Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/27/96 AGENDABREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 239 4TH STREET BREMERTON, WA 98337 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA NARCH 27, 1996 CALL TO ORDER - 5:30 P.M. A. Pledge Of Allegiance B. Invocation 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 p~ the request of a Council member. - A. Minutes - March 6, 1996 #AB96-062 / B. Minutes - March 13, 1996 CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS 4. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS 5. MAYOR'S REPORT 6. PUBLIC RECOGNITION -- (Comments Limited to 3 Minutes) NEW BUSINESS A. Bid Award Recommendation For Golf Course #AB96-064 Capital Equipment/Barnett Implementation Company Bid Award Recommendation For Golf Course Capital Equipment/Western Equipment Callow Avenue Basin CSO Reduction Project; Priority 1, Phase 2 (V4214) - Amendment To Professional Services Agreement With CH2M Hill Budget Adjustment Converting The City's Fleet Maintenance From A Contracted To A City Staffed Operation #AB96-065 3~7 #AB96-066 ~i #AB96-067 ~0 ORDINANCES 'A. Ordinance #4549 (Second Reading) Amending #AB96-061'70 Parking Regulations To Enhance Penalties, Repeal Reparking 1. SUBJECT: AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL M~NUTES - MARCH 6, 1996 FOR AGENDA OF: March 27, 1996 ORIGINATING DEPT: City Council ORIGINATOR: John Law, President DATE SUBMITTED: 3-19-96 2. ~: (comment on back if necessary) ENDORSEMENT__ INFORMATION__ APPROVED BY COUNCIL SUBMITTAL: MAYOR coUNcIL PRESIDENT~ 4. SLR4I~ARY STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENT FOR~COUNClL ACTION: 8. RECOMMENDATION: 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE: TAPE #1363 UNAPPROVED DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING NINUTES MARCH 6, 1996 #0076 #0096 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, March 6, 1996, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President John Law presiding. Council members present were A1 Colvin, Cecil McConnell, Carlos Montgomery, Sherril Huff-Menees, and Richard Neville. Council members Bob Winters, David Farr, and Lon Overson were absent. Also present were City Attorney Ian Sievers and City Clerk Kathy McCluskey. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Law and Invocation given by Pastor Ray Streutker. President Law announced an Executive Session in the Council Conference room will be held immediately following the City Council meeting. Topic of discussion will be: "Planning Position to be Taken during Collective Bargaining." CONSENT &~ENDA A. Minutes -- February 14, 1996 #AB96-045 M/S/C/U(Neville/Montgomery) to approve Consent Agenda as presented. CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS Vouchers audited and certified by the auditing officer as required by RCW 42.24.080, and those expense reimbursement claims certified as required by RCW 42.24.090, have been recorded on a listing that had been made available to the Council. M/S/C/U(Colvin/Montgomery) on March 6, 1996, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 195470, 195479 through 195482, 195485, and 195508 through 195855 in the amount of $1,453,961.39; and Regular Payroll in the amount of $857,375.40 for the period ending 2/29/96. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Mr. Colvin discussed an article in the Sun by Jim Rothgeb on the topic of scotch broom, and announced he had blank forms for any senior citizen who would like to state their concerns about the problem, or any ideas for a solution. Mr. McConnell announced the next District 2 Neighborhood Meeting is scheduled for March 12, 1996, at Fire Station No. 3 located at E. 31st Street & Olympus Drive, at 6:30 P.M. Special guest for the evening will be Police Chief Paul Du Fresne, and the two Beat TAPE #1363 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 6, 1996 Page 2 of 17 Officers for that area. Mrs. Huff-Menees thanked The Sun, Bremerton Mainstreet Association, Bremerton Area Chamber of Commerce, and the Downtown Waterfront Task Force for sponsoring the Downtown Bremerton Image Workshop that took place last Thursday evening in the Washington Mutual Building. The workshop was well attended, and a real success. Ideas were presented by architect Bill Isley on possibilities for downtown revitalization. Mr. Neville reminded the public about the West Narrows Neighborhood Information Network Meeting scheduled for March 12, 7:00 P.M. at the Neighborhood Christian Center at 5th & Warren. Topics to be discussed include the Puget Power Park, and the Sewer Plant Upgrades and Stormwater Program. Mr. Law announced the District 3 Neighborhood Meeting will be held March 19, 7:00 P.M., at the Senior Center. Special Guest will be Randy McGreal from Fletcher Wright to discuss "Downtown Waterfront Development". MAYORtS REPORT Mayor Horton discussed an update of the USS Missouri funding issue which was still "alive" at the Legislature; however, there is a battle between the House and Senate about the source of funding. She introduced Megan Kalsen, City Grant Writer, who gave a presentation on an "Activity Report 1995" which showed loans and grants the City has applied for and those which have actually been funded. Over 30% of the City's 1995 budget was funded through grants and loans, with a total of $4,117,000 in cash received by the City. For 1996 to date, Megan has assisted with 12 applications for more than 6.5 million dollars, and has used 32% of her contract time. A lot of the funding dead lines were brought forward this year because there is very little regional funding coming through the Puget Sound Regional Council, so many state and federal programs have made their deadlines earlier, so her office has been very active. Mr. Neville thanked her for all her hard work, and is hopeful the City can be as successful this year as they were last year. PUBLIC RECOGNITION Gordy Byrd, Bremerton, asked Council members to speak into the microphones because some people have difficulty hearing. He attended the Downtown Bremerton Image Workshop meeting and a voting caucus meeting for his area. Don Atklnson, on behalf of the Homebuilders Association, announced their annual Home Show to be held March 15-17, at the Kitsap Pavilion. TAPE #1363 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 6, 1996 Page 3 of 17 Ray Streutker, discussed the Kitsap Museum moving to downtown Bremerton on Armed Forces Day, and his offer to display his collection of military telephones at the museum during Armed Forces Week. Carol Atkinson, Bremerton Mainstreet, commented on the successful Downtown Bremerton Image Workshop and thanked all the citizens who attended, and The Sun for helping to put the event together. Emily Moshay - thanked the American Legion Post #149, and several others involved for providing cash, time, supplies, and labor to build the toy storage shed for the KCAP Head Start Program. YWCA Women of Achievement Awards Luncheon - April 30, 1996, 11:30 A.M., at the Kitsap Golf & Country Club. Deadline for nominations has been extended to Friday, March 10. Del Knauss commented that in his opinion, Councilman Winters had asked some very good questions at the previous Council meeting, however, Mayor Horton's response to those questions was out of line. If the Mayor felt Mr. Winters had done something wrong, she should have discussed it with him in private. He urged the Mayor to use the "Mayor's Report" for her comments, and to stay seated at other times unless invited by Council members to speak on issues. Shirley Green, Merle Norman, - thanked Bremerton Main Street for sponsoring the "Image Workshop. The Swing City Committee's 40's Dance at the Eagles will be on May 15, 8:00 P.M. to 12 midnight. Tickets - $15 per person, and $25 per couple - available at Los Andes Import shop, Make Waves Deli, Washington Mutual, and Bremerton Area Chamber Of Commerce. Charlie Brown - Even without State funding for the U.S.S. Missouri, there is still $4 million coming from Kitsap County and $2 million from the Port of Bremerton, for a total of $6 million. Suggestion - when presentations are made on the Sinclair Landing Project, the presence of Mayor Horton would be beneficial in understanding the public side of the public/private funding and risks involved. Don Larson, Washington Scuba Alliance President - Marine life educational signs will be installed in Evergreen Park (installation materials have been donated by Eagle Hardware). Sinclair Inlet Clean-Up April 20, noon to 3:00 P.M., starting at the First Street Dock. The Army Corp of Engineers will be bringing a large floating crane, and will be open for tours, and the U.S. Coast Guard will bring a 41' patrol boat also available for tours. A Marine Fair will be part of the "Countdown to Earth Day" event. A concern - some of the new garbage cans around down over-flowing, and possibly need to be emptied more frequently. Suggestion - that City TAPE #1363 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 6, 1996 Page 4 of 17 officials contact the Federal Government to donate a ship for an underwater park to boost the tourism in this area. Andy Parypa, asked Council to correct two statements made at last Wednesdays meeting regarding Ordinance No. 4543 on oversized vehicles. He presented a written statement of his concerns. 7A - EVERGREEN PARK EXP]tNSION PROJECT -- AMENDMENT NO. i TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH FAILURE ANALYSIS ASSOCIATES, INC., ~AB96-046 Failure Analysis Associates (FAA), under contract with the City, has completed Phase I investigations of existing conditions of properties within the proposed expansion area of Evergreen Park, and has concluded that the City should proceed to the next phase of project development within the current plan. A Professional Services Agreement (PSA) authorizing funding of Phases I and II of the project was approved by Council effective October 18, 1995. An amendment to the existing PSA is recommended as follows: a) The existing Evergreen Park property is outside the study area defined in the Scope of Services. It was necessary to include this property in the Phase I study at an additional cost of $5,900. b) Consultant support services are needed in the maximum amount of $27,716 to bring timely closure of remediation issues from the Department of Ecology (Ecology) so that Phase I development of Evergreen Park planned for this year can proceed in parallel with remediation efforts in the remaining park expansion area. c) Authorize completion of the original Scope of Services in the amount of $183,206. This work is required to complete the remedial investigation and feasibility study which will define the remediation plan to be approved by Ecology. Notice to proceed with work included in this item will be subject to the City's successful negotiation of Purchase Option Agreements with current owners of the subject properties. Gene Sampley, Public Works Director, stated this project is being managed by his department, on behalf of the Parks Department, for the remedial investigation and feasibility study required to initiate remediation of the property that is included in the Evergreen Park expansion area. Gor~y Byr4 asked the locations of the boundaries for the expansion. Mr. Sample¥ stated from the existing park boundaries, around Smith Cove to Highland, and the portion north of Sheldon Blvd. Don Larson encouraged Council to approve this proposal presented. as #1773 TAPE #1363 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 6, 1996 Page 5 of 17 Mr. Neville stated he is very much in favor of this proposal, but before expanding Evergreen Park, the City needs to make sure the existing park is ready for the upgrades. M/S/C/U(Neville/Montgomery) to approve Amendment No. 1 to the professional services agreement with Failure Analysis Associates, Inc. and authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment subject to City Administrative Policies and Procedures; to approve attached Budget Adjustment #96-4. 7B - MUNICIPAL COURT BUDGET ADJUSTMENT --REORGANIZATION, ~AB96-047 A reorganization of probation service to provide for referral of defendants to outside agencies, scheduling, monitoring, and reporting to the court will result in the elimination of one position. The Court's new Discs computer system includes a program for monitoring cases with probation conditions and collection of fees. This organizational change will provide for a more efficient method of managing probation conditions. Kathy McCluskey, City Clerk, stated there is no legal requirement for a city to have a Probation Officer or Probation Office for misdemeanor Court, and many cities do not. What is being proposed is not eliminating staff entirely from this function since there will be one staff person devoted entirely to probation services, and back-up service provided by the Municipal Court Office. Currently, the Probation case load is around 600-700 cases, which is too high to adequately provide probation services with one Probation Officer. The addition of a second officer would be costly, with no appreciable increase in revenue. Because of the high case load, the office is already functioning to a great degree as a scheduling, monitoring, and reporting agency. This reorganization will not be a significant change from current operation, but will formalize processes and improve efficiency. Kathleen McCluskey, City Clerk, read following letters into the record from John Wise, Executive Director of West Sound Treatment Center; and from Barbara Day Miller, Executive Director of Agape' Unlimited; lending their support to retain the Probation Officer position. R.A. Zedinsk¥, Court Administrator for the City of Tacoma, which stated their new computerized probation program was a success. Court Judges say they are pleased with the new monitoring program, and compliments have also been received from representatives of the Pierce County Bar with the speed in which defendants are brought back before the court when they violate conditions of sentencing. Also, an actual savings in the current budget will be $200,000 as a result of this action. Penny Hill, Court Services Manager, commented on the operation of the scheduling and monitoring function. She pointed out that the TAPE #1363 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 6, 1996 Page 6 of 17 computer is just a "tool" that will be used to monitor defendants. A staff person will still be available for defendants to contact for treatment agency referrals. DISCIS is a state-wide computer system and already has in place a program that will allow a city to monitor defendants for compliance. Reports can be generated weekly, monthly, or daily. The staff person will be responsible to report any defendant, who is out of compliance, to the Prosecutor; and the computer will be able to check with the state-wide computer system for any additional violations. Probation is not being eliminated, but the monitoring procedure will be changed. The public has been confused in the past with the two offices, and having probation handled through the Court Office will require just one stop, thereby eliminating any confusion. Bruce Martin, Municipal Judge, expressed his support of this change because it will be better for the court, and the citizens of the City. The current system is not working because the Probation Officer is overwhelmed with cases, which is not conducive to quick justice. He will now use referrals more than he has in the past, because he was always hesitant to further burden the Probation Officer. He is confident this new system will be a success. Mayor Horton stated anything that the City can do to alleviate some potential deficits toward the end of the year, she will try to do. The County is looking at a sever downturn in sales tax, and the City right now is holding its own, but come the middle of this year Wal-Mart will open outside of the City, Safeway is going to be leaving, and some other businesses have left to relocate outside of the City. It is anticipated that 1997 will be an extremely difficult financial year. She has presented several proposals, in the past, to streamline and be more cost effective, and this is another one of those proposals. Any time a RIF situations is considered it is difficult, regardless of the service affected. She believes the proposed system will work as well, at a lower cost, without having the defendants harmed in any way. The following individuals spoke in support of retaining the Probation Officer position with the present system: Darryl Nelson, 1238 7th Street; Don McConne11, 22500 Sunlight Place, Poulsbo; Tina Miller, 5832 Nora Street; Evelyn McConne11, 5150 NW Mystic Ct., Silverdale; Kelley Rhinehart, 500 Pacific Avenue #307; Ruby DeSantis, 2009 Magnuson Way (DWI Victims Panel); Michael J. McDuff¥, 1745 N. Cambrian; Michael Price, 3543 Redwing Tr. NW; Shirley Prior, 441 S. (Prior & Associates); Paul Casson, 115 S. Cambrian; James Shirk, 3627 Wheaton Way (Tara Counseling Center); Ellen Epstein, 1104 Pitt Avenue (RMH Services); Jan Enevaldsen, 3468 NE Pantridge Hallow Road (DWI Victims Panel); Carole Hooker, 4792 Parkhurst Lane #102 (Domestic Violence Task Force); and Jan Batt, 4412 Fitz Drive (Cascade Recovery Center). TAPE #1363 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 6, 1996 Page 7 of 17 Several of the above individuals used their own lives as examples of how important it was for them to be able to meet with someone face-to-face, not a computer, to give them that pat on the back when needed, or to just encourage them to keep trying. It was felt that someone taking the time to talk to them was very important to keep up the motivation when they felt like giving up. If a defendant is only dealing with a piece of paper from the computer or a data entry person, and not having to face somebody, who will hold them accountable for what they are doing? It will mean nothing. TAPE #1364 Additional reasons stated in support of keepinq the Probation Officer are as follows: (1) Public safety; (2) Success in treatment; (3) Financial; (4) Probation Officer is almost like a parent to over-age adults, who do not know how to manage their own lives, and still need a parent; (5) A real person is needed in this position to spot the real bad people that come through the system, to be able to keep them on a "short leash"; (6) Suggestion that the present probation system stay in place with the new computer system used as an added tool; (7) Strong point of the criminal justice system is the ability to make certain offenders are in compliance with their probation, and that is the job of the probation officer; (8) Someone needs to be looking over the shoulder of those criminals on a regular basis; (8) Is the City putting themselves in a vulnerable position if an offender on probation, only monitored by a computer, goes out and hurts or kills an innocent person? (9) Who is the person left to monitor the probation system? Would it be simply a data entry person, or another probation officer? (10) Many examples were given of the types of referrals made by Linda Rose, and other ways she helps people; (11) The future image of Bremerton is also at stake; (12) Will the computerized system monitor a defendant that lives out-of-state? (13) More clients "fall through the cracks" when a City does not have a Probation Officer/Department; (14) Some Pierce County treatment providers and some attorneys have a difference of opinion on how well the Tacoma Municipal Court's probation monitoring system is working; (15) Tacoma Municipal Court hired four new employees to implement their computerized probation monitoring system; (16) A computer program could not set up programs, such as the DWI Victims Panel, which is very successful and a model for the State; (17) The number of incarcerations will increase for those not complying with probation orders, at a cost of $45 - $50 per day; (18) New DWI laws call for a major probation violation penalty of 30 days in jail; (19) Who will monitor mental health clients, who also have substance abuse problems, but are not eligible for mental health treatment from State agencies? (20) Cities that do not have Probation Officers are going to have higher failure rates; (21) Through the efforts of TAPE #1364 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 6, 1996 Page 8 of 17 Linda Rose, several mental health clients are clean and sober, and gainfully employed for the first time in many years. Such an achievement could not be been accomplished by a computer; (22) More Probation Officers are needed, not less; (23) Who will be the person responsible to monitor the computer that will tract the client load that is currently on Linda Rose's desk? (24) Will a Bench Warrant be issued if someone is found to be out of compliance? (25) How many police officers will be available to serve Bench Warrants, and how much room is available in the jail to house those that are picked up? (26) Will those charged with serious offenses be required to attend the DWI Victim Panel presentations? (27) Defendants calling into Municipal Court will be faced with a Voice Mail Routing System, which may have an adverse affect on them in their effort to report in or to ask questions of the Probation staff person; (28) Domestic Violence Counseling providers are concerned about what will happen to defendants who are not closely monitored to make sure they are in treatment; (29) Probation Officers are trained to recognize attitudes in defendants, and whether or not they are making progress in overcoming their behavioral problems; (30) Suggestion - raise taxes to pay for two Probation Officers; (31) If the issue is insufficient funds, then how can the City produce an elaborate "budget book" document. If the City plans budget cuts in personnel in 1997, it was suggested that the City not publish elaborate documents like the 1996 budget book. Mrs. Huff-Menees asked Ms. Epstein to clarify why the mental health clients she referred to would not have qualified for any other program? Ms. Epstein stated she did not know the reasons they were rejected; however Linda Rose had spent years trying to get them into appropriate treatment. Ms. Huff-Menees' question could only be answered by Kitsap Mental Health. Lind& Rose, City of Bremerton Probation Officer, stated she has been fighting for this position for seven years and if she had as much support from her superiors as she has from the public she works with, this would not be happening. She takes pride in her job and has done every thing possible to help keep defendants off the street and keep the citizens of Bremerton safe. With the case load she carries, it has been next to impossible and with the paperwork load it has been more than impossible. She is supported by one staff person and if it wasn't for her, she would be buried in paperwork. She deals with clients having committed domestic violence assault, DWI defenders, malicious mischief problems and other gross misdemeanor offenses. The people she deals with are criminals and they commit 90% of the crime under the influence of alcohol and drugs. She does her best to keep these individuals in compliance and report to the Municipal Court Judge when they are not in compliance. Yes, Monday Court calendars are large, but she TAPE #1364 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 6, 1996 Page 9 of 17 already monitors, by hand, 30 or more cases per month, who are on a write-in status and who are in compliance. The people she sees on probation are those in need of extra pushing to get into compliance, many are on welfare, transient or on government grants and some have zero funding to pay $45.00 or $100.00 to get an alcohol evaluation. There is a State run organization for alcohol treatment, but sometimes there is a 3-month waiting list for a bed in that program. She has mental health clients that come to her office on a weekly basis to report to her that they are taking their medication, that they have no new offenses and are doing their community service work. She monitors two people taking the drug "Antibuse" because they can't stop drinking. She was overwhelmed by the number of people in the audience in support of her as the City's Probation Officer. She wants to continue being the City's Probation Officer, but in order to do that she needs more support in the department and additional funding. Ms. McCluskey stated for clarification that the Probation fees do not cover the cost of Probation services. Ms. Rose was correct in that her case load is extremely high and it is difficult for her to keep up with her schedule, report to the Court, as well as counseling defendants. There are two options, i.e., hire more Probation Officers and fund the program at a higher level or find another way to provide the services. The solution recommended to Council is a different way of providing Probation services. While this is an emotion and people issue, such a situation also exists when there is a storage of staff in the Police Department or Fire Department. The City does not have the luxury of having enough money to do everything desired in the best possible fashion. The City is faced with the situation of determining how to provide the service to the best of our ability with the resources available. What is being proposed may not be the ideal, but Bremerton cannot afford to provide the ideal. Council would not be asked to consider this option if it was felt jail costs would go up extremely high, that would defeat the purpose. In response to the comment about a "flat probation fee" being more costly than the current $30.00 per month, the proposed flat fee can be paid on a payment plan and will reduce the overall cost to the defendant. She emphasized the majority of the defendants do not pay their probation costs when they walk out of the courtroom, but rather over time. It will amount to a lesser cost to the defendant for a lesser service and still have the opportunity to pay their fines and Probation costs on a payment plan. On the liability issue, she believes the liability exposure is a real issue; however the liability is far greater at the present time than under what is being proposed. The City is much more exposed when purporting to have a Probation Department and to be counseling and monitoring defendants and not doing it because of a too large workload. This is not a criticism of the Probation Officer, but rather the TAPE #1364 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 6, 1996 Page 10 of 17 function of the service. Under the proposed program, the City is sending the defendants out to professionally trained counselors, for the required treatment. It has been inferred that people will be "left to flounder", which is not correct because the City will continue to make referrals to the same agencies that are currently providing those services. Ms. Hill again emphasized the computer system will be used as a "tool" for monitoring, and the Court will still be referring individuals to the appropriate agencies who are certified to provide necessary counseling services. It will be the counseling agencies' responsiblity to make sure the individuals are "on the straight and narrow", making sure they are in treatment and reporting to the Court. The person assigned to monitor the City's probation monitoring will be responsible for making sure the reports are filed showing the defendants are in compliance with the Court-ordered treatment. A Court staff person, who comes with 12 years experience in the Court system, will be available to respond to questions/information associated with individual Probation clients, following up with the treatment agencies, if there is a problem or a question, and the person the treatment agencies will be calling. In response to the comment that the City would immediately issue warrants for defendants not in compliance, it is anticipated the Court would have a show cause hearing for those people not in compliance. Bench Warrants would be issued for the most serious offenders, who are not in compliance with their Court ordered treatment. The Court staff person assigned to the Probation system will have no other Court duties or have further data imputing since the Court cases are entered when they first come into the Court system. Other Court staff members will provide back up support as needed. Judqe Martin stated change in people is probably one of the most gratifying things to see in anyone's work and he has seen that in his position as Judge. However, the problem is he does not see enough of those changes because many people ignore the Court's orders and it is 6-8 months before he is aware of the situation before he can do anything to once again get someone to change. He is in favor of change, counseling and rehabilitation, but he must use a different method because his responsibilities are not to counsel, but to get people to counseling. He felt confident the proposed system is well thought out and it will work. He described how defendants will leave his Court and go directly to the Court Probation Scheduler where they will be told to get into a treatment program within 30 days. Under the present system, it does not work that quickly because of the workload carried by the City's Probation Officer. If someone comes into his Courtroom and states he is having a problem paying their fines and needs more time, he listeners to them and grants them more time. When people are set TAPE #1364 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 6, 1996 Page 11 of 17 to go to jail and have a family emergency, they can come to his court and explain the situation, which allows him to then schedules around that family emergency. If the Court receives information from a treatment center that someone is having a problem meeting their commitment, they can be brought before the Judge on Probation review and he can determine if they are telling the truth and how the Court can help them. The people, who testified during this issue, are sincere and he assured them he was not taking away their opportunities for counseling because it is required by law that they enter into counseling. He wants to see people rehabilitated and he is concerned about his community. Mayor Horton stated more than once she has assured Council when programmatic changes are made they will be evaluated to see how well it is functioning. In the event it is not functioning as anticipated, she will come back to Council and report that situation. The current system is flawed and what she is looking for is a cost effective remedy to the system. She will be monitoring jail costs, the criminal activity in the community to make sure there is not an adverse affect due to this change and in any situation that arises where it is determined it is working adversely, she'll be back for Council requesting a different approach. Mr. Montgomery pointed out the need for people to accept responsibility for their actions and saw no reason why this proposal could not be supported. He felt it was physically impossible for anyone to handle the caseload carried by Ms. Rose. Mrs. Huff-Menees stated as Judge Martin indicated, some significant comments have been made by those in the audience, which brought about some confusion in part of what the public perceives and what can be accomplished with the recommended program. Based on the information she has been given on three occasions, she felt those individuals having such a fear about the safety of our citizens would be celebrating this change because there will be much quicker notification of non-compliance. If not, she asked someone to show her the discrepancy. Out of 700 people, she could not believe the majority are people that will constantly be in compliance, which is what she is hearing from the Court. We are not hearing, at this time, from those that are not in compliance for extensive periods of time, so those persons having committed misdemeanors are out on the street continuing to do whatever they do. The proposed system will identify much more rapidly those individuals not in compliance with the Court, so they can be directed to where they need to be going, or be remanded to serve jail time. Ju4ge Martin concurred with Mrs. Huff-Menees' comments and emphasized if people don't follow through with their court ordered TAPE #1364 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 6, 1996 Page 12 of 17 treatment, they are in contempt of Court. The current situation before him now is continuance after continuance without seeing significant results. He illustrated expedient sentencing being handled through the City's video arraignment system. He also emphasized he does have the time to expand his Court calendar for Probation Review in order to see people that are having problems or emergency situations. There has been a decrease in Court cases and the City's Prosecutor is prosecuting very effectively. Many of the defendants in his Court also appear in District Court and the Prosecutor is effectively managing those cases. Mrs. Huff-Menees stated it was alluded to that the Probation Officer is available to defendants 24-hours per day. Ms. McCluske¥ stated no, the Probation Office hours are 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM, Monday through Friday. Mr. McConne11 pointed out someone in the audience testified that they take daily doses of ANTIBUSE, which is distributed by the Probation Officer. He asked how would such a situation be handled under the proposed system? Judge Martin stated he was not aware the Probation office was dispensing any drugs. Ms. McCluskey stated she questioned the City providing such a service. Ms. Hill stated she understood Pharmacies will dispense drugs to individuals; however, the Municipal Court office will not provide that service. Mr. McConnell stated from the testimony given earlier, several individuals have changed in a way to lead more productive lives and he believed it was money well spent to save two individuals out of 20. His own personal preference would be to fund an additional Probation Officer rather than remove all human contact from the defendants. TAPE #1365 Mr. Neville asked what percentage rate the defendants are actually paying? Judge Martin stated that is controlled by statute, and has recently gone up to $100 per month. Ms. McCluskey stated the caseload will not increase if the revenue is increased and will still not pick up the cost of a Probation Officer, which can be from $45,000-$47,000 per year for salary, and that does not include overhead. Lack of space is also an issue. As the cost goes up, the uncollectible rate increases, and it is already at a very high percentage. Mayor Horton stated we must ask ourselves, what would we hope to achieve with a second Probation Officer? The City will be paying more versus what we would be bringing in. Crime statistics show that probation has never affected statistics to bring the crime rate down, and they are actually going up. Mr. Neville stated in response to a suggestion made earlier about a tax increase to pay for a second Probation Officer, he believed more people would probably prefer to see an added Police Officer TAPE #1365 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 6, 1996 Page 13 of 17 instead of another Probation Officer. He referenced the City of Tacoma hiring three additional people to implement their new system, and questioned is the City firmly convinced that the person in place now will have the time to do the necessary data entry? Ms. MaCluskey responded the City of Tacoma hired three additional staff because they did not have any Probation staff at the time they implemented their computer monitoring program. Right now, Bremerton has a Probation Officer and a staff person, so there is the availability of one person already there full time. During the transition to this new system, the current Probation Officer, the current full time staff person, and an additional staff person from the Court Office will all be in place to get the new system up and running. Mr. Neville wanted a response for all those in attendance tonight who feel the "personal touch" will be eliminated. Ms. Bart, Cascade Recovery Center, stated in Phase I of treatment, they are mandated by law to spend 2 hours with each client every 20 hours in one-on-one sessions. In Phase II of treatment, it drops down to 1 one-on-one session, or as needed. Mr. Neville stated that is probably the minimum requirements, but what if you recognize somebody who is really having problems? Ms. B&tt stated additional sessions would then be scheduled, and also another outside recovery program could quite possibly become involved. Ms. Epstein stated where she sees Linda doing the most work is with those who don't follow through, those who need the extra help, but don't or can't get it. Linda has basically been their mental health counselor because they haven't been able to get the treatment they need anywhere else; and she has struggled numerous times with available facilities to take people in. Mr. Neville wanted clarification on those people who are required by the court to get treatment, and they are refused by the facility? Judge Martin stated he has had many people come to him after six months of doing nothing and state they couldn't get the help because they didn't have the money. Many times those individuals must then be sent to jail. As far as mental health patients, or those with no families, no one is taking the responsibility for those people, neither the Federal Government, State or County. Mr. Neville wanted to also address the fact that a defendant could not do all of their monitoring from out-of-state, they will still have to check in personally on occasion. Mr. Colvin questioned the liability regarding the absence of a Probation Officer? Mr. Sievers stated if the City does not have Probation Officer and doesn't have a program in place, in a sense, to rescue these people, the City will not be liable if they recommit more crimes. He used the "Rescue Analogy" from the Public Duty Doctrine, which says if you see a person drowning you are not TAPE #1365 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 6, 1996 Page 14 of 17 liable if you do not attempt to rescue that person, but if you do attempt to rescue that person and you do it negligently, you are then liable. Mr. Colvin stated he is a "people person" and cares about people, and wanted to make clear that the City was not putting a system into place that would leave people "hanging out to dry". There will still be a system in place which will refer people to the outside agencies they need to get the help they require. Ju4ge Martin stated that is correct. He is required by law to refer defendants to agencies where they can get help. He is very confident that this new system will work, but there is no guarantee. What he does know for sure is that the present system in place is not working, and people are suffering for it. Mr. Montqomery pointed out the fact the City of Tacoma was a much larger City than Bremerton; thereby requiring more staff members to run the Probation monitoring program. He feels strongly that if defendants are required to do something, they either do it or suffer the consequences. Mr. MoConnell asked why can't the current Probation Officer stay on and utilize the new computer system? Mayor Horton stated she could, but the issue is that she is still a Probation Officer, therefore part of her duties include scheduling conferences with defendants, which is what takes up most of her time. Her job description is not simply a scheduler. Her job description would need to be re-written, and there are a number of civil service implications to do that. Also, there is the question of her salary. Mr. Colvin stated people will not be seeing a Probation Officer, but they would still have to see someone? Mayor Horton stated under the new system, there will be a closer link between the probationers and the Court. They will still need to report to a person who will refer them into the various agencies for required treatment. The City will still receive feed-back from the various agencies in monthly reports as to who is and who is not in compliance. Mr. Law assured the public that the defendants on probation are not the real serious criminals, such as rapists and molesters. Judge Martin stated that is correct, we are talking about defendants with misdemeanors and gross misdemeanors. This is a municipal court and the maximum jail time is one year and fines up to $5,000. The Department of Corrections has a person in Kitsap County to monitor convicted felons, who are coming out of prison and will report to their parole officer four times a month in the field and two times a month in the office during the first Phase of their release program helping them adjust to society. Mr. Colvin asked if Judge Martin sentenced people to community service? Judge Martin stated yes, but that does not address the treatment issue. The idea is to get people the help they need, get them out of the system and then #1365 TAPE #1365 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 6, 1996 Page 15 of 17 move on to the next case. M/S/C (Montgomery/Neville) to approve elimination of Probation officer position effective March 31, 1996, and budget adjustment. Vote on Motion: In Favor: Neville, Huff-Menees, Montgomery, Law Opposed: McConnel 1 Abstain: Colvin Motion carried. 8A - ORDIN~,NCE NO. 4546 (SECOND RE~,DING) ~ENDING THE BREMERTON ZONING ORDINANCE TO BETTER ~CCO~I~OD~TE RECYCLING F~CILITIES, ~B96- #1024 044 MS. MoCluske¥, City Clerk, read into record a letter from John R. Thomas 2004 Perry Avenue, requesting Council approve this amendment. Ron Hough, Planning Manager, stated this amendment to the Zoning Ordinance involved some changes to the definition of "recycling center", and added definitions for the terms "recycling collection station", and "recycling collection station limited". Also, some criteria was set for the design of collection stations and the Land Use Table was modified to provide zones for these type of facilities. Public comment - none. Mr. Neville wanted to clarify Mr. Thomas' assumption that a special use permit was allowed in Single Family 1, 2, 3, and Duplex Residential? Ms. McCluske¥ stated it only allows for it in Multi- Family residential, not Single Family. Mr. Hough stated the "recycling collection station" itself allows for all types of recycling collectibles and is required to go through the Special Use Permit process in certain zones. The "recycling station limited" is limited to certain types of recycling materials that do not involve any hazardous materials, large appliances, or automobile parts, etc., so the limited ones would be allowed as Special Use Permits in the Multi-Family, Commercial and Industrial zones. They would not be allowed in the low-density zones such as Single Family 1, 2, 3, and Duplex Residential. M/S/C/U(Huff-Menees/Montgomery) to pass Ordinance No. 4546 on second reading, amending the Bremerton Zoning Ordinance to better accommodate recycling facilities and amending Chapter 21.02 of the #1195 TAPE #1365 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 6, 1996 Page 16 of 17 Bremerton Municipal Code. 8B - ORDIN~%NCE (FIRST READING) REORG~%NIZING THE HEARING EXAMINER FUNCTIONm ~AB96-048 The provisions for appealing to the Hearing Examiner were made uniform throughout the BMC including a filing fee of $50, giving the appellant 7 working days to file an appeal, and requiring that the appeal be based upon a written decision authorized by the Department Director. P&ula Johnston, License Inspector, stated Council had reorganized the Hearing Examiner ordinance months ago, and since that time it became apparent that some of the criteria in different titles of the BMC weren't consistent. This is an attempt to capture all of the titles that have a hearing process in them, and to make some of the more elemental parts uniform throughout the whole code. One of the changes being proposed is a uniform fee of $50. Currently, a fee of $75 is charged for all appeals except water and utility, which are $25. The other item being proposed, is to capture potential appeals and verify with the Department Director that there is no resolution at their level. Hopefully, this will alleviate the Hearing Examiner element before getting to the point of an appeal, which would only happen if all other avenues are exhausted. Mr. Sievers requested the deletion of the word "process" in Section 1 of the last paragraph; and clarified the language in other sections. He pointed out that jurisdictional areas were added, and the City is very specific as to which decisions get a Hearing Examiner appeal. Public comment - none. Mr. Colvin asked if the Hearing Examiner must be an attorney? Ms. McCluskey stated no; however Judge Martin is the City's Hearing Examiner. Judge Marti~ added he has heard very few appeal cases. these cases. Mr. Sievers stated the Hearing Examiner Ordinance does allow for the Judge or Court Commissioner to be appointed as a Hearing Examiner. It is not required that they be attorneys, but must be trained to do judiciary hearings. M/S/C/U(Montgomery/McConnell) to approve ordinance on first reading, reorganizing the hearing examiner function as part of the Bremerton Municipal Court, and amending Chapters 2.62, 5.02, 6.04, 6.32, 7.07, 7.08, 10.11, 10.40, and 15.08 of the Bremerton Municipal Code. TAPE #1365 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 6, 1996 Page 17 of 17 With no further business meeting adjourned at 9:16 P.M. KATHLEEN L. McCLUSKEY, City Clerk J~'. LAW, Council President City of Bremerton KLM/JL/me cc: Normal Distribution File/Vault 1. SUBJECT: AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL M~NUTES - MARCH 13, 1996 3-27-96 FOR AGENDA OF: ORIGINATING DEPT: City Council ORIGINATOR: John DATE SUBMITTED: 3-21-96 2. ~: (comment on back if necessary) ENDORSEMENT INFORMATI ON MAYOR __ APPROVED BY couNcIL PRUrieNT FOR SUBMITTAL: COUNCIL PRESIDENT' 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENT FOR'COUNCIL ACTION: 8. RECOMMENDATION: 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED TABLED COUNCIL QIRECTIVE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE: 11. AGENDA'~ILL NO: TAPE #1366 UNAPPROVED DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETINH MINUTES MARCH 15. 1996 #0049 #0069 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, March 13, 1996, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President John Law presiding. Council members present were Bob Winters, A1 Colvin, Cecil McConnell, Carlos Montgomery, Sherril Huff-Menees, David Farr, and Lon Overson. Council member Richard Neville was absent. Also present were City Attorney Ian Sievers and Rich Hanna, Acting City Clerk. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Law and Invocation given by Chaplain Ben Belcher of Harrison Memorial Hospital. President Law announced an Executive Session was held prior to this City Council meeting tonight, and the topic discussed was "Litigation". CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes -- February 21, 1996 #AB96-049 M/S/C/U(Montgomery/McConnell) presented. to approve Consent Agenda as CLaIMS/CHECK REHISTERS 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. M/S/C/U(Colvin/Winters) on March 13, 1996, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 195864, 195875 through 196013 in the amount of $240,103.16. COUNCIL ~E~BER REPORTS Mr. Colvin thanked Councilman McConnell for the invitation to his District #2 neighborhood meeting. Mr. McConnell reported he recently toured the sewer plant and was pleased to find it odor free. Mr. Montqomer~ announced the City is holding a special meeting in District #8 on March 26, 7:00 P.M., at the Public Works Complex, TAPE #1366 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 13, 1996 Page 2 of 11 concerning the roadway improvements on Kitsap Way between Weslon Place and Auto Center Way. He encouraged residents of this area to attend, and to call 373-1300 if anyone had additional questions. Mr. Fart reported he attended an Anderson Cove Neighborhood meeting and was pleased to see the public interest shown from the people of that area. He complimented all those working to get this neighborhood "straitened out". A few problems have become apparent because some of the properties in the area are non-owner-occupied rental units. He is seeking help from the Puget Sound Renters Association and hopes to have someone from that organization attend the next neighborhood meeting. Mr. Law announced District #3 Neighborhood meeting will be held on March 19, 7:00 P.M. at the Senior Center located at East 13th & Nipsic, with Mr. Randy McGreal, Project Executive from Fletcher Wright making a presentation on the "Downtown Development". He pointed out that thanks to the Engineering Department, Street Department and Risk Manager, there is now a curb constructed at Wheaton Way and Winfield Avenue near 13th Street for pedestrian safety. Mr. Montgomery reported he accompanied Bob Tulp, Public Works Operations Manger, on a tour of the Street Department and saw the new "pothole repair" truck in operation. He was amazed at the amount of work that can be accomplished with the new repair equipment using only two men. He urged the public to have patience while the City tries to catch up with the pothole repair workload. What the City really needs is a second pothole truck. PUBLIC RECOGNITION Gordy Byr4 commented on the March 12th Neighborhood Information Network meeting. He questioned why the Executive Session was held before the City Council meeting, before the public had a chance for input. President Law explained the topic of the Executive Session was unrelated to any of the Agenda items. He further clarified why other meetings may be held before Council meeting. John Thomas asked the whereabouts of the fire boat, how long it had been out of the water and when will it be back in service.? Don Larson thanked the Bremerton Police Department and Fire Department for responding promptly, and for all the help received from them after he was involved in a serious auto accident. He reminded the public about the importance of using safety/seat belts, which can reduce the chance of serious injuries. Due to this experience, he recommended the Police Department carry copies of Washington State Accident Report Forms in their Patrol vehicles, and members of the public carry a copy in their own vehicles for TAPE #1366 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 13, 1996 Page 3 of 11 future use. Mr. Montqomery pointed out Accident forms are available on the first floor in City Hall. Mr. L&rson explained the State Patrol Accident form must be filled out within 24 hours, and City Hall is locked up during evening hours and on the weekend. He announced the Bremerton Parks & Recreation Department is sponsoring events for Earth Day at Evergreen Park on April 15, at 10:00 A.M. The Sinclair Inlet CleanUp is scheduled for april 20, 12:00 noon. C&rol Atkinson, Bremerton Mainstreet Association announced the following events: 5th Annual St. Patrick's Day Parade, March 16, 11:00 A.M., beginning at 5th Street & Pacific Avenue; and St. Patrick's Day Dinner at the Cloverleaf Tavern on March 17, at 6:00 P.M. Del Kn&uss challenged the City Council over the use of the yellow "Request To Address The City Council" forms in that it violated RCW Chapter 42.30 Open Public Meetings Act. He observed the City's Fire Boat has been sitting uncovered up on block at the Port Orchard Boat Yard for several months. He questioned why is it still sitting out in the weather? Bob Tulp, Public Works Operations Manager, reported the Fire Boat should be back in service by the next weekend. Bonnie MoD&de thanked the City for the improvements at Forest Ridge Park. She announced the following event: 40's theme Dance on March 15, 8:00 P.M. to 12:00 midnight, at the Eagles Hall - Admission $25.00 per couple, $12.50 for singles. Gene Hart, 2015 Trenton Avenue, thanked the Mayor and City Council for wisely protecting and investing taxpayers resources; and complimented the City on the decision to use video arraignment in the Municipal Court, which results in a more efficient operation of the Court. 7A - INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT -- TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNALS WITH THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARDt ~AB96-050 Approval of agreement between the City of Bremerton and the City of Port Orchard to maintain traffic signals located within the City of Port Orchard. Bob Tulp, Public Works Operations, noted this is an on going contract with the City of Port Orchard to service two traffic signals for a term of 3-years. Public comment - none. Mr. Winters asked the number of years the City of Bremerton has had an agreement with the City of Port Orchard to provide this service? #0925 #1047 TAPE #1366 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 13, 1996 Page 4 of 11 Mr. Tulp stated 5-6 years. M/S/C/U(Montgomery/Colvin) to approve Interlocal Agreement between City of Bremerton and City of Port Orchard to maintain traffic signals. 7B - INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT -- TRafFIC CONTROL SIGNanS WITH KITSAP OO~i-TY, ~AB96-051 Approval of agreement between the City of Bremerton and Kitsap County to maintain traffic signals located within Kitsap County. Bob Tulp, Public Works Operations Manager, stated this is an on going contract with Kitsap County to service 32 traffic signals. The City has provided this service for well over 12 years and the terms of this agreement is 3-years. Gord¥ Byrd asked how are signal lights maintained? Mr. Tulp gave a brief description of the kinds of services they provide. Elizabeth Buell, High Avenue, questioned why some traffic signals take so long to cycle on? President Law pointed out Mrs. Buell's question was not pertinent to the issue. Mr. Tulp offered to talk with Mrs. Buell at a later time. M/S/C/U(Colvin/Montgomery) to approve Interlocal Agreement between City of Bremerton and City of Port Orchard to maintain traffic signals in Kitsap County. 7C - OVERWATER PARK BIOLOGICAL MITIGATION MONITORING CONTRACT WIT~ FISH PRO, INC., ~AB96-052 As part of the Overwater Park project, the beach immediately adjacent was rehabilitated as a condition of the permits to construct the Boardwalk. The permit also required the City to periodically monitor the biological activity on the beach. A consultant services agreement in the amount of $21,370 has been negotiated with Fish Pro, Inc. to determine the biological activity and document the activity to the permitting agencies. Additionally, a budget amendment is attached increasing the project budget by $4,100, from $19,200 to $23,300. This reflects the funds available for the 1996 mitigation monitoring. Mark Souza, Senior Engineer, explained Fish Pro Inc., performed other biological services related to the mitigation plan like those to be performed in years 4 and 2. The mitigation plan is for a period of five years and was developed by the Engineering Department and Fish Pro Inc. Mr. McConne11 asked if the budget amendment was just rolling out #1215 #1291 #1387 TAPE #1366 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 13, 1996 Page 5 of 11 the money out of the escrow account into an active fund so that it can be used for the mitigation project? Mr. Souza state yes. Gord¥ Byrd questioned for clarification what is an park"? Mrs. Huff-Menees pointed out it meant the boardwalk. "overwater Mr. Colvin asked for clarification the term "periodically" as stated in the document. Mr. Souza explained the mitigation plan covers a period of five years and the City must monitor the biological features of the beach in years 2, 4 and 5. The proposal before Council is for year-4. Mr. Winters asked since we are in the 4th year of the observation program, is the City in any violation? Mr. Souza stated it appears the fish are doing fine, but this testing will give a better evaluation of how well the new beach has performed. M/S/C/U(McConnell/Montgomery) to authorize and direct the Mayor to execute the attached agreement with Fish Pro, Inc. in the amount of $21,370 for the biological monitoring of the Overwater Park mitigation beach and to approve the budget amendment increasing the project budget by $4,100 to $23,300. 7D - KITSAP PHYSICIANS SERVICE CONTRACT FOR 1996, ~AB96-053 This is the seventh year of our contract with KPS for employee medical services. Through the efforts of our consultant and the Insurance Benefits Committee, which represents all unions and management, we recommend a one year contract 1/01/96 to 12/31/96. We further recommend the stop loss be lowered to $100,000 from the $150,000 ISL in 1995. Rich Hanna, Acting City Clerk, stated he would standby for questions. Public comment - none. M/S/C/U(Winters/Colvin) to approve one year contract with KPS for employee medical services and budget adjustment. 8A - ORDINANCE NO. 4547 (SECOND READING) REORGANIZING THE ~R_ARIN~ EXAMINER FUNCTION, ~AB95-048 Gordy Byrd asked if someone could explain the intent of the issue in layman's language. Ian Sievers, City Attorney, gave a brief overview of the intent of the ordinance. M/S/C/U(Huff-Menees/Farr) to pass Ordinance No. 4547 on second reading, reorganizing the hearing examiner function as part of the Bremerton Municipal Court, and amending Chapters 2.62, 5.02, 6.04, TAPE #1366 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 13, 1996 Page 6 of 11 6.32, 7.07, 7.08, 10.11, 10.40, and 15.08 of the Bremerton Municipal Code. 8B - ORDINANCE (FIRST READIN~) SETTIN~ STOI~4WATER~TES, #AB96-054 The proposed ordinance will increase the City's retail wastewater rates by an average of five percent. Staff analysis has demonstrated that an increase is necessary to allow the utility to pay for current operations and to implement the capital improvements which are mandated to meet environmental regulations. An increase in retail wastewater rates of five percent is proposed to take effect July 1, 1996. This rate increase is needed to compensate for the effects of inflation since rates were last set, to allow for continuing renewal and replacement of the wastewater system infrastructure and to finance capital improvements including the mandated separation of the storm and sanitary sewer systems and odor improvements to the wastewater plant. If current regulatory and economic conditions continue, additional rate increases of three percent will be requested each January 1 beginning in 1997 and continuing until 2007. These increases are expected to be approximately equal to inflation over that time span. Elizabeth Buell asked if the 5% increase was on the sewer part or on both the water and sewer? Mr. Hanna explained the proposed rate increase would only affect the wastewater portion. John Thomas, 2004 Perry Avenue, stated most local households are tied into the Federal Government and experience an annual raise of 2.5 - 3.5%. Even the labor contracts for City employees fall within this range, yet each year the City raises the budget 6% and now is proposing to increase sewer rates by 5% and in January of 1997 raise it another 3%. He did not believe anyone was opposed to paying for the operating costs of the sewer treatment plant or any other City service. He believes it is time to separate the capital expenditures for the sewer treatment plant from the operating and normal maintenance costs and present a bond issue to the taxpayers to pay for the capital expenditures, which would allow the them to use that cost as a tax deduction. He raised the following questions: (1) is there a law preventing the City from separating the capital expenses from the operating costs and presenting a bond issue to the residents for the capital expenditures and paid by property taxes? (2) If there is not such a law, when and will the City make it easier for the citizens to pay for the capital expenditures at the sewer treatment plant with an additional property tax? Brian Mueller, 1541 Park Avenue, stated 2 1/2 years ago when the City raised the rates by 30% he had specific questions about the division of rates and Puget Sound Naval Shipyards proportion, their use and their payment. During that time, the rate of the Shipyards TAPE #1366 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 13, 1996 Page 7 of 11 use was 30-35% and they were only paying 25% of the actual costs of the operation of the sewer treatment plant. Members of the City Council and the public were told that Shipyard's rate structure would be revisited and their rates increased. Two and one half years have passed and to his knowledge the Shipyard rates have not been increased and it was not revisited. There has been some chan~e in upper management within the w~stewater treatment plant~ but that has not changed. As a member of the citizens committee for the sewer treatment plant upgrade project, he has tracked some of this information. Due to the recent separation of the two stormwater drainage systems, both the Callow Avenue and Warren Avenue basins, there should be less actual effluent coming into the plant, so the percentage of actual usage should increase for the Shipyard. Again, they are not paying their fair share. Now, the City is proposing to raise the rates of the average homeowner and businesses. It is not a fair and equitable rate because people are not being charged the same nor does the City monitor the rate of effluent coming from people's homes. He urged the City Council to remand this issue back to staff for further study. Mr. Hanna stated in answer to the question regarding the ability of the City to levy property taxes with which to retire bonds used for utility purposes, that is a viable financial alternative under Washington law. He did not know if such a proposal had ever been before the voters of the City prior to his tenure of the last 10 years, but it has not been used during the time he has been with the City. Mr. Mueller struck the point of that question - people who own significant amounts of property within the City are not likely to be pleased by that financial alternative. Whether that is more equitable than continuing with Revenue Bonds that are supported by wastewater rates is a question that could be debated by the Council, if they so desire. In response to the question about the Navy's rates, since rates were last raised in February 1994, the City has gone through a process of cost of service and rate analysis on the Navy accounts, which resulted in an increase of rates of slightly over 60% from the rates being paid at the time of the last retail adjustment. He emphasized that is a very recent development and Mr. Mueller may not have been aware of that action. Rich Hanna, Acting City Clerk, read a letter from Gloria L. Agas, 1522 Almira Court, into the record: "I am writing to you at this time to express my unhappiness about the proposed wastewater rate increase effective July 1996 and every January 1 thereafter. My unhappiness is not caused by the fact that I have to pay for the increase. Like almost everything else in this time and age, a rate increase is inevitable. If we want a service, in this case, processing of our sewage, we should be willing to pay for that service and since the City has the monopoly, we have to pay the rates it charges. My unhappiness stems from a number of things, TAPE #1366 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 13, 1996 Page 8 of 11 among them are: (1) The two newspaper articles (The Sun 2/1/96 and 3/13/96) and the City Council Agenda Bill mentioned that the proposed increase is 5%. Unless the City is basing this increase on something else other than the current rate, my calculation is showing an approximately 50% increase. (Single Family, Within City Limits, at $3.00/Acct increased to$4.49/acct = 49.6%). Please correct me if I am wrong and I apologize if I am in error. (2) since this City Council action will affect the entire service area, the customers should be given more time and opportunity to ponder on the proposed rate increase and comment on it, instead of just two short newspaper articles which appeared on the same day that the issue will be taken up by the City Council. If there was a neighborhood meeting, specifically in my district (#2), to discuss this very important issue, I was not aware of it. There was no newspaper article or a mailed invitation to attend and I do not subscribe to Cable TV. (3) While it is beneficial to the City's objective, increasing the base charge does not encourage water conservation, especially since there is a movement on water conservation, nation-wide, if not world-wide, due to diminishing water supplies, stricter environmental regulations and higher costs for the development of new water supplies sources. If water conservation is practiced, there will be less sewage going through the treatment plant which will translate to lower maintenance and operations costs. After all, one of the tips given by the City during the neighborhood meetings held prior to the 30% rate increase in 1994 was water conservation. The recent change in the operations of the Wastewater Treatment Plant from contract operations to City staff should result in lower operating costs since the City will no longer have to pay mark-up costs. It might be a good idea to separate, as in the past, charges collected and earmarked for capital improvements (treatment plant and sewer mains) from operating costs and efforts made to establish a mechanism wherein we, the ratepayers, may have the ability to claim such payments as tax deductions. The City and the ratepayers can work together towards a user-friendly solution. There will be less stress between them - the ratepayers will put up less resistance and the City will have an easier task of collecting. Rate increases in smaller doses are easier to take; I am still recovering from the 30% rate increase in 1994. A huge rate increase causes further hardship to low-or one-income families. Their inability to pay, in a timely manner, if at all, results in TAPE #1366 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 13, 1996 Page 9 of 11 higher operating costs for Utility Billing/Customer Service and the Utilities meter crew who have to spend longer time talking with delinquent customers, printing delinquent/overdue utility bills, issuing promissory notes, hanging door knockers, disconnecting/reconnecting meters due to nonpayment, filing liens against the property of non-paying customers and at worst, complete loss of revenue due to non-paying customers leaving the area or write-off of uncollectible. A more equitable rate structure might be in order - that is generators of industrial wastes should be charged more than residential users. There are other reasons and comments worth mentioning but I will not burden you further. I am glad the City gave me a 2.9% cost of living increase effective January 1, 1996. At least, I know where it is going, although I still have to put out some of my limited savings stashed away for a "rainy day" to makeup for the difference. But how about those who are less fortunate than me?" President Law stated for clarification the City Council held a Study Session in February on the proposed rate increase and many questions were asked and alternatives were discussed. Mr. Overson stated he received a phone call from a citizens, Mark Fisher, who voiced his concern over the proposed sewer increase. Mr. Overson assured members of the public that Council has looked closely at this issue and validated the need. Whether to levy the rate by volume or by direct rate has been discussed extensively. Mr. Hanna provided detailed comparisons on several options and the end result indicated that if the City levied a tax it would mean a significant increase in monthly costs for many people throughout the City. One of the great values of the present volume system in that it allows people to control, to some degree, their costs. He used the example of retired individuals, who use a low amount of water, and often times are on a fixed income and not in a position to pay higher rates. The proposal to levy the increase on the base rate seems to be an excellent way to implement the increase because it gives a level income for the capital development that is necessary to improve the quality of the water in Puget Sound. Mr. McCo~ell asked why the 1996 budget did not reflect the need for an increase in sewer rates? Mr. Harm& explained as discussed in the first of the two Study Sessions held on this issue, the financial projections reflected lacking this rate increase the City's Utility would not run out of money in 1996. However, what will happen is rates will be such that we are not contributing as much to the capital renewals and replacements to the system as should be. If we continue at the current rate, the reinvestments TAPE #1366 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 13, 1996 Page 10 of 11 diminish rather rapidly and actually become negative about the middle of 1997. Mr. McConnell's comment about the 1996 budget is correct. Mr. McConnel~ asked if money from the Wastewater Fund is being used to purchase property in the "condemnation" area near the sewer treatment plant and is it a mandated requirement? Mr. Hanna stated the acquisition of those properties is a part of the capital budget of the Wastewater Fund for 1996; however, there is no mandate and the City made that decision. Mr. Colvin called John Thomas to the podium and referenced a comment Mr. Thomas made that if the rate increase was placed as a property tax it would be tax deductible on his Federal Income Tax. Mr. Thomas stated as a bill, he could not deduct it from his Income Tax, but if it were a tax, he could deduct that portion from his Income Tax. Mr. Cclvln asked the City Treasurer if Council had considered that point? Mr. Hanna restated his earlier comments that to his knowledge there has never been a formal presentation of that alternative. Mr. Montgomez-f stated he seriously doubted the citizens of Bremerton would ever approve such an increase in property taxes for this purpose considering the 50-60% increase in property taxes in 1996. Mr. M~o~nell stated in response to Ms. Agas's comment about information on the sewer increase was not put out to the residents, this issue was discussed at his District #2 Neighborhood Meeting, which was held on March 12. He stressed that the 5% increase was not being attached to volume, but rather being added to the base rate of $3.00 for residential accounts. Mr. F&rr concurred with earlier comments about Council having opportunity on several occasions to discuses the proposed rate increase. During that discussion, data was brought in from other wastewater utilities, some of which indicated the majority of the Wastewater Utilities in the State don't base sewer charges on water usage. Personally, he favors another system that would not base it on water usage, but at this time to cover the cost of operating the plant by dividing it among the number of customers some would have raises that would be more unpleasant. The current billing system is based largely on volume and in effect what that does is for each extra gallon of water that is used you pay many times more than the price of the water because it runs up the sewer when in effect the cost of operating the sewer plant remains constant. The good news of all of the different proposals that were brought forth this time, the one before Council places the majority of this increase, although this increase is small, on the base rate verses the volume. The other side of the proposition is there is not a corresponding increase on charges on volume and the sewer bills should not reflect a greater than 5% increases and in many cases will be less than a 5% increase. In his opinion, the rate TAPE #1366 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes March 13, 1996 Page ll of 11 structure is still skewed in favor of volume and this is the first step in getting it down to something more realistic. This proposal does not delude water conservation. President Law noted when the first discussions on this issue came to the Council in Study Sessions, the consultant did mention having the basic sewer charges on the property tax and they felt the expense and exposure for errors were so great they did not recommend using that method. Mr. Hanna explained there were two different discussions along those lines and as he recalled one was the use of property taxes as a portion of Utility funding and the other was a system-wide L.I.D. for improvements to the treatment plant. There is no perfect answer to Utility solutions and the alternatives were given serious consideration. #2512 M/S/C(Montgomery/Huff-Menees) to approve reading, amending rates and charges for services; and amending Ordinance No. 4529. ordinance on first municipal wastewater Vote on motion: In Favor: Overson, Farr, Huff-Menees, Law, Montgomery, Colvin Opposed: McConnell, Winters Motion carried. With no further business meeting adjourned at 6:50 P.M. KATHLEEN L. McCLUSKEY, City Clerk JOHN E. LAW, Council President City of Bremerton KLM/JL/me cc: Normal Distribution File/Vault AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Bid Award Recommendation for Golf- Course Capital Equipment City Attorney Purchasing ~~_~~----~_ City Treasurer -------L;~;~_.__.. Parks Director .~_~ '~' Fiscal and Budget ~o.~ ~)-,,::~t~ Council Operations .~,~'. FOR THE AGENDA OF: March 27, 1996 ORIGINATING DEPT: Parks & Recreation Dept. ORGINATOR: Pat Westhoff DATE SUBMITTED: March 14, 1996 3. EXHIBITS: A. Technical specifications B. Bid Proposal C. Budget ENDORSEMENT MAYOR: SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENTS FOR COUNCIL A~'~i0N: A call for Bid on Two (2) John Deere Triplex mowers and Three (3) John Deere Walking Mowers for Gold Mountain Golf Course was prepared, advertised, distributed and received in accordance with accepted call for bid procedures. Two bids were received. Low bidder, Barnett Implement. Base bid $38,786.00 + sales Tax of $2,947.74. Total cost of $41,733.74. It should be noted that the Techinical Specifications called for bids on Three (3) Walking Greens Mowers not Two (2) as stated in the Proposal. We would like to have the bid amr~ended to include the third walking greens mower at a cost of $4,729.02 including sales tax. The new total of the bid would be $46,462.76 {tax included). 8. RECOMMENDATION: That City Council accept the ammended bid and approve the purchase of the mowers from Barnett Implement CO. at a price of $46,462.76 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Sim Spencer, Interim Director ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Jim Spencer, Interim Director EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO: AMENDED 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: $. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE The new golf course could not be maintained during the grow-in or for normal golf course maintenance. 6. IIVIPACT ON I{TAFFING? BUDGETS. FACILITIES. EOUIPMENT OR OTI-IKR RKSOURCES: This equipment was budgeted out of the 1996 Golf Course Construction Fund and the 1996 Golf Course Capital Equipment Fund. (see attached budget) 7. I~ESEARCH RESOURCES: TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS The City owned Gold Mountain Golf Course is requesting bids for the following list of mowers and equipment for its grounds maintenance division. To be considered, equipment must comply with manufacturers name and model number as listed below. The City's representative for this bid is John Alexander, Greens Superintendent, and will be the sole judge of the compliance and performance of any equipment proposed. Successful Bidder will provide SERVICE TECHNICAL MANUALS for all equipment bid. Equipment & Model Number: 1. TWO (2) TRIM MOWERS - JOHN DEERE 2653 TRIPLEX MOWER 8 BLADE E.S.P. CUTTING UNITS, 3" GROOVED FRONT ROLLERS, SCRAPPERS, MICRO-BACKLAP VALVE, 3 WHEEL DRIVE, POWER STEERING. e THREE (3) WALKING GREENS MOWERS - JOHN DEERE 220 WALK BEHIND REEL MOWERS EQUIPPED WITH 11 BLADE REEL, MACHINED GROOVED FRONT ROLLER, 22 TRANSPORT TRA/LER. DATE: ~_/~. >/q .~. TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND CITY CLERK, CITY OF BREMERTON: In accordance with your advertisement, plans and specifications on file in the office of the City Clerk the undersigned hereby agree(s) to provide equipment as follows: Two (2) each John Deere 2653 Triplex Mowers $ Two (2) each John Deere 220 Walk Behind Greens Mowers $ Delivered To Owner for A Cost of $ SalesTax: 7-fa, ~ev j _qn. oo TOTAL PRICE BID: TOTAL COST WRITTEN BID BOND ENCLOSED ~ Delivery Will Be Contractor Finn Name Address (2. ! ) D~A~er Receipt of Order, but not later than May 15, 1996. ~o..,~-,.,.~'"~------- Signature Ink or Typewritten. Telephone Number /~ Signature of Preparer:~ Bremerton Business License #~ IRS TIN/SS # No Erasures Permitted /- ?_.oeo - 3 ~' "Jr ' q o q ~:' q/- /dd DATE: TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND CITY CLERK, CITY OF BREMERTON: In accordance with your advertisement, plans and specifications on file in the offic~ o[ thc C~7, C_lerk~th_e _ _ undersigned hereby agree(s)to provide equipment as follows: ~~/~/~2q {~Dfd2 0/d ~ ~ Two (2) each John Deere 2653 Triplex Mowers Two (2) each John Deere 220 Walk Behind Greens Mowers Delivered To Owner for A Cost of Sales Tax: ~z~ ~ TOTAL PRICE BID: $ .32, qb'o- BID BOND ENCLOSED TOTAL COST WRITTEN (.J ~~ Delivery Will Be Contractor Firm Name Address Telephone Number ( q~'Days After Receipt of Order, but not later than May 15, I996.~''''~ ~- .~7 __ Signature All Proposals Must Be Ink or Typewritten. No Erasures Permitted I - ~oo - q3 z -//o ~ Signature of Preparer: Bremerton Business License IRS TIN/SS 1 GOLD MOUNTAIN GOLF COURSE 1996 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT TRIM MOWERS WALKING GREENS MOWERS TOTAL TAX BUDGET $32,000.00 $12,000.00 $44,000.00 BID PRICE $29,996.00 $13,185.00 $43,181.00 $46,462.76 AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Bid Award Recommendation for Golf- Course Capital Equipment 2. CLEARANCES: (comme~o~ a~if necessary) City Attorney Purchasing City Treasurer , ~-~ Parks Director Fiscal and Budget Council Operations FOR THE AGENDA OF: March 27, 1996 ORIGINATING DEPT: Parks & Recreation Dept. ORGINATOR: Pat Westhoff DATE SUBMITTED: March 14, 1996 3. EXHIBITS: A. Bid Proposal/Specifications B. Budget Summary ENDORSEMENT ~x' INFORMATION APPROVED BY CITY COUNCI~VO/R SUBMITTAL: SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REOUIREMENTS FOR COUNCIL ACTION: A call for bids on the attached list of Golf Course equipment was prepared, advertised, distributed and received in accordance with accepted call for bid procedures. One bid was received that met the specificiafion requirements as advertised. Western Equipment of Kent, Wa. submitted the only acceptable bid in the amount of $211,713.85. (tax included) RECOMMENDATION: That City Council authorize and direct the Mayor to execute the contract for the Golf Course equipment with Western. Equipment for the bid amount of $211,713.85 (including tax), subject to City Administrative Policies and Procedures. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Jim Spencer, Interim Director ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Jim Spencer, Interim Director EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: PULLED TABLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE ;, 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED DATE: AMENDED 11. AGENDA BILL NO: CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NO[N-PASSAGE Maintenance of the 2 courses at Gold Mountain would not be possible. 6, IMPACT ON STAFFING. BUDGETS. FACILITIES. EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: This equipment was budgeted out of the 1996 Golf Course Construction Fund and the 1996 Golf Course Capital Equipment Fund. (see attached budget). Minimal staff time will be required to oversee the contract, 7. RESEARCH RESOURCES: D^T : ,I-I.-C/6 TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND CITY CLERK, CITY OF BREMERTON: In accordance with your advertisement, plans and specifications on file in the office of the City Clerk the undersigned hereby agree{s) to provide equipment as follows: Two (2) each Toro Reelmaster 5300 D Fairway Mowers One (1') each Toro Reelmaster Rough Mower $ Two (2) each Toro Greensmaster 3100 Triplax Mower $ Two (2) each Toro Greensmaster Greens Tee Triplex Mower Two (2) each Toro 2300 Top Dressers One (1) each Toro Multi Pro 1100 Spray Unit Tlxree (3) each Club Car carryall II One (1) each Cushman 898632 Utility Vehicle One (1) each Foley 650 Reel Grinder Delivered To Owner for A Cost of $ / TOTAL COST WRITTEN Bid is Submitted on Basis of (check One): Ail or None ..~;; A~y or All ,, BID BOND ENCLOSED Delivery Will Be (9) Days After Receipt of Order, but not later than May 15, 1996. 1 FAIRWAY MOWERS (2) ROUGH MOWER (1) GREENS MOWERS (2) TEE MOWERS (2) TOP DRESSERS (2) SPRAY MACHINE (1) UTILITY VEHICLES (3) GOLD MOUNTAIN GOLF COURSE 1996 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT BID PACKAGE $50,000.O0 $18,000.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $10,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 HEAVY DUTY UTILITY VEHICLE $15,000.00 $206,000.00 REEL GRINDER (1) TOTALS TAX TORO IRRIGATION BONUS ADJUSTED EQUIPMENT COST TOTAL BUDGET SAVINGS $50,656.00 $14,773.00 $27,330.O0 $27,204.00 $12,090.00 $12,381.00 $15,498.00 $13,237.00 $195,669.00 16,044.85 $211,713.85 ($15,000.00) $196,713.85 $9,286.15 AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: Callow Avenue Basin CSO Reduction Project; Priority 1, Phase 2 (V4214) - Amendment to Professional Services Agreement with CH2M Hill. FOR AGENDA OF: ORIGINATING DEPT: ORIGINATOR: DATE SUBMITTED: March 27, 1996 Public Work,qUtilities ,., ~, R. Witt, City Engineer'r~fs~ March 12, 1996 2. CLEAi~qCES: (comment on bac~sarv) /. /,/-) r'T ' City Treasurer ' - ~x~ 3. EXHIBITS A. Amendment No. 8 B. Amendment No. 9 C. March 13, 1996, Letter from CH2M Hill. D. March 14, 1996, Letter from CH2M Hill. ENDORSEMENT X INFORMrATION APPROVED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FO~~,L: _ MAYOR~ ¢~ '7-~/,,..__ COUNCIL PRESIDENT 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: The City has negotiated amendments with CI-L2M Hill Inc. for professional services on the Callow Avenue Basin CSO reduction project. Amendment No. 8 is for additional design services outside ofthe existing scope of work for the Priority 1, Phase 2 project. These include changing of the storm sewer alignment in Puget Sound Naval Shipyard (PSNS), preparation of separate surface restoration plans for Montgomery Avenue, the addition of storm sewer in Burwell Street, soil charact 'enzation in PSNS, an overflow manhole in Cambrian and an increase in complexity on the project greater than what was originally anticipated resulting in additional plan sheets and effort. An additional task was included to prcrdde for final payment on the Wastewater Comprehensive Plan effort, The not to exceed amount of Amendment No. 8 is $64,350. Amendment No. 9 is new contract services. It provides for construction staking and an allowance for on-call design services during the Priority 1, Phase 2 construction. City survey crews will not have the resources to provide construction staking for this project It is valuable for the design finn to provide construction staking because of their familiarity with the project and ability to quickly resolve any errors or changes which may arise. The design engineer will be available for submittal review, conflict resolution, and field re'view of critical situations on an on-call basis. The not to exceed mount of Amendment No 9 is $64,240 The amendments will revise agreement mount to $1,093,928. Adequate funds exist for this work Smffrecommends approval and execution of the amendments. 8. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorize and direct the Mayor to execute Amendment Number 8 and 9 to the Professional Services Agreement with CI-I2M Hill. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: City Engineer ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: N/A EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: 10. N___OTICE OF ACTION PULLED TABLED APPROVED DISAPPROVED ~NDED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE DATE: l 1. AGENDA BILL NO: 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: The design of the Callow Avenue Basin CSO Reduction Project (Priority 1, Phase 2) will not proceed, delaying our ability to complete the project on schedule. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING, BUDGETS, FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: The total value of the amendments are: Amendment No. 8: Amendment No. 9: TOTAL: $ 64,350 $ 64,240 <$128,590 The 1996 Budget allocates $3,838,000 to this project with $250,000 identified for Professional Services. Of this amount $217,934 is encumbered for the existing contract leaving $32,066 available to cover this increase in the scope of work. The remaining $96,524 is available from the construction funding. Any adjustment required to the project budget will be made after receipt of the construction bids. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES 96179 Engineers Planners Economists Scientists March 13, 1996 106783.F1 Mr. Randy Witt, P.E., City Engineer City of Bremerton Public Works and Utilities 3027 Olympus Drive Bremerton, WA 98310 .~"%%/,-°~96, Dear Randy: Subject: Callow Avenue Basin Priority 1 Storm Drainage Separation and Overflow 17 Improvements - Amendment No. 8 to Agreement for Professional Services By this letter we are requesting that the budget for the Callow Avenue Basin Priority 1 Storm Drainage Separation and Overflow 17 Improvements final design be increased to cover scope increases. It is also requested that the budget amounts for the various tasks be revised to better reflect the effort required for each task. Attached is a draft of Amendment No. 8 to the Agreement For Professional Services that provides for the budget increase and reallocation. In addition to the cost budget changes, the amendment includes a fixed fee increase based on the total cost budget increase. The current budget status and the proposed increase and redistribution are shown on the attached table. The requested cost budget changes are summarized as follows: T~sk Task D-I - Final Elevations and VE Participation Task D-2 - Storm Sewers W/thin PSNS Expansion Area and Overflow No. 17 Co~t Bud~e~ Current (Amendment No. 7) Adjusted Net Chan_~e S152,570 S152,570 $0 Task D-3 - Storm Sewers Outside of PSNS Expansion Area Task D-4 - Stormwater Outfall Task D-5 - Environmental Compliance Task D-6 - Permits and Easements Task D-7 - Project Management Task M-8 - Navy Assistance TOTAL $229,530 $348,900 $119370 $18.580 $18.580 $0 $10,850 $13.900 $3.050 $77,580 $38,400 -$39,180 S40~lO S43,700 $2,86O $32,690 $1,500 -$31.190 $584,340 $639.25O $54,910 Seattle Office 777 108th Avenue NE, Bellevue. WA 98004-5118 P O. Box 91500, Bellevue, WA 98009-2050 206 453-5000 Fax No. 206 462-5957 Planners Economists Scientists March 14, 1996 106668.X0 Ms. Kathleen Cahall Water Quality Manager City of Bremerton Department of Public Works and Utilities 3027 Olympus Drive Bremerton, WA 98310 Dear Kathleen: Subject: Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Budget The purpose of this letter is to clarify work tasks and level of effort required to finalize the Wastewater Comprehensive Plan that were outside of the current scope of work and therefore resulted in cost overruns. Listed below are tasks performed to complete the plan which we believe are additions to the Scope of Services included in the Professional Services Agreement dated October 3, 1995. In identifying the cost impacts of these tasks, I referenced my man-hour estimate that was the basis of the Scope of Services and Budget. 1. Resolve the Number of Pump Stations At the time the Scope of Services and Budget was prepared, City staff had indicated that the sewerage system included 33 pump stations rather than the 31 included in the draft plan and provided written descriptions for 3 pump stations. I had assumed that City staff would provide me with the necessary information and, therefore, that 2 hours was sufficient to resolve this issue and mark up the document accordingly. I estimate that this task ultimately took 8 hours, requiring several conversations and faxes with several City staff to identify which station was eliminated (so that the addition of the 3 new station descriptions would equal 33 stations), the location o~ each new station, and their point of discharge to the system, and then revising all affected plan figures and text descriptions and Table 6-1 of the Capital Improvements Plan, Chapter 6. Also, the elimination of station EB-7 which was not indicated in City staffs' review of the draft document and, therefore, was not included in any budget, required significant revision to the Tracyton Beach Basin projects. Seattle Office 777 108th Avenue NE, Bellevue, WA 98004-5118 206 453-500(3 P.O. Box 91500, Bellevue, WA 98009-2050 Fax No. 206 462-,5957 Mr. Randy Wi~t, P.E. Page 2 March 14, 1996 106668.X0 The estimated cost of this scope addition is $600 for Susan Dennis' time, graphics, and document processing. 2. Revisions to the WWTP Planned Improvements ge Two hours were budgeted to insert project descriptions and costs for the improvements either planned or under construction at the WWTP resulting from. work by R. W. Beck and Associates. I assumed that the complete information would be provided to me ready to insert into the plan. Instead, updating the projects required excerpting portions of R. W. Beck and Associates engineering reports which turned out to be out of date in terms of the projects specifics. Followup calls to City staff were then required to resolve the project descriptions and costs. This effort took up to 8 hours to ensure that the changes were consistent in Chapter 5 and throughout the plan. Further, the disinfection project changed again after the Final Draft Plan was sent to the City for review. The change required modification of the project description and cost, and revising the costs in Table 6-1. This tookapproximately 4 hours. The estimated cost of the above scope additions is $900 for Susan Dennis' time. Develop Table 6-3, Utility-Funded Improvements From 1996 Through 2000 Eight to 16 hours were budgeted for this work based on the groupings of projects in Table 6-1 (Through 1995, 1996-2000, and Beyond 2000). When the budget was developed, no comments had been made by City staff relative to the Table 6-1 project prioritization. I prepared the first cut of Table 6-3 based on the projects included in the 1996-2000 time period in Table 6-1. Upon reviewing this, City staff required the table to be revised based on their draft Capital Improvements Plan of which I ultimately received two versions, neither of which was consistent with the draft comprehensive plan projects. Ultimately, I developed Table 6-3 by interviewing City staff to get close to the eventual prioritization and then confirming the final project prioritization by faxes. This process moved projects between the three time groupings in Table 6-1 requiring significant changes to Tables 6-1 and 6-3. Up to a week was spent resolving this issue at an estimated additional cost of $2,200. 4. Final Draft Review Comments The budgets developed for the Scope of Services and Budget assumed that the City Staffs' review of the Final Draft Plan would be to simply verify that their review comments were adequately addressed and no budget was included for work other than final editing and document processing. In fact, we received significant additional comments which I was asked to review and then discuss with you. While Mr. Gene Sampley ultimately resolved the majority of staffs' comments without requiring further modification of the plan, time was expended to review the Mr. Randy Witt, P.E. Page 3 March 14, 1996 106668.X0 comments, discuss them with staff, and to make the required changes to the plan for the comments I was directed to address. It is estimated that 16 hours of additional time were spent at a cost of $1,500. The total of the above scope additions is $5,200. Please recognize that we are making every effort to minimize the total cost to finalize the Wastewater Comprehensive Plan and we are committed to deliver the final plan to the City within the week. Even so, CH2M HILL will incur an estimated additional $5,000 in graphics, editing and document processing costs that were underestimated in Scope of Services and Budget. We are not asking for reimbursement for those costs but only to be compensated for the scope additions described above. Sincerely, CH2M HILL Project Manager C: Randy Witt Bud VanDerAa/SEA AMENDMENT NO. 8 TO AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES For Callow Avenue Basin Storm Drainage Separation Project CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON ARTICLE 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES The Scope of Services for Priority 1 Storm Sewer Construction and OF-17 Improvements as revised by Amendment No. 7 is changed as set forth below. DESIGN PHASE SERVICF*~; Task D-3 Final Design Services, Priority 1 Storm Sewers Outside PSNS Expansion Area Add the following: Perform a subsurface investigation in the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in the vicinity of the proposed outfall for the purpose of characterizing the soil along the proposed storm sewer alignment to determine transportation and disposal requirements for excavated material that is not needed for backfill, or is unsuitable for backfill. Specific elements of the investigation are as follows: Prepare a field sampling and analysis plan and a health and safety plan for the investigation. Arrange for a drill rig to bore the exploratory holes and establish a subcontract for this work. Attempt to bore 11 holes each 20 feet deep between the SR 304 right-of-way line and the shore of Sinclair Inlet. The borings will be at the approximate locations indicated by the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard(PSNS) environmental staff. It is expected that there are large rocks and concrete rubble along the storm sewer alignment that will halt further advancement of any boring in which they are encountered. ENGINEER will select the type of soil boring equipment that in ENGINEER's best judgment, will have the best chance of advancing the borings to the desired depth and obtaining the required soil samples. A maximum of 3 attempts will be made per hole to reach the 20-foot depth in case of refusal. A composite sample will be obtained for each hole. Observation well will be installed in a maximum of 4 of the borings to monitor the fluctuation of groundwater level relative to tidal action. Any soil from the borings that is not included in the samples and that is not returned to the holes will be placed in containers provided by the PSNS and will be disposed of by the PSNS. Any amounts charged for the containers or disposal by the PSNS will be paid directly by OWNER. FN: f:Xusers\106780Xf I k:alamd8.doc Page 1 of 5 P~,t~d: 3an/96 AMENDMENT NO.~ TO AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES For Callow Avenue Storm Drainage Separation Project CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON Stake the locations of the test borings and coordinate with the PSNS staff relative to identifying possible conflicts with existing underground facilities. 5. Observe the drilling and sampling. Obtain samples for chemical analysis. Arrange for laboratory analysis of the samples obtained and establish a subcontract for this work. Analysis will include, with limitation, TCLP Metals and SVOC Extraction (1311), TCLP Metals Analysis Plus Cu. NJ. and Zn., TCLP SVOCs Analysis, TCLP VOCs Extraction, TCLP VOCs Analysis, TPH (EPA Method 418.1), PCBs (EPA Method 8081), total VOCs Analysis (EPA Method 8260), total SVOCs Analysis (EPA Method 2870), pH (9040/9045), BTUs, and Static Acute Fish Toxicity. Rush turnaround for laboratory analysis will not be used without OWNER's prior written approval. 7. Perform a cursory review of the analytical data. Prepare a scaled field sketch of the sample locations for submittal with the waste profile sheets. Transmit copies of the field notes, the sketch of the sample locations, and the analytical data to OWNER. Formal documentation, such as a report, of the sampling and testing is not included in this scope of services. Determination of the disposal requirements for the material will be by others and is not included in this scope of services. Prepare plan and profile drawings for the surface restoration on Montgomery Avenue from First Street to Sixth Street. OWNER will provide the standard cross section to be used for the restoration. Perform a field survey to document the locations and elevations of the existing surface improvements that will be removed and existing improvements at the right-of-way line to which the restored improvements must match. Include the storm sewer in Burwell Street from Montgomery Avenue to Callow Avenue with the Priority 1, Phase 2 construction. Extend all storm sewers at the intersection of Burwell Street and Callow Avenue far enough out of the intersection so that anticipated street improvements in the intersection will not have to be disturbed by future storm sewer construction. These storm sewers were not originally included in Priority 1. OWNER will perform exploritory excavations as requested by ENGINEER to determine the locations and elevations of existing utilities that might influence the design of the storm sewers. Any surveying for design of the Burwell Street storm sewer will be performed as incidental to other surveying included in the Scope of Services. FN: f:~use~s\106780~'Bcalamd8.doc Page 2 of 5 Printed: 3/14t96 AMENDMENT NO. ~ TO AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES For Callow Avenue Storm Drainage Separation Project CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON Revise the design of the storm sewer in the vicinity of the outfall to minimize the length of storm sewer on Puget Sound Naval Shipyard (PSNS) property and to avoid what is believed to be one of the worst areas of contaminated soils. Include a flow monitoring manhole over the existing 24-inch overflow pipeline in Cambrian Avenue at Porter Street. OWNER will provide the design and configuration details of the manhole and appurtenances to ENGINEER. ENGINEER will perform the necessary drafting. Drawings for the manhole and appurtenances will require a maximum of 1/4 of a drawing sheet. Additional OWNER-provided sketches may be bound in an appendix to the construction contract documents. This scope of services assumes that construction of the flow monitoring manhole will not disrupt the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard security fence along Cambrian Avenue. Task D-6 Final Permit and Easement Acquisition Assistance Item a.6. (Burlington Northern Railroad Crossing) is deleted. Add the following: h. A Biological Assessment is not included in this Scope of Services. MISCELLANEOUS ENGINEERING SERVICES Task M9 is added as follows: Task M9. Finalize Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Perform the additional work required to complete final revisions and publication of the Wastewater Comprehensive Plan. ARTICLE 2. COMPENSATION A. COST REIMBURSABLE-COST PLUS FIXED FEE The cost budget and fixed fee for Tasks D-1, D-2, D-3, D-4, D-5, D-6, D-7, and M-8 is changed as follows: The Cost Budget is increased from Five Hundred Eighty Four Thousand Three Hundred Forty Dollars ($584,340.00) to Six Hundred Thirty Nine Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($639,250.00). The changes to ARTICLE I. SCOPE OF WORK constitute a net increase in the scope of services provided under the Agreement. The Fixed Dollar Profit is, Fbi: f.'kusers\106780~fl~calamd8.doc Page 3 of 5 Printed: 3114/96 AMENDMENT NOr8 TO AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES For Callow Avenue Storm Drainage Separation Project CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON therefore, increased from Fifty Three Thousand Six Hundred Sixty. Dollars ($53,660.00) to Fifty Seven Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($57,900.00). An amended breakdown of the Cost Plus Fixed Fee is included on Table 1. For purposes of monthly payments for Tasks D-l, D-2, D-3, D-4, D-5, D-6, D-7, and M-8 for 1996, ENGINEER's overhead rate of 2.667 shall be used instead of the 2.669 rate stated in Amendment No. 5. Add the following: Compensation by OWNER to ENGINEER for Task M9. Finalize Wastewater Comprehensive Plan will be the lump sum of Five Thousand Two Hundred Dollars ($5,200.00), plus applicable sales, use, value-added, business transfer, gross receipts, or other similar taxes. FN: fAusers'd 06780~flk:alamd8.doc Page 4 of 5 Printed: 3114/96 AMENDMENT NO:$ TO AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES For Callow Avenue Storm Drainage Separation Project CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON SIGNATURES Except as modified in this Amendment No. 8, the basic AGREEMENT dated April 30, 1992, and previous amendments to the basic AGREEMENT shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties execute below: For OWNER, dated this By: By: City of Bremerton, Washington ~ day of ,19 , Nsm~ For the City of Bremert0n, Washington, Mayor Title By: N~Nam~ D~a~ment Head Approved As To From, Bremerton City Attorney Title Title By: City Clerk Name Title For ENGINEER, CH2M HILL, INC., FN: f Ausers~,106780~'1 ~calamd8 .doc Page 5 of 5 Printed: 3/14/96 Task DESIGN PHASE SERVICES AMENDMENT NO. 8 Table 1 Cost Plus Fixed Fee Breakdown Cost Plus Fixed Fee Budgets Labor at 1.00 Overhead at 1.699 Expenses Cost Subtotal Profit Total D-1 Final Elevations & VE Participation $7,670 $13,030 $1 000 $21,700 $2,300 $24,000 D-2 PSNS Sewers & OF-17 $49,489 $84,081 $19 000 $152,570 $13,930 $166,500 D-3 Storm Sewers Outside PSNS $100,000 $169,900 $79 000 $348,900 $30,100 $379,000 D-4 Stormwater Outfall $1,326 $2,254 $15 000 $18,580 $1,420 $20,000 D-5 SEPA Compliance $4,780 $8,120 $1 000 $13,900 $1,400 $15,300 D-6 Permits and Easements $13,486 $22,914 $2 000 $38,400 $4,100 $42,500 D-7 Project Manac~ement Total $14,894 $25,306 $3 $191,645 $325,605 $120 500 $43,700 $4,500 $48,200 500 $637,750 $57,750 $695,500 MISCELLANEOUS ENGINEERING SERVICES M,;8 Coordination With U.S.Nav~/ $482 $818 $200 $1,,500 $150 $1,650 ~ Contract Total $192,127 $326,423 $120,700 $639,250 $57,900 $697,150 AM8TBLI.XLS Printed:3/14/96 AMENDMENT NO. 9 TO AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAl. SERVICES For Callow Avenue Basin Storm Drainage Separation Project CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON ARTICLE 1. SCOPE OF SERVICF_~ The Scope of Services is changed to add the following services for the construction included in the Contract Documents for construction of Callow Avenue Basin Priority 1, Phase 2, Storm Drainage Separation. BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES Task C12-1 Construction Staking and Other Surveying for Callow Avenue Ba.qin Priority 1, Phase 2, Storm Drainage Separation Provide the Construction Staking that is specified to be provided to the construction Contractor for storm sewers, sewers, and water mains in the Special Provisions of the construction Contract Documents. Provide Construction Staking for surface restoration as requested by OWNER. Perform Other Surveying during construction as requested by OWNER. bo This scope of services includes Construction Staking and Other Surveying performed by a two-person field survey crew requiring a maximum one hundred eighty four (184) field survey crew hours at the PROJECT site and a maximum of twenty seven (27) round trips from ENGINEER's Bellevue office to the PROJECT site. The scope of the Construction Surveying and Other Surveying is further limited to the budget for this task. c. Meet with OWNER's survey crew to review the Construction Staking survey data. Provide OWNER a copy of the data in electronic format for use by OWNER's staff. d. ENGINEER will perform the Construction Surveying and Other Surveying only in response to requests by OWNER. OWNER will notify ENGINEER of each request for Construction Staking at least ten (10) working days before any of the staking included in the request will be needed. The need for Construction Staking shall be based on the construction Contractor's Progress Schedule, as specified in the Special Provisions of the construction Contract Documents. ENGINEER will notify OWNER of ENGINF~F.R's schedule for performing Construction Staking at least five (5) working days before the Construction Staking is performed in order for OWNER to arrange for the required traffic control. OWNER will provide to ENGINEER construction stake offset distances and directions with each Construction Staking request. OWNER will notify ENGINEER of each request for Other Surveying at least five (5) working days before any of the staking included in the request will be needed. If ENGINEER must reschedule Construction Staking or Other Surveying because required traffic control is not provided, or for any other reason beyond ENGINEER's control, the minimum notifications times stated above shall apply to the rescheduled work. FN: mhv/c:k:allow\prior_Bcalamd9.doc Page I of 5 Printed: 3/13/96 AMENDMENT NO.~ TO AGItgEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES For Callow Avenue Storm Dr~_inage Separation Project CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON The Fixed Dollar Profit of Four Thousand Two Hundred Forty Dollars ($4,240.00) for Task C12-1 may not be increased, except in the case of an amendment to this AGREEMENT that recognizes an increase in the scope of work. The Fixed Dollar Profit of One Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($1,500.00) for Task C12-2 may not be increased, except in the case of an amendment to this AGRI~MENT that recognizes an increase in the scope of work. For purposes of monthly payments, ENGINEER's overhead rate of 2.667 shall be used. The Fixed Dollar Profit shall be prorated, based on the percentage of Direct Salaries expended, plus Provisional Salary and General Overheads, plus Direct Expense charges, all compared to the Cost Budget. B. BUDGET ENGINEER will make reasonable efforts to complete the work within the Cost Budget and will keep OWNER informed of progress toward that end so that the Cost Budget or work effort can be adjusted if found necessary. ENGINEER is not obligated to incur costs beyond the indicated Cost Budget, as may be adjusted, nor is OWNER obligated to pay ENGINEER beyond these limits. When any Cost Budget has been increased, ENGINEER's excess costs expended prior to such increase will be allowable to the same extent as if such cost had been incurred after the approved increase. C. DIRECT SALARIES Direct Salaries are the amount of wages or salaries paid ENGINEER's employees for work directly performed on the PROJECT, exclusive of all payroll-related taxes, payments, premiums, and benefits. D. SALARY OVERHEAD Salary Overhead is a percentage of all firmwide Direct Salaries paid ENGINEER's employees on all clients projects necessary to cover all taxes and other costs measured by, or applicable at the time of performance to, all wages or salaries of ENGINEER, such as, but not limited to, Worker's Compensation Insurance, Social Security, State and Federal unemployment insurance, medical-hospital insurance, salary continuation insurance, pension plan costs, and allowance for vacations, sick leave, and holiday pay. Salary FN: mhv/c:k:allow\prior_l~calamdg.doc Page 3 of 5 ~.,~: 3/13/96 AMENDMENT NG.-.~ TO AGRF_,~NT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICF~ For Callow Avenue Storm Drainage Separation Project CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON SIGNATURES : Except as modified in this Amendment No. 9, the basic AGRI~.MENT dated April 30, 1992, and previous amendments to the basic AGReeMENT shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties execute below: For OWNER, dated this By: City of Bremerton, Washington day of ,19 , By: By: By: Nam~ $~tl~ For the City of Bremerton, Washington. Mayor Tide Approved As To From, Bremerton City Attorney Tide Department Head Tide. City Clerk Title For ENGINEER, CH2M HILL, INC., dated this ~ day of By: ,19 Title FN: mhv/cAcallow\prior_l~calamd9.doc Page 5 of 5 ~.t~: 3113/96 Task DESIGN PHASE SERVICES AMENDMENT NO. 8 Table 1 Cost Plus Fixed Fee Breakdown Cost Plus Fixed Fee Budgets Labor at 1.00 Overhead at 1.699 Ex~enees Cost Subtotal Profit Total D-1 Final Elevations & VE Participation $7,670 $13,030 $1,000 $21,700 $2,300 $24,000 D-2 PSNS Sewers & OF-17 $49,489 $84,081 $19,000 $152,570 $13,930 $166,500 D-3 Storm Sewers Outside PSN$ $100,000 $169,900 $79,000 $348,900 $30,100 $379,000 D-4 Stormwater Ouffall $1,326 $2,254 $15,000 $18,580 $1,420 $20,000 D-5 SEPA Compliance $4,780 $8,120 $1,000 $13,900 $1,400 $15,300 D-6 Permits and Easements $13,486 $22,914 $2,000 $38,400 $4,100 $42,500 D-7 Proiect Mana~lement Total MISCELLANEOUS ENGINEERING SERVICES M-8 Coordination With U.S. Nav~ $14,894 $25,306 $3,500 $43,700 $4,500 $48,200 $191,645 $325,605 $120,500 $637,750 $57,750 $695,500 $482 $818 $200 $1,500 $150 $1,650 Contract Total $192,127 $326,423 $120,700 $639,250 $57,900 $697,150 AM8TBLI.XLS Printed:3/14/96 CALLOW AVENUE BASIN CSO REDUCTION PROJECT CH2M HI1,L PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT CHRONOLOGY AMENDMENT BUDGET NUMBER DATE WORK AREA AMOUNT Agreement April 92 Engineering report $293,000 1 June 92 Change method of compensation for Engineering -0- report. 2 April 93 Included NPDES permit assistance, reduced flow -0- monitorinl by equal amount 3 May 94 Re-allocation of budget among existing tasks -0- 4. July 94 Priority 1 design $638,000 5 Oct 94 Change method of compensation for Priority 1 -0- design 6 June 95 Priority 1, Phase 1 Construction services $34,338 7 August 95 Re-allocated remaining budget to address Priority 1 -0- requirements. 8 March 96 Proposed - increase in design services to complete $64,350 Priority 1 design. 9 March 96 Priority 1, Phase 2 Construction Services $64,240 TOTAL $1,093,928 AGENDA BILL BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL ~ BUDGET ADJUSTMENT Converting the City's Fleet Maintenance from a Contracted to a City Staffed Operation FOR AGENDA OF: March 27, 1996 ORIGINATING DEPT: Treaeu_re.~~. ORIGINATOR: R. Hanna DATE SUBMITTED: March 19, 1996 2. CLEARANCES: Comment of back if necessary) ,~3ir Public Works ,_~~_ ~-'~ Human Res. Mgr./~/~./~ Dir Admin Ser.~,~ --~ ~'~. ~ ( ~ Coun~l Comm. STUDY SESSION ~R~ 18 ENDORSEMENTS .~ INFOR~ION 3. EXHIBITS: Budget Adjustment Request Amended Pages from Budget Document APPROVED BY~__~~~~FOR SUBMI'I-I'A COUNCIL PRESID~'~ 4. SUMMARY STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: It has been determined that it is in the best interest of the City to not renew the current contract for fleet maintenance upon ils expiration April 30. The contractor has been given notice to this effect pursuant to the terms of the contract. This budget adjustment will authorize the positions and expenditure authority necessary for the City to take over the fleet maintenance upon the expiration of the contract. 8. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to approve the proposed budget adjustment for fleet maintenance. 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Public Works Dir ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Mayor EXPIRATION DATE: N/A REVIEW DATE: Annual Budget PULLED COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: TABLED 10. NOTICE OF ACTION APPROVED DISAPPROVED 11. AGENDA BILL NO: ~ ~"' O~ 7 2. CLEARANCE COMMENTS: 5. IMPACT ON NON-PASSAGE: The City will have terminated the contract but will lack the authority to hire staff and expend funds necessary to perform vehicle maintenance. 6. IMPACT ON STAFFING. BUDGETS. FACILITIES. EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: As presented in the attachments. The contract with the Teamsters represented employees will be amended by a letter of understanding. The union has agreed to the wage grades reflected in this agenda bill. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: Contract with Ryder. Staff financial analysis. Staff position analysis. Requesting Department: - CITY OF BREMERTON - BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST TRANSPORTATION DEPT. - GENERAL FUND No. 96-10 SOURCE OF FUNDS: REDUCE: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACTOR DEPOSIT Amount 456,500 48.000 USE OF FUNDS: ~ Amount INCREASE: PERSONNEL 190,000 COMPUTER SYSTEM 20000 PARTS & SUPPLIES 190,000 SUB - LET WORK 40,000 SHOP TOOLS 25,000 SAVINGS 39.500 NARRATIVE: This adjustment will authorize the positions and expenditures necessary to change the City's vehicle maintenance activity from a contracted basis to a City staffed activity. The position of Fleet Manager is authorized and funded as of Apdl 1 and all other positions are authorized and funded as of May 1. Department Head Signature Treasurer Comments: Date Director Signature Date ~-~-Recommended ~ Mayor Comments: Not Recommended Treasurer's SignOre '~ ~- [~ Recommended ~ Not Recommended / Approved ~ Denied ~ ~:?. "/-~//~ -~ ~/~ M~y6r's Signature Fiscal & Budget Committee Comments: Date Recommended ~-~ Approved ~ Not Recommended Denied Fiscal & Budget Committee Signature Date CITY OF BREMERTON FLEET MAINTENANCE OPERATION BUDGET ADJUSTMENT CURRENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUDGET NEEDED: JANUARY thru APRIL ~ 55,000 LESS DEPOSIT LESS MANAGER IN APRIL BALANCE AVAILABLE 220,000 (4S,000) (4,500) 672,000 167,500 504,500 USES: SAVINGS PERSONNEL FLEET MANAGER OA SENIOR LEAD MECHANIC MECHANIC (2) MECHANIC ASST. OVERTIME COMPUTER SYSTEM INVENTORY PURCHASE PARTS SUB-LET REPAIRS SUPPLIES SHOP TOOLS 43,215 22,996 31,392 57,069 25,937 9,030 189,639 20,000 30,000 135,000 40,000 25,000 25.000 39.861 CITY OF BREMERTON FLEET MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS MANAGER MAYOR IDIRECTOR, PUBLIC WORKS FLEET MANAGER 'l tOFFICE ASSISTANT SENIOR IlVIECHANIC IVIECHANIC ASSISTANT CITY OF BREMERTON DEPA~¥MENT: Transportation FUND: General 001-45 DEPARTMENT FUNCTION This department is tasked with the maintenance of the vehicle/equipment fleet of the City. This operation is contracted to Ryder-Managed Logistics Systems, Incorporated and managed by the City Treasurer. The capital budget In 1996 will purchase equipment for four new police patrol cars. EXPENDITURE SUMMARY 1994 1995 1996 Ending Working Capital Personnel Supplies & Services Taxes Capital Outlay Operating Transfers Debt Service TOTAL 839,470 64,292 25,668 929,430 874,481 54,000 928,481 39,500 190,000 675,35O 62,500 967,350 STAFFING AUTHORIZATION POSITION TOTAL STAFFING 1994 ACTUAL 0 0 0 0 0 1995 0 0 0 0 0 199 0.75 0.67 1.34 1 CITY OF BREMERTON MANAGEMENT AND PROFESSIONAL STAFF SALARY PLAN APPENDIX A I ~ A~m~y APPROX MO 5,124 5,38~ 5,51g 5,656 5,797 5,942 6,~1 ~. ~b~o ~ & U~6es A~AL BI-M 2,561.88 2,691.59 2,758.86 2,827.85 2,898.54 2,971.~ 3,~5.27 3,121.~ F~ ~ef Police ~ief 2 ~, ~dmln ~/Ci~ Cle~ APPROX MO 4,877 5,124 5,252 5,383 5,518 5,656 5,797 5,~2 A~AL BI-M 2,438.~ 2,561.88 2,625.95 2,691.59 2,758.86 2,827.85 2,898.54 2,~ 1 3 Ci~ Engineer APPROX MO 4,642 4,877 4,~ 5,1241 5,252 5,383 5,518 5,656 ~, ~ ~wlop~nt A~AL BI-M 2,320.94 2,438.~ 2,4~.~ 2,561.88 2,625.95 i 2,691.59 2,758.86 2,~7.85 ~r. P~ & ~c~on 4 A~i~t F~ ~ief APPROX MO 4,418 4,642 4,758 4,877 4,~ 5,124 5,252 5,383 Ci~ ~r A~AL BI-M 2,2~. 11 2,320.94 2,378.~ 2,438.~ 2,4~.~ 2,56 l.g8 2,625.95 2,691,59 5 [~PROX MO 4,205 4,418 4,529 4,~2 4,758 4,877 4,~ 5,124 AC~AL BI-M 2,102.~ 2,2~.11 2,2~.34 2,320.94 2,378.~ 2,438.~ 2,4~.~ 2,561.88 6 Bufl~ & ~e O~c~l ~PROX MO 4,003 4,205 4,310 4,418 4,529 4,~2 4,758 4,877 ~wl~ ~er A~AL BI-M 2,~1.34 2,102.~ 2,155.23 2,2~.11 2,264.34 2,320.94 2,378.~ 2,438.~ Fom~ ~er Hu~ ~u~s ~ger M*nng~r, ~o ~ices planning ~er Pmjea ~er ~or ~er ~U~ ~ons ~er W~w~r ~r W~r R~u~s ~ager 7 As~ ~r, P~ &~cr ~PROX MO 3,810 4,~3 4,103 4,205 4,310 4,418 4,529 4,~2 Ci~ Au~mr A~AL BI-M 1 ,~4.92 2,~ 1.34 2,051.38 2,102.~ 2,155.23 2,2~. 11 2.2~.34 2.320.94 8 As~C~ A~mey II ~PROX MO 3,626 3,810 3,~5 4,~3 4,103 4,205 4,310 4,418 Am ~r A~AL BI-M 1,813.13 1 ,~4.92 1,952.54 2,~ 1.34 2,051.38 2,102.~ 2,155.23 2~. 11 ~u~ ~i~s ~r Poli~ ~ni~ Res. Mgr ~ new.ox MO 3,4~ 3,~ 3,7~7 ~,S]0 3,~S 4,~3 4,]03 ~,~0~ A~AL B]-M 1,725.77 1,813.13~ 1,858.~ 1 ,~4.92 1,952.54 2,~ 1-34 2.051.38 2~1 ~.~ 10 Aamini~w ~y~ ~PROX MO 3,285 3,452 3,538 3,626 3,717 3,810 3,905 4,~3 A~ Ci~ A~mey I AC~AL BI-M 1,642.61 1,725.77 ] 1,768.91 1,813.13 1,858 .~ 1 ,~4.92 1,952.54 2,~ 1.34 O~a P~ ~ccr ~h ~pv~ C.CIk 11 APPROX MO ~,12~ 3,2~5 3,~7 3,452 3,538 3,~2~ 3,717 ~,gl0 A~AL BI-M 1,5~3.4~ 1 ,~42.~ 1 1,6g~.~g 1,725.77 1,7~g.~ 1 1 ,~ I ~. 1 ~ 1 ,g5 g.~ ! ,~.~ 12 APPROX MO 2,~76 ~,127 3,205 ~,2~5 ~,~7 ~,452 3,5~ 3,~2~ A~AL BI-M 1,4gg. l ~ 1,5~3.~ 1~02.55 1,~42.~1 ~ 1,~8~.68 ~ 1,725.77 1,7~g.91 I CITY OF BREMERTON MANAGEMENT AND PROFESSIONAL STAFF SALARY PLAN APPENDIX A ~IO. TITLF. RA~F. RATIO. I RATI~ RAT~. ~ RATR. RATIO. RATF. 6 RATIO. ] RATIT. n 13 Budget Specialist APPROX MO 2,833 2,976 3,051 3,127= 3,205 3,285 3,367 3,452 Civil service Officer ACTUAL BI-M 1,416.43 1,488.13 1,525.33 1,563.46 1,602.55 1,642.61 1,683.68 1,725.771 l~tccutive Sec~tuy Human Resources Specialist Lesislative Assis~at Muni¢i~)al Sen, Coord 14 Legal Assistant APPROX MO 2696 2833 2904 2976 3051 3127 3205 3285 ACTUAL BI-M 1348.21 1416.43 1451.84 1488.13 1525.33 1563.46 1602.55 1642.61 15 APPROX MO 2567 2696 2?64 2833 2904 2976 3051 3127 ACTUAL BI-IV[ 1283.28 1348.21 ] 38 |.92 1416.4~ 1451.84 1488.13 1525.33 1563.46 16 ; APPROX MO 2443 2567 2631 2696 2764 2833 2904 2976 ACTUAL BI-M 1221.48 1283.28 1315.~6 1348.;~1 1381.92 1416.43 1451.84 1488.t3 17 Human Resources Assistant APPROX MO 2325 2443 2504 2567 2631 2696 2764 2833 ACTUAL BI-M 1162.65 1221.48 1252.02 1283.28 1315.36 1348.21 1381.92 1416.43 18 APPROX MO 2213 2325 2383 2443 2504 2567 2631 2696 AC'['dAL BI-M 1106.65 ! 162.65 1191.72 1221.48 1252.0; 1283.28 1315.36 1348.2~[ 19 Leg/Internal Audit A ssis~nt APPROX MO 2107 2213 2269 2325 2383 2443 2504 2567 ACTUAL BI-M 1053.35 1106.65 1134.31 1162.65 1191.72 1221.48 1252.02 1283.28 GRAD 4 CITY OF BREMERTON APPENDIX A SALARY SCHEDULE AND JOB CLASSIFICATION NON-UNIFORMED REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES STEP AND MONTHLY SALARY JOB CLASSIFICATION Data Entry Operator Office Assistant I 5 Laborer Legal Secretary I Legal Technician I Office Assistant II 6 Accounting Assistant I Parking Enforcement Officer Recreation Program Coord. I 7 Accounting Assistant II Computer Operator - Utility Legal Technician II Office Assistant Senior WWTP Operator Trainee 8 Personal Computer Tech. 9 Accounting Assistant Senior Animal Control Officer Building and Development Specialist I Department Secretary Engineering Technician I Legal Secretary II Legal Technician III Operator Service Specialist Utility Billing Specialist 10 Engineering Technician II Office Supervisor Payroll Specialist Water Quality Technician WWTP Laboratory Technician WWTP Maintenance Technician 11 Computer Programmer Electrician I Operator Senior Recreation Program Coord. II Service Specialist Senior Warrant Server WW'I'P Operator 12 Animal Control/Parking Supervisor Aquatics Supervisor Biosolids Technician Cemetery Caretaker Computer Programmer Sr. A B C D E F G 1,768 1,812 1,860 1,910 1,960 2,010 2,065 1,860 1,910 1,960 2,010 2,065 2,119 2,178 1,960 2,010 2,065 2,119 2,178 2,233 2,297 2,065 2,119 2,178 2,233 2,297 2,356 2,417 2,178 2,233 2,297 2,356 2,417 2,483 2,551 2,297 2,356 2,417 2,483 2,551 2,618 2,695 2,417 2,483 2,551 2,618 2,695 2,768 2,843 2,551 2,618 2,695 2,768 2,843 2,923 3,002 2,695 2,768 2,843 2,923 3,002 3,082 3,171 1 CITY OF BREMERTON SALARY SCHEDULE AND JOB CLA8SlFICATION NON-UNIFORMED REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES GRAD JOB CLASSIFICATION 12 Engineering Technician III Environmental Technician Facilities Supervisor Maintenance Electrician Probation Officer Welder APPENDIX A STEP AND MONTHLY SALARY A B C D E F G 2,695 2,768 2,843 2,923 3,002 3,082 3,171 13 14 15 16 17 18 Building & Development Specialist II Engineering Technician IV Inventory Specialist Lead Operator Lead Service Specialist Maintenance Coordinator Planner Accountant Building & Development Spec. III Business License Inspector/Auditor Computer Programmer/Analyst Electronics Technician Engineering Technician Sr. Journey Level Electrician Project Coordinator Utility Accounts Supervisor Civil Engineer I Inventory/Facilities Supervisor Parks Maintenance Supervisor Planner Senior Service Specialist Supervisor Water Distribution Supervisor Water Operations Supervisor WWTP Maintenance Supervisor Civil Engineer II Electronics Supervisor Network Administrator WWTP Operations Supervisor Civil Engineer III LONGEVITY WAGE RATES Date of hire thru 5 years: 6th through 10th years: 11th through 15th years: 16th through 20th years: 21st year and thereafter: 2,843 2,923 3,002 3,082 3,171 3,257 3,346 3,002 3,082 3,171 3,257 3,346 3,437 3,535 3,171 3,257 3,346 3,437 3,535 3,635 3,738 3,346 3,437 3,535 3,635 3,738 3,845 3,952 3,535 3,635 3,738 3,845 3,952 4,065 4,177 3,738 3,845 3,952 4,065 4,177 4,295 4,414 +O% +1% +2% +3% +4% AGENDA BILL rainance Amending Parking Regulations to Enhance Penalties, Repeal Reparking BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 1. SUBJECT: FOR AGENDA OF: ORIGINATING DEPT: Police ORIGINATOR: Ian R. Sieve~..~~-~ City Attorney ~-~ DATE SUBMITTED: 2. _/(UL~C, ES: (Comment on CHIEF OF POLICE back if necessary) 3. EXHIBITS: Proposed Ordinance ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR APPROVED BY COUNCIL P T FOR SUBMITTAL: COUNCIL PRESIDENT 4. S~Y STATEMENT AND REQUIREMENT FOR COUNCIL ACTION: The proposed ordinance addresses complaints about the reparking prohibition in the downtown business district, which is felt to be confusing and unfair to visitors to the City or others who have multiple trips downtown during the day. This provision is replaced with a more conventional approach to controlling commuter parking on the streets, with the aid of mobile computer units. The base fine for overtime parking has increased from $5.00 to $10.00, with second and third tickets during any rolling 30 day period costing $25.00 and $50.00 respectively. The tickets will be tracked during the 30 day period with the use of mobile computers in the field. In conjunction with these changes, the free parking zones downtown will be reduced from a 3 to 2 hour limit. With the greater likelihood of tickets and a higher cost for repeat offenses, it is intended to make it more economical for commuters to use off-street commercial parking lots. 8. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to approve on second reading Ordinance No. z/~.%/~ 9. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: EXPIRATION DATE: REVIEW DATE: 10. NOTICE OF ACTION PULLED [] TABLED [] APPROVED [] DISAPPROVED [] AMENDED [] DATE: COUNCIL DIRECTIVE: 11. AGENDA BILL NO.: (OVER) 5. IMPACT OF NON-PASSAGE: Continued fines and time limit regulations. IMPACT ON STAFFINGt BUDGETSt FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT OR OTHER RESOURCES: Software reprogramming to allow tracking of 3 or more tickets is estimated to cost $2,250.00. Revision to 123 downtown parking signs is estimated to cost $1,845.00 in materials and $1,173.00 in City labor and equipment, for a total of $3,018.00. 7. RESEARCH SOURCES: PARKING1.AB - Agendas - 1/3/96 7{ ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE amending the parking code to remove prohibition on reparking except in residential permit areas, increasing penalties for overtime parking and repeat offenders; and amending BMC Title 10. THE CITY OF BREMERTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN: Section 1. Amendment. Section 10.09.130 of the Bremerton Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 10.09.130 SERVICE VEHICLES. Clearly marked service or delivery vehicles are exempt from the time zone requirements while providing service or making deliveries to dwellings within a residential parking permit area. Service vehicles shall comply with time limits for parking in commercial ~..+ ........~ c ...... ...;.., .......... t.; ..... a,:.. zones, ........... Section 2, Ameadment, Section 10. ! l.OlO of the Breme~on ~unicipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: ]0,11.010 ^DD~T~ON^L V~O~^T[ONS. ~n addition to those statutes adopted by reference in BMC 10.04.010restricting standing, stopping and parking of vehicles, it shall be unlawful and punishable as a civil infraction for any person to commit any of the following actions: (a) Overtime Parking. It is unlawful for any person to permit a vehicle to remain parked, or to be reparked between two intersections within a residential parking permit area, if the parking time or combined parking time for the vehicle, exceeds the time limitations of the parking zone.; ' .... ;'~"'~ '~ .... ":-~ : ..... '":""'-: .... ' ~' .......: ..... :"~" Vehicles issued permits under BMC Chapter the permit. Section 3. Amendment. Section hereby amended to read as follows: 10.11·030 PENALTIES. Unless 10.09 and 10.10 shall be exempt from posted rime limits according to the terms of 10.11.030 of the Bremerton Municipal Code is specifically set forth elsewhere penalties for each parking violation of the provisions of this chapter and Chapter defined as an infraction, shall be: (a) Overtime (i) (ii) (iii) in this rifle, the 10.04, or non-payment in collection devices: ,~ ...... :., .......,.; ..... ,...,..~ ,.~ ,. ..... e~ an First violation within past thirty (30) days - $10.00 ^. ~.,t.~.... ¢~n an Second violation within thirty (30) days- $25.00 Third and additional violations of this aubs¢¢dc.n within thirty (30) days ~ ~" $50.00 Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective sixty (60) days from passage and publication. APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this ~ day of ,1996. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton this ~ day of . . ,1996. PARKINOI.IR$- Ordinance Disk 2 - !13196 JOHN E. LAW, Council President APPROVED this~ day of ,1996 LYNN HORTON, Mayor ATTEST: KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY, City Clerk PARKINOI.IRS - Ordinanc~ Disk 2 - 113/96 3