HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/20/99 AGENDABREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
239 4TH STREET
BREMERTON, WA 98337
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
JANUARY 20, 1999
1. CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION: 5:00 - 5:30 P.M.
A. General Council Business
2. CALL TO ORDER: 5:30 P.M.
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Invocation
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Items listed below have been distributed to Council members in advance for study
and will be enacted by one motion. If separate discussion is desired on an item, it
may be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed on the Regular Agenda at
the request of a Council member.
A. Minutes of Meeting - December 30, 1998 #AB99-011
B. Minutes of Meeting - January 6, 1999 #AB99-012
4. CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS
5. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS
6. MAYOR'S REPORT
7. LEGISLATIVE REPORT
8. PUBLIC RECOGNITION -- (Comments Limited to 3 Minutes)
9. NEW BUSINESS
A. 1999 CDBG Final Allocation #AB99-013 I ~,
B. Bid Award for Naval Avenue Slide Repair #AB99-014 I~
(CONTINUED ON BACK)
10. ORDINANCES
A. Ordinance No. 4645 (Second Reading) Authorizing #AB99-008 ,2.,2.
the Issue of a $1,250,000 Tax Anticipation Note and
Accepting the Purchase Offer of Seafirst Bank
B. Ordinance (First Reading) Naming the new SR304 #AB99-015 ~0
Roadway Alignment East of First Street "Charleston
Boulevard"
11. PUBLIC HEARING (6:00 P.M. or LATER)
A. Public Hearing and Resolution No. 2689, Approving #AB99-016 °o5
a Special Use Permit for Day Care Center for up to 41
Children; Applicant: Emmanuel Apostolic Church;
Location: 1023 6th Street
Kitsap County Department of Public Works
614 Division Street (MS-27), Por~ Orchard, WA 98366-4686 R.W. Casteel, P.E., Director
January 14, 1999 ~x~.o7~-~
Dear John Poppe, City Engineer:
Subj:Legislation to set aside prohibited shell fishing areas that have multiple public uses as
marine life preserves. Response to DNR resource damage policy.
Attached is a letter sent out to our State Legislators for Kitsap ~ounty. This letter is proposing that
the prohibited shellfish areas be defined as "preservation areas." These are areas where NPDES
permits outfall discharge to marine waters, State Ferry traffic lanes, and marina closure areas.
The users of these areas are people who live in the Urban Growth Areas. These people are being
penalized by the Department of Natural Resources' policy of collecting "resource damages" for a
resource that is not being damaged, which is witnessed by the incredibly high value of the geoducks
in those areas. DNR's ability to sell the geoducks is the only thing affected.
We are asking that you forward this information to your legislators and provide as much clout as you
can muster to see that this issue is addressed in this legislative session. If nothing is done, the
penalty, to our scwer ratepayers will be significant. In many cases, in the millions of dollars and
additional transportation moneys will be diverted to DNR.
We sympathize with the severe monetary squeeze that DNR is experiencing, but suggest that the
problem as it relates to school construction funding should not be solved on the backs of our sewer
rate payers, but should be addressed statewide.
Please pass this information on to your superiors and to your legislators.
Thank you for your help.
Sincerely,
George J. Mason
Assistant Director of Public Works Utilities
The Open Line 360-337-5777 or 800-825-4940 · FAX 360~37-4867
--printed on recycled paper--
January 1'1, 1999
Addressed to House Representatives & Senate Members:
Kitsap County is concerned by the State Department of Natural Resources' policy regarding
collection of"resource damages" from water dependent users. DN-R will not issue a renewal
or new easement for outfalls, ferry traffic lanes, marinas, or any other subtidal water
dependent user without conditioning to receive payment for "resource damages" for
geoducks that are in the Federally or State mandated prohibited shellfishing areas associated
with these closures.
These "damages" or required mitigations will cost our rate and fee payers millions of dollars.
The resource that is being charged for is not "damaged" as witness the millions of dollars of
healthy geoducks in these areas. This geoduck industry is an- export industry. The money
collected from this "damage" fee will not be used to enhance geoduck reproduction or
habitat. It will go to support the agency and to the school construction fund.
These costs are statewide concerns and should be provided for by statewide taxation not from
sewer rate payers, ferry riders, and boaters. In fact, DNR has excluded some outfalls from
tiffs proposed charge along the southeast shore of Puget Sound because they can't
differentiate outfall closure areas from closures due to non-point source run off. This
"policy" so far has effected Hartstene Point, Alderbrook Resort, a nursing home on
Bainbridge Island, a combined sewer outfall for Seattle Metro, and now Kitsap County's
Kingston Treatment Plant.
This piece-meal approach is not productive nor fair. The cost increase for Kingston sewer
rate payers will be $15.00 per month just to pay for geoducks. The attached bar graph shows
the history of sewer bills and the impact of the geoduck charge. These people live in a
designated Urban Growth Area. In fact, most sewer rate payers live in urban growth areas.
These proposed penalties mn counter to the purposes of the Growth Management Act.
We have attached a letter proposing legislation that will provide protection for the geoducks
in these prohibited areas, locations for necessary outfalls, ferry lanes, and marina areas. All
of these uses are needed to protect the interests of all the people, and not just the economic
interest of one agency. The legislation would prohibk "resource damage" collection in these
areas simply because they are prohibited by Federal decree or by concem for the safety of the
public.
**Please use this information to sponsor or support your legislators to stop this
discriminatory taxation**
FORMATION OF PRESERVATION AREAS -
IN SPECIFIC SUBTIDAL ZONES IN PUGET SOUND
Legislation is needed to create subtidat preservation zones in and around the Washin~on State Ferry traffic lanes,
Washin~on State Department of Health Shell fishing prohibited zones around permitted treated effluent outfalls and
the WDOH Shellfishing prohibited zones around marinas. These preservation zones would be for the purposes of
protecting the public health, encouraging economic development, protecting water qualitv, protecting the shellfish and
other biota present in these zones, a~d/he prevention of discriminatory taxation by DNa. -
DN'R policy is to remove all pebmitted outfalls from Puget Sound based on the misconception that NPDES
permits are a license to pollute, that it is economically feasible to apply ail effluent to land in the urban areas
served by sewers and the desire to harvest as many Geoducks as possible to make up for the shortfall in DN-R
revenues.
DNR policy is to collect "resource damages" from all operations that prohibit harvesting of shellfish such a
federally mandated closures around ouffalls and marinas and State mandated closures in ferry traffic lanes. This
resource damage claim comes from a judicial ruling that DNR could collect because the closures made it
impossible to mange the geoduck resource.
Dama_es will be assessed to sewer rate payers, Ferry users, Marina users and any other water dependent use
that prevents harvest of shellfish.
"Damages" amount to millions of dollars based on harvest of all the shellfish and market price and will be
assessed to a special group of citizens to satisfy state,vide needs.
Harvest of shellfish supports DNR operations and contributions to the School Construction Fund.
Use of ouffalls protects public health, supports upland economic development and protects the quality of marine
waters through the imposition of Federal Discharge Permits which require regular monitoring and reporting and
bioassay testing of the effluent.
Ferry traffic closure areas support transportation needs associated with economic development.
Marinas support a muitimillion dollar a year marine industry. Assessing damages to some of these could put
them out of business.
Permitted ouffalls, marinas and ferry operations have no measurable effect on the geoduck resource as witnessed
by the large numbers of Geoducks in the prohibited areas and the plentiful variety of life in these areas.
These closure areas provide an old ~owth forest of geoducks and other marine biota protected from the ravages
of harvest.
Creation of these special zones will:
1. Provide special protection for marine organisms in these areas and in particular prevent harvest of old ~bwth
species of Geoducks that live wet1 over 100 years.
2. Prevent indirect discriminatory taxation of special classes of people to support Statewide needs.
3. Avoid special penalties to p~ople who live in Urban Growth Areas, thus support G~MA.
4. Support reasonable costs for provision of sewer service and transportation which provides public health
protection and supports economic development while protecting the marine envkonment.
5. Prevent transfer of State funds from DOT to DNR without legislative approval or public hearing.
In short these special areas will provide for many public benefits and encourage development of transportation and build
out of Urban Growth areas while preventing discriminatory taxation of special classes of people.
Itistoric and Projected
Kitsap County - Monthly Sewer Rates
Exantple Impact of DNR Resource Damage Policy or! Sewer Charges
$?o.oo
$60.00
[] Single Family Rate
[] Kingston Single FamilY Rate
[] Si 5 Geoduck Surchar. ge
$5o.oo
$40.00
$30.00
$20.00
$10.00
$0.00
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
Year
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
1. $_U_D_J_~QT: FOR AGENDA OF: JANUARY 20, 1999
ORIGINATING DEPT: CITY COUNC I L
ORIGINATOR: DAVID FARR, PRESIDENT
MINUTES OF MEETING -- DECEMBER 30, 1998 DATE SUBMITTED: JANUARY 13, 1999
2. ~: (comment on back 3. ~:
if necessary)
ENDORSEMENT INFORMATION APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT F~
MAYOR __ __ COUNCIL PRESIDENT.~.~.~/-~~~J
4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ~CTIQN:
8. RECOMMENDATION:
9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL:
EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
10. NOTICE OF ACTION
PULLED TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED AMENDED
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: DATE: ~~
TAPE #1590 UNAPPROVED DRAFT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
DECEMBER 30, 1998
The regular 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,
December 30, 1998, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President David Farr presiding. Council
members present were Jim Reed, Carlos Montgomery, Carol Arends, Mike Shepherd,
Lon Overson, John Law, Cecil McConnell, and Wayne Olsen. Also present were City
Attorney Glenna Malanca and Deputy City Clerk Paula Johnston.
The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Farr, and
invocation given by Chaplain John Reitz, of Naval Subase Bangor.
President Fart made the following announcements:
(1) City Council held a Study Session prior to the Council meeting, in the Council
Conference room, 5:00 - 5:30 P.M. to discuss general Council business.
(2) City Council will hold their next monthly Study Session on Monday, January 04,
1999, in the Council Conference room, 5:30 - 7:45 P.M. to discuss the New Jail;
Non-Profit Agency Leases; a Resolution to consider the AT&T and TCI Merger;
Construction Project Updates; and a Contract Amendment and Budget
Adjustment for Evergreen Park Remediation Project.
(3) City Council will hold a Study Session immediately following the City Council
meeting on Wednesday, January 6, 1999 in the Council Conference Room to
discuss "Proposed Amendments to Bremerton Title 21, Land Use".
CONSENT AGENDA
None
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.
#0188 M/S/C/U (Montgomery/Arends) On December 30, 1998, the Council does
approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 226707
through 226845, and EFT 5170 in the amount of $649,186.52; and Retiree Payroll in the
amount of $121,181.93 for the period ending December 31, 1998.
COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS
Mr. Olsen wished everyone a Happy New Year, and urged no one to drink and drive.
Mr. McConnell wished everyone Happy Holidays and Happy New Year, and reminded
everyone to drive safe and sober.
TAPE #159O
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
December 30, 1998
Page 2 of 5
Mr. Law announced the next District 3 meeting to be held Tuesday, January 19, 1999.
He also wished everyone Happy Holidays.
Mr. OYerson was glad to see the rain subside, and hopes mother nature will be kinder
in the New Year. He also wished everyone a happy holiday season.
Mrs. Arend..s wished everyone a Happy New Year. She also wanted to thank Mr.
Sampley for solving the problem of the "freezing" Council Chambers last week...by
closing the window! She enjoyed a visit to the Charleston Cinema over the weekend.
Mr. Montgomery_ wished everyone a Happy New Year.
President Farr joined the Council in wishing everyone a safe and Happy New Year.
PUBLIC RECOGNITION
Louis Soriano, voiced his concerns about Kitsap Transit, and the problems created
due to the lack of signage and access for taxis and busses near the ferry terminal,
particularly around the construction site, for elderly and disabled ferry riders. He urged
the Council to visit the area to see the problems first hand, and find an immediate
solution to this problem.
Susan Brown concurred with the previous comments, and also inferred that the City
might be breaking federal law when it comes to the lack of handicap access at the ferry
terminal.
Gordy Byrd also voiced his concerns about a dangerous intersection at the corner of
Sheridan & Wheaton Way, and also at 6th & Park.
Mike Shepherd arrived at the Council meeting at 5:50 P.M.
President Fart asked the Legislative Assistant to contact Richard Hayes at Kitsap
Transit to request that he come before Council at next weeks meeting and address the
issues and concerns brought up here tonight.
8A - AGREEMENTS WITH KITSAP COUNTY FOR BI(AT SERVICES, #AB98-290
This is the second year of agreements with Kitsap County to provide BKAT services.
The Funding Agreement provides the County 21-cent pass-through and the
Governmental Services Agreement provides for a payment of $50 per hour for filming
county government hearings and other programming.
Kathleen McCluskey, Administrative Services Director, stated that both contracts are
essentially the same, except for the 21 -cents which is an increase over available funds
last year, and are written for one-year, with an added clause for additional years at the
election of the Commissioners. The agreements went before the County first, and have
TAPE #159O
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
December 30, 1998
Page 3 of 5
already been approved by them. Since the County participated only part of last year,
the Governmental Services Agreement doesn't reflect what she thinks the City will see
this year. She predicts a real increase in the governmental programming, and added
the City will probably be ready within a year to expand to a second public access
channel, which will coincide with the upgrade of the Bremerton cable system.
Bruce Stier, Executive Director of BKAT, passed out information on 1997 and 1998
statistics showing the increase and the playback time. He provided a brief report on
what has occurred this year, including an increase in the amount of public, educational,
and governmental programming. He added that approximately 50,000 households are
being reached.
Mr. Byrd asked what it costs to tape the City Council meetings. Ms. McCluskey
clarified that each cable subscriber is charged 21-cents per month on his or her bill,
which is used for the cable access programming. There are only two and-a-half staff
members, and the rest of the group is made up from volunteers. The $50.00 per hour is
what the City and County governments pay BKAT to televise the governmental
programming.
Mr. McConnell wanted to clarify that the automatic extension of the contract is the only
section that could be changed. Ms, McCluskey stated yes.
Mr. Montgomery referred to the additional channel to be added next year, and asked if
it would be strictly reserved for governmental programming. Ms. M¢Cluskey stated that
it may be proposed to have one channel for government and public/education on the
other channel, however, this idea would need to be brought before the Advisory
Committee, City Council, and the County Commissioners.
#0951 M/S/C/U (Montgomery/Olsen) Motion to approve Funding Agreement with Kitsap
County.
#0965 M/S/C/U (Montgomery/Olsen) Motion to approve Governmental Services
Agreement with Kitsap County.
8B - 1999 AMBULANCE RATES, #AB98-291
Pursuant to the ambulance regulatory ordinance, Council must approve rates charged
for 911 Basic Life Support (BLS) aid calls. Both local companies, Olympic and
Bremerton, have submitted requests for rate increases for 911 BLS calls to be effective
January 1, 1999. Clerk staff has surveyed regional ambulance companies for
comparable rates. All surveyed companies have raised their rates since 1997 for BLS
and the army of products and services they provide.
Kathleen McCluskey, Administrative Services Director, stated that per the Bremerton
Municipal Code, staff is only required to review the rates proposed, as compared to
TAPE #1590
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
December 30, 1998
Page 4 of 5
other comparable rates. This was done, and the information was provided in the
Agenda Packet. The rates reflect a 5% increase over a two year period. Staff
recommends approval.
Mr, Byrd supported the rate increase.
Roy M¢lnnis referred to the chart showing the "1999 Rate Increase Proposal" on page
24 of the Agenda Packet, and asked what was meant by "Wait Time". Kimberly A.
Doyle, of Bremerton Ambulance, gave an example of transporting a patient for radiation
treatment, then waiting for that patient while they are at their appointment and then
transporting them back to the facility they came from. This can save the patient from
having two transporting fees. This fee is not usually charged on 911 calls. She
explained it is less expensive for the patient, and still allows ambulance companies to
pay the employee and the cost for running the ambulance.
Mr. Montgomery_ and Mr. Overson questioned the justification for the rate increase. It
was felt that a study on what an appropriate rate should be for providing this service
was needed, and how closely these proposed rates meet that cost, rather than simply
comparable rates of other cities.
Mr, Olden pointed out for the benefit of the public, that the BLS basic rate from the two
ambulance companies in Bremerton is $242.55; with a comparison rate from American
Medical Response of $316.00. Mr. McCon.ne!l asked who did the comparisons. He
also questioned why there are two companies. Paula Johnston, Deputy City Clerk,
stated the report shows a balanced comparison of companies, type of service, and base
rate charges. She assured Council the report is a comparison of "apples to apples".
Mr, William Little_iohn, President of Olympic Ambulance, stated that they have been
coming to the City for rate approvals for the past 20 years, and this was the first time
there has been such a large turnover of Council members. He provided some history of
an Ambulance Review Committee used in the past, which he believed, was helpful in
explaining the issues. He also pointed out that this item was brought to the two Council
Committees, and he would have been happy to answer any questions at that time. He
explained the companies are in negotiations right now to increase employee wages,
and gave examples of new expenses anticipated in the coming year.
Mr. Law suggested that the companies take the time to educate the Council, and show
why the rates should increase, rather than use a comparison chart.
Mr. Reed wondered why Council was not this frugal a few weeks ago when water and
sewer rates were raised 3%... It amazed him that no questions were asked then, but
scrutinizing this private employers request for an increase. He fully understands the
high cost of running a business, and pointed out that a patient's insurance company
pays most bills anyway.
.5
TAPE #159O
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
December 30, 1998
Page 5 of 5
President Farr questioned if the rates that are in effect now, stay in effect after the first
of the year? If this rate increase fails, he asked if staff could work with the contractors
and bring this issue back before Committees again. MS. McCluskey explained that the
only requirement in the BMC is that the ambulance companies bring the proposals to
staff before December 1 st, which they did. There is no time-line in which the Council
must act on the request. If it is denied, they will certainly work with the companies, and
get back to Council.
#2150 M/S/F (Montgomery/McConnell) Motion to not approve the proposed rate
increases for 1999.
Vote on motion: In Favor: Montgomery, Farr
Opposed: Overson, Shepherd, Arends, Reed Olsen, McConnell,
Law
Motion failed.
#2180 M/S/C (Overson/Reed) Motion to approve the proposed rate increases by
Olympic and Bremerton Ambulance Companies for 1999.
Vote on motion: In Favor: Shepherd, Arends, Reed, Olsen, Law, Overson
Opposed: Montgomery, McConnell, Farr
Motion carried.
President Fart invited fellow Council members to take a walk down to the Ferry
Terminal to see first hand some of the issues and concerns raised earlier tonight during
Public Recognition.
With no further business, meeting adjourned at 6:35 P.M.
Paula Johnston, Deputy City Clerk
DAVID FARR, Council President
City of Bremerton
P J/DF/Is
cc: Normal Distribution
File Vault
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
1. SUBJECT: FOR AGENDA OF: JANUARY 20, 1999
ORIGINATING DEPT: CITY COUNCI l
ORIGINATOR: MIKE SHEPHERD, PRESIDEh
MINUTES OF MEETING -- JANUARY 6, 1999 DATE SUBMITTED: JANUARY 11, 1999
2. ~: (comment on back 3. ~:
if necessary)
ENDORSEMENT INFORMATION APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESID~E~T FOR.~U~~L~:
MAYOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT/~~~"~~
~. s~~ ST~T~,~,~T ~ ~OUI~~ ~O~ CO~C~L ~C~IO~:
8. RECOMMENDATION:
9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL:
EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
10. NOTICE OF ACTION
PULLED TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: DATE:
11. AGENDA BILL NO: q~ - O1~_
TAPE #1591 -' UNAPPROVED DRAFT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
JANUARY 6, 1999
The regular 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,
January 6, 1999, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President David Fart presiding. Council
members present were Jim Reed, Carlos Montgomery, Carol Arends, Mike Shepherd,
Lon Overson, John Law, Cecil McConnell, and Wayne Olsen. Also present were City
Attorney Glenna Malanca and Deputy City Clerk Paula Johnston.
The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Farr, and
invocation given by Reverend Cleveland Williams of the Ebenezer A.M.E. Church.
ELECTION OF CITY COUNCIL OFFICERS
President Farr opened nominations for City Council President/Mayor Pro Tempore:
Mr. Reed nominated Mike Shepherd.
Mr. Overson nominated Cecil McConnell.
President Farr closed the nominations.
VOTE: Mike. Shepherd - 5 Votes (Farr, Shepherd, Reed, Montgomery, Arends)
VOTE: Cecil McConnell - 4 Votes (Olsen, McConnell, Law, Overson)
Mike Shepherd was elected City Council President/Mayor Pro Tempore.
The meeting was turned over to new Council President Mike Shepherd.
President Shepherd opened nominations for City Council Vice-President:
Mr. Farr nominated Carol Arends.
Mr. Law nominated Wayne Olsen. Mr. Olsen declined.
President Shepherd closed the nominations.
VOTE: Carol Arends- 9 Votes (Unanimous)
Carol Arends was elected City Council Vice-President.
President Shepherd made the following announcements:
(1) City Council held a Study Session prior to the Council meeting to discuss general
Council business.
(2) City Council will hold a Study Session to discuss "Proposed Amendments to
Bremerton Title 21 Land Use" immediately following the City Council meeting.
(3) City Council will hold a Study Session to discuss "Bremerton Code of Ethics" on
Wednesday, January 13, 1999, immediately following the City Council meeting.
CONSENT AGENDA
A. Minutes of Meeting - December 9, 1998 #AB99-001
B. Minutes of Meeting - December 16, 1998 #AB99-002
#0001 M/S/C/U (McConnell/Montgomery) Motion to approve Consent Agenda as
presented.
TAPES #1591
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
January 6, 1999
Page 2 of 4
CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS
Vouchers audited and certified by the auditing officer as required by RCW 42.24.050,
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.
#0030 M/S/C/U (Montgomery/Farr) On January 6, 1999, the Council does approve for
payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: Regular Payroll for
the period ending December 31, 1998 in the amount of $951,381.87.
COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS
Mr. M¢Connell thanked Mr. Fart for serving two years as Council President, and
congratulated newly elected President Shepherd and Vice-President Arends.
Mr. Law also congratulated the newly elected President and Vice-President. He also
announced the next District 3 meeting to be held Tuesday, January 19, 1999, 7:00 P.M.,
at the Senior Center located at 13t~& Nipsic Avenue. Citizens will have an opportunity
to meet Acting Police Chief Rob Forbes; hear a brief presentation on the concept for the
Manette Study; followed by an opportunity to discuss questions and concerns with their
Councilman.
Mr. Overson was happy to announce that Richard Hayes, Director of Kitsap Transit,
was available at the Council meeting tonight to address one of the biggest concerns
downtown right now -- the development of the Bremerton Transportation Center.
Mr. Farr congratulated newly elected President Mike Shepherd and Vice President
Carol Arends. He also thanked Carlos Montgomery for his service the past year as Vice
President.
Mrs, Arends congratulated President Mike Shepherd, and thanked the Council for their
support. She urged drivers to turn on their headlights now that the shorter, dark winter
days are here.
Mr. Montgomery congratulated all those nominated and elected.
Mr. Reed congratulated newly elected President Shepherd and stated it was a pleasure
serving under Past President Farr.
President Shepherd announced the next District 5 meeting to be held Thursday,
January 21, 1999 at 6:30 P.M. at the Memorial Lutheran Church located at 10th &
Veneta, Municipal Court Judge James N. Docter will be available to discuss Probation
and the new Home Detention Program. He announced that this Friday is the 50t'
anniversary of the Kitsap Historical Society, and new exhibits will be available. He
discussed his recent trip to Medford, Oregon, and noted that the City is dealing with
some of the same issues as Bremerton.
MAYORS REPORT
Mayor Horton urged the public to take steps to promote fire safety in their homes in
TAPES #1591
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
January 6, 1999
Page 3 of 4
light of recent house fires in the City and County, such as making sure there is working
fire and smoke detectors in the home.
For an entertaining evening, she urged the public to support the Bremerton High School
basketball teams, both men and women.
Mayor Horton read the following Proclamation:
Monday, January 18, 1999 as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. Reverend Cleveland
Williams of Ebenezer African Methodist Ebenezer Church received the Proclamation.
Rev. Williams accepted the Proclamation, and thanked the Mayor. He invited the
public to the Annual Celebration Program in celebration of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Day to be held Monday, January 18, 1999, at 11:00 A.M. at the Kitsap Pavilion.
Mr. Olsen left the meeting at 6:10 P.M.
Richard Hayes., Executive Director with Kitsap Transit, gave a presentation on
"Pedestrian Improvements", including signage, at the ferry dock and new Transportation
Center. He stated that this would be a constant improvement process. He also
provided an example of a new sign being used to provide information regarding buses,
taxis, auto-pickup, and handicap accessibility. Mrs. Arends asked if this information
could be coordinated with the taxi companies. She stated that a problem exists for
people new to the area, and not aware of all this information. Mr. Farr asked if a
temporary covered shelter could be provided in the interim, while the permanent shelter
is being built. Mr. Law asked for an update on handicap accessibility.
Louis Soriano thanked Mr. Hayes for the presentation, but did not believe that enough
has been done. He still had concerns about the unique and difficult problems that face
the elderly and disabled. Sue Brown asked for further clarification regarding
wheelchair access. Mr. Hayes stated that a 1-800 number would soon be available, as
well as purchase of an airport-style accessible cart.
PUBLIC RECOGNITION
Reverend Williams showed an example of a poster advertising the Annual Celebration
Program for Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. He also thanked all the volunteers who
assisted in serving approximately 170 people Christmas dinner, and helping to pass out
a new toy for each child in attendance. He also invited the Council members to
participate in the MLK Choir.
Roy Mclnnis gave an example of an incident defused in Tacoma recently between a
police officer and a citizen in the process of being arrested. Insights on efforts being
made in Tacoma, such as a minister on-call each night to help defuse various incidents.
He felt it was important to have the local ministers involved in more community
activities. Mr. Law provided information on a "duty chaplain" currently available and
used by the City of Bremerton.
Gordy Byrd warned the public about a bogus service where a phone call is made
offering to haul off "hazardous" material for a fee.
10
TAPES #1591
City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes
January 6, 1999
Page 4 of 4
9A - APPOINTMENT OF SUSAN L. BELL TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION
COMMISSION, #AB99-003
There is a vacancy on the Parks and Recreation Commission. It is recommended
Susan L. Bell be appointed to fill the vacancy.
Mayor Horton gave a brief description of the experience and interests of Ms. Bell.
Public comment - none.
#2455 M/S/C/U (Arends/Montgomery) Motion to confirm the appointment of Susan L.
Bell to the Parks and Recreation Commission.
Susan Bell thanked the Council for their support.
10A-RESOLUTION NO. 2686 REQUESTING ASSIGNMENT OF SUPER FERRY
KALEETEN TO SERVICE IN BREMERTON, #AB99-004
Request assignment of Super Ferry Kaleeten t o service in Bremerton.
Mr. Byrd asked how quickly the service would start. President Shepherd stated that
the next step in this process is to send the Resolution to the State for consideration.
Jack Arends stated this was an excellent ferry, and offered his services in writing a
letter of support.
#2740 M/S/C/U (Montgomery/Reed) Motion to approve Resolution No. 2686.
With no further business, meeting adjourned at 7:00 P.M.
Paula Johnston, Deputy City Clerk
..:': . .;>.--.
I~if~E SHEPPIERD, Council President
City of Bremerton
P J/MS/Is
cc: Normal Distribution
File Vault
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
1. SUBJECT: FOR AGENDA OF: January 20, 1999
1999 CDBG Final Allocation ORIGINATING DEPT: Neighborllood Dev. .
ORIGINATOR: Marylyn Waibel k/~&~-~04~ ~
DATE SUBMITTED: January 14, 1999
2. CLEARANCES: 3. EXHIBITS;
Development Director ~~,,~-~ Allocation Spreadsheet
Operauons Comm,tt..~~~.~'~ ~
ENDORSEMENT ~._~'- INFORMATION APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR
SUBMITTAL: ~ -- ~ .....~.
MAYOR~--~ '¢~ ~//~ [COUNCIL PR~. SIDENT~~~
4.SUMMARY STATEMENT AND ~QUI~MENT ~OR COUNCIL ACTION:
The Ci~ of Breme~on has r~eived nofificahon ~at i~ acm~ en~flement for 1999 CDBG is $580,~.~. We
esfimat~ ~d ~located $550,~.~, ~eret~re we have an additional $30,~.~. Smffrecommends $6,~.~
go to DCD fBr ~e M~e~e PI~, ~,5~.~ go to ~e P~ Play~ound Express, $5,~.~ go to ~blic Works
fBr Traffic C~ming, ~d $14,5~.~ go to DCD for Code EnlBrcement.
Also, we have an additional $6,526.12 un~nt ~om 1997 capitol project. S~ff recommends ~at ~e
$6,526.12 go to DCD tBr Code Enforcement.
Finally, we recommend re-allocating $8,973.88 from ~e DCD Hous~g ~ograms to DCD Code Enforcement
allowing ~e request to be ~lly ~nded at $30,~.~. We received over our estimate in loan repaymenm
dmng 1998, ~erefore ~is change will not negatively effect our hous~g programs.
8. ~COMMENDATION:
Authorize approval of staff recommendations for final 1999 CDBG allocation.
9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL- Administrative Analyst
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Administrative Analyst
EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
10. NOTICE QF ACTION
PULLED__ TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE; DATE:
11. AGENDA BILL NO.: qq -0/.3
2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS:
5. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE:
Will not be able to complete 1999 CDBG process.
6. IMPACT ON STAFFI.NG, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES:
None
7. RESEARCH SOURCES:
z~ ~o oo
~ o oo~~°°°
............... q~88~ooooooooooo°°°°°°°°°°°
<0 ~ ~ ~
o z m
z m ~ ~ 0~
o<o ~ ~< ~
~=~ ~ ~o_zz~
n~W WW 0
f- I-.."-~ I,-- I~ h- I-. 03 (,0 (D ..J
~ ~ <<~ ~"'o <<~
0 ~ < ~o ~ -~, ~ oo~_~
<.~ ~ < ¥,~> _
- o_~ ~z~:= =Z~<z,,,
zz~: ,,,zzzz R'"o~ a. zzzzz~9
o oi~ ~ o:~.'-'~- s o
t-
0:. =. ~o~o~o ~o~,..~__ ---~ oooo ~:~-o
13. m.nm~
~W o ~o~ o
o~ ~ ~o~ o
~ ooooo ~
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
1. SUBJECT: NAVAL AVENUE FOR AGENDA OF: January 20, 1999
SLIDE REPAIR - BID AWARD ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works & Utils
ORIGINATOR: Randy Witt, City Eng.
DATE SUBMITTED: January 5, 1999
2. CLEARANCES: (Comment on back if necessary) 3. EXItlBITS:
~->6d ~ ~\ 1. Location Map
~-~y~o~f ,lyblic 'v~fi '; & !rltilities 2. Bid Tabulation
Ci~ ~_'~ ~
Pur~hasine ~di ~or -
C~Fiscal & B, udge_.~Committe~
Council Operations Committee
ENDORSEMENT/I~" INFORMATION [] APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDE~tT FOR, SUBMITTAL:
4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION:
Bids were opened for the Naval Avenue Slide Repair Project on December 21, 1998. This is a Federal Emergency
Management Administration (FEMA) funded project to repair an unstable slope that occurred during a 1997 winter
storm. Fourteen bids for this project were received. The lowest responsive bid came from Olalla Hills Excavating,
Inc., Olalla WA for $101,793.78. The engineer's estimate for this project was $108,404. The action before the City
Council is approval of a contract with Olalla Hills Excavating, Inc for the Naval Avenue Slide Repair Project.
5. RECOMMENDATION:
The City Council approve a contract for $101,793.78 with Olalla Hills Excavating, Inc. for the Naval Avenue Slide
Repair Project and authorize the Mayor to execute the same.
9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Director Pub Wks & Util
EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
10. NOTICE OF ACTION
PULLED [] TABLED [] APPROVED [] DISAPPROVED [] AMENDED [1
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE;
qq-ol4
(OVER) 11. AGENDA BILL NO.:
2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS:
3. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION - Continuation
5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE:
Funding from FEMA will be lost and repairs to the hillside and damaged roadway will not be affected. Possible
further movement of the unstable slope could damage the property below.
6. IMPACT ON STAFFING. BUDGETS, FACILITIES. EQUIPMENT AND OTHER RESOURCES:
Staffing: 30 staffhours for construction administration and inspection.
- Budget: No impact on City budget, funding from FEMA
Facilities/Equipment: No impact.
7. RESEARCH SOURCES:
APPROXIMATE PROJECT CONSTRUCTION AREA
CITY OF BREMERTON
BID TABULATION
BIDTrrLE: I~J'~--,J,~J2 /~-~LO"~L~~'~r OPENEDBY
DA'~. OPENED: ~ '7..- 7_~ -cI ~ TIME OPENED: RECORDED BY
I~O
BIDDER aOND
aECD ITEM 1 ITEM 2 ITEM 3 ITEM 4 ITEM 5' NET BID TAX TOTAL
., ,; , ,~ :'j',~ .... ,,,~,,, ,., ,. , , ,, , ~,..;,, , ,',,,. .... ,.,., l
SUMMARY! TOTAL BID~ COMMENTS
CITY OF BREMERTON
BID TABULATION
BID TITLE: /~ra ¥ o~ ~ ~[ [~L '[~:~1'~' OPENED BY
DATE OPENED: J Z - 2. ~ .-- q'~ TIME OPENED: RECORDED BY
BiO
BIDDER
REC'D ITEM 1 ITEM 2 ITEM 3 ITEM 4 ITEM 5 NET BID TAX TOTAL
'" '" '" i ' '1 "' "
SUMMARY TOTAL BID COMMENTS
L~
5TAI?. OF W'ASI~ilNG']'ON
MILITARY DEPAR'f'M Eh,~T
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DiVJSION
MS: ~,~-20 B~ilding 20
Phone: (~2) S12-7000 ~ FAX: ~253~ 512..72~
Mr. Allison Duke III
Assistant Fire Chief
City of Bremerton
239 4th Street
Bremerton, Washington 98337
RE: State No MD-97-7431-031
Disaster No. 1172-DR.WA
FEMA No. 035-06925
DSR No. 71626
Dear Mr. Duke:
This letter serves as our concurrence with tne recommended se!action of the Olalla Hills
for the bid award to repair the Naval fi. venue Slide p;'oject und,~.r Damage Survey
Reports (DSR) 71626. The bid tab is approved in the amount of $101,79500 for DSR
71626.
Please monitor this contract carefuily. As ar~ improveo project additional funding for this
project is not available. If any change orders develop as the ". ' ,-
· ~.roje.,t is completed, ney
will require prior approval by t,he state and FEMA
if you have any questions, please do -*.~,~ '~. -~
.... ~es~at.= to contact me at (253) 512-7083
Since.,'ei.y
/
/~Jeanette I_omax, GEM
State Public Assistaf:ce Coordinator
f
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
January 13, 1999
II/
1. SUBJECT: ORDINANCE NO. 7'~ ¥'_~ FOR AGENDA OF: January 20, 1999 ,.,~
ORIGINATING DEPT: tre~~\
AUTHORIZING THE ISSUE OF A $1,250,000 TAX ORIGINATOR: Ri~_Hanna~,.-~..~
ANTICIPATION NOTE AND ACCEPTING THE DATE SUBMITTED: January 4, 1999 ~
PURCHASE OFFER OF SEAFIRST BANK
2. CLEARANCES: Comment of back if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS:
Dir. Admin. Services .,~'~.,~ Proposed Ordinance
Fiscal and Budget Comr~.~,~~ ~Cx'f,v',~~$h Flow Projection
Note Purchase Offer (at Council meeting)
ENDORSEMENTS ~ INFORMATION APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR/SUBMI~L: ..
4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION:
As indicated in the attached documents, the City's General Fund will operate in a deficit cash position through most
of the year without some form of cash flow financing. Analysis indicates that issuance of a Tax Anticipation Note, or
TAN is the most economical way of financing this cash flow need.
8. RECOMMENDATION:
Motion to approve on first reading the Ordinance authorizing the issue of a Tax Anticipation Note and accepting the
purchase offer of Seafirst Bank.
Motion to pass on second reading Ordinance No. ~ ¢'~'~authodzing the issue of a Tax Anticipation Note and
accepting the purchase offer of Seafirst Bank.
9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Treasurer
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Mayor
EXPIRATION DATE: January 31,2000
REVIEW DATE: N/A
10. NOTICE OF ACTION
P U LLE D TAB LED APP ROVE D D ISAP P ROVED AM I=NDEI..~ ~ j~l~
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE:
2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS:
5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE:
The City's General Fund will operate for most of the year with a negative cash balance which is contrary to statute.
6. IMPACT ON STAFFING~ BUDGETS~ FAClLITIES~ EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES:
Included in the 1999 - 2000 Budget.
7. RESEARCH SOURCES:
Cash flow projections. Bond counsel. Negotiations with underwriting bank.
CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. 4645
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Bremerton Washington relating
to the incurrence of indebtedness; providing for the sale and
issuance of $1,250,000 principal amount tax anticipation notes,
1999, to pay City expenses pending for the receipt of general City
taxes; providing for the date, denominations, form, terms,
registration privileges, maturity, interest rates and covenants of the
notes; and providing for the sale and delivery of such notes to
NationsBanc Montgomery Securities LLC
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Bremerton (the "City") finds that the
periodic collections of sales, excise and general ad valorem taxes and other revenue in
1999 will not be sufficient to meet necessary City expenses as they are incurred in 1999,
and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City deems it to be in the best interest of the
City that the City borrow money and issue and sell a short-term obligation in the form of
tax anticipation notes pursuant to chapter 39.50 RCW for the purpose of financing such
expenses pending receipt of taxes and other revenue collected by the City; and
WHEREAS, the incurrence of such indebtedness by the City will not cause the
total indebtedness of the City to be incurred without the assent of the voters of the City to
exceed the limitations set forth in Chapter 39.36 RCW; and
WHEREAS, NationsBanc Montgomery Securities LLC (the "Purchaser") has
offered, by way of the Purchase Agreement (the "Purchase Agreement"), to purchase
such limited tax anticipation notes upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Finding, Purpose and Description of Notes. The City authorizes the
sale and issuance of its "Tax Anticipation Notes, 1999" (the "Notes") for the purpose of
financing City expenses pending receipt of taxes and other revenue collected by the City
and to pay certain "incidental costs and costs related to the sale and issuance" (as defined
in RCW 39.46.070) of the Notes.
The Notes shall be in the aggregate principal amount of $1,250,000; shall be
dated February 1, 1999; shall mature on January 31, 2000; shall bear interest (computed
on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months) from their date at the rate of
3.25% per annum, payable at maturity. The Notes shall be issued in fully registered form
as to both principal and interest; shall be in the denomination of $50,000 each or any
integral multiple thereof; shall be numbered separately in such manner and with any
additional designation as the fiscal agencies of the State of Washington in Seattle,
Washington, and New York, New York (collectively, the "Registrar"), deem necessary
for purposes of identification.
If any Note is not paid upon proper presentment at its maturity date, the City shall
have the obligation to pay interest at the same rate from and after such maturity date until
such Note, both principal and interest, is paid in full.
The Notes shall be negotiable instruments to the extent provided by
RCW 62A.8-102 and RCW 62A. 8-105.
On the date of issue of the Notes, all Notes maturing in the same maturity year shall
be issued in the form of a single certificate, which certificate shall be registered in the
name of The Depository Trust Company or any successor thereto engaged to operate a
book-entry system for recording the beneficial ownership of the Notes, as Custodian (the
2
"Custodian"), or its nominee, and delivered to the Custodian. The Custodian shall hold
each such Note certificate in fully immobilized form for the benefit of the beneficial
owners of the Notes (the "Beneficial Owners") pursuant to the Blanket Issuer Letter of
Representations, dated November 19, 1997, between the City and the Custodian (the
"Letter of Representations"), until the earliest to occur of either (1) the date of maturity of
the Notes evidenced by such certificate, at which time the Custodian shall surrender such
certificate to the Registrar for payment of the principal of and interest on such Notes
coming due on such date, and the cancellation thereof; (2) the fifth business day
following the date of receipt by the Registrar of the City's request to terminate the book-
entry system of registering the beneficial ownership of the Notes (the "Book-Entry
Termination Date"); or (3) the date the City determines to utilize a new Custodian for the
Notes, at which time the old Custodian shall (provided the City is not then in default of
any payment then due on the outstanding Notes) surrender the immobilized certificates to
the Registrar for transfer to the new Custodian and cancellation as herein provided.
For so long as any outstanding Notes are registered in the name of the Custodian or
its nominee and held by the Custodian in fully immobilized form as described in this
Section 1, the rights of the Beneficial Owners shall be evidenced solely by an electronic
and/or manual entry made from time to time on the records established and maintained by
the Custodian in accordance with the Letter of Representations, and no certiftcates
evidencing such Notes shall be issued and registered in the name of any Beneficial
Owner or such Beneficial Owner's nominee.
The City may terminate the "book-entry" system of registering ownership of the
Notes at any time (provided the City is not then in default of any payment then due on the
outstanding Notes) by delivering to the Registrar: (a) a written request that it issue and
deliver Note certificates to each Beneficial Owner or such Beneficial Owner's nominee
on the Book-Entry Termination Date; (b) a list identifying the Beneficial Owners as to
both name and address; and (¢) a supply of Note certificates, if necessary for such
purpose. Upon surrender to the Registrar of the immobilized certificates evidencing all
of the then outstanding Notes, the Registrar shall issue and deliver new certificates to
each Beneficial Owner or such Beneficial Owner's duly appointed agent, naming such
Beneficial Owner or such Beneficial Owner's nominee as the Owner thereof. Such
certificates may be in any integral multiple of $50,000. Following such issuance, the
Owners of such Notes may transfer and exchange such Notes in accordance with
Section 9 hereof.
Neither the City nor the Registrar shall have at any time any responsibility or
liability to any Beneficial Owner of any Notes or to any other person for any error,
omission, action or failure to act on the part of the Custodian with respect to payment,
when due, to the Beneficial Owner of the principal and interest on the Notes, proper
recording of beneficial ownership of Notes, proper transfers of such beneficial
ownership, or any notices to Beneficial Owners or any other matter pertaining to the
Notes.
Section 2. Place~ Manner and Medium of Payment. Both the principal of and
interest on the Notes shall be payable in lawful money of the United States of America.
Prior to the Book-Entry Termination Date, the principal and interest on the Notes shall be
paid by the Registrar to the Custodian as the Owner (hereinat~er defined) thereof, for the
benefit of the Beneficial Owners thereof, in accordance with the Letter of
Representations. From and after the Book-Entry Termination Date, principal of and
interest on the Notes shall be paid to the persons who are named as the registered owners
of the Notes (the "Owners") on the registration books for the Notes (the "Note Register")
maintained by the Registrar only upon presentation and surrender of such Owners' Notes
upon maturity, at the principal corporate trust office of either Registrar, at the option of
the Owners.
Section 3. No Redemption; Open Market Purchase. The Notes shall not be
subject to redemption prior to maturity.
The City reserves the right to purchase any or all of the Notes on the open market
at any time and at any price. All Notes purchased by the City shall be surrendered to the
Registrar for cancellation.
Section 4. Debt Limit Not Exceeded. The City finds and covenants that the
Notes are issued within all constitutional and statutory debt limitations presently
applicable to the City.
Section 5. Pledge of Full Faith, Credit and Resources. The Notes are limited tax
general obligations of the City. The City hereby irrevocably covenants to include in its
budgets and to make annual levies of taxes upon all property within the City subject to
taxation without a vote in amounts which, together with any other money legally
available therefor, shall be sufficient to pay the principal and interest on the Notes as the
same shall become due. The City hereby irrevocably pledges its full faith, credit and
resources to the annual levy and collection of such taxes and for the prompt payment of
such principal and interest.
The City hereby irrevocably covenants that the annual tax provided for herein to
be levied for the payment of the principal of and interest on the Notes shall be within and
as a part of the tax levy permitted the City without a vote of the people and that a
sufficient portion of each such annual tax levy to be made so long as the Notes are
outstanding, together with any other money legally available therefor, shall be and is
hereby set aside, pledged and appropriated for the payment of the principal of and interest
on the Notes as the same shall become due.
Section 6. Form of Notes. The Notes shall be typewritten, printed or
lithographed on good bond paper in a form consistent with this ordinance and
Washington law.
Section 7. Execution of Notes. The Notes shall be signed on behalf of the City
with the facsimile or manual signatures of the Mayor and the City Clerk, and shall have
the seal of the city impressed or a facsimile thereof imprinted thereon.
In case either or both of the officers who shall have executed any Note shall cease
to be such officer or officers of the City before the Note so signed shall have been
authenticated or delivered by the Registrar or issued by the City, such Note nevertheless
may be authenticated, delivered and issued and upon such authentication, delivery and
issuance, shall be as binding upon the City as though those who signed the same had
continued to be such officers of the City. Any Note also may be signed and attested on
behalf of the City by such persons as at the actual date of execution of such Note shall be
the proper officers of the City although at the original date of such Note such persons
were not such officers of the City.
Section 8. Authentication and Delivery of Notes by Registrar. The Registrar are
authorized and directed, on behalf of the City, to authenticate and deliver Notes initially
issued or transferred or exchanged in accordance with the provisions of such Notes and
this ordinance.
Only such Notes as shall bear thereon a "Certificate of Authentication" manually
executed by an authorized signatory of the Registrar shall be valid or obligatory for any
purpose or entitled to the benefits of this ordinance. Such Certificate of Authentication
shall be conclusive evidence that the Notes so authenticated have been duly executed,
authenticated and delivered hereunder and are entitled to the benefits of this ordinance.
The Registrar shall be responsible for its representations contained in the
Certificate of Authentication on the Notes.
Section 9. Registration; Transfer and Exchange. The Registrar shall keep, or
cause to be kept, the Note Register at its principal corporate trust office.
The City and the Registrar, each in its discretion, may deem and treat the Owner
of each Note as the absolute owner thereof for all purposes, and neither the City nor the
Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Payment of any such Note shall
be made only as described in Section 2 hereof, but such registration may be transferred as
herein provided. All such payments made as provided in Section 2 hereof shall be valid
and shall satisfy and discharge the liability of the City upon such Note to the extent of the
amount or amounts so paid.
The registered ownership of any Note may be transferred. Prior to the Book-
Entry Termination Date, the beneficial ownership of the Notes may only be transferred
on the records established and maintained by the Custodian. On and after the Book-Entry
7
Termination Date, no transfer of any Note shall be valid unless it is surrendered at any
principal corporate trust office of the Registrar, with the assignment form appearing on
such Note duly executed by the Owner or such Owner's duly authorized agent, in a
manner satisfactory to the Registrar. Upon such surrender, the Registrar shall cancel the
surrendered Note and shall authenticate and deliver, without charge to the Owner or
transferee therefor (other than any governmental fees or taxes payable on account of such
transfer), a new Note or Notes (at the option of the new Owner), of the same maturity and
interest rate and for the same aggregate principal amount, in any authorized
denomination, naming as Owner the person or persons listed as the assignee on the
assignment form appearing on the surrendered Note, in exchange for such surrendered
and cancelled Note.
On and after the Book-Entry Termination Date, any Note may be surrendered at
the principal corporate trust office of the Registrar and exchanged, without charge, for an
equal aggregate principal amount of Notes, in any authorized denomination. The
Registrar shall not be obligated to transfer or exchange any Note during the 15 days
preceding the maturity date.
The Registrar may become the Owner of any Note with the same rights it would
have if it were not a Registrar and, to the extent permitted by law, may act as depository
for and permit any of its officers or directors to act as a member of, or in any other
capacity with respect to, any committee formed to protect the fights of the Owners of the
Notes.
The City covenants that, until all Notes shall have been surrendered and
cancelled, it will maintain a system of recording the ownership of each Note that
complies with the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the
"Code").
Section 10. Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Notes. If any Note becomes
mutilated, lost, stolen or destroyed, the Kegistrar may authenticate and deliver a new
Note of the same maturity and interest rate and of like tenor and effect in substitution
therefor, all in accordance with law. If such mutilated, lost, stolen or destroyed Note has
matured, the City at its option, may pay the same without the surrender thereof.
However, no such substitution or payment shall be made unless and until the applicant
shall furnish (a) evidence satisfactory to the Registrar of the destruction or loss of the
original Note and of the ownership thereof, and (b) such additional security, indemnity or
evidence as may be required by or on behalf of the City. No substitute Note shall be
furnished unless the applicant shall reimburse the City and the Registrar for their
respective expenses in the furnishing thereofi Any such substitute Note so furnished shall
be equally and proportionately entitled to the security of this ordinance with all other
Notes issued hereunder.
Section 11. Defeasance. If money and/or "Government Obligations" (as such
obligations are defined in Chapter 39.53 RCW, as now in existence or hereafter
amended) maturing at such times(s) and bearing such interest to be earned thereon
(without any reinvestment thereof) as will provide a series of payments which shall be
sufficient, together with any money initially deposited, to provide for the payment of the
principal of and interest on all or a portion of the Notes, when due in accordance with
their terms in accordance with a refunding plan adopted by the City, are set aside in a
special fund (hereinafter called the "trust account") to effect such payment and are
9
pledged irrevocably for the purpose ofeffecting such payment, then no further payments
need be made into the Note Fund for the payment of the principal of and the interest on
such Notes, the Owners thereof shall cease to be entitled to any lien, benefit or security of
this ordinance except for the right to receive the money and the principal and interest
proceeds on the obligations set aside in the trust account, and such Notes shall no longer
be deemed to be outstanding hereunder.
Section 12. Sale of the Notes. The Purchaser has presented the Purchase
Agreement to the City pursuant to which the Purchaser has offered to purchase the Notes,
under the terms and conditions provided in the Purchase Agreement, which written
Purchase Agreement is on file with the City Clerk and is incorporated herein by this
reference. The City Council finds that entering into the Purchase Agreement is in the
City's best interest and therefore accepts the offer contained in the Purchase Agreement
and authorizes the execution of the Purchase Agreement by City officials.
The Notes will be prepared at City expense and will be delivered to the Purchaser
in accordance with the terms of the Purchase Agreement with the approving legal opinion
of the City's bond counsel relative to the issuance of the Notes printed on each Note or
attached thereto. Bond counsel has not been engaged to participate in the preparation or
review of, or express any opinion concerning the completeness or accuracy of the official
statement or other disclosure documentation used in connection with the offer or sale of
the Notes by any person, and bond counsel's opinion shall so state. Bond counsel has not
been retained to monitor, and shall not be responsible for monitoring, the City's
compliance with any federal law or regulations to maintain the tax-exempt status of the
interest on the Notes.
10
Section 13. Delivery of Notes; Temporary Notes. The proper City officials are
authorized and directed to execute and/or approve, as appropriate, all documents,
including but not limited to, the final Official Statement pertaining to the Notes, and to do
everything necessary for the preparation and delivery of a transcript of proceedings
pertaining to the Notes, and the printing, execution and prompt delivery of the Notes to
the Purchaser and for the proper application and use of the proceeds of the sale thereof.
If definitive Notes are not ready for delivery by the date established for closing
(the "Closing"), the City Treasurer, upon the approval of the Purchaser, may cause to be
issued and delivered to the Purchaser one or more temporary Notes with appropriate
omissions, changes and additions. Any temporary Note or Notes shall be entitled and
subject to the same benefits and provisions of this ordinance with respect to the payment,
security and obligation thereof as definitive Notes authorized hereby. Such temporary
Note or Notes shall be exchangeable without cost to the Owners thereof for definitive
Notes when the latter are ready for delivery.
Section 14. Application of Note Proceeds. The accrued interest on the Notes
received by the City upon the sale of the Notes, if any, shall be deposited into the General
Fund and shall be applied to the payment of interest coming due on the Notes. The
principal proceeds of the Notes shall be deposited in the General Fund of the City and
used solely for the purpose of paying the cash flow deficits in the City's General Fund
resulting from budgeted expenditures, and any interest received from the deposit or
investment of such proceeds shall be applied and used solely for such purposes.
Section 15. Permitted Financing of Cumulative Cash Flow Deficit. Based upon
the reasonably expected amounts of sales, excise and general ad valorem property taxes
11
and other revenue to be collected in 1999 (including investment proceeds of the Notes)
and that are expected to be available to make General Fund expenditures in 1999
(computed by treating a reasonably working capital reserve in an amount not exceeding
5% of the total General Fund expenditures in the prior fiscal year as not being available
to make those expenditures), the City Council finds that the principal amount of the
Notes does not exceed the maximum anticipated "cumulative cash flow deficit" (as
defined by Section 148 of the Code, and applicable Treasury Regulations thereunder)
expected to occur in the City's General Fund during 1999 and that is to be financed with
the proceeds of the Notes.
Section 16. Tax-Exemption Covenants. The City covenants that it will not take
or permit to be taken on its behalf any action that would adversely affect the exclusion of
the interest on the Notes from gross income for purposes of federal income taxation, and
will take or require to be taken such acts as may be permitted by Washington law and as
may from time to time be required under applicable law to continue the exclusion of the
interest on the Notes from gross income for purposes of federal income taxation.
Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the City will not invest or make or
permit any use of the proceeds of the Notes or of its other money at any time during the
term of the Notes which would cause the Notes to be "arbitrage bonds" within the
meaning of Section 148 of the Code.
The Notes are intended to qualify for the $5,000,000 small governmental issuer
exception to the arbitrage rebate requirement, set forth in the Code. The City covenants
that, if the City issues more than $5 million in tax-exempt bonds in the calendar year
1999 and all the proceeds of the Notes have not been spent within six months from the
12
date of issuance of the Notes, it will calculate or cause to be calculated, and shall rebate
to the United States, all earnings from the investment of Note proceeds that are in excess
of the amount that would have been earned had the yield on such investments been equal
to the yield on the Notes, plus income derived from such excess earnings, to the extent
and in the manner required by Section 148 of the Code.
The City has not been notified of any listing or proposed listing by the Internal
Revenue Service to the effect that the City is a bond issuer the arbitrage certifications of
which may not be relied upon.
The City will take no actions and will make no use of the proceeds of the Notes or
any other funds held under this ordinance which would cause any Note to be treated as a
"private activity bond" (as defined in Section 141 (b) of the Code) subject to treatment
under said Section 141 (b) as an obligation not described in Section 103(a) of the Code,
unless the tax exemption thereof is not affected.
The City hereby designates the Notes as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" for
purposes of Section 265 of the Code (relating to the deduction by financial institutions of
the interest incurred to carry tax-exempt debt), and authorizes and directs the proper City
officials to execute and deliver all documents necessary to evidence such designation to
any and all interested parties. The City further covenants not to issue more than
$10,000,000 of such "qualified tax-exempt obligations" during 1999.
Section 17. Preliminary_ Official Statement Declaration. The City has been
provided with copies of a preliminary official statement dated January 12, 1999 (the
"Preliminary Official Statement"), prepared in connection with the sale of the Notes. For
the sole purpose of the Purchaser's compliance with Securities and Exchange
13
Commission Rule 15c2-12(b)(1), the City "deems final" the Preliminary Official
Statement, as of its date, except for the omission of information on offering prices,
interest rates, selling compensation, delivery dates, ratings, other terms of the Notes
dependent on such matters.
Section 18. Undertaking to Provide Continuing Disclosure. This section
constitutes the City's written undertaking for the benefit of the Owners and the Beneficial
Owners of the Notes required by subsection (d)(2)(ii) of Rule 15c2-12 (the "Rule") of the
United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC").
The City hereby agrees to provide or cause to be provided upon request to any
person or at least annually to the State Information Depository ("SID"), if one is created:
(a) financial statements prepared in accordance with the generally accepted accounting
principles applicable to governmental units, as such principles may be changed from time
to time and as permitted by State law; which statements will not be audited, except that if
and when audited financial statements are otherwise prepared and available to the City,
they will be provided; and (b) other operating data that may be prepared by the City (the
"Financial Information").
In its provision of such Financial Information, the City may cross-reference to any
"final official statement" (as defined in the Rule) available from the Municipal Securities
Rulemaking Board (the "MSRB") or any other documents theretofore provided to each
then existing nationally recognized municipal securities information repository
designated by the SEC ("NRMSIR") or the SID, if one is created.
14
The City further agrees to provide or cause to be provided, in a timely manner, to
the SID, if one is created, and to either the MSRB or each then existing NRMSIR, notice
of any of the following events with respect to the Notes, if material:
1. Principal and interest payment delinquencies;
2. Non-payment related defaults;
3. Unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial
difficulties;
4. Unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial
difficulties;
5. Substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to
perform;
6. Adverse tax opinions or events affecting the tax-exempt status of the
Notes;
7. Modifications to rights of the Owners of the Notes;
8. Optional redemptions of the Notes;
9. Defeasances of the Notes;
10. Release, substitution or sale of property securing repayment of the
Notes; and
11. Rating changes.
After the issuance of the Notes, so long as the interests of the Owners or Beneficial
Owners of the Notes will not be materially impaired thereby, as determined by a party
unaffiliated with the City (including, without limitation, a trustee for the Owners,
nationally recognized bond counsel or other counsel familiar with the federal securities
15
law), or pursuant to a favorable "no-action letter" issued by the SEC, this Section 18 may
only be amended in connection with any change in legal requirements, change in law, or
change in the identity, nature or status of the obligated person, or type of business
conducted, and only in such a manner that the undertaking of the City, as so amended,
would have complied with the requirements of the Rule at the time of the primary
offering, at~er taking into account any amendments or interpretations of the Rule, as well
as any change in circumstances.
The City's obligations to provide Financial Information and notices of certain
events shall terminate without amendment upon the defeasance, prior redemption or
payment in full of all of the then outstanding Notes. This Section 18 or any provision
hereof, shall be null and void if the City (i) obtains an opinion of nationally recognized
bond counsel or other counsel familiar with the federal securities laws to the effect that
those portions of the Rule which require this Section 18 or any such provision are invalid,
have been repealed retroactively or otherwise do not apply to the City; and (ii) notifies
and provides the SID, if any, and either the MSRB or each then existing NRMSIR with
copies of such opinion.
The right of each Owner and Beneficial Owner of Notes to enforce the provisions
of this Section 18 shall be limited to the right to obtain specific enforcement of the City's
obligations under this Section 18, and any failure by the City to comply with the
provisions of this undertaking shall not be a default with respect to the Notes under this
ordinance.
16
The City Treasurer is authorized and directed to take such further action on behalf
of the City as may be necessary, appropriate or convenient to carry out the requirements
of this Section 18.
Section 19. Contract; Severability. The covenants contained in this ordinance
shall constitute a contract between the City and the Owners of each and every Note. The
City unconditionally covenants that it will keep and perform all of the covenants of the
Notes and this ordinance. If any one or more of the provisions of this ordinance shall be
declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining provisions of this ordinance or the Notes, and this ordinance and
the Notes shall be construed and enforced as if such unconstitutional or invalid provision
had not been contained herein.
Section 20. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force
ten days a~er passage and publication of an approved summary, consisting of the title.
APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington, this 13th
day of January, 1999.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington, this 20th day
of January, 1999.
MIKE SHEPHERD, Council President
APPROVED this ~ day of January, 1999.
LYNN HORTON, Mayor
17
ATTEST:
Kathleen McCluskey, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By.
Judith Andrews, Bond Counsel
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO. 4645
18
CITY OF BREMERTON
~ 999 CASH FLOW PROJECTION
Thousands
2OOOI
!
1500 ...........................................................................
1000
500
0
-500
-1000 ..................
-1500
~c ~A, ,~. UA. A,. UA¥ ,U, ,U, AU~ S~, OCT ,OV ~C
I ~ PROJECTION I
C. .CIAL STATEMENT DATED JANUARY21,
BOOK-ENTRY ONLY
NEW ISSUE
NEGOTIATED RATING: Not Applied For
In the ol3inion of Bond Counsel, as of the Date of l$:~ue, and assuming the Ciiy fulfills its covenant to comply with certain requirements of the internal Revenue Code
of 1986, as amended {the "Code") that must be met subsequent to the issuance of the Notes: interest on the Notes is excluded from gross income for federal
income tax purposes, and is not an item of tax preference for purposes of determining the alCemative minimum tax on individuals and corporations; and the
are "qualified lax-exempt obligations" for purposes of the partial interest expense deduction available under Section 265 of the Code. However, interest on the
Notes is included in the computation of other taxes, including without limitation the alternative minimum tax on corporations, and may be subject lo other collateral
tax consequences. See "TAX EXEMPTION" and "OTHER TAX CONSEQUENCES" heroin.
CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON
$1,250,000
ANTICIPATION NOTES, 1999
DATED: February 1, 1999 DUE: January 31, 2000
The City's Tax Anticipation Notes, 1999 (the "Notes"), are issued in fully registered form, and will be fully registered in the
name of Cede & Co., as Note owner and nominee for The Depository Trust Company ("DTC"), New York, New York. DTC will
act as securities depository for the Notes. The Notes will be initially issued in book-entry form only in the principal amount of
$50,000 or any integral multiple thereof. Purchasers will not receive certificates representing their interest in the Notes
purchased. The Notes bear interest payable at maturity. The principal of and interest on the Notes are payable by either
fiscal agency of the State of Washington, currently The Bank of New York, New York, New York and Wells Fargo Bank,
National Association, Seattle, Washington (the "Fiscal Agent~ or "Registrar"). For so long as the Notes remain in a "book-
entry only" transfer system, the Fiscal Agent will make such payments only to DTC, which will in turn remit such principal and
interest to the DTC participants for subsequent disbursement to Beneficial Owners of the Notes as described herein under the
caption "Book-Entry Only System."
MATURITY
Due Amount Rate Yield or Price
January 31,2000 $1,250,000 3.25% 100
The Notes will not be subject to redemption prior to their stated maturity.
The Notes are limited tax general obligations of the City. The City irrevocably covenants that, unless the principal of and
interest on the Notes are paid from other sources, so long as the Notes are outstanding, the Cibj shall make annual levies of
taxes upon all property within the City subject to taxation without a vote in amounts sufficient, together with any other money
legally available therefor, to pay such principal and interest as the same shall become due. The City has irrevocably pledged
its full faith, credit and resources to the annual levy and collection of such taxes and for the prompt payment of such principal
and interest. See "SECURITY" herein.
The City has designated the Notes as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" under the Internal Revenue Code of 1996, as
amended, for banks, thrift institutions and other financial institutions. See "TAX EXEMPTION" and "OTHER FEDERAL TAX
CONSEQUENCES" herein.
The Notes are offered by the Underwriter when, as, and if issued, subject to the approving legal opinion of Gottlieb, Fisher &
Andrews, PLLC, Bond Counsel, Seattle, Washington, a copy of which opinion will be delivered with the Notes. The Notes in
definitive book-entry form will be ready for delivery through the facilities of DTC in New York, New York, on or around
February 1, 1999.
This cover page contains certain information for quick reference only. It is not a summary of this issue. Investors must read
the entire Official Statement to obtain information essential to making an informed investment decision.
Representations
Neither the City nor the Underwriter has authorized any dealer, broker, salesperson or other
perso_n to give any information or make any representation other than those made in this Official
Statement, and, if given or made, such other information or representations must not be relied
upon as having been authorized by the City or the Underwriter. This Official Statement does not
constitute an offer to sell, nor shall there be any sale of the Notes by any person in any
jurisdiction in which it is unlawful for such person to make such a sale.
The information contained in this Official Statement has been obtained from City Officials and
other sources believed to be reliable. Neither a representation, warranty nor guarantee is made by
the Underwriter as to the accuracy or completeness of any information in this Official Statement
and nothing contained in this Official Statement is or shall be relied upon as a promise or
representation by the Underwriter. The delivery of this Official Statement does not imply that the
information contained herein is correct as of any time subsequent to the date of the Official
Statement as shown on the cover page.
Disclosure Statement
The City will deliver to the Underwriter at the time of delivery of the Notes a signed statement
substantially to the effect that this Official Statement, as of its date and as of the date of the
Notes, neither contains any untrue statement of a material fact nor omits to state any material fact
necessary to make the statements therein, in light of the circumstances under which they were
made, not misleading in any material respect and that there has not been any material adverse
change in the normal operations or financial condition of the City nor, to the best of the City's
knowledge, in the general economy of the City since the date of the final Official Statement.
Secondary Market
It has been the practice of the Underwriter to maintain a secondary market in municipal securities
which it sells. The Underwriter intends to engage in secondary market trading of the Notes,
subject to applicable securities laws. The Underwriter, however, is neither obligated to engage in
secondary trading nor to repurchase any of the Notes at the request of the registered owners
thereof and no assurance can be given that a secondary market for the Notes will be available.
In connection with the offering of the Notes, the Underwriter may over-allot or effect
transactions that stabilize or maintain the market price of the Notes at a level above that which
might otherwise prevail in the open market. Such stabilizing, if'commenced, may be discontinued
at any time.
CITY OF BREMERTON
Kitsap County, Washington
239 Fourth Street
Bremerton, Washington 98337
(360) 478-5290
MAYOR
Term Expires
December 31
Lynn Horton 2001
CITY COUNCIL
Mike Shepherd Chairperson 2001
Wayne Olsen Member 2001
John Law Member 2001
Carol Arends Member 2001
Cecil McConnell '~ Member 1999
Carlos Montgomery Member .1999
David Farr Member 1999
Lon Overson Member 1999
Jim Reed Member 2001
APPOINTED CITY OFFICIALS
Richard Hanna Treasurer
Kathleen McC1uskey Administrative Services Director/City Clerk
Glenna Malanca Attorney
BOND COUNSEL
Gottlieb, Fisher & Andrews, PLLC
Seattle, Washington
U N DERWRITER
NationsBanc Montgomery Securities LLC
Seattle, Washington
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
..... Page
In~'oduction ........................................................................................................................................ !
Description of the Notes ........................................................................................................ ; ............ !
Authorization ....................................................................................................................... ~ .............. 4
Security ............................................................................................................................................... 4
Purpose ............................................................................................................................................... 4
Note Fund ........................................................................................................................................... 4
Failure to Redeem the Notes .............................................................................................................. 4
Debt Payment Record ......................................................................................................................... 5
Future Financing ............................................................................................................... : ................. 5
Assessed Valuation Determination. .......................................... : ......................................................... 5
Tax Collection Procedure ................................................................................................................... 5
Authorization of Debt ......................................................................................................................... 6
General Obligation Indebtedness ....................................................................................................... 6
Limits on Amount of General Obligation Indebtedness. .................................................................... 6
Authorization of Short-Term Debt ..................................................................................................... 7
Taxing Powers and Limitations .......................................................................................................... 7
Auditing of City Finances .................................................................................................................. 8
Authorized Investments, ................................................................................................... : ................. 8
Net Direct Debt and Estimated Net Overlapping General Obligation Debt ...................................... 10
Bonded Debt Ratios of the City...i ................................................................................... : .................. I0
Statutory Debt Limit Calculation ....................................................................................................... 11
Ad Valorem Tax Record of the City ................................................................................................. 12
Ad Valorem Property Tax Rates in the City ...................................................................................... 12
Comparative Statement of General Fund Revenues and Expenditures .............................................. 13
Contingency Reserve Fund Year-End Balances ................................................................................ 13
General Fund Budget .......................................................................................................................... 14
Schedule of General Obligation Bond Debt Service for the City ........................................................ 15
City Profile ......................................................................................................................................... 15
General and Economic Information ................................................................................................... 17
Preservation of Tax Exemption .......................................................................................................... 23
Conflicts of Interest ............................................................................................................ ~ ............... 23
Tax Exemption ................................................................................................................................... 23
Other Tax Consequences .................................................................................................................... 24
Absence of Material Litigation. .......................................................................................................... 24
Approval of Bond Counsel ................................................................................................................. 25
Continuing Disclosure ........................................................................................................................ 25
Underwriting ...................................................................................................................................... 26
Concluding Statement ........................................................................................................................ 26
Form of Legal Opinion .......................................................................................................... Appendix A
iii
OFFICIAL STATEMENT
_ CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON
$1,250,000
TAX ANTICIPATION NOTES, 1999
INTRODUCTION
The City of Bremerton, Washington (the "City"), a municipal corporation duly organized and
existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Washin~on, furnishes this Official
Statement in connection with the-offering of $1,250,000 principal mount of Tax Anticipation
Notes, 1999 (the '~Notes"). This Official Statement provides information concerning the City
and the Notes.
DESCRIPTION OF THE NOTES
Principal Amount, Date, Interest Rate, and Maturity
The Notes will be issued in the principal mount of $1,250,000 and will be dated and bear
interest from February 1, 1999 until their stated maturity. The Notes will mature on January 31,
2000, and will bear interest, payable at maturity, at the rate of 3.25% per annum. Interest on the
Notes will be computed on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months.
Optional Redemption
The City has not reserved the right to redeem the Notes prior to maturity.
Paying Agent
Principal of and interest on the Notes will be payable by either State fiscal agency (the "Fiscal
Agent" or "Registrar") in New York, New York, or Seattle, Washington, currently The Bank of
New York and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (or such other fiscal agency or agencies
as the City Treasurer may from time to time designate). So long as Cede & Co. is the registered
owner of the Notes, principal of and interest on the Notes are payable by wire transfer by the
Registrar to DTC, which, in mm, is obligated to remit such principal and interest to the DTC
Participants for subsequent disbursement to the Beneficial Owners of the Notes, as further
described herein under the caption "Book-Entry Only System."
Form and Denomination
The Notes will be issued in fully registered form as to both principal and interest in the
denomination of $50,000 or any integral multiple thereof. The Notes, when issued, will be
registered in the name of Cede & Co., as registered owner and nominee of The Depository Trust
Company, New York, New York ("DTC").
DTC will act as securities depository for the Notes. Individual purchases may be made in book-
entry form only. Purchasers will not receive certificates representing their interest in the Notes
purchased. So long as Cede & Co. is the registered owner of the Notes, as nominee of DTC,
references herein to the registered owners or Note owners will mean Cede & Co. and will not
mean the "Beneficial Owners" of the Notes. In this Official Statement, the term "Beneficial
Owner" will mean the person for which a DTC participant acquires an interest in the Notes.
1
So long as Cede & Co. is the registered owner of the Notes, principal of and interest on the Notes
are payable by wire transfer by the Registrar to DTC, which, in turn, is obligated to remit such
principal and interest to the DTC participants for subsequent disbursement to Beneficial Owners
of the-Notes, as further described under the caption "Book-Entry Only System."
Book-Entry Only System
The following information has been provided by DTC. Beneficial Owners should confirm the
following with DTC or the Participants.
DTC will act as initial securities depository for the Notes. The Notes will be issued as fully
registered Notes, and will be registered in the name of Cede & Co. (DTC's partnership nominee).
One fully-registered Note certificate will be issued for the Notes, in the aggregate principal
mount of the Notes, and will be deposited with DTC.
DTC is a limited-purpose trust company organized under the New York Banking Law, a
"banking organization" within the meaning of the New York Banking Law, a member of the
Federal Reserve System, a "cleating corporation" within the meaning of the New York Uniform
Commercial Code and a "clearing agency" registered pursuant to the provisions of Section 17A
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. DTC holds securities that its participants
(the "Participants") deposit with DTC. DTC also facilitates the settlement among Participants of
securities transactions, such as transfers and pledges, in deposited securities through electronic
computerized book-entry changes in accounts of the Participants, thereby eliminating the need of
physical movement of securities certificates. Direct Participants include securities brokers and
dealers, banks, trust companies, cleating corporations and certain other organizations. DTC is
owned by a number of its Direct Participants and by the New York Stock Exchange, Inc., the
American Stock Exchange, Inc. and the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. Access
to the DTC system is also available to others such as banks, brokers, dealers and trust companies
that clear through or maintain a custodial relationship with a Direct Participant, either directly or
indirectly ("Indirect Participants"). The rules applicable to DTC and its Participants are on file
with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Purchases of the Notes under the DTC system, in denominations of $50,000 or any integral
multiple thereof, must be made by or through Direct Participants, which will receive a credit for
the Notes on DTC's records. The ownership interest of each actual purchaser of each Note
("Beneficial Owner') is in mm to be recorded on the Direct and Indirect Participants' records.
Beneficial Owners will not receive written confirmation from DTC of their purchase, but
Beneficial Owners are expected to receive written confirmations providing details of the
transaction, as well as periodic statements of their holdings, from the Direct or Indirect
Participants through which the Beneficial Owner entered into the transaction. Transfers of
ownership interests in the Notes are to be accomplished by entries made on the books of
Participants acting on behalf of Beneficial Owners. Beneficial Owners will not receive
certificates representing their ownership interests in the Notes, except in the event that use of the
book-entry system for the Notes is discontinued.
To facilitate subsequent transfers, all Notes deposited by Participants with DTC are registered in
the name of DTC's partnership nominee, Cede & Co. The deposit of Notes with DTC and their
registration in the name of Cede & Co. effect no change in beneficial ownership. DTC has no
knowledge of the actual Beneficial Owners of the Notes. DTC's records reflect only the identity
of the Direct Participants to whose accounts such Notes are credited, which may or may not be
the Beneficial Owners. The Participants will remain responsible for keeping account of their
holdings on behalf of their customers.
Conveyance of notices and other communications by DTC to Direct Participants, by Direct
Participants to Indirect Participants, and by Direct Participants and Indirect Participants to
Beneficial Owners will be governed by arrangements among them, subject to any statutory or
regulatory requirements as may be in effect from time to time.
Redemption notices will be sent to Cede & Co. If less than all of the Notes are being redeemed,
DTC's practice is to determine by lot the amount of the interest of each Direct Participant in
Notes to be redeemed.
Neither DTC nor Cede & Co. will consent or vote with respect to Notes. Under its usual
procedures, DTC mails an Omnibus Proxy to the City as soon as possible after the record date.
The Omnibus Proxy assigns Cede & Co.'s consenting or voting rights to those Direct
Participants to whose accounts the Notes are credited on the record date (identified in a listing
attached to the Omnibus Proxy).
Principal and interest payments on the Notes will be made to DTC. DTC's practice is to credit
Direct Participants' accounts on payable date in accordance with their respective holdings shown
on DTC's records unless DTC has reason to believe that it will not receive payment on the
payable date. Payments by Participants to Beneficial Owners will be governed by standing
instructions and customary practices, as is the case with securities held for the accounts of
customers in bearer form or registered in "street name," and will be the responsibility of such
Participant and not of DTC, the Registrar, or the City, subject to any statutory or regulatory
requirements as may be in effect from time to time. Payment of principal and interest to DTC is
the responsibility of the City or the Registrar. Disbursement of such payments to Direct
Participants will be the responsibility of DTC, and disbursement of such payments to the
Beneficial Owners will be the responsibility of Direct and Indirect Participants.
DTC may discontinue providing its services as securities depository with respect to the Notes at
any time by giving reasonable notice to the City or the Registrar. Under such circumstances and
in the event that a successor securities depository is not obtained, Note certificates are required to
be printed and delivered.
The City may decide to discontinue use of book-entry transfers through DTC (or a successor
securities depository).. In that event, Note certificates will be printed and delivered.
The information in this section concerning DTC and DTC's book-entry system has been obtained
from sources the City believes to be reliable, but the City takes no responsibility for the accuracy
thereof.
Procedure in the Event of Revisions of Book-Entry Transfer System
If the City is unable to retain a qualified successor to DTC or the City has determined that it is in
the best interest of the City not to continue the book-entry system of transfer or that interests of
the Beneficial Owners of the Notes might be adversely affected if the book-entry system of
transfer is continued, the City will execute, authenticate and deliver at no cost to the Beneficial
Owners of the Notes or their nominees, Notes in fully registered form, in the denomination of
$50,000 or any integral multiple thereof. Thereafter, the principal of and interest on the Notes
will be payable to the persons who are named as registered owners of the Notes on the
registration books for the Notes upon due presentment and surrender thereof at the principal
corporate trust office of the Registrar, and the Notes will be transferable as provided in the Note
Ordinance.
Year 2000 Issues (The Bank of New York and DTC)
DTC has stated that it is aware of the problems that may be presented for certain computer
systems by the use of date fields and the like on and after January 1, 2000, and that it has
developed and is implementing a program to help assure that its systems, as the same relate to
the timely payment of principal and interest to bondholders, will be unaffected by such problems.
However, DTC's ability to facilitate the timely payment of principal and interest is also
dependent upon the issuer and certain third party vendors which routinely supply DTC with
payment information. DTC has contacted these third party vendors to make them aware of the
Year 2000 issues and has requested status update of their Year 2000 readiness. DTC has not
indicated that it has contacted its Participants regarding Year 2000 compliance.
3
The Bank of New York has stated that it is aware of the problems that may be presented for
certain computer systems on and after January 1, 2000, and has developed a strategic plan to
complete Year 2000 compliance modifications to Bank-owned mission critical systems by the
end of 1998, which should allow for a full year of production use of these systems prior to the
Year 2000.
AUTHORIZATION
The Notes are issued in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution and applicable
statutes of the State of Washington, pursuant to Ordinance No. 4645 (the "Ordinance") of the
City Council, adopted on January 20, 1999.
SECURITY
The Notes are limited tax general obligations of the City. Unless the principal of and interest on
the Notes are paid from other sources, so long as the Notes are outstanding, the City has
irrevocably covenanted in the Ordinance to include in its budgets and to make annual levies of
taxes upon all property within the City subject to taxation without a vote in mounts which,
together with any other money legally available therefor, shall be sufficient to pay the principal
and interest on the Notes as the same shall become due. The City has irrevocably pledged its full
faith, credit and resources to the annual levy and collection of such taxes and for the prompt
payment of such principal and interest. All of such taxes shall be paid into the Note Fund.
The City has irrevocably covenanted that the annual tax to be levied for the payment of the
principal of and interest on the Notes shall be within and as a part of the tax levy permitted the
City without a vote of the people and that a sufficient portion of each such annual tax levy to be
made so long as the Notes are outstanding, together with any other money legally available
therefor, shall be set aside, pledged and appropriated for the payment of the principal of and
interest on the Notes as the same shall become due.
PURPOSE
The proceeds of the Notes will be used to provide cash flow management of the City's General
Fund revenues and expenditures, in anticipation of the eollection of sales, excise and general ad
valorem property taxes and other money due the City's General Fund in 1999, and paying the
costs of issuance and sale of the Notes, all as approved by the City Council.
NOTE FUND
The City has created and established in the office of the City Treasurer a special fund to be
known and designated as the Tax Anticipation Note Fund, 1999 (the "Note Fund") for the sole
purpose of payment of the principal of and interest on the Notes. Accrued interest, if any,
received from the sale of the Notes shall be deposited in the Note Fund.
FAILURE TO REDEEM THE NOTES
If any Note is not paid when properly presented at its maturity, the City is obligated to pay
interest on that Note at the same rate provided in the Note from and after its maturity until that
Note, both principal and interest, is paid in full or until sufficient money for its payment in full is
on deposit in the Note Fund.
4
DEBT PAYMENT RECORD
The C_ity has always promptly met principal and interest payments on outstanding obligations
when due. Additionally, no refunding Bonds have been issued for the purpose of preventing an
impending default.
FUTURE FINANCING
The City is considering the possibility of refinancing approximately $2 to $2.5 million of its
Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds, 1994, issued for development of thc Oold Mountain
Golf Course, sometime in the first quarter of 1999.
ASSESSED VALUATION DETERMINATION
In the State of Washington, the County Assessor (the "Assessor") determines the value of all real
and personal property throughout the County (including the City) which is subject to ad valorem
taxation. The Assessor's duties and methods of determining value are prescribed and controlled
by statute and by detailed regulations promulgated by the Department of Revenue of the State of
Washington. For tax purposes the assessed value of property is set at 100% of its actual value.
Property in Kitsap County is revalued annually based on market sales and receives an on-site
appraisal every six years. The property is listed by the Assessor on a tax roll at its current
assessed value and the tax roll is filed in the Assessor's office.
The Assessor's determinations are subject to revision by the County Board of Equalization and,
for certain property, subject to further revision by the State Board of Equalization. After all
administrative procedures are completed, the taxing unit receives the Assessor's final certificate
of assessed value of property within the taxing unit.
TAX COLLECTION PROCEDURE
Property taxes are levied in specific amounts, and the rate for all taxes levied for all taxing cities
in the County (including the City) are determined, calculated and fixed by the Assessor based
upon the assessed valuation of the property within the various taxing cities. The Assessor extends
the taxes to be levied within each taxing City upon a tax roll which contains the total amount of
taxes to be so levied and collected and assigns a tax account number to each tax lot. The tax roll
is delivered to the Kitsap County Treasurer by January 15 of each year, and an abstract of the tax
roll, showing the total amount of taxes collectible in each of the taxing cities for the year, is
delivered to the Board of County Commissioners at the same time. All taxes are due and payable
on the 30th of April of each year, but if the amount due from a taxpayer exceeds $30.00, one-half
may be paid then and the balance no later than October 31 of each year.
The method of giving notice of payment of taxes due, accounting for the money collected, the
division of the taxes among the various taxing cities, giving notice of delinquency, and collection
procedure are all covered by detailed statutes. The lien for ad valorem property taxes which have
been levied prior to the filing of federal tax liens is prior to such federal tax liens.
In other respects, and subject to the possible "Homestead Exemption," the lien for delinquent
property taxes is prior to all other liens or encumbrances of any kind on real or personal property
subject to taxation. By law (chapter 6.13 RCW) the taxing unit may commence foreclosure of a
tax lien on real property after three years have passed since the first delinquency. Washington
State's courts have not decided whether the Homestead Exemption"may give the occupying home
owner a right in the forced sale of the family residence for delinquent general property taxes to
retain the first $30,000 of proceeds of the sale. (See Algona vs. Sharp, 30 Wn. App. 837, 638
P.2d 627 (1982), holding the homestead right superior to liens for local improvement district
assessments).
AUTHORIZATION OF DEBT
The power of the City to contract debt of any kind is controlled and limited by state law. All debt
must be set forth in accordance with detailed budget procedures and paid for out of identifiable
receipts and revenues. The budget must be balanced for each fiscal year. It is unlawful for an
officer or employee of the City to incur liabilities in excess of budgetary appropriations.
GENERAL OBLIGATION INDEBTEDNESS
Under the Constitution and statutes of the State, the City may incur two types of general
obligation indebtedness, differentiated by the limits on the real and personal property taxes which
may be collected for the payment thereof.
Limited tax general obligation indebtedness is payable from taxes upon all the taxable property
in the City which may be imposed by the City within the limitations prescribed by State statute
without a vote of the people (sometimes referred to as "non-voted debt" or "non-voted bonds" or
"councilmanic bonds or notes"). The statutory limits on the levy of such taxes are described in
the section herein entitled "LIMITS ON AMOUNT OF GENERAL OBLIGATION INDEBTEDNESS."
Unlimited tax general obligation indebtedness is payable from taxes without limitation as to rate
or mount, imposed upon all taxable property in the City. Unlimited tax indebtedness may be
incurred only after approval by 60% of the City voters at an election in which the total vote cast
exceeds 40% of the votes cast at the last preceding general election of the City or State. Such
unlimited tax indebtedness is sometimes referred to as "voted debt," "voted bonds" or "unlimited
tax bonds."
Bonds issued to refund outstanding general obligation indebtedness of either type may be issued
without voter approval.
LIMITS ON AMOUNT OF GENERAL OBLIGATION INDEBTEDNESS
State statutes limit the total principal amount of all City general obligation indebtedness incurred
for "general" purposes, both limited tax and unlimited tax, to 2.5% of the actual value of taxable
property within the City. Within this 2.5% limitation, non-voted indebtedness is further limited
to 1.5% of the value of sUch taxable property.
The City is additionally authorized to incur general obligation indebtedness for the following
"special" purposes, with voter approval, in the total principal amount of up to the following
percentages of the actual value of taxable property within the City: water, artificial light and
sewers: 2.5%; open space and park facilities: 2.5%. The combination of unlimited tax and limited
tax general obligation debt for all purposes cannot exceed 7.5% of the City's assessed valuation.
The gtate statutory limits on City general obligation indebtedness described in this section are
more restrictive than those contained in the State Constitution. Both the Constitutional and
statutory debt limits may be exceeded if necessary to meet obligations made mandatory by State
law or, if necessary, to maintain the corporate existence of the City.
In computing total general obligation indebtedness, the following "assets" may be deducted
against the principal amount of indebtedness outstanding: (a) money and investments on deposit
in general obligation bond retirement funds: (b) taxes (both current and delinquent) levied for the
payment of general obligation indebtedness; and (c) delinquent (but not current) taxes due the
general fund.
In addition to limits on the total principal amount of general obligation indebtedness described in
this section, the Constitution and statutes of the State impose other limitations on the City's levy
of taxes upon real and personal property (see section herein entitled "TAXING POWERS AND
LIMITATIONS".)
AUTHORIZATION OF SHORT-TERM DEBT
As a result of 1982 legislation, any Washington municipal corporation may borrow money and
issue short-term obligations, the proceeds of which may be used for any lawful purpose. Short-
term obligations may be issued in anticipation of the receipt of revenues, taxes, or grants or the
sale of (1) general obligation bonds if the bonds may be issued without the consent of the voters
or if previously ratified by the voters; (2) revenue bonds if the bonds have been authorized by
ordinance or resolution; or (3) local improvement district bonds if the bonds have been
authorized by ordinance or resolution. These short-term obligations shall be repaid out of money
derived from the source or sources in anticipation of which they were issued or from any money
legally available for this purpose.
Additionally, the City may incur short-term indebtedness in the following ways: f'n-st, in an
emergency, the Council members may put a plan into effect and authorize indebtedness outside
the current budget. All expenditures for emergency purpose shall be paid by warrants from any
available money in the fund properly chargeable with such expenditures. If there is insufficient
money on hand in the fund, the warrants become registered interest-bearing warrants. In adopting
the budget for any fiscal year, the Council members shall appropriate funds to retire any
outstanding registered warrants issued since the adoption of the last preceding budget. Second,
the City may, without a vote of the electors, purchase property on a conditional sales contract if
the total contract amount, together with the other non-voted general obligation indebtedness of
the City, does not exceed 3/4 of 1% of the value of taxable property in the City; any item so
purchased must be budgeted for payment in accordance with the terms of the contract.
TAXING POWERS AND LIMITATIONS
Pursuant to chapter 84.52.043 KCW, cities may levy, without a vote of the residents residing
therein, a maximum of $3.375 per thousand for general city purposes (the "regular levy"). Cities
with full-time firemen may levy an additional $.225 per thousand to fund the city's Fireman's
Pension Fund (chapter 41.16.060 RCW), thus creating a maximum annual levy rate of $3.60 per
thousand. The City is currently levying $3.325 per thousand dollars of taxable assessed valuation
for its regular levy.
According to RCW 27.12.390, any city or town annexed to a rural library district, island library
district, or inter-county rural library district, such as the City, shall be entitled to levy up to $3.60
per thousand dollars of assessed valuation less any regular levy made by such library district in
the incorporated area, notwithstanding any other provision of law.
A city's regular property taxes are subject to the provisions of a state statute limiting the growth
of annual property taxes (RCW 84.55.010). The limitation, which was amended by the Property
Tax Act (enacted as Senate Bill 5835 by the Washington Legislature in 1997 and adopted and
ratified at the November 1997 general election) provides that the regular property taxes payable
in the following year shall not exceed the amount of the single highest regular levy amount
lawfully levied by the municipal entity in the three immediately preceding calendar years
.multiplie.d by a limit factor, plus an additional amount due to the incremental assessed valuation
increase in the municipal entity caused by new construction and property improvements. The
limit factor is defined in the Property Tax Act as (i) the lesser of 106% or 100% plus inflation, or
(ii) any amount up to 106% if approved by a majority plus one vote of the governing body of the
7
municipality upon a finding of substantial need. The regular property taxes levied by a city may
be increased above the limit factor upon the affirmative vote of a majority of the voters residing
in th_e municipal entity at an election held for such purposes (RCW 84.55.050).
AUDITING OF CITY FINANCES
The State Auditor is required to examine the affairs of cities at least once every two years. The
examination must include, among other things, the financial condition and resources of the City,
whether the laws and constitution of the State are being complied with, and the methods and
accuracy of the accounts and reports of the City. Reports of the Auditor's examinations are
required to be filed in the office of the State Auditor and in the auditing department of the City.
AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS
Chapter 39.59 RCW limits the investment of public funds to the following authorized
investments: bonds of the State and any local government in the State, which bonds are rated at
the time of investment in one of the three highest credit ratings by a nationally recognized rating
agency; general obligation bonds of other states and subdivisions thereof so long as those bonds
are rated in one of the three highest categories; registered warrants of a local government within
the same county as the entity making the investment; and any investment authorized by law for
the treasurer of the State or any local government exclusive of certificates of deposit of banks or
bank branches not located in the State, Under chapter 43.84 RCW, the State Treasurer may invest
in non-negotiable certificates of deposit in designated qualified public depositories; in
obligations of the U.S. government, its agencies and wholly owned corporations; in bankers'
acceptances; in commercial paper; in repurchase agreements; in the obligations of the federal
home loan bank, federal national mortgage association and other government corporations
subject to statutory provisions. Utility revenue bonds and warrants of any city and bonds or
wan'ants of a local improvement district are also eligible investments (RCW 35.39.030).
Any municipal corporation, including the City, may authorize the investment of funds not
required for immediate expenditure by the County Treasurer. Such funds of the City, including
debt service funds, may be invested by the County Treasurer. The County Treasurer may, upon
the request of one or more units of local government that invest their money with the County,
combine that money for the purposes of investment (RCW 36.29.022). The office of the County
Treasurer receives up to five percent of the earnings on such investments, subject to a maximum
of $50 on each transaction, as its investment service fee. The County Treasurer may reimburse
its office for any expenses incurred in the establishment and maintenance of such a County
investment pool (RCW 36.29.024).
Local Government Investment Pool
The State Treasurer's Office administers the Washington State Local Government Investment
Pool (the "LGIP"), a $1.25 billion fund that invests money on behalf of more than 350 cities,
counties and special taxing districts. In its management of LGIP, the State rrreasury adheres, at
all times, to the principles appropriate for the prudent investment of public funds. These are, in
priority order, (i) the safety of principal; (ii) the assurance of sufficient liquidity to meet cash
flow demands; and (iii) to attain the highest possible yield within the constraints of the first two
goals. Historically, the LGIP has had sufficient liquidity to meet all cash flow demands.
The LGIP, authorized by chapter 43.250 RCW, is a voluntary pool that provides its participants
the opportunity to benefit from the economies of scale inherent in pooling. It is also intended to
offer participants increased safety of principal and the ability to achieve a higher investment
yield than would otherwise be available to them. The LGIP is a conservatively managed, highly
liquid money market fund. The pool is restricted to investments with maturities of one year or
less, and the average investment life typically is less than 90 days. Permissible investments
include U.S. government and agency securities, bankers' acceptances, high quality commercial
paper, repurchase and reverse repurchase a~eements, and certificates of deposit issued by
qualified Washington State depositories.
Authi~rized Investments for Bond Proceeds
In addition to the eligible investments discussed above, bond proceeds only may also be invested
in mutual funds with portfolios consisting of U.S. government and guaranteed agency securities
with average maturities of less than four years; municipal securities rated in one of the four
highest categories; and money market funds consisting of the same, so long as municipal
securities held in the fund(s) are in one of the two highest rating categories. Bond proceeds may
also be invested in shares of money market funds with portfolios of securities otherwise
authorized by law for investment by local governments (RCW 39.59.030).
The City's Investments
The investments of the City, except those of the Community Development Block Grant Fund, are
managed in a pooled format. Interest earnings are distributed monthly to the individual funds
based on their respective balances at the beginning of the month. These pooled investments are
classified on the balance sheet as cash and equivalents. As required by state statue, all
investments and deposits of the City's funds are obligations of the U.S. Government, U.S.
agency issues, deposits with the State Treasurer's Investment Pool, prime bankers' acceptances,
deposits with W~hington State banks and savings and loan institutions or repurchase a~eements
with authorized securities as collateral.
9
NET DIRECT DEBT AND ESTIMATED NET
OVERLAPPING GENERAL OBLIGATION DEBTt
(As of November 30, 1998)
Direct Debt:
Voted General Obligation Bonds Outstanding ....................... $ 1,395,000
Non-Voted Bonds Outstanding .............................................. 8,458,150
Non-Voted General Obligation Tax Anticipation Notes ......... 1,250,000
Bank Line of Credit Outstanding ............................................ 8,210
Lease-Purchase Contract Outstanding ..................................... 10,128
Less: Debt Service Fund Balance ............................................ (346,374)
Net Direct Debt ........................................................ $ 10,775,114
Estimated Net Overlapping Debt:
Net G.O. Debt Percent of Amount of
Outstanding Overlap' Overlap
Kitsap County $ 46,077,179 11.05% $ 5,089,710
Port of Bremerton 1,564,788 25.95 406,056
Bremerton Sch. Dist. No. 100-C 27,625,000 73.98 20,435,879
Central Kitsap Sch. Dist. No. 401 87,175,000 1.09 948,188
South Kitsap Sch. Dist. No. '402 9,780,000 0.13 13,163
Estimated Net OYerlapping Debt: .............................................. $ 26,892,996
Net Direct Plus Estimated Net Overlapping Debt: .......................................... $ 37,668,110
BONDED DEBT RATIOS OF THE CITY
Preliminary Assessed Valuation for Collection Year 19992 .......................... $1,343,271,067
Estimated City Population (1998)3 ............................................................... 37,260
Assessed Valuation Per Capita ..................................................................... $ 36,051
Net Direct Debt to Assessed Valuation ........................................................... 0.80%
Net Direct and Estimated Overlapping Debt to Assessed Valuation ............ 2.80%
Net Direct Debt per Capita ........................................................................... $ 289
Net Direct and Estimated Overlapping Debt Per Capita ............................... $ 1,011
I Adjusted to reflect the issuance of the Notes.
2 Preliminary assessed valuation for tax collection year 1999 is stated as the full assessed value of all taxable real and
personal property in the City.
3 Source: Washington State Office of Financial Management (August 1998).
10
STATUTORY DEBT LIMIT CALCULATION~
(As of November 30, 1998)
Total Preliminary 1998 Assessed Valuation for Collection Year 1999 .................. $ 1,343,271,067
I. General Purposes
a. Non-Voted Indebtedness Limit (1.5% of Assessed Valuation) .............. $ 20,149,066
Less: Non-Voted Bonds Outstanding ................................................ (8,458,! 50)
Less: Non-Voted Notes Outstanding ................................................ (1,250,000)
Less: Bank Line of Credit Outstanding ............................................. (8,210)
Less: Lease-Purchase Contract Outstanding ...................................... (10,128)
Plus: Cash and Investments in Debt Service Funds ........................... 302,927
Remaining Capacity for General Purposes (Non-voted) ............. $ 10,725,505
b. Voted Indebtedness Limk (2.5% of Assessed Valuation) ...................... $ 33,581,777
Less: Voted Bonds Outstanding ......................................................... (1,395,000)
Less: Non-Voted Bonds Outstanding ................................................ (8,458,100)
Less: Non-Voted Notes Outstanding (the Notes) .............................. (1,250,000)
Less: Bank Line of Credit Outstanding ............................................. (8,210)
Less: Lease-Purchase Contract Outstanding ...................................... (10,128)
Plus: Cash and Investments in Debt Service Funds ........................... 346,374
Remaining Capacity for General Purposes (Voted) ..................... $ 22,806,713
II. Utility Purposes (2.5% of Assessed Valuation)
Limit ...................................................................................................... $ 33,581,777
Less: Bonds Outstanding ............................................................. ......... 0
Remaining CapaciTM for Utility Purposes .................................... $ 33,581,777
III. Parks and Open Space Purposes (2.5% of Assessed Valuation)
Limit ...................................................................................................... $ .33,581,777
Less: Bonds Outstanding ...................................................................... 0
Remaining Capacity for Parks and Open Space Purposes ........... $ 33,581,777
1 Adjusted to reflect the issuance of the Notes.
11
AD VALOREM TAX RECORD OF THE CITY i
- Collected as of
Collection Taxable Assessed Tax Collected Year of Levy November 30, 1998
Year Valuation2 Levy3 Amount Percent Amount Percent
1999 $1,343,271,0674 NA5 HA5 NA5 NA5 NA5
1998 1,345,904,065 $ 5,450,559 $ 3,779,316 69.74%6 $ 3,801,020 69.74%
1997 1,299,548,001 4,953,030 4,702,202 94.94 4,858,989 98.10
1996 1,223,940,521 4,669,894 4,467,109 95.66 4,622,692 98.99
1995 1,203,299,197 4,464,606 4,236,391 94.89 4,455,531 99.80
1994 1,169,824,600 4,128,583 3,957,637 95.86 4,122,384 99.85
NOTE: Taxes are due and payable on April 30, of each year. At least one half of the tax mount due must be
paid on or before April 30, or else the total amount becomes delinquent on May 1. The second half of the
tax due is payable on or before October 31, becoming delinquent November 1.
AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAX RATES IN THE ClTY~
(Rates In Dollars per $1,000 of Assessed Valuation)
City School Emerg.
Collection General City State Kitsap Port of Dist. No. Medical Regional
Year Fund Bonds School County Bmmerton 100C PUD Services Library Total
1998 $ 3.3250 $ 0.2218 $ 3.5911 $ 1.3908 $ 0.4624 $ 5.0292 $ 0.1017 $ 0.5000 $ 0.5000 $15.1220
1997 3.3469 0.2153 3.6467 1.6641 0.4338 5.1331 0.0998 0.2500 0.9781 15.7678
1996 3.3573 0.2255 3.4848 1.6347 0.4287 5.1551 0.0939 0.2500 0.4677 15.0977
1995 3.2470 0.2308 3.5508 1.2249 0.4079 2. ! 387 0.0940 0.2500 0.4595 1 [.6036
1994 3.0635 0.2393 3.4297 1.1731 0.3897 5.0440 0.0865 0.2490 0.4447 14.1210
I Source: Kitsap County Treasurer
2 Assessed valuation is stated as the assessed valuation of ali taxable real and personal property in the City.
3 Includes all City levies.
4 Preliminary, subject to change.
5 Not available.
6 Does not include December 1998 collections.
12
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF GENERAL FUND
REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES 1
: (FISCAL YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31)
1997 1996 1995 1994 1993
Revenues:
Taxes $ 15,678,923 $ 15,498,917 $ 14,501,567 $ 14,137,828 $ 13,340,322
Licenses & Permits 348,796 312,203 298,989 390,454 362,968
Intergovernmental 812,436 742,432 847,272 728,407 778,927
Charges for Services 1,762,945 1,864,848 1,783,646 1,394,815 1,502,067
Fines & Forfeits 512,828 433,775 483,964 593,093 556,447
Miscellaneous 290,343 342.700 248,743 240,672 261,198
Total Revenues $ 19,406,271 $ 19,194,875 $ 18,164,181 $ 17,485,269 $ 16,801,929
Expenditures:
General Government $ 4,199,525 $ 5,313,516 $ 5,009,311 $ 4,843,656 $ 5,039,485
Security of Persons & Prop. 10,893,020 9,313,570 8,614,262 8,219,945 7,850,957
Physical Environment 613,338 942,764 848,346 587,931 698,08i0
Transportation 923,064 959,327 850,639 840,530 879,838
Economic Environment 507,996 276,689 454,250 514,320 448,824
Men£al & Physical Health 24,632 30,818 264,239 250,493 249,239
Culture & Recreation 1,768,867 1,867,204 1,566,669 1,426,763 1,323,285
Redemption of Gen. L.T. Debt 2,688 0 0 24,672 30,735
Debt Service 74,055 85,540 59,860 44,593 18,414
Capital Outlay 298,438 404,888 486,005 385,414 277,113
Total Expenditures $ 19,305,623 $ 19,194,316 $ 18,153,581 $ 17,138,317 $ 16,815,970
Other Financing Sources
(Uses)
Operating Transfers In $ 113,144 $ I96,725 $ 6,000 $ 6,000 $ 6,000
Operating Transfers Out (406,836) (357,180) (307,836) (398,376) (236,725)
General Fixed Assets Disp. 15,568 36,671 2, 886 59,640 0
Proceeds of Gen. L.T. Debt 16,629 237,700 0 0 0
Total Other Financing
Sources (Uses) $ (261,495) $ 113,916 $ (298,950) $ (323,736) $ (230,725)
Fund Balance, January 1 $ 861,135 $ 709,671 $ 1,064,368 $ (44,548) $ 206,399
Prior Year's Corrections 0 0 0 0 0
Residual Equity Transfers 0 6,435 (65,128) 9,717 (6,108)
Other Equity Changes 1,438 30.554 (1,219) I ~084,983 (73)
TOTAL ENDING FUND $ 701,726 $ 861,135 $ 709,671 $ 1,064,368 $ (44,548)
BALANCE
CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUND
YEAR-END BALANCES1,2
1997 t996 1995 1994 1993
Ending Fund Balance $ 706,947 $ 673,110 $ . 709,040 $ 704,922 $ 387,205
1 Source: City of Brcmerton Annual Financial Reports. Ail years have been audited by the Washington State Auditor's Office.
2 Money in this fund in excess of $650,000 is transferred to thc General Fund to finance capital purchases.
13
GENERAL FUND BUDGET
FOR 1998 AND 1999~
(Fiscal Year Ending December 31)
19982 1999
REVENUES
Begflaning Fund Balance ........................................................ $ 550,667 $ 535,000
Taxes ...................................................................................... 16,353,700 16,569,500
Licenses and Permits .............................................................. 343,605 343,480
Intergovernmental Revenue ................................................... 787,043 1,057,811
Charges for Services .............................................................. 1,64 t,065 1,739,205
Fines and Forfeitures ............................................................. 515,500 $ 36,600
Miscellaneous and Other ........................................................ 3,085,828 3,057,345
Total Revenue ........................................................................ $ 23,277,408 $ 23,838,941
EXPENDITURES
General Government
City Council ........................................................................... $ 163,326 $ 166,397
Executive ............................................................................... 213,189 160,297
Administrative Services3 ....................................................... 2,070,164 2,088,385
Police & Fixe Pension ..................................................... 1,432,188 1,513,337
Intergovernmental Service .............................................. 119,956 134,447
Misc. Non-Departmental ............................................... 1,002,163 1,347,387
Legal Department .................................................................. 586,119 501,756
Human Resources .................................................................. 236,272 205,352
Community Development ...................................................... 714,729 709,457
City Auditor ........................................................................... 89,621 85,426
Public Safety
Police Department .................................................................. 6,090,02 l 6,269,049
Fire Deparlxnent ..................................................................... 4,151,654 4,218,965
Public Works
General Facilities ................................................................... 419,776 418,171
Engineering ............................................................................ 355,601 351,178
Transportation ........................................................................ 1,106,342 1,165,008
Leisure Services
General Parks ......................................................................... t,022,620 1,054,51 l
Recreation .............................................................................. 227,362 221,692
Senior Center ......................................................................... 166,794 171,668
Pool ........................................................................................ 281,535 293,328
Cemetery Services ................................................................. 71,415 72,025
Athletics ................................................................................. 256,561 191,105
Tax Anticipation Note Debt Service ..................................... 2,500,000 2,500,000
Total Current Expenditures ................................................ $ 23,277,408 $ 23,838,941
I Source: City of Bremerton.
2 Amended Budget.
3 City Clerk, Treasurer, Information Services, Municipal Court and Risk Management are combined under Administrative
Services.
14
SCHEDULE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND DEBT SERVICE FOR THE CITY]
(As of December 31, 1998)
Outstanding Non-Voted
Voted General Obligation Bonds General Obligation Bonds
Total
Year Principal Interest Principal Interest All Bonds
1999 $ 205,000 $ 56,994 $ 452,391 $ 496,105 $ 1,210,490
2000 140,000 47,723 480,758 471,815 1,140,296
2001 185,000 40,805 680,000 445,850 1,351,655
2002 190,000 32,648 720,000 406,057 1,348,705
2003 205,000 23,906 760,000 363,213 1,352,119
2004 135,000 16,308 810,000 317,252 1,278,560
2005 140,000 10,085 855,000 267,563 1,272,648
2006 150,000 3,450 910,000 213,872 1,277,322
20.07 0 0 965,000 155,663 1,120,663
2008 0 0 275,000 92,475 367,475
2009 0 0 290,000 75,370 365,370
2010 0 0 315,000 57,195 372,195
2011 0 0 335,000 37,017 372,017
2012 0 0 275,000 15,537 290,537
Total $ 1,350,000 $ 231,919 $ 8,123,149 $ 3,414,984 $ 13,120,052
CITY PROFILE
The City was incorporated in 1901 and operates as Home Rule Charter City with a Mayor
Council form of government. The Council is comprised of nine members,' elected by district by
the citizens of the City, each serving a four-year term. The Council Members are part-time
elected officials who exercise the legislative powers of the City and determine matters of policy.
The Mayor, a full-time elected official, is the chief executive officer of the City. The Officers and
department directors are appointed by the mayor with Council approval.
The City provides a full range of municipal services including fire and police protection, parks
and recreation facilities/activities, streets, planning, zoning and general administrative services.
The City operates water, sewer and stormwater utility systems. Currently, there are 322 full-time
employees of the City.
Key Personnel
Lynn Horton, Mayor: Ms. Horton began her second term as Mayor of the City ia 1998. Before
her election as mayor, she served for six years on the Bremerton City Council. She is the past
Chair and current Board Member of the Kitsap Regional Planning Council, and a board member
of Kitsap Transit, Kitsap County Cen-Com and the Bremerton-Kitsap County Health
Department. Ms. Horton is a graduate of the University of Washington and has been a resident
of the City since 1974.
1 Does not include the Notes.
15
Richard Hanna, City Treasurer: Mr. Hanna has been the Treasurer of the City of Bremerton
since 1986. Before joining the City, he was Treasurer of the City of Centralia, Washington. Mr.
Hanna received his Bachelor's Degree in Accounting from Western Washin~on University in
1974-and a Masters of Business Administration Degree in Finance from University of Puget
Sound in 1983. Mr. Hanna is a member of the Washington Finance Officers Association,
Washington Municipal Treasurers Association and Puget Sound Finance Officers Association.
Labor Relations
The City has entered into written agreements with each of the bargaining groups set forth below.
These agreements contain provisions on such matters as vacations, sick leave, medical and dental
insurance, salaries, working conditions and grievance procedures.
Employees of the City r6presented by bargaining units are as follows:
Union Membership Contract Period Expiration Date
Teamsters Local 589 130 3 yr. 12/31/00
PatrOlman's Association 53 3 yr. 12/31/99
Police Management Association 5 3 yr. 12/31/99
International Association of 44 3 yr. 12/31/98 I
Fire Fighters Local 437
In accordance with State reqUirements, the City conducts full negotiations with all bargaining
units. The City's management considers its relations with employees to be satisfactory.
The City - Year 2000 Information
The City has evaluated its computer applications and equipment using date logic regarding the
potential problems related to date-sensitive functions beginning in the year 2000. The City is
continuing to address these issues. The City does not believe that there will be any material
adverse impact on the City or its operation. However, it is not possible to forecast or anticipate
all potential problems at this time that could arise from internal systems or interfaces with other
service providers. It is not possible to quantify potential losses due to disruption of service nor
the amount of any potential recovery or liability by the City.
Kitsap County - year 2000 Information
Two years ago Kitsap County began identifying and correcting technology programs and
replacing systems which were not Year 2000 compliant. The County has classified these
applications into three major categories: its own business computing applications, its interface
with external agencies and its non-business computing environment. Each area includes
identified critical and non-critical factors, as well as target dates for completion of each task.
Factors identified as "critical" by the County are targeted for completion (reaching compliance)
by mid- 1999.
1 Under negotiation.
16
GENERAL AND ECONOMIC INFORMATION
The City of Bremerton, is located on Puget Sound, approximately 15 miles west of Seattle and
35 miles north of Tacoma. The largest city in Kitsap County (the "County"), Bremerton was
incorporated in 1901 and has an estimated 1998 population of 37,260 Kitsap County, covering
393 square miles of land, also includes the following other incorporated areas: Bainbridge Island
(1998 population 19,080), Port Orchard (1998 population 6,945) and Poulsbo (1998 population
6,590).
Military Presence
The economy of the City is closely tied to the United States Navy. The Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard in Bremerton ("PSNS") is the largest Naval shipyard on the Pacific Coast and is the
only West Coast shipyard capable of working on nuclear ships. With 8,494 civilian employees,
8,955 military personnel, and approximately 12,000 military family members, the shipyard is
also the only facility capable of decommissioning and recycling nuclear submarines which are
being disassembled in accordance with Strategic Arms Limitations Treaties. PSNS is the largest
naval employer in the State. The shipyard itself encompasses 344 acres of hard land, 382
buildings and nine permanent piers totaling 12,310 feet of deep water space. The economic
impact of PSNS locally is $700 million per year. The Fleet Industrial Supply Center is another
local military, facility in the City, with about 200 employees.
Located a few miles north of the City of Bremerton is the Naval Submarine Base at Bangor.
Bangor serves as a home base for Trident Missile submarines, the USS Parche fast attack
submarine and various support commands. The base provides employment to 5,000 civilians,
and 5,300 military personnel. Another 10,000 military family members are connected to the
base. Bangor is the only base of its kind on the Pacific Coast. Annual local economic impact of
Bangor is $230 million are local residents.
Another military installation located near the City is the Naval Undersea Warfare Engineering
Station at Keyport. The station tests and maintains torpedoes, provides maintenance support for
fire control equipment and mines, and provides other engineering-related services for undersea
warfare. The Undersea Warfare Station employs approximately 1,450 civilian and 30 military
personnel.
U.S. Navy Projects in Kitsap County
Recent historical and projected spending for Navy construction and related facilities support
work in Kitsap County provided by the U.S. Navy Engineering Field Activity Northwest office
as follows:
Kitsap County
Fiscal Year Amount (millions)
1995 $ 200.7
1996 192.3
1997 142.3
1998 127.8
1999 115.8
2000 109.3
17
The $250.5 billion defense spending bill approved by Con~ess in September of 1998, includes
the following projects for Kitsap County military facilities:
Project Location Amount
(millions)
Innovative wastewater treatment research program PSNS $ 7.0
Development of an environmentally safe and inexpensive
way to eradicate asbestos PSNS 4.0
Additional ship repair and maintenance projects* PSNS and
others 30.0
Strengthening of apprenticeship program PSNS 3.5
Impact aid to education provided to Washington State (to
offset loss of local tax base because of military Kitsap Co. 1.9
installations)
Expansion of Naval Hospital Bremerton Bremerton 28.0
Security Force Building at Strategic Weapons Facility
Pacific Bangor 2.8
Facility for housing the Navy's Disease Vector, Ecology
and Control Center Bangor 5.7
Community Support Facility at Jackson Park Naval
Housing Bangor 4.3
* A supplemental Defense Bill, expected to be passed later in the 1998-99 fiscal year,
will include another $60 million for naval ship repair.
Other Major Employers
The Port of Bremerton (the "Port") operates the Bremerton National Airport and the 560-acre
Olympic View Industrial Park, both located approximately 10 miles southwest of the City. The
park includes 34 firms which employ a total of approximately 350 people. The Port's facilities
are designated as a foreign trade zone which offers duty savings to its tenants. Harbor Air
recently began providing commuter flights fi-om the Bremerton Airport, and a boat manufacturer
recently began business at the industrial park.
Bremerton National Airport is the largest airport in the County, with a 6,200-foot runway and
full instrumentation and lighting systems. The airport can handle all general aviation aircraft and
most transport and military planes. Charter passenger and air freight services are available to
SeaTac Airport, the major international airport in the Puget Sound area. The Bremerton Airport
is currently undergoing improvements.
Health care needs are met by several facilities in the Bremerton area including the Naval Hospital
- Bremerton with 347 civilian, 719 military and approximately 2,500 military family members.
The Naval Hospital is undergoing a major renovation and expansion project. Harrison Memorial
Hospital in Bremerton has 1,330 employees. In late 1993, Harrison Memorial completed a
$20.5 million expansion project which doubled the number of operating rooms; expanded the
laboratory and administration areas; and provided additional space for patient education and an
outpatient mental health clinic. Harrison is building a new facility in the Silverdale area-of the
County. A number of nursing homes and retirement complexes are also located in Bremerton.
Olympic College is a two-year public community college located in Bremerton, with an
enrollment of approximately 4,310 (full-time equivalents) and 600 employees, including part-
time workers. The college offers associate of arts degrees in four fields, as well as adult
education and non-credit courses, and began a four-year degree program (called "2-Plus-2") in
18
1994. The 2-Plus-2 degree program is associated with the University of Washington, Tacoma
branch. A new library is being constructed at the college. The Olympic College campus will be
expanding in the years ahead due to a private donation of 20 acres of land for that purpose near
Poulsbo.
Housing
Kitsap County home sales in the first six months of 1998 indicated a stronger housing market
than the first six months of 1997. Home listings averaged a listing time before sale of 98 days,
versus 150 in the year prior. There were 1,439 single-family homes sold in the first six months
of 1998, compared with 1,257 homes sold in the same period in 1997. Condominium sales were
also up, with 69 sold in the first two quarters of 1998, compared with 50 sold in that period the
year before.
New Developments
A proposed Growth Management Plan for Kitsap County will be heard by the Washington State
Growth Management Heating Board in the first quarter of 1999. Upon approval of the plan it is
expected that development of several projects in the City and the County which are dependent
upon zoning changes, will proceed.
Among the projects recently completed or proposed for development in Bremerton are the
following:
· The first phase of a Planned Unit Development, Sinclair Landing, is now under construction
on the City's downtown waterfront. A combination of public and private uses make up this
38-acre project, including: a transit center, new ferry terminal, expansion of the waterfront
park, expansion of the marina, a new terminal for passenger-only ferry service, parking, retail
use, restaurants, offices, an inn, a multiplex cinema and multi-family housing, all connected
with pedestrian corridors. A letter of commitment has been signed by the developer of the
privately funded portion of the project, and anchor tenants are expected to be secured by the
end of the first quarter of 1999.
The portion of the project that will be publicly funded includes two fast foot ferries that will
serve Bremerton (one is already in service), the Bremerton Transportation Center, highway
improvements to Bremerton and an expanded overwater park and a parking garage. The cost
of the publicly funded projects is estimated at $21 million. The privately funded projects,
which include an outlet shopping complex, restaurants, history-theme entertainment, night
clubs, a multi-screen move complex, a hotel and condominiums, are estimated to cost $265
million.
Transportation linkage is the key public investment in Sinclair Landing. The new Bremerton
Transportation Center, scheduled .to open in 1999, will serve ferry, bus, bicycle and
pedestrian commuters and travelers on their way to Seattle and Port Orchard. Expanded ferry
service is also on the way: hi~h-speed 30-minute passenger ferries between Bremerton and
Seattle began service in 1998 and a 30% increase in car capacity is anticipated by 2000. New
parking garages will accommodate foot ferry passengers and visitors coming to enjoy and do
business at Sinclair Landing.
· Pope Resources, a timber and land management company based in Poulsbo, and its
subsidiary, Olympic Resource Management, have recently obtained land within the .City that
is planned for development as a 61-acre business park and 209 acres for 450 new homes.
Known as West Hills, the project will be submitted to the City for review upon receiving
approval of the Growth Management Plan.
· The Kitsap County Economic Development Council (EDC) has recently reorganized,
reducing the size of its board, appointing four new directors and is refocusing its priorities on
business (a) recruitment, (b) retention and expansion, (c) startup and education, (d)
information services, and (e) community development for economic expansion.
19
· The Oyster Bay Plaza retail complex in the City has recently undergone expansion and
renovation. QFC purchased the former 6,000 square-foot Thriftway and invested $3 million
try upgrade the facility to a 26,000 square-foot supermarket. A remodeled Rite Aid
Drugstore, new video stores, a renovated auto supply store and other improvements are now
part of the this complex.
· Twenty-First Century Research, a chemical research company, will be relocating from its
current building near Poulsbo to a new, 20,000 square-foot demonstration plant on 18.8 acres
at the Olympic View Industrial Park (partially within the City.) The company is expected to
expand fi.om its 15 employees to approximately 50, upon completion of its two new
buildings during the first quarter of 2000.
· A 34-unit congregate care facility is currently under construction in the City.
· The City is conducting a site plan review of the proposed Auto Center Industrial Park. The
project includes cleating and grading of roadways and building pads for development of a
16.4 acre industrial park.
· Another new addition to the Olympic View Industrial Park is Custom Camera Design, a
recycler of disposable cameras. The company expects to complete construction of two 8,500
square-foot buildings by August 1999. Initially, the company expects to employ about 150
people
· In the summer of 1998, ETF Electroplating located at the Olympic View Industrial Park. The
company produces chrome parts for vehicles and has six employees.
· Romark, Inc., a manufacturer of custom closets, also located at the Olympic View Industrial
Park in late summer of 1998 in a 6,000 square-foot facility with 12 employees. The company
is already expanding by another 3,000 square-feet and will add several new employees as
well.
· The Port is Currently in the design stage of a light industrial area known as the West Puget
Tech Park, which will be developed at the Olympic View Industrial Park. Site work is
expected to begin in spring of 1999 for a 24,000 square-foot business development center.
The remainder of this project will be developed on a demand basis.
· As of November 30, 1998, 536 building permits had been issued in the City for a total value
of $!8.6 million. This compares with annual totals of 508 permits in 1997 valued at $19.4
million and 511 permits in 1996 valued at $15.8 million. There were 26 single-family homes
permitted in 1998 as of November 30 and one four-plex. The eight new commercial
properties .to receive permits during that time were valued at $3.8 million.
Following are economic indicators of the City and the County.
KITSAP COUNTY POPULATIONI
Kitsap
City of Other KitsapCounty County
Year Bremerton Incorporated Unincorporated Total
1998 37,260 32,615- 159,125 229,000
1997 38,600 32,060 158,740 229,400
1996 38,496 31,210 155,120 224,700
1995 39,610 29,915 151,075 220,600
1994 35,920 28,625 148,655 213,200
1993 36,380 28,160 145,460 210,000
1992 38,990 27,405 139,205 205,600
1991 37,040 26,6392 132,821 196,500
1990 38,142 12,913 138,676 189,73I
I Source: Washington State Office of Financial Management and U.S. Census.
2 The large increase is due to the annexation of the unincorporated areas of Bainbridge Island to the new City of Bainbridge
Island.
20
CITY OF BREMERTON MAJOR TAXPAYERSl
: Assessed Valuation for
Taxpayer Business 1998 Collection Year
Puget Sound Energy Electric Utility $ 21,832,996
US West Inc. Telecommunications 18,316,212
HMI, Inc. Developer 11,039,360
Michael Connolley Olympic College Business Svcs. 8,036,000
Viewcrest Villages Limited Partnership Apartments 7,828,000
Merit Company Retail 6,729,000
FirLane Terrace Convention Center Convention Center 6,504,000
East Towne Center Community Center 6,231,000
Cascade Natural Gas Gas Utility 5,918,012
Bremerton Cascade Associates Apartments 5,775,000
TAXABLE RETAIL SALES2
Year Kitsap County City of Bremerton
1997 $ 1,958,346,681 $ 498,779,418
1996 1,836,198,934 477,467,218
1995 1,768,304,057 451,277,414
1994 1,774,185,000 461,026,409
1993 1,658,975,823 422,329,475
SEATTLE-BREMERTON FERRY TRAFFIC STATISTICS3
Year Number of Vehicles Number of Passengers
1997 756,796 2,047,014
1996 731,926 1,863,596
1995 751,266 1,820,433
1994' 719,125 1,719,414
1993 676,031 1,694,234
KITSAP COUNTY AND WASHINGTON STATE
LABOR FORCE AND AVERAGE ANNUAL UNEMPLOYMENT4
Resident Civilian Average Annual Total
Year Labor Force Unemployment Employment Kitsap County (%) Washington (%)
1997 92,900 5,100 87,800 5.5 4.8
1996 93,500 6,300 87,200 6.7 6.5
1995 89,600 6,000 83,600 6.7 6.4
1994 88,600 5,300 83,300 6.0 6.4
1993 89,600 6,100 83,500 6.8 7.6
1 Source: Kitsap County Assessor's Office.
2 Source: Washington State Department of Revenue.
3 Source: Washington State Department of Transportation, Marine Division. Passengers total includes the passenger-only
ferries and vehicle ferries.
4 Includes nonagricultural wage and salary, self-employed, unpaid family workers, domestics, agricultural workers, labor
disputants.
21
KITSAP COUNTY AND WASHINGTON STATE
INCOME ESTIMATES!
Kitsap County Per Capita Income
Year Personal Income ($000) Kitsap County Washington
1996 $ 4,811,513 $ 20,815 $ 25,277
1995 4,560,454 20,193 23,974
1994 4,330,443 20,024 22,806
1993 4,126,471 19,426 22,168
1992 3,937,392 18,714 21,515
KITSAP COUNTY
MAJOR PRIVATE SECTOR EMPLOYERS2
Employer No. of Employees
Harrison Memorial Hospital 1,330
Johnson Controls World Services'* 825
Safeway 644
Wal-Mart (as of Dec-97) 549
Laurier Enterprises (McDonald's) 450
Tracor3 401
Town & Country Markets 400
Fred MeYer 33 I
Martha & Mary Nursing/Child Care 331
Group Health Cooperative 325
The Doctors Clinic 320
Belmont Terrace & Ridgemont Terrace 307
JC Penney Company 245
Costco Wholesale 230
The SUN Newspaper 221
Kitsap Physicians Service 208
KITSAP COUNTY
MAJOR PUBLIC AGENCY EMPLOYERS4
Employer No. of Employees
State agencies (Dept. of Revenue,
Employment Security, Social & Health
Services, Transportation, State Patrol) 1,891
Central Kitsap School District 1,595
South Kitsap School Dish"itt 1,295
North Kitsap School District 1,100
Kitsap County 1,053
Bremerton School District 950
Bainbridge Island School District 415
Olympic College 277
I Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis; presented in 1996 dollars.
2 Source: Kitsap County Economic Development Council as of August 1998.
3 Private companies handling major contracts with the D.O.D.
4 Source: Kitsap County Economic Development Council as of August 1998.
22
PRESERVATION OF TAX EXEMPTION
The C-ity has covenanted, in the Ordinance, to take all actions necessary to prevent interest on the
Notes from being included in gross income for federal income tax purpose, and it will neither
take any action nor make or permit any use of proceeds of the Notes or other funds of the City at
any time during the term of the Notes which will cause interest on the Notes to be included in
gross income for federal income tax purposes. The City certifies that it has not been notified of
any listing or proposed listing by the Internal Revenue Service to the effect that it is a bond
issuer whose arbitrage certifications may not be relied upon.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
Some or all of the fees of the Underwriter and Bond Counsel are contingent upon the issuance
and sale of the Notes. Furthermore, Bond Counsel from time to time serves as counsel to the
Underwriter with respect to issuers other than the City and transactions other than the issuance of
the Notes. None of the council members or other officers of the City has interests in the issuance
of the Notes that are prohibited by applicable law.
TAX EXEMPTION
In the opinion of Gottlieb, Fisher & Andrews, PLLC, Bond Counsel, as of the date of issue of the
Notes (the "Date of Issue"), and subject to certain assumptions described in the next paragraph:
the Notes are not "private activity bonds," as defined by the Code; the Notes have been
designated by the City as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" for purposes of the partial
interest expense deduction for purposes of Section 265 of the Code; interest on the Notes is
excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes under existing federal law; and such
interest is not an item of tax preference for purposes of determining the alternative minimum tax
on individuals and corporations under existing federal law. However, under existing federal law
interest on the Notes received by certain corporations is to be taken into account in the
computation of adjusted current earnings for purposes of calculating the alternative minimum tax
applicable to such corporations; such interest received by certain S corporations may be subject
to tax; and such interest received by foreign corporations with United States branches may be
subject to a foreign branch profits tax. Bond Counsel expresses no opinion regarding any other
federal tax consequences of receipt of interest on the Notes. Potential purchasers of the Notes
should consult with their tax advisors as to all possible tax consequences of ownership of the
Notes. See also, "OTHER TAX CONSEQUENCES," herein.
The Code contains certain requirements which must be satisfied subsequent to the issuance of the
Notes in order to maintain the tax treatment described above, including requirements relating to
the application of the proceeds of the Notes, use of facilities which are financed with such
proceeds, limitations on income derived from the investment of gross proceeds of the Notes, and
rebate to the United States Treasury of certain of such investment income on such gross
proceeds. The City has covenanted to comply with these requirements; and the opinion of Bond
Counsel described in the preceding paragraph assumes such compliance. However, Bond
Counsel has not undertaken and shall not undertake to monitor compliance by the City with such
requirements and failure of the City to comply with such requirements could cause the interest on
the Notes to be included in gross income for federal income tax purposes, and could be treated as
an item of tax preference for purposes of the alternative minimum tax on individuals and
corporations, and could result in a loss of the partial interest expense deduction available for
qualified tax-exempt obligations, in each case, retroactive to the Date of Issue.
23
OTHER TAX CONSEQUENCES
Unde~ current federal law:
1. Corporate Alternative Minimum Tax. The interest on tax-exempt obligations received
by a corporation is taken into account in the computation of the alternative minimum tax
applicable to corporations (as defined for federal income tax purposes). Under current
federal law, the alternative minimum taxable income of such a corporation (other than an
S corporation, a regulated investment company, a real estate investment trust or a
REMIC) is increased by 75% of the amount by which the "adjusted current earnings" of
the corporation exceeds the corporation's alternative minimum taxable income
determined without regard to such increase and any alternative tax net operating loss
deduction. Interest on tax-exempt obligations, whenever issued or acquired, including
interest on the Notes, is included in the computation of "adjusted current earnings."
2. Tax on Excess Passive Investment Income of S Corporations. Certain excess net
passive investment income, including interest on the Notes, received by an S corporation
(a corporation treated as a partnership for most federal tax purposes) that has "subchapter
C earnings and profits" at the close of its taxable year may be subject to federal income
tax at the highest rate applicable to corporations if more than 25% of the gross receipts of
such S corporation for such taxable year is passive investment income.
3. Foreign Corporation Branch Profits Tax. Interest on the Notes received by certain
foreign corporations doing business in the United States may be subject to a branch
profits tax applicable to such corporations that is based on their Untied States source
earnings and profits, including tax-exempt interest on obligations such as the Notes.
4. Reduction of Loss Deduction for Property and Casualty Insurance Companies.
Interest on tax-exempt obligations, including the Notes, received by property and casualty
insurance companies, will reduce tax deductions for loss reserves otherwise available to
such companies by an amount equal to 15 percent of such tax-exempt interest received
during the taxable year.
5. Social Security and Tier 1 Railroad Retirement Benefits Subject to Tax. Interest
received or accrued during the year from tax-exempt obligations, such as the Notes, is
included in the calculation of"modified adjusted gross income" of recipients of the social
security or tier 1 raikoad retirement benefits. If the sum of the "modified adjusted gross
income" for the taxable year plus one-half of the social security or tier 1 raikoad
retirement benefits received during the taxable year exceeds a base amount provided by
the Code (the "excess amount"), then the lesser of (i)' one-half of the social security or tier
1 raikoad retirement benefits received during the taxable year or (ii) one-half of the
"excess amount", is included in the gross income of the social security or tier 1 railroad
retirement benefit recipient.
ABSENCE OF MATERIAL LITIGATION
There is no litigation of any kind now pending or, to the knowledge of the City, threatened to
restrain or enjoin the issuance or delivery of the Notes or in any manner questioning the
proceedings and authority under which the Notes are issued or affecting the ability of the City to
pay the principal of or the interest on the Notes.
24
APPROVAL OF BOND COUNSEL
Legal matters incident to the authorization, issuance and sale of Notes by the City are subject to
the approving legal opinion of Gottlieb, Fisher & Andrews, PLLC, Bond Counsel. A copy of the
opinion of Bond Counsel will be delivered with the Notes.
CONTINUING DISCLOSURE
The City has undertaken, for the benefit of the Owners and Beneficial Owners of the Notes
required by subsection (b)(5)(i)of the Rule 15c2-12 (the "Rule") of the United States Securities
and Exchange Commission (the "SEC"), to provide or cause to be provided upon request to any
person or at least annually to the State Information Depository ("SID"), if one is created,
financial statements prepared in accordance with the generally accepted accounting principles
applicable to governmental units, as such principles may be changed from time to time and as
permitted by State law; which statements will not be audited, except that if and when audited
financial statements are otherwise prepared and available to the City, they will be provided; and
other operating data that may be prepared by the City (collectively, the "Financial Information").
In its provision of such financial information and operating data, the City may cross-reference to
any "final official statement" (as defined in the Rule) available from the Municipal Securities
Rulemaking Board (the "MSRB") or any other documents theretofore provided to each then
existing Nationally Recognized Municipal Securities Information Repository designated by the
SEC ("NRMSIR") or the SID, if one is created.
The City further agrees to provide or cause to be provided, in a timely manner, to the SID, if one
is created, and to either the MSRB or each then existing NRMSIR, notice of any of the following
events with respect to the Notes, if material:
1. Principal and interest payment delinquencies;
2. Non-payment related defaults;
3. Unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial difficulties;
4. Unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial difficulties;
5. Substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perform;
6. Adverse tax opinions or events affecting the tax-exempt status of the Notes;
7. Modifications to rights of the Owners of the Notes;
8. Optional redemptions of the Notes;
9. Defeasances of the Notes;
10. Release, substitution or sale of property securing repayment of the Notes; and
11. Rating changes.
After the issuance of the Notes, so long as the interests of the Owners or Beneficial Owners of
the Notes will not be materially impaired thereby, as determined by a party unaffiliated with the
City (including, without limitation, a trustee for the Owners, nationally recognized bond counsel
or other counsel familiar with the federal securities law), or pursuant to a favorable "no-action
letter" issued by the SEC, this continuing disclosure undertaking may only be amended in
connection with any change in legal requirements, change in law, or change in the identity,
nature or status of the obligated person, or type of business conducted, and only in such a manner
that the continuing disclosure undertaking of the City, as so amended, would have complied with
the requirements of the Rule at the time of the primary offering, after taking into account any
amendments or interpretations of the Rule, as well as any change in circumstances.
The City's obligations to provide Annual Financial Information and notices of certain events
shall terminate without amendment upon the defeasance, prior redemption or payment in full of
all of the then outstanding Notes. This continuing disclosure undertaking or any provision
25
hereof, shall be null and void if the City (i) obtains an opinion of nationally recognized bond
counsel or other counsel familiar with the federal securities laws to the effect that those portions
of the Rule which require this continuing disclosure undertaking or any such provision are
invalid, have been repealed retroactively or otherwise do not apply to the Notes; and (ii) notifies
and provides the SID, if any, and either the MSRB or each then existing NRMSIR with copies of
such opinion.
The right of each Owner or Beneficial Owner of Notes to enforce the provisions of this
continuing disclosure undertaking shall be limited to the right to obtain specific enforcement of
the City's obligations in this continuing disclosure undertaking and any failure by the City to
comply with the provisions of this continuing disclosure undertaking shall not be a default with
respect to the Notes under the Ordinance.
UNDERWRITING
The Underwriter has agreed, subject to certain conditions, to purchase ali of the Notes, if any are
purchased, at a price of 99.65% of the par value of the Notes, plus accrued interest from the dated
dat~ to the settlement date. The Notes will be reoffered at an average price of 100% of the par
value of the Notes, resulting in a underwriting spread of $3.50 per $1,000. Alter the initial
public offering, the public offering prices may be varied from time to time.
CONCLUDING STATEMENT
All estimates, assumptions, statistical information and other statements contained herein, while
taken from sources considered reliable, are not guaranteed by the City or the Underwriter. So far
as any statement herein includes matters of opinion, or estimates of future expenses and income,
whether or not expressly so stated, they are intended merely as such and not as representations of
fact.
The information contained herein should not be construed as representing all conditions affecting
the City or the Notes. Additional information may be obtained directly from the City or the
Underwriter.
The foregoing statements relating to the Ordinance and other documents are in all respects
subject to and qualified in their entirety by provisions of such documents.
This Official Statement, starting with the cover page and all subsequent pages, including the
appendices, comprise the entire Official Statement, which has been approved by the City. The
City has represented to the Underwriter that the portions of this Official Statement directly
pertaining to the City neither contain any misrepresentation of material fact nor omit any material
fact necessary to understand the financial, economic or legal nature of the City or any
information presented herein.
26
APPENDIX A
FORM OF LEGAL OPINION
(Form of Approving Opinion of Gottlieb, Fisher & Andrews, PLLC,
Bond Counsel)
February 1, 1998
Mayor and City Council
City of Bremerton
Bremerton, Washington 98310
Ladies and Gentlemen:
We have acted as bond counsel in connection with the issuance by the City of Bremerton,
Washington (the "City"), of the notes described below (the "Notes"):
$1,250,000
CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON
TAX ANTICIPATION NOTES, 1999
Dated: February 1, 1999
The Notes are issued pursuant to Ordinance No. 4645 of the City (the "Note Ordinance")
and other proceedings duly had and taken in conformity therewith. The Notes are issued for the
purpose of financing City expenses pending receipt of taxes and other revenue collected by the
City and to pay costs related to the sale and issuance of the Notes, all as provided in the Note
Ordinance.
The Notes are issued as fully registered notes in the denomination of $50,000 each or any
integral multiple thereof. The Notes bear interest (computed on the basis of a 360-day year of
twelve 30-day months) fi:om their date, payable at the maturity thereof, at the rate of 3.25% per
annum, and shall mature on January 31, 2000.
The Notes are not subject to redemption prior to maturity.
In rendering this opinion letter, we have examined the following: (i) the Note Ordinance;
(ii) one executed and authenticated Note (we assume that all other Notes are in the same form
and have been similarly executed and authenticated); and (iii) the certified proceedings of the
City and other certificates of public officials and representatives of the City which have been
furnished to us and which comprise the transcript of proceedings pertaining to the issuance of the
Notes (the "Transcript").
City o_f Bremerton, Washington
February 1, 1998
Page 3
corporations; such interest received by foreign corporations with United States branches may be
subject to a foreign branch profits tax; and such interest received by certain S corporations may
be subject to tax.
Except as stated in the preceding paragraphs 4, 5 and 6, we express no opinion as to any
federal or state tax consequences of the ownership or disposition of the Notes.
The Code contains certain requirements which must be satisfied subsequent to the date of
issue of the Notes in order to maintain the tax treatment described above in paragraphs 4, 5 and
6, including requirements relating to application of the proceeds of the Notes, use of facilities
financed with such proceeds, limitations on income derived from the investment of gross
proceeds of the Notes (as defined in Section 148 of the Code), and rebate to the United States
Treasury of certain investment earnings on such gross proceeds. The City has covenanted to
comply with these requirements, and the opinions expressed in paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 assume
such compliance. However, we have not undertaken and do not undertake to monitor compliance
by the City with such requirements; and failure by the City to comply with such requirements
could cause interest on the Notes and any properly allocable original discount to be included in
gross income for federal income tax purposes, and to be treated as an item of tax preference for
purposes of the alternative minimum tax on individuals and corporations, and could result in the
loss of the partial interest expense deduction available in respect of "qualified tax-exempt
obligations" under Section 265 of the Code, in each case, retroactive to the date of issue of the
Notes.
We have not been engaged to participate in the preparation or review of, or express any
opinion concerning the completeness or accuracy of, the official statement or other disclosure
documentation prepared or used by any person in connection with the offer or sale of the Notes,
and thus express no opinion concerning the completeness or accuracy thereof.
Copies of this opinion letter may be delivered to the Owners of the Notes, who may rely
on this opinion letter as if it were addressed to them on the date hereof. Subject to the foregoing,
this opinion letter may be relied upon by you only in connection with the issuance of the Notes
and may not be used or relied upon by you or any other person for any other purpose whatsoever,
without in each instance our prior written consent. We expressly disclaim any responsibility to
advise you or any Owner of any developments in areas covered by this opinion letter that occur
after the date hereof.
Respectfully submitted,
GOTTLIEB, FISHER & ANDREWS
By
Judith L. Andrews
Jane Towery
Vice President
Northwest Public Finance
January 20, 1999
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Bremerton
239 4th Street
Bremcrton, Washington 98337
Ladies and Gentleman:
NationsBanc Montgomery Securities LLC (the "Underwriter") is pleased to present an offer to purchase
from the City of Bremerton (the "City")all of its $1,250,000 principal amount of Tax Anticipation Notes,
1999 (the "Notes"), which will be dated February 1, 1999. Principal of and interest on the Notes shall be
payable on January 31, 2000, the maturity date of the Notes, at the rate shown immediately below:
January 31 Amount Rate Price
2000 $1,250,000 3.25% 100
We will pay you $1,245,625.00 (which is net of the Underwriter's spread of $4,375.00), plus accrued
interest, if any, for $1,250,000 par value of Notes. Our offer is subject to the following conditions:
1. The City has the full legal right, power and authority to enter into and perform its obligations under
this note purchase contract and under the ordinance authorizing the issuance of the Notes (the
"Note Ordinance"), to pass the Note Ordinance and to sell and deliver the Notes to the Underwriter.
2. The approving legal opinion of Gottlieb Fisher & Andrews, PLLC ("Bond Counsel") will be
delivered with the Notes.
3. The Notes will be delivered through the facilities of The Depository Trust Company in New York,
New York on February 1, 1999, or any other date mutually agreed upon by the City, the
Underwriter and Bond Counsel. The City may, as required, close the purchase of the Notes with
temporary notes.
4. The City will be responsible for all of the note issuance expenses (other than those for which the
Underwriter agrees to be responsible), including, but not limited to: Bond Counsel and fiscal
agency fees.
5. Interest on outstanding principal of the Notes will be paid at maturity.
6. Interest shall accrue on the basis of a 360-day year comprised of twelve 30-day months.
NationsBanc Montgomery Securities/800 Fifth Avenue, Floor 34/Post Office Box 34662/Seattle, Washington 98124
Telephone (206) 358-8991 / Telefax (206) 358-8818
City of Bremerton
January 20, 1999
Page 2
7. The Notes will be issued in fully registered book-entry form as to both principal and interest in the
denomination of $50,000 each or any integral multiple thereof. The Notes, will be registered in the
name of Cede & Co., as registered owner and nominee of The Depository Trust Company, New
York, New York ("DTC"), which will act as securities depository for the Notes.
8. Optional Redemption: The Notes are not subject to redemption prior to maturity.
9. The Underwriter will prepare, on behalf of the City, the preliminary and final Official Statements
describing the Notes. The City shall cooperate with the Underwriter in all aspects of the preparation
of the Official Statements. The preliminary Official Statement, as of its date, shall be in a form
"deemed final" by the City for purposes of SEC Rule 15c2-12 but will be subject to revision,
amendment, and completion in a final Official Statement which will be available within seven
business (7) days of the note purchase contract signing date.
10. The City agrees to cooperate with the Underwriter to permit the Underwriter to deliver or cause to
be delivered, within seven business days after any final agreement to purchase, offer, or sell the
securities and in sufficient time to accompany any confirmation that requests payment from any
customer of the Underwriter, copies of a final Official Statement in sufficient quantity to comply
with paragraph (b) (4) of the Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2-12 and the rules of
the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board.
11. The Underwriter agrees to deliver three copies each of the final Official Statement to all nationally
recognized municipal securities information repositories on the business day on which the final
Official Statement is available and, in any event, no later than seven business days after the date
hereof. The City agrees to provide continuing disclosure pursuant to the Securities and Exchange
Commission's Rule 15c2-12, as amended, which is included as an undertaking in the Note
Ordinance.
12. The City shall deliver to the Underwriter, at the time of delivery of the Notes, a certificate,
substantially to the effect that from the date of the City's acceptance of this note purchase contract
to the delivery date of the Notes: (a) the Official Statements contain no untrue statement of a
material fact nor state any material fact necessary to make the statements therein, in light of the
circumstances under which the statements were made, not misleading in any material respect; (b) to
the best of the City' s knowledge, the City has not incurred any material liability, nor has there been
any material adverse change in the operations or financial condition of the City, nor in the general
economy of the City, except as described in the Official Statements.
13. If, prior to the closing date of the Notes by the Underwriter, the interest receivable on the Notes
becomes taxable, either directly or indirectly except as described in the preliminary Official
Statement, by the terms of any federal income tax law, the Underwriter may, at its option, be
relieved of the obligation to purchase the Notes.
14. Immaterial changes to the preliminary Official Statement and the final Official Statement as of their
dates will not provide a basis for removal of this offer.
15. This offer is submitted for acceptance by the City on January 20, 1999 at a meeting of the City
Council of the City duly held.
16. Details of this offer may be altered by mutual consent of the Underwriter and the City to
accommodate the needs of the City.
City of Bremerton
January 20, 1999
Page 3
Respectfully submitted,
,~?.~owe~ - /~
I~onsBanc Montgomery Sed~ities kkC
Accepted this 20th day of January, 1999
City of Bremerton, Washington
By:
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
1. SUBJECT: FOR AGENDA OF: January 20, 1999
Ordinance Number . SR304 Transportation ORIGINATING DEPT: PW&U Engineering Div.
Improvement Project-Naming the New Roadway ORIGINATOR: Randy Witt, City Engineer
Alignment east of First Street "Charleston Boulevard" DATE SUBMITTED: January 7, 1999 ,/?
2. CLEARANCE S: (comment on ba¢}/,)~n~sa~,,.-,~ ,.~ ,--~, 3. EXHIBITS
Director, Public Works/Utilities '-'P"x"y~ "~ ." A. 1. Map
City Attorney ../'3:'_~._~~~"- 2. Ordinance
Heard at City Council Study Session6f 3~afi6ary 2~, 1999 3. Fall 1998 Gateway News Coupon
ZNDORSEMENT )<' RMATION APPROVED BY COUNCrL PRESDENTJ; O P :Sm3 AL:
MAYOR~---~- COUNCIL PRESIDENT /'~/5 ~
4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION:
One of the main features of the SR304 Transportation Improvement Project is the construction of a new roadway alignment
south of First Street. This new alignment crosses Callow Avenue, Wy¢off Avenue and Cambrian Avenue and, as such,
requires that a single street name be established for its use. The development of the new street name was assigned to thc
project Citizen's Landseap~.lC~ittee. The Committee unanimously recommended that "Charleston Boulevard" be the
name of the new roadway e, Ua~of First Street to SR3 Interehan§e. City Staff then solicited community input on the name
through a City Council meeting presentation, Inside Bremerton presentation and a coupon in the Fall 1998 Gateway News.
Community response overwhelmingly supported the use of "Charleston Boulevard". The roadway name will be
implemented as the new street clements are constructed. Because of the limited access features of the project, only Kitsap
Transit will have direct access onto the new roadway, and will be required to change their address.
Staff supports passage of the attached ordinance naming SR304 from First Street to the SR3 Interchange to "Charleston
Boulevard".
8. RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council (approve upon first reading/pass upon second reading) the attached Ordinance Number
establishing a new name for State Route 304 from First Street to the SR3 interchange as Charleston Boulevard.
9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: City Engineer
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: City Engineer
EXPIRATION DATE: None
REVIEW DATE: None
10. NOTICE OF ACTION
PULLED TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE
11. AGENDA BILL NO: <~<~ - 0 1 5
2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS:
5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE:
A new roadway alignment requires a new street name because it crosses several streets. Should the Council not
pass the attached ordinance at this time, consideration of a street name will need to be made again at a future date.
6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES:
No impact on staffing budgets or facilities.
7. RESEARCH SOURCES
AGENDABI~99006
ORDINANCE NO.
An Ordinance naming the new State Route 304 (SR304) roadway alignment from eas~
of First Street to the State Route 3 (SR3) interchange "Charleston Boulevard".
WHEREAS, the City is the lead agency in the reconstruction of (SR304); and,
~, WHEREAS, the reconstruction of SR304 includes establishment of a new roadway alignment
caat of First Street to the SR3 interchange; and,
WHEREAS, the new roadway alignment needs to have a single name to eliminate public
confusion and provide for public safety; and,
WHEREAS, the project Citizen's Landscape Committee unanimously recommended the name
"Charleston Boulevard" for SR304 east of First Street; and,
WHEREAS, the Bremerton community response to the proposed name overwhelmingly
supports the use of"Charleston Boulevard" for SR304 east of First Street; now, therefore,
The City of Bremerton does hereby ordain:
1. That SR304 from First Street to the SR3 interchange be named Charleston Boulevard.
2. That the new Charleston Boulevard street name be implemented with construction of the
new street and implementation of the limited access features of the SR304 Transportation
Improvement Project.
APPROVED on first reading by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this
day of ., 1999.
PASSED on second reading by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this
day of ., 1999.
Mike Shepherd, Council President
APPROVED this ~ day of ., 1999.
Lynn S. Horton, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathleen L. McCluskey, City Clerk
(g) ~o-zoo~ ~s~o3 I
831NI
IOOZ-OOO~oooz_66619NIdV2SONV~lSN03 ~,~¢X 39~p~/C~S
66-~66~ 03V '~'0'~ ' .' ((
66-B661 NOlS30 ) //7 i
(~ 3S~Hd)
66-~66~ NI NOI13~1SN03
133C0~d
~S flNV g31N3O NOIIVJ~OJSNV~I
NOl~J~2~B HII~ 31~1~00~ 221~ ,d '
(g 3S~Hd) ~3~ 7~N1~31
NOI,On~,SNO~ a]aNn SNgd
'0'1'
IN3~dOqA30 9NIQN~9 ~I~9ONIS ir
g
C
m
posed the name "Charleston Boulevard", honoring the rich history of this neighborhood that xvas once a city. Before any'
decision is made about a name, the City wants to know what you think. Use the coupon below to tell us your opinion, or call the
Project Holline at 478-4033 and leave a message. Changing the street name will be relatively painless. There won't be any homes
or businesses, except for Kitsap Transit, fronting the new boulevard, so no one will have to change their address.
Check Ail that Apply! Name:
[] Keep me informed - make sure my name is on the mailing list
[] Contact me - I'm interested in getting involved Address:
[-] Remove my name from the mailing list
[] Correct my name/address on the mailing list
[] I like the name "Charleston Boulevard" Phone:
[] I have another suggestion for the street name E-mail:
[] I don't like the name "Charleston Boulevard"
If you have additional comments or
[] See my suggestions or comments on separate sheet suggestions, please include them
. on a separate sheet of paper.
~ r2~'~-r,r, = NORTH~
r~ ~ ~-~ "z~'.J:
"':> ['~ - - - ~ _ Arrows m point to
> .? ,, L)-> ,, cb u ~ -. :....., --
¢ .,} :~ :.JLt?.,.. -[.j _, -- sites set aside for
'-.~, ~ ' c~:. r,~ ~ ' " ..... :: public design
_ ~ _, ............ ~ , .N;(~ _ ..; . ,~ -._
L._U ~ f'~ ~:'P~ ~" ........... ~%:~':=~-- ~ -----~ ~- '-, ...... '- "~
X . · ,-. J. ...... r _ ' '~,:_ ' '~
/ I i ; ' ( ~ ~5 - ..-'- - '.' '( 5-=-=-- ~ '~ ':==-~ '--=z= ~, .~ ::.-.'~ ~: ..:L-~__ - ~--- ~- -~ ----
O~
AGENDA BILL
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
1. SUBJECT: ~~ FOR AGENDA OF: January 20, 1999
PUBLIC HEA/~ING/RESOLUTION # DEPT. OF ORIGIN: DECD - Planning
ACTION: Special Use Permit for day ORIGINATOR: Jot Helen
care center for up to 41 children. DATE SUBMITTED: October 30, 1998
APPLICANT: Emmanuel Apostolic Church
LOCATION: 1023 6th Street
2. CLEARANCES: (Comment on back if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS:
DECD Director : ~?/~'J/' CC Resolution No.~&~ ~
~J-~'-~~ ~~ Notice of Public Hearing.
Fiscal & Budget Comm PC Resolution No #98-08.
~~//_~,~ PC Minutes (12/22/98).
PC Findings of Fact &
Operations Committ ~ _. Conclusion.
/ Special Use Permit
Application.
-~ Letter of Complaint.
ENDORSE NT V IN O T ON PRO D COUNCr P SIDENT
4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION:
Council must decide if the applicant's Special Use Permit Application
(SUP98-0017) meets the necessary tests and criteria required for approval
of this day care center use.
5. RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Staff and the Planning Commies^ion both recommend that the Special
Use Permit be approved~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~c4~
6. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Jot Helen
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL:
EXPIRATION DATE:
REVIEW DATE:
PULLED TABLED AJPPROVED DISAPPROVED ._. ~4EN~ ~
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: DA~'~__~ ~ ~
8. AGENDA BILL NO.: ~q-0[&
9. CLEARANCE COMMENTS:
The Commission in its review determined that three proposed
conditions: days of operation, hours of using the play area, and
supervision of the play area were not needed.
10. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE:
The applicant would be unable to have a day care for more than 12
children.
11. IMPACT ON STAFFING~ BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES:
Additional staff resources might be required to review final revised
plans and permits.
12. RESEARCH SOURCES:
Zoning Ordinance
File
Site Visits
Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual
Relevant State Laws
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. ~8~
A CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
EMMANUEL APOSTOLIC CHURCH
APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT
(SUP98-0017)
WffEREAS, the Emmanuel Apostolic Church requested a Special Use Permit for a day
care center at 1023 6a~ Street; and
WffEREAS, the Bremerton Planning Commission conducted a public meeting on
December 22, 1998 during which it received oral and written comments pertaining to the
subject application; and
WItEREAS, the Bremerton Planning Commission recommended approval of application
SUP98-0017 without conditions; and
WffEREAS, the Bremerton City Council conducted a public heating on January 20, 1999
during which it received oral and written comments pertaining to the subject application;
NOW, T[IEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Bremerton City Council concurs
with the Bremerton Planning Commission's findings in support of the use request and
affirms that:
1. The proposed use is needed in the community to provide day care services in this area,
and is in the public interest.
2. The proposed use does meet the necessary tests and criteria required for approval of a
Special Use Permit.
BE IT FURTRER RESOLVED, that the Bremerton City Council hereby approves
application SUP98-0017.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this .day of
,1999.
MIKE SHEPHERD, President
Bremerton City Council
APPROVED this day of ,1999.
LYNN S. HORTON, Mayor
City of Bremerton
ATTEST:
PAULA JOHNSTON, Deputy City Clerk
CITY OF BREMERTON · 239 4th Street ° Bremerton, WA 98337
NOTICE OF PUBLIC me~ARING
Bremerton City Council
The Bremerton City Council will conduct a public heating on the following item during its
regular meeting on Wednesday, January 20, 1999 which will begin at 6:00 PM in the City_
Council Chambers of the Bremerton City Hall, 239 4m Street, Bremerton, WA.
SUP98-0017 - Special Use Permit for Day Care Facility at the Emanuel Apostolic
Church at 1023 6th Street.
Applicants requests using two renovated first floor rooms in an existing church building
for day care facility for up to 41 children.
All interested persons may appear and provide testimony on the matter. The Department
of Economic and Community Development, located at 286 4~ St., Bremerton, WA 98337,
will receive written comments and other exhibits on the above item up to 5:00 PM on the
day of hearing. Written comments and other extfibits may also be submitted to the
Council prior to the close of the public hearing. Staff reports and copies of pertinent
materials can be obtained from the Department of Economic and Community
Development. Staffreports will be available by 5:00 PM on January 13, 1999. Call James
Coombes at (360) 478-5845 for additional information.
Celebrating 50 Years of Freedom ·
BREMERTON PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION//98-08
A PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
EMMANUEL APOSTOLIC CHURCH
APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT
(SUP 9S-0017)
WHEREAS, the Emmanuel Apostolic Church requested a Special Use Permit for a day care center
at 1023 6th Street; and
WHEREAS, the Bremerton Planning Commission conducted a public meeting on December 22,
1998, during which it received oral and written comments pertaining to the subject application;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Bremerton Planning Commission makes the
following findings in support of the use request:
1. The proposed use is needed in the community to provide day care services in this area, and
is in the public interest.
2. The proposed use does meet the necessary tests and criteria required for approval of a Special
Use Permit.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Bremerton Planning Commission hereby approves
application SUP 98-0017.
APPROVED:
Bill Robinson, Chairman Date
o~'~I$1a~,' Secretary Date
Draft 3dinutes for Approval
Planning Commission Meeting
December 22, 1998
L Roll Call
Those present were: Chairman Robinson, Commissioners Boyd, Dingfield, Stone, Griggs,
Wolfe. Commissioner Adams had an excused absence. Quorum certified.
H. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Robinson at 6:00 p.m.
IlL Approval of the Agenda
Motion by Commissioner Stone to approve the agenda as presented. Seconded by
Commissioner Boyd. Agenda approved.
Public Hearing
No public heatings presented.
V.. Approval of the November 17, 1998 ~91inutes
A motion was made by Commissioner Dingfield and seconded by Commissioner Wolfe to
approve the minutes of the November 17, 1998 meeting as presented. Question called:
Boyd, yes; Stone, yes; Dingfield, yes; Griggs, yes; Wolfe, yes; Robinson, yes. Motion
passes.
VI. Call to the Public
No public comment.
[/71. Director %. Report
Nothing to report.
Planning Commission Meeting December 22, 1998 Page 1 of 6
Study Session
No study session presented.
LY. OM Business.
Nothing to report for subcommittee.
New Business.
1. Special Use Permit for a day care facility at the Emmanuel Apostolic Church, 1023 6th
Street (SUP 98-0017).
Mr. Jon ltolan presented the staff report. This is being presented as a public meeting, rather
than a public hearing, based on the requirements in the Bremerton Municipal Code. The Planning
Commission's recommendation will be forwarded to City Council for a public hearing.
The Emmanuel Apostolic Church has applied for a Special Use Permit to operate a day care
facility for 41 children, ages 18 months to school age, in two rooms on the first floor of the
church. The day care would be operated Monday through Friday. Staff has conducted a review
of the proposed use with various City departments, and there were no relevant comments
received.
The analysis based on the criteria for approval is that the day care facility is substantively
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The plan encourages a variety of uses, including social
services; thus the plan for a daycare is supported by the plan policy and would be considered
appropriate. The applicant must also comply with ail applicable development standards and
requirements. With regards to parking, the ordinance requires one space for every five children,
which is a total of eight spaces for this proposal. These additionai parking spaces are provided on
the lot adjacent to the church site and would be available to the day care facility Monday through
Friday, and would aiso be available for services at the church on Sunday. A condition has been
proposed to limit the daycare operation to Monday through Friday so as not to have any impact
on the parking availability for church services.
~Mr. Holan noted the City had received a letter from an adjacent property owner regarding
increased traffic in the alley. Based on information obtained from the Institute of Transportation
Engineers, it is estimated that there would be approximately 8.3 trips per day each morning and
afternoon, for a totai of 16.6 trips. Staffbelieves the additional traffic would not create a
significant problem within the alley.
The use is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The neighborhood is commercial to
the north and east, and single family residential to the south and west. There is another church
with a school one block west of this proposed site. This area is zoned high density residential,
though many properties are currently single family residences. Day care facilities are allowed in
this zone if approved via the Special Use Permit process. One aspect of the day care facility is the
Planning Commission Meeting December 22, 1998 Page 2 of 6
provision for a 900 square foot fenced play area. There are two concerns that staff had with this.
One concern is the potential noise compatibility with existing single family residences in the area,
and the other is a safety concern. Staffhas proposed two conditions: 1) the outside play area
would be available from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., which is based on normal working hours. Staff
also recommends the day care operator would provide adult supervision in the play area at all
times during use of the area.
Staffbelieves the proposed use is needed in the community and that it is in the public interest to
have this type of facility in the community. Further, the proposed use does meet the necessary
tests and criteria for approval of this Special Use Permit. Staff recommends the Planning
Commission adopt Resolution 98-08, recommending approval to the City Council of Special Use
Permit with associated conditions.
Commissioner Robinson asked if there was any additional testimony received, other than the
one letter provided in the Planning Commission packet, to submit to the Planning Commission.
Mr. l:lolan indicated that no other testimony had been received in this matter. At the time of
application submittal, stafftold the applicant that notice would be sent to adjoining property
owners and if there were any concerns, the permit would be presented as a public hearing item.
Only one letter was received by staff.
Chairman Robinson asked if the applicant would like to make any comments to the Planning
Commissioners.
Larry Robertson, Pastor of the Emmanuel Apostolic Church, wished to thank the Planning
Department stafffor their work in processing the application. He also stated that approval of this
application will allow the church to ~ve a quality of child care that is greatly needed and that jobs
will be created. Pastor Robertson asked if the Planning Commissioners had any questions for him.
Chairman Robinson said that the commissioners would have questions for him, but would need
to ask if there was anyone present who was opposed to this application.
Public Comment
There was no public comment given.
Commissioner Wolfe asked how many people were in the congregation and approximately how
many children would be using the proposed day care facility?
Pastor Robertson said that there are approximately 300-350 church members and that there
would be space for 41 children at the daycare. He also indicated that people have been calling the
church already and asking them to reserve spaces in the daycare for their children, although the
church is not advertising for the daycare. This daycare would be state-of-the-art. They have been
working with the state agency in Olympia regarding codes, have talked with an architect, and feels
that this would be a daycare facility that the church and also the City would be very proud of. He
feels they would be adding to the quality of life of the people who use this facility.
Planning Commission Meeting December 22. 1998 Page 3 of 6
Commissioner Wolfe wanted to thank the large number of people present who had come in
support of the project.
Chairman Robinson closed the meeting to the public and opened it for Planning Commissioner's
comments. He informed Pastor Robertson that the commissioners would be making a
recommendation to the City Council, and that the City Council would conduct the official hearing
and will vote and make their decision on the matter.
Commissioner Dingfield asked if Pastor Robertson could explain what some of the enhanced
landscaping might be, as indicated in the application packet.
Pastor Robertson said that trees would be planted to help in terms of noise and privacy.
Commissioner Stone stated that Pastor Robertson should be commended on the enthusiasm and
sincerity of the supporters that were present at the meeting. He felt it was very impressive. Mr.
Stone wanted to comment on the one letter that was received with concerns about the proposed
daycare. Mr. Stone felt that the items listed in the letter had all been addressed during the staff'
report and through Pastor Robertson's comments.
Commissioner Boyd indicated that she had been involved with Head Start in the past and
wondered what type of staff he would be hiring, how many, and what type of training would they
have.
Pastor Robertson answered that the number of staffwould be determined by the number of
children enrolled at the daycare. He is hiring a consultant who will assist him with all aspects of
hiring personnel, purchasing equipment that would be functional and also meet state requirements,
and how to market the daycare. He will require that staff have a degree related to child care. He
anticipates h/ting the very best applicant possible. He is looking for someone who has a deep
desire to work with children.
Commissioner Griggs asked what type of fee would be charged to use the daycare.
Pastor Robertson responded that daycare tees are one of the items the consultant will be
recommending to him. He wants to ensure that low-income families are taken into consideration,
and also working with a sliding scale for fees.
Commissioner Dingfield noted that the application shows the daycare being occupied Monday
through Friday only. She asked if Pastor Robertson saw a time where he might have a need to
open it during the weekend?
Pastor Robertson said that he certainly sees a need for this, but currently they are asking for
Monday through Friday only. Child care is needed at all times, all days of the week.
Commissioner Dingfield feels that there is a need for weekend service, and she would like
Pastor Robertson to consider, at some point, 24-hour service.
Planning Commission Meeting December 22, 1998 Page 4 of 6
q4
Mr. Holan commented that if there were changes to be made to the conditions, that this certainly
is the time to discuss those changes.
Chairman Robinson asked if the play area was fenced. The findings mention that a paved
parking lot for 12 vehicles would be required. Would the church still have enough property to
meet this requirement?
Pastor Robertson indicated that the play area was fully fenced-in. Regarding the parking area,
they would be able to provide more than 12 parking spaces if needed.
Commissioner Stone asked if there was a reason for the Monday-Friday limitation on the staff
report.
Mr. Holan answered that the staff was looking at the issue of potential parking conflicts between
the daycare facility and the church services on Sunday.
Pastor Robertson feels there is plenty of parking available. He felt that the staff was also looking
at the noise level.
Mr. Holan responded that the noise issue is more related to the hours of use of the outside play
area.
Commissioner Dingfield asked if the conditions could be reconsidered. Most day cares are open
until 6:00 p.m. She also wondered why these additional conditions were put on this application,
and perhaps the zoning ordinance itself would be more applicable. State law is pushing for quali~
daycare and the regulations surrounding daycare are very strict. She felt that the word "adult"
could be removed from the condition regarding adult supervision. There are many local schools
that have excellent training in early childhood development. Students from these schools could
possibly volunteer at the daycare facility, but may not necessarily be an "adult." The state is very
restrictive on all requirements for operating a daycare and if the state deemed a teenager qualified
to supervise the play area, then the City should be able to work within the state requirements.
Pastor Robertson added that they will be following the state guidelines and would be staffing
with personnel that had passed all requirements through the state or through the school they were
enrolled in.
Chairman Robinson asked if Pastor Robertson had any difficulty with the word "adult" in the
condition?
Pastor Robertson said that the church's overall mission for the daycare is to give people an
opportunity to interface with the children to help their growth. The state requirements are so
strict that by following them, there should not be any problems with any staff member they have
supervising the outdoor play area.
Planning Commission Meeting December 22, 1998 Page 5 of 6
A motion was made by Commissioner Dingfleld to adopt Resolution 98-07 approving the
Emmanuel Apostolic Church application for a Special Use Permit for a day care center at 1023
6th Street, without staff's recommended conditions. Seconded by Commissioner Boyd.
Question called: Boyd, yes; Stone, yes; Dingfield, yes; Wolfe, yes; Griggs, yes; Robinson,
yes. Motion passes.
Chairman Robinson informed Pastor Robertson that he would be notified when the City Council
would be hearing this application.
2. Election of Planning Commission officers for 1999.
A motion was made by Commissioner Stone to elect Commissioner Joan Dingfield as Chairman
of the Planning Commission for 1999, and to elect Commissioner Jerry Griggs as Co-Chairman.
Seconded by Commissioner Boyd. Question called: Boyd, yes; Stone, yes; Dingfield, yes;
Wolfe, yes; Griggs, yes; Robinson, abstain. Motion passes.
XI. Adjournment
Meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by:
Pattie Haas, Recording Secretary
Approved by:
Bill Robinson, Chairman
Planning Commission Meeting December 22, 1998 Page 6 of 6
CITY OF BREMERTON
BREM£RTON PLANNING COMMISSION
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
REGARDING:
Prepared by: James Coombes
SUMMARY
1, Applicant: Emmanuel Apostolic Church
1023 6~ Street
Bremerton, WA 98337
2, Location: 1023 6~ Street
3. Tax Assessor's Lot No.: 3718-024-027-0008
4. Attachments: o SUP Application
o Comprehensive Plan Map
o Zoning Map
o Site Plan
5. Comprehensive Plan Map: High-density Residential (HDR)
6. Zoning: High-density Residential (MR)
FINDINGS
1. Property & Development:
The subject property is 110 ft. by 102.96 ft. lot on the south side of 6th Street,
between Warren Avenue and Chester Avenue, in the 'MR' zone. The site
contains an existing two story church building and paved parking lot for 12
vehicles. Lots adjacent to west of the property contain three single story existing
houses with additional accessory parking and a play area designated for the
proposed day care.
2. Surrounding Land Uses:
West & South: Residential and office.
North: Business and residential.
East: Business.
3. Requested SPECIAL USE:
The applicant requests a Special Use Permit (SUP) to operate a day care
center for 41 children aged 18 months to school age, in two rooms
totaling approximately 1600 square feet, on the first floor of the existing
church, in a High-density Residential (MR) zone. The applicant has
indicated that the day care would be operated Monday through Friday.
The church is currently being extensively renovated.
The application is being processed non-administratively because of a
letter received from a neighboring property owner protesting the day care
use. BMC 21.02.905( c ) states in part:
mA SUP that may have significant impacts beyond the immediate site, that
is of neighborhood or community-wide interest, or that may be of a
sensitive or controversial nature, may be classified a Non-administrative
SUP by the Director and processed as a type III application."
4. Comment Survey: The application was routed to various City
Departments for review and comment. No relevant
comments were received.
CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL
Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) 21.02.905 ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIAL
USE PERMITS, [d] "Criteria for Administrative Special Use Permits" states
that the Director of Community Development may approve a Special Use Permit
only if all of the following are true:
1. Is the proposal substantively consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
either desiqnated "SUP" in the Zoninq Ordinance, or is beinq processed ag
an "Unlisted Use"?
YES. The day care use is substantively consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan. Element B5 of The Plan, The Vision For
Bremerton, Human Development/Education, encourages a variety of
needed social services to help children within the community. Thus, the
proposed use is supported by Plan policies and would be considered
appropriate for the area.
2. Will the proposal be consistent with all applicable development standards
and requirements, includin.q the availability of all needed utilities and
services?
YES. The applicant must comply with all applicable development
standards and requirements for this substantially renovated church with
day care facility. All needed utilities and services are current provided to
the existing church.
The zoning ordinance requires one space for every five children, which
would require eight (8) for the proposal. These additional parking spaces
for the day care are provided on the adjacent lot to west of the church.
These spaces would be available for church service use on Sunday, since
the day care is intended to operate Monday through Friday. To insure
this, a condition is proposed to limit the day care operation during these
days.
3. Will the proposal, alon~ with anv miti(~ation measures or other conditions
of approval, avoid significant adverse environmental consequences?
YES. Though there has been concern expressed by an adjacent property
owner regarding increased traffic in the alley (see attached letter), the
access to the church parking lot via east bound lane of 6~h Street to the
north, and the adjacent alley to the south, do not appear to present
significant environmental consequences.
Using Institute of Transportation Engineers estimates of vehicular trips
per day, the day care use would generate an additional 8.3 trip per day
both in the morning and afternoon. The additional traffic would not create
a significant traffic problem for the alley.
4. Will the proposal be compatible with adiacent uses and surrounding
nei.qhborhood?
YES. The surrounding neighborhood is commercial to the north and east,
single-family residential to the south and west. There is another church
3
with school one block west. However, the zoning designation for the area
is High-density Residential, though many properties remain single-family
use. This zone allows some mix of compatible non-residential uses.
Mixed use developments are encouraged and day care facilities are
allowed in the zone district if found, through a Special Use Permit, to be
appropriate for the specific location.
Another issue is the provision for a play area. An approximate 900
square foot, fenced play area is indicated on the site plan adjacent and
west of the church. The play area is separated from 6th street by an
existing house and from the alley by an existing garage, but would be
adjacent to the existing single-family uses. The play area represents a
potential noise compatibility issue with the existing uses. Further, the
play area for the children could present a potential safety issue if not
properly supervised. Thus, staff is proposing two conditions to address
the noise and safety issues.
5. Does the proposal comply with all other criteria or desiqn ,quidelines that
are applicable to the specific use or type of development?
YES. The proposal must comply with all other criteria or design
guidelines associated with this type of use, including the Uniform Building
Code, Uniform Fire Code, and State licensing for day care centers. The
applicant has shown substantial compliance with zoning requirements by
applying for a Special Use Permit and addressing the five (5) necessary
criteria.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The proposed use is needed in the community, to provide day care
services in this area, and is in the public interest.
2. The proposed use does meet the necessary tests and criteria required for
approval of a Special Use Permit.
DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Based on the record developed, the Bremerton Planning Commission recommends
approval the Special Use Permit for a day care facility on the first floor of the existing
church at 1023 6~' Street, as shown on the attached Site Plan, subject to the following
conditions:
1. The day care center shall operate only Monday through Friday.
2. The applicant shall limit the use of the play area for the day care center between the
hours or 8:00am to 5:00pm.
3. The applicant or any subsequent operator shall provide adult supervision of the play
area at all times during the use of the area by the day care center.
Bill Robinson, Chair Date
Bremerton Planning Commission
5
.% . . , ~r .... .: . . · -'. - ~"L-,~-%: ~"~' - ~= · '" . - " .'-- ' "
of Breme on OcT 3 o
Special Use Permit
BREMERTON
Application ~U~L~.S DEPARTUENT
***Please provide 5 copies of Applicatioa and site plan***
Special Use Permit - BMC 21.02.905 l Special Use Permit may be approved for a land
use that is not specifically listed in the Land Use Tables of Chapter V as an "Allowed
Principal Use" or an "Accessory Use", and for uses that are listed as "SUP" (Special Use
Permit required).
Instructions
Please complete the following application with as much detail as possible about your
proposal and submit it along with the application fee. The application must be complete
before any processing, can occur.
Applicant: ~(,Arx/ /~ cCJ~/~ A'tA--
Address: /[o N O ~T~- 'T'3 '~ ~7-, PhoneNumber:
<~ ~4~L% ~ 1~$ - o4-'~o
Contact Person (if different than applicant):
Address: Phone Number:
Title Holder (if different than applicant):
Address: Io z. 5 & +~ .~TW~.z-r'- Phone Number:
Page 1 of 3
Revised on I 1/I 7/97 8:30 AM C:W£y Documentsk~pe~al Use Permit. doc
Site Address (location):
Tax Assessor's Parcel #: Zoning Designation:
Parcel Size (property dimensions):
Legal Description (aUacb ex~ra sheet if' necess~j):
Special Use Requested:
Proposal (please describe in as much detail as possible the nature of the development):
Criteria for Approval:
Your requested Special Use Permit can be approved only if all of the following criteria
can be answered "YES".
1. Is the proposal consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and either
desigxmted "SUP" in the Zoning Ordinance, or is being processed as an "Unlisted
Use"7
2. Will the proposal comply with all applicable development standards and
requirements, including the availability of all needed utilities and services?
3. Will the proposal, along with any mitigation measures or other conditions of
approval, avoid significant adverse environmental consequences?
4. Will the proposal be compatible with adjacent uses and surrounding
neighborhood9.
Page 2 of 3
Revised on 11/l 7/97 8:30 AM C.'~?vfy DocurnentsLgpecial Use PermiLdoc
$. Does the proposal comply with all other criteria or design guidelines that are
applicable to the specific use or type of development?
Please provide below (or on a separate paper) detailed explanations or other information
that will assist in the review of your request and that will help show that your proposal
meets the above criteria.
Applicant's Statement
I hereby certify that the statements contained herein are correct. I understand that
conditions of approval may be required to adequately protect the zone or neighborhood
wikin which the subject use is located, and I agree to abide by those conditions.
I understand that the decision on this application may be appealed and possibly
overturned. I also understand that an approved Special Use Permit is subject to future
review and possible revocation by the City Council for any violation of terms or
limitations.
I understand that approval of this Special Use Permit may be appealed and possibly
overturned by the City Council.
I have read, understand, and ag-ree with all of the above statements.
cant Date
The City of Bremerton does not discriminate on the basis of race, sex, color, religion,
national origin, age, or disability in the provision of services, in pro~arns or
activities, or employment opportunities and benefits.
P. age 3 of 3
Revised on l 1/17/97 8:30 A3d C:~vly Documents~pecial Use PerrniLdoc
McCLELLAN ARCHITECTS
Special Use Permit Application
Emmanuel Apostolic Church
1023 6th Street
Bremerton, WA
Applicant: Regan McClellan AIA
Criteria for Approval:
1) The proposal is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and is designated
"SUP" in the Zoning Ordinance.
2) The proposal will comply with all applicable development standards and
requirements.
a) Parking for the daycare use will be provided for on adjacent lots and on the
same side of the street for safety.
b) Landscaping areas will be enhanced and enlarged by 380 square feet along 6th
street.
c) A play area will be provided for at an adjacent lot.
d) Access to the daycare and play area will be fi.om the alley side of the building
and away from 6th street for additional safety.
3) There will be no adverse environmental consequences of the proposed development.
4) The daycare will be compatible with the adjacent uses and surrounding neighborhood.
a) "Star of the Sea" school is one block from the proposed development
b) Currently there is no public daycare available in this area of Bremerton
c) The daycare will provide a much needed service in this area of Bremerton
5) The proposal will comply with all criteria and design guidelines that are applicable to
a daycare service.
a) Daycare planning is coordinated with the City of Bremerton Building
Department, Fire Department,. and Department of Public Works and Utilities.
b) Daycare planning is coordinated with DSHS, represented by Ms. Lowest
Jefferson.
110 N. 77TH ST. SEATTLE, WA 98103 PH:206.783.7341 FX:206.781.4857
"'""' '""' L~-[fl NVld 3J_IS
5980 Su~set Ave. N.~o
Bremerton, WA 98311
November 7, 1998
City of Bremerton
Department of Community Development
286 Fourth Street
File ~ SU798-0017
As property owners directly across the alley from the church
we highly protest the proposed day care.
This protest is for the following reasons:
1. The lack of safety for the children attending the day
care; no safe place for the children to play or do
outside activities.
2. Conjestion due to additional traffic in the alley.
3. Lack of parking; no parking on sixth street; limited
parking in the alley and around the church.
4. The negative impact on the entire neighborhood.
Jim Richardson
Terry Richardson