FUNDING SOURCES $. Use of Financing - All Funding Sources Attachment C-3 b} Project Co~t Amount CDBGIHOME Funds Other Source of Funds PERSONNEL Managers Staff SUBTOTAL SUPPLIES/EQUIPMENT Office Supplies Equipment SUBTOTAL *ADMINISTRATION Advertising Audit Insurance/Bonds Postage/Printing Rent/Utilities Communication Training/Travel Transportation SUBTOTAL ACQUISITION COSTS Acquisition SUBTOTAL DEVELOPMENTAL SOFT COSTS Appraisal Design and A & E Processing/Settlement and Financing Marketing Operating Reserve SUBTOTAL DEVELOPMENTAL HARD COSTS Clearance/Demolition Construction Rehabilitation Improvements SUBTOTAL OTHER COSTS Relocation Operating/Maintenance expenses SUBTOTAL TOTAL PROJECT COST * ff your agency has an administrative oveKnead rate pre-pproved, 31ease attach documentation. ATTACHMENT C4 National Objective and Eligibility Determination AGENCY NAME PROJECT * Indicate the national objective your project meets. At~ach the documentation specified for the national obiective (refer to PART V of this manual. Required documentation for each national obiective is marked with a []}. Principally benefit low and very low ~ncornc __Area Benefit (Part Vpages 1 and 2) Limited Clientele __At least 51% of beneficiaries are low or very low income persons/households (identify "a", "b", "c", or "d" below, documentation will be determined by the letter selected) (a)_ Presumed Benefit (Part Y page 1) (b) Agency Requires Client Information (Part }'page 3) (c)_ Income Eligibility Requirement (Direct Benefit)(Part V pages 3 & 4) (d)_ Nature/location (Part Vpage 4) __Removal of Architectural Barriers (Pan Vpage 4) __ Assistance to Owners of Microenterprises (Part Vpage 4) __ Employment Support Services (Part V page 4 & 5) __ Housing Activities (Residential) (Part Vpage 5) __.Job Creation or Retention - Economic Development (Part Ypage 5) Reduce or eliminate Slum or Blight (Part Ypage 5) · Identify how you think your project is eligible according to CDBG requirements. Part V pages 6 through 10 provides additional information concerning eligibility requirements. __Acquisition of real property Acquisition, construction reconstruction or installation of public works facilities Code enforcement Clearance, demolition, removal, and rehabilitation of buildings and improvements Removal of material and architectural barriers which restrict the mobility and accessibility Public/human service __Planning activities __ Assistance to Community Based Development Organizations (CBDO) __Economic development project __ Housing services __ Assistance to facilitate economic development __ Assistance to expand homeownership __ Lead based paint hazard evaluation and reduction Checklist for Public Service Applications [] Application is complete and signed by authorized official [] All narrative questions have been answered and are included [] Board and Staff Profile with the names, addresses and associations of Board Members attached (A-I) [] Organizational chart showing all staff, board members and volunteer positions (A- 2) [] Organizational Oata (501(c)(3), public charter, etc.) (A-3) [] Non-Discrimination Policies (A-4) [] Mission Statement (A-5) [] Agency CDBG/HOME History Form (B-l) [] Summary of most recent financial audit (B-2) [] A statement of experience (B-3) [] Annual Report (B-4) [] iRS 990 (for non-profits) (B-5) [] Secretary of State CHO-1 Form (for non-profits) (B-6) [] Secretary of State Non-Profit Corporate Annual Report (for non-profrts) (B-7) [] Salary Summary (B-8) [] Total Budget, Form I (C-1) [] 2004 Agency Budget, Form 2 (C-2) [] Sources of Financing (C-3(a)) [] Uses of Financing (C-3(b)) [] National Objective and Eligibility Determination (C-4) [] Outcome Evaluation (C-5) [] Job Description (if requesting funding for personnel) (C-6) [] Commitment Letter (C-7) [] Attachments to demonstrate compliance with national objective [] The original plus five copies of the application are included 2002 CDBG APPLICATION -PUBLIC SERVICE APPLICATIONS-PART lll PAGE 3 CAPITAL APPLICATION 2004 CDBG Application CAPITAL APPLICATIONS 2004 CDBG Funding Application Form Response to Rating Factors Attachments Attachment A (Organizational Capacity): **A-1 A Board Profile, attach the names and addresses of Board Members A-2 An organizational chart showing all staff, board members and volunteer positions A-3 Organizational Data (i.e. 501 (c)(3), public charter...) A-4 Non-Discrimination Policies A-5 Mission Statement Attachment B (Organizational Financial Management): **B-1 Agency CDBG/HOME History Form B-2 Summary of most recent Financial Audit or Financial Statement prepared by an Accounting Firm. B-3 A statement of experience including operating statements and lender references and record of performance, qualifications, and capacity to carry out the project described in this application B-4 Annual Report B-5 IRS 990 (for non-profits) B-6 Secretary of State CHO-1 Form (for non-profits) B-7 Secretary of State Non-Profit Corporate Annual Report (for non-profits) **B-8 Salary Summary Attachment C (Project Feasibility) ** C-3(a) Sources of Financing **C-3(b) Use of Financing ** C-4 National Objective and Eligibility Determination C-5 Commitment Letters from other funding sources for the project C-6 Management Plan C-7 Preliminary Environmental Review Checklist Additionally, include the following Attachments if you propose any one activity with a total project cost greater than $50,000. E-5 Operating Pro Forma E-6 Plans and Specs for the Project E-7 Relocation Plan, if appropriate **Form provided within packet 2004 CDBG FUNDING APPLICATION FORM Check the approptfate box to Identify the type of funds for which you are applying: __Public Service Capital Improvement __ Planning Amount of CDBG Funds Requested $. Project Title (If this project has been previously funded, please use the same title) Project Description: Funds will be used to: (25 words or less with specific numbers/goals): Project Location (physical address) Geographic Service Area Census Tract(s) Number of Unduplicated People Directly Benefiting from this Project Applicant Name Mailing Address Agency Director Name Telephone # Staff Contact Name and Title Telephone and Fax # Federal Tax I.D. # Type of Organization: Public Agency Privat~ Nonprofit Other (Specify) Are you a Certified Housing Development Organization (CHDO) or Certified Community Based Development Organization (CBDO)? 0 Yes 0 No If not, are you planning on becoming a Certified CHDO or CBDO? r~ Yes 0 No Authorized Signature Date 2004 Capital Applications Response to Rating Factors: Your project will be rated on the factors listed in Part IV of the application. Review the factors carefully and identify below how your project relates to the criteria. It is unlikely that any application will address all of the criteria. Indicate by N/A if the criteria is not applicable to your application. Limit your response to a maximum of 4 pages. Briefly describe your project: (3 to 4 sentences) 1. Is the project you are proposing identified/prioritized in a community or agency plan? If so, explain how, identify the plan, and provide sufficient information to address rating criteria number 1. 2. Question 2 has three sections a. Describe how you determined that the project is the most appropriate method to address the need. Describe the impact the project will have on the problem or condition the project is addressing. b. Provide a schedule for completion of the project including specific milestones to be accomplished. Describe any potential obstacles in completing the project. c. Describe how you determined costs. What is the status of any other funds needed to complete the project. Clarify the information on the budget form if necessary. 3. Does the project address slum and blighting conditions in an area meeting the definition ora slum and blight area under state or local law. Attach documentation. 4. Does your program have adopted post assistance maintenance requirements? Attach a copy of the requirements if it does. 5.. Describe the impact the project will have on the lives of the people using the services/facility in relation to the cost of the service/facility. 6. Describe how the project addresses a problem resulting in health and safety hazards for low and very low income persons. 7. Does your project leverage private funds or other public funds? How much will the CDBG funds leverage? Attach documentation if available. Agency CDBGIHOME History Form Attachment B-1 Agency Name Project Name Provide a history of your agency's management of CDBG and/or HOME Projects since 1999. Year Project Dollar Funds CDBG or HOME City or County Amount Expended Funds by 12/31/03 CDBG [] COUNTY [] HOME [] CITY [3 CDBG [] COUNTY ~ HOME [] CITY [] CDBG [] COUNTY [] HOME [] CITY [] CDBG [] COUNTY [] HOME [] CITY [] CDBG [] COUNTY ~ HOME [] CITY [; CDBG [] COUNTY [] HOME [] CITY [] CDBG [] COUNTY [] HOME [] CITY [] What is the agency's insurance program for general liability/officers and board/volunteers, etc.? Does the agency have any threatened or pending litigation? [] No [] Yes (if yes, attach explanation) Does the agency have any audit or IRS problems? [] No [] Yes (if yes, attach explanation) Authorized Signature Date Salary Summary ATTACHMENT B-8 Agency Name: Project Name Description 2004 Projected Budget Number of professional ~- I Es , Number of cledcal I- IEs Number of all other ~- I Es Salary Information Salary of Director Salaries of Professional Staff 'Salaries of Clerical Staff Other Salaries Description Description Description Description Totals Total Payroll Cost (including payroll taxes) Total Cost of Benefits Total Cost of Retirement Total Salary and Fdnge Costs Sources of Financing - All Project Funding Sources Attachment C-3(a) Source (Name) Committed Conditional Tentative Federal: $ $ $ State: $ $ $ Local: $ $ $ Applicant: $ $ $ Pdvate: $ $ $ In-kind: $ $ $ Subtotals: $ $ $ TOTAL ALL FUNDING SOURCES $ Use of Financing - All Funding Sources Attachment C-3(b) Project Co~t Amount CDBG/HOME Funds Other Source of Funds PERSONNEL Managers Staff SUBTOTAL SUPPLiES/EQUIPMENT Office Supplies Equipment SUBTOTAL *ADMINISTRATrON Adve~sing Audit Insurance/Bonds Postage/Printing Rent/Utilities Communication Training/Travel Transportation SUBTOTAL ACQUISITION COSTS Acquisition SUBTOTAL DEVELOPMENTAL SOFT COSTS Appraisal Design and A & E Processing/Settlement and Financing Marketing Operating Reserve SUBTOTAL DEVELOPMENTAL HARD COSTS Clearance/Dem otition Construct Jori Rehabilitation Improvements SUBTOTAL OTHER COSTS Relocation Operating/Maintenance expenses SUBTOTAL TOTAL PROJECT COST * ffyour agency has an administrative overhead rate pre-pproved, ~lease attach documentation. ATTACHMENT C4 National Objective and Eligibility Determination AGENCY NAME PROJECT · Indicate the national objective your project meets. Attach the documentation specified for the national obiective (refer to PART V of this manual. Required documentation for each national obiective is marked with a I~). Principally benefit low and very low income __ Area Benefit (Part Ypages I and 2) Limited Clientele __At least 51% of beneficiaries are low or very low income persons/households (identify "a", "b", "c", or "d" below, documentation will be determined by the letter selected) (a)_ Presumed Benefit (Part Ypage 1) (b) Agency Requires Client Information (Part Ypage 3) (c) Income Eligibility Requirement (Direct Benefit)(Part I~ pages 3 & 4) (d). Nature/location (Part I/page 4) __ Removal of Architectural Barriers (Part Ypage 4) __ Assistance to Owners of Microenterprises (Part I/page 4) __Employment Support Services (Part F page 4 & 5) Housing Activities (Residential) (Part I/page 5) __Job Creation or Retention - Economic Development (Part I/page 5) __ Reduce or eliminate Slum or Blight (Part I/page 5) · Identify how you think your project is eligible according to CDBG requirements. Part l/pages 6 through 10 provides additional information concerning eligibility requirements. __.Acquisition of real property __ Acquisition, construction reconstruction or installation of public works facilities Code enforcement __ Clearance, demolition, removal, and rehabilitation of buildings and improvements Removal of material and architectural barriers which restrict the mobility and accessibility Public/human service Planning activities __ Assistance to Community Based Development Organizations (CBDO) __ Economic development project __ Housing services __Assistance to facilitate economic development __Assistance to expand homeownership __Lead based paint hazard evaluation and reduction Community Development Block Grant Capital Projects Preliminary Environmental Review Checklist At the site under consideration for the project, please make an observation for each of the seven "Compliance Factors" listed below. Enter a "Y" for Yes or "N" for No in the space for the given condition. Fill in the blank with the appropriate answer for all other questions. Project Name and Address: ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE FACTORS 1.) HISTORIC PRESERVATION Does the project involve a building greater than 50 years old? · If yes, does the project involve rehabilitation of some sort? · Are you aware of any historically significant events that have taken place at the site? Iftbe structure is greater than 50 years old and rehabilitation is proposed, the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) must be contacted (as well as any local historic office). Iftbe property is on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), eligible for listing, located in a Historic District, or adjacent to a NHRP, additional action may be required. 2.) FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT · Is the property where the proposed project is located in a Coastal High Hazard Area, flood way or have a finished floor below the 100 year flood plain? · Does the project propose the development of imperious surfaces (roof or concrete)? If yes, approximately how many square feet of impervious surface will be developed? Property in a flood plain will require flood insurance. 1 Io0 If you need help making this determination, you may contact Michelle Eichhom at the City of Bremerton, Community Development Office at (360) 473-5211 for information regarding the Floodplain areas of Bremerton. 3.) WETLANDS PROTECTION · Does the site or the adjacent areas of the proposed project have the appearance ora swamp, marsh, or slough? · Does the project appear to be wet (standing water) at any time of the year? 4.) NOISE · Is the proposed project site within 1,000 square feet of a Highway (usually a four (4) lane road) , or within 3,000 square feet ora Railroad ? 5.) ENDANGERED SPECIES · Is the proposed project site a habitat area for any endangered species? 6.) Am · Do you know if the proposed project site has any asbestos located on the property? 7.) HAZARDS A.) Explosive or Flammable Tanks · Does the site for the proposed project have any visible storage tanks for a flammable substance with in a quarter (1/4) of a mile? · Is the proposed site within a quarter (I/4) of a mile fi-om a loading terminal for a flammable substance? · Does the proposed site have high pressure gas lines or overhead transmission lines present within 200 square feet? B.) Hazardous Waste · Will the proposed i~roject be located on fill land? If yes, what materials were used for the fill? 2 Is the project area on or near a site suspected of posing a potential environmental hazard such as a dump, land fill, or industrial location containing hayardous wastes? LAND USE HISTORY · What if any prior uses existed on the property? Note: A "Yes" response to any of these question may be an indicator that some form of mitigation could be required for the project. 3 Checklist for Capital Applications [] Application is complete and signed by authorized official [] All narrative questions have been answered and are included [] Board and Staff Profile with the names, addresses and associations of Board Members attached (A-l) [] Organizational chart showing all staff, board members and volunteer positions (A- 2) [] Organizational Data (501(c)(3), public charter, etc.) (A-3) [] Non-Discrimination Policies (A-4) [] Mission Statement (A-5) [] Agency CDBG/HOME History Form (B-l) [] Summary of most recent financial audit (B-2) [] A statement of experience (B-3) [] Annual Report (B-4) [] IRS 990 (for non-profits) (B-5) [] Secretary of State CliO-1 Form (for non-profits) (B~6) [] Secretary of State Non-Profit Corporate Annual Report (for non-profits) (B-7) [] Salary Summary (B-8) [] Sources of Financing (C-3(a)) [] Uses of Financing (C-3(b)) [] Commitment letters (C-5) [] Management Plan (C-6) [] National Objective and Eligibility Determination (C-4) [] Preliminary Environmental Review Checklist (C-7) [] Attachments to demonstrate compliance with national objective [] Operating Pro Forma (E-5) [] Plans and Specs for the Project (E-6) [] Relocation Plan, if appropriate (E-7) [] The original plus five copies of the application are included 2004 CDBG RATING CRITERIA PUBLIC SERVICE APPLICATIONS 1. In order to encourage the development of communRy priorities and to maximize the impact of the limited CDBG funds, activities that address priorities identified in communi~y planning efforts will receive c will rate this criteria. Ratin~ Criteria w ' ~' .................. Points The need for the specific activity is clearly defined and prioritized in a community wide plan. (Ir'the plan 20-30 does not clearly prioritize the activity, it does not fall in this cat~ory). The need for the specific activity is clearly identified in a community wide plan. 10-15 The need for the specific project is clearly defined and prioritized in an agency plan. 5-10 The need for the specific project is clearl), defined in the application (not in communi~ or a~eacy plan) 5 The need for the project is not clearl}, defined 0 2. Projects that are well thought out and effective in addressing the identified need will receive priority. a. ,4[~prqoriateness and impact: { The solution is appropriate to address the need and will have a major impact on the problem or condition. !0 [ The solution is appropriate to address the need and will have an impact on the problem or condition. The solution will have little impact on the problem or condition. b. Project Desisn: The design of the;roposed project is well thought out. The application includes a realistic schedule for 10 completion, identifies and controls potential problems. The proposed project is adequately thought out. The schedule is adequate and potential obstacles are 5 identified The proposed project does not include a realistic schedule nor identify or control potential problems. 0 ~ Cost: Cost are well defined. The project is ready to proceed if funded. 10 Costs are realistic. The project is read}t, with minor issues, to proceed if funded. 5 Costs are questionable. There appear to be major issues that may delay proceeding with the project if 0 funded. 3. Projects that are a collaboration between 2 or more agencies to best serve a client group will receive t~riori~. ~fwo or more agencies are/will be working together to provide the specific service to the clients (joint 10 application with a lead agency) Two or more agencies will coordinate with each other to provide the specific service 5 Little, or no coordination with other a~encies 0 4. Projects that address a basic need (food, shelter, or clothing) will receive priori~7. The project addresses a basic need (food, shelter, or clothing)lA I The project does not addresses a basic need (food, shelter, or clothinl~) u0 2004 CDBG Advisory Rating Criteria PART IV PaGE 1 5. Projects that have the greatest impact on the lives of clients in relation to the cost of services will receive priority. (CDBG funds are limited-this factor is designed to prioritize projects that give the greatest "bang ~or the buck ~Latin~ Criteri~ Points a. Impact on the lives of clients is major in relation to cost of services 10 b Impact on the lives of clients is average in relation to cost of services 5 c. Impact on the lives of clients is minor in relation to cost of services 0 6. Projects that address a defined problem through prevention and thus reduce crises and the need for future services will receive priority. I The project directly addresses a defined problem through prevention. (point spread is based on the i- 10I de~ree to which the issue is defined and the extent to which the project prevents the problem~ The project does not address a problem through prevention 7. Project that include a fair and realistic system for measuring both short-range and long range progress will receive priori{v. Results of the project are defined in short and long term outcomes rather than in units. (point 5-10 I spread is based on the desree to which the outcome is defined and can be measured) 0 Results of the project are not defined in "planned outcomes" 8. Projects that directly address child care issues, prepare people to get a job, and or employ people who ar, currentl,~ on TANF will receive priori~. The project directly addresses cl~itd car~ issues, prepares people to get a job and/or employs people 15 who currently are on TANF. The project does not directly addresses child care issues, prepares people to get a job and/or 0 employs people who currently are on TANF. 9. Projects that address a problem that results in a health and/or safety hazard for low and very low incom, ~ersons will receive a priori~g. Yhe project addresses ~ problem creating health and/or safety ba?ards for low and very low income 5-10 persons. (point spread based on the degree the health and safety problem is defined and the extent to which the project will address the need) The project does not address a problem creating health and safety hazards for low and very low 0 income persons. 10. Quality points: Citizen Advisory members have the option of providing up to +10 or-10 points for projects that are either exceptional or projects they feel will have a negative impact on the community. speciJ~c reason for awardin~ points, either + or- must be stated. Quality Points: Explanation: 2004 CDBG Advisory Rating Criteria PART IV PAGE2 71 2004 CDBG ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMPILATION SHEET PUBLIC SERVICE APPLICATIONS Applicant Project Name Advisory Member # I #2 #3 ~ #5 1. Need/Community Planning (0-30) 2a. Appropriateness and Impact (0-10) 2b. Project Design (0-10) 2c. Cost (0-10) 3. Collaboration (0-10) 4. Basic Need (0-10) 5. Benefit (0-10) 6. Prevention (0-10) 7. Progress measures (0-10) 8. Child care/employment (0-15) 9. Health and Safety Hazards (0-10) 10. Quality Points (+ or - 10) Total Total of five ratings -- divided by 5 = RATING Individual rating form of fiveCAC to be attached 2004 CDBG Advisory Rating Criteria PART IV PAGE 2004 CDBG ADVISORY COMMITTEE RATING CRITERIA ~'~ PLANNING APPLICATIONS 1. Plans that result in the development y st~eci~c communit? priorities will receive priorit?. Rating Criteria Points The plan will result in the development of specific community priorities 20-30 The plan will result in the development of ~eneral community priorities 10-20 i The plan will not result in priorities. 0 2. Plans that upon implementation will benefit iow and moderate income persons will receive priority. [ Ratin~ Criteria !oints The plan will benefit low and moderate income persons 0 The plan will not benefit low and moderate income persons 3. Projects that are a collaboration between 2 or more a~encies will receive priority. Ratin riteria Points Two or more agencies are/will be workin~ tol~ether to develop the plan. 5-10 Two or more al~encies will coordinate with each other to develop the plan 0-5 No coordination with other a~encies .0 4. Projects that plan and promote neitfhborhood and local improvements will receive priority. Points I Rating Criteria I The plan will promote nei~hborho~d and local improvements 1 0 The plan will not promote neighborhood and local improvements u' 5. Quallty polnts: Citizen Advisory members have the option of providing up to +10 or -l O points for projects that are either exceptional or projects they feel will have a negative impact on the community. A specific reason for awarding points, either + or- must be stated. I Ratinl~ Criteria Points Quality Points: Explanation: 2004 CDBG Advisory Rating Criteria PART IV PAGE 4 2001 CDBG ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMPILATION SHEET PLANNING APPLICATIONS Applicant Project Name Advisory Member # 1 #2 #3 #4 #5 1. Community Planning (0-30) 2. LowfMod Benefit (0-20) 3. Collaboration (0-10) 4. Neighborhood/ local improvement (0-10) 5. Quality Points (+ or - 10) Total Total of five CAC ratings = divided by 5 = RATING Individual rating form of five CAC members to be attached 2004 CDBG Advisory Rating Criteria PART IV PAGE 5 2004 CITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE RATING CRITERIA CAPITAL PROJECT APPLICATIONS 1. In order to encourage the development of community priorities and to maximize the impact of the limite CDBG funds, activities that address priorities identified in community planning efforts will receive higher consideration. ~ will rate this criteria. Ratin~ Criteria Points The need for the specific activity is clearly defined and prioritized in a community wide plan. (If the plan 20-30 does not clearly prioritize the activity, it does not fall in this cate[~or~). The need for the specific activit}, is clearly,' identified in a community wide plan. 10-15 The need for the specific project is clearl), defined and prioritized in an agency plan. 5-10 The need for the specific project is clearI]~ defined in the application (not in community or al~enc)' plan) 5 The need for the project is not clearly defined 0 2. Projects that are well thought out and effective in addressing the identified need will receive priority. a. Appropriateness and impact: I The solution is appropriate to address the necd and will have a major impact on the problem or condition, i0 [ The solution is appropriate to address the need and will have an impact on the problem or condition. The solution will have little impact on the problem or condition. b. Project Design: The des}gn of the;roposed project is well thought out. The application includes a realistic schedule for 10 completion, identifies and controls potential problems. The proposed project is adequately thought out. The schedule is adequate and potential obstacles are 5 identified The proposed project does not include a realistic schedule nor identify or control potential problems. 0 ~ Cost: Cost are well defined. The project is read)' to proceed if funded, 10 Costs are realistic. The project is read~', with minor issues, to proceed if funded. 5 Costs are questionable. There appear to be major issues that may delay proceeding with the project if 0 funded. 3. Activities that address slum and blighting conditions in areas meeting the definition of a slum and bligh area under state or local law will receive a t~riori~. IRatin[~ Criteria Points Activity addresses slum and blyat conditions in an area determined to be bli~hted Activity does not occur in an area determined to be blil~hted ~0 4. Prosrams that include post-assistance maintenance and operation requirements will receive t~riori~. Ratin~ Criteria Points Project includes adopted post-assistance maintenance requirements 10 2004 CDBG Advisory Rating Criteria PART IV PAGE 6 5. Projects that have the greatest impact on the lives of clients in relation to the cost of services will receive priority. (CDBG funds are limited-this factor is designed to prioritize projects that give the greatest "bang ~or the buck'~ ~,atin[~ Criteri~ Points a. Impact on the lives of clients is major in relation to cost of services 10 b Impact on the lives of clients is average in relation to cost of services 5 c. Impact on the lives of clients is minor in relation to cost of services 0 6. The project will address a problem that results in a health and/or safety hazard for low and very low income person~ Ratin~ C~iteria Points The project addresses a problem creating health and/or safety hazards for low and very low income 5-10 persons. (point spread based on the degree the health and safety problem is defined and the extent to which the project will address the need) The project does not address a problem creating health and safety hazards for low and very low 0 income persons. 7. Projects that leverage private jeunds or other public,funds will receive priori~. ' . Rat riteria Points Each activit~ leveral~es one dollar or more of private/other funds for each dollar of CDBG funds. 10 Each activit~ leverages between 50 and 99 cents of private/other funds for each dollar of CDBG funds. 5-10 Each activit~ leveral~es less than 50 cents of private/other funds for each dollar of CDBG funds. 0 8. Quality points: Citizen Advisory members have the option of providing up to +10 or -lO points for projects that are either exceptional or projects they feel will have a negative impact on the community. A specific. . reason [or awarding,. .points, either + or- must be stated. Ratin~ Criteria Points Quality Points: Explanation: 2004 CDBG Advisory Rating Criteria PART IV PAGE 7 2004 CITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMPILATION SHEET CAPITAL PROJECT APPLICATIONS Applicant Project Name Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating Factors #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 l. Need/Commnnity Planning (0-30) 2a. Appropriateness and Impact (0-10) 2b. Project Design (0-10) 2c. Cost (0-10) 3. Slum and Blight (0-10) 4. Operation and Maintenance (0-10) 5. Benefit (0-10) 6. Health and Safety (0-10) 7. Leverage (0-10) 8. Quality Points (-10 - +10) Total Total of five CAC ratings -- divided by 5 -- RATING Individual rating form of five CAC members to be attached 2004 CDBG Advisory Rating Criteria PART IV PAGE g PART V 2004 NATIONAL OBJECTIVES AND ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS As stated in Part I, each activity must meet a national objective and must be eligible in order to be funded. The following information is provided to assist you in denning the ellg~ility and national objentive that your activity meets and the type of information you need to provide to the City. Specific regulations that govern the CDBG program are available in our office. What are the National Obiectives? (Benefit Criteria) An eligible CDBG activity must either (I) principally benefit low and very low income households, (2) reduce or prevent slum and blight or (3) meet an urgent need. The vast majority of the City's CDBG activities are designed to benefit low and very low income persons and households. The following list outlines the way in which CDBG projects can meet a national objective. The criteria is described in more detail below. I. Principally benefit low and very low income A. Area Benefit B. Limited Clientele (1) At least 51% of beneficiaries are low or very low income persons/households (a) Presumed Benefit (b) Agency Requires Client Information (c) Income Eligibility Requirement (Direct Benefit) (d) Nature/location (2) Removal of Architectural Barriers (3) Assistance to Owners of Microenterprises (4) Employment Support Services C. Housing Activities (Residential) D. Job Creation or Retention - Economic Development II. Reduce or Eliminate Slum or Blight A. Area Basis B. Spot Basis Potential applicants must be able to demonstrate that their proposed CDBG activity addresses one of these national objectives in one of several ways described below. 2004 National Objective and Eligibility Requirements PART V PAGE 1 I. Benefit Low and Very Low Income Persons To meet this national objective, an applicant must document that the proposed project will benefit predominantly low and very low income persons or households. A low income person/household is one whose annual income does not exceed 80% of the area median income for the City of Bremerton. The following shows income limits by household size for the City of Bremerton. INCOME LIMITS # IN FAMILY LOW INCOME 1 $34~600 2 $39,550 3 $44~500 4 $49,450 5 $53,400 6 $57,350 7 $61,300 8 $65,250 *Bremerton SMSA, Published by HUD, Gross Annual Income, Effective 02/28/03 There are several different ways th~at CDBG activities can benefit low and very low income persons: · AREA BENEFIT- This is defined as an activity, the benefits of which are available to all residents in a particular area, where at least 51% of the residents are low and very low income persons. In addition, the area must be primarily residential Examples of area benefit activities include parks (that serve the immediate area), water and sewer projects, sidewalks and streets, and other public improvements that are available to all residents in a particular area. Applicants must: [] Attach a map with the boundaries of the project's service area delineated (the surrounding geographic area in which all or most of the people benefiting from the project reside): [] Explain why that particular geographic area is the service area for the project; [] Indicate on the map residential and commercial areas within the service area boundary; [] Provide documentation that 51% or more of the residents within the service area are low and very low income persons/households. 2004 National Objective and Eligibility Requirements PART V PAGE 2 If you would like assistance in determining if your project is in a low income area, please contact Marylyn at 473-5375. · Limited Clientele An activity which benefits a limited clientele, at least 51% of whom are low or very low income persons/househelds. There are four types of activities in this category: Presumed Benefit -- An activity may benefit one of the following groups who are presumed by HUD to be principally low and very low income: abused children, battered spouses, elderly persons, handicapped persons, homeless persons, illiterate persons, and migrant farm workers. Applicants must: [] Demonstrate that the facility or service is designed for and used predominantly by one of the groups identified above. Agency Requires Client Informetion Which Shows 5t% or More ere Low end Very Iow Income -- For example, community health clinic and most other agencies keep information on client income and family size. The information will be able to document whether or not 51% or more of the clientele are persons whose family income does not exceed low and very low income limits for Kitsap County. Note: Income qualification criteria from other programs (such as state poverty guidelines) may be substituted provided those criteria are at least as restrictive as the HUD income limits. Applicants must: [] Provide documentation of the total number of clients/households served in 1997 (if this is an existing service); [] State what percent of the clients/households served in 1997 were low or very low income (or met criteria that are stricter); [] Provide a copy of the income qualification criteria that were used to screen clients and to determine the percent that were low and very low income; [] Provide a copy of the client intake form highlighting the questions regarding family size and income levels; and [] Agree to maintain documentation of the client's incomes for the CDBG contract period. Income Eli~llbilJtv Re41ulrements (Direct Benefit) --This means that the agency uses income screening to limit the benefits of the CDBG funded activity to only those persons who are low and very low income. For example, a 2004 National Objective and Eligibility Requirements PART V PAGE 3 housing counseling program would screen potential clients and use the CDBG funds to pay for the counseling only of those who are income eligible. Applicants must: [] Screen clients by family size and income; [] Provide a copy of the client intake form highlighting the questions regarding family size and income levels; and [] Describe how the program/project would limit the benefits of the CDBG funded activity exclusively to low and very low income persons/households. Nature/Location of Activity Allows Conclusion of Primarily Low and Very Low Income Benefit -- This means that the activity is of such a nature and in such a location that it may be concluded that the clientele will be primarily Iow and very Iow income; for example, a food bank near an assisted housing project. Applicants must: [] Explain how the nature, and if applicable, the location of the proposed project, establishes that it is used primarily for low and very low income persons. · Remeval of Architectural Barriers A project which removes material or architectural barriers which restrict the mobility and access~ility of elderly or handicapped persons to publicly owned and privately owned non-residentiul buildings, facilities and improvements, and the common areas of residential structures containing more than one dwelling un/t is considered a limited clientele activity. Note: This refers to the removal of existing barriers. It does not apply to new construction. · Assistance to Owners of Microenterprlses When assistance is to be provided to a microenterprise (a commercial enterprise that has five or fewer employees, one or more of whom owns the enterprise) the owner must qualify as low or moderate income. Note: for microenterprise projects under the limited clientele national objective justification, the low and moderate income threshold applies only to the owner, there are no income requirements for the workers the owner employs. 200~ National Objective and Eligibility Requirements PART V PAGE 4 · Employment Support Services. If CDBG assistance is only provided for training or supportive services (peer support programs, counseling, child care, transportation, and other similar services) to assist business(es), the percentage of low and moderate income persons assisted may be less than 51% if the proportion of the total cost borne by CDBG funds is no greater than the proportion of the total number of persons assisted who are low or moderate income. For example: A new business moves into town and begins an on-site day care program for workers. The total cost of the day care is $10,000. There are 40 children 3 of which meet qualifications as low and moderate income. The maximum amount chargeable to the CDBG program is $750.00. ($10,000/40 =$250 X 3 = $750). Applicants must: Maintain data documenting the total cost of the service, Screen clients by family size and income; and provide a copy of the client intake form highlighting the questions regarding family size and income levels; · Housing Rehabilitation Activities (Residential) These are activities providing or improving permanent residential structures which are or wilt be occupied by low and very low income households. It does not include group homes or shelters for the homeless, which are considered limited clientele activities. Applicants must: [] Screen households for family size and income eligibility. If a residential structure contains two dwelling units, at least one must be occupied by low or moderate income households. If it contains more than 2 units, at least 51% must bo occupied by low and moderate income households. · Job Creation or Retention Activities These are economic development activities which are designed to create or retain permanent jobs, where at least 51% of the jobs, computed on a full-time equivalent basis, can be documented to employ low and very low income persons for the geographic area where it is located. There are very specific elements of this national objective. Please contact the Community Development staff to discuss your project prior to submitting an application. 2004 National Objective and Eligibility Requirements PART V PAGE 5 · Reduce or Eliminate Slum and Slight An activity may meet the national objective of reducing or eliminating slum and blight, instead of benefiting Iow and very low income people. There are two different ways that CDBG activities can meet this second national objective. Area Basis A project must be located in an area defined as a slum or blighted area under state or local law; the conditions which qualified the area as slum or blight must be on record; and the project must specifically address one or more of these conditions. Spot Basis A CDBG project to eliminate slum and blight on a spot basis (for example, outside of a locally designated slum or blighted area) must be limited to activities necessary to eliminate specific conditions posing a threat to the public health or safety. The health or safety baTard must be identified, and the scope of the project must be limited to correcting the ba?ard. What are Eligible Activities? To be considered for funding, a CDBG proposal must also be an eligible activity under the federal CDBG regulations. A variety of activities serving low and very low income people are eligible activities as well as any special requirements or limitations that apply to use of CDBG funds. The applicant should recognize that the City may have local priorities within each of these categories of federally eligible activities that reflect local needs. Local priority policies are described in Part II of this document. ~ Acquisition of real property in whole or in part by public agencies or private non- profit organizations which is: - blighted, deteriorated, deteriorating, undeveloped, or inappropriately developed ~om the standpoint of sound community development and growth; - appropriate for rehabilitation or conservation activities; and, - appropriate for the preservation or restoration of historic sites, the beautification of urban land, the conservation of open spaces, natural resources and scenic areas; the provision of recreational opportunities, or the guidance of urban development; Acquisition, construction, reconstruction or installation (including design features and improvements that promote energy efficiency of these) of public works facilities (except of buildings for the general conduct of government), and site or other improvements; 2004 National Objective and Eligibility Requirements PART V PAGE 6 Code enforcement in deteriorated or deteriorating areas where such enforcement together with public and private improvemems or services are expected to arrest the decline of the area; Clearance, demolition, removal, and rehabilitation (including rehabilitation which promotes energy efficiency) of buildings and improvements, such as interim assistance, and financing of public or private acquisition for rehabilitation, and rehabilitation of privately owned properties, including the renovation of closed school buildings; Special projects directed to the removal of material and architectural barriers which restrict the mobility and accessibility of elderly and handicapped per, sons; Relocation payments and assistance to individuals, families or businesses displaced permanently or temporarily by a CDBG funded project consistent with the Federal Uniform Relocation Act; · Public/human services, including but not limited to those concerned with employment, crime prevention, child care, health, drag abuse, education, energy conservation, welfare or recreation needs, if such services have not been provided by the unit of general local government (through funds raised by such unit, or received by such unit fi.om the State) during any part of the twelve-month period immediately preceding the date of submission of the CDBG Action Plan; · Planning activities necessary to: - develop a comprehensive community development plan; - develop policy-planning managemem capacity to rationally and effectively determine needs, set long and short term objectives, devise programs and activities to meet these objectives, and carry out management, coordination, and monitoring of activities necessary for effective planning implementation; · Provide assistance including loans and grams for activities carried out by public and private non-profit organizations including: - acquisition of real property; - acquisition, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation and installation of certain public facilities, site improvements and utilities; and commercial or industrial buildings or structures and other commercial or industrial real property improvements; and - planning; 2004 National Objective and Eligibility Requirements PART V PAGE 7 Assistance to Community Based Development Orga~iTations (CBDO) to carry out neighborhood revit~li?ation, community economic development, or energy conservation. A CBDO is an organi?ation with specific characteristics such as: it is organized under State or local law to engage in community development activities; has as its primary purpose the improvement of the physical, economic or social environment of the area; may be either non profit or for profit provided any monetary profit to its shareholders must be only incidental to its operation; it must maintain at least 51% of its governing body's membership for low and moderate income residents of its geographical area of operation, owners or senior officers of private establishments, or representatives of Iow and moderate income neighborhood organizations located in the area of operation. The Development staff is available to review other requirements with entities interested in becoming CBDOs. Provide assistance to private, for-profit entities, when the assistance is appropriate to carry out an economic development project (that shall minimize to the extent practical, displacement of existing businesses and jobs in neighborhoods) that: - create or retain jobs for low and very low income people; - prevents or eliminates slums and blight; - meets urgent needs; - creates or retains businesses owned by community residents; - assists businesses that provide goods or services needed by, and affordable to, low and very low income residents; - provide technical assistance to promote any of the activities described above; Provide technical assistance to public or non-profit entities to increase the capacity of that entity to carry out eligible neighborhood revitalization or economic development activities; Housing services such as housing counseling, energy auditing, preparation of work specifications, loan processing, inspections, tenant selection, management of tenant based rental assistance and other services related to assisting owners, tenants, contractors, and other entities participating or seeking to participate under CDBG or under Title II of the Cranston-Gonzales National Affordable Housing Act; 2004 National Objective and Eligibility Requirements PART V PAGE $ Provide assistance to public and private organizations, agencies and other non- profit and for profit entities to enable such entities to facilitate economic development by: - providing credit such as through direct loans and loan guarantees, establishing revolving loan funds, and facilitating peer lending programs for the establishment, stabilization and expansion of micro enterprises; - providing technical assistance, advice and business support services (including assistance, advice, and support relating to developing business plans, securing f~nding, conducting marketing, and otherwise engaging in micro-enterprise activities) to owners of micro-enterprises and persons developing micro-enterprises; and - providing general support, such as peer support programs, counseling, child care, transportation, and other similar services to owners of micro-enterprises and persons developing micro- enterprises; · Provide direct assistance to facilitate and expand homeownership among persons of tow and very low income by using such assistance to: - subsidize interest rates and mortgage principal amounts for low and very low income homebuyers; - finance the acquisition by low and very low income homebuyers of housing that is occupied by the homebuyers; - acquire guarantees for mortgage financing obtained by low and very low income homebuyers from private lenders, except that funds may not be used to directly guarantee such mortgage financing and grantees may not directly provide such guarantees; - provide up to 50% of any down payment required from low and very low income homebuyers; or - pay reasonable closing costs normally associated with the purchase of a home incurred by a low or very low income homebuyer. · Lead based paint ba?ard evaluation and reduction, as defined in Section 104 of the Residential Lead Based Paint Ha?ard Reduction Act of 1992. 200d National Objective and Eligibility Requirements PART V PAGE 9 The following activities are not eligible for CDBG funding: X New Residential Housing Construction - CDBG funds generally cannot be used to construct new residential housing units, although activities in support of new housing construction may be eligible. (exception: CBDOs may use CDBG funds for new housing construction) Please note that group homes and shelters are not considered residential housing and are eligible for CDBG for new construction. X Regular Government Operations - CDBG funds cannot be used to fund the ongoing respons~ilities of general local government. X Government Buildings - Government buildings such as city halls, police stations, jails and other buildings predominantly for the general conduct of government are not generally eligible for CDBG assistance. A major exception is rehabilitation to remove architectural barriers, which is ellg~le, even in goverranent buildings. X Income payments - CDBG funds cannot be used for income payments such as payments for income maintenance or housing allowances. X Political Activities - CDBG funds cannot be used to finance the use of facilities or equipment for political purposes or to engage in other partisan political activities. 2004 National Objective and Eligibility Requirements PART V PAGE I-0 FILE KITSAP COMMUNITY A Community Action Agency creating opportunities for people in need. July 23, 2003 Bremerton City Council Dear Council Members, We are writing to express our concems and recommendations regarding proposed uses of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding. We did not testify on this issue at the first public hearing because the first draft plan appeared reasonable to us. The changes proposed later in Attachment C, however, would significantly affect the amount of CDBG funding available to community organizations serving people in need. The block grant regulations require that 70% of the funds be used to directly benefit low and moderate income residents. As we read it, Attachment C proposes that: 15% of the funds be used for administration and planning, 11% for public services, 11% for community capital projects and 63% for city municipal projects. Does this meet the intent &the funding? Also, it doesn't appear that the Housing Rehab or Worldchangers programs will be continued this year. Traditionally, the City has not provided most human services directly but instead has relied on its non-profit community partners to provide such services as helping domestic violence survivors, providing housing for homeless families, or providing childcare, weatherization help, youth activities or food assistance. One primary way the City has supported its human services panners is with CDBG funding for public services, capital projects and housing improvement. The City CDBG funding to non-profit partners typically leverages substantially more resoumes from private and public sources, often meeting specific match requirements for extemal funds. Most of our human services agencies are currently experiencing funding cuts from state, federal and private sources, making CDBG funding even more important. This local CDBG commitment has been very important to human service agencies and very much appreciated in past years. We do not oppose setting aside some funding for municipal projects, but we encourage you to make additional dollars (at least another $100,000 more than the $90,000 recommended in Attachment C) available for competitive proposals from outside city government. Quality human services and housing are very important to the quality of life in Bremerton. CDBG funding has and should continue to be used for these purposes. Sincerely, Larry Eyer Executive Director cc: Mayor CaryBozeman Sherrill Huff-Menees 802 7th Street Bremerton, WA 98337-1512 360-478-2301 · Fax 360-415-2706 · www. kcr. org Catholic Communitv ~q. uices ~85 J~h ~reet, Suite ~ B~mm~on, WA 98337 (36o)~-~o~0 ~U]yoo, 2003 City of Bremerton City Counctl a39 Fourth Street Bremerton, WA 983~? Dear Council Members: I was p!~ted to have the opportunity to attend your Committee Meeiin~ on Tuesday, July 1~'~h where several important topics were discussed. One of those topics, the proposed CDBO distribution, was of ~rticular interest to. my co~ieasues and me in the non-pro~t community. Since your Committee Meeting does not allow for public comment, you were only able to hear one side of the equation. I would like to share with you my perception of the impact the proposed distribution scheme will have on non-profits: · Non-profits must ot~en demonstrate local (city) support for projects they wish to pursue to improve conditions for poor and vulnerable citizens in the community. City block grant f~lndlng for viable capital projects is a way to show strot~g loeal suppo~. s Non-pro,ts experience the same need for matching funds for projects, similar to the need for matching funds for some city projects (example: Skateboard Park). a The ..magnitude of the disparity in the proposed distribution o~. CDBG funding will allow fewer non-profits to be funded, and those thst may be funded may be awarded such a small amount of funding that their projects may be ineffectual of unable to move forward. · Decreased allocations to non-cRy projects may place sreater burdens on our Kitsap County United Way at a time when many United Ways in the Puget Sound Region are unable to meet their fundraislng goals due to the economy. Social Service agencies have been meeting human needs in our community in partnership with Bremerton's Block grant Program for many years. I hav~ found the City's program to be one of the most effectively managed prosrams of those I have worked with. As you know. $5oo,ooo was set aside last year for the l~laritime Park project; fl~s set-aside funding wes available es a result of an excess in block ~rant pro,mm income; it is a ~omewhat unusual occurrence to have this much pro,ram income compared to other years. Since the City does not maintain a human services department that provides competitive funding for identified human service capital needs, it becomes exceedingly important for non-profit or~,anizationz to have the opportunity to apply for block grant funding for the purpose of addressing emerging and urgent needs. Catholic Community Serv!c_,~ .recommends that the City Council amend the propoeed distribution of funds by increasing the apportionment of CDBG funding for non-city capital projects to $igo,ooo, thereby reducing the administration's capital project allocation to $4oo,ooo. Feel free to contact me at home at (36o) 89543m or at my office (253) 5oz-2744 if you have questions re8arding this recommendation. Sincerely, Bevarly lllncaid, Orants Manager Catholic Community S~rvtces, Southwest Re$ion DATE SUBMITTED: 6-30-03 BILL # AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL '~ ~ ~ ~'('c~.~r~'~'' ~>'. ' ~2~-'~' ~' ~" ....... "'"''''"''"'''"'committee MeetingDate''": ........... " .............. SUBJECT: A Resolution for the City 7-15-03 Council to place on the September 16, 2003 COUNCIL MEETING Date: 7-23-03 ballot a continuation of the Emergency Department: Fire Medical Care and Service Tax levy for a 6- Presenter: A1 Duke year period. Phone: 478-5381 SUMMARY: The Bremerton Fire Department provides Emergency Medical Care to the citizens of Bremerton. The "Rescue One" program is funded through a property tax of $.50 per thousand of assessed valuation. The property tax has to be renewed every 6 years. This is not a new tax, but a continuation at the same rate. Before the City Council is the Resolution to place this measure on the September 16th ballot. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): This property tax generates approximately $750,000 anually. Failure to pass the levy would jeopardize the paramedic program. APPROVALS: ~ DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: ~~ FINANCE DIRECTOR: ~ MAYOR: ~ FISCAL/BUDGET: _ CONSENT AGENDA [] OPERATIONS: ~~ COUNC1L PRESIDENT: RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to pass Resolution # ~ #~,.,C. COUNCIL ACTION: [] Approve [] Deny [] Table [] Continue [] No Action RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington setting forth a property tax levy to fund emergency medical services for submission to the voters of the City for approval and ratification or rejection at the election to be held on September 16, 2003. WHEREAS, it is deemed necessary to the public health, safety and welfare that the City of Bremerton (the "City") provide emergency medical care and emergency medical treatment to its citizens; and WHEREAS, the Fire Department of the City of Bremerton is in need of monetary funds for the present and future funding of its emergency medical service; and WHEREAS, a property tax levy would perpetuate and enhance the Bremerton emergency medical services program by funding personnel costs, training and related equipment, supplies, vehicle and structures needed for the provision of such care or services not including the costs of transportation to and from medical treatment facilities; NOW THEREFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTIONL That at the election to be held on September 16, 2003, there shall be submitted a proposition for a property tax levy in an amount equal to .50 cents per thousand dollars of the assessed value of real and personal property located within the City to qualified voters of the City of Bremerton for approval or rejection in the form set forth below: THE CITY OF BREMERTON PROPOSITION NO.1 EMERGENCY MEDICAL CARE AND SERVICES TAX Shall the City of Bremerton, in order to continue financing emergency medical care and services, authorize a total tax levy of Fifty cents ($.50) per One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) of assessed valuation for each of six (6) consecutive years beginning in 2004? YES NO EMS Levy The City Clerk is hereby authorized to deliver a certified copy of this resolution to the Kitsap County Auditor. SECTION2. Severability. If any one or more sections, subsections, or sentences of this Resolution are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Resolution and the same shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION& Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect and be in force immediately upon its passage. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington this __ day of ~ 2003. CAROL ARENDS, Council President APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney KATHLEEN MCCLUSKEY, City Clerk EMS Levy DATE SUBMITTED: July 1, 2003 BILL # ,- - ".' AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON ~ 8 CITY COUNCIL ......... ' .............. ' ........ "'"' .... ' ............ " SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING AND Committee Meeting Date: July 15, 2003 RESOLUTION ON SURPLUS AND SALE COUNCIL MEETING Date: July 23, 2003 OF PUBLIC UTILITY PROPERTY Department: Public Works & Utilities Presenter: Gene Sampley Phone: 473-5315 SUMMARY: The City has received an offer from the Kitsap Square Dance Association to purchase certain public utility property. The property is not currently used for public utility service nor will it be required for providing public utility service in the future. The offer to purchase the property is fair market value and the City and greater community would be better served by the surplus and sale of the property. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Resolution with exhibits 2. Offer to purchase property FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): The public utility would receive the sum of $107,000 from the sale of the property and the property would be returned to the tax rolls. APPROVALS: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: F ANCE DmECTOR: MAYOR:- k ~" < 55 . , FISCAL/B UOGET:/ ~ i CONSENT AGENDA [] OPERATIONS: COUNCIL PRESIDENT: RECOMMENDED MOTION: I move to pass Resolution No. ,2 ~ ~'7 declaring the public utility property surplus, approving a negotiated sale of the property pursuant to BMC 2.78.030(e) to the Kitsap Square Dance Association, approving the purchase and sale agreement and authorizing the Mayor to execute any and all documents necessary to close the transaction. COUNCIL ACTION: [] Approve [] Deny [] Table [] Continue [] No Action RESOLUTION NO. J ~q 7 A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington, declaring certain public utility property surplus to thc City's needs and approving a negotiated sale of the property in accordance with the provisions of RCW 35.94.040 and BMC 2.78.030(e). WHEREAS, the City has received an offer to purchase the public utility property depicted in Exhibit A and legally described in Exhibit B from Kitsap Square Dance Association, for $107,000, which sum is the fair market value of the property; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the property is surplus to the City's needs and is not required for providing continued public utility service; and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 35.94.040, a public hearing was held on July 23, 2003 relating to the proposed surplus and negotiated sale of the property; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The public utility property legally described in Exhibit B is hereby declared surplus to the City's needs and is not required for providing continued public utility service. SECTION 2. The sale of the above-mentioned property creates a benefit to the City and the greater community and therefore a negotiated sale is hereby authorized pursuant to BMC 2.78.030(e) and. SECTION 3. The Mayor is hereby authorized to finalize and execute a purchase and sale agreement with substantially the same terms and conditions as set forth in the proposed agreement attached as Exhibit C authorizing the sale of the property to Kitsap Square Dance Association for $107,000. SECTION 4. The Mayor is further authorized to execute any and all other documents, including but not limited to statutory warranty deeds and real estate excise tax affidavits, necessary to complete the transaction. SECTION5. Severabilitv. If any one or more sections, subsections, or sentences of this Resolution are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Resolution and the same shall remain in full force and effect. Surplus and Sale of Public Utility Property SECTION 6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect and be in force immediately upon its passage. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington this __ day of ,2003. CAROL ARENDS, Council President APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney KATHLEEN MCCLUSKEY, City Clerk R :~LEGAL~Files\Curvent Active FilesW. itsap Square Dance AssociafionkSu~plus and Negotiated Sale.doc Surplus and Sale of Public Utility Property EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR SQUARE DANCE HAI.L PROPERTY A portion of the Plat of Bremerton Waterworks Tracts No..2, as recorded in Volume 6 of plats, Page 13, records of Kitsap County, Washington, situate in the Southwest quarter of the Northwest quarter, of Section 32, Township 24 North, Range 1 East, Williamette Meridian, Kitsap County, Washington, which is more particularly described as follows: Lots 36, 37 and 38. LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR CAMPING AREA PROPERTY A portion of the Plat of Bremerton Waterworks Tracts, as recorded in Volume 4 of plats, Page 102, records of Kitsap County, Washington and a portion of the Northwest quarter of the Southwest quarter, of Section 32, Township 24 North, Range 1 East, Wflliamette Meridian, Kitsap County, Washington, which is more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest comer of Lot 38 of the Plat of Bremerton Waterworks Tracts No. 2, as recorded in Volume 6 Of plats, Page 13, records of Kitsap County, Washington, also being the Tree Point of Beginning; thence along the west line of said plat No. 2, S 2°33'10" W 493.81 feet; thence leaving said west line, N 88o13'32" W 111.49 feet; thence S 11 56'13" W 142.22 to the Northwest comer of Lot 22 of said plat No. 2; thence continuing along said west line of the plat, S 11 56'13" W 159.70 feet; thence leaving said west line, S 89 49'02" W 255.22 feet along an existing timber rail fence; thence leaving said fence line, N 16 39'01" E 837.47 feet to the southerly right of way of Belfair Valley Road (formerly Navy Yard Highway); thence easterly along said southerly right of way to the Tme Point of Beginn/ng. Consisting of approximately 4.794 acres. EXHIBIT B REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT WITH EARNEST MONEY PROVISION This contract controls the terms of the sale of real property. (Please read carefully before sic,nine,.) This Agreement is entered between the Kitsap Square Dance Association, a · whose mailing address is ("Buyer"), and the CITY OF BREMERTON, a Washington municipal corporation, whose mailing address is 239 4th Street, Bremerton, Washington 98337, ("Seller"), for the sale and purchase of real property as follows: 1. PROPERTY. Buyer agrees to buy and Seller agrees to sell the property, including improvements and appurtenances situated thereon which may be owned by the Seller, if any, which is legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"). It is acknowledged that Buyer has constructed improvements, which are owned by Buyer, and has occupied the Property pursuant to a lease between Seller and Buyer. A map indicating the location of the Property is also attached as Exhibit B, incorporated herein by this reference. 2. PURCHASE PRICE. The total purchase price for the Property is One Hundred Seven Thousand Dollars and No/100 Dollars ($107,000.00), payable on closing. 3. EARNEST MONEY. None. 4. CONTINGENCIES. This agreement is contingent upon: (a) Acceptance of its terms by the Bremerton City Council. (b) Grant of a utility easement from Buyer to Seller upon closing. Should any of these contingencies not be met prior to closing, then this Agreement shall terminate and neither Buyer nor Seller shall have any further rights, duties or obligations hereunder. 5. CONVEYANCE AND CONDITION OF TITLE. The title to the real property shall be conveyed by Seller to Buyer at closing by Statutory Warranty Deed, free and clear of all liens, encumbrances or defects except those described in Paragraph 5 below. 6. TITLE INSURANCE. At Closing, Seller shall cause Pacific Northwest Title· whose address and telephone number is 9927 Mickelberry Road, N.W., Silverdale, Washington 98383, (360) 692-4141, to issue a standard form owner's policy of title insurance to Buyer in an amount equal to the total purchase price of the Real Property, and insuring the Real Property being discharged by Seller. The cost of said policy shall be shared equally by Seller and Buyer, with Seller REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT C 13o bearing the initial cost and Buyer reimbursing one-half of the cost at Closing. For purposes of this Agreement, the following shall not be deemed encumbrances or defects: rights reserved and federal patents or state deeds; building or use restrictions consistent with current zoning, and utility and road easements of record. If title cannot be made so insurable prior to the Closing date called for herein, unless, Buyer elects to waive such defects or encumbrances, this agreement shall terminate. 7. CLOSING COSTS AND PRO-RATIONS. Costs of closing shall be shared equally between Buyer and Seller, except those fees which are expressly limited by Federal Regulation. Seller shall pay for excise tax and revenue stamps as applicable. Taxes for the current year, rents, interest, Association, Condominium and/or Homeowner's fees, water and other utility charges, if any, shall be pro-rated as of date of closing unless otherwise agreed. 8. CLOSING OF THE SALE. WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE FOR THIS AGREEMENT, this sale shall close on or before September 1, 2003 which shall also be the termination date of this agreement unless said closing date is extended in writing by mutual agreement of the parties. Closing, for the purpose of this agreement, is defined as the date that all documents are executed and the sale proceeds are available for disbursement to the Seller. 9. POSSESSION. Buyer shall be entitled to possession on closing. 10. CONDITION OF PROPERTY AND IMPROVEMENTS. EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN THIS PARAGRAPH, SELLER MAKES NO REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY RESPECTING, AND PURCHASER HEREBY RELEASES SELLER FROM, THE ECOLOGICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL, OR PHYSICAL CONDITION AND/OR USE OF THE PROPERTY, ITS COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS, ZONING OR OTHER MATTERS WITH RESPECT THERETO. PURCHASER IS RELYING SOLELY UPON ITS OWN EXAMINATION OF THE PROPERTY AND SHALL ACCEPT THE PROPERTY IN "AS-IS" CONDITION WITHOUT IMPLIED OR EXPRESS WARRANTY, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 11. TERMINATION OF LEASE. Buyer and Seller agree that the Land Lease Agreement executed by Buyer and Seller on March 11, 2000 (and any amendments thereto), wherein Buyer leased the Property from Seller will terminate and be of no further effect upon the Closing of this transaction. 12. DEFAULT AND ATTORNEY'S FEES. (a) Buyer's Default. IF BUYER DEFAULTS HEREUNDER, SELLER'S SOLE REMEDY SHALL BE LIMITED TO DAMAGES AGAINST PURCHASE IN THE AMOUNT OF THE THIRD-PARTY COSTS INCURRED BY SELLER IN PREPARING THIS TRANSACTION INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO TITLE COMPANY AND ESCROW FEES. BUYER AND REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT Page 2 of 4 SELLER INTEND THAT SAID AMOUNT CONSTITUTES LIQUIDATED DAMAGES: AND SO AS TO AVOID OTHER COSTS AND EXPENSES TO EITHER PARTY IN CONNECTION WITH POTENTIAL LITIGATION ON ACCOUNT OF BUYERS' DEFAULT. BUYER AND SELLER BELIEVE SAID AMOUNT TO BE A FAIR ESTIMATE OF ACTUAL DAMAGES. (b) Seller's Default. IF SELLER DEFAULTS HEREUNDER, BUYER SHALL HAVE ALL THE RIGHTS AND REMEDIES AVAILABLE AT LAW OR IN EQUITY. (c) Attorney's Fees and Costs. In the event of litigation to enforce any of the terms or provisions herein, each party shall pay all its own costs and attorney's fees. 13. NOTICE TO SELLER. This form contains provisions for an agreement for the purchase and sale of real estate. The Buyer makes NO WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION OF ANY KIND that this form, or any of its provisions, is intended to meet the factual and legal requirements of a particular transaction, or that it accurately reflects that laws of the State of Washington at the time you enter the agreement. THIS AGREEMENT HAS SIGNIFICANT LEGAL AND FINANCIAL CONSEQUENCES AND YOU ARE ADVISED TO SEEK INDEPENDENT LEGAL AND FINANCIAL COUNSEL REGARDING THESE CONSEQUENCES. If you do not understand the effect of any part, consult your Attorney before signing. 14. NON-MERGER. The terms, conditions, and provisions of this Agreement shall not be deemed merged into the deed, and shall survive the Closing and continue in full force and effect. 15. NOTICES. All notices required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be in writing and shall be sent U.S. certified mall, return receipt requested, or by facsimile transmission addressed as set forth below: (a) All notices to be given to Buyer shall be addressed as follows: Mayor City of Bremerton 239 Fourth Street Bremerton, Washington 98337 (b) All notices to be given to Seller shall be addressed as follows: REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT Page 3 of 4 Either party hereto may, by written notice to the other, designate such other address for the giving of notices as being necessary. All notices shall be deemed given on the day such notice is personally served, or on the date of the facsimile transmission, or on the third day following the day such notice is mailed in accordance with this paragraph. 16. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This agreement, including all incorporated exhibits, constitutes the full understanding between seller and buyer. There have been no verbal or other agreements that modify this agreement. 17. BINDING EFFECT AND SURVIVAL. This Agreement shall be binding upon pa[ties hereto and their respective heirs, successors and assigns; and the terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement shall survive the closing of this transaction. 18. DATE OF MUTUAL ACCEPTANCE. For the purposes of this Agreement, the date of mutual acceptance of this Agreement shall be the last date on which the parties to this Agreement have executed this Agreement as indicated below. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date set forth below. BUYER: SELLERS: THE CITY OF BREMERTON KITSAP SQUARE DANCE ASSOCIATION By:. By: Cary Bozeman, Mayor Its: Dated: Dated: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By:. Roger A. Lubovich, City Attorney REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT Page 4 of 4 /33 LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR SQUARE DANCE HALL PROPERTY A. portion of the Plat of Bremerton Waterworks Tracts No. 2, as recorded in Volume 6 of plats, Page 13, records of Kitsap County, Washington, situate in the Southwest quarter of the Northwest quarter, of Section 32, Township 24 North, Range 1 East, Williamette Meridian, Kitsap County, Washington, which is more particularly described as follows: Lots 36, 37 and 38. LEGAl, DESCRIPTION FOR CAMPING AREA PROPERTY A portion of the Plat of Bremerton Waterworks Tracts, as recorded in Volume 4 of plats, Page 102, records of Kitsap County, Washington and a portion of the Northwest quarter of the Southwest quarter, of Section 32, Township 24 North, Range 1 East, Williamette Meridian, Kitsap County, Washington, which is more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest comer of Lot 38 of the Plat of Bremerton Waterworks Tracts No. 2, as recorded in Volume 6 0f plats, Page 13, records of Kitsap County, Washington, also being the True Point of Beginning; thence along the west line of said plat No. 2, S 2°33'10'' W 493.81 feet; thence leaving said west line, N 88013'32'' W 111.49 feet; thence S 11 56'13" W 142.22 to the Northwest comer of Lot 22 of said plat No. 2; thence continuing along said west line of the plat, S 11 56'13" W 159.70 feet; thence leaving said west line, S 89 49'02" W 255.22 feet along an existing timber rail fence; thence leaving said fence line, N 16 39'01" E 837.47 feet to the southerly right of way of Belfalr Valley Road (formerly Navy Yard Highway); thence easterly along said southerly fight of way to the True Point of Beginning. Consisting of approximately 4.794 acres. EXHIBIT A EXHIBIT B June 26, 2Q03 Director of Public Works & Utilities Dear Mr. Eugene Sampley: The Kitsap Squa'e Dance Association (KSDA) has decided that they would like to pu~'sue pu~ing the property lhat we are currently leasing from the city of Bremerton. We have leased and maintained lhis property since June of 1969 under vadous Land Lease Agreements. We have reviewed the fair m. arke{ appraisal of the land packages that the city has obtained. KSDA agrees lhat the value $49,000 for parcel ~ and $58,000 ~r pamel.# 2 is reasor~able and therefore terries an offer of $107,000 for the property. We request that the city proceed with surplusing the property and accept our offer. Please let us know when this issue will be discussed at the City Council Meeting so a contingent of Square Dancers can be in attendance to answer any questions. RECEIVED JUN 3 0 2003 DEPT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND UTILITIES DATE SUBMITTED: July 17, 2003 BILL # ;~ ? AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON ~'~ C1TY COUNCIL g ; ";4;, : .... '"'"" ........ '"" ....... '" ..... '"' .... '"'"' BJECT: Resolution authorizing an Committee Meeting Date: July 14, 2003 Interfund loan to the Conference Center COUNCIL MEETING Date: July 23, 2003 Fund from the Equipment Rental and Department: Finance Department Revolving Fund Presenter: Michael R. Wilson Phone: 473-5590 SUMMARY: The Conference Center needs interim financial resources in the amount of $300,000 to pay for the conference center management company for operating expenses. Interim funding is needed until such time the conference center generates sufficient case to repay such debt obligation or an alternative plan for repayment has been developed within the FY 2004 budget. This loan shall be repaid to the Equipment Rental Reserve Fund from the Conference Center Fund on or before October 1, 2004. Future cash flow and capital expense needs for the Conference Center beyond this initial $300,000 loan will be addressed in the Conference Center FY 2004 Budget. ATTACHMENTS: A. Resolution authorizing an interfund loan to the Conference Center from the Equipment Rental and Revolving Fund; B. Memo from the Director of Finance; and C. Interfund loan schedule FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): The Conference Center will need to repay this $300,000 interfund loan, plus applicable interest, to the ER&R Fund in FY 2004. It is recommended that the interfund loan be repaid by use of reserves and future revenues from hotel/motel taxes. / APPROVALS: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: FiNANCE DIRECTOR: '~ MAYOR: FISCAL/BUDGET: HEARD AT STUDY SESSION 7/14/03 CONSENT AGENDA [] OPERATIONS: HEARD AT STUDY SESSION 7/~4/03 COtn, CIL Pm S DENT: RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve Resolution No. ~ ~ / d authorizing the Director of Finance to make and interfund loan from the Equipment Rental Reserve Fund (Fund 510) to the Conference Center Fund (Fund 410) in the amount not to exceed $300,000. COUNCIL ACTION: [] Approve [] Deny [] Table [] Continue [] No Action /37 RESOLUTION NO. , ~.~ 't ~ A RESOLUTION of the City of Bremerton, Washington, authorizing an interfund loan to the Conference Center Operating Fund from the Equipment Rental Reserve Fund. WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton entered into an agreement with Columbia Hospitality, Inc. on June 6, 2003 for the management of the City's new conference center; and WHEREAS, the Conference Center needs interim fmancial resources in the amount of $300,000 to pay for the conference center management company for pre-opening operating expenses; and WHEREAS, interim funding is needed until such time the conference center generates sufficient cash to repay such debt obligation or a long-range plan for repayment has been developed within the FY 2004 budget document; and NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City of Bremerton's Director of Finance is hereby authorized and directed to make an interfund loan from the Equipment Rental Reserve Fund (Fund 510) to the Conference Center Fund (Fund 410) in the amount not to exceed $300,000 to cover conference center pre-opening expenses. This loan shall bear interest at a rate based on the monthly average yield from the Washington State Local Government Investment Pool and shall be repaid to the Equipment Rental Reserve Fund from the Conference Center Fund on or before October, 2004. SECTION 2. Severability. If any one or more sections, subsections, or sentences of this Resolution are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Resolution and the same shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect and be in force immediately upon its passage. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington, on this day of 2003. CAROL ARENDS, Council President APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: KATHLEEN L. McCLUSKEY, City Clerk ROGER LUBOVICH, City Attorney Department of Finance 239 Fourth Street, Bremerton, WA 98337 Telephone: 360-478-5590 Fax: 360-478-5200 mwilson@ci, bremerton, wa.us Michael R. Wilson, Director of Finance TO: Carol Arends, Council President Bremerton City C/ouncil members FROM: Michael R. WilsOn s., ~ _ Director of Finny' SUBJECT: Conference Center Financial Plan DATE: July 16, 2003 At the July 14 City Council special study session, I again reviewed with the Council the financial plan for our new Conference Center and provided additional funding resource information. It was my recommendation to establish a line of credit through BofA and use hotel/motel tax resources for financial backing of this line of credit as a long-term solution for funding the Conference Center's pre-opening expenses. In addition, I proposed that the portion of the hotel/motel taxes that is not committed to the Admiral Theater be earmarked and pledged to the Conference Center to assist in paying off this line of credit and other future Conference Center financial obligations. The Council determined that we should pursue borrowing funds through an interfund loan from the Equipment Rental and Revolving Fund rather than using a bank line of credit. Pursuant to the direction of the Council, we have prepared a resolution to provide interim funding through an ER&R Fund loan. This measure is intended to be a short-term funding solution and will be examined again during the FY 2004 budget process. We have also provided you with an interfund loan status report as requested so you can examine the loan activity within the ER&R Fund.